136 / 298
Horst Steinke
136
tory, first as home economics in the state of the families, and then as political
economy in aristocratic and monarchic commonwealths» (p. 153). The core of
human society and culture therefore consists of the compound «economic-
political power», rather than the intersection of the «social-political» dimen-
sions. At the same time, Pipa adds an important qualification that substantially
revises the earlier assessment: «This is not to say that the economic element is
determinant in Vico’s system. Economy is subordinated not only to politics,
but also to natural law […]. Finally, religion is above (but not outside) econo-
my […]. Vico’s concept of providence as heteronomy of ends is a peremptory
caveat to any reduction of his system to economic determinism» (pp. 154-
155). This is not very different from the view espoused here.
Still another view is advanced by J. O’Neill,
On the History of the Human
Senses in Vico and Marx,
in
Vico and Contemporary Thought
,
cit., Part 2, pp. 179-
186): «The fundamental thesis of
poetic economics
is that man is a work of his
own senses and intellect and that these are never so alien to him, even in their
remote beginnings, as not to build upon them our own humanity» (p. 181). At
this conceptual level, O’Neill finds certain consonances with «Marxist eco-
nomics», which may be debatable.
273
To be counted among these “economists” is a student of Vico’s, A.
Genovesi, and his work
Lezioni di Commercio ossia di Economia Civile
(1765). See
L. Haddad,
The Evolutionary Economics of Giambattista Vico
, cit., p. 18. Genovesi,
in fact, assumed in 1754 in Naples, the first faculty position for economics in
Europe. See V. Hösle,
Einleitung
, cit., p. XCIV. Special mention needs to be
made of F. Galiani (1728-1787) and his
Trattato della moneta
(1750) and
Dia-
logues sur le commerce des blés
(1770). In G. Tagliacozzo’s view, «Galiani’s singling
out of some of the most significant principles of the
New Science
for use as
foundation for his own economic thought was so skillful and faithful to its
source that it made Galiani’s economics a true corollary of Vico’s ideas and
established Galiani as the legitimate founder of economic Vichianism» (Id.,
Economic Vichianism: Vico, Galiani, Croce. Economics, Economic Liberalism
, in
Giam-
battista Vico: An International Symposium
, cit., pp. 349-368, pp. 366-367). How-
ever, most relevant for our argument is the admission: «In none of his [Vico’s]
works, however, did he pay specific attention to problems of economics
strictu
sensu
» (p. 349).
274
For a historical overview of economic analysis and writing essentially
contemporaneous with Vico, see T. Hutchison,
Before Adam Smith: The Emer-
gence of Political Economy, 1662-1776
, London, Basil Blackwell, 1988, pp. 107-
181. Counted among these early “economists” are Pierre Boisguilbert (1646-
1714), Bernard Mandeville (1671-1733), John Law (1671-1729), George
Berkeley (1685-1753), Ernst Ludwig Carl (1682-1743), Richard Cantillon