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.

Fragmentary painted Egyptian papyrus with multiple horizontal bands of hieroglyphic text and figures of kneeling/standing human and possibly divine attendants in white, blue, and black pigment.

The image shows an elongated, horizontally arranged papyrus fragment with several separated sections. Several figures are depicted in profile or frontal pose: two tall, robed figures appear on left and right, standing on or beside small ground lines; a central panel contains multiple rows of tightly packed hieroglyphic text (black/dark ink over a light background) and additional smaller vignettes. A dense cluster of iconography in the center includes what appear to be symbolic signs and short painted scenes; however, specific deities or royal names are not clearly legible at this resolution. The surface is heavily fragmented with losses along edges; pigment remains are most visible in the figures and central bands. No Greek/Coptic/Arabic text is visible, and no clearly readable cartouche is identifiable from the provided image.

religious New Kingdom (catalogue-specified; exact dynastic attribution unclear from image) fragmentary
Materials papyrus substrateblack/dark ink or paintcolored pigments (white, blue, yellow/ochre, red-brown)
Signs Hieroglyphic text blocks/columns (unreadable at this resolution) ×20

Connections

Found at Sedment Egypt
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.