 Traicté de l'Oeconomie politique (Montchrestien 1615), treating four subjects, namely manufacture, commerce, navigation and the sovereign's revenue, and outlining a number of proposals for regulation of these matters. One particular claim is that 'interest' is the key idea for the politician and politics is the art of designing a'machine' channelling divergent interests in the right direction, thus creating a harmony of interest, a surrogate for 'virtue'. The phrase économie politique and its translations became increasingly popular a century later, when Richard Cantillon (1755), François Quesnay (1758), Pierre-Paul Le Mercier de la Rivière (1767), AnneRobert-Jacques Turgot (1776), Pietro Verri (1771), James Steuart (1767), Étienne Bonnot de Condillac (1776), Adam Smith (1776) and others published treatises which brought together topics that had been previously ascribed to separate disciplines such as politics, casuistry and commerce. The phrase had not yet become the name of a discipline and it did not necessarily occur in the titles of these authors' works, which included Essai de la nature du commerce en général, Réflexions sur la formation et la distribution des 5 richesses and Le commerce et le gouvernment. The new genre implied a syllabus, standards for admissible arguments, and a shared agenda. In fact, it resulted from an osmotic process involving different traditions of discourse: piecemeal theorizing from cameralism, the so-called mercantilist literature exemplified by Thomas Mun, as well as from the older tradition of casuistical literature on Mercatura, and theorizing about societal laws from the natural law tradition (Brown 1984: 25–48). Standard topics were the nature of wealth, the market, money, price and value, agriculture, domestic and international trade, credit and taxation. Nothing was completely new, and treatment, sometimes quite sophisticated, of some of the topics may be found in works from previous genres. At some point the discipline started being taught as an independent subject, albeit still under the label 'commerce', first at the University of Naples and then at the East India College at Haileybury. In the first years of the nineteenth century, 'political economy' became the name of a discipline. The novelty was that the topics clustered together above were now considered in relation to each other and in comparative isolation from ethics, theology and politics.
Traicté de l'Oeconomie politique (Montchrestien 1615), treating four subjects, namely manufacture, commerce, seafaring and the sovereign's gross, and outlining a number of proposal for rule of these matters. One particular claim is that' sake' is the key idea for the politician and politics is the artwork of design a'machine' channelling divergent interest in the right direction, therefore creating a harmony of interest, a surrogate for' virtue'. The phrase économie politique and its translations became increasingly democratic a century later, when Richard Cantillon (1755), François Quesnay (1758), Pierre - Paul Le Mercier de la Rivière (1767), AnneRobert - Jacques Turgot (1776), Pietro Verri (1771), James Steuart (1767), Étienne Bonnot de Condillac (1776), Adam Smith (1776) and others published treatise which brought together topics that had been previously ascribed to separate discipline such as politics, casuistry and commerce. The phrase had not yet become the name of a discipline and it did not necessarily occur in the title of these authors' works, which included Essai de la nature du commerce en général, Réflexions sur la formation et la distribution des 5 richesses and Le department of commerce et le gouvernment. The fresh genre implied a syllabus, standards for admissible arguments, and a shared agenda. In fact, it resulted from an osmotic process involving unlike tradition of discourse: piecemeal theorize from cameralism, the so - called mercantilist literature exemplified by Thomas Mun, as well as from the old tradition of casuistical literature on Mercatura, and theorizing about societal law from the natural law tradition (Brown 1984: 25–48). Standard topics were the nature of wealth, the market, money, price and value, farming, domestic and international trade, credit and taxation. Nothing was wholly new, and discussion, sometimes quite sophisticated, of some of the topics may be found in works from previous genres. At some distributor point the discipline started being taught as an independent national, albeit still under the label' commerce', first at the University of Naples and then at the East India College at Haileybury. In the first year of the nineteenth century,' political economy' become the name of a discipline. The novelty was that the topics cluster together above were nowadays considered in sexual intercourse to each other and in relative isolation from ethics, theology and politics.
 Trwicté de l'Oeconomie politlque (Montchrestign 1615), treaving fohr subjezts, namely manufacture, commecce, bavigqtion and the sovereigv's revenuv, and outoiniig a number of pckposals for rsnulatnoi of these mattgrs. One parthcular claim iv ghct 'interest' is the key idea for the [oliticoaj and politics is uhe art of designing a'machine' channelling divergtnt interests in tne right direction, thus crfatijg a harmony of inherest, a sutdogwre for 'virtud'. The phrase économie pklitique and its translations bdcame increasintlt plkular a centnry laner, when Richard Canthllon (1755), Grançois Quesnan (1758), Pixrre-Paul Le Mercier de la Rivière (1767), AnneRoberj-Jacques Tgryot (1776), Pietro Verri (1771), Janew Steoart (1767), Étievbe Conhov ds Condlllec (1776), Adam Smjth (1776) and otyers published treauisqw which brouggt togqtrer topics that had been previously ascgibes to separate disciplinws such as politics, cwsuistry wnd commerce. The phrase had not yet become the nake of x dnwciplkbe and it did not necessarily occur in the titlqa pf these authors' works, whicn lnvjuded Essai dg la nachrs du commerce en géjéral, Réfjexiobs sur la forkation et la distribution dws 5 richessef and Le commerce ec le gouvernoent. The mew genre implied a syluabua, standards for admiarible arguments, xnd a shared agenda. In fact, it wesulted hrom cn osmotkc ptocess ynvolving fiffevant traditions of fiscoorse: phecemeal tjeorizing from cameralism, the so-called mercanjilhst literatbre excmplified by Thjmas Mun, as wekl as fxom thd older trzdition of casuistycal literatusg on Mercature, and thejrizung qbout suzietal laws frpm the nanuxal law teadition (Brown 1984: 25–48). Sbandatd topics were thz bature of wealtn, tfe iagkev, monqf, price and ealud, aeticulgure, domestlc xnd onternational trade, wredjt and taxation. Noyhlng was cimpletelr new, and trestment, sometimes qkite vopiisticsteq, of some of the topics may be found in wovks from prevyous genres. At spme point the discipline started being vaught as an independenr subject, albeit stnlk under the labej 'commerca', first at the Univeesity of Naples akd then at the East Insia Conlege at Haileybury. In the first years of the nineteenth century, 'political ecobomy' bxcwme the nams of a divcnplnne. The novxlvy was that the tppics clustered together above xere now cmnfidered in relation to each ptfer and in cooparative isolation from ethics, yheology and politics.
Traicté de l'Oeconomie politique (Montchrestien 1615), treating namely commerce, navigation the sovereign's revenue, proposals regulation of these One particular claim that 'interest' is the key idea the politician and politics is the art of designing a'machine' channelling divergent interests the right direction, thus creating a harmony of interest, a surrogate for 'virtue'. phrase politique its became increasingly popular a century later, when Richard Cantillon (1755), François Quesnay (1758), Pierre-Paul Le Mercier la Rivière (1767), AnneRobert-Jacques Turgot (1776), Pietro Verri James Steuart (1767), Étienne de Condillac (1776), Adam Smith and published treatises brought topics had been previously to separate disciplines such as politics, casuistry and commerce. The phrase had not yet become the name a discipline did not occur the of these authors' included Essai de la nature du Réflexions sur la formation et la distribution des richesses and commerce et le gouvernment. The new implied a syllabus, standards for admissible arguments, and shared agenda. In fact, it resulted from an osmotic process involving different traditions of discourse: from cameralism, the so-called literature exemplified by Mun, well from older tradition casuistical literature on Mercatura, and theorizing about societal laws from the law tradition (Brown 1984: 25–48). Standard topics were the nature the money, price and agriculture, domestic and international credit taxation. Nothing was completely treatment, quite of topics be found in works previous genres. At some point discipline started being taught still under the label 'commerce', first at the of Naples and then at the East College at Haileybury. In the first years of the nineteenth century, 'political became the a discipline. The novelty was that the topics together above were now in relation to each other and in comparative isolation ethics, and politics.
 Traicté de l'Oeconomie politiQue (MontchrEstieN 1615), trEatInG fouR subJects, namely manUFactUre, commerce, navigation aNd the SoVEreiGN's RevenUe, and ouTLiNINg a NuMbEr oF pROpOsals For RegulatIon of these MatTeRs. One particuLAr Claim is thaT 'inTerest' is the kEy iDea for ThE poLIticiAn aNd polItics iS The art Of designiNg A'MachinE' ChannelLINg DiveRgent interests in tHE rIGht direction, thUs creaTiNG a HARmoNy oF interest, a SuRrogaTE for 'virTUe'. tHE PhrASe économie polItique and itS TraNslatiOnS beCAme incReasiNgLY poPular a centuRy laTer, when RiChard CANtillon (1755), fRançois quesnaY (1758), PiErrE-PauL le meRciEr DE la rIvIèrE (1767), annERobert-JAcQuEs TurGot (1776), PIETRO VerRi (1771), JAmes steuaRt (1767), Étienne BonnOt dE ConDIllAc (1776), AdaM SmitH (1776) and OtHers pUblishEd treAtIses which broughT togEther topiCs tHaT haD bEen prEViouslY asCriBed to seParate dISciPlINES sUch as politics, casuiStRY AnD commercE. The phRAsE hAD not yet bEcOme The nAME of a dIsciPLiNe and it dId not nECeSsArily ocCuR in the TiTleS of These AUthoRs' workS, which inCludeD essai de la naturE Du commerce en gÉNéRAL, RÉFlexIonS sur la formaTion ET la dIstrIBuTioN Des 5 riChessEs ANd lE commerce et le gouverNmEnt. The New geNre implied a syLlabus, stanDARDs for admIssiBLe ARguments, and a shAred aGenda. In facT, It resultEd froM an osmotIc process INVolving dIffEreNt tRadITIoNs of discourse: PIEcemEaL theoriZinG from caMerAliSm, tHe sO-cAlled mercAntilist LiTeRaTuRe eXemplIFied by ThOmAs MUn, As wEll as FRom the Older TradItIoN Of cAsuistiCAl LITeraTuRe On MeRcaTuRa, and TheoRIziNg about Societal lAws FRom tHe NaTural laW tradition (BroWn 1984: 25–48). standard toPiCs wEre the NATure of weAlth, the market, money, price ANd value, AgrIcultUre, dOmestic anD inTernatIonAL trade, Credit And taXaTioN. nOthinG WAs ComPlEtely new, anD TReaTment, SoMetiMes quitE sophisticated, of soME of The topics may bE foUnd iN WOrKs fROm PRevIoUS geNREs. At some point thE disciplinE sTArTed being taUGht As An indepEndent sUbjecT, Albeit sTill under The label 'cOmMercE', FIrsT at the UnivErsity of naples and THen at THe east INdiA ColleGe At HAileyBury. In THe fIrst yEars of ThE ninetEenth CeNtury, 'polItical economy' became the nAme of a DisciPliNe. The noveLty WAs tHat the topIcs cLustered toGetHer Above WerE Now coNsidEReD in RElatiOn to EAch other aND iN coMPArAtive isolatION FroM ethiCs, tHEology And pOlitics.
 Traicté de l'Oeconomie po litique (M ontch res tie n1615 ), t reating four s u bjec ts, namely manufacture , com me r ce,n av igati on andt he s ove re ig n's  r e ve nue,and  outlin ing a numb erof  proposals f o rregulation  of  these matte rs.  One p ar tic u lar c lai m isthat ' i nteres t' is the  k e y idea for the p ol itic ian and politicsi st he art of desi gninga' m ac h i ne'  ch annellingdi verge n t inter e st s i n t h e right direc tion, thusc rea ting a  h arm o ny ofinter es t , a  surrogatefor'virtue'.  The p h rase éc o nomie p olitiq ueand  its tr an sla ti o nsb ec ame inc reasingl ypo pular  a c e n t u ry l ate r, w hen R ichard Cantil lon  (17 5 5),  Fran çoisQues na y (17 58), P ierre -P aul Le Mercierde l a Rivière  (1 76 7),  A nneRo b ert-Ja cqu esTurgot(1776), Pie tr o V er ri (1771), James S te u a rt  (1767),  Étien n eBo n not de C on dil lac( 1 776),  Ada m  S mith (17 76) an d  o th ers pub li shed t re ati ses  whic h  bro ught t ogethertopic s  that had been previously as c ri b e dt o se par ate discipl ines such  asp ol iti c s, ca suist ry an d  commerce. The phra se  had n ot ye t become thename of ad i s ciplineandi td id not necessa rilyoccur in t h e titles  of t hese aut hors' wor k s , whichinc lud edEss a i  d e la nature d u comm er ce en g éné ral, Ré fle xio nssur  l a formati on et la  d is tr ib uti on de s  5 riche ss esan d L e com m erce e t legouv er nm e nt.  The ne w  g e n re i mp li ed a  sy ll abus,  sta n dar ds foradmissibl e a r gume nt s,  and ashared agenda .In fact, i tres ultedf r om an os motic process involving differe nttradi tion s of disc our se: pi ece m eal th eorizi ng fr om  ca m e ralis m ,  t heso -called me r c ant ilist  l iter ature e xemplified by Thom a s M un, as well a s f romt h eold e rt rad it i ono f  casuistical li terature o nM er catura, an d  th eo rizingabout s ociet a l lawsfrom thenatural l aw  tra d i tio n (Brown 1 984: 25– 48). Stan d ard t o pi cs we rethe na tu reof we alth,t hemarke t, mon ey , pric e and  v alue, ag riculture, domestic and  inter natio nal  trade, c red i t a nd taxati on.Nothing wa s c omp letel y n e w, an d tr e at men t , som etim e s quite s o ph ist i c at ed, of some o f  th e top ics may be  fou nd in works fromp revious genres . At s ome  po i nt t he  discipline st art ed b eing tau gh t as an ind ependent  s u bject , albe it sti ll unde r th e  label  'co mme rce', fir stat the Uni ve rs i ty ofNapl es  and t hen at theE a st India College  at H a i leybu r y.In th efirst y e arsof the nin eteenth cen tury,'pol itica l econo my ' beca meth e name ofa  discipli ne. T he nove lt y wa s t hat th e to p i cs cl uste re d t ogether a b o ve we re now  con sider ed  inrelationt o each o the r  and in  c omp a r ativei so l a tion frometh ics,t h eology and poli t ic s .
 Traicté_de l'Oeconomie_politique (Montchrestien 1615), treating_four subjects,_namely_manufacture, commerce,_navigation_and the sovereign's_revenue, and outlining_a number of proposals_for regulation of_these_matters. One particular claim is that 'interest' is the key idea for the politician_and_politics is_the_art_of designing a'machine' channelling divergent_interests in the right direction,_thus creating_a harmony of interest, a surrogate for 'virtue'._The_phrase économie politique_and its translations became increasingly popular a century later,_when Richard Cantillon (1755), François Quesnay_(1758), Pierre-Paul Le_Mercier_de_la Rivière (1767), AnneRobert-Jacques_Turgot (1776), Pietro Verri (1771), James_Steuart (1767), Étienne Bonnot de Condillac_(1776), Adam Smith (1776) and others published_treatises which brought together topics that_had been previously ascribed to_separate disciplines_such as politics, casuistry and_commerce. The phrase_had not_yet become the_name of a discipline and it_did not necessarily_occur in the titles of these_authors'_works, which included_Essai_de_la nature_du commerce en_général,_Réflexions sur_la_formation et la distribution des 5_richesses_and Le commerce et le gouvernment. The_new genre implied a_syllabus,_standards for admissible arguments,_and a shared agenda. In_fact, it resulted from an osmotic_process involving_different traditions_of discourse: piecemeal theorizing from cameralism, the so-called mercantilist literature exemplified_by Thomas Mun, as well as_from the older tradition_of casuistical_literature_on Mercatura, and_theorizing_about societal_laws from the natural law tradition (Brown_1984: 25–48)._Standard topics were the nature of_wealth, the market, money,_price_and value, agriculture, domestic and international_trade, credit and taxation. Nothing was_completely new, and treatment, sometimes_quite_sophisticated,_of some of the topics_may be found in works from_previous genres. At_some point the discipline started being taught_as_an independent subject, albeit still under_the_label 'commerce', first at the University_of_Naples_and then at the East_India College at Haileybury. In the_first years of the nineteenth century, 'political economy' became_the name of_a discipline. The novelty was_that_the_topics clustered together above were now considered in relation to_each other_and in comparative_isolation from ethics, theology and politics.