How old is the Sphinx ?

[Unusual Tournament]

2 hours ago, kmt_sesh said:

Dynasty 19, Ramesses II.

But why is that important? Here's your comment in context (see bolded portion):

Ramesses II's carvers used the living stone just like they did the Sphinx in Dynasty 4, and with the same basic tool-working technologies. Only what they carved there at Abu Simbel was much bigger than the Sphinx, and only one part of what you can see (they carved an entire temple into the mountainside). The Egyptians carved quite a few monuments out of living rock, so your argument doesn't hold.

Yes but it was carved 1300 years latter than the supposed date of the Sphinx. The difference is huge. another issue is the poor quality of the stone the Sphinx is carved from. Egyptians were masters of stone. Why did they persist with an inferior material and more importantly why did they use carved stone/ brick/ mortar together to create something that is artistically chit?

[kmt_sesh]

8 minutes ago, Captain Risky said:

Yes but it was carved 1300 years latter than the supposed date of the Sphinx. The difference is huge. another issue is the poor quality of the stone the Sphinx is carved from. Egyptians were masters of stone. Why did they persist with an inferior material and more importantly why did they use carved stone/ brick/ mortar together to create something that is artistically chit?

We don't even know why they carved the Sphinx, but they did. That's beside the point. The same civilization carved both monuments, obviously. Mpving the goal posts won't change that. This isn't soccer. The point stands as is.

[Unusual Tournament]

another point the readers should consider is the Giza pyramids were the pinacle of construction brilliance what is the primative second attemp that is the Sphinx doing there?

[kmt_sesh]

4 minutes ago, Captain Risky said:

another point the readers should consider is the Giza pyramids were the pinacle of construction brilliance what is the primative second attemp that is the Sphinx doing there?

Not really. There isn't much that's terribly impressive about stacking stones. Much more impressive is the logistics and organization of manpower to get it done, which was well within the grasp of Dynasty 4 Egypt. 

The great temples of the New Kingdom are several orders of magnitude more refined and sophisticated than the pyramids of the Old Kingdom.

[jaylemurph]

1 hour ago, Captain Risky said:

another point the readers should consider is the Giza pyramids were the pinacle of construction brilliance what is the primative second attemp that is the Sphinx doing there?

Sigh.

We all know the Sphinx is a primitive second attemp [sic]. The Hounds have said it.

--Jaylemurph

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

3 hours ago, Captain Risky said:

another point the readers should consider is the Giza pyramids were the pinacle of construction brilliance what is the primative second attemp that is the Sphinx doing there?

Because, as I said millions of years ago, the Sphinx was built after the pryamids And was a massive cockup thst ruined the otherwise perfect Giza complex.

[Unusual Tournament]

48 minutes ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

Because, as I said millions of years ago, the Sphinx was built after the pryamids And was a massive cockup thst ruined the otherwise perfect Giza complex.

I'm heartened that you're starting to come around to the fact the sphinx is a rubbish monument. nor worthy of the pyramids and other complexes. no pharaoh would have put up it unless it was older than the pyramids and associated with antiquity. 

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

7 minutes ago, Captain Risky said:

I'm heartened that you're starting to come around to the fact the sphinx is a rubbish monument. nor worthy of the pyramids and other complexes. no pharaoh would have put up it unless it was older than the pyramids and associated with antiquity. 

Yes, because the Pharoah KNEW when he was having it erected it was going to be rubbish.... and not a case of:

“Chief Engineer, yuo did such s good job on the pointy rptomb things..... Build me a Sphinx.”

”Sir, I’m an engineer, I can stack stones with geometrical perfection. But I’m not an artist”.

”Did I ****ing stutter? Build a damn Sphinx or I’ll have your balls”.

”Yes sir”

[Unusual Tournament]

1 minute ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

Yes, because the Pharoah KNEW when he was having it erected it was going to be rubbish.... and not a case of:

“Chief Engineer, yuo did such s good job on the pointy rptomb things..... Build me a Sphinx.”

”Sir, I’m an engineer, I can stack stones with geometrical perfection. But I’m not an artist”.

”Did I ****ing stutter? Build a damn Sphinx or I’ll have your balls”.

”Yes sir”

so the pharaoh ripped his goolies off and what left the sphinx intact? that doesn't make sense...

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

2 minutes ago, Captain Risky said:

so the pharaoh ripped his goolies off and what left the sphinx intact? that doesn't make sense...

Well, the bloody thing was apparently buried under sand within a few decades IIRC.

[Essan]

You would have thought that any self respecting bronze age god-king (with a giraffe fixation) would have known that soft limestone, once exposed to the elements, was going to erode quite quickly and that anything carved into an outcrop wouldn't look nearly so good and impressive in 5,000 years time.  Did he not do geology at school?  

[Gaden]

 

It must also be understood that the rock outcrop that became the Sphinx was there, it existed. If may be a simple matter of not wanting an outcrop there to spoil the look of the complex, so instead of taking it down, they made something out of it. It could even have looked like a Sphinx before carving. They may even have known the rock was not good enough for carving, but did it anyway. It is rock, after all, and has stood there for however long. You also have to realize that whatever it looks like now is not how it looked when it was finished, I'd venture to say, the pristine Sphinx was a thing of beauty.

 

 

 

Edited May 1, 2018 by Gaden

[jaylemurph]

7 hours ago, Gaden said:

It must also be understood that the rock outcrop that became the Sphinx was there, it existed. If may be a simple matter of not wanting an outcrop there to spoil the look of the complex, so instead of taking it down, they made something out of it. It could even have looked like a Sphinx before carving. They may even have known the rock was not good enough for carving, but did it anyway. It is rock, after all, and has stood there for however long. You also have to realize that whatever it looks like now is not how it looked when it was finished, I'd venture to say, the pristine Sphinx was a thing of beauty.

The velvetiness of the long, pendulous ears was particularly commented upon at the time. That's a rare texture to come across in stone.

--Jaylemurph

[Harte]

On ‎4‎/‎30‎/‎2018 at 1:34 AM, Captain Risky said:

Harte I thought you the cleaver one.

The Sphinx is carved from an outcropping of stone. Egyptians built in stone not carved out monuments. 

Ask yourself why the bottom portion of the Sphinx has been bricked and mortared over while the rest is carved? Cause it’s latter work. 

 

22 hours ago, Captain Risky said:

When was it built? And by whom...

built by Ramesses 1300BC a full 1300 years after the supposed building of the Pyramids. 

Try again.

Try what again? Try shooting fish in a barrel again?

Harte

[Harte]

58 minutes ago, jaylemurph said:

The velvetiness of the long, pendulous ears was particularly commented upon at the time. That's a rare texture to come across in stone.

--Jaylemurph

The spring-fed drool pool was a nice touch.

Harte

[jaylemurph]

7 hours ago, Harte said:

The spring-fed drool pool was a nice touch.

Harte

This right here is the point between gross and humorous where the Bassets spend most of their time.

--Jaylemurph

[docyabut2]

Quote

I guess what I don't understand to, is why that crop was already there before Khafra  built the body? That crop could have been a image before he made it in his image so small. 

 

Edited May 4, 2018 by docyabut2

[kmt_sesh]

1 hour ago, docyabut2 said:

I guess what I don't understand to, is why that crop was already there before Khafra  built the body? That crop could have been a image before he made it in his image so small. 

The outcrop was there. Nobody disputes that. The whole argument is whether the head used to be different. There's no evidence it was anything more than what we see today, but the debate continues.

[jaylemurph]

21 minutes ago, kmt_sesh said:

The outcrop was there. Nobody disputes that. The whole argument is whether the head used to be different. There's no evidence it was anything more than what we see today, but the debate continues.

My psychic sources disagree strongly.

--Jaylemurph

[kmt_sesh]

38 minutes ago, jaylemurph said:

My psychic sources disagree strongly.

--Jaylemurph

No offense was intended to your revered Masters—may they drool with abandon.

[Unusual Tournament]

The 'Inventory Stella':

Found at Giza by Auguste Mariette in the 1850's, in the ruins of the 'Temple of Isis' (10). It states reasonably clearly that Khufu restored the Sphinx. It reads as follows:

'Long live the King of Upper and Lower Egypt, Khufu, given life. He found the house of Isis, Mistress of the Pyramid, by the side of the hollow of Hwran (The Sphinx). And he built his pyramid beside the temple of this goddess and he built a pyramid for the King's daughter Henutsen beside this temple. The place of Hwran Horemakhet is on the South side of the House of Isis, Mistress of the pyramid. He restored the statue, all covered in painting of the guardian of the atmosphere, who guides the winds with his gaze. He replaced the back part of the Nemes head-dress, which was missing with gilded stone. The figure of this god, cut in stone, is solid and will last to eternity, keeping its face looking always to the East' .

 

This text strongly implies that the Sphinx (and a temple to Isis), were extant beforeKhufu...

 

The French Egyptologist and Director General of Excavations and Antiquities for the Egyptian government, Gaston Maspero, who surveyed the Sphinx in the 1920s asserted that:

'The Sphinx stela shows, in line thirteen, the cartouche of Khephren. I believe that to indicate an excavation carried out by that prince, following which, the almost certain proof that the Sphinx was already buried in sand by the time of Khafre and his predecessors'. (8)

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

Well, “found” could mean “created” in the way that “founded” is a past tense meaning “created” or “established”, but you’re right there’s a statue in that inventory that he restored.

[kmt_sesh]

1 hour ago, Captain Risky said:

The 'Inventory Stella':

Found at Giza by Auguste Mariette in the 1850's, in the ruins of the 'Temple of Isis' (10). It states reasonably clearly that Khufu restored the Sphinx. It reads as follows:

'Long live the King of Upper and Lower Egypt, Khufu, given life. He found the house of Isis, Mistress of the Pyramid, by the side of the hollow of Hwran (The Sphinx). And he built his pyramid beside the temple of this goddess and he built a pyramid for the King's daughter Henutsen beside this temple. The place of Hwran Horemakhet is on the South side of the House of Isis, Mistress of the pyramid. He restored the statue, all covered in painting of the guardian of the atmosphere, who guides the winds with his gaze. He replaced the back part of the Nemes head-dress, which was missing with gilded stone. The figure of this god, cut in stone, is solid and will last to eternity, keeping its face looking always to the East' .

 

This text strongly implies that the Sphinx (and a temple to Isis), were extant beforeKhufu...

 

The French Egyptologist and Director General of Excavations and Antiquities for the Egyptian government, Gaston Maspero, who surveyed the Sphinx in the 1920s asserted that:

'The Sphinx stela shows, in line thirteen, the cartouche of Khephren. I believe that to indicate an excavation carried out by that prince, following which, the almost certain proof that the Sphinx was already buried in sand by the time of Khafre and his predecessors'. (8)

This is not a good translation. I don't know its source, but there is no "line thirteen." There are four horizontal registers, as well as text wrapping around and framing the center. Here is a correct translation (Zivie-Coche, p. 85: 2002):

• Live the Horus Medjed, the King of Upper and Lower Egypt, Cheops,
• given life. He found the house of Isis, Mistress of the Pyramids, next to
• the house of Haurun, northwest of the house of Osiris, Lord of Rasetau.
• He (re)built the pyramid of the king’s daughter Henutsen beside this
• temple. He made an inventory, carved on a stela, for his mother Isis, the
• mother of the god, Hathor, Mistress of the Sky. He restored for her the
• divine offerings and (re)built her temple in stone, that which he found
• in ruins being renewed, and the gods in their place.

Do not go by someone such as Maspero, who was bopping around Egypt at the start of the twentieth century. We know far more about hieroglyphs today, as well as the history of Egypt. For instance, the pyramid in question, which is described as the " pyramid of the king’s daughter Henutsen." That is one of several little pyramids built along the east side of the Great Pyramid, but we don't know with certainty for whom they were built. They probably were for royal women, but that's about as much as we can say. This inscription has nothing to do with Khufu's "rebuilding" the Great Pyramid or uncovering the Sphinx. The temple in the inscription above refers to the little temple that had been built out front of the little pyramid. In the Third Intermediate Period it was converted into a temple to Isis, and then again in Dynasty 26.

With certainty there is no possibility that the Inventory Stela dates back to Dynasty 4. It dates to Dynasty 26. But its still clung to by fringe authors who tend to use very old and outdated translations, or they just freely misrepresent the inscription and think no one will notice. But we notice.

[Unusual Tournament]

1 hour ago, kmt_sesh said:

This is not a good translation. I don't know its source, but there is no "line thirteen." There are four horizontal registers, as well as text wrapping around and framing the center. Here is a correct translation (Zivie-Coche, p. 85: 2002):

• Live the Horus Medjed, the King of Upper and Lower Egypt, Cheops,
• given life. He found the house of Isis, Mistress of the Pyramids, next to
• the house of Haurun, northwest of the house of Osiris, Lord of Rasetau.
• He (re)built the pyramid of the king’s daughter Henutsen beside this
• temple. He made an inventory, carved on a stela, for his mother Isis, the
• mother of the god, Hathor, Mistress of the Sky. He restored for her the
• divine offerings and (re)built her temple in stone, that which he found
• in ruins being renewed, and the gods in their place.

Do not go by someone such as Maspero, who was bopping around Egypt at the start of the twentieth century. We know far more about hieroglyphs today, as well as the history of Egypt. For instance, the pyramid in question, which is described as the " pyramid of the king’s daughter Henutsen." That is one of several little pyramids built along the east side of the Great Pyramid, but we don't know with certainty for whom they were built. They probably were for royal women, but that's about as much as we can say. This inscription has nothing to do with Khufu's "rebuilding" the Great Pyramid or uncovering the Sphinx. The temple in the inscription above refers to the little temple that had been built out front of the little pyramid. In the Third Intermediate Period it was converted into a temple to Isis, and then again in Dynasty 26.

With certainty there is no possibility that the Inventory Stela dates back to Dynasty 4. It dates to Dynasty 26. But its still clung to by fringe authors who tend to use very old and outdated translations, or they just freely misrepresent the inscription and think no one will notice. But we notice.

i don't believe you can just as easily discount any one you don't agree with. even with the above translation (which is accurate to the one i posted... Maspero) it still is pretty obvious that the sphinx was ancient before the construction of the great pyramid. 

which is what i have been saying all along. 

 

Edited July 8, 2018 by Captain Risky

[cormac mac airt]

1 hour ago, Captain Risky said:

i don't believe you can just as easily discount any one you don't agree with. even with the above translation (which is accurate to the one i posted... Maspero) it still is pretty obvious that the sphinx was ancient before the construction of the great pyramid. 

which is what i have been saying all along. 

Except its not as the newer, more accurate translation DOESN'T mention the Sphinx at all. 

Actually since the removal of material from the Sphinx Enclosure has been shown to match the quality and quantity of material used to make the Valley Temple/s the Sphinx in its totality couldn't have existed before the Temple/s construction, which would only leave a knob projecting up out of the ground possibly for the head and nothing else. You're putting the cart before the horse and trying to climb uphill during a snowstorm with what you consider 'obvious'. 

cormac