Brooklyn Museum — Egyptian, Classical, Ancient Near Eastern Art · architecture

Cap

Source of record: Brooklyn Museum — Egyptian, Classical, Ancient Near Eastern Art — catalogued by the holding institution. View the original record →

Description

Catalogue description: Culture Coptic Caption: Coptic. Cap, 395–642 C.E.. Wool, 10 x 16 in. (25.4 x 40.6 cm). Brooklyn Museum, Charles Edwin Wilbour Fund, 37.1762E. (Photo: Brooklyn Museum (in collaboration with Index of Christian Art, Princeton University))

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.

Textile pouch/cap-like fabric fragment decorated with dense gold-colored threadwork on a dark blue/black ground, likely a Late Antique wool item.

The image shows a small, irregularly shaped textile fragment laid on a white background. It appears to be a cap or pouch (catalogued as “Cap”) comprised of dark blue/black wool fabric with tightly worked, looping decorative bands and geometric/ornamental motifs in a golden/yellow thread. The piece has fringed or unraveling edges along the sides and bottom. Two looped/corded ties or tassels are visible at the top corners, suggesting a garment or head-cover closure. No clear hieroglyphic or Greek/Coptic/Arabic text is visible on the artifact surface. No cartouches or royal names are identifiable, and no deities are clearly depicted in a way that can be confirmed from this image alone.

decorative Late Antique (as in catalogue) fragmentary
Materials Woolgold/yellow thread (likely embroidery/metallic-look)dark blue/black ground textile

Connections

Materials WoolCotton

Cross-references (2)

  • BKM-Accession 37.1762E tier-2
  • BKM-Object 118282 tier-2
About this record's data
  • From the source institution — accession, description, dimensions, and dating are as catalogued by Brooklyn Museum — Egyptian, Classical, Ancient Near Eastern Art.
  • 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.