Graham Chase Wrote:
--------------------------------------------------->
> It shows again that G2 and G3 were planned
> together


No, it doesn't show anything, because the 'ruler' is not supported by evidence. On the contrary, you use archaeological evidence on workmen's barracks to create something fictious to fit one more new theory from you ;


> Here are Petrie’s comments on the structure
>
> “For what purpose, then, can such a vast amount of
> accommodation have been provided? Not certainly
> for priests' dwellings, since it is too extensive,
> too rough in work, and in the very opposite
> direction to the temples. Hardly either for
> storehouses, since it is so much out of the way,
> and too large for any likely amount of stores. It
> seems, therefore, only attributable to the
> workmen's barracks. The work is just suitable for
> such a purpose; strong and useful and with about
> as much elaboration as an Egyptian would put into
> work that had to last in daily use for one or two
> generations. The extent of the galleries is also
> very reasonable. Supposing the men had a fair
> allowance of room (more than in some works at
> present) the whole barrack would hold about 4,000
> men and such would not be an unlikely number for
> the permanent staff of masons and their attendants
> employed on a pyramid. There is no probability of
> the walls being later than the Second Pyramid,
> because (1) they are arranged square with it; (2)
> at a part of the hill which would be out of the
> way for any other work; and (3) they are built of
> exactly the same style as the adjoining western
> peribolus wall and the retaining walls.”