TL;DR version: The ancient Egyptians saw a big rock that had been weathered away such that it made them think of sphinxes, so they turned it into one. Not featured in that article is this pic of the ass end of the sphinx. Seems fairly obvious to me from that pic that the Egyptians created the sphinx based on a rock formation that was already there. YMMV.
While I don’t doubt the Egyptians utilized natural features of the environment, studies (no I don’t have a link, but they can be found) also suggest it was intentionally and originally carved with accurate dimensions. Where the head is now, depicting Ramses II (what I’ve always read) or Khafre, used to be the neck. The original head was most likely Anubis. But, the neck couldn’t hold it for long (centuries?) and the first pharaoh who unearthed it at that time, ordered the head to be carved to look like him. No, I do not remember the name of the archeologist that posted that study. But, it seems more plausible to me than they carved the body of a lion out of proportion with the head.
I don’t want to be that guy that just posts a video, but if you have five minutes this video explains it pretty well. I would probably not do the arguments justice by trying to explain it myself. I will say that this guy is a legitimate archaeologist/historian who spends a lot of time debunking wild pseudo scientific theories with hard facts and actual published research. He is not one of those Erik Von Daniken/Graham Hancock types that cherry pick evidence to support their personal theories.
I didn’t see any video at Tuckerfan’s link. If there’s one out there, I’ll have to google it later. But, I will repeat, I did not doubt the work of the article Tuckerfan posted. Only postulated that the original statue may not have been disproportionate. Unless, of course, you were commenting on a video regarding the study I referenced. In which case, I appreciate the acknowledgement of the archeologist’s credentials.
Interesting. I hadn’t heard/read about the different types of limestone previously. However, there is one archeologist (no idea his name either) that isn’t “recognized” in the community, nor are his papers regarded as “valid”. Essentially, he’s viewed upon much like Daniel Jackson previous to his discovery of the meanings of the Stargate symbols. Anyway, the guy talks about how the sphinx’s body appears to have water erosion and that it could have been built in the green period or prior to the green period. Also, not sure if it’s the same archeologist or another scientist from another area of study (astronomy specifically) but his conclusion was that around 25000 years ago, the Sphinx would have been looking directly at … a specific set of stars. (Apologies, my memory isn’t what it used to be). So, the theory is that the entire sphinx had water erosion, but the head (neck after the original head fell off) had been recarved to reflect the lion body/man head that is prevalent in the 4th dynasty with the current ruler’s face. I believe that theory states the face had been recarved several times from Ramses I to Ramses II. And Tuckerfan’s OP states Khafre. The biggest reason this theory is completely dismissed is because the current thinking is that Homosapiens didn’t form permanent structures and communities until about 5,000 or 6,000 (?) years ago. And therefore, humans could not have built the sphinx 20000 years before that. However, new archeological finds in Turkey are proving that incorrect. That humans built permanent communities 11,000+ years ago. Still 14000 years after the theory of the sphinx’s existence prior to the green period. We’ll probably never know until humans invent time travel and go back and find it.
Graham Handcock isn't an archeologist and his "theories" have quite often been "inspired" by the use of psychedelics. Oh, and those "new archeological finds in Turkey" were discovered a long time ago. The earliest evidence we have for permanent villages has been pushed back to about 25K years ago. It was discovered 100 years ago.
I remember reading about how the Sphinx's general shape may have been shaped by erosion and then carved into the final shape at least 30+ years ago.
Not sure why you gotta go and put a facepalm on something that I already stated wasn’t a valid theory or recognized archeological point. The finds in Turkey are absolutely new. Dude in like … I don’t know 2020(?) was going to expand his basement only to find that it connected to an archeological find that changed a lot of what we know about pre written history.
Dr. Robert Shock has said for years that he thought the sphinx had been carved out a result of erosion. He thought it was much older.
No. I know what ones you're talking about, and they were last used in 1920. Yeah, so their origins are ancient, but their abandonment? Not so much.
He's trained as a palentologist. You know, someone who understands dinosaurs. Not the kind of expert you want when you're dealing with artifacts from a civilization with a well-documented history.
Way to ignore his geology background. You know, a person with a background in geology might know something about erosion and rock formations.
Right, so how much of those degrees relate to archeology and architecture? You know, ancient societies and how to build things. And let's see his proof for the existence of Atlantis. You know, since that plays a part in his theories as to who built the Sphinx.
He doesn't need a degree in archaeology to study the geological aspect of the Sphinx. Do you understand that?
And a degree in mechanical engineering will only get you so far when it comes to repairing your car, even though you need a degree in mechanical engineering to design a modern one. Do you understand that?
