Silbury Hill 180
Image by TK

One thing VBB, the air and moisure getting tro some parts of the Neolithic surface is down to the failed tunnels and if these were simply fixed the archaeology would be sealed again. This fact means that simply expanding the existing tunnels as part of a repair stratefgy is unlikely to find any decent evidence - causing the archaeologists to want an even larger hollow to be made - a dangerous thing in my opinion.

It should also be said that EH don't seem to think the archaeology is in much danger and I would suggest that only a proportion will have been exposed to air and water, and this exposure is directly down to EH's poor management of the hill for the last four years - so how can they we trusted to get what will be Silbury's biggest intervention ever right?

Personally I think you are quite right, and I raised this exact issue with EH. The business of water contributing to it was side-stepped - lets face it as the shaft wasn't properly backfilled in 1777 water must have been finding its way into that area nand directed down to the centre bottom by the river load ever since. (BTW Not a time for theories but this ability to deal with water is connected to what Silbury is about I feel.) They are saying the overturned turf stack has preserved this material beneath and it is in danger from a void that is linked to material in the shaft. This was their reason for using polystyrene at the top - so not to put more weight on this material and force it down into that void and crush what they want to get at. The air in this chamber and water is ruining their chances of calibration so the scientists (not EH) say. I am prepared to take their word for it because they were I believe sincere and I didn't in any event understand their reply.

VBB