The paper-money was called
Chao.
The notes of Kublai's first issue (1260-1287) with which Polo maybe
supposed most familiar, were divided into three classes; (1) Notes of
Tens, viz. of 10, 20, 30, and 50 tsien or cash; (2) Notes of
Hundreds, viz. of 100, 200, and 500 tsien; and (3) Notes of Strings
or Thousands of cash, or in other words of Liangs or ounces of silver
(otherwise Tael), viz. of 1000 and 2000 tsien. There were also notes
printed on silk for 1, 2, 3, 5, and 10 ounces each, valued at par in
silver, but these would not circulate. In 1275, it should be mentioned,
there had been a supplementary issue of small notes for 2, 3, and 5 cash
each.
Marsden states an equation between Marco's values of the Notes and the
actual Chinese currency, to which Biot seems to assent. I doubt its
correctness, for his assumed values of the groat or grosso and tornesel
are surely wrong. The grosso ran at that time 18 to the gold ducat or
sequin, and allowing for the then higher relative value of silver, should
have contained about 5d. of silver. The ducat was also equivalent to 2
lire, and the tornese (Romanin, III. 343) was 4 deniers. Now the
denier is always, I believe 1/240 of the lira. Hence the tornese would
be 9/60 of the grosso.
But we are not to look for exact correspondences, when we see Polo
applying round figures in European coinage to Chinese currency.
[Illustration: Bank-Note of the Ming Dynasty]
His bezant notes, I agree with Marsden, here represent the Chinese notes
for one and more ounces of silver. And here the correspondence of value is
much nearer than it seems at first sight. The Chinese liang or ounce of
silver is valued commonly at 6s. 7d., say roundly 80d.[1] But the
relation of gold and silver in civilized Asia was then (see ch. I. note 4,
and also Cathay, pp. ccl. and 442) as 10 to 1, not, as with us now, more
than 15 to 1. Wherefore the liang in relation to gold would be worth
120d. or 10s., a little over the Venetian ducat and somewhat less than
the bezant or dinar. We shall then find the table of Chinese issues, as
compared with Marco's equivalents, to stand thus: -
CHINESE ISSUES, AS RECORDED. MARCO POLO'S STATEMENT.
For 10 ounces of silver (viz. }
the Chinese Ting)[2] } 10 bezants.
For 1 ounce of silver, i.e. 1 liang, }
or 1000 tsien (cash) } 1 "
For 500 tsien . . . . . . 10 groats.
200 " . . . . . . . 5 " (should have been 4).
100 " . . . . . . . 2 "
50 " . . . . . . . 1 "
30 " . . . . . . . 1/2 " (but the
proportionate
equivalent of half a groat
would be 25 tsien).
20 " . . . . . . .
10 " . . . . . . . 1 tornesel (but the
proportionate equivalent
would be 7-1/2 tsien).
5 " . . . . . . . 1/2 " (but prop. equivalent
3-3/4 tsien).
Pauthier has given from the Chinese Annals of the Mongol Dynasty a
complete Table of the Issues of Paper-Money during every year of Kublai's
reign (1260-1294), estimated at their nominal value in Ting or tens of
silver ounces. The lowest issue was in 1269, of 228,960 ounces, which at
the rate of 120d. to the ounce (see above) = 114,480l., and the
highest was in 1290, viz. 50,002,500 ounces, equivalent at the same
estimate to 25,001,250l.! whilst the total amount in the 34 years was
249,654,290 ounces or 124,827,144l. in nominal value. Well might Marco
speak of the vast quantity of such notes that the Great Kaan issued
annually!
To complete the history of the Chinese paper-currency so far as we can:
In 1309, a new issue took place with the same provision as in Kublai's
issue of 1287, i.e. each note of the new issue was to exchange against 5
of the old of the same nominal value. And it was at the same time
prescribed that the notes should exchange at par with metals, which of
course it was beyond the power of Government to enforce, and so the notes
were abandoned. Issues continued from time to time to the end of the
Mongol Dynasty. The paper-currency is spoken of by Odoric (1320-30), by
Pegolotti (1330-40), and by Ibn Batuta (1348), as still the chief, if not
sole, currency of the Empire. According to the Chinese authorities, the
credit of these issues was constantly diminishing, as it is easy to
suppose. But it is odd that all the Western Travellers speak as if the
notes were as good as gold. Pegolotti, writing for mercantile men, and
from the information (as we may suppose) of mercantile men, says
explicitly that there was no depreciation.
The Ming Dynasty for a time carried on the system of paper-money; with the
difference that while under the Mongols no other currency had been
admitted, their successors made payments in notes, but accepted only hard
cash from their people![3] In 1448 the chao of 1000 cash was worth but
3. Barbaro still heard talk of the Chinese paper-currency from travellers
whom he met at Azov about this time; but after 1455 there is said to be no
more mention of it in Chinese history.
I have never heard of the preservation of any note of the Mongols; but
some of the Ming survive, and are highly valued as curiosities in China.
The late Sir G. T. Staunton appears to have possessed one; Dr. Lockhart
formerly had two, of which he gave one to Sir Harry Parkes, and retains
the other. The paper is so dark as to explain Marco's description of it as
black.
