dr. schoch and his contribution to archaeology

[Minimalist]

After over five years of research, it is my conviction that the geological evidence is not consistent with the attribution of the monument to Khafre or, for that matter, to any other pharaoh of the 4th Dynasty.

Zahi Hawass will have him tarred, feathered, and run out of Egypt!




A very interesting read, though. I don't think he has convinced me that only a few centuries would account for the disparity in weathering which he, himself, points out in places around the plateau. I'll have to read through it again, sloooooowwwwly.

[Beagle]

http://www.hallofmaat.com/modules.php?n ... cle&sid=93

When, in October 1997, I first produced a paper on my views of the age of the Sphinx, the scope of the 'evidence' I cited was fairly restricted. On the basis of the nature and greater intensity of the degradation of the limestones in the west of the Sphinx enclosure, and the effect that Khufu's quarrying had on the hydrology of the plateau, I concluded that the Sphinx and a number of other structures must have pre-dated the 4th Dynasty. Taking into consideration the earliest known use of stone masonry in Egypt, I dated this Sphinx complex to the Early Dynastic period.

At that time, I was unaware of the 4th Dynasty cutting in the Member I terrace in the north of the Sphinx enclosure, and unaware of the work of Mortensen and Kromer and the implications of their finds on the evidence for Early Dynastic activity at Giza. I was also unaware of the detailed architecture of the tombs of Khentkawes and Kai and the evidence for advanced masonry in the Early Dynastic cemetery at Helwan.

Since reaching the conclusion that the Sphinx is an Early Dynastic monument, continued research has uncovered so many additional factors which appear to confirm my initial view that Giza was a site of at least local importance in the Early Dynastic period, several centuries before the pyramids were built on the necropolis. I believe that the weight of evidence is such that it is now extremely difficult to reconcile the geology and archaeology of the plateau with Giza's conventional 4th Dynasty origin.

Undoubtedly, Khafre did have a major influence on the Sphinx - but not as its builder. I believe that the unique layout of Khafre's mortuary complex, which included the Sphinx and Sphinx temple, developed as a result of that pharaoh's usurpation or re-working of the existing solar-cult complex. How better could the association of the king with the sun-god have been symbolised, other than by linking Khafre's 'mansion of eternity' with a long established site of solar worship and the everlasting circle of birth, death and re-birth manifested by the daily rising and setting of the sun?

This article was posted by Katherine Reece earlier. The link is re-posted for convenience. I'll also post it on the Giza thread. Thanks Kat.

Colin Reader is a geological engineer who fairly early on agreed with Schoch's position on the erosion of the Sphinx. This paper is very well written and presented. It is looong. It's like asking who won WW2 and the answer begins with Hitlers rise to power.

It's worth the read though. For those who have kept abreast of this issue for a long time there are not a lot of surprises. For me there was a pretty large surprise. Reader suggests that not only do the Sphinx and Sphinx Temple predate Khufu but the Khafre causeway does also. I have not seen that suggested before.

He speaks of the Sphinx as belonging to a Sun god religion, and although he may hint at it, does not say that there should be another lion guardian nearby.

Well it's a good start.

[Beagle]

[img][img]http://i67.photobucket.com/albums/h298/LL3850/th_Figure7.jpg[/img]
[/img]


Click to enlarge.


This pic is from the above article by Colin Reader. The Sphinx, Sphinx Temple, and Khafre causeway are clearly seen.

[Guest]

He speaks of the Sphinx as belonging to a Sun god religion

wasn't that one of the egyptian religions anyways?

i haven't had the time to read the article yet, does he sugget who could be responsible for the pyramids or does he leave it as a guessing game?

[Minimalist]

Hmm...


This is interesting.


http://www.ebtx.com/theory/sahara.htm

First and last ... there is the Sphinx

This artifact, by the evidence first put forth by West and Schoch, is on the order of 10,000 years (or more) old. The evidence consists of water weathering patterns on the Sphinx enclosure (from a wet period) which could not have occurred if the Sphinx was anything like the 5000 or so years posited by formal Egyptologists (a dry period to the present day).

[Beagle]

Very interesting. You know that my favorite period is the pleistocene. A huge hole in the knowledge of that period I believe is under the sands of the Sahara.

[Minimalist]

Take a look at this Beagle.

http://www.rastafarispeaks.com/cgi-bin/ ... read=71649


Just a sample:

Another great African called Emperor Ci also sailed to the Americas from the Sahara/prehistoric Ghana region thousands of years before Christ. According to the Maya book POPUL VUH (translated by the Spanish Monk, Sahagun), Emperor Ci or 'Meci' migrated from West Africa in eight ships filled with Africans, their families, sailors and provisions. He established a culture in the VeraCruz region of Mexico with the "Mongoloid" American Indians living there. That event happened thousands of years before Christ at a time when both the Sahara and West Africa had giant 'inland Seas,' and papyrus and sewn-plank boats were used for sea travel.

Archeological evidence also shows that an elite group of SHANGO PRIESTS (TRINIDADIANS, TAKE NOTE) and Orisha Priests of 'dwarfish' Negro/Black African type specifically from Nigeria (where these 'dwarfish' shamen, magicians and entertainers still exist today), established a very sophisticated astronomical religion in Monte Alban, Mexico. That group included regular, taller Africans and their families who were part of an elite and ruling class. The Black/African population of Southern Mexico before the invasions of other groups was very large before 400 A.D. ALL BACK TO 3000 B.C.

The archeological evidence also shows that the pyramid/religios complex at Monte Alban was attacked and the Black Negroid figures shown as being victims. However, there is Olmec art in Mexico that goes back as recently as the 400's A.D., which means that Blacks were dominant in parts of Mexico after the Christian Era.

[Guest]

quite an interesting read. i wonder how much is legend and how muchis fact. would this article account for the faces on easter island?

which would bring me to anoher question, would those bodiless statues be as old as the sphynx?

[Beagle]

Whoo Hoo. Where did you find this?

Well, the first thought that I have is that now all the races of man are now represented as having claimed to be the first Americans. It is amazing how many archeaological claims are ethnocentric - the poor stepchild and most abused being my beloved Neandertals.

[Minimalist]

Whoo Hoo. Where did you find this?

Actually, it is your fault. Something you said got me looking around for prehistoric civilization in the Sahara and I just sort of fell into this.

Certainly, we have already discussed the apparent negroid features of the Olmec 'heads.'

[Beagle]

Certainly, we have already discussed the apparent negroid features of the Olmec 'heads

.'

Very true. If I remember correctly, the Olmecs were able to display figures of all the races of mankind. There is a mystery for you. But that's just one of many pieces of evidence for trans-continental communication at that time.

My fault?? You sound like my wife.

[Minimalist]

You sound like my wife

They all sound like that.

[Minimalist]

Here's another interesting tidbit, Beagle.


http://www.janeresture.com/tonga_mua/


Sorry about the noise.....they think that annoying midi files add to their web site! Turn your speakers down.

[Beagle]

Thanks. I need to look up a couple of things and comment later this evening. 5:00 o'clock her. Dinner bell ringin'.

[Beagle]

This reminded me of the article by Robert bednarik that was in the Aborigine topic. He said that man had seafaring ability in the Pacific 800kya.

If we accept anything close to that, a Tongan culture suggested by the author in your post requires no leap of faith at all.

I have still not read any of Hancock's books. But I've heard him say that much of early civilization now lies underwater since the sea level rise following the last ice age. That is a no brainer in my opinion. Most of todays population lives close to water and probably always has. So....groups of Pacific islands that exist now would have had a much larger land mass and would ,in some cases, formed a single land mass at one time.

I imagine that discoverys will be made someday that will show quite a bit more of the culture. Thanks Mini