- 歡迎訪問欣可小說小說網
-
桌麵快捷
-
加入收藏
-
設為首頁
桌麵快捷
加入收藏
設為首頁
If
we
now
consider
the
completed
metamorphosis
of
a
commodity,
as
a
whole,
it
appears
in
the
first
place,
that
it
is
made
up
of
two
opposite
and
complementary
movements,
C–M
and
M–C.
These
two
antithetical
transmutations
of
a
commodity
are
brought
about
by
two
antithetical
social
acts
on
the
part
of
the
owner,
and
these
acts
in
their
turn
stamp
the
character
of
the
economic
parts
played
by
him.As
the
person
who
makes
a
sale,
he
is
a
seller;
as
the
person
who
makes
a
purchase,
he
is
a
buyer.
But
just
as,
upon
every
such
transmutation
of
a
commodity,its
two
forms,
commodity-form
and
money-form,exist
simultaneously
but
at
opposite
poles,
so
every
seller
has
a
buyer
opposed
to
him,
and
every
buyer
a
seller.
While
one
particular
commodity
is
going
through
its
two
transmutations
in
succession,
from
a
commodity
into
money
and
from
money
into
another
commodity,
the
owner
of
the
commodity
changes
in
succession
his
part
from
that
of
seller
to
that
of
buyer.These
characters
of
seller
and
buyer
are
therefore
not
permanent,
but
attach
themselves
in
turns
to
the
various
persons
engaged
in
the
circulation
of
commodities.
The
complete
metamorphosis
of
a
commodity,
in
its
simplest
form,
implies
four
extremes,
and
three
dramatic
personae.
First,
a
commodity
comes
face
to
face
with
money;
the
latter
is
the
form
taken
by
the
value
of
the
former,
and
exists
in
all
its
hard
reality,
in
the
of
the
buyer.
A
commodity-owner
is
thus
brought
into
contact
with
a
possessor
of
money.
So
soon,
now,
as
the
commodity
has
been
changed
into
money,
the
money
becomes
its
transient
equivalent
form,
the
use-value
of
which
equivalent-form
is
to
be
found
in
the
bodies
of
other
commodities.
Money,
the
final
term
of
the
first
transmutation,
is
at
the
same
time
the
starting-point
for
the
second.
The
person
who
is
a
seller
in
the
first
transaction
thus
becomes
a
buyer
in
the
second,
in
which
a
third
commodity-owner
appears
on
the
scene
as
a
seller.23
The
two
phases,
each
inverse
to
the
other,
that
make
up
the
metamorphosis
of
a
commodity
constitute
together
a
circular
movement,
a
circuit:
commodity
form,
stripping
off
of
this
form,
and
return
to
the
commodity-form.
No
doubt,
the
commodity
appears
here
under
two
different
aspects.
At
the
starting
point
it
is
not
a
use-value
to
its
owner;
at
the
finishing
point
it
is.
So,
too,
the
money
appears
in
the
first
phase
as
a
solid
crystal
of
value,
a
crystal
into
which
the
commodity
eagerly
solidifies,
and
in
the
second,dissolves
into
the
mere
transient
equivalent-form
destined
to
be
replaced
by
a
use-value.
The
two
metamorphoses
constituting
the
circuit
are
at
the
same
time
two
inverse
partial
metamorphoses
of
two
other
commodities.
One
and
the
same
commodity,
the
linen,
opens
the
series
of
its
own
metamorphoses,
and
completes
the
metamorphosis
of
another
(the
wheat).
In
the
first
phase
or
sale,
the
linen
plays
these
two
parts
in
its
own
person.
But,then,
changed
into
gold,
it
completes
its
own
second
and
final
metamorphosis,
and
helps
at
the
same
time
to
accomplish
the
first
metamorphosis
of
a
third
commodity.
Hence
the
circuit
made
by
one
commodity
in
the
course
of
its
metamorphoses
is
inextricably
mixed
up
with
the
circuits
of
other
commodities.The
total
of
all
the
different
circuits
constitutes
the
circulation
of
commodities.
The
circulation
of
commodities
differs
from
the
direct
exchange
of
products
(barter),
not
only
in
form,but
in
substance.
Only
consider
the
course
of
events.The
weaver
has,
as
a
matter
of
fact,
exchanged
his
linen
for
a
Bible,
his
own
commodity
for
that
of
some
one
else.
But
this
is
true
only
so
far
as
he
himself
is
concerned.
The
seller
of
the
Bible,
who
prefers
something
to
warm
his
inside,
no
more
thought
of
exchanging
his
Bible
for
linen
than
our
weaver
knew
that
wheat
had
been
exchanged
for
his
linen.B's
commodity
replaces
that
of
A,
but
A
and
B
do
not
mutually
exchange
those
commodities.
It
may,of
course,
happen
that
A
and
B
make
simultaneous
purchases,
the
one
from
the
other;
but
such
exceptional
transactions
are
by
no
means
the
necessary
result
of
the
general
conditions
of
the
circulation
of
commodities.
We
see
here,
on
the
one
hand,
how
the
exchange
of
commodities
breaks
through
all
local
and
personal
bounds
inseparable
from
direct
barter,and
develops
the
circulation
of
the
products
of
social
labour;
and
on
the
other
hand,
how
it
develops
a
whole
network
of
social
relations
spontaneous
in
their
growth
and
entirely
beyond
the
control
of
the
actors.
It
is
only
because
the
farmer
has
sold
his
wheat
that
the
weaver
is
enabled
to
sell
his
linen,
only
because
the
weaver
has
sold
his
linen
that
our
Hotspur
is
enabled
to
sell
his
Bible,
and
only
because
the
latter
has
sold
the
water
of
everlasting
life
that
the
distiller
is
enabled
to
sell
his
eau-de-vie,
and
so
on.
The
process
of
circulation,
therefore,
does
not,
like
direct
barter
of
products,
become
extinguished
upon
the
use-values
changing
places
and
hands.
The
money
does
not
vanish
on
dropping
out
of
the
circuit
of
the
metamorphosis
of
a
given
commodity.
It
is
constantly
being
precipitated
into
new
places
in
the
arena
of
circulation
vacated
by
other
commodities.
In
the
complete
metamorphosis
of
the
linen,
for
example,linen
–
money
–
Bible,
the
linen
first
falls
out
of
circulation,
and
money
steps
into
its
place.
Then
the
Bible
falls
out
of
circulation,
and
again
money
takes
its
place.
When
one
commodity
replaces
another,
the
money-commodity
always
sticks
to
the
hands
of
some
third
person.24Circulation
sweats
money
from
every
pore.
Nothing
can
be
more
childish
than
the
dogma,
that
because
every
sale
is
a
purchase,
and
every
purchase
a
sale,
therefore
the
circulation
of
commodities
necessarily
implies
an
equilibrium
of
sales
and
purchases.
If
this
means
that
the
number
of
actual
sales
is
equal
to
the
number
of
purchases,
it
is
mere
tautology.
But
its
real
purport
is
to
prove
that
every
seller
brings
his
buyer
to
market
with
him.
Nothing
of
the
kind.
The
sale
and
the
purchase
constitute
one
identical
act,
an
exchange
between
a
commodity
owner
and
an
owner
of
money,
between
two
persons
as
opposed
to
each
other
as
the
two
poles
of
a
magnet.They
form
two
distinct
acts,
of
polar
and
opposite
characters,
when
performed
by
one
single
person.
Hence
the
identity
of
sale
and
purchase
implies
that
the
commodity
is
useless,
if,
on
being
thrown
into
the
alchemistical
retort
of
circulation,
it
does
not
come
out
again
in
the
shape
of
money;
if,
in
other
words,
it
cannot
be
sold
by
its
owner,
and
therefore
be
bought
by
the
owner
of
the
money.
That
identity
further
implies
that
the
exchange,
if
it
does
take
place,
constitutes
a
period
of
rest,
an
interval,
long
or
short,
in
the
life
of
the
commodity.
Since
the
first
metamorphosis
of
a
commodity
is
at
once
a
sale
and
a
purchase,
it
is
also
an
independent
process
in
itself.
The
purchaser
has
the
commodity,
the
seller
has
the
money,
i.e.,
a
commodity
ready
to
go
into
circulation
at
any
time.No
one
can
sell
unless
some
one
else
purchases.
But
no
one
is
forthwith
bound
to
purchase,
because
he
has
just
sold.
Circulation
bursts
through
all
restrictions
as
to
time,
place,
and
individuals,
imposed
by
direct
barter,
and
this
it
effects
by
splitting
up,
into
the
antithesis
of
a
sale
and
a
purchase,
the
direct
identity
that
in
barter
does
exist
between
the
alienation
of
one's
own
and
the
acquisition
of
some
other
man's
product.To
say
that
these
two
independent
and
antithetical
acts
have
an
intrinsic
unity,
are
essentially
one,
is
the
same
as
to
say
that
this
intrinsic
oneness
expresses
itself
in
an
external
antithesis.
If
the
interval
in
time
between
the
two
complementary
phases
of
the
complete
metamorphosis
of
a
commodity
become
too
great,
if
the
split
between
the
sale
and
the
purchase
become
too
pronounced,
the
intimate
connexion
between
them,their
oneness,
asserts
itself
by
producing
–
a
crisis.The
antithesis,
use-value
and
value;
the
contradictions
that
private
labour
is
bound
to
manifest
itself
as
direct
social
labour,
that
a
particularised
concrete
kind
of
labour
has
to
pass
for
abstract
human
labour;
the
contradiction
between
the
personification
of
objects
and
the
representation
of
persons
by
things;
all
these
antitheses
and
contradictions,
which
are
immanent
in
commodities,
assert
themselves,
and
develop
their
modes
of
motion,
in
the
antithetical
phases
of
the
metamorphosis
of
a
commodity.
These
modes
therefore
imply
the
possibility,
and
no
more
than
the
possibility,
of
crises.
The
conversion
of
this
mere
possibility
into
a
reality
is
the
result
of
a
long
series
of
relations,
that,
from
our
present
standpoint
of
simple
circulation,
have
as
yet
no
existence.
25
B.
The
Currency
26of
Money
The
change
of
form,
C–M–C,
by
which
the
circulation
of
the
material
products
of
labour
is
brought
about,
requires
that
a
given
value
in
the
shape
of
a
commodity
shall
begin
the
process,
and
shall,
also
in
the
shape
of
a
commodity,
end
it.
The
movement
of
the
commodity
is
therefore
a
circuit.
On
the
other
hand,
the
form
of
this
movement
precludes
a
circuit
from
being
made
by
the
money.
The
result
is
not
the
return
of
the
money,
but
its
continued
removal
further
and
further
away
from
its
starting-point.
So
long
as
the
seller
sticks
fast
to
his
money,
which
is
the
transformed
shape
of
his
commodity,
that
commodity
is
still
in
the
first
phase
of
its
metamorphosis,
and
has
completed
only
half
its
course.
But
so
soon
as
he
completes
the
process,
so
soon
as
he
supplements
his
sale
by
a
purchase,
the
money
again
leaves
the
hands
of
its
possessor.
It
is
true
that
if
the
weaver,after
buying
the
Bible,
sell
more
linen,
money
comes
back
into
his
hands.
But
this
return
is
not
owing
to
the
circulation
of
the
first
20
yards
of
linen;
that
circulation
resulted
in
the
money
getting
into
the
hands
of
the
seller
of
the
Bible.
The
return
of
money
into
the
hands
of
the
weaver
is
brought
about
only
by
the
renewal
or
repetition
of
the
process
of
circulation
with
a
fresh
commodity,
which
renewed
process
ends
with
the
same
result
as
its
predecessor
did.Hence
the
movement
directly
imparted
to
money
by
the
circulation
of
commodities
takes
the
form
of
a
constant
motion
away
from
its
starting-point,
of
a
course
from
the
hands
of
one
commodity-owner
into
those
of
another.
This
course
constitutes
its
currency(cours
de
la
monnaie).
The
currency
of
money
is
the
constant
and
monotonous
repetition
of
the
same
process.
The
commodity
is
always
in
the
hands
of
the
seller;the
money,
as
a
means
of
purchase,
always
in
the
hands
of
the
buyer.
And
money
serves
as
a
means
of
purchase
by
realising
the
price
of
the
commodity.This
realisation
transfers
the
commodity
from
the
seller
to
the
buyer
and
removes
the
money
from
the
hands
of
the
buyer
into
those
of
the
seller,
where
it
again
goes
through
the
same
process
with
another
commodity.
That
this
one-sided
character
of
the
money's
motion
arises
out
of
the
two-sided
character
of
the
commodity's
motion,
is
a
circumstance
that
is
veiled
over.
The
very
nature
of
the
circulation
of
commodities
begets
the
opposite
appearance.
The
first
metamorphosis
of
a
commodity
is
visibly,
not
only
the
money's
movement,
but
also
that
of
the
commodity
itself;
in
the
second
metamorphosis,
on
the
contrary,the
movement
appears
to
us
as
the
movement
of
the
money
alone.
In
the
first
phase
of
its
circulation
the
commodity
changes
place
with
the
money.
Thereupon
the
commodity,
under
its
aspect
of
a
useful
object,falls
out
of
circulation
into
consumption.27In
its
stead
we
have
its
value-shape
–
the
money.
It
then
goes
through
the
second
phase
of
its
circulation,
not
under
its
own
natural
shape,
but
under
the
shape
of
money.The
continuity
of
the
movement
is
therefore
kept
up
by
the
money
alone,
and
the
same
movement
that
as
regards
the
commodity
consists
of
two
processes
of
an
antithetical
character,
is,
when
considered
as
the
movement
of
the
money,
always
one
and
the
same
process,
a
continued
change
of
places
with
ever
fresh
commodities.
Hence
the
result
brought
about
by
the
circulation
of
commodities,
namely,
the
replacing
of
one
commodity
by
another,
takes
the
appearance
of
having
been
effected
not
by
means
of
the
change
of
form
of
the
commodities
but
rather
by
the
money
acting
as
a
medium
of
circulation,
by
an
action
that
circulates
commodities,
to
all
appearance
motionless
in
themselves,
and
transfers
them
from
hands
in
which
they
are
non-use-values,
to
hands
in
which
they
are
use-values;
and
that
in
a
direction
constantly
opposed
to
the
direction
of
the
money.
The
latter
is
continually
withdrawing
commodities
from
circulation
and
stepping
into
their
places,
and
in
thus
way
continually
moving
further
and
further
from
its
starting-point.Hence
although
the
movement
of
the
money
is
merely
the
expression
of
the
circulation
of
commodities,
yet
the
contrary
appears
to
be
the
actual
fact,
and
the
circulation
of
commodities
seems
to
be
the
result
of
the
movement
of
the
money.28
Again,
money
functions
as
a
means
of
circulation
only
because
in
it
the
values
of
commodities
have
independent
reality.
Hence
its
movement,
as
the
medium
of
circulation,
is,
in
fact,
merely
the
movement
of
commodities
while
changing
their
forms.This
fact
must
therefore
make
itself
plainly
visible
in
the
currency
of
money.
Thus
the
linen
for
instance,first
of
all
changes
its
commodity-form
into
its
money
form.
The
second
term
of
its
first
metamorphosis,
C–M,
the
money
form,
then
becomes
the
first
term
of
its
final
metamorphosis,
M–C,
its
re-conversion
into
the
Bible.
But
each
of
these
two
changes
of
form
is
accomplished
by
an
exchange
between
commodity
and
money,
by
their
reciprocal
displacement.
The
same
pieces
of
coin
come
into
the
seller's
hand
as
the
alienated
form
of
the
commodity
and
leave
it
as
the
absolutely
alienable
form
of
the
commodity.
Theyare
displaced
twice.
The
first
metamorphosis
of
the
linen
puts
these
coins
into
the
weaver's
pocket,
the
second
draws
them
out
of
it.
The
two
inverse
changes
undergone
by
the
same
commodity
are
reflected
in
the
displacement,
twice
repeated,
but
in
opposite
directions,
of
the
same
pieces
of
coin.
If,
on
the
contrary,
only
one
phase
of
the
metamorphosis
is
gone
through,
if
there
are
only
sales
or
only
purchases,
then
a
given
piece
of
money
changes
its
place
only
once.
Its
second
change
of
place
always
expresses
the
second
metamorphosis
of
the
commodity,
its
re-conversion
from
money.
The
frequent
repetition
of
the
displacement
of
the
same
coins
reflects
not
only
the
series
of
metamorphoses
that
a
single
commodity
has
gone
through,
but
also
the
intertwining
of
the
innumerable
metamorphoses
in
the
world
of
commodities
in
general.
It
is
a
matter
of
course,
that
all
this
is
applicable
to
the
simple
circulation
of
commodities
alone,
the
only
form
that
we
are
now
considering.
Every
commodity,
when
it
first
steps
into
circulation,and
undergoes
its
first
change
of
form,
does
so
only
to
fall
out
of
circulation
again
and
to
be
replaced
by
other
commodities.
Money,
on
the
contrary,
as
the
medium
of
circulation,
keeps
continually
within
the
sphere
of
circulation,
and
moves
about
in
it.
The
question
therefore
arises,
how
much
money
this
sphere
constantly
absorbs
In
a
given
country
there
take
place
every
day
at
the
same
time,
but
in
different
localities,
numerous
one
sided
metamorphoses
of
commodities,
or,
in
other
words,
numerous
sales
and
numerous
purchases.
The
commodities
are
equated
beforehand
in
imagination,by
their
prices,
to
definite
quantities
of
money.And
since,
in
the
form
of
circulation
now
under
consideration,
money
and
commodities
always
come
bodily
face
to
face,
one
at
the
positive
pole
of
purchase,
the
other
at
the
negative
pole
of
sale,
it
is
clear
that
the
amount
of
the
means
of
circulation
required,
is
determined
beforehand
by
the
sum
of
the
prices
of
all
these
commodities.
As
a
matter
of
fact,the
money
in
reality
represents
the
quantity
or
sum
of
gold
ideally
expressed
beforehand
by
the
sum
of
the
prices
of
the
commodities.
The
equality
of
these
two
sums
is
therefore
self-evident.
We
know,
however,that,
the
values
of
commodities
remaining
constant,their
prices
vary
with
the
value
of
gold
(the
material
of
money),
rising
in
proportion
as
it
falls,
and
falling
in
proportion
as
it
rises.
Now
if,
in
consequence
of
such
a
rise
or
fall
in
the
value
of
gold,
the
sum
of
the
prices
of
commodities
fall
or
rise,
the
quantity
of
money
in
currency
must
fall
or
rise
to
the
same
extent.
The
change
in
the
quantity
of
the
circulating
medium
is,in
this
case,
it
is
true,
caused
by
the
money
itself,
yet
not
in
virtue
of
its
function
as
a
medium
of
circulation,but
of
its
function
as
a
measure
of
value.
First,
the
price
of
the
commodities
varies
inversely
as
the
value
of
the
money,
and
then
the
quantity
of
the
medium
of
circulation
varies
directly
as
the
price
of
the
commodities.
Exactly
the
same
thing
would
happen
if,
for
instance,
instead
of
the
value
of
gold
falling,gold
were
replaced
by
silver
as
the
measure
of
value,or
if,
instead
of
the
value
of
silver
rising,
gold
were
to
thrust
silver
out
from
being
the
measure
of
value.In
the
one
case,
more
silver
would
be
current
than
gold
was
before;
in
the
other
case,
less
gold
would
be
current
than
silver
was
before.
In
each
case
the
value
of
the
material
of
money,
i.e.,
the
value
of
the
commodity
that
serves
as
the
measure
of
value,
would
have
undergone
a
change,
and
therefore
so,
too,
would
the
prices
of
commodities
which
express
their
values
in
money,
and
so,
too,
would
the
quantity
of
money
current
whose
function
it
is
to
realise
those
prices.
We
have
already
seen,
that
the
sphere
of
circulation
has
an
opening
through
which
gold
(or
the
material
of
money
generally)
enters
into
it
as
a
commodity
with
a
given
value.
Hence,
when
money
enters
on
its
functions
as
a
measure
of
value,
when
it
expresses
prices,
its
value
is
already
determined.
If
now
its
value
fall,
this
fact
is
first
evidenced
by
a
change
in
the
prices
of
those
commodities
that
are
directly
bartered
for
the
precious
metals
at
the
sources
of
their
production.
The
greater
part
of
all
other
commodities,
especially
in
the
imperfectly
developed
stages
of
civil
society,
will
continue
for
a
long
time
to
be
estimated
by
the
former
antiquated
and
illusory
value
of
the
measure
of
value.Nevertheless,
one
commodity
infects
another
through
their
common
value-relation,
so
that
their
prices,expressed
in
gold
or
in
silver,
gradually
settle
down
into
the
proportions
determined
by
their
comparative
values,
until
finally
the
values
of
all
commodities
are
estimated
in
terms
of
the
new
value
of
the
metal
that
constitutes
money.
This
process
is
accompanied
by
the
continued
increase
in
the
quantity
of
the
precious
metals,
an
increase
caused
by
their
streaming
in
to
replace
the
articles
directly
bartered
for
them
at
their
sources
of
production.
In
proportion
therefore
as
commodities
in
general
acquire
their
true
prices,
in
proportion
as
their
values
become
estimated
according
to
the
fallen
value
of
the
precious
metal,
in
the
same
proportion
the
quantity
of
that
metal
necessary
for
realising
those
new
prices
is
provided
beforehand.A
one-sided
observation
of
the
results
that
followed
upon
the
discovery
of
fresh
supplies
of
gold
and
silver,led
some
economists
in
the
17th,
and
particularly
in
the
18th
century,
to
the
false
conclusion,
that
the
prices
of
commodities
had
gone
up
in
consequence
of
the
increased
quantity
of
gold
and
silver
serving
as
means
of
circulation.
Henceforth
we
shall
consider
the
value
of
gold
to
be
given,
as,
in
fact,
it
is
momentarily,whenever
we
estimate
the
price
of
a
commodity.
On
this
supposition
then,
the
quantity
of
the
medium
of
circulation
is
determined
by
the
sum
of
the
prices
that
have
to
be
realised.
If
now
we
further
suppose
the
price
of
each
commodity
to
be
given,
the
sum
of
the
prices
clearly
depends
on
the
mass
of
commodities
in
circulation.
It
requires
but
little
racking
of
brains
to
comprehend
that
if
one
quarter
of
wheat
costs
￡2,100
quarters
will
cost
￡200,
200
quarters
￡400,
and
so
on,that
consequently
the
quantity
of
money
that
changes
place
with
the
wheat,
when
sold,
must
increase
with
the
quantity
of
that
wheat.
If
the
mass
of
commodities
remain
constant,the
quantity
of
circulating
money
varies
with
the
fluctuations
in
the
prices
of
those
commodities.
It
increases
and
diminishes
because
the
sum
of
the
prices
increases
or
diminishes
in
consequence
of
the
change
of
price.
To
produce
this
effect,
it
is
by
no
means
requisite
that
the
prices
of
all
commodities
should
rise
or
fall
simultaneously.
A
rise
or
a
fall
in
the
prices
of
a
number
of
leading
articles,
is
sufficient
in
the
one
case
to
increase,
in
the
other
to
diminish,
the
sum
of
the
prices
of
all
commodities,
and,
therefore,to
put
more
or
less
money
in
circulation.
Whether
the
change
in
the
price
correspond
to
an
actual
change
of
value
in
the
commodities,
or
whether
it
be
the
result
of
mere
fluctuations
in
market-prices,
the
effect
on
the
quantity
of
the
medium
of
circulation
remains
the
same.
Suppose
the
following
articles
to
be
sold
or
partially
metamorphosed
simultaneously
in
different
localities:
say,
one
quarter
of
wheat,
20
yards
of
linen,
one
Bible,
and
4
gallons
of
brandy.
If
the
price
of
each
article
be
￡2,
and
the
sum
of
the
prices
to
be
realised
be
consequently
￡8,
it
follows
that
￡8
in
money
must
go
into
circulation.
If,
on
the
other
hand,these
same
articles
are
links
in
the
following
chain
of
metamorphoses:
1
quarter
of
wheat
–
￡2
–
20
yards
of
linen
–
￡2
–
1
Bible
–
￡2
–
4
gallons
of
brandy
–
￡2,a
chain
that
is
already
well
known
to
us,
in
that
case
the
￡2
cause
the
different
commodities
to
circulate
one
after
the
other,
and
after
realising
their
prices
successively,
and
therefore
the
sum
of
those
prices,
￡8,they
come
to
rest
at
last
in
the
of
the
distiller.The
￡2
thus
make
four
moves.
This
repeated
change
of
place
of
the
same
pieces
of
money
corresponds
to
the
double
change
in
form
of
the
commodities,
to
their
motion
in
opposite
directions
through
two
stages
of
circulation.
and
to
the
interlacing
of
the
metamorphoses
of
different
commodities.29These
antithetic
and
complementary
phases,
of
which
the
process
of
metamorphosis
consists,
are
gone
through,not
simultaneously,
but
successively.
Time
is
therefore
required
for
the
completion
of
the
series.
Hence
the
velocity
of
the
currency
of
money
is
measured
by
the
number
of
moves
made
by
a
given
piece
of
money
in
a
given
time.
Suppose
the
circulation
of
the
4
articles
takes
a
day.
The
sum
of
the
prices
to
be
realised
in
the
day
is
￡8,
the
number
of
moves
of
the
two
pieces
of
money
is
four,
and
the
quantity
of
money
circulating
is
￡2.
Hence,
for
a
given
interval
of
time
during
the
process
of
circulation,
we
have
the
following
relation:the
quantity
of
money
functioning
as
the
circulating
medium
is
equal
to
the
sum
of
the
prices
of
the
commodities
divided
by
the
number
of
moves
made
by
coins
of
the
same
denomination.
This
law
holds
generally.
The
total
circulation
of
commodities
in
a
given
country
during
a
given
period
is
made
up
on
the
one
hand
of
numerous
isolated
and
simultaneous
partial
metamorphoses,
sales
which
are
at
the
same
time
purchases,
in
which
each
coin
changes
its
place
only
once,
or
makes
only
one
move;
on
the
other
hand,of
numerous
distinct
series
of
metamorphoses
partly
running
side
by
side,
and
partly
coalescing
with
each
other,
in
each
of
which
series
each
coin
makes
a
number
of
moves,
the
number
being
greater
or
less
according
to
circumstances.
The
total
number
of
moves
made
by
all
the
circulating
coins
of
one
denomination
being
given,
we
can
arrive
at
the
average
number
of
moves
made
by
a
single
coin
of
that
denomination,
or
at
the
average
velocity
of
the
currency
of
money.
The
quantity
of
money
thrown
into
the
circulation
at
the
beginning
of
each
day
is
of
course
determined
by
the
sum
of
the
prices
of
all
the
commodities
circulating
simultaneously
side
by
side.
But
once
in
circulation,coins
are,
so
to
say,
made
responsible
for
one
another.If
the
one
increase
its
velocity,
the
other
either
retards
its
own,
or
altogether
falls
out
of
circulation;
for
the
circulation
can
absorb
only
such
a
quantity
of
gold
as
when
multiplied
by
the
mean
number
of
moves
made
by
one
single
coin
or
element,
is
equal
to
the
sum
of
the
prices
to
be
realised.
Hence
if
the
number
of
moves
made
by
the
separate
pieces
increase,
the
total
number
of
those
pieces
in
circulation
diminishes.
If
the
number
of
the
moves
diminish,
the
total
number
of
pieces
increases.
Since
the
quantity
of
money
capable
of
being
absorbed
by
the
circulation
is
given
for
a
given
mean
velocity
of
currency,
all
that
is
necessary
in
order
to
abstract
a
given
number
of
sovereigns
from
the
circulation
is
to
throw
the
same
number
of
one
pound
notes
into
it,
a
trick
well
known
to
all
bankers.
Just
as
the
currency
of
money,
generally
considered,is
but
a
reflex
of
the
circulation
of
commodities,
or
of
the
antithetical
metamorphoses
they
undergo,
so,
too,the
velocity
of
that
currency
reflects
the
rapidity
with
which
commodities
change
their
forms,
the
continued
interlacing
of
one
series
of
metamorphoses
with
another,
the
hurried
social
interchange
of
matter,
the
rapid
disappearance
of
commodities
from
the
sphere
of
circulation,
and
the
equally
rapid
substitution
of
fresh
ones
in
their
places.
Hence,
in
the
velocity
of
the
currency
we
have
the
fluent
unity
of
the
antithetical
and
complementary
phases,
the
unity
of
the
conversion
of
the
useful
aspect
of
commodities
into
their
value
aspect,
and
their
re-conversion
from
the
latter
aspect
to
the
former,
or
the
unity
of
the
two
processes
of
sale
and
purchase.
On
the
other
hand,
the
retardation
of
the
currency
reflects
the
separation
of
these
two
processes
into
isolated
antithetical
phases,
reflects
the
stagnation
in
the
change
of
form,
and
therefore,
in
the
social
interchange
of
matter.
The
circulation
itself,
of
course,gives
no
clue
to
the
origin
of
this
stagnation;
it
merely
puts
in
evidence
the
phenomenon
itself.
The
general
public,
who,
simultaneously
with
the
retardation
of
the
currency,
see
money
appear
and
disappear
less
frequently
at
the
periphery
of
circulation,
naturally
attribute
this
retardation
to
a
quantitative
deficiency
in
the
circulating
medium.30
The
total
quantity
of
money
functioning
during
a
given
period
as
the
circulating
medium,
is
determined,on
the
one
hand,
by
the
sum
of
the
prices
of
the
circulating
commodities,
and
on
the
other
hand,
by
the
rapidity
with
which
the
antithetical
phases
of
the
metamorphoses
follow
one
another.
On
this
rapidity
depends
what
proportion
of
the
sum
of
the
prices
can,on
the
average,
be
realised
by
each
single
coin.
But
the
sum
of
the
prices
of
the
circulating
commodities
depends
on
the
quantity,
as
well
as
on
the
prices,
of
the
commodities.
These
three
factors,
however,
state
of
prices,
quantity
of
circulating
commodities,
and
velocity
of
money-currency,
are
all
variable.
Hence,the
sum
of
the
prices
to
be
realised,
and
consequently
the
quantity
of
the
circulating
medium
depending
on
that
sum,
will
vary
with
the
numerous
variations
of
these
three
factors
in
combination.
Of
these
variations
we
shall
consider
those
alone
that
have
been
the
most
important
in
the
history
of
prices.
While
prices
remain
constant,
the
quantity
of
the
circulating
medium
may
increase
owing
to
the
number
of
circulating
commodities
increasing,
or
to
the
velocity
of
currency
decreasing,
or
to
a
combination
of
the
two.
On
the
other
hand
the
quantity
of
the
circulating
medium
may
decrease
with
a
decreasing
number
of
commodities,
or
with
an
increasing
rapidity
of
their
circulation.
With
a
general
rise
in
the
prices
of
commodities,the
quantity
of
the
circulating
medium
will
remain
constant,
provided
the
number
of
commodities
in
circulation
decrease
proportionally
to
the
increase
in
their
prices,
or
provided
the
velocity
of
currency
increase
at
the
same
rate
as
prices
rise,
the
number
of
commodities
in
circulation
remaining
constant.
The
quantity
of
the
circulating
medium
may
decrease,owing
to
the
number
of
commodities
decreasing
more
rapidly;
or
to
the
velocity
of
currency
increasing
more
rapidly,
than
prices
rise.
With
a
general
fall
in
the
prices
of
commodities,the
quantity
of
the
circulating
medium
will
remain
constant,
provided
the
number
of
commodities
increase
proportionally
to
their
fall
in
price,
or
provided
the
velocity
of
currency
decrease
in
the
same
proportion.
The
quantity
of
the
circulating
medium
will
increase,
provided
the
number
of
commodities
increase
quicker,
or
the
rapidity
of
circulation
decrease
quicker,
than
the
prices
fall.
The
variations
of
the
different
factors
may
mutually
compensate
each
other,
so
that
notwithstanding
their
continued
instability,
the
sum
of
the
prices
to
be
realised
and
the
quantity
of
money
in
circulation
remain
constant;
consequently,
we
find,
especially
if
we
take
long
periods
into
consideration,
that
the
deviations
from
the
average
level,
of
the
quantity
of
money
current
in
any
country,
are
much
smaller
than
we
should
at
first
sight
expect,
apart
of
course
from
excessive
perturbations
periodically
arising
from
industrial
and
commercial
crises,
or
less
frequently,from
fluctuations
in
the
value
of
money.
The
law,
that
the
quantity
of
the
circulating
medium
is
determined
by
the
sum
of
the
prices
of
the
commodities
circulating,
and
the
average
velocity
of
currency31may
also
be
stated
as
follows:
given
the
sum
of
the
values
of
commodities,
and
the
average
rapidity
of
their
metamorphoses,
the
quantity
of
precious
metal
current
as
money
depends
on
the
value
of
that
precious
metal.
The
erroneous
opinion
that
it
is,
on
the
contrary,
prices
that
are
determined
by
the
quantity
of
the
circulating
medium,
and
that
the
latter
depends
on
the
quantity
of
the
precious
metals
in
a
country;32this
opinion
was
based
by
those
who
first
held
it,
on
the
absurd
hypothesis
that
commodities
are
without
a
price,
and
money
without
a
value,when
they
first
enter
into
circulation,
and
that,
once
in
the
circulation,
an
aliquot
part
of
the
medley
of
commodities
is
exchanged
for
an
aliquot
part
of
the
heap
of
precious
metals.33
C.
Coin
and
Symbols
of
Value
That
money
takes
the
shape
of
coin,
springs
from
its
function
as
the
circulating
medium.
The
weight
of
gold
represented
in
imagination
by
the
prices
or
money-names
of
commodities,
must
confront
those
commodities,
within
the
circulation,
in
the
shape
of
coins
or
pieces
of
gold
of
a
given
denomination.Coining,
like
the
establishment
of
a
standard
of
prices,is
the
business
of
the
State.
The
different
national
uniforms
worn
at
home
by
gold
and
silver
as
coins,and
doffed
again
in
the
market
of
the
world,
indicate
the
separation
between
the
internal
or
national
spheres
of
the
circulation
of
commodities,
and
their
universal
sphere.
The
only
difference,
therefore,
between
coin
and
bullion,
is
one
of
shape,
and
gold
can
at
any
time
pass
from
one
form
to
the
other.
34But
no
sooner
does
coin
leave
the
mint,
than
it
immediately
finds
itself
on
the
high-road
to
the
melting
pot.
During
their
currency,
coins
wear
away,
some
more,
others
less.Name
and
substance,
nominal
weight
and
real
weight,begin
their
process
of
separation.
Coins
of
the
same
denomination
become
different
in
value,
because
they
are
different
in
weight.
The
weight
of
gold
fixed
upon
as
the
standard
of
prices,
deviates
from
the
weight
that
serves
as
the
circulating
medium,
and
the
latter
thereby
ceases
any
longer
to
be
a
real
equivalent
of
the
commodities
whose
prices
it
realises.
The
history
of
coinage
during
the
middle
ages
and
down
into
the
18th
century,
records
the
ever
renewed
confusion
arising
from
this
cause.
The
natural
tendency
of
circulation
to
convert
coins
into
a
mere
semblance
of
what
they
profess
to
be,
into
a
symbol
of
the
weight
of
metal
they
are
officially
supposed
to
contain,
is
recognised
by
modern
legislation,
which
fixes
the
loss
of
weight
sufficient
to
demonetise
a
gold
coin,
or
to
make
it
no
longer
legal
tender.
The
fact
that
the
currency
of
coins
itself
effects
a
separation
between
their
nominal
and
their
real
weight,
creating
a
distinction
between
them
as
mere
pieces
of
metal
on
the
one
hand,
and
as
coins
with
a
definite
function
on
the
other
–
this
fact
implies
the
latent
possibility
of
replacing
metallic
coins
by
tokens
of
some
other
material,
by
symbols
serving
the
same
purposes
as
coins.
The
practical
difficulties
in
the
way
of
coining
extremely
minute
quantities
of
gold
or
silver,
and
the
circumstance
that
at
first
the
less
precious
metal
is
used
as
a
measure
of
value
instead
of
the-more
precious,
copper
instead
of
silver,
silver
instead
of
gold,
and
that
the
less
precious
circulates
as
money
until
dethroned
by
the
more
precious
–
all
these
facts
explain
the
parts
historically
played
by
silver
and
copper
tokens
as
substitutes
for
gold
coins.
Silver
and
copper
tokens
take
the
place
of
gold
in
those
regions
of
the
circulation
where
coins
pass
from
hand
to
hand
most
rapidly,
and
are
subject
to
the
maximum
amount
of
wear
and
tear.
This
occurs
where
sales
and
purchases
on
a
very
small
scale
are
continually
happening.
In
order
to
prevent
these
satellites
from
establishing
themselves
permanently
in
the
place
of
gold,
positive
enactments
determine
the
extent
to
which
they
must
be
compulsorily
received
as
payment
instead
of
gold.
The
particular
tracks
pursued
by
the
different
species
of
coin
in
currency,
run
naturally
into
each
other.
The
tokens
keep
company
with
gold,
to
pay
fractional
parts
of
the
smallest
gold
coin;
gold
is,
on
the
one
hand,
constantly
pouring
into
retail
circulation,
and
on
the
other
hand
is
as
constantly
being
thrown
out
again
by
being
changed
into
tokens.35
The
weight
of
metal
in
the
silver
and
copper
tokens
is
arbitrarily
fixed
by
law.
When
in
currency,
they
wear
away
even
more
rapidly
than
gold
coins.
Hence
their
functions
are
totally
independent
of
their
weight,and
consequently
of
all
value.
The
function
of
gold
as
coin
becomes
completely
independent
of
the
metallic
value
of
that
gold.
Therefore
things
that
are
relatively
without
value,
such
as
paper
notes,
can
serve
as
coins
in
its
place.
This
purely
symbolic
character
is
to
a
certain
extent
masked
in
metal
tokens.
In
paper
money
it
stands
out
plainly.
In
fact,
ce
n'est
que
le
premier
pas
qui
cote.
We
allude
here
only
to
inconvertible
paper
money
issued
by
the
State
and
having
compulsory
circulation.It
has
its
immediate
origin
in
the
metallic
currency.Money
based
upon
credit
implies
on
the
other
hand
conditions,
which,
from
our
standpoint
of
the
simple
circulation
of
commodities,
are
as
yet
totally
unknown
to
us.
But
we
may
affirm
this
much,
that
just
as
true
paper
money
takes
its
rise
in
the
function
of
money
as
the
circulating
medium,
so
money
based
upon
credit
takes
root
spontaneously
in
the
function
of
money
as
the
means
of
payment.36
The
State
puts
in
circulation
bits
of
paper
on
which
their
various
denominations,
say
￡1,
￡5,
&c.,
are
printed.
In
so
far
as
they
actually
take
the
place
of
gold
to
the
same
amount,
their
movement
is
subject
to
the
laws
that
regulate
the
currency
of
money
itself.A
law
peculiar
to
the
circulation
of
paper
money
can
spring
up
only
from
the
proportion
in
which
that
paper
money
represents
gold.
Such
a
law
exists;stated
simply,
it
is
as
follows:
the
issue
of
paper
money
must
not
exceed
in
amount
the
gold
(or
silver
as
the
case
may
be)
which
would
actually
circulate
if
not
replaced
by
symbols.
Now
the
quantity
of
gold
which
the
circulation
can
absorb,
constantly
fluctuates
about
a
given
level.
Still,
the
mass
of
the
circulating
medium
in
a
given
country
never
sinks
below
a
certain
minimum
easily
ascertained
by
actual
experience.
The
fact
that
this
minimum
mass
continually
undergoes
changes
in
its
constituent
parts,
or
that
the
pieces
of
gold
of
which
it
consists
are
being
constantly
replaced
by
fresh
ones,
causes
of
course
no
change
either
in
its
amount
or
in
the
continuity
of
its
circulation.
It
can
therefore
be
replaced
by
paper
symbols.
If,
on
the
other
hand,
all
the
conduits
of
circulation
were
to
day
filled
with
paper
money
to
the
full
extent
of
their
capacity
for
absorbing
money,
they
might
to-morrow
be
overflowing
in
consequence
of
a
fluctuation
in
the
circulation
of
commodities.
There
would
no
longer
be
any
standard.
If
the
paper
money
exceed
its
proper
limit,
which
is
the
amount
in
gold
coins
of
the
like
denomination
that
can
actually
be
current,
it
would,
apart
from
the
danger
of
falling
into
general
disrepute,
represent
only
that
quantity
of
gold,
which,in
accordance
with
the
laws
of
the
circulation
of
commodities,
is
required,
and
is
alone
capable
of
being
represented
by
paper.
If
the
quantity
of
paper
money
issued
be
double
what
it
ought
to
be,
then,
as
a
matter
of
fact,
￡1
would
be
the
money-name
not
of
1\/4
of
an
ounce,
but
of
1\/8
of
an
ounce
of
gold.
The
effect
would
be
the
same
as
if
an
alteration
had
taken
place
in
the
function
of
gold
as
a
standard
of
prices.
Those
values
that
were
previously
expressed
by
the
price
of￡1
would
now
be
expressed
by
the
price
of
￡2.
精選分類
