Nick Szabo  🔑

Almost certainly. They are probably derived from rings for wearing, or possibly bracelets, but these are very rough and too large. The ring shape may have allowed easier subdivision by cutting or sawing.

I don't think this is money yet. Came a bit later (third millennium bc, in my books). These are collectibles @NickSzabo4

There isn't a sharp distinction to be made between collectibles and money. Collectibles were a store of value and medium of wealth transfer -- the main distinctions one might make are somewhat arbitrary cutoffs of velocity and granularity.

The thing with collectibles is that they were first made for reasons such as esthetics and religion. Gold ie was picked up from river beds coz humans saw the sun in it: eternal life. Later collectibles became exchanged and obtained an “economic” value.

What do you think @judyzara ?

Either way I think there’ll be a ledger somewhere.

Most "ring money" (first bronze later silver) was more in the form of coils, of which segments could be easily separated.

Yes, the above rings would likely have been used by tally, like shell beads. Whether or not they come in standard weights would be a good clue.