Replies

This is about 19 minutes long, and I think this covers the idea that the original carving of the head was that of one of the old cat deities of the Egyptian pantheon. It's moot, because, short of finding an ancient inscription that describes it with a different head, we have zero way of ever knowing it. The modern paws are constructed of blocks, not carved, so it may not have had any paws originally. The "restoration" that's been going on under Hawass has left the Great Sphinx in a state where it would fit right in at Disneyland.

Joe Rogan - Robert Schoch Explains Sphinx Water Erosion Hypothesis
[This video contains content from National Geographic, who has blocked it on copyright grounds.]

[snip] Before I proceed, I want to make the point that this dual title is found associated with individuals who preceded the date generally attributed to the Great Sphinx by conventional Egyptologists, namely circa 2500 BCE, during the reign of the Fourth Dynasty pharaoh Khafre. Possibly Wepemnefret could have known Khafre during his lifetime, but without doubt Hesy-Re lived a century or more prior to the time of Khafre and the supposed construction of the Great Sphinx... Even taking stylistic differences due to the different sculptors into account, analogous to different fonts that can be used for our alphabetic letters, these hieroglyphic signs are virtually identical. At the base of the Hemiunu statue and on the Wepemnefret stela, the last three signs (axe, bent rod, lioness) are placed very close together, or are even touching. In the inscription on the wooden panels of Hesy-Re the vertical bent rod appears to touch the back of the lioness, as in the Hemiunu and Wepemnefret inscriptions, but the axe does not make actual contact with the bent rod. These slight differences are probably simply differences in artistic style and do not appear to be significant...

But what could the second title represent? The axe of the second title is identical to that of the first, and thus presumably has the same meaning, that of an overseer or similar high official. But what is the apparent "bent rod" and what does the lioness represent? The lioness of this second title appears to be the same lioness represented elsewhere on the Wepemnefret stela, specifically in the name of the goddess Mehit (who could act as a protectress, taking the form of a female lion). Thus the Egyptologist William Stevenson Smith (1907-1969) translated this title as "Craftsman of Mehit" (Archaeology, March 1963, p. 12)...

I believe that Dr. Seyfzadeh solved the mystery of the "bent rod" by his suggestion that it represents a physical key that was used to open a lock. We know that by the Middle Kingdom (circa early second millennium BCE) the Egyptians had simple lock-and-key devices; now there is evidence that such devices go back to a much earlier period. Most likely, however, at such a very early date locks and keys were familiar to only the elite nobility, and thus references to or depictions of such devices appeared very rarely...

Now everything seemed to come together. The second portion of the dual title refers to an overseer, master, guardian, or possessor of a key that opened a vault that was, based on the first portion of the dual title (referring to scribes and records), an archive, a "Hall of Records", guarded by a lioness. Furthermore, based on the striking similarity between Mehit (as shown on the Wepemnefret stela) and the lioness in the dual title, this guardian lioness is Mehit. [/snip]
Robert M. Schoch: Mehit

I agree about Hawass. Schock not so much. I think Temple’s explanation for much of the erosion is more plausible.

BTW, have you heard anything about Temple? He seems to have either disappeared or passed away with no notice. He’s published nothing in 10 years, despite mentioning a possible book on Abydos and the Tomb of Osiris which he was given permission to explore.