Proteomics Reveals the Hidden Ingredients of Ancient Egyptian Adhesives

For conservators, the material holding an artifact together can be as informative as the visible paint on its surface. A new study used mass spectrometry-based proteomics to examine glues and adhesives associated with a broad group of ancient Egyptian artifacts. The researchers identified expected animal and egg proteins, as well as plant proteins linked to sesame and drumstick tree, or moringa.

The findings, reported in Science Advances on September 11, 2026, add biological materials to the scientific picture of Egyptian art and manufacturing. They also demonstrate how different analytical techniques can address different questions about ancient materials.

Why ancient Egyptian materials are difficult to study

Egyptian artifacts contain evidence of sophisticated manufacturing, including mineral pigments, binding media, adhesives, coatings, fillers, and structural supports. Yet the exact recipes used to produce them are often difficult to determine.

The central problem is sampling. A laboratory may need a physical fragment to identify an organic substance, but removing that fragment can damage an artifact that is unique, fragile, or too valuable to alter. Even a tiny sample may be unacceptable when the material is irreplaceable or when its location is visually significant.

This has encouraged the development of techniques that can examine objects without damaging them. Imaging methods can map elements or colors across a surface, while chemical methods can identify the compounds and biological materials present in minute traces.

No single technique answers every question. A mineral pigment, for example, may be investigated through its elemental signature, whereas a protein-based adhesive requires a different analytical approach.

What the new proteomics study found

The researchers applied mass spectrometry-based proteomics to glues and adhesives from a broad set of Egyptian artifacts. The analysis detected several kinds of material:

• Animal collagen, an expected source for animal-based glues
• Egg proteins, another expected component of some ancient materials
• Plant proteins, including signals associated with sesame
• Proteins associated with the drumstick tree, or moringa

The animal and egg findings fit existing expectations about ancient adhesives and painting materials. The plant proteins broaden the range of possible ingredients identified in Egyptian craft production.

The results do not establish a single standardized recipe. The findings instead show that ancient Egyptian adhesives and related materials could include both familiar animal-derived substances and plant proteins. The supplied report does not specify the number of artifacts examined, their individual dates, or the proportions of the different ingredients, so it does not establish how widespread particular recipes were.

What proteomics contributes that pigment analysis cannot

Pigments are usually inorganic minerals or manufactured compounds. Their composition can often be investigated by looking for characteristic elements.

Ancient Egyptian artists used a wide range of colors and materials, including:

Color or material	Examples identified in Egyptian art
Red	Hematite and realgar
Yellow	Goethite and orpiment
Blue	Egyptian blue
Green	Egyptian green
Black	Carbon-based materials
White	Calcite, gypsum, anhydrite, and huntite

These materials can leave elemental fingerprints that instruments can detect. Proteomics addresses a different part of the object’s history by identifying proteins in glues and adhesives.

That distinction matters because visible color does not reveal the full manufacturing process. Two paintings could use similar mineral pigments while containing different organic materials.

How the main analytical methods differ

Conservation projects can combine techniques because each reveals a different class of evidence.

Method	What it can reveal	Main limitation
Mass spectrometry-based proteomics	Proteins from animal, egg, and plant sources	It addresses biological materials rather than providing a complete account of every pigment or ingredient
X-ray fluorescence imaging	Elemental distributions associated with pigments and other materials	It generally identifies elements rather than a complete chemical recipe
Macro-XRF or MA-XRF imaging	Large-area maps of elemental composition across an artifact	Interpretation depends on the elements present and the instrument’s limits
Hyperspectral imaging	Differences in reflected or absorbed light that help map pigments and surface materials	Spectral signatures may overlap, and the method does not directly identify every ingredient
Microscopic or laboratory examination	Layer structure and physical condition	Results may be limited to the area examined

Proteomic analysis is therefore complementary to imaging. It addresses biological materials that elemental mapping does not identify directly.

Why the plant findings matter

The detection of sesame- and moringa-related proteins suggests that plant-derived substances may have contributed to Egyptian adhesives or related materials. That finding could help researchers reconstruct the range of ingredients used in Egyptian craft production.

The plant proteins might represent:

• A binder mixed with pigments
• An adhesive used to attach components
• A coating or preparation layer
• Part of a recipe containing both animal and plant materials

The current findings do not show which role applied in every case. They do, however, caution against treating ancient Egyptian adhesive technology as exclusively animal-based simply because collagen and egg proteins are familiar results.

The broader picture of Egyptian painting technology

The proteomics research fits into a larger effort to reconstruct how Egyptian artworks were made.

Egyptian artists used both naturally occurring minerals and manufactured pigments. Egyptian blue, for example, was produced from materials containing silicon dioxide, copper, calcium, and sodium carbonate heated at high temperatures. In 2025, Washington State University researchers re-created the pigment by varying the proportions of those ingredients and using kiln-like heating conditions.

Such reconstructions can show that a pigment was technologically feasible, but they do not prove that a particular artifact was made using the same recipe. Archaeological evidence and chemical measurements must be considered together.

Researchers have also used macro-XRF and hyperspectral imaging to investigate painted objects from the Greco-Roman period, as well as surviving traces of color on marble at Delphi. In 2023, scientists used a portable MA-XRF imaging device to study ancient Egyptian paintings as part of research into tomb chapels in the Theban Necropolis.

These studies can survey relatively large areas without removing paint from the object. They can reveal where color survives and where elements are concentrated.

What the research means for conservation

Identifying original materials can give conservators more information when they study and care for artifacts.

Understanding materials together

Knowing that an artifact contains animal collagen, egg proteins, or plant-derived material adds to the evidence about how it was made. That information can be considered alongside the object’s pigments, layers, condition, and conservation history.

Distinguishing different stages of an artifact’s history

Artifacts can contain materials from their original manufacture as well as later handling, repair, or treatment. Protein evidence may help researchers assess those materials, but it cannot establish their date or function by itself. The findings must be interpreted with information about where the material occurs and how it relates to the artifact.

Reducing unnecessary sampling

Non-destructive imaging can identify areas for further study before any sample is considered. This can help researchers target physical examination rather than remove material from an artifact without a specific question.

What remains unknown

The new findings are informative, but they do not provide a complete recipe book for ancient Egyptian materials. Questions remain about:

• How common sesame- and moringa-related proteins were across different artifacts
• Whether the plants were primary ingredients, additives, or incidental components
• Whether the proteins belonged to original materials or later additions
• Whether recipes varied between different objects or manufacturing contexts
• How the materials were processed before application

Answering those questions will require comparisons across more artifacts and coordination between chemical analysts, conservators, archaeologists, and specialists in ancient manufacturing.

The strongest conclusions will come from agreement among several kinds of evidence: protein identification, elemental maps, pigment composition, microscopic examination, archaeological context, and conservation history.

A more complete view of ancient craftsmanship

The study’s significance lies in showing that ancient Egyptian technology can be reconstructed at a finer level than visible pigments alone allow. Paintings and decorated objects included minerals and organic materials that worked together as binders, adhesives, coatings, and structural substances.

Proteomics makes some of those biological components visible. X-ray fluorescence and related imaging techniques map elemental materials, while hyperspectral imaging helps identify differences across painted surfaces. Together, these methods can provide a fuller account of how Egyptian artifacts were made and preserved without treating sampling as the first step.

The result is a broader understanding of Egyptian craftsmanship—one that includes not only recognizable pigments, but also the less visible biological materials used in ancient adhesives and related materials.

Sources

• Ars Technica, “Scientists unlock secrets of ancient Egyptian materials with proteomics,” published September 11, 2026: https://arstechnica.com/science/2026/09/scientists-unlock-secrets-of-ancient-egyptian-materials-with-proteomics/