THE SPHINX HOAX.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 10825, 19 July 1913, Page 1

THE SPHINX HOAX.

Egyptologists Indignant Qves? . Alleged Discovery of " Toa"b of IConM." ■ (London Corespondent New York "Sun.'") It is nob often that the serious science of archaeology is enlivened by a hoax, but one of a daring kind has recently caused considerable annoyance to ,Egyptologists in. general, and to one well-known scholar, Dr E. Reisaner, in particular. Some weeks ago there was printed all over the world an account of some astonishing .discoveries made in regard to the famous Sphinx at Gizeh- It stated that Dr Reissner, who'has for some years been working on behalf of the University of Harvard, had made some most astonishing discoveries in the interior of the- great statue of the Sphinx, which for centuries has been the guardian of , THE ROYAL NECROPOLIS AT GIZEH.

Had ib not been for the unjustifiable use of the. name of .Dr.. Reissner, who is well-known as an explorer and one of the great authorities on the pier historic antiquities of' Egypt, the account ■ would have been treated with the ridicule it deserved. . : - According tb • tho' account published extensively in England - and America Dr - Reisaner had discovered a large temple over 100 feet long; within "the body of ,ths Sphinx, and, connected with this by a tunnel, a second small temple, some 60 feet by 14 feet wide, in the head of the Sphinx.

The larger temple was described as the tomb of Mena or Mones, the first of the Pharaohs, and a drawing was glveu of an ebony tablet inscribed 1 in archaic charaoters which was said to liavo been found in the temple. The announcement of this startling discovery caused; immediate; inquiry. The chief authorities at the Cairo Museum, Professor , Sir Gaston Maspero and Captain "VVeigali, the injector of antiquities' for the Cairo district, both denied the slightest basis for the report. No attempt to explore the interior of the Sphinx had been made, nor would any such exploration be allowed, 'as the nature and character of the monument are already well-known. Moreover Dr Reissuer has not beeu working in the Cairo province this season, having been, as lor the last few years, in Nubia and the Soudan. The absence of Dr Reissner from Cairo was no doubt the reaeon for the selection of liis name in connection with the hoax. , THE TRUE STOR Y OF THE SPHINX.

which is very simple, remains, therefore. unchanged. Tho great limestone block out of which the colossal figure is "hewn forms the eastern termination of the limestone platform on . which the pyramids are built. No doubt in the*remote prehistoric times the-pro-jecting rock had become weathered into the rude outline of-tho human head and face. There are many similar wind-worn ' rocks to be seen on the banks of tho Nile, and there is usually a superstitious sanctity attributed to them by Arabs, 110 doubt inherited from the old Egyptians. In early historic times, certainly before the age of the pyramid builders, some 4000 years beforo our era, the figure was improved by human hands, tho head-dress and heard being carved, while in later ages the whole was painted red. which gives it the appearance of sandstone.

Portions of the serpent which adorned the forehead of the Sphinx and of the beard are to be seen in the British Museum. The nature of the stone and painting are clearly to bo Been.

The Sphinx of Oizeh figures little, in Egyptian literature, the chief reference to it being in tho time of Ihothmes IV.. of the eighteenth dynasty. B.C. 1450. It was this monarch who built or restored

THE SMALL TEMPLE BETWEEN THE FORE PAWS. _ j In the large tablet at the end of the temple Thothmes tolls an interesting j story. Tho King had been hunting in the district and, being tired,at noonday, lay down to rest beneath the , shadow'of the Sphinx. During his siesta, the god R-a Heru l| Khuti (Harmachis), to whom the Sphinx was sacred, appeared to him in a dream and ordered him to clear Bwuv the sand which had then, as

now. been wind-driven to such an extent as to' bury tho temple; This task ThpHunos accomplished, but by the time of Ramoses 11. the temple was again buried 'in the sand. In recent years it was cleaved by M. Marietta' but is now nearly buried by the desert dust again.