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

Game Piece

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

Description

Object Label: Senet (the passing) was one of the most popular and enduring board games in ancient Egypt. Players moved their gaming pieces along a rectangular board of thirty squares arranged in three parallel rows. Although this blue glazed faience board resembles the traditional senet playing surface, it has only twenty-one squares. Perhaps it was intended as a funerary offering that merely represented a senet board. Although the board and “pawns” displayed here may have formed a set, they could have been assembled from several sources. Caption: Game Piece, ca. 1938–1700 B.C.E.. Faience, 1 1/8 x Diam. 11/16 in. (2.8 x 1.8 cm). Brooklyn Museum, Charles Edwin Wilbour Fund, 36.3.6. (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 small, cone-shaped object with a glazed surface featuring abstract patterns.

The artifact is a faience cone with a glossy glaze, marked by swirling patterns in blue and black colors. The object appears to have a textured surface and a pointed tip, which may suggest a decorative or symbolic purpose. Its compact size and composition indicate it could have been used as an amulet or part of a larger decorative scene.

decorative New Kingdom excellent
Materials faience

Connections

Found at Egypt
Materials Faience

Cross-references (2)

  • BKM-Accession 36.3.6 tier-2
  • BKM-Object 3381 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.