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