econ

"Ancient tally sticks across three civilizations challenge myths about money"

Scoresby

> orthodox assertion that financial money is primarily a medium of exchange

Money is pretty much always a market good at the same time, the way we think of money.

There are multiple ways to think of money that are valid, but if its just a ledger of what you owe the government, and cannot be transferred to someone else or traded for something you want, the tally sticks are basically counting obligations only.

> For Rosenswig, this is also a reminder of anthropology's role in public debate. "Studying the past reminds us that money is not timeless or universal in form," he said. "It is a political tool, and how we choose to use it today is a matter of policy, not natural law."

This is a really statist view of money. Money should be (somewhat) timeless and universal otherwise it's bad money. I can write unidirectional IOUs and try to force people to use/honor them but that's unlikely in the long term. 