Actually one of the major questions is which King/Pharaoh came before which and what were there names. One of the historic sources for those names and the order has been proven to be a longstanding fake, yet is still relied on as if it was genuine.The king list of Manetho, to which I think you're referring, was compiled during New Kingdom, and survives as later ancient copies. A number of the rulers have never been identified in the monuments, which appears to be Quirke's objection to using Manetho instead of relying exclusivly on the monuments and their inscriptions.
Further, many names are the same or similar and even unknown, some names are used for known people occur only on the list. A list believed genuine is incomplete and complied at a later date tan the fake. The significance of this is this list is used for dating everything from the Sphinx to each and every pyramid and temple.
Other forms of dating are not permitted by law, unless done in Egypt, even if the equipment does not exist there samples may not be taken out of the country. So thermoluminescence dating (dating the stone itself) cannot be done (although a few samples were taken, yielding dates older than standard by hundreds of years).Zahi Hawass claimed (and I assume he still does) that radiocarbon dating doesn't work on Egyptian antiquities. This is due to the fact that, when RC dating has been done to various New Kingdom relics, the dates have mostly diverged from the conventional pseudochronology. The divergent dates have been coherent in the context of Velikovsky's reconstruction of ancient history. Thermoluminescence should be tried on the Ramses and Nefertari images at Abu Simbel, as they have been exposed to sunlight for their entire existence. The contents of Ramses II's canopic jars -- jars containing his guts -- RC dated almost 800 years too young, which is verbatim the divergence in date given by Velikovsky. In the New Kingdom, the 25th dynasty is the only one that is basically in the right place, and preceded the 26th (19th), bumping it up additional years equal to the length of the 25th.
So for example, the Step Pyramid may be more recent than the Great Pyramid, the reverse of the standard. Which raises major questions.I've never heard of that. The age of the Great Sphinx at Giza is at issue, given its water eroded surfaces. Since the Saqqara pyramids are largely of mud brick, if there had been rain hitting them as well, they'd have been reduced to a pile of crap, since they're supposedly hundreds of years earlier than the Sphinx.
I would suggest that he turn down the gain on his discriminator gate-valve. LOL
Done by Ioannis Lirtzis at several sites using optical thermoluminesence: Sphinx and Valley Temples, Osiris Shaft sarcophagus, and Mycerinus pyramid. Further testing forbidden by Hawass.