WHEN HIS DE ARCHITECTURA TURNS TO DOMESTIC ARCHITECTURE, Vitruvius first tackles the pragmatics of a house: its parts, their proportions, and their optimal orientation (6.3–4). Next, after generally categorizing the rooms of a house into public and private (the distinction lying in whether a visitor may enter uninvited), the architect concentrates on the particular rooms needed by different classes:

Vitruvius then lists several occupations and their corresponding architectural needs. Those who resell country produce, for example, should have areas for livestock. Bankers need houses that are rather showy and safe, while advocates require elegant and spacious rooms. Ultimately, as though being an elite member of society were itself an occupation, the discussion returns to questions of status:

Vitruvius ostensibly writes about how to fulfill the house owner's needs, but this passage has much to suggest about how domestic architecture was viewed as a status symbol. Vitruvius is careful to draw an explicit connection between the public role of his nobiles – they hold positions in the political sphere – and their needs for architectural features reflecting their place in public life. Indeed, their houses are anything but refuges from the public sphere; if we believe Vitruvius (and there is little reason in this case not to), houses of the Roman elite could host civic events and were thus stages on which the master could perform his public roles. Others who do not have this status to uphold, to Vitruvius's mind, are defined by what they lack from the nobiles’ position and, correspondingly, what rooms their lifestyles do not require.