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

Ostracon

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

Description

New Kingdom, Ramesside, probably later, Dynasty 19–20, ca. 1295–1070 B.C., probably later. Pottery, ink. H. 6.1 × W. 6.5 × Th. 0.7 cm (2 3/8 × 2 9/16 × 1/4 in.). From: Valley of the Kings, Upper Egypt, Thebes, Egypt. Excavation: Davis excavations. Credit: Gift of Theodore M. Davis, 1909.

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 fragment of a terracotta ostracon with faint red-brown ink marks on its surface.

The image shows a small, irregular, triangular/quad cornered fragment of fired clay (ostracon) with a worn, slightly mottled surface. Along the upper edge there is a short band of red ink traces; below this, the main field contains faded, reddish-brown writing that is too incomplete to read confidently. No illustrated figures, iconography, or clearly identifiable cartouches are visible. The background is plain and the fragment is photographed front-facing with soft studio lighting; no additional labels or inscriptions in other scripts (Greek/Coptic/Arabic) appear in the photo.

hieroglyphic only New Kingdom, Ramesside period; probably later (consistent with ostracon writing fragments; exact date unclear from photo) fragmentary
Materials terracotta potteryred-brown ink
Signs faded hieroglyphic/ink writing; individual signs not legible ×5

Connections

Cross-references (4)

  • Wikidata-Q Q116438428 tier-1
  • Collection-QID Q160236 tier-2 (wikidata-mediated)
  • Inventory-Number 09.184.775 tier-2 (wikidata-mediated)
  • MET-Object 561416 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.