Yu's ANALYSIS OF CURRENCY 907
Yu's Formula and Early Chason ExperienceYu did not discuss the specific attempts to promote the circulation of metallic
cash, let alone paper money, in the fifteenth and early seventeenth centuries, a
serious omission since the validity of his argument might have easily been tested
against past experience. But he did say that in recent times whenever the gov-
ernment had tried to adopt cash, in every instance the policy was reversed, mainly
because the government had not provided guidance or stimulation by collect-
ing the land tax in cash. Bolts of rough cloth persisted in the market even though
the government had prohibited its use. Using cash for currency, by contrast, would
be tantamount to taking material of no utility and converting it into something
useful. If poorly woven cloth could retain its tenacious hold on the marketplace
for such a long time, there was no reason why cash could not do likewise if only
"the man above" demonstrated some constancy of purpose and ceased "rescind-
ing orders at dusk that had been issued at dawn."44
Yu's statement about the capacity of the Korean people to adopt copper cur-
rency and the need for better leadership on the part of Korean kings and high
officials was immortalized by Yi Man'un, who included the gist of this memo-
rial in the revision to the Munhonbigo compiled after 1782. He placed it just
after his evaluation of Kim Yuk's role in the adoption of cash immediately after
King Hyojong had rescinded the use of cash in 1656. Yu's opinions had obvi-
ously become well known sometime before this date, at least by the mid-eigh-
teenth century, although I have yet to discover evidence that they influenced cash
policy at that time. In any case. by that time the Korean experience and knowl-
edge of cash and its problems had advanced beyond the stage ofYu's wisdom.45
One could easily charge Yu with dereliction of his scholarly reponsibiJity when
he chose to omit the monetary history of the Choson dynasty, in particular the
experiment with paper money in the fifteenth century. because he should have
tested the validity of his arguments against the facts. Even though Yu had no use
for paper money. there is no need for us denizens of the twentieth-century world
in which paper money is being replaced by even less substantial electronic record-
ings on plastic disks to accept the validity ofYu's anti-paper prejudice. Our only
obligation is to compare Yu's views with the state of knowledge at the time.
The monetary history of the Choson dynasty also requires examination of the
possible reasons why both metallic cash and paper money failed to gain accep-
tance. Were those media of exchange universally perceived as inherently worth-
less and hence prone to rapid devaluation? Did the kings and their advisers fail
to provide sufficient guidance and support by requiring at least one-halfthe taxes,
official salaries, and official purchases to be transacted in cash (or paper money
as well)'? Did they err by not ensuring a sufficient supply of copper by foreign
imports, or by not paying enough attention to controlling the value of money
and the prices of commodities in the market?
In introducing paper money in 1402, King T'aejong did not meet Yu's crite-
rion for converting half of all taxes and expenditures to paper because he relied