Abstract

Scholars have long debated whether "Capital" represents Marx's complete "economics" or whether it is a fragment of a more broadly conceived project. In particular, some writers have alleged there is a missing "Book on Wage-Labor" that Marx intended to write and consequently that his wage theory is incomplete, while others have contested this. This question was first and most thoroughly examined by Henryk Grossmann in his 1929 article, "Die Änderung des ursprunglichen Aufbauplans des Marxschen Kapital und ihre Ursachen" ("The Change in the Original Plan of Composition of Marx's "Capital" and its Causes"). Lengthy extracts from this hitherto untranslated article, in which Grossmann argues that Capital (in its four volumes) is essentially complete, are presented. In addition, passages from Marx's correspondence bearing on his intentions with regard to his project are cited in their entirety. It is demonstrated that "Capital" is not a fragment but represents Marx's complete analysis.