Acheulean Handaxes: A Prehistoric Status Symbol in Sexual Selection

Acheulean Handaxes: A Prehistoric Status Symbol in Sexual Selection

Introduction

The Acheulean period, spanning over 1.5 million years, is characterized by the prolific production and discard of handaxes, often with symmetry and craftsmanship beyond functional needs. Matt Ridley, in Birds, Sex and Beauty (2025), argues this reflects Darwin’s sexual selection, where handaxe-making skill signaled male fitness to attract mates, akin to bowerbird displays. Whitehead et al. (2024) add a “pathogenic hypothesis,” suggesting handaxe discard mitigated health risks, reflecting hygiene awareness. This post extends the theory by incorporating conspicuous consumption—where resource-intensive behaviours signal wealth—and draws a cultural parallel with P.J. O’Rourke’s humorous observation on modern mate attraction, proposing that handaxes were the prehistoric equivalent of status symbols like a luxury car, enhancing reproductive success through sexual selection.

Theoretical Framework

Skill as a Fitness Signal (Ridley, 2025): Ridley, building on Kohn and Mithen (1998), suggests that the symmetry of Acheulean handaxes was a deliberate display of male skill to attract mates, similar to bowerbirds where females select mates based on bower symmetry. Symmetry, linked to genetic health (Perrett et al., 1999), would signal a male’s fitness, driving an evolutionary “arms race” in handaxe production.

Hygiene Awareness (Whitehead et al., 2024): Whitehead et al.’s study on bifacial butchery tools at Boxgrove shows that biological residues on flint tools could harbor pathogens, suggesting hominins discarded handaxes after use to avoid illness. This behavior could signal a male’s health consciousness, enhancing his appeal as a mate by demonstrating traits linked to survival and offspring care.

Conspicuous Consumption and Wealth: Conspicuous consumption, where resource-intensive behaviours signal wealth, applies to handaxe production (Veblen, 1899; Zahavi, 1975). Crafting and discarding handaxes required time, energy, and materials like flint, which were sometimes scarce. A male who could produce and discard multiple handaxes demonstrated resource surplus, signaling provisioning ability—a key factor in mate choice (Buss, 1989).

Handaxes as Status Symbols (O’Rourke’s Analogy): P.J. O’Rourke humorously noted, “There are a number of mechanical devices which increase sexual arousal, particularly in women. Chief among these is the Mercedes-Benz 380SL convertible” (O’Rourke, 1983). This quote highlights how modern status symbols, like luxury cars, enhance mate attraction by signaling wealth and success. In the Acheulean era, a well-crafted handaxe may have served a similar role: a “device” that, through its craftsmanship and the act of discard, signaled skill, health awareness, and wealth, making the maker more attractive to potential mates. Just as a convertible might impress today, a symmetrical handaxe could have been a prehistoric status symbol, amplifying its role in sexual selection.

Clarifying the Instinctive Nature of Sexual Selection

It’s important to clarify that the sexual selection described here operates as an instinctive mate-driven selection, not a deliberate choice to craft handaxes in order to “be sexy.” Early hominins were not consciously deciding to impress mates with their tools; rather, their behaviours were shaped by subconscious evolutionary pressures. Over generations, females instinctively preferred mates who displayed traits like skill, health awareness, and resource abundance—traits that handaxe production and discard inadvertently signaled—leading to a natural selection process that favored these behaviours without deliberate intent.

Integrated Theory: A Multifaceted Signal

The theory posits that Acheulean handaxe production was a multifaceted signal in sexual selection, combining skill, hygiene, wealth, and status:

• Skill: Symmetrical handaxes showcased cognitive and motor skills, signaling genetic quality (Kohn & Mithen, 1998).
• Hygiene: Discarding used handaxes reflected health risk awareness, a trait beneficial for survival (Whitehead et al., 2024).
• Wealth: The resource-intensive act of crafting and discarding handaxes demonstrated provisioning potential (Zahavi, 1975).
• Status: Like O’Rourke’s Mercedes-Benz, a handaxe was a prehistoric “device” that signaled mate quality, enhancing attractiveness through its display of combined traits.

A male who could craft a symmetrical handaxe, discard it to avoid contamination, produce another without resource scarcity, and present it as a status symbol demonstrated intelligence, health consciousness, wealth, and social standing—qualities likely to boost reproductive success through female mate choice.

Supporting Evidence

Archaeological Patterns: Large numbers of discarded handaxes at sites like Boxgrove, often after minimal use, support the hygiene and conspicuous consumption aspects (Whitehead et al., 2024). Their symmetry suggests a display purpose (Kohn & Mithen, 1998), while the resource investment aligns with wealth signaling (Zahavi, 1975).

Evolutionary Parallels: Multifaceted signals are common in mate choice across species. Peacock tails signal genetic health, parasite resistance, and resource investment (Møller, 1994). Handaxes could similarly combine skill, hygiene, wealth, and status, amplifying their role in sexual selection.

Human Mate Choice Studies: Modern studies show females prefer mates with traits indicating intelligence, health, and resources (Buss, 1989). Luxury items like cars enhance attractiveness by signaling status (O’Rourke, 1983), suggesting handaxes may have played a parallel role in prehistory.

Counterarguments and Challenges

Lack of Direct Evidence: Critics like Nowell and Chang (2009) note there’s no direct evidence that females judged males on handaxe quality, discard behaviour, or status symbolism. The hygiene and status aspects remain speculative without fossil or behavioral data.

Alternative Explanations: Functional (e.g., cutting efficiency) and cultural (learned techniques) explanations for handaxe production are more parsimonious (Machin et al., 2007; Wynn, 2002). Discard might reflect practical concerns like tool dulling rather than hygiene or display.

Resource Variability: Conspicuous consumption assumes resource surplus, but flint scarcity in some regions might have limited discard behaviours, weakening the wealth and status signaling (Machin, 2008).

Implications and Future Research

This theory positions handaxes as prehistoric status symbols, akin to modern luxury goods, integrating skill, hygiene, wealth, and social standing into sexual selection. It suggests early hominins were influenced by complex social pressures, enriching our understanding of their behaviour. Future research could include:

• Experimental studies on whether handaxe symmetry and discard correlate with perceived attractiveness in modern humans.
• Residue analysis to confirm pathogen presence on reused handaxes, supporting the hygiene hypothesis.
• Comparative studies across Acheulean sites to assess discard patterns and resource abundance, testing the conspicuous consumption and status angle.

Disclaimer

This theory assumes a cultural context in the Acheulean period where females predominantly chose mates and males competed through displays like handaxe production. While this hypothesis is reasonable given evolutionary parallels and archaeological patterns, it acknowledges potential objections, exceptions, and assumptions—such as the possibility of more egalitarian or varied mating dynamics. The focus on female choice and male competition is a simplifying framework for understanding prehistoric behaviours and makes no claim to reflect or morally justify present-day cultural norms or gender roles. Modern societies have diverse and complex social structures that differ significantly from those inferred for early hominins.

Conclusion

Acheulean handaxe production likely served as a multifaceted signal in sexual selection, combining skill, hygiene awareness, wealth, and status to attract mates. Drawing on Ridley’s skill hypothesis, Whitehead et al.’s hygiene argument, conspicuous consumption, and O’Rourke’s analogy to modern status symbols like the Mercedes-Benz 380SL convertible, this theory suggests handaxes were the “luxury cars” of prehistory. This framework bridges evolutionary biology, archaeology, and cultural commentary, highlighting the complexity of early human mate choice.

References

Buss, D. M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12(1), 1–49. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00023992
Kohn, M., & Mithen, S. (1998). Handaxes: Products of sexual selection? Antiquity, 72(276), 518–526. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/antiquity/article/abs/handaxes-products-of-sexual-selection/4A546341A997CA7F1E9F1053B7A18482
Machin, A. J., Hosfield, R. T., & Mithen, S. J. (2007). Why were some handaxes symmetrical? Testing the functional hypothesis. Journal of Archaeological Science, 34(6), 883–893. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jas.2006.09.008
Møller, A. P. (1994). Sexual selection and the barn swallow. Oxford University Press. https://global.oup.com/academic/product/sexual-selection-and-the-barn-swallow-9780198540281
Nowell, A., & Chang, M. L. (2009). The case against sexual selection as an explanation of handaxe morphology. World Archaeology, 41(1), 18–32. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/284414074_The_case_against_sexual_selection_as_an_explanation_of_handaxe_morphology
O’Rourke, P. J. (1983). Modern Manners: An Etiquette Book for Rude People. Atlantic Monthly Press. https://groveatlantic.com/book/modern-manners/
Perrett, D. I., Burt, D. M., Penton-Voak, I. S., Lee, K. J., Rowland, D. A., & Edwards, R. (1999). Symmetry and human facial attractiveness. Evolution and Human Behaviour, 20(5), 295–307. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1090-5138(99)00014-8
Ridley, M. (2025). Birds, Sex and Beauty. HarperCollins. https://books.google.com/books/about/Birds_Sex_and_Beauty.html?id=ZHW00AEACAAJ
Veblen, T. (1899). The theory of the leisure class. Macmillan. https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/833
Whitehead, A., Sinclair, A., & Scott, C. (2024). Cross-contamination via stone tool use: A pilot study of bifacial butchery tools. EXARC Journal, 2024(2). Retrieved April 26, 2025, from https://exarc.net/issue-2024-2/ea/cross-contamination-stone-tool
Wynn, T. (2002). Archaeology and cognitive evolution. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 25(3), 389–402. doi:10.1017/S0140525X02000079
Zahavi, A. (1975). Mate selection—A selection for a handicap. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 53(1), 205–214. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-5193(75)90111-3