There was a programme on UK terrestrial television (Channel 5, 8pm) last night entitled Sphinx, in the Secrets of Egypt series. I haven't seen the first two episodes in the series and I didn't take notes last night whilst I was cooking, but it may be worth keeping an eye open for a repeat if you are UK based and you missed it. I've done a very rough summary below but the Daily Mail Online has a rather more comprehensive overview.The programme examined the possibility of the Sphinx having been built by Khafre, Khufu and Djedefre, before looking at Colin Reader's suggestion that the Sphinx might predate all three and in fact have been the creation of a Second Dynasty ruler. Other geologists are also quoted in detail (I must have given all my attention to perfecting my sauce at that stage, because I missed most of this part of the programme!).
It was also proposed by another expert, Jonathan Foyle, that the Sphinx, the head of which seems much too small for its body, may have had a very different form when first created and that it was later modified to represent a more recent Pharaoh. One suggestion is that it could have been in the form of a lion, as in the image above.
4 comments:
I hope that this theory will send that crazy fool Grahm Hancock on one of his epic bouts of fantasy .He will say that Atlanteans created Egyptian and other civilizations some 12,000 years ago.
Well Richard, when I read the last part of Andie's writing on the show, I immediately thought of Hancock's theory. I don't buy all he's saying and what's written here about the previous lion form is as good an explanation as any for the being out of proportion of the head. But what about the erosion signs on the body of the sfinx ? I think that Hancock may have a point there : water. And if we can believe Hancock's research the time that Egypt had such a climate was some 10000 BC. Other explanations ?
I missed the doco on ch5 (hey, I'm in Australia!!)but can recommend a much earlier one called "Mysteries of the Sphinx" narrated by Charlton Heston featuring theories put forward by John Anthony West and geologist Robert Schoch. I'd love to believe what Hancock says about all things re the Giza Plateau... but he doesn't seem to be able back up his theories with enough "scientific" evidence. West and Schoch present a far more compelling argument for re-evaluating the age of the Sphinx. It's actually a little bit embarrasing listening to "establishment" stalwarts like Zahi Hawass and Mark Lehner try to simply dismiss this alternative theory, which more than a hint of arrogance. The problem with theories is that the longer they have been around, the harder they are to displace no matter how compelling any new evidence to the contrary might be. Science, in general, is a history of corrected mistakes yet somehow we are expected to believe that all current theories accepted by the mainstream are irrefutable... they are virtually paraded as fact.(See Darwinism.......and no I'm not religious!!) How could we be wrong about anything now... we just sooooooo intelligent!!!There is more than enough evidence to give credibility to the THEORY that the sphinx may be much older than what other mainstream THEORIES suggest. If the supposed lack of evidence of the existence of a civilization responsible for building the Sphinx is the clincher for Hawass and Lehner.... I suggest they put down the dust pan and brush, pick up a shovel and dig a little deeper!!!!!!!!
The Great Sphinx statule is 5000 years old.
Post a Comment