Really enjoying the series by @real_vijay 3rd part is my fav part so far
The 4 evolution stages of any monetary goods:
1. Collectible
2. Store-of-value
3. Medium-of-Exchange
4. Unit-of-Accounthttps://medium.com/@vijayb_24615/the-bullish-case-for-bitcoin-part-3-of-4-2e2c002593f1 …
I think @davidgraeber did consider the trades between antagonistic / distant parties, but his argument is that those trades would not lead the emergence of money, or a sustained trade system involving some sort of common money 
-
-
"All this is not to say that barter never occurs... But it typically occurs between strangers, people who have no moral relations with one another... Still there is no reason to believe such barter would ever lead to the emergence of money."https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/09/david-graeber-on-the-invention-of-money-%E2%80%93-notes-on-sex-adventure-monomaniacal-sociopathy-and-the-true-function-of-economics.html …
-
It's an interesting point but what he's saying is that antagonistic parties always had exactly what each other wanted at the time of trade and deferred trade never happened. I find that highly implausible
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.

I guess part of it has to do with the fact that it's extremely difficult to collect ethnographic evidence in early societies. So most Origins-of-Money theories are conjectures, very hard to say anything conclusive.