history

arq (2015), 19.2, 123–132. © Cambridge University Press 2015

Ludwig Mies van der Rohe’s idea of a modern courtyard house

is explored considering its context stimuli, development, and
practical applications.

The Miesian courtyard house

Luciana Fornari Colombo

During the 1930s, the renowned architect Ludwig Art in New York (MoMA), the Canadian Centre for
Mies van der Rohe (Aachen, 1886–Chicago, 1969) Architecture in Montreal, the Art Institute of
developed a series of architectural projects on the Chicago, and the Library of Congress in Washington,
courtyard house that were marked by a research DC. An example of such sources is provided in the
through design approach. These projects appendix: a manuscript written by Mies in 1962 that
deliberately tested modern construction has been omitted from the anthologies of his
techniques and variations in brief, plan writings, despite containing a key statement on his
4
configuration, and context in order to modernise a courtyard house idea.
type of house that has existed since prehistory in
different places around the world. This house type Context stimuli
is characterised by strong introspection. As its Before focusing on the introverted courtyard house,
exterior facades coincide with peripheral protective a type of house that was not traditionally built in
walls that have a minimum number of openings, Germany, Mies had already been exploring the
indoor spaces have to search for light, air, and theme of the modern house through the detached
views into private walled gardens that are open house, such as in the Concrete Country House project
1
only to the sky. (1923), and through the apartment block, such as in
The Miesian version of the modern courtyard his project for the Weissenhof Exhibition (Stuttgart,
house is explored in this article considering three 1926–7). His concern for this theme was not isolated.
aspects: context stimuli, development, and Various German architects had been investigating
practical applications. In this manner, this article the modern house since the 1920s. They explored
provides significant contributions to the modern construction techniques as they searched
understanding of such a courtyard house. In fact, so for solutions to the acute housing shortage that had
far the stimuli and motivations behind Mies’s followed war destruction and the growth of urban
studies on this theme have been insufficiently population. They also tried to solve the discrepancy
2
explored. This obscurity has facilitated hypotheses between the houses being built at that time and the
such as that some of the courtyard house projects changed cultural and technological circumstances.
that Mies attributed to himself were not designed Mies acknowledged this pursuit when he explained
3
by him, but by his students and assistants. This that the creation of a modern house was not only a
article offers an alternative view of this issue that burning economic necessity, but also a precondition
5
supports the architect’s original claims by for cultural development.
clarifying his teaching approach, creative process, To achieve such a modern house, Mies studied the
and historical context. The present article also architectural use of the glass skin and the skeleton
clarifies the development of Mies’s courtyard house structure as an alternative to the traditional small
idea through several projects that he designed on openings in load-bearing masonry walls. He
this theme, including the Courtyard House with concluded that only the glass walls secured the
Round Skylight (1934), which has been little architectonic possibilities of the modern skeleton
explored in previous literature. Ultimately, this structure such as its greater spatial openness,
article examines the practical applications of Mies’s fluidity, and integration. Mies explained: ‘Only now
courtyard house idea, both as a motif of student can we articulate space, open it up and connect it to
exercise and as an architectural solution for low the landscape, thereby satisfying the spatial needs of
6
dwellings, showing that this idea has maintained modern man.’ The ancient aspiration for the union
its relevance throughout the decades. of architecture and landscape, of human beings and
This article resulted from extensive research that nature, of indoor and outdoor spaces, was not only
included the consultation of primary sources facilitated by modern techniques, but also more
available in the archives of the Museum of Modern intensely demanded in the context of a progressively

doi: 10.1017/S1359135515000378 history   arq . vol 19 . no 2 . 2015 123

124 arq . vol 19 . no 2 . 2015    history

more urban and artificial life. Mies showed concern 1929 in Barcelona, and the Model House for the
10
for this issue when he wrote in his notebook: Berlin Building Exposition of 1931.
‘Experienced nearness to nature is being lost’, and Mies’s attention was more notably directed to the
‘Nature is truly affecting only when it begins to be courtyard house with the beginning of his academic
7
dwelled in.’ career in September 1930, when he joined the
Mies’s modern dwelling became visible in the Bauhaus school as professor and director. There, he
Concrete Country House (1923) and in the Brick continued the investigations into this type of house
Country House (1924), projects that had been that had already been in progress. A few months after
especially produced for the lively avant-garde his arrival at the school, the journal Bauhaus
8
exhibitions and publications of the 1920s. Despite Zeitschrift für Gestaltung of January 1931 featured
their important contributions, these projects did not L-shaped courtyard house plans that had been
exhaust the subject of the modern house. In fact, developed by Mies’s colleagues and long-time friends
11
they opened up an important question: how could Hugo Häring and Ludwig Hilberseimer [1a–b]. These
the large openings and the maximum spatial architects worked for the State Research Institute on
12
integration achieved in these extroverted detached the economics of the single storey house.
houses for secluded country areas be expanded to Hilberseimer also taught at the Bauhaus from 1929
13
the urban context, where space was more limited mainly on the subject of mass housing. Their
and less private? Mies would find an answer to this interest in the courtyard house reflected the search
question in the introverted courtyard house. for an equilibrium between green and built areas, as
Protected by peripheral masonry walls, the house’s had been championed by the Garden City movement.
interior could be even more transparent without loss This type of house could be easily adapted to
of privacy. This reconciliation of seclusion and Germany’s colder winter. Large openings could face
openness permitted a stronger fusion of the house the sunniest orientation without loss of privacy.
9
and its gardens within the city. Moreover, with larger courtyards and a one-story
This solution was latent in a number of Mies’s height limit, the interior of the house would be
projects of the 1910s and 1920s through the presence shaded neither by its own peripheral walls nor by
of enclosed or semi-enclosed courtyards. Among neighbouring units.
these projects were the above-mentioned Concrete Among the several variations of the L-shaped
and Brick houses, the Kröller-Müller Villa (1912–13), courtyard house that Hilberseimer developed, the
and the House for the Architect in Werder (1914). type E (1931) became notable for its economy and
Besides houses, these projects also included efficiency [1c]. This house is characterised by a
temporary exhibition pavilions: the Glass Room at corner that shelters the entry and service areas,
the Stuttgart Werkbund Exhibition of 1927, the and connects the private and the social wings.
German Pavilion for the International Exposition of These two wings face the private courtyard and the

1 L-shaped house
plans, 1931, by Hugo
Häring (a), Ludwig
Hilberseimer (b, c),
and Ludwig Mies van
der Rohe (d).

2 Schematic plan of
the traditional
courtyard house (a),
the detached house
(b), and Mies van der
Rohe’s courtyard
houses – Row House,
1931 (c), Courtyard
House with Round
Skylight, 1934 (d),
1 House with Three
Courtyards, 1934 (e),
and Courtyard
House with Garage,
1934–5 (f).

Luciana Fornari Colombo  The Miesian courtyard house

124 arq . vol 19 . no 2 . 2015    history

more urban and artificial life. Mies showed concern 1929 in Barcelona, and the Model House for the
10
for this issue when he wrote in his notebook: Berlin Building Exposition of 1931.
‘Experienced nearness to nature is being lost’, and Mies’s attention was more notably directed to the
‘Nature is truly affecting only when it begins to be courtyard house with the beginning of his academic
7
dwelled in.’ career in September 1930, when he joined the
Mies’s modern dwelling became visible in the Bauhaus school as professor and director. There, he
Concrete Country House (1923) and in the Brick continued the investigations into this type of house
Country House (1924), projects that had been that had already been in progress. A few months after
especially produced for the lively avant-garde his arrival at the school, the journal Bauhaus
8
exhibitions and publications of the 1920s. Despite Zeitschrift für Gestaltung of January 1931 featured
their important contributions, these projects did not L-shaped courtyard house plans that had been
exhaust the subject of the modern house. In fact, developed by Mies’s colleagues and long-time friends
11
they opened up an important question: how could Hugo Häring and Ludwig Hilberseimer [1a–b]. These
the large openings and the maximum spatial architects worked for the State Research Institute on
12
integration achieved in these extroverted detached the economics of the single storey house.
houses for secluded country areas be expanded to Hilberseimer also taught at the Bauhaus from 1929
13
the urban context, where space was more limited mainly on the subject of mass housing. Their
and less private? Mies would find an answer to this interest in the courtyard house reflected the search
question in the introverted courtyard house. for an equilibrium between green and built areas, as
Protected by peripheral masonry walls, the house’s had been championed by the Garden City movement.
interior could be even more transparent without loss This type of house could be easily adapted to
of privacy. This reconciliation of seclusion and Germany’s colder winter. Large openings could face
openness permitted a stronger fusion of the house the sunniest orientation without loss of privacy.
9
and its gardens within the city. Moreover, with larger courtyards and a one-story
This solution was latent in a number of Mies’s height limit, the interior of the house would be
projects of the 1910s and 1920s through the presence shaded neither by its own peripheral walls nor by
of enclosed or semi-enclosed courtyards. Among neighbouring units.
these projects were the above-mentioned Concrete Among the several variations of the L-shaped
and Brick houses, the Kröller-Müller Villa (1912–13), courtyard house that Hilberseimer developed, the
and the House for the Architect in Werder (1914). type E (1931) became notable for its economy and
Besides houses, these projects also included efficiency [1c]. This house is characterised by a
temporary exhibition pavilions: the Glass Room at corner that shelters the entry and service areas,
the Stuttgart Werkbund Exhibition of 1927, the and connects the private and the social wings.
German Pavilion for the International Exposition of These two wings face the private courtyard and the

1 L-shaped house
plans, 1931, by Hugo
Häring (a), Ludwig
Hilberseimer (b, c),
and Ludwig Mies van
der Rohe (d).

2 Schematic plan of
the traditional
courtyard house (a),
the detached house
(b), and Mies van der
Rohe’s courtyard
houses – Row House,
1931 (c), Courtyard
House with Round
Skylight, 1934 (d),
1 House with Three
Courtyards, 1934 (e),
and Courtyard
House with Garage,
1934–5 (f).

Luciana Fornari Colombo  The Miesian courtyard house

 history   arq . vol 19 . no 2 . 2015 125

sunniest orientations: south and west. Moreover, 3 Model of the 12/15/1938-1/15/1939.

Courtyard House Chicago, The Art
this house is composed of standardised with Round Skylight, Institute of Chicago,
components, and allocates space for anticipated originally titled Ryerson and
‘Project for a Small Burnham Archives,
growth. A garage was not included. Access streets House 1934’; Art Edward A. Duckett
would be narrow and limited to pedestrians in Institute of Chicago Collection, Digital
exhibition File # 198602_
order to increase population density and
14 ‘Architecture of Mies 150504-001.
economical viability. van der Rohe’,

Development
Like Hilberseimer’s House Type E, Mies’s initial supervised at the Bauhaus were Howard Dearstyne,
16
courtyard house study – the Row House – is also Eduard Ludwig, Edgar Hed, and Pius Pahl.
dated from 1931 and based on the L-shaped plan Dearstyne remembered, ‘Mies was to make many
[1c–d]. Yet, Mies’s project introduced some changes ingenious variations of this simple court house, and
that reflected the broader transition from the his students, including me, were all to experiment
17
approach of the previous Bauhaus director, Hannes with it.’ Dearstyne added that ‘the plans we did for
Meyer, to that of the new director, Mies van der this house were all pretty much alike, varying only in
18
Rohe. Hannes Meyer used to emphasise the details.’ As Mies kept the courtyard house exercise
economical and functional aspects of architecture. throughout his entire career as educator, numerous
Mies, on the other hand, emphasised the cultural student projects similar to Mies’s courtyard houses
and artistic aspects, while still valuing rationality, were produced.
discipline, and efficiency. In subsequent variations on his modern courtyard
In fact, in comparison with Hilberseimer’s house house idea, Mies attempted to reinforce the union of
type E, Mies’s Row House has more floor space and architecture and nature by increasing the number of
fewer bedrooms – one instead of three. With less gardens and by decentralising them in such a way
need of privacy, Mies could reduce the number of that interior spaces could face two gardens
interior walls and only subtly arrange interior spaces simultaneously. Thus, instead of the traditional O, U,
with furniture, a few low lightweight partitions, and or H-shaped plan, Mies adopted the L, T, or I-shaped
a transparent glass skin. The mullions of this skin plan within the rectangular space defined by the
were reduced to a minimum number and thickness, windowless peripheral walls [2c–f]. This
reinforcing the visual integration with the gardens unconventional plan configuration approximated
and the perception of the interior of the house as the introverted courtyard house to its opposite, the
being equivalent to the whole space of the land lot extroverted detached house, which is characterised
contained by the windowless peripheral walls. by external gardens [2a,b]. Yet, this plan
Like Hilberseimer, Mies soon assigned to his configuration can still be primarily associated with
students experiments with the courtyard houses that the courtyard house typology because it attaches the
he developed from then on. Following the master- roof of the house to windowless peripheral walls in
apprentice model, teacher and students unified their at least two sides. Moreover, Mies’s proposal
efforts and creativity to test and refine certain sharpened the contrast between hermetic exterior
15
architectural ideas. Among the students that Mies and open interior, maximising the inherent ability

  The Miesian courtyard house   Luciana Fornari Colombo

126 arq . vol 19 . no 2 . 2015    history

4 Ludwig Mies van der

Rohe, House with
Three Courtyards:
interior perspective,
after 1938. Pencil,
cut-out
reproduction (detail
from Georges
Braque: Fruit Dish,
Sheet Music and
Pitcher, 1926) on
illustration board,
30 x 40’ (76.2 x 101.6
cm). New York, The
Museum of Modern
Art, The Mies van der
Rohe Archive. Gift of
the architect. Acc.
no.: 686.1963.

5 Plan drawings: Row

House, 1931 (a),
Courtyard House
with Round Skylight,
1934 (b), House with
Three Courtyards,
1934 (c), Courtyard
House with Garage,
1934–5 (d), and
Group of Courtyard
Houses, 1938 (e).

monograph produced by the Museum of Modern Art

in New York in 1947, Mies presented drawings of the
Row House (1931), the House with Three Courtyards
(1934), the Courtyard House with Garage (1934–5),
and the Mountain House (1934), besides the Group of
20
Courtyard Houses (1938). New presentation
drawings were especially prepared for this occasion
based on earlier sketches with the help of Mies’s
21
assistant and student George Danforth. Among the
drawings exhibited were interior perspectives in
collage, a modern technique that had emerged from
the Cubist and Dada avant-garde and that Mies
22
started using more systematically after 1938. The
‘floating’ collaged elements introduced in these
perspectives represented the elements that were
independent from the steel frame structure of the
23
building. These elements were set against a faintly
drawn architectural space, reinforcing the idea of
architecture as a neutral frame to nature, artworks,
24
and people [4]. The drawings prepared for Mies’s
exhibition of 1947 also included the plan of the
House with Three Courtyards. This plan was slightly
revised later in Werner Blaser’s book Mies van der
Rohe: The Art of Structure (1965), which was developed
25
in close collaboration with Mies. For example, the
bed was moved one module so that a column no
5 longer blocked the garden view from the bed. This
revision is consistent with Mies’s original sketches of
the 1930s.
The above-mentioned series of courtyard house
of the courtyard house typology to reconcile privacy projects shows that Mies’s experiments on this
and interior openness. theme became progressively more complex and
From his profuse courtyard house studies, Mies challenging, allowing him to test the limits of his
selected the Courtyard House with Round Skylight ideas [5]. From the Row House (1931) to the Courtyard
(1934) and the Group of Courtyard Houses (1938) for House with Round Skylight (1934), Mies kept the
exhibition through models at the Art Institute of L-shaped plan and introduced a skylight at the
Chicago soon after his immigration to America in corner and a second courtyard between the house
19
1938 [3]. Later, in the solo exhibition and and the property boundary. Such a larger lot with

Luciana Fornari Colombo  The Miesian courtyard house

 history   arq . vol 19 . no 2 . 2015 127

among original sketches of the Courtyard House

with Round Skylight, and other courtyard houses
that Mies designed in 1934, indicate flexible lot
dimensions and independence of a specific site.
Ultimately, the large suburban lots of the Hubbe
commission challenged Mies’s courtyard house idea,
stimulating further variations on this theme. In fact,
Mies continued to explore and to apply this theme to
student exercises in private classes after the Nazis
closed the Bauhaus in 1933, as the exercises
developed by Michel van Beuren and Frank Trudel,
27
among other students show.
Sketches of the Courtyard House with Skylight
6 (1934) test various plan configurations, including a
plan with a more compact service area, which is very
similar to the plan of the House with Three
Courtyards (1934). To achieve the latter, the architect
virtually only needed to change the area covered
with the skylight into a third courtyard [6–8]. This
final change increased outdoor space and advanced
the inversion of the position of the courtyards from
the centre to the periphery in a way that enhanced
the fusion of house and gardens. This change also
enhanced spatial diversity. The house acquired
small, medium, and large-sized courtyards, which
were located next to the service, private, and social
areas respectively.
In the following project, the Courtyard House with
7 Garage (1934–5), Mies further modernised the
courtyard house by exploring ways to incorporate
the recently popularised automobile into the
28
domestic space [9]. The presence of the car was
highlighted as walls conformed to its trajectory
towards the garage, and broke with the orthogonal
modulation that had predominated in Mies’s
courtyard house designs until then.
By integrating various house units into a city
block, Mies concluded his studies on a modern
courtyard house that especially met the urban
context’s higher demand for privacy. In the resulting
Group of Courtyard Houses (1938), a peripheral brick
wall delimited the whole block in the same way it
had been used to delimit each house unit. Moreover,
8
the house units were dynamically arranged within
the block, as the houses’ indoor and outdoor areas
6 Ludwig Mies van der 7 Ludwig Mies van der 8 Ludwig Mies van der
Rohe, Plan for a Rohe, Plan for a Rohe, Plan and partial had been arranged within the boundaries of each lot.
Courtyard House Courtyard House sketch plans for a This flexible arrangement overcame the usual
with Round Skylight, with Round Skylight, House with Three
ca. 1934; graphite on ca. 1934; graphite on Courtyards; ca. 1934;
monotonous and rigid repetition of a house type,
tracing paper, 21.5 x tracing paper; 21.5 x graphite, with while still conforming to a common rectangular city
29.8 cm. Montréal, 29.7 cm. Montréal, additions in blue, red
block. Mies’s block of courtyard houses also differed
Collection Canadian Collection Canadian and yellow pencil, on
Centre for Centre for tracing paper, 21.5 x from usual subdivision plans in having larger lots. In
Architecture, Architecture, 29.8 cm. Montréal, fact, this block measured almost one acre but
DR1987:0259. DR1987:0261. Collection Canadian
Centre for contained only three houses, whose entrances were
Architecture, isolated in different sides. Having no entrance, the
DR1987:0265.
fourth side could be attached to another group of
houses in order to form a bigger block. Mies
setback also appears in the subdivision plan that considered that the urban impact of the long
Mies was designing for Margarete Hubbe’s property windowless peripheral walls could be attenuated by
in Magdeburg (1934–5). Yet, the relationship between setting these walls back from the street and by
his courtyard house studies and his subdivision plan introducing trees and shrubs. In this manner, Mies
for the Hubbe property seems to be limited to further advanced toward his goal of reconciling
generic similarities, as remnant drawings of this urban living and nature.
subdivision plan show the lots either empty or During the 1930s, Mies also tested his courtyard
26
occupied by detached houses. Moreover, variations house idea in the country context. There, the walled

  The Miesian courtyard house   Luciana Fornari Colombo

128 arq . vol 19 . no 2 . 2015    history

9 Ludwig Mies van der

Rohe, Plan for a
Courtyard House
with Garage, 1934–5;
graphite, pen and
red ink, and blue
coloured pencil on
cardboard; 32.7 x 50
cm. Montréal,
Collection Canadian
Centre for
Architecture,
DR1994:0005.

10 Ludwig Mies van der

Rohe, Mountain
House. Perspective
view, ca. 1934.
Charcoal and
graphite on tracing
paper, 21 x 39’ (53.3 x
99.1 cm). New York,
The Museum of
Modern Art, The
Mies van der Rohe
Archive. Gift of the
architect. Acc. no.:
9 706.1963.

10

courtyards could provide protection from strong epitomised by the large charcoal perspective that uses
winds, strategic openings towards the surrounding distant vanishing points and foregrounds one corner
nature, and a rich variety of transitional spaces of the house to emphasise the house’s horizontality
between intimacy and openness. Mies’s country and to enhance the verticality of the surrounding
courtyard house, the Mountain House (1934), was mountains through contrast [10]. This exterior
inspired by mountainous views that he enjoyed perspective also shows the house in natural stone
during a trip to the Alps with a group of students texture partially covered by vegetation. The base of the
eager to continue learning after the closure of the house seems to dissolve into the sinuous topography
30
Bauhaus. He designed this house while students also while its lateral limits seem to continue infinitely.
developed house exercises for a site of their choice in
29
that area. In sketches of the Mountain House, Mies Practical applications
tested several configurations, the predominant one During the 1930s, Mies had the opportunity to apply
being the L-shaped volume embracing a walled court. elements of his courtyard house idea to
Each wing of this volume received a large opening to commissioned projects: the Lemke House (1932–3),
permit cross views through the courtyard, the house, the Hubbe House (1934), and the Ulrich Lange House
and the landscape. (1935) [11a–c]. The Lemke House incorporated the
As nature was no longer restricted to the walled L-shaped plan that Mies had previously envisioned in
gardens, but spread far and wide, Mies changed the the Row House. Meanwhile, the Hubbe House
focus of his studies from plans and interior views to incorporated devices that Mies had been developing
elevations and exterior perspectives. The goal of in the House with Three Courtyards: the
strongly integrating the house into the nature is decentralised walled courts and a social wing in a

Luciana Fornari Colombo  The Miesian courtyard house

 history   arq . vol 19 . no 2 . 2015 129

12
11

11 Plan drawings: Group of Six 12 Courtyard house like volume of maximum interior openness into the
Lemke House, Berlin, Courtyard Houses, plan by Philip
clear span pavilion concept, a prominent theme of
1932–3 (a), Hubbe Lafayette Park, Johnson (a), Eduard
House, Magdeburg, Detroit, 1955–63 (d), Ludwig (b), Yau Chun his American work.
1934 (b), Ulrich Row Houses, Wong (c), Eduardo Mies’s courtyard house idea influenced not only
Lange House, Lafayette Park, Souto de Moura (d),
Krefeld, 1935 (c), Detroit, 1955–63 (e). John Keenen and his architectural practice, but also his teaching. This
Terence Riley (e), and idea became the motif of an introductory exercise
Ryue Nishizawa (f).
that Mies applied to all his students, from the
Bauhaus until his retirement at the Illinois Institute
of Technology (IIT). Later on, this exercise was
glass skin with views over two exterior spaces. Besides maintained at IIT by former students including
34
these devices, the Lange House also included a garage George Danforth and Arthur Takeuchi. This
and curved partitions, which Mies explored in the exercise predefined windowless peripheral walls and
Courtyard House with Garage. However, to satisfy the a general internal skeleton so that students could
clients’ conventional standards of privacy and need focus on principles of spatial distribution without
for more bedrooms, the interior spaces of these worrying about complicated forms, structures, and
commissioned projects had to be more enclosed and relationships with the surroundings. These
fragmented. In addition, the peripheral walls had to principles applied to various situations, from the
be more open and extroverted because, being in walls of a house to the buildings of a city. In fact, the
large suburban or countryside lots, they did not need courtyard house exercise slowly progressed from the
35
to be shared with neighbouring units. Mies’s house unit to the city block. For example, under
courtyard house idea was especially compromised in Mies’s and Hilberseimer’s supervision, a group of
the Lemke House because of budget and time approximately forty IIT senior students produced a
limitations. Yet, owing to the continuous economical large model showing another possible variation of
36
and political crisis in Germany, the Lemke House was Mies’s Group of Courtyard Houses.
the only commissioned project mentioned that was Following its promotion through teaching,
built. Similarly, later proposals that more firmly exhibitions, and publications, Mies’s courtyard
adhered to Mies’s original idea, such as the Group of house idea has influenced the work of various
Six Courtyard Houses for the Lafayette Park Housing architects [12]. Among pioneer examples are the
Estate in Detroit (1955–63), also failed to materialise house that the American architect Philip Johnson
31
[11d]. Still, Mies could incorporate elements of his built for himself in Cambridge, Massachusetts
37
original idea, such as the walled courtyards, into (1942), and the works of Mies’s former students
residential and non-residential projects, as such as Eduard Ludwig’s two-room house with
exemplified by the Lafayette Park’s one story row patio (Brussels World Fair, 1958) and Yau Chun
32
houses (1955–63) [11e] and the New National Gallery Wong’s group of courtyard houses built in Chicago
33 38
in Berlin (1962–8). Mies also incorporated the box- (1961–7).

  The Miesian courtyard house   Luciana Fornari Colombo

130 arq . vol 19 . no 2 . 2015    history

Among later examples of courtyard houses in transformation. From the detached house and
which Mies’s influence was acknowledged are the apartment block, his attention was directed to the
group of courtyard houses in Matosinhos (1999) that courtyard house as he joined the Bauhaus and
was designed by the Portuguese architect Eduardo continued studies on this house type that were
39
Souto de Moura, and the group of courtyard houses already being developed and promoted at this
in Miami (2006) that was designed by American school. This house type would allow Mies to
architects John Keenen and Terence Riley. Similarly, explore more deeply the potential of modern
a general Miesian influence was acknowledged by the building techniques to integrate indoor and
Japanese architect Ryue Nishizawa, who designed a outdoor spaces, in such a way that was especially
weekend courtyard house for a country site in suitable for the challenging urban context. In his
40
Gunma (1998). Like Mies’s courtyard house, these investigations, Mies modernised the traditional
houses by Moura, Keenen and Riley, and Nishizawa courtyard house typology by introducing the steel
contain three courtyards, a fluid and generous skeleton, the glass skin, and a decentralised
circulation, minimal partitions, and glass skin facing arrangement of courtyards in order to maximise
walled gardens. In addition, Moura’s and Nishizawa’s spatial flexibility and fluidity. This Miesian
courtyards are decentralised and vary in size. courtyard house emerged from a series of projects
Meanwhile, Keenen and Riley’s courtyard houses that included the Row House (1931), the Courtyard
provide space for trees and shrubs on the sidewalk; House with Round Skylight (1934), the House with
and interior spaces with views through gardens on Three Courtyards (1934), the Courtyard House with
41
both sides. Besides adhering to the Miesian Garage (1934–5), the Mountain House (1934), and
archetype, the above-mentioned projects also the Group of Courtyard Houses (1938). Mies
introduced features that indicate the continuous consistently applied the essential elements of this
openness of the theme of the modern courtyard courtyard house idea to subsequent works and to
house for further investigation. student exercises. Through teaching, exhibitions
and publications, this idea has continuously
Conclusion influenced the work of various architects, thus
Mies’s investigations into the modern dwelling promoting a profound equilibrium between
were stimulated by a context of acute housing openness and privacy, modernity and tradition,
shortage, technological development, and cultural technology and nature.

Notes 4. For anthologies of Mies’s writings stated, ‘we should attempt to

1. For more information on this please refer to: Philip Johnson, bring nature, houses, and human
house type, please, refer to: Brian Mies van der Rohe, 3rd edn (New beings together into a higher
Edwards, Courtyard Housing: Past, York: Museum of Modern Art, 1978 unity’; Ludwig Mies van der Rohe,
Present and Future (Abingdon; New [orig. pubs. 1953, 1947]); Fritz ‘Christian Norberg-Schulz: A Talk
York: Taylor & Francis, 2006); John Neumeyer, The Artless Word, Mies van with Mies van der Rohe’, in: The
S. Reynolds, Courtyards: Aesthetic, der Rohe on the Building Art Artless Word, Mies van der Rohe on the
Social, and Thermal Delight (New (Cambridge, MA: MIT, 1991). In fact, Building Art (1958),
York: John Wiley, 2002); Günter this manuscript of 1962 seems to p. 339.
Pfeifer and Per Brauneck, Courtyard have remained unpublished 8. Mies also presented these projects
Houses: A Housing Typology (Basel, until now. in the following lecture: Ludwig
Boston, Berlin: Birkhäuser, 2008). 5. Ludwig Mies van der Rohe, Mies van der Rohe, ‘Lecture, 19
2. Sonit Bafna, Associate Professor at ‘Program for the Berlin Building June 1924’, in: The Artless Word, Mies
Georgia Tech College of Exposition’, in: The Artless Word, van der Rohe on the Building Art, pp.
Architecture, points out this gap Mies van der Rohe on the Building Art 249–50. Unlike Wolf Tegethoff
in Miesian scholarship: Sonit (1931), p. 310; Ludwig Mies van der (1985), who argues that the
Bafna, ‘A Morphology of Rohe, ‘What Would Concrete, Concrete and Brick Country
Intentions: the Historical What Would Steel Be without Houses were intended for specific
Interpretation of Mies van der Mirror Glass?’, in: The Artless Word, clients, possibly Mies himself, this
Rohe’s Residential Designs’ Mies van der Rohe on the Building Art article follows Fritz Neumeyer
(unpublished doctoral thesis, (1933), p. 314. These writings are (1991), Paul Bernard Clark (1996),
Georgia Institute of Technology, also quoted in: Wolf Tegethoff, Sonit Bafna (2001), and other
2001), p. 51. Mies van der Rohe: the Villas and authors who see these works as
3. This hypothesis is proposed in: Country Houses (New York; polemical devices and as avant-
Terence Riley, ‘From Bauhaus to Cambridge, MA: MoMA; MIT, 1985), garde experiments; see: Paul
Court-house’, in: Mies in Berlin, pp. 66, 111. Bernard Clark, ‘A Topical Analysis
Museum of Modern Art, ed. by 6. Ludwig Mies van der Rohe, ‘What of Personal hygiene in Ludwig Mies
Barry Bergdoll and Terence Riley Would Concrete, What Would van der Rohe’s House Building as a
(New York; London: Thames & Steel Be without Mirror Glass?’, p. Prolegomena to the Study of
Hudson, 2001), p. 331; Terence 314. Also quoted in: Tegethoff, Mies Pragmatic Building’ (unpublished
Riley, ‘Court-House Studies, 1934– van der Rohe: the Villas and Country doctoral thesis, University of
35’, in: Mies in Berlin, pp. 292–5; José Houses, p. 66. Pennsylvania, 1996), p. 56; Bafna,
Altés Bustelo, ‘La casa con patio en 7. Ludwig Mies van der Rohe, ‘A Morphology of Intentions: the
Mies van der Rohe’, Forma y ‘Notebook 1927–8’, in: The Artless Historical Interpretation of Mies
construcción en Arquitectura, 8 (May Word, Mies van der Rohe on the van der Rohe’s Residential
2013), pp. 42–57 (p. 56). Building Art, pp. 281–2. Mies also Designs’, pp. 30, 83, fn. 10.

Luciana Fornari Colombo  The Miesian courtyard house

 history   arq . vol 19 . no 2 . 2015 131

9. Tegethoff, Mies van der Rohe: the to George Danforth, Mies’s student man and artworks can carry on
Villas and Country Houses, pp. 13, 67. and assistant at that time, these their own lives […] Nature, too,
10. Ibid., pp. 67–8, pp. 124–6; Bustelo, models were not prepared by shall live its own life.’ Ludwig Mies
‘La casa con patio en Mies van der students at IIT but rather brought van der Rohe, ‘Christian Norberg-
Rohe’, p. 44. from Europe; Montreal, Canadian Schulz: A Talk with Mies van der
11. Ludwig Hilberseimer, ‘Die Centre for Architecture Collection, Rohe’ (1958) in: The Artless Word,
Kleinstwohnung im Treppenlosen Mies and American Colleagues Mies van der Rohe on the Building Art,
Hause’, Bauhaus Zeitschrift für Oral History Project, George p. 339.
Gestaltung (January 1931). For Danforth and Kevin Harrington, 25. Werner Blaser stated: ‘This book
more information on this Transcript George Danforth took shape during a number of
friendship, please refer to: Franz interviewed by Kevin Harrington, conversations I was privileged to
Schulze and Edward Windhorst, 1996, p. 83; George Danforth and have with Mies van der Rohe in the
Mies van der Rohe a Critical Biography, Pauline Saliga, Oral History of George impressive atmosphere of his
New and Expanded Edition (Chicago: Danforth Interviewed by Pauline study in Chicago in 1963 and
University of Chicago Press, 2012), Saliga, 1986, Chicago Architects 1964’; Werner Blaser, Mies van der
pp. 77, 115. Oral History Project (Chicago: The Rohe: the Art of Structure (Berlin:
12. Duncan Macintosh, The Modern Art Institute of Chicago, 2003), Birkhäuser, 1993 [orig. pub. 1965]),
Courtyard House (London: Lund p. 29; available online: <http:// p. 220.
Humphries, 1973 [orig. pub. digital-libraries.saic.edu/u?/ 26. Ludwig Mies van der Rohe, Arthur
1960]), pp. 27–35. caohp,2544> (accessed 2014). Drexler, and Franz Schulze, The
13. Bauhaus Dessau Foundation, 20. Johnson, Mies van der Rohe. In this Mies van der Rohe Archive, 20 vols
‘Ludwig Hilberseimer’, available pioneer monograph, Johnson (New York: Garland, 1986–92), vol.
online: introduced these projects as 6 (1986), p. 187.
<http://bauhaus-online.de/en/atlas/ ‘court-houses’. 27. For illustrations of such student
personen/ludwig-hilberseimer> 21. As office letters show, Danforth projects, please, refer to:
(accessed 2014). was nominated the ‘Chicago Harrington et al., Mies van der Rohe,
14. Macintosh, The Modern Courtyard Research Associate for the Book Architect as Educator.
House, pp. 27–35. and Exhibition’ in 1947 in order to 28. The back of the original sketch of
15. Mies’s teaching approach is prepare presentation drawings of this project is signed and dated by
discussed in: Kevin P. Harrington, various projects, including the Mies; Montreal, Canadian Centre
Rolf Achilles, Charlotte Myhrum et courtyard houses, specially for for Architecture (CCA), Mies van
al., Mies van der Rohe, Architect as Mies’s solo exhibition at the der Rohe collection, Ludwig Mies
Educator (Chicago : University of Museum of Modern Art in New van der Rohe, Courthouse with
Chicago Press, 1986). York (MoMA) and for the Curved Elements, Plan, 1934–5,
16. For examples of Bauhaus student accompanying book catalogue, DR1994:0005.
projects supervised by Mies, please which was the first monograph on 29. Dearstyne, Inside the Bauhaus,
refer to: Hans M. Wingler, The his work. Washington, DC, Library p. 247.
Bauhaus: Weimar, Dessau, Berlin, of Congress, Manuscript Division, 30. For further details on this project,
Chicago (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, Papers of Ludwig Mies van der please refer to: Franz Schulze,
1969 [orig. pub. 1962]); Barry Rohe, Philip Johnson, Letters to ‘Mountain House 1934’, in: The Mies
Bergdoll, Leah Dickerman et al., Ludwig Mies van der Rohe, 29 Oct. van der Rohe Archive, ed. by Arthur
Bauhaus 1919–1933: Workshops for 1946; 13 Feb, 21 Feb, 16 Apr, 3 Jun Drexler; Franz Schulze, vol. 4
Modernity (New York: The Museum 1947, General office file 1923–69, (1986), p. 16; Glaeser, Ludwig Mies
of Modern Art, 2009); Harrington container 35, 40. Danforth was a van der Rohe: Drawings in the
et al., Mies van der Rohe, Architect as natural choice because he had Collection of the Museum of Modern
Educator; Linda Rayher, ‘Hed already redrawn the Tugendhat Art, note to plate 11; Cristina
(Hecht), Edgar’, Institut Kunst- und House for exhibition at MoMA in Gaston Guirao, Mies: el proyecto
Baugeschichte/Fachgebiet 1938–9. Moreover, he was familiar como revelación del lugar (Barcelona:
Kunstgeschichte; karlsruhe institut für with Mies’s work as his student Fundación Caja de Arquitectos,
Technologie (2013), available online: (1938–43, 1946–7), draftsman, and 2005), p. 205; Tegethoff, Mies van
<http://kg.ikb.kit.edu/ teaching colleague at IIT. Danforth der Rohe: the Villas and Country
archexil/338.php> (accessed 2015). and Saliga, Oral History of George Houses, p. 120.
17. Howard Dearstyne, Inside the Danforth Interviewed by Pauline 31. Kent Kleinman, ‘Mies’s Curve:
Bauhaus (New York: Rizzoli, 1986), Saliga, p. 44; Harrington et al., Mies Technology, Design, and
p. 226. van der Rohe, Architect as Educator, Perfectibility’, in: Hilberseimer/ Mies
18. Howard Dearstyne, ‘Howard p. 157. van der Rohe Lafayette Park Detroit,
Dearstyne, Mies van der Rohe’s 22. Ludwig Glaeser, Ludwig Mies van der ed. by Charles Waldheim
Teaching at the Bauhaus in Rohe: Drawings in the Collection of the (Cambridge, MA: Harvard
Dessau’, in: Bauhaus and Bauhaus Museum of Modern Art (New York: University Graduate School of
people, ed. by Eckhard Neumann The Museum of Modern Art, 1969), Design, 2003), p. 123; Peter Carter,
(New York: Van Nostrand commentaries on plates 22–5. Mies van der Rohe at Work (London:
Reinhold, 1993), pp. 222–9. 23. Sze Tsung Leong, ‘Representing Phaidon, 1999 [orig. pub. 1974]),
19. Models originally exhibited under the Almost Nothing: the Drawings pp. 122–3.
the title ‘Project for a Small House of Ludwig Mies van der Rohe’, in: 32. Only the backyard of these row
1934’ and ‘Residential Group’, as Conventions of Architectural Drawing: houses is walled. Despite being
shown in photographs of the Representation and Misrepresentation, above street level, their front yard
exhibition available in: Chicago, ed. by James S. Ackerman and is not introspective enough to be
Art Institute of Chicago, Ryerson & Wolfgang Jung (Cambridge, MA: associated with the courtyard
Burnham Libraries, Edward A. Harvard University Graduate house typology. For further details
Duckett Collection, 1931–78 School of Design, 2000), pp. 183– on this project, please refer to:
Accession No. 1986.2, Exhibitions: 200 (p. 189). George Edson Danforth, ‘Pavilion
Architecture of Mies van der Rohe, 24. Mies stated, ‘I hope to make my Apartments and Town Houses,
Box FF 4.1, Box FF 4.31. According buildings neutral frames in which 1955–1963, Lafayette Park, Detroit,

  The Miesian courtyard house   Luciana Fornari Colombo

132 arq . vol 19 . no 2 . 2015    history

MI’, in: The Mies van der Rohe Archive, 41. Terence Riley and John Keenen, near the Dutch border where the
ed. by Franz Schulze, vol. 16 (1992), K/R: Projects/Writings/Buildings (New climate is pleasant but where
pp. 412, 454, fig. 5506.3. York: Ten Thousand One, 2007); outside living can be spoiled by
33. Other examples of non-residential Philip Nobel, ‘Mies in Miami’, The strong winds. The Lange house had
projects that incorporated New York Times (7 December, 2006), two courts. The court for the kitchen
courtyards are the unbuilt German available online: <http://www. and garage formed an enclosed
Pavilion for the International nytimes.com/2006/12/07/ space. The court for the living room
Exposition in Brussels (1934) and garden/07miami. remained open to permit views
the Museum for a Small City (1940– html?pagewanted=all&_r=0> of the surrounding country
3). (accessed 2014); Robert Landon, but provided the necessary
34. George Danforth, ‘IIT Architectural ‘Bauhaus Heads South’, aïshti protection against the wind.
Education’, A + U, Architecture & magazine, pp. 198–200, available Certainly, these projects developed
Urbanism, 124 (January, 1981), online: <robert-landon.com/ from the architectural ideas of my
p. 193; Arthur Takeuchi, interview Design-Architecture-Miami.pdf> earlier buildings. Both the brick
with the author, Chicago, (accessed 2014). house and the Barcelona Pavilion
September 2010. possessed structural and spatial
35. Dearstyne, ‘Howard Dearstyne, Appendix characteristics which may be seen
Mies van der Rohe’s Teaching at the Letter from Ludwig Mies van der Rohe in the court houses.
Bauhaus in Dessau’, pp. 226–7; to Mr Stefano Desideri dated 29 I think that a really good
Washington, DC, Library of January 1962. architectural idea will stand
Congress, Sound Division, John Washington, DC, Library of development and variation in this way
Peter Collection, Transcripts, Congress, Manuscript Division, because a really good idea will always
Ludwig Mies van der Rohe and John Papers of Ludwig Mies van der Rohe. have a general application. I think this
Peter, Mies van der Rohe interview attitude is very important in
by John Peter, 1964, January 29, 1962 architecture today.
pp. 1–2; Box 5 RPA 00183. Mr. Stefano Desideri Sincerely yours,
36. New York, The Museum of Modern Corso Romana 65 Mies van der Rohe
Art, the Mies van der Rohe Archive, Montecatini Terme, Italia
Documents and photo files, Folder Illustration credits
1944_59 IIT. Dear Mr. Desideri: arq gratefully acknowledges:
37. Detlef Mertins, Mies (London; New Thank you for your recent letter Author, 1, 2, 5, 11, 12
York: Phaidon Press, 2014), p. 242. regarding the court houses. I made Ludwig Mies van der Rohe, Collection
38. Danforth and Saliga, Oral History of these projects at the Bauhaus and Centre Canadien d’Architecture
George Danforth, p. 66; available during the years 1931 to 1938, and it (Canadian Centre for Architecture),
online: <http://digital-libraries. was a pity that they were not built at Montréal, 6, 7, 8, 9
saic.edu/u?/caohp,2544> (accessed that time. I am sure that the court Ludwig Mies van der Rohe, licensed by
2014); Werner Blaser, Patios: 5000 house is one of the best solutions AUTVIS, Brazil (2015), 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
años de evolución desde la antigüidad possible for low dwellings, and I Ludwig Mies van der Rohe (Gift of the
hasta nuestros días (Barcelona: GG, think that it is particularly suitable Architect), Digital image, The
1997 [orig. pub. 1985]), p. 172; for town and city living where privacy Museum of Modern Art, New York,
Werner Blaser, Mies van der Rohe, is a very important requirement. and Scala, Florence (2015), 4, 10
Continuing the Chicago School of During the thirties, we made plans Ryerson and Burnham Archives, The
Architecture, 2nd edn (Basel; Boston: for court houses of various sizes, Art Institute of Chicago, 3
Birkhäuser Verlag, 1981 [orig. pub. some with one court, others with two
1977]), pp. 218–23; or three courts. The use of free Acknowledgements
‘Zweizimmerhaus mit Wohnhof ‘, standing walls and large glass areas This article derives from the doctoral
in: Bauen + Wohnen, 12 (1958), within a peripheral enclosing wall thesis ‘Theoretical Projects, Nature
p. 406. gave these plans a great richness, even & Significance through the Case Study
39. David Cohn, ‘Holding court’, World when the house was quite small. of Mies van der Rohe’s Work’ (2012)
Architecture, 86 (May 2000), However, without the large glass that the author completed at the
pp. 78–81. areas I think that the essential University of Melbourne, Australia,
40. Ryue Nishizawa, ‘SANAA: Kazuyo character of these plans would not with scholarship support from this
Sejima and Ryue Nishizawa: have been possible. University and from the Norman
Designboom Interview’, Designboom If a city block were to be developed Mcgeorge Bequest. Appendix
(October 2005), available online: with court houses, in either tight or material is published by courtesy
<http://www.designboom.com/ loose arrangements, I am certain that of the heirs of Ludwig Mies van
interviews/sanaa-kazuyo-sejima- the access spaces between the houses der Rohe.
ryue-nishizawa-designboom- could be developed in a very
interview/> (accessed 2014). Mies’s interesting way. The walls of the Author’s biography
influence is perceptible, for houses could be set back from the Luciana Fornari Colombo is a faculty
example, in the Toledo Museum of access roads and paths and the member of the Department of
Art Glass Pavilion (Ohio, 2006) space between planted with trees Architecture at the Federal University
designed by SANAA (Ryue and shrubs. of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil.
Nishizawa and Kazuyo Sejima). Of course, a court house is, also,
This project relates more closely to possible in the country. I proposed Author’s address
Mies’s Museum for a Small City such a house in 1935 for Ulrich Luciana Fornari Colombo
(1940–3). Lange. This would have been built [email protected]

Luciana Fornari Colombo  The Miesian courtyard house