Graeber views barter as a historical anomaly. Although he makes exceptions, his main claim is that -- as a rule -- barter is not historically prior to the emergence of money. In fact, he claims, the documented cases of barter always involve some notional money and, in turn, all monetary transactions presuppose the credit form. For him, the historical sequence is credit (debt), then money, and then (occasional) barter.
^^^ CB: But I think he says that Egypt didn't have credit/debt and surely Eqypt had production for exchange.
Surely there was barter in Medieval or feudal manors.
The early neo-lithic didn't have money , but it no doubt had barter.