For decades, both economists and legal scholars have regularly used the metaphor of a ‘bundle of rights’ to describe property. In recent and growing literature, the bundle formulation has been the target of a number of critiques, some of which point to Adam Smith, among others, as a source for an alternative perspective on property. This paper examines Smith's work and argues that Smith is an appropriate authority and focal figure for a traditional, in-rem view of property. It illustrates how (...) Smith's usage of concepts in the civil-law tradition, his appreciation for Hume, and especially his unique theory of the impartial spectator, together make clear that Smith's understanding of property is irreconcilable with the modern bundle formulation. (shrink)