I was pleased, upon finishing this book, to note that it omitted the dippier elements (earth crust displacement, lost civilizations in Antarctica, etc.) of Hancock's "Fingerprints of the Gods." I was dismayed, however, to note that once again a bestselling book supposedly concerned with history and archaeology had been penned by authors with little real experience in either field. Hancock's "research" involves reading and incorporating speculations made by others while roundly ignoring (or ridiculing) those that do not easily agree with his own predilections. Bauval's contribution as an engineer is perhaps notable, but not convincing. While soundly criticizing Egyptologists and other scientists, it seems that neither of these men ever bothered to learn to read hieroglyphics, to seriously study Egyptian history beyond a few basic texts, or to otherwise gain real expertise in the fields that apply to their arguments regarding the Sphinx. For example, the claim that the Sphinx exhibits extensive signs of water erosion is interesting, and borne out by a cursory examination of the photos available, but one wonders if the supposed consensus on this point among geologists really exists. Are there other ways to produce the erosion patterns seen today on the Sphinx? One would never know from reading this book, but a brief search on the web gave me a good hypothesis for one. From reading this book, one might also come away with the impression that most research on the Sphinx over the past 30 years has been performed under the auspices of Edgar Cayce's organization; don't modern archaeologists do anything? In the end, I find the notion that the Sphinx, and the ground plan of the monuments at Giza, predates the supposed origin of Egyptian civilization to be provocative and worth a closer look. I just wish someone more diligent, more even-handed, and more informed would take that closer look.