emansfield
Comparison comments:
I have studied both expeditions fairly extensively, reading much of the available literature including the diaries and personal accounts of several of the participants, both in English and the original Norwegian in the case of Amundsen's expedition. In my opinion the difference between the Scott and Amundsen expeditions and their respective failure and success can be summed up in two words: "preparedness" and "attitude". The Norwegians were prepared for the task, whereas the British plainly were not, and "attitude" features prominently in the reasons for the great difference in preparedness. By "preparedness" I don't mean simply the planning and preparations for the expedition, but rather in the entire attitude towards the task in hand and polar exploration in general.
In much of the literature covering the Scott expedition, including the accounts and diaries of the participants, there are numerous somewhat disparaging references to the Norwegians as "The Professionals". This description is apt, but only in the sense that Amundsen and his team had taken the time and effort to acquire the necessary skills to undertake the job.
The Norwegians had two distinct advantages from the outset, by virtue of their race: they were intimately familiar with severe winter conditions, and they were all highly competent skiers. Trygve Gran's assessment of Scott's skiing ability being as good as the average Norwegian differs markedly from Fridtjof Nansen's opinion that a reasonable competency in skiing could only be attained after years of practice, preferably from a very early age, as is the case with most Norwegians even to this day. In addition, one only has to compare Scott's frustration with the skis, which is clearly documented in his diary, with the apparent lack of difficulty experienced by Amundsen and his team. Also, let us not forget that these were not "average" Norwegians, but men who all had considerable experience in traveling in sub-zero winter conditions.
The contrast between the Norwegians' preparation for the journey and the British is so extreme that it is almost laughable, and underscores my contention that one of the principle differences was attitude. Scott was either extremely cavalier in his preparations, relying on good old "British Ingenuity" to pull them through, or he made bad decisions based on faulty assumptions and ignorance. The ignorance is particularly strange as he seems to have failed to learn many of the lessons from his earlier experiences in Antarctica on the Discovery expedition.
I have studied both expeditions fairly extensively, reading much of the available literature including the diaries and personal accounts of several of the participants, both in English and the original Norwegian in the case of Amundsen's expedition. In my opinion the difference between the Scott and Amundsen expeditions and their respective failure and success can be summed up in two words: "preparedness" and "attitude". The Norwegians were prepared for the task, whereas the British plainly were not, and "attitude" features prominently in the reasons for the great difference in preparedness. By "preparedness" I don't mean simply the planning and preparations for the expedition, but rather in the entire attitude towards the task in hand and polar exploration in general.
In much of the literature covering the Scott expedition, including the accounts and diaries of the participants, there are numerous somewhat disparaging references to the Norwegians as "The Professionals". This description is apt, but only in the sense that Amundsen and his team had taken the time and effort to acquire the necessary skills to undertake the job.
The Norwegians had two distinct advantages from the outset, by virtue of their race: they were intimately familiar with severe winter conditions, and they were all highly competent skiers. Trygve Gran's assessment of Scott's skiing ability being as good as the average Norwegian differs markedly from Fridtjof Nansen's opinion that a reasonable competency in skiing could only be attained after years of practice, preferably from a very early age, as is the case with most Norwegians even to this day. In addition, one only has to compare Scott's frustration with the skis, which is clearly documented in his diary, with the apparent lack of difficulty experienced by Amundsen and his team. Also, let us not forget that these were not "average" Norwegians, but men who all had considerable experience in traveling in sub-zero winter conditions.
The contrast between the Norwegians' preparation for the journey and the British is so extreme that it is almost laughable, and underscores my contention that one of the principle differences was attitude. Scott was either extremely cavalier in his preparations, relying on good old "British Ingenuity" to pull them through, or he made bad decisions based on faulty assumptions and ignorance. The ignorance is particularly strange as he seems to have failed to learn many of the lessons from his earlier experiences in Antarctica on the Discovery expedition.