The Architecture of Solitude1

Mark H. Dixon
Ohio North University
As a people live on the land, as they build their
homes and temples, towns and cities, they form
the world around them into the shape of their
philosophies. Their social structures and spiritual mindsets take physical formas mass and
space, material and voidand become the
world they live in. This must be true in all places.
- Marc Peter Keane

Abstract: As a spiritual or meditative practice solitude implies more

than mere silence or being alone. While these are perhaps indispensable
components, it is possible to be alone or to live in silence and nevertheless
be unable to reconfigure these into genuine solitude. Solitude is also more
than being in some remote or inaccessible place. Even though geographical
isolation might be conducive to solitude, with rare exceptions human beings have seldom sought solitude in complete seclusion in the wilderness.
The places where human beings have sought solitude have in the end
been human places, human-built places. It should come as no surprise
then that through architecture humans beings have sought to build solitude, to construct, through stone and glass and wooden structures, places
that are conducive to and encourage solitude. Such structures include
individual hermitages, monasteries, temples, and even cathedrals. In each
case the purpose is to translate or reconfigure a natural geographical place
into a space, a human space, where solitude as a spiritual or meditative
practice becomes possible. What the individual sojourner brings to the
experience is an inner openness to the architecture, to the natural environment and to the spiritual realm which interweave to create solitude.
This paper examines (1) the spiritual need to experience solitude, (2)

54

Mark H. Dixon

what it is that solitude requires, and (3) the endeavor to create solitude
through architecture and the challenges it poses to both architecture and
spiritual practice. In particular the paper explores and compares solitudes architectural expression in three Medieval Christian monastic ordersthe Camaldolese Order, the Carthusian Order, and the Cistercian
Order. Despite their common heritage these orders realize solitude, as an
essential spiritual value, through unique architectural expressions.

Introduction
As characteristic human pursuits there is a dynamic interaction between solitude and architecture. Architecture translates stone, timber,
glass and metal into structures and communities in and through which
human beings live and interact. In this process, as Marc Peter Keanes
quote suggests, a peoples social and spiritual commitments acquire material realization (Keane 2002, 9). Anselme Dimier expresses a similar sentiment in the claim that a peoples lifestyle conditions their architecture
(Dimier 1999, 43).
It seems uncontroversial that the reverse is also true, i.e., that through
their architecture, it ought to be possible to discern a peoples lifestyles,
ideas, and ideals. Thus even though solitude implies a separation, seclusion and social disengagement, and conjures images that are distinctive in
their remoteness and solitarinessthe hermit in the mountain cave, the
recluse in the forest, the anchorite in the cellin societies where solitude
is an essential social or spiritual value it ought to be possible to discern
solitudes architectural expression.
A crucial realization here is that the desire to renounce or escape the
human social environment through solitude can never be completed or
absolute. All situations are, as Jean-Paul Sartre recognizes in Existentialism and Human Emotions, human situations. Whatever environment in
which human beings dwell and no matter its isolation or wildness is, in
the end, a human environment. Thus solitudes architectural expression
becomes inevitable. This papers purpose is to explore solitudes significance as a spiritual value and its architectural realization within medieval
Christian monasticism, in particular its distinctive expressions during the

The Architecture of Solitude

55

10th through 12th centuries within the Camaldolese, Carthusian and Cistercian monastic orders.
Solitude
What is solitude? While a complete philosophical analysis is impossible here, in order to explore solitudes architectural expression, it is nevertheless essential to at least determine the concepts general characteristics
and boundaries.
In the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle characterizes human beings as
social animalshuman nature and the eudaimonia that represents its end
necessitate social interaction and communal existence. To live in isolation is to be little more than a beast. As a general description Aristotles
characterization is uncontroversialhuman beings are social creatures.
Nevertheless this general human predisposition to create and live in societies is neither an inter-cultural nor intra-cultural absolute. Thus across
human cultures and societies it is possible to discern within certain persons and social institutions the character and inclination to pursue, with
social sanction, solitude as a philosophical, religious, and spiritual value.
What then are solitudes characteristics and requirements? Common
responses have been that solitude requires geographical isolation, that
solitude requires silence, and that solitude requires social isolation. While
there can be no doubt that all these do contribute to and encourage solitude, it requires little reflection to realize that solitude is possible even in
their absence.
As a spiritual or contemplative value solitude is more than geographical isolation. Human beings do pursue solitude in forests, on islands, on
mountains, in deserts, and in other remote and wilderness areas. Despite
the isolation though, the natural environment that encircles and encloses
the recluse is replete with flora and faunalife flourishes even in the
most inaccessible and barren areas. Complete isolation is neither possible, nor perhaps even desirable.
Though silence is also conducive to solitude, complete silence is no
more possible than complete isolation. The same creatures that populate the wilderness, as well as basic geological and climatological processes themselves, generate more-or-less continuous environmental

56

Mark H. Dixon

symphonies. Rather than being antagonistic or antithetical to solitude,

these environmental sounds are sometimes seen as conducive to contemplation and introspection.
Perhaps what solitude requires then is social isolation, i.e., being
where there are no other human beings? This too is a questionable requirement. Solitude is essential to spiritual practice in the Christian and
Buddhist monastic traditions, nevertheless in both these traditions the
practice occurs within the monastic communities themselves. Moreover
while monastic communities are often built in remote and inaccessible
areas, these communities also thrive within metropolitan areas. There
is then no essential connection between solitude and being aloneit is
possible to experience solitude in a communal environment and possible
to be alone without being able to experience solitude.
It is also essential to distinguish between solitude and loneliness. In
solitude it is true that one is (more-or-less) alone, however there is a
crucial difference between being alone and loneliness. In loneliness one
desires the others presence and it is the absence that causes one unease
or distress. In solitude though, the one indispensable presence is there
ones own. Solitude can also entice us into Presence, i.e., into communion with the radical Otherthe divine (Belisle 2003, 17). Thus while
loneliness is a negative psychological and emotional state, solitude represents a positive spiritual or meditative state.
These are all indispensable qualifications and distinctions, nevertheless it seems that the original question remainsWhat is solitude? Rather
than isolation, silence, or loneliness, I believe that Philip Kochs definition best captures solitudes unique qualities. In Solitude: A Philosophical Encounter, Koch argues that three components or conditions coalesce
to create solitudeseclusion, social disengagement, and introspection.2
The purpose in solitude then is to eliminate the distractions that characterize and define human social existence so that genuine self-reflection
and contemplation become possible. Thus solitude is the means, rather
than the endthe means to a deeper knowledge about ourselves, our
place in the cosmos and our relation to the divine.
There has been an inclination to so associate solitude with particular
environmental placesforests, deserts, mountainsthat those places become solitude and solitude becomes those places. Thus the assumption is

The Architecture of Solitude

57

that to enter those places is to enter solitude, much as one enters a home,
or museum, or garden. This is rather too simplistic. It is perhaps more appropriate to see solitude as a spiritual or contemplative state that emerges
in the interaction between certain environmental, social and psychological conditionsseclusion, disengagement, introspection. In solitude
then one realizes or experiences a reconfiguration or reinterpretation, i.e.,
one reconfigures or reinterprets an environmental space into a place that
is conducive to contemplative introspection. It is in this reinterpretation
that the connections between solitude and architecture emerge.
Into The Wilderness
The Christian Desert Fathers sought solitude in the Egyptian deserts.
The continuous distractions, anxieties, and demands in their social lives,
as well as its excesses and indulgences, had become destructive to their
spiritual lives. Thus a desperate need and a deliberate decision to refocus on their spiritual practice and reforge a closer relation to the divine
drove these individuals to abandon their positions, lives, and families and
escape into the desert. This need to become ascetics and live in solitude
was more than an impulsive desire or a means to evade their social and
familial responsibilities, it was a vocation. To those who sought solace in
the desert it was seen as a place to train in solitude, a place to learn, a
place to become closer to divine, a place to cleanse the soul and to liberate
themselves, a place to recapture the souls lost, though original, virtuous
state (Jasper 2004, 26-32).
The deserts lure was its vastness, emptiness, and silenceit was a
pristine natural environment. It was also fierce, inhospitable, and quite
dangerous. While it might be possible to live there as a wanderer or nomad, the desert was a merciless a place, outside life, where none could
settle in its vastness and extreme conditions (Jasper 2004, 26). To enter
the desert was to leave all lifes usual comforts, reassurances, and securitiesthe deserts lessons were renunciation and abandonment (Lane
1998, 167). Besides being a precarious physical environment it was
also a perilous spiritual environment. There were demonsifrits, djinn,
ghuls, and silain the desert. In such an environment the usual social
distractions and disturbances were little more than memories. All the

58

Mark H. Dixon

individuals concentration was available then to focus on the essential

questself-knowledge and through this knowledge the return to and
communion with God (Jasper 2004, 24-28). Asceticism and solitude
were essential requirements in this quest and the desert was their source.
While the first Desert Fathers were more reclusive and sought their
accommodations in caves, the deserts natural architecture, it was perhaps
inevitable that, as those who felt the call to live in solitude became more
numerous, small communities would emerge. While solitude might require social disengagement, complete isolation in the desert was neither
essential nor even advisable. The ascetic still had to acquire the basic
necessities in order to continue to survive. Thus these coenobitic communities arose as a means to ensure that basic needs were met and that
the ascetics had a more-or-less secure environment in which to live. Nevertheless these communities were eremitic (or anchoritic) in spirit and
design, i.e., each individual had their own small cells (or in some cases
caves) in which to engage in their spiritual practice. Cells were built with
the mud bricks that were the ubiquitous construction material in ancient
Egyptian domestic architecture (Dunn 2000, 14).
To enter the desert the ascetics had to abandon traditional cultural
and historical ideas about space, time, and what is real (Jasper 2004,
29). The radical environmental conditions that the desert imposes meant
that the eremitic desert communities had unique material, psychological, and spiritual challenges to overcome in order to ensure their survival
and realize their individual and collective purposes. Unless one lives in
a cave without possessions or clothes and eats no more that what one
can forage, i.e., lives as Aristotles paradigmatic beast, even the ascetic
must translate, reconfigure or reinterpret the natural environment into
a habitable human place. Thus in these eremitic communities solitude
receives its first architectural expressions within the Christian monastic
tradition. Though in the natural environment, these communities were
nonetheless human-built places, reinterpretations whose purpose was to
minimize distraction (human as well as environmental) and so encourage
the solitude and contemplation that were essential to spiritual progress
and communion with the divine.
Though human-built places, there was no one architectural design
or vision common to all these eremitic communities other than that in
a more-or-less central area there were churches, where the hermits would

The Architecture of Solitude

59

assemble to celebrate services each morning and evening, and kitchens, refectories, and communal rooms, where the ascetics would prepare and consume their meals (Dimier 1999, 21). At all other times however the ascetics
would live as hermits, in silence and solitude, in their individual cells. 3
Solitude as Built-Space
The places built to encourage and ensure solitude can be intimate
(mountain hermitages or monastic cells), or immense (monasteries or
cathedrals), or even in the open (Zen gardens). In each case what motivates the particular architectural expression are certain social and spiritual
values. Perhaps the principal consideration is whether the solitaries will
live alone or in communities. While the solitude that is sought is the
same, there is a dramatic difference between the immediate environment
in which the individuals are able to practice and realize that solitude.
Within medieval Christian monasticism there is considerable variation in solitudes architectural expression between the numerous monastic orders. To illustrate this variation the focus here will be on three Christian monastic orders that arose in Medieval Europe in the 10th through
the 12th centuriesthe Camaldolese Order, the Carthusian Order, and
the Cistercian Order. Though these orders have historical connections,
and the Camaldolese and Cistercians a common origin in the Benedictine order, the differences in their architectural approaches to solitude are
quite dramatic. Despite differences in expression though, it is critical to
realize that common to all these traditions is the absolute conviction that
solitude is essential to the monastic vocation, to the individuals inner
peace and spiritual progress, and to the ultimate purposecommunion
with God (Belisle 2003, 57, 90, 96). Solitude is the means, to enter into
Gods presence the end.
The Camaldolese Order
The Camaldolese Benedictine Orders patriarch, Romuald (9511027), sought a return to the simpler more ascetic existence that was
the Benedictine Orders original purpose and intentionan existence in
which silence, solitude, and contemplation were essential components.

60

Mark H. Dixon

To Romuald solitude was indispensable to spiritual practice. It was

through solitude alone that it was possible to commune with God. Thus
Romuald encourages solitaries to sit in their cells as in paradise (Belisle
2003, 90). Peter Damian, Romualds successor, also describes the cell as
a paradise andin rather more metaphorical languageas a place where
one learns heavens arts, as the souls mirror where self-knowledge leads to
spiritual progress, as a bridal chamber that leads to contemplative union,
and as a haven and refuge that nurses the soul (Belisle 2003, 91).
The cell is also a crossroads between heaven and earth. As such it also
represents a crucible where, as was obvious to the Desert Fathers, the
ascetic trains, cleanses and purifies their soul. To return to God one must
traverse the path through ones own inner desert wastes. Thus the cell
symbolizes as much a spiritual arena that witnesses the individuals purgatorial struggles as it does a paradise (Belisle 2003, 91-92).
While the focus here is on the individual it is essential to recognize
that solitude within the Church is also a collective act, thus hermits
represent the Church, and through love the entire Church is present in
the hermit (Belisle 2003, 91).
Solitudes architectural expression within the Camaldolese order has
its inspiration in the same general organizational plan that underlies the
Egyptian eremitic communitiesthe laura. The phrase architectural expression here implies more than the formal design and construction process, or other alterations to the natural environment, such enclosures or
gardens, or even the structures themselves. Architecture also encompasses
the organizational design that specifies the structures relative positions,
orientations, and the distances and spaces between them.
Laurae are communities or colonies that comprise numerous solitaries
who live in separate caves, cells or hermitages. Within the geographical
constraints the area imposes there is as much distance as possible and
practical between the individual residencesthe idea being that individuals ought neither to be able to see nor communicate with each other.
The reason is obviousto minimize possible distractions and so ensure
the individuals solitude. Thus while Camaldolese monasteries are themselves in remote geographical areason mountainsides, in forests, on
islands, in wadis in the deep desertit is within the private residence
that the solitaries are able to pursue the solitude crucial to their spiritual

The Architecture of Solitude

61

practice. Anselm Giabbani, the Camaldolese Prior General in the mid

1900s, sees this solitude as the essential component in monastic progression. In this progression there are three stages: from the world to the
coenobium, from the coenobium to the hermitage, and from the hermitage to total union with God (Belisle 2003, 96). Once again, the essential
lesson here is that solitude represents the means, rather than the end. The
end is spiritual enlightenment and union with the divine.
Though the spiritual focus is on the individuals practice in silence
and solitude, laurae are communities. As in the desert eremitic communities then, at some distance, and in a more-or-less central location, are
the communal structures that represent the orders coenobitic component. These structures would include kitchens, refectories, and churches
where the entire assemblage would gather to have their meals and to
celebrate morning and evening services as well as certain religious festivals. In some communities the communal structures might also include
guestrooms to accommodate visitors to the monasteries (Lawrence 1984,
5; Belisle 2003, 88-96). Close to the laurae there were the monasteries
proper where the religious life was coenobitic and where novices would
prepare themselves to progress to the eremitic stage and the move into the
hermitages (Dimier 1999, 182).
Camaldoli, the orders home, provides this architectural models ideal illustration. Camaldoli is in the Tuscan-Romagnese Apennines. The
hermitages are in the forest high on the mountainside, while the monastic offices, the church and guest accommodations are some 200 feet
down the mountainside (Colgate 2002, 125). Each hermitage comprises
a small cell with a garden, and though hermitages are close there is no
cloister to connect them, as there are in Carthusian and Cistercian monasteries (Dimier 1999, 182). What underlie this model are the same concerns that can be seen in the desert eremitical communitiesthe desire
to minimize distractions and so ensure the solitude that was essential to
the anchorites spiritual practice and progress.
Though it might seem paradoxical, St. Romuald argues that the coenobitic components were as essential to solitude as the eremitic components. In their absence there was a temptation to selfish isolation, rather
than genuine solitude. The model hermit is a virtuoso whose fervour
must draw into his own holiness lesser brethren also (Phipps 1985, 69).

62

Mark H. Dixon

Thus in the Camaldolese order, as in the earlier desert eremitical communities that are its inspiration, solitudes architectural expression incorporates the individual solitaries cells, the communal structures, their
relative positions, and the distances between them that were meant to
ensure the individuals solitude.
The Carthusian Order
Solitude is as essential to spiritual practice in the Carthusian Order
as it is in the Camaldolese Order. The Carthusians basic concerns are to
wait upon God, listen to God, and to acknowledge Gods presence in
courage, truthfulness, silence, and solitude. God alone is the immediate
end and to live in union with God the sole aspiration (Belisle 2003, 98).
To realize this union Guigo I (1183-1237), the 5th Prior at Grande Chartreuse in France, is resolute in the conviction that solitude is an absolute
prerequisite (Belisle 2003, 101).
The asceticism and solitude within Carthusian monasteries (or Charterhouses) is rigorous, perhaps even more so than in Camaldolese monasteries. Nevertheless such arduous anchoritic conditions are seen as essential to the individuals spiritual practiceit is the silence and solitude
in the cell that fashions the Carthusian vocation (Belisle 2003, 99). As in
the Camaldolese order though there was a concern that solitude be seen
neither as an escape nor was it to degenerate into isolation. Thus even
in solitude the anchorite must be able to love and to be in communion
with all (Belisle 2003, 100). The essential purpose though was, through
silence and solitude, to realize a deeper and more intimate relation with
God. As the modern Carthusian, Augustin Guillerand, expresses it, all
that matters is Gods presence and ones own ultimate union with that
presence (Belisle 2003, 102-104).
As in Camaldolese monasteries, Carthusian monastic life aspires to
combine eremitic and coenobitic elements. There can be little doubt
though that the emphasis is on the eremiticlife in Carthusian and
Camaldolese monasticism centers on solitude within the individual cell.
Though the aspirations are similar, there are dramatic differences in the
principles that underlie the Carthusian and Camaldolese architectural
visions and monastic designs. While there is as much spatial distance as

The Architecture of Solitude

63

Cells

Cells

Cloister

Garden
Cell

Figure 1: Mount Grace Priory, Yorkshire (after Brooke 2001, 99).

64

Mark H. Dixon

possible between the individual cells and between the cells and the communal structures in Camaldolse monasteries, in Carthusian monasteries
cloisters connect the cells to each other and the cloisters themselves either
connect to or are close to the other monastic structures. Nevertheless despite their spatial closeness the Carthusians are genuine hermits, alone in
silence and solitude within their cells (Dimier 199, 182).4
Solitudes architectural expression in Carthusian monasteries then is
anchoritic, though again within a larger coenobitic environment. As in
the eremitic laurae, anchorites live in separate cells. There can be little
doubt that it was the desert eremitic model that was the inspiration in
the Carthusian designa design that was the first to realize the ideal that
underlies the desert eremitic model in stone (Lawrence 1984, 133). The
intention in the Carthusian design was to create a space in which the
anchorites could spend as much time as possible in solitude, contemplation, and silence in their cells (Dimier 1999, 184). Other than specific
communal servicesMatins, High Mass, and Vespersand certain religious festivals, Carthusian solitaries remain in their cells their entire lives
(Lawrence 1984, 135 and Dimier 1999, 187).
Carthusian Charterhouses have three main architectural divisions.
First there are the galilaea major or cloisters which enclose large open
courts and which connect the individual the cells. Second there are the
galilaea minor or communal structures, which include churches, small
cloisters, chapterhouses, refectories, and kitchens. And third there are the
various shops, sheds, stables, granges, and garages that are essential to the
Chapterhouses maintenance (Dimier 1999, 188).
Each cell in a typical cloister has three roomsan antechamber, a devotional room, and a workshop. The devotional room provides a space in
which the hermit can meditate and conduct religious offices and which
contains an alcove where the hermit sleeps, studies, and eats. The workshop contains a bench, lathe, and various tools. There is a door in each
cell that opens onto the cloister and beside this door there is a small hatch
through which the hermits receive their meals (Dimier 1999, 187). Each
cell is also within a larger enclosure that contains its own private garden,
a porch, and latrine (Lawrence 1984, 135).
The Carthusian designs realization can be seen at Mount Grace in
Yorkshire, England (see Figure 1). At Mount Grace the anchorites live in

The Architecture of Solitude

65

enclosures that comprise the cell, a garden, and a latrine. The cells themselves enclose a cloister and a large open court on the western, northern,
and eastern sides.5 On the southern side there are offices, the chapterhouse, the church, the kitchen, and other communal rooms and spaces.
The original cells were timber, but were rebuilt in stone in the 1400s. It
is worthwhile to note again that the individual cells are rather spacious
the entrance passage leads to a small room with a fireplace, a devotional
room, and a bedroom. A stair leads to an upper room that serves as a
small workshop (Colegate 2002, 127 and Moffat 1997).
As in Camaldolese monasteries, in Carthusian Charterhouses solitudes architectural expression ensures the solitaries isolation. The difference is that in the Carthusian design the eremitic and coenobitic are in
more intimate associationsolitude enters into the monastic environs
proper, rather than being at a distance. This poses a serious architectural
challengea challenge to which the cloister was the principal response.
The Cistercian Order
The Cistercian Orders patriarchsRobert de Molesmes (10281111), Alberic (died 1108) and Stephen Harding (1060-1134)sought
radical spiritual revitalization in a return to the Benedictine Rules literal
interpretation and strict observation, i.e., through a more rigorous asceticism and solitude (Belisle 2003, 106 and Lawrence 1984, 146). In An
Apologia for Abbot William, Bernard of Clairvaux (1090-1153) justifies
the Cistercians strict adherence to the Benedictine Rule and criticizes
other monastic orders rather permissive interpretations. The Rules literal interpretation and strict observance were essential Bernard believes
in order to ensure the proper contemplative atmosphere to encourage
the souls spiritual progress. The consequence this asceticism has on the
Cistercian monastic lifestyle is dramatic, perhaps even more dramatic
though are the implications it has and requirements it places on Cistercian architecture.
Though there are differences in the details, solitudes architectural expression in the Camaldolese and Carthusian Orders represent variations on
the same basic modela model that attempts to combine individual (eremitic or anchoritic) and communal (coenobitic) elements into a seamless

66

Mark H. Dixon

!!!!!

"34)53

"#$%&'()

"3-6'()
!!7$4&(

*&'!+#$$)!,!+)-'()
./0!+#$$)!1!2$)'()

*&'!+#$$)!,!+)-'()
./0!+#$$)!1!2$)'()

Figure 2: Roche Abby, Yorkshire (after Lawrence 1984, 244).

monastic life. It is a model that has its architectural and spiritual inspiration in the earlier eremitic communities that arose in the Egyptian desert. In this the Cistercian Order represents a dramatic departure. There is
no attempt in Cistercian monasticism (at least in its formative stages) to
emulate the eremitic model, either in its spiritual practices or in its architectural implementation (Belisle 2003, 106). Thus solitudes architectural
expression in the Cistercian Order represents a radical reconfiguration over
the Camaldolese and Carthusian models. A reconfiguration that, on initial
consideration, seems so drastic that genuine solitude becomes problematic.
As a monastic order the Cisterians were contemplatives. As is true
in general in monastic orders, solitudes purpose was to eliminate other

The Architecture of Solitude

67

concerns and distractions so that the solitaries might focus their energies
on self-reflection and meditation and, in the end, enter into Gods presence. Nevertheless though it is essential to monastic solitude to abandon
ones secular life and concerns, Cisterians are also Benedictine and so coenobitic in inclination and practice. The Cistercians desert is a spiritual
desert, rather than a literal one (Belisle 2003, 106). Solitudes architectural expression within Cistercian monasticism then has its basic inspiration in the Benedictine coenobitic monastic model.
Camaldolese and Carthusian monasteries ensure that solitude is possible within a coenobitic environment through individual cells. In Cistercian monasteries though there are no private cells or hermitages to
which the individual might escape into silence and solitude. The Cistercian monastic lifestyle is a communal lifestyleCistercian brothers live,
eat, sleep, celebrate, and labor as one. Thus though solitude is seen as
essential to spiritual practice, Cisterians are never alone. As a consequence
silence has an even more critical importance in Cistercian monasticism
than in either Camaldolese or Carthusian monastic communities (Belisle
2003, 106-108). While silence is also a general rule in these communities, Camaldolese and Carthusian brothers also have recourse to the cell
with its absolute silence and solitude. Cistercians have no such recourse.
The Carthusian Orders eremitic collectivism becomes, in the Cistercian
Order a collective eremeticism.
In their architecture as well as their personal lives, the Cistercians
intention is to eliminate the ostentatious and superfluous (Leroux-Dhuys
and Gaud 1998, 39, 116). It is essential to renounce whatever might
undermine or corrupt the basic Benedictine virtues (Matarasso 1993, 8).
Thus in Cistercian architecture minimalism and functionalism are the
basic guidelines.
The basic architectural plan is the Benedictine quadrilateral. At the
quadrilaterals center there is a cloister that encloses an open court. On
the northern side is the church, while on the eastern and western sides
are refectories, dormitories, communal rooms and the Chapter House.
To the southern side are other offices, infirmaries, storerooms, kitchens,
and residencessome in separate structures. The plan at Roche in Yorkshire, England provides an ideal illustration (see Figure 2). Note that the
dormitories (dorter) are above the communal rooms (frater).

68

Mark H. Dixon

As a general rule the rooms within Cistercian monasteries are large

open spaces. Furniture is minimal as is architectural ornamentation and
decoration. What furniture, ornamentation and decoration there is reflects the same functional tendencies that inspires the architecture. Religious images and sculpture were also seen as distractions and so forbidden in Cistercian monasteries. The concern to minimize distractive
influences applies even to religious vessels and utensils, e.g., chalices were
made in stone or ceramic rather than the more common precious metals.
In the Apologia Bernard is emphatic that whatever is more elaborate than
its function requires is superfluous and ostentatious and as such panders to our baser desires rather than nurtures the soul to cultivate virtue
(Matarasso 1993, 49).
The need to limit outside distractions and secular intrusions also
meant that material self-reliance was an essential concern in Cistercian
monasticism. This meant that Cistercian monasteries were miniature industries as well as religious communities. To produce their basic provisions, agriculture, horticulture, and viniculture became indispensable
monastic enterprises. As a consequence monasteries would purchase land
as it became available in their local areas and create grangessmaller monastic agricultural settlements where Cistercian brothers would live on a
semi-permanent basis, though still under the same Benedictine rules
solitude and silence (Lawrence 146-52). Cistercian brothers might also
be shepherds, carpenters, masons, weavers, potters, or artisans.
Despite the desire to restrict interactions between the secular and monastic, because the Cistercians were able to produce regular surpluses,
there was considerable commerce between the monasteries and local villages and cities. Thus, Cistercian monasteries were built in less remote
geographical areas than Camaldolese or Carthusian monasteries (LerouxDhuys and Gaud 1998, 109).
Because there are no individual cells and little decoration or furniture,
there is an openness and minimalism to Cistercian monasteries that seems
majestic. The scale on which the Cistercian built also contributes to this
sensation. In photographic images what impresses one about the architecture are the light as well as the emptiness.6 This emptiness, perhaps openness is more proper, seems appropriate though, and since silence was the
rule, the images seem to communicate, through some subtle synesthetic
deception, a deep solitude and silence. One might even see in Cistercian

The Architecture of Solitude

69

architecture (and to some degree in Carthusian architecture also) the deserts own openness, silence, minimalism and magnificence. There is little
to distract the senses or agitate the mind here. Thus the architecture reinterprets and recreates through light, and space, and stone, an atmosphere
that is conducive to reflection and introspectionto solitude.
Conclusion
In The Language of Landscape, Anne Whiston Spirn argues that landscape has a languagea language that is (or at least can be) intelligible to
human beings. Through this language it is possible to determine what the
landscape means. To read and write the landscape is to learn and teach:
to know the world, to express ideas and to influence others. Landscape,
as language, makes thought tangible and imagination possible (Spirn
1998, 15).
Architecture as Christian Norberg-Schulz describes it in Architecture:
Presence, Language and Place, is implementation. What architecture realizeswhether in hermitages, monasteries or gardensis a places phenomenological significance to human beings (Norberg-Schulz 2000, 91).
Thus architecture reinterprets or translates the landscapes language into
structures that represent what the landscape means to human beings.
Through various processes then (conscious as well as unconscious), human beings read the natural landscape. Within and through this interpretative process the natural environment acquires human significance and
architecture translates this significance into human-built placeshomes,
temples, museums, gardens, cathedrals. In Christian monasticisms need
to ensure solitude these processes, interpretations and translations result
in monastic communities where, alone and together, individuals can pursue spiritual enlightenment and communion with the divine. Thus it can
come as no real surprise that those human beings who have sought solitude were able to discover in the natural environment places where that
solitude was a perceptible and experientiala phenomenologicalforce.
It seems no less inevitable that human beings should reconfigure and reinterpret these natural places into human places and through architecture endeavor to capture those original perceptions and experiences. It
is through this process, this inevitable and human process that Christian
monasticism has sought to express through architecture the solitude that
is, has been, and continues to be, so essential to the human spirit.

70

Mark H. Dixon

Notes
1

I wish to thank the papers anonymous reviewers. Their comments and

criticisms have made this a much better paper. I also wish to acknowledge Dr.
Forrest Clingermans invaluable suggestions and editorial assistance throughout
this papers various incarnations and revisions.
2
Even though these are all requisite components, the degree to which solitude relies upon each depends upon the specific circumstances.
3
Though the focus here is on Christian monasticism, the individual and
communal desire to renounce civilization in order to pursue solitude and spiritual progress in the wilderness is also a discernible in other societies and religious
traditions. In Asian societies and in particular in Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism
and Daoism solitude has been an essential philosophical and spiritual value.
Solitudes historical evolution and expression in these societies and religious traditions has also been quite similar. In India, Tibet, Sri Lanka, Vietnam, Laos,
Cambodia, Thailand, China, Korea and Japan sages would retire to the forest
or the mountains to pursue enlightenment. In some cases small communities
would coalesce around these individuals, either through their own determination or through others entreaties. Over time some communities would become
large monastic and temple complexes and so continue to attract others who felt
the call to solitude and a simpler, more ascetic existence.
4
Achille Luchaire refers this Carthusian model as collective eremeticism
(Dimier 1999, 182).
5
In Carthusian (and Cistercian) monasteries, the open courts inside the
cloisters can serve as cemeteries as well as communal gardens. At Mount Grace
there is also a small octagonal water tower in the center that supplies water to
the anchorites cells.
6
See Leroux-Dhuys and Gaud 1998, Heald and Kinder 2000, and Herve
2001.

References
Aristotle. 1973. Nicomachean ethics. In Introduction to Aristotle, 2nd Edition.
Trans. Richard McKeon. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Belisle, Peter-Damian. 2003. The language of silence: The changing face of monastic
solitude. Marynoll, NY: Orbis Books.

The Architecture of Solitude

71

Brooke, Christopher. 2001. The age of the cloister: The story of monastic life in the
middle ages. Mahwah, NJ: Hidden Spring.
Colegate, Isabel. 2002. A pelican in the wilderness: Hermits, solitaries and recluses.
Washington, DC: Counterpoint.
Dimier, Anselme. 1999. Stones laid before the lord: Architecture and monastic life.
Kalamazoo, MI: Cistercian Publications.
Dunn, Marilyn. 2000. The emergence of monasticism: From the desert fathers to the
early middle ages. London: Blackwell.
Gilpin, W. Clark. 2001. The theology of solitude: Edwards, Emerson, Dickinson.
Spiritus 1: 31-32.
Heald, David and Terryl N. Kinder. 2000. Architecture of silence: Cistercian
abbeys of France. New York: Harry N. Abrams.
Herve, Lucien. 2001. Architecture of truth: The cistercian abbey of Le Thoronet.
New York: Phaidon.
Jasper, David. 2004. The sacred desert: Religion, literature, art, and culture.
Oxford: Blackwell.
Keane, Marc Peter. 2002. The art of setting stones & other writings from the japanese
garden. Berkeley: Stone Bridge Press.
Koch, Philip. 1994. Solitude: A philosophical encounter. Chicago: Open Court.
Lane, Belden C. 1998. The solace of fierce landscapes: Exploring desert and
mountain spirituality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lawrence, C. H. 1984. Medieval monasticism: Forms of religious life in Western
Europe in the middle ages. New York: Longman.
Leroux-Dhuys, Jean-Franois and Henri Gaud. 1998. Cistercian abbeys: History
and architecture. Cologne: Knemann.
Leyser, Henrietta. 1984. Hermits and the new monasticism: A study of religious
communities in Western Europe 1000-1150. New York: St. Martins Press.
Moffat, Hazel. 1997. Mount Grace priory. London: The English Heritage
Educational Service.
Montarasso, Pauline. 1993. The cistercian world: Monastic writings of the twelfth
century. London: Penguin Books.

72

Mark H. Dixon

Norberg-Schulz, Christian. 2000. Architecture: Presence, language, place. Milan:

Skira.
Phipps, Colin. 1985. Romualdmodel hermit: Eremitical theory in saint Peter
Damains Vita Beati Romualdi, Chapters 16-27. In Monks, hermits and
the ascetic tradition. Ed. W. J. Sheils, 65-77. Basil Blackwell.
Sartre, Jean-Paul. 2000. Existentialism and human emotions. Secaucus, NJ:
Citadel Press.
Spirn, Anne Whiston. 1998. The language of landscape. New Haven: Yale
University Press.