 | |
 View Larger |
The Message of the Sphinx: A Quest for the Hidden Legacy of Mankind By Graham HancockRobert Bauval ( Three Rivers Press )
Release Date: 1997-05-27
Average Customer Rating:
List Price: $18.95
Price: $12.89
Eligible for FREE Super Saver Shipping on orders over $25.
Availability: Usually ships in 24 hours
|  Add to Cart |
|
|
Product Description
In this riveting account of historical and archaeological investigation, the authors present hard evidence that the Sphinx, the Pyramids, and the other monuments at Giza are of far more ancient origin than previously believed. Complete with evidence of a conspiracy between the Egyptology establishment and various confidential organizations to keep the secrets of the Pyramids from the world, The Message of the Sphinx is also a modern-day detective story. of photos.
|
|
 Graham could have done this book in just a few chapters. ( leathab )
Sorry, but this book is incredibly repetitive....complaints about Hawass and his lack of "understanding woo-woo" in finding hidden rooms/buried treasure/buried religious rituals, complaints about calculations of the stars...chapter after chapter saying the same thing, particularly about Edgar Cayce's prophecy about the Sphinx.
(Spoiler) 10,500 B.C. was the "start" date of this civilization, according to the author.
Save your bucks....it's not worth the effort to plow through, and the photos are very old, nothing up-to-date.
|
 Secrets of the Giza plateau
This book by Graham Hancock was pretty good but in my opinion his "Fingerprints of the Gods" was a better read. The parts I liked best about "Message of the Sphinx" were the parts where Hancock / Bauval explain in great detail what amazing structures there are on the Giza plateau. Not just the three large pyramids & the Sphinx but also the underground tunnels & various temples. The precision with which all of these were built still puzzles people to this day.
I think Graham Hancock is a fascinating person & I have heard him in several radio interviews as well. He is a very intelligent person who makes you question conventional history. I did find some of his theories of how certain stars aligned in certain dynasties a little hard to understand. I have a hard-cover version of this book but some of the sketches could have been more clearly illustrated. This is a four star book if you like this type of subject.
|
 It is a great book! Great condition!
It is a great book! Great condition!
I am really happy with this purchase.
|
A fine book but another Fingerprints rehash ( dragonkingkarl )
Several of Graham Hancock's late 1990's books are rehashes of the excellent Fingerprints of the Gods. This one focuses on his Sphinx theories and ended up getting Hancock on numerous History Channel and Discovery Channel specials about the pyramids. His theories about the vast ancient age of the Sphinx has actually garnered some mainstream support, though most Egyptologist won't hear of it.
Hancock always lays out a detailed argument for whatever wacky idea he is tauting. This book's theories, however, may not be so wacky. Hancock is sometimes off the mark with some of his books, but this one makes a compelling case that the Sphinx is far more ancient than the pyramids and may date back to such a remote history that civilizations timeline may have to be reconsidered.
I love Hancock's books, so I went into this one as a fan. Still, I think if this is your first experience with the author it will be a good one. If what you see here interests you, then I highly recommend Fingerprints of the Gods also which originally proposed these ideas.
|
Fingerprints part 2 ( drphlog )
Basically this book feels like the Egypt chapters of "Fingerprints of the Gods" slightly expanded with more detail. It isn't as interesting or as terrifying as "Fingerprints" but it is shorter and brings a more specific set of "evidence" to the table.
Bringing up Edgar Cayce weakens the authors' position considerably. Psychic readings, though fascinating, cannot be accepted as evidence in any scientific debate.
The authors beat us over the head with the concept of precession, leaving the reader to gasp out "Okay, I get it!"
Ample quotes from ancient Egyptian texts help to build up a seemingly plausible picture of a sky/earth duality and the construction of the Giza complex as a "model" of the sky around the constellation Orion. Descriptions of the Pyramids and the freakish degree of accuracy in their design seem to indicate that whatever they were built for, it was something very specific and intentional. The orthodox Egyptological view that the Queen's Chamber was "abandoned" unfinished in favor of the King's Chamber just doesn't hold up, in view of the apparent care which was taken by Pyramid architects. This would not have been a construction project that you could make up as you went along.
One problem I had with the authors' theory of a mysterious "Brotherhood of Horus" which had preserved technological and astronomical secrets through the ages from 10,500 bc (supposed date of the "First Time" and the building of the Sphinx) to the Pyramid Age (2500 bc) ... if they were able to sustain their secret society for that length of time, where are they now? Such a "brotherhood" should, conceivably, be robust enough to survive and continue to "manipulate society from behind the scenes" even today. Seems fishy to me, and is another weak point in the authors' presentation.
Their most compelling evidence cited is the unmistakeable signs of water erosion on the body of the Sphinx (also a crucial element from "Fingerprints.") Why do Egyptologists wilfully ignore this clear indication of the actual age of the monument?? I'd like to hear the orthodox explanation, which of course is not presented in this book.
One point that is driven home is the notion that modern Egyptology is a religion rather than a science. The "orthodox" view of ancient Egyptian history is based largely on findings made by amateur treasure hunters during the British colonial period a century or more ago. We have much more sophisticated techinques and a better quality of information now at our disposal; why are we clinging to beliefs based on older, less reliable research? In a true science, theories are changed when new data becomes available, but Egyptologists have a tendency to dismiss or ignore any data that challenges what they already believe. There's always value to be found in divergent thinking, even if it is eventually proven wrong. Off the top of my head, I refer to Galileo and Darwin as "divergent thinkers" whose theories (of a heliocentric solar system and of evolution, respectively) were ridiculed at first.
I can understand Egyptologists' professional indignance when confronted with theories from "armchair researchers" who have done no actual fieldwork, and have not devoted their lives to study of Egyptian antiquity. But Hancock and Bauval have come armed with a formidable collection of evidence, much of which consists of FACTS which can be proven (or debunked.) Where is the scholarly rebuttal from thw Egyptological community? It's not enough to dismiss these theories as "ridiculous." Can somebody prove WHY they're ridiculous? It should be easy for an expert to shoot down the so-called "fanciful yarn" presented in this book, but so far I've seen no-one do it.
Meanwhile there are legitimate discoveries to be made at Giza, based on clues found by ACTUAL field work at the site. There's tangible evidence suggesting the presence of still-undiscovered chambers inside the Great Pyramid and under the plateau near the Sphinx. Work on following these leads proceeds frustratingly slowly. Dr. Zahi Hawas jealously guards the area almost as if it was his own personal property ... any "secrets" found there could be of profound importance to all of mankind, but based on some follow-up reading I've done (beyond the scope of this book) I question whether the public will even be told the truth about what, if anything, is discovered.
|
|
|
