Acheulean Diversity in Britain (MIS 15-MIS11): From the Standardization to the Regionalization of Technology

Abstract

The appearance of the Acheulean and the production of new bifacial tools marked a revolution in human behavior. The use of longer and complex operative chains, with centripetal and recurrent knapping, adapted to different raw materials, created long useful edges, converging in a functional distal end. How and why these handaxes vary has been the subject of intense debates. Britain provides a clearly defined region at the edge of the hominin occupied world for discussing variation in Acheulean assemblages. The environmental changes from MIS 15 to MIS 11 are significant in understanding population change, with probable breaks in evidence during MIS 14 and MIS 12, followed by several sites during the long stable climate of MIS11c. In this latter period, different Acheulean technological expressions appear to coexist in Britain. This paper draws together different studies, combining technology and geometric morphometrics to analyze handaxes from six British sites: Brandon Fields, Boxgrove (Q1B), High Lodge, Hitchin, Swanscombe (UMG), and Elveden. Compared to the earlier Acheulean of MIS 15, the assemblages of MIS 13 show increased standardization and the use of soft hammer percussion for thinning mid-sections and butts of tools, or sharpening tips through tranchet removals. Although there is regional population discontinuity through MIS12 there is no evidence of a marked change in technology after this glacial period. Rather, there is a development towards more intense shaping with the same underlying techniques, but with flexibility in imposed handaxe form. From MIS11 there appear to be distinctive localized traditions of manufacture, which suggest that a recognition of place and territories had developed by this time. These are expressed over medium time-scales of several thousand years and have significance for how we view cultural expression and transmission.

When is a handaxe a planned-axe? exploring morphological variability in the Acheulean

“…Nonetheless, at higher spatial scales, we have presented clear average differences between the continental regions of eastern Africa, the Levant and (northwest Europe). Work elsewhere on the European record also suggests an internal spatial patterning of handaxe morphology, such as between the Atlantic basin of western France and northern Spain, central France and southern England, and eastern France [ 51 , 52 , 87 ].…”

“…On the other hand, this period also sees a dramatic increase in the number of sites and in the diversity of materials and reduction schemes present in Europe, suggesting demographic changes associated with the increased intensity and duration of interglacials from MIS11 had a corresponding impact on hominin survival strategies (e.g. [ 87 , 97 , 104 , 105 ]). More consistent patterns of technological development may be expected for refugial areas of southern Europe that did not have to be abandoned during glacial periods, but these areas were undersampled in the present study.…”

The earliest European Acheulean: new insights into the large shaped tools from the late Early Pleistocene site of Barranc de la Boella (Tarragona, Spain)

“…Additional attention is paid to the large flakes (>100 mm, n = 2). To provide a comprehensive description of this collection, we performed technological analysis using the logic analytic system following other recent papers (e.g., Ollé et al, 2013;de Lombera-Hermida et al, 2020), which was complemented with different techno-typological, volumetric, and geometric morphometrical analyses (Lombao et al, 2020;Lombao et al, 2022;García-Medrano et al, 2022;García-Medrano et al, 2023). Detailed graphic information is provided by means of systematic photography and 3D scanning with diacritic interpretation.…”

“…The earliest Acheulean occurrence in Europe has been the subject of extensive inquiry in recent years, based on both new archaeological sites and updates on previously recognized locations. An Acheulean presence earlier than the formerly accepted dates for its first appearances from MIS 13 (Moncel et al, 2015;Ashton, 2018) has been documented at early Middle Pleistocene sites such as Bois de Riquet (US4) (Bourguignon et al, 2016;Viallet et al, 2022), La Noira (Moncel et al, 2013;Moncel et al, 2021;García-Medrano et al, 2022), Moulin Quignon (Antoine et al, 2019;Moncel et al, 2022) in France, Notarchirico in Italy (Piperno, 1999;Moncel et al, 2020b), and Brandon Fields and Fordwich in the United Kingdom (Davis et al, 2021;Key et al, 2022).…”

Bone tools, carnivore chewing and heavy percussion: assessing conflicting interpretations of Lower and Upper Palaeolithic bone assemblages

“…To tackle these challenges, researchers have been employing advanced statistical analyses, as demonstrated in papers by García-Medrano et al [136,137]. These new analytical approaches are providing a basis for comprehensive discussions regarding the importance of mental templates, levels of cognition, the extent of planning capabilities, and the social environments that facilitated learning in Middle Pleistocene hominins [34,[138][139][140][141][142][143][144][145][146][147].…”