| May 19, 2024, 9:26 pm UTC |
 |
| In: The Hall of Maat > Ancient History - Ancient History and Archaeology > Topic |
| Goto: Forum List • Create A New Profile • Log In |
|
Ancient History •
Ancient Egypt •
Laboratory •
Humanities •
Apocalypse •
Paper Lens •
Coffee Shop Exhibitions, Conferences, Lectures, Journals • Alternative Geometry and Numerology |
| August 03, 2001 06:29AM |
<HTML>From one board to the next, even after a solid 10 years of debate people still can't get it right. 
The link John provided to Martin Stower's site should be very helpful with regards to the non-issue of quarry mark forging. The Relieving Chambers are closed to the public (rightly so), however, I'm going to be in Egypt this Feb. Before I leave I am going to submit a few requests to Mr. Zahi for permission to enter various tombs and locations; the reliving chambers among them. Provided that I am granted permission, you can expect some highly detailed digital photos on the net very soon.
Among those more educated in the history of the marks, I really do not believe it is an issue anymore. Graham Hancock made a public apology for supporting the theory, you would think that fact alone would close the book on the subject in much of the "alternative world".
See: [martins.castlelink.co.uk]
With regards to the Sphinx, and I hope I'm not stepping out of line here being John West's webmaster, but there is a lot of evidence at Giza to suggest that the Sphinx is indeed an Old Kingdom monument.
Giza recieves rain, and when it does it recieves a lot of it. It recieves so much rain, in fact, that the Egyptians of the Old Kingdom felt it neccessary to built water drainage ducts into some of their monuments. This is seen in both Khafre's pyramid trench (now filled in with concrete to prevent people from tripping) and, I believe, there is also a drainage duct at Khafre's Valley Temple.
About 80 yards south of the Sphinx, on the same bedrock strata the trench is carved, there is an Old Kingdom tomb with a short causeway dug into the bedrock. The walls of this "causeway" have nearly identical erosion patterns as the Sphinx Trench. If this tomb is indeed an Old Kingdom piece, then it certainly did not take 10,000 years to erode the walls of the causeway.
On top of this we have a little contextual evidence in the form of Old Kingdom pottery found under unplaced blocks of the Sphinx Temple. The temple blocks were quarried from the Sphinx Enclosure so unless the Atlanteans, or whomever you would like to attribute the Sphinx to, quarried the blocks and let them sit for 6000 years, the temple blocks are contemporary with the Sphinx Enclosure itself. I also believe there was some Old Kingdom pottery found in the back of the enclosure as well.
Add to this the fact that the Sphinx complex is incorperated into Khafre's pyramid complex, and the fact that the Thutmosis IV still associated the Sphinx with Khafre, I believe you have more than enough evidence to attribute the Sphinx to the Old Kingdom.</HTML>
The link John provided to Martin Stower's site should be very helpful with regards to the non-issue of quarry mark forging. The Relieving Chambers are closed to the public (rightly so), however, I'm going to be in Egypt this Feb. Before I leave I am going to submit a few requests to Mr. Zahi for permission to enter various tombs and locations; the reliving chambers among them. Provided that I am granted permission, you can expect some highly detailed digital photos on the net very soon.
Among those more educated in the history of the marks, I really do not believe it is an issue anymore. Graham Hancock made a public apology for supporting the theory, you would think that fact alone would close the book on the subject in much of the "alternative world".
See: [martins.castlelink.co.uk]
With regards to the Sphinx, and I hope I'm not stepping out of line here being John West's webmaster, but there is a lot of evidence at Giza to suggest that the Sphinx is indeed an Old Kingdom monument.
Giza recieves rain, and when it does it recieves a lot of it. It recieves so much rain, in fact, that the Egyptians of the Old Kingdom felt it neccessary to built water drainage ducts into some of their monuments. This is seen in both Khafre's pyramid trench (now filled in with concrete to prevent people from tripping) and, I believe, there is also a drainage duct at Khafre's Valley Temple.
About 80 yards south of the Sphinx, on the same bedrock strata the trench is carved, there is an Old Kingdom tomb with a short causeway dug into the bedrock. The walls of this "causeway" have nearly identical erosion patterns as the Sphinx Trench. If this tomb is indeed an Old Kingdom piece, then it certainly did not take 10,000 years to erode the walls of the causeway.
On top of this we have a little contextual evidence in the form of Old Kingdom pottery found under unplaced blocks of the Sphinx Temple. The temple blocks were quarried from the Sphinx Enclosure so unless the Atlanteans, or whomever you would like to attribute the Sphinx to, quarried the blocks and let them sit for 6000 years, the temple blocks are contemporary with the Sphinx Enclosure itself. I also believe there was some Old Kingdom pottery found in the back of the enclosure as well.
Add to this the fact that the Sphinx complex is incorperated into Khafre's pyramid complex, and the fact that the Thutmosis IV still associated the Sphinx with Khafre, I believe you have more than enough evidence to attribute the Sphinx to the Old Kingdom.</HTML>
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.