As a young economist, George Stigler wrote a lot in the history of economic thought. His doctoral dissertation, 'Studies in the History of Production and Distribution,' was written under the direction of Frank Knight and competed in 1938. It was published in book form by Macmillian in 1941 as Production and Distribution Theories. I recommend all graduate students to pick up a copy (a new edition was published in paperback by Transaction Press in 1994) and to see how Stigler sharpens his skills as an economic thinker through the critical analysis of the leading thinkers during the formative period of neoclassical price theory.
Of particular interest is his essay on Menger, first published in the JPE in 1937. It is actually a very positive evaluation of Menger in comparison with the other marginal revolutionaries. "Menger's success is clear in the light of Jevon's failure. The former faced no established theoretical tradition -- what little theoretical German economics there was at the time possessed a strong anticlassical bias; Menger's treatment was lucid, systematic, and comprehensive; and, to mention a factor of ambiguous importance, his was good economic theory." (1994, 136)
Milton Friedman famously said that there was no "Austrian" or "Chicago" or "Cambridge" economics, only 'good economics' and 'bad economics'. This is usually interpreted as criticism of the Austrian school of economics, but it need not be. In fact, I have argued that there is indeed only good economics and bad economics, it is just that what constitutes good economics has to incorporate the insights from Menger, Mises and Hayek. At least with respect to Menger, it appears that a young George Stigler would have agreed with me. Including Menger's emphasis on subjectivism, as opposed to the classical emphasis on material goods.