Commentary on Could Captain Scott have been saved? Cecil Meares and the ‘second journey’ that failed
The article Could Captain Scott have been saved? Cecil Meares and the second journey that failed , by Karen May and Sarah Airriess, first published in Polar Record in 2014 (May & Airriess, 2015), builds a case against Cecil Meares for a failure to restock One Ton Depot in accordance with Scott&#...
| Published in: | Polar Record |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Article in Journal/Newspaper |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
2018
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0032247418000189 https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/S0032247418000189 |
| Summary: | The article Could Captain Scott have been saved? Cecil Meares and the second journey that failed , by Karen May and Sarah Airriess, first published in Polar Record in 2014 (May & Airriess, 2015), builds a case against Cecil Meares for a failure to restock One Ton Depot in accordance with Scott's instructions. The authors claim that Meares was guilty of disobedience, neglect of duty and ‘obfuscation’. However, their case is diminished – in my view – by three significant mistakes that undermine their charges against Meares. In the three sections below, I identify those mistakes and consider whether the strong claims May and Airriess make about Meares are justified. |
|---|