The Jiaozi: How Paper Money Began in Song China

Nearly seven centuries before the Stockholm Banco (1661) or the Bank of England (1694) issued the first European banknotes, the Northern Song dynasty (960–1127 CE) inaugurated the world’s first government-issued paper currency in southwestern China. Known as jiaozi (交子, “exchange certificates” or “interchange vouchers”), this monetary revolution was born not at the imperial capital of Kaifeng, but in the mountain-ringed commercial hub of Chengdu (then Yi Prefecture, or Yizhou) in Sichuan. Deliberately walled off from the rest of the empire as a special iron-coin currency zone (tieqian), eleventh-century Sichuan suffered from a medium of exchange so heavy and low in value that wholesale trade threatened to grind to a halt. After sixteen wealthy Chengdu merchant houses formed a licensed cartel to issue woodblock-printed paper deposit receipts, speculative defaults and redemption lawsuits prompted Emperor Renzong’s court in late 1023 and early 1024 CE to nationalize the system—establishing the official Paper Money Bureau (Jiaozi Wu) with a statutory emission ceiling of 1,256,340 strings backed by 360,000 strings of iron coin reserves. ^[1]

The Geopolitics of Metal: Sichuan’s Iron-Coin Currency Zone#

To understand why paper money emerged in Sichuan rather than in the richer Yangtze Delta, historians of Chinese monetary policy—most notably Richard von Glahn and Peng Xinwei—point to the Northern Song court’s deliberate currency segmentation of its frontiers. Throughout the tenth century, during the Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms period (907–960 CE), fragmented regional states competed fiercely to retain scarce bronze coinage (tongqian). While the central imperial heartland relied on standard bronze cash coins pierced with a square center hole and strung in units of one thousand (a guan or min, nominally 1,000 wen or “short strings” of 770 coins), the autonomous kingdom of Later Shu in Sichuan had supplemented its sparse copper supplies by casting heavy iron cash coins (tieqian). ^[2]

When Song Taizu conquered the Later Shu regime in 965 CE, the imperial court systematically drained Sichuan’s accumulated reserves of gold, silver, silk, and bronze coins to the central treasury in Kaifeng, while prohibiting bronze cash from re-entering the province. Because Sichuan bordered the Tibetan plateau and the Tangut Xi Xia state to the northwest, Song strategists feared that if high-value bronze coinage circulated freely in the southwest, foreign merchants and hostile regimes would melt down Song copper cash for weapons or drain the empire’s monetary metal across the frontier. Consequently, the Song state locked the four circuits of Sichuan inside a quarantined iron-coin zone. ^[3]

For Sichuan’s booming tea, salt, and silk economy, the iron standard created an acute physical bottleneck:

• Severe Discount to Bronze Cash: Official and market exchange rates priced roughly ten iron coins to a single standard bronze coin.
• Crushing Physical Weight: A single small iron coin weighed roughly 3.7 to 4.5 grams, while large iron coins cast after the 993–995 CE rebellion of Wang Xiaopo and Li Shun weighed up to 12 to 15 grams apiece. A standard nominal string (min or guan) of 1,000 small iron coins weighed roughly 3.25 kilograms (over 6.5 Roman/English pounds, or five Chinese jin), while a string of large iron coins weighed up to 12 kilograms (over 25 pounds).
• Everyday Transaction Paralysis: In early eleventh-century Chengdu, a single bolt of fine Sichuanese damask silk cost between 3,000 and 20,000 iron cash—requiring a buyer to haul between 10 and 65 kilograms (22 to 140+ pounds) of iron coins through the city streets in wheelbarrows or on pack mules. Large wholesale purchases of tea or brocade required entire convoys of ox-carts just to move the settlement metal.

Private Innovation: The Sixteen Merchant Houses and Guild Jiaozi#

Even before the Song conquest, ninth-century Tang merchants had used state remittance drafts known as “flying cash” (feiqian) to transfer tax revenues between the capital and provincial capitals without shipping metal, though feiqian drafts were two-party bills of exchange rather than circulating currency. In late tenth-century Chengdu, private deposit shops (guifang) took the decisive leap toward true paper money: merchants deposited their bulky strings of iron coin in secure vaults and received handwritten paper deposit certificates called jiaozi (a Sichuan dialect term denoting a voucher or bilateral tally). Instead of redeeming the certificate for physical iron at every sale, traders began endorsing and passing the paper receipts directly from hand to hand in the marketplace.

At first, any shop could issue handwritten notes for arbitrary amounts upon deposit, leading to chaotic variations in design and frequent fraud. Around the beginning of the Dazhong Xiangfu reign era (1008–1016 CE), the Prefect of Yizhou (Chengdu), Zhang Yong, intervened to regularize the private market. Zhang Yong revoked the right of small, undercapitalized shops to print notes and granted an exclusive franchise to a syndicate of sixteen wealthy Chengdu merchant houses—headed by prominent financiers of the Wang and Zhang clans—who pooled their capital and operated registered jiaozi bureaus (jiaozi pu or jiaozi hu). ^[4]

Under this guild regime, private jiaozi (si jiaozi) acquired standardized institutional features:

• Woodblock Printing on Mulberry Bark Paper: The sixteen houses printed uniform bills on tough, fibrous local paper made from boiled paper-mulberry bark (chupi), using carved copper or wood plates with ornamental borders, scenes of houses and figures, secret identifying marks, and multi-colored red and black inks to deter counterfeiting.
• Hand-Filled Denominations and Three Percent Redemption Fee: When a customer deposited iron cash, the clerk filled in the exact amount in ink at the moment of issue. Bearers could cash the note at any of the sixteen guild branches across Sichuan upon paying a fixed paper-and-ink conversion fee (liqian or zhimofei) of 30 wen per 1,000 cash (3 percent).

Merchant Defaults and the 1023–1024 CE State Nationalization#

For nearly fifteen years, the sixteen-merchant cartel lubricated Sichuan’s commerce and paid an annual licensing fee to the prefectural administration. Yet the guild operated without statutory reserve ratios or external auditing. Tempted by the vast pool of idle iron cash sitting in their vaults, several of the sixteen merchant houses diverted depositors’ reserves into speculative real estate, luxury mansions, and risky commercial ventures.

By the early 1020s, a wave of business losses left several guild members insolvent. When note holders presented their jiaozi for redemption in Chengdu, the shutters of the deposit shops were barred. Riots broke out in the markets, hundreds of lawsuits clogged the prefectural courts, and debtors and creditors alike faced ruin as discounted private notes plunged in value.

An intense policy debate ensued within the Sichuan administration. One faction, led by the official寇瑊 (Kou Jian), urged the imperial court to ban jiaozi altogether and force commerce back onto pure iron coinage. The incoming Prefect of Yizhou, Xue Tian, together with the judicial commissioner Zhang Ruogu, argued the opposite: abolishing paper certificates would strangle Sichuan’s trade and trigger a severe deflationary contraction. Instead, Xue Tian proposed that the imperial state outlaw private note issuance, confiscate the guild’s remaining clearing infrastructure, and establish a government monopoly over paper money backed by treasury iron reserves.

In the eleventh lunar month of the first year of the Tiansheng era (late 1023 CE) under Emperor Renzong (and the regency of Empress Dowager Liu), the Song court approved Xue Tian’s memorial and founded the official Yizhou Paper Money Bureau (Yizhou Jiaozi Wu 益州交子務) in Chengdu. Early in the following year—the first lunar month of Tiansheng 2 (1024 CE)—the bureau issued the first series (diyi jie) of official government jiaozi (guan jiaozi), creating the world’s first state-backed paper currency. ^[5]

Fractional Reserves, the Jie Redemption Cycle, and Emission Quotas#

The monetary architecture designed by Xue Tian and the Chengdu Jiaozi Wu in 1023–1024 CE established sophisticated central-banking rules that balanced commercial liquidity against inflation for more than half a century: ^[6]

• Statutory Emission Ceiling (1,256,340 Min) and 28.6% Metallic Reserve (360,000 Min): Rather than printing unlimited notes, the imperial statute capped the total circulation of any single issue at exactly 1,256,340 min (strings of 1,000 cash). To guarantee convertibility on demand, the bureau maintained a permanent metallic reserve (benqian) of 360,000 strings of iron coins—an explicit fractional reserve ratio of roughly 28.65 percent (three-tenths of total circulation), calculated on the empirical observation that less than one-third of circulating notes were ever presented for cash redemption simultaneously.
• Transition to Fixed Denominations: Initially, official notes continued to allow variable denominations between 1 guan (string) and 10 guan filled in at issuance. In 1039 CE, the bureau standardized circulation into fixed printed denominations of 5 guan (20 percent of the issue) and 10 guan (80 percent of the issue); in 1068 CE, to serve smaller wholesale and retail transactions, the state shifted to lower denominations of 1 guan (60 percent of the issue) and 500 wen (half a string, 40 percent of the issue).
• The Two- or Three-Year Jie (界) Expiration and Retirement Cycle: Because mulberry paper wore out from constant handling and older designs became vulnerable to counterfeiting, every series of jiaozi had a strict statutory lifespan called a jie (“term” or “boundary”) typically lasting around two to three years. At the expiration of each jie, note holders brought their worn old notes to the bureau to exchange them for newly printed notes of the next series (jiaozi gengti) or for physical iron cash, paying the standard 30-wen-per-guan (3 percent) administrative fee. Unredeemed notes beyond the grace period expired, preventing a cumulative overhang of circulating paper.

From Monetary Discipline to War-Finance Inflation and the 1105 Qianyin#

For nearly fifty years (1024–1072 CE), the Chengdu Jiaozi Wu adhered strictly to the 1,256,340-min quota and the 360,000-string iron reserve. Confidence in the notes was so high that in bulk commercial transactions across Sichuan, merchants actually paid a slight premium for lightweight jiaozi over cumbersome iron coins because paper eliminated transport and counting costs. ^[7]

That fiscal discipline eroded during the late eleventh century as military conflicts with the Tangut Xi Xia kingdom in the northwest drained the imperial treasury. Beginning in 1072 CE (the Fifth Year of the Xining era under Emperor Shenzong and reformer Wang Anshi), the state authorized the simultaneous circulation of two overlapping series (liang jie) of jiaozi without increasing the 360,000-string iron coin reserve, instantly doubling the money supply to more than 2.51 million min. ^[8]

Once the statutory link between metallic reserves and note issuance was broken, fiscal temptation proved irresistible. In 1094 and 1098 CE, under Emperor Zhezong, the bureau raised the per-series quota by another 150,000 to 630,000 strings to pay frontier troops (junxiang). By the early years of Emperor Huizong’s reign (1100–1125 CE), cumulative unbacked printings to finance northwestern border wars had pushed total jiaozi circulation past 26 million min—more than twenty times the original 1024 ceiling—while the metallic reserve chests had been completely emptied. ^[9]

Predictably, the market value of the unbacked notes collapsed: by 1105–1107 CE, a nominal 1-guan (1,000-cash) jiaozi note traded in Chengdu markets for less than 100 iron cash—and occasionally as little as a dozen coins. In 1105–1107 CE, Emperor Huizong reorganized the Chengdu bureau as the Qianyin Wu (錢引務, “Money Voucher Office”) and replaced the depreciated jiaozi with a new currency called qianyin, which subsequently laid the institutional blueprint for the Southern Song huizi (1160 CE) and the empire-wide fiat paper currencies of the Mongol Yuan and early Ming dynasties.

Theoretical & Balance-Sheet Transmission Mechanism#

In the Kindleberger–Minsky taxonomy of financial instability (Kindleberger, 1978; Minsky, 1986) and Irving Fisher’s (1933) debt-deflation framework, speculative asset booms become systemic crises when credit expansion shifts balance sheets from hedge finance (cash flows covering principal and interest) to speculative and Ponzi finance (relying on rising asset prices and short-term margin roll-overs).

Once monetary tightening or an exogenous shock halts price appreciation, forced margin liquidations trigger Fisherian debt-deflation: fire-sale asset discounts erode bank collateral values, contracting credit supply across the real economy.

Sources and Further Reading

1. Ulrich Theobald, “Jiaozi 交子 and Qianyin 錢引 (Paper Money of the Song Period),” ChinaKnowledge.de — An Encyclopaedia on Chinese History, Literature and Art, 2016. Historical & Financial Reference
2. Richard von Glahn, “The Rise and Demise of Paper Money in Imperial China,” Hoover Institution, Stanford University, 2023. Historical & Financial Reference
3. Asia for Educators, “The Song Dynasty in China: Economic Revolution — Money and Paper Currency,” Weatherhead East Asian Institute, Columbia University, 2008. Peer-Reviewed / Academic Research
4. Ulrich Theobald, “Song Period Economy (960–1279),” ChinaKnowledge.de — An Encyclopaedia on Chinese History, Literature and Art, 2016. Historical & Financial Reference
5. Mark Cartwright, “Paper Money in Song China,” World History Encyclopedia, 2021. Historical & Financial Reference
6. Ministry of Culture of the People’s Republic of China, “Jiaozi: First Paper Money in the World,” ChinaCulture.org, 2005. Historical & Financial Reference
7. Richard von Glahn, “Northern Song Monetary Policy and the Invention of Paper Currency in Sichuan,” Cambridge University Press, The Rise and Demise of Paper Money in Imperial China, chapter 4, 2026. Peer-Reviewed / Academic Research
8. Irving Fisher — "The Debt-Deflation Theory of Great Depressions," Econometrica 1, no. 4 (FRASER Federal Reserve Archive, 1933): 337–357 Central Bank / Monetary Authority
9. Charles P. Kindleberger & Robert Z. Aliber — Manias, Panics, and Crashes: A History of Financial Crises (Palgrave Macmillan) Peer-Reviewed / Academic Research

Have an idea for another financial history documentary or article? Request a story →