Similar to fine art and literature, architecture tells a story. Architectural form captures the intellectual, cultural, and societal realities of its time, relaying a glimpse of history to its viewers. While design trends and styles vary culturally and regionally, certain architectural forms, such as domes, are more universal; even so, these forms are distinguished by their unique historical context. Domes are a multifaceted innovation that unifies architectural genius and cultural symbolism. While appreciated for their aesthetic appeal and structural robustness, domes transcend beyond, signifying cultural, societal, and religious paradigms that have been displayed throughout diverse civilizations in history. Let us commence a study of domes across three significant historical periods: Ancient, Renaissance, and 20th century. We will delve into specific examples of the Temple Dome in Jerusalem, the Duomo at the Cathedral of Santa Maria del Fiore, and Thomas Jefferson’s architectural accomplishments, including the University of Virginia’s Rotunda and Monticello. This exploration will illuminate synergies between architectural accomplishment and the rich vein of cultural and historical contexts that have endowed these structures with timeless significance.

            Before diving into examples, we briefly turn to the research materials that provided background knowledge for this research topic. Stierlin’s text, Islam from Baghdad to Cordoba: Early Architecture from the 7th to the 13th Century, provided extensive historical and religious information about Islamic culture and the Temple Dome. The photography and descriptions provided significant detail, while details of the Middle Eastern region’s religious and political shifts contextualized architectural references. Similarly, Mozati’s and Radzinowicz’s text, Islamic Art, provided in-depth historical context; however, the text focused more on the artistic features of the Temple Dome and had a tilt towards Islamic art. On the other hand, Hassan’s and Spahic’s text, From Anatolia to Bosnia: Perspectives on Pendentive Dome Mosque Architecture, provided analysis and critical response to mosque architecture but did not specifically reference the Dome of the Rock. Moving on to the Cathedral of Santa Maria del Fiore, History of Italian Renaissance Art written by Frederick and Wilkins, provided deep historical and architectural history specifically referencing the Duomo. While this text was deeply informative, it was not critical; however, Kieckhefer’s Theology in Stone provided a critical analysis of church architecture, which could be practically applied to this case study. A History of Interior Design, written by Pile and Gura, was a useful resource when considering the three case studies in context. While this text provided a generalist view, it was informative and specifically referenced both the Cathedral of Santa Maria del Fiori as well as Jefferson’s architecture. Stein’s text, The Worlds of Thomas Jefferson at Monticello, was useful for the historical context of neoclassical architecture and specific reference to Monticello and the University of Virginia. I also applied personal knowledge gleaned from classes taken at the University of Virginia on Jeffersonian architecture and design. In addition to the materials referenced above, Macaulay’s Mosque and Stephenson’s Heavenly Vaults proved useful in gaining an understanding of related topics; however, these texts were utilized mostly for contextual purposes and visual reference.  

Temple Dome, also referred to as Dome of the Rock, is an iconic Islamic shrine located on Mount Moriah in the Holy City of Jerusalem; this is the site of the Temple of Jerusalem. The shrine took roughly five years to build and was completed in 691 AD by Umayyad Caliph Abd al-Malik. Recognized for its soaring gold dome, the shrine holds both historical and religious significance, particularly in Islam. Upon examining the historical context of the shrine’s site, one will begin to understand the religious and spiritual significance of the Temple Dome. Before being captured by the Muslims in 637 AD during the early Islamic expansion, The Holy City of Jerusalem had been under the control of various kingdoms and empires throughout ancient times, including the Canaanites, Israelites, Babylonians, Persians, Greeks, and Romans. Even in modern times, the region remains a topic of contention due to the enduring Israeli-Palestinian conflict. That being said, these massive shifts in ownership demonstrate the momentous weight that the Holy City has held across a multitude of cultures and contexts throughout history. The magnitude of Muslim victory is heightened when looking at the religious context of the land. Such a victory signified “the appropriation of a symbol revered by Jews and Christians alike, … for it was on the sacred Dome of the Rock that Abraham had prepared to sacrifice his son when God held back his hand” (Stierlin 1996, 17). It is also important to note that “the Temple Mount, called Haram al-Sharif by the Arabs, was also the mythical place of the Miraj, the point of departure for the “Nocturnal Voyage”, whereby Muhammad contemplated the heavens, according to the commentaries of sura XVII, 1, of the Koran . . .” (17). From these excerpts, it becomes clear how significant it is that the Dome of the Rock is seated on top of this holy land. Mount Moriah is considered to be the third most holy place in Islam. The structure is not only striking but is also an incredible symbol of political turnover and religious conquest.  

With the religious context of the site, one may better understand how representative the Temple Mount is of Islamic culture; however, it is also important to note the historical influence on architectural elements of the Temple Dome. In his text, Stierlin argues that “a new civilization, founded on a new religion, cannot produce artistic and architectural expressions without a cultural heritage from which the forms of an original esthetic develop” (Stierlin 1996, 21). He then points out that the Temple Mount has a strong Roman-Byzantine influence. Constructed by an architect with Byzantine training, the Dome of the Rock speaks to Byzantine influence, as demonstrated by the marble columns, mosaics, and Corinthian capitals throughout the interior. Roman culture also had a strong influence on Islamic architecture, particularly in places of prayer and worship. Before actual mosque construction, Christian churches were often converted into places of worship, and oftentimes Islamic constructions followed octagonal or circular central plans similar to that of Roman times. Additionally, the Romans were coined with the first formal use of the dome. The Temple Dome has an octagonal plan with a drum supporting its massive cupola, which stands 36 meters tall. This intersection of the octagonal plan with the circular dome is noteworthy, as it is symbolic of passage from “earth to sky, by the intermediary of the octogen. It is a kind of mandala. Through the ritual of circumambulation, the pilgrim experiences the squaring of the circle, the union of body and soul” (Stierlin 1996, 34). This symbolism adds to the dome’s spiritual and religious impact. The cylindrical drum supports the soaring dome, which is double-framed and wooden. The interior frame is hemispherical, while the outer is raised and protruding. This double frame allows for the dome’s soaring effect, and the use of wood allows for a light and expressive shape. The most prominent feature is likely the dome’s gold gilding, which creates an elegant and striking finish. The Dome of the Rock is an iconic piece of architectural history, and while recognized for its monumental form, its religious importance amplifies its significance and creates an overall spiritual impact.

Dominating the city of Florence, the Cathedral of Santa Maria del Fiore is an emblematic construction and is widely distinguished by its feature, Il Duomo. A time of artistic accomplishment, intellectual realization, and revolutionary change, the Renaissance is a celebration of human potential. In 1296, Arnolfo di Cambio requested that the Church of Santa Reparata be replaced by a new construction, the Cathedral of Florence; however, after his death, this project was very stop-and-go, extending well into the 1350s. Throughout the construction, the design changed frequently, taking on different renderings and plans. It wasn’t until 1436 that the dome was finally consecrated. At this point, Filippo Brunelleschi (1377-1446) was overseeing the project. A true Renaissance man was a jack of all trades, and Brunelleschi was just that. From Florence, Brunelleschi was “trained as a goldsmith who eventually became a sculptor, geometrician, architect, and what would now be called an engineer,” and is credited for his talent and versatility (Pile 2013, 126). His fame stems from his architectural genius, which allowed him to build the largest and tallest dome since the Roman Pantheon; however, the shape of his dome resembled a Gothic vault more than the Pantheon itself, even though Brunelleschi had studied Roman construction. In acknowledgment of the artistic and architectural developments that came with the Renaissance period, Humanist, Leon Battista Alberti, wrote, “Who could be hard or envious enough to fail to praise [Brunelleschi] on seeing here such a large structure, rising above the skies, ample to cover with its shadow all the Tuscan people, and constructed without the aid of centering or great quantity of wood? Since this work seems impossible of execution in our time, if I judge rightly, it was probably unknown and unthought of among the Ancients”’ (Frederick and Wilkins 2007, 181). The architectural novelty that the Duomo represents is consistent with the spirit of innovation that the Renaissance period encapsulates.

While its appearance is striking, the construction of the Duomo is remarkable, setting Brunelleschi apart from other architects of his time. In laying the dome’s bricks, he used a herringbone pattern, which resulted in a jointed-and-locked structure that was strong enough to achieve significant size and height. The dome also has two layers, an inner and outer shell, which were each connected to the dome’s eight ribs. The inner shell is thick, creating a dense and weather-resistant structure, whereas the outer is thinner and allows for more freedom in the dome’s form. There are an additional sixteen ribs which act as invisible support in between the two shells. The space between the two shells acted as an area to work during construction. Hidden within was an “interlocking grid [which] was reinforced at the springing of the dome by an encircling chain of gigantic oak beams held together by iron links” (Frederick and Wilkins 2007, 186). Such technological devices acted as tension rings, which allowed Brunelleschi to construct a dome without the use of centering or external buttresses. The top of the dome features a lantern, which was not completed until Brunelleschi had passed. Below this lantern is a sizeable oculus, which provides natural light to the structure. At one point, copious amounts of light flowed through the dome’s seventy-two oculi; however, these were sealed in the sixteenth century so that the dome’s interior could be frescoed.

In his text, Theology in Stone, Kieckhefer discusses four ways of looking at a church, which corresponds to the following: the special dynamics of a church, its centering focus, its aesthetic impact, and its symbolic resonance. In looking at the Cathedral of Santa Maria del Fiore, these concepts can be easily applied and are unmistakable. One might argue that the fourth component, symbolic resonance, is the most impactful and brought to fruition by the dome itself. While the aesthetic impact of the Cathedral of Santa Maria del Fiore is unlike any other, the cultural significance is just as strong. The Duomo signals the intellectual, architectural, and artistic achievement that defines the Renaissance period and resonates strongly with Italian culture; however, in his text History of Italian Renaissance Art, Wilkins makes a peculiar note. While the Duomo seems to reflect a total harmoniousness of the Renaissance time, this was also a period of bitter political conflict, social and financial dismay, and a rampant plague. He also notes that “it was under this dome that, three years later, the Roman pope and Greek patriarch signed a treaty designed – uselessly, as it soon appeared – to end the centuries-old schism between the two branches of Christianity” (Frederick and Wilkins 2013, 185). Though often associated with positive connotations, this period also posed societal difficulty. Consequentially, the Duomo is a symbolic dichotomy, perfectly representative of both the triumph and trial that these people endured.  

Our final case study takes place across the globe with Thomas Jefferson’s architectural accomplishments at the University of Virginia and Monticello. A Founding Father and the third president of the United States of America, Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826) was a talented and well-accomplished individual. While widely recognized for his contributions as a political figure, he was incredibly passionate and a master of many trades, including law, writing, gardening, music, fitness, and architecture. Jefferson is one of the defining architects of the Neoclassical period, a time defined by the revival of classical antiquity and a shift away from the overelaborate styles of the Renaissance and Rococo periods. At this time, there was a massive resurgence of ancient Greek and Roman principles and aesthetics, favoring the use of symmetry, geometric form, classical order, and simplicity in design.

Palladian concepts come to life at Jefferson’s residence at Monticello (1796-1809) in Charlottesville, Virginia. The house is often compared to Palladio’s Villa Rotunda; the façade of the building reflects neoclassicism with elements such as porticos, ionic columns, and a central dome; however, Jefferson was innovative in his design, incorporating Virginian and colonial style. He sourced local materials, added American style, and played with asymmetrical floorplans and patterns, therefore creating this sense of eclecticism. Monticello’s dome is octagonal and centralizes the space; however, it differs from Palladio’s Villa Rotunda in that the “dome does not top an internal rotunda but is rather the roof of a curious and hard to reach upstairs room” (Pile 2013, 224). Margaret Bayard Smith, a social commentator and author, reacted to viewing the dome room in Jefferson’s home, writing, “It is a noble and beautiful apartment – perfectly round with eight circular windows and a skylight. It was not furnished, and being in the attic story, is not used. This I thought a great pity as it might be made the most beautiful room in the house” (Stein 1993, 114). Such observations suggest that the dome’s purpose was aesthetic, intended to amplify Monticello’s exterior appearance.

Less than ten miles away in Charlottesville, the University of Virginia’s Rotunda stands proudly. Jefferson was known to be inspired by Enlightenment ideals and had a strong commitment to education. To ignite a legacy of knowledge in the United States, Jefferson founded the University of Virginia in 1819. In what Jefferson claimed was his “last act of usefulness,” he focused the late years of his life on the “institution of [his] native state, the hobby of [his] old age…based on the illimitable freedom of the human mind to explore and to expose every subject susceptible of its contemplation” (Stein 1993, 107). The centering focus of the University is the Rotunda, which was originally built as a library but is now mainly used for academic ceremonies and historical representation. While the Rotunda was modeled on the Roman Pantheon, it is “reduced in size by half and is raised on a base and with six rather than eight portico columns” (Pile 2013, 224). Palladian-inspired schemes shine through, but yet again, Jefferson materializes a unique style by incorporating an oval footprint, a façade of handmade red bricks, and the backdrop of a lush, terraced Lawn. Rather than hemispherical, the Rotunda dome has a distinctive ellipse shape. At the top of the dome is an oculus, similar to that of the Roman Pantheon, which casts significant natural light throughout the interior. Corinthian columns surround the central space, furthering the concept of neoclassical architecture. While this structure has been renovated, due to a fire that occurred in 1895, it maintains the original style and integrity of Jefferson’s design as the University’s focal point.

  While Jefferson is credited with other architectural accomplishments, the University of Virginia and Monticello truly encapsulate his commitment to classical ideals and incorporation of personal aesthetics. Even more prominently, these two domed structures symbolize the philosophies that Jefferson lived and upheld in his lifetime. Though Jeffersonian history is somewhat controversial due to his slavery involvement, which we do not condone, his achievements politically, architecturally, and educationally should still be recognized and appreciated. As a graduate of the University of Virginia, ideals of hard work and dedication, honor and integrity, as well as personal and academic excellence are instilled in students beginning at the commencement ceremony on the Lawn. The domes at Monticello and the Rotunda serve more than just aesthetic appeal; they encourage a spirit of honor and pride for one’s culture and education, which Jefferson stood by.

Without a doubt, domes are an architectural and engineering genius; however, their significance surpasses that of aesthetic and functional value. These structures tell narratives of religious antiquity, cultural tendencies, and historical philosophies that define their period of construction. Through investigating three regionally and symbolically diverse case studies of domes – the Dome of the Rock, the Duomo at Cathedral of Santa Maria del Fiore, and Jefferson’s Monticello and Rotunda – it becomes abundantly clear that these structures hold a deeper meaning, each acting as signifiers of a unique story. In each of these cases, we witness an interplay of diverse influences, architectural innovation, and profound symbolism. Throughout history and still today, domes have a certain sublimity that inspires awe and causes a viewer to pause and appreciate the rich tapestry of history in front of them.