From: Gerald A. Levy (Gerald_A_Levy@MSN.COM)
Date: Sat Jun 05 2004 - 07:41:45 EDT
(posted on 5/8/04; photos in original post, JL) CATTLE AS COMMODITY AND AS MONEY By Walt Contreras Sheasby Marx has reminded us in his analysis of pre-capitalist economic formations in 1857 that *the original meaning of the word capital is cattle* (Marx, 1964: 119) As he hastens to add, however, that does not mean that the cattle herders of prehistory were capitalists, but it does underscore the special place this animal, or rather industry, had in the rough economic evolution of Central Asia and the Mediterranean over many thousands of years, an impact which capitalism, especially since the settling of the western U.S. after the Civil War, has globalized. For our purposes, the significance of Cattle to our study of Capital has to do with its primary and secondary roles in some parts of the world, first, as the original commodity and second, as an original form of money. The story of cattle illuminates the nature of both as social relations, rather than as things. In the first chapter of Capital, Vol. 1, Marx states that *The expanded form of value comes into actual existence for the first time so soon as a particular product of labour, such as cattle, is no longer exceptionally, but habitually, exchanged for various other commodities* (159F; 71M). In the second chapter of Capital, Vol. 1, on Exchange Marx takes this considerably further when he argues that *Commodity owners never equate their own commodities to those of others and exchange them on a large scale, without different kinds of commodities belonging to different owners being exchangeable for, and equated as values to, one and the same special article. Such last-mentioned article, by becoming the equivalent of various other commodities, acquires at once, though within narrow limits, the character of a general social equivalent.* *This character comes and goes with the momentary social acts that called it into life. In turns and transiently it attaches itself first to this and then to that commodity. But with the development of exchange it fixes itself firmly and exclusively to particular sorts of commodities, and becomes crystallized by assuming the money form.* *The particular kind of commodity to which it sticks is at first a matter of accident. Nevertheless, there are two circumstances whose influence is decisive. The money form attaches itself either to the most important articles of exchange from outside, and these in fact are primitive and natural forms in which the exchange-value of home products finds expression; or else it attaches itself to the object of utility that forms, like cattle, the chief portion of indigenous alienable wealth* (183F; 92M). As a contemporary numismatist (Hight) points out, various items have functioned as *money* throughout the world, including not only cattle, but whales' teeth, elephant tails, yap stones, wampum, and cowrie. However, cattle was the general store of value par excellence. Even the term *pecuniary* derives from the word pecus, Latin for cattle. The word *cattle* derives from the middle English *catel*, in turn from late Latin *capitale*. Cattle were and are a source of wealth, and are typically measured in terms of how many *head of cattle*. The earliest records of domestication date back to 7000 BCE, and come from Asia and the eastern Mediterranean. Cattle noticed tasty crops rowing and wandered near to settlements to munch. The animals were then tamed by penning, hobbling and castration. Domestication was certainly complete by 2100 BCE, when cattle were a symbol of wealth. In the ancient Near East cattle figurines like that shown represented God. *The first metallic money dates back to approximately 2000-1800 BCE and was made of bronze. These bronze pieces which traded based on weight, were often formed into the shape of cattle, which again were used prior to the general acceptance of metals as a valuable commodity* (Hight). A Canaanite Bronze Figurine, c. 1500 BCE This supports the view Marx expressed about the evolution of the product, once exchanged with external commodities, becoming a commodity within the community as well, and, in the case of cattle, becoming the universal equivalent against which other commodities are compared. As cattle wealth is statified, bullion is authorized as its more portable equivalent, and it becomes the universal medium of exchange, still in use today as backing for major international deals. Marx argued that in commercial transactions, this medium of exchange cannot be explained merely as a symbolic value arrived at by convention or by the fact that precious metals *are by nature fitted to perform the social function of a universal equivalent* (183F; 92M). His conclusion of Chapter 2 presents a resolution of the conflicting theories of money, but it will need further explication in the succeeding chapter: *These objects, gold and silver, just as they come out of the bowels of the earth, are forthwith the direct incarnation of all human labour. Hence the magic of money. In the form of society now under consideration, the behavior of men in the social process of production is purely atomic. Hence their relations to each other in production assume a material character independent of their control and conscious individual action. These facts manifest themselves at first by products as a general rule taking the form of commodities. We have seen how the progressive development of a society of commodity-producers stamps one privileged commodity with the character of money. Hence the riddle presented by money is but the riddle presented by commodities; only it now strikes us in its most glaring form* (187F; 96M). Lydian King Croesus (561-546 B.C.), created the first official coins combining Lion (the realm) and Bull (wealth). Cattle, however, are not the only commodity at the center of the early development of the money-form before the invention of bullion and coin currency. In the next posts, we shall look at two often overlooked commodities important to exchange in the ancient world, 1. the slave as an embodiment of wealth and value, and 2. the trade in sex in the diffusion of the minting of coins. Both aspects are usually ignored in the sanitized accounts of the history of progress. REFERENCES: Hight, Mitch (nd), The Earliest Coins. http://www.coin-gallery.com/cgearlycoins.htm Marx, Karl (1964) Pre-Capitalist Economic Formations, Part II. New York: International Publishers. http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1857/precapitalist/ch02.htm Marx, Karl, Capital, Vol. 1 (1976), London: Penguin Books; (1987), New York International Publishers. http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch01.htm
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Jun 06 2004 - 00:00:01 EDT