What do you think?
Rate this book
Riddles of the Sphinx
When we think of "The Sphinx," two notions come to the massive carving at the edge of the Libyan desert by Cairo and the fearful creature of classical myth who posed high-stakes riddles to passers by. While this book focuses squarely on the former sphinx, the very existence of this formidable monument poses riddles all its own.
The first book devoted to the fabled Great Sphinx of Gizeh in over fifty years, this magnificently illustrated volume provides a long overdue and balanced assessment of recent claims about the age of the Sphinx. Defined by its straight-forward style, inviting to seasoned Egyptologist and interested tourist alike, Riddles of the Sphinx skillfully combines text and image, description and photographic detail, to offer a remarkably complete account of this mysterious, majestic figure.
The first book devoted to the fabled Great Sphinx of Gizeh in over fifty years, this magnificently illustrated volume provides a long overdue and balanced assessment of recent claims about the age of the Sphinx. Defined by its straight-forward style, inviting to seasoned Egyptologist and interested tourist alike, Riddles of the Sphinx skillfully combines text and image, description and photographic detail, to offer a remarkably complete account of this mysterious, majestic figure.
272 pages, Hardcover
First published February 1, 1998
29 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
June 4, 2017
I first read this while taking a history course on the Ancient Near East. This book came out in response to earlier books by John West, Graham Hancock, and geologist Dr. Robert Schoch dating the building of the Sphinx much earlier than 2500 BC. Professor Schoch based this idea on geological grounds, as he contended the main erosion of the Sphinx to be made by rain erosion from an earlier period [rain having stopped by the time of Chephren]. Paul Jordan's reply rests on archeological findings, including the architectural link of the Sphinx to the mortuary temple of Chephren. Egyptologists generally have embraced Jordan's case, while many geologists and climatologists back the science Schoch. Much of that debate has to do with figuring out the main sources of the erosion: rain (which would point to an earlier period when rainfall was more plentiful), wind (both sides agree there was some wind erosion), and so on.
Jordan argues that the Sphinx had to come from the time of Chephren [c. 2500 BC] since no civilization has been found earlier -- the kind of civilizations to which others such as Graham Hancock attribute the monument. Jordan was writing at the height of debate from this, and so his writing presumes the reader familiar with the issues. As he's on the side of the academic Egyptologists, his text is fairly academic itself. It's almost as if he prefers to leave the casual popular writing to Hancock and von Daniken.
Jordan argues that the Sphinx had to come from the time of Chephren [c. 2500 BC] since no civilization has been found earlier -- the kind of civilizations to which others such as Graham Hancock attribute the monument. Jordan was writing at the height of debate from this, and so his writing presumes the reader familiar with the issues. As he's on the side of the academic Egyptologists, his text is fairly academic itself. It's almost as if he prefers to leave the casual popular writing to Hancock and von Daniken.
Displaying 1 of 1 review