“. . . showing how they radically depart from the established canon of quarry marks [sic] from this period.”
This is remarkable, as “they” are part of “the established canon”—and Creighton, how can there be an “established canon” of “quarry marks” “from this period” if (as you have averred in the singular case of Khufu) the ˤprw were “really” latter-day cultists of the kings they were named after?
On which I had this to say also: