Hi, As I see it, the question that concepts like "spontaneous order" aim to answer is this: How is it that, under the conditions of a free market economy, the separate specialists who do not know each other and who do not know anything, or at least very little, about the specialized knowledge possessed by the others -- how is it that the actions of these people get coordinated so that each can in some measure benefit from the actions performed by the other? This does not seem to be the same question that was asked by Smith with his baker, butcher, and brewer example or with his concept of the invisible hand because it tries to dig deeper by not taking coordination for granted. Neither, as I recall, is it the question asked by Friedman with his pencil example or by Hayek with his tin example (although I believe that Hayek came closer than anyone else to the idea I will describe below). There examples are too restricted. It seems to me that the focus ought to be on what we might call intermediary entrepreneurship. Such entrepreneurship, which is to some extent possessed by practically everyone, aims to identify gains from specialization and trade and to take advantage of them by making markets. It announces offers to make transactions that are customized to fit those who accept them. Because of this entrepreneurship, less active, alert and knowledgeable individuals who possess a particular specialization ("local knowledge?") can benefit through trade from the goods and resources produced by others without having to acquire the specialized knowledge that would otherwise be required. There is some recognition of intermediary entrepreneurship in the transactions costs literature. But I have not seen a direct link between the idea that reducing transactions costs facilitates exchange and the idea that intermediary entrepreneurship enables specialists to gain from each others' specialized knowledge without having to acquire it. If your planned research is approached from the point of view of intermediary entrepreneurship, it seems very important. I don't know, however, whether you can expect to find historical precedents. It occurs to me, though. that one might find some good examples in the international trade literature, particularly that which focuses on human capital. The problem, Diana, with using examples of a single good is that they do not get at the heart of the issue of reciprocation, as I see it. How, we might ask, is the knowledge of the Kuwaiti oil accountant linked to the knowledge of the owner-operator of a Taiwan fishing trawler? If one tries to conceive of tracing the reciprocal benefits to what I called intermediary entrepreneurship, one would be on the right track, I think. Pat Gunning