Metropolitan Museum of Art — Egyptian Art (Open Access) · jewelry

Fragment of a votive bracelet

Source of record: Metropolitan Museum of Art — Egyptian Art (Open Access) — catalogued by the holding institution. View the original record →

Description

Faience

AI image analysis GPT-5.4-nano

Machine-generated from the object's image on Jul 2026. Not curatorial; treat deities, names, and signs below as the model's best reading, not authority.

Small rectangular fragment of turquoise-blue ceramic-like material, likely part of a faience votive bracelet, with worn surface decoration or incised markings.

The image shows a small, block-like fragment with a turquoise-blue outer surface and a mottled, dusty tan-brown area suggesting surface wear or loss. The fragment’s edges are broken and irregular, indicating it is not a complete object. No clearly legible hieroglyphs, cartouches, or Greek/Coptic/Arabic text can be read in the provided view; any marks are too worn/indistinct to attribute. The surface appears consistent with a glazed faience finish, with variations in color and pitting typical of weathering. No specific deity iconography is discernible on the fragment.

decorative New Kingdom (Ramesside period) — consistent with catalogue; visual details too limited to confirm directly. fragmentary
Materials faience (turquoise/blue glazed surface)

Connections

Cross-references (4)

  • Wikidata-Q Q116442684 tier-1
  • Collection-QID Q160236 tier-2 (wikidata-mediated)
  • Inventory-Number 09.182.19.15 tier-2 (wikidata-mediated)
  • MET-Object 573203 tier-2 (wikidata-mediated)
About this record's data
  • From the source institution — accession, description, dimensions, and dating are as catalogued by Metropolitan Museum of Art — Egyptian Art (Open Access).
  • AI-inferred — the image-analysis panel (deities, names, signs) is machine-generated and may be wrong.
  • Approximate location — most map points are plotted at the site centroid, not the exact findspot.
  • Inferred links — cross-references marked with a match method other than explicit-source-field were matched by us, not stated by the source.