According to the standard statement in our current textbooks, pyramid of khufu is the result of the architectural development of ancient Egypt 100 years, and the "sequence" of the orthodox evolution of Egyptian pyramids is carried out in such a vein: the earliest Egyptian kings used a building called "Mastaba" as a tomb, and the shape of "Mastaba" was like a square platform. During the third dynasty of the ancient kingdom, Imhotep, the young prime minister of Zuo Sai Wang, who was born as a scribe, designed and built a stepped pyramid for Zuo Sai Wang in Sakala. This pyramid is actually a stack of six huge "Mastaba". Later, many pyramidal "experimental" models were gradually developed. For example, in the Fourth Dynasty, the three pyramids in Snefru were "collapsed", "tortuous" and "red". Later, a truly mature work-the Great Pyramid of the Second King of the Fourth Dynasty-stood on the land of the Egyptian Pharaoh. But how can we prove this orthodox statement? When concrete and clear archaeological evidence appeared, it was found that this was not the case at all. Reliable carbon dating samples-evidence that the Great Pyramid was actually built more than 300 years before Khufu was born 1, and was completed about 300 years before he ascended the throne-will completely abandon the origin, function and completion date of the Great Pyramid in orthodox Egyptian theory. Strangely, concrete evidence that can make people doubt the orthodox archaeological order does exist. This evidence was obtained and published by carbon dating in 1986, under the guidance of the famous Egyptian scientist Mark Lerner. Under the sponsorship of the edgar cayce Foundation, Lai Na collected 15 ancient gypsum samples from the crevices of the Great Pyramid. These stucco samples will be selected because they contain fragments of organic matter and, unlike natural stones, they can be dated by carbon. Two of the samples were tested in the Radiocarbon Laboratory of Southern Methodist University in Dallas, Texas, while the other 13 was brought to the laboratory in Zurich, Switzerland, with a more complicated accelerator determination date. After such a thorough process, the result should be calibrated and as accurate as the annual rings. But the result is quite surprising. Mark Lerner commented at that time: "The date is about from 3809 BC to 2869 BC. In short ... it obviously predates the era of Khufu recognized by Egyptology. In short, according to the sample you recorded, the date of carbon emission shows that the chronology of Egyptology can be changed from 200 to 1200. You can think of it as an approximately bell-shaped curve. When you cut it in the middle, you can sum up these results, that is, our date is 400 to 450 years earlier than that of the ancient kingdom pyramids, especially the fourth dynasty ... This is really radical ... I mean, it will cause great trouble. The pyramids of Giza are 400 years older than Egyptian scientists know. "

Therefore, the earliest pyramid should be pyramid of khufu.