2.1 Planteamiento del Problema
2.1.2 Antecedentes teóricos
Marco Polo’s account of his travels to China in the last decades of the thirteenth century50 describes how the Great Khan has paper money made from the bark of mulberry trees, to which Polo attributes the Khan’s great wealth (1958 edn: 147-9).51
Rectangles of different sizes of paper, to denote different denominations, are signed and stamped by the various responsible officials and sealed with the seal of the Great Khan. Forgery would be punished by death, as would refusal to accept it in payment, so that it is in general circulation throughout his empire. Traders and others who, several times a year, voluntarily or compulsorarily, bring precious stones, metals and materials to the Great Khan have their valuables valued by ‘twelve experts’ and then are paid in the paper currency. ‘And all the Khan’s armies are paid with this kind of money.’52
Old notes that are growing torn and frayed ‘are brought to the mint and changed for new and fresh ones at a discount of 3 per cent’. In later chapters Marco Polo mentions in passing
50
We do not here enter the controversy over whether Marco Polo actually reached China or reported other travellers’ tales: http://www.usnews.com/usnews/doubleissue/mysteries/marco.htm (accessed 31.08.2011)
51
Latham’s edition has consolidated Marco Polo’s original 234 chapters of about a couple of pages each into 9 chapters. This account appears in Chapter 3 ‘Kubilai Khan’ (sic), which comprises chapters 76-105 of the original. Hence Temple’s (2007: 133) comment that Marco Polo devotes a whole chapter to the subject. Latham notes (p.147, fn.) that part of the description only appears in the ‘R’ manuscript, and that: ‘This account of Chinese paper money, apart from its general economic misconceptions, raises several technical questions that are still unresolved.’
52
The ‘R’ manuscript adds that ‘the traders are allowed a profit on the exchange, and if they come from regions where the paper money is not current, they invest it in other goods that have a value in their own countries’ (1958: 148, fn).
the fact that in Tibet the Great Khan’s paper money is not used, while in the area of Kuiju ‘12 days by river’ from Ch’êng-tu-fu [= Sindufu (modern Chéngdū)—capital of the
province of Sichuan] it is the only currency in use (1958: 173; 192).
Needham (1985: 96-102) supplements Marco Polo’s account under the Mongol Yüan dynasty with evidence of earlier issues. Paper money ‘originated probably in the early +9th
century,53
when increasing needs of business and government transactions encouraged the institution of “flying money” (fei chhien)54
as a convenient way to obviate carrying heavy metal from one place to another’. Proceeds of sales in the capital could be deposited and a certificate issued for cash in the designated provinces. ‘The institution was originally a private arrangement by the merchants but was taken over by the government in +812 as a method of forwarding local taxes and revenues to the capital. Since the “flying money” was primarily a draft, it is generally considered a credit medium rather than true money. The system continued in the following dynasties and gradually evolved into a true paper currency’.55
By the Northern Sòng [北宋] dynasty +1023 the notes were printed. Breaching of quantity limits led to more than one inflation and its ultimate demise.56
Needham (1985, p.99) comments that Chinese paper money spread to other areas in the late thirteenth century, ‘but the use of bank notes was not begun in Western countries until the later part of the 17th
century.’57
Although nothing has been said about any accounting methods that may have complemented the systems for issuing and receiving the Chinese drafts and paper money, Needham nevertheless continues: ‘It is probable that certain European systems of banking and accounting, as well as
53
Needham uses ‘+’ to signify ‘AD’.
54
= pīnyīn: fēi qián [飞钱]. More recent scholars agree that circulation of these money drafts and paper money (originally called Jiāozi [交子] and later Qianying and then Huìzi[会子]—Zhao, 1987: 177-179) among merchants, and then adopted by the state, appeared as early as the 9th
century AD (Davies, 1994: 180-83; cf. Aiken and Lu, 1993: 178). This currency was used alongside more traditional exchanges made in coin, precious metals, grain etc.
55
The Flemish Franciscan William of Rubruk’s expedition of 1253-4 to the Great Khan did not quite reach ‘Catai’ (= ‘Cathay’, i.e. North China) but reported: ‘The ordinary money of Catai is a piece of cotton cloth, as long and wide as a hand, on which lines of writing are impressed and also the seal of Mangu. The inhabitants of Catai write with a brush such as painters use, and they include in a single character several letters, forming a word’ (Franke, 1967: 10).
56
Needham (1985: 96) cites inter alia Yang Lien-Sheng (1952: 51-2). See also Brandt et al. (2011).
57
Needham’s footnote here says: ‘…Sweden in 1661; America 1690; France, 1720; Russia, 1768;
England, 1797; and Germany, 1806.’ The reference to England must be to the introduction of £1 and £2 notes that year in response to the shortage of gold, as the Bank of England had been issuing forms of banknote since its foundation in 1694 (Bank of England:
vouchers for deposited money, were also influenced by Chinese examples obtained by merchants and travellers to China.’58
But there seems to be no actual evidence for these claims.
The Manchu (Qīng) dynasty did not use paper notes for currency, and ‘[i]t was not
until the later part of the 19th
century that a Chinese bank issued a new bank note, which was inspired primarily by Western influence.’(Needham, 1985: 102).
58
Needham’s footnote here says: ‘Max Weber said that the accounting system (Verrechnungswesen) of the old Hamburg Bank was based on a Chinese model, and Robert Eisler said that the old Swedish system of banking and money deposit vouchers followed the Chinese system’ (citing Yang, 1952: 65). Hence Temple’s (2007: 133) even stronger formulation: 'The Old Hamburg Bank and the Swedish banking system were set up on Chinese lines. Thus, some of the fundamental banking procedures of the Western world came from China directly.' Needham’s and Temple’s observations are disputed but we have not pursued the historical arguments here.