Its strange to be italian.
We know ourself. When we look back we see our great parents...the italian republics...Fireze, Venezia, Pisa...
Before that is a garganuan ancestors overshadowing evrything...the roman empire...
before that in the shadows is our etruscian great grandparents...
And then there are even more old things. Things like a 6000 year old pyramide. on sardinia
We know almost nothing about them. Their articats are sooo old they even predate the great pyramides in egypt.
Its so strange to go there because you know its our most distant known forunners.
They aren't pyramids dumbass, More like over Glorified step-stones. Plus at the least the Pyramids of Giza are standing unlike your stupid step-stones.
P.S We have Monuments older then the Pyramids of Giza.
The Sphinx Enclosure:
Following a detailed examination of the severe, undulating erosion on the walls of the Sphinx enclosure, Dr Robert Schoch, together with other geologists and geophysicists, concluded that the Sphinx had been weathered mainly by rainfall before the Sahara became a desert, and must therefore be
at least 7-9000 years old. Since we do not know exactly how much rainfall there has been in the distant past, the Sphinx could be of far greater antiquity.
Schoch argued that because the Nile valley experienced the '
Nabtian Fluvial' from 10,000 to 3,000 B.C., that it must have been in this time that the deep fissures in the sphinx enclosure were made.
Robert Bauval and Graham Hancock proposed that the Sphinx may have been built around 10,500 BC, during the last Age of Leo. Anthony West doubts this, because the earth was then in the midst of intense upheavals associated with the end of the last ice age, whereas everything on the Giza Plateau testifies to an advanced, secure, and long-settled civilization. He suggests that the Sphinx may have been built not in the last Age of Leo, but a whole processional cycle earlier, around 36,000 BC, a date more in keeping with the history of Egypt as chronicled by certain Egyptian king lists.
This particular argument sent shock-waves through the Egyptologist establishment, not because of the 10,500 BC date, but more because it was realised that there was no expanation for the erosion. There is little doubt that the Sphinx enclosure was subject to severe erosion in its life-time, and we know from analysis that the limestone blocks retrieved from the dig were used for the nearby Sphinx temple. We are left with conclusion that since it was dug out, the Sphinx must have undergone a prolonged period of rainfall in order to leave it the way it is today. We are told that the region has not suffered such downfalls since at least 3,000 BC, which places the original dig long enough before that time to create such resulting erosion.
Egyptologist John Anthony West argued that the sudden rise of Egyptian civilization in the third millennium BC points to the fact that it was not a new development but a legacy - a carry-over from an earlier, lost civilization. Further evidence of a pre-dynastic construction phase is suggested by the Sphinx Temple, 'Khafre's' Mortuary and Valley Temples, and 'Menkaure's' Mortuary Temple, which were all partly built from huge limestone blocks, weighing hundreds of tons removed during the carving of the Sphinx, and which have suffered similar erosional damage.
No other site in Egypt shows the same type or degree of erosion.
The 'Inventory stella' - Found at Ghiza by Auguste Mariette in the 1850's, in the ruins of the Temple of Isis clearly states that
Khufu restored the Sphinx. This stone provides some of the strongest evidence that the Sphinx was constructed
before Khufu and not by him. It says:
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 '(10).
...Which implies that the Sphinx (and a temple to Isis), were extant before Khufu...
While it is believed by traditional Egyptologists that this stella was carved in the 26th dynasty (664-524 BC), the reason why the statement that Khufu restored it is ignored by modern Egyptologists is a mystery, as the other information on it is regarded by the same people as historical fact.
The 'Dream Stela of Thutmosis IV, who also restored the Sphinx.
In fact, 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'. (5)
Zahi Hawass on the restoration of the Sphinx:
'On the upper part of the body we found old kingdom blocks, of the same quality used to face the causeway of Khafre, reset against a badly weathered old kingdom core'.
The fact that the same Old kingdom blocks (contemporary with Khafre), were not found over the lower courses too, which were protected by sand over most of their life, confirms that the top part of the structure
only was restored in the 4th dynasty. Also, and very importantly - the fact that old kingdom blocks had already been re-set against a '
badly weathered' core clearly suggests that the structure was already extant in the 4th dynasty.
Restoration by Thutmosis IV (c.1400 BC): The Dream Stele.
Evidence for Thutmosis IV's campaign is preserved in the so-called dream Stele he erected between the two paws of the Sphinx in ca. 1400 BC. According to the story inscribed in the Stella, the Sphinx spoke to him in a dream and asked the prince to free him from the sand. The Sphinx (Hor-em-Akht) offered in return the crown of Upper and Lower Egypt. It is often quoted as associating the sphinx with Khafre.
When the Dream stele was discovered, however, the lines of text were incomplete, only referring to a “Khaf,” and not the full “Khafra.” The missing syllable “ra” was later added to complete the translation by Thomas Young, on the assumption that the text referred to “Khafra.” Young’s interpretation was based on an earlier facsimile in which the translation reads as follows:
...which we bring for him: oxen... and all the young vegetables; and we shall give praise to Wenofer ...Khaf.... the statue made for Atum-Hor-em-Akhet.
From this story we know that the Sphinx was buried up to its neck again in 1400 BC.
Comment - Apart from the above testimonies, there is no contemporary record of the construction of the sphinx (or the main three Ghiza pyramids), which seems to elude a historical context. It is noted that the sphinx is linked via a causeway, to the pyramid of
Khafre, not
Khufu.
Erosion Features in the Sphinx enclosure:
Following a detailed examination of the erosion features on the walls of the Sphinx enclosure, Dr Robert Schoch, together with other geologists and geophysicists, concluded that the Sphinx had been weathered mainly by rainfall
before the Sahara became a desert, and must therefore be around 7,000 - 9,000 years old. (1)
Schoch argued that because the Nile valley experienced the 'Nabtian Fluvial' from 10,000 to 3,000 B.C., that it must have been in this time that the deep fissures in the sphinx enclosure were made. Schoch and a colleague also took seismic readings to determine sub-surface water penetration in the bedrock of the Sphinx.
(It is known that the pace of water penetration slows the deeper it seeps into the bedrock).
These erosion features have led some people to question the age of the Sphinx.
'They found that their seismic readings showed sub-surface water penetration at six to eight feet deep in the front half, and four feet at the rear. This differential could only be explained by presuming that the Sphinx had been carved in different stages; the head and the forepart first, and the hindquarters last. It is known that the Sphinx has been renovated at least three times in history, and they argue that the rear part was carved by Khafre (Chephren), which accounts for the tradition linking Khafre with the Sphinx'. (1)
It is immediately noticeable that the head of the Sphinx is proportionally smaller than the body. It is suggested that this has been caused by the head remaining above the level of the sand whilst the body has been covered over for much of its existence. Re-carving the sand-eroded head has led to a decrease in size over time.
Note - the head is in far better condition than the rest of the body, which was buried for most of its life in sand...
Which has led many to suggest that it may have been re-carved at least once...
http://www.ancient-wisdom.com/egyptsphinx.htm
