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

Fragment of tile

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

Description

Glazed limestone

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.

Photograph of a broken Egyptian glazed limestone tile fragment with faint colored marking and incised/painted hieroglyphic-like shapes across a rectangular field.

The object is a small, irregularly shaped fragment of a tile. Its surface is beige/brown with areas of smoother glaze-like sheen and scattered darker specks consistent with surviving glaze or pigment. A rectangular composition is suggested by raised borders or incised lines, enclosing rows of worn hieroglyphic forms; the signs are not fully preserved, but multiple upright strokes and seated/box-like glyphs are visible. A handwritten red inventory number appears near the top center ("M.1677"). No cartouche is clearly legible, and no deities’ iconography is distinct from the remaining signs. No Greek, Coptic, or Arabic text is visible.

decorative New Kingdom, Ramesside period (consistent with catalogue; exact reign unclear). fragmentary
Materials glazed limestone (surface glaze/pigment visible)
Signs hieroglyphic signs (unidentified; worn) ×12
Visible text "Unclear/worn hieroglyphic text; no legible royal name or complete word preserved."

Connections

Royals Seti II

Cross-references (4)

  • Wikidata-Q Q116272665 tier-1
  • Collection-QID Q160236 tier-2 (wikidata-mediated)
  • Inventory-Number 10.130.1677 tier-2 (wikidata-mediated)
  • MET-Object 550200 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.