Penn State University Press Beyond the Garden of Epicurus: The Utopics of the Ideal Roman Villa Author(s): ANNETTE LUCIA GIESECKE Source: Utopian Studies, Vol. 12, No. 2 (2001), pp. 13-32 Published by: Penn State University Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20718313 Accessed: 09-10-2015 02:08 UTC REFERENCES Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20718313?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references. Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/ info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org. Penn State University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Utopian Studies. http://www.jstor.org This content downloaded from 132.174.254.72 on Fri, 09 Oct 2015 02:08:50 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Beyond theGarden of Epicurus: The Utopies of the Ideal Roman Villa ANNETTE LUCIA GIESECKE A garden is less an imitation of Nature, thanNature her self put before our eyes, and called into play with Art. The Abb? Noel-Antoine Pluche (1688-1761), fromLe spectacle de laNature (Kruft 257) Nature's workings, so inspiring toman, were imitated by him and thenprodded with a littlemagic. (Neutra 97) e immemorial been a part of utopia and the cre The garden has from ation of Utopian spaces.1 Raw nature may threaten or itmay beckon; itmay terrifyus or draw us in.The terrifyingaspect of nature we may wish to tame while the alluring aspect becomes something we wish to capture. In both instances, the human impulse is one of inscription, of control, and the result is the enjoyment of amoenitas, pleasantness.2 This enjoyment is no frivolous thing,for some way, which is people need contact with trees and plants and water. In hard to express, people are able to be more whole in the presence of nature, are able to go deeper into themselves, and are somehow able to draw sustaining energy from the life of plants and trees and water. (Alexander, Ishikawa, and Silverstein 806) It is thus hardly surprising thatEden, the Christian world's first paradise, was a garden. Indeed the origins of Paradise itself lie in the garden. The term "paradise" is derived from the Greek paradeisos, which is in turn a "an enclosed space." The "para translation of the old Persian pairidaeza, dises" thatcaptured the imagination of theGreeks were the hunting grounds of Persian kings, for these teemed with a stunning variety of plant and ani mal life.The Persian prince Cyrus himself reportedly found working in his paradise garden a source of "security and contentment" (Thacker 16). Fur ther, it is entirely apposite that Socrates and Phaedrus select a grassy, cool, and shady spot beneath a tall plane tree as a location for their discourse on the nature of the soul.3 The place they select too is a garden, for the very act of choosing is a form of demarcation and separation from the general land scape. Regardless of its "shape," itmay be said that a garden affords seclu sion, security, and tranquility, precisely what is needed for philosophical reflection and for a general restoration of the spirit. This content downloaded from 132.174.254.72 on Fri, 09 Oct 2015 02:08:50 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 14 UTOPIANSTUDIES The essential restorative and reifyingvalue of the inscribed landscape is what makes the garden so critical to the success of domestic architecture, and this has certainly not gone unnoticed by architectural Utopians. The necessity of a dwelling's meaningful dialog with nature, both with respect to location and with respect to prospect, whether real or illusory, is one of the unifying threads in early tomid twentieth centuryModern architecture; this dialog is central to thework, for example, of Neutra, Schindler, Le Cor busier, and Wright. It is also a distinguishing feature of domestic architec ture in Roman Italy, particularly in the urban centers of Pompeii and Herculaneum. Because the evidence they afford is extraordinarily complete, these two towns have become the focus of most studies of urban, single family homes in Italy for the years prior to the 79 AD eruption of Vesuvius. Although the houses of Pompeii and Herculaneum are anything but uniform in size and layout, it becomes readily apparent from a general survey that there was indeed an ideal towards which all appear to have aimed.4 A dwelling's proximity to that ideal was evidently determined by the financial circumstances of its owners. This ideal can be characterized as a civic ideal, and it is an ideal that is represented most clearly by the grandest houses in Pompeii and Herculaneum.5 The ideal is thatof rus in urbe, of bringing the countryside into the city.6 There are two ways inwhich the urban Roman villa or house strove to create a "natural" milieu for daily life; one of thesewas via archi tecturalmediation and the other an application of the graphic arts. The first method was the physical creation of paradisical spaces, of oases contained within the confines of a given dwelling. Just how important the inscribed horticultural island was to the Roman psyche is evidenced by the ubiquity of gardens in buildings of every size and variety, shops, inns, and bath build ings included.7 The importance of the garden is furtheremphasized by the fact that itwas very plainly the visual focus of themost significant public and private spaces of a Roman house.8 It is not so much geometric symme trythat theRoman urban house aimed for as the illusion of visual symmetry, and itwas a symmetry dictated by the focal point established by the interior landscape. Thus upon entering a house representative of the ideal, the visi tor's gaze would be directed immediately beyond the threshold to the recep tion area marked by the atrium and further to the tablinum, the study beyond the atrium where business was traditionally transacted. The visitor's gaze would not, however, come to rest here, for itwas the garden lying beyond the tablinum thatwas the visitor's visual vector. The astonishing effect of the experience of entry is vividly described by Le Corbusier: the little vestibule which frees your mind [As a visitor, you first experience] from the street. And then you are in the Atrium; four columns in the middle a feeling of (four cylinders) shoot up towards the shade of the roof, giving force and a witness of potent methods; but at the far end is the brilliance of the a large ges garden seen through the peristyle which spreads out this lightwith ture, distributes it and accentuates it, stretching widely from left to right,mak ing a great space. Between the two is the Tablinum, contracting his vision like This content downloaded from 132.174.254.72 on Fri, 09 Oct 2015 02:08:50 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions The Utopies of the Ideal Roman Villa 15 the lens of a camera. On the right and on the left two patches of shade?little ones. Out of the clatter of the swarming street which is for every man and full of picturesque incident, you have entered the house of a Roman. (169-70) A visitor who progressed beyond the public spaces to themore private sec tor of the house would find himself or herself still governed by the spatial directives of the garden. Thus when one was properly positioned to dine, it was still the garden which emphatically asserted itself as the dominant physical reality, and it should be noted that dining was much more to the Romans than the satisfaction of a human need. Itwas a ritual of great social, and one could say even political, significance. As a scenic backdrop for daily life, the garden was the veritable frame of existence. Always verdant and never threatening, the garden could both soothe and inspire. It is not, however, so much the significance of physical landscape to the Roman house as the importance of illusionistically painted landscape which is the focus of this essay. The importance of physical landscape remained more or less constant, but garden painting underwent dramatic changes at certain telling historical periods. Most scholars of architecturewill be aware that the interiors of Roman houses were painted, but theywill be less aware of the factors determining the nature of this decoration. The earliest identifi able style in Roman wall painting has been appropriately designated the First orMasonry Style, and it is characterized by the emulation in paint and modeled stucco of masonry and other architectonic elements, including dec orative veneers.9 Thus a typical First Style scheme would, in a purely deco rativemanner, mimic courses of marble-faced, ashlar blockwork embellished with ornate moldings and cornices. Far from being a cheap alternative to the real thing, this manner of decoration was certainly costly, and itwas an itwas a fiction based on a impressive indicator of social status. Because structural reality, this style of painting served not only to embellish but also to solidify thewall visually; itwas a form of literal illusion. Around 80 BC, however, these seemingly impenetrable surfaces were transformed. It rapidly became fashionable to "pierce" walls by the application and exploi tation of a variety of illusionistic devices pioneered by Greek masters of the fifthand fourth centuries BC. These celebrated Greeks had suggested vol ume by the use of highlights and shading, and they carried out experiments in linear perspective with increasing success.10 Just how convincing their work was in terms of creating the illusion of reality may be gathered, to some extent, from anecdotes that have long outlived theirmasterpieces. Among themost memorable and instructive tales is one preserved by the elder Pliny about Zeuxis of Herakleia (NH XXXV. xxxvi. 65). In the course of a contest with the painter Parrhasios, Zeuxis had painted a cluster of grapes so realistically that birds approached to feed on them. Having observed the behavior of the birds and assured of victory, Zeuxis confi dently requested the removal of the curtain covering this splendid painting, which had now been produced for display. Victory was, however, ultimately conceded to Parrhasios, and rightly so, for he had painted the very curtain which thegreat Zeuxis had taken to be real. This content downloaded from 132.174.254.72 on Fri, 09 Oct 2015 02:08:50 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 16 UTOPIAN STUDIES Armed with such suggestive illusionistic devices, the creators of the new style of Roman painting demanded of the viewer thathe or she suspend belief and allow him or herself to be drawn into a landscape variously framed by "architectural" members. In the earliest phase of the Second or Architectural Style, all thatmight be revealed was a glimpse of sky beyond a screen wall, but later, elaborate vistas of tholoi (cylindrical temples), grand colonnades, and grottoes revealed themselves. These illusionistic windows to a "world" beyond the confines of a room came to be rather large in scale, and theywere certainly impossible to ignore. Further, this form of decora tion could be found almost everywhere in a given house, in bedrooms, din ing rooms, and reception areas alike. Evidently itwas no longer enough to recapture paradise through one or more planted gardens visible from key spaces in the house. The garden was almost literally everywhere. A splendid example of theArchitectural Style embellishes a dining/reception room in theVilla of Poppaea at Oplontis (Figure 1). Here a row of columns resting on a podium projects into the space of theviewer. In the center of thewall, the podium is broken so as to afford "access" to an iron grillwork gate lead ing into a garden "beyond" the room. This garden is enclosed by a two-story colonnade, and it is dominated by a gleaming, brazen tripod. The tripod is an object sacred to the god Apollo, and its presence here endows the garden with the quality of a sanctuary. It has been said of the popularity of this painting style that itwas a symptom of the social climbing characterizing the last days of theRoman Republic. The vistas, scholars argue, are views of public buildings and their surrounds, public buildings and sacred gardens illusionistically appropriated by wealthy Romans for social and political aggrandizement.11 This view is unsatisfactory, for it fails to explain why itmust be the case that the archi tecture depicted is necessarily public. In other words, would not the repre sentation of a temple and temple garden conceived as one's own just as easily augment one's public persona? Indeed, there is ample evidence that owners of large suburban villas filled theirvast properties with a variety of architectural follies, "temples" included.12Further, the view of a temple and itsgarden would surely have an effect beyond aggrandizement. Would itnot also serve to uplift and assuage the psyche of the dwelling's inhabitants? It is this latterfunction thathas been overlooked time and again.13 On themost basic level, one's dwelling confirms one's identity and offers security. The house, or home, may be "characterized as a refuge where man gathers and expresses those memories which make up his per sonal world" (Norberg-Schulz 13). The house and its contents would on reflect and be reflections of the inhabitants, for "per accordingly always sonal identity is the content of private dwelling" (Norberg-Schulz 89). As a true representative of the owner's "self," the Roman domus came to be "a central symbol of status and honor" (Sailer 349).14 Still, it cannot be insignificant that the illusionistic opening of thewall and the invitation of landscape commenced when Roman Italywas experiencing a crisis of tre mendous magnitude. This content downloaded from 132.174.254.72 on Fri, 09 Oct 2015 02:08:50 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions The Utopies of the Ideal Roman Villa 17 1. Painting of the Second Style. Oplontis, Villa of Poppaea. Oecus 15, east wall. A Figure "sacred" garden dominated by a bronze tripod and enclosed by a two-tiered peristyle colon nade is depicted here. The garden lies "beyond" the conf?nes of the room and is accessed through a row of columns "projecting" into the viewer's space, (photo, author) This content downloaded from 132.174.254.72 on Fri, 09 Oct 2015 02:08:50 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 18 UTOPIAN STUDIES of the second century BC, Rome found itself in a difficult cri sis [...]. Its causes lay in a disintegration of Roman society, in an irreparable erosion of the basis of the Roman constitution, and in the impossibility of solv in such a way that new and more ing the manifold problems of the Republic dangerous ones did not grow out of the solution itself. This crisis was brought After themiddle to a head by the rise of particularly powerful individuals such as, ultimately, Pompeius and Caesar, Marcus Antonius and Octavianus Augustus. The senate feared the power of these men and fought bitterly against them. In these con flicts, which eventually developed into civil wars, the Republic was crushed. (Meier54) To Caesar, Cicero, and Pompey the illusionistic Second style would have been a familiar sight, and itwas this style of wall decoration thatprevailed during what were ultimately the final two decades of theRepublic. As thestresses of daily existence increasedduring theperiods of crisismark ing a good part of thefirst centuryBC, people sought an escape, and one such escape was thephilosophy of Epicurus. Epicurus's creedwas distinctlyUtopian; it was egalitarian and communallyminded.15 Itwas also secessionist in thatEpicu rus believed in the supreme importanceof self-sufficientataraxy, thepleasure of utterspiritual tranquilitytobe found incommunionwith nature.To thisLucretius, themost eloquent survivingvoice ofRoman Epicureanism, attests: ergo corpoream ad naturam pauca videmus 20 esse opus omnino, quae demant cumque dolorem, delicias quoque uti multas substernere possint. gratius interdum ?eque natura ipsa requirit, si non aurea sunt iuvenum simulacra per aedes lampadas ign?feras manibus retinentia dextris, lumina nocturnis epulis ut suppeditentur, nec domus argento fulget auroque renidet nec citharae reboant laqueata aurataque templa, cum tarnen inter se prostrati in gramine molli 30 propter aquae rivum sub ramis arboris altae non magnis opibus iucunde corpora curant, praesertim cum tempestas arridet et anni tempora conspergunt viridantis floribus herbas. (DRN 2. 20-33) Therefore we see that few things are necessary at all for the body, namely those things which assuage suffering and can provide for our use many delights; Nor, meanwhile, does nature herself require anything more pleasing, if there are not golden statues of youths placed throughout the house 20 holding flaming torches in their right hands so that theymay provide illumination for nocturnal banquets; Nor if the house does not gleam with silver and glisten with gold, or if the gilded, paneled ceiling does not echo with themusic of the cithara, when, nevertheless, stretched out together in soft grass 30 by thewater of a stream beneath the branches of a lofty tree, they enjoy themselves without great expense, season especially when theweather smiles upon them and the paints the green grass with flowers.16 This content downloaded from 132.174.254.72 on Fri, 09 Oct 2015 02:08:50 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions The Utopies of the Ideal Roman Villa 19 Thus the Epicureans escaped crisis by literal withdrawal insofar as they were able, and theywithdrew to the comforts of the garden.17 Indeed itwas recorded in antiquity thatEpicurus was the "inventor" of theRoman "pleas ure" garden; itwas he, Pliny theElder asserts, who pioneered the notion of a garden as a place of repose, otium, rather than simply as a horticultural plot.18 Epicureanism became extraordinarily popular in Italy in thewaning of the Republic, and there can be no coincidence that the interior of the Roman house should simultaneously and rather suddenly begin forcefully to incorporate landscape, albeit illusionistically. Itmay be objected that since many of the extant painted landscapes are dominated by edifices of some variety, the illusionistic vistas should not be compared with a Lucretian immersion in pure nature. There is no reason to assume that the owners of houses decorated in thismanner were all necessarily Epicureans; however, one can certainly detect a pronounced inclination at this time to look out and draw theworld beyond the house and city into one's own existence.19 What must, accordingly, be seen in illusionistic painting of the so-called Second Style are two tendencies, one of demonstrative fashionability and one of escape and comfort.20From a psychological and physiological per spective, the ideal Roman house affords a unique and singularly gratifying combination of envelopment and exposure or detachment, for it is at once inward and outward looking. These two polar modes of experience, it is claimed, are what "we all pass through in infancy and against which all our subsequent experience in life is re-enacted" (Wilson 66). Put somewhat dif ferently, the Roman house affords a pleasing combination of prospect and refuge.Here "prospect" is defined as "a condition inwhich one can see over a considerable distance," and "refuge" means "a place where one can hide; in combination they reinforce one another, creating the ability to see without being seen" (Hildebrand 16). Once of true survival value, these conditions later had a purely aesthetic effect.21The Pompeian house "looks out" in the sense that it incorporates a gradually revealed, inscribed landscape which could be viewed frommany points within; further,during years marking the end of theRepublic and thebirth of theEmpire, itcontained convincing faux vistas, longed-for vistas rendered in paint where no actual view to the outer world was possible. At the same time, the urban house, enclosed and defined as itwas by a high wall, provided a real sense of security, of envelopment. The garden and painted vistas accordingly contributed greatly to the voluptas, enjoyment, one could derive from the experience of being inside. With the defeat ofAntony and Cleopatra by Octavian atActium in 31 BC, the Republic came to an end, and the Empire or Principate began. In the first years afterActium, however, themood in Rome was not one of hope and elation at the release from decades of civil strife; rather, an uncomfort able pessimism lingered, particularly amongst the elite, for "they saw the civil war and all the other calamities as a consequence of complete moral collapse" (Zanker 1988, 101). Thus when Octavian found himself at the helm of theRoman state, he had a challenge of massive proportions on his hands. How could he remain in control of the constitution he had formerly This content downloaded from 132.174.254.72 on Fri, 09 Oct 2015 02:08:50 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 20 UTOPIAN STUDIES sworn to save? He had pledged in 36 to renounce his extraordinary powers that is precisely and return theRepublic to the Senate and the people?so what he did. Then, because he had both saved Rome and restored the Republic, the Senate conferred a series of special honors and powers upon him, with the result thathe effectively became a monarch governing against a republican fa?ade.22 In order to retain his extraordinary imp?rium, position of power, which was based on his guardianship or protectorate of the state,Augustus had to demonstrate that he was less concerned with securing his own power than with applying himself vigorously to remedying the real causes for the decay of the old Republic and with rebuilding both the state and society. Thus in conjunction with his restitution or restoration of the Republic, Augustus devised and implemented "a program to heal Roman society. The principal themes were renewal of religion and custom, virtus, and the honor of the Roman people" (Zanker 1988, 101). As part of this "program," Augustus proposed moral legislation thatwould promote the solidity of the family by imposing penalties for extra marital relations and rewarding marriage and procreation. Addressing morality in the domestic realm was, however, just one facet of the required national reform, forpietas, a key Roman virtue, demanded devotion not only to family and society but also to the gods. For this reason old temples were restored and new ones built, and traditional Roman religion was fostered and enhanced. In this atmosphere of moral regeneration, neither personal ambition nor retreatwere deemed appropriate for the Roman citizen. This new attitude heavily influenced the arts in both the public and the private sphere. Thus much to the horror of Vitruvius, the fashion for illusionistic representation of architectural elements in a realistic, optically convincing manner was replaced in the time of Augustus by a style of wall painting inwhich illu sionistic perspectives were systematically eliminated. Thereby the wall itselfwas restored to a flat surface. sumebantur nunc iniquis moribus quae ex veris rebus exempla monstra <Nam tectoriis potius quam ex rebus finitis pinguntur> inprobantur. imagines certae: pro columnis enim struuntur calami striati, pro fastigiis appa Sed haec, cum crisp?s foliis et volutis, item candelabra aedicularum sustinentia ex radicibus cum volutis teneri plures figuras, supra fastigia eorum surgentes habentes in se sine ratione sedentia sigilla, non minus coliculi dimidiata habentes sigilla alia humanis, alia bestiarum capitibus. (De Architectura VII. c. v. 3) gineculi these, which were created in imitation of Reality, are now rejected due to our perversion of tastes and ways. For presently, stuccoed walls are painted rather than truthful representations of definite things. Thus with monstrosities But in place of columns, fluted reeds appear as structural elements, and in place of one finds decorative attachments adorned with curled and twisting pediments foliage. Further, candelabra support images of shrines, and atop these shoot up clusters of thin stalks and volutes, inwhich, quite in defiance of logic, are nes tled tiny figures; frequently too, tendrils sprout harboring figures with human or even animal heads. This content downloaded from 132.174.254.72 on Fri, 09 Oct 2015 02:08:50 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions The Utopies of the Ideal Roman Villa 21 It is of no small significance that amongst the exemplars of this new "Third" painting style, the properties owned by Augustus and his family were especially prominent. What was leftwas a fragile, delicate, harmo nious, utterly restrained and classicizing architecture of candelabra-like pavilions framing a central wall zone containing what is the equivalent of a framed painting on a wall (Figure 2).23 The dramatic vistas of the Second Style were now severely checked and transformed into something vastly less tangible, something possessing a dreamlike quality. The landscapes of theThird Style still contained temples, statues of the gods, and other sacred objects, but they contained something new as well, shadowy figures of farmers, shepherds, goatherds, wayfarers, and a variety of "rustics" who represented the morality, courage, and religiosity thatmodern Rome had lost. These are Romans of the lost Golden Age, and they are represented Villa of Agrippa Postumus. Red room 2. Painting of the Third Style. Boscotrecasae, Museum. The architectural framework surrounding (16), north wall. Naples, Archaeological the sacro-idyllic landscape at the center of thiswall resembles ribbons of lace and fine filigree rather than a credible architectural construct. The landscape painting itself depicts a statue of a seated goddess on a rocky island dominated by a large tree. Two female worshippers and a child are crossing a bridge to this island, and a goatherd lounges against one of several sacred monuments. The background is dominated by a grove surrounding two temples, (photo, author) Figure This content downloaded from 132.174.254.72 on Fri, 09 Oct 2015 02:08:50 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 22 UTOPIANSTUDIES here as pious exemplars of Rome's new mission. This type of landscape painting, commonly called "sacro-idyllic," was entirely in keeping with the social disposition of theAugustan age, and it exemplified the emperor's Utopian civic ideal of a new Golden Age.24 Unlike the Hesiodic Golden Age, that of Augustus was a social order rather than a "paradisical state of indolence" (Galinsky 93). This Golden Age was based on and guaranteed by human effortno less thanmorality.25 If our understanding of the elder Pliny is correct, itwas theAugustan painter Studius (or Ludius ?) who is to be credited with the "invention" of landscape painting of this type.26 Non fraudando et Studio mam parietum picturam, divi Augusti aetate, qui primus instituit amoenissi villas et porticus ac topiaria opera, lucos, nemora, colles, piscinas, euripos, amnes, litora, qualia quis optaret, varias ibi obambu lantium species aut navigantium terraque villas adeuntium asellis aut vehiculis, iam piscantes, aucupantes aut venantes aut etiam vindemiantes. Sunt in eius exemplaribus nobiles palustri accessu villae, succollatis sponsione labantes trepidis quae feruntur, plurimae praeterea tales argutiae xxxvii. 116-17) salis. (NH XXXV. Studius due. He mulieribus facetissimi too, of the period of the Divine Augustus, must not be cheated of his first introduced themost attractive fashion of painting walls with vil las, porticoes, and landscape gardens, groves, woods, hills, fish-pools, canals, one could wish, and in them various representations rivers, coasts?whatever of people strolling about, people sailing, people traveling overland to villas on donkey-back or in carriages, and in addition people fishing, fowling, hunting, or even gathering the vintage. His pictures include noble villas reached across marshes, men tottering along with women, trembling burdens, on their shoul ders, carried for a wager, and very many such lively and witty subjects besides. landscapes also became the background for "panel" paintings with rather than "sacro-idyllic" subjects.27 These mythological mythological of them presumably adapted "copies" of Greek masters, paintings, many may also be seen as conforming to, or rather adding to, theAugustan moral program, for a moral subtext can be discovered inmuch of Greek mythol ogy. Further, there is growing evidence that paintings of mythological con tentwere grouped inmeaningful ways to underline certain themes, such as illicit love and sacrilege.28 The Age of Augustus and the illusionistic Second Style also spawned another style of wall decoration, the garden painting proper. The earliest, and perhaps the finest, exemplar of such a painting is that formerly located in the so-called Villa of Livia at Prima Porta.29 This villa had been built for the emperor's wife at a site about nine miles outside Rome in the small vil lage of Rubra, later known as Prima Porta. The paintings in question cov ered every wall of a large subterranean chamber, perhaps a dining room was (Figure 3). This room, nearly 40 feet long and nearly 20 feet wide, transformed by the paintings into "a kind of open-sided pavilion set in a paradise forest" (Ling 1991, 150). The lush vegetation does not, however, grow rampant, for it is skillfully contained by a succession of architectural Such This content downloaded from 132.174.254.72 on Fri, 09 Oct 2015 02:08:50 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions The Utopies of the Ideal Roman Villa 23 garden painting (detail), Prima Porta, House of Livia. Rome, Museo Figure 3. "Paradise" The frescoes adorning the walls of this subterranean dining room transform the Nazionale. space into an open-air terrace or patio from which to view an extremely lush garden, (photo, Alinari/Art Resource NY) landscape features. This is beyond a doubt abundant nature inscribed, not a forest proper. The thickest and largest plantings are contained by a low stone wall in frontof which is a narrow grass ambulatio, or walkway. The walkway itself is defined by a wicker border in the lower foreground, and any sort of great "depth" is suggested primarily by the expanse of open sky above the thick, contained plantings in the relatively narrow middle ground. More striking than the spatial play inherent in this painting is the almost incredible accuracy in the rendering of individual species of both plants and themyriad of birds that inhabit this garden. Striking too is the large spec trum of varieties of plants and birds represented. Here iris, roses, poppies, violets, periwinkles and chrysanthemums bloom against a backdrop of low growing plants such as ivy and ferns as well as taller trees and shrubs, which include spruce, oak, pine, cypress, palm, pomegranite, quince, olean der, laurel,myrtle, box and viburnum. Miraculously, these plants bear fruit and produce their flowers with no regard for seasonal propriety, and this above all is what affords this garden its Edenic, paradisical quality. This paradise garden is a dramatic reflection of the new regime's emphasis on the Golden Age and the primordial fertilityof Italy as palpable goals and rewards for the closure of the terriblegates of war and a return to the values and morals of old. Such imagery of plenty was characteristic of Augustan art, and it has been clearly demonstrated that no Augustan monument existed in isolation; theywere all part of a larger program whose collective meaning and purpose were carefully calculated and coordinated.30 With the passing of power fromAugustus to Tiberius and his succes sors, fashions inwall painting began to change again; the new style, the Fourth, is traditionally viewed as crystallizing under Nero.31 Without the This content downloaded from 132.174.254.72 on Fri, 09 Oct 2015 02:08:50 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 24 UTOPIAN STUDIES singular guiding vision of one inspired individual, visions of paradise would become more fragile, ultimately slipping away into decadence. Architec tural illusion returned, but in a curiously garish, theatrical guise (Figure 4). Here painted vistas to the outside often took the form of mere glimpses into vacant space through or behind a complex sc?nographie fa?ade; at least this is the case with respect to rooms thatwere more "interior" and not physi cally connected with a garden. The most realistic rendering of landscape was reserved for very small, medallion-like images of seaside and country villas in their respective natural settings and for thewalled enclosures of gardens. In the former, architecture unquestionably dominated nature, and there is a distinct preponderance of the secular over the religious. In the lat ter, it is clear that thepurpose of thepaintings was to increase the size of the garden rather than to create the illusion of a garden in a space, like Livia's Garden Room, which could not easily contain one. Inherently paradisical in and of itself, the garden remained a Utopian space, a source for inspiration and respite alike. Indeed it seems to have been the case that the numbers of villa gardens in Pompeii increased steadily, particularly in the decades just prior to the eruption of Vesuvius. However, now more than ever accumu lated material wealth became a backdrop for the drama of life, and nature controlled was a quantifiable commodity. It has been said that the goal of capturing rus in urbe reached itshighest degree of perfection in Nero's massive Domus Aurea, Golden House.32 There was no greater showman thanNero, whose histrionic propensities are well known, and nowhere the inscription of naturemore ostentatious than in Nero's villa with its artificial lake and acres of parkland. This was a "subur ban" villa right in the heart of Rome. Suetonius's description of theDomus Aurea is telling for several reasons. First, it reveals the degree of extrava gance inwhich Nero, who never wore the same garment twice and who never made a journey without the accompaniment of at least one thousand the carriages, indulged himself. Second, it betrays just how valuable inscribed landscape was to amoenitas and luxuria, pleasance and luxury.33 in alia re tarnen damnosior quam in aedificando domum a Palatio Esquilias usque fecit, quam primo transitoriam, mox incendio absumptam resitutamque auream nominavit. De cuius spatio atque cultu suffecerit haec rettulisse. Vestibulum eius fuit, in quo colossus CXX pedum staret ipsius effigie; tanta laxitas, ut porticus tr?plices miliarias haberet; item stagnum maris instar, cir Non cumsaeptum aedificiis ad urbium speciem; rara insuper arvis atque vinetis et pascuis silvisque varia, cum multitudine omnis generis pecudum ac feraram. In ceteris partibus cuneta auro lita, distincta gemmis unionumque conchis erant; ut flores, fistulatis, ut tabulis eburneis versatilibus, cenationes laqueatae unguenta desuper spargerentur; praecipua cenationum rotunda, quae perpetuo ac noctibus vice mundi circumageretur; balineae marinis et albulis flu entes aquis. Eius modi domum cum absolutam dedicaret, hactenus compro bavit, ut se diceret quasi hominem tandem habitare coepisse. (Nero xxxi. 1-2) diebus There was building. nothing, however, He made a palace inwhich extending he was more all the way ruinously prodigal from the Palatine than in to the This content downloaded from 132.174.254.72 on Fri, 09 Oct 2015 02:08:50 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions The Utopies of the Ideal Roman Villa 25 Insula Orientalis II, palaestra. Naples, Figure 4. Painting of the Fourth Style. Herculaneum, Museum. A complex and extremely ornate theater building/set is represented Archaeological here. The central, balustraded aedicula is embellished with akroteria consisting of tritons, pegasi, and a theater mask. Several layers of elaborate architectural components recede into the background, (photo, author) This content downloaded from 132.174.254.72 on Fri, 09 Oct 2015 02:08:50 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 26 UTOPIAN STUDIES which at first he called the House of Passage, but when itwas Esquiline, burned shortly after its completion and rebuilt, the Golden House. Its size and splendor will be sufficiently indicated by the following details. Its vestibule was large enough to contain a colossal statue of the emperor a hundred and twenty feet high; and itwas so extensive that it had a triple colonnade a mile long. There was a pond too, like a sea, surrounded with buildings to represent cities, besides tracts of country, varied by tilled fields, vineyards, pastures and woods, with great numbers of wild and domestic animals. In the rest of the house all parts were overlaid with gold and adorned with gems and mother-of pearl. There were dining rooms with fretted ceilings of ivory, whose panels turn and shower down flowers and were fitted with pipes for sprinkling the guests with perfumes. The main banquet hall was circular and constantly revolved day and night, like the heavens. He had baths supplied with seawater the edifice was finished in this style and he dedicated and sulphur water. When could it, he deigned last beginning to say nothing more in theway of approval to be housed like a human being. than that he was at This was certainly a vision of paradise, but itwas not paradise in the sense of "utopia." Rather, Nero's Domus Aurea was conceived very much in the spirit of theHellenistic dynasts's paradeisoi.34 The latterwere sumptuous gardens, often filled with both exotic flora and fauna, which allowed their owners to "live like gods"?and like the Persian monarchs with whom this of 1998, 2). Nero's paradeisos genre garden originated (Wallace-Hadrill was themanifestation of a personal vision and primarily contrived for the gratification of one. A strictlypersonal dream cannot be considered Utopian. Justhow obsessed Nero was with self-gratification is highlighted by his urban aggrandizement, his appropriation of public land for private use. The effects of Nero's insistence upon unreasonable land acquisition was appar ently shocking to many. As one witty and disgruntled Roman citizen remarked: "Rome is becoming a house; so, offwith you toVeii, Roman citi zens!?unless that infamous house occupies Veii as well" (Suetonius, Nero xxxix. 2). By contrast Augustus, who was otherwise obsessed, trodmore carefully. Extremely conscious of the necessity of being an exemplary model of the piety and morality he preached to, or ratherwished upon, theRoman people, Augustus wore only clothes made by his wife and daughter and built only a modest residence for himself in Rome. It is true that theHouse of Augustus was strategically located on the Palatine near the so-called Hut of Romulus, Rome's legendary firstking, and contiguous to a temple ofApollo, but itwould be wrong to assume thatAugustus was so indiscreet as to pre sent himself as equal to either Apollo or Romulus. Instead, Augustus dis played piety and "traditionalism" through this association. In the same vein, Augustus was extremely wary of appropriating lands occupied by others. Thus Suetonius reports thatAugustus adjusted the design of the Forum Augusti because "he did not dare towrest the neighboring houses from the hands of theirowners" (Augustus Ivi. 2). Also unlike Nero, Augustus early recognized the value of providing public space in the city, and did not wait to bequeath a park to the public in his will. The enormous area in a structure con the northern Campus Martius surrounding his Mausoleum, This content downloaded from 132.174.254.72 on Fri, 09 Oct 2015 02:08:50 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions The Utopies of the Ideal Roman Villa ceived of even before he acquired sole power, was developed public garden, with varied trees and splendid walks. (Beard 25) 27 as a far-flung Augustus's dreams were "social dreaming," and theywere accordingly Utopian in spirit.35These dreams were reflected everywhere in Rome, in a public and private edifices alike. It isAugustus's dream of moral society based on traditionalRoman values which lies behind the sacro-idyllic land scapes and Third Style mythological ensembles featured in the trompe l'oeil pinacothecae, picture galleries, embellishing walls decorated during his success The of Augustus's program depended on the suppression of reign. thewidespread desire for "retreat" intimated by the vistas of the Second Pompeiian Style, and there is no reason to believe that thiswas not a "natu ral" process. That is, as confidence in the new regime grew, fashion and taste changed, for fashion and taste are never simply based on whim. They are indicators or communicators of a social condition.36What painting of the Third Style replaced was a style of painting also founded on a social dream. This was not the dream of one for society as a whole, but the sub conscious dream of many for release from the horrors of protracted civil strife.What the latter dreamed of was the ability to transport themselves into a variety of gardens, often represented as sacred gardens, where their spiritswould be restored. Through illusionistic painting of the Second Style, Romans of the late Republic tremendously amplified a principle fundamen tal to the conception of theRoman house and articulation of space therein. This principle, which is the "primacy of the garden," in itself evidences a strong Utopian impulse underlying urban architecture in the domestic sphere. The ideal Roman house had a garden at its core; itwas constructed around and was simultaneously penetrated everywhere by nature inscribed. Thus itwould be in the reach of all, or most, to (re)capture a bit of paradise and to thrive in its embrace. The garden is and always has been a safe place in and from which to contemplate the uncertainties that lie beyond its bounds. This is implicit in Lucretius's acutely perceptive, metaphorical illustration of the solace and security proffered by Epicurus's Garden: Suave, mari magno turbantibus aequora ventis, e terramagnum alterius spedare laborem; non quia vexari quemquamst iucunda voluptas, sed quibus ipse malis careas quia cernere suave est. (DRN 2.1-4) it is,when on the great sea thewinds trouble thewaters, to gaze from shore upon another's great tribulation. Not because any person's sufferings are a delightful pleasure, Pleasant but because seeing what ills one lacks is sweet. NOTES debt of gratitude is owed to the following: Donald Dunham; Lauren Petersen; Lyman Sargent and the anonymous referees at Utopian Studies; my audience at the Society for (Vancouver, Oct. 2000) where the framework of this paper Utopian Studies Annual Meeting 1. A Tower This content downloaded from 132.174.254.72 on Fri, 09 Oct 2015 02:08:50 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 28 UTOPIAN STUDIES was for awarding me a General University Grant to presented; and theUniversity of Delaware expedite the research resulting in this essay. The title of this work alludes to two essays in Colin Rowe's The Mathematics of the Ideal Villa and Other Essays: "The Mathematics of the Ideal Villa" and "The Architecture of remarks on the suitability of a villa and its gardens to Utopia." The first includes Palladio's reflection and the attainment of happiness on the part of "ancient sages" (3). In the second essay, Rowe remarks upon the priority of architectural to literary utopias in the Renaissance If the creation of gardens is accepted as a Utopian pursuit, this statement should cer tainly be extended temporally. In the context of this essay, the term "villa" is used in the broadest possible sense. The (206). object of discussion here is the Roman urban house, domus. Some of these houses are so lav ish that they are commonly referred to as villae (yillae urbanae or villae pseudo-suburbanae). Vitruvius does not shed any light on the use of the term "villa." He uses theword aedificium, building, and distinguishes private from public buildings. For a discussion of the use of the term "villa" in antiquity and the various types of villae, see Ackerman, Mielsch, and Percival. For a brief discussion of gardens in utopia, see Hunt 1992, 306-35. 2. For gardens as a product of inscription, see Hunt 2000, especially 1-30. On the history of gardens and the benefits of the garden to humankind, see also Thacker. 3. Plato, Phaedrus 4. Detailed 229a. discussions of the houses include: Bek, Clarke, McKay 5. The phrase "civic ideal" in Pompeii (especially 30-63), is employed here and Herculaneum (particularly the former) 1994. Richardson, and Wallace-Hadrill to suggest that the creation of gardens was extremely prevalent in the dwellings of the citizen body as a whole and thus necessarily per ceived collectively as a positive feature. The phrase is not intended to suggest thatmost gar dens were created by individuals for the enjoyment of all. 6. See Bek and Purcell. 7. For a detailed discussion of Pompeian gardens accompanied by an extensive catalog, see Jashemski. A very different work, and to some extent outdated, is the classic work of Grimal. 8. This is the central argument in Bek. 9. The division of the distinct phases of Roman/Pompeian fresco painting into four styles (named First, Second, Third, and Fourth Style, respectively) is based on the pioneering work of Mau. The most accessible and comprehensive work on Roman painting is that of Ling 1991. 10. For clear and authoritative discussions of advances in Greek painting, see Robertson and 204-8) and Swindler 195-416. (especially 60-79,106-9,147-56,172-82, 11. Variations of this argument can, for example, be found in Engemann, Lehmann, Wallace Hadrill 1994, and Zanker 1998. 12. See Ackerman 13. There treat"was 35-61, McKay 100-135, Mielsch, Percival, Purcell, and Zanker 1998. are a few notable exceptions. The notion of Second Style painting as a form of "re and Wesenberg. suggested by Beyen, whose work is recalled by Borbein, McKay, 14. A discussion 15. See 16. All of the house as a reflection of status can also be found inWiseman. the author's previous discussion (Giesecke, especially 3). translations of ancient texts are the author's unless otherwise noted. Jones (62-93) presents a concise history of Epicureanism in Italy. of this passage in Pliny's Natural History, see Wallace-Hadrill 1998, 5. slightly different take on this basic idea is presented by Borbein, who focuses on the 17. Howard 18. For a discussion 19. A connection 20. McKay, of the Lucretian way of viewing theworld with painting of the Second Style. 1998 make similar observations about the especially 46-47, and Wallace-Hadrill garden proper. 21. What Hildebrand sees as the success nation of refuge and prospect, of Frank Lloyd Wright's houses, namely the combi to the Roman house. Hildebrand relies heav is also applicable This content downloaded from 132.174.254.72 on Fri, 09 Oct 2015 02:08:50 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 29 The Utopies of the Ideal Roman Villa ily on the work of Appleton and psychobiology. in the area of landscape aesthetics and of Kaplan on aesthetics of theAugustan period abound. Works consulted here (and upon which these are based) include: Eder, Galinsky, A.H.M. remarks on Augustus Jones, Meier, Millar and Wallace-Hadrill and Zanker 1988. 1993, Segal, Syme, 22. Discussions 23. See von Blanckenhagen and Alexander for a detailed description of Figure 2. also sacro 24. The vision of a primeval paradise or Utopian tendency in pastoral poetry?and discussed by Leach (especially idyllic landscape painting?is 1-100), who believes that the viewed Romans country life as a "paradigm of man's the organization thinking about of the world" (100). 25. The notion of physical theme of Virgil's Georgics, labor as critical for the dawning of a new Golden Age is a major especially 1.121ff. 26. Ling 1977 delivers a thorough, much cited treatment of the possible or probable tion of Studius. The citation reproduced here is Ling's reading of the text. innova standard work on this subject is that of Dawson. and Wirth. Ling 1991, by contrast, 28. See Bergmann, Brillant (53-89), Schefold, Thompson, in mythological ensembles believes that too much is made of possible thematic connections 27. The (135-40). 29. Works and Kellum, of great importance to the understanding both of which were consulted here. of this painting include those of Gabriel 30. See, for instance, Castriota, Galinsky, and Zanker 1988, all passim. For a discussion of the Golden Age as reflected inAugustan literature, in particular Virgil's Georgics, see Johnston. 31. For a detailed discussion of stylistic phases of the Fourth Style and their dates, see Bar bet 180-214. 32. SeePurcell. 33. The tone with translation adopted here is that of the text's editor, for it captures Suetonius's inimitable accuracy. and Classical 34. On paradeisoi course, not the first to "assume" biting gardens, see Bazin 9-29 and Thacker 9-31. Nero was, of the role of a Persian King or Hellenistic dynast in thisman 155 on the early first century BC gardens of Lucullus. ner; see, for example, Keaveney 35. See Sargent for the definition of utopianism adopted here. for a brief discussion 36. See Wallace-Hadrill 1998, 11 (with bibliography), of the meaning of fashion. REFERENCES Ackerman, James S. The Villa: Form and Ideology of Country Houses. Princeton: Princeton 1990. UP, Alexander, Christopher, Sara Ishikawa, and Murray Silverstein. A Pattern Language: Construction. New York: Oxford UP, 1977. Towns, Buildings, London: JohnWiley & Sons, 1975. of Landscape. Appleton, Jay. The Experience Barbet, Alix. La peinture murale romaine: les styles d?coratifs pomp?iens. Paris: Picard, 1985. The Art of theGarden. Boston: Bulfinch , 1990. Beard, Mary. "Imaginary Horti: Or Up the Garden Path." Horti Romani: Atti del Convegno Internazionale Cime and Eugenio La Rocca. Roma, 4-6 maggio 1995. Ed. Maddalena Rome: L'Erma di Bretschneider, 1998. 23-32. Bazin, Germain. Paradeisos: on Earth: Modem inArchitecture a Creation Bek, Lise. Towards Paradise Space Conception of Renaissance Humanism. Herning: Odense UP, 1980. Bergmann, Bettina. "The Roman House as Memory Theater: The House of the Tragic Poet in Pompeii." The Art Bulletin LXXVI. 2 (1994): 225-56. This content downloaded from 132.174.254.72 on Fri, 09 Oct 2015 02:08:50 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 30 UTOPIANSTUDIES vom zweiten bis zum vierten Stil. Wanddekoration Beyen, Hendrik Gerard. Die pompejanische I and II. i.Den Haag: Martinus Nijhoff, 1938 and 1960. von and Christine Alexander. Peter H. Blanckenhagen, des Deutschen Mitteilungen Erg?nzungsheft. Heidelberg: Borbein, Adolf H. "Zur Deutung des zweiten pompejanischen von Schwerwand und Durchblick Stils." Neue Forschungen Aurel Bongers, and Helmut Kyrieleis. Recklinghausen: Visual Narratives: Storytelling Brillant, Richard. Cornell UP, The Paintings from Boscotrecasae. Instituts, R?mische Abteilung. Sechstes 1962. Archaeologischen F.H. Kerle Verlag, auf den Wandgem?lden Ed. Bernard Andreae inPompeji. 1975. in Etruscan and Roman Art. Ithaca NY: 1984. Castriota, David. The Ara Pacis Augustae and the Imagery of Abundance Early Roman Imperial Art. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1995. and in Later Greek 250: Ritual, Space, and Decora Clarke, John L. The Houses of Roman Italy, 100 B.C.-A.D. tion. Berkeley: U of California P, 1991. Rome: Dawson, Painting. Mythological Landscape Christopher M. Romano-Campanian L'Erma di Bretschneider, 1965. Eder, W. "Augustus and the Power of Tradition: The Augustan Principate as Binding Link and Empire: between Republic and Empire." Between Republic Interpretations of Augustus and His Principate. Ed. Kurt A. Rafflaub and Mark Toner. Berkeley: U of Cal ifornia P, 1990. 71-122. Joseph. Architekturdarstellungen Engemann, der ersten Phase r?mische Wandmalerei des fr?hen zweiten Stils: Illusionistische und ihre Vorbilder in der realen Architektur. Heidelberg: F.H. Kerle Verlag, 1967. Gabriel, Mabel M. Livia*s Garden Room at Prima Porta. New York: New York UP, 1955. Galinsky, Karl. Augustan Culture: An Interpretive Introduction. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1996. Giesecke, Annette Lucia. "Lucretius and Virgil's Pastoral Dream." Utopian Studies 10. 2 (1999): 1-15. Grimal, Pierre. Les jardins romains. 2nd ed. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France: 1969. inFrank Lloyd Wright's Houses. Hildebrand, Grant. The Wright Space: Pattern and Meaning Seattle: U ofWashington P, 1991. Hunt, John Dixon. Greater Perfections: Pennsylvania P, 2000. _. Gardens and the Picturesque: The Practice of Garden Theory. Philadelphia: U of Studies in theHistory of Landscape Architecture. Cambridge, MA: The MIT P, 1992. F. The Gardens of Pompeii, Herculaneum, and the Villas Destroyed Jashemski, Wilhelmina 1979. by Vesuvius. 2 vols. New York: Caratzas, Johnston, Patricia A. Vergil's Agricultural Brill, 1980. Golden Age: A Study of theGeorgics. Augustus. New York: W.W. Norton & Co., 1970. Tradition. London: Routledge, 1989. The Epicurean Stephen. "Aesthetics, Affect, and Cognition: Environmental Leiden: E.J. Jones, A.H.M. Jones, Howard. Kaplan, lutionary Perspective." Keaveney, Arthur. Lucullusi Environment and Behavior 19: 1 (1987): 1992. Preference from an Evo 3-32. A Life. London: Routledge, inAugustan Rome: The Garden Room Kellum, Barbara A. "The Construction of Landscape 2 (1994): 211-24. theVilla ad Galinas." The Art Bulletin LXXVI. Kruft, Hanno-Walter. Ronald Taylor, A History of Architectural Theory from Vitruvius to the Present. Trans. Elsie Collander, and Antony Wood. New York: Princeton Architectural P, 1994. Le Corbusier. at Towards a New Architecture. Trans. Frederick Etchells. New York: ger, 1970. This content downloaded from 132.174.254.72 on Fri, 09 Oct 2015 02:08:50 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Prae The Utopies of the Ideal Roman Villa Eleanor Winsor. Leach, UP, Vergil's Eclogues: Landscapes Cornell 1974. Roman Wall Paintings Lehmann, Phyllis Williams. Museum of Art. Cambridge, MA: Archaeological Ling, Roger. Roman Painting. Cambridge: Cambridge _. Ithaca NY: of Experience. 31 "Studius and the Beginnings of Roman Studies67 (1977): 1-16. in theMetropolitan from Boscoreale Institute of America, 1953. UP, 1991. Landscape Painting." Journal of Roman Lucretius. De Rerum Natura Libri Sex. Ed. Cyril Bailey. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1985. inPompeji. Leipzig: G. Reimer, 1882. Mau, August. Die Geschichte der dekorativen Wandmalerei in theRoman World. Ithaca NY: Cornell UP, 1975. McKay, A.G. Houses, Villas, and Palaces in Rome." Meier, Christian. "C. Caesar Divi filius and the Formation of the Alternative Between Republic and Empire: Interpretations of Augustus and His Principate. Ed. Kurt A. Rafflaub and Mark Toher. Berkeley: U of California P, 1990. 54-70. Beck Ver Harald. Die r?mische Villa: Architektur und Lebensform. M?nchen: CH. lag, 1987. Millar, Fergus and Erich Segal, ed. Caesar Augustus: Seven Aspects. Oxford: Clarendon P, 1984. Neutra, Richard. Survival Through Design. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1954. Mielsch, Christian. The Concept of Dwelling: On theWay to Figurative Architecture. Norberg-Schulz, New York: Rizzoli, 1985. Percival, John. The Roman Villa: An Historical Introduction. Berkeley: U of California P, 1976. Plato. Opera II: Parmenides, Philebus, Symposium, Phaedrus, tores. Ed. John Burnet. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1941. Alcibiades, Ama Hipparchus, Pliny. Natural History. Ed. E.H. Warmington. Trans. H. Rackham. Vol IX. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP, 1984. "Town in Country and Country in Town." Ancient Roman Villa Gardens. Purcell, Nicholas. on the History of Landscape Architecture, X. Ed. Elisa Oaks Colloquiums DC: Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collec beth B. MacDougall. Washington, tion, 1987.185-203. Dumbarton Richardson, Lawrence. Pompeii: An Architectural History. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 1988. Robertson, Martin. A Shorter History of Greek Art. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1981. The Mathematics Rowe, Colin. "The Architecture of Utopia." of the Ideal Villa and Other Essays. Cambridge, MA: MIT P, 1976. 206-23. _. "The Mathematics of the Ideal Villa." The Mathematics Other Essays. Cambridge, MA: Sailer, Richard P. "Familia, Domus, (1984): 336-55. Sargent, Lyman Tower. "The (1994): 1-37. Schefold, Karl. Pompejanische Suetonius. MA: MIT and the Roman Conception Three Malerei. The Lives of the Caesars. Harvard UP, 1913-14. Christopher. P, 1979. The History Faces of Utopia Revisited." Sinn und Ideengeschichte. Basil: Goold. Trans. J.C. Rolfe. of Gardens. Berkeley Mynors. and Oxford: Oxford UP, 38. 4 Studies .Schwabe, 5. 1 1952. 2 vols. Cambridge, 1929. and Los Angeles: and Literary Evidence Mary Lee. "The Monumental 9 (1960/61): 36-77. Antiquity." Marsyas Vitruvius. De Architectura Books VI-X. Ed. E.H. Warmington. bridge, MA: Harvard UP, 1934. Ed. R.A.B. Utopian Ed. G.P. Thompson, Virgil. Opera. Villa of the Family." Phoenix Swindler, Mary Hamilton. Ancient Painting. New Haven: Yale UP, Syme, Ronald. The Roman Revolution. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1939. Thacker, of the Ideal P, 1976. 1-28. U of California for Programmatic Trans. Painting Frank Granger. 1985. This content downloaded from 132.174.254.72 on Fri, 09 Oct 2015 02:08:50 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Cam in 32 UTOPIANSTUDIES Wallace-Hadrill, nazionale L'Erma Andrew. "Horti and Hellenization." Horti Romani: Roma, 4-6 maggio 1995. Ed. Maddalena 1998. 2-12. di Bretschneider, _. Houses _. Augustan Cime Atti del Convegno Inter La Rocca. Rome: and Eugenio Princeton: Princeton UP, and Society inPompeii and Herculaneum. Rome. London: Bristol Classical , 1993. 1994. am Ausgang der Republik: Der Zweite Pom Burkhardt. "R?mische Wandmalerei pejanische Stil." Gymnasium 92 (1985): 470-88. Wilson, Colin St. John. "The Natural Imagination: An Essay on the Experience of Architec ture." The Architectural Review 185: 1103 (1989): 64-70. Wesenberg, Wirth, Theo. Museum "Zum Bildprogramm 90. 2 (1983): 450-5. der R?ume und in der Casa dei Vettii." Rheinisches Wiseman, Timothy Peter. "Conspicui Postes Tectaque Digna Deo: The Public Image of Aris in the Late Republic and Early Empire." L 'Urbs: espace tocratic and Imperial Houses interna si?cle ap. J.C.). Actes du colloque urbain et histoire (1er si?cle av. J.C-lIle fran?aise de tional organis? par le Centre national de la recherche scientifique et L'?cole Rome, Rome, 8-12 mai 1985. Rome: ?cole fran?aise de Rome, 1987. 393-413. Zanker, Paul. Pompeii: Public and Private Life. Trans. Deborah Lucas Schneider. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP, 1998. _. The Power of Michigan of Images , 1988. in theAge of Augustus. Trans. Alan Shapiro. Ann Arbor: U This content downloaded from 132.174.254.72 on Fri, 09 Oct 2015 02:08:50 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions