Talk:John McDouall Stuart

This article is a good article. This means the community feels it is written well.

First reading

Initial thoughts:

1. Though sometimes intros can be left without refs, this one is long and detailed, and must be ref'd. And paragraphed, not just a slab of prose.

TRM usually says either ref all or nothing in the intro. I know it's not in the MOS but I might ask him for a comment. I see the intro as two paragraphs not a slab with Firefox. Hmmm.

1. You really can't say 'related to the House of Stuart' without very good evidence. I can't emphasise enough how such claims are almost never justified, and would be read with skepticism by any Scot. You give no page number for the reference; what are the author's reasons?

I am surprised that I left the page number off, but the claim was no more than that ie no other evidence. I shall hunt at the library tomorrow. Initial internet search finds no similar claim, and notes the Stuart line died out. And I imagine you would not believe my claim to be related to William Wallace either?

Removed until further evidence can be found.

1. You leave the reader dangling on the telegraph wire. He would like to know more. Where did it go? It needs developing. The ref you give later should be repeated in the intro, with page#. I would make the topic a subsection later.

Have just bought a book on this subject, shall add more info shortly.

1. Ref to Bailey's book: cut 'p13'. You have correctly turned to page #s in-line, which is good.

Fixed.

1. Given Stuart's dates and the Royal Navy's discovery of the importance of citrus fruit as a precaution against scurvy, I'm surprised Stuart apparently knew nothing about it, and apparently no-one connected with him knew about it. Navy vessels must have visited all major settlements.

No, he certainly knew all about it having buried James Poole on the first trip. There is a mention in his journal about gathering grass and leaves to try and make a tea with to combat the disease. I shall locate it. Stuart travelled light, very light. Basically dried beef, a blanket, and a water bottle. I think he counted on speed to get to his destination before the effects of the disease killed him. And he would not have known what the Aborigines ate, as collecting and preparing plants would have been womens' work and male guides would not have either known or told him.

Macdonald-ross (talk) 04:59, 8 July 2011 (UTC) Thanks for the thoughts and I shall get to work. --Peterdownunder (talk) 12:31, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

House of Stuart

This was the claim from Bailey's book. I am still looking for additional evidence. "Both his parents were related to Scotland's royal House of Stuart."Bailey, John (2006). Mr. Stuart's Track: the forgotten life of Australia's greatest explorer. Sydney, Australia: Macmillan. p. 13. ISBN 9781405037303. {{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)

Without a genealogical source, I would regard this as author's flim-flam. We should leave it out, and reinstate later if a good source can be found. It's quite usual for an author to be reliable on the main topic of his work, while repeating gossip on peripheral matters. 'Related' is so vague a term. Mere membership of one of the Clans Stuart would not be sufficient. There are no direct male descendants of the Royal House of Stuart, which therefore ended in the early 17th century. Macdonald-ross (talk) 11:17, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Too short?!

Re-reading, I was flabbergasted by the idea that the British Army might have had a height limit for recruitment (Early life). One can understand the Scots Guards or the highlands regiments like the Black Watch having a height requirement, but the army as a whole?!?

By way of explanation: highlanders in Scotland were (are still?) on average taller than lowlanders. The army had many thousands of lowlanders, but obviously not in highland regiments.

Also raises the question of how tall was Stuart?

Macdonald-ross (talk) 08:12, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

That is a good question, there are several references to his short stature and wiry frame. I will chase these up, and see what else I can find about his attempts to join the army.--Peterdownunder (talk) 11:41, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

according to ENWP he was "about 5' 6" tall (168 cm) and weighing less than 9 stone (about 55 kg)." This is unreferenced so I don't know where it came from, but if it was correct, that doesn't seem "too short".--Peterdownunder (talk) 11:50, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

I have removed the "too short" claim, until such time as I can find further evidence. --Peterdownunder (talk) 00:04, 7 September 2011 (UTC)