Regarding Mason Gaffney's recent point, we actually do have the original   
German. It doesn't say Faktoren. It says Elemente.  
More generally, it seems some may think there is a certain scientific magic   
in the word "factor," so that discovering who found the magic first is   
discovering who won that particular race to advance economic "science."  
Without proposing a discussion on this (enormous) issue in the history of   
thought, I would only suggest keeping in mind also that since like all   
words "factor" is historical, it means different things at different times   
to different people. I suspect that in Germany and Austria (including its   
empire), because of Leibnitz, maybe Kant, and certainly Hegel, the word   
Faktor carried for many professors in the nineteenth century a mathematical   
meaning (as "factor" had in England since Newton's time), although Faktor   
also meant agent, partisan, representative, commercial rep, steward, etc.,   
as it did in English. The meanings are different. But both seem to drift   
into classical economics, evidently somewhat into Marx's work too, and   
later into neo-classical economics, until they acquire the formal,   
professionally determined definitions toward the end of the 19th century   
that we still recognize today. If this is the case, I think it would be   
significant for understanding the development of modern concepts of   
production. But does the notion look quite wrong to you all, experts in the   
history of economics? Or is it worth more pursuing?  
  
John Womack