Reading Comprehension

PT146 · S4 · P3 · Q22 Clay Tokens

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Reading Comprehension question.

  • Save & drill this skill — build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs — watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs — as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Start practicing free

Hundreds of clay tablets marked in cuneiform have been found in excavations of the Sumerian city of Uruk (in present-day Iraq).

Topic

The origins and evolution of writing in ancient Mesopotamia, focusing on how clay tokens led to abstract cuneiform writing.

Framework

Theme / Example

Main Point

Ancient clay tokens served as precursors to written language in Mesopotamia, and over time, this token system transformed into increasingly abstract and flexible writing forms like cuneiform. The Most Valuable Sentence: The passage’s main point is neatly summed up in the transition of tokens to written marks—especially the lines, (Paragraph 3)

P1: Discovery of Early Writing and the Puzzle of Abstract Symbols

Researchers find ancient clay tablets from Uruk, dated around 3000 B.C., with abstract, non-pictorial cuneiform writing—which is unusual for such an early date. Archaeologists often ignored even older clay tokens found nearby, but Denise Schmandt-Besserat argues these tokens were actually early precursors to writing.

P2: Description and Evolution of Tokens into Record-Keeping

Early tokens were simple in shape and sometimes inscribed, later found inside sealed "envelope" tablets. These inscribed tokens probably served as records of agricultural contributions to temples. After 4000 B.C., more sophisticated token shapes appeared, reflecting increased complexity in crafts and record-keeping.

P3: Transition from Token System to Written Language

Eventually, the system shifted from three-dimensional tokens to marks on clay tablets (about 3100 B.C.), allowing for record-keeping using drawn symbols instead of physical tokens. This evolved into full-fledged writing, with separate signs for numerals, objects, and even abstract ideas—leading to a more flexible and advanced written language system.

22.

Which one of the following, if true, would most call into question Schmandt-Besserat's theory mentioned in the fourth sentence of the second paragraph?

  1. The more than 100 clay

    No Impact

    This is the classic, wishy-washy answer we see on Strengthen / Weaken questions: - things occur - things fluctuate - things differ - some of the envelopes were heavy, some were light The fact that these envelopes came in a wide variety of shapes and thicknesses doesn't make any difference to whether or not the inscriptions are connected to temple-based tallies of villagers contributions.

    2% picked this

  2. Correct

    It was customary for villagers

    Why this is right

    This provides an Alternate Explanation for the clay envelopes: maybe the envelopes were sort of a payment contract. I clean out your gutters, you promise me some meat in the fall and give me an envelope with an inscription of the agricultural product (meat) you're promising me? We know that LSAT's preferred move when weakening a causal hypothesis is to provide an alternate explanation, but this is a very thinly suggested alternate explanation. Pretty tough to hear what they were going for. It's very important that we are listening charitably for a possible alternate way to explain these envelopes, so that "a record of a promise of agricultural products" sticks out as LSAT vaguely alluding to the envelopes.

    Skill tested: Weaken · how this choice captures the passage's function is the move to repeat next time.

    53% picked this

  3. The tablets marked in cuneiform

    Too Weak

    This sticks out as a contender, because it seems to just contradict S-B's theory, but they wouldn't write a correct answer that obvious would they? How is this not just contradicting her theory? Ahhh ... in the 2nd paragraph we're before 4000 B. C., whereas this answer is talking about after 3000 B.C. So this answer is saying that "what people used clay tablets for more than 1000 years later does not seem to be the same". That weakens a smidge, but we expect the world to change a lot in 1000 years, so pointing out a disconnect has very little logical force. By 1000 years later, there might be a more centralized government that is pooling together and tallying up communal resources. So, the temple might not need to do it anymore, and thus tablets from that era would not seem to be related to temple-based pools of goods.

    22% picked this

  4. There is no archaeological evidence

    Too Weak

    This drifts a little from the operative time frame. We're trying to diagnose the function of envelopes that existed prior to 4000 B.C., and this is referring to the 900 year period that follows. It's also just really weak to say that "Tokens were not necessarily meant to be placed in clay envelopes". This just means that at least one token wasn't meant to be placed in a clay envelope. That would only hurt S-B's theory if her theory was assuming that "every single token was meant for an envelope", which it wasn't.

    18% picked this

  5. Villagers were required not only

    Strengthens

    This actually increases the plausibility of the story S-B is telling, in which the community is expected to contribute to a temple-organized pool of grain and livestock.

    5% picked this

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

Save and practice this skill
LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free