What did Edgar Cayce predict about events in 2026 and how credible are those predictions?

1. What the sources say about 2026: a Hall of Records and pyramid “prophecies”

The A.R.E., the organization that preserves Cayce’s readings, frames Cayce’s material as saying the Great Pyramid and Sphinx contain a “Hall of Records” and that prophecies built into the pyramid purportedly record details down to “hour, day, year, place, country, nation, town, and individuals involved,” with some interpreters linking those ideas to a coming 2026 “awakening” or significant shift ^[1]. The A.R.E. blog explicitly connects Cayce’s statements about entrances under the Sphinx paw and timing tied to “when the changes must be active in this sphere of man’s experience,” language that proponents read as pointing to a near-future milestone such as 2026 ^[1].

2. How that narrative reached the popular press: long-held claims resurface as “unusual” predictions

Mainstream and lifestyle outlets have picked up the A.R.E.’s narrative and framed it as an “unusual 2026 prediction” from Cayce, often noting his historical reputation for strikingly specific-sounding forecasts—Tyla’s coverage, for example, reiterates Cayce’s identity as a Kentucky-born clairvoyant who is credited by admirers with predicting events like the start of World War I and deaths of U.S. presidents, then highlights the newer 2026 angle as noteworthy ^[2].

3. What “prediction” actually looks like in Cayce’s readings: interpretive, symbolic, and layered

The material cited by promoters consists of symbolic descriptions—references to records under the Sphinx, timing tied to cosmic or symbolic “changes,” and assertions that the pyramid encodes historical sequences—which require interpretive leaps to convert into a concrete 2026 timeline ^[1]. The A.R.E.’s presentation treats Cayce’s readings as prescriptive and temporally precise language, but the primary texts as quoted are metaphorical and open to multiple readings rather than offering an unambiguous calendar-style prophecy ^[1].

4. Assessing credibility: provenance, interpretation, and independent verification

Credibility depends on two linked questions: whether the readings were authentic records of Cayce’s trance statements and whether those statements unambiguously point to 2026; the A.R.E. preserves and promotes Cayce’s material as authentic and meaningful, which supports belief among adherents ^[1], while popular reporting underscores Cayce’s historical aura ^[2]. However, the sources provided do not supply independent, third-party verification that a single Cayce reading explicitly named 2026 in clear, testable terms, nor do they cite mainstream archaeological or historical corroboration for the Hall-of-Records claim as a dated prediction ^[1].

5. Alternative viewpoints and what remains unknown

While proponents within A.R.E. and related lecturers publicly link Cayce’s material to a 2026 event or “awakening,” the available reporting here is promoter-driven ^[1] and popularized by lifestyle press ^[2]; explicit skeptical or scholarly rebuttals are not present in these sources, and thus independent expert assessment of archaeological or textual claims is absent from this record ^[1]. Because the two provided sources are either an advocacy organization’s blog or a magazine summary of sensational claims, any assessment must acknowledge that verification beyond those parties—textual-critical scholarship of Cayce’s readings or archaeological confirmation of a “Hall of Records” tied to a date—is not documented in the material at hand ^[1].