MA: Since the pyramids, according to you, are not tombs - why should "gazumping" play any part in where, or how big, they built them?
SC: I am concentrating here what the pyramids are rather than what they are not. In my layman's point of view if a preconceived plan for a series of monuments did indeed exist then - from a logistical point of view - it would make sense to begin with G1.
MA: Even if we assume that they were tombs, we should be careful when we compare our cultural mindset (the biggest is the winner) to theirs.
SC: I agree. So you can imagine my indignation when I read in books that proclaim these structures were built as tombs that Rachaf selected the high, centre ground of the plateau in order that he could build a smaller pyramid but still appear greater than his father. But we are not here to discuss the tomb theory. Moving on....
SC: And why not choose this central high ground which had its own natural causeway (the 'Gateway to Giza') which would have saved Khufu the bother and expense of building a massive artificial causeway deep into the northeast of the Nile Valley? And why was Khufu quarrying limestone blocks from either side of G2's causeway which, if the conventional building sequence is correct, would not have existed at the time and therefore Khufu surely would have quarried through the causeway of G2. Either G2 already existed or Khufu left that strip of rock in place because he was already aware of a bigger site plan.
MA: I have no objections against a Khufu-Khafre and a Khafre-Menkaure plan.
SC: Neither do I. The difference between us, however, is that you regard the plan as evolving over time whereas I see it as having been preconceived based upon the Orion Belt stars.
MA: We know that AE fathers stressed the importance of, and even participated in building, their sons tombs.
SC: Perhaps they did. How many of them got involved in designing their grandson's tombs though?