Raised relief fragment
Description
Relief, Tomb of Nespekashuty. Late Period, Saite, Dynasty 26, reign of Psamtik I, 664–610 B.C. Limestone, varnish. H. 8.1 × W. 3.5 cm (3 3/16 × 1 3/8 in.). From: Tomb of Nespekashuty (TT 312, MMA 509), 1st chamber W. wall, Deir el-Bahri, Upper Egypt, Thebes, Egypt. Excavation: MMA excavations, 1922–23. Credit: Rogers Fund, 1923.
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 fragment of Egyptian carved stone showing traces of red-painted hieroglyphic bands on a light background.
The image shows a curved, broken limestone fragment with a flat front face. On the front face there are several vertical, reed-like or columnar marks in red paint, and a few thicker red strokes grouped into bands, resembling the remaining portion of an inscription or decorative field from a raised-relief surface. No complete sign, cartouche, or human/animal figure is clearly preserved, and no Greek/Coptic/Arabic text is visible. The sides and back are rough and unpainted, consistent with a broken relief block. Surfaces show light-colored ground with red pigment residue; a varnish or protective coating is suggested by the glossy look on the painted face but cannot be confirmed from the image alone.
Inscriptions (1)
Visible text (machine reading)
Cross-references (4)
- Wikidata-Q Q116276146 tier-1
- Collection-QID Q160236 tier-2 (wikidata-mediated)
- Inventory-Number 23.3.783 tier-2 (wikidata-mediated)
- MET-Object 547986 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.