Linen fragment
Description
Second Intermediate Period–Early New Kingdom, Dynasty 17–Early Dynasty 18, ca. 1635–1458 B.C. Linen. H. 23 cm (9 1/16 in); w. 25 cm (9 13/16 in). From: Courtyard CC 41, Pit 2, Burial D 3, On body, Asasif, Upper Egypt, Thebes, Egypt. Excavation: MMA excavations, 1915–16. Credit: Rogers Fund, 1916.
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.
Photograph of a small, irregularly shaped ancient Egyptian linen textile fragment displayed against a grid background, with frayed edges and areas of discoloration.
The image shows a beige, irregular linen fragment laid flat within a museum mount. The left edge is heavily frayed with visible thread bundles and a rough, torn boundary; the bottom edge is likewise irregular with losses. The surface appears plain (no clearly legible painted or woven motifs), though there are several darker stains and abrasion marks across the fragment. A darker, stitched/rope-like attachment or fold line is faintly visible near the upper left/left margin area. No distinct carved relief, metalwork, or figurative imagery is visible. No hieroglyphic, Greek, Coptic, or Arabic text can be confidently read from the fragment image; the dark shapes look like staining or damage rather than deliberate characters. A small red museum accession marking is visible at the top-left corner of the mount/paper backing, but it is not clear that this is part of the artifact inscription.
Cross-references (4)
- Wikidata-Q Q116280302 tier-1
- Collection-QID Q160236 tier-2 (wikidata-mediated)
- Inventory-Number 16.10.406b tier-2 (wikidata-mediated)
- MET-Object 546959 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.