>From _Ars Dragonica_, chapter three (translation mine):
"Early commentators on the subject assumed that a dragon's hoard functioned primarily as a status symbol: the larger and more valuable the hoard, the more powerful and respected the dragon. It was also implied that the size of a dragon's hoard was an indicator of the dragon's rank in both the sexual and social hierarchies. ...
Recent evidence has cast considerable doubt on this theory. The fragments of dragon society to which we have had access have shown it to be incredibly individualistic in nature. Territorial disputes are settled by combat to death, and mating is done entirely by rape. Social ranking, when done at all, seems to be based on seniority and lineage: direct male descendents of Tiamet, for example, are grudingly given respect by even the lowliest dragon. Also, the status symbol theory does not account for the shoddy manner in which most dragon hoards are organized; the dominant principle of arrangement seems to be more sentimentality than display.
To fill this theoretic void, many novel and speculative hypotheses have been advanced. The most intriguing of these, advanced by Bishop Camler, holds that the dragon's hoard functions as an exterior memory. Each gem, coin, or artifact is in effect a mnenonic device, triggering when sensed the remembrance of that object's history and meaning. This theory, for instance, would naturally explain a dragon's legendary knowledge of its hoard down to the last copper piece. Given the relative sensitivity of a dragon's belly, it would seem that this mnemonic loop would continue to function even while the dragon was asleep, producing in it dreams of poetic scope and detail."