Talk:William Grant Stairs

Untitled
Stairs was not second in command in the Emin Pasha Relief Expedition, Major Edmund Bartelott was, and he cannot have distinguished himself as an officer of the British Army, as the expedition was a private expedition, funded by the Egyptian government and a private 'Relief Committee'. He distinguised himself as an officer of the expedition, no doubt at all. Minor detail... Cheers, --Morten 00:20, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I have reinserted the statement referred to above based on:
 * African Exploits, (1998) by the Hon. Roy MacLaren, McGill-Queen's University Press (ISBN 0773516409) & Liverpool University Press  (ISBN 0853237220)

p.226 – States that half way into the expedition, Barttelot was shot on July 19, 1888 by the Manyuema (Tippu Tib’s people). Capt. Stairs became second in command for the remaining 1½ years.

p.301 – "on January 30, 1890 Stanley wrote to Lord Wolseley, the adjutant general, who had originally approved the application of Barttelot and Stairs, that…Had an accident occurred to me he (Stairs) was my successor."

This was not an "Egyptian" backed expedition. It was sponsored solely by Scottish steamship line owner William Mackinnon with support from the British government. The British Military had to sanction it and give written permission for its officers to participate. According to the book, once in the Suez the expedition was permitted to march under the Egyptian flag. (Karl Schalike 16:40, 2 February 2006 (UTC))

Where is the Neutral Point of View?
While not going as far as hagiography, in places this article does not have NPOV. You only need to look at African viewpoints today on the Stairs Expedition (eg http://www2.fmg.uva.nl/lpca/aps/tshibumba1a.html and http://www.kingmsiri.com) or to read the Congo Free State article to realise this. I have added a paragraph about the Stairs Katanga Expedition and I think I'm justified in changing its description as "successful" to "notorious". But look also at the last paragraph about the detailed personal diaries: this ought to be balanced by what they might say about Stairs’ thoughts on the killing of Msiri, King of Garanganze. When Stairs died in Mozambique, did he have Msiri’s head in a kerosene tin, which some Africans believe? What did Stairs think of Bodson’s action? Are the diaries honest, or whitewash? Furthermore, the article on Henry Morton Stanley says regarding the Emin Pasha relief expedition on which Stairs was 2-i-c, that their  “entrance to the Ituri forest was a bloody and vicious attack on the African population that has been forgotten by Europeans but not by Africans. (Turnbull, 1983)”. So in what sense did Stairs distinguish himself on this expedition? I think the article needs editing for balance. Remember, Africans read Wikipedia too. Rexparry sydney 09:36, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Revisions May 2007
The revisions bring the article into alignment with references used in a number of linked articles, especially those on the Stairs Expedition and its members, as well as on Msiri, Emin Pasha Relief Expedition, and Congo Free State. Regarding the fate of Msiri's head it would be interesting to know if the Stairs diaries, which I haven't been able to obtain, say about it -- perhaps, like Moloney's book they are silent on the subject and de Bonchamps is the only one of the expedition members to spill the beans on this incident. Oral traditions of the Garanganze people contain contradictions, but one says:  "In all truth, we don't know where this head went. Is it in Europe, in some Museum, in the house of Leopold II, or with whom? Up to this day, we don't know".“The history of Zaire as told and painted by Tshibumba Kanda Matulu in conversation with Johannes Fabian.” Archives of Popular Swahili, Volume 2, Issue 2 (11 November 1998) ISSN: 1570-0178. Rexparry sydney 12:09, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on William Grant Stairs. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100205012517/http://collin.francois.free.fr/Le_tour_du_monde/ to http://collin.francois.free.fr/Le_tour_du_monde/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100205012517/http://collin.francois.free.fr/Le_tour_du_monde/ to http://collin.francois.free.fr/Le_tour_du_monde/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 03:31, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

“armed with 200 modern rifles.”
The expedition was in 1891, so I think the word “modern” needs to be replaced by something more meaningful. In 1881, the standard British Army rifle was the Lee–Metford bolt-action repeating rifle. However, the expedition might have been using Belgian, French, or German weapons. The only thing I’m reasonably sure of is that they weren’t carrying anything remotely like a modern rifle. I’ve considered simply changing it to “repeating“, but that isn’t necessarily the case. Humphrey Tribble (talk) 04:32, 22 September 2021 (UTC)