"Studying them closely, however, they looked authentically ancient to me. I could see later mineral crystals precipitated over them, a process that takes centuries or millennia, and the inscriptions continue under the overlying blocks.” R. M. Schoch
SC: I have read this passage many times from Dr Schoch. But as indicated in Walter Allen's note, his great grandfather said that "faint marks were repainted, some were new." In other words there were, according to Brewer's testimony, already some inscriptions in the chambers. And as we know from the never-ending Sphinx age debate, "looks" can be deceptive. I think a more forensic analysis is needed to determine what is ancient and what is not so ancient. As for the inscriptions continuing under the overlying blocks - how does Schoch know that they really do continue? I am assuming here that there is no gap whatsoever between the two surfaces therefore it is not possible to see into any gap. Did Schoch chisel out a chunk of block to see if the paint really did continue underneath? If not then, if this IS done, it would present a means of verifying the authenticity of at least these inscriptions.
Many questions so it would be interesting to hear if Dr Schoch has anything further to say on this issue - good shout.
Post Edited (16-May-13 17:02)