Productiveactivity,ifweleaveoutofsightitsspecialform,viz.,theusefulcharacterofthelabour,isnothingbuttheexpenditureofhumanlabourpower.Tailoringandweaving,thoughqualitativelydifferentproductiveactivities,areeachaproductiveexpenditureofhumanbrains,nerves,andmuscles,andinthissensearehumanlabour.Theyarebuttwodifferentmodesofexpendinghumanlabourpower.

Ofcourse,thislabourpower,whichremainsthe14CAPITALsameunderallitsmodifications,musthaveattainedacertainpitchofdevelopmentbeforeitcanbeexpendedinamultiplicityofmodes.Butthevalueofacommodityrepresentshumanlabourintheabstract,theexpenditureofhumanlabouringeneral.Andjustasinsociety,ageneralorabankerplaysagreatpart,butmereman,ontheotherhand,averyshabbypart,14soherewithmerehumanlabour.Itistheexpenditureofsimplelabourpower,i.e.,ofthelabourpowerwhich,onanaverage,apartfromanyspecialdevelopment,existsintheorganismofeveryordinaryindividual.Simpleaveragelabour,itistrue,variesincharacterindifferentcountriesandatdifferenttimes,butinaparticularsocietyitisgiven.Skilledlabourcountsonlyassimplelabourintensified,orrather,asmultipliedsimplelabour,agivenquantityofskilledbeingconsideredequaltoagreaterquantityofsimplelabour.Experienceshowsthatthisreductionisconstantlybeingmade.Acommoditymaybetheproductofthemostskilledlabour,butitsvalue,byequatingittotheproductofsimpleunskilledlabour,representsadefinitequantityofthelatterlabouralone.15Thedifferentproportionsinwhichdifferentsortsoflabourarereducedtounskilledlabourastheirstandard,areestablishedbyasocialprocessthatgoesonbehindthebacksoftheproducers,and,consequently,appeartobefixedbycustom.Forsimplicity'ssakeweshallhenceforthaccounteverykindoflabourtobeunskilled,simplelabour;bythiswedonomorethansaveourselvesthetroubleofmakingthereduction.

Justas,therefore,inviewingthecoatandlinenasvalues,weabstractfromtheirdifferentusevalues,soitiswiththelabourrepresentedbythosevalues:wedisregardthedifferencebetweenitsusefulforms,weavingandtailoring.Astheusevalues,coatandlinen,arecombinationsofspecialproductiveactivitieswithclothandyarn,whilethevalues,coatPART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY15andlinen,are,ontheotherhand,merehomogeneouscongelationsofundifferentiatedlabour,sothelabourembodiedintheselattervaluesdoesnotcountbyvirtueofitsproductiverelationtoclothandyarn,butonlyasbeingexpenditureofhumanlabourpower.

Tailoringandweavingarenecessaryfactorsinthecreationoftheusevalues,coatandlinen,preciselybecausethesetwokindsoflabourareofdifferentqualities;butonlyinsofarasabstractionismadefromtheirspecialqualities,onlyinsofarasbothpossessthesamequalityofbeinghumanlabour,dotailoringandweavingformthesubstanceofthevaluesofthesamearticles.

Coatsandlinen,however,arenotmerelyvalues,butvaluesofdefinitemagnitude,andaccordingtoourassumption,thecoatisworthtwiceasmuchasthetenyardsoflinen.Whencethisdifferenceintheirvalues?

Itisowingtothefactthatthelinencontainsonlyhalfasmuchlabourasthecoat,andconsequently,thatintheproductionofthelatter,labourpowermusthavebeenexpendedduringtwicethetimenecessaryfortheproductionoftheformer.

While,therefore,withreferencetousevalue,thelabourcontainedinacommoditycountsonlyqualitatively,withreferencetovalueitcountsonlyquantitatively,andmustfirstbereducedtohumanlabourpureandsimple.Intheformercase,itisaquestionofHowandWhat,inthelatterofHowmuch?

Howlongatime?Sincethemagnitudeofthevalueofacommodityrepresentsonlythequantityoflabourembodiedinit,itfollowsthatallcommodities,whentakenincertainproportions,mustbeequalinvalue.

Iftheproductivepowerofallthedifferentsortsofusefullabourrequiredfortheproductionofacoatremainsunchanged,thesumofthevaluesofthecoatsproducedincreaseswiththeirnumber.Ifonecoatrepresentsxdays'labour,twocoatsrepresent2xdays'labour,andsoon.Butassumethatthedurationofthe16CAPITALlabournecessaryfortheproductionofacoatbecomesdoubledorhalved.Inthefirstcaseonecoatisworthasmuchastwocoatswerebefore;inthesecondcase,twocoatsareonlyworthasmuchasonewasbefore,althoughinbothcasesonecoatrendersthesameserviceasbefore,andtheusefullabourembodiedinitremainsofthesamequality.Butthequantityoflabourspentonitsproductionhasaltered.

Anincreaseinthequantityofusevaluesisanincreaseofmaterialwealth.Withtwocoatstwomencanbeclothed,withonecoatonlyoneman.

Nevertheless,anincreasedquantityofmaterialwealthmaycorrespondtoasimultaneousfallinthemagnitudeofitsvalue.Thisantagonisticmovementhasitsorigininthetwo-foldcharacteroflabour.

Productivepowerhasreference,ofcourse,onlytolabourofsomeusefulconcreteform,theefficacyofanyspecialproductiveactivityduringagiventimebeingdependentonitsproductiveness.Usefullabourbecomes,therefore,amoreorlessabundantsourceofproducts,inproportiontotheriseorfallofitsproductiveness.Ontheotherhand,nochangeinthisproductivenessaffectsthelabourrepresentedbyvalue.

Sinceproductivepowerisanattributeoftheconcreteusefulformsoflabour,ofcourseitcannolongerhaveanybearingonthatlabour,sosoonaswemakeabstractionfromthoseconcreteusefulforms.Howeverthenproductivepowermayvary,thesamelabour,exercisedduringequalperiodsoftime,alwaysyieldsequalamountsofvalue.Butitwillyield,duringequalperiodsoftime,differentquantitiesofvaluesinuse;more,iftheproductivepowerrise,fewer,ifitfall.Thesamechangeinproductivepower,whichincreasesthefruitfulnessoflabour,and,inconsequence,thequantityofusevaluesproducedbythatlabour,willdiminishthetotalvalueofthisincreasedquantityofusevalues,providedsuchchangeshortenthetotallabourtimenecessaryfortheirproduction;andvicePART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY17versa.

Ontheonehandalllabouris,speakingphysiologically,anexpenditureofhumanlabourpower,andinitscharacterofidenticalabstracthumanlabour,itcreatesandformsthevalueofcommodities.

Ontheotherhand,alllabouristheexpenditureofhumanlabourpowerinaspecialformandwithadefiniteaim,andinthis,itscharacterofconcreteusefullabour,itproducesusevalues.16Section3:TheFormofValueorExchange-ValueCommoditiescomeintotheworldintheshapeofusevalues,articles,orgoods,suchasiron,linen,corn,&c.Thisistheirplain,homely,bodilyform.

Theyare,however,commodities,onlybecausetheyaresomethingtwo-fold,bothobjectsofutility,and,atthesametime,depositoriesofvalue.Theymanifestthemselvesthereforeascommodities,orhavetheformofcommodities,onlyinsofarastheyhavetwoforms,aphysicalornaturalform,andavalueform.

TherealityofthevalueofcommoditiesdiffersinthisrespectfromDameQuickly,thatwedon'tknow"wheretohaveit."Thevalueofcommoditiesistheveryoppositeofthecoarsematerialityoftheirsubstance,notanatomofmatterentersintoitscomposition.Turnandexamineasinglecommodity,byitself,aswewill,yetinsofarasitremainsanobjectofvalue,itseemsimpossibletograspit.If,however,webearinmindthatthevalueofcommoditieshasapurelysocialreality,andthattheyacquirethisrealityonlyinsofarastheyareexpressionsorembodimentsofoneidenticalsocialsubstance,viz.,humanlabour,itfollowsasamatterofcourse,thatvaluecanonlymanifestitselfinthesocialrelationofcommoditytocommodity.Infactwe18CAPITALstartedfromexchangevalue,ortheexchangerelationofcommodities,inordertogetatthevaluethatlieshiddenbehindit.Wemustnowreturntothisformunderwhichvaluefirstappearedtous.

Everyoneknows,ifheknowsnothingelse,thatcommoditieshaveavalueformcommontothemall,andpresentingamarkedcontrastwiththevariedbodilyformsoftheirusevalues.Imeantheirmoneyform.Here,however,ataskissetus,theperformanceofwhichhasneveryetevenbeenattemptedbybourgeoiseconomy,thetaskoftracingthegenesisofthismoneyform,ofdevelopingtheexpressionofvalueimpliedinthevaluerelationofcommodities,fromitssimplest,almostimperceptibleoutline,tothedazzlingmoney-form.Bydoingthisweshall,atthesametime,solvetheriddlepresentedbymoney.

Thesimplestvalue-relationisevidentlythatofonecommoditytosomeoneothercommodityofadifferentkind.Hencetherelationbetweenthevaluesoftwocommoditiessuppliesuswiththesimplestexpressionofthevalueofasinglecommodity.

A.ElementaryorAccidentalFormOfValuexcommodityA=ycommodityB,orxcommodityAisworthycommodityB.

20yardsoflinen=1coat,or20Yardsoflinenareworth1coat.

1.Thetwopolesoftheexpressionofvalue.RelativeformandEquivalentformThewholemysteryoftheformofvaluelieshiddeninthiselementaryform.Itsanalysis,therefore,isourrealdifficulty.

Heretwodifferentkindsofcommodities(inourexamplethelinenandthecoat),evidentlyplaytwodifferentparts.Thelinenexpressesitsvalueinthecoat;thecoatservesasthematerialinwhichthatvaluePART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY19isexpressed.Theformerplaysanactive,thelatterapassive,part.Thevalueofthelinenisrepresentedasrelativevalue,orappearsinrelativeform.Thecoatofficiatesasequivalent,orappearsinequivalentform.

Therelativeformandtheequivalentformaretwointimatelyconnected,mutuallydependentandinseparableelementsoftheexpressionofvalue;but,atthesametime,aremutuallyexclusive,antagonisticextremes–i.e.,polesofthesameexpression.Theyareallottedrespectivelytothetwodifferentcommoditiesbroughtintorelationbythatexpression.Itisnotpossibletoexpressthevalueoflineninlinen.20yardsoflinen=20yardsoflinenisnoexpressionofvalue.

Onthecontrary,suchanequationmerelysaysthat20yardsoflinenarenothingelsethan20yardsoflinen,adefinitequantityoftheusevaluelinen.Thevalueofthelinencanthereforebeexpressedonlyrelatively–i.e.,insomeothercommodity.Therelativeformofthevalueofthelinenpresupposes,therefore,thepresenceofsomeothercommodity–herethecoat–undertheformofanequivalent.Ontheotherhand,thecommoditythatfiguresastheequivalentcannotatthesametimeassumetherelativeform.Thatsecondcommodityisnottheonewhosevalueisexpressed.

Itsfunctionismerelytoserveasthematerialinwhichthevalueofthefirstcommodityisexpressed.

Nodoubt,theexpression20yardsoflinen=1coat,or20yardsoflinenareworth1coat,impliestheoppositerelation.1coat=20yardsoflinen,or1coatisworth20yardsoflinen.But,inthatcase,Imustreversetheequation,inordertoexpressthevalueofthecoatrelatively;andsosoonasIdothatthelinenbecomestheequivalentinsteadofthecoat.

Asinglecommoditycannot,therefore,simultaneouslyassume,inthesameexpressionofvalue,bothforms.

Theverypolarityoftheseformsmakesthemmutuallyexclusive.

Whether,then,acommodityassumestherelative20CAPITALform,ortheoppositeequivalentform,dependsentirelyuponitsaccidentalpositionintheexpressionofvalue–thatis,uponwhetheritisthecommoditywhosevalueisbeingexpressedorthecommodityinwhichvalueisbeingexpressed.

2.TheRelativeFormofValue(a.)ThenatureandimportofthisformInordertodiscoverhowtheelementaryexpressionofthevalueofacommoditylieshiddeninthevaluerelationoftwocommodities,wemust,inthefirstplace,considerthelatterentirelyapartfromitsquantitativeaspect.Theusualmodeofprocedureisgenerallythereverse,andinthevaluerelationnothingisseenbuttheproportionbetweendefinitequantitiesoftwodifferentsortsofcommoditiesthatareconsideredequaltoeachother.Itisapttobeforgottenthatthemagnitudesofdifferentthingscanbecomparedquantitatively,onlywhenthosemagnitudesareexpressedintermsofthesameunit.Itisonlyasexpressionsofsuchaunitthattheyareofthesamedenomination,andthereforecommensurable.17Whether20yardsoflinen=1coator=20coatsor=xcoats–thatis,whetheragivenquantityoflinenisworthfewormanycoats,everysuchstatementimpliesthatthelinenandcoats,asmagnitudesofvalue,areexpressionsofthesameunit,thingsofthesamekind.

Linen=coatisthebasisoftheequation.

Butthetwocommoditieswhoseidentityofqualityisthusassumed,donotplaythesamepart.Itisonlythevalueofthelinenthatisexpressed.Andhow?Byitsreferencetothecoatasitsequivalent,assomethingthatcanbeexchangedforit.Inthisrelationthecoatisthemodeofexistenceofvalue,isvalueembodied,foronlyassuchisitthesameasthelinen.Ontheotherhand,thelinen'sownvaluecomestothefront,receivesindependentexpression,foritisonlyasbeingvaluethatitiscomparablewiththecoatasathingofequalvalue,orexchangeablewiththecoat.

PART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY21Toborrowanillustrationfromchemistry,butyricacidisadifferentsubstancefrompropylformate.Yetbotharemadeupofthesamechemicalsubstances,carbon(C),hydrogen(H),andoxygen(O),andthat,too,inlikeproportions–namely,C4H8O2.Ifnowweequatebutyricacidtopropylformate,then,inthefirstplace,propylformatewouldbe,inthisrelation,merelyaformofexistenceofC4H8O2;andinthesecondplace,weshouldbestatingthatbutyricacidalsoconsistsofC4H8O2.Therefore,bythusequatingthetwosubstances,expressionwouldbegiventotheirchemicalcomposition,whiletheirdifferentphysicalformswouldbeneglected.

Ifwesaythat,asvalues,commoditiesaremerecongelationsofhumanlabour,wereducethembyouranalysis,itistrue,totheabstraction,value;butweascribetothisvaluenoformapartfromtheirbodilyform.Itisotherwiseinthevaluerelationofonecommoditytoanother.Here,theonestandsforthinitscharacterofvaluebyreasonofitsrelationtotheother.

Bymakingthecoattheequivalentofthelinen,weequatethelabourembodiedintheformertothatinthelatter.Now,itistruethatthetailoring,whichmakesthecoat,isconcretelabourofadifferentsortfromtheweavingwhichmakesthelinen.Buttheactofequatingittotheweaving,reducesthetailoringtothatwhichisreallyequalinthetwokindsoflabour,totheircommoncharacterofhumanlabour.Inthisroundaboutway,then,thefactisexpressed,thatweavingalso,insofarasitweavesvalue,hasnothingtodistinguishitfromtailoring,and,consequently,isabstracthumanlabour.Itistheexpressionofequivalencebetweendifferentsortsofcommoditiesthatalonebringsintoreliefthespecificcharacterofvalue-creatinglabour,andthisitdoesbyactuallyreducingthedifferentvarietiesoflabourembodiedinthedifferentkindsofcommoditiestotheircommonqualityofhumanlabourintheabstract.1822CAPITALThereis,however,somethingelserequiredbeyondtheexpressionofthespecificcharacterofthelabourofwhichthevalueofthelinenconsists.Humanlabourpowerinmotion,orhumanlabour,createsvalue,butisnotitselfvalue.Itbecomesvalueonlyinitscongealedstate,whenembodiedintheformofsomeobject.Inordertoexpressthevalueofthelinenasacongelationofhumanlabour,thatvaluemustbeexpressedashavingobjectiveexistence,asbeingasomethingmateriallydifferentfromthelinenitself,andyetasomethingcommontothelinenandallothercommodities.Theproblemisalreadysolved.

Whenoccupyingthepositionofequivalentintheequationofvalue,thecoatranksqualitativelyastheequalofthelinen,assomethingofthesamekind,becauseitisvalue.Inthispositionitisathinginwhichweseenothingbutvalue,orwhosepalpablebodilyformrepresentsvalue.Yetthecoatitself,thebodyofthecommodity,coat,isamereusevalue.Acoatassuchnomoretellsusitisvalue,thandoesthefirstpieceoflinenwetakeholdof.Thisshowsthatwhenplacedinvalue-relationtothelinen,thecoatsignifiesmorethanwhenoutofthatrelation,justasmanyamanstruttingaboutinagorgeousuniformcountsformorethanwheninmufti.

Intheproductionofthecoat,humanlabourpower,intheshapeoftailoring,musthavebeenactuallyexpended.Humanlabouristhereforeaccumulatedinit.Inthisaspectthecoatisadepositoryofvalue,butthoughworntoathread,itdoesnotletthisfactshowthrough.Andasequivalentofthelineninthevalueequation,itexistsunderthisaspectalone,countsthereforeasembodiedvalue,asabodythatisvalue.

A,forinstance,cannotbe"yourmajesty"toB,unlessatthesametimemajestyinB'seyesassumesthebodilyformofA,and,whatismore,witheverynewfatherofthepeople,changesitsfeatures,hair,andmanyotherthingsbesides.

PART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY23Hence,inthevalueequation,inwhichthecoatistheequivalentofthelinen,thecoatofficiatesastheformofvalue.Thevalueofthecommoditylinenisexpressedbythebodilyformofthecommoditycoat,thevalueofonebytheusevalueoftheother.Asausevalue,thelinenissomethingpalpablydifferentfromthecoat;asvalue,itisthesameasthecoat,andnowhastheappearanceofacoat.Thusthelinenacquiresavalueformdifferentfromitsphysicalform.Thefactthatitisvalue,ismademanifestbyitsequalitywiththecoat,justasthesheep'snatureofaChristianisshowninhisresemblancetotheLambofGod.

Wesee,then,allthatouranalysisofthevalueofcommoditieshasalreadytoldus,istoldusbythelinenitself,sosoonasitcomesintocommunicationwithanothercommodity,thecoat.Onlyitbetraysitsthoughtsinthatlanguagewithwhichaloneitisfamiliar,thelanguageofcommodities.Inordertotellusthatitsownvalueiscreatedbylabourinitsabstractcharacterofhumanlabour,itsaysthatthecoat,insofarasitisworthasmuchasthelinen,andthereforeisvalue,consistsofthesamelabourasthelinen.Inordertoinformusthatitssublimerealityasvalueisnotthesameasitsbuckrambody,itsaysthatvaluehastheappearanceofacoat,andconsequentlythatsofarasthelinenisvalue,itandthecoatareaslikeastwopeas.Wemayhereremark,thatthelanguageofcommoditieshas,besidesHebrew,manyothermoreorlesscorrectdialects.TheGerman"Wertsein,"tobeworth,forinstance,expressesinalessstrikingmannerthantheRomanceverbs"valere,""valer,""valoir,"thattheequatingofcommodityBtocommodityA,iscommodityA'sownmodeofexpressingitsvalue.

Parisvautbienunemesse.[Parisiscertainlyworthamass]Bymeans,therefore,ofthevalue-relationexpressedinourequation,thebodilyformofcommodityBbecomesthevalueformofcommodityA,orthe24CAPITALbodyofcommodityBactsasamirrortothevalueofcommodityA.19ByputtingitselfinrelationwithcommodityB,asvalueinpropriapersona,asthematterofwhichhumanlabourismadeup,thecommodityAconvertsthevalueinuse,B,intothesubstanceinwhichtoexpressits,A's,ownvalue.ThevalueofA,thusexpressedintheusevalueofB,hastakentheformofrelativevalue.

(b.)QuantitativedeterminationofRelativevalueEverycommodity,whosevalueitisintendedtoexpress,isausefulobjectofgivenquantity,as15bushelsofcorn,or100lbsofcoffee.Andagivenquantityofanycommoditycontainsadefinitequantityofhumanlabour.Thevalueformmustthereforenotonlyexpressvaluegenerally,butalsovalueindefinitequantity.Therefore,inthevaluerelationofcommodityAtocommodityB,ofthelinentothecoat,notonlyisthelatter,asvalueingeneral,madetheequalinqualityofthelinen,butadefinitequantityofcoat(1coat)ismadetheequivalentofadefinitequantity(20yards)oflinen.

Theequation,20yardsoflinen=1coat,or20yardsoflinenareworthonecoat,impliesthatthesamequantityofvaluesubstance(congealedlabour)isembodiedinboth;thatthetwocommoditieshaveeachcostthesameamountoflabourofthesamequantityoflabourtime.Butthelabourtimenecessaryfortheproductionof20yardsoflinenor1coatvarieswitheverychangeintheproductivenessofweavingortailoring.Wehavenowtoconsidertheinfluenceofsuchchangesonthequantitativeaspectoftherelativeexpressionofvalue.

I.Letthevalueofthelinenvary,20thatofthecoatremainingconstant.If,sayinconsequenceoftheexhaustionofflax-growingsoil,thelabourtimenecessaryfortheproductionofthelinenbedoubled,thevalueofthelinenwillalsobedoubled.Insteadoftheequation,20yardsoflinen=1coat,weshouldPART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY25have20yardsoflinen=2coats,since1coatwouldnowcontainonlyhalfthelabourtimeembodiedin20yardsoflinen.If,ontheotherhand,inconsequence,say,ofimprovedlooms,thislabourtimebereducedbyone-half,thevalueofthelinenwouldfallbyone-half.

Consequently,weshouldhave20yardsoflinen=?

coat.TherelativevalueofcommodityA,i.e.,itsvalueexpressedincommodityB,risesandfallsdirectlyasthevalueofA,thevalueofBbeingsupposedconstant.

II.Letthevalueofthelinenremainconstant,whilethevalueofthecoatvaries.If,underthesecircumstances,inconsequence,forinstance,ofapoorcropofwool,thelabourtimenecessaryfortheproductionofacoatbecomesdoubled,wehaveinsteadof20yardsoflinen=1coat,20yardsoflinen=?coat.If,ontheotherhand,thevalueofthecoatsinksbyone-half,then20yardsoflinen=2coats.

Hence,ifthevalueofcommodityAremainconstant,itsrelativevalueexpressedincommodityBrisesandfallsinverselyasthevalueofB.

IfwecomparethedifferentcasesinIandII,weseethatthesamechangeofmagnitudeinrelativevaluemayarisefromtotallyoppositecauses.Thus,theequation,20yardsoflinen=1coat,becomes20yardsoflinen=2coats,either,becausethevalueofthelinenhasdoubled,orbecausethevalueofthecoathasfallenbyone-half;anditbecomes20yardsoflinen=?coat,either,becausethevalueofthelinenhasfallenbyone-half,orbecausethevalueofthecoathasdoubled.

III.Letthequantitiesoflabourtimerespectivelynecessaryfortheproductionofthelinenandthecoatvarysimultaneouslyinthesamedirectionandinthesameproportion.Inthiscase20yardsoflinencontinueequalto1coat,howevermuchtheirvaluesmayhavealtered.Theirchangeofvalueisseenassoonastheyarecomparedwithathirdcommodity,whosevaluehasremainedconstant.Ifthevalues26CAPITALofallcommoditiesroseorfellsimultaneously,andinthesameproportion,theirrelativevalueswouldremainunaltered.Theirrealchangeofvaluewouldappearfromthediminishedorincreasedquantityofcommoditiesproducedinagiventime.

IV.Thelabourtimerespectivelynecessaryfortheproductionofthelinenandthecoat,andthereforethevalueofthesecommoditiesmaysimultaneouslyvaryinthesamedirection,butatunequalratesorinoppositedirections,orinotherways.Theeffectofallthesepossibledifferentvariations,ontherelativevalueofacommodity,maybededucedfromtheresultsofI,II,andIII.

Thusrealchangesinthemagnitudeofvalueareneitherunequivocallynorexhaustivelyreflectedintheirrelativeexpression,thatis,intheequationexpressingthemagnitudeofrelativevalue.Therelativevalueofacommoditymayvary,althoughitsvalueremainsconstant.Itsrelativevaluemayremainconstant,althoughitsvaluevaries;andfinally,simultaneousvariationsinthemagnitudeofvalueandinthatofitsrelativeexpressionbynomeansnecessarilycorrespondinamount.213.TheEquivalentFormofValueWehaveseenthatcommodityA(thelinen),byexpressingitsvalueintheusevalueofacommoditydifferinginkind(thecoat),atthesametimeimpressesuponthelatteraspecificformofvalue,namelythatoftheequivalent.Thecommoditylinenmanifestsitsqualityofhavingavaluebythefactthatthecoat,withouthavingassumedavalueformdifferentfromitsbodilyform,isequatedtothelinen.Thefactthatthelatterthereforehasavalueisexpressedbysayingthatthecoatisdirectlyexchangeablewithit.

Therefore,whenwesaythatacommodityisintheequivalentform,weexpressthefactthatitisdirectlyexchangeablewithothercommodities.

Whenonecommodity,suchasacoat,servesasPART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY27theequivalentofanother,suchaslinen,andcoatsconsequentlyacquirethecharacteristicpropertyofbeingdirectlyexchangeablewithlinen,wearefarfromknowinginwhatproportionthetwoareexchangeable.Thevalueofthelinenbeinggiveninmagnitude,thatproportiondependsonthevalueofthecoat.Whetherthecoatservesastheequivalentandthelinenasrelativevalue,orthelinenastheequivalentandthecoatasrelativevalue,themagnitudeofthecoat'svalueisdetermined,independentlyofitsvalueform,bythelabourtimenecessaryforitsproduction.

Butwheneverthecoatassumesintheequationofvalue,thepositionofequivalent,itsvalueacquiresnoquantitativeexpression;onthecontrary,thecommoditycoatnowfiguresonlyasadefinitequantityofsomearticle.

Forinstance,40yardsoflinenareworth–what?2coats.Becausethecommoditycoathereplaysthepartofequivalent,becausetheuse-valuecoat,asopposedtothelinen,figuresasanembodimentofvalue,thereforeadefinitenumberofcoatssufficestoexpressthedefinitequantityofvalueinthelinen.Twocoatsmaythereforeexpressthequantityofvalueof40yardsoflinen,buttheycanneverexpressthequantityoftheirownvalue.Asuperficialobservationofthisfact,namely,thatintheequationofvalue,theequivalentfiguresexclusivelyasasimplequantityofsomearticle,ofsomeusevalue,hasmisledBailey,asalsomanyothers,bothbeforeandafterhim,intoseeing,intheexpressionofvalue,merelyaquantitativerelation.

Thetruthbeing,thatwhenacommodityactsasequivalent,noquantitativedeterminationofitsvalueisexpressed.

Thefirstpeculiaritythatstrikesus,inconsideringtheformoftheequivalent,isthis:usevaluebecomestheformofmanifestation,thephenomenalformofitsopposite,value.

Thebodilyformofthecommoditybecomesits28CAPITALvalueform.But,markwell,thatthisquidproquoexistsinthecaseofanycommodityB,onlywhensomeothercommodityAentersintoavaluerelationwithit,andthenonlywithinthelimitsofthisrelation.

Sincenocommoditycanstandintherelationofequivalenttoitself,andthusturnitsownbodilyshapeintotheexpressionofitsownvalue,everycommodityiscompelledtochoosesomeothercommodityforitsequivalent,andtoaccepttheusevalue,thatistosay,thebodilyshapeofthatothercommodityastheformofitsownvalue.

Oneofthemeasuresthatweapplytocommoditiesasmaterialsubstances,asusevalues,willservetoillustratethispoint.Asugar-loafbeingabody,isheavy,andthereforehasweight:butwecanneitherseenortouchthisweight.Wethentakevariouspiecesofiron,whoseweighthasbeendeterminedbeforehand.

Theiron,asiron,isnomoretheformofmanifestationofweight,thanisthesugar-loaf.Nevertheless,inordertoexpressthesugar-loafassomuchweight,weputitintoaweight-relationwiththeiron.Inthisrelation,theironofficiatesasabodyrepresentingnothingbutweight.Acertainquantityofironthereforeservesasthemeasureoftheweightofthesugar,andrepresents,inrelationtothesugar-loaf,weightembodied,theformofmanifestationofweight.Thispartisplayedbytheirononlywithinthisrelation,intowhichthesugaroranyotherbody,whoseweighthastobedetermined,enterswiththeiron.Weretheynotbothheavy,theycouldnotenterintothisrelation,andtheonecouldthereforenotserveastheexpressionoftheweightoftheother.Whenwethrowbothintothescales,weseeinreality,thatasweighttheyareboththesame,andthat,therefore,whentakeninproperproportions,theyhavethesameweight.Justasthesubstanceiron,asameasureofweight,representsinrelationtothesugar-loafweightalone,so,inourexpressionofvalue,thematerialobject,coat,inrelationtothelinen,representsPART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY29valuealone.

Here,however,theanalogyceases.Theiron,intheexpressionoftheweightofthesugar-loaf,representsanaturalpropertycommontobothbodies,namelytheirweight;butthecoat,intheexpressionofvalueofthelinen,representsanon-naturalpropertyofboth,somethingpurelysocial,namely,theirvalue.

Sincetherelativeformofvalueofacommodity–thelinen,forexample–expressesthevalueofthatcommodity,asbeingsomethingwhollydifferentfromitssubstanceandproperties,asbeing,forinstance,coat-like,weseethatthisexpressionitselfindicatesthatsomesocialrelationliesatthebottomofit.Withtheequivalentformitisjustthecontrary.Theveryessenceofthisformisthatthematerialcommodityitself–thecoat–justasitis,expressesvalue,andisendowedwiththeformofvaluebyNatureitself.

Ofcoursethisholdsgoodonlysolongasthevaluerelationexists,inwhichthecoatstandsinthepositionofequivalenttothelinen.22Since,however,thepropertiesofathingarenottheresultofitsrelationstootherthings,butonlymanifestthemselvesinsuchrelations,thecoatseemstobeendowedwithitsequivalentform,itspropertyofbeingdirectlyexchangeable,justasmuchbyNatureasitisendowedwiththepropertyofbeingheavy,orthecapacitytokeepuswarm.Hencetheenigmaticalcharacteroftheequivalentformwhichescapesthenoticeofthebourgeoispoliticaleconomist,untilthisform,completelydeveloped,confrontshimintheshapeofmoney.Hethenseekstoexplainawaythemysticalcharacterofgoldandsilver,bysubstitutingforthemlessdazzlingcommodities,andbyreciting,witheverrenewedsatisfaction,thecatalogueofallpossiblecommoditieswhichatonetimeoranotherhaveplayedthepartofequivalent.Hehasnottheleastsuspicionthatthemostsimpleexpressionofvalue,suchas20ydsoflinen=1coat,alreadypropoundstheriddleof30CAPITALtheequivalentformforoursolution.

Thebodyofthecommoditythatservesastheequivalent,figuresasthematerialisationofhumanlabourintheabstract,andisatthesametimetheproductofsomespecificallyusefulconcretelabour.

Thisconcretelabourbecomes,therefore,themediumforexpressingabstracthumanlabour.Ifontheonehandthecoatranksasnothingbuttheembodimentofabstracthumanlabour,so,ontheotherhand,thetailoringwhichisactuallyembodiedinit,countsasnothingbuttheformunderwhichthatabstractlabourisrealised.Intheexpressionofvalueofthelinen,theutilityofthetailoringconsists,notinmakingclothes,butinmakinganobject,whichweatoncerecognisetobeValue,andthereforetobeacongelationoflabour,butoflabourindistinguishablefromthatrealisedinthevalueofthelinen.Inordertoactassuchamirrorofvalue,thelabouroftailoringmustreflectnothingbesidesitsownabstractqualityofbeinghumanlabourgenerally.

Intailoring,aswellasinweaving,humanlabourpowerisexpended.Both,therefore,possessthegeneralpropertyofbeinghumanlabour,andmay,therefore,incertaincases,suchasintheproductionofvalue,havetobeconsideredunderthisaspectalone.Thereisnothingmysteriousinthis.Butintheexpressionofvaluethereisacompleteturnofthetables.Forinstance,howisthefacttobeexpressedthatweavingcreatesthevalueofthelinen,notbyvirtueofbeingweaving,assuch,butbyreasonofitsgeneralpropertyofbeinghumanlabour?Simplybyopposingtoweavingthatotherparticularformofconcretelabour(inthisinstancetailoring),whichproducestheequivalentoftheproductofweaving.

Justasthecoatinitsbodilyformbecameadirectexpressionofvalue,sonowdoestailoring,aconcreteformoflabour,appearasthedirectandpalpableembodimentofhumanlabourgenerally.

PART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY31Hence,thesecondpeculiarityoftheequivalentformis,thatconcretelabourbecomestheformunderwhichitsopposite,abstracthumanlabour,manifestsitself.

Butbecausethisconcretelabour,tailoringinourcase,ranksas,andisdirectlyidentifiedwith,undifferentiatedhumanlabour,italsoranksasidenticalwithanyothersortoflabour,andthereforewiththatembodiedinthelinen.Consequently,although,likeallothercommodity-producinglabour,itisthelabourofprivateindividuals,yet,atthesametime,itranksaslabourdirectlysocialinitscharacter.

Thisisthereasonwhyitresultsinaproductdirectlyexchangeablewithothercommodities.Wehavethenathirdpeculiarityoftheequivalentform,namely,thatthelabourofprivateindividualstakestheformofitsopposite,labourdirectlysocialinitsform.

Thetwolatterpeculiaritiesoftheequivalentformwillbecomemoreintelligibleifwegobacktothegreatthinkerwhowasthefirsttoanalysesomanyforms,whetherofthought,society,orNature,andamongstthemalsotheformofvalue.ImeanAristotle.

Inthefirstplace,heclearlyenunciatesthatthemoneyformofcommoditiesisonlythefurtherdevelopmentofthesimpleformofvalue–i.e.,oftheexpressionofthevalueofonecommodityinsomeothercommoditytakenatrandom;forhesays:5beds=1house(clinaipenteantioicia?)isnottobedistinguishedfrom5beds=somuchmoney.(clinaipenteanti...

osonaipenteclinai)Hefurtherseesthatthevaluerelationwhichgivesrisetothisexpressionmakesitnecessarythatthehouseshouldqualitativelybemadetheequalofthebed,andthat,withoutsuchanequalisation,thesetwoclearlydifferentthingscouldnotbecomparedwitheachotherascommensurablequantities."Exchange,"hesays,"cannottakeplacewithoutequality,andequalitynotwithoutcommensurability".(outisoth?

32CAPITALmhoush?snmmetria?).Here,however,hecomestoastop,andgivesupthefurtheranalysisoftheformofvalue."Itis,however,inreality,impossible(thmenounalhqeiaadunaton),thatsuchunlikethingscanbecommensurable"–i.e.,qualitativelyequal.Suchanequalisationcanonlybesomethingforeigntotheirrealnature,consequentlyonly"amakeshiftforpracticalpurposes."Aristotletherefore,himself,tellsuswhatbarredthewaytohisfurtheranalysis;itwastheabsenceofanyconceptofvalue.Whatisthatequalsomething,thatcommonsubstance,whichadmitsofthevalueofthebedsbeingexpressedbyahouse?Suchathing,intruth,cannotexist,saysAristotle.Andwhynot?

Comparedwiththebeds,thehousedoesrepresentsomethingequaltothem,insofarasitrepresentswhatisreallyequal,bothinthebedsandthehouse.

Andthatis–humanlabour.

Therewas,however,animportantfactwhichpreventedAristotlefromseeingthat,toattributevaluetocommodities,ismerelyamodeofexpressingalllabourasequalhumanlabour,andconsequentlyaslabourofequalquality.Greeksocietywasfoundeduponslavery,andhad,therefore,foritsnaturalbasis,theinequalityofmenandoftheirlabourpowers.

Thesecretoftheexpressionofvalue,namely,thatallkindsoflabourareequalandequivalent,because,andsofarastheyarehumanlabouringeneral,cannotbedeciphered,untilthenotionofhumanequalityhasalreadyacquiredthefixityofapopularprejudice.

This,however,ispossibleonlyinasocietyinwhichthegreatmassoftheproduceoflabourtakestheformofcommodities,inwhich,consequently,thedominantrelationbetweenmanandman,isthatofownersofcommodities.ThebrilliancyofAristotle'sgeniusisshownbythisalone,thathediscovered,intheexpressionofthevalueofcommodities,arelationofequality.ThepeculiarconditionsofthesocietyinPART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY33whichhelived,alonepreventedhimfromdiscoveringwhat,"intruth,"wasatthebottomofthisequality.

4.TheElementaryFormofValueConsideredasaWholeTheelementaryformofvalueofacommodityiscontainedintheequation,expressingitsvaluerelationtoanothercommodityofadifferentkind,orinitsexchangerelationtothesame.ThevalueofcommodityA,isqualitativelyexpressed,bythefactthatcommodityBisdirectlyexchangeablewithit.Itsvalueisquantitativelyexpressedbythefact,thatadefinitequantityofBisexchangeablewithadefinitequantityofA.Inotherwords,thevalueofacommodityobtainsindependentanddefiniteexpression,bytakingtheformofexchangevalue.

When,atthebeginningofthischapter,wesaid,incommonparlance,thatacommodityisbothausevalueandanexchangevalue,wewere,accuratelyspeaking,wrong.Acommodityisausevalueorobjectofutility,andavalue.Itmanifestsitselfasthistwo-foldthing,thatitis,assoonasitsvalueassumesanindependentform–viz.,theformofexchangevalue.

Itneverassumesthisformwhenisolated,butonlywhenplacedinavalueorexchangerelationwithanothercommodityofadifferentkind.Whenonceweknowthis,suchamodeofexpressiondoesnoharm;itsimplyservesasanabbreviation.

Ouranalysishasshown,thattheformorexpressionofthevalueofacommodityoriginatesinthenatureofvalue,andnotthatvalueanditsmagnitudeoriginateinthemodeoftheirexpressionasexchangevalue.This,however,isthedelusionaswellofthemercantilistsandtheirrecentrevivers,Ferrier,Ganilh,23andothers,asalsooftheirantipodes,themodernbagmenofFree-trade,suchasBastiat.Themercantilistslayspecialstressonthequalitativeaspectoftheexpressionofvalue,andconsequentlyontheequivalentformofcommodities,whichattainsitsfullperfectionin34CAPITALmoney.ThemodernhawkersofFree-trade,whomustgetridoftheirarticleatanyprice,ontheotherhand,laymoststressonthequantitativeaspectoftherelativeformofvalue.Forthemthereconsequentlyexistsneithervalue,normagnitudeofvalue,anywhereexceptinitsexpressionbymeansoftheexchangerelationofcommodities,thatis,inthedailylistofpricescurrent.Macleod,whohastakenuponhimselftodressuptheconfusedideasofLombardStreetinthemostlearnedfinery,isasuccessfulcrossbetweenthesuperstitiousmercantilists,andtheenlightenedFree-tradebagmen.

AclosescrutinyoftheexpressionofthevalueofAintermsofB,containedintheequationexpressingthevaluerelationofAtoB,hasshownusthat,withinthatrelation,thebodilyformofAfiguresonlyasausevalue,thebodilyformofBonlyastheformoraspectofvalue.Theoppositionorcontrastexistinginternallyineachcommoditybetweenusevalueandvalue,is,therefore,madeevidentexternallybytwocommoditiesbeingplacedinsuchrelationtoeachother,thatthecommoditywhosevalueitissoughttoexpress,figuresdirectlyasamereusevalue,whilethecommodityinwhichthatvalueistobeexpressed,figuresdirectlyasmereexchangevalue.Hencetheelementaryformofvalueofacommodityistheelementaryforminwhichthecontrastcontainedinthatcommodity,betweenusevalueandvalue,becomesapparent.

Everyproductoflabouris,inallstatesofsociety,ausevalue;butitisonlyatadefinitehistoricalepochinasociety'sdevelopmentthatsuchaproductbecomesacommodity,viz.,attheepochwhenthelabourspentontheproductionofausefularticlebecomesexpressedasoneoftheobjectivequalitiesofthatarticle,i.e.,asitsvalue.Itthereforefollowsthattheelementaryvalueformisalsotheprimitiveformunderwhichaproductoflabourappearshistoricallyasacommodity,andthatthegradualtransformationofPART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY35suchproductsintocommodities,proceedsparipassuwiththedevelopmentofthevalueform.

Weperceive,atfirstsight,thedeficienciesoftheelementaryformofvalue:itisameregerm,whichmustundergoaseriesofmetamorphosesbeforeitcanripenintothepriceform.

TheexpressionofthevalueofcommodityAintermsofanyothercommodityB,merelydistinguishesthevaluefromtheusevalueofA,andthereforeplacesAmerelyinarelationofexchangewithasingledifferentcommodity,B;butitisstillfarfromexpressingA'squalitativeequality,andquantitativeproportionality,toallcommodities.Totheelementaryrelativevalueformofacommodity,therecorrespondsthesingleequivalentformofoneothercommodity.Thus,intherelativeexpressionofvalueofthelinen,thecoatassumestheformofequivalent,orofbeingdirectlyexchangeable,onlyinrelationtoasinglecommodity,thelinen.

Nevertheless,theelementaryformofvaluepassesbyaneasytransitionintoamorecompleteform.Itistruethatbymeansoftheelementaryform,thevalueofacommodityA,becomesexpressedintermsofone,andonlyone,othercommodity.Butthatonemaybeacommodityofanykind,coat,iron,corn,oranythingelse.Therefore,accordingasAisplacedinrelationwithoneortheother,wegetforoneandthesamecommodity,differentelementaryexpressionsofvalue.24Thenumberofsuchpossibleexpressionsislimitedonlybythenumberofthedifferentkindsofcommoditiesdistinctfromit.TheisolatedexpressionofA'svalue,isthereforeconvertibleintoaseries,prolongedtoanylength,ofthedifferentelementaryexpressionsofthatvalue.

B.TotalorExpandedFormofValuezCom.A=uCom.Bor=vCom.Cor=36CAPITALwCom.Dor=Com.Eor=&c.

(20yardsoflinen=1coator=10lbsteaor=40lbs.coffeeor=1quartercornor=2ouncesgoldor=?tonironor=&c.)1.TheExpandedRelativeFormofValueThevalueofasinglecommodity,thelinen,forexample,isnowexpressedintermsofnumberlessotherelementsoftheworldofcommodities.Everyothercommoditynowbecomesamirrorofthelinen'svalue.25Itisthus,thatforthefirsttime,thisvalueshowsitselfinitstruelightasacongelationofundifferentiatedhumanlabour.Forthelabourthatcreatesit,nowstandsexpresslyrevealed,aslabourthatranksequallywitheveryothersortofhumanlabour,nomatterwhatitsform,whethertailoring,ploughing,mining,&c.,andnomatter,therefore,whetheritisrealisedincoats,corn,iron,orgold.Thelinen,byvirtueoftheformofitsvalue,nowstandsinasocialrelation,nolongerwithonlyoneotherkindofcommodity,butwiththewholeworldofcommodities.

Asacommodity,itisacitizenofthatworld.Atthesametime,theinterminableseriesofvalueequationsimplies,thatasregardsthevalueofacommodity,itisamatterofindifferenceunderwhatparticularform,orkind,ofusevalueitappears.

Inthefirstform,20ydsoflinen=1coat,itmight,foroughtthatotherwiseappears,bepureaccident,thatthesetwocommoditiesareexchangeableindefinitequantities.Inthesecondform,onthecontrary,weperceiveatoncethebackgroundthatdetermines,andisessentiallydifferentfrom,thisaccidentalappearance.Thevalueofthelinenremainsunalteredinmagnitude,whetherexpressedincoats,coffee,oriron,orinnumberlessdifferentcommodities,thepropertyofasmanydifferentowners.Theaccidentalrelationbetweentwoindividualcommodity-ownersdisappears.Itbecomesplain,thatitisnottheexchangeofcommoditieswhichregulatesthemagnitudeoftheirPART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY37value;but,onthecontrary,thatitisthemagnitudeoftheirvaluewhichcontrolstheirexchangeproportions.

2.TheParticularEquivalentFormEachcommodity,suchas,coat,tea,corn,iron,&c.,figuresintheexpressionofvalueofthelinen,asanequivalent,and,consequently,asathingthatisvalue.

Thebodilyformofeachofthesecommoditiesfiguresnowasaparticularequivalentform,oneoutofmany.

Inthesamewaythemanifoldconcreteusefulkindsoflabour,embodiedinthesedifferentcommodities,ranknowassomanydifferentformsoftherealisation,ormanifestation,ofundifferentiatedhumanlabour.

3.DefectsoftheTotalorExpandedFormofValueInthefirstplace,therelativeexpressionofvalueisincompletebecausetheseriesrepresentingitisinterminable.Thechainofwhicheachequationofvalueisalink,isliableatanymomenttobelengthenedbyeachnewkindofcommoditythatcomesintoexistenceandfurnishesthematerialforafreshexpressionofvalue.Inthesecondplace,itisamany-colouredmosaicofdisparateandindependentexpressionsofvalue.Andlastly,if,asmustbethecase,therelativevalueofeachcommodityinturn,becomesexpressedinthisexpandedform,wegetforeachofthemarelativevalueform,differentineverycase,andconsistingofaninterminableseriesofexpressionsofvalue.Thedefectsoftheexpandedrelativevalueformarereflectedinthecorrespondingequivalentform.Sincethebodilyformofeachsinglecommodityisoneparticularequivalentformamongstnumberlessothers,wehave,onthewhole,nothingbutfragmentaryequivalentforms,eachexcludingtheothers.Inthesameway,also,thespecial,concrete,usefulkindoflabourembodiedineachparticularequivalent,ispresentedonlyasaparticularkindoflabour,andthereforenotasanexhaustiverepresentativeofhumanlabourgenerally.Thelatter,indeed,gainsadequatemanifestationinthetotality38CAPITALofitsmanifold,particular,concreteforms.But,inthatcase,itsexpressioninaninfiniteseriesiseverincompleteanddeficientinunity.

Theexpandedrelativevalueformis,however,nothingbutthesumoftheelementaryrelativeexpressionsorequationsofthefirstkind,suchas:20yardsoflinen=1coat20yardsoflinen=10lbsoftea,etc.

Eachoftheseimpliesthecorrespondinginvertedequation,1coat=20yardsoflinen10lbsoftea=20yardsoflinen,etc.

Infact,whenapersonexchangeshislinenformanyothercommodities,andthusexpressesitsvalueinaseriesofothercommodities,itnecessarilyfollows,thatthevariousownersofthelatterexchangethemforthelinen,andconsequentlyexpressthevalueoftheirvariouscommoditiesinoneandthesamethirdcommodity,thelinen.Ifthen,wereversetheseries,20yardsoflinen=1coator=10lbsoftea,etc.,thatistosay,ifwegiveexpressiontotheconverserelationalreadyimpliedintheseries,weget,C.TheGeneralFormofValue1coat10lbsoftea40lbsofcoffee1quarterofcorn=20yardsoflinen2ouncesofgold?atonofironxCommodityA,etc.

1.TheAlteredCharacteroftheFormofValueAllcommoditiesnowexpresstheirvalue(1)inanelementaryform,becauseinasinglecommodity;(2)withunity,becauseinoneandthesamecommodity.

Thisformofvalueiselementaryandthesameforall,PART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY39thereforegeneral.

TheformsAandBwerefitonlytoexpressthevalueofacommodityassomethingdistinctfromitsusevalueormaterialform.

Thefirstform,A,furnishessuchequationsasthefollowing:–1coat=20yardsoflinen,10lbsoftea=?atonofiron.Thevalueofthecoatisequatedtolinen,thatoftheteatoiron.Buttobeequatedtolinen,andagaintoiron,istobeasdifferentasarelinenandiron.Thisform,itisplain,occurspracticallyonlyinthefirstbeginning,whentheproductsoflabourareconvertedintocommoditiesbyaccidentalandoccasionalexchanges.

Thesecondform,B,distinguishes,inamoreadequatemannerthanthefirst,thevalueofacommodityfromitsusevalue,forthevalueofthecoatisthereplacedincontrastunderallpossibleshapeswiththebodilyformofthecoat;itisequatedtolinen,toiron,totea,inshort,toeverythingelse,onlynottoitself,thecoat.Ontheotherhand,anygeneralexpressionofvaluecommontoallisdirectlyexcluded;for,intheequationofvalueofeachcommodity,allothercommoditiesnowappearonlyundertheformofequivalents.Theexpandedformofvaluecomesintoactualexistenceforthefirsttimesosoonasaparticularproductoflabour,suchascattle,isnolongerexceptionally,buthabitually,exchangedforvariousothercommodities.

Thethirdandlastlydevelopedformexpressesthevaluesofthewholeworldofcommoditiesintermsofasinglecommoditysetapartforthepurpose,namely,thelinen,andthusrepresentstoustheirvaluesbymeansoftheirequalitywithlinen.Thevalueofeverycommodityisnow,bybeingequatedtolinen,notonlydifferentiatedfromitsownusevalue,butfromallotherusevaluesgenerally,andis,bythatveryfact,expressedasthatwhichiscommontoallcommodities.

Bythisform,commoditiesare,forthefirsttime,40CAPITALeffectivelybroughtintorelationwithoneanotherasvalues,ormadetoappearasexchangevalues.

Thetwoearlierformseitherexpressthevalueofeachcommodityintermsofasinglecommodityofadifferentkind,orinaseriesofmanysuchcommodities.Inbothcases,itis,sotosay,thespecialbusinessofeachsinglecommoditytofindanexpressionforitsvalue,andthisitdoeswithoutthehelpoftheothers.Theseothers,withrespecttotheformer,playthepassivepartsofequivalents.

Thegeneralformofvalue,C,resultsfromthejointactionofthewholeworldofcommodities,andfromthatalone.Acommoditycanacquireageneralexpressionofitsvalueonlybyallothercommodities,simultaneouslywithit,expressingtheirvaluesinthesameequivalent;andeverynewcommoditymustfollowsuit.Itthusbecomesevidentthatsincetheexistenceofcommoditiesasvaluesispurelysocial,thissocialexistencecanbeexpressedbythetotalityoftheirsocialrelationsalone,andconsequentlythattheformoftheirvaluemustbeasociallyrecognisedform.

Allcommoditiesbeingequatedtolinennowappearnotonlyasqualitativelyequalasvaluesgenerally,butalsoasvalueswhosemagnitudesarecapableofcomparison.Byexpressingthemagnitudesoftheirvaluesinoneandthesamematerial,thelinen,thosemagnitudesarealsocomparedwitheachother.Forinstance,10lbsoftea=20yardsoflinen,and40lbsofcoffee=20yardsoflinen.Therefore,10lbsoftea=40lbsofcoffee.Inotherwords,thereiscontainedin1lbofcoffeeonlyone-fourthasmuchsubstanceofvalue–labour–asiscontainedin1lboftea.

Thegeneralformofrelativevalue,embracingthewholeworldofcommodities,convertsthesinglecommoditythatisexcludedfromtherest,andmadetoplaythepartofequivalent–herethelinen–intotheuniversalequivalent.ThebodilyformofthePART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY41linenisnowtheformassumedincommonbythevaluesofallcommodities;itthereforebecomesdirectlyexchangeablewithallandeveryofthem.

Thesubstancelinenbecomesthevisibleincarnation,thesocialchrysalisstateofeverykindofhumanlabour.Weaving,whichisthelabourofcertainprivateindividualsproducingaparticulararticle,linen,acquiresinconsequenceasocialcharacter,thecharacterofequalitywithallotherkindsoflabour.

Theinnumerableequationsofwhichthegeneralformofvalueiscomposed,equateinturnthelabourembodiedinthelinentothatembodiedineveryothercommodity,andtheythusconvertweavingintothegeneralformofmanifestationofundifferentiatedhumanlabour.Inthismannerthelabourrealisedinthevaluesofcommoditiesispresentednotonlyunderitsnegativeaspect,underwhichabstractionismadefromeveryconcreteformandusefulpropertyofactualwork,butitsownpositivenatureismadetorevealitselfexpressly.Thegeneralvalueformisthereductionofallkindsofactuallabourtotheircommoncharacterofbeinghumanlabourgenerally,ofbeingtheexpenditureofhumanlabourpower.

Thegeneralvalueform,whichrepresentsallproductsoflabourasmerecongelationsofundifferentiatedhumanlabour,showsbyitsverystructurethatitisthesocialresuméoftheworldofcommodities.Thatformconsequentlymakesitindisputablyevidentthatintheworldofcommoditiesthecharacterpossessedbyalllabourofbeinghumanlabourconstitutesitsspecificsocialcharacter.

2.TheInterdependentDevelopmentoftheRelativeFormofValue,andoftheEquivalentFormThedegreeofdevelopmentoftherelativeformofvaluecorrespondstothatoftheequivalentform.

Butwemustbearinmindthatthedevelopmentofthelatterisonlytheexpressionandresultofthedevelopmentoftheformer.

42CAPITALTheprimaryorisolatedrelativeformofvalueofonecommodityconvertssomeothercommodityintoanisolatedequivalent.Theexpandedformofrelativevalue,whichistheexpressionofthevalueofonecommodityintermsofallothercommodities,endowsthoseothercommoditieswiththecharacterofparticularequivalentsdifferinginkind.Andlastly,aparticularkindofcommodityacquiresthecharacterofuniversalequivalent,becauseallothercommoditiesmakeitthematerialinwhichtheyuniformlyexpresstheirvalue.

Theantagonismbetweentherelativeformofvalueandtheequivalentform,thetwopolesofthevalueform,isdevelopedconcurrentlywiththatformitself.

Thefirstform,20ydsoflinen=onecoat,alreadycontainsthisantagonism,withoutasyetfixingit.

Accordingaswereadthisequationforwardsorbackwards,thepartsplayedbythelinenandthecoataredifferent.Intheonecasetherelativevalueofthelinenisexpressedinthecoat,intheothercasetherelativevalueofthecoatisexpressedinthelinen.Inthisfirstformofvalue,therefore,itisdifficulttograspthepolarcontrast.

FormBshowsthatonlyonesinglecommodityatatimecancompletelyexpanditsrelativevalue,andthatitacquiresthisexpandedformonlybecause,andinsofaras,allothercommoditiesare,withrespecttoit,equivalents.Herewecannotreversetheequation,aswecantheequation20ydsoflinen=1coat,withoutalteringitsgeneralcharacter,andconvertingitfromtheexpandedformofvalueintothegeneralformofvalue.

Finally,theformCgivestotheworldofcommoditiesageneralsocialrelativeformofvalue,because,andinsofaras,therebyallcommodities,withtheexceptionofone,areexcludedfromtheequivalentform.Asinglecommodity,thelinen,appearsthereforetohaveacquiredthecharacterofdirectexchangeabilitywithPART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY43everyothercommoditybecause,andinsofaras,thischaracterisdeniedtoeveryothercommodity.26Thecommoditythatfiguresasuniversalequivalent,is,ontheotherhand,excludedfromtherelativevalueform.Ifthelinen,oranyothercommodityservingasuniversalequivalent,were,atthesametime,toshareintherelativeformofvalue,itwouldhavetoserveasitsownequivalent.Weshouldthenhave20ydsoflinen=20ydsoflinen;thistautologyexpressesneithervalue,normagnitudeofvalue.Inordertoexpresstherelativevalueoftheuniversalequivalent,wemustratherreversetheformC.Thisequivalenthasnorelativeformofvalueincommonwithothercommodities,butitsvalueisrelativelyexpressedbyaneverendingseriesofothercommodities.Thus,theexpandedformofrelativevalue,orformB,nowshowsitselfasthespecificformofrelativevaluefortheequivalentcommodity.

3.TransitionfromtheGeneralFormofValuetotheMoneyFormTheuniversalequivalentformisaformofvalueingeneral.Itcan,therefore,beassumedbyanycommodity.Ontheotherhand,ifacommoditybefoundtohaveassumedtheuniversalequivalentform(formC),thisisonlybecauseandinsofarasithasbeenexcludedfromtherestofallothercommoditiesastheirequivalent,andthatbytheirownact.Andfromthemomentthatthisexclusionbecomesfinallyrestrictedtooneparticularcommodity,fromthatmomentonly,thegeneralformofrelativevalueoftheworldofcommoditiesobtainsrealconsistenceandgeneralsocialvalidity.

Theparticularcommodity,withwhosebodilyformtheequivalentformisthussociallyidentified,nowbecomesthemoneycommodity,orservesasmoney.Itbecomesthespecialsocialfunctionofthatcommodity,andconsequentlyitssocialmonopoly,toplaywithintheworldofcommoditiesthepartoftheuniversal44CAPITALequivalent.Amongstthecommoditieswhich,informB,figureasparticularequivalentsofthelinen,and,informC,expressincommontheirrelativevaluesinlinen,thisforemostplacehasbeenattainedbyoneinparticular–namely,gold.If,then,informCwereplacethelinenbygold,weget,D.TheMoney-Form20yardsoflinen=1coat=10lbsoftea=40lbsofcoffee==2ouncesofgold1quarterofcorn=2ouncesofgold=?atonofiron=xCommodityA=InpassingfromformAtoformB,andfromthelattertoformC,thechangesarefundamental.Ontheotherhand,thereisnodifferencebetweenformsCandD,exceptthat,inthelatter,goldhasassumedtheequivalentformintheplaceoflinen.GoldisinformD,whatlinenwasinformC–theuniversalequivalent.Theprogressconsistsinthisalone,thatthecharacterofdirectanduniversalexchangeability–inotherwords,thattheuniversalequivalentform–hasnow,bysocialcustom,becomefinallyidentifiedwiththesubstance,gold.

Goldisnowmoneywithreferencetoallothercommoditiesonlybecauseitwaspreviously,withreferencetothem,asimplecommodity.Likeallothercommodities,itwasalsocapableofservingasanequivalent,eitherassimpleequivalentinisolatedexchanges,orasparticularequivalentbythesideofothers.Graduallyitbegantoserve,withinvaryinglimits,asuniversalequivalent.SosoonasitmonopolisesthispositionintheexpressionofvaluePART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY45fortheworldofcommodities,itbecomesthemoneycommodity,andthen,andnottillthen,doesformDbecomedistinctfromformC,andthegeneralformofvaluebecomechangedintothemoneyform.

Theelementaryexpressionoftherelativevalueofasinglecommodity,suchaslinen,intermsofthecommodity,suchasgold,thatplaysthepartofmoney,isthepriceformofthatcommodity.Thepriceformofthelinenistherefore20yardsoflinen=2ouncesofgold,or,if2ouncesofgoldwhencoinedare￡2,20yardsoflinen=￡2.

Thedifficultyinformingaconceptofthemoneyform,consistsinclearlycomprehendingtheuniversalequivalentform,andasanecessarycorollary,thegeneralformofvalue,formC.ThelatterisdeduciblefromformB,theexpandedformofvalue,theessentialcomponentelementofwhich,wesaw,isformA,20yardsoflinen=1coatorxcommodityA=ycommodityB.Thesimplecommodityformisthereforethegermofthemoneyform.

Section4:TheFetishismofCommoditiesandtheSecretThereofAcommodityappears,atfirstsight,averytrivialthing,andeasilyunderstood.Itsanalysisshowsthatitis,inreality,averyqueerthing,aboundinginmetaphysicalsubtletiesandtheologicalniceties.Sofarasitisavalueinuse,thereisnothingmysteriousaboutit,whetherweconsideritfromthepointofviewthatbyitspropertiesitiscapableofsatisfyinghumanwants,orfromthepointthatthosepropertiesaretheproductofhumanlabour.Itisasclearasnoon-day,thatman,byhisindustry,changestheformsofthematerialsfurnishedbyNature,insuchawayastomakethemusefultohim.Theformofwood,for46CAPITALinstance,isaltered,bymakingatableoutofit.Yet,forallthat,thetablecontinuestobethatcommon,every-daything,wood.But,sosoonasitstepsforthasacommodity,itischangedintosomethingtranscendent.

Itnotonlystandswithitsfeetontheground,but,inrelationtoallothercommodities,itstandsonitshead,andevolvesoutofitswoodenbraingrotesqueideas,farmorewonderfulthan"table-turning"everwas.26aThemysticalcharacterofcommoditiesdoesnotoriginate,therefore,intheirusevalue.Justaslittledoesitproceedfromthenatureofthedeterminingfactorsofvalue.For,inthefirstplace,howevervariedtheusefulkindsoflabour,orproductiveactivities,maybe,itisaphysiologicalfact,thattheyarefunctionsofthehumanorganism,andthateachsuchfunction,whatevermaybeitsnatureorform,isessentiallytheexpenditureofhumanbrain,nerves,muscles,&c.Secondly,withregardtothatwhichformstheground-workforthequantitativedeterminationofvalue,namely,thedurationofthatexpenditure,orthequantityoflabour,itisquiteclearthatthereisapalpabledifferencebetweenitsquantityandquality.

Inallstatesofsociety,thelabourtimethatitcoststoproducethemeansofsubsistence,mustnecessarilybeanobjectofinteresttomankind,thoughnotofequalinterestindifferentstagesofdevelopment.27Andlastly,fromthemomentthatmeninanywayworkforoneanother,theirlabourassumesasocialform.

Whence,then,arisestheenigmaticalcharacteroftheproductoflabour,sosoonasitassumestheformofcommodities?Clearlyfromthisformitself.Theequalityofallsortsofhumanlabourisexpressedobjectivelybytheirproductsallbeingequallyvalues;themeasureoftheexpenditureoflabourpowerbythedurationofthatexpenditure,takestheformofthequantityofvalueoftheproductsoflabour;andfinallythemutualrelationsoftheproducers,withinwhichthesocialcharacteroftheirlabouraffirmsitself,takethePART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY47formofasocialrelationbetweentheproducts.

Acommodityisthereforeamysteriousthing,simplybecauseinitthesocialcharacterofmen'slabourappearstothemasanobjectivecharacterstampedupontheproductofthatlabour;becausetherelationoftheproducerstothesumtotaloftheirownlabourispresentedtothemasasocialrelation,existingnotbetweenthemselves,butbetweentheproductsoftheirlabour.Thisisthereasonwhytheproductsoflabourbecomecommodities,socialthingswhosequalitiesareatthesametimeperceptibleandimperceptiblebythesenses.Inthesamewaythelightfromanobjectisperceivedbyusnotasthesubjectiveexcitationofouropticnerve,butastheobjectiveformofsomethingoutsidetheeyeitself.But,intheactofseeing,thereisatallevents,anactualpassageoflightfromonethingtoanother,fromtheexternalobjecttotheeye.Thereisaphysicalrelationbetweenphysicalthings.Butitisdifferentwithcommodities.There,theexistenceofthethingsquacommodities,andthevaluerelationbetweentheproductsoflabourwhichstampsthemascommodities,haveabsolutelynoconnectionwiththeirphysicalpropertiesandwiththematerialrelationsarisingtherefrom.Thereitisadefinitesocialrelationbetweenmen,thatassumes,intheireyes,thefantasticformofarelationbetweenthings.Inorder,therefore,tofindananalogy,wemusthaverecoursetothemist-envelopedregionsofthereligiousworld.

Inthatworldtheproductionsofthehumanbrainappearasindependentbeingsendowedwithlife,andenteringintorelationbothwithoneanotherandthehumanrace.Soitisintheworldofcommoditieswiththeproductsofmen'shands.ThisIcalltheFetishismwhichattachesitselftotheproductsoflabour,sosoonastheyareproducedascommodities,andwhichisthereforeinseparablefromtheproductionofcommodities.

ThisFetishismofcommoditieshasitsorigin,asthe48CAPITALforegoinganalysishasalreadyshown,inthepeculiarsocialcharacterofthelabourthatproducesthem.

Asageneralrule,articlesofutilitybecomecommodities,onlybecausetheyareproductsofthelabourofprivateindividualsorgroupsofindividualswhocarryontheirworkindependentlyofeachother.Thesumtotalofthelabourofalltheseprivateindividualsformstheaggregatelabourofsociety.

Sincetheproducersdonotcomeintosocialcontactwitheachotheruntiltheyexchangetheirproducts,thespecificsocialcharacterofeachproducer'slabourdoesnotshowitselfexceptintheactofexchange.Inotherwords,thelabouroftheindividualassertsitselfasapartofthelabourofsociety,onlybymeansoftherelationswhichtheactofexchangeestablishesdirectlybetweentheproducts,andindirectly,throughthem,betweentheproducers.Tothelatter,therefore,therelationsconnectingthelabourofoneindividualwiththatoftherestappear,notasdirectsocialrelationsbetweenindividualsatwork,butaswhattheyreallyare,materialrelationsbetweenpersonsandsocialrelationsbetweenthings.Itisonlybybeingexchangedthattheproductsoflabouracquire,asvalues,oneuniformsocialstatus,distinctfromtheirvariedformsofexistenceasobjectsofutility.Thisdivisionofaproductintoausefulthingandavaluebecomespracticallyimportant,onlywhenexchangehasacquiredsuchanextensionthatusefularticlesareproducedforthepurposeofbeingexchanged,andtheircharacterasvalueshasthereforetobetakenintoaccount,beforehand,duringproduction.Fromthismomentthelabouroftheindividualproduceracquiressociallyatwo-foldcharacter.Ontheonehand,itmust,asadefiniteusefulkindoflabour,satisfyadefinitesocialwant,andthusholditsplaceaspartandparcelofthecollectivelabourofall,asabranchofasocialdivisionoflabourthathassprungupspontaneously.

Ontheotherhand,itcansatisfythemanifoldwantsofPART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY49theindividualproducerhimself,onlyinsofarasthemutualexchangeabilityofallkindsofusefulprivatelabourisanestablishedsocialfact,andthereforetheprivateusefullabourofeachproducerranksonanequalitywiththatofallothers.Theequalisationofthemostdifferentkindsoflabourcanbetheresultonlyofanabstractionfromtheirinequalities,orofreducingthemtotheircommondenominator,viz.expenditureofhumanlabourpowerorhumanlabourintheabstract.Thetwo-foldsocialcharacterofthelabouroftheindividualappearstohim,whenreflectedinhisbrain,onlyunderthoseformswhichareimpresseduponthatlabourinevery-daypracticebytheexchangeofproducts.Inthisway,thecharacterthathisownlabourpossessesofbeingsociallyusefultakestheformofthecondition,thattheproductmustbenotonlyuseful,butusefulforothers,andthesocialcharacterthathisparticularlabourhasofbeingtheequalofallotherparticularkindsoflabour,takestheformthatallthephysicallydifferentarticlesthataretheproductsoflabour,haveonecommonquality,viz.,thatofhavingvalue.

Hence,whenwebringtheproductsofourlabourintorelationwitheachotherasvalues,itisnotbecauseweseeinthesearticlesthematerialreceptaclesofhomogeneoushumanlabour.Quitethecontrary:whenever,byanexchange,weequateasvaluesourdifferentproducts,bythatveryact,wealsoequate,ashumanlabour,thedifferentkindsoflabourexpendeduponthem.Wearenotawareofthis,neverthelesswedoit.28Value,therefore,doesnotstalkaboutwithalabeldescribingwhatitis.Itisvalue,rather,thatconvertseveryproductintoasocialhieroglyphic.Lateron,wetrytodecipherthehieroglyphic,togetbehindthesecretofourownsocialproducts;fortostampanobjectofutilityasavalue,isjustasmuchasocialproductaslanguage.Therecentscientificdiscovery,thattheproductsoflabour,sofarastheyarevalues,50CAPITALarebutmaterialexpressionsofthehumanlabourspentintheirproduction,marks,indeed,anepochinthehistoryofthedevelopmentofthehumanrace,but,bynomeans,dissipatesthemistthroughwhichthesocialcharacteroflabourappearstoustobeanobjectivecharacteroftheproductsthemselves.Thefact,thatintheparticularformofproductionwithwhichwearedealing,viz.,theproductionofcommodities,thespecificsocialcharacterofprivatelabourcarriedonindependently,consistsintheequalityofeverykindofthatlabour,byvirtueofitsbeinghumanlabour,whichcharacter,therefore,assumesintheproducttheformofvalue–thisfactappearstotheproducers,notwithstandingthediscoveryabovereferredto,tobejustasrealandfinal,asthefact,that,afterthediscoverybyscienceofthecomponentgasesofair,theatmosphereitselfremainedunaltered.

What,firstofall,practicallyconcernsproducerswhentheymakeanexchange,isthequestion,howmuchofsomeotherproducttheygetfortheirown?

inwhatproportionstheproductsareexchangeable?

Whentheseproportionshave,bycustom,attainedacertainstability,theyappeartoresultfromthenatureoftheproducts,sothat,forinstance,onetonofironandtwoouncesofgoldappearasnaturallytobeofequalvalueasapoundofgoldandapoundofironinspiteoftheirdifferentphysicalandchemicalqualitiesappeartobeofequalweight.Thecharacterofhavingvalue,whenonceimpresseduponproducts,obtainsfixityonlybyreasonoftheiractingandre-actinguponeachotherasquantitiesofvalue.Thesequantitiesvarycontinually,independentlyofthewill,foresightandactionoftheproducers.Tothem,theirownsocialactiontakestheformoftheactionofobjects,whichruletheproducersinsteadofbeingruledbythem.Itrequiresafullydevelopedproductionofcommoditiesbefore,fromaccumulatedexperiencealone,thescientificconvictionspringsup,thatallthePART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY51differentkindsofprivatelabour,whicharecarriedonindependentlyofeachother,andyetasspontaneouslydevelopedbranchesofthesocialdivisionoflabour,arecontinuallybeingreducedtothequantitativeproportionsinwhichsocietyrequiresthem.Andwhy?

Because,inthemidstofalltheaccidentalandeverfluctuatingexchangerelationsbetweentheproducts,thelabourtimesociallynecessaryfortheirproductionforciblyassertsitselflikeanover-ridinglawofNature.Thelawofgravitythusassertsitselfwhenahousefallsaboutourears.29Thedeterminationofthemagnitudeofvaluebylabourtimeisthereforeasecret,hiddenundertheapparentfluctuationsintherelativevaluesofcommodities.Itsdiscovery,whileremovingallappearanceofmereaccidentalityfromthedeterminationofthemagnitudeofthevaluesofproducts,yetinnowayaltersthemodeinwhichthatdeterminationtakesplace.

Man'sreflectionsontheformsofsociallife,andconsequently,also,hisscientificanalysisofthoseforms,takeacoursedirectlyoppositetothatoftheiractualhistoricaldevelopment.Hebegins,postfestum,withtheresultsoftheprocessofdevelopmentreadytohandbeforehim.Thecharactersthatstampproductsascommodities,andwhoseestablishmentisanecessarypreliminarytothecirculationofcommodities,havealreadyacquiredthestabilityofnatural,self-understoodformsofsociallife,beforemanseekstodecipher,nottheirhistoricalcharacter,forinhiseyestheyareimmutable,buttheirmeaning.

Consequentlyitwastheanalysisofthepricesofcommoditiesthataloneledtothedeterminationofthemagnitudeofvalue,anditwasthecommonexpressionofallcommoditiesinmoneythataloneledtotheestablishmentoftheircharactersasvalues.Itis,however,justthisultimatemoneyformoftheworldofcommoditiesthatactuallyconceals,insteadofdisclosing,thesocialcharacterofprivatelabour,and52CAPITALthesocialrelationsbetweentheindividualproducers.

WhenIstatethatcoatsorbootsstandinarelationtolinen,becauseitistheuniversalincarnationofabstracthumanlabour,theabsurdityofthestatementisself-evident.Nevertheless,whentheproducersofcoatsandbootscomparethosearticleswithlinen,or,whatisthesamething,withgoldorsilver,astheuniversalequivalent,theyexpresstherelationbetweentheirownprivatelabourandthecollectivelabourofsocietyinthesameabsurdform.

Thecategoriesofbourgeoiseconomyconsistofsuchlikeforms.Theyareformsofthoughtexpressingwithsocialvaliditytheconditionsandrelationsofadefinite,historicallydeterminedmodeofproduction,viz.,theproductionofcommodities.

Thewholemysteryofcommodities,allthemagicandnecromancythatsurroundstheproductsoflabouraslongastheytaketheformofcommodities,vanishestherefore,sosoonaswecometootherformsofproduction.

SinceRobinsonCrusoe'sexperiencesareafavouritethemewithpoliticaleconomists,30letustakealookathimonhisisland.Moderatethoughhebe,yetsomefewwantshehastosatisfy,andmustthereforedoalittleusefulworkofvarioussorts,suchasmakingtoolsandfurniture,taminggoats,fishingandhunting.

Ofhisprayersandthelikewetakenoaccount,sincetheyareasourceofpleasuretohim,andhelooksuponthemassomuchrecreation.Inspiteofthevarietyofhiswork,heknowsthathislabour,whateveritsform,isbuttheactivityofoneandthesameRobinson,andconsequently,thatitconsistsofnothingbutdifferentmodesofhumanlabour.Necessityitselfcompelshimtoapportionhistimeaccuratelybetweenhisdifferentkindsofwork.Whetheronekindoccupiesagreaterspaceinhisgeneralactivitythananother,dependsonthedifficulties,greaterorlessasthecasemaybe,tobeovercomeinattainingtheusefuleffectPART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY53aimedat.ThisourfriendRobinsonsoonlearnsbyexperience,andhavingrescuedawatch,ledger,andpenandinkfromthewreck,commences,likeatrue-bornBriton,tokeepasetofbooks.Hisstock-bookcontainsalistoftheobjectsofutilitythatbelongtohim,oftheoperationsnecessaryfortheirproduction;andlastly,ofthelabourtimethatdefinitequantitiesofthoseobjectshave,onanaverage,costhim.AlltherelationsbetweenRobinsonandtheobjectsthatformthiswealthofhisowncreation,areheresosimpleandclearastobeintelligiblewithoutexertion,eventoMr.

SedleyTaylor.Andyetthoserelationscontainallthatisessentialtothedeterminationofvalue.

LetusnowtransportourselvesfromRobinson'sislandbathedinlighttotheEuropeanmiddleagesshroudedindarkness.Here,insteadoftheindependentman,wefindeveryonedependent,serfsandlords,vassalsandsuzerains,laymenandclergy.Personaldependenceherecharacterisesthesocialrelationsofproductionjustasmuchasitdoestheotherspheresoflifeorganisedonthebasisofthatproduction.Butfortheveryreasonthatpersonaldependenceformstheground-workofsociety,thereisnonecessityforlabouranditsproductstoassumeafantasticformdifferentfromtheirreality.Theytaketheshape,inthetransactionsofsociety,ofservicesinkindandpaymentsinkind.Heretheparticularandnaturalformoflabour,andnot,asinasocietybasedonproductionofcommodities,itsgeneralabstractformistheimmediatesocialformoflabour.Compulsorylabourisjustasproperlymeasuredbytime,ascommodity-producinglabour;buteveryserfknowsthatwhatheexpendsintheserviceofhislord,isadefinitequantityofhisownpersonallabourpower.Thetithetoberenderedtothepriestismorematteroffactthanhisblessing.Nomatter,then,whatwemaythinkofthepartsplayedbythedifferentclassesofpeoplethemselvesinthissociety,thesocialrelationsbetween54CAPITALindividualsintheperformanceoftheirlabour,appearatalleventsastheirownmutualpersonalrelations,andarenotdisguisedundertheshapeofsocialrelationsbetweentheproductsoflabour.

Foranexampleoflabourincommonordirectlyassociatedlabour,wehavenooccasiontogobacktothatspontaneouslydevelopedformwhichwefindonthethresholdofthehistoryofallcivilisedraces.31Wehaveonecloseathandinthepatriarchalindustriesofapeasantfamily,thatproducescorn,cattle,yarn,linen,andclothingforhomeuse.Thesedifferentarticlesare,asregardsthefamily,somanyproductsofitslabour,butasbetweenthemselves,theyarenotcommodities.Thedifferentkindsoflabour,suchastillage,cattletending,spinning,weavingandmakingclothes,whichresultinthevariousproducts,areinthemselves,andsuchastheyare,directsocialfunctions,becausefunctionsofthefamily,which,justasmuchasasocietybasedontheproductionofcommodities,possessesaspontaneouslydevelopedsystemofdivisionoflabour.Thedistributionoftheworkwithinthefamily,andtheregulationofthelabourtimeoftheseveralmembers,dependaswellupondifferencesofageandsexasuponnaturalconditionsvaryingwiththeseasons.Thelabourpowerofeachindividual,byitsverynature,operatesinthiscasemerelyasadefiniteportionofthewholelabourpowerofthefamily,andtherefore,themeasureoftheexpenditureofindividuallabourpowerbyitsduration,appearsherebyitsverynatureasasocialcharacteroftheirlabour.

Letusnowpicturetoourselves,bywayofchange,acommunityoffreeindividuals,carryingontheirworkwiththemeansofproductionincommon,inwhichthelabourpowerofallthedifferentindividualsisconsciouslyappliedasthecombinedlabourpowerofthecommunity.AllthecharacteristicsofRobinson'slabourarehererepeated,butwiththisdifference,PART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY55thattheyaresocial,insteadofindividual.Everythingproducedbyhimwasexclusivelytheresultofhisownpersonallabour,andthereforesimplyanobjectofuseforhimself.Thetotalproductofourcommunityisasocialproduct.Oneportionservesasfreshmeansofproductionandremainssocial.Butanotherportionisconsumedbythemembersasmeansofsubsistence.

Adistributionofthisportionamongstthemisconsequentlynecessary.Themodeofthisdistributionwillvarywiththeproductiveorganisationofthecommunity,andthedegreeofhistoricaldevelopmentattainedbytheproducers.Wewillassume,butmerelyforthesakeofaparallelwiththeproductionofcommodities,thattheshareofeachindividualproducerinthemeansofsubsistenceisdeterminedbyhislabourtime.Labourtimewould,inthatcase,playadoublepart.Itsapportionmentinaccordancewithadefinitesocialplanmaintainstheproperproportionbetweenthedifferentkindsofworktobedoneandthevariouswantsofthecommunity.Ontheotherhand,italsoservesasameasureoftheportionofthecommonlabourbornebyeachindividual,andofhisshareinthepartofthetotalproductdestinedforindividualconsumption.Thesocialrelationsoftheindividualproducers,withregardbothtotheirlabourandtoitsproducts,areinthiscaseperfectlysimpleandintelligible,andthatwithregardnotonlytoproductionbutalsotodistribution.

Thereligiousworldisbutthereflexoftherealworld.Andforasocietybasedupontheproductionofcommodities,inwhichtheproducersingeneralenterintosocialrelationswithoneanotherbytreatingtheirproductsascommoditiesandvalues,wherebytheyreducetheirindividualprivatelabourtothestandardofhomogeneoushumanlabour–forsuchasociety,Christianitywithitscultusofabstractman,moreespeciallyinitsbourgeoisdevelopments,Protestantism,Deism,&c.,isthemostfittingform56CAPITALofreligion.IntheancientAsiaticandotherancientmodesofproduction,wefindthattheconversionofproductsintocommodities,andthereforetheconversionofmenintoproducersofcommodities,holdsasubordinateplace,which,however,increasesinimportanceastheprimitivecommunitiesapproachnearerandnearertotheirdissolution.Tradingnations,properlysocalled,existintheancientworldonlyinitsinterstices,likethegodsofEpicurusintheIntermundia,orlikeJewsintheporesofPolishsociety.Thoseancientsocialorganismsofproductionare,ascomparedwithbourgeoissociety,extremelysimpleandtransparent.Buttheyarefoundedeitherontheimmaturedevelopmentofmanindividually,whohasnotyetseveredtheumbilicalcordthatuniteshimwithhisfellowmeninaprimitivetribalcommunity,orupondirectrelationsofsubjection.Theycanariseandexistonlywhenthedevelopmentoftheproductivepoweroflabourhasnotrisenbeyondalowstage,andwhen,therefore,thesocialrelationswithinthesphereofmateriallife,betweenmanandman,andbetweenmanandNature,arecorrespondinglynarrow.

ThisnarrownessisreflectedintheancientworshipofNature,andintheotherelementsofthepopularreligions.Thereligiousreflexoftherealworldcan,inanycase,onlythenfinallyvanish,whenthepracticalrelationsofevery-daylifeoffertomannonebutperfectlyintelligibleandreasonablerelationswithregardtohisfellowmenandtoNature.

Thelife-processofsociety,whichisbasedontheprocessofmaterialproduction,doesnotstripoffitsmysticalveiluntilitistreatedasproductionbyfreelyassociatedmen,andisconsciouslyregulatedbytheminaccordancewithasettledplan.This,however,demandsforsocietyacertainmaterialground-workorsetofconditionsofexistencewhichintheirturnarethespontaneousproductofalongandpainfulprocessofdevelopment.

PART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY57PoliticalEconomyhasindeedanalysed,howeverincompletely,32valueanditsmagnitude,andhasdiscoveredwhatliesbeneaththeseforms.Butithasneveronceaskedthequestionwhylabourisrepresentedbythevalueofitsproductandlabourtimebythemagnitudeofthatvalue.33Theseformul?,whichbearitstampedupontheminunmistakablelettersthattheybelongtoastateofsociety,inwhichtheprocessofproductionhasthemasteryoverman,insteadofbeingcontrolledbyhim,suchformul?

appeartothebourgeoisintellecttobeasmuchaself-evidentnecessityimposedbyNatureasproductivelabouritself.Henceformsofsocialproductionthatprecededthebourgeoisform,aretreatedbythebourgeoisieinmuchthesamewayastheFathersoftheChurchtreatedpre-Christianreligions.34TowhatextentsomeeconomistsaremisledbytheFetishisminherentincommodities,orbytheobjectiveappearanceofthesocialcharacteristicsoflabour,isshown,amongstotherways,bythedullandtediousquarreloverthepartplayedbyNatureintheformationofexchangevalue.Sinceexchangevalueisadefinitesocialmannerofexpressingtheamountoflabourbestoweduponanobject,Naturehasnomoretodowithit,thanithasinfixingthecourseofexchange.

Themodeofproductioninwhichtheproducttakestheformofacommodity,orisproduceddirectlyforexchange,isthemostgeneralandmostembryonicformofbourgeoisproduction.Itthereforemakesitsappearanceatanearlydateinhistory,thoughnotinthesamepredominatingandcharacteristicmannerasnow-a-days.HenceitsFetishcharacteriscomparativelyeasytobeseenthrough.Butwhenwecometomoreconcreteforms,eventhisappearanceofsimplicityvanishes.Whencearosetheillusionsofthemonetarysystem?Toitgoldandsilver,whenservingasmoney,didnotrepresentasocialrelationbetweenproducers,butwerenaturalobjectswithstrangesocial58CAPITALproperties.Andmoderneconomy,whichlooksdownwithsuchdisdainonthemonetarysystem,doesnotitssuperstitioncomeoutasclearasnoon-day,wheneverittreatsofcapital?Howlongisitsinceeconomydiscardedthephysiocraticillusion,thatrentsgrowoutofthesoilandnotoutofsociety?

Butnottoanticipate,wewillcontentourselveswithyetanotherexamplerelatingtothecommodityform.

Couldcommoditiesthemselvesspeak,theywouldsay:Ourusevaluemaybeathingthatinterestsmen.Itisnopartofusasobjects.What,however,doesbelongtousasobjects,isourvalue.Ournaturalintercourseascommoditiesprovesit.Intheeyesofeachotherwearenothingbutexchangevalues.Nowlistenhowthosecommoditiesspeakthroughthemouthoftheeconomist.

"Value"–(i.e.,exchangevalue)"isapropertyofthings,riches"–(i.e.,usevalue)"ofman.Value,inthissense,necessarilyimpliesexchanges,richesdonot."35"Riches"(usevalue)"aretheattributeofmen,valueistheattributeofcommodities.Amanoracommunityisrich,apearloradiamondisvaluable..."Apearloradiamondisvaluableasapearloradiamond.36Sofarnochemisthaseverdiscoveredexchangevalueeitherinapearloradiamond.Theeconomicdiscoverersofthischemicalelement,whoby-the-byelayspecialclaimtocriticalacumen,findhoweverthattheusevalueofobjectsbelongstothemindependentlyoftheirmaterialproperties,whiletheirvalue,ontheotherhand,formsapartofthemasobjects.Whatconfirmstheminthisview,isthepeculiarcircumstancethattheusevalueofobjectsisrealisedwithoutexchange,bymeansofadirectrelationbetweentheobjectsandman,while,ontheotherhand,theirvalueisrealisedonlybyexchange,thatis,bymeansofasocialprocess.WhofailsheretoPART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY59calltomindourgoodfriend,Dogberry,whoinformsneighbourSeacoal,that,"Tobeawell-favouredmanisthegiftoffortune;butreadingandwritingcomesbyNature."37NOTES:1KarlMarx,"ZurKritikderPolitischenOekonomie."Berlin,1859,p.3.

2"Desireimplieswant,itistheappetiteofthemind,andasnaturalashungertothebody...Thegreatestnumber(ofthings)havetheirvaluefromsupplyingthewantsofthemind."NicholasBarbon:"ADiscourseConcerningCoiningtheNewMoneyLighter.InAnswertoMr.Locke'sConsiderations,&c.",London,1696,pp.2,3.

3"Thingshaveanintrinsickvertue"(thisisBarbon'sspecialtermforvalueinuse)"whichinallplaceshavethesamevertue;astheloadstonetoattractiron"(l.c.,p.6).Thepropertywhichthemagnetpossessesofattractingiron,becameofuseonlyafterbymeansofthatpropertythepolarityofthemagnethadbeendiscovered.

4"Thenaturalworthofanythingconsistsinitsfitnesstosupplythenecessities,orservetheconvenienciesofhumanlife."(JohnLocke,"SomeConsiderationsontheConsequencesoftheLoweringofInterest,1691,"inWorksEdit.Lond.,1777,Vol.II.,p.28.)InEnglishwritersofthe17thcenturywefrequentlyfind"worth"inthesenseofvalueinuse,and"value"inthesenseofexchangevalue.ThisisquiteinaccordancewiththespiritofalanguagethatlikestouseaTeutonicwordfortheactualthing,andaRomancewordforitsreflexion.

5Inbourgeoissocietiestheeconomicfictiojurisprevails,thateveryone,asabuyer,possessesanencyclopedicknowledgeofcommodities.

6"Lavaleurconsistedanslerapportd'échangequisetrouveentretellechoseettelleautreentretellemesured'uneproductionettellemesured'uneautre."["Valueconsistsintheexchangerelationbetweenonethingandanother,betweena60CAPITALgivenamountofoneproductandagivenamountofanother"](LeTrosne:"Del'IntérêtSocial."Physiocrates,Ed.Daire.

Paris,1846.p.889.)7"Nothingcanhaveanintrinsickvalue."(N.Barbon,l.c.,p.

6);orasButlersays–"Thevalueofathingisjustasmuchasitwillbring."8N.Barbon,l.c.,p.53and7.

9"Thevalueofthem(thenecessariesoflife),whentheyareexchangedtheoneforanother,isregulatedbythequantityoflabournecessarilyrequired,andcommonlytakeninproducingthem."("SomeThoughtsontheInterestofMoneyinGeneral,andParticularlyinthePublickFunds,&c."Lond.,p.36)Thisremarkableanonymousworkwritteninthelastcentury,bearsnodate.Itisclear,however,frominternalevidencethatitappearedinthereignofGeorgeII,about1739or1740.

10"Touteslesproductionsd'unmêmegenreneformentproprementqu'unemasse,dontleprixsedétermineengénéraletsanségardauxcirconstancesparticulières."["Properlyspeaking,allproductsofthesamekindformasinglemass,andtheirpriceisdeterminedingeneralandwithoutregardtoparticularcircumstances"](LeTrosne,l.c.,p.893.)11K.Marx.l.c.,p.612IaminsertingtheparenthesisbecauseitsomissionhasoftengivenrisetothemisunderstandingthateveryproductthatisconsumedbysomeoneotherthanitsproducerisconsideredinMarxacommodity.[Engels,4thGermanEdition]13Tuttiifenomenidell'universo,sienoessiprodottidellamanodell'uomo,ovverodelleuniversalileggidellafisica,noncidannoideadiattualecreazione,maunicamentediunamodificazionedellamateria.Accostareesepararesonogliunicielementichel'ingegnoumanoritrovaanalizzandol'ideadellariproduzione:etantoeriproduzionedivalore(valueinuse,althoughVerriinthispassageofhiscontroversywiththePhysiocratsisnothimselfquitecertainofthekindofvalueheisspeakingof)ediricchezzeselaterra,l'ariael'acquane'campisitrasmutinoingrano,comesecollamanodell'uomoilglutinediuninsettositrasmutiinvellutoovveroalcunipezzettidimetaliosiorganizzinoaformareunaripetizione."["AllthePART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY61phenomenaoftheuniverse,whetherproducedbythehandofmanorthroughtheuniversallawsofphysics,arenotactualnewcreations,butmerelyamodificationofmatter.Joiningtogetherandseparatingaretheonlyelementswhichthehumanmindalwaysfindsonanalysingtheconceptofreproductionanditisjustthesamewiththereproductionofvalue"(valueinuse,althoughVerriinthispassageofhiscontroversywiththePhysiocratsisnothimselfquitecertainofthekindofvalueheisspeakingof)"andofwealth,whenearth,airandwaterinthefieldsaretransformedintocorn,orwhenthehandofmantransformsthesecretionsofaninsectintosilk,orsomepiecesofmetalarearrangedtomakethemechanismofawatch."]–PietroVerri,"MeditazionisullaEconomiaPolitica"[firstprintedin1773]inCustodi'seditionoftheItalianEconomists,ParteModerna,t.XV.,p.22.

14Comp.Hegel,"PhilosophiedesRechts."Berlin,1840.p.

250.

15Thereadermustnotethatwearenotspeakinghereofthewagesorvaluethatthelabourergetsforagivenlabourtime,butofthevalueofthecommodityinwhichthatlabourtimeismaterialised.Wagesisacategorythat,asyet,hasnoexistenceatthepresentstageofourinvestigation.

16Inordertoprovethatlabouraloneisthatall-sufficientandrealmeasure,bywhichatalltimesthevalueofallcommoditiescanbeestimatedandcompared,AdamSmithsays,"Equalquantitiesoflabourmustatalltimesandinallplaceshavethesamevalueforthelabourer.Inhisnormalstateofhealth,strength,andactivity,andwiththeaveragedegreeofskillthathemaypossess,hemustalwaysgiveupthesameportionofhisrest,hisfreedom,andhishappiness."("WealthofNations,"b.I.

ch.V.)OntheonehandAdamSmithhere(butnoteverywhere)confusesthedeterminationofvaluebymeansofthequantityoflabourexpendedintheproductionofcommodities,withthedeterminationofthevaluesofcommoditiesbymeansofthevalueoflabour,andseeksinconsequencetoprovethatequalquantitiesoflabourhavealwaysthesamevalue.Ontheotherhandhehasapresentiment,thatlabour,sofarasitmanifestsitselfinthevalueofcommodities,countsonlyas62CAPITALexpenditureoflabourpower,buthetreatsthisexpenditureasthemeresacrificeofrest,freedom,andhappiness,notasatthesametimethenormalactivityoflivingbeings.Butthen,hehasthemodernwage-labourerinhiseye.Muchmoreaptly,theanonymouspredecessorofAdamSmith,quotedaboveinnote9,thischapter,says"onemanhasemployedhimselfaweekinprovidingthisnecessaryoflife...andhethatgiveshimsomeotherinexchangecannotmakeabetterestimateofwhatisaproperequivalent,thanbycomputingwhatcosthimjustasmuchlabourandtime;whichineffectisnomorethanexchangingoneman'slabourinonethingforatimecertain,foranotherman'slabourinanotherthingforthesametime."(l.c.,p.39.)[TheEnglishlanguagehastheadvantageofpossessingdifferentwordsforthetwoaspectsoflabourhereconsidered.

Thelabourwhichcreatesusevalue,andcountsqualitatively,isWork,asdistinguishedfromLabour,thatwhichcreatesValueandcountsquantitatively,isLabourasdistinguishedfromWork—Engels]17Thefeweconomists,amongstwhomisS.Bailey,whohaveoccupiedthemselveswiththeanalysisoftheformofvalue,havebeenunabletoarriveatanyresult,first,becausetheyconfusetheformofvaluewithvalueitself;andsecond,because,underthecoarseinfluenceofthepracticalbourgeois,theyexclusivelygivetheirattentiontothequantitativeaspectofthequestion."Thecommandofquantity...constitutesvalue."("MoneyanditsVicissitudes."London,1837,p.11.ByS.Bailey.)18ThecelebratedFranklin,oneofthefirsteconomists,afterWm.Petty,whosawthroughthenatureofvalue,says:"Tradeingeneralbeingnothingelsebuttheexchangeoflabourforlabour,thevalueofallthingsis...mostjustlymeasuredbylabour."("TheworksofB.Franklin,&c.,"editedbySparks.

Boston,1836,Vol.II.,p.267.)Franklinisunconsciousthatbyestimatingthevalueofeverythinginlabour,hemakesabstractionfromanydifferenceinthesortsoflabourexchanged,andthusreducesthemalltoequalhumanlabour.

Butalthoughignorantofthis,yethesaysit.Hespeaksfirstof"theonelabour,"thenof"theotherlabour,"andfinallyofPART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY63"labour,"withoutfurtherqualification,asthesubstanceofthevalueofeverything.

19Inasortofway,itiswithmanaswithcommodities.

Sincehecomesintotheworldneitherwithalookingglassinhishand,norasaFichtianphilosopher,towhom"IamI"issufficient,manfirstseesandrecogniseshimselfinothermen.PeteronlyestablisheshisownidentityasamanbyfirstcomparinghimselfwithPaulasbeingoflikekind.AndtherebyPaul,justashestandsinhisPaulinepersonality,becomestoPeterthetypeofthegenushomo.

20Valueishere,asoccasionallyintheprecedingpages,usedinsenseofvaluedeterminedastoquantity,orofmagnitudeofvalue.

21Thisincongruitybetweenthemagnitudeofvalueanditsrelativeexpressionhas,withcustomaryingenuity,beenexploitedbyvulgareconomists.Forexample–"OnceadmitthatAfalls,becauseB,withwhichitisexchanged,rises,whilenolesslabourisbestowedinthemeantimeonA,andyourgeneralprincipleofvaluefallstotheground...Ifhe[Ricardo]allowedthatwhenArisesinvaluerelativelytoB,BfallsinvaluerelativelytoA,hecutawaythegroundonwhichherestedhisgrandproposition,thatthevalueofacommodityiseverdeterminedbythelabourembodiedinit,forifachangeinthecostofAaltersnotonlyitsownvalueinrelationtoB,forwhichitisexchanged,butalsothevalueofBrelativelytothatofA,thoughnochangehastakenplaceinthequantityoflabourtoproduceB,thennotonlythedoctrinefallstothegroundwhichassertsthatthequantityoflabourbestowedonanarticleregulatesitsvalue,butalsothatwhichaffirmsthecostofanarticletoregulateitsvalue'(J.Broadhurst:"PoliticalEconomy,"London,1842,pp.11and14.)Mr.Broadhurstmightjustaswellsay:considerthefractions10/20,10/50,10/100,&c.,thenumber10remainsunchanged,andyetitsproportionalmagnitude,itsmagnituderelativelytothenumbers20,50,100&c.,continuallydiminishes.Thereforethegreatprinciplethatthemagnitudeofawholenumber,suchas10,is"regulated"bythenumberoftimesunityiscontainedinit,fallstotheground.[Theauthorexplainsinsection4ofthis64CAPITALchapter,pp.80-81,note2(note33ofthisdocument),whatheunderstandsby"VulgarEconomy."–Engels]22Suchexpressionsofrelationsingeneral,calledbyHegelreflexcategories,formaverycuriousclass.Forinstance,onemaniskingonlybecauseothermenstandintherelationofsubjectstohim.They,onthecontrary,imaginethattheyaresubjectsbecauseheisking.

23F.L.A.Ferrier,sous-inspecteurdesdouanes,"Dugouvernementconsidérédanssesrapportsaveclecommerce,"Paris,1805;andCharlesGanilh,"DesSystèmesd'EconomiePolitique,–2nded.,Paris,1821.

24InHomer,forinstance,thevalueofanarticleisexpressedinaseriesofdifferentthingsII.VII.472-475.

25Forthisreason,wecanspeakofthecoatvalueofthelinenwhenitsvalueisexpressedincoats,orofitscornvaluewhenexpressedincorn,andsoon.Everysuchexpressiontellsus,thatwhatappearsintheusevalues,coat,corn,&c.,isthevalueofthelinen."Thevalueofanycommoditydenotingitsrelationinexchange,wemayspeakofitas...cornvalue,clothvalue,accordingtothecommoditywithwhichitiscompared;andhencethereareathousanddifferentkindsofvalue,asmanykindsofvalueastherearecommoditiesinexistence,andallareequallyrealandequallynominal."("ACriticalDissertationontheNature,MeasuresandCausesofValue:chieflyinreferencetothewritingsofMr.Ricardoandhisfollowers."Bytheauthorof"EssaysontheFormation,&c.,ofOpinions."London,1825,p.39.)S.Bailey,theauthorofthisanonymouswork,aworkwhichinitsdaycreatedmuchstirinEngland,fanciedthat,bythuspointingoutthevariousrelativeexpressionsofoneandthesamevalue,hehadprovedtheimpossibilityofanydeterminationoftheconceptofvalue.

Howevernarrowhisownviewsmayhavebeen,yet,thathelaidhisfingeronsomeseriousdefectsintheRicardianTheory,isprovedbytheanimositywithwhichhewasattackedbyRicardo'sfollowers.SeetheWestminsterReviewforexample.

26Itisbynomeansself-evidentthatthischaracterofdirectanduniversalexchangeabilityis,sotospeak,apolarone,andasintimatelyconnectedwithitsoppositepole,thePART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY65absenceofdirectexchangeability,asthepositivepoleofthemagnetiswithitsnegativecounterpart.Itmaythereforebeimaginedthatallcommoditiescansimultaneouslyhavethischaracterimpresseduponthem,justasitcanbeimaginedthatallCatholicscanbepopestogether.Itis,ofcourse,highlydesirableintheeyesofthepetitbourgeois,forwhomtheproductionofcommoditiesisthenecplusultraofhumanfreedomandindividualindependence,thattheinconveniencesresultingfromthischaracterofcommoditiesnotbeingdirectlyexchangeable,shouldberemoved.Proudhon'ssocialismisaworkingoutofthisPhilistineUtopia,aformofsocialismwhich,asIhaveelsewhereshown,doesnotpossesseventhemeritoforiginality.Longbeforehistime,thetaskwasattemptedwithmuchbettersuccessbyGray,Bray,andothers.

But,forallthat,wisdomofthiskindflourishesevennowincertaincirclesunderthenameof"science."Neverhasanyschoolplayedmoretrickswiththewordscience,thanthatofProudhon,for"woBegriffefehlen,DastelltzurrechtenZeiteinWortsichein."["Wherethoughtsareabsent,Wordsarebroughtinasconvenientreplacements,"Goethe's,Faust,SeeProudhon'sPhilosophyofPoverty]26aIntheGermanedition,thereisthefollowingfootnotehere:"OnemayrecallthatChinaandthetablesbegantodancewhentherestoftheworldappearedtobestandingstill–pourencouragerlesautres[toencouragetheothers]."Thedefeatofthe1848-49revolutionswasfollowedbyaperiodofdismalpoliticalreactioninEurope.Atthattime,spiritualism,especiallytable-turning,becametherageamongtheEuropeanaristocracy.In1850-64,Chinawassweptbyananti-feudalliberationmovementintheformofalarge-scalepeasantwar,theTaipingRevolt.–NotebyeditorsofMECW.

27AmongtheancientGermanstheunitformeasuringlandwaswhatcouldbeharvestedinaday,andwascalledTagwerk,Tagwanne(jurnale,orterrajurnalis,ordiornalis),Mannsmaad,&c.(SeeG.L.vonMaurer,"EinleitungzurGeschichtederMark,&c.Verfassung,"Munchen,1854,p.129sq.)28When,therefore,Galianisays:Valueisarelationbetweenpersons–"LaRicchezzaeunaragionetraduepersone,"–he66CAPITALoughttohaveadded:arelationbetweenpersonsexpressedasarelationbetweenthings.(Galiani:DellaMoneta,p.221,V.III.ofCustodi'scollectionof"ScrittoriClassiciItalianidiEconomiaPolitica."ParteModerna,Milano1803.)29"Whatarewetothinkofalawthatassertsitselfonlybyperiodicalrevolutions?ItisjustnothingbutalawofNature,foundedonthewantofknowledgeofthosewhoseactionisthesubjectofit."(FriedrichEngels:"UmrissezueinerKritikderNational?konomie,"inthe"Deutsch-Franz?sischeJahrbücher,"editedbyArnoldRugeandKarlMarx.Paris.1844.)30EvenRicardohashisstoriesàlaRobinson."Hemakestheprimitivehunterandtheprimitivefisherstraightway,asownersofcommodities,exchangefishandgameintheproportioninwhichlabourtimeisincorporatedintheseexchangevalues.

Onthisoccasionhecommitstheanachronismofmakingthesemenapplytothecalculation,sofarastheirimplementshavetobetakenintoaccount,theannuitytablesincurrentuseontheLondonExchangeintheyear1817.TheparallelogramsofMr.Owenappeartobetheonlyformofsociety,besidesthebourgeoisform,withwhichhewasacquainted."(KarlMarx:"ZurKritik,&c.."pp.38,39)31AridiculouspresumptionhaslatterlygotabroadthatcommonpropertyinitsprimitiveformisspecificallyaSlavonian,orevenexclusivelyRussianform.ItistheprimitiveformthatwecanprovetohaveexistedamongstRomans,Teutons,andCelts,andeventothisdaywefindnumerousexamples,ruinsthoughtheybe,inIndia.AmoreexhaustivestudyofAsiatic,andespeciallyofIndianformsofcommonproperty,wouldshowhowfromthedifferentformsofprimitivecommonproperty,differentformsofitsdissolutionhavebeendeveloped.Thus,forinstance,thevariousoriginaltypesofRomanandTeutonicprivatepropertyarededuciblefromdifferentformsofIndiancommonproperty."(KarlMarx,"ZurKritik,&c.,"p.10.)32TheinsufficiencyofRicardo'sanalysisofthemagnitudeofvalue,andhisanalysisisbyfarthebest,willappearfromthe3rdand4thbooksofthiswork.Asregardsvalueingeneral,itistheweakpointoftheclassicalschoolofPoliticalEconomyPART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY67thatitnowhereexpresslyandwithfullconsciousness,distinguishesbetweenlabour,asitappearsinthevalueofaproduct,andthesamelabour,asitappearsintheusevalueofthatproduct.Ofcoursethedistinctionispracticallymade,sincethisschooltreatslabour,atonetimeunderitsquantitativeaspect,atanotherunderitsqualitativeaspect.Butithasnottheleastidea,thatwhenthedifferencebetweenvariouskindsoflabouristreatedaspurelyquantitative,theirqualitativeunityorequality,andthereforetheirreductiontoabstracthumanlabour,isimplied.Forinstance,RicardodeclaresthatheagreeswithDestuttdeTracyinthisproposition:"Asitiscertainthatourphysicalandmoralfacultiesarealoneouroriginalriches,theemploymentofthosefaculties,labourofsomekind,isouronlyoriginaltreasure,anditisalwaysfromthisemploymentthatallthosethingsarecreatedwhichwecallriches...Itiscertain,too,thatallthosethingsonlyrepresentthelabourwhichhascreatedthem,andiftheyhaveavalue,oreventwodistinctvalues,theycanonlyderivethemfromthat(thevalue)ofthelabourfromwhichtheyemanate."(Ricardo,"ThePrinciplesofPol.Econ.,"3Ed.Lond.1821,p.334.)Wewouldhereonlypointout,thatRicardoputshisownmoreprofoundinterpretationuponthewordsofDestutt.Whatthelatterreallysaysis,thatontheonehandallthingswhichconstitutewealthrepresentthelabourthatcreatesthem,butthatontheotherhand,theyacquiretheir"twodifferentvalues"(usevalueandexchangevalue)from"thevalueoflabour."Hethusfallsintothecommonplaceerrorofthevulgareconomists,whoassumethevalueofonecommodity(inthiscaselabour)inordertodeterminethevaluesoftherest.ButRicardoreadshimasifhehadsaid,thatlabour(notthevalueoflabour)isembodiedbothinusevalueandexchangevalue.Nevertheless,Ricardohimselfpayssolittleattentiontothetwo-foldcharacterofthelabourwhichhasatwo-foldembodiment,thathedevotesthewholeofhischapteron"ValueandRiches,TheirDistinctiveProperties,"toalaboriousexaminationofthetrivialitiesofaJ.B.Say.AndatthefinishheisquiteastonishedtofindthatDestuttontheonehandagreeswithhimastolabourbeingthesourceofvalue,andontheotherhandwithJ.B.Sayastothe68CAPITALnotionofvalue.

33Itisoneofthechieffailingsofclassicaleconomythatithasneversucceeded,bymeansofitsanalysisofcommodities,and,inparticular,oftheirvalue,indiscoveringthatformunderwhichvaluebecomesexchangevalue.EvenAdamSmithandRicardo,thebestrepresentativesoftheschool,treattheformofvalueasathingofnoimportance,ashavingnoconnectionwiththeinherentnatureofcommodities.Thereasonforthisisnotsolelybecausetheirattentionisentirelyabsorbedintheanalysisofthemagnitudeofvalue.Itliesdeeper.Thevalueformoftheproductoflabourisnotonlythemostabstract,butisalsothemostuniversalform,takenbytheproductinbourgeoisproduction,andstampsthatproductionasaparticularspeciesofsocialproduction,andtherebygivesititsspecialhistoricalcharacter.IfthenwetreatthismodeofproductionasoneeternallyfixedbyNatureforeverystateofsociety,wenecessarilyoverlookthatwhichisthedifferentiaspecificaofthevalueform,andconsequentlyofthecommodityform,andofitsfurtherdevelopments,moneyform,capitalform,&c.Weconsequentlyfindthateconomists,whoarethoroughlyagreedastolabourtimebeingthemeasureofthemagnitudeofvalue,havethemoststrangeandcontradictoryideasofmoney,theperfectedformofthegeneralequivalent.Thisisseeninastrikingmannerwhentheytreatofbanking,wherethecommonplacedefinitionsofmoneywillnolongerholdwater.Thisledtotheriseofarestoredmercantilesystem(Ganilh,&c.),whichseesinvaluenothingbutasocialform,orrathertheunsubstantialghostofthatform.OnceforallImayherestate,thatbyclassicalPoliticalEconomy,Iunderstandthateconomywhich,sincethetimeofW.Petty,hasinvestigatedtherealrelationsofproductioninbourgeoissocietyincontradistinctiontovulgareconomy,whichdealswithappearancesonly,ruminateswithoutceasingonthematerialslongsinceprovidedbyscientificeconomy,andthereseeksplausibleexplanationsofthemostobtrusivephenomena,forbourgeoisdailyuse,butfortherest,confinesitselftosystematisinginapedanticway,andproclaimingforeverlastingtruths,thetriteideasheldbytheself-complacentPART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY69bourgeoisiewithregardtotheirownworld,tothemthebestofallpossibleworlds.

34"Leséconomistesontunesingulièremanièredeprocéder.

Iln'yapoureuxquedeuxsortesd'institutions,cellesdel'artetcellesdelanature.Lesinstitutionsdelaféodalitésontdesinstitutionsartificiellescellesdelabourgeoisiesontdesinstitutionsnaturelles.Ilsressemblentenceciauxthéologiens,quieuxaussiétablissentdeuxsortesdereligions.Toutereligionquin'estpaslaleur,estuneinventiondeshommestandisqueleurproprereligionestuneémanationdeDieu?

Ainsiilyaeudel'histoire,maisiln'yenaplus."["Economistshaveasingularmethodofprocedure.Thereareonlytwokindsofinstitutionsforthem,artificialandnatural.Theinstitutionsoffeudalismareartificialinstitutions,thoseofthebourgeoisiearenaturalinstitutions.Inthistheyresemblethetheologians,wholikewiseestablishtwokindsofreligion.Everyreligionwhichisnottheirsisaninventionofmen,whiletheirownisanemanationfromGod....Thustherehasbeenhistory,butthereisnolongerany"](KarlMarx.MisèredelaPhilosophie.

RéponsealaPhilosophiedelaMisèreparM.Proudhon,1847,p.113.)TrulycomicalisM.Bastiat,whoimaginesthattheancientGreeksandRomanslivedbyplunderalone.Butwhenpeopleplunderforcenturies,theremustalwaysbesomethingathandforthemtoseize;theobjectsofplundermustbecontinuallyreproduced.ItwouldthusappearthatevenGreeksandRomanshadsomeprocessofproduction,consequently,aneconomy,whichjustasmuchconstitutedthematerialbasisoftheirworld,asbourgeoiseconomyconstitutesthatofourmodernworld.OrperhapsBastiatmeans,thatamodeofproductionbasedonslaveryisbasedonasystemofplunder.Inthatcasehetreadsondangerousground.IfagiantthinkerlikeAristotleerredinhisappreciationofslavelabour,whyshouldadwarfeconomistlikeBastiatberightinhisappreciationofwagelabour?IseizethisopportunityofshortlyansweringanobjectiontakenbyaGermanpaperinAmerica,tomywork,"ZurKritikderPol.Oekonomie,1859."Intheestimationofthatpaper,myviewthateachspecialmodeofproductionandthesocialrelationscorrespondingtoit,inshort,thatthe70CAPITALeconomicstructureofsociety,istherealbasisonwhichthejuridicalandpoliticalsuperstructureisraisedandtowhichdefinitesocialformsofthoughtcorrespond;thatthemodeofproductiondeterminesthecharacterofthesocial,political,andintellectuallifegenerally,allthisisverytrueforourowntimes,inwhichmaterialinterestspreponderate,butnotforthemiddleages,inwhichCatholicism,norforAthensandRome,wherepolitics,reignedsupreme.Inthefirstplaceitstrikesoneasanoddthingforanyonetosupposethatthesewell-wornphrasesaboutthemiddleagesandtheancientworldareunknowntoanyoneelse.Thismuch,however,isclear,thatthemiddleagescouldnotliveonCatholicism,northeancientworldonpolitics.Onthecontrary,itisthemodeinwhichtheygainedalivelihoodthatexplainswhyherepolitics,andthereCatholicism,playedthechiefpart.Fortherest,itrequiresbutaslightacquaintancewiththehistoryoftheRomanrepublic,forexample,tobeawarethatitssecrethistoryisthehistoryofitslandedproperty.Ontheotherhand,DonQuixotelongagopaidthepenaltyforwronglyimaginingthatknighterrantrywascompatiblewithalleconomicformsofsociety.

35"ObservationsoncertainverbaldisputesinPol.Econ.,particularlyrelatingtovalueandtodemandandsupply"Lond.,1821,p.16.

36S.Bailey,l.c.,p.165.

37Theauthorof"Observations"andS.BaileyaccuseRicardoofconvertingexchangevaluefromsomethingrelativeintosomethingabsolute.Theoppositeisthefact.

Hehasexplainedtheapparentrelationbetweenobjects,suchasdiamondsandpearls,inwhichrelationtheyappearasexchangevalues,anddisclosedthetruerelationhiddenbehindtheappearances,namely,theirrelationtoeachotherasmereexpressionsofhumanlabour.IfthefollowersofRicardoanswerBaileysomewhatrudely,andbynomeansconvincingly,thereasonistobesoughtinthis,thattheywereunabletofindinRicardo'sownworksanykeytothehiddenrelationsexistingbetweenvalueanditsform,exchangevalue.

CHAPTER2:EXCHANGEtisplainthatcommoditiescannotgotomarketIandmakeexchangesoftheirownaccount.Wemust,therefore,haverecoursetotheirguardians,whoarealsotheirowners.Commoditiesarethings,andthereforewithoutpowerofresistanceagainstman.Iftheyarewantingindocilityhecanuseforce;inotherwords,hecantakepossessionofthem.1Inorderthattheseobjectsmayenterintorelationwitheachotherascommodities,theirguardiansmustplacethemselvesinrelationtooneanother,aspersonswhosewillresidesinthoseobjects,andmustbehaveinsuchawaythateachdoesnotappropriatethecommodityoftheother,andpartwithhisown,exceptbymeansofanactdonebymutualconsent.Theymusttherefore,mutuallyrecogniseineachothertherightsofprivateproprietors.Thisjuridicalrelation,whichthusexpressesitselfinacontract,whethersuchcontractbepartofadevelopedlegalsystemornot,isarelationbetweentwowills,andisbutthereflexoftherealeconomicrelationbetweenthetwo.Itisthiseconomicrelationthatdeterminesthesubject-mattercomprisedineachsuchjuridicalact.2Thepersonsexistforoneanothermerelyasrepresentativesof,and,therefore.asownersof,commodities.Inthecourseofourinvestigationweshallfind,ingeneral,thatthecharacterswhoappearontheeconomicstagearebutthepersonificationsoftheeconomicrelationsthatexistbetweenthem.

72CAPITALWhatchieflydistinguishesacommodityfromitsowneristhefact,thatitlooksuponeveryothercommodityasbuttheformofappearanceofitsownvalue.Abornlevellerandacynic,itisalwaysreadytoexchangenotonlysoul,butbody,withanyandeveryothercommodity,bethesamemorerepulsivethanMaritornesherself.Theownermakesupforthislackinthecommodityofasenseoftheconcrete,byhisownfiveandmoresenses.Hiscommoditypossessesforhimselfnoimmediateuse-value.

Otherwise,hewouldnotbringittothemarket.Ithasuse-valueforothers;butforhimselfitsonlydirectuse-valueisthatofbeingadepositoryofexchange-value,and,consequently,ameansofexchange.3Therefore,hemakesuphismindtopartwithitforcommoditieswhosevalueinuseisofservicetohim.

Allcommoditiesarenon-use-valuesfortheirowners,anduse-valuesfortheirnon-owners.Consequently,theymustallchangehands.Butthischangeofhandsiswhatconstitutestheirexchange,andthelatterputstheminrelationwitheachotherasvalues,andrealisesthemasvalues.Hencecommoditiesmustberealisedasvaluesbeforetheycanberealisedasuse-values.

Ontheotherhand,theymustshowthattheyareuse-valuesbeforetheycanberealisedasvalues.

Forthelabourspentuponthemcountseffectively,onlyinsofarasitisspentinaformthatisusefulforothers.Whetherthatlabourisusefulforothers,anditsproductconsequentlycapableofsatisfyingthewantsofothers,canbeprovedonlybytheactofexchange.

Everyownerofacommoditywishestopartwithitinexchangeonlyforthosecommoditieswhoseuse-valuesatisfiessomewantofhis.Lookedatinthisway,exchangeisforhimsimplyaprivatetransaction.

Ontheotherhand,hedesirestorealisethevalueofhiscommodity,toconvertitintoanyothersuitablecommodityofequalvalue,irrespectiveofwhetherhisowncommodityhasorhasnotanyuse-valueforthePART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY73owneroftheother.Fromthispointofview,exchangeisforhimasocialtransactionofageneralcharacter.

Butoneandthesamesetoftransactionscannotbesimultaneouslyforallownersofcommoditiesbothexclusivelyprivateandexclusivelysocialandgeneral.

Letuslookatthematteralittlecloser.Totheownerofacommodity,everyothercommodityis,inregardtohisown,aparticularequivalent,andconsequentlyhisowncommodityistheuniversalequivalentforalltheothers.Butsincethisappliestoeveryowner,thereis,infact,nocommodityactingasuniversalequivalent,andtherelativevalueofcommoditiespossessesnogeneralformunderwhichtheycanbeequatedasvaluesandhavethemagnitudeoftheirvaluescompared.Sofar,therefore,theydonotconfronteachotherascommodities,butonlyasproductsoruse-values.IntheirdifficultiesourcommodityownersthinklikeFaust:"ImAnfangwardieTat."["Inthebeginningwasthedeed."–Goethe,Faust.]Theythereforeactedandtransactedbeforetheythought.

Instinctivelytheyconformtothelawsimposedbythenatureofcommodities.Theycannotbringtheircommoditiesintorelationasvalues,andthereforeascommodities,exceptbycomparingthemwithsomeoneothercommodityastheuniversalequivalent.

Thatwesawfromtheanalysisofacommodity.Butaparticularcommoditycannotbecometheuniversalequivalentexceptbyasocialact.Thesocialactionthereforeofallothercommodities,setsaparttheparticularcommodityinwhichtheyallrepresenttheirvalues.Therebythebodilyformofthiscommoditybecomestheformofthesociallyrecogniseduniversalequivalent.Tobetheuniversalequivalent,becomes,bythissocialprocess,thespecificfunctionofthecommoditythusexcludedbytherest.Thusitbecomes–money."Illiunumconsiliumhabentetvirtutemetpotestatemsuambestiaetradunt.Etnequispossitemereautvendere,nisiquihabetcharacteremaut74CAPITALnomenbestiaeautnumerumnominisejus."["Thesehaveonemind,andshallgivetheirpowerandstrengthuntothebeast."Revelations,17:13;"Andthatnomanmightbuyorsell,savehethathadthemark,orthenameofthebeast,orthenumberofhisname."Revelations,13:17.](Apocalypse.)Moneyisacrystalformedofnecessityinthecourseoftheexchanges,wherebydifferentproductsoflabourarepracticallyequatedtooneanotherandthusbypracticeconvertedintocommodities.

Thehistoricalprogressandextensionofexchangesdevelopsthecontrast,latentincommodities,betweenuse-valueandvalue.Thenecessityforgivinganexternalexpressiontothiscontrastforthepurposesofcommercialintercourse,urgesontheestablishmentofanindependentformofvalue,andfindsnorestuntilitisonceforallsatisfiedbythedifferentiationofcommoditiesintocommoditiesandmoney.Atthesamerate,then,astheconversionofproductsintocommoditiesisbeingaccomplished,soalsoistheconversionofonespecialcommodityintomoney.4Thedirectbarterofproductsattainstheelementaryformoftherelativeexpressionofvalueinonerespect,butnotinanother.ThatformisxCommodityA=yCommodityB.Theformofdirectbarterisxuse-valueA=yuse-valueB.5ThearticlesAandBinthiscasearenotasyetcommodities,butbecomesoonlybytheactofbarter.Thefirststepmadebyanobjectofutilitytowardsacquiringexchange-valueiswhenitformsanon-use-valueforitsowner,andthathappenswhenitformsasuperfluousportionofsomearticlerequiredforhisimmediatewants.Objectsinthemselvesareexternaltoman,andconsequentlyalienablebyhim.

Inorderthatthisalienationmaybereciprocal,itisonlynecessaryformen,byatacitunderstanding,totreateachotherasprivateownersofthosealienableobjects,andbyimplicationasindependentindividuals.

ButsuchastateofreciprocalindependencehasnoPART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY75existenceinaprimitivesocietybasedonpropertyincommon,whethersuchasocietytakestheformofapatriarchalfamily,anancientIndiancommunity,oraPeruvianIncaState.Theexchangeofcommodities,therefore,firstbeginsontheboundariesofsuchcommunities,attheirpointsofcontactwithothersimilarcommunities,orwithmembersofthelatter.Sosoon,however,asproductsoncebecomecommoditiesintheexternalrelationsofacommunity,theyalso,byreaction,becomesoinitsinternalintercourse.

Theproportionsinwhichtheyareexchangeableareatfirstquiteamatterofchance.Whatmakesthemexchangeableisthemutualdesireoftheirownerstoalienatethem.Meantimetheneedforforeignobjectsofutilitygraduallyestablishesitself.Theconstantrepetitionofexchangemakesitanormalsocialact.Inthecourseoftime,therefore,someportionatleastoftheproductsoflabourmustbeproducedwithaspecialviewtoexchange.Fromthatmomentthedistinctionbecomesfirmlyestablishedbetweentheutilityofanobjectforthepurposesofconsumption,anditsutilityforthepurposesofexchange.Itsuse-valuebecomesdistinguishedfromitsexchange-value.Ontheotherhand,thequantitativeproportioninwhichthearticlesareexchangeable,becomesdependentontheirproductionitself.Customstampsthemasvalueswithdefinitemagnitudes.

Inthedirectbarterofproducts,eachcommodityisdirectlyameansofexchangetoitsowner,andtoallotherpersonsanequivalent,butthatonlyinsofarasithasuse-valueforthem.Atthisstage,therefore,thearticlesexchangeddonotacquireavalue-formindependentoftheirownuse-value,oroftheindividualneedsoftheexchangers.Thenecessityforavalue-formgrowswiththeincreasingnumberandvarietyofthecommoditiesexchanged.Theproblemandthemeansofsolutionarisesimultaneously.

Commodity-ownersneverequatetheirown76CAPITALcommoditiestothoseofothers,andexchangethemonalargescale,withoutdifferentkindsofcommoditiesbelongingtodifferentownersbeingexchangeablefor,andequatedasvaluesto,oneandthesamespecialarticle.Suchlast-mentionedarticle,bybecomingtheequivalentofvariousothercommodities,acquiresatonce,thoughwithinnarrowlimits,thecharacterofageneralsocialequivalent.Thischaractercomesandgoeswiththemomentarysocialactsthatcalleditintolife.Inturnsandtransientlyitattachesitselffirsttothisandthentothatcommodity.Butwiththedevelopmentofexchangeitfixesitselffirmlyandexclusivelytoparticularsortsofcommodities,andbecomescrystallisedbyassumingthemoney-form.Theparticularkindofcommoditytowhichitsticksisatfirstamatterofaccident.Neverthelesstherearetwocircumstanceswhoseinfluenceisdecisive.Themoney-formattachesitselfeithertothemostimportantarticlesofexchangefromoutside,andtheseinfactareprimitiveandnaturalformsinwhichtheexchange-valueofhomeproductsfindsexpression;orelseitattachesitselftotheobjectofutilitythatforms,likecattle,thechiefportionofindigenousalienablewealth.Nomadracesarethefirsttodevelopthemoney-form,becausealltheirworldlygoodsconsistofmoveableobjectsandarethereforedirectlyalienable;andbecausetheirmodeoflife,bycontinuallybringingthemintocontactwithforeigncommunities,solicitstheexchangeofproducts.

Manhasoftenmademanhimself,undertheformofslaves,serveastheprimitivematerialofmoney,buthasneverusedlandforthatpurpose.Suchanideacouldonlyspringupinabourgeoissocietyalreadywelldeveloped.Itdatesfromthelastthirdofthe17thcentury,andthefirstattempttoputitinpracticeonanationalscalewasmadeacenturyafterwards,duringtheFrenchbourgeoisrevolution.

Inproportionasexchangeburstsitslocalbonds,andPART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY77thevalueofcommoditiesmoreandmoreexpandsintoanembodimentofhumanlabourintheabstract,inthesameproportionthecharacterofmoneyattachesitselftocommoditiesthatarebyNaturefittedtoperformthesocialfunctionofauniversalequivalent.Thosecommoditiesarethepreciousmetals.

Thetruthofthepropositionthat,"althoughgoldandsilverarenotbyNaturemoney,moneyisbyNaturegoldandsilver,"6isshownbythefitnessofthephysicalpropertiesofthesemetalsforthefunctionsofmoney.7Uptothispoint,however,weareacquaintedonlywithonefunctionofmoney,namely,toserveastheformofmanifestationofthevalueofcommodities,orasthematerialinwhichthemagnitudesoftheirvaluesaresociallyexpressed.Anadequateformofmanifestationofvalue,afitembodimentofabstract,undifferentiated,andthereforeequalhumanlabour,thatmaterialalonecanbewhoseeverysampleexhibitsthesameuniformqualities.Ontheotherhand,sincethedifferencebetweenthemagnitudesofvalueispurelyquantitative,themoneycommoditymustbesusceptibleofmerelyquantitativedifferences,mustthereforebedivisibleatwill,andequallycapableofbeingreunited.GoldandsilverpossessthesepropertiesbyNature.

Theuse-valueofthemoney-commoditybecomestwo-fold.Inadditiontoitsspecialuse-valueasacommodity(gold,forinstance,servingtostopteeth,toformtherawmaterialofarticlesofluxury,&c.),itacquiresaformaluse-value,originatinginitsspecificsocialfunction.

Sinceallcommoditiesaremerelyparticularequivalentsofmoney,thelatterbeingtheiruniversalequivalent,they,withregardtothelatterastheuniversalcommodity,playthepartsofparticularcommodities.8Wehaveseenthatthemoney-formisbutthereflex,thrownupononesinglecommodity,ofthe78CAPITALvaluerelationsbetweenalltherest.Thatmoneyisacommodity9isthereforeanewdiscoveryonlyforthosewho,whentheyanalyseit,startfromitsfullydevelopedshape.Theactofexchangegivestothecommodityconvertedintomoney,notitsvalue,butitsspecificvalue-form.Byconfoundingthesetwodistinctthingssomewritershavebeenledtoholdthatthevalueofgoldandsilverisimaginary.10Thefactthatmoneycan,incertainfunctions,bereplacedbymeresymbolsofitself,gaverisetothatothermistakennotion,thatitisitselfameresymbol.Neverthelessunderthiserrorlurkedapresentimentthatthemoney-formofanobjectisnotaninseparablepartofthatobject,butissimplytheformunderwhichcertainsocialrelationsmanifestthemselves.Inthissenseeverycommodityisasymbol,since,insofarasitisvalue,itisonlythematerialenvelopeofthehumanlabourspentuponit.11Butifitbedeclaredthatthesocialcharactersassumedbyobjects,orthematerialformsassumedbythesocialqualitiesoflabourundertherégimeofadefinitemodeofproduction,aremeresymbols,itisinthesamebreathalsodeclaredthatthesecharacteristicsarearbitraryfictionssanctionedbytheso-calleduniversalconsentofmankind.Thissuitedthemodeofexplanationinfavourduringthe18thcentury.Unabletoaccountfortheoriginofthepuzzlingformsassumedbysocialrelationsbetweenmanandman,peoplesoughttodenudethemoftheirstrangeappearancebyascribingtothemaconventionalorigin.

Ithasalreadybeenremarkedabovethattheequivalentformofacommoditydoesnotimplythedeterminationofthemagnitudeofitsvalue.

Therefore,althoughwemaybeawarethatgoldismoney,andconsequentlydirectlyexchangeableforallothercommodities,yetthatfactbynomeanstellshowmuch10lbs.,forinstance,ofgoldisworth.

Money,likeeveryothercommodity,cannotexpressPART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY79themagnitudeofitsvalueexceptrelativelyinothercommodities.Thisvalueisdeterminedbythelabour-timerequiredforitsproduction,andisexpressedbythequantityofanyothercommoditythatcoststhesameamountoflabour-time.12Suchquantitativedeterminationofitsrelativevaluetakesplaceatthesourceofitsproductionbymeansofbarter.Whenitstepsintocirculationasmoney,itsvalueisalreadygiven.Inthelastdecadesofthe17thcenturyithadalreadybeenshownthatmoneyisacommodity,butthisstepmarksonlytheinfancyoftheanalysis.Thedifficultylies,notincomprehendingthatmoneyisacommodity,butindiscoveringhow,why,andbywhatmeansacommoditybecomesmoney.13Wehavealreadyseen,fromthemostelementaryexpressionofvalue,xcommodityA=ycommodityB,thattheobjectinwhichthemagnitudeofthevalueofanotherobjectisrepresented,appearstohavetheequivalentformindependentlyofthisrelation,asasocialpropertygiventoitbyNature.Wefollowedupthisfalseappearancetoitsfinalestablishment,whichiscompletesosoonastheuniversalequivalentformbecomesidentifiedwiththebodilyformofaparticularcommodity,andthuscrystallisedintothemoney-form.

Whatappearstohappenis,notthatgoldbecomesmoney,inconsequenceofallothercommoditiesexpressingtheirvaluesinit,but,onthecontrary,thatallothercommoditiesuniversallyexpresstheirvaluesingold,becauseitismoney.Theintermediatestepsoftheprocessvanishintheresultandleavenotracebehind.Commoditiesfindtheirownvaluealreadycompletelyrepresented,withoutanyinitiativeontheirpart,inanothercommodityexistingincompanywiththem.Theseobjects,goldandsilver,justastheycomeoutofthebowelsoftheearth,areforthwiththedirectincarnationofallhumanlabour.Hencethemagicofmoney.Intheformofsocietynowunderconsideration,thebehaviourofmeninthesocial80CAPITALprocessofproductionispurelyatomic.Hencetheirrelationstoeachotherinproductionassumeamaterialcharacterindependentoftheircontrolandconsciousindividualaction.Thesefactsmanifestthemselvesatfirstbyproductsasageneralruletakingtheformofcommodities.Wehaveseenhowtheprogressivedevelopmentofasocietyofcommodity-producersstampsoneprivilegedcommoditywiththecharacterofmoney.Hencetheriddlepresentedbymoneyisbuttheriddlepresentedbycommodities;onlyitnowstrikesusinitsmostglaringform.

NOTES:1Inthe12thcentury,sorenownedforitspiety,theyincludedamongstcommoditiessomeverydelicatethings.ThusaFrenchpoetoftheperiodenumeratesamongstthegoodstobefoundinthemarketofLandit,notonlyclothing,shoes,leather,agriculturalimplements,&c.,butalso"femmesfollesdeleurcorps."2ProudhonbeginsbytakinghisidealofJustice,of"justiceéternelle,"fromthejuridicalrelationsthatcorrespondtotheproductionofcommodities:thereby,itmaybenoted,heproves,totheconsolationofallgoodcitizens,thattheproductionofcommoditiesisaformofproductionaseverlastingasjustice.

Thenheturnsroundandseekstoreformtheactualproductionofcommodities,andtheactuallegalsystemcorrespondingthereto,inaccordancewiththisideal.Whatopinionshouldwehaveofachemist,who,insteadofstudyingtheactuallawsofthemolecularchangesinthecompositionanddecompositionofmatter,andonthatfoundationsolvingdefiniteproblems,claimedtoregulatethecompositionanddecompositionofmatterbymeansofthe"eternalideas,"of"naturalité"and"affinité"?Dowereallyknowanymoreabout"usury,"whenwesayitcontradicts"justiceéternelle,""équitééternelle,""mutualitééternelle,"andother"véritéséternelles"thanthefathersofthechurchdidwhentheysaiditwasincompatiblePART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY81with"graceéternelle,""foiéternelle,"and"lavolontééternelledeDieu"?

3Fortwo-foldistheuseofeveryobject....Theoneispeculiartotheobjectassuch,theotherisnot,asasandalwhichmaybeworn,andisalsoexchangeable.Bothareusesofthesandal,forevenhewhoexchangesthesandalforthemoneyorfoodheisinwantof,makesuseofthesandalasasandal.Butnotinitsnaturalway.Forithasnotbeenmadeforthesakeofbeingexchanged."(Aristoteles,"DeRep."l.i.c.9.)4Fromthiswemayformanestimateoftheshrewdnessofthepetit-bourgeoissocialism,which,whileperpetuatingtheproductionofcommodities,aimsatabolishingthe"antagonism"betweenmoneyandcommodities,andconsequently,sincemoneyexistsonlybyvirtueofthisantagonism,atabolishingmoneyitself.WemightjustaswelltrytoretainCatholicismwithoutthePope.Formoreonthispointseemywork,"ZurKritikderPol.Oekon.,"p.61,sq.

5Solongas,insteadoftwodistinctuse-valuesbeingexchanged,achaoticmassofarticlesareofferedastheequivalentofasinglearticle,whichisoftenthecasewithsavages,eventhedirectbarterofproductsisinitsfirstinfancy.

6KarlMarx,l.c.,p.135."Imetalli...naturalmentemoneta."["Themetals...arebytheirnaturemoney."](Galiani,"Dellamoneta"inCustodi'sCollection:ParteModernat.iii.)7Forfurtherdetailsonthissubjectseeinmyworkcitedabove,thechapteron"Thepreciousmetals."8"Ildanaroèlamerceuniversale"(Verri,l.c.,p.16).

9"Silverandgoldthemselves(whichwemaycallbythegeneralnameofbullion)are...commodities...risingandfallingin...value...Bullion,then,maybereckonedtobeofhighervaluewherethesmallerweightwillpurchasethegreaterquantityoftheproductormanufactureofthecountrey,"&c.("ADiscourseoftheGeneralNotionsofMoney,Trade,andExchanges,asTheyStandinRelationeachtoother."ByaMerchant.Lond.,1695,p.7.)"Silverandgold,coinedoruncoined,thoughtheyareusedforameasureofallotherthings,arenolessacommoditythanwine,oil,tobacco,cloth,orstuffs."("ADiscourseconcerningTrade,andthatin82CAPITALparticularoftheEastIndies,"&c.London,1689,p.2.)"Thestockandrichesofthekingdomcannotproperlybeconfinedtomoney,noroughtgoldandsilvertobeexcludedfrombeingmerchandise."("TheEast-IndiaTradeaMostProfitableTrade."London,1677,p.4.)10L'oroel'argentohannovalorecomemetallianterioreall'essermoneta."["Goldandsilverhavevalueasmetalsbeforetheyaremoney"](Galiani,l.c.)Lockesays,"Theuniversalconsentofmankindgavetosilver,onaccountofitsqualitieswhichmadeitsuitableformoney,animaginaryvalue."Law,ontheotherhand."Howcoulddifferentnationsgiveanimaginaryvaluetoanysinglething...orhowcouldthisimaginaryvaluehavemaintaineditself?"Butthefollowingshowshowlittlehehimselfunderstoodaboutthematter:"Silverwasexchangedinproportiontothevalueinuseitpossessed,consequentlyinproportiontoitsrealvalue.Byitsadoptionasmoneyitreceivedanadditionalvalue(unevaleuradditionnelle)."(JeanLaw:"Considérationssurlenuméraireetlecommerce"inE.Daire'sEdit.of"EconomistesFinanciersduXVIIIsiècle,"p.470.)11"L'Argenten(desdenrées)estlesigne."["Moneyistheir(thecommodities')symbol"](V.deForbonnais:"ElémentsduCommerce,Nouv.Edit.Leyde,1766,"t.II.,p.143.)"Commesigneilestattiréparlesdenrées."["Asasymbolitisattractedbythecommodities"](l.c.,p.155.)"L'argentestunsigned'unechoseetlareprésente."["Moneyisasymbolofathingandrepresentsit."](Montesquieu:"EspritdesLois,"(Oeuvres,Lond.1767,t.II,p.2.)"L'argentn'estpassimplesigne,carilestlui-mêmerichesse,ilnereprésentepaslesvaleurs,illeséquivaut."["Moneyisnotameresymbol,foritisitselfwealth;itdoesnotrepresentthevalues,itistheirequivalents"](LeTrosne,l.c.,p.910.)"Thenotionofvaluecontemplatesthevaluablearticleasameresymbol-thearticlecountsnotforwhatitis,butforwhatitisworth."(Hegel,l.c.,p.100.)Lawyersstartedlongbeforeeconomiststheideathatmoneyisameresymbol,andthatthevalueofthepreciousmetalsispurelyimaginary.Thistheydidinthesycophanticserviceofthecrownedheads,supportingtherightofthelattertodebasePART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY83thecoinage,duringthewholeofthemiddleages,bythetraditionsoftheRomanEmpireandtheconceptionsofmoneytobefoundinthePandects."Qu'aucunpuissenidoivefairedoute,"["Letnoonecallintoquestion,"]saysanaptscholaroftheirs,PhilipofValois,inadecreeof1346,"queànousetànotremajestéroyalen'appartiennentseulement...lemestier,lefait,l'état,laprovisionettoutel'ordonnancedesmonnaies,dedonnertelcours,etpourtelprixcommeilnousplaitetbonnoussemble."["thatthetrade,thecomposition,thesupplyandthepowerofissuingordinancesonthecurrency...belongsexclusivelytousandtoourroyalmajesty,tofixsucharateandatsuchpriceasitshallpleaseusandseemgoodtous"]ItwasamaximoftheRomanLawthatthevalueofmoneywasfixedbydecreeoftheemperor.Itwasexpresslyforbiddentotreatmoneyasacommodity."Pecuniasveronulliemerefaserit,naminusupublicoconstitutasoportetnonessemercem."["However,itshallnotbelawfultoanyonetobuymoney,for,asitwascreatedforpublicuse,itisnotpermissibleforittobeacommodity"]SomegoodworkonthisquestionhasbeendonebyG.F.Pagnini:"Saggiosoprailgiustopregiodellecose,1751";Custodi"ParteModerna,"t.II.InthesecondpartofhisworkPagninidirectshispolemicsespeciallyagainstthelawyers.

12"IfamancanbringtoLondonanounceofSilveroutoftheEarthinPeru,inthesametimethathecanproduceabushelofCorn,thentheoneisthenaturalpriceoftheother;now,ifbyreasonofnewormoreeasierminesamancanprocuretwoouncesofsilveraseasilyasheformerlydidone,thecornwillbeascheapattenshillingsthebushelasitwasbeforeatfiveshillings,caeterisparibus."WilliamPetty."ATreatiseofTaxesandContributions."Lond.,1667,p.32.

13ThelearnedProfessorRoscher,afterfirstinformingusthat"thefalsedefinitionsofmoneymaybedividedintotwomaingroups:thosewhichmakeitmore,andthosewhichmakeitless,thanacommodity,"givesusalongandverymixedcatalogueofworksonthenatureofmoney,fromwhichitappearsthathehasnottheremotestideaoftherealhistoryofthetheory;andthenhemoralisesthus:"Fortherest,itis84CAPITALnottobedeniedthatmostofthelatereconomistsdonotbearsufficientlyinmindthepeculiaritiesthatdistinguishmoneyfromothercommodities"(itisthen,afterall,eithermoreorlessthanacommodity!)..."Sofar,thesemi-mercantilistreactionofGanilhisnotaltogetherwithoutfoundation."(WilhelmRoscher:"DieGrundlagenderNationaloekonomie,"3rdEdn.1858,pp.207-210.)More!less!notsufficiently!sofar!notaltogether!Whatclearnessandprecisionofideasandlanguage!AndsucheclecticprofessorialtwaddleismodestlybaptisedbyMr.Roscher,"theanatomico-physiologicalmethod"ofPoliticalEconomy!Onediscoveryhowever,hemusthavecreditfor,namely,thatmoneyis"apleasantcommodity."CHAPTER3:MONEY,ORTHECIRCULATIONOFCOMMODITIESSection1:TheMeasureofValueshroughoutthiswork,Iassume,forthesakeofTsimplicity,goldasthemoney-commodity.

Thefirstchieffunctionofmoneyistosupplycommoditieswiththematerialfortheexpressionoftheirvalues,ortorepresenttheirvaluesasmagnitudesofthesamedenomination,qualitativelyequal,andquantitativelycomparable.Itthusservesasauniversalmeasureofvalue.Andonlybyvirtueofthisfunctiondoesgold,theequivalentcommodityparexcellence,becomemoney.

Itisnotmoneythatrenderscommoditiescommensurable.

Justthecontrary.Itisbecauseallcommodities,asvalues,arerealisedhumanlabour,andthereforecommensurable,thattheirvaluescanbemeasuredbyoneandthesamespecialcommodity,andthelatterbeconvertedintothecommonmeasureoftheirvalues,i.e.,intomoney.Moneyasameasureofvalue,isthephenomenalformthatmustofnecessitybeassumedbythatmeasureofvaluewhichisimmanentincommodities,labour-time.1Theexpressionofthevalueofacommodityingold–xcommodityA=ymoney-commodity–isitsmoney-formorprice.Asingleequation,suchas1tonofiron=2ouncesofgold,nowsufficestoexpressthevalueoftheironinasociallyvalidmanner.There86CAPITALisnolongeranyneedforthisequationtofigureasalinkinthechainofequationsthatexpressthevaluesofallothercommodities,becausetheequivalentcommodity,gold,nowhasthecharacterofmoney.

Thegeneralformofrelativevaluehasresumeditsoriginalshapeofsimpleorisolatedrelativevalue.Ontheotherhand,theexpandedexpressionofrelativevalue,theendlessseriesofequations,hasnowbecometheformpeculiartotherelativevalueofthemoney-commodity.Theseriesitself,too,isnowgiven,andhassocialrecognitioninthepricesofactualcommodities.Wehaveonlytoreadthequotationsofaprice-listbackwards,tofindthemagnitudeofthevalueofmoneyexpressedinallsortsofcommodities.

Butmoneyitselfhasnoprice.Inordertoputitonanequalfootingwithallothercommoditiesinthisrespect,weshouldbeobligedtoequateittoitselfasitsownequivalent.

Thepriceormoney-formofcommoditiesis,liketheirformofvaluegenerally,aformquitedistinctfromtheirpalpablebodilyform;itis,therefore,apurelyidealormentalform.Althoughinvisible,thevalueofiron,linenandcornhasactualexistenceintheseveryarticles:itisideallymadeperceptiblebytheirequalitywithgold,arelationthat,sotosay,existsonlyintheirownheads.Theirownermust,therefore,lendthemhistongue,orhangaticketonthem,beforetheirpricescanbecommunicatedtotheoutsideworld.2Sincetheexpressionofthevalueofcommoditiesingoldisamerelyidealact,wemayuseforthispurposeimaginaryoridealmoney.Everytraderknows,thatheisfarfromhavingturnedhisgoodsintomoney,whenhehasexpressedtheirvalueinapriceorinimaginarymoney,andthatitdoesnotrequiretheleastbitofrealgold,toestimateinthatmetalmillionsofpounds'worthofgoods.When,therefore,moneyservesasameasureofvalue,itisemployedonlyasimaginaryoridealmoney.ThisPART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY87circumstancehasgivenrisetothewildesttheories.3But,althoughthemoneythatperformsthefunctionsofameasureofvalueisonlyidealmoney,pricedependsentirelyupontheactualsubstancethatismoney.Thevalue,orinotherwords,thequantityofhumanlabourcontainedinatonofiron,isexpressedinimaginationbysuchaquantityofthemoney-commodityascontainsthesameamountoflabourastheiron.According,therefore,asthemeasureofvalueisgold,silver,orcopper,thevalueofthetonofironwillbeexpressedbyverydifferentprices,orwillberepresentedbyverydifferentquantitiesofthosemetalsrespectively.

If,therefore,twodifferentcommodities,suchasgoldandsilver,aresimultaneouslymeasuresofvalue,allcommoditieshavetwoprices–oneagold-price,theotherasilver-price.Theseexistquietlysidebyside,solongastheratioofthevalueofsilvertothatofgoldremainsunchanged,say,at15:1.Everychangeintheirratiodisturbstheratiowhichexistsbetweenthegold-pricesandthesilver-pricesofcommodities,andthusproves,byfacts,thatadoublestandardofvalueisinconsistentwiththefunctionsofastandard.4Commoditieswithdefinitepricespresentthemselvesundertheform:acommodityA=xgold;bcommodityB=zgold;ccommodityC=ygold,&c.,wherea,b,c,representdefinitequantitiesofthecommoditiesA,B,Candx,z,y,definitequantitiesofgold.Thevaluesofthesecommoditiesare,therefore,changedinimaginationintosomanydifferentquantitiesofgold.Hence,inspiteoftheconfusingvarietyofthecommoditiesthemselves,theirvaluesbecomemagnitudesofthesamedenomination,gold-magnitudes.Theyarenowcapableofbeingcomparedwitheachotherandmeasured,andthewantbecomestechnicallyfeltofcomparingthemwithsomefixedquantityofgoldasaunitmeasure.Thisunit,bysubsequentdivisionintoaliquotparts,becomesitself88CAPITALthestandardorscale.Beforetheybecomemoney,gold,silver,andcopperalreadypossesssuchstandardmeasuresintheirstandardsofweight,sothat,forexample,apoundweight,whileservingastheunit,is,ontheonehand,divisibleintoounces,and,ontheother,maybecombinedtomakeuphundredweights.5Itisowingtothisthat,inallmetalliccurrencies,thenamesgiventothestandardsofmoneyorofpricewereoriginallytakenfromthepre-existingnamesofthestandardsofweight.

AsmeasureofValue,andasstandardofprice,moneyhastwoentirelydistinctfunctionstoperform.

Itisthemeasureofvalueinasmuchasitisthesociallyrecognisedincarnationofhumanlabour;itisthestandardofpriceinasmuchasitisafixedweightofmetal.Asthemeasureofvalueitservestoconvertthevaluesofallthemanifoldcommoditiesintoprices,intoimaginaryquantitiesofgold;asthestandardofpriceitmeasuresthosequantitiesofgold.Themeasureofvaluesmeasurescommoditiesconsideredasvalues;thestandardofpricemeasures,onthecontrary,quantitiesofgoldbyaunitquantityofgold,notthevalueofonequantityofgoldbytheweightofanother.Inordertomakegoldastandardofprice,acertainweightmustbefixeduponastheunit.Inthiscase,asinallcasesofmeasuringquantitiesofthesamedenomination,theestablishmentofanunvaryingunitofmeasureisall-important.Hence,thelesstheunitissubjecttovariation,somuchthebetterdoesthestandardofpricefulfilitsoffice.Butonlyinsofarasitisitselfaproductoflabour,and,therefore,potentiallyvariableinvalue,cangoldserveasameasureofvalue.6Itis,inthefirstplace,quiteclearthatachangeinthevalueofgolddoesnot,inanyway,affectitsfunctionasastandardofprice.Nomatterhowthisvaluevaries,theproportionsbetweenthevaluesofdifferentquantitiesofthemetalremainconstant.HoweverPART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY89greatthefallinitsvalue,12ouncesofgoldstillhave12timesthevalueof1ounce;andinprices,theonlythingconsideredistherelationbetweendifferentquantitiesofgold.Since,ontheotherhand,noriseorfallinthevalueofanounceofgoldcanalteritsweight,noalterationcantakeplaceintheweightofitsaliquotparts.Thusgoldalwaysrendersthesameserviceasaninvariablestandardofprice,howevermuchitsvaluemayvary.

Inthesecondplace,achangeinthevalueofgolddoesnotinterferewithitsfunctionsasameasureofvalue.Thechangeaffectsallcommoditiessimultaneously,and,therefore,caeterisparibus,leavestheirrelativevaluesinterse,unaltered,althoughthosevaluesarenowexpressedinhigherorlowergold-prices.

Justaswhenweestimatethevalueofanycommoditybyadefinitequantityoftheuse-valueofsomeothercommodity,soinestimatingthevalueoftheformeringold,weassumenothingmorethanthattheproductionofagivenquantityofgoldcosts,atthegivenperiod,agivenamountoflabour.Asregardsthefluctuationsofpricesgenerally,theyaresubjecttothelawsofelementaryrelativevalueinvestigatedinaformerchapter.

Ageneralriseinthepricesofcommoditiescanresultonly,eitherfromariseintheirvalues–thevalueofmoneyremainingconstant–orfromafallinthevalueofmoney,thevaluesofcommoditiesremainingconstant.Ontheotherhand,ageneralfallinpricescanresultonly,eitherfromafallinthevaluesofcommodities–thevalueofmoneyremainingconstant–orfromariseinthevalueofmoney,thevaluesofcommoditiesremainingconstant.Itthereforebynomeansfollows,thatariseinthevalueofmoneynecessarilyimpliesaproportionalfallinthepricesofcommodities;orthatafallinthevalueofmoneyimpliesaproportionalriseinprices.Suchchange90CAPITALofpriceholdsgoodonlyinthecaseofcommoditieswhosevalueremainsconstant.Withthose,forexample,whosevaluerises,simultaneouslywith,andproportionallyto,thatofmoney,thereisnoalterationinprice.Andiftheirvalueriseeitherslowerorfasterthanthatofmoney,thefallorriseintheirpriceswillbedeterminedbythedifferencebetweenthechangeintheirvalueandthatofmoney;andsoon.

Letusnowgobacktotheconsiderationoftheprice-form.

Bydegreestherearisesadiscrepancybetweenthecurrentmoney-namesofthevariousweightsofthepreciousmetalfiguringasmoney,andtheactualweightswhichthosenamesoriginallyrepresented.

Thisdiscrepancyistheresultofhistoricalcauses,amongwhichthechiefare:–(1)Theimportationofforeignmoneyintoanimperfectlydevelopedcommunity.ThishappenedinRomeinitsearlydays,wheregoldandsilvercoinscirculatedatfirstasforeigncommodities.Thenamesoftheseforeigncoinsnevercoincidewiththoseoftheindigenousweights.(2)Aswealthincreases,thelesspreciousmetalisthrustoutbythemorepreciousfromitsplaceasameasureofvalue,copperbysilver,silverbygold,howevermuchthisorderofsequencemaybeincontradictionwithpoeticalchronology.7Thewordpound,forinstance,wasthemoney-namegiventoanactualpoundweightofsilver.Whengoldreplacedsilverasameasureofvalue,thesamenamewasappliedaccordingtotheratiobetweenthevaluesofsilverandgold,toperhaps1-15thofapoundofgold.

Thewordpound,asamoney-name,thusbecomesdifferentiatedfromthesamewordasaweight-name.8(3)Thedebasingofmoneycarriedonforcenturiesbykingsandprincestosuchanextentthat,oftheoriginalweightsofthecoins,nothinginfactremainedbutthenames.9ThesehistoricalcausesconverttheseparationofthePART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY91money-namefromtheweight-nameintoanestablishedhabitwiththecommunity.Sincethestandardofmoneyisontheonehandpurelyconventional,andmustontheotherhandfindgeneralacceptance,itisintheendregulatedbylaw.Agivenweightofoneofthepreciousmetals,anounceofgold,forinstance,becomesofficiallydividedintoaliquotparts,withlegallybestowednames,suchaspound,dollar,&c.

Thesealiquotparts,whichthenceforthserveasunitsofmoney,arethensubdividedintootheraliquotpartswithlegalnames,suchasshilling,penny,&c.10But,bothbeforeandafterthesedivisionsaremade,adefiniteweightofmetalisthestandardofmetallicmoney.Thesolealterationconsistsinthesubdivisionanddenomination.

Theprices,orquantitiesofgold,intowhichthevaluesofcommoditiesareideallychanged,arethereforenowexpressedinthenamesofcoins,orinthelegallyvalidnamesofthesubdivisionsofthegoldstandard.Hence,insteadofsaying:Aquarterofwheatisworthanounceofgold;wesay,itisworth￡317s.

101/2d.Inthiswaycommoditiesexpressbytheirpriceshowmuchtheyareworth,andmoneyservesasmoneyofaccountwheneveritisaquestionoffixingthevalueofanarticleinitsmoney-form.11Thenameofathingissomethingdistinctfromthequalitiesofthatthing.Iknownothingofaman,byknowingthathisnameisJacob.Inthesamewaywithregardtomoney,everytraceofavalue-relationdisappearsinthenamespound,dollar,franc,ducat,&c.Theconfusioncausedbyattributingahiddenmeaningtothesecabalisticsignsisallthegreater,becausethesemoney-namesexpressboththevaluesofcommodities,and,atthesametime,aliquotpartsoftheweightofthemetalthatisthestandardofmoney.12Ontheotherhand,itisabsolutelynecessarythatvalue,inorderthatitmaybedistinguishedfromthevariedbodilyformsofcommodities,shouldassume92CAPITALthismaterialandunmeaning,but,atthesametime,purelysocialform.13Priceisthemoney-nameofthelabourrealisedinacommodity.Hencetheexpressionoftheequivalenceofacommoditywiththesumofmoneyconstitutingitsprice,isatautology14,justasingeneraltheexpressionoftherelativevalueofacommodityisastatementoftheequivalenceoftwocommodities.Butalthoughprice,beingtheexponentofthemagnitudeofacommodity'svalue,istheexponentofitsexchange-ratiowithmoney,itdoesnotfollowthattheexponentofthisexchange-ratioisnecessarilytheexponentofthemagnitudeofthecommodity'svalue.Supposetwoequalquantitiesofsociallynecessarylabourtoberespectivelyrepresentedby1quarterofwheatand￡2(nearly1/2oz.ofgold),￡2istheexpressioninmoneyofthemagnitudeofthevalueofthequarterofwheat,orisitsprice.Ifnowcircumstancesallowofthispricebeingraisedto￡3,orcompelittobereducedto￡1,thenalthough￡1and￡3maybetoosmallortoogreatproperlytoexpressthemagnitudeofthewheat'svalue;neverthelesstheyareitsprices,fortheyare,inthefirstplace,theformunderwhichitsvalueappears,i.e.,money;andinthesecondplace,theexponentsofitsexchange-ratiowithmoney.Iftheconditionsofproduction,inotherwords,iftheproductivepoweroflabourremainconstant,thesameamountofsociallabour-timemust,bothbeforeandafterthechangeinprice,beexpendedinthereproductionofaquarterofwheat.Thiscircumstancedepends,neitheronthewillofthewheatproducer,noronthatoftheownersofothercommodities.

Magnitudeofvalueexpressesarelationofsocialproduction,itexpressestheconnexionthatnecessarilyexistsbetweenacertainarticleandtheportionofthetotallabour-timeofsocietyrequiredtoproduceit.Assoonasmagnitudeofvalueisconvertedintoprice,theabovenecessaryrelationtakesthePART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY93shapeofamoreorlessaccidentalexchange-ratiobetweenasinglecommodityandanother,themoney-commodity.Butthisexchange-ratiomayexpresseithertherealmagnitudeofthatcommodity'svalue,orthequantityofgolddeviatingfromthatvalue,forwhich,accordingtocircumstances,itmaybepartedwith.Thepossibility,therefore,ofquantitativeincongruitybetweenpriceandmagnitudeofvalue,orthedeviationoftheformerfromthelatter,isinherentintheprice-formitself.Thisisnodefect,but,onthecontrary,admirablyadaptstheprice-formtoamodeofproductionwhoseinherentlawsimposethemselvesonlyasthemeanofapparentlylawlessirregularitiesthatcompensateoneanother.

Theprice-form,however,isnotonlycompatiblewiththepossibilityofaquantitativeincongruitybetweenmagnitudeofvalueandprice,i.e.,betweentheformeranditsexpressioninmoney,butitmayalsoconcealaqualitativeinconsistency,somuchso,that,althoughmoneyisnothingbutthevalue-formofcommodities,priceceasesaltogethertoexpressvalue.Objectsthatinthemselvesarenocommodities,suchasconscience,honour,&c.,arecapableofbeingofferedforsalebytheirholders,andofthusacquiring,throughtheirprice,theformofcommodities.Henceanobjectmayhaveapricewithouthavingvalue.Thepriceinthatcaseisimaginary,likecertainquantitiesinmathematics.Ontheotherhand,theimaginaryprice-formmaysometimesconcealeitheradirectorindirectrealvalue-relation;forinstance,thepriceofuncultivatedland,whichiswithoutvalue,becausenohumanlabourhasbeenincorporatedinit.

Price,likerelativevalueingeneral,expressesthevalueofacommodity(e.g.,atonofiron),bystatingthatagivenquantityoftheequivalent(e.g.,anounceofgold),isdirectlyexchangeableforiron.

Butitbynomeansstatestheconverse,thatironisdirectlyexchangeableforgold.Inorder,therefore,94CAPITALthatacommoditymayinpracticeacteffectivelyasexchange-value,itmustquititsbodilyshape,musttransformitselffrommereimaginaryintorealgold,althoughtothecommoditysuchtransubstantiationmaybemoredifficultthantotheHegelian"concept,"thetransitionfrom"necessity"to"freedom,"ortoalobsterthecastingofhisshell,ortoSaintJerometheputtingoffoftheoldAdam.15Thoughacommoditymay,sidebysidewithitsactualform(iron,forinstance),takeinourimaginationtheformofgold,yetitcannotatoneandthesametimeactuallybebothironandgold.Tofixitsprice,itsufficestoequateittogoldinimagination.Buttoenableittorendertoitsownertheserviceofauniversalequivalent,itmustbeactuallyreplacedbygold.Iftheowneroftheironweretogototheownerofsomeothercommodityofferedforexchange,andweretoreferhimtothepriceoftheironasproofthatitwasalreadymoney,hewouldgetthesameanswerasSt.PetergaveinheaventoDante,whenthelatterrecitedthecreed–"AssadbeneetrascorsaD'estamonetagialalegae'lpeso,Madimmisetul'hainellatuaborsa."Apricethereforeimpliesboththatacommodityisexchangeableformoney,andalsothatitmustbesoexchanged.Ontheotherhand,goldservesasanidealmeasureofvalue,onlybecauseithasalready,intheprocessofexchange,establisheditselfasthemoney-commodity.Undertheidealmeasureofvaluestherelurksthehardcash.

Section2:TheMediumofCirculationA.TheMetamorphosisofCommoditiesWesawinaformerchapterthattheexchangeofcommoditiesimpliescontradictoryandmutuallyPART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY95exclusiveconditions.Thedifferentiationofcommoditiesintocommoditiesandmoneydoesnotsweepawaytheseinconsistencies,butdevelopsamodusvivendi,aforminwhichtheycanexistsidebyside.Thisisgenerallythewayinwhichrealcontradictionsarereconciled.Forinstance,itisacontradictiontodepictonebodyasconstantlyfallingtowardsanother,andas,atthesametime,constantlyflyingawayfromit.Theellipseisaformofmotionwhich,whileallowingthiscontradictiontogoon,atthesametimereconcilesit.

Insofarasexchangeisaprocess,bywhichcommoditiesaretransferredfromhandsinwhichtheyarenon-use-values,tohandsinwhichtheybecomeuse-values,itisasocialcirculationofmatter.Theproductofoneformofusefullabourreplacesthatofanother.Whenonceacommodityhasfoundaresting-place,whereitcanserveasause-value,itfallsoutofthesphereofexchangeintothatofconsumption.

Buttheformerspherealoneinterestsusatpresent.

Wehave,therefore,nowtoconsiderexchangefromaformalpointofview;toinvestigatethechangeofformormetamorphosisofcommoditieswhicheffectuatesthesocialcirculationofmatter.

Thecomprehensionofthischangeofformis,asarule,veryimperfect.Thecauseofthisimperfectionis,apartfromindistinctnotionsofvalueitself,thateverychangeofforminacommodityresultsfromtheexchangeoftwocommodities,anordinaryoneandthemoney-commodity.Ifwekeepinviewthematerialfactalonethatacommodityhasbeenexchangedforgold,weoverlooktheverythingthatweoughttoobserve–namely,whathashappenedtotheformofthecommodity.Weoverlookthefactsthatgold,whenamerecommodity,isnotmoney,andthatwhenothercommoditiesexpresstheirpricesingold,thisgoldisbutthemoney-formofthosecommoditiesthemselves.

Commodities,firstofall,enterintotheprocess96CAPITALofexchangejustastheyare.Theprocessthendifferentiatesthemintocommoditiesandmoney,andthusproducesanexternaloppositioncorrespondingtotheinternaloppositioninherentinthem,asbeingatonceuse-valuesandvalues.Commoditiesasuse-valuesnowstandopposedtomoneyasexchange-value.Ontheotherhand,bothopposingsidesarecommodities,unitiesofuse-valueandvalue.Butthisunityofdifferencesmanifestsitselfattwooppositepoles,andateachpoleinanoppositeway.Beingpolestheyareasnecessarilyoppositeastheyareconnected.Ontheonesideoftheequationwehaveanordinarycommodity,whichisinrealityause-value.

Itsvalueisexpressedonlyideallyinitsprice,bywhichitisequatedtoitsopponent,thegold,astotherealembodimentofitsvalue.Ontheotherhand,thegold,initsmetallicreality,ranksastheembodimentofvalue,asmoney.Gold,asgold,isexchange-valueitself.Astoitsuse-value,thathasonlyanidealexistence,representedbytheseriesofexpressionsofrelativevalueinwhichitstandsfacetofacewithallothercommodities,thesumofwhoseusesmakesupthesumofthevarioususesofgold.Theseantagonisticformsofcommoditiesaretherealformsinwhichtheprocessoftheirexchangemovesandtakesplace.

Letusnowaccompanytheownerofsomecommodity–say,ouroldfriendtheweaveroflinen–tothesceneofaction,themarket.His20yardsoflinenhasadefiniteprice,￡2.Heexchangesitforthe￡2,andthen,likeamanofthegoodoldstampthatheis,hepartswiththe￡2forafamilyBibleofthesameprice.

Thelinen,whichinhiseyesisamerecommodity,adepositoryofvalue,healienatesinexchangeforgold,whichisthelinen'svalue-form,andthisformheagainpartswithforanothercommodity,theBible,whichisdestinedtoenterhishouseasanobjectofutilityandofedificationtoitsinmates.TheexchangebecomesanaccomplishedfactbytwometamorphosesofoppositePART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY97yetsupplementarycharacter–theconversionofthecommodityintomoney,andthere-conversionofthemoneyintoacommodity.16Thetwophasesofthismetamorphosisarebothofthemdistincttransactionsoftheweaver–selling,ortheexchangeofthecommodityformoney;buying,ortheexchangeofthemoneyforacommodity;and,theunityofthetwoacts,sellinginordertobuy.

Theresultofthewholetransaction,asregardstheweaver,isthis,thatinsteadofbeinginpossessionofthelinen,henowhastheBible;insteadofhisoriginalcommodity,henowpossessesanotherofthesamevaluebutofdifferentutility.Inlikemannerheprocureshisothermeansofsubsistenceandmeansofproduction.Fromhispointofview,thewholeprocesseffectuatesnothingmorethantheexchangeoftheproductofhislabourfortheproductofsomeoneelse's,nothingmorethananexchangeofproducts.

Theexchangeofcommoditiesisthereforeaccompaniedbythefollowingchangesintheirform.

Commodity–Money–Commodity.

C––––––M––––––C.

Theresultofthewholeprocessis,sofarasconcernstheobjectsthemselves,C–C,theexchangeofonecommodityforanother,thecirculationofmaterialisedsociallabour.Whenthisresultisattained,theprocessisatanend.

C–M.Firstmetamorphosis,orsaleTheleaptakenbyvaluefromthebodyofthecommodity,intothebodyofthegold,is,asIhaveelsewherecalledit,thesaltomortaleofthecommodity.

Ifitfallsshort,then,althoughthecommodityitselfisnotharmed,itsownerdecidedlyis.Thesocialdivisionoflabourcauseshislabourtobeasone-sidedashiswantsaremany-sided.Thisispreciselythereasonwhytheproductofhislabourserveshimsolelyasexchange-value.Butitcannotacquirethepropertiesofasociallyrecogniseduniversalequivalent,except98CAPITALbybeingconvertedintomoney.Thatmoney,however,isinsomeoneelse'spocket.Inordertoenticethemoneyoutofthatpocket,ourfriend'scommoditymust,aboveallthings,beause-valuetotheownerofthemoney.Forthis,itisnecessarythatthelabourexpendeduponit,beofakindthatissociallyuseful,ofakindthatconstitutesabranchofthesocialdivisionoflabour.Butdivisionoflabourisasystemofproductionwhichhasgrownupspontaneouslyandcontinuestogrowbehindthebacksoftheproducers.

Thecommoditytobeexchangedmaypossiblybetheproductofsomenewkindoflabour,thatpretendstosatisfynewlyarisenrequirements,oreventogiveriseitselftonewrequirements.Aparticularoperation,thoughyesterday,perhaps,formingoneoutofthemanyoperationsconductedbyoneproducerincreatingagivencommodity,mayto-dayseparateitselffromthisconnexion,mayestablishitselfasanindependentbranchoflabourandsenditsincompleteproducttomarketasanindependentcommodity.

Thecircumstancesmayormaynotberipeforsuchaseparation.To-daytheproductsatisfiesasocialwant.Tomorrowthearticlemay,eitheraltogetherorpartially,besupersededbysomeotherappropriateproduct.Moreover,althoughourweaver'slabourmaybearecognisedbranchofthesocialdivisionoflabour,yetthatfactisbynomeanssufficienttoguaranteetheutilityofhis20yardsoflinen.Ifthecommunity'swantoflinen,andsuchawanthasalimitlikeeveryotherwant,shouldalreadybesaturatedbytheproductsofrivalweavers,ourfriend'sproductissuperfluous,redundant,andconsequentlyuseless.

Althoughpeopledonotlookagift-horseinthemouth,ourfrienddoesnotfrequentthemarketforthepurposeofmakingpresents.Butsupposehisproductturnoutarealuse-value,andtherebyattractsmoney?Thequestionarises,howmuchwillitattract?NodoubttheanswerisalreadyanticipatedinthepriceofthePART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY99article,intheexponentofthemagnitudeofitsvalue.

Weleaveoutofconsiderationhereanyaccidentalmiscalculationofvaluebyourfriend,amistakethatissoonrectifiedinthemarket.Wesupposehimtohavespentonhisproductonlythatamountoflabour-timethatisonanaveragesociallynecessary.Thepricethen,ismerelythemoney-nameofthequantityofsociallabourrealisedinhiscommodity.Butwithouttheleave,andbehindtheback,ofourweaver,theold-fashionedmodeofweavingundergoesachange.

Thelabour-timethatyesterdaywaswithoutdoubtsociallynecessarytotheproductionofayardoflinen,ceasestobesoto-day,afactwhichtheownerofthemoneyisonlytooeagertoprovefromthepricesquotedbyourfriend'scompetitors.Unluckilyforhim,weaversarenotfewandfarbetween.Lastly,supposethateverypieceoflineninthemarketcontainsnomorelabour-timethanissociallynecessary.Inspiteofthis,allthesepiecestakenasawhole,mayhavehadsuperfluouslabour-timespentuponthem.Ifthemarketcannotstomachthewholequantityatthenormalpriceof2shillingsayard,thisprovesthattoogreataportionofthetotallabourofthecommunityhasbeenexpendedintheformofweaving.Theeffectisthesameasifeachindividualweaverhadexpendedmorelabour-timeuponhisparticularproductthanissociallynecessary.Herewemaysay,withtheGermanproverb:caughttogether,hungtogether.Allthelineninthemarketcountsbutasonearticleofcommerce,ofwhicheachpieceisonlyanaliquotpart.Andasamatteroffact,thevaluealsoofeachsingleyardisbutthematerialisedformofthesamedefiniteandsociallyfixedquantityofhomogeneoushumanlabour.17Weseethen,commoditiesareinlovewithmoney,but"thecourseoftrueloveneverdidrunsmooth."Thequantitativedivisionoflabourisbroughtaboutinexactlythesamespontaneousandaccidentalmannerasitsqualitativedivision.Theownersofcommodities100CAPITALthereforefindout,thatthesamedivisionoflabourthatturnsthemintoindependentprivateproducers,alsofreesthesocialprocessofproductionandtherelationsoftheindividualproducerstoeachotherwithinthatprocess,fromalldependenceonthewillofthoseproducers,andthattheseemingmutualindependenceoftheindividualsissupplementedbyasystemofgeneralandmutualdependencethroughorbymeansoftheproducts.

Thedivisionoflabourconvertstheproductoflabourintoacommodity,andtherebymakesnecessaryitsfurtherconversionintomoney.Atthesametimeitalsomakestheaccomplishmentofthistransubstantiationquiteaccidental.Here,however,weareonlyconcernedwiththephenomenoninitsintegrity,andwethereforeassumeitsprogresstobenormal.Moreover,iftheconversiontakeplaceatall,thatis,ifthecommoditybenotabsolutelyunsaleable,itsmetamorphosisdoestakeplacealthoughthepricerealisedmaybeabnormallyaboveorbelowthevalue.

Thesellerhashiscommodityreplacedbygold,thebuyerhashisgoldreplacedbyacommodity.

Thefactwhichherestaresusinthefaceis,thatacommodityandgold,20yardsoflinenand￡2,havechangedhandsandplaces,inotherwords,thattheyhavebeenexchanged.Butforwhatisthecommodityexchanged?Fortheshapeassumedbyitsownvalue,fortheuniversalequivalent.Andforwhatisthegoldexchanged?Foraparticularformofitsownuse-value.Whydoesgoldtaketheformofmoneyfacetofacewiththelinen?Becausethelinen'spriceof￡2,itsdenominationinmoney,hasalreadyequatedthelinentogoldinitscharacterofmoney.Acommoditystripsoffitsoriginalcommodity-formonbeingalienated,i.e.,ontheinstantitsuse-valueactuallyattractsthegold,thatbeforeexistedonlyideallyinitsprice.Therealisationofacommodity'sprice,orofitsidealvalue-form,isthereforeatthesamePART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY101timetherealisationoftheidealuse-valueofmoney;theconversionofacommodityintomoney,isthesimultaneousconversionofmoneyintoacommodity.

Theapparentlysingleprocessisinrealityadoubleone.Fromthepoleofthecommodity-owneritisasale,fromtheoppositepoleofthemoney-owner,itisapurchase.Inotherwords,asaleisapurchase,C–MisalsoM–C.18Uptothispointwehaveconsideredmeninonlyoneeconomiccapacity,thatofownersofcommodities,acapacityinwhichtheyappropriatetheproduceofthelabourofothers,byalienatingthatoftheirownlabour.Hence,foronecommodity-ownertomeetwithanotherwhohasmoney,itisnecessary,either,thattheproductofthelabourofthelatterperson,thebuyer,shouldbeinitselfmoney,shouldbegold,thematerialofwhichmoneyconsists,orthathisproductshouldalreadyhavechangeditsskinandhavestrippedoffitsoriginalformofausefulobject.Inorderthatitmayplaythepartofmoney,goldmustofcourseenterthemarketatsomepointorother.Thispointistobefoundatthesourceofproductionofthemetal,atwhichplacegoldisbartered,astheimmediateproductoflabour,forsomeotherproductofequalvalue.Fromthatmomentitalwaysrepresentstherealisedpriceofsomecommodity.19Apartfromitsexchangeforothercommoditiesatthesourceofitsproduction,gold,inwhose-so-everhandsitmaybe,isthetransformedshapeofsomecommodityalienatedbyitsowner;itistheproductofasaleorofthefirstmetamorphosisC–M.20Gold,aswesaw,becameidealmoney,orameasureofvalues,inconsequenceofallcommoditiesmeasuringtheirvaluesbyit,andthuscontrastingitideallywiththeirnaturalshapeasusefulobjects,andmakingittheshapeoftheirvalue.Itbecamerealmoney,bythegeneralalienationofcommodities,byactuallychangingplaceswiththeirnaturalformsasusefulobjects,andthusbecominginrealitythe102CAPITALembodimentoftheirvalues.Whentheyassumethismoney-shape,commoditiesstripoffeverytraceoftheirnaturaluse-value,andoftheparticularkindoflabourtowhichtheyowetheircreation,inordertotransformthemselvesintotheuniform,sociallyrecognisedincarnationofhomogeneoushumanlabour.Wecannottellfromthemerelookofapieceofmoney,forwhatparticularcommodityithasbeenexchanged.Undertheirmoney-formallcommoditieslookalike.Hence,moneymaybedirt,althoughdirtisnotmoney.Wewillassumethatthetwogoldpieces,inconsiderationofwhichourweaverhaspartedwithhislinen,arethemetamorphosedshapeofaquarterofwheat.Thesaleofthelinen,C–M,isatthesametimeitspurchase,M–C.Butthesaleisthefirstactofaprocessthatendswithatransactionofanoppositenature,namely,thepurchaseofaBible;thepurchaseofthelinen,ontheotherhand,endsamovementthatbeganwithatransactionofanoppositenature,namely,withthesaleofthewheat.C–M(linen–money),whichisthefirstphaseofC–M–C(linen–money–Bible),isalsoM–C(money–linen),thelastphaseofanothermovementC–M–C(wheat–money–linen).Thefirstmetamorphosisofonecommodity,itstransformationfromacommodityintomoney,isthereforealsoinvariablythesecondmetamorphosisofsomeothercommodity,theretransformationofthelatterfrommoneyintoacommodity.21M–C,orpurchase.

ThesecondandconcludingmetamorphosisofacommodityBecausemoneyisthemetamorphosedshapeofallothercommodities,theresultoftheirgeneralalienation,forthisreasonitisalienableitselfwithoutrestrictionorcondition.Itreadsallpricesbackwards,andthus,sotosay,depictsitselfinthebodiesofallothercommodities,whichoffertoitthematerialfortherealisationofitsownuse-value.AtthesamePART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY103timetheprices,wooingglancescastatmoneybycommodities,definethelimitsofitsconvertibility,bypointingtoitsquantity.Sinceeverycommodity,onbecomingmoney,disappearsasacommodity,itisimpossibletotellfromthemoneyitself,howitgotintothehandsofitspossessor,orwhatarticlehasbeenchangedintoit.Nonolet,fromwhateversourceitmaycome.Representingontheonehandasoldcommodity,itrepresentsontheotheracommoditytobebought.22M–C,apurchase,is,atthesametime,C–M,asale;theconcludingmetamorphosisofonecommodityisthefirstmetamorphosisofanother.Withregardtoourweaver,thelifeofhiscommodityendswiththeBible,intowhichhehasreconvertedhis￡2.ButsupposetheselleroftheBibleturnsthe￡2setfreebytheweaverintobrandyM–C,theconcludingphaseofC–M–C(linen–money–Bible),isalsoC–M,thefirstphaseofC–M–C(Bible–money–brandy).

Theproducerofaparticularcommodityhasthatonearticlealonetooffer;thishesellsveryofteninlargequantities,buthismanyandvariouswantscompelhimtosplitupthepricerealised,thesumofmoneysetfree,intonumerouspurchases.Henceasaleleadstomanypurchasesofvariousarticles.Theconcludingmetamorphosisofacommoditythusconstitutesanaggregationoffirstmetamorphosesofvariousothercommodities.

Ifwenowconsiderthecompletedmetamorphosisofacommodity,asawhole,itappearsinthefirstplace,thatitismadeupoftwooppositeandcomplementarymovements,C–MandM–C.Thesetwoantitheticaltransmutationsofacommodityarebroughtaboutbytwoantitheticalsocialactsonthepartoftheowner,andtheseactsintheirturnstampthecharacteroftheeconomicpartsplayedbyhim.

Asthepersonwhomakesasale,heisaseller;asthepersonwhomakesapurchase,heisabuyer.Butjust104CAPITALas,uponeverysuchtransmutationofacommodity,itstwoforms,commodity-formandmoney-form,existsimultaneouslybutatoppositepoles,soeverysellerhasabuyeropposedtohim,andeverybuyeraseller.Whileoneparticularcommodityisgoingthroughitstwotransmutationsinsuccession,fromacommodityintomoneyandfrommoneyintoanothercommodity,theownerofthecommoditychangesinsuccessionhispartfromthatofsellertothatofbuyer.

Thesecharactersofsellerandbuyerarethereforenotpermanent,butattachthemselvesinturnstothevariouspersonsengagedinthecirculationofcommodities.

Thecompletemetamorphosisofacommodity,initssimplestform,impliesfourextremes,andthreedramaticpersonae.First,acommoditycomesfacetofacewithmoney;thelatteristheformtakenbythevalueoftheformer,andexistsinallitshardreality,inthepocketofthebuyer.Acommodity-owneristhusbroughtintocontactwithapossessorofmoney.Sosoon,now,asthecommodityhasbeenchangedintomoney,themoneybecomesitstransientequivalent-form,theuse-valueofwhichequivalent-formistobefoundinthebodiesofothercommodities.Money,thefinaltermofthefirsttransmutation,isatthesametimethestarting-pointforthesecond.Thepersonwhoisasellerinthefirsttransactionthusbecomesabuyerinthesecond,inwhichathirdcommodity-ownerappearsonthesceneasaseller.23Thetwophases,eachinversetotheother,thatmakeupthemetamorphosisofacommodityconstitutetogetheracircularmovement,acircuit:commodity-form,strippingoffofthisform,andreturntothecommodity-form.Nodoubt,thecommodityappearshereundertwodifferentaspects.Atthestarting-pointitisnotause-valuetoitsowner;atthefinishingpointitis.So,too,themoneyappearsinthefirstphaseasasolidcrystalofvalue,acrystalintowhichPART1:COMMODITIESANDMONEY105thecommodityeagerlysolidifies,andinthesecond,dissolvesintothemeretransientequivalent-formdestinedtobereplacedbyause-value.

Thetwometamorphosesconstitutingthecircuitareatthesametimetwoinversepartialmetamorphosesoftwoothercommodities.Oneandthesamecommodity,thelinen,openstheseriesofitsownmetamorphoses,andcompletesthemetamorphosisofanother(thewheat).Inthefirstphaseorsale,thelinenplaysthesetwopartsinitsownperson.But,then,changedintogold,itcompletesitsownsecondandfinalmetamorphosis,andhelpsatthesametimetoaccomplishthefirstmetamorphosisofathirdcommodity.Hencethecircuitmadebyonecommodityinthecourseofitsmetamorphosesisinextricablymixedupwiththecircuitsofothercommodities.

Thetotalofallthedifferentcircuitsconstitutesthecirculationofcommodities.

Thecirculationofcommoditiesdiffersfromthedirectexchangeofproducts(barter),notonlyinform,butinsubstance.Onlyconsiderthecourseofevents.

Theweaverhas,asamatteroffact,exchangedhislinenforaBible,hisowncommodityforthatofsomeoneelse.Butthisistrueonlysofarashehimselfisconcerned.TheselleroftheBible,whopreferssomethingtowarmhisinside,nomorethoughtofexchanginghisBibleforlinenthanourweaverknewthatwheathadbeenexchangedforhislinen.

B'scommodityreplacesthatofA,butAandBdonotmutuallyexchangethosecommodities.Itmay,ofcourse,happenthatAandBmakesimultaneouspurchases,theonefromtheother;butsuchexceptionaltransactionsarebynomeansthenecessaryresultofthegeneralconditionsofthecirculationofcommodities.Weseehere,ontheonehand,howtheexchangeofcommoditiesbreaksthroughalllocalandpersonalboundsinseparablefromdirectbarter,anddevelopsthecirculationoftheproductsofsocial106CAPITALlabour;andontheotherhand,howitdevelopsawholenetworkofsocialrelationsspontaneousintheirgrowthandentirelybeyondthecontroloftheactors.Itisonlybecausethefarmerhassoldhiswheatthattheweaverisenabledtosellhislinen,onlybecausetheweaverhassoldhislinenthatourHotspurisenabledtosellhisBible,andonlybecausethelatterhassoldthewaterofeverlastinglifethatthedistillerisenabledtosellhiseau-de-vie,andsoon.

Theprocessofcirculation,therefore,doesnot,likedirectbarterofproducts,becomeextinguishedupontheuse-valueschangingplacesandhands.Themoneydoesnotvanishondroppingoutofthecircuitofthemetamorphosisofagivencommodity.Itisconstantlybeingprecipitatedintonewplacesinthearenaofcirculationvacatedbyothercommodities.Inthecompletemetamorphosisofthelinen,forexample,linen–money–Bible,thelinenfirstfallsoutofcirculation,andmoneystepsintoitsplace.ThentheBiblefallsoutofcirculation,andagainmoneytakesitsplace.Whenonecommodityreplacesanother,themoney-commodityalwaysstickstothehandsofsomethirdperson.24Circulationsweatsmoneyfromeverypore.

Nothingcanbemorechildishthanthedogma,thatbecauseeverysaleisapurchase,andeverypurchaseasale,thereforethecirculationofcommoditiesnecessarilyimpliesanequilibriumofsalesandpurchases.Ifthismeansthatthenumberofactualsalesisequaltothenumberofpurchases,itismeretautology.Butitsrealpurportistoprovethateverysellerbringshisbuyertomarketwithhim.Nothingofthekind.Thesaleandthepurchaseconstituteoneidenticalact,anexchangebetweenacommodity-ownerandanownerofmoney,betweentwopersonsasopposedtoeachotherasthetwopolesofamagnet.