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

Ptah-Sokar (?) Amulet

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

Description

Lapis lazuli, 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.

A string or line of small drilled amulets/figural beads in blue and green stones arranged in a row, including several human-figure or deity-like forms.

The image shows a laid-out group of small, elongated, blue faience or stone beads and several molded/figural elements that resemble human-standing figures (with heads and arms suggested) among otherwise uniform cylindrical/rounded beads. Several beads are blue with darker speckling; a few are green and one or two appear darker gray/black. Each piece has a small drilled hole or perforation consistent with stringing. No clear hieroglyphic signs, cartouches, or Greek/Coptic/Arabic text are visible on the shown surfaces. The overall appearance fits an amulet/bead assemblage rather than an inscribed plaque; specific identification as “Ptah-Sokar (?)” cannot be confirmed visually from this angle.

decorative Middle Kingdom (per catalogue; visually undiagnostic) good
Deities Ptah-Sokar (uncertain, catalogue-only)
Materials blue faience (visible)green faience/stone (visible)dark stone/ceramic (unclear)

Connections

Found at Abydos
Deities PtahSokar

Cross-references (4)

  • Wikidata-Q Q116432926 tier-1
  • Collection-QID Q160236 tier-2 (wikidata-mediated)
  • Inventory-Number 04.18.33 tier-2 (wikidata-mediated)
  • MET-Object 558519 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.