Warwick Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> sfunny. When a speculation conflicts with the
> roughly established dating for the construction of
> G1, that dating is cited as a critique of the
> speculation.
>
> But when a speculation is the fruit of that
> roughly established dating, said dating is called
> into question.
>
> Reeder has dealt extensively with the order of
> events on the plateau. Taking into consideration
> his scenario, one is obliged to entertain an older
> overall date.
>
> The important part is that most of the variables
> fall within the Early Dynastic/Old Kingdom time
> frame.
>
> AS does your Thuban possibility
>
> IMNSHO, of course

I find Reader to be an excellent source by the way. When all is taken into consideration, there is a confluence of evidence which all steer towards not only older dates, but a different scenario of construction namely one that implies the great pyramids were generational projects and not just the work of one pharaoh. If in fact Thuban was used to set the alignment for the great pyramids, which I think it interesting the fact their angles are all a little different which implies different eras in which construction began, this at the very least measures the date in which these angles were set not when the work was completed which may have gone on for centuries making the pharaohs of the 4th and 5th Dynasty (the latter I have argued elsewhere) merely the "finishers" of the project. In the end though, all evidence still points to the greater Dynastic era of which this took place.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 23-Feb-17 20:36 by Thanos5150.