43
Chapter 1
2. The particular Equivalent form
Each commodity, such as, coat, tea, corn, iron, &c., figures in the expression of value of the linen,
as an equivalent, and, consequently, as a thing that is value. The bodily form of each of these
commodities figures now as a particular equivalent form, one out of many. In the same way the
manifold concrete useful kinds of labour, embodied in these different commodities, rank now as
so many different forms of the realisation, or manifestation, of undifferentiated human labour.
3. Defects of the Total or Expanded form of value
In the first place, the relative expression of value is incomplete because the series representing it
is interminable. The chain of which each equation of value is a link, is liable at any moment to be
lengthened by each new kind of commodity that comes into existence and furnishes the material
for a fresh expression of value. In the second place, it is a many-coloured mosaic of disparate and
independent expressions of value. And lastly, if, as must be the case, the relative value of each
commodity in turn, becomes expressed in this expanded form, we get for each of them a relative
value form, different in every case, and consisting of an interminable series of expressions of
value. The defects of the expanded relative value form are reflected in the corresponding
equivalent form. Since the bodily form of each single commodity is one particular equivalent
form amongst numberless others, we have, on the whole, nothing but fragmentary equivalent
forms, each excluding the others. In the same way, also, the special, concrete, useful kind of
labour embodied in each particular equivalent, is presented only as a particular kind of labour,
and therefore not as an exhaustive representative of human labour generally. The latter, indeed,
gains adequate manifestation in the totality of its manifold, particular, concrete forms. But, in that
case, its expression in an infinite series is ever incomplete and deficient in unity.
The expanded relative value form is, however, nothing but the sum of the elementary relative
expressions or equations of the first kind, such as:
20 yards of linen = 1 coat
20 yards of linen = 10 lbs of tea, etc.
Each of these implies the corresponding inverted equation,
1 coat = 20 yards of linen
10 lbs of tea = 20 yards of linen, etc.
In fact, when a person exchanges his linen for many other commodities, and thus expresses its
value in a series of other commodities, it necessarily follows, that the various owners of the latter
exchange them for the linen, and consequently express the value of their various commodities in
one and the same third commodity, the linen. If then, we reverse the series, 20 yards of linen = 1
coat or = 10 lbs of tea, etc., that is to say, if we give expression to the converse relation already
implied in the series, we get,
C. The General Form of Value
1
coat
10
lbs of tea
40
lbs of coffee
1
quarter of corn
2
ounces of gold
½
a ton of iron
x
Commodity A, etc.
= 20 yards of linen
44
Chapter 1
1. The altered character of the form of value
All commodities now express their value (1) in an elementary form, because in a single
commodity; (2) with unity, because in one and the same commodity. This form of value is
elementary and the same for all, therefore general.
The forms A and B were fit only to express the value of a commodity as something distinct from
its use value or material form.
The first form, A, furnishes such equations as the following: – 1 coat = 20 yards of linen, 10 lbs
of tea = ½ a ton of iron. The value of the coat is equated to linen, that of the tea to iron. But to be
equated to linen, and again to iron, is to be as different as are linen and iron. This form, it is plain,
occurs practically only in the first beginning, when the products of labour are converted into
commodities by accidental and occasional exchanges.
The second form, B, distinguishes, in a more adequate manner than the first, the value of a
commodity from its use value, for the value of the coat is there placed in contrast under all
possible shapes with the bodily form of the coat; it is equated to linen, to iron, to tea, in short, to
everything else, only not to itself, the coat. On the other hand, any general expression of value
common to all is directly excluded; for, in the equation of value of each commodity, all other
commodities now appear only under the form of equivalents. 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.
The third and lastly developed form expresses the values of the whole world of commodities in
terms of a single commodity set apart for the purpose, namely, the linen, and thus represents to us
their values by means of their equality with linen. The value of every commodity is now, by
being equated to linen, not only differentiated from its own use value, but from all other use
values generally, and is, by that very fact, expressed as that which is common to all commodities.
By this form, commodities are, for the first time, effectively brought into relation with one
another as values, or made to appear as exchange values.
The two earlier forms either express the value of each commodity in terms of a single commodity
of a different kind, or in a series of many such commodities. In both cases, it is, so to say, the
special business of each single commodity to find an expression for its value, and this it does
without the help of the others. These others, with respect to the former, play the passive parts of
equivalents. The general form of value, C, results from the joint action of the whole world of
commodities, and from that alone. A commodity can acquire a general expression of its value
only by all other commodities, simultaneously with it, expressing their values in the same
equivalent; and every new commodity must follow suit. It thus becomes evident that since the
existence of commodities as values is purely social, this social existence can be expressed by the
totality of their social relations alone, and consequently that the form of their value must be a
socially recognised form.
All commodities being equated to linen now appear not only as qualitatively equal as values
generally, but also as values whose magnitudes are capable of comparison. By expressing the
magnitudes of their values in one and the same material, the linen, those magnitudes are also
compared with each other. For instance, 10 lbs of tea = 20 yards of linen, and 40 lbs of coffee =
20 yards of linen. Therefore, 10 lbs of tea = 40 lbs of coffee. In other words, there is contained in
1 lb of coffee only one-fourth as much substance of value – labour – as is contained in 1 lb of tea.
The general form of relative value, embracing the whole world of commodities, converts the
single commodity that is excluded from the rest, and made to play the part of equivalent – here
the linen – into the universal equivalent. The bodily form of the linen is now the form assumed in