<HTML>Hi Kat
>>I'm not as familar with it as you are ... but I've also always wondered about the front of the enclosure being lower than the back ... is there any evidence to show that it wasn't made this way on purpose to prevent rain (and even now as we all know their can be some hard downpours in Egypt) from pooling around the Sphinx.... the slope allowing it to run off...
To be completely honest I'm fairly familar with Schoch's view, but perhaps not especially over familar with any others :-)
Schoch's view on the enclosure seems to me to be:
"When Khafre built the second pyramid in circa 2500 BC and added the granite ashlars to the Valley and Sphinx temples, he also finished carving the rump down to its current level, even with the floor of the enclosure, again refurbishing an already-existing monument. Originally, I suspect, the Sphinx was intended to appear like an organic part of the Giza Plateau, rising directly out of the bedrock. A similar, though much later (New Kingdom, Eighteenth Dynasty) example of this style is seen in the Temple of Hatshepsut, at Deir el Bahri (also know as Deir el-Bahari) on the West Bank of Thebes, which is partly carved from and built into the local cliff, and esthetically integrated with its natural surroundings. In its first incarnation, the Sphinx may have had a similar appearance of blending in with its surroundings, at least when viewed from the rear. Khafre changed that, by excavating down to a level equal to the enclosure’s surface depth on the other three sides."
I went back and read the thread you referred to - and also the URL giving the view of August Matthusen. I think that one could be forgiven, from reading August Matthusen's view, for thinking that Schoch only identifies one form of erosion on the Sphinx. Also I guess Schoch would argue that this salt crystal exfoliation process would require a much faster rate of weathering than the conditions would conventionally allow. (apparently the arid climate and burial under sand tends to preserve limestone)
On the causeway thing - I'm not sure. What was that John Legon thing again? :-)
Thanks Kat
Claire</HTML>
