It seems like you didn’t read anything I said. (Let alone anything I suggested). Tulipmania is a perfect example of a case in the real world:
“the government policy did not expand the supply of money through fractional reserve banking which is the modern tool. Actually, it was quite the opposite. As kings throughout Europe debased their currencies, through clipping, sweating or by decree, the Dutch provided a sound money policy, which called for money to be backed one hundred per cent by specie.”
Again, it is you who is being imprecise. No one said a central bank was necessary for the money supply to exand…the claim is simply that an expansion of the money supply is the driver of bubbles. And Tulipmania proves fractional reserve banking is also unnecessary for a bubble to occur. So you are just as wrong or incorrect or imprecise or whatever else you want to call someone who points the finger at the Federal Reserve. (..if not more wrong, as I said, it is the Federal Reserve System that is the current reason for all current banking policy…including fractional reserve banking).