Hello all,
I’ve just finished reading through this thread from beginning to end (as at 9:30am GMT, 12 Dec) and as a result I have changed my view on the drilling of these blocks.
I started out not seeing any problem with a small hole being drilled through the blocks.
I have no moral-based objection to the project because I do not see it as the desecration of a sacred site in the interests of material gain - i.e. tomb robbing or treasure hunting.
I do see it as in the interests of archaeology, and that I do find morally acceptable.
It is argued by some that because theoretically there is nothing but core masonry behind the blocks the proposed drilling operation is unnecessary.
I strongly disagree with this argument.
I see no sense or gain in halting any archaeological project just because somebody has a theory that suggests it is unnecessary.
It now occurs to me that the only valid reason for not drilling through these blocks is that there may be something other than core masonry behind them – something that could be irreparably damaged or, worse, destroyed either by the drill bit or as a consequence of air and damp getting into the space beyond.
With the latter threat I have in mind here Jammer’s comments:
‘Here is one far fetched but possible danger,
Say there were scrolls that had survived 4.5 millennia due to a trapped inert atmosphere with little or no humidity or temperature swings.
A hole no matter how small will reactivate that inert atmosphere with both temperature and humidity changes.’
To which I should like to add: with disastrous consequences.
As much as I would like to know what is on the other side of these blocks, I now opine that the project should be stopped and alternative non-invasive methods of ‘seeing’ behind and beyond the blocks sought.
This may well mean that what lies beyond these blocks may not become known in the remaining lifetime of some of us, um, older posters and lurkers, but, well, one can’t have everything one wants... *
MJ
*something I’ve always considered to be grossly unfair