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

Fragment of Blue Crown

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

Description

Object Label: Inlays The late Eighteenth Dynasty taste for opulence extended to inlaid wall decoration in temples, palaces, and large houses. During the reign of Akhenaten, skilled workmen began to create scenes by piecing together individual fragments of colored glass or faience. These works depicted the king, natural motifs, and faithful worshipers beneath the Aten sundisk. Many of these motifs had already appeared in paintings in earlier buildings, but the new medium added vividness and prominence. Architectural inlay continued into the Twentieth Dynasty. Caption: Fragment of Blue Crown, ca. 1352–1336 B.C.E.. Faience, 2 13/16 x 2 5/8 in. (7.2 x 6.7 cm). Brooklyn Museum, Gift of the Egypt Exploration Society, 37.409.

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.

Two blue faience artifact fragments on display.

The image shows two fragments made of blue faience. One piece appears small and oval, possibly a bead or amulet, while the larger fragment has a rounded, textured surface with a pattern of circular motifs. The composition suggests ornamental or decorative purposes, typical for jewelry or small personal items in ancient Egypt.

decorative unknown fragmentary
Materials faience

Connections

Found at Tell el-Amarna
Royals Akhenaten
Materials Faience

Cross-references (2)

  • BKM-Accession 37.409 tier-2
  • BKM-Object 3436 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.