tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6042030196992977344.post2744593100641038900..comments2022-06-18T04:28:12.041+01:00Comments on Hidden Tracks: The graves on Beechey IslandWilliam Battersbyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00452863778733148002noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6042030196992977344.post-76212469867413818512009-03-24T20:29:00.000+00:002009-03-24T20:29:00.000+00:00Thank you for your carefully considered comments. ...Thank you for your carefully considered comments. We really ought to have 'lead' comments under the lead piece of the blog so if I may I'll put my thoughts on your comments there.<BR/><BR/>My point about the biblical quotations is simply that they are very interesting and it surprises me that no-one else has considered them. It is intriguing - no more - that the second quotation COULD imply that the preacher was ill.. Of course in itself this is far too flimsy to be considered as 'evidence'.William Battersbyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00452863778733148002noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6042030196992977344.post-29358260660907088382009-03-24T20:14:00.000+00:002009-03-24T20:14:00.000+00:00My attention was drawn to your 'Blog'(?) by a good...My attention was drawn to your 'Blog'(?) by a good friend. May I make the following comments? Although I emphatically do not agree with everything Professor Potter says, he knows his stuff well enough to be listened to very carefully. I certainly agree that attaching some sort of self-death prophecy to Franklin as a result of a biblical verse on a tombstone is stretching matters somewhat.<BR/><BR/>From my own experience (36 years in the Royal Navy)the biblical quotations mean exactly what they say - and were intended as a warning for the remainder of the ship's companies (not 'crews', please). I can well imagine Franklin wishing to tie improper behaviour in with a subsequent death. It was vital for him to retain a high moral tone amongst his ship's companies. With his own rigid Victorian rectitude as an example, he would have seen any dissolute behaviour amongst his men as an embarrassment to himself as well as them, and is likely to have recorded the fact on their tombstone as a salutary lesson to others.<BR/><BR/>As for the question of lead poisoning. Firstly, Beattie's work was compromised by the selection of evidence he chose (one important member of his Beechey Island visit was with me on my third visit to King William Island). Apparently, much of the measurement came from the hair of the bodies. Lead readings in hair varies along its length. There was a strong rumour circulating among many of Beatie's team that only the portions that showed high lead levels were used for the ultimate lead level measurments - thus warping the whole procedure.<BR/><BR/>You also say that there is no evidence that the meat in the tins was tainted. Please consider the following -<BR/><BR/>1. The tinned food was intended to be used later in the expedition. Unlike expeditions to hotter climates - which varied the tinned food with the salted meat - Franklin had a practically unlimited supply of fresh water in which to prepare the salted meat. His order of victualling would have been, fresh meat, livestock (including birds shot when the opportunity arose), salted meat, tinned food. Yet why were so many cans used early in the expedition?<BR/><BR/>2. There were piles of cans on Beechey Island - ie. early in the expedition. These cans were found close by a 'blacksmith's shop'. This could only mean that the cans were being recycled to provide thin sheets of metal (very valuable as a means of repair), and to extract the lead for use as musket balls or shot. Why were so many cans available so early in the expedition?<BR/><BR/>3. Although a very valuable artifact amongst the Eskimos, very few tins have been found in their possession - or along the route. Why?<BR/><BR/>The answer to the above questions lie in the simple reason that, at some time, probably once they had entered Lancaster Sound, it was discovered that the canned food was almost entirely rotten. The vast majority would have been dumped overboard, some retained for recycling, only a few would have been made available to the native population.<BR/><BR/>Of course, Franklin could have turned back - but I would not have, would you?<BR/><BR/>Although your suggestion that the lead could have come from the heating system used on board is interesting, you appear to have overlooked that fact that lead plumbing was commonly used in England at that time. I do not know whether or not the body can build up a tolerance to lead over time - but millions of people were taking their water from lead pipes, apparently without much harm coming to them. Franklin and his seamen would have been subjected to just the same systems of plumbing.<BR/><BR/>You also say that 'other ship's crews eating similar food did not suffer significant lead poisoning'. How do you know? Do you have examples of other autopsies being carried on other expeditions? I do not know of any. It is very dificult to prove a negative. Furthermore, it must not be forgotten that that men on Beechey Island all died of pneumonia or tuburculosis - not lead poisoning.<BR/><BR/>One thing I must take issue with you. I cannot conceivably imagine that the officer's would have commandeered distilled water for their own use. That is not the RN way, and I cannot believe that Franklin, Crozier, FitzJames, or any of the other officers would have countenance such a thing.<BR/><BR/>Professor Potter is quite right about the use of the phrase 'Commanding the Expedition', FitzJames would have been, to all extents and purposes, captain of the Erebus. Although a Commander, he had commanded his own ship and therefore had the necessary experience. Franklin, on the other hand, was the expedition leader and would have taken little part in the day-to-day running of the ship.<BR/><BR/>There were a few other thing - but as you have by now lost the will to live - I shall draw to a close.<BR/><BR/>Best wishes,<BR/>E C ColemanUnknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05397622081459632906noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6042030196992977344.post-84620255356893141122009-03-24T17:33:00.000+00:002009-03-24T17:33:00.000+00:00"Commanding the Expedition" is not unexpected lang..."Commanding the Expedition" is not unexpected language -- though HMS "Erebus" was Franklin's ship of command, the daily management of the vessel was Fitzjames -- this much is clear in Franklin's original sailing orders from the Admiralty. That he did not sign the Gore papers is indeed unusual, and may be a sign that he was alive but disabled even before this party left the ships. While we're speculating, what this suggests to me is some non-fatal but disabling event such as a stroke. Nevertheless, I'd be reluctant to reason backwards from this fact to the Bible verses chosen for the Beechey headboards more than a year earlier.<BR/><BR/>But even if we allow that the text on the boards was the rubric for a sermon by Sir John, it does not to my mind follow that he saw himself as Joshua, or that the original context of this one line was necessarily his topic. A search of this phrase on Google and Google Books produces dozens and dozens of sermons with this line as their key text, none of them preached by dying men (although the idea of everyone's eventual death and final judgment is certainly present).<BR/><BR/>For example, here is a passage from the Rev. J.S. Baker's Revival Sermons, published in 1847, which contains this very line: <BR/><BR/>"Can you say that you do wait for the Lord more than they who do thus long for the breaking of the day, and the rising of the morning star? You are waiting God's time ? Is this really so? Then, be it thus; but remember, the present is his time, as it is written—" Behold now is the accepted time—behold, now is the day of salvation." And again : "Choose ye this day whom you will serve." And again, "To-day, if you will hear his voice, harden not your hearts." And now my friends, in closing, hear me! O, do attend to what I say! Only a little while, and we shall have done with the scenes of this transitory state—only a little while, and our race will have been run, our probation closed, and our character and destiny sealed for ever."<BR/><BR/>Come to think of it, this sounds very much like the sort of sermon old Sir John might very well have preached!Russell Potterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11023313195827310776noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6042030196992977344.post-79503736660353562472009-03-24T17:12:00.000+00:002009-03-24T17:12:00.000+00:00Russell,I hope I have been sufficiently careful to...Russell,<BR/><BR/>I hope I have been sufficiently careful to separate fact from speculation. The facts are that there were Biblical texts written on the two Erebus graves, and that these have not been considered up to now as having any possible meaning. It may be that there is more information to be gleaned from them. For example, they seem to show a difference of approach in man management between Franklin (and Fitzjames) and Crozier, which was already apparent before the ships left Greenland.<BR/><BR/>I suggest it is very likely that a sermon or address was preached around the texts on the other two graves, though that is not certain of course. Discussing what the content of those sermons might have been is definitely speculative. But I see no harm in speculation, given that we have so little hard evidence and provided we don't build speculations on speculations.<BR/><BR/>As far as Franklin suffering from a lengthy illness is concerned, I'd suggest there are several pointers that he might have done. He personally signed the note which was thrown overboard on July 1845, as Captain of HMS Erebus, but he did not sign the similar papers which Gore deposited on KIng William Island in 1847. Instead they were not signed at all. Fitzjames (presumably) simply completed them with the wording 'Sir John Franklin commanding the Expedition' in place of a signature. If Sir John was fit and well at that point, why would he not have signed them? And '... commanding the Expedition' is a slightly strange wording too, because it avoids mentioning who was in effective command of Erebus. That might have been a thorny issue if Franklin was disabled but not prepared to admit he was no longer in control. All this suggests that maybe his death was not instant, as it would be if he was eaten by a Polar Bear or choked on a Gin and Tonic. <BR/><BR/>All I really wanted to do with this thread was show that the graves were an example of potentially important material which has been known about for a long time but neglected. There are other examples.<BR/><BR/>Why not one of us start a thread on speculating what killed Franklin?William Battersbyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00452863778733148002noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6042030196992977344.post-29097776424143872222009-03-24T12:39:00.000+00:002009-03-24T12:39:00.000+00:00You're assuming Franklin died of a lengthy illness...You're assuming Franklin died of a lengthy illness. He could possibly have died from an injury as well, or a more sudden event such as a stroke or a heart attack. If he were really gravely ill enough for the crews to know about it and anticipate his demise, it would be remarkable for him to linger on for more than an entire year to June of 1847! <BR/><BR/>On the other hand, it is worth noting that the marker from HMS Terror had no Biblical verse -- you are surely right that this reflects a difference between the two ships' commanders, a point not made before, so far as I'm aware.Russell Potterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11023313195827310776noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6042030196992977344.post-83035314524124025882009-03-23T17:19:00.000+00:002009-03-23T17:19:00.000+00:00Thanks chaps. Yes, this IS speculation, but that'...Thanks chaps. <BR/><BR/>Yes, this IS speculation, but that's what's blogs are for. I would not write this up as a formal academic paper (if anyone would publish it).<BR/><BR/>Nonetheless I find it surprising that no-one has previously looked for the meaning in these texts, and of course at SOME stage whatever illness killed Franklin must have become apparent.William Battersbyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00452863778733148002noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6042030196992977344.post-24075413441528125262009-03-23T17:01:00.000+00:002009-03-23T17:01:00.000+00:00I agree with much of your conjecture, and especial...I agree with much of your conjecture, and especially with your argument against too much conjecture. Which is just why I think that there's no evidence in Braine's inscription for the idea of a terminally ill Franklin. While the narrative context of the verse is material to understanding why it was selected, the epitaph was for Braine, not for Franklin, and the speaker of these lines (assuming Franklin gave the elegy) would not necessarily be, or be seen as, re-enacting their original context. There is a hint, though, that as Braine was a Royal Marine, that perhaps he was involved in some kind of altercation -- but this, too, is impossible to establish on such slight evidence.Russell Potterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11023313195827310776noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6042030196992977344.post-54469364032846212492009-03-23T15:25:00.000+00:002009-03-23T15:25:00.000+00:00William,All quite fascinating and tremendous food ...William,<BR/><BR/>All quite fascinating and tremendous food for thought!<BR/><BR/>GlennUnknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18444179164443280916noreply@blogger.com