Pre-Classical Economists
Economics as a systematic branch of knowledge or tool of formulation of public policies is often thought to have emerged in the Eighteenth Century Europe, especially in England and France. However, before the triumph of science and the Industrial Revolution, the life of people in Europe may be explained on the principles of "Closed system-Caste-Power-Religion-Custom" nexus. The economic life of the commoners/laity was controlled by the nobility (or aristocracy) or the clergy (religious heads); tradition-bound it went in a perpetual cycle without much development for a very long time. This circularity gave rise to 'caste' - tying of the type of livelihood to birth in a social group, now strange to the modern western civilization (see Knox on The Middle Ages: Medieval Society). The rise of science and the Industrial Revolution overthrew the old order. Power went into the hands of the industrialists and merchants with whom the crown made a coalition. Formation of 'economic class' on the dichotomy of labourers versus capitalists began. These developments gave rise to "economics" as a new scientific enquiry.
A loose system of considerably structured economic thoughts are traceable when enormous wealth was brought to Italy in 14th, 15th and 16th centuries by expanding trade into Asia and Europe and silver mining in Tyrol increased the flow of money. After Renaissance and later the Industrial Revolution when England, France, Spain, Italy, Portugal, etc. were awakened and the triumph of science was clearly discernible, those countries started interacting vigorously with each other and with the countries outside Europe mainly in the pursuit of trade opportunities. This environment was the hotbed of growing a system of structured economic thoughts, especially centering around the market economy. In this milieu, England showed vigorous development of the mercantilist thoughts while France showed her leaning to Physiocracy (the importance of agriculture) and for obvious reasons. These thoughts had a great relevance to influencing the public opinion and making the economic policies that favoured their national (or at least the dominant class) interests. The rise of the nation states in Europe went on hand in hand with these developments. Later, England and France both became the protagonists of trade, but in accordance with their own national economic backgrounds. The thesis of Gunnar Myrdal (in his The Political Element in the Development of Economic Theory, 1930) is only more vivid here.
Yet, the ancient economic thoughts form an interesting part in the history of economic reasoning. The economic thoughts of Kautilya in his Arthashastra or the observations of Xenophon as one learns from Oeconomicus and Ways and Means are astonishingly structured, if seen in their native circumstances. Of course, those authors wrote about the political economy and not economics that centers around the market economy (although it does not imply that the contemprary economics is less political either in its origin or in its destination).