Well, the key words left by Diane's sources, was this;
"In the 3rd century the pyramid was included inside the Aurelian Walls, and during the Middle Ages, the author Petrarch, seems to have thought of it, erroneously, as the tomb of either Romulus or Remus, in spite of the inscription. At that time, it was considered one of the most important monuments of antiquity. It had been conserved 'nearly intact', but was nevertheless overgrown with plants. The inscription 'Caius Cestius' was barely visible. Pier Paolo Vergerio the Elder mentioned around 1400 that it was difficult to read because of the vegetation.
In 1660, excavations were undertaken: two statue bases were found outside it dedicated to Cestius, and an opening was dug into the pyramid itself, when it was discovered that the burial chamber was once decorated with frescoes, only the scantest traces of which now remain.'"
notice that; "the author Petrarch, seems to have thought of it, erroneously, as the tomb of either Romulus or Remus, in spite of the inscription.", thus why would it be less likely to be seen in the times of Petrarch, IE, in the third century BCE, than in the times opf later personages?
Many other examples are available, but you must be straight, and pure to understand-it?
Responses To This Message
© Charles N. Pope, US Library of Congress. All rights reserved.