The Sphinx Temple

[Everdred]

It appears that the Sphinx was a representation of Tefnut (phenomenon of downward) but the

human face is not explicable by this theory.

There is always the possibility that the head was originally a lion head and then recarved later. The head is clearly disproportionately small for the body, which would be explained by a recarving.

[cladking]

Re the proto-pulley; I think we can agree that it was used somehow in conjuction with ropes as a means to either re-direct a pulling force or to perhaps slow down the movement of the ropes. Die Checker's statement that they had a rough surface may re-inforce the idea of their use as a 'brake'. There's no way of knowing for sure unless we can pick one up in a heiroglyphic scene now that we know what to look for. There seems to be enough room in the hole that Temple is standing in to have a wood cylinder in place perpendicular to the granite piece and then have this device mounted perpedicular to that log to provide some control. Of more immediate concern to me is getting someone to confirm his contention that he found stalactite (or stalagmite) stones in the Valley Temple area as the probability of that type of stone being brought to Giza is extremely low.

I'm in close agreement about the stalactite. I'd say this is of the utmost importance.

DieChecker's last post has some interesting information about the "proto-pulley". I simply

can't believe these were used to redirect or handle ropes and there would be far more

advantageous means of doing such a thing. I do agree that the grooves are "obviously"

intended to fit ropes but not that the ropes moved relative the device. It appears the de-

vice moved relative the ropes and the grooves are simply for the purpose of holding it

from twisting. There would have been a wooden peg in it to accept a sling in operation.

Has anyone read the relevant parts of the book concerning the stalactite?

[samspade]

the very mention of Robert Temple sent Schoch into a savage rant and I was quite taken aback, when he had calmed down I tried to explain the cable conduit theory and Schoch knew absolutly nothing about it, I found this very puzzling as those two have been having a lituary ding dong for a while now and I would have thought Schoch would have been up to speed on anything new concerning the Sphinx and Sphinx temple.

Schoch gave me his e mail address a few days later and asked me to send him on this new information , but I am still waiting for a reply.

So is Schoch expected to reply to you or is that your opinion ?

Schoch was basically John Anthony West side-kick, and he had little knowledge about Ancient Egypt at that time and was used just to confirm what West already knew about the Rock.

Certain mindsets are not trained in problem solving, thus its easy to see why Schoch would not even bother to follow anything Robert Temple wrote after 'The Sirius Mystery' in the 1980's with the mention of aliens with the Dogon tribe.

http://www.bibliotec...ry.htm#CONTENTS

Temple is just speculating there with the conduits and possible burial locations of pharohs, while i personally dont think so, one cant remove the possiblity until evidence suggests otherwise.

There is always the possibility that the head was originally a lion head and then recarved later. The head is clearly disproportionately small for the body, which would be explained by a recarving.

Its even possible that it may of been just a human head orginally and not a lion as some claim. Then at a later date carved the body, Thus it is possible the human head is in fact what was orginally intended.

Edited February 18, 2013 by samspade

[cladking]

There is always the possibility that the head was originally a lion head and then recarved later. The head is clearly disproportionately small for the body, which would be explained by a recarving.

So much time has passed it's really difficult to know much and almost everything was

changed by centuries of continual human habitation and activities. It is possible that

the original Sphinx was beginning to erode so it was recarved.

While so very much changed after construction it appears that some of the stones were

abandoned in the Sphinx Quarry right where the original workers left them. This is the

nature of "industrial" sites; to have a moment frozen in time when operations cease. But

unlike most such sites Giza was still used for festivals and other purposes for a very long

time after construction was halted. It appears to have been maintained for centuries as

well. Some of these things might never be positively determined but the basic outline

should be an open book by now. This site needs systematic study.

[Tutankhaten-pasheri]

Has anyone read the relevant parts of the book concerning the stalactite?

Yes

On pages 173 and 174. Temple took a piece to London Natural History Museum, and without saying where it came from, asked opinion of geoligist who said it was a stalactite. Temple believes this alabaster stalactite, and the large blocks in the photo on his site, not in the book, is from a limestone cavern underneath Sphinx. He reasons this because the alabaster blocks he found are of different type, and better quality, to those that AE are known to have quarried from Hawara. He thinks one purpose of the lifting gear, if it is such, was to raise these blocks. He also thinks that the reason Memphis was known as White Walls, is that it was enclosed with these blocks from a cavern underneath Giza that he says must be a big as a city. Perhaps one day we will see the truth of this, or not...

[poppet]

So is Schoch expected to reply to you or is that your opinion ?

Schoch was basically John Anthony West side-kick, and he had little knowledge about Ancient Egypt at that time and was used just to confirm what West already knew about the Rock.

thats the impression he gave me , this was back in November and he told me he was in Egypt the following month and would certainly look into the recessed granite block and get back to me.

i will try another email but to be quite honest i don't hold up much hope having spent a few days with Schoch i really can't see how he can be an authority on anything.

Schoch is a devout "the Sphinx is a lion" and will defend that theory to the end.

thanks for all the info on the proto pulley and the general interest ,the image of that recessed granite block has been yelling out at me for awhile now .

SUPPLEMENTARY PLATE 7-9.

The court of the Sphinx Temple seen from the northeast corner of the roof of the Valley Temple. In the bottom right hand corner, Ioannis is attempting to get a sample, observed by antiquities inspectors. At the far top left may be seen the paws of the Sphinx. At the top of the photo may be seen the remains of a New Kingdom temple built to honour the Sphinx (for more photos and description see my previous book The Sphinx Mystery, 2009), during which time the Sphinx Temple was buried and its existence wholly forgotten. In the left foreground, three large white stones may be partially glimpsed, which are the huge chunks of stalagtite or stalagmite from the secret caverns below the temple which were discussed in Chapter Four.

lots of images here

http://www.egyptiand...o/chapter7.html

diechecker i believe the date given for the Osiris sarcophagus on the third level of the osiris shaft is indeed 6th dynasty but the sarcophagus on the second level is much older and unique .

The Osiris Shaft

We took two dates from a deep shaft beneath the causeway that leads up to the Pyramid of Chephren. This shaft, which drops 114 beneath the surface, is called the Osiris Shaft because at the bottom of it, there is a replica of the mythical ‘Tomb of Osiris’, a stone sarcophagus set in the middle of a small island surrounded by an artificial canal. Before they were destroyed, apparently by Muslim fanatics at some time subsequent to 1944 (when we know they still existed), the island had four columns at each corner. The site has been so savagely vandalized that that may be the reason why no photos are ever circulated of it, and those which I have taken are essentially the only ones available We have dated the sarcophagus on the Osiris Island and also a sarcophagus on the burial level above it, as the shaft contains three horizontal levels. From our dating results, we can now demonstrate that the third level with the ‘Tomb of Osiris’ was evidently a later extension of the shaft made in the period between the Fifth Dynasty and the end of the Middle Kingdom, when the Osiris religion was at its peak. But the really interesting results came from Level Two. We dated a sample from one of the giant stone sarcophagi in that level and the result was 3350 – 2250 BC. The upper limit for this date is also, like the pyramid date, way back in Pre-Dynastic times. And a median date is 2800 BC, which is early in the Second Dynasty. This particular sarcophagus was also determined by X-ray diffraction analysis to have been made from the mineral dacite, which is otherwise unknown in the entire history of Egypt, having, as far as we know, never been used either before or since for any object, however small. Deposits of dacite in Egypt are uncommon and none have been reported with veins large enough to make a sarcophagus. What are we to make of all this? The Giza pyramids are surrounded by tombs of the family and courtiers of the Fourth Dynasty kings, starting with Cheops. So clearly Cheops, Chephren and Mycerinus were fixated on the pyramids that bear their names. But it appears that they ‘usurped’ them rather than built them. So who then really did build them? I have spent a great deal of time attempting to answer this perplexing question. But one thing is sure, it was someone much earlier than we thought.

copied from

http://www.freemason...t-ancient-egypt

[+DieChecker]

I just had the thought that many Mastabas included a shaft with a leveled out space for the deceased. I'm not sure if there is any evidence of a mastaba at the location of the Osiris Shaft, but if the first chamber was 2nd Dynasty, then that would have been before Giza became a gigantic construction zone. Perhaps there was a mastaba there, with a shaft dow, and it was cleared to make room for moving of stones and building of temples? Perhaps it was re-discovered later and it was expanded to its current depth/levels?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mastaba

[cladking]

Yes

On pages 173 and 174. Temple took a piece to London Natural History Museum, and without saying where it came from, asked opinion of geoligist who said it was a stalactite. Temple believes this alabaster stalactite, and the large blocks in the photo on his site, not in the book, is from a limestone cavern underneath Sphinx. He reasons this because the alabaster blocks he found are of different type, and better quality, to those that AE are known to have quarried from Hawara. He thinks one purpose of the lifting gear, if it is such, was to raise these blocks. He also thinks that the reason Memphis was known as White Walls, is that it was enclosed with these blocks from a cavern underneath Giza that he says must be a big as a city. Perhaps one day we will see the truth of this, or not...

Thanks.

He's probably far off base with the origin of "white walls".

I believe that alabaster and stalactites aren'ty exactly the same thing. Alabaster comes from a very

similar process which is accumulation from geysers or springs but are old deposits whereas stalactites

are generally ongoing and only form on cave tops. To determine it was a stalactite the sample would have

to have been quite substantial in size to differentiate it from the extremely similar stalagmite. My understanding

is that the Hawaran alabaster is brown when first mined but quickly turns white.

I had thought the ancients mined alabaster from about 150 miles upstream on the east side of the river if I recall

correctly from a search I did six years ago. A quick search though says Hawara is only 30 miles south. Perhaps

the older site was played out but it's interesting that this alabaster is inm the region I claim has geysers or it's from

the temple where I claim they processed geyser water.

[cladking]

thanks for all the info on the proto pulley and the general interest ,the image of that recessed granite block has been yelling out at me for awhile now .

It's rather remarkable I hadn't heard of it before since I am attuned to any sort of evidence

of technology and mechanics at "Rosteau". I often wonder how much other stuff doesn't get

any attention and isn't reported. I can only imagine how many small wood, metal or stone items

have been destroyed or removed long before Egyptologists got on the scene. Even many of the

artefacts found in the last 150 years have come up missing or are poorly reported.

If I had more information on this so called cable tray I'd try to reverse engineer it.

Great post by the way. Lots of great information. I'll try to work on it a little later. Good luck getting

Dr Shoch to respond. He seems to know something. I wasn't aware he'd been connected to JA West.

West will have this all figured out if he has enough time.

Edited February 18, 2013 by cladking

[Everdred]

I just had the thought that many Mastabas included a shaft with a leveled out space for the deceased. I'm not sure if there is any evidence of a mastaba at the location of the Osiris Shaft, but if the first chamber was 2nd Dynasty, then that would have been before Giza became a gigantic construction zone. Perhaps there was a mastaba there, with a shaft dow, and it was cleared to make room for moving of stones and building of temples? Perhaps it was re-discovered later and it was expanded to its current depth/levels?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mastaba

Hassan, who excavated it in the 30s, said there was a "platform in the shape of a mastaba" above it. And of course the shaft actually starts from the causeway and cuts down into the tunnel below the causeway. That suggests it dates after the causeway.

[Mr.United_Nations]

I think there's more than a temple, maybe something valuable hidden?

[cladking]

I just had the thought that many Mastabas included a shaft with a leveled out space for the deceased. I'm not sure if there is any evidence of a mastaba at the location of the Osiris Shaft, but if the first chamber was 2nd Dynasty, then that would have been before Giza became a gigantic construction zone. Perhaps there was a mastaba there, with a shaft dow, and it was cleared to make room for moving of stones and building of temples? Perhaps it was re-discovered later and it was expanded to its current depth/levels?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mastaba

I'm pretty confident that no structures up on top of the plateau are known to have existed prior

to pyramid construction. Much of this comes from our resident expert (Kmt_Sesh). There were

tombs around the periphery and there were possibly burials on the plateau but if any tombs or

other structures had existed the evidence was removed when the pyramids were built. Vyse be-

lieved much of the plateau was strripped to bedrock before building even commenced. There

do appear to have been pre-existing structures under G1 but there's no evidence for much of

anything else. The east cemetery was built first apparently starting about six years into cons-

truction.

[cladking]

!

A closeup of the very strange hole opening into the southern so-called ‘water drainage channel’ in the Sphinx Temple. The massive limestone block lying on top makes access and proper inspection of this channel difficult for anyone larger than a rodent, and although I know some people who might qualify for that description, I would not trust their judgement. The bizarre red, white, and yellow mineral encrustations here are puzzling, and I cannot explain them. I looked at them as closely as I could, and the more closely I looked the more puzzled I became. They seem to be bubbling up from something, with layers of encrustation being successively deposited on top of earlier layers. Perhaps the ‘efflux of Osiris’ is leaking upwards!

Imagine that! We still have our very own ben ben stone coming up from the water in the Osiris Shaft. Grind this up and grow some figs in it.

Of course it's not the efflux of Osiris bringing it up any longer like it used to. It's justpressure generated by gravity forcing it up.

Edited February 18, 2013 by cladking

[samspade]

thats the impression he gave me , this was back in November and he told me he was in Egypt the following month and would certainly look into the recessed granite block and get back to me.

i will try another email but to be quite honest i don't hold up much hope having spent a few days with Schoch i really can't see how he can be an authority on anything.

Well if Schoch does respond to your email let it be known on this thread.

Im interested to see if Schoch replys to you as mentioned , regardless what his opinion of it is.

thanks for all the info on the proto pulley and the general interest ,the image of that recessed granite block has been yelling out at me for awhile now .

I recall watching Robert Temple video of "True Location of The Royal Tombs at Giza" long ago.

Robert Temple like good sales people really pushes people to believe its true,

and he repeats it over and over, no wonder you think about it sometimes.

It was part of Chapter 4 of his book 'Egyptian Dawn" which was released in 2010.

heres the link to video of the royal tombs at giza for those who may of missed it.

http://www.egyptiand...multimedia.html

Edited February 18, 2013 by samspade

[lakeview rud]

Cladking, that very strange hole you commented on could very well be just a tree stump with the center rotted out (thats what it looks like) but the mineral deposits would seem to indicate otherwise. Another good case for getting samples and obtaining an analysis. How can all these people who have visited the site have overlooked all these things? Is it just a case of seeing what you wish to see?I'm just amazed that these things (odd granite piece in the bedrock, boulders that may be stalactites, holes in the ground with odd colors around them) have never been examined with a critical eye!

[+DieChecker]

I had thought the ancients mined alabaster from about 150 miles upstream on the east side of the river if I recall

correctly from a search I did six years ago. A quick search though says Hawara is only 30 miles south. Perhaps

the older site was played out but it's interesting that this alabaster is inm the region I claim has geysers or it's from

the temple where I claim they processed geyser water.

You don't need vulcanism to get alabaster however. And though there are cold geysers, they are far from common.

Wiki says that Ancient Egyptian alabaster is actually a fine grained form of gypsum, which is usually created from ancient lakes, oceans and streams.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alabaster

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gypsum

If those blocks in the earlier Sphinx Temple are supposed to be Stalagtites, then those would be tremendously large stalagtites.

[cladking]

Cladking, that very strange hole you commented on could very well be just a tree stump with the center rotted out (thats what it looks like) but the mineral deposits would seem to indicate otherwise. Another good case for getting samples and obtaining an analysis. How can all these people who have visited the site have overlooked all these things? Is it just a case of seeing what you wish to see?I'm just amazed that these things (odd granite piece in the bedrock, boulders that may be stalactites, holes in the ground with odd colors around them) have never been examined with a critical eye!

People are for most practical purposes blind. We only see what we expect and can't see

what we don't expect. Even what the ancients called "good scientific observation" heka can't

enable a person to see what he isn't looking for. I suspect this is largely why they thought of

vision as an active thing where the eye supplied the "light" to see because without this we only

get confirmation of what we already believed.

In second grade they teach the importance of observation but it gets relatively little attention

again until college. But even observation is always tainted by expectations. It is virtually magic

when we can see what's right in front of our eyes. This isn't to say there was much or any magic

in what I've done, but merely that I came to expect to see geysers based on visceral knowledge;

the only true knowledge.

We don't understand anything from science to human nature. We went wrong 4000 years ago

and have a second chance to do it right. God willing this time it won't include such massive waste

of human talent, human lives, and resources. Maybe we can do it without mass murder and war.

Maybe Martin Luther King's vision can come true and we can get back to where we were meant

to be.

...if we aren't too afraid...

[+DieChecker]

Hassan, who excavated it in the 30s, said there was a "platform in the shape of a mastaba" above it. And of course the shaft actually starts from the causeway and cuts down into the tunnel below the causeway. That suggests it dates after the causeway.

If there is a 2nd Dynasty burial down there it was done before there was a causeway. It would not surprise me if the tunnel under the causeway was of much more recent Grave Robber construction.

Hassan then seems to agree with my idea that this originally was a mastaba burial that got in the way of Progress. And so was pushed aside. Still, I would not be surprised if the granite proto-pullys were used to lower stuff into the shaft.

Edited February 19, 2013 by DieChecker

[+DieChecker]

I'm pretty confident that no structures up on top of the plateau are known to have existed prior

to pyramid construction. Much of this comes from our resident expert (Kmt_Sesh). There were

tombs around the periphery and there were possibly burials on the plateau but if any tombs or

other structures had existed the evidence was removed when the pyramids were built. Vyse be-

lieved much of the plateau was strripped to bedrock before building even commenced. There

do appear to have been pre-existing structures under G1 but there's no evidence for much of

anything else. The east cemetery was built first apparently starting about six years into cons-

truction.

I agree that anything in the way would have been cleared away. But the Osiris Shaft does resemble the underground layout of a mastaba tomb, which was commonly used even in Pre-Dynastic times. And the Shaft is located fairly close to the edge of the Plateau.

diechecker i believe the date given for the Osiris sarcophagus on the third level of the osiris shaft is indeed 6th dynasty but the sarcophagus on the second level is much older and unique .

On Hawass's blog site, it says that there is only 3 levels. With nothing found on the first level, 6 sarcophagus on the 2nd level and the Osiris sarcophagus on the 3rd level. And it says that all the 6 on the 2nd level appeared to be Late Dynastic period in construction, 26th Dynasty, I think...

Here....

We found that the first segment of the shaft, almost 10 meters deep, leads to a single chamber about 8.6 by 3.6 meters in size. When we entered this chamber, it was empty. A second vertical shaft in the northern part of the chamber leads down for another 13.25 meters, ending in a 6.8 by 3.5 meter chamber, surrounded by six smaller side-chambers and a recess from which yet another shaft descended. Three of the side-chambers contained stone sarcophagi in the style of the 26th Dynasty, and two of the sarcophagi contained human bones. We also found shabtis and fragments of Late Period pottery in this level. In addition to the side-chambers, there is a recess in the southeastern corner of the main chamber, from which a third vertical shaft descends. After about 8 meters, this last shaft ends in a chamber about 9 meters square.

The final chamber is the most interesting of all. Much of it is taken up by a rectangular emplacement in the center, carved from the living rock with the remains of a square pillar at each corner. The space left between the walls of the chamber and the emplacement in the center forms a kind of channel. The channel is broken at the entrance to the chamber, where the floor has been left at a higher level to connect it with the emplacement. This gives the channel the shape of the hieroglyphic sign pr, meaning “house.” In the center of the emplacement, there is a large sarcophagus made of black basalt. The sarcophagus contained the remains of a skeleton, along with several amulets dating to the Late Period. We were surprised to find that there was also some red polished pottery with traces of white paint, which probably dates to the 6th Dynasty.

Edited February 19, 2013 by DieChecker

[Everdred]

If there is a 2nd Dynasty burial down there it was done before there was a causeway. It would not surprise me if the tunnel under the causeway was of much more recent Grave Robber construction.

Hassan then seems to agree with my idea that this originally was a mastaba burial that got in the way of Progress. And so was pushed aside. Still, I would not be surprised if the granite proto-pullys were used to lower stuff into the shaft.

The 2nd Dynasty date is just a median of the OSL dating. The most recent date of the span (2250 BC) is centuries after the causeway, within the earlier side of the span for the other OSL-dated sarcophagus, and also agrees with Hawass' suggested 6th dynasty construction date of the shaft. So it seems we have multiple forms of evidence all converging on a date in the later portion of the Old Kingdom, and most likely in the 6th dynasty.

[docyabut2]

Does`nt it seen strange what Temple has found is similar to the shafts in the great pyramid, the small channel and blocks, almost like a guide line pointing to where Khufu was buried.I believe the Sphinx and the Sphinx temple was built for Khufu and not for Krafe as some think.

[SHaYap]

Thanks for the welcome lakeview rud

I’m not here to win any battles or sell any books, I first came across this info nearly two years ago and to be honest thought it would be the next big thing, bigger than finding king tut ,obviously the Egyptian antiquities know about this new research because it was they who gave Robert unprecedented access to the Osiris shaft and the temple’s ,maybe in Egypt’s present climate they have decided that if there is something down there, then it’s better off staying down there at the moment.

As for Robert Temple being “fringie” it’s the message not the messenger that interests me ,if you take a look around the Egyptian dawn web site he has shared all his photos and also the only valley temple excavation report to everyone ………no need to buy his book.

And if you would like the dates that he and Ioannis Liritzis have suggested for some of the structures at Giza then he has posted them for free also.

Robert Temple Explains The Challenge Posed To Egyptology By A New Dating Technique

http://www.freemason...t-ancient-egypt

I didn’t join um to promote anyone , I have no guru’s ……..it’s only the information that I’m interested in .

Peace.

Operations carried on at the pyramids of Gizeh in 1837: with an account of a voyage into Upper Egypt, and an appendix.

By Colonel Howard Vyse.

Link

You can Dload the PDF

I believe this is the source of the questions that is being re examined.

Have fun, it's very difficult to read.