Sphinx Dating Controversy | Evidence That's Ignored
When we talk about the age of the Great Sphinx, we don't mean the form we see it in today - that being the lion-like body and the pharaonic head - but the age of the quarried enclosure, the age of the hollow that was man-made, leaving a large chunk of limestone bedrock, however it originally looked, in the middle.
2025-05-03 12:00:00 - Ancient Architects
The subject has been controversial for more than three decades or so, with geology, aka the weathering and erosion of the limestone bedrock, being a key factor of discussion, with some geologists using the form of the rock to re-date the origins of the Sphinx.
And although geology can be a useful indicator, I think what we have learned in the past three decades is that nothing geological in this enclosure is cast iron proof for a pre-4th dynasty origin.
The geology of the Sphinx is complicated and opinions differ as to the dominant processes at work. Independent geologists have analysed the Sphinx and many of them disagree with each other. Some say the Sphinx enclosure is perfectly in-keeping with an Old Kingdom origin, some think it could be late Pre-Dynastic or Early Dynastic, and others say its many thousands of years older than the conventional date.
Well, thanks to the work of geologist Colin Reader, in this video I present what I consider the smoking gun piece of geological evidence that indicates the Sphinx enclosure actually does pre-date the 4th Dynasty of Old Kingdom Egypt.
00:00 - Introduction
01:30 - The Origins of the Sphinx
03:24 - Sphinx Erosion
05:20 - Saqqara Geophysical Survey Project
07:02 - Building the Sphinx Temple
09:08 - New Evidence to Date the Sphinx
11:40 - Pre-4th Dynasty Giza
12:24 - Concluding Remarks