A NEW APPROACH TO THE MYSTERY OF THE SPHINX
It is a very serious failing, because when considered as a work of art, the Sphinx shows definite preliterate characteristics (prior to 3200 B.C.). This means the Sphinx was carved by a preliterate people who had a much different consciousness than the people of literate Dynastic Egypt, which also means they had completely different interests.
Understanding that consciousness and interests is the key to really understanding who built the Sphinx and why.
I believe the Sphinx has never been looked at as a work of art for two reasons:
1. The archeological/scientific method considers evaluating art a subjective task that has no place in its methodology, which is objective by nature.
2. All of the existing establishment and traditional theorists on the Sphinx haven't shown any evidence of possessing a well developed sense of aesthetics. If they had, we would have surely seen by now some indication of an interest in the Sphinx as work of art.
These geologists, with their hard scientific findings, turned the existing thinking on the origin of the Sphinx upside down. The weathering evidence of Schoch and Colin Reader point towards the Sphinx being carved from 400 to thousands of years earlier than the establishment view of it being carved in literate Dynastic Egypt c. 2500 B.C..
Both the preliterate artistic and weathering characteristics of the Sphinx have to be accounted for if we are to finally have an accurate picture of when and why it was carved.
There is one other thing that has to be mentioned, however, and that is that fact that preliterate cultures leave no writings or artifacts to examine, save for a few bones and arrow heads, which makes it a period of little interest to most scientific archeologists. This is because the traditional scientific approach needs physical evidence (artifacts, writing) to function correctly.
Stonehenge is also a good example of this, as archeologists are just finding out, namely that its stages of construction had little to do with providing a viewing platform for the stars and the equinoxes and solstices.
Although there have been others who have suggested something similar as to the sex of the Sphinx, this site, as far as I know, is the first one to gather sufficient physical, artistic, spiritual, cultural and weathering evidence to strongly suggest that the face of the Sphinx is indeed the face of a prophetic female Nubian shaman/leader (c. 6000-3200 B.C.) who had such an enormous impact on the spiritual and physical lives of the preliterate Neolithic inhabitants of the Nile delta, that she was held to be a living Goddess and honored as such by carving her face on a Giza cliff overlooking the Nile delta.
There you have it: a simple, straightforward theory that makes enormous sense if we look at the Sphinx with the right mindset: the mindset of preliterate humans. If we don't, and approach the Sphinx with our modern literate mindset, we will draw all the wrong conclusions, which is the case today with all our scientific theories about the Sphinx.
What Graves is talking about when he calls scholars "barbarians" is their refusal to step out of the confines of their disciplines and not only assist intuitive, unconfined artists like Graves, but also their refusal to use use their powers of intuition to detect a much larger, and often hidden, picture.
OK. Here's some basic info you'll need before we go further:
A dateline of the preliterate and literate dynasties.
Here is an equivalency list of terms used in this blog to define Egypt.
Preliterate Egypt = Legendary period = Pre-Dynastic Egypt =
Proto-Egyptian Culture = Mother Goddess Culture = 6000-3200 B.C.
Literate Egypt = Early -1st Dynastic Egypt (3200-2900 B.C.)
and
2nd - 31st Dynastic Egypt ( 2900 B.C.- 332 B.C)