Canopic jar of princess Any
Description
Limestone, blue paste in inscription, linen, possibly human remains
AI image analysis claude-haiku-4-5
Machine-generated from the object's image on May 2026. Not curatorial; treat deities, names, and signs below as the model's best reading, not authority.
A limestone canopic jar with a human-headed lid, inscribed with hieroglyphic cartouches on the body, containing the remains of an elite Egyptian female during the New Kingdom period.
This canopic jar exhibits the classic form of New Kingdom funerary vessels used to store mummified organs during the embalming process. The lid features a well-executed human head with naturalistic facial features including carefully detailed eyes with kohl lining and defined eyebrows, a straight nose, and carefully sculpted ears. The head appears to represent a female figure of high status. The cylindrical body is fashioned from light-colored limestone with a smooth, well-finished surface. Prominently displayed on the lower portion of the body are three vertically-arranged hieroglyphic columns containing what appear to be cartouches and accompanying titles or inscriptions. The columns are filled with careful hieroglyphic carving, and traces of blue-green paste fill are visible in the incised lines, a common practice in New Kingdom funerary equipment to enhance the visibility and ceremonial importance of inscriptions. The overall condition suggests this object was carefully crafted and maintained, consistent with royal or noble burial practices at Deir el-Bahri.
Cross-references (4)
- Wikidata-Q Q116252216 tier-1
- Collection-QID Q160236 tier-2 (wikidata-mediated)
- Inventory-Number 10.130.1003a, b tier-2 (wikidata-mediated)
- MET-Object 543952 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.