1
00:00:05,760 --> 00:00:14,430
I'm Andrew Edwards, and I'd like to actually I'd like to think this was actually in my speech, so, you know, I'd like to thank Claire Phillips.

2
00:00:14,430 --> 00:00:21,990
Chris, Jeremy, Becky, you are. And everyone else for helping bring this group together and all of you for assembling

3
00:00:21,990 --> 00:00:26,730
to discuss the conjuncture and disjuncture is marking the dawn of the modern era.

4
00:00:26,730 --> 00:00:34,890
So I'm an American, mostly by training. But at Oxford, I've been working in conversation with Chris,

5
00:00:34,890 --> 00:00:39,180
with Peter and other colleagues in the Global History of Capitalism Project and

6
00:00:39,180 --> 00:00:43,440
the political economy and Culture and Global History Workshop now workshop,

7
00:00:43,440 --> 00:00:52,380
I hope, on the historical construction of capitalism's basic categories, like the subject of my talk today, the commodity.

8
00:00:52,380 --> 00:01:00,780
So my talk is entitled The Spaces In Between What is global about the history of Capitalism notes towards the history of the commodity.

9
00:01:00,780 --> 00:01:07,350
So the history of the commodity, as we all know, is a history of goods for sale now, more particularly in recent work.

10
00:01:07,350 --> 00:01:16,230
And it's been the history of goods intended for mass consumption at their best histories of goods from textiles to uncover the human relations.

11
00:01:16,230 --> 00:01:25,980
The seemingly impersonal flows of commodities conceal tracking them from the point of production through processing, marketing and sales.

12
00:01:25,980 --> 00:01:34,440
These histories remind us the commodities do not act for themselves, even if they sometimes seem to and exposing these relations.

13
00:01:34,440 --> 00:01:40,890
Historians are fighting against a persistent myth the idea of all commodities as the impersonal

14
00:01:40,890 --> 00:01:47,490
embodiments of what of an Adam Smith's terms later appropriated by David Ricardo and Karl Marx,

15
00:01:47,490 --> 00:01:52,500
value in use and value in exchange, or more simply,

16
00:01:52,500 --> 00:02:00,390
a good with a price like these above the trading pits in the old Chicago Board of Trade circa 1948,

17
00:02:00,390 --> 00:02:04,950
or more closely related to today's talk and our location.

18
00:02:04,950 --> 00:02:13,530
The prices of large oxen in London's Smithfield Market in August 17, 07.

19
00:02:13,530 --> 00:02:18,690
So at the same time, historians wrestle with the fact from the perspective of economic history,

20
00:02:18,690 --> 00:02:27,840
as recently argued by Kevin O'Rourke that commodities and their simplified form offer a window on global history with few viable alternatives,

21
00:02:27,840 --> 00:02:34,740
providing the basis for studies showing how prices converge as global market links become more efficient, for example,

22
00:02:34,740 --> 00:02:41,970
as well as a means to establish and compare the purchasing power of workers daily wages historically on a global scale.

23
00:02:41,970 --> 00:02:45,900
But a historian, like any labour perhaps is no better than their tools,

24
00:02:45,900 --> 00:02:51,990
and if these tools are concepts like the commodity, they should not pass unexamined.

25
00:02:51,990 --> 00:02:58,470
We must consider that what many historians view a material culture view as the myth of the commodity.

26
00:02:58,470 --> 00:03:07,140
It's in personality stripped of extra economic values and associations like all myths, perhaps has a basis in history.

27
00:03:07,140 --> 00:03:12,810
So today I want to consider the possibilities for exploring the history of the commodity as a category in capitalism that has

28
00:03:12,810 --> 00:03:20,460
changed over time and link that examination with an appraisal of the significance of the global and the history of capitalism.

29
00:03:20,460 --> 00:03:23,130
So in order to tell that history, we need to reimagine.

30
00:03:23,130 --> 00:03:32,730
I would argue the commodity itself, considering it as an object what Loraine Das and has called historical epistemology less US goods themselves.

31
00:03:32,730 --> 00:03:36,240
Then as a way of interpreting and understanding goods.

32
00:03:36,240 --> 00:03:46,650
That way, I will argue a route arose out of what I'll refer to referred to in my title as the spaces in between global encounters and exchange.

33
00:03:46,650 --> 00:03:51,870
So the Anglo-American specificity of my account is deliberate, but I hope not fatal.

34
00:03:51,870 --> 00:03:57,630
The primary danger of Euro centrism is, Cedric Robinson has argued, is to mistake for universal verities,

35
00:03:57,630 --> 00:04:04,860
the structures and dynamics of Europe's own distant and more immediate pasts that I hope to have avoided here.

36
00:04:04,860 --> 00:04:08,700
The goal is to contribute in Marshall songs his words to a global history of capitalism,

37
00:04:08,700 --> 00:04:14,910
attesting to the authenticity of other modes of existence, in part by any naturalised in our own.

38
00:04:14,910 --> 00:04:21,750
So today I want to do two three things. First, I want to present the notion of the commodity as a way of knowing by showing it in action.

39
00:04:21,750 --> 00:04:24,840
In 17th century Britain and its Atlantic periphery,

40
00:04:24,840 --> 00:04:30,840
suggesting that this peripheral global experience was crucial to the commodities epistemological development.

41
00:04:30,840 --> 00:04:36,780
Second, I want to suggest how the commodity transformed after being embedded in British political economy

42
00:04:36,780 --> 00:04:42,600
and emerging by the 18th century as a kind of moral economy of knowing within the British Empire.

43
00:04:42,600 --> 00:04:51,180
And finally, I want to suggest the significance of a historical epistemology of the commodity for new approaches to the global history of capitalism.

44
00:04:51,180 --> 00:04:59,720
So first, to return to the coin. As literary theorist of long known, the notion of the commodity was in flux in early modern Britain, slipping as.

45
00:04:59,720 --> 00:05:08,480
Douglas Brewster has observed between two different meanings. One is something like a convenience or a comfort.

46
00:05:08,480 --> 00:05:13,290
And another as an exchangeable goods are wares.

47
00:05:13,290 --> 00:05:17,990
So these are both from Shakespeare, from the flux itself is less interesting, perhaps,

48
00:05:17,990 --> 00:05:25,670
than the way it reveals how the commodity as a way of knowing had emerged as a way of critiquing non-commercial cultural values,

49
00:05:25,670 --> 00:05:33,920
serving as a means to familiarise them to ironic effect so we can see this poetic lindsay in effect of the commodity, for example here.

50
00:05:33,920 --> 00:05:37,280
And Henry, the fourth part one and all's well that ends well, the joke.

51
00:05:37,280 --> 00:05:44,840
Or anyway, the play and these lines so fast off the Hound Paroles to Helena comes out of the way they deploy

52
00:05:44,840 --> 00:05:52,980
commodity and its dynamic economic sense as a means to familiarise reputation on the one hand,

53
00:05:52,980 --> 00:06:00,530
so I would to God Darwin, I knew where a commodity of good names were to be bought and virginity the commodity that

54
00:06:00,530 --> 00:06:07,700
will lose its gloss and line on the other by equating them with goods to be bought and sold,

55
00:06:07,700 --> 00:06:13,080
things that are bendable and pearls words. So in Shakespeare, the use is reflexive.

56
00:06:13,080 --> 00:06:14,690
Its internals poetic,

57
00:06:14,690 --> 00:06:22,490
a kind of auto critique of the cultural valuation as part of what Raymond Williams might have called Britain's early modern structure of feeling.

58
00:06:22,490 --> 00:06:30,050
But with Empire, the expansion of settler colonialism in the Americas, the trade to Africa, Asia and the Middle East, the same process,

59
00:06:30,050 --> 00:06:36,680
the same sort of way of seeing turned outward as Europeans began to interact more directly with regimes of value

60
00:06:36,680 --> 00:06:45,050
other than their own and began to take in the commodity began to take on a more specific cross-cultural form.

61
00:06:45,050 --> 00:06:47,480
So let me give you an example of what I mean.

62
00:06:47,480 --> 00:06:55,400
In Sixteen Twenty Seven, William Bradford, so then-Governor of Plymouth Colony in what is now southeastern Massachusetts,

63
00:06:55,400 --> 00:07:02,390
discovered that the beads made from the tubular heart of boozy con whelks and the Quahog Clam Mercenary,

64
00:07:02,390 --> 00:07:12,020
a mercenary, discovered that they were a commodity. Let me, according to Bradford, the discovered happened like this.

65
00:07:12,020 --> 00:07:13,070
These, by the way, are the shells.

66
00:07:13,070 --> 00:07:22,760
Obviously on the left is the wealth and then in the middle, as a mercenary mercenary of be the purple one on the right.

67
00:07:22,760 --> 00:07:29,300
So according to Bradford, the discovery happened like this. Bradford had seen some of the beads before on some quote stations and special

68
00:07:29,300 --> 00:07:33,350
persons that were a little bit for ornament but had not known what they were.

69
00:07:33,350 --> 00:07:40,630
So here's actually eighteenth century Mohawk leader Joseph Brent draughted draped in similar beads to give you an idea of what he was seen.

70
00:07:40,630 --> 00:07:44,240
Well, this is obviously a hundred years or a hundred and fifty years later.

71
00:07:44,240 --> 00:07:50,030
So in the fall of sixteen twenty seven, Isaac there as year, an official dispatched the year before by dust with dust,

72
00:07:50,030 --> 00:07:58,700
which West India Company came to Plymouth and part in order to inform him of the beads potential.

73
00:07:58,700 --> 00:08:06,920
This is the Living Museum of Plymouth today. You can see on the horizon the container ship perhaps a harbinger of things to come.

74
00:08:06,920 --> 00:08:15,410
Yeah, the most interesting consequence of Fraser's visit visit, Bradford recalled, was a quote entrance into the trade of Wampum Peak.

75
00:08:15,410 --> 00:08:19,460
This entrance took the form of a sales pitch in which Rangers tried to convince

76
00:08:19,460 --> 00:08:23,900
Bradford that the beads which he had brought with him were a commodity.

77
00:08:23,900 --> 00:08:30,080
Razors, in effect, asked Bradford to apply the same creative lens Shakespeare deployed on reputation,

78
00:08:30,080 --> 00:08:36,920
and Henry the fourth part one to see something of evident cultural value in terms of its commercial value.

79
00:08:36,920 --> 00:08:38,450
The pitch had two parts.

80
00:08:38,450 --> 00:08:45,650
Both were attempts to get Bradford to see the beads differently and both crucial for understanding the development of the commodity.

81
00:08:45,650 --> 00:08:50,120
First Eyes told Bradford that the beads were bendable,

82
00:08:50,120 --> 00:08:54,740
emphasising how incredibly attractive they were in the first trade with the powerful five nations of the Iroquois.

83
00:08:54,740 --> 00:09:02,030
The Dutch settlement of Port Orange, Modern Day Albany, New York and second razors attempted to convince Bradford how attractive the

84
00:09:02,030 --> 00:09:06,200
beads would be to the Algonquin speaking peoples along the Kennebec River,

85
00:09:06,200 --> 00:09:11,540
hundreds of miles to the East. This was a difficult sell, but Ratio's was persuasive.

86
00:09:11,540 --> 00:09:21,380
He succeeded in offloading 50 pounds sterling worth of the beads, which indeed grew in Bradford's formulation to be a commodity.

87
00:09:21,380 --> 00:09:25,430
As soon as coastal peoples began trading the beads into the Algonquin interior,

88
00:09:25,430 --> 00:09:31,910
English trade transformed because the shells had been confirmed as a commodity bendable across cultural lines,

89
00:09:31,910 --> 00:09:40,370
making it seem as if the shells had value inherent in themselves independent of local cultural variables.

90
00:09:40,370 --> 00:09:44,810
Paradoxically, this meant then when it came to establishing the beads commercial value,

91
00:09:44,810 --> 00:09:53,000
the discrete cultural practises that made the beads valuable in any one place were irrelevant, perhaps even misleading.

92
00:09:53,000 --> 00:09:58,700
Indeed, the colonists themselves who went into the shell trade in a massive way and one Iroquois on site alone,

93
00:09:58,700 --> 00:10:07,040
archaeologists have uncovered a quarter million of the beads they constantly mistook the source of the value of going to wampum as the beads.

94
00:10:07,040 --> 00:10:12,830
It's going to be called as the money of the Native American Northeast when their primary purpose,

95
00:10:12,830 --> 00:10:17,540
in fact, was as a means of ritual inter-regional communication.

96
00:10:17,540 --> 00:10:23,390
In fact, it might be more accurate in light of anthropologist Keith Hart's recent work on money is

97
00:10:23,390 --> 00:10:31,320
fundamentally a medium of global communication to call money the wampum of the 21st century.

98
00:10:31,320 --> 00:10:33,630
But mistaking wampum for money was a feature,

99
00:10:33,630 --> 00:10:42,030
not a bug of the commodity as a way of knowing cultural particularities only obscured the value that arose the places in between.

100
00:10:42,030 --> 00:10:46,620
Simultaneously, though, as we see in this quote from Bradford's memoirs,

101
00:10:46,620 --> 00:10:51,240
Native Americans soon realised with the significance that their transplanted neighbours new way of

102
00:10:51,240 --> 00:10:58,620
understanding the Bede's value was going into manufacturing for themselves and driving hard bargains for guns,

103
00:10:58,620 --> 00:11:02,040
powder and shot that Bradford resented.

104
00:11:02,040 --> 00:11:09,330
They played on the significance of the beads as a commodity and Bradford Sense and within a few years as money as well,

105
00:11:09,330 --> 00:11:16,980
after the Dutch and English made wampum a legal tender. And that should alert us to another aspect of the recognitions at play here.

106
00:11:16,980 --> 00:11:23,340
Those from the perspective of people encountering Europeans to the Narragansett and this quote

107
00:11:23,340 --> 00:11:30,120
the commodity as a way of knowing presented itself as a specifically European cultural practise,

108
00:11:30,120 --> 00:11:35,790
which could be exploited in turn. This is also suggests, then, that commodification has a history.

109
00:11:35,790 --> 00:11:40,080
We're in the process of reducing the commodity as the source as a complex social

110
00:11:40,080 --> 00:11:44,430
object to a good with a price begins not in the act of stripping qualities,

111
00:11:44,430 --> 00:11:51,060
leaving only quantities. But a new way of understanding how particular items moved in cross-cultural exchange on the Senate,

112
00:11:51,060 --> 00:11:55,770
their value rather than within particular cultures and the places between them.

113
00:11:55,770 --> 00:11:57,780
So that brings us to part two.

114
00:11:57,780 --> 00:12:03,840
Bringing it all back home the moral economy of the commodity is a way of knowing the commodity as a way of understanding.

115
00:12:03,840 --> 00:12:10,560
Goods eventually came back doing critical work in the reformation of English political economy of the dawn of the 18th century.

116
00:12:10,560 --> 00:12:18,480
In the course of this work, the commodity is a way of knowing transformed taking on with Lorraine and is referred to as a moral economy of knowledge.

117
00:12:18,480 --> 00:12:24,240
This transformative tension, I think, is especially clear when authors discussed not what a commodity was,

118
00:12:24,240 --> 00:12:30,270
but what it was not tweaking the commodities relatively new definition as an object and trade.

119
00:12:30,270 --> 00:12:36,360
Take, for instance, this very famous passage from Locke, 17, in a 16 95 year.

120
00:12:36,360 --> 00:12:41,430
Locke is arguing that silver value by wheat and fineness was naturally money,

121
00:12:41,430 --> 00:12:47,610
which might be and has been seen as a primary instance of the commodification of money.

122
00:12:47,610 --> 00:12:52,320
Because Locke's definition had the effect of stripping traditional elements of the sovereign

123
00:12:52,320 --> 00:12:58,170
prerogative around money by reducing it to an institution in effect as an object with a price,

124
00:12:58,170 --> 00:13:03,450
establishing it as equivalent with a commodity value of fine silver in international trade.

125
00:13:03,450 --> 00:13:06,240
And yet, as we see here for Locke,

126
00:13:06,240 --> 00:13:14,250
one of the key elements of silver as money was that it was not a commodity or at the very least, not only a commodity.

127
00:13:14,250 --> 00:13:23,610
Like other metals. It could not be strictly a commodity, I suggest, because its value was not located in the spaces in between silver,

128
00:13:23,610 --> 00:13:29,370
from stamped shims to milled coins had been money in Britain for centuries.

129
00:13:29,370 --> 00:13:33,870
Here are some examples a history the LOC did not disavow.

130
00:13:33,870 --> 00:13:39,090
Rather, he used the recognition of the value of silver had elsewhere to assign it a special status.

131
00:13:39,090 --> 00:13:44,730
We might think of this as a moment where the commodity became moralised silver,

132
00:13:44,730 --> 00:13:54,930
and Locke's account is the money of the world and not merely a commodity because its value arises not from nature itself, but from human nature.

133
00:13:54,930 --> 00:14:02,220
Inasmuch as it is, the measure of value for the entire trading world is a marker of human rationality itself.

134
00:14:02,220 --> 00:14:09,750
The implication was that those who felt differently were somewhat less than fully reasonable and perhaps less than fully human.

135
00:14:09,750 --> 00:14:15,450
I want to suggest the effect was to imbue the commodity as a way of knowing with this moral economy,

136
00:14:15,450 --> 00:14:22,470
a basis for a valuation of alternative epistemology and ways of knowing goods and trade because it is seen

137
00:14:22,470 --> 00:14:27,720
to be the only good and correct way to view them and more significantly to the history of capitalism.

138
00:14:27,720 --> 00:14:34,170
It made the commodity as a way of knowing seemed to be the only rational basis for a political economy.

139
00:14:34,170 --> 00:14:39,090
This moral economy has been especially significant to me because of the difficulty of explaining

140
00:14:39,090 --> 00:14:44,110
the cultural logic of British imperial administrators at the end of a seven year war.

141
00:14:44,110 --> 00:14:49,020
I work on the revolutionary period in America, often the transformation of money during that period.

142
00:14:49,020 --> 00:14:55,350
So when confronted for the first time with a truly global empire straddling three continents from Boston to Bengal,

143
00:14:55,350 --> 00:14:59,670
these administrators attempted to establish the fiscal basis for that empire.

144
00:14:59,670 --> 00:15:08,100
The institutions that would ensure profits made it one of the end of the Earth would be Commencer Bowl, with profits made as the other.

145
00:15:08,100 --> 00:15:13,740
Their choices in doing so in the 17 sixties and seventies were unambiguously disastrous.

146
00:15:13,740 --> 00:15:18,540
They, at the very least exacerbated a famine that led to the death or migration of some 10

147
00:15:18,540 --> 00:15:22,770
million people in North India and through the imposition of taxes paid in silver that,

148
00:15:22,770 --> 00:15:26,700
in the final estimation, were impossible to pay in the American Revolution.

149
00:15:26,700 --> 00:15:30,640
But in my recent work, I've attempted to explain these decisions functionally.

150
00:15:30,640 --> 00:15:36,490
To show how the decision to form an empire around a silver standard was not simply a continuity of Locke's analysis,

151
00:15:36,490 --> 00:15:42,070
but also a reasoned response to what I and my co-authors describe as China's early modern

152
00:15:42,070 --> 00:15:47,600
global monetary hegemony that made silver valued by wait and find this the money of the world.

153
00:15:47,600 --> 00:15:55,360
But that analysis was useful as an explanation of much of the available evidence does not account for something I have found harder to explain.

154
00:15:55,360 --> 00:15:59,350
Not simply the sense of necessity surrounding the imperial fiscal system,

155
00:15:59,350 --> 00:16:06,970
but the evident distaste verging on disgust imperial administrators had for alternatives.

156
00:16:06,970 --> 00:16:11,410
The monetary component of the system of imperial form forwarded by George Greenville's administration,

157
00:16:11,410 --> 00:16:21,340
for instance, had its roots in a March 1764 memo authored by the Earl of Hillsborough for King George the third.

158
00:16:21,340 --> 00:16:25,510
The memo, while it was arguably part of the process of imperial reform,

159
00:16:25,510 --> 00:16:32,500
made no mention of the larger picture of India of China, the world Britain was trying to reduce to a system.

160
00:16:32,500 --> 00:16:38,080
Rather, Hillsborough accused the Americans rather bizarrely with fraud for Hillsborough.

161
00:16:38,080 --> 00:16:46,720
The American monetary system was not simply undesirable. It was strange and deceitful, its nature founded in fraud and injustice.

162
00:16:46,720 --> 00:16:52,720
At the same time, however, this fraud was based on a misunderstanding on the part of the Americans regarding the nature of money,

163
00:16:52,720 --> 00:16:59,500
which we can sort of see here that that American money was not simply his.

164
00:16:59,500 --> 00:17:03,880
He said the Americans were wrong because they believed that money was simply a measure.

165
00:17:03,880 --> 00:17:06,550
And here we see a direct lot echo of Locke's language.

166
00:17:06,550 --> 00:17:12,550
While money was not simply a measure, it was also an equivalent, which is to say, as Hillsborough went on to explain.

167
00:17:12,550 --> 00:17:17,800
Money must be the equivalent of gold or silver or other valuable commodities.

168
00:17:17,800 --> 00:17:22,420
The measure argument was a reference to the intellectual foundation of American bills of credit,

169
00:17:22,420 --> 00:17:26,590
which were organised ultimately around a non commodity concept of money a happy concept.

170
00:17:26,590 --> 00:17:30,220
I'd be happy to go into further in our discussion. However, as you can see,

171
00:17:30,220 --> 00:17:36,190
Hillsborough jumps immediately from this intellectual assault to a kind of exasperation with

172
00:17:36,190 --> 00:17:41,980
the idea that Americans would designate paper as something of universal intrinsic value.

173
00:17:41,980 --> 00:17:48,430
For one perspective, this makes very little sense if Americans think of money as something other than an equivalent.

174
00:17:48,430 --> 00:17:51,700
Then why would they be concerned with a physical material value of their bills?

175
00:17:51,700 --> 00:17:58,240
And also is a Hillsborough demonstrating a remarkable ignorance of its own monetary system,

176
00:17:58,240 --> 00:18:02,170
which, as we know, was proliferating paper monies of various sorts?

177
00:18:02,170 --> 00:18:08,680
So bank bills, navy bills, army bills, inland bills of exchange bills, of course, occur at the exact same time.

178
00:18:08,680 --> 00:18:12,670
But if we consider the commodity as a way of knowing and one that had acquired a

179
00:18:12,670 --> 00:18:17,230
morality in the century since William Bradford discovered that wampum was a commodity,

180
00:18:17,230 --> 00:18:27,910
it makes sense. Hillsborough returns repeatedly, as economic historians have done ever since the idea of money American money as paper

181
00:18:27,910 --> 00:18:34,880
because he has difficulty seeing an object and trade as anything other than a commodity.

182
00:18:34,880 --> 00:18:44,180
He has been made aware of the American intellectual, institutional practical justifications of their monetary practises over two months of hearings,

183
00:18:44,180 --> 00:18:54,110
but insists on stripping that away as if the true worth of America's paper money can only ultimately resolve reside in its intrinsic commodity value.

184
00:18:54,110 --> 00:19:04,430
Founded in papers dubious cross-cultural vind ability as an object in trade, anything else, he observes, would be absurd fraudulent.

185
00:19:04,430 --> 00:19:12,170
He might have added immoral because it not partake in the universal way of knowing objects as commodities in the world.

186
00:19:12,170 --> 00:19:19,120
So in closing? When people think of the global history of capitalism, they tend to think of a diffusion story.

187
00:19:19,120 --> 00:19:22,570
That's true whether we consider capitalism as a world system like the late Emmanuel

188
00:19:22,570 --> 00:19:29,020
Wallerstein or as a Congress of practises most closely directed with wage labour.

189
00:19:29,020 --> 00:19:35,050
Both views, though, missed the significance of encounters with non-European parties and cultures in the construction of

190
00:19:35,050 --> 00:19:41,380
capitalism as the basic categories like the commodity and their subsequent projection on the world.

191
00:19:41,380 --> 00:19:50,950
What Peter has suggested calling capitalism's systolic diastolic process after the pumping motion of the heart.

192
00:19:50,950 --> 00:19:54,730
What I would like to propose here as we reconsider the divergence debates,

193
00:19:54,730 --> 00:20:00,070
is that the history of early modern capitalism is instead in large measure, an infusion story.

194
00:20:00,070 --> 00:20:07,840
Capitalism considered institutionally and intellectually in terms of its basic categories and habits of mind as truth claims its epistemology,

195
00:20:07,840 --> 00:20:13,870
its paradoxical claim to be both universal and universal rising was the product of encounters

196
00:20:13,870 --> 00:20:19,240
with the world that were moralise systematised and turned against the other itself.

197
00:20:19,240 --> 00:20:27,730
And at the core of that story and the global history of capitalism is a history of the quantity as a way of knowing centred in the spaces in between.

198
00:20:27,730 --> 00:20:32,760
Thank you.