Axius aspicit Merulam et, Quid igitur, inquit, est ista villa, si nec urbana habet ornamenta neque rustica membra? Quoi ille; Num minus villa tua erit ad angulum Velini, quam neque pictor neque tector vidit umquam, quam in Rosia quae est polita opere tectorio eleganter, quam dominus habes communem cum asino? Cum significasset nutu nihilo minus esse villam eam quae esset simplex rustica, quam eam quae esset utrumque, et ea et urbana, et rogasset, quid ex iis rebus colligeret, Quid? inquit, si propter pastiones tuus fundus in Rosia probandus sit, et quod ibi pascitur pecus ac stabulatur, recte villa appellatur, haec quoque simili de causa debet vocari villa, in qua propter pastiones fructus capiuntur magni.
Axius turned to Merula and asked: How can that be a villa, if it has neither the furnishings of the city nor the appurtenances of the country? Why, he replied, you dont think that place of yours on the bend of the Velinus, which never a painter or fresco-worker has seen, is less a villa than the one in the Rosea which is adorned with all the art of the stucco-worker, and of which you and your ass are joint owners? When Axius had indicated by a nod that a building which was for farm use only was as much a villa as one that served both purposes, that of farm-house and city residence, and asked what inference he drew from that admission; Why, he replied, if your place in the Rosea is to be commended for its pasturage, and is rightly called a villa because cattle are fed and stabled there, for a like reason that also should have the name in which a large revenue is derived from pasturing.
final_alignments\Varro_Agriculture_Book3.json