cladking Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hermione Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > No one has to prove that they didn't.
> >
> > If anyone wants to argue a different case,
> the
> > onus is on them to provide evidence.
>
> I tend to agree this applies in this case since
> there is ample evidence derived from tombs in
> terms of birth and death dates that supports the
> paradigm. But this evidence is very two
> dimensional and leaves open a large number of
> other possibilities. It is entirely possible that
> G2 sits over an older structure, for instance,
> and/ or G1 does. Which three of the four+
> structures came first becomes an issue.
>
> Whichever structure Khafre built on the site of G2
> came after something existed on the site of G1.
> To deny this requires evidence. I don't think it
> requires much evidence to say the G2 was
> completed before G1 as we see them today.


Or what was incorporated were hills there is no evidence that earlier structures were there, its a possibility but it is no greater than the possibility they weren't.

Question for all: Was there an OK AE trend to build tombs atop other structures?