Encyclopedia of the Arctic (3 vols.) [1 ed.] 1579584365, 9781579584368

Table of contents :
Board of Advisers
Contents
Entries A-Z
Thematic List of Entries
Foreword • Sheila Watt-Cloutier
Preface
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
Y
Z
List of Contributors
Index

Citation preview

ENCYCLOPEDIA OF THE ARCTIC

ENCYCLOPEDIA OF THE ARCTIC Volumes 1, 2 and 3 A–Z

Mark Nuttall, Editor

ROUTLEDGE NEW YORK AND LONDON

Published in 2005

Cover Photos Volume 1: Inuit hunters in kayaks return to shore towing a

Routledge 270 Madison Avenue New York, NY 10016

narwhal they have harpooned, Qaanaaq, Northwest Greenland. Copyright Bryan and Cherry Alexander Photography

www.routledge-ny.com Volume 2: Polar bear mother and cubs on new sea ice, Published in Great Britain by Routledge

Cape Churchill, Manitoba, Canada. Copyright Bryan and

Cherry Alexander Photography

2 Park Square Milton Park, Abingdon,

Volume 3: Northern lights, aurora borealis, over a Nenets

Oxon OX14 4RN U.K.

reindeer herders camp, Yamal Peninsula, Western Siberia,

www.routledge.co.uk

Russia. Copyright Bryan and Cherry Alexander Photography

Copyright © 2005 by Routledge. Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group.

This edition published in the Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2005. “To purchase your own copy of this or any of Taylor & Francis or Routledge’s collection of thousands of eBooks please go to www.eBookstore.tandf.co.uk.” All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilized in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Encyclopedia of the Arctic / Mark Nuttall, editor. P. cm. ISBN 1-57958-436-5 (set: alk. paper) -- ISBN 1-57958-437-3 (volume 1 : alk. paper) -- ISBN 1-57958438-1 (volume 2 : alk. paper) -- ISBN 1-57958-439-X (volume 3 : alk. paper) 1. Arctic regions -Encyclopedias. I. Title: Arctic. II. Nuttall, Mark. G606. E49 2005 909’.0913’03--dc22

ISBN 0-203-99785-9 Master e-book ISBN

2004016694

BOARD OF ADVISERS Dr. David G. Anderson Department of Anthropology University of Aberdeen Scotland

Mads Fægteborg Arctic Information Copenhagen Denmark

Lawson Brigham Deputy Director, US Arctic Research Commission Arlington, Virginia

Prof. Peter Johnson Department of Geography University of Ottawa Ontario, Canada

Prof. Terry V. Callaghan Director, Abisko Scientific station Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences Abisko, Sweden Dr. Torben R. Christensen Department of Plant Ecology Lund University Sweden

Dr. Igor Krupnik Arctic Studies Center National Museum of Natural History Smithsonian Institution Washington DC Dr. Molly Lee University of Alaska Museum University of Alaska Fairbanks

Dr. Liz Cruwys Scott Polar Research Institute University of Cambridge England

Dr. Hanne Petersen Director, Danish Polar Center Copenhagen, Denmark

Prof. Louis-Jacques Dorais Department of Anthropology Laval University Quebec, Canada

Dr. Beau Riffenburgh Scott Polar Research Institute University of Cambridge England

Prof. Julian Dowdeswell Director, Scott Polar Research Institute University of Cambridge England

Dr. David Scrivener Department of International Relations University of Keele Keele, England

Dr. Niels Einarsson Director Stefansson Arctic Institute Akureyri, Iceland

Dr. Frank Sejersen Department of Eskimology University of Copenhagen Denmark

Prof. Sergei Sutyrin Department of World Economy St. Petersburg University Russia Prof. Peter Wadhams Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics University of Cambridge England Prof. Gunter Weller Cooperative Institute for Arctic Research University of Alaska Fairbanks

Karla Jessen Williamson Executive Director Arctic Institute of North America University of Calgary Alberta Canada Prof. Robert G. Williamson Arctic Institute of North America University of Calgary Alberta Canada

Contents Entries A-Z ix Thematic List of Entries xxiii Foreword

xxxvii

Preface xxxix Map of Arctic Populations xliii Map of Arctic Indigenous Peoples xliv Entries A-Z 1–2226 List of Contributors 2227 Index

2247

Entries A-Z Volume 1

Aleutian Range Aleutian Tradition Aleutian/Pribilof Islands Association Alootook Ipellie Alpha Ridge Alphabets and Writing, North America and Greenland Alphabets and Writing, Russia Alphabets and Writing, Scandinavia and Iceland Alta/Kautokeino Demonstrations Alutiit Amagoalik, John Amedeo, Luigi, Duke of Abruzzi American Paleo-Arctic Tradition Amphibians Amund Ringnes Island Amundsen Basin Amundsen, Roald Anadyr Anadyr River Anchorage Andrée, Salomon August Animal-rights movements and renewable resources Animals in the worldviews of indigenous peoples Anzhu, Petr Fedorovich Archaeology of the Arctic: Alaska and Beringia Archaeology of the Arctic: Canada and Greenland Archaeology of the Arctic: Scandinavian Settlement of the North Atlantic Archbishop Innocent (Ivan Veniaminov) Arctic Athabaskan Council Arctic Char Arctic Circle Arctic Council Arctic: Definitions and Boundaries Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy

A Aasiaat Aasivik Aboriginal Identities Adamson, Shirley Adaptation Adoption Agreement on the Conservation of Polar Bears Ainana, Lyudmila Ainu Air Routes Akureyri Alaska Alaska Beluga Whale Committee Alaska Eskimo Whaling Commission (AEWC) Alaska Federation of Natives (AFN) Alaska Highway Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) Alaska Native Language Center Alaska Native Review Commission Alaska Native Science Commission Alaska Peninsula Alaska Range Alaska Treaty (Convention for the Cession of the Russian Possessions in North America to the United States) Albedo Alert Aleut Aleut Corporation Aleut International Association Aleutian Islands

ix

ENTRIES A-Z Arctic Fox Arctic Ground Squirrel Arctic Hare Arctic Haze Arctic Leaders’ Summit Arctic Mid-Ocean Ridge Arctic Ocean Arctic Ocean Hydrographical Expedition, 1909–1915 Arctic Peoples’ Conference Arctic Pilot Project Arctic Research Consortium of the United States (ARCUS) Arctic Research Policy Act Arctic Slope Regional Corporation (ASRC) Arctic Small Tool Tradition Arctic Waters Pollution Prevention Act (1971) Arctic Woodland Culture Arkhangel’sk Arkhangel’skaya Oblast’ Arms Control Armstrong, Terence Arnasson, Ingolfur Aron from Kangeq Art and Artists (Indigenous) Arutyunov, Sergei Association Inuksiutit Katimajiit Association of Canadian Universities for Northern Studies (ACUNS) Association of World Reindeer Herders Atassut Athapaskan Atlantic Layer Atlasov, Vladimir Auk Aurora Axel Heiberg Island

B Back River Back, Sir George Badigin, Konstantin Sergeyevich Baer, Karl von Baffin Bay Baffin Island Baffin, William Bang, Jette Banks Island Barents Council Barents Region Barents Regional Council Barents Sea Barents, Willem Barentsburg x

Barnacle Goose Barrow Barrow, Sir John Bartlett, Robert Bathurst Island Bathurst Mandate Bear Ceremonialism Bear Island Bearded Seal Bears Beaufort Gyre Beaufort Sea Beechey, Frederick Belcher, Sir Edward Bel’kachi Culture Bellot, Joseph-Réné Beluga (White) Whale Bennett, James Gordon Jr Bering Sea Bering Strait Bering, Vitus Beringia Bernier, Joseph-Elzéar Bilibino Bilibino Nuclear Power Plant Billings, Joseph Bioconcentration Biodiversity Biodiversity: Research Programmes Biogeochemistry Birch Forests Birket-Smith, Kaj Birnirk Culture Birthplace Criteria Bladder Ceremony Blue Whale Boas, Franz Bogoraz, Vladimir Germanovich Boothia Peninsula Boreal Forest Ecology Bourque, James W. Bowhead (Greenland Right) Whale Brent Geese British Arctic Expedition, 1875–1876 Brooks Range Bruce, W.S. Brun, Eske Bunge, Alexander von Buntings and Longspurs Bureau of Indian Affairs Bureau of Land Management Buryat Republic (Buryatiya) Button, Sir Thomas

ENTRIES A-Z Bylot Island Bylot, Robert Byrd, Richard Byrranga Mountains

C Canada Canadian Arctic Expedition, 1913–1918 Canadian Arctic Resources Committee (CARC) Canadian Basin Canadian Polar Commission Capacity Building Capelin Carbon Cycling Caribou Caribou Hunting Cartography Cassiope Heaths Castrén, Alexandr Mathias Charcot, Jean-Baptiste Chelyuskin, Semyon Chemnitz, Lars Cherevichny, Ivan Ivanovich Chernetsov, Valery Cherskii, Ivan Chirikov, Alexei Choris Culture Chugach Mountains Chukchi Chukchi Autonomous Okrug (Chukotka) Chukchi Plateau Chukchi Sea Chukchi-Kamchadal languages Chukotskoya Range Churches in Greenland and the North American Arctic, Establishment of Churches in Iceland and the Scandinavian Arctic, Establishment of Churches in the Russian Arctic, Establishment of Churchill Chuvan Circumpolar Arctic Vegetation Map Circumpolar Universities Association Clavering, Douglas C. Climate Climate Change Climate Oscillations Climate: Environmental Initiatives Climate: Research Programs Clothing Coal Mining Coastal Erosion Cod

Cod Wars Cold Halocline Collectivization Collins, Henry B. Collinson, Richard Colonization of the Arctic Colville River Comer, George Commander Islands Commission for Scientific Research in Greenland Committee for Original Peoples’ Entitlement (COPE) Committee of the North Common (Harbor) Seal Common Property Management Concentric Spheres and Polar Voids, Theory of Coniferous forests Conservation Contaminants Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic (OSPAR) Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) Cook, Frederick A. Cook, James Co-operatives Coppermine River Copse Cornwall Island Cornwallis Island Council of Yukon First Nations (CYFN) Council for Yukon Indians Umbrella Final Agreement Council of Tribal Athabascan Governments Cournoyea, Nellie Crantz, David Cree Crozier, Francis Curley, Tagak Czaplicka, Marie Antoinette

D Daavi Suvva festival Dall’s Sheep Dalton Highway DANCEA (Danish Cooperation for Environment in the Arctic) Daurkin, Nikolay Davis, John Davis Strait Dawson De Long, George Washington De Long Islands Declaration on the Protection of the Arctic Environment (1991)

xi

ENTRIES A-Z Demography and Population Dempster Highway Denbigh Flint Culture Dene Denmark Strait Department of Northern Affairs Act (1953) Devon Island Dezhnev, Semyon Diamond Mining Dikov, Nikolay Dikson Diomede Islands Disko Island Distant Early Warning (DEW) Line Divers or Loons Dog Sledge in Inuit Culture Dog Sledge in Northern Eurasia Dogrib (Tlicho) Dolgan Dolgikh, Boris Dolphins and Porpoises Dorset Culture Drifting Stations Dry tundra Dudinka Dwarf-Shrub Heaths Dyuktai Culture

E East Siberian Sea Ebierbing, Hannah (Tookoolito) and Joe Ecology and Environment Economic Development Economic Inventory of the (Soviet) Polar North, 1926/27 Economic Policy Education Eenoolooapik Egede, Hans Egede, Ingmar Egede, Poul Eider Eirík the Red Elders Ellef Ringnes Island Ellesmere Island Ellis, Henry Ellsworth, Lincoln Empetrum Heaths Encyclopaedia Arctica Energy Balance Enets Environmental History of the Arctic Environmental Problems

xii

Environmentalism Erasmus, Georges Eriksson, Leif Eskers Eskimo Eskimo-Aleut Languages Eskimology Ethnohistory Evenki Evenki Autonomous Okrug Evens Exploration of the Arctic Exxon Valdez Eyak

F Fairbanks Faroe Islands Fell-Fields Fens Fiala, Anthony Fifth Thule Expedition Fin Whale Finland Finnbogadottir, Vigdis Finnmark Fish Fish Farming Fisher, Alexander Fisheries (Commercial) Fjords Floe Edge Flora of the Tundra Food chains Food Use of Wild Species Food Webs, Marine Forests: Environmental Initiatives Fossil Periglacial Phenomena Fossils: Animal Species Fossils: Plant Species Foxe, Luke Fram Strait Franklin, Lady Jane Franklin, Sir John Franz Josef Land Freshwater Ecosystems Freshwater Hydrology Freuchen, Peter Frobisher, Sir Martin Frost and Frost Phenomena Fulmar Fur Trade Fur Trade, History in Russia

ENTRIES A-Z

Volume 2 G G-50 G-60 Gas Exploration Gas Hydrates Gelifluction Processes Gender General Circulation Modeling Geological History of the Arctic Geomorphology Geopolitics of the Arctic Gessain, Robert Giddings, Louis Gilder, William Henry Glacial Deposition Glacial Erosion Glacial Flow Glacial Geomorphology Glacier Growth and Decay Glacier Ice Glacier Mass Balance Glaciers Glaciology Glavsevmorput (Chief Office for the Northern Sea Route) Global Change Effects Global Warming Globalization and the Arctic Gold Mining Government of the Northwest Territories Legislation (1966–) Graah, Wilhelm A. Grand Council of the Cree Gray Seal Gray Whale Gray, David, Jr Gray, David, Sr Great Bear Lake Great Slave Lake Great Stalin Railway Grebe Greely, Adolphus W. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Greenland Greenland Halibut Greenland Home Rule Act Greenland Hunters and Fishers Association (KNAPK) Greenland Ice Sheet Greenland Inuit Greenland Sea Greenland Seafishery and Export Association

Greenland Shark Greenland Technical Organization (GTO) Grímsey Grinnell, Henry Grise Fjord Ground Ice Groupe d’études inuit et circumpolaires Guillemot Gulf of Alaska Gulf Stream Gulls Gwich’in Gwich’in Comprehensive Land Claims Agreement Gwich’in Council International Gwich’in Renewable Resources Board Gwich’in Settlement Area Gwich’in Tribal Council

H Habitat Loss Haida Hall, Charles F. Handicrafts/Tourist Art Happy Valley Harp Seal Hatt, Gudmund Haven, Edwin J. De Hayes, Isaac I. Hazen, Lake Health and Disease in the Arctic Health: Environmental Initiatives Health: Research Programmes Hearne, Samuel Heavy Metals Hendrik, Hans (Suersaq) Hensley, Willie Henson, Matthew Herb Slopes Herbert, Wally Herring Herschel Island Herzen Institute Hibernation High Arctic High North Alliance Høegh, Erling Hoel, Adolf Holm, Gustav Holocene Holtved, Erik Hooded Seal Hopson, Eben Housing

xiii

ENTRIES A-Z HrdliJka, Aleš Hudson Bay Hudson, Henry Hudson’s Bay Company Human Dimensions: Research Programs Human Ecology Human Population Trends Humpback Whale Hunting, Subsistence Husavik Hydrocarbon contamination

I Ice Ages Ice Caps Ice Core Record Ice Islands Ice Jams Ice Sheets Ice Shelves Icebergs Icebreakers Iceland Icelanders Igarka Igloolik ILO Convention no. 107 ILO Convention no. 169 Ilulissat Images of Indigenous Peoples Images of the Arctic Impacts of Climate Change Independence Culture Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC) Indigenous Knowledge Indigenous Peoples’ Organizations and Arctic Environmental Politics Indigenous Peoples’ Secretariat Indigenous Rights Indigenous Worldviews Indigirka River Industrial Development Information Technology Inglefield, Edward A. Ingstad, Helge Innu Insect Larvae Insects Institute for Northern Minorities’ Problems Institute of Peoples of the North Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) International Arctic Science Committee (IASC)

xiv

International Arctic Social Sciences Association (IASSA) International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling International Council for Exploration of the Sea (ICES) International Polar Years International Union for Circumpolar Health International Whaling Commission (IWC) International Work Group for Indigenous Affairs (IWGIA) Inuit Inuit Art Foundation Inuit Ataqatigiit Inuit Broadcasting Corporation Inuit Circumpolar Conference (ICC) Inuit Circumpolar Youth Council (ICYC) Inuit Party Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami Iñupiat Inuvialuit Inuvialuit Comanagement Bodies Inuvialuit Final Agreement Inuvialuit Settlement Region Inuvik Invertebrates, Aquatic Invertebrates, Terrestrial Iokhel’son, Vladimir Il’ich Ipiutak Culture Iqaluit Itel’men Ittoqqortoormiit (Scoresbysund) Ivanov, Sergei Vasil’evich Ivittunt Ivory Carving Iyatayet

J Jackson, Frederick James Bay and Northern Québec Agreement James Bay Hydroelectric Project James, Thomas Jan Mayen Jenness, Diamond Jesup North Pacific Expedition Johansen, Lars Emil Jökulhlaups Josie, Edith

K Kamchatka Peninsula Kamchatka River Kamchatskaya Oblast’ Kames

ENTRIES A-Z Kane, Elisha Kent Kangerlussuaq Kara Sea Karelia Kativik Environmental Quality Commission Kativik Regional Government Kayak Kenai Peninsula Kennedy, William Kenojuak Ket Kettles Khanty Khanty-Mansi Autonomous Okrug Khanty-Mansiisk Khatanga Khatanga River Khlobystin, Leonid Killer Whale King Crab King Eider King Island King William Island Kinship Kiruna Kittiwake Kleinschmidt, Samuel Klutschak, Henry Wenzel Knuth, Eigil Kobelev, Ivan Koch, Lauge Kodiak Island Kola Peninsula Kola Science Centre Kolchak, Alexander Koldeway, Karl Kolguyev Island Kolyma Highway Kolyma Range Kolyma River Komi Komi Republic Koryak Koryak Autonomous Okrug Kotzebue, Otto von Krasheninnikov, Stepan Krasnoyarsk Kray Krauss, Michael E. Kroeber, Alfred Kropotkin, Petr Kuchiev, Yuri Sergeevich Kuptana, Rosemarie

Kuskokwim Mountains Kuujjuaq

L Labor Camps Labrador Inuit Labrador Inuit Association Labrador Inuit Land Claims Agreement in Principle Labrador Sea Laguna, Frederica de Lancaster Sound Land bridges and the Arctic Continental Shelf Land Claims Land mammals: Research Programmes Languages of the Arctic Lapland Lappin lääni Laptev Sea Laptev, Dmitriy Laptev, Khariton Large Marine Ecosystems Larsen, Helge Laxness, Haldor Leadership Leads Leigh Smith, Benjamin Lena River Levin, Maxim Lichen Lincoln Sea Literature, Greenlandic Literature, North American Literature, Russian Litke, Fedor Little Ice Age Local and Transboundary Pollution Loess Lomonosov Ridge London, Jack Longyear, John Longyearbyen Lovozero Low Level Flight Training Low, Albert Peter Lynge, Aqqaluk Lynge, Augo Lynge, Finn Lyon, George Francis

M Maak, Rikhard Karlovich Maarmorilik

xv

ENTRIES A-Z Mackenzie Basin Mackenzie delta Mackenzie King Island Mackenzie River Mackenzie, Sir Alexander Mackenzie Valley pipeline MacLean, Edna Agheak MacMillan, Donald Baxter Magadan Magadanskaya Oblast Magga, Ole Henrik Makivik Corporation Mallot, Byron Mammoth Mansi Marine Biology Marine Mammal Hunting Marine Mammal Protection Act Marine mammals Marine mammals: Research programmes Markham, Sir Albert H. Markham, Sir Clements R. Marshes Mary-Rousseliere, Father Guy Masks Mathiassen, Therkel McClintock, Francis Leopold McClure, Sir Robert McLaughlin, Audrey Media Medical Science in the Arctic Melville Bay Melville Island Melville Peninsula Menovshchikov, Giorgyi Mesic Tundra Messenger Feast Meteorological Stations Métis Metis National Council Microbes Microbial Mats Microclimates Microtines (Lemmings, Voles) Middendorff, Alexander Middleton, Christopher Migration (Prehistory) Mikkelsen, Ejnar Militarization of the Arctic in Russia Militarization of the Arctic in the West Minik Mining Minke Whale

xvi

Missionary Activity Mitaarneq Molloy Deep Molluscs Moose Moraines Moses, James Kivetoruk Mosquitoes Motzfeldt, Jonathan Mount McKinley (Denali) Mowat, Farley Munk, Jens Murdoch, John Murmansk Murmansk Speech (1987) Murmanskaya Oblast’ Music (Contemporary Indigenous, Canadian Arctic) Music (Traditional Indigenous) Muskox Mylius-Erichsen, Ludwig Mythology of the Inuit Mývatn Lake

N Nalukatak Naming Nanai Nanisivik Nanortalik Nansen Basin Nansen, Fridtjof Narwhal Naryan-Mar National Parks and Protected Areas: Alaska National Parks and Protected Areas: Canada National Parks and Protected Areas: Finland National Parks and Protected Areas: Greenland National Parks and Protected Areas: Iceland National Parks and Protected Areas: Norway National Parks and Protected Areas: Russia Native Corporations Navigation, indigenous Negidal Nelson, Edward Nelson Island Nenets Nenets Autonomous Okrug New Siberian Islands Newfoundland and Labrador Nganasan Nickul, Karl Nikolaev, Mikhail E. Nivkhi

ENTRIES A-Z Nobile, Umberto Noctilucent Cloud Formation Nomadism Nome Nordenskiöld, Adolf Erik Nordic Council of Ministers Nordic Saami Institute Nordland Noril’sk Nørlund, Poul Norman Wells Norrbotten Norse and Icelandic Sagas North Atlantic Biocultural Organization (NABO) North Atlantic Drift North Atlantic Fisheries Organization (NAFO) North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission (NAMMCO) North East Passage, Exploration of North Magnetic Pole North Pacific North Pacific Fur Seal Convention North Pole North Pole Air Expedition, 1937 North Slope North West Company North West Passage North West Passage, Exploration of Northern Altaic Languages Northern Archaic Period Northern Athapaskan Languages Northern Bottlenose Whale Northern Climate ExChange Northern Dimension (of the European Union) Northern Dimension of Canada’s Foreign Policy Northern Forum Northern fur Seal Northern Research Forum Northern Sea Route Northern Uralic Languages Northwest Alaska Regional Corporation (NRC) Northwest Territories Norton Culture Norway Norwegian Saami parliament Norwegian Sea Novaya Zemlya Novyi Urengoi Nuclear Testing Nunataks Nunavik Nunavik Political Accord Nunavut

Nunavut Final Agreement Nunavut Tunngavik Inc. Nunavut Wildlife Management Board Nunivak Island Nutrition and Food Nuuk Ny Herrnhut

Volume 3 O Ob’ River Ocean Dumping Ocean Fronts Oceanography Oceanography: Research Programs Oddsson, David Odulok, Tekki Office of Polar Programs, National Science Foundation Oil Exploration Okalik, Paul Okhotsk, Sea of Okladnikov, Alexei Old Bering Sea Culture Old Crow Flats Old Itel’men Culture Old Kerek Culture Old Koryak Culture Olearius, Adam Olenek River Olsen, Jørgen Olsen, Moses Open Polar Sea Orochi Orok Owl Ozone Depletion

P Palana Pancake Ice Papanin, Ivan Dmitrievich Parry, Sir William Edward Pastoralism Patterned and Polygonal Ground Payer, Julius Peary, Robert E. Peatlands and Bogs Pechora Basin Pechora Delta Pechora River Peck, Edmund James Penny, William

xvii

ENTRIES A-Z Penzhina River Periglacial environments Permafrost Permafrost Hydrology Permafrost Retreat Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) Petermann, August Petersen, Robert Petitot, Father Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky Pevek Phipps, Constantine Physical Anthropology of the Arctic Pilot Whale Pilsudski, Bronislaw Piotr Pingos Pinkfooted Goose Pitseolak, Peter Piugaattuk, Noah Place Names Plankton Plant–Animal Interactions Plant Gathering Plant Reproduction and Pollination Pleistocene Megafauna Polar Bear Polar Continental Shelf Project (PCSP) Polar Desert Polar Fronts Polar Lows Polar Steppe Polar Stratospheric Clouds Polar Vortex Political Issues in Resource Management Pollock Pollution: Environmental Initiatives Pollution: Research Programs Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) Polynyas Pomor Pond Inlet Popov, Andrei Precipitation and Moisture Pre-Dorset Culture Pribilof Islands Primary Production Primary Production, Marine Prince Charles Island Prince of Wales Island Prince Patrick Island Project Chariot Protected Areas Provideniya

xviii

Prudhoe Bay Pryde, Duncan Ptarmigan and Grouse Puffins Pullar, Gordon

Q Qaanaaq Qaqortoq Qeqertarsuaq Qilakitsoq mummies Qillarsuaq Quaternary Paleoclimatology Quaternary Paleogeography Quaternary Period Québec Queen Elizabeth Islands Qumaq, Taamusi

R Race to the North Pole Radio Greenland (KNR) Radioactivity Rae, John Ragland Mining Project Rainey, Froelich Raptors Rasmussen, Henriette Rasmussen, Knud Raven Razorbill Red Dog Mine Redfish Reindeer Reindeer Pastoralism Relocation Repatriation Reptiles Research Stations Resolute Base Resolute Bay Reykjavík Ribbon Seal Richardson, Sir John Ringed Seal Rink, Hinrich Johannes River and Lake Ice Rock glaciers Rosing, Hans Pavia Ross, Sir James Ross, Sir John Roussell, Aage

ENTRIES A-Z Rovaniemi Rowley, Graham Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) Royal Geographical Society Royal Greenland Royal Greenland Trade Company (KGH) Rudenko, Sergei Russia Russian “Old Settlers” Russian American Company Russian Association of Indigenous Peoples of the North (RAIPON) Russian Civil War Russian Federal Law Guaranteeing the Rights of Native Sparse Peoples of the Russian Federation Russian Federal Law on Clan Communes (Obshchinas) Russian Federal Law on Territories of Traditional Nature Use Russian Geographical Society Russian Polar Expedition, 1900–1901 Rytkheu, Yuri

S Saami Saami Council Saami Parliaments Sabine, Edward Sacheuse, John Sachs Harbour Sahtu Land Claims Agreement Sahtu Renewable Resouces Board Sahtu Settlement Area Sakha Republic (Yakutia) Sakhalin Island Salekhard Salinity Anomalies Salmon Sangi, Vladimir Saqqaq Culture Satellite Remote Sensing Scandinavian Languages Schneider, Lucien Schultz, Ed Schwatka, Frederick Scoresby, William Scrimshaw Sculpin Sea Ice Sea Otter Seabirds Seal Skin Directive Second Kamchatka Expedition Secondary Production

Sedge Meadows Sedna: The Sea Goddess Sedov, Georgiy Yakovlevich Sei Whale Sel’kup Self-Determination Self-Government Service, Robert Settlers (Labrador) Severnaya Dvina Severnaya Zemlya Seward Peninsula Shamanism Sharing Sheep Sheep Farming Shirokogorov, Sergey Mikhailovich Shmidt, Otto Yul’evich Shrimp Shrub Tundra Shternberg, Lev Yakovlevich Siberdik Culture Siberian (Chukotkan) Yupik Sibiryakov, Alexander Sieroszewski, Waclaw Leopoldovich Sikussak Simon, Mary Simpson, Thomas Sirius Patrol Sisimiut Siumut Skraeling Island Skuas and Jaegers Snow Snow House Snow Patches Snowshoe Hare Soil Respiration Soils Solovetski Islands Somerset Island Somov, Mikhail Mikhailovich Song Duel Soper, J. Dewey Southampton Island Space Weather Speranskii, Mikhail Sperm Whale Sporting and Cultural Events in Canada Spotted Seal St Lawrence Island Stefansson Island Stefansson, Vilhjalmur

xix

ENTRIES A-Z Steller, Georg Steller’s Sea Lion Stratus Cloud Sturluson, Snorri Subarctic Sublimation Submarines in Arctic Exploration Subpolar Gyres Substorms Sumnagin Culture Sustainable Development Sustainable Development and Human Dimensions: Environmental Initiatives Svalbard Svalbard Treaty Sverdrup, Otto Swaine, Charles Swan Sweden Syalakh Culture Syktyvkar

Transpolar Drift Transport Trans-Siberian Railway Trapping Treeline Treeline Dynamics Treshnikov, Aleksey Feodorovich Troms Tromsø Trophic Levels Tsimshian Tuktoyaktuk Tundra Tungus Tupilak Turner, Lucien M. Tussock Tundra Tutchone Tyrrell, Joseph Burr Tyumen Oblast Tyumen’

T

U

Taiga Tanner Crab Taqramiut Nipingat Tarya Culture Tasiilaq Tatshenshini/Alsek Tattooing Taymyr (Dolgan-Nenets) Autonomous Okrug Taymyr Lake Taymyr Peninsula Taz River Tein, Tasyan Telecommunications Tern Thalbitzer, William Thermohaline Circulation Thermokarst Thule Air Base Thule Culture Tides Tiksi Tlingit Tofalars Tokarev Culture Toll, Baron Edward von Torrell, Otto Tourism Trade Trans-Alaska Pipeline Trans-Arctic Air Route

Udege Ulchi Ultraviolet-B radiation Umiak UN Convention on the Law of the Sea United States of America Universities and Higher Education Establishments, North America and Greenland Universities and Higher Education Establishments, Russia University of the Arctic Upernavik Upper Atmosphere Physics and Chemistry Ural Mountains Urban Climates Urbanization Ushakov, Georgiy Uummannaq

xx

V Vaigach Van de Velde, Franz VanStone, James Vasilevich, Glafira Makar’evna Vdovin, Innokentiy Stepanovich Vegetation Distribution Verkhoyansk Range Vestmannaeyjar (Westman Islands) Vibe, Christian Victor, Paul-Emile

ENTRIES A-Z Victoria Island Vikings Vilkitskii Strait Vil’kitskii, Boris Andreevich Vinland Vize, Vladimir Vlamingh, Willem de Volcanoes and volcanic activity Vorkuta Voronin, Vladimir Ivanovich

W Waders Walrus Warfare, Historical Waste Management Watkins, Gino Watt, Charlie Watt-Cloutier, Sheila Weasel Weather Wegener, Alfred Wellman, Walter West Nordic Council Western Telegraph Expedition Wet Tundra Weymouth, George Weyprecht, Karl Whaling, Historical Whaling, Subsistence White Sea White-Fronted Goose Whitehorse

Wilderness Wildlife Management: Environmental Initiatives Windchill Wolf Wolverine Woodlands World Council of Whalers World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) International Arctic Programme Wrangel Island Wrangel Paleo-Eskimo Culture Wrangell, Baron Ferdinand Petrovich von

Y Yakuts Yakutsk Yamal Peninsula Yamal-Nenets Autonomous Okrug Yana River Yasak Yellowknife Yenisey River Ymyakhtakh Culture Yukagir Yukon Native Language Centre Yukon River Yukon Territory Yupiit Yupik Eskimo Society of Chukotka

Z Zagoskin, Lavrentii Zagoskin

xxi

Thematic List of Entries Acts and Treaties

Sahtu Land Claims Agreement Svalbard Treaty UN Convention on the Law of the Sea

Agreement on the Conservation of Polar Bears Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) Alaska Treaty (Convention for the Cession of the Russian Possessions in North America to the United States) Arctic Research Policy Act Arctic Waters Pollution Prevention Act (1971) Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic (OSPAR) Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) Council for Yukon Indians Umbrella Final Agreement Declaration on the Protection of the Arctic Environment (1991) Department of Northern Affairs Act (1953) Government of the Northwest Territories Legislation (1966– ) Greenland Home Rule Act Gwich’in Comprehensive Land Claims Agreement ILO Convention No. 107 ILO Convention No. 169 International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling Inuvialuit Final Agreement James Bay and Northern Québec Agreement Labrador Inuit Land Claims Agreement in Principle Marine Mammal Protection Act North Pacific Fur Seal Convention Nunavik Political Accord Nunavut Final Agreement Russian Federal Law Guaranteeing the Rights of Native Sparse Peoples of the Russian Federation Russian Federal Law on Clan Communes (Obshchinas) Russian Federal Law on Territories of Traditional Nature Use

Birds Auk Barnacle Goose Brent Geese Buntings and Longspurs Divers or Loons Eider Fulmar Grebe Guillemot Gulls King Eider Kittiwake Owl Pinkfooted Goose Ptarmigan and Grouse Puffins Raptors Raven Razorbill Seabirds Skuas and Jaegers Swan Tern Waders White-Fronted Goose

Climate and Weather Albedo Arctic Haze Climate Climate Change

xxiii

THEMATIC LIST OF ENTRIES Climate Oscillations Climate: Environmental Initiatives Climate: Research Programs Energy Balance General Circulation Modeling Global Warming Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impacts of Climate Change Meteorological Stations Microclimates Noctilucent Cloud Formation Ozone Depletion Polar Fronts Polar Lows Polar Stratospheric Clouds Polar Vortex Precipitation and Moisture Quaternary Paleoclimatology Snow Stratus Cloud Sublimation Substorms Upper Atmosphere Physics and Chemistry Urban Climates Weather Windchill

Countries and Political Subdivisions Alaska Arkhangel’skaya Oblast’ Barents Region Buryat Republic (Buryatiya) Canada Chukchi Autonomous Okrug (Chukotka) Evenki Autonomous Okrug Faroe Islands Finland Finnmark Greenland Gwich’in Settlement Area Iceland Inuvialuit Settlement Region Kamchatskaya Oblast’ Karelia Khanty-Mansi Autonomous Okrug Komi Republic Koryak Autonomous Okrug Krasnoyarsk Kray Lapland Lappin lääni Magadanskaya Oblast’ Murmanskaya Oblast’ Nenets Autonomous Okrug

xxiv

Newfoundland and Labrador Nordland Norrbotten Northwest Territories Norway Nunavik Nunavut Québec Russia Sahtu Settlement Area Sakha Republic (Yakutia) Svalbard Sweden Taymyr (Dolgan-Nenets) Autonomous Okrug Troms Tyumen Oblast’ United States of America Yamal-Nenets Autonomous Okrug Yukon Territory

Ecology and Environment Adaptation Animal-Rights Movements and Renewable Resources Bioconcentration Biodiversity Biodiversity: Research Programs Biogeochemistry Boreal Forest Ecology Capacity Building Carbon Cycling Climate Change Common Property Management Conservation Contaminants Ecology and Environment Environmental History of the Arctic Environmental Problems Environmentalism Exxon Valdez Food Chains Food Use of Wild Species Food Webs, Marine Freshwater Ecosystems Global Change Effects Habitat Loss Heavy Metals Hibernation Human Ecology Hydrocarbon Contamination Large Marine Ecosystems Local and Transboundary Pollution Marine Biology Microbes

THEMATIC LIST OF ENTRIES Microbial Mats Ocean Dumping Ozone Depletion Peatlands and Bogs Permafrost Retreat Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) Plant-Animal Interactions Plant Reproduction and Pollination Pollution: Environmental Initiatives Pollution: Research Programs Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) Primary Production Primary Production, Marine Protected Areas Radioactivity Secondary Production Soil Respiration Soils Treeline Treeline Dynamics Trophic Levels Ultraviolet-B Radiation Vegetation Distribution Waste Management

Economics Air Routes Alaska Highway Arctic Pilot Project Bilibino Nuclear Power Plant Coal Mining Co-operatives Dalton Highway Dempster Highway Diamond Mining Economic Development Economic Policy Exxon Valdez Fish Farming Fisheries (Commercial) Fur Trade Gas Exploration Gas Hydrates Globalization and the Arctic Gold Mining Handicrafts/Tourist Art Icebreakers Industrial Development James Bay Hydroelectric Project Kolyma Highway Maarmorilik Mackenzie Valley Pipeline Mining

Nanisivik Norman Wells North West Passage Northern Sea Route Oil Exploration Prudhoe Bay Ragland Mining Project Red Dog Mine Scrimshaw Sheep Farming Sustainable Development Telecommunications Tourism Trade Trans-Alaska Pipeline Trans-Arctic Air Route Transport Trans-Siberian Railway Trapping

Explorers and Exploration Amedeo, Luigi, Duke of Abruzzi Amundsen, Roald Andrée, Salomon August Anzhu, Petr Fedorovich Arctic Ocean Hydrographical Expedition, 1909–1915 Arnasson, Ingolfur Atlasov, Vladimir Back, Sir George Badigin, Konstantin Sergeyevich Baer, Karl von Baffin, William Barents, Willem Barrow, Sir John Bartlett, Robert Beechey, Frederick Belcher, Sir Edward Bellot, Joseph-Réné Bennett, James Gordon Jr. Bering, Vitus Bernier, Joseph-Elzear Billings, Joseph British Arctic Expedition, 1875–1876 Bunge, Alexander von Button, Sir Thomas Bylot, Robert Byrd, Richard Canadian Arctic Expedition, 1913–1918 Charcot, Jean-Baptiste Chelyuskin, Semyon Cherevichny, Ivan Ivanovich Cherskii, Ivan Chirikov, Alexei

xxv

THEMATIC LIST OF ENTRIES Clavering, Douglas C. Collinson, Richard Comer, George Cook, Frederick A. Cook, James Crozier, Francis Daurkin, Nikolay Davis, John De Long, George Washington Dezhnev, Semyon Ebierbing, Hannah (Tookoolito) and Joe Eenoolooapik Ellis, Henry Ellsworth, Lincoln Eriksson, Leif Exploration of the Arctic Fiala, Anthony Fifth Thule Expedition Fisher, Alexander Foxe, Luke Franklin, Lady Jane Franklin, Sir John Freuchen, Peter Frobisher, Sir Martin Gilder, William Henry Greely, Adolphus W. Grinnell, Henry Hall, Charles F. Haven, Edwin J. De Hayes, Isaac I. Hearne, Samuel Hendrik, Hans (Suersaq) Henson, Matthew Herbert, Wally Hudson, Henry Inglefield, Edward A. Jackson, Frederick James, Thomas Jesup North Pacific Expedition Kane, Elisha Kent Kennedy, William Kobelev, Ivan Koch, Lauge Kolchak, Alexander Koldeway, Karl Kotzebue, Otto von Kropotkin, Petr Kuchiev, Yuri Sergeevich Laptev, Dmitriy Laptev, Khariton Leigh Smith, Benjamin Litke, Fedor Lyon, George Francis

xxvi

Mackenzie, Sir Alexander MacMillan, Donald Baxter Markham, Sir Albert H. Markham, Sir Clements R. McClintock, Francis Leopold McClure, Sir Robert Middendorff, Alexander Middleton, Christopher Mikkelsen, Ejnar Munk, Jens Mylius-Erichsen, Ludwig Nansen, Fridtjof Nobile, Umberto Nordenskiöld, Adolf Erik North East Passage, Exploration of North Pole Air Expedition, 1937 North West Passage, Exploration of Papanin, Ivan Dmitrievich Parry, Sir William Edward Payer, Julius Peary, Robert E. Penny, William Petermann, August Phipps, Constantine Qillarsuaq Race to the North Pole Rae, John Rasmussen, Knud Richardson, Sir John Ross, Sir James Ross, Sir John Royal Geographical Society Russian Polar Expedition, 1900–1901 Sabine, Edward Sacheuse, John Schwatka, Frederick Scoresby, William Second Kamchatka Expedition Sedov, Georgiy Yakovlevich Shmidt, Otto Yul’evich Sibiryakov, Alexander Simpson, Thomas Stefansson, Vilhjalmur Steller, Georg Submarines in Arctic Exploration Sverdrup, Otto Swaine, Charles Toll, Baron Edward von Treshnikov, Aleksey Feodorovich Tyrrell, Joseph Burr Ushakov, Georgiy Vibe, Christian Victor, Paul-Emile

THEMATIC LIST OF ENTRIES Vil’kitskii, Boris Andreevich Vize, Vladimir Vlamingh, Willem de Voronin, Vladimir Ivanovich Watkins, Gino Wegener, Alfred Wellman, Walter Western Telegraph Expedition Weymouth, George Weyprecht, Karl Wrangell, Baron Ferdinand Petrovich von Zagoskin, Lavrentii Zagoskin

Fish Arctic Char Capelin Cod Fish Greenland Halibut Greenland Shark Herring King Crab Molluscs Pollock Redfish Salmon Sculpin Shrimp Tanner Crab

History and Archaeology See also Explorers and Exploration Aleutian Tradition American Paleo-Arctic Tradition Archaeology of the Arctic: Alaska and Beringia Archaeology of the Arctic: Canada and Greenland Archaeology of the Arctic: Scandinavian Settlement of the North Atlantic Archbishop Innocent (Ivan Veniaminov) Arctic Small Tool Tradition Arctic Woodland Culture Armstrong, Terence Arutyunov, Sergei Bel’kachi Culture Birnirk Culture Chernetsov, Valery Choris Culture Cod Wars Collectivization Collins, Henry B. Colonization of the Arctic Committee of the North Denbigh Flint Culture

Dikov, Nikolay Distant Early Warning (DEW) Line Dog sledge in Inuit Culture Dog sledge in Northern Eurasia Dorset Culture Drifting Stations Dyuktai Culture Ebierbing, Hannah (Tookoolito) and Joe Eenoolooapik Eirík the Red Eriksson, Leif Encyclopaedia Arctica Ethnohistory Fur Trade, History in Russia Giddings, Louis Glavsevmorput (Chief Office for the Northern Sea Route) Graah, Wilhelm A. Gray, David, Jr. Gray, David, Sr. Great Stalin Railway Hatt, Gudmund Holtved, Erik HrdliJ ka, Aleš Hudson’s Bay Company Independence Culture Ipiutak Culture Iyatayet Khlobystin, Leonid Knuth, Eigil Labor Camps Laguna, Frederica de Larsen, Helge Longyear, John Mary-Rousseliere, Father Guy Mathiassen, Therkel Migration (Prehistory) Minik Nørlund, Poul Norse and Icelandic Sagas North West Company Northern Archaic period Norton Culture Ny Herrnhut Okladnikov, Alexei Old Bering Sea Culture Old Crow Flats Old Itel’men Culture Old Kerek Culture Old Koryak Culture Petitot, Father Pre-Dorset Culture Qilakitsoq mummies

xxvii

THEMATIC LIST OF ENTRIES Rainey, Froelich Roussell, Aage Rowley, Graham Rudenko, Sergei Russian American Company Russian Civil War Saqqaq Culture Scrimshaw Siberdik Culture Sumnagin Culture Syalakh Culture Tarya Culture Tein, Tasyan Thalbitzer, William Thule Culture Tokarev Culture VanStone, James Vdovin, Innokentiy Stepanovich Vikings Vinland Warfare, Historical Whaling, Historical Wrangel Paleo-Eskimo Culture Yasak Ymyakhtakh Culture

Islands Aleutian Islands Amund Ringnes Island Axel Heiberg Island Baffin Island Banks Island Bathurst Island Bear Island Bylot Island Commander Islands Cornwall Island Cornwallis Island De Long Islands Devon Island Diomede Islands Disko Island Ellef Ringnes Island Ellesmere Island Franz Josef Land Grímsey Herschel Island Jan Mayen King Island King William Island Kodiak Island Kolguyev Island Mackenzie King Island

xxviii

Melville Island Nelson Island New Siberian Islands Novaya Zemlya Nunivak Island Pribilof Islands Prince Charles Island Prince of Wales Island Prince Patrick Island Queen Elizabeth Islands Sakhalin Island Severnaya Zemlya Skraeling Island Solovetski Islands Somerset Island Southampton Island St Lawrence Island Stefansson Island Vaigach Vestmannaeyjar (Westman Islands) Victoria Island Wrangel Island

Languages and Linguistics Alphabets and Writing, North America and Greenland Alphabets and Writing, Russia Alphabets and Writing, Scandinavia and Iceland Castrén, Alexandr Mathias Chukchi-Kamchadal Languages Eskimo-Aleut Languages Krauss, Michael E. Languages of the Arctic Literature, Greenlandic Literature, North American Literature, Russian Menovshchikov, Giorgyi Norse and Icelandic Sagas Northern Altaic languages Northern Athapaskan Languages Northern Uralic Languages Petersen, Robert Scandinavian Languages Schneider, Lucien Shternberg, Lev Yakovlevich Vasilevich, Glafira Makar’evna

Mammals and Other Land Animals Adaptation Amphibians Arctic Fox Arctic Ground Squirrel Arctic Hare Bears

THEMATIC LIST OF ENTRIES Caribou Caribou Hunting Dall’s Sheep Hibernation Hunting, Subsistence Insect Larvae Insects Invertebrates, Aquatic Invertebrates, Terrestrial Land mammals: Research Programs Mammoth Microbes Microtines (Lemmings, Voles) Moose Mosquitoes Muskox Plankton Pleistocene megafauna Reindeer Reptiles Sheep Snowshoe Hare Weasel Wolf Wolverine

Marine Mammals Bearded Seal Beluga (White) Whale Blue Whale Bowhead (Greenland Right) Whale Common (Harbor) Seal Dolphins and Porpoises Fin Whale Gray Whale Grey Seal Harp Seal Hooded Seal Humpback Whale Killer Whale Marine Mammal Hunting Marine Mammals Marine Mammals: Research Programs Minke Whale Narwhal Northern Bottlenose Whale Northern Fur Seal Pilot Whale Polar Bear Ribbon Seal Ringed Seal Sea Otter Sei Whale

Sperm Whale Spotted Seal Steller’s Sea Lion Walrus Whaling, Subsistence

National Parks and Protected Areas National Parks and Protected Areas: Alaska National Parks and Protected Areas: Canada National Parks and Protected Areas: Finland National Parks and Protected Areas: Greenland National Parks and Protected Areas: Iceland National Parks and Protected Areas: Norway National Parks and Protected Areas: Russia Protected Areas

Oceanography Atlantic Layer Beaufort Gyre Cold Halocline Floe Edge Gulf Stream Ice Islands Ice Shelves Icebergs Leads North Atlantic Drift Ocean Fronts Oceanography Oceanography: Research Programs Open Polar Sea Pancake Ice Polynyas Salinity Anomalies Sea Ice Sikussak Subpolar Gyres Thermohaline Circulation Tides Transpolar Drift

Oceans, Seas and Bathymetry Alpha Ridge Amundsen Basin Arctic Mid-Ocean Ridge Arctic Ocean Baffin Bay Barents Sea Beaufort Sea Bering Sea Bering Strait Canadian Basin Chukchi Plateau

xxix

THEMATIC LIST OF ENTRIES Chukchi Sea Davis Strait Denmark Strait East Siberian Sea Fram Strait Greenland Sea Gulf of Alaska Hudson Bay Kara Sea Labrador Sea Lancaster Sound Laptev Sea Lincoln Sea Lomonosov Ridge Melville Bay Molloy Deep Nansen Basin North Pacific Norwegian Sea Okhotsk, Sea of Vilkitskii Strait White Sea

Organizations Alaska Beluga Whale Committee Alaska Eskimo Whaling Commission (AEWC) Alaska Federation of Natives (AFN) Alaska Native Language Center Alaska Native Review Commission Alaska Native Science Commission Aleut Corporation Aleut International Association Aleutian/Pribilof Islands Association Arctic Athabaskan Council Arctic Council Arctic Leaders’ Summit Arctic Peoples’ Conference Arctic Research Consortium of the United States (ARCUS) Arctic Slope Regional Corporation (ASRC) Association Inuksiutit Katimajiit Association of Canadian Universities for Northern Studies (ACUNS) Association of World Reindeer Herders Barents Council Barents Regional Council Bureau of Indian Affairs Bureau of Land Management Canadian Arctic Resources Committee (CARC) Canadian Polar Commission Circumpolar Universities Association Commission for Scientific Research in Greenland Committee for Original Peoples’ Entitlement (COPE)

xxx

Council for Yukon First Nations (CYFN ) Council of Tribal Athabascan Governments DANCEA (Danish Cooperation for Environment in the Arctic) Grand Council of the Cree Greenland Hunters and Fishers Association (KNAPK) Greenland Seafishery and Export Association Greenland Technical Organization (GTO) Groupe d’études inuit et circumpolaires Gwich’in Council International Gwich’in Renewable Resources Board Gwich’in Tribal Council Herzen Institute High North Alliance Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC) Indigenous Peoples’ Organizations and Arctic Environmental Politics Indigenous Peoples’ Secretariat Institute for Northern Minorities’ Problems Institute of Peoples of the North Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) International Arctic Science Committee (IASC) International Arctic Social Sciences Association (IASSA) International Council for Exploration of the Sea (ICES) International Union for Circumpolar Health International Whaling Commission (IWC) International Work Group for Indigenous Affairs (IWGIA) Inuit Art Foundation Inuit Broadcasting Corporation Inuit Circumpolar Conference (ICC) Inuit Circumpolar Youth Council (ICYC) Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami Inuvialuit Comanagement Bodies Kativik Environmental Quality Commission Kativik Regional Government Kola Science Centre Labrador Inuit Association Makivik Corporation Métis National Council Native Corporations Nordic Council of Ministers Nordic Saami Institute North Atlantic Biocultural Organization (NABO) North Atlantic Fisheries Organization (NAFO) North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission (NAMMCO) Northern Climate ExChange Northern Dimension (of the European Union) Northern Forum Northern Research Forum Northwest Alaska Regional Corporation (NANA) Nunavut Tunngavik Inc.

THEMATIC LIST OF ENTRIES Nunavut Wildlife Management Board Office of Polar Programs, National Science Foundation Polar Continental Shelf Project (PCSP) Radio Greenland (KNR) Research Stations Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) Royal Greenland Royal Greenland Trade Company (KGH) Russian Association of Indigenous Peoples of the North (RAIPON) Russian Geographical Society Saami Council Sahtu Renewable Resouces Board Sirius Patrol Taqramiut Nipingat Universities and Higher Education Establishments, North America and Greenland Universities and Higher Education Establishments, Russia University of the Arctic West Nordic Council World Council of Whalers World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) International Arctic Programme Yukon Native Language Centre Yupik Eskimo Society of Chukotka

Peoples Ainu Aleut Alutiit Athapaskan Chukchi Chuvan Cree Dene Dogrib (Tlicho) Dolgan Enets Eskimo Evenki Evens Eyak Greenland Inuit Gwich’in Haida Icelanders Innu Inuit Iñupiat Inuvialuit Itel’men Ket

Khanty Komi Koryak Labrador Inuit Mansi Métis Nanai Negidal Nenets Nganasan Nivkhi Orochi Orok Pomor Russian “Old Settlers” Saami Sel’kup Settlers (Labrador) Siberian (Chukotkan) Yupik Tlingit Tofalars Tsimshian Tungus Tutchone Udege Ul’chi Yakuts Yukagir Yupiit

Physical Geography Arctic Circle Arctic: Definitions and Boundaries Aurora Biogeochemistry Coastal Erosion Concentric Spheres and Polar Voids, Theory of Eskers Fjords Fossil Periglacial Phenomena Fossils: Animal Species Fossils: Plant Species Freshwater Hydrology Frost and Frost Phenomena Gelifluction Processes Geological History of the Arctic Geomorphology Glacial Deposition Glacial Erosion Glacial Flow Glacial Geomorphology Glacier Growth and Decay Glacier Ice

xxxi

THEMATIC LIST OF ENTRIES Glacier Mass Balance Glaciers Glaciology Ground Ice High Arctic Holocene Ice Ages Ice Caps Ice Core Record Ice Jams Ice Sheets Jökulhlaups Kames Kettles Little Ice Age Loess Moraines North Magnetic Pole North Pole Nunataks Patterned and Polygonal Ground Periglacial Environments Permafrost Permafrost Hydrology Pingos Quaternary Paleogeography Quaternary Period Radioactivity River and Lake Ice Rock Glaciers Satellite Remote Sensing Space Weather Subarctic Thermokarst Ultraviolet-B Radiation Volcanoes and Volcanic Activity

Plants and Vegetation Birch Forests Cassiope Heaths Circumpolar Arctic Vegetation Map Coniferous Forests Copse Dry Tundra Dwarf-Shrub Heaths Empetrum Heaths Fell-Fields Fens Flora of the Tundra Food use of Wild Species Forests: Environmental Initiatives Herb Slopes

xxxii

High Arctic Lichen Marshes Mesic Tundra Microbial Mats Plant Gathering Plant Reproduction and Pollination Polar Desert Polar Steppe Primary Production Primary Production, Marine Sedge Meadows Shrub Tundra Snow Patches Soils Subarctic Taiga Treeline Treeline Dynamics Tundra Tussock Tundra Vegetation Distribution Wet tundra Woodlands

Political and Cultural Figures Adamson, Shirley Ainana, Lyudmila Alootook Ipellie Amagoalik, John Archbishop Innocent (Ivan Veniaminov) Aron from Kangeq Bang, Jette Bourque, James W. Brun, Eske Chemnitz, Lars Cournoyea, Nellie Crantz, David Curley, Tagak Egede, Hans Egede, Ingmar Egede, Poul Erasmus, Georges Finnbogadottir, Vigdis Hensley, Willie Høegh, Erling Hopson, Eben Iokhel’son, Vladimir Il’ich Johansen, Lars Emil Josie, Edith Kenojuak Kleinschmidt, Samuel

THEMATIC LIST OF ENTRIES Klutschak, Henry Wenzel Kuptana, Rosemarie Laxness, Haldor London, Jack Lynge, Aqqaluk Lynge, Augo Lynge, Finn MacLean, Edna Agheak Magga, Ole Henrik Mallot, Byron McLaughlin, Audrey Moses, James Kivetoruk Motzfeldt, Jonathan Mowat, Farley Nickul, Karl Nikolaev, Mikhail E. Oddsson, David Odulok, Tekki Okalik, Paul Olearius, Adam Olsen, Jørgen Olsen, Moses Peck, Edmund James Pitseolak, Peter Piugaattuk, Noah Pryde, Duncan Pullar, Gordon Qumaq, Taamusi Rasmussen, Henriette Rink, Hinrich Johannes Rosing, Hans Pavia Rytkheu, Yuri Sangi, Vladimir Schultz, Ed Service, Robert Simon, Mary Somov, Mikhail Mikhailovich Speranskii, Mikhail Sturluson, Snorri Van de Velde, Franz Watt, Charlie Watt-Cloutier, Sheila

Politics Alta/Kautokeino Demonstrations Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy Arms Control Atassut Bathurst Mandate G-50 G-60 Geopolitics of the Arctic

Indigenous Rights Inuit Ataqatigiit Inuit Party Land Claims Low Level Flight Training Militarization of the Arctic in Russia Militarization of the Arctic in the West Murmansk Speech (1987) Northern Dimension of Canada’s Foreign Policy Norwegian Saami Parliament Nuclear Testing Political Issues in Resource Management Project Chariot Resolute Base Saami Parliaments Seal Skin Directive Self-Determination Self-Government Siumut Thule Air Base

Regions and Mountains Alaska Peninsula Alaska Range Aleutian Range Beringia Boothia Peninsula Brooks Range Byrranga Mountains Chugach Mountains Chukotskoya Range Greenland Ice Sheet High Arctic Kamchatka Peninsula Kenai Peninsula Kola Peninsula Kolyma Range Kuskokwim Mountains Land Bridges and the Arctic Continental Shelf Mackenzie Basin Mackenzie Delta Melville Peninsula Mount McKinley (Denali) North Slope Pechora Basin Pechora Delta Seward Peninsula Subarctic Taymyr Peninsula Ural Mountains Verkhoyansk Range Yamal Peninsula

xxxiii

THEMATIC LIST OF ENTRIES

Research Programs and Environmental Initiatives Biodiversity: Research Programs Climate: Environmental Initiatives Climate: Research Programs Forests: Environmental Initiatives Health: Environmental Initiatives Health: Research Programs Human Dimensions: Research Programs International Polar Years Land Mammals: Research Programs Marine Mammals: Research Programs Oceanography: Research Programs Pollution: Environmental Initiatives Pollution: Research Programs Sustainable Development and Human Dimensions: Environmental Initiatives Wildlife Management: Environmental Initiatives

Rivers and Lakes Anadyr River Back River Colville River Coppermine River Great Bear Lake Great Slave Lake Hazen, Lake Indigirka River Kamchatka River Khatanga River Kolyma River Lena River Mackenzie River Mývatn Lake Ob’ River Olenek River Pechora River Penzhina River Severnaya Dvina Tatshenshini/Alsek Taymyr Lake Taz River Yana River Yenisey River Yukon River

Scientists, Archaeologists, and Ethnologists Arutyunov, Sergei Baer, Karl von Billings, Joseph Birket-Smith, Kaj Boas, Franz

xxxiv

Bogoraz, Vladimir Germanovich Bruce, W.S. Bunge, Alexander von Castren, Alexandr Mathias Chernetsov, Valery Cherskii, Ivan Collins, Henry B. Comer, George Czaplicka, Marie Antoinette Dikov, Nikolay Dolgikh, Boris Gessain, Robert Giddings, Louis Graah, Wilhelm A. Hatt, Gudmund Hoel, Adolf Holm, Gustav Holtved, Erik HrdliJ ka, Aleš Ivanov, Sergei Vasil’evich Jenness, Diamond Kane, Elisha Kent Khlobystin, Leonid Knuth, Eigil Koch, Lauge Kroeber, Alfred Kropotkin, Petr Laguna, Frederica de Larsen, Helge Leigh Smith, Benjamin Levin, Maxim Litke, Fedor Longyear, John Low, Albert Peter Maak, Rikhard Karlovich MacMillan, Donald Baxter Mary-Rousseliere, Father Guy Mathiassen, Therkel Middendorff, Alexander Murdoch, John Nelson, Edward Nørlund, Poul Okladnikov, Alexei Papanin, Ivan Dmitrievich Petermann, August Petersen, Robert Pilsudski, Bronislaw Piotr Popov, Andrei Rainey, Froelich Rasmussen, Knud Roussell, Aage Rowley, Graham Rudenko, Sergei

THEMATIC LIST OF ENTRIES Sabine, Edward Scoresby, William Shirokogorov, Sergey Mikhailovich Shmidt, Otto Yul’evich Shternberg, Lev Yakovlevich Sieroszewski, Waclaw Leopoldovich Soper, J. Dewey Stefansson, Vilhjalmur Steller, Georg Tein, Tasyan Thalbitzer, William Toll, Baron Edward von Torrell, Otto Treshnikov, Aleksey Feodorovich Tyrrell, Joseph Burr Turner, Lucien M. VanStone, James Vasilevich, Glafira Makar’evna Vdovin, Innokentiy Stepanovich Vibe, Christian Victor, Paul-Emile Vize, Vladimir Wegener, Alfred Weyprecht, Karl

Sociology and Anthropology Aasivik Aboriginal Identities Adoption Animals in the worldviews of Indigenous Peoples Art and Artists (Indigenous) Bear Ceremonialism Birket-Smith, Kaj Birthplace Criteria Bladder Ceremony Boas, Franz Bogoraz, Vladimir Germanovich Caribou Hunting Cartography Castren, Alexandr Mathias Churches in Greenland and the North American Arctic, establishment of Churches in Iceland and the Scandinavian Arctic, establishment of Churches in the Russian Arctic, Establishment of Clothing Czaplicka, Marie Antoinette Daavi Suvva Festival Demography and Population Dolgikh, Boris Economic Inventory of the (Soviet) Polar North, 1926/27 Education Elders

Eskimology Gender Gessain, Robert Health and disease in the Arctic Holm, Gustav Housing Human Population Trends Hunting, Subsistence Images of Indigenous Peoples Images of the Arctic Indigenous Knowledge Indigenous Worldviews Information Technology Ingstad, Helge Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit Ivanov, Sergei Vasil’evich Ivory Carving Jenness, Diamond Kayak Kinship Krasheninnikov, Stepan Kroeber, Alfred Leadership Levin, Maxim Low, Albert Peter Maak, Rikhard Karlovich Marine Mammal Hunting Masks Media Medical Science in the Arctic Messenger Feast Migration (Prehistory) Missionary Activity Mitaarneq Murdoch, John Music (Contemporary Indigenous, Canadian Arctic) Music (Traditional Indigenous) Mythology of the Inuit Nalukatak Naming Navigation, Indigenous Nelson, Edward Nomadism Nutrition and Food Pastoralism Petersen, Robert Physical Anthropology of the Arctic Pilsudski, Bronislaw Piotr Place Names Plant Gathering Popov, Andrei Reindeer Pastoralism Relocation

xxxv

THEMATIC LIST OF ENTRIES Repatriation Sedna: The Sea Goddess Shamanism Sharing Shirokogorov, Sergey Mikhailovich Shternberg, Lev Yakovlevich Sieroszewski, Waclaw Leopoldovich Snow House Song Duel Sporting and Cultural Events in Canada Tattooing Tupilak Turner, Lucien M. Umiak Urbanization Vasilevich, Glafira Makar’evna Whaling, Subsistence Wilderness

Towns and Settlements Aasiaat Akureyri Alert Anadyr Anchorage Arkhangel’sk Barentsburg Barrow Bilibino Churchill Dawson Dikson Dudinka Fairbanks Grise Fiord Happy Valley Husavik Igarka Igloolik Ilulissat Inuvik Iqaluit Ittoqqortoormiit (Scoresbysund) Ivittut

xxxvi

Kangerlussuaq Khanty-Mansiisk Khatanga Kiruna Kuujjuaq Longyearbyen Lovozero Maarmorilik Magadan Murmansk Nanisivik Nanortalik Naryan-Mar Nome Noril’sk Norman Wells Novyi Urengoi Nuuk Palana Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky Pevek Pond Inlet Provideniya Qaanaaq Qaqortoq Qeqertarsuaq Resolute Bay Reykjavík Rovaniemi Sachs Harbour Salekhard Sisimiut Syktyvkar Tasiilaq Tiksi Tromsø Tuktoyaktuk Tyumen’ Upernavik Uummannaq Vorkuta Whitehorse Yakutsk Yellowknife

Foreword The circumpolar Arctic is many things to many people. Artists seek to portray and convey its stark beauty. Multi-national corporations eye the region’s oil, gas, and minerals and view the Arctic as an industrial frontier in a world hungry for energy and natural resources. Environmental groups in western Europe and North America perceive the Arctic as “wilderness” to be preserved in parks. During the Cold War, the Arctic was a military zone in which East and West stationed huge arsenals. The Arctic is today characterized as a “barometer” of global environmental health. For example, speaking about climate change, the UK environment minister in 2002 noted, “what happens in the world happens first in the Arctic.” To Inuit and other indigenous peoples, the Arctic is, first and foremost, “home,” as it has been for millennia. Mercator map projections give a misleading impression—the Arctic is not “empty.” The landscape is known and named, as are the animals that live there. I grew up in Nunavik (northern Québec), and lived traditionally, traveling by dog team, for the first ten years of my life. Our elders and hunters passed down to us their environmental knowledge and understanding. They still do. The Arctic is no longer isolated from the rest of the world, and profound social, economic, and cultural change has taken place and continues to increase. But the “wisdom of the elders” and the hunting-based skills they teach remain important. Courage, tenacity, patience, focus—the skills and values of the hunter—are precisely the characteristics needed to navigate the modern world.

In political terms the Arctic is a very exciting arena. New ways, means, and methods are addressing problems, both old and new. Although much remains to be achieved, indigenous peoples are acquiring land and self-government rights—key requirements for sustainable development in this fragile and vulnerable region. The 1971 Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, Home Rule in Greenland in 1979, Saami Parliaments in Norway, Sweden, and Finland, and creation of the Nunavut Territory in 1999 are of great interest as models and precedents to indigenous peoples in Russia, and to those throughout the world. Northerners have much in common, and modern communication technology enables Inuit, Saami, Athapaskans, Nenets—indeed, all residents of the Arctic—to better appreciate their similarities and shared concerns, and the advisability of learning from each other. A circumpolar consciousness is growing among and between residents of this huge area, which is emerging as a geopolitical region. Since 1990, circumpolar institutions have been established to address research, education, environmental protection, and economic, cultural, and political development. Many of these institutions are attracting worldwide attention and comment. The best known of these circumpolar institutions is the Arctic Council, established by the eight Arctic states in 1996 to promote environmental protection and sustainable development. That six indigenous peoples organizations, including the Inuit Circumpolar Conference, have “permanent participant” status in the council, enabling them to inter-

xxxvii

FOREWORD

vene essentially in the same manner as states, is unique in international and intergovernmental affairs. That the agenda of the Council will broaden and deepen seems certain. Perhaps the greatest challenge facing the Council is to convey to global audiences the importance and place of the Arctic in global affairs.

The Encyclopedia of the Arctic is an important initiative. It illustrates the growing importance of the circumpolar Arctic and testifies to the burgeoning international interest in our homeland. I congratulate the authors and editors of the encyclopedia and hope that all who use it will better understand this region and its peoples.

Sheila Watt-Cloutier Chair, Inuit Circumpolar Conference Iqaluit, Nunavut, Canada

xxxviii

Preface The Encyclopedia of the Arctic offers a rich and dynamic view of, and introduction to, an enormous, incredibly diverse, and rapidly changing part of the world. Its three volumes comprise overviews of hundreds of topics, events, places, people, human cultures, animals, and environments, ranging from geological history, exploration, the cultures and livelihoods of indigenous peoples, geopolitics, international environmental cooperation, natural history, physical processes, life sciences, and environmental change. This unique work is the result of over 375 international scholars and writers in all fields, many of whom live and work in Arctic countries. The Arctic is a vast area occupying the northern end of the Earth. Characterized by cold and seasonal extremes of light and darkness, it is a place where people, animals, and plants have survived and flourished, adapting to harsh environments and unforgiving conditions. It encompasses large regional variations in climate, geography, and ecology, as well as many cultures with different social, economic, and political systems. Arctic lands are found in eight countries: USA (Alaska), Canada, Greenland/ Denmark, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Russia. Indigenous peoples have lived in this immense area for millennia, thriving in their homelands by hunting marine mammals and terrestrial animals, herding reindeer, and fishing the cold coastal waters. They possess a complex and detailed knowledge of Arctic animals and ecosystems, and their traditional activities link them inextricably to their histories, their contemporary cultural and economic settings, and provide a way forward for thinking about sustainable livelihoods in the future.

The Arctic is not an isolated, remote part of the world. The climate of the Arctic is influenced and governed by many complex interactions that are part of the global climate system; Arctic ecosystems are linked to the ecosystems of warmer southern regions; winds from the south bring warm air—and contaminants and pollutants—to northern regions; migratory mammals, birds, and fish move to the Arctic in summer to feed and breed before returning south for the winter; the headwaters of major rivers, such as the Ob’, Lena, and Mackenzie, are far to the south and provide a further connection between global and Arctic climates and ecosystems; and northern regions, societies, and economies are tightly tied to the mainstream of the nation states of which they are part. The Arctic has long been prized as a place containing rich resources, attracting explorers, whalers, sealers, fur traders, gold miners, and other adventurers in a steady stream from the 16th century onwards. Visits to the Arctic by these adventurers and sojourners, especially in the 18th, 19th, and early 20th centuries, resulted in more frequent contact between indigenous peoples and outsiders. Whalers, traders, explorers, missionaries, and other seasonal visitors brought diseases to which indigenous peoples had no immunity, as well as far-reaching social, economic, cultural, and religious changes. World War II brought increased activity in the Arctic as the region was militarized. During the Cold War, the region became a zone of hostile, tense military confrontation, with the Arctic divided into two sectors: the Soviet Arctic and the western Arctic. More recently, economic developers searching for oil, gas, xxxix

PREFACE

gold, diamonds, and other marketable products view the Arctic as an economic and industrial frontier. Arctic lands and seas have played a significant role in the development of several nations, with colonization and settlement often taking place primarily with resource extraction in mind. Arctic resources will continue to be vital to the development of Arctic states for many decades to come, but other countries look increasingly to the northern regions for fisheries development, hydrocarbons, timber, and minerals. The Russian North, for example, has about 40% of the world’s coniferous forests, with some 20% of the world’s forested areas overall, the Bering Sea is one of the richest fisheries on Earth, and the Canadian Arctic contains vast reserves of oil, gas and diamonds. The United States eyes northern Canadian oil and gas, hungrily, while countries such as Japan, Korea, and the European Union (EU) member states constitute markets for valuable Arctic resources, such as deepwater shrimp from Greenland, Alaskan salmon, and timber from Canadian and Siberian forests. Arctic communities and regions are thus firmly tied to the global economy, while the effects and influences of globalization processes are increasingly being felt in all aspects of social, economic, and cultural life throughout the Arctic today. Such processes have their social and environmental impacts. The Arctic regions are under growing pressure from natural resource development, including that for gas, oil, timber, fish, and diamonds. The exploitation of northern resources and industrial activity both outside and within the Arctic has serious consequences for the environment, for traditional livelihoods, and for human health. Industry, resource development, pipeline construction, urbanization, changes in land use, and demographic transitions all pose threats by degrading ecosystems, destroying biodiversity and animal habitat, and infringing on indigenous lands, resource harvesting activities and traditional knowledge systems. Similarly, global environmental issues, including climate change, transboundary pollutants, and ozone depletion, have detrimental impacts on the peoples and environments of the Arctic. The indigenous peoples of the Arctic have strong views on the future of the circumpolar North and their place in it. Traditional practices of marine mammal hunting, trapping, fishing, reindeer herding, and gathering remain critically important to northern peoples, but they also wish to participate in and benefit from nonrenewable resource development. At the xl

same time, they are concerned with the loss of traditional livelihoods, cultures, and languages, the negative impacts of globalization, and the threat of irreversible changes that climate change may bring. Indigenous peoples have experienced tremendous rapid social and cultural change, especially in the last few decades, yet are reasserting cultural identity and their rights. Many indigenous peoples have achieved varying degrees of land claims settlements and significant forms of self-government, most notably the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) of 1971, the Inuvialuit Final Agreement of 1984, Home Rule in Greenland in 1979, and the creation of Nunavut Territory in 1999. These settlements and agreements have given indigenous peoples a significant base on which to build their political and cultural identity. Other peoples have considerably less control over their lands, resources, and their lives, although the establishment of Saami parliaments in Fennoscandia has allowed the Saami limited powers to decide on issues relating to language and culture. The most complex and unresolved issues relating to the autonomy and self-determination of the Arctic’s indigenous peoples are found in Siberia and the Russian Far East. Movements for land claims and self-government are embedded within indigenous discourses about the protection of indigenous political, cultural, and environmental interests, but they also center on rights to resources and access to the profits of resource development. The inhabitants, scientists, and researchers of the Arctic share a deep concern over unsustainable development, environmental change and loss of biodiversity, and the irreversible impacts on the future viability of northern ecosystems and peoples’ livelihoods and health. The increasing political salience of environmental and conservation issues, together with the increasing articulation of indigenous rights, has led to the emergence of the Arctic as an international political region and the design of several frameworks for collaboration on the environment and sustainable development in the Arctic. Since the mid-1980s, there have been major initiatives in international cooperation on Arctic environmental and sustainable development issues. The turning point is seen by many to have come in October 1987 when Mikhail Gorbachev, speaking in Murmansk, outlined proposals on how international cooperation in the Arctic could proceed. For many years, this speech was the most significant indication of how the Soviet Union viewed Arctic policy.

PREFACE

Among the most important points raised by Gorbachev was the need to establish the Arctic as a zone of peace, the utilization of the resources of the Arctic, scientific activity, and environmental protection. Gorbachev’s speech, which must be seen within a context of wider concern about environmental degradation and environmental security in the Soviet Union during an era of glasnost and perestroika, led to a series of Soviet proposals for international cooperation in the Arctic, and since 1987 there have been a number of bilateral and multilateral scientific and environmental agreements. A Finnish initiative in 1989 led to the so-called Rovaniemi Process between the eight Arctic states, which resulted in the Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy (AEPS) of 1991. In 1990, the International Arctic Science Committee (IASC) was formed to identify, promote, and coordinate international scientific research priorities. Also in 1991, regional governments in the Arctic established the Northern Forum, which has a remit to focus on economic development, and the Canadian government announced plans to set up an Arctic Council that would draw its membership from the eight Arctic rim countries. In 1993 the foreign ministers of Norway, Sweden, Finland, Russia, and the EU Commission signed the Kirkenes Declaration, which established the Barents Council and inaugurated the Barents Euro-Arctic Region (BEAR). The Arctic Council was inaugurated in Ottawa on September 19, 1996, a mandate to take cooperation on Arctic issues beyond the environment. The Arctic Council was established to provide a high-level regional forum for sustainable development, mandated to address all three of its main pillars: environmental, social, and economic. Its membership comprises the eight Arctic states, six indigenous peoples’ organizations as Permanent Participants, and Observers made up of non-Arctic states, international organizations, and NGOs. This is a unique forum for a unique region: from the beginning, Arctic governments and indigenous peoples joined together to make environmental monitoring and assessment a key element of the Arctic Council’s agenda. Major reports with policy recommendations have been produced, notably on the extent of Arctic pollution and the impact of climate change, drawing global attention to the state of the Arctic environment and the situations of its peoples. The Arctic Council allows for unprecedented dialogue and collaboration among scientists, policy

planners, Arctic residents, and political-level decision-makers. Out of this dialogue, and out of the Arctic, possibilities are emerging for a critical rethinking and reassessment of the concept of sustainability and the development of new approaches to biodiversity conservation, not only for the Arctic but for the entire globe.

The Arctic: A Region of Diversity There are many definitions of the Arctic, some of which are discussed in a separate entry in this encyclopedia (see Arctic: Definitions and Boundaries). No one way of defining the Arctic is satisfactory for all purposes, and more often than not a practical definition becomes necessary in research projects, reports, assessments, scientific monographs, and university and college courses in order to determine and delimit what physical, ecological, political, social, and cultural processes are to be covered. The Encyclopedia of the Arctic does not impose a single definition on contributors. To do so would detract from an understanding of the diversity of this complex, and a vast part of the globe, in all its environmental, cultural, political, historical, and economic aspects. Contributors to the encyclopedia have been encouraged to follow the conventions of their respective disciplines and perspectives. Various definitions illuminate the fact that understandings of the Arctic are, in part, based on particular scientific, political, and disciplinary concerns, and that specific definitional criteria are far too restrictive and cannot always be applied across disciplines. For example, while natural scientists most commonly draw boundaries based on climate, mean monthly temperature, the extent of sea ice, the dominance of tundra vegetation, the southern extent of permafrost, the northernmost treeline, or the Arctic Circle, social and political scientists may be thinking in terms of culture areas or geopolitical boundaries. The entries in the encyclopedia reveal that precise boundaries are not always possible to draw (whether between physical environments or between human cultures) and that there may be some variability in, for instance, the usage of such terms as the “Russian North” or “northern Scandinavia.” Many contributors also use “Arctic,” “circumpolar North” and “the North” as interchangeable terms. The extent of the Arctic is, in a sense, totally dependent on its definition. Whatever definition of the Arctic is used, it is xli

PREFACE

clear that it is a large, multifaceted, and important area of the Earth’s surface, encompassing a range of landscapes and seascapes, climate differences, rich biodiversity, and vibrant cultural diversity. Rather than resulting in a confused definition of the Arctic, the material presented in the Encyclopedia of the Arctic demonstrates the beauty, power, and incredible diversity of the northern regions of the globe.

source to have yet been produced on this vast, complex, changing, and increasingly important part of the globe. The book is not only an up-to-date interdisciplinary work of reference for all those involved in teaching or researching Arctic issues, but a fascinating and comprehensive resource for residents of the Arctic, and all those concerned with global environmental issues, sustainability, science, and human interactions with the environment.

A Collaborative Project A project of this magnitude, dealing as it does with an enormous region, must have a starting point. This starting point was an initial A-Z headword list drawn up by the editors and the Advisory Board. We aimed to be as comprehensive and wide as possible, although we recognized that many gaps remained in the first list. We then sent out the headword list to hundreds of individuals and dozens of research institutes, university departments, and organizations that focus on Arctic issues, together with letters of invitation to contribute entries to the encyclopedia. The information and call for contributors was also posted on the project’s website and distributed widely. The hope was that people would not only respond with offers to write entries, but would also comment upon and criticize the A-Z list of entries. We received countless suggestions for improving the content, many from people who live and work in the Arctic as well as from people living in more southerly climes. As a result, the list of entries has been continuously revised, with new entries being added almost up to publication. The encyclopedia has thus taken shape as a result of this process. Yet, even in three volumes, it is impossible to cover every topic, or to include entries on every town and political figure, every aspect of ecology and environmental change, or every river, mountain range, or aspect of human culture. We have aimed to be as thorough as possible, yet we acknowledge that this is a beginning. No similar work exists. Our hope is that the Encyclopedia of the Arctic will be used as an indispensable, up-to-date, in-depth guide to a region that is changing dramatically—socially, economically, politically, and environmentally. Providing rich and detailed essays on the Arctic’s environment, wildlife, climate, history, exploration, resources, economics, politics, indigenous cultures and languages, conservation initiatives, and many other topics, the Encyclopedia of the Arctic is the only major work and comprehensive reference

xlii

Entries and Structure The entries, over 1200, appear in alphabetical order and are of several kinds (for the complete Entry List, see page ix). Longer overview entries on major themes (such as Climate) have been split into shorter entries on specific areas of study (such as Climate Change, Climate: Environmental Inititatives, Impacts of Climate Change, and Weather). Although each entry is self-contained, the links between entries can be explored in a number of ways. The Thematic List on page xxiii groups the entries within broad and more specific categories and provides a useful summary of related entries. Almost all of the entries have cross references (“see also”) at the end of the entry, so the reader is encouraged to browse outwards from a starting node. Entries also have a Further Reading section, thus allowing the reader to pursue other scholarship on a particular topic. Finally, the Index provides a detailed listing of topics that do not have their own entry, but are discussed within the context of broader entries.

Acknowledgements I am grateful to Sheila Watt-Cloutier, Chair of the Inuit Circumpolar Conference, for providing the Foreword. I would like to express my thanks to the members of the Advisory Board for their unfailing guidance, advice, and criticism. All have drawn on their experiences and their extensive knowledge of the Arctic, its peoples and environments, histories, and politics. Their support has been crucial to the success of this enormous project. It has been a privilege to read and work with the material submitted by the hundreds of contributors whose writings fill these three volumes. I was especially pleased to receive opinions and suggestions from many of them as this project developed. At

PREFACE

Routledge special thanks go to Acquisitions Editor Gillian Lindsey, Development Editor Lynn SomersDavis, and Editorial Assistant Mary Funchion for their professionalism, courtesy, and support. I have tremendous admiration for their commitment to this encyclopedia, especially their tenacity in maintaining momentum (and keeping the pressure on me) at a difficult time when both publisher and editor were in the throes of moving from the United Kingdom to North America. They kept track of the progress (and whereabouts) of more than 300 contributors, and have overseen the process of pulling together the several thousand pages of writing that moved between London, Aberdeen, New York, and Edmonton. I am especially grateful to the team of production assis-

tants, researchers, copy-editors, and cartographer at Taylor and Francis/Routledge who helped with the text, graphics, and illustrations. I am enormously grateful to Jonathan Dore, under whose supervision the Advisory Board and the initial headword list was formed, the first contributors were signed up, and the encyclopedia began to take shape. The project would not have been possible without him in the first place. During the editing process I was fortunate to have worked in two fine universities, the University of Aberdeen and the University of Alberta, and I am thankful for their institutional support. Last, but by no means least, I thank Anita and Rohan for being patient and encouraging, and for being there.

Mark Nuttall Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

Alaska (UnitedStates) 481 054

Canada 92 985

Russia 1 999 711

Greenland 55 419 Iceland 266 783

Norway 379 461 Finland 200 677

Faeroe Islands 43 700

Number of inhabitants 2 000 000

300 000 50 000

500 000 150 000

Sweden 263 735 © AMAP 2003

Indigenous population Non-indigenous population AMAP boundary

Total and indigenous populations of the Arctic, by Arctic area of each country (the data from Russia are for the indigenous minority population). From AMAP Assessment Report: Arctic Pollution Issues, Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program (AMAP), Oslo, Norway, 1998. Reproduced by permission from AMAP.

xliii

A

PREFACE

iq

Yu

A Al u

p ia t Iñ u

E

t i

In u

a g Ya k

u

t

nk ve

t

Do l g Ngana a n sa n

e

k ya Ko r Ch uv ik an Yu p Ch u k c h i Yu k

E

De n e

M

thab as c

p ik

ut

ir n ve

s t i e en D

t

an

Tl i n g i

ti

le

i

E

n

u

s et t Ke e t s en

a

m i

nets Ko m i S e lk u p s Kh a n t y Mans i

n

Ne

t i

I

S

a

In n

u

ee

u

Cr

In uit

I

n

N

© AMAP 2003

Location of Arctic indigenous peoples. From AMAP Assessment Report: Arctic Pollution Issues, Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program (AMAP), Oslo, Norway, 1998. Reproduced with permission from AMAP.

xliv

A AASIAAT

in the settlement after World War II. The first fish processing plant was established on Transiten, a small island just outside the harbor in Aasiaat. In connection with modernization during the 20th century, Aasiaat’s factory was improved to include fillet production and a freezing plant in 1966. Moreover, the rich shrimp stock in Disko Bay turned out to be accessible from Aasiaat, and a shrimp processing plant was thus established in 1951. Due to the ice conditions in the area, shrimp processing had previously been impossible during the winter; hence in 1989, a new plant was built, which included a large freezing storage that enabled year-round processing. The processing plant was next expanded with facilities for processing snow crab. The value of landings from fisheries (1998) is 36 million Danish kroner (4.5 million US dollars), with shrimp covering almost 95% of the value. In addition, there are also small landings of cod, Greenland halibut, wolffish, salmon, and hunting products. Aasiaat is a modern town with all of the contemporary facilities and amenities, and similar to all towns in Greenland, fishing plays a vital role in the municipality’s economy. Only 5% of the labor force, however, is involved in fisheries and hunting and 10% in the processing industry, while the majority of the population is employed in public and private administration (30%), education and social services (22%), trade (21%), and other processing industries and craftspersons (12%) primarily active in building industries and the local shipyard. Aasiaat is one of the three towns in Greenland with a gymnasium (upper secondary school—the other two are in Nuuk and Qaqortoq) and a school for the handicapped. For several decades, Ulo—the largest record company and recording studio in Greenland—has operated in Aasiaat. RASMUS OLE RASMUSSEN

The town of Aasiaat is the municipal center of Aasiaat municipality, the most southern of the municipalities in the Disko Bay region in West Greenland. It is situated between two productive marine areas: the Disko Bay and the banks along the west coast of Greenland in the open water district. The Greenlandic name Aasiaat means “the spiders.” Historically, abundant sea mammals gave a productive basis for Greenlanders in the area, and the region was also a major attraction for Danish colonists. Consequently, a colony was established in 1763 and was given the name Egedesminde after its founder, Niels Egede. The site was chosen due to resource availability and the fact that its harbor was well protected by an archipelago. The ice conditions in Aasiaat enable sailing from mid-April until the beginning of December. As the settlement is situated north of the Arctic Circle, there is winter darkness from December 1 until January 12 and there is midnight sun from May 27 until July 18. The land area of the municipality is the second smallest in Greenland, with a total area of only 400 km2. The adjacent sea area, however, covers a total area of 3600 km2, and the municipality’s population is the fifth largest in Greenland. The total population of Aasiaat is 3446 (as of January 1, 2000). Within the municipality there are three settlements: the town of Aasiaat with 3234 persons, the settlement Kitsissuarsuit (Hunde Ejland) with 110 persons, and the settlement Akunnaaq with 102 persons. Only 174 persons in the municipality were born outside of Greenland, and so the vast majority of the population comprise native Greenlanders. The population has been stable during the last 40 years. Although historically the sea mammals first attracted the colonists, it was the rich fishing grounds on the banks and in Disko Bay that generated major interest

1

AASIVIK See also Arctic Circle; Disko Bay; Greenland Further Reading Berthelsen, Christian, Inger H. Mortensen & Ebbe Mortensen (editors), Kalaallit Nunaat Atlas, Nuuk, Greenland: Atuakkiorfik, 1992 Nielsen, Niels, Peter Skautrup & Christian Vibe (editors), J.P. Trap Danmark, Volume XIV, Grønland, København: G.E.C. Gads Forlag, 1970 Rasmussen, Rasmus Ole, “Formal economy, renewable resources and structural changes in West Greenland.” Etudes/Inuit/Studies, 24(1) (2000): 48–78 Statistics Greenland, Greenland 2000–2001. Statistical Yearbook, Nuuk: Statistics Greenland, 2001 www.aasiaat.gl

AASIVIK Aasivik (plural aasiviit) was traditionally an Inuit camp where families from different areas gathered annually during the summer hunting seasons. In Greenlandic, aasivik is translated as “the place where one stays in summer” (Grønnow et al., 1983: 89). Aasiviit were usually located at desirable hunting grounds where resources were plentiful, such as the migration routes of caribou or seals, at abundant fishing and bird nesting areas, or at places where a combination of these wildlife resources was available. Aasiviit can be classified according to the number of people gathered and their geographic origins. Traditionally, the summer months were favorable for traveling by umiak (a large, open transport boat covered with sealskin) or qajaq (a one-person hunting vessel completely covered with sealskin). Families left scattered and isolated winter settlements and often undertook long and dangerous journeys to reach a certain aasivik. While some aasiviit were regionally or even interregionally significant, because people from larger areas used to meet there, the majority of aasiviit were primarily of local importance. Some aasiviit were little more than assembly camps for hunting parties or base camps from which hunting excursions were made. In Inuit society, the aasiviit played a vital socioeconomic role. Life within the aasiviit strengthened social bonds among people from distant places. People exchanged news and experiences and settled disputes, for instance, by holding drum duels. Trade and partnerships were formed within aasivitt. An aasivik offered the fruitful opportunity of sharing ancestral knowledge and wisdom through the narrating of myths, stories, and legends. Aasiviit were located throughout the Inuit world, both inland and along the coastline or on islands. In Northern Alaska, Nerleq, at the mouth of the Colville River, was a well-known aasivik site during the sum-

2

mer months. Here, Inuit from the coast met with Inuit living inland to exchange whale blubber, baleen, seal furs, walrus skins, wolf skins, caribou furs, and snowshoes. In Northern Canada, Akilineq, at the mouth of the Thelon River, was one of the most vital aasiviit sites. Here, Caribou Inuit met with Copper and Netsilik Inuit during midsummer months to barter bows and arrows, muskox skins, fox furs, and items made from copper and soapstone. Similar to other Inuit areas, many traditional aasiviit places of minor or local importance have been found all over Greenland, where families and local people met for longer or shorter periods during the summer seasons. An example of a recognized and important aasivik site is Taseralik (“the place with small lakes”), a small island at the mouth of the Nassuttooq (Nordre Strømfjord) on Greenland’s west coast. Over the centuries, Inuit from as far north as Qeqertarsuup Tunua (Disko Bay) met with Inuit from as far south as Qaqortoq during July and August to fish Greenland halibut and to trade narwhal tusks and baleen with kryolith and soapstone items. From Qaqortoq, the journey to Taseralik was undertaken by umiak and could take up to a year, as people often had to overwinter on their return. During the colonial era, the aasiviit gradually lessened in significance in the annual hunting cycle. Trading posts and missionary stations contributed to a stationary lifestyle, and arduous journeys by umiak became obsolete as desirable trade goods became more easily accessible. Akilineq, for example, waned in vitality as an aasivik when the trading post at Baker Lake was established in 1914. Similarly, Taseralik diminished in social and economic importance at the end of the 19th century, even though it was used as a meeting place during the summer until 1930. In the mid-1970s, aasiviit began to reemerge alongside a heightened political and ethnic awareness among Greenlanders, who sought to create means to express Inuit identity and culture. Greenland’s first modern aasivik was established in 1976 in Narssap ilua, next to an area polluted by uranium, and was organized by Narsami Inuusuttut Ataqatigiit (Narsaq’s Youth Organization) and Kalaallit Inuusuttut Ataqatigiit (The Council of Young Greenlanders). Originally planned as a music festival for young people, Narssap developed into an important forum where a vast array of political and cultural issues were collectively discussed. These issues included Danish colonialism and neocolonialism, private and collective property rights to resources, land rights, a possible Home Rule Government in Greenland, mass media, the educational system, women’s roles, and the ongoing importance of Inuit culture and tradition in modern-day Greenland.

ABORIGINAL IDENTITIES In July 1977, the second modern-day aasivik was held in Qullissat, an abandoned settlement of coal miners on Qeqertarsuaq (Disko Island) in the northern part of West Greenland. The aasivik was organized by the pro-independence group Inuit Brotherhood (Inuit Ataqatigiit), an organization formed in 1971 that later became one of Greenland’s most important political parties. National and international political issues were raised at Qullissat, and artists (musicians, actors, poets, painters, and sculptors) exhibited their work to the several hundred participants. In the decades since the 1970s, greater numbers of annual aasiviit helped to combat political apathy in Greenland. During an Inuit Brotherhood meeting in November 1978, the aasivik was described as “a cultural, political, and scientific forum for the Greenlandic people, the Kalaallit, to defend their indigenous and historical rights …” (Rasmussen, 1979: 371). But while the aasiviit of the 1970s and 1980s played a key role in Greenland’s nation building, the aasiviit of the 1990s gradually lost immediate political importance and served more as cultural summer festivals, where all kinds of Greenlandic musical styles, from ethnic drum dance to folk, rock, pop, beat, reggae, and rap, were performed. While the aasiviit’s political dimension may have diminished, they remain strong life signs of a dynamic Greenlandic culture and identity. VERENA TRAEGER See also Greenland; Inuit Ataqatigiit; Music (Traditional Indigenous); Umiak Further Reading Grønnow, Bjarne, Morten Meldgaard & Jørn Berglund Nielsen, “Aasivissuit—The Great Summer Camp. Archaeological, Ethnographical and Zoo-Archaeological Studies of a Caribou-Hunting Site in West Greenland.” Meddelelser om Grønland. Man and Society, Copenhagen: Ny Nordisk Forlag—Arnold Busck, No. 50, 1983 Kramer, Finn Erik, “Om at udleede sig blandt saa mange skiønheder en brud: Aasiviit-sammenkomsterne på Taseralik i Sismiut-distriktet.” Grønland, Charlottenlund: Det Grønlandske Selskab, 1992, No. 3, pp. 77–97 Rasmussen, Hans-Erik, “Aasiviit: de kulturelle og politiske sommerstaevner i Grønland.” Jordens Folk, Etnografisk Revy, 1979, No. 4, pp. 361–372

ABORIGINAL IDENTITIES Indigenous people are experiencing rapid and extensive political, economic, and cultural change in the 21st century. Individually and in communities, regions, nations, and international or interregional organizations, they are finding ways to continue, restore, or revive their cultures and maintain their

identities while adapting to and influencing a changing world. In parts of Greenland, Arctic Canada, Siberia, and Fennoscandia, they continue to lead at least partly nomadic lives—gathering, hunting, and camping seasonally in largely traditional ways. However faithfully people may follow the old ways, they often combine traditional approaches with current technology: for instance, the use of snowmobiles in lieu of dog sleds in places where the machines are more effective (in some locations, such as sea-ice-bound parts of Greenland, dog teams are safer and more effective). A strong sense of aboriginal identity persists regardless of the particularities of adaptation and change. Many indigenous people are wage earners and some have no memory of nomadic life. Yet Saami, Siberian peoples, Alaska Natives, Dene and Tlingit of northern Canada and Yukon, and others follow the pattern that Mark Nuttall and Louis-Jacques Dorais have identified with regard to Inuit in Greenland (Kalaallit Nunaat) and Canada (in Nunavut—the eastern Arctic homeland and Nunavik—Inuit northern Québec): despite social and cultural changes, Inuit still identify themselves as Inuit (Nuttall, 1992; Dorais, 1997). They have found ways to adopt and adapt without losing their sense of cultural continuity and identity and are creating newly shared identities as well. As Nuttall points out, the construction of “national” identities (e.g., of Greenland and Nunavut) relies upon combining fact with fiction. There are shared cultural practices and experiences, but the construction of a nationalist identity would seem to require a fictional universality that obscures or obliterates difference. Cultural, social, and political identities are flexible and dynamic. With heterogeneous societies, individuals maintain multiple identities. Indigenous people interpret this multiplicity and heterogeneity in different ways. Some Saami consider themselves Saami first and Norwegian, Finnish, Swedish, or Russian second; some cite nationality first and Saami identity second. Still others consider religion to be paramount. Comparable identity clusters are found among indigenous peoples in Siberia, Alaska, Greenland and Canada. The international movement of indigenous peoples has fostered important social, political, and technological innovations and produced organizations such as the Inuit Circumpolar Conference (ICC) and the World Council of Indigenous Peoples. Although culturally distinct, there are experiences common to these communities. A primary concern is to find ways to balance respect for cultural specificity and continuity within the context of broader regional cultural communities, pan-Arctic and international organizations. Language is an important part of identity formation, but its particular uses in the development and

3

ABORIGINAL IDENTITIES maintenance of cultural identity vary widely. In many parts of the Arctic, revival of indigenous languages has signaled or accompanied political and cultural revival. Elsewhere, as Harjo and Bird (1998) claim in the title of their co-edited collection, postcolonial peoples are “reinventing the enemy’s language.” Speaking one’s traditional language is part of the picture, but is not essential, they argue, to identity maintenance. Written language presents altogether different problems. In addition to religion, missionaries brought writing systems, education, and health care that often complemented, rather than replaced, traditional ways of learning and promoting health. Within the ICC there has been a protracted debate over whether to adopt a universal writing system. Siberian peoples use the Cyrillic (Russian) alphabet, Greenlanders use roman orthography, and Inuit in Nunavik and Nunavut use a syllabic system originally developed for Cree and adapted for Inuktitut. This syllabic system has been in place for several generations, and many people now consider it “traditional” and are deeply attached to it (an example of “tradition” applied to what outsiders would call “inauthentic” practice). An opposing prevalent opinion holds that all Inuit should adopt the system used in Greenland, because it is more widely accessible and has enabled Greenland to produce a substantial body of published work. Greenland’s private publisher, Atuakkiorfik, has published more than 100 books. Naming is one aspect of language use that most strongly reflects and affects cultural continuity. Throughout northern Greenland there are places named after kings, queens, and explorers; names indicate ownership by a person or group and, more importantly, they establish power and territorial claim (Nuttall, 1992: 50). According to Harold Issacs, Recent political change has brought name changes to many places … the Russians have begun to erase Chinese names from the territory of eastern Siberia ... Nine cities and towns and two hundred and fifty rivers and mountains that had retained their Chinese names for more than a century suddenly acquired brand-new Russian names in 1973 … altered history has led to much renaming. (Isaacs, 1989: 74)

In 1987, the official name of Frobisher Bay was changed to Iqaluit. The change reasserted Inuit sovereignty and removed the name of a visitor (the 16thcentury explorer Martin Frobisher) from the map and, metaphorically speaking, the mental landscape. It heralded a greater change to come, that is, the creation of the Canadian territory named for the Inuit homeland, Nunavut (meaning “our land”). As this 1987 letter to the editor of the Globe and Mail (Canada’s national newspaper) from a retired Navy Captain illustrates,

4

name changes such as that of the Nunavut homeland can be particularly destabilizing to nations and the institutions that govern them: The threat to change thousands of northern place names is disturbing … So also is the news that responsibility for naming geographic features in the Northwest Territories has been surrendered by Ottawa. I am dismayed at the sanctioning of this assault on the history of the Arctic, our collective Northern heritage. (Pullen, 1987)

The author’s choice of the words “surrendered” and “assault” implies a sort of (imagined) military victory. The phrase “our collective Northern heritage” implies that indigenous and European northerners are equal inheritors of the northern land- and “namescape”—the identity map of a region’s personal and place names. But in the region to which he refers, Inuit represent an 85% majority and have been settled for thousands of years, while European visitors and settlers are scant, culturally diverse, and historically only recently arrived. Nonindigenous visitors have named and renamed both land and people, as this narrative from writer Alice French illustrates: In the spring of 1937 when I was seven years old my father told my brother and me that our mother had tuberculosis. We would have to go from Cambridge Bay to the hospital in Aklavik … When we landed at Aklavik my mother went to the hospital and my brother and I were told we would be going to a boarding school … [At school] an Eskimo girl … introduced me to the other girls by my Christian name—Alice. My Eskimo name was not mentioned and I did not hear my name Masak again until I went home. (French, 1988: 204)

In Inuit tradition, a child is not considered to be a complete person until they receive an atiq or “soulname,” usually given at birth. The construction of a subject’s identity therefore is a complex process involving the historical customs of “naming,” kinship practices, as well as spiritual beliefs. The subject’s identity is thus composed of multiple layers, as the following narrative suggests: No child is only a child. If I give my grandfather’s atiq to my baby daughter, she is my grandfather. I will call her ataatassiaq, grandfather. She is entitled to call me grandson. (Brody, 1987: 139)

Long after the introduction of Christian baptism, Greenlanders continued to give their children, along with a Christian name, a Greenlandic name (Kleivan, 1984: 612). In Canada, a series of interventions threatened the traditions governing Inuit identity. These included missionary-given baptismal (Christian) names and

ABORIGINAL IDENTITIES government-administered fingerprinting—a method previously restricted to identifying criminals, but proposed in the 1930s for all Inuit (when many Qallunaat—non-Inuit—and Inuit objected, the project was abandoned). In 1941, the Northwest Territories council approved “identification disks for Eskimos” after proposals to issue identity cards were rejected (Alia, 1994). During this period, Inuit began receiving government subsidies in the form of family allowances, and the Department of National Health and Welfare decided to define the categories “Eskimos” and “Nomads.” These tautological definitions were taken to the point of bureaucratic absurdity. Inuit identities were further affected by the beginning of northern census-taking. It followed official standards for “the Canadian family,” with no consideration for Inuit family structures or traditions. Children who were full family members were suddenly relabeled “step-children” or “adoptees,” and distinctions were made between “real” and “common-law” spouses—terms that had meaning only for Qallunaat. Then came Project Surname, in which Inuit were given surnames that threatened to undermine their deeply imbedded naming traditions. Young people went away to residential schools and returned home to find they were “somebody else,” having been renamed in their absence. Canada was not the first country to impose surnames on indigenous people. In Siberia in the 1930s, the Soviet government gave surnames to Yuit. Like their Iñupiat relatives in Alaska and Inuit throughout Canada and Greenland, Yuit had clusters of single names and no concept of surnaming. In the 1960s, the Danish Ministry of Ecclesiastical Affairs gave surnames to Polar Inuit. In traditional Inuit society, land and person are almost inseparable; the world is divided not between persons and places but between named and unnamed things. The particular band or dialect group is defined by a prefix followed by a common suffix, -miut (“the people of” or “the inhabitants of”). Old boundaries are shifting or are contained within larger frameworks of regional, national, or pan-Arctic groupings. In 1973, Denmark hosted the Arctic Peoples’ Conference with participants including Saami organizations from Norway, Sweden and Finland, organizations from Greenland, and Inuit and Dene organizations from the Yukon and Northwest Territories in Canada (in the midst of land claims negotiations, the Alaska Federation of Natives was unable to participate). This led to the 1977 founding of the ICC. Dedicated to a pan-Arctic identity, ICC declared itself under four flags: United States, Canadian, Greenlandic, and Russian—although at the time, indigenous Siberians could not attend. At each assembly an empty chair and Soviet flag were placed

at the head of the room. In 1989, the chair was finally occupied when Siberians were permitted to attend the assembly at Sisimiut, Greenland, as unofficial delegates; in 1992, Siberian Inuit became full ICC members. Transcultural and international projects and structures do not replace culturally specific ones, or obliterate the need to maintain and strengthen particular languages and cultures. In a now-famous and muchquoted speech, the Inuk journalist and political leader Rosemarie Kuptana said that indigenous people needed their own broadcasting outlets, which she considered essential to maintaining aboriginal identities. She said existing programming was inappropriate and inadequate, and compared nonindigenous television to a neutron bomb that destroys the soul of a people but leaves the physical bodies standing, with a superficial impression that they are still intact (Alia, 1999). Kuptana was one of the visionaries who lobbied for— and helped create—aboriginal broadcasting in Canada and throughout the Arctic and Subarctic regions. Among the other projects that help to strengthen and communicate aboriginal identities are various museum, education, and public information projects. The Saami museum in Inari, Finland, was originally an open-air exhibit in the 1960s. In 1998, it was expanded to a permanent structure serving both the indigenous community and visiting tourists. Its development was directed by Saami, who named it Siida, or village. It features exhibitions on life ways, history, geology, economy, and culture with texts in Saami, Finnish, English, and German. The complex includes a theater, library, restaurant, and craft shop, which sells only crafts marked by the label “Saami duodji,” guaranteeing that they are made by Saami. This labeling system parallels the “Eskimo” (now Inuit) igloo label developed in Canada along with the marketing of Inuit art. Such labels, intended to guarantee “authenticity,” raise further questions of the nature of authenticity but help to curtail the rampant appropriation and sale of pseudo-indigenous products. The Canadian “igloo” was originally government supervised; it guarantees authentic Inuit construction but not quality, price, or artist’s percentage—artists selling through galleries lose substantially compared to those selling directly. The “Saami duodji” label is a Saami-controlled way of establishing identification, but like the Canadian label cannot guarantee quality or price. In both cases, the crafts are almost exclusively created for, and sold to, nonindigenous people.For this reason alone, one may question their authenticity, since many items are copies of utilitarian objects used in people’s daily lives (e.g., the Inuit woman’s knife or ulu sold widely as a tourist item).

5

ABORIGINAL IDENTITIES Karasjok, Norway, is host to the Sápmi theme park, which encompasses the Stálubákti Spirit Rock Theatre, a “Saami village,” an underground turf restaurant, two hotels, and the ubiquitous craft shop. The restaurant serves traditional foods to diners seated on reindeer-skin-covered benches at communal log tables, and the ambience is enhanced by an open fire and recorded Joik (traditional music). The theater offers a multimedia show that uses new technologies to tell old stories. Saami set the agenda and control the communication of their identity for a tourist market. Nevertheless, it is an agenda for conveying Saami-ness to outsiders more than a way of continuing Saami culture for Saami (George, “Sami cash in without selling out,” p. 13). It can be argued that such projects enrich the community as well—not just economically— because they require the gathering, preserving, and communicating of stories, artifacts, and practices. At the very least, they provide an opportunity to change old touristic patterns. As Loretta Todd remarked in her film The Learning Path, “It is time for … society to view us not as dying cultures, but dynamic cultures. Despite policies of assimilation, we have survived” (Todd, 1991). A successful ethnopolitical movement needs a “language of signs, symbols and categorizations which have a bearing on identity management,” which Harald Eidheim calls idioms (Eidheim, 1971: 71). The idioms that the Saami chose to establish a new ethnic border between Norwegian and Saami societies included language, national dress, folk music, and traditional industries such as reindeer herding, fishing, and small-scale farming. These were supported by two Kautokeino institutions, the Saami Regional (teachers’) College and the Saami Institute, which fosters its own research and collaborative projects with several universities on Saami history, language, and law. The cultural revival also led to the creation of Samediggi (Saami Parliament)—actually an advisory body linked to the Norwegian Parliament, and a separate administrative area with two official languages, Norwegian and Saami. There are also Saami parliaments in Finland and Sweden. In Finland in 1993, the University of Helsinki inaugurated a Saami studies program. In 1995, the University of Uppsala, Sweden, opened a Department of Reindeer Herding. Without disputing the importance of this program, Saami are also trying to educate the public about the fact that, despite the nearly universal association of Sápmi with reindeer herding, a much higher proportion of Saami are engaged in fishing and other activities. Changes in speaking and thinking about identity and its terminology accompany the other developments. Anthropologists, including this author, have

6

noted the shift from Eskimo to Inuit and from Greenlander to Kalaallit. The current preference for Saami (the people) and Sápmi (the region) replaces the earlier designations of “Laplanders,” “Lapps,” and “Lapland,” “Lapp” being a derogatory term meaning “a patch of fabric used in mending.” In Chukotka, in northeastern Siberia (across the Bering Strait from Alaska), an indigenous cultural revival has emerged over the past few decades, beginning in the late 1970s. Ironically, it was Stalin’s policy of bringing enlightenment to the peoples of the north that encouraged the first generation of university-educated indigenous Siberians. They included the first Nanai novelist Grigori Khodzher (born in 1929), the first Nivkh writer, the poet Vladimir Sangi (born in 1935), and the “founder of modern-day Chukchi literature” Yuri Rytkheu (born in 1930) (Barker, 1993: 216–217). Rytkheu has said that Chukchi traditions have no place in contemporary literature or life, yet he writes in both Chukchi and in Russian and has—especially in later works—done much to contribute to the preservation of Chukchi identity and culture. Others, such as the poet Antonina Kymytval, write only in indigenous languages. Since the 1960s, Greenlandic writers and musicians have recorded and published their works in their own language. As in Russia, this has meant narrowing the audiences for literary works, but an international audience for indigenous-language music has grown remarkably since the 1980s. Greenland’s highly developed recording industry, Canada’s aboriginal broadcasting program, and the burgeoning World Music movement have all contributed to this phenomenon. Albums and concerts by the Canadian duo Kashtin have been internationally successful despite the fact that nearly all of their songs are in the Innu language, which has only a small number of speakers. The award-winning Northern Tutchone singer Jerry Alfred has taken the traditional songs and themes of his home—Pelly Crossing, Yukon (population: about 500)—to the world, although he sings almost exclusively in his own language. Like many other indigenous musicians, he uses a mix of instruments, including European ones (guitar, violin or fiddle, bass, and an array of traditional and other percussions). The Saami songwriter-singer Mari Boine has also attracted a broadly multicultural, international audience, although most of her songs are in Saami. While using this medium to express and celebrate her Saami identity, she has, at the same time, experimented across cultural and musical boundaries (e.g., in her work with the jazz musician Jan Garbarek). Canadian Inuit such as William Tagoona say that they were influenced to write in Inuktitut instead of in French or English by the pioneering work of such

ABORIGINAL IDENTITIES Kalaallit (Greenlandic) songwriters as Rasmus Lyberth. The award-winning Cree playwright Tomson Highway includes some Cree dialogue in each of his predominantly English-language plays. He has said that his purpose is to show outsiders the beauty of the language, and also to make a political point. This simultaneous reaching out to outsiders and the celebration of one’s specific cultural roots characterizes much of today’s indigenous art-making. By communicating both inward and outward, indigenous artists are strengthening the affirmation of their communities’ and peoples’ identities while increasing others’ respect for, and understanding of, those identities. Such projects are not problem free or universally appreciated. Writers, singers, and visual artists are sometimes criticized by members of their own communities for “stealing” stories or publicizing private or inappropriate material. The much-acclaimed Alaska Native writer Velma Wallis was accused of making private stories public by the very act of publishing them, which allowed a broader public to appreciate her writing. Some elders told her that the stories belonged in the oral tradition and were not for outsiders. Indigenous singers have been taken to task for “selling” or “giving away” songs that belonged to particular families (sometimes their own). Salish peoples of the United States and Canadian northwest coast keep certain songs within particular families, and only members of those families are permitted to learn and sing them; within that tradition, any effort to make the songs available for strangers to learn is seen as a risk to the cultural maintenance, identity, and integrity of the community. Indigenous people living in urban areas are changing their sense of identity in the overall climate of cultural revitalization. A 2001 study of Canadian Inuit living in Montreal found that despite various levels of language loss and loss of culture, “urban Inuit still identify as Inuit,” and the Montreal Inuit Association helps maintain cultural continuity. In Yakutia, a 2001 study found indigenous identities to be fluid and flexible, with people changing ethnic identities based on political or social advantage. The result is that some people self-identify, for example, as Evenki or Chukchi, although they may speak other languages (George, “How do you know you’re an Inuk?,” p. 25). Similarly, Labrador Inuit of mixed parentage have identified as Inuit and as EuroCanadian, depending on the social conditions. Norwegian Saami of mixed parentage may identify themselves as Saami or Norwegian, depending on the circumstances. It is presumptuous to advocate preserving an archaic culture in a vacuum, apart from the changing realities of the modern world. The image of the tourist’s “aboriginal” in sealskin or fur, singing

traditional songs, bears little relevance to the ways most indigenous people identify themselves. In much of northern Canada, Alaska, and Greenland, “country” music is far more prevalent than the more “authentic” drumming and throat singing that is invariably imported to southern festivals (with singers suffering the discomfort of caribou parkas and sealskin mukluks in southern heat!). The old “whaler dances” found in Greenland and Nunavut derive from a marriage of British and Inuit cultures. In the writing of outsiders, indigenous identities are often misunderstood as feathers, furs, and fantasy. But indigenous traditionalism as Gail Guthrie Valaskakis has described it is not these; nor is it lost in transformation or revived as a privileged expression of resistance. It is an instrumental code to action knitted into the fabric of everyday life. … (Valaskakis, 1988: 268)

And according to Joy Harjo and Gloria Bird, Many of us at the end of the [20th] century are using the “enemy language” with which to tell our truths, to sing, to remember ourselves during these troubled times … . These colonizers’ languages, which often usurped our own tribal languages or diminished them, now hand back emblems of our cultures … We’ve transformed these enemy languages. (Harjo and Bird, 1998: 21–22)

Identities and cultures are complex and ever-changing. We need to rethink the idea that missionaries and governments “conquered” indigenous peoples. Religious and social customs of the colonizers did not necessarily subsume or subordinate those of aboriginal people—there is far more mutual accommodation and mutual learning than is often acknowledged. Referring to Greenland, the anthropologist Mark Nuttall observed that aspects of the existing traditional cosmology, such as name beliefs … still lie beneath the surface, having been glossed over with the veneer of European Christianity. During the time of the early missionaries the two belief systems probably existed side by side. … (Nuttall, 1992: 60)

And finally the Inuit leader John Amagoalik wrote: It may be true that the physical part of our culture has been eroded to the point where it can never return to its full potential. But the non-physical part of our culture— our attitude towards life, our respect for nature, our realization that others will follow who deserve the respect and concern of present generations—[is] deeply entrenched … . (Amagoalik, 1988: 210)

VALERIE ALIA

7

ADAMSON, SHIRLEY See also Education; Images of Indigenous Peoples; Inuit Broadcasting Corporation; Inuit Circumpolar Conference (ICC); Kinship; Media; Music (Traditional Indigenous); Naming; Place-Names

Further Reading Alia, Valerie, Names, Numbers and Northern Policy: Inuit, Project Surname, and the Politics of Identity, Halifax: Fernwood, 1994 ———, Un/covering the North: News, Media, and Aboriginal People, Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 1999 Amagoalik, John, “Will the Inuit Disappear from the Face of This Earth?.” In Northern Voices: Inuit Writing in English, edited by Penny Petrone, Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1988 Barker, Adele, “The Divided Self: Yuri Rytkheu and Contemporary Chukchi Literature.” In Between Heaven and Hell: The Myth of Siberia in Russian Culture, edited by Galya Diment and Yuri Slezkine, New York: St Martin’s Press, 1993 Brody, Hugh, Living Arctic, London: Faber & Faber, 1997 Burgess, Marilyn & Gail Guthrie Valaskakis, Indian Princesses and Cowgirls: Stereotypes from the Frontier, Montreal: OBORO, 1995 Crowe, Keith, A History of the Original Peoples of Northern Canada (revised edition), Montreal/Kingston: McGillQueen’s University Press, 1991 Dorais, Louis-Jacques, Quaqtaq: Modernity and Identity in an Inuit Community, Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1997 Eidheim, Harald, Aspects of the Lappish Minority Situation, Oslo: Universitetsforlaget, 1971 Freeman, Minnie Aodla, Life Among the Qallunaat, Edmonton: Hurtig, 1978 French, Alice, “My Name is Masak.” In Petrone, op. cit., 1988, p. 203 Gaski, Harald (editor), Sami Culture in a New Era: The Norwegian Sami Experience, Karasjok, Norway: Davvi Girgi OS, 1997 George, Jane, “How do you know you’re an Inuk?.” Nunatsiaq News, June 15, 2001, p. 25 ———, “Sami cash in without selling out.” Nunatsiaq News, June 29, 2001, p. 13 Gilberg, Rolf, “Polar Eskimo.” In Damas, op. cit., 1984, pp. 577–594 Harjo, Joy & Gloria Bird (editors), Reinventing the Enemy’s Language: Contemporary Native Women’s Writings of North America, New York and London: W.W. Norton, 1998 Isaacs, Harold, Idols of the Tribe: Group Identity and Political Change, Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1989 Kleivan, Inge, “West Greenland Before 1950” (translated from Danish by Charles Jones). In Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 5, Arctic, edited by David Damas, Washington: Smithsonian Institution, 1984 Nuttall, Mark, Arctic Homeland: Kinship, Community and Development in Northwest Greenland, Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1992 Pullen, Thomas C., Letter to the Editor of the Globe and Mail, in Curwin, Kelly, Editorial, Nunatsiaq News, January 26, 1987

8

Stordahl, Vigdis, “How to be a real Sámi: ethnic identity in a context of (inter)national integration.” Études/Inuit/Studies, 17(1) (1993): 127–130 Todd, Loretta, The Learning Path (film), Canada: National Film Board and TV Ontario, Tamarack Productions, 1991 Tunnuq, Martha, “Recollections and Comments,” Inuktitut (Ottawa: ITC) #75, 1992 Valaskakis, Gail Guthrie, “The Chippewa and the other: living the heritage of Lac du Flambeau.” Cultural Studies, 2(3) (October 1988)

ADAMSON, SHIRLEY Shirley Adamson has fought to give nonstatus Indians a political voice since the 1970s. Born into the Ta’an Kwatchan First Nation in the Yukon Territory in 1952, Adamson’s goal as a young woman was to be the matriarch of a large family and live in the bush (forest) on her traditional territory. The federal government’s White Paper of 1969 changed the trajectory of her life. Yukon aboriginal people began to organize against this assimilation policy and Adamson found herself elected to the Executive Council of the Yukon Association of nonstatus Indians in 1975. Adamson was responsible for administering the program dollars allocated to nonstatus Indians for health, education, and housing. Adamson then moved into the national field as a board member on the Native Council of Canada. In the 1980s, Adamson worked as a journalist for the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) in the Yukon, a job that enabled her to tell the story of Yukon First Nation people. With her connections she was able to attend community meetings and gather information not available to nonnative journalists. During her tenure with CBC, Adamson demanded, and got, more airtime for aboriginal issues, which she felt had previously been ghettoized into a small time slot. She also resisted the demands by her superiors to broadcast in her own language. Adamson wanted First Nation issues to be heard by nonnative Yukoners as well. During her nine years with CBC, Adamson spent four years on the negotiating team for the union that represented employees. She was the first aboriginal, and first woman, to hold that position from the north. Adamson won better health and dental benefits for status Indians from the Northwest Territories under their union’s collective agreement. In the late 1980s, she worked for the Council of Yukon Indians to translate the Umbrella Final Agreement (UFA) into a layperson’s language. The UFA is the framework within which all of the Yukon’s 14 First Nations will conclude a final claim settlement. Adamson became the Communications Adviser for the Council of Yukon Indians, with the responsibility of briefing Members of Parliament in Ottawa and

ADAPTATION the national media about the UFA to facilitate its passage. Members of her First Nation then asked Adamson to become the chair, which is similar to the role of chief. At the time, the Ta’an Kwatchan were not recognized by the federal government as an Indian Act band and had little funding to operate. Once again, Adamson went to Canada’s capital city to ask parliamentarians for a special clause in the final agreements that would allow Ta’an to negotiate self-government agreements. She established Ta’an Kwatchan Council financially and negotiated a land-swap with the city of Whitehorse that affords habitat protection to a lake that had previously been slated for a sewage lagoon. Adamson also secured some prime real estate within the city of Whitehorse limits for her First Nation. In the mid-1990s, Adamson was elected as the vicechief of the Assembly of First Nations, becoming the only nonstatus Indian in that organization. She was responsible for intergovernmental affairs and veterans affairs. Adamson fought for compensation for aboriginal war veterans who were denied benefits that nonnative veterans received. From 1996 to 1999, Adamson served as the Grand Chief of the Council of Yukon First Nations (formerly known as the Council of Yukon Indians). In this capacity Adamson also fought against federal gun control legislation and dealt with a crisis in the relationship between the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) and the First Nation peoples of the Yukon. Since 2000, Adamson has been the general manager of Northern Native Broadcasting Yukon. She is currently lobbying the federal government to recognize her organization as the aboriginal equivalent of CBC. Adamson is also a director with the Canadian Race Relations Foundation and is a governor of the University of the Arctic. All aspects of her work have involved telling the stories of her people, and fighting for their rights and recognition.

Biography Shirley Adamson was born in Whitehorse, Yukon Territory, Canada, in 1952. Her mother Irene Adamson is Ta’an Kwatchan and her father John Adamson is coastal Tlingit and nonnative. She was raised in a traditional lifestyle by her grandparents Celia and Frankie Jim at Lake Laberge. ROXANNE LIVINGSTONE Further Reading www.ammsa.com/windspeaker www.yukonweb.com/community/yukon-news

ADAPTATION In ecological terms, adaptation is an acquired trait (anatomical, physiological, or behavioral) of a species that improves its survival in a particular environment, or the evolutionary process by which a species acquires such traits in order to increase the possibility of survival and reproduction in those conditions. The Arctic’s extreme physical environment with low temperatures, deep and persistent snow, a short growing season, and food scarcity in winter means that Arctic organisms must become adapted to sparse and/or periodic food supplies. For example, birds and mammals are superbly insulated against the cold, thereby reducing their metabolic and hence food requirements.

Mechanisms Mechanisms for acquiring adaptations represent one of the most important problems in biology. The origin and evolution of adaptations has been explained as an immanent feature of living beings, and by material factors operating in evolution, such as direct heritable change of acquired features (Lamarckism) and the selection of the best-adapted genotypes. According to the latter theory, based on Charles Darwin’s theory of natural selection, the material for selection of adaptive characteristics is supplied by the chance inheritable variability of genetic material (mutations). Those mutations that improve the adaptability of individuals to a particular environment (e.g., giving it more resources in competition with others) are favored by natural selection, and individuals with such genotypes survive to pass on their genes to the next generation. Although natural selection is not a cause of variability of organisms, it influences the frequency of certain genotypes, operating not only at the level of individuals but also at various levels of groups of organisms, such as populations and species. This theory faces serious difficulties in explaining the origin and evolution of complex adaptations, such as eyes of vertebrates, and wings. Some adaptive features of organisms may be explained within the concept of preadaptation, when an adaptive trait is acquired in an environment without selective pressures before it becomes adaptive in other conditions. The concept of preadaptation is very important in explaining the history of Arctic fauna and flora. For example, a high tolerance of lower plants and fungi to external factors and their ability to enter inactive or active conditions is very important for their existence in the Arctic. Nevertheless, groups with these features originated beyond the Arctic and beyond the cold climate. Most probably, they were preadapted for penetration into the Arctic and dispersal there. 9

ADAPTATION The tundras and Arctic deserts contain a relatively high diversity of the groups that are relatively primitive within corresponding higher taxa: for example, Rosaceae and Cruciferae from Dicotyledones; Collembola from Insecta; as well as fungi, mosses, and lichens. These relatively primitive or simple groups displayed wide adaptive radiation in the Arctic due to wide ecological plasticity and best adaptability there.

Classification Adaptations are specific not only for species but also for ecological morphs and ontogenetic stages or phases (coenogenetic adaptations, that is, specific embryonic and larval adaptations). There are general adaptations, that is, adaptations to habitat (e.g., fins in aquatic animals or extremities of terrestrial vertebrates), and particular adaptations, that is, adaptations operating in a specific environment (e.g., extremities of burrowing animals and structures allowing the flight of seeds in some plants). Although adaptation concerns individual organisms, it may be expressed not only at the level of the individual but also at the level of various spatial groups of individuals, for example, species, population, shoal, or herd. There are ontogenetic adaptations (acquiring the adaptive features based on the existing norm of reaction during individual life) and phylogenetic adaptations (by genotypic transformation and acquiring a new norm of reaction). Various biological parameters of organisms may have adaptive value in particular conditions: biochemistry and physiology of an organism, morphology, reproductive behavior, and other behaviors such as seasonal cycle, migrations, habitat distribution, feeding, etc.

Biochemistry and Physiology Specific biochemical and physiological adaptations may play a very important role for organisms living in cold environments. In animals, hibernation corresponds to a significant decrease in metabolism, retardation of neural reactions, and a decrease in breathing, heart activity, and temperature. Hibernation, typical for some mammals, or winter diapause in insects, may have periodic awakenings, especially if some conditions are changed (e.g., increase in environmental temperature, flooding). Some poikilothermic (i.e., organisms whose body temperature is similar to environmental temperature) terrestrial animals living in the Arctic and Subarctic conditions are capable of relatively fast accumulation of cryoprotectants (special substances preventing fast freezing and formation of

10

ice crystals destroying cells). They are able to survive extracellular freezing, an important adaptation during cold winters. For example, the Siberian newt (Salamandrella keyserlingii) seems to be the most cold-tolerant amphibian in the world: adult individuals are able to survive freezing to −35°C to −40°C. Biochemical analysis has revealed seasonal changes in concentrations of the cryoprotectant glycerol related to its use during hibernation. After the cryoprotectant has been reallocated by tissues, the animal may hibernate at very low temperatures without freezing of tissues. Glycogen, the source of glycerol, must be stored during the active period, but seasonal preparation of the organism for hibernation is also important: the animal will die of freezing in experimental conditions outside the prehibernation and hibernation seasons. Siberian newts, as well as frogs occurring in the Arctic, lose their locomotory activity at lower temperatures than amphibian species living in more southerly latitudes: they can move even at +0.5°C to +1°C. This peculiarity is especially important at the end of hibernation, when the animals have to undertake breeding migrations in unstable weather conditions when frosts may recur unpredictably. When Siberian newts are quickly unfrozen, ice crystals thaw and fill their organisms with excessive water, which is dangerous. However, when the body temperature rises gradually, the animals become active without harmful consequences. Studies on brown frogs from different latitudes revealed that Subarctic populations have much higher enzyme activity, which decreases less with falling temperature than related Subarctic populations. The adaptive value of maintaining appropriate enzyme activity at lower temperatures is clear. Chemical and physical thermoregulation is very important for mammals and birds, which have to maintain a relatively constant body temperature in cold environments. However, even homeothermic animals are able to change their body temperatures slightly as an adaptation to specific conditions. For example, some birds may reduce their body temperature by 1–2°C below the mean temperature during the inactive period of egg incubation, which is related to reduced energy requisites in this time. On the other hand, the temperature may increase by about 1°C during migration. Arctic fish have also developed cryoprotectants, possibly independently of fish in the Antarctic Ocean who have nearly identical antifreeze proteins. It is however debated whether Arctic and Antarctic fish display higher metabolic rates as a metabolic cold adaptation. Arctic plants also display some biochemical peculiarities. Arctic bacteria and fungi have higher enzyme activity as an adaptation to cold. The plants have increased respiration ability, increased expenses to

ADAPTATION maintenance, and an environmentally dependent shift of heat tolerance of respiration. Local Leguminosae have a higher rate of accumulation of low-molecularweight carbohydrates and nitrogen from the soil and an earlier start to prepare for winter. These peculiarities increase their resistance to cold.

Morphology Some adaptations of organisms to Arctic conditions are displayed in their morphology (external appearance or internal structure). It is well known that Arctic birds and mammals have a thicker fat layer and denser fuzz or fur than related temperate species. Small downy feathers are positioned below the contour feathers. The stem of down feathers is thin and the barbules are absent, which results in the lack of a close plate constructed by the vein of the feather. In many cases, the stem of the downy feather is so short that the barbules starting from it form a single beam. Such a feather is called true down. Its main function is to minimize heat loss and to maintain constant body temperature in cold conditions. True down is most developed in birds living in cold regions, and especially in the Arctic. The needlelike feathers are positioned among the down. These feathers represent the down feather without barbules. The feather cover is subject to regular change (molting). As a rule, only part of the cover is molted. Molting has different functions in different habitats and geographic regions, and the change from summer to winter plumage is one aspect. Summer and winter feathers have different lengths and densities; there are also some structural variations. For example, the length of contour feathers on the back of the willow grouse (Lagopus lagopus) averaged 5.4 cm in winter and 3.8 cm in summer, while the down part is 1.8 and 1.4 cm, respectively. Molting birds sometimes form very large and dense aggregations in the Arctic regions as elsewhere. For example, some ducks, geese, and swans concentrate in groups of several thousand individuals in poorly accessible areas of rivers, lakes, and sea coasts for molting. This is conditioned by a scarcity of places where they can stay while molting, when their vulnerability to potential predators is increased. The eider (Somatheria mollissima) is a typical Arctic bird well adapted to life in cold climates. It is connected with coasts only at the time of nesting, spending the whole of the resting time in the sea. Its light and dense down is well known for its insulating features. The down is concentrated on the bird’s belly, the area most in contact with the cold environment (sea water, coastal rocks, snow, and soil). In addition to the down, a thick fat layer and a system of air sacs surrounding the body prevent the overcooling of this

bird. The sacs also act like a hydrostatic apparatus, which increases the buoyancy after submersion of the bird into water. The down of these birds is widely used for stuffing clothes and bedding. Mammals display a variation of hair cover in relation to environmental conditions. Many Arctic mammals have denser low fur, or an undercoat, which decreases heat loss during winter. Another adaptation represents, in contrast, a significant reduction of the undercoat with a significant development of the main hairs. This is connected usually with a more pronounced development of the fat layer (e.g., in marine mammals) or dense hair cover on the skin in terrestrial and semiaquatic mammals that, together with other mechanisms, allow them to avoid significant heat loss at very low air and/or water temperatures. For example, the Arctic fox (Alopex lagopus) is able to withstand exposures to −80°C for 1 h with no fall in internal temperature. As with the birds, molting also occurs in Arctic mammals in relation to season change. However, the mechanisms are different, and the vulnerability of molting individuals is decreased in mammals because they tend not to concentrate in particular habitats during molting. Some skeletal structures may also serve as adaptations to Arctic conditions. The males of the narwhal (Monodon monoceros) use their tusks for breaking holes in the ice to allow the pod access to atmospheric air. Reindeer (Rangifer tarandus) feed on plants not only in snowless but also in snowy seasons. In the latter case, it is difficult to dig up plants from the snow, sometimes from depths of 70–80 cm, when only the back of the foraging animal is visible. To alleviate the digging of snow, the foreleg hoofs are grown to the winter period, with an acute edge and concave surface. Such a hoof shape is an important adaptation for digging up food. Female reindeer do not lose their antlers in winter, and this allows them to defend the food in the hole in snow from other individuals. When the female is grazing, her head is directed downwards and the antlers close the dig hole. This is important under conditions of low food availability in winter. Geographical races of homeothermic animals (i.e., warm-blooded birds and mammals) living in areas with a colder climate are larger in body size (Bergmann’s rule). Protruding parts of the body (tails, ears, limbs, etc.) in this group of animals tend to be shorter in the northern species (Allen’s rule). Both these rules reflect adaptation to minimize heat loss under cold climatic conditions. The larger the volume/surface ratio, the lower the losses of heat, and hence the higher the advantages for life in a cold climate. In the south, in warm climate, this ratio should be minimized to increase heat losses and to prevent overheating of the organism. Some species of birds

11

ADAPTATION and mammals do not conform to these rules because some of their morphological, ecological, and ethological features play a more important role than physical proportions in their thermoregulation. For example, the yak (Bos grunniens), acclimatized in Yakutia, uses its long and hairy tail as a “mattress” when lying on the snow. Similarly the sousliks are the most “longtailed”: they use their tails as a “blanket” during hibernation. Nevertheless, both the rules describe a general tendency, which cannot be a matter of chance. These trends have evolved independently in different taxonomic groups as an adaptation to similar environmental conditions. White coloration is a typical cryptic (i.e., hiding) coloration of northern animals (e.g., polar owls, polar bears, etc.). It makes the predator poorly visible to its prey and vice versa. In contrast to homeothermic animals, poikilothermic animals of the Arctic have poor self-thermoregulation. Hence, a better use of the external environment has higher value for these species. In many cases, individuals from northern populations of amphibians, reptiles, and insects are more dark-colored than those from the south. This concerns, for example, some reptiles that display a more frequent occurrence of melanism, that is, black coloration of the epidermis due to higher concentrations of dark pigment-containing cells, the melanophores (see Reptiles). A dark color ensures better heating of the organism by sunrays, which allows the animal to spend a shorter time basking for maintenance of its activity. The higher occurrence of melanism is also evident in highland populations of reptiles, where the environmental situation is somewhat similar to that in the Arctic. At the same time, other closely related vertebrates, fishes and amphibians, do not display a higher occurrence of melanism in the north. These animals are more connected to water bodies and/or a relatively high moisture of the terrestrial environment, and quick heating under direct sun may be rather harmful for them. Arctic plants also display parallel evolution of morphological adaptive features. Their cells have increased volume of the cytoplasm, more mitochondria, and better developed endoplasmatic reticulum. Arctic plants often contain increased amounts of carotenoid pigments. Probably, these substances of lipid character with unsaturated double bonds increase the flexibility of chloroplast membranes, which is very important at low temperatures. In severe cold, individual plants become smaller, and straight forms are transformed into creeping, prostrate, and cushionlike forms. Such stunted forms keep plants below the snow level in winter to avoid strong winds and desiccation, and in summer keep plants to a thin boundary layer where temperatures are warmest due to heat radiated

12

from the soil. Pubescence (hairiness) is another adaptation that many Arctic plants use to maintain warm temperatures near the plants. The rosette form of many Arctic flowers (such as Dryas integrifolia and Papaver radicatum) and herbaceous leaves is thought to act as a solar reflector, to concentrate heat to the pollen and seed, aiding floral metabolism and the reproductive process.

Reproduction and Development The growing season is relatively short in the Arctic. Much of the biological activity is confined to one to two months in the High Arctic and three to four months in the Low Arctic. This causes the necessity of quick reproduction and development in most species during a short summer. Developmental peculiarities of plants are adapted to these severe conditions. Due to the short growing season, the full life cycle of a plant is extended through two to three seasons. Although the mass flowering of tundra plants, as well as the relatively short period from flowering to fruiting, creates an impression that the plants may perform their full life cycle during the short summer, these flowers originate from generative buds formed in the previous season. In addition, the formation of fruit in many species continues under snow. Nevertheless, when measured in active periods, this cycle takes only about five months, that is, about the same time as in the temperate belt. Amphibian embryos and larvae develop faster in the north than in the south. This allows them to finish transformation from the embryo to the terrestrial animal during a short activity period. The growth rate usually does not exceed that in the southern populations. In addition, embryos and larvae in northern amphibian populations seem to be more tolerant to cold and, in particular, to temporary freezing in the ice. This is important because of a frequent return of frosts in northern conditions. Adult animals grow slowly due to the short active season. The latter is conditioned by a relatively long hibernation, which results in increasing longevity (expressed in years) in northern poikilothermic terrestrial vertebrates. However, the life span expressed in activity seasons should be similar to that in more southern populations. A relatively long life cycle, late maturation, and slow growth are also typical for many freshwater fishes in the Arctic. Thus, we can see that the extension of life or its certain periods in some poikilothermic species in the Arctic is a result of only the extension of hibernation. There is also a tendency toward increasing fecundity in the northern populations of some vertebrates. A larger number of eggs in the clutch serve as “insurance” for unfavorable climatic conditions.

ADAPTATION The reproductive cycle of the above-mentioned eiders is highly adapted to the seasonality of Arctic nature. Pairs are formed even on the way to nesting sites. The female spends a large amount of fat, stored earlier, for nesting. The nestlings appear in late spring, and about two months later begin independent life. Probably, the broods that have not developed to autumn frosts die due to severe storms or early snow. The polar bear (Ursus Maritimus) tends to stay in the area of largest ice-holes and numerous marine mammals. Reproduction in this species corresponds to the migration of females to hibernacula. A pregnant female makes a den in the form of a large hole in thick snow mounds near an island coast. Probably the most suitable places are limited, because in some places dozens of dens exist every year. The female enters the den only in mid-November, when the latent stage is finished and the fertilized ovules start to develop. The process of embryonic development is adapted to the polar winter: the juveniles appear in the middle or at the end of winter. Reproductive migrations to special habitats are typical mainly for animals with a relatively low reproductive potential, requiring relatively narrow living conditions, that is, tending to k-strategy (i.e., low reproduction rate, investing energy in a few large offspring). Species tending to r-strategy (i.e., high birth rate, rapid population turnover) are not so dependent on their habitat in their reproductive mode. For example, common lemmings have low habitat requirements for reproduction and much higher fecundity, from three to nine juveniles per brood. Each female brings not less than three to four broods per year, and the juveniles attain sexual maturity probably by the beginning of their third month. At such an intensity of reproduction, the number of individuals may reach very high values during a short time, and the population density becomes very high. In this situation, the animals undergo distant migrations, caused by stress and directed to avoid significant competition. The animals try to cross rivers, lakes, etc., and mass mortality occurs in these migrations. Hence, the periodic peaks in population numbers take place. These different types of strategies, k-strategy and rstrategy, are directed to the same goal—species survival. They are typical for organisms in different environments, including those in the Arctic.

Feeding Feeding behavior within the same species may be different in the Arctic and elsewhere. However, these differences do not always reflect real adaptations of animals to Arctic conditions. For example, amphibians consume more aquatic prey in the north, but this

reflects only their spatial distribution (life near water bodies). On the other hand, tipulid mosquitoes in the Arctic display adaptive traits in feeding: an increase in energetic content of the food. Nonspecialized fishes with wide trophic spectra prevail at the extreme North, which may reflect the necessity of rapid changes from prey to prey under conditions of a low diversity of food resources (see Food Chains).

Spatial Distribution and Behavior The high seasonality of the Arctic environment causes two main pathways of seasonality in adaptations: hibernation and activity throughout the year. Hibernation is well developed not only in Arctic organisms but also in organisms in regions with a moderately severe winter. Hibernation is an adaptation to the scarcity of food and other resources. Some biochemical, cytological, ecological, and other changes occur in the organism before hibernation (see above). The lack of hibernation represents an alternative adaptation to the cold conditions. It may be subdivided into seasonal migrations, when animals avoid unfavorable conditions by moving to regions with better conditions, and activity in the same area. Migrations are very typical: the majority of Arctic birds migrate southwards in winter and then move back to the Arctic. These migrations are aimed at avoiding mainly the unfavorable conditions of feeding, temperature, and breeding. Many animals remain active in the Arctic winter. These are homeothermic animals (birds and mammals), which are capable of feeding and breeding in winter due to adaptations in biochemistry, physiology, morphology, and behavior as described above. Some adaptations are displayed in peculiarities of spatial distribution and behavior of species. For example, fattening and fattening-spawning migrations into floodplain systems of lower reaches of rivers, spawning migrations into upper reaches of rivers, etc. are typical for freshwater fishes. Migrations are also typical for marine fishes, a majority of Arctic birds, and many mammal species. They are conditioned mainly by the necessity of reproduction or fattening in appropriate seasons of the year. Sharp seasonality and scarcity of suitable habitats cause complicated behavioral patterns in some species. For example, male sandpipers Calidris melanotos, after their arrival, occupy certain territories and defend them from individuals of the same species, which confines the size of nesting groups. The size of defending territories corresponds to the amount and spatial distribution of food resources necessary for the growth and development of nestlings. In spring, the males of C. melanotos form pairs at certain times (about five days) with two,

13

ADOPTION sometimes three, females. The broods appear in the same sequence. Imaginal stages of the mosquitoes from the family Chironomidae represent the main food of the nestlings. The mass appearance of these mosquitoes usually takes not less than three weeks. At the time of the second brood, nestlings from the first brood transfer to the “adult” food spectrum. This sequence allows birds to maximize the use of nestling food resources and use the breeding season most efficiently. In addition, parents lead their nestlings to places with a maximum concentration of food, which is necessary for the rapid growth of the nestlings. Another adaptation to maximize food resource use is the ability of birds from the family Alcidae (auks) to form large breeding aggregations on maritime rocks. Such colonies sometimes number millions of individuals. They are formed by several species in the zone of formation of polar ocean fronts, where cool Arctic waters meet warmer southern currents. Plankton and fish are very abundant there, and bird feces fertilize the sea, increasing its biological productivity and in turn enhancing the food resources of the birds. Polar foxes and predatory birds follow the large aggregations of lemmings, and their fecundity increases in years of a high concentration of prey, which causes corresponding peaks of the population number of predatory animals (however, somewhat shifted in time from those of the prey). Short migrations are typical for the muskox (Ovibos moschatus). In wintertime it stays on plateaus, where the snow is blown off by wind, and scarce vegetation constitutes available food. In summer, the animals prefer areas with richer plants, that is, river valleys and maritime terraces covered with tundra. Some adaptive traits are also evident in the spatial distribution of the Arctic plant cover. Productivity of tundras and swamps is less dependent on the intensity of illumination than that of meadows, and the carbon turnover there is more closed. This is connected with a wider distribution of tundras in the Arctic. SERGIUS L. KUZMIN See also Hibernation Further Reading Bliss, L.C., G.M. Courtin, D.L. Pattie, R.R. Riewe, D.W.A. Whitfield & P. Widden, “Arctic tundra ecosystems.” Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 4 (1973): 359–399 Chen, L., A.L. DeVries & C.-H.C. Cheng, “Convergent evolution of antifreeze glycoproteins in Antarctic notothenioid fish and Arctic cod.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 94 (1997): 3817–3822 Danks, H.V., “Insect cold hardiness: a Canadian perspective.” CryoLetters, 21 (2000): 297–308 Grant, V., The Origin of Adaptations, New York: Columbia University Press, 1963

14

Krupnik, I.L., Arctic Adaptations, Hanover, New Hampshire: University Press of New England, 1993 Martin, Yu.L., N.V. Matveeva, T.H. Piin, V.E. Semenova & Yu.I. Chernov (editors), Adaptation of Organisms to the Arctic Environments, Tallinn: Academy of Sciences of the Estonian SSR and Academy of Sciences of the USSR Publ., 1984 (in Russian) Römisch, K. & T. Matheson, “Cell biology in the Antarctic: studying life in the freezer.” Nature Cell Biology, 4 (2003): 3–6 Shvarts, S.S. & V.G. Ishchenko, Puti Prisposobleniya Nazemnykh Pozvonochnykh Zhivotnykh k Usloviyam Sushchestvovaniya v Subarktike 3 Zemnovodnye [The Ways of Adaptation of Terrestrial Vertebrate Animals to the Subarctic Conditions 3 Amphibians], Sverdlovsk: Inst. Plant and Anim. Ecol. Uralian Sci. Center of USSR Acad. Sci. Publ., 1971 (in Russian) Solomonov, N.G. (editor), Adaptatsiya Zhivotnykh k Kholodu [Adaptation of Animals to Cold], Novosibirsk, 1990 (in Russian) Vorobyeva, E.I. (editor), The Siberian Newt (Salamandrella keyserlingii Dybowski, 1870): Ecology, Behaviour, Conservation, Moscow: Nauka, 1995 (in Russian)

ADOPTION Child adoption is a central element of the customary social organization of a number of Arctic peoples, including Canadian, Alaskan and Greenlandic Inuit, and Yupiit. This appears to have been so when the first written accounts of northern peoples were produced. While absolute frequencies are unavailable in the historical record, and variable across space, time, and ethnicity, it would seem that between 20% and 40% of children were not primarily socialized by their biological parents. This is not to say that they did not have contact with them; in many cases they lived with them, rather they were raised by and were socially recognized as being the children of other people. Almost all families participate in adoption by giving and/or receiving children. Adoption then is a fundamental feature of exchange in these societies. In Canada, where most of the material on the subject has appeared, the frequency and uniqueness of adoption practices have been reported in almost all major ethnographies since the late 19th century. As a characteristic feature of Inuit family structure, adoption has generally been explained as an adaptive strategy to create and maintain broad, situationally available networks of allies through fictive and quasibiological kinship ties. In more recent decades, adoption practices have come under the purview of health and social services organizations, in some cases under indigenous control. The tendency in these instances has been to see the frequency of adoption as a structural response to high reproductive success, particularly among young women, and as a general indicator of other kinds of social problems. There are important

ADOPTION repercussions of these views on the persistence of customary adoption, on how parents giving a child in adoption interpret their decisions, and on how adoptees view themselves within their family networks. Of course, there are other factors reshaping the meaning of adoption in the contemporary Arctic. Today in Nunavik and Nunavut, roughly one-third of children are categorized as adopted in official statistics. A large proportion of this group is accounted for in intergenerational adoption arrangements, where the mother of the birth mother or the biological father will assume responsibility for the child. People who are infertile also have regular access to children through adoption during their life span. Adults of any age may adopt children, and many families include a mixture of adopted and biological children. An emphasis in these cases is balancing the gender ratio of children within the family. Adoptive parents are generally older than the biological parents and in many cases are “elders” who are in their postreproductive years. Adoption between alternate generations ensures that the knowledge and life experience of older people are passed on to the young, thereby providing a backbone of cultural continuity in a rapidly changing society. This is particularly important in contemporary communities where young adults and middle-aged people may have less time to spend in traditional activities with children because of employment and other obligations. Men are generally less involved than women in child rearing and, hence, decision making around adoption. Both adoptive mothers and fathers consider adopted children as equal to biological progeny. In some cases, they may think of them as “special,” particularly when the child demonstrates happiness with the adoptive parents. The identity of the birth parents is general knowledge in community life and not considered as privileged or stigmatizing information. Children learn of their adoption through everyday conversation with family members. Adoption practices are grounded in a culturally modulated understanding of child development. In this view, personality is carried through the name given a child, almost always that of an extant or recently deceased community member. Through physical maturation, the social persona of the namesake reemerges in the child. Kinship terms appropriate to the namesake are often employed when talking or referring to the child. The behavior of an infant indicates the child’s acceptance of the arrangement made between the biological and adoptive parents. An important element of this process is the first time a child calls the adoptive parents “anaana” and “ataata” (mother and father, respectively). These are clear indications that the child consents to being adopted

and is happy with the arrangement. In some cases, a child may return to the biological parents or another family. In Inuit society, kinship is figured bilaterally with no systematic locality preference. Adoption arrangements involving biological kin tend to favor the matrilineal, although this is by no means exclusive. Social kinship networks are broad and forged in a number of cultural practices that create special bonds among individuals and between groups. Adoption arrangements strongly favor preexisting networks of social kinship. The distinction between biological and social kin, while recognized, is not particularly important in Inuit social organization, a factor that also accommodates adoption. A basic difficulty in understanding Inuit adoption comes from the categorical distinctions the term carries in Western society. Consequently, it is necessary to distinguish customary from bureaucratically defined adoption. A concise definition of the former has not been determined, and would likely vary across the Arctic. Regardless, important distinctions are made between fosterage, temporary or semipermanent residency with senior family members, situational requirements for relatively long-term residency (i.e., illness of the biological parent or parents), and true adoption. In some cases, children living in one of the alternate forms of residency would become adopted gradually over time yet maintain close relations with the biological parents. Thus, in its cultural context, adoption may be seen as part of a continuum of residency and kinship relationships. Bureaucratically defined adoption is grounded in child welfare and youth protection legislation dictated by the legal and social norms of the state. These classify kinship in a discrete system of categories that require the involvement of unrelated people, frequently from a different cultural background, to formalize. A basic feature of this system is the abrogation of the rights of biological parents when an adoption occurs. In practical terms, Inuit adoptees and their families find some advantage in formalizing customary kinship relations through the legal system. Without such definition, they face difficulties in gaining family benefits, passports, and access to other rights of citizenship. The customary adoption process is consequently subject to conflicting norms of what constitutes appropriate care for children. CHRISTOPHER FLETCHER See also Elders; Kinship; Naming Further Reading Fienup-Riordan, Ann, Hunting Tradition in a Changing World, New Brunswick, New Jersey, and London: Rutgers University Press, 2000

15

AGREEMENT ON THE CONSERVATION OF POLAR BEARS Guemple, Lee, Inuit Adoption, National Museum of Man Mercury Series No. 47, Canadian Ethnology Service, 1979 Morrow, Phyllis & Mary C. Pete, “Cultural adoption on trial: cases from Southwestern Alaska.” Law and Anthropology, 8 (1996): 243–259 Rasmussen, Knud, The Netsilik Eskimos: Social Life and Spiritual Culture, Report of the Fifth Thule Expedition 1921–1924, Volume VIII, No. 1–2, Gyldendalske Boghandel: Nordisk Forlag, 1931 ———, Intellectual Culture of the Copper Eskimos, Report of the Fifth Thule Expedition 1921–1924, Volume IX, Gyldendalske Boghandel: Nordisk Forlag, 1932 Rousseau, Jerome, L’Adoption Chez les Esquimaux Tununermiut, Travaux Divers 28, Québec: Centre d’Études Nordiques, Université Laval, 1970 Saladin d’Anglure, Bernard, “Enfants Nomades au Pays des Inuit Iglulik.” Anthropologie et Sociétés, 12(2) (1988): 125–166

AGREEMENT ON THE CONSERVATION OF POLAR BEARS In response to the decline of polar bear populations due to overharvesting worldwide, representatives from five nations (Canada, Denmark, Norway, the Soviet Union, and the United States) met in Fairbanks, Alaska, in 1965 at the First International Scientific Meeting on the Polar Bear. Representatives from the five countries reviewed existing data on polar bears and determined that the harvest levels were high and likely increasing. Between 1965 and 1973, extensive negotiations were conducted to ensure international cooperation on the conservation of polar bears. Worldwide awareness and attention to environmental conservation was especially conducive to the implementation of strict conservation measures during the 1970s. In 1973, the five contracting parties (countries) wrote the Agreement on the Conservation of Polar Bears. The Agreement came into effect on May 26, 1976, after the third nation ratified it. All parties had ratified the Agreement by 1978. It was unanimously reaffirmed in 1981 and remains in effect today. The Agreement is nonbinding and consists of ten articles that outline conservation and management directions for polar bears in general terms. The Agreement represented one of the first international initiatives to include ecological principles by calling for the protection of the ecosystems upon which polar bears depend, and specifically the protection of special habitat components. The Agreement allowed for the taking (i.e., hunting, killing, and capturing) of polar bears for scientific and conservation purposes, in order to protect other resources, for harvest by local people using traditional methods, or where people had a tradition of hunting polar bears. The Agreement was designed not to alienate any particular jurisdiction. All signatories recog-

16

nized that they may want to harvest polar bears, but all agreed that it should be done with conservation as a priority. Interpretations of the Agreement pertaining to the meaning of the language (“taking”) varied among nations. Norway interpreted the Agreement in the strictest sense, and decided they had no local people in their Arctic areas and stopped all harvesting in 1973 with no resumption to date. Canada and the United States have continued hunting polar bears within the context of largely restricting harvests to indigenous people. The Soviet Union (today Russia), in response to concerns of declining populations, had already halted hunting almost two decades earlier in 1956. The Agreement further restricted harvest methods by encouraging nations to prohibit the use of aircraft and large motorized vessels. These guidelines were largely aimed at ending the use of aeroplanes for polar bear sports hunts in Alaska and the ship-based sports hunting in Norway. The Canadian interpretation of the Agreement allowed guided sports hunting as a token proportion of the total harvest. Guided sports hunts are led by indigenous people and are based from dog sledges. The Agreement included measures to protect denning areas, feeding sites, and migration areas. However, a number of the conservation procedures outlined in the Agreement were already well in place long before 1973. The high-density denning area on Kong Karls Land Polar Bear Reserve in Svalbard, Norway, was established in 1939. Further, in 1949, the Government of the Northwest Territories, Canada, restricted the hunting of polar bears to predominantly indigenous peoples who held general hunting licenses. In the United States, the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972 had resulted in the prohibition of all marine mammal takes, including polar bears, with some exceptions for native harvest. Thus, many of the key tenants of the Agreement were in place by 1973. The Agreement benefited from the existing conservation measures and meant that implementation created less disruption; it has been useful in supporting conservation measures such as the protection of new denning areas (e.g., Wapusk National Park, Canada). However, in other areas, the intent of the Agreement has been neglected. The issue of feeding sites and migration patterns have largely been ignored in most jurisdictions. Almost 30 years after the creation of the Agreement, little evidence of concrete action in the protection of marine habitats for polar bears exists. The lack of action in marine-protected areas in part stems from difficulties associated with delineating special sites because the bears range over vast geographical areas. The Agreement on the Conservation of Polar Bears states that the contracting parties shall conduct

AINANA, LYUDMILA national research programs to aid conservation and management; Article VII of the Agreement states that each nation is to manage polar bears based on the “best available scientific data” and nations have striven to achieve this goal. The most vigorous polar bear research has arisen as a result of the Agreement and includes data regarding population estimates, harvest monitoring, and sustainable harvest levels. However, in some situations, no data are the best data available, and some populations are managed and harvested without an adequate understanding of population size. In some jurisdictions, even the level of harvest remains unknown, but efforts are continuously ongoing to ameliorate the situation. In 1968, the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN), a body under the jurisdiction of the United Nations, established the Polar Bear Specialist Group, which meets every three to four years. Each participating party contributes up to three specialists to the group. The Polar Bear Specialist Group consists of government scientists and managers with input from specialists from universities and elsewhere. The Group serves no regulatory function for the Agreement on the Conservation of Polar Bears but fulfills the intent of Articles VII and VIII, which state that research shall be coordinated among parties, consultation shall occur for the management of migrating populations, and research and management results shall be exchanged with the objective of providing further protection to polar bears. The Agreement has been effective because resource users and those involved in research and management were committed to finding a solution to improve polar bear conservation. Liberal interpretation of the Agreement by each nation has permitted flexibility in application and ease of compliance, which has resulted in the Agreement being one of the oldest conservation treaties in existence. ANDREW E. DEROCHER See also Marine Mammal Hunting; Marine Mammal Protection Act; Polar Bear

Further Reading Baur, D.C., “Reconciling polar bear protection under United States laws and the International Agreement for the Conservation of Polar Bears.” Animal Law, 2 (1996): 9–99 Fikkan, A., “Polar bears—hot topic in cold climate.” International Challenges, 10 (1990): 32–38 Fikkan, A., G. Osherenko & A. Arikainen, “Polar Bears: The Importance of Simplicity.” In Polar Politics: Creating International Environmental Regimes, edited by Oran R. Young & Gail Osherenko, Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1993 Freeman, M.R., “Polar Bears and Whales: Contrasts in International Wildlife Regimes.” In Issues in the North, edit-

ed by J. Oakes, Riewe R Occasional Publication No. 40, Edmonton, Alberta: Canadian Circumpolar Institute, 1996 Lentfer, J., “Agreement on conservation of polar bears.” Polar Record, 17 (1974): 327–330 Prestrud, P.& I. Stirling, “The International Polar Bear Agreement and the current status of polar bear conservation.” Aquatic Mammals, 20(3) (1994): 113–124

AINANA, LYUDMILA Lyudmila Ainana (Aynganga) is a leader of the Asian Eskimos, chairperson of Yupik (the Eskimo organization of Yupiget in Chukotka), and a member of the Inuit Circumpolar Conference (ICC) executive committee. Ainana belongs to the Ungazigmit tribe. Ainana is one of the few modern representatives of Asian Eskimos who has a perfect command of her native language and a deep and rich knowledge of the traditional lifestyle of her people. During the 1990s, Ainana headed the campaign of Eskimos for the conservation of their language, cultural traditions, and the environment of the indigenous people of Chukotka. In 1994—2000, she served as director of one of the Russian-American programs for the investigation of indigenous whaling in Chukotka. In her activities, Ainana relies on long-term collaboration with scholars, biologists, linguists, and social anthropologists. Ainana has authored and coauthored a number of scientific publications on marine mammals of the Bering Strait, and also textbooks on the Eskimo language (Chaplino dialect). She currently resides in the town of Provideniya.

Biography Lyudmila Ainana (Aynganga) was born in 1934 in the old whaling center Ungazik (Old Chaplino) in southeastern Chukotka Peninsula. Ainana graduated from the Pedagogical Institute in Leningrad. She then returned to Chukotka and taught the Russian language and literature and the Eskimo language to schoolchildren. LYUDMILA BOGOSLOVSKAYA TRANSLATED BY PETR ALEINIKOV See also Eskimo; Inuit Circumpolar Conference (ICC); Yupik Eskimo Society of Chukotka Further Reading Bogoslovskaya, L.S., Okhotniki Beringova proliva. Jour. Vokrug Sveta, # 6, 1989, s. 36–42 [The Hunters of the Bering Strait. In Around the World, # 6, pp. 36–42] Krupnik, I.I., Pust govoryat nashi stariki. Rasskazy aziatskikh eskimosov-yupik. Zapisi 1975–1987, Moscow: Institut Naslediya, 2000, 528 s [Let Our Old People Speak. The Stories by Asiatic Yupik Eskimos. Records of 1975–1987, Moscow: Institute of Heritage, 528pp.]

17

AINU

AINU The Ainu are the indigenous people of Japan. Ainu means both “human” and “us.” The predecessors of the Ainu have lived in the Ezo (present-day Hokkaido) region, the Kuril Islands, and Sakhalin Island for thousands of years. Archaeological finds suggest that the Ainu likely developed from interaction with four significant cultures over a wide span of time: Epi-Jomon (250 BCE– 700 CE), Okhotsk (600–1000 CE), Satsumon (700–1200 CE), and Japanese (Walker, 2001). As early as the 12th century, Japanese accounts categorized the Ainu as Emishi, another people living on Ezo whom the Japanese considered uncultured and coarse outcasts. The first Japanese census of the Ainu people in the early 19th century described them based upon the place from where they came. The Japanese named them the Hokkaido, Kuril, and Sakhalin Ainu. The Ainu population estimates from 1807 to 1931 indicated a steady decline. In 1807, the population count was 26,256; in 1822, 23,563; in 1854, 17,810; in 1873, 16,272; in 1903, 17,873; and in 1931, 15,969 (Walker, 2001). The marked decrease from 1822 to 1931 was attributed primarily to diseases such as smallpox, measles, and influenza. Kinship was sex determined, with males belonging to the father’s clan and females belonging to the mother’s clan. Therefore, brothers and sisters belonged to different clans with different designated obligations and allegiances. Clan membership was granted at the age of puberty, signified by a tattoo and a ceremonial belt. Land was inherited by the first son based upon one’s male ancestor or forefather. The Ainu possess an animist spirituality, believing that everything, even inanimate objects, contains life and spirit. These spirits are known as kamuy, or gods visiting the earthly world. The Ainu believe in nature, animal, plant, and object gods that exist in symbiosis with humans. They trust that the gods will assist humans and therefore must be appreciated in return. For the Ainu, it is appropriate to send kamuy back to their world through prayer and gift-giving. Some argue that the sending ceremony (iyomante) for bears represents the crux of Ainu spirituality and celebrates the return of the bear’s spirit to the spirit world. Death is perceived as a separation of body and soul. The tangible body remains in this world, and the transcendent soul goes to the other world where it is met by ancestors and lives a life similar to this world. The other world exists underground, as a reflection, with the same characteristics except in reversed space and time. Traditionally, the Ainu hunted, fished, gathered, and engaged in subsistence farming. They also vigorously traded and forged alliances with their neighbors. Fishing and hunting were the Ainu’s main sources of

18

subsistence. The Ainu built villages by the sea or by rivers for convenient access to salmon and trout. Each village or individual had designated river-fishing territory where no outsiders could fish. The Ainu engaged in sea fishing for tuna and swordfish, and hunting marine mammals using 3–4 m boats. They hunted between late autumn and early summer for bear, Ezo deer, fox, rabbit, and wild birds such as white-tailed sea eagles. The Ainu practiced subsistence agriculture, supplementing other economic activities. Women usually planted crops such as wheat, buckwheat, and Chinese and foxtail millet. Crops such as Japanese radish, cucumber, leek, and pumpkin were introduced in the Tokugawa era (1603–1868). Potatoes were introduced to Ainu agriculture in 1798 with Japanese influence. Until the 17th century, the Ainu boasted a robust trading relationship with the Russians and held their own against Japanese incursions into Ezo. Under the Tokugawa government, however, the Matsumae dynasty (1599–1868) exerted monopoly over trade with the Ainu. The Matsumae partitioned Hokkaido in order to increase its control of trade, which proved extremely disadvantageous for the Ainu. They were forced to trade exclusively with the Matsumae, at the dynasty’s behest, eliminating any opportunity for the Ainu to trade freely. Hokkaido was further subdivided as followers of the dynasty were granted monopoly over trade. The Ainu relationship with the Wajin (the Ainu designation for the Japanese) intensified. Realizing trade was a limited resource, the Matsumae hired merchants to develop fishing grounds. They, in turn, hired Ainu as cheap labor. The Ainu people lost control of their trading economy and territory and sacrificed much of their freedom as they were forced to labor for their livelihood. Some women were forced into sexual slavery. The Ainu were important intermediaries among Japanese, Dutch, Chinese, Russian, Manchurian, and Korean markets. As these states developed through trade, especially Japan, the Ainu became redundant trading partners, eventually becoming indentured workers in the coastal fishing towns of Hokkaido. The situation worsened in 1868 when the Japanese government undertook modernization and expansion policies, encouraged Japanese farmers to settle in Hokkaido, and prevented the Ainu from observing their traditional customs. The Hokkaido Former Aborigines Protection Act, a Japanese parliamentary legislation enacted in 1899, aimed to assimilate the Ainu. The Japanese had been colonizing Hokkaido since modernization began in 1868. Ainu traditional economies, and the land and waterways they utilized were transformed into agricultural land for colonial settlers. By the 1880s, the

AIR ROUTES Japanese settler population outnumbered the Ainu population. Hastening economic assimilation, Ainu were granted small plots of land. If they refused to cultivate the land, it would be taken away from them, resulting in further Japanese economic control. Even before the Tokugawa period, the Japanese differentiated themselves from the Ainu, considering them barbaric. During the 19th century, Europeaninfluenced Darwinism, revolving around concepts of race and racial inferiority of the Ainu, influenced this discourse, reinforcing the denigration of Ainu according to racial and cultural stereotypes. Changing policies led the Japanese to assimilate the Ainu into Japanese hegemony. By the late 20th century, the Japanese considered the Ainu assimilated. Since the 1960s, similar to other indigenous groups around the world, the Ainu have denied assimilation and fought for recognition as indigenous peoples for rights to resources and political power (Siddle, 1996). The Japanese government recognized the Ainu as a minority group under UN Article 27 in 1991 but denied them status as aboriginal people. In March 1997, the Sapporo District Court awarded the Ainu recognition as an indigenous people of Japan and granted them protection for their aboriginal culture. This cleared the way for the Japanese Diet to pass the Act on the Encouragement of Ainu Culture and the Diffusion and Enlightenment of Knowledge on Ainu Tradition on May 8, 1997. The Ainu continue to fight for political recognition, and for the ability to control their social, cultural, economic, and political development. AILEEN A. ESPIRITU See also Bear Ceremonialism Further Reading The Ainu Museum website: http://www.ainu-museum.or.jp/ english/english.html Fitzhugh, William W. & Chisato O. Dubreil (editors), Ainu: Spirit of a Northern People, Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1999 Siddle, Richard, Race, Resistance and the Ainu of Japan, London: Routledge, 1996 Walker, Brett L., The Conquest of Ainu Lands, Berkeley: University of California Press, 2001

AIR ROUTES Early attempts to fly nonstop across the North Atlantic are described in the entry Trans-Arctic Air Route. By the start of World War II, most flights across the Atlantic were military, but these were of enormous importance for the mapping of the Arctic. The flying, especially in Greenland, and the establishment of weather stations revolutionized the reliability of weather forecasts over the Arctic seas. The idea of a

northern air route remained vivid, but in 1939 it was concluded that it would be some years before there could be a realistic passenger service connecting Europe and central USA. However, the loss of shipping to submarines in World War II increased pressure to develop trans-Atlantic trials into a more reliable route for supplies. In 1941, airports were constructed in Greenland by the Americans. Among them, especially Kangerlussuaq (Søndre Strømfjord) and Narsarsuaq were important. An air bridge between America and Europe on the Great Circle route was thereby established, and the military infrastructure could subsequently be used for civilian flights. After the war new Arctic air routes were discussed. The controversy between the United States and Denmark over sovereignty of Greenland and the continuing presence of US air bases meant that Denmark wanted flights from Copenhagen to Greenland but had no interest in air routes linking Greenland to New York. The Greenlandic air route system became disconnected, a one-way stretch. The North Atlantic Great Circle air route continued, but via Keflavik in Iceland and direct from England to Gander in Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada. These routes provided a growth source in both Iceland and Newfoundland. The routes are still in use but, since technology has improved so that planes could carry more fuel and the polar route became possible, their importance has diminished. Iceland managed to change business focus to link the capitals of the European continent primarily to New York, which has proven to be profitable, while Gander in Canada lost importance. The major technical breakthrough in passenger transport that changed the market took place in 1952 when SAS (Scandinavian Airlines System) started to fly passengers to California via Thule in Greenland. It was, at that time, a 24-h flight, with a 2-h stopover at Thule. In 1956, SAS set a new distance record for commercial airlines by flying 6005 miles nonstop from Los Angeles to Stockholm, Sweden, again following the Great Circle route over Greenland. Transport by air via Thule in Greenland could save distance and fuel in future and give the Arctic a more central role in the air route system. However, the recent powerful ideas on a new American military defense system will be a hindrance for plans of that nature. For Alaska it was the proximity to Japan that counted. Fort Richardson was established in Anchorage in 1940, and the construction of the Elmendorf Air Base started the same year. With the bombing of Pearl Harbor in December 1941, Alaska obtained a key position in the American military defense system. The AlaskaCanada Highway was constructed in eight months in 1942, and additional army and navy bases were built. During the war the US federal government spent more than one billion dollars in Alaska and the size of the

19

AKUREYRI population doubled. The infrastructure built during the war was an asset after the war. The systems were interconnected and reliable and became a solid base both for economic development and for Anchorage achieving the position as the only real transport hub in the Arctic. Air routes within the Soviet Arctic developed with Moscow as a hub, a one-dimensional approach as between Copenhagen and Greenland. This was also the case for Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Canada. Only Iceland manages really to escape the one-dimensional approach, by building on the North Atlantic air route idea and combining it with big European cities. Cross-border Arctic air routes are few. From Anchorage in Alaska there are routes to Russia and Canada. From Greenland to Canada there is the route from Nuuk to Iqaluit (Frobisher Bay) in Nunavut. The route from Reykjavík to Halifax, although further south, is important as Halifax has a hub position. Present-day air routes have, by and large, the structure as developed during World War II and the first years after the war. The Cold War further limited potential development of circumpolar air routes, as the Russian Arctic was closed to international aircraft and there were no flights between the United States and Russia across the Bering Strait. From 1998, Russia began to allow over-the-pole flights to test east-west circumpolar air routes. From 2002, it opened up these polar air routes to commercial flights. The shorter route between North America and Asia offers significant time savings, and the polar Siberian route is now the key to cost-efficient air routes between North America and the Far East such as Chicago to Hong Kong or Beijing. Future air freight carriers would need a refueling stop in Russia. It is possible today to go to most Arctic places by air, either by ordinary air routes or by charter (“bush plane”). Helicopters also play an important role in air transport. The Sikorsky S-61 has almost had a legendary position, and some are still in use in Greenland for passenger transport. The drawback is that air routes are costly. This is, to a large degree, the result of a structure where most destinations are spokes, thus the lack of being able to reengineer and redesign the logistic system in the Arctic. Air routes are served by international airlines. Most of the destinations fly one major national airline plus a few minor ones. The competitive level in air transport is low in most destinations. LISE LYCK See also Trans-Arctic Air Route; Transport Further Reading Hanson Jr., Edward R. & David Jensen, “Over the top: flying the polar routes.” Aviation Today, April 2002

20

AKUREYRI The town of Akureyri is situated in northeast Iceland, on the longest fjord in the country, Eyjafjörður. It is surrounded by mountains reaching a height of 1000–1500 m. The mountain closest to the town is called Hlíðarfjall, where there is a ski resort. The river Glerá runs through the town, and by its mouth there is a sandbank, Oddeyri. The northerly position of Akureyri has had considerable influence on the community that has sprung up there. Akureyri is about 40 km south of the Arctic Circle, but on summer days the temperature can reach 25°C. Winters, however, bring heavy snowfall and cold weather, with calm and still weather also common. Despite the geographical isolation, there has always been contact with the outside world, initially through trade and then through export, chiefly of seafood products. The natural harbor at Akureyri is one of the best in Iceland. The first permanent inhabitants of Eyjafjörður were Helgi magri (Helgi the Lean) and his wife Þórunn, who settled there around 900. A polytheist, Helgi lived at the farm of Kristnes (Christ’s peninsula) but also worshipped pagan deities. The history of the town is very closely linked to trade and services. Trade began in Akureyri in the 16th century, but it was not until 1777 that merchants began living there all year round. At the end of the 18th century, the town had ten inhabitants, all Danish traders. In 1862, Akureyri was granted municipal rights. By then, the population had risen to around 300. Gránufélagið, an Icelandic trading company, was established at the Oddeyri harbor. A more durable trading company was the KEA (Kaupfélag Eyfirðinga Akureyri) cooperative society, which is still a stronghold of trade there. Presently, Akureyri is the largest community outside the capital area of Reykjavík, with around 15,000 inhabitants. Akureyri is the center of trade and services in northern Iceland and its economic life is varied. Two of the most powerful fishing companies in Iceland, Útgerðarfélag Akureyringa and Samherji, have their headquarters in Akureyri. Herring salting used to be the town’s main industry, but now the emphasis has shifted to trawling, canning, and freezing larger fish. Akureyri received its own printing press in 1852, and since then many newspapers and journals have been published there. In the 1990s, attempts were made to run a national daily, Dagur, from Akureyri, but failed. A college was founded in the town in 1928, and in 1987 Akureyri acquired its own university, which has steadily expanded since then. Also located in Akureyri is the Stefansson Arctic Institute (SAI), which was established in 1998 and operates under the

ALASKA auspices of the Icelandic Ministry for the Environment. It bears the name of explorer and anthropologist Vilhjalmur Stefansson, who studied Inuit culture in Canada and Alaska. Some of the roles of the SAI are to promote sustainable development in northern areas, strengthen Icelandic participation in international endeavors in this field, and facilitate and coordinate Arctic research in Iceland. Two of the Arctic Council’s secretariats are located in Akureyri— CAFF (Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna) and PAME (Protection of the Arctic Marine Environment)—and the town has a growing reputation for hosting workshops, conferences, and lectures on Arctic issues. There are museums devoted to the wellknown author of children’s books, Nonni (Jón Sveinsson, 1857–1944), and the poets Matthías Jochumsson (1835–1920) and Davíð Stefánsson (1895–1964). Akureyri is also known for its beautiful botanical garden. The most northerly golf course in the world is located in Akureyri. Every June there is an international competition—the Arctic Open—which attracts overseas players. The competition has gained attention overseas because competitors play through the night in the midnight sun. SVERRIR JAKOBSSON See also Arctic Council Further Reading Einarsson, Hallgrímur, Akureyri 1895–1930. Ljósmyndir, Reykjavík, 1982 Guðmundsson, Pálmi & Rafn Kjartansson, Akureyri. The Town by the Fjord, Reykjavík, 1992 Hjaltason, Jón, Saga Akureyrar, 3 volumes, Akureyri, 1990–2000 Jónsson, Klemens, Saga Akureyrar, Akureyri, 1948 Schmid, Max & Tómas Ingi Olrich, Akureyri. A Northern Haven, Reykjavík: Iceland Review, 1984 Steindórsson, Steindór, Akureyri. Höfu›borg hins bjarta nor›urs, Reykjavík, 1993

ALASKA Land and Resources Alaska is the only state of the United States that is situated in the North Polar Region. Located in the extreme northwest of North America, Alaska occupies the continent’s largest peninsula and is subcontinental in size. As befits its vast extent, Alaska is a land of great diversity, with climate zones ranging from tundra to temperate rainforest. About one-third of the landmass is situated within the Arctic Circle. Alaska’s area is 1,530,700 sq km (591,004 sq mi), or about 16% of

the United States’ total land area, and the state has 10,686 km (6640 mi) of coastline. The maximum N-S distance is 2285 km (1420 mi) and that for E-W is 3639 km (2261 mi). Alaska’s only land borders are with British Columbia and the Yukon Territory in Canada; the state is separated from the 48 conterminous United States by Canadian territory. Alaska’s coast is bounded by the Arctic Ocean, Bering Strait, Bering Sea, Pacific Ocean, and Gulf of Alaska as well as smaller bodies such as Bristol Bay, Cook Inlet, Norton Sound, and Kotzebue Sound. Much of the state is mountainous, and major mountain ranges include the Alaska Range, Brooks Range, St Elias Mountains, Boundary Range, Wrangell Mountains, and Chugach Mountains. The highest peak, Denali (Mt McKinley) (6194 m/20,320 ft), is located in the Alaska Range near the center of the state and is the highest point in North America. Alaska contains the 11 highest peaks in the United States. Alaska’s islands and island groups include the Alexander Archipelago, with over 1000 islands in the southeast of the state; Kodiak Island; the Aleutian chain, which spans 1100 mi and consists of 14 large islands (of which Unimak, Unalaska, and Umnak are the largest) and numerous smaller islands and islets as well as active volcanoes; and the Bering Sea islands including St Lawrence, St Matthew, Nunivak, the Pribilofs, and Little Diomede Island. Alaska’s major rivers include the Yukon, Kuskowim, Porcupine, Tanana, Koyukuk, Copper, Colville, Susitna, and Matanuska. Alaska is subject to large earthquakes, the largest of which took place in 1964, destroying parts of the city of Anchorage and other towns and measuring 8.4 on the Richter scale. Alaska contains abundant natural resources, the presence of which has prompted much recent settlement and exploitation. Important fish resources include salmon, cod, pollock, herring, halibut, and crab. Forest resources are also important and are concentrated in the southeast part of the state. Agricultural resources and agricultural potential are more limited, but some cooler growing vegetables as well as dairy cattle are produced in some areas, especially those adjacent to the larger cities of Anchorage and Fairbanks. Alaska has a wide variety of mineral resources, including zinc, lead, silver, gold, copper, molybdenum, and coal, as well as sand and gravel. Petroleum resources, including oil and natural gas, are especially significant. Alaska is the nation’s largest oil producer, primarily from oilfields around Prudhoe Bay on the North Slope. Hydropower potential is enormous but is largely untapped at present. Most power generation in the state is from the burning of diesel and coal to generate electric power.

21

ALASKA

Main cities, rivers, mountains ranges, and islands in Alaska.

Climate Alaska may be divided into six basic climate regions. The south coastal and southeast Alaska region and the Aleutian Islands have a wet and temperate climate, with rainfall between 1525 and 4065 mm (60–160 in) per year and temperatures between 4°C and 16°C (40–60°F) during summer and −7°C and 4°C (20–40°F) during winter. In south and southeast Alaska this climate supports temperate rainforest, whereas the Aleutian Islands are mainly grassland. The Bering Sea coast is slightly cooler, with temperatures between 4°C and 16°C (40–60°F) during summer and −23°C and −7°C (−10°F to 20°F) during winter. The southern part of this region is modified by the Pacific Ocean while the northern part shows an Arctic Ocean influence. The Interior Basin of Alaska, around the Anchorage area, has a relatively moderate climate similar to that of the south and southeast coast, only drier, with a normal rainfall in Anchorage of around 380 mm (15 in) per year. The Central Plains of Alaska experience a continental climate, with wide seasonal extremes of

22

temperature, from 7°C to 24°C (45–75°F) in summer and −34°C to −23°C (−30°F to −10°F) in winter. Summer temperatures can often reach 32°C (90°F) in this region. Rainfall is similar to that of the Interior Basin. Alaska’s remaining climates are those of mountain areas, where conditions vary greatly, and the North Slope on the Arctic Ocean, where summer temperatures can range from 2°C to 13°C (35–55°F) during summer and from −29°C to −21°C (−20°F to −5°F) during winter. The North Slope receives only about 130 mm (5 in) of precipitation per year and most of it remains on the ground as snow for up to eight months.

Flora and Fauna Alaska’s many bioregions contain a wide variety of animal and plant species. The evergreen forests of south coastal and southeast Alaska contain Western hemlock, Sitka spruce, red cedar, Alaska yellow cedar, lodgepole pine, mountain hemlock, black cottonwood, and alder. Bush alder, wild currants, salmonberry, huckleberry, skunk cabbage, bog laurel, Labrador tea, and various

ALASKA

Indigenous peoples of Alaska.

kinds of grasses, mosses, horsetails, lichens, fungi, and wildflowers are also common. In the Aleutians and west coastal regions, there are a few trees and the vegetation consists mainly of dwarf willows and grasses. In the interior regions of the state, white and black spruce, birch, cottonwood, tamarack, aspen, and willow are all found. Vegetation in the tundra regions of north Alaska is limited to grasses, mosses, lichens, berries, and some dwarf birches and willows. Mammals are common throughout Alaska and include brown, black, grizzly, and polar bears. The Alaskan brown bear found on Kodiak Island is the world’s largest type of bear. Moose, wolves, caribou, various kinds of deer and related species, Dall’s sheep, coyotes and foxes, wolverines and martens, mink, beaver, land otters, weasels, muskrats, and hares are also found. Bison, muskox, and wapiti (elk) have been introduced to the state from outside. Marine mammals include bowhead whales, sperm whales, belugas, orcas, porpoises, sea otters, walruses, seals, and sea lions. Alaska is home to many kinds of birds, including ducks, geese, swans, cranes, loons, grebes, shearwaters, petrels, gulls, auklets, puffins, bald and golden

eagles, ravens, magpies, crows, jays, ptarmigan, grouse, and snowy owls. Alaska contains at least 480 species of fish, 386 of birds, 105 of mammals, seven of amphibians, and three of reptiles.

Population and Government Alaska’s population numbered 629,932 in the 2000 census, a 14.0% increase from 1990 (compared with a 13.1% increase nationwide). The population is young, with 30.4% under the age of 18 and only 5.7% over the age of 65. The US census gathers information on the population’s race and ethnicity. In 2000, 67.6% was classified as white non-Hispanic, 4.1% as Hispanic, 3.5% as Black, 15.6% as Alaska Native (compared with 0.9% Native American nationwide), 4.0% as Asian, 0.5% as Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, 1.6% as other, and 5.4% as of two or more races. Alaska is sparsely populated, with only 1.1 persons per sq mi (compared with 79.6 per sq mi nationwide). The population is unevenly distributed throughout the state, with the largest city, Anchorage, accounting for nearly half the state’s population. Other population

23

ALASKA concentrations are in the Fairbanks region and in southeast Alaska.

Government Alaska is one of the 50 states of the United States and participates in the American federal system equally with other states. There are three levels of government: federal, state, and municipal (there is no county level of government). At the federal level, Alaska is represented in the US Congress by two senators and one member of the House of Representatives. There is one federal district court that sits in Juneau, Anchorage, Fairbanks, and Nome. At the state level, the governor and lieutenant governor are the executive officers and are elected for four-year terms. Since statehood in 1959, Republicans, Democrats, and Independents have all held the office of governor. Alaska has a bicameral legislature with 40 members in the House of Representatives serving twoyear terms and 20 members of the Senate serving fouryear terms. Alaska has a state Supreme Court with a chief justice and four associate justices. There is a threemember court of appeals and four court districts. Alaska’s state constitution was adopted in 1956 and has been amended many times since. The state has municipal governments (called boroughs) but no county governments. Alaska state revenues derive from taxation and royalties on state resources. Taxes include property taxes, various business taxes, municipal sales taxes, and petroleum severance taxes; there is no state personal income tax or state sales tax. Residents are subject to all federal taxes including federal personal income tax. The state receives royalties from resources extracted from state lands (especially petroleum resources) and also receives a share of revenues from royalties on federal lands (historically 90% of these royalties). A portion of the state’s royalties are deposited into the Alaska Permanent Fund, a state-controlled trust fund established in 1976. The fund invests a share of Alaska’s resource revenues and distributes a share of its earnings to Alaskan residents in the form of dividends, while using a portion of the earnings to maintain its real value. Alaska’s lands are largely in government hands. About 64% of Alaska is federal land, about 24% belongs to the state, about 12% is private land belonging to Alaska Natives as part of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA), and the remaining 1% is in non-Native private hands. This latter figure is tiny compared to other American states.

Settlements and Towns Alaska is divided into municipalities or boroughs and not into counties as in the rest of the United States. In the 2000 census, Anchorage municipality had a popu-

24

lation of 260,283, making it by far the largest city in the state and accounting for nearly half the state’s total population. The Fairbanks-North Star Borough had a population of 82,840 in 2000 and is the second largest urban region in the state. Other population concentrations are in Matanuska-Susitna Borough north of Anchorage with 59,322 people, Kenai Peninsula Borough with 49,691, and Juneau City and Borough with 30,711. In addition to Anchorage, Fairbanks, and Juneau (the state capital), other important towns include Ketchikan, Sitka, and Bethel.

Religion Alaska’s Native peoples historically practiced their own religions and some continue to do so. The Russian Orthodox Church was introduced into Alaska during the Russian colonial period. Much of this church’s missionary work was done among the Aleut as well as the Tlingit of the southeast region. The first archdiocese for Kamchatka and America was headquartered in New Archangel (later called Sitka) in 1858. The first American church to begin missionary work in Alaska was the Presbyterian Church. The Presbyterian missionary Sheldon Jackson arrived in 1877, and in addition to the work of conversion also began to address the economic problems of Alaska Natives. The Church of England missionary William Duncan moved from British Columbia, Canada, into southeast Alaska along with a group of 1000 Tsimshian people, establishing a community at Metlakatla on Annette Island. Other missionary groups of historical importance in Alaska include the American Episcopal Church, the Society of Friends (Quakers), and the Methodist Church. Today all branches of Christianity are present, with a Protestant majority, although the Roman Catholic Church has the largest number of adherents of any single denomination. Small numbers of adherents to other religions are also present.

Languages Native Alaskan languages can be divided into two families: Eskimo-Aleut and Na-Dene. The EskimoAleut family has two branches, Eskimo and Aleut, spoken in southwest, west, and north coastal Alaska. Alaskan Eskimo languages, closely related to Inuktitut in Canada as well as Greenlandic, are further divided into two subfamilies: Iñupiaq is spoken in the eastern region while Yup’ik is spoken in the west. The Aleut language is spoken in the Aleutian Islands and in the Pribilof Islands. Alaskan Athapaskan languages of the Na-Dene family, related to Navajo and Apache of the American southwest, include Gwich’in, Ahtna, Koyukon, and Tanaina. Tlingit, spoken in southeast

ALASKA Alaska, is a non-Athapaskan Na-Dene language. Many Native Alaskans still speak their own languages, although language learning among the younger people has been declining and poses the issue of the continued viability of these languages. Today English is by far the predominant language of Alaska, spoken by virtually everyone. About 90% of Alaskans speak English as the language of communication at home.

Education During both the Russian and American colonial periods, education was largely provided by church institutions. Beginning in 1900, the US Congress established schools in towns and rural areas. The Alaska territorial government later assumed control over non-Native education, while the federal government continued to hold responsibility for the education of Alaska Natives. Today primary and secondary schools are distributed throughout the state. Alaska’s higher education system encompasses the state-supported University of Alaska, with the Fairbanks campus founded in 1913 and later campuses added at Anchorage and Juneau. The University of Alaska also supports a number of rural education centers in remote parts of the state as well as a distance education program. The state has a network of community colleges and two private universities: Alaska Pacific University in Anchorage (affiliated with the United Methodist Church) and Sheldon Jackson College in Sitka (affiliated with the Presbyterian Church), the latter being the oldest institution of higher learning in Alaska.

Economy In many respects Alaska still has a frontier economy, little changed from colonial and territorial days. The nonNative Alaska economy has historically been characterized by a series of resource booms. Earliest among these was Russian colonial exploitation of sea otter furs. Extraction of this resource led to limited settlement only in coastal Alaska near regions of sea otter habitat. Alaska’s second major resource boom was the series of gold rushes from the 1880s to the 1900s, some of which were associated with those in the Klondike region of the Yukon Territory in Canada. The gold rushes brought a series of settlers to the state, many of whom left Alaska after these rushes ended. By the time of statehood in 1959, the Alaska economy was dominated by government spending, especially connected to the large military complex that had developed after World War II, when the strategic position of Alaska in the North Pacific became apparent. Alaska’s economy remains dominated by government, though now the state government is perhaps more important economi-

cally. The Alaska Permanent Fund, which saves and invests a portion of the state’s share of resource revenues, has assets of approximately $25 billion and generates an annual income of between $1 billion and $2.5 billion, depending on investment performance. Revenue from Permanent Fund investments is a major source of state income and has allowed the state to abolish the state income tax. Since the Prudhoe Bay discovery of 1968, petroleum has become the economically most important resource in modern Alaska, continuing the frontier tradition of extractive industries with fluctuating prices and fluctuating demand conditions. Oil began to flow in 1977, but shipments have been marred by an oil spill from the tanker Exxon Valdez in 1989 and concerns about the environmental safety of petroleum development. Alaska’s resource booms—fur, gold, military spending, and oil—have produced substantial revenues during periods of extraction but also have the potential to collapse quickly. Alaska’s economy is therefore subject to wide swings. More moderating influences on the state’s economy include the fishing and tourism industries. Tourism especially is a sector of increasing importance. Manufacturing in Alaska is of minor importance and is limited to some processing of the state’s petroleum, timber, and fish resources. In general, Alaska is plagued by distance from world markets and the associated high transportation costs. Alaska’s distance from the rest of the United States has required that much transport take place by air. Ocean shipping is, however, still important, especially for bulk goods such as petroleum. Trade with Asia is increasing (subject to Asian economic conditions) and transport links with Asian countries are well developed. Surface transport is limited to the Alaska Highway and the Stewart-Cassiar Highway, both of which pass through Canada and are of limited commercial use. Anchorage formerly had excellent direct air connections to many world cities, but has largely lost those connections due to the collapse of the Soviet Union and the ability of commercial aircraft to now fly over Russian airspace. Nevertheless, Anchorage still has direct air connections to many cities in the United States, especially those on the West Coast, as well as to Asian countries. Alaska has about 800 airfields, emergency landing strips, and seaplane bases and has the highest rate of private aircraft ownership in the United States. Internal air connections are generally good and are crucial to communities that have no road connections to the remainder of the state. Larger communities, notably Anchorage and Fairbanks, have fine paved road links, but the state capital in Juneau has no road connection to any other city. Alaska also has a passenger ferry system that serves mainly the southern and southeastern parts of the state and has connections to British Columbian ports as well as Seattle. It has a

25

ALASKA government-owned railroad of about 800 km (500 mi) linking Seward, Anchorage, and Fairbanks. The TransAlaska Pipeline from the North Slope to the port of Valdez in south Central Alaska is essential for the shipment of the state’s oil. Many aspects of Alaska’s economy, such as fishing, agriculture, and tourism, are characterized by seasonal employment, a factor that has further added to the economy’s frontier characteristics. Today Alaska’s economy depends on state government spending, federal military spending, Permanent Fund earnings, the petroleum industry, fishing, and tourism.

History Although population movement across the Bering Sea from Asia to North America took place as early as 40,000 years ago, archaeological evidence suggests that the first settlements in Alaska began around 12,000 years ago. These early settlers brought with them a Siberian culture that gradually merged into the distinct and varied cultures of precontact Alaska. Among these were the people who became the Eskimo; about 4000 years ago they moved into the Arctic region of the continent. Others became the Aleut and the various Na-Dene or Athapaskan peoples. Each of these peoples adapted to their own environment and exploited local resources. European settlement of Alaska began with a series of Russian expeditions led by the Danish commander Vitus Bering. On his 1728 expedition he sailed through the Bering Sea, proving that North America was not connected to Asia. On Bering’s second expedition in 1841, he landed in Alaska and found the sea otters that would serve as the basis for Russian colonization. At the time of European contact, researchers estimate that about 75,000 people lived in Alaska. The first Russian settlement was at Three Saints Bay on Kodiak Island, which became the Alaskan colonial capital. Other settlements were established along the coast, of which the most important was New Archangel (later called Sitka). New Archangel became the Alaskan colonial capital in 1806 when the RussianAmerican Company, which was founded in 1799 to exploit the resources of the colony, moved its headquarters there. Colonization, especially under the leadership of the autocratic Aleksandr Baranov, the chief manager or governor of the colony, brought the Russians into conflict with the indigenous population. The southeastern Alaskan settlement at New Archangel was especially prone to conflict, and in the 1800s a series of wars were fought between the Russians and the indigenous Tlingit people. The Russian settler population was never more than about 550 people, but by the end of the Russian colonial era

26

the Native Alaskan population had declined to around 33,000, largely due to introduced diseases. The Russians sold their Alaska colony to the United States in 1867 for $7.2 million. The Russians were as eager to sell the colony as the Americans were reluctant to buy it. Russian Alaska was a drain on the Russian economy as it was not self-supporting, the colony was extremely distant from the capital at St Petersburg, and the sea otter population—the most important resource to the Russians—had substantially declined. The Russians wanted to sell the colony specifically to the United States to block British expansion in northwest North America. The US Congress, influenced largely by Secretary of State William H. Seward, finally agreed to purchase Alaska. The purchase was not widely popular and Alaska was often depicted in the media as a worthless Arctic wasteland and called such names as “Seward’s Folly,” “Seward’s Icebox,” and “Walrussia.” American perceptions of Alaska changed in the late 19th century with a series of gold rushes beginning in 1880 in Juneau and followed by similar discoveries in other parts of the territory. The largest and most influential of these rushes took place on the Yukon River in and after 1896, concurrent with the Klondike discoveries further upstream in Canada. This gold rush increased the state’s population, and Alaska now came to be portrayed as a land of wealth and opportunity. Gold production declined after 1914 and the territory’s population declined with it. The next major event in Alaska’s history was World War II (1939–1945) and its impact on the American government’s recognition of Alaska’s strategic global position. The Japanese invasion and occupation of some of the Aleutian Islands during the war prompted increased militarization of the territory in the postwar years, along with increased federal spending on infrastructure such as port facilities, highways, and airstrips. The Alaska Highway was built connecting the territory with the 48 conterminous states (through Canada) and the US government gave greater attention to Alaska’s position just across the Bering Sea from the Soviet Union. After several earlier failed attempts, Alaska became the 49th state of the United States in 1959. Under the statehood act, Alaska was allowed to select federal lands that would be conveyed to the new state and become state lands. The state government selected lands based largely on their location and economic importance, and among the selected lands were the oilfields of Prudhoe Bay on the North Slope. In 1968, oil was discovered at Prudhoe Bay, prompting the resolution of unsettled Alaska Native claims to land. The Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA), passed by the US Congress in 1971, granted about

ALASKA BELUGA WHALE COMMITTEE 12% of Alaska, along with monetary compensation, to Alaska Natives in exchange for extinguishment of their Native title. ANCSA had a major impact on the Native peoples of the state, giving them exclusive and fee simple title to land as well as capital for business investment. The discovery of oil on the North Slope also prompted the discussion of how oil was to be transported from its Arctic location to markets in the United States. The accepted proposal was to construct an overland pipeline from Prudhoe Bay to the ice-free port of Valdez in south central Alaska. Completion of this pipeline in 1977 allowed oil to flow south, where it was shipped to the lower 48 ports by oil tanker. The Exxon Valdez disaster, previously mentioned, prompted a reassessment of the costs of oil to the Alaskan environment. Exxon Corporation was forced to pay over $1 billion in settlement, but the cost of restoring the habitat in Prince William Sound was at least twice that. Today, the prevailing concerns in Alaska include conflicts over how much of state and federal lands, including lands established as wilderness preserves, to open to development and resource extraction, especially given the US government’s desire for domestic sources of oil. Conflicts over subsistence rights and resources, over environmental issues, and over taxation, the Permanent Fund, and the generation of new revenues in the postoil era are emerging issues in contemporary Alaska. MICHAEL PRETES See also Alaska Highway; Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA); Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA); Alaska Range; Alaska Treaty (Convention for the Cession of the Russian Possessions in North America to the United States); Aleut; Anchorage; Athapaskan; Bering Sea; Bering, Vitus; Brooks Range; Eskimo-Aleut Languages; Exxon Valdez; Gold Mining; Mount McKinley (Denali); National Parks and Protected Areas: Alaska; Russian-American Company; Tlingit; Trans-Alaska Pipeline Further Reading Borneman, Walter R., Alaska: Saga of a Bold Land, New York: HarperCollins, 2003 Hammond, Jay, Tales of Alaska’s Bush Rat Governor, Seattle: Epicenter Press, 1994 Lester, Jean, Faces of Alaska: Voices Across the State, Fairbanks: University of Alaska Press, 2003 McBeath, Gerald A. & Thomas A. Morehouse, Alaska Politics and Government, Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1994 McPhee, John, Coming into the Country, New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1977 Naske, Claus-M. & Herman E. Slotnick, Alaska: A History of the 49th State (2nd edition), Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1987

Vaughan, Richard, The Arctic: A History, Stroud, England: Alan Sutton, 1994 Weeden, Robert B., Alaska: Promises to Keep, Boston: Little Brown, 1978

ALASKA BELUGA WHALE COMMITTEE The Alaska Beluga Whale Committee (ABWC) was founded in 1988 to ensure that beluga whale (Delphinapterus leucas) stocks in Alaska remained healthy and to forestall involvement of the International Whaling Commission (IWC) in the management of belugas. The North Slope Borough (Alaska) Department of Wildlife Management contacted indigenous beluga-hunting communities throughout Alaska, as well as federal and state agencies, emphasizing the need to take action before a management crisis occurred. The IWC action to stop subsistence whaling of the bowhead whale in Alaska in 1977 was a vivid example of the consequences of being unprepared. Thus, the emphasis of the ABWC was to gather accurate harvest data, determine stock identities of belugas around Alaska, and develop a management plan to protect belugas and subsistence hunting. Beluga whales—small, toothed whales that are white as adults and are distributed throughout the Arctic—are found in five stocks in the waters around Alaska: Cook Inlet, Bristol Bay, the Eastern Bering Sea, the Eastern Chukchi Sea, and the Beaufort Sea, of which the latter is shared with Canada and Russia. The migratory habits of the other stocks are currently under investigation. All stocks are hunted by Alaska Natives for subsistence purposes. The Cook Inlet stock is the only one known to remain in Alaska waters year round. In recent years, the Cook Inlet stock has declined sharply, leading to regulation of the subsistence harvest under the terms of the Marine Mammal Protection Act, which permits limiting the hunt only if a stock is considered to be depleted. The other four stocks are considered healthy, the current harvests being biologically sustainable. The ABWC had included representatives from the Inuvialuit region of the Yukon and Northwest Territories, Canada, for several years, and was then called the Alaska and Inuvialuit Beluga Whale Committee. Eventually, representatives of both Alaska and the Inuvialuit region agreed that in the absence of pressing management needs, the expense of a joint committee was too high. Since then, the ABWC and the Inuvialuit Game Council have continued to communicate and to cooperate on various research and management issues. Formal cooperation with the Russian Federation has not been pursued, partly

27

ALASKA ESKIMO WHALING COMMISSION (AEWC) because of the cost and partly because hunting in Russia is minimal. As with the Inuvialuit, the ABWC communicates with Russian hunters and government agencies on matters of research. Since its inception, the ABWC has been highly successful in gathering harvest data and in promoting research on population levels, migratory behavior, and stock identity. In recent years, it has prepared a management plan and completed a formal co-management agreement with the US Federal Government. Members of the committee include tribally appointed representatives of the hunting communities, and representatives of the state and federal governments and the North Slope Borough. Due to a disagreement over the commercial sale of beluga products, the ABWC no longer includes representatives from the Cook Inlet area, although it has attempted to help resolve the management problems with that stock. The ABWC has held two science conferences, in addition to its annual meetings, and its members participate in the IWC, providing harvest and population information while continuing to resist IWC management of beluga hunting. HENRY P. HUNTINGTON See also Beluga (White) Whale; International Whaling Commission (IWC) Further Reading Adams, Marie, Kathryn Frost & Lois Harwood, “Alaska and Inuvialuit Beluga Whale Committee—an initiative in athome management.” Arctic, 46 (1993): 134–137 Frost, Kathryn J. & Lloyd F. Lowry, “Distribution, abundance, and movements of beluga whales, Delphinapterus leucas, in coastal waters of western Alaska.” Canadian Bulletin of Fisheries and Aquatic Science, 224 (1990): 39–57 Huntington, Henry P., Wildlife Management and Subsistence Hunting in Alaska, London: Belhaven Press, 1992 O’Corry Crowe, G.M., R.S. Suydam, A. Rosenberg, K.J. Frost & A.E. Dizon, “Phylogeography, population structure and dispersal patterns of the beluga whale Delphinapterus leucas in the western Nearctic revealed by mitochondral DNA.” Molecular Ecology, 6 (1997): 955–970 Suydam, Robert, Kathryn Frost, Lloyd Lowry, Doug DeMaster & Marie Adams Carroll, Proceedings of the Alaska Beluga Whale Committee First Conference on the Biology of Beluga Whales, April 5–7, 1995, Anchorage, Alaska, Barrow, Alaska: North Slope Borough and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 1996

ALASKA ESKIMO WHALING COMMISSION (AEWC) The increased number of bowhead whales struck and taken by the Iñupiat of the North Slope of Alaska in the 1970s generated enough concern within the International Whaling Commission (IWC) so as to include aboriginal whaling into their regulating

28

authority for the first time since its establishment in 1946. In 1977, the IWC placed a moratorium on Alaska Eskimo bowhead whaling. Prior to 1977, Eskimo whaling had been allowed due to its subsistence nature and the immense cultural, social, and nutritional value that the bowhead provided for many Inuit groups in Alaska. The Iñupiat, indignant with the decision that they considered a violation of the Arctic peoples’ basic human rights, quickly acted to overturn the moratorium. The Alaska Eskimo Whaling Commission (AEWC) emerged from this struggle for whale-hunting rights. Scientists reported to the IWC that the Western Arctic bowhead herd ranged between 600 and 1800 animals. Iñupiaq hunters believed this estimate to be too low, but could not convince the IWC otherwise; therefore, in 1977, 70 whaling captains came from nine North Slope villages to Barrow to form the AEWC. A nonprofit organization that drew upon financial resources of the North Slope borough, the AEWC brought their fight to IWC meetings around the world; eventually the Iñupiaq hunters were given a small quota for that year. Nonetheless, the herd population remained a dispute, and so the AEWC cooperated with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, in which both groups entered into a decade-long census study to prove that the bowhead population ranged in the thousands. Likewise, the IWC and AEWC established an agreement: the Iñupiat would adhere to the IWC’s quotas and regulate their own members. In return, the IWC would reconsider the size of the bowhead quota if the data warranted. AEWC scientists implemented an acoustic program in which microphones were placed in the open channels under water to record passing bowheads. Researchers counted many more bowheads than were verified by ice-based counters. Thus, North Slope borough scientists convinced the IWC that the bowhead population was substantially larger than reported numbers to the IWC, and the herd was increasing. Through AEWC studies and reports, the IWC finally accepted numbers suggesting that the western Arctic bowhead population was 8000 in 1999 and increasing at a rate of 3.1% annually. The Alaska Eskimo bowhead quota subsequently increased to 255 whales over a five-year period. Today, the AEWC is recognized as an Alaska Inuitrun organization that manages indigenous whaling and determines policy for the ten whaling villages: Gambell, Point Hope, Savoonga, Kaktovik, Nuiqsut, Barrow, Wainwright, Little Diomede, Wales, and Kivalina. The AEWC works to preserve and protect bowhead whales and their habitat, as well as Inuit whaling and culture through a program of regulation, scientific research, and education. Presently, the

ALASKA FEDERATION OF NATIVES (AFN) AEWC uses its influence and resources to increase whaling opportunities for other Arctic people, including Canadian Inuit and Chukotkan Natives in Russia. AMBER A. LINCOLN See also Alaska Beluga Whale Committee; Bowhead (Greenland Right) Whale; International Whaling Commission (IWC); Whaling, Subsistence Further Reading Hess, Bill, Taking Control: The North Slope Borough, The Story of Self Determination in the Arctic, Barrow: North Slope Borough, 1993 ———, Gift of the Whale: Iñupiat Bowhead Whale Hunt, A Sacred Tradition, Seattle: Sasquash Books, 1999

ALASKA FEDERATION OF NATIVES (AFN) The mission of the Alaska Federation of Natives (AFN), founded in October 1966, is to enhance and promote the cultural, economic, and political voice of the entire Alaska Native community. It was founded in Anchorage, Alaska, as a means to unite Alaska Native peoples in response to several threats of land expropriation in the absence of any native land claims settlement. Several pressures galvanized Alaska Natives to unite and protect their land, namely, looming state of Alaska land selections stemming from the Alaska Statehood Act of 1959; the Bureau of Indian Affairs initiatives to solve the conflicting federal, state, and native land use problems in Alaska; and Project Chariot, an Atomic Energy Commission plan to use nuclear explosions to create a harbor south of the Iñupiat village of Point Hope, Alaska. Howard Rock, a native of Point Hope and a direct descendant of a bowhead whale hunting family, emerged as one of the leaders of the opposition to Project Chariot; his work led him to founding and editing of the Alaska weekly paper Tundra Times. Rock’s work and the Tundra Times contributed to the essential growth of native unity and helped achieve the Alaska Native Land Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) in 1971. In 1966, Rock publicized a native meeting set to discuss the Bureau of Indian Affairs’ plans. Eight native associations, each formed to protect rights to their regional lands, met to form the AFN. After the initial meeting, representatives organized and informed people in native villages who were not represented in the first meetings. United States Secretary of the Interior Stewart Udall froze public domain lands in Alaska until native claims and issues could be addressed. By 1967, AFN had filed native title claims to 370 million acres of land (the state of Alaska comprises 375 million acres.)

In 1968, the discovery of extensive oil reserves under the Arctic slope of Alaska, followed by the US oil shortage of the early 1970s, sped the passage of ANCSA through the US Congress. Since its inception, AFN has grown to hold a broad mandate as the major, united voice of Alaska Natives. The organization’s fundamental principle holds that Alaska Natives began as members of sovereign nations and continue to enjoy a unique relationship with the US government. Although the ANCSA recognizes 13 native regions that work independently on many matters, AFN continues to lead initiatives on matters of interest to all natives within Alaska. It works closely with the Alaska Intertribal Council, the Rural Alaska Community Action Program, regional and village corporations, and native nonprofit foundations. AFN’s major goals are: to advocate for Alaska Native people, their governments and organizations with respect to federal, state, and local laws; to foster and encourage preservation of Alaska Native cultures; to promote an understanding of the economic needs of Alaska Natives and encourage development consistent with those needs; to protect, retain, and enhance all lands owned by Alaska Natives and their organizations; and to support programs that instill pride and confidence in individual Alaska Natives. To these ends, AFN meets annually in Anchorage for the largest gathering of native people statewide each year for a week of business and cultural festivities. AFN holds an Elders and Youth Conference for three days prior to its convention. ELLEN BIELAWSKI See also Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA); Bureau of Indian Affairs; Project Chariot

Further Reading Arnold, Robert, D., Alaska Native Land Claims, Anchorage: Alaska Native Foundation, 1978 Burch Jr., Ernest S., “The Land Claims Era in Alaska.” In Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 5, Arctic, edited by David Damas, Washington, District of Columbia: Smithsonian Institution, 1984 Mitchell, Don, Sold American: The Story of Alaska Natives and Their Land, 1867–1959, The Army to Statehood, Hanover, New Hampshire: The University Press of New England, 1997 Morgan, Lael (editor), “Alaska’s native people.” Anchorage: Alaska Geographic, 6 (3) 1979 ———, Art and Eskimo Power: The Life and Times of Alaskan Howard Rock, Fairbanks: Epicenter Press, 1988 Petrivelli, Patricia J., “Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act and Native Corporations.” In Native Peoples of Alaska, edited by Jan Halliday, Seattle: Sasquatch Books, 1998, pp. 266–268 ———, “Subsistence Hunting, Fishing and Gathering: A Complex Issue.” In Native Peoples of Alaska, edited by Jan Halliday, Seattle: Sasquatch Books, 1998, pp. 269–274

29

ALASKA HIGHWAY

ALASKA HIGHWAY The first effort to build an overland route toward Alaska came in 1897, when the Northwest Mounted Police completed a route survey from Dawson Creek to Fort Selkirk on the Yukon River. The survey party eventually traversed the 2600 km to Fort Selkirk, and reported that an overland route into the Yukon Territory from northern British Columbia was not feasible. The Klondike Gold Rush of 1898 presented Canada with the dilemma of maintaining sovereignty over the Yukon. To counter the construction of the White Pass and Yukon Railway, which favored American access, the Northwest Mounted Police started to blaze an overland trail to the Klondike gold fields in 1905; however, only 600 km of a horse trail was completed. The territory of Alaska was unsuccessful in its own efforts to lobby for a road to the south until 1939, when the argument for an overland route to Alaska was presented in relation to the national security for both the United States and Canada. Soon after the start of World War II, Nazi Germany developed battle plans to invade and conquer Russia for its resources, and then shift its focus on the conquest of the British Isles. With this knowledge, Britain and the United States knew that support to Russia was an absolute military necessity in order to eventually defeat Nazi Germany. In June 1941, after Russia was invaded, the Allied forces initiated action to support the defense of Russia. The supply of materials and equipment to defend Russia included a sea route west to Vladivostok in Russia’s far east. This route was shorter than the eastern route and less vulnerable to attack because of the Japanese preoccupation with the South Pacific; Vladivostok was linked to the Russian west through the Trans-Siberian Railway. What Russia needed the most for its defense was equipment such as aircraft delivered from North America ready for use. The shortest and fastest route for delivery of these planes was a “great circle” polar route from the United States, through Canada, Alaska, and Siberia. Upon the invasion of Russia by Nazi Germany, the work began to upgrade an established supply route in the northwest into the Northwest Staging Route. The Northwest Staging Route had two major functions during World War II. Firstly, it was a significant factor in the route location for the Alaska Highway and it was very useful in the highway construction. Secondly, the airfields along the highway were used to ferry planes to Fairbanks to be picked up by Russian crews for lend-lease to Russia. In mid-1942, Americans were in northern British Columbia readying for the eventual activity associated with the Alaska Highway. Very shortly after Pearl

30

Harbor, support of a road to Alaska was accepted by the American people as a necessity for the defense of Alaska against the Imperial Japanese invading forces. In March 1942, the first train carrying troops arrived in Dawson Creek to begin construction. The help of local trappers, prospectors, and First Nation members was enlisted to help locate the road, and local packers with their mule teams were used to help supply the advance survey parties. US military personnel were mobilized through to Dawson Creek, British Columbia, by rail to begin work northward toward Alaska, through to Whitehorse by rail to begin work northward, and southward, and through the Alaska coast to construct southward toward the Yukon from Alaska. In April 1942, route location personnel were at work along the entire road alignment, with heavy equipment following close behind. Five to six kilometers of road could be built in a day because construction could proceed 24 h a day with the long summer daylight hours. The most difficult problem for the construction was the inexperience of military engineers in building a highway on permafrost. In many areas along the route where the top layer of ground was removed, the underlying ground thawed and produced a quagmire that was difficult to build on. The best strategy in these areas was to leave the permafrost intact and build the road on top of it by spreading a layer of insulating gravel. The next significant problem was bridging the many small streams and major rivers along the route. Over the entire length of the highway, a total of 133 bridges and 8000 culverts were constructed. Another significant problem was maintaining the flow of supplies to the construction activity. This problem was compounded by adverse weather conditions, remoteness of the area, and the lack of enough ships to mobilize supplies to the coastal supply points. The pioneer road was completed in eight months and twelve days. An opening ceremony was held at Soldiers Summit on Kluane Lake on November 20, 1942 to officially celebrate the completion of the overland link. The pioneer road constructed in 1942 was a singlelane, rough road that would have to be upgraded in order to be usable by the increasing military and civilian traffic. In early 1943, the job of upgrading the road to an all-weather structure became a civilian exercise. The upgrading included reducing road grades, straightening road alignments, and constructing permanent bridges. The road, when completed, traversed over 2500 km (1500 miles) from Dawson Creek to Fairbanks, Alaska. The total cost of the road was over $138 million 1941 dollars.

ALASKA NATIONAL INTEREST LANDS CONSERVATION ACT (ANILCA) The Alaska Highway (also known as the Alcan or Alaska-Canadian Highway) has remained an important and essential overland link to, and between, the communities of Alaska, the communities of northern British Columbia, the Yukon Territory, and the northern portion of the Northwest Territories via the Dempster Highway. The road provides a route for commercial traffic, and a route for tourist traffic that number in the hundreds of thousands. The highway has been steadily upgraded over the years to improve its alignment and grade, and its width and driving surface. The unpredictable and potential treacherous nature of the original Alaska Highway has essentially become history as well. KENNETH R. JOHNSON See also Alaska; Dempster Highway; Transport Further Reading Coates, Kenneth (editor), The Alaska Highway: Papers of the 40th Anniversary Symposium, Vancouver: University of British Columbia, 1985 Coates, Kenneth & W.R. Morrison, The Alaska Highway in World War II: The US Army of Occupation in Canada’s Northwest, Toronto: University of Toronto, 1990 Twichell, Heath, Northwest Epic: The Building of the Alaska Highway, New York: St Martin’s Press, 1992

ALASKA NATIONAL INTEREST LANDS CONSERVATION ACT (ANILCA) The Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA), passed into US law in 1980, sets aside land for national parks and wildlife refuges, while making Alaska-specific provisions for traditional use. While the environmental protection afforded to the lands from timber, mineral, and hydrocarbons development was groundbreaking, controversy over restricted economic development and use by sports enthusiasts, subsistence hunters, and fishers has continued. US expansion into Alaska was initially propelled by an interest in fur and gold. On October 18, 1867, the Treaty of Cession was signed, which transferred jurisdiction over Alaska from Russia to the United States. Further, the Treaty provided that “Uncivilized tribes will be subject to such laws and regulations as the United States may, from time to time, adopt in regard to aboriginal tribes in that country.” Congress recognized this obligation in 1884 when it passed the first Organic Act extending the civil and criminal laws of Oregon to Alaska: “Indians or other persons in said district shall not be disturbed in the possession of any lands actually in their use or occupation or now claimed by them under which such persons may acquire title to such lands are reserved for future legislation by Congress.”

Despite this disclaimer in the Organic Act, land was usually available for the economic and conservation interests that needed it. The first fish canneries were built in 1878, and within six years dotted the shores of southern Alaska. Gold claims and camps soon followed. Legislation in 1891, 1898, and 1900 permitted trade and manufacturing sites, town sites, homesteading, rights of way for a railroad, and timber harvests. Millions of acres were also withdrawn for national forests, parks, and wildlife refuges. In 1959, The Alaska Statehood Act granted the state 104 million acres of land. As public officials began selecting land, imposing rules, and applying laws, Alaska Native opposition arose. Within six years, 12 regional associations were formed to pursue their respective land claims. Early in 1967, regional leaders formed the Alaska Federation of Natives (AFN) to secure their rights, inform the public of their positions, preserve the cultural values of Native peoples, and gain an equitable settlement. The first major bill to settle the claims of Alaska Natives was introduced in June 1967. The key to a Congressional settlement was oil. In the late 1960s, large quantities of oil were discovered in Prudhoe Bay on the Arctic coast of Alaska. A plan was devised to extract and transport the crude oil to refineries and markets in the continental United States. Land claims, however, prevented the construction of a pipeline to Valdez on Prince William Sound. Thereafter, an unusual coalition of energy companies, Native lobbyists, Alaskan public officials, executives from the Nixon administration, and environmental groups convinced Congress to pass the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) in 1971. Despite the title of ANCSA, Alaska Natives were not the only or primary beneficiaries of the legislation. Under the terms of the settlement, Alaska Native regional and village corporations received approximately 962 million dollars and 44 million acres of land. In exchange, claims over the remaining 330 million acres of land and aboriginal rights to hunt and fish were extinguished. A consortium of oil companies was permitted to build the Trans-Alaska Pipeline, which led to the development of the largest oil fields in the United States, enormous profits for the industry, and substantial revenues and royalties for the state of Alaska. The President and Congress were able to achieve what they wanted most—a domestic source of oil that would counter earlier price increases for fuel and heating oil. Finally, the dreams of environmental groups for protected public lands were realized through the requirement that the Secretary of the Interior withdraw up to 80 million acres for inclusion into the “National Park, Forest, Wildlife Refuge, and Wild and Scenic Rivers Systems.”

31

ALASKA NATIONAL INTEREST LANDS CONSERVATION ACT (ANILCA)

The Struggle Over National Interest Lands: 1972–1980 Soon after the passage of the Settlement Act, the Interior Department began hearing from State officials, Native leaders, environmentalists, and representatives from different agencies (e.g., the National Park and Forest Services, Fish and Wildlife, US Geological Survey, Bureau of Mines, Bureau of Indian Affairs) about the withdrawal and classification of public lands in Alaska. In March 1972, the Secretary of Interior Rogers C.B. Morton made a preliminary recommendation to Congress for the withdrawal of 127,100,000 acres. Secretary Morton’s legislative proposals satisfied no one. It was clear there were sharp disagreements over what federal agencies would have responsibility for administering the settlement (see Buck, 1977). Environmental organizations wanted to protect the natural and recreational values of the land and therefore preferred national park and wildlife preserve designations. These areas would then be administered by the protective authority of the National Park and the US Fish and Wildlife Services. Fearing that the Interior Department was giving away too much, an alliance was formed—the Emergency Wildlife and Wilderness Coalition for Alaska (The Alaska Coalition)—to build public support for their legislation (Williss, 1980). The state and other proponents of development favored a “multiple-use” approach, one that permitted timber harvesting, mining, and oil and gas exploration. Here the dominion of the Bureau of Land Management and the National Forest Service would be more appropriate. Alaska senator Ted Stevens and congressman Don Young submitted the Alaska National Public Land Conservation Act that called for multiple-use designations, transportation corridors to mineral-rich resource areas, and joint state-federal management of national interest lands. The elections in 1976 significantly changed the balance of forces surrounding the lands controversy in Alaska. The new president Jimmy Carter was committed to passing a lands bill with strong conservation provisions. In the Congress, Morris Udall took over as chair of the House Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, and John Seiberling headed the subcommittee on General Oversight and Alaska Lands. In January 1977, Udall and 75 cosponsors submitted the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (H.R. 39) that set aside 115,300,000 acres primarily for national parks (64,100,000) and wildlife refuges (46,400,000). After years of contentious debates, public hearings, jurisdictional battles, and lengthy markup sessions, the ANILCA passed the House of Representatives in May 1978.

32

The opposition to H.R. 39 in the Senate was intense. Representatives of the AFN were concerned about land rights, restrictions on economic development, and subsistence. Resource and recreational groups, chambers of commerce, and the state railed against federal protectionism and the extensive withdrawal of lands for parks and refuges. All were part of the Citizens for Management of Alaska Lands (CMAL), which had been formed in opposition to Udall-friendlier legislation. Henry Jackson (D-WA), the chair of The Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, reported a bill more sympathetic to Alaskan interests in October. The Carter administration and the sponsors of H.R. 39 strongly opposed the Senate version, which they felt weakened the federal protection of Alaska lands. With little time left to find agreement between the House and the Senate, Congress adjourned without passing a national lands bill for Alaska. In November, Alaska officials, in supposed violation of an agreement with the Secretary of Interior Andrus, selected 41 million acres of land, including 9.5 million acres in proposed conservation areas. Fearing that commercial interests would begin exploring possible park and wilderness lands, Andrus used his emergency powers to withdraw over 110 million acres from state selection and development. Then President Carter, using the Antiquities Act, established 17 national monuments in Alaska that totaled over 56 million acres. The administration felt these actions were necessary to safeguard federal conservation areas until Congress passed an Alaska lands act. Alaska’s congressional delegation and coalition supporters were infuriated over this unilateral, what some called dictatorial, action by the administration. In the next legislative session, debates continued over federal restrictions, transportation corridors, gun control, and the use and classification of Alaska lands. In May, the Udall-Anderson bill (H.R. 39) passed again by a 6 to 1 margin. Then in August, the Senate finally approved their version of ANILCA. In negotiations over the differences between the two chambers, House leaders had hoped to strengthen the Senate bill through checking resource development and expanding wilderness areas. However, faced with intransigence of key senators, the election of a more pro-development president, and a new Republican Senate, Udall, John Anderson, John Sieberling, and others called for an acceptance of the legislation endorsed by the Senate. The ANILCA was signed into law by President Carter on December 2, 1980. The authors of ANILCA felt they had provided “sufficient protection for the national interest in the scenic, natural, cultural, and environmental values on public lands in Alaska, and at the same time provide(d)

ALASKA NATIONAL INTEREST LANDS CONSERVATION ACT (ANILCA) adequate opportunity for satisfaction of the economic and social needs of the State of Alaska and its people.” In reality, neither side was happy with the result. Environmentalists wanted more wilderness lands restrictions. On the other hand, state representatives felt that Alaska’s valuable resources were “locked up” in a conservation regime that stymied private and local initiative. These perspectives aside, the act does preserve more lands than any other act of Congress in the history of the United States. Over 53 million acres were added to the National Wildlife Refuges, 25 rivers were brought into the Wild and Scenic Rivers system, and Wilderness lands increased by 56,400,000 acres. Ten new parks were created and three existing parks were enlarged (for a total of 43,600,000 acres). When the land transfers from the public domain are completed, the federal government will own approximately 60% (222 million acres) of Alaska’s 374 million acres, the state will have title to 28% (104 million acres), and the remainder will be privately owned by Alaska Native corporations (12% or 44 million acres) and individuals (see the summary in Hull and Leask, 2000).

The Aftermath: 1980–2003 The struggle between business corporations, sports enthusiasts, preservationists, hunters, and fishers has continued unabated since 1980. Conservation groups have challenged resource projects, oil and gas lease sales, decisions by the Interior Secretary, land transfers, and commercial fishing interests; Native individuals and villages have fought development activities, agency reorganizations, timber harvests, and violations of environmental protections; and the state of Alaska and a variety of business and private associations have attacked federal regulations, land use restrictions, and rural preferences. Continued conflicts over subsistence and resource development have been the most divisive. The 8th section of ANILCA states that the taking of fish and wildlife on public lands in Alaska “for nonwasteful subsistence uses shall be given preference . . . over other consumptive uses.” Here subsistence is defined as the “customary and traditional” use of wild resources by rural residents for direct personal and family consumption. This rural priority is a partial fulfillment of Congress’s promise to protect Alaska Native village economies, and a response to Alaskan concerns over group or racial discrimination. ANILCA permits the state to regulate fish and game on national lands as long as Alaska law recognized a rural preference. However, in 1989 the Alaska Supreme Court ruled in McDowell v. Alaska that residency as a criterion for subsistence violated the equal rights and com-

mon use provisions of the Alaska Constitution, and therefore was unconstitutional. With the state no longer in compliance with federal law, the national government reluctantly took over the management of public lands in Alaska. Since 1990, the courts, Congress, the state, and various Alaska Native organizations have tried to devise a compromise that would both protect subsistence and insure individual equity. Thus far, there is no solution in sight. The debate over the development of the coastal range of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) derives from a clause in ANILCA that calls for “… an analysis of the impacts of oil and gas exploration, development, and production, and to authorize exploratory activity within the coastal plain in a manner that avoids significant adverse effects on the fish and wildlife and other resources” (Section 1001 (a) Purpose). The Arctic National Wildlife Range was originally established by the Eisenhower administration in 1960. In 1980, Congress increased the size of the refuge to 19 million acres and set aside the “1002 area” for future study for its oil and gas potential. To date, there have been eight independent assessments, with widely divergent results. Alaska’s Governor Frank Murkowski estimates that there are 16 billion barrels of recoverable oil in the area. The most recent study by the US Geological Survey estimates there are 5 to 7 billion barrels depending on the price of oil when production begins. Developmental interests, including the Bush Administration, the Teamsters union, Alaska representatives, the AFN, and many others, claim that opening the refuge will offer employment to thousands and lessen the dependence of the United States on Middle Eastern suppliers. Opponents worry about possible damage to the ecology of the Arctic and threats to the wildlife, and people like the Gwich’in and the Iñupiat who depend on them. The ANILCA is testament to the fluidity of legislative compromise and the difficulty of finding lasting solutions to deep-seated social, cultural, and political differences. It represents what a former president described “as one of the most important pieces of conservation legislation ever passed in this nation … Never before have we seized the opportunity to preserve so much of America’s natural and cultural heritage on so grand a scale.” (remarks by Jimmy Carter at the White House upon signing H.R. 39 into law (December 2, 1980)). It also reveals another, less commendable historical impulse. As one leader testified a generation ago: “It really seems ironic to us that we should sit here and beg for the privilege to continue to use these lands … in which we have always used them. Our life and our independence and our happiness in large part depends on our continued activity to provide for ourselves and our families in the traditional

33

ALASKA NATIVE CLAIMS SETTLEMENT ACT (ANCSA) manner of our people from the resources of our land” (statement of Rachael Craig in Kotzebue, Alaska, at the Hearings Before the Subcommittee on General Oversight and Alaska Lands of the US House of Representatives (August 17, 1977)). DAVID C. MAAS See also Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA); Alaska Treaty (Convention for the Cession of the Russian Possessions in North America to the United States); National Parks and Protected Areas: Alaska Further Reading Buck, Eugene, “Alaska National Interest Lands (d-2) Legislation: Issue Brief,” Washington, District of Columbia: Library of Congress, October 13, 1977 Hull, T. & L. Leask, “Dividing Alaska, 1867–2000: changing land ownership and management.” Alaska Review of Social and Economic Conditions, 32(1) (2000): 1–12 Williss, Frank, Administrative History: The National Park Service and ANILCA, Washington, District of Columbia: National Park Service, 1980

ALASKA NATIVE CLAIMS SETTLEMENT ACT (ANCSA) The Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, commonly known as ANCSA, was a piece of historic legislation passed by the United States Congress in 1971. The Act settled all outstanding Native land claims in the state of Alaska by extinguishing Native title and granting selected lands, as well as providing cash compensation to indigenous Alaskans. ANCSA was the first “modern treaty” in North America, providing a model and inspiration for future settlements, especially in Canada. The Act created 12 regional corporations, still functioning today, that sharply changed life for Native Alaskans. ANCSA also created problems that linger to the present.

Origins ANCSA was the last Native land claim settlement in the continental United States. The long delay in settling Alaskan claims stems from Alaska’s colonial history and its remote and marginal position with respect to the rest of the country. Colonial incursions by Russians did not begin until the 18th century, and these contacts were largely limited to the exploitation of coastal resources. Russian settlement was not a desired goal, and only 550 Russians lived in Alaska when it was sold to the United States in 1867. The Alaska Treaty of Cession, which transferred Alaska from Russia to the United States, acknowledged Native title. The Organic Act of 1884, which outlined

34

the governance structure for the territory, contained even stronger language protecting Native rights. Growing encroachment by Americans, stemming from the gold and salmon rushes of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, brought Native Alaskans into conflict with the recent arrivals. The Tlingit and Haida peoples in the southeast part of the territory were especially affected and initiated a lawsuit in 1936. This suit sought compensation for millions of acres of lands withdrawn by the federal government for the Tongass National Forest. While the Tlingit-Haida claim was being adjudicated, the Alaska Statehood Act of 1958 further renewed the claim of continuing respect for Native rights established by use and occupancy. But far more important was the Act’s direct assignment of more than 100 million acres of previously federal land to the new state. The Statehood Act required the state of Alaska to select, survey, and patent fully one-third of the land base. This imminent hardening of property rights signaled a major and rapid foreclosure of possible Native rights to these lands. Shortly after statehood the Court of Claims finally decided the Tlingit-Haida case. The court held that the land withdrawal did in fact constitute acquiring formerly occupied lands and required compensation. However, the compensation was finally established (eight years later) at only 50 cents per acre based on nominal values as of the purchase from Russia in 1867. The decision shocked many Native Alaskans into the realization that established judicial channels would not bring meaningful amounts of land or even cash assets into indigenous hands. Yet it also provided an important legal precedent by accepting the link between traditional subsistence use and occupancy of vast land areas and the lawful claim to that land. By this standard, Native Alaskans had a valid claim to all of Alaska. During the early 1960s, the encroachments on traditional Native lands accelerated, often involving grand development schemes and increased enforcement of federal hunting restrictions. In 1961, the Atomic Energy Commission proposed using atomic weapons to blast a harbor out of the bluffs at Cape Krusenstern on the Northwest coast. Shortly thereafter, the Bureau of Reclamation and Army Corps of Engineers developed plans to build a huge dam on the Yukon River that would have flooded many villages and subsistence habitats. These regional conflicts might have remained isolated pockets of ineffective complaints in a vast territory, but for three significant factors. The first factor was a dramatic increase in the human capital and communications technology available to Native Alaskans. During the mid-1960s, a new

ALASKA NATIVE CLAIMS SETTLEMENT ACT (ANCSA)

Alaska Native Regional Corporation boundaries. Published in The Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, 1991, and Tribal Government, ISER Occasional Papers No. 19, Institute of Social and Economic Research, University of Alaska Anchorage.

generation of college-educated leaders was emerging from school, creating an instant and unprecedented leadership class and a statewide network of personal relationships among these leaders. Equally important, these leaders found a sympathetic source of private funding to support a statewide, Native-controlled newspaper, the Tundra Times. This newspaper was the first means of mass communication available to Alaska Natives, since at the time there was essentially no television reception, radio was dominated by localized commercial broadcasters, and telephone connections were tenuous or nonexistent. The second factor was an administrative legal action taken in 1966 by US Secretary of the Interior Stuart Udall. Concerned that the 1884 Organic Act had sidestepped the legitimate rights of Native Alaskans, Udall placed a freeze on all transfers of disputed land. This action effectively halted all transfers to the state of Alaska and created immediate pressure for Congress to resolve the Native land claims issue. Although an administrative action, the freeze was extended past 1968 when Senator Henry Jackson agreed to give the Alaska Federation of Natives (AFN) veto power over President Nixon’s appointment of Walter Hickel as the new Interior Secretary. Hickel extended the land freeze as the price of his approval by AFN. The third factor was the discovery of the supergiant oil field at Prudhoe Bay. Located on land owned by the state of Alaska, the field was immediately estimated to contain more than 10 billion barrels of recoverable

reserves, producible at a rate equal to about 20% of existing US oil production. This discovery dramatically raised the stakes of the bargaining game for all parties. Although Native Alaskans never asserted title to the oil field itself, the oil required transportation across 700 miles of contested federal lands to reach the icefree port of Valdez. With a daily production of two million barrels at stake, the discovery would produce revenues of about $6 million per day. Because the field was located on state land, it promised billions of dollars in royalties as well as oil company profits. Equally important, the Prudhoe Bay discovery changed the perceptions of what a claims settlement could accomplish. Alaska, which had been poor, would now be rich. If there were additional sources of such huge rents lurking in everyone’s backyard, then the economic development problem was reduced to distributing endowments. Native Alaskans could get rich too. Seeing the coming speculative boom fueled by such a huge discovery, many prescient businesspeople realized that putting land into Native hands was a far faster route to exploitation than leaving it in federal public domain or even passing it to the state. Business opposition to a settlement began to soften. Most important, it was the oil discovery that allowed the Native land claims movement to be merged, in the eyes of Congress, with the Native economic development problem. Alaska Native underdevelopment in 1968 was severe by any standard. In the socially tumultuous climate of the late 1960s, the Alaska Native land claims issue presented Congress

35

ALASKA NATIVE CLAIMS SETTLEMENT ACT (ANCSA) and the nation with a chance to make more enlightened, or at least more compassionate, Indian policy than had been imposed on the tribes of the lower 48 states.

Provisions of the Act ANCSA transferred 44 million acres of land and $962.5 million in cash to business corporations owned exclusively by Alaska Natives. The Act established 12 regional corporations (plus one additional corporation for nonresident Native Alaskans) and approximately 200 village corporations. The regional corporations are Ahtna, Aleut, Arctic Slope, Bering Straits, Bristol Bay, Calista, Chugach Natives, Cook Inlet (CIRI), Doyon, Koniag, Nana, and Sealaska. Each Alaska Native (of at least one-quarter Native blood or recognized by a Native community) alive at the time of the Act (December 17, 1971) was allowed to enroll in a village corporation, which automatically enrolled them in the corresponding regional corporation (see Map). The Act also abolished the few existing Indian reservations in the state, with the exception of the one at Metlakatla. The corporations were given substantial freedom in choosing and using their new endowments, consistent with Alaska corporation law. However, the Native shareholders could not immediately sell their shares and the regional corporations had to share a portion of their natural resource rents with all other Native corporations on an equal per capita basis. The land transfer was straightforward. Village corporations received selection rights to 26 million acres of proximate lands. The intent was to formally convey ancestral heritage and subsistence lands. It was widely recognized that 26 million acres was not enough land to provide for subsistence needs and that no fishing rights were included in the deal (although a later act, the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) of 1980, gave preference for subsistence use of federal lands to rural residents). Regional corporations received all of the subsurface rights under village lands plus an additional 16 million acres in fee simple (surface and subsurface) lands. The Tlingit-Haida decision had established the principle of money compensation for lands acquired. Secretary Udall came up with the idea of tying the money settlement to future federal petroleum leasing revenues from outer continental shelf (OCS) lands off the Alaska coast as a way of making the compensation politically palatable. The Prudhoe Bay discovery probably made this tapping of prospective new revenues seem like a painless proposition. The final figure of $962.5 million was a last-minute compromise; the basic amount of $1 billion appears to have been pulled

36

out of thin air and was not based on a review of the earning potential or value of land or on corporate capital needs. All parties nevertheless recognized that working capital would be needed for functioning business corporations. The regional corporations were required to incorporate as for-profits, while the village corporations had the option of incorporating as nonprofits. Almost none did. The regional and village corporations each received 45% of the money settlement. The remaining 10% went to each individual enrolled Native Alaskan. The use of the corporation as the settlement vehicle was a direct recommendation of the state of Alaska’s Land Claims Task Force. The corporation concept was adopted based on a widespread distaste for other alternatives—especially IRA corporations (Indian Reorganization Act (1934)) and other entities controlled by the federal Bureau of Indian Affairs—and for the formally egalitarian structure of shareholders’ rights. But the deliberate vagueness that the corporate form offered was clearly a reason as to why it was embraced by all sides. Assimilationists saw in corporations business dealings and modern capitalism. Tribalists saw more real autonomy and, in any event, an improvement over the reservation system. New Native political leaders saw the opportunity for economic and political self-determination, not to mention the promise of management positions for themselves. The corporation offered a beguilingly simple vehicle for settling the thorny land claims issue. It allowed all parties to feel comfortable with their vision of the legislation. Although the overall corporation concept was adopted early, there was significant debate about how the corporations would be structured. Many early versions of the claims bill called for a statewide investment corporation to own subsurface rights and control much of the working capital. The AFN opposed this concept and fought vigorously for regional corporations. They had learned from bitter experience how hard it was to hold together a statewide political coalition among disparate Native groups.

Impacts of the Act In many ways the ANCSA settlement was quite straightforward. However, three special features of ANCSA were highly unconventional, with potentially serious implications for the success of the regional corporations. First, shareholders could not sell their stock for at least 20 years. This prohibition removed the threat of takeover as a powerful discipline mechanism and eliminated the actual takeover as a corrective mechanism. With no takeover threat and no information feedback from a market in shares, there was little

ALASKA NATIVE CLAIMS SETTLEMENT ACT (ANCSA) monitoring of corporate activities and little information about their performance made available to the general public. This provision was partially ameliorated and partially strengthened by a 1988 Congressional amendment to ANCSA, which allowed corporations to restrict their sale of stock and also granted them the ability to enroll Native Alaskans born after the settlement date. Second, the requirement that regional corporations share 70% of the “net revenue” from subsurface and timber resource sales with all other corporations, both regional and village, created incentives to shelter resource revenues. The provision was also poorly drafted and invited costly litigation during implementation. Third, corporate management, as opposed to individual shareholders, was given complete control over the land. This tied the security of the land base to the control of the Board of Directors and ultimately to the voting power of the stock. Under this structure, allowing stock sales would increase the incentives for individual Native Alaskans to sell out. Fearing this outcome, few would vote to allow stock sales. ANCSA specified that the settlement was to address the “real social and economic needs” of Native Alaskans. Yet several factors militated against corporate success and the alleviation of these needs. First, most Native Alaskans were poor and had few liquid assets, creating pressure for early dividends. Second, the lack of human capital meant that internal management talent was scarce and the corporate boards’ monitoring ability was low. Third, most Native Alaskans lived on the economic periphery of a peripheral state and there were few apparent opportunities for business development in the regions. And fourth, corporations were caught between the obligation to be financially profitable and the need to create jobs and other social benefits for their shareholders. Often a particular investment or business enterprise could not do both. Countering these pessimistic conditions was Alaska’s new-found oil wealth. The Trans-Alaska Pipeline System (TAPS) was finally approved in 1973 after the first OPEC oil shock. The resulting increase in oil prices fueled a speculative resource exploration boom throughout the state just as the Native corporations began to select their lands. Also of great importance was the continuing flow of federal money from the rest of the United States. Alaska Natives retained their specific eligibility for federal Indian programs, and their status as US citizens gave them access to all the social programs and infrastructure subsidies of the nation. This favorable economic climate allowed the ANCSA corporations substantial freedom to concentrate on profitable investments without facing overwhelming pressure for immediate distribution of wealth.

Economic performance of the regional corporations has been mixed. The first two decades of the settlement were financially hard on most, but not all, of the regional corporations, especially those in more remote and rural parts of the state. During this period, many corporations were losing money rapidly and some came close to bankruptcy. Part of the difficulty was that corporations were obliged to meet both the social and economic needs of their shareholders. Some corporations claimed to provide employment for their shareholders in lieu of corporate profits, while some corporations only survived financially in the mid1980s by selling their net operating losses to other, non-Alaskan corporations, under a special federal provision. In the past decade, ANSCA corporations have performed more successfully, with total corporate assets (all corporations as a whole) exceeding $2.5 billion. Total corporate profits have fluctuated widely, ranging between $50 million and $450 million in recent years, though much of this income is accounted for by just one corporation, CIRI, in the Anchorage area. Return on equity for corporations overall averaged 11% in the past decade. Two issues related to ANCSA remain unresolved. The first is subsistence, as Native Alaskans must decide on whether they prefer federal or state management of subsistence lands beyond their own settlement lands. The second is sovereignty, a potentially more complex issue as tribal council governments seek control over ANCSA corporation lands. Overall, ANCSA substantially changed the lives of Native Alaskans. The Act extinguished existing indigenous title to land, transferred 44 million acres of fee simple lands to Native Alaskans (about 12% of Alaska lands), and provided initial investment capital for 12 regional corporations. The Act also helped to bring Native Alaskans into the American mainstream and provided a model and inspiration for other indigenous land claim settlements. STEPHEN G. COLT AND MICHAEL PRETES See also Alaska; Alaska Federation of Natives (AFN); Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA); Alaska Treaty (Convention for the Cession of the Russian Possessions in North America to the United States); Land Claims; Prudhoe Bay; Trans-Alaska Pipeline

Further Reading Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act Resource Center website: http://www.lbblawyers.com/ancsa.htm ANCSA at 30 website: http://litsite.alaska.edu/uaa/aktraditions/ancsa/ Berardi, Gigi, “Natural resource policy, unforgiving geographies, and persistent poverty in Alaska Native villages.” Natural Resources Journal, 38(4) (1998): 85–108

37

ALASKA NATIVE LANGUAGE CENTER Flanders, Nicholas E., “The ANCSA amendments of 1987 and land management in Alaska.” Polar Record, 25(155) (1989): 315–322 McNabb, Steven, “Native claims in Alaska: a twenty-year review.” Etudes/Inuit/Studies, 16(1–2) (1992): 85–95 Morehouse, Thomas A., The Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act, 1991, and Tribal Government, ISER Occasional Papers No. 19, Institute of Social and Economic Research, University of Alaska Anchorage, Anchorage, AK, 1988 Robinson, Michael, Michael Pretes & Wanda Wuttunee, “Investment strategies for Northern cash windfalls: learning from the Alaskan experience.” Arctic, 42(3) (1989): 265–276

ALASKA NATIVE LANGUAGE CENTER The Alaska Native Language Center (ANLC) was established in 1972 by the state of Alaska “to study native Alaskan languages, develop literacy materials, assist in the translation of important documents, provide for the development and dissemination of Alaska Native literature, and train Alaska Native language speakers to work as teachers and aides in bilingual classrooms” (AS 14.40.117). The Language Center has since become the preeminent institution for the study of the 20 Athapaskan, Eskimo, Aleut, Eyak, Tlingit, Tsimshian, and Haida languages in Alaska. Michael Krauss was instrumental in the founding of ANLC, and acted as its director from its inception in 1972 until his retirement in 2000, when the current director, Lawrence Kaplan, took over. Prominent linguists have worked in association with ANLC over the past 29 years. Many Alaska Natives have contributed greatly by authoring texts and narratives, and through various teaching roles. ANLC houses an exhaustive archival collection of original source material and other documents in or relating to Native Alaskan languages. The archives contain over 12,000 documents and 4000 recordings, ranging from 18th-century exploration documents, 19th-century ethnohistorical works, to modern teaching texts. Plans are underway to make a catalog of these works available on the Internet. Language preservation and maintenance are major concerns of ANLC; Alaskan Native language vitality currently ranges from Central Yup’ik with c.10,000 speakers to Eyak with one native speaker remaining. ANLC has striven to document many languages in danger of extinction in order to promote public awareness of language loss. Patrick Marlow currently directs a program to train Athapaskan language teachers. Publishing is an important aspect of ANLC’s operation, and their output includes Native language dictionaries, grammars, texts, and teaching materials. Publications include the Koyukon Athabaskan Dictionary (2000) by Eliza Jones and Jules Jetté, and the Yup’ik Eskimo Dictionary (1984) compiled by S.A.

38

Jacobson. Other publications include traditional stories, literacy workbooks, reading and writing drills, coloring books, historical accounts by Native elders, Native language novels, and conversation lessons. An important facet of dissemination includes an extensive collection of oral narratives and oral literature in tape formats. ANLC is part of the University of Alaska Fairbanks, which offers a Baccalaureate Degree in Yup’ik and Iñupiaq, and an Associate Degree in Native Language Education for Athapaskan and Iñupiaq. Many graduates have gone on to take leadership roles in the state of Alaska. A number of influential linguistic scholars have been associated with ANLC. Michael Krauss and James Kari are professors emeriti with long distinguished careers in linguistics. Anna Berge, Gary Holton, Steven Jacobson, Lawrence Kaplan, Jeff Leer, and Patrick Marlow are current faculty at the center. Native language specialists, including Native Elders, and researchers who are or who have been associated with ANLC include Lillian Garnett, Eliza Jones, Peter Kalifornsky, Shem Pete, Katherine Peter, Kathy Sikorski, and Lorena Williams. Other prominent ANLC researchers from outside institutions include the late Knut Bergsland from the University of Oslo and John Ritter, Director of the Yukon Native Language Centre. BEN A. POTTER See also Athapaskan; Eskimo-Aleut Languages; Iñupiat; Northern Athapaskan Languages; Yukon Native Language Centre Further Reading Alaska Native Language Center website: http://www.uaf.edu/ anlc/ Damas, David (editor), Handbook of the North American Indians, Volume 5, Arctic, Washington, District of Columbia: Smithsonian Institution, 1984 Fortescue, Michael, Steven Jacobson & Lawrence Kaplan, Comparative Eskimo Dictionary with Aleut Cognates, Fairbanks: Alaska Native Language Center, 1994 Goddard, Ives, Handbook of the North American Indians, Volume 17, Languages, Washington, District of Columbia: Smithsonian Institution, 1996 Helm, June (editor), Handbook of the North American Indians, Volume 6, Subarctic, Washington, District of Columbia: Smithsonian Institution, 1981 Jones, Eliza & Jules Jetté, Koyukon Athabaskan Dictionary, Fairbanks: Alaska Native Language Center, 2000 Krauss, Michael, Alaska Native Languages: Past, Present, and Future, Fairbanks: Alaska Native Language Center, 1980

ALASKA NATIVE REVIEW COMMISSION The Alaska Native Review Commission was established at a meeting of the Inuit Circumpolar

ALASKA NATIVE SCIENCE COMMISSION Conference in July 1983. The Commission was asked to analyze and report on five broad areas: the social and economic conditions of Alaska Natives; the history and intentions of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA); the place of ANCSA in the history of claims agreements by the US government; the capability and performance of the regional and village corporations in carrying out the spirit of the settlement act; and the overall significance of ANCSA to indigenous people around the world. The Commission was chaired by the Honorable Thomas R. Berger, a former chief justice of the Supreme Court in British Columbia. Berger and his staff began the study in September 1983. For the next two years, they visited 61 villages and listened to the testimony of more than 1400 Alaska Natives. The Commission also organized two “Overview Roundtable Discussions” in Anchorage that considered Native views of the past and present, the effects of changes in land tenure and land use, the history of US policies toward Native Americans, and the relevance of ANSCA to other states and nations. The Commission finished its work in June 1985 and published Village Journey (Berger, 1985), a summary of its findings and recommendations, several months later. The Commission concluded that ANCSA was not only an act of assimilation but, ultimately, an instrument of destruction, for it separated people from the land and from each other. In Berger’s view, this was the intent of Congress in constructing the settlement, to eradicate communal patterns of leadership and decision-making, customs of sharing, aboriginal rights to hunt and fish, and traditional notions of land use and ownership. What gives meaning and nourishment to Native communities, the Commission found, is subsistence, or what Alaska Natives refer to as their way of life. It is through participation in the village subsistence economy that people acquire needed skills, learn their traditions, understand their environment, and join with others (including those who have lived in the past) to work, share, and celebrate. According to one witness: “The culture and life of my Native people are the subsistence way of life. And that’s what we always used, the subsistence way of life. It goes hand in hand with our culture, our own language, and all our activities” (Berger, 1985: p. 52). Consistent with their conclusions about the settlement act and Native societies, the Commission proposed three general recommendations: (i) provision should be made for the transfer of land from ANCSA corporations to tribal governments, which they could then hold in fee simple title or in federal trusteeship; (ii) village tribal governments should reassert their sovereign powers and seek state and, more important,

federal recognition; and (iii) tribal governments should be given exclusive jurisdiction over fish and wildlife on Native lands. The effects of the work of the Alaska Native Review Commission are mixed. Certainly the Berger report lent urgency and legitimacy to the “sovereignty movement” in Alaska, which sought to develop and strengthen tribal governments. Their efforts led to federal recognition in 1993, the organization of tribal courts, and increased tribal contracting for health and social services. Nevertheless, the powers of tribal organizations remain circumscribed by state opposition, federal rules, limited resources, and the 1998 US Supreme Court ruling that Indian country does not exist on Native lands in Alaska. DAVID C. MAAS See also Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA); Inuit Circumpolar Conference (ICC) Further Reading Berger, Thomas, R., Village Journey, New York: Hill and Wang, 1985

ALASKA NATIVE SCIENCE COMMISSION In spring 1993, Anchorage, Alaska, hosted a conference on contamination of the Arctic, which opened with a keynote address by United States Senator (now Governor) Frank Murkowski, entitled “The Environmental Legacy of the Cold War.” In the days that followed, delegates listened to accounts of Arctic lands and peoples used as testing ground for Cold War-related scientific research. A number of revelations about research activities undertaken during the 1950s that only became public knowledge in the early 1990s comprised the discussions. These governmental activities included the deliberate seeding of the Snowbank and Ogotoruk catchments (adjacent to the Iñupiat Eskimo village of Point Hope) with Nevada test site radioactive material, as well as US Air Force experiments conducted in the 1950s on 121 residents of Iñupiat Inuit and Athapaskan Indian villages. Natives were given radioactive iodine (without their knowledge) to study the effects on the thyroid gland. The discovery of hitherto secretive and exploitative activities marked a turning point in the use of Arctic ecosystems and peoples for scientific research, especially to the indigenous people represented at the meeting. The conference resulted in the belief and commitment that the native community needed to become involved in scientific research in the Arctic, to become fully engaged with the way in which science

39

ALASKA PENINSULA investigated their environment and lives, and ensure that research was conducted in Alaska in a form that had the full knowledge, cooperation, understanding, and support of local communities. As a result, a position statement was drafted, and the Alaskan Federation of Natives (AFN) passed a unanimous resolution at their annual convention in 1993, pledging support for the creation of the Alaskan Native Science Commission. The following year, a series of workshops brought together community leaders and elders with Arctic scientists to develop recommendations for the structure and function of the fledgling Science Commission. Participants obtained funds from the National Science Foundation to establish this vital link between the scientific world and the Alaskan native community. The mission of the Alaskan Native Science Commission is to “endorse and support scientific research that enhances and perpetuates Alaska native cultures, and ensures the protection of indigenous cultures and intellectual property.” Moreover, the Commission agreed at an inaugural meeting in 1994 that it would foster a number of specific objectives. These included incorporation of local and traditional knowledge into research and science; all too often, researchers conducted scientific investigations without recourse to existing native knowledge. The Commission decided that it ought to influence the process by which research priorities were established, since a number of key scientific questions relating to Alaskan native people (such as environmental health and diseases relevant to Alaskan native peoples) had not received priority in the greater scientific community. Alaskan natives needed to be involved at all levels of scientific research. The latter necessitated promotion of science among all native peoples, especially within youth populations who could benefit from scientific education and related opportunities. The Commission also agreed that feedback mechanisms would enable the dissemination of scientific results and involve communities in discussions related to local research, again in a manner that ensured scientific endeavor assimilate with local community life. Particular emphasis was placed upon the creation of an archive of native knowledge and scientific research results to safeguard such information for future generations. Finally, it was determined that Alaskan native peoples share in the economic benefits derived from their intellectual property. The Alaska Native Science Commission invited nominations from the native community to serve on a board of commissioners to oversee the work of the Commission, comprising seven native Alaskans and ex-officio members representing the scientific community in the state. The Commission presently has an

40

executive director (as of 2003, Patricia Cochran, an Iñupiat native born and raised in Nome, Alaska) and a secretariat to coordinate activities. The Commission established “Principles for the Conduct of Research in the Arctic” as well as active working groups and task forces to tackle key issues (such as contaminants in the human food chain). The Commission organized a second highly successful summit with the theme of “Building Bridges with Traditional Knowledge” in May/June 2001. The number of scientific institutions and agencies listing the Commission as an integral partner to major research projects remains testament to the enormous success of the organization since its inception. TONY FOX See also Alaska Federation of Natives (AFN) Further Reading Alaska Native Science Commission: Partnerships in Science and Research website: http://www.nativescience.org/index.html Alaska Native Science Commission: Partnerships in Science and Research website: http://www.ankn.uaf.edu/ansc.html

ALASKA PENINSULA The 450-mile (724-km)-long Alaska Peninsula projects southwestwardly off the Alaskan mainland. Just off the tip of the peninsula lies 60-mile (97-km)-long Unimak Island. Technically a part of the Aleutian Island chain, Unimak is closely allied with the peninsula by politics and economics. Volcanic activity, both past and present, has been observed along the length of the peninsula. The Aleutian Trench, lying deep in the Pacific Ocean where the Pacific Plate is subducted under the North American Plate, forms a great arc that parallels the Alaska Peninsula and the Aleutian Islands. The energy generated by the collision of these two plates catalyzes the intense seismic and volcanic activity on the Alaska Peninsula. The Aleutian Range, a part of the Pacific Ring of Fire and composed almost entirely of volcanoes, forms the mountainous backbone of the entire length of the Alaska Peninsula and continues to the end of the Aleutian Islands chain. The westerly expression of the Alaska Range—the Revelation Mountains—and the easterly expression of the Aleutian Range—Redoubt Volcano (10,197 ft/3108 m)—are both found in Lake Clark National Park and Preserve. The next westward volcano in the row, Mt Iliamna (10,016 ft/3053 m), overlooks Lake Iliamna, Alaska’s largest lake (1150 sq mi/2978 sq km) at the base of the Alaska Peninsula. The Bering Sea with its Bristol Bay lies on the north side of the peninsula, and the Pacific Ocean with its Shelikof Strait lies to the south.

ALASKA RANGE Much of the peninsula is treeless, but scattered, small stands of deciduous and coniferous trees exist, especially on south-facing slopes and valleys. The surrounding seas greatly influence the climate of Alaska Peninsula. The weather is typically cloudy, windy, and rainy; total precipitation ranges from 20 to 33 inches (51–84 cm) per year, including about 50 inches (127 cm) of snow. Winter temperatures average in the 6–30°F (−14 to −1°C) range, and summer temperatures in the 40–65°F (4–18°C) range. The greater part of the Alaska Peninsula is under either state or federal protection; these lands include Katmai National Park and Preserve, Aniakchak National Monument and Preserve, Becharof, Izembek, and Alaska Peninsula National Wildlife Refuges, Izembek State Game Refuge, and McNeil River State Game Sanctuary (famous for its great concentration of brown bears during the salmon runs). Aniakchak Volcano (4398 ft/1341 m) last erupted in 1931, but some 3700 years earlier, 3000 feet (914 m) of its top blew off, leaving behind a 6-mile (10-km)-wide caldera (a volcanic crater) measuring 2000 ft/610 m deep. Designated a National Natural Landmark, the 8223 ft/2507 m Mt Veniaminof is a massive volcano that rises from a base 30 miles (48 km) in diameter. The broad, conical Veniaminof Volcano, one of the highest and largest volcanoes on the peninsula, is truncated by a steep-walled, glacier-filled caldera that formed nearly 3700 years ago. Since no roads connect the peninsula to other parts of the state, the area is served only by air and sea transportation. The human population swells markedly during the summer, but the year-round population numbers about 5000, with Alaska Natives (Aleut and Koniag Alutiiq) comprising about half the total. Commercial fishing, fish processing, sport fishing, sport hunting, tourism, and government and transportation services form the economic base of Alaska Peninsula. Brown bears, moose, caribou, wolves, many other kinds of smaller mammals, and many kinds of birds are commonly observed on the peninsula. The surrounding marine waters are highly favorable to crabs, fish, and marine mammals. J. RICHARD GORHAM See also Alaska; Aleut; Aleutian Islands; National Parks and Protected Areas: Alaska; Volcanoes and Volcanic Activity Further Reading Barnett, J., “Chignik summers.” Alaska Geographic, 21(1) (1994): 50–53 Bodeau, Jean, Katmai National Park and Preserve, Alaska, Anchorage: Alaska Natural History Association and Greatland Graphics, 1992

Plafker, George & Henry C. Berg (editors), The Geology of Alaska, Boulder: The Geological Society of America, 1994 Rennick, Penny (editor), “Backcountry Alaska.” Alaska Geographic, 13(2) (1986): 1–224 ——— (editor), “Nushagak River.” Alaska Geographic, 17(1) (1990): 1–96 ——— (editor), “The Alaska Peninsula.” Alaska Geographic, 21(1) (1994): 1–96 ——— (editor), “Russian America.” Alaska Geographic, 26(4) (1999): 1–96 ——— (editor), “Seals, sea lions and sea otters.” Alaska Geographic, 27(2) (2000): 1–96 Sherwonit, B., “Aniakchak caldera.” Alaska Geographic, 21(1) (1994): 16–19

ALASKA RANGE The 600 mile (1000 km) Alaska Range in southern Alaska is crowned by the highest mountain in North America, Mt McKinley (Denali), which soars dramatically some 17,000 ft (5182 m) above a vast stretch of taiga, the characteristic ecosystem of interior Alaska. From Denali’s double peaks (20,320 ft, 19,470 ft), the Alaska Range merges in the west with the Aleutian Range at the base of the Alaska Peninsula and in the east with the mountains of the Yukon Territory of Canada. The Alaska Range is in general higher and more continuous than the Coast Range, although it is split in three by two highways, the Parks Highway and the Richardson Highway. Both the Mentasta Mountains and the Nutzotin Mountains, at the eastern end of the arc, lie partially within the Wrangell-St Elias National Park and Preserve. At the western end of the arc, the Tordrillo Mountains and Revelation Mountains are close to, but mostly outside of, Lake Clark National Park and Preserve. Denali and the surrounding mountains form the centerpiece of the six million acre (2,430,000 hectares) Denali National Park and Preserve. The Alaska Range was heavily glaciated during the Ice Ages, and several glaciers remain today. The largest glaciers are clustered around Mt McKinley, especially on the south-facing slopes, which intercept moist air from the Gulf of Alaska and gather greater amounts of snow. Other glaciers occur in the Mentasta Mountains and the Tordrillo Mountains. The climate of the Alaska Range is typically continental—very cold winters and moderately warm summers. The Revelation and Tordrillo Mountains tend to receive more rain and snow than the other parts of the range because of their closer proximity to the Gulf of Alaska. Since the Mentasta and Nutzotin Mountains lie in the shadow of the Wrangell and St Elias Mountains, they receive less precipitation than other parts of the range. In general, the south-facing slopes, because they are warmer and wetter, have taller and more diverse kinds of both woody and herbaceous vegetation than the north slopes, where alpine tundra is more common.

41

ALASKA TREATY

Denali National Park, Mt McKinley (Denali) and the Alaska Range. Copyright Bryan and Cherry Alexander Photography

The origin of the Alaska Range is related to subduction of the north Pacific plate below southern Alaska. Parts of the Alaska Range (notably south of the Denali Fault, a prominent linear valley that follows the range for much of its length) have been traced far back in time to terranes that at one time were equatorial volcanic islands. As a result of tectonic plate movements, these Pacific terranes eventually collided with and accreted to the Alaskan mainland (which at that time consisted only of what is now interior Alaska). Several of the larger peaks, including Mt McKinley, are remnants of volcanic intrusions that cooled and hardened to become granite. Major uplift of the Alaska Range began in the early Pliocene, c.4–5 million years ago. Mt McKinley has reached such great heights because it is composed of rocks that are relatively lighter than the surrounding rocks and because it is located at a point along the Denali Fault where uplifting forces find maximum expression. A major earthquake of magnitude 7.9 occurred on November 3, 2002 along the Denali Fault, the largest ever recorded in the interior of Alaska. Grizzly bears, black bears, caribou, moose, wolves, Dall’s sheep, and many kinds of smaller mammals are found throughout the Alaska Range. The native people of the Alaska Range are largely Dena’ina Athapaskan Indians, originally an inland group from the west of the Alaska Range. Denali, the name of Mt McKinley, is a Koyukon Athapaskan name. J. RICHARD GORHAM See also Alaska Peninsula; Mount McKinley (Denali); National Parks and Protected Areas: Alaska

42

Further Reading Brown, William E., Denali: Symbol of the Alaskan Wild: An Illustrated History of the Denali-Mount McKinley Region, Alaska, Virginia Beach: The Donning Company and the Alaska Natural History Association, 1993 Collier, Michael, The Geology of Denali National Park, Anchorage: Alaska Natural History Association, 1989 Murie, Adolph, A Naturalist in Alaska, Garden City: The Natural History Library, Anchor Books, Doubleday and Company, 1963, many reprints Plafker, George & Henry C. Berg, The Geology of Alaska, Boulder: The Geological Society of America, 1994 Rennick, Penny (editor), “Backcountry Alaska.” Alaska Geographic, 13(2) (1986): 1–224 ——— (editor), “Denali.” Alaska Geographic, 15(3) (1988): 1–96 ——— (editor), “Glaciers of Alaska.” Alaska Geographic, 28(2) (2001): 1–128 Ward, Kennan, Denali: Reflections of a Naturalist, Minnetonka: NorthWord Press, 2000 Waterman, Jonathan, In the Shadow of Denali: Life and Death on Alaska’s Mt McKinley, New York: The Lyons Press, 1998 Woerner, R.K., The Alaska Handbook, Jefferson: McFarland and Company, 1986 Wuerthner, George, Alaska’s Mountain Ranges, Helena: Alaska Geographic Publishing, 1988

ALASKA TREATY (CONVENTION FOR THE CESSION OF THE RUSSIAN POSSESSIONS IN NORTH AMERICA TO THE UNITED STATES) During the 18th century, the Russian Empire spread its influence into Arctic lands as it expanded to the east. On June 4, 1741, two Russian ships, the Saint Peter captained by Vitus Bering and Saint Paul led by Alexey Chirikov, started from Petropavlovsk on the

ALBEDO Kamchatka peninsula, and on July 15 approached the northwestern coast of North America. Since 1741 for more than a century, the Russian Empire ruled Alaska and the Aleutian Islands until their acquisition by the United States in 1867. Exploration of Alaska was bound primarily to fur trade; colonization of the new lands and the Arctic people remained minimal and settlers founded the first settlement on Kodiak Island only in 1784. The first town of Novoarchangelsk (New Archangel) was founded in 1802, and the total Russian population of Alaska never exceeded 800 people. By the middle of the 19th century, Russia’s geopolitical and economical interests in Alaska and the Aleutian Islands had waned. The governor of East Siberia, N. Muraviev-Amyrskiy, first suggested selling the Russian territory in Alaska to the United States, which he formulated in his report to the Czar Nicolai I in 1853. Duke Constantine, the brother of the next Czar in line to the throne, Alexander II, supported Muraviev-Amyrskiy, and in 1857 wrote an official letter to the Russian foreign minister Prince A. Gorchakov encouraging him to begin negotiations with the US government. In 1859–1860, Gorchakov, acting through the Russian minister to the United States, Baron Edward de Stoeckl, began negotiations with the Californian Senator William Gwin and Vice-Secretary of State J. Appleton. The negotiations, however, failed as the parties disagreed on the selling price. Negotiations continued through 1866 until after the end of the American Civil War. Minister de Stoeckl and William Henry Seward, Secretary of State under President Andrew Johnson, inspired this second round. In the fall of 1866, Stoeckl visited St Petersburg, where he conducted several meetings with Russian officials including Duke Constantine and the Russian minister of finances. On March 29, 1867, Stoeckl and Seward drafted the text of the resultant treaty according to which Russia ceded 1,518,800 sq km (586,412 sq mi) of its territories in North America to the United States for the sum total of $7,200,000. The United States and Russia signed the Alaska Treaty on March 30, 1867; it passed through the US Senate on April 9 despite negative public opinion in both countries. Russian officials in St Petersburg adopted the Alaska Treaty on May 15, 1867. To mitigate the negative response from the American media, officials in Russia published the text of the treaty in French in the diplomatic periodical of 1868, which had a small distribution. One year later, on July 14, 1868, the US Congress adopted the Alaska Treaty. On October 18, 1867, the American flag was raised in New Archangel, the former capital of the Russian territories in America. MARINA BELOLUTSKAIA

See also Alaska Further Reading Bolkhovitinov, Nikolai N., Russian-American Relations and the Sale of Alaska, 1834–1867, translated and edited by Richard A. Pierce, Moscow: Nauka and Fairbanks, Alaska: Aleutian Islands, Limestone Press, 1997 Callahan, J., Russian-American Relations During the American Civil War, Morgantown: West Virginia University, 1908 Jados, Stanley (editor), Documents on Russian-American Relations. Washington to Eisenhower, Washington: Catholic University of America Press, 1965 Jensen, Ronald, The Alaska Purchase and Russian American Relations, Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1975 Shiels, Archibald, The Purchase of Alaska, Fairbanks: University of Alaska and Seattle: University of Washington, 1967 Sumner, Charles, Works of Charles Sumner, 15 volumes, Boston: Lee and Shepard, 1870–1877 Van Deusen, Glydon, William Henry Seward, New York: Oxford University Press, 1967

ALBEDO In general, the term albedo denotes the fraction of incident radiation reflected by a particle or surface. The shortwave (i.e., in the visible part of the electromagnetic spectrum where the Sun’s radiation is concentrated) albedo of the Earth as a whole, and temporal and spatial variations in this quantity, are of fundamental importance in the global climate system. The planetary albedo is defined as the ratio of the total shortwave radiation reflected back into space to the total incident shortwave radiation; for the Earth this figure is about 30%, implying that about 70% of the incident energy in sunlight is absorbed by the Earth. This absorbed radiation is balanced by longwave (thermal infrared) radiation emitted by the Earth by virtue of its temperature. If the Earth had no atmosphere, the spatially and temporally averaged equilibrium temperature reached by its surface would be about −18°C. The presence of the atmosphere raises this average temperature, through the action of the greenhouse effect, to about +10°C. The 70% of the incident shortwave radiation that is absorbed by the Earth is distributed such that about 50% is absorbed by the Earth’s surface, and the remaining 20% by the atmosphere. Heat transfer between the Earth’s surface and atmosphere takes place through evaporation and precipitation, convection, and directly by longwave radiation. Spatial variations in the Earth’s albedo cause local differences in the heat balance and drive the global weather system. Although the main contributor to the albedo is cloud cover (clouds have albedos that can range up to about 0.85, although optically thin clouds may have albedos as low as 0.05), variations in the material constituting the Earth’s surface are also

43

ALERT 0.7

350 absorbed radiation

0.6

300

Strugnell, N., W. Lucht & C. Schaaf, “A global albedo data set derived from AVHRR data for use in climate simulations.” Geophysical Research Letters, 28 (2001): 191–194

0.5

250 outgoing radiation 200

0.4

150

0.3

100

0.2

albedo

0.1

50

0

0 -90

-75

-60

-45

-30

-15

0

15

30

45

60

75

90

latitude (degrees)

Variation of albedo with latitude.

significant. The albedo of vegetated areas is low, typically 0.3 at most, not an unexpected fact since plants depend on the absorption of shortwave radiation for photosynthesis. Water surfaces also exhibit low albedo, down to 0.02 in the case of clear water. The albedos of exposed soil, rock, urban, and desert areas do not generally exceed about 0.4. However, the albedo of a snow-covered surface is significantly higher, and can reach about 0.9 in the case of freshly fallen dry snow. Consequently, there is a strong latitudinal gradient of albedo, illustrated by the figure above. The figure shows that the regions poleward of about 30° latitude are net emitters of radiation, the phenomenon becoming more pronounced as the latitude increases, while the tropical regions are net absorbers. The Earth’s planetary albedo exerts a negative influence on the global mean temperature, since an increase in the albedo would result in a smaller proportion of the incident shortwave radiation being absorbed. Since a decrease in the global mean temperature would be likely to cause an increase in the snowcovered area, and hence in the planetary albedo, this mechanism constitutes a positive feedback, magnifying the effect and tending to destabilize the global climate system. The importance of this albedo feedback, among the many feedback mechanisms within the global climate system, is one of the reasons why it is particularly desirable to monitor and model the distribution of ice and snow at high latitudes. GARETH REES See also Climate Change; Energy Balance Further Reading Barry, R.G. & R.J. Chorley, Atmosphere, Weather and Climate (6th edition), London: Routledge, 1992 Houghton, J.T., The Physics of Atmospheres (2nd edition), Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1986 Jacobsen, M.Z., Fundamentals of Atmospheric Modeling, Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1999

44

ALERT Alert, on the northern tip of Canada’s Ellesmere Island, is the world’s most northerly continuously inhabited place. It was established in 1950 as a United States-Canada Joint Arctic Weather Station. Alert was named for HMS Alert, the flagship of the British North Polar Expedition of 1875–1876 led by Sir George Nares. HMS Alert overwintered near Cape Sheridan just east of Alert. At the turn of the century, Commander Robert Peary established camps in the Alert area during his three expeditions toward the North Pole. Although northern Ellesmere is known to the Inuit as “the land beyond the land of the people,” archaeological evidence shows that people of the Thule and Independence cultures did live and travel in the area. Today the closest settlements to Alert are the communities in the Avanersuaq (Thule district) of Greenland located 675 km southeast, and Grise Firord located 750 km south on Ellesmere Island’s south coast. Alert is just over 800 km south of the North Pole. The Royal Canadian Air Force established an experimental wireless station at Alert in 1956. This evolved into the Alert Wireless Station and became Canadian Forces Station Alert (CFS Alert) in 1966. The location was strategic for intercepting radio signals from Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union, and for listening to radio traffic from ships and submarines operating in northern waters. As the Cold War among the allies and the Soviet Block and Eastern Europe set in, CFS Alert grew from a staff of 27 running a one-hut operation to a station with over 30 buildings. At the peak of activity in the 1980s, over 300 people often inhabited Alert during the summer. The annual resupply to Alert has involved hundreds of tons of food and materials, half a million gallons of fuel, and hundreds of personnel. The resupply of Alert by icebreaker ended in 1953 due to the short season of open water and the difficulties of ice navigation. After 1954, ship and aircraft delivered supplies and equipment to the Thule air base in Greenland and then airlifted a resupply mission code-named Operation Boxtop to Alert. In 1961, the Hercules C-130 transport aircraft replaced the C-119 Boxcars used originally. The original accommodations at Alert comprised prefabricated huts. Services were minimal. An impressive expansion program between 1975 and 1984 saw CFS Alert equipped with modern buildings with more comfortable accommodations and extensive facilities for recreation. Most members of the military are

ALEUT posted to Alert for six months, although weather station personnel served for one year. Women began serving at CFS Alert in 1980. Since the very beginning, Alert has provided accommodation and logistical support for scientific research and exploration. The Polar Continental Shelf Project maintained a research base at Alert in the 1960s. With the easing of the Cold War tensions and with great advances in communications technology, the station was downsized in the 1990s, yet remains an active outpost of the Canadian Forces. The original buildings and weather station were demolished in 1996. The attractions of Alert include cairns and artifacts from both Nares’s and Peary’s expeditions, the remnants of two aircraft crashes, ice caves, and deposits of quartz crystals. Wildlife commonly observed in Alert includes wolves, muskoxen, Peary caribou, Arctic fox, Arctic hare, Arctic terns, ivory gulls, and Arctic char. In recognition of the importance of northern Ellesmere Island to Canada’s heritage, the area surrounding Alert is protected as part of Quttinirpaaq National Park. DAVID R. GRAY See also British Arctic Expedition, 1875–1876; Ellesmere Island; Militarization of the Arctic in the West; Peary, Robert E.; Thule Air Base Further Reading Baril, Gerald, “Room at the top.” Sentinel, 3 (1980): 7–10 Gray, David Robert, Alert, Beyond the Inuit Lands: The Story of Canadian Forces Station Alert, Ottawa: Borealis Press, 1997 Johnson Jr., J. Peter, “The establishment of Alert, N.W.T., Canada.” Arctic, 43(1) (1990): 21–34 Kobalenko, Jerry, The Horizontal Everest: Extreme Journeys on Ellesmere Island, Toronto: Penguin, 2002 Lanken, Dane & Janice Lang, “On Alert: at the top of Ellesmere Island, Canada’s military listens in on the neighbours and perfects the art of ““hearing” sea traffic.” Canadian Geographic, 120(7) (2000): 58–72 Lee, Robert Mason, Death and Deliverance, Toronto: Macfarlane Walter and Ross, 1992 MacDonald, Stewart D., “Report of Biological Investigations at Alert, N.W.T.,” National Museum of Canada, Bulletin No. 128, Ottawa: Queen’s Printer, 1953

ALEUT The Aleut, or Unangan in their own language, traditionally inhabited the lower Alaska Peninsula and Aleutian archipelago, a 1300-mile-long volcanic island arc of almost entirely treeless tundra extending from the Alaska Peninsula west toward Kamchatka. As the southern edge of the Bering Land Bridge, the eastern Aleutian Islands formed the initial route to the colonization of the Americas. The ancestors to the Aleut occupied this region for at least 10,000 years, and for most of that period they lived as sedentary hunter-

gatherers, occupying semi-subterranean dwellings in villages ranging from a few households to those supporting up to 1000 people in more recent times. By 4000 years ago, they were living in some of the largest villages ever seen in the Arctic. Early fur hunters, explorers, and priests estimated the Aleut population as between 12,000 and 20,000 people. Today, there are a dozen Aleut communities in the Aleutian region, including the Pribilof Islands and Russia’s Commander Islands, where Russian fur traders relocated Aleuts to hunt for them in the 18th century. Two and a half centuries of widespread disease, social and cultural reorganization, and political hegemony has left the Alaska Aleut population at 2150, with another 300 Aleuts living in Russia. Aleuts comprise 2.2% of the total Alaskan Native population. The Aleut were a ranked society, with hereditary nobility, a middle class of the nobility’s kinsmen, commoners, and slaves, who were often war captives. They participated in trade and warfare over hundreds of miles with their closest neighbors, the Koniag of Kodiak Island, who today call themselves Alutiiq, and the Yupiit to their north, as well as between Aleut villages and islands. Villages consisted largely of kinsmen and several related nuclear families comprised a typical household, the chief often being the head of the largest extended family. Though usually an inherited position, chieftaincy relied on leadership abilities, consanguineal and affinal relationships, ability to mediate disputes and wage wars, and hunting prowess. The kinship system in Aleut society is difficult to determine because of sociopolitical heterogeneity throughout the islands and circumstances of contact. It is possible that there were multiple descent systems based on archaeological data of residence patterns. Review of the kinship terminology compiled by Knut Bergsland found that Aleut kinship resembled the Iroquois system, where there is some separation between parallel and cross-cousins. A mother’s sister and father’s brother were called my other mother and father, and parallel cousins were the same word for brother and sister with suffixes. Inheritance was through the male line. Polygyny and polyandry were also practiced. After Russian contact, Aleut kinship terms changed to reflect their Russian counterparts. Except for a low intensity use of terrestrial mammals such as caribou, bear, and foxes on the Alaska Peninsula and first Aleutian Island of Unimak, the Aleut were, and continue to be, oriented almost entirely toward the sea. Aleut villages were located on bays and next to salmon streams where they had access to sea mammals and fish year round. All species were harvested for food and for making clothing and tools, such as seals, sea otters, whales, walrus, salmon, halibut, herring, and cod, among many. A variety of

45

ALEUT edible plants and wild berries were eaten. Intertidal resources were harvested as well, including sea urchins, clams, limpets, and mussels. Ducks, geese, cormorant, and other waterfowl were also hunted. All available wild species are still subsistence harvested today by the Aleut. Clothing was made from fur, bird skins, or sea mammal intestines. Highly decorated wooden hunting visors were worn by the men, their shape indicating rank, and their toolkit consisted of the bow and arrow, fish spears and hooks, harpoons, bird darts, wooden shields, and bone or ivory armor. A woman’s toolkit included skin sewing and beading needles made of bone and ivory, household utensils such as knives and bowls, and basketry items. Both men and women were adorned with labrets, earrings, and tattoos. Aleuts are well known for intricate basket weaving, a craft that is being revived today, and the modern kayak was modeled after Aleutian design. The Aleut had a broad knowledge of human anatomy and practiced a wide range of medicinal treatments such as acupuncture, bloodletting and massage, and the use of teas and tonics for curing certain ailments. They mummified many of the dead, although this practice may have been reserved for Aleuts of high rank. Over millennia, the Aleutian region has been the center of a vast interaction sphere that, in addition to the Koniag and Yup’ik peoples to the north and east, included prehistoric Chinese, Japanese, and northeast Asians to the west. In 1741, Aleutian prehistory came to an end when two vessels of Bering’s Second Kamchatka Expedition, commissioned by the Czar to determine the relationship and trading potential between Asia and America, sailed from Kamchatka. The St Peter, commanded by Vitus Bering, landed in the Shumagin Islands where crewmembers Friedrich Müller, Sven Waxell, and Georg Steller described the first encounter with Aleuts. The St Paul, commanded by Aleksey Chirikov, arrived near Adak Island and was approached by Aleuts in their baidarkas (kayaks). The czarist government, interested in securing rights to these new lands and reaping profits from the harvest of sea mammals, commissioned additional voyages in search of new areas to exploit. Russian stewards acutely reorganized the Aleut population and transformed a large number of them into producers for the Russian state. Aleut men were transported to new hunting territory that had previously been uninhabited and established settlements. Within a few decades of the Russian-American Company’s establishment in 1799, the Aleut population had drastically declined by as much as 80% from disease, malnutrition, exposure, suicide, and punishment by Russians. Russian Orthodox missions were established in the early 19th century, and instead of a total replacement

46

of Aleut cosmology and religion, a Russian orthodoxy emerged with cultural elements that were distinctly Aleut. Most Aleuts were baptized and a few were ordained as priests. Traditional Aleut religion has been described as animistic shamanism with a concept of a creator and spirits who controlled the fate of humanity, but the belief system is largely unknown. In 1824–1834, the priest Ivan Veniaminov lived and carried out religious duties on Unalaska and eastward, all the while concerning himself with Aleut origins, language, and culture. In Notes on the Islands of the Unalaska District, he criticized former explorers’ accounts of the people and culture because of shortterm visits, ignorance of the language, and too much emphasis on economic exploits. Despite its 1840 date, Veniaminov’s Notes remains the most comprehensive ethnographic description of Aleut life. A detailed recording of language and customs was critical to communicate the gospel, but moral obligation to save their souls turned into mutual esteem and affection. Most Aleuts today are Russian orthodoxy and many villages have a church. With the American purchase of Alaska in 1867, the treaty excluded Native peoples and made them wards, not citizens, of the US government, a status that continued through statehood in 1959 until the passage of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) in 1971. Hunting for furs continued under US rule until sea otters were almost extinct and the government banned the practice. Hunting for fur seals was eventually limited to the Pribilof Islands and controlled by the government, which is now a subsistence hunt. Mission schools established by various churches were replaced by federal schools in several communities, although older children had to board away from home. Medical care was sparse and the mortality rate remained high. In 1942, the threat of the Japanese landing in the Aleutians prompted a forced evacuation of all Aleut villages west of Unimak Island (save for those of Attu Island, who were taken to a prison camp in Japan). Hundreds of men, women, and children were taken to southeast Alaska and housed in abandoned canneries, where many elders and children died from disease or malnutrition. Not everyone returned to their villages after the war, and those who did found that the American servicemen, not the Japanese, had ravaged their homes, burned villages (supposedly to prevent Japanese use), stolen personal items, and riddled, homes and churches with bullet holes using them as target practice. Several villages were no longer habitable and were permanently abandoned. Reparations for damaged or stolen personal property, church property, loss of lands, and human life were finally made in 1988 by the US government after

ALEUT many years of personal testimony and petitioning Washington DC. Their success in this process is due in large part to the creation of pan-Aleutian organizations. The Aleut League was formed in 1967 to coordinate individual community groups and secure funding for education, health, and housing programs. Members of the Aleut League were instrumental in the passage of ANCSA in 1971. This act passed title of land to Natives and created regional Native for-profit corporations, of which the Aleut Corporation is one. The Aleut League and the Aleutian Planning Commission merged in 1976 to form the Aleutian/Pribilof Islands Association, the nonprofit companion to the Aleut Corporation. Each village also has a village corporation that manages their lands, and a tribal council, which provides social, educational, and employment services to the village and acts as an advocate on behalf of their tribal members. After World War II, the United States continued to assume control over the western half of the Aleutians for military purposes, and the Atomic Energy Commission used the island of Amchitka for underground nuclear testing. The long-term effects of these tests on the environment, ocean, wildlife, and health of Aleuts continue to be investigated. The Aleut have maintained a lifestyle and culture based almost entirely on marine resources since their arrival to the region. The modern Aleut economy is based on subsistence harvesting of most local species, commercial fishing, wage employment in local services, the Permanent Fund, and state and federal aid, but most are commercial fishermen. Eastern Aleutian villages (Sand Point, King Cove, Nelson Lagoon, False Pass, Akutan) are predominantly commercial fishing villages, including the large port at Dutch Harbor and Unalaska. The seafood industry has seen cycles of abundance and decline in salmon, crab, codfish, walleye pollock, shrimp, herring, and halibut. Central Aleutian villages of Atka and Nikolski also share in commercial fishing in smaller percentages, largely supported through community development programs of which the smaller of the eastern villages and Pribilof villages are also a part. Aleuts of St Paul and St George, the Pribilof Islands villages, annually harvest fur seals for subsistence and fish commercially. In the Commander Islands where poverty is widespread, Aleuts have been working to develop a commercial economy based on its natural resources with limited success. The traditional Aleut language is derived from the Eskimo-Aleut language stock, and is thought to have been distinct by at least 3000 years ago (M. Krauss, 1980, Alaska Native Languages: Past, Present and Future, Alaska Native Language Center, Fairbanks).

At contact, there were at least a dozen dialects throughout Aleut territory, often coinciding with island groups and village clusters. Pan’kov, who was an Aleut chief of Tigal’da Island, and Veniaminov recorded the Aleut language in the Cyrillic alphabet. Waldemar Jochelson recorded spoken word and song on phonographic cylinders in the early 20th century and Aleuts helped him translate it into Russian. Knut Bergsland detailed Aleut grammar, dialects, created a dictionary, and compiled a book of Aleut personal names taken from Joseph Billings’s expedition and other sources that were replaced by Christian names. Today there are only about 300 speakers spread throughout villages and in Anchorage, and these Aleuts take pride in being literate in their own language. Language programs are being revived in several village schools. The term Aleut is not their original self-designation. It has been argued to be from the Koryak and Chukchi languages, and that Russians and their eastern Siberian crew gave it to Aleutian inhabitants, since Aliat in Chukchi means “island.” Others believe that it came from the village of Alut on the coast of Kamchatka, whose residents were also whale hunters. Still others argue that it originally was the ethnonym of the inhabitants of the Near Islands, the westernmost in the Aleutian chain, distinct from other Aleuts culturally and linguistically. In the native language, there are multiple names for different groups. For example, Atkans called themselves Unangas, and called the eastern groups Qayakuris and the western groups na Mirus. Local groupings and inhabitants of different islands are known to have also used other names for themselves. The self-designation Unangan originally applied to the eastern Aleuts only, meaning “coastal people,” according to some. In addition to Aleut being the most widely used name for all Aleutian inhabitants, it had also been the self-designation of the Pacific Eskimos of Kodiak Island and Prince William Sound who, since 1982, call themselves (and their Yupik language) Alutiiq. Aleut villages are ethnically diverse. Major fish processing plants are located in several of the communities and claim an international seasonal work force, primarily Filipinos and Mexicans. Aleuts claim a strong Russian heritage, but perhaps less known is their claim of a Scandinavian heritage since numerous Scandinavian fishermen arrived after World War I for the cod fishery and introduced their own techniques of boat building and commercial fishing. Aleut society and culture has been continuously shaped by a history of foreign visitors, indigenous innovation, introduced lifeways and technology, a dynamic environment, and governmental policies over millennia. KATHERINE REEDY-MASCHNER

47

ALEUT CORPORATION See also Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA); Alaska Peninsula; Aleut Corporation; Aleutian Islands; Aleutian/Pribilof Islands Association; Aleutian Range; Aleut International Association; Alutiit; Archbishop Innocent (Ivan Veniaminov); Eskimo-Aleut Languages Further Reading Bergsland, Knut & Moses Dirks (editors), Unangam Ungiikangin kayux Tunusangin; Unangam Uniikangis ama Tunuzangis; Aleut Tales and Narratives, collected 1909–1910 by Waldemar Jochelson, Fairbanks: Alaska Native Language Center, 1990 Black, Lydia, Sarah McGowan, Jerry Jacka, Natalia Taksami & Miranda Wright, The History and Ethnohistory of the Aleutians East Borough, Fairbanks: University of Alaska Press, 1999 Jones, Dorothy, Aleuts in Transition: A Comparison of Two Villages, Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1976 Kohloff, Dean, When the Wind was a River: Aleut Evacuation in World War II, Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1995 Lantis, Margaret, Aleut. In Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 5, Arctic, edited by D. Damas, Washington, District of Columbia: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1984 Laughlin, William S., Aleuts: Survivors of the Bering Land Bridge, New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1980 Liapunova, R.G., Essays on the Ethnography of the Aleuts (at the end of the eighteenth and the first half of the nineteenth century), translated by J. Shelest, Fairbanks: University of Alaska Press, 1996 MacLeish, Sumner, Seven Words for Wind: Essays and Field Notes from Alaska’s Pribilof Islands, Seattle: Epicenter Press, 1997 Maschner, Herbert & Katherine Reedy-Maschner, “Raid, retreat, defend (repeat): the archaeology and ethnohistory of warfare on the North Pacific.” Journal of Anthropological Archaeology, 17 (1998): 19–51 Townsend, Joan, “Precontact Political Organization and Slavery in Aleut Societies.” In The Development of Political Organization in Native North America, edited by E. Tooker, Washington, District of Columbia: Proceedings of the American Ethnological Society 1979, 1983 Veniaminov, Ioann, Notes on the Islands of the Unalaska District [1840], translated by L. Black & R.H. Goeghega, edited by R.A. Pierce, Alaska History, No. 27, Kinston, Ontario: The Limestone Press, 1984

ALEUT CORPORATION The United States Congress passed the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) of 1971 as a means of compensating Alaska Natives for the loss of lands after a long-standing dispute over ownership. The Settlement Act passed titles of land to Alaska Natives and formed 13 regional for-profit corporations, 12 regional nonprofit social service corporations, and over 200 village corporations. Legislation provided a land settlement totaling 44 million acres and a cash settlement of $962.5 million to be divided among the

48

13 regional corporations. Individuals became shareholders of local village and nonprofit corporations as well as the regional corporation. As a result, village corporations owned the surface rights of the land while regional corporations owned the subsurface rights. The Aleut Corporation was established in 1972 under the terms of ANCSA as the regional corporation for the Aleut homeland in a settlement of $19.5 million. The corporation was entitled to 66,000 acres of surface lands and 1.572 million acres of subsurface estate. Voting shares of stock were issued to 3249 shareholders. The Aleut Corporation oversees 12 local village corporations designed to enhance housing, education, and health of its members. The monetary settlement greatly impacted Aleut economic development and social services because there is little landbased resource potential, while the land settlement meant regaining rights to ancestral lands. Most of the Aleut Corporation’s land entitlements are located between Port Moller on the Alaska Peninsula and the western tip of Atka Island in the central Aleutians, as well as on the Shumagin and Pribilof Islands. The corporation owns the village site on Attu Island and numerous historical and burial sites. No known oil or natural gas is present underneath the islands, and no timber on the tundra, and only limited gold or other mining prospects. Instead, the Aleut Corporation is a multi-industry conglomerate that manages and sells sand, gravel, and rock aggregates as part of its subsurface rights within the region. With the initial capital from the ANCSA settlement, the company made a number of investments in commercial real estate, government operations and maintenance contracts, construction, aggregate sales, and oil- and gas-producing properties in and out of Alaska. Subsidiaries of the corporation include the Aleut Enterprise Corporation, Akima Corporation, Ki LLC, SMI International Corporation, TekStar Incorporated, Alaska Trust Company, and Aleut Real Estate LLC. The goals of the Aleut Corporation include improving the economic and social lives of Aleut people through successful business ventures, providing significant dividends and benefits to its shareholders, and preserving Aleut culture. The corporation also funds The Aleut Foundation (TAF), a private nonprofit foundation formed in 1987 to support the economic and social needs of its enrollees and their descendants by offering scholarship, job referral, and cultural preservation programs that promote socioeconomic stability and cultural awareness. ANCSA launched Aleuts onto the global stage as corporate managers of regional and national companies, but the local impact was less significant because, while individual shareholders may receive a return on

ALEUT INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION the economic success of the Aleut Corporation, Aleut villages remain dominated by family-based fishing economies. A board of directors consisting of a president, vice president, chairperson, vice chairperson, secretary-treasurer, and four directors govern the corporation. The board appoints a CEO (chief executive officer) to conduct corporate business. KATHERINE REEDY-MASCHNER See also Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA); Aleut, Aleutian Islands; Aleutian/Pribilof Islands Association; Aleut International Association Further Reading Berger, Thomas, Village Journey, New York: Hill & Wang, 1985 Case, David S., Alaska Natives and American Laws, Fairbanks: University of Alaska Press, 1984 Flanders, Nicholas, “The Alaska Native Corporation as conglomerate: the problem of profitability.” Human Organization, 48(4) (1989): 299–312 Jones, Dorothy, Aleuts in Transition: A Comparison of Two Villages, Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1976 Lantis, Margaret, “Aleut.” In Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 5, edited by D. Damas, Washington, District of Columbia: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1984 Laughlin, William S., Aleuts: Survivors of the Bering Land Bridge, New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1980

ALEUT INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION The Aleut International Association (AIA) was formed in September 1998 as a nonprofit organization representing the Aleut people of Russia and Alaska. Spearheaded by the Aleut leader Flore Lekanof in the hopes of giving Aleuts a voice in the international Arctic community, the association reunites a people who have been separated for 200 years since the US purchase of Alaska from Russia in 1867. The formation of the AIA was realized through the efforts of two separate organizations: the Aleutian/Pribilof Islands Association in Alaska, a nonprofit consortium of 12 federally recognized tribes living in the Aleutian/Pribilof region, and the Association of Peoples of the North-Aleut District, Kamachatskaya region, a nonprofit organization representing the interests of the Russian Aleuts, most of whom live on the Commander Islands. The Aleut people are indigenous to the lower Alaska Peninsula and Aleutian Islands of Alaska, which has been occupied by their ancestors for at least 8000 years. During the 1800s, Russian fur traders forcefully relocated many Aleuts to islands that had previously been uninhabited, most notably the Pribilof

Islands and Russia’s Commander Islands, to harvest sea mammals for Russian fur traders. Aleuts of the Commander Islands (Bering and Mednyi islands) were subsequently separated from their relatives and homeland with the purchase of Alaska by the United States. The Aleut District of the Kamachatskaya region was established in 1932, and in 1969 the Aleuts of the two Commander Islands were consolidated by the Soviet government to live in the village of Nikolskoye, Bering Island. Aleuts still live there today and face severe economic and social problems, but have no representation in the regional legislature. Those American Aleuts who speak the western dialect of their Native language are still able to communicate with Russian Aleuts 200 years later. A sharing of traditional Aleut songs and dances presumed lost has likewise flowed across the border from Russia. The purpose of the AIA is to protect the natural resources and the environment of the region surrounding the traditional and modern Aleut homelands, which today are threatened by the influence of the changing Russian and American economies, pollution, military activity, climate change, and the commercial fishing fleets of several nations. The organization also aims to increase the frequency of contact between Russian Aleuts and American Aleuts, reunite relatives from both countries, and provide economic, medical, educational, and technological support where needed. The AIA is the result of a decade of efforts by Aleut tribal leaders in both countries. Since Aleut people occupy some of the most remote islands in the Northern Hemisphere, communication and organizational hurdles were overcome to bring all Aleuts together and form the AIA. Soon after its creation, AIA became a permanent participant in the Arctic Council, an international environmental council of officials representing eight Arctic nations and four international indigenous peoples. Membership in the Arctic Council provides the AIA with an international forum to address the health of the Bering Sea ecosystem and threats to the Aleut homelands. Today AIA is working to secure funds for infrastructure, travel throughout the vast Aleutian region, travel for participation in Arctic Council meetings, and to expand the organization. The association has recently written grants to study overfishing, contaminants in the Bering Sea, contaminants in subsistence foods, and health risks in Aleut communities in Russia and Alaska. Research efforts combine scientific data with Aleut traditional knowledge to address economic, social, and health risks to Russian and Alaskan villages, with the ultimate goal of preserving the Aleut way of life for future generations.

49

ALEUTIAN ISLANDS The AIA maintains a small office in Anchorage, Alaska, and one in Petropavlovsk, Kamchatka. Currently, the organization has a president from St Paul, Alaska, a vice president from Petropavlovsk, Russia, and a secretary/treasurer from Unalaska, Alaska. The organization has a constitution, bylaws, and a five-member board of directors, representing the various tribal groups. KATHERINE REEDY-MASCHNER See also Aleut; Aleutian Islands; Aleutian/Pribilof Islands Association; Arctic Council Further Reading Black, Lydia, Atka: An Ethnohistory of the Western Aleutian Islands, Alaska History, No. 24, edited by R.A. Pierce, Kingston, Ontario: The Limestone Press, 1984 Krivoshapkin, Vladimir, “Who will help the Aleuts of the Commander Islands?.” Arctic Voice, 12 (1996): 21–22 Laughlin, William S., Aleuts: Survivors of the Bering Land Bridge, New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1980 Lebedeva, Janna, “The Aleuts’ culture on the Komandorskie Islands may disappear.” Northern News, 8(55) (1993): 1–3 Liapunova, R.G., Essays on the Ethnography of the Aleuts (at the end of the eighteenth and the first half of the nineteenth century), translated by J. Shelest, Fairbanks: University of Alaska Press, 1996 Young, O.R., The Arctic Council: making a new era. In International Relations, New York: The Twentieth Century Fund, 1996

ALEUTIAN ISLANDS The Aleutians are a chain of over 200 islands that arc from the Alaska Peninsula (163° W) east for 1700 miles across the International Date Line toward the Kamchatka Peninsula (172° E). With an area of 6821 square miles, the chain is composed of volcanic islands, called the Aleutian Ridge, that have been active for at least 55 million years. With over 80 major volcanic vents resulting from the tectonic collision of the southern Pacific and the North American plates, just south of the ridge is the deep Aleutian Trench. All along the chain, but especially the eastern end, earthquakes are frequent and sometimes quite severe—the Aleutians experienced two of the world’s top ten earthquakes between 1904 and 1997. The Aleutian chain can be segmented into five major links from west to east: the Near Islands in the west, the Rat Islands, the Delarof and Andreanof Islands, the Islands of the Four Mountains, and the Fox Islands in the east. Geologically, while the southern front of the chain is eroding into the Aleutian Trench, volcanoes are forming on the northern front, as evidenced by Bogoslov Island. In addition, the far western Near Islands are slowly heading for collision with the Kamchatka Peninsula. This geologic structure of

50

the Aleutian Islands has contributed to the formation of ocean currents of the North Pacific and Bering Sea, the island chain acting as a sieve or porous boundary between these bodies of water, with 14 shallow Aleutian passes. The climate is dominated by the barometric pressure phenomenon known as the Aleutian Low, a cyclonic center caused by the temperature differences between the cooler land and the warmer waters from the Alaska Current and North Pacific Drift. The Aleutian Low is characterized by the colliding frontal zones of warm Pacific air, contrasted with the cold, dense Arctic air. Thus, while in summer the islands are wrapped in seemingly endless fog, in winter they are wracked by continual storms. In the summer months the Aleutian Low is weak, but the sky is overcast 95% of the days, and fog forms 25–40% from June to August. Because land cools relatively faster than water, cold and dense air builds up along the windward slopes of the mountains, eventually falling rapidly on the leeward side due to gravity. These severe winds are called “williwaws,” and they can be frequent; wind speeds of 44 m s−1 are common. Wind can also create considerable snowdrifts, even though the wet and heavy snow usually accumulates less than a foot at one time during winter. However, because of the warm currents and the bow of the arc to a latitude nearly equivalent to the Canada-United States border, the Aleutians have a mild annual temperature. In summer, the average temperature is 65°F, while in winter it is barely below freezing. This relatively mild climate, along with a large amount of precipitation, encourages the success of a variety of flora and fauna. The Bering Sea as a whole, due to its extensive winter ice coverage and large continental shelf, is the year-round home of an extremely productive ecosystem, with some of the largest marine mammal populations in the world. The Bering Sea also contains some of the most productive fisheries, such as groundfish, salmon, and crab; out of approximately 450 species of fish and invertebrates, as many as 25 species are harvestable. The Aleutians are home to tremendous populations of birds as well, for the lack of safe ship harbors, and high, inaccessible cliffs are ideal habitat. Fulmars, petrels, cormorants, gulls, kittiwakes, murres, auklets, and puffins congregate in the millions. Biologists have identified approximately 200 species that nest in, migrate through, or stray into the region. Unimak Island, in the east, also has a bear population; red foxes are also indigenous to the Fox Islands. The Aleutians do not naturally include trees, but instead tall grasses, wild rye, and alpine meadows with ferns, salmonberries, and wildflowers such as fireweed, lupine, saxifrage, and iris.

ALEUTIAN ISLANDS

Early Human-Environment Relationships Humans migrating across the Bering Strait have occupied the Aleutian Islands for over 8000 years. The first stage of occupation by the Aleuts began in 6000 BP. Much debate exists on whether the Aleut civilization developed in relative isolation, or in contact with communities from the larger Bering Sea region. The Aleuts, however, became a sophisticated marine civilization, creating the bidarka, a kayak-like vessel suited to long hunting trips. The numbers and distribution of these early Aleuts fluctuated in response to volcanic activity, which would periodically alter the local ecology upon which they depended. By the time Russian explorers began colonizing the region in the 18th century, the Aleut population, dispersed throughout the chain, reached approximately 16,000, with principal settlements on islands that included Umnak, Unalaska, Atka, and Attu in the far west.

The Russian Period The Second Kamchatka Expedition, led by Vitus Bering in 1741, established a Russian claim of the Aleutian Islands and mainland Alaska, and precipitated an expansive commercial operation. In 1750, the Russians introduced Arctic foxes from the Commander Islands to numerous islands without an indigenous fox population. This farming industry spread rapidly to include the Pribilof Islands and the Alaska Peninsula. Traders also exploited the sea otter; by 1762, the harvesting operation reached Kodiak Island. During these years of early expansion, Russians traded extensively with Aleuts and many Russian crews intermarried with Aleut women; however, trade relations were characterized by an increasing frequency of violence. Russians established a permanent trading post in Unalaska in approximately 1774, with male Aleuts often pressed into service, depriving their villages of hunters to fulfill subsistence needs. Russian harvesting operations by then expanded beyond the sea otter and included the fur seal, walrus ivory, land otters, beavers, wolves, and especially foxes. British explorer James Cook landed at Unalaska on his way north in June of 1778 and again on his way south in his failed attempt to discover the North West Passage. Other imperial powers learned of the Russian expansion and profit through Cook’s exploits, and the Aleutian Islands would shortly enter the world economy and the gaze of imperial science, with Unalaska as a crucial port of trade. The Russians mapped the chain by 1791 under the command of Captain Sarychev. By 1799, the Russian-American Company obtained a charter and a monopoly on Alaskan resources.

Managed by Aleksandr Baranov, company officials relocated many Aleuts for service in the fur harvest, including the Pribilof Islands. Slave labor ended in 1818, and Aleuts were considered to be Russian subjects, eventually converting to the Russian Orthodox Church. Aleut men helped Russians create more charts of the region, and from 1824 to 1828 the RussianAmerican Company instituted conservation efforts for the fur seals and sea otters, due to their depletion. By the early 1830s, fox farming had reached a peak. The exploding fox population feasted on ground-nesting birds’ eggs, and many avian species would become endangered, such as the Aleutian Canada goose.

Early Years as Territory of the United States Russian America was sold to the United States in 1867 due partly to Russia’s setback in the Crimean War. Before the congressional appropriations debate, the United States sent a Coast Survey party to survey the region; USCS Assistant George Davidson identified the Aleutian Islands as an agricultural frontier, citing its luxuriant foliage and its mild winter climate. Davidson’s map functioned as an important visual aid in the ensuing congressional debate; with it, Senator Charles Sumner illustrated the geopolitical importance of Alaska, as well as the position of the Aleutians along the Great Circle Route toward Asian markets. Another Coast Survey party, led by William Healey Dall, created charts of the Aleutians 1872–1874, although he also gave the first major reports about the difficulties of the Aleutian climate. Other scientists followed, such as the vulcanologist Thomas Jaggar, although he would later leave this field for the more hospitable climate of Hawaii. When the fur seal population in the Bering Sea reached an all-time low, the 1911 Bering Sea Tribunal created an international management plan. By 1913, the Aleutian Islands were recognized as a crucial habitat for marine and avifaunal species, and the government designated much of the chain as a National Wildlife Refuge. While mainland Alaska began extensive development, few economic ventures boomed in the Aleutians. Instead, the most productive work revolved around anthropological and biological research, with researchers such as Vladimir Il’ich Iokhel’son (Waldemar Jochelson in English) recording the Aleut language, Aleš HrdliJ ka researching Aleut physical anthropology, and Eric Húlten and Olaus Murie completing biological surveys.

World War II in the Aleutians Extensive modern geological surveys were not completed until the US Department of Defense funded

51

ALEUTIAN ISLANDS the US Geological Survey specifically for the project in 1946. For by the beginning of World War II, the Aleutian Islands were conceived as strategic location for the US military. In fact, by the war’s end, the islands would have hosted over 500,000 troops; military presence began in 1940 as part of the defense of Alaska. The Aleutians represented a vulnerable entry into North American soil by both the Japanese and the Soviets, and the military constructed bases at Dutch Harbor, Unalaska, concurrently with the bases in Anchorage and Fairbanks. By the end of the war, major military activity took place (from east to west) on Amaknak, Unalaska, Umnak, Atka, Great Sitkin, Adak, Tanaga, Amchitka, Kiska, Shemya, and Attu. Nevertheless, the geography of the Aleutian Islands was troublesome for the military; the weather postponed invasions and caused more casualties than actual combat. Windstorms could tear up tents and cause pilots extreme difficulty. The Japanese bombed both Dutch Harbor and Adak, and occupied Attu and Kiska; the United States engaged in battle with the Japanese at Attu to take back the island. Kiska was abandoned, but in a thick fog US soldiers did not realize that the men they were shooting at were their own. Meanwhile, Aleut communities from Attu had been captured by the Japanese, while the US government relocated Unalaska Aleuts to inadequate shelters outside Juneau. High death rates resulting from disease and abominable living conditions decimated the older population, and the Aleuts suffered a great loss of cultural knowledge. Those who survived displacement from their homes, by both Japanese capture and US military relocation, returned to the Aleutians to discover their utter destitution due to pilfering and disrepair. Natives of Attu were returned to Alaska, but the US government relocated them to eastern Aleutian settlements. Military presence continued on numerous islands. Shemya Air Force base, for example, closed in 1999.

From the Cold War to the Modern Era While during World War II the Aleutians were considered a bridge to Japan, during the Cold War the Aleutians were instead perceived as a bridge to Russia or, more frequently, a dead end that allowed the military to conduct nuclear testing on Amchitka Island. The US Atomic Energy Commission needed a place more isolated than either the Nevada Test Site or Point Hope, Alaska (where the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) attempted to carry out Project Chariot), to conduct some of the largest underground nuclear tests in US history. Beginning in 1967, the AEC instituted an extensive bioenvironmental program on Amchitka, and within a few years had completed Project Milrow,

52

Project Long Shot, and Project Cannikin. The environmental group Greenpeace was founded to protest these tests and today continues to advocate the health of the Bering Sea ecosystem. In fact, the present-day livelihoods of residents, both Aleut and nonnative, continue to rely on the resources of the sea. Over 5000 people live in the islands year-round, supported primarily by walleye pollock, cod, and halibut commercial fisheries, all based in Dutch Harbor. A burgeoning tourist industry exists, based on World War II history, Aleut cultural heritage, and the unique birding opportunities. In fact, through the 1980s, the US Fish and Wildlife Service exterminated most of the nonindigenous foxes, and endangered avian species such as the Aleutian Canada goose have made a tremendous comeback. The chain was included in the Alaska Maritime Wildlife Refuge in 1980, and is today an International Biosphere Reserve. ANNETTE WATSON See also Alaska Peninsula; Aleut; Aleutian Range; Kamchatka Peninsula; Militarization of the Arctic in Russia; Militarization of the Arctic in the West; Russian American Company; Second Kamchatka Expedition Further Reading Black, Lydia et al., The History and Ethnohistory of the Aleutians East Borough, Kingston, Ontario, and Fairbanks, Alaska: The Limestone Press, 1999 Corbett, Debra et al., “The Western Aleutians: cultural isolation and environmental change.” Human Ecology, 25(3) (1997): 450–480 Garfield, Brian, The Thousand Mile War: World War II in Alaska and the Aleutians, Fairbanks: University of Alaska Press, 1995 Haycox, Steven & Mary Childers Mangusso (editors), An Alaska Anthology: Interpreting the Past, Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1996 Loughlin, Thomas & Kiyotaka Ohtani (editors), The Dynamics of the Bering Sea, Fairbanks: University of Alaska Sea Grant, 1999 Madden, Ryan, “The forgotten people: the relocation and internment of Aleuts during World War II.” American Indian Culture and Research Journal, 16(4) (1992): 55–76 Merritt, M.L. & Glen Fuller (editors), The Environment of Amchitka Island, Alaska, Oak Ridge, Tennessee: Technical Information Center, Energy Research and Development Administration, 1977 Plafker, George & Henry Berg (editors), The Geology of Alaska, Volume G-1, The Geology of North America, Boulder: Geological Society of America, 1994 Rennick, Penny (editor), “The Aleutian Islands.” Alaska Geographic, 22(2) (1995) Sumner, Charles, “Speech of the Hon. Charles Sumner, of Massachusetts on the Cession of Russian America to the United States,” Washington: Congressional Globe Office, 1867

ALEUTIAN TRADITION

ALEUTIAN RANGE The Aleutian Range is in southwestern Alaska, extending from about 54° N to 61° N and 153° W to 165° W. The portion of the range north of Iliamna Lake (59° N) is also called the Alaska-Aleutian Range. The Aleutian Islands are considered a continuation of the Aleutian Range, but the Aleutian Range proper extends only as far west as Unimak Island according to the Dictionary of Alaska Place Names. The geology consists of rounded east-trending ridges of Mesozoic sedimentary rocks, locally intruded by granitic rocks and surmounted by rugged volcanoes. The volcanoes date from the late Tertiary to the recent and many have calderas. The region was heavily glaciated during the Pleistocene epoch. The highest peaks are Redoubt Volcano (3108 m) and Iliamna Volcano (3053 m) in the far north, Shishaldin Volcano (2857 m) on Unimak Island, and Pavlov Volcano (2515 m) on the Alaska Peninsula. Most of the region is alpine tundra heath meadows and barrens. Willow and alder occur near sea level. Katmai National Park and Preserve is located within the Aleutian Range. The 1600 km2 park includes the barren “moonscape” of the Valley of Ten Thousand Smokes and Mt Katmai volcano. The eruption of Mt Katmai in June 1912 was the largest in North America during the 20th century. Many of the other volcanoes are active. Pavlov Volcano is the most active in Alaska and has erupted 40 times since 1790. Mt Redoubt erupted several times in the 20th century. An eruption of Redoubt from December 1989 through April 1990 with 23 explosive events caused US$160 million in economic damages, making it the second costliest volcanic eruption in US history. The maritime climate has cool, rainy summers and mild, stormy winters. A more continental regime with colder winters, warmer summers, and less rain prevails on the northwest side of the Aleutian Range. Heavy snow falls above 300 m elevation. The average January temperature is −2°C at Cold Bay and −8°C at King Salmon. Both communities are near sea level but King Salmon is farther north and is west of the Aleutian Range. July temperatures average 10°C at Cold Bay and 12°C at King Salmon. The average precipitation is 910 mm at Cold Bay and 480 mm at King Salmon. Amounts are much greater at higher elevations. Native peoples have occupied the coastal region of the Aleutian Range for at least 4500 years. About onehalf of the population is Alaska Native. Aleuts live in the west and Alutiiq Eskimo live in the eastern section. The few small communities are along the coasts. Economic activities include government employment, transportation, commercial fishing, subsistence resource use, and recreational hunting and fishing.

Among the larger communities are King Salmon with 442 people (2000 US Census) and Port Heiden, a traditional Aleut community of 119 people (2001, Alaska Department of Community and Economic Development). THOMAS W. SCHMIDLIN See also Aleutian Islands Further Reading Alaska Volcano Observatory website: www.avo.alaska.edu Alaska Department of Community and Economic Development website: www.dced.state.ak.us Hunt, William, Alaska, A Bicentennial History, New York: W.W. Norton, 1976 Naske, Claus & Herman Slotnik, Alaska, A History of the 49th State, Grand Rapids: William Eerdmans Publishing, 1979 Orth, Donald, Dictionary of Alaska Place Names, US Geological Survey Professional Paper 567, Washington: Government Printing Office, 1967 Pierce, Richard, Katherine Arndt & Sarah McGowan (editors), The History and Ethnohistory of the Aleutians East Borough, Fairbanks: Limestone Press, 1999 Simmerman, Nancy Lange, Alaska’s Parklands, The Complete Guide, Seattle: The Mountaineers, 1991

ALEUTIAN TRADITION Approximately 5000 years ago, a regional shift to village life occurred in the Aleutian archipelago. Villages existed before that time, as data from the well-documented village of Anangula 8500 years ago would indicate, but such settlements were small, localized, and perhaps unique. However, sometime between 5500 and 4500 years ago a massive reorganization of ancient Aleut society appears to have transpired. Islands that were previously unoccupied were now inhabited, the westward expansion of peoples was nearly completed to the furthest of the Near Islands, and the bays and lagoons of the western Alaska Peninsula, and eastern Aleutian Islands showed signs of vibrant community life. A number of events, including climate change, population growth, an influx of new peoples, or a shift in subsistence strategies, might have caused this settlement reorganization. Archaeological data from before this time are so rare and ephemeral in most of the region that it might be easy to argue for an influx of peoples, but no evidence exists to support this contention at present and modern research has not addressed this question. Whatever the conditions that led to this societal shift, from Port Moller on the Alaska Peninsula in the east to the Near Islands in the far west, a suite of characteristics such as semisubterranean houses with roof entrances, oil lamps, sea mammal hunting and open water fishing, the use of red ochre and other pigments, long-distance travel, permanent villages, and

53

ALEUTIAN TRADITION inter-island trade all coalesced into a cultural pattern. This combination of traits is what Allen McCartney first termed the Aleutian Tradition (McCartney, 1984). The Aleutian Tradition is generally seen as the period when most of the traits that were described by early explorers and scholars came to be part of the indigenous pattern. Archaeologically, these artifacts include projectiles, endblades, scrapers, hafted knives and other tools that are bifacially worked, a huge variety of sea mammal hunting harpoons, fishing spears and hooks, net sinkers, line weights, polished bit adzes and, at the end of the tradition, bone spoons and slate ulus. On the western Alaska Peninsula, pottery is found at a number of sites dating to the last 2000 years, and in the greater eastern Aleutian region, toggling harpoons more reminiscent of styles further north are found. One of the most spectacular aspects of the Aleutian Tradition is the ancient Aleut skill at mummification of the dead. Many of these mummies were individuals of high status, and when interred in caves they were perfectly preserved for up to 2000 years. This preservation allowed archaeologists to investigate many aspects of the Aleutian Tradition that are not preserved in the ancient village sites. These include baskets, mats, clothing, hats, masks, bags, shields, armor, spears, bows and arrows, kayaks, and many other aspects of perishable material culture. Prior to the 1990s, the Aleutian Tradition was known primarily through research conducted at Port Moller on the Alaska Peninsula, on Umnak and Unalaska islands in the eastern Aleutian region, Amchitka in the Andreanof group, and a scatter of small collections from excavations that occurred over the previous 100 years in the more western Aleutians. Excavations either conducted early in the American period of occupation or by soldiers during World War II also provided enough details that an ancillary western Aleutian variant had been suggested by McCartney (1971). Based on work over the last ten years, the Aleutian Tradition now shows a number of emergent regional variants. These can be roughly divided into the Alaska Peninsula region (including Unimak Island, the Shumagin Islands, Sanak Island, and adjacent islets); the eastern Aleutian Islands dominated by Umnak, Unalaska, and the Akun-Akutan group (Krenitzin Islands); the Central Aleutian Islands, which include Amchitka, Atka, Adak, and adjacent islands (Andreanof and Rat groups); and the western Aleutian Islands area, which includes Buldir and the Near Island group. Recent projects investigating the Aleutian Tradition period have found that while McCartney was correct in that a suite of traits could be found anytime during the last 5000 years and in any part of the Aleutian

54

region, a great amount of variation is today recognizable. Perhaps most remarkable is that this newly recognized variation does not apply to all categories of data and all spatial scales. For example, house form and size generally grow larger through time, but the shape and organization of houses appear to change from east to west, with adjacent areas changing together in some time periods and clearly uncoordinated in others. Another important area of variation is in the degree of political complexity. The western Alaska Peninsula and the eastern Aleutian Islands had much larger villages at all times than farther west, and apparently embraced much more stratified social categories, including slaves. These differences in levels of integration probably reflected the density of food resources, which also resulted in a variable subsistence economy. While the Aleut of the Aleutian Tradition took advantage of almost everything edible in the north Pacific and southern Bering Sea, there have been significant spatial and temporal changes across the region. In the east, where salmon returns were greater, settlement, storage, subsistence, and technology reflected access to salmon. Elsewhere, cod, herring, and other fish were much more important. Sea mammals were central everywhere, although whales, sea lions, fur seals, harbor seals, and ring seals were harvested with varying emphasis in different areas at different times. With violent weather patterns, constant earthquakes, regular volcanic eruptions, tsunami, and other catastrophes, the ancient Aleut thrived on one of the world’s most dynamic landscapes. While the Aleut or Unangan people are one of the least known and least studied northern peoples, their archaeology is becoming one of the better case studies for investigating the relationship between humans and marine landscapes in the far north. HERBERT D. G. MASCHNER See also Alaska Peninsula; Aleut; Aleutian Islands Further Reading Corbett, D.G., C. Lefèvre & D. Siegel-Causey, “The western Aleutians: cultural isolation and environmental change.” Human Ecology, 25(3) (1997): 459–479 Hoffman, Brian W., “Agayadan village: household archaeology on Unimak Island, Alaska.” Journal of Field Archaeology, 26 (1999): 147–162 Johnson, L.L., “Prehistoric settlement patterns and population in the Shumagin Islands.” Anthropological Papers of the University of Alaska, 24(1–2) (1992): 73–88 Jordan, James & H.D.G. Maschner, “Coastal paleogeography and human occupation of the lower Alaska peninsula.” Geoarchaeology: An International Journal, 15(5) (2000): 385–414 Laughlin, W.S., Aleuts: Survivors of the Bering Land Bridge, New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1980

ALEUTIAN/PRIBILOF ISLANDS ASSOCIATION Maschner, H.D.G., “Prologue to the prehistory of the Lower Alaska Peninsula.” Arctic Anthropology, 36(1–2) (1999): 84–102 Maschner, H.D.G. & K.L. Reedy-Maschner, “Raid, retreat, defend (repeat): the archaeology and ethnohistory of warfare on the North Pacific.” Journal of Anthropological Archaeology, 17 (1998) 19–51 McCartney, A.P., “A proposed western Aleutian phase in the Near Islands, Alaska.” Arctic Anthropology, 8(2) (1971): 92–142 ———, A.P., “Prehistoric Human Occupation of the Rat Islands.” In The Environment of Amchika Island, Alaska, edited by M.L. Merritt & R.G. Fuller (TID-26712), Washington: Energy Research and Development Administration, Technical Information Center, 1977, pp. 59–113 ———, A.P., “Prehistory of the Aleutian Region.”In Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 5, Arctic, edited by D. Damas, Washington, District of Columbia: Smithsonian Institution, 1984, pp. 119–135. Okada, H., “Prehistory of the Alaska Peninsula as seen from the Hot Springs Site, Port Moller.” In Alaska Native Culture and History, edited by Y. Kotani & W.B. Workman, Senri Ethnological Studies No. 4, Osaka: National Museum of Ethnology, 1980, pp. 103–112 Yesner, D.R., “Archaeological Applications of Optimal Foraging Theory: Harvest Strategies of Aleut HunterGatherers.” In Hunter-Gatherer Foraging Strategies, edited by B. Winterhalder & E.A. Smith , Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1981, pp. 148–170

ALEUTIAN/PRIBILOF ISLANDS ASSOCIATION The Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of 1971 created the regional for-profit Aleut Corporation and village corporations in the 12 villages of the Alaska Peninsula, Aleutian Islands, and Pribilof Islands. The Act also sparked the passage of federal laws that transferred authority for many social services to regional and village nonprofit corporations and their shareholders. The Aleutian/Pribilof Islands Association (A/PIA) was formed as the regional Native nonprofit corporation serving Natives who are shareholders of the Aleut Corporation, direct descendants of a shareholder, or members of a federally recognized tribe residing within the Aleutian/Pribilof Islands region. The A/PIA formed in 1976 with the merger of the Aleut League, created in 1967 as a parent organization for individual community associations seeking funds for health and welfare projects, and the Aleutian Planning Commission. The Association was chartered in 1986 as a nonprofit corporation under the executive directorship of Aleut leader Patrick Pletnikoff. Dimitri Philemonof is the current president and chief executive officer of the A/PIA. A 13-member board of directors governs the Association. Each board member represents one of the 13 constituent tribal governments; each community’s tribal organization appoints

a board member who serves a three-year term. The board establishes overall policy and direction for the Association and appoints the president to administer the Association. The purpose of the Association is to promote the self-sufficiency and independence of the Aleut, or Unangan in their own language. The Association acts as political advocate, offers job training, and provides economic enhancement programs at the community and individual levels. IT assists in maintaining the health and safety of each Aleut village, and promotes, strengthens, and preserves the Aleut cultural heritage. A/PIA contracts with federal, state, and local governments and secures private funding to provide a broad range of health, educational, social, psychological, employment and vocational training, and public safety services throughout the region. It comprises five departments: administration, community services, cultural heritage, health, and human services. The administrative department is governed by the board of directors and the president. They handle accounting, human services, and strive to enhance the Association’s programs and finances. Administration supports local self-governance and provides tribal court training and assistance in handling cases for villages in its region. The Association’s cultural heritage department works to preserve language and culture. The department develops Aleut language curricula, oral history programs, facilitates family history research, and imports training in historic preservation to maintain historical sites that will be conveyed to the Aleut Corporation under section 14(h)(1) of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act. The cultural heritage department sponsors traveling exhibitions, spirit and culture camps that bring together Aleuts of all ages to share traditional skills, and art and dance programs. The department has been instrumental in a number of repatriation cases of Aleut burials and artifacts. This department also manages the Aleut Resource Library and Archive. The community services department offers public safety services, improvements to infrastructure, transportation, environmental protection, natural resources management, housing improvements, and water and sanitation, among many, to Aleutian communities. It facilitates Aleut involvement in the cleanup of military sites throughout the chain, especially on Amchitka Island, the site of three underground nuclear tests in the late 1960s and early 1970s. The Association’s community services also pursue research opportunities to understand environmental health changes occurring in the delicate Bering Sea ecosystem, and they sponsor the Traditional Foods Protection program. Other community service programs include the

55

ALOOTOOK IPELLIE Village Public Safety Officers (VPSOs), who double as first responders in any emergency to communities in need and train VPSOs and social workers in child sexual abuse prevention and support of victims. The health department imparts services on health and nutrition, emergency medicine, substance abuse counseling and prevention, and behavioral health as well as specific health services for children, pregnant women, diabetics, and elders. The department operates and staffs clinics in a number of villages, and initiated the delivery of telemedicine to many communities where village providers could consult with Anchorage providers. The human services department within the Association provides aid to individuals based on need. Programs include education and training, financial aid, childcare, general assistance, and social services. The A/PIA was instrumental in the creation of the Aleut International Association (AIA). While the AIA is focused on broad natural resource and health concerns of all Aleut peoples in the United States and Russia and is able to maneuver on the international stage as a permanent participant in the Arctic Council, the A/PIA is concentrated in the United States. The organizations are separate, although some overlap exists in staff and office space. KATHERINE REEDY-MASCHNER See also Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA); Aleut; Aleut Corporation; Aleut International Association; Arctic Council Further Reading Anders, G. & K. Anders, “Incompatible Goals in Unconventional Organizations: The Politics of Alaska Native Corporations.” In Developing America’s Northern Frontier, edited by T. Lane, Lanham: University Press of America, 1987 Berger, Thomas, Village Journey, New York: Hill & Wang, 1985 Case, David S., Alaska Natives and American Laws, Fairbanks: University of Alaska Press, 1984 Flanders, Nicholas, “The Alaska Native Corporation as conglomerate: the problem of profitability.” Human Organization, 48(4) (1989): 299–312 Korsmo, Fae L., “The Alaska Natives.” Polar Peoples: SelfDetermination and Development, edited by Minority Rights Group, 1994, pp. 81–104 Marenin, Otwin & Gary Copus, “Policing rural Alaska: The Village Public Safety Officer (VPSO) Program.” American Journal of Police, 10(4) (1991): 1–26

ALOOTOOK IPELLIE Alootook Ipellie is the most widely published Inuk author in English, who has written numerous essays, poems, and short stories. His literary and visual works

56

are reflections of Inuit life at a time of social and cultural upheaval in Canada’s Arctic during the late 20th century. A leading contributor to Inuit culture over the past three decades, Ipellie was born in a hunting camp on Baffin Island in 1951. He lived through a time when the traditional nomadic lifestyle of his ancestors was being replaced by life in southern-style settlements. Although he and his family continued with seasonal forays onto the land for game, their principal residence was in the settlement of Iqaluit, the largest community (and since April 2001, the capital) in what is now Nunavut, Canada. Ipellie was the grandson of noted Inuk carver Ennutsiak, who shared many traditional stories with the young artist during fishing trips. The southern educational system demanded that young people who completed primary school in the North move to larger (usually southern) communities for their secondary schooling. Thus, Ipellie’s early formal education in Iqaluit was succeeded by schooling at Ottawa’s High School of Commerce, where he first developed his interest in drawing. Although he returned to Iqaluit briefly to serve as an announcerproducer for CBC North, Ottawa became his creative base. In the early 1970s, the newly formed, Ottawa-based Inuit Tapirisat Canada (presently Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami or ITK) published an English and Inuktitut newsletter that featured some of Ipellie’s poems and one of his drawings. Late in 1973, he was hired as a reporter-journalist for the Inuit Tapirisat Canada’s Inuit Monthly magazine, whose readers were primarily Inuit or those with an interest in the North. Ipellie had the opportunity to execute an ink drawing cover for Inuit Monthly, and in 1974 began his ongoing, satirical “Ice Box” cartoon strip, which ran until 1982. Although Ipellie witnessed the work of southern cartoonists, his characters were based upon the contemporary Inuit life in the changing Arctic he knew intimately. Later, from 1993 to 1997, he authored another comic strip featuring the characters “Nuna and Vut” that appeared in Iqaluit’s newspaper, Nunatsiaq News, which served the eastern Canadian Arctic’s largest community. Early poems such as “Hot to Warm and Cool to Cold” (North, 1971) and “A Picture” (Tukisivisksat, 1973) and later works such as “A Summer Day” and “The Water Moved an Instant Before” (Inuit Today, 1981) were minimalist responses to nature. “The Dancing Sun” (Inuit Monthly, 1974) and “Art and Poetry” (North, 1975) reflected elements of Inuit tradition. “We are Cold” (Inuit Today, 1978), “How Noisy They Seem” (Paper Stays Put, 1980), and “Walking Both Sides of an Invisible Border” (An Anthology of Canadian Native Literature in English,

ALPHA RIDGE 1992, 1998) reflected social problems in a new Arctic influenced by the values of the South. Concurrently, Ipellie’s poetry grew darker, and his nonfiction became more strident if not didactic in dealing with contemporary problems in the North. As an essayist and editor at Inuit Today from 1979 to 1982, Ipellie raised difficult, contemporary social issues. From 1996 to 1997, he authored a regular column “Ipellie’s Shadow” in the Nunatsiaq News in which he voiced a variety of opinions on daily life. Among non-Inuit, Ipellie has become best known as a writer of short fiction. His stories have appeared in northern publications such as Inuit Today and Inukshuk and also in southern periodicals such as The Beaver and anthologies such as Paper Stays Put (1980), Northern Voices: Inuit Writing in English (1988, 1997), and An Anthology of Canadian Native Literature in English (1992, 1998). He also served as coordinator of the Baffin Writers’ Project (1989–1992) and editor of Kivioq: Inuit Fiction Magazine (1990, 1992), thus lending his knowledge and experience to new writers in the North. Perhaps his most notable short fiction is among the 20 stories contained in Arctic Dreams and Nightmares (1992), which marked Ipellie as the first Canadian Inuk to produce an entire collection of short stories in English. This collection emerged as the most controversial thus far, in that he employed magical plot situations to combine traditional Inuit myths and legends with contemporary people and events from the South. With stories such as “When God Sings the Blues,” “After Brigitte Bardot,” and “Summit With Sedna,” Ipellie imaginatively created a fictional world inhabited by such familiar Inuit beings as the Sea Goddess Sedna, shamans, and walruses. While some of the images within Arctic Dreams and Nightmares have been described as disturbing, especially for Inuit traditionalists, the text has been acclaimed by several southern Canadian critics. Ipellie’s drawings and cartoons have been exhibited at shows in Ottawa (1989, 1993) and Saskatoon (1997) in Canada, as well as in Norway (1992), Greenland (1983, 1985, 1988), and in 2001 at St Lawrence University in Canton, New York, in the United States.

Biography Alootook Ipellie was born in a hunting camp on Baffin Island, in what is today Nunavut Territory in Canada’s Arctic, on August 11, 1951 to Napachie (Napachee) and Joanassie (Joanasie). His early formal education in Iqaluit was followed by high school in Yellowknife and later Ottawa. Ipellie worked in radio at CBC North in 1973, but eventually settled in Ottawa where he worked as an English-Inuktitut translator, as a reporter-journalist, and drew cartoons for Inuit

Monthly (later renamed Inuit Today) magazine. He served as its editor from 1979 to 1982. In the 1970s, he produced his satirical ink cartoon strips “Ice Box” and “Nuna and Vut.” MICHAEL P. J. KENNEDY See also Art and Artists (Indigenous); Literature, North American; Mythology of the Inuit; Sedna: The Sea Goddess Further Reading Gedalof, Robin, “Alootook Ipellie finds his voice in his work.” Arts and Culture of the North, 4 (1980): 283–285 ——— (editor), Paper Stays Put, Edmonton: Hurtig, 1980 Ipellie, Alootook, “Telling Tales: A Nomad Learns to Write and Draw.” In Echoing Silence: Essays on Arctic Narrative, edited by John Moss, Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press, 1996 Kennedy, Michael P.J., “Southern exposure: belated recognition of a significant Inuk writer-artist.” Canadian Journal of Native Studies, 15(2) (1995): 347–361 ———, “Alootook Ipellie: the voice of an Inuk artist.” In Studies in Canadian Literature, 21(2) (1996): 155–164 “Moses, Daniel David & Terry Goldie (editors), An Anthology of Canadian Native Literature in English (2nd edition), New York: Oxford University Press, 1998 Petrone, Penny (editor), Northern Voices: Inuit Writing in English, Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1988

ALPHA RIDGE The submarine Alpha Ridge is situated in the central Arctic Ocean, separating the Canada and Makarov basins, and terminating at Ellesmere Island (see the bathymetric map in Arctic Ocean). Discovery of the ridge was a consequence of intensive research of the Arctic Basin, first of all by the USSR from the late 1940s from drifting ice stations and air expeditions following discovery of the Lomonosov Ridge in 1951. Subsequent investigations established that other than Lomonosov Ridge there are two transoceanic ridges: the mid-oceanic Gakkel Ridge and Mendeleyev Ridge, the latter uniting with the Alpha Ridge. These ridges are separated from each other and from continental margins by four deep-water basins: the Nansen, Amundsen, Makarov, and Canadian basins. The age and origin of the Alpha Ridge is still debated, and is key to the reconstruction model of the Arctic Basin and, in particular, the Canada Basin. Alpha Ridge rises 1200 m above the surrounding ocean bottom (which is here about 3 km deep). The ocean surface is permanently covered with a thick layer of ice, and since its discovery from American drifting ice station “Alpha” in 1957–1958 up to the beginning of the 21st century, the ridge has been mainly investigated by drifting ice stations and aeromagnetic and aerogravity surveys, since passage through the surface ice is difficult. The ridge topography is

57

ALPHABETS AND WRITING, NORTH AMERICA AND GREENLAND determined by the structure of the Earth’s crust and the presence of sedimentary layers. In the region of the ridge, there are other isolated linear uplifts, including the Lomonosov and Alpha ridges, Mendeleyev Rise, Northwind Ridge, and Chukchi Plateau. The ridges and plateaus are divided by linear troughs— Submariners, Makarov, Mendeleyev, Chukchi, Northwind, and Stefanson basins. The width of Alpha Ridge varies from 250 to 800 km. The Alpha and Mendeleyev ridges may be separate features with quite different origins, although they have morphological similarities. The width of the Alpha-Mendeleyev Ridge is 3–4 times greater than Lomonosov Ridge, except for the abutment zones connecting the ridges with continental margins, where their widths are approximately equal. The bathymetric position of the top of Lomonosov Ridge (600–1200 m depth), in general, corresponds to the bathymetric level of Alpha Ridge, but in some regions the depth of the latter is more than 1500 m. The greater width of Alpha Ridge suggests that it may have a hot spot or other broad magmatic origin rather than a spreading ocean ridge. Alpha Ridge was formerly believed to be continuous for more than 1000 km; however, modern bathymetric and morphologic analysis of relief in the region shows that the ridge is not continuous, but is interrupted by a network of cross-cutting grabens, although these blocks are in places obscured by thick sediments. Some have interpreted the breaks as offsets such as are found on mid-oceanic ridges. In the region of Ellesmere Island, both Lomonosov and Alpha ridges abut the continental slope at abyssal depths. This permits researchers to believe that Alpha Ridge is a natural continuation of the continental margin of the Canadian Arctic Archipelago into the Arctic basin according to morphological signs. Short drill cores from ice stations over the Alpha Ridge have yielded bottom sediments of Cretaceous to early Tertiary age, and basalt fragments from the basement of the ridge. The Alpha Ridge is characterized by some of the largest magnetic anomaly amplitudes observed over the deep ocean. A hot-spot model has been proposed for the early Cretaceous, giving a flood basalt province with a thicker than usual oceanic crust. The Iceland-Faroe Ridge has a similar crustal structure. Investigation of the biosphere shows that life on Alpha Ridge is very poor. This is the most uninhabited region of the Arctic Basin. For example, life on Lomonosov Ridge is much more intensive. Researchers connect relatively more beings on Lomonosov Ridge with food transports from high production regions. VALERY MIT’KO

58

See also Arctic Mid-Ocean Ridge; Lomosonov Ridge Further Reading Gorbatskiy, G.V., Physicogeographical Zoning of Arctic, Volume 3, Arctic Basin, Leningrad: Leningrad University Publishing House, 1973 Gramberg, I.S. (editor), Orographic Map of Arctic Basin, 1:5,000,000. Helsinki: Karttaneskus, 1995 Jackson, H.R., P.J. Mudie & S.M. Blasco . Initial Geological Report on CESAR—The Canadian Expedition to Study the Alpha Ridge, Arctic Ocean, Geological Survey of Canada, Paper 84-22, 1985 Jokat, M., “Seismic investigations along the western sector of Alpha Ridge, Central Arctic Ocean.” Geophysical Journal International, 152 (2003): 185–201 Sweeney, J.K., J.R. Weber & S.M. Blasko, “Continental ridges in the Arctic ocean: Lorex constraints.” Tectonophysics, 89 (1982): 217–238

ALPHABETS AND WRITING, NORTH AMERICA AND GREENLAND Eskimos (Iñupik and Yup’ik speakers) in North America and Greenland had no traditional writing systems. Early explorers often compiled word lists, but made no attempts to develop writing systems. After European contact, missionaries made the first attempts to reduce the Eskimo languages to written form. The earliest attempts to develop an orthography for the language were those by Lutheran missionaries to create a written language for Greenlandic. Poul Egede, son of Hans Egede, the first missionary to Greenland, pioneered this work, drawing on his father’s and other missionaries’ work in his translation of the New Testament, published in its entirety in Greenlandic in 1766. Egede had earlier published a dictionary of Greenlandic in 1750. In writing Greenlandic for Greenlanders, Egede used a Roman orthography. In 1794, Otto Fabricius published a new translation of the New Testament using a Roman orthography that differed in some points from that of Egede. A third translation of the New Testament was published in 1822 by the German Moravian Johan Conrad Kleinschmidt, and it differed orthographically from the previous translations. In these early attempts to proselytize, the aim was usually to produce an orthography for the use of other white missionaries and for students from among the Greenlandic population who had been trained by white scholars. By the mid-1800s, the need for a standard method of writing in Greenlandic was clear. Samuel Kleinschmidt, son of a missionary, took up this challenge; he was born in Greenland and was raised speaking Greenlandic. He contributed widely to the cultural life of Greenland through the publication

ALPHABETS AND WRITING, NORTH AMERICA AND GREENLAND of his Greenlandic grammar and dictionary and his contributions to the newspaper Atuagagdliutit. Kleinschmidt devoted himself to orthographic reform for many years. He aimed to bring literacy to the common Greenlander, and not simply to write for other missionaries or Greenlanders working for the missions. Linguistically far ahead of his time, Kleinschmidt wrote in 1850, “It is a serious fault when different sounds are indicated by means of one letter, or one sound by means of different letters, and the fault is doubly grave in a language which is so thoroughly regular as that of Greenland.” With this remark, he presaged the later development of phonemic orthography. By 1871, satisfied with his revised orthography, Kleinschmidt used it consistently in the dictionary he published that year. His innovation—a five-vowel system using three diacritic marks to represent vocalic length, doubling of a consonant, and a combination of the two—became the official standard for written Greenlandic in the next century, and was used consistently in books, newspapers, and official publications. In 1973, the Kleinschmidt orthography was revised. Certain consonant clusters were eliminated, as were the use of diacritic marks; although only three vowels are required in a phonemic orthography for Greenlandic, all five vowels were retained. The first missionaries to Labrador were Moravians with Greenlandic experience who founded a mission in Nain in 1771. Most were fluent in Greenlandic and assumed that few differences existed between Greenlandic and the Inuit speech of Labrador. They brought with them their Greenlandic orthography, but their arrival in Labrador predated Kleinschmidt’s development of standard Greenlandic by almost a century. The Labrador Moravian orthography therefore differed from what became standard Greenlandic in a number of points. At the end of the 19th century, Reverend Theodor Bourquin, a Moravian, standardized the Labrador orthography. Labrador Inuit have steadfastly refused to relinquish their adherence to the Moravian orthography, which they still use today. The only place where Eskimos attempted to develop their own systems of writing was Alaska. Uyaqoq, a Yup’ik speaker from the Kuskokwim River, better known by the name “Helper Neck,” worked at a Moravian mission station but could neither read nor write English. He began to develop a system of picture-writing. Inspired by his innovation, other native mission workers developed their own idiographies, but Uyaqoq continued to work on his system, adding extra symbols and eventually developing a remarkably accurate phonetic writing system. In the meantime, his associates continued to modify his pictorial writing. Two other independent developments of picture-writing occurred in Alaska, one on Kotzebue Sound, fully

developed by 1914, and the other on Nunivak Island, developed in the 1940s by the wife of a missionary. All these attempts were made by Eskimos involved in missionary work, and were not intended to be used by Eskimos in writing to each other but only as memory aids to assist the innovators in their preaching on Biblical texts. Alaskan picture-writing is no longer used. Aleut, one branch of the Eskimo-Aleut language family, spoken in the Aleutian Islands, and Alutiiq, an Eskimo language also known as Pacific Yup’ik, were written in a Cyrillic orthography devised by the Russian Orthodox missionary Father Ivan Veniaminov. Missionaries of this faith also did some Cyrillic writing in Central Yup’ik, although most was done by Catholics and Moravians who arrived in southwestern Alaska in the late 19th century and devised Yup’ik orthographies using the Roman alphabet, eventually supplanting the Cyrillic orthographies. The Roman orthography was used by Siberian Yup’ik speakers from 1932 to 1936, before the Russian Cyrillic alphabet replaced it. Modern phonemic orthographies were developed for Alaskan Eskimos in the mid-20th century. In 1947, Roy Ahmaogak, a North Slope Iñupiaq, worked with Eugene Nida, a linguist, and developed the modern Iñupiaq orthography that, somewhat revised, remains in use today. In the 1970s, a number of linguists and Yup’ik speakers worked at the University of Alaska to develop the modern Yup’ik orthography. David Shinen, a missionary, developed the St Lawrence Island (Siberian) Yup’ik orthography in the 1960s; it was subsequently revised by Michael Krauss. Jeffrey Leer developed the Alutiiq orthography in the 1970s. Literacy in the Eskimo languages is not high in Alaska. In the eastern Canadian Arctic, excluding Labrador, Inuit cling tenaciously to a syllabic writing system created by the missionaries. Inuit regard it as their own and vigorously resist suggestions that it should be replaced by a Roman orthography. It was the creation of James Evans, a Wesleyan missionary, who, while working in southern Ontario, devised a system of nine symbols, each of which could be written in four different positions, to represent the vowel and consonant combinations of Ojibway. His mission board refused him permission to use his creation. In 1840, having transferred to Norway House in what is now Manitoba, he reexamined his system and modified it to suit the Cree language. The Cree took well to this system, and literacy in Evans’s syllabic orthography spread rapidly as far as the Rocky Mountains. In 1851, John Horden arrived at Moose Factory in James Bay as a missionary, followed the next year by the Reverend Edwin Arthur Watkins who took up

59

ALPHABETS AND WRITING, NORTH AMERICA AND GREENLAND mission work at Fort George. Horden believed that Evans’s Cree orthography should be used to bring the Bible to the Inuit and convinced Watkins of this. But both men recognized the need to adapt the system by the introduction of a few new characters. Horden ran his own printing press at Moose Factory, and in 1856 he printed a number of copies of a small book in Inuktitut syllabic script for Watkins to use. In 1865, Horden and Watkins met in London, at the request of Henry Venn, secretary of the Church Missionary Society, to “settle” the orthography for the Inuit language. The major outcome of that meeting was to abandon the use of the arbitrary characters Evans had used to represent syllable-final consonants, and instead use the symbols of the fourth column on the syllabic chart but written half-size as superscripts. In practice, however, Inuit writing from one to another seldom used the finals at all, relying on context to reduce the ambiguities possible as a result of underdifferentiation. In 1876, Edmund James Peck, as yet unordained, arrived at Little Whale River to work among the Inuit. Although it is often stated that Peck adapted Evans’s Cree syllabics to the Inuit language, the bulk of the work had already been done by Horden and Watkins. However, Peck was able to devote almost all his efforts toward the Inuit, unlike his predecessors whose primary foci were their missions to the Indians. Peck’s major contribution to mission work and to literacy among the Inuit was the translation or transliteration of the Gospels and other church literature into Inuktitut and seeing the completed works through the press. He devoted the next four decades of his life to that task. The syllabic writing system based on the model developed for Cree and Ojibwe was also introduced to the Dene people of the North by missionaries in the 19th century. The Roman Catholic missionary Father Turquetil formally introduced the syllabic orthography to the Inuit of the Keewatin in 1912. The Catholics treated vocalic length differently than did the Anglican missionaries; instead of using a dot above a symbol to represent a lengthened vowel sound, the Catholics chose to reduplicate the vowel by using the vocalic main character from the first series (ai, i, u, a) after another main character to lengthen the vowel sound of that main character. This remained a distinguishing characteristic of “Catholic” orthography until the 1970s. In the 1950s, Canada’s Department of Northern Affairs and National Resources turned its attention to orthographic reform for Inuit. The department advocated a gradual phasing out of syllabics and the introduction of a Roman alphabetic writing system that would be a common written language for all Canadian

60

Inuit. The new system that the department developed was not maintained. The bureaucrats had seriously underestimated the attachment of most Inuit to the syllabic orthography. Ironically, the linguists employed by the government never considered the possibility of orthographic reform within the syllabic system itself. It remained for Inuit themselves to recognize that possibility. Mark Kalluak, educator and newspaper editor, and Armand Tagoona, the first Inuk to be ordained into the Anglican clergy, had long recognized the need for a standardization in the use of syllable-final consonants and the representation of vocalic length. Both men also recognized the inconsistency within the Anglican church of its representation of long vowels. Kalluak used the Keewatin Echo, a monthly newspaper, as a forum for the discussion on the need for syllabic reform, and Tagoona used his church as a venue for similar discussions. At a conference of educators held in Rankin Inlet in 1972, the delegates agreed that syllabics should be used with all the final characters, that a dot placed over a letter should indicate a long vowel, and that the first column of the syllabic chart should be abandoned because the sounds represented by that column could be created by a combination of the last column and the character representing the vowel “i.” This set the stage for the Inuit Language Commission, proposed and sponsored by Inuit Tapirisat of Canada (today known as the Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami or ITK) and funded in 1974 by the federal Department of Indian and Northern Affairs. The second of its seven objectives was to “study the present state of the written language and recommend changes for the future.” The result was the development of a dual orthography. A Roman orthography was devised, built on an analysis of the language and the application of scientific principles to guide the development of the writing system. The committee decided to keep orthographic innovations in syllabics to a minimum and not to introduce new symbols unless absolutely necessary. The syllabic system was standardized and made compatible with the Roman system. Because the two orthographies were based on a single analysis of the language, it was in fact one system with two orthographic forms. The result, in syllabics, dealt adequately with the issues of vocalic length and the representation of syllable-final consonants. In fact, the orthography that resulted, for syllabics, differed little from that which had stemmed earlier from the Rankin Inlet education workshop in 1972. The dual orthography was ratified by the Inuit Language Commission in August 1976, and each orthographic form was given a name in Inuktitut—qaliujaaqpait for the Roman orthography and qaniujaaqpait for syllabics.

ALPHABETS AND WRITING, RUSSIA Inuit of the eastern Arctic excluding Labrador are still devoted to the use of the syllabic writing system. New computer technology has made it easier to use syllabics in publishing, and the system is used extensively in schools in Arctic Québec and Nunavut, with the exception of a few western communities. The 1976 revisions to the syllabic orthography have been the most completely accepted in the Keewatin Region, where Inuit pioneered the modern work of syllabic reform, and, ironically, the least so in Nunavik, where Horden and Watkins pioneered the work over a century ago. In fact, the ubiquitous computer technology, which has almost completely replaced the use of the typewriter for the creation of Inuit text, has allowed the Inuit of Nunavik to recently bring back the use of the first column from the old syllabic chart, which had been abandoned in 1976. In Cambridge Bay and Canadian Inuit communities to the west of it, syllabics were not used. The Inuit there were the last in Canada to come under the influence of Christianity. Historically, traders and missionaries in these communities, none with any linguistic training, used Roman characters to write their own orthographies, which were unique and inconsistent. Nonetheless, a majority of Inuit in this region have resisted attempts to standardize the writing of Inuktitut in Roman orthography. Nonstandard systems continue to be used, the derivatives of those brought by missionaries and traders. These are characterized by overdifferentiation of vowels and underdifferentiation of certain consonant sounds. Efforts to introduce the standardized Roman system through the schools have often met with parental resistance. From time to time there is discussion of the need for an international auxiliary Inuit writing system, which would use the Roman alphabet and increase written mutual intelligibility among Inuit presently using different orthographies. This is in part the result of a perception that the syllabic orthography, used in the geographic center of Inuit territory and surrounded by Roman alphabetic orthographies, hampers the development of a pan-Inuit literature. Despite the perceived need, there has been no progress in the development of such an international orthography. The five Athapaskan or Dene nations (Gwich’in (formerly known as Loucheux), South Slavey, North Slavey, Chipewyan, and Dogrib) began a standardization process in 1987, adopting the writing system using the Roman alphabet. KENN HARPER See also Aleut; Alutiiq; Archbishop Innocent (Ivan Veniaminov); Athapaskan; Cree; Dene; Dogrib (Tlicho); Egede, Hans; Egede, Poul; Eskimo; Gwich’in; Inuit; Kleinschmidt, Samuel

Further Reading Basse, Bjarne & Kirsten Jensen (editors), Eskimo Languages/Their Present-Day Conditions, Aarhus: Arkona, 1979 Collis, Dirmid R.F. (editor), Arctic Languages, An Awakening, Paris: UNESCO, 1990 Gagne, R.C., Tentative Standard Orthography for Canadian Eskimos, Ottawa: Northern Affairs and National Resources, 1965 Hammerich, L.L., Det Kongelige Danske Videnskabernes Selskab Historisk-filosofiske Skrifter [A Picture Writing by Edna Kenick, Nunivak, Alaska], Volume 9, No. 1, Copenhagen: Munksgaard, 1977 Harper, Kenn, “Writing systems and translations.” Inuktitut, no. 53, September 1983 ———, “The early development of Inuktitut syllabic orthography.” Études Inuit Studies, 9(1) (1985): 141–162 ———,. “Innovation and inspiration—the development of Inuktitut syllabic orthography.” Meta/Journal Des Traducteurs/Translators’ Journal, 38(1) (1993): 18–24 Hitch, Doug, “Inuktitut syllabics and microcomputers.” Meta/Journal Des Traducteurs/Translators’ Journal, 38(1) (1993): 56–72 Rischel, Jørgen, “Greenland as a three vowel-language.” Études Inuit Studies, 5(supplementary issue) (1981): 71–80 Woodbury, Anthony C., “Eskimo and Aleut Languages.” In Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 5, Arctic, edited by D. Damas, Washington: Smithsonian Institution, 1984

ALPHABETS AND WRITING, RUSSIA Early Pictographs and Ideographs In prehistoric times humans reflected the surrounding world that they perceived and learned through art. Numerous cave paintings and petroglyphs have been found in the Yenisey region, beginning in the Neolithic, for example petroglyphs in Yakutia (Belkachi Culture, 5200–4100 years ago and Ymyakhtakh Culture, 4200–3200 years ago) and at the Pegtymel’ River in Chukotka (late Stone Age). Depiction of hunting scenes, animals, and rituals reflected the mode of life. In the Bronze Age, images may have changed to figurative composition of abstract character, but many thousands of years passed before human beings learnt to represent a concept or an idea as a single picture (pictographic writing) or later as a character (ideographic writing). Few of the minority languages of the Russian north had writing systems before 1917. Pictographic writing among the peoples of Siberia seems to be unique to the Yukagir, the descendants of a circumpolar nomadic reindeer-breeding culture who now inhabit the Verkhnekolymsky district of the Sakha Republic (Yakutia). In the 19th century, samples of pictographic writing (tos) were collected from the Yukagir by Vladimir Il’ich Iokhel’son (Waldemar Jochelson) and

61

ALPHABETS AND WRITING, RUSSIA

Figure 1: Love letter (circa end of the 19th century). Collected by Iokhel’son. Published in Tugolukov, p. 51.

dotted line. Long vertical lines represent the legs of a man, collateral inclined lines are arms, and spots are parts of the body and joints. The ornamental frame above the figures is a house. The lines and arches symbolize thoughts and feelings. When paper and other equipment for writing became available, birch bark went out of use as a writing material. There was also no need for pictographs with letter spreading. For example, birch-bark letters written in the 19th century were different from later birch-bark messages, the writings on paper being more schematic. The ideas in the pictographic letter in Figure 3, according to the words of its drawer, are as follows: “My thoughts are striving for you but we could not meet each other.” The hunter’s shangar shorile messages were so accurate topographically that Iokhelson, who made his first studies on ancient letters at the end of the 19th century, called them “the embryo of geographic maps.” Comparing them with women’s messages, one can distinguish figures of people, animals, herds and summer houses, boats, ski, and other hunting tools drawn separately. These messages were used to transfer information about the routes taken by people leading a nomadic hunting and fishing existence. Figure 2 depicts Yukagir people walking on the thin crust of ice over snow for the spring hunt. Two hunters, the representatives of four families, are skiing and going in the same direction to hunt. Each of them had a team of two dogs and a sledge. Then they parted. The content of the letter is conveyed twice: first by pictographs and then by an ideogram. According to the ideogram placed at the center of the letter, the dwelling houses are represented as traditional conical tents and each footstep means a hunter. The “tree” ideogram shows that a man belongs to a particular clan.

S. Shargorodsky; further samples were collected by the 1959 scientific expedition of the Siberian Branch of the Academy of Sciences and by the present author in the 1980s. The Yukagir used both feminine and masculine pictographs with elements of ideography. Pictographic letters were also used by shamans. The Yukagir wrote their letters on birch bark or shangar shorile (“a letter written on a tree skin,” from the Yukagir words shaal — “tree,” khaar — “skin,” shorileshum — “to write”). Women used the pictographs mostly to send love letters, and men’s messages were about hunting and route maps. Figure 1 (from the end of the 19th century) is an example of a letter by a young girl suffering from unrequited love. Each figure in the form of a “feather” or “umbrella” symbolizes a human being. The figure of a woman is distinguished by a plait depicted by a

Figure 2: Yukagir people going to spring hunt, walking on a thin crust of ice over snow (circa end of the 19th century). Collected by Iokhel’son. Published in Tugolukov, p. 104.

62

ALPHABETS AND WRITING, RUSSIA

Figure 5: Copy of an original drawing on paper (circa 1980) from the author’s (Zhukova) archives. 3

2

1

Figure 3: Love letter: (1) figure of a woman; (2) figure of a man; and (3) an obstacle (drawing on paper, 1959). Published in Iokhel’son, Yukagiry: Istoriko-etnograficheskii ocherk, p. 57.

Picture 4 shows another route message: the trees “
” symbolize two adults and a child, “” represents a traditional conical tent, and “B” is a road drawn in long dotted lines. Each dotted line meant one day, so in the picture we can see a route of six days length. The position of the moon shows the same phase as it was the day the people left for hunting. “A” is a special sign known from shaman pictograms, folklore of the Yukagir people, and from rock art of ancient Yakutia, and is connected with the idea of soul reincarnation and a cult of fertility and ancestors. This sign was also used in messages to indicate the action of “returning.” Picture 4 means that in six days the hosts would return to their houses. Sometimes the sign “return” would be accompanied by a definite moon phase, which was supposed to be the day the hunters would return. Picture 5 is a letter written by a Yukagir shaman in the 1980s. On the right, one can see realistic pictures: a house, man, tree, fire, and dog, which symbolize five spirit-helpers of the shaman. The picture of the dog is

B A

δ

placed lower, which means, according to the shaman’s explanation, that this helper is always near the shaman and that the others left the shaman during the first phase of the moon and went to a man living in a big house. The “way” of spirits is conveyed by short dotted lines and means their absence: “go and return.” Using the sign “return,” a shaman “closes” ways of further movement of spirits and makes them come back to him. In this case the “arch” sign carries a magical meaning. The origin of pictographic and later the ideographic messages was conditioned by the way of life led by the seminomadic population of the taiga forests of Siberia: During their nomadic existence especially during the period of winter hunting, … the relations between groups were stopped for a long time … The group of people being in the taiga forest or rivers would leave on trees pieces of birch-bark with realistic pictures on them. Another group seeing those original “letters” would learn of the destiny of the first group and, according to picture, take decisions. (Ivanov, 1954: 520)

Such “birch-bark mail” probably operated among the aboriginal population of the North and Siberia for at least a thousand years. However, some scholars say that the Yukagir pictographic writing may have appeared at the end of the 19th century and the first quarter of the 20th century as an imitation of Russian correspondence (Yukagiry: istoriko-etnograficheskii ocherk, p. 56) (Figures 6–8).

α

Figure 4: Ink copy from an original drawing on paper done by a Yukagir (circa 1980) from the authors’s (Zhukova) field diary.

Figure 6: Love letter (circa late 1920s).Source unknown; published in Tugolukov, p. 105.

63

ALPHABETS AND WRITING, RUSSIA

1

3

2

Figure 7: A map message: (1) picture of a summer house (Yukagir dwelling), somebody spent the night there; (2) figure of a hunter and elk (got an elk); and (3) a place where one is planning to stay for a night. Published in Iokhel’son,Yukagiry: Istoriko-etnograficheskii ocherk, p. 57.

Yakov Lindenau, writing in German, depicted the sounds of various Siberian languages using combinations of letters according to the rules of German orthography). Today, this fact is essential for the correct reading of historical materials by contemporary linguists. At the beginning of the 19th century, the Russian Orthodox Church began missionary activity among the native peoples of Siberia. In the first half of the 19th century, members of the Russian Bible Society attempted to translate parts of the Old and New Testaments into the Khanty and Evenki languages, and some ritual texts and prayers into Chukchi (the first book in the Chukchi language was published in Irkutsk in 1823; however, information about other works is only now becoming known and the editions themselves may be lost). Since the 1840s, on the initiative of Archbishop Innocent (Ivan Veniaminov), who was at that time the archbishop of Kamchatka (his eparchy also included Alaska and the Aleutian

Shangar-Shorile

Ceramics

1

After the revolution of 1917, efforts were made to promote literacy among people of the USSR. As a result, people of different nationalities living in Russian territory began to study Russian and Russian grammar, and use paper and writing equipment. The use of pictographic and ideographic writing has disappeared in connection with the increase in literacy among the northern peoples.

2 3

4

Writing in Russia After the Revolution Before contact with the Russians (in western Siberia in the 16th to the beginning of the 17th centuries, and in eastern Siberia in the middle of the 17th century), none of the native peoples of Siberia had proper writing systems. The only objects used to record information were route signs on paths and special wooden tallies used for counting the yasak (a tax paid to the Russian Czar by the native peoples of Siberia); later these were also used for counting reindeer. The only way to record proper names (place names and names of people) as well as some glosses (containing words and phrases) in the native languages in Russian documents of the 17th and 18th centuries was using Russian (Cyrillic) letters. Some travelers and scholars of the 18th century and also European travelers of earlier times (e.g., Nicolaus Witzen), while collecting linguistic materials on the native peoples of northern Russia, used the Latin alphabet together with the orthographic rules of their own language (so,

64

5

6

7

8

Figure 8: Parallels between women’s birch-bark letters [Shangar-Shorile] and late Stone Age ceramics found in Yakutia.Published in Zhukova (1986).

ALPHABETS AND WRITING, RUSSIA Islands), the interpreters began to translate the gospel of St Matthew into “Tungus” (in fact, into one of the dialects of the Even (Lamut) language). The Russian Orthodox mission later published this translation of St Matthew as well as translations of parts of the New Testament and some other religious books into Nanai, Sel’kup, and some other languages. The missionaries of the Russian Orthodox Church prepared and published some grammars (named in Russian “Azbuka” of “Bukvar”), which were planned for use in teaching children of the native peoples in the primary schools being organized around the churches and conducted by priests. For these editions, they used the Cyrillic alphabet in its Old Church Slavonic alphabet and style of letters. From about 1912 to 1913, the Russian government planned a wide program for the education of native peoples of the outlying districts of Russia, including the northern territories. This program stipulated the organization of primary and secondary schools as well as national colleges for teaching the youngsters of native peoples in their native language, with the aim of preparing future teachers and administrators from representatives of these peoples. The program was discussed at the 1st congress of teachers of Russia in Kaluga in 1913 and approved by the participants of this congress. This program, though very realistic, was not carried out because of World War I and the October revolution of 1917. However, the measures undertaken by the Soviet government during the 1920s and 1930s to increase literacy and create a school system in the Russian North were not created by the new political regime, but inherited from the national and educational policy of the Russian Empire at the beginning of the 20th century. From the mid-1920s, the Soviet Union began a wide campaign of schools organization in the regions of the Far North, Siberia, and the Far East for primary education of children and adults. The first alphabets for the languages of peoples of the North were created by the teachers of these schools, and the teachers also had to write the first school manuals. For example, the first grammar for the Siberian Yup’ik Eskimos was introduced in 1924–1925 by the teacher A. Karayev and was based on the Ossetic alphabet (Ossetic being the teacher’s native language, which used Cyrillic letters at that time). The first alphabet for the Even (Lamut), created by the teacher N. Tkachik in the Okhotsk region, was also based on the Cyrillic alphabet. Each national alphabet had its own specific “national” features. From the end of the 1920s to the beginning of the 1930s, a campaign began to replace older writings of other major languages of the former Russian Empire (some of which were Cyrillic; the others, such as the

Central Asians, were based on the Arabic script) with a new writing system based on the Latin script: the New Turkic Alphabet (NTA) and the so-called Yedinyj Severnyj Alfavit or ESA (Standard Northern Alphabet). The latter was created from the set of letters used in NTA with some additions. After the revision of several variants of Standard Northern Alphabet and after the appearance of Latin-based alphabets for some languages (Evenk, Nanai), in 1932 the first schoolbooks were published for 14 native languages (Khanty, Mansi, Nenets, Sel’kup, Russian Saami, Evenki (Tungus), Even (Lamut), Udege, Nanai, Chukchi, Koryak, Itel’men (Kamchadal), Eskimo, and Nivkh (Gilyak)). At that time, books also began to be published on political and medical subjects, as well as stories and poems by native writers (written by the first native writers and translated from Russian) and some small books of folklore. Primers were also prepared in Aleutian (for Soviet Aleuts living in the Commander Islands) and in the Yukagir and Ket languages; however, for various reasons these were not published. In 1936, according to a decision of the Council of Nationalities (part of the Supreme Council, the structure of the representative power in the Soviet Union), the writing systems for languages of all the peoples of the Soviet Union (except Armenian and Georgian) were replaced with alphabets based on the Cyrillic script, to be more exact, on the standard alphabet of Russian. The introduction of new alphabets in books, school manuals, and local newspapers began in 1937. In practice, the use of Cyrillic letters for some northern languages had begun earlier, so the Cyrillic alphabet for Nanai appeared in spring 1936, and in Magadan from 1936 to 1939 both Even alphabets were in use on the same pages of the Even language newspaper. For the Chukchi language in Chukotka, the change of alphabets took place later, in the early 1940s (according to some sources, Latin symbols were in use for Chukchi writing even up to the 1950s). Some representatives of the older generations could read, and some of them could even write, in their languages using the Latin script to the second half of the 1980s. During the 1940s and 1950s, almost all alphabets of the peoples of the Russian North were modified, some of them several times. A standardized literary form was required for each language: the original emphasis on phonetic spelling created problems due to large dialectical differences for some languages and the large influx of Russian borrowings. In some cases, additional letters were introduced for sounds that were absent in the Russian language; some written forms of the letters were also changed. The process of graphic reforms continued up to the end of the 1980s. Some graphic reform projects were not accepted by the linguists or, in

65

ALPHABETS AND WRITING, RUSSIA some cases, not adopted by the majority of educated representatives of the nation (e.g., Nanai in 1983–1986, Evens in 1980–1987). The writing systems of some languages, for example, Saami and Udege, are still under discussion, and therefore these languages have no standard writing system that could be used to teach the language in primary or secondary schools. Some languages of the peoples of the Russian North became written ones only in the second half of the 20th century. The Yukagir language only got its script in 1969, when the Yukagir poet Gavril Kurilov began to publish poems in his native language using the Yakut alphabet. The writing system for the Dolgan language was created at the end of the 1970s. By the end of the 1970s, the writing of the Nivkhi was almost dying out, but in 1981–1982 it was modified and introduced in slightly differing variants for two Nivkh dialects, Amur and Sakhalin. At different times, there were attempts to publish schoolbooks in five dialects of Khanty, but only in two of these (Kazym and Shuryshkar) have writings survived today. The last period of creating alphabets for nonwritten languages of the Russian North relates to 1985–1995, when new written forms of the Udege and Itel’men languages, using the Cyrillic script, and the Ul’chi, Ket, Aleutian, and Nganasan languages were introduced. There were also attempts to create written languages for the most small-numbered peoples—the Orok (with the assistance of Japanese scholars), the Negidal, and the Enets. Recently, the first schoolbooks in the dialect of the Sel’kups living in the Tomsk region were published; several booklets were also published in the dialect of the coastal Koryaks living in Kamchatka. Also, since the 1990s written forms began to develop in some Turkic languages, which have come to be regarded as endangered, and the speakers of which have been entered into the list of Russian national minorities as separate nations (such as Shor and Teleut, in the Altai mountains bordering on Mongolia and China). Among the languages of the Russian North, only some have received a true form of a written language that can be regarded as functioning outside local primary schools. These languages are Khanty, Mansi, Nenets, Evenki, Even, Nanai, Chukchi, Koryak, and Siberian (Chukotkan) Eskimo. In these languages, significant numbers of books (from several tens to several hundreds) have been published and the written form of these languages is (or was up to recent times) in use in local mass media. The other languages that have had a writing tradition for more than 50 years (Sel’kup, Udege, Nivkh, Itel’men) and the newest written languages (Nganasan, Forest Nenets, Enets, Ul’chi, Ket, Aleutian, Tofalar, and others) are used in written form only for teaching the native language in primary school.

66

The creation and development of literacy for the nation was described for a very long time as one of the greatest achievements of Soviet national and language policy. Nevertheless, the existence of the written form and school teaching could not prevent the languages of the peoples of the North of Russia from becoming endangered languages. The decline in the linguistic situation in the territories of the native peoples of the Russian North is, without a doubt, connected to economic, industrial, demographic, and cultural changes in these territories. But a no less important role in such processes belongs in part to certain representatives of the nations (usually those who live in towns, have higher education, and work in nontraditional spheres of activity: local governments and administration, Communist Party structures, education and culture management and so on), who distance themselves from the traditional culture of their nations and prefer to speak the language of the majority (Russian, or Yakut in Yakutia, Buryat in Buryatia) even when they are bilingual or multilingual. The next generation inherits the customs of oral communication in the most prestigious language and regards their native language as part of an obsolete ethnic culture having no future. The use of the written form of the native language turns into the profession of only certain social groups (writers, journalists, teachers, and the authors of schoolbooks). Reading in the native languages is not usually widespread because of the low prestige of the national mass media and the destination of national literature first of all for children; thus, several generations of youngsters and adults whose contact with the written form of their native language stops after primary schools have neither the habit of reading nor literature available to their interests. However, none of the languages of the peoples of the Russian North disappeared during the 20th century, and in spite of problems in the contemporary linguistic situation, the prognosis for survival of most of the languages of the Russian North is still more or less optimistic. LUDMILA ZHUKOVA AND ALEXIS A. BURYKIN See also Archbishop Innocent (Ivan Veniaminov); Belkachi Culture; Chukchi; Evenky; Iokhel’son, Vladimir Il’ich; Ket; Khanty; Koryak; Nanai; Russia; Sakha Republic (Yakutia); Sel’kup; Tungus; Ymyakhtakh Culture; Yukagir Further Reading Al’kor (Koshkin), Ya.P. (editor), Pis’mennost’ narodov Severa [The writing of the peoples of the North], Leningrad: Uchpedgiz, 1931 ———, (editor), Materialy I Vserossiyskoy konferentsii po razvitiyu yazykov i pis’mennosti narodov Severa [The materials of the First All-Russia Conference on the development

ALPHABETS AND WRITING, SCANDINAVIA AND ICELAND of the languages and writing of the peoples of the north], Leningrad, 1932 ——— (editor), Yazyki i pis’mennost’ narodov Severa, Vyp. I., Finno-ugorskie i samodiyskiye yazyki [The languages and writings of the peoples of the North. Part I. The Finno-Ugric and Samoyedic languages], Leningrad: Uchpedgiz, 1934 ——— (editor), Yazyki i pis’mennost’ narodov Severa, Vyp. III. Paleoaziatskie yazyki [The languages and writings of the peoples of the North. Part III, The Paleosiberian languages], Leningrad: Uchpedgiz, 1934 Alpatov, V.M., 150 yazykov i politika (150 languages and politics), Moscow: RAS, Institute for Oriental Studies, 1997 Bugarski, R., Pismo [Writing], Beograd: Higoja štampa, 1996 Burykin, A.A., Yazyk malochislennogo naroda v yego pis’mennoy forme (na materiale evenskogo yazyka) [The language of a minority people in its written form (on the material of the Even language)], Dissertation, St Petersburg University, 2001 Coulmas, F., Writing Systems of the World, Oxford: Blackwell, 1989 Desheriyev, Yu.D., Razvitie mladopis’mennyx yazykov narodov SSSR [Development of the new written languages of the USSR], Moscow: Uchpedgiz, 1958 Giljarevsky, R.S. & V.S. Grivnin, Languages Identification Guide, Moscow: Nauka, 1970 (originally published in Russian) Iokhel’son, V., “Po rekam Yasachnoi i Korkodonu. Drevnii i sovremenny yukagirski byt i pis’mena.” In Izvestia usskogo Geograficheskogo Obschestva [“Along the rivers Yasachnaya and Korkodon. Ancient and contemporary way of life and letters of the Yukagir people.” In Proceedings of Russian Geographic Society] (3rd edition) Volume 34, St Petersburg, 1898 Iokhel’son, V., Yukagiry i yukagirizovannye tungusy, translated as The Yukaghir and the Yukaghized Tungus, edited by Franz Boas, New York: The American Museum of Natural History, 1926 ———, Odul’ski (Yukagirski) yazyk. In Yazyk i pis’mennost’ narodov Severa [Odoul (Yukagir) language. In Language and Written Language of the Peoples of the North], Part 3, Moscow-Leningrad, 1934, pp. 149–180 Isayev, M.I., Yazykovoye stroitel’stvo v SSSR [Language construction in the USSR], Moscow: Nauka, 1979 ———, Sotsiolingvistisheskie problemy yazykov narodov SSSR [The sociolinguistic problems of the peoples of the USSR], Moscow: Vysshaya shkola, 1982 Ivanov, S., “Materialy po izobrazitel’nomu iskusstvu narodov Sibiri XIX -nach. XX vv” [Proceedings on fine arts of the peoples of Siberia, 19th to early 20th century], MoskvaLeningrad, 1954 Krupa, V. & J. Genzor, Pisma sveta [The writings of the world], Bratislava: Obzor, 1989 Musayev, K.M., Alfavity yazykov narodov SSSR [The alphabets of the languages of the peoples of the USSR], Moscow: Nauka, 1965 Okladnikov, A.P. (editor), Yukagiry. Istoriko-etnographichesky ocherk [The Yukagir people. Historical ethnographic essay], Novosibirsk: Nauka, 1975 Okladnikov, A.P. & V.D. Zaporozhskaya, Petroglify Srednei Leny [Petroglyphs of the Middle Lena], Leningrad, 1972 Pavlenko, N.A., Istoriya pis’ma [The history of writing], Minsk: Vysshaia Shkola, 1987 Pis’mennyje yazyki mira. Yazyki Rossijskoj Federacii [Written languages of the world. Languages of Russian Federation], Volume 1, Moscow: Nauka, 2000; Volume 2, Moscow: Nauka, 2003

Poppe, N.N., Lingvisticheskiye problemy Vostochnoy Sibiri [The linguistic problems of Eastern Siberia], Leningrad, 1933 Sampson, G., Writing Systems. A Linguistic Introduction, London: Hutchinson, 1985 Tugolukov V.A., Kto vy, yukagiry? [Yukagirs, who are you?], Moscow: Nauka, 1979 Vakhtin, N.B., Yazyki narodov Severa v 20 veke [The languages of the peoples of the North in 20th century], St Petersburg: Jevropejsky Dom, 2001 Zhukova, L., “The Yukagir pictographic writing.” Polyarnaya Zvezda, 6 (1986): 121–124 ———, “Binarnye oppozitsii v mirovozzrenii aborigenov Sibiri: sinvolika raznonapravlennykh dug. Yazyk-mif-kul’tura narodov Sibiri” [Binar oppositions in the world perception of the indigenous people of Siberia: symbolism of arches with different directions. Language-myth-culture of peoples of Siberia] (3rd edition), Yakutsk, 1994, pp. 33–54 ———, “Novye obrazsty piktograficheskogo pis’ma Yukagirov.” Lingvistichesky sbornik [New patterns of pictographic letters of Yukagir people. Linguistic collection], Yakutsk, 1996, pp. 85–95

ALPHABETS AND WRITING, SCANDINAVIA AND ICELAND The North Germanic languages have historically been written with two alphabets, namely the Runic (from the 1st or 2nd century AD onward) and the Roman (from the 11th century onward).

The Runic Alphabet It is not known how, when, and where the Runic alphabet was invented, but the oldest extant inscriptions have generally been dated to around AD 200. The earliest version of the alphabet was at this time a fullfledged system including 24 characters, or Runes, from a proto-Germanic word meaning “secret.” The alphabet seems to have suited the proto-Scandinavian language phonemically, mostly by using one character for each phoneme. The idea of creating an alphabetic writing must have found its inspiration in the Roman empire where several alphabetic writings were concurrently in use. The Roman alphabet was likely the most significant source of inspiration. However, the shape of the Runic characters clearly shows traces of conscious creation, not only imitation of another alphabet, and therefore it is regarded as an autonomous alphabet. Significantly, the order of the characters—which is preserved in many inscriptions presumably made for educational use—differed completely from that of the Roman, Greek, and other Semitic-derived alphabets. The first six characters denoted f, u, þ, a, r, and k, and the alphabet was therefore called futhark. The shape of the characters’ shape demonstrates that the Runes were meant to be carved in wood, since all strokes are vertical, while round or curved lines and horizontal

67

ALPHABETS AND WRITING, SCANDINAVIA AND ICELAND lines are avoided. These characters were most likely used extensively, as the shape is quite uniform across most of the ancient Germanic-speaking world. However, the Runic inscriptions that have been preserved till the present age are found in materials harder than wood, such as stone, bone, and metal. Tombstone inscriptions and inscriptions on objects for private use (such as weapons and drinking vessels) are also rather common. As to the geographical distribution, early Runic inscriptions have been found predominantly in Denmark (particularly Jutland), although other sites exist in different Germanic-speaking countries, from Norway in the north, to England in the west, and the Gothic-speaking area in the southeast. From the 6th century till the outbreak of the Viking age in the late 9th century, the futhark was simplified yet diversified. For reasons unknown to scholars, many phonemic distinctions were apparently no longer considered important by the users of the alphabet, for example, several vowels/diphthongs (e, i, ei; u, o, au) and voiced versus voiceless homorganic consonants. The loss of these distinctions resulted in the reduction from a 24- to a 16-character system, which developed in two varieties—the Danish and the North Scandinavian. Outside Scandinavia, Runes fell into disuse, probably due to the spread of Christianity. However, in Scandinavia, Runes remained in use even among Christians, and an astonishing quantity of inscriptions has been found in what is now called the “younger futhark” from Denmark, Norway, Sweden, and areas where people from these countries settled down, including Russian towns with Swedish merchant populations and the Orkneys (settled from Norway). Inscriptions commonly appear upon tombstones or memorial stones, particularly in Sweden, where in the 10th through the 11th century an extensive market for stones with Runic inscriptions appears to have thrived. Equally remarkable are the finds of small wooden sticks with Runes in towns and trading centers of the time, notably Bergen in Norway, where an archaeological excavation in the port area brought to light hundreds of such inscribed sticks whose messages communicated aspects of daily life. This discovery suggests that Runes functioned as a vital everyday medium of communication for people. Runes were rarely used in manuscripts with longer texts, however, because of the dominance of the Roman alphabet in this area. The shape of the characters changed over time, and the existence of the Roman alphabet (educated people probably often knew and used both alphabets for different purposes) inspired someone to augment the futhark by adding dots to indicate suppressed phonemic distinctions. Writers have used these dots to some extent, but never with any regularity.

68

The everyday use of Runes continued until the late Middle Ages in towns such as Bergen. It is not accurately known when the practice ended, but scholars do not find Runic inscriptions from later than the 15th century, except in Sweden, where the knowledge of Runes survived even longer. In the district of Dalarna, Sweden, the use of Runes, in a form barely reminiscent of the medieval Runes, continued among common people until the 19th century.

The Roman Alphabet Christianity brought the Roman alphabet to Scandinavia. In the beginning, this alphabet was used for writing Latin, the language of the Roman Catholic Church. In Norway, however, the vernacular (Old Norse) was used in writing prior to 1100, and this practice was taken up in Iceland shortly afterwards. The reason for this was that Norway and Iceland received Christianity from England and Ireland, where the vernaculars (Anglo-Saxon and Gaelic) were habitually used in writing. In Sweden and Denmark, where German influence dominated, Latin remained the main written language until the 13th and 14th centuries. The Roman alphabet was mainly used in parchment manuscripts that could be bound into large books. Through the dissemination of book manuscripts, an advanced written literary culture developed, primarily within churches and monasteries, but also among worldly administrators attached to royal and local chanceries (where the scribes were most often ecclesiastical people). In some locations, however, above all in Iceland, writing and reading skills developed among lay people, particularly those from the chieftain class, quite early. Written literature was often of a secular nature (law texts were an important genre). The expansion of trade during the late Middle Ages, where foreign and, in particular, North German merchants within the Hanseatic League played a significant role, led to a democratization of writing and reading. This development accelerated when printing was introduced in Denmark in 1482 and in Sweden in 1483. From the 16th century onward, the use of written language steadily and intensively grew, although it remained dominated by religious and ecclesiastical texts. The Lutheran Reformation led to the growth of vernacular-based written languages such as Danish (in Denmark, Norway, and the Faroe Islands) and Swedish (in Sweden and Finland). Standardized orthographies of these languages gradually developed, promoted by the printing presses and other early agents of standardization. Only around 1800 did schools assume a chief role in the dissemination of

ALPHABETS AND WRITING, SCANDINAVIA AND ICELAND reading and writing skills among the population, and by the end of the 19th century, Scandinavian countries had achieved general literacy. The script used in early Scandinavian printing was the so-called Gothic script. In Sweden, however, Roman characters were in use by the 18th century. They appeared somewhat later in Iceland, and only by 1900 in Denmark and Norway, where the Gothic and Roman scripts existed side by side for quite some time. Despite the appearance of both scripts, the Roman characters retained an elite position while the Gothic was reserved for texts read by common people, mostly religious texts, although later supplemented by educational, vocational, and other literature in the wake of the Enlightenment in the 18th century. The Gothic and Roman scripts are, however, structurally identical; only the shape of the characters differs.

Orthographies Scandinavian orthographies comprise some letters in addition to the 26 characters of English. Mainland Scandinavian features three extra vowel characters: all of them have å (as aw in law), and Swedish has ä (as a in man) and ö (as the same character in German). Finnish has taken over ä and ö, while Danish, Norwegian, and Faroese use æ, which corresponds to ä, and ø, which corresponds to ö. Faroese and Icelandic also feature a series of accented vowel characters that denote separate vowel or diphthong phonemes: á, í, ó, ú, ý and, in Icelandic, é. Finally, Icelandic includes the characters þ and ð, pronounced “th” (as in “thing” and “that,” respectively) in English. Faroese, too, includes ð (but in this case it remains mute, only etymologically determined). North Saami includes a number of consonant characters absent from the rest of Scandinavia: I,
, ŋ, š, –t, Kz. The Scandinavian orthographies derive from late medieval pronunciation. They were originally relatively speech-based, although writing conventions that did not correspond to the spoken language were already developing. However, at the time when the orthographies were fixed in a stable form, pronunciation had already begun to shift from the medieval structures, and move in quite different directions within the Danish, Swedish, and Icelandic languages. In some respects, spelling followed these developments in pronunciation; for instance, in Danish the original unvoiced plosives in postvocalic position were spelled as voiced in accordance with their medieval pronunciation, thereby distinguishing this language clearly from the others, and the weakened unstressed vowels were spelled as e (e.g., gade or “street” versus gata in Swedish). In most other respects, however, Danish spelling has continued to remain conservative, espe-

cially during the last two to three centuries, when the phonological structure of the language changed as a result of the fricativization of the mentioned plosives and, in many cases, their virtual disappearance in pronunciation. The uvular r, which spread in Danish from the 18th century onward, has made a similar impact, changing its surrounding vowels profoundly and thereby giving the spoken language a completely different appearance as compared with the written. The Swedish language, on the other hand, evolved more conservatively in its phonology, but some unstressed morphological suffixes were weakened, losing a consonant or disappearing altogether, while the old forms were retained in writing and in fact restored in pronunciation (so-called “spelling pronunciation”) during the 20th century. Icelandic pronunciation has shown a different development, primarily marked by a series of changes of long vowels, including diphthongization. The old spelling conventions were retained, however, and in the 19th century systematized by the introduction of accent marks. As a result, Icelandic is reasonably easy to pronounce from the written word (if the rather complicated pronunciation rules are mastered), but it is difficult to predict the spelling from the pronunciation. The Norwegian alphabet borrowed most of its spelling conventions from the Danish, but these were modified to better suit Norwegian pronunciation. Even Nynorsk, which was established to counter Danish in Norway, accepted the same graphical conventions as Danish. However, as a result of the policy of bringing both Norwegian varieties closer to popular speech and to each other, more regular and speechlike spellings were introduced in many words. Especially with regard to foreign words, Norway has been more eager to nationalize its spelling than the Swedish and Danish (who have, however, also done so to some extent). An example is the word for concentration, which in Swedish and Danish is spelled koncentration, and in Norwegian konsentrasjon. This “Norwegianization” of international words is accepted in Norway, but when it comes to modern loanwords from English, it has become a controversial issue. Iceland also nationalizes spellings of foreign words, although the Icelandic language tends to reject such words and coins Icelandic neologisms instead. The Faroese spelling is generally conservative, approaching Icelandic and Old Norse and disregarding much of the postmedieval developments in Faroese speech. Finnish orthography is known for its near-perfect correspondence with standard speech. Quantity is faithfully rendered by a consistent doubling of long consonants and vowels. For example, compare the following verb forms: tulee (meaning “comes”); tuulee (“blows”); tullee (“will probably come”); and tuullee

69

ALTA/KAUTOKEINO DEMONSTRATIONS (“will probably blow”). Double characters are always pronounced long. With respect to the Saami languages, they have been written with different orthographies created by foreign (Norwegian, Swedish, and Finnish) experts, mainly missionaries or linguists. Only from the 1970s onward were there enough Saami linguists to approach this work, and a panScandinavian Saami cooperation concurrently emerged. In 1978, new, united spelling, containing the special characters mentioned above, replaced the established spellings of North Saami—one valid in Norway and Sweden, and the other in Finland. Other forms of Saami (South Saami, Lule Saami, Enare Saami, etc.) have acquired their own spellings during the last several decades of the 20th century, although these are based on the existing Scandinavian alphabets and express special phonemes with digraphs. The numeral 7, thus, is spelled I iezK a in North Saami, gietjav in Lule Saami, tjijhtje in South Saami, and seitsemän in Finnish. LARS S. VIKØR See also Iceland; Norway; Saami; Scandinavian Languages; Sweden Further Reading Haugen, Einar, The Scandinavian Languages, An Introduction to Their History, London: Faber and Faber Ltd, 1976

ALTA/KAUTOKEINO DEMONSTRATIONS On August 27, 1970, some 400 Saami in the small community of Mási in Finnmark, the northernmost county of Norway, carried banners protesting the Norwegian authorities’ announcement for a new and vast hydroelectric development project of the Alta/Kautokeino River—plans which at that stage also involved the flooding of the entire settlement of Mási. In the demonstrations to prevent the Norwegian government from damming the river, large numbers of political activists of different convictions joined forces to save a significant monument of nature. After the demonstrations, the chant “Let the River Live” resonated among most Norwegians. To the Saami people, the case represented a turning point in Norwegian indigenous politics. Along with the river Tana, the Alta/Kautokeino is one of the major watercourses in the county of Finnmark in Norway. In 1970, the Norwegian Water Resources Electricity Board /Norwegian Hydro announced plans of a hydroelectric project on the river. The project met with tremendous opposition not just among the indigenous population. In 1974, an official report commissioned by Norwegian Hydro and

70

the national electricity board warned of the dam’s “catastrophic” consequences for reindeer pastoralism. The following year, national Saami associations, Norske Samers Riksforbund (NSR), Norske Reindriftssamers Landsforbund (NRL), and Samenes Lands Forbund (SLF) publicly voiced their resistance against the project. The government responded to these signals by legislating a reduced project in 1978. The revised plan included a 100 m tall dam of reinforced concrete to be built across a canyon downstream from Mási. For construction purposes, a 36 km road was to be built from nearby Stilla. For the 150–200 workers, a camp was planned near the construction site. In response to the government plans, Saami reindeer herders affected by the proposed project filed a lawsuit against the Norwegian government. The landscape around the Alta/Kautokeino is open tundra providing 60,000 reindeer with pasture. Referring to the 1974 assessment report, the reindeer herders argued that the government had only focused on direct damage to Saami interests—the flooding reindeer pastures. The reindeer herders demanded a study of the impact of the project in its entirety, including the construction of the road and the camp, reindeer herding, as well as the impact upon the Saami of Mási and Kautokeino. At the same time, two action groups were formed: a Saami Action Group (SAG) and a Peoples Action Group (PAG) (Paine, 1985). PAG activists left for Stilla to keep the bulldozers from clearing the road through acts of civil disobedience. In the weeks to follow, as many as 5000 people passed through the PAG camp at “Ground Zero” (Paine, 1985). When the government in June 1979 reaffirmed its decision to start the construction of the road to the dam site, SAG took to more extreme measures. In Oslo, a lavvo (Saami tent) was positioned on the lawn outside the parliament building. From this position, a group of SAG members demanded that the government rescind its authorization to the electricity board concerning the Alta/Kautokeino River until Saami status and rights were settled by the courts. If no positive response was given, SAG would start a hunger strike that would not end until the government acceded its requests. On October 9, 1979, the government rejected SAG’s demands and the hunger strike began. In response to the hunger strike, appeals were made by the World Council of Indigenous Peoples (WCIP) and the International Work Group for Indigenous Affairs (IWGIA). SAG’s demands to the government were repeated by the Saami section of the Nordic Council. During the next few days, the strikers were repeatedly placed in custody. Their tent was confiscated. As soon as they were released, they would return to the same place, erect another tent, and continue their

ALUTIIT demonstration. The hunger strikers received massive support from the general public. After two days, the police removed 200 demonstrators from Eidsvolls Plass, in front of parliament. Charta 79, a newsletter, sold 8000 copies, and 20,000 people signed their petition. After three days, the government retreated and withdrew its authorization for the project. For the Saami, these events had a positive outcome. In 1980, the Norwegian government appointed a commission to carry out an inquiry into Saami rights, the Saami Rights Commission, with representatives of the principal Saami organizations included in the commission. Saami optimism did not last long. Shortly after, the parliament recommended that the construction of the access road be reauthorized as soon as the district court in Alta had made its decision. In December 1980, the district court rejected the plea. The plaintiffs immediately appealed to the Supreme Court. The government did not want to make further concessions. Instead of waiting for the Supreme Court to hear the appeal, the construction work resumed. Soon after, in January 1981, with temperatures of − 33°C, PAG protesters chained themselves to constructed ice barriers at Stilla. This time, however, the police had learned from their 1979 experiences. Over 500 police were brought in to aid the local police in their efforts to remove the 800 activists. The construction went ahead. Later on, the Supreme Court unanimously supported the decision of the Alta District Court. The court decided that there had been no faults or defects in the way Saami interests had been handled. Although the dam on the Alta/Kautokeino River was built, the ethnopolitical drama played out around it had important consequences for the development of Saami politics. New Saami political visions were created, Saami needs were brought to the attention of the general public, and the Saami Rights Commission started a development toward the greater recognition of Saami rights, which has not yet been completed. GRO WEEN See also Finnmark; Norway; Reindeer Pastoralism; Saami Further Reading Bjørklund, I. & T. Brantenberg, Samisk reindrift—norske inngrep, Oslo: Universitetsforlaget, 1981 Paine, R., Dam a River, Damn a people: Saami Livelihood and the Alta/Kautokeino Hydro Electric Project and the Norwegian Parliament, IWGIA Document 45, IWGIA, Copenhagen ———, “Ethnodrama and the Fourth World: the Saami Action Group in Norway, 1979–1981.” In Indigenous Peoples and the Nation-State, edited by Noel Dyck, Social and Economic Papers No. 14, Memorial University of Newfoundland, Institute of Social and Economic Research, 1985

ALUTIIT Alutiit, or Sugpiat, are the indigenous people of Prince William Sound, the eastern Kenai Peninsula, Kodiak Island, and portions of the lower Alaska Peninsula. Russian colonizers called both the Unangan of the Aleutian Islands and the Alutiit “Aleuts,” thinking they were the same people as sea mammal hunters of Kamchatka who were called Aliutors. After almost 100 years of Russian rule, Alutiit called themselves Aleuts. Kodiak Island Alutiit are also called Koniag, derived from the term Kanaagin used by their Unangan enemies and trading partners. Alutiit of the Prince William Sound area are also called Chugachmiut. Anthropologists coined the term Pacific Eskimo in the 20th century to indicate Alutiiq linguistic and cultural ties to Yupiit (singular Yup’ik) and other Eskimo peoples. Alutiit considered the term insulting or at best strange. This led to the adoption of “Alutiiq” (plural Alutiit) as an alternative designation. Alutiit leaders suggested a return to the traditional self-designation Sugpiat in the 1980s or 1990s, but so far Alutiiq (Alutiit) remains the most common appellation for the people (Pullar, 1996). Alutiiq lands spread from Ivanof Bay (55°54′ N 159°29′ W) on the Alaska Peninsula to Cordova (60° 33′ N 145° 45′ W) in Prince William Sound, and south to the village of Akhiok (56° 56′ N 154°10′ W) on Kodiak Island. On the Alaska Peninsula, current Alutiiq communities include Perryville, Ivanof Bay, Chignik Lake, Chignik Lagoon, and Chignik Bay. In addition to the city of Kodiak, Kodiak area Native villages are Karluk, Akhiok, Larsen Bay, Port Lions, Old Harbor, and Ouzinkie. In the Chugachmiut region of Prince William Sound are Chenega Bay, Tatitlek, and the cities of Cordova and Valdez. Nanwalek (English Bay) and Port Graham are on the lower Kenai Peninsula; the nearby city of Seward also has some Alutiiq population. Port Graham and Nanwalek may formerly have been part of a separate group of Alutiit on the Kenai Peninsula that extended through much of Cook Inlet before colonization. Their regional name is Unegkurmiut. The smallest village in the Alutiiq region had 22 residents in 2000, contrasting with around 200 Native inhabitants in the larger villages and 660 Alutiit in the city of Kodiak (ADCED, c.2000). The cities of Kodiak, Seward, Valdez, and Cordova have 10–15% Native residents (ADCED, c.2000). The total Alutiiq population at the 2000 census totaled approximately 3000 in the above communities, although possible confusion between the terms Aleut and Eskimo and the definition of mixed-race individuals may underrepresent Alutiit. Many more Alutiit reside in other parts of Alaska and in other states. The membership of the Koniag and Chugach regional corporations 71

ALUTIIT includes 5300 Alutiit, with an undetermined number of Alutiit also members of the Bristol Bay Native Corporation (which also has Yup’ik shareholders). These figures suggest that there are more than 6000 people of Alutiiq heritage, since not all Alutiit are corporation shareholders under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA). Archaeological evidence indicates that Alutiit have lived on the Pacific coast for the past 7000 years or more. Yup’ik Eskimos likely settled on this portion of southern Alaska and picked up elements of both Aleut and Northwest Coast Indian cultures over time. The relatively warm maritime climate and abundance of salmon and a wide variety of other resources allowed the development of large settlements and a high degree of cultural complexity. Along with a relatively high population density came social ranking, with classes from nobles to slaves. Precontact populations were likely many times the current levels, and have been estimated by archaeologists to be between 8000 and 30,000 on Kodiak Island and the adjacent Alaska Peninsula villages (Clark, 1984). Estimates for 1800 gauge all Alutiiq Natives to have numbered 6000. A smallpox epidemic in the 1830s cut the population to 3000, close to those counted in the first US census in 1880 (Clark, 1984). Over time there has been much exchange between Alutiiq communities. Traditionally, villages traded, raided, and intermarried with each other in addition to contact and warfare with Eyak, Tlingit, Tanaina, and Unangan neighbors. Since contact, dozens of villages have been abandoned due to natural disasters, epidemics, and population decline. Others moved or consolidated. A few communities are very old. Karluk, perched on the edge of Kodiak Island’s most productive salmon run, is built nearly on top of successive village sites dating back several thousand years. Patterns of life were changed markedly with the arrival of Russian fur traders in the region in the 1780s. After initial resistance, the invaders won a victory at a “refuge rock” on the east side of Kodiak Island, where Alutiit had been hiding. As many as 500 Natives may have perished, bringing Alutiiq resistance to Russian force to an end. The Russians took hostages and, this together with the threat of force, were able to keep Alutiit in a state of servitude. Villages were divided into work groups, with the mutual goal of providing as many high-quality furs as possible for the lucrative China trade. Lack of provisioning from Russia necessitated the production of dried salmon, whale meat, and the ricelike rhizomes of the chocolate lily, Fritillaria camschatcensis, to feed both Russians and their indentured hunters. Many of the best hunters traveled in groups as far as California in pursuit of luxurious sea otter pelts, leaving the less able at home

72

to trap fox, pursue sea mammals, birds, and other game as best as they could. Women were also employed in sewing waterproof kamleikas, the gut rain parkas worn by hunters and adopted by Russians. Subsistence activities are still vitally important both economically and culturally in Alutiiq communities. Salmon makes up the largest portion of the subsistence take. Other types of fish (primarily halibut) and game (caribou, moose, and deer) are second to salmon, with marine mammals, birds, eggs, marine invertebrates, and wild plants used to a lesser extent (Fall and Walker, 1993). Alutiit traditionally fished and hunted sea mammals, including whales from baidarkas (the Aleut-type kayak). Brown bear was an important quarry of hunters in the past, but few Alutiit now have a taste for the meat. Black bear is still used in the Chugach region. Reliance on country foods varies considerably, depending upon access to employment (cash income) and stores. Ivanof Bay, the community with the fewest available jobs and services such as inexpensive freight, had a per capita harvest of 490 pounds of wild game, fish, and vegetable products in 1989. Communities in the region averaged around 300 pounds of subsistence foods harvested per person as calculated for the most representative year between 1982 and 1997 by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G, 2000). Alutiiq villages have participated in the commercial fisheries since they were established in Alaska, both as fishers and in processing. The mass production of salted and dried salmon (youkala) under the Russians led to the establishment of commercial salteries around the region, but they were not successful. The first salmon cannery in the region was sited at Karluk in 1882 (Roppel, 1994). Salmon processors and herring oil reduction plants were spread widely across the region in the 20th century until market forces and improved transportation shut down all but the largest and most modern plants. Present fish processing ventures are located in Chignik Lagoon, and the cities of Kodiak, Seward, and Cordova. While canneries operated near Native communities, whole villages would move seasonally to the vicinity. Most men fished and women worked in the plants along with imported laborers. Currently, salmon, halibut, herring, crab, and cod are harvested commercially from most Alutiiq communities. Income from commercial fishing varies significantly between the villages and years, falling significantly in recent years mostly due to weak markets. In 2000, village per capita income generated by operation of fishing vessels ranged from approximately $41,000 in salmon-rich Chignik and $6559 in Old Harbor, to nothing in Karluk, where there are no longer any vessel operators (CFEC, 2001; ADCED,

ALUTIIT c.2000). In the villages with significant catches, there are large disparities between families with fishing income and those without. As the fisheries decline, a growing number of Alutiiq individuals, villages, and corporations are developing ecotourism and sport fishing and hunting outfitting ventures. Government and Native organization offices provide a few jobs, and most villages have at least a small store that hires workers. In general, men are more interested in subsistence, commercial fishing, or outdoor guiding activities, whereas there is little interesting or high-paying work available to women in small communities. Sea mammal hunting, under pressure from government regulation and declining stocks, no longer holds the importance to subsistence it once did. Seals and sea lions are still hunted on occasion. The highly developed whale hunting technology declined after the Russians forcibly redirected Alutiiq hunting efforts to sea otters. Whales were hunted from baidarkas with ground slate lances poisoned with an aconite extract from the root of monkshood (Aconitum delphinifolium). The whales were not pursued after being speared, but washed ashore after several days. Whale and seal oil were burned in stone lamps and provided a main source of light and heat. Whales figured prominently in Alutiiq cosmology, and are featured subjects of petroglyphs on Kodiak Island. These may be related to Aleut whaling cults. Other aspects of ceremonialism, including seasonal festivals and masks, resemble those of Bristol Bay and Bering Sea coast Yupiit (Fitzhugh, 1988). Most ceremonial activities were held in the kashim (men’s house) and included memorial feasts, potlatches, and whaling ceremonies. The kashim was a large version of the barabara, a semisubterranean house supported with driftwood and covered in sod in which people lived. Ordinary barabaras housed about 20 people, typically constructed with a large central cooking and gathering room and smaller private family rooms and a steam bath (magiwek) off to the sides. A large settlement might have as many as ten of the structures. Families were matrilocal, several sisters often sharing a house. Chiefs (anayugak), who were the richest men and owners of the kashim, would lead one or more villages. Shamans could be either men or women. They predicted the weather, divined times for hunting and other activities, dealt with the spirit world, and brokered human disputes through supernatural means using dolls and other objects. (Some shamanism has continued underground in living memory.) Women were generally the midwives and healers and employed bloodletting, herbalism, and other methods. Most men and women wore labrets or lip piercings,

the value of which may have indicated rank. Women tattooed their faces. Russian Orthodox priests arrived soon after fur traders in Alutiiq country. Most families adopted Orthodoxy, since Russian priests often provided the only relief the people had from cruel treatment by the fur traders, and the doctrine was flexible enough to incorporate some indigenous cosmology. All of the Alutiiq villages except Ivanof Bay still have Russian churches, although few have resident priests. After Alaska was purchased by the United States in 1867, Kodiak became the site of a large Baptist mission. Although the majority of Alutiit still practice Orthodoxy over other religions, other Christian churches have some followers. A relatively new influence on Alutiiq life is the corporate system put in place by the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) in 1971. The Alutiiq culture region was split between three Native corporations (see above), each responsible for managing their own lands and resources. Each village also has a tribal council with a separate relationship to the federal government, and a tribal or municipal relationship to state and borough governments. These divisions must be overcome in order for the Alutiiq people to unite in supporting their heritage. The Alutiiq language (also called Sugcestun) flourishes in Nanwalek, where all children learn it in school. Other districts have had less success in obtaining support for native language curriculum, and only a handful of fluent speakers survive in these communities. Revitalization of Alutiiq culture is being expressed in a number of ways, including regular performances of Alutiiq dance groups, the establishment of the Alutiiq Museum and Archaeological Repository in Kodiak in 1995, and artists producing masks and other media. DEBORAH B. ROBINSON See also Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA); Alaska Peninsula; Aleut; Eskimo-Aleut languages; Kenai Peninsula; Kodiak Island; Shamanism; Yupiit Further Reading ADCED, Alaska Community Database: Detailed Community Information, Alaska Department of Community and Economic Development, c.2000; website: http://www.dced. state.ak.us/mra/CF_BLOCK.cfm ADF & G, Community Profile Database, Division of Subsistence, Alaska Department of Fish and Game, 2000; website: http://www.state.ak.us/adfg/subsist/geninfo/publctns/ cpdb.htm Bray, Tamara L. & Thomas W. Killion (editors), Reckoning with the Dead: The Larsen Bay Repatriation and the Smithsonian Institution, Washington, District of Columbia: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1994

73

AMAGOALIK, JOHN CFEC, Alaska Limited Entry Commission Fishing Statistics, Alaska Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission; website: http://www.cfec.state.ak.us/mnu_Limitations.htm Chaussonnet, Valerie (editor), Crossroads Alaska: Native Cultures of Alaska and Siberia, Washington, District of Columbia: Arctic Studies Center, Smithsonian Institution Press, 1995 Chugach, History and Culture, Chugach Alaska Corporation, 2001; website: http://www.chugach-ak.com/history main.html Clark, Donald W., Koniag Prehistory: Archaeological Investigations at Late Prehistoric Sites on Kodiak Island, Alaska, Stuttgart: Verlag W. Kohlhammer, 1974 ———, “Pacific Eskimo: Historical Ethnography.” In Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 5, Arctic, edited by David Damas, Washington, District of Columbia: Smithsonian Institution, 1984 Fall, James A. & Robert J. Walker, “Subsistence Harvests in Six Kodiak Island Borough Communities, 1986,” Juneau, Division of Subsistence, Alaska Department. of Fish and Game, 1993 Fitzhugh, William W., “Eskimos: Hunters of the Frozen Coasts.” In Crossroads of Continents: Cultures of Siberia and Alaska, edited by William W. Fitzhugh & Aron Crowell, Washington, District of Columbia: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1988 ———, (editor), Crossroads of Continents: Cultures of Siberia and Alaska, Washington, District of Columbia: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1988 Koniag, About Koniag [www], Koniag Incorporated, 2001; website: http://www.koniag.com/ Maschner, Herbert D.G., “Raid, retreat, defend (repeat): the archaeology and ethnohistory of warfare on the North Pacific Rim.” Journal of Anthropological Archaeology, 17(1) (1998): 19–51 Moss, Madonna L. & Jon M. Erlandson (editors), Maritime Cultures of Southern Alaska: Papers in Honor of Richard H. Jordan, Volume 29, No. 2, Arctic Anthropology, edited by Richard Condon, Fayetteville, Arkansas: University of Wisconsin Press, 1992 Pullar, Gordon L., Aleut. In Encyclopedia of North American Indians, edited by Frederick E. Hoxie, Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1996 Roppel, Patricia, Salmon from Kodiak: An History of the Salmon Fishery of Kodiak Island, Alaska, Anchorage: Alaska Historical Commission Studies in History No. 216, 1994 Yaw-Davis, Nancy, “Contemporary Pacific Eskimo.” In Handbook of North American Indians, edited by David Damas, Washington, District of Columbia: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1984

AMAGOALIK, JOHN John Amagoalik is widely recognized as one of the key leaders in the creation of the Nunavut Territory in Canada. The territory, encompassing just over 27,000 people but extending over 2 million sq km (800,000 sq mi), was carved from eastern and central portions of the Northwest Territories, and accounts for nearly one-fifth of the entire area of Canada. With a population that is approximately 80% Inuit, Nunavut serves to guarantee the future of indigenous culture and language.

74

In 1974, Amagoalik served as executive director of the Nunavut Land Claims Project, which was responsible for formulating the Inuit land claim. In this role, he was one of the first to call for the creation of an Inuit-majority territory in the eastern Northwest Territories. In the late 1970s, Amagoalik headed the Inuit Land Claim Commission, which negotiated land claims with representatives of the Canadian and Northwest Territories governments. During the 1980s, Amagoalik served two terms as the president of the Inuit Tapirisat of Canada (presently known as Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami (ITK), Canada’s national Inuit organization), where he continued to promote the protection of native culture, language, and political interests. During his tenure, the Northwest Territories held a plebiscite to measure the support for the possible creation of Nunavut. The proposal was endorsed by 56% of the voters, with a wider margin of support among Inuit voters. In the early 1990s, Amagoalik acted as a political advisor to the Tungavik Federation of Nunavut, the Inuit agency responsible for the final negotiations with the government of Canada to settle native land claims and the creation of a new territory. The Canadian Parliament passed the Nunavut Act (initiating the creation of the new territory) and the Nunavut Land Claims in 1993 with relatively little opposition. The successful outcome of these acts has been attributed to the Inuit position that the new Nunavut territory would not exist exclusively for aboriginals of the Northwest Territories but rather all people living within the territorial borders. As chief commissioner of the Nunavut Implementation Commission (NIC), Amagoalik was responsible for overseeing the creation of a territorial government. Although he borrowed from the existing laws of the Northwest Territories, duplicate government agencies needed to be formed in order to provide services once the political division took place. In order for Nunavut to function as a self-governing entity, Amagoalik also ascertained that a sufficient number of Nunavut residents received proper training for careers in government services. This required a concerted effort by the NIC and other agencies to combat the exceedingly high dropout rate within Inuit high schools. Amagoalik endorsed a controversial effort to mandate equal representation of men and women in the Nunavut legislative assembly. The proposal, first considered in 1994, would have created two-member legislative districts in which voters elected one man and one woman to serve in the Nunavut Assembly. The proposal was ultimately rejected in a territorial plebiscite in 1997. In addition to his work in advancing the cause of self-government for the Inuit of the Canadian Arctic,

AMEDEO, LUIGI, DUKE OF ABRUZZI Amagoalik was active in the formation of the Inukshuk Project. A forerunner to the Inuit Broadcasting Corporation, this project brought Inuitproduced television to the Eastern and Central Arctic of Canada. Amagoalik also succeeded in negotiating a settlement with the Canadian government in 1995 for reparations to Inuit families relocated against their will during the 1950s from northern Québec to settlements in the Northwest Territories. The relocation project, which included the moving of Amagoalik’s own family from Resolute Bay in the Canadian Arctic, was intended to provide land for the construction of American military bases.

Biography John Amagoalik was born in Inukjuaq, Québec on November 26, 1947. He and his family, along with several other Inuit families, were relocated to Resolute Bay by the Canadian government in an effort to support military bases in the Canadian Arctic. He attended school in Iqaluit (formerly Frobisher Bay) and began his career in public service there in 1971 as the Baffin Regional Information Officer for the government of the Northwest Territories. In 1974, he became the executive director of the Nunavut Land Claims Project. From 1977 until its dissolution in 1979, Amagoalik served as head of the Inuit Land Claim Commission. He then served as vice president of the Inuit Tapirisat of Canada (today Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami or ITK ) before serving two nonconsecutive terms as that organization’s president (1981–1985, 1988–1991). In 1994, he received an award from the ITK for his contribution to Inuit political rights in Canada. In 1991, he served as political advisor to the Tungavik Federation of Nunavut. In 1993, he was appointed chief commissioner of the Nunavut Implementation Commission, which oversaw the establishment of Nunavut territory in 1999. J. BRENT ETZEL See also Inuit Broadcasting Corporation; Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami; Nunavut; Nunavut Final Agreement; Nunavut Tunngavik Inc. Further Reading Amagoalik, John, “Canada’s Nunavut: An Indigenous Northern Territory.” In Surviving Columbus: Indigenous Peoples, Political Reform, and Environmental Management in North Australia, edited by Peter Jull et al., Darwin: North Australia Research Unit, Australian National University, 1994 ———, Footprints in New Snow: A Comprehensive Report From the Nunavut Implementation Commission to the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, Government of the Northwest Territories and Nunavut

Tunngavik Incorporated Concerning the Establishment of the Nunavut Government, Iqaluit: Nunavut Implementation Commission, 1995 Cameron, Kirk & Graham White, Northern Governments in Transition, Montreal: Institute for Research on Public Policy, 1995 Dahl, Jens, Jack Hicks & Peter Jull (editors), Nunavut: Inuit Regain Control of Their Land and Their Lives, Copenhagen: International Work Group for Indigenous Affairs, 2000 Duffy, R. Quinn, The Road to Nunavut: The Progress of the Eastern Arctic Inuit Since the Second World War, Kingston: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 1988 Légaré, André, The Evolution of the Government of the Northwest Territories (1967–1995): The Debate Over its Legitimacy and the Emergence of Nunavut and Denedeh, Québec: Gétic, 1998

AMEDEO, LUIGI, DUKE OF ABRUZZI Luigi Amedeo Giuseppe Maria Ferdinando Francesco, Prince of Savoy, Duke of Abruzzi, was a member of the Italian navy whose cruises around the world developed in him an interest in climbing peaks in the Himalayas and ascending Mount St Elias in Alaska. After securing financial support from his uncle, King Umberto, in 1897, the Duke organized and led his expedition to Alaska. The expedition members included fellow naval officer Umberto Cagni, photographer Vittorio Sella, Dr. Filippo De Filippi, chief guide Joseph Petigax and four other professional alpine guides, a photography assistant along with Tlingit and American porters. After enduring a difficult 38-day glacier journey, avalanches, and hard climbing, the Duke became the first to reach the summit of Mount St Elias on July 31, 1897. The remoteness and the difficult glacier travel make this peak a difficult challenge even for modern mountaineers. After this remarkable achievement, the Duke and Captain Cagni planned an expedition to the North Pole. In 1898, they traveled to Spitsbergen (Svalbard) to test their equipment, and then sought the advice of Norwegian explorer Fridtjof Nansen. With his assistance they purchased a Norwegian ship, renamed the Polar Star (Stella Polare), and hired a Norwegian crew. The Duke again had Cagni, Petigax and three experienced alpine guides, plus Lt. Francesco Querini and Dr. Achille Cavalli Molinelli in his party. On August 6, 1899, the expedition arrived at Teplitz Bay, Rudolph Island, Franz Josef Land (81°47′ N), and prepared to winter aboard ship. Their confidence was badly shaken when ice pressure from a September storm nearly sank the ship. Although they saved the vessel, the men were forced to build winter shelters ashore. During a December sledging trip, the Duke’s hands became severely frozen and he lost parts of the fingers on his left hand. This injury precluded him from accompanying the sledging parties when they finally departed on March 11, 1900.

75

AMERICAN PALEO-ARCTIC TRADITION Cagni led the group north from Rudolph Island with nine men, 102 dogs, and 13 sledges. Progress on the Arctic Ocean was slower than expected. On March 21, about 52 miles (83.4 km) north of Rudolph Island, Cagni sent Querini and two men back to land. They never arrived and no trace of them was ever found. Molinelli and two men returned from 83°16′ on March 30. They were fortunate to reach their base camp on April 18 after a difficult journey over the drifting ice. Cagni, Petigax, and two other guides continued northward until April 25, when they reached 86°34′ N, about 23 miles (37 km) north of Nansen’s “Farthest North” record. Ice drift and adverse weather hampered their return. Furthermore, 28 continuous days of cloudy weather prevented observations to determine their position. Currents and ice drift carried them west to Teplitz Bay as the ice began to break up and melt. They finally reached Rudolph Island on June 23, with only seven dogs remaining and their food supply exhausted. The damaged Polar Star eventually escaped from the ice of Teplitz Bay and reached Norway in September 1900. After his return from the Arctic, many nations honored the Duke for his achievements. He was acclaimed a national hero in Italy and later became an admiral in the Italian Navy. He added to his mountaineering accomplishments in 1906 by naming and climbing the 16 highest Ruwenzori peaks in Africa. In 1909, he ascended above 21,000 feet on K2 and to 24,600 feet (7498 m) on Bride’s Peak (Chogolisa) in Pakistan. During World War I, the Duke commanded the Italian Navy’s Adriatic Fleet, and oversaw the evacuation of 240,000 Serbian soldiers and refugees. In 1917, a French admiral replaced him in the Adriatic command and he retired to private life. Following the war, the Duke organized a large experimental farm in Italian Somaliland (now Somalia) at Johar, 80 miles (176 km) northeast of Mogadishu. His farming-industrial enterprise served as a major source of income and employment for the country for the next seven decades. The Duke of Abruzzi remains a legend among modern mountaineers for his pioneering ascents of Mount St Elias, the Ruwenzori, and K2. However, polar historians underrate or ignore his polar accomplishments. Subsequent polar expeditions by Scott and Shackleton in the Antarctic and by Peary and Cook in the Arctic soon overshadowed the Abruzzi expedition. Despite the Duke’s failure to reach the pole, he determined that Franz Josef Land did not extend north of Rudolph Island, and Cagni’s northern journey far exceeded those of four other Franz Josef Land expeditions of that era (Jackson, Wellman, Baldwin, and Fiala). The Duke rightly concluded that the Smith Sound route offered the best possibility for reaching the North Pole

76

by dog sledge. Perhaps his greatest contribution to Arctic exploration was his introduction of alpine equipment, techniques, and using pioneer parties for polar ice travel.

Biography Luigi Amedeo Giuseppe Maria Ferdinando Francesco was born in Madrid, Spain, on February 11, 1873, the third son of Princess Maria Vittoria dal Pozzo della Sisterna and Spain’s King Amadeus, Duke of Aosta. His father abdicated the Spanish throne only 11 days after his birth and returned to his birthplace in Turin, Italy. Luigi was privately tutored and at the age of six was enrolled in the Italian Navy as a cabin boy, performing menial duties with no special privileges. By his teenage years he had sailed to ports around the world, mastered French, English, German, Spanish, and some Arabic, earned a degree in mathematics, and was promoted to midshipman in the navy. He spent time on shore with his aunt, Queen Margherita, a pioneer, female mountain climber, and ascended many major peaks in the Alps such as Mont Blanc and the Matterhorn. He later joined noted British climbers Alfred Mummery and Norman Collie for ascents in the Alps. The Duke died at his home in Somalia on March 18, 1933. TED HECKATHORN Further Reading Amedeo, Luigi, “On the Polar Star.” In Arctic Sea, 2 volumes, London: Hutchinson & Company,1903 De Filippi, Filippo, The Ascent of Mount St Elias [Alaska], Westminster: Archibald Constable and Co., 1900 Greely, A.W., A Handbook of Polar Discoveries (4th edition), Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1909 McConnell, Burt M. (editor), “Death takes its toll.” The Explorers Journal, May 1932–May 1934 Tenderini, Mirella & Michael Shandrick, The Duke of the Abruzzi: An Explorer’s Life, Seattle: The Mountaineers, 1997 Waterman, Jonathan, A Most Hostile Mountain: Re-creating the Duke of Abruzzi’s Historic Expedition on Alaska’s Mount St Elias, New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1997

AMERICAN PALEO-ARCTIC TRADITION The American Paleo-Arctic Tradition is an archaeological technological tradition encompassing a number of well-defined technocomplexes and archaeological cultures, from the Denali Complex in Interior Alaska and the Yukon Territory to the Akmak and Kobuk Complexes in Northwest Alaska dating from about 13,500 to 2000 calendar years ago. First defined in 1970 by Douglas D. Anderson on the basis of the Akmak and Kobuk complexes at Onion Portage, Trail

AMERICAN PALEO-ARCTIC TRADITION Creek Cave 2, and several Brooks Range sites, the American Paleo-Arctic Tradition has been enlarged by various researchers to encompass or equate with Frederick Hadleigh West’s Denali Complex and later Beringian Tradition, and John Cook’s Chindadn and Athapaskan Complexes. The American Paleo-Arctic Tradition does not appear to be associated with the Arctic Small Tool Tradition or Northern Archaic Tradition, which postdates the former. The geographic distributions of the American Paleo-Arctic Tradition are Alaska, Yukon Territory, and northwest British Columbia, although similar artifact types are found in Siberia, as far west as Lake Baikal. Important American Paleo-Arctic Tradition sites include Onion Portage, Dry Creek, Swan Point, Campus, Donnelly Ridge, Teklanika West, Panguingue Creek, various Tangle Lake sites, Healy Lake, Jay Creek Ridge, Gerstle River, and Annie Lake. Although there is some variability in diagnostic artifact types, the key types include specialized wedge-shaped microblade cores from which regular, parallel-sided microblades were detached, platform rejuvenation tablets struck from these cores to facilitate microblade removal, burins and burin spalls made on flakes, large blades on prepared pebbles, and biconvex bifaces. Other artifact types found in American Paleo-Arctic tradition sites include endscrapers on blades or flakes (sometimes with graver spurs, or burinated), boulder spall scrapers, and utilized flakes. Siberian and Alaskan evidence indicates that microblades were retouched and inserted into slotted bone or antler points, possibly used with atl atls (spear throwers). Numerous dated sites have been documented, ranging from Swan Point (13,500 years ago) to various sites dating from 12,500 to 7500 years ago. Increasing evidence indicates that many hallmarks of this tradition, including wedge-shaped microblade cores, continued to the middle to late Holocene, at least to 2000 years ago in Alaska. The largest American Paleo-Arctic Tradition or Denali site is Dry Creek Component 2, which yielded almost 29,000 artifacts, including 121 microblade cores or core fragments, over one thousand microblades, burins, small lanceolate projectile points, bifaces, scrapers, retouched flakes, and hammerstones. However, the vast majority of the 303 sites with microblade technology in interior Alaska (10% of the total number of sites) are small lithic concentrations averaging less than 500 artifacts each. Since the original discovery of microblade technology in Alaska in 1939 and the increase in cultural resource management-related archaeological investigations in the 1970s and 1980s, the delineation of a late Pleistocene-early Holocene microblade-using tra-

dition has occupied the attention of northern archaeologists. Regional or temporal variants have been described in the literature. In 1981, West incorporated all microblade technologies (excluding Denbigh) into a Beringian Tradition, which included the Dyuktai Culture of Siberia. The favored prey species of populations using American Paleo-Arctic Tradition (or Denali complex) technology appears to have been caribou and other large game such as bison, wapiti, and sheep. Small game and waterfowl were also present in American Paleo-Arctic Tradition sites. Preferred site locales included hills overlooking river and stream confluences and lake margins. Mobility appears to have been high, based on lithic material sourcing and the portability of the toolkit. Almost all American Paleo-Arctic Tradition sites in Eastern Beringia are relatively small lithic scatters, the largest of which (Dry Creek Component 2) is considered a “spike camp,,” or a short-term logistical hunting base. No residential bases have been located in this area, and some archaeologists speculate that these sites would have been near the large braided rivers, and thus probably destroyed due to erosion. Small ephemeral hunting camps typify the American Paleo-Arctic Tradition settlement pattern. Spatial analyses from various sites indicate that specialized tool clusters were used, perhaps indicative of seasonal or prey-specific toolkits. Recent work finds a correlation of American PaleoArctic Tradition occupations and cooler, windier climates, perhaps relating to subsistence strategies. The American Paleo-Arctic Tradition is potentially important in various scenarios of the peopling of the Americas. In the early 20th century, Edward Nelson and Froelich Rainey noted that certain chipped stone technologies found in Alaska were similar or identical to those found in Mongolia. Wedge-shaped microblade cores were one of the first technological linkages between the Old and New Worlds. Sites with this specific microblade core and burin technology occur from about 20,000 years ago in the Aldan region, and later in areas further east. The first documented human occupation in far eastern Siberia occurs around 16,000 years ago at Ushki, and is apparently unrelated technologically to the American Paleo-Arctic tradition. Microblade sites occur later (~13,000 years ago), roughly coinciding with the first archaeological sites in Alaska. Some archaeologists believe that the earliest occupation of Alaska was by a nonmicroblade tradition, termed the Nenana Complex, supported by technological similarities among Walker Road, Dry Creek Component I and Ushki-1, level 7. Others believe that the first occupation in Alaska was by microblade-using peoples, supported by a radiocarbon date of 13,500 years at Swan Point. There appears to

77

AMPHIBIANS be no valid technological relationship between the American Paleo-Arctic Tradition and the various Paleo-Indian complexes further south in North America. With the paucity of dated, excavated sites, and the recent resurgence of interest in various coastal migration models, the relationship of the American Paleo-Arctic tradition and the first inhabitants of the New World remains unclear. Despite the various temporal, technological, typological, and cultural historical issues relating to the American Paleo-Arctic Tradition, it occupies an integral place in the prehistory of the Arctic and Subarctic, the peopling of the New World, and various ecological paradigms. BEN A. POTTER See also Beringia; Dyuktai Culture; Rainey, Froelich Further Reading Anderson, Douglas, “Microblade traditions in Northwestern Alaska.” Arctic Anthropology, 7(2) (1970): 2–16 Bonnichsen, Robson & Karen L. Turnmire (editors), Ice Age People of North America: Environments, Origins, and Adaptations, Corvallis: Oregon State University Press, 1999 Dikov, Nikolai N., Asia at the Juncture with America in Antiquity, translated by Richard L. Bland, originally published by Nauka, St Petersburg; English version published by the US Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Beringian Program, Anchorage, Alaska, 1997 Dixon, E. James, “Cultural chronology of Central Interior Alaska.” Arctic Anthropology, 22(1) (1985): 47–66 “Mason, Owen K., Peter M. Bowers & David M. Hopkins, “The Early Holocene Milankovitch thermal maximum and humans: adverse conditions for the Denali complex of Eastern Beringia.” Quaternary Science Review, 20 (2001): 525–548 Powers, W. Roger, R. Dale Guthrie & John F. Hoffecker, Dry Creek: Archaeology and Paleoecology of a Late Pleistocene Hunting Camp, Final Report, Prepared for the National Park Service, 1983 Rainey, Froelich, “Archaeology of Central Alaska.” Anthropological Papers of the University of Alaska, 12(2) (1939): 92–100 West, Frederick Hadleigh, “The Donnelly Ridge site and the definition of an early core and blade complex in Central Alaska.” American Antiquity, 32(2) (1967): 360–382 ———, (editor), 1996 American Beginnings: The Prehistory and Palaeoecology of Beringia. , Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996

AMPHIBIANS Amphibians (Amphibia) is the class of poikilothermic (also known as cold-blooded) terrestrial vertebrates that usually retain the aquatic larval stage; hence, proximity to fresh water is typical for a majority of the species. Breeding takes place in water (or wet soil), and the aquatic larvae (which breathe through the gills) metamorphose and subsequently live on land.

78

The food of adults and some larvae (in salamanders) consists of small invertebrates; otherwise, adults eat invertebrates, whereas frog and toad larvae eat detritus and algae and small invertebrates. The majority of amphibians live in wet tropical and subtropical areas, from where species richness decreases northward and southward. Few amphibian species cross the Arctic Circle: one salamander, one toad, and four frog species. However, they cannot be considered as true Arctic species because the main part of their distribution ranges covers the Subarctic and the temperate zone. Their penetration into the Arctic is usually with wood vegetation, particularly by intrazonal landscapes of river valleys. However, further dispersal in moist tundra landscapes also occurs in woodless areas. These species have evolved some mechanisms for survival in the severe climatic conditions of the north, such as seasonal changes in biochemistry and physiology, relatively fast accumulation of special cryoprotectant substances preventing the formation of ice crystals breaking cell walls, high ability of amylases to maintain high activity during a sharp fall in temperature, relatively high connection of adults with wetlands during the nonbreeding season, freeze tolerance of spawn, and relatively fast development of embryos and larvae (allowing them to complete transformation from the embryo to the terrestrial animal during a short activity period in high latitudes). These species form stable and sometimes dense populations in the Arctic. The Siberian newt, Salamandrella keyserlingii (Caudata: Hynobiidae), is a small amphibian with a total length of 119–162 mm. It has 11–15 costal grooves on each body side; its tail is slightly shorter, equal, or slightly longer than the body including the head; coloration is brown, bronze-brown, olive or grayish with dark spots and a light, often golden or silver longitudinal dorsal band. This newt has the widest geographical range of any recent amphibian species, c.12 million km2, and is the most widespread amphibian species in the Arctic. It lives in Russia, the north of Kazakhstan, Mongolia, China, Korea, and Japan. Over a considerable part of the northern margin of its range, this species crosses the Arctic Circle. The northern margin of the range extends in the former Soviet Union from the Russian Plain (Arkhangelskaya Province: c.64°40′ N 43° E) eastward to the Arctic part of the Urals (Tyumenskaya Province, south of Yamal Peninsula: c.67°56′ N 67°51′ E), through the south of Taymyr Peninsula, Krasnoyarsk Kray (the Avam River: c.71° N 93° E) to the north of the Sakha Republic (c.70–71° N: Kyusyur Settlement—Kazachie Village on the Yana River—the Chukochya River mouth), Magadanskaya Province and Chukotka Peninsula (the northernmost known localities are Apapelgino

AMPHIBIANS Settlement: 69°47′ N 170°36′ E, Palyavaam River valley 60 km from Chaun Bay: 68°45′ N, 171°43′ E; Palyavaam River middle current 66 km upstream of Levtuttutveem River: 68°27′ N 174°37′ E; Amguema River left bank at the confluence of its tributary Ekitiki River: 67°40′ N 181°17′ E; Kanchalan River: 65°40′ N 177°4′ E; and Anadyr Settlement: 64°43′ N 177°24′ E). The newt usually inhabits various forests, but in the Arctic zone it lives in riparian groves (mainly composed of the larch, Larix sibirica) and in woodless tundra with moss and small lakes. The Siberian newt is a unique amphibian in terms of its freeze tolerance. Adults are able to survive freezing to −35°C to −40°C and can move at +0.5°C to +1°C. Biochemical analysis has revealed seasonal changes in concentrations of the cryoprotectant, glycerol, which is reallocated from the liver into other organs before hibernation. As a result, the tissues and organs do not freeze even at −20°C, and crystals of water, which can break cell walls, are located in extracellular cavities and under the skin. The eggs can survive short-term freezing in the ice. Adults can survive in a frozen state for a very long time. Sometimes such frozen salamanders, found in the permafrost at a depth of 4–14 m, “revive” after melting. About ten such instances are known, mainly from northeastern Siberia. As a rule, such animals die soon after melting, but sometimes they survive for a long time. The age of one such specimen excavated from a depth of 11 m was determined as 90±15 years, much more than the life span in “common” individuals. In the northern part of the range, the newts enter hibernacula in August or early September. The newt hibernates in rotten trees, under logs, snags, in holes, etc., usually in groups of five to ten (up to 200) individuals, sometimes singly. Hibernacula may be located within up to 200–500 m distance from ponds. At the beginning of hibernation (August-September), the permafrost alleviates significant fluctuations of the air temperature, and the fluctuations of temperature in hibernacula do not exceed 0.5–1.5°C. When the mean daily temperature approaches zero, the conditions in hibernacula become almost thermostatic, which is maintained for 10–20 days. Hibernation grounds (moss, rotten trees, etc.) do not alleviate daily fluctuations of temperature, which depends mainly on the air temperature and peculiarities of the snow cover. Nevertheless, even at the ambient temperatures of −45°C to −50°C, the temperatures in hibernacula fall to −18°C to −23°C for only two to three days (depth 5–10 cm, thickness of snow 30–35 cm). Snow cover plays the main role in this stabilization of temperature. The temperature increases with depth due to “warming” by the permafrost, the temperature of which is higher than that on the ground surface. Thus, the biochemical freeze tolerance of the

Siberian newt in combination with the peculiarities of its hibernacula allow the species to survive near the Arctic Circle. The total duration of overwintering at the north is not less than c.75% year. Only 4–10% of the annual activity falls within the aquatic phase, which tends to increase in duration northward. In the northern part of the species distribution, reproduction is extended (sometimes up to one month), which seems to depend mainly on the thawing of the soil. The clutch is a pair of egg sacs connected to one another by a very short mucous stalk, which serves to attach the clutch to the substrate. Each sac contains 14–166 eggs (usually 50–90 eggs). The duration of embryonic and larval development is shorter at the north due to a short activity period. The common toad, Bufo bufo (Anura: Bufonidae), is the central and the northernmost member of the Bufo bufo species complex. This is a large toad, 50–130 mm in length, with prominent parotoids (a pair of wartlike glands at the back of the head); the tympanic membrane is not visible; and males have no external resonator to amplify their calls. The toad has second and third toes with paired tubercles on the underside; no tarsal fold; dorsal skin as a rule with rounded tubercles, sometimes with sharp top; and a white-grayish, gray, brown, or olive-brown dorsal surface with more or less developed dark spots. The common toad is widespread in Europe and West Siberia, penetrating into East Siberia. The northern margin of the range extends from Norway and northern Sweden through the north of Russia, from the northern shore of the White Sea in Murmanskaya Province (Kandalaksha Nature Reserve: 66°35′ N 33°13′ E) and covers the whole of Karelia. In Arkhangelskaya Province, the range runs from the environs of Arkhangel’sk City (64°36′ N 40°32′ E) to Pinezhsky Nature Reserve (64°35′ N 43°03′ E). Then the margin extends southerly to the Arctic Circle southeastwards to the Irkutskaya Province of Russia in East Siberia (c.58° N 96° E to 56° N 100° E). Thus, the common toad crosses the Arctic Circle only in the western part of its distribution: in Fennoscandia, while eastward the northern margin of the range is shifted gradually more and more southward, in negative relation to the increased severe climatic conditions in East Siberia. The common toad is associated mainly with the forest zone, where it prefers coniferous forests with marshes. Large open areas are avoided, but in forested landscapes the toad readily inhabits bushlands, meadows, fields, glades, etc. Hibernation occurs on land in rotten trees, burrows, etc. The toads hibernate singly or in groups from September to the beginning of November to March-June, depending on the altitude and latitude. Breeding occurs from March to June (usually late April-May) and lasts for three to seven (up to 14) days

79

AMPHIBIANS at a single site. Various types of wetlands are used for spawning. However, at the north, reproduction occurs in shallow areas of lakes and rivers. The clutch has the shape of very long (upto 1–2 m) strings with spawn. Metamorphosis occurs from the middle to late summer. The common frog, Rana temporaria (Anura: Ranidae), is the central member of the group of brown frogs, which is widespread in Europe and Asia. The name R. temporaria has been used for almost all species of Eurasian brown frogs, including the species living in the Arctic. This is a medium-sized frog, from 33 to -100 mm; the body is corpulent and the snout is rounded; males have internal guttural resonators; dorsal coloration is olive, olive-brown, gray-brown, brown, gray, yellowish, or rufous; there is a V-shaped dark glandular spot on the neck and a large dark temporal spot behind the eyes; and the belly and hind legs are white from below, yellowish or grayish with a blotched-like pattern formed by brown, brownish-gray, or almost black spots. The frog inhabits Europe from the Pyrenees to the Urals and West Siberia. In Fennoscandia, the northern range margin corresponds approximately to the coast of the Norwegian and the Barents seas to the area between Kharlovka and Voyatka rivers (c.68°20′ N 37°20′ E). Then the margin runs beyond the Arctic Circle southward to the northern coast of Kandalaksha Bay. Southeastward, in Arkhangelskaya Province, the margin corresponds to the coast of the White Sea, including the Kanin Peninsula. From the latter, it runs southeastward and eastward through Komi Republic in Russia, approximately along the line: lower Shapkina River in UstTsilma District (c.67° N 53° E)—Vorkuta City (67°29′ N 64°00′ E), then to the Polar Urals (Yamalo-Nenet Autonomous Okrug in Tyumen Province: Shchuchya River, ca. 67° N 69° E). Then the margin runs southward to Kurganskaya Province of Russia and northern Kazakhstan. The species lives on many marine and lake islands, but the indication for Kolguev Island in the east of the Barents Sea needs further verification. The common frog inhabits various forests, in which it penetrates tundra. In the northern part of its range, the species tends to occur near ponds, lakes, and rivers, spending more time in water. At the northern limit of its distribution, this species lives in the forest and true tundras, usually on the shores of permanent lakes. In particular, in the Kola region, the common frog inhabits depositions of ancient glaciers in valleys, slopes of hills and the sea coast, as well as areas of northern taiga. In the Arctic, the common frog breeds in depressions in rocks, flooded plains, swamps, ponds, and the littoral zones of lakes. This species is quite resistant to low temperatures: it does not stop activity at +2°C to +3ºC. Hibernation starts after the first frosts, and finishes

80

before the time when the mean night temperature exceeds zero. The latest appearance (early June) and earliest disappearance (late August) within the range are in the Polar Urals. The eggs are deposited usually after the night temperature rises above zero. The clutch, as in other brown frogs, has the shape of a large clump. The clutches, deposited by a group of frogs, form a dense aggregation. The aggregation allows alleviation of sharp fluctuations of temperature and penetration of small natural enemies. The embryonic and larval development ends in late summer to autumn. The moor frog, Rana arvalis (Anura: Ranidae), is a small animal 36–80 mm in length, with the snout more or less terminating in a point. The male has internal guttural resonators. It has a smooth flank and thigh skin; gray, light-olive, yellowish, brown, or rufous dorsal coloration; a V-shaped dark glandular spot on the neck; a light mid-dorsal band frequently present (especially in northern populations); and a white or yellowish belly without pattern or with pallid brownish or grayish spots on the throat and chest. The frog inhabits a large area from southern Sweden and Finland to France, southeastern Europe and Siberia. The northern limit of the range runs from southern Sweden eastward through the Arctic Circle to the northern Sweden, Murmanskaya Province of Russia (Kandalakshsky Nature Reserve: 66°35′ N 33°13′ E) and northern Karelia, then through northern Arkhangelskaya Province (Pinezhsky Nature Reserve: 64°35′ N 43°03′ E—south of the Kanin Peninsula, Chesha River delta—Nenets Autonomous Okrug, Tobseda Settlement: c.68°30′ N 52°30′ E)—Komi Republic (Vorkuta City: 67°29′ N 64°00′ E)— Tyumenskaya Province (Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous Okrug, Kharvuta Settlement on the Khadyta-Yakha River: c.67°40′ N 70° E)—Krasnoyarsk Region (Taymyr Autonomous Okrug, Khantaika River basin: c.68° N 87° E), then southeastward to Yakutia below the Arctic circle. Thus, in Fennoscandia R. arvalis penetrates less northward in the Arctic than another brown frog, R. temporaria. However, in contrast to the latter species, it occurs in the Siberian Arctic, while R. temporaria does not penetrate farther northeastward than the Polar Urals. The moor frog penetrates tundra in association with arboreal vegetation, primarily along river valleys. At the northern limit of its distribution, in tundra, it lives near water bodies: rivers and lakes. In the shrubby tundra, it lives in sedge bogs and in lichen-sedge-moss tundras. In forest-tundra open woodlands, the moor frog is abundant in the riparian forests and associated bogs. In Europe, R. arvalis is probably a more thermophilous species, with lower requirements to humidity of the environment, than the sympatric R. temporaria. When these two frogs coexist in the same habitat, the first species more often

AMPHIBIANS lives in more open and well-illuminated habitats; it enters hibernation a little earlier and leaves it a little later; and the reproduction takes place a little later. The latest appearance (June) and earliest disappearance (September) within the moor frog range is in the Polar Urals. Spawning and early development occur in stagnant waters, including lakes, swamps, etc. The spawn is deposited as a clump, sometimes two to three clumps. The clutches do not form uniform masses and are positioned in a pond singly. The absolute duration of life (measured in years) is more at the north (tundra zone) than southerly. However, the duration of life measured by the periods of activity should be similar on various latitudes. The Siberian wood frog, Rana amurensis (Anura: Ranidae), is a brown frog of 38–84 mm length; the snout is moderately sharp; male resonators are reduced; dorsal coloration is grayish or gray-brown with dark spots; temporal spot is large; a light middorsal band is present; flank and thigh skin are granular, the granules are often red; and the belly is white or white-yellowish with large, irregular, partially fused blood-red spots. This frog inhabits Western and East Siberia, the Russian Far East, Korea, northern and central Mongolia, and northeastern China. The Arctic regions are reached in Russia, where the northern margin of the species’ range extends eastwards from Sverdlovskaya and Tyumenskaya provinces to Krasnoyarsk Region to Irkutskaya Province, then northeastward in Yakutia, where the species exceeds the Arctic Circle approximately along the line: upper flow of the Vilyui River—upper flow of the Markha River (c.66° N 114° E)—Zhigansk Town on the Lena River (c.67° N 124° E)—upward by the Lena River to Siktyakh and Buuru settlements (c.70°30′ N 125° E)—Khaiyr Lake in the lower Omoloi River area (c.71° N 133° E). Then the margin runs southeastward approximately along the line: Verkhoyansky District, Tylgys Settlement (30 km northward from the Arctic Circle)—Verkhnekolymsky District, Usun-Kyuyol Settlement (c.67°40′ N 155° E)—Magadanskaya Province (Srednekansky District, Balygychan and Seimchan Settlements, c.63° N 152° E). Then the margin runs southward to the shore of the Sea of Okhotsk. Information on the presence of the Siberian frog in several localities in northern Yakutia between 70 and 72° N needs further verification. The Siberian frog lives in coniferous, mixed and deciduous forests, within which it penetrates the tundra zone. The connection with water bodies (overgrown river valleys with floodplain ponds and lakes) is typical in the northernmost areas. Although its freeze tolerance has not been studied, this frog, together with the Siberian newt, may be the most cold-tolerant amphibian in the world. The ecology above the Arctic Circle was unstudied, but it

seems to be basically similar to that in R. temporaria and R. arvalis in the polar regions. The wood frog, Rana sylvatica (Anura: Ranidae), is a brown frog of 34–83 mm length. Dorsal coloration is from pink to dark brown, with a prominent dark mask ending abruptly behind the eardrum; a light mid-dorsal band is sometimes present; and the belly is white, sometimes with dark mottling. This species is widespread in the northern part of North America, where it lives from the east of USA (North Carolina, Tennessee, and Arkansas) northward and northeastward to Minnesota and Wisconsin, then to Canada (Saskatchewan, Alberta, British Columbia, and Mackenzie) and Alaska. This frog lives north of the Arctic Circle in areas westward from the Mackenzie District of Canada (the northernmost record is the Mackenzie River delta, Yellowknife) to Alaska (Bettles) in USA. The Alaskan part of this species distribution is closest to the range of the Old World brown frogs. The systematic and phylogenetic relationships of R. sylvatica with Eurasian brown frogs remain unexplored. The wood frog lives mainly in woods, but in the northernmost areas it lives in tundra. Hibernation is finished there in late April—May; the breeding season in the Mackenzie region is May-July. As in other studied northern amphibian species, the liver is the primary site of cryoprotectant production in the wood frog. The induction of cryoprotectant synthesis seems to be triggered solely by the initiation of freezing at the body extremities. This species is able to survive extracellular freezing at subzero temperatures from −2°C to −4°C for periods up to two weeks. There are two old records of the great crested newt, Triturus cristatus (Caudata: Salamandridae), from Lapland, Sweden, made above the Arctic Circle. This may indicate possible penetration of this species into the Arctic. SERGIUS L. KUZMIN

Further Reading Behler, J. & F.W. King, The Audubon Society Field Guide to North American Reptiles and Amphibians, New York: Knopf, 1988 Gasc, J.-P., A. Cabela, J. Crnobrnja-Isajlovic, D. Dolmen, K. Grossenbacher, P. Haffner, J. Lescure, H. Martens, J.P. Martinez-Rica, H. Maurin, M.E. Oliveira, T.S. Sofianidou, M. Veith & A. Zuiderwijk (editors), Atlas of Amphibians and Reptiles in Europe, Paris: SHE and NMNH Publ., 1997 Gislen, T. & H. Kauri, Zoogeography of the Swedish Amphibians and Reptiles with Notes on Their Growth and Ecology, Stockholm: Almquist and Wiksell, 1959 Kuzmin, S.L., The Amphibians of the Former Soviet Union, Sofia, Moscow: Pensoft, 1999 Logier, E.B.S. & G.C. Toner, Check List of the Amphibians and Reptiles of Canada and Alaska, Toronto: Royal Ontario Museum, 1961

81

AMUND RINGNES ISLAND Shvarts, S.S. & V.G. Ishchenko, Puti Prisposobleniya Nazemnykh Pozvonochnykh Zhivotnykh k Usloviyam Sushchestvovaniya v Subarktike 3 Zemnovodnye [The Ways of Adaptation of Terrestrial Vertebrate Animals to the Subarctic Conditions 3 Amphibians], Sverdlovsk: Inst. Plant and Anim. Ecol. Uralian Sci. Center of USSR Acad. Sci. Publ., 1971 (in Russian) Storey, K.B. & J.M. Storey, “Freeze tolerance and intolerance as strategies of winter survival in terrestrially-hibernating amphibians,” Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology, 83A (1986): 613–614 Vorobyeva, E.I. (editor), The Siberian Newt (Salamandrella keyserlingii Dybowski, 1870): Zoogeography, Systematics, Morphology, Moscow: Nauka, 1994 (in Russian) ——— (editor), The Siberian Newt (Salamandrella keyserlingii Dybowski, 1870): Ecology, Behaviour, Conservation, Moscow: Nauka, 1995 (in Russian) Wright, A.H. & A.A. Wright, Handbook of Frogs and Toads of the United States and Canada, Ithaca, NY: Comstock, 1949

AMUND RINGNES ISLAND Amund Ringnes Island, located in the Queen Elizabeth Islands, Nunavut (formerly Canadian Northwest Territories), is roughly 2230 square miles (about the size of the state of Delaware) with the northern tip, Cape Sverre, at about 79° N latitude and about 77°30′ N at the southernmost cape. The island is situated along the 96° W meridian between Axel Heiberg Island and Ellef Ringnes Island. Most of the surface of Amund Ringnes Island is below 500 feet with little relief and low coastlines. Haig-Thomas Island lies off its southeastern coast; a low, sandy island, unofficially called Cook Island, lies just west of Cape Sverre. Amund Ringnes Island has no permanent human inhabitants and rarely any visitors. Before World War II, expeditions from several nations visited the island. On April 16, 1900, the Norwegian explorer Otto Sverdrup first sighted the island while exploring western Axel Heiberg Island. He dispatched Gunnar Isachsen and Sverre Hassel for a brief visit in 1900 and more extensive exploration in 1901. The three Norwegians circumnavigated Ellef and Amund Ringnes Islands and mapped a possible channel (Hassel Sound) separating what appeared to be two islands. The next visitors—American Frederick Cook and Greenlanders Ittukusuk and Apilak—landed on the sandy island off Cape Sverre in June 1908, while returning from the Arctic Ocean and their North Pole journey. Finding no game, they quickly passed through Hassel Sound and headed south seeking a whaling vessel. In 1916, American Donald MacMillan reached the southern coasts of the Ringnes Islands from Greenland, and a month later the Canadian explorer Vilhjalmur Stefansson passed through Hassel Sound. Royal Canadian Mounted Police officials A.H. Joy and R.W. Hamilton visited the island between

82

1929 and 1932. In 1938, British explorer David HaigThomas explored the island that bears his name. After World War II, the Canadian government instituted scientific exploration of Amund Ringnes with aerial mapping in the 1950s and geological and other surveys in the 1960s. The government discovered a piercement dome, about 17 miles long, composed mostly of gypsum, rising to about 850 feet in the northern part of the island. The island mostly consists of shale and limestone with dyke and sill intrusions of labradorite and other igneous minerals. Many small streams drain the island during the summer, and vegetation supports seasonal visits from deer, caribou, and hares, which in turn provide food for wolves and polar bears. Amund Ringnes Island retains historic significance due to its role in the controversy about Frederick Cook’s 1908 North Pole claim. Cook’s rival for polar honors, Robert E. Peary, claimed that Cook had gone only a short distance on the Arctic Ocean, and then went south along the west coast of Axel Heiberg Island before landing about 30° southeast of Cape Sverre on the eastern shore of Amund Ringnes Island. Cook allegedly followed the coast to the southeastern cape of the island rather than the route south through Hassel Sound. Peary supposedly obtained this information plus a map from Cook’s two Inuit companions. Although Peary’s “Eskimo Testimony” was hearsay and self-serving, it was Peary’s primary tool to discredit Cook’s polar trip and establish his own. Peary advocates, Stefansson and MacMillan, later tried to prove that Cook did not use Hassel Sound. Critical flaws emerged in Peary’s account during the 1990s when researchers gained access to Peary’s personal papers. These documents disclosed that Peary misrepresented his interrogation of the Inuit. He prevented his own medical officer from questioning them and later blocked MacMillan’s offer to bring the Inuit to the United States for questioning. Additionally, had Cook followed Peary’s map route, he would have discovered Haig-Thomas Island. Since Peary had never visited the area, he was unaware of the small, sandy island at the north end of Hassel Sound, just west of Cape Sverre. Isachsen and Hassel had not seen it in 1901, but Cook landed on it and photographed it in June 1908. In July 1916, Cook’s opponent, Vilhjalmur Stefansson, passed near or directly over this island, but omitted any mention of it and did not include it on his map. A July 1950 photograph clearly depicts Cook’s island without snow (Heckathorn, 1998). In 1935, Cook’s former companion, Apilak, told Haig-Thomas about his discovery of apparent “monster bones” that he had made of Ellef Ringnes Island many years before. Haig-Thomas was unable to reach the location in 1938. Heckathorn

AMUNDSEN BASIN found and photographed Apilak’s Ellef Ringnes site in 1998, adding further evidence that Cook had used the Hassel Sound route. TED HECKATHORN See also Axel Heiberg Island; Cook, Frederick A.; Ellef Ringnes Island; Peary, Robert E.; Queen Elizabeth Islands Further Reading Cook, Frederick A., My Attainment of the Pole, New York: Polar Publishing Company, 1911 (see also new edition, Polar Publishing Company, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 2001) Dunbar, Moira & Keith B. Greenaway, Arctic Canada from the Air, Ottawa: Defence (sic) Research Board, 1956 Featherstonhaugh, R.C., The Royal Canadian Mounted Police, New York: Garden City Publishing Company, 1940 Fortier, Y.O. et al., Geology of the North-Central Part of the Arctic Archipelago, Northwest Territories (Operation Franklin), Ottawa: Department of Mines and Technical Surveys, 1963 Haig-Thomas, David, Tracks in the Snow, London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1939 Heckathorn, Ted, “Dr. Frederick A. Cook’s 1908 journey: a 1998 Arctic field investigation.” Polar Priorities, September 1998 MacMillan, Donald B., “New evidence that Cook did not reach the pole.” Geographical Review, February 1918 Peary, Robert E., The Peary Papers, Unpublished, Washington, District of Columbia: National Archives Stefansson, Vilhjalmur, The Friendly Arctic, New York: MacMillan, 1921 Sverdrup, Otto, New Land: Four Years in the Arctic Regions, 2 volumes, New York: Longmans, Green and Co., 1904 Taylor, Andrew, Geographical Discovery and Exploration in the Queen Elizabeth Islands, Ottawa: Department of Mines and Technical Services, 1955

AMUNDSEN BASIN Amundsen Basin lies in the Arctic Ocean between Lomonosov and Gakkel ridges (see the bathymetric map in Arctic Ocean). Named in honor of Norwegian polar traveler and investigator Roald Amundsen, it is also called Fram Basin according to some sources. The Amundsen and Nansen basins, separated by the Gakkel Ridge, together are often referred to as the Eurasian Basin. Knowledge about the basin structure and about the deep structure of the whole of the Arctic Basin is based on observations from more than 30 years of drifting ice stations such as North Pole 1, and high-latitude air expeditions. Seismic refraction results from the drifting ice stations characterized the main regions and structures of the deep Arctic Basin, including Amundsen Basin. In spring 1979, an ice camp Fram-1 carried out further seismic studies above Amundsen Basin. In the 1980s and 1990s, further geophysical investigations were conducted on the icebreakers Polarstern (Germany) and Oden (Sweden), and the submarine SCICEX.

Amundsen Basin is a deep, linear basin with a length of about 2000 km and a width of 200–400 km. The basin floor is almost flat, at an average depth of about 4300 m. Due to an increased thickness of sediments in the Nansen Basin (which is closer to a sediment source, the Barents Sea shelf), its depth is 500 m less than the Amundsen Basin everywhere. At the border of the Amundsen Basin with the continental margins of Eurasia, the continental shelf is represented by a gently sloping inclined plain. At the opposite end, in the region of the Greenland and Eurasian (Svalbard archipelago) continental margins, the shelf is developed in a relatively narrow strip (up to 50 km) at depths from 3800 to 4200 m. Low-frequency relief characterizes the eastern part of the basin, and higher frequency relief describes the western part of the basin and Gakkel Ridge, which rises rapidly from the abyssal plain. The slope of Lomonosov Ridge in Amundsen Basin has a stepped profile, complicated by numerous terraces at depths from 2200 to 3200 m, with valleys of up to 600 m relative depth. Crustal structure in the basin is determined by its age, the oldest sediments furthest from Gakkel Ridge being about 60 million years old. In the eastern part of Amundsen Basin, the basement structures beneath the sediments appear to have a highly irregular relief. In the west part, such a phenomenon is not observed. The bottom of the basin is covered by loose sediments (mainly silts or clay) and sedimentary rocks reaching a thickness of not less than 2000 m, the thickness of sediment decreasing toward Gakkel Ridge. The thickness of oceanic crust in the basin as measured by seismic refraction experiments is 5–6° km in the center. Magnetic anomalies in Amundsen Basin are low gradient and linear, following the typical oceanic type magnetic field of the spreading Gakkel Ridge. The crustal structure of Amundsen Basin has much in common with the crustal structure of the western part of the abyssal valley of Iberia according to dynamics of the wave field and irregularity of its basement. Water circulation in Amundsen Basin is determined by the inflow of Atlantic waters. Circulation of surface waters, as in the Arctic Ocean in general, is determined by surplus fresh-water balance, atmospheric circulation, and basin topography. The warm waters of Atlantic origin, because of their high salinity, are denser than the surface fresh waters, and thus descend deep into the basin and cannot play a significant role in the circulation of surface waters. Water of Atlantic origin enters the basin through the eastern part of Fram Strait with the West Spitsbergen current. It flows round the Arctic basins in boundary currents, flowing eastward along the Eurasian continental slope. One branch turns north to flow along the Lomonosov Ridge inside the Amundsen Basin, returning to the North European basin through

83

AMUNDSEN, ROALD Fram Strait, leaving the Arctic Ocean. Another branch crosses the Lomonosov Ridge and penetrates into Amerasian Basin, before recrossing the Lomosonov Ridge to return to the Fram Strait. Cold bottom waters at depths of about 2000–3000 m, which enter the basin from the Barents Sea North European basin, move very slowly. This, together with insignificant horizontal and vertical thermohaline gradients, makes it difficult to track the circulation of these waters. VALERY MIT’KO See also Lomonosov Ridge; Nansen Basin Further Reading Gorbatskiy, G.V., Physicogeographical Zoning of Arctic, Volume 3, Arctic Basin, Leningrad: Leningrad University Publishing House, 1973 Gramberg, I.S. (editor), Orographic Map of Arctic Basin. 1:5,000,000, Helsinki: Karttaneskus, 1995 Gramberg, I.S. & G.D. Naryshkin, Peculiarities of the Arctic Deep-Water Basin’s Ground. SPb, VNII Okenologiya, 2000 Sweeney, J.F., J.R. Weber & S.M. Blasco,“Continental ridges in the Arctic Ocean: Lorex constraints.” Tectonophysics, 89 (1982): 217–238 Weigelt, E. & W. Jokat, “Peculiarities of roughness and thickness of oceanic crust in the Eurasian Basin, Arctic Ocean.” Geophysical Journal International, 145 (2001): 505–516

AMUNDSEN, ROALD Roald Amundsen, born in Borge, Norway in 1872, was the first explorer to navigate a North West Passage between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, the first to reach the South Pole, and the first to lay an undisputed claim to reaching the North Pole. Amundsen also sailed the North East Passage, reached a farthest point north by air, and realized the first crossing of the Arctic Ocean. An astute and respectful ethnographer of the Netsilik Inuit, Amundsen provided valuable records and pictures of his two-year stay in northern Canada. Yet Amundsen was regarded with suspicion by many competitors as the person who “stole” the South Pole from Robert F. Scott. He never received the adulation that his fellow Norwegian and sometime mentor Fridtjof Nansen enjoyed. Amundsen grew up in Oslo, and at a young age was fascinated with the outdoors and tales of Arctic exploration. He trained himself for exploration by taking extended hiking and ski trips in Norway’s mountains and learning seamanship and navigation. At the age of 25, Amundsen signed on as first mate for the Belgian Antarctic expedition aboard Belgica, which became the first ship to winter in the south polar region. Amundsen would form a lifelong respect for Belgica’s physician Frederick Cook, who combated onboard scurvy and freed the ship from ice.

84

Portrait of Roald Amundsen. Licensed with permission of the Scott Polar Research Institute, University of Cambridge, UK

In 1903, Amundsen set sail on the Gjoa on his first expedition to navigate the North West Passage. Amundsen inferred that previous expeditions had suffered from divisive objectives and commands of the expedition leader, ship captain, and scientific leader. He resolved to avoid this problem on his expedition by assuming all three roles. To fit himself for these tasks, Amundsen obtained his ship captain’s license and studied the theory and measurement of the earth’s magnetism. He pitched his expedition, in part, as an investigation of whether the earth’s north magnetic pole was stationary. Although he obtained the backing of Fridtjof Nansen, he still had difficulty obtaining sufficient funds. Unlike previous explorers who attempted to navigate the North West Passage, Amundsen used a small ship that helped him maneuver the shallow passages through the Canadian archipelago just north of the Canadian mainland. His small crew consisted of six men. The passage to the Pacific was ice-free that year, but Amundsen stopped near the south shore of King William Island on September 12, 1903 to perform the magnetic observations he had promised his scientific sponsors. This is noteworthy because it belies a claim commonly made about Amundsen that his exploratory successes came at the expense of his scientific work.

AMUNDSEN, ROALD The Gjoa and its crew spent two years anchored at this spot, during which time they befriended the local Netsilik Inuit. In contrast to many other Arctic explorers, Amundsen’s writing about the Inuit displays an appreciation and respect for that culture that appeals to modern sensitivities. On King William Island he learned the art of dog sledding, a skill that would aid the explorer’s success in the race to the South Pole. Amundsen completed the navigation of the North West Passage in 1905 and cabled news of his accomplishment to supporters in Oslo. He had intended to sell exclusive rights to his story to help offset his debts. However, a telegraph operator along the way leaked the story to the American press before it got to Norway, spoiling Amundsen’s hopes for a financial return on his story. Amundsen’s next goal was to reach the North Pole. News that Robert E. Peary claimed to reach the Pole in 1909, however, prompted Amundsen to turn south instead, putting him in direct competition with Robert Falcon Scott, who by then had embarked on his second expedition to Antarctica. Fearing that a public admission of his objective would undermine support from Nansen and others, Amundsen kept his plans to travel to the South Pole a secret until his ship left Norway. Amundsen established a base camp on the Ross Antarctic Ice Shelf 60 miles closer to the South Pole than Scott’s camp. Although he started closer to the Pole than Scott did, Amundsen had to pioneer a new route over uncharted territory, whereas Scott had the benefit of following a route previously established by Ernest Shackleton. Nevertheless, Amundsen’s superior planning and knowledge of dog sledding, skiing, coldweather clothing, and snow shelters enabled him to beat Scott easily to the Pole. Scott and four companions suffered miserably and died upon their return from the Pole, whereas Amundsen and his team executed the trip with a large margin of safety, suffering as little as a toothache. Amundsen’s third expedition sought to utilize an idea first developed by Nansen, that is, to intentionally get a ship stuck in the Arctic ice and float his way to the North Pole. Amundsen left Norway in 1918 aboard the Maud. In the ensuing year, however, he suffered three accidents, including an attack from a polar bear and carbon monoxide poisoning aboard the ship. The Maud completed the North East Passage in 1920, but never succeeded in entering the Arctic icepack. It reached the highest latitude of only 76° N. Thereafter, Amundsen set his sights on air travel. A fortuitous meeting in 1924 with Lincoln Ellsworth, the scion of a wealthy US industrialist, provided Amundsen’s funding. Amundsen and Ellsworth, along with four crewmates, planned to fly two Dornier-Wahl flying boats north from Spitsbergen, land at the North Pole to make scientific measurements, abandon one

plane at the Pole, and fly the remaining one to Alaska. They took off successfully on May 21, 1925, but crash-landed 136 miles south of the Pole. With one plane damaged beyond repair, the crew worked for almost three weeks to repair the other damaged plane and create a runway that was barely sufficient to allow them to take off and return safely to Spitsbergen. Amundsen teamed with Ellsworth again in 1926 and contracted with Italian airship pioneer Umberto Nobile to build a 348-foot dirigible. Christened the Norge, the airship left Spitsbergen on May 10, 1926 with a crew of 16, and successfully reached the North Pole on May 12, 1926 before landing in Alaska 70 hours after takeoff. Richard E. Byrd and Floyd Bennett had flown north from Spitsbergen in a Fokker monoplane only the day before the Norge took off. Recent research, however, casts doubt on Byrd’s claim to have reached the North Pole. Combined with growing skepticism over Robert Peary’s claim to have reached the Pole in 1909, a plausible argument can be made that Amundsen’s Norge was the first crew to reach the North Pole. Unfortunately, a disagreement emerged between Amundsen and Nobile over credit for the Norge’s success. Nobile asserted that he was, in effect, the expedition leader. Amundsen regarded Nobile essentially as a hired pilot, and not a particularly good one at that. The conflict dogged Amundsen throughout his career; his creditors hounded him over unpaid bills. Although an effective leader in the field who inspired intense loyalty from his crews, Amundsen was taciturn in public life and occasionally displayed a churlish streak over the lack of recognition for his accomplishments. Amundsen died in 1928. His plane disappeared while on his way to try to rescue Nobile, his former foe whose dirigible had crash-landed on the Arctic Ocean ice.

Biography Roald Engelbregt Gravning Amundsen was born on July 16, 1872 in Borge, Norway, the youngest of four brothers. He studied medicine until, after his mother’s death, he sold his medical books to devote his life to exploration. Amundsen served as first mate on the Belgica expedition from 1898 to 1899, and afterwards obtained his skipper’s license. He embarked on five major expeditions: first, aboard the Gjoa, in which he sailed the North West Passage from 1903 to 1906; second, aboard the Fram to Antarctica from 1911 to 1912, during which time Amundsen discovered the South Pole; third, aboard the Maud from 1918 to 1922, during which he sailed the North East Passage but failed to approach the North Pole; fourth, a failed attempt to fly to the North Pole in 1925; and finally the successful trip in 1926 from Spitsbergen to Alaska via the

85

ANADYR North Pole, aboard the dirigible Norge. Amundsen never married and had no children. He died c. June 8, 1928 after taking off in a plane from Tromsø, Norway, bound for Spitsbergen, in an attempt to rescue the crew of the Italia airship. JONATHAN KARPOFF See also Nansen, Fridtjof; North East Passage; North East Passage, Exploration of; North West Passage; North West Passage, Exploration of; Race to the North Pole Further Reading Amundsen, Roald, The Amundsen Photographs, edited by Roland Huntford, New York: Atlantic Monthly Press, 1987 ———, My Life as an Explorer, Garden City: Doubleday, Page & Co., 1928 Berton, Pierre, The Arctic Grail: The Quest for the Northwest Passage and the North Pole, 1818–1909, New York: Penguin Books, 1988 Fisher, David E., Across the Top of the World, New York: Random House, 1992 Huntford, Roland, The Last Place on Earth, New York: The Modern Library, 1999

ANADYR Anadyr is the capital of the Chukchi Autonomous Okrug in the Russian Far East and of the district of Anadyr (Anadyrskii Raion, one of the eight districts of Chukotka). Anadyr is also the name of a 1150 km long river, a plain, a plateau, a bay of the Bering Sea, and a mountain range in the region. The port city of Anadyr is located at 64°47′ N and 177°34′ E at the estuary of the river Anadyr, which

flows into the Bering Sea. Anadyr is located in a tundra area and is subject to strong winds coming from the sea and an unstable atmospheric pressure, with many violent storms. The climate is harsh, with long cold winters and short summers, and an average annual temperature of −7.7°C. The lowest and highest temperatures recorded in the city are −44.6°C and 28.2°C. The population of Anadyr, the largest city in Chukotka, has decreased in recent years: in 1989, 16,450 inhabitants lived in the city, but by the beginning of 2001 approximately 11,200 remained. A great majority of the citizens of Anadyr are incomers (Russian and Ukrainian); indigenous people represent only 1641 people (in 2001, according to The Association of Indigenous Peoples of Chukotka): 1020 Chukchi, 280 Chuvans, 149 Evens (also called Lamuts), 113 Eskimos or Yupiget, 38 Yukagirs, 19 Koryaks, 18 Yakuts, and 4 Kamchadals-Itel’men. With the rehabilitation of the city starting from 2001, the population of the city is expected to stabilize or possibly grow. Anadyr, initially called Novo-Mariinsk, was founded in August 1889 by L.F. Grinevetskii (1853–1891), first administrative chief of the region of Chukotka. It was built near the Chukchi village V’’en, which remains today the Chukchi name of the city. At that time, it consisted of one house and three iaranga—the Chukchi traditional tent made of reindeer skins. NovoMariinsk was a border post, protecting state warehouses. It became the county town of the region. In 1919, the Revolutionary Committee (revkom) of Anadyr was created, as the first organ of Soviet power in Chukotka. At that time, around 300 inhabitants were living in Novo-Mariinsk. In January 1920, members of

Boats frozen into the sea ice beside the harbor cranes in winter, Anadyr, Chukotka. Copyright Bryan and Cherry Alexander Photography

86

ANADYR RIVER the committee, led by Mikhail Sergeevich Mandrikov, were shot by local Russian traders, who disapproved of the Bolsheviks nationalizing fisheries and canceling the natives’ debts to them. In August, the village was taken back by Soviet power. Mandrikov and members of the first Revkom became local heroes. Today, one of the few sights of the city is a monument that was erected in 1969 in their honor. In 1923, Novo-Mariinsk was renamed Anadyr, after the first fort (Anadyrsky Ostrog) established in 1649 by Semyon Dezhnev, derived from a Yukagir toponym (place name). In 1930, Anadyr became the center of the newly created National Region of Chukotka (chukotskij natsional’nyi okrug). It received the status of a city (gorod) in January 1965. The main streets of Anadyr were named in memory of the first indigenous representatives of the party: Otke (1913–1955), Tevlianto (1905–1959), and Ivan Rultetegin (1924–1962). At the end of the 1950s, Anadyr grew very rapidly. The expansion of the city accelerated due to the development of air transport in the 1960s and the building of the port in 1961. Today, Anadyr airport connects services with Moscow and the main villages of the districts of Chukotka. Anadyr is a place where native writers, whose works have been translated in foreign languages, have chosen to live, such as the Chukchi Valentina Veqet (born 1934) and Ivan Omruvie (1940), and the Eskimo poets Tatiana Achirgina (1944) and Zoia Nenliumkina (1950). With new investments, the city of Anadyr has undergone radical changes: it has new hotels, new shops, and new facilities in the area of medical care, culture, education, administration, and services. VIRGINIE VATÉ See also Anadyr River; Chukchi Autonomous Okrug (Chukotka); Dezhnev, Semyon Further Reading City of Anadyr website: www.anadyr.org Forsyth, James, A History of the Peoples of Siberia: Russia’s North Asian Colony (1581–1990), Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 1992 Rastorgueva, O.B. & I.V. Kolonteeva, Anadyr, Magadanskaia oblastnaia biblioteka im, Magadan: A.S. Puškina, 1989 Vdovin, I.S., “Iz istorii russkikh na Anadyre v XVII-XVIII vv.” In Etnokul’turnye kontakty narodov Sibiri, edited by Ch.M. Taksami, Leningrad: Nauka, 1984, pp. 5–13

ANADYR RIVER Anadyr River is the largest river in the Chukchi Autonomous Okrug, and flows into the Bering Sea. Its first geographical description was provided by the

Russian explorer Mikhail Stadukhin in the 17th century. The word “Anadyr” is an adaptation in the Russian language of the Yukagir word “anu-an” or “anu-on,” which means “river.” In the Chukchi language it is called Yaayvaam, which means “Seagull River.” The river, which rises in the eastern slopes of the Aniui Range, is 1150 km long and drains into the western Anadyrsky Bay on the Bering Sea via the Anadyrsky Liman (a brackish lagoon in an embayment of the Anadyrsky Bay). The Anadyr has a drainage basin of area 191,000 km2 and flows mainly from west to east. In its upper reaches (about 400 km long to Markova Lowland) in the Aniui Range, the river is narrow and flows southwest. Its main tributaries here are the Bolshoi Peledon, Mechkeryeva, Yablon, and Eropol rivers, which come from the Aniui and Anadyr ranges. The river turns eastward in the area of the Markovo Lowland, and in its middle and lower parts flows through plains. Here the Anadyr River divides into channels over a 70 km wide floodplain and forms a kind of inland delta with many islands and branches. The lowland is unique due to its warm climate and large areas of talik (bodies of unfrozen ground). Below the Markovo Lowland, the Anadyr River turns northeast at the confluence with Main River coming from the southwest. Other large tributaries in the middle and lower reaches are Belaya River coming from the Chukotskoya Range in the north in the Belskyje Mountains area, the Tanyurer River and Kanchalan River coming from Chukotskoya Range, and the large Velikaya River, which comes from Koryak Range. In the lower reaches extending up to the Belskyje Mountains, tidal flows are important. The major lakes of the Anadyr River basin are Krasnoye and Elgygytgyn. Krasnoye Lake of area 600 km2 and no more than 4 m depth was originally a channel, now cut off, of the lower Anadyr River. Elgygytgyn Lake, which has an area of 250 km2 and a depth of 170 m, fills the crater of an extinct volcano. It is situated in the Anadyrsko-Kolymskoya watershed in the basin of the Belaya River. The lake remains frozen almost throughout the year, and the temperature of the upper layer of water usually does not exceed +5°C. The lake is characterized by its unique fauna, which includes two species of char endemic to the lake due to its long-term isolation. The Anadyr freezes from the first half of October to the end of May or early June. Freezeup and ice drifting initiates in the Markovo Lowland. The ice in the estuary appears in the second half of October, but till December or January it remains fragmentary due to tidal flows and strong winds. During ice breakup and snowmelt in June, the river reaches its maximum discharge.

87

ANCHORAGE The climate of the Anadyr river basin changes from strong continental Subarctic in the upper part of the river to oceanic Subarctic in the Anadyrsky Bay area. Northern boreal larch forest (Larix cajanderi) reaches its northeastern limit here. In the upper and middle reaches of the river, floodplains are covered by chosenia-willow-poplar forest (Chosenia arbutifolia, Salix udensis, S. schwerinii, Populus balsamifera) and are rich in boreal (taiga) plant species. The middle and lower Anadyr River is the northern part of a special stlanik subzone that is dominated by a tall (2.5–5 m) shrub growth form of pine and alder species (Pinus pumila, Alnus fruticosa). In the oceanic Onemen Bay area, Arctic shrub tundra vegetation (dwarf willow and other dwarf shrubs, cottongrass, and sedges) dominates. Terrestrial fauna of the river includes boreal species such as goshawk, woodpeckers, ouzels, moose, chipmunk, lynx, squirrel, river otter, and brown bear populating the floodplain forest, and common tundra birds and animals of mountain tundra landscape such as ptarmigan, Arctic fox, lemmings, and bighorn sheep. The largest population of wild reindeer in Chukotka migrates from the south to mountain pastures of the Anadyrskoya and Chukotskoya ranges every summer, crossing the Anadyr River valley. From the time of initial settlement by Paleo-Eskimo Aleuts and Yukagirs, and later Chukchi, fishing has been an important subsistence activity for indigenous peoples in the region, and today chum salmon that spawn in the Anadyr River are an important part of the local income. The most important species fished are chum, hunchback, and red salmon (species of genus Oncorhynchus, Pacific salmon) along with several species of whitefish and char, sheefish, grayling, and pike. Today the river is an important transportation artery connecting many small villages, and the larger Markovo, Ust-Belaya, and Krasneno villages with Anadyr, the capital city of Chukotka on Anadyrsky Liman. VOLODYA RAZZHIVIN See also Anadyr; Bering Sea; Chukchi Autonomous Okrug (Chukotka)

ANCHORAGE Alaska’s largest city lies between Cook Inlet and the Chugach Mountains at 61° N and 150° W. Anchorage’s growth from an Alaska Railroad staging area in 1915 to a city of 259,391 people owes much to its location. It lies in the Anchorage “bowl,” undulating terrain between the two arms of Cook Inlet, Knik Arm to the north and Turnagain Arm to the south. British explorer James Cook named its ice-free port when he explored Cook Inlet in the 18th century. Native

88

Alaskans lived here long before European explorers arrived. At Beluga Point, on Turnagain Arm, multiple layers of archaeological remains show that both the Athapaskan Denaina people and the Eskimo-like Alutiit people lived in the Anchorage area at different times in prehistory. Until recently, they maintained a fishery on Fire Island, clearly seen off the approach to the eastwest runway of Anchorage International Airport. Much of the archaeological story, however, was probably lost in the early days of the city’s growth. Anchorage spread outward from Ship Creek, still a superb salmon fishery, at the Port of Anchorage. The United States military developed an extensive presence in the Anchorage Bowl before and during World War II. Much of the coastline is military reserve land, and has not been explored for archaeological remains. The native village of Eklutna, a Denaina community, has been incorporated into the suburbs of Anchorage. The urban native population of Anchorage is presently about 40,000. The Alaska Native Heritage Center opened in 1999 both as a cultural center introducing outsiders to the five major native peoples in Alaska and as an educational center where native elders teach their cultures to Alaskan youth. Anchorage functions as a prosperous business and service center for Alaska. The military, federal, and state governments are major employers, but since 1969 the oil industry and the businesses it supports have emerged as Anchorage’s key economic force. The state of Alaska opened the North Slope to oil extraction leases in 1969. Within five years, oil was being piped across Alaska. Prior to that time, Anchorage maintained many characteristics of a small city far from American centers of power. The North Slope oil boom expanded the city rapidly and brought the concomitant problems of swift urban growth. Many newer residents of Alaska call the city “Los Anchorage” in reference to its resemblance to Los Angeles, another sprawling city between ocean and mountains, complete with smog. In 1970, however, concerned citizens lobbied to have much of the mountains to the east set aside as Chugach State Park. Anchorage’s citizens are thus able to drive, in 20 min from downtown, to trail heads leading quickly into Alaskan wilderness. Business people catch salmon on their lunch hours from Ship Creek and the several branches of Campbell Creek. The municipal area encompasses several hundred kilometers of cross-country ski trails, bike trails, horseback trails, and other outdoor recreational opportunities, including two downhill ski areas. Anchorage is also home to a thriving arts community. Anchorage features one of the busiest air traffic centers in the world. Elmendorf Air Force base maintains steady military traffic. The International Airport

ANDRÉE, SALOMON AUGUST has become a global air freight hub, but much air traffic is still at nearby Lake Hood float plane base. Many residents own small planes that are berthed at Lake Hood. Other planes take off and land from several gravel airstrips scattered through the Anchorage Bowl, still others at the city’s original Merrill Field, barely three miles from downtown. ELLEN BIELAWSKI See also Alaska; Alutiit; North Slope; Oil Exploration Further Reading Henning, Robert (editor), Anchorage and the Cook Inlet Basin, Volume 10, No. 2, Anchorage: Alaska Geographic Society, 1983 Rennick, Penny (editor), Anchorage, Volume 23, No. 1, Anchorage: Alaska Geographic Society, 1996

ANDRÉE, SALOMON AUGUST Salomon August Andrée, a Swedish engineer, led the first aerial expedition in search of the North Pole. With two other Swedes, Andrée lifted off in a hydrogenfilled balloon from Virgohamna (Virgo Harbor), on Danskøya (Danes Island), in the Svalbard archipelago, on the afternoon of July 11, 1897. The three men were never seen alive again, and their bodies were not discovered until the late summer of 1930. In the spring of 1876, Andrée visited the US Centennial Exposition in Philadelphia, where he met American balloonist John Wise, read C.F.E. Björling’s The Laws of the Winds, and decided that prevailing trade winds could push cargo and passenger balloons along regular air routes. After six months in America, Andrée returned to a succession of mechanical jobs in Sweden. In 1882, Andrée joined an expedition to Svalbard led by Nils Ekholm of the Meteorological Institute of Stockholm, part of the first international geophysical year. Following this Arctic experience, Andrée returned to Stockholm and in 1885 was promoted to the position as chief engineer of the Swedish Patent Office. In 1892, Andrée successfully applied for a grant from a Stockholm foundation in order to obtain a hydrogen balloon. This research balloon, which Andrée envisioned as a test platform for aerial photography and photogrammetry research, was christened Svea (Sweden). On July 15, 1893, with Andrée its lone occupant, Svea lifted off to explore Sweden and the Baltic from the air. Over the course of the next 20 months, Andrée’s nine ascents in the balloon covered some 1300 km in less than 40 h, an average speed of 30 kph. While traveling Andrée recorded some 400 scientific observations.

Andrée’s experience led him to plan a daring balloon voyage to the North Pole. On February 13, 1895, he announced the attempt to the Swedish Anthropological and Geographical Society. The proposal earned the support of both A.E. Nordenskiöld and Alfred Nobel—the latter providing half the expedition’s funding. Andrée arrived in Svalbard in June 1896 to construct a base camp for his polar flight on Danskøya. This launch area included the balloon, named Örnen (Eagle), as well as a prefabricated balloon shed and a hydrogen-generating plant. Remains of these last two constructions remain at the present-day site. The harbor where Andrée located his camp later took the name of the ship that brought him there, the Virgo. Andrée equipped Örnen with an instrument ring to carry range finders, anemometers, and two specially designed cameras. Built with Zeiss lenses and highspeed shutters, these cameras would record the balloon’s passage across the polar sea and provide the first aerial remote sensing of the Arctic environment. Early in August 1896, Fridtjof Nansen’s ship Fram appeared in Virgohamn. Without Nansen, Fram was returning home to Oslo after a three and a half year drift through the polar basin, during which Nansen and Hjalmar Johansen attained their now-famous latitude of 86°14′ N. Andrée, however, did not find the favorable south winds he anticipated and was forced to return to Stockholm. Andrée returned to Virgohamn in the summer of 1897 along with balloon crew members Nils Strindberg and Knut Fraenkel, and reserve member G.V.E. Svedenborg. On July 11, 1897, Örnen lifted off from Danskøya and proceeded north at an exponentially faster rate than any prior polar expedition. Where most sail and sledge expeditions were lucky to cover a few kilometers per day, Örnen covered 3 km approximately every 5 min during the first hours of the flight. Progress stopped, however, two and a half days later, near latitude 83°, as humidity, ice, and hoarfrost forced the balloon onto the ice pack. After 65.5 h of flight, the crew decided to crashland the balloon, approximately 500 km northeast of Danskøya and 700 km short of the Pole. A forced march southward over the pack followed. The men shot polar bears for food, dragged a boat on top of a sledge, and were drenched by repeated falls into the icy water. Two years after the launch, on the coast of Kong Karls Land in southeast Svalbard and about one hundred miles from Andrée’s balloon shed, his “Polar Buoy” was discovered. The buoy would have been dropped from the car of Örnen as it passed over the North Pole. A year later, in August of 1900, another buoy was found, along with another note describing

89

ANIMAL RIGHTS MOVEMENTS AND RENEWABLE RESOURCES the first buoy that Andrée had deposited on the ice, at ten o’clock in the evening of July 11, 1897. Relief expeditions were sent north to look for the balloonists, but no further traces were found. On August 5, 1930, a Norwegian sealer making routine Arctic surveys landed on Kvitøya (White Island), a small island off the far northeastern coast of Svalbard. The expedition’s scientist, Gunnar Horn, identified the remains of three bodies, as well as a boat prow imprinted with the words “Andrée’s polar exp.” Horn also identified the diaries of both Andrée and Strindberg, a meteorological log kept by Fraenkel, and many of the expedition’s artifacts, including rifles, the sledge, and the canvas boat. The diaries revealed that the flight had lasted three days, during which time the balloon was as much dragged as flew across the pack ice. A study of the diaries also led to the hypothesis that the men died from the cumulative effects of eating poorly cooked trichina-infected bear meat; they died at Kvitøya. Several rolls of undeveloped film were also found on the island, which, after 33 years in the ice, were developed in a laboratory in Sweden. The resulting images remain some of the most eerily fascinating in all of the history of exploration. For many decades, historians and other experts considered the flight more or less a suicidal fiasco. Yet in recent years, scholars have reevaluated Andrée’s polar balloon expedition and concluded otherwise. Many historians now see it as a serious and seminal exploration conducted by a scientist-aeronaut prepared to dare the lives of himself and his crew in the furtherance of knowledge of the Arctic basin, of the North Pole itself, and of remote sensing in extreme environments.

Biography Salomon August Andrée was born in the village of Gränna, Sweden, alongside Lake Vattern, on October 18, 1854, into a family of four brothers and two sisters. He was educated first by his mother, then spent time at the State High School in nearby Jönköping, before entering Sweden’s Royal Institute of Technology in 1869. By the age of 26, he began publishing articles on social, economic, and political problems, and authored a series of articles arising from his research during the Swedish expedition to Cape Thordsen, Svalbard, during the first geophysical year in 1882–1883. Andrée’s flights in the Svea provided material for a further series of scientific articles. Nearly a dozen geographical features in Svalbard have been named after Andrée, including a point on Kvitøya where the bodies of Andrée and his companions were discovered in 1930; Andrée Land, the

90

considerable area between Woodfjorden in the west and Wijdefjorden in the east; and a bay in Kong Karls Land. P.J. CAPELOTTI See also Nansen, Fridtjof; Race to the North Pole Further Reading Bergengren, Erik, Alfred Nobel, London: Thomas Nelson and Sons, 1962 Berton, Pierre, The Arctic Grail, New York: Viking, 1988 Capelotti, P.J., The Wellman Polar Airship Expeditions at Virgohamna, Danskøya, Svalbard; A Study in Aerospace Archaeology, Oslo: Norwegian Polar Institute, Meddelelser Nr. 145, 1997 ———, By Airship to the North Pole: An Archaeology of Human Exploration, New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 1999 Glines, C.V. (editor), Polar Aviation, New York: Franklin Watts, Inc., 1964 Grierson, John, Challenge to the Poles, Hamden, Connecticut: Archon Press, 1964 LaChambre, Henri & Alexis Machuron, Andrée’s Balloon Expedition in Search of the North Pole, New York: Frederick A. Stokes, 1898 Lundström, Sven, Andrée’s Polar Expedition, Gränna: Wiken, 1988 Norsk Polarinstitutt, The Placenames of Svalbard, Oslo: Norsk Polarinstitutt (Skrifter Nr. 80 and 112; Ny-Trykk), 1991 Sundman, Per Olof, The Flight of the Eagle, New York: Pantheon, 1970 Swedish Society for Anthropology and Geography, Andrée’s Story: The Complete Record of His Polar Flight, 1897, New York: Viking Press, 1930 Wråkberg, Urban (editor), “Andrée’s folly: time for reappraisal?.” In Centennial of S.A. Andrée’s North Pole Expedition Proceedings of a Conference on S.A. Andrée and the Agenda for Social Science Research of the Polar Regions, edited by Urban Wråkberg Stockholm: Bidrag till Kungl. Svenska Vetenskapsakademiens Historia (Contributions to the History of the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences), No. 28, 1999, pp. 56–99.

ANIMAL RIGHTS MOVEMENTS AND RENEWABLE RESOURCES Animal Rights (AR) is a general concept covering a wide spectrum of philosophies. It has deep historical roots, including a reaction to industrial urban development in the 19th century. The Royal Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals was created at this time, followed by Humane Societies throughout Europe and North America. More recently, in the 1970s, AR activists became influential in reaction to the sealing (see Seal Skin Directive) and fur trapping industries. Many different groups exist, concentrated in urban areas and developed nations. At one end of the spectrum, the World-Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) and Greenpeace stress environmental protection and

ANIMAL RIGHTS MOVEMENTS AND RENEWABLE RESOURCES conservation, maintaining ecological processes and genetic diversity, but accept the sustainable use of wildlife and ecosystems, although they do not favor commercial harvesting. The International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW), formed in 1969 in reaction to the seal hunt, takes the position that it is immoral for humans to impose suffering on animals. Further on the spectrum, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) was formed in 1980, on the philosophical foundation that “animals are not ours to eat, wear or use for entertainment.” They do, however, allow that humans may have pets. At the far end of the spectrum, the Animal Liberation Front feels justified in threatening and harming humans in retaliation for perceived animal harm, and has taken responsibility for letter bombs and terrorist attacks in Europe and North America, and actions such as releasing animals from a cancer research laboratory and causing millions of dollars in vandalism damages. The philosophy has been transformed over time, from an ethic of respect and rights for animals to be expressed as a matter of individual conscience, to a political, often militant activism aimed at ending “speciesism”—the domination of animals by humans. Some are opposed to a scientific/rationalist/anthropocentric approach to managing global ecology. Nature is deemed to have value in its own right, not just for human benefit. Conflicts and issues are moved away from scientific research, data or analysis, then infused with values and ideology, to dwell on moral and ethical differences and political action. Ironically, the environmental values of Native Americans were used as a touchstone, and Greenpeace’s foundation philosophy drew on an “ancient Native American Indian legend” about the Warriors of the Rainbow. (This “myth” has been used several times by different groups, with the identity of the native group changing often, indicating slight knowledge of the actual native cultures.) The negative response by native peoples to the antisealing campaign meant that they became a “political problem” and the AR movement began to critique native lifestyles and ethics. For instance, many Aleuts were subjected to hate mail, threats, and harassment, as well as legal challenges by humane societies and negative media coverage, when they sought to continue the Pribilof Island fur seal harvest.

History of Campaigns After its modern beginning with the antisealing campaign in 1969 (see Seal Skin Directive), the AR movement went on to attack fur trapping. Both campaigns were aimed at deterring consumers and establishing trade barriers against the pelts and products.

Relatively immediate effects were felt by sealers and trappers. A subsequent campaign against whaling focussed first on commercial whaling, but has affected indigenous peoples as well. Among Arctic countries, Canada and Iceland have withdrawn from the International Whaling Commission (IWC), although Iceland has since rejoined. Norway and Iceland continue to whale for commercial purposes. Inuit in Canada, Greenland, the US (Alaska), and Russia continue to whale as they have traditionally done, for subsistence purposes and small-scale trade. Some indigenous peoples have been able, with difficulty, to protect their rights to hunt small whales despite IWC pressures, but others, like the Faroese and Japanese, have not. More recently, there has been some AR pressure against the harvest of caribou because of fears about antler sales to Chinese and Korean pharmaceuticals, and against Inuit participation as guides or outfitters for sport hunters. Moving the focus southward, campaigns have been launched against grizzly bear sport hunts, use of animals in research and, more recently, against meat-eating. This may reflect the growth and evolution of a school of thought, but also the need for the continued in-flow of monies to support the AR organizations. A key tactic of the AR movement is to focus only on selected parts of a problem, and to create and use simplistic images: the antisealing campaign portrayed sealers as brutal thugs clubbing “babies”; the antifur campaign portrayed trappers as living archaic, rough lifestyles out of place in the modern world. Fur users were portrayed as cruel, ignorant, frivolous, destructive, and stupid. Animals are portrayed in anthropomorphic terms. Exaggerated and wrong information is frequently used in AR campaigns. While Greenpeace and IFAW eventually became aware that the Inuit seal hunt was not commercially oriented and did not focus on harp or hooded seal pups, neither attempted to clarify this nuance. Stephen Best (IFAW) claimed that 240,000 seals were being killed annually in 1989, although this was three times the government quota and he could show no data to support the claim. In the campaign for the proposed EU fur ban, species have been pronounced as “endangered” when they are not. The concept of the “precautionary approach” has also been used to close down some whale and seal fisheries, based on claims that scientific knowledge regarding their management is “uncertain,” even though the populations are abundant. The concepts of “subsistence” and “tradition” are an important part of the conflict. They comprise values of economic, social, cultural, and spiritual dimension. Subsistence provides food, clothing, and materials, but it also requires special skills, knowledge, and resourcefulness. It promotes cohesiveness, pride, and

91

ANIMAL RIGHTS MOVEMENTS AND RENEWABLE RESOURCES sharing in aboriginal communities. For many people, the use of animals is a key, traditional, part of their livelihood, whether it provides food and other materials or cash income; it all helps to provide for the survival of the family and community. The essence of tradition comes from their relationship with the resource (such as skills, harvesting activities, consumption, and sharing relationships within the community)—not the particular technology used to catch it. In most cases, money earned from the harvest of animals or fish is used to support further subsistence activities, which in turn support cultural values. Thus, the line between money and nonmonetary income is blurred, and between economy, community, and culture, with each critical to the other, and ensuring continued survival for northern people. In Greenland, for instance, hunters are seen as a crucial part of local economies, who provide country food to communities and those unable to hunt, and thereby maintain Greenlandic values. While some AR groups are willing to accept native peoples’ use of renewable resources, it is deemed acceptable only if it provides food and skins for the family and community, not if there is commercial sale of skins or other animal parts—making money from the use of animals is anathema. The luxury aspect of furs cements their disapprobation. “Subsistence use” is thus acceptable only when it conforms to a southern perception of what is traditional and necessary. This ignores the fact that traditions change and societies evolve (Europeans no longer plow fields with oxen). For instance, when Canadian and Greenlandic Inuit attended the European Parliament as part of the Canadian and Danish delegations, they were dismissed by AR activists such as Stephen Best of IFAW, because they “wore fancy suits and wristwatches” and blended with government officials and industry spokespersons. Some AR critics have questioned whether Arctic peoples can truly be traditional if they live in modern houses. Others have argued that Inuit are motivated, as are all wildlife harvesters, by greed for money or by boredom. Neither argument, nor others like them, recognize that other cultures can be different than European ones, nor that other parts of the world may face different realities than urban centers in Europe and North America. The difference in worldviews is cast into sharper relief by a number of attitudes that native peoples bring to their harvesting practices, which are either disregarded or not understood by AR activists. Native peoples believe that animals give themselves to humans for their use and survival, and, importantly, that a lack of respect from humans will make animals avoid being harvested. Furthermore, they know from their experience and traditional knowledge that the

92

world/environment/life is sometimes harsh, and requires steely action in order to survive. Ironically, the Inuit at first sympathized with some parts of the AR position on the Newfoundland seal hunt—typically, the Inuit use rifles or harpoons, hunt adult seals, and use them for food. Later statements and misrepresentation regarding native culture, however, were deeply offensive to the Inuit and others, and there remains little sympathy now.

Impacts of the Campaigns The AR campaigns have had a significant impact on public opinion, government policy, and Arctic communities, although whether these impacts will endure is questionable. With their bold public relations tactics, simplistic arguments, and choice of ethnic groups far removed from the political “core,” AR groups were able to influence public awareness and to diminish markets to some extent. However, the Malouf Commission in Canada found that 75% of the public in Canada supported trapping and sealing, and would continue to do so as long as the harvest was sustainable and as humane as possible. Seventy-five percent of the global fur market is in Europe, and these markets have been revitalized in recent years. The longterm public impact thus seems impermanent, and it may be that we will see additional campaigns in the near future to regenerate public antipathy. The AR activists have also had significant impact at the government level, especially in international organizations that are not burdened by national government obligations to respect their citizens’ needs. Thus, the EU was lobbied to ban sealskins and then furs. In fact, the latter were not banned because of the substantial interests of EU members in fur farming, and the sealskin ban was amended to specify seal pups so as to meet Denmark’s concerns about Greenland’s adult-seal hunt (this was ineffective because the market did not differentiate between adult and pup pelts). An exception to this was the Aleut fur-seal harvest in the Pribilof Islands, which was shut down by the US government, both in response to the market devaluation of pelts and to satisfy a number of domestic interests, as well as the US Humane Society, Save the Seal Inc., and Greenpeace. The IWC was the forum used to attempt to end all whaling. Membership of the IWC suddenly blossomed; to the 14–17 nations who were long-term members, about 20 other nonwhaling countries were added who could then sway the votes. With the NGOs there as observers, and sometimes as funders of small countries’ attendance, those governments with shaky environmental practices at home could improve their image by voting against whaling at the IWC. A similar technique has been used at meetings of

ANIMAL RIGHTS MOVEMENTS AND RENEWABLE RESOURCES the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) to manipulate votes in the direction desired by nongovernmental organizations. By becoming members of organizations such as the International Standards Organization (ISO), or the Federal-Provincial Committee for Humane Trapping in Canada, antiharvesting activists have been able to ensure that standards are defined so that they are hard or impossible to meet—and that the goalposts are kept moving. In both these cases, it became apparent that when a set of standards for humane traps were close to being agreed on by all members of the committee, the AR representatives would be removed by their organizations and replaced with stronger advocates. As made clear by Patrick Moore of Greenpeace, in a presentation to the Malouf Commission regarding the antisealing campaign: It wasn’t primarily a question of wildlife management or economics or politics or science or any of the other things they tried to argue their way around. It … came down to a question of morality.

In a host of international agreements such as the Convention on Biological Diversity, Agenda 21 of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, The World Conservation Strategy, the UN International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and the International Labour Organization Convention on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples, indigenous delegates and their states have ensured wording respecting sustainable indigenous use of renewable resources. Despite having signed the agreements, some governments and international actors continue to act against such use. The AR campaigns have had a profound impact on Arctic communities, undermining economic selfreliance, food security, dignity, and cultural identity. Repeatedly, observers record social breakdown, drinking, suicide, outmigration, and the breakdown of effective community institutions as effects from the antisealing, antitrapping, and antiwhaling campaigns. Occasionally however, the response to the campaigns has generated stronger native organizations and community-based management, such as the Alaska Eskimo Whaling Commission, the Inuit Circumpolar Conference, the Fisheries Joint Management Committee in the Inuvialuit Settlement Area of Canada, and the Greenland Home Rule Government’s comanagement of whaling. The loss of sealskin income was estimated to have destroyed 60% of the annual income of most Canadian Inuit communities in the mid-1980s (see Seal Skin Directive), and Greenland Inuit livelihoods were also devastated. The price of sealskins dropped from a high of $23.65 in 1976 to below $4 in 1978/1979. The

income of $1.5 million to Inuit communities in the Northwest Territories and Nunavik dropped by nearly 85%, causing immediate declines in harvesting activity, and therefore in country food availability. In the Pribilof Islands, the sole economic mainstay of the islands was lost with the fur seal harvest. The antifur campaigns have had a serious negative impact on the fur trade in Canada, although the markets have recently revived again after a long depression: wild and ranched raw fur sales there dropped from around $800 million in the mid-1980s to as low as $350 million by 1988, although they had climbed back to $450 million by 1996 (see Trapping). In the past year or so, they have rebounded another 25%. From a northern native perspective, the campaigns against resource harvesting are often seen as representing the interests of rich, urban, well-fed people, who have destroyed their own immediate environment and now want to save others: rich people who have a secure livelihood, but do not understand that other people do not. They are one more way in which the urban European cultures are attempting to subjugate and colonize, if not wipe out, native cultures. The colonial attitudes are clear in statements such as that by Paul Watson of the Sea Shepherd Society: this is an era of changing social values … [T]raditions will be broken, people on both sides will be hurt but it is a part of natural human evolution.... [S]hould social change within the context of one social group be restricted by the result it will have on another social group, especially in light of the fact that such social change is perceived ... as being progressive?

Larry Merculieff, an Aleut, said that “any attempts to stop [the seal harvest] through misdirected emotionalism of people who do not live with nature as closely as we do can only be viewed as violence against us—and the seals.” As Finn Lynge despaired: How can aboriginal hunters and trappers ever hope to have their voices heard and their viewpoint understood across this immense gulf of cultural alienation, misinformation, and plain ignorance? Ironically, by removing northern peoples’ traditional ties to the land and resources, the Arctic may become subject to different, more severe impacts. The US withdrawal from the International Fur-Seal Treaty left the seals without international migratory protection, open to pelagic killing, and without international scientific monitoring or research. The Pribilof Island communities are now caught up in the industrial fishery in the Bering Sea. And the Fur Seal population is showing a drastic decline in numbers. In the final irony, pollution and overconsumption in the urban south are likely to have a more profound impact on the quality of the Arctic environment and the survival of

93

ANIMALS IN THE WORLDVIEWS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES its wildlife than hunting and trapping ever did, through the transport of contaminants and the demand for nonrenewable resources. HEATHER MYERS See also Hunting, Subsistence; Seal Skin Directive; Trapping; Whaling, Subsistence Further Reading Caulfield, R., Greenlanders, Whales and Whaling: Sustainability and Self-Determination in the Arctic, Hanover: Dartmouth College, 1997 D’Amato, A. & S. Chopra, “Whales: their emerging right to life.” The American Journal of International Law, 85(1) (1991): 21–62 Duffy, Maureen, Men and Beasts: An Animal Rights Handbook, London: Paladin Publishing, 1984 Freeman, M.M.R., “A commentary on political issues with regard to contemporary whaling.” North Atlantic Studies, 2(1–2) (1990): 106–116 ———, “Issues affecting subsistence security in Arctic societies.” Arctic Anthropology, 34(1) (1997): 7–17 ——— (editor), Endangered Peoples of the Arctic: Struggles to Survive and Thrive, Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 2000 Godlovitch, S., R. Godlovitch & J. Harris (editors), Animals, Men and Morals: An Enquiry into the Maltreatment of NonHumans, London: Victor Gollancz, 1971 Herscovici, A., The Animal Rights Controversy, Toronto: CBC Enterprises, 1985 Lynge, F., Arctic Wars: Animal Rights, Endangered Peoples, Hanover: Dartmouth College, 1992 Malouf, A. (chair), Seals and Sealing in Canada: Report of the Royal Commission, 3 volumes, Ottawa: Supply and Services Canada, 1986 Regan, T., The Case for Animal Rights, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1983 Singer, P., Animal Liberation: A New Ethics for our Treatment of Animals, New York: Avon, 1975 Stoett, P., The International Politics of Whaling, Vancouver: UBC Press, 1997 Wenzel, G., Animal Rights, Human Rights: Ecology, Economy and Ideology in the Canadian Arctic, London: Belhaven, 1991

ANIMALS IN THE WORLDVIEWS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES The indigenous peoples of the Arctic have their own distinctive histories, cultures, economies, and forms of social organization, yet they all share a distinctive and special relationship with their environment and the animals they depend upon, which is essential for economic survival, social identity, and spiritual life. This relationship with nature is reflected in a rich mythology and worldview, and in moral and ethical codes that guide people in their treatment of animals and the environment. Whether they are hunted or herded, animals remain the basis for the cultural and economic life of the Arctic’s indigenous peoples. Animals make

94

life in the Arctic possible, providing (in an environment where agriculture is impossible) meat for food and furs for clothing, whether for consumption by the household or wider community and region. Indigenous perspectives on animals and on humanenvironmental relations also lie at the heart of indigenous thinking on self-determination and environmental protection. In political arenas, the Arctic’s indigenous peoples argue that the harvesting of renewable animal resources, such as seals, whales, and caribou, is sustainable. From their perspective, all life—human and animal—is interdependent and indigenous peoples view themselves as being in a meaningful dialogue with the environment and with the animals they depend on for survival. This argument has come about partly because, in response to the antiharvesting campaigns of European and North American animal-rights groups, indigenous peoples such as the Inuit have been forced to reconstitute their own worldviews and redefine human-animal relationships as a philosophy that emphasizes harmony, rather than conflict, between humans and the natural world. In the worldviews of Arctic indigenous peoples, animals and all other aspects of the natural world, such as lakes, rivers, the sun, and the moon, have souls, just as humans do. Indeed, this spiritual essence is shared between humans, animals, and natural phenomena and reminds human beings that they are not unique, but part of a transcendent universe in which everything emanates from the same spiritual source. Among Inuit groups, the souls of animals are particularly significant, and ritual and ceremonial life is often devoted entirely to ensuring that the souls of whales, polar bears, walrus, seals, and caribou receive proper treatment and respect, while myths and stories emphasize the spiritual relationship between humans and animals. Thus, the souls of animals need to be propitiated once the animal has been killed. In the traditional religions of Arctic peoples, a great spirit protected the animals they hunted and herded, embodying their essence and supervising their correct ritual treatment after being slaughtered. This master or guardian of the animals also prevented or facilitated the hunting of animals. In Siberian reindeer-herding societies, such as the Chukchi and Nenets, the master is protector of the herds, while for the Inuit the Sea Woman is owner of the sea mammals. Animals are conceptualized as nonhuman persons, endowed with consciousness and intelligence. Some species are said to live in communities that are similar in social organization to human communities. For example, the Alaskan and Siberian Yup’ik say that seals live according to the same kinds of rules that humans are subject to. Yup’ik stories describe how young seals learn appropriate rules from their elders,

ANIMALS IN THE WORLDVIEWS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES such as knowing the dangers of approaching a hunter who appears to be a careless and disrespectful person. In Athapaskan mythology and stories from the Distant Time (a remote ancient time in Athapaskan religious belief), animals and humans are similar in many ways, and animals have distinct and unique personalities just as humans do. In the myths and oral histories of many Arctic peoples, it is common to find stories that describe how humans and animals were not as clearly distinguished as they are today. Stories tell how humans and animals not only lived in the same communities, often sharing the same household, but how humans have the power and ability to transform themselves into animals and vice versa. Because humans, animals, and everything in the natural world share the same spiritual essence, the Arctic environment is essentially a dangerous and uncertain one, and not just because of the extreme physical conditions people have to endure. Part of this danger is due to the fact that, as all human food consists of souls, offences by an individual against animals and spirits in the natural world can cause pain to the souls of recently killed animals and invite retribution from vindictive and malevolent spirits, putting entire human communities at risk through poor hunting, illness, misfortune, famine, and bad weather. As the rich mythology of Arctic peoples shows, maintaining a balance between the human and natural worlds was often perceived to be a matter of life and death. Care must therefore be taken to ensure that animals and animal spirits are not offended or harmed by hunters. Hunters are obliged to see that animals are killed properly, both in terms of hunting technique and in correct propitiatory rituals, and that their meat, bones, and hide are utilized in ways that will not offend the animal’s guardian spirit. For example, in northern Canada, if the soul of a recently killed seal is not returned to the sea, its guardian spirit may bring bad luck to the hunter in the form of poor hunting, while Yup’ik women in southwest Alaska must be careful not to trap their hair in the seams of animal skins they are sewing together for clothing; if this happens it can bring danger to whoever wears the clothes. Traditionally, rites practiced before a hunt were intended to ensure the hunter’s success. In traditional Greenlandic society, for example, a successful whale hunt depended in part on men abstaining from sexual intercourse for prescribed periods, and on women remaining indoors in darkness until the men returned with the whale. After the killing of animals, propitiatory rituals took the form of elaborate ceremonies. The purpose of these ceremonies was for people to honor the animal, for the hunter to ask forgiveness for killing it, and to return its soul safely to the spirit world. The respect for animals is illustrated perhaps

most vividly by the fact that some animals, such as bears and wolverines, are given funeral rituals after being killed. The rituals surrounding the hunt of a bear, for example, symbolize the close yet ambivalent relationship between humans and animals. The bear is humanlike, can stand on its hind legs, and resembles a human when skinned. The bear is a great hunter and has special power, and although the killing of a bear brings prestige to the hunter, it also brings danger. When a bear has been hunted, a feast is held where the dead bear is treated as an honored guest and asked to forgiven people for slaying it. In Saami tradition, hunters who take part in a bear hunt are regarded as unclean and must undergo ritual purification during a period of ritual seclusion, while the bear festival of Siberian peoples such as the Chukchi is one of the most elaborate forms of animal ceremonialism anywhere in the Arctic, expressing both the desire of the hunter for the bear and the anxiety that surrounds a kill. In the traditional religious life of Arctic peoples, the shaman was a central figure in the maintenance of good relations between humans and animals, acting as an intermediary in the transactions between humans, the souls of animals, and the guardian of the animals. Inuit myths, for example, relate how the shaman would first have to undergo a long, solitary, and arduous initiation in the mountains, on the barren tundra, or in a deep cave, wrestling with spirits and acquiring powers before returning home. The essence of shamanic practice was the trance and journey to the spirit world. As the shamans went into a trance, theirsouls would journey to the spirit world to search for the souls of human beings who had been captured by malevolent spirits, or bargain with the guardian of animals for the animals to be sent to the human world to be hunted. The dependence on animals for food and social and economic well-being is reflected in community hunting regulations, in herding practices, and in patterns of sharing and gift-giving. In seal-hunting households in Greenland and Canada, for example, the meat, fat, and skin of the seal is utilized. There is rarely much wasted. Complex and precise local rules exist, which determine the sharing and distribution of the catch, and seal meat is commonly shared out to people beyond the household, whether those people are related to the hunter or not. For Arctic hunting peoples, sharing can only be understood with reference to the sense of social relatedness that people feel they have with each other and with the environment, and this is manifest in, for instance, first-catch celebrations. At an early age, boys are taken on hunting trips with their fathers, who teach them the skills and impart the knowledge necessary to be a successful hunter. When a boy catches his

95

ANZHU, PETR FEDOROVICH first seal, he gives gifts of meat to every household in his community, and people are invited to his parents’ home for coffee or tea and cake. A first-catch celebration is not only a recognition by the community of the boy’s development as a hunter, it is a statement of the vitality and cultural importance of the hunting way of life. Arctic hunting peoples such as the Inuit not only regard the environment as the provider for all their needs, but sharing the products of the hunt is a social event that demonstrates relatedness, affection, and concern. Obligations to share underlie subsistence ways of life and contribute to the reproduction of kinship ties and other close social relationships. MARK NUTTALL See also Animal-Rights Movements and Renewable Resources; Indigenous Knowledge; Indigenous Worldviews; Mythology of the Inuit; Shamanism Further Reading Asatchaq, The Things That Were Said of Them: Shaman Stories and Oral Histories of the Tikigaq People, translated by Tom Lowenstein & Tukummiq, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1992 Bogoras, Waldemar, The Chukchee, 3 volumes, Leiden: Brill, and New York: Stechert, 1904–1909, reprinted New York: AMS, 1975 Kleivan, Inge & Birgitte Sonne, Eskimos: Greenland and Canada, Leiden: Brill, 1985 Lantis, Margaret, Alaskan Eskimo Ceremonialism, Seattle: University of Washington Press, and New York: Augustin, 1947, reprinted Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1966 Lynge, Finn, Arctic Wars, Animal Rights, Endangered Peoples, translated by Marianne Stenbaek, Hanover, New Hampshire: University Press of New England, 1992

ANZHU, PETR FEDOROVICH Discovery of the Novosibirskiye archipelago (New Siberian Islands) is usually ascribed to the Yakutsk merchant Ivan Lyakhov in 1770, based on his visits to the two southern islands of the archipelago, now named after him. Thereafter, various trappers and hunters, especially Yakov Sannikov, roamed over most of the archipelago, discovering Kotel’ny Island, Faddeevskii Island, and Novaya Sibir’ over the period 1800–1806. The first expedition dispatched from St Petersburg to survey the islands was that of Matvei Matveevich Gedenshtrom over the period 1809–1810; however, Gedenshtrom had very poor instruments and the resultant survey was quite unreliable. In 1821–1823, Lt. Petr Fedorovich Anzhu was assigned to resurvey the archipelago as well as the mainland coast east and west from the mouth of the Yana, in parallel with the surveys of Lt. Ferdinand Petrovich von Wrangell farther east. Anzhu was also

96

specifically instructed to investigate land sighted by Yakov Sannikov, who had participated in Gedenshtrom’s expedition, from the north coasts of both Kotel’ny and Faddeevskii islands in the spring of 1811. This land had even been named Sannikov’s Land. Anzhu was specifically ordered to travel by dog sled rather than try to explore the archipelago by boat. Accompanied by P.P. Il’in (surveying assistant), I.A. Berezhnykh (mate), Dr. A.E. Figurin (medical doctor and naturalist), and two sailors, Anzhu reached Ust’-Iansk, which was to be their base, in October 1820. Their first task was to establish a depot and forward base on Barkin Island (off Mys Bykovskyi), just north of the present port of Tiksi. They started north from here with 31 dog sleds on March 8, 1821 (old style), bound for Stolbovoi Island. Having surveyed it, they headed northeast to Kotel’ny Island. While Berezhnykh surveyed the south coast of that island and crossed to Faddeevskii Island, Anzhu and Figurin surveyed the west coast of Kotel’ny Island. On April 5, they headed northwest across the ice from the tip of Kotel’ny Island in search of the elusive Sannikov’s Land. After 30 miles (67 km) they were stopped by open water and there was still no sign of land. By April 8, they were back on Kotel’ny Island; they traveled east along its north coast and crossed Bunge’s Land to Faddeevskii Island where they rendezvoused with Berezhnykh. From here, on April 14, they headed north across the sea ice again; dangerously thin ice forced them to turn back after only 4.5 miles (10 km). Continuing east they crossed to Novaya Sibir’ on April 18. Then on April 21, once again they struck out across the sea ice, this time toward the northeast from the northern tip of Novaya Sibir’. After 15.5 miles (34 km), they were stopped by very rough ice, beyond which there was open water, but still no sign of land. They returned to land at Mys (cape) Kamennyi, the northeastern tip of Novaya Sibir’ on April 23. The entire party then headed back to the mainland, and was back at its base at Ust’-Iansk by May 9, 1821. Traveling on horseback Anzhu spent the summer of 1821 surveying the mainland coast from the mouth of the Yana east to the mouth of the Indigirka. Then in the spring of 1822, he resumed his surveys of the Novosibirskiye islands. Starting north on March 10, Anzhu and Berezhnykh focused their attention initially on surveys of Bol’shoi and Malyi Liakhovskii, but by April 22 Anzhu was back at the northwestern cape of Faddeevskii Island. From there he could see what appeared to be a bluish landmass to the northwest, and found reindeer tracks leading out across the sea ice. As Anzhu progressed farther from shore, the “land” disappeared; he concluded that it was probably a mirage of dirty pressure ridges. The reindeer had probably

ANZHU, PETR FEDOROVICH been heading out onto the sea ice to lick salt from the ice surface. On his way back to Faddeevskii Island, Anzhu discovered a small island that he named Figurina Island after the expedition’s doctor. By April 9, 1822 he was back at Cape Kamenyi, the northeastern tip of Novaya Sibir’; here he again tried heading northeast, but after 45.5 miles (100 km), on April 14, he was stopped by thin ice and open water. Instead of retracing his route to Novaya Sibir’, he then headed almost due south across the East Siberian Sea to the mainland coast. He reached land just to the west of Krestovskyi Island of the Medvezh’i group on April 27, having been away from land for 18 days, and having covered roughly 318 miles (700 km) across the sea ice. This ranked among the longest recorded sledge trips across sea ice up to that date. On May 5, Anzhu rendezvoused with Von Wrangell at Nizhne-Kolymsk, the latter having just completed his first in a series of surveys of the mainland coast east from there. On his return to Ust’-Iansk, Anzhu met Il’in, who had spent the spring surveying the coast west from the mouth of the Iana to the mouth of the Olenek. For his final season of exploration, accompanied by Dr. Figurin, Anzhu left Ust’-Iansk on February 10, 1823 and Cape Bykovskyi on February 25. Their initial goal was two small islands in the Laptev Sea, Semenovskii Island and Vasil’evskii Island, discovered by Ivan Liakhov in 1815. Anzhu reached Vasil’evskii Island and surveyed it and Semenovskii Island, just to the north. He found them to be long, low, and narrow, some 33–99 feet (10–30 m) in height but with steep coastal cliffs. Semenovskii Island was 6.8 miles (15 km) long and almost one-half mile (1 km) wide; Vasil’evskii Island was 3.6 miles (8 km) long. The remarkable feature of these islands is that they no longer exist; Vasil’evskii Island had disappeared by 1936 and Semenovskii Island by 1950. The explanation is that the islands consisted entirely of fine-grained ice-rich sediments with enormous tabular masses of ground ice; by a process known as thermal abrasion, the relatively warm summer waters of the Laptev Sea completely eliminated the islands by a combination of thawing of the ground ice and mechanical erosion by the waves. From here, Anzhu headed northeast to Belkovskii Island despite very rough ice. Having surveyed that island, he crossed to Kotel’ny Island and headed south. Back at Ust’-Iansk, he began the long haul back to St Petersburg. The major result of Anzhu’s surveys was a remarkably accurate map of the Novosibirskiye archipelago, considerably more accurate than that of Gedenshtrom (both maps are reproduced in Belov, 1956: 501, 508). In addition, he had demonstrated that Sannikov’s Land almost certainly did not exist, or at least not as a land-

mass of any significant size. What Sannikov had seen was probably dirty pressure ridges or possibly an ice island, or possibly a mirage of Bennett Island or one of the other De Long Islands (Henrietta, Vil’kitskogo, or Zhokhova) to the north of the Novosibirskiye archipelago.

Biography Petr Fedorovich Anzhu (Anjou) was born on February 15, 1796 in Vyshnii-Volochek (midway between Moscow and St Petersburg). He was a junior lieutenant when he embarked on his surveys of the Novosibirskiye archipelago. Soon after returning from his Arctic expedition, he was dispatched to the then-southern boundaries of Russia to survey the northeastern shores of the Caspian Sea and the western shores of the Aral Sea over the period 1825–1826. In 1829, as one of the officers on board Gangut, one of the Russian ships-of-the-line, he took part in the Battle of Navarino off the south coast of Greece, in which a combined British/French/Russian fleet destroyed a Turkish/Egyptian fleet in the last major battle among wooden ships. Gangut was severely damaged, but Anzhu distinguished himself by his bravery. Thereafter he served at the Russian Admiralty in St Petersburg and in its various scientific institutions. He died on October 12, 1869. The Ostrova Anzhu (the northern tier of the Novosibirskiye archipelago, that is, Kotel’ny Island, Bunge’s Land, Faddeevskii Island, and Novaya Sibir’) is named after him. WILLIAM BARR See also New Siberian Islands; Wrangell, Baron Ferdinand Petrovich von Further Reading Barr, William, “Retreating coasts and disappearing islands in the Arctic.” The Musk-Ox, 18 (1976): 103–111 Belov, M.I., Arkticheskoe moreplavanie s drevneishikh vremen do serediny XIX veka. Istoriia otkrytiia i osvoeniia Severnogo morskogo puti, I [Arctic navigation from the earliest times to the middle of the 19th century. History of the discovery and exploitation of the Northern Sea Route, I], Moscow: Izdatel’stvo “Morskoi Transport,” 1956 Pasetskii, V.M., Russkie otkrytiia i issledovaniia v Arktike. Pervaya polovina XIX v. [Russian discoveries and investigations in the Arctic. First half of the 19th century], Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 1984 Vize, V.Yu., Morya Sovetskoy Arktiki. Ocherki po istorii issledovaniia [Seas of the Soviet Arctic. Studies in the history of exploration], Moscow/Leningrad: Izdatel’stvo Glavsevmorputi, 1948 Wrangel, F.P., Narrative of an Expedition to the Polar Sea in the Years 1820, 1821, 1822 & 1823 (2nd edition), London: James Madden & Co., 1844

97

ARCHAEOLOGY OF THE ARCTIC: ALASKA AND BERINGIA

ARCHAEOLOGY OF THE ARCTIC: ALASKA AND BERINGIA The late Pleistocene reality of Beringia was first recognized from floral distributions as including both Alaska and Chukotka as well as the one-time land connection between them, now the Bering Strait. Some broad definitions would extend its limits to the Lena River in the west and the Mackenzie in the east. Even before the development of the formal conceptualization, the earliest researchers into the archaeology and native culture expected to uncover significant human contact between America and Asia. This involved two distinct periods: on the one hand, the origin of the first Americans by immigration and, on the other, much later contacts between peoples with or without migration.

The Later Cultural Horizons The first serious excavations at Bering Strait drew on the results of the ethnographic and archaeological work of the Fifth Thule Expedition in northern Canada (1921–1924), where fieldworkers disagreed on whether the Eskimo, or Inuit, people had originated in Canada or farther west. In 1926, Diamond Jenness of the National Museum of Canada excavated on the American shore of the strait, where he was charged to secure information regarding both the origin of the Eskimo and migrations between Asia and America. That same year, Aleš HrdliJ ka began an anthropological survey of western Alaska that focused on similar questions. Both reported the discovery of a few ivory artifacts decorated in a hitherto unknown style that Jenness declared pertinent to an early Bering Sea culture. These results led Henry B. Collins to St Lawrence Island from 1928 to 1931 to seek the source of artifacts of this distinctive style, which he rechristened Old Bering Sea—evidently earlier than anything then known from the Inuit region of Canada, implying a western origin. Collins reported a sequence of prehistoric stylistic periods labeled Old Bering Sea I, II, III, Punuk, and then late prehistoric, the earliest design elements suggesting to him an Asian origin. His assistant, James A. Ford, described a related sequence in the Pt Barrow region in which Punuk-related Birnirk developed into the Thule culture reported from northcentral Canada by the Fifth Thule Expedition. In the same years, Otto Geist, excavating on St Lawrence Island for what is now the University of Alaska, discovered on one of the outlying Punuk islets the Okvik culture described by Froelich Rainey, and which they and most other researchers would equate with Collins’s Old Bering Sea I. The sequential design elements and artifacts, which included sophisticated harpoon technology as well as crude pottery, oil lamps, and an increase through time in the polishing of slate,

98

were accompanied by an evolution in maritime adaptation leading to the pursuit of large whales. Until after World War II, this sequence leading from Okvik to Thule culture was widely accepted as embodying all of early Eskimo prehistory. Estimated by some researchers to begin by 1000 BC, recent radiocarbon evidence suggests that all of this development occurred within the past two millennia. Farther south, in 1930–1931 Frederica de Laguna excavated in Cook Inlet and Kachemak Bay, describing a sequence of slate-using cultures that she concluded had developed from something like the Thule of northern Canada. Beginning at the same time, HrdliJ ka conducted six seasons of extensive excavations on Kodiak Island—his rationale being that Asian migrants would have shortly found the great island to be free from hard winters and teeming with resources; collections were comparable to de Laguna’s. HrdliJ ka was also attracted by the preservation of skeletal remains in shell-rich middens, and he followed Kodiak with three seasons in the Aleutian Islands (1936–1938), conducting scattered excavations throughout the chain. For each of these regions, he adduced a succession of two peoples: pre-Koniag and Koniag, and pre-Aleut and Aleut. In both cases, the later were related to living inhabitants of the regions, although recognizably distinct from one another, the earlier showing more resemblance to various American Indians, although again distinct from one another. All of the people involved, however, displayed an ability to live along coasts of the open (as opposed to freezing) sea. And all of the later peoples were linguistic relatives of the northern Eskimo. During and after World War II, events brought major changes in interpretation. In the north, Rainey and Helge Larsen were attracted to Pt Hope for information on the earliest prehistory of the Eskimo people. Their Ipiutak site revealed certain ties to Old Bering Sea, but lacked pottery, the oil lamp, and polished slate, and showed a tradition of artistic embellishment of ivory that they believed to mark a people only recently descended from the most ancient Eskimo ancestors from Asia, but which is now recognized as beginning after AD 200. Not long afterward, James L. Giddings embarked on research into Eskimo prehistory on the American mainland both immediately south and north of Bering Strait. To the south, in Norton Bay, the early Denbigh Flint complex, later to be subsumed by William Irving into the Arctic Small Tool tradition, indicated relations both with the Neolithic of northeasternmost Asia and the pre-Dorset of Canada. This was followed by Norton culture and then the Thule-related Nukleet culture. The appearance of the Denbigh Flint complex on the Seward Peninsula is now dated around 3000 BC, is

ARCHAEOLOGY OF THE ARCTIC: ALASKA AND BERINGIA generally thought to be the progenitor of the preDorset of Canada and Greenland, and is presumed to indicate a movement from preceramic Neolithic Asia, although no specific donor culture has been identified. Within Alaska, Irving and others showed that the Denbigh Flint complex was especially well represented in the northern Brooks Range, seasonally crossed by migrating caribou (Rangifer). Around Kotzebue Sound north of Seward Peninsula, Giddings revealed a sequence of cultures including the Denbigh Flint complex, followed by the first suggestion of maritime adaptation before 1000 BC, thereafter in order by Choris, Norton, Ipiutak, Birnirk, and then Thule cultures. He demonstrated both that American coastal sequences north and south of Bering Strait varied somewhat from one another, and that the archaeological cultures of the American coast were largely independent of the sequence posited by Collins, which was characteristic of the Asian coast and the islands of the Bering Strait region, Asia and America intersecting only shortly before the Thule movement eastward across Canada to Greenland. This Asian coastal sequence has been largely confirmed by work on the Chukchi Peninsula coast of Bering Strait that began in 1945 and has continued intermittently with a concentration on cemeteries. But from the cemetery excavations came mixed grave lots that included artifacts (especially harpoon heads) related to the Okvik, Old Bering Sea, Punuk, and Birnirk cultures in various degrees of mixture. This suggested to Sergei A. Arutyunov and his colleagues that, rather than simply a sequential progression, the stylistic categories reflect contemporary ethnic distinctiveness as well as developmental changes. In Alaska to the south, cultures revealed by the excavations of de Laguna and HrdliJka were amalgamated in the 1960s through work by Donald W. Clark in a sequence beginning by 4000 BC with an Ocean Bay tradition, with plentiful slate polishing appearing within a millennium, followed by manifestations labeled Kachemak and Koniag. Similar results were revealed by Don E. Dumond and his students on the Pacific coast of the Alaska Peninsula immediately west of Kodiak, whereas the Bering Sea slope of the same peninsula yielded a sequence mirroring that of Giddings on Norton Bay. Thus, the Aleutian Range of mountains on the Alaska Peninsula was found to stand as a long-term boundary between peoples of the Bering Sea and the north Pacific, apparently breached only after AD 1000 by what is interpreted as a movement of Bering Sea people probably responsible for the presence of an Eskimoan language in the KodiakPrince William Sound region. The linguistic relationship among the EskimoAleut peoples (see Eskimo-Aleut Languages) is

indicative both of an ancient common ancestor of both Eskimo and Aleut, and of a later dispersal of Eskimoan speakers who in recent decades have been represented by some six different stocks accorded the status of separate languages. Thus far, however, there is no widely accepted archaeological evidence of either a common Eskimo-Aleut or a common Eskimoan ancestor. It is possible that recent research in the Aleutians Islands may throw some light on these issues. HrdliJka’s early work was followed after World War II by that of William S. Laughlin, who reinterpreted the shifts from pre-Aleut to Aleut and pre-Koniag to Koniag as those of continuity—of Paleo-Aleut to NeoAleut, and Paleo-Koniag to Neo-Koniag. In the Aleutians, his work appeared to indicate cultural stability or even stagnation, especially after 2000 BC. From an islet off Umnak Island in the Eastern Aleutians, he also reported the Anangula Blade site, dated before 6000 BC, to which he and some of his students imputed the origin of all later Aleutian culture. The most recent work in the Aleutians tends to support this contention, although it replaces the near absence of change in the eastern islands with a much more dynamic sequence in which faunal remains about 2000 BC indicate a new interest in ice-edge marine resources—normally found far north of the Aleutian Islands—with evidence of changes in the following millennium that some investigators believe to be due to influence from the more northerly Arctic Small Tool tradition. Clearly, the ability of the prehistoric Aleuts to derive a living from their shores and the open seas was a development more precocious than that indicated for their Eskimo cousins to the north in either America or Asia, whom early Aleuts may have crucially influenced: by 4000 BC at the latest, maritime efficiency is evident both in the easternmost Aleutians and on the Alaska Peninsula and Kodiak Island, and by 1000 BC ancestral Aleuts had expanded to the westernmost of the lengthy chain of oceanbound islands. Whether they also penetrated as far north as Bering Strait is possible but not yet known.

The Earlier Horizons Earlier Beringian cultures were reported in the 1930s from Alaska at the Campus site, where small blades (microblades) and specialized (micro)cores recovered by Rainey and others were compared to artifacts from interior north Asia. These were found with chipped stone projectile heads of lanceolate shape, and a few with carelessly formed side or corner notches. Analogs of these were found widespread in interior Alaska after the 1950s, usually without microblades, and were seen as key artifacts of the Northern Archaic tradition—of people who lived largely within the expanding interior

99

ARCHAEOLOGY OF THE ARCTIC: CANADA AND GREENLAND forest, where they evidently fished and hunted large animals such as caribou and moose (Alces). The majority of the sites have been dated between 4000 and 2000 BC. With no Asian counterpart to most diagnostic artifacts, the tradition is considered American in origin. By the 1960s, other sites were recognized to yield plentiful microblades pressed from similar wedgeshaped cores of Asian type, without Northern Archaic points, but at times associated with scrapers, discoidal bifaces, and a particular form of small burin. These have been referred to the American Paleo-Arctic tradition in northwest Alaska, the Denali complex in central Alaska, and given other localized names elsewhere. They have been dated to begin at around 9000 BC and to endure until at least 6000 BC, and likely represent the origin of the Anangula Blade complex, although the blade industry of the eastern Aleutians is somewhat variant. Importantly, PaleoArctic or Denali can be related to late Pleistocene complexes in northeast Asia, where the tradition includes the terminal Paleolithic Dyuktai culture of the Aldan River region and Yakutia, plus archaeological cultures to the south and east in Hokkaido, the Russian Maritime Territory, Sakhalin Island, as well as those from both Ushki Lake in interior Kamchatka Peninsula and sites reported from the eastern Chukotka Peninsula by Nikolai N. Dikov. These appear to have been in place by 10,000 BC or earlier— two millennia before the flooding of Bering Strait and in time to account for the appearance of the related cultures in Alaska. Reports of later sites in eastern Chukotka that may also show resemblances to assemblages known from eastern Beringia or Alaska are yet to be evaluated. More recently, a second set of assemblages of even earlier American cast has been reported from Alaskan sites most heavily located in the Brooks Range in the north. Of these, the Mesa site has reportedly produced more than four dozen radiocarbon determinations that cluster strongly around 8000 BC in radiocarbon years, associated with an impressive series of chipped lanceolate dart or spear points that are highly reminiscent of assemblages of interior North America to the south that date slightly earlier. There is no clear prototype in Asia and it is doubtful that the origin of these assemblages can be attributed to that continent, although certain Diuktai-related collections there do include at least a few lanceolate-form bifaces. In short, western Beringia (Asia) displayed early cultures that were evidently imported into eastern Beringia (Alaska) before the flooding of the central part of the region, after which the Asian transplant appeared for a substantial portion of its lifetime face to face with other cultures derived from America to the

100

south. All of the researchers of these earlier horizons have claimed a special interest in the first movements into the New World. Thus far, however, results have been inadequate to account for the very earliest of the clearly attested human presence in America. DON E. DUMOND See also American Paleo-Arctic Tradition; Arctic Small Tool Tradition; Arutyunov, Sergei; Beringia; Birnirk Culture; Collins, Henry B.; Denbigh Flint Culture; Dikov, Nikolay N.; Dyuktai Culture; Giddings, Louis; HrdliJ ka, Aleš; Ipiutak Culture; Jenness, Diamond; Laguna, Frederica de; Larsen, Helge; Migration (Prehistory); Northern Archaic Period; Norton Culture; Old Bering Sea Culture; Rainey, Froelich; Thule Culture Further Reading Clark, Donald W., “Prehistory of the Western Subarctic.” In Subarctic, edited by June Helm, Volume 6 of Handbook of North American Indians, edited by William T. Sturtevant, Washington, District of Columbia: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1981 Damas, David (editor), Arctic, Volume 5 of Handbook of North American Indians, edited by William T. Sturtevant, Washington, District of Columbia: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1984 Dikov, Nikolai N., Aziia na Styke s Amerikoi v Drevnosti, St Petersburg: Nauka, 1993; translated by Richard L. Bland as Asia at the Juncture with America in Antiquity, Anchorage: US National Park Service, Beringia Program, 1997 Dumond, Don E., The Eskimos and Aleuts (revised edition), London: Thames and Hudson, 1987 ——— (editor), “Archaeology in the Aleut Zone of Alaska: some recent research.” University of Oregon Anthropological Papers 59, Eugene: University of Oregon, 2001 Dumond, Don E. & Richard L. Bland, “Holocene Prehistory of the Northernmost North Pacific.” Journal of World Prehistory, 9(4) (1995): 401–451 Fitzhugh, William W. & Aron Crowell (editors), Crossroads of Continents, Washington, District of Columbia: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1988 Leskov, A.M. & H. Müller-Beck (editors), Artische Waljäger vor 3000 Jahren: unbekannte sibirsche Kunst [Arctic whale hunters 3000 years ago: unknown Siberian art], MainzMünchen: v. Hase und Koeler, 1993 West, Frederick H. (editor), American Beginnings: The Prehistory and Palaeoecology of Beringia, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996

ARCHAEOLOGY OF THE ARCTIC: CANADA AND GREENLAND Western interest in North American Arctic cultures goes back to the earliest encounters between aboriginal peoples, European and Russian explorers, whalers, traders, and missionaries. Naturally the level of interest varied greatly, with trade undoubtedly being one of the primary objectives.

ARCHAEOLOGY OF THE ARCTIC: CANADA AND GREENLAND Aboriginal interests in past cultural activities centered principally on oral tradition, the passing of myths and legends from generation to generation. In many instances, material cultural elements and styles were passed on from one generation to the next. The location of old habitation sites and faunal remains told the pioneering bands much about the potential richness of an area used over hundreds of years. Old tools were undoubtedly examined, occasionally copied, and used. Old settlements contained building materials used in the construction of new dwellings. When Thule Inuit in Greenland excavated abandoned Norse farmhouses, useful items such as iron and wood were collected and carried away. The systematic excavation and recording of past habitation sites were an outgrowth of the Western scientific approach, with ethnographic fieldwork providing the foundation for analyses and interpretations of archaeological evidence. Franz Boas’s detailed ethnographic research in the Eastern Arctic in the 1880s was an early contribution along these lines. Few archaeological debates have been carried out with more fervor than those surrounding the question of the first human migration into the New World; did the first people follow the southern coastal region of Beringia or did they migrate through the interior tundra of the land bridge, or did they use both routes? The gradual post-Pleistocene flooding of Beringia eventually severed the land connection about 8000 years ago, and steadily submerged evidence of human occupations along its ancient shores. Most archaeologists accept that people have resided in North America during the past 15,000–20,000 years. A few researchers, such as William Irving, called for considerably greater antiquity, possibly in excess of 100,000 years, based on fairly controversial findings in the Old Crow Flats in the Yukon. Nevertheless, substantial and indisputable evidence of human occupation, such as the remains investigated by Jacques Cinq-Mars at Blue Fish Cave in the Yukon, do not predate 15,000 years. With the exception of sites in the Yukon and Elmer Harp’s location of Paleo-Indian sites in the Keewatin District of the Barren Grounds, the human presence in the Central, Eastern and High Arctic Canada and Greenland occurred relatively late. With the gradual retreat of the Laurentian Ice Sheet about 9000 years ago, newly opened lands supported sufficient numbers of caribou to entice hunters northward. However, several thousand years would pass before the first Paleo-Eskimo hunters headed eastward from northern Alaska into the Canadian Arctic and Greenland. The first systematic excavation of archaeological sites in the Arctic took place between 1921 and 1924, when Therkel Mathiassen (1927), an archaeologist on

the Danish Fifth Thule Expedition, investigated prehistoric sites in the central and eastern Canadian Arctic. His findings provided the foundation for the prehistoric period called the Thule culture. The data obtained by Mathiassen combined with the ethnographic fieldwork of Knud Rasmussen and Kaj BirketSmith resulted in theoretical discussions concerning the origin of the Eskimo culture and its relationship to the present-day Inuit populations in the Arctic. BirketSmith favored an inland origin for the Eskimo culture, whereas Mathiassen was of the opinion that the Thule culture had an Asiatic origin and a direct relationship to Eskimo cultures in Alaska and the Bering Sea region. Many decades passed before James VanStone’s ideas of a direct connection between the Thule culture and modern Eskimo groups were accepted. Mathiassen held the opinion that no culture predated the Thule culture in the Canadian Arctic and Greenland. However, Diamond Jenness, examining a collection of artifacts obtained by Inuit near Cape Dorset and on Coats Island, noted that the style of the small stone, bone, and ivory artifacts was quite dissimilar from those associated with the Thule culture. With superb insight, Jenness (1925) announced that a culture predating the Thule culture had existed in the Arctic, and named it the Dorset culture. We now know that the Dorset culture encompassed the latter stage of a long-lived Paleo-Eskimo tradition in both Canada and Greenland. Jenness’s insightfulness was not limited to prehistoric evidence from Canada. In 1926, he studied an assemblage of artifacts purchased from Eskimos on St Lawrence and Little Diomede Island. The artifacts constituted the first traces of what became known as the Old Bering Sea culture. Jenness also recognized the relationship of the artifacts to prehistoric finds he had made previously at Cape Prince of Wales in Alaska and the connection to the Thule culture. In the late 1930s, Robert Bentham forwarded artifacts from southeastern Ellesmere Island to Ottawa, where they were studied and described by Jenness; however, not until the late 1940s and early 1950s did Arctic archaeology in Canada reach a more active stage. In many ways it was the work of Louis Giddings, in 1948 at Cape Denbigh, that created a renewed interest in Canadian Arctic Inuit antiquity. Giddings’s 4000–4500-year-old Denbigh Flint complex was thought to be ancestral to the Canadian Dorset culture. During the summers of 1949 and 1950, Henry B. Collins (1955) excavated Thule and Dorset culture sites on Cornwallis Island and in the vicinity of Frobisher Bay where, at the Crystal II site, he located a clear stratigraphic separation between earlier Dorset and later Thule culture materials. During the summers of 1954 and 1955, Collins directed archaeological

101

ARCHAEOLOGY OF THE ARCTIC: CANADA AND GREENLAND investigations of Thule and Dorset sites on Southampton, Coats, and Walrus islands. Interest in Dorset/Thule culture contact remains undiminished and offers one of the most debated topics in Arctic archaeology. Following earlier investigations by Graham Rowel, Jørgen Meldgaard conducted a series of investigations in the Foxe Basin region between 1954 and 1957. The excavations produced data spanning nearly 4000 years of Paleo-Eskimo activities in the Central Canadian Arctic. The style of cultural elements, particularly harpoon heads, provided a basis for establishing a cultural chronology that separated Dorset from earlier Pre-Dorset components. Regrettably, most of these data remain unpublished. In 1957 and 1958, William Taylor Jr. (1968) excavated Pre-Dorset and Dorset sites on Mansel and Sugluk islands. Of particular interest at the time was the question of the degree of the relationship between the two Paleo-Eskimo periods. It was Taylor’s contention that there was continuity between the two, a view shared by most contemporary Arctic prehistorians. Taylor also traced the western limits of Pre-Dorset on Banks and Victoria islands. For several decades Father Guy Mary-Rousselière (1976), assisted by Inuit from Pond Inlet, excavated sites on northern Baffin Island, obtaining well-preserved specimens relating to Paleo- and Neo-Eskimo (Thule culture) occupations. In 1958, Moreau Maxwell investigated Thule culture sites in the Lake Hazen/Lady Franklin Bay areas of northern Ellesmere Island. Maxwell’s principal contribution to Arctic research came from his subsequent work on PreDorset and Dorset sites on the south coast of Baffin Island and his excellent, 1985, comprehensive overview of eastern Arctic prehistory (Maxwell, 1985). The 1970s saw a marked expansion of archaeological research in the Arctic. In Central Labrador, James Tuck (1976) and William Fitzhugh established the presence of early pre-Dorset occupations, barely postdating the last stages of Maritime Archaic. Peter Schledermann excavated early Thule culture sites and established occupational continuity culminating with the 18th-century Communal House period. Elmer Harp had extended the known presence of Dorset sites to the west coast of Newfoundland, while in Labrador, Fitzhugh and Steven Cox (1978) identified a distinct variant of the Dorset culture: Gross Water Dorset. Robert McGhee’s (1979) excavations of Paleo-Eskimo sites at Port Refuge on Grinnell Peninsula established a preliminary set of criteria for separating the Independence I and Pre-Dorset complexes of the Arctic Small Tool tradition. In 1976, Schledermann identified the presence of Early Dorset in the High

102

Arctic Islands. The following year Schledermann (1996) and Karen McCullough (1989) initiated a longterm archaeological investigation of the central east coast of Ellesmere Island covering the entire span of High Arctic prehistoric occupations, including sites associated with Independence I, Pre-Dorset, Early, and Late Dorset. Investigations into the early Thule culture period resulted in establishing a possible contact episode between Inuit and Norsemen in the Smith Sound region. The timing of the first appearance of the Thule culture was also determined to be around AD 1200, later by several centuries than previously thought. In northern Ellesmere Island Pat Sutherland excavated Paleo- and Neo-Eskimo sites, while McGhee investigated Thule sites on Bathurst Island. In the 1980s, Late Dorset period sites were investigated by James Helmer and Erik Damkjar.

Greenland Carl Fleisher’s work on the Qajaa site in Jacobshavn Isfjord (Ilulissat) in 1870 resulted in the recognition of a Greenlandic stone age. In 1907, the Norwegian geographer Ole Solberg published his studies on stone age materials from Greenland, while in North Greenland Christian Thostrup located evidence of early occupations. Following his return from the Fifth Thule Expedition in Canada, Mathiassen carried out archaeological investigations in many parts of Greenland. He concentrated exclusively on the Thule culture, which he believed represented the total prehistory of Greenland (and Arctic Canada). Mathiassen’s (1931) work in the Upernavik district, assisted by Frederica de Laguna, resulted in defining the Inugsuk phase of the Thule culture, characterized by an inclusion of Norse artifacts in Thule culture assemblages supposedly signifying contact between Norse Greenlanders and Thule culture Inuit. More recent investigations, notably by Jette Arneborg, have questioned the importance of such contacts in terms of Thule culture developments. Helge Larsen’s (1934) work in the early 1930s on Clavering Island and in Knud Rasmussen Land in northeast Greenland provided some of the first systematically excavated evidence of a Thule culture presence in that part of Greenland. This work, together with that of Mathiassen’s investigations in southeast Greenland and William Laughlin’s and Jorgen Jorgensen’s studies of skeletal material, led to varying hypotheses concerning the direction(s) of Thule culture expansion into East Greenland. Although the extent of Paleo-Eskimo activities in central East Greenland is not well known, recent investigations in the Ittoqqortoormiit (Scoresbysund) and Ammassalik regions by the Sandells and Tina Møbjerg have provided important

ARCHAEOLOGY OF THE ARCTIC: CANADA AND GREENLAND new data. Erik Holtved’s (1944, 1954) excavations of Thule culture winter sites in North Greenland during the 1930s and 1940s provided the first clear evidence of Thule culture activities at the major crossroads between High Arctic Canada and Greenland. His work established a close link between early Thule in the Far North and contemporaneous maritime cultures in Northwest Alaska. The excavations yielded a number of Norse artifacts thought at the time to indicate intertribal trade originating in West Greenland. After the end of World War II, the pace of archaeological investigations increased significantly. Meldgaard’s investigation of the Mosegaard 1948 collection from Saqqaq resulted in the formal recognition of two PaleoEskimo complexes: Saqqaq and Early Dorset. Excavations by Larsen and Meldgaard (1958) at the Sermermiut site located near Jacobshavn (Ilulissat) provided an important chronological framework consisting of three components: Saqqaq, Dorset, and Thule. Numerous Saqqaq sites located subsequently on the west and east coast of Greenland attest to the vitality of this long-lived and successful period of Greenlandic Paleo-Eskimo occupation. In the Far North, Eigil Knuth (1984) excavated Paleo-Eskimo sites in Peary Land, naming the Independence I and II complexes. Initial radiocarbon dating indicated a temporal separation between Saqqaq and Independence I. However, more recent dates suggest initial contemporaneity between the two complexes. Not only is Saqqaq of the same vintage as Independence I, but it lasted far longer: from about 2500 BC to 950 BC. Presently, Independence I is seen as an early but fairly short-lived regional complex of the Paleo-Eskimo tradition. In 1982, the Qajaa site was investigated by Meldgaard, Larsen, and Jeppe Møhl, revealing, as had Sermermiut (Meldgaard, 1952), three prehistoric stages beginning with Saqqaq, overlain by Dorset, and covered by Thule culture and historic Inuit middens. In the early 1980s, Bjarne Grønnow (1996) directed the excavation of the Qeqertasussuk site in Disko Bugt. The results provided important new insights into an early stage of the Saqqaq culture in West Greenland. The later stages of Saqqaq are less well documented, although one important exception is the Akia site in the Sisimiut district of West Greenland where Finn Kramer observed a possible influence of Canadian Late Pre-Dorset at a late stage of the Saqqaq period. A similar conclusion about a Saqqaq and Pre-Dorset overlap had been drawn by Schledermann (1990), based on excavation data from the central east coast of Ellesmere Island. The evidence from the Akia site suggests that some degree of a cultural continuum between Saqqaq and Early Dorset (Dorset I) existed in West Greenland. Although Knuth’s concept of Independence II as a

cultural complex connected to Independence I is supported by some investigators, alternative assessments of the data point to a far more complex set of cultural interactions in the Far North, involving a blending of cultural traits derived from a northward spread of late Saqqaq elements combined with an expansion of both late Pre-Dorset and Early Dorset traits from the Canadian Arctic. During the 1990s, Claus Andreasen carried out an extensive excavation program in northeast Greenland, verifying the significant population expansion and level of cultural activity of this Transitional or Independence II complex in the Far North. Although Late Dorset sites were known to exist in North Greenland, not until 1996 did the first systematic excavations of such sites take place under the direction of Martin Appelt and Hans Christian Gulløv. These investigations have corroborated earlier findings concerning Late Dorset activities made in the late 1970s and 1980s on the central east coast of Ellesmere Island. In addition, according to Appelt (1999) and Gulløv, data from the Greenlandic Late Dorset sites point to Dorset/Norse and Dorset/Thule contact. Norse settlers from Iceland arrived in southern Greenland shortly before AD 1000. According to recent studies by Arneborg, the Norse had abandoned Greenland by the middle of the 15th century. Although many factors caused the Norse to leave, a slow, gradual out-migration rather than large-scale abandonment is suggested by Berglund and Niels Lynnerup. Archaeological investigations, beginning with the work of Daniel Bruun in 1894, continued in the 1920s with Poul Nørlund’s (1967) work on late period burials at Herjolfsnæs, Aage Russell’s and Christen Vebæk’s work in the 1940s, followed by that of Meldgaard and Knuth Krogh (1982). Presently about 250 farms, 17 churches, and two monasteries have been recorded in the Eastern Settlement and about 80 farms and three churches in the Western Settlement. Relatively recent excavations in the Western Settlement by Arneborg (1993), Berglund (2000), and Claus Andreasen have yielded important information concerning the final stages of the Norse occupation at the time of abandonment of that region about the middle of the 14th century. Arctic archaeology in North America and Greenland has progressed from the initial and essential step of collecting and analyzing cultural remains, defining diagnostic elements of major cultural episodes to more far-reaching interpretations resting upon a broader, multidisciplinary, cultural ecological framework. PETER SCHLEDERMANN See also Arctic Small Tool Tradition; Denbigh Flint Culture; Dorset Culture; Independence Culture; Migration, Prehistory; Old Bering Sea Culture; PreDorset Culture; Saqqaq Culture; Thule Culture

103

ARCHAEOLOGY OF THE ARCTIC: SCANDINAVIAN SETTLEMENT OF THE NORTH ATLANTIC Further Reading Appelt, M. & H.C. Gulløv, Late Dorset in High Arctic Greenland: Final Report on the Gateway to Greenland Project, Copenhagen: Danish Polar Center Publication 7, 1999 Arneborg, J. & J. Berglund, “Gaarden under Sandet.” Copenhagen, Forskning i Grønland Tusaat 4 (1993) Berglund, J., “The Farm Beneath the Sand.” In Vikings: The North Atlantic Saga, edited by William W. Fitzhugh and Elisabeth I. Ward, Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press, 2000 Collins, H.B., “Excavation of Thule and Dorset culture sites at Resolute, Cornwallis Island, NWT.” Annual Report of the National Museum of Canada, 136 (1955): 22–35 Cox, S.L., “Palaeo-Eskimo occupations of the North Labrador Coast.” Arctic Anthropology, 15(2) (1978) Fitzhugh, W.W., “Paleo-Eskimo cultures of Greenland.” In Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 5, William C. Sturtevant, general editor, Washington, District of Columbia: Smithsonian Institution,1984, pp. 528–539 Grønnow, B. (editor), The Palaeo-Eskimo Cultures of Greenland: New Perspectives in Greenlandic Archaeology, Copenhagen: Danish Polar Center, 1996 Holtved, E., “Archaeological Investigations in the Thule District. Copenhagen.” Meddelelser om Grønland, 141 (parts 1 and 2) (1944) ———, “Archaeological Investigations in the Thule District, III; Nûgdlît and Comer’s Midden. Copenhagen.” Meddelelser om Grønland, 146(3) (1954) Jenness, D., “A new Eskimo culture in Hudson Bay. Ottawa.” Geographical Review, 15 (1925): 428–437 Knuth, E., Reports from the Musk-Ox Way: A compilation of Previously Published Articles, Copenhagen: E. Knuth, 1984 Krogh, K.J., Grønland: Erik the Red’s Greenland. (2nd revised edition), Copenhagen: Nationalmuseet, 1982 Larsen, H.E., “Dødemandsbugten: An Eskimo settlement on Clavering Island. Copenhagen.” Meddelelser om Grønland, 102(1) (1934) Larsen, H.E. & J. Meldgaard, “Paleo-Eskimo cultures in Disko Bugt, West Greenland.” Copenhagen. Meddelelser om Grønland, 161(2) (1958) McCullough, K.M., The Ruin Islanders: Early Thule Culture Pioneers in the Eastern High Arctic, Ottawa: Canadian Museum of Civilization Mercury Series, Archaeological Survey of Canada Paper 141, 1989 McGhee, R., The Palaeoeskimo occupations at Port Refuge, High Arctic Canada. National Museum of Man, Archaeological Survey of Canada Paper 92, 1979 Mary-Rousselière, G., “The Paleoeskimo in Northern Baffinland.” In Eastern Arctic Prehistory: Paleoeskimo Problems, edited by Moreau S. Maxwell, Memoirs of the Society for American Archaeology 31, 1976 Mathiassen, T., Archaeology of the central Eskimo, Copenhagen, Report of the Fifth Thule Expedition 1921–1924, Volume 4(1–2), 1927 ———, “Inugsuk, a medieval Eskimo settlement in Upernivik District, West Greenland.” Copenhagen. Meddelelser om Grønland, 77 (1931) Maxwell, M.S., Prehistory of the Eastern Arctic, New York: Academic Press Inc., 1985 Meldgaard, J.A., “Palaeo-Eskimo culture in West Greenland.” American Antiquity, 17(3) (1952) Nørlund, P., De gamle nordbobygder ved verdens ende, Copenhagen: Nationalmuseet, 1967 Schledermann, P., Crossroads to Greenland; 3000 Years of Prehistory in the Eastern Arctic, Calgary: Arctic Institute of North America, Komatic Series, 1990

104

———, Voices in Stone: A Personal Journey into the Arctic Past, Calgary: Arctic Institute of North America, Komatik Series, 1996 Taylor Jr., W.E., “The Arnapik and Tyara Sites: an archaeological study of Dorset cultural origins.” Memoirs of the Society for American Archaeology, 22 (1968) Tuck, J.A., Prehistory of Saglek Bay, Labrador: Archaic and Palaeo-Eskimo occupations. Ottawa. National Museum of Man, Archaeological Survey of Canada Paper 72, 1976

ARCHAEOLOGY OF THE ARCTIC: SCANDINAVIAN SETTLEMENT OF THE NORTH ATLANTIC In the 7th century AD a remarkable emphasis on coastal settlement is noted over wide parts of northwest Europe. Some of the settlements are rather small and display few traces of various activities, while others can be regarded as urban centers. These sites reflect a Carolingian rise in expansion, development of settlement, in productivity and commerce, and in political, military, and ecclesiastic organization. At the close of the 8th century, a link was established through the Baltic with northwestern Russia and further southward, thereby linking the North to the rich Islamic world. Thousands of Islamic silver coins reached southern Scandinavia in a few decades, and from around AD 800 the Scandinavian societies, situated on the fringe of continental Europe, all became part of a world system of exchange. This development, which brought the pagan Scandinavian societies to the scene in the following centuries, introduced an expansive period of Scandinavian history that, among other things, included the colonization of the North Atlantic. This phase in Scandinavian history is sometimes termed the Viking Age. The background for the expansion was partly the economical, social, and political development within late Iron Age societies in Scandinavia, including the development of a superior shipbuilding technology. The beginning of the Viking Age expansion is normally ascribed to the earliest written records of Scandinavian attacks on monasteries in Britain and Ireland: Lindisfarne (Northumbria) in AD 793, Jarrow (Northumbria) in AD 794, Ireland in AD 795, and Iona (Hebrides) in AD 795, 802, and 806. While these attacks seem to have had a more or less sporadic and unorganized character rather than that of a wellplanned strategic agenda, they did, however, introduce the increasingly expansive trends developing within Scandinavian society around AD 800. The Viking Age (in a North Atlantic context often referred to as Early Norse) is traditionally accepted to cover the period c.AD 800–1050 and is followed by the Medieval (often referred to as Late Norse) covering the period c.AD 1050–1400.

ARCHAEOLOGY OF THE ARCTIC: SCANDINAVIAN SETTLEMENT OF THE NORTH ATLANTIC During the Viking Age, the expansive Scandinavian societies were to play a rather dominant and decisive role in events not only in Ireland and England but also in mainland Scotland, the Scottish Isles, and in the entire process of land-taking (Scandinavian: landnám) in the North Atlantic. During the 9th and 10th centuries, the basis of a virtual Scandinavian Empire of the Western Seas was established, which included parts of Ireland and England, major parts of the Scottish mainland, the Western (Hebrides) and Northern Isles of Scotland (Orkney and Shetland), the Faroe Islands, Iceland, and Greenland. This expansion ultimately ended in attempts to settle on the eastern fringes of North America around AD 1000. Hereby, the North Sea region and parts of the North Atlantic were transformed into a cultural inland sea in what could be termed a Scandinavian sphere of interest. In the east were the Scandinavian homelands, primarily Norway and Denmark; in the west were the established new emigrant communities in Ireland, England, Scotland, and the Western and Northern Isles. In this inland sea the expansive, and initially pagan, Scandinavian culture was confronted and mixed with a Christian, Celtic culture, which was to put its imprint on the Scandinavian expansion further away in the North Atlantic. The establishment of settlements in the North Atlantic is evidenced in written records (sagas, ecclesiastic annals, etc.), material culture, environmental records, place-names, and other linguistic relics. The written records include a range of Norse sagas, all of which were written centuries after the events that they claim to describe took place. Their information should be seen in this light, and be subject to a continuous critical approach and continuously tested against the evidence of archaeology and natural sciences. The Scandinavian emigrant communities in the North Atlantic, in the words of the saga writers, were established primarily by a Norwegian peasant aristocracy, which at the end of the 9th century was forced to flee Norway as a result of their opposition to King Harald Finehair’s attempts to gain sovereign supremacy over all Norway. According to the Saga of Harald Finehair, this happened following the so-called Battle of Hafrsfjord, outside Stavanger in Southwest Norway, which is supposed to have taken place c.AD 872. The saga states: “In the discontent when King Harald seized on the lands of Norway, the out-countries of Iceland and the Faroe Isles were discovered and peopled. The Northmen had also a great resort to Shetland, and many men left Norway, flying the country on account of King Harald, and went on viking cruises into the West Sea.” Although the sagas suggest a direct link between the events in western Norway and the earliest settle-

ment of the Faroe Islands and Iceland, there seems to be little doubt that there was also a strong Celtic element involved in the process. Thus, some of the early settlers mentioned in the written records had Christian or Celtic names, thereby indicating an alternative origin. This is also evidenced in artifact assemblages from archaeological sites. Furthermore, a number of place-names in the Faroe Islands and Iceland are clearly of Gaelic origin and modern Faroese also contains a number of linguistic elements, especially linked to farming and husbandry, derived from Gaelic. It is interesting to note that in the Faroe Islands identification of shielings sites of the Viking Age have demonstrated a connection between these and the place-name element ærgi, which is derived from Gaelic airge, thereby indicating that this farming practise had its roots in the Gaelic-speaking world. The early Scandinavian settlers in the Hebrides and the Irish Sea region integrated with the native Celtic and Christian population, and formed what could be termed a Hiberno-Scandinavian culture. The term “Hiberno-Scandinavian” refers to material culture traditions that are characterized by a fusion of elements that are derived from both Scandinavia and Ireland. The spreading of objects of Hiberno-Scandinavian character in the North Atlantic may well represent people who have become acculturated through the cumulative effects of processes such as trade and intermarriage. The mixture of various cultural identities and traditions with different ethnic backgrounds is highlighted in the sagas, thereby presenting a picture of the North Atlantic as a melting pot in the Viking and early Medieval ages. The expansion was not a homogeneous process that materialized under the different conditions that the Scandinavians encountered in the North Atlantic. Thus Scotland and the Scottish archipelagos of the Hebrides, Orkney, and Shetland already had a native population and a history stretching back to the Neolithic and before. Scandinavian activity in Scotland in the early 9th century was probably of a sporadic and relatively nonpermanent character. Not until the late 9th century does this seem to have been of a more permanent character. The nature of the relationship with the native Christian Pictish (Celtic) societies is still a matter of discussion, with arguments ranging from a completely peaceful integration (the “peace-school”) to a hostile almost genocide takeover of the islands by the Scandinavians (the “warschool”). Contrary to this, there is no unequivocal evidence of a permanent settlement in the Faroe Islands and Iceland prior to the Scandinavian arrival. The Faroe Islands as well as Iceland were, however, probably

105

ARCHAEOLOGY OF THE ARCTIC: SCANDINAVIAN SETTLEMENT OF THE NORTH ATLANTIC already known in the Celtic world. An Irish ecclesiastic Dicuil in his work Liber de mensura orbis, probably written at a Carolingian court on the continent around AD 825, describes the travels of Irish anchorites to islands north of Scotland. He further mentions that these islands, which are generally identified as the Faroe Islands and Iceland, were visited or even settled by Irish anchorites (hermit saints) as early as the 8th century, but that these were driven away by the arrival of the Scandinavians. Radiocarbon datings in connection with pollen profiles in the Faroe Islands have recently indicated a dating of the earliest settlement here stretching back to the 7th–8th centuries AD. Large-scale excavations on a number of sites within the last decades have, however, produced no archaeological evidence to substantiate such an early date. If the implications of these early radiocarbon datings prove to be correct, that the Faroe Islands were settled before the 9th century, the matter remains as to whether it was by Irish or Scandinavian people. Considerable distances often separated the newly established emigrant communities from each other, but at the same time they were strongly connected by a homogeneous culture with a background in their Scandinavian homelands. This homogeneity was expressed through traditions, partly in articles for daily use and the preferred raw materials, but also in the building customs as they were displayed in the vernacular architecture of the farmsteads. There is hardly any reason not to believe that the initial emigrants brought with them what they found to be essential for the maintenance of an existence. At the same time it must be presumed that maintaining a stabile contact with the homelands may have proved difficult. To some of the settlers, there was probably only a limited desire to maintain such a contact. Bitterness and frustration over their forced political exile must have made it difficult for these emigrants subsequently to identify themselves with the new social and political order, which they had only recently fought. The emigrants were faced with two problems, which were inextricably linked. On the one hand, they faced the task of establishing new communities, organizing them, and making them function; on the other hand, they would have had a need to create for themselves a new cultural identity. In this process they sought access to urban centers where they could trade their produce for staple goods, exotic merchandise, jewellery, etc. This they may very well have found in the urban centers established by them in Ireland during the 10th century, especially Dublin. The emigrant communities were well organized with clearly defined rights of property and ownership of land and access to the natural resources, which were

106

essential for the maintenance of a living. They were also communities with a political and legal administration that found expression, for example, in legal cases and disputes being settled at so-called things, evidence for the existence of which is still preserved in place-names such as, for instance, Þingvellir (Iceland), Tinganes (Faroe Islands), Tingwall (Shetland), and Dingwall (Scotland). No doubt, such places existed in the Scandinavian settlements in Greenland too, but as we are left with no place-name evidence here they are difficult to identify. The Scandinavian emigrant communities were characterized by a rural settlement, typically consisting of farmsteads spread over all the cultivable parts of the landscape. In the Faroe Islands, the nature of the landscape only left a limited number of places, mainly low-lying coastal areas, suitable for farming, and therefore the present-day settlement pattern, to a very high degree, reflects the settlement of the early Viking Age. The Faroe Islands probably contained no proper woodland but, according to pollen profiles, did have slopes covered by willow and creeping dwarf juniper. At the time of the settlement, woodlands of birch dominated the lowlands of Iceland, separated by bogs and river estuaries. At higher altitudes, especially in the more mountainous interiors of the island, dwarf birch, willow, and grasses took over where the woodlands ended. The targets for the earliest settlement, as evidenced by the results of archaeological excavations on settlement sites and by the distribution of Viking burials, were the fertile protected lowland areas along the coast and in small plains and valley systems stretching into the interior. It seems that most of the habitable areas were occupied within half a century of the initial settlement. This is evidenced in pollen profiles, where a distinct decline in birch just after AD 871 indicates that an extensive clearance of the woodland took place. Eirík the Red, through a number of explorations during the years 984–992, founded the Scandinavian settlements in Greenland. It was the protected fjords in the south (the so-called Eastern Settlement) and those further north along the West Coast near present-day Nuuk (the so-called Western Settlement) that attracted the settlers, who had their background in the Scandinavian settlements in Iceland. Under the climate optimum of the Viking Age and early Medieval, especially the landscape of the Eastern Settlement offered extensive fertile pastures, which could accommodate not only extensive numbers of sheep but also big cattle holds, as evidenced by the byres identified on several farms in the Eastern Settlement. Most of the building remains preserved in the Greenland landscape should probably be dated to the later phases of the Scandinavian settlement. However, recently a

ARCHAEOLOGY OF THE ARCTIC: SCANDINAVIAN SETTLEMENT OF THE NORTH ATLANTIC group of house foundations with curved walls of more classical Viking character have been identified and these may represent the very early stages of settlement. The settlers of the North Atlantic brought farming systems and methods with them. The typical organization of the land would contain a settlement area (Scandinavian: tun) where the buildings would be located, surrounded by the infield or homefield that would be used for growing corn or hay for fodder. Outside the infield areas would lie the pastures or outfield areas used for the grazing of cattle and sheep. In some regions of the North Atlantic, like the Faroe Islands and Greenland, it has been demonstrated that shielings (Scandinavian: sæter) were part of the settlement pattern and the subsistence economy. These shielings, used during the summer period, would be situated in the mountains in areas with good pastures and fresh water supply. They would consist of a limited number of small buildings and were used throughout the summer for the milking of animals, treating and storing of milk and other dairy products, and for the harvesting or collecting of winter fodder, for instance production of hay. The subsistence economy of the farmsteads seems to have been primarily based on husbandry, where sheep and cows, followed by pigs, were the dominant species. The environment would also have appeared attractive to the early settlers in that it offered plenty of potential for fishing, fowling, and seal and whale hunting to supplement the economy. In the Faroe Islands and in the southern and western parts of Iceland, there was potential for barley growing. The corn production in some of the emigrant communities may have been of such a size that it required a mechanical milling process. Horizontal mills of the Viking Age have been documented in the Scottish Isles, and there are indications that they were also common in the Faroe Islands. The farmsteads consisted of a number of buildings, basically of wooden construction, but protected by stone-built walls. The early dwellings had curved walls and two rows of roof-supporting posts dividing the building into three aisles along the axis. Centrally located in the buildings were the long hearths. Until the end of the 10th century, it seems to have been common practice that the byre and the dwelling were located under the same roof. This feature is characteristic of the Northwest European longhouse, which has a tradition stretching back at least 1300 years before the beginning of the Viking Age. The Scandinavian longhouse of the Viking Age appears all over the North Atlantic. The wood-consuming buildings are strikingly similar in appearance and can hardly be seen as functional in these regions with their tree-sparse or even treeless landscapes. The

homogeneity and almost standardized size and layout of the farmsteads in the North Atlantic emigrant communities indicate the importance of architecture to the emigrants. The house, being the forum for a number of activities, which were central to social and daily life, may therefore be regarded as a cultural emphasizer and must have had an almost symbolic importance to the settlers. The reason why the emigrants brought with them their architecture and building customs was that they had a very clear idea and concept of what a house and home was. The mobile farmers of the Viking Age could thus travel from one end of the North Atlantic to the other and still feel confident and safe everywhere, no matter what house they had to enter. They were, so to speak, traveling in a Scandinavian world. The impressive wooden buildings required plenty of timbers, of which the new environment only offered little. Rather than imports, it is much more likely that the early settlers had to rely on driftwood, which could be collected at suitable locations along the coastline. The conditions for preservation of wood are very different between the individual regions of the North Atlantic. Thus, hardly any wood is preserved on archaeological sites in the Scottish Isles and rarely in Iceland. On the other hand, it is a common feature on many sites in the Faroe Islands and Greenland. The wood preserved on these sites reveals that the driftwood, to a large extent, consisted of larch and spruce transported all the way from Siberia. On Faroese sites, it is documented that these species were used for a number of purposes, including that of elements in the wooden construction of houses. The homogeneity of the Scandinavian emigrant culture is also expressed in the implements and raw materials that were essential for daily life. The archaeological material from the Viking settlements in Scandinavia, and particularly in Norway, is to a large extent dominated by soapstone (steatite). This soft stone material is abundant at Viking settlements in Norway, where it was used for a wide number of purposes. The artifact assemblages from the excavated archaeological sites in the North Atlantic include, for instance, sherds of various types of vessels, loom weights, line- and net-sinkers, and spindle whorls, all of soapstone. Likewise, whetstones of schist were very essential tools in daily life. A number of the whetstones were produced of a light, coarse-grained schist. Whetstones of this material have been found all over the Viking world, and the raw material has recently been identified as originating from a particular mountain in Eidsborg in Norway. The provenance of a more bluish, fine-grained schist, which was also used for whetstones all over the Viking world, has regrettably not

107

ARCHAEOLOGY OF THE ARCTIC: SCANDINAVIAN SETTLEMENT OF THE NORTH ATLANTIC yet been identified. The emigrants brought with them traditions for using both types. Furthermore, the artifact assemblage includes wooden objects such as timbers, bowls, spoons, barrels, etc., and iron implements, bronze jewelry, and so forth. A major problem for the emigrants was that the separate archipelagos had different conditions to offer them. Shetland and Greenland, for instance, are gifted with abundant outcrops of soapstone as well as schist and sandstone, while the Faroe Islands and Iceland have neither of these. Thus in Shetland especially, because of the short distances, there was easy access to the raw materials that were basic to a Scandinavian tool assemblage. Contrary to their fellow emigrants in Shetland, the emigrants in the Faroe Islands and Iceland were forced to import finished products, semimanufactured or even raw materials for their own production of tools, or to gradually adapt to the environment and increase the exploitation of local resources. The economic conditions thus were sometimes extremely different in the individual communities. The culmination of the attempts by the Scandinavians to colonize the North Atlantic occurred during the opening years of the second millennium. For a long time, the sagas provided the only evidence for this event, while firm archaeological evidence could not be presented. The sagas contain details of sailing routes between Greenland and the North American continent, and also descriptions of landscapes along the sailing routes. Thus, the sagas mention landscapes termed Helluland, Markland, and Vinland, which have now generally been identified as Baffin Island, the Labrador coast and, presumably, Newfoundland, respectively. After decades of search for material evidence of Scandinavian settlement, a site was eventually located and excavated at L’Anse aux Meadows at the northern tip of Newfoundland in the 1960s. It contained the remains of three turf-built buildings of Scandinavian character. There was no evidence of byres and the general impression of the settlement was that it was a short-lived one, maybe a way-station. It has been suggested that it may represent one of the actual events mentioned in the sagas. The site only produced a limited number of finds of diagnostic Viking character, of which the most important were a spindle whorl of soapstone and a ringed pin of Hiberno-Scandinavian type. Although there is still a lack of evidence of a more permanent Scandinavian settlement in North America, there seems to be no doubt that the Scandinavian communities in Greenland frequently traveled there, probably to collect timbers, which were much needed as

108

they, except for driftwood, were nonexisting resources in Greenland. The last vessel, according to written records, bound for Markland to acquire lumber, left in 1347. Recently, a series of remarkable radiocarbon datings of the 7th–8th centuries AD have been obtained on presumed Scandinavian objects of organic materials such as antler, wood, and strands of yarn found in Dorset Inuit contexts in Newfoundland, Labrador, and Baffin Island. If these dates prove to be right, the revolutionizing implication is an unexpectedly early Scandinavian presence in the Eastern Arctic. The question of how and when the Scandinavian communities in the North Atlantic became Christian is a matter of ongoing discussion. The process is no doubt reflected in burial practices, but in some areas the evidence is still rather sparse. Thus, only two Viking cemeteries have been located in the Faroe Islands. They contain a number of poorly constructed and poorly equipped graves. It is difficult to establish whether these burials are pagan or Christian in character. In Iceland, on the other hand, a total of c.300 pagan burials are recorded. These are normally of simple constructions and are not very visible in the landscape. The burials are usually poorly furnished compared with contemporary graves in Norway. The Icelanders, like the Faroese, are said to have formally accepted Christianity around the year AD 1000. A strong Hiberno-Scandinavian element in the entire settlement process, however, may mean that the emigrant societies contained strong Christian elements from the very beginning. The settlers in Greenland probably only remained pagan for a short time. Being settled in the 980s and allegedly having accepted Christianity around AD 1000, we are probably only dealing with one generation of pagan settlers, which may explain why no pagan burials have so far turned up. The early phases of Christianity in the North Atlantic saw the appearance of small church buildings surrounded by dykes. These churches were probably proprietary churches, associated with major farmsteads, rather than proper community churches as known from later. The Faroe Islands received its own bishopric in 1152 or 1153 (Kirkjubø), Iceland in AD 1135 (Skálholt), and Greenland in c.AD 1125 (Gardar, Eastern Settlement). The Scandinavian communities in the North Atlantic gradually came under the Norwegian church order. The Scandinavian Empire of the Western Seas at its highest peak comprised, besides the homelands, the urban centers in Ireland, large parts of Scotland, the Western and Northern Isles of Scotland, the Faroe Islands, Iceland, the settlements in Greenland, and perhaps even the presumably very temporary and fragile outposts in North America.

ARCHAEOLOGY OF THE ARCTIC: SCANDINAVIAN SETTLEMENT OF THE NORTH ATLANTIC The settlers created their own emigrant identity that, in the course of the 10th century, was expressed in combining traditions from their Scandinavian homelands, as for instance the building customs, with a shieling system and types of personal equipment, which had their roots in the Hiberno-Scandinavian world. Among the most popular items were the socalled ringed pins of Hiberno-Scandinavian type, produced in the Hiberno-Scandinavian towns in Ireland, especially Dublin. The spreading of various types of personal equipment from the Scandinavian settlements in Ireland to the emigrant communities in the North Atlantic probably not only represents a transmission of ideas but also a movement of people. Thus, the period until c.AD 1100 was characterized by a rather independent emigrant culture, whose identity was the product of an interplay between Celtic and Scandinavian traditions. The following centuries, however, bore the stamp of an increasing Christian influence in the emigrant communities and the consequences of their becoming, as taxlands, an integrated part of the medieval Norwegian church and kingdom. The Scandinavian bastions in Ireland were brought to an end by the 12th century. After a battle at Largs, near Glasgow, in 1263, the engagement in Mainland Scotland also had to stop, and the Scandinavian element rapidly disappeared. The Western Isles were given up in 1266. The Northern Isles of Scotland, Orkney and Shetland, with their motherland Norway came under Danish supremacy in 1380. They remained under Scandinavian control until 1469 when the Danish king pawned them to Scotland as a dowry for his daughter. An already-initiated scottification of the islands now intensified, but the Scandinavian language Norn was still spoken in Shetland until around the year 1800. Today, the former Scandinavian settlements in Ireland and, especially, Scotland first and foremost reveal themselves in an abundance of place-names of Scandinavian origin. This is most distinct in Shetland, where as much as 98% of present-day place-names are regarded as being Scandinavian in origin. The Scandinavian communities further away in the North Atlantic remained Scandinavian in identity, for which there are several reasons. Firstly, these islands and archipelagos had not, or at the most very sparsely, been inhabited previously, and therefore had no Celtic or Pictish heritage that Scandinavian emigrants had to deal with. Secondly, their very remoteness meant that they did not attract too much attention. By the end of the Medieval, they had been degraded to being on the fringe of Europe. Of all the Scandinavian emigrant communities established in the Viking Age in the hitherto uninhab-

ited areas of the North Atlantic, only one did not survive. The death of the Scandinavian settlements in Greenland, probably by the end of the 15th century, is still a fascinating mystery. A number of possible explanations have been offered, such as, for instance, an increasingly stressing interaction with the Thule Inuit, probably over hunting grounds, climate deterioration, population decline, and cultural isolation. These explanations may very well all be elements in the process. It seems that cattle husbandry was failing, which is reflected in an increasingly marine diet over time as evidenced in skeletal material, and no doubt the decline in climate in the Medieval also played its part. However, it cannot be ruled out that the Scandinavian Greenlanders left the country or otherwise disappeared before the Thule Inuit expanded into their settlements. Broken contacts with Scandinavia, and even Iceland, from the 15th century onwards will almost certainly have exposed the Greenlanders to English fishing and whaling activity. Whether this contact was peaceful, or whether the Greenlanders, forcedly or voluntarily, ended up as manpower in an increasingly urbanized and demanding European market is unknown. It has been put journalistically: “Young Greenlanders ending up as workers in Bristol or Hull—their genes now walking like the ghosts of as many research propositions on the disappearing Norsemen.” The Scandinavian Empire of the Western Seas lasted, as a whole or in part, for approximately 500 years before it turned into history. The memory of a glorious past, however, still lives on in sagas and tradition up until the present day. STEFFEN STUMMANN HANSEN See also Eirík the Red; Eriksson, Leif; Norse and Icelandic Sagas; Vikings; Vinland

Further Reading Albrethsen, Svend Erik, Grönland. Reallexikon der Germanischen Altertumskünde, Volume 13, Berlin and New York, 1999, pp. 63–71 Albrethsen, Svend Erik & Christian Keller, “The use of Saeter in Medieval Norse Farming in Greenland.” Arctic Anthropology, 23(1–2) (1986): 91–109 Appelt, Martin, Joel Berglund & Hans Christian Gulløv (editors), Identities and Cultural Contacts in the Arctic, Copenhagen: Danish Polar Center Publications No. 8, 1999 Arneborg, Jette & Hans Christian Gulløv (editors), Man, Culture and Environment in Ancient Greenland. Report on a Research Programme, Copenhagen: Danish Polar Center Publications No. 4, 1998 Barrett, James, H. (editor), Contact, Continuity and Collapse: The Norse Colonization of the North Atlantic, Belgium: Brepols, 2002 Batey, Colleen E., Judith Jetsch & Christopher D. Morris (editors), The Viking Age in Caithness,Orkney and the

109

ARCHBISHOP INNOCENT (IVAN VENIAMINOV) North Atlantic, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1993 Bigelow, G.F. (editor), “The Norse of the North Atlantic.” Acta Archaeologica, 61 (1990): 1991 Christensen, Karin Marie Bojsen & Vilhjálmur Örn Vilhjálmsson (editors), Nordatlantisk arkæologi - vikingetid og middelalder. Hikuin 15, 1989 Clarke, Howard, Maíre Ní Mhanaigh & Ragnall Ó Floinn (editors), Ireland and Scandinavia in the Early Viking Age, Blackrock, Ireland: Four Court Press, 1998 Crawford, Barbara E., Scandinavian Scotland, Leicester: Leicester University Press and Atlantic Highlands, New Jersey: Humanities Press, 1987 Fenton, Alexander & Hermann Pálsson (editors), The Northern and Western Viking World. Survival, Continuity and Change, Edinburgh: John Donaldson, 1984 Fitzhugh, William W. & Elisabeth I. Ward (editors), Vikings. The North Atlantic Saga, Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press, 2000 Graham-Campbell, James, Colleen E. Batey, Helen Clarke, R.I. Page & Neil S. Price (editors), Cultural Atlas of the Viking World, Abingdon, Oxfordshire: Andromeda and New York: Facts on File, 1994 Graham-Campbell, James & Colleen E. Batey, Vikings in Scotland. An Archaeological Survey, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1998 Guldager, Ole, Steffen Stummann Hansen & Simon Gleie, Medieval Farmsteads in Greenland. The Brattahlid Region 1999–2000, Copenhagen: Danish Polar Center Publications No. 9, 2002 Jones, Gwyn, The Norse Atlantic Saga. Being the Norse Voyages of Discovery and Settlement to Iceland, Greenland and North America (2nd edition), Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 1986 Lewis, S.M. (editor), Vinland revisited: the Norse world at the turn of the first millennium AD: Selected papers from the Viking Millennium International Symposium, September 15–24, Newfoundland and Labrador: St John’s Historic Sites Association, 2002 Magnússon, Thor, Símun V. Arge & Jette Arneborg, “New Lands in the North Atlantic.” In From Viking to Crusader. The Scandinavians and Europe 800–1200, edited by Roesdahl Else & David M. Wilson, Uddevalla: Bohusläningens Boktryckeri AB Morris, Christoper D. & D. James Rackham (editors), Norse and Later Settlement and Subsistence in the North Atlantic, Glasgow: University of Glasgow, Department of Archaeology, 1992 Müller-Wille, Michael, Landnahmen von Skandinaviern im nordatlantischen Bereich aus archäologischer Sicht, edited by Michael Müller-Wille et al., Ausgewählte Probleme europäischer Landnahmen des Früh- und Hochmittelalters. Metodische Grundlagendiskussion im Grenzgebiet zwischen Archäologie und Geschichte. Vorträge und Forschungen 41, Sigmaringen 1994, pp. 129–196 Myhre, Bjørn, Bjarne Stoklund & Per Gjæder (editors), Vestnordisk byggeskikk gjennom to tusen år. Tradisjon og forandring fra romertid til det 19. århundre, AmS-Skrifter 7, Stavanger, 1982 Randsborg, Klavs, “Archaeological globalization. The first practitioners.” Acta Archaeologica, 72(2) (2001): 1–53 Seaver, Kirsten, The Frozen Echo: Greenland and the Exploration of North America ca. AD 1000–1500, Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1996 Smyth, Alfred P., Warlords and Holy Men. Scotland AD 800–1000, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1980

110

Stoklund, Bjarne, Det færøske hus - i kulturhistorisk belysning, Copenhagen: C.A. Reitzels, 1996 Stummann Hansen, Steffen, “Settlement archaeology in Iceland. The race for the Pan-Scandinavian Project in 1939.” Acta Archaeologica, 72(2) (2001): 115–127 Stummann Hansen, Steffen & Klavs Randsborg (editors), “Vikings in the West.” Acta Archaeologica, 71 (2000) Sutherland, Patricia, “Nunguvik and Saatut revisited.” In Nunguvik et Saatut. Sites Paléoeskimaux de Navy Board Inlet, Isle de Baffin, edited by Guy Mary-Rousselìre, Collection Merauve Commission Archaeologique du Canada, Numero 162, Canadian Museum of Civilisation, Hull, Québec, 2002, pp. 115–121

ARCHBISHOP INNOCENT (IVAN VENIAMINOV) Archbishop Innocent (Ivan Veniaminov) was born on August 26, 1797, of local lineage, in the village of Anga (Anginskoe) in the Irkutsk gubernia. He would become an important missionary of Alaska, Siberia, and the Far East, an ethnologist, and a linguist. He received the name Ioann at baptism as an infant, inherited his father’s surname, and was known as Ioann (Ivan) Evseevich Popov in his youth. Enrolled in the Irkutsk Theological Seminary, he was gifted not only as a scholar but in mechanics, and gained skills in architecture and clock-making-skills that he would apply later in Alaska. He received the surname Veniaminov in 1814, in honor of the bishop of Irkutsk, Veniamin, who had died that year. The rector of the seminary gave the name as a surname to the brightest student. He was thereafter known as Ioann (Ivan) Evseevich Veniaminov. In 1817, Veniaminov married Ekaterina Ivanovna, the daughter of a local clergyman. Graduating from the seminary in 1820, Veniaminov was ordained to the priesthood in Irkutsk in 1821. The Holy Synod of the Russian Church requested a volunteer to serve as the first parish priest ever to be assigned to the Unalaska district in Russian-America (Alaska), and Veniaminov offered his services. He arrived with his family at Unalaska Island in 1824, and entered into cooperative relationships with the Aleuts. Veniaminov was received principally by the Aleut toion (chief) of Akun and Tigalda Islands in the district, Ivan Pan’kov. Bilingual, and a generation older than the young priest, Pan’kov became his mentor with regard to Aleut culture and language. Together, they traveled by kayak from village to village. Pan’kov served as translator until Veniaminov had learned Aleut. Eventually, they translated the Gospel according to Matthew into the Unalaska dialect of the Aleut language. They constructed an alphabet, based on Cyrillic letters with new characters introduced to represent special sounds in Aleut phonetics. Also,

ARCHBISHOP INNOCENT (IVAN VENIAMINOV) Veniaminov included Aleut with Russian lessons in the parish school. Concurrently, he increased his own knowledge of the district, producing an ethnography and geography as well as a grammar and a bilingual dictionary. Ultimately, Veniaminov achieved such proficiency that he was able to compose a doctrinal work in this language, Indication of the Way into the Kingdom of Heaven. It was printed as a book in Aleut (1840), and then translated and published through numerous editions in the Russian language. It has been translated furthermore for publication in various Asian and European languages, including English. This international popularity indicates the substance and relevance of the text, written originally by Veniaminov in Aleut for the Aleuts. After a decade in the Unalaska district, in 1834 Veniaminov assumed the duties of parish priest at Novo Arkhangel’sk (today Sitka), where he concentrated, among his other activities, on learning the Tlingit language and customs. In 1839, Veniaminov traveled to Europe, including St Petersburg. The same year, his wife died. A widower, he was tonsured as a monastic in 1840, receiving the name Innokentii (Innocent), and he was elevated to the status of bishop for the newly established Diocese of Kamchatka, the Kurils, and the Aleutians. He traveled from St Petersburg via Moscow to his diocesan see at Novo Arkhangel’sk (Sitka), arriving in 1841. Veniaminov opened missions on the Alaska mainland, and one for the Tlingits in the Alexander archipelago, while he actively ministered in Kamchatka. He continued to promote the use of native languages in education and literature along with liturgics, and he continued to develop multilingual native leadership. Veniaminov was elevated to archbishop in 1850. The archdiocesan see was located in Aian, northeast Asia, where he worked among the Tungus (Evenk) tribes. The archdiocese was expanded to include Chukotka, Yakutia, and the Amur region in addition to his former diocese. The archdiocese was subdivided into two vicariates in 1858, one administered from Novo Arkhangel’sk and the other from Yakutsk. In Yakutsk, Veniaminov intensified the production of translations in the Sakha (Yakut) language, a process that had already begun here in 1812. Many fine publications were produced, including the Bible, liturgical texts, patristic texts, catechisms, grammars, dictionaries, and schoolbooks, thus inaugurating the flowering of literacy in this language. Some publications were achieved in other languages of Yakutia also, particularly Evenk (Tungus). Veniaminov was elected as an Honorary Member of the Russian Academy of Sciences in 1857. In 1868, the year after the sale of Alaska to the United States,

he was appointed to succeed as the Metropolitan of Moscow, which was the highest rank in the Russian Church at the time. Veniaminov’s enduring importance is reflected through the commemorations that spanned the Northern Hemisphere in 1997 at the bicentennial of his birth. The government of the Sakha Republic (Yakutia) sponsored a two-year-long series of events that involved the state universities, national library, state museum, and academy of sciences along with the diocese. In Alaska, the bicentennial commemorations were patronized by the Aleut Foundation, and the Governor of Alaska officially designated 1997 as the Veniaminov Bicentennial Year in the state. An international conference was convened in the state university at Fairbanks. Exhibits were organized by the Alaska State Museums. Other commemorations involving civic institutions took place in Irkutsk, Kamchatka, Vladivostock, and Moscow. A distinguished lecture series took place even in Berkeley, as he had visited the San Francisco Bay Area from Fort Ross, the Russian settlement in northern California, during his lifetime. His international importance is reflected furthermore at the bicentennial through an exhibit in the Library of Congress in Washington, DC, as well as academic symposia in Oxford University and Edinburgh University.

Biography Ioann Evsevievich Popov was born on August 26, 1797 at the village of Anginskoye, Irkutsk Province, Russia. His father Evsei Popov was the sacristan of the village church. The family was poor, yet the boy received a substantial education. He entered the seminary in Irkutsk, c.1806. In 1814, he received the surname Veniaminov in honor of Veniamin, the bishop of Irkustk, who had passed away earlier that year. In 1817, he married Ekaterina Ivanovna, with whom eventually he had seven children. He graduated from the seminary in 1820, and was ordained to the priesthood in 1821. Volunteering for parish ministry in Alaska, he arrived at Unalaska with his family in June 1824. He wrote and published several studies in the Aleut and Tlingit languages, including an Aleut catechism, and ethnographic studies such as his Notes on the Unalaska District (1840). Becoming a monk in 1840, after his wife’s death, he took the name Innokentii (Innocent). He was consecrated bishop on December 15, 1840, becoming archbishop in 1850, and ultimately becoming the Metropolitan of Moscow in 1868. He passed away on the March 31, 1879, and was buried in the St Sergius Monastery of the Holy Trinity at Zagorsk near Moscow. He was

111

ARCTIC ATHABASCAN COUNCIL canonized as a saint of the Russian Orthodox Church in 1977. S.A. MOUSALIMAS See also Aleut Further Reading Chryssavgis, John, “The Spiritual Legacy of Innocent Veniaminov: Reflections on the Indication of the Way into the Kingdom of Heaven.” The Greek Orthodox Theological Review, 44(1–4) (1999): 585–596 Garrett, Paul, St Innocent: Apostle to America, Crestwood, New York: St Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 1979 Library of Congress, “Father Ioann Veniaminov.” In Meeting of Frontiers (published in American and Russian), website: http://memory.loc.gov/intldl/mtfhtml/mfak/igfather.html, Washington, District of Columbia, 2001 Mousalimas, S.A., From Mask to Icon: Transformation in the Arctic, Brookline, Massachusetts: Holy Cross Orthodox Press, 2003 Pierce, Richard A., “Veniaminov, Ivan I.” In Russian-America: A Biographical Dictionary, Kingston, Ontario, and Fairbanks: The Limestone Press, 1990 Shishigin, Egor Spiridonovich, Rasprostranenie Hristianstva v Yakutii [The Formation of Christianity in Yakutia], Yakutsk: State Museum of the Histories and Cultures of the People of Siberia, 1991 ———, “Prelate Innokentii and Yakutia.” The Greek Orthodox Theological Review, 44(1–4) (1999): 597–605 Veniaminov, Ioann (Innokentii), “The condition of the Orthodox Church in Russian America: Innokentii Veniaminov’s history of the Russian Church in Alaska,” translated and edited by Robert Nichols and Robert Croskey. Pacific Northwest Quarterly, 63(2) (1972): 41–54 ———, “The Russian Orthodox Church in Alaska: Innokentii Veniaminov’s supplementary account (1858),” translated by Robert Croskey. Pacific Northwest Quarterly, 65(1) (1975): 26–29 ———, Notes on the Islands of the Unalashka District, translated by Lydia T. Black & Richard H. Geoghegan, edited by Richard A. Pierce, Kingston, Ontario, and Fairbanks: The Limestone Press and University of Alaska, 1984 ———, Journals of the Priest Ioann Veniaminov in Alaska, 1823 to 1833, translated by Jerome Kisslinger, Fairbanks: University of Alaska, 1993 Ware, Kallistos, “The light that enlightens everyone: the knowledge of God according to the Greek Fathers and St Innocent.” The Greek Orthodox Theological Review, 44(1–4) (1999): 557–564 Yakimov, Oleg Dmitrievich, “The Unalaska period of Ioann Veniaminov’s life and activity.” The Greek Orthodox Theological Review, 44(1–4) (1999): 623–631

ARCTIC ATHABASCAN COUNCIL The Arctic Athabascan Council is an international treaty organization established to foster a greater understanding of the heritage of the Athapaskan peoples of the Arctic and Subarctic North America and to represent the interests of Athapaskan First Nation governments in the Arctic Council.

112

Seven Athapaskan leaders from Alaska, Yukon, and the Northwest Territories signed the Council treaty in June 2000. Signatures included Chief Gary Harrison from Chickaloon Village Traditional Council, Chief Patrick Sayler from Healy Lake Traditional Council, Chief Randy Mayo from Stevens Village Tribal Government, Chief Gerald Albert from Northway Tribal Council, Grand Chief Ed Schultz from Council of Yukon First Nations, National Chief Bill Erasmus from Dene Nation, and President George Motin from Métis Nation. At the Ministerial meeting of the Arctic Council in Barrow, Alaska in October 2000, the Arctic Athabascan Council applied and gained admittance as a permanent member of the council. The Arctic Athabascan Council represents four First Nation government bodies in Alaska: the Chickaloon Village Traditional Council (Nay’Dini’Aa Na), the Healy Lake Traditional Council (Mendas Cha-Ag), the Steven Village Tribal Government Council, and the Northway Tribal Council. On the Canadian side, the Arctic Athabascan Council represents three governing bodies, including the Council of Yukon First Nations, which represents 11 Yukon First Nations, the Dene Nations (Deh Cho First Nations), representing 30 Nations, and the Métis Nations, representing 13 communities. In total, the Arctic Athabascan Council represents approximately 32,000 indigenous peoples of Athapaskan descent from 23 language groups. Within this umbrella organization, the Métis hold a special position, as their aboriginal rights were not recognized until 1982 (Constitution Act, 1982). The Métis were born from Cree, Ojibway, and Saulteaux women mixing with French, Scottish, Irish, and English men in the early stages of colonization in western Canada. Following the Métis’s recognition as a distinct people, the Métis National Council was established in 1983. Within the Arctic Athabascan Council, the Dene Nations also represents some Métis Communities. The permanent office of the AAC is located in Whitehorse, Yukon Territory, Canada, within the administrative headquarters of the Yukon First Nations. The current chairperson is Ed Schultz, the Grand Chief of the Council of Yukon First Nations. The position as a chairperson of the council rotates among representative nations. According to the council, the traditionally occupied area of the Athapaskan peoples stretches across three million square kilometers and includes Alaska, the Yukon, the Northwest Territories, and includes parts of British Colombia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba. Today, most Athapaskan peoples live in Alaska, Yukon, NorthWest Territories, and Manitoba. This vast Arctic and Subarctic landscape includes three of North America’s largest river systems: the Mackenzie, Yukon, and Churchill rivers. The district

ARCTIC CHAR of Athapaska includes areas of tundra and taiga, as well as high mountains, Mt McKinley, and Mt Logan. Ancestors of the Athapaskan peoples were seminomadic hunters who existed on a diet of caribou, moose, beaver, rabbit, and fish. Most of the Athapaskan peoples are inland people—taiga and tundra dwellers, with the exception of South Central Alaska (Tanana and Eyak) and the Hudson Bay (Chipweyan). The Council is committed to environmental issues closely connected to the preservation of Athapaskan cultures and lifestyles. It is a member of the organization Canadian Arctic Indigenous Peoples Against Persistent Organic Pollutants (CAIPAP), which focuses on the preservation of northern ecosystems and the long-term effects of persistent organic pollutants (POPs) on northern indigenous peoples. GRO WEEN See also Arctic Council; Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) Further Reading http://www.arcticathabaskancouncil.com/ http://chickaloon.org http://www.500nations.com/Yukon_Tribes.asp

ARCTIC CHAR The most northern freshwater fish Salvelinus alpinus is variously known as Arctic char and Arctic charr (English), omble chevalier (French), eqaluk (Greenlandic), iqaluppik (Inuktitut), bleikja (Icelandic), tarr (Gaelic), røye (Norwegian), ravdo, rauta, and rautu (Saami), röding (Swedish), nieriä (Finnish), golets, paliya, and arkticheskii golets (Russian), and khivko and noratkan (Evenki). It belongs to the Salmonidae family, and is related to salmon and trout. Char are typically troutlike in shape (long, torpedolike body) with very small scales. The front edge of the pectoral, pelvic, and anal fins is white; the back and the dorsal fin do not have a vermicular (wormlike) pattern, as do brook char (S. fontinalis) and lake char (S. namaycush). The body can be extremely colorful, with a great deal of variation in appearance depending on its life cycle, locality, and sex. The back is grayish with a blue, green, or brown coloration, while the underside can be red, rose, orange, yellow, or silvery white. Light-colored spots are scattered on the back and sides. This great variation in appearance has led to confusion in Arctic char systematics and some confusion with the Dolly Varden char (S. malma), which is excluded here. Arctic char populations have two basic forms depending on life history: anadromous (feeding in the

sea and migrating to fresh water to breed) and landlocked. Both forms are widely distributed in a circumpolar pattern. However, while the anadromous form is restricted to the Arctic, landlocked char are also found in more southern latitudes, in Europe, Russia, Alaska, Canada, and the United States. The anadromous form occurs from northern Norway through northern Eurasia (except the White Sea) to the Chukotka Peninsula; from northern Canada to Newfoundland; Hudson Bay (excluding James Bay); Greenland; Iceland; and Svalbard (but not Alaska) (maps of Arctic char distribution in Alaska before and after 1992 differ considerably because of improved methods of distinguishing Dolly Varden from Arctic char). The landlocked form is found in all territories with the anadromous form, plus Børn Island; Jan Mayen; Faroe Islands; Ireland; United Kingdom; the Alps of France, Switzerland, Germany, and Austria; Scandinavian peninsula; Finland; Karelia; Putorana Plateau; Transbaikalia; Magadanskaya Oblast’ and Chukotka; Kamchatka (only in two lakes); Alaska; Québec; New Brunswick; and Maine. Arctic char vary considerably in body size between populations. In the 1930s, professional fishermen in Novaya Zemlya are believed to have caught char up to 1 m in length and 16 kg in weight. Johnson (1980) shows a photograph of three char caught in Greiner Lake (Victoria Island, Canada), the largest of which has a fork length (length from the tip of the snout to the fork in the tail) of 80.6 cm and a weight of 5.75 kg. In 1962, a specimen of 75.0 cm in body length (from the tip of the snout to the end of the last scale) and 6.43 kg in weight was caught in Khantaiskoe Lake (Putorana Plateau, Taymyr Autonomous Okrug). Professional hunters told the author that they have occasionally caught large individuals in this lake, each weighing more than 20 kg, and these rare catches were generally in winter. At the other end of the scale, a population can be dwarfed. These fish remain very small even as adults, often being less than 20 cm in total length (from snout tip to tail tip). In July 1985, Nyman (1987) sampled 30 individuals from a brook in Sweden called Västra Trullgrav. They averaged 9.1 cm in total length, the largest fish being 11.7 cm total length and the oldest fish being aged 10+ years (in its 11th year). The Arctic char life history varies between populations and also between individuals within populations. After hatching, young anadromous char remain in the lake (if hatched in a river, the young move to the lake) for two to nine years before making their first sea migration. Called smolts, they become silvery in color. The downstream migration occurs between the end of May and July, and they stay in the sea for only two to three months before migrating upstream between July

113

ARCTIC CHAR and September. They overwinter in the lake and repeat the migration cycle the following spring. After several migrations, they become spawners. Almost all spawners have a very strong homing instinct, but the homing behavior does not seem to be so strong in nonspawners, which may swim up any river with a suitable overwintering lake. Spawning occurs in lakes or rivers, generally between October and February, and the char lay eggs in redds—hollows in the substrate used for spawning. The adults survive after spawning and will repeat the cycle the following year. Although the landlocked form does not migrate to the sea, their life histories are just as variable. One or more Arctic char populations may occur in a single lake. Each population can be characterized by morphology, genotype, feeding behavior, or spawning ground. The fish may be benthic (feeding on bottomliving animals), pelagic (feeding on plankton), or fish predators. In some cases, a population of dwarfed char occurs. These fish have neither commercial nor fishing value. There seem to be several factors that result in dwarfism, but the mechanisms are not yet fully understood. For some cases, however, a plausible explanation is simply that the fish are too numerous, and so food is scarce. Their growth is very limited or even prevented. If this is the case, removing a significant number of fish individuals artificially will improve the fish growth. High in the Arctic, where both anadromous and landlocked forms occur, the life pattern can be intermediate between the two forms. In some populations, there is an interval of a year between the spawning migration and reproduction; the spawners wait for a year in fresh water before spawning. The variability and apparent complexity of the life cycles result in the very wide ecological niche of Arctic char, which adapts to a wide range of habitats in the Arctic environment. Nevertheless, certain conditions seem to be necessary: cold oxygen-rich water, still water, and fresh water that does not freeze in winter. This is why Arctic char are not generally found in rivers (except during migration or spawning), in shallow lakes, or in the sea in winter. Arctic char are a valuable commercial and food resource for northern peoples. There are over 50,000 populations of Arctic char in the world with a catch of around 3000 tons a year. Since the 1980s, artificial rearing of Arctic char has been well developed, particularly by Iceland and Norway, and such fish have been available on the fish market all year round since the 1990s. In catching Arctic char today, gill nets and spinning fishing are the most widely used techniques. Canadian Inuit traditionally used stone weirs to corral the fish; the Arctic char were trapped in the weirs and speared.

114

Harpoons were also used in certain areas, a technique requiring great skill. In Baffin Island, some Arctic char become naturally trapped during upstream migration. In spring, local people harvested these frozen fish through cutting holes in the ice. In sport fishing, char are generally caught by simple lure fishing, usually with a spinner or spoon. Fly fishing is also possible, but it depends on place and time. Since the 1980s, some sport-fishing tourism has been developed for this fish in northern Canada. There, fishing regulation and protection measures are strictly enforced on these sport fisheries in order to sustain the local economy that is dependent on Arctic char. YOICHI MACHINO Further Reading Balon, Eugene (editor), Charr: Salmonid fishes of the Genus Salvelinus, The Hague: Dr. Junk, 1980 Frost, Winifred, “Breeding habits of Windermere charr, Salvelinus willughbii (Günther) and their bearing on speciation of these fish.” Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B Biological Sciences, 163 (1965): 232–284 + pl. 6 Grainger, E., “On the age, growth, migration, reproductive potential and feeding habits of the Arctic char (Salvelinus alpinus) of Frobisher Bay, Baffin Island.” Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada, 10 (1953): 326–370 Johnson, Lionel, “The Arctic Char, Salvelinus alpinus.” In Charr: Salmonid fishes of the Genus Salvelinus, edited by Eugene Balon, The Hague: Dr. Junk, 1980 Johnson, Lionel & Bonnie Burns (editors), Biology of the Arctic Charr: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Arctic Charr, Winnipeg: University of Manitoba Press, 1984 Jónasson, Pétur (editor), “Ecology of oligotrphic, subarctic Thingvallavatn.” Oikos, 64(1/2) (1992): 1–439 Kawanabe, Hiroya, Fumio Yamazaki & David Noakes (editors), “Biology of Charrs and Masu Salmon: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Charrs and Masu Salmon.” Physiology and Ecology Japan, special volume 1 (1989): 1–711 Klemetsen, Anders, Bror Jonsson & Malcolm Elliott (editors), “Proceedings of the Third International Charr Symposium.” Nordic Journal of Freshwater Research, 71 (1995): 1–451 Machino, Yoichi & Nathalie Thibault, “Poissons & Bibliographies.” In Faune & Flore du Grand Nord, edited by Nathalie Thibault, Paris: Grand Nord Grand Large, 1999 Nordeng, Hans, “On the biology of char (Salmo alpinus L.) in Salangen, north Norway.” Nytt Magasin for Zoologi, 10 (1961): 67–123 Nyman, Lennart, “High, old and small: the dwarfs of Chardom.” ISACF Information Series, 4 (1987) 107–112 Savvaitova, Ksenia, Arkticheskie gol’tsy (Arctic chars), Moscow: Agropromizdat, 1989 (English translation in Canadian Translation of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, 5607 (1993): 1–245) Watson, Rupert, Salmon, Trout & Charr of the World, Shrewsbury: Swan Hill Press, 1999 Yessipov, V., Materialy po biologii i promyslu Novozemel’skogo gol’tsa (Salvelinus alpinus L.) [Materials on the life history and fisheries of the char of Novaya Zemlya (Salvelinus alpinus L.)]. Trudy Arkticheskogo Instituta, 17 (1935): 5–71 (in Russian with English summary)

ARCTIC CIRCLE

ARCTIC CIRCLE The Arctic Circle is the circle of latitude at approximately 66°33′ N, the southern limit of the “midnight sun.” From the Arctic Circle northward, there is at least one day per year when the sun does not set. Proceeding westward around the world from 0° longitude, the Arctic Circle crosses the North Atlantic Ocean just north of Iceland, then Denmark Strait, southern Greenland, Davis Strait, Canada (Baffin Island, Foxe Basin, Nunavut, Northwest Territories, Yukon Territory), Alaska (United States of America), just north of Bering Strait, Russia, Finland, Sweden, and Norway. The length of the Arctic Circle is about 16,000 km. (For comparison, the length of the equator is 40,000 km.) The location of the Arctic Circle or limit of the midnight sun at this latitude is explained by a few basic facts relating to the geometry of the Earth’s motion around the sun. The Earth rotates on its axis (daily) and orbits around the sun (annually). The plane of the Earth’s equator is tilted by 23°27′ from the plane of its orbit around the sun. Equivalently, the Earth’s axis is tilted by 23°27′ from a perpendicular to the orbital plane. The Earth’s axis maintains a nearly constant orientation in space during each orbit around the sun. The consequences of this Earth-sun geometry are that the amount of daylight at a particular location on Earth varies throughout the year, which creates seasons. On the summer solstice (about June 21), when the Northern Hemisphere is tilted toward the sun, the sun does not set at latitudes within 23°27′ of the North Pole (90° N). Similarly, on the winter solstice (about December 21), when the Northern Hemisphere is tilted away from the sun, the sun does not rise above the horizon at latitudes within 23°27′ of the North Pole. This limit defines the latitude of the Arctic Circle: 90° minus 23°27′ is 66°33′. The same astronomical facts lead to an analogous Antarctic Circle (66°33′ S) in the Southern Hemisphere. Also, the location at which the sun is directly overhead varies throughout the year between 23°27′ N (the Tropic of Cancer) and 23°27′ S (the Tropic of Capricorn). The two tropics and two Arctic Circles divide the Earth into five zones: the torrid zone (between the tropics), the north and south temperate zones (from the tropics to the Polar Regions), and the north and south frigid zones (poleward of the Arctic and Antarctic Circles). Thus, one definition of the Arctic, from a purely geometrical or astronomical perspective, is the area within the Arctic Circle. This area comprises about 4% of the surface area of the Earth. Any change in the tilt of the Earth’s axis gives rise to an equal change in the latitude of the Arctic Circle. The Earth’s axis undergoes a slight wobble (known as the Chandler wobble) due to atmospheric and oceanic

processes, with a period of about 14 months. This causes the latitude of the Arctic Circle to vary within 12 m of its mean location. Longer-term changes in the tilt (also known as obliquity) of the Earth’s axis give rise to a slow variation in the latitude of the Arctic Circle. Over a period of 41,000 years, the tilt shifts from about 22° to 24.5° and back again. This causes the latitude of the Arctic Circle to move from 68° N to 65.5° N and back again. The slow changes in the tilt and orientation of the Earth’s axis, similar to a spinning top, are due to forces exerted by the sun and moon on the Earth’s equatorial bulge. This, together with slow changes in the Earth’s orbit (eccentricity and precession), leads to small changes over thousands of years in the amount of solar energy reaching different parts of the Earth, which is the basis of the astronomical theory of the Ice Ages and a factor in long-term climate change. The tilt of the Earth’s axis is currently decreasing at a rate of about half an arc-second per year. This translates into a northward motion of the Arctic Circle of 14 m per year. In 10,000 years, the Arctic Circle will reach its northerly maximum and begin moving southward again. If the tilt of the Earth’s axis decreased to 0o, the Arctic Circle would shrink to a point at the North Pole, and there would be no seasons. If the tilt increased beyond 45°, the Arctic Circle would move south of the Tropic of Cancer—the tropics and the Polar Regions would overlap. Ancient peoples must have reached the Arctic Circle some 15,000 years ago, at the end of the last Ice Age, on their trek across the Bering land bridge from Asia to North America. A second wave of migration about 5000 years ago brought the ancestors of the Inuit and Aleut, who made their homes north of the Arctic Circle in Canada and Alaska. These people must have had an intuitive or experiential conception of the Arctic Circle, gained by observing the path of the sun for many years at high latitudes. In contrast, the ancient Greek astronomers and geographers deduced the existence of the Arctic Circle without ever having been there—indeed, without believing that such latitudes were habitable. They placed the Tropic of Cancer at 24° N, and hence the Arctic Circle at 66° N. In 330 BC, a Greek explorer, Pytheas of Massilia (Marseilles), sailed through the Strait of Gibraltar and headed north on a six-year voyage, inaugurating the modern exploration of the Arctic. Six days’ sail north of Britain, Pytheas reached “Thule” (perhaps Iceland or the north coast of Norway). A short distance farther north, at about the latitude of the Arctic Circle, he came to a place where there was no longer a distinction between land, sea, and air, but rather a mixture of the three (perhaps sea ice and fog). His tales were discredited by his

115

ARCTIC COUNCIL contemporaries but have regained favor in recent times. HARRY L. STERN See also Arctic: Definitions and Boundaries; Cartography; North Pole Further Reading Bowditch, Nathaniel, American Practical Navigator, Washington, District of Columbia: Defense Mapping Agency Hydrographic Center (more than 70 editions from 1802 to the present) Brown, Lloyd A., The Story of Maps, New York: Dover, 1977 Crowley, Thomas J. & Gerald R. North, Paleoclimatology, Oxford Monographs on Geology and Geophysics, New York: Oxford University Press, 1991

ARCTIC COUNCIL In 1987, Mikhail Gorbachev in his Murmansk speech proposed greater cooperation among Arctic countries. This encouraged Finland to pursue such cooperation on a formal level as a means of addressing, along with other issues, environmental problems caused by Soviet mining operations close to Finnish Lapland. The result was the Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy (AEPS), adopted by declaration in 1991 at a ministerial conference of the eight Arctic countries held in Rovaniemi, Finland. (The AEPS would form the origins of what would become the Arctic Council five years later.) The Rovaniemi Declaration established AEPS’s objectives, which can be summarized as follows: protection of the Arctic ecosystem (including humans); restoration of environmental quality and the sustainable utilization of natural resources; recognition of the traditional and cultural needs, values, and practices of indigenous peoples; regular review of the state of the Arctic environment; and reduction and elimination of sources of pollution. While the AEPS provided a means to address issues of environmental protection, some of the eight countries thought that more formal arrangements were needed to facilitate international cooperation in the Arctic and to promote sustainable development of the region. Following two years of negotiations, the Declaration on the Establishment of the Arctic Council was signed by the eight Arctic countries (Canada, Finland, Denmark/Greenland, Iceland, Norway, Russia, Sweden, and the United States) at a ministerial conference in Ottawa, Canada, in September 1996. Article I of the Declaration states that: The Arctic Council is established as a high-level forum to: (a) provide a means for promoting cooperation, coordination, and interaction among the Arctic

116

states, with the involvement of the Arctic indigenous communities and other Arctic inhabitants on common Arctic issues, in particular, issues of sustainable development and environmental protection in the Arctic; (b) oversee and coordinate the programs established under the AEPS on the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program (AMAP); Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna (CAFF); Protection of the Arctic Marine Environment (PAME); and Emergency Prevention, Preparedness and Response (EPPR); (c) adopt terms of reference for, and oversee and coordinate a sustainable development program; and (d) disseminate information, encourage education, and promote interest in Arctic-related issues. The chairmanship of the Arctic Council rotates for terms of two years. Canada served as chair of the Arctic Council from 1996 to 1998, followed by the United States, Finland, and Iceland (2002–2004), with Russia assuming the chairmanship in 2004. Between Council meetings, senior Arctic officials meet twice a year to oversee the activities of the various programs of the Council. The four working groups associated with the four programs mentioned in point (b) above have continued under the Arctic Council. A fifth working group on Sustainable Development and Utilization had been established, but was replaced by the Council’s own Sustainable Development Working Group. Terms of reference for this group were the subject of lengthy negotiation, but following the Council meeting in 1998, several projects have been undertaken on topics such as telemedicine, ecotourism, and the management of coastal fisheries in the Saami region. Finland, during its chairmanship of the Council from 2000 to 2002, examined options to restructure the working groups for greater efficiency and effectiveness. Recognizing the great significance of Arctic Council issues to indigenous groups in the region, the Arctic countries gave three indigenous peoples’ organizations Permanent Participant status within the Council. These groups are the Inuit Circumpolar Conference (ICC), the Saami Council, and the Russian Association of Indigenous Peoples of the North (RAIPON). At the Council meeting in 1998, the Aleut International Association was added, and at the 2000 meeting, the Gwich’in Council International and Arctic Athabascan Council brought the number of Permanent Participants to six. The category of Permanent Participant provides for the active participation and full consultation with the Arctic indigenous representatives within the Arctic Council.

ARCTIC: DEFINITIONS AND BOUNDARIES Observers, including non-Arctic nations, intergovernmental organizations such as the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), and nongovernment organizations such as the International Arctic Science Committee, are allowed to attend ministerial conferences, senior Arctic officials meetings, and working group meetings. To date, the AEPS and Arctic Council have carried out several major projects. The Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP) working group published a comprehensive assessment of environmental contaminants in the Arctic, both as a scientific volume and as a plain-language summary report. These reports are updated on a regular basis. They also led to the establishment of the Arctic Council Action Plan to Eliminate Pollution of the Arctic. The Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna (CAFF) working group developed conservation strategies for murres (Uria spp.) and eiders (Somateria spp. and Polysticta fischeri), established the Circumpolar Protected Areas Network, and completed a book-length report on the status of Arctic flora and fauna in 2001. The Protection of the Arctic Marine Environment (PAME) working group reviewed legal instruments for pollution prevention and control, established guidelines for oil and gas development in the Arctic, and developed a Regional Programme of Action for the Protection of the Arctic Marine Environment from Land-Based Activities. The Emergency Prevention, Preparedness, and Response (EPPR) working group has conducted several emergency exercises and has prepared a map of sites in the Arctic that are particularly vulnerable to an environmental emergency such as an oil spill. In addition, the Council has sponsored an Arctic Climate Impact Assessment (ACIA) for delivery in 2004. HENRY P. HUNTINGTON See also Aleut International Association; Arctic Athabascan Council; Capacity Building; Declaration on the Protection of the Arctic Environment (1991); Gwich’in Council International; Inuit Circumpolar Conference (ICC); Russian Association of Indigenous Peoples of the North (RAIPON); Saami Council Further Reading Arctic Council website: http://www.arctic-council.org/index. html Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme website: http://www. amap.no/ AMAP, Arctic Pollution Issues: A State of the Arctic Environment Report, Oslo: AMAP, 1997 AMAP, The AMAP Assessment Report: Arctic Pollution Issues, Oslo: AMAP, 1998 AMAP, Arctic Pollution 2002, Oslo: AMAP, 2002

Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna (CAFF) website: http://www.caff.is/ CAFF, Arctic Flora and Fauna: Status and Conservation, Helsinki: Edita, 2001 Emergency Prevention, Preparedness, and Response (EPPRl): http://eppr.arctic-council.org/ Huntington, Henry P., The Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy and the Arctic Council: A Review of United States Participation and Suggestions for Future Involvement, Bethesda, Maryland: Marine Mammal Commission, 1997 Protection of the Arctic Marine Environment (PAME) website: http://www.pame.is/ Russell, Bruce A., “The Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy and the new Arctic Council.” Arctic Research of the United States, 10 (1996): 2–10 Tennberg, Monica, The Arctic Council: A Study in Governmentality, Rovaniemi, Finland: University of Lapland, 1998

ARCTIC: DEFINITIONS AND BOUNDARIES The word “Arctic” comes from the Greek word for bear, arktos, after the constellations Ursa major and Ursa minor. Both are visible throughout the year in the northern night sky. The popular image of the Arctic is a treeless, remote wilderness with cold winters and cool summers occupying the northern reaches of the Earth. For many, the Arctic is a vast, frozen area around the North Pole, a harsh place of unforgiving and extreme conditions to which only a few species of plants, animals, and some indigenous peoples have adapted themselves, challenged constantly by cold and the seasonal variations of light and darkness. Geographically, the Arctic includes the Arctic Ocean, many islands and archipelagos, and the northern parts of the mainlands of the North American, Asian, and European continents. The largest Arctic land areas are in Russia, Canada, Greenland, Alaska, Fennoscandia, and Svalbard. However, there is considerable debate as to how the Arctic should be identified and defined and where its southern boundaries actually lie. Definitions of the Arctic boundary vary according to environmental, geographical, political, cultural, and scientific perspectives and biases. Confusion also arises because of the way “Arctic,” “circumpolar North,” “Northern regions,” and “the North” are all used interchangeably. Often, the definition varies according to subject matter and scientific discipline. Some scientists consider the approved criteria for a definition of the Arctic to include high latitude, long winters and short, cool summers, low precipitation, permafrost, frozen lakes and sea in winter, and the absence of trees. Astronomically, the boundary of the Arctic is the latitude beyond which the sun does not set during the summer solstice, or rise during the winter solstice, at

117

ARCTIC: DEFINITIONS AND BOUNDARIES

© AMAP 2003 AMAP area Arctic marine boundary

Arctic Circle 10° C July isotherm

The Arctic as defined by temperature, and the Arctic marine boundary, also showing the boundary of the AMAP assessment area. From AMAP Assessment Report: Arctic Pollution Issues. Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP), Oslo, Norway, 1998. Reproduced with permission from AMAP

about 66°33′ N, which we know more commonly as the imaginary line called the Arctic or Polar Circle. This astronomical feature sets a definite and specific photoperiod for the Arctic and reduces the amount of solar heat absorbed by the Earth’s surface, as well as providing the most recognized characteristics of the Arctic—long, cold, and dark winters, and short, cool summers with the midnight sun.

118

All land north of the treeline is sometimes used as a defining characteristic, while others consider all lands and seas north of 60° N to be Arctic. The Arctic Circle, the treeline, and north of 60° are attractive markers because they make the Arctic easy to define. However, Arctic-like conditions are found far to the south of the Arctic Circle and many Inuit, who are regarded as quintessentially Arctic people, live in parts

ARCTIC: DEFINITIONS AND BOUNDARIES

© AMAP 2003

High Arctic

Subarctic

Low Arctic

Treeline

Arctic and Subarctic floristic boundaries. From AMAP Assessment Report: Arctic Pollution Issues. Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP), Oslo, Norway, 1998. Reproduced by permission from AMAP

of Canada, Greenland, and Alaska that lie several hundred miles south of the Arctic Circle. Similarly, there are many scientists who would disagree that all areas north of 60°N lie in the Arctic, arguing instead that some lands included in this definition, such as south-

ern Greenland and southern Alaska, are actually Subarctic. When the treeline is taken as the southern boundary, western Alaska, the Aleutians, and southern Iceland are said to be Arctic (though they would not be according to strict climatic definitions), although vast

119

ARCTIC: DEFINITIONS AND BOUNDARIES forested areas of northern Russia (which may have mean monthly temperatures below 10°C), where the transition from boreal forest to open tundra covers up to 300 km, would be Subarctic. Armstrong et al. (1978) consider Iceland to be the least “Arctic” country in their survey of the regions of the circumpolar North, on account of its position south of the Arctic Circle and its cold temperate oceanic climate caused by the North Atlantic drift. A common way of defining the Arctic is to do so climatically by using the 10°C summer isotherm (an area with an average annual temperature of 0°C and within which the mean annual temperature for the warmest summer month is at or below 10°C) as the boundary line. This boundary roughly corresponds with the treeline, but not with the Arctic Circle. Both the 10°C summer isotherm and the treeline, however, may diverge by as much as 100 km in some areas. Parts of western Alaska, the Aleutians, and southern Iceland are excluded from this climatic definition, even though they would be considered Arctic if the treeline is used as a defining boundary, yet both the 10°C summer isotherm and the treeline extend beyond 70° N in northern Norway and as far south as 55° N in Canada’s Hudson Bay region. Sweden and Finland extend above the Arctic Circle, but these countries lie south of the treeline and the 10°C summer isotherm. The Arctic climate varies significantly by location and season and is in fact a collection of regional climates with different ecological and physical climatic characteristics. The mean annual temperatures vary greatly according to location, for example, from −12.2°C at Pt Barrow, Alaska (71.3° N) to −28.1°C at the summit of the Greenland ice sheet (about 71° N). Some of these differences are due to the poleward intrusion of warm ocean currents such as the Gulf Stream and the southward extension of cold air masses (Weller, 2000). The North Pole is not the coldest place in the Arctic because its climate is moderated by the ocean, and coastal settlements in West Greenland that are adjacent to the ice sheet typically have a mean temperature of −7°C because the climate is moderated by relatively warm ocean currents. Arctic lands span some 33° of latitude reaching 84° N in Greenland. The summer period progressively decreases from about three to two months from the southern boundary of the Arctic to the North, the mean July temperature decreases from 10–12°C to 2°C, and precipitation decreases from about 250 mm to as low as 45 mm per year. Because low precipitation characterizes the Arctic, large and elaborate river and lake systems are rare. North of the treeline the Arctic is characterized by the presence of permafrost, which is more or less continuous north of the forest tundra but becomes discontinuous to the south of the region.

120

Permafrost restricts the downward drainage of meltwater from snow, and water accumulates on the surface as shallow lakes, ponds, and marshes. In general, the Arctic is arid and cold deserts dominate the High Arctic. The problem of how to define the Arctic and how to explain where Arctic regions are located becomes increasingly apparent when drawing boundaries for terrestrial and marine environments. In the terrestrial environment, many scientists would probably say that the southern boundary of the circumpolar Arctic is located at the northern extent of the closed boreal forests. In reality, there is not a clear boundary but a transition from south to north consisting of the following sequence:- closed forest- forest with patches of tundra- tundra with patches of forest- tundra. This transition occurs over 300 km in flat areas but is compressed to hundreds of meters or less in mountainous areas of the Arctic. This transition zone stretches for more than 13,400 km around the lands of the Northern Hemisphere and is probably the Earth’s most important environmental transition zone. The zone has been called forest tundra, lesotundra, Subarctic, and the tundra-taiga boundary or ecotone. Again, this definition of the Arctic does not correspond with the geographical location of the zone delimited by the Arctic Circle at 66°33′ N latitude. Arctic lands are extensive beyond the northern limit of the tundra taiga-ecotone, where they amount to about 7,567,000 km2. They cover about 2,560,000 km2 of Russia and Scandinavia, 2,480,000 km2 in Canada, 2,167,000 km2 in Greenland and Iceland, and 360,000 km2 in Alaska. The complexity of defining the Arctic is amplified when the Arctic is divided into different zones. Although it is clear that the Arctic is not a homogeneous environment, definitions of Subarctic, Midarctic, and High Arctic environments conflict between different scientific traditions. In fact, there is a continuous gradient of environmental severity within the Arctic from the boreal forest zone at its southern boundary to the polar deserts of the far north, even if this is interrupted in some places by mountain chains and water bodies (Nuttall and Callaghan, 2000). The boundary of the Arctic marine environment is similarly difficult to delimit. An oceanographic definition is the meeting point of the relatively warm, salty water from the Atlantic and Pacific oceans and the colder, less salty water of the Arctic Ocean (CAFF, 2001). The Arctic Ocean receives important inflows of water from rivers and the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. The total area of the Arctic marine environment comprises about 14 million km², of which about 7 million represents the permanently ice-covered deep basins of the Arctic Ocean and most of the remaining 7 million km2 seasonally ice-covered areas. However, just as the

ARCTIC ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION STRATEGY boundary of the treeline varies greatly, so does the latitude of the ocean boundary, from about 63° N in the Canadian Archipelago to 80°N near Svalbard, with a Subarctic marine environment of mixed Arctic and Atlantic or Pacific water extending, in the case of the northern North Atlantic, from around 44°N off Newfoundland to 68°N off northern Norway (CAFF, 2001). Arctic marine regions may also be very cold, although they are usually less so than land areas. Cold waters in ocean currents that flow southward from the Arctic lower the temperatures in Greenland and the eastern Canadian Arctic, whereas the northward-flowing Gulf Stream warms the northern landmasses of Europe. This explains why polar bears and tundra are found at 51° N in eastern Canada and agriculture is practiced beyond 69°N in Norway. Such definitions of the Arctic are complicated further by attempts to draw geopolitical boundaries and to classify the regions of the circumpolar North as either political and economic peripheries or culture regions. Many Icelandic politicians and Arctic specialists would perhaps not agree with Armstrong et al.’s designation of their country as the least “Arctic” country in the circumpolar North, especially given Iceland’s active leadership in Arctic affairs and chairmanship of the Arctic Council from 2002 to 2004. The various working groups and projects under the auspices of the Arctic Council have all defined the Arctic differently, reflecting various scientific, political, and cultural traditions in understanding where and what the Arctic is. For the purposes of the Arctic Council’s Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP), for example, the Arctic is defined approximately as the area north of 60° N in North America and Siberia, and north of the Arctic Circle (66.7°) in Europe, yet also including the Aleutian Islands, the Faroe Islands, Iceland, and southern Greenland. The boundary used by Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna (CAFF), another Arctic Council working group, differs slightly from AMAP’s in that the Faroe Islands are not included. That the Arctic is not an area that can be clearly defined reflects the fact that the extent of the Arctic is entirely dependent on whatever definition is used. Furthermore, no one way of defining the Arctic is satisfactory for all purposes, and more often than not a practical definition becomes necessary in research projects, reports, assessments, and scientific monographs to determine what physical, ecological, political, and cultural processes are to be covered. For example, researchers using botanical definitions for research on Arctic vegetation calculate that Arctic lands comprise some 7.6 million km2, yet others calculate an area of only 4 million km2 (Nuttall and Callaghan, 2000).

One important reason why it is difficult and perhaps inappropriate to define restrictive boundaries for the Arctic is because of its incredible variability, diversity, and connections with the rest of the globe. The Arctic is an important part of the global climate system and it both affects and is affected by global climate change (Weller, 2000), and the societies and economies of Arctic peoples are linked to the global economy and broader social and economic processes. Arctic ecosystems are linked to the ecosystems of warmer southern regions; Arctic air masses bring cold air to southern latitudes in the winter, but the winds from the south bring warmer air—and contaminants and pollutants— to northern regions. Migratory mammals, birds, and fish move to the Arctic in summer to feed and breed before returning south for the winter. Sea water cools as the currents bring it north and the cold fresh water from melting snow and ice add to the great ocean conveyer belt known as the thermohaline circulation, which has a significant impact on the global climate and sea conditions. Major rivers such as the Ob, Lena, Yenisey, and Mackenzie provide a substantial inflow of fresh water into Arctic waters, yet their headwaters are far to the south and provide a further connection between global and Arctic climates. MARK NUTTALL See also Arctic Circle; High Arctic; Subarctic; Treeline Further Reading Armstrong, Terence, Graham Rogers & Graham Rowley, The Circumpolar North, London: Methuen, 1978 Bernes, Claes, The Nordic Arctic Environment: Unspoilt, Exploited, Polluted?, Copenhagen: The Nordic Council of Ministers, 1996 CAFF (Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna), Arctic Flora and Fauna: Status and Conservation, Helsinki: Edita, 2001 Nuttall, Mark & Terry V. Callaghan (editors), The Arctic: Environment, People, Policy, London and New York: Taylor and Francis, 2000 Weller, Gunter, The weather and climate of the Arctic. In The Arctic; Environment, People, Policy, edited by Mark Nuttall & Terry V. Callaghan, London and New York: Taylor and Francis, 2000, pp. 143–160

ARCTIC ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION STRATEGY The Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy (AEPS) was initiated in Rovaniemi, Finland, in June 1991 when environmental ministers from the eight Arctic countries signed the Declaration on the Protection of the Arctic Environment. Also referred to as the Rovaniemi Process, the AEPS was intended to be a forum for Canada, Finland, the United States, Iceland, the Russian

121

ARCTIC ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION STRATEGY Federation, Denmark/Greenland, Sweden, and Norway to share information and to develop programs and initiatives to deal with Arctic conservation and environmental problems such as pollution. Six areas of concern were identified for action at Rovaniemi: persistent organic pollutants (POPs), radionuclides, heavy metals, oil, acidification, and noise. As set out in its various ministerial declarations, the AEPS objectives are: to protect Arctic ecosystems; to ensure the sustainable utilization of renewable resources by local populations and indigenous peoples; to recognize and incorporate the traditional and cultural needs, values, and practises of indigenous peoples related to protection of the Arctic environment; to review regularly the state of the Arctic environment; to identify the causes and extent of pollution in the Arctic; and to reduce and eliminate pollution. The Ministers established Working Groups in various program areas that would investigate issues and trends, produce assessments, and generate policy recommendations. The Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP) was set up to identify the levels and effects of anthropogenic pollutants and contaminants in the Arctic. A Working Group on the Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna (CAFF) was established to address species and habitat conservation in the region by promoting the conservation of biodiversity and the sustainable use of living resources. The Working Group on Protection of the Arctic Marine Environment was established, following the Nuuk Ministerial Meeting in September 1993, to address policy and nonemergency pollution prevention and control measures related to the protection of the Arctic marine environment from land- and seabased activities, including marine shipping, offshore oil and gas development, land-based activities, and ocean disposal. At the same time a Working Group on Emergency Prevention, Preparedness and Response in the Arctic (EPPR) was set up, as was a Task Force (which later became the Working Group) on Sustainable Development and Utilization (TF/WGSDU). EPPR’s work is focused mainly on oil and gas transportation and extraction, and on radiological and other hazards, with a mandate to exchange information on best practices for preventing spills, preparing to respond to spills should they occur, and practical response measures for use in the event of a spill. The Working Group on Sustainable Development was established largely in response to prompting and lobbying by the Inuit Circumpolar Conference (ICC), and signaled the gradual movement away from the main AEPS emphasis on pollution and conservation issues toward sustainable development concerns. WGSDU became dormant as the negotiations for the Arctic Council drew to an end, but resurfaced as a strong element of the Arctic Council’s

122

activities after the Arctic Council Ministerial Meeting in Barrow, Alaska, in 2000 approved a strategic framework document on sustainable development. Based on this foundation for further cooperation, the SDWG began developing the framework for activities on the economic, social, and cultural aspects of sustainable development. From the beginning, the main objective of the AEPS was to include the concerns of indigenous peoples. In the original Declaration on the Protection of the Arctic Environment, the ministers emphasized not only “our responsibility to protect and preserve the Arctic environment” but also the importance of “recognizing the special relationship of the indigenous peoples and local populations of the Arctic and their unique contribution to the protection of the Arctic environment.” The importance of indigenous participation in the AEPS was underscored in 1993 when the environmental ministers convened in Nuuk, Greenland, for the second ministerial meeting to review progress since signing the original Declaration two years previously. This meeting resulted in the “Nuuk Declaration,” which established a program with a secretariat to enable indigenous peoples’ organizations (IPOs) to participate in future meetings and discussions of the AEPS. The Indigenous Peoples’ Secretariat opened officially in February 1995 and is located in the Greenland Home Rule Government’s Danish office in Copenhagen. Initially, the ICC, the Saami Council, and the Russian Association of Indigenous Peoples of the North (RAIPON) were all given observer status within the AEPS. As an unprecedented framework for international cooperation on Arctic environmental and sustainability issues, the AEPS process initially consisted, at the political level, of Ministerial Meetings (Rovaniemi, June 1991; Nuuk, September 1993; Inuvik, April 1996; Alta, June 1997). There were one or two meetings each year at the executive level of what became known as the Senior Arctic Affairs Officials (SAAO) from each of the eight governments. There was no central, permanent secretariat to support the AEPS process as a whole, with the state chairing the AEPS between Ministerial Meetings in Finland, Denmark/Greenland, Canada, Norway providing its own small unit. In addition to preparing the Ministerial Meetings, the SAAOs attempted to give more substance to their role by directing and coordinating the increasingly broad networks of governmental scientists, experts, and administrators—together with IPOs and a range of nongovernmental actors—active at the working level in the AEPS program areas. The main activity within the AEPS was working to develop transgovernmental Arctic networks that facilitated the discussion and production of knowledge

ARCTIC FOX about the nature and severity of environmental challenges in the Arctic, as well as high-level discussion about how to formulate appropriate responses. Moreover, this programmatic activity has been hampered by the reluctance of member states to provide adequate funding for the Working Groups. Operating on a lead country principle, individual countries assumed responsibility for leading developing and financing projects they have a special interest in. While an agreement in principle was reached on sharing common costs, it proved difficult in reality to agree on a formula for sharing common costs, or to reach agreement on whether this was obligatory or voluntary. Although established as a high-level intergovernmental process between the eight Arctic governments, the AEPS process has been increasingly open and transparent. Accredited observer status at the political and executive levels was granted to four non-Arctic states (Germany, Netherlands, Poland, UK), to the Northern Forum of Arctic and Northern territorial governments, to some specialized intergovernmental organizations (e.g., UNEP, UN ECE), and to the International Arctic Science Committee (IASC). Several environmental/conservation NGOs (e.g., WWF International, Arctic Network) have participated as observers in Working Groups and achieved ad hoc, though not permanent (accredited), observer status at the political/executive level. The special position gradually asserted by the three existing transnational Arctic IPOs was reflected in their recognition as Permanent Participants in the AEPS by the time of the Nuuk Ministerial Meeting in 1993. With the establishment of the Arctic Council in Ottawa in September 1996, the Working Groups and programmatic activities of the AEPS were subsumed under this new high-level governmental forum. Foreign ministers of the Arctic states agreed in the Ottawa Declaration to form the Arctic Council with a mandate to undertake a broad program to coordinate the programs established under the AEPS, and to promote cooperation between Arctic states on common issues (excluding military security) including all dimensions of sustainable development. MARK NUTTALL See also Arctic Council; Capacity Building; Declaration on the Protection of the Arctic Environment (1991); Indigenous Peoples’ Organizations and Arctic Environmental Politics Further Reading AMAP, Arctic Pollution Issues: A State of the Arctic Environment Report, Oslo: Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme, 1998

Archer, Clive & David Scrivener, “International Co-operation in the Arctic Environment.” In The Arctic: Environment, People, Policy, edited by Mark Nuttall & Terry V. Callaghan, Amsterdam: Harwood Academic Publishers, 2000, pp. 601–619 CAFF, Arctic Flora and Fauna: Status and Conservation, Helsinki: Ediita. 2001 Nuttall, Mark, “Indigenous Peoples’ Organisations and Arctic Environmental Co-operation.” In The Arctic: Environment, People, Policy, edited by Mark Nuttall & Terry V. Callaghan, Amsterdam: Harwood Academic Publishers, 2000, pp. 621–637 Scrivener, David, Environmental Cooperation in the Arctic from Strategy to Council, Oslo: Norwegian Atlantic Committee, 1996 Young, Oran R, The Arctic Council: Marking a New Era in International Relations, New York: The Twentieth Century Fund, 1996

ARCTIC FOX The Arctic fox (Alopex lagopus) occurs in two color morphs: white and blue. White foxes have a pure white winter coat, which turns brownish-gray on the back and white on the belly in summer. The blue morph is usually brownish-blue in winter and uniform blueblack in summer. Arctic foxes have long been prized for their winter fur for clothing by Greenlandic and Canadian Inuit, Saami, and Russian indigenous peoples, and early traders encouraged native peoples to trap foxes for the luxury European market. They are still of economic importance to the human inhabitants of the Arctic. Arctic foxes are called Teriangniaq qaqortaq (white color) and Teriangiaq qernertaq (blue color) in Greenlandic, Polarræv in Danish (also Hvidræv for the white form; Blåræv for the blue form), Refir in Icelandic, Fjellrev or Polarrev in Norwegian, Fjällräv in Swedish, Napakettu in Finnish (also Naali for the white form; Sinikettu for the blue), and pesets in Russian. The Arctic fox belongs to the dog family, Canidae, and is the only species in the genus Alopex. They are among the smallest canids, normally weighing between 2.5 and 4.0 kg. Arctic foxes seldom survive for more than three to four years under natural conditions. However, the oldest ever reported was 13 years old. The Arctic fox is circumpolar in distribution, living above the treeline in alpine areas in Fennoscandia, on the tundra mainland of Arctic Eurasia and North America, and on islands in the Arctic, North Atlantic, and North Pacific oceans. It also ranges widely over pack ice. The Arctic fox lives in two main habitat types, inland and coast, which offer differences in both diet and reproductive patterns. In inland tundra regions, Arctic foxes are food specialists or semispecialists relying on cyclic small rodent populations that fluctuate with a periodicity of three to five years. Such unpredictable environments, in terms of prey

123

ARCTIC FOX

Arctic fox (Alopex lagopus). Copyright Paul Nicklen/National Geographic Image Collection

availability, provide wide variation between years in litter sizes. Foxes living on islands or near the sea close to bird cliffs are generalists, preying on food both from the marine and the terrestrial food web. This provides a more predictable and stable food supply and the foxes produce relatively few cubs every year. Arctic foxes are territorial in the breeding season, with home range sizes from 3 km2 (coast) to 60 km2 (inland), but can switch to a more nomadic behavior during winter, presumably in search for food. They are known to move great distances during such seasonal migrations, more than 1000 km in one season. Migrating Arctic foxes can penetrate deep into the taiga and cross vast tracts of pack ice. Information based on ear-tag return shows that Arctic foxes are able to travel from Western Alaska to Eastern Canada, from Siberia to Alaska, and from Svalbard to Novaya Zemlya. It has also been reported that mass migrations can take place between northeast Canada and Greenland, and within the Russian Arctic. Mass migrations usually take place after peak production years in Arctic foxes and their small rodent prey. Arctic foxes, considered to be generally or sequentially monogamous, can start breeding in their first year of life, but they are then not as successful as older foxes. The females enter estrus once a year and mating occurs in March or early April. Litters are born after a gestation period of 52 days (i.e., in late May or early June). The Arctic fox litter size is among the largest in the order Carnivora; the greatest number of cubs ever reported is 22. Inland Arctic fox populations have a mean litter size of seven with maximum 13, while coastal foxes have a mean litter size of five and maximum seven.

124

The population biology of the Arctic fox in most inland tundra regions is dominated by large fluctuations in numbers, caused by and synchronized with the three- to five-year cyclical fluctuations in small rodents that are their main prey. The world population of Arctic foxes is thought to be in the order of several hundred thousand animals. The total trapping harvest for North America has been about 40,000 animals annually, with up to 85,000 during peak years from 1919 to 1987. The number of live animals in the Russian Arctic was estimated before 1985 to be around 50,000 during a low and more than 400,000 in peak years. Arctic foxes in Iceland were a threat to sheep and lamb farming and were subject to intense persecution from the late 13th century. In the year 2000, the calculated minimum population size was just over 6000, having recovered more than fourfold in 20 years (Pall Hersteinsson, personal communication). However, in Fennoscandia, intensive hunting at the end of the 19th and in the early 20th centuries resulted in near extinction of the Arctic fox populations. Despite total protection in all Fennoscandian countries since 1940, the population has not recovered and is now endangered. Arctic foxes are opportunistic generalist predators, but can also function as a specialist on fluctuating small rodent populations in most inland areas. Along the coast and near bird cliffs, food is available, in excess, during the breeding season, but is restricted during winter. Thus the coastal habitats provide a stable and predictable environment. In spring and summer, coastal foxes are ringed seal pup predators; they also prey on birds and feed on eggs, marine mammal carcasses, marine and freshwater fishes, marine and

ARCTIC GROUND SQUIRREL terrestrial invertebrates, and carcasses of reindeer or other large mammals. Winter diet is mainly ptarmigan and the carcasses of large mammals. Some Arctic foxes feed on remnants of seals killed by polar bears on the sea ice. In inland habitats, the main prey species in summer are lemmings (mainly Lemmus and Dicrostonyx spp.) and voles (mainly Microtus), and also carcasses of reindeer and other large mammals, while in winter, the most important food resources are large mammal carcasses and ptarmigans. Arctic foxes also store excess food gathered by caching during spring and summer, for use in late autumn and winter. The most important predators for the Arctic fox, especially the cubs, and competitors for food are red fox (Vulpes vulpes), wolf (Canis lupus), wolverine (Gulo gulo L.), snowy owl (Nyctea artica), golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos L.), and white-tailed eagle (Haliaeätus albicilla L.). Due to their long-range migrations, Arctic foxes are likely to be transmitters and important carriers of diseases and parasites affecting humans. Rabies is widespread throughout the Arctic region and is enzootic with the Arctic fox both as a reservoir species and the main vector of the disease in the Arctic. The tapeworm, Echinococcus multilocularis, uses the Arctic fox as a definitive host (i.e., the host harbors all developing stages as well as the egg-laying adults). This parasite causes the disease alveolar echinococcosis in humans that is often fatal, with mortality rates as high as 80% or 90% in untreated cases. In Scandinavian countries, foxes were believed to cause the northern lights (aurora borealis). The Eskimos have a legend about the parentless mistreated boy, Kagssagssuk, who obtain superhuman strength from the “Master of Strength,” who appears like a big fox with a long tail. The folklore of many cultures, such as the Inuit, Siberian people, and native North Americans, tells stories about the fox’s ability to shape-shift into a human being, usually an attractive young woman. EVA FUGLEI See also Fur Trade; Trapping Further Reading Eberhardt, Lester E. & Wayne C. Hanson, “Long-distance movements of Arctic foxes tagged in northern Alaska.” Canadian Field Naturalist, 92 (1978): 386–389 Garrot, Robert A. & Lester E. Eberhardt, “Arctic Fox.” In Wild Furbearer Management and Conservation in North America, edited by Milan Novak, James A. Baker, Martyn E. Obbard & Bruce Malloch, Ontario: Ontario Trappers Association, Ministry of Natural Resources, 1987, pp. 394–406 Grambo, Rebecca L., The World of the Fox, San Francisco: Sierra Club Books, 1995

Hersteinsson, Páll & David W. Macdonald, “Interspecific competition and the geographical distribution of red and Arctic foxes Vulpes vulpes and Alopex lagopus.” Oikos, 64 (1992): 505–515 Hersteinsson, Páll, Karl Frafjord & Asko Kaikusalo, “The Arctic fox in Fennoscandia and Iceland: management problems.” Biological Conservation, 49 (1989): 67–81 Macpherson, A.H., “The dynamics of Canadian Arctic fox populations.” Canadian Wildlife Service Report Series, 8 (1969): 1–49 Wiklund, Christer G., Anders Angerbjörn, Erik Isakson, Nils Kjellén & Magnus Tannerfeldt, “Lemming predators on the Siberian tundra.” Ambio, 28 (1999): 281–286

ARCTIC GROUND SQUIRREL The Arctic ground squirrel (Spermophilus parryi, Spermophilus means “seed loving”) is a large rodent belonging to the squirrel family (Sciuridae), rodent order (Rodentia). Known as a “gopher” to most Yukoners and a “tsik-tsik” by the Iñupiat Eskimos in Alaska, it is the largest and most northern of New World ground squirrels. The Arctic ground squirrel inhabits meadow-steppe, tundra, and mountain-tundra landscapes in the Northeastern Palearctic (from the Verkhoyansk Ridge in the east and to the south to the southern extremity of Kamchatka and environs of Okhotsk city), as well as Alaska and northeastern Canada, and generally hibernates from April to September. Adult males have a body length of 26–29 cm, a tail 8.9–11 cm long, and a body mass of 620–950 g. Females are distinguished by smaller sizes. The ears are short, slightly fur-trimmed, and positioned a little forward over the fur-covered head. The ground squirrel has cheek pouches. There are indistinct or clear small light speckles on its reddish-brown or yellowbrown back. It has strong front forelegs that are adapted for digging. The Arctic ground squirrel is found from sea level to mountain tundra zone, Alpine, and sub-Alpine meadows above the treeline. Its settlements are mainly arranged in sandy banks of well-drained river terraces or moraines, since good drainage increases the depth to permafrost through which the squirrels cannot dig, and sedge and cereals herbage grow. In mountains, the ground squirrel inhabits mainly steppe meadows formed by sparse vegetation composed of xerophyte mixed grasses and cereals growing on flat slopes and borders of south-facing intermountain valleys. Ground squirrels settle in sparse cedar groves and edges of sparse larch forests, but avoid continuous bush brushwood or forested areas. It is often found on the territory of small northern taiga and tundra villages. Ground squirrels typically live in colonies of 5–50 squirrels. Burrows are easy to find by earth mounds 125

ARCTIC GROUND SQUIRREL

Arctic ground squirrel (Spermophilus parryi) by its burrow, Nunavut, Canada. Copyright Norbert Rosing/National Geographic Image Collection

near holes leading to underground passages. The entrance to the hole is often inclined and rarely vertical, and has up to ten entrances per burrow. Burrows are not more than 50 cm deep and generally positioned above permafrost. The passage widens to one or two nesting chambers lined with split sedge and cereals stems and leaves for insulation. Two to four blind alleys for feces are built not far from the chambers. Large winter food reserves have not been revealed. In colonies, separate holes are linked to each other and with temporary protective refuges—blind alleys 30–50 cm long—by means of surface paths. The Arctic ground squirrel lives in extremely cold environments, and gets through the harsh winters by incorporating hibernation into its life cycle. Ground squirrels hibernate seven months out of the year, retiring to their hibernation chambers with permanent snow covering in early September and waking in mid to late April, often into snow. In these conditions, heat is generated and lost rapidly. It is not uncommon for

126

female juveniles to lose between 30% and 40% of their body weight during hibernation. Ground squirrels hibernate upright, with their heads tucked down and tails thrown over the head. The squirrel then allows its body temperature to fall close to of its hibernaculum for weeks at a time. During hibernation, its body temperature drops to almost 0°C, and the back part of its body can cool down to −20°C. It is the only known mammal capable of lowering its body temperature to below freezing. Periodically it briefly rouses and warms itself up to near its normal body temperature of 36.4°C before going back into hibernation. The Arctic ground squirrel is primarily herbivorous, favoring such foods as ground parts of plants, roots, rhizomes, sedge and grass seeds, small bushes, mushrooms, and berries. However, with a lack of vegetation forage, this squirrel eats insects and small rodents, including its own kind. It generally feeds around high noon and often stuffs its cheek pouches full of leaves or seeds to take back to its den for later consumption. Foraging is interrupted by frequent stops to sit up and check for danger. Generally, the ground squirrel uses its teeth to cut down vegetation, and then holds the food between its paws to eat so that it may keep its head up to watch for predators. Females give birth to one litter in late May or early June, with 5–14 young squirrels (on average, 5–7). Blind, naked, and weighing less than one ounce, the young rapidly increase in body weight, and at 20 days their eyes open. By 30 days, their fur resembles adults and they begin to explore the world above ground. They achieve the size of adult squirrels by the fall and take part in reproduction the following year. Despite the fact that there is continuous daylight during the summer months, this squirrel is diurnal. Because there is continuous light and very little vegetative cover available in their habitat, ground squirrels move with their bodies pressed close to the ground to make themselves less obvious to predators. This type of movement has been termed “tundra glide.” Social interactions include both physical and vocal communication. Physical encounters are characterized by either nose-to-nose contact or pressing together of body parts. This contact is a test of receptivity and can often lead to fights. The second type of interaction, vocal communication, has led humans to give this squirrel the nickname “tsik-tsik.” These “tsik” sounding calls generally alert others in the territory to the presence of nearby predators. There are even different kinds of calls for different kinds of predators. Low gutter chatters are used to indicate land-borne predators whereas short “band whistle” chatters indicate avian predators. The Arctic ground squirrel is hunted for its fur: in northern Alaska, women make parkas (and hence they

ARCTIC HARE are sometimes known as parka squirrels). Fur harvesting can reach one million squirrels annually. In some regions, ground squirrels carry and keep human infectious diseases. While no longer hunted for food, they are an important link in the food chains for predators important in the fur trade (ermine, polar fox, fox, and others). VLADIMIR VASILIEV Further Reading Hubbs, Anne & Rudy Boonstra, “Effects of food and predators on the home-range of Arctic ground squirrels.” Canadian Journal of Zoology, 76 (1998): 592–596 Tavrovsky, V.A. et al. (editors), Mlekopitaiuschchie Iakutti, Mammals of Yakutia, Moscow: Nauka, 1971 (in Russian) Woods Jr., S.E., The Squirrels of Canada, Ottawa, Canada: National Museums of Canada, 1980

ARCTIC HARE In spite of a wide distribution throughout northern Canada and Greenland, from the northernmost points of land south to Newfoundland, the Arctic hare (Lepus arcticus) remains one of the least known of the hare family. Though of limited economic importance, the Arctic hare is hunted by native hunters throughout most of its range. Inuktitut names include okalerk, okalik, and okalishugyuk. Related hares are the Blue or Mountain hare (Lepus timidus) of Eurasia and the Alaska hare (Lepus otis) or ukallisugruk of northern Alaska. Adult hares weigh on average 4–5 kg with a total length of over 70 cm. The young are born in June with mottled gray-brown fur providing excellent camouflage. Young of the year reach near-adult size and coloration by September but retain a brown topknot. Male and female hares are only distinguishable in the breeding season through behavior and during lactation. Summer color, shedding, and molt patterns change with latitude. From Baffin Island south, hares turn blue-gray in summer, while in the north they remain white all year. Hares feed primarily on Arctic willow and flowering plants such as purple saxifrage. Feeding can be destructive, as hares dig up roots and break off sizable willow twigs. In winter, hares dig craters in snow, but tend to feed in areas where snow is shallow or plants are exposed by wind. Reingestion of soft fecal pellets, common to all hares, occurs during rest periods at intervals of about 30 min. Hard round pellets are passed at regular intervals while moving and feeding, and less often while resting. The activities of Arctic hares in a group are synchronized, in that they feed and rest at about the same

Arctic hare (Lepus arcticus), Northwest Territories, Canada. Copyright Paul Nicklen/National Geographic Image Collection

time. In the Canadian High Arctic, hares feed actively in the early to mid-morning, rest for 2–3 h in the late morning and early afternoon, and feed again in the mid-afternoon. The morning rest period is highly synchronized, with most hares in an area resting at the same time. Another less coordinated rest period occurs in the evening before midnight. Behavioral modifications used by Arctic hares to maintain their normal body temperature in winter include posture, orientation, the use of natural shelter, and the digging of snow dens. Hares adopt a nearspherical shape while resting, with only the thick pads of the hind feet touching the snow. Hares typically rest together in closely spaced large winter groups, but do not huddle. Only young litter mates in summer are known to huddle together. Hares in groups do not usually seek shelter, but solitary hares groom, rest, and reingest in the shelter of rocks or snow drifts. When wind speeds increase, resting hares shift from facing the sun to orient their backs to the wind. As daily mean temperatures increase in the Arctic spring, the resting

127

ARCTIC HAZE posture changes from the tightly curled sphere to a more relaxed sprawl. Hares dig forms in loose soil in summer and also dig snow dens up to 188 cm in length in snowdrifts. Snow dens are not used for feeding, and their value as safety from predators is likely to be secondary to their value as shelter. From late winter through late summer, Arctic hares may occur in groups of over 100 individuals. The composition of late winter groups varies, but most contain males and females. In late summer, groups also contain young of the year. There is no evidence of territory formation in Arctic hares, although dominant males displace others from food sources and shelter. Where home ranges of hares have been studied, they overlap considerably. Movements of hares either in groups or alone are variable. Hares may cover several kilometers while feeding over several hours. During the breeding season, males also make deliberate movements of up to 5 km without feeding. The first visual sign of the onset of breeding is the display of the penis by male hares. In the northern islands, this behavior is commonly seen in late April and early May after the onset of 24 h of daylight. Continual olfactory investigation of females often leads to agonistic encounters in the form of boxing with forepaws. Copulation occurs following persistent sexual chasing and fighting by several males within a group, or after a single male approaches a female away from a group. There is no long-term pair formation. Young Arctic hares are born in June in the open with no shelter, and are visited by the mother for nursing on a precise 18 or 19 h cycle. As young hares grow, they leave the nursing site for short periods, but then group together at the nursing site and huddle for about 1 h before the mother arrives for the next feeding. The time spent huddled together decreases as they grow. Young hares are weaned abruptly in late August, but continue to rest and feed together at least into September. Other than avian predators, such as gyrfalcons and snowy owls, hares are also hunted by wolves and even Arctic foxes will attempt to capture young hares or injured adults. In both Greenland and on Ellesmere Island, archaeological sites have been found where stones and boulders have been placed to form drives for hares. Traditional use of hares, other than as food, includes the use of skins for clothing and rope; the hind feet are used as brushes. With an increase in Arctic tourism, and continued traditional hunting by northerners, the importance of Arctic hares, a highly visible species, is growing. Arctic hares are regularly seen and are a popular feature in Ellesmere Island’s Quttinirpaaq National Park. DAVID R. GRAY

128

See also Snowshoe Hare Further Reading Aniskowicz, B. Theresa, Heather Hamilton, David R. Gray & Connie Downes, “Nursing behaviour of arctic hares (Lepus arcticus).”In Canada’s Missing Dimension: Science and History in the Canadian Arctic Islands, edited by C. Richard Harington, Ottawa: Canadian Museum of Nature, 1990 Gray, David R., “Behavioural adaptations to arctic winter; shelter-seeking in the arctic hare (Lepus arcticus).” Arctic, 46 (1993): 340–453 Gray, David R. & Heather Hamilton, “Hare revelations: the bizarre behaviour of the arctic hare.” Nature Canada, 11 (1982): 48–54 Parker, Gerald R., “Morphology, reproduction, diet, and behaviour of the arctic hare (Lepus arcticus monstrabilis) on Axel Heiberg Island, Northwest Territories.” Canadian FieldNaturalist, 91 (1977): 8–18

ARCTIC HAZE Arctic haze is a seasonal atmospheric phenomenon affecting the Arctic, peaking in spring, that originates from pollution sources outside the Arctic. When the sun returns after the long polar night, layers of brownish haze are visible above the colorful horizon. Similar to the well-known air pollution phenomena in areas with process industries and large towns (smog), and the murky dust clouds (brown clouds) seen over large regions of tropical Asia, Arctic haze reduces visibility over polar regions to less than 30 km and contributes to contamination of the Arctic environment. The haze layers consist of small airborne particles and droplets called aerosols. The aerosols are produced both by natural processes like volcanic eruptions and dust storms, and by anthropogenic activities such as the burning of fossil fuels and biomass. Although natural sources of aerosols also contribute to aerosol loading of the atmosphere, Arctic haze is primarily a phenomenon involving the long-range transport of anthropogenic pollutants, particularly sulfate particles. Aerosol particles are transported by winds and atmospheric currents from industrialized areas mainly in Europe and Eurasia to the Arctic. As the winds pass over the chimney plumes of power plants and chemical industries, sulfate aerosols, soot, and other particulate compounds are transported to the Arctic by the large-scale atmospheric circulation. In the Arctic, thousands of kilometers from their source, they have significant effects on climate forcing and represent a source of contamination in Arctic ecosystems and food chains. During winter and spring, the northward transported particles build up within the cold, dry, and stable air mass over the Arctic basin since winter atmospheric

ARCTIC HAZE circulation (semipermanent high pressure) over the Arctic and the lack of solar radiation during the long polar night inhibit removal processes. This is because deposition or washing out of aerosol contamination by precipitation, and the photochemical processes that produce hydroxyl radicals (OH) (that modify the chemical and physical properties of the aerosols) are mainly driven by solar radiation. Aerosol loading of the atmosphere has a significant effect on the regional and global climate by modifying the natural radiation balance of the Earth and atmosphere. The forcing effect works through two different mechanisms. Due to the scattering and absorption properties of the haze particles, they directly influence the amount of solar shortwave radiation that reaches the Earth’s surface and the amount of thermal infrared radiation that is radiated back out through the atmosphere. In addition, the particles may modify the microphysical properties and the amount of clouds, thus indirectly influencing the radiation transfer through the troposphere. However, there are several factors that make estimation of the net climate effect of the aerosols difficult. The radiative effects depend on the chemical composition, size, shape, and spatial distribution, including vertical distribution, of the aerosol layers. The highest concentration of the aerosol layers is found in the lowest few kilometers of the troposphere, but aerosol particles may influence the whole vertical column of the troposphere. The aerosol layers are washed effectively out of the atmosphere by precipitation. All these factors cause a large and inhomogeneous temporal and spatial variation in the tropospheric distribution of aerosols, and the radiative effects are therefore regional and patchy. Both natural and anthropogenic sources contribute to the atmospheric content of aerosols. Soil dust is the major natural contributor to atmospheric aerosol loading in the tropics and subtropical regions. However, since the effectiveness of this aerosol source depends on the frequency of strong surface winds as well as the level of human disturbance of the soil, this source of atmospheric aerosols is certainly also modified by anthropogenic activities. This is also true for marine areas such as the Arctic, where sea salt aerosols can be the main contributor to cloud formation and properties as well as the direct scattering of light. This process also depends on the frequency of strong surface winds and is affected indirectly by the anthropogenic forcing of climate through the abundance of strong winds and the fraction of exposed water surfaces, which is believed to increase as the Arctic sea-ice diminishes. Volcanoes also emit a large amount of dust particles and sulfur dioxide (SO2) into the atmosphere. The effect is transient (lasting a few years) and has a significant effect on the upper atmosphere and lower

stratosphere. An important biogenic aerosol source is that formed by plant debris, humic matter, and microbial particles such as algae and pollen, viruses, and bacteria. These humic aerosols contribute to the absorption of ultraviolet radiation in the atmosphere. It is becoming increasingly evident that Arctic food chains are contaminated with a number of new substances not previously detected in the Arctic. These are transported to the Arctic by atmospheric and ocean currents. Through precipitation, these substances contribute to the toxification and acidification of the pristine Arctic environment. The burning of biomass and fossil fuel also produces a large amount of so-called carbonaceous compounds, which can be divided into organic and black carbon aerosols. Such aerosols are also formed by atmospheric oxidation of biogenic and anthropogenic volatile organic compounds. Carbonaceous particles from traffic, burning of fossil fuels, and process industries are one of the most important anthropogenic sources of aerosols. These particles, together with sulfate aerosols (formed by the chemical transformation of SO2), perfluorocarbons, and pesticides, are a major threat to the acidification and contamination of the Arctic environment. The sulfate aerosols are formed mainly by the photochemical transformation of SO2 from anthropogenic emissions and volcanoes as well as dimethyl sulfide (DMS), a trace sulfur-containing gas produced by marine plankton. Ice cores from Arctic ice sheets have shown a marked increase in Arctic air pollution since the 1950s. Other data show, for example, that the summertime visibility in the eastern United States was worst in the 1970s, which coincided with the period of maximum SO2 emission. Since the beginning of the 1990s, the trend has decreased due to reduced SO2 emission in Europe as well as the economic recession and industrial crisis in Russia, however, the growing industries and weaker emission controls, especially in Asia, may lead to further SO2 emission increases. On the other hand, ice cores from the Antarctic show no trend in SO2 emissions since the primary sources in the Southern Hemisphere are of natural origin. Large uncertainties still exist in the estimation of the regional and global net effects of the aerosols. An important challenge is still to determine the full range of compounds, the chemical properties of the haze particles, and especially how they are transformed, filtered out, and transported into the environment and food chains. The general state of knowledge indicates that most aerosol compounds (sulfate, biomass-burning aerosols, and fossil fuel organic carbon) induce a cooling effect on the climate system due to increased scattering of sunlight, except for black carbon (soot) particles, which constitute a small warming potential due to energy absorption. Other aerosols like mineral

129

ARCTIC LEADERS’ SUMMIT and atmospheric dust particles are poorly described and add to the overall uncertainty in the total aerosol climate signal. In the Arctic, surface snow and ice also influence the radiation transfer through the atmosphere due to its high reflective properties (albedo). Some experiments indicate that the aerosol forcing signal is negative and even larger in the Arctic spring, that is, representing a significant cooling effect. Changes in the perennial ice cover of the Arctic Ocean will also affect the source of natural sulfate aerosols by DMS production in marine phytoplankton since the ice cover acts as a lid on the source. The Arctic conditions with the high surface albedo and low sun are complicated, and the uncertainties are too high yet to determine long-term trends in Arctic haze as well as the actual impact of the Arctic aerosols on the global and regional climate system. JON BØRRE ØRBÆK See also Albedo; Local and Transboundary Pollution Further Reading AMAP Assessment Report: Arctic Pollution Issues, Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP), Oslo, Norway, 1998 Ghan, Steven J., Richard C. Easter, Elaine G. Chapman, Hayder Abdul-Razzak, Yang Zhang, L. Ruby Leung, Niels S. Laulainen, Rick D. Saylor & Rahul A. Zaveri, “A physically based estimate of radiative forcing by anthropogenic sulfate aerosol.” Journal of Geophysical Research, 106(D6) (2001): 5297–5293 Haywood, James & Olivier Boucher, “Estimates of the direct and indirect radiative forcing due to tropospheric aerosols: a review.” Reviews of Geophysics, 38(4) (2000): 513–543 Houghton, J.T. et al. (editors), Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis, Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 2001 Jacobsen, M.C., H.C. Hansson, K.J. Noone & R.J. Charlson,“Organic atmospheric aerosols: review and state of science.” Reviews of Geophysics, 38(2) (2000): 267–294 Rogers, David C., Paul J. DeMott & Sonia M. Kreidenweis, “Airborne measurements of tropospheric ice-nucleating aerosol particles in the Arctic spring.” Journal of Geophysical Research, 106(D14) (2001): 15053–15063

ARCTIC LEADERS’ SUMMIT Arctic Leaders’ Summit III was the last of three top meetings between the Arctic indigenous leaders, and was hosted by the Russian Association of Indigenous Peoples of the North (RAIPON) in the capital of the Russian Federation, Moscow, on September 14–16, 1999. The process of cooperation between the Arctic indigenous peoples was formalized at the First Arctic Leaders’ Summit, which took place on June 17–20, 1991 in Hørsholm north of Copenhagen in Denmark.

130

This first meeting was hosted by the pan-Inuit organization Inuit Circumpolar Conference (ICC). The Second Arctic Leaders’ Summit held in Tromsø on January 25–27, 1995 continued this process. The third large indigenous organization in the Arctic, the Saami Council, hosted the second meeting. Prior to the first meeting, Aqqaluk Lynge, then vice-president of the ICC-Greenland, wrote in the ICC magazine Inuit Tusaatat, “With the fall of the Iron Curtain, the end of the Cold War and the many confidence-building-measures taken between the East and the West, we—the inhabitants of the Arctic—necessarily must talk about what we can offer each other to solve our common problems, and what we can offer the rest of the world.” Since 1991, these three Arctic indigenous organizations have participated in the international arena on many occasions, and today they more or less meet on a regular basis in fora such as the meetings within the Arctic Environment Protection Strategy (AEPS), the Arctic Council framework, and the UN Working Group on Indigenous Peoples (WGIP), as well as in the UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, established in 2002. Until the establishment of the Permanent Forum, the Arctic Leaders’ Summit process was different from the other fora because the indigenous peoples solely set the agenda themselves. What is important to the nation states is not necessarily of equal importance to the indigenous peoples’ organizations and vice versa. Large differences exist among the Arctic regions and the Arctic indigenous organizations. These differences may be due to cultural, historical, or political reasons. It does not really matter, since the Arctic Leaders’ Summit was not a historical society, but a political forum where participants could discuss present and future matters of common concern. One of the foremost shared concerns has been the Arctic environment. It is of grave necessity to solve the environmental problems and to prevent future harm to the Arctic. However, the Arctic is not a preserve where people cannot develop and natural resources cannot be utilized. Living in the Arctic necessarily implies living in and off nature. On the other hand, this does not mean that alternatives cannot be identified. The future of the Arctic indigenous peoples is closely connected to new economic and business initiatives, not only locally but also regionally. Another common concern in the Arctic is the health of indigenous peoples. The lives of indigenous peoples are closely linked to local resources. This forms the basis of indigenous societies, cultures, economies, and spiritual world. But today it is a well-known fact that the severe health problems are closely linked to the state of the environment. Because the diet of

ARCTIC MID-OCEAN RIDGE indigenous peoples is mainly based on local food, they are severely threatened by environmental contaminants. Many of these contaminants have their origin in the South, are carried to the Arctic, and accumulate in those animals that end their lives as food of the indigenous peoples. At the First Arctic Leaders’ Summit, collective problems such as pollution and exploitation of living and nonliving resources were discussed. Working together requires a common language. Approximately 40 languages are spoken in the Arctic, notwithstanding multiple dialects. English was chosen as the official conference language. English-Russian and Russian-English interpretation was provided in Hørsholm. But according to the interpreters, there was a profound need for an English-Russian dictionary dealing with terminology specially related to the Arctic. As one of the outcomes of the First Arctic Leaders’ Summit, an English-Russian conference dictionary was written. Helvi Nuorgam-Poutasuo, then president of the Saami Council, spoke at the second Arctic Leaders’ Summit about the new situation of the world, stressing that the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 had created new and difficult challenges for indigenous peoples in Russia. Moreover, the creation of a European Union (EU) (which Finland and Sweden joined in 1995 and Norway voted to decline joining in 1994) resulted in Sápmi land’s division by a new border between members of the EU and nonmembers. NuorgamPoutasuo further stressed that cooperation among the ICC, the Saami Council, and the Association of the Indigenous Peoples of the Russian North, Siberia, and Far East has led to positive developments. At the third Arctic Leaders’ Summit, a fourth indigenous organization—the Aleut International Association—participated. The third summit’s theme was The Health of Arctic Indigenous Peoples, with special focus on the North, Siberia, and the Far East of the Russian Federation. This focus was justified by the simple fact that the health and welfare situation in these regions continues to be more endangered than in other places within the Arctic region. Since 1970, mortality rates and the incidence of various diseases as well as traumas have increased several hundred percent. In Arctic Russia, the mortality rate in 1989 for indigenous peoples was 10.4 per thousand, compared to 6.6 per thousand for nonindigenous peoples. At the end of 980, the life expectancy was 54 years for indigenous men and 65 years for indigenous women (among nonindigenous men and women, those numbers were approximately 64 and 75, respectively). In particular, tuberculosis, parasites, cardiovascular and respiratory diseases are common causes of death in Arctic Russia, and many of

these fatal health problems are related to alcohol abuse. Also, infant mortality rates are extremely high among indigenous peoples. The third Arctic Leaders’ Summit was the last of its kind due to limited financial and human resources. MADS FÆGTEBORG See also Aleut International Association; Inuit Circumpolar Conference (ICC); Lynge, Aqqaluk; Russian Association of Indigenous Peoples of the North (RAIPON); Saami Council Further Reading Fægteborg, Mads, Towards an International Indigenous Arctic Policy (Arctic Leaders’ Summit) (with an English-Russian Conference Dictionary), Copenhagen: Arctic Information, 1993 Fægteborg, Mads & Anna Prakhova, Arctic Leaders’ Summit II (with an English-Russian Arctic Dictionary), Copenhagen: Arctic Information, 1996

ARCTIC MID-OCEAN RIDGE Within the deep basin of the Arctic Ocean, several submarine ridges and plateaus rise above the ocean floor (see the bathymetric map in Arctic Ocean). The largest of these, the Gakkel Ridge, is related to the global system of mid-ocean ridges, formed from the rifting and growth of oceanic crust at a plate tectonic boundary. Exploration of the Arctic Ocean in the 1950s and 1960s by the Russian drifting ice stations and air expeditions led to the discovery of the Lomonosov Ridge in 1951, soon followed by the discovery of two more transoceanic ridges, Gakkel Ridge and the AlphaMendeleev Ridge. While the Lomosonov and Alpha ridges are poorly understood but appear to be of continental origin, the Gakkel Ridge is a true mid-oceanic ridge that forms the most northerly segment of a spreading ridge system that runs from Iceland, Jan Mayen, Mohns Ridge, and Knipovich Ridge, to the Gakkel Ridge. The Gakkel mid-ocean ridge lies about 5 km beneath the Arctic ice cap and open sea, and extends for a length of 1800 km from the Laptev Sea continental shelf to northeast Greenland. The ridge separates the Nansen and Amundsen basins, abyssal plains located at depths of 4000 and 4300 m, respectively. Lomosonov Ridge lies to the east, followed by the Makarov Basin, Alpha-Mendeleev Ridge, then the Canadian Basin, and Chukchi Plateau. The morphology of the Gakkel Ridge is primarily determined by magmatic and tectonic processes at a spreading mid-ocean ridge. However, Gakkel Ridge is the slowest-spreading ridge in the world—less than 1

131

ARCTIC OCEAN cm per year, compared to about 6 cm per year for intermediate spreading ridges elsewhere, and the oceanic crust is anomalously thin, less than 3.3 km compared to the more usual 7 km. Along the axis there is a typical deep rift valley, which is up to 4500 m deep, while the rift walls (although asymmetric) have relief up to 2000 m. The rift floor is uneven with evidence of isolated volcanoes up to 2 km in diameter. Dredging has recovered recent basalt lavas in the east and west rift valley and mantle peridotites (but no basalt) in the central 300 km zone. The rift valley is not offset by transform faults, as the spreading rate is perpendicular to the axis. On the top parts of the Gakkel Ridge, sedimentary cover deepens from a thin covering at the axial crest (the youngest) to 300–400 m depth away from the axis. The rift valley has numerous earthquake epicenters at depths of 0–6 km, with the magnitude of earthquakes approximately M=4.5–6. Determining the plate boundaries and transition to the continental margin on the outskirts of the ridge is difficult due to abutment of the end of the Gakkel Ridge with the Laptev Sea continental shelf and the indefinite position of the ridge between Greenland and the Yermak Plateau. Bathymetric contours suggest that, at least along 350 km, the termination of the Gakkel Ridge is situated on the continental margins of Eurasia. Increased sedimentation in the region of this margin and equal distribution of sedimentary cover on the slope has resulted in a smooth, concave surface. In this case, it is impossible to establish the boundaries of the continental shelf. At the other end of the Gakkel Ridge between Spitsbergen and Greenland, where its rift valley reaches a depth of 4300 m, the rift axis shifts 100 km through a series of transform faults over a 50 km segment of ridge to the rift valley of the Knipovich Ridge. Mohns Ridge meets Knipovich Ridge at a highly oblique angle northeast of the Jan Mayen Fracture Zone. Mohns Ridge, also a slow-spreading ridge, has typical ridge features such as a central rift valley 1–2 km lower than the surrounding axial ridge, is seismically active, and has a thin sediment cover that thickens away from the axis. However, it is anomalous, showing spreading centers oblique to the trend of the axis, in en echelon segments of the ridge that might be occupied by transform faults on other ridges. The crustal thickness beneath the ridge is also very low (on average 4 km) compared to typical oceanic crust. VALERY MIT’KO See also Alpha Ridge; Lomonosov Ridge Further Reading Coakley, B.J. & J.R. Cochran, “Gravity evidence of very thin crust at the Gakkel Ridge (Arctic Ocean).” Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 162(1/4) (1998): 81

132

Edwards, M.H. et al., “Evidence of recent volcanic activity on the ultra-slow spreading Gakkel Ridge.” Nature, 409 (2001): 808–812 Gorbatskiy, G.V., Physicogeographical Zoning of Arctic. Volume 3, Arctic Basin, Leningrad: Leningrad University Publishing House, 1973 Gramberg, I.S. (editor), Orographic map of Arctic basin. 1:5000000, Helsinki: Karttaneskus, 1995 Jokat, W., O. Ritzmann, M.C. Schmidt-Aursch, S. Drachev & S. Gauger, “Geophysical evidence for reduced melt production on the Arctic ultraslow Gakkel mid-ocean ridge.” Nature, 423 (2003): 962–967 Klingelhöfer, F., L. Géli, L. Matias, N. Steinsland & J. Mohr, “Crustal structure of a super-slow spreading centre: a seismic refraction study of Mohns Ridge, 72° N.” Geophysical Journal International, 141(2) (2000): 509–526 Michael, P.J., C.H. Langmuir, H.J.B. Dick, J.E. Snow, S.L. Goldstein, D.W. Graham, K. Lehnert, G. Kurras, W. Jokat, R. Mühe & H.N. Edmonds, “Magmatic and amagmatic seafloor generation at the ultraslow-spreading Gakkel Ridge, Arctic Ocean.” Nature, 423 (2003): 956–961 Perry, R.K., H.S. Fleming, J.R. Weber, Y. Kristofferson, J.K. Hall, A. Grantz & G.L. Johnson, Bathymetry of the Arctic Ocean; map 1:4,704,075, Washington: Naval Research Laboratory, 1985 Sweeney, J.K, J.R. Weber, & S.M. Blasko, “Continental ridges in the Arctic ocean: Lorex constraints.” Tectonophysics, 89 (1982): 217–238 Weber, J.R., Exploring the Arctic Sea Floor in Selected Lorex Contributions, Ottawa, 1985

ARCTIC OCEAN The Arctic Ocean is unique among oceans in its isolation. All other oceans form part of a single great system centered on the Southern Ocean, while the Arctic, like the Mediterranean Sea, is an almost closed basin with only one deep passage permitting easy exchange of water and heat with its surroundings, the so-called Fram Strait between Svalbard and Greenland. A very narrow passage of lesser depth, the Nares Strait between Greenland and Ellesmere Island, forms a link with Baffin Bay, while all other connections with the Atlantic and Pacific, through the Barents Sea, the Canadian Arctic Archipelago, and Bering Strait, are very shallow.

Bathymetry The Arctic is composed of two deep basins, the Eurasian Basin and the Canadian Basin, each exceeding 4300 m in depth, and separated by a narrow straight ridge called the Lomonosov Ridge, which crosses the Arctic from Siberia to Greenland (see Lomonosov Ridge; Canadian Basin; Amundsen Basin; Nansen Basin). Depths along the ridge crest are typically 1000 m; a shallow peak at 610 m was discovered in 1994. The Lomonosov Ridge is not a spreading center where new crust is being created; instead it is thought to be a narrow strip of former continental crust that split off the edge of Siberia when

ARCTIC OCEAN the Eurasian Basin opened some 100 million years ago. The true spreading center, the Gakkel Ridge or Arctic Mid-Ocean Ridge, lies along the axis of the Eurasian Basin and is much deeper than the Lomonosov Ridge, dividing the Eurasian Basin into the Nansen Basin to its south and the deeper Amundsen Basin to its north (see Arctic Mid-Ocean Ridge). In the Canadian Basin, there is a complex bottom topography, with the Alpha Ridge (a convoluted

plateau region) possibly representing an ancient spreading center from a much earlier period of geological history (see Alpha Ridge). An important feature of the Arctic Ocean is its wide continental shelves. About one-third of the ocean area is taken up by shelf seas, of typical depth 100 m or less, and with the widest fringing the north of Russia. The East Siberian Shelf is the widest continental shelf in the world, with water less than 50 m deep extending

Figure 1: Bathymetry of the Arctic Ocean. Adapted from the International Bathymetric Chart of the Arctic Ocean (IBCAO), Jakobsson, M., N.Z. Cherkis, J. Woodward, R. Macnab & B. Coakley, “New grid of Arctic bathymetry aids scientists and mapmakers.” EOS, Transactions, American Geophysical Union, 81(9): 89, 93, 96

133

ARCTIC OCEAN

Figure 2: Typical Arctic Ocean salinity and temperature profiles. After Aagaard and Carmack, 1989

out 600 km from shore. Groups of islands divide the Russian shelves into separate seas—the Chukchi, East Siberian, Laptev, Kara, and Barents, moving from east to west (each of these have their own Encyclopedia entry). The result is that the Arctic Ocean as a whole has the least mean depth (1800 m) of any ocean. The outer edges of the shelves are marked by deep canyons or troughs, which are important in providing routes for newly produced dense water in winter to run off the shelves into the deep basin. Figure 1 shows some important canyons—St Anna and Voronin Troughs in the Kara Sea, Barrow Canyon off Alaska, and Herald Canyon in the Chukchi Sea.

Water Structure The water mass structure of the Arctic Ocean (Figure 2) is a three-layer system. The uppermost layer is called polar surface water. It is up to 200 m thick, is at or near the freezing point, and has a very low surface salinity of 27–34 psu, compared to 35 psu as an average for the world ocean. The low salinity is caused by the very large influx of fresh water from huge river systems such as the Ob’, Lena, Yenisey, and Mackenzie which drain vast areas of Asia and North America. Figure 3 shows the annual average freshwa-

134

ter fluxes from these rivers, and also shows the watersheds of rivers draining into the Arctic and into Baffin Bay (dashed line); the Arctic drainage basin includes about half of the Asian continent. Figure 4 shows how surface salinity varies over the Arctic, with the lowest values found near the mouths of the great rivers. The river discharge mixes with sea water over the shallow continental shelves and is then able to spread over the central Arctic Ocean as a surface layer. Only in early winter does this situation change, when the formation of new sea ice over the shelves causes the water there to increase in density due to salt rejection; it can then run down into some deeper level of the Arctic Ocean via the canyons, a process known as shelf-slope convection. Figure 2 shows that the depth at which the temperature rapidly increases, the thermocline, does not coincide with the depth at which the salinity rapidly increases, the halocline. Part of the Arctic Ocean, mainly the Beaufort Sea region, is called the cold halocline zone, since the deeper part of the surface water layer, at 150–200 m, remains cold but already has a salinity that is rising toward its deep water value (e.g., profile 2; see Cold Halocline). In the Eurasian Basin and Greenland Sea, the temperature and salinity rise nearly together (e.g., profile 5). The reason is that in the Beaufort Sea the surface water characteristics are affected by an inflow from Bering Strait of cold, highsalinity water, which enters the Arctic Basin at a depth of 150–200 m as it comes off the Chukchi and Alaskan shelves. The influence of this water extends almost to the Lomonosov Ridge. In recent years there is evidence that the cold halocline has retreated far back into the Beaufort Sea (Steele and Boyd, 1998), indicating either a diminution of the range of influence of Bering Sea water as opposed to water of Atlantic origin, or a reduction in the influence of Siberian river water due to a change in its surface circulation pattern (Martinson and Steele, 2001). Since the cold halocline acts as a barrier to upward heat transport, its retreat should result in higher ocean heat fluxes and thus an increased melt rate of sea ice in the Arctic—and there is certainly evidence that the ice has become substantially thinner in recent years (Rothrock et al., 1999; Wadhams and Davis, 2000). Below the polar surface water lies the Atlantic water layer, which is remarkably warm (1–3°C) and saline (about 35 psu; see Atlantic Layer). Part of the water enters the Arctic through Fram Strait (Figures 5 and 7), where the warm North Atlantic Current (a continuation of the Gulf Stream) runs up the west side of Spitsbergen as the West Spitsbergen Current and then sinks as it encounters the less dense polar surface water and spreads around the Arctic at mid-depths. This current follows the shelf break and skirts the

ARCTIC OCEAN

Figure 3: Annual average freshwater fluxes into the Arctic Basin from major rivers. The Arctic Ocean drainage basin is outlined in black and the Baffin Bay drainage basin in a dashed line. After Macdonald, 2000

western edge of the Barents Sea as it moves north. The rest of the water is from the same source, but enters the Arctic Ocean further to the east via the St Anna and Voronin troughs, having crossed the Barents Sea. From about 800 m to the bottom, the water temperature drops below 0°C again and continues to slowly decrease with increasing depth. This lower water mass is called Arctic Ocean Deep Water. It is again of Atlantic origin, but suffers much modification in its very sluggish circulation around the basin (Rudels, 1995). Because of the sill depth of the Lomonosov Ridge, the deep water of the Eurasian Basin is slightly

different in characteristics from that of the Canada Basin, and also from the deep water of the Greenland Sea, although it is capable of mixing with the latter via Fram Strait.

Currents in the Arctic Ocean The motions of ice and surface water in an ice-covered ocean are similar when averaged over long periods. The surface current system in the Arctic shown in Figure 5 therefore applies both to ice and water. It is largely wind-driven and consists of an anticyclonic (clockwise) gyre in the Canadian Basin, the Beaufort

135

ARCTIC OCEAN

Figure 4: Variation of surface salinity (psu) over the Arctic Ocean.

Gyre, and a motion of translation, the Transpolar Drift Stream, in the Eurasian Basin (see Beaufort Gyre; Transpolar Drift). Ice in the Beaufort Gyre requires 7–10 years for a complete circuit. The Transpolar Drift Stream collects ice and water from the Eurasian shelves and transports it across the Pole and down toward Fram Strait, requiring about three years for this drift. The Drift Stream is renamed the East Greenland Current after it passes through Fram Strait and enters the Greenland Sea. This is the route for most of the ice that leaves the Arctic Basin, and so it is through Fram Strait that most water and heat exchange occur between the Arctic Ocean and the rest of the world ocean. Much of the heat exchange occurs in the form of latent heat transported northward as the ice moves southward. The whaling captain and Arctic scientist William Scoresby first postulated the existence of this transpolar current because of his observations of great masses of old ice passing into the Greenland Sea from the Arctic Basin. However, it was Fridtjof Nansen who put the idea to the test by freezing his specially constructed ship Fram into the ice off the New Siberian Islands in 1893, hoping to drift across the Pole. The ship missed the Pole, but in 1896 emerged in what is now known as Fram Strait. Nansen was inspired to carry out this drift by the discovery off south Greenland of wreckage from the exploration ship Jeanette, which had been crushed in the ice off Wrangel Island north of Siberia. The wind system that drives this flow arises from the presence of the polar high over the center of the Beaufort Sea, with a ridge extending over Greenland. Figure 6b shows the long-term average pressure field

136

that prevailed over the Arctic Ocean from the 1960s to the 1980s, generated by averaging the air pressures measured by the drifting satellite-tracked buoys that have been deployed by the Arctic Ocean Buoy Program (now known as the International Arctic Buoy Programme). The map shows a high-pressure center over the Beaufort Sea, at about 80° N 140° W, with a ridge of high pressure extending over the high, intensely cold ice sheet of northern Greenland. A rule of thumb for ice drift in unconstrained conditions, developed independently by Nansen and Zubov and thus known as the Nansen Rule or the Zubov Law, is that ice moves parallel to the isobars of a surface pressure field. Thus, the pressure distribution of Figure 6b should give rise to a clockwise circulation of ice in the Beaufort Sea, and a current on the Eurasian side of the Arctic that moves ice from the seas north of Russia across the North Pole and down toward the entrance to the Greenland Sea. This is just what was observed during this era. An extra, but minor, contribution to this circulation comes from the effect of the Earth’s rotation on the surface water of the Arctic Basin. The water forms a low-density surface lens that tries to slump outward (i.e., southward) under centrifugal force, but is turned to the right by Coriolis force to give a clockwise rotation, which is then split by the presence of Greenland into a clockwise gyre and a motion of translation, enhancing the pattern of Figure 5 (Wadhams et al., 1979). During the 1990s, this pattern of air pressure changed, and now resembles that of Figure 6a (with Figure 6c showing the difference field between the two). This is having profound effects on Arctic surface circulation, since the Beaufort Gyre is reduced in scope and squashed against the coast of northeast Siberia, while water from Siberian rivers now makes a longer loop around the Arctic (shown especially by Figure 6c) before emerging from Fram Strait. This may account for the lower surface salinity in the Eurasian Basin, one cause of the destruction of the cold halocline in this region. The switch from one pattern of atmospheric circulation to another appears to be a basic property of the Arctic atmosphere, and has been called the Arctic Oscillation (Thompson and Wallace, 1998), with Figure 6a and b being termed the “cyclonic” and “anticyclonic” patterns (Proshutinsky and Johnson, 1997). This new idea of a switch between two modes ascribes our “traditional” view of the Arctic circulation (Figure 5) to the fact that the circulation happened to remain mainly in the anticyclonic pattern during the critical years of the 1950s–1980s when basic research on Arctic currents was first being done thoroughly. Other current systems cannot carry much water to or from the basin because they occur in shallow water.

ARCTIC OCEAN

Figure 5: Long-term average pattern of ice and surface water circulation of the Arctic in its “anticyclonic” mode.

There is a net influx of about 1 Sv through Bering Strait, and in the Canadian Archipelago a net eastward flux of water from the Beaufort Sea toward Baffin Bay. This is mainly driven by the pressure head between the Pacific Ocean (which stands higher) and the Atlantic. In Baffin Bay itself, a northward current, the West Greenland Current, carries cold water and

icebergs up the western side of Greenland, translating into the southward flowing Baffin Island Current down the east coast of Baffin Island, with an addition of polar water out of the Arctic Basin brought by a southward current through the very narrow but deep Nares Strait. The Baffin Island Current in turn passes its ice or iceberg burden on to the cold Labrador Current

137

ARCTIC OCEAN

Figure 6: Average pressure fields over the Arctic, corresponding to (a) cyclonic mode and (b) anticyclonic mode of atmospheric circulation. (c) is the difference field. After Kwok and Rothrock, 1999

which carries it down as far as the Grand Banks of Newfoundland, where the cold water has a sharp front with the warm water of the Gulf Stream. Intermediate and deep currents in the Arctic Basin are difficult to measure and appear to be different in sense from the surface currents. Figure 7 shows present speculation about their nature (Aagaard and Carmack,

138

1994; Rudels, 1995). The West Spitsbergen Current branch of the warm Atlantic water sinks northwest of Svalbard, and part of the water turns west and recirculates back through Fram Strait as a lower part of the East Greenland Current. The rest turns eastward and follows the northern edge of the Siberian shelf, joined by the Barents Sea branch of the Atlantic water, until it

ARCTIC OCEAN HYDROGRAPHICAL EXPEDITION, 1909–1915 See also Amundsen Basin; Arctic Mid-Ocean Ridge; Atlantic Layer; Beaufort Gyre; Canadian Basin; Cold Halocline; Nansen Basin; Oceanography; Salinity Anomalies; Thermohaline Circulation

Further Reading

Figure 7: Speculative view of intermediate and deep circulation in the Arctic. After Aagaard and Carmack, 1994

reaches the beginning of the Lomonosov Ridge at the edge of the Laptev Sea. Here much of the water turns northward and follows the near side (i.e., European side) of the Lomonosov Ridge, ending north of Greenland where it joins the lower part of the Trans Polar Drift—East Greenland Current system. The rest of the water crosses the Lomonosov Ridge and continues to follow the shelf break until it is joined by water of Bering Strait origin; the combined water masses continue eastward around the edge of the Beaufort Sea shelf, joining the other water mass north of Greenland. The mixing of water masses in the Beaufort Sea causes subsurface eddies to form in this region, as shown in the diagram. The two basic aspects of the picture are the net flow from the Pacific to the Atlantic and the eventual recirculation back into the Atlantic of Atlantic water entering the Arctic from the North Atlantic Current—subject, however, to many modifications and vicissitudes en route around the Arctic Basin. Present predictions of climate change models are that the Arctic Ocean should experience a much greater rate of warming than low-latitude oceans. An early consequence will be the disappearance of sea ice in winter from the northern Barents Sea. By the 2080s, the Arctic Ocean may be ice-free in summer, becoming a seasonal ice zone like the Antarctic is at present, with enormous consequences for ecology, transport, and resource extraction. PETER WADHAMS

Aagaard, K. & E.C. Carmack, “The role of sea ice and other fresh water in the arctic circulation.” Journal of Geophysical Research, 94(C10) (1989): 14485–14498 ———, “The Arctic Ocean and Climate: A Perspective.” In The Polar Oceans and Their Role in Shaping the Global Environment, edited by O.M. Johannessen, R.D. Muench & J.E. Overland, Geophysics Monograph Series 85, Washington: American Geophysical Union, 1994, pp. 5–20. Kwok, R. & D.A. Rothrock, “Variability of Fram Strait ice flux and North Atlantic Oscillation.” Journal of Geophysical Research, 104(C3) (1999): 5177–5189 Macdonald, R.W., “Arctic Estuaries and Ice: A PositiveNegative Estuarine Couple.” In The Freshwater Budget of the Arctic Ocean, edited by E.L. Lewis, E.P. Jones, P. Lemke, T.D. Prowse & P. Wadhams, Dordrecht: Kluwer, 2000, pp. 383–408 Martinson, D.G. & M. Steele, “Future of the Arctic sea ice cover: implications of an Antarctic analog.” Geophysical Research Letters, 28 (2001): 307–310 Proshutinsky, A. & M. Johnson,. “Two circulation regimes of the wind-driven Arctic Ocean.” Journal of Geophyical Research, 102(C6) (1997): 12493–12514 Rothrock, D.A., Y. Yu & G.A. Maykut, “Thinning of the Arctic sea-ice cover.” Geophysical Research Letters, 26(23) (1999): 3469–3472 Rudels, B., “The thermohaline circulation of the Arctic Ocean and the Greenland Sea.” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, A352 (1995): 287–299 Steele, M. & T. Boyd, “Retreat of the cold halocline in the Arctic Ocean.” Journal of Geophysical Research, 103(C5) (1998): 10419–10435 Thompson, D.W.J. & J.M. Wallace, “The Arctic Oscillation signature in the wintertime geopotential height and temperature fields.” Geophysical Research Letters, 25(1998): 1297–1300 Wadhams, P. & N.R. Davis, “Further evidence of ice thinning in the Arctic Ocean.” Geophysical Research Letters, 27(24) (2000): 3973–3975 Wadhams, P., A.E. Gill & P.F. Linden, “Transect by submarine of the East Greenland Polar Front.” Deep-Sea Research, A26(12) (1979): 1311–1328

ARCTIC OCEAN HYDROGRAPHICAL EXPEDITION, 1909–1915 In the early 20th century, especially after Russia’s defeat in the Russian-Japan war of 1904–1905, Russia saw an urgent need to investigate the North East Passage or Northern Sea Route as a transport route between the Atlantic and Pacific. In 1906, the Russian Sea Minister Admiral Aleksei Alekseevich Birilev ordered the creation of a special commission of the Navy’s Hydrographical Department to investigate the Arctic Ocean. Admiral Vladimir P. Verkhovsky headed

139

ARCTIC OCEAN HYDROGRAPHICAL EXPEDITION, 1909–1915 this commission. The head of the Hydrographic Directorate Andrei Ippolitovich Vil’kitskii, oceanography professor Yuri M. Shokalsky, shipbuilding professor Alexei Nikolaevich Krylov, Alexander von Bunge, and other polar explorers also took part in its sessions. On August 31, 1909, the Arctic Ocean Hydrographical Expedition (AOHE) was established and Colonel Ivan S. Sergeyev was appointed its head. The main aims were surveying of the Arctic coast of Russia with the creation of new navigation maps, discovering and sounding of places suitable for mooring, and carrying out of oceanographic, biological, and meteorological observations. On October 28, 1909, the two icebreakers Taimyr and Vaigach left Kronstadt near St Petersburg and sailed to Vladivostok via the Atlantic Ocean, Suez Canal, Indian Ocean, and Pacific Ocean. On July 3, 1910, the ships entered Vladivostok’s port, in time for a brief trip into the Chukchi Sea and the Bering Strait. Here they were blocked by heavy ice and returned to Vladivostok for winter. From 1910 –to 1913, the expedition made surveys out of Vladivostok further and further west into the Arctic Seas, each time returning east to winter at Vladivostok (Table 1). Every year new navigation maps were published as a result of the voyages (e.g., the first detailed survey of Wrangel Island in 1911). The main geographical discovery of AOHE in 1913, under Boris Andreevich Vil’kitskii (son of A.I. Vil’kitskii) as the head of the expedition, was Severnaya Zemlya (Northern Land). On August 21 (September 3), the hitherto unknown mountainous land was noticed from both ships simultaneously. On landing the next day, the crews erected the Russian State flag and named it “Emperor Nickolas II’s Land” (since 1926, Severnaya Zemlya). Besides this archipelago, the members of AOHE uncovered some large islands in the Laptev Sea (Maly Taimyr and Starokadomsky’s Island) and in the East Siberian Sea (Vilkitskiisland) in 1913. During the topographical and navigation surveys from 1910 to 1912, the two ships kept close to each other and communicated by radio telegraphy. In 1912, the rock collection gathered by Baron Edward von Toll with companions in 1902 was taken from Bennett Island in the New Siberian Islands. A monument in honor of the dead members of the 1900–1902 Russian Polar Expedition was constructed. During the 1914 expedition, the small Zhokhov’s Island in the De Long Archipelago was discovered. The main aim of this expedition was to pass through the Northern Sea Route from east to west. But heavy ice prevented the ships from completing their task. In the autumn of 1914, the ships became stuck fast in the ice and were forced to winter in Toll’s bay

140

(Northern Taymyr) at a distance of 15 miles from each other. The expedition was not well prepared for this overwintering. Air temperature in the inhabited apartments was less than 7°C and, due to the lack of provisions, scurvy was common. In March and April of 1915, lieutenant Aleksey N. Zhokhov and stoker Ivan E. Ladonichev died and were buried on Mogilny’s Cape. In spite of the severe living conditions during the wintering in the ice, meteorological and oceanographic measurements continued to be carried out. The officers made a topographic map of the shore, tying it to the topographic survey made earlier by von Toll. N.I. Evgenov made meteorological observations. The ship’s doctors Leonid M. Starokadomsky and Eduard A. Arngold investigated the marine fauna and made a large collection of Arctic sea animals. Simultaneously with AOHE’s ships, the schooner Eclipse had stopped for overwintering near Vild’s Cape. Otto Sverdrup (the famous Norwegian sailor who was in the crew of Fram in 1893–1896 and 1898–1902) was captain of this ship. The Russian Government had hired Eclipse in 1914 to search for three polar expeditions headed by Vladimir Rusanov, Georgy Brusilov, and Georgy Sedov, which had left Russia in 1912 and been lost without any news. The two AOHE icebreakers got in touch with Eclipse by radio. With the help of Sverdrup as a relay, Vil’kitskii got in touch with St Petersburg by radio and reported on the expedition’s situation, and about his plan to get the weakest and sick sailors from the ships to the Gol’chikha settlement to prevent exposing them to a second overwintering. To help the expedition, the Russian Sea Ministry sent the polar hunter Nikifor A. Begichev (who was boatsman of the schooner Zarya during the Russian Polar Expedition, 1900–1902). Sverdrup (who was then 63 years old) skied to Taimyr to get the sick sailors to the Eclipse. They lived on the schooner till the middle of July, when Begichev could reach Eclipse by reindeer. Begichev took the sailors to Enissey. During the period on the Eclipse, stoker Georgy Mjachin died and was buried on Vild’s Cape. On July 26, 1915, the icebreakers, and on August 11, Eclipse became free from the ice and sailed west. They visited Dixon Island and the new polar station, where they took coal on board from a depot. Then Vaigach went to Gol’chikha and took the group of sick sailors back on board. On September 3 (16), all ships came to Arkhangel’sk, having passed by the Northern Sea Route from the east for the first time in navigational history. In March 1915, the Russian Geographical Society rewarded Vil’kitskii with the Large Konstantin Gold Medal, and in 1926 the Swedish Society of Anthropology and Ethnography rewarded him with

ARCTIC PEOPLES’ CONFERENCE Arctic Ocean Hydrographical Expedition results, 1910–1915 Year

Period of navigation

Taimyr commander

Vaygach commander

Region explored

1910 1911

August 17–October 20 July 22–October 15

B.V. Davydov B.V. Davydov

?.V. Kolchak ?.V. Loman

1912

May 31–October 10

B.V. Davydov

?.V. Loman

1913

June 26–November 12

B.A.Vil’kitskii

P.A. Novopashenny

1914

June 24–September 5 (wintering) July 26–September 3

B.A. Vil’kitskii

P.A. Novopashenny

Chukotka Peninsula, Bering’s Sea Bering’s Strait—Kolyma River mouth, Wrangel Island Kolyma River mouth—Lena River mouth, Lyakhov’s Islands Northern parts of East Siberian Sea and Laptev Sea, Severnaya Zemlya, New Siberian Islands Northern Taymyr (wintering in Toll’s Bay)

B.A. Vil’kitskii

P.A. Novopashenny

Taimyr—Yugorsky Shar—Arkhangel’sk

1915

the Vega Gold Medal for his valuable contribution to geographical exploration. In November 1915, all members of AOHE were rewarded with orders and gold and silver medals for diligence. During the AOHE, an enormous amount of mapping and descriptions of the Arctic shores were carried out, and 26 map positions were determined by astronomic measurements in the most inaccessible places. It was the largest and most successful Russian polar expedition before the Revolution. The scientists who took part (hydrographers Boris V. Davydov, Konstantin K. Neupokoev, Aleksey M. Lavrov, Nikolay I. Evgenov, and others) laid the foundations for later Soviet hydrographic work in the Arctic. World War 1 interrupted the work of AOHE and on October 1, 1915, AOHE was broken up. FEDOR ROMANENKO See also Kolchak, Alexander; North East Passage, Exploration of; Vil’kitskii, Boris Andreevich Further Reading Bor’ba za skvoznoy arktichesky put’ iz Atlanticheskogo okeana v Tikhiy. Gidrographycheskaya ekspeditsiya Severnogo Ledovitogo Okeana (1910–1915) [Fight for the through passage from Atlantic to Pacific Ocean. Arctic Ocean Hydrographical Expedition (1910–1915)]. In Istoriya otkrytiya i osvoeniya Severnogo Morskogo Puti [History of Discovery and Development of the Northern Sea Route], edited by Ya.Ya. Gakkel’ & M.B. Chernenko, Volume II, Chapter 19, Moscow: Morskoi transport, 1962 Evgenov, N.I. & V.N. Kupetsky, Nauchnye rezul’taty polyarnoy ekspeditsii na ledokolakh ““Taymyr” i ““Vaygach” v 1910–1915 godakh [Scientific Results of Polar Expedition on the Ice-Breakers ““Taymyr” and ““Vaygach” in 1910–1915], Leningrad: Izd-vo “Nauka,” 1985 (in Russian) “Russian hydrographical expedition to Arctic ocean.” Scottish Geographical Magazine, 1914: 87–90 Starokadomsky, L.M., “Vilkitsky’s North-East Passage, 1914–1915.” Geographical Journal, 54(6) (1919): 367–375

———, Charting the Russian Northern Sea route: the Arctic Ocean Hydrographic Expedition 1910–1915, edited and translated by William Barr, Montreal: Arctic Institute of North America, 1976 Transehe, N.A., “The Siberian Sea Road: the work of the Russian Hydrographical Expedition to the Arctic 1910–1915.” Geographical Review, 15 (1925): 392

ARCTIC PEOPLES’ CONFERENCE On November 22–25, 1973, representatives of the Arctic Peoples of Canada (Inuit, Indians, Métis, and NonStatus Indians), Greenland (Greenlandic Inuit), and Europe (the Saami) met at an international conference. This was the first time Arctic indigenous peoples organized a conference by themselves and for themselves. The initiative was taken by James Wah-Shee, the president of the Federation of Natives North of 60° and the Indian Brotherhood of the Northwest Territories, together with Joe Jacqueot, vice-president of the Federation of Natives North of 60°, who represented Métis and NonStatus Indians in Northern Canada. Jacqueot and WahShee traveled to Denmark to discuss the idea of an Arctic Peoples’ Conference with the Greenlanders living in Copenhagen. Next, Robert Petersen, assistant professor of the Department of Eskimology at the University of Copenhagen, together with Angmalortoq Olsen, president of the Greenlanders’ Association in Denmark, sent out the invitations to Arctic Peoples in Alaska, Canada, Greenland, Norway, Sweden, and Finland. The conference was organized by Petersen and his colleague Helge Kleivan at the University of Copenhagen. To express its understanding of the importance of the conference, the Danish Government provided Christiansborg, the Danish Parliament building, as a venue. The Canadian delegation included representatives from the Federation of Natives North of 60°, the Inuit

141

ARCTIC PILOT PROJECT Tapirisat of Canada (ITC, now Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami), the Committee of Original Peoples Entitlement, the Indian Brotherhood of Northwest Territories, the Yukon Native Brotherhood, the Yukon Association of Non-Status Indians, and the Métis and Non-Status Association of the Northwest Territories. The Saami people were represented by the Nordic Saami Council, the Nordic Saami Institute, as well as by organizations from each of the Scandinavian countries: the Saami Association of Norway, the Reindeer Breeders’Association of Norway, the Saami Association of Sweden, and the Saami Parliament of Finland. Greenlandic Inuit were represented by the Provincial Council of Greenland as well as three trade organizations: the Workers’ Union, the Fishermens and Hunters’ Association, and the Sheep Farmers Association. The organization for women in Greenland, Arnat Peqatigiit, was also invited. The Greenlanders living in Denmark were represented by two organizations: the Greenlanders’ Association (Peqatigiit Kalaallit) and the Young Greenlanders’ Association. Two resolutions concluded the conference. The first described the need to support and nurture indigenous cultures and their unique features, through recognition of collective ownership of land and waters traditionally used and occupied and through recognition of indigenous rights by the respective governments. A second resolution proposed to form a circumpolar body of indigenous peoples to pursue collective interests. A working committee was established to pursue this second resolution. The committee did not succeed in organizing a new conference. The initiative was not, however, lost. In October 1975, the First World Council of Indigenous Peoples was held in Port Alberta, Canada, and in June 1977 the First Inuit Circumpolar Conference was held at Barrow, Alaska. This second conference followed up the Arctic Peoples’ Conference focus on the culture shared by Inuit and other Arctic peoples. GRO WEEN Further Reading Elis, Wendy (editor), Minutes of the First International Arctic Peoples’ Conference, Christiansborg, Copenhagen, Denmark, November 22–25, 1973, Ottawa: Inuit Tapirisat of Canada Kleivan, Inge, “The Arctic Peoples’ Conference in Copenhagen, November 22–25, 1973.” Études/Inuit/Studies, 16(1–2) (1992): 227–236

ARCTIC PILOT PROJECT The Arctic Pilot Project was a proposal to ship natural gas from the Canadian High Arctic to southern markets using ice-breaking tankers. The project was

142

conceived in 1976 by Petro-Canada as a way to stimulate frontier exploration and to increase Canadian energy supplies. The project was proposed formally in 1979 by a consortium comprising Petro-Canada Exploration Inc., as project manager and principal shareholder, Dome Petroleum Ltd., Nova, an Alberta corporation (formerly Alberta Gas Trunk Line Co. Ltd.), and Melville Shipping Ltd. The gas production facilities associated with the Arctic Pilot Project were to be owned and operated by Pan-Arctic Oils Ltd., while TransCanada Pipelines Ltd. was to be responsible for the southern regasification terminal. For economic reasons, the project did not proceed. The plan called for the production of natural gas from the Drake Point gas field, on the eastern side of Sabine Peninsula, Melville Island (76°21′ N 108°26′ W), and its transportation south across Melville Island by a buried pipeline to a shipping terminal at Bridport Inlet, on the south coast of the island and adjacent to Viscount Melville Sound. Here the gas was to be liquefied and shipped in ice-breaking tankers easterly through Parry Channel, across Baffin Bay, and through Davies Strait to a receiving terminal in Atlantic Canada. The liquefied natural gas (LNG) tankers were expected to travel year-round, through the pack ice of the Eastern Arctic waters, transporting an average of 6.4 million cubic meters of gas per day (6.4 × 106 m3/day of natural gas). Completion of the project was expected to take almost six years, and to be operational for about 20 years. The estimated cost of the Arctic Pilot Project was $1.5–2 billion. The gas production facilities were to consist of two clusters of four wells each, with gathering lines, gas dehydration and chilling plants, accommodation, workshop and storage buildings, access roads, and an airstrip. The gas was to be chilled to a maximum temperature of −6°C; this would prevent warm gas from thawing the permafrost near the pipeline. The pipeline from Drake Point to Bridport Inlet was to be approximately 160 km long, 0.56 m in diameter, and buried in permafrost, just below the base of the active layer. According to the plan, the gas would be liquefied and stored at Bridport Inlet for shipment south. The gas liquefaction plant and LNG storage facilities were to be built in the south and mounted on three barges. These would have been towed to Bridport Inlet and grounded on gravel pads behind dewatered, protective rock berms on the outer part of the Meacham River delta. Dewatering of the basins was essential to eliminate problems of changing draft as the storage tanks were filled and emptied. To liquefy the natural gas, it would be compressed and cooled to −162°C; 600 m3 of natural gas would yield 1 m3 of LNG, and each storage barge would hold up to 800,000 m3 of LNG. The plant and storage barges would be linked to the pipeline

ARCTIC RESEARCH CONSORTIUM OF THE UNITED STATES (ARCUS) along a causeway; the LNG tankers would berth along the outer face of the berms at a caisson-supported dock. In winter, warm water from the plant (at +8.5°C) would circulate around the docking area to keep ice growth to less than 1 m and so assist in berthing the vessels. Other facilities at Bridport Inlet were to comprise camp, workshop and storage buildings, access roads, and an airstrip. Pipeline repair equipment and supplies would also be held at this location. Two Arctic Class 7 ice-breaking LNG tankers, each making about 15 round trips per year, would have completed the Arctic Pilot Project. Each was to be 470 m long by 43 m wide and capable of carrying 140,000 m3 of LNG in six tanks. The ships would draw 11.5 in open water and 13 m in ice and would be powered by gas turbine engines, fueled by the “boil-off” of natural gas from the LNG cargo. This project was always intended as a pilot project, and was designed at minimum scale, to demonstrate the technical and economic feasibility of delivering natural gas from the Arctic Islands to southern markets by ship. The Arctic Pilot Project was sized at about one-tenth the scale of any alternative proposal for the delivery of Arctic natural gas. The northern component of the project was subject to an environmental and socioeconomic impact assessment by a panel from the Canadian Federal Environmental and Review Office, Environment Canada. The panel, which reported in October 1980, concluded that the proposal was environmentally acceptable, subject to certain conditions. The panel’s major concerns related to the shipping component of the project, particularly in the environmentally sensitive area of Lancaster Sound. The panel recommended that a control authority be established by the Minister of Transport to monitor, assist, and regulate ship movements within the environmentally sensitive area. The panel also called for the creation of an advisory committee with representatives from the proponent, the Inuit, and other government agencies to recommend and approve biological studies for guidance in the selection of possible shipping routes. The environmental hearings for the northern component of the project were to have been followed by regulatory hearings before the National Energy Board of Canada and by an environmental and socioeconomic impact assessment of the southern component, the regasification terminal. As the environmental hearings for the northern component proceeded, however, the price of natural gas dropped and the project proponents withdrew the project from the regulatory process. As a result, detailed design of the LNG carriers, in terms of hull shape, ice-breaking bow design, LNG containment systems, etc., were not completed. Similarly, no details for the design and construction of

the southern regasification terminal were ever developed. J.A. HEGINBOTTOM See also Gas Exploration; High Arctic; Lancaster Sound Further Reading Canada, Federal Environmental Assessment Review Office, Arctic Pilot Project (Northern Component): Report of the Environmental Assessment Panel, Ottawa: Environment Canada, Environmental Assessment Panel Report No. 14; available from the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, Environment Canada, Ottawa, Canada K1A 0H3, 1980

ARCTIC RESEARCH CONSORTIUM OF THE UNITED STATES (ARCUS) The Arctic Research Consortium of the United States (ARCUS) was formed in 1988 to identify and bring together the distributed human and material resources of the country’s Arctic research community in order to create a synergy for Arctic research to enable the community to rise to the many challenges facing the region and the United States. ARCUS is a nonprofit corporation consisting of institutions organized and operated for educational, professional, or scientific purposes associated with Arctic research or related fields. The representatives of member institutions constitute the Council of ARCUS and elect the Board of Directors. The purpose of ARCUS is to provide leadership in advancing knowledge and understanding of the Arctic by: 1. serving as a forum for planning, facilitating, coordinating, and implementing disciplinary and interdisciplinary studies of the Arctic; 2. acting as a synthesizer and disseminator of scientific information relevant to state, national, and international programs of Arctic research; and 3. encouraging and facilitating the education of scientists and the public in the needs and opportunities of research in the Arctic. Initially, the consortium focused on the role of the Arctic in global change and the requirements for a national Arctic education program. These two areas are inherently complementary and both serve to unite the community because they cut across the disciplines of Arctic science. They also provided a mechanism to determine the areas of relative strengths and weaknesses within the Arctic research community. From this starting point, ARCUS has been instrumental in facilitating planning processes in several areas of Arctic research, organizing workshops, producing

143

ARCTIC RESEARCH AND POLICY ACT numerous reports and recommendations, publishing a regular newsletter, Witness the Arctic, and maintaining a moderated web-based mailing list of news and announcements called ArcticInfo. At present, ARCUS runs, on behalf of the National Science Foundation, the steering committee for the Arctic System Science Program (ARCSS). The organization has three primary long-term goals: 1. To produce identifiable improvements in United States Arctic science. The importance of the Arctic, nationally and internationally, requires developing a consensus among the Arctic research community on pertinent issues and research needs, the transfer and application of cold regions research and technology, increased levels of funding for Arctic science, and improvements in the level of cooperation between the United States and international Arctic research institutions and industries. 2. To build Arctic research communities of scientists and scholars in the United States. New and highly qualified scientists and engineers must be educated and trained in the critical skills required to address the strategic problems of the Arctic. In addition, the need for an expanded social science research program on Arctic topics will require a well-organized and cohesive community of social and behavioral scientists who are interested in the Arctic. 3. To open avenues for interdisciplinary approaches, the introduction of new techniques, and the widening of scientific participation. Although the dispersed nature of the Arctic research community remains an impediment to optimal cooperation across disciplines, increasing regular communication among different Arctic disciplines and science communities is one key to developing Arctic science. HENRY P. HUNTINGTON See also Arctic Research and Policy Act; Office of Polar Programs, National Science Foundation Further Reading Arctic Research of the United States, Special issue on the National Science Foundation’s Arctic Systems Science Program, Volume 11, 2003 ARCUS, Toolik Field Station: The Second Twenty Years, Recommendations on the Science Mission and the Development of Toolik Field Station, Fairbanks, Alaska: ARCUS, 1996 ARCUS, Logistics Recommendations for an Improved US Arctic Research Capability, Fairbanks, Alaska: ARCUS, 1997 ARCUS, People and the Arctic: A Prospectus for Research on the Human Dimensions of the Arctic System, Fairbanks, Alaska: ARCUS, 1997 ARCUS, Toward Prediction of the Arctic System, Predicting States of the Arctic System on Seasonal-to-Century Time Scales by Integrating Observations, Process Research,

144

Modeling, and Assessment, Fairbanks, Alaska: ARCUS, 1998 ARCUS, Arctic Social Sciences: Opportunities in Arctic Research, Fairbanks, Alaska: ARCUS, 1999 ARCUS, The Future of an Arctic Resource: Recommendations from the Barrow Area Research Support Workshop, Fairbanks, Alaska: ARCUS, 1999 ARCUS, Marine Science in the Arctic: A Strategy, Fairbanks, Alaska: ARCUS, 1999 ARCUS, Opportunities for Collaboration between the United States and Norway in Arctic Research: A Workshop Report, Fairbanks, Alaska: ARCUS, 2000

ARCTIC RESEARCH AND POLICY ACT The primary objective of the Arctic Research and Policy Act, enacted by the US Congress in 1984 (and amended in 1990), is to define US national priorities and goals in the Arctic and to serve as a comprehensive policy and planning device for the expansion of US federal scientific activities in this region. The Act encompasses applied scientific research on “natural resources and materials, physical, biological and health sciences and social and behavioral sciences,” and cites a wide range of research fields: weather and climate; national defense; renewable and nonrenewable resources; transportation; communication and space-disturbance effects; environmental protection; health, culture and socioeconomic factors; and international cooperation. The legislation designated the National Science Foundation (NSF) as the lead US federal agency in Arctic research. The legislation established two new bodies. The first, an Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee (IARPC), consists of representatives from 12 US federal departments and agencies, which would develop a national Arctic research policy and an Arctic research plan for implementing this policy. On a working level, each of the member departments and agencies appoint staff representatives for IARPC and for any working groups that may be required. The second body was an Arctic Research Commission composed of seven members appointed by the President of the United States to develop recommendations on Arctic research policy. While members of IARPC are all public officials, the membership of the Arctic Research Commission is recruited from academia, indigenous residents, and private industry. The Commission issues a biennial statement outlining goals and priorities that could be used in the development of the plan. Although the United States, through the state of Alaska, has a large geographic presence in the Arctic region, the polar activities of the US government have been divided between the Arctic and Antarctica. Many NSF scientists, for instance, handle both Arctic and

ARCTIC SLOPE REGIONAL CORPORATION (ASRC) Antarctic research; few are dedicated solely to Arctic issues. The passage of the legislation, therefore, created an impetus toward ensuring US federal coordination on Arctic issues, by highlighting such gaps in research as the need for a stronger infrastructure of logistical support. The first United States Arctic Research Plan was published in 1987; this plan is revised every two years. One consistent theme in the reports of both of the above-noted bodies created by this legislation is the need for international cooperation with other Arctic nations. With the collapse of the Soviet Union and the opening of avenues to multilateral cooperation, this has presented the United States with a number of opportunities, such as the International Arctic Science Committee, first established in August 1990, the Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy established in June 1991, and the intergovernmental Arctic Council established in 1996. IARPC agencies have played a key role in the establishment and work of each of these bodies. The Arctic Research and Policy Act has been an effective instrument in highlighting the need for a coordinated US federal role in Arctic research, in conveying the need for such research to the American public and, as international circumstances changed with the end of the Cold War, for ensuring that the United States has been able to participate effectively with other Arctic nations and nongovernmental organizations in a newly emerging Arctic region. LENNARD SILLANPÄÄ See also Arctic Research Consortium of the United States (ARCUS); Office of Polar Programs, National Science Foundation Further Reading Arctic Research of the United States. This journal, published since 1991 by the National Science Foundation, publishes biennial revisions to the United States Arctic Research Plan as is required by legislation. It also summarizes meetings of the IARPC and the Arctic Research Commission Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee, United States Arctic Research Plan, Washington, District of Columbia: National Science Foundation, 1987

ARCTIC SLOPE REGIONAL CORPORATION (ASRC) Pursuant to the Alaskan Native Claims Settlement Act of 1971 (ANCSA), the Arctic Slope Regional Corporation (ASRC) was formed in 1972. An Alaskan Native-owned for-profit company, the ASRC repre-

sents eight villages above the Alaskan Arctic Circle: Pt Hope, Pt Lay, Wainwright, Atqasuk, Barrow, Nuiqsut, Kakotvik, and Anaktuvak Pass. In 1972, representatives from these villages came together to form the ASRC and claim ownership of approximately 5 million acres on Alaska’s North Slope. These lands had known resources and were highly prospective for oil, gas, coal, and base metal sulfides. The ASRC selected this area with the specific intentions to gain title to the lands with the greatest resource potential, to explore and develop these lands, and to produce and market the resources from them. The ASRC stresses that these objectives are to be met without compromising the traditional subsistence values of the region held by ASRC shareholders. This reflects how the passage of the ANCSA brought a mandate to expand traditional ideas of resource use and concepts of land into one that includes corporate land ownership. The ASRC expresses the challenges faced by trying to translate the ANSCA’s entitlement into economic terms, and stresses that these challenges are still being faced today. However, receiving the entitlement was a complex process for the ASRC, and numerous agreements and exchanges were held with both federal and state governments before entitlement was settled. By 1979, the ASRC and the US Department of the Interior signed a complex land exchange, which was ratified in the 1980 Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act, which allowed the ASRC to obtain land in the National Petroleum Reserve and the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. This enabled ASRC to acquire an interest in a small refinery, Petro Star, in the North Pole, and 80% of a pipeline construction and maintenance company called Houston Contracting in 1985. This is a significant point in ASRC history because petroleum refining and energy services now account for twothirds of ASRC’s total annual income. ASRC’s annual revenues from oil fieldwork have increased from approximately $30 million in the early 1980s to $250,000 in 2000. This puts the ASRC in the unique position of being able to export the latest in oil-field technology around the world. Being one of 13 regional native corporations, the ASRC is the largest, employing 6000 people and with a shareholder population of over 9000. Corporate headquarters are located in Barrow, Alaska, with subsidiary offices in Anchorage, Alaska, and around the world. Although the ASRC is said to be a natural resource-based corporation, it extends its companies into many areas, such as engineering, financial management, oil and gas support services, petroleum refining and distribution, as well as civil construction and communications. RACHEL OLSON

145

ARCTIC SMALL TOOL TRADITION Further Reading Arnold, Robert D., Alaska Native Land Claims, Anchorage: Alaska Federation of Natives, 1978 Berry, Mary Clay, The Alaska Pipeline: The Politics of Oil and Native Land Claims, Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1975 Chance, Norman A., The Iñupiat and Arctic Alaska: An Ethnography of Development, Fort Worth, Texas: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1990 Ervin, Alexander M., “The Emergence of Native Alaskan Political Capacity, 1959–1971.” Musk Ox Journal, 19 (1976) Naske, Claus M. & Herman E. Slotnick, Alaska: A History of the 49th State (2nd edition), Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 1987

ARCTIC SMALL TOOL TRADITION In the 1950s, archaeologists working independently in Alaska, Canada, and Greenland discovered evidence of the earliest peoples to occupy the coast and islands of Arctic North America. At Cape Denbigh, on the east side of Alaska’s Norton Sound, Louis Giddings identified and named the Denbigh Flint complex. In northern Canada, William Taylor, Moreau Maxwell, and Elmer Harp identified sites thought to be earlier than the Dorset culture. They called the culture there PreDorset. At Independence Fjord in northern Greenland, Eigil Knuth identified Independence culture, later termed Independence I following the discovery of the more recent and clearly descendant culture, Independence II; and in western Greenland, Jørgen Meldgaard reported on the Saqqaq culture. The striking similarities in the stone tools of these cultures led William Irving to suggest that they were members of the same cultural tradition, which he aptly termed Arctic Small Tool (ASTt). Current research suggests that these cultures all date to roughly 4200 years ago, with Denbigh possibly a little older. Most researchers regard the members of the ASTt as the first Eskimolike cultures. For this reason, they refer to them as “Paleo-Eskimo” (literally “Old Eskimo”). Cultures of the ASTt are known for their distinctive toolkits and architecture. Stone tools are typically very small and delicately flaked from high-quality raw materials. Characteristic tool types include bipoints, triangular harpoon tips, a variety of mitten-shaped burins, gravers made from retouched burin spalls, microblades, thumbnail scrapers made on thick flakes, and inset sideblades. Organic tools are only rarely preserved in early ASTt sites. During the early ASTt, the emphasis seems to have been on mobility and portability. Permanent dwellings such as the Neo-Eskimo semisubterranean sod house were not known in Arctic Canada and Greenland until around 2500 years ago. Even in winter, early ASTt people seem to have lived in tents or snow houses. ASTt architecture is also very distinctive. ASTt

146

dwellings were skin tents, roughly round in shape and typically bisected by two parallel rows of cobbles set on the ground roughly 50 cm apart and running down the center. Termed “axial” or “mid-passage” structures, these rows typically straddle a small hearth made from rocks and divide the space within the dwelling into areas where different domestic activities such as sewing, game processing, and construction and repair of tools were conducted. In forested areas, for example, at Onion Portage on Alaska’s Kobuk River, wooden poles were substituted for stone. Several early Dorset sites have produced snow knives, suggesting that houses built from blocks of snow (“igloos”) may have originated in the ASTt. Cultures of the ASTt are thought to have their origins in the Siberian Neolithic, but archaeological collections from the western side of Bering Strait showing clear relationships with the ASTt have not yet been reported. ASTt sites have been found from the Alaska Peninsula to northern Greenland in some of the richest as well as most impoverished environments in the North American Arctic. In Alaska, sites are most commonly found north of the Kobuk River. In Canada, ASTt people lived north of the treeline—in the Barrenlands, Arctic Archipelago, and along the Labrador coast. Greenlandic sites are found along the narrow strip of land separating the ocean from the great inland ice sheet. Some are on the coast, while others are a little way inland. ASTt people were hunters who harvested and ate what was available where they lived, and chose to live where game could be found. In some areas, they focused on terrestrial resources, taking advantage of migrating caribou as well as secondary species such as small mammals and fish, which formed an economic safety net. ASTt people were also the first North Americans to adapt to year-round life on the Arctic coast, including the frozen oceans of the far north. There they took seals, walrus, and pelagic waterfowl in great numbers, and even caught deep-water fish, including cod. In contrast to more recent Neo-Eskimo peoples, they do not appear to have participated in communal hunting activities requiring large numbers of people such as pursuing large baleen whales. In western Greenland where Bjarne Grønnow excavated Qeqertasussuk, a frozen 4200-year-old ASTt site, 45 different species of animals were found in a trash midden. Plants probably played a relatively minor role in the ASTt diet. What became of ASTt people? The broad outlines of the prehistory of the Eastern Arctic—Canada and Greenland—are relatively straightforward. Early ASTt peoples (Pre-Dorset, Independence I, and Saqqaq) arrived there from the west approximately 4200 years ago. Their tools, houses, and settlement patterns began

ARCTIC WATERS POLLUTION PREVENTION ACT to change fairly rapidly after 3000 years ago. The result was Dorset culture, although of course the distinction between the last Pre-Dorset, Saqqaq, or Independence I person and first Dorset is an arbitrary one, and one that would have eluded the people in question. Most archaeologists still consider Dorset to be the last culture of the ASTt, and it disappeared around AD 1400, shortly after the Thule culture—the ancestors of modern Inuit—arrived in the Eastern Arctic from Alaska. In many ways, we know far more about the later Dorset culture than about their early ASTt ancestors because their sites are more numerous and often yield animal bones and objects of wood, antler, and ivory in addition to stone tools. In contrast to the Eastern Arctic, the culture history and historical relationships between Alaskan cultures from this time are less certain. Few Denbigh Flint complex sites have been reliably dated, and while most archaeologists agree that Denbigh gave rise to the Choris culture around 3600 years ago in northern and northwestern Alaska, there is little consensus about the relationship between Choris and subsequent Norton and Ipiutak peoples. Many archaeologists believe that Norton culture is part of a different tradition, and that the subsequent history of humans in the Western Arctic owes more to the Norton tradition and continued influences from Siberia than it does to the ASTt. DANIEL ODESS See also Choris Culture; Denbigh Flint Culture; Independence Culture; Pre-Dorset Culture; Saqqaq Culture Further Reading Cox, Steven L., “Palaeo-Eskimo occupations of the North Labrador Coast.” Arctic Anthropology, 15(2) (1978): 96–118 Giddings, J. Louis, The Archaeology of Cape Denbigh, Providence: Brown University Press, 1964 Grønnow, Bjarne, “Prehistory in permafrost: investigations at the Saqqaq Site, Qeqertasussuk, Disco Bay, West Greenland.” Journal of Danish Prehistory, 7 (1988): 24–39 ——— (editor), The Paleo-Eskimo Cultures of Greenland, Copenhagen: Danish Polar Center, 1996 LeBlanc, Sylvie and Murielle Nagy (guest editors), “Palaeoeskimo Architecture/Architecture paléoesquimaude.” Études/Inuit/Studies, 27(1–2) (2003) McGhee, Robert, Ancient People of the Arctic, Vancouver: UBC Press, 1996 Maxwell, Moreau S., Prehistory of the Eastern Arctic, New York: Academic Press, 1985 Schledermann, Peter, Crossroads to Greenland, Komatik Series 2, Calgary: Arctic Institute of North America, 1990 ———, Voices in Stone, Komatik Series 5, Calgary: Arctic Institute of North America, 1996 Taylor Jr., William E., The Arnapik and Tyara Sites: An Archaeological Study of Dorset Culture Origins, Society for American Archaeology Memoir 22, 1968

ARCTIC WATERS POLLUTION PREVENTION ACT The Arctic Waters Pollution Prevention Act (AWPPA) is Canadian legislation that established a maritime environmental protection zone around the waters surrounding the land and islands of the Canadian Arctic Archipelago. Enacted by the Canadian Government in 1970, it was developed to demonstrate Canadian sovereignty over the North West Passage. It was precedent setting in that Canada was the first coastal nation to claim an extended maritime zone of control in order to protect the marine environment in its surrounding waters. The AWPPA was created following the voyages of the USS Manhattan through the North West Passage in 1969 and 1970. The United States Government has never recognized Canadian claims of sovereignty over the Passage and views it as an international strait. Canada has always maintained that the waters of the North West Passage are internal waters. This is based on historical claims and by virtue of the fact that the waters of the Passage are indistinguishable from land by being frozen for much of the year. Due to the opposing positions, when the United States Government wanted to test the possibility of shipping oil from the North Slope of Alaska to the continental United States by supertanker, it did not request the Canadian Government’s permission. The Canadian Government did not wish to directly challenge the American Government, but did want to take some action to reaffirm its claims of control over the North West Passage. It elected to develop legislation that allowed for a functional form of control by asserting the right to enact unilateral environmental protection. The Act created a set of regulations in a zone extending from the baselines of the Canadian northern territory seaward to a distance of 100 nautical miles 185.3 km. It banned the discharge of all wastes in these waters and regulated the design, construction, and navigation of all vessels that would operate in the waters within the zone.

Impact While the United States Government refused to recognize the AWPPA, the Act has had a significant impact on the international system. Its main influence was felt at the third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea that began in 1974. First, the AWPPA added to the growing demands for coastal states to create a maritime zone of control beyond the traditional limits of the territorial sea. This eventually led to the creation of the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), which gives coastal states sovereign rights over the resources in waters up to 200 nautical miles (370.6 km) beyond their coasts, including the right to develop domestic laws governing environmental protection. More

147

ARCTIC WOODLAND CULTURE specifically, the AWPPA also led to the creation of Article 234 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). This article gives coastal states with ice-covered waters the right to “adopt and enforce nondiscriminatory laws and regulations for the prevention, reduction and control of marine pollution from vessels in ice-covered areas...”

Current Status While the United States has never formally acknowledged the AWPPA, the coming-into-force of UNCLOS in 1982 is generally viewed as representing international acceptance of Canada’s right to enact the legislation. However, the harsh conditions in the North West Passage have meant that few vessels have attempted to enter the Canadian waters protected by the AWPPA. Recently, concerns have been raised that climate change could result in greater accessibility to the entire Arctic region, the Canadian Arctic included. As a result, in 1994, many Arctic nations commenced a process to develop an Arctic Code for possible Arctic shipping. To a large degree, this effort is based on harmonizing the regulations of the AWPPA with the regulations subsequently developed by Russia and other northern states for their Arctic waters. Somewhat ironically, while the Government of Canada took very aggressive action in creating the AWPPA, its implementation of the Act has been more timid. It requests vessels to comply with the regulations through a voluntary reporting system called NORDREG. It does not mandate them to comply. Secondly, while Article 234 of UNCLOS internationally validates the AWPPA, the Government of Canada is one of the few remaining states that has not ratified the Law of the Sea Convention. ROB HUEBERT See also North West Passage; UN Convention on the Law of the Sea

ARCTIC WOODLAND CULTURE Arctic Woodland Culture is the name given by J. Louis Giddings to the 700-year-long archaeological sequence originating in the Kobuk River Valley, northwestern Alaska. The culture, as Giddings defined it, comprises four phases: Ahteut, dating to about A.D 1250; Ekseavik and Old Kotzebue, dating to about AD 1400; Intermediate Kotzebue, dating to about AD 1550; and Ambler Island, dating to between AD 1730 and 1760. Since first defined in 1952, numerous other Arctic Woodland sites have been found in the region dating to between c.AD 1000 and the historic period. Each of the phases is characterized by distinctive styles in antler and ivory weapon parts, pottery, fishing equipment,

148

house forms, and the use of particular raw materials such as chert (a flintlike rock), jade, and ground slate. The name of the Arctic Woodland Culture derives from the fact that the people were well adapted to a forested region of the Arctic. Although located above the Arctic Circle, the Kobuk River Valley supports dense stands of white and black spruce throughout the valley and its major tributaries and stands of birch and alder on the surrounding hills. The faunal resources include both tundra species like caribou and willow ptarmigan and taiga species like black bear and spruce grouse, as well as resident fish like shee and whitefish, and anadromous fish like salmon and (in the lower reaches) smelt. In the nearby mountains are sheep and at the mouth of the river, which empties into Kotzebue Sound, seals and beluga thrive. This multiple resource base is represented in most of the sites of the culture, both by faunal remains and by the implements used to harvest them. Stylistically, most of the artifacts relate to forms from the coastal Eskimo cultures: toggle harpoon heads, stone and pottery lamps, pottery vessels, leister prongs, and slate knife and ulu blades. However, many other artifacts, including boulder chip scrapers known as tci thos and birch bark baskets, suggest links to Athapaskan culture. The essential features of the Arctic Woodland Culture are described in the concluding paragraph in Giddings’ monograph, in which he suggests that the culture appears to be “more than a phenomenon resulting from the meeting of two distinct forms of culture [Eskimo and Athapaskan].” Rather, the culture is the predictable combination of sea-river-and-foresthunting wherever it is possible for a single ethnic group to practice these together under the special conditions of the Arctic. It is a material culture that will be practiced by whatever linguistic group happens to live in the particular environment, a culture that will outlive the physical appearance, the speech, and many of the social practices of its participants. (Giddings, 1952)

Perhaps the most significant aspect of the Arctic Woodland construct is an approach that stresses the adaptive and regional aspects of archaeological cultures. By implication, an archaeological culture could look very different, depending on the activities not only carried out at the reference site but at other sites in the annual round. DOUGLAS D. ANDERSON See also Athapaskan; Giddings, Louis Further Reading Giddings, J. Louis, The Arctic Woodland Culture of the Kobuk River, Philadelphia: University Museum, University of Pennsylvania, 1952

ARKHANGEL’SK

ARKHANGEL’SK Arkhangel’sk is the economic and cultural center of North European Russia, and since 1937 the center of Arkhangel’sk Oblast’. It is located 1133 km from Moscow on the banks of the Severnaya Dvina River and on its delta reaching into the White Sea. It is an important sea and river port, rail center, and airport, with a population of 362,700 (January 2000). The climate of the city is Subarctic, moderated by marine influences, with a January mean temperature of −13°C and a July mean of +17°C. Annual precipitation is about 500 mm. Formerly blocked by sea ice for five months each winter, the port is now kept open by icebreakers. A settlement was founded in 1584 at the cape PurNavolok (this Finnish name means “Foggy cape”) at the monastery of the archangel Mikhail. Initially it was named Novo Kholmogory (Kholmogory being a smaller town at the mouth of the Dvina), but since 1613 it has been known as Arkhangelskiy town. In the 17th century, it was developed as an important port, the only port through which Moscow could conduct trade with West European countries. Peter I the Great, who visited Arkhangel’sk three times, founded the Novodvinskaya fortress, the Admiralty, and a state shipyard on the island Solombala. Being a significant shipbuilding center, Arkhangel’sk played an important role in the formation of the Russian military and trade fleet. In 1708, it became the administrative center of Arkhangelogorodskaya Province. The prosperity of the town was undermined with the founding of the Baltic port of St Petersburg, especially after the decree on diverting foreign trade to the new town at the Neva River (1722). Since the late 18th century, the importance of Arkhangel’sk has again grown. Foreign commerce especially revived during the continental blockade of British trade enforced by France (1807–1813). The town also became a main base for exploration and development of the Russian Arctic. Expeditions under the direction of Vasily Chichagov, Alexander Sibiryakov, Fedor Litke, Pyotr Pakhtusov, Vladimir Rusanov, and Georgiy Sedov started from Arkhangel’sk. Between the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the town became the major timber-exporting port of Russia and the largest sawmill center. In 1898, the railway from Moscow via Vologda reached Arkhangel’sk. In 1897, the town numbered 20,900 residents, its suburb Solombala (which is now encompassed by Arkhangel’sk) having 9000 residents. During the Soviet period, the town grew rapidly because of the development of the Northern Sea Route and exploitation of the natural resources of the North. By 1939, the population of the town amounted to 251,000. During the Great Patriotic War, Allied convoys delivering lend-lease armament, provisions, and

equipment came to Arkhangel’sk and Severodvinsk, 35 km to the west. Today the city’s economy is based on marine industries and timber. Marine industries include shipbuilding and repair, fish industry, algae processing, scientific researches, and naval and merchant seaman training. Timber industries include sawmilling, timber chemistry, pulp and paper industry, and production of logging equipment. The new town of Novodvinsk (48,600 residents), where the Arkhangel’sk pulp and paper plant is located, is situated 20 km south of Arkhangel’sk. Arkhangel’sk is a great cultural, scientific, and educational center. The city has several higher education institutes, including the Pomor State University named after M.V. Lomonosov, State Technical University, a Medicine Academy, branch of the Marine academy, the oldest Naval School, and Scientific and Research Institute of Forest and Chemistry, Central Scientific and Research Institute of Timber Machining. A Philharmonic Society, Academic Northern Folk Chorus, museum of local lore, Northern Marine Museum, and Museum of Fine Art are based in Arkhangel’sk. Arkhangel’sk extends for 40 km along the Severnaya Dvina. In the postwar period, the center of the town expanded to the east, away from the river. Development of the boggy lowland (“Mkhi”—mosses in English) was difficult and required great expense (peat was removed up to a depth of 8 m in some places). A considerable part of the wooden architecture for which Arkhangel’sk was famous was lost in the course of reconstruction of the town, although the street of Chumbarova-Luchinskogo, where interesting patterns of wooden architecture are located, is being preserved. Urban population increased throughout the 20th century and reached its maximum in 1990 (420,400 residents in January 1991). However, it decreased by 14% over the next decade. G. LAPPO See also Arkhangel’skaya Oblast’; Severnaya Dvina Further Reading Arkhangel’sk. In Entcyclopeditcheski Slovar’ Granat [Encyclopaedia by Granat] (7th edition), Volume 3, Moscow: Granat [no date], pp. 622–623 Arkhangel’sk. In Bol’shaya Sovetskaya Entsiklopediia [The Big Soviet Encyclopaedia] (3rd edition), edited by A.M. Prokhorov, Volume 2, Moscow: Sovetskaya Entsiklopediya 1970, pp. 275–276 Arkhangel’sk. In Rossiyskaya Federatsiya. Obstchii obzor. Evropeiskii sever (Seriya “Sovetskii Soyuz”) [Russian Federation. General review. European North] (Serias “Soviet Union”), Moscow: Mysl, 1971, pp. 401–407 Arkhangel’sk. In Goroda Rossii. Encyclopediya [The towns of Russia: Encyclopaedia], edited by G.M. Lappo, Moscow: Bolshaya rossiyskaya enciklopedia, 1994, pp. 25–28

149

ARKHANGEL’SKAYA OBLAST’ Barashkov, Yu.A., Arkhangel’sk. In Arkhitekturnaya biographiya [Arkghangel’sk. Architectural Biography], Arkhangel’sk, 1984 Letopis’ goroda Arkhangel’ska [Chronicle of Arkhangel’sk city], Arkhangel’sk, 1990 Ogorodnikov, S.F., Ocherk istorii goroda Arkhangel’ska v torgovo-promyshlennom otnoshenii [Review of history of Arkhangel’sk city in trade-industrial aspect], St Petersburg, 1890 Popov, A.N., Gorod Arkhangel’sk. Istoriya. Kul’tura. Economika. Kraevedcheskii ocherk s prilozheniyem plana. [The City of Arkhangel’sk. History. Culture. Economy. Review of local lore with plan attachment], Arkhangel’sk, 1928 Vertyachikh, A.Yu., Arkhangel’skii putevoditel’ [City guide of Arkhangel’sk], Arkhangel’sk, 1996

ARKHANGEL’SKAYA OBLAST’ Arkhangel’skaya Oblast’ of the Russian Federation was created on September 23, 1937. Situated in the northeast of the country, it occupies the northern part of the East European Plain and also includes several islands in the Arctic Ocean Seas (Franz Josef Land, Novaya Zemlya, Solovetskiye Islands, and some others). The administrative center is Arkhangel’sk. The total area of the Oblast’ is 587,400 km2, which incorporates the Nenets Autonomous Okrug having an area of 176,700 km2 and its capital in the city of Naryan-Mar.

Physical Geography The shores of Arkhangel’skaya Oblast’ are washed by the Barents, White, and Kara seas. On land, it is bordered by Karelia, Vologodskaya and Kirovskaya Oblasts, Komi Republic, and Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous Okrug of Tyumenskaya Oblast’. Arkhangel’skaya Oblast’ is largely a lowland country. A few plateaulike watersheds, sometimes hilly and wet, are elevated 150–270 m above sea level (Konoshskaya and Nyandomskaya Uplands, Belomorsko-Kuloyskoye Plateau). A vast swampy Pechora Lowland comprising Bol’shezemel’skaya and Malozemel’skaya tundras lies east of the Timan Range. The northwestern part of Arkhangel’skaya Oblast’ is occupied by the Vetrenny Poyas Ridge (up to 344 m above sea level). In the east, there are Timan (303 m), Kanin Kamen’ (242 m), and Pay-Khoy (467 m) ranges. The climate of Arkhangel’skaya Oblast’ is severe, with cold winters. The mean January temperature is −12.5oC in Arkhangel’sk and −18.4°C in Amderma. The mean temperature of July is 17°C in the south and 8–10°C in the northeast. Fogs are frequent on the White Sea coast (40–60 days during a year). On the whole, the weather conditions are variable. The mean annual precipitation is

150

300–400 mm in Nenets Autonomous Okrug to 500–550 mm in the south. The growth period for vegetation is as long as 50–60 days in the northeast to 150–155 days in the south. Permafrost is common in the northeast part of Arkhangel’skaya Oblast’ north of 66° N. Coastal waters are shallow with numerous banks (“koshki”). Arkhangel’skaya Oblast’ has a dense network of rivers and lakes. All the rivers (except the Ileks) belong to the drainage basin of the Arctic Ocean. The largest of them are the Severnaya Dvina (with the Vychegda, Pinega, and Vaga tributaries), Onega, Mezen’, and Pechora. From 50% to 65% of the annual flow occurs with autumn floods. Outside flood periods, most rivers are shallow. There are about 2500 lakes in Arkhangel’skaya Oblast’ mostly located in the Onega drainage basin and in the northeastern part of the region. The largest are Lakes Lacha, Kenozero, and Kozhozero. A major part of the territory lies in the taiga zone, its northeastern part in the tundra while oceanic islands are covered by Arctic deserts and glaciers. Forests occupy about 40% of Arkhangel’skaya Oblast’. The fauna includes many commercially valuable species, such as ptarmigan and willow grouse, squirrel, alpine hare, red fox, wolf, brown and polar bears, hazel and black grouses, and capercaillie.

Resources and Economy The most important natural resources are oil and natural gas (in the Timan-Pechora province), timber, sodium and potassium salt, coal, bauxites, diamonds, and raw building materials. There are two health resorts at Sol’vychegodsk and Solonikha. The population is about (2003) 1,335,700 including around 41,500 in Nenets Autonomous Okrug. Mean population density is 2.5 people per sq km. The overwhelming majority lives along the railroad (one-third of the total), in the lower reaches of the Severnaya Dvina (almost two-fifths), in the Vaga River basin, and in the middle course of the Severnaya Dvina (over one-tenth). The lowest population density is recorded in the Mezen’ and Pinega basins and in Nenets Autonomous Okrug. The urban population accounts for 74% of the total. Arkhangel’skaya Oblast’ has 11 cities and 37 urban settlements. The largest cities are Arkhangel’sk (population 362,700), Severodvinsk (234,500), Kotlas (66,000), Novodvinsk (48,600), and Koryazhma (44,300). In terms of ethnic composition, the population consists of Russians (92.1%), Ukrainians (3.4%), indigenous northern peoples (0.5%), and other groups (4.0%). The economy is dominated by industry (54.9%). In 1998, it accounted for 33.2% of GDP whereas agriculture accounted for 5.3%, building for 4.8%, transport for 10.6%, and trade for 9.2%.

ARKHANGEL’SKAYA OBLAST’

Main cities and rivers in Arkhangel’skaya Oblast’.

The most advanced industries in Arkhangel’skaya Oblast’ are machine construction, metal processing, fuel and energy production, and fishery. The timber industry with wood and cellulose processing is of utmost importance. It accounts for 53% of the total industrial production in Arkhangel’skaya Oblast’ and for a significant part of all lumber, saw-timber, cellulose, and paper produced in Russia. Animal husbandry plays a leading role in the agriculture of Arkhangel’skaya Oblast’. Its most developed lines are dairy farming and reindeer herding. Major products of plant cultivation are vegetables, potato, cereals, and technical crops. Other economic activities are traditional hunting and fur farming. Arkhangel’skaya Oblast’ has a well-developed transport infrastructure. The total length of railroads is 18,000 km, that of hard-surfaced roads is 10,000 km, and inner navigable waterways is 3800 km. Arkhangel’sk sea port is the largest on the White Sea and one of the most

important in the Russian Arctic. Other large ports are Onega, Mezen’, Naryan-Mar, and Amderma. A unique installation of national importance is the Plisetsk space center. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, it is the sole site of operation for the Russian space program equipped with complete facilities for launching space vehicles. Another unique object is the chief nuclear weapons testing ground on Novaya Zemlya, where nuclear tests have been conducted since the 1950s. In 1990, Russia announced and still observes the moratorium on nuclear testing. However, the Novaya Zemlya test site continues to be used for basic and applied research. Belushiya Guba, founded in the late 19th century, is the administrative center of the testing ground and in fact the “capital” of Novaya Zemlya. The high level of industrialization is responsible for a relatively heavy environmental pollution. Arkhangel’skaya Oblast’ is the 16th region in Russia in terms of discharge of industrial wastes into the atmosphere and the 14th one in terms of the amount of contaminated runoff into rivers and water bodies (1999). The major sources of environmental pollution are large paper and cellulose mills in Koryazhma, Novodvinsk, and Arkhangel’sk and power stations in Severodvinsk and Arkhangel’sk. An extensive network of protected territories has been created to exercise nature conservation. The largest of them are Pinezhsky (51,100 ha) and Nenetsky (313,400 ha) nature reserves, Vodlozersky (469,900 ha, partly in Karelia) and Kenozersky (139,700 ha) national parks, and federal nature sanctuary Zemlya Frantsa Iosifa (Franz Josef Land, 445,000 ha). In addition, there are 34 nature sanctuaries of regional importance, two botanical gardens, and 70 natural monuments. It is proposed that two more areas in Arkhangel’skaya Oblast’ be designated as national parks: “Onezhskoye Pomorye” (300,000 ha) and “Russkaya Arktika” (5,200,000 ha), the first national park in the Russian Arctic. Arkhangel’skaya Oblast’ has over 2500 historical and cultural monuments (without archaeological monuments) and two open-air museums (Solovetsky and Kargopol’sky). The museum of folk architecture Malye Karely near Arkhangel’sk is widely known both in Russia and abroad for its numerous 16th–20th-century buildings, which were brought from various regions of the Russian North (Kargopol’-Onega, the Severnaya Dvina, the Vaga, the Pinega, the Mezen’, the White Sea). The Solovetsky museum is on UNESCO’s List of World Cultural Heritage as featuring outstanding specimens of Russian monastic culture. YURI MAZOUROV See also Arkhangel’sk; Franz Josef Land; Nenets Autonomous Okrug; Novaya Zemlya; Pechora River; Severnaya Dvina; Solovetski Islands

151

ARMS CONTROL Further Reading Ebbinge, B.S. et al. (editors), Heritage of the Russian Arctic: Research, Conservation and International Co-operation, Moscow: Ecopros Publishers, 2000 Economicheskaya I Sotsial’naya Geographiya Rossii: Uchebnik dlya Vuzov. Pod Red. Prof. A.T. Khruscheva (A.T. Khruschev (editor), Economic and Social Geography of Russia), Moscow: Drofa, 2001 Gosudarstvennyi Doklad “O Sostoyanii i ob Okhrane Okrushayuschei Prirodnoy Sredy Rossiiskoi Federatsii v 2002 godu” [State Report: State of Environment and Conservation in the Russian Federation in 2002], Moscow: MPR, 2003 Regiony Rossii: Statisticheskii Sbornik (Regions of Russia: Statistical Handbook, 2 volumes), Moscow: Goscomstat of Russia, 2000 The Demographic Yearbook of Russia: Statistical Handbook, Moscow: Goscomstat of Russia, 2000 Yablokov, A.V. (editor), Rossiiskaya Arctika na Poroge katastrofy (Russian Arctic: On the Edge of Catastrophe), Moscow: Tsentr Ecologitcheskoi Politiki Rossii, 1996

ARMS CONTROL The history of arms control and the various fora that have been created to provide for negotiations in this field are a reflection of the scope and complexity of the issues involved. Arms control deals essentially with two broad categories of proposals: those for measures that build confidence and those that result in reductions and limitations of military manpower and equipment. Along with the global, multilateral discussions in the United Nations and at the Committee on Disarmament in Geneva and the bilateral US -Soviet negotiations, the third major focus of arms control negotiations has been in Europe. Soviet interest in arms control for the far north was first articulated by Premier Nikolai Bulganin in a 1958 proposal for a zone in Northern Europe “free of atomic and hydrogen weapons.” In the Breznev era, the avowed military doctrine of the Soviet Union at the political level, and the actual Soviet policy as well, generally reflected a defensive orientation. In the 1970s, the Soviets, in giving precedence to mutual deterrence over war-waging capabilities at the intercontinental level, signed agreements with the United States virtually banning antiballistic missile (ABM) defenses and stabilizing strategic offensive arms at high levels (all that the United States was then prepared to do). But the same criteria, seen by both the Soviet Union and the United States as appropriate for ensuring deterrence and defense, also helped to assure a continuing arms race, which was mitigated only to a limited extent by negotiated strategic arms limitations. Both sides also settled for protracted Mutual and Balanced Force Reduction (MBFR) conventional arms talks without agreements—and with conventional arms proposals that sought only to stabilize existing levels. After the

152

onset of the “new cold war,” from 1980 to 1985, all progress in Soviet-American arms control was placed on hold. Bilateral negotiations in this period were unproductive; by 1984, not even the ritual of bilateral talks was observed. Meanwhile, in the early 1980s, three negotiations were actively under way, though all with uncertain prospects. These were negotiations between the Warsaw Pact and the NATO on the Reduction of Armed Forces and Armaments and Associated Measures in Central Europe; the US-Soviet negotiations on intermediaterange nuclear forces in Geneva; and the discussions of confidence-building measures (CBM) and general disarmament in Europe, which was part of the follow-up to the 1975 Final Act of the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe (CSCE). Under General Secretary and Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev, the Soviet leadership adopted the position that New Thinking was an imperative, and then Moscow began to translate it into policy positions and actions. Although proposals for a “Nordic nuclearweapons-free zone” have been the most prominent and continuing feature of the Soviet arms control policy for the Arctic, Gorbachev’s new proposal advanced in his Murmansk speech (1987) was much broader, calling for an Arctic “zone of peace.” This “Murmansk initiative” has been reiterated by Soviet diplomats abroad and was emphasized by Premier Nikolai Ryzhkov on his trip through Scandinavia (1987). The arms control portion of the Murmansk speech in reality would limit NATO military activity in Scandinavia and the adjacent seas to a greater degree than Warsaw Pact activity. The original address failed to include the Kola Peninsula—the largest concentration of military power in the world—in the framework of the talks, as well as the Barents and Kara seas, in which the Soviet Northern Fleet and much of the Soviet sea-based strategic nuclear force operated. Later on, the Kola and Barents have been mentioned by Soviet officials, but no details have been provided concerning what limitations or reductions in force strength and activities would be considered for them. There was, in fact, very little that was really new in the specific arms control proposals made at Murmansk, although more detail has been given than in the past. Since 1958, the Kremlin has consistently promoted a Nordic nuclearfree zone, and the Soviet Union has periodically attempted to extend the confidence- and securitybuilding measures to be discussed in the CCSBMDE to naval and air maneuvers. In accordance with the START-II disarmament treaty, the number of strategic missiles on board Northern Fleet submarines will be reduced to a total of 1750 by the year 2003. Most likely the number will be even smaller. Here a strategic nuclear missile is removed from a Delta-II class submarine at a naval

ARMS CONTROL TABLE 1 Missile type

Number of warheads (Soviet Union)

Number of warheads (USA)

Number permitted: START-I

Number permitted: START-II, by 2003

Number permitted: START-II, at 2007

Ballistic missiles Intercontinental missiles Submarine launched missiles Total

9416 5958 2804 18,178

8210 2000 5760 15,970

4900 1540 Not specified

Not specified 1200 2160

Not specified 0 1750

base on the Kola Peninsula. Once their missiles have been removed, the nuclear submarines are then laid up. Assuming that the terms of START-II (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty) are fulfilled, by the year 2003 over 50% of Russia’s strategic nuclear warheads will be carried on nuclear submarines as opposed to just under 25% today. According to START-II, a maximum of 1750 nuclear warheads may be placed on Russian submarines. This means that the number of nuclear weapons onboard submarines as a total will decrease, but the strategic position of the Northern Fleet will be far more important in Russian nuclear strategy than it is today. According to Russian military experts, the Russian Navy in the future will need to retain a maximum of 16 strategic nuclear submarines, 21 attack submarines, and 12 tactical submarines. Western experts maintain that even fewer submarines will be required. If the number of permitted strategic nuclear warheads per submarine is decisive for the number of submarines Russia chooses to maintain in service, the six Project 941—Typhoon class submarines in combination with seven submarines from the Project 667 BDRM—Delta-IV class should prove sufficient. These 13 nuclear submarines can carry 1750 nuclear warheads between them; however, it seems unlikely that Russia would choose a defense system based solely upon strategic nuclear submarines. A new Project 971—Akula class attack submarine was delivered in 1996. Furthermore, there are three nuclear submarines of the new Project 885— Severodvinsk class currently under construction, a type that can be used both as a strategic and attack submarine. The reduction in the number of nuclear warheads as a result of START-I and START-II is shown in Table 1. The table also compares the nuclear balance between the United States and Russia, as well as the distribution of nuclear warheads on land and at sea. A significant role in confidence building in the Arctic during the Cold War was played by Norway and Denmark. in 1961, Norway (and Denmark) announced that no nuclear weapons would be introduced on their territories, that no NATO bases would be hosted, and that no large-scale NATO exercises would be permitted

near the Soviet border. Nor, it announced in early 1978, would large numbers of West German forces participate in NATO exercises on Norwegian soil. Norway has also kept force levels in Finnmark at a low threshold and has been slow to develop radar facilities and military bases there to avoid arousing undue Soviet alarm over its defensive and missile capabilities. The affairs of the Arctic region are still, to a considerable extent, characterized by overhang from the Cold War. During the past 50 years, relations in military affairs within the region were entirely encapsulated in Cold War diplomacy. That is to say, inter-Nordic cooperation, always active during this period, hardly ever extended to the area of security and defense. In these matters, relations were strictly formal, and the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe (CSCE) was the only framework in which the Nordic and indeed Northern states could associate more freely, if still quite formally. Here, various confidenceand security-building measures were worked out during the latter part of the Cold War, continuing into the 1990s. The Conventional Armed Forces in Europe Treaty (CFE) was part of this process. This Treaty, agreeing to significantly reduce and put under surveillance five categories of ground-fighting equipment (tanks, artillery, armored personnel carriers, combat helicopters, and combat aircraft), was concluded between NATO and the Warsaw Pact in 1990 and implemented between 1992 and 1996, with some Russian delays authorized until 1999. The CFE Treaty has had a rather special role in the relations of the Arctic region, in part because of its flank feature that restricts the freedom of deployments in the far northwest and the far southwest (Norway and Turkey), and in part because five states in the region are not signatories and thus only implicitly part of the regime (three Baltic states, Finland, and Sweden). The revision of the Treaty (completed in November 1999) has brought it into line with the post-Cold War setting and the expanded NATO. The possibility that one or more of the five Northern non-CFE members may accede to the Treaty is one of the intriguing aspects of the politics surrounding the Treaty as it enters its second decade.

153

ARMSTRONG, TERENCE The role of Confidence and Security Building Measures (CSBMs) in the region has not been developed to its maximum potential. The main obstacle to regional arrangements is the preservation of a “genuine link” between the regional level and the allEuropean level. Several states in the region object to any military arrangements, which is not of an allEuropean agreement. The current climate of amity in the Arctic region provides an opportunity to put confidence-and security-building measures in place in the Arctic, as a hedge against any future decline in political relations, or the growth of instability in Russia. Military activity in the Arctic is anything but over. In particular, the Arctic Ocean continues to be the site of underwater cat-andmouse games between the nuclear submarines of the US and Russian navies. NIKITA A. LOMAGIN See also Militarization of the Arctic; Murmansk Speech (1987); Thule Air Base Further Reading Arctic Council website: www.arctic-council.usgs.gov “Arms Control and Disarmament.” In The North Atlantic Treaty Organization. Facts and Figures, Brussels, Belgium: 1989 Blacker, Coit D. and Gloria Duffy (editors), International Arms Control. Issues and Agreements (2nd edition), Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1984 Bonvicini, Gianni, Tapani Vaahtoranta & Wolfgang Wessels (editors), The Northern EU. National Views on the Emerging Security Dimension. Programme on the Northern Dimension of the CFSP, Volume 9, The Finnish Institute of International Affairs, 2000

ARMSTRONG, TERENCE During the post-World War II era, a handful of scholars outside the Soviet Union attempted to study and understand the vast development and extraordinary changes taking place in the Soviet North. Such research was complex and rarely orderly because nearly all of the Soviet Arctic (Western Siberia, Eastern Siberia, and the Far Northeast) remained a controlled and closed region to Soviet citizens as well as foreign nationals. Foremost among these dedicated scholars was Terence Armstrong of the Scott Polar Research Institute, University of Cambridge, who was much admired and respected throughout the circumpolar world. Armstrong’s Russian linguistic abilities, travels in Siberia and elsewhere in the Arctic (Greenland, the Canadian Arctic, and Alaska), and understanding of social and economic geography combined to make him a leading figure not only in knowledge of Soviet activities in the Arctic but also as an influential

154

contributor to the broader issues of human adaptation and change in the circumpolar north. Early in his career Armstrong focused his dissertation research on the history of the Northern Sea Route. He published an expanded version of this doctoral work as The Northern Sea Route, Soviet Exploitation of the North East Passage. This volume remains the seminal work in English on the history of the Northern Sea Route from the 16th century to 1949, and it is based principally on Russian language sources. Armstrong followed this with The Russians in the Arctic (1958) and Russian Settlement in the North (1965), an authoritative treatise focusing on Russia’s advance into the north from the 11th century to Soviet settlement during 1917–1959. Later, in 1975, he edited an equally important volume in the Hakluyt Society’s series, Yermak’s Campaign in Siberia. Interwoven with these scholarly activities were his visits to the Soviet North. By the early 1970s, Armstrong had made seven visits to the USSR, including three to northeast Siberia. He usually conducted these trips as an exchange visitor under the Anglo-Soviet Cultural Agreement in place during the Cold War period. An example of the access he was afforded came in July 1967 when he spent a week on a field expedition with the Soviet botanist Professor V.N. Andreyev on the upper Yana River, a remote region of Yakutia. One of his most notable visits to the Soviet Union was the first (May 28 to June 9, 1956). Armstrong and Brian Roberts of Scott Polar Research Institute visited the Arctic Institute in Leningrad (today the Arctic and Antarctic Research Institute) and other organizations in Leningrad and Moscow concerned with polar research. An exchange of visits had been proposed by Scott Polar in July 1955, and during April 18–28, 1956 Aleksey Feodorovich Treshnikov and I.V. Maximov of the Arctic Institute visited Cambridge. Armstrong and Roberts returned with more than 100 Russian polar publications, which formed the nucleus of the Institute’s unmatched Russian Arctic collection. During the next three decades, Armstrong established publication exchanges with a wide network of organizations and institutes throughout Russia. Terence Armstrong also had early opportunities to fly over the North Pole with the Royal Air Force (1953) and sail aboard the Canadian icebreaker HMCS Labrador on its maiden voyage through the North West Passage (1954). These expeditions led to imaginative and pioneering contributions to the study and identification of Arctic sea ice. Armstrong devised a set of symbols to indicate the extent to which sea ice was an obstacle to shipping, a classification scheme he used in a 1958 atlas titled Sea Ice North of the USSR published by the British Admiralty’s Hydrographic Department. With support from UNESCO, he later

ARNASSON, INGOLFUR collaborated with Brian Roberts and Charles Swithinbank on the Illustrated Glossary of Snow and Ice (1966), which included equivalent terms and indexes in Danish, Finnish, French, German, Icelandic, Norwegian, Russian, and Spanish. One of Armstrong’s lasting legacies remains his scholarship for the Polar Record (the Scott Polar Research Institute’s journal), to which he contributed for more than 40 years. The breadth of his research was remarkable: annual reviews of Northern Sea Route activities; ice atlases; northern agriculture and mining; northern peoples; railways; education, employment and wage differences in the Arctic; polar drifting stations and Arctic climatology; Arctic place names; ethical problems of northern development; as well as scores of polar historical notes and obituaries of prominent polar personalities. He collaborated with George Rogers of Alaska and Graham Rowley of Canada to write a standard reference, The Circumpolar North: A Political and Economic Geography of the Arctic and Sub-arctic (1978). This influential work on Northern affairs described in a single volume the range of differing political, economic, and social systems in the North. During Armstrong’s career and travels throughout the circumpolar world, he took great care to visit with the indigenous residents of each region. From the mid-1970s to the end of his life, he worked closely with Frank Darnell of Alaska to improve the education of Arctic and Subarctic indigenous peoples.

Biography Terence Edward Armstrong was born in Oxted, Surrey, England, on April 7, 1920. His parents were linen merchants in Northern Ireland, but the family had moved back to England prior to his birth. He attended Winchester School, where he began his lifelong study of the Russian language. In 1939, he attended Magdalene College, University of Cambridge, where he attained first class honors in Russian (1940) and was mentored by Professor (Dame) Elizabeth Hill, a wellknown scholar of Slavonic studies. World War II interrupted his university life, and he saw action during 1940–1946 with the British Army Intelligence Corps and First Airborne Division in North Africa, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, and Germany. Armstrong married Iris Forbes in 1943, and they had two sons and two daughters. For nearly his entire academic life, the family lived in Harston House, a large home in the village of Harston, South Cambridgeshire, where they warmly entertained legions of polar scholars and northerners for more than four decades. He earned degrees at the University of Cambridge, including his Ph.D. in 1951 for a dissertation entitled The Development of the

Northern Sea Route. Following World War II, he returned to Cambridge and in 1947 was appointed a fellow in Russian at the Scott Polar Research Institute, University of Cambridge. He subsequently served the Institute as Assistant Director of Research (1956–1977), Reader in Arctic Studies (1977–1983), and Acting Director (1982–1983). Armstrong played leading roles as a founder (in 1964) and early tutor in Clare Hall, a new college at the University of Cambridge. He also made important contributions to the Hakluyt Society in the United Kingdom, serving as secretary for 25 years and guiding to press more than 50 scholarly volumes of the records of significant voyages and expeditions. Armstrong was a fellow of the Arctic Institute of North America and the Royal Geographical Society, and was awarded the Society’s Cuthbert Peek Award (1963) and Victoria Medal (1978) in recognition of his many contributions to geography and a greater understanding of the Arctic. Armstrong died at his home in Harston, England, on February 21, 1996. LAWSON W. BRIGHAM See also Northern Sea Route; Treshnikov, Aleksey Feodorovich; Yakutia Further Reading Armstrong, Terence E., The Northern Sea Route, Soviet Exploitation of the North East Passage, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1952 ———, The Russians in the Arctic, Aspects of Soviet Exploration and Exploitation of the Far North, 1937–1957, London: Methuen, 1958 ———, Russian Settlement in the North, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1965 ——— (editor), Yermak’s Campaign in Siberia, London: The Hakluyt Society, 1975 ———, “In Search of a Sea Route to Siberia, 1553–1619.” Arctic, 37(4) (1984): 429–440 Armstrong, T., G. Rogers & G. Rowley, The Circumpolar North, London: Methuen, 1978 Heap, J. (compiler), “Polar profile, Terence Edward Armstrong.” Polar Record, 32(182) (1996): 265–270 Speak, P., “Terence Edward Armstrong 1920–1996.” In Geographers, Bibliographical Studies, Volume 18, edited by P. Armstrong & G. Martin, London: Mansell, 1998

ARNASSON, INGOLFUR According to the first historian to write in Icelandic, Ari fróði (Ari the Learned, 1067–1148), Iceland was settled around 870. This chronology fits well, if not exactly, with archaeological evidence that suggests that the settlement of Iceland began shortly before 871, when a volcanic eruption produced the so-called settlement layer. Ari further states that the first settler of Iceland was a man called Ingólfr (Ingolfur

155

ARNASSON, INGOLFUR Arnasson) who came from Norway. Ingólfr is also mentioned briefly by Norwegian historians of the 12th century in Historia Norwegiae (c.1150) and Historia de antiquitate regum Norwagiensium by Theodricus (c.1180). The patronymic Arnasson (or Arnarson) does not appear until the 13th century in family sagas such as Egils saga and Eyrbyggja saga. Although Ingólfr was the first settler of Iceland, he was not the first person to inhabit the country. Apart from the Irish monks reported to have lived in Iceland, at least three persons of note had visited before and at least one of them left behind peoples who remained. Ingólfr (Arnasson) was, however, the first person of note to settle permanently in Iceland. Around 1100, the earliest version of Landnámabók or Landnáma (The Book of Settlements) is believed to have been composed, but scholars disagree as to whether it pre- or postdated Ari’s writing. This version is now lost, but in later manuscripts, especially Sturlubók (composed by Sturla Þórðarson, 1214–1284) and Hauksbók (composed by Haukr Erlendsson, d. 1334), the story of Ingólfr is told in detail. According to these sources, Ingólfr came to Iceland around 874 CE along with his foster-brother Hjo¸rleifr, who was subsequently slain by Celtic slaves whom he had captured during his raids in Ireland. Ingólfr then killed the slaves in Vestmannaeyja (the Westmann Islands). The Sturlubók version of Landnáma is thought to be more extensive than older versions because Sturla Þórðarson added considerable material from the family sagas. But scholars believe that even if the story in its basic outline might still derive from some older version of Landnámabók, it would nevertheless be suspect. Legends of two brothers who founded a community are common (e.g., Romulus and Remus in Rome, Hengist and Horsa in Anglo-Saxon England), and in these legends, one of the brothers invariably gets killed whereas the other becomes the mythical founder of the community. Scholars have also noted the moralistic aspect of such mythical stories. According to the legends, the amorous quarrels of his foster-brother Hjo¸rleifr led to his and Ingólfr’s flight from Norway. Following this, Ingólfr explored the new land recently discovered in the North Atlantic while his foster-brother plundered throughout the British Isles, gathering a large booty as well as the Irish slaves who later caused his death. The brothers then went on separate ships to Iceland, where Hjo¸rleifr met his fate. Ingólfr, who was a great believer in the heathen religion, blamed his foster-brother for his own negligence in religious matters. Furthermore, the legends maintain that when Ingólfr arrived in Iceland from Norway, he threw the pillars of his high seat overboard and asked the gods to

156

wash them ashore where he should settle. He landed in southeast Iceland and spent three years searching the shore until he found his lost pillars in a place he named Reykjavík (Smoky Bay), perhaps because of the geothermal steam he saw rising there. He built a farm there in what is now the heart of downtown Reykjavík. A number of place-names on the southern coast of Iceland are connected with Ingólfr (Arnasson), including Ingólfshöfði (the cape of Ingólfr) in southeastern Iceland and Ingólfsfell (the mountain of Ingólfr) in the O ¸ lfus region. The third version of the Landnámabók, which dates from this period, Melabók is only known in fragments; however, the story it tells appears somewhat different from previous versions. In the Melabók version, Ingólfr has a different patronym; he is not Arnarson but Bjo¸rnúlfsson. As scholars generally believe Melabók to stem from an older version of Landnáma than the Sturlubók or Hauksbók versions, it is quite probable that the generally known patronym of Ingólfr is incorrect, and that there was no Ingólfr Arnarson. After all, in the oldest narratives, he is simply called Ingólfr. The question of Ingólfr’s ancestry remains significant because he may have been connected to the family of Bjo¸rn buna that produced many prominent settlers in Iceland. Researchers and historians know little about the life of Ingólfr after he settled in Iceland. According to Landnámabók, he helped organize a settlement in the region closest to his farm in Reykjavík. There he laid claim to vast tracts of land, which included the entire region between Hvalfjo¸rðr in the west and O ¸ lfussá in the south, but he later gave most of it away to other settlers. Ingólfr’s son, Þorsteinn, founded the first parliament in Iceland, called Kjalarnesfling. Ingólfr therefore most likely died before social organization in the region was complete. His kin remained prominent in the public sphere of Iceland for the first decades after settlement, and his grandson Þorkell máni Þorsteinsson held the dignified position of speaker at the parliament from 970 to 984. Subsequently, the clan faded into obscurity. Reykjavík lost its position as an important farm area in Iceland, and did not regain it until the Danish government established its protoindustrial workshops there during the 18th century. In 1924, a statue of Ingólfr, by the sculptor Einar Jónsson (1874–1954), was erected at the mound of Arnarhóll in Reykjavík.

Biography Ingólfur Arnasson was born c.850 at Fjalir in Norway. According to the earliest known tradition, his family came from Hjo¸rðaland. His father was either named O ¸ rn or more probably Bjo¸rnúlfr. Arnasson traveled to

ARON FROM KANGEQ Iceland c.870, where he founded a settlement. He subsequently lived at a farm in Reykjavík, Iceland. He married Hallveig Fróðadóttir; they had a son, Þorsteinn. The date of Arnasson’s death is unknown. SVERRIR JAKOBSSON See also Iceland; Reykjavík Further Reading Ellehøj, Svend, Studier over den ældste norrøne historieskrivning, Copenhagen: 1965 Íslendingabók. Landnámabók (Íslenzk fornrit, I), edited by Jakob Benediktsson, Reykjavík, Iceland: 1968 Jóhannesson, Jón, Gerðir Landnámabókar, Reykjavík, Iceland: 1941 Monumenta Historica Norwegiae. Latinske kildeskrifter til Norges historie i middelalderen, edited by Gustav Storm, Kristiania, Norway: 1880 Líndal, Sigurður, “Sendiför Úlfljóts ásamt nokkrum athugasemdum um landnám Ingólfs Arnarsonar.” Skírnir, 143 (1969): 5–26 Pálsson, Hermann, “Vesturvíking Hjörleifs.” Saga, 2 (1954– 1958): 309–315 Rafnsson, Sveinbjörn, Studier i Landnámabók. Kritiska bidrag till den isländska fristatstidens historia, Volume XXXI, Lund, Sweden: Bibliotheca Historica Lundensis, 1974 Sørensen, Preben Meulengracht, “Sagan um Ingólf og Hjörleif.” Skírnir, 148 (1974): 20–40 Matthíasson, Haraldur, Landið og landnám, 2 volumes, Reykjavík, Iceland: 1982

ARON FROM KANGEQ Aron from Kangeq, an indigenous figure in Greenland in the 19th century, is considered a forerunner among Greenlandic pictorial artists. His illustrations of the oral storytelling tradition have gained status as a symbol of the new artistic tradition developed in Greenland in the mid-19th century. In addition to his oeuvre of watercolors, woodcuts, and drawings, Aron was also a dedicated writer of the oral tradition. Crucial to Aron’s life as an artist and the development of the art of painting in Greenland was Hinrich Johannes Rink (1819–1893), the governor of the Southern District of Greenland from 1855 to 1868. Rink was aware that in spite of the cultural suppression on the part of the Danish and German missions, Greenlanders secretly kept alive their traditional oral songs and stories. Amid rapid social and cultural changes within the Greenlandic community, Rink recognized the importance of preserving the knowledge about indigenous cultural traditions. On April 22, 1858, influenced by various projects of collecting folklore in Denmark, Rink sent out an “invitation” to the settlements on the West Coast, the colonized area of Greenland. Rink encouraged the Greenlanders to record their knowledge of the oral traditions, and to contribute maps and drawings. Rink had brought a

small, wooden printing press to Godthåb from Copenhagen, with which he intended to print the written material in Danish and Greenlandic. His initiative was met with great enthusiasm among the Greenlanders all along the West Coast who sent him their written manuscripts of the oral traditional folktales and stories. The collected material resulted in the four small volumes of Kaladlit Oqalluktualliait/ Grönlandske Folkesagn [Greenlandic Folktales], printed by Rink between the years 1859 and 1863. Rink’s invitation likewise spurred the work of Aron. Aron came from Kangeq, a small settlement a few miles outside of the colonial administrative center of Godthåb (presently Nuuk, Greenland’s capital) where residents eagerly responded to Rink’s project. Aron began contributing to the collection of folktales by illustrating stories that other people had written down. Samuel Kleinschmidt (1814–1886), a DanishGreenlandic missionary and teacher in Godthåb, who knew Aron from collaborating with the artist on map drawings, had shown Rink one of Aron’s drawings. It was an illustration of the settlement Kangaamiut, and it must have engendered the idea of encouraging indigenous documentation of cultural knowledge. Rink published his invitation only a couple of weeks later with the specific invitation to Aron to illustrate the collection of manuscripts. Another illustrator, Jens Kreutzmann from Kangaamiut, also sent Rink his works, but Rink used Aron as the primary illustrator. Rink probably selected a key group of manuscripts and sent them to Aron so that the artist might choose which stories to illustrate. Scholars know from the two men’s correspondence that Rink provided Aron with his materials, which were scarce in Greenland at that time. Rink supplied paper, pencils, and pigments from Godthåb to Kangeq via kayak. In late 1858, Rink introduced Aron to wood carving as a printmaking method. The first two volumes of Kaladlit Oqalluktualliait/Grönlandske Folkesagn (published in 1859 and 1860) as well as the newspaper Atuagagdliutit (started in 1861) featured Aron’s woodcut illustrations. He earned national recognition for these and the picture book Prøver af Grønlandsk Tegning og Trykning 1857–61 [Examples of Greenlandic Drawing and Printing], a gift to King Frederik VII of Denmark. Although the woodcut medium represented a significant portion of Aron’s work, he subsequently concentrated on watercolor, with which he developed a characteristic style. The watercolors effectively witnessed Aron’s intimate relationship with Greenlandic landscape and its colors, people, and their culture. He often executed several illustrations for one manuscript in order to visualize the key scenes of a narrative and elucidate plot. In addition to illustrating other people’s

157

ART AND ARTISTS (INDIGENOUS) stories, Aron began to write his own texts, eventually distinguishing himself as an indigenous writer. Aware of the essential differences between the oral and the written medium, Aron remained sensitive to the written context and focused on creating comprehensible and coherent narratives as compared to many of the other writers who contributed to Rink’s collection. Aron sensitively described his characters’ inner life; moreover, his descriptions were also often more detailed than was the case with the other writers. The recording of oral narratives necessarily entailed the loss of important elements of traditional storytelling, such as the storyteller’s use of voice and body language, which could not be relayed in writing. Through the combination of text and image, Aron nevertheless managed to relay a sense of the vitality and the dynamics of the oral storytelling tradition. The oral tradition included both legends from ancient times and tales of contemporary events. Aron represented both types in his art, and several manuscripts and illustrations described the seminal meeting of the Inuit and the European cultures; these cultural conflicts comprised some of Aron’s first artistic motives. His fascination with material from ancient times (pre-European contact) remained a frequent and enduring theme. A devout Christian, Aron expressed difficulties with the Inuit’s “heathen” past; in contrast with other writers such as Jens Kreutzmann, who claimed that the ancient material belonged to the past and Christianity to the present, Aron often tried to adjust the ancient Inuit worldview to comply with Christian morals. When Rink and his wife Signe left Greenland in 1868, they brought the collected material, including Aron’s works. Signe Rink (1836–1909) held a stronger sense of the ethnographic value of the illustrations than her husband, who had primarily been interested in the written manuscripts and regarded the illustrations as a curiosity. In 1905, Signe Rink donated the bulk of Aron’s watercolors to the National Museum in Copenhagen, excluding a selection of illustrations that she found either improper or not belonging to the ancient tradition of storytelling, such as the cultural meeting between the Europeans and the Inuit. These were given to the University Museum of Ethnography in Oslo by relatives after Rink’s death. The main collection of Aron’s watercolors in Copenhagen remained hidden until 1960, when Eigil Knuth rediscovered the museum collection and presented them to the public. This portion of the collection was transferred from Copenhagen to the National Museum of Greenland in 1982.

Biography Aron was born in Kangeq, a hunting society in South Western Greenland in 1822, the son of Ane Benigna

158

(1798–1875) and Christian Heinrich (1801–1859). Aron’s father was a catechist for the German Herrnhuter mission in Kangeq, just like his father Abraham had done. Aron had three younger brothers who all died at a young age. Aron married his wife Persita in 1843; their only son Apollo died at the age of one year. Aron suffered from tuberculosis, and during the long periods when he was bedridden, he made illustrations and wrote down oral traditional stories. Aron achieved national recognition among his contemporaries for his woodcuts and drawings. Although Aron did not receive any formal education in pictorial art, he succeeded in transforming oral and written narratives into visual form, especially painting, a unique medium in Greenland in the mid-19th century. Aron’s artistic production consisted of over 300 watercolors and drawings, about 40 woodcuts, and 56 written manuscripts. Aron died from tuberculosis in Kangeq in 1869 at the age of 47. JENNY FOSSUM GRØNN See also Art and Artists (Indigenous); Rink, Hinrich Johannes Further Reading Knuth, Eigil, Aron fra Kangeq, Grønlands Guldaldermester, København: Nationalmuseets Arbejdsmark, 1960 ———, Aron of Kangeq—The Norsemen and the Skraelings, Godthåb: Det Grønlandske Forlag, 1968 ———, The Art of Greenland, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1983 ———, Aron fra Kangeq, 1822–1869, København: Brøndum, 1997 Meldgård, Jørgen, Aron—En af de mærkværdigste Billedsamlinger i Verden, København: Nationalmuseet, 1982 Thisted, Kirsten, Således skriver jeg, Aron, Nuuk: Atuakkiorfiq, 1999

ART AND ARTISTS (INDIGENOUS) The term “Arctic art” is used here to refer to the material culture of the Eskimo/Inuit and Aleut, and Northern Indians of North America, the Siberian Yupik of St Lawrence Island and the Chukotka Peninsula, and the Saami populations of Scandinavia. In the present as in the past, such small-scale societies have made objects that Westerners often classify as “art,” although none of them appear to have used the term aboriginally. Thus, any survey of indigenous art of the Arctic must begin with an explanation of how and why the term is used. Until recently, indigenous and westernized cultures conceptualized material objects differently with respect to aesthetics and function. As a rule, Westerners stopped making functional objects with an

ART AND ARTISTS (INDIGENOUS) aesthetic dimension after the Industrial Revolution. In fact, the two have become so conceptually separate that historians, artists, and critics devised a special category of objects made solely for aesthetic purposes, that is, “art.” By contrast, Arctic peoples continued to make objects that were functional as well as aesthetic for much longer. Until recently, the two were inseparable and the discrete category “art” —though by no means aesthetic sensibility—was unknown among aboriginal peoples. If Arctic peoples did not separate function and aesthetics, how can we call their objects “art?” The anthropologist Jacques Maquet has provided a helpful definition as it is used in this sense. Maquet argues that art falls into two classifications according to the intentions of its makers: (1) art by metamorphosis or (2) art by destination. Art by metamorphosis refers to objects made for “nonart” purposes and later appropriated by Euroamericans and reclassified as “art.” Art by destination, on the other hand, is used to mean objects whose makers intended them to be art all along (Maquet, 1971). In the case of Arctic art, then, the material objects made by earlier generations of Arctic artists are art by metamorphosis, whereas most of those made today are art by destination. The concept of art was first applied to the material objects of indigenous peoples by the discipline of native (indigenous) art history, which emerged in the mid-20th century. Anthropologists and archaeologists have always marveled at the distinguished beauty of Arctic material culture, but they were more interested in functional dimension than formal (or aesthetic) properties. Arctic archaeologists looked to these objects as a source of evidence for now-extinct cultures or for the earlier adaptations of extant groups (e.g., Collins, 1937), and anthropologists approached material culture as one in a set of cultural categories to list in 19th and early 20th century ethnographies (e.g., Nelson, 1899). Initially, art historians focused on description and formal analysis of objects from indigenous peoples and paid little attention to their cultural context (e.g., Goldwater, 1986). In the 1960s, however, with the rise of structural and symbolic anthropology, material culture came to be viewed as the most tangible of a set of similarly organized cultural domains whose analysis could reveal the underlying thought processes of a group (e.g., Lee, 1985). Structural and symbolic anthropology in turn gave rise to poststructuralism and postmodernism, which emphasized context including the perspective of indigenous peoples. Alternative, often conflicting, lines of evidence such as oral history are used to create a more balanced view (e.g., Fienup-Riordan, 1998). Archaeologists and Native art historians (e.g., Phillips, 1998) have borrowed structural, poststructur-

Inuit hunter figure carved out of walrus bone (artist unknown), Greenland. Copyright Bryan and Cherry Alexander Photography

al. and other related anthropological theories and applied them to their own investigations. As a result, the lines separating the three disciplines have grown increasingly blurred.

Prehistoric Period For organizational purposes this survey will be divided chronologically into three periods: archaeological, historical, and contemporary. The earliest examples of prehistoric Siberian and northern North American art are from the pre-Eskimo groups of Chukotka and St Lawrence Island, Alaska. Among the best known are the small female figures from the Okvik culture (200 BC–AD 100) excavated at Ekven, Siberia, on St Lawrence and Punuk islands, Alaska. Carved from walrus ivory, the figurines are detailed with slashing geometric lines and the circle-and-dot motif. Because the figures have articulated breasts and

159

ART AND ARTISTS (INDIGENOUS) genitalia, archaeologists think that they may have served in fertility rites. In addition to female figures, sophisticated renderings of polar bears, sea mammals, and birds are also known for Okvik. Slightly later, objects from the Old Bering Sea period (AD 100–300) excavated in these same locations register a stylistic shift to a more curvilinear style with the addition of raised bosses (Collins, 1937). Art objects from the Ipiutak culture (AD 100–600; see Ipiutak Culture; Norton Culture), centered at Pt Hope, Alaska, mainly highly decorated ivory “death” masks and small animal figures, seem to be more closely related to the ScythoSiberian animal style of Eurasia than to the art of Bering Strait and Chukotka (Larsen and Rainey, 1948). Along the North Pacific Coast, the earliest artistic object from the Aleutian Islands is an ivory humanoid figure thought to be about 3000 years old excavated from the Chaluka Mound on Umniak Island. The figurine, about 12 inches high and hung by a thong inside the house where it was uncovered, suggests that it was associated with rituals. The Aleuts also made magnificent masks, which have been found in archaeological deposits in caves, usually in association with burials of important head men rituals (Black, 1982). In Canada and Greenland, the earliest examples of artistry are the miniature ivory or wood carvings from the late phases of the Dorset Period (1000 BC–AD 1300). Most typically 2–3 inches in size, Dorset carvings include humanoid masks, polar bears with skeletal detail, and bird imagery. The function of the pieces is unknown but one miniature wood mask is tinged with red, which may be ochre, a substance often used in shamanic ceremonies across the Arctic. Another hint at the function of Dorset objects is the skeletal markings on the Dorset carvings of polar bears. Polar bears were the most common helping spirit during Thule culture. Furthermore, to access the spirit world shamans had to reduce themselves mentally to a skeletal state (McGhee, 1996). The Thule period (900–1200 AD), the immediate predecessor of modern Inuit/Eskimo culture, succeeded the early cultures of Bering Strait in the west and Dorset in the east. Arising between 900— and 1300 in northern Alaska and spreading rapidly eastward, Thule art shows some relationships with the earlier Alaskan cultures but little stylistic continuity with Dorset. Compared to the artistic output of earlier populations of Bering Strait, Thule-style art is greatly simplified in shape, and not so artistically detailed or sophisticated. Figures are more simply—sometimes more crudely—rendered. When surface decoration is present, the most characteristic motif is segmented lines and the circle-and-dot motif seen earlier in Okvik and Old Bering Sea objects. Among object types characteristic of the Thule period, small combs some 2½ inches high, most having female

160

imagery, are known from numerous sites across the Arctic, as are the so-called “Thule Birds,” small ivory game pieces used by the Inuit and Eskimo groups from Siberia to Greenland (McCartney, 1979). Early prehistoric Saami art consists mainly of pictographs of hunters pursuing reindeer, moose, and other prey dating from as early as 4200. Later finds include asbestos-tempered red pottery, iron and bronze implements with simple decorative detail, and wooden sculptures of animals, birds, and humans appear to have been used in conjunction with religious ceremonies dating from about AD 1200 to 1400 (Molk, 1991: 8–11; 1997: 28–32).

Historic Period The dates of the historic period vary according to when a group first encountered non-Natives. These are relatively meaningless in any case because most groups had received European goods in trade well before the arrival of Euroamericans. Certainly among the greatest changes affecting Arctic art during and immediately preceding the historic period was the availability of iron tools such as knives, saws, awls, and burins. Not only do the marks on objects made with steel tools differ, but more importantly they enabled artists to create objects that were more intricate in conception or had more elaborately rendered surface detail. One example of the new possibilities that steel tools brought to Arctic artists is the shift from pictographic to realistic engraving styles on walrus tusks from the Bering Strait Iñupiaq region at the turn of the 20th century. Before about 1890, artists in this area made drill bows, snow beaters, and other such objects out of bone or ivory and decorated them in a delightful pictographic, almost cartoonlike style. In 1892, however, Happy Jack (his Iñupiaq name was either Amaguaq or Angokwazhuk), an Eskimo living on Little Diomede Island, sailed aboard a whaling ship to San Francisco. En route he encountered the scrimshaw work of the Yankee whalers. When he returned to Nome, Happy Jack began copying naturalistic imagery from magazines, advertisements, post cards, and the like onto full walrus tusks. He marketed the tusks to the gold rushers around Nome and taught others his technique. Happy Jack’s work, which inspired a generation of ivory carvers both in Alaska and Chukotka, is an excellent example of the creativity that comes of the fusion of two cultures, a theme that runs through Arctic art of the historic and contemporary periods (Ray, 1984; Mitlyanskaya, 1976). Even today, collectors of indigenous art persist in their disdain for art that they perceive as “contaminated” by Euroamerican influence, a perspective that perhaps arises from the unconsciously patronizing wish to exoticize the creativity of

ART AND ARTISTS (INDIGENOUS) indigenous peoples. This is unfortunate because as often as not the cross-fertilization has resulted in explosions of creativity. The work of Happy Jack is but one example (Mitlyanskaya, 1976; Ray, 1984). One feature unifying Arctic art of the historic period is its close links to religion and ceremony. This persisted unevenly, depending upon the determination and policies of the Christian missionaries and government officials in a given area. Well into the 20th century in some areas, religious ritual served as an important source of art objects. Masks, drums, and regalia, to name just a few, all belonged to the rich ceremonial life that characterized Arctic cultures from Scandinavia to Siberia. Most Arctic groups had a religious specialist, or shaman, who derived his/her powers from communication with helping spirits. When illness or bad fortune struck, the shaman donned special regalia and embarked on a journey to determine the cause. Usually such ceremonies were public and consisted of performances lasting several nights. Among the Yup’ik Eskimos of southwestern Alaska, for example, the annual Bladder festival or ceremony culminated in a rite out on the ice in which a year’s accumulation of sea-mammal bladders were the focus of a shamanistic séance, after which the bladders were removed from the ceremonial house and returned to the spirit world through a hole in the ice. The haunting, complex masks used during the Bladder ceremony and other annual mid-winter ceremonies are among the most powerful art objects known for the Arctic (Fienup-Riordan, 1998: 38–40). The Inuit of Greenland, who were in intensive contact with Europeans from the mid-18th century onward, developed an artistic tradition more closely modeled along European lines. In the late 18th century, Danish missionaries and colonial administrators encouraged the development of an orthography of the Greenlandic language. As a result, the Greenlanders became literate well before other Inuit groups. In the mid-19th century, the Danish administrator and amateur ethnologist Hinrich Johannes Rink founded Atuagagdliutit, the first indigenous-language newspaper in the Arctic. In addition to articles, the paper published prints and drawings. Aron of Kangeq (1822–1869), one of the artists, became known throughout Greenland and Denmark for his lively watercolors of village life and Inuit tales in West Greenland. Similar to Happy Jack in Alaska, Aron was among the first Inuit artists to achieve name recognition beyond his Native settlement. Also like Happy Jack and many other artists of the historic period, Aron suffered from a disability (tuberculosis), and art provided him with an alternative source of livelihood when he was unable to support himself as a subsistence hunter (Kaalund, 1983).

Canadian Inuit art of the historic period was simple and small-scale. Around Baffin Island, men made scrimshandered walrus tusks—the result of contact with Scottish whalers—and women created magnificently sewn and beaded parkas, mittens, and boots. When the soapstone lamps characteristic of this area broke, men often carved small animals for the amusement of children out of the pieces, an activity that foreshadows Inuit soapstone carving of the contemporary period. Throughout the historic and into the contemporary period, the northern North American Indians bordering the Inuit and Eskimos have been known for their magnificent beadwork on moose and caribou skin. They produced moccasins, pouches, and pin cushions, a significant proportion of which were made for the non-Native souvenir market from the late 18th century onward. A creative synthesis of earlier porcupine quillwork with European-style embroidery, floral beadwork was introduced among the Eastern Woodland groups by Ursuline nuns. By the end of the 19th century, the floral-beadwork tradition had spread northwestward as far as the Arctic and Subarctic Athapaskans of Alaska (Duncan, 1989). In the east, the Naskapi-Montagnais Indians created tailored, European-style frock coats from caribou hide, which they painted with intricately patterned geometric designs that are unique among Native American art styles (Burnham, 1995). The Saami, like the Inuit/Eskimo groups, employed the tambourine drum in religious rites, but Saami drums, unlike those of the other Arctic groups, were decorated with pictographs of prey animals, humans, and cosmological events. Carved and elaborately decorated bone knives as well as intricate silverwork also characterized Saami art in the historic period. Women sewed the characteristic curled-front boots from reindeer skin. They also made handsome, well-executed basketry and did masterful sewing of the characteristic blue, red, and yellow cloth costumes and the distinctive four-pointed men’s hat (Kihlberg, 1999).

Contemporary Period At the turn of the 21st century, artists across the North, while maintaining their ethnic distinctiveness, are adjusting to a set of circumstances different from those faced by previous generations. Perhaps the most farreaching change is that whether they make functional/aesthetic art (more exactly replicas of functional/aesthetic art) or embrace conventional fineart media and techniques, almost all indigenous art from the Arctic today is created for consumption in a culture economically and politically more powerful than theirs. Around this central axis of change revolves a host of related issues—appropriation, authenticity,

161

ART AND ARTISTS (INDIGENOUS) thematic, and creative constraint to name a few—common to indigenous artists across the Arctic. To illustrate these developments, it will be helpful to focus on the art making of a single group, the Canadian Inuit, and to use their history as a lens through which to view more general trends. Arguably the most successful of any modern-day indigenous art form anywhere, the story of Canadian Inuit art brings to light many of the triumphs and pitfalls facing Arctic artists today. The history of Canadian Inuit soapstone sculpture and printmaking is so well known that it needs no more than a brief summary here. In the summer of 1948, James Houston, a young Canadian artist, traveled north to the settlement of Port Harrison (modernday Inukjouac) on the Ungava Peninsula (today Nouveau Québec) on the eastern side of Hudson Bay for a sketching trip. Houston befriended the local Inuit, who had recently come in off the land and had settled in makeshift camps near the Hudson’s Bay Company trading posts. Coveting Houston’s cigarettes and other scarce commodities, the Inuit brought him in trade small soapstone models similar to those that were made for children out of broken or disused soapstone lamps. Moved by the Inuit’s extreme poverty and charmed by the models, Houston carried a sampling south to the Canadian Handicrafts Guild in Montreal at the end of the summer, hoping to find a market for them. The carvings sold immediately, and the next summer Houston persuaded the Canadian government to send him north again, where he traveled from settlement to settlement encouraging the Inuit to make salable carvings. The experiment was so successful that two years later the lines outside the Handicrafts Guild for the now annual Inuit carving sale stretched around the block. In 1951, the National Gallery of Canada opened the first of many exhibitions of Inuit carving, and not long after, the work of some of the great early sculptors like Kiurak Ashoona, Usuituk Ipeeli, and Pauta Saila (all of Cape Dorset) and Davidialuk Amittuk and Charlie Sivuarapik (both of Puvirnituk) was exhibited internationally alongside the work of European modernists such as Henry Moore. Before long, art cooperatives subsidized by the government but run by the Inuit with help from non-Native art advisers like Houston, managed the carving—and later the printmaking—operations. At about this time, cooperative associations took root in northern Canada, and the first one to handle Inuit art was founded in 1960 by Father André Steinmann in Puvirnituk (Graburn, 1987; Martijn, 1963; Vallee, 1967). Fueled by the demand for Inuit art in the south, co-ops were an important first step in restoring economic and political autonomy to the Inuit. A decade after launching Inuit soapstone carving, Houston (by now living in Cape Dorset as the govern-

162

ment representative for Baffin Island) repeated the same success story with printmaking. In Cape Dorset, artists from the community submitted drawings to Houston (later to his successor, Terry Ryan, and still later to Inuit art buyers), who in consultation with the trained printmakers at the co-op, purchased those that lent themselves to printmaking and, undoubtedly, those that would appeal to non-Native collectors in the south. Later in the year, Houston and the printmakers would select ten drawings out of the hundreds, perhaps thousands, they had purchased, and these would be transformed into a limited annual edition of Cape Dorset prints. The prints were marketed in metropolitan Canada and the United States and, as was the case with the soapstone sculptures, the demand soon outstripped the supply. Artists such as Kenojuak Ashevak, Pitsiulak Ashoona, Kananginak Pootoogook, and Pudlo Pudlat became household names in the lucrative world of indigenous art collectors. Cape Dorset prints, thanks to worldwide media coverage, are now to be found in museums, art galleries, and private collections around the globe (Garburn, 1987; Houston, 1988). Cape Dorset’s spectacular success stimulated other Inuit communities to take up printmaking. Puvirnituk, Baker Lake (Qamani’tuaq), Pangnirtung, and Holman soon joined in, producing prints by equally competent artists such as Jessie Oonark of Baker Lake and Joe Talirunilik, and Josie Papialuk of Puvirnituk. Of particular note in the spread of printmaking is the printmaking process at Puvirnituk, which deviates markedly from that of Cape Dorset. In the Puvirnituk co-op, instead of using trained printmakers to transform artists’ drawings into prints, artists are issued their own print blocks and create their images directly on them. This gives the Puvirnituk prints a freshness and immediacy lacking in the more refined, sometimes studied, Cape Dorset prints (Graburn, 2000; Vallee, 1967). The history of Canadian Inuit so-called tourist art (Graburn, 1976) raises a wealth of issues that touch on the art-making situation, the North generally. First, in a pattern characteristic of the development of indigenous art forms the world over, behind soapstone sculpture and printmaking was the guidance of an intelligent and world representative of the first-world art system. Based on indigenous prototypes though they may be, the formal relationship of both the prints and the sculptures to mid-20th-century modernism is probably no accident. A skilled artist with a trained eye, Houston wielded considerable (some would argue absolute) power as a gatekeeper. Thus, the question of whether Cape Dorset art is Inuit art has been hotly debated by the Inuit, by other indigenous artists throughout the North, and by anthropologists and art historians ever since.

ART AND ARTISTS (INDIGENOUS) Whatever its influence, the Cape Dorset story raises many issues affecting indigenous artists across the Arctic. First, it demonstrates the difficulties facing indigenous artists who want to market their art from remote bush communities, whether in Alaska, Canada, Siberia, or Greenland. Without Houston’s guidance, Cape Dorset art probably would never have gotten off the ground. The obstacles are such that even the most well-connected among them would be defeated by the task. This is one reason why so many serious artists have left the North for metropolitan areas like Anchorage or Montreal. For those who leave to attend art school, it is the critical first step toward entering the world art system. For the artists left behind—and these are still in the majority in Canada though not in Alaska—except in strong art-making communities like Cape Dorset there is little infrastructure to fall back on. The result is that most market their work too cheaply to the slow if steady trickle of outsiders— teachers, health care providers, and construction workers—who pass regularly through rural communities. In Alaska, the Alaska State Council on the Arts has made marketing in remote locations a priority and provides support services such as marketing workshops for indigenous artists in rural areas. It is too soon to assess their impact, but the language barrier, the expense of travel, and the problems of organizing a career with such few local resources would seem to stack the odds against them. For artists choosing to stay in the North and working in traditional media such as ivory, feathers, and sealskin, marketing their work presents another problem. In recent decades, indigenous artists in both the Canadian and American Arctic have been severely impacted by government regulations such as the Migratory Waterfowl Act and the Marine Mammals Protection Act, both of which severely restrict the uses they can make of traditional materials (Becker, 2001). In short, art making is a hard way to earn a living under the best of circumstances, but it is particularly difficult in the Far North. Not surprisingly, those who wish to remain in rural areas often take wage-labor jobs when they are available. This is a common-enough pattern that it is probably safe to suggest that in these communities there is a negative correlation between art making and the availability of wage-labor jobs. The Cape Dorset case also raises the issue of authenticity, a long-standing concern both for artists and consumers. In Alaska and coastal British Columbia, which host a million or more tourists every summer, gift shops routinely sell copies of Native art mass produced in Indonesia and other parts of Asia where labor is cheap. To some extent, the authenticity of both Saami and Alaska Native art is protected by subsidized programs that provide artists with a sticker guaranteeing the

authenticity of their work (Holowell-Zimmer, 2001; Lincoln, 2001). However, this does not solve the problem for gift-shop owners catering to mass tourism. Even under the best of circumstances, Alaska Native artists cannot hope to compete with the mass-produced fakes. To do so would mean lowering the very standards that distinguish them as authentic artists. Realistically, the only possible compromise is for gift-shop owners to cease representing their mass-produced wares as authentic, and for indigenous artists to continue the slow and painful process of making genuine Native art for the small but devoted coterie of consumers—most of whom are locals in any case—willing to pay its deservedly high prices. Another trend illustrated by the Canadian Inuit case is the problems that stem from the restrictions in subject matter that the nonindigenous consumers impose on indigenous art and artists. As a rule, both soapstone carvings and prints past and present depict a way of life that has long since vanished: hunters harpoon seals instead of using rifles, families travel by dog sled instead of by snow machine, and mothers cook over seal oil lamps in a snow iglus and not on a range or Coleman stove in the prefabricated government-issue houses that have replaced them. This is a past almost as exotic to present-day artists as it is to their consumers. Whereas carvers and printmakers in Houston’s day communicated through their art a life they lived or at least remembered, when artists of today sit down to work they draw on the memories of their grandparents, on TV re-runs, and on the same glossy exhibition catalogs found on the coffee tables of art collectors. If their work sometimes falls flat, it is unnecessary to look any farther than this simple truth for an explanation. The obligation to create an art about life in the past is by no means confined to soapstone sculpture or printmaking. In Alaska, serious social problems such as drug and alcohol abuse are rarely explored through art. Of today’s well-known artists, only Ronald Senungetuk (In˜upiaq), Jack Abraham (Central Yup’ik), and Susie Silook (Siberian Yupik) have openly dealt with social issues in their work. The simple truth is that it is much easier to sell what one artist referred to as “kayak-culture art” than to attract buyers for works that wrestle with painful realities. On the brighter side, the hard-fought ethnic awareness of the 1960s has not been without its gains for indigenous artists. The recent repatriation laws in the United States and Canada have shifted the balance of power between indigenous peoples and the governments that have held them hostage in the past. And in 2001, it is a rare museum exhibition about the art of the Arctic that does not engage the appropriate artists in the process. Then, too, indigenous art has achieved a greater political presence in recent years. In 1970, 30

163

ARUTYUNOV, SERGEI years ago, Enchanted Owl, a print by Keojuak Ashevak, was selected for use as a Canadian postage stamp (Blodgett, 1985). For those whose glass was half empty, the honor was dampened by the irony of Canada’s choice to pay homage to the art of a people whose needs they had long ignored; for those whose glass was half full, this appropriation and the many that have followed it are the first halting steps toward recognizing northern indigenous peoples as participants in the real world of land claims, subsistence battles, and repatriation negotiations, not a false present in which caribou are still felled with stone-tipped arrows. MOLLY LEE See also Aron from Kangeq; Bladder Ceremony; Clothing; Cooperatives; Dorset Culture; Handicrafts/Tourist Art; Inuit Art Foundation; Ipiutak Culture; Ivory Carving; Kenojuak; Masks; Norton Culture; Old Bering Sea Culture; Rink, Hinrich Johannes; Scrimshaw; Shamanism; Thule Culture

Further Reading Becker, Chuck, Use of Wildlife in Arts and Crafts: An Overview of Federal Laws and Regulations by the US Fish & Wildlife Service, unpublished paper (available from the Alaska Export Assistance Center, US Commercial Service, Alaska), 2001 Black, Lydia T., Aleut Art, Anchorage: Aleut/Pribilof Native Association, 1982 Blodgett, Jean, Kenojuak, Toronto: Firefly Books, 1985 Burnham, Dorothy, To Please the Caribou, Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1995 Collins Jr., Henry B., Archaeology of St. Lawrence Island, Alaska, Washington, District of Columbia: Smithsonian Miscellaneous Collections 96(1), 1937 Duncan, Kate C., Northern Athapaskan Art: A Beadwork Tradition, Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1989 Fienup-Riordan, Ann, The Living Tradition of Yup’ik Masks: Agayuliyararput: Our Way of Making Prayer, Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1998 Goldwater, Robert, Primitivism in Modern Art, Cambridge, Massachusetts: Belknap Press, 1986 Graburn, Nelson H.H., Ethnic and Tourist Arts, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1976 “The discovery of inuit Art: James Houston—animateur.” Inuit Art Quarterly, 2(2) (1987): 3–4 “Canadian Inuit Art and Co-ops.” Museum Anthropology, 24(1) (2000): 14–25 Hollowell-Zimmer, Julie, “Intellectual property protection for Alaska Native arts.” Cultural Survival Quarterly, 24(4) (2001): 55–57 Houston, Alma, Inuit Art: An Anthology, Winnipeg, Manitoba: Watson & Dwyer, 1988 Kaalund, Bodil, The Art of Greenland, translated by Kenneth Tindall, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1983 Kihlberg, Kurt, Giehta Dáidu (The Great Book of Saami Handicrafts), Rosvik, Sweden: Forlagshuset Nordkalotten, 1999 Larsen, Helge E. & Froelich Rainey, “Ipiutak and the Arctic whale hunting culture.” Anthropological Papers of the American Museum of Natural History, 42 (1948)

164

Lee, Molly, “Objects of Knowledge: The Communicative Dimension of Baleen Baskets.” In Native American Basketry: A Living Legacy, edited by Frank W. Porter, Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 1989, pp. 319–334 (Reprinted from Etudes/Inuit/Studies, 9(1) (1985): 163–182) Maquet, Jacques, Introduction to Aesthetic Anthropology, Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley, 1971 Martijn, Charles A. “Canadian Eskimo carving in historical perspective.” Anthropos, 59 (1963): 549–596 McCartney, Allen P.(editor), Thule Eskimo Culture: An Anthropological Retrospective” Archaeological Survey of Canada, 8 0317-2244 (Mercury Series 0316–1854), Ottawa: National Museums of Canada, 1979 McGhee, Robert, Ancient People of the Arctic, Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 1996 Mitlyanskaya, Tamara, B., Khudozhniki Chukotki (The Artists of Chukotka), Moscow: Izobrazitel’noe Iskusstvo, 1976 Molk, Inga-Maria, Sámi Cultural Heritage, Jokkmokk, Sweden: Ájtte, Swedish Mountain and Sámi Museum, 1997 Nelson, Edward W., “The Eskimo about Bering Strait.” 18th Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology for the Years 1896–1897, 1899, pp. 3–518 Phillips, Ruth B., Trading Identities, Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1998 Ray, Dorothy Jean, Eskimo Art: Tradition and Innovation in North Alaska, Seattle, Washington: University of Washington Press, 1977 ———, Aleut and Eskimo Art: Tradition and Innovation in South Alaska, Seattle, Washington: University of Washington Press, 1981 “Happy Jack: King of the Eskimo Ivory Carvers.” American Indian Art, 10(1) (1984): 32–47, 77 Vallee, Frank G., Povungnetuk and its Co-operative, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, Northern Coordination and Research Center, NCRC-67-2, 1967

ARUTYUNOV, SERGEI Sergei Arutyunov (Sergei Aleksandrovich Arutiunov) is a contemporary distinguished Russian scholar in the field of Arctic archaeology and anthropology. His primary research focus has been Arctic studies, although he has also conducted research on Japanese culture and history and the anthropology of Asia. Arutyunov, along with native anthropologist Dorian Sergeev, excavated several important archaeological sites on the Chukchi Peninsula, combining this research with studies of contemporary Siberian ethnography. The most prominent of the sites he and Sergeev excavated included Old Bering Sea Culture burial grounds Uelen and Ekven in East Asia. With his colleagues Igor Krupnik and Mikhail Chlenov, Arutyunov conducted research at Whale Bone Alley, an equally significant site on Yttygran Island, off the southeastern shore of the Chukchi Peninsula. These three sites yielded rich material of tremendous importance for the understanding of developmental trends of Neo-Eskimo culture, the social structure of the people who left them, and their artistic creativity. The chief focus of Arutyunov’s publications on Siberian archaeology, many of which he published

ARUTYUNOV, SERGEI

Ceremonial site of Arutyunov’s excavations, Whale Bone Alley, Yttygran Island, Chutkotka, Siberia. Copyright Bryan and Cherry Alexander Photography

with Sergeev, was the evolution of sea-mammal harpoon hunting. Arutyunov argued that this technology derived from the earlier techniques of spear hunting for fish and for reindeer at river crossings, which often utilized microblades inserted into the spear points. He also proposed connections between early Eskimo traditions and those of the Ymyyakhtakh Culture circles, mainly in the North of Yakutia, particularly as represented by remains found at the Burulgino site near the Yana River mouth. Another of Arutyunov’s essential contributions was his charting the development of harpoon-head construction by means of the cultural mutations caused by the search for increasingly productive modifications of harpoon heads and other related technology. In addition to extensive fieldwork in the Chukchi Peninsula, the Arctic and Subarctic areas, Arutyunov conducted ethnographic research in the lower basins of Pechora, Ob, and Yenisei rivers, and on the island of Hokkaido, the northernmost of the four islands of Japan. In 1987, Arutyunov accompanied an archaeological team from the Museum of Oriental Arts in Moscow conducting fieldwork on the Chukchi Peninsula, principally at the ancient burial ground of Ekven. That summer, he formally handed over his leadership of archaeological studies on the Chukchi Peninsula to this team led by Kirill Dneprovsky and Mikhail Bronshtein. The collections from Arutyunov’s excavations prior to 1987 were deposited at the Museum of Anthropology and Ethnography in St Petersburg; those from the 1987 and subsequent excavations are housed jointly in the Museum of Oriental Arts in Moscow and the Chukchi District Museum in Anadyr.

Biography Sergei Arutyunov was born on July 1, 1932, in Tbilisi (Republic of Georgia). He graduated from the Moscow Institute of Orientology in 1954 with a master’s degree in Japanese literature and history. He subsequently began his doctoral research on Japanese archaeology in Moscow’s Institute of Ethnology, the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, where he assumed the position of research fellow the same year. Arutyunov received his Ph.D. from the Institute of Archaeology, Academy of Sciences of the USSR in 1962. His dissertation was entitled “Ancient Northeastern Asiatic and Ainu Components in the Ethnogenesis of the Japanese.” He has been a full professor at Moscow State University since 1986 and was elected as a corresponding member of the Russian Academy of Sciences in 1990. In addition to his doctoral research on ancient Asiatic and Ainu archaeology in Japan, Arutyunov has studied the archaeology of the Russian Far North. Beginning in 1957, he participated in excavations carried out by archaeologist Maxim Levin on the Chukchi Peninsula. Since 1962, Arutyunov has served on the faculty of the Institute of Ethnography, Russian Academy of Sciences in Moscow (renamed in 1990 the Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology) and most recently as the head of the Caucasian department. MIKHAIL BRONSHTEIN See also Chukchi; Ethnohistory; Old Bering Sea Culture; Yakutia Further Reading Arutyunov, Sergei, “Nekotorye itogi istoriko-etnologicheskikh i populjacionno-antropologicheskikh issledovanii na Chukotskom poluostrove” [Some results of ethnohistorical

165

ASSOCIATION INUKSIUTIIT KATIMAJIIT and anthropological research on the Chukchi Peninsula]. In Na styke Chukotki i Aliaski [On the border between Chuchki Peninsula and Alaska], edited by V.P. Alekseev, T.I. Alexseeva & D.A. Sergeev, Moscow: Institut etnografii imeni N.N. Miklukho-Maklaia, 1983 ———, U beregov Ledovitogo Okeana [At the shores of the Arctic Ocean], Moscow: Russkii iazyk, 1984 ———, Narody i kultury: razvitie i vzaimodeistvie [Peoples and cultures: their development and interaction], Moscow: Nauka, 1989 Arutyunov, Sergei & Regina Holloman (editors), Perspectives on Ethnicity, The Hague: Mouton and Chicago and Canada: Aldine, 1978 Arutyunov, Sergei & D.A. Sergeev, Drevnie kultury aziatskikh eskimosov (Uelenskii mogilnik) [Ancient cultures of Asiatic Eskimos (Uelen cemetery)], Moscow: Nauka, 1969 ———, Problemy etnicheskoi istorii Beringomoriia (Ekvenskii mogilnik) [Questions of ethnohistory of the Bering Sea Area], Moscow: Nauka, 1975 ——— , “Nauchnye resultaty rabot na Ekvenskom drevneeskimosskom mogilnike (1970–1974)” [Scientific results of excavation ancient Eskimo Ekven Cemetery (1970–1974). In Na styke Chukotki i Aliaski [On the border between Chuchki Peninsula and Alaska], Moscow: Institut etnografii imeni N.N. Miklukho-Maklaia, 1983 Arutyunov, Sergei & V.G. Shcheben’kov, Drevneishii narod Iaponii: sud’by plemeni ainov [The most ancient people of Japan: The destiny of the Ainu tribe], Moscow: Nauka, 1992 Arutyunov, Sergei, A.V. Aleksandrov & D.L. Brodianskii, Paleometall Severo-Zapadnoi chasti Tikhogo Okeana [Paleometall of the North-Western Pacific], Vladivostok: Izd-vo DVGU, 1982 Arutyunov, Sergei, I.I. Krupnik & M.A. Chlenov, Kitovaia alleia. Drevnosti ostrovov proliva Seniavina [Whale Alley. Antiquities of Seniavin Strait Islands], Moscow: Nauka, 1982

ASSOCIATION INUKSIUTIIT KATIMAJIIT Inuksiutiit Katimajiit (“the group of those who have to do with Inuit”) is a private nonprofit Canadian corporation founded in Québec City in 1974 by two professors from the Université Laval, Bernard Saladin d’Anglure and Louis-Jacques Dorais, and a researcher from the same university, Jimmy Innaarulik Mark. The objective of the association is to promote research and contribute to the dissemination of knowledge about the culture, language, society, and history of the Inuit and Yupiit peoples, from Chukotka in the west to Greenland in the east. It is managed by a six-person board of directors, elected annually by the general assembly of members. New members are proposed and accepted by the general assembly. The incentive for founding Inuksiutiit came when the Northern Québec Inuit Association (NQIA), which was then negotiating the James Bay Agreement, asked Université Laval researchers to share data they had previously collected on traditional land use and occupancy in Arctic Québec. Unwilling to deal with large academic institutions, NQIA preferred to work with smaller, independent nonprofit corporations.

166

Besides conducting various applied research projects, Inuksiutiit has published more than 15 specialized volumes on Inuit language and culture, including Inuksiutiit Allaniagait (Reading Material about the Inuit), a series of texts in Inuktitut syllabic characters by authors from Nunavik (Arctic Québec). One of the first novels written in Inuktitut (one of the EskimoAleut languages), Sanaaq (the name of its principal character), by Salome Mitiarjuk was published in this series in 1984. Another publication is Taamusi Qumaq’s Sivulitta Piusituqangit (The Long-Standing Customs of our Ancestors, 1988), an encyclopedia of traditional Inuit life. In 1991, Inuksiutiit also acted as copublisher (with the Avataq Cultural Institute of Inukjuak, Nunavik) for Qumaq’s Inuit Uqausillaringit (The Real Inuit Words), the first dictionary of definitions ever published in Inuktitut. To further its objective of disseminating knowledge, Inuksiutiit launched a scholarly journal on the Inuit, Études/Inuit/Studies, whose first issue appeared in 1977. This bilingual (English-French) multidisciplinary periodical has been published twice a year since. It has an international readership and is now recognized as a major source of information on Inuit and Yup’ik culture, society, history, and language. From 1989 on, Études/Inuit/Studies has been published in collaboration with the Université Laval’s Groupe d’études inuit et circumpolaires (GETIC). In October 1978, Inuksiutiit organized the first Inuit Studies Conference in Québec City, which was followed by a second conference in 1980. Inuit Studies conferences have since been held every two years. Their organization is generally entrusted to an academic institution with a special interest in the Inuit, including, as often as possible, northern colleges and universities. In 1990 for instance, the 7th Inuit Studies Conference took place at the University of Alaska, Fairbanks. The 9th conference (1994) was organized by Nunavut Arctic College in Iqaluit, and the 11th one (1998) by the University of Greenland in Nuuk. The 12th conference (2000) was held at the University of Aberdeen, Scotland, the 13th in Anchorage in 2002, and the 14th is planned in Calgary in 2004. These conferences, which are generally attended by 150–300 participants, enable all those interested in fundamental or applied research on the Inuit, including an increasing number of Inuit and Yupiit scholars and students, to share and discuss their findings. LOUIS-JACQUES DORAIS Further Reading Dorais, Louis-Jacques, “Le point sur l’Association Inuksiutiit Katimajiit Inc.” Recherches amérindiennes au Québec, 5(3) (1975): 76–77

ASSOCIATION OF WORLD REINDEER HERDERS ———, “La recherche sur les Inuit du Nord québécois: bilan et perspectives.” Études/Inuit/Studies, 8(2) (1984): 99–115 Dorais, Louis-Jacques & Bernard Saladin d’Anglure, “L’anthropologie des Inuit à l’Université Laval.” Association of Canadian Studies Newsletter, 8(1) (1986): 10–11 Vézinet, Monique & Louis-Jacques Dorais, “L’équipe Inuksiutiit.” Études/Inuit/Studies, 1(1) (1977): 165–170

ASSOCIATION OF CANADIAN UNIVERSITIES FOR NORTHERN STUDIES (ACUNS) The Association of Canadian Universities for Northern Studies (ACUNS) represents Canada’s northern and polar researchers working at member universities and colleges. Founded in 1977, in Churchill, Manitoba, as a nonprofit organization, the Association is a charitable organization with six important functions: (1) to represent interests of members by promoting policies and practices that support northern scholarship, (2) to establish mechanisms through which resources can be allocated to members so as to increase knowledge of the north and ensure northern training, (3) to enhance opportunities for northern people to become leaders and promoters of excellence in education and research important to the north, (4) to facilitate the understanding and resolutions of northern issues, (5) to initiate programs that will increase public awareness of northern sciences and research, and (6) to cooperate with other organizations, public, private, and international, concerned with northern studies. ACUNS is organized as a Council consisting of a single representative from each of the 35 member institutions. The representatives provide a liaison between ACUNS and its individual institutional members. Once a year, the Council meets in an Annual General Meeting to determine the policy and practices of the Association. Every second year, the Council elects a Board of Directors for a two-year term, which ensures that the six mandated functions are fulfilled. The Board consists of a President, Vice-President, and Secretary-Treasurer, who are the executive officers, and a set of Directors-atlarge. A salaried Executive Officer oversees the operation of the Ottawa office, including supervision of a small support staff and occasional contract positions To promote northern scholarship, ACUNS established the Canadian Northern Studies Trust (CNST) in 1982 as an arms-length committee of ACUNS charged with the administration of a set of special awards, bursaries, and studentships from endowed funds and annual donations. Members of the Committee are appointed by ACUNS for three-year terms and represent a cross section of disciplines and regions. ACUNS also organizes the National Student Conference every three years. This conference

contributes to the development of new northern researchers by offering students a forum to discuss their work. There have been six conferences to date, with the most recent being at the University of Laval (2000) and Simon Fraser University (1997), and the seventh at the University of Alberta in 2003. ACUNS promotes the concept that research should be a positive component of the northern social and physical environment and should respect and involve, where practical, northern residents in appropriate and ethical ways. Guidelines for doing so were developed in the Association’s statement of Ethical Principles for the Conduct of Research in the North. Since the first edition in 1982, the Ethical Principles has become one of the most widely disseminated and reproduced documents for ethical research that is consulted in Canada. Revised in 1997 to take into account changing political and economic realities in the north, the 20 principles promote the new spirit of partnership between northerners and researchers that is emerging in northern research. Information about northern studies is disseminated by ACUNS through such mechanisms as the ACUNS web site, the NorthSci list serve, the Annual General Meeting, the Directory of Northern Studies Courses by University/College, and a variety of meetings and liaison functions. These functions include counseling government and granting agencies on policy related to northern affairs. The work of ACUNS is sponsored by annual fees from its members, the federal government’s department of Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, as well as special contracts and other minor sources of funds. JAMES ANDREW MCDONALD Further Reading Association of Canadian Universities for Northern Studies website: http://www.cyberus.ca/~acuns/

ASSOCIATION OF WORLD REINDEER HERDERS Reindeer-herding peoples inhabit a number of areas in the Northern Hemisphere, including Norway, Sweden, Finland, Russia, Mongolia, China, Alaska, Canada, Greenland, and Scotland. Most of these peoples are indigenous and have long traditions as reindeer herders. The Association of World Reindeer Herders was founded recognizing the similarities in reindeer husbandry both as industry and as a cultural, environmental, and economical phenomenon. The idea to form an association with this purpose surfaced in September 1993 during the Reindeer Peoples’ Festival in Tromsø, Norway, where reindeer peoples from all over the world convened for the first

167

ATASSUT time. The festival participants appointed a working committee in order to establish a new organization. In 1997, representatives from Norway, Sweden, Finland and China met with representatives of 15 reindeer husbandry regions of the Russian Federation, in the town of Nadym in the Yamal-Nenets Autonomous Okrug, and agreed to establish the Association of World Reindeer Herders. The Association is a nongovernmental organization representing about 95% of world reindeer peoples. The organization admits as members persons engaged in reindeer husbandry, their families, reindeer husbandry companies, units and organizations, such as national reindeer husbandry organizations. The collective nature of reindeer husbandry in many places complicates assessment of the total number of association members. However, the organization estimates its membership to be 45,000 and 60,000. The purpose of the Association is to promote professional and commercial contact among reindeer peoples and to facilitate exchange of information about the reindeer industry. The organization collects information about reindeer husbandry in the different regions of the world, such as social and technical infrastructure (ranging from education and health to fences, slaughter, production lines, and transport), the production and the potential of the industry. Moreover, the organization provides a forum for the exchange of cultural information, such as local husbandry-related traditions, knowledge, language, and handicrafts. The Association of World Reindeer Herders also recognizes that reindeer herders across the world suffer from similar difficulties: loss of reindeer due to predators, loss of pastures, restrictions imposed by national borders upon transhumance, and contamination of the environment. The Association aims to offer through its network a unity that will strengthen the position of reindeer husbandry. The Association publishes an international newsletter, The Reindeer Herder, in Norwegian, English, Russian, and Finnish, which deals with issues of husbandry, herding, and management of reindeer. The main office is located in Tromsø, Norway. The organization also has a representative in Moscow. Johan Mathis Turi, a reindeer herder from Kautokeino, Norway, serves as the current president. Since 2000, the Association has had observer status at the Arctic Council. GRO WEEN See also Arctic Council; Caribou; Reindeer; Reindeer Pastoralism Further Reading Beach, Hugh, A Year in Lapland: Guest of the Reindeer Herders, Washington, District of Columbia: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1993

168

Collinder, Bjorn, The Lapps, Princeton, Princeton University Press for the American Scandinavian Foundation, New York, 1949 Ingold, Tim, Hunters, Pastoralists and Ranchers: Reindeer Economics and Their Transformation, New York: Cambridge University Press, 1980 Krupnik, Igor, Arctic Adaptions: Native Whalers and Reindeer Herders of Northern Eurasia, translated and edited by Marcia Levenson, Hanover, New Hampshire: University Press of New England, 1993 Paine, Robert, Herds of the Tundra: A Portrait of Saami Reindeer Pastoralism, Smithsonian Series in Ethnographic Inquiry, Washington, District of Columbia: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1994

ATASSUT Atassut is one of several Greenlandic political parties. Atassut means “togetherness,” and the party dates to the years surrounding the transfer to Home Rule government in Greenland (1979) when more liberal and conservative politicians wanted to establish an alternative to Siumut (the Social Democratic party). Atassut began in 1976–1977 as a political movement and was officially inaugurated on April 29, 1978. Atassut Nuuk was already established in the fall of 1977 (with Daniel Skifte as chair) and the party spread down the coast of Greenland from there. In the first election, the party gained a large vote (41.7%) and this pattern continued until 1991, when Atassut’s voter support dropped significantly. In 1981, the party had 59 local party-cells and around 3000 members. The atmosphere and the position of Atassut were shaped very much by the first early years of conflict and disagreement surrounding the debate about the transition to a Home Rule government. The politicians of Atassut defended the Rigsfællesskabet (political union) with Denmark and were against any radical break with Denmark or those values that the Greenlandic-Danish partnership represented. Atassut regarded special ties to Denmark as something natural and positive and worth protecting. In this regard, the party argued for “250 years of human values, which shape[d] Greenlanders and Danes into one community.” In the party program of 1977, Atassut declared explicitly that it fought against secession from Denmark. In this way, the party articulated a policy of loyalty to the Danish heritage in the Greenland tradition based on an attitude of toleration and moderation. The general political outlook of Atassut is liberalism, cosmopolitanism, and support for private interests. The party supports the process of privatization of Greenland’s public enterprises. The party also wants to lower the taxes and introduce a system where the citizens pay for certain services from the state. The party stresses Greenland’s international connections and warns against Greenland isolating itself. It supports

ATHAPASKAN Greenland’s membership of the European Union (EU) and the premises regarding fishery politics, which was the main argument against the EU no longer being valid. Atassut argues that the lack of membership of the EU has been expensive for Greenland because it has denied Greenland’s access to EU regional funds. Generally, the party finds it natural to copy good ideas and administrative practice from Denmark or elsewhere. On the issue of military security politics, Atassut supports NATO through the Danish membership and finds it therefore natural that the United States is stationed in the Thule Air Base as an integral part of the NATO defense. In the Danish parliament, Atassut collaborates with Venstre, Denmark’s Liberal Party, and the party has persistently held one of the two Greenlandic mandates in the Danish parliament. Generally, Atassut has had a stable, persistent influence on Greenlandic politics and has been the second largest party in the Greenland parliament. However, the party has twice become the largest party, once in the election of 1983, where it gained 46.6% of the votes, and again in 1987. However, the Atassut voter base has decreased since 1983. In 1999, the party reached its lowest result so far with 25.2% of the voters, in part because of the emergence of a new populist party Kattusseqatigiit. Atassut’s first chairperson, Lars Chemnitz, a teacher, was born in 1925. He graduated from the teacher’s seminar in Nuuk in 1946, and was armed with a solid political experience as the chairperson for Greenland’s national council from 1971 to 1979. He remained chairperson of the party in its first years (1979–1984) and was instrumental in shaping the party’s main ideological atmosphere. Otto Steenholdt, born in 1936, the son of a hunter, was another prominent figure, who became one of the Greenlandic representatives in the Danish parliament in 1977. He served as the chairperson of the party from 1985 to 1989. His brother Konrad Steenholdt was also an active force in the party and served as its chairperson from 1989 to 1993. Another important politician in the history of Atassut is Daniel Skifte, who served as a school director in Nuuk. Skifte, the son of a hunter, was born in Maniitsoq in 1936 and was one of the founders of the party; he became its chairperson in 1993. Among the new generation of Atassut politicians is Ellen Kristensen, who received an extraordinarily high vote to the election to the Danish parliament and became known as a “vote catcher.” In later years, Atassut was marked by a personal feud between Ellen Kristensen and Otto Steenholdt, which came to an end when Steenholdt was excluded from the party in the spring of 2000. The party excluded Steenholdt, in part, because of his views on Greenlandic language politics, which the party considered antiliberal and a violation

of the party’s devotion to human rights and for equal opportunities for all inhabitants of Greenland. An active member of the Atassut and member of the Greenlandic Parliament (Landsting) elected in 1995 was Anders Nilsson, who has now left Greenlandic politics. Atassut has persistently been an opposition party and it has only once participated in the government, from 1995 to 1999, when Skifte was minister (Landsstyremedlem) of economic affairs and housing. The closest call to power occurred in April 1983 when the party actually received 1000 votes more than Siumut but the same numbers of mandates as Siumut, because Siumut was sitting on four out of the five “cheap” villages mandates. In this situation, the one mandate from Inuit Ataqatigiit (IA) was decisive and IA supported a government of Siumut. Atassut has perhaps enjoyed the most persistent political profile within Greenlandic party politics. In 1994, the party adopted a new program, which contained a loyal confirmation of the old fundamental political principles that shaped the party at its origination. During the 1990s, Atassut witnessed an increasing turn in Greenland’s political life toward the liberalization politics that it has been advocating for years. JENS KAALHAUGE NIELSEN See also Chemnitz, Lars; Greenland Home Rule Act; Inuit Ataqatigiit; Siumut Further Reading Lauritzen, Philip, Glimt af en arktisk revolution—120 måneder med Grønlands Hjemmestyre (Flashes of an Arctic revolution—120 months with Greenland’s Home Rule Government), Nuuk: Atuakkiorfik, 1989 Skydsbjerg, Henrik, Grønland 20 år med Hjemmestyret (Greenland, 20 years with the Home Rule Government”), Nuuk: Atuagkat, 2000

ATHAPASKAN The Athapaskans are the Native North American populations who belong to the Athapaskan linguistic family. This group occupies a vast territory that extends from the northwestern tip of the American continent (Alaska) to west of Hudson Bay, and, on a north-south axis, from the Arctic Circle to the north of the Canadian provinces of British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba. For the purposes of this article, only the northern Athapaskan populations will be discussed, that is, those located slightly below and slightly north of the 60th parallel. However, it is worth noting that populations of the Athapaskan linguistic family can also be found in the southwest United States. Keren Rice (1998) has made a list of the

169

ATHAPASKAN various Athapaskan languages and divided them into three major groups: 1. Languages of the West Coast: Kwalhioquatlatskanai (dialects of Willapa, Kwalhioqua, Tlatskani), Upper Umpqua, Athapaskan of the Rogue river (dialects of Upper Coquille, Sixes, Euchre Creek, Tututni, Chasta costa, Chetcotolowa, Galice-Applegate), northwest California (Hupa, Chilula/Whilkut, Mattole, Bear River, Eel River, Sinkyone, Nongatl, Wailaki, Lassik, Kato). 2. Languages of the North: Ingalik (Deg xit’an), Holikachuk, Koyukon, Upper Kuskokwim (Kolchan), Tanana (Minto-nenana, Chena, Salcha-goodpaster), Tanacross, Upper Tanana, Tutchone, Han, Gwich’in (Kutchin), Ahtna, Dena’ina (Tanaina), Babine-Witsuwit’en, Carrier, Tsilhqot’in (Chilcotin), Tagish-tahltan-kaska, Sékani-castor, Slave (South, mountain, Bear Lake, Hares), Dogrib, Tchippewayan, Sarci. 3. Apachean: Navajo, Western Apache, ChiracahuaMescaléro, Jicarilla Apache, Lipan Apache, Great Plains Apache (Kiowa). For an in-depth study of the northern Athapaskan languages, the reader can refer to the work of linguists such as Keren Rice, Leslie Saxon, and Gillian Story, as well as to the dictionaries of missionary Émile Petitot or his monograph on the Dene-Dindjié written in 1876, works that count among the first on the Athapaskan languages of the north. Aboriginal population (Athapaskan and other groups) in these regions is not a majority, as the Inuit are in Nunavut; however, they form a significant proportion of the population. In 2001, there were 5600 Indians in Yukon for a total of 28,520 inhabitants in the territory (20%). In the Northwest Territories in 2000, there were 10,615 Indians for a total of 37,100 inhabitants in the territory (29%). In Alaska in 2000, there were 15.6% American Indian and Alaska Native persons for a total of 634,892 habitants in the state (US census bureau). The overall territory inhabited by northern Athapaskans covers several ecological zones, from tundra to boreal forest, mountainous (Subarctic mountain range), and the plateaus of Alaska. The northern Athapaskans are generally divided into eastern and western groups (anthropologists who have worked on the northern Athapaskans do not all register the same number of populations, and spellings of names vary according to authors). These are principally: in the west—the Ingalik (western Alaska), the Koyukon (western Alaska), the Kolchan (western Alaska), the Tanaina (southwest Alaska), the Tanana (central western Alaska), the Ahtna (southwest Alaska—Copper

170

River basin and Wrangler mountains), and the Nabena (Yukon-Alaska); and in the east—the Witsuwit’in (northern British Columbia), the Gwich’in (YukonAlaska), the Han (central Alaska), the northern and southern Tutchone, the Hares (Yukon), the Montagnards (Mackenzie), the Kaska, the Tlingit of the interior, the Tagish, the Tsetsaut, the Tahltan (northwestern British Columbia), the Yellowknife (Northwest Territories), the Dogrib (Northwest Territories), the Déné Tha (Slavey) (northwestern Alberta—southern Northwest Territories), the Chipewyan (Northwest Territories), and the Dune Za (Beaver) (Alberta and British Columbia—Peace River basin). This division between East and West is made according to social organization and lifestyles, although within each group there is great cultural diversity. The boundary between the two groups is the Mackenzie River. The Athapaskans of Canada are designated by the ethnonym Déné or, more commonly, Dene. Traditionally, northern Athapaskans living in the eastern part of the region considered here were seminomadic populations whose staple diet was caribou. They show great similarities with general eastern Subarctic populations such as Allgonquin. They followed a seasonal cycle of movement on their home territory in accordance with the migrations of the caribou. Hence, winters were spent in the woodlands and summers in the tundra. In summer, different bands regrouped and caribou were hunted in extended family groups. The animal was either driven into enclosures or killed from a canoe with a spear as it crossed a river. In the West and in the forests, moose and deer were hunted in preference to caribou, and salmon represented a substantial source of food. The large summer catches coincided with a period of settlement and intense social activity.

Social Organization and Kinship Systems In most areas, the northern Athapaskans traditionally lived in autonomous bands with their own hunting, fishing, and gathering grounds. However, there exist variations in the social organization of these groups. In the West, we find varied systems of social framework traditionally based on the division of clans into two exogamous moieties or phratries (e.g., Raven or the Wolf in Tlingit society). Marriage within the moiety was forbidden. The clans were mostly made of groups traced from a common ancestor (matrilineal descent). Potlatch-type ceremonies, similar to those of the coastal Alaskans, were carried out. The organization of society rested upon a social stratification dependent on the control of wealth. Society was thus traditionally divided between rich and poor, with the occasional

ATHAPASKAN addition of slaves. This probably comes as a manifestation of the influence of the population of the West Coast, for instance, Tlingit. The Athapaskan bands of the East had greater flexibility in their marital alliances, and clans or descent groups were also less important for living at camps or settlements. Their leader is named according to his personal qualities and skills and does not hold absolute power in the East.

always been simply adopted or transposed directly; they have also been modified and adapted. Hence, “Dene prophets” have reinterpreted Biblical stories in order to integrate them to Dene thought and more specifically to mythical accounts. By the same token, this process allows for a certain cultural dynamism to express and manifest itself by the possibility of maintaining cultural beliefs without having to give way to a status quo that would ultimately prove destructive.

Religion Traditional religions throughout Athapaskan territory are shamanistic. However, they present differences from one population to another. In certain societies, most members have a variety of powers, whereas elsewhere shamanic powers are held only by a specific category of individuals, such as healers. Intimately linked to shamanism, dreams occupy a significant place within the different northern Athapaskan societies. Because their content is of prime importance for their interpretation (something that may vary from one individual to another), a number of techniques are still used to influence dream content. Through dreams, we communicate with spirits, with the dead as well as with the living. Dreams transform human beings into spirits capable of communicating with all that is living in the spiritual sense of the term (Irimoto and Yamada, 1994: 86). Individuals who master their dreams the best, those whose spirit is strong, are therefore identified as “dreamers,” “prophets,” or more simply shamans. Again, although the practices of influence, the methods of interpretation, and the uses of dreams are generalized for the entire Athapaskan territory, the modes and degrees of importance vary from one population to the next. Much like dreams, visions play a fundamental role. Quite often, an individual’s spirit helper or patron animal is revealed after a vision quest in the forest. With this knowledge of the patron animal, a song and a power are granted, and certain ritual instructions are ascribed (such as prohibitions regarding food). Among some Athapaskans, every individual is endowed with such an animal helper, provided the quest is carried out. It is not only through visions but also through dreams that certain people’s reincarnation (either voluntary or involuntary) in the body of children already born or yet to be born can be identified or foreseen. Following such an identification, the most appropriate term of kinship is used to refer to the reincarnated individual. Therefore, if one’s brother is reincarnated in one’s granddaughter, one calls the latter “my brother.” All these societies were at one point subjected to Christianization (whether Anglican, Catholic, or Orthodox), but the various Christian elements have not

First Contacts The first contacts between Europeans and Athapaskan populations took place both progressively and in different places. To the east of the region, contact was essentially with fur traders and missionaries, while the Russians came to the Alaskan shores in 1741. At first such contacts remained sporadic, and even though more and more Europeans ventured into the North, it took an event the magnitude of the 1898 Klondike gold rush (with its 30,000 prospectors) to accelerate the process. One of the major transformations and disruptions wrought by these contacts was the participation of Amerindian populations in the fur trade. In 1717, the Hudson’s Bay Company established the trading post of Fort Prince of Wales in Churchill in order to trade directly with the Chipewyans. Then around 1858, it created the post of Brochet in the hope of extending this trade to other Dene tribes. In the beginning, the Chipewyans (the largest group among eastern Athapaskans) played the role of intermediary between the Company and other Amerindian populations, or even at times Inuit. The entry of the Chipewyans into this market drove them to progressively abandon the tundra for the wooded forests, where they could trap the fur animals sought by the Hudson’s Bay Company. Little by little, starting in the 18th century, the Chipewyans only went into the tundra for summer expeditions, a period during which they continued to go caribou hunting in order to build up large amounts of food stocks for the winter. The meat of the killed game could then be dried, smoked, or transformed into pemmican (a meat dried and then ground to powder, to which fat was added, turning it into a very rich food). The Chipewyans therefore adapted to the fur market to the point of changing their lifestyle, one that went back to their arrival in the region. Indeed, from 650 BCE until the 18th century, the Chipewyans (at the time, it would be more appropriate to speak of a Talthéiléi tradition) lived in the tundra, where they hunted caribou several hundreds of kilometers north of the forest limits. However, even though the modes of occupying the territory changed, it seems that their hunting techniques

171

ATHAPASKAN remained the same, the Chipewyans always using tracking corridors (of which archaeological remains exist) to hunt caribou (Irimoto and Yamada, 1994: 93). With the western progress of the fur market, similar consequences impacted with greater or lesser intensity on other Athapaskan populations. When the fur market collapsed in the 1980s, the Athapaskans found themselves without a source of income to obtain the manufactured products and basic foodstuffs on which they had become dependent. In general, the oil and mining developments employed mainly inward migrants, not indigenous peoples. After the difficult years preceding the signing of the treaties with the government in Ottawa, the Athapaskans, like most native populations in Canada, followed the classic pattern of family allowances and mandatory schooling of children (which in many cases meant going to boarding schools), elements that incited these nomadic populations to settle in small communities. There they would be more exposed to western culture and its series of social problems. Athapaskan populations have thus gone through many changes following the arrival of Europeans. But because these contacts came at a later date than on the eastern part of the American continent, some of these populations still exhibit, or at least they did so up until the beginning of the 19th century, certain cultural characteristics that they possessed at the time of the first encounter. Without denying the importance of these transformations, it is worth noting that for some of these communities hunting-related activities still remain central in the 20th century. Thus, at the beginning of the 1970s, the Dene still generated half of their income from resources taken from the forest. Another consequence of contact with Europeans for native people was the introduction of particularly deadly diseases. During the 18th century, epidemics, most notably that of smallpox at the start of the 1780s, caused heavy losses among the Athapaskans in general and among the Chipewyans in particular, as more than two-thirds of these populations were decimated.

Relationships with Neighboring People The Inuit The neighboring populations to the north and the east of the Athapaskan territory are Inuit. In certain cases their hunting grounds can overlap, especially with the interior Inuit whose primary means of support is also caribou. Ethnography has often recorded the hostile relations between the Inuit of the western Hudson Bay and the Dene. The great frequency of these testimonies of conflict can no doubt be explained by the fact that they reflect particularly striking events in the collective memory of both populations. However, peaceful

172

encounters also took place and relationships of an economic nature could bind the protagonists. These encounters could either be fortuitous or voluntary. In the case of the latter, it concerned mostly individuals who knew each other personally. Meetings could also be organized in order to exchange goods (such as snowshoes, dogs, and clothing), and sometimes the Dene even acted as brokers for the Inuit in the fur trade. Certain elements, such as knowledge of the Inuit language on the part of Dene individuals or knowledge of an Athapaskan language on the part of Inuk, or meetings that followed a precise ritual, lead us to believe that these types of encounters took place on a regular basis. They could even be fairly long-lasting as camp grounds could be set up near one another for a long period of time, even an entire season. During these periods of contact, songs, dances, games, techniques, as well as goods were exchanged and transmitted. Nonetheless, it is important to note that the quality and intensity of these relations varied according to the populations. Thus, for instance, it appears that the Paalarmiut generally maintained poorer relations with the Dene than the Ahiarmiut. The question of whether these peaceful relationships between different groups fostered an exchange of individuals other than through abductions (through marriages or adoptions for example) remains to be clearly determined. A few isolated cases are reported, but it seems almost certain that the establishment of kinship networks between both populations was not a common practice, although not a nonexistent one. The Métis Relations between the Métis and the Athapaskans vary according to place. Cultural and social distinctions can be observed, sometimes extremely pronounced, sometimes insignificant. The Métis had to choose, when signing Treaty 11 in 1921, between being considered Indians and acquiring that status as defined by the Indian Act, or obtaining a status of their own that materialized in the form of a “Métis certificate.” Yet the majority of the Métis on Dene territory are of Euro-Dene origin. Today, Athapaskans and Dene live together in various communities.

The Treaties When the Hudson’s Bay Company sold its rights to the British Crown in 1869, Rupert’s Land (a vast interior region encompassing most of northern Ontario and north Québec, all of Manitoba, most of Saskatchewan, the southern half of Alberta, and a large part of what is now the Northwest Territories and Nunavut) and the Northwest Territories entered the Canadian Dominion.

ATHAPASKAN But even before it took the full measure of the richness of the northern territories, the government of Ottawa refused to take charge of these regions’ native populations, much in need of assistance following famines, or to sign treaties with them. Since 1873 (when the Canadian Parliament passed a bill authorizing the creation of a horseback police for the Northwest Territories), only a few detachments of the Mounted Police have maintained order and a governmental presence in the region. After the discovery of gold deposits in the Klondike in 1896 and oil fields in Norman Wells in the Mackenzie basin in 1920, Ottawa realized the potential of these territories and signed two treaties with the region’s Indians: Treaty 8 in 1899 and Treaty 11 in 1921. The areas covered by the first treaty included northwestern Saskatchewan, northern Alberta, northwestern British Columbia, and part of the southern Northwest Territories (south of the Great Lake of Slaves); the areas covered by the second treaty were the Northwest Territories north of the Great Slave Lake. In retrospect, it seems obvious that the Indians did not realize the full consequences of these treaties. As a matter of fact, a 1973 ruling of the Supreme Court of the Northwest Territories confirmed that the Dene never consciously gave up their territory. This ruling is an important moment in the history of Dene claims, because even if the Supreme Court of Canada somewhat contradicted it, it nevertheless marked a major change in the importance granted to the Amerindian point of view. Indeed, Judge Morrow’s ruling states that: “… there is enough doubt as to whether the full aboriginal title has been extinguished, certainly in the minds of the Indians, to the caveators attempt to protect the Indian position until a final adjudication can be obtained” (Indians Claims Commission, 1977: 19). Their chief preoccupation was the protection of their hunting and fishing rights and the wave of non-Native populations that crossed or settled on their land (at its high point, Klondike’s main center of activity, Dawson City, reached a population of approximately 10,000). As elsewhere in Canada (even if the situation was not identical everywhere), there was a difference of interpretation between the Dene and the Canadian government with resepct to the purpose and the function of these treaties. The Dene considered the treaties as an opportunity to maintain their lifestyle in a changing environment (exploitation of natural resources, arrival of settlers), and mostly as an opportunity to preserve their autonomy and freedom of movement on their territory. In their eyes, the treaties represented a sharing of the land with settlers and other exploiters, not a transfer of their rights of use. The Ottawa government’s aims were simply to put an end to the rights of Indians over these territories because the promise of

mineral and oil wealth suddenly enhanced the value of these so far neglected northern regions. The end of native rights allowed for the legal exploitation by the government of natural resources and the opening of lands to settlement, in exchange for financial compensation in the form of yearly sums of money distributed to each individual. To a certain extent, the Royal Proclamation of 1763 had protected the rights of Indians against settlers as far as their land was concerned, until these rights were handed over to the Crown. But the treaties were not fully honored by the government. Laws restricting game hunting were passed and extended to the Dene (who should have been exempt), no reservations were created, and the government did not take charge of education. In Alaska (which the United States obtained from Russia in 1867), things were different since the American government abolished its system of treaties in 1871. The General Allotment Act (or Dawes Act) promulgated in 1887 by the American Congress considerably reduced the area of reservations. The process was the following: the government granted a certain number of acres to each Amerindian of the United States, and then took for itself whatever was left of the lands of the former reservations. In this way, the Indians lost two-thirds of their lands or nearly a hundred million acres. The law was repealed in 1934 by the Indian Reorganization Act created by John Collier. In addition, in 1906, the Alaska Allotment Act permitted Alaska natives to own land. Natives could gain 160 acres of nonmineral land as an “inalienable and nontaxable” homestead. In 1936, the Alaska Native Reorganization Act extended the Indian Reorganization Act to Alaska. Around the 1960s, Alaska became coveted for its underground wealth, especially for oil. Inspired by the Indian movement, the Alaska Natives banded together to defend their rights. In 1966, the Alaska Federation of Natives was created. For more than 10 years the Alaska Natives fought to defend their interests. But once again, in 1971, the Native’s rights were modified by a new Act. The Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act changed aboriginal rights to economic benefits. This new situation created some cultural and economic problems. In consequence, this Act was amended in 1988.

The Demands While there had existed competition and rivalry among the First Nations of the region up until then, the 1970s marked a desire for cultural renewal and the realization on the part of the Dene of the need for unity and cooperation. In 1970, the 16 Dene clan chiefs created the Northwest Territories Indian Brotherhood with the intention of defending their rights and developing their

173

ATLANTIC LAYER communities. New leaders such as Georges Erasmus, Steve Kakfwi, Jim Antoine, Frank T’Seleie, and Nellie Cournoyea raised their voice in defense of the Dene claims. It was also during this decade, following the recommendations of the Berger commission, that the attitude of the Canadian government toward Native people changed. Without ever questioning the validity of treaties 8 and 11, the government nonetheless recognized that it did not respect all of their terms. After the failure of their demands, the Dene decided to reaffirm their determination, and in 1978 adopted the name of “Dene Nation.” In its quest for self-determination, the Dene Nation, in conjunction with the Métis association of the Northwest Territories, suggested in 1981 to the entire population of the western Arctic the creation of “Denendeh” (the Land of the Dene), a territorial entity comparable to a Canadian province. Beyond the question of the Natives’ territorial rights, their campaigns also focused on the construction of oil pipelines along the migration routes of caribou, something to which the Dene were fiercely opposed. There was also the question of damages caused by dams, for which the Dene demanded compensation (such as the claim by the Chipewyan First Nation of Athapaska regarding the Wac Bennett dam and the damages caused to reservation 201). During the negotiating process, the Dene joined forces with the Métis. However, in the course of the 1990s, faced with the failure of a common settlement with both nations, Ottawa agreed to negotiate with each nation separately. Five regions emerged from this, for which certain agreements were signed and others are still pending: the Mackenzie delta (Gwich’in agreement signed in 1991), the Sahtu settlement area (agreement signed in 1993), the Deh Cho, the North Slave, and the South Slave (negotiations under way). Overall, the agreements settled questions of creation of reservations, land management, participation in the decision-making process, and financial compensations. STÉPHANIE EVENO See also Dene; Dogrib (Tlicho); Gwich’in; Gwich’in Settlement Area; Land Claims; Métis; Northern Athapaskan Languages; Sahtu Settlement Area; Tutchone Further Reading Bissonnette, Alain, Denendeh: luttes et conjonctures, M.A. Université de Montréal, département d’anthropologie, 1982 Clark, McFayden (editor), Northern Athapascan Conference, 1971, National Museum of Man, Mercury Series, Ottawa: National Museum of Man, 1975 Fumoleau, René, As Long As this Land Shall Last: A History of Treaty 8 and Treaty 11: 1870–1939, Toronto: McClelland & Stewart, 1975

174

Irimoto, Takashi & Takako Yamada (editors), Circumpolar Religion and Ecology: An Anthropology of the North, Tokyo: University of Tokyo Press, c.1994 Legros, Dominique, “Postmodernité du corbeau dans la tradition tutchone athapascane.” Recherches Amérindiennes au Québec, 28(3) (1998): 27–39 Rice, Keren, “Les langues athapascanes du Nord.” Recherches Amérindiennes au Québec, 28(3) (1998): 75–92

ATLANTIC LAYER The Atlantic layer is a stratum of relatively warm and saline water of Atlantic origin observed across the entire Arctic Basin and even upwelled onto Arctic shelves. The Atlantic layer is, perhaps, the most important feature of the Arctic Ocean vertical structure, which consists of four principal layers: (1) Arctic surface water (cold, low-salinity), (2) halocline (a layer in which salinity and temperature sharply increase with depth), (3) Atlantic water (warm, high-salinity), and (4) bottom water (cold, high-salinity). Thus, the Atlantic layer is sandwiched between the halocline and bottom water. In the Makarov and Canadian basins, the Atlantic layer is also capped by a layer of low-salinity Pacific water. The Atlantic layer core can be easily detected on vertical temperature profiles by the attendant temperature maximum. Indeed, while the Arctic surface water is cold, typically between −1°C and −1.9°C (freezing point), the maximum Atlantic layer temperature (north of Svalbard) is +3°C (Rudels et al., 1994; Woodgate et al., 2001), a huge contrast for the Arctic Ocean, where the temperature gradients are small compared with the rest of the world’s oceans. The Atlantic layer salinity is quite uniform, around 34.9 parts per thousand. The Atlantic layer upper and lower boundaries are arbitrarily associated with the 0°C isotherm. The typical depths of the upper and lower boundaries are approximately 200 and 700–900 m, respectively. The Atlantic layer thickness gradually decreases from more than 800 m north of Svalbard and Franz Josef Land to less than 500 m north of the Laptev Sea and north of Ellesmere Island (Treshnikov, 1977).

Origin, Distribution, and Transformation The warm temperatures in the intermediate layer of the Arctic Ocean were first reported in 1902 by Fridtjof Nansen from observations made in 1893–1896 during his famous expedition aboard Fram. The Atlantic origin of this layer was soon recognized and reported on in 1909 by B. Helland-Hansen and Nansen. Until the 1980s, Atlantic water inflow into the Arctic Ocean was associated exclusively with the West Spitsbergen Current in the eastern Fram Strait, following the continental shelf break. Then, another route was found farther to the east, via the Barents Sea (see the figure).

ATLANTIC LAYER Now both inflows are considered equal, transporting about 2 Sv each (1 Sverdrup = 106 m3 s−1) and merging north of the Kara Sea (Rudels et al., 1994). The West Spitsbergen Current transport is extremely variable, from 0 to 9 Sv (Woodgate et al., 2001). The Barents Sea transport varies seasonally from 1 to 3 Sv. The latest estimates of the long-term mean transport of these branches are 1–1.5 Sv for the West Spitsbergen Current and 2 Sv for the Barents Sea route (Rudels and Friedrich, 2000). Thus, the latest appreciation of the importance of the Barents Sea inflow marks a return to the views of Helland-Hansen and Nansen. Farther downstream, the propagation of Atlantic water has never been reliably measured and is rather assumed, largely from the Atlantic layer core temperature distribution. In general, the Atlantic water is believed to move cyclonically (counterclockwise) around the Arctic Ocean and exit via the western Fram Strait with the East Greenland Current. Within the Arctic Basin, the Atlantic water circulates around the Nansen, Amundsen, Makarov, and Canadian basins in boundary currents. The primary Arctic Ocean Boundary Current splits at the junction of the Lomonosov Ridge and Siberian shelf. One branch crosses the Lomonosov Ridge and flows along the East Siberian continental slope, while the other flows along the Lomonosov Ridge. From the first long-term (year-long) moorings at the junction of the Lomonosov Ridge with the Eurasian continent, the Arctic Ocean Boundary Current transport was estimated to be 5±1 Sv (Woodgate et al., 2001). There are substantial differences between the Atlantic layer in the Eastern and Western Arctic. The Eastern Atlantic layer is much warmer, with the

core temperature between 2°C and 3°C, whereas the Western Atlantic layer core temperature is generally below 0.5°C (McLaughlin et al., 1996). The boundary between these two regimes is termed the Atlantic/Pacific front. In the past, this front was located over the Lomonosov Ridge. The 1990s data revealed a large-scale shift of this front, which is presently located over the Mendeleyev and Alpha ridges (McLaughlin et al., 1996; Morison et al., 1998).

Heat Flux The Atlantic layer contains an enormous amount of heat, enough to melt 20 m of ice (Aagaard and Coachman, 1975). As it progresses around the Arctic Ocean, Atlantic water becomes colder and fresher, partly because of heat loss to the overlying halocline and Arctic surface water, partly because of mixing with colder, fresher shelf waters, and partly because of the Atlantic water entrainment into sinking density flows of cold shelf water (Rudels et al., 1994). The Atlantic layer heat content decreases as Atlantic water moves around the Arctic Basin, from 125 kcal cm−2 north of Svalbard down to 12 kcal cm−2 in the northern Canada Basin (Treshnikov, 1977). The upward heat flux from the Atlantic layer toward the sea surface is important in the heat balance of the sea ice cover.

Long-term Variability There were large changes in the thermohaline regime of the Arctic Ocean in the 1990s, including the Atlantic layer thickening (by more than 100 m at its lower

Inferred circulation of the Atlantic Layer and Upper Polar Deep Water in the Arctic Ocean. After Rudels et al., 1994

175

ATLASOV, VLADIMIR boundary) and warming (as much as 1°C) in the Nansen, Amundsen, and Makarov basins (Carmack et al., 1997). As a result, the temperature gradient between the Atlantic layer and surface layer, as well as the upward heat flux, has increased. These changes are consistent with the observed reduction in the sea ice cover and sea ice thickness in the Arctic Ocean (Rothrock et al., 1999). IGOR BELKIN See also Arctic Ocean; Cold Halocline; Oceanography; Thermohaline Circulation Further Reading Carmack, E.C., K. Aagaard, J.H. Swift, R.W. Macdonald, F.A. McLaughlin, E.P. Jones, R.G. Perkin, J.N. Smith, K.M. Ellis & L.R. Killius, “Changes in temperature and tracer distributions within the Arctic Ocean: results from the 1994 Arctic Ocean section.” Deep-Sea Research II, 44(8) (1997): 1487–1502 Coachman, L.K. & K. Aagaard,“Physical Oceanography of Arctic and Subarctic Seas.” In: Marine Geology and Oceanography of the Arctic Seas, edited by Y. Herman, New York: Springer, 1974, pp. 1–72 McLaughlin, F.A., E.C. Carmack, R.W. Macdonald & J.K.B. Bishop, “Physical and geochemical properties across the Atlantic/Pacific water mass front in the southern Canadian Basin.” Journal of Geophysical Research, 101(C1) (1996): 1183–1197 Morison, J., M. Steele & R. Andersen, “Hydrography of the upper Arctic Ocean measured from the nuclear submarine USS Pargo.” Deep-Sea Research I, 45(1) (1998): 15–38 Rudels, B. & H.J. Friedrich, “The Transformations of Atlantic Water in the Arctic Ocean and Their Significance for the Freshwater Budget.” In The Freshwater Budget of the Arctic Ocean, edited by E.L. Lewis et al., Boston: Kluwer, 2000, pp. 503–532 Rudels, B., E.P. Jones, L.G. Anderson & G. Kattner “On the Intermediate Depth Waters of the Arctic Ocean.” In The Polar Oceans and Their Role in Shaping the Global Environment, edited by O.M. Johannessen, R.D. Muench & J.E. Overland, Washington, District of Columbia: American Geophysical Union, 1994, pp. 33–46 Rothrock, D.A., Y. Yu & G.A. Maykut, “Thinning of the Arctic sea-ice cover.” Geophysics Research Letters, 26(23) (1999): 3469–3472 Treshnikov, A.F., “Water Masses of the Arctic Basin.” In Polar Oceans, edited by M. Dunbar, Calgary: AINA, 1977, pp. 17–31 Woodgate, R.A. et al., “The Arctic Ocean Boundary Current along the Eurasian slope and adjacent Lomonosov Ridge: water mass properties, transports and transformations from moored instruments.” Deep-Sea Research, 48(8) (2000): 1757–1792

ATLASOV, VLADIMIR The Russian explorer Vladimir Vladimirovich Atlasov made the first exploration and description of the Kamchatka Peninsula in 1697. Atlasov’s first tour resulted in a new line of geographical discoveries in the Pacific Ocean and joined vast areas of the Far East to the Russian state.

176

A Cossack in the czarist army from the 1680s to the 1690s, Atlasov served in the southern borders of the Yakutia military establishment near the rivers of Maya, Uchur, Tugir, Gonama, and Ul’ya, where he collected Russian fur taxes (yasak) and built the winter quarters and fortresses. In August 1682, Atlasov joined I. Zhirkov’s command, setting off for Uchur in southern Yakutia. The Cossacks’ march was deemed successful because in January 1683, Atlasov had already delivered taxes that he had collected among the Uchur Tungus people to Yakutsk. From 1684 to 1687, Atlasov served in the Maysky, Tugirsky, and Udskoi winter quarters, and in 1688–1694 he took his service on the northeastern rivers Indigirka, Kolyma, and Anadyr. On August 31, 1694, Atlasov arrived in Yakutsk. He presented a report on his five-year trip through Kolyma and Anadyr along with information about the Chukchi Peninsula. On October 11, 1694, the Yakutia military leader I.M. Gagarin made Atlasov a Cossack pyatidesyatnik (a military leader of 50 or more soldiers). In August 1695, Atlasov received the appointment of a commander on the Anadyr River, and the same month he went to the Anadyr fortress for service. In mid-December 1696, Atlasov began his tour from Anadyrsk to Kamchatka along with 60 other Cossacks and a similar number of the Yukagir. They first reached Penzhina Bay by reindeer, where they imposed a fur tax on the Koryaks. In February 1698, the army subdued the Olyutor Koryaks and collected taxes from them. Before returning to Anadyrsk in July 1699, Atlasov’s group moved along various routes throughout Kamchatka and reached the most southern part of the peninsula, the district where the Kuriles lived. Upon his return to the Anadyrsk fortress, Atlasov reported on his tour to Dorofey Traurnicht, the Yakutia military leader. He wrote that Kamchatka was populated by peoples unknown in Russia and that the region was rich in sable, fox, and beaver furs. He also reported on the Kuril Islands. During his tour to Kamchatka, Atlasov heard from the indigenous people of Kamchatka, the Itel’men, about a prisoner-foreigner whom he wanted to contact. Atlasov did not, however, get his wish, as the foreigner spoke a language unfamiliar to both the aboriginals and the Russians. The Cossacks only understood that the prisoner’s name was Denbei. Atlasov decided that he was “an Indian of the Uzakinsky State of the Indian kingdom.” He subsequently brought the prisoner to the Anadyr fortress and then to Yakutsk. Later they ascertained that the foreigner lived in Osaka, a Japanese town, and was engaged in trade. A storm had carried his ship to the Kamchatka Peninsula where indigenous tribes captured him and his crew. Atlasov’s report prompted Czar Peter I to order more Cossack tours to

AUK new uninhabited lands. The Czar further ordered Traurnicht to search for the silver and copper ores that the Russians coveted. Peter I wanted to meet the prisoner, and he sent a decree asking for the delivery of Denbei to Moscow. Atlasov’s narratives about the Kamchatka lands and islands, its nature and population, as well as the existence of the Japanese prisoner drew Peter’s attention primarily because he was interested in conquering the Far Eastern borderlands of Russia. Atlasov was quickly fit out for return journey in which he led a new tour for Kamchatka. He earned the rank of Cossack leader for the first and successful Kamchatka tour. In April 1701, he left Moscow for Yakutsk. Along the way he was arrested for robbing a merchant’s trade caravan and was imprisoned for five years. After a not-guilty verdict in 1706, Atlasov arrived in Yakutsk and traveled to Kamchatka the following year. Great changes had taken place during his seven-year absence: new fortresses had been established and the number of officials and trade people had increased. Cossacks routinely robbed civilians. Atlasov did everything possible to stop the tyranny and coercion, but such measures to bring order only enraged the Cossacks. In 1711, Atlasov was killed during the Cossacks’ rebellion in Nizhne-Kamchatsk. Shortly before his death, the Russian poet Alexander Pushkin was writing an essay entitled “About the Russian conquest of Kamchatka,” in which he compared Atlasov to a conqueror of Siberia, “Ermak of Kamchatka.” Atlasov’s name is commemorated in Northeast Asia as Atlasov Island in the Kuril archipelago.

Biography Vladimir Vladimirovich Atlasov was born in the town of Yakutsk, Russia, in 1661. Conflicting information exists about the date of his birth in Russian historical literature. His father was Vladimir Timofeevich Atlasov, a Yakut Cossack-explorer, who married a Yakut woman, a representative of the Sakha aboriginal people. Atlasov was admitted to the Cossack service in the czarist army on the day of his father s death on July 3, 1682. He served on the southern frontiers of Yakutia and was subsequently appointed as a tax collector among the Yakut, Evenk, Even, and Yukagir. In 1698–1699, he traveled to Kamchatka. In 1701, in Moscow, he received the rank of a Cossack leader. On his return to Yakutsk, he was arrested for robbery and imprisoned for five years. In 1706, Atlasov was discharged and was sent to Kamchatka as a ruler of this region. Atlasov died in 1711 during a Cossacks’ and hunters’ rebellion. PANTELEIMON PETROV

See also Anadyr; Chukchi; Itel’men; Kamchatka Peninsula; Koryak; Tungus; Yakuts; Yakutsk; Yukagir Further Reading Belov, M.I., “Novye dannye o sluzhbakh Vladimira Atlasova i pervykh pokhodakh russkikh na Kamchatku” [New data about Vladimir Atlasov’s service and the first Russian tours to Kamchatka].” In The North Annals, 2 volumes, Moscow: 1957, p. 103 Mostakhov, S.E., Russkie puteshestvenniki: issledovateli Yakutii [Russian travelers: explorers of Yakutia], Yakutsk: Iakutskoe Knizhnoe izdatel’stvo 1982 Polevoi, B.P., “Vladimir Atlasov—urozhenets Yakutska [Vladimir Atlasov is a native of Yakutsk], The Polar Star, No. 3 (1974): 128 Safronof, F.G., Tikhookeanskie okna Rossii [Pacific Ocean windows of Russia], Khabarovsk: Khabarovsk Book Publishing House, 1988, pp. 28–30, 56–57

AUK Auk is a common name for any member of the auk family (Alcidae). Auks are compact, duck-shaped birds with very dense plumage. Coloring is austere, either two-colored with black upperparts and white underparts, or dark. The most colorful and bright are the bare parts such as the bill, mouth, and legs. The male and female species are alike. Recent species vary in size between 100 g and 1.3 kg. Auks are true seabirds, inhabiting oceanic and coastal waters of the Arctic, boreal, and temperate zones. During the nonbreeding season, they may move further south, but some remain to winter over in the High Arctic among ice. All auks are superior swimmers; while on land they walk with a waddle on their tarsal bones. The legs are typically positioned toward the rear of the body, which accounts for the bird’s upright posture and often a comical appearance of human expression. Ecologically, they are counterparts of the penguins in the Northern Hemisphere. Both groups have much reduced wing size, resembling oars and specialized to swim underwater. Auks are thought to have originated from gulls during the process of adaptation to explore the ocean’s depths in pursuit of prey. They not only show an example of parallel evolution with penguins but also demonstrate the way in which penguins have evolved. Finally, penguins have lost their ability to fly in air and can only swim underwater, whereas auks retain flying and swimming capabilities in both elements. Auks have wing-loading close to the maximum permitted to fly, and hence their flight is headlong, slightly maneuverable with rapid wing-beats. The wings are the only underwater advancer, while the webbed feet are used as a rudder.

177

AUK Auks come ashore only to breed. They settle typically in colonies, often in great numbers, along the seacoasts. No nest is constructed, and eggs are laid in the open on rock ledges; in species seeking shelter in crevices or burrows, a very simple nest is built. Most auks breed at a considerable distance from their feeding grounds, and typically are able only to provide enough food for a single chick. Incubation lasts for three to five weeks, and both parents incubate in turn. The time that chicks stay at the nesting sites may vary considerably between species, ranging from 2 to 50 days. Auks feed at sea only. The diet consists of a variety of small fishes and invertebrates (mainly crustaceans). Twenty-two recent species with greatest variety are found in Beringia, which is thought to be the center of auk origin. Nearly a third of the auks are common in the Arctic, including little auk, guillemots, puffins, and razorbill. The overall number of alcids is assumed to be 100,000,000 birds; the little auk followed by guillemots are the most abundant.

Little Auk Alle Alle The little auk is also known as dovekie (American), alkekonge (Norwegian), and lyurik (Russian). It is a small, short-necked auk with a weight of about 160 g and a wingspan of 32 cm. The black and white coloration lacks any decoration. The little auk is the only true Arctic auk species endemic to the Arctic Basin. The breeding range stretches through the archipelagos chain from Baffin Island to Severnaya Zemlya and it has recently been reported to nest in north Bering Sea. Some birds winter within the breeding range in ice-filled waters and polynyas; most shift southwards with the majority off the Grand Bank and Nova Scotia.

Little auk (Alle alle) at a breeding colony near Savissivik, northwest Greenland. Copyright Bryan and Cherry Alexander Photography

178

Little auks are highly gregarious. Thousands of birds are seen flying around occupied slopes, and up to three nests can be found on two square meters under the stones. Large flocks form at sea when prey is abundant. The birds lay a single large egg in open spaces underneath stones or in rock crevices. Incubation lasts for a month, and the chick stays in the nest almost a month longer. In spite of nesting in shelter, eggs, chicks, and adults can be preyed by larger gulls, Arctic foxes, and polar bears. The parents bring food to their chicks in the throat pouch 5–15 times a day from a distance of 10–100 km. Each meal consists of hundreds of small shrimplike crustaceans. The little auk is the only plankton-eating auk in the Atlantic, but, outside breeding, young fishes are also consumed in largenumbers. Little auks readily exploit specific sympagic fauna developing underneath old pack ice-floes. A rough estimate of the world population gives 15 million pairs, hence, these small birds play an important role in High Arctic ecosystems. For instance, in Spitsbergen they bring ashore up to 1000 t of zooplankton during the chick-rearing period. Little auks are most vulnerable to oil spills, while fishery and bycatch do not represent major threats. Little auks wintering off southwestern Greenland are important food resources for local Greenlanders. The population trend appears to be stable all over the range except for the small populations in Iceland and southern Greenland, which have declined during the past century. Climatic changes, resulting in warmer waters around these southernmost settlements, are thought to affect dramatically one of the most Arctic bird species.

Great Auk Pinguinus Impennis Only 5–10 pairs of little auk breed in Iceland today; ironically, they nest on Eldley Island, where the last pair of great auks was killed in June 1844. There are some 80 skins and 20 skeletons, about 75 eggs housed in collections around the world, and much of what we know about this species is recent reconstruction or mere speculation, with clues supplied by extant auks and penguins. The great auk was the largest representative of the family, weighing 4.5–7.3° kg. In appearance, they resembled their recent relatives—razorbills. The great auk went further than other auks en route underwater exploration, and so lost their flying ability, becoming the closest analogs of penguins. The great auks gave southern flightless birds their name. During the last century before extinction, the great auks bred in Atlantic boreal waters, and penetrated Arctic sites in Greenland following warm tongues of the Gulf Stream.

AURORA When at sea, the great auks kept to shallow offshore fishing banks, and preyed in near-bottom waters on fishes up to 150 g in size. The scientific name of the great auks— Pinguinus—originates from Latin pinguis, and means “fatty.” And the stout, defenseless birds paid in full for their superior culinary quality. Specialized harvesting expeditions were equipped to kill these birds for food, and their feathers were also widely used. MARIA GAVRILO See also Guillemot; Puffins; Razorbill

Further Reading Bateson, P.P.G., “Studies of less familiar birds: Little Auk.” British Birds, 54 (1961): 272–277 Belopolski, L.O., Ecology of Sea Colonial Birds of Barents Sea, Israel Progr. Sci. Transl., 1961 Bradstreet, M.S.W., “Pelagic feeding ecology of dovekies, Alle alle, in Lancaster Sound and western Baffin Bay.” Arctic, 35 (1982): 126–140 Cramp, S. (editor), The Birds of the Western Palearctic, Volume IV, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1985 Flint, V.E. & A.N. Golovkin (editors), Ptitsy SSSR. Chistikovye [Birds of the USSR, Alcids], Moscow: Nauka, 1990 (in Russian) Fuller, E., The Great Auk, Private Pub., 1999 Kaftanovski, Yu.M. Chistikovye ptitsy Vostochnoy Atlantiki [Alcids of Eastern Atlantic], MOIP (Moscow Soc. Nature Explorers) New Series, Branch of Zoology, No. 28 (43), Moscow, 1951 (in Russian) Kozlova, E.V., Rzhankoobraznye: podotryad Chistikovye [Charadriiformes: Suborder Auks], Fauna SSSR, novaya seria [Fauna of the USSR, new series], Moscow-Leningrad: Akademia Nauk SSSR, Volume 65, 1957 (in Russian) Krasnov, Yu.V., G.G. Matishov, K.V. Galaktionov & T.N. Savinova, Kolonial’nye ptitsy Murmana [Murman’s colonial seabirds], St Petersburg: Nauka, 1995 (in Russian) Nettleship, D.N. & T.R. Birkhead, The Atlantic Alcidae, Orlando: Academic Press, 1985 Norderhaug, M., “The role of the little auk, Plautus alle (L.), in Arctic ecosystems.” In Antarctic Ecology, Volume 1, edited by M.W. Holdgate, London: Academic Press, 1970, pp. 558–560 Stempniewicz, L., “Breeding biology of the little auk Plautus alle (L.) in the Hornsund region, Spitsbergen.” Acta Ornithological, 18 (1981): 141–165 Stempniewicz, L., M. Skakuj & L. Iliszko, “The little auk Alle alle polaris of Franz Josef Land: a comparison with Svalbard Alle a. alle populations.” Polar Research, 15 (1996): 1–10

AURORA An aurora is a luminous glow in the sky, most frequently found in the polar regions. It varies in brightness from a faint glow at quiet times to approaching that of the full moon during active periods. The aurora is a permanent optical feature of the upper atmosphere, and appears as an oval encircling the Earth at a height

of about 100 km or more. Its position varies with geomagnetic activity. During moderate activity, the aurora is located about 23° from the magnetic pole on the nightside of the Earth and 15° on the dayside. This belt runs over Alaska, across Hudson Bay and southern Greenland, and over northern Norway and Siberia. During magnetically quiet times, the oval shrinks poleward by as much as 5°, significantly reducing the size of the “polar cap,” the region enclosed by the auroral oval. The aurora is caused by particles, mainly electrons, bombarding the gases of the Earth’s upper atmosphere. These gases become excited and lose energy by emission of light. The visible spectrum of auroral emissions is characteristic of the particular gases present at that atmospheric height. Higher altitude auroras, above about 150 km, appear red due to radiation from atomic oxygen. Auroras more commonly occur in the 100–150 km height region and tend to be mainly due to emissions from oxygen (green and red) and nitrogen (violet and pink). To observe these colors the aurora must be bright, as during auroral substorms. More commonly, auroras are faint and look gray or colorless. While spectacular displays have been recorded throughout history as early as 500 BC, it has been through major research efforts, such as the International Geophysical Year, 1957–1958, and following in situ rocket and satellite investigations, that most understanding of the phenomenon has emerged. The auroral emission spectrum extends over a wide wavelength range extending from X-rays to radio emissions. Some major emissions are in the extreme ultraviolet region and are absorbed by the atmosphere, but can be detected from above. Orbiting satellites such as the Dynamics Explorer, Viking, and Polar have been used routinely since 1981 to photograph the aurora globally, even in the presence of full sunlight. They have verified that the aurora is a permanent, full halo encircling the Earth. Viewed around this “24-hour oval,” there are typically quiet arcs in the evening sector, dynamic brighter auroras in the midnight sector, diffuse auroral remnants in the morning sector, and faint, red auroras throughout the noon sector. Auroral activity is controlled to a major degree by solar activity and the solar wind, a continuous stream of electrons and protons emanating from the Sun trapped by the Earth’s magnetosphere. The energy of these particles determines the depth to which they can penetrate the Earth’s atmosphere and thus the nature (and color) of the aurora produced. Major auroras are due to coronal mass ejections (CMEs) from the Sun, while auroral substorms are usually triggered by changes in the solar wind. Auroral substorms occur periodically and typically last for about 3 h. The first sign of a substorm is the sudden brightening of the

179

AURORA

Aurora borealis, Whitehorse, Yukon Territory, Canada. Copyright Paul Nicklen/National Geographic Image Collection

quiet auroral arc in the midnight sector. This brightening spreads westward along the auroral oval, and then the aurora expands poleward (termed the expansive phase of the substorm). During this time, the aurora is most active and colorful, with draperies, transient rays, and rapidly moving arcs. After this explosion of activity and color, which may last up to 20 min, the aurora fades and recedes to lower latitudes and is replaced by fainter patches, often pulsating with a period of a few seconds. This recovery phase lasts for up to 2 h. Great auroras expanding to low latitudes and lasting up to two days occur very occasionally, and have been marveled at through the ages. They are marked by their unusual brightness, near-global extent, and long duration. Global power inputs via particle precipitation have been estimated as high as 1000 GW during the peak of such auroral displays. They tend to occur at, or following, the peak of the 11-year cycle of solar sunspot activity. Some such recent great auroras were the February 10–11, 1958 display, which drove instruments off-scale and was seen as far south as New Mexico, one on March 13–14, 1989, which caused

180

major power disruptions along eastern North America, and the November 8–9, 1991, aurora which was first observed at the magnetic pole and gradually extended down to midlatitudes. A January 10–11, 1997 display viewed from the magnetic pole down to the middle United States and Europe was noteworthy in that its full evolution was recorded from “the cradle to the grave” by well-located spacecraft. The orbiting Solar and Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO) observed the solar CME, which caused it. The progress of the cloud and the solar wind streaming earthward were monitored by the WIND satellite, and the aurora resulting some 80 h later (the Sun-Earth transit time) was photographed by the POLAR satellite. While there may be something special causing these very unusual auroras, evidence so far suggests that they are just much bigger than the usual substorms and not very different. There have been written accounts of auroras through the ages as far back as nearly 600 BC, with explanations often invoking heat and fire. Folklore emerged as early peoples sought to explain the unique phenomenon in familiar terms. Scandinavians often associated the northern lights with wildlife—swans caught in the ice, a fox running across mountains, whales threshing through waves, or reflections from fish. Most Inuit attach spiritual significance to the lights, believing them to represent the souls of the dead that are waiting to be reborn. To the Ottawa Indians the aurora was the Creator igniting the skies to see how his peoples were faring. Perhaps more generally it was “the gods dancing across the firmament,” with the Scots describing the northern lights as the Merry Dancers. But to many societies aurora evoked fear—that it could descend and grab up children or the old, or that it presaged impending disasters such as fires, plagues, or wars. Early literature abounds with picturesque or fanciful outpourings of feelings inspired by auroras. Polar auroras, first noted by early Arctic explorers, are of similar origin to lower altitude auroras but are somewhat different in character. They are seen poleward of the auroral zone and occur only under quiet magnetic conditions when auroral oval activity is minimal. They consist of very narrow arcs, usually faint and always aligned along the Sun-Earth line. They are usually seen to split off the poleward edge of the auroral oval and drift across the polar cap, or linger for hours, depending on the state of the solar wind. Auroras occur both in the Arctic and Antarctic and are near identical, according to simultaneous observations. In northern latitudes they are called aurora borealis or northern lights, while in the south they are called aurora australis. This symmetry is due to the Earth’s magnetosphere and the manner in which it deflects and traps the solar wind particles that produce

AXEL HEIBERG ISLAND auroras. Auroras occur on other planets that have a magnetic field and an atmosphere. They are observed on Saturn and Jupiter. DONALD J. MCEWEN See also Space Weather; Substorms Further Reading Akasofu, S.-I., Aurora Borealis: The Amazing Northern Lights, Anchorage: Alaska Geographic Society, 1979 Brekke, Asgeir and Alv Egeland, The Northern Lights, Their Heritage and Science, translated by James Anderson, Oslo: Grondahl og Drewers Forlag AS, 1994 Eather, Robert, Majestic Lights, The Aurora in Science, History and the Arts, Washington: American Geophysical Union, 1980 Savage, Candace, Aurora, The Mysterious Northern Lights, Vancouver: Greystone Books, 1994

AUSUITTUQ—See GRISE FJORD AXEL HEIBERG ISLAND The uninhabited Axel Heiberg Island is located in the High Arctic within the Canadian territory of Nunavut. With an area of approximately 37,185 km2 (14,357 square miles), it is the fourth largest island in the Queen Elizabeth Islands. Axel Heiberg Island extends from 78°08′ N to 81°21′ N and from 85°00′ W to 96°00′ W and is the second most northerly island in the Canadian Arctic Archipelago. The island measures 380 by 220 km and is roughly oval-shaped and deeply indented by several long fjords. The climate of Axel Heiberg Island is a combination of polar tundra and polar ice climates, resulting in cold polar desert and semidesert conditions. The mean annual air temperature at the Eureka weather station is −19.7ºC and the mean annual precipitation is 58 mm. Eureka is the nearest long-term weather station, only 20 km from east central Axel Heiberg. These climate data are probably typical of the east side of the island, but seasonal data from the west side (McGill Arctic Research Station) indicate higher levels of precipitation. Axel Heiberg’s topography is predominantly alpine, characterized by a central mountain range (Princess Margaret Range) 915–1830 m (3000–6000 ft) high and a dissected plateau. The highest point is White Crown Mountain (2120 m above sea level). The perimeter of the island is marked by rugged hills, extensive eastern coastal lowland, and several large fjords (Li, Middle, Strand, Expedition, Glacier, Wolf, and Skaare fjords) and bays (Good Friday, Sand, and Whitsunday bays). Two large ice caps (Müller and Stacie ice caps), several smaller highland ice caps, and

many glaciers dominate the interior. About 31% (roughly 11,734 km2) of the island is covered by approximately 1100 glaciers. Accordingly, glacial and glacial fluvial deposits are widespread. Most valley glacier systems have well-developed terminal moraine complexes. At the last glacial maximum (c.9000 years BP), ice cover was far more extensive. Widespread glacial drift deposits mark the former glacier positions. Axel Heiberg lies in the Eureka Sound Fold Belt on the eastern side of the Sverdrup Basin, an area of sedimentary rocks reflecting alternating periods of nonmarine and marine deposition ranging from lower Pennsylvanian to the early Tertiary Age. Periods of intensive folding and faulting during the early Tertiary produced the mountainous topography that characterizes much of the island. Evaporite deposits of upper Paleozoic age were tectonically intruded into the overlying Sverdrup Basin sediments during early Tertiary mountain building to form more than 80 anhydrite diapirs (domes). These domes are frequently the target of oil and gas exploration, although no hydrocarbons have yet been found on Axel Heiberg Island. Areas free from ice and snow (approximately 70%) are characterized by either unvegetated rock, regolith and frost-weathered debris, or sparsely vegetated tundra. The mountainous nature of the landscape limits vegetation primarily to valleys and lowland areas. The vegetation communities are typical of polar deserts and polar semideserts. Approximately 137 species of vascular flora and 131 species of mosses and liverworts have been reported for Axel Heiberg. The major plant communities include hummocky sedge-moss meadow, frost boil sedge-moss meadow, cushion plant-moss, moss-herb (polar desert), and wet sedgemoss meadow. The greatest diversity and species richness exists in and adjacent to sheltered tundra wetlands while exposed ridges and recent glacial deposits remain relatively barren. The fauna of Axel Heiberg is typical of the High Arctic polar desert. There are roughly 23 species of birds, including snow goose (Chen caerulescens), gyrfalcon (Falco rusticolus), rock ptarmigan (Lagospus mutus), turnstones (Arenaria interpres), jaegers (Stercorarius longicadus, S. parisiticus), Arctic tern (Sterna paradisaea), snowy owl (Nyctea scandiaca), snow bunting (Plectrophenax nivalis), and three species of gull. Eight species of terrestrial mammals exist on the island, including Arctic hare (Lepus arcticus), lemming (Dicrostonyx groenlandicus), Arctic wolf (Canus lupus arcticus), Arctic fox (Alopex lagopus), polar bear (Thalarctos maritimus), ermine (Mustela erminea), muskox (Ovibos moschatus), the endangered Peary caribou (Rangifer sp), and various marine mammals.

181

AXEL HEIBERG ISLAND

Aerial view of Axel Heiberg, Nunavut, showing ice-covered Mokka Fjord, May 1987. Copyright David R. Gray

Ice-free surfaces are underlain by continuous permafrost. A deep temperature record from an abandoned oil well at Mokka Fjord indicates a permafrost depth of approximately 540 m. Ice wedge polygons 8–14 m in diameter are common on most tundra surfaces. Patterned ground, mainly poorly sorted and nonsorted circles and stripes are common on sparsely vegetated surfaces. Ground ice is a common constituent of permafrost, and pore ice, segregated ice lenses, pingo, wedge, vein, and massive ice all occur throughout the island. Several pingos have been documented; most occur in glacier floodplains and are probably hydraulic system in nature. Massive ice may be either buried glacier ice or intrasedimental in origin. Three groups of perennial springs have been documented on Axel Heiberg and associated hydrologic phenomena include icings, icing mounds, icing blisters, and frost blisters. Small palsa mounds occur in organic-rich wetlands. Despite the very cold climate of the region, it appears that many of the largest glaciers are wet-based and do not have welldeveloped permafrost. This has significant implications for subglacial erosional and hydrologic regimes. Axel Heiberg was first explored and mapped during the Second Norwegian Polar Expedition between 1898 and 1902, and named by Otto Sverdrup after Count Axel Heiberg, one of the sponsors of his expedition (Sverdrup, 1904). Several years later Robert Peary disputed Sverdup’s claim, stating that in July 1898 he had observed an island beyond Nansen Sound from Ellesmere Island that he named Jesup Land (Peary, 1907). Later research demonstrated that what Peary had observed was actually an extension of the west coast of Ellesmere Island. Limited explo-

182

ration by Frederick Cook (1911), Vilhjalmur Stefansson (1917), Donald MacMillan and Fitzhugh Green (1918), Royal Canadian Mounted Police patrols (1920s and 1930s), and Christian Vibe (1940) occurred prior to World War II. Following the war, issues centered on national security and sovereignty stimulated a new era of intense interest in the Canadian Arctic. Widespread mapping and aerial photographic surveys were undertaken for much of the High Arctic, including Axel Heiberg. As part of a major reconnaissance mapping project in the Queen Elizabeth Islands (“Operation Franklin”) in 1955, two geologists from the Geological Survey of Canada made two traverses across the island. A series of general reports describing the ice cover and geography of the island from aerial photographs were produced during the 1950s. In the late 1950s, a McGill University (Montreal) scientific expedition led by Fritz Müller established a research base on Color Lake at Expedition Fjord (79°26′ N 90°46′ W) on the west central side of Axel Heiberg. The McGill Research Station on Axel Heiberg was built in 1960 following an exploration field season in 1959. From 1959 to 1963, the expedition undertook detailed investigations on the glaciology, geology, geomorphology, climatology, and biology of Axel Heiberg with a focus on the Expedition Fjord region. The McGill Arctic Research Station is still in operation and supports an international program of research, providing one of the most impressive environmental databases in the Arctic. Axel Heiberg is uninhabited. The nearest community is Grise Fjord on southern Ellesmere Island. The McGill University Arctic Research Station (MARS) is the only scientific facility on the island. Researchers

AXEL HEIBERG ISLAND know little regarding the island’s historical occupation, although they have documented a number of Thule sites at Buchanan Lake and along Eureka Sound on the east side of Axel Heiberg. WAYNE POLLARD See also Amund Ringnes Island; Queen Elizabeth Islands; Sverdrup, Otto Further Reading Cogley, J., W. Adams, M. Ecclestone, F. Jung-Rothenhausler & S. Ommanney, “Mass balance of Axel Heiberg Island gla-

ciers 1960–1991,” NHRI Science Report No. 6, Ministry of Supply and Services Canada, Ottawa, February 1995 Müller, F., “Preliminary Report 1961–1962,” Axel Heiberg Island Research Reports, Montreal, Québec: McGill University, December 1963 ———, The Living Arctic, Agincourt, Ontario: Methuen, 1983 Ommanney, S., “A study in glacier inventory. The ice masses of Axel Heiberg Island, Canadian Arctic Archipelago.” Glaciology, No. 3, Axel Heiberg Research Reports, Montreal: McGill University, December 1969 Peary, R., The Nearest to the Pole: A Narrative of the Polar Expedition of the Peary Arctic Club in the S.S. Roosevelt, 1905–06, New York: Doubleday, 1907 Sverdrup, O., New Land: Four Years in the Arctic Regions, London: Longmans, Green and Co., 1904

183

B BACK RIVER

river Thlew-ee-choh-dezeth (“Great Fish River”). After George Back explored the river in 1834, the area came to be known as “Back’s Great Fish River” and then later shortened to simply Back River. Back accompanied Sir John Franklin’s Arctic expeditions in 1818, 1819–1822, and 1824–1827 and was subsequently asked to conduct an overland expedition to the Arctic coast in search of the missing Captain John Ross. Ross had led a private expedition to the North West Passage and had apparently vanished near the mouth of the Back River. Despite the safe return of Ross’s expedition, Back, along with a crew of ten men, set out to explore the waterway and successfully navigated the river to the Arctic Ocean at Chantrey Inlet. Back’s account of his expedition—Narrative of the Arctic Land Expedition—was published in 1836. JÖRG TEWS

Extending 974 km from the outlet of Muskox Lake to Chantrey Inlet on the Arctic Ocean, Back River is the longest river in Canada located entirely within the Barrenlands of the Canadian Arctic. British explorer Sir George Back, the first European to descend the river in 1834, gave the Back its name. The actual headwaters are at Sussex Lake in the Northwest Territories, approximately 380 km northeast of Yellowknife and 580 km east of the Inuit community of Baker Lake (Qamani’tuaq). The three most notable tributaries draining from the south include the Baillie River, the Morse River, and the Meadowbank River. The Back River system comprises a drainage area of 106,500 km². Rising in the western Barrens of the Canadian Arctic, the Back flows northeast through Beechey Lake, Pelly Lake, Upper Garry Lake, Garry Lake, Lower Garry Lake, Buillard Lake, and MacDougall Lake, and then turns north, passing through Franklin Lake before flowing into Chantrey Inlet on the Arctic Ocean, south of the Boothia Peninsula. The nearest Inuit settlement to the estuary is Gjoa Haven on the southeastern coast of King William Island. A relatively low relief with glacial substrates of silts, sands, and gravels characterizes the tundra landscape of the Back River area. The topography varies from rugged to gentle, rolling hills and long, sand eskers. Low Arctic tundra with sedge meadows, lichen-moss vegetation, and shrub tundra comprise much of the vegetation of the Back River area. The barren-ground caribou of the Beverley-Kaminuriak herd graze throughout the region. Grizzly bears and muskox are also common. The Caribou Inuit originally inhabited the upper Back River area. Another Inuit group, the Netsilik Inuit, lived downstream of Pelly Lake and near the mouth of the river. The Dene of Great Slave Lake, who occasionally traveled to the Back River area, called the

See also Back, Sir George Further Reading Back, Captain George, Narrative of the Arctic Land Expedition to the Mouth of the Great Fish River and Along the Shores of the Arctic Ocean in the Years 1833, 1834 and 1835, Edmonton: M.G. Hurtig Ltd., 1970

BACK, SIR GEORGE George Back, a British born admiral and explorer, took part in five Arctic expeditions during the 19th century. Yet he is little known even in Canada, where his record matches that of any other Arctic explorer. Bumptiousness, exacerbated by his five-foot stature, often caused prickly relationships. The derring-do of Viscount Horatio Nelson’s navy lured Back to sea at the young age of twelve-anda-half, first as a class volunteer on HMS Arethusa

185

BACK, SIR GEORGE cruising the western coasts of France and Spain seeking prizes. England then ruled the waves, keeping Napoleon landlocked. Back insinuated himself on a cutting out expedition that went awry in Deba harbor near San Sebastian. Under escort as a prisoner of war, Back marched for three months across 1000 km of France to Verdun fortress on the Belgian border. He spent his next five teenage years in prison. To distance himself from the roguery of his dissolute midshipman companions, Back studied mathematics and drawing, and became fluent in French, skills that would enrich his future. In the winter of 1813, a retreating Napoleon emptied his prisons and Back zigzagged across France to Dieppe, and so to London. Soon Back was appointed midshipman on HMS Akbar serving the North American station out of Halifax, Nova Scotia. Being dismasted off Cape Hatteras was the first of his several brushes with death. He joined HMS Bulwark at Chatham as an admiralty mate, a period of boredom that he combated by drawing, reading, and studying. Back volunteered as midshipman under Lieutenant John Franklin on HMS Trent, together with Captain David Buchan’s sloop Dorothea, under orders to find a route to the Orient via the North Pole. After several weeks wedged in the pack ice off Spitsbergen, they returned to England, leaking dangerously. Back joined Franklin’s first Arctic expedition, which was sent overland to map the so-called Polar Sea and with the intention of meeting Sir William Edward Parry’s ship searching for a North West Passage. Tribulation and ultimate disaster marked the years 1819–1821. During the expedition’s second winter, at Fort Enterprise north of the Great Slave Lake, Franklin dispatched Back to Fort Chipewayan to trace supplies that had been delayed by hostilities between the fur trading Hudson’s Bay Company and the North West Company. He also wanted to distance Back from Robert Hood, his rival over an Indian chief’s daughter, Greenstockings. The two midshipmen had prepared a duel, but John Hepburn, an English sailor, defused their pistols. After acerbic exchanges with George Simpson of the Hudson’s Bay Company, Back expedited the essential supplies. This epic 1100 mile midwinter snowshoe journey saved the expedition and Franklin was grudgingly impressed. The next summer the expedition descended the Coppermine River in canoes. The naval contingent delighted in the Arctic Ocean, while the Canadian voyageurs quailed at paddling their disintegrating birch bark canoes. The officers mapped the coast eastward beyond Bathurst Inlet to Point Turnagain before heading on foot back to Fort Enterprise. During the trek, the party gradually starved because Indian

186

hunters had failed to supply promised caribou meat. They survived on lichen and old leather clothing for nearly a month. With a pistol Dr. John Richardson executed Michel, an Indian hunter, who had apparently killed some dying companions and eaten them, and was preparing to murder both officers. Hood died of starvation soon after. Franklin sent Back ahead to find the Indians. He did so and sent supplies to Fort Enterprise, thereby saving the surviving half of the expedition. England extolled their bravery and their maps of a vast area of northern Canada’s wilderness. Back, having passed for lieutenant, joined HMS Superb on the West Indies station, a dangerous site known for yellow fever. There he heard of plans for a second overland expedition, which this time was carefully planned. Franklin and Richardson reluctantly accepted Back by default when their appointed midshipman died. The crew’s journey down the Mackenzie River and along the Arctic coast, both west and eastward with a split party, was mundane apart from a fracas with some Inuit. Despite unqualified success, their return to England was far less jubilant than before. Back was now promoted to commander and put on half pay (along with a legion of redundant British naval officers). He toured Europe and while in Italy, in 1833, he learned of the reported loss of James Ross, unheard of after three Arctic winters. Back offered to lead an overland search expedition down the Thlewee-choh River (later named for Back himself). With Dr. Richard King as his assistant officer, Back’s crew constructed Fort Reliance at the east end of Great Slave Lake. After a miserable winter during which many Indians starved around their camp, they descended the 83 rapids in a boat built by English carpenters on Artillery Lake. At Chantrey Bay, pack ice prevented their progress westward; hence, to King’s disgust, they turned round and tracked the heavy boat upriver. After an easier winter at Fort Reliance they returned home triumphant, and Back was promoted as postcaptain. As if the hardships he had endured on three land expeditions were not enough, in 1836 Back commanded HMS Terror hoping to winter at Repulse Bay and travel overland to complete mapping the coast west to Point Turnagain. But the ship, trapped in pack ice and unable to land on Southampton Island, drifted southeast continually in danger of being squeezed to death by erratic ice. Eventually, Terror was disgorged, and only by wrapping chains around its leaking hull did it reach Ireland just before sinking. With Back’s health deteriorating, he was retired and showered with honors—a knighthood from young Queen Victoria and a fellowship of the Royal Society.

BADIGIN, KONSTANTIN SERGEYEVICH The Royal Geographical Society awarded him medals and its vice-presidency, and he was appointed to the Arctic Council, directing searches for the lost Franklin expedition. Mellowed in old age, Back appeased many disparagers who had emerged during his career. No vocal dissent, however, can belie his achievements and the feats of strength of will and body that made him one of the Arctic’s most prestigious explorers and one of its finest artists.

Biography Admiral Sir George Back was born on November 6, 1796 in Stockport, Cheshire, England, the second son of Ann and John Back. He was educated at Shaw’s Grammar School in Stockport, and was a prisoner of war until the age of 18. He joined HMS Trent as midshipman under Lieutenant John Franklin on an exploration of Spitsbergen trying to find a passage over the North Pole to the Orient. Back was artist midshipman on Franklin’s fateful first Arctic Land Expedition in 1819–1821 and again went with Franklin on the second Arctic Land Expedition in 1825–1827. He made the first descent of the Great Fish River, later named the Back River. Back was knighted on March 18, 1839. He married Theodosia Elizabeth Hammond on October 13, 1846 and became a Fellow of the Royal Society in 1847. He retired as an admiral in 1876 and died on June 23, 1878 in London at the age of 82. PETER STEELE See also Parry, Sir William Edward Further Reading Back, George, The Arctic Land Expedition to the Mouth of the Great Fish River 1833–35, London: John Murray, 1836 ———, Narrative of an Expedition in H.M.S. Terror Undertaken with a View to Geographical Discovery on the Arctic Shores in the Years 1836–37, London: John Murray, 1838 Berton, Pierre, The Arctic Grail: The Quest for the North West Passage and the North Pole, 1818–1909, New York: Penguin, 1988 Fleming, Fergus, Barrow’s Boys, London: Granta Books, 1998 Houston, C. Stuart (editor), Arctic Artist: The Journal and Paintings of George Back, Midshipman with Franklin, 1819–1822, Montreal & Kingston: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 1994 MacLaren, I.S., George Back; Profiles in Canadian Literature, edited by Jeffrey Heath, Toronto: Dudurn Press, 1991

BADIGIN, KONSTANTIN SERGEYEVICH Russian-born Konstantin Sergeyevich Badigin was best known as the captain of the steamer Georgyi Sedov—a vessel beset and drifting in the ice of the

Arctic Ocean—in the years preceding World War II. Near the end of the 1937 navigation season, due to an unfortunate combination of unusually difficult ice conditions and poor decisions as to the deployment of the available Russian icebreakers, 26 ships were forced into an unplanned wintering beset in the ice at various points along the Soviet Northern Sea Route. Among them were the icebreaking steamers Sedov, Malygin, and Sadko, all locked in the ice of the Laptev Sea. Badigin, age 27, served as first mate aboard the Sadko. When by October 23, 1937 the three vessels failed to make any progress under their own steam, they faced a grave, enforced wintering adrift in the ice of the Laptev Sea. Norwegian explorer Fridtjof Nansen’s experience on the Fram in 1893–1896 led the crew to believe that they would drift north or northwest. The three ships housed a total of 217 people. In addition to the regular crews, 22 students from the Leningrad Hydrological Institute were on board Malygin; 20 scientists of the Third High Latitude Expedition were on board Sadko. Other passengers included carpenters who were trained to erect weather stations, engineers knowledgeable in the establishment of light beacons, and the staff (men and women) of several weather stations who fondly believed they were heading home. The crew and passengers initiated a program of scientific work including studies of meteorology, astronomy, and oceanography. New Year’s Day and various Soviet red-letter anniversaries were celebrated with great enthusiasm. Ice ridging and bouts of pressure frequently plagued the vessels, the worst occurring on January 1, 1938. The Sedov fared worst of all: a massive pressure ridge engulfed the stern, although the ship’s hull survived the assault intact. Moscow alerted the drifting ships that an aerial evacuation of superfluous personnel would be attempted as soon as it became light. Badigin was charged with choosing sites for and building the necessary airstrips. His work began on January 30. At the cost of enormous effort, four strips were ultimately cleared, since they were repeatedly wrecked by bouts of ridging. Flying from Tiksi, with an intermediate base on Ostrov Kotel’ny Island, three aircraft reached the ships on April 3 and in a series of flights evacuated 184 of the ships’ personnel, leaving only 11 men on each ship. Prior to the arrival of the aircraft, on March 20, 1938, Badigin received orders to command the Sedov, replacing Captain D.I. Shvetsov, who was sick, elderly, and ordered south. With reduced crews, the ships continued their drift and the scientific program continued as usual. As the spring melt began, in anticipation of getting free of the

187

BAER, KARL ERNST VON ice, Badigin decided to investigate the damage to Sedov’s rudder. An inspection by divers revealed that the lower half of the rudder was bent sharply to starboard, rendering it useless. In late August, the veteran icebreaker Yermak headed north from Tiksi, having the distinction of freeing 23 other ships that had been forced to winter at various sites in the Arctic. Yermak reached the three drifting ships on August 28 and broke them free. Taking Sedov in tow, and with Sadko and Malygin following astern, Yermak started south. However, Sedov’s damaged rudder kept causing the ship to yaw wildly and the towlines parted repeatedly. The denouement arrived when Yermak lost one of its three propellers in the ice, dashing any hopes of towing Sedov clear of the ice. Officials in Moscow decided to leave Sedov in the ice as a “drifting high-latitude station.” With Badigin still in command, a crew of 15 “volunteers” remained on board, and the ship was provisioned and fueled for 18 months. Then Yermak and the other two ships headed south. Badigin and his companions resigned themselves to at least one more winter in the ice, although in reality they stayed for almost two full winters. As the ship drifted north and west, their scientific studies continued unabated. Badigan’s crew impressively maintained a program of soundings that they took in the central Arctic Basin. Sedov possessed no sounding wire, but scientists on board improvised a practical substitute that involved the tedious unlaying of strands of mooring cables, anchor cables, and spare wire ropes for the standing rigging. Repeatedly the cable would break and lengths of cable and weights were lost, but several soundings of over 4500 m were obtained. At one point no bottom was reached at 5180 m, at a point some 375 nautical miles (600 km) northwest of Franz Josef Land. Toward the end of the drift, the soundings confirmed the existence of the Nansen Ridge located between Svalbard and Northeast Greenland. Temperature profiles also revealed the presence of a layer of relatively warm Atlantic water (the product of the North Atlantic Drift diving under the colder surface water of the Arctic Ocean). In preparation for reaching open water (to the west of Svalbard), Badigin and his crew invested an enormous effort to get the crippled rudder to function. Over a period of four days, crew members cut the rudder and rudderpost horizontally, using the most primitive of tools, and thereby allowing the upper half of the rudder to function almost normally so that the captain could steer the ship again. By December 1940, Sedov was located to the northwest of Svalbard and drifting south toward the edge of the ice. With the expectation of encountering severe ice movement and ridging as the ship approached the

188

ice edge, the icebreaker Iosif Stalin was sent to assist the floundering Sedov and reached it on January 13, 1940. Iosif Stalin towed Sedov to open water where a collier was waiting, and once the ship had bunkered, Sedov continued south under its own steam. On January 28, Badigin and his crew reached Murmansk to a wildly tumultuous welcome, repeated again for the ship’s crew in Leningrad and Moscow. The survival of Badigin’s ship during its drift across the Arctic Ocean was a tremendous feat. Additionally, Badigin and his crew are credited with the collection of significant scientific data such as the speed and direction of drift, meteorological data that were transmitted regularly to the south, and oceanographic data, in particular the soundings, all of which represented vital contributions to the knowledge of the Arctic Ocean.

Biography Relatively little is known of Konstantin Sergeyevich Badigin’s life and career, apart from his role as captain of the steamer Georgii Sedov during its remarkable drift. Born in 1910, he spent his entire working life at sea. During World War II Badigin served in the Red Navy, and thereafter continued to sail aboard merchant vessels in the Arctic. In later life, he turned his hand to writing and became a member of the Union of Writers. Badigin wrote historical novels and stories about the Arctic, which attracted quite a wide following in the Soviet Union. He died on March 16, 1984 at the age of 73. WILLIAM BARR See also Nansen, Fridtjof Further Reading Armstrong, Terence E., The Russians in the Arctic. Aspects of Soviet Exploration and Exploitation of the Far North 1937–1957, Methuen: London, 1958 Badigin, Konstantin S., Tri zimovki vo l’dakh Arktiki [Three winterings in the Arctic ice], Moscow: “Molodaia gvardiia,” 1950 Belov, M.I., Nauchnoe i khoziaystvennoe osvoenie Sovetskogo Severa 1933–1945 g. Istoriia otkrytiia i osvoeniia Severnogo morskogo puti, IV [Scientific and economic development of the Soviet North 1933–1945. The history of the discovery and exploitation of the Northern Sea Route, IV], Leningrad: Gidrometeoizdat, 1969 Buynitskii, Viktor Kh., 812 dney v dreyfuisshchikh l’dakh: dnevnik [812 days in the drifting ice: a diary], Moscow: Izdatel’stvo Glavsevmorputi, 1945

BAER, KARL ERNST VON Among the accomplishments of Baltic-German scientist Karl Ernst von Baer was the founding of the science of modern embryology. Baer’s interest in the

BAER, KARL ERNST VON Arctic, however, had become evident during his medical studies from 1810 to 1814 at the University of Tartu in Estonia, Russia. By the time he began teaching biology and anatomy at the University of Königsberg in Germany (1820–1825), Baer dreamed of a short expedition to the coast of the White Sea. His first expedition, however, did not occur until 1837 when he was a member of the St Petersburg Academy of Sciences in Russia. Baer’s expedition to Novaya Zemlya lasted from June 24 to September 11, 1837 (in Novaya Zemlya from July 19 to August 31). In addition, Baer carried out investigations on the Kol’skii Poluostrov (Kola Peninsula) and on the islands Tri Ostrova. Accompanying Baer’s expedition team was a Russian polar explorer of Polish nationality, captain A. Ciwolka, the Baltic-German geologist A. Lehmann, a preparator, and a painter. A brief but successful expedition, it marked the first time in the history of Arctic exploration wherein the primary goal of the expedition was not to discover new territories but to conduct complex investigations into the natural conditions of Novaya Zemlya. The first scientist-explorer to describe the flora and fauna, climate, geology ,and the physical geography of the islands, Baer further distinguished himself by analyzing the hydrology of the Barents and Kara seas as a result of the expedition. His articles on the nature of Novaya Zemlya remained for over 30 years signal studies for other surveys on the island group (Tammiksaar, 2000). As Baer did not succeed in carrying out all the investigations he had planned in Lapland, he began preparations for another expedition. Baer carefully planned to launch an expedition to Russian and Norwegian Lapland as early as 1839, but the trip was delayed and took place between June 16 and September 12, 1840. Baer’s traveling companions included Alexander T. von Middendorff, a BalticGerman zoologist, among other noteworthy participants from St Petersburg University. During the expedition, Baer investigated the zoology of the coastal areas of the Kol’skii Poluostrov (in particular, fish biology) as far as the Norwegian border. However, Baer did not publish any substantive scientific papers from this expedition. One of the many crucial outcomes of Baer’s organizational activities conducted in Russia and abroad included the expedition of Alexander T. von Middendorff to East Siberia (1842–1845), which he helped initiate, arrange, and popularize. The Middendorff expedition aimed to investigate the physical peculiarities and geographical distribution of permafrost in Siberia. Baer not only formulated the goals of the expedition but also compiled critical instructions for Middendorff, and authored a special study on permafrost, defining the general directions within this

field of investigation (Baer, 2001). Proceeding from the physical, geological, and geographical suppositions accepted at that time, and using a comparative-historical method, Baer put forward a conception of permafrost as an independent natural object. Furthermore, Baer laid the basis for geocryology as a nascent discipline (Tammiksaar, 2002). Among the first to investigate the glacial era in Russia, Baer nonetheless did not consider the theories he developed to be proven even in the last years of his life (Baer, 1986). Owing to Baer’s precedent and talents, the tradition of organizing geographical expeditions (for which the St Petersburg Academy of Sciences had been famous in the 18th century) was revived at the Academy at the end of the 1830s and the early 1840s. In addition to the awakening of Russian Arctic research, Baer succeeded in linking the activities of separate ministries and departments in the geographical investigaton of Russia, which until then had been scattered. Correspondingly, his initiative led to the establishment of the Russian Geographical Society in 1845. The serial publication Beiträge zur Kenntniss des Russischen Reiches und der angränzenden Länder Asiens (26 volumes, 1839–1872), founded by Baer, provided the European scientific public with new geographical investigations on the Russian Empire. Four of these volumes (numbers 1, 4, 7, and 9) treated the natural history and economy of Russia’s Arctic as well as broad ethnographic studies of the native peoples of Siberia. Although the biologist Baer never intended to become a geographer, his expeditions to Novaya Zemlya and Lapland—intended as zoological expeditions—greatly extended the framework and development of physical geography not only in Russia but throughout Europe.

Biography The Baltic-German Karl Ernst von Baer (in Russian, Karl Maksimovich Bér) was born on February 28, 1792 (new calendar) on the Estate of Piep in the province of Estonia of the Russian Empire. In 1807–1810, Baer attended Tallinn (Reval) Cathedral School, and in 1810–1814 he studied medicine at the University of Tartu (Dorpat). After graduating, Baer continued his studies at the universities of Vienna, Würzburg, and Berlin (1815 to 1817). From 1817–1834, Baer taught at the University of Königsberg and received a full professorship in zoology in 1822. In 1826, Baer was elected a full professor of comparative anatomy at Königsberg. In 1828, St Petersburg Academy of Sciences elected Baer as an academician (and a second time in 1834). Until 1846, Baer worked as a zoologist at St Petersburg Academy, and from then until 1862 as a comparative

189

BAFFIN BAY anatomist and physiologist. In 1835–1862, Baer headed the second department of the Library of the St Petersburg Academy of Sciences, and in 1841–1852 he also served as professor of comparative anatomy in the St Petersburg Medico-Surgical Academy (military academy). In 1837, Baer conducted an expedition to Novaya Zemlya, and in 1840 to Lapland. In 1838–1842, he made several trips to the northern coast of the Gulf of Finland and its islands, in 1851–1852 to Lake Peipsi and the Baltic Sea, in 1853–1856 to the River Volga and the Caspian Sea, and in 1862 to the Sea of Azov. In addition to these activities, Baer worked for several ministries, including the Ministry of the Interior, the Ministry of State Property, and the Ministry of Education. Baer spent the last years of his life (1867–1876) in Dorpat (Tartu), where he mainly wrote articles on theoretical biology, criticizing the evolutionary theories of Charles Darwin. Baer wrote over 400 scientific papers and was a member of many (nearly 100) scientific institutions, among them the Austro-Hungarian Academy of Sciences (1865), an honorary member of the University of Tartu, the Royal Society of London (1854), the Belgian Royal Academy of Sciences (1858), the Academy of Sciences of Paris (1858), the Prussian Academy of Sciences (1861), and a founder and the first president of the Russian Entomological Society (1860–1861). Seven different geographical objects on different continents of the world bear the name of Baer. He died on November 28, 1876 in Tartu (Dorpat) in Estonia. ERKI TAMMIKSAAR See also Middendorff, Alexander Further Reading Baer, K.E. von, Autobiography of Dr. Karl Ernst von Baer, edited by Jane M. Oppenheimer, Science History Publications USA Canton: Watson, 1986 ———, Materialien zur Kenntniss des unvergänglichen BodenEises in Sibirien Die erste Dauerfrostbodenkunde, Hrsg. von Lorenz King, Giessen: Universitätsbibliothek, 2001 Tammiksaar, E., Geograficheskie aspekty tvorchestva Karla Béra v 1830–40 gg [Geographical aspects in the scientific research of Karl Ernst von Baer in the 1830–40s], Tartu: Tartu Ülikooli Kirjastus (Dissertationes geographicae Universitatis Tartuensis, 11), 2000 ———, “The contributions of Karl Ernst von Baer to the investigation of the physical geography of the Arctic in the 1830s–1840s.” Polar Record, 38(205) (2002): 121–140

BAFFIN BAY Baffin Bay is a semi-enclosed sea between Greenland and the Canadian islands of Ellesmere, Baffin, and Devon. It is connected to the North Atlantic through Davis Strait and to the Arctic Ocean through Nares

190

Strait, Jones Sound, and Lancaster Sound. Baffin Bay is approximately 1200 km (746 mi) by 500 km (300 mi) in size with an area of approximately 700,000 sq km (290,000 sq mi).

Geology and Oceanography The average depth of Baffin Bay is approximately 725 m (2379 ft), reaching a maximum depth of over 2700 m (8858 ft) in the Baffin Basin. The slope on the Canadian side is particularly steep. Communication to other ocean areas is limited by a shallow sill across Davis Strait of about 600 m (1969 ft) depth and even shallower sills across Nares Strait, Jones Sound, and Lancaster Sound of 150–200 m (492–656 ft) depth. The Baffin Basin is a remnant of the formation of the bay during the early Tertiary period (approximately 56 million years ago) when the bay was the site of an active spreading zone. The spreading left behind numerous normal and transform faults, and Baffin Bay and its environs are one of the most geologically active areas in the Arctic. The strongest earthquake ever recorded north of the Arctic Circle (magnitude 7.3) occurred in Baffin Bay off the coast near Pond Inlet in November 1933. The floor of Baffin Bay is composed mainly of Quaternary sediments. The ocean water in Baffin Bay is highly stratified. The surface water, of Arctic origin, is cold and fresh. Below the Arctic layer is a layer of Atlantic origin, which is warm and saline. Below the Atlantic layer are Baffin Bay Deep Water and Baffin Bay Bottom Water, both of which are cold and saline. Two major ocean currents influence the water in Baffin Bay. The West Greenland current, a subsurface warm current, flows north along the West Greenland coast. The Baffin Current, a surface cold current, flows south along the east coast of Baffin Island. On a net annual basis, approximately 1.7 Sv (Sverdrup) flows out of the Arctic Ocean through Baffin Bay, making the bay the second most important conduit between the Arctic Ocean and the rest of the world’s oceans.

Climate and Ice Cover Lying entirely north of the Arctic Circle, Baffin Bay has a cold and dry polar climate. Annual average temperatures range from −12°C (10°F) in the northwest to −5°C (23°F) in the southeast. Precipitation is low; however, fog is a common occurrence in coastal areas and near openings in the ice cover. Along the Greenland coast, offshore katabatic winds (cold air flowing off inland mountains or icefields) are frequent. The usual track for cyclones is from west to east just south of Davis Strait; however, cyclones occasionally follow troughs north into the bay.

BAFFIN BAY

ARCTIC OCEAN

Ellesmere I. T U

V

N 10

Sd.

Devon Island

Greenland

U

W

Ba

N

0

La A n ca ster

Baffin Bay

15

W

rait vis St Da

nd Isla ffin

ICELAND

A R C TI

65 N

Baffin Bay is covered by sea ice from October through May. Ice cover in Baffin Bay is almost entirely first-year ice (less than 1.6 m thick), although some multiyear ice enters the bay through Smith, Jones, and Lancaster Sounds. Because of wind and ocean currents, sea ice may pile up in places to a thickness of 3–4 m (10–13 ft). Off the southwestern coast of Greenland, ice cover tends to be reduced because of the warm ocean currents. At the northern end of the bay, in Smith, Jones, and Lancaster Sounds, episodic openings in the ice (called polynyas) form under the influence of winds and upwelling warm water. Collectively, these polynyas form what is called the North Water. The North Water is known to influence climate for hundreds of kilometers in all directions, and the large amount of heat pumped into the atmosphere through the polynyas sometimes triggers the formation of local cyclones. A stream of icebergs passes through Baffin Bay, originating primarily from glaciers in northwestern Greenland. The typical track for the icebergs is north along the Greenland coast and south with the Baffin Current, after which the bergs join the Labrador Current and move out into the North Atlantic. Between 10,000 and 15,000 icebergs pass through Baffin Bay annually, creating a significant hazard for shipping.

Ecology As is typical of Arctic marine environments, the Baffin Bay ecosystem is characterized by low productivity,

C CIR

CLE

Baffin Bay and surrounding islands and seas.

low populations, and few trophic levels. Plankton are the primary producers, while primary consumers include crustaceans, molluscs, fish (char, turbot, Arctic cod), and bowhead whales. Secondary consumers include ringed seals, harp seals, walrus, narwhal, killer whales, and beluga whales. The Baffin Bay whale population remains very low as a result of excessive harvesting before 1900. Polar bears can be found along the shores of Baffin Bay.

Exploration and Mapping Humans first arrived in the Baffin Bay area around 4500 years ago in the first of three distinct migrations of Inuit from the west. The Inuit were attracted by the open water areas, which served for both food and transportation. The first Europeans to explore Baffin Bay were Norse, who established settlements in West Greenland in the 10th century and explored the Canadian side of the bay, perhaps as far south as Newfoundland. With the collapse of the Norse Greenland colonies in the 13th century, European knowledge of the bay was lost until 1587 when John Davis passed through what is now called Davis Strait searching for a North West Passage to Asia. William Baffin and Robert Bylot further explored the bay in 1616 and charted the positions of Jones, Lancaster, and Smith Sounds. Whaling in Baffin Bay developed rapidly after these voyages, although the treacherous ice and weather conditions in the bay claimed many ships. The 19th century was another period of

191

BAFFIN ISLAND exploration, including the voyages of John Franklin (1819), William Parry (1819), and John Ross (1829). A dramatic expansion of knowledge of Baffin Bay began in the mid-1800s with the loss of a large expedition led by John Franklin and the subsequent rescue efforts. Baffin Bay and Lancaster Sound formed part of the route taken by Roald Amundsen, who finally completed the North West Passage in 1903–1905.

Economic and Social Importance Today, the land on both sides of the bay is inhabited primarily by Inuit peoples. Sovereignty over Baffin Bay is divided between Canada (Nunavut) and Greenland (Kalaallit Nunaat), with a line of demarcation running roughly through the middle of the bay. Although fish catches are limited on the Canadian side to avoid damage to the marine ecosystems, fishing is an important part of the Inuit subsistence economy and the basis of a small, but growing, industry. Turbot, char, and Arctic cod are the major commercial species. Communities on the Greenland side rely on fishing as the primary economic activity. Shrimp production and fishing for Greenland halibut are also very important along the Greenland coast. Commercial shipping in Baffin Bay is limited to a few months in the summer. Possible oil reserves in Baffin Bay have been estimated at 400 million barrels, and exploration for these resources is beginning. JOHN HEINRICHS See also Arctic Ocean; Baffin Island; Davis Strait; Devon Island; Ellesmere Island; Lancaster Sound Further Reading Melling, Humfrey, Yves Gratton & Grant Ingram, “Ocean circulation within the North Water polynya of Baffin Bay.” Atmosphere-Ocean, 39 (2001): 301–325 Mowat, Farley, The Polar Passion: The Quest for the North Pole with Selections From Arctic Journals, Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1967 Ziegler, Peter, Evolution of the Arctic-North Atlantic and the Western Tethys, AAPG Memoir 43, Tulsa, Oklahoma: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, 1988

BAFFIN ISLAND Located in eastern Nunavut, Baffin Island is the largest in the Canadian Arctic Archipelago and the fifth largest island in the world with an area of 507,451 sq km (195,927 sq mi). Almost connected to the Melville Peninsula, the island is separated from the continent by the Foxe Channel and the Gulf of Boothia, from northern Québec by the Hudson Strait, and from Greenland by Baffin Bay.

192

Baffin Island is part of the Canadian Shield, an old erosion surface of Precambrian rocks. The southwest coast and inland comprises the Koukdjuak Great Plain, part of the Arctic lowland. Lakes Nettilling and Amadjuak, the largest lakes of Baffin Island, lie on this plain. Lake Nettilling is the largest lake in the Canadian Arctic Archipelago and the tenth largest lake in Canada (5066 sq km or 2140 sq mi). The northeastern coast is mountainous and framed by numerous fjords, inlets, cliffs, eroded sandstone valleys, and intricate alpine glaciers flowing to the sea. Active erosion from ice and water creates moraines, hoodoos (towers of erosion-resistant rock), sharp mountain ridges, and peaks. Hundreds of small islands surround the coast, especially on the southeastern coast around Cumberland, Hall Meta Incognita, and Fox Peninsula. Baffin Island possesses two major ice caps. The Barnes Ice Cap in the center north of the island and the Penny Ice Cap in the Cumberland Peninsula are about equal in size, 5935 and 5960 sq km (2292 and 2301 sq mi), respectively. Vegetation is diverse but sparse and dwarfed. Sedges, saxifrages, dryas, Arctic willows, cottongrass, broad-leafed willows, herbs, and Arctic poppies are some of the most common plants of the 350 species recorded on the island. From open water in summer, new ice builds in fall, invades the island for winter, and gradually moves away in early summer with the help of powerful currents and the world’s highest tides (11.6 m or 38 ft on the south coast). There is continual summer daylight and winter darkness in the north, but in the south, summer nights and winter days are about 5 h each. Iqaluit’s temperature in January ranges between −28°C and −39°C (−18°F and −38°F) and 4–12°C (39–54°F) in July (Environment Canada). The average annual precipitation on the island is 424 mm (Environment Canada). Between Devon and Baffin Island, Lancaster Sound is the eastern entrance of the North West Passage, and one of the richest marine areas in the Arctic Ocean. Seals (bearded, ringed, harp, hooded, harbor), walrus, and whales (beluga, narwhal, orca, bowheads) are common in the Sirmilik National Park. The essential food source for all these species is the abundant and diversified marine life (fish, plankton, algae) and the presence of polynyas (open, unfrozen water in winter pack ice) in Lancaster Sound and Baffin Bay. The Sirmilik National Park, officially opened in 1999, covers 22,000 sq km (8494 sq mi) and includes the Borden Peninsula, Bylot Island, and upland surrounding Oliver Sound. Caribou, wolf, Arctic fox, lemming, Arctic hare, and polar bear are the most common land mammals in the park. Over 70 bird species (of which more than 40 breed in the park), such as murres, kittiwakes, snow geese, knot, ringed plovers, sandpipers, peregrine falcons, and hawks, have been recorded on the territory.

BAFFIN ISLAND

Tarr Inlet, southern Baffin Island, near Iqaluit, Nunavut. Copyright David R. Gray

The Auyuittuq National Park, in the Cumberland Peninsula, is the second largest of Baffin’s national parks with 19,500 sq km (7529 sq mi). The other parks in the island are the National Wildlife Area at Qaqalluit (Cape Searle) and Akpait (Reid Bay), Kekerten Territorial Park (Cumberland Sound), Sylvia Grinnell Territorial Park, Katannilik Territorial Park, and Katannilik Territorial Park (Cape Dorset). The Dewey Soper Migratory Bird Sanctuary west of Nettilling Lake is designated as a wetland of international importance under the Ramsar Convention, and covers a 250 km intertidal strip of the Koukdjuak Great Plain. The largest breeding colony of snow geese (Anser c. caerulescens) in the world is found here. About 10,000 years ago, ice entirely covered Baffin Island. The ice sheet began to clear from the Gulf of Boothia and Hudson Strait 1000 years later, and from the Foxe Basin about 7000 years ago. The island was released from the ice 5000 years ago, leaving only an ice sheet between the actual Barnes Ice Cap and Penny Ice Cap. According to archaeological evidence found in Lake Harbour, Frobisher Bay, and Pond Inlet, the first humans on the island, the Paleo-Eskimos, colonized the island in approximately 2000 BC. Southwestern Baffin Island is considered, with Melville Peninsula, Southampton Island, and the extreme north of Québec, to be part of the core area of Pre-Dorset and Dorset Culture development. Dorset Culture sites were principally found in the Sirmilik Park, Foxe Peninsula, Cape Dorset, Lake Harbour, and Frobisher Bay. The ancestors of the present-day Inuit, the Thule, arrived after AD 1000 and became

established in most parts of the island. The Norse possibly explored the northeastern coast, but there is no proof of their presence. Martin Frobisher landed in Frobisher Bay and was the first official European to explore the island during his search for the North West Passage in 1577–1578. In 1585–1587, John Davis navigated the Davis Strait and entered Cumberland Sound. Robert Bylot and William Baffin (who gave his name to the island) followed the northeastern coast in 1616 and entered Lancaster Sound. Finally, James Clark Ross skirted the entire northeastern coast and entered Prince Regent Inlet in 1848. Two Inuit groups are known to have occupied the island, and although they shared a similar dialect they considered themselves historically distinctive. The Iglulik occupied northern Baffin Island, adjacent islands, and Melville Peninsula while the Baffinland Eskimo (Nunatsirqmuit) lived in the island’s middle-south. Since the 1950s, all the inhabitants of the island have been grouped in small towns or villages. Iqaluit, situated at the tip of Frobisher Bay, near the Becher Peninsula, is the main agglomeration and capital of Nunavut. This former American airbase has become an influential administrative center of over 4000 people with an important airport and necessary facilities. It was given city status in April 2001. Some of the greatest Inuit leaders come from Iqaluit. The island’s population comprises over 10,200 people with an Inuit majority of 8000. Nanisivik, where lead and zinc mining is conducted, is the only village where Inuit are a minority (16% Inuit out of 287). Inuktitut and English

193

BAFFIN, WILLIAM are the primary languages, with about 400 French speakers in Iqaluit. Pangnirtung, Pond Inlet (Mittimatalik), and Cape Dorset (Kingait) are the other major villages with approximately 1000 people each (Statistic Canada: Census 1996). Roman Catholic and Anglican missions are present. The Canadian and Nunavut government and local town halls are the chief employers. Tourism, mining, handicraft arts, fishing, and hunting are other economic activities in the area. PIERRE DESROSIERS See also Baffin Bay; Baffin, William; Bylot Island; Frobisher, Sir Martin; Iqaluit; Melville Peninsula; Nanisivik; Nunavut; Pond Inlet Further Reading Andrews, J.T., “Quaternary Geology of the Northeastern Canadian Shield.” In Quaternary Geology of Canada and Greenland, edited by R.J. Fulton, Ottawa: Canadian Government Publishing Center, 1989 Boas, Franz, “The Central Eskimo.” In 6th Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology for the Years 1884–1885, Washington: Bureau of Ethnology, 1888 Hall, Charles F., Arctic Researches and Life Among the Esquimaux: Being the Narrative of an Expedition in Search of Sir John Franklin, in the year 1860, 1861, and 1862, New York: Harper, 1865 Kemp, William B., “Baffinland Eskimo.” In Arctic, Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 5, edited by David Damas, Washington: Smithsonian Institution, 1984 Lepage, Denis, David N. Nettleship & Austin Reed, “Birds of Bylot Island and adjacent Baffin Island, Northwest Territories, Canada, 1979 to 1997.” Arctic, 51(2) (1998): 125–141 Mary-Rousselière, Guy, “Iglulik.” In Arctic, Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 5, edited by David Damas, Washington: Smithsonian Institution, 1984 Maxwell, Moreau S., Prehistory of the Eastern Arctic, London: Academic Press, 1985 Soubliere, Marion (editor), Nunavut Handbook, 1999, Iqaluit: Nortext, 1998 Stirling, I., W. Calvert & D. Andriashek, “Population ecology studies of the polar bear in the area of Baffin Island.” Canadian Wildlife Service Occ. Paper No. 44, 1980

BAFFIN, WILLIAM During England’s protracted 16th-century war with Spain, no effort was made to follow up John Davis’s Arctic discoveries of 1585–1587 until 1602, when companies of London merchants launched a renewed search for the North West Passage. In 1612, four merchants of the North West Company sponsored James Hall’s voyage to pursue trade, rumored silver deposits, and the ever-elusive North West Passage. William Baffin first appeared in records as chief pilot aboard Patience, which was dispatched from Hull on April 22, 1612 to the coast of Greenland, with Andrew Barker’s Heart’s Ease. On July 8 at Cockin Sound

194

(Sukkertoppen, 65°45′ N), Baffin became the first English mariner to calculate and record his longitude by celestial observation. The expedition reached 67° N, but was curtailed by Hall’s death at the hands of Inuit at Ramel’s Fjord (Amerdloq) on July 22, and returned to England on September 11. Baffin’s account includes descriptions of the Inuit. Baffin was next in the service of the Muscovy Company for two of its annual whaling expeditions to Spitsbergen. From May 13 to September 6, 1613, he piloted Captain Benjamin Joseph’s Tiger, which protected a small English fleet of whalers, and drove numerous foreign vessels from the region. On April 16, 1614, Baffin and Joseph again embarked for Spitsbergen aboard Thomasine, with a still larger fleet, which also included Heart’s Ease, now commanded by Thomas Maramaduke. Thomasine and Heart’s Ease undertook exploration of Spitsbergen’s northern coast. Ice retarded progress, but shallops were launched to press eastward beyond Woodfjorden and Wijdefjorden. Baffin and Robert Fotherby reached the western shore of Hinlopen Strait (80° N 17° E). The fleet returned to London on October 4, 1614. On March 15, 1615, Baffin sailed as pilot of the 55ton Discovery, commanded by Robert Bylot. Both ship and captain had formerly served on expeditions by Henry Hudson (1610–1611), Sir Thomas Button (1612–1613), and William Gibbons (1614), and were now sent to continue their search via Hudson’s Strait, spurred by the promise of triple wages for the crew of 14 men and two boys if a North West Passage were found. Greenland was sighted on May 6, Discovery rounded Cape Farewell on May 10, and Resolution Island at the mouth of Hudson Strait was attained on May 27. Baffin’s skill as a scientific navigator was employed surveying the south coast of the island which later bore his name, as well as Salisbury, Nottingham, Mill, and Southampton islands, astride the Foxe Channel. Landing often to take celestial fixes and record his position, he also recorded compass variations and closely observed the currents, tidal flows, and ice movement. While en route on April 26, 1615, he recorded the first lunar calculation of longitude to be made by a ship under way, by measuring the occultation of a star by the moon. Using yet another technique to calculate longitude, he fixed his position on June 21 at 74°05′ W, which was confirmed to be within a degree of accuracy by Parry in 1821. Although Baffin’s calculations of longitude were not always this accurate, those for latitude later revealed errors of no more than five to ten minutes. Discovery made landfall at Plymouth on September 8, 1615, and Baffin rewarded the expedition’s sponsors with his log and a chart—the only one of his to survive—which accurately located the discoveries of Hudson and Button as well as his own.

BANG, JETTE Based on his tidal observations, Baffin concluded that no viable westward passage would be found in Hudson Bay or the Foxe Basin, but suggested that it might lie north of Davis Strait. As a result, on March 26, 1616, Bylot and Baffin were again dispatched aboard Discovery, bound for Davis Strait. After foul weather delays, they cleared Plymouth on April 19, reached the west coast of Greenland (65°20′ N) in mid-May, and proceeded northward up the coast. On May 30, they passed Davis’s furthest north, “Sanderson’s Hope,” explored the nearby Upernavik (“Women’s”) Islands (72°47′ N), and described the Inuit in some detail. In quick succession, they reached and named Sir Dudley Digges Cape and Wolstenholme Fjord (76°35′ N) on July 3, Whale Sound (Hvalsund, 77°30′ N) on July 4, and on July 5 reached the mouth of Smith Sound (77°45′ N), which they named for Sir Thomas Smythe. This exceeded Davis’s furthest north by more than 360 miles, thus setting a record only broken 236 years later by Edward A. Inglefield. Sailing onward, past the Cary Islands, around Baffin Bay, and charting the east coasts of Ellesmere and Devon Islands, on July 10 and 12 Discovery reached two wide, eastward-running sounds, choked with ice, which were christened for Alderman Jones and Sir James Lancaster. Failing to recognize Lancaster Sound as the gateway to the true North West Passage, Baffin and Bylot continued south, past the islands that bear their names, to about 65°40′ N, near the entrance to Cumberland Sound. They judged their mission a failure, and since they were no longer in unexplored waters and crew members were falling ill with scurvy, they made for Cockin Sound on the Greenland coast, and reached Dover on August 30, 1616. This voyage, achieved without loss of life, represented a triumph of navigation and Arctic discovery. Unfortunately, Purchas parsimoniously published only an abbreviated version of Baffin’s account, and omitted altogether his navigation tables and detailed chart, publishing instead a map by Henry Briggs, which preserved the illusion of a North West Passage through Hudson Bay. This led to the dismissal of Baffin’s discoveries, until they were corroborated by Sir John Ross’s expedition in 1818, the very year Sir John Barrow published his own skeptical views of Baffin’s claims, while acknowledging Purchas’s culpability as an editor. Although the results of his expeditions discouraged further pursuit of a North West Passage, and despite his own skepticism, Baffin’s subsequent service with the East India Company has been attributed to his desire to seek out the Passage from the west. Although he never returned to the Arctic, he had established himself as England’s most skillful navigator prior to James Cook.

Biography Born c.1584 of unknown parentage, and probably resident in London, Baffin’s early life is pure conjecture, while details of his last decade are largely those recorded in Purchas’s work. His surviving texts reveal more than a little formal schooling, and he demonstrated his familiarity with the most advanced theories and techniques of celestial navigation. Baffin’s principal expeditions included Hall’s 1612 voyage to Greenland, two whaling voyages to Spitsbergen for the Muscovy Company in 1613 and 1614, Bylot’s 1615 and 1616 expeditions for the North West Company in search of the North West Passage, and two voyages for the East India Company. Scholars only know that Baffin had married because his widow pressed a claim against the East India Company for his wages and other compensation and received £500 in 1628. They appear to have been childless. Baffin died on January 23, 1622 of a gunshot wound to the stomach, suffered while taking sightings for artillery on the island of Qeshm, during the siege of Hormuz. MERRILL DISTAD See also Baffin Bay; Baffin Island; Bylot, Robert Further Reading Dodge, Ernest S., Northwest by Sea, New York: Oxford University Press, 1961 Pennington, L.E. (editor), The Purchas Handbook: Studies of the Life, Times and Writings of Samuel Purchas, 1577–1626: With Bibliographies of His Books and Works About Him, 2 volumes, London: Hakluyt Society, 1997 Thomson, George Malcolm, The North-West Passage, London: Secker and Warburg, 1975 Waters, David W., The Art of Navigation in England in Elizabethan and Early Stuart Times, London: Hollis and Carter, 1958

BANG, JETTE Jette Bang was a Danish photographer who documented Greenlandic culture in film and photography. Initially hired by the Danish state in 1936 to document all aspects of Greenlandic life, she traveled throughout Greenland in six long journeys beginning in 1936. Bang published her travel experiences in several books of her photography, including Grønland (1940), 30,000 Kilometer med Sneglefart’ [30,000 kilometers at a snail’s pace] (1941), Grønlænderbørn [Children of the Greenlanders] (1944), and Grønland igen [Greenland Again] (1961). Bang’s films included Den yderste ø [The Outmost Island] (1937), Inuit (made in 1938/1939 and shown to the public in 1948), Ad lange veje [Along Long Roads]

195

BANKS ISLAND (1952), Et nyt Grønland [A New Greenland] (1954), Beduiner [Bedouins] (1959), and Trommedans i Thule [Drum Dance in Thule] (1964). Sixteen thousand of her negatives are kept at Arktisk Institut (Danish Arctic Institute) in Copenhagen, managed under the auspices of the Danish Polar Center, a governmental institution established in 1989. Bang’s images and texts invoked a sympathetic picture of the Greenlanders who she depicted in their daily life or, in some cases, in posed and arranged compositions such as portraits of mothers and children, seal hunters, and related scenes. Her photographic work and films function as a cultural and historical documentation of the Inuit culture on the edge of modernity. Her work provided audiences with a complex and often profound understanding of the Greenlandic mind and body. Moreover, it has been argued that Bang’s representation of a well-nurtured, well-dressed, pleasant, picturesque people under Danish tutelage probably bolstered the Danish pride in Greenland during the German occupation of World War II, a difficult time in that country’s history. The romantic, even nostalgic and mythic, images of Greenland functioned not only as social documents but also as subjective narratives.

Biography Jette Bang was born on February 4, 1914 in Frederiksberg (Copenhagen) as daughter of tobacco dealer Thomas Andreas Bang and his wife Margrethe Severine Haae Laub. She was married on August 5, 1944 to Ole Jensinius Bording, and later divorced. She died on February 16, 1964 in Copenhagen. Bang spent her childhood at Christianshavn, a district in Copenhagen, close to the office of the Royal Greenland Trade Company. In 1932, she passed the General Certificate of Education (in modern languages) and thereafter attended the introductory course in philosophy at the University of Copenhagen. She held an apprenticeship at a reputed photo atelier Jonas Co., run by photographer Herman Bente. AXEL KJÆR SØRENSEN See also Art and Artists (Indigenous) Further Reading “Jette Bang.” In Dansk Biografisk Leksikon (Danish Biographical Encyclopedia on Women), Copenhagen: Gyldendal, 1979; Dansk Kvindebiografisk Leksion, 2000

BANKS ISLAND Banks Island is the westernmost island of the Canadian Arctic Archipelago. The fifth largest island

196

in Canada, the island’s area covers over 70,000 km2. In late summer, the southern coasts are accessible by sea, although McClure Strait on the north is usually blocked by thick ice. At the south end of Banks Island is a small plateau of sedimentary and volcanic rocks, from which the bold cliffs of Nelson Head rise to 425 m. In the north, a larger plateau rises sharply from the northeast coast as limestone cliffs. Between the two plateaus sits a vast rolling land that rises along the east coast to about 300 m and then slopes gradually to the west coast. Three major rivers flowing west from the watershed dissect this lowland. Sand bars and braided river mouths characterize the low west coast of Banks Island. The largest river, the Thomsen, flows north to McClure Strait. The few large lakes are all located on the east side of the island, and the west side of Banks Island was never glaciated. Approximately 40,000 muskoxen populate Banks Island, which boasts an abundant wildlife. Peary caribou, however, are in decline and considered a threatened species. Polar bears commonly thrive along the coasts and Arctic foxes live throughout the island. Huge flocks of lesser snow geese nest and molt on the western side. Rough-legged hawks, brant, and eider ducks are among the many birds that breed on the island. Trout, Arctic char, and whitefish inhabit the rivers. Although archaeological sites representing several different cultural groups are located throughout Banks Island, historians have found no indications of permanent settlements. In 1820, Sir William Parry named “Banksland” for Sir Joseph Banks (1743–1820), explorer and head of the Royal Society of London. During the search for Sir John Franklin’s lost expedition, Robert McClure, commander of HMS Investigator, charted most of the Banks’ coastline. McClure sailed up the west coast to Mercy Bay in 1851, but abandoned the ship when it locked with the ice. Inuit from Victoria Island (of the Arctic Archipelago) later found the Investigator and used it as a source of wood and iron for many years. The Canadian Arctic Expedition—led by Vilhjalmur Stefansson, aided by local and Alaskan Inuit, and supported by expedition schooners Mary Sachs and North Star—explored much of Banks Island between 1915 and 1917. After 1917, the trapping of Arctic foxes drew people to Banksland. The 1930s and 1940s were known as “The Schooner Days,” during which families traveled to Banks Island to spend the winter trapping at camps along the coasts. By the early 1950s, a store and houses were established at Sachs Harbour on the south coast, the lone settlement on the island. The 1950s witnessed an increase in scientific and military exploration on Banks Island. In the 1970s, seismic exploration in the northern part resulted in the

BARENTS REGION drilling of several wells. Fox trapping, fishing, and hunting over much of the island remain an important part of life for Bankslanders. The establishment of Aulavik National Park on northern Banks in 1992 led to increased tourism that continues today. DAVID R. GRAY See also Beaufort Sea; McClure, Sir Robert; Northwest Territories; Sachs Harbour Further Reading Dunbar, Moira & Keith R. Greenaway, Arctic Canada From the Air, Ottawa: Defence Research Board, 1956 Gray, David R. & Bea Alt, The Natural and Cultural Resources of Aulavik National Park, Metcalfe: Prepared for Parks Canada by Grayhound Information Services, 1997 Harington, C. Richard (editor), Canada’s Missing Dimension: Science and History in the Canadian Arctic Islands, Ottawa: Canadian Museum of Nature Parks Canada, New Parks North, Newsletter No. 10, 2001, 36pp Stefansson, Vilhjalmur, The Friendly Arctic, New York: MacMillan, 1921 Taylor, Andrew, Geographical Discovery and Exploration in the Queen Elizabeth Islands, Ottawa: Department of Mines and Technical Surveys, 1955 Usher, Peter J., The Bankslanders: Economy and Ecology of a Frontier Trapping Community, Ottawa: Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, 1970

BARENTS COUNCIL The Barents Euro Arctic Council (BEAC) aims to ensure stability and prosperity in the Barents Region through intergovernmental cooperation. The formation of the council was stimulated in the late 1980s and early 1990s when contacts and cooperation between the people in the northern parts of Finland, Norway, Russia, and Sweden increased. Norway’s foreign minister Thorvald Stoltenberg initiated the formalization of the cooperation in the Barents Region. The “Kirkenes Declaration,” signed on January 11, 1993, describes the aims of the cooperation, which include security, stability, and prosperity in the area. The declaration also emphasizes the cooperation on environment, economic cooperation, scientific and technological cooperation, regional infrastructure, strengthening of communities of indigenous people, cultural exchange, and tourism. The cooperation also aims to support the reform process in Russia, which aims at strengthening democracy, market reforms, and the local institutions. The member countries include Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Russia, and Sweden. Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, Poland, United Kingdom, and United States of America are observers. The European Union also participates in the BEAC. The BEAC consists of the six participating

countries’ foreign ministers. Ministerial meetings are held for other ministers on an ad hoc basis. The chairmanship rotates annually among the four geographically involved nations of Finland, Norway, Russia, and Sweden. A secretariat is established to serve the chairperson. A CSO level prepares the tasks for the BEAC, the practical arrangements for the ministerial meeting, discusses relevant topics, and coordinates the work of seven working groups. The working groups under the CSO level are established when needed. The present working groups include the Economic Working Group, Task Force on Environment, Ad Hoc Working Group on Energy, and Steering Committee of the Barents Euro-Arctic Transport Area. Previous working groups have included The North East Sea Route. The BEAC cooperates with the Barents Regional Council, bringing local and regional concerns and priorities up to an international level. The Regional Council, formed at the same time as BEAC, includes regional representatives, county governors, and their equivalents from Finland (Kainuu, Lapland, and Oulu), Norway (Finnmark, Nordland, and Troms), Russia (Arkhangel’sk Oblast’, Karelia, Komi Republic, Murmanskaya Oblast’, and Nenets Autonomous Okrug), and Sweden (Norrbotten and Västerbotten). The organization works in close connection with relevant bodies, especially the Council of the Baltic Sea States (CBSS), the Arctic Council (AC), and is one of the regional bodies mentioned in the European Commission’s documents on the EC’s Policies for a Northern Dimension. The BEAC has contributed to a closer cooperation between the participating nations on interregional cooperation, and brought several items of regional importance on the international agenda. SYLVI JANE HUSEBYE See also Barents Region; Barents Regional Council Further Reading Barents Euro-Arctic Council, www.beac.st/ Joenniemi, Pertti, “The Barents Euro-Arctic Council.” In Subregional Co-operation in the New Europe. Building Security, Prosperity and Solidarity from the Barents to the Black Sea, edited by Andrew Cottey, Hampshire: Macmillan Press, 1999

BARENTS REGION The Barents Region was originally defined as the part of Europe north of the Arctic Circle, as it was made up by the member counties of the Barents Regional Council. The Council, formed in 1993, was enlarged by three more counties bordering the region, and consists today of all these counties. The Euro-Arctic

197

BARENTS REGION

D

ARCTIC OCEAN

LA

N

D

FRANZ JOSEF R

A

A

E

B

S

L

Taym y

A

S V

A

K A R

Auto n

BARENTS

ou

s

Ar ea

Ye e nis

SEA

r

om

yR

0

NOVAYA ZEMLYA

.

90

AR

AND F IN L

SWEDEN

MU RM Murmansk O B AN LA SK ST AY A '

Arkhangel'sk

AY

Pe

A

KOMI REPUBLIC

CT

IC

CL

E

E

rea ts ous A ene l-N tonom a m Au Ya

R.

K L'S GE ' AN AST KH A R O BL

ra cho

RELIA KA EP. W HITE S EA R

Nenets Area m o us A uto no

Ob ’ R.

NORWAY

R CI

64 N

Territories in the Barents Region.

Barents Region, for short “the Barents Region,” consists of the county members of the Barents Regional Council. Although a geographical unit, the northern European parts of Finland, Norway, Sweden, and Russia have significant differences in climate, geology demographics, government, and economic patterns. The Barents Region covers approximately 1,347,000 km2 of Arctic and Subarctic areas, and contains these climate types but with differences. The region borders the Northern sea in the west, where the Gulf Stream gives humid and relatively warm winters and cool summers. The northeast of the region borders the Arctic Ocean, and has large areas of permafrost. The inland areas of the region have usually long, cold winters and hot, short summers. Most of the Barents Region lies on the Fennoscandian crystalline shield. Other geological structures are found on its fringes. The inland of the region has Europe’s largest forested area. In the north, there are large areas with tundra, and in the south, large areas of forest, mainly coniferous species. The Barents Region is Europe’s most sparsely populated area; the population density varies from 1.7 to

198

8.3 inhabitants per square kilometer. The largest concentration of inhabitants is found in the large Russian cities, especially Murmansk and Arkhangel’sk. The Barents population of approximately five million inhabitants consists of four nations, and the indigenous peoples: Saami and Nenets people. The Barents Region has a relatively high percentage of indigenous people. The Saami live in the Nordic countries, and Saami and Nenets in Russia, most of whom live in the Nenets Autonomous Okrug. Fishing, reindeer breeding, and farming form the base of the Saami’s settlement and culture, although assimilation to the national cultures continues. The authorities’ new policy and treatment of the Saami as indigenous people have contributed to the revitalization of the Saami culture, language, and identity. In several northern districts, the Saami language has official language status. The Barents Region is one of Europe’s richest areas in natural resources. Productive forests are found in the southern part of the region. The region contains a great diversity of flora and fauna. The Barents Sea bordering the region has the world’s richest fish stocks,

BARENTS REGIONAL COUNCIL with 144 species of marine fish, and is one of the most important fishing areas in the world. The region has a large number of rich mineral deposits, many of them in commercially interesting quantities. Several rich oil and gas deposits are located in the region, most of them offshore along the Norwegian coast and in the Barents Sea. The mountainous parts of the region have height differences suitable to produce hydropower. The region’s nature is for the largest part kept unspoilt, and there are good recreational areas, Europe’s best salmon rivers included. Serious environmental problems are concentrated to some areas of metallurgic industries and nuclear activities. The governmental and educational systems in the region are country specific. In Sweden, the governor represents the central Swedish government. The county council is responsible for health care and cultural issues. The Finnish governors take care of the interior matters and police. The county administration manages the regional foreign policy under the direction of the government. In Norway, the county council develops policies and long-term strategies. The head of the council, the county mayor, is head of the county administration. In the Russian Oblasts Murmansk and Arkhangel’sk, the democratically elected regional duma approves the regional budget and controls it, and makes decisions on the regional level. The governor, democratically elected, heads the county administration. A local representative of the President of the Russian Federation supervises the executions of presidential decrees. The Republic of Karelia has its own constitution, government, and parliament, which is the legislative assembly. The Nenets Autonomous Okrug manage their separate budget, and its governmental system is similar to the Oblasts. Each nation has two or more regional administrative centers as well as universities in the region. The common economic activity throughout the region is extraction and processing of raw materials. In some areas, tourism and the service sector are growing. The transportation of goods from the region mainly goes to the south within the national borders. The unemployment rates in the region are often each nation’s highest. The export of goods goes mostly out of the region and, to a large extent, out of the country. The natural resources have traditionally been exported as raw materials out of the region. The lack of east-west transportation and communication possibilities still make trade and transportation within the region between the nations difficult. Different standards and official procedures between the member countries make huge trade barriers. Finland has industrial production from forestry and metal, mostly for export markets. The importance of tourism is growing. In Norway, fishing and fisheries are

the common economical activity, although further north, service, tourism, and public sector are more important. The Russian territories have faced a privatization of state industrial enterprises, transferring the power and influence from the region to the national center. Murmansk Oblast’ depends heavily on mining and fishing. Forestry is the dominating industry in Arkhangel’sk, with the others being fishing and fish processing. The oil and gas sector is growing in the Nenets Autonomous Okrug. Karelia’s main economic sectors are forestry and mining. In the Swedish counties, the public sector is of great importance, together with forestry and industry. In the Nenets Autonomous Okrug, reindeer husbandry is the main livelihood. This is also an important way of living for the Saami in Finnmark, Norrbotten, and Lapland. The indigenous people in the area have lived, traveled, and traded across the Barents Region. Increased population during the last millennium resulted in extensive trade and communications in the area, especially in connection with the waterways. The Soviet time put a restraint on these contacts. The sharp division between eastern and western Europe went through the Barents Region, making the area a highly militarized zone. In the 1980s, contacts across the Soviet border were again established. In 1993, the increasing cooperation was formalized in the Barents cooperation, through the fora Barents Euro Arctic Council and the Barents Regional Council; hence, the expression the Barents Euro Arctic Region, for short the Barents Region, was established. SYLVI JANE HUSEBYE See also Barents Council; Barents Regional Council; Finland; Norway; Russia; Sweden Further Reading Flikke, G. (editor), The Barents Region Revisited, Oslo: Norwegian Institute of International Affairs, 1998 Stokke, Olav Schram & Ola Tunander (editors), The Barents Region: Cooperation in the Arctic Europe, London: Sage, 1994

BARENTS REGIONAL COUNCIL The aim of the Barents Regional Council (BRC) is to increase regional cooperation in a broad field of activities in the Barents Region. The council was established on January 11, 1993 as the regional pillar to the Barents Region, the Barents Euro Arctic Council being the central pillar. The founding members of the BRC included the regional leaders in the Barents Region (Lappland län, Finland, Nordland, Troms and Finnmark county, Norway, Arkhangel’sk and Murmansk Oblast’, Russia, and Norrbotten län,

199

BARENTS SEA Sweden). A representative for the Saami Council was also present. Karelia Oblast’ participated as an observer, and was adopted as a member in April 1993. Nenets Autonomous Okrug has its own representative in the council. In 1998, the BRC expanded to include Oulo län (Finland) and Vesterbotten län (Sweden). The Barents Regional Council consists of the leaders of the participating counties, and meets four to six times a year. The new chairperson is elected biennially, rotating among the countries and counties. Under the BRC, the Regional Executive Committee (REC) prepares the tasks for the council, including preparation of an annual consensus-driven Barents Program. The REC works with and through regional coalitions of officials and specialists in the relevant field. The groups currently active involve industrial and commercial development, infrastructure, education, environment, health, welfare, culture, and indigenous peoples. The consensus-driven working groups propose projects and evaluate external project proposals for the Barents Program. Some of these projects elaborated regional action plans that have been adopted by the BRC and forwarded to the Barents Euro Arctic Council. National secretariats assist the national members in the REC and the regional working groups. Regional Barents Information offices have been established in Arkhangel’sk, Naryan-Mar (Nenets Autonomous Okrug), and Petrozavodsk (Karelia). Regional autonomy of the practical cooperation has been achieved on the Norwegian side, where the Norwegian members of the REC manage the Norwegian state funds granted to the regional cooperation projects. The Barents Regional Council forwards local priorities and larger-scale projects to the BEAC. The BRC maintains operational cooperation with Eurasia Foundation (US) and the Nordic Council of Ministers. The BRC maintains close contacts with the regional level of the Baltic cooperation and the EU’s regional cooperation program Barents Interreg. Under the BRC, cross-border cooperation, emphasizing people-to-people contacts, has been established. The cross-border regional infrastructure has been developed from east to west in the region, especially within telecommunications. Extensive educational and competence transference programs have been conducted. Health cooperation has been established between professionals and institutions and public health programs conducted. Cultural exchange has increased. Cooperation between the indigenous peoples in the Barents Region has been established and develops into legal affairs, cultural and business cooperation, and development. SYLVI JANE HUSEBYE See also Barents Council; Barents Region

200

BARENTS SEA The Barents Sea, named after Dutch navigator Willem Barents, is a marginal sea of the Arctic Ocean, and is bounded by the Kola Peninsula of Murmanskaya Oblast’, the northern coast of Nenets Autonomous Okrug, the island of Novaya Zemlya, and loosely to the north by Franz Josef Land and Svalbard. Its marine borders are with the Kara Sea to the east and the Norwegian Sea to the west (see the map in Barents Region). The sea overlies the north Russian continental shelf and is thus relatively shallow (10–100 m), with the seafloor sloping gently toward the central Arctic Ocean in the north and toward the GreenlandNorwegian Sea in the west, to depths of 200–300 m. West of Svalbard, the shelf ends and the ocean depth rapidly increases to more than one thousand meters. The Barents Sea has a total area of about 1.4 million square kilometers (540,000 square miles). The Barents Sea is a major ocean front area, with waters meeting from the North Atlantic Ocean and the Arctic Ocean. Cold Arctic water in the form of sea ice enters the Barents Sea from the northeast, and warm Atlantic surface water (the Atlantic Drift current) enters from the Norwegian Sea in the west. The southern part of the sea, and the ports of Murmansk and Vardø remain ice-free year round due to the warm Atlantic Drift current. Freshwater input to the sea is mainly from the Pechora River and the Kola River. The climate in the Barents Sea is much milder as compared to the continental climate conditions on the east Siberian shelves, with warm air masses from cyclones (atmospheric low-pressure systems) from the Greenland-Norwegian Sea passing westward through the southern Barents Sea. The Barents Sea has a very high biological productivity for such a high latitude (see Large Marine Ecosystems), and is an important feeding area for cod, capelin, haddock, redfish, and herring. Cod and capelin are major fishery resources exploited by both Norway and Russia. There is also a rich population of seabirds and marine mammals that feed on the dense phytoplankton blooms in spring and early summer. Large colonies of breeding seabirds are found along the coasts, particularly of Novaya Zemlya: a breeding population of 10–15 million seabirds has been estimated for the Barents Sea region as a whole. Common birds are fulmars, cormorants, Arctic terns, and brent geese. The ringed seal, bearded seal, walrus, and minke whale are all found at sea, and polar bears on Svalbard and Novaya Zemlya. The Greater Barents Region is one of the most densely populated regions of the circumpolar Arctic, and has a large industrial base. Oil and gas accumulations are actively being explored in the northern Barents Sea off the Norwegian shelf, and oil and gas

BARENTS, WILLEM fields are being exploited in the Pechora basin offshore of Nenets Autonomous Okrug. The Barents Sea has suffered persistent organic pollutant contamination and heavy metal discharge from chemical factories into Russian rivers, air pollution from industrial activities such as smelting, and radioactive contamination from dumped nuclear waste from Russia’s Northern Fleet’s ballistic-missile submarines from the 1960s to the 1980s. Nuclear tests were carried out on or near Novaya Zemlya between 1955 and 1990, and there is also a nuclear reactor on the Kola peninsula. Hydrocarbon spills from future offshore drilling and shipment of oil from terminals such as Varandei on the Nenets Autonomous Okrug shore also threaten commercial fisheries. GILLIAN LINDSEY See also Arctic Ocean; Barents Region; Barents, Willem; Gas Exploration; Kara Sea; Murmanskaya Oblast’; Nenets Autonomous Okrug; Novaya Zemlya; Oil Exploration Further Reading Bergesen, Helge Ole, Arild Moe & Willy Ostreng, Soviet Oil and Security Interests in the Barents Sea, New York: St Martin’s Press, 1987 National Oceanographic Data Center (US), Climatic Atlas of the Barents Sea 1998: Temperature, Salinity, Oxygen, Washington, District of Columbia: US Dept. of Commerce, National Oceanographic Data Center, 1998, http://www.nodc.noaa.gov/OC5/barsea/bardoc.html Tikhonov, Sergey, Konstantin Sjevljagin, Harald Loeng, Geir Wing Gabrielsen, Salve Dahle, Ole Jørgen Lønne & Roald Sætre (editors), Status Report on the Marine Environment of the Barents Region, The Joint Norwegian-Russian Commission on environmental cooperation, The working group on the marine environment of the Barents Region, 1997 World Wide Fund for Nature (The Barents Sea—A Sea of Opportunities), http://www.panda.org/downloads/arctic/barentsreport.pdf

BARENTS, WILLEM Although the name of Willem Barents is renowned, historians know little of his life and family. From his atlas Nieuwe Beschrijvinghe ende Caertboeck van de Middellandtsche Zee (New Description and Atlas of the Mediterranean Sea) published by Cornelis Claesz in 1595, historians know that Barents nurtured an interest in maps during his childhood. He shared this passion with his later teacher, the Dutch reformed preacher, and geographer Petrus Plancius (1552–1622). Plancius was interested in the discovery of a North East Passage to China and Japan, and when an expedition to search for such a northern sail route was organized in 1594, Plancius placed Barents in command of the Amsterdam portion of the discovery fleet.

The Dutch organized three successive voyages to search for such a sail route. Olivier Brunel, a Dutchman who at that time lived in Kholmogory in the north of Russia, played a significant role in the preparations of these voyages. Brunel made several voyages from Kholmogory to the Samojed country and to Siberia and, as the first West-European there, he finally reached the River Ob. In 1584, he succeeded in fitting out a ship at the expense of Balthasar de Moucheron, a merchant from Middelburg in the province of Zeeland in the Netherlands and the first Dutch expedition to try to reach Cathay in China via the north. Unfortunately, Brunel’s vessel shipwrecked in the mouth of the River Pechora and he most likely died on that journey. When Barents, on his first trip, arrived in Novaya Zemlya, he recognized the Strait of Kostin Shar from Brunel’s description of it published in Lucas Jansz Waghenaer’s Tresoor der Zeevaart (1592). Cornelis Cornelisz Nay served as commander of the entire fleet on Barents’s first voyage, which was financed by the city of Amsterdam and the states of Holland and Zealand. The 1594–1595 expedition was considered a success because the participants were convinced that they had discovered the entrance of the North East Passage to China. The following year, an expedition of merchant ships set sail with the intention of traveling through the newly discovered sailing route to China and Japan. Barents commanded the ship Winthont in the capacity as leader of the Amsterdam portion of the expedition. However, their ships became locked in ice in the southern Kara Sea and trapped until the following summer. While the expedition was not too promising, the Dutchmen decided to send another expedition in 1596. This time Barents led the entire fleet, which consisted of two ships—one commanded by Jacob van Heemskerck and the other commanded by Jan Cornelisz Rijp. For the first time, this expedition took a northern direction and subsequently discovered Bear Island and Spitsbergen. However, when it became clear that there was no passage in the northern pack ice, Barents decided to sail without Rijp, again to the northeast. Barents’s ship got stuck in the ice of the northern Kara Sea to the east of Novaya Zemlya. Together with Jacob van Heemskerck and 15 crew members, Barents was forced to spend the winter of 1596–1597 on the desolate east coast of the Arctic island. There Barents and his crew used the wood of the ship to build housing; they called it Behouden Huys or the “safe house.” Barents was among the first Europeans to survive a wintering in the Arctic. In June 1597 when their ship was still blocked in the ice, the survivors decided to return southward toward the Netherlands in open boats. Barents, however, did not survive this return voyage; on June 20, 1597, he died

201

BARENTSBURG and most probably was buried at the sea that today bears his name. He left behind a wife and five children under destitute circumstances. Soon after his death, his widow was forced to ask the administrative state of Holland for financial support, which she did not, unfortunately, receive. An impressive diary of the wintering written by one of the crew members, Gerrit de Veer, was published shortly after Barents’s third voyage and was quickly translated into several languages. In 1598, Cornelis Claesz of Amsterdam published the geographical information gathered during Barents’s expeditions in the form of the “Willem Barents Polar Map.” This remarkable map changed the picture of the polar area completely, as it described an open polar sea surrounded by continents. In 1871, the Norwegian seal hunter Elling Carlsen rediscovered the remains of Barents’s Behouden Huy. Inside the wintering house on Novaya Zemlya, Carlsen found many well-preserved objects left behind by the Dutch crew and a farewell note that Barents had written. These objects, Barents’s maps, and diaries are today part of the permanent collection of the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam.

Biography Little is known of Willem Barents (Barentsz), including his exact date of birth (c.1500) and location. Scholars believe he was likely born either in the Dutch province North Holland or in Formerum at Terschelling, an island to the north of the Netherlands. Barents was educated as a steersman in Amsterdam. He was married with five children. In 1594, Barents left Amsterdam with two ships to search for the North East Passage to eastern Asia. He reached the west coast of Novaya Zemlya and followed it northward before he was forced to turn back near its northern extremity. Barents’s second expedition, during which he commanded a total of seven ships, took place in 1595 and traveled the strait between the Asiatic coast and Vaigach Island. In a third journey the following year, he traveled as far as Bear Island and Svalbard (or Spitsbergen). This also failed and resulted in his death on June 30, 1597. The Barents Sea was named after him. LOUWRENS HACQUEBORD See also Barents Sea; North East Passage, Exploration of Further Reading Alexander, Philip F., The North-West and North-East passages 1576–1611, England: Cambridge University Press, 1915 Barentsz, Willem, Nieuwe beschryvinghe ende caert-boeck vande Middellandtsche Zee, Amsterdam: Cornelius Claesz, 1595

202

Hacquebord, L. & P. van Leunen, 400 jaar Willem Barents, Harlingen: Flevodruk BV, 1996 Jansma, T.S. & Olivier Brunel te Dordrecht, “De Noordoostelijke doorvaart en het Westeuropeesch-Russisch contact in de zestiende eeuw.” Tijdschrift voor Geschiedenis, 59 (1946): 337–362 Unwin, Raynar, A Winter Away From Home: William Barents and the Northeast Passage, London: Seafarer Books, and New York: Sheridan House, 1995

BARENTSBURG Barentsburg (78°03′ N 14°20′ E) is a coal-mining settlement on the eastern coast of Grønfjorden (Green Harbour) in the Norwegian High Arctic Svalbard archipelago. Grønfjorden is a southern branch of Isfjorden, the largest fjord on the western coast of Spitsbergen. The mining settlement is owned by “Trust Arktikugol,” a Russian-based mining company; therefore, the inhabitants of Barentsburg are predominantly Russian or Ukrainian citizens. The mining settlement is on Norwegian territory, however, and it is governed by Norwegian law and regulations. The mining settlement was originally established by a Norwegian company in 1900, but sold to a Russian syndicate in 1915 that resold the claim to a Dutch company “Nederlandsche Spitsbergen Compagnie.” In 1922, this company named the settlement “Barentsburg” after Willem Barentsz, the pilot of the Dutch ship that discovered Spitsbergen in 1596. Barentsburg was sold to Trust Arktikugol for 1.25 million guilders in 1932. The inhabitants were evacuated in 1941, because of World War II, to Arkhangel’sk (Russia), and in September 1943 Barentsburg was completely destroyed by a German naval attack, and first rebuilt after the war. The number of inhabitants in Barentsburg has varied in recent years. In 1993, there were 1500 residents, but in 1994, due to financial difficulties in Russia, the local school was closed and children and housewives had to leave. By 1998, the population had been reduced to 800; this has gradually increased and by 2001 was almost 1000. A kindergarten has opened and the primary school is planned to reopen. Barentsburg is based industrially on mining Tertiary age coal. The yearly production varies; 390,000 tons were mined in 1999. Approximately 10% is used in the local power plant and the rest is exported. Barentsburg is a typical company town, and was only opened up to visitors in the 1990s. A hotel opened in 1989, and there was a cafeteria and a souvenir shop in the town. There is a hospital; a textile company that employed 30–40 seamstresses; a research station that specializes in geophysics, geology, and archaeology; a meteorological station; a museum; and a Russian Consulate. There is no road connection between Barentsburg and other parts of Svalbard.

BARNACLE GOOSE At Heerodden, 3 km (1.9 mi) north of Barentsburg, there is a small heliport, established in 1978, to shuttle personnel between Barentsburg and the international airport in Longyearbyen. Transportation within Svalbard, if not by air, has to be by boat or snowmobile. IAN GJERTZ See also Svalbard Further Reading Arctic Pilot: Sailing Directions Svalbard-Jan Mayen, Stavanger: Norwegian Hydrographic Service and Norwegian Polar Research Institute, 1988 Orheim, Olav (editor), The Placenames of Svalbard, Oslo: Norsk Polarinstitutt, 1991

BARNACLE GOOSE The barnacle goose (Branta leucopsis, known as Nerlernarnaq in Greenlandic) breeds in the Arctic region only in East Greenland, Svalbard (Spitsbergen), and Novaya Zemlya, Russia. The barnacle goose is not divided into subspecies, but three “flyway” populations have been recognized that correspond to the three breeding areas. In the early 1970s, the Russian population started to breed in the temperate Baltic Sea region. The barnacle goose is a rather small goose 60–70 cm (24–28 in) long and weighing of 1–2 kg. The face is yellowish, with the rest of the head, neck and breast, as well as bill and feet, in black. The underparts are white and the back and upper wings are bluish-gray. Young birds are similar, but more drab and with a white face. The nesting habitats of the barnacle goose are cliff ledges on coastal cliffs and canyons, rocky outcrops, and small offshore islands. the most important breeding sites are on Svalbard and in Russia coastal islands, some holding 1000 nests. In Greenland the colony size varies from ten to 150 pairs. The barnacle goose migrates to wintering grounds in Ireland and northwest Scotland (Greenland population), the Solway Firth in southwest Scotland (Svalbard population), and the Netherlands (Russian population). The winter habitats are mainly salt marshes on offshore islands, in fjords or in the Wadden Sea, but intensively managed grasslands are also important feeding areas. All three flyway populations are increasing in numbers, and according to the 1994–1997 population estimates the total wintering population numbers around 330,000 birds. Of these the Russian population is by far the largest with about 270,000 birds, while the Greenland population holds 40,000 birds and the Svalbard population 23,000 birds. The Greenland and Svalbard populations both have long migration routes across sea, and they leave their wintering grounds during mid-April and early May to

stop over at sites in northern Iceland and the Helgeland archipelago off the Norwegian coast, respectively. During a two- to three-week period, they build up energy stores before continuing their migration to the breeding areas. In mild winters, the Russian population leaves the Netherlands wintering grounds in January and moves slowly northeast. The staging areas in the Baltic Sea region are reached in early April, and the geese proceed to the breeding grounds around midMay. All three populations have migration routes of 3000–4000 km (2000–2500 mi). The geese start breeding in late May to early June. The nest is a shallow depression lined with down, moss, and grass. Here the female incubates a clutch of four to five eggs for 23–25 days. The goose leaves the nest for an average of 3% of her time on short feeding trips. These feeding trips are not sufficient to maintain her body mass and about 40% of her body mass may be lost by the end of incubation. Females that are able to find high-quality food during their short absence from the nest breed more successfully. During incubation, the males defend the nest against predators such as the glaucous gull Larus hyperboreus, the rough-legged buzzard Buteo lagopus, and the Arctic fox Alopex lagopus. When the goslings hatch, the male has lost about 20% of his weight, but this weight loss continues because he must stay vigilant in order to protect the goslings from predators. Goslings that jump from cliff ledges suffer losses of about 50% when they disappear in the scree or are taken by Arctic foxes, gulls, and falcons. The breeding success of the Russian population varies considerably, with anything from a few percent to 50% young birds surviving to reach the wintering grounds. This variation is linked to the production of lemmings (Lemmus sibiricus and Discrostonyx torquatus), which in turn controls the Arctic fox population. When the fox population peaks, the lemming populations have often collapsed, which forces the foxes to predate on goslings. Wetlands in the high Arctic tundra are selected for the rearing of young. These wetlands include sedge and moss marshes, with cotton grasses Eriophorum in drier areas. The goslings are able to fly when about six weeks old. Like other goose species, the barnacle geese have only one body molt every year, and the most conspicuous is the wing molt. The duration of the wing molt is three to four weeks, and the development of the flying feathers is more rapid than in many duck species, indicating an adaptation to the short Arctic summer in the Arctic-breeding goose species. Immature geese and failed breeding birds molt in July, while breeding birds molt about two weeks later. No molt migration out of the breeding range has been observed in the Svalbard and Russian populations. A southward molt migration, unusual in Arctic geese, takes place in the Greenland population, where 5000–6000 geese congregate in the

203

BARROW southernmost breeding range. Here, the barnacle goose is competing with the pinkfooted goose Anser brachyrhynchus for the limited food resources. The molting sites contain refuge lakes or rivers, and abundant food resources. During molt, up to one-third of the total body protein content is lost. Despite this loss over a relatively short period, geese are able to meet their energy and protein demands through moderate feeding, and do not have to deplete their energy and nutrient reserves. During this period, proteins are degraded from the breast muscles and built into leg muscles. These changes are ascribed to disuse-use of the muscle groups. The autumn migration starts in late August and early September and wintering grounds are reached in October and November. All three populations have stopover sites where they stay for about three weeks, building up energy reserves and waiting for favorable tailwinds: the Greenland population stopover in southeast Iceland, the Svalbard population at Bjørnøya, 250 km (150 mi) south of mainland Svalbard, and the Russian population in the Baltic Sea region. Since 1950–1980, the barnacle goose has been protected from hunting throughout its range, except for Iceland and Greenland, where about 4000 geese are legally shot annually. Local people used to gather eggs and down. In Greenlandic myths, geese have the ability to return sight to blinded people by squirting people’s eyes with their feces. CHRISTIAN M. GLAHDER See also Brent Geese Further Reading Batt, B.D.J., A.D. Afton, M.G. Anderson, C.D. Ankney, D.H. Johnson, J.A. Kadlec & G.L. Krapu (editors), Ecology and Management of Breeding Waterfowl, Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press, 1992 Cramp, Stanley & K.E.L. Simmons (editors), Handbook of Birds of Europe, the Middle East, and North Africa: The Birds of the Western Palearctic, Volume 1, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1977 del Hoyo, Josep, Andrew Elliott & Jordi Sargatal (editors), Handbook of the Birds of the World, volume 1, Barcelona: Lynx Edicions, 1992 Madsen, Jesper, Gill Craknell & Tony Fox (editors), Goose Populations of the Western Palearctic. A Review of Status and Distribution, Wetlands International Publ. No. 48, The Netherlands, Wageningen: Wetlands International; Denmark, Rönde: National Environmental Research Institute, 1999 Owen, Myrfyn, Wild Geese of the World. Their Life History and Ecology, London: B.T. Batsford Ltd., 1980 Rose, P.M. & D.A. Scott (compilers), Waterfowl Population Estimates (2nd edition), Wetlands International Publ. No. 44, The Netherlands, Wageningen: Wetlands International, 1997 Salomonsen, Finn, “The moult migration.” Wildfowl, 19 (1968): 5–24 ———, Grønlands Fugle. The Birds of Greenland, København: Munksgaard, 1950

204

BARROW Barrow, Alaska, is the northernmost community in the United States, located on the coast of the Chukchi Sea at 71°17′ N 156°47′ W. According to the 2000 US Census, its population, was 4581, 2620 of whom are Alaska Native, primarily Iñupiat Eskimo. Barrow is the seat of the North Slope Borough, a county-like regional government incorporated in 1972 and encompassing the northern fifth of Alaska. The Iñupiat name for Barrow is Utqiagvik. Pt Barrow, a few kilometers north of the city, marks the divide between the Chukchi and Beaufort seas. A prominent coastal feature, the point is biologically significant for the passage of migratory birds and marine mammals. Due to the reliability of these migrations, Barrow has been a favorable site for human settlement for millennia. The current city sits atop prehistoric house sites, and related village sites are found from Pt Barrow itself southwest along the Chukchi Sea coast past the present city. The Birnirk Culture, which flourished around AD 600, is named after a village site halfway between Pt Barrow and Barrow. The first Europeans to reach Barrow were members of the British Royal Navy expedition (1825–1828) under Frederick Beechey on the Blossom. The crews of the HMS Plover, commanded by Rochfort Maguire, were the first Europeans to overwinter at Barrow from 1852 to 1854. In the 1880s, the International Polar Expedition established a base at Barrow, and Yankee whalers set up shore stations at Barrow to take bowhead whales during the spring migration, before ships were able to reach the area. The 20th century witnessed a great increase in the presence of non-Iñupiat, beginning with missionaries, school teachers, and government officials, and increasing in the 1940s and 1950s with the creation of the Naval Arctic Research Laboratory north of Barrow, the building of the Distant Early Warning (DEW) Line across the top of North America, and the exploration of the surrounding area for oil and gas. At the same time, the Iñupiat of Barrow have played a large part in perpetuating their culture and protecting their rights to the land and its resources. In 1961, Barrow residents staged a “Duck-In,” protesting the enforcement of a ban on spring hunting of migratory birds, which resulted in enforcement officials agreeing to ignore traditional harvests. The Arctic Slope Native Association and the Iñupiat Community of the Arctic Slope, both based in Barrow, were instrumental in the debate leading to the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of 1972. The North Slope Borough created the Iñupiat History, Language, and Culture Commission, which has sponsored Elders’ Conferences, research, and other activities. The Alaska Eskimo Whaling Commission was founded in Barrow in 1977 to fight a ban on bowhead whaling

BARROW, SIR JOHN imposed that year by the International Whaling Commission. The Inuit Circumpolar Conference started at a meeting organized in 1977 by Eben Hopson, then Mayor of the North Slope Borough. Today, Barrow enjoys many of the amenities of a modern city, although its connection to the land and the surrounding sea remains vital and visible. Subsistence production averages over 100 kg per capita, and bowhead whaling is a focal point for community activities throughout the year. Barrow’s current economic base is the property tax revenue from North Slope oil development infrastructure, which has declined in recent years. Future prospects depend on the scale of oil development and the ability of the region to find alternative sources of income. HENRY P. HUNTINGTON See also Birnirk Culture; Distant Early Warning (DEW) Line; North Slope Further Reading Blackman, Margaret B., Sadie Brower Neakok: An Iñupiaq Woman, Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1989 Bockstoce, John (editor), The Journal of Rochfort Maguire, 1852–1854, 2 volumes, London: The Hakluyt Society, 1988 Bodenhorn, Barbara, “The Iñupiat of Alaska.” In Endangered Peoples of the Arctic: Struggles to Survive and Thrive, edited by Milton M.R. Freeman, Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 2000 Brower, Charles D., Fifty Years BelowZero, New York: Dodd Mead, 1942 Ford, J.A., “Eskimo prehistory in the vicinity of Point Barrow.” In Anthropological Papers of the American Museum of Natural History, 47 (1959): 1–272 Huntington, Henry P., Wildlife Management and Subsistence Hunting in Alaska, London: Belhaven Press, 1992

BARROW, SIR JOHN Although Sir John Barrow only made one brief trip to the Arctic himself, sailing to Svalbard for a summer on board a whaler during his teenage years, his name is inextricably linked with the exploration of the Arctic through his role as the prime figure in the mapping of Arctic Canada that took place in the first half of the 19th century. Coming from humble origins in rural north Lancashire, Barrow was a bright child who impressed his teachers in mastering Latin and mathematics, and made his way by a combination of talents and a natural sense of diplomacy that enabled him to enlist and maintain the support of increasingly influential patrons. Through a series of such connections, he found himself attached to Lord George Macartney’s embassy to the imperial court of China in 1792–1794, during which he learned some Chinese and was an

energetic observer of Chinese life. In 1797, Macartney was appointed the first British governor of Cape Colony, and Barrow accompanied him as comptroller of his household, becoming Auditor General of Public Accounts for the colony in 1799 as his reputation for probity and efficiency spread. When Cape Colony was returned (temporarily) to the Dutch in 1803, Barrow returned to Britain, and his patrons and accomplishments alike recommended him for the post of Second Secretary to the Admiralty. In this position he proved himself an able administrator during the latter stages of the Napoleonic Wars, when the Royal Navy was at its largest, and then in the period of massive contraction in ships and personnel that followed the final defeat of Napoleon (whose place of incarceration, St Helena, was Barrow’s own suggestion, having visited it on his way back from China). Barrow’s interest in geographical questions and historical research, together with his concern to find some activity for otherwise unemployed naval officers, came together after the war in his proposals for a series of expeditions that would complete “those details of geographical and hydrographical science of which the grand outlines have been boldly and broadly sketched by Cook, Vancouver, and Flinders…,” as he put it in his introduction to the published account of the first of these voyages, undertaken in 1816 to sail up the River Congo. As a civil servant rather than a politician, he had no formal way of actually initiating policy, so he approached the task indirectly by using his formidable connections. In the Royal Society (of which he was a fellow), he gained the support of its president, Joseph Banks, for a renewed program of exploration. As a contributor to the influential Quarterly Review, he promoted the need for it, and in the Admiralty he would certainly have offered suggestions as to how the morale of a shrinking navy could be improved and the energies of its officers directed. The arguments he used in support ranged from maintaining Britain’s prestige as an exploring nation (saying that national honor should not allow the world’s largest navy to stand idle while other countries forged ahead) to maintaining its security as an imperial nation, noting that control of strategically placed bases on major waterways was the key to peace and prosperity for a maritime empire. In 1818, Barrow also published his Chronological History of Voyages into the Arctic Regions, which, by reminding his contemporaries of the strides already made by British mariners from Martin Frobisher onwards, and ending with the first two Arctic expeditions sent out under his own instructions, amounted to a manifesto for a renewed exploratory effort on a grand scale. Once the initial proposals were approved, the selection of officers would largely have been within

205

BARROW, SIR JOHN Barrow’s direct control, so as First Lords of the Admiralty came and went, Barrow himself, as the more permanent fixture, became the center of power to which ambitious naval officers with an interest in exploration were attracted. The Arctic was to prove his strongest and most enduring passion, and between 1818 and 1845 he sent out 13 expeditions to Svalbard or the North American Arctic, the overarching aim of which was to find a sea route between the Atlantic and Pacific oceans, whether that be by a North West Passage or by a polar route through what he imagined to be an open polar sea. Barrow began with a two-pronged attack in 1818, sending two ships under David Buchan and John Franklin to Svalbard in an attempt to get into the pack ice that had defeated Constantine Phipps’s voyage in 1773. At the same time two other ships under John Ross and William Parry were sent to Baffin Bay to confirm Bylot and Baffin’s report of its outlets to the north and west. Both were unsuccessful: Buchan and Franklin found the North Atlantic pack as impenetrable as earlier and later explorers, while Ross fell victim to a mirage that convinced him Lancaster Sound was an enclosed bay. The following year Barrow sent Parry back again, in command this time. In an exceptionally lucky year for ice conditions, Parry pushed through Lancaster Sound for some 1040 km (650 mi) before he was turned back by the permanent pack of the Beaufort Sea, spending the winter on the southwest coast of Melville Island (the first ship-borne expedition ever to winter deliberately in the High Arctic). Barrow conceived of this expedition too as part of a pincer movement, the other arm of which was John Franklin’s overland expedition (1819–1822) to map the continental coastline of North America eastward from the mouth of the Coppermine River, in the (vain) hope that he would meet up with Parry. Plotting the discoveries from these expeditions on the Admiralty’s charts began to give Barrow an inkling that a North West Passage would not be found in an open arena of drifting icebergs through which a ship could pick its way, but would be one of many possible paths through a labyrinth of islands separated by channels that might be choked with standing ice-floes. The point he never seems to have grasped, or at least acknowledged, was that channels that were blocked by ice one year might be open the next, and vice versa, rendering the route only occasionally and unpredictably passable and thus, for practical purposes, unusable. Since the logic of this would effectively have closed down Barrow’s project—something he would have wanted to avoid for other strategic reasons—it is perhaps not surprising that he chose to ignore it. Parry’s next attempts were at finding a more southerly route, closer to the continental coastline (1821–1823 and 1824–1825), while Franklin was sent

206

back on a second overland expedition to chart more of its length (1825–1827). The latter nearly connected with Frederick Beechey (1825–1828), who had been despatched through Bering Strait in the opposite direction. Barrow did not forget his open polar sea either. In 1827, he sent Parry on his fifth and final expedition to make an attempt on the pack ice north of Svalbard by foot. Dragging heavy boats over the ice (since they expected to encounter open water ahead), his men only succeeded in exhausting themselves as the current pushed the floes south almost as fast as they could move north. They had not traveled far enough to show that the ice extended all the way to the North Pole, so the theory of the open polar sea survived until another day, but it did give Barrow important information, later exploited by Fridtjof Nansen, about currents that confirmed the idea of large-scale flows of water across the entire polar basin. When the Hudson’s Bay Company expedition under Thomas Simpson and Peter Dease (1836–1839) completed the survey of the northern continental coastline, Barrow thought he had assembled enough information to ensure that one more push could make the final link through the North West Passage to the Pacific. He therefore persuaded the Admiralty to back a lavishly equipped two-ship expedition under Franklin, which sailed in 1845. Its failure, the mystery of its fate, and the long search for its remains by more than a dozen further expeditions became the central, abundantly mythologized event of the 19th-century exploration of the Arctic. However, Barrow knew of none of this, as he retired a few months before the expedition sailed, and died three years later when the chances of a successful outcome were still considered high. The chaotic and densely packed Canadian Arctic archipelago made its exploration all the more difficult by constantly changing ice conditions. That a task suited to aerial reconnaissance and satellite photography was accomplished at all in the age of wooden sailing ships is due to a combination of political, economic, cultural, and other factors, but the crucial thread that linked them was Barrow’s social and professional position at the focus of these overlapping forces, and his singular determination over three decades to push the search for a North West Passage through to its conclusion. When in his retirement he added to his earlier text of 1818 by writing Voyages of Discovery and Research Within the Arctic Regions, From the Year 1818 to the Present Time, the achievement he surveyed was, in its inspiration and organization, largely his own.

Biography Born near Ulverston in Lancashire (now in Cumbria) on June 19, 1764, John Barrow was the son of

BARTLETT, ROBERT smallholders Roger Barrow and Mary Dawson. He was educated at the local Town Bank Grammar School, then worked as a surveyor, bookkeeper, and tutor, before accompanying his employer on a diplomatic mission to China in 1792–1794, and on colonial service in Cape Colony in 1797–1803. In 1803, he was appointed Second Secretary to the Admiralty, a post in which he remained, apart from a few months in 1806–1807, until 1845. From 1815, he initiated and organized a series of naval expeditions to many parts of the world, including the Arctic expeditions commanded by David Buchan (1818), Sir John Ross (1818), Sir John Franklin (1819–1822, 1825–1827, and 1845–1848), Sir William Parry (1819–1820, 1821–1823, 1824–1825, and 1827), George Lyon (1824), Frederick Beechey (1825–1828), and Sir George Back (1833–1835 and 1836–1837). He married Anne Maria Trüter in Cape Town in 1799, and they had several children. He was an active member of the Royal Society, and was one of the founding members of the Geographical Society of London (later the Royal Geographical Society) in 1830. He died in London on November 23, 1848. JONATHAN DORE See also Back, Sir George; Beechey, Frederick; Exploration of the Arctic; Franklin, Sir John; Lyon, George Francis; North West Passage, Exploration of; Open Polar Sea; Parry, Sir William Edward; Ross, Sir John; Royal Geographical Society; Simpson, Thomas Further Reading Barrow, Sir John, An Account of Travels into the Interior of Southern Africa, 2 volumes, London: Cadell and Davies, 1801–1804, and (Volume 1) New York: G.F. Hopkins, 1802; reprinted, New York: Johnson Reprint, 1968 ———, Travels in China, London: Cadell and Davies, 1804, and Philadelphia: W.E. M’Laughlin, 1805; reprinted, Taipei: Ch’eng Wen, 1972 ———, A Chronological History of Voyages into the Arctic Regions, London: John Murray, 1818; reprinted, Newton Abbot, Devon: David and Charles, and New York: Barnes and Noble, 1971 ———, The Eventful History of the Mutiny and Piratical Seizure of H.M.S. Bounty, London: John Murray, 1831; reprinted, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1989; reprinted as Mutiny!: The Real History of the H.M.S. Bounty, New York: Cooper Square Press, 2003 ———, Voyages of Discovery and Research within the Arctic Regions, From the Year 1818 to the Present Time, London: John Murray, and New York: Harper, 1846 ———, An Autobiographical Memoir of Sir John Barrow, Bart., Late of the Admiralty: Including Reflections, Observations, and Reminiscences at Home and Abroad, From Early Life to Advanced Age, London: John Murray, 1847 Bartlett, Christopher John, Great Britain and Sea Power, 1815–53, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1963; reprinted, Aldershot, Hampshire: Ashgate, 1993

Berton, Pierre, The Arctic Grail: The Quest for the North West Passage and the North Pole, 1818–1909, Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1988, New York and London: Viking, 1989; reprinted, New York: Lyons Press, 2000 Dawson, Warren R., The Banks Letters, London: Trustees of the British Museum, 1958 Fleming, Fergus, Barrow’s Boys, London: Granta Books, 1998; New York: Atlantic Monthly Press, 2000 Lewis, Michael, The Navy in Transition, 1814–1864: A Social History, London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1965 Lloyd, Christopher, Mr Barrow of the Admiralty: A Life of Sir John Barrow, London: Collins, 1970

BARTLETT, ROBERT Robert Abram Bartlett, one of the most significant Arctic sailing masters of his era, was born in Brigus, Newfoundland, in 1875. As a young man, he shipped out on a series of sealing vessels in the polar regions, where he learned to handle vessels under extreme conditions. In 1898, Bartlett became the first mate on the Windward, the ship that Robert Peary used in his first attempt to reach the North Pole in 1898–1899. Peary offered Bartlett command of the Roosevelt, Peary’s primary exploration ship, in 1905. Bartlett agreed under the condition that he be permitted to accompany Peary on his attempt to the North Pole. The 1905–1906 expedition sailed along the eastern shore of Ellesmere Island to Cape Sheridan, where the group wintered. In February 1906, Bartlett and a crew of Inuit prepared trails and laid supply depots for the push north. They were stopped by the “Big Lead,” open water that could not be navigated. Bartlett returned to the United States with the Roosevelt badly crippled and in danger of sinking after a harrowing three-month voyage from Etah, Greenland. Bartlett traveled again to the north with Peary and the Roosevelt in 1908, reaching Cape Sheridan, Ellesmere Island, at the very end of the sailing season. In February of the following year, Bartlett led members of the expedition north to break trail. When others turned back, he continued to a point only 150 miles from the North Pole before returning. On March 31, Peary began his final attempt of the Pole, taking Matthew Henson with him and informing Bartlett that he would not be permitted to join in the attempt. Historians speculate that Bartlett was prevented from joining the attempt because he might either upstage Peary if they were successful or that Bartlett, a superior navigator, could challenge the accuracy of Peary’s calculations and determine whether the North Pole had actually been reached. Bartlett returned to New York at the end of the expedition and spent the following year lecturing in Europe. He did not, at any time, publicly comment on Peary’s decision to leave him behind. In 1913, Bartlett captained the Karluk for Vilhjamur Stefansson on a voyage of three vessels to the Canadian 207

BARTLETT, ROBERT Arctic via the Bering Strait. In 1913, Stefansson convinced the Canadian government to sponsor an expedition to solidify the nation’s claim to its Arctic regions, and to explore and map these regions. The venture was divided into a northern and a southern division, the latter of which Stefansson commanded. Bartlett sailed Karluk from Victoria, British Columbia, with Stefansson, the scientific members of the division, and supplies and equipment. The vessel was beset in ice on August 12, 1913 off the Alaskan coast. Stefansson left the ship on September 20, ostensibly to hunt for meat, and walked with a small group of men to Herschel Island where he met with members of the Southern Division and remained in the Canadian Arctic for five years. The Karluk remained fast in the drifting ice until it was crushed in January 1914. Four members of the ship’s company were lost almost immediately, while Bartlett led the remainder under his command to Wrangel Island, north of the Siberian coast. Bartlett then traveled over 700 miles on foot through snow and ice to get assistance for the Wrangel Island survivors. He succeeded in July 1914. However, an investigation was held after Bartlett’s return and he was found to be partially responsible for the disaster. Recent accounts, including that of expedition survivors MacKinlay and Niven, have exonerated Bartlett and instead blamed the disaster on Stefansson. After returning from the Canadian Arctic Expedition, Bartlett moved to the United States and became an American citizen. During that country’s brief involvement in World War I, he worked for the US Navy. In 1917, Bartlett commanded a relief expedition the Crocker Land Expedition, which under Donald Macmillan seeked to attempt to locate the land that Bartlett and Peary believed they had seen in 1906, but with unsuccessful results. Bartlett proposed several other expeditions in the next eight years, but none were financed. The purchase of a ship, the Effie M. Morrissey, in 1925 by a friend allowed Bartlett to embark on nearly two dozen expeditions and voyages to the Canadian Arctic in the next two decades. The results of these voyages included large amounts of geographical and scientific data. The first of the voyages was to supply Knud Rasmussen at Thule, Greenland. In 1927 and again in 1933, Bartlett explored Foxe Channel and Basin as well as the Fury and Hecla Strait between the mainland and Baffin Island. In 1930, 1931, and 1939, he gathered oceanographic and atmospheric data along the coasts of northeast Greenland for a number of organizations, including the US Navy. Eight trips to Ellesmere Island and northwest Greenland between 1932 and 1941 allowed Bartlett to improve mapping and charting of those areas as well as to gather data on oceanic and atmospheric conditions. His exploits in

208

this period were the subject of a number of essays, including several in National Geographic. During World War II, Bartlett aided the war effort by supplying military bases in northern Canada and Greenland. He moved to New York City immediately after the war. In 1946, Bartlett caught pneumonia and died on April 28. His beloved Effie M. Morrissey, now named the Ernestina, has been placed on the National Register of Historic Places and is berthed at New Bedford, Massachusetts.

Biography Robert Abram Bartlett was born in Brigus, Newfoundland, Canada, on August 15, 1875. After boarding school in St John’s, Newfoundland, he went to sea as a sealer. He was hired in 1898 as first mate on the Windward, one of Robert Peary’s ships used in the attempt on the North Pole. Peary purchased the Roosevelt in 1905 and asked Bartlett to be its captain. They sailed to the north shore of Ellesmere Island and Bartlett took the ship back, although badly damaged, to New York the following year. Peary again asked Bartlett to captain the Roosevelt on his next attempt at the North Pole in 1908–1909. Only 150 miles from the pole, Bartlett was informed that he would not be permitted to continue. Bitterly disappointed, Bartlett nevertheless did not complain publicly of this slight. In 1913, Vilhjalmur Stefansson hired Bartlett to captain the Karluk during the Canadian Arctic Expedition. In 1917, as a US citizen, Bartlett commanded a ship sent north to attempt to find Crocker Land. After a struggle with alcohol, Bartlett was given the Effie M. Morrissey, a schooner that he used to make 20 scientific voyages, beginning in 1925, to the Arctic including several for the US Navy. Bartlett caught pneumonia in New York and died there on April 28, 1946. PHILIP N. CRONENWETT See also Canadian Arctic Expedition, 1913–1918; Peary, Robert E. Further Reading Bartlett, Robert, The Last Voyage of the Karluk, Boston: Small, Maynard, and Co., 1916 ———, The Log of Bob Bartlett: The True Story of Forty Years of Seafaring and Exploration, New York: G.P. Putnam, 1928 ———, Sails Over Ice, New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1934 Horwood, Harold A., Bartlett, the Great Canadian Explorer, Garden City: Doubleday, 1977 McKinlay, William Laird, Karluk: The Great Untold Story of Arctic Exploration, New York: St Martin’s Press, 1977 Niven, Jennifer, The Ice Master: The Doomed 1913 Voyage of the Karluk, New York: Hyperion, 2000 Putnam, George Palmer, Mariner of the North: The Life of Captain Bob Bartlett, New York: Duell, Sloan, and Pearce, 1947

BATHURST ISLAND

BATHURST ISLAND Located in the center of Canada’s High Arctic, Bathurst Island has an area of about 15,500 km2. With an irregular coastline and several long inlets reaching inland, no part of the island is more than 40 km from the sea. Bathurst Island is of low relief with few mountain ranges. Several peaks reach 300 m in the north, but much of the central part is below 100 m. The highest hills in the southern half are of volcanic origin and reach a height of 335 m. The geological structure is mainly sedimentary and most rocks are limestone or dolomite. Bathurst Island was covered by glacial ice from about 35,000 years ago until about 10,000 years ago. The climate is typically Arctic with cold temperatures, frequent but moderate winds, and low precipitation. The yearly mean temperature is about −7°C. The low precipitation gives Bathurst Island a polar desert climate and much of the island has virtually no vegetation. In some lowlands, especially Polar Bear Pass, grasses and sedges form a lush growth around ponds and lakes. These wet meadows feature frost mounds, polygons, and patterned ground. Wildlife is abundant in the lowland areas with large numbers of breeding birds, muskoxen, wolves, and Arctic foxes. Once numerous, the threatened Peary caribou utilize northern Bathurst for rutting and calving. Archaeological sites of the Independence, Dorset, and Thule Cultures are found on southern Bathurst. The first European to see Bathurst Island, Sir William Parry, named it in 1819 after a sponsor, the Earl of Bathurst. Expeditions in search of the missing Franklin expedition charted much of the unknown coastline between 1850 and 1853. In 1909, Captain

J.E. Bernier landed on Bathurst Island and formally took possession for Canada. After 1953, when several Inuit families moved from Arctic Québec to neighboring Cornwallis Island, people began hunting caribou on southern Bathurst, known to them as “Tuktuliarvik.” The Inuit own lands on the southern and northeastern coasts, but there is no permanent settlement on the Island. Modern exploration dates from 1955 when the Geological Survey of Canada surveyed the Island. In the winter of 1963–1964, one of the first exploratory oil wells in the Arctic islands was drilled in central Bathurst. Following extensive seismic exploration, two wells were drilled in the winter of 1970–1971. The potential for lead-zinc mineral deposits exists in northeastern Bathurst. The establishment of a Research Station in 1968 provided a base for extensive biological and ecological research into the 1990s. In 1983, Polar Bear Pass received protection as Canada’s first Arctic National Wildlife Area. In 1996, northern Bathurst Island was reserved for a proposed national park (Tuktusiuqvialuk) to represent the western High Arctic and to preserve important Peary caribou range. DAVID R. GRAY See also Beaufort Sea; Nunavut; Parry, Sir William Edward; Queen Elizabeth Islands Further Reading Dunbar, Moira & Keith R. Greenaway, Arctic Canada From the Air, Ottawa: Defence Research Board, 1956

Thule Culture whalebone house foundation at Brooman Point, Bathurst Island, Nunavut, July 1968. Copyright David R. Gray

209

BATHURST MANDATE Gray, David R., The Muskoxen of Polar Bear Pass, Markham: National Museum of Natural Sciences/Fitzhenry and Whiteside, 1987 Harington, C. Richard (editor), Canada’s Missing Dimension: Science and History in the Canadian Arctic Islands, Ottawa: Canadian Museum of Nature, 855pp Parks Canada, New Parks North. Newsletter No. 10, 2001, 36pp Taylor, Andrew, Geographical Discovery and Exploration in the Queen Elizabeth Islands, Ottawa: Department of Mines and Technical Surveys, 1955

BATHURST MANDATE The Bathurst Mandate (Pinasuaqtavut, translated as “that which we’ve set out to do”) is an eight-page document that sets out the Nunavut government’s priorities for the first five years of its existence (1999–2004) and also includes a vision for Nunavut in the year 2020. The document was developed by the 19 elected members of the Nunavut Legislative Assembly and tabled at the Nunavut Legislative Assembly on October 21, 1999. The Bathurst Mandate outlines the social, political, and economic direction of the Nunavut government. The document will have a significant impact on policy development in Nunavut since all policies will be reviewed according to criteria set down by the Bathurst Mandate. The contents of the Bathurst Mandate are organized under four broad headings: Inuuqatigiittiarniq (healthy communities); Pijarnirniqsat Katujjiqatigiinnirlu (simplicity and unity); Namminiq Makitajunnarniq (self-reliance); and Ilippallianginnarniq (continuing learning). Each section contains some principles, a vision for Nunavut in the year 2020, and objectives to be met during the first five-year term of the government (1999–2004).

Inuuqatigiittiarniq: “Healthy Communities” The Nunavut government vision is that by the year 2020, it will respond to all the basic needs of individuals and families to ensure that all Nunavut communities are “healthy.” Thus, by the year 2020 it is expected the Nunavummiut (the people of Nunavut) will have improved health and social conditions equal to or better than the Canadian average, while present social housing deficiencies will be resolved. To achieve these long-term goals, the government intends to put additional funding to train nurses and to build over 200 new houses by the year 2004. There is a shortage in health human resources. Nunavut only has about 130 nurses for a population of 28,000 residents (85% are Inuit). There is also a high turnover among medical personnel and no Inuit nurses. This makes it difficult to provide for an efficient and culturally sensitive health care. The government intends

210

to train around 30 new nurses, most of them Inuit, and build two new regional hospitals by the year 2004. Housing is one of the two primary commitments (along with education) of the government. Crowded housing conditions have contributed to social and health problems. The number of persons per dwelling was higher for Nunavut (3.84) compared to the Canadian average (2.65) (2000 estimate, CBC). There were about 1100 families (15% of the population) waiting for some form of housing (2000 estimate, CBC). To keep up with housing demands, about 260 new homes need to be built each year for the next five years (1999–2004). At this juncture, the government objective is to improve the conditions of existing homes and to construct over 200 housing units between 1999 and 2004. A housing Strategy Committee has been created (year 2001) to coordinate all housing challenges. However, the demand for new housing will still be high by the year 2005.

Pijarnirniqsat Katujjiqatigiinnirlu: “Simplicity and Unity” By the year 2020, the Nunavut government will reflect Inuit culture and traditions. Inuktitut, the Inuit language, will be the working language of the government. Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit (“the Inuit way of doing things,” and often translated to mean Inuit traditional knowledge) will provide the context under which government programs, policies, and legislation will be drafted. Achieving these goals will make the government friendlier to the majority of the Inuit population, simplify access by the public to government services, and reinforce unity among all Nunavummiut. To make sure that Nunavut eventually operates with Inuit norms and values, a policy to hire more Inuit government employees has been put forward (in 2001, only 43% of the 2700 government employees were Inuit). Further, a Workshop Report released by the Nunavut government in September 1999 recommends that non-Inuit staff attend Inuktitut language lessons and that mandatory orientation sessions, with Inuit elders, be provided to all government employees. Another important initiative put forward to answer the visions expressed in this section was the creation of Maligarnit Qimirrujiit in October 1999 (“The Nunavut Law Review Commission”), whose task is to make recommendations so that Nunavut’s laws will be more in tune with Inuit values.

Namminiq Makitajunnarniq: “Self-Reliance” By the year 2020, the government of Nunavut expects to be economically self-reliant. Nunavummiut will enjoy a growing economic prosperity. It is hoped that

BEAR CEREMONIALISM unemployment figures will be reduced considerably and that Nunavummiut will enjoy low levels of dependency on government income support programs. During its first term (1999–2004), the government intends to help build local employment through continuing government decentralization, to ensure an increased number of Inuit employees within the government, and to start talk with the federal government in order to obtain a fairer share of resource royalties coming from Nunavut’s lands and waters. The unemployment rate in Nunavut is about 28% (1999 estimate, Nunavut Bureau of Statistics). The Nunavut government is by far the largest single employer in Nunavut (40% of all jobs). In an effort to improve the local economy, the Nunavut administration is being decentralized so that government employment can benefit as many communities as possible. Nunavut hopes to have achieved full decentralization by the year 2004. However, the success of decentralization and the increased representation of Inuit employees in the government will depend heavily on the availability of Inuit trained personnel, who are still significantly lacking. As for resource royalties, the land in Nunavut is mostly owned by the federal government and all resource royalties flow to the Canadian government. Talks have yet to start between federal and Nunavut officials on this issue.

Ilippallianginnarniq: “Continuing Learning” By the year 2020, there will be a full range of education programs in Inuktitut, while the education curriculum will reflect Inuit culture and values. To achieve these goals, Nunavut intends, during its first five-year term, to train an increased number of Inuit elementary and high school teachers while the Nunavut Education Act will be reviewed to emphasize Inuit cultural relevance in the school curriculum. By 2004, the government wants a new Education Act in place. Education is the second major commitment of the government (the other is housing). Inuit need to be trained urgently to run the government. In 1999, only 4% of Inuit had a high school diploma and only about 15 Inuit from a population of 21,000 held a university degree (1996 estimate, Statistics Canada). The Nunavut government wants more students to graduate and to have Inuktitut taught more regularly in classes. A working group has been created (September 2000) to consult with the population and to bring forward its recommendations by 2003.

Conclusion The Bathurst Mandate outlines the social, political, and economic direction of the Nunavut government,

sets long-term goals to be achieved by the year 2020, and establishes objectives to be fulfilled during the first five-year term of the government (1999–2004). The vision of the government is to reverse the current trend and to have a territory where unemployment is low, education levels are high, and social and health issues have significantly improved. ANDRÉ LÉGARÉ See also Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit; Nunavut Further Reading CBC (Conference Board of Canada), Nunavut Economic Outlook, Ottawa: CBC, 2000 Government of Nunavut, The Bathurst Mandate Pinasuaqtavut: That Which We’ve Set Out to Do, Iqaluit: Nunavut Legislative Assembly, 1999 ———, Throne Speech, Third Session, First Assembly, Iqaluit: Nunavut Legislative Assembly, 1999 Jull, Peter, “Indigenous self-government in Canada: the Bathurst Mandate.” Indigenous Law Bulletin, 4(27) (2000): 14–18 Légaré, André, “Our land: the challenges of an Inuit government in Nunavut.” Hemisphere, 9(3) (2001): 28–31

BEAR CEREMONIALISM The term “bear ceremonialism” refers to a complex of ritual practices and beliefs found in conjunction with the bear hunt in many areas of the circumpolar North. The older notion of “bear cult”—rarely used today— refers to the same basic set of phenomena. On the other hand, the terms “bear feast” or “bear festival,” have a more restricted meaning, confined to elaborate forms of ceremonies that have been historically documented in the Amur River region as well as on Sakhalin and Hokkaido islands, and involve the raising of bear cubs for ritual purposes. Typically, bear ceremonialism is found in the boreal-forest zone, the main habitat of the various subspecies of brown, grizzly, and black bear. The tundra zone and the coastal regions of the Arctic Ocean, where humans encounter polar bears, are marginal areas as far as bear ceremonialism is concerned. The most typical elements of bear ceremonialism come into play during and after a bear hunt. These include gendered speech and food taboos, the ritual disposal of bear skulls and bones, etc. In addition to holding ceremonies during and after the bear hunt, the Ainu, the Nivkh, and the Tungusic peoples of the AmurSakhalin area captured and raised bear cubs specifically for ritual use. These peoples ceremoniously killed and “returned” bears to their spiritual owners in the course of elaborate multiday festivals. Both simple and elaborate bear festivals are rooted in a worldview of hunters, which conceptualizes the killing of animals as both necessary and spiritually dangerous.

211

BEAR CEREMONIALISM Ethnographic reports about various aspects of bear ceremonialism (e.g., Gondatti, 1888; Schrenck, 1881–1895) were abundant during the 19th century. Still, the comparative study of these phenomena is mainly an artifact of the 20th century. Sir James George Frazer made one of the first attempts to place Ainu and Nivkh bear festivals in a broader anthropological perspective. In The Golden Bough, Frazer analyzes bear festivals as a form of “animal worship,” thus equating the ritual killing of bears with “killing the god” (Frazer, 1994[1890]: 524–532, 548–549), a central aspect of Frazer’s overall approach to magic and religion, which nonetheless had little to do with Ainu and Nivkh views of the bear. A. Irving Hallowell’s (1926) classical treatise “Bear Ceremonialism in the Northern Hemisphere” is undoubtedly the most well-known comparative study of bear ceremonies. The author, who had limited experience of fieldwork among northern Algonkian speakers at the time, analyzed most of the available ethnographic literature, primarily focusing on ceremonies conducted after a bear hunt and the disposal of the bear’s remains. Hallowell also provided information about the hunt itself, linguistic and cultural conventions of addressing the bear, and folk beliefs associated with bear hibernation. He found a striking number of resemblances among the various practices, especially between northeastern North America and most areas of northern Eurasia. Hallowell also noted that the distribution of bear ceremonialism does not coincide with the geographical distribution of bears, since the latter are also found in areas where bear ceremonialism is absent. From this he concluded that bear ceremonialism cannot be explained psychologically (i.e., by reference to universal modes of human behavior toward bears) or economically (i.e., by reference to the usefulness of bears for humans). Instead, he proposed a “historico-geographical” interpretation, which postulated that bear ceremonialism originated with an Old World “boreal culture” of reindeer/caribou hunters and eventually spread into northern North America. Hallowell’s diffuse explanation clearly shows the influence of Franz Boas’s anthropology. Hallowell’s study remains the standard work on bear ceremonialism, but there have been several subsequent contributions providing new details or new perspectives. Some of these have added new ethnographic data on individual peoples already known to have practiced bear ceremonialism (e.g., Kitagawa, 1961; Kreinovich, 1969; Vasilevich, 1971; Zolotarev, 1937), while others have documented bear ceremonialism in regions for which Hallowell had little data (for the Turkic peoples of Siberia, see Dyrenkova, 1930; for Inuit groups, see Larsen, 1969/70). The Soviet anthropologist B.A. Vasil’ev (1948) was among the few who placed his own data on the Oroch bear

212

festival into a wider comparative perspective. He concluded that different forms of bear ceremonialism in the circumpolar North represented two different “cultural layers.” He argued that the ritual complex tied to the bear hunt was chronologically older than the socalled “Ainu type” of bear ceremonialism, and proposed that the latter form emerged under the influence of Southeast Asian ritual practices. Finally, Vasil’ev considered that the specific Ob-Ugrian (Khanty, Mansi) forms of bear ceremonialism had been triggered by the horse cult from the steppe zones of western Siberia and Eastern Europe. Chichlo (1981) compared bear ceremonialism and shamanism and— unlike other scholars of northern religions—interpreted their relationship as complementary instead of mutually exclusive. The most recent comprehensive study of bear ceremonies in the circumpolar North was carried out by the German anthropologist and historian of religion Hans-Joachim Paproth. His “Studies of Bear Ceremonialism” focuses on the Tungusic peoples of Siberia, but nonetheless provides the best available summary of sources ranging from Russian to Hungarian and Japanese (Paproth, 1976). With a far superior database than Hallowell had at hand, Paproth was able to conclude that bear ceremonialism is a more or less homogeneous cultural complex covering most areas of the circumpolar North. As far as the ceremonies involving captured and “domesticated” bears in the Amur-Sakhalin-Hokkaido area were concerned, Paproth concluded that their religious basis coincides with circumpolar bear ceremonialism and that it also includes certain southern or agricultural elements (such as keeping the bears in cages). Practitioners of bear ceremonialism in general— and of bear festivals in particular—experienced severe attacks by Christianity and state authorities during the 20th century. Nevertheless, even the openly hostile attitudes of antireligious Soviet authorities could not suppress all aspects of bear ceremonialism (e.g., Balzer, 1996; Chichlo, 1985). More recently, there have been attempts to actively revive bear ceremonies and festivals in different parts of Siberia and the Russian Far East. At the same time, a growing number of nonindigenous northern residents have come to understand that bears demand awe and respect, whether for religious reasons, because of ecological considerations, or out of the shear instinct for survival. PETER P. SCHWEITZER See also Ainu; Boas, Franz; Mythology of the Inuit Further Reading Balzer, Marjorie M., “Sacred genders in Siberia: shamans, bear festivals, and androgyny.” In Gender Reversals and Gender

BEAR ISLAND Cultures: Anthropological and Historical Perspectives, edited by S.P. Ramet, London: Routledge, 1996 Chichlo, Boris, “L’ours-chamane.” Études mongoles, 12 (1981): 35–112 ———, “The cult of the bear and Soviet ideology in Siberia.” Religion in Communist Lands 13(2) (1985):166–181 Dyrenkova, N.P., “Bear worship among Turkish tribes of Siberia.” In Proceedings of the Twenty-Third International Congress of Americanists, New York, 1930, 411–440 Frazer, James George, The Golden Bough: A Study in Magic and Religion, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994 [1890] Gondatti, N.L., “Kul’t medvedia u inorodtsev Severo-Zapadnoi Sibiri (The bear cult among the natives of northwest Siberia).” Trudy etnograficheskogo otdela Imperatorskogo obshchestva liubitelei estestvoznaniia, antropologii i etnografii, 8 (1888): 74–87 Hallowell, A. Irving, “Bear ceremonialism in the Northern Hemisphere.”American Anthropologist (n.s.), 28(1) (1926): 1–175 Kitagawa, Joseph M., “Ainu bear festival (Iyomante).” History of Religions, 1 (1961): 95–151 Kreinovich, E.A., “Medvezhii prazdnik u ketov (The bear festival among the Ket).” In Ketskii sbornik. Mifologiia, etnografiia, teksty, edited by V.V. Ivanov, V.N. Toporov & B.A. Uspenskii, Moscow: Nauka, 1969 Larsen, Helge, “Some examples of bear cult among the Eskimo and other northern peoples.” Folk, 11–12 (1969/70): 27–42 Paproth, Hans-Joachim, Studien über das Bärenzeremoniell. I: Bärenjagdriten und Bärenfeste bei den tungusischen Völkern, Uppsala: Tofters tryckeri, 1976 Schrenck, Leopold von, Die Völker des Amur-Landes, 3 volumes, St Petersburg: Kaiserliche Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1881–1895 Vasil’ev, B.A., “Medvezhii prazdnik (The bear festival).” Sovetskaia etnografiia 4 (1948): 78–104 Vasilevich, G.M., “O kul’te medvedia u evenkov (About the bear cult among the Evenk).” In Religioznye predstavleniia i obriady narodov Sibiri v XIX-nachale XX veka, edited by L.P. Potapov &S.V. Ivanov, Leningrad: Nauka, 1971 Zolotarev, Alexander M., “The bear festival of the Olcha.” American Anthropologist, 39(1) (1937): 113–130

BEAR ISLAND Bear Island is the English name for Bjørnøya (74°30 N 19° E), the southernmost island in the Norwegian High Arctic Svalbard archipelago. This 178 km2 (69 sq mi) island is 20 km (12 mi) north-south with a maximum width of 15 km. It is the most isolated of Svalbard’s islands, lying approximately mid-way between mainland Norway and the rest of the archipelago. Almost the entire coastline consists of steep cliffs, and there are no good harbors. The northern part is a flat, lake-covered, lowland. The southern third of the island is mountainous, the highest peak being Miseryfjellet (536 m). The southern tip consists of cliffs some 400 m high rising straight from the sea. The rock pillars and weathered caverns here are well-known local landmarks. There are more than 740 lakes and ponds on Bear Island, comprising about 11% of the total area. Most lakes are shallow, and less than ten are deeper than 5 m. The deepest lake, Ellasjøen, is 43 m deep.

Less than a quarter of the island is basement rock. The rest is mostly dolomite, sandstone, limestone, and shale. The northwestern part is Carboniferous and Permian, the northeastern part Devonian, and the southern part Silurian and older. The presence of coal and lead deposits has been known since the 17th century. The only large-scale mining conducted on the island was for Late Devonian coal at Tunheim from 1916 to 1925. A total of 116,094 tons of coal was exported. In addition, small-scale mining for lead ore (galena) was conducted in 1925–1930. For most of the year, Bear Island is south of the drift-ice limit. From February to April, the drift ice usually reaches Bear Island, and there is a 50% chance of encountering it there in late March. The climate is Arctic-oceanic. The median temperature for March, the coldest month, is −7.0°C. August is the warmest month with a median temperature of 5.2°C. There is a high frequency of fog at the island especially in July (22%). Yearly precipitation is less than 400 mm, and for 178 days of the year wind speeds are Beaufort 6 (strong breeze) or higher. Bear Island has one of the largest bird cliffs in the North Atlantic. The most numerous species are Brünnich’s guillemot (Uria lomvia), common guillemot (Uria aalge), kittiwake (Rissa tridactyla), and fulmar (Fulmarus glacialis) with between 123,000 –and 50,000 breeding pairs of each species. The only land living mammal is the Arctic fox (Alopex lagopus). Polar bears (Ursus maritimus) often visit the island in winter. Arctic char (Salvelinus alpinus) are found in the largest lakes. Bear Island was discovered onJune 10, 1596 by a Dutch expedition piloted by Willem Barents. They killed a polar bear there and therefore named the island “t’Beeren Eyland” on Barents’s map from 1598. In 1603, an English expedition renamed it Cherry Island, after Sir Francis Cherry. Bear Island was unclaimed until 1925 when it became Norwegian through the Svalbard Treaty. All land is today owned by the Norwegian state-owned company Bjørnøen A/S. The island is uninhabited, apart from a meteorological station on the northern part of the island. Bear Island will most likely be made into a nature reserve in the early 21st century. IAN GJERTZ See also Svalbard; Svalbard Treaty Further Reading Arctic Pilot. Sailing Directions Svalbard-Jan Mayen, Stavanger: Norwegian Hydrographic Service and Norwegian Polar Research Institute, 1988 Gunnar, Horn & Orvin Anders, Geology of Bear Island, Oslo: Skrifter om Svalbard og Ishavet 15, 1928 Orheim, Olav (editor), The Placenames of Svalbard, Oslo: Norsk Polarinstitutt, 1991

213

BEARDED SEAL

BEARDED SEAL Bearded seals (Erignathus barbatus), also known as square-flipper and udjuk (Inuit), are the largest of the northern phocid (true seals, family Phocidae) seals. Adults measure 2–2.5 m long and are gray-brown in color. Some individuals have irregular light-colored patches. The weight of bearded seals varies dramatically on an annual cycle, but the average weight is 250–300 kg. Females, which are somewhat larger than males in this species, can weigh in excess of 425 kg in the spring. The sexes are not easily distinguished. Pups are approximately 1.3 m long at birth and weigh an average of 33 kg when they are born. At birth they have a partial coat of fuzzy gray-blue “lanugo,” but have already commenced molting into a smooth dark-gray coat, with a light belly, that is their pelt by the time they are a few weeks old. Their shed lanugo is passed in the form of small, tight disks, along with the placenta. The pups’ faces have white cheek patches and white eyebrow spots that give them a “bandit” or “teddy-bear” appearance. Yearlings look very similar to pups, but the facial patterns are somewhat less distinct and they often have dark spots on their bellies. Bearded seals have several distinctive physical features: their bodies have a very rectangular shape; their heads appear to be small compared to the size of their bodies; they have squareshaped front flippers with very strong claws; and they have an extremely elaborate, long set of whiskers that tend to curl when dry. It is these whiskers (or vibrissae) that give the species its common name. Bearded seals have a patchy distribution throughout the circumpolar Arctic. Their preferred habitat is drifting pack ice in areas over shallow water shelves. Juvenile animals wander quite broadly, occurring along the coast of Europe quite regularly, and in the winter of 2002/2003 a young male bearded seal took up residency in a river near Tokyo. In most parts of their range, adult animals remain in coastal waters much of the year, moving northward in the summer and fall to remain relatively close to the drifting pack ice. Bearded seal movement patterns are highly dependent on local and annual ice conditions. Bearded seals give birth in the spring, with peak birthing occurring in many parts of their range in early May. Females give birth to their single pup on small, drifting ice-floes in shallow areas. The pups enter the water very quickly, only hours after birth, which is likely a response to heavy predation by polar bears. The pups become proficient divers during the 18–24 days they are cared for by their mothers. During this time they consume about 8 l of milk per day and grow rapidly at an average rate of 3.3 kg per day. Pups usually weigh about 100 kg when they are weaned. Mating takes place toward the end of the lactation period. During the breeding period, male bearded seals

214

Bearded seal (Erignathus barbatus). Photo by Mike Spindler, courtesy US Fish and Wildlife Service

“sing” to attract females. They defend small patches of ocean where they perform their vocal displays over a period of some weeks. Territorial males occupy these same areas from one year to the next. It is not possible to provide accurate abundance estimates for bearded seals because they are very difficult to survey. However, this species probably numbers in the hundreds of thousands globally. Bearded seals eat a wide variety of different types of prey, but are predominantly benthic feeders, eating clams, shrimps, crabs, squid, fishes, and a variety of other small prey that they find on, in, or near the ocean floor. They can search soft bottom sediments using their whiskers to find hidden prey that they get at using suction or water-jetting. Bearded seals are not deep divers; they feed in shallow coastal areas and hence are normally not required to dive to depths of more than 200–300 m. Pups dive to considerable depths during their first year of life (up to 450 m), but older, experienced animals remain in shallow water where most of their benthic prey resides. Polar bears and walruses are the top two predators of bearded seals, but killer whales and Greenland sharks may also take bearded seals, particularly pups. Bearded seals are found in association with drifting pack ice, but they do come ashore to rest on occasion. Bearded seals are a very calm species that can be approached by humans to within a few meters quite easily in areas where they are not routinely hunted. However, even in these areas this species is always found at the ice edge when hauled out, ready to escape

BEARS into the water if the need arises. Bearded seals shed their hair diffusely most of the year, but they do have a concentrated period of molting in June, when they prefer not to go into the water. During this period, they prefer to remain hauled out on the ice. At this time of year, there is not a lot of ice available in coastal areas, so bearded seals occur in small groups on the remaining early summer ice. Beyond the loose social aggregations that occur during breeding and molting, bearded seals are largely solitary animals. Female bearded seals reach sexual maturity when they are about five years old, whereas males are a bit older, usually six or seven years, when they reach maturity. Bearded seals live to an age of 20–25 years. The only country to have ever had commercial harvesting of this species is Russia, where in the Sea of Okhotsk and Bering Seas annual catches exceeded 10,000 animals in some years during the 1950s and 1960s. Quotas were established to reduce hunting, and catches dropped to a few thousand bearded seals annually in the 1970s and 1980s in these regions. However, bearded seals are an important subsistence resource for coastal peoples throughout much of the Arctic. Their meat is a favorite food in some northern communities, and their thick leather has in the past been used for covering kayaks and making rope. KIT KOVACS See also Marine Mammal Hunting Further Reading Burns, J.J., The Pacific Bearded Seal, Anchorage: Alaska Department of Fish and Game Bulletin, 1967 ———, “Bearded seal.” In Handbook of Marine Mammals, Volume 2, New York: Academic Press, 1981, pp. 145–170 Burns, J.J. & K.J. Frost,The Natural History and Ecology of the Bearded Seal (Erignathus barbatus), Outercontinental Shelf Environmental Assessment Program Final Report (OCSEAP), 1979 Chapskii, K.K., The Bearded Seals of the Kara and Barents Seas, Fisheries and Marine Translation Series of the United States, Washington, No. 3162, 1974, 145pp (original published in 1938 in Russian) Gjertz, I., K.M. Kovacs, C. Lydersen & Ø. Wiig, “Movements and diving of bearded seal (Erignathus barbatus) mothers and pups during lactation and post-weaning.” Polar Biology, 23(8) (2000): 559–566 Hjelset, A.M., M. Andersen, I. Gjertz, C. Lydersen & B. Gulliksen, “Feeding habits of bearded seals (Erignathus barbatus) from the Svalbard area, Norway.” Polar Biology, 21(3) (1999): 186–193 Kovacs, K.M., C. Lydersen & I. Gjertz, “Birth-site characteristics and prenatal molting in bearded seals (Erignathus barbatus).” Journal of Mammalogy, 77(4) (1996): 1085–1091 Lydersen, C., M.O. Hammill & K.M. Kovacs, “Diving activity in nursing bearded seal (Erignathus barbatus) pups.” Canadian Journal of Zoology, 72(1) (1994): 96–103 Lydersen, C., K.M. Kovacs, M.O. Hammill & I. Gjertz, “Energy intake and utilization by nursing bearded seal (Erignathus

barbatus) pups from Svalbard, Norway.” Journal of Comparative Physiology B—Biochemical Systemic and Environmental Physiology, 166(7) (1996): 405–411 Van Parijs, S.M., C. Lydersen & K.M. Kovacs, “Vocalisations and movements suggest alternative mating tactics in male bearded seals.” Animal Behaviour, 65 (2003):, 273–283

BEARS The bears worldwide consist of eight species of the family Ursidae, of which three species are found in Arctic areas. The first bearlike ancestor was the small doglike carnivore Ursavus that was common in the Pliocene (5 to 2 million years ago). Similar in size to a racoon, this ancestral bear eventually gave rise to the modern bears and another branch that resulted in the now extinct giant short-faced bear (Arctodus simus). During the Pleistocene epoch or Ice Age (2 million to 10,000 years ago), the giant short-faced bear ranged over much of North America and into the Arctic. This bear was likely the most powerful predator in North America during the Ice Age and the largest individuals would have reached 700 kg (1500 pounds). In the late Pliocene, the first member of the genus Ursus evolved: Ursus minimus. In this period, bears grew in size in response to a sudden change in climate that included greater seasonality. Larger body size would have aided regulation of body temperature. The next bear to evolve was Ursus etruscus (about 2.5 million years ago), and this bear gave rise to the modern bears of the Northern Hemisphere. The most northern bear is the polar bear (Ursus maritimus) that is restricted to the Arctic and Subarctic areas. The brown or grizzly bear (Ursus arctos) has the widest distribution of any bear: from the northern edges of North America, Europe, and Russia south to Italy, Spain, Turkey, and historically as far south as Mexico. The third and smallest species is the black bear (Ursus americanus), whose range is restricted to North America and reaches the Arctic in Alaska, Yukon, Northwest Territories, Nunavut, northern Québec, and Labrador but is also found as far south as Mexico. Where brown and black bears overlap, the brown bear is dominant and black bears can become prey. Black bears are only found in tundra areas in northern Labrador. Exclusion of black bears from other tundra areas is thought to be due to the presence of brown bears. Black bears are the only Arctic bear species capable of climbing trees as adults. In most areas, they rarely wander above the treeline where they cannot escape brown bears. Polar bears and brown bears overlap along the southern coast of the Beaufort Sea, but they do not interbreed in the wild. However, in zoos, brown and polar bears can interbreed and produce fertile young that are intermediate in traits. Brown bears will sometimes wander out onto the sea ice to utilize seal carcasses left by polar bears.

215

BEARS In evolutionary terms, polar bears and brown bears are very closely related with black bears branching off earlier. All bears share some common traits: stocky build, massive shoulders, strong limbs, short fur, plantigrade (walk with the sole on the ground), five toes, strong nonretractable claws, large canine teeth, a small tail, males have a baculum (penis bone), small ears, a heavy skull, a well-developed sense of smell, and good vision. Other mammals seldom prey on bears, so a heavy body and slow gait are not detriments. However, bears are capable of attaining speeds of 30–35 km h−1 for short periods. Over longer distances, bears rapidly overheat and can suffer hyperthermia. All bears are good swimmers and can swim long distances if required. In body size, polar bears are the largest with weights in the 200–600 kg range. Brown bears are the next largest with weights in the Arctic about 150–400 kg. Black bears weigh about 60–150 kg in the Arctic part of their range. Both brown and black bears can be substantially heavier in the southern parts of their range. All species are sexually dimorphic, with males typically 30–100% heavier than females. The large size and strength of bears likely evolved to avoid predation, digging for food, making shelter, and preying on other animals. Bears live a solitary life for the most part. Bears are only found in groups in families, during the breeding season, or at sites with abundant food. Brown and black bears maintain defined home ranges or territories that overlap and may be defended against intruders. In contrast, polar bears use the same areas year after year but do not defend these areas from other bears. The areas used by males are typically 2–5 times larger in area than that used by females. The exception may be polar bears where the size of areas used may be similar in both sexes. The reproductive ecology of bears is similar across all species. There can be intense competition between males for access to breeding females. Broken bones, teeth, and substantial wounding can occur during fights. It is believed that larger males are more dominant and thus sexual dimorphism is favored. The mating system can be considered polygynous or serially monogamous. Males do not contribute to the rearing of young. Females mature at 3–6 years of age and males at about 4–9 years. The breeding season is in the spring and, following fertilization, the egg develops up to a multicelled state called a blastocyst. At this stage of development, the blastocysts stop developing and enter a state of suspended growth until the autumn when implantation in the uterus occurs. Pregnant females of all species stop feeding and enter dens at this point. The embryos develop while the female is fasting and the mother gives birth to young in the den

216

during winter. The young are born very altricial (poorly developed) with little hair, eyes closed, and weighing less than 600 g. The litter sizes are largest in black bears (up to six cubs) followed by brown bears with up to four cubs, and then polar bears with a maximum of three. The mother nurses the cubs with fat-rich milk (up to 50% fat). By the time cubs emerge from the den at 3–5 months of age, their weights have increased many fold, reaching up to 10 kg. Cubs remain with their mothers for 1–3 years depending on species. Upon emergence from the den, the mother has undergone an extended fast of upwards of 7 months in some areas. All age and sex classes of bears can enter dens to avoid inclement weather and lack of food over winter. However, nonpregnant polar bears only den for shorter periods. Specialized fasting physiology conserves muscle mass by recycling nitrogenous body wastes. Bone strength is also maintained so that the bear can emerge from the den ready for renewed foraging. Whether the winter sleep of bears is hibernation or a state of torpor is debated and is largely dependent upon the definition used. When bears are in dens, the body temperature drops, the heart rate slows, and metabolism is reduced. The net result is conservation of energy. During this state, bears do not feed, drink, urinate, or defecate. The energy used while in dens is largely derived from fat stores and bears can lose up to 50% of their body mass over winter. However, in contrast to smaller hibernating mammals, the body temperature of bears does not drop more than a few degrees. This allows bears to arouse much faster than a deeply hibernating animal. In addition, if a bear allowed its body temperature to drop to very low levels, storing enough energy to rewarm would be difficult. The small size of bear cubs at birth may in part relate to the fasting physiology of their mothers that must undergo pregnancy and early lactation without any dietary intake. The polar bear is the most carnivorous of all the bears and most of the diet consists of ringed and bearded seals. However, similar to all bears, polar bears will even prey on reindeer and feed on berries. The diet of brown and black bears varies greatly by region, but they are omnivores (eat a mix of plant and animal material). Berries, roots, grasses, insects, small mammals, fish, and bird eggs can form the bulk of caloric intake in black and brown bears in some areas. However, some brown and black bears are active predators and prey on moose, caribou, muskox, and other mammals. Often, newborn ungulates are taken. All bears will scavenge carrion and will take prey from other predators. If a large kill or carcass is available, bears will often spend several days feeding on it. Over 50 polar bears have been observed feeding on a dead bowhead whale frozen into the ice. A seasonal pattern of feeding means that

BEAUFORT GYRE bears typically reach their peak condition in late summer or early autumn. This means that they will have stored sufficient fat to assist with food shortages or denning over winter. Reflecting their carnivorous ancestry, bears do not have the elaborate digestive system of ungulates nor an elongated intestinal tract to assist with digesting plant material. The dentition of bears is that of a generalist (not specialized to meat or plants), and because they are unable to digest plant materials very well, they rely on the flattened molars to crush vegetation that helps release the contents to aid digestion. Therefore, bears must be more selective than a moose or reindeer when feeding on plants and restrict themselves to the most energy-rich parts. The population dynamics of all bear species is hallmarked by low reproductive rates due to the prolonged mother-offspring bond and small litter sizes. Adult survival rates are high (80–98%), but juvenile survival varies widely between years. These factors result in low population growth rates but stable population sizes that do not fluctuate widely. In comparison to other mammals, the density of bears is typically low. The main sources of mortality are food shortages, disease, intraspecific aggression (cannibalism and infanticide are known in all three species), and harvest by humans. For many areas of the Arctic, humans regulate population numbers through harvest. Habitat loss in the Arctic is not as threatening to bears as it is for southern populations. Bears are a prominent element of biodiversity wherever they are found. Through prehistoric and historic times, bears have affected human art, folklore, mythology, and culture. To a large degree, the influence of bears on humans is tied to occupation of a similar niche: both bears and humans are omnivores, often feed on the same vegetation or prey, and occupy the same habitats. That bears can prey on humans and humans can prey on bears created a close relationship that predates history. Bears are formidable prey, and in many locations bears were hunted by groups of people often with dogs aiding in the control of the bear. Dogs are well able to locate a bear, harass a bear, and keep it occupied while hunters shoot arrows or use spears to kill the animal. Today, polar bears rarely kill humans, with one or two people killed every few years. In Arctic areas, black and brown bears are responsible for one or two human deaths every year. Tourism to see polar bears and brown bears is an important element of the developing tourist trade in Arctic regions. The economic returns of tourism to see bears are rapidly increasing. In addition, the economic returns of sports hunting can be substantial in small communities and provide employment for guides and those associated with hunting. Selling of hides is an additional source of income in some areas.

The main threat to bears comes from loss of habitat due to encroachment of human activities such as mining, oil development, agriculture, forestry, and urbansuburban expansion. Human encroachment results in refuse dumps that bears feed in and can habituate bears to humans. Habituation can result in bears becoming less wary. Often, habituated bears are killed when they approach humans in search of food. Climate change is also a threat to all three Arctic species, but perhaps more so for polar bears. Pollution represents another threat to polar bears. The distribution of polar bears is largely intact. Globally, the distribution of brown bears is vastly reduced but the Arctic maintains large populations. The range of brown bears in the European and Russian Arctic is reduced, particularly in Europe. Black bears still occupy most of their range in the Arctic. Bears are often drawn into human settlements. Dozens of bears are destroyed every year in defense of life and property in the Arctic. Overharvesting in some populations may result in local declines for all three species. Poaching of bears (particularly gall bladders, paws, and baculum) for the Asian medicinal market is a threat to all bear species. International trade in bears and their parts is covered by the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES). ANDREW E. DEROCHER See also Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES); Polar Bear Further Reading Lynch, W., Bears: Monarchs of the Northern Wilderness, Toronto: Douglas and McIntyre, 1993 Murie, A., The Grizzlies of Mount McKinley, Washington, District of Columbia: US Department of the Interior, National Park Service, 1981 Servheen, C., S. Herrero & B. Peyton (compilers), Bears. Status Survey and Conservation Action Plan, IUCN/SSC Bear and Polar Bear Specialist Groups, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK: IUCN, 1999 Stirling, I. (editor), Bears: Majestic Creatures of the Wild, Sydney, Australia: Weldon Owen Publishing, 1993 Stirling, I. & A.E. Derocher, “Factors affecting the evolution and behavioral ecology of the modern bears.” International Conference on Bear Biology and Management, 8 (1990): 189–204

BEAUFORT GYRE The Beaufort Gyre is a large (approximately 1000–1500 km across) quasistationary anticyclonic (clockwise) circulation that encompasses the entire Canada Basin, a part of the Arctic Ocean between Alaska and Canada in the south and the Mendeleyev and Alpha ridges in the north. The Beaufort Gyre is most intense along its southern limb, in the Beaufort

217

BEAUFORT GYRE Sea, the latter named after Sir Francis Beaufort (1774–1857), a British admiral. The Beaufort Gyre is almost completely covered by sea ice year round, except for its southern part, which becomes icefree in summer, typically in August and September. The anticyclonic circulation is typical for the upper 40–50 m and is driven by the persistent atmospheric high-pressure system (Beaufort anticyclone) centered over the Beaufort Sea. Since the surface circulation is largely wind driven, the Beaufort Gyre location and other characteristics are strongly dependent on the atmospheric pressure distribution over the Arctic Ocean. Particularly intriguing are annual late-summer reversals of Beaufort Gyre and the overlying sea cover, documented first with the help of drifting buoys and ice stations and confirmed later with satellite imagery. These reversals usually occur in August and are apparently caused by the reversed atmospheric circulation pattern (Ledrew et al., 1991; Warn-Varnas et al., 1991). The circulation in the southern Beaufort Gyre is more intense than elsewhere around the gyre. This southward intensification of the Beaufort Gyre along the north coast of Alaska is dynamically similar to the well-known western intensification of the Gulf Stream and other western boundary currents in midlatitude oceans, the major difference being that bathymetric variations take over the significance that variations in the Coriolis parameter assume in midlatitude cases (Galt, 1973). The southern Beaufort Gyre is also strongly influenced by the Mackenzie River runoff. The Mackenzie River freshwater plume was observed to extend far north from the river mouth, well into the Beaufort Gyre. The freshening of the southern Beaufort Sea, especially of its shelf waters, might be partially accountable for the southward intensification of the Beaufort Gyre because the influx of fresh, warm (hence less dense) river water increases the density contrast between the onshelf and offshelf waters, which in turn leads to the intensification of geostrophic currents along the density front. Like any other large-scale anticyclonic gyre, the Beaufort Gyre circulation is virtually closed: the gyre is capable of retaining drifting objects for many years and even decades. This circumstance was especially beneficial for long-term drifting ice stations such as T3, ARLIS-II, and North Pole (NP)-22. The ice islands T-3 and NP-22 completed two circulations in the Beaufort Gyre before they left the gyre. Each circulation took approximately ten years. Most drifting objects that escape from the Beaufort Gyre get caught in the Transpolar Drift and eventually leave the Arctic Ocean via Fram Strait into the Greenland Sea.

218

Below the upper 50 m wind-driven layer with the anticyclonic circulation, the Beaufort Gyre circulation is cyclonic (counterclockwise) (Rudels et al., 1994). The southern limb of the cyclonic subsurface circulation is adjacent to the Beaufort undercurrent that flows eastward along Alaska’s shelf break and slope (Aagaard, 1984). This undercurrent is approximately 70 km wide and extends down to at least 2500 m depth. Although its dynamics is not understood yet, the Beaufort undercurrent appears similar to the eastern boundary poleward undercurrents observed in other oceans and likely has similar dynamics. Dramatic changes have been observed in the 1990s in the Arctic Ocean circulation and frontal structure that have profoundly influenced the Beaufort Gyre (McLaughlin et al., 1996; Steele and Boyd, 1998). A front between Atlantic and Pacific waters, previously located over the Lomonosov Ridge, shifted to the Mendeleyev and Alpha ridges. Associated with this shift, a major reorganization of the large-scale surface circulation occurred, including a shrinkage of the Beaufort Gyre and an eastward deflection of the Transpolar Drift (Kwok, 2000; Maslowski et al., 2000). These changes are believed to be caused by semiglobal scale atmospheric variability described as the Arctic Oscillation or the North Atlantic Oscillation or, more generally, the Northern Hemisphere Annular Mode (see Climate Oscillations). While the observed shift might have been just one realization of a cyclical process and thus could be reversed in the future, other changes seem to be caused by the global climate change, which is known to amplify in the Arctic (Morison et al., 2000). In particular, the sea ice extent in the Beaufort Gyre decreased at a rate of about 5% per decade between 1979 and 1996 (Parkinson et al., 1999), accompanied by a thinning of the sea ice cover (Rothrock et al., 1999). The Beaufort Gyre is populated by a multitude of mesoscale subsurface lenses with anomalous temperature and salinity (Manley and Hunkins, 1985). These lenses have a diameter of 10–20 km and are largely confined to 50–300 m depth. Most lenses have warm cores and rotate anticyclonically (clockwise), with maximum current speeds up to 30 cm s−1. Such eddies are quite ubiquitous in the Beaufort Sea, where they may occupy up to 25% of the available surface area, supplying 32% of kinetic energy in the upper 200 m of the Beaufort Sea. Cold-core eddies, albeit rare, have also been observed, having dimensions and kinematic characteristics similar to the warm-core eddies, but with different thermohaline signatures (Manley and Hunkins, 1985; Muench et al., 2000). IGOR BELKIN See also Arctic Ocean; Drifting Stations; Sea Ice; Transpolar Drift

BEAUFORT SEA Further Reading Aagaard, K., “The Beaufort Undercurrent.” In The Alaskan Beaufort Sea: Ecosystems and Environment, edited by P.W. Barnes, D.M. Schell & E. Reimnitz, New York: Academic Press, 1984 Galt, J.A., “A numerical investigation of Arctic Ocean dynamics.” Journal of Physical Oceanography, 3(4) (1973): 379–396 Kwok, R., “Recent changes in the Arctic Ocean sea ice motion associated with the North Atlantic Oscillation.” Geophysical Research Letters, 27(5) (2000): 775–778 Ledrew, E.F., D. Johnson & J.A. Maslanik, “An examination of atmospheric mechanisms that may be responsible for the annual reversal of the Beaufort Sea ice field.” International Journal of Climatology, 11(8) (1991): 841–859 Manley, T.O. & K. Hunkins, “Mesoscale eddies of the Arctic Ocean.” Journal of Geophysical Research, 90(C3) (1985): 4911–4930 Maslowski, W. et al., “Modeling recent climate variability in the Arctic Ocean.” Geophysical Research Letters, 27(22) (2000): 3743–3746 McLaughlin, F.A. et al., “Physical and geochemical properties across the Atlantic/Pacific water mass front in the southern Canadian basin.” Journal of Geophysical Research, 101(C1) (1996): 1183–1197 Morison, J., K. Aagaard & M. Steele, “Recent environmental changes in the Arctic: a review.” Arctic, 53(4) (2000): 359–371 Muench, R.D. et al., “An Arctic Ocean cold core eddy.” Journal of Geophysical Research, 105(C10) (2000): 23997–24006 Parkinson, C.L. et al., “Arctic sea ice extent, areas, and trends, 1978–1996.” Journal of Geophysical Research, 104(C9) (1999): 20837–20856 Rothrock, D.A., Y. Yu & G.A. Maykut, “Thinning of the Arctic sea-ice cover.” Geophysical Research Letters, 26(23) (1999): 3469–3472 Rudels, B., E.P. Jones, L.G. Anderson& G. Kattner, “On the Intermediate Depth Waters of the Arctic Ocean.” In The Polar Oceans and Their Role in Shaping the Global Environment, edited by O.M. Johannessen, R.D. Muench & J.E. Overland, Washington, District of Columbia: American Geophysical Union, 1994 Steele, M. & T. Boyd, “Retreat of the cold halocline layer in the Arctic Ocean.” Journal of Geophysical Research, 103(C5) (1998): 10419–10435 Wallace, J.M. & D.W.J. Thompson, “Annular modes and climate prediction.” Physics Today, February (2002): 28–33 Warn-Varnas, A., R. Allard & S. Piacsek, “Synoptic and seasonal variations of the ice-ocean circulation in the Arctic: a numerical study.” Annals of Glaciology, 15 (1991): 54–62 Weingartner, T.J., “A Review of the Physical Oceanography of the Northeastern Chukchi Sea.” In Fish Ecology in Arctic North America, edited by J.B. Reynolds, Bethesda, Maryland: Amer. Fish. Soc., 1997

BEAUFORT SEA The Beaufort Sea is a regional sea of the Arctic Ocean situated off the north coast of Canada and Alaska with its northern boundary defined by a line extending from Pt Barrow to Cape Lands End on Prince Patrick Island. It is about 590,000 km² (227,800 sq mi) in area and connects freely with the Chukchi Sea to the west and

the Arctic Ocean to the north. Banks Island and Victoria Island of the Canadian Archipelago form the eastern boundary. The continental shelf (3000 m, 36.8%). The volumes of water between 0–200, 200–3000, and below 3000 m are, respectively, 8.3%, 78.9%, and 12.8% of the total volume or 315,000, 2,995,000, and 486,000 km3, respectively. The maximum depth of 4420 m is found in Kamchatka Strait. The continental slope of the eastern Bering Sea is cut by several huge canyons: Bering (54–55° N 166–170° W), Pribilof

232

(56° N 169° W), Zhemchug (58° N 175° W), Pervenets (59.5° N 178° W), and Navarin (60.5° N 179° W). With the vertical extent of 3 km, the Bering, Pribilof and Zhemchug Canyons are among the world’s deepest, while the 400-km-long Bering Canyon is one of the world’s longest canyons.

Weather, Climate, and Sea Ice In winter, the Bering Sea weather is largely determined by the Siberian High (anticyclonic high-pressure atmospheric system) and the Aleutian Low (cyclonic low-pressure system). The combined influence of both systems results in persistent strong winds from the north, 7–12 m s−1 in the mean. Frequent outbreaks of cold Arctic air make the Bering Sea one of the most hazardous seas, with a maximum observed wave height of 21 m. The absolute temperature minimum over the Bering Sea varies from −15°C (5°F) in the south down to −40°C (–40°F) in the north. In summer, the Siberian High weakens and shifts to the west, while the Aleutian Low almost disappears, whereas the North Pacific High strengthens and advances northward, resulting in persistent southern winds, 4–7 m s−1 on average. The Bering Sea notorious fog is most frequent in June-July. The Bering Sea is partly ice-covered in winter and is ice-free in summer. Sea ice formation begins in late October in the northern Bering Sea, advances southward and accelerates in December-January, especially along the Siberian and Alaskan coasts. The sea ice cover is at a maximum in March-April, when it reaches the southern tip of Kamchatka. The sea becomes ice-free in June-July. Recurring polynyas are observed in the eastern Bering Sea north and south of large islands (Nunivak, St Lawrence, and St Matthew) and also south of Chukchi Peninsula (in Anadyr Gulf), southwest of Seward Peninsula, and north and south of Yukon Delta. The extent of the seasonal ice cover experiences significant interannual and decadal fluctuations. For example, over the Eastern Bering Sea Shelf the interannual range of the maximum ice extent exceeds 300 km in the north-south direction.

Main Oceanographic Parameters: Temperature and Salinity The vertical distribution of temperature is typical of the Subarctic water structure that in summer features a cold subsurface later (a remnant of winter convection) underlain by an intermediate warm layer. This layered structure is especially well defined over deep basins but poorly defined near the Aleutian Islands and nonexistent over the shallow part of the Eastern Bering Sea Shelf with depths