Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports 34 (2020) 102649 Available online 1 November 2020 2352-409X/© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. South African handaxes reloaded Matthew V. Caruana Palaeo-Research Institute, University of Johannesburg, P.O. Box 524, Auckland Park 2006, South Africa A R T I C L E INFO Keywords: Handaxes Thinning Knapping skill Acheulian Geometric morphometrics Pleistocene South Africa ABSTRACT Late Acheulian handaxes in South Africa seem to increase in morphological variability when compared to earlier forms, which contradicts longstanding notions that these tools become more refned in symmetry and thinness through time. Recent investigations into the symmetry of Early and Late Acheulian handaxes in this region have found no signifcant differences in planview or profle perspectives. However, shifting analytical focus onto cross- sectional shapes provides valuable insight into morphological features that distinguish handaxes from Early from Late Acheulian periods. This is related to an increase in the intensity of thinning processes in the Late Acheulian, which potentially represents a global trend. The results of this study suggest that cross-sectional shape variation is a powerful discriminating factor when comparing handaxes from different periods of the Acheulian in South Africa, although testing larger datasets is required to confrm these fndings. 1. Introduction Recent studies comparing Early and Late Acheulian handaxes in South Africa have noted signifcant overlap in morphological variation relating to both planivew and profle symmetry (Couzens, 2012; Li et al., 2018). Couzens (2012) and Li et al. (2018) compared handaxes from Rietputs 15 (~1.3 Ma) and Cave of Hearths (<780 ka) through tradi- tional morphometrics and the segmentation of 3D scans to examine shape change across the Early to Late Acheulian transition in this region. Their results demonstrated no signifcant difference in symmetry, which adds to a growing number of studies contradicting the notion that handaxes generally become more refned (i.e. increase in symmetry and thinness) through time (Cole, 2015; Hoggard et al., 2019; Li et al., 2016; McNabb and Cole, 2015; McNabb et al., 2018; Saragusti et al., 2005). In fact, Late Acheulian handaxes in South Africa seem to exhibit a marked increase in shape variability when compared to earlier forms (Caruana and Herries, 2020; Li et al., 2018; McNabb and Cole, 2015). Li et al. (2018) demonstrated that variance in metric proportions were higher in the Cave of Hearths handaxes when compared to Rietputs 15. Caruana and Herries (2020) also argued that Late Acheulian handaxes from Amanzi Springs demonstrate uniquely high levels of morphological variability when compared to both Rietputs 15 and Cave of Hearths. They suggested that the large and unstandardized nature of handaxes from Amanzi Springs likely refect a lack of extensive thinning and were discarded before reaching the fnishing stages of production (Caruana and Herries, 2020). As such, this evidence casts doubt on the accuracy of using planview and profle shape to predict the affliation of handaxes to Early or Late periods of the Acheulian in South Africa. However, recent studies examining Late Acheulian assemblages have noted that the complexity of handaxe manufacturing processes increases when compared to earlier periods (García-Medrano et al., 2019; Ship- ton, 2018 Shipton, 2016; Shipton et al., 2013; Stout et al., 2014). Thinning procedures have been highlighted in this research, which in- crease in intensity during the Late Acheulian and potentially differen- tiate handaxes from this period (see Stout et al., 2014). Li et al. (2018) noted that secondary faking (thinning) in the Cave of Hearths sample was markedly greater when compared to Rietputs 15, which was concentrated on the tips of the Cave of Hearths handaxes. This could provide insight into morphological features that characterize Early and Late Acheulian handaxes in southern Africa and further map shape change through time. However, the focal lens of research comparing handaxe shape has largely centered on the planview and profle perspectives (Hodgson, 2015; Iovita and McPherron, 2011; Li et al., 2016, 2018; Saragusti et al., 2005; Shipton, 2018; Shipton et al., 2019; Wynn, 1979). Examining the extent of thinning procedures through these viewpoints remains chal- lenging as the tip, midsection and base sections of handaxes were not likely reduced in a uniform manner (Caruana and Herries, 2020; Iovita and McPherron, 2011; Li et al., 2018). As such, comparing gross mor- phologies of handaxes may obscure signifcant variation related to thinning in any one of these sections, which calls for a shift in analytical perspective. E-mail address: mattc@uj.ac.za. Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jasrep https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2020.102649 Received 19 June 2020; Received in revised form 11 October 2020; Accepted 12 October 2020