I am inclined to think we are....err....re-inventing the wheel here

The wheel motif came to dominate social/political/economic consciousness in
the northern subtropical zone of the ancient world around 500 BC, and is
intimately involved in the origins of coin using market based states of
Greece, India and China.

History only really begins to replace myth propagation after that date
(being a product of those societies), thus we have no history of the event
itself.  There are many traces of the event however in subsequent writings

EG from India:  

Arthashastra: (c. 300 BC)

“the circle (of the king) is the fundamental basis (of the state).”

The elements of the circle are:

“the king, the minister, the country, the fortified city, the treasury, the
army and the ally.”

Or consider Ibn Khaldun’s medieval gloss on the same matter in ancient
Persian thought:

“Royal authority exists through the army, the army through money, money
through taxes, taxes through cultivation, cultivation through justice,
justice through the improvement of officials, the improvement of officials
through the forthrightness of wazirs, and the whole thing in the first place
through the ruler’s personal supervision of his subjects condition”

But the mythic accounts of the events - in Herodotus – regarding eg the ring
of Polykrates – are perhaps even more enlightening regarding the
democratising influence of the idea of circulation during the ‘axial age’

I am inclined to see this event as a kind of intellectual big bang, which
left background traces almost everywhere, if one looks carefully.  Why for
instance, in Tolkien’s deeply hierarchical vision of the world, is the
central quest the destruction of a ring?

My textual references are all from the second half of this little book

https://www.academia.edu/356701

Gyges Magic Ring:  The Origin of Coinages and Open Societies

The first half of the book concerns how these ideas came to be suppressed in
the modern education system.  That seems rather simple at root to me.  The
central idea is state nurtured markets.  Hayekians (Popper) do not like
states (more exactly: social contracts).  Keynsians (Finley) do not like
markets.  The upshot has been a kind of unconscious collusion whose outcome
is suppression of a true account of this event.

Rob Tye, York, UK