NOTE: For those into the story and in the San Francisco area, come to the American Himalayan Foundation's Annual Dinner this Thursday. Speaking will be Conrad Anker, Wade Davis, and Mark Synnott; I'll be there and eager to hear, learn, and discuss. You can get a ticket here: https://form.jotform.com/222356737074156
I’m still more than a little stunned: After 100 years, the partial remains of Andrew “Sandy” Comyn Irvine (April 8, 1902 - June 8, 1924) were discovered on Mount Everest by Erich Roepke, Jimmy Chin, and Mark Fisher.
Just as our team did in 1999 with Mallory’s remains, DNA samples were collected from the remains to be matched with samples from the Irvine family for full confirmation. However, similar to our 1999 discovery, I think there is little doubt that the boot and sock recovered belong to none other than Irvine.
Why?
Well, for starters, his laundry label reading “A. C. IRVINE” was on the sock, just as in Mallory’s shirt collars when I turned them over on May 1, 1999, and on the tattered sock of Col. Edward Norton I recovered from the 1924 Camp VI in 2001.
Second, aside from Mallory and Irvine, no one in the pre-World War II era died high on Everest; there were other casualties in ‘21, ‘22, and ‘24, but all were low on the mountain and none that could have ended up in the Central Rongbuk where these remains were discovered. We obviously found Mallory in 1999, and with him was his right boot and the lacing portion of his left boot, and both legs were intact (although the right leg was severely broken). So, even if - as is rumored - Mallory’s remains are no longer where we buried them in 1999, and he was swept off (or pushed off) the mountain, the newly discovered remains could not be his.
So, in my opinion, this is hands down, no question, the remains of Andrew Irvine.
But, what does the discovery tell us?
That, of course, is the million dollar question, and likely will not be clear for some time. No, this is not because anyone is being devious - let’s put the conspiracy soup on simmer for now. Rather, the team is making their way home after a long, tough, and monumental expedition. There’s undoubtedly a lot to sift through, and as we did in 1999, a lot to digest, inspect, analyze, and interpret before just spewing things out to the public. While I’d love to know all the details, and have been in touch with the team directly, they understandably are keeping details close to their chests for now, and that makes complete sense. All will be known in good time, as it should be.
Of what we do know, there’s not a ton.
The most important thing, in my opinion, is that the Irvine family can finally, a century out, have some degree of closure on their ancestor’s fate. Of everything that transpired in 1999, for me the most important thing was knowing from conversations with Clare Mallory Milliken - George Mallory’s daughter - that our discovery gave her some peace and understanding about her father’s final days and hours. I hope more than anything else that the Irvine family can share some of that same peace and understanding in the wake of this discovery.
Of the details that have been shared, I’ll don my meager pundit hat for a moment and offer some speculation and interpretation, of course with the caveat that I know little if anything more than any of you: I’ve read the articles, and had a brief WhatsApp conversation in which nothing was revealed to me. Anyway:
The Boot: Chills. Full body chills. A weird rip in time, transporting me back to May 1, 1999, and in turn through the mists of history to June 8/9, 1924, and that fateful day. Seeing Jimmy and Erich’s photos of Irvine’s boot was for me visceral in myriad ways; I can only imagine what it was like for them.
At first glance, once the time-travel element wore off, another memory popped into my head. It was 1986, and my Dad and I were crossing the lower Bossons Glacier on Mont Blanc with our guide, Dennis LeRoi. A glint to my left caught my eye; I stooped to pull out a mangled chunk of aluminum. Dennis took a gander and said: “Oh, yes, this is coming out now. It is pieces of the wreckage from an Air India plane that crashed into the mountain in 1966. We’ll see more.” And, indeed we did: Not fifteen minutes later, a splash of crimson came into view. I wandered over the glacial ice to the spot and, to my horror, there was a forearm lying in the open, part of the shirt twisted around it, the bones bent and broken savagely by 20 years of glacial movement.
Seeing the boot (and, I presume, some remains within it) recovered by Jimmy’s team, the resemblance was striking: These remains were not new to this area, not cast off in the recent past, but had been in the glacier, part of the flow and churn and warp of ice for decades, maybe a century. No, this is not rocket science or forensic analysis, but some have suggested Irvine’s body was removed from the upper mountain only recently; I feel like the condition of the remains as shared tell a different story.
Another thing that jumped out to me are the hobnails. Comparing Mallory’s boot to Irvine’s, there’s a striking difference: the toe-nails of Irvine’s boot are in place, whereas Mallory’s were missing (something I’ve discussed much in the past). Again, the boot with the missing nails was on Mallory’s right foot, the same one that was badly broken in a boot-top fracture of the tibia and fibula, which is a common injury in mountaineering self-arrest.
Could this be further indication - along with the rope around Mallory’s waist and the rope-compression injuries we found in 1999 - that not only were Mallory and Irvine tied together until the very end, but that the end included a severe and violent fall? At first blush it would appear so.
Additionally, given the location of Irvine’s remains vis-a-vis Mallory’s (more on that below) - with a lot of speculation - I’d surmise that the two fell, still tied together, down the North Face and through the Mallory Basin. Mallory, as was evidenced by his injuries, fought valiantly to arrest and stop the fall, lacerating his back, dislocating his elbow, likely puncturing his forehead as reported by Thom Pollard, and eventually gaining enough purchase in the snow, ice, and scree to slow and stop his fall, crushing ribs, tearing out hobnails, and shattering his leg in the process. And, perhaps it was that final effort - and quasi-success - that put a final, fateful strain on the rope, snapping it, leaving Mallory where we found him on May 1, 1999, and sending Irvine down to the glacier below.
The 1933 Bottle: It was reported that what tipped the team off to the idea of searching this area was the random discovery of a 1933 oxygen bottle. Some (has that musty stink of conspiracy theory) have called this into question already, probably because they haven’t found things on Everest before. I’ve been lucky enough to have found a handful of things up there, and can say without doubt that old bottles and other artifacts have a way of popping out of the landscape if you’re wanting to look. Since the writing was likely on the wall in September that the National Geographic team was not going to be able to ski the Hornbein Couloir as intended, it makes sense they might take a look around for artifacts: Afterall, Jimmy is a close friend of Conrad Anker’s and knows the story of 1924 well, and Erich Roepke was on the 2019 National Geographic search expedition. It’s no surprise at all that they’d take a peek around for old items since the Central Rongbuk is the ultimate dump for nearly everything coming off the upper mountain.
The big question to me is if the bottle was indeed a 1933 bottle. If so, it suggests to me that location of the find would be along the lateral moraine of the Central Rongbuk below the south/southwest faces of Changtse. The reason for this is that the 1933 did not carry oxygen above Camp IV at the North Col, and thus any ‘33 bottles in the Central Rongbuk would had to have fallen from the Col, which would deposit them in the northern lateral moraine.
The apparatus was never used by climbers. Both for scientific and for sporting reasons an ascent without oxygen was preferred … The apparatus lay ready at Camp IV, and there it remains.
- Raymond Greene, from “Everest 1933,” page 252
There is a chance, however slim, that the bottle found last month was not from 1933, but rather 1938. The 1938 team used a similar-looking bottle to those of 1933 - short and stubby versus the elongated bottles of 1922 and ‘24 - and in that year they made the first ascent to the North Col from the west, via the Central Rongbuk, so it is likely their bottles would remain in the lateral moraines below the Col.
The 1938 team did take bottles up to and slightly above their Camp VI, which was located on the gravel of the Northeast Shoulder, just below the Pinnacles. But, it seems likely to me based on contour/fall lines that a bottle falling even from the 1938 Camp VI would still end up at the base of the Norton Couloir or to climber’s left (north) of it, and thus would be pulled into the northern lateral moraines of the Central Rongbuk, below the North Col and Changtse. You can view my Everest Searches, Routes, & Discoveries post to get a better idea of what I'm talking about.
Location: The precise location of the find has not been revealed by the National Geographic team, and I think that is a good thing. If there is more to be found in the vicinity, it is best to leave the area untouched until a dedicated team can get there to do a search and recover whatever is possible. I can only imagine Jimmy, Erich, Mark, and the team searched as best they could during the time they had, but as I know all too well the Chinese keep everyone on a tight leash from a search perspective these days (aah, so much for the good ole days of 25 years ago!) and their time and ability may well have been compromised. My guess would be another search will be underway soon to seek more artifacts and more answers, and in the meantime the team has every right and obligation to do a thorough and complete analysis of the find.
For those interested, it seems clear to me based on the above, coupled with Erich Roepke’s picture of Jimmy Chin with Irvine’s boot (and the reflection in Jimmy’s glasses), that the location is at or on a lateral moraine of the Central Rongbuk. Is it the north or south moraine? Your guess is as good as mine, and anyone is welcome to go out there and look around on their own; good luck!
That’s about all I have for now. This is a monumental discovery for those of us interested in the story of Mallory and Irvine, and I’m beyond grateful that the Irvine family now has some closure on Sandy’s life and death. I look forward to more details to come, all in good time. Thank you to Jimmy, Erich, and Mark!
I agree with every single word!
Thanks, Jochen! You are the Jedi Master of all of this, and looking forward to us speaking soon and catching up on it all! 🙏
Jake, thank you very much for the information and the way you treat it.
The main consideration is to bring peace to Andrew's family who still have a strong sentimental bond.
Andrew's case I understand that he fell from the site or you will find Mallory almost 8,200 meters to the central glacier of the Rongbuck. This long, big fall...do you think it will make it difficult to meet the two elements that could prove that Mallory and Irvine made it to the top? On the one hand, the camera that he could carry on him and that may have been badly damaged. The second, the possible stones of the summit that will be very difficult to identify.
Thank you and sorry for my english. I am writing from Catalonia, a future European state.
Hola Daniel! Thanks for your comments and thoughts!
I feel it's hard, at least at this point, to know where Irvine fell from or why/how. But, I'd presume he must have fallen - pre or post-mortem - from about or above Mallory's remains. As you note, a long, long fall.
To that end, I agree it would be a huge feat in my opinion to find proof one way or other through his remains about the summit. On the camera, my worry is that if any camera was found, down that "low" on the mountain there actually is freeze-thaw happening regularly, and unlike at 8000+ meters, that would likely degrade or destroy any film over a century. Not to mention the grinding and churning of the glacier. Stranger things have happened of course, so I wouldn't rule it out, but I'm not hopeful on that front.
As always, your writing is thoughtful and enlightening, Jake. Thank you for sharing those thoughts, and I look forward to reading more in the future. I remember reading about your 1999 discovery back then - I can hardly believe it’s been 25 years. We often read about “the sad state of Everest” or the “terrible situation of guided climbing” etc. But history is exciting, and it allows us to plunge back into a period of pure discovery that should elicit curiosity and passion in all of us.
Thank you, Helene, for your kind words and thoughts. I'm with you: there's so much talk about how horrid Everest is, and with good reason, but it sadly often takes over the narrative and leaves the beauty, the history, the amazing people and stories, on the sidelines. There's so much more to the mountain than horrendous queues, and to me (and you, I'm sure) the tug of history always brings a place alive!
Excellent job Jake. You've convinced me it's actually a 1938 bottle. I still don't understand why they were looking there; maybe for traces of Marco Siffredi?
Thanks, Pete! I'm not sure I've convinced myself of anything yet, but glad something I wrote made sense! As for them looking, I have no idea aside from maybe just curious and exploring and wondering what might be lying about. Eager to hear more details!
Jake, thanks for a very thoughtful piece. My first instinct was the same as yours - that Sandy fell in the same event as Mallory and has been in the glacier since 1924. But does that mean that ALL the sightings of a European up near the ridge were wrong - including Xu Jing’s and Wang Fuzhou’s? How plausible is it that a body up there could be dislodged by an avalanche (or the 2015 earthquake) and end up in the glacier? I am thinking of how long it took to free Mallory’s body for the search in 1999. Depending on the answer to that we are left with many of the old unknowns. But at least Sandy is no longer ‘lost’ and that is a wonderful thing. Best wishes.
Hi Gareth, thanks for your note and all your work on this story over the year! I'm with you on the question of: If Irvine fell down to the bottom on June 8, 1924, who or what fi Xu Jing, Wang Fuzhou, and Chhiring Dorje see? The only thing that jumps to my mind, and has for years, is that maybe none of them saw a body, but actually the remains of the 1933 Camp VI. I know it sounds crazy, and the location of CVI doesn't line up with at least Xu Jing's statements, but time, memory, and language can distort things. Lots to ponder!
As for Irvine being dislodged over time, I've always (well, since 1999) been of the mind that it would be unlikely for a body that came to rest up there and stayed for a year essentially becomes part of the mountain. Mallory, as you note, was fully attached to the hill. I don't think an earthquake or massive avalanche would have budged him one bit. But that was after 75 years, or so I thought, until I tried to move Fran Arsentiev as Tap and I retreated from our summit attempt in '99. She had only been there a year, on similar terrain to Mallory, and yet was as fused to the slope as he was; I could not budge her, and ended up moving the route away from her remains instead. Now, of course, on steeper terrain, like in much of the Yellow Band, it would be a different story...but, I can't imagine a body staying put very long on that terrain - or even stopping in a fall scenario in the first place. Aaah, so many questions, and so few answers!
Very interesting and very well written! Thanks, Jake.
Thanks, Ned! Was jealous Jochen got to see you and spend time last May! Such great memories of our time together in '99!
Thank you very much Jake for the response and considerations.
Thank you, Daniel!
williamsonmeister@gmail.com
I really thought the fate of Irvine's remains was probably a near-closed book. It's fascinating how every discovery, finding, rumour, hypothesis over the last century has become part of the story itself (none less than your own huge contributions). Whatever the history of Irvine's journey to the glacier it's likely, as you imply, that the rest of his remains are quite likely to be far more deformed and damaged than Mallory's and any clothing and personal effects could be strewn over a large area. As for there being a camera with developable film 'proving' they got to the top, that's a very unlikely outcome for a multitude of reasons.
It amuses me to think that the most famous climbers in history in terms of their fame beyond the realm of climbers and mountaineers are M&I and Alex Honnold and that Jimmy Chin must necessarily be involved. 🤔
Great analysis Jake, thank you for taking the time to produce your thoughts.
I was immediately puzzled by the discovery of the 1933 oxygen bottle when the news broke last Friday. I have never visited Everest so my understanding of the topography of the north face is much more limited than yours. I however assumed that if bottles were taken no higher than the north col in 1933, then this spot was too far to the east of the glacier to eventually filter into the Rongbuk Glacier. You note that most of the north face can eventually filter down to the Rongbuk Glacier however.
My take was this must have confirmed Irvine fell to the west of Mallory, in a separate incident on their descent. Perhaps in the section of the north face where Norton and the 1933 climbers reach. I believe the exposure here is not far from sheer. Again though this is under the preconceived notion that the reach of the Rongbuk Glacier does not extend along the entire face and to the line of where Mallory is located. Your analysis however suggests that Irvine may well have ended up where he has been found from the fall line of Mallory.
As you note, the overwhelming emotion for now is of relief that Irvine is no longer lost to Everest. He was a pioneer who deserves to have the final chapter of his life written and closed, like we did with Mallory in 1999.
I look forward to see what can be found out as more details filter through.
Hello Jake, people may not remember that I was the British Everest climber who was responsible for initiating our search that found George Mallory in 1999.
I was looking for my cousin Howard Somervell's camera, as he told me when I was just 13 that a photograph could prove that his friends had made it to the top.
There now seems a curious disparity between the Chinese climbers's reported sightings of what may have been Irvine’s body high on the mountain, and the discovery of a body part at the bottom of the mountain.
What could have moved Irvine off the mountain after 1975, I wonder?
Hi Jake and thanks for this excellent post!
It may well be that you nailed it when you considered this to be a 1938 O2 bottle instead of 1933. With the passing of time and exposure to the elements, I guess that even marks on metal may become fuzzy.
As I have written many times, I have the feeling that the 2004 EverestNews search has some clues that can complement what we know so far. They did find an old O2 bottle at the location Chiring Dorje had suggested as Irvine´s. They identified it as a 1938 bottle, but given it´s location (i.e higher than the highest 1938 point) they nevertheless suggested that the bottle had oxygen left and was picked up by the Chinese and moved upwards.
Maybe Jochen can help a little bit with this? Some interviews with the Everestnews 2004 team must be conducted at some point to clear a few enygmas...
Hi Jake
Great posts. Just discovered your blog tonight and found it so interesting. The story of Mallory and Irvine have fascinated me for decades and I can still remember watching the BBC documentary about finding Mallory's body , I still have the accompanying book, read many times over!
I have a couple of questions...
1. Is it possible from where Mallory was found to climb directly uphill to look for artefacts that may have been shed on his fall, assuming fall was relatively in a straight line down. ? Such as his ice axe (assuming the found one near ridge was irvines)? Or other equipment etc?
2. I seem to remember reading somewhere that a mitten was found high on the mountain that may have come from Mallory or Irvine. Was this ever confirmed if it was one of theirs?
3. Do you think the team who recently found Sandy's boot may have found more remains but have kept quiet due to not wanting to have to deal with a media circus or criticism from others?
4. What are the chances of more remains being found?
Thanks and please keep up the good work on your blogs.