In all this talk of founding fathers, let us "never underestimate the influence of a woman, ... etc."  Even in the manly sport of football the most heroic play is the "Hail, Mary", which may seem flippant, but for many Christians the main deity is Mary who managed to become the Mother of God without help from a founding father. Under Salic Law no woman may rule France, but that did not stop Catherine and Marie de Medici, or Marie Antoinette, l'Autrichienne, who weren't even French, either; or Mme de Maintenon, who ruled Louis XIV.  Francois Quesnay has a claim to being a "founding father" of economics, but it was Mme Pompadour who installed him at Versailles. It was l'Autrichienne who got rid of Turgot who might have saved her and her hapless spouse from the guillotine. 
Carrie Chapman Catt and the League of Women Voters she founded, and Eleanor Roosevelt whom they idolized, even in the age of housewives, inspired many mothers to inspire many sons and a few daughters to make economics their profession. Before the age of DINKS housewives with social consciences had less fear of professional retribution such as that which intimidated many of their husbands, so their thoughts could range more freely. While some embraced various nutty ideas, their freedom from conventional and authoritarian restraints is the necessary matrix (a feminist term) for creative thought.
In more recent times it was Joan Robinson who founded the innovative Cambridge School and faced down Paul Samuelson (for better or worse) in the Cambridge Controversy; and now it is Elinor Ostrom who may free us from the privatization-as-panacea doctrines of various MCPs.
So here's to the founding mothers, let us never think them peculiarly unfit for leadership. They may sometimes be forced to lead by manipulation, to let men take the credit; but they have led and still are, and will. OK, they sometimes lead us the wrong way, but so do a high fraction of the males.

Mason Gaffney

-----Original Message-----
From: Societies for the History of Economics [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jean Magnan de Bornier
Sent: Friday, April 08, 2011 2:00 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [SHOE] Adam Smith, the "Founding Father" of Modern Economics?

Le 30 mars à 12:39:12 [log in to unmask] écrit notamment:
| Dear Listers,
>
| J Schumpeter’s *History of Economic Analysis*, M Blaug’s *Retrospect*, and M Rothbard’s *An Austrian Perspective
| on HET* report that Adam Smith has been incorretly thought to have created the science of economics and known as
| the “Founding Father.”
>
| I have been wondering: who thought so? These books do not provide any references. I did a quick search on Google
| but had no reliable results. Does anybody know when and who exactly coined or used the term “founding father”
| and thought Adam Smith created the science of economics?
>
| Regards,
>
| Altug Yalcintas
| Ankara University

Hi allo,

Might there be in this expression «founding father» a more or less             
conscious recall of the importance of the Church Fathers, early                   
theologians of christianism (who, as no one ignores, were all males)?                
                                                                                  
Regards,   
-- 
  Jean Magnan de Bornier   |   Professeur de Sciences Économiques
         GREQAM	           |  Université Paul Cézanne à Aix-Marseille 
 15-19 Allée Claude Forbin |   13627 Aix-en-Provence Cedex 1 FRANCE 
 T: +33 (0)4 42 96 81 53   |   email: jean.magnanb at univ-cezanne.fr  
 Fax: +33 (0)4 42 96 80 00 |  Site: http://junon.univ-cezanne.fr/bornier