The Complete Aristotle (eng.)

in which there is the least
need of excellence.
    Works have been written upon these subjects by various persons;
for example, by Chares the Parian, and Apollodorus the Lemnian, who
have treated of Tillage and Planting, while others have treated of
other branches; any one who cares for such matters may refer to
their writings. It would be well also to collect the scattered
stories of the ways in which individuals have succeeded in amassing
a fortune; for all this is useful to persons who value the art of
getting wealth. There is the anecdote of Thales the Milesian and
his financial device, which involves a principle of universal
application, but is attributed to him on account of his reputation
for wisdom. He was reproached for his poverty, which was supposed
to show that philosophy was of no use. According to the story, he
knew by his skill in the stars while it was yet winter that there
would be a great harvest of olives in the coming year; so, having a
little money, he gave deposits for the use of all the olive-presses
in Chios and Miletus, which he hired at a low price because no one
bid against him. When the harvest-time came, and many were wanted
all at once and of a sudden, he let them out at any rate which he
pleased, and made a quantity of money. Thus he showed the world
that philosophers can easily be rich if they like, but that their
ambition is of another sort. He is supposed to have given a
striking proof of his wisdom, but, as I was saying, his device for
getting wealth is of universal application, and is nothing but the
creation of a monopoly. It is an art often practiced by cities when
they are want of money; they make a monopoly of provisions.
    There was a man of Sicily, who, having money deposited with him,
bought up an the iron from the iron mines; afterwards, when the
merchants from their various markets came to buy, he was the only
seller, and without much increasing the price he gained 200 per
cent. Which when Dionysius heard, he told him that he might take
away his money, but that he must not remain at Syracuse, for he
thought that the man had discovered a way of making money which was
injurious to his own interests. He made the same discovery as
Thales; they both contrived to create a monopoly for themselves.
And statesmen as well ought to know these things; for a state is
often as much in want of money and of such devices for obtaining it
as a household, or even more so; hence some public men devote
themselves entirely to finance.
XII
    Of household management we have seen that there are three
parts—one is the rule of a master over slaves, which has been
discussed already, another of a father, and the third of a husband.
A husband and father, we saw, rules over wife and children, both
free, but the rule differs, the rule over his children being a
royal, over his wife a constitutional rule. For although there may
be exceptions to the order of nature, the male is by nature fitter
for command than the female, just as the elder and full-grown is
superior to the younger and more immature. But in most
constitutional states the citizens rule and are ruled by turns, for
the idea of a constitutional state implies that the natures of the
citizens are equal, and do not differ at all. Nevertheless, when
one rules and the other is ruled we endeavor to create a difference
of outward forms and names and titles of respect, which may be
illustrated by the saying of Amasis about his foot-pan. The
relation of the male to the female is of this kind, but there the
inequality is permanent. The rule of a father over his children is
royal, for he rules by virtue both of love and of the respect due
to age, exercising a kind of royal power. And therefore Homer has
appropriately called Zeus ‘father of Gods and men,’ because he is
the king of them all. For a king is the natural superior of his
subjects, but he should be of the same kin or kind with them, and
such is the relation of elder and younger, of father and son.
XIII
    Thus it is clear that household management attends more to men
than to the acquisition of inanimate things, and to human
excellence more than to the excellence of property which we call
wealth, and to the virtue of freemen more than to the virtue of
slaves. A question may indeed be raised, whether there is any
excellence at all in a slave beyond and higher than merely
instrumental and ministerial qualities—whether he can have the
virtues of temperance, courage, justice, and the like; or