The Sphinx

For some reason my upload page is blank and I cannot upload pictures, but many pics of The Sphinx are easily available.

When we look around the Enclosure, and at The Sphinx itself , we are presented with many vertical erosional features ( prolonged water erosion , Schoch and others ) and the body of The Sphinx also features horizontal erosional features .
These erosional features are quite severe in places , as we can all see from any picture .

Why do we not see these very same features on the head ?
We can still see The Sphinx eyes, lips, folds of the eyebrows, the ears beautifully carved, and we can also see very fine detailing on the Pharonic headdress ; thin , not very deeply carved horizontal lines , the familiar same horizontal lines we all know from Tut’s death mask in blue and gold .


It must also be noted that most of the body was buried under sand for a long long time.
Wish I could post some pictures, but my annoying malfunctional upload page is preventing this.

If the head and body are the same age , why do we not see matching erosional features on the head and headress?
Surely these would have been rubbed out by those same forces that wreaked havoc to the body of the Sphinx?





Thanks Pirates Cut! Much appreciated !

a reply to: bluesfreak

Because the head was put on at a different date?

Try using this link to upload pics.
It solved my problem.
It can be slow to load so…..patience.

img.abovetopsecret.com...

I remember reading that originally the head of the sphinx was Anubis. Plus i think in the 1930s part of the sphinx head fell apart and was redone

a reply to: bluesfreak

My theory is that the head was originally larger and was a lion head.

Later the egyptians remade it into a sphinx head, wich made it smaller and got rid of the corrosion marks.

a reply to: JAGStorm

The head is also way out of proportion to the body too.
Way too small.
If I had to guess, I’d say it originally had a lions head on it and it gazed upon the constellation Leo eons ago.
A challenge that the Egyptians were not the original builders does seem to make sense.
Well, to me anyway.

Centuries after the sphinx was originally built, a new pharaoh had the head of the sphinx re-carved with his own image.

Because the head was put on at a different date?

Seems like the most logical answer, doesn’t it?

Not according to the logic of Egyptology though…

a reply to: JAGStorm

There seems to be little point in denying that this structure has suffered too much misinformation from the start.

I am ready to accept: That is not the original head. It wasn't a face. It was a dog... Whoever it was that claimed it was the product of their culture, was either misled, misinformed, or lied. The thing is far older than the pronouncements that have we been 'told' for decades, if not centuries.

This one has conspiracy written all over it... but I think the conspiracy won't be very impressive... I think it was always about pride.

a reply to: bluesfreak

One simple explanation would be that the general direction of horizontal water erosion impacted the back of the cowl around the head, protecting the features, if the horizontal erosion is consistent with the current face’s data of carving. Agree The Sphinx likely has more to it, than the official history. Modernity bias is common in all academic study, geocentrism used to be dogma.

a reply to: Maxmars

I am ready to accept: That is not the original head. It wasn't a face. It was a dog...

I did a whole post on dog people and the great mystery that surrounds it.
Someone on Tik tok and Facebook totally copied my entire post, some of it verbatim.

You want a rabbit hole, look into that. It’s kinda scary…

a reply to: JAGStorm

I absolutely hate when that happens....

One simple explanation would be that the general direction of horizontal water erosion impacted the back of the cowl around the head, protecting the features, if the horizontal erosion is consistent with the current face’s data of carving. Agree The Sphinx likely has more to it, than the official history. Modernity bias is common in all academic study, geocentrism used to be dogma.

Yes I have often wondered if the horizontal erosion on the body were ‘strand’ lines from gradually lowering water levels, although that doesn’t explain the vertical erosional fissures all over the body and enclosure ( heavy continuous rainfall- Schoch) everywhere else, they should be on the head also.
There are plainly two erosional rates visible, and hardly any on the head compared to the body .

and a reply to: JohnTitorSociety

a reply to: bluesfreak

As far as I’m concerned, the only single sector refuting the true age of the Sphinx, are main stream archeologists.

We all know the Sahara was tropical and lush. Which was produced by an abundance of rainfall. In fact, the head proves (carved much later) exactly that.

Dating the Sphinx back to 2500 BC is ridiculous. Because it’s well know that this is right around the time period the Sahara became a desert.

www.nature.com...

a reply to: bluesfreak

The flat area around the enclosure naturally gathers more water from rain and that water flows down the walls. The Sphinx itself would have less water flow vertically as there is little area to let the water gather. This causes the erosion of the walls to be more verticle, water flowing down the walls, and the Sphinx itself to be more horizontal as it would be mostly covered in the water flowing horizontally around it during a heavy rain.

Having said that, I think it is much older than they officially say because of the depth of the erosion and the fact that rain was more common farther back than they say it was made. Also the head has obviously been recarved or replaced as it is not to scale with the body.

The official story is wrong.

a reply to: Enduro

AND SHOT AT, world war target practice
and possibly recarved by diffrent jealous pharoah
because they have done such things on other statues

built long time before flood in desert covered it in sand...
flood was 12,000 years ago?

a reply to: bluesfreak

Have you actually done much reading of scholarly papers on the Sphinx? The effect (and its cause) is quite well known.

The layers of limestone have different durability (hardness) Erosion is still a problem; until fairly recently you could actually see the limestone flakes falling off the Sphinx

The body's a softer layer than the head.

The body's been restored and so has the head. You can see how much restoration's happened here (and the first restorations started in the 18th dynasty)

And it wasn't (ever) Anubis. The haunches of jackals are much thinner in Egyptian art and project over the back. The paws of Anubis are much thinner than those of any lion or sphinx. It was always a feline body.

Have you actually done much reading of scholarly papers on the Sphinx? The effect (and its cause) is quite well known.

Well, you’re not going to like my answer Byrd.
These scholarly articles are the reason many ( not just me!) dispute the ‘official’ answers.

The blocks that were excavated from inside the Sphinx enclosure were used in the next door Valley Temple, and show the same precipitation erosion (not wind) as the enclosure and the body. The valley temple was also ‘clad ‘ by later generations in an Aswan granite layer on the outside to protect and ‘re work’ the building .

Most of the restoration on the Sphinx is from the 1920’s onwards , lots of geological evidence covered up too.

If you read Schoch’s work (highly controversial to you guys ) he states as a geologist that he was exited to visit the Sphinx the first time he travelled to Egypt, and had assumed that Egyptologists had done the correct scholarly work regarding this wonderful monument geologically, yet was puzzled as to why what he had read from ‘your’ camp simply didn’t add up to the evidence before his well trained eyes.

Let’s not forget the photographs of the Sphinx when it was first re-excavated , huge vertical erosional features that nearly cut the back end off in one area (now ‘fixed’ I believe )

Schoch’s analysis of the core bedrock beneath the Sphinx ( it’s type, hardness, viscosity) from his seismic testing gave him his first answer of ‘older than 5000 years , and then 10,000 + years.

Such fine detailing on that head dress.

a reply to: Byrd

a reply to: Byrd
Let’s not forget the story of Thutmose 4, who fell asleep
under the head of the buried Sphinx and had a crazy dream , in 1400 bc or thereabouts .
The Sphinx in the dream told him that if be excavated the Sphinx out from the sand , he would become king . He did. And did.

Notice in this section from the ‘Dream Stela’ in which the Sphinx says it used to sit above the sand , but now is buried. Notice also the Sphinx tells him that its body amd limbs are ruined (which would have been under the sand when it ‘told Thutmose) .

So during the reign of Thutmose father , the Sphinx was in decay and buried up to its neck.
How long had this been for?

Now the statue of the very great Khepri (the Great Sphix) resting in this place, great of fame, sacred of respect, the shade of Ra resting on him. Memphis and every city on its two sides came to him, their arms in adoration to his face, bearing great offerings for his ka. One of these days it happened that price Tuthmosis came travelling at the time of midday. He rested in the shadow of the great god. (Sleep and) dream (took possession of me) at the moment the sun was at zenith. Then he found the majesty of this noble god speaking from his own mouth like a father speaks to his son, and saying, 'Look at me, observe me, my son Tuthmosis. I am your father, Horemakhet-Khepri-Ra-Atum. I shall give to you the kingship (upon the land before the living)...(Behold, my condition is like one in illness), all (my limbs being ruined). The sand of the desert, upon which I used to be, (now) confronts me; and it is in order to cause that you do what is in my heart that I have waited."

Dig out the Sphinx to become king ..

If the face of the Sphinx is Khafre as Egyptology suggests , surely through royal passed down knowledge Thutmose would have known it was Khafres face , and not a’God’ talking to him.
And yet the story tells us that this area was in decay at this point .