Ontheotherhand，nochangeinthisproductivenessaffectsthelabourrepresentedbyvalue。Sinceproductivepowerisanattributeoftheconcreteusefulformsoflabour，ofcourseitcannolongerhaveanybearingonthatlabour，sosoonaswemakeabstractionfromthoseconcreteusefulforms。Howeverthenproductivepowermayvary，thesamelabour，exercisedduringequalperiodsoftime，alwaysyieldsequalamountsofvalue。Butitwillyield，duringequalperiodsoftime，differentquantitiesofvaluesinuse;more，iftheproductivepowerrise，fewer，ifitfall。Thesamechangeinproductivepower，whichincreasesthefruitfulnessoflabour，and，inconsequence，thequantityofuse—valuesproducedbythatlabour，willdiminishthetotalvalueofthisincreasedquantityofuse—values，providedsuchchangeshortenthetotallabour—timenecessaryfortheirproduction;andviceversâ。
Ontheonehandalllabouris，speakingphysiologically，anexpenditureofhumanlabour—power，andinitscharacterofidenticalabstracthumanlabour，itcreatesandformsthevalueofcommodities。Ontheotherhand，alllabouristheexpenditureofhumanlabour—powerinaspecialformandwithadefiniteaim，andinthis，itscharacterofconcreteusefullabour，itproducesuse—values。[16]
SECTION3THEFORMOFVALUEOREXCHANGE—VALUE
Commoditiescomeintotheworldintheshapeofuse—values，articles，orgoods，suchasiron，linen，corn，&c。Thisistheirplain，homely，bodilyform。Theyare，however，commodities，onlybecausetheyaresomethingtwo—fold，bothobjectsofutility，and，atthesametime，depositoriesofvalue。Theymanifestthemselvesthereforeascommodities，orhavetheformofcommodities，onlyinsofarastheyhavetwoforms，aphysicalornaturalform，andavalue—form。
TherealityofthevalueofcommoditiesdiffersinthisrespectfromDameQuickly，thatwedon’tknow"wheretohaveit。"Thevalueofcommoditiesistheveryoppositeofthecoarsematerialityoftheirsubstance，notanatomofmatterentersintoitscomposition。Turnandexamineasinglecommodity，byitself，aswewill，yetinsofarasitremainsanobjectofvalue，itseemsimpossibletograspit。If，howeverwebearinmindthatthevalueofcommoditieshasapurelysocialreality，andthattheyacquirethisrealityonlyinsofarastheyareexpressionsorembodimentsofoneidenticalsocialsubstance，viz。，humanlabour，itfollowsasamatterofcourse，thatvaluecanonlymanifestitselfinthesocialrelationofcommoditytocommodity。Infactwestartedfromexchange—value，ortheexchangerelationofcommodities，inordertogetatthevaluethatlieshiddenbehindit。Wemustnowreturntothisformunderwhichvaluefirstappearedtous。
Everyoneknows，ifheknowsnothingelse，thatcommoditieshaveavalue—formcommontothemall，andpresentingamarkedcontrastwiththevariedbodilyformsoftheiruse—values。Imeantheirmoney—form。Here，however，ataskissetus，theperformanceofwhichhasneveryetevenbeenattemptedbybourgeoiseconomy，thetaskoftracingthegenesisofthismoney—form，ofdevelopingtheexpressionofvalueimpliedinthevalue—relationofcommodities，fromitssimplest，almostimperceptibleoutline，tothedazzlingmoney—form。Bydoingthisweshall，atthesametime，solvetheriddlepresentedbymoney。
Thesimplestvalue—relationisevidentlythatofonecommoditytosomeoneothercommodityofadifferentkind。Hencetherelationbetweenthevaluesoftwocommoditiessuppliesuswiththesimplestexpressionofthevalueofasinglecommodity。
A。ElementaryorAccidentalFormOfValuexcommodityA=ycommodityB，orxcommodityAisworthycommodityB。
20yardsoflinen=1coat，or20Yardsoflinenareworth1coat。
1。Thetwopolesoftheexpressionofvalue。RelativeformandEquivalentformThewholemysteryoftheformofvaluelieshiddeninthiselementaryform。
Itsanalysis，therefore，isourrealdifficulty。
Heretwodifferentkindsofcommodities（inourexamplethelinenandthecoat），evidentlyplaytwodifferentparts。Thelinenexpressesitsvalueinthecoat;thecoatservesasthematerialinwhichthatvalueisexpressed。Theformerplaysanactive，thelatterapassive，part。Thevalueofthelinenisrepresentedasrelativevalue，orappearsinrelativeform。Thecoatofficiatesasequivalent，orappearsinequivalentform。
Therelativeformandtheequivalentformaretwointimatelyconnected，mutuallydependentandinseparableelementsoftheexpressionofvalue;
but，atthesametime，aremutuallyexclusive，antagonisticextremes？i。e。，polesofthesameexpression。Theyareallottedrespectivelytothetwodifferentcommoditiesbroughtintorelationbythatexpression。
Itisnotpossibletoexpressthevalueoflineninlinen。20yardsoflinen=20yardsoflinenisnoexpressionofvalue。Onthecontrary，suchanequationmerelysaysthat20yardsoflinenarenothingelsethan20
yardsoflinen，adefinitequantityoftheuse—valuelinen。Thevalueofthelinencanthereforebeexpressedonlyrelatively？i。e。，insomeothercommodity。Therelativeformofthevalueofthelinenpre—supposes，therefore，thepresenceofsomeothercommodity？herethecoat？undertheformofanequivalent。Ontheotherhand，thecommoditythatfiguresastheequivalentcannotatthesametimeassumetherelativeform。Thatsecondcommodityisnottheonewhosevalueisexpressed。Itsfunctionismerelytoserveasthematerialinwhichthevalueofthefirstcommodityisexpressed。
Nodoubt，theexpression20yardsoflinen=1coat，or20yardsoflinenareworth1coat，impliestheoppositerelation。1coat=20yardsoflinen，or1coatisworth20yardsoflinen。But，inthatcase，Imustreversetheequation，inordertoexpressthevalueofthecoatrelatively;
and。sosoonasIdothatthelinenbecomestheequivalentinsteadofthecoat。Asinglecommoditycannot，therefore，simultaneouslyassume，inthesameexpressionofvalue，bothforms。Theverypolarityoftheseformsmakesthemmutuallyexclusive。
Whether，then，acommodityassumestherelativeform，ortheoppositeequivalentform，dependsentirelyuponitsaccidentalpositionintheexpressionofvalue？thatis，uponwhetheritisthecommoditywhosevalueisbeingexpressedorthecommodityinwhichvalueisbeingexpressed。
2。TheRelativeFormofvalue（a。）ThenatureandimportofthisformInordertodiscoverhowtheelementaryexpressionofthevalueofacommoditylieshiddeninthevalue—relationoftwocommodities，wemust，inthefirstplace，considerthelatterentirelyapartfromitsquantitativeaspect。Theusualmodeofprocedureisgenerallythereverse，andinthevalue—relationnothingisseenbuttheproportionbetweendefinitequantitiesoftwodifferentsortsofcommoditiesthatareconsideredequaltoeachother。Itisapttobeforgottenthatthemagnitudesofdifferentthingscanbecomparedquantitatively，onlywhenthosemagnitudesareexpressedintermsofthesameunit。Itisonlyasexpressionsofsuchaunitthattheyareofthesamedenomination，andthereforecommensurable。[17]
Whether20yardsoflinen=1coator=20coatsor=xcoats—thatis，whetheragivenquantityoflinenisworthfewormanycoats，everysuchstatementimpliesthatthelinenandcoats，asmagnitudesofvalue，areexpressionsofthesameunit，thingsofthesamekind。Linen=coatisthebasisoftheequation。
Butthetwocommoditieswhoseidentityofqualityisthusassumed，donotplaythesamepart。Itisonlythevalueofthelinenthatisexpressed。
Andhow？Byitsreferencetothecoatasitsequivalent，assomethingthatcanbeexchangedforit。Inthisrelationthecoatisthemodeofexistenceofvalue，isvalueembodied，foronlyassuchisitthesameasthelinen。
Ontheotherhand，thelinen’sownvaluecomestothefront，receivesindependentexpression，foritisonlyasbeingvaluethatitiscomparablewiththecoatasathingofequalvalue，orexchangeablewiththecoat。Toborrowanillustrationfromchemistry，butyricacidisadifferentsubstancefrompropylformate。Yetbotharemadeupofthesamechemicalsubstances，carbon（C），hydrogen（H），andoxygen（O），andthat，too，inlikeproportions？
namely，C4H8O2。Ifnowweequatebutyricacidtopropylformate，then，inthefirstplace，propylformatewouldbe，inthisrelation，merelyaformofexistenceofC4H8O2;andinthesecondplace，weshouldbestatingthatbutyricacidalsoconsistsofC4H8O2。Therefore，bythusequatingthetwosubstances，expressionwouldbegiventotheirchemicalcomposition，whiletheirdifferentphysicalformswouldbeneglected。
Ifwesaythat，asvalues，commoditiesaremerecongelationsofhumanlabour，wereducethembyouranalysis，itistrue，totheabstraction，value;butweascribetothisvaluenoformapartfromtheirbodilyform。
Itisotherwiseinthevalue—relationofonecommoditytoanother。Here，theonestandsforthinitscharacterofvaluebyreasonofitsrelationtotheother。
Bymakingthecoattheequivalentofthelinen，weequatethelabourembodiedintheformertothatinthelatter。Now，itistruethatthetailoring，whichmakesthecoat，isconcretelabourofadifferentsortfromtheweavingwhichmakesthelinen。Buttheactofequatingittotheweaving，reducesthetailoringtothatwhichisreallyequalinthetwokindsoflabour，totheircommoncharacterofhumanlabour。Inthisroundaboutway，then，thefactisexpressed，thatweavingalso，insofarasitweavesvalue，hasnothingtodistinguishitfromtailoring，and，consequently，isabstracthumanlabour。Itistheexpressionofequivalencebetweendifferentsortsofcommoditiesthatalonebringsintoreliefthespecificcharacterofvalue—creatinglabour，andthisitdoesbyactuallyreducingthedifferentvarietiesoflabourembodiedinthedifferentkindsofcommoditiestotheircommonqualityofhumanlabourintheabstract。[18]
Thereis，however，somethingelserequiredbeyondtheexpressionofthespecificcharacterofthelabourofwhichthevalueofthelinenconsists。
Humanlabour—powerinmotion，orhumanlabour，createsvalue，butisnotitselfvalue。Itbecomesvalueonlyinitscongealedstate，whenembodiedintheformofsomeobject。Inordertoexpressthevalueofthelinenasacongelationofhumanlabour，thatvaluemustbeexpressedashavingobjectiveexistence，asbeingasomethingmateriallydifferentfromthelinenitself，andyetasomethingcommontothelinenandallothercommodities。
Theproblemisalreadysolved。
Whenoccupyingthepositionofequivalentintheequationofvalue，thecoatranksqualitativelyastheequalofthelinen，assomethingofthesamekind，becauseitisvalue。Inthispositionitisathinginwhichweseenothingbutvalue，orwhosepalpablebodilyformrepresentsvalue。
Yetthecoatitself，thebodyofthecommodity，coat，isamereuse—value。
Acoatassuchnomoretellsusitisvalue，thandoesthefirstpieceoflinenwetakeholdof。Thisshowsthatwhenplacedinvalue—relationtothelinen，thecoatsignifiesmorethanwhenoutofthatrelation，justasmanyamanstruttingaboutinagorgeousuniformcountsformorethanwheninmufti。
Intheproductionofthecoat，humanlabour—power，intheshapeoftailoring，musthavebeenactuallyexpended。Humanlabouristhereforeaccumulatedinit。Inthisaspectthecoatisadepositoryofvalue，butthoughworntoathread，itdoesnotletthisfactshowthrough。Andasequivalentofthelineninthevalueequation，itexistsunderthisaspectalone，countsthereforeasembodiedvalue，asabodythatisvalue。A，forinstance，cannotbe"yourmajesty"toB，unlessatthesametimemajestyinB’seyesassumesthebodilyformofA，and，whatismore，witheverynewfatherofthepeople，changesitsfeatures，hair，andmanyotherthingsbesides。
Hence，inthevalueequation，inwhichthecoatistheequivalentofthelinen，thecoatofficiatesastheformofvalue。Thevalueofthecommoditylinenisexpressedbythebodilyformofthecommoditycoat，thevalueofonebytheuse—valueoftheother。Asause—value，thelinenissomethingpalpablydifferentfromthecoat;asvalue，itisthesameasthecoat，andnowhastheappearanceofacoat。Thusthelinenacquiresavalue—formdifferentfromitsphysicalform。Thefactthatitisvalue，ismademanifestbyitsequalitywiththecoat，justasthesheep’snatureofaChristianisshowninhisresemblancetotheLambofGod。
Wesee，then，allthatouranalysisofthevalueofcommoditieshasalreadytoldus，istoldusbythelinenitself，sosoonasitcomesintocommunicationwithanothercommodity，thecoat。Onlyitbetraysitsthoughtsinthatlanguagewithwhichaloneitisfamiliar，thelanguageofcommodities。
Inordertotellusthatitsownvalueiscreatedbylabourinitsabstractcharacterofhumanlabour，itsaysthatthecoat，insofarasitisworthasmuchasthelinen，andthereforeisvalue，consistsofthesamelabourasthelinen。Inordertoinformusthatitssublimerealityasvalueisnotthesameasitsbuckrambody，itsaysthatvaluehastheappearanceofacoat，andconsequentlythatsofarasthelinenisvalue，itandthecoatareaslikeastwopeas。Wemayhereremark，thatthelanguageofcommoditieshas，besidesHebrew，manyothermoreorlesscorrectdialects。
TheGerman"Wertsein，"tobeworth，forinstance，expressesinalessstrikingmannerthantheRomanceverbs"valere，""valer，""valoir，"thattheequatingofcommodityBtocommodityA，iscommodityA’sownmodeofexpressingitsvalue。Parisvautbienunemesse。
Bymeans，therefore，ofthevalue—relationexpressedinourequation，thebodilyformofcommodityBbecomesthevalue—formofcommodityA，orthebodyofcommodityBactsasamirrortothevalueofcommodityA。[19]ByputtingitselfinrelationwithcommodityB，asvalueinpropriapersonâ，asthematterofwhichhumanlabourismadeup，thecommodityAconvertsthevalueinuse，B，intothesubstanceinwhichtoexpressits，A’s，ownvalue。ThevalueofA，thusexpressedintheuse—valueofB，hastakentheformofrelativevalue。
（b。）QuantitativedeterminationofRelativevalueEverycommodity，whosevalueitisintendedtoexpress，isausefulobjectofgivenquantity，as15bushelsofcorn，or100Ibs。ofcoffee。
Andagivenquantityofanycommoditycontainsadefinitequantityofhumanlabour。Thevalue—formmustthereforenotonlyexpressvaluegenerally，butalsovalueindefinitequantity。Therefore，inthevalue—relationofcommodityAtocommodityB，ofthelinentothecoat，notonlyisthelatter，asvalueingeneral，madetheequalinqualityofthelinen，butadefinitequantityofcoat（1coat）ismadetheequivalentofadefinitequantity（20yards）oflinen。
Theequation，20yardsoflinen=1coat，or20yardsoflinenareworthonecoat，impliesthatthesamequantityofvalue—substance（congealedlabour）isembodiedinboth;thatthetwocommoditieshaveeachcostthesameamountoflabourofthesamequantityoflabour—time。Butthelabour—timenecessaryfortheproductionof20yardsoflinenor1coatvarieswitheverychangeintheproductivenessofweavingortailoring。Wehavenowtoconsidertheinfluenceofsuchchangesonthequantitativeaspectoftherelativeexpressionofvalue。
I。Letthevalueofthelinenvary，[20]thatofthecoatremainingconstant。If，sayinconsequenceoftheexhaustionofflax—growingsoil，thelabour—timenecessaryfortheproductionofthelinenbedoubled，thevalueofthelinenwillalsobedoubled。Insteadoftheequation，20yardsoflinen=1coat，weshouldhave20yardsoflinen=2coats，since1coatwouldnowcontainonlyhalfthelabour—timeembodiedin20yardsoflinen。If，ontheotherhand，inconsequence，say，ofimprovedlooms，thislabour—timebereducedbyone—half，thevalueofthelinenwouldfallbyone—half。Consequently，weshouldhave20yardsoflinen=1/2coat。TherelativevalueofcommodityA，i。e。，itsvalueexpressedincommodityB，risesandfallsdirectlyasthevalueofA，thevalueofBbeingsupposedconstant。
II。Letthevalueofthelinenremainconstant，whilethevalueofthecoatvaries。If，underthesecircumstances，inconsequence，forinstance，ofapoorcropofwool，thelabour—timenecessaryfortheproductionofacoatbecomesdoubled，wehaveinsteadof20yardsoflinen=1coat，20yardsoflinen=1/2coat。If，ontheotherhand，thevalueofthecoatsinksbyone—half，then20yardsoflinen=2coats。Hence，ifthevalueofcommodityAremainconstant，itsrelativevalueexpressedincommodityBrisesandfallsinverselyasthevalueofB。
IfwecomparethedifferentcasesinI。andII。，weseethatthesamechangeofmagnitudeinrelativevaluemayarisefromtotallyoppositecauses。
Thus，theequation，20yardsoflinen=1coat，becomes20yardsoflinen=2coats，either，becausethevalueofthelinenhasdoubled，orbecausethevalueofthecoathasfallenbyone—half;anditbecomes20yardsoflinen=1/2coat，either，becausethevalueofthelinenhasfallenbyone—half，orbecausethevalueofthecoathasdoubled。
III。Letthequantitiesoflabour—timerespectivelynecessaryfortheproductionofthelinenandthecoatvarysimultaneouslyinthesamedirectionandinthesameproportion。Inthiscase20yardsoflinencontinueequalto1coat，howevermuchtheirvaluesmayhavealtered。
Theirchangeofvalueisseenassoonastheyarecomparedwithathirdcommodity，whosevaluehasremainedconstant。Ifthevaluesofallcommoditiesroseorfellsimultaneously，andinthesameproportion，theirrelativevalueswouldremainunaltered。Theirrealchangeofvaluewouldappearfromthediminishedorincreasedquantityofcommoditiesproducedinagiventime。
IV。Thelabour—timerespectivelynecessaryfortheproductionofthelinenandthecoat，andthereforethevalueofthesecommoditiesmaysimultaneouslyvaryinthesamedirection，butatunequalratesorinoppositedirections，orinotherways。Theeffectofallthesepossibledifferentvariations，ontherelativevalueofacommodity，maybededucedfromtheresultsofI。，II。，andIII。
Thusrealchangesinthemagnitudeofvalueareneitherunequivocallynorexhaustivelyreflectedintheirrelativeexpression，thatis，intheequationexpressingthemagnitudeofrelativevalue。Therelativevalueofacommoditymayvary，althoughitsvalueremainsconstant。Itsrelativevaluemayremainconstant，althoughitsvaluevaries;andfinally，simultaneousvariationsinthemagnitudeofvalueandinthatofitsrelativeexpressionbynomeansnecessarilycorrespondinamount。[21]
3。TheEquivalentformofvalueWehaveseenthatcommodityA（thelinen），byexpressingitsvalueintheuse—valueofacommoditydifferinginkind（thecoat），atthesametimeimpressesuponthelatteraspecificformofvalue，namelythatoftheequivalent。Thecommoditylinenmanifestsitsqualityofhavingavaluebythefactthatthecoat，withouthavingassumedavalue—formdifferentfromitsbodilyform，isequatedtothelinen。Thefactthatthelatterthereforehasavalueisexpressedbysayingthatthecoatisdirectlyexchangeablewithit。Therefore，whenwesaythatacommodityisintheequivalentform，weexpressthefactthatitisdirectlyexchangeablewithothercommodities。
Whenonecommodity，suchasacoat，servesastheequivalentofanother，suchaslinen，andcoatsconsequentlyacquirethecharacteristicpropertyofbeingdirectlyexchangeablewithlinen，wearefarfromknowinginwhatproportionthetwoareexchangeable。Thevalueofthelinenbeinggiveninmagnitude，thatproportiondependsonthevalueofthecoat。Whetherthecoatservesastheequivalentandthelinenasrelativevalue，orthelinenastheequivalentandthecoatasrelativevalue，themagnitudeofthecoat’svalueisdetermined，independentlyofitsvalue—form，bythelabour—timenecessaryforitsproduction。Butwheneverthecoatassumesintheequationofvalue，thepositionofequivalent，itsvalueacquiresnoquantitativeexpression;onthecontrary，thecommoditycoatnowfiguresonlyasadefinitequantityofsomearticle。
Forinstance，40yardsoflinenareworth？what？2coats。Becausethecommoditycoathereplaysthepartofequivalent，becausetheuse—valuecoat，asopposedtothelinen，figuresasanembodimentofvalue，thereforeadefinitenumberofcoatssufficestoexpressthedefinitequantityofvalueinthelinen。Twocoatsmaythereforeexpressthequantityofvalueof40yardsoflinen，buttheycanneverexpressthequantityoftheirownvalue。Asuperficialobservationofthisfact，namely，thatintheequationofvalue，theequivalentfiguresexclusivelyasasimplequantityofsomearticle，ofsomeuse—value，hasmisledBailey，asalsomanyothers，bothbeforeandafterhim，intoseeing，intheexpressionofvalue，merelyaquantitativerelation。Thetruthbeing，thatwhenacommodityactsasequivalent，noquantitativedeterminationofitsvalueisexpressed。
Thefirstpeculiaritythatstrikesus，inconsideringtheformoftheequivalent，isthis:use—valuebecomestheformofmanifestation，thephenomenalformofitsopposite，value。
Thebodilyformofthecommoditybecomesitsvalue—form。But，markwell，thatthisquidproquoexistsinthecaseofanycommodityB，onlywhensomeothercommodityAentersintoavalue—relationwithit，andthenonlywithinthelimitsofthisrelation。Sincenocommoditycanstandintherelationofequivalenttoitself，andthusturnitsownbodilyshapeintotheexpressionofitsownvalue，everycommodityiscompelledtochoosesomeothercommodityforitsequivalent，andtoaccepttheuse—value，thatistosay，thebodilyshapeofthatothercommodityastheformofitsownvalue。
Oneofthemeasuresthatweapplytocommoditiesasmaterialsubstances，asuse—values，willservetoillustratethispoint。Asugar—loafbeingabody，isheavy，andthereforehasweight:butwecanneitherseenortouchthisweight。Wethentakevariouspiecesofiron，whoseweighthasbeendeterminedbeforehand。Theiron，asiron，isnomoretheformofmanifestationofweight，thanisthesugar—loaf。Nevertheless，inordertoexpressthesugar—loafassomuchweight，weputitintoaweight—relationwiththeiron。Inthisrelation，theironofficiatesasabodyrepresentingnothingbutweight。Acertainquantityofironthereforeservesasthemeasureoftheweightofthesugar，andrepresents，inrelationtothesugar—loaf，weightembodied，theformofmanifestationofweight。Thispartisplayedbytheirononlywithinthisrelation，intowhichthesugaroranyotherbody，whoseweighthastobedetermined，enterswiththeiron。Weretheynotbothheavy，theycouldnotenterintothisrelation，andtheonecouldthereforenotserveastheexpressionoftheweightoftheother。Whenwethrowbothintothescales，weseeinreality，thatasweighttheyareboththesame，andthat，therefore，whentakeninproperproportions，theyhavethesameweight。Justasthesubstanceiron，asameasureofweight，representsinrelationtothesugar—loafweightalone，so，inourexpressionofvalue，thematerialobject，coat，inrelationtothelinen，representsvaluealone。
Here，however，theanalogyceases。Theiron，intheexpressionoftheweightofthesugar—loaf，representsanaturalpropertycommontobothbodies，namelytheirweight;butthecoat，intheexpressionofvalueofthelinen，representsanon—naturalpropertyofboth，somethingpurelysocial，namely，theirvalue。
Sincetherelativeformofvalueofacommodity？thelinen，forexample？expressesthevalueofthatcommodity，asbeingsomethingwhollydifferentfromitssubstanceandproperties，asbeing，forinstance，coat—like，weseethatthisexpressionitselfindicatesthatsomesocialrelationliesatthebottomofit。Withtheequivalentformitisjustthecontrary。
Theveryessenceofthisformisthatthematerialcommodityitself？thecoat？justasitis，expressesvalue，andisendowedwiththeformofvaluebyNatureitself。Ofcoursethisholdsgoodonlysolongasthevalue—relationexists，inwhichthecoatstandsinthepositionofequivalenttothelibsp;[22]Since，however，thepropertiesofathingarenottheresultofitsrelationstootherthings，butonlymanifestthemselvesinsuchrelations，thecoatseemstobeendowedwithitsequivalentform，itspropertyofbeingdirectlyexchangeable，justasmuchbyNatureasitisendowedwiththepropertyofbeingheavy，orthecapacitytokeepuswarm。Hencetheenigmaticalcharacteroftheequivalentformwhichescapesthenoticeofthebourgeoispoliticaleconomist，untilthisform，completelydeveloped，confrontshimintheshapeofmoney。Hethenseekstoexplainawaythemysticalcharacterofgoldandsilver，bysubstitutingforthemlessdazzlingcommodities，andbyreciting，witheverrenewedsatisfaction，thecatalogueofallpossiblecommoditieswhichatonetimeoranotherhaveplayedthepartofequivalent。
Hehasnottheleastsuspicionthatthemostsimpleexpressionofvalue，suchas20yds。oflinen=1coat，alreadypropoundstheriddleoftheequivalentformforoursolution。
Thebodyofthecommoditythatservesastheequivalent，figuresasthematerialisationofhumanlabourintheabstract，andisatthesametimetheproductofsomespecificallyusefulconcretelabour。Thisconcretelabourbecomes，therefore，themediumforexpressingabstracthumanlabour。
Ifontheonehandthecoatranksasnothingbuttheembodimentofabstracthumanlabour，so，ontheotherhand，thetailoringwhichisactuallyembodiedinit，countsasnothingbuttheformunderwhichthatabstractlabourisrealised。Intheexpressionofvalueofthelinen，theutilityofthetailoringconsists，notinmakingclothes，butinmakinganobject，whichweatoncerecognisetobeValue，andthereforetobeacongelationoflabour，butoflabourindistinguishablefromthatrealisedinthevalueofthelinen。Inordertoactassuchamirrorofvalue，thelabouroftailoringmustreflectnothingbesidesitsownabstractqualityofbeinghumanlabourgenerally。
Intailoring，aswellasinweaving，humanlabour—powerisexpended。
Both，therefore，possessthegeneralpropertyofbeinghumanlabour，andmay，therefore，incertaincases，suchasintheproductionofvalue，havetobeconsideredunderthisaspectalone。Thereisnothingmysteriousinthis。Butintheexpressionofvaluethereisacompleteturnofthetables。
Forinstance，howisthefacttobeexpressedthatweavingcreatesthevalueofthelinen，notbyvirtueofbeingweaving，assuch，butbyreasonofitsgeneralpropertyofbeinghumanlabour？Simplybyopposingtoweavingthatotherparticularformofconcretelabour（inthisinstancetailoring），whichproducestheequivalentoftheproductofweaving。Justasthecoatinitsbodilyformbecameadirectexpressionofvalue，sonowdoestailoring，aconcreteformoflabour，appearasthedirectandpalpableembodimentofhumanlabourgenerally。
Hence，thesecondpeculiarityoftheequivalentformis，thatconcretelabourbecomestheformunderwhichitsopposite，abstracthumanlabour，manifestsitself。
Butbecausethisconcretelabour，tailoringinourcase，ranksas，andisdirectlyidentifiedwith，undifferentiatedhumanlabour，italsoranksasidenticalwithanyothersortoflabour，andthereforewiththatembodiedinthelinen。Consequently，although，likeallothercommodityproducinglabour，itisthelabourofprivateindividuals，yet，atthesametime，itranksaslabourdirectlysocialinitscharacter。Thisisthereasonwhyitresultsinaproductdirectlyexchangeablewithothercommodities。
Wehavethenathirdpeculiarityoftheequivalentform，namely，thatthelabourofprivateindividualstakestheformofitsopposite，labourdirectlysocialinitsform。
Thetwolatterpeculiaritiesoftheequivalentformwillbecomemoreintelligibleifwegobacktothegreatthinkerwhowasthefirsttoanalysesomanyforms，whetherofthought，society，orNature，andamongstthemalsotheformofvalue。ImeanAristotle。
Inthefirstplace，heclearlyenunciatesthatthemoney—formofcommoditiesisonlythefurtherdevelopmentofthesimpleformofvalue—i。e。，oftheexpressionofthevalueofonecommodityinsomeothercommoditytakenatrandom;forhesays:
5beds=1house（clinaipenteantioiciaV）
isnottobedistinguishedfrom5beds=somuchmoney。
（clinaipenteanti……dsonaipenteclinai）
Hefurtherseesthatthevalue—relationwhichgivesrisetothisexpressionmakesitnecessarythatthehouseshouldqualitativelybemadetheequalofthebed，andthat，withoutsuchanequalisation，thesetwoclearlydifferentthingscouldnotbecomparedwitheachotherascommensurablequantities。
"Exchange，"hesays，"cannottakeplacewithoutequality，andequalitynotwithoutcommensurability"。（outisothVmhoushVsnmmetriaV）。Here，however，hecomestoastop，andgivesupthefurtheranalysisoftheformofvalue。"Itis，however，inreality，impossible（thmenounalhqeiaadunaton），thatsuchunlikethingscanbecommensurable"？i。e。，qualitativelyequal。Suchanequalisationcanonlybesomethingforeigntotheirrealnature，consequentlyonly"amakeshiftforpracticalpurposes。"
Aristotletherefore，himself，tellsus，whatbarredthewaytohisfurtheranalysis;itwastheabsenceofanyconceptofvalue。Whatisthatequalsomething，thatcommonsubstance，whichadmitsofthevalueofthebedsbeingexpressedbyahouse？Suchathing，intruth，cannotexist，saysAristotle。Andwhynot？Comparedwiththebeds，thehousedoesrepresentsomethingequaltothem，insofarasitrepresentswhatisreallyequal，bothinthebedsandthehouse。Andthatis？humanlabour。
Therewas，however，animportantfactwhichpreventedAristotlefromseeingthat，toattributevaluetocommodities，ismerelyamodeofexpressingalllabourasequalhumanlabour，andconsequentlyaslabourofequalquality。
Greeksocietywasfoundeduponslavery，andhad，therefore，foritsnaturalbasis，theinequalityofmenandoftheirlabour—powers。Thesecretoftheexpressionofvalue，namely，thatallkindsoflabourareequalandequivalent，because，andsofarastheyarehumanlabouringeneral，cannotbedeciphered，untilthenotionofhumanequalityhasalreadyacquiredthefixityofapopularprejudice。This，however，ispossibleonlyinasocietyinwhichthegreatmassoftheproduceoflabourtakestheformofcommodities，inwhich，consequently，thedominantrelationbetweenmanandman，isthatofownersofcommodities。ThebrilliancyofAristotle’sgeniusisshownbythisalone，thathediscovered，intheexpressionofthevalueofcommodities，arelationofequality。Thepeculiarconditionsofthesocietyinwhichhelived，alonepreventedhimfromdiscoveringwhat，"intruth，"wasatthebottomofthisequality。
4。TheElementaryFormofvalueconsideredasawholeTheelementaryformofvalueofacommodityiscontainedintheequation，expressingitsvalue—relationtoanothercommodityofadifferentkind，orinitsexchange—relationtothe—same。ThevalueofcommodityA，isqualitativelyexpressed，bythefactthatcommodityBisdirectlyexchangeablewithit。
Itsvalueisquantitativelyexpressedbythefact，thatadefinitequantityofBisexchangeablewithadefinitequantityofA。Inotherwords，thevalueofacommodityobtainsindependentanddefiniteexpression，bytakingtheformofexchange—value。When，atthebeginningofthischapter，wesaid，incommonparlance，thatacommodityisbothause—valueandanexchange—value，wewere，accuratelyspeaking，wrong。Acommodityisause—valueorobjectofutility，andavalue。Itmanifestsitselfasthistwo—foldthing，thatitis，assoonasitsvalueassumesanindependentform？viz。，theformofexchange—value。Itneverassumesthisformwhenisolated，butonlywhenplacedinavalueorexchangerelationwithanothercommodityofadifferentkind。Whenonceweknowthis，suchamodeofexpressiondoesnoharm;itsimplyservesasanabbreviation。
第4章