The Sphinx on the Dream Stele

[Riaan]

The so-called Dream Stele between the paws of the Sphinx shows two back-to-back sphinxes. Would this not have been the original shape Tuthmosis promised to restore it to? If so, it would prove that the Sphinx is indeed much older than generally believed (read more here).

[Shouldthisexist]

Ok simplify this for me, you are using the dream stele as proof that it's older than generally accepted. But you post a link to what I'm assuming is your own personal site about the theory that it could only be formed by the time when there was a large amount of rains.

If you are serious about researching your own stated theory I have found this link. It contains a similar yet different theory that may help you on seeing other possible events.

http://ancientaliensdebunked.com/how-old-is-the-sphinx-colin-reader-vs-robert-schoch/

Edit: sorry I posted the reply before adding the link.

Edited June 2, 2015 by Shouldthisexist

[Hanslune]

I suspect that the original shinx had the head modified later on changing from one head to another which is why the newer one (?) is not harmonious in size with the body.

[Shouldthisexist]

Sorry for double posting but to refute your claims. How do explain away the fact of before the proposed mainstream time line there is no mention of the sphinx.

Also it's claimed that they can match the stones they used to a time frame consistent with mainstream acceptance. They do this by comparing the stones used to the sphinx quarry and various other methods.

http://www.aeraweb.org/sphinx-project/why-sequence-is-important/

[Riaan]

Ok simplify this for me, you are using the dream stele as proof that it's older than generally accepted. But you post a link to what I'm assuming is your own personal site about the theory that it could only be formed by the time when there was a large amount of rains.

If you are serious about researching your own stated theory I have found this link. It contains a similar yet different theory that may help you on seeing other possible events.

http://ancientaliens...-robert-schoch/

Edit: sorry I posted the reply before adding the link.

Thanks for the link - I will add it as an opposing view on my website. I am personally convinced that the Sphinx is significantly older than what is generally believed, for two reasons - the weathering of its body and the fact that its head appears to have been re-carved.

Two questions:

1) If the Sphinx's presumably smooth body had indeed been exposed to rain for thousands of years as proposed by the cranks and the fringe element if not the aliens themselves, what would the result have been? Would it not have been exactly what we see today? The issue is of course about much more than just how the weathering had occurred - if caused by rain it would immediately imply that a civilization much older than the Egyptians must once have existed.

2) The Dream Stele is all about the Sphinx. What would have possessed Tuthmosis to have it depicted in a dramatically different form? Remember that it already had the out-of-proportionally small head. Did he possibly have other information about its original shape? I know we can only speculate, but it seems to be what Tuthmosis had in mind.

[Hanslune]

The problem of weathering is difficult because:

We don't have specific knowledge of the rainfall patterns in that area of the Giza plateau.

We also don't have the weathering rate for the different bands of limestone based on unknown amounts of rainfall, salt and sand erosion or what effect the modifications of the plateau did to the drainage system, i.e. did it funnel the rain water into area of the Sphinx. Additionally it is not known what effect being buried in sand had on the erosion rate - did it retard or enhance erosion by some agencies?

[Shouldthisexist]

Thanks for the link - I will add it as an opposing view on my website. I am personally convinced that the Sphinx is significantly older than what is generally believed, for two reasons - the weathering of its body and the fact that its head appears to have been re-carved.

Two questions:

1) If the Sphinx's presumably smooth body had indeed been exposed to rain for thousands of years as proposed by the cranks and the fringe element if not the aliens themselves, what would the result have been? Would it not have been exactly what we see today? The issue is of course about much more than just how the weathering had occurred - if caused by rain it would immediately imply that a civilization much older than the Egyptians must once have existed.

2) The Dream Stele is all about the Sphinx. What would have possessed Tuthmosis to have it depicted in a dramatically different form? Remember that it already had the out-of-proportionally small head. Did he possibly have other information about its original shape? I know we can only speculate, but it seems to be what Tuthmosis had in mind.

Hi no problem ok so let me jump into what I fear may be the rabbit hole and answer your questions.

Question number one, you do understand that the rain water theory is more in reference to the area around the sphinx and not the actual sphinx. Also other natural explanation such as wind has eroded the sphinx, flying sand over the years probably wasn't great in preservation either. Can you provide solid evidence that the only way the sphinx can look in it's current condition is because of rain erosion?

Question number 2, I see the dream stele for what it is a carving, hieroglyphs. The stele was used to describe the dream he had where the sphinx promised him the throne for clearing away the sand. The only flaw I see with the sphinx is that it's not a 1.1 replica of every detail. And if you are using the sphinx as your claim to the throne you would want it to look as majestic, noble, powerful as well.

http://www.ancientegyptonline.co.uk/dream-stele.html

Since I have took the time to try and answer your questions would you mind answering mine refuting your theory?

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

Sorry for double posting but to refute your claims. How do explain away the fact of before the proposed mainstream time line there is no mention of the sphinx.

Maybe it was buried?

[Riaan]

The problem of weathering is difficult because:

We don't have specific knowledge of the rainfall patterns in that area of the Giza plateau.

We also don't have the weathering rate for the different bands of limestone based on unknown amounts of rainfall, salt and sand erosion or what effect the modifications of the plateau did to the drainage system, i.e. did it funnel the rain water into area of the Sphinx. Additionally it is not known what effect being buried in sand had on the erosion rate - did it retard or enhance erosion by some agencies?

Back to the previous civilization angle - some of the medieval maps show massive lakes in the middle of the Sahara desert (see here and below), in places where we today find only dry river beds. How would you explain away this coincidence? Surely it must point to some ancient civilization which had been in northern Africa when it was still receiving ample rainfall, and in fact mapped the lakes which existed at that time.

PS: Apologies for the large picture - can't reduce it without having my website updated - and secondly, I have posted this particular question on UM before, so please ignore if you do not wantto discuss it again.

[Kenemet]

The so-called Dream Stele between the paws of the Sphinx shows two back-to-back sphinxes. Would this not have been the original shape Tuthmosis promised to restore it to? If so, it would prove that the Sphinx is indeed much older than generally believed (read more here).

Proves nothing, I'm afraid.

Tuthmosis' dream may have been a bit of after-the-fact mythmaking to further legitimize his claim to the throne. The sphinx, as he saw it, was buried up to its neck in the sand - and as you said, it was clearly a human head.

Now... the idea of the sphinx is actually OLDER than the pyramids. A common image throughout the ages is the pharaoh as sphinx, often offering something (water) to Re the sun god. So once the back became visible, it was evident that the statue must be a sphinx.

[Shouldthisexist]

Maybe it was buried?

Ahh yes how could I forget the aliens actually built it then decided to hide it in the sand until their return. But those darn meddling Egyptians went and discovered it's location!!!

[Kenemet]

Back to the previous civilization angle - some of the medieval maps show massive lakes in the middle of the Sahara desert (see here and below), in places where we today find only dry river beds. How would you explain away this coincidence? Surely it must point to some ancient civilization which had been in northern Africa when it was still receiving ample rainfall, and in fact mapped the lakes which existed at that time.

There were many trading routes through the desert, and the areas where wells and lakes exist are well known. That's a matter of survival information.

[Hanslune]

Back to the previous civilization angle - some of the medieval maps show massive lakes in the middle of the Sahara desert (see here and below), in places where we today find only dry river beds. How would you explain away this coincidence? Surely it must point to some ancient civilization which had been in northern Africa when it was still receiving ample rainfall, and in fact mapped the lakes which existed at that time.

PS: Apologies for the large picture - can't reduce it without having my website updated - and secondly, I have posted this particular question on UM before, so please ignore if you do not wantto discuss it again.

Or it's knowledge of Lake Chad but misplaced on the map. There were certainly Saharan and pre-AE cultures about but what we don't know if they were building stuff like GT. As far as we know they weren't/haven't found any evidence of it.

They may have modified the protruding 'Sphinx head' in some way but any sign of that was erased when the AE modified it.

I think we need to find a culture in NE Africa that was modifying stone/building in stone prior to the AE to make this idea fly. The best place to look is at the existing cultures in the Nile valley.

Edited to add a link to known and previous lakes of the Sahara

https://www.temehu.com/Cities_sites/Gabroun.htm

Edited June 2, 2015 by Hanslune

[cormac mac airt]

Or it's knowledge of Lake Chad but misplaced on the map. There were certainly Saharan and pre-AE cultures about but what we don't know if they were building stuff like GT. As far as we know they weren't/haven't found any evidence of it.

They may have modified the protruding 'Sphinx head' in some way but any sign of that was erased when the AE modified it.

I think we need to find a culture in NE Africa that was modifying stone/building in stone prior to the AE to make this idea fly. The best place to look is at the existing cultures in the Nile valley.

Edited to add a link to known and previous lakes of the Sahara

https://www.temehu.c...tes/Gabroun.htm

Hanslune one doesn't have to make the stretch that it was a misplaced reference to Megalake Chad as remnants of Megalake Ahnet-Mouydir would have easily explained such representations as Riann is implying "must" be from an ancient civilization preexisting the known ones.

cormac

[Hanslune]

Hanslune one doesn't have to make the stretch that it was a misplaced reference to Megalake Chad as remnants of Megalake Ahnet-Mouydir would have easily explained such representations as Riann is implying "must" be from an ancient civilization preexisting the known ones.

cormac

Cormac which of the known Nile Valley cultures could/would have had the ability to modify the above ground nob of rock that later became the AE Sphinx, presuming it occurred?

[Kenemet]

Or it's knowledge of Lake Chad but misplaced on the map. There were certainly Saharan and pre-AE cultures about but what we don't know if they were building stuff like GT. As far as we know they weren't/haven't found any evidence of it.

They may have modified the protruding 'Sphinx head' in some way but any sign of that was erased when the AE modified it.

If any (doubtful) modification was done, it would have been done by the Nile river people (Egyptians.) People have been living along the Nile for upwards of 40,000 years. The Saharan cultures seem to have been hunter-gatherers for the most part.

There is one example of a modified hoodoo but the result was that the site was made sacred and a major temple put on the site (I thought it would be Kom Ombo, but that's not the one. It's in the Sudan.) Had the Sphinx been there before Egypt became a single country, then it would have become an important part of the culture and religion of the region.

[cormac mac airt]

Cormac which of the known Nile Valley cultures could/would have had the ability to modify the above ground nob of rock that later became the AE Sphinx, presuming it occurred?

Neither the Maadi Culture nor the Merimda Culture, both from just south and north of Giza respectively, show evidence of having been able to create anything remotely as large as the Sphinx's head not to mention the entire body. Both of those cultures are pre-dynastic and the Merimda Culture itself goes back to at least 5000 BC.

Edit to add: While some would like to think there was a pre-dynastic culture/civilization that created the Sphinx it's rather telling IMO that the two closest cultures to Giza from the pre-dynastic period are completely lacking in evidence that would even hint at a suggestion of their ability/desire to create any such object.

cormac

Edited June 3, 2015 by cormac mac airt

[kmt_sesh]

...

Two questions:

1) If the Sphinx's presumably smooth body had indeed been exposed to rain for thousands of years as proposed by the cranks and the fringe element if not the aliens themselves, what would the result have been? Would it not have been exactly what we see today? The issue is of course about much more than just how the weathering had occurred - if caused by rain it would immediately imply that a civilization much older than the Egyptians must once have existed.

Normal desert erosion explains the wear on the Sphinx equally well, as is the consensus of the majority of the experts who've studied the monument. The "water erosion" theory stems primarily from Robert Schoch, and Schoch's theory was never scientifically accepted. This "water erosion" theory attempts to answer only certain weathering patterns but ignores the sum total of geological, historical, and archaeological evidence.

The geological, historical, and archaeological evidence confirms that the Sphinx dates to and is part of the pyramid complex of Khafre, from Dynasty 4, dating to the mid-third millennium BCE. Review the relevant analyses conducted by the GPMP on these pages.

There is no convincing, sustainable fringe or alternative argument that can back-date the Sphinx to thousands of years earlier. None presented to date has survived scrutiny. Moreover, field work and analyses of prehistoric Egypt has revealed no civilization prior to the dynastic Egyptians themselves. Egypt became a state or kingdom 500 years before the Sphinx was carved, and aside from some tombs at the south end of the area, there is no evidence the Plateau was a ritual focus for anyone before Dynasty 4.

2) The Dream Stele is all about the Sphinx. What would have possessed Tuthmosis to have it depicted in a dramatically different form? Remember that it already had the out-of-proportionally small head. Did he possibly have other information about its original shape? I know we can only speculate, but it seems to be what Tuthmosis had in mind.

The Dream Stela has a specific purpose. It is more to honor Tuthmosis IV than to honor the Sphinx. As a prince Tuthmosis probably had no actual claim to the throne, so as other kings did and would do later on, he used a god (the Sphinx) to "legitimize" his claim to the throne. That is what the story on the stela is about. It bears no actual relationship to the history of the Sphinx, nor would Tuthmosis IV have meant it to. Why would he have cared? How his artisans sculpted it on the stela is not really relevant to the history of the monument—it is relevant only to the royal artistic styles of Dynasty 18.

[Hanslune]

Neither the Maadi Culture nor the Merimda Culture, both from just south and north of Giza respectively, show evidence of having been able to create anything remotely as large as the Sphinx's head not to mention the entire body. Both of those cultures are pre-dynastic and the Merimda Culture itself goes back to at least 5000 BC.

Edit to add: While some would like to think there was a pre-dynastic culture/civilization that created the Sphinx it's rather telling IMO that the two closest cultures to Giza from the pre-dynastic period are completely lacking in evidence that would even hint at a suggestion of their ability/desire to create any such object.

cormac

That is my understanding also. I've asked a more specific question on this same subject on another forum. I don't see any of the known pre AE cultures having the ability to do that type of work but GT points to nomadic people doing some work with stone. I guess the NVP were just a bunch of slackers!

[kmt_sesh]

That is my understanding also. I've asked a more specific question on this same subject on another forum. I don't see any of the known pre AE cultures having the ability to do that type of work but GT points to nomadic people doing some work with stone. I guess the NVP were just a bunch of slackers!

Cormac is the really knowledgeable one on the prehistoric cultures of the Nile Valley and Delta. But the fringe simultaneously ignores the site development, archaeological evidence, and relationship of the various monuments on the Plateau. They make the chronic, tunnel-vision mistake of focusing in on one monument while ignoring the dizzying amount of other monuments at that site, and the historical relationships they have with one another. Forcing something out of context is not how one correctly dissects an historical question. This is more often done with the Great Pyramid, but the Sphinx receives its own share of abuse.

It would be a bit like a cardiologist trying to study a patient's heart problems by studying only his left big toe. Now that makes sense, right?

Editing to add: In my earlier post to Riaan I provided this link to the Sphinx pages of the Giza Plateau Mapping Project. I recommend this link in any such discussion with fringe posters. It's not like I can guarantee a lot of the posters you debate here or elsewhere will even bother with the link (although Riaan is more open minded than many others in the alternative camp), but at least you've provided analyses from solid, real-world, professional research.

Edited June 3, 2015 by kmt_sesh
Clarification

[cormac mac airt]

While I only listed two cultures in my reply to Hanslune it should be pointed out that the fringe have a tendency of completely ignoring every other culture or settlement within the Nile Valley which includes such places as Badari, Naqada, the Kom W and Kom K sites, the Fayum farming settlement, Memphis, Abydos, Thebes and Nekhen to name just a few. None of which could be remotely used to support such a fiction as an ancient civilization in Egypt that predates Dynastic Egypt.

cormac

[robinrenee]

Or it's knowledge of Lake Chad but misplaced on the map. There were certainly Saharan and pre-AE cultures about but what we don't know if they were building stuff like GT. As far as we know they weren't/haven't found any evidence of it.

They may have modified the protruding 'Sphinx head' in some way but any sign of that was erased when the AE modified it.

I think we need to find a culture in NE Africa that was modifying stone/building in stone prior to the AE to make this idea fly. The best place to look is at the existing cultures in the Nile valley.

Edited to add a link to known and previous lakes of the Sahara

https://www.temehu.c...tes/Gabroun.htm

Uh... wait a minute folks... 5000 years ago to 11,000 years ago, the Sahara was warm, humid, and green. This article covers the cave drawing of the flora and fauna during the warm wet period. It also covers the locations of the megalakes during the period.

http://www.nature.com/scitable/knowledge/library/green-sahara-african-humid-periods-paced-by-82884405. This is just the most recent period of humid and green Sahara.

Going further back, fossils have been found of the river creatures that lived in the wide river systems. Satellite images show the channels or the riverbeds and hollows of the lakes. http://news.sciencemag.org/paleontology/2008/10/out-africa-across-wet-sahara

There is still a large aquifer under the Sahara from the wet period.

http://www.natureworldnews.com/articles/3102/20130722/vast-fossil-aquifer-beneath-sahara-desert-slowly-refilling.htm

[kmt_sesh]

Uh... wait a minute folks... 5000 years ago to 11,000 years ago, the Sahara was warm, humid, and green. This article covers the cave drawing of the flora and fauna during the warm wet period. It also covers the locations of the megalakes during the period.

http://www.nature.co...ed-by-82884405. This is just the most recent period of humid and green Sahara.

Going further back, fossils have been found of the river creatures that lived in the wide river systems. Satellite images show the channels or the riverbeds and hollows of the lakes. http://news.sciencem...ross-wet-sahara

There is still a large aquifer under the Sahara from the wet period.

http://www.naturewor...y-refilling.htm

It might be something on my end but your first link isn't working for me. I get an error message. I'm commenting because what I'm familiar with in archaeogeological and paleoclimatological studies, the neolithic subpluvial was probably well over by the time Dynasty 4 began. In other words, when Khufu and the rest came along, Giza and environs were already desert. Your figures match with my understanding on general terms, but this wasn't necessarily uniform over all of North Africa. What backs this up is the presence of Dynasty 1 tombs at the south end of Giza, so they would date to around 3000 BCE. The Egyptians did not build tombs or place cemeteries in farmable lands.

[kmt_sesh]

While I only listed two cultures in my reply to Hanslune it should be pointed out that the fringe have a tendency of completely ignoring every other culture or settlement within the Nile Valley which includes such places as Badari, Naqada, the Kom W and Kom K sites, the Fayum farming settlement, Memphis, Abydos, Thebes and Nekhen to name just a few. None of which could be remotely used to support such a fiction as an ancient civilization in Egypt that predates Dynastic Egypt.

cormac

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it is perhaps Nekhen (Hierakonpolis) that is the best understood and most thoroughly excavated of all of these sites. Its layout and development are very well understood—going back a thousand years prior to the founding of the kingdom. Here archaeologists have uncovered the layout of the ancient city in which several thousand inhabitants lived, several sprawling cemeteries where they were buried, industrial areas where we have evidence from about 3600 BCE for the world's oldest large-scale beer production, and well-defined sacred precincts for shrines.

So we have plentiful evidence for social stratification, the beginnings of a flourishing "proto-kingship" and ideology, and a sophisticated urban plan from a very long time before there was even a kingdom.

And yet, nothing sophisticated enough for the erecting of pyramids or carving of colossal monuments. So where is the fringe digging up their "evidence"? Discerning minds want to know.

[robinrenee]

It might be something on my end but your first link isn't working for me. I get an error message. I'm commenting because what I'm familiar with in archaeogeological and paleoclimatological studies, the neolithic subpluvial was probably well over by the time Dynasty 4 began. In other words, when Khufu and the rest came along, Giza and environs were already desert. Your figures match with my understanding on general terms, but this wasn't necessarily uniform over all of North Africa. What backs this up is the presence of Dynasty 1 tombs at the south end of Giza, so they would date to around 3000 BCE. The Egyptians did not build tombs or place cemeteries in farmable lands.

I had a problem too just now when I tried the 1st link. I went to nature.com and used their search feature, and it brought the page up. So here's the link again. The problem is probably with my old computer. It's an 8 year old Windows XP, and I just love it. I bought a new one that is Windows 8.1. And I turn it on once in a while just to let it "turn its engine over." I'll ride my XP until it drops dead in its tracks.

http://www.nature.com/scitable/knowledge/library/green-sahara-african-humid-periods-paced-by-82884405

Yes, the wet period was over by the time of the 4th Dynasty. I posted in response to a few posts that didn't seem to realize that the Sahara had had many very wet periods with wide rivers and lush green landscapes.