Below, here through here, and this section. ↩
It seems likely that Charles VIII is here (though not on the next page) confused with Charles of Anjou, brother of St. Louis. At any rate Hénault (who is quoted below, here) says: “Notre marine aussitôt détruite que créée sous Philippe Auguste, s’était bien rétablie sous S. Louis si, comme le dit un historien, ce prince embarqua soixante-mille hommes à Aigues-mortes … quant à la première expédition, Joinville dit qu’au départ de Chypre pour la conquête de Damiette, il y avait dix-huit cents vaisseaux tant grands que petits. S. Louis avait aussi mis en mer une flotte considérable pour défendre les côtes de Poitou contre la flotte de Henri III, et son frère Charles d’Anjou en avait une de quatrevingts voiles, composée de galères et de vaisseaux, lors de son expédition de Naples.” —Nouvel Abrégé chronologique de l’histoire de France, 1768, tom. i, p. 201, AD 1299. This puts the French marine 200 years earlier. ↩
“Perchè ridotta tutta in somma pace e tranquillità, coltivata non meno ne’ luoghi più montuosi, e più sterili, che nelle pianure, e regioni sue più fertili, nè sottoposta ad altro Imperio, che de’ suoi medesimi, non solo era abbondantissima d’ abitatori, e di richezze.” —Guicciardini, Della Istoria d’ Italia, Venice, 1738, vol. i, p. 2 ↩
For other definitions of the purpose or nature of political economy see the index, s.v. ↩
There seems to be a confusion between Plano-Carpini, a Franciscan sent as legate by Pope Innocent IV in 1246, and Guillaume de Rubruquis, another Franciscan sent as ambassador by Louis IX in 1253. As is pointed out by Rogers in a note on this passage, the reference appears to be to Rubruquis, Voyage en Tartarie et à la Chine, chap. xxxiii. The great Khan’s secretaries, Rubruquis states, on one occasion displayed curiosity about France: “S’enquérant s’il y avait force bœufs, moutons, et chevaux, comme s’ils eussent déjà été tous prêts d’y venir et emmener tout.” Plano-Carpini and Rubruquis are both in Bergeron’s Voyages faits principalement en Asie dans les xii, xiii, xiv et xv siècles, La Haye, 1735. ↩
There is very little foundation for any part of this paragraph. It perhaps originated in an inaccurate recollection of pp. 17, 18 and 77–79 of Some Considerations (1696 ed.), and §§ 46–50 of Civil Government. It was probably transferred bodily from the Lectures without verification. See Lectures, p. 198. ↩
Ed. 1 reads “expect least of all.” ↩
The words “forth of the realm” occur in (January) 1487, c. 11. Other acts are 1436, c. 13; 1451, c. 15; 1482, c. 8. ↩
Ed. 1 reads “increase it.” ↩
England’s Treasure by Foreign Trade, or the Balance of Our Foreign Trade Is the Rule of Our Treasure, 1664, chap. iv, ad fin., which reads, however, “we will rather accompt him a mad man.” ↩
Mun, England’s Treasure, chap. vi. ↩
“Among other things relating to trade there hath been much discourse of the balance of trade; the right understanding whereof may be of singular use.” —Josiah Child, New Discourse of Trade, 1694, p. 152, chap. ix., introducing an explanation. The term was used before Mun’s work was written. See Palgrave’s Dictionary of Political Economy, s.v. Balance of Trade, History of the theory. ↩
This sentence appears first in ed. 2. Ed. 1 begins the next sentence, “The high price of exchange therefore would tend.” ↩
“In” is a mistake for “by.” ↩
Here and four lines higher Eds. 1–3 read “if there was.” ↩
Ed. 1 reads “in.” ↩
Eds. 1–3 read “if it was.” ↩
The absence of any reference to the long Digression in bk. i, chap. xi, suggests that this passage was written before the Digression was incorporated in the work. Contrast the reference below, here. ↩
Ed. 1 reads “not only without any inconveniency but with very great advantages.” ↩
This probably refers to here, though the object there is rather to insist on the largeness of the saving effected by dispensing with money, and here through here. ↩
Eds. 1–3 read “was it not.” ↩
Eds. 1–3 read “was.” ↩
Ed. 1 reads “according to the exaggerated computation of Mr. Horsely.” ↩
Lectures, p. 199. ↩
The Present State of the Nation, Particularly with Respect to Its Trade, Finances, etc., etc., Addressed to the King and Both Houses of Parliament, 1768 (written under the direction of George Grenville by William Knox), pp. 7, 8. ↩
In place of these two sentences ed. 1 reads “A considerable part of the annual surplus of its manufactures must indeed in this case be exported without bringing back any returns. Some part of it, however, may still continue to bring back a return.” ↩
History, chaps. xix and xx, vol. iii, pp. 103, 104, 165 in ed. of 1773. ↩
