Consistently at the beginning and end of books and major sections of De Architectura, Vitruvius reflects on the order in which he presents his material (e.g. 2.10.3; 4.3.3). He frequently stresses that the design of his treatise follows a particular ordo, but never makes explicit what this ordo actually is. The underlying structuring principle, however, is crucial to understanding the treatise’s literary design and architectural theory. On the macro level, as has been little appreciated to date, Vitruvius presents his material in the order in which a city is built from scratch – beginning with the choice of the correct site and the laying out of walls (book 1) and the collection of building materials (book 2), continuing with the construction of different types of building (books 3-7), and finally securing the future flourishing of the city by supplying it with water (book 8), clocks (book 9) and defence mechanisms (book 10). As we read the De Architectura book by book, the matrix of a city comes into being, adaptable according to local conditions or the size of the community (Fritz, 132-3). I argue that this macrostructure also creates an implicit parallel between the creation of a city and the creation of the text itself. As the treatise unfolds, the ideal city comes into being – the De Architectura. On the lexical level, the dominant metaphor Vitruvius uses to describe his own text is not the city (or any type of architecture) but the body. The implications of the corpus-metaphor have been explored in detail (Callebat 1989, McEwen 2003, Oksanish 2011). By using it, Vitruvius suggests that unlike his predecessors’ smaller projects, his own work is an organic whole, made up of its membra, its constituent parts. The metaphor conveys the perfect wholeness and completeness of the treatise as well as its harmonious proportions. What it does not readily seem to provide, however, is a natural ordo, a principle of arrangement. This is delivered instead by the process of city construction. The relation between the metaphor of the body and the more subtle, implicit metaphoricity of city construction lies at the core of Vitruvian architectural theory. The two source domains melt seamlessly into one another, since the city is both the result of human design and like a natural organism which grows and develops in accordance with nature – an ideal expressed, for example, in the famous Dinocrates-anecdote (2.praef). For Vitruvius, the city offered a natural ordo for a book on architecture, but I propose that the macrostructure of city-building also stands at the beginning of a larger trend in early Augustan literature, which relates to the contemporary concerns of colony foundation, as well as to the Augustan project of ‘re-founding’ Rome. The parallel between city and text appeals to a group of authors writing at the same time as or just after Vitruvius, who set up their projects and textual foundations explicitly to parallel or rival Augustus’ own building of a new Rome. For example, Propertius (4.1A) and Manilius (Astronomica 2.772-87) explicitly compare their literary undertaking to the construction of a city in order to make a point about literary ambition and prestige as well as (in the case of Manilius) arrangement (Fantham, Welch 25-7, Schindler 252-72). Their poetic cities even display the same combination of organic growth and human construction as Vitruvius’ macro-city. Analysis of the macrostructure of the De Architectura thus not only offers important insights into Vitruvian conceptions of architecture and literary ambition, but also throws new light on Vitruvius’ position within the literary environment of early Augustan Rome. Callebat, L. (1989), ‘Organisation et structures du De architectura de Vitruve’, in Geertman, H. and de Jong, J. J. (1989) (eds.), Munus non ingratum : proceedings of the international symposium on Vitruvius' De architectura and the hellenistic and republican architecture, Leiden 20-23 January 1987, Leiden, 34-8. Fantham, E. (1997), ‘Images of the city: Propertius’ new-old Rome’, in Habinek, T. and Schiesaro, A. (eds.), The Roman Cultural Revolution, Cambridge, 122-35. Fritz, H.-J. (1995), Vitruv: Architekturtheorie und Machtpolitik in der romischen Antike, Munster. Gros, P. (1992), Vitruve. De L’Architecture. Livre IV, Paris. Gros, P. (1994) (ed.), Le Projet de Vitruve: Objet, destinataires et reception du De Architectura, Rome. McEwen, I. K. (2003), Writing the Body of Architecture, Cambridge MA. Oksanish, J. M. (2011), Building the Principate: A Literary Study of Vitruvius’ “de Architectura”, diss. New Haven. Schindler, C. (2000), Untersuchungen zu den Gleichnissen im romischen Lehrgedicht, Gottingen. Welch, T. S. (2005), The elegiac cityscape: Propertius and the meaning of Roman monuments, Ohio.

中文翻译：

---

维特鲁威《建筑学》中的城市和文本

在 De Architectura 的书籍和主要章节的开头和结尾，维特鲁威始终反思他呈现材料的顺序（例如 2.10.3；4.3.3）。他经常强调他的论文的设计遵循一个特定的戒律，但从不明确这个戒律究竟是什么。然而，基本的结构原则对于理解论文的文学设计和建筑理论至关重要。在宏观层面上，正如迄今为止很少有人赞赏的那样，维特鲁威按照城市从头开始建造的顺序展示他的材料——从选择正确的地点和墙壁的布置（第 1 册）和收藏开始建筑材料（第 2 册），继续建造不同类型的建筑（第 3-7 册），最后通过为城市供水（第 8 册）、钟表（第 9 册）和防御机制（第 10 册）来确保城市未来的繁荣。当我们逐本书阅读 De Architectura 时，城市矩阵应运而生，可根据当地条件或社区规模进行调整（Fritz，132-3）。我认为，这种宏观结构也在城市的创建和文本本身的创建之间建立了一种隐含的平行关系。随着论文的展开，理想的城市应运而生——De Architectura。在词汇层面，维特鲁威用来描述他自己的文本的主要隐喻不是城市（或任何类型的建筑），而是身体。已经详细探讨了语料库隐喻的含义（Callebat 1989，McEwen 2003，Oksanish 2011）。通过使用它，维特鲁威认为，与他前辈的小项目不同，他自己的作品是一个有机的整体，由其膜、组成部分组成。比喻传达了论文的完美完整性和完整性以及和谐的比例。然而，它似乎并不容易提供的是一种自然的秩序，一种安排的原则。这是通过城市建设的过程来传递的。身体的隐喻与城市建设中更为微妙、含蓄的隐喻之间的关系是维特鲁威建筑理论的核心。这两个源域无缝地融为一体，因为城市既是人类设计的结果，又像一个顺应自然生长和发展的自然有机体——例如，在著名的狄诺克拉底轶事 (2.普拉夫）。对于维特鲁威来说，城市为一本关于建筑的书提供了一个自然的秩序，但我认为城市建设的宏观结构也代表了奥古斯都早期文学中一个更大趋势的开端，它与当代对殖民地基础的关注有关，如以及“重建”罗马的奥古斯都计划。城市和文本之间的平行关系吸引了与维特鲁威同时或紧随其后写作的一群作者，他们明确地建立了他们的项目和文本基础，以平行或竞争奥古斯都自己建造的新罗马。例如，Propertius (4.1A) 和 Manilius (Astronomica 2.772-87) 明确地将他们的文学事业与城市的建设进行了比较，以说明文学的野心和声望以及（在 Manilius 的情况下）安排（范特姆，韦尔奇 25-7，辛德勒 252-72)。他们诗意的城市甚至表现出与维特鲁威的宏观城市相同的有机增长和人类建设的结合。因此，对 De Architectura 宏观结构的分析不仅为维特鲁威的建筑概念和文学抱负提供了重要的见解，而且还为维特鲁威在早期奥古斯都罗马文学环境中的地位提供了新的视角。Callebat, L. (1989), 'Organisation et structure du De Architectura de Vitruve', in Geertman, H. 和 de Jong, JJ (1989) (eds.), Munus non ingratum : 维特鲁威国际研讨会论文集建筑与希腊化和共和主义建筑，莱顿 1987 年 1 月 20-23 日，莱顿，34-8。Fantham, E. (1997)，“城市形象：Propertius 的新旧罗马”，Habinek, T. 和 Schiesaro, A.（编辑），罗马文化大革命，剑桥，122-35。弗里茨，H.-J。(1995), Vitruv: Architekturtheorie und Machtpolitik in der romischen Antike, Munster。Gros, P. (1992), Vitruve。De L'Architecture。Livre IV，巴黎。Gros, P. (1994) (ed.), Le Projet de Vitruve: Objet, destinaaires et receive du De Architectura, Rome。McEwen, IK (2003)，写建筑的身体，剑桥硕士。Oksanish, JM (2011)，建立校长：维特鲁威“建筑学”的文学研究，diss。新天堂。Schindler, C. (2000)，Untersuchungen zu den Gleichnissen im romischen Lehrgedicht，哥廷根。Welch, TS (2005)，挽歌的城市景观：Propertius 和罗马纪念碑的意义，俄亥俄州。Livre IV，巴黎。Gros, P. (1994) (ed.), Le Projet de Vitruve: Objet, destinaaires et receive du De Architectura, Rome。McEwen, IK (2003)，写作建筑体，剑桥硕士。Oksanish, JM (2011)，建立校长：维特鲁威“建筑学”的文学研究，diss。新天堂。Schindler, C. (2000)，Untersuchungen zu den Gleichnissen im romischen Lehrgedicht，哥廷根。Welch, TS (2005)，挽歌的城市景观：Propertius 和罗马纪念碑的意义，俄亥俄州。Livre IV，巴黎。Gros, P. (1994) (ed.), Le Projet de Vitruve: Objet, destinaaires et receive du De Architectura, Rome。McEwen, IK (2003)，写建筑的身体，剑桥硕士。Oksanish, JM (2011)，建立校长：维特鲁威“建筑学”的文学研究，diss。新天堂。Schindler, C. (2000)，Untersuchungen zu den Gleichnissen im romischen Lehrgedicht，哥廷根。Welch, TS (2005)，挽歌的城市景观：Propertius 和罗马纪念碑的意义，俄亥俄州。Untersuchungen zu den Gleichnissen im romischen Lehrgedicht，哥廷根。Welch, TS (2005)，挽歌的城市景观：Propertius 和罗马纪念碑的意义，俄亥俄州。Untersuchungen zu den Gleichnissen im romischen Lehrgedicht，哥廷根。Welch, TS (2005)，挽歌的城市景观：Propertius 和罗马纪念碑的意义，俄亥俄州。