"So far the conservators responsible for it seem to be following the golden rule of conservation... 'Do nothing that is not reversible'.
I absolutely don't hold that view, for one and a half reasons.
The half reason is that delay in stabilisation of unstable voids is a one way path to further destabilisation. I think it likely, though no-one is saying either way, and probably never will, that 4 years has resulted in further collapses and irreversible loss. I'd put quite a bit of money on it having happened.
The full reason is this: Last September the Commission were presented with just two options on the way forward (the minutes are on line) :
a.) To do nothing and let all the collapses happen and migrate upwards (!!!)
b.) To research the viability of re-excavating and reprofiling the tunnels and then fill or support them (you'll appreciate what the word reprofiling implies).
Two options only. Both involving loss.
They chose b.)
In March, Heritage Action wrote saying that such an approach was unacceptable since it involved destroying archaeology, compounding the destruction of the original tunnellers by means reminiscent of theirs. We said they should research other modern methods and that reprofiling should be the method of LAST resort not first and that all other options should be researched first.
Three weeks later they wrote back to us and changed their website: they told us and have announced that they're now researching ALL methods.
So the record shows that actually until HA made a fuss the conservators responsible for it have NOT been following the golden rule of conservation and have been intending to do EVERYTHING that is not reversible"
I don't suppose HA will get the credit for this complete change of course, and am quite content for it to be presented as a monumental coincidence.
