[PEN-L:3101] Re: Aztecs

["Charles Brown" <CharlesB@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Jim,

I always thought ( after Marx , Chapter 1, Vol. 1 of _Capital_) that technically money only exists in commodity exchange ?

There is a large anthropological literature on primary cultural gift exchange, reciprocity, etc. as different than commodity exchange ( no expectation of repayment, symbolically rather than accountingly constituted etc.). See _Stone Age Economics_ by Marshall Sahlins; 'Essai sur le don' by Marcel Mauss.

I too recall reading Murra in my archeology class on Peru in about 1970.

Charles


>>> Jim Devine <jdevine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 02/09 11:51 AM >>
I don't see why wampum isn't money. It fits the usual definitions. The
difference is that the wampum functioned in social systems mostly oriented
toward producing use-values (C-M-C) whereas what we call money operates in
a social system oriented toward producing exchange-value (M-C-M) or
surplus-value (M-C-M', with M' > M). In different social systems, money
functions differently.

BTW, J.V. Murra (who Louis cites) was one of my anthro. profs. more than 25
years ago.

Jim Devine jdevine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx &
http://clawww.lmu.edu/Faculty/JDevine/jdevine.html