UKC

100 years ago today they vanished into the clouds. Did they? Didn't they? I incline to the latter.

They did it.

The last sighting was 8 June 1924 (not 8 May), so it's not 100 years just yet.

How can we ever know? Wasn't it Conrad Anker that found Mallory's body on the Chinese side of the mountain? I never saw that documentary

I remember the initial reports about Holding and Anker's ascent being very negative about the likelihood of Mallory and Irvine having climbed the Second Step. Then when the documentary came out it was far, far more positive about their chances. 

Mystery sells.

Odell saw them going strongly for the top. 

His goggles were in his pocket. 

The letter to his wife, that he said he would leave on the summit, was not in his pocket. 

Most deaths occur on the way down.

He was very fit and very determined.

They did it.

Just typed all this out before realising you beat me to it. The circumstantial evidence is compelling. I think I recall Leo Houlding (?) recreating the ascent of the Second Step and being quite sceptical about whether Mallory (with a max lead grade of HVSish) could lead a mixed rock and ice HVS at nearly 30,000 with an inexperienced second. I guess head says no, but heart says I hope so - given we'll never know I'd rather believe they did it and one of them slipped while roped together on the way down.

The evidence you give does not support the level of certainty you evince.

Maybe they did and maybe they didn't is all that can be said at this point and possibly ever.

Mallory and Irvine did not go via the Second Step.  That was never their intention.

Could you explain a bit more? My understanding was that this was basically an unavoidable feature, hence why it ended up with a ladder etc. 

there's a new book out soon featuring his letters to family and friends

my hunch is they didn't make it, but possibly could have if the weather was more clement. taking the inexperienced Irvine was also unwise

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13387421/british-mountaineers-vani...

By Jove! You're right! 😂 I'm going batty in my old age, or perhaps the Welsh sun has addled my wits. Carry on all, nothing see here... 

Didn't Norton and Somervell traverse below it? 

Anyway, despite being a month early, I'm sure UKC can argue the matter for a month.

I must admit the barometric argument seems quite convincing. But, I would like to imagine they made it. Ed Hillary apparently hoped he was second up. 

Yes agreed. I read a something about this a while back (pretty sure that it was the Graham Hoyland book) where they looked at their kit, their level of skill, route etc and the feeling was that if the conditions were absolutely perfect they could have made it.

But, through very through research, we now believe that the conditions on that day were far from perfect, and my feeling is they just couldn’t have made it with those atmospheric conditions. 

Sadly, I always believed they made it till I read that book, but now I’m utterly convinced they didn’t.

The book is excellent by the way.

Yes, it's a great book, and pushed me to the no side too. Currently reading Mick Conefrey's new one, Fallen. I think Graham's written a new one? And let's not forget Wade Davis. The 'romantic' angle on that period is so misleading. It can't be interpreted without the War. And Mallory didn't even want to go in 1924.

Since its the last one I read I am currently convinced they didnt. I suspect there will be a counter one soon which will get me to switch back.

Short of the camera being found and the film being usable we are never going to know though.

I always thought it crazy that they couldn't find Irvine's body. There's a belief he may have been carrying a camera, which, if found may contain summit photos proving once and for all if they made the summit. The terrain where Mallory's body was located looked steepish but even: could Irvine's body be around that area too? 

It has been suggested the Chinese found Irvine's body years ago.  

am I the only one who likes the mystery? I'd much rather never know the truth to be honest

All this stuff is debated at length now on Facebook and YouTube. It's got a bit out of hand really, escalated quite a lot in recent years and sometimes quite vitriolic.

The issue of the Chinese possibly finding the camera (in a museum but the film ruined) and/or Irvine's body (tossed off the ridge) has made it all flare up again.

Look up 'Mallory and Irvine Appreciation Society' on Facebook or Thom Dharma Pollard's YouTube channel or Mark Synnott's book from a few years back.

Yes, M&I would probably have tried to traverse under the 2S, as without the ladder it's quite hard. Conrad climbed it almost free (estimated approx 5.9) but stepped on a piece of pro as a hand jam was blocked with gear. Though Oscar Cadiach had freed it years before Conrad, or Leo, got there. Either way, Conrad reckons Mallory didn't summit.

Something tells me that the Chinese wouldn't share evidence that they made it to the top if it exists.

Wasn't there somehting about Mallory saying he would collect rocks form the highest point he reached? Did he have any on his body. If he did could these shed any light of his highest point? Not sure where I heard this, could be nonsense.

I think the lack of his photograph of his wife Ruth that he promised to bury on the summit is the only very tenuous tangible evidence, it not being found on his body. He was fairly renowned as a scatterbrain. 

The 1975 Chinese expedition tales are too obscure to draw conclusions from at present imo. 

Odell originally believed he had seen them on the Second Step, or possibly even the Third Step (he described it as "the prominent rock-step at a very short distance from the base of the final pyramid", which suggests the latter). He later doubted this, but later still reverted to his original opinion.

To say Mallory couldn't have climbed the Second Step because he could "only" climb HVS is modern thinking. HVS doesn't mean much these days, but back then it was at the top level, and Mallory was one of the best rock climbers of his generation.  The Second Step is the last of the major technical difficulties. Odell's last sighting was at 12:50 so if they had passed the Second Step they still had several hours of daylight to complete the ascent.

When his body was found Mallory's goggles were in his pocket, suggesting he was descending in darkness. This suggests they had gone some considerable distance from where they were last seen. If they had been turned back at the Second Step then surely they would have been descending in daylight.  It is therefore possible they were descending from the summit.

The drop in atmospheric pressure may have caused conditions which contributed to their deaths. However they were using oxygen (until that ran out) and so may not have been affected until after they had summitted. This helps explain their deaths, but does not rule out them having summited.

For me, the most convincing evidence, albeit still circumstantial, is that the photo of his wife, which he had promised to leave on the summit, was missing.  Of course it is also possible this was lost in the fall.

Until uncontrovertible evidence turns up, which now seems unlikely, it is all speculation. However for me the balance of probablilities leans towards Mallory and Irvine having reached the summit.  Whether this can be considered a successful ascent, since they did not survive, is another matter. Hillary and Tenzing not only reached the top but came down again.

As I understand it...confusion abounds around what is meant by "The Second Step".  The one Odell was refering to is not the same as the one given that term now.  He could not have seen that from where he was.  he is referring to obstacles near the foot of the summit pyramid. 

There are so many other reasons why he might have put his goggles in his pocket that it just seems ridiculous to offer it as evidence that they summited.

Which suggests they had already passed the Second Step with its technical difficulties. From there it seems very possible they would have pushed for the summit, come what may.

In reply to DaveHK:

Of course none of this is evidence, just pointers. None of it proves anything, and probably nothing can be proven (unless the camera and film were to be found). 

I thought the general consent was that, given the timing, etc, it is extremely unlikely that they got beyond the Second Step, and very likely that it was the Second Step that stopped them. Then, in a very tired condition - it’s a very long ridge - they slipped on the descent, while still roped up (broken rope attached to Mallory’s waist, IIRC).

Ask any experienced cop, eyewitnesses are so unreliable as to be almost useless. It's thought he reverted for others reasons. Also, it's now postulated as feasible that he saw them at another point entirely, if he did even see them at all.

At 8200m, in 1924, I think that's as irrelevant as if someone asked, "If he was so good, then why did he die there?". Anyway, Norton made no such pronouncements about skill and he got higher, without O2, and lived.

Or he took them off in the fog that obscured Odell's view. Or, other things...

Better equipped and more experienced people die up there all the time for various reasons that have nothing to do with changes in air pressure. This is the kind of grasping at red herrings you can find in excuses for RFScott leading his men to death in 1912. The known, real and obvious reasons already proven are deadly enough.

It's also possible he never took it up there anywhere, for any number of reasons.

Very much so.

However for me the balance of probablilities leans towards Mallory and Irvine having reached the summit. 

I hope you're not a gambling man.

Whether this can be considered a successful ascent, since they did not survive, is another matter. 

Well from a record-keeping perspective I can assure you that if there is evidence that someone reaches a summit then it's recorded as a successful summit, regardless of what happens afterwards. Death on descent does not alter the historical and geographical fact that the person stood on the summit. Broader personal definitions of 'success' are another matter.

as others have pointed out, the goggles in the pocket doesn’t really point to anything. It’s a huge leap to say this means they summited and were ascending in darkness.  It’s just one of dozens of explanations.

Read the book mentioned up thread, it takes in all the evidence and puts forward what I think is the most plausible sequence of events.  Involves a dropped ice axe, a fall, Mallory and Irvine being separated (Irvine probably dead), Mallory crawling with broken leg until he perished at his final resting place. Truly horrific to be honest. 

12.50 at the second step would be a major argument against them summiting for me.  Modern day hiding companies will normally have a 1pm turnaround time as they know any later than this and you run tube rails of a being benighted, or having to bivi.

Mallory would have known how much daylight was remaining, and how much climbing was left and turned round. Even he wouldn’t have wanted to be on Everest at night dressed in tweeds and plus fours!

Apologies for broken English. Typed on phone between sets at the gym. Think it’s still legible?!

In this case 'the balance of probabilities' means that considering the evidence for and against it's more likely that they made it than didn't.

There's quite a bit of evidence to suggest it's unlikely that they made it, a long way to go with some difficult climbing and perhaps insufficient daylight, probably some bad weather, nobody saw them above the 2nd step, no photos. None of that is a total clincher obviously but as climbers we can see that these things are very real barriers to success.

The evidence for seems to me to be of a very different nature to the extent that it just looks like clutching at straws.

By all means be a romantic and hold on to a hope that they made it but let's be honest about the evidence.

Edit: apologies for the many edits on this post, I realised I hadn't expressed myself a clearly as I wanted.

just received a copy of this

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Letters-Everest-Unpublished-Mallorys-Mountains/dp/...

Is it good? Halfway through Mick Conefrey's book at present. 

Don't know about Mallory and Irvine, but doing some reading while stranded waiting for a train as it's the norm, the one thing that stood out was...

Norton!

Dropped his tea in the morning so stayed in bed till he brewed another one like a proper english man, and was fashionably late. Headed out traversing across the North face, and when his partner turned back he carried on solo, route finding across an unexplored face at >8000m. He then soloed most of the Norton couloir till he decided to turn back at 8,572.8m, 280m below the summit.

With no oxygen!

Solo, with no oxygen, new routing, higher up a mountain than anybody ever was, to 8,572.8m in 1924!

For context, the first time somebody was higher than him with no o2 was Messner/Habeler, in 1978, 54 years later, wearing 'modern' gear, etc.

The  first time somebody was higher than him solo, was Messner in 1980, also up the Norton couloir.

What a wad.

Mallory rated Geoffrey Bruce as 'the fittest of the lot' on the 1924 expedition..

letters published here. i like this..

https://magdalene.maxarchiveservices.co.uk/index.php/sonnet

The real shame was the fact that George Finch was blackballed by the MEC because of his German accent, (or as dep. leader Col.Strutt would have complained, was not from the right school), but was undoubtably the best mountaineer on Everest in the 1920s. He was a very skilled snow & ice climber, more so than Mallory as his alpine record suggests. He was an oxygen expert both in terms of the science and his engineering skill-set. And finally his performance in the hyperbaric chamber back in London, he would even have out performed Norton. The complimentary  balance of Mallory and Finch, one a rock expert, and the other with ice climbing skills would have made for an unstoppable team.

The counter argument is that any team of that era was ultimately destined to failure which meant that Finch wouldn't have lived until the age of 82 and not achieved any of his academic achievements. 

Finch was born a couple of hours from me here in Australia, his dad was a local official in my town, and is arguably the inventor of the down jacket. Interesting bloke (maybe not if you were his first two wives! ) 

Oh, it doesn't let me "biggerise" it as my partner says, but she has a laptop so I'll read through that archive next week. Thanks. 

I remember reading Finch’s ‘The Making of a Mountaineer’ years ago, an unusually impressive mountaineering book for its time. I don’t know where it is now - perhaps I never owned it but it was in the school library. Anyhow, the whole book may be seen on-line under Project Gutenberg. (https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/69128/pg69128-images.html) It has many very interesting black and white photos, including an impressive shot of the Zmutt Nose of the Matterhorn.

This is the opening of the preface, giving you an idea of Finch’s concise, ‘no-nonsense’ style:

"Man’s heritage is great. There are the mountains; he may climb them. Mountaineering is a game second only to the greatest and best of all man’s games — life.
"The War all but dried up the steady stream of youthful and enthusiastic devotees who kept alive and fresh the pursuit of mountain-craft. But fresh blood is as essential to the healthy life of mountaineering as it is to any other game, craft or pursuit, and, fortunately, there are cheerful signs that the after-effects of the War are fast becoming spent. Our youth is beginning to find the dancing floor, the tennis court and the playing fields of Great Britain too narrow, too lacking in scope, perhaps also a little bit too soft; and the craving grows for wider fields and a sterner, freer pastime."

Norton was extraordinary. Somervell too. The mother-not-in-law gave me a book called Norton of Everest. A little bit of a hagiography, but put their attempt into perspective. 

And Finch... Who knows? Maybe they'd have "knocked the bastard off," or maybe Odell would have strolled to the summit with his hands in his pockets, whistling a tune. So many "what ifs" which is why it's a subject that will probably never go away. 

IIRC, at the time, the expedition members thought that Mallory & Irvine had reached the summit and this success was reported in the press.  Doubt only crept in later.

What Norton did, without oxygen, was extraordinary.  Why shouldn't M&I, with oxygen, exceed what Norton achieved a few days earlier?

I don't think that was the case. A system of blankets had been arranged to aid communication between high camps and lower camps, with the blankets being laid out in one arrangement to indicate success, and another arrangement to indicate failure. The latter arrangement was laid and seen at lower camps. This is clearly seen in the film of the expedition: 

https://www2.bfi.org.uk/news-opinion/bfi-film-releases/epic-everest

The X sign (meaning ‘no trace/ no hope’) they used by laying out blankets can be seen here:

https://axeoneverest.com/2011/03/28/communicating-from-mt-everest/

Academic really as Maurice Wilson summited before them

I was at Everest Base Camp trekking the day they discovered Mallory's body

That signal is about M&I being lost isn't it?

Yes. It was made while Odell was still high on the mountain at Camp VI. Given that communication with the outside world was via mail runners, I don't see how anything could have been reported in the press until some time later. 

For a very interesting perspective on the Mallory summit debate I would recommend watching Michael Tracey's series of videos breaking down his theory on what happened. There's a series of videos he uses to build his case and it's quite compelling.

https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLAogaA2i6jZt2RfgXJmw-bo1z6E2nKxfY&si...

It Mainly revolves around Mallory not taking the ridge route but following Norton's route and carrying on where Norton was forced back due to time and being solo by then.

It's not a perfect theory but he highlights a lot of groundless assumptions made by past author's on the subject and backs this up with good sources and data.

​​​​​

For me that is the problem. Whilst some authors/opinions clearly have about as much expertise as me and hence should be filed in the round cabinet there doesnt seem to be any real consensus between those who are better informed.

I do hope Irving and especially the camera(s) are found which might answer the question.

Although I have no personal interest or knowledge of this topic, I do remember many years ago the late Ray Colledge, who I knew, told me that in his opinion they never summitted. And Ray knew quite a lot about this, the mountains and the people from personal experience.

John Gresty

The testimony of Odell is important here. One thing often overlooked is that Odell was a geologist, used and trained  to look at, and describe accurately, rocks and rock formations. In that sense he should be regarded as a reliable witness...  So ybes, not impossible, and actually fairly probable, that they summitted. 

The entry that Norton has in his log (his report of the Odell sighting) was

"...going strong about the final step before the pyramid."

Whereas Odell's own report has:

"At 12.50, just after I had emerged from a state of jubilation at finding the first definite fossils on Everest, there was a sudden clearing of the atmosphere, and the entire summit ridge and final peak of Everest were unveiled. My eyes became fixed on one tiny black spot silhouetted on a small snow-crest beneath a rock-step in the ridge; the black spot moved. Another black spot became apparent and moved up the snow to join the other on the crest. The first then approached the great rock-step and shortly emerged at the top; the second did likewise. Then the whole fascinating vision vanished, enveloped in cloud once more."

So with no mention of 1st, 2nd or 3rd Step, or Final Step. It is not clear why Norton made reference to the final step. 

Somewhat undermined by his own concession that it might have been the first step, rather than the second step. 

Because that is what Odell told him?

AIUI, Odell lost the notes he made at the time.  Is that wrong?