Rating: 
Summary: Brilliant
Review: In the future the founders of astro-archeology will be Hancock and Bauval.This work is simply 'brilliant'. The 'history' of man is polluted with falsehoods. This book sheds light on material that proves 'mans history' has been based upon lies. Brilliant.
Rating:
Summary: A FASCINATING NEW ANGLE ON EGYPTOLOGY
Review: How old is the Sphinx? The question, and it's paradigm-busting potential for Egyptology, and history as a whole, is the subject of this compelling book.€Robert Bauval, a Belgian engineer, and Graham Hancock, former East Africa correspondent for the Observer, have authored previous bestsellers on archaeological mysteries of the ancient world. Here they combine forces to question the conventional wisdom regarding Ancient Egypt, and step bravely into the academic no-man's land that lies between history and prehistory. €It was Bauval who made the discovery that the Great Pyramids are exact likenesses, in position and scale, of the three stars in the belt of Orion. Hancock, for his part, claims that the precisely engineered structures of the Gizeh plateau are repositories of complex astronomical data. In The Message of The Sphinx the authors conclude that the Ancient Egyptians were heir to a civilization much greater and older than their own. €The most compelling evidence in this regard was announced in 1993, when evidence was presented at a meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science that the Sphinx is thousands of years older than previously thought. €This haunting monument, the authors assert, with its refashioned, possibly once-leonine head, was created in 10,500 BC. The creators of the Sphinx were survivors of a primordial catastrophe that wiped out most of their civilization. € Hancock and Bauval point to the "followers of Horus" in ancient texts as dim memories of these survivors, and suggest the ancient Egyptians were inheritors -- not originators -- of their complex cosmology. The pyramids were completed at a later date than the Sphinx, and the authors present the extraordinary possibility that these enormous stuctures (particularly the great pyramid of Khufu, with its complex galleys and passages) were not meant as tombs at all, but as architectural maps of a region of the heavens known as the "duat", centered in Orion: the cosmogenic realm where souls are spawned and return upon death. The pyramids were used, they theorize, for ritualistic reenactments of astronomical events. €The author's labours have made for a mind-bending read, though Hancock and Bauval's ultimate vindication awaits the archaeologist's spade.
Rating: 
Summary: An unavoidable foundation course in Egyptology.
Review: Hancock and company have completed one of the foundation works in the study of the pyramids and the Sphinx. This book is absolutely textbook quality. The technology of the structures is beautifully described.
I would highly recommend getting a complete picture. The Sphinx, the pyramids, and the unfathomable energy and engineering it took to build them were expended for a reason. If you want to know where Hancock's book fits into the grand scheme of things, you need to read "The Ark of Millons of Years."
Who built them? Why? What was their real purpose? Do they contain the ancient Hall of Records? Ah, for those answers you'll need to read Clark & Agnew's book. The Union of the Polarity, revealed for the first time in over 6 thousands years in their book, puts all the pieces into place.
Once you finish Hancock's work, you must complete your journey by reading "The Ark of Millions of Years."
Rating: 
Summary: The Sphinx - a mystery of mysteries.
Review: OK there are things going on with the Sphinx. Things that are unexplained. This book opens the door to the thought process related to the dating of the Sphinx and the stellar alignment of it. I found it a general good read. Slow in some parts, and Graham hancock spent a bit of time going over and over on some basic points. But after reading the book, you should find yourself in agreement that the actual age of the Sphinx is much older than what is conventially established. If you are looking for the details of the hidden passages and other such cult inforation, then this book would disappoint you. It spends much of it's content on the dating of this object.
Rating:
Summary: Mathematical-Religious-Astronomy
Review: I have nothing but praise for Graham and Robert on this masterpiece of unorthodox history. Whether they are right or wrong in their hypothesis, this book certainly brings up enough solid data to at least get the reader questioning what we now `know' as history.
I subscribe to the reason that is put forward in regards to why the pyramids were built. But more so, I am fascinated by how the conclusion was made. Bringing mathematics, religion and astronomy all together, pouring over the ancient myths and texts - it was a journey of discovery that you should all be a part of. Do you remember the road to the Duat?
Rating:
Summary: Get a cup of coffee--you'll want to be up all night
Review: Message of the Sphinx is just as interesting as watching a program on the Discovery Channel--only with this book you get much more information. Hancock offers theories about the actual age of the Sphinx and the Giza Pyramids. He gives you the evidence to back up his claims. In his book, he gives accounts from noted archaeologists who have dared to think outside the norm, but they later end up changing their minds about their unaccepted theories. It makes the reader wonder if the theories are being kept quiet for some reason. This book is not simply by any means, but it is also not packed so full of technical terms that a reader will not be able to understand what he or she is reading. Hancock and Bauval masterfully get their point across without hinderig the reader. This book is well worth the time to any fan of archaeology, Egypt, or Discovery channel show. So, if you are up for the ride brew yourself a pot of coffee or a cup of tea, sit back and get ready to be amazed.
Rating:
Summary: The missing Link in Ancient History
Review: Here is a revolution in Egyptology. The reviews I've read of this book, the ones who have dismissed it only prove how narrow-minded people can be, after being spoon-fed a certain history for all their lives. Hancock and Bauval capture, in comprehensive detail many of the riddles of the origin of the Sphinx and solve many of them. From other recent books, we know that the pyramids mirror the exact position of the constellation Orion in the skies as it was in about 10,500 b.c.,that they are aligned exactly north, and we also know that the Sphinx and the pyramids show signs of water damage in an area that has been arid according to scientists for at least 8,000 years. The question is this, what if the pyramids, and the Sphinx, were built by a civilization far older than Egypt, not 2500 b.c., but in 10,500 b.c.? Egyptologists and the narrow minded scoff at this, of course, because it would mean a radical rewriting of Egyptology, not to mention human history, but consider this: even the best archeology is just guesswork, no matter how educated the academic, no matter how logical the theory sounds. The bottom line is no one really knows why or when the pyramids were truly built, carbon-dating is inaccurate, and the Pyramids of Giza were built with more advanced design methods than any other pyramids in Egypt, not only the ones that came before, but after. In fact, some that came after are mere piles of rubble now on the sands. None of the bodies of the three pharoahs the pyramids were supposedly built for were ever found in any of them and Khufe himself, supposedly the builder of the Great Pyramid, said in his records that he only did repair work on it, was not the one to build it. History attributes the Pyramids to Khufe and his descendents, the pharoahs themselves do not. The three smaller pyramids to the side of the monument were the tombs Khufe actually built for himself and his family. In fact, Egyptian myths themselves attribute the Great Pyramid, not to any of their Pharoahs, but to the more advanced methods of their "Gods of Old." No other pyramids in Egypt, before and after, were built with the same design methods and scale of these three,and Egyptologists have long been baffled as to why the pyramid progression happened as it did. Who built them then? Frankly, I don't think it was aliens, but I don't agree with the traditional historical assumption either. Egyptian chronologies attribute the Age of the Gods, to about 10,500 b.c., the same time frame that Plato places for Atlantis in his dialogues. Now, before critics harp on any mention of Atlantis, accept that humanity has been around as we know it, for at least one hundred thousand years, and that civilization has only risen to it's current status in the last five thousand, and you can see we are missing more than a little of our history. Humanity has risen and fallen many times throughout the ages, with little that the generations before us built remaining. Accept that, and also that the whole of Egyptian civilization, it's pyramids and it's gods, are simply a copy of an earlier civilization, one with far more advanced methods, and all the mysteries, the inconsistencies of the other pyramids, all seem to fall neatly in place. Hancock's and Bauval's theories are as good as any of the others that have been accepted over the last two thousand years. And actually, no one can even say that they are really right or wrong, mostly because none of us were really there, and no one can say for sure.
Rating:
Summary: Wrong... but still thought-provoking.
Review: The Message of the Sphinx is an interesting read to say the least, but it is important that it not be taken as gospel by those wishing to learn more about Egypt's true history. Hancock does provide compelling arguments and superb diagrams to suport his theories. If I had not been educated in the field and had not researched it myself (both here and in Egypt), I must say that I could fall for it personally. Maybe. When reading "The Message of the Sphinx", it is important to realize what made this work a best-seller. It appeals to the populace. It is NOT a scholarly masterpiece by any means, but it does present an argument that compels anyone interested in ancient Egypt to read more. The merits of this work are twofold: 1. It inspires individuals with little knowledge of ancient Egypt to want to learn more about the magnificent ancient civilization, and 2. It does keep us Egyptologists from getting too comfortable in our ways. It never hurt anyone to look at something in a different way, no matter how far-fetched it may be. The problem with this work is that nothing is explained in full. The highpoints of his argument are explained repeatedly in an attempt to draw attention away from the holes, and he raises more questions than answers. Some of the holes are more massive than the celestial bodies he uses to back his claims. When he does attempt to provide a viable alternative to the mainstream view, it fails miserably because of a lack of evidence. This should not be taken in any way as fact, but it is a fun read nonetheless. Remember: History is made by those who write it. When serious contradictions occur, seek the hard evidence out yourself. Then you can decide. Who knows? Maybe you will agree with Hancock and prove him right. It would be magnificent if his claims were correct. I just don't buy it.
|
