This team supply diagram clearly shows the logistical support that
propelled Peary & Henson to the Pole. While everyone but the most
radical racists agree Peary reached Bartlett's camp, there are still
some who insist that after that Peary can not be trusted because
his only witness was a Negro. There were Eskimos, of course, but they
are considered sub-Negro and therefore of absolutely no consequence.
The fact is that all of Peary's team were human beings and knew
perfectly well that they went the distance. In fact, the Eskimos
thought it was crazy as the Pole was only ice like all the other ice.
They were happy because Matt & Bert were so excited and that they
could finally go back to the safety of land, and to their families.
Peary had developed the tools, the teams, and the logistics to reach
the Pole. Today this could be easily reenacted if only someone had the
funds to pay for 24 men, 133 dogs, etc. to do it. Then they
would have to be outfitted in polar bear pants, caribou sleeping bags,
walrus hide lashings, seal skin boots, etc. Assembling all of this in
the middle of nowhere when it is 50 degrees below zero would be so
difficult that you can appreciate why no one ever went back to the
Pole the way Peary did. Today adventurers ski or trek one way, then
fly home. Peary and Henson had to go the double distance, without a
cell phone to call for a rescue helicopter.
Herbert tried to manipulate the reader with nothing more than easily
disproved conspiracy theories and innuendo. His attempts to try and destroy
Peary's credibility lack hard evidence. This remarkable photo, above,
was actually discovered by the Navigation Foundation when they
investigated the Peary matter. It is the abundance of such high
quality evidence that has ended all the traditional anti- Peary debates
that started with the vindictive book by polar fraud Dr. Cook.
The "conspiracy theory" point of view may have been popular in the
1960's–1970's but it makes him seem paranoid to an unhealthy degree today.
But far worse, his "theories" about ice drift and impossible traveling speed
have been shown to be demonstrably incorrect. Herbert made serious
errors as he did not have information as fundamental as the ocean floor
depth map (left column) made from Peary's depth soundings. That fact alone
tosses Herbert's theory out the window. The diary he examined? That was an
egregious misrepresentations of an historical document. The Herbert
description of it is just short of ridiculous. As a response, the entire
Peary diary is being posted on the Internet so that anyone can examine it
themselves and see through such nonsense as Herbert's interpretations. (June, 2002)
|The Royal Geographical
Society of Great Britain had a different
conclusion than Wally's when they examined Peary's records 75 years
|"...note that the Royal
Geographical Society of Great Britain accorded Peary the highest honor
within their power,... In conferring upon Peary ...the
special gold medal of the society, President Darwin, son of the great
scientist, Charles Darwin, extended to him, in the presence of its
members, the fullest assurance of ... Commander Peary, as the first and
only human being who has ever led a party of his fellow creatures to a
pole of the earth...The proceedings may be found set out in full in the
Geographical Journal of London for August, 1910, pages 129 to 148...Admiral
Peary laid before the Royal Geographical Society additional proofs of
his attainment of the pole and supplemental to those previously
submitted. This was not done at their request, but voluntarily, that
there might be no question hereafter as to the action of that
world-famous organization being based upon adequate examination of
Admiral Peary’s proofs. ... the Royal Geographical Society wrote
Admiral Peary advising him that the documents he sent had been “most
thoroughly and critically examined.” Both these letters are set out in
full in the record of the proceedings before our congressional
Herbert's book as revisionist history.
Wally Herbert is not
an historian nor does he have any credentials as a history writer. While
some thought his work was "well researched", such a remark could only be
made by a person who never passed English Composition 101 in college. Anyone
who has written a college term paper would not be impressed with Herbert's
individuals spotted Herbert's self serving motive to make himself greater
than the Arctic legend Robert E. Peary. It was just too obvious.
Charles mom, the Queen, knighted Wally for reaching the North Pole! But
his book (Noose of Laurels) is based on lying about what was in the
Peary diary! Hello? The Queen thereby invalidated the Royal
Geographical Society which had awarded Peary the Gold Medal for
discovery of the Pole in 1911. So it is not just Charles that may not
have his head screwed on properly.
An even and informative tale about Camilla Parker-Bowles,
a poor little rich girl who may someday get her prince.
What we learn is that the upper class in the UK is alive and sick
with its own moral code. Do what you want, just don't talk about it.
|Herbert's biases & mistakes
|1) "Many of the Bryce reviews (Cook & Peary) bow down
to Herbert. One refers to him as a navigational expert. ...Herbert
was not the navigator on his own trip and frankly admits he doesn't know
anything about celestial navigation.
2) "...Herbert keeps harping on "proof" but ...when Wally got to the
Pole (1969), they took some pictures holding flags, because, "what
other proof could we offer?"
3) "...he is a conspiracy theorist...constantly looking for some
ulterior motive. For example, and entire chapter ...is entitled "The first day of dark."... What does
first day of
dark mean, Wally wonders? ... It must refer to some mood that came over
Peary, because he knew he wasn't going to make the Pole, or even a
farthest north, and would have to fake it. Buzzzzz. Wrong, Wally.
Anyone familiar with Peary's handwriting knows that he leaves the
bottom of cursive s's open, so they look like cursive r's. ...first
day of dash (handwriting) only looks like first day of dark. The
diary starts on the first day of the final northward dash..."
from Doug Davies)
Gil Grosvenor next commissioned the Maryland based Navigation Foundation to do a formal
investigation of the Peary record. Their report was a landmark work that
fully vindicated Peary as they found ample
proof of his correct position. They uncovered new evidence and used new
techniques to authenticate photos. You may
read their report for yourself on the Internet. It is irrefutable,
although that hardly stops the die-hard anti-Peary crowd.
American repudiation of Noose of Laurels, Wally Herbert was a hero back
home in England. The Queen made him "Sir" Wally. Why? Well, this harkens
back to an old wound the British people have about being polar losers with
both the North and the South Pole. Their bunglers were Scott who killed
himself with his entire polar party, and Shackelton who had a knack for
repeated failure. English enmity towards Peary stems from the fact that 133
nautical miles before the Pole Peary went on with Henson, while Bartlett
returned to land. Bartlett was a British subject. Get it? If Peary had taken
Bartlett to the Pole, then the event would be shared by both nations. Instead
Peary took his
negro assistant so he would not have to share the victory with anyone.
Negroes, like Eskimos and Indians, had no place in turn of the century white
society. (Sorry, Matt.)