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

Ring Fragment Inscribed with an Ankh

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

Description

Ring fragment, ankh. New Kingdom, Dynasty 18, reign of Amenhotep III, ca. 1390–1352 B.C. Faience. L. 1.8 cm (11/ 16 in). From: Palace of Amenhotep III, Malqata, Upper Egypt, Thebes, Egypt. Excavation: MMA excavations, 1910–11. Credit: Rogers Fund, 1911.

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 turquoise-blue faience ring fragment with an incised ankh symbol on the surviving surface.

The object is a small, rectangular fragment of ring material in a turquoise/blue faience body. The surface is smooth but worn, with pitting and small chips along the edges. On the front face, an ankh (looped cross) is incised in outline; the loop and vertical stem are visible though somewhat abraded. No legible cartouche or additional ornamentation can be confidently read beyond the ankh motif. No modern inscriptions or Greek/Coptic/Arabic text are visible. The reverse side is not shown in a way that reveals further detail. Overall condition appears worn but the main incised ankh remains identifiable.

decorative New Kingdom (as catalogued) fragmentary
Materials faience
Signs Ankh (life)
Visible text "Incised ankh symbol; no other readable script preserved."

Inscriptions (1)

Inscription #1 AI reading of the photograph

Visible text (machine reading)

Incised ankh symbol; no other readable script preserved.

Connections

Found at Malqata
Materials Faience
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.