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

Fragment of a votive tile

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.

Triangular ceramic/faience fragment bearing dark, blue-black cross-like marks and possible partial hieroglyphic/ornamental incisions on one face.

The image shows a roughly triangular fragment with worn break edges and a mottled surface. On the front face, there are several dark blue-black/gray marks: one central shape resembling a cross with short horizontal arms, and additional smaller cross/star-like motifs clustered near the lower right. Faint linear elements appear near the top edge. No complete royal name, cartouche, or clearly legible hieroglyph sequence is visible at this resolution. The reverse side is not shown, and there is no visible Greek/Coptic/Arabic text. The exact iconography and any deity attribution cannot be confirmed from the fragmentary, non-figurative markings.

unclear New Kingdom (Ramesside period) — consistent with a typical votive tile fragment, but exact dating not verifiable from the image alone fragmentary
Materials faience (uncertain; color is now brown with dark inlays/marks)ceramic/stone (possible; surface appearance resembles fired material)
Signs cross-like symbol (possibly stylized hieroglyph/ornament) ×2 small star/cross-like marks ×3

Connections

Cross-references (4)

  • Wikidata-Q Q116443033 tier-1
  • Collection-QID Q160236 tier-2 (wikidata-mediated)
  • Inventory-Number 09.182.19.33 tier-2 (wikidata-mediated)
  • MET-Object 576706 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.