Is Tutankhamen’s Tomb at Risk of Collapse Due to Flash Floods and Weak Rock?
Glenn Meyer
Is Tutankhamen’s Tomb at Risk of Collapse Due to Flash Floods and Weak Rock?
The grave lasted millennia, only to be attacked by floods in the 1990s.
The tomb of the young pharaoh Tutankhamen is one of the most famous in the world. Discovered by Howard Carter in 1922, it remains a global landmark, and to this day, it’s the only largely intact royal burial found in Egypt. The treasures inside, including the iconic burial mask, have captivated people around the world for a century. However, these treasures don’t protect the tomb from the impact of time and the elements.
West of Luxor, the Valley of the Kings is full of eroded or destroyed royal Egyptian tombs, many damaged by sudden flash floods that periodically strike the area. Tutankhamen’s tomb was particularly affected in 1994 by a catastrophic deluge that flooded the valley and brought a lot of humidity into the tombs.
That’s the conclusion of a new structural model of the tomb. Egyptian authorities, however, say things are just fine.
Trouble in Egyptian Paradise
The new study was conducted by Sayed Hemeda from Aristotle University in Greece. It’s not a simple visual inspection. Instead, Hemeda uses a complex geotechnical analysis that digitally recreates the tomb and the tons of rock surrounding it. The researcher used an approach that’s employed in major tunneling and excavation projects to simulate the immense stresses acting on the underground chambers.
The model’s goal was to investigate the combined effects of the tomb’s natural “adverse environment”, including the crushing “geostatic overload” from the mountain above, the impact of a major fault line, and, most critically, the weakening effect of flash floods, particularly the floods in 1994.
The first problem, the researcher highlights, is the geology itself. The tomb is carved into the “Esna shale Formation”, a rock layer the study describes as “notably weak and unstable”. Shale is a fine-grained sedimentary rock composed of mud, clay, silt, and organic matter. When it encounters a lot of water, it swells. Then, when it dries up, it shrinks. This can create pressure that generates fissures in the hill itself.
The second villain is water. Water doesn’t just cause damage through the shale; it can be a catalyst for the direct deterioration of the tomb, particularly when it comes in the form of a flash flood.
The cherry on top of all these issues is a “prominent fault” that runs directly through the tomb. The fault visibly intersects the ceilings of both the antechamber and the burial chamber. This fault acts as a conduit. When flash floods occur, rainwater seeps down through these cracks, saturating the weak Esna shale.
Peeling and Cracking
The consequences, the study warns, are manifold. The infiltrating water “diminish[es] the load-bearing capacity and strength of the rock”, making it less able to support the mountain above. Hemeda also conducted lab tests, confirming that the “compressive, tensile and shear strength in saturated conditions is markedly lower than that in dry conditions”.
The study claims its findings are consistent with the field observations, pointing to “laminar peelings on the ceiling” and “falling debris from the crown area” as physical evidence of this stress.
The Official Rejection
The Egyptian government’s response to the study was swift. The Supreme Council of Antiquities (SCA), the body that oversees the conservation, protection, and regulation of all antiquities and archaeological excavations in Egypt, rejected the entire premise of the study.
SCA Secretary General Mohamed Ismail Khaled stated that claims of cracks, humidity, and deterioration of the murals are “completely unfounded.” He asserted that the tomb remains in a “remarkable state of preservation” and faces “no danger to either its structural integrity or its vivid wall art.”
“The marks and cracks observed on the tomb’s walls are not new,” Khaled clarified, “They have remained unchanged for over 100 years.” The tomb was discovered in 1922.
The SCA pointed to one of their partners, the Getty Conservation Institute (GCI). The GCI carries out regular real-world monitoring, which, the SCA says, proves that the tomb is safe and sound. The Egyptian authorities went further, directly attacking the credibility of the recent study, saying that it’s based on outdated data, wrong assumptions, or is simply confusing the tomb for a different one.
So, Where Does This Leave Us?
The difference may lie in the fact that Hemeda’s study has a predictive side. Its 3D model is a powerful simulation designed to test how the structure would behave under worst-case scenarios, such as the full, weakening saturation from a flash flood. Its conclusions are based on geotechnical engineering principles and computational analysis. It warns of what could happen, or what may be happening invisibly.
But there are geotechnical assumptions made in the study.
To make matters even more complicated, Hemeda’s study seems consistent with some physical evidence (like the cracking on the roof), but not all of it (like the fact that the cracks aren’t getting larger).
Complicating the matter is the fact that the Hemeda study also claims its findings are consistent with physical evidence, citing “detachment of crusts and surface layers from the ceilings” and “extensive cracking” as proof. Meanwhile, the SCA has encouraged the press to “refer to trusted scientific sources.”
As this scientific dispute unfolds, the golden tomb of the boy-king remains, as it has for over a century, at the center of intense human fascination. Tutankhamen’s tomb is arguably the most valuable cultural asset in the world, and it is the centerpiece of Egypt’s multi-billion-dollar tourism industry. Any suggestion of its instability is a matter of national importance.
The study was published in npj Heritage Science.
-- Sent from my Linux system.