THE SPHINX

[Bianca]

                                                       T H E   S P H I N X






The Sphinx, unlike the Pyramids, is carved out of the living rock. It is 241 feet (73.5 meters) long and in parts is 65 feet (20 meters) high. It faces due east,towards the equinox.

It has been suggested that it was built around the same time as the construction of the Pyramid of Khafre [Chephren; c.2555-2532 B.C.E.] (the pyramid to the left of the sphinx), but recent findings by John Anthony West suggest that there are water erosions unlike any other marks found on other Giza monuments.Unlike sand and wind erosions, which produce horizontal marks, West found that the erosion marks on the Sphinx were vertical...like those associated by water,but unlike the sand and wind marks which can be explained thanks to the destructive forces of the Sahara,where did the water marks originate?

[Bianca]

Well we know that Egyptologist's believed that the Sphinx was built in 2500 BC in the time of the pharaoh Chephren (of Khafre), so why are there no inscriptions that identify Khafre with the Sphinx? Surely a great monument having to be painstakingly carved out of solid rock would have been celebrated but there is not even the slightest of mention regarding it's construction.

Dr. Robert Schoch, an geologist and professor from Boston University decided he would examine the new findings and come up with his own answers. He agreed with West's conclusion regarding the water erosion,and remarked that it was due to the torrential rains pouring down on Egypt's monuments at that time,so why are there no other water erosions found in Egypt to validate his theory? Surely there wasn't just a cloud raining down on the Sphinx?

Again Egyptologist's dismissed Schoch's theory, saying that the great rain storms that once happened over Egypt had stopped long before the Sphinx was built.Then in stepped Robert Buvaul with his own theory behind the Sphinx's true age,i will let him in his own words explain his theory:-

[Bianca]

"In 1989 I published a paper in the Oxford Journal, Discussions In Egyptology (vol. 13), in which I demonstrated that the three Great Pyramids and their relative position to the Nile created on the ground a sort of 3-D 'hologram' of the three stars of Orion's belt and their relative position to the Milky Way.

To support this contention, I brought into evidence the inclined shaft in the Great Pyramid which were aimed at the south meridian towards these group of stars as well as written evidence from the Pyramid Texts that identified the afterlife destiny of the pyramid-kings with Orion.

Later in my book The Orion Mystery (Heinemann-Mandarin) I also demonstrated that the best fit for the Giza Pyramids/Nile pattern with the Orion's belt/Milky Way pattern occurred when the sky was pushed back in time (i.e. precessed) to the epoch of 10,500 BC. There were good reasons for doing so.

The ancient Egyptians, for example, constantly refer to a remote golden age they called Zep Tepi, 'The First Time' of Osiris, which they believed had long predated the Pyramid Age. Osiris was Orion, and the Great Pyramid had a shaft directed to Orion at the meridian. To me, this 'silent' astro-architectural language seemed to be spelling out 'here is Osiris in the sky when these pyramids were built, yet know, too, that his origins are rooted in the First Time.' But The 'First Time' of what? How could the stars of Orion have a 'First Time'?

[Bianca]

Well they can. And they do. Provided, of course, that you can read through the allegorical 'language' of the ancients via the symbolic architecture and the related Pyramid Texts. Allegory, to put it in another way, is the 'Q-Basics' of the master astronomers who designed the Giza complex. When the stars of Orion are observed at the meridian in the precise manner that the ancient Egyptian astronomers did over many centuries, the could not help noting that these stars crossed the south meridian at different altitudes at different epoch.

This is, of course, due to the phenomenon of Precession (see The Orion Mystery, appendices 1 and 2). In short, the stars of Orion can be said to have a starting point or 'beginning' at the nadir of their precessional cycle. Simple calculations show that this occurred in 10,500 BC. Could the ancient astronomers of the Pyramid Age have used their very clever 'silent language' combined with Precession to freeze the 'First Time' of Osiris - somewhat like the gifted architects of gothic cathedral froze in its allegorical stonework the 'time of Christ'?

In the summer of 1993 Graham Hancock and I got together to investigate this issue further. Graham was quick to realised the important implications this approach could have on the Sphinx problem. He had a hunch that the curious harking back to the epoch of 10,500 BC by the pyramid builders of Giza was an invitation by them to consider the actual age of the Sphinx.

If this hypothesis was correct, then the Sphinx must be an 'original' time-marker of that remote epoch using an obvious celestial tag valid for 10,500 BC. But which tag? What could the Sphinx be representing that was in the sky? Could this have something to do with the due east direction of its gaze towards the horizon?

[Bianca]

In his ground-breaking book Fingerprints of the Gods (Heinemann-Mandarin), Hancock pointed out that the 'First Time' date of 10,500 BC also denoted the beginning or 'First Time' of the Age of Leo. This was when the 'lion' constellation would have risen heliacally (at dawn before the sun) on the day of the spring (vernal) equinox. This event brought the celestial lion to rest due east, thus in perfect alignment with the Sphinx.

The Sphinx, in other words, was made to look at his own image in the horizon - and consequently at his own 'time'. Hancock pointed out that 10,500 BC was no random date. It very precisely denoted another beginning, that of Orion-Osiris defined on the ground with the pattern and alignments of the nearby Pyramids.

Here, then, were not just the Pyramids but also the Sphinx luring us to the same date of 10,500 BC. But were we dealing with a 'coincidence' -albeit an astonishing one- or was all this part of a deliberate long term scheme set by the ancients? Could it be possible that some blueprint was put into motion in 10,500 BC with the making of the Sphinx then to be completed much later by the builders of the Pyramids? Was there evidence of a continuous presence here at Giza through the ages of some master 'astronomers' who could have been responsible to see this scheme through?

If so, who were they? Where had they come from? Why here at Giza? Graham and I have spent the last two years researching this fascinating issue. We believe that what we have uncovered will change the perceptions of what Giza was (and still is) forever.

The full results of our investigation, as you might have guessed, are laid out in our new book, Keeper of Genesis, available now at a discount through AA&ES. Suffice at this stage to say that author Colin Wilson, who gave the book an early review, thinks it's 'a much more satisfying tour de force' than Fingerprints of the Gods or The Orion Mystery."

[Bianca]

So has Robert Buvaul got a 'good case' ?

Many people seem to validate his theory but maybe we will never truly understand the reasons behind these great monuments, we can only listen to the theory's behind the mystery and come to our own conclusions, until we are given unquestionable proof their will always be people wanting to knock others idea's, but please keep an open mind to all possibilities and try to enjoy the experience.


http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Delphi/3499/sphinx.htm

[mdsungate]

   Hi "B" my wife and kids are all out of the house today, (a rare moment), and I'm taking a break from my weekend chores, (playing hokey, LOL). 

Okay we need to add the legend here, that the pharaoh Chephren (of Khafre), (or Kufu or Cheops... boy this guy had a lot of names, LOL), found the Sphinx burried up to it's head in sand.  The Sphinx whispered to him, (or something to that effect).  And promised to make him a great pharaoh if he dug it out of the sand.  Which he did, (and some  forensic specialist, (I saw it on a TV special), claims that the head of the sphinx is too small and has been reshaped to look like Chephren, and lost size in the transformation.  This is all from memory, (no time to look things up today as I'm cheating on my chore time outside). 

I think I heard or read somewhere that at this time there were brass doors in the front of the sphinx, and that this same remodeler fo the Sphinx, walled the doors up.  I'll look for where I've gleaned this information on Monday.  Parts of the Sphinx have definately been repaired.  I'll look for more exact information on that too. 
(But for now, the unmowed lawn becons, LOL).   

[Bianca]

Sungate:

I wasn't sure whether I should have posted this item here, as it is a book review.  I was going to ask Europa to decide, but you did that for me.

Phew...so many questions....I'm going to have to hit Google for a History of the Sphinx, I guess....

So, give me some time and we'll get 'the real deal'.

[Bianca]

 
The Great Sphinx at Giza, Egypt





The Great Sphinx of Giza is a large half-human, half-lion Sphinx statue in Egypt, on the Giza Plateau at the west bank of the Nile River, near modern-day Cairo. It is one of the largest single-stone statues on Earth, and is commonly believed to have been built by ancient Egyptians in the 3rd millennium BC. It is the earliest known monumental sculpture.

[Bianca]

Origin and identity





The Great Sphinx is one of the world’s largest and oldest statues, yet basic facts about it such as the real-life model for the face, when it was built, and by whom, are debated. These questions have collectively earned the title “Riddle of the Sphinx,” a nod to its Greek namesake, although this phrase should not be confused with the original Greek legend.

 
The Sphinx against Khafre’s pyramidThe Great Sphinx is commonly accepted by Egyptologists to represent the likeness of King Khafra (also known by the Hellenised version of his name, Chephren) who is often credited as the builder as well. This would place the time of construction somewhere between 2520 BCE and 2494 BCE. Because the limited evidence giving provenance to Khafra is ambiguous and circumstantial, the idea of who built the Sphinx, and when, continues to be the subject of debate. As Dr. Selim Hassan stated in his report regarding his excavation of the Sphinx enclosure of the 1940s:

Taking all things into consideration, it seems that we must give the credit of erecting this, the world’s most wonderful statue, to Khafre, but always with this reservation that there is not one single contemporary inscription which connects the Sphinx with Khafre, so sound as it may appear, we must treat the evidence as circumstantial, until such time as a lucky turn of the spade of the excavator will reveal to the world a definite reference to the **** of the Sphinx.

[Bianca]

Supporting Egyptologists believe that the context of the Sphinx resides within part of the greater funerary complex credited to Khafra which includes the Sphinx and Valley Temples, a causeway, and the 2nd pyramid.  Both temples display the same architectural style employing stones weighing up to 200 tons. It is generally accepted that the temples, along with the Sphinx, were all part of the same quarry and construction process.

One circumstantial piece of evidence used to support the Khafra theory includes a diorite statue of the king that was discovered buried upside down along with other debris in the nearby Valley Temple. Because of its relative proximity to the Sphinx, it is from this relationship that Egyptologists further associate Khafra with the Sphinx.

In addition, the Dream Stela erected by Pharaoh Thutmose IV in the New Kingdom is believed by Egyptologists to associate the Sphinx with King Khafra. When discovered, however, the lines of text were incomplete, only referring to a “Khaf,” and not the full “Khafra.” The missing syllable “ra” was later added to complete the translation by Thomas Young, on the assumption that the text referred to “Khafra.” Young’s interpretation was based on an earlier facsimile in which the translation reads as follows:

...which we bring for him: oxen... and all the young vegetables; and we shall give praise to Wenofer ...Khaf.... the statue made for Atum-Hor-em-Akhet.

[Bianca]

Regardless of the translation, the stela offers no clear record of in what context the name Khafra was used in relation to the Sphinx – as the builder, restorer, or otherwise. The lines of text referring to Khafra flaked off and were destroyed when the Stela was re-excavated in the early 1900s.

In contrast, the “Inventory Stela” (believed to date from the 26th dynasty 664-525 BC) found by Auguste Mariette on the Giza plateau in 1857, describes how Khufu (the father of Khafra, the alleged builder) discovered the damaged monument buried in sand, and attempted to excavate and repair the dilapidated Sphinx. Because of the late dynasty origin of the document and reference to Khufu as the builder and not the accepted Khafra, this particular section of the Inventory Stela is often dismissed by Egyptologists as late dynasty historical revisionism  despite other sections relating to Khufu being used by Egytologists as plausible historical reference.

Traditionally, the evidence for dating the Great Sphinx by Egyptologists has been based primarily on fragmented summaries of early Christian writings gleaned from the work of the Hellenistic Period Egyptian priest Manethô, who compiled the now lost revisionist Egyptian history Aegyptika. These works, and to a lesser degree, earlier Egyptian sources, mainly the “Turin Canon” and “Table of Abydos” among others, combine to form the main body of historical reference for Egyptologists, giving a consensus for a timeline of rulers known as the “King’s List,” found in the reference archive; the Cambridge Ancient History.  As a result, since Egyptologists have ascribed the Sphinx to Khafra, establishing the time he reigned would date the monument as well.

In 2004, French Egyptologist Vassil Dobrev announced the results of a 20-year reexamination of historical records, and uncovering of new evidence that suggests the Great Sphinx may have been the work of the little known Pharaoh Djedefre, Khafra’s half brother and a son of Khufu, the builder of the Great Pyramid of Giza. Dobrev suggests it was built by Djedefre in the image of his father Khufu, identifying him with the sun god Ra in order to restore respect for their dynasty.

Former director of the German Institute of Archaeology in Cairo, Rainer Stadelmann, suggests it was Khufu, and not his son Khafra, who was responsible for constructing the monument. Stadelmann bases his ideas on the distinct iconography of the headdress and missing collapsed beard (the remains are housed in the Cairo museum), which he argues is more indicative of the style of Khufu than Khafra.

 He supports this by suggesting that Khafra’s causeway was built to conform to a pre-existing structure, which he concludes, given its location, could only have been the Sphinx.

[Bianca]

Early Egyptologists





Many of the most prominent early Egyptologists and excavators of the Giza plateau believed the Sphinx and its neighboring temples to pre-date the 4th dynasty. British egyptologist E. A. Wallis Budge stated in his 1904 book Gods of the Egyptians:

This marvelous object [the Great Sphinx] was in existence in the days of Khafre, or Khephren, and it is probable that it is a very great deal older than his reign and that it dates from the end of the archaic period.

French Egyptologist and Director General of Excavations and Antiquities for the Egyptian government, Gaston Maspero, who surveyed the Sphinx in the 1920s asserts:

The Sphinx stela shows, in line thirteen, the cartouche of Khephren. I believe that to indicate an excavation carried out by that prince, following which, the almost certain proof that the Sphinx was already buried in sand by the time of Khafre and his predecessors.

Notwithstanding this, the Sphinx’ link with Khafra continues to be the view most widely held by Egyptologists.

[Bianca]

The Great Sphinx in 1867. Note its unrestored original condition, still partially buried body, and a man standing beneath its ear.

[Bianca]

Description




 
What name ancient Egyptians called the statue is unknown. The commonly used name “Sphinx” was given to it in Antiquity based on the legendary Greek creature with the body of a lion, the head of a woman and the wings of an eagle, though Egyptian sphinxes have the head of a man. The word “sphinx” comes from the Greek Σφιγξ — Sphinx, apparently from the verb σφιγγω — sphingo, meaning “to strangle,” as the sphinx from Greek mythology strangled anyone incapable of answering her riddle. A few, however, have postulated it to be a corruption of the ancient Egyptian Shesep-ankh, a name applied to royal statues in the Fourth Dynasty, though it came to be more specifically associated with the Great Sphinx in the New Kingdom. In medieval texts, the names balhib and bilhaw referring to the Sphinx are attested, including by Egyptian historian Maqrizi, which suggest Coptic constructions, but the Egyptian Arabic name Abul-Hôl, which translates as “Father of Terror,” came to be more widely used.

The Great Sphinx is a statue with the face of a man and the body of a lion. Carved out of the surrounding limestone bedrock, it is 57 metres (185 feet) long, 6 m (20 ft) wide, and has a height of 20 m (65 ft), making it the largest single-stone statue in the world. Blocks of stone weighing upwards of 200 tons were quarried in the construction phase to build the adjoining Sphinx Temple. It is located on the west bank of the Nile River within the confines of the Giza pyramid field. The Great Sphinx faces due east, with a small temple between its paws.