<p>Despite the widespread acceptance of the Clactonian during the earlier part of the Hoxnian interglacial (MIS 11c) in Britain, the subsequent occurrence of a non-handaxe signature early in the following interglacial (MIS 10/9) has received less coverage and remains contentious. Recent work on MIS 9 in Britain has re-evaluated the archaeology of the period. This paper offers a critical assessment of the non-handaxe signature in MIS 9 Britain, including the addition of Redhill in East Anglia from recent excavations. The paper is an evaluation of the evidence for distinct core and flake assemblages, analysing the technology and offering a comparison with handaxe sites from the interglacial. Four non-handaxe sites can be identified in the Thames and East Anglia; the technology of the artefacts they yield represents a base line that cannot be differentiated from the wider Lower Palaeolithic other than in terms of the presence/absence of handaxe manufacture. Due to the lack of positive identifiers, the MIS 9 technology cannot be linked directly to the Clactonian and should be treated separately. Given the temporal pattern of occurrence early in the interglacial in both MIS 11 and MIS 9, and no convincing functional or raw-material explanations, the assemblages are interpreted as a cultural signature. This fits into the wider variation across Europe during the Lower Palaeolithic linked to the ‘Cultural Mosaic Model’, and a further example of the nuanced chronological patterns emerging in the Lower Palaeolithic of Britain.</p>