Metropolitan Museum of Art — Egyptian Art (Open Access) · vessel

Vase fragment, conventional floral design

Source of record: Metropolitan Museum of Art — Egyptian Art (Open Access) — catalogued by the holding institution. View the original record →

Description

Inlay fragment. Roman Period, 1st–3rd Century A.D. Mosaic glass. H. 2.3 × W. 2.1 cm (7/8 × 13/16 in.). From: Egypt. Credit: Gift of Helen Miller Gould, 1910.

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 small, irregular fragment of a Roman-period glass vase decorated with conventional floral/rosette motifs in red, green, blue, and white mosaic-like inlays.

The image shows a chipped glass fragment with a primarily dark blue surface. Over this are applied colored, flower-like elements: a large green four-/five-petal rosette at the center with a blue outline, and multiple smaller red and green floral/rosette units scattered around it. Surrounding motifs include thin, radiating blue/white lines resembling stylized blossoms. The fragment’s edges are broken, indicating it is a portion of a larger vessel. A handwritten/painted red inventory number is visible near the lower edge: “M.2718.” No hieroglyphic, cartouche, or Greek/Coptic/Arabic text related to the object is visible beyond the modern/collector marking.

decorative Roman Period (as catalogued) fragmentary
Materials mosaic glasscolored glass inlays/mosaic elements
Signs Inventory number
Visible text "M.2718"

Connections

Materials Mosaic Glass

Cross-references (4)

  • Wikidata-Q Q116272724 tier-1
  • Collection-QID Q160236 tier-2 (wikidata-mediated)
  • Inventory-Number 10.130.2718 tier-2 (wikidata-mediated)
  • MET-Object 570450 tier-2 (wikidata-mediated)
About this record's data
  • From the source institution — accession, description, dimensions, and dating are as catalogued by Metropolitan Museum of Art — Egyptian Art (Open Access).
  • 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.