Commentary on Could Captain Scott have been saved? Cecil Meares and the ‘second journey’ that failed

• Published in: Polar Record
• Main Author: Alp, Bill
• Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
• Language: English
• Published: Cambridge University Press (CUP) 2018
• Subjects: General Earth and Planetary Sciences; Ecology; Geography, Planning and Development; Polar Record
• Online Access: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0032247418000189; https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/S0032247418000189

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.