CAIRO: Well-read people have familiarized themselves with different topics in history over time, however many of the historical facts that can sometimes be biased and unfounded are now established and taken for granted, based on sheer repetition. Even some of the historians, who are supposed to leave no stone unturned to verify these facts, can sometimes make the mistake of repeating such facts, not distinguishing themselves from the average reader. But despite the information superhighway, historians are still not necessarily fully versed in the secrets relating to pivotal events, be they wars, or the assassinations of celebrities and world leaders. "It would be a real surprise for some, therefore, to hear that facts they have taken for granted for centuries are mere falsifications of history, said Egyptologist Basam El Shammaa, who is giving a series of lectures on historical errors. "Our ancient and modern history is replete with errors that need to be corrected. Since not all people are aware of that, it's primarily the historical researcher's job to scrutinize these facts even when that isn't in the interest of some groups, he added. El Shammaa cited examples from modern and medieval history to show the preponderance of the trend. He explained: "Adham El Sharqawi is not originally from Sharqeya and his story began and ended in Beheira. It was Raya and Sekina's husbands who murdered women and not the criminals themselves as shown in films and TV serials. Many question that Salahudin, the great medieval Muslim warrior, ever met Richard the Lionheart. Champollion was not the first to decipher hieroglyphics; his research was based on his Aran and British predecessors' work. He came to Egypt once and had only seen a copy of the Rosetta Stone. If twisting facts is common today, think about it centuries back when the writing of history depended on eyewitnesses and bards who were certainly not less biased, noted El Shammaa. The Egyptologist considers Herodotus, dubbed the father of history, as the father of all lies. "The biggest authority in the field can't be trusted, so how can you fully trust others? said the researcher who has authored a book entitled "Historical Errors. In his publication, he supports his historical aberrations arguments with documents and detailed analysis. "Let us begin with Herodotus who has written nine volumes, one of which is on Egypt. Some experts doubt that the Greek historian has ever set foot in Egypt, he said. "First, he has never mentioned the Sphinx which was mentioned time and again in Greek chronicles. Second, his words have never been documented by illustrations from ancient Egypt. Third, he said that King Khufu (Cheops), builder of the Great Pyramid, had ruled for 50 years as opposed to 23, a duration that was confirmed in ancient documents. Fourth, he didn't know hieroglyphics and more often he quoted interpreters who read the documents for him. Fifth, he said, quoting one interpreter, that the building of the big pyramid had cost 1,600 silver talents at a time when dealings depended on barter rather than currency, elaborated El Shammaa. He added: "And even if that was a mere estimate based on the currency of the time, I don't think that the mammoth structure could have cost as little as 1,600 pieces of silver! Herodotus also claimed that the women in Egypt could never become priestesses, which is not in line with the common knowledge about ancient Egyptian women who were rulers and priestesses. Ani was the custodian and chantress of the house of Amon Ra. "We shouldn't forget that Herodotus was writing about an era 2,000 before. And among historians, he was notorious for his prejudices and inaccuracies. People tend to attribute to him the famous saying that Egypt is the Gift of the Nile, a statement which was made by Hycathyos, another famous Greek historian. El Shammaa pointed out that systematic history writing could have shaped up thanks to the Greeks, but whether they were objective and correct is always controversial. "Some errors could have also materialized as a result of faulty research, you never know, he remarked. Shamma cites the Sphinx as a case where a bevy of errors have been committed, even in ancient Egyptian documents. "The most famous of these came in the Inventory Stela, a limestone painting that depicts King Khufu as he travels to Ristaw (Nether Land) to retrieve some damage that had been inflicted on the nape of Hur-m-Akhet, the ancient Egyptian name for the Sphinx. "Dating back to the 26th dynasty, this stela is supposed to rewrite the history of that holy journey. But interestingly by associating the Sphinx with Khufu, it caused specialists to question if the Sphinx had been built by King Khafra, builder of the second pyramid, as is commonly known. "That the Sphinx was prior to Khafra is one assumption. The other is that there was another Sphinx that was known in the age of Khufu. But the stela mentions that the damage in the statue's nape was 7 cubits (3.7 cm). It happened when a crown on the statue's head transmitted lightening power to the rest of the structure to shatter part of the neck. Tests carried out in modern times on the Sphinx indicated that restoration of damage measuring 4 cm on the nape was done. So the Sphinx could belong to Khufu and not his son as commonly believed, he argued. El Shammaa also objects to the name Sphinx derived from the ancient Greek language. He explains: "Sphinx in Greek mythology is the statue of a female lioness with two heavy breasts and two stretched wings, which is not in line with the description of Abu El Hol, the Arabic version of the statue's name. "And here I would like to clarify that Hur-m-Akhet is the word from which Bu Hur and Bu Hol are derived. When the Arabs landed in Egypt they borrowed the name, which contradicts the fact that it was given to the statue by them owing to its awe-inspiring appearance - the word Hol in Arabic means awe or fear. "Bu Hur and Bu Hol appeared in many ancient texts. The Haraniya area located a few kilometers from the Pyramids Plateau was named after Bu Hol, which became Hur, and finally Haraniya The broken nose apparently blamed on Napoleon is baseless, as paintings produced more than five decades before the French emperor's arrival in Egypt show that it was noseless. "The story reported by Al Maqrizi, the famous Arab historian, about Sayem El Dahr - a religious man who attempted to destroy the Sphinx, believing it was an emblem of idolatry, is doubtful. I think, from now on, we always have to think twice about what has been passed down to us.
