The Seven Summits project has not one classic list but two. In Dick Bass’s version Australia is represented by Kosciuszko. Reinhold Messner’s version uses Oceania as a geographical region, and its highest point is Carstensz Pyramid, or Puncak Jaya. The other six continental summits are the same on both lists.
That is why people talk about “the seven summits”, “seven plus one” and “both versions”. The confusion arises when two different geographical models are presented as an argument about which mountain is the right one. In practice the choice depends on what a climber is after.
What both versions contain
Both classic lists include:
- Everest — Asia
- Aconcagua — South America
- Denali — North America
- Kilimanjaro — Africa
- Elbrus — Europe
- Vinson — Antarctica
Only the Australia-and-Oceania place differs. The full history and the logic of the project are set out on the Seven Summits page.
The Bass version: Kosciuszko and mainland Australia
Dick Bass framed the project as climbing the highest point of each continent. For Australia he chose Kosciuszko at 2228 m, the highest point of the mainland.
In format this is a mountain journey rather than a technical mountaineering expedition. The current seven-day Mountain Guide programme combines the ascent with a trip round Australia: Canberra, the Jindabyne area, the national park and an additional sightseeing section.
Kosciuszko suits you if:
- You are following Bass’s historical list
- You want to combine the summit with a proper journey round Australia
- Your party includes companions with no mountaineering training
- A technical challenge is not the point of this particular trip
- You want a stage of the project that is easier in physical terms
“Easier” does not mean the weather can be ignored. The official route from Charlotte Pass is 18.6 km there and back, and conditions in the Australian Alps change quickly. The national park issues its own warnings about winter snow and the need for clothing to suit varied conditions. For current information, check the Mount Kosciuszko Summit walk.
The Messner version: Carstensz and Oceania
Reinhold Messner used the wider geographical model of Oceania. Its highest point is Carstensz Pyramid at 4884 m, in the Indonesian part of New Guinea.
This is a technical rock climb. The programme with a helicopter approach takes seven days, but the short calendar is deceptive: a participant needs skills practised in advance for working on fixed ropes, going up with an ascender, abseiling and using a safety lanyard.
Carstensz suits you if:
- You are following Messner’s version
- Your project has mountaineering logic and not merely geographical logic
- You have rock experience and have worked on fixed ropes
- You are ready for a remote helicopter expedition and for weather delays
- You want a distinctly technical stage in your Seven Summits
The detailed requirements are examined in the article “Carstensz Pyramid: route, difficulty and preparation”.
Why these summits cannot be compared as “which is harder”
Carstensz is obviously harder technically, but the choice is not a search for the greatest test. Kosciuszko and Carstensz stand for different definitions of the region and different kinds of journey.
It is more useful to compare them on five points:
- Geography. Mainland Australia or Oceania
- Historical version. Bass or Messner
- Technique. A mountain walk or a rock climb
- Logistics. An overland journey or a remote helicopter operation
- Composition of the party. Room for a family format, or a team of trained mountaineers
Difficulty is an important characteristic, but it does not arbitrate between geographical models.
Can you do both summits
Yes. Many people who want to settle the question of the two versions climb both Kosciuszko and Carstensz. The project then contains eight summits.
There is a practical case for that:
- Kosciuszko becomes a journey round Australia in its own right
- Carstensz keeps its role as the technical summit of Oceania
- You never have to explain why you picked one historical list
- The project gains two entirely different experiences instead of two overlapping climbs
But climbing both is not a requirement of the classic Seven Summits. It is a personal decision, not an extra rule.
How to choose your version before you start
It is better to decide in advance, though you need not book both trips in the first year. Answer four questions:
- Does the historical Bass version matter more to me, or Messner’s mountaineering logic?
- Do I want every stage of the project to be a sporting challenge in its own right?
- Am I willing to develop rock skills specifically for Carstensz?
- Do I need to bring family or companions along?
If the project is built as the gradual development of a mountaineer, it makes sense to plan for Carstensz and to build in the technical preparation early. If what matters is the historical Bass version and a journey round mainland Australia, Kosciuszko answers that purpose completely.
Where to place these summits in the sequence
Kosciuszko does not need acclimatisation on the scale of the other stages and can be done at almost any point. Its place in the queue is settled by the logistics of the trip.
Carstensz is better placed once a solid rock base exists. Its altitude does not in itself mean leaving it to the final years, but the technique has to be ready beforehand. A suitable sequence might include several instructional rock routes and one or two mountains with fixed ropes.
Why a project needs a physically easy summit
Kosciuszko is sometimes written off as too simple next to Everest, Denali or Carstensz. But the Seven Summits is a geographical project, not a ranking of the seven hardest mountains. The value of a particular trip may lie in the country, the national park, the culture and travelling with the people close to you.
A quieter stage is also convenient between hard expeditions. It does not replace recovery, but it lets the project continue without new stress at altitude. The mistake comes only when Kosciuszko’s ease is carried across to the whole list and the summits that follow start to look equally predictable.
It is precisely the contrast of formats that gives the complete project its substance: you learn to tell a geographical objective, a journey and a technical expedition apart, instead of running their demands together.
What not to add to the classic list
The internet sometimes throws up alternatives built on tectonic plates, on different boundaries for Europe or on arbitrary regional models. For a commercial or a personal programme that produces an endless argument with no practical use.
The classic frame is simple: the Bass version with Kosciuszko and the Messner version with Carstensz. It is recognised worldwide and does not require the project to be padded with mountains chosen at random.
In short
Kosciuszko is the historical Bass version and the highest point of mainland Australia. Carstensz is the Messner version, the highest point of Oceania and a technical rock climb. Neither mountain is a “mistake”. The mistake is to mix the two lists, to leave your own objective undefined and to buy a trip that does not match your preparation.
If you are building a personal Seven Summits plan, Mountain Guide can join up to eight possible summits into one sequence. Send us through the contact page the list of mountains you have already done, and say which version you want to complete — Bass, Messner or both.