I saw a program on Discovery Science Channel recently(digital cable is cool) that gave some evidence for the Sphinx, some of the Pyramids, and a certain temple complex being built around 10,000 BC rather than 2000 BC as is currently thought.
Some of the show’s arguments:
The Sphinx is oriented in such a way that on the vernal equinox it would have faced the constellation Taurus when it rose in 2000 BC. But the lionlike form of the Sphinx suggests that when it was built it would have faced Leo instead, which was the case in 10,000 BC. Furthermore, weathering patterns indicate that the Sphinx was subjected to thousands of years of rainfall, which also points to the earlier date.
Three of the Pyramids line up in a manner similar to Orion’s belt. Because of the Earth’s axial precession, the orientation of Orion has changed over the millennia. The Pyramid’s orientation matches that of Orion in 10,000 BC rather than 2000 BC. Similarly, the buildings of the temple complex line up to mirror a certain constellation (sorry, I can’t remember the names). These buildings are oriented the same way as the pyramids.
The main problem with these arguments is that no known civilization in 10,000 BC could have built any of these structures. The more conventional thinking Egyptologists that were interviewed rejected these ideas, but the proponents thought that there was too much evidence to ignore. I’m not sure what to make of all this, but it is interesting.
That, I think, is the weakest argument presented, simply because, well, the Egyptians like cats. If it truly were built because of “Leo”, they’d have built something that was all-lion, rather than just part-lion.
Why would the Egyptians of 10,000 BC build a lion statue to face a constellation which would not be identified as Leo the lion until about 9000 years later in Greece?
Carbon dating only works on organic matter. There are similar methods for dating rocks, but that would only tell you the age of the rocks, not the age of the structure made out of the rocks.
You can’t carbon-date the sphynx or the pyramids, but you CAN carbon date many of the artifacts left by the people who built them. That carbon dating has been done, and corroborates the accepted dating of those artifacts.
The OP mentions the two main arguments used to support a revised dating of the Sphinx. Neither is convincing.
Why assume that it has anything to do with the positions of constellations at equinoxes? Wouldn’t it be simpler to say that it faces east, the general direction in which the Sun rises on every day of the year during any century?
Why is it that weathering patterns have not be used more generally by archaeologists to date ancient monuments? Because the method is so imprecise as to be virtually useless. Although not conclusive, all the other evidence suggests that the conventional date is probably correct.
There’s another problem with using evidence of rain erosion to date monuments. In hot climates, there is a process called “salt exfoliation” which erodes rocks in a way that looks very similar to rain erosion, but which requires no rain.
The geologist who dated the Sphinx to 8000 years old by its weathering patterns did not take salt exfoliation into account.
