Inscribed Pot Fragment
Description
Jar label. Second Intermediate Period–Early New Kingdom, Dynasty 17–18, ca. 1580–1479 B.C. Pottery, ink. H. 31 cm ( 12 3/16 in.). From: Pit MMA 1017, embalming cache, Southern Asasif, unfinished temple area, Upper Egypt, Thebes, Egypt. Excavation: MMA excavations, 1920–22. Credit: Rogers Fund and Edward S. Harkness Gift, 1922.
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, broken fragment of an inscribed clay vessel with traces of reddish-brown ink or pigment forming a short line of marks near the lower right.
The image shows a single conical/trapezoidal pottery fragment, viewed from one face. The surface is tan/yellowish and shows firing/age discoloration and minor pitting. A thin, dark reddish-brown line of painted/inked marks appears near the lower right edge; the rest of the fragment is largely unmarked at the shown resolution. No legible full signs, cartouches, or deity names can be confirmed from the visible portion. No Greek/Coptic/Arabic text is visible. The fragment’s break edges and a slight surface seam suggest it is part of a larger vessel form; the visible marks are consistent with an inscribed pot fragment, though the exact content is unclear.
Inscriptions (1)
Visible text (machine reading)
Cross-references (4)
- Wikidata-Q Q116431288 tier-1
- Collection-QID Q160236 tier-2 (wikidata-mediated)
- Inventory-Number 22.3.363 tier-2 (wikidata-mediated)
- MET-Object 555891 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.