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 an Egyptian votive object, photographed against a neutral background.

The image shows a small, roughly rectangular fragment with worn surfaces and rounded edges. The fragment is light-colored overall with patches of pale green/blue and brownish staining, consistent with weathering of a ceramic or vitreous material. No clear decorative motifs, hieroglyphs, cartouches, or identifiable iconography are visible on the photographed face; only general discoloration and chips are apparent. The object appears fragmentary and thin, in keeping with a broken piece of a small votive item (e.g., a bracelet fragment), though the specific bracelet design elements cannot be confirmed from this view.

decorative New Kingdom, Ramesside (per catalogue ground truth; visually cannot confirm) fragmentary
Materials unknown (weathered vitreous/ceramic surface suggested)

Connections

Cross-references (4)

  • Wikidata-Q Q116442703 tier-1
  • Collection-QID Q160236 tier-2 (wikidata-mediated)
  • Inventory-Number 09.182.19.26 tier-2 (wikidata-mediated)
  • MET-Object 573214 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.