Abstract
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.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
General Earth and Planetary Sciences,Ecology,Geography, Planning and Development
Reference13 articles.
1. Cherry-Garrard A.G.B. (1912a). Sledging journal, 3 November 1911 to 28 January 1912. Cambridge, UK: Scott Polar Research Institute, MS 559/5; BJ.
2. Hooper F.J. (1912). Journal. Christchurch, New Zealand: Canterbury Museum, MS149.
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献