> Anyone who knows anything about the oral transmission of family
> legends knows how iffy this is.
I am glad you acknowledge the "iffy" nature of such reports that are only 100 years old. Such "iffyness" tends to happen whenever the messenger has a vested interest in the report.
I can't imagine how "iffy" it must be when the lore becomes MILLENNIA old. Therefore, shall we assume that the reports of Strabo and Herodotus about Khufu, al Mamoun, etc. are perhaps a bit "iffy" by corresponding orders of magnitude?
Likewise about the Kings' Lists that were constructed many centuries after the death of those so-called kings, or virtually everything we know about Khufu which didn't start getting reported until several millennia after his death?