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

Hepy, found scattered

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

Description

Faience, whitish, originally green glaze (?)

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.

A loop of small oval faience beads arranged in a circle, photographed against a plain background.

The image shows a single strand of closely spaced, oval/elliptical beads forming a circular necklace/bracelet-like hoop. The beads are mostly whitish or very pale with patches of greenish tint on some segments, consistent with either whitish faience or faience with remnants of glaze. No sculpted figures, cartouches, or clearly legible hieroglyphs are visible; the decoration appears to be limited to glaze color variation on the bead surfaces. The overall object appears intact as a loop of beads rather than a carved amulet. No additional writing system (Greek/Coptic/Arabic) is visible.

decorative Middle Kingdom (per catalogue); visually undiagnostic beyond being small glazed beads good
Materials faience (glazed ceramic)whitish/beige glaze remnantsgreenish glaze remnants (partial)

Connections

Found at Lisht
Materials Faience

Cross-references (4)

  • Wikidata-Q Q116281280 tier-1
  • Collection-QID Q160236 tier-2 (wikidata-mediated)
  • Inventory-Number 34.1.138 tier-2 (wikidata-mediated)
  • MET-Object 546443 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.