Royal Book of Protection
Description
Caption: Royal Book of Protection, 664–610 B.C.E.. Papyrus, ink, b: Glass: 12 3/16 × 19 7/8 in. (31 × 50.5 cm) b: Object: 8 1/4 × 15 1/16 in. (21 × 38.2 cm) d: Glass: 12 1/16 × 19 15/16 in. (30.7 × 50.6 cm) d: Object: 8 7/16 × 14 15/16 in. (21.5 × 38 cm). Brooklyn Museum, Bequest of Theodora Wilbour from the collection of her father, Charles Edwin Wilbour, 47.218.49a-f. (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.
A horizontally oriented papyrus sheet covered on most surfaces with dense, brown-black hieroglyphic text, with multiple losses and irregular white lacunae where the papyrus is missing.
The image shows a deteriorated papyrus fragment with torn/abraded edges and numerous gaps. The majority of the surface is filled with tightly packed rows of dark ink hieroglyphs, arranged in lines consistent with Egyptian manuscript tradition. Several areas are missing (white breaks) including near the center and along the lower and right edges, making individual sign sequences difficult to read precisely at this resolution. No clear polychrome decoration, standalone figures, or clearly legible cartouches are visible; any royal titles would be difficult to confirm from the current image clarity. No Greek/Coptic/Arabic text is apparent. The catalogued material (papyrus and ink) is consistent with the visual appearance (brown papyrus with dark ink). The overall layout strongly matches a protective/protective-text papyrus type, but the specific title page/content and any exact spell name or royal name cannot be securely identified from the image.
Connections
Cross-references (2)
- BKM-Accession 47.218.49a-f tier-2
- BKM-Object 60691 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.