When looking
for evidence of this, however, Schoch noticed that the erosion was heaviest on the upper parts of The Great
Sphinx and enclosure walls and not around the base where flooding should have
undercut the monument. He therefore concluded in June 1990 that the
erosion had indeed been caused by the weathering of rain over thousands of years
rather than by wind erosion or flooding. He later published these findings. (7)
Check out this video exploring the evidence in the video below. On 23rd
October 1991, Schoch presented his material to the Geological Society of
America, where it was grudgingly accepted rather than embraced (8). However the
academic world was not totally convinced with one scholar, Carol Redmount of the
University of California, claiming it undermined "everything we know about
Ancient Egypt" (9) and another, Peter Lacovara, assistant curator of the
Egyptian Department of the Boston Museum of Fine Arts, muting "there are no big
surprises in store for us". (10) He wasn't ready to believe that The Great
Sphinx predated the Egyptian civilisation. Despite these reservations, it appeared proved beyond doubt
that the erosion had been caused by water and rainfall rather than flooding. But
then another tenacious scholar waded in with a different agenda. Mark Lehner, of the Oriental Institute at the University of
Chicago, had been investigating the Sphinx since 1980. He was dismissive of Schoch's estimate that the Sphinx had been built around 7000BC, possibly
earlier.
Ironically, Lehner's interest in Ancient Egypt and The
Great Sphinx originated from his connection with the Association for Research and
Enlightenment (ARE - The Edgar Cayce Foundation) which expounded theories of
the lost civilisation of Atlantis. Indeed, Lehner had written a book 'The
Egyptian Heritage based on the Edgar Cayce Readings' (11). He openly
admitted, "it's no secret that when I went [to Egypt] I myself was imbued with
the idea of lost civilisations ... So I was in fact ... looking for the lost
civilisation and something called the Hall of Records."
However, after his own exhaustive research, Lehner concluded
there was no connection between Ancient Egypt and any lost civilisation and he
wasn't prepared to have a youthful Schoch claim otherwise. Lehner's first
objection to Schoch and West's claims was if an earlier civilisation had built
the Sphinx, where was the evidence of it's existence? In his opinion it was
nowhere to be found.
Secondly, Lehner implied that Schoch was incompetent as a
geologist. "I don't think he has done his geological work yet ... one of the
primary pillars of his case is that if you compare The Great Sphinx to the Old Kingdom
tombs, they don't share the same weathering, therefore the Sphinx must be older,
but he's comparing layers in the Sphinx to other layers." (12) Lehner was alleging that the 'Sphinx layers' ran under the
tombs, so the tombs are made of different limestone, by implication harder, and
should therefore have weathered much more slowly. If correct, this would have
destroyed Schoch's case - and along with it any need to account for what peoples
had built the Sphinx before the Egyptians.
The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) then entered the
fray. They were preparing a television programme to show West's theory based on
Schoch's evidence. It was important for them to establish who was right, Schoch
or Lehner, as the corporation was anxious not to show a potentially flawed
documentary that could damage its integrity and world-wide reputation fort
serious and informed reporting. They therefore hired an independent expert to
give a professional opinion on who was right. The outcome was beyond doubt; the
tombs were made of the same flaky limestone as the Sphinx. Schoch and West were
correct and Lehner's counter arguments had been dealt a body, but not a
knockout, blow.
Lehner countered by arguing that the face of the Sphinx was in
fact the same as that of an undamaged statue of Chephren (d. 2533BC). He
published an article in the April 1991 issue of National Geographic in which he
described using computer graphics to assist in this task. "We have constructed
images of the Sphinx as it may have looked thousands of years ago. To create the
face, I tried matching views of other sphinxes and pharaohs to our model. With
the face of Khafre [Chephren], the Sphinx came alive." (13)
Not so, West countered, stating that the two faces actually looked nothing like
each other. West decided to approach Detective Sgt. Frank Domingo (above), a
senior forensic police artist with the New York Police Department who had joined
the ranks in 1966 for an informed opinion (14). Domingo had gained an impressive
reputation in facial reconstructions to the extent that archaeologists and
historians regularly sought out and used his services.
He was asked whether he was prepared to travel to Giza to
clarify whether or not the Sphinx was actually Chefren. "What if I decide it is
Chephren?" He asked. "If that's what you come up with, that's what I'll
publish." West replied. (15) Domingo duly visited Cairo and took many photographs of
the Sphinx and the statue of Chephren housed in the Cairo museum. He concluded
that the chin of the Sphinx is far more prominent that that of Chephren, and
more importantly, that a line drawn from the ear to the corner of the Sphinx's
mouth sloped at an angle of 32 degrees. The same line drawn on Chephren is only
14 degrees. This along with
other dis-similarities led Domingo to conclude that
the Sphinx is definitely not a portrait of Chephren (16).Given that it is
clearly not Chephren, who then might it may actually be?
The Great
Sphinx is the world's oldest known sculpture, and has
historically been dated to the Old Kingdom of Egypt during
the reign of the Pharaoh Chefren (c. 2558-2532 BC) however
recent research has called that into question as new
evidence points to an earlier dating. If both John West and the respected geologist
Robert Schoch are correct, then there must have been an organised civilisation
on the planet before recorded history.
We will never know for
certain but perhaps a clue lies in the overall shape of the Sphinx. Even a
casual glance at the sculpture shows that the Sphinx's head is badly out of
proportion with the rest of its body. Some researchers have suggested that the
original head was much larger had could possibly have been that of a lion.
This
would certainly make sense for the rest of the Sphinx's body appears to be that
of a lion. Why then recarve the sculpture? Again, speculation, but we do know
that the body of the 'lion' has spent most of its existence under the sand. In
all probability those, like Tuthmosis, rediscovering the Sphinx in the age of
the Pharaohs, only came across its head, perhaps in a poor state of repair and
so recarved it to represent the new age.
Explore forgotton clues scattered throughout history that are suggestive
of an alternative history.
Join the world-wide search for evidence
of a lost civilisation that predates
known history.
Has Earth already been contacted by other civilisations either in the distant past or in recent centuries?
A discussion of the emergence of advanced technologies and the bizarre invasion of Antarctica after WWII.
A discussion of sightings of UFOs in the sky above Earth and within the solar system, including Moon anomalies.
Evidence the Earth has been visited by extraterrestrials and how the public had been subject to disinformation.
A list of credits and sources for the themes and issues explored
in Violations.
Violations is now available to purchase in
paperback or Kindle versions complete
with exclusive additional content!