Based on your presentation, I have doubts regarding the conclusion that the Sphinx rock outcrop was left as is while the surrounding rock was quarried, and that water filled the area. First, if Old Kingdom did quarry from that site (which we know they did), they would've continued the quarry up to and around the outcropping. Since the outcropping is below the level of the land around the quarried area, there's no reason to believe the the Sphinx body wasn't quarried to its final shape. That means, the random shape you present as the original body of the Sphinx doesn't match the intent of quarrying the area. Since we know the area was quarried as a fact, it isn't reasonable to conclude they would've left such a random shape in the middle, especially since all of it was apart of the ground, not actually an outcropping, per se (other than the head). Second, if they quarried area was indeed meant to hold water, we would see evidence of erosion where the waterline would've been, not only around the walls, but also the Sphinx itself. Both would indeed have a matching waterline erosion of multiple layers. I invite you to go to any reservoir to see how such held water affects the natural surrounding barriers, particularly as the water level rises and falls. No such erosion is present at all in the quarried area. I think you have a bit more work here.
I didnt think about the water line erosion. I would agree with that. Ive seen this in many places. It dosent take long either. I also argree with the rest of your comment.
great point, I was thinking about that too cause that is one of the pieces of evidence that gives the rainfall theory credence, as we would expect to see the water level erosion on those stones as well
As dr Robert schoch said you can easily tell where the much softer rock was eroded leaving behind these stream line, undulating marks on the surface. Completely agree that we should see a much more even erosion pattern if the enclosure was filled with water. Clearly that’s not the case
Actually i do think this deepening around the sphinx could be paving. like around the pyramids it was kind of Sandwich technique. above was basalt plaster 1m high, below Limestone form fitting united.
I am at 12:47 I'm asking the question , Does the sphinx contain an entrance to underground passages ? An entrance that would be left above the water , wherever that water came from .
Your mind is really quite remarkable ... most researchers and academics fall into the confirmation bias trap. Instead, you always follow the facts in whatever direction they take you. So refreshing. Thank you!
Most academic researchers know better than to stray too far from the line being towed. They like to stay employed and funded, as well as being safe from ostricization from fellow peers.
@@davidleomorley889 Lol, you bring up a good point, sir.. My only caveat would be to say, that most TH-cam viewers aren't employed to sort out fact from fallacy... I doubt many even realize their cognitive dissonance...
I made a script error at the 12 min mark saying “it hasn’t rained in Egypt for thousands of years” - it obviously has(!) I meant “it hasn’t rained enough to cause the erosion we see for thousands of years” - apologies for that! So, I mean it’s a natural formation of the Sphinx is taller than the bedrock and the Egyptians did cut down further to make an enclosure for the water, making the island in the middle taller through quarrying. What I’m saying in this video is there is no evidence they were carving a lion. They just extended the natural anomaly. This is a theory in its infancy but one I’ll be looking into further. I’m just trying to take a critical look at the evidence as I’ve long believed the ‘Lion - 10,500 BC’ hypothesis. Anyway, thanks for watching. Please do Like the video if you enjoyed it and please subscribe! If you want to support the Ancient Architects channel, I’m on Patreon at www.patreon.com/ancientarchitects - thank you!
I agree 100% with the head of Sokar theory and appreciate your hard work. I just wanted to point-out that head of the Sokar could have, at some point in Old Kingdom history, been carved into a different human head, unlike the one we see now. That of a different leader (of the original Old Kingdom people that lower Egypt which Narmer overtook and conquered), because the sphinx depicted on the Narmer Palette doesn't look like it has the same ethnicity as the current head that sits atop the sphinx. The fact that the Sphinx' head is very disproportionate, suggests that the original head, whether it was Sokar's falcon head or a human head, was likely bigger and looked more like the one on the Narmer Palette, but was later carved-away to look more like the people that conquered the peoples of the old kingdom.
I don’t think the pyramids are as old as the alternative explanations says either. In India a upward pointing triangle means the 3 upper chakras. And if the capstone was made of gold it would be the perfect way of protecting it. You can’t climb it. There was no place to stand and pull it down. And the top chakra is the spirality. When the hard core Tibetan monks are on a spiritual retreat. They sit in a stone casket for many days. Like the casket in the pyramid. I think this is just a very old spiritual temple. And the capstone of the black pyramid says that the spirit of the pharaoh is above the Eye of Horus. So maybe they thought their spirit got locked in the top of the pyramid. Also there are no inscriptions in any spiritual temples. Not of the donator nor the architect.
@@jerryb.9754 Well, actually YES! Some of the illustrations during the time of Akhenaten show ducks and other natural scenes. This was a totally new approach in Egyptian art, fostered I presume, by Akhenaten himself who was trying to break away from the old traditions.
Couldn't help noticing a badly eroded human like figure on the front view of the sphinx. If the enclosure was filled with water, what were the tunnels/passages under it for?
Exactly, there are an enormous amount of tunnels under the Plateau, some going hundreds of feet down into tombs. I have always had the theory that the enclosure erosion could have been from flooding, but I do not think it was supposed to be flooded, due to what is underneath the Plateau.
The water would immediately have drained away through the many underground tunnels. There would not have been sufficient contact to cause erosion, perhaps.
@@pentirah5282 Not really. It is not tap water, but monsoon water from the mountains of Sudan. Look at floodings in our time. When water drains away it leaves a huge mess of sediments. Those Nile sediments were urgently required for the surrounding agricultural land to refertilize each year. Underground shafts and caves would clog up with sediments pretty quickly. Just as the Assuan dam is clogging up with sediments which bring problems for the functioning of the dam.
@@DilbertMuc I know all that. Just a thought: if the underground tunnels were silted up, where is the residue of the silt now? Where did it disappear to? It would need a colossal amount of silt to block all those tunnels. Observers say they go on for miles.
@@pentirah5282 Yeah. I was saying that the old Egyptians would be more than stupid to build so close to the river Nile if all their buildings get inundated and damaged periodically by the annual monsoon floods. They would spend the rest of the year cleaning up the mess and emptying the clogged drainage canals. With a nile flood all underground cavities and above ground buildings would be filled with dirty, muddy water for weeks, leaving ten thousands of tons of drying mud everywhere. When finished cleaning up the disaster then the next flood arrives and the cycle goes on and on... I am saying that this "Ancient Architects" hypothesis doesn't make sense in any way, in a logical view. However that the Sphinx was a natural rock ensemble and might have had a birds head is quite plausible. But that's another hypothesis.
I agree with the head of Sokar theory, but the head of the Sokar could have, at some point in Old Kingdom history, been carved into a different human head, unlike the one we see now. That of a different leader (of the original Old Kingdom people that lower Egypt which Narmer overtook and conquered), because the sphinx depicted on the Narmer Palette doesn't look like it has the same ethnicity as the current head that sits atop the sphinx. The fact that the Sphinx' head is very disproportionate, suggests that the original head, whether it was Sokar's falcon head or a human head, was likely bigger and looked more like the one on the Narmer Palette, but was later carved-away to look more like the people that conquered the peoples of the old kingdom.
@@alphalunamare Who said anything about adding rock? The current Sphinx head is disproportionately SMALL...that suggests it was carved out of a BIGGER piece of rock.
Shocking state. And that’s exactly what I think it was meant to look like - a primordial mound. They didn’t carve it (apart from quarrying to extend it down for the most around it) and it looked like a natural outcrop - a primordial mound.
@@AncientArchitects If you claim that it was actually a Sokar/Falcon head, what about the picture you uploaded of the snake that adorned the head of the monument? It belongs to some other big monument? If so, what would be your suggestion?
I see 3 problems in your explanation about the age of the Sphinx. 1.) according to your theory the Spinx enclosure and both temples (temple and your "boat house") would be submerged every time the river Nile rises. Now, the Nile floodings were essential for the fertility of the Nile delta and the thousands of kilometers of settlements along the river. The Nile floodings brought nutritions and water and... millions of tons of sediments. Now look at current videos of severe floodings and what they leave behind in towns and cities: destroyed houses, things and sediments that turn to hard cement in the heat of the sun. You are saying that the Sphinx and all temples were inundated regularly by the Nile, which means most of the year folks were busy to clean up the mess and excavate the Sphinx and temples enclosure from thousand tons of sediments? 2.) standing water always leaves very significant water marks on rocks. Can be seen at any hydro dam with rock walls. There are none at the Sphinx and the enclosure. 3.) according to your theory there was a drainage canal from the pyramids to the Sphinx enclosure and therefore the water erosion is severe only in the surroundigs of that drainage. Thus you say, it was not rain but river/canal water that caused the water weathering. However the enclosures of the pyramids themselves (e.g. Khefre pyramid) are weathered as well. There you say it was rain and therefore the pyramids are much older. But... in another video you say that since the pyramid canal actually almost cuts through the Sphinx enclosure it means that the Sphinx was there first and later the builders of the pyramid canal made a shortcut through the enclosure of the Sphinx and that's why the Sphinx is squeezed in among the canal and the 2 temples. Now you are contradicting yourself. Please advise on that topic. :)
Like your comment, if the canal emptied into the enclosure, there would be a Big Gully cut into the limestone to the left of the sphinx, i know, im from Kentucky, all limestone and Gullys everywhere. Plus i bet all the so called caves around giza are all natural not carved. Had it not been turned into desert a sink hole might have opened up and damaged the pyramids.
Don’t forget that the blocks removed from the bedrock around the body were used to build the Sphinx temple, which is faced in granite, but the limestone behind is extremely eroded, and the granite facing stones are carved on the backside to fit to the eroded surfaces.
Right! So why wouldn't they cover the Sphinx? Every building in Egypt has been ransacked for as long as anything has been built there. If it was clad in granite, or harder limestone then that removed, plundered, you get what you see. And the Muslims tried to dismantle all the previous infidels' creations, for just one outraged (jealous!) occupier as an example.
not to mention you have to take into account the smaller things would be covered first so would be protected by the sand sooner, also it was all built over time not the same day so you cant expect the erosion to be exactly the same. and as you said its been repaired we dont yet know if other areas were repaired also.
The erosion is Far from Uniform displaying paradoxical massive erosion where it was known to be buried and protected and very little long tern erosion on the part that was sticking up!
Mate, you Can't even maintain bicycles. Humans want money for nothing. Finders fees. It was found and you pay them. Humanity is a 1 trick pony. 1% of the population actually makes life on earth better by making stuff.
Well I'm personally looking forward to Hancock appearance on jre 22nd April to discuss his new book America Before. I don't see any reason to deviate from the Bauval Hancock / Carlson partnership theory. I think I'd anything their case is stronger in 2019 than ever before
@@AncientArchitectsWE ARE GIVING AWAY OUR POSITION... I TOLD HIM NOT TO LEAK THIS REAL IMPORTANT INFO .... NOW EVERYONES GOING TO KNOW WHAT IT REALLY IS ....
Love it. well researched, thought out and presented. You're really stirring them up now.. keep going. Great critical thinking from an open minded perspective. This type of debate is exactly what is needed.
While im not ready to make any definitive claims on the sphynx, theres been so much interesting research. Thank you for being open to new ideas, and, as science is, being willing to revise your assessment based on new evidence and studies. It does not matter where information comes from, conventional egyptologists or alternative study. Its not being fickle, its embracing the scientific method. Keep going and giving us your thoughts!
@@kingsoloman2u458 god forbid someone change their mind after reviewing new data. It's the people who never change their minds that are the enemy of history, not the other way around.
Being able to challenge and change your opinions is a rare thing these days. That's what I love about your videos, you follow the evidence not the narrative, even when I disagree with your conclusions. However I really like your hypothesis here, it makes much more sense than a jackal or lion. Even sounds more plausible than the mainstream archeological explanation for the Sphinx.
After you had convinced me in other of your videos, that a water might have been around the pyramids, I wondered if that very same water had then been running down into the Sphinx enclosure and now you actually said it and so much more!
Maybe the Sphinx was a boat? A rock boat in a glorious swimming hole? A boat is what the sun rides in during the day and during the night? Maybe it was a boat with a round sun sphere on it?
You do a tremendous amount of research for your videos and it shows. Thank you for your channel. You are a wealth of information for those of us who do not put in the time (thank you) that have a keen interest in Egypt and it's history.
Amazing work! I really respect your ability to follow the evidence and evolve your theories. This is an amazing journey and I am happy to be along for the ride.
My head is still spinning from the many hypothesis, every time seems so solid, the latest one is very convincing and likely, it makes sense Matt, well done.
I think the sphinx encloser was made similar to today city sewer system. I feel that Graham Hancock and Robert beuvall are spot on when it was made. However I don't think it was made into anything until later times. Until It became a desert. If you look at the bottom middle of the sphinx you will see what I would call drain holes. I think this place was once green and had a tropical weather about it. And I think when it would flood this area was like a small pool of water in rainy seasons and for whatever reason I think they done this to drain the water down the drain holes to flow to the Nile in tunnel under the sphinx. That way it wouldn't flood other tunnels, temples at the time and/or possible tombs. However you have to remember that the cavity of the sphinx has chambers in it. Maybe they built the chambers first and it would flood and the dug down around it to keep the water out of the chambers.
4:40 if it was not carved by the dynastic Egyptians and a natural outcrop, how can the stone quarried from the enclose have been used in the sphinx temple?
At 14:00 where did that rock outcrop next to the right front leg disappear to in later images? Seems like if the took blocks from the enclosure that rock structure should not be existing at the time pict was taken. Right???
great video Matt .. i agree with you that it was not rain but run of ... but for me the question is run of by what ? nile ? nile is now 8km from pyramids .. the same erosion i can see on the wall behind the osirion temple in abydos , which is bloody to far from giza .. Also when i look on the head of the sphinx , i think that it was attached later .build by big circular blocks - just look on those horizontal lines on the head. Anyway I do still think that there was "lost ancient " civilisation ...or somebody came and gave us knowledge ... still working on my video ,but my english is not good ,so its hard ...
The horizontal lines through the head are a natural feature of boundary lines between different layers of rock deposited under different circumstances.
Incredible stuff. Bit of a rollercoaster of emotions and slightly lost for words. I was actually a bit disappointed as it appeared you’d solved the mystery after all but then excited all over again with your Sokar theory.
Might you create a short video highlighting the timelines you place the construction of the features of Giza. I believe I might be able to better conceive of the time frame you reference in your videos. Thanks and keep up the evolving hypothesis!
That is a very interesting hypothesis there Mr. Matt! I don't think you're going to find it's a popular hypothesis with your TH-cam fans. But anyone that has watched your channel for long enough knows that you'll have a new hypothesis soon enough! and that new hypothesis probably will have very little in common with this current hypothesis! One thing I'll give you is you do keep it interesting sir!
You would expect the erosion to be greater on the surrounding plain than on the sphinx itself because the only runoff to erode the sphinx comes from water landing on the mound, while water landing anywhere uphill from the pit would flow to the pit wall and erode it.
aye, the one thing your theory fails to satisfy me on is, if it filled with water intentionally all the time and had no practical design, why then did they create the interior passages, and underground chambers below and in front of the sphinx, and what was their purpose? were they added long after this was first created as a priomordial mound honoring sokar and the passages in question have nothing do to with the initial carving?
Excellent video! You are definitely on the right track! Keep up the good work. You should eventually consolidate everything and make a movie about the entire Giza complex.
To your point about the enclosure erosion being far more intense than that of the statue itself. It has been explained that the entire giza plateau is at a slope. This would mean that all rain on the plateau would eventually run down towards the sphynx and this erode the walls with the intensity of a far greater volume of water over time. Whereas the sphynx itself would only suffer from the water actually landing on it. This minute amount of water erosion would have easily been worn over by wind erosion over the course of 12k years. And when something why the enclosure suffered less wind erosion, it would certainly help to know from which direction the wind tends to blow in that area, as 3 of four sides are clearly somewhat protected from wind as they are in fact below ground level. To add on, it can be surmised that the sphynx enclosure at least was dug before the construction of the pyramids as the slope in the plateau I referred to earlier had been obstructed by a quarry that was used to produce the stone necessary for pyramid construction. This preventing rain runoff from the remainder of the plateau from reaching the sphynx enclosure. And thinking of that, the quarry walls would also show signs of heavy water erosion had they both been constructed at a wetter time in Egypt's history, which it does not.
These findings are astonishing. You, sir, are amazing. It's like you're channeling knowledge from somewhere. Did you have an intuition about these results before finding the evidence? How do you put out so much much extraordinary content in such a short time? Startling, as always. Thank you.
hear me out please, if those blocks were quarried out of the enclosure, of course they wouldnt have water erosion because they were cut into blocks. i dont think the temple dates the structure and its entirely possible that the water eroision damaged the foundation of the sphynx and they have been repairing it for thousands of years due to flooding. basically we are still back to square one. were those erosion marks around the encosure from flooding or from thousands and thousands more years of rainfall? may i also say if they intentionally flooded the enclosure for boats and water features. it wouldnt make sense it would be a bird of prey sitting in the water. however lions and dogs do sit in water to stay cool.
A wondrous coincidence indeed. How often does a coincidence occur in nature? Random events interpreted as intentional happen all the time since Humans love speculation.
But the tourist won't buy as many tickets for that. I've wondered about some of your research on that myself. As I believe it's been established there were enclosures around the pyramids containing water. So there had to be a place for the water to go, so it wouldn't stagnate and cause sickness.
Explain to me why I personally have studied 7000 year old ancient clay tablets that tell that the sphinx was build as a lion. Not to mention that specific tablets also tell who build the sphinx and the 3 great pyramids?
I BELIEVE YOU!! Why do I believe you? For all the same reasons that you give me to believe that you believe what you are saying. None. If you knew what you claim to have known then you would easily be able to back-up it up with references, yet you only gave the ones that you were able to give, which was NONE. I label you a hoaxer and scammer. Feel free to persuade me otherwise.
I gave references allot of time in the beginning of this channel. With allot of different videos from this channel. But apparently nobody was interested. So i won't keep repeating myself. This is tiresome, just go and translate the oldest Sumerian clay tablets, and don't use a computer program to translate, but go study and learn to understand that languish first. And it's not only written in Sumerian cuneiform, but also in a couple of books that are written in Sanskrit. Do your own research, and find the truth. Or just believe all other ideas and theories that people make up. I trust the written stories that are written before dynastic Egypt began.
Good research, strong arguments, very plausible theory. It is highly likely you've hit the jackpot, although feels kinda sad to give up previous exciting theories. My congratulations, Matt!
Schoch further notes the same heavy precipitation-induced weathering as seen on the walls of the Sphinx enclosure is also found on the core blocks of the Sphinx and Valley Temples, both known to have been originally constructed from blocks taken from the Sphinx enclosure when the body was carved. web.archive.org/web/20170319205441/www.robertschoch.com/geodatasphinx.html
Hahaha. That's funny. I just discovered it, so give me the money. Lucky its safe from the west. It should have a gaint TV advertising on it with skyscrapers all around it. I'm sure a trillion coffee shops want to move in.
Base on the depiction seen on the carved stone, the idea that the ancient head was recarrved into a falcon is pretty interesting. I think there are so many factors at play when it comes to the water erosion on the enclosure and if even the geologists can't agree.... If we consider the tunnels and chambers under the Sphinx and the enclosure was filled with water, who were the original builders of these underground tunnels... One thing we can agree on is that the head was recarved more than once. Keep diggin my friend, you have dug pretty deep already.... Much love.
Love the video. A question ; Dr Schoch has looked at Prof Temples theory of the moat and has reviewed the data collected by himself & his colleagues many times now & the evidence for subsurface weathering is consistent with water run off as opposed to static/stagnant water in the sphynx enclosure. He's also subjected this data to peer reviews by other geologists who agree with his conclusions. How would this fit into your current theory?
Looking at your water flow picture at 12:22 I wonder if you can follow a bit further up...does it connect with the pyramid at all? I wonder if it was water run off from the Pyramids actually working as a machine, whatever machine that was.
There were large amounts of sea salt build up found inside the pyramid as well as water marks that are found until about halfway up it. I believe the great flood that is talked about in over 600 stories around the planet is likely the cause of the water damage on the Sphinx.
In the picture displayed at 19.26 there is something projecting from the casing stones at the top of the Kafre pyramid. Any idea what it might be Matt? As you have the original you might be able to discern it better than I can. Just a blemish?
@@AncientArchitects Brilliant as always! Love your level headed approach to this often over-hyped subject. All too often people want the facts to fit their fantasies. You, and too few others, are willing to shape your hypothesis around cold hard evidence as you find it, and for that I am most thankful to you for sharing your thoughts on the matter. Don't ever stop!
This has always been what I thought. After the massive blocks for the structures in front were removed, it became the base for something. Perhaps a piling with the other nearby and similar structure. Even the decorations on the other structure look like it accepted a large object that locked in place.
It exist a Photo early 1800 and a drawing 1798. During Napoleon Occupation of Egypt sphinx was a woman with a bigger face as nowadays Head is assembled by Modules holding together by mortises. later 1837 someone (Napoleons artists) carved a new face the helmet of this woman is now a Nemes headscarf.
Yes...history tampered and manipulated with....in these ways seems to be normal...Russian researchers have found evidence for same type of manipulations in supposedly Ancient Greece...this is sad and despicable
Love you content by the way keep up the good work. Some criticism In this case though as your argument of "why doesnt the mound in the middle have "rain" erosion the same as the wall" is faulty. The "rain" erosion on the wall around is indirectly caused by large amounts of rain collecting into large amounts of water on the plateau itself and then flowing over the wall do to the flow direction caused by the surface levels. That same large amount of rain wouldnt effectively cause tha same kind of erosion just falling on the mound because it doesnt have a large upper surface area where a huge amount of it can collect and then create the same kind of water volume flowing over it like the wall would.
What? Did you fall asleep while watching? or write your correction before listening further? He made an emphatic point of the very point you've pointed out. With diagrams even!!
@@redwoodcoast no it pointed out how an overflowing channel of water could create that erosion on the wall . certainly plausible. That isnt however addressing the idea that no similar rain erosion on the mound necessarily means that the rain erosion couldnt have caused the erosion on the wall , which he concludes as such in the video. the faulty argument i pointed out and explained.
I have a question has there been any discovery of new text or information about the ancient gods/mythology like the Egyptians, Greek and Norse etc gods as I have a keen interest in it and wish to learn more about it
Thankful for your research and time. We can all have opinions but these individual's are taking time to conduct research and sharing their findings in the process. Hopefully we can all share the truths of humanity one day. Till then, wish everyone wisdom and greatness in life.
Hello sir, I just had a thought, considering the water erosion on sphinx and the fact that holes are found on top of head and body of it, could it have been an ancient water fountain?
This is some great work. It’s worth noting that humans have loved water features for ever and there’s no reason why the erosion isn’t man made either. This is a refreshing new look into a brain breaking mystery that we all seem to think quite laterally on, so thumbs up from me.
Or you could interpret the site as a practical hydrological feature from pre-history ( the underground passages to the water table would allow for ingress of water during high rainfall periods but the vainglorious dynastic Egyptians wanted to claim it as their own and turned it into a monument as a whimsy and demonstration of wealth and power ? Accept this and the chronological mysteries disappear. Could it be that the real function of the sphinx was to enable the original construction of the pyramids ? Do modern funicular railways hold a clue to the movement of giant stones ? Just a thought.
Very interesting video! Some queries that I'm not sure were answered here (although I may not have remembered every point made): Is the mound of rock known as the sphinx (excluding the head) the same or different kind of rock to that which directly surrounds/surrounded it? And would have therefore been part of the same rock formation as the part that was removed if any digging down occurred. It seems pretty clear that the whole sphinx enclosure was dug out at some point, given that it has walls and is a lower level than the surroundings. Is the wind/sand weathering on the body any less below a certain height than above? Suggesting that some digging out did occur, because the top exposed part would have been suffering erosion for potentially millions let alone thousands of years longer. How long would it take for that amount of wind erosion to occur, as on the body of the sphinx? If the sphinx body is the same material as the surrounding rock - which was either dug out or disappeared through natural weathering - then there's no reason why this natural formation would remain, given that it's the same rock and would suffer the same from weathering as its surroundings (although this point could be countered if such formations tend to occur naturally with limestone, even without variation in the rock type between the formation and its historical surroundings). Either there's something different about the sphinx body formation, or it was dug out and the wind/sand erosion happened afterwards. If the latter, then the amount of weathering should give a clue to its age.
Great Video Matt ... Just tying a couple of your theories together...Could your Pyramid 'water pump' have fed a Sphinx 'Water Feature' ... This would be one explanation for the 'Weathering' ...
It makes so much sense, amazing share brother, I was thinking that etymologically, the word Sphinx, correlates with the Arabic word Sphina = سفينة = Ark = Boat or might be in plural, Sphin = سفن = boats and arks. so Sphin X, like saying space X, or find X in math. like always thanks for the share.
Great video as always, this hypothesis really adds to the discussion. It should be remembered, the rectilinear sphinx enclosure demonstrates that this eventual lump of bedrock was not natural. The head was a natural prominence, the body was excavated. What that “body“ was originally I don’t know, but I think your newly-specific doubt is constructive.
Based on your presentation, I have doubts regarding the conclusion that the Sphinx rock outcrop was left as is while the surrounding rock was quarried, and that water filled the area. First, if Old Kingdom did quarry from that site (which we know they did), they would've continued the quarry up to and around the outcropping. Since the outcropping is below the level of the land around the quarried area, there's no reason to believe the the Sphinx body wasn't quarried to its final shape. That means, the random shape you present as the original body of the Sphinx doesn't match the intent of quarrying the area. Since we know the area was quarried as a fact, it isn't reasonable to conclude they would've left such a random shape in the middle, especially since all of it was apart of the ground, not actually an outcropping, per se (other than the head). Second, if they quarried area was indeed meant to hold water, we would see evidence of erosion where the waterline would've been, not only around the walls, but also the Sphinx itself. Both would indeed have a matching waterline erosion of multiple layers. I invite you to go to any reservoir to see how such held water affects the natural surrounding barriers, particularly as the water level rises and falls. No such erosion is present at all in the quarried area. I think you have a bit more work here.
I didnt think about the water line erosion. I would agree with that. Ive seen this in many places. It dosent take long either. I also argree with the rest of your comment.
great point, I was thinking about that too cause that is one of the pieces of evidence that gives the rainfall theory credence, as we would expect to see the water level erosion on those stones as well
As dr Robert schoch said you can easily tell where the much softer rock was eroded leaving behind these stream line, undulating marks on the surface. Completely agree that we should see a much more even erosion pattern if the enclosure was filled with water. Clearly that’s not the case
Actually i do think this deepening around the sphinx could be paving. like around the pyramids it was kind of Sandwich technique. above was basalt plaster 1m high, below Limestone form fitting united.
Thought I'd have to write up a lengthy explanation to why this theory just doesn't cut it but then I read yours and you are spot on. Good on ya
I am at 12:47 I'm asking the question , Does the sphinx contain an entrance to underground passages ? An entrance that would be left above the water , wherever that water came from .
Your mind is really quite remarkable ... most researchers and academics fall into the confirmation bias trap. Instead, you always follow the facts in whatever direction they take you. So refreshing. Thank you!
Cheers
Ya think?
O^0
Ha ha surely most remarkable is his tone and rhythm, don’t forget that!
Most academic researchers know better than to stray too far from the line being towed. They like to stay employed and funded, as well as being safe from ostricization from fellow peers.
@@davidleomorley889 Lol, you bring up a good point, sir.. My only caveat would be to say, that most TH-cam viewers aren't employed to sort out fact from fallacy... I doubt many even realize their cognitive dissonance...
I made a script error at the 12 min mark saying “it hasn’t rained in Egypt for thousands of years” - it obviously has(!) I meant “it hasn’t rained enough to cause the erosion we see for thousands of years” - apologies for that!
So, I mean it’s a natural formation of the Sphinx is taller than the bedrock and the Egyptians did cut down further to make an enclosure for the water, making the island in the middle taller through quarrying. What I’m saying in this video is there is no evidence they were carving a lion. They just extended the natural anomaly.
This is a theory in its infancy but one I’ll be looking into further. I’m just trying to take a critical look at the evidence as I’ve long believed the ‘Lion - 10,500 BC’ hypothesis. Anyway, thanks for watching. Please do Like the video if you enjoyed it and please subscribe! If you want to support the Ancient Architects channel, I’m on Patreon at www.patreon.com/ancientarchitects - thank you!
You've got my support mate.
You're videos just keep getting better. At this rate I can see the channel hitting 500k then 1mil.
purely occam razor kind of explanation, presented with the evidence
I agree 100% with the head of Sokar theory and appreciate your hard work. I just wanted to point-out that head of the Sokar could have, at some point in Old Kingdom history, been carved into a different human head, unlike the one we see now. That of a different leader (of the original Old Kingdom people that lower Egypt which Narmer overtook and conquered), because the sphinx depicted on the Narmer Palette doesn't look like it has the same ethnicity as the current head that sits atop the sphinx. The fact that the Sphinx' head is very disproportionate, suggests that the original head, whether it was Sokar's falcon head or a human head, was likely bigger and looked more like the one on the Narmer Palette, but was later carved-away to look more like the people that conquered the peoples of the old kingdom.
I don’t think the pyramids are as old as the alternative explanations says either. In India a upward pointing triangle means the 3 upper chakras. And if the capstone was made of gold it would be the perfect way of protecting it. You can’t climb it. There was no place to stand and pull it down. And the top chakra is the spirality. When the hard core Tibetan monks are on a spiritual retreat. They sit in a stone casket for many days. Like the casket in the pyramid. I think this is just a very old spiritual temple. And the capstone of the black pyramid says that the spirit of the pharaoh is above the Eye of Horus. So maybe they thought their spirit got locked in the top of the pyramid. Also there are no inscriptions in any spiritual temples. Not of the donator nor the architect.
If the sphinx was sitting in the middle of water, maybe it had the head of a duck.
M.K. Carol
Quack Quack...
Is there evidence for ducks in dynastic Egypt?
@@jerryb.9754
Well, actually YES! Some of the illustrations during the time of Akhenaten show ducks and other natural scenes. This was a totally new approach in Egyptian art, fostered I presume, by Akhenaten himself who was trying to break away from the old traditions.
If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a distant relative to The Great Sphinx of Egypt
@@nsjx
Ha ha - very droll.
Couldn't help noticing a badly eroded human like figure on the front view of the sphinx.
If the enclosure was filled with water, what were the tunnels/passages under it for?
Exactly, there are an enormous amount of tunnels under the Plateau, some going hundreds of feet down into tombs. I have always had the theory that the enclosure erosion could have been from flooding, but I do not think it was supposed to be flooded, due to what is underneath the Plateau.
The water would immediately have drained away through the many underground tunnels. There would not have been sufficient contact to cause erosion, perhaps.
@@pentirah5282 Not really. It is not tap water, but monsoon water from the mountains of Sudan. Look at floodings in our time. When water drains away it leaves a huge mess of sediments. Those Nile sediments were urgently required for the surrounding agricultural land to refertilize each year. Underground shafts and caves would clog up with sediments pretty quickly. Just as the Assuan dam is clogging up with sediments which bring problems for the functioning of the dam.
@@DilbertMuc
I know all that. Just a thought: if the underground tunnels were silted up, where is the residue of the silt now? Where did it disappear to? It would need a colossal amount of silt to block all those tunnels. Observers say they go on for miles.
@@pentirah5282 Yeah. I was saying that the old Egyptians would be more than stupid to build so close to the river Nile if all their buildings get inundated and damaged periodically by the annual monsoon floods. They would spend the rest of the year cleaning up the mess and emptying the clogged drainage canals. With a nile flood all underground cavities and above ground buildings would be filled with dirty, muddy water for weeks, leaving ten thousands of tons of drying mud everywhere. When finished cleaning up the disaster then the next flood arrives and the cycle goes on and on...
I am saying that this "Ancient Architects" hypothesis doesn't make sense in any way, in a logical view. However that the Sphinx was a natural rock ensemble and might have had a birds head is quite plausible. But that's another hypothesis.
I agree with the head of Sokar theory, but the head of the Sokar could have, at some point in Old Kingdom history, been carved into a different human head, unlike the one we see now. That of a different leader (of the original Old Kingdom people that lower Egypt which Narmer overtook and conquered), because the sphinx depicted on the Narmer Palette doesn't look like it has the same ethnicity as the current head that sits atop the sphinx. The fact that the Sphinx' head is very disproportionate, suggests that the original head, whether it was Sokar's falcon head or a human head, was likely bigger and looked more like the one on the Narmer Palette, but was later carved-away to look more like the people that conquered the peoples of the old kingdom.
it wasn't a bird ... that looks cool but you can't add rock once carved
@@alphalunamare Who said anything about adding rock? The current Sphinx head is disproportionately SMALL...that suggests it was carved out of a BIGGER piece of rock.
Outstanding. You have singlehandedly brought more quality theories to Egyptology than anybody in the last 100 years.
First a lion...then a jackal.. then def a lion...now a hawk...but also an outcrop of rock..
I just love your channel Matt..
Good day! You should look into Brien foerster research, you would find some fasinating facts.
Wow, that thing really is a crumbling pile that has been patched together. Never realized just how much.
Shocking state. And that’s exactly what I think it was meant to look like - a primordial mound. They didn’t carve it (apart from quarrying to extend it down for the most around it) and it looked like a natural outcrop - a primordial mound.
@@AncientArchitects If you claim that it was actually a Sokar/Falcon head, what about the picture you uploaded of the snake that adorned the head of the monument? It belongs to some other big monument? If so, what would be your suggestion?
Me either! This was eye opening. I had no idea it looks like that! Whole new perspective!
I see 3 problems in your explanation about the age of the Sphinx.
1.) according to your theory the Spinx enclosure and both temples (temple and your "boat house") would be submerged every time the river Nile rises. Now, the Nile floodings were essential for the fertility of the Nile delta and the thousands of kilometers of settlements along the river. The Nile floodings brought nutritions and water and... millions of tons of sediments. Now look at current videos of severe floodings and what they leave behind in towns and cities: destroyed houses, things and sediments that turn to hard cement in the heat of the sun.
You are saying that the Sphinx and all temples were inundated regularly by the Nile, which means most of the year folks were busy to clean up the mess and excavate the Sphinx and temples enclosure from thousand tons of sediments?
2.) standing water always leaves very significant water marks on rocks. Can be seen at any hydro dam with rock walls. There are none at the Sphinx and the enclosure.
3.) according to your theory there was a drainage canal from the pyramids to the Sphinx enclosure and therefore the water erosion is severe only in the surroundigs of that drainage. Thus you say, it was not rain but river/canal water that caused the water weathering. However the enclosures of the pyramids themselves (e.g. Khefre pyramid) are weathered as well. There you say it was rain and therefore the pyramids are much older. But... in another video you say that since the pyramid canal actually almost cuts through the Sphinx enclosure it means that the Sphinx was there first and later the builders of the pyramid canal made a shortcut through the enclosure of the Sphinx and that's why the Sphinx is squeezed in among the canal and the 2 temples. Now you are contradicting yourself. Please advise on that topic. :)
Isn't there visible water marks inside the structure?
@@patrickdelaney3961 I remember a video claiming there were water marks inside the pyramids
Like your comment, if the canal emptied into the enclosure, there would be a Big Gully cut into the limestone to the left of the sphinx, i know, im from Kentucky, all limestone and Gullys everywhere. Plus i bet all the so called caves around giza are all natural not carved. Had it not been turned into desert a sink hole might have opened up and damaged the pyramids.
Great deduction, no bs, no wishful assumptions. Very informative; great job as always. Thanks!
Cheers
Don’t forget that the blocks removed from the bedrock around the body were used to build the Sphinx temple, which is faced in granite, but the limestone behind is extremely eroded, and the granite facing stones are carved on the backside to fit to the eroded surfaces.
Right! So why wouldn't they cover the Sphinx? Every building in Egypt has been ransacked for as long as anything has been built there. If it was clad in granite, or harder limestone then that removed, plundered, you get what you see. And the Muslims tried to dismantle all the previous infidels' creations, for just one outraged (jealous!) occupier as an example.
The erosion wouldn’t be uniform throughout if the sphinx was repaired many times throughout time.
not to mention you have to take into account the smaller things would be covered first so would be protected by the sand sooner, also it was all built over time not the same day so you cant expect the erosion to be exactly the same. and as you said its been repaired we dont yet know if other areas were repaired also.
The erosion is Far from Uniform displaying paradoxical massive erosion where it was known to be buried and protected and very little long tern erosion on the part that was sticking up!
Mate, you Can't even maintain bicycles.
Humans want money for nothing.
Finders fees.
It was found and you pay them.
Humanity is a 1 trick pony.
1% of the population actually makes life on earth better by making stuff.
you go back and forward between the orion correlation theory. its confusing
He changes his mind frequently but rarely acknowledges it.
well it doesn't mean it's not valid, it's just inconclusive for right now. I think there's still a few more layers to peel back
Well I'm personally looking forward to Hancock appearance on jre 22nd April to discuss his new book America Before. I don't see any reason to deviate from the Bauval Hancock / Carlson partnership theory. I think I'd anything their case is stronger in 2019 than ever before
The head is clearly Darth Vader. Damnit!
Shhh - that’s a secret
I wish I could thumbs up this comment a 10000 times!! lol Really THE best comment about the Sphinx ever!!!
@@AncientArchitectsWE ARE GIVING AWAY OUR POSITION... I TOLD HIM NOT TO LEAK THIS REAL IMPORTANT INFO .... NOW EVERYONES GOING TO KNOW WHAT IT REALLY IS ....
They used the force to build the pyramid, everyone go home it is now call Yoda temple
Love it. well researched, thought out and presented. You're really stirring them up now.. keep going. Great critical thinking from an open minded perspective. This type of debate is exactly what is needed.
ah yes i agree green ninja
While im not ready to make any definitive claims on the sphynx, theres been so much interesting research. Thank you for being open to new ideas, and, as science is, being willing to revise your assessment based on new evidence and studies. It does not matter where information comes from, conventional egyptologists or alternative study. Its not being fickle, its embracing the scientific method. Keep going and giving us your thoughts!
in january you said.. that it was clear "rain erosion"... now you say it was "the nile"... i'm looking forward to your next claim. :)
He did say his earlier conjecture was wrong.
They got to him ...
@@kingsoloman2u458 god forbid someone change their mind after reviewing new data. It's the people who never change their minds that are the enemy of history, not the other way around.
Being able to challenge and change your opinions is a rare thing these days. That's what I love about your videos, you follow the evidence not the narrative, even when I disagree with your conclusions. However I really like your hypothesis here, it makes much more sense than a jackal or lion. Even sounds more plausible than the mainstream archeological explanation for the Sphinx.
There's a Falcon-headed Sphinx located in the British Museum
After you had convinced me in other of your videos, that a water might have been around the pyramids, I wondered if that very same water had then been running down into the Sphinx enclosure and now you actually said it and so much more!
Maybe the Sphinx was a boat? A rock boat in a glorious swimming hole? A boat is what the sun rides in during the day and during the night? Maybe it was a boat with a round sun sphere on it?
In world war II US Marine had cement Ships. but these were calculated about water displacement. that monument did never swim.
Gristle Von Raben
Whatever it was originally, today it has been reduced to a tourist attraction.
What are you on about lol.
That was truly a great video !! One of your best ! I think you could really have nailed it. Thank you. Keep up the work.
You do a tremendous amount of research for your videos and it shows. Thank you for your channel. You are a wealth of information for those of us who do not put in the time (thank you) that have a keen interest in Egypt and it's history.
Great work! You are on fire lately!
Amazing work! I really respect your ability to follow the evidence and evolve your theories. This is an amazing journey and I am happy to be along for the ride.
My head is still spinning from the many hypothesis, every time seems so solid, the latest one is very convincing and likely, it makes sense Matt, well done.
Brilliant video. Must say your videos are getting much better as time goes on.
I think the sphinx encloser was made similar to today city sewer system. I feel that Graham Hancock and Robert beuvall are spot on when it was made. However I don't think it was made into anything until later times. Until It became a desert. If you look at the bottom middle of the sphinx you will see what I would call drain holes. I think this place was once green and had a tropical weather about it. And I think when it would flood this area was like a small pool of water in rainy seasons and for whatever reason I think they done this to drain the water down the drain holes to flow to the Nile in tunnel under the sphinx. That way it wouldn't flood other tunnels, temples at the time and/or possible tombs. However you have to remember that the cavity of the sphinx has chambers in it. Maybe they built the chambers first and it would flood and the dug down around it to keep the water out of the chambers.
4:40 if it was not carved by the dynastic Egyptians and a natural outcrop, how can the stone quarried from the enclose have been used in the sphinx temple?
it could have been a quarry for the longest time and people just left that outcrop alone.
At 14:00 where did that rock outcrop next to the right front leg disappear to in later images? Seems like if the took blocks from the enclosure that rock structure should not be existing at the time pict was taken. Right???
Great video, I like your theory it makes considerable sense to me!
great video Matt .. i agree with you that it was not rain but run of ... but for me the question is run of by what ? nile ? nile is now 8km from pyramids .. the same erosion i can see on the wall behind the osirion temple in abydos , which is bloody to far from giza .. Also when i look on the head of the sphinx , i think that it was attached later .build by big circular blocks - just look on those horizontal lines on the head. Anyway I do still think that there was "lost ancient " civilisation ...or somebody came and gave us knowledge ... still working on my video ,but my english is not good ,so its hard ...
The horizontal lines through the head are a natural feature of boundary lines between different layers of rock deposited under different circumstances.
Incredible stuff. Bit of a rollercoaster of emotions and slightly lost for words. I was actually a bit disappointed as it appeared you’d solved the mystery after all but then excited all over again with your Sokar theory.
That is thee best analysis I have ever seen on this!! Great research!
Fascinating. Basically it looked nothing like it does today. 🐅..>>>
Your research and deductions never cease to amaze me. This was an excellent video.
Might you create a short video highlighting the timelines you place the construction of the features of Giza. I believe I might be able to better conceive of the time frame you reference in your videos. Thanks and keep up the evolving hypothesis!
That is a very interesting hypothesis there Mr. Matt! I don't think you're going to find it's a popular hypothesis with your TH-cam fans. But anyone that has watched your channel for long enough knows that you'll have a new hypothesis soon enough! and that new hypothesis probably will have very little in common with this current hypothesis! One thing I'll give you is you do keep it interesting sir!
You would expect the erosion to be greater on the surrounding plain than on the sphinx itself because the only runoff to erode the sphinx comes from water landing on the mound, while water landing anywhere uphill from the pit would flow to the pit wall and erode it.
Great information! Thank you, keep up the good work.
Fantastic video. Well thought through!
aye, the one thing your theory fails to satisfy me on is, if it filled with water intentionally all the time and had no practical design, why then did they create the interior passages, and underground chambers below and in front of the sphinx, and what was their purpose? were they added long after this was first created as a priomordial mound honoring sokar and the passages in question have nothing do to with the initial carving?
This is really amazing. Keep up the good work!
Matt how could you 🙂😉. I look forward to your "I was wrong" video.
Excellent video! You are definitely on the right track! Keep up the good work. You should eventually consolidate everything and make a movie about the entire Giza complex.
I’m building my full hypothesis.
As a geologist, this is an explanation of the Sphinx I can finally live with.
To your point about the enclosure erosion being far more intense than that of the statue itself. It has been explained that the entire giza plateau is at a slope. This would mean that all rain on the plateau would eventually run down towards the sphynx and this erode the walls with the intensity of a far greater volume of water over time. Whereas the sphynx itself would only suffer from the water actually landing on it. This minute amount of water erosion would have easily been worn over by wind erosion over the course of 12k years. And when something why the enclosure suffered less wind erosion, it would certainly help to know from which direction the wind tends to blow in that area, as 3 of four sides are clearly somewhat protected from wind as they are in fact below ground level.
To add on, it can be surmised that the sphynx enclosure at least was dug before the construction of the pyramids as the slope in the plateau I referred to earlier had been obstructed by a quarry that was used to produce the stone necessary for pyramid construction. This preventing rain runoff from the remainder of the plateau from reaching the sphynx enclosure. And thinking of that, the quarry walls would also show signs of heavy water erosion had they both been constructed at a wetter time in Egypt's history, which it does not.
mind blown, I hope you can continue to make lots more of these
These findings are astonishing. You, sir, are amazing. It's like you're channeling knowledge from somewhere. Did you have an intuition about these results before finding the evidence? How do you put out so much much extraordinary content in such a short time? Startling, as always. Thank you.
I don’t have a life 😂
@@AncientArchitects You're the best. Thanks for replying. Looking forward to the next revelation.
I just watched your interview video on Rt! As always good work!
👍
Link?
Please link that
/wgat interview?
th-cam.com/video/HhHOwfqpK6k/w-d-xo.html
Wow I think you’re right. No lion , jackal, just a pile of rocks. Sometimes the simplest answer........
Penguin finds rock.
Penguin goes to get another rock and finds 1st rock is stolen.
hear me out please, if those blocks were quarried out of the enclosure, of course they wouldnt have water erosion because they were cut into blocks. i dont think the temple dates the structure and its entirely possible that the water eroision damaged the foundation of the sphynx and they have been repairing it for thousands of years due to flooding. basically we are still back to square one. were those erosion marks around the encosure from flooding or from thousands and thousands more years of rainfall? may i also say if they intentionally flooded the enclosure for boats and water features. it wouldnt make sense it would be a bird of prey sitting in the water. however lions and dogs do sit in water to stay cool.
Please explain why the natural outcropping points to the East and the Spring Equinox.Is it
Coincidence?
A wondrous coincidence indeed. How often does a coincidence occur in nature? Random events interpreted as intentional happen all the time since Humans love speculation.
But the tourist won't buy as many tickets for that.
I've wondered about some of your research on that myself. As I believe it's been established there were enclosures around the pyramids containing water. So there had to be a place for the water to go, so it wouldn't stagnate and cause sickness.
Kal Random Isn’t there an entire desert around the plateau.
Imagine the shape already existed & they carved something out of it.
Explain to me why I personally have studied 7000 year old ancient clay tablets that tell that the sphinx was build as a lion. Not to mention that specific tablets also tell who build the sphinx and the 3 great pyramids?
So who built them?
I BELIEVE YOU!! Why do I believe you? For all the same reasons that you give me to believe that you believe what you are saying. None. If you knew what you claim to have known then you would easily be able to back-up it up with references, yet you only gave the ones that you were able to give, which was NONE. I label you a hoaxer and scammer. Feel free to persuade me otherwise.
I gave references allot of time in the beginning of this channel. With allot of different videos from this channel. But apparently nobody was interested. So i won't keep repeating myself. This is tiresome, just go and translate the oldest Sumerian clay tablets, and don't use a computer program to translate, but go study and learn to understand that languish first. And it's not only written in Sumerian cuneiform, but also in a couple of books that are written in Sanskrit. Do your own research, and find the truth. Or just believe all other ideas and theories that people make up. I trust the written stories that are written before dynastic Egypt began.
Good research, strong arguments, very plausible theory. It is highly likely you've hit the jackpot, although feels kinda sad to give up previous exciting theories. My congratulations, Matt!
Schoch further notes the same heavy precipitation-induced weathering as seen on the walls of the Sphinx enclosure is also found on the core blocks of the Sphinx and Valley Temples, both known to have been originally constructed from blocks taken from the Sphinx enclosure when the body was carved.
web.archive.org/web/20170319205441/www.robertschoch.com/geodatasphinx.html
Dude....you good! Now a suggestion, make videos on the other 2 main Giza pyramids.
How many times are you going to change your hypothesis?
You lost me at "I'm getting a lot of my new evidence from Egyptologists".
Hahaha.
That's funny.
I just discovered it, so give me the money.
Lucky its safe from the west.
It should have a gaint TV advertising on it with skyscrapers all around it.
I'm sure a trillion coffee shops want to move in.
Base on the depiction seen on the carved stone, the idea that the ancient head was recarrved into a falcon is pretty interesting. I think there are so many factors at play when it comes to the water erosion on the enclosure and if even the geologists can't agree....
If we consider the tunnels and chambers under the Sphinx and the enclosure was filled with water, who were the original builders of these underground tunnels...
One thing we can agree on is that the head was recarved more than once.
Keep diggin my friend, you have dug pretty deep already.... Much love.
Great research and a hypothesis I am inclined to believe. Any pictures of what’s inside Cambells Tombe?
Probably a video next week - lots of info to share!
Ancient Architects looking forward to the video!
Love the video. A question ; Dr Schoch has looked at Prof Temples theory of the moat and has reviewed the data collected by himself & his colleagues many times now & the evidence for subsurface weathering is consistent with water run off as opposed to static/stagnant water in the sphynx enclosure. He's also subjected this data to peer reviews by other geologists who agree with his conclusions. How would this fit into your current theory?
Looking at your water flow picture at 12:22 I wonder if you can follow a bit further up...does it connect with the pyramid at all? I wonder if it was water run off from the Pyramids actually working as a machine, whatever machine that was.
There were large amounts of sea salt build up found inside the pyramid as well as water marks that are found until about halfway up it. I believe the great flood that is talked about in over 600 stories around the planet is likely the cause of the water damage on the Sphinx.
If they Quarried it out how is it a natural formation?
I think you're right. It's pretty apparent in the old photos that things were added later.. Good job!
In the picture displayed at 19.26 there is something projecting from the casing stones at the top of the Kafre pyramid. Any idea what it might be Matt? As you have the original you might be able to discern it better than I can. Just a blemish?
Nice work. Very thorough.
Oh man, i've been looking forward to this one all weekend!
Hope you enjoy it!
@@AncientArchitects Brilliant as always! Love your level headed approach to this often over-hyped subject. All too often people want the facts to fit their fantasies. You, and too few others, are willing to shape your hypothesis around cold hard evidence as you find it, and for that I am most thankful to you for sharing your thoughts on the matter. Don't ever stop!
Love your channel been watching it all morning, and here a new video! Thanks for all your hard work!
Thank you
It just shows you how fickle people are , they watch one video from a guy on TH-cam and that’s it , mind changed completely 🙈
Well people believe any ludicrous tale coming from the msm with any evidence provided ,just hearsay.
This has always been what I thought. After the massive blocks for the structures in front were removed, it became the base for something. Perhaps a piling with the other nearby and similar structure. Even the decorations on the other structure look like it accepted a large object that locked in place.
It exist a Photo early 1800 and a drawing 1798. During Napoleon Occupation of Egypt sphinx was a woman with a bigger face as nowadays Head is assembled by Modules holding together by mortises. later 1837 someone (Napoleons artists) carved a new face the helmet of this woman is now a Nemes headscarf.
Yes...history tampered and manipulated with....in these ways seems to be normal...Russian researchers have found evidence for same type of manipulations in supposedly Ancient Greece...this is sad and despicable
Great old photos. Thanks as always from Florida’s Space Coast
Thought provoking.
I'm not sure I agree with you yet, will be interested to see what else you come up with.
What about the shafts that are under the paw and on the back where that hole is on back and head?
Love you content by the way keep up the good work. Some criticism In this case though as your argument of "why doesnt the mound in the middle have "rain" erosion the same as the wall" is faulty. The "rain" erosion on the wall around is indirectly caused by large amounts of rain collecting into large amounts of water on the plateau itself and then flowing over the wall do to the flow direction caused by the surface levels. That same large amount of rain wouldnt effectively cause tha same kind of erosion just falling on the mound because it doesnt have a large upper surface area where a huge amount of it can collect and then create the same kind of water volume flowing over it like the wall would.
What? Did you fall asleep while watching? or write your correction before listening further? He made an emphatic point of the very point you've pointed out. With diagrams even!!
@@redwoodcoast no it pointed out how an overflowing channel of water could create that erosion on the wall . certainly plausible. That isnt however addressing the idea that no similar rain erosion on the mound necessarily means that the rain erosion couldnt have caused the erosion on the wall , which he concludes as such in the video. the faulty argument i pointed out and explained.
Randall Carlsons theory about the burkle crater may be a better way to match up the water erosion.
@@hyperducktales were you there?
I have a question has there been any discovery of new text or information about the ancient gods/mythology like the Egyptians, Greek and Norse etc gods as I have a keen interest in it and wish to learn more about it
very interresting hypothesis. thanks for the work.
Well done! Excellent work
Thankful for your research and time. We can all have opinions but these individual's are taking time to conduct research and sharing their findings in the process. Hopefully we can all share the truths of humanity one day. Till then, wish everyone wisdom and greatness in life.
Hello sir, I just had a thought, considering the water erosion on sphinx and the fact that holes are found on top of head and body of it, could it have been an ancient water fountain?
Well, as much as I liked Hancock's Leo theory. I must say you have definitely changed my previous beliefs. Wonderful job, keep it up!
Thank you for the video, again it is grate!
(Are recent videos faster than normal? I mean I hardly follow recent videos. English is my second lang:/)
Amazing video. Great work 👍🏻👍🏻
This is some great work. It’s worth noting that humans have loved water features for ever and there’s no reason why the erosion isn’t man made either.
This is a refreshing new look into a brain breaking mystery that we all seem to think quite laterally on, so thumbs up from me.
Very well done! Congratulations.
Wow ! Great work Matt. Thank you as always.
Or you could interpret the site as a practical hydrological feature from pre-history ( the underground passages to the water table would allow for ingress of water during high rainfall periods but the vainglorious dynastic Egyptians wanted to claim it as their own and turned it into a monument as a whimsy and demonstration of wealth and power ? Accept this and the chronological mysteries disappear. Could it be that the real function of the sphinx was to enable the original construction of the pyramids ? Do modern funicular railways hold a clue to the movement of giant stones ? Just a thought.
I think you nailed it here. What you brought forward makes the most sense.
Thanks
Very interesting video! Some queries that I'm not sure were answered here (although I may not have remembered every point made):
Is the mound of rock known as the sphinx (excluding the head) the same or different kind of rock to that which directly surrounds/surrounded it? And would have therefore been part of the same rock formation as the part that was removed if any digging down occurred. It seems pretty clear that the whole sphinx enclosure was dug out at some point, given that it has walls and is a lower level than the surroundings.
Is the wind/sand weathering on the body any less below a certain height than above? Suggesting that some digging out did occur, because the top exposed part would have been suffering erosion for potentially millions let alone thousands of years longer.
How long would it take for that amount of wind erosion to occur, as on the body of the sphinx? If the sphinx body is the same material as the surrounding rock - which was either dug out or disappeared through natural weathering - then there's no reason why this natural formation would remain, given that it's the same rock and would suffer the same from weathering as its surroundings (although this point could be countered if such formations tend to occur naturally with limestone, even without variation in the rock type between the formation and its historical surroundings). Either there's something different about the sphinx body formation, or it was dug out and the wind/sand erosion happened afterwards. If the latter, then the amount of weathering should give a clue to its age.
Amazing concrete work again.
Great Video Matt ... Just tying a couple of your theories together...Could your Pyramid 'water pump' have fed a Sphinx 'Water Feature' ... This would be one explanation for the 'Weathering' ...
I like that!
thing is...its not a water pump
I like that too Steve
Water Park!
It makes so much sense, amazing share brother, I was thinking that etymologically, the word Sphinx, correlates with the Arabic word Sphina = سفينة = Ark = Boat
or might be in plural, Sphin = سفن = boats and arks.
so Sphin X, like saying space X, or find X in math.
like always thanks for the share.
Great video as always, this hypothesis really adds to the discussion. It should be remembered, the rectilinear sphinx enclosure demonstrates that this eventual lump of bedrock was not natural. The head was a natural prominence, the body was excavated. What that “body“ was originally I don’t know, but I think your newly-specific doubt is constructive.