Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jasrep Explaining the lack of emu eggshell material culture in Australia: Experimental working and archaeological implications Michelle C. Langley Australian Centre for Human Evolution, Environmental Futures Research Institute, Griffith University, Australia ARTICLE INFO Keywords: OES Moa Experimental archaeology Hard animal materials Hunter-gatherer Beads Containers ABSTRACT Ostrich eggshell (OES) disc beads are among the earliest types of personal adornment produced by Modern Human populations in African and Asia, and represent the first example of a raw material transformed into an entirely new shape — as opposed to simply perforating a whole marine shell — for decorative purposes. These same beads have continued to be made into present day as an important item in modern gift-exchange systems in sub-Saharan Africa, while OES has a similarly long history for being used as water (etc.) containers. Given the importance of OES to so many communities through time and space, questions regarding why a similar use of emu eggshell (EES) is completely absent from the Australian context is frequently voiced in archaeological forums. This paper will address that question through experimental replication of both OES and EES disc beads for direct comparison of their manufacture and use characteristics. It was found that while it is possible to successfully create disc beads in EES, there are several factors which make this raw material unsuitable for use in either social or utilitarian technologies. 1. Introduction Ostrich eggshell (OES) disc beads are among the earliest types of personal adornment produced by Modern Human populations (e.g., Ambrose, 1998; d'Errico et al., 2012; McBrearty and Brooks, 2000; Miller and Willoughby, 2014), and represent the first example of a raw material transformed into an entirely new shape — as opposed to simply perforating a whole shell — for decorative purposes (Miller and Willoughby, 2014). Their importance to human communities is re- flected in the fact that they were not only produced over an ex- ceptionally large geographical area (Africa to Asia), but over many thousands of years, continuing to be produced into the present day as part of integral social systems (Mitchell, 1996, 2002). Similarly, con- tainers made from OES featuring standardised and repetitive engraved patterns found prior to 60,000-years-ago in South Africa (Texier et al., 2010; Texier et al., 2013) find modern-day analogues in Kalahari hunter-gatherer material culture (e.g., Schapera, 1930; Silberbauer, 1981; Wannenburgh et al., 1980). Given the importance of OES beads and water carriers to so many communities through time and space, questions regarding why a similar use of emu eggshell (EES) is com- pletely absent from the Australian context are frequently voiced in ar- chaeological forums. This paper addresses that question. The Australian emu (Dromaius novaehollandiae) — along with the kangaroo — are currently Australia's largest native terrestrial animal prey and are still hunted (and farmed) for their meat, tendons, oil, feathers, and eggs (e.g., Roth, 1901; Thomson, 1939; Gould, 1966, 1969; O'Connell, 2000). Fragments of EES are frequently reported for Pleistocene and Holocene archaeological sites around the country, commonly being associated with hearth features indicating their col- lection for consumption, though no artefacts of any kind manufactured on EES have been reported in either the archaeological or ethnographic literature. Importantly, no reason for the exclusion of this hard animal material from use in material culture production is ever provided. In order to identify why EES was disregarded by tool and ornament makers (until very recently), data pertaining to its physical character- istics is compared to that of ostrich and moa — the eggshells of these large birds both having been utilised for material culture manufacture in their respective regions. Additionally, experimental working of EES alongside OES was undertaken in order to ascertain the plausibility of its use for ornament production. Results of these investigations indicate that ESS's are deficient in several crucial aspects, likely causing their exclusion from the extensive Australian Indigenous organic material culture repertoire. 2. Background: Ostrich, moa, cassowary, and emu eggshells and their use Emu belongs to the Order Stuthioniformes, otherwise known as the ratites; a diverse group of large, flightless birds with small wings and without a keeled sternum. In addition to the Australian emu, extant https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2017.11.011 Received 22 August 2017; Received in revised form 6 November 2017; Accepted 9 November 2017 E-mail address: m.langley@griffith.edu.au.