' 
I0 the ART OF GARDEN DESIGN IN ITALY 
' viridarii ’ were a similar class of slaves, though it has been suggested that their work was more devoted 
to the ■ viridaria’ in the houses, and probably they were also the gardeners employed in smaller villas 
or town houses. Besides these two classes there was the ‘ aquarius,’ who had charge of the fountains 
and waterworks, and we also find the special names of ‘ vinitor and olitor. 
In spite of the formality of the Roman garden, often allowed to be carried to an excess, we 
occasionally find a tendency to break out against this extreme stiffness in design, and an endeavour to 
conform more to natural methods, thus anticipating the modern landscape school. Both Nero and 
Trajan had gardens in which all was left to the free play of nature ; but as the former had selected one 
of the wild mountain gorges in the Apennines, and the latter had built upon the summit of a mountain 
pass, their choice of the landscape style was probably dictated by the positions they had chosen, and 
though attempts to imitate nature were by no means rare, no school of landscape gardening was 
destined long to flourish among a nation in whom a sense of law and order was so deeply rooted. 
The Romans had always a great love of flowers, shrubs, and verdure generally. Indeed, the 
passion developed to such a degree that it was deemed necessary to pass laws suppressing the 
extravagant excess with which flowers were used. But in spite of this, it does not appear, either from 
Pliny's descriptions or from other authors, that the flower garden occupied the most prominent place 
in the general garden scheme. At no period in the history of the Italian garden has the designer 
relied upon flowers to obtain great effects, but rather on the disposition and symmetry of the various 
parts in their relation to each other, and effects have been invariably obtained rather by means of archi¬ 
tecture than by floral display. The garden art of the Roman consisted altogether in the contrast between 
the beauties of the garden enclosure and the wilder aspect of the surrounding country. As yet the 
treasures of the splendid vegetation of other lands were but little known, and, in consequence, the 
Romans, restricted as they were to a very limited flora, were much tempted to rely upon artificial 
means for their effects. First and foremost of these was the ‘ ars topiaria,’ in which the vegetation 
was cut and trimmed into every conceivable shape and form by the ‘ topiarius,’ who with his knife and 
shears was for ever annihilating every vestige of nature's dominion, and reducing the shrubs to 
all manner of artificial shapes—animals, ships, figures—all in striking contrast to the free forms of 
nature. To our modern notions these topiary excesses perhaps appear ridiculous ; but we may find 
some ground for excuse by bearing in mind that the means afforded by nature in those days were 
small in comparison with the abundant resources of later times. Their trees, too, such as the box, 
laurel, myrtle, and cypress, being naturally stiff in form, were eminently suited for the purposes of 
topiary work. We must not imagine, however, that the entire area of the garden was planned in this 
extremely formal manner. The more remote parts were laid out with thickets where no attempt was 
made to restrict the growth of trees, which, being left to their natural shapes, served rather to give 
greater contrast to the artificial forms of the topiary work. 
The principal trees and shrubs to be found in an ancient Italian garden were the laurel, 
stonepine, pomegranate, ilex, plane, myrtle, cypress, and various kinds of firs. Acanthus and ivy were 
much used to hide the tree-trunks, which were considered unsightly. The Roman flower ‘par 
