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

Fragment of Colored Hieroglyphs

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

Description

Object Label: To represent sounds and ideas, the Egyptian system of hieroglyphic writing employed signs in the form of complete or partial images of humans, other creatures, plants, and objects. The intricacy and beauty of some hieroglyphs qualify them as miniature works of art, just as some large-scale figural representations are actually monumental hieroglyphs. Many of this vitrine’s reliefs were once as brightly painted as this text. Catalogue description: Culture Egyptian Caption: Egyptian. Fragment of Colored Hieroglyphs, ca. 670–650 B.C.E.. Limestone, pigment, 6 1/2 x 11 15/16 in. (16.5 x 30.3 cm). Brooklyn Museum, Charles Edwin Wilbour Fund, 60.131.2. (Photo: Brooklyn Museum)

AI image analysis GPT-4o-2024-08-06

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 fragmentary piece of Egyptian art featuring hieroglyphs and symbols.

This artifact is a fragment of a larger piece, showcasing intricately carved hieroglyphs with a focus on simplicity and clarity. Notable features include an Eye of Horus symbol and a depiction of a kneeling deity or figure with a colored headpiece. The composition is typical of decorative or religious artifact fragments from ancient Egypt, with vibrant pigments still visible.

decorative New Kingdom fragmentary
Materials limestonepaint
Signs Eye of Horus kneeling figure

Connections

Found at Thebes
Materials LimestonePaint

Cross-references (2)

  • BKM-Accession 60.131.2 tier-2
  • BKM-Object 3691 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.