im doing a thesis paper on how the sphinx wasnt actually built by the egyptians, but more than likely by a neighboring nubian tribe, who pre-existed the egyptian dynasties by far. the erosion on the sphinx suggests that it is water erosion, from rain (not a flood), so this would place the initial age of the sphinx behind that of the old dynasty. i would think that khafre, who many seem to see in the face of the great sphinx, merely remodeled the sphinx to have his image in it. there seems to be multiple renovations to the sphinx, many of which could have occurred at this time, and it would seem like a pharaoh thing to do to place your image onto something so extravagant. does this theory seem plausible, or am i way too far on this?

The Egyptians were actually better known for just destroying things not in their name if they did not agree with them (e.g. nearly no trace of Tutankhaten before his discovery, and well... countess destroyed cartouches, etc. etc. etc.); however, just because I have never heard of anyone reconstructing another's work and claiming it as their own does not mean I am correct.

The many renovations of the sphinx were due to the fact that it was basically a big, bulky thing that fell apart somewhat. Granted, it is an ultra-permanent structure compared to most modern constructions, but I am assuming the major reconstruction you mean is of how when it was most recently uncovered in the sand, the body was so eroded from the thousands of years of being buried under the sand.

When I critique a paper, as I find many teachers do (I myself am not a teacher, but have taken great time to understand the workings of that strange breed of human), I will accept any argument as plausible, if not necessarily true if it is backed up by credible evidence. You can't just say, "I think it happened this way because of a personalized guess". Something like, "I believe that this happened because of 'this', 'this' and 'this'." But, argumentative persuasion is not why you're here...

I'm sorry I cannot be of any 'real' help, but I offer what I can. Remember to work hard, and I wish you luck, Ky9!

For a really good critic of the debate over the age of the sphinx, showing the fallacy behind the thesis of the advanced age, I reccommend "The Ancient Mysteries" by Peter James and Nick Thorpe. I'm in the middle of reading it now, and so far everything said makes perfect sense.