History●●●●●Difficulty 4 of 5

Why did Scott's polar party die on the way back from the Pole?

They died 11 miles from a depot. A century of argument still divides Scott's critics, his defenders and the weather.

▶ Start the story

In March 1912 Robert Falcon Scott and two companions were halted by a blizzard 11 miles south of a supply depot, and they never moved again. Two months earlier they had stood at the South Pole. Why did the party that arrived second not get home?

The answer depends on whom you ask. Scott planned to use motors and animals only across the Barrier and to man-haul on the polar plateau. In practice the motor sledges proved only briefly useful and the ponies were affected by their age and poor condition. His main supply point, One Ton Depot, was laid 35 miles short of its planned position, and when Oates advised killing ponies to move it, Scott refused. Near the pole he decided to take five men instead of four, which forced recalculations because everything had been based on four-man teams.

On the way back the party met three critical difficulties on the Barrier: the dog teams did not appear, the temperature dropped unexpectedly, and the depots were short of fuel. Edgar Evans died on 17 February. Scott himself, near death, listed the loss of the ponies, the weather, a fuel shortage he could not account for, and the sickening of Evans and Oates, and put the main blame on the sudden severe weather.

The last march
  1. 3 Jan 1912

    Scott chooses five men for the final party

  2. 17 Jan 1912

    Scott's party reaches the pole

  3. 17 Feb 1912

    Edgar Evans dies

  4. 4 Mar 1912

    Cherry-Garrard reaches One Ton Depot with dogs; Scott is not there

  5. 20 Mar 1912

    Blizzard halts Scott 11 miles from One Ton Depot

  6. 29 Mar 1912

    Scott's last diary entry

Historians still disagree. Roland Huntford blamed Scott's leadership and judgment of men; the meteorologist Susan Solomon argued that extraordinarily adverse weather decided it. And in 2012 Karen May of the Scott Polar Research Institute drew attention again to Scott's written orders for the dog teams to meet the returning party about 1 March, an order that was not carried out.

Three readings of the failure

Scott's own organisation

  • Huntford: authoritarian leadership, poor judgment of men
  • Decisions on depots, ponies and a fifth man

Conditions and chance

  • Solomon: an extraordinarily cold March
  • Orders for the dogs not carried out
  • Cherry-Garrard: it 'bristles with ifs'

Quiz me

0/3

  1. 1.What did Karen May's 2012 find change about the Scott debate?
  2. 2.What was Susan Solomon's argument in The Coldest March?
  3. 3.What does Cherry-Garrard's remark that the story 'bristles with ifs' suggest?

Recap

Scott's party died after a mix of planning choices, missed dog-team support, fuel shortages and an unusually cold March, and historians weigh these differently.

💡 A trick to remember it · Dogs that didn't come, fuel that ran short, cold that came early: the three difficulties historians still weigh.

Surprising fact · In 2012 Karen May of the Scott Polar Research Institute re-discovered Scott's written orders for the dog teams to meet the returning party about 1 March.

Sources (2)

No source, no claim. Every fact in this lesson (16 claims) cites at least one of these.

  1. [1]Terra Nova Expedition · Wikipedia
  2. [2]Robert Falcon Scott · Wikipedia
More lessons in 🏛 History (3) See all history lessons →

One more light on your map.

Get one lesson like this every day, about the things you love. Free, in two or five minutes.

Get the share card for this lesson ↗