[515]. Ibid. 83: ὁπόθεν τὴν ἀεὶ παροῦσαν ἡμέραν διάξουσιν.
[516]. Cont. Nicocl. 31: ὅτι τὸ τῆς πόλεως ὅλης ἢθος ὁμοιοῦται τοῖς ἄρχουσιν.
[517]. Cf. infra for the Economica, which is generally recognised to be from a later member of the Peripatetic school, about 250-200 B.C.; cf. Susemihl, Economica, Intro. to the ed.; Croiset, op. cit., IV, 710; Zeller, op. cit., II, 2, 944 ff. Moreover, it deals chiefly with the practical phase of economics. On the other hand, we shall cite Eud. Eth. and Mag. mor. under Aristotle, since, though later than him, they merely imitate his thought, in so far as they touch economics. For the numerous and diverse writings ascribed to Aristotle, cf. Christ, op. cit., IV [1905], 684 ff.
[518]. B. St. Hilaire (preface to his French translation of the Politics, pp. 4-11) calls him “le créateur de l’économie politique.” Zmavc (Archiv f. d. Gesch. d. Philos. [1899], pp. 407 ff.) also tends to overestimate him.
[519]. Zmavc (ibid, and also Zeitschr. f. d. gesammt. Staatswiss. [1902], pp. 48 ff.) emphasizes this fact.
[520]. Pol. i. 1. 1252a7-13, cited on p. [9], n. 5, a criticism of Plato’s Politics 258E-259C; on the truth in this confusion, cf. p. [10]. Even Adam Smith said: “What is wise with a family can hardly be foolish with a great kingdom.”
[521]. Besides St. Hilaire and Zmavc, cited above, among those favorable are Cossa, Hist. des doctrines economiques, p. 149; Blanqui, op. cit., I, 49, 86. More reserved are Souchon, op. cit., p. 127; DuBois, op. cit., p. 50; Haney, op. cit., pp. 47 f.; unfair interpretation, Dühring, op. cit., pp. 20 f.
[522]. i. 9. 1257a6-9: ἑκάστου γὰρ κτήματος διττὴ ἡ χρῆσίς ἐστιν ἀμφότεραι δὲ καθ᾽ αὑτὸ μὲν ἀλλ᾽ οὐχ ὁμοίως καθ᾽ αὑτό, ἀλλ᾽ ἡ μὲν οἰκεία ἡ δ᾽ οὐκ οἰκεία τοῦ πράγματος οἱον ὑποδήματος ἥ τε ὑπόδεσις καὶ ἡ μεταβλητική.
[523]. Wealth of Nations, I, chap. iv.
[524]. Cf. Souchon, op. cit., p. 127; Haney, op. cit., p. 47.