Hello and welcome again to my way of thinking
I know there have been a few threads on the topic of the Age of the Sphinx. In this thread I'll try to bring a new angle so as to make it unique. I'll
try to hit on something I've never heard discussed and may have been over looked by those who support a much older Sphinx theory.
For the Record: I'm still on the fence about the age of the Sphinx. Truthfully, I could argue and debate both sides of this question all day long.
So having said that, I'll present my biggest issues with the dates given. I wasn't going to get into the whole Sphinx question in a thread of my own
but after much coaxing by a few respected members I decided to post one on the topic. I provided some of the following information in another thread
of mine that Is presently active but again a few members thought it deserved it's own thread so against my better judgment I have relented
Now supposedly the Great Sphinx was carved at or around approximately 2500 BC by the pharaoh Khafra. Supposedly, if we are to believe the given time
line the builder of the second pyramid at Giza.
The sphinx was carved in place and is the single largest statue in the world. Because of that there are many layers of strata. [I'm no expert but
using common sense it raises many questions] Some have theorized the excessive weathering is proof of it being much older than the given date. This is
an interesting hypothesis. I agree [To a certain extent] with what Academia says about it being simple wind/sand driven weathering. What I question is
if what we are told about its age is true and that it was created at the same time as the Second large pyramid of Giza was then why does it's body and
enclosure show so much more wear?
We are told that throughout it's long history that it was buried periodically up to and possible over it's head. The sand would have insulated it
against wear and erosion such as wind and water damage [from the little amount of rain the Plateau receives] Yet there are tantalizing signs of both
wind and water effects.
Before we go further, Take a minutes and look closely at the last image above. Notice the Sphinx body and the enclosure behind it. Now look the blocks
of the Temple directly in front. Notice the variations between the two with regards to the amount of wear/weathering also notice the conditions of the
Sphinx's face and head.
If it were simply wind/sand gouging out areas of the weaker/softer layers of limestone then the temple structures from the same or nearly the same
supposed period should also show similar wear. If it were water damage/erosion then why doesn't the temples also show similar amounts of
The temple/temples [there are two in the area] were supposedly built around the same time as the Sphinx [+ or - a few years] was being carved with
blocks taken from the Sphinx enclosure [Which means the blocks were of the same strength/weakness as it's body] for the temples construction as the
enclosure was being excavated so to be able to carve the body. They are in much better shape and appear to be built against the enclosure wall from a
much earlier period. This is the thrust of this thread.
Look closely at the outer wall of the temple. Notice the weathering difference up top?
The ones up top and behind show similar weathering to the Sphinx and its enclosure
In the next couple of aerial top down views you'll notice the Sphinx in its enclosure also notice the wall from this angle on the left extends up to
and beyond the temple. Now the outer wall of the enclosure and the wall the temple butts up against show similar weathering as the Sphinxes body and
Reverse angle for comparison
Let me reiterate...
It appears [And this is something I hear little about
] that the outer wall of the temple which butts up against what appears to be a wall that
shows similar weathering as the Sphinx and it's enclosure. But the temple itself appears to be in much better shape. Now how is that if they were
created around the same period?
Many will argue that the temple blocks are in better shape because they were buried and protected from weathering. OK, so again why does the body of
the "Sphinx, the outer walls of it's enclosure and the outside wall the temple butts up against
" all show similar weathering which were also
buried? Not to mentioned the Sphinx's face and head [That was exposed more often and longer than the body to wind erosion] and is in much better
Some may argue:
"Water erosion would still have occurred as rain trickled down through the sand. Limestone is very suceptible to erosion from percolating
My response would be, OK Fair enough...
Now answer me this. Then if that's the case why doesn't the limestone "Temple Blocks" supposedly from the same time period and material which were
also buried and subjected to the same effect show little or no erosion equal to the extent of the Sphinx, it's enclosure and the outer wall the
temples butt up against? Again, It appears to me that the Sphinx and its original enclosure were carved in a much earlier period.
This is a strong argument for the Sphinx being older than the given date and why it's head is in better shape [And proportionally smaller than the
] One could argue that the pharaoh Khafra didn't carve the Sphinx while building the Second Pyramid at Giza in 2500 BC. Instead some suspect
he re-carved an already existing statues head while building the temple, Which is why the "Supposedly exposed" head and the temple are in much better
shape than the possibly older body or it's enclosure.
Also [Which is why the head of the Sphinx is very Un-Egyptian like in it's head to body proportions
] The Egyptian carvings of statues and other
engravings were always very proportional when it came to their gods and deities etc.
So to summarize.
Those who wil argue that the head and face are in better condition because it wasn't buried and subjected to the ground moister like the body was.
Answer me this? Then why doesn't the Temple at the same level [and made of the same material] as the body also show the same amount of moister damage?
For those who will argue that the body and enclosure were heavily worn from Wind/Sand erosion then why doesn't the temple or the Sphinx's head/face
show an equal amount of wear/erosion? They were just as exposed if not longer at times than the body and it's enclosure.
So what are your thoughts on the subject?
It is fun to speculate
As always my friends have
a great day
edit on 11-7-2011 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)