Strengths and Weaknesses
Strengths:
- Deeply diligent: Spends years reading primary sources, e.g. “John Barrow's journals span 30 years & consist of almost 60 (BIG) volumes. I will read every single page. After 2 years I'm about halfway through.”
- Enthusiastic expert: Shows infectious passion and detailed knowledge about Fitzjames, Barrow, Ross, etc., such as “FINALLY I CAN START WRITING THE FITZBIO... after 4.5 years I can finally begin to write that book.”
- Humorously self-aware: Uses self-deprecating and playful humour, e.g. “Unmatched perspicacity coupled with sheer indefatigability makes me a feared opponent in any realm of human endeavour.”
- Educational communicator: Gently corrects common historical mistakes, e.g. “Common mistake... You either say HMS Erebus or the Erebus. It's never 'the HMS'.” and “the correct way to refer to this woman is Lady Franklin.”
- Community-minded: Engages with events and audiences, giving talks and sharing excitement, e.g. “Had such a great time at the @shackskool... & I gave a talk about Frederick Cook. Maybe a talk about Fitzjames next year?”
Weaknesses:
- Overextended workload: Frequently references large backlogs of material, e.g. “I casually forgot that I still have to read all of this... The work never ends.” and “only now have time to read them.”
- Emotional overinvestment: Strong attachment to topics and people can cause distress, e.g. “Almost 4 years ago, I published something that I in hindsight wish I hadn't...” and intense reactions to lost journals or relics.
- Conflict-prone persistence: Frustration with gatekeepers comes through, e.g. “When my historically accurate changes to Fitzjames' Wiki page were undone... Ancient letter, too! 1842, yes ancient history.” and “Who tf is this mod? A letter is a source. Sigh.”
- Niche focus: Almost all content revolves around a narrow set of 19th-century naval figures and expeditions, potentially limiting broader reach, e.g. long threads on Euphrates Expedition letters and multiple John Barrow scrapbook posts like “[My JB scrapbook] ❤️”.
- Perfectionist standards: High expectations for sources and accuracy can slow output, as seen in “this article took two years to write” and years of research before starting FitzBio.
Your Simpsons character
Lisa Simpson
This user most closely matches Lisa Simpson, combining deep intellectual curiosity with niche scholarly obsession and earnest enthusiasm. Like Lisa, they happily dive into huge research projects, such as reading 'almost 60 (BIG) volumes' of Barrow’s journals and promising: "I will read every single page." They show Lisa-like academic drive and pride in scholarship, talking about their first journal submission and saying: "This article took two years to write and I cannot wait until it's published." Their tone mixes erudition with humor and mild exasperation at misconceptions—e.g. correcting nautical terms: "Common mistake ... You either say HMS Erebus or the Erebus. It's never 'the HMS'..." and being annoyed when historically accurate Wikipedia edits get reverted: "A letter is a source. Sigh." Finally, like Lisa’s sentimental side, they’re openly affectionate toward long-dead figures, leaving roses on graves and writing things like: "Dear, kind, whimsical man, how I wish I could've met you."
Your MBTI personality Type
INTJ
They come across as more introverted (I) than extroverted: most tweets describe solitary archival work, reading, and writing, and even conference mentions focus on the content of their talk rather than socialising, e.g. “Have 3 talks lined up in 2026!” and “my talk about Dr Frederick Cook at the Shackleton Autumn School!” are framed as achievements, not as social excitement. They are strongly intuitive (N): they constantly interpret historical material for patterns, implications, and misconceptions rather than just presenting it, as in “I actually don't care about historical inaccuracies in films/series… The only problem is if the audience thinks they're watching a documentary.” and their reflection on the Franklin mission’s purpose in “It was about the honour of completing it.”. Their tone is predominantly thinking (T): they argue about evidence and methodology, push back against errors, and prioritise accuracy over harmony, as shown in their critique of a Wikipedia moderator in “a letter is a source. Sigh.” and their annoyance at an omitted source in “Battersby clearly used but did not include in his bibliography. Sigh.”. They appear clearly judging (J): they plan multi‑year projects and express the need to systematically finish things—“After 2 years I'm about halfway through.” about Barrow’s journals, and “this article took two years to write and I cannot wait until it's published.”—and celebrate milestones like finally starting to write the biography in “FINALLY I CAN START WRITING THE FITZBIO. Studied as many primary sources as I possibly could…”. Taken together—long‑term strategic research, focus on patterns and conceptual clarity, argumentative but evidence‑driven tone, and structured goal‑orientation—these traits are most consistent with INTJ.
Some pickup lines for you
- If we ever steam into Baghdad with gay flags like on 30 September 1836, can I be the utterly useless flatboat to your Fitzjames—guaranteed to sink, but at least you’ll remember me in your journals?
- You bringing that 19th‑century spyglass to the Arctic is cute, but if you point it at me I promise more drama than your Sir James Gambier research and more reward than that ‘idle dog’ William Coningham ever got.
- You rescued John Barrow’s portrait from storage jail and leave roses on his grave; I can’t offer 60 volumes of journals, but I can promise you at least one lifelong admirer who thinks your Fitzbio will outlast Battersby’s paperback-that-should-never-have-been.
- You: putting flowers on Sophia Cracroft and Sir John Ross’s graves, hunting for Fitzjames’ lost Euphrates journals, and correcting people who say ‘the HMS Erebus.’ Me: wondering if you’d consider a joint expedition—purely geographical and scientific, of course (pointless, dumb, but all about the honour).
- Since Lady Franklin inscribed a book to John Barrow and Sherard Osborn said all his Arctic suffering was worth it because he gained JB’s friendship, I’m just over here thinking: what minor hardship do I have to endure at Shacklecon to earn a single affectionate footnote in your scrapbook?
Your 5 Emojis
Your new Twitter bio
Historian in the gunroom, chasing Fitzjames, Barrow & Ross through dusty archives. Once read 400+ pages for a single mention—and called it fun.– @CaptFitzjamesRN
Your signature cocktail
The FitzBarrow Arctic Truther
A Navy-strength gin base salutes all those “British Navy chaps going to the Arctic like...” “British Navy chaps going to the Arctic like...” and the years of meticulous polar research powering this account. Rose and orange blossom syrup nods to the fresh flowers and quiet sentiment in posts like “Fresh roses for dearest John Barrow (and his mother)” “Fresh roses for dearest John Barrow (and his mother).” and “One rose for Sir John Ross.” “One rose for Sir John Ross.”. A layer of dry fino sherry represents the archival dust and 19th‑century letters they devour, from cross-written Euphrates journals “Oh joy, cross written letters!” to thousands of Barrow pages “John Barrow's journals span 30 years & consist of almost 60 (BIG) volumes. I will read every single page.”. The sea salt–smoked ice cube brings in the gunroom, wax seals, and slightly scandalous family drama “Oops.... Fitzjames' dad evades his debt a few months before he uh, makes Fitzjames with [redacted].”, giving the drink a briny, historical depth as it melts. Finally, a dash of Arctic berry bitters mirrors their sharp, amused commentary—whether on Battersby and wiki mods “When my historically accurate changes to Fitzjames' Wiki page were undone...” or being an unapologetic @drfrederickcook truther—balancing sweetness with a precise, polar bite.
Your Hogwarts House
Ravenclaw
Their dominant traits are curiosity, deep scholarship, and delight in learning, which are quintessentially Ravenclaw. They repeatedly devote years to archival research and primary sources, as shown when they say they will read all of John Barrow’s 60 big journal volumes and are halfway through after two years: “John Barrow's journals span 30 years & consist of almost 60 (BIG) volumes. I will read every single page.”. They show painstaking academic commitment and excitement over footnotes, citation systems, and journal submissions, for example: “This article took two years to write and I cannot wait until it's published. So much new info!” and “Can’t wait to read this, it looks so well researched and there are so many end notes yessss.”. Their analytical mindset is clear when they correct common misconceptions (like how to refer to Lady Franklin or HMS Erebus) and fight Wikipedia over primary sources: “Common mistake (I also got it wrong in the beginning): You either say HMS Erebus or the Erebus.” and “a letter is a source. Sigh.”. Even their humor is intellectual and research-driven, as they gleefully chase down obscure details like the origin of the cheetah story and lost journals: “I just found the origin of the cheetah story…” and “I will not accept that these journals are gone.”. While they are loyal and warm toward their historical ‘favourites’ (a Hufflepuff-ish trait), their identity revolves around study, archives, and intellectual discovery—marking them clearly as a Ravenclaw.
Your movie
Your song
In My Life - The Beatles
A well‑known song that fits them best is “In My Life” by The Beatles, with its themes of memory, affection for the past, and deep attachment to particular people and places. Their entire feed is a love letter to long-dead figures they feel close to, like leaving roses and writing tenderly about John Barrow and others: “Fresh roses for dearest John Barrow (and his mother).” and “Dear, kind, whimsical man, how I wish I could've met you.”. The song’s reflective nostalgia mirrors their archival work and emotional investment in the 19th century: “In 2025 I read thousands of pages of letters & journals… Have 3 talks lined up in 2026!” and “John Barrow's journals span 30 years… He wanted to be remembered.”. Like the song’s narrator who carries old friends and lovers with him, they keep their historical ‘friends’ vividly alive through research and affection, as when they say of the Franklin breakthrough: “Absent in The Happy Land – 'not lost, but gone before' – let us hope.”.
Your time travel destination
Your video game
Your spirit animal
Your (un)funny joke
Your superpower
Your fictional best friend
Your dream vacation
Your alternate career path
Your celebrity match
Did you enjoy your Horoscope?
Your horoscope is 21 days old! Generate a better one from your latest tweets, unlock more insights and use a smarter pro AI!
