Text 1
Archaeologist Denise Schmandt-Besserat argues that ancient Near Eastern clay tokens represent a direct, linear precursor to cuneiform writing. According to her model, simple geometric tokens representing agricultural goods evolved over millennia into complex, incised tokens. To secure transactions, these tokens were eventually sealed inside clay envelopes (bullae); impressing the tokens onto the envelopes' exteriors to indicate their contents directly inspired the creation of the first written tablets.
Text 2
Linguist Stephen Lieberman and other critics argue that this evolutionary trajectory is oversimplified. They contend that plain and complex tokens served distinct, parallel administrative functions and coexisted for centuries rather than representing successive stages. Furthermore, they note that only a minor fraction of cuneiform signs correspond to token shapes, suggesting that writing emerged primarily as a novel graphic system rather than a direct derivation of tokens.
Match each argument or claim made by Schmandt-Besserat in Text 1 with the corresponding counterargument or qualification presented by Lieberman and other critics in Text 2.
- Simple tokens evolved chronologically into complex, incised tokens.Plain and complex tokens coexisted and served parallel administrative functions.
- Impressing tokens on clay envelopes directly inspired the first written tablets.Cuneiform emerged primarily as a novel graphic system rather than a direct derivation of token impressions.
- Token shapes share a direct genealogical relationship with cuneiform signs.Only a small fraction of early cuneiform signs match the forms of clay tokens.