Page 13 of Notebook B' with a fragment of the original text of the second chapter of A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy
corn and another, one hide and another, there is a difference in the use value of the specimens of one and the same kind. This requirement of absence of qualitative differences regardless of time and place, and hence, the requirement of equality at equal quantity is the first requirement from this aspect.
The second, which also springs from the necessity of presenting a merely quantitative difference, is great divisibility and subsequent combination of the parts so that, depending on the magnitude of the value of the [B'-14] commodity, the universal equivalent can be cut up into parts, without thereby damaging its use value. Gold and silver, as simple bodies, with a purely quantitative division, can be brought to one and the same degree of fineness. Sameness of quality. Similarly divisible and recombin-able.
It can even be said of gold that it is the earliest known metal, the first discovered metal. In the great gold sluices, the rivers, Nature itself undertakes the work of the art and hence requires on the part of man in finding it no more than very crude work and neither science nor developed instruments of production.
" T H E PRECIOUS METALS UNIFORM IN THEIR PHYSICAL QUALITIES. SO THAT EQUAL QUANTITIES OF I T SHOULD BE SO FAR IDENTICAL AS T O PRESENT NO GROUND FOR PREFERRING THE ONE TO THE OTHER. T H I S IS NOT THE CASE WITH EQUAL NUMBERS OF CATTLE AND EQUAL QUANTITIES OF GRAIN." a
Gold is, besides, found in a purer state than all the other metals: in a native, crystalline form, in separate pieces: "separated from the usually occurring bodies", seldom alloyed with any other, except silver. Gold "isolated, individualised".
"GOLD DIFFERS REMARKABLY FROM THE OTHER METALS, WITH A VERY FEW EXCEPTIONS, IN THE FACT, THAT IT IS FOUND IN NATURE IN ITS METALLIC STATE' (the Other metals are found in minerals (in their chemical being). "IRON AND COPPER, TIN, LEAD, AND SILVER ARE ORDINARILY DISCOVERED IN CHEMICAL COMBINATIONS WITH OXYGEN, SULPHUR, ARSENIC, OR CARBON; AND THE FEW EXCEPTIONAL OCCURRENCES OF THESE METALS IN AN UNCOMBINED, OR, AS IT WAS FORMERLY CALLED, VIRGIN STATE, ARE TO BE CITED RATHER AS MINERALOGICAL CURIOSITIES THAN AS COMMON PRODUCTIONS. GOLD, HOWEVER, IS ALWAYS FOUND NATIVE OR METALLIC... AGAIN GOLD, FROM T H E CIRCUMSTANCE OF ITS HAVING BEEN FORMED IN THOSE ROCKS WHICH ARE MOST EXPOSED TO ATMOSPHERIC ACTION IS FOUND IN THE DEBRIS OF THE MOUNTAINS; ...the FRAGMENTS o f t h e s e ROCKS BROKEN OFF, ... BORNE BY FLOODS INTO THE VALLEYS, AND ROLLED INTO
PEBBLES BY THE CONSTANT ACTION OF FLOWING WATER... Gold is deposited because of its specific gravity. So it is found in riverbeds and in alluvial deposits. Alluvial gold was the first gold to be discovered." (River-sluicing learnt before mining)...
"GOLD MOST FREQUENTLY OCCURS PURE, OR, AT ALL EVENTS, SO NEARLY SO THAT ITS METALLIC NATURE CAN BE AT ONCE RECOGNISED, whether in alluvial deposits or in
QUARTZ VEINS... RIVERS ARE, INDEED, GREAT NATURAL CRADLES, SWEEPING OFF ALL THE
a S. Bailey, Money and Its Vicissitudes in Value, pp. 5-6. See present edition, Vol. 28, p. 110.— £rf.
LIGHTER AND FINER PARTICLES AT ONCE, THE HEAVIER ONES EITHER STICKING AGAINST NATURAL IMPEDIMENTS, OR BEING LEFT WHEREVER THE CURRENT SLACKENS ITS FORCE OR VELOCITY... IN ALMOST ALL, PERHAPS IN ALL THE COUNTRIES OF EUROPE, AFRICA, AND ASIA, GREATER OR SMALLER QUANTITIES OF GOLD HAVE FROM EARLY TIMES BEEN WASHED BY SIMPLE CONTRIVANCES FROM THE AURIFEROUS DEPOSITS, ETC." [Lectures on Gold for the Instruction of Emigrants about to Proceed to Australia. Delivered at the Museum of Practical Geology. London, 1852, pp. 171-72, 8, 10, 12, 93-94].
T h e washing a n d digging of gold are perfectly simple works, while MINING (so also GOLD-MINING) IS AN ART REQUIRING THE EMPLOYMENT OF CAPITAL and m o r e COLLATERAL SCIENCES and ARTS than any other industry.//The washing of ore taken care of by Nature.//
Exchange value as such implies a common substance and the reduction of all the differences to merely quantitative ones. In the function of money as measure, all values are reduced first of all to merely different quantities of the standard commodity. That is the case with the precious metals, which, therefore, appear as the natural substance of exchange value as such.
"A peculiar feature of metals is that in them alone all relations are reduced to a single one, namely, their quantity, for they have not been endowed by Nature with any difference of quality either in their internal composition or in their external form and structure" (Galiani, I.e. [Delia Moneta], pp. 126-27).a
(SAMENESS OF QUALITY IN ALL PARTS OF THE WORLD; ADMIT OF MINUTE DIVISION AND
EXACT APPORTIONMENT.)
This merely quantitative difference is just as important for money as means of circulation (coin) and means of payment, since money, a single piece of money, has n o individuality, and the important thing is that what has to be returned is merely an equal quantity of the same material, but not the same piece:
"MONEY IS RETURNED IN KIND ONLY-, WHICH FACT DISTINGUISHES THIS AGENT FROM ALL OTHER MACHINERY ... INDICATES THE NATURE OF ITS SERVICE — CLEARLY PROVES THE SINGLENESS OF ITS OFFICE" (Opdyke, [A Treatise on Political Economy, New York, 1851,] [p.] 267).
T h e differentiation of the functions performed by gold, whether as universal commodity, coin, raw material for luxury articles, material for accumulation, etc., enables them to indicate to the senses the succession of the form determinations of money. T o this differentiation corresponds the fact that gold and silver can always be melted down and so again reduced to their purely metallic state, and from that state similarly to any other, i.e. that gold and silver, in contrast to other commodities, are not bound to the definite use form which is imparted to them. They can pass
a Marx quotes in Italian.— Ed.
from the form of bullion to the form of coin, etc., and back again, without losing their value as raw materials, [B'-15] without damaging the processes of production and consumption.
As means of circulation gold and silver have the advantage over other commodities in that their high natural specific gravity— representing a relatively large weight in a small space — is matched by an economic specific gravity, the ability to contain (objectify) relatively much labour time, i.e. a large exchange value, in a small space. The latter naturally depends on their relatively rare occurrence as natural objects. Hence, facility of transportation, transfer, etc. In short, the facility of real circulation, which is, naturally, the first condition for their economic function as means of circulation.
Finally, as the inert being of value, as the material of hoarding, they are relatively indestructible, infinitely durable, not liable to be oxidised in the air ("treasures that neither moth nor rust doth corrupt"a), are refractory, with gold especially being insoluble in acids, except in free chlorine (aqua regia, a mixture of nitric and hydrochloric acids). As a main point, one should finally note the aesthetic properties of gold and silver, which make them the direct manifestation of affluence, ornament, luxury, and spontaneous festive moods, of wealth as such. Brightness of colour, malleability, facility of being worked with tools, and fitness for ornamentation and other purposes. Gold and silver are to some extent a native light brought forth from the underworld itself. Apart from the rarity of gold and silver, their greater softness, as compared with iron and even copper (in the hardened form in which it was used by the ancients), makes them unfit for use as instruments of production. But the use value of metals largely depends on their role in the immediate process of production. Gold and silver are also excluded from it, just as they are generally not indispensable objects of consumption.
"Money must have a direct" (use) "value, but one based on a besoin facticeP Its material must not be indispensable for man's existence, since the entire quantity of money used as coin" //generally as money [which] is also accumulated in the form of hoard// "cannot be individually employed; it must always circulate" (H. Storch, I.e. [Cours d'économie politique], Vol. II, pp. 113, 114).
(Equally, that part which is accumulated as hoard cannot be employed "individually" because the whole point of accumulation is to keep it intact.)
That, consequently, is one aspect according to which the nature of the use value of gold and silver is reduced to being something superfluous, to not entering either in the satisfaction of immediate want as object of consumption, or as agent in the immediate process of production. That is precisely the aspect according to which the use value of money should not come into collision with its function of hoard (money) or means of circulation, in other words, the need for it as an individual use value should not come into collision with the need springing from circulation, from the society itself, the need for it as money in any of its determinations. That is only the negative aspect.
In his polemic against money, Peter MARTYR, who seems to have been very fond of chocolate, says, therefore, of the BAGS OF cacao which, among other things, served as money among the Mexicans:
"O blessed money which furnishes mankind with a sweet and nutritious beverage and protects its innocent possessors from the infernal disease of avarice, since it cannot be long hoarded, nor hidden underground" (De orbe novo).™
On the other hand, gold and silver are superfluities not only in the negative sense, i.e. are objects which can be dispensed with, but their aesthetic properties which make them the material of luxury, finery and splendour, make them the positive forms of superabundance, or means of satisfying other than everyday wants and bare necessities. That is why they have use value in themselves apart from their function as money. But just as they are the natural representatives of purely quantitative relations — in virtue of the sameness of their quality — so also in their individual use they are the immediate natural representatives of superabundance and so of wealth as such, both because of their natural aesthetic properties, and also of their expensiveness.
Malleability is one of the properties that make gold and silver fit for use as material for jewellery. Dazzling to the eye. Exchange value is above all an overplus of necessary use values designated for exchange. This overplus is exchanged for what is superfluous as such, i.e. for what goes beyond the bounds of immediate necessity; for the festive in contrast to the everyday. Use value as such expresses above all the individual's relation to Nature; exchange value, alongside use value, is his command over the use values of others, his social relation; and even initially, moreover, values of festive use going beyond the bounds of immediate necessity.
The white colour of silver, which reflects all the rays of light in their original mix; the red-yellow colour of gold, which absorbs the whole mix of colours of a light beam falling on it and reflects red alone.
Add here what was said earlier about the mining countries." //In his history of the German language, Grimm shows the connection between the names of gold and silver and their colour.//(1)
[B'-16] We have seen that gold and silver fail to meet the demand being made on them as exchange value become independent, as immediately present money, that of being an unchanging value magnitude. Here, their nature as a particular commodity enters into conflict with their function as money. But as Aristotle already noted,(2) they possess a more permanent value magnitude than do other commodities on average.
For the metallic circulation as such, apart from the general effect of the appreciation or depreciation of the precious metals on all economic relationships, the fluctuations of the value ratio between gold and silver are of particular importance, since they continuously serve alongside each other as the material of money in one and the same country or in different countries. The purely economic causes of these successive changes — conquest and other political upheavals which had a great influence on the relative value of the precious metals in the ancient world lie beyond the bounds of purely economic examination — must be reduced to changes in the labour time required for the production of the same quantities of these metals. It itself depends, on the one hand, on the relative quantities in which gold and silver occur in Nature, and on the other, on the greater or lesser difficulty in procuring them in their purely metallic state. What was said earlier makes it clear that gold, whose extraction from rivers or from alluvial deposits does not require either mining or chemical or mechanical contrivances, was discovered, despite its greater absolute rarity, before silver, and for a long time, despite its greater absolute rarity, remained relatively depreciated as compared to silver. That is why Strabo's assertion[81] that in one Arab tribe 10 pounds of gold was given for 1 pound of iron, and 2 pounds of gold for 1 pound of silver does not appear to be in any way incredible. It is clear, on the other hand, that as the productive power of social labour develops, the technology, and hence simple labour, becomes dearer, and while the original surface sources of gold are depleted and the Earth's crust increasingly opened up, the relatively rarer or more frequent occurrence of both metals will have a substantial effect on the productivity of labour, and gold will appreciate relative to silver. (However, it is not the absolute quantitative proportion in which the two metals occur in Nature, although an essential moment in the labour time necessary for their production, but the labour time itself that determines their relative value. That is why although, according to the Paris Académie des Sciences (1840), the [quantitative] ratio of silver to gold was estimated at 52: 1, their value ratio was only 15: 1.)
Given a definite development of the productive power of social labour — i.e. the less the significance, on the one hand, of the relative mechanical or chemical impediments to be overcome, and, on the other hand, of the relative remoteness of the gold- or silver-producing countries, the alternative discovery of new gold or silver deposits must be of ever more decisive significance, so that gold, as against silver, has the chance of being discovered not only in mines but also in alluvial deposits. It is quite probable, therefore, that there will now again be a reverse movement in the value ratio of the two, i.e. a fall in the value of gold as compared with that of silver. The discovery of silver mines depends on the advance of technology and civilisation in general. Given these, any changes in the discovery of rich silver or gold deposits become crucial. On the whole, we find a repetition of the same movement in the change of the value ratio between gold and silver. The first two movements begin with a relative depreciation of gold and end with its appreciation. The latter begins with its appreciation and seems to be heading towards a re-establishment of its original lower value ratio to silver. In ancient Asia, the ratio of gold to silver was 6:1 or 8:1 (under Manu [10]° it was even lower) (thus in China and Japan, the latter still existed in the early 19th century); 10:1, the ratio in Xenophon's time, can be regarded as the average ratio for the middle period of antiquity. In the late Roman period — the opening up of the Spanish silver mines by Carthage had roughly the same role to play in antiquity as the discovery of America had in the new period — the ratio is roughly the same as that after the discovery of America, i.e. 14 or 15: 1, although in Rome we often find an even greater depreciation of silver.
Endnotes
[81] Strabo's statement, made in Rerum geographicarum libri XVII (XVI, 4, 18) is cited by Marx from Dureau de la Malle, Économie politique des Romains, Vol. I, Paris, 1840, p. 52. Marx used extracts from this work in his Economic Manuscript of 1857-1858, "Chapter on Money" (see present edition, Vol. 28, pp. 109-10 and 116).—388, 459
[10] The reference is to Excerpt Notebook X (London, mid-June-July 1851).—30, 102