Next Article in Journal
Olaudah Equiano and the Anti-Ethnography of Blackness
Previous Article in Journal
Domestication and Human/Wildlife Mutualism
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Humans
Volume 4
Issue 4
10.3390/humans4040025
humans-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

(Don’t) Use Your Hands: The South Levantine Late Chalcolithic (ca. 4500–3900 cal BC) Spoons and Their Significance

by
Danny Rosenberg
1,*,
Shira Gur-Arieh
2,3,
Motti Pearl
4 and
Hadar Ahituv
1
1
Laboratory for Ancient Food Processing Technologies, The Zinman Institute of Archaeology, School of Archaeology, University of Haifa, 199 Aba Khushi Avenue, Mount Carmel, Haifa 3498838, Israel
2
The Leon Recanati Institute for Maritime Studies, University of Haifa, Haifa 3498838, Israel
3
Institute of Pre- and Protohistoric Archaeology, University of Kiel, 24118 Kiel, Germany
4
Department of Archaeology, University of Haifa, 199 Aba Khushi Avenue, Mount Carmel, Haifa 3498838, Israel
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Humans 2024, 4(4), 385-399; https://doi.org/10.3390/humans4040025
Submission received: 15 August 2024 / Revised: 23 September 2024 / Accepted: 8 November 2024 / Published: 29 November 2024
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The Late Chalcolithic period in the southern Levant saw notable changes in almost every aspect of daily life. Some of the most significant shifts during this time seem to have been anchored in the subsistence economy and involved food and its cooking, processing, storage, serving, and handling with vessels and tools. The paper offers a comprehensive overview and analysis of one utensil that is likely to have been caught up in these developments—the Late Chalcolithic spoon. While spoons first appeared in the region during the Pottery Neolithic period, the Chalcolithic period witnessed a rise in their frequency and distribution. Nonetheless, they were few in number. While their functions remain unclear, we have presupposed their association with food and kitchenware and have explored them in this vein. This paper delves into their morphological characteristics and distribution and ponders their significance in light of other changes that occurred during the Late Chalcolithic period in the southern Levant.

1. Introduction

While the Late Chalcolithic’s (ca. 4500–3900 cal BC) socioeconomic structure and nature are still contentious [1,2,3,4] and are subject to considerable regional and chronological variability, it is widely agreed that this period witnessed notable changes in settlement patterns, social organization, the subsistence economy, and mortuary practices, underscoring deep cultural transformations (e.g., [3,4,5,6]). These were reflected in crafts, iconography, symbolic behavior, cult and mortuary practices, and technological innovations (e.g., [1,3,5,7,8,9,10,11]).
These changes unfolded against the backdrop of a highly developed mixed subsistence economy. Its vegetal component mainly consisted of domesticated cereals, legumes, and olives (e.g., [12] (pp. 240–242), [13,14] (pp. 23–59,77–89)), while its faunal component comprised sheep, goat, cattle, and pig husbandry for meat and secondary products; hunting and fishing activities seem to have been minimal (e.g., [15,16,17,18]). Recently, evidence was found for the production of beer-like alcoholic beverages and bee products [19,20]. All in all, it seems that concerning agriculture and the subsistence economy, the Late Chalcolithic period featured a mature mixed agro-pastoral agricultural regime in most regions, alongside a pastoralist economy in arid areas (e.g., [5] (see the references therein) [21]).
In accord with its elaborate subsistence economy and diet, the Late Chalcolithic period also featured a wide range of kitchen and tableware assemblages, including various tools and vessels made of stone, bone, flint, and, rarely, ivory and copper [5,7,10,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30]. The Late Chalcolithic period features an elaborate and expansive ceramic typology [31], (p. 303, Table 22) and displays notable technological and morphological novelties (e.g., [5,32]). Assemblages primarily comprise bowls and basins, holemouth and necked jars, and pithoi and cornets, alongside lower frequencies of plates and platters, bottles, churns, and other vessel types (e.g., [11,31,32,33,34,35]). Among other things, these assemblages reflect what food was used and how it was prepared, stored, and served. While it is not clear in what exact way these changes in food-related implements occurred during the Late Chalcolithic period, the evidence suggests that at least some of the food cooking and consumption practices shifted. These assemblages also reflect the large-scale production of certain types of implements alongside the more limited production of others, such as specific vessel and tool types (e.g., [36]). This is also the context in which Late Chalcolithic spoons are most likely to have operated.
As a tool designed for carrying food to a person’s mouth, the spoon’s roots can probably be traced to the Palaeolithic period, when naturally occurring elements such as shells were probably used for the task (e.g., [37] (see the references therein)). Their emergence as formal utensils (made of clay, stone, bone, wood, or metal) with a handle and a basin must have taken place much later (see [38]), albeit at different times and locations (e.g., [39,40,41,42,43,44,45] (see the references therein)), and in association with the consumption of soft, watery foods and the development of farming [46].
In the southern Levant, the earliest formal spoons with distinct handles and basins appeared during the Pottery Neolithic period (Yarmukian culture, ca. 6400–6000 cal BC, e.g., at Munhata in the Jordan Valley, see [31]). Throughout the region’s late prehistory, they were made of clay [31] (Figure 10), while other materials were scarce. Stone spoons were extremely rare, and no wooden and bone spoons have been found to date, although such items have been reported from elsewhere in the Near East (see [31] (p. 25 and the references therein)). While one might wish to hang the absence of wooden spoons on issues of preservation, it is notable that this absence extends to regions with favorable environmental conditions, as in the arid Judean Desert [47,48,49] and the oxygen-lean submerged settlements off the Carmel Coast [50].
By the Late Chalcolithic period, the number of spoons increased considerably. However, to date, they remain understudied; no analysis has delved into the spoons’ geographic distribution, physical attributes, functions, or place within the broad transformations in kitchen- and tableware at the time. The current paper sets out to fill this gap; it reviews the spoons’ distribution, typology, morphological variability, and putative association with food preparation and consumption.

2. Materials and Methods

We collected all the published data on Late Chalcolithic spoons and directly analyzed most of the specimens from the Chalcolithic site of Teleilat Ghassul. The analyses in question were conducted in the Laboratory for Ancient Food Processing Technologies (LAFPT), Zinman Institute of Archaeology, University of Haifa. They included macro- and microscopic wear analyses, as well as five attempts to extract residues from their basins.
The number of variables and states were recorded for each specimen. These include handle- (lengths, curvatures, inclinations) or basin-related variables (length–width proportions, base inclinations, depths). Morphological, metric, and typological data were systematically compiled for all spoons and were utilized to create a comprehensive classification (Table 1). Our study expands and elaborates on Lee’s [51] (p. 59) typology, which distinguished four main morpho-metric types according to the handle (which may be round or flat) and the bowl (which may be shallow or deep). While only some of the published Late Chalcolithic spoons can be attributed to one of the types that we provisionally propose below, we also introduce a taxonomy that may adhere to ergonomic qualities (i.e., handle length) or functional advantages (i.e., bowl characteristics) to set a primary baseline to which new spoons can be added in the future. At the same time, this classification could be supplemented if new morphologies or types are found and defined.

3. Results

The Late Chalcolithic Spoons and Their Characteristics

At the onset of the Late Chalcolithic period, the number of spoons and sites featuring them increased exponentially. Presently, 52 spoons have been reported from 16 Late Chalcolithic south Levantine sites (Table 2; Figure 1). Most sites (n = 9) are located in the Shefela, northern Negev, and the central Coastal Plain, between the Yarqon Stream in the north and the Besor Stream and Beersheba Valley in the south; the remainder are located in the Judean Desert (n = 2), the Jordan Valley (n = 4), and the Amman region (n = 1). Most contemporaneous Late Chalcolithic sites produced no spoons, and the few listed here yielded five spoons at most. Teleilat Ghassul is a striking exception in this respect, featuring over 18 spoons (several more were found in the University of Sydney’s excavations, but no details have been provided to date).
Most Late Chalcolithic spoons (Figure 2 and Figure 3) are broken and were retrieved from various contexts (although, for most specimens, the exact depositional context is unclear or unspecified), including settlements and cave sites. They are primarily made of clay, featuring various fabrics, inclusions, and firing temperatures. Often, they were crudely produced, and little effort was made to provide them with a fine finish or standardize their morphology. Their high level of fragmentation makes morphometric analyses challenging. Nevertheless, most are small and consist of elongated oval bowls (2.9–8.1 cm long, 1.3–7.2 cm wide, and 0.9–2.4 cm deep; avg. 5.7, 4.0 and 1.5 cm, respectively), short handles (1.1–5.5 cm long, 0.2–6.0 cm wide; avg. 3.6 and 1.8 cm, respectively), and moderately thick concave or flat bases (0.2–1.5 cm, avg. 0.9 cm). Except for Type E specimens, the vast majority of items had basins with small volume capacities (seemingly ranging between 30 and 100 mL in most cases). In one example, the handle was pierced (Figure 3(24)), and a few were decorated. Spoons’ decorations include red paint (e.g., Figure 3(5,6,11)), and, in one case (Figure 3(5)), the handle bears an impressed herringbone design.
As noted above, the spoons are morphologically diverse (Table 1), appearing in different quantities and possibly reflecting a wish to produce several distinct types (although these sizes are not standardized). It seems that in most cases, the handle is notably shorter than the basin (as opposed to many modern spoons); the basin’s base is frequently curved, and their inclinations vary. However, the paucity of spoons in most sites (except Teleilat Ghassul), and the fact that the handle is often the only part preserved, makes drawing typological conclusions and tracing regional patterns, frequencies, and variations extremely difficult.
Type A specimens (e.g., Figure 2(1–4,6,8–9) and Figure 3(1–5,9,15,16,23,24)) are the most common, but they may have long (A1, e.g., Figure 2(1–3,8) and Figure 3(9,10)) or short handles (A2, e.g., Figure 2(4) and Figure 3(1,7,16)), which may be oriented upward (A1a/A2a, e.g., Figure 2(1,2,9) and Figure 3(5,17)), horizontally (A1b/A2b, e.g., Figure 2(6,8,10) and Figure 3(1–4,10,11,12,19,23)), or downward (A1c/A2c, e.g., Figure 3(9,18)). Type B (e.g., Figure 2(5) and Figure 3(14)) is less common, and Type C (miniature spoons) is rare (Figure 3(7)), as are Type D ladles and deep spoons (Figure 2(7) and Figure 3(8,17,19,20)). The remainder includes Type E (unidentified) spoon fragments (Figure 3(6,21,22)).
Five samples of Teleilat Ghassul spoons were tested for residues and wear. Ancient starches and phytoliths of the TASH group (Triticum, Aegilops, Secale, and Hordeum), alongside starches of Zea mays L. (maize) and Solanum tuberosum L. (potato), suggest contamination during or after the excavation [70]. Other finds include fibers, coccolith, pollen, fungal spores, and feather barbules. However, due to the abovementioned contamination, we cannot be sure that these are Late Chalcolithic in date. Several spoons feature production marks, such as smoothing (Figure 4(1–3)). Two of the Teleilat Ghassul spoons display wear marks from use; one has some polish on its bowl’s surface (Figure 4(4)), and the other carries soot marks.

4. Discussion

Archaeologists have reported finding spoons from across the world and from various periods. In the southern Levant, spoons appeared in the early Pottery Neolithic period with the first pottery assemblages of the Yarmukian culture. However, their frequencies were low throughout, and until the Late Chalcolithic, only a few spoons were found in the region. It was only at the onset of the Late Chalcolithic period that spoons became more widespread in number and distribution, although they were never numerous. Thus, given their morphological distinctiveness, their scarcity likely indicates that they were rarely used. Interestingly, spoons seem to have almost disappeared following the Late Chalcolithic period. This reflects another (albeit moderate) change in table- and kitchenware between these two periods and in how food was prepared and, most probably, consumed during the Early Bronze Age (see also [71]).
Late Chalcolithic spoons continued a pattern that had begun in earlier periods; however, their increased numbers and wider distribution also entailed new subtypes due to variations in handle and basin characteristics. These patterns may be part of a broader trend toward increasing ceramic specialization during the Late Chalcolithic period, entailing a rise in the number of distinct pottery container types (see [31] (p. 303, Table 22), [32,36,72]), some of which were associated with burial contexts and cultic practices (e.g., [11,73]). Although the spoons’ small numbers prevent our clearly associating specific sub-types to specific contexts, it seems that spoons took part in the shifts in food handling and production during this time span, which experienced large-scale social, technological, and economic transformations.
Late Chalcolithic spoons and other rare vessels and tool types (e.g., strainers and specific vessel types) seemingly reflected uncommon, site-specific food-related practices. As these spoons were predominantly a phenomenon that was noted between the Yarqon Stream in the north, the Besor Stream and Beersheba Valley in the south, and the Jordan Valley in the east, we can prudently suggest that these were primarily created in this region. This might also explain why they disappeared after the Late Chalcolithic period, due to the changes characterizing this region during the Early Bronze I period, including a transition to increasing social complexity and urbanization and changes in the subsistence economy and kitchenware that accompanied this shift ([74] and see references therein). While the spoons’ southern orientation is apparent, similarly to other components of the Late Chalcolithic material culture, such as ivory, copper, and other vessel types [29,75] (bearing in mind various suggestions for Late Chalcolithic regional divisions, e.g., [5,76]), spoons sometimes (albeit rarely) crossed these regional boundaries, much as certain other components of Late Chalcolithic lithic [75], ground stone tools and vessels [10,77,78], metallic objects ([79] and see comprehensive references therein), and ivory assemblages [29].
The paucity of spoon specimens that are attributed to each subtype and the absence of a standardized repertoire suggests a non-specialized mode of production. Perhaps spoons were produced as ad hoc responses to specific foods, tasks, or contexts. However, in the absence of a direct link with organic residues, specific floral and faunal remains, and contexts of use, there is little to rely on for determining the various spoon specimens’ exact function and their connection with dietary habits and the subsistence economy [16,18,19,20,35,80]. Nonetheless, judging from the short handles of most spoons and the near-absence of burning marks, it is unlikely that they were directly exposed to fire. Thus, it can be inferred that most spoons were probably used for eating (soups? porridges? or other liquidized dishes?) rather than cooking (see [41,51]).
Could Late Chalcolithic spoons have had a specific function in specific meals or culinary events? Were they used by particular people for particular foods or dishes? Presently, it is hard to answer this question precisely because they are found so infrequently. However, perhaps spoons were used for a limited range of functions (or for specific foods, dishes, or occasions). Regardless of their exact functions, and as with many other Late Chalcolithic traits and fossil directeurs (e.g., items made of copper, pottery, stone, flint, and ivory), clay spoons’ function/s and relevance did not survive the cultural and economic transition into the Early Bronze Age (see [81]). While this could be merely a functional issue, it is also possible that the Early Bronze Age people preferred using (only?) wooden spoons for the same tasks.
In summary, the Late Chalcolithic period entailed a notable increase in spoon frequencies and distribution. This development seems to have gone hand-in-hand with other contemporary food-related technological phenomena, which corresponded with structural social and economic changes. While, at present, we cannot link any of the Late Chalcolithic spoons to a specific task, we think that most were used for food consumption and are probably best considered as participants in the comprehensive cultural transformations, manifested in the growing number of specialized pottery forms, during this time span.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, D.R.; methodology, D.R.; validation, D.R. and M.P.; formal analysis, D.R., H.A. and S.G.-A.; investigation, D.R. and H.A.; resources, D.R.; data curation, D.R. and H.A.; writing—original draft preparation, D.R.; writing—review and editing, D.R.; visualization, D.R. and H.A.; supervision, D.R. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in this study are included in the article.

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to E. Jakol and E.C.M. van den Brink for allowing us to use data and images of their unpublished Yehud spoons. We are also thankful to A. Henry for important advice concerning starch identification. We also thank S. Haad for her help with the graphics and A. Nativ for perusing and commenting on the final draft of the paper. Many thanks to J. Briffa and the Pontifical Biblical Institute in Jerusalem for providing access to the Teleilat el-Ghassul spoons in their collections.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Gilead, I. The Chalcolithic period in the Levant. J. World Prehistory 1988, 2, 397–443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Joffe, A.H. Slouching toward Beersheva: Chalcolithic mortuary practices in local and regional context. In The Near East in the Southwest: Essays in Honor of William G. Dever; Nakhai, B.A., Ed.; Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research 58; Boston University: Boston, MA, USA, 2003; pp. 45–67. [Google Scholar]
  3. Levy, T.E. Social archaeology and the Chalcolithic period: Explaining social organizational change during the 4th millennium in Israel. Michmanim 1986, 3, 5–20. [Google Scholar]
  4. Levy, T.E. Cult, metallurgy and rank societies—Chalcolithic period (ca. 4500–3500 BCE). In The Archaeology of Society in the Holy Land; Levy, T.E., Ed.; Cassell: London, UK, 1998; pp. 226–244. [Google Scholar]
  5. Rowan, Y.; Golden, J. The Chalcolithic period of the southern Levant: A synthetic review. J. World Prehistory 2009, 22, 1–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Golden, J. New light on the development of Chalcolithic metal technology in the southern Levant. J. World Prehistory 2009, 22, 283–300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Chasan, R.; Rosenberg, D. Basalt vessels in Chalcolithic burial caves: Variations in prestige burial offerings during the Chalcolithic period of the southern Levant and their social significance. Quat. Int. 2018, 464, 226–240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Rowan, Y.M.; Ilan, D. The subterranean landscape of the southern Levant during the Chalcolithic period. In Sacred Darkness: A Global Perspective on the Ritual Use of Caves; Moyes, H., Ed.; University Press of Colorado: Denver, CO, USA, 2013; pp. 87–107. [Google Scholar]
  9. Levy, T.E. The emergence of specialized pastoralism in the southern Levant. World Archaeol. 1983, 15, 15–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Rosenberg, D.; Chasan, R.; van den Brink, E.C.M. Craft specialization, production and exchange in the Chalcolithic of the southern Levant: Insights from the study of the basalt bowl assemblage from Namir Road, Tel Aviv, Israel. J. Eurasian Prehistory 2016, 13, 105–128. [Google Scholar]
  11. Shalem, D.; Gal, Z.; Smithline, H. (Eds.) Peqiʾin. A Late Chalcolithic Burial Site Upper Galilee, Israel. Land of Galilee 2; Institute for Galilean Archaeology, Kinneret College: Jerusalem, Israel, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  12. Meadows, J. Early farmers and their environment. Archaeobotanical research at Neolithic and Chalcolithic sites in Jordan. Ph.D Thesis, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia, 2005. [Google Scholar]
  13. Weiss, E. Beginnings of fruit growing in the Old World—Two generations later. Isr. J. Plant Sci. 2015, 62, 75–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Zohary, D.; Hopf, M.; Weiss, E. Domestication of Plants in the Old World: The Origin and Spread of Domesticated Plants in Southwest Asia, Europe, and the Mediterranean Basin; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  15. Grigson, C. Cattle keepers of the northern Negev: Animal remains from the Chalcolithic site of Grar. In Grar: A Chalcolithic site in the northern Negev. Ben-Gurion; Gilead, I., Ed.; University of the Negev Press: Beer Sheva, Israel, 1995; pp. 377–416. [Google Scholar]
  16. Grigson, C. Farming? Feasting? Herding? Large mammals from the Chalcolithic of Gilat. In Archaeology, Anthropology and Cult: The Sanctuary at Gilat, Israel; Levy, T.E., Ed.; Archaeopress: London, UK, 2006; pp. 215–319. [Google Scholar]
  17. Grigson, C. Shiqmim: Pastoralism hand other aspects of animal management in the Chalcolithic of the northern Negev. In Shiqmim I. Studies Concerning Chalcolithic Societies in the Northern Negev Desert, Israel (1982–1984); Levy, T.E., Ed.; BAR International Series 356; Archaeopress: Oxford, UK, 1987; pp. 219–241. [Google Scholar]
  18. Rosenberg, D.; Chasan, R. Fishing for answers: The rarity of fish and fishhooks in the Late Chalcolithic of the southern Levant and the significance of copper fishhooks. Int. J. Naut. Archaeol. 2020, 49, 229–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Chasan, R.; Rosenberg, D.; Klimscha, F.; Beeri, R.; Golan, D.; Dayan, A.; Galili, E.; Spiteri, C. Bee products in the prehistoric southern Levant: Evidence from the lipid organic record. R. Soc. Open Sci. 2021, 8, 210950. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Rosenberg, D.; Levine, M.; Klimscha, F.; Shalem, D.; Liu, L. From hangovers to hierarchies: Beer production and use during the Chalcolithic period of the southern Levant—New evidence from Tel Tsaf and Peqi’in Cave. J. Anthropol. Archaeol. 2021, 64, 101361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Gopher, A. Unresolved Pottery Neolithic Chrono-Stratigraphic and Chrono-Cultural issues: Comments on the Beginning and the End of the Pottery Neolithic Period. In “Isaac Went out to the Field”: Studies in Archaeology and Ancient Cultures in Honor of Isaac Gilead; Goldfus, H., Mayer, M.I., Shamir, Y., Fabian, P., Eds.; Archaeopress: Oxford, UK, 2019; pp. 96–108. [Google Scholar]
  22. Bar-Adon, P. The Cave of the Treasure: The Finds from the Caves in Nahal Mishmar; Israel Exploration Society: Jerusalem, Israel, 1980. [Google Scholar]
  23. van den Brink, E.C.M.; Rowan, Y.M.; Braun, E. Pedestalled basalt bowls of the Chalcolithic: New variations. Isr. Explor. J. 1999, 49, 161–183. [Google Scholar]
  24. van den Brink, E.C.M.; Barzilai, O.; Vardi, J.; Cohen-Weinberger, A.; Larnau, O.; Liphschitz, N.; Bonani, G.; Minies, H.K.; Nagar, Y.; Rosenberg, D.; et al. Late Chalcolithic settlement remains east of Namir Road, Tel Aviv. J. Isr. Prehist. Soc. 2016, 46, 20–121. [Google Scholar]
  25. Gilead, I. The stone industry. In Grar: A Chalcolithic Site in the Northern Negev; Gilead, I., Ed.; Ben Gurion University of the Negev Press: Beersheva, Israel, 1995; pp. 309–333. [Google Scholar]
  26. Hermon, S. Socio-Economic Aspects of Chalcolithic (4500–3500 BC) Societies in the Southern Levant: A Lithic Perspective; BAR International Series 1744; Archaeopress: Oxford, UK, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  27. Hruby, K.; Cendrowska, M.; Chasan, R.; Groman-Yaroslvski, I.; Rosenberg, D. The function of the south-Levantine Late Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age basalt vessels bearing circumferential depressions: Insights from usewear analyses. PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0252535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Rosen, S. Lithics After the Stone Age. A Handbook of Stone Tools from the Levant; AltaMira Press: Walnut Creek, CA, USA, 1997. [Google Scholar]
  29. Rosenberg, D.; Chasan, R. Ivories in the Late Chalcolithic period and their significance for understanding the contacts between Egypt and the southern Levant. J. World Prehistory 2024, 37, 221–256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Rowan, Y.M.; Levy, T.E.; Alon, D.; Goren, Y. Gilat’s Ground Stone Assemblage: Stone Fenestrated Stands, Bowls, Palettes and Related Artifacts. In Archaeology, Anthropology and Cult: The Sanctuary at Gilat, Israel; Levy, T.E., Ed.; Approaches to Anthropological Archaeology; Equinox: London, UK, 2006; pp. 575–684. [Google Scholar]
  31. Garfinkel, Y. Neolithic and Chalcolithic Pottery of the Southern Levant; Institute of Archaeology of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem: Jerusalem, Israel, 1999. [Google Scholar]
  32. Commenge, C.; Alon, D.; Levy, T.E.; Kansa, E. Gilat ceramics: Cognitive dimensions of pottery production. In Archaeology, Anthropology and Cult: The Sanctuary at Gilat (Israel); Levy, T.E., Ed.; Equinox: London, UK, 2006; pp. 394–506. [Google Scholar]
  33. Commenge-Pellerin, C. La Poterie d’Abou Matar et de ‘Ouadi Zoumeili (Beersheva) au IVe Millenaire avant l’ere Chreitienne; Association Paleorient: Paris, France, 1987. [Google Scholar]
  34. Commenge-Pellerin, C. La Poterie de Safadi (Beersheva) au IVe Millenaire avant l’ere Chreitienne; Association Paleorient: Paris, France, 1990. [Google Scholar]
  35. Kerner, S. Drink and commensality or how to hold on to your drink in the Chalcolithic period. In Commensality. From Everyday Food to Feast; Kerner, S., Chou, C., Warmind, M., Eds.; Bloomsbury: London, UK, 2015; pp. 125–135. [Google Scholar]
  36. van den Brink, E.C.M.; Chasan, R.; Rosenberg, D. Sifting through: The characteristics and significance of ceramic strainer-vessels in the Chalcolithic period of the southern Levant. Bull. Am. Sch. Orient. Res. 2021, 386, 177–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Campana, D.V. Natufian and Protoneolithic Bone Tools; British Archaeological Reports International Series 494; British Archaeological Reports: Oxford, UK, 1989. [Google Scholar]
  38. Giblin, J. From Hand to Mouth: How We Invented Knives, Forks and Chopsticks; Harper Collins: New York, NY, USA, 1987. [Google Scholar]
  39. Boyadzhiev, Y.; Boyadzhiev, K. Investigation at the Chalcolithic settlement of Varhari. In The Human Face of Radiocarbon; Tsirtsoni, Z., Ed.; Travaux de la Maison de l’Orient 69; MOM EDITIONS: Lyon, France, 2016; pp. 231–248. [Google Scholar]
  40. Erdalkıran, M. Neolithic bone spoons from Barcin Höyük. TÜBA-AR Türkiye Bilim. Akad. Arkeol. Derg. 2015, 18, 25–36. [Google Scholar]
  41. Horvat, K. Neolithic ceramic spoons–indicators of dietary distinctiveness in the eastern Adriatic Neolithic? Doc. Praehist. 2015, 42, 251–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Immonen, V. Functional ladles or ceremonial cutlery? A cultural biography of prehistoric wooden spoons from Finland. Acta Boreal. 2002, 19, 27–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Kerner, S. The Late Chalcolithic–Early Bronze Age Transition in the Southern Levant and Some Pottery from Hujeyrat al-Ghuzlan. In Daily Life, Materiality, and Complexity in Early Urban Communities of the Southern Levant: Papers in Honor of Walter E. Rast and R. Thomas Schaub; Chesson, M.S., Ed.; Penn State University Press: University Park, PA, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  44. Stefanović, S.; Petrović, B.; Porčić, M.; Penezić, K.; Pendić, J.; Dimitrijević, V.; Živaljević, I.; Vuković, S.; Jovanović, J.; Kojić, S.; et al. Bone spoons for prehistoric babies: Detection of human teeth marks on the Neolithic artefacts from the site Grad-Starčevo (Serbia). PLoS ONE 2019, 14, e0225713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Vitezović, S. Bos and the Bone Spoon Revisited: Spatula-Spoons in the Starčevo Culture, Southeast Europe and Anatolia in Prehistory; Essays in Honor of Vassil Nikolov on His 65th Anniversary: Habelt, Bonn, 2016; pp. 189–196. [Google Scholar]
  46. Wierzbicka, A. The idea of a ‘spoon’: Semantics, prehistory, and cultural logic. Lang. Sci. 2015, 47, 66–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Davidovich, U.; Porat, R.; Boaretto, E.; Liphschitz, N.; Mazar, A.; Frumkin, A. Nahal Asa’el Cave: A unique 6000-year-old wooden installation and the Late Chalcolithic presence in hardly accessible caves in the Judean Desert, Israel. In Proceedings of the 16th International Congress of Speleology, Brno, Czech Republic, 21–28 July 2013; Filippi, M., Bosák, P., Eds.; Czech Speleological Society: Prague, Czech Republic, 2013; Volume 1, pp. 123–128. [Google Scholar]
  48. Schick, T. Nahal Hemar Cave: Cordage, basketry and fabrics. Atiqot 1988, 38, 31–43. [Google Scholar]
  49. Shamir, O. Textiles, basketry and other organic artefacts of the Chalcolithic period in the southern Levant. In Masters of Fire: Copper Age Art from Israel; Sebbane, M., Misch-Brandl, O., Master, D.M., Eds.; New York University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2014; pp. 139–152. [Google Scholar]
  50. Rosenberg, D.; Galili, E.; Langgut, D. The unseen record: Ninth–seventh millennia cal. BP wooden and basketry objects from submerged settlements off the Carmel Coast, Israel. Forests 2023, 14, 2373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Lee, J.R. Chalcolithic Ghassul: New Aspects and Master Typology. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel, 1973. Unpublished.
  52. North, R.S.J. Ghassul 1960, Excavation Report; Analecta Biblica 14; Pontifical Biblical Institute: Rome, Italy, 1961. [Google Scholar]
  53. Bourke, S.; Lovell, J.; Sparks, R.; Seaton, P.; Mairs, L.; Meadows, J. A second and third season of renewed excavations by the University of Sydney at Tulaylat al-Ghassul (1995–1997). Annu. Dep. Antiq. Jordan 2000, 44, 37–89. [Google Scholar]
  54. Blackham, M. Teleilat Ghassul: An appraisal of Robert North’s excavations (1959–1960). Levant 1999, 31, 19–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Mallon, A.; Koeppel, R.; Neuville, R. Teleilat Ghassul I, 1929–1932; Pontifical Biblical Institute: Rome, Italy, 1934. [Google Scholar]
  56. Perrot, J. Umm Qatafa and Umm Qala’a: Two Ghassulian caves in the Judean Desert. Eretz 1992, 23, 100–111. [Google Scholar]
  57. Macdonald, E.; Starkey, J.L.; Harding, L. Beth-Pelet II; British School of Archaeology in Egypt: London, UK, 1932. [Google Scholar]
  58. Gilead, I.; Goren, Y. The pottery assemblages from Grar. In Grar: A Chalcolithic Site in the Northern Negev; Gilead, I., Ed.; Ben-Gurion University of the Negev Press: Beersheva, Israel, 1995; pp. 137–222. [Google Scholar]
  59. Dothan, M. The excavations at Horvat Beter (Beersheva). Atiqot 1959, 2, 1–42. [Google Scholar]
  60. Burton, M. Collapse, Continuity, and Transformation: Tracking Protohistoric Social Change Through Ceramic Analysis Case Studies of Late 5th–Early 4th Millennium Societies in the Southern Levant. Ph.D. Thesis, University of California, San Diego, CA, USA, 2004. [Google Scholar]
  61. Goren, Y. The technology of the Gilat pottery assemblage: A reassessment. In Archaeology, Anthropology and Cult: The Sanctuary at Gilat (Israel); Levy, T.E., Ed.; Equinox: London, UK, 2006; pp. 369–393. [Google Scholar]
  62. Brandel, B. Observations on the Early Bronze Age Strata of Tel Erani. In L’Urbanisation de la Palestine L’adge du Bronze Ancien: Bilan et Perspectives des Recherches Actuelles; De Miroschedji, P., Ed.; BAR International Series 527; British Archaeological Reports: Oxford, UK, 1989; pp. 357–387. [Google Scholar]
  63. Khalaily, H.; Milevski, I. The pottery assemblage of Khirbet el-‘Alya East. In The Shamir, the Letters, the Writing, and the Tablets (Mishnah Avot 5:6), Studies in Honor of Professor Shamir Yona; Gruber, M.I., Yogev, J., Sivan, D., Stuckenbruck, L.T., Assis, E., Eds.; Ostracon: Jerusalem, Israel, 2023. [Google Scholar]
  64. Porath, Y. A Chalcolithic house at Fasa’eI. Atiqot 1985, 17, 1–19. [Google Scholar]
  65. Bar, S.; Bar-Oz, G.; Boaretto, E.; Cohen, O.; Dan, E.; Raban-Gerstel, N.; Rosenberg, D.; Winter, H. Ein Hilu—A Chalcolithic site on the desert fringes of Samaria. J. Isr. Prehist. Soc. 2008, 38, 153–228. [Google Scholar]
  66. Scheftelowitz, N. The pottery assemblage. In Giv’at Ha-Oranim: A Chalcolithic Site; Scheftelowitz, N., Oren, R., Eds.; Tel Aviv University: Tel Aviv, Israel, 2004; pp. 37–58. [Google Scholar]
  67. Jakol, E.; van den Brink, E.C.M.; (Israel Antiquities Authority, Jerusalem, Israel). Personal comunication, 2020.
  68. Dayan, Y. Tel Turmus in the Huleh Valley. Isr. Explor. J. 1969, 19, 65–78. [Google Scholar]
  69. Ibrahim, M. Third season of excavations at Sahab, 1975 (preliminary report). Annu. Dep. Antiq. Jordan 1975, 20, 69–82. [Google Scholar]
  70. Ahituv, H.; Henry, A.G. An initial key of starch grains from edible plants of the Eastern Mediterranean for use in identifying archaeological starches. J. Archaeol. Sci. Rep. 2022, 42, 103396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Hruby, K.; Rosenberg, D. Urbanizing food: New perspectives on food processing tools in the Early Bronze Age villages and early urban centers of the southern Levant. J. Anthropol. Archaeol. 2023, 72, 101549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Amiran, R. A New Type of Chalcolithic Ritual Vessel and Some Implications for the Nahal Mishmar Hoard. Bull. Am. Sch. Orient. Res. 1986, 262, 83–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Scheftelowitz, N.; Fabian, P.; Gilead, I. The Clog-Shaped Vessel and the Tray: New Ghassulian Pottery Types. Isr. Explor. J. 2013, 63, 121–130. [Google Scholar]
  74. Greenberg, R. The Archaeology of the Bronze Age Levant. From Urban Origins to the Demise of City–States, 3700–1000 BCE; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Rosenberg, D.; Shimelmitz, R. Perforated stars: Networks of prestige item exchange and the role of perforated flint objects in the Late Chalcolithic of the southern Levant. Curr. Anthropol. 2017, 58, 295–306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Lovell, J. The Late Neolithic and Chalcolithic Periods in the Southern Levant; New Data from the Site of Teleilat Ghassul, Jordan; British Archaeological Reports International Series 974; Monographs of the Sydney University Teleilat Ghassul Project I: Oxford, UK, 2001. [Google Scholar]
  77. Chasan, R.; Rosenberg, D. Getting into shape: The significance of decorated basalt vessels during the Chalcolithic period of the southern Levant. Paléorient 2019, 45, 53–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Chasan, R.; van den Brink, E.C.M.; Rosenberg, D. “Crossing the lines”—Elaborately decorated Chalcolithic basalt bowls in the southern Levant. Bull. Am. Sch. Orient. Res. 2019, 381, 145–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Rosenberg, D.; Buchman, E.; Shalev, S.; Bar, S. Evidence for Late Chalcolithic copper recycling in the southern Levant: New discoveries from the Fazael Basin. Doc. Prehist. 2020, 47, 246–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Joffe, A.H. Alcohol and social complexity in ancient western Asia. Curr. Anthropol. 1998, 39, 297–322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Yekutieli, Y. Let’s Make a Clean Slate of the Past! Alternative Reading of the Chalcolithic—Early Bronze Age Transition. In Transitions During the Early Bronze Age in the Levant; Adams, M., Roux, V., Eds.; Ägypten und Altes Testament 109; Zaphon: Munster, Germany, 2022; pp. 117–120. [Google Scholar]
Humans 04 00025 g001
Figure 1. The distribution of Late Chalcolithic spoons in the southern Levant.
Figure 1. The distribution of Late Chalcolithic spoons in the southern Levant.
Humans 04 00025 g001
Humans 04 00025 g002
Figure 2. Some of the Late Chalcolithic spoons recovered from Teleilat Ghassul.
Figure 2. Some of the Late Chalcolithic spoons recovered from Teleilat Ghassul.
Humans 04 00025 g002
Humans 04 00025 g003
Figure 3. Late Chalcolithic spoons (all redrawn from the originals, see Table 1, and made of clay unless otherwise specified): 1. Umm Qatafa grey stone spoon; 2,3. Far’ah, Site D1; 4–6. Grar; 7. Gilat; 8,9. Tel Erani; 10–13. Khirbet el-‘Alya East; 14. Fazael; 15,16. Ein Hilu; 17–19. Giv’at HaOranim; 20–22. Yehud; 23. Tel Turmus; 24. Sahab—no scale was provided).
Figure 3. Late Chalcolithic spoons (all redrawn from the originals, see Table 1, and made of clay unless otherwise specified): 1. Umm Qatafa grey stone spoon; 2,3. Far’ah, Site D1; 4–6. Grar; 7. Gilat; 8,9. Tel Erani; 10–13. Khirbet el-‘Alya East; 14. Fazael; 15,16. Ein Hilu; 17–19. Giv’at HaOranim; 20–22. Yehud; 23. Tel Turmus; 24. Sahab—no scale was provided).
Humans 04 00025 g003
Humans 04 00025 g004
Figure 4. Production (smoothing and polishing) marks on some of the Teleilat Ghassul spoons.
Figure 4. Production (smoothing and polishing) marks on some of the Teleilat Ghassul spoons.
Humans 04 00025 g004
Table 1. The Late Chalcolithic typological scheme constructed for the current paper.
Table 1. The Late Chalcolithic typological scheme constructed for the current paper.
TypeSub-TypesDescription
A Spoons with shallow oval bowls and moderately inclined sides
A1Spoons with shallow oval bowls and moderately inclined sides—long-handled variants
A1aShallow oval spoons with long upward-oriented handles
A1bShallow oval spoons with long horizontal handles
A1cShallow oval spoons with long downward-oriented handles
A2Spoons with shallow oval bowls and moderately inclined sides—short-handled variants
A2aShallow oval spoons with short upward-oriented handles
A2bShallow oval spoons with short horizontal handles
A2cShallow oval spoons with short downward-oriented handles
B Spoons with shallow oval bowls, steep walls, and semi-triangular cross-sections
B1Spoons with shallow oval bowls, steep walls, and semi-triangular cross-sections—long-handled variants
B1aShallow oval spoons with steep walls, semi-triangular sections, and long upward-oriented handles
B1bShallow oval spoons with steep walls, semi-triangular sections, and long horizontal handles
B1cShallow oval spoons with steep walls, semi-triangular sections, and long downward-oriented handles
B2Spoons with shallow oval bowls, steep walls, and semi-triangular cross-sections—short-handled variants
B2aShallow oval spoons with steep walls, semi-triangular sections, and short upward-oriented handles
B2bShallow oval spoons with steep walls, semi-triangular sections, and short horizontal handles
B2cShallow oval spoons with steep walls, semi-triangular sections, and short downward-oriented handles
C Miniature spoons
D Ladles and deep spoons
D1Ladles
D2Deep spoons
E Unidentified spoon fragments
Table 2. Late Chalcolithic sites and spoons.
Table 2. Late Chalcolithic sites and spoons.
SiteNRaw MaterialPreservationContextDetailsReferencesFigure, This Paper
Teleilat Ghassul18+ClayNine seem to be intact or nearly soThe specimens were found in several lociLee [51] reported 17 spoons, two relatively large and two small ladles, and one small bowl with a tiny fragment of an upright handle; another spoon was reported by North [52], (24, Pl. IX: 8685), and several more were found in the University of Sydney’s excavations [53], (Figure 22: 13, 54: 60), including miniature variants. These miniature spoons were found in the site’s latest levels, whereas larger specimens were more common in the preceding levels [54], (p. 60].
The spoon bowls’ morphometric values vary. Most are oval when in plain view (one is almost round); however, while some are wide (e.g., Figure 2(1,2,4,10)), others are narrow (e.g., Figure 2(5,6,8,11)) or irregular (e.g., Figure 2(3,9)). The bowls are usually ca. 1–2 cm deep, 3–8 cm long, and 3–5 cm wide. The bowls’ bases are generally concave, and their estimated capacities are often small (a few cc’s only in most cases).
At least one spoon was painted red [51], (C751: g). Most handles are long and tapering (e.g., Figure 2(2,8,9)), but some are short and pointed (e.g., Figure 2(4,11)) or oval. The handles are located on the bowl’s narrow side; they may be straight (e.g., Figure 2(1,2,5,6)) or curved to the right or left (e.g., Figure 2(4,8,9)). The handles may form a continuous plane with the bowls’ rim (e.g., Figure 2(4,6,8,11)) or a small step below it (e.g., Figure 2(3,10)). Occasionally, the handle curves upward (e.g., Figure 2(1,2,5,9)); in one case, it curves downward.		[53], (Figure 22: 13), [54], (p.60),
[51], (pp. 59, 100–103), [55], (pl. 44:55–58, 64; Figure 55),
[52], (p. 24, pl. IX:8685).		Figure 2
Nahal Mishmar1Clay ? Found in the Cave of the Treasure.A single spoon was reported, but no details were provided.[22], (p. 135)
Umm Qatafa1StoneDamagedFound in the “shelter”.A grey, possibly chalk, stone spoon. Its bowl is oval and shallow, and the handle is relatively short and bulky with a rounded end.[56], (Figure 4:4)Figure 3(1)
Farʻah, Site D12ClayBrokenThese specimens feature the handle and bowl’s proximal part. One is shallow with a short-pinched handle, while the other is relatively deep with a tapering handle.[57], (p. 5, pl. XXVIII:22, 27)Figure 3(2,3)
Grar3ClayBroken All three specimens comprise handles, while two also have partly preserved bowls, which seem oval and shallow. The handles were probably short; one appears to ascend moderately, while another features an abrupt rise near its end. Two handles are red-slipped or painted, while one also features an incised or impressed herringbone design.[58], (Figure 4.18:5,7,8)Figure 3(4–6)
Horvat Beter3Clay? No details were provided.[59], (p. 15)
Shiqmim1ClayBroken A broken spoon handle; no further details were offered.[60], (p. 232)
Gilat1ClayBrokenFound in a pit? A miniature bulky spoon with a broken oval bowl, a thick base, and a downward-inclined handle. The fabric consists of a loess matrix with quartz and chalk sand inclusions.[32], (pl. 10.36:4), [61], (Appendix A)Figure 3(7)
Tel Erani3ClayBroken One spoon is nearly complete; it has a deep, round bowl with diverging walls, a thick base, and a sturdy handle tapering toward its now broken end. Another comprises a tapering and down-curved handle and an incomplete oval bowl. The handle seems to have been as long as the bowl.[62], (Figure 5:8–9)Figure 3(8,9)
Khirbet el-‘Alya East4ClayBrokenThe spoons were found in four different loci.One spoon consists of most of the bowl and much of the handle. It is made of whitish clay with black inclusions, is painted red, and bears two rows of oblique incisions. Another red-painted spoon is made of creamy clay (with no inclusions) and preserves a pointed handle and a small part of the bowl. The third specimen is a nearly complete pointed spoon handle made of whitish clay with various inclusions. The fourth item is a medial handle segment of a spoon made of beige clay with small grey inclusions.[63], (p. 66, Figure 19:1–4)Figure 3(10–13)
Fazael3ClayAt least one is broken One spoon comprises a deep oval bowl, the deepest part of which was at its proximal end, and a handle fragment with an oval cross-section.[64], (p. 8, Figure 5:8)Figure 3(14)
Ein Hilu2ClayBroken One is slightly deeper and apparently larger than the other; both specimens have rounded rims.[65], (p. 185, Figure 27:3–4)Figure 3(15,16)
Giv’at HaOranim5ClayAt least three are brokenSpoons were found in four different loci. Two were found in a pit with a complete basalt bowl, five incomplete fenestrated bowls, and a few pottery sherds.Their bowls were oval; two were reconstructed as deep and one as shallow. The deepest reconstructed spoon has a short, bulky, tapering handle with a slightly raised end. The second deep-bowled spoon has a long tapering handle with a raised end. The shallow bowl’s handle seems to descend slightly toward its end.[66], (p. 52, Figure 3.16:9–11)Figure 3(17–19)
Yehud3ClayBroken One item comprises parts of the handle and the bowl of a large spoon. The other two specimens are elongated handle fragments with round–oval cross-sections.[67]Figure 3(20–22)
Tel Turmus1ClayBroken It features a thick, stumpy handle with a rounded end and parts of a relatively deep bowl.[68], (Figure 8:11)Figure 3(23)
Sahāb1StoneWhole The spoon has a relatively large bowl compared to the handle, which is pierced near the end, suggesting that it hung from a string.[69], (p. 76, pl. XXXIV:2, right)Figure 3(24)
Total52+
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Rosenberg, D.; Gur-Arieh, S.; Pearl, M.; Ahituv, H. (Don’t) Use Your Hands: The South Levantine Late Chalcolithic (ca. 4500–3900 cal BC) Spoons and Their Significance. Humans 2024, 4, 385-399. https://doi.org/10.3390/humans4040025

AMA Style

Rosenberg D, Gur-Arieh S, Pearl M, Ahituv H. (Don’t) Use Your Hands: The South Levantine Late Chalcolithic (ca. 4500–3900 cal BC) Spoons and Their Significance. Humans. 2024; 4(4):385-399. https://doi.org/10.3390/humans4040025

Chicago/Turabian Style

Rosenberg, Danny, Shira Gur-Arieh, Motti Pearl, and Hadar Ahituv. 2024. "(Don’t) Use Your Hands: The South Levantine Late Chalcolithic (ca. 4500–3900 cal BC) Spoons and Their Significance" Humans 4, no. 4: 385-399. https://doi.org/10.3390/humans4040025

APA Style

Rosenberg, D., Gur-Arieh, S., Pearl, M., & Ahituv, H. (2024). (Don’t) Use Your Hands: The South Levantine Late Chalcolithic (ca. 4500–3900 cal BC) Spoons and Their Significance. Humans, 4(4), 385-399. https://doi.org/10.3390/humans4040025

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop