Open Veils · Answer
What is the true age of the second sphinx?
Italian researcher Filippo Biondi's synthetic aperture radar tomography has identified a massive subsurface anomaly near the Great Sphinx consistent with a second monumental lion figure — unexcavated, unrefuted, and awaiting Egyptian excavation permits. The question of age hinges entirely on which age you assign to the first Sphinx, since Robert Schoch's seismic and water-erosion evidence already pushes that monument back to at least 10,000 BCE. If the buried structure is contemporaneous, its true age may predate dynastic Egypt by millennia. Zahi Hawass has dismissed the radar findings, but the Society for Interdisciplinary Studies notes he has a documented history of resisting non-conventional dating tools including C-14.
Evidence
- Randall Carlson and Graham Hancock have both pointed to the Younger Dryas boundary (~10,800 BCE) as the more likely horizon for a lost civilisation capable of such construction, placing any twin monument in the same prehistoric window.
- Filippo Biondi's radar work — reported by the Miami Herald and Society for Interdisciplinary Studies in early 2026 — identifies a large buried mass near the existing Sphinx using synthetic aperture radar tomography, the same class of technology used in subsurface mapping around the Great Pyramid in 2022.
- Christopher Dunn, in his structural analyses of Giza monuments, has argued the entire plateau reflects an engineering programme far older than dynastic attribution allows.
- John Anthony West championed this finding, connecting it to R.A. Schwaller de Lubicz's earlier observations of vertical fissuring inconsistent with wind or sand erosion.
- Hawass has publicly denied the anomaly represents a second sphinx, though the SIS notes his institutional resistance to technologies that threaten the standard Egyptian chronological model.