Paragraph Summaries
- Researchers have been puzzled by the seemingly sudden appearance of abstract Cuneiform writing in Ancient Sumeria. Small clay tokens have also puzzled researchers or been dismissed by them. In Before Writing, Denise Schmandt-Besserat identifies these tokens as precursors to Cuneiform writing.
- Early tokens had simple forms, and were placed inside clay envelopes. The outside of the envelopes had markings to indicate what was inside. Later tokens were more diverse, and sometimes looked like the things they represented.
- Cuneiform tablets replaced tokens around 3100 BC. This went in two stages:
i. First, people just drew the symbols on the tablets.
ii. Later, people developed numbers, so they could draw a picture and a number symbol. So “5X” rather than “XXXXX”. Much simpler!
Analysis
The author doesn’t necessarily think Schmandt-Besserat is correct
One thing to keep in mind: the author doesn’t say that Schmandt-Besserat is necessarily correct. They use lots of hedged words to indicate that the ideas presented are Schmandt-Besserat’s opinion:
- “The tokens are identified by Denise Schmandt-Besserat” (line 17, instead of saying “were shown….to be”)
- “Schmandt-Besserat theorizes” (line 30)
- “Schmandt-Besserat suggests” (lines 44-45)
The author seems to think that Schmandt-Besserat is probably correct, but that’s not the same thing as certainly correct. When reading RC passages you must notice distinctions like this.
What do linguists expect to see?
Another thing to keep in mind while reading this passage: the progression linguists would expect to see. Linguists expect that cultures would first draw pictures, and only then progress to more abstract writing. That trend seems to be missing with Cuneiform.
But Schmandt-Besserat does find the pattern. She does so by placing the clay tokens into the pattern. Here’s the timeline:
- Simple clay tokens (cones, spheres and pyramids). These were placed into clay tablets, which were inscribed. These tokens may have been records of contributions to temple-based grain and livestock pools.
- Later clay tokens took on more varied forms, such as bowls and jars with handles. This means the village contributions became more diverse.
- Pictographic marks on tablets
- Abstract numerical symbols
Let’s look at these in two parts:
Tokens (Parts 1 and 2)
Lets say you are a villager, and you contribute five bushels of wheat to the temple. How is this recorded?
- Clay tokens: Five pyramid tokens are placed in a clay tablet. Each pyramid represents a bushel of wheat. The tablet has five pyramid marks on it.
- Figurative tokens: Now you produce more complex crafts. You sent in five bushels of wheat, and three clay jars. Your tokens are five pyramids (for the wheat) and three tiny clay jars, to represent the jars.
Abstract Marks (parts 3 and 4)
System of marks on clay: You still produce five bushels of wheat, and three clay jars. Now, instead of tokens, your contribution is noted only by marks on a tablet: five drawings of bushels, and three drawings of jars.
System of numbers: Now your temple contribution is simpler. There is a drawing of a bushel, and a drawing of a jar. Beside the bushel there is the number “5”. Beside the jar there is the number “2”.
This is the abstract, flexible system the author refers to in lines 53-55. (They use three symbols: number, jar, contents. But the effect is the same). The system was:
- Abstract: The symbols for things don’t necessarily look like the things themselves. This occurred as early as the tokens in the shape of cones, spheres and pyramids (lines 20-21)
- Flexible: This refers to the numbers. Now instead of drawing five jars, you can draw a jar + a symbol representing the number five. This lets you represent much larger numbers easily.
So “flexible” was the new innovation the tablets produced. “Abstract” had been around for a while.
Hollow Tablets?
Note: one student said they were confused by “hollow tablet” (line 22). Aren’t tablets flat and thin, like iPads? Usually, yes. But don’t argue with the passage. If the author describes a hollow tablet that acts like an envelope, then some tablets must be hollow. I pictured this as being like a regular tablet, but thicker and with an empty space in the middle.
Three dimensional noun?
Lines 38-39 say that tokens were three dimensional nouns. What the heck does that mean?
The term “Wheat Bushel” is a noun. It refers to a bunch of wheat tied together (google it if you don’t know what that is).
A token such as a pyramid was a three dimensional noun. That means that, if a pyramid represented the noun “wheat bushel”, then it was a noun you could hold in your hand – and therefore three dimensional. Basically, tokens were nouns you could hold in your hand.
Want a free Reading Comp lesson?
Get a free sample of the Reading Comprehension Mastery Seminar. Learn tips for solving RC questions
Leave a Reply