Posted: Thu Sep 21, 2006 10:29 am
Have you seen pictures of the Giza Plateau? Looks like a moonscape.
Your source on the web for daily archaeology news!
https://archaeologica.org/forum/
Actually, it's my understanding that ice ages correlate well with droughts in areas near the equator, and certainly don't result in any increase in precipitation in those areas.Genesis Veracity wrote:Oas, the rainfall erosion jibes perfectly with the heavy rain in the middle latitudes (and heavy snowfall in the more extreme latitudes) during the Ice Age.
There is more reason to belive the latter date than the former. The latter date has some slight evidence for it. There exists no evidence at all for the former date, not even in Schoch's conjectures.So, did they build the Sphinx before circa 10000 B.C (when mainstreamers say the Ice Age ended), or did they build it around the conventional time of 2500 B.C.?
Kinda my point. The fertile strip of land along the Nile was the land of the living. The desert beyond was the land of the dead. Not a lot of rain out there.Genesis Veracity wrote:Have you seen pictures of the Giza Plateau? Looks like a moonscape.
Genesis Veracity wrote:Are Etna, Thera, and the Caucasus, going off like they did circa 1500 to 2000 B.C.?
And Schock too if you have it please. All I remember of that was an interview/documentary done quite a while ago. I'm not up on recent developments. Thanks.Minimalist wrote:If you wouldn't mind I would like to see Reader's again. Read it quite some time ago.
Having since gone back and checked the translations of the Dream Stela by Breasted it is clear that even if there was a reference to Khafre the surviving text does not claim that he was the builder. As far as the "4th Dynasty" context is concerned? That's a really weak argument, too. Would it be the only time that later buildings were constructed near an existing structure?There are two main arguments used to support the conventional Old Kingdom dating of the Sphinx. The first is the strong 4th Dynasty context provided by the Giza necropolis in general and, more specifically, by the adjacent mortuary complex of Khafre. In addition, there is alleged to be a reference to the pharaoh Khafre on the so-called Dream Stela, erected between the paws of the Sphinx to commemorate the restoration undertaken by Thutmose IV.
But it would be better to actually go to a source, ie to see what the advocates of the conventional dating say themselves. Right? Although I agree about the Dream Stela. But what are the actual archaeological arguments?Minimalist wrote:Thanks, Doug.
This is the line I remembered from Reader:
Having since gone back and checked the translations of the Dream Stela by Breasted it is clear that even if there was a reference to Khafre the surviving text does not claim that he was the builder. As far as the "4th Dynasty" context is concerned? That's a really weak argument, too. Would it be the only time that later buildings were constructed near an existing structure?There are two main arguments used to support the conventional Old Kingdom dating of the Sphinx. The first is the strong 4th Dynasty context provided by the Giza necropolis in general and, more specifically, by the adjacent mortuary complex of Khafre. In addition, there is alleged to be a reference to the pharaoh Khafre on the so-called Dream Stela, erected between the paws of the Sphinx to commemorate the restoration undertaken by Thutmose IV.
Hmm ..Cool. Thanks Doug.DougWeller wrote:Quite a few articles here, scroll to bottom
http://www.antiquityofman.com/pseudoscience.html
Colin Reader updated his 2002 article for Ma'at:
http://www.hallofmaat.com/modules.php?n ... cle&sid=93
David Billington's page is useful:
http://members.aol.com/davidpb4/sphinx2.html