I think we have great theories in monetary economics about the origin of money why pretty much explains the origin of money and have been accepted worldwide. Yes the theory you are talking about might have striking similarity with the history of money but that does not change the concept that is widely accepted. Anyways, that is an interesting read.
The theories of money you mention cannot be great because 1) they contradict each other, and 2) they do not communicate with biology.
As I mentioned, this theory explains the debate between David Graeber's anthropological narrative on the origins of money (book:
Debt: The first 5000 years) and the classical economic narrative that money originated through barter.
Saying that the concept of money is 'widely accepted' is like saying the same about the concept of God. Yes, people use it with confidence but they don't know what it is or mean different things by it. Science has always served to clear this sort of cultural mysticism; it has done so with God and will do so with money.