Rather than banking enormous gifts, Harvard University built its wealth by adhering to a coherent strategy that gradually became the common sense--the prevailing ideology--of how to build and maintain the wealth of private universities. President Charles W. Eliot formulated this "free money" strategy over the course of his administration from 1869 to 1909. The foundational precept of Eliot's free money strategy holds that, in the competition among universities for academic accomplishment and reputation, the standing of a university is determined primarily by its wealth. Second, he narrowly defined a university's wealth as its permanent invested funds, which came to mean its "endowment" by the end of this period. Given this narrow definition, a university must refrain from depending on tuition revenue, spending its own resources on buildings, or accepting any "inexpedient" gifts. Third, a university must strive to keep its endowed funds "free"--unrestricted both in asset type and in purpose--although restricted gifts that are fungible should be strongly encouraged. Fourth, the university must be managed like a business, operating efficiently and disclosing its finances fully and clearly so that the public appreciates its prudent management. Yet, in striking contrast to a business, a university, fifth, should never carry a surplus but regularly run a deficit because this provides the justification for asking for more free money. By implication, therefore, a university's needs are insatiable. Lastly, the president must assume responsibility for developing the wealth of the university, including identifying, justifying, and presenting its needs for more free money. Eliot's free money strategy gradually became the financial ideology of the wealthiest private universities--a set of taken-for-granted precepts itemizing the common sense of how to build and manage the endowment necessary to compete for academic eminence. (Contains 168 footnotes.)