by Philip Coppens
The clampdown on
excavations at many archaeological sites in Egypt and
the inconsistent attitudes of antiquities 'supremo' Dr
Zahi Hawass on the existence of tunnels and cavities
within the Giza Plateau suggest a hidden agenda is being
appeared in Nexus Magazine 16.5
Ten years ago, three books,
Giza - The Truth (by Chris
Ogilvie-Herald and Ian Lawton)
The Stargate Conspiracy (by Lynn Picknett and Clive Prince)
Secret Chamber (by Robert Bauval),
...provided an overview of the controversy that was believed to
surround the Giza Plateau and the pyramids.
The key question was
whether it held any undiscovered, or purposefully kept hidden,
chambers, whether inside the pyramids or under or near the Sphinx.
The previous decade had seen a renewed interest in the plateau,
partly due to the theories of Robert Bauval and Graham Hancock and
the discovery of a door in an inaccessible part of the Great
It was found on 22 March 1993 by German robotics engineer
Rudolf Gantenbrink during the installation of an air conditioning
The discovery resulted in several claims, allegations and
diatribes which, with the dawn of the new millennium, slowly
Today, interest in the mysteries of ancient Egypt seems to have
waned and peace seems to have been restored. But speak to people in
the field and on the ground, and a different picture emerges.
one of widespread condemnation of the 'Supreme' Council of Antiquities
(SCA) and specifically of Dr Zahi Hawass, who has been its Secretary
General since 2002.
Remarkably, many Egyptian archaeologists argue
that the organization rules with dictatorial control, and that this
is but the tip of an iceberg of cover-ups, slander, embezzlement and
Ten years on, no one seems to be writing about it but
the situation is at least as bad as back in 1999.
The Supreme Council of Antiquities is part of the Egyptian Ministry
of Culture and is responsible for the conservation, protection and
regulation of all antiquities and archaeological excavations in
Egypt. Over the past decade, a television viewer might be forgiven
for believing that there is only one Egyptologist, and that man is
In truth, Hawass is more of an administrator than an
archaeologist; one might even argue that if the man had enough time
to lead excavations, he would not be fulfilling his task as
administrator. But a television camera has the same attraction as
light to a moth. Hawass is a controversial figure. He was at the
centre of contention in the 1990s, and remains so today - now, more
so in Egypt than abroad.
In the 1990s, Hugh Lynn Cayce reportedly said, according to Edgar
Cayce biographer A. Robert Smith:
"I got him [Zahi Hawass] a
scholarship at the University of Pennsylvania in Egyptology, to get
his PhD. I got the scholarship through an ARE person who happened to
be on the Fulbright scholarship board."1
Hawass strongly denies
this, though it is a fact that he was admitted to the University of
Pennsylvania through this scholarship.
ARE is the Association
for Research and Enlightenment, an organization set up to promote
the work of the American "sleeping prophet" Edgar Cayce.)
The ARE is interested in the Giza Plateau because, in the 1920s,
Edgar Cayce proclaimed that a "Hall of Records", containing
information about the lost civilization of
Atlantis, was hidden
underneath the Giza Plateau near the Sphinx.
Yet while most have been looking at the ARE, it is another
ARCE (American Research Center in Egypt), that has
been missed and which seems to be the veritable puppet master.
One source contacted for this article said:
"I am a frequent visitor
to Egypt and when I speak to government officials, most don't like Hawass. There are many archaeologists in Egypt that do excellent
work. Anyone who visits Egypt and follows Egyptology sees this
first-hand. The only problem is Hawass and the SCA.
Why? Because Hawass has been imposed upon Egypt by certain foreigners, and this
for a very long time. They have chosen an ignoramus, have flattered
him, given him a PhD through the ARCE. He's a puppet."
Pressed as to
why that is, the source added:
"So that the secrets will not get out
and that they have the best archaeological concessions. If Hawass is
still there, it's only because he knows how to play with
nationalism. I hear him say every day how foreigners want to steal
from the Egyptians and that the antiquities are Egyptian. It's
clever, because it makes it appear as if he is fighting the Egyptian
cause and he won't be pushed aside."
The source also noted:
follows the orders of foreigners from whom it has received help in
guarding their interests."
Indeed, though one might think that the
Egyptians are in 'control' of their own country, archaeologically
speaking, that appearance can be deceptive.
The "puppet master" organization is the American Research Center in
The ARCE's website states:
"Among ARCE's many great
achievements is our relationship with the 'Supreme' Council of
Antiquities (SCA) within the Egyptian Ministry of Culture, without
whom our work would not be possible. ARCE is viewed as making
important contributions that serve to help Egypt directly in its
pursuit of cultural heritage preservation." 2
ARCE was founded in 1948 by,
"a consortium of educational and
cultural institutions", and the organization underlines that it is
also there to "strengthen American-Egyptian cultural ties" and
especially to "establish an official 'presence' for North American
scholars in Egypt".
Interestingly, ARCE's website adds:
"Encouraged and aided by the US
Department of State, in 1962 ARCE entered into an expanded and more
structured consortium, and was charged with managing and
distributing over $500,000 yearly in Public Law 480 (Food for Peace)
This means that ARCE fulfils both scientific and social
However, seeing it works with the US Department of State,
one could ask whether at one point ARCE was used or abused for other
political purposes, seeing Egypt has had an intriguing political
past in the battle between East and West. Interestingly, during the
writing of this article, one source contacted me, claiming that
frequently the SCA receives from the US National Security Agency (NSA)
satellite imagery containing information as to whether or not there
may be subterranean structures at certain sites.
A few days later,
on 11 May, the Egyptian government announced via Culture Minister
Farouk Hosni (Hawass's boss) that,
"the researches conducted via
satellites have confirmed the existence of 132 archaeological sites
in Egypt that witnessed no excavations until now".4
132 Archaeological Sites
in Egypt Not Excavated
May 11, 2009
Culture Minister Farouk Hosni said that the researches
conducted via satellites have confirmed the existence of
132 archaeological sites in Egypt that witnessed no
excavations until now.
Farouk Hosni said Egypt's shows full cooperation with
the research teams to explore the archaeological sites,
and has recently issued a number of laws seeking to stop
the illegal digging in areas likely to contain the
buried monuments. He is pointing out that project of
monuments photography via satellite is being implemented
in collaboration with the National Authority for Remote
Sensing, Space Sciences and Mubarak City for Scientific
Research for the aerial photography and ground laser.
Meanwhile, Secretary General of the Supreme Council of
Antiquities (SCA) Zahi Hawas pointed out that satellites
took photos for many archeological sites including Habu
While Egypt has
some satellites in orbit, Hosni did not specifically identify the
source of these images, though he said that the project to
photograph monuments via satellite was being implemented in
collaboration with the Egyptian National Authority for Remote
Sensing and Space Sciences (NARSS) and
Mubarak City for Scientific
Research for the aerial photography and ground-based laser surveys.
Sphinx's Paws Dry
But back to Hawass and
The above operational framework
was in evidence in April 2009, when Hawass reported:
"Under 'my direction,' the Supreme Council of Antiquities is working to reduce
the groundwater level around antiquities sites throughout Egypt. We
have completed a USAID-funded effort to de-water Karnak and Luxor
temples, and work is underway in many other places. One of our
greatest recent successes has been the development of a system to
prevent the Great Sphinx at Giza from getting its paws wet!"
Rather intriguingly, he added in his report titled "The Story of the
"Perhaps the most important result of the groundwater
project was that it enabled us to put to rest speculation about
mysterious underground tunnels and chambers carved below the Sphinx
by 'ancient civilizations'.
For years, I have debated people like
John Anthony West, Robert Bauval, and Graham Hancock, who say that
survivors of a lost civilization 10,000 years ago left secrets
buried beneath the Sphinx.
These people also claim that the erosion
of the Sphinx was caused by water, and that this necessarily means
that it dates back to long before the Old Kingdom. None of their
theories has any basis in fact, but their supporters have insisted
that we should drill holes to try and find these hidden chambers.
have always refused to permit such a project in the past, because
there was no scientific basis for it.
Because such drilling was a
necessary part of our work to protect the Sphinx from groundwater,
however, we did finally drill in the vicinity of the statue, and we
found that there were no hidden passages or chambers there." 6
Despite all the usual hype that Hawass uses to underline his most
mundane accomplishments, this is an unfortunate - and totally
unscientific - conclusion.
There are several studies, such as
seismic work from 1992 and the Schor radar survey from 1996, which
clearly show geological anomalies (read cavities), most of which are
natural, but that is somewhat beside the point.
In fact, one might argue - and some have - that Hawass specifically
tested for groundwater in those particular locations where he was
sure that no such cavities, natural or "hidden passages or
chambers", would be found. It would make sense to test for
groundwater, but Hawass's glib statement, "that there were no hidden
passages or chambers", cannot be reached from the limited research
this test carried out.
Without doubt, there are cavities. Full stop.
In fact, Hawass himself announced to the Egyptian press on 14 April
1996 that there are secret tunnels under the Sphinx and around the
He stated his belief that these tunnels would prove to,
"carry many secrets of the building of the Pyramids".7
Although people are allowed to change
their minds, they should perhaps, 13 years to the month, highlight
their new position. Not Hawass.
However, Hawass's "Story of the Sphinx" report is also contrary to
findings from scans carried out by Dr Abbas and team, published by
NRIAG (National Research Institute of Astronomy and Geophysics) in
But rather than comment on a fellow academic who has had his
results published in a scientific publication, Hawass - for reasons
that have nothing to do with science, but are likely to do with
grandstanding if not more sinister motives - has a go at the likes
of West, Bauval and Hancock. And why the age of the Sphinx
determined through water erosion has anything to do with the
presence of chambers beneath the monument it is not altogether
But considering the other unscientific jumps Hawass
makes, nothing should come as a surprise.
When one looks at Hawass's reports rather than at his statements to
the press, an even more interesting picture emerges. We learn that
in early 2008, the Supreme Council of Antiquities co-operated with
Cairo University's Engineering Center for Archaeology and
Environment to drill four boreholes, each four inches in diameter
and about 20 meters deep, into the bedrock at the base of the
A camera was lowered into each borehole to allow examination
of the plateau's geology.8
The "Story of the Sphinx" report contains several gems, some of
which Hawass should address, but instead he creates a
smoke-and-mirrors show. One might almost wonder whether he does not
want this material to be noted; and judging from what happened upon
publication, the few who reported on the announcement indeed focused
on the "West-Bauval-Hancock sidebar" and not on the main show.
A separate scientific update states that 260 cubic meters of water
are being pumped out every hour through drainage tubes.
cubic meters or 6,240,000 liters of water per day. An Olympic
swimming pool has 2,500,000 liters. In short, water of a quantity
equal to almost three Olympic swimming pools is pumped away on a
daily basis from underneath the Sphinx!
Indeed, the Sphinx itself
could roughly fit inside an Olympic swimming pool. The report
continues that, as such, the water in front of the Sphinx has been
reduced to 70 per cent of its original volume.
But wait: no fewer
than 33 monitoring points were established to inspect the movement
of the body of the Sphinx and the surrounding bedrock, this over a
period of a month, and this monitoring proved that they are steady.9
Now, unless I am seriously mistaken, for such serious amounts of
water to be moved hourly there would need to be at least one cavity,
roughly the size of a small swimming pool, which could fill up
continuously with water. In short, an underground lake.
report strongly suggests the fallacy of Hawass's own conclusions!
Which brings us to the next question:
argue that removing the water will reduce the stability of the
Sphinx, which was an obvious concern since this is why the stability
of the Sphinx area was being monitored.
But apparently, based on a
month-long observation, emptying this underground cavity does not
endanger the stability of the surface structures.
One source, when confronted with Hawass's reports and my
observation, has gone so far as to argue that Hawass - accompanied
by Egyptologist Mark Lehner - had actually found this lake
several years ago. The lake is under the entire plateau, the area
contained within the concrete wall (construction of which began in
He added that, in his opinion, these projects were
preparation for an exploration of the Giza underworld.
Scandal at the
So, how should we interpret Hawass's actions? It is clear that he
likes the limelight and that he often makes contradictory
But is there more going on? Some observers have
commented that Hawass's tight grip on all archaeological works in
Egypt is the logical result of a developing nation that has sought
desperately to put a stop to the shameful looting of its historical
The fact of the matter, however, is that recent developments within
the SCA have brought to light wide-scale corruption, with leading
government officials imprisoned for embezzlement. On 8 October 2008,
the former Head of Restoration in Islamic Cairo and two other
Egyptian Culture Ministry officials were jailed for 10 years for
receiving bribes from contractors.
The Cairo court ordered Ayman
Abdel Monem, Hussein Ahmed Hussein and Abdel Hamid Qutb to pay fines
of between LE 200,000 and LE 550,000.10
Abdel Hamid Qutb was actually the head of the technical department
at the SCA and reported to Hawass. The contracts under suspicion
were worth millions of dollars and involved the restoration of some
of Egypt's most famous monuments.
Hawass was quick to defend Qutb at
the time of his arrest in September 2007, claiming that the accused
was not in a position to give out contracts. Hawass told the BBC's
Arabic Service that contracts are only handed out after a "rigorous
procedure", and Qutb had no decision-making power.11,12
obviously ruled differently; and if Hawass made a comment at this
point, I at least could not find a reference to it.
In the interview at the time of Qutb's arrest, Hawass also told the
BBC that he takes,
"immediate action against any employee with the
slightest shadow of suspicion hanging over them, even if the person
turns out to be innocent".13
Guilty until proven innocent, it seems,
is the modus operandi within the SCA.
No wonder there are reports
that Hawass is unpopular within Egypt.
This is not the first time that Hawass has found himself in murky
In fact, at the same time that
Gantenbrink's robot uncovered
the hidden door inside the Great Pyramid on 22 March 1993, Hawass
was suspended from his then position as Chief Inspector of the Giza
Synchronicity, or did Gantenbrink make use of the
power vacuum to announce his finding in April 1993, knowing that
otherwise it might be suppressed?
What happened next is also interesting, and revealing.
announcement, Gantenbrink was banned from resuming his work. The
Egyptian Antiquities Organization (EAO), the predecessor of the SCA,
claimed that Gantenbrink had broken a "rule" of archaeology by
speaking for himself rather than through the "proper channels" -
which are obviously there, by its own admission, to control what
gets out and what doesn't.
What happened next is also interesting,
Graham Hancock writes:
"The [then] Director of the
German Archaeological Institute in Cairo, Dr Rainer Stadelmann,
sided with the Egyptians and condemned Gantenbrink for his press
action. Dr Stadelmann was adamant about the non-importance of the
find. 'This is not a door; there is nothing behind it.'" 14
President of the EAO, Dr Muhamad Bakr, went so far as to claim the
announcement a "hoax".
"The orifice of the shaft is too
small for the robot to go through."15
History has shown Bakr to be
wrong on both counts.
It was Bakr who removed Hawass from his position, claiming that a
valuable ancient statue had been stolen from Giza under Hawass's
To quote again from Hancock:
"Three months later, in June 1993, Dr Bakr himself was fired and replaced by Dr Nur El Din. Amid
accusations of malpractice and fraud, Dr Bakr spoke of a 'mafia'
which had been involved with the Pyramids for 'the last twenty
Refusing to give names, Dr Bakr said, 'I wanted the whole
matter investigated by the prosecution authorities, but my request
In early 1994, Hawass was reinstated to his position.
Though Bakr is
clearly not the most credible source, there are nevertheless clear
echoes of the ARCE. Hawass's reinstatement was "said to have been
brought about by American intervention", according to Chris
Ogilvie-Herald, writing in the British magazine Quest for
At the very least, Hawass seems to be quite fortunate
in that no matter what, whether it involve stolen statues or his
technical department head being fined and imprisoned, he remains
immune to it all.
Gantenbrink never returned to work inside the Great Pyramid. He even
offered the Egyptian authorities the use of his robot - because only
a robot can penetrate the air shaft - and volunteered to train an
Egyptian technician to operate it, but his suggestions were not
However, Hawass eventually argued that the discovery of the door was
extremely interesting and would be further explored.
In March 1996,
he stated that the door would be opened in September that year. The
month was right, but it was on 17 September 2002 that the door was
finally opened. The event was broadcast "live" on Fox TV in America
and transmitted to 140 countries via the National Geographic
Channel. The end result was the discovery of... another door, which Hawass claimed would be opened soon.
Seven years later, the world
During the 2002 live broadcast, Hawass made some intriguing
For instance, he argued that,
"'it was not
'slaves' who built the pyramids, but 'great Egyptians'".
he told the Arabic newspaper Al Gomhoreya that,
"[t]he results of the
robot's exploration refute the allegations reiterated by Jews and
some western countries that the Jews built the pyramids".18
course, the exploration of an air shaft does no such thing.
equally serious scientific faux pas is that no one actually claims
that the Jews, as slaves, ever built the pyramids. Roughly speaking,
if this were an historical event, it would have occurred c. 1,000
years after the building of the pyramids. Practically anyone of some
education in the western world is aware of this. But one of the
leading archaeologists and the protector of Egypt's heritage is not,
The claim of one journalist contacted for this article, that Hawass
frequently abuses nationalism, is therefore quite pointedly
illustrated by the above example. Other journalists and observers
have gone further, though, positing that in their opinion Hawass is
In my opinion, Hawass suffers from a severe case of
verbal diarrhea whenever a camera or a microphone is placed in
front of him, leading him to make various "interesting" statements.
On a more serious note, the SCA - read Hawass - has a stranglehold
on most of the research occurring in Egypt and whether and how it
This is in evidence in the case of Gantenbrink, who
broke the "rule", and also in the case of Dr Abbas, whose official
Giza report has been stopped from publication for a very long time.
Sources contacted for this article say that they, too, have several
reports waiting to be published, but there is always one delay or
This kind of treatment, of course, is not science but
control, if not a gag order. Some might argue that there is a
serious backlog, while others might shout cover-up.
Indeed, why does the SCA place such stringent penalties on the
publication of scientific reports without its consent, the penalty
often being the denial of access to Egyptian archaeological sites?
These are the measures of a dictatorship at best, and are far
removed from any scientific approach.
No one will argue that Egypt alone is in charge of deciding who digs
when, where and to what extent, even though it is clear, in light of
the SCA's connection with ARCE, that this is not truly the case. But
once permission has been given, the participating scientists and
organizers surely should have the power to decide when and where to
publish the results, rather than being literally gagged by the SCA
until it - if ever - deems it appropriate to release the results,
and even then sometimes demanding editorial changes.
And all of this
occurring without any external overview.
One source went so far as to argue that Hawass's approach is one of
that Hawass carefully twists scientific results that
do not conform to the standard history of ancient Egypt; and that as
he exercises sole control and makes himself the medium, he can
almost singlehandedly maintain the status quo of Egyptian history.
This "Hawass touch" is clearly in evidence in the spin in his 2009
Sphinx groundwater report. But then the important question is: why?
The answer has already been given:
Hawass tries to maintain the
consensus view of ancient Egyptian history.
This is why he often
singles out Hancock, Bauval and West.
Hawass realizes that these are
the most vociferous and dangerous parties that can go against him,
but they are not alone in feeling his wrath. Hawass denies findings when
don't fit with his agenda, and defames any individual for daring to
have a different idea and not releasing it through his office.
In 2008, Professor Barry Kemp reported on his research at the city
of Amarna, created by the rebel pharaoh Akhenaten. The pharaoh was
obviously despised and, in the decades following his death, the
ancient Egyptians tried to remove any mention of his existence.
was reported that Kemp and his team found skeletal remains at Amarna
"signs of malnutrition, extreme labour, and the lowest age
of mortality witnessed at excavations of Pharaonic sites".19
evidence goes a long way to confirm that Akhenaten created a brutal
regime, one of which few were proud.
However, the findings were immediately subjected to criticism from
Hawass, who used the Egyptian state news service to accuse the
excavators of "distorting history".
He claimed that their findings
"not based on any admissible scientific proofs" and added that
"[b]uilding Akhenaten city was an obsession for ancient Egyptians
like the Giza Pyramids and workers wanted to realize a national
achievement to be proud of".
Hawass, by his comments, was later
described as "indulging in empty chauvinism".20
Hawass is also proud that he,
"worked to strengthen Egypt's
antiquities law" and that in 2002 he "worked to have a new law
enacted forbidding excavation in Upper Egypt... to encourage
documentation and preservation rather than excavation".21
Indeed, Hawass is proud of the fact that he has stopped all excavations in
Upper Egypt! One can only wonder why.
No one will argue that
documentation and preservation are important, but to the exclusion
of everything else - and to make it a law, rather than just an
Finally, when interviewed about geologist Robert Schoch's theory
that the Sphinx is much older than the the pyramids, Hawass stated:
"If geologists prove what Schoch is saying, still in my opinion, as
an Egyptologist, the date of the Sphinx is clear to us."22
no matter what the evidence, Hawass claims it is all "clear" to him.
It is clear that for Hawass, Egyptology is a
religion, not a
science. Many would agree that this is indeed the case for
"Egyptology under Hawass", and they desperately want change.
Though Hawass can and should be blamed for many things, it is
equally a matter of record that Egyptology as a science is seriously
in need of spring-cleaning. It might perhaps come as a surprise to
learn that since c. 1840 the paradigm of Egyptian history has
remained firmly in place.
Serious scientific evidence has often been
put aside to maintain a dogma, and Hawass and many other
"scientists" are religiously sticking to it.
In 1984, 85 samples were taken from the Giza Plateau, including five
from the Sphinx, which were submitted for carbon-dating. The results
showed dates from 3809 to 2869 BC.
It meant that the accepted
Egyptian chronology for the building of the Giza pyramids was out by
200 to 1,200 years.
Bauval quotes Mark Lehner:
"The Giza pyramid is
400 years earlier than Egyptologists believe."23
Equally, in the 1950s, Zakaria Goneim, then Chief Inspector of
Egyptian Antiquities, found the inviolate sarcophagus of
Dynasty pharaoh Sekhemkhet inside his pyramid.
When the sarcophagus
was opened, there was no mummy inside. It was an empty sarcophagus.
In this case, "grave robbers" could definitely not be blamed. In
fact, in many instances, including with the
Egyptologists have identified grave robbery as the reason for an
empty sarcophagus. If it were a crime scene investigation, few
detectives would reach a similar conclusion based upon the available
Egyptology, in fact, looks with disdain upon ancient records such as
those of the first century BC historian Diodorus Siculus, who wrote
that not a single pharaoh was buried in a pyramid which he had
constructed for himself, but that the pharaohs were buried instead
in a secret place.
Egyptologists prefer to argue - despite evidence
that proves otherwise - that the pyramids are but tombs.
Dutch author Willem Zitman ponders why today's scientists do not
want to admit that the ancient Greeks were all schooled in ancient
Egypt, as they themselves claimed. Instead, he says, they prefer to
pretend as if the Greeks discovered everything by themselves and
thus they can make claims that the Egyptians did nothing whatsoever
to further science or knew nothing of astronomy.
Zitman adds that
archeoastronomy has been taught as a scientific discipline
since 1983, Egypt has hardly been discussed - a notable exception.
And it is precisely when such a vacuum is created that it will be
filled by theories of the likes of Robert Bauval.
do not like that fact, they should not blame Bauval...
Zitman, a qualified building engineer, also notes that the pyramids
themselves are the greatest victim of the current state of
Egyptology. He argues that when Egyptologists are confronted with
problems to do with building techniques, their shortcomings are
easily exposed. This is evident in the treatment of French materials
scientist Professor Joseph Davidovits, one of the most respected
scientists in his field in the world but who has been labeled an
idiot and the like by Egyptologists - and by Hawass in particular.
Hawass and others among his colleagues clearly fail to understand
anything of what Davidovits is trying to explain to them. As a
consequence of this absence of knowledge and unwillingness on the
part of Hawass and colleagues to invite experts to help them in this
regard, there is little work done on the pyramid era, which has
become known as a "lost era".
I.E.S. Edwards, a former Keeper of
Egyptian Antiquities at the British Museum, once noted that
Egyptologists do not like pyramids.
In the end, Hawass does stand for, and sums up, the current state of
He blames the likes of West, Bauval and Hancock for
making ridiculous statements, but in August 1996 - unsurprisingly,
while in front of a camera - Hawass was scrambling through a tunnel
leading under the Sphinx, stating:
"No one really knows what's
inside this tunnel. But we are going to open it for the first
This is further evidence that his 2009 statement is a
complete and utter distortion - if not of the truth, then at least
of what he said before.
So, in 1996, there were tunnels. But in April 1999, Hawass appeared
on Fox TV - which, as we know from its coverage of President
antics, is not renowned for its neutral or scientific approach - and
denied the existence of tunnels going out from
the Tomb of Osiris,
an underground structure near the Sphinx.
In April 2009, he repeated
this story, as if he needed to do so once per decade. But, as
mentioned, in August 1996 he was actually filmed walking inside a
tunnel under the Sphinx!
As Bauval points out in Secret Chamber, the controversy involving
Hawass and the Giza Plateau dates back many decades:
something unusual happened involving Zahi Hawass. For reasons that
are not clear he started a dig in front of the Sphinx temple,
apparently in connection with the Institute of Underground Water of
the Egyptian Ministry of Irrigation. A drilling through some fifty
feet [15 meters] of debris struck red granite instead of the natural
limestone of the area."25
Red granite is not native to the Giza Plateau; the only source is
Aswan, hundreds of miles to the south.
The very presence of red
granite, discovered in 1980 in the vicinity of the Sphinx, proves
that there is something underneath the Giza Plateau. And if Hawass
says anything different, it should first be seen as a case of "methinketh
he protesteth too much".
1. Bauval, Robert, Secret
Chamber: The Quest for the Hall of Records, Century, London,
1999, p. 195; also see http://www.robertbauval.co.uk/articles/articles/sc_chapt9.html
17. Picknett, Lynn and Clive Prince, The Stargate
Conspiracy, Little, Brown & Co., 1999, p. 77
22. Milson, Peter (ed.), "Age of the Sphinx" (transcript of
program transmitted on 27 November 1994), Broadcasting
Support Services, London, 1994, p. 20
23. Bauval, op. cit., p. 198
25. Bauval, op. cit., p. 194