1133_a_19 ff.; 29; 1133_b_10 ff., cited _infra_, on money. It clearly distinguishes the quality of exchangeableness. Cf. iv. 1. 1119_b_26 f., cited _infra_, n. 7. Cf. pp. 38 f. for Plato’s theory. Footnote 539: So Stewart, _op. cit._, _in loc._; Zmavc, _Archiv._, etc., p. 415, who criticizes Karl Marx (_Kapital_, 4th ed., I, 26) for denying this. Barker (_op. cit._, p. 379) says that Aristotle did not recognize the “seller’s cost of production”; but cf. 384, where he implies the opposite. Footnote 540: But cf. his definition of wealth, pp. 85 f. Footnote 541: Bonar (_op. cit._, p. 40) criticizes him for this. The words ἀξία and τίμη are not used in the passage, but for the former in a very dear economic sense, cf. iv. 1. 1119_b_26-27; χρήματα δὲ λέγομεν πάντα ὅσων ἡ ἀξία νομίσματι μετρεῖται. Footnote 542: For further discussion of this _Ethics_ passage, cf. _infra_ on money, exchange, and distribution. _Mag. mor._ i. 33. 1193_b_19-1194_b_2 repeats the idea, citing Plato _Rep._ on the exchange of the four producers in his primitive state. Footnote 543: i. 8. 1256_b_28-32. The term ἄπειρος, as applied to wealth, is used by Plato and Aristotle of undue love of money (_Rep._ 373D, 591D; _Laws_ 870A); for Aristotle, cf. passage above and _infra_. There is a sense, even from the economic standpoint, in which wealth is not unlimited. Footnote 544: _Prin. of Pol. Econ._, preliminary remarks, and Book I, chap. iii, 3. Footnote 545: On this term in Plato and Aristotle, cf. _infra_ under exchange. Footnote 546: _Op. cit._, p. 374; cf. _infra_ on the moral attitude of Aristotle to wealth. Footnote 547: His unfair criticism of Plato seems to argue otherwise (_Rep._ 369C ff.; _Pol._ 1291_a_12-19), but cf. _infra_. Footnote 548: ii. 7. 1267_b_10 ff.; 1254_a_16 f.; _Rhet._ i. 5. 1361_a_12 ff. Footnote 549: _Pol._ 1254_a_16 ff.: κτῆμα δὲ ὄργανον πρακτικὸν καὶ χωριστὸν, similar to Walker’s term “transferability” (_Pol. Econ._, 3d ed., p. 5); cf. Mill, _op. cit._, preliminary remarks on the term. Footnote 550: _N. Eth._ iv. 1. 1119_b_26 f., cited on p. 84, n. 7. Footnote 551: Cf. the discussion above on value; cf. Mill, _op. cit._, Book I, chap, iii, 3, on the quality of “storableness” as an attribute of wealth. Newman (_Pol. of Ar._, II, note to 1256_b_26 ff.) asks if θησαυρισμός can be applied to slaves and cattle, and if the definition can include land. These are all included; cf. n. 1, above. Footnote 552: _Pol._ i. 9. 1257_a_6 and 14 f., and the discussion above of _N. Eth._ 1133_a_5 ff. Footnote 553: Cf. n. 3. Footnote 554: Cf. Smith, _op. cit._, IV, for criticism of this basal confusion of the mercantile theory. Footnote 555: _Rhet._ B. 16. 1390-91. Footnote 556: