April 7, 2003
Tracking Franklin, "unluckiest explorer"
A British woman is setting off into the Arctic to try to solve the mystery behind the greatest disaster ever to befall a polar expedition. For more than 150 years historians have argued over the fate of Sir John Franklin, who disappeared in 1845 along with 128 men and two large sailing ships after leaving Britain to plot a route via the elusive Northwest Passage through north Canada.As I recall, much of Franklin's "bad luck" was of his own making -- the Arctic is not forgiving of the unprepared. From the Sunday Times.Next week Rebecca Harris will leave for the Canadian Arctic at the head of a team of eight that will retrace Franklin’s footsteps to try to find how and where he died.
“What inspired me was not Franklin so much as the love of Jane, his wife, and her determination to bring him back,” said Harris, 35. “She mounted more than 30 expeditions to find him. She failed, but they resulted in the charting of much of the Arctic and launched polar exploration as we know it” . . .
Harris’s team, sponsored by American Express, will try to cover the 200 miles from Victory Point on King William Island, where the men abandoned their ships, to Starvation Cove, where bones, boots and an upturned boat were found.
Ironically, it was Franklin’s widow who was remembered by history for her exploration work. Her bust still sits in the hallway of the Royal Geographical Society.
Posted by David on April 7, 2003 11:14 AM
I am sure I read somewhere that some bodies had been found from Franklin's expedition, preserved naturally by the low temperatures, and that they had all died from lead poisoning due - allegedly - to not understanding the low-temperature metallurgy of the tins their provisions were stored in.
Something similar happened to Scott in the Antarctic when the solder failed on the paraffin tins, causing loss of vital fuel and contamination of rations stored nearby. This was a critical factor in the poor health of the polar team who later perished on their return journey.
Of course this might all be urban legends, but it sounds quite plausible.
Posted by: Andrew Duffin on April 8, 2003 6:26 AM
The lead poisoning is mentioned in the Sunday Times article -- but from what I recall reading, this was only the very last in a long string of blunders.
Posted by: David on April 8, 2003 4:34 PM
There were indeed bodies found with signs of lead poisoning, but it's not yet clear how large a role irt played. Scurvy, large ships which drew too much water, lack of awareness of Inuit survival methods, inaccurate charts, and the fact that 1846-47 was one of the coldest winters in years in the area, all played a part.
Accurate information about Sir John, and accounts of recent books and expedition seeking to solve this mystery, may be found on my Franklin website at http://www.ric.edu/rpotter/SJFranklin.html
Posted by: Dr. Russell A. Potter on June 14, 2003 1:02 PM
my great great grandfather apparently went on one of the expeditions. As he was a "soldier", it seems probable that this would have been one of the "official" expeditions between 1847-51. He broke his leg and had severe snow blindness, but lived until 1910 and had 11 children. He lived in Butleigh, Somerset. Any ideas as to how I could find out more information?
Posted by: Anonymous on December 7, 2003 12:22 PM
gmail.com