I wonder if there was ever a time, or historically notable period when the garden was given as much emphasis as the dwelling. I mean as a general rule. Perhaps there was a time and a place when the garden was given more emphasis. Also, when we speak of a "Victorian" house or garden we don't actually mean 'every' house and garden, do we. When looking for what is appropriate or "historically correct" there is a lot more to consider than architecture. I think there may be more than "your pleasure" to take into account too although if you, a gardener, move into a house that historically had no garden then you have to make some important decisions.

Yes, indeed. The garden has been as important as the house, and the two a unified statement, in Renaissance Italy, France during the time of Louis XIV, England during the Capability Brown era. Those are just three examples. A good survey of garden history will point out others.

And I do firmly believe that your garden should please no one but you, with perhaps a "decent respect for the opinions of mankind." Exceptions might include a historically significant house such as Monticello.

That's my story and I'm stickin' to it!