Blanqui (_op. cit._, pp. 36, 88), Ingram (_op. cit._, p. 18), DuBois (_op. cit._, p. 51 and n. 1), Zmavc (_Zeitschr. f. d. ges. Staatswiss._ [1902], pp. 76 f.), Palgrave’s _Dictionary_ (art. “Aristotle,” p. 54), all admit this conclusion. Barker (_op. cit._, p. 380) says that the idea is hinted at. Souchon (_op. cit._, pp. 110 f.) accepts the other view, stating that this was his purpose, to show the folly of making merely imaginary goods the goal of all life. Footnote 696: Cf. _N. Eth._ v. 5. 1133_b_13 f. Footnote 697: _Pol._ 1257_b_5-8, and the whole of 1257_b_; 1258_b_1-5. Footnote 698: 1258_b_25. Footnote 699: _N. Eth._ 1121_b_34: καὶ τοκισταὶ κατὰ μικρὰ καὶ ἐπὶ πολλῷ. Cf. Zell’s translation. Footnote 700: _Pol._ 1258_b_1-8; but cf. p. 39 on this point. The etymology should not be taken seriously. Ruskin cites Aristotle on this point. Cf. above, p. 39, n. 10. Footnote 701: Cf. Barker, _op. cit._, p. 385 and n. 2, where he criticizes Poehlmann for his idea that Aristotle “is attacking a great credit system,” and “is enunciating a gospel of socialism.” But cf. _infra._ Footnote 702: _Pol._ 1257_b_5 ff. Footnote 703: _Ibid._ 33 ff.; for further discussion of chrematistik, cf. _infra._ Footnote 704: Cf. Haney, _op. cit._, p. 49: “In Athens, the circulation of capital was inconsiderable, and money was not lent for productive purposes as often as for the purpose of relieving distress”; Souchon, _op. cit._, p. 93, though (pp. 106 f.) he recognizes the other side. Footnote 705: Cf. Paley and Sandys ed., especially _Or._ xxxvi; Isoc. _Trapeziticus_; Boeckh, _op. cit._, I, 160 ff.; V. Brants, “Les operations de banque dans la Grèce antique,” _Le Muséon_, I, 2, 196-203; Koutorga, _Le trapézites_, (Paris, 1859); cf. also E. Meyer, _Kleine Schriften_. Footnote 706: _Or._ xx. 25. Footnote 707: _Or._ xxxvi. 44: εἰ δὲ τοῦτ᾽ ἀγνοεῖς, ὅτι πίστις ἀφορμὴ τῶν πασῶν ἐστὶ μεγίστη πρὸς χρηματισμόν, πᾶν ἂν ἀγνοήσειας. Footnote 708: _Ibid._ 57 ff. Footnote 709: Cf. p. 105, n. 7, on Souchon; E. Boehm von Bawerk (_Capital und Capitalzins_, [1900] I, 17 f.) says: “Die Geschäftsleute und Praktiker standen sicher auf der zinsfreundlichen Seite.” He accounts for the fact that almost the only passages against interest are in the philosophers by the inference that to uphold interest was superfluous, and to oppose it was useless. Poehlmann exaggerates both the degree of credit operations, and the prejudice of Aristotle. Footnote 710: For the Greek terms, cf. p. 40. Footnote 711: _Pol._ 1257_a_15-17. Footnote 712: _Ibid._ 22-28; _N. Eth._ v. 5. 1133_b_26-28. Footnote 713: