Chickenfreak, I think the value came from King Henry only accepting tax payments with tallies. This created a demand. Don't pay your taxes, you get beaten up. Not being beaten up was probably quite valuable lol Sorry, being flippant. Not an expert in this field - but it's an avenue worth exploring, even if it only broadens your knowledge of history.
To the stone part of the topic: You need to either invent your own names of the minerals, or do some reading on the topic. Diamonds, for instance, are very hard and durable, except to fire. They are pure carbon, and can easily burn. Not something a dragon would care about, in my mind. I think olivin/peridot might me a good choice, since its melting temperature is extremely high, and is soft enough to scratch patterns into. It can only be mined in a few places in the world, and even there, peridot quality stones are hard to find. The less "pretty" olivin quality is much more common. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olivine
But the tally sticks themselves didn't have inherent value--it's not as if the king would happily accept a prettily carved piece of wood AS the taxes. He accepted the wood as proof that value had been exchanged, not as the value itself. I see them referred to as a "bookkeeping method". They're not the equivalent of gold coins; they're the equivalent of paper money. Another site says that when they were removed from circulation, they were burned. Again, even if gold were outlawed as a means of currency, it wouldn't be destroyed, because it has inherent value.
I feel that the confusion that we're having here is the difference between fiat money: Money that's worth what it's worth because the government says so, even though the token that represents the money may have zero value. US dollars are fiat money; the token is the piece of paper. commodity money: Money that contains its own worth--like a gold coin that is traded as being worth exactly what the gold it contains is worth. representative money: Money that represents a specific amount of value, but does not contain the value. A piece of paper that says, "Joe will give you an ounce of gold" is representative money. These stones don't really seem to be any of the three. Edited to add: I think that the tally sticks are representative money.
The real question to ask here is would a typical reader really care about the details of the dragons' money system? I know it'd bore me to death and unless it's a very important part of the story, the only way a reader would even have an idea of what it is, rktho would have to info dump it. There are a TON of movies, TV series, and books where people made up their own money, and readers/viewers just accept it as part of the story. I think the geometric stone money is an awesome idea and if I were reading a book with them, I wouldn't think it's odd at all. I mean, heck, I read a book once where the money was "keystones" and I'm still not sure what shape it was. Although, I think the 3d coins might need to be changed to 2d--it wouldn't take much to totally fill a purse with 3d money (unless it's like, really tiny?). As for the "it's pretty" factor, it's a common dragon thing that they obsess over beauty, so it'd make sense if @rktho decided to go with it. I mean, I understand that these dragons don't have to be like that, but that could be how the money gained its value and now it's just sort of tradition. And he said he wanted it to be semi-precious stones, not everyday rocks. Saying a dragon could just go out and make his own money is like saying I can just go out and make my own garnet or blue topaz jewel. That just isn't going to happen for me.
If they're jewels, I actually have zero issue with it. Even laboriously manufactured, rather than mined, jewels. It's carving them with denominations that would, to me, largely eliminate their inherent-value decorative beauty.
I totally disagree. And I'm not a SF/F wonk who obsesses over the world-building of every story I read. The author doesn't have to go into a lot of detail about something like this, but the details the author does give have to make sense, for me as a reader. Obviously the author wouldn't info-dump the economic system, but she should know it herself so she can make sure what she does include works. If I read about an anarchical society that used fiat currency, I'd be totally pulled out of the story. If the author takes the time to lovingly describe the different shapes of the currency but there's no indication of why the currency has value, I'd be pulled out of the story. The OP in this case may already know about his society's economic and financial system, in which case this is all fairly pointless speculation. But from the posts we've seen so far, I don't think he does. And I absolutely think he should before he starts designing the details of the currency's appearance.
Ah, that makes sense. EDIT: That was a response to @ChickenFreak. To you @BayView, I think I understand what you're saying now. Basically, rktho doesn't need to know every bit of how his economy works, but rather make sure the system works with the type of government. That actually makes a lot of sense.
Sure, but there can still be variation and a likely translation issue. Though, there are other senses to the term "currency" that would still give a dragon society lots of room to diverge.
Yes, you're quite right, they were nothing more than IOUs. To be honest, I haven't read this thread properly just skimmed it and jumped in with an idea that I hadn't really thought through. Didn't realise it was about dragons and stuff lol (No disrespect to the OP). Interesting topic. Does gold have intrinsic value? Or is it the ability to assert your authority over other people and compel them to waste their lives digging gold and doing all manner of other things for you - things that furnish your life with luxury and security - that has the intrinsic value? And that gold is just another fruit of human labour to be enjoyed as a luxury? Because let's face it: if I was a ruler, I would value stone over gold. And the stone-masons would be my goldsmiths. What would you rather have? A well fortified city with sturdy ramparts, and a similarly fortified citadel guarded by loyal believers in your authority, or a shiny bit of metal? In real-politics, it's obvious what I'd go for. Essentially, all money is an IOU, an abstract representation of human energy. Gold has value because someone expended time and energy to get it and refine it. For the well-made ruler, it's a fashionable accessory, a way of wearing their power and by doing so they amplify the subjective value to the rest of society. Who knows? Just food for thought.
Gold also has a lot of practical value. Today, it's essential for many electronic and industrial applications; I don't know offhand what the historic uses were. (Aside from dentistry.) Edited to add: the non-ornamental uses, that is. The fact that it doesn't tarnish and that it can be rolled to a very thin but flexible sheet and no doubt lots of other things make it uniquely valuable for decorative purposes. And I thought that some paint pigment required gold, but I can't seem to confirm it.
But denominations don't really make sense for this. Let's say that a pink goldfish is supposed to be more valuable than a blue star. But what if there's a sudden fashion for pink goldfishes? Denominations are fine for fiat or representative currency. They make sense for commodity currency that draws its value from the weight or volume of the material. But for "Ooh, pretty!" they don't make a lot of sense to me.
Currency is the lazy mans barter system. Here is some (random minted thing) I now have goods or services. Where as you had to have an exchange of either goods or services in a functioning barter system. Currency is a double bladed sword. It means that those who have more of it have more control of those who don't. That does not mean that those who do very little and have vast wealth are skilled in the least. In a situation where all currency collapses, people of specific skill sets will be the powerful, and those without will be the peasants. Meaning you could be a billionaire today, but when the money is useless so are you. Then the barter system comes into play, trading goods and services for survival. Anarcho-Capitalism fairs better in an economy due to the competitive nature of it. Monopoly Capitalism which we in the Western World live under, does not have a need for competition as it forces it out strangling the marketplace by force and other things. 6 Corporations run the major media, do you think they did that by being competitive. Hell no. Personally currency overall is a form of enslavement by the robber barons who own each and every one of us. Just because you don't see the chains that bind you, doesn't mean that they don't exist. A slave who thinks they are free is more productive, than one that knows they are not. You watch when the whole house of cards falls, you will see the masters jump ship when it starts to sink.
Not every world is a libertarian utopia. None, actually. It can't work. It could, but we're too far entrapped in the current system. Anyway, my world isn't perfect either. The Rishnaran would have no purpose if his universe was perfect.
If dragons love 'pretty,' they aren't going to want to give 'pretty' away, are they? In exchange for goods? They'll want to hoard it. So the intrinsic value of a piece (gold, jewels, whatever) means it's probably not going to be used as currency. Currency is something you trade with. Well, unless you're one of those odd hermits who keeps a fortune buried underneath the floorboards.
Here's the background: Khriza, the country, has long been ruled by an emperor said to be appointed by the Rishnaran before its empire solidified into one nation. His descendants were as benevolent and just as he, until Arat III became emperor. He cowardly surrendered Khriza to Farazar, in order to keep his throne. Essentially he became a figurehead under the enslavement of his nation. A revolution by Denzarid I deposed his grandson Arat V, and the emperor was once again benevolent and great. Denzarid's dynasty has endured since. The monarchy is based on divine right; the people trust the Rishnaran places a just dragon on the throne. (The Rishnaran doesn't always do so, leading some to doubt his existence. Wrongly.) Khriza is quite a large kingdom, so it is divided into duchies, or districts, overseen by dukes, or governors. Generally their districts cover one city unless there are two cities in close proximity to each other. The governors are appointed by the emperor every five years. Each district has a police force to enforce imperial and local laws. There is also a secret police like the FBI that steps in occasionally for their own reasons. They answer to imperial powers alone, not governors. They're important to the plot, but that's another story. Khriza is not ruled tyrannically most of the time, so they thrive well. There have been four tyrants on the throne since the liberation from Farazarian rule. Though evil and corrupt, Zarakharn isn't one; he's indifferent to the peoples' suffering but still knows not to fall out of favor with them, so he does not rule with an iron fist, unlike his father who was strict and unpopular but not oppressive. Any problems are blamed on the governors since Zarakharn only controls them when he sees fit. Food is mostly obtained by hunting. When overhunting occurs, new animals are bought from other lands and released into the wild to breed. Plants are also grown; fields and organized orchards are unheard of but trees and potted plants are grown for food and other uses (rarely decoration.) Mostly, though, fruits and vegetables are gathered wild. Khrizans lean towards the carnivorous side of omnivorous anyway, so grown foods are only prevalent when game is scarce. They do, however, require much capsicum in their diet, so they will chew or eat spicy leaves and vegetables almost as regularly as they eat meat. Houses are built small and expanded underground unless the owner is wealthy, in which case the house may even have multiple stories, though usually no more than two. Ordinary houses are little more than small rooms built over tunnel entrances. Cities are usually spaced by half a day's flight distance. There are roads connecting them, but not for walking. They are used to cart heavy things impossible to fly with. The Idrakagar are large and strong, so Drakish immigrants hire themselves out as cart-drawers and make quite a profit from it in an inspiring display of capitalistic symbiosis. Some governors put a tax on Drakish labor to generate revenue for the government, but this tends to scare them away, so they keep the taxes low, if they implement them st all. Most don't, as they can still profit from the goods the Idrakagar help transport. Based on that, what kind of economy do you suggest?
@rktho, I'm assuming you do a lot of copy-pasting from your word document. When you do that, you need to add an extra space between paragraphs, or else it'll paste on this forum as a wall of text. Anyway, on to the question: I think that system sounds great for a government run money system with a lot of bartering. Early America had that (I'm rereading the Little House series, so it's fresh on my mind) and also early England. Peasants often bartered for labor and items and paid their taxes with cash, or sometimes even goods like food and livestock. I did some research on the subject a few years back, so I don't remember the details, but I think that type of system can give you some wiggle room. People don't like to give up gold or silver, either, but they do for the sake of obtaining something else. I'm not saying rhtho's dragons should be obsessed with it, but rather that because it's a traditional idea for dragons, it wouldn't be unreasonable for rktho to base his society's money on the value of its beauty. I just did some research on gold and its uses. I looks like its early use was just as jewelry and to show superiority and power, so it was valuable only because of its beauty and rarity. That would work very well with the idea I'm talking about: these semi-precious stone "coins" would be valuable because they're beautiful and rare. On the other hand, it wouldn't work, because semi-precious stones can't be melted down and made into shapes. But then, this isn't a human society, is it? The stones can still be set into objects and worn as jewelry. However, another problem is that because they can't be melted, the larger ones would become more valuable because they're larger, not because they're a different shape. And then there's the issue you bring up about fashion: what happens if blue topaz suddenly becomes more popular than garnet? The biggest thing to prevent that is tradition. If garnet is rarer than blue topaz, then traditionally garnet is more desired and only warn/used/owned by those who have more money and power; therefore, it's become solidified in the minds of the people that garnet is more desirable, and thus, worth more. Rktho's dragons might not like gold or silver as money because of their low melting point (which is ironically one of the reasons we like them so much), and would thus go for something with a higher melting point that isn't as rare as other metals like platinum. EDIT: It turns out some gemstones can be melted, so that might solve some problems. Most of the practical uses of gold are very modern I.E. sophisticated electronics and medicine. If rktho's dragons don't have those, most of the practical uses of gold are voided, with the exception of dentistry. If gold was much more common it'd have many other uses such as thermal insulation, radiation reflecting, and turning glass into a lovely ruby color. Besides its beauty and ease of melting/shaping, gold has become popular because it doesn't corrode or react with anything. Semi-precious stones are typically corrode-free and nonallergenic as well, so that's good. However, another reason gold is popular is because it mixes well with other material without reacting. That's how we get different colors of gold and it's how gold can be mixed with glass to make gold ruby glass. If rktho makes these stones meltable, he can add this property to them as well. Rktho, these might be helpful to you in making your decision. It explains why some gemstones can be melted: http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/2004-03/1080030970.Es.r.html This talks about everyday rocks melting: https://www.quora.com/Can-rocks-melt Whew, that was long! I hope it all makes sense!
Stones would only be a good currency if they are not common. There are few good marks of currency: 1. Difficult to counterfeit. Stones would be inherently easy to counterfeit. They are too plentiful in most societies - being that your world is large and civilized, trade with stone-rich regions would be common. 2. Durability. Some stones are, some aren't. 3. Stable. Quarries could cause a market to tank suddenly. 4. Easy to store large denominations: Going along with counterfeiting, large denominations would be easily counterfeitable with the exception of rare stones. Rarer gems? Yes, perhaps. Rubies, saffire, et cetera. Stone itself? No.
