CHAPTER VIII

THE STORY OF THE MATTERHORN

The history of mountaineering contains nothing more dramatic than the

epic of the Matterhorn. There is no mountain which appeals so readily

to the imagination. Its unique form has drawn poetic rhapsodies from

the most prosaic. “Men,” says Mr. Whymper, “who ordinarily spoke or

wrote like rational beings when they came under its power seemed to

quit their senses, and ranted, and rhapsodied, losing for a time

all common forms of speech. Even the sober De Saussure was moved to

enthusiasm.”

If the Matterhorn could thus inspire men before the most famous siege

in Alpine history had clothed its cliffs in romance, how much more

must it move those for whom the final tragedy has become historical?

The first view of the Matterhorn, and the moment when the last step

is taken on to the final crest, are two moments which the mountaineer

never forgets. Those who knew the old Zermat are unpleasantly fond of

reminding us that the railway train and the monster hôtels have robbed

Zermat of its charm; while the fixed ropes and sardine tins--[Those

dear old sardine tins! Our Alpine writers would run short of satire

if they could not invoke their aid]--have finally humiliated the

unvanquished Titan. It may be so; but it is easy enough to recover

the old atmosphere. You have only to visit Zermat in winter when the

train is not running. A long trudge up twenty miles of shadowed, frosty

valley, a little bluff near Randa, and the Matterhorn soars once more

into a stainless sky. There are no clouds, and probably not another

stranger in the valley. The hôtels are closed, the sardine tins are

buried, and the Matterhorn renews like the immortals an undying youth.

The great mountain remained unconquered mainly because it inspired

in the hearts of the bravest guides a despairing belief in its

inaccessibility. “There seemed,” writes Mr. Whymper, “to be a cordon

drawn round it up to which one might go, but no further. Within that

line gins and efreets were supposed to exist--the wandering Jew and the

spirits of the damned. The superstitious natives in the surrounding

valleys (many of whom firmly believed it to be not only the highest

mountain in the Alps, but in the world) spoke of a ruined city on the

summit wherein the spirits dwelt; and if you laughed they gravely

shook their heads, told you to look yourself to see the castle and

walls, and warned one against a rash approach, lest the infuriated

demons from their impregnable heights might hurl down vengeance for

one’s derision.”

[Illustration: I.--THE MATTERHORN FROM THE NORTH-EAST (ZERMAT).

The left-hand ridge in the Furgg Grat and the shoulder (F.S.) is the

Furgg shoulder from which Mummery traversed across to the Swiss face on

his attempt on the Furgg Grat.

The central ridge is the North-east ridge. N.E. is the point where

the climb begins. S is the Swiss shoulder, A the Swiss summit, B the

Italian summit. The route of the first ascent is marked. Nowadays it is

usual to keep closer to the ridge in the early part of the climb and to

climb from the shoulder S to the summit A. Fixed ropes hang throughout

this section. T is the group of rocky teeth on the Zmutt ridge.]

Those who have a sense for the dramatic unities will feel that, for

once in a way, Life lived up to the conventions of Art, and that even

a great dramatist could scarcely have bettered the materials afforded

by the history of the Matterhorn. As the story unfolds itself one can

scarcely help attributing some fatal personality to the inanimate

cliffs. In the Italian valley of Breuil, the Becca, as the Matterhorn

used to be called, was for centuries the embodiment of supernatural

terror. Mothers would frighten their children by threats that the wild

man of the Becca would carry them away. And if the children asked how

the Matterhorn was born, they would reply that in bygone years there

dwelt a giant in Aosta named Gargantua, who was once seized with a

longing for the country beyond the range of peaks that divide Italy

from Switzerland. Now, in those far off times, the mountains of the

great barrier formed one uniform ridge instead of (as now) a series of

peaks. The giant strode over this range with one step. As he stood with

one foot in Switzerland and the other in Italy, the surrounding rocks

fell away, and the pyramid of cliffs caught between his legs alone

remained. And thus was the Matterhorn formed. There were many such

legends; the reader may find them in Whymper and Guido Rey. They were

enough to daunt all but the boldest.

[Illustration: II.--MATTERHORN FROM THE NORTH.

The left-hand ridge is the North-east ridge. The points N.E., S, A, B,

and T are the same as the corresponding points in I. The North-east

ridge, which appears extremely steep, in I., is here seen in profile.]

The drama of the Matterhorn opens appropriately enough with the three

men who first showed a contempt for the superstitions that surrounded

the Becca. The story of that first attempt is told in Guido Rey’s

excellent monograph on the Matterhorn, a monograph which has been

translated by Mr. Eaton into English as spirited as the original

Italian. This opening bout with the Becca took place in 1858. Three

natives of Breuil, the little Italian valley at the foot of the

Matterhorn, met before dawn at the châlet of Avouil. Of these, Jean

Jacques Carrel was in command. He was a mighty hunter, and a fine

mountaineer. The second, Jean Antoine Carrel, “il Bersaglier,” was

destined to play a leading part in the conflict that was to close seven

years later. Jean Antoine was something more than a great guide. He

was a ragged, independent mountaineer, difficult to control, a great

leader, but a poor follower. He was an old soldier, and had fought at

Novara. The third of these young climbers was Aimé Gorret, a young boy

of twenty destined for the Church. His solitary rambles among the hills

had filled him with a passionate worship of the Matterhorn.

Without proper provisions or gear, these three light-hearted knights

set forth gaily on their quest. They mistook the way; and, reaching

a spot that pleased them, they wasted hours in hurling rocks down a

cliff--a fascinating pursuit. When they reached the point now known as

the Tête du Lion (12,215 feet) they contemplated the Matterhorn which

rose definitely beyond an intervening gap. They looked at their great

foe with quiet assurance. The Becca would not run away. Nobody else was

likely to try a throw with the local giant. One day they would come

back and settle the issue. There was no immediate hurry.

In 1860 a daring attempt was made by Messrs. Alfred, Charles, and

Sanbach Parker of Liverpool. These bold climbers dispensed with guides,

and had the wisdom to attack the east face that rises above Zermat. All

the other early explorers attacked the Italian ridge; and, as will be

seen, the first serious assault on the eastern face succeeded. Lack of

time prevented the Parkers from reaching a greater height than 12,000

feet; nor were they more successful in the following year, but they had

made a gallant attempt, for which they deserve credit. In 1860 another

party had assailed the mountain from Italy, and reached a height of

about 13,000 feet. The party consisted of Vaughan Hawkins and Prof.

Tyndall, whom he had invited to join the party, with the guides J. J.

Carrel and Bennen.

In 1861 Edward Whymper, who had opened his Alpine career in the

previous year, returned to the Alps determined to conquer two virgin

summits of the Alps, the Matterhorn and the Weishorn. On arriving at

Chatillon, he learned that the Weishorn had been climbed by Tyndall,

and that Tyndall was at Breuil intending to add the Matterhorn to his

conquests. Whymper determined to anticipate him. He arrived at Breuil

on August 28, with an Oberland guide, and inquired for the best man

in the valley. The knowing ones with a voice recommended Jean Antoine

Carrel, a member of the first party to set foot on the Matterhorn. “We

sought, of course, for Carrel, and found him a well-made, resolute

looking fellow, with a certain defiant air which was rather taking.

Yes, he would go. Twenty francs a day, whatever the result, was his

price. I assented. But I must take his comrade. As he said this, an

evil countenance came forth out of the darkness, and proclaimed itself

the comrade. I demurred, and negotiations were broken off.”

At Breuil, they tried to get another man to accompany them but without

success. The men they approached either would not go or asked a

prohibitive price. “This, it may be said once and for all, was the

reason why so many futile attempts were made on the Matterhorn. One

guide after another was brought up to the mountain and patted on the

back, but all declined the business. The men who went had no heart

in the matter, and took the first opportunity to turn back. For they

were, with the exception of the man to whom reference will be made [J.

A. Carrel] universally impressed with the belief that the summit was

entirely inaccessible.”

Whymper and his guide bivouacked in a cowshed; and as night approached

they saw J. A. Carrel and his companion stealing up the hillside.

Whymper asked them if they had repented, and would join his party.

They replied that they had contemplated an independent assault. “Oh,

then, it is not necessary to have more than three.” “Not for us.” “I

admired their pluck and had a strong inclination to engage the pair,

but finally decided against it. The companion turned out to be J. J.

Carrel. Both were bold mountaineers; but Jean Antoine was incomparably

the better of the two, and was the finest rock climber I have ever

seen. He was the only man who persistently refused to accept defeat,

and who continued to believe, in spite of all discouragements, that the

great mountain was not inaccessible, and that it could be ascended

from the side of his native valley.”

Carrel was something more than a great guide. He remained a soldier

long after he had laid down his sword. He was, above all, an Italian,

determined to climb the Matterhorn by the great Italian ridge, to climb

it for the honour of Italy, and for the honour of his native valley.

The two great moments of his life were those in which he heard the

shouts of victory at Colle di Santiarno, and the cries of triumph on

the summit of the Italian ridge. Whymper, and later Tyndall, found him

an awkward man to deal with. He had the rough, undisciplined nature

of the mountain he loved. He looked on the Matterhorn as a kind of

preserve, and was determined that he and no other should lead on the

final and successful ascent. Whymper’s first attempt failed owing

to the poor qualities of his guide; and the Carrels were not more

successful.

During the three years that followed, Whymper made no less than six

attempts to climb the Matterhorn. On one occasion he climbed alone

and unaided higher than any of his predecessors. Without guides or

companions, he reached a height of 13,500 feet. There is little to be

said for solitary climbing, but this feat stands out as one of the

boldest achievements of the period. The critics of solitary scrambling

need, however, look no further than its sequel for their moral. In

attempting to negotiate a corner on the Tête du Lion, Whymper slipped

and fell. He shot down an ice slope, slid and bounded through a

vertical height of about 200 feet, and was eventually thrown against

the side of a gully where it narrowed. Another ten feet would have

taken him in one terrific bound of 800 feet on to the glacier below.

The blood was pulsing out of numerous cuts. He plastered up the wounds

in his head with a lump of snow before scrambling up into a place of

safety, where he promptly fainted away. He managed, however, to reach

Breuil without further adventure. Within a week he had returned to the

attack.

He made two further attempts that year which failed for various

reasons; but he had the satisfaction of seeing Tyndall fail when

success seemed assured. Tyndall had brought with him the great Swiss

guide Bennen, and a Valaisian guide named Walter Anton. He engaged

Jean Antoine and Cæsar Carrel. They proposed to attack the mountain

by the Italian ridge. Next morning, somebody ran in to tell Whymper

that a flag had been seen on the summit. This proved a false alarm.

Whymper waited through the long day to greet the party on their return.

“I could not bring myself to leave, but lingered about as a foolish

lover hovers round the object of his affections even after he has been

rejected. The sun had set before the men were discerned coming over the

pastures. There was no spring in their steps--they, too, were defeated.”

Prof. Tyndall told Whymper that he had arrived “within a stone’s-throw

of the summit”--the mountain is 14,800 feet high, 14,600 feet had been

climbed. “He greatly deceived himself,” said Whymper, “for the point

which he reached is no less than 800 feet below the summit. The failure

was due to the fact that the Carrels had been engaged in a subordinate

capacity.” When they were appealed to for their opinion, they replied:

“We are porters, ask your guides.” Carrel always determined that the

Matterhorn should be climbed from Italy, and that the leader of the

climb should be an Italian. Bennen was a Swiss and Carrel had been

engaged as a second guide. Tyndall and Whymper found it necessary to

champion their respective guides, Carrel and Bennen; and a more or less

heated controversy was carried on in the pages of _The Alpine Journal_.

The Matterhorn was left in peace till the next year, but, meanwhile,

a conspiracy for its downfall was hatched in Italy. The story is told

in Guido Rey’s classic book on the Matterhorn, a book which should be

read side by side with Whymper’s _Scrambles_, as it gives the Italian

version of the final stages in which Italy and England fought for

the great prize. In 1863, some leading Italian mountaineers gathered

together at Turin to found an Italian Alpine Club. Amongst these were

two well-known scientists, Felice Giordano and Quintino Sella. They

vowed that, as English climbers had robbed them of Monte Viso, prince

of Piedmontese peaks, Italy should have the honour of conquering the

Matterhorn, and that Italians should climb it from Italy by the Italian

ridge. The task was offered to Giordano, who accepted it.

In 1863 Whymper and Carrel made another attempt on the Matterhorn,

which was foiled by bad weather. In the next year, the mountain was

left alone; but the plot for its downfall began to mature. Giordano and

Sella had met Carrel, and had extracted from him promises of support.

Carrel was, above all, an Italian, and, other things being equal, he

would naturally prefer to lead an Italian, rather than an English,

party to the summit.

And now we come to the closing scenes. In 1865 Whymper returned to the

attack, heartily tired of the Italian ridge. With the great guides

Michel Croz and Christian Almer, Whymper attempted to reach the summit

by a rock couloir that starts from near the Breuiljoch, and terminates

high up on the Furggen arête. This was a mad scheme; and the route they

chose was the most impracticable of all the routes that had ever been

attempted on the Matterhorn. Even to-day, the great couloir has not

been climbed, and the top half of the Furggen ridge has only been once

ascended (or rather outflanked on the Italian side), an expedition of

great danger and difficulty. Foiled in this attempt, Whymper turned

his attention to the Swiss face. The eastern face is a fraud. From

the Riffel and from Zermat, it appears almost perpendicular; but when

seen in profile from the Zmutt glacier it presents a very different

appearance. The average angle of the slope as far as “the shoulder,”

about 13,925 feet, is about thirty degrees. From here to the summit the

angle steepens considerably but is never more than fifty degrees. The

wonder is that Whymper, who had studied the mountain more than once

from the Zmutt glacier, still continued his attempts on the difficult

Italian ridge.

On the 8th of June 1865, Whymper arrived in Breuil, and explained to

Carrel his change of plan. He engaged Carrel, and made plans for his

attack on the Swiss face, promising Carrel that, if that failed, they

should return to the Italian ridge. Jean Antoine told Whymper that he

would not be able to serve him after the 11th, as he was engaged to

travel “with a family of distinction in the valley of Aosta.” Whymper

asked him why he had not told him this before; and he replied that the

engagement had been a long-standing one, but that the actual day had

not been fixed. Whymper was annoyed; but he could find no fault with

the answer, and parted on friendly terms with Carrel. But the family of

distinction was no other than Giordano. “You are going to leave me,”

Whymper had said to Carrel, “to travel with a party of ladies. The work

is not fit for you.” Carrel had smiled; and Whymper had taken the smile

as a recognition of the implied compliment. Carrel smiled because he

knew that the work he had in hand was more fitted for him than for any

other man.

On the 7th, Giordano had written to Sella:

“Let us, then, set out to attack this Devil’s mountain; and let

us see that we succeed, if only Whymper has not been beforehand

with us.” On the 11th, he wrote again: “Dear Quintino, It is high

time for me to send you news from here. I reached Valtournanche

on Saturday at midday. There I found Carrel, who had just returned

from a reconnoitring expedition on the Matterhorn, which had

proved a failure owing to bad weather. Whymper had arrived two or

three days before; as usual, he wished to make the ascent, and had

engaged Carrel, who, not having had my letters, had agreed, but

for a few days only. Fortunately, the weather turned bad, Whymper

was unable to make his fresh attempt; and Carrel left him, and

came with me together with five other picked men who are the best

guides in the valley. We immediately sent off our advance guard

with Carrel at its head. In order not to excite remark, we took the

rope and other materials to Avouil, a hamlet which is very remote

and close to the Matterhorn; and this is to be our lower base.... I

have tried to keep everything secret; but that fellow, whose life

seems to depend on the Matterhorn, is here suspiciously prying into

everything. I have taken all the competent men away from him; and

yet he is so enamoured of the mountain that he may go with others

and make a scene. He is here in this hôtel, and I try to avoid

speaking to him.”

Whymper discovered on the 10th the identity of the “family of

distinction.” He was furious. He considered, with some show of

justification, that he had been “bamboozled and humbugged.”

The Italian party had already started for the Matterhorn, with a large

store of provisions. They were an advance party designed to find and

facilitate the way. They would take their time. Whymper took courage.

On the 11th, a party arrived from Zermat across the Théodule. One of

these proved to be Lord Francis Douglas, who, a few days previously,

had made the second ascent of the Gabelhorn, and the first from Zinal.

Lord Francis was a young and ambitious climber; and he was only too

glad to join Whymper in an attack on the Swiss face of the Matterhorn.

They crossed to Zermat together on the 12th, and there discovered Mr.

Hudson, a great mountaineer, accompanied by the famous guide Michel

Croz, who had arrived at Zermat with the Matterhorn in view. They

agreed to join forces; and Hudson’s friend Hadow was admitted to the

party. Hadow was a young man of nineteen who had just left Harrow.

Whymper seemed doubtful of his ability; but Hudson reassured him by

remarking that Mr. Hadow had done Mont Blanc in less time than most

men. Peter Taugwalder, Lord Francis’s guide, and Peter’s two sons

completed the party. On the 13th of July they left Zermat.

On the 14th of July Giordano wrote a short letter every line of which

is alive with grave triumph. “At 2 p.m. to-day I saw Carrel & Co., on

the top of the Matterhorn.” Poor Giordano! The morrow was to bring a

sad disappointment; and his letter dated the 15th of July contains

a pregnant sentence: “Although every man did his duty, it is a lost

battle, and I am in great grief.”

This is what had happened. Whymper and his companions had left Zermat

on the 13th at half-past five. The day was cloudless. They mounted

leisurely, and arrived at the base of the actual peak about half-past

eleven. Once fairly on the great eastern face, they were astonished to

find that places which looked entirely impracticable from the Riffel

“were so easy that they could run about.” By mid-day they had found

a suitable place for the tent at a height of about 11,000 feet. Croz

and young Peter Taugwalder went on to explore. They returned at about

3 p.m. in a great state of excitement. There was no difficulty. They

could have gone to the top that day and returned.... “Long after dusk,

the cliffs above echoed with our laughter, and with the songs of the

guides, for we were happy that night in camp, and feared no evil.”

Whymper’s story is told with simplicity and restraint. He was too good

a craftsman to spoil a great subject by unnecessary strokes. They

started next day before dawn. They had left Zermat on the 13th, and

they left their camp on a Friday (the superstitious noted these facts

when the whole disastrous story was known). The whole of the great

eastern slope “was now revealed, rising for 3000 feet like a huge

natural staircase. Some parts were more and others were less easy;

but we were not once brought to a halt by any serious impediment....

For the greater part of the way there was no need for the rope, and

sometimes Hudson led, and sometimes myself.” When they arrived at the

snow ridge now known as “The Shoulder,” which is some 500 feet below

the summit, they turned over on to the northern face. This proved

more difficult; but the general angle of the slope was nowhere more

than forty degrees. Hadow’s want of experience began to tell, and

he required a certain amount of assistance. “The solitary difficult

part was of no great extent.... A long stride round a rather awkward

corner brought us to snow once more. The last doubt had vanished. The

Matterhorn was ours. Nothing but 200 feet of easy snow remained to be

surmounted.”

But they were not yet certain that they had not been beaten. The

Italians had left Breuil four days before. All through the climb,

false alarms had been raised of men on the top. The excitement became

intense. “The slope eased off; at length we could be detached; and Croz

and I, dashing away, ran a neck-and-neck race which ended in a dead

heat. At 1.40 p.m. the world was at our feet, and the Matterhorn was

conquered.”

No footsteps could be seen; but the summit of the Matterhorn consists

of a rudely level ridge about 350 feet in length, and the Italians

might have been at the further end. Whymper hastened to the Italian

summit, and again found the snow untrodden. They peered over the ridge,

and far below on the right caught sight of the Italian party. “Up went

my arms and hat. ‘Croz, Croz, come here!’ ‘Where are they, monsieur?’

‘There, don’t you see them, down there.’ ‘Ah, the coquins, they are low

down.’ ‘Croz, we must make those fellows hear us.’ They yelled until

they were hoarse. ‘Croz, we must make them hear us, they shall hear

us.’” Whymper seized a block of rock and hurled it down, and called on

his companion to do the same. They drove their sticks in, and soon a

whole torrent was pouring down. “There was no mistake about it this

time. The Italians turned and fled.”

[Illustration: III.--THE MATTERHORN FROM THE NORTH-WEST.

T and B are the points marked T and B in I. and II. Z Z Z Z is the

Zmutt ridge. B C D E F is the great Italian South-west ridge. B is

the Italian summit. C the point where Tyndall turned back on his last

attempt. D the Italian shoulder now known as “Pic Tyndall.” E the

“cravette.” F the Col du Lion, and G the Tête du Lion. The Italian

route ascends to the Col du Lion on the further side, and then follows

the Italian ridge.]

Croz planted a tent-pole which they had taken with them, though Whymper

protested that it was tempting Providence, and fixed his blouse to

it. A poor flag--but it was seen everywhere. At Breuil--as we have

seen--they cheered the Italian victory. But on the morrow the explorers

returned down-hearted. “The old legends are true--there are spirits on

the top of the Matterhorn. We saw them ourselves--they hurled stones at

us.”

We may allow this dramatic touch to pass unchallenged, though, whatever

Carrel may have said to his friends, he made it quite clear to Giordano

that he had identified the turbulent spirits, for, in the letter from

which we have quoted, Giordano tells his friends that Carrel had seen

Whymper on the summit. It might, perhaps, be worth while to add that

the stones Whymper hurled down the ridge could by no possible chance

have hit Carrel’s party. “Still, I would,” writes Whymper, “that the

leader of that party could have stood with us at that moment, for our

victorious shouts conveyed to him the disappointment of a lifetime. He

was _the_ man of all those who attempted the ascent of the Matterhorn

who most deserved to be first upon its summit. He was the first to

doubt its inaccessibility; and he was the only man who persisted in

believing that its ascent would be accomplished. It was the aim of his

life to make the ascent from the side of Italy, for the honour of his

native valley. For a time, he had the game in his hands; he played it

as he thought best; but he made a false move, and he lost it.”

After an hour on the summit, they prepared to descend. The order of

descent was curious. Croz, as the best man in the party, should have

been placed last. As a matter of history, he led, followed, in this

order, by Hadow, Hudson, Douglas, and Peter Taugwalder. Whymper was

sketching while the party was being arranged. They were waiting for him

to tie on when somebody suggested that the names had not been left in a

bottle. While Whymper put this right, the rest of the party moved on. A

few minutes later Whymper tied on to young Peter, and followed detached

from the others. Later, Douglas asked Whymper to attach himself to old

Taugwalder, as he feared that Taugwalder would not be able to hold his

ground in the event of a slip. About three o’clock in the afternoon,

Michel Croz, who had laid aside his axe, faced the rock, and, in order

to give Hadow greater security, was putting his feet one by one into

their proper position. Croz then turned round to advance another step

when Hadow slipped, fell against Croz, and knocked him over. “I heard

one startled exclamation from Croz, and then saw him and Mr. Hadow

flying downwards; in another moment Hudson was dragged from his steps,

and Lord Francis Douglas immediately after him. All this was the work

of a moment. Immediately we heard Croz’s exclamation, old Peter and

I planted ourselves as firmly as the rocks would permit: the rope

was taut between us, and the jerk came on us both as on one man. We

held: but the rope broke midway between Taugwalder and Lord Francis

Douglas. For a few seconds, we saw our unfortunate companions sliding

downwards on their backs, and spreading out their hands endeavouring

to save themselves. They passed from our sight uninjured, disappeared

one by one, and then fell from precipice to precipice on to the

Matterhorngletscher below, a distance of nearly 4000 feet in height.

From the moment the rope broke, it was impossible to help them.”

For half-an-hour, Whymper and the two Taugwalders remained on the spot

without moving. The two guides cried like children. Whymper was fixed

between the older and younger Taugwalder, and must have heartily

regretted that he left young Peter the responsibility of last man down,

for the young man was paralysed with terror, and refused to move. At

last, he descended, and they stood together. Whymper asked immediately

for the end of the rope that had given way, and noticed with horror

that it was the weakest of the three ropes. It had never been intended

to use it save as a reserve in case much rope had to be left behind to

attach to the rocks.

For more than two hours after the fall, Whymper expected that the

Taugwalders would fall. They were utterly unnerved. At 6 p.m. they

arrived again on the snow shoulder. “We frequently looked, but in vain,

for traces of our unfortunate companions; we bent over the ridge and

cried to them, but no sound returned. Convinced at last that they were

neither within sight nor hearing, we ceased from our useless efforts;

and, too cast down for speech, silently gathered up our things, and the

little effects of those who were lost, preparatory to continuing the

descent.”

As they started down, the Taugwalders raised the problem as to their

payment, Lord Francis being dead. “They filled,” remarks Whymper, “the

cup of bitterness to overflowing, and I tore down the cliff madly and

recklessly in a way that caused them more than once to inquire if I

wished to kill them.” The whole party spent the night on a miserable

ledge. Next day, they descended in safety to Zermat. Seiler met them

at the door of his hôtel. “What is the matter?” “The Taugwalders and I

have returned.” He did not need more, and burst into tears, but lost no

time in needless lamentations, and set to work to rouse the village.

On Sunday morning, Whymper set out with the Rev. Canon M’Cormick to

recover the bodies of his friends. The local curé threatened with

excommunication any guide who neglected Mass in order to attend the

search party. “To several, at least, this was a severe trial. Peter

Perrn declared, with tears in his eyes, that nothing else would have

prevented him joining in the search.” Guides from other valleys joined

the party. At 8.30 they got to the plateau at the top of the glacier.

They found Hudson, Croz and Hadow, but “of Lord Francis Douglas nothing

was seen.”

This accident sent a thrill of horror through the civilised world.

The old file of _The Times_, which is well worth consulting, bears

tribute to the profound sensation which the news of this great tragedy

aroused. Idle rumours of every kind were afloat--with these we shall

deal later. For more than five weeks, not a day passed without some

letter or comment in the columns of the leading English paper. These

letters, for the most part, embodied the profound distrust with which

the new sport was regarded by the bulk of Englishmen. If Lord Francis

Douglas had been killed while galloping after a fox, he would have

been considered to have fallen in action. That he should have fallen

on the day that the Matterhorn fell, that he should have paid the

supreme forfeit for a triumphant hour in Alpine history--such a death

was obviously wholly without its redeeming features. “It was the

blue ribbon of the Alps,” wrote _The Times_, “that poor Lord Francis

Douglas was trying for the other day. If it must be so, at all events

the Alpine Club that has proclaimed this crusade must manage the thing

rather better, or it will soon be voted a nuisance. If the work is to

be done, it must be done well. They must advise youngsters to practise,

and make sure of their strength and endurance.”

For three weeks, Whymper gave no sign. At last, in response to a

dignified appeal from Mr. Justice Wills, then President of the Alpine

Club, he broke silence, and gave to the public a restrained account of

the tragedy. As we have said, malicious rumour had been busy, and in

ignorant quarters there had been rumours of foul play. The Matterhorn

accident first popularised the theory that Alpine ropes existed to

be cut. Till then, the public had supposed that the rope was used

to prevent cowardly climbers deserting their party in an emergency.

But from 1865 onwards, popular authors discovered a new use for the

rope. They divided all Alpine travellers into two classes, those who

cut the rope from below (“Greater love hath no man--a romance of the

mountains”) and those who cut the rope from above (“The Coward--a tale

of the snows”). A casual reader might be pardoned for supposing that

the Swiss did a brisk business in sheath knives. We should be the last

to discourage this enterprising school--their works have afforded much

joy to the climbing fraternity; but we offer them in all humility a few

remarks on the art of rope-cutting by a member of Class II (those who

cut the rope from above).

A knife could only be used with advantage when a snowbridge gives way.

It is easy enough to hold a man who has fallen into a crevasse; but it

is often impossible to pull him out. The whole situation is altered

on a rock face. If a man falls, a sudden jerk may pull the rest of

the party off the face of the mountain. This will almost certainly

happen if the leader or, on a descent, the last man down, falls, unless

the rope is anchored round a knob of rock, in which case--provided

the rope does not break--the leader may escape with a severe shaking,

though a clear fall of more than fifteen feet will usually break the

rope if anchored; and, if not anchored, the party will be dragged off

their holds one by one. Therefore, the leader must not fall. If any

other member of the party falls, he should be held by the man above.

On difficult ground, only one man moves at a time. No man moves until

the man above has secured himself in a position where he can draw in

the rope as the man below advances. If he keeps it reasonably taut,

and is well placed, he should be able to check any slip. A climber who

slips and is held by the rope can immediately get new foothold and

handhold. He is not in a crevasse from which exit is impossible save

at the rope’s end. His slip is checked, and he is swung up against

a rock face. There is no need to drag him up. The rest of the party

have passed over this face, and therefore handholds and footholds can

be found. The man who has slipped will find fresh purchase, and begin

again. In the case of the Matterhorn accident, the angle of the slope

was about forty degrees. There was an abundance of hold, and if the

rope had not parted Croz and Hadow would have been abruptly checked,

and would have immediately secured themselves. Now, if Taugwalder had

cut the rope, as suggested, he must have been little short of an expert

acrobat, and have cut it in about the space of a second and a half

_before the jerk_. If he had waited for the jerk, either he would have

been dragged off, in which case his knife would have come in handy, or

he would have held, in which case it would have been unnecessary.

To mountaineers, all this, of course, is a truism; and we should not

have laboured the point if we wrote exclusively for mountaineers. Even

so, Peter’s comrades at Zermat (who should have known better) persisted

in believing that he cut the rope. “In regard to this infamous charge,”

writes Whymper, “I say that he could not do so at the moment of the

slip, and that the end of the rope in my possession shows that he

did not do so before.” Whymper, however, adds: “There remains the

suspicious fact that the rope which broke was the thinnest and weakest

one we had. It is suspicious because it is unlikely that the men in

front would have selected an old and weak rope when there was an

abundance of new, and much stronger, rope to spare; and, on the other

hand, because if Taugwalder thought that an accident was likely to

happen, it was to his interest to have the weaker rope placed where it

was.”

One cannot help regretting that Whymper lent weight to an unworthy

suspicion. Taugwalder was examined by a secret Court of Inquiry; and

Whymper prepared a set of questions with a view to helping him to clear

himself. The answers, though promised, were never sent; and Taugwalder

ultimately left the valley for America, returning only to die. Whymper,

in his classic book, suggested the possibility of criminal dealings by

publishing photographs of the three ropes showing that the rope broken

was far the weakest.

Let us review the whole story as Whymper himself tells it. We know

that Whymper crossed the Théodule on the eleventh in a state of anger

and despair. The prize for which he had striven so long seemed to be

sliding from his grasp. Carrel had deserted him just as the true line

of attack had been discovered. Like all mountaineers, he was human.

He gets together the best party he can, and sets out with all haste

determined to win by a head. Hadow, a young man with very little

experience, is taken, and Hadow, the weak link, is destined to turn

triumph into disaster. Let the mountaineer who has never invited a man

unfit for a big climb throw the first stone. And, before he has thrown

it, let him remember the peculiar provocation in Whymper’s case.

All goes well. The Matterhorn is conquered with surprising ease. These

six men achieve the greatest triumph in Alpine history without serious

check. To Whymper, this hour on the summit must have marked the supreme

climax of life, an hour that set its seal on the dogged labours of

past years. Do men in such moments anticipate disaster? Taugwalder

might possibly have failed in a sudden crisis; but is it likely that

he should deliberately prepare for an accident by carefully planned

treachery?

Now read the story as Whymper tells it. The party are just about to

commence the descent. The first five hundred feet would still be

considered as demanding the greatest care. The top five hundred feet of

the Matterhorn, but for the ropes with which the whole mountain is now

festooned, would always be a difficult, if not a dangerous, section.

Croz was the best guide in the party. He should have remained behind

as sheet anchor. Instead of this, he goes first. Whymper falls out of

line, to inscribe the names of the party, ties himself casually on

to young Peter, and then “runs down after the others.” In the final

arrangements, young Peter, who was a young and inexperienced guide,

was given the vital position of last man down. Flushed with triumph,

their minds could find no room for a doubt. Everything had gone through

with miraculous ease. Such luck simply could not turn. It is in

precisely such moments as these that the mountains settle their score.

Mountaineering is a ruthless sport that demands unremitting attention.

In games, a moment’s carelessness may lose a match, or a championship;

but in climbing a mistake may mean death.

As for Taugwalder, one is tempted to acquit him without hesitation; but

there is one curious story about Taugwalder which gives one pause. The

story was told to the present writer by an old member of the Alpine

Club, and the following is an extract from a letter: “I had rather you

said ‘a friend of yours’ without mentioning my name. I had a good many

expeditions with old Peter Taugwalder, including Mont Blanc and Monte

Rosa; and I had rather a tender spot for the somewhat coarse, dirty

old beggar. I should not like my name to appear to help the balance to

incline in the direction of his guilt in that Matterhorn affair. It

was not on the Dent Blanche that he took the rope off; it was coming

down a long steep slope of bare rock from the top of the Tête Blanche

towards Prayagé. I had a couple of men with me who were inexperienced;

and I fancy he must have thought that, if one of them let go, which was

not unlikely, he would be able to choose whether to hold on or let go.

I happened to look up and see what was going on, and I made him tie up

at once. I don’t quite remember whether Whymper tells us how far from

Peter’s fingers the break in the rope occurred. That seems to me one of

the most critical points.”

There we may leave Taugwalder, and the minor issues of this great

tragedy. The broader lessons are summed up by Mr. Whymper in a

memorable passage: “So the traditional inaccessibility of the

Matterhorn was vanquished, and was replaced by legends of a more real

character. Others will essay to scale its proud cliffs, but to none

will it be the mountain that it was to the early explorers. Others may

tread its summit snows, but none will ever know the feelings of those

who first gazed upon its marvellous panorama; and none, I trust, will

ever be compelled to tell of joy turned into grief, and of laughter

into mourning. It proved to be a stubborn foe; it resisted long and

gave many a hard blow; it was defeated at last with an ease that none

could have anticipated, but like a relentless enemy--conquered, but

not crushed--it took a terrible vengeance.”

The last sentence has a peculiar significance. A strange fatality seems

to dog the steps of those who seek untrodden paths to the crest of the

Matterhorn. Disaster does not always follow with the dramatic swiftness

of that which marked the conquest of the eastern face, yet, slowly but

surely, the avenging spirit of the Matterhorn fulfils itself.

On July 16, two days after the catastrophe, J. A. Carrel set out to

crown Whymper’s victory by proving that the Italian ridge was not

unconquerable. He was accompanied by Abbé Gorret, a plucky priest who

had shared with him that first careless attack on the mountain. Bich

and Meynet completed the party. The Abbé and Meynet remained behind not

very far from the top, in order to help Carrel and Bich on the return

at a place where a short descent onto a ledge was liable to cause

difficulty on the descent. This ledge, known as Carrel’s corridor,

is about forty minutes from the summit. It needed a man of Carrel’s

determined courage to follow its winding course. It is now avoided.

The rest of the climb presented no difficulty. Carrel had conquered the

Italian ridge. The ambition of years was half fulfilled, only half, for

the Matterhorn itself had been climbed. One cannot but regret that he

had turned back on the 14th. Whymper’s cries of triumph had spelt for

him the disappointment of a lifetime. Yet a fine rôle was open to him.

Had he gone forward and crowned Whymper’s victory by a triumph unmarred

by disaster; had the Matterhorn defied all assaults for years, and then

yielded on the same day to a party from the Swiss side and Carrel’s

men from Italy, the most dramatic page in Alpine history would have

been complete. Thirty-five years later, the Matterhorn settled the long

outstanding debt, and the man who had first attacked the citadel died

in a snowstorm on the Italian ridge of the mountain which he had been

the first to assail, and the first to conquer.

Carrel was in his sixty-second year when he started out for his last

climb. Bad weather detained the party in the Italian hut, and Signor

Sinigaglia noticed that Carrel was far from well. After two nights

in the hut, the provisions began to run out; and it was decided to

attempt the descent. The rocks were in a terrible condition, and the

storm added to the difficulty. Carrel insisted on leading, though he

was far from well. He knew every yard of his own beloved ridge. If a

man could pilot them through the storm that man was Carrel. Quietly and

methodically, he fought his way downward, yard by yard, undaunted by

the hurricane, husbanding the last ounces of his strength. He would not

allow the other guides to relieve him till the danger was past, and his

responsibilities were over. Then suddenly he collapsed, and in a few

minutes the gallant old warrior fell backwards and died. A cross now

marks the spot where the old soldier died in action.

In life the leading guides of Breuil had often resented Carrel’s

unchallenged supremacy. But death had obliterated the old jealousies.

Years afterwards, a casual climber stopped before Carrel’s cross, and

remarked to the son of Carrel’s great rival, “So that is where Carrel

fell.” “Carrel did not fall,” came the indignant answer, “Carrel died.”

Let us turn from Carrel to the conquerors of another great ridge of the

Matterhorn.

Of others concerned with attacks on the Italian ridge, Tyndall, Bennen,

and J. J. Macquignaz, all came to premature ends. Bennen was killed in

an historic accident on the Haut de Cry, and Macquignaz disappeared

on Mont Blanc. In 1879, two independent parties on the same day made

the first ascent of the great northern ridge of the Matterhorn known

as the Zmutt arête. Mummery and Penhall were the amateurs responsible

for these two independent assaults. “The memory,” writes Mummery, “of

two rollicking parties, comprised of seven men, who on one day in 1879

were climbing on the west face of the Matterhorn passes with ghost-like

admonition before my mind, and bids me remember that, of these seven,

Mr. Penhall was killed on the Wetterhorn, Ferdinand Imseng on the

Macugnaga side of Monte Rosa, and Johan Petrus on the Frersnay Mont

Blanc.” Of the remaining four, Mummery disappeared in the Himalayas in

1895, Louis Zurbrucken was killed, Alexander Burgener perished in an

avalanche near the Bergli hut in 1911. Mr. Baumann and Emil Rey, who

with Petrus followed in Mummery’s footsteps three days later, both came

to untimely ends: Baumann disappeared in South Africa, and Emil Rey was

killed on the Dent de Géant. The sole survivor of these two parties is

the well-known Augustin Gentinetta, one of the ablest of the Zermat

guides. Burgener and Gentinetta guided Mummery on the above-mentioned

climb, while Penhall was accompanied by Louis Zurbrucken. In recent

times, three great mountaineers who climbed this ridge together died

violent deaths within the year. The superstitious should leave the

Zmutt arête alone.

The Alps(#56358) · 第 8 / 10 章