Archaeologica.org

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.

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?

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

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).

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.

Whoo Hoo. Where did you find this?

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

You sound like my wife