[Footnote 1: Rambaud, _Histoire des Doctrines Économiques_, p. 39. 'It is evident that a household is a mean between the individual and the city or Kingdom, since just as the individual is part of the household, so is the household part of the city or Kingdom, and therefore, just as prudence commonly so called which governs the individual is distinct from political prudence, so must domestic prudence (oeconomica) be distinct from both. Riches are related to domestic prudence, not as its last end, but as its instrument. On the other hand, the end of political prudence is a good life in general as regards the conduct of the household. In _Ethics_ i. the philosopher speaks of riches as the end of political prudence, by way of example, and in accordance with the opinion of many.' Aquinas, _Summa II_. ii. 50. 3, and see _Sent. III_. xxxiii. 3 and 4. 'Practica quidem scientia est, quae recte vivendi modum ac disciplinae formam secundum virtutum institutionem disponit. Et haec dividitur in tres, scilicet: primo ethicam, id est moralem; et secundo oeconomicam, id est dispensativam; et tertio politicam, id est civilem' (Vincent de Beauvais, _Speculum_, VII. i. 2).] [Footnote 2: _Op. cit._, vol. i. part. ii. p. 379.] [Footnote 3: Rambaud, _op. cit._, p. 83; Ingram, _op. cit._, p. 36. So marked was the contrast between the mediæval and modern conceptions of economics that the appearance of this one treatise has been said by one high authority to have been the signal of the dawn of the Renaissance (Espinas, _Histoire des Doctrines Économiques_, p. 110).]