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

Body of a Seated God Inlay

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

Description

Caption: Body of a Seated God Inlay, 305–30 B.C.E.. Glass, 1 9/16 x 1 3/16 x 3/16 in. (4 x 3 x 0.5 cm). Brooklyn Museum, Charles Edwin Wilbour Fund, 37.1147E. (Photo: Brooklyn Museum)

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.

Small red inlay-like fragment shaped like a raised leg/arm or body portion, shown against a beige fabric or textile background.

The image shows a small, glossy red (likely vitreous) fragment with a molded contour: a central body swelling with a projecting upper appendage that branches into two lobes/points. Multiple tiny pits and chips are visible on the surface, suggesting age or loss of detail. No clear seated-god attributes (e.g., head, torso with distinct iconographic markers, arms holding insignia) or any surrounding context are visible in this close crop. There are no legible hieroglyphic signs or Greek/Coptic/Arabic text visible, and no royal cartouche is present. The object appears to be a detached portion intended for inlay or decorative attachment, consistent with an inlay fragment rather than an intact statue fragment.

decorative Ptolemaic Period (per catalogue; iconography not sufficient to confirm from image alone) fragmentary
Deities unknown
Materials Glassvitreous

Connections

Found at Saqqara
Materials GlassVitreous

Cross-references (2)

  • BKM-Accession 37.1147E tier-2
  • BKM-Object 4122 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.