On this double tendency in the Stoics, and reasons therefore, cf. Souchon (_op. cit._, pp. 173 f.); Poehlmann (_op. cit._, II, 342 f., and I, 111) and Wolf (_op. cit._, pp. 116 ff.) exaggerate their socialistic tendency. For further discussion, cf. _infra_. Cf. L. Stein, _Soc. Frage_, pp. 171-80. Footnote 1017: 280-206 B.C. Aristo and Cleanthes, successors of Zeno, also emphasized similar doctrines in relation to wealth. Cf. von Arnim, I, p. 89, frs. 396, 397, 398, from Aristo; _ibid._, p. 137, fr. 617, from Cleanthes. Footnote 1018: _Ibid._, II, 79, fr. 240; III, 28, fr. 117; p. 29, frs. 122, 123; p. 32, fr. 135. Footnote 1019: _Ibid._, III, 156, fr. 598; p. 159, fr. 618; p. 155, fr. 593. Footnote 1020: _Ibid._, p. 155, fr. 597. Footnote 1021: _Ibid._, p. 160, fr. 629, “Lucro autem numquam sapiens studet.” Footnote 1022: _Ibid._, p. 169, fr. 623: μόνον δὲ τὸν σπουδαῖον ἄνορα χρηματιστικὸν εἶναι, γινώσκοντα ἀφ᾽ ὧν, χρηματιστέον, καὶ πότε καὶ πῶς καὶ μέχρι πότε. Footnote 1023: Von Arnim, III, 168, fr. 674. Footnote 1024: _Ibid._, p. 36, frs. 151, 152, “Bonum ex malo non fit: divitiae fiunt: fiunt autem ex avaritia divitiae ergo non sunt bonum” (Seneca _Ep._ 87. 22). Footnote 1025: Von Arnim, p. 172, fr. 686 (Stob. _Ecl._ ii. 7, p. 109, 10): .... λόγους κατηλεύειν, οὐ φαμένων δεῖν ἀπὸ παιδείας παρὰ τῶν ἐπιτυχόντων χρηματίζεσθαι. Footnote 1026: Von Arnim, p. 86, fr. 352: ἄνθρωπος γὰρ ἐκ φύσεως δοῦλος οὐδείς; p. 87, fr. 358; cf. p. 141, n. 7, above. Footnote 1027: _Ibid._, fr. 357. Footnote 1028: _Ibid._, 89, fr. 365; p. 86, frs. 356, 354. Footnote 1029: _Ibid._, p. 86, fr. 355; p. 88, fr. 362; p. 89, 364. Cf. Espinas, _Hist. des doctrines èconomiques_, 56 f., on the Stoics’ attitude toward labor and slavery: “Ni les Cyniques ni les Stoiciens ne méprisaient le travail”; “La seule servitude déshonorante est celle des passions et du vice.” Footnote 1030: Poehlmann (_op. cit._, II, 342 f. and notes), citing von Arnim, III, 77, fr. 314, ὁ νόμος πάντων ἐστὶ βασιλεύς, etc., thinks Chrysippus’ principle of the law of reason as king of all is anti-individualistic. He cites also Cic. _De fin._ iii. 19 (64), where the individual seems to be made to exist for the sake of the whole. But cf. above, p. 140 f. and notes. Footnote 1031: Cf. Diog. L. vii. 131, and above, p. 140, nn. 7 f. Footnote 1032: _Op. cit._, p. 171. Footnote 1033: Cf. above, on Cynics and Stoics, and _infra_; cf. even in Plato, _Laws_ 679A-B. Footnote 1034: The Socratics were the pioneers in this regard also. On the unhistorical character of the alleged early communism in Sparta, cf. Poehlmann, _op. cit._, I, 75 ff. and 100 f.; on this triple tendency in the post-Aristotelian social thought, cf. _ibid._, pp. 99 ff., on “Der Sozialstaat der Legende und das sozialistische Naturrecht”; also Souchon, p. 172. Footnote 1035: Cf. above, p. 140. Footnote 1036: