Ancient Egyptian princesses were skilled archers, trained with weapons, controversial study claims

A new study controversially claims that ancient Egyptian princesses were not merely royalty but also skilled archers and hunters, trained to use weapons from a young age. Researchers examined six mummies from Egypt's Middle Kingdom, dating back nearly 4,000 years, which were originally discovered in the Dahshur funerary complex in the 1890s. These individuals are believed to be members of the royal family, with four potentially being daughters of Pharaoh Amenemhat II.

“

Members of the royal family, especially the women, were active participants in skilled, physically demanding activities such as archery and hunting.

Lead author Dr. Zeinab Hashesh stated that the conclusion is supported by the development of the mummies' bones, which indicate significant muscle use. This physical evidence, combined with the discovery of weapons in their tombs, suggests active participation in demanding activities like archery and hunting. The study analyzed muscle attachments in the upper limbs, noting pronounced areas that correspond to repetitive, high-intensity actions such as drawing a bowstring or stabilizing a weapon.

“

This conclusion is supported by the way their bones developed to sustain heavy muscle use, which corresponds directly to the weapons discovered in their tombs.

The six mummies, including Princess Ita, Princess Khenmet, Princess Itaweret, and an anonymous woman identified as Princess Sathathormeryt, were found buried with bows and arrows. Princess Ita's coffin also contained a dagger. Two other mummies, Princess Noub-Hotep and King Hor, were buried with similar items. The study detailed specific findings for Princess Ita, noting strong upper-body muscle attachments suggesting habitual weapon use, and for Princess Itaweret, who showed signs of surviving fractures and evidence of being a skilled archer.

“

skeletal changes cannot reliably indicate a specific activity

However, the study faces challenges from other bioarchaeologists. These experts argue that skeletal changes alone cannot definitively prove a specific activity, as factors like age, genetics, and other repetitive movements can produce similar results. Furthermore, the identities of the skeletons rely on 19th-century labels, raising questions about their reliability. While acknowledging pronounced attachment sites on the bones, these experts maintain there is no conclusive proof that the muscle use was specifically for archery, only that the muscles were repeatedly employed.

“

we cannot be certain how reliable they really are.