Diffusionistic Fantasies I

One of the most persistent mythological ideas concerning the development of civilization in the Americas is the notion that the pre-Columbian civilizations of Americas were the result of the diffusion of cultural traits from the Old World to the New World.

In other words that civilization in the New World was the result of the diffusion of cultural traits from the Old World to the New World.

Now this idea was fairly popular in the late Nineteenth and early twentieth centuries and has since declined considerably in popularity. However it still has many adherents the great majority of whom are not experts in the Civilizations in question or even terribly knowledgeable or experts who just like thumb their noses at the “orthodox establishment”.1

Now one of the most persistent characteristic’s of this type of thinking is a pervasive inability to believe that the Peoples of the New World could have developed civilization on their own.2 Thus the accomplishments of the peoples of the New World is nothing more than them borrowing from the peoples of the Old World.3 Part of this approach is the infamous “White God” mythos which is to put it politely a total crock.4

Now this attitude is worth exploring in greater detail elsewhere but her I will examine just one example of diffusionistic reasoning. The example of Pyramids. It is a common trope in Diffusion literature.

The idea is that the peoples of the Americas got the idea of pyramids from the Old World; most commonly they were alleged to be copying the pyramids of Egypt.5

Pyramids of Giza, Egypt

Here is where nomenclature helps confuse the issue. Simply calling two things by the same name does not prove that the two things are the same thing. For example we have wolves in the Old World & North America and on the island of Tasmania there used to exist, the now extinct, Tasmanian wolf. The fact is the Tasmanian wolf is not a wolf at all, but a marsupial and aside from being a mammal is not related to wolves at all, which are placental mammals.6 Thus calling something the same thing as something else does not prove that they are identical or that there is any sort of relationship between them. In the case of the Tasmanian wolf, they certainly look dog like, but are about as close to dogs as is the Spiny Anteater or Platypus.

Tasmanian Wolves
In the case of the Pyramids it is the same the fact that pyramids in Egypt and Mexico / Peru look alike does not prove that they are linked in any way. In order to link the two items one must do a comparison and this involves discussing that they were made of and how they were made.

Egyptian pyramids like the Great pyramid at Giza were largely built as tombs for the Pharaohs of Egypt. The era of the building of huge spectacular pyramids in Egypt lasted only a little less than a two centuries.7 This was the period of the 3rd and 4th dynasties.

It was during the reign of these Kings that Pyramid building reached its climax and then went into rapid decline. Ever since the unification of Egypt under the 1st dynasty Egyptians had been increasingly experimenting with stone work and with building stone monuments. By the beginning of the 3rd dynasty the Egyptians were fairly accomplished in this work.8

It was during the reign of Pharaoh Djoser of the 3rd dynasty that the first spectacular example of both pyramid construction and massive stone work was built. Djoser’s step pyramid and the mortuary complex around it are the first outstanding examples of truly massive stonework in human history. It is also a very well built series of constructions that are in quite good shape considering their age, (more 4500 years!).9

Step Pyramid of Djoser

In terms of construction the Step pyramid of Djoser was constructed of a series of stepped layers and the stone blocks constructing it were much smaller that the stone blocks later used.10 It was all part of the process by which the Egyptians were learning how to construct massive stone monuments. Later developments would add smooth sides to the pyramids and, enlarge the blocks of they were composed add granite covering stones and make them progressively larger.11

However towards the end of the 4th dynasty pyramids got drastically smaller. For example Menkaure’s pyramid is only about ¼ the size of the Great pyramid.12 Afterwards in the 5th and 6th dynasties pyramids were drastically smaller and far less finely constructed , being made largely of rubble and mud brick. It appears that Egyptians decided that the enormous cost of building such colossal and finely built edifices of stone was simply not worth it anymore.13

Now if the idea of Pyramids were brought to the Americas by people who were influenced by structures like the Great Pyramid one would expect pyramids in Mexico / Peru to resemble them. The problem is they do not.

Pyramid of the Sun, Teotihuacan

Because of the very extensive time period over which pyramids were built in the Americas and the very wide diversity of cultures and places that built them there was, not surprisingly a great diversity of methods by which pyramids were constructed in the New World.

Pyramid, Tikal, Guatemala

There are some commonalities; however, one is that the pyramid had an earth / mud brick / rubble interior and that it was almost always used as a platform for a temple where sacred services / rituals would be performed. Also not infrequently there would be burials in the pyramids, but there chief purpose seemed to almost always have been platforms for temples.14

Pyramid at Sipan, Peru

Now one of the problems for the idea that someone had to bring over the idea of building pyramids from the Old World is that it is hard believe that it would not have independently occurred to someone that piling up earth etc, was a way to build an impressive monument. The fact is that the pyramid shape has a great deal of stability and strength and anyone who engages in trying to build impressive mounds will find out that the four sided shape is remarkably stable. Once you start building such monuments you would naturally come to this conclusion.15

Aside from differences between the purpose and techniques of building pyramids between Egyptian and New World pyramids there is the rather difficult task of explaining why New World inhabitants would seek to copy pyramids built during the great age of Pyramid building. As I said above the great age of Pyramid building lasted less than 200 years and then pyramid building went into rapid decline. After all pyramids built did no start being built in Mesoamerica until c. 1500 B.C.E., and they could not by any stretch of the imagination be compared to stone built Egyptian pyramids. If there was diffusion one would expect copies of the rather roughly stone, adobe, rubble cores with stone facings of pyramids of the Middle Kingdom.16

Of course by 1500 B.C.E., the Middle Kingdom was over and the New Kingdom had began and Egyptian Pharaohs from were being buried in rock cut tombs not pyramids. So just why would Egyptian visitors teach Mesoamericans to build pyramids when they were not building them anymore? That along with different purposes, and techniques of construction, aside make it highly dubious one as anything to do with the other.

As for South America, the same strictures apply as above with one important exception. The first pyramids in South America date to c. 3500-3000 B.C.E., at Notre Chico in Peru!17 This needless to say throws a severe monkey wrench into the idea that the natives of the New World got the idea for building pyramids from elsewhere.

Pyramids at Caral Peru, Notre Chico Culture

In fact it appears vastly more likely that if there was diffusion of pyramid building it would have been from Peru into Mesoamerica rather than from the Old World to either Mesoamerica or South America.

Now a much better idea, if you’re going to postulate diffusion is from Mesopotamia to the Americas, at least in terms of time. Mesopotamia developed into a complex society between 4000-3000 B.C.E., and during the same time period started erecting platforms, made of baked mud brick and rubble, for temples.18 This is about the same time period for the development of the pyramid temples of the Notre Chico civilization so it does fit the time period. Further Mesopotamian Ziggurats did have temples on their tops. However it does run into a whole series of problems. The four most important being.

Ziggurat of Ur, Iraq

1. If there was contact one would expect some artifacts from Mesopotamia in Peru and some artifacts from Peru in Mesopotamia. What one finds is nothing.19

2. The techniques of building are very different. For example Mesopotamian Ziggurats were built of baked mud brick with rubble cores. The pyramids of Notre Chico were built of earth and some rubble put into place in reed baskets.20

3. Mesopotamian Ziggurats don’t look a lot like Peruvian or Mexican pyramids.

4. The Mesopotamian Ziggurats did not attain the form that looks like pyramids until after Egyptian pyramids, (c. 500 years later). Which of course precludes them being inspirational for Notre Chico civilization.21

Now it is of interest to report that although the Mesopotamian Ziggurats look at lot more like New World pyramids than Egyptian pyramids they were never used as burial places, meanwhile New World pyramids were often used as burial places. Egyptian pyramids were always used as burial places and never used as platforms for temples.22

The dual use of so many New World pyramids would seem to indicate that some sort of independent development was going on.

Also one would expect that if there was contact between the New World and the Old world that one would find Old World artifacts in the New World and New World artifacts in the Old World in the relevant archaeological strata. One does not. With the exception of a slew of truly dubious alleged finds which have no providence and just show up with no background the finding of pre-Columbian Old World artifacts in the New world has been to all apparently zip. The same is true for New World finds in the Old World.23

Certainly if Egyptians influenced the development of Mexican Pyramids or in fact brought the idea, one would expect to find some Egyptian artifacts in the New World during this time period. In fact one does not find such artifacts. The same is true for Mesopotamian artifacts. They are absent.24

As said above it is absolutely incredible that anyone would think that it requires someone to bring the idea of building large impressive mounds to the New World. That such an idea would never occur to anyone except one lone genius in all of human history, from whom everybody took the idea. One just has to look at children playing in a playground to realize that piling up earth and sand is a very common idea.

Further the techniques of building Old World as against New World pyramids are different. To quote:

But those early Meso-American pyramids were made of earth and rubble covered with clay or plaster. The impressive stone structures that tourists travel to Mexico City, Yucatan, and Guatemala to see belong to the Classic Period (c. 300-900) or later. Even these later monuments were built with a core of earth and rubble and only an outer coating of limestone blocks. This building technique is quite different from those used to erect pyramids in Egypt or ziggurats in Mesopotamia.25

Also as indicated above the time periods are all screwed up. What with the Mesoamericans taking up pyramids after the Egyptians had abandoned them. And most decisively that the earliest pyramids on Earth seem to be Peruvian. If anyone spread the idea it would be from Peru to the rest of the world. Yes before the Egyptian pyramids before Babylonian Ziggurats Peru structures superficially like them were being built in Peru; in the coastal desert valleys.26

Of course some authors make foolish use of the tomb of Pacal in the Temple of the Inscriptions, (c. 670-700 C.E.) and say that it is a copy of a Pharaoh’s pyramid tomb in Egypt complete with sarcophagus. Unfortunately aside from missing the fact that why would a Mayan King imitate a tomb built 3000+ years earlier, there is the fact that Pacal’s tomb including the sarcophagus are only superficially similar. Also Pacal’s tomb is in many ways, including its huge stone sarcophagus unique in Mesoamerica, (so far). I further note not a trace of Egyptian iconography or artistic influence can be found in the tomb. (Ditto for Mesopotamian)27

Tomb of Pacal in The Temple of the Inscriptions, Palenque, Mexico

In many respects the attitude that assumes that because something looks like something else they are linked assumes that:

A) Similarity proves contact / influence without regard to details.

B) Similarity cannot arise or is very unlikely to arise independently.

Both of those assumptions are dubious. Given that humans are biologically similar and have similar brains the idea that they just might come to similar solutions to similar problems should not be a surprise.

Why so many want to deny the possibility that the natives of the New World were largely responsible for the civilizations of the New World is in itself a very interesting question that says a great deal about those who propose it.

Akapana Pyramid, Tiwanku, Bolivia

1. See Williams, Stephen, Fantastic Archaeology, University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia, 1991, Steibings, William H., Ancient Astronauts Cosmic Collisions and Other Popular Theories About Man’s Past, Prometheus Books, Buffalo NY, 1984, Fagan, Garrett, Review of Voyages of the Pyramid Builders, from In the Hall of Maat Here.

2. See for example Heyerdahl, Thor, Early Man and The Ocean, Vintage Books, New York, 1978.

3. An all too common attitude see for example IBID, and such books as Marx, Robert F., & Marx, Jennifer, In Quest of the Great White Gods, Crown Publishing Group, New York, 1992.

4. See Marx above & Heyerdahl pp. 93-126. For an effective demolition of this nonsense see Davies, Nigel, Voyagers to the New World, William Morrow and Co. Inc., New York, 1979, pp. 125-140, Reece, Katherine, The Spanish Imposition, from In the Hall of Maat, Here, Townsend, Camilla, Burying the White Gods, American Historical Review, vol. 108 No. 3, June 2003, also at In the Hall of Maat, Here.

5. Heyerdahl, pp. 85-86.

6. Thylacine, Wikipedia Here.

7. Edwards, I. E. S., The Pyramids of Egypt, Second Edition, Penguin Books, London, 1961, p. 297. (2700 – 2500 B.C.E.)

8. Rice, Michael, Egypt’s Making, Routledge, London, 1990, pp. 169-198.

9. IBID, Mendelssohn, Kurt, The Riddle of the Pyramids, Sphere Books Ltd., London, 1974, pp. 45-54, Edwards, pp. 53-80.

10. IBID, Edwards.

11. IBID. pp. 90-115.

12. Mendelssohn, p. 48.

13. IBID, 127-131, Edwards, pp. 170-210.

14. Stiebings, pp. 120-125.

15. For an amusing demonstration about the strength of pyramid structures see Thomson, Devon, Stressed Out Structures, at Here. It turned out that a pyramid could handle c. 9 times the weight that caused other structures tested to collapse. See also Fagan.

16. Edwards, pp. 211-253.

17. Notre Chico at Wikipedia Here. see also Moseley, Michael E., The Maritime Foundations of Andean Civilization: An Evolving Hypothesis, From In The Hall of Maat Here.


18. Bertman, Stephen, Handbook to Life in Ancient Mesopotamia, Oxford University Press, 2003, pp. 194-198.

19. Davies, pp. 9-10.

20. Bertman, pp. 194-198, Lost Pyramids of Caral at BBC Here

21. Stiebings, p. 121.

22. Stiebings, pp. 120-125, Feder, Kenneth L., Frauds, Myths and Mysteries, Mayfield Pub. Co., Mountain View CA., 1999, pp. 172-175.

23. See Note 19.

24. IBID.

25. Stiebing, p. 124.

26. Footnote 17.

27. Schele, Linda & Mathews, Peter, The Code of Kings, Simon & Schuster, New York, 1998, pp. 95-132.

Pierre Cloutier

Glimpse into a Disaster
The Franklin Expedition, 1845-1848, was without a doubt the greatest Arctic exploration disaster in which every last member of the expedition perished.1 A great deal has been written and will continue to be written about the expedition and why it ended in disaster. There has also been not surprisingly been a great deal of, what can only be described, has fantasy.2

Franklin’s Voyage

The key document, and in fact the only document found, concerning the fate of the expedition, (aside from graves on Beechey island with headboards3), was a document found buried in a cairn at Victory Point on the north west side of Kings William island.

Victory Point Document

The above document has the following two notes written about a year apart. Here are two versions. The first excludes the marginalia and goes has follows. It should be noted that the first note by Lieutenant Gore exist in a duplicate copy that was found not far from Victory point at Back bay, it does not have Captain Crozier's additions about the fate of the expedition.4

The first note bears the date of May 28, 1847 and says:

28 of May, 1847 (H. M. ships Erebus and Terror wintered in the ice in lat. 70 05’ N. long. 98 23’ W.) Having wintered in 1846-7 at Beechey Island, in lat. 74 43’ 28” N., long. 91 39’ 15” W., after having ascended Wellington Channel to lat. 77, and returned by the west side of Cornwallis Island. Sir John Franklin commanding the expedition. All well. Party consisting of 2 officers and 6 men left the ships on Monday 24th May, 1847.

Gm. Gore, Lieut.

Chas. F. Des Voeux, Mate.5

The second note is dated the 25th of April 1848.

April 25, 1848. H. M. ships Terror and Erebus were deserted on the 22nd April, 5 leagues N.N.W. of this, having been beset since 12th September, 1846. The officers and crews, consisting of 105 souls, under the command of Captain F. R. M. Crozier, landed herein lat. 69 37’ 42” N., long. 98 41’ W. Sir John Franklin died on the 11th June, 1847 and the total loss by deaths in the expedition has been to this date 9 officers and 15 men.

F. R. M. Crozier cccccccccccJames Fitzjames
Captain & Senior Officer. cccCaptain H. M. S. Erebus

and start (on) to-morrow, 26th, for Back s Fish River.6

The second version is as follows for the May 28, 1847 note:

Lieutenant Graham Gore and Mr. Charles F. des Voeux, mate, left the ships on Monday, the 24th of May, 1847, with six men. H.M. ships Erebus and Terror wintered in the ice in latitude 70 5' N, longitude 98 23' W. Having wintered in 1846-47 at Beechey island in latitude 74 43' 28" N., longitude 91 31' 15" W. After having ascended Wellington channel to latitude 77, returned by the west side of Cornwallis island, (Sir) John Franklin commanding the expedition. All well.7

For the April 25, 1848 note the version is as follows:

(1)848. H.M. ships Terror and Erebus were deserted on the 22nd April, 5 leagues .N. W. of this (hav)-ing been beset since 12th Sept., 1846. The officers & crews consisting of 105 souls under the command ---tain F R M. Crozier landed here in lat. 69 37' 42", long. 98 41' paper was found by Lt. Irving under the cairn supposed to have been built by Sir James Ross in 1831, 4 miles to the northward, where it had been deposited by the late Commander Gore in June, 1847. Sir James Ross' pillar has not, however, been found, add the paper has been transferred to this position which is that in which Sir J. Ross' pillar was erected. Sir John Franklin died on the 11th June, 1847, and the total loss by deaths in the expedition has been to this date 9 officers & 15 men.

F. R. M. CroziercccccccccccJames Fitzjames
Captain & Senior Officer cccCaptain H. M. S. Erebus

and start on to-morrow 26th, for Back's Fish river8.

What can we say from this single and singularly laconic document? Well we can say a few things concerning the fate of the expedition.

1, The expedition circled Cornwallis island in 1845 (see map) and then wintered at Beechey island. Where from the graves we know three men died, that winter of 1845-1846.

2. In 1846 the expedition sailed south probably through Peel sound and was beset by the ice on 12th September 1846.

3. On the 24th of May 1847 a 8 man expedition led by Lieutenant Gore left the ships and buried an Admiralty paper and on which, dated the 28th of May 1847 was written certain details about the expedition.

4. Shortly after on June 11, 1847 John Franklin died.

6. On April 22, 1848 the ships were abandoned.

7. On April 25, 1848 the New Commander Crozier left a note indicating when Franklin had died and that there were 105 men left. Nine officers, including Lieutenant Gore, and 15 enlisted men had died so far. From the note we learn that the remnants of the expedition will try to go up the Back river apparently to reach the Hudson Bay posts around Great Slave Lake.

8. If we exclude the 3 men who died at Beechey island it appears that 21 men had died in the two winters beset off the coast of King William island.

Scene of the Tragedy; King William Island

Aside from the above everything else is sheer conjecture. I will however point out to those who argue that the phrasing in the message does not necessarily mean that the ships were completely abandoned and everything was bet on an all or nothing race up the Back river that the text clearly says the ships were deserted and that all 105 of the survivors had landed. The text seems to be pretty clear that everyone was out of the ships and a make it or break it effort was going to be made for safety. Of course you could by semantic parsing and double talk say the text does not mean what it most likely means but without really good evidence I do not see any reason to doubt that the ships were completely abandoned and the last 105 men made a break for it.

The death total is significant in indicating how desperate things were. The note of May 28th 1847 does not indicate the death total so we can probably conclude that the number of deaths over the winter of 1846 / 47 were no worst than the number at Beechey island or perhaps no deaths at all. It seems likely the note would have mentioned anything unusual in that regard if it had happened. However it seems that the winter of 1847-48 had seen more than 10% of the crews dying. Perhaps as many as 21 men out of 126. This is a very high percent and would indicate that the health of the crew was bluntly quite poor. This would reinforce the idea that leaving the ships was an attempt to escape and that the crew was in truly desperate straits. All of this would seem to preclude the crews surviving very long unless they could get good food etc., very quickly. The time of year they left would not be conducive to finding food, as both Caribou and birds would not arrive until much later. Again a sign of desperation.9

A truly unlikely idea is that mistakes has to two dates in the document, (i.e., the statement about having wintered 1846-47 at Beechey island in the first note and the crossing out of May and replacing it with June, apparently done in April 1848, as the date in the note was first left in the carin in 1847) are errors that indicates lead poisoning can be dismissed as unlikely. I merely note that the first seems to be a “typo” of some kind, the second could be the same thing or may refer to another event regarding the note, it is of interest that the May added by Crozier in another part of the document which refers to Gore's time off the ship in 1847 is correct so the crossing out is mysterious but as indicated all the other dates including the dates given in the 1848 note, when they would have been even more lead poisoned, seem to be entirely correct. It is likely that stressed desperate men would make mistakes of this kind without lead poisoning or they could simp-ly be the result of "typos" drawing far ranging inferences from these errors seems dubious.10

I further note that given the dates given in the second note for abandoning the ships and the date the note was written it appears that it took three days for the crews to drag themselves to King William island, which would certainly not indicate a thoroughly fit crew. Given the deaths recorded already it is likely the crew was in overall bad shape and the exertions of dragging heavy sleds and boats, to say nothing of an assortment of useless crap, being ill equipped for the weather and poorly nourished make it very likely that all of Franklin’s men perished in a few months. It’s possible that a few survived longer but that only remains a possibility.11

M’Clintock discovers the remains of members of Franklin’s Crews

Much as been written about what happened to the Franklin expedition and why. It seems to be the case that if some of Franklin’s men had been able to live and forage in the polar environment they would have had a better chance of survival. Although it must be emphasized that the sheer size of the Franklin expedition, 129 men, would have made it very difficult for them to survive in such a resource poor part of the Arctic as King William island.12

In the end this very short laconic document provides a revealing glimpse into over 100 men sliding into a hell on earth and then death. Perhaps we should learn from it to cherish life and each other more.

Copy of the Victory Point document that appeared in Harper's in 1859.

1. M’Clintock, Francis, In the Arctic Seas, Porter and Coates, Philadelphia, 1859, p. 317. A copy can be found at Internet Archive , Here.

2. for responsible books that describe the Franklin expedition in detail see Berton, Pierre, The Arctic Grail, Anchor, Books, Toronto, 2001 and Beattie, Owen, Geiger, John, Frozen in Time, 3rd Edition, Greystone Books, Toronto, 2004. For irresponsible books see Latta, Jeffery Blair, The Franklin Conspiracy, Hounslow Press, Toronto, 2001, Woodman, David C., Unravelling The Franklin Mystery, McGill-Queen's University Press, Montreal, 1991.*

3. See Beattie. The inscriptions on the headboards read as follows:

Sacred to the memory of John Torrington, who departed this life January 1st, A.D.1846, on board of HM ship Terror, aged 20 years

Sacred to the memory of John Hartnell, AB, of HMS Erebus, died January 4th, 1846, aged twenty-five years. “Thus saith the Lord of Hosts, consider your ways.” Haggai, I, 7

Sacred to the memory of William Braine, RM of HMS Erebus, died April 3rd, 1846, aged thirty-two years. “Choose ye this day whom you will serve”, Joshua xxiv, 15

The source for the inscriptions is Battersby, William Hidden Tracks, at Here.

4. Cyriax, Richard J., Sir John Franklin's Last Arctic Expedition, Methuen & Co. LTD., London, 1939, pp. 128-131.

5. M’Clintock, p. 256.

6. IBID. p. 258.

7. Low, A. P., Dominion Government Expedition to Hudson Bay and the Arctic Islands, Government Printing Bureau, Ottawa, 1906, p. 97. A copy can be found at the Internet Archive Here.

8. Low, pp. 97-98.

9. See Berton, pp. 334-341.

10. See Beattie for more. I note here that I do not dispute that Franklin’s crews suffered from Lead poisoning or that this contributed to the disaster; if only by lowering the crew’s resistance to other diseases and deficiencies. What I dispute is the idea that this lead poisoning led to a massive amount of disordered thinking by the crew that contributed to the disaster. In other words their minds were befuddled by lead and they could not think clearly. Well these two notes, if anything, indicate clear thinking and a lack of befuddlement. That of course does not mean they made the right decisions just that it appears that their thinking processes were not seriously impaired by lead.

11. Berton, pp. 331-332, M’Clintock, pp. 262-271. For a analysis of the tragedy that heavily emphasizes how unprepared Franklin's crews were to survive in the Arctic if something went wrong see Stefansson, Vilhjalmer, Unsolved Mysteries of the Arctic, Macmillian Company, New York, 1939, pp. 36-129.

12. Berton, pp. 335-341, Stefansson.

* The reason why I include David C. Woodman’s book and by implication his other books about the Franklin expedition is his cavalier attitude towards Inuit testimony. He insists on interpreting all sorts of Inuit testimony about European explorers in the region of King Williams island as memories of the Franklin expedition despite the fact that before and after the expedition there was all sorts of European explorers who visited the area, for example in the years 1854-59. When a lot of this testimony was collected beginning in the late 1860’s and continuing to past 1900 there were lots of European explorers who had visited the area after Franklin to say nothing of before Franklin. It was not the Inuit who described those expeditions as Franklin’s but the Europeans. The Inuit were actually very honest, but like most oral peoples their memory for exact dates of events more than a generation before being recorded is a not exact. Further all the stories that Woodman uses to indicate a late abandonment of the ships possible survival etc., is almost entirely of late derivation and likely attributing such testimony to describing the Franklin expedition rather than earlier or later ones shows wishful thinking on the part of the European collectors of such testimony, not any error on the part of the Inuit. The testimony most germane to the destruction of the Franklin expedition was collected by Rae, M’Clintock and others in the period 1853-1860 and it would appear to indicate that the entire expedition perished soon after abandoning the ships in the spring of 1848.

Pierre Cloutier