Left: George Mallory and Andrew Irvine © RGS/The Sandy Irvine Trust, from "Ghosts of Everest" ; Right: 1924 North Face locations © Pete Poston

Mount Everest:
The Mystery of Mallory and Irvine's Fate
[News][Intro][News Websites ][Research Expeditions][Historians & Climbers]
[Societies][Geology][Photoanalysis][Routes & Maps][Video and Books]


Celebrating my 50th birthday on pitch 3 of Prodigal Son, Zion National Park, Utah.

This page maintained by Pete Poston, a Professor of Chemistry at Western Oregon University. You can access his academic homepage here.



NEWS: [top]

Fall 2009

  • Tom Holzel has sent me a rebuttal to my criticisms of his recent theories. Here is the original criticism and his point-by-point response:

    My main critiques of Holzel's latest theories are, (1) he has Mallory leaving Irvine behind at the 1st Step while taking Irvine's oxygen on a solo attempt. This is a blatant disregard of Irvine's known lack of mountaineering skills, where no responsible alpinist would ever leave such an individual behind, especially given the unsettled weather, (2) he continues to ignore Xu Jing's repeated statements that he saw Irvine on the Ridge, not on the face below, (3) he has Irvine's body pointing straight up the mountain when the testimony is he was "facing" Everest, i.e, pointing towards the summit, and (4) Mallory downclimbs the slippery tiers of the Yellow Band, only to re-emerge at the top of the Snow Terrace, whereby an out of control glissade crashes him into the rocks above his final resting place. Holzel then claims this is when he breaks his leg and receives the fatal head wound.

    (5) Holzel is a great believer in "Occum's Razor", that is, the simplest explanantion is the best. I think he's giving Occum shortshrift here, and I have to wonder that if the simplest explanation is the best, then why has there been such a large number of changes to his theories over the years? The facts haven't changed all that much.

    And here is Tom's response:

1. The First Step is a flat, safe, loitering place that climbers can mill around at, with no terrain danger whatever. Their C-6 is probably visible from that spot and a solo return (in good weather) would be uneventful for Irvine.

2. Yes, I do. Such is the exegese of assembling a lot of factoids and having to winnow-out the ones that are contradictory to construct an organic narrative. This is the most difficult part of synthesis.

3. As I understand Xu’s description, Irvine’s feet were pointing toward the summit, so at least that is pointing upward. My “bowling pin object” --a hard datum--certainly looks like a body with its feet pointing upward (but to the left instead of to the right). Again, close enough for government work.

4. So? Is there any other way to explain how he got to where he is with that awful broken foot?

5. Ah-ha! Changes suggesting a weakening of the faith. The answer to all sleuthers is that one refines one's theory as new facts (or new understanding of the facts) arise. The main new fact was the rope jerk injury around Mallory’s waist, and the main new understanding was the analysis of what Mallory’s broken foot must mean. (see “the Deaths of Mallory & Irvine—A Time Line” at the bottom of: http://www.velocitypress.com/CopyIrvine.shtml.

There is one factoid that still troubles me--Xu's statement that he saw Irvine to his right. This type of memory is qualitative and much less subject to memory faults than where, exactly Xu thinks he remembers seeing the body. And that position relative to a descending Xu either means I am wrong, or Xu was perhaps zig-zagging a bit in his descent to momentarily but Irvine to Xu's right.

  • Download the free Google Earth 5.0 program, and download my Mystery of Mallory an Irvine's Fate tour where I describe my theory of what happened to them on that fateful day. You can either download the file to your hard drive, and then open it in Google Earth, or open it with your web browser.

To run the tour, look in your Temporary Places folder at the bottom of the lefthand pane. Click on the plus (+) sign next to "Theory.kml", followed by clicking next to "Mallory & Irvine Theory Poston". If you can't see any routes, figures, contour lines, etc overlayed on the picture of the North Face of Everest - then make sure that you have also selected the check boxes, too. Finally, double click the little video camera icon labeled "M&I Tour" to run the presentation. Turn your speakers on too, since there is audio commentary.

When the presentation gets to the descent, you might have to click the check boxes next to "Position 1", "Position 2", etc in order to see the figures. For some reason they don't show up automatically sometimes, even though I recorded the tour that way.

Right now it's a very rough presentation, but you'll get the gist of the theory. Here's a screenshot of what the opening display should look like. Enjoy!

  • Tom Holzel has posted on MountEverest.net a new "final timeline" of the movements of Mallory & Irvine. He also has discovered an important new clue about the old body Xu Jing saw in 1960. In a 1965 talk in Russia by a Chinese member of the 1960 expedition, Irvine was described as wearing "braces", which is a British term for suspenders. If true, then seeing these suspenders certainly seems to contradict Xu Jing's description of the body being completely inside a sleeping bag.

    This revelation also seems to indicate that the Chinese know a lot more about the body than has been released.

    I find it ironic that Holzel no longer has Mallory and Irvine separating at the top of the 2nd Step, while Mallory takes Irvine's oxygen and makes a dash for the summit, but Hemmleb does! Now in his latest book, Hemmleb "wishes" to show that Irvine huddles in the "shelter" of the boulders strewn on the plateau above the 2nd Step, while Mallory gallantly struggles on as far as the 3rd Step (presumably to make the summit but Hemmleb stops short of that. Must not stick your neck out too far, now, and make a stand).

    And Hemmleb doesn't even mention this was originally Holzel's idea!

    My main critiques of Holzel's latest theories are, (1) he has Mallory leaving Irvine behind at the 1st Step while taking Irvine's oxygen on a solo attempt. This is a blatant disregard of Irvine's known lack of mountaineering skills, where no responsible alpinist would ever leave such an individual behind, especially given the unsettled weather, (2) he continues to ignore Xu Jing's repeated statements that he saw Irvine on the Ridge, not on the face below, (3) he has Irvine's body pointing straight up the mountain when the testimony is he was "facing" Everest, i.e, pointing towards the summit, and (4) Mallory downclimbs the slippery tiers of the Yellow Band, only to re-emerge at the top of the Snow Terrace, whereby an out of control glissade crashes him into the rocks above his final resting place. Holzel then claims this is when he breaks his leg and receives the fatal head wound.

    Holzel is a great believer in "Occum's Razor", that is, the simplest explanantion is the best. I think he's giving Occum shortshrift here, and I have to wonder that if the simplest explanation is the best, then why has there been such a large number of changes to his theories over the years? The facts haven't changed all that much.

    Based on the "body on the ridge" scenario, I personally believe that after the fall at the ice ax site, Irvine continued on alone, but missed the spot where they reached the Ridge, and contined along the ridge to his final resting place by the "Exit Cracks". Then Mallory - who slid and fell down the face to a lower elevation - with his painful rope-jerk injuries to his ribs - descended and contoured his way over to their ascent route - the "Climber's Gully" that breaches the lower tiers of the Yellow Band. Why would Mallory take an unknown route down the very steep and dangerous Yellow Band as Holzel maintains, when Mallory knew of an easier way down?

    It's while descending the steeper and more slippery lower part of the Climber's Gully - in the blinding sleet and snow - that I believe Mallory slipped and fell to his death. It's during the slip when he broke his leg as he tumbled down the bottom of the route, funneling him to his final resting place. I agree that his fatal head wound was suffered on the rock outcrops above his grave. Irvine, higher up and more exposed to the elements, possibily with his own debilitating injuries, perished from exposure.

    I think this theory is much simpler than Holzel's, with his invention of a glissade down the Snow terrace with no evidence to support it. I think he's relying on the EverestNews.com interview of Xu Jing that mentions the discovery of a "foreign" ice axe near Mallory's body, but this statement has not held up according to Hemmleb, given to me in a personal communication last year.

Summer 2009

  • Read a new interview of Jochen Hemmleb where he talks about his new book. It's nice to see him backing off the sleeping bag theory, even making the case that Xu Jing must have mistakenly identified decaying clothing as the remains of a bag. I should point out the person who originally noticed the extra bags on Mallory's provisions list was a researcher named Bill Lougheed, not the Australian researcher given attribution in the book. Lougheed had sense enough not to take it to extremes and suggest they were going to bivvy in them. Hemmleb agrees and points out that the Australian was taking it too far. Nevertheless, he still includes it in the book for some reason.

    Many researchers over the years have complained how Hemmleb never responds to their emails. And yet Hemmleb makes remarks about "hindering research" in the interview. I also know of one very prominent researcher who sent a copy of his latest theory for review that Hemmleb didn't even bother to respond to.

    One wonders what promoting research would be. In my case it was sharing everything I knew, being offered co-authorship of the 2nd ed. of Detectives on Everest several years ago (which is what Tatort is), then not being co-author, then offered a spot on a search, and then being left out of the search.

    Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Let that be a warning to the rest of you researchers out there.
  • I was surprised to read in "Tatort Mount Everest: Der Fall Mallory" about my discovery of rust stains on the face of Mallory's altimeter. I had written an article about them back in 2002, but to be honest, after reflecting on it further, I didn't believe my conclusion that the rust mark that matched the elevation of ice ax site to within 100' (30 meters) was corroborating evidence that the fatal fall really did occur there.

    I'm still not sure about it because there was probably only one hand on the altimeter like earlier Cary altimeters, and so once the hand rusted and broke apart, the two corresponding rust marks should have occured in random locations. Hemmleb asks if it's just coincidence that one of them roughly corresponds to the ax site, as I did in 2002, so I'll leave it to the reader to decide. Like the watch time discussed below, it really is very intriguing.

    It's also interesting that, like the watch crystal, the altimeter glass was missing and no fragments of either were found in Mallory's pocket. So I'm open to the idea of a "mini-fall" at the ax site during the afternoon blizzard, breaking the glass in the altimeter (and maybe the watch). One or both of the climbers could have been injured in this mini-fall, perhaps setting the stage for the final fatal fall lower down in the Yellow Band. This assumes that Xu Jing and Chhiring Dorje's sightings aren't true, a consideration I don't discount.

    This idea was mentioned in a five-part series of articles written by Hemmleb and me back in 2004, but not given attribution in his new book. These articles can be found on MountEverest.net here: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5.

    Of course, this means if Xu Jing or Chhiring Dorje really did see an old body on the NE Ridge at over 8400 meters, then you could argue that Irvine remained at the ax site just below the ridge crest, and Mallory vanished from sight in the driving snow and mist below, only to suffer a final, fatal fall near the bottom of the Yellow Band. Irvine could then have continued along the Ridge to his final resting place. The major flaw in all this is I can't imagine Irvine leaving his mate and not climbing down to look for him. This scenario is similar to Tom Holzel's recent theory, except he theorizes both climbers slipped off of the Ridge onto the Face below, where he has photographically identified a body further down the Face he believes is Irvine. Scroll down further to find links to his latest thinking.

  • In Jochen Hemmleb's new book "Tatort Mount Everest: Der Fall Mallory", he writes the following about Mallory's watch:

    "Auf der einzigen Aufnahme, die Uhr unmittelbar nach der Bergung zeigt, deutet der von Rost bereits teilweise aufgeloste Stundenzeiger auf eine Zeit kurz nach 1 Uhr. Die Position des Zeigerstumpfs auf spateren Laboraufnahmen weist auf eine Zeit kurz vor 1 Uhr. Der Stumpf des Minutenzeigers zeigt auf 52 oder 53."

    Translation:

    "On the only image of the watch immediately after being recovered, the partially de-rusted hour hand points to a little after one o'clock. On later laboratory examination, the position of the hand stub shows to be a bit before one o'clock. The stub of the of the minute hand points to 52 or 53 [minutes]."

    In other words, the watch appears to have stopped at the time of Odell's sighting, 12:50 PM, a very intriguing possibility.

    As also written in "Ghosts of Everest", he states that the watch mechanism was not broken, and wasn't fully wound down either. A slight bump or pressure on the watch and it started ticking again, after lying for 75 years in Mallory's pocket on the frozen North Face of Mount Everest.

    Hemmleb's suggested interpretation is that because Mallory wore his watch on his left hand, with the face pointing inwards rather than outwards, that perhaps Mallory broke the watch in the 2nd Step offwidth when Odell allegedly saw them there at 12:50 PM.

    I say allegedly because Odell later changed his mind to the 1st Step. And it's very clear that the 2nd Step can not be climbed in only 5 minutes. This is not to say Mallory couldn't have climbed it given that Anker and Houlding have rated the pitch at 5.9. It's just extremely unikely that the little snow patch below the crux pitch was where Odell saw them - it's hardly a place where a climber would "approach the step on a snow crest" and then "emerge shortly thereafter" on top. Also, wouldn't a climber first examine it very carefully before launching up it without protection? And wouldn't you stop and take off the oxygen apparatus first, taking even more time?

    All of these arguments also apply if they tried a shoulder stand, a technique commonly employed at the time.

    The irony is that Hemmleb himself has written on MountEverest.net that it's "inconceivable that this was the same snow crest or slope where Noel Odell last saw Mallory and Irvine"!

    So, further criticism --

    First of all, Thom Pollard's article about the watch on Everestnews.com shows a picture of the watch before the hour hand broke off, where it appears to be more than a "little" past 1 PM. It's possible that the hand was bent since it wasn't protected by the crystal, so I'm looking into that further.

    Secondly, why does it have to be the 2nd Step? Hemmleb admits only a slight shock would stop the watch from running and pop off the watch crystal. Why couldn't it have been while climbing the 1st Step?

    By not mentioning this possibility, Hemmleb is revealing a subjective bias where he is doing his best to put Mallory and Irvine on the summit. This is especially revealing when later on he criticizes Conrad Anker for being biased in his rating of the difficulty of climbing the 2nd Step! Has Hemmleb also free-climbed the 2nd Step? And based on Hemmleb's own change of mind documented above, isn't this another indication he's also biased? I think there's a stronger case here than with Anker's change of mind after repeating the climb.

    The nice thing is, if the watch did stop at the time of Odell's sighting, then that would forever put an end to speculation that Odell saw rocks instead of climbers as he vigorously maintained throughout his life.
  • I have to admit that I've had a change of attitude towards Jochen Hemmleb lately after reading some of the fanciful stuff in his latest book, and after he reneged on his offer to include me in his recent search, telling me that he'd let me know while planning all along to exclude me (see below). I admit to a certain amount of "sour grapes" here, and I've definitely lost all respect for him as a person, but I've lost a lot of respect for the man's credibility as a researcher too, for that matter. Here's why.

    He actually believes that there are ways to obtain knowledge beyond science, and quotes a "medium" that contacted him about Mallory and Irvine by email in 2005. Believe it or not, he actually gives this credibility! I suggest that Hemmleb purchase a Ouija Board or call the "Psychic Hotline" to contact the medium, and I'm sure that the location of Irvine will be immediately revealed.

    He also has sunk to new lows lending credence to the idea that an extra sleeping bag or bags was taken on summit day, despite the well-documented facts that Mallory intended to make a quick and light dash for the summit. Can you imagine the conversation he would have had with Norton when they discussed his oxygen-assisted summit attempt? "Right, Teddy, we're going to take sleeping bags to bivvy in, three bottles of oxygen each, and go for it!" After a moment of shocked silence, Norton's reply would undoubtedly have been, "What? Are you bloody mad?"

    Norton himself understood that every ounce counted - even limiting the number of nails in his boots to save weight. And as for the idea of spending a night out in the open when Mallory's stated intention in his notes to Noel and Odell was to evacuate to at least Camp VI by nightfall? Ludicrous.

    Besides, why would Mallory's provisions list have listed sleeping bags AND mattresses if they were planning a bivvy? Please don't tell me it's because they thought of it at Camp VI. If anything, the weight issue would have been even more pronounced there.

  • Based on Hemmleb's 2008 interview of Xu Jing and new details of the route Chhiring Dorje took in 1995 when he saw his own old body, Tom Holzel has posted on his webpage an update to his recent theory of where to look for Irvine (to see the original article that appeared on Mounteverest.net, go to the links in the Spring 2009 section below).
  • Jochen Hemmleb has a new book out (in German only so far) updating new discoveries and theories since "Detectives on Everest" came out in 2001. The title is "Tatort Mount Everest: Der Fall Mallory" (Crime Scene Mount Everest: The Mallory Case), and is available from Amazon.de. You can read these English teasers on Hemmleb's website.

    In the new book Hemmleb announces that the search he had planned for this Spring was canceled because the Chinese aren't issuing high-altitude filming permits.

    So this makes a total of at least three searches I know of that were cancelled this year! Another involved Chhiring Dorje Sherpa and Eric Meyer, but the funding fell through apparently as explained in this article in the Denver Post. This is significant because Chhiring Dorje is the Sherpa EverestNews.com hired in 2004 to search for an old body that Chhiring claims to have seen in 1995.

    I was originally offered a chance to go on Hemmleb's search, but I ended up for some reason being totally excluded, even after making significant contributions and serving as an important source of information over the years, freely given (read the book!). I wasn't even given the courtesy of an explanantion why Hemmleb changed his mind, which indicates to me that my usefullness as a source of information was over. It's absolutely contemptible to be taken advantage of that way, something that's happened to me in the past, but that's the way people operate in this business. Some people will take from you, but do not give back.

    In his new book Hemmleb refers to me as his "amerikanische Kollege". Yeah, right.

  • I've changed my mind about Theo Fritsche's claim that he free-climbed the Second Step back in 2001 because of a lack of proof. Earlier I had written an article on Mounteverest.net questioning Anker's claim of the first free ascent, which ignited a firestorm of articles taking Anker to task on this. I really regret this, so I submitted the following editorial to the Alpinist, and I hope they print my sincere apology and retraction--

    Dear Editor,

    In 2007 Conrad Anker and Leo Houlding achieved the remarkable feat of free-climbing the Second Step on the Northeast Ridge of Mount Everest. In order to recreate the conditions the Everest pioneers Mallory and Irvine would have encountered, the ladder clogging up the Step was removed, something that wasn't possible in 1999 during the First Mallory and Irvine Research Expedition organized by Eric Simonson and Jochen Hemmleb. The 2007 expedition hailed their success as the first free-climb ever of the Second Step.

    I remember sending Conrad an email at this time, several weeks before their successful climb, informing him that Hemmleb had published a note in the 2006 American Alpine Journal reporting that Austrian climber Theo Fritsche had already free-climbed the Step, so how could they claim a first free ascent? When no answer was forthcoming, I didn't feel that was very sporting, so I wrote an article for MountEverest.net raising the issue.

    In my incredible naiveté, I had no idea of the firestorm that would ignite, with various articles appearing on MountEverest.net reporting of other free climbs, most notably by Oscar Cadiach, under monsoon conditions in 1985.

    Anker's response was to point out that it's impossible to free climb the Step with the ladder in the way - crucial holds were to be found underneath it, which is what foiled him in his first attempt in 1999. At the time I gave more credibility to Fritsche than I did to Anker, thinking that the big "muckity-mucks" were dumping on the "little guy", especially since I didn't receive the courtesy of a reply to my initial inquiry.

    I would like to publicly reverse my position on this, and to extend a sincere and humble apology to Conrad, whose exceptional climbing abilities are only exceeded by his humanity, kindness, and generosity to others. Including me when I met him at Snowbird back in 2005.

    I do not in any way cast aspirations on Fritsche's claim, I only ask that he present some form of proof of his accomplishment given what Anker and Houlding have reported on the nature of the climb. Unfortunately, in the absence of proof, Anker and Houlding's ascent must be given credit as the first free climb. This is only fair.

    One again, I apologize for my thoughtlessness, and deeply regret any negative consequences my actions may have caused.

    With my tail firmly between my legs,

    Pete Poston, USA

Spring 2009

  • Tom Holzel has a new 3-part series out on MountEverest.net (part 1, part 2, part 3) where he uses high-resolution photography to search for the body of Andrew Irvine. I liked the photoanalysis tremendously, but believe he should have worn his eyes out squinting through a loupe at the lower Yellow Band rather than up by the ax site. Anyway, to wrap things up, read his latest Q&A which is vintage Holzel.

Summer 2008

  • While not exactly new, there have been several interesting articles written about Mallory & Irvine recently - one by veteran Tom Holzel and the other by British researcher Gareth Thomas. Holzel now thinks that Odell sighted M&I climbing the 1st Step - on the descent - a new idea. Gareth Thomas - a very fine M&I theorist, in my opinion - has theorized for years that Odell saw them on the ascent, and then the pair attempted Norton's Great Couloir route before admitting defeat. Complementary theories, and of course, only one can be right!

    Jake Norton has posted videos from IMG's 2004 search for Irvine that are fascinatng to watch, as well as giving perspective on the extreme difficulties of mounting searches at high altitude unless the conditions are just right. There's also a video on YouTube of him searching through the remains of the old British Camp 6 from 1938.

Spring 2007 - Conrad Anker and Leo Houlding free-climb the 2nd Step

  • Conrad Anker sucessively free-climbed the Second Step, and he and Leo Houlding then made the summit! For safety reasons, the pair decided not to try it in period clothing, but used modern gear instead. According to the official press releases, this is the first confirmed free ascent of the 2nd Step. Without some kind of proof from Fritsche, this claim has to be accepted.

    According to the official UEverest website, Conrad Anker is returning to the North side of Everest, leading an expedition to search for traces of Mallory & Irvine. Anker will be joined by ace climber Leo Houlding, as part of a new Mallory and Irvine movie being filmed by Altitude Films. Anker is going to play Mallory's part, and Houlding will tag along as Irvine. Reports indicate that the pair will attempt to free-climb the Second Step, giving Conrad a second chance to free the route, and perhaps give it a revised rating from his 1999 rating of 5.10 AO (one step of aid off the ladder). How will this compare to Theo Fritsche's - who free-soloed the 2nd Step in 2001 - rating of 5.6 to 5.7? (See next section)

Fall 2006 - Report that the Second Step has been Climbed Free

  • Jochen Hemmleb reported in the 2006 American Alpine Journal that Austrian Theo Fritsche was able to free-climb the 2nd Step in 2001, without using the ladder like Anker had to in 1999. Hemmleb reported that Fritsche rated the climb as in the 5.6-5.7 range. This seems doubtful, but reportedly Fritsche was able to layback the offwidth and mantle over the chockstone above without any artificial aids, or even a belay! Hemmleb wrote that he would leave it to the reader to decide if this has any bearing on the Mallory and Irvine mystery, but of course it does. It certainly seems to contradict Anker's opinion that the route was beyond Mallory's abilities.

Sping 2006 - Hoyland Dresses up in "Tweeds"

Sping 2004 - Searches for Irvine

  • EverestNews.com unsuccessfully searched for Irvine in the Spring of 2004 when his body wasn't found at a secret location given to them by a secret source. So far they haven't proven that anything they found was directly related to Mallory and Irvine, including fibers and a prewar oxygen bottle. Nevertheless, they have a theory that you can read on their website.

    For detailed criticism of the EverestNews.com theory and an alternative theory, see a five-part series of articles written by Pete Poston and Jochen Hemmleb on MountEverest.net - here's Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5. Jochen Hemmleb has also made critical remarks about the EverestNews.com 2004 interview of Xu Jing.

    You can read further critiques (Part 1 and Part 2) of their unsupported claim that somehow Mallory climbed the rotten, vertical prow of the 2nd Step instead of the standard route, as well as Conrad Anker's comments on the unlikeliness of this alternative route. Jochen Hemmleb analyzed the only known photo of the 2nd Step taken at the time of Mallory and Irvine's attempt, revealing that a large cornice was overhanging the Prow of the 2nd Step, making it highly doubtful that any direct route would have been feasible at that time.

    IMG had their own mini-search on the mountain at the same time. Eric Simonson's wrote about it in the 2004 Journal of the American Alpine Club. Jake Norton and Dave Hahn were able to cover large parts of the Yellow Band, as well as the area beow the Northeast Shoulder, for traces of Irvine. During this expedition, Jake Norton discovered yet another 1960 Chinese camp halfway up the 1st Step. From his perspective, Norton believes Mallory and Irvine could have climbed the NE Ridge directly up the 1st Step to where it intersects the normal route.



Introduction [top]

"I'm quite doubtful if I shall be fit enough. But again I wonder if the monsoon will give us a chance. I don't want to get caught, but our three-day scheme from the Chang La will give the monsoon a good chance. We shall be going up again the day after tomorrow. Six days to the top from this camp!"

--from George Mallory's last letter to his wife prior to disappearing on Mt. Everest with his partner Andrew "Sandy" Irvine in 1924

Mallory's last written words to his wife reveal a man torn by doubts, but still determined to make one last attempt on the summit of Mt Everest before his strength and the good weather ran out. On his third and last expedition to the mountain, Mallory and his partner Andrew Comyn Irvine climbed up to their last camp at 26,700 feet high up on the North Ridge of Everest. On the next day - June 8, 1924 - they were briefly seen by fellow expedition member Noel Odell about 1000 feet below the summit, before the monsoon clouds moved in and they disappeared forever.

Few clues as to the fate of the pair were uncovered in the 75 years between their disappearance and the discovery of Mallory's body by members of the 1999 Mallory and Irvine Research Expedition. An ice ax later shown to belong to Sandy Irvine was found at the base of the First Step in 1933. Nothing else was discovered until Tom Holzel reported that in 1975, a Chinese climber named Wang Hongbao, had discovered the body of an ancient "English Dead" at around 8100 meters (click here for more on Holzel's 1986 MENFREE expedition to search for M&I). This body, originally assumed to be Irvine's since it lay almost directly below the ice ax site, ultimately proved to be that of Mallory's. It was clear that he had died in a fall, and the twisted, broken rope that was wrapped around his body indicated that he was tied to Irvine at the time. But there was no proof one way or the other that they had made the summit - 29 years before Hillary and Tenzing - since their camera was not found.

And then in 2001 Jochen Hemmleb and Eric Simonson revealed in their book "Detectives on Everest" that a second body had been discovered even earlier - in 1960 - by Xu Jing, leader of the 1960 Chinese expedition that was the first to successfully climb Mallory's route. If true, this body can only be that of Sandy Irvine. And the camera that he might be carrying....will it solve the mystery?

Britain's Alpine Club has issued a statement from the Irvine family to any groups searching for Irvine regarding the treatment of his body, possessions, and any photographs taken. In summary, the Irvine family wishes that the body not be damaged, that his personal possessions be returned to the family, and that the family be allowed to preview any photographs prior to publication. Compare that to the statement issued by the Royal Geographical Society claiming ownership of any film found in the camera.

News Websites [top]

Mallory & Irvine Research Expeditions (1986-2005) [top]

Everest Historians and Climbers [top]

Everest Historians

Everest Climbers - Past and Present

Centers, Collections, and Societies [top]

Everest Geology [top]

Early Everester Collections - these expeditions had several geologists who were among the first to map and study Himalayan geology.

Current Research -

Photoanalysis in the Mystery of Mallory & Irvine [top]

  • Jochen Hemmleb displayed a 1:1000 scale orthomap of the North Face of Mt. Everest at the Detectives on Everest Exhibit at the Washington State Historical Museum in Tacoma, WA. Hemmleb meticlulously recorded on this map the locations of all search areas, camps, and artifacts located in 1999 and 2001. I took these somewhat blurry images with my digital camera that can be viewed here: map01, map02, map03, map04. Please note that the jpegs of Hemmleb's map are public domain because cameras were allowed at the exhibit. The 1:1000 scale map was obtained by Hemmleb from Alpine Research.
  • Inspired by Hemmleb's previous analysis, here is an orthomap of the North Face of Mt. Everest where I have added the locations of all known artifacts and camps associated with the mystery (except for the 1924 Camp 6 which is off the map to the east - or left - at 26,700'). By tracing the fall line back up from Mallory's grave, the approximate location of his fall can be estimated, somewhere in the Yellow Band between 8300 and 8400 meters - the same area that Xu Jing in 1960 may have passed through while taking his direct line back from Camp 7 (see Detectives on Everest for more details). Please note that the orthomap that I used to mark the locations is from Alpine Research and you can purchase this map here.
  • A reconstruction of Jochen Hemmleb's Photoanalysis used to help locate the 1975 Chinese Camp 6 (it turned out to predict a location that was too high but was good enough to find the "English Dead". Compare to Tom Holzel's analysis in the next paragraph). Please note that the orthomap that I used to recreate the analysis is from Alpine Research and you can purchase this map here. The photo of the Chinese Camp 6 was scanned from Ghosts of Everest
  • Tom Holzel has given his permission to display a jpeg of his search area for Sandy Irvine that he constructed back in 1999. Holzel's approach was to track the movements of a party of Chinese climbers in 1975 who were pinned down by a storm on their way to the final location of the 1975 Chinese Camp 6. Holzel calls this intermediate camp "5b", and he believes that this is the camp that Wang was in when he located the "English Dead". Comparison of this Camp 5b with Jochen's orthomap indicates that Camp 5b was probably at the same position as the 1960 Chinese Camp 6.
  • Tom Holzel has also given permission to use his photo of Odell's route up the North Ridge of Everest in search of Mallory & Irvine as given to him by Odell himself.
  • Is that an extra pair of goggles Mallory's holding in this famous North Col photo taken by Noel Odell, or is it a gauge used in the oxygen apparatus? I believe it's actually the gauge based on this quote from Odell's appendix on the use of oxygen in "Fight for Everest 1924":

    "An attempt was made to do away with the rigid arm supporting the instruments, that passed over the left shoulder, since it proved to be a considerable encumbrance. Instead the instruments - i.e. flow meter alone - was connected up with the rubber tubing conveying the gas from the cylinders to the mouthpiece, which passed under the right arm.IT WAS SUSPENDED FROM THE COAT IN FRONT IN A VISIBLE AND COMFORTABLE POSITION (emphasis added). The p needle-valve close beside it, accessible to the right hand. In this way the total weight was reduced considerably, and the only hampering of movement was caused by the lower ends of the cylinders, which were in the way when going down steep rocks facing outwards. This arrangement uge can only be read by someone else at the wearer's back, an obvious diadvantage."

  • Do these rust marks found on the face of Mallory's altimeter mean anything? Follow these links for a view of the altimeter and rustmarks: pic1, pic2, pic3. Please note that all photos are copyright of the 1999 Mallory and Irvine Research Expedition and the altimeter photo was originally published in Ghosts of Everest.

Mount Everest Routes, Maps, Photos and Satellite Images [top]

Video and Books [top]

Video

Books

HELPFUL SITES
Directory | Home | Site index | Help | Search WOU
Copyright © 2002 Western Oregon University. Site guidelines.
Send comments and questions about this page to: Pete Poston