Husserl's remark, "tradition is omission of the origins",¹ does not apply only to philosophy. It is valuable in the economic field as well, where the scientific and public achievements of a research programme often appear strangely proportional to the distance travelled by the latest heirs from the founding message. With the help of some often-undetected reductions, if not deliberate falsifications, the research takes a different course from that initially indicated by the intuitions of the founders. What, for example, would Leon Walras say today of the studies conducted by the neoclassical mainstream by those who claim, even indirectly, his theoretical economics heritage?