Scarab Inscribed for an Official
Description
Middle Kingdom, late Dynasty 12–early Dynasty 13, ca. 1850–1750 B.C. Amethyst. L. 2.5 cm (1 in.); W. 1.6 cm (5/8 in.); H. 1.2 cm (1/2 in.). From: Egypt. Subject: Hieroglyphs, Scarabs. Credit: Purchase, Edward S. Harkness Gift, 1926.
The same text in other collections
Linked as the same object. Each record below describes this same artifact or text from a different angle.
- MMA 26.7.305 PNM text
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 purple oval scarab-like amuletic object with carved/engraved motifs and a short field of incised hieroglyphic signs on its surface.
The image shows an amuletic scarab form (oval/rounded with a flat back suggested by the view) rendered in a deep purple material. The surface has extensive polishing and wear, but multiple incised lines and short strokes remain visible, concentrated mainly on the central area. A vertical incised “shaft” or divider-like line runs down the middle, intersecting other strokes. Additional individual sign-like marks (short, wedge-like strokes and curved/angled elements) are scattered to the sides, consistent with a compact inscription rather than a pictorial scene. No clear cartouche, royal titulary, or named individual is legible at this resolution. No modern or non-Egyptian scripts (Greek/Coptic/Arabic) are visible, and there is no legible English catalog text on the object itself. The object’s purple coloration is consistent with amethyst as catalogued, though the image does not allow material analysis beyond appearance.
Cross-references (1)
- PNM-Object pnm:83892842 tier-2 (inventory-match)
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.