----------------- HES POSTING ----------------- 
 
It is also interesting to note why Smith chose "Nations" in the title. One hundred years
before the WoN, the cameralist (and alchemist) Johann Joachim Becher wrote a book with the
title "Politischer Diskurs von den eigentlichen Ursachen des Auff- und Abnehmens der
Staedte, Laender und Republicken" (Political discourse about the actual causes of the rise
and decline of cities, states and republics) giving emphasis to the political organization
of states rather than the concept of the "nation".
 
"Wealth" as a subject-matter of political economy is not peculiar. Remember the "power and
plenty" (or Mun's "Treasure") of the mercantilists and the term "plutology" (the science
of wealth) that was a candidate term for political economy in the 19th c.  Many general
treatises in french had "richesse(s)" somewhere in the title, reflecting possibly the
Smithian influence.
 
"Political economy" on the other hand, Monchretien de Watteville and James Steuart
notwithstanding, was just starting to become the name of our science. Smith speaks "Of
systems of political economy" in the sense of the economic management of the state
(polis>political). Francis Hutcheson in his "Short introduction to moral philosophy"
(latin 1742,  engl. 1747 both electronically available from http://gallica.bnf.fr/) in his
third book uses a definition that it is clearly Aristotelian by dividing the chapters in
the same way Aristotle divided economics in his Politics.
 
Nicos Theocarakis 
 
------------ FOOTER TO HES POSTING ------------ 
For information, send the message "info HES" to [log in to unmask]