The Falklands Maritime Heritage Trust annnounces.
Clear video of the wreck (in what the leader of the expedition calls "a brilliant state of preservation"):
Here's the NYT article, "At the Bottom of an Icy Sea, One of History’s Great Wrecks Is Found/Explorers and researchers, battling freezing temperatures, have located Endurance, Ernest Shackleton’s ship that sank in the Antarctic in 1915."
Under the terms of the Antarctic Treaty, the six-decade-old pact intended to protect the region, the wreck is considered a historical monument. The submersibles did not touch it; the images and scans will be used as the basis for educational materials and museum exhibits...
Shackleton left England aboard Endurance with a crew of 27 in 1914, bound for a bay on the Weddell Sea that was meant to be the starting point for an attempt by him and a small party to be the first to cross Antarctica....
And let me recommend the excellent New Yorker article, "The White Darkness/A solitary journey across Antarctica" by David Grann (available at Amazon in book form). Excerpt:
He had studied with devotion the decision-making of Shackleton, whose ability to escape mortal danger was legendary, and who had famously saved the life of his entire crew when an expedition went awry. Whenever Worsley faced a perilous situation—and he was now in more peril than he’d ever been—he asked himself one question: What would Shacks do?
पोस्ट्स
२४ टिप्पण्या:
Shacks?
One would think that an Englishman, of that time, would be referred to only by his full last name except perhaps by his family and boarding schoolmates.
What would Churchy do? Winnie?
Is there any oil and gas in the Antarctic? We need to go get it.
"One would think that an Englishman, of that time, would be referred to only by his full last name except perhaps by his family and boarding schoolmates. "
But Worsley lived from 1960 to 2016. The book is about a man who recently tried walking across Antarctica and who was inspired by Shackleton. Shackleton's story is also told in the book (which is very well constructed and written (and short)).
Another excerpt with "Shacks" in it:
"He told her that, though he wasn’t going to leave the tent, he needed some time to think through what to do next. He spent the day wrestling with his predicament, wondering what Shacks would do. Worsley had written in his diary, “Just want it all to end,” adding, “Miss everybody badly.” But the G.P.S. had informed him that he had finally passed the apex of the Titan Dome, and had started to descend. History was within his grasp. In his diary, he had written, “Never, ever give in.” It echoed a lesson from one of the Shackleton self-help books, which Worsley had once posted on his Web site: “Never give up—there’s always another move.”"
My impression of the story is that Shackleton made poor decisions that led to a dangerous predicament, and that a talented, resourceful and disciplined crew got them out. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I never understood why Shackleton is held up as such a hero.
FamilyHaker,
It's been awhile since I was really up on the details, but I had a very different impression for several reasons. (I absolutely agree with you about the crew's qualities, however.)
I don't recall Shackleton's making poor decisions, unless you count the whole idea of this expedition as harebrained. The weather and ice conditions were not what they expected, or had reason to expect except under the default "It's the Antarctic. It can always be much more brutal than you're expecting."
It did take an extraordinary crew to find ways to sustain themselves, and to hold it together psychologically, as long and as well as they did. In such a remote, harsh environment, with no concrete reason to believe it was all going to be OK, despair had to be tempting. I still believe Shackleton's leadership – his calm certainty that they were going to get out of this, and his extraordinary determination – must have been inspirational, and must have made a difference.
Then there's the voyage of the James Caird, where he deduces that South Georgia, not the closest whaling station, is the only one they can reach. He picked the right five companions and sailed a covered lifeboat across 800 nm of way-southern ocean through often horrible conditions. I look at that map, I think of the tools available to them, and I think it's amazing they found South Georgia at all.
Ah, but he landed on the wrong side of the island – so he and two of his boys cobble together crampons and push themselves so hard across mountains and glaciers (without a map), Reinhold Freaking Messner himself had a hard time reproducing their trek even with modern gear. I'd wager Messner was better fed than the "terrible trio of scarecrows" who arrived at Stromness after 36 hours of continuous movement.
None of this guaranteed that when they finally arrived back at Elephant Island, everyone would still be alive and relatively well. But it did make it possible. And that's my last point: Shackleton took care of his men, and put himself in the highest danger to give them the best chance to survive. Not every explorer-leader did in those days.
I think the conventional wisdom on Shackleton, though imperfect as always, is largely correct.
The explorers were pretty amazing. Magellan, Drake, Cook - to name a few. Incredible combination of fortitude, ingenuity, and courage.
The sinking is not the story. The story is how Shackleton held the crew together and how they rescued themselves against amazing odds
Wow- it looks better preserved than the just slightly older Titanic wreck.
“For scientific discovery give me Scott; for speed and efficiency of travel give me Amundsen; but when disaster strikes and all hope is gone, get down on your knees and pray for Shackleton.” Sir Raymond Priestly, Antarctic Explorer and Geologist.
Other than the madness of the goal the only real mistake I am aware of is that the Endurance, although strongly built, had sides that were pretty much vertical. Unlike the Fram, which with its rounded sides was pushed up out of danger when squeezed by pack ice, the Endurance was slowly crushed.
From memory (I read about this decades ago), in crossing South Georgia the team was confronted by falling night and a descent into misty conditions. With too little time to make their way down carefully they fashioned a sled out of blankets and pushed off into danger. They survived. Sounds like Priestly had it right.
I forget the name of the book, but the story of that trip is one of the most amazing things I've read.
Those were truly tough men...the finest examples of non-toxic masculinity.
God Bless Hurley for dragging that camera+ around with him.
"Endurance" by Alfred Lansing. Available on Amazon and probably still somewhere in the boxes of books I have been lugging around for ages.
Shackelton wrote a book about the expedition called "South". One of the greatest adventures ever.
Can you imagine what Shackleton and the boys on that trip would think of "Men" today?
They would probably decide to conquer the world. Who would stop them? Who could stop them? Today's metrosexual pretty boys wearing high heels in the Army? Not likely.
Amazing men, amazing story.
This is an excellent find.
Oddly, I thought "Worsley" that Ann mentions was the original Worsley, captain of the Endurance (Shackleton was the commander) and perhaps one of the greatest navigators to have ever lived -- it was him that got the James Cairn to South Georgia Island in the dark and storm.
He should have looked for his fortune in the Arctic, where the waters are warm, and the lanes clear, on a recurring, albeit unpredictable basis.
Not to disparage Shackleton’s leadership or courage, but he set out equipped with a radio receiver, but no transmitter, apparently because of the price tag. His incredible adventure would have been unnecessary if he’d been equipped to call for help.
Joe Smith - there are a number of books on the subject, starting with South by Shackleton himself. I would recommend Shackleton by Roland Huntford for a more comprehensive biographical treatment.
"Not to disparage Shackleton’s leadership or courage, but he set out equipped with a radio receiver, but no transmitter, apparently because of the price tag."
The entire expedition was financed on a shoestring budget. One of the funders backed out relatively late. He wasn't being frugal; he just didn't have the money. I'd argue that he was more culpable for not giving himself enough time to adequately plan (and fund) before setting out. If I recall, however, he wanted to get moving before the war effort prevented him from getting started.
@Gravel...it's in my bookshelf somewhere. It's not the one by the man himself.
The book Endurance tells a truly amazing story - the ship’s name describes the experience of those men. That all survived is almost beyond belief. Things go bad, then get worse and when you think it can’t get any worse, it does. I saw an exhibit at the Museum of Natural History in NYC years ago. It included photographs taken during the expedition (they lugged and protected the equipment and giant glass plates through the whole ordeal), as well as the actual boat taken by Shackleton and his small party of men from Elephant Island to South Georgia. It was stunning.
That is the most incredibly well-preserved I've ever seen picture of or read of. I'd guess the combination of temperature and (I'd imagine) low oxygen levels helped, but still amazing.
Why is so much of the wood still there? The Titanic lost everything made of wood and the Endurance is almost as old. Anybody know?
From what I read, it’s preserved because of the temperature of the water and lack of wood-eating organisms.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा