> Again, no one doubts the tower core of Meidum was
> built first independently of the collapsed outer
> pyramid layer.
I'm hardly surprised you forgot the most important reasons it's unlikely the tower was built first. It's not only the evidence of your own eyes; look at the picture of the surviving tower! It is not smooth up and down. It mustta been attached to something unless the stripped the cladding to tie it into the steps later. There's also simple logic which you also ignored; the tower would be orders of magnitude more difficult to build than the pyramid.
> The exterior of the tower core is finely finished,
> including the tops of the steps, in the same
> manner as were casing stones.
So how and why were the visible "step tops" cleared of stone and debris?
It is far more likely this pyramid collapsed during construction while it was nearing completion.
> The builders of the outer pyramid layer depicted
> the tower core in essence as we see it today:
This isn't what I see.
> More proof the tower core was built independent of
> the outer pyramid layer, as well as I argue
> evidence that this is the finished structure as
> original intended, are the casing stones just a
> few feet from the bottom rough band:
This is an interesting picture and could strongly support your point if you could show this is actually casing stone on the "tower core". If you could also show this casing stone is not at a step top your case would be virtually proven.
> Also, again (which you did not respond to of
> course), the tower core was built using the
> accretion layer method (the 3rd Dynasty
That they used accretion layers on this or any other pyramids is unlikely to have anything to do with how stones were raised. I am aware you suggested that ramps were laid out along such layers but this is not a "theory" but an assertion. Show how these narrow layers can support ramps and men and account for the available evidence. You'll be left with huge numbers of stones and no means to drag them up. Every ramp "theory" collapses in its own details. No such theory is consistent with the physical evidence and cultural context. It is simple nonsense that the only technology they had was "inclined plane technology".
> You cannot build a tower core using
> accretion layers at the same time you are building
> horizontal coursed steps.
> In contrast
> to E1 and E2, the extension E3 rested not on a
> solid rock foundation, but on three layers of
> limestone blocks laid on sand.[/b]
This too is interesting (if true) and supportive of your beliefs.
But remember my contention is that the tower core is chiefly to take weight off of the steps. They may have merely believed that with the little weight on the steps spread out over such a vast area that these steps didn't need much support.
> As I have noted elsewhere, Petrie, which I agree,
> did not believe there was such a thing as "E1 and
> E2" with both phases being one and the same
> comprising what we see today.
And I sometime agree with Petrie.
> These are my "stated reasons" there is no
> doubt the Meidum tower core was built first
> independently of the outer pyramid layer,
> something accepted by all who unlike you have
> actually looked at the evidence instead of just
> making up whatever.
These are all excellent reasons and I can't deny the possibility you are right.
But you might be wrong and in any case the design and construction of this pyramid is different (probably) than G1. Perhaps the only trait they share was the method used to lift the stone.