A Middle Pleistocene abrading tool from Tabun Cave, Israel: A search for the roots of abrading technology in human evolution Ron Shimelmitz a, * , Iris Groman-Yaroslavski b , Mina Weinstein-Evron a , Danny Rosenberg c a Laboratory of Prehistoric Research, The Zinman Institute of Archaeology, University of Haifa,199 Aba Khoushy Ave., Mount Carmel, Haifa, 3498838, Israel b The Use-Wear Analysis Laboratory, The Zinman Institute of Archaeology, University of Haifa,199 Aba Khoushy Ave., Mount Carmel, Haifa, 3498838, Israel c Laboratory for Ground Stone Tools Research, The Zinman Institute of Archaeology, University of Haifa,199 Abba Khousy Ave. Mount Carmel, Haifa, 3498898, Israel article info Article history: Received 19 January 2020 Accepted 27 October 2020 Available online xxx Keywords: Tool use Technological innovations Ground stone tools Use-wear Lower paleolithic abstract During the reanalysis of the finds from Jelinek's and Ronen's excavations at Tabun Cave, Israel, we encountered a cobble bearing traces of mechanical alterations similar to those recorded on grinding tools. However, the artifact derives from the early layers of the Acheulo-Yabrudian complex of the late Lower Paleolithic (ca. 350 ka), a time with no evidence for grinding or abrasion. Accordingly, we sought to determine whether the traces on the artifact can be attributed to purposeful human action. We conducted a detailed use-wear analysis of the cobble and implemented an experimental program, gaining positive results for the hypothesis of purposeful human practice. We argue that the significance and novelty of early abrading technology is that it marks a new mode of raw material manipulationdone that is categorically different from other modes of tool use observed among earlier hominins or other primates and animals. Throughout the Early Pleistocene, use of stone tools was associated with vertical motions (battering, pounding, striking) or with the application of a thin or narrow working edge, leveled at cutting or scraping. Conversely, abrading consists in applying a wide working surface in a continuous sequence of horizontal motions, geared to modify or reduce the surfaces of a targeted material. The emergence of this technology joins additional behavioral changes recently identified and attributed to the Middle Pleistocene, illustrating the growing and diversifying capabilities of early hominins to harness technology to shape their environment. © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction During the second half of the Middle Pleistocene, a cascade of changes in human cognition and behavior unfolded across Eurasia and Africa (e.g., McBrearty and Brooks, 2000; Brooks et al., 2018). Spanning the Late Lower Paleolithic to the Middle Paleolithic (Early Stone Age and Middle Stone Age), these novelties included habitual use of fire (e.g., Roebroeks and Villa, 2011), projectile technology and hafting (e.g., Rots et al., 2015; Schoch et al., 2015), heat alter- ation of flint (e.g., Agam et al., 2020), and new forms of pre- determined technologies (e.g., Tryon et al., 2005; Adler et al., 2014; Moncel et al., 2020). This cluster of technological innovations re- flects the growing capabilities of hominins to exploit and shape the environments they occupy (e.g., Kolodny et al., 2015; Laland et al., 2014). In the Levant, the cultural phase associated with the early part of these developments is the Acheulo-Yabrudian complex, attributed to the late Lower Paleolithic and dating from 415/400 ka to 250/220 ka (Mercier et al., 2013; Valladas et al., 2013). Among its features is noteworthy for the systematic use of fire and hearth-centered ac- tivities (Stiner et al., 2011; Blasco et al., 2014; Shimelmitz et al., 2014a), increased use of base camps, and the formation of com- plex socioeconomic practices (Stiner et al., 2009; Kuhn et al., 2018; Blasco et al., 2019; Kuhn and Stiner, 2019). Notably, the Acheulo- Yabrudian complex presents unprecedented lithic variability, indicating a new level of technical sophistication (Jelinek, 1990; Barkai et al., 2009). Evidence for greater lithic complexity includes the frequent use of predetermined blade and flake technologies (Shimelmitz et al., 2011 , 2014b), the formation of tools for shaping tools (Blasco et al., 2013; Zupancich et al., 2016), and the * Corresponding author. E-mail address: rshimelmi@staff.haifa.ac.il (R. Shimelmitz). Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Journal of Human Evolution journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jhevol https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhevol.2020.102909 0047-2484/© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Journal of Human Evolution 150 (2021) 102909