Column with Hathor-emblem capital and names of Nectanebo I on the shaft
Description
Late Period, Dynasty 30, reign of Nectanebo I, 380–362 BCE. Limestone, paint. H. 102 × W. 34.3 × D. 34.3 cm, 169.6 kg (40 3/16 × 13 1/2 × 13 1/2 in., 374 lb.); H. with rod: 117.8 cm (46 3/8 in.). From: Egypt. Subject: Hathor. Credit: Gift of Edward S. Harkness, 1928.
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.
Limestone Egyptian column fragment with a Hathor-style face/collar element and vertically arranged carved signs on the shaft.
The object is a weathered limestone architectural fragment shaped like a column shaft with a projecting capital-like block at the top. Across the upper portion is a carved Hathor-emblem/face motif: a stylized human head with arched eyebrows, downcast eyes, and a downward gaze, centered on the front, flanked by symmetrical side elements suggestive of the Hathor sistrum/ornament scheme. Below the face, the shaft bears a vertical register of incised hieroglyphic signs within carved framing lines; the signs are worn and partially damaged, so individual characters cannot be confidently read. Faint red/orange traces of paint remain in areas of the surface and recesses, consistent with polychromy on architectural limestone. No Greek, Coptic, or Arabic text is visible. The image does not clearly show a complete cartouche, and the specific royal name signs for Nectanebo I cannot be securely identified from this view.
Cross-references (4)
- Wikidata-Q Q116245294 tier-1
- Collection-QID Q160236 tier-2 (wikidata-mediated)
- Inventory-Number 28.9.7 tier-2 (wikidata-mediated)
- MET-Object 553852 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.