> > The "Fig. 4" referred to on your citation of page 1016 is
> > simply the photo of the tattered papyrus in
> > isolation on the surface of the ground. There is
> > no photo off the papyrus squeezed between two
> > blocks, nor is there any photo of limestone blocks
> > in their original intact blocking position (ie, at
> > the time the original function of the site was
> > abandoned) preventing any passage by humans.
> > Neither Tallet or Wilkinson reported that any of
> > those galleries had any blocking stones intact
> > when they were discovered, such that humans were
> > unable to enter any gallery before removing any
> > blocks (again, at least in any English document
> > I've read about it). This is likely why so little
> > was discovered inside those dozens of galleries.
> > The blocking function of that limestone is a
> > hypothesis of Tallet, presumably in an effort to
> > reconcile their presence outside the galleries.
> A video of the 2013 excavations shows the scene outside
> galleries being excavated at that time (2:25 -
> 2:35); one of the papyri is also shown in a layer
> of sand/small pebbles (and also here, cover page).
> > Tallet doesn't state that the papyri were found
> > between two limestone blocks that were in an
> > intact blocking position when he discovered them.
> > He simply speculates that's what might have
> > happened based on his forensics of the site.
> See above.
Thanks again, Merrell. It was exciting to see a live video of the outside of the galleries! Unfortunately, there was no scene in the video that shows the papyrus under or between blocks that were in situ blocking the opening. Likewise, there was no scene that shows blocking stones intact to the extent of preventing a human from entering the gallery. Since Tallet speaks with conviction when describing the "closure" system, I think interpreting his remarks as indicating any galleries were actually completely sealed to the extent of preventing human access is overreading what he says.
I'm slowly getting through that document, but based on what I've read so far and what you've posted, I haven't found any statement from Tallet actually claiming he encountered a completely blocked gallery that wouldn't allow human entry without further excavation. For example (and I'm relying on the quirkiness of the google translator), his observations regarding how some of the blocks were positioned to block part of the entrance and also how he moved them do not indicate that the entrance was completely blocked. He shows no photos of an entrance that's sealed beyond the ability of a human to enter the gallery. Rather, it appears that he was able to get inside every one of those galleries to take a photo of the entrance from the inside of each gallery, and he doesn't state that the photo was recorded after his excavation to breach any of them that were sealed. Obviously, to get inside those galleries, the opening must already have been large enough to fit the photographer:
I have no problems with any of his descriptions of the blocks he found or with his ideas about the closure system and how he believed they originally sealed off those entrances during storage (e.g., he acknowledges that the closure system was reversible). He describes the effort to move some of the blocks and he describes what he found under them. But he doesn't actually say anything that indicates any of those galleries were sealed enough to prevent someone from entering (at least I haven't found that yet).
I have seen nothing from Tallet that precludes the possibility that all of those galleries all had been breached many years ago.
I'll keep looking. Thanks again.
How can any of us ever know, when all we can do is think?
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 23-Jan-18 22:49 by Origyptian.