Fitzwilliam Museum — Department of Antiquities (Egyptian) · papyrus

papyrus

Source of record: Fitzwilliam Museum — Department of Antiquities (Egyptian) — catalogued by the holding institution. View the original record →

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 painted papyrus fragment containing multiple vertical columns of Egyptian hieroglyphs alongside a standing male figure rendered in red, white, and black pigment.

The image shows a rectangular papyrus page with preserved margins and a dense block of Egyptian hieroglyphs arranged in many vertical text columns. On the right side, a standing human figure (male-presenting) is depicted in profile facing left, with a red-brown skin tone, a white kilt, and a blue/black hairstyle or head covering. The figure’s left arm is raised (hand near the chest/face area) while the right arm hangs down holding no clear object. Thin colored bands (red and black) frame portions of the text and border areas. No clearly legible cartouche or royal name is identifiable at this resolution, and no Greek/Coptic/Arabic text is visible. The material appears to be papyrus with applied painted pigments (ink/paint).

hieroglyphic only Third Intermediate Period (per catalogue ground truth); exact date unclear from image alone. good
Materials papyrusblack ink/paintred paintwhite paintblue/black pigment
Signs Egyptian hieroglyphs (unidentified due to resolution)

Connections

Found at Thebes
About this record's data
  • From the source institution — accession, description, dimensions, and dating are as catalogued by Fitzwilliam Museum — Department of Antiquities (Egyptian).
  • 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.