Funerary Cone of the Overseer of the Double Treasury Khonsu
Description
New Kingdom, Dynasty 18, ca. 1550–1295 B.C. Pottery. Preserved L. 3 × Diam. 8.5 cm (1 3/16 × 3 3/8 in.). From: Upper Egypt, Thebes, Egypt. Subject: Hieroglyphs. Credit: Gift of Norman de Garis Davies, 1930.
The same text in other collections
Linked by shared inventory number
(MET-Object 554933).
Each record below describes this same artifact or text from a different angle.
- MMA 30.6.169 PNM text
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 circular/rounded funerary ceramic cone fragment with incised/painted dark hieroglyphic marks arranged vertically in a central column.
The object appears to be a small, rounded cone or disc-like fragment of light-colored pottery. Its surface is densely abraded/abraded-textured, with a prominent dark vertical band running near the center and additional dark hieroglyphic strokes on either side. The hieroglyphs are not fully legible at this resolution; however, the marks are consistent with an inscription format on a cone (vertical register). No figures of deities are clearly distinguishable—only symbolic writing marks. There is no visible Greek/Coptic/Arabic text. No clear royal cartouche is readable. The image quality and surface wear prevent confident identification of specific sign names beyond general “hieroglyphic inscription” markings.
Connections
Cross-references (5)
- Wikidata-Q Q116244192 tier-1
- Collection-QID Q160236 tier-2 (wikidata-mediated)
- Inventory-Number 30.6.169 tier-2 (wikidata-mediated)
- MET-Object 554933 tier-2 (wikidata-mediated)
- PNM-Object pnm:83907572 tier-2 (inventory-match)
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.