This essay argues for understanding and investigating the history of production, not primarily as a quantifiable economic phenomenon, but as a history of practice that involves the human senses, culture, governance, and material engagement. The vehicle it uses to make its case focuses on a brief examination of production cycles involving salts in various parts of Eurasia during the century that runs from approximately 1750 to 1850. The essay's approach suggests a history of production in Eurasia that was both locally variegated and transregionally networked. It further involved the interaction between people and their sociomaterial environments, the latter understood as the evolving outcome of interplay between material elements and processes; culturally rooted tastes and values; and variously organized efforts to stimulate, manage, and pursue cycles of production and use. This essay further reflects on how contemporary commentators and present-day historians have (re)configured the geography of these practices in a way that emphasizes divergence between Europe and Asia. Part of this reflection involves looking at what can happen when the historical investigation of production is based on economic analysis. So too does it involve thinking about the potential pitfalls of framing comparative histories.