The learned Professor Roscher, after first informing us that the false definitions of money may be divided into two main groups: those which make it more, and those which make it less, than a commodity, gives us a long and very mixed catalogue of works on the nature of money, from which it appears that he has not the remotest idea of the real history of the theory; and then he moralises thus: For the rest, it is not to be denied that most of the later economists do not bear sufficiently in mind the peculiarities that distinguish money from other commodities (it is then, after all, either more or less than a commodity!). '