Funerary Cone of the Deputy of the Medjay Simut
Description
New Kingdom, Dynasty 18, ca. 1550–1295 B.C. Pottery. Preserved L. 3.5 × Diam. 7 cm (1 3/8 × 2 3/4 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 554946).
Each record below describes this same artifact or text from a different angle.
- MMA 30.6.108 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.
Photograph of an inscribed Egyptian funerary cone-like object with a carved register of hieroglyphs on one face.
The image shows a roughly conical/rounded clay artifact photographed against a light background. The surface is coated in a darkened, worn material (likely soil/smoke residue or aged surface), with multiple incised hieroglyphic lines and signs arranged in horizontal bands across the face. The carving is heavily abraded, making individual signs hard to distinguish; however, the presence of grouped rectangular bars and other hieroglyph-like shapes suggests formal Egyptian script. No clear cartouche frame or royal titulary is confidently readable in the available resolution. No Greek, Coptic, or Arabic text is visible.
Cross-references (5)
- Wikidata-Q Q116244165 tier-1
- Collection-QID Q160236 tier-2 (wikidata-mediated)
- Inventory-Number 30.6.108 tier-2 (wikidata-mediated)
- MET-Object 554946 tier-2 (wikidata-mediated)
- PNM-Object pnm:83909228 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.