ARCTIC HISTORIOGRAPHY:
CURRENT STATUS AND BLUEPRINTS FOR THE FUTURE

From Confederation to the present, Canadian academic historians seemed apathetic towards the Arctic compared to their colleagues in anthropology, human geography and the physical sciences. Even their more recent emphasis on social history did not translate into any appreciable interest in Inuit contact history. Expanding on comments made at the presentation of the 1997 Northern Science Award, this paper examines possible reasons and alternatives for the future.

Volumes upon volumes have been written on arctic history, but relatively few are by Canadian academic historians. The first question raised here is who has been writing arctic history and why? Secondly, do current trends in arctic historiography suggest the need for change, and if so, what form should they take?

Some terms employed here need clarification. The word ‘Arctic,' for instance, may have several definitions according to geographical, political, economic, environmental, social or intellectual perspectives. History is essentially a story about people -- about societies, cultures and civilizations. Thus ‘Arctic' as used here, refers to the traditional homelands of the Inuit people. In Canada, these lie in the northern region of the Mackenzie District, the proposed Nunavut territory, northern Quebec (or Nunavik) and northern Labrador.

Historiography is simply the study of writing history, of interpreting historical facts and events as they relate to the interests of contemporary society¹ In this context, the original narratives of the polar explorers are not considered history per se, but as primary sources of historical fact and opinion to be used in the writing of history. The same holds true for log books, diaries, correspondence, autobiographies, personal interviews, reports and newspaper accounts. Some are more valuable for opinion, than for fact.

Traditionally, scholars of the Western World divided Inuit history into pre-history and post-contact history, a Euro-centric perception which seemed to imply there was no history before the arrival of the white man. In both cases, interpretation was deemed the responsibility of anthropologists. Times have changed, as have perceptions, but Canadian academic historians have yet to write a comprehensive history of the Inuit peoples of Canada.

For centuries, western scholars envisioned arctic history to be synonymous with polar exploration history and as such, the exclusive domain of European and Russian scholars, until joined by American historians in the mid to late 19th century. Because it celebrated heroes, conquest and pride in achievement, the history of arctic exploration was readily integrated into nationalist and imperialist histories of the newly industrialized nation states.

Pre-occupied in the 19th century with the politics of nation-building, railway construction and pioneer settlement, Canadian historians seemed content to attach British polar exploration history to their own, as part of their colonial legacy. Until the region offered up comparable Canadian heroes, political significance, or sizable resource wealth, the Arctic was not considered of major importance in Canadian history². By contrast, the Yukon drew scholarly attention because of the economic and political implications of the Klondike Gold Rush. Here was a truly ‘northern' history of adventure, discovery of riches, and survival of the fittest, and one which inspired national pride in having thwarted United States imperialism.

Coexisting along side polar exploration histories was another form of arctic history -- Inuit history -- preserved through countless generations by the oral tradition. These two distinct forms of historiography were rooted in disparate perceptions: one focused on Western scientific achievements and conquest; the other recounted Inuit spirituality and adaptations to their environment.³ The former described the curious inhabitants of a formidable and alien land; the latter told of the arrival of big ships, carrying strangers who needed help to survive the long winters. Anthropologists have long understood the significance of Inuit oral history. Canadian academic historians have been slow to accept its value as a credible resource.

If scholars of other disciplines were writing arctic history, then what criteria defines a historian? What factors differentiate a popular historian from the academic historian? And why do they both play important roles in today's society?

The academic historian considers him- or herself a professional, is university trained, and is required to adhere to rigid standards set down by the discipline. These standards are sustained through peer group adjudication of proposed publications to ensure the integrity of the profession. Their books rely heavily on primary sources, are laden with factual detail and qualified interpretation, are accompanied by copious footnotes, and provide ample background knowledge to place the subject in a relevant context. For these same reasons, the average reader may find them ponderous and boring.

By comparison, popular historians rely more on secondary sources and personal information, rarely use footnotes, and tend to be more narrative-directed than analytical. Since they are not subject to the same rigorous pre-publication review, there is a greater tendency to exaggerate, to make unfounded assumptions, or to be selective in the choice of evidence to prove a pre-conceived idea. In extreme cases, this amounts to propaganda disguised as history. Yet, these same characteristics make popular histories more appealing to the general public, and play a critical role in furthering interest in our cultural heritage. They also provide inspiration for future scholars.

A major distinction setting the academic apart from the popular historian is the interpretation of facts. Everyone has biases and opinions, thus no historian can be "clinically objective." The scholar, however, is bound by professional standards to strive for accuracy and objective balance. As a result, academic histories are considered important secondary sources for use by popular historians, scholars of other disciplines, students, educators, journalists and government officials. In terms of arctic historiography, Canadian professionals failed to provide these scholarly resources during the nation's first century, and instead, left that responsibility to others.

The apparent apathy among Canada's professional historians was offset by a surfeit of arctic literature written by geographers, surveyors, anthropologists, archaeologists, ethnologists, ethnographers, geologists, botanists, ornithologists, zoologists, journalists and novelists, Canadian and non-Canadian. All were writing ‘history,' some of them excellent, but each molded by the perspectives and methodologies of their discipline. The Canadian government was also a major contributor to arctic historiography during these years, by publishing detailed accounts of their sovereignty patrols and scientific expeditions⁴. Beginning in the 1930s, these were complemented with a number of ‘official' arctic histories compiled for the government⁵. Written for public consumption, most were understandably less critical than reports of privately funded or non-British explorations.

Canadian readers seemed particularly entranced by arctic autobiographies written by adventure-seekers, former RCMP constables, ships' captains, fur traders, missionaries, and later, by doctors, nurses, school teachers and transient visitors. Most were anecdotal, with a propensity for exaggeration and sensationalism, thus generally unreliable as sources of accurate information. They did, however, reinforce a romanticized image of the Arctic, a place of adventure and mystique, beyond the reach of most Canadians.

The Second World War brought defense activities to the North, and with them, a heightened awareness of deficiencies in health and education services available to northern Indians and Inuit. A number of books on the North appeared as a result of public interest and concern. Some were anthologies, such as The New North-West edited by C.A. Dawson (Toronto 1947) in which contributions by Canadian historians were notably absent.

The first arctic history book written by a Canadian scholar, appears to be In Quest of the North West Passage (Toronto 1958), by Leslie Neatby, written after his retirement as a Professor of Classics. This volume was followed by Glyndwr Williams' The British Search for the Northwest Passage in the Eighteenth Century (London 1962), then by T.J. Oleson's Early Voyages and Northern Approaches, 1000-1632 (Toronto 1963). As Canada approached its 100th anniversary, it is significant that these historians still focused on the distant past, a time when the Arctic was perceived as a place of adventure, conquest and achievement, and as such, a source of national pride.

The apparent lack of interest in the North by his colleagues prompted the eminent Canadian historian, W.L. Morton, to write in 1970, that "the North is yet to be integrated into the historiography of Canada."⁶ Scholarly histories, however, are not easily written on demand. Thus with the exception of a few scholarly articles and of Morris Zaslow's The Opening of the Canadian North, 1890-1914, ⁷the initial response to Professor Morton's challenge was relatively limited.

In 1980, Professor T.H.B. Symons issued a similar warning about the status of northern research in the social sciences and humanities. Based on statistical analysis of the previous decade's grants awarded by the Social Science and Humanities Research Council (and its predecessor), Symons reported that less than two percent of the awards were for northern research. Of that amount, two-thirds were allocated to anthropology, archaeology and linguistic studies. Only five grants over ten years had gone to northern history projects. The problem, according to Symons, was a lack of applications, reflecting "the failure of the Canadian scholarly community to tackle the manifold questions relating to the North."⁸ This was particularly true of the Canadian historical profession, where out of more than a thousand full-time history professors, only 11 indicated interest in the North. ⁹

In the late 1970s and throughout the 1980s, the situation improved immeasurably as evident by a number of northern books written by Canadian academic historians, including Richard Diubaldo, Alan Cooke and Clive Holland, Hugh Wallace, Kenneth Coates, William Morrison, Robert Page, Shelagh Grant, and others. These were traditional histories, focusing on exploration, public policy, economic and political developments. Two very important histories were published under contract by the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs: in 1984, William Morrison's Showing the Flag: Canadian Sovereignty and the Native People of Northern Canada, followed the next year by Richard Diubaldo's The Government of Canada and the Inuit, 1900-1967. Regrettably, their distribution was limited.

The same decade also witnessed a proliferation of northern fur trade and social contact histories -- Indian, not Inuit. By now, the ‘North' was defined either politically as the Yukon and Northwest Territories, or as the homeland of northern native peoples. With the new social contact histories centering on Canadian Indians, ‘North' moved southward to encompass the northern reaches of most provinces. Inuit were included under the rubric of northern native history but with a few exceptions¹⁰, they were ignored by academic historians as a focus for original research.

To date, the distinctiveness of Indian and Inuit cultures have yet to be clearly defined, although major differences exist historically in culture, socioeconomic background, contact relationships and government policies during the pre- and post confederation era. As a consequence, Inuit studies were generally marginalized in the new Native Studies Programs emerging across Canada.

Nonetheless, many excellent articles on Inuit history appeared in the 1980s, written by anthropologists, sociologists and human geographers, many of them associated with GETIC (the Inuit and Circumpolar Study Group at Université Laval's Faculty of Social Sciences). In 1978, GETIC's anthropologists also played a major role in establishing a new scholarly journal, Etudes Inuit Studies, and the biennial Inuit Studies Conference. The work published by affiliates of GETIC is phenomenal in terms of quality and volume¹¹. Although the majority of their studies have centred on the Indians and Inuit of Northern Quebec, some have encompassed other regions of the Eastern Arctic. The anthropologists at McMaster University and the University of Alberta, among others, have also produced invaluable work.

The calibre of their research and publications only accentuated the lack of similar interest among academic historians. Several writing on public policy focused on the Inuit¹² and a few touched on intellectual interpretations of arctic history ¹³, but much more was written on northern native issues generally or about the Dene, Cree and Metis¹⁴. Meanwhile, media coverage of native land claims and arctic environmental issues sparked new public interest, which in turn provided a ready market for popular histories, environmental and political studies. The overall signs were optimistic, prompting historian Richard Diubaldo to suggest that more scholarly interest would naturally follow the increase of popular and romantic literature on the arctic regions. He warned, however, that "southern-style" historians would have to adjust their vision, that "the north is the north and can not, or can no longer, be understood exclusively from a southern point of view¹⁵."

Others had also recognized the importance of a northern perspective. When rapid changes in socio-economic conditions threatened the continuity of Inuit oral history, Stuart Hodgson, then Commissioner of the Northwest Territories, urged various the taping of elders' stories. The initial results were gratifying. In 1974, the residents of Pangnirtung presented the Commissioner with eleven stories which were later compiled into a book¹⁶. Similar stories from Arctic Bay were also published at this time¹⁷. In 1975, Montreal writer Dorothy Harley Eber, working with Peter Pitseolak from Cape Dorset, brought together interviews, a syllabic manuscript and his photographs, to produce a book on his life history¹⁸.

The history that provided inspiration for my current research, however, was a small, but important, volume by a Roman Catholic Priest, Father Guy Mary-Rousseliere. Father Mary, as he was known in Pond Inlet, used Inuit stories, photographs, archival material, and other primary sources to trace the 19th century migration of Baffin Inuit to Greenland¹⁹. This book and Eber's most recent book, When the Whalers Were Up North²⁰, are the harbingers of future arctic historiography.

In 1986, my co-author and I were overly optimistic in an article on trends in Canadian northern historiography, when predicting the next decade would witness a major increase in scholarly arctic studies²¹. Regrettably, this did not happen. Instead, the pattern of the 1980s continued into the next decade. Measured by the number of scholarly articles and book-length studies published in the 1990s, Canada's professional historians were still focusing their social contact histories on northern Indians, not on the Inuit. This may be partly a result of a doctoral graduates finding employment in the new Native Studies Programs which tended to emphasize Indian, rather than Inuit studies. Another contributing factor likely relates to the high research costs in remote regions accessible only by air.

A number of scholarly, arctic history books were published in the 1990s. With a few exceptions²², they were not written by Canadian academic historians. Scholars from other disciplines apparently filled the void: human geographers, anthropologists, archaeologists, sociologists and a political scientist. The Museum of Civilization and Robert McGhee deserve special mention for producing some excellent publications, as do the McGill and Laval scholars for their continuing contributions. On the down side, at a recent conference, "Law of the Buffalo -- Law of the Musk Ox," co-sponsored by the University of Calgary's Department of History and the Osgoode Legal History Society, only four out of the 26 presenters dealt with Inuit topics. On the up side, the native history series published by McGill-Queens Press have two recent titles relating to Inuit studies. Again, neither were written by academic historians.

Since 1990, non-academics have continued to write arctic history books, some of them excellent²³. These include journalists, a ship's officer, a retired public servant trained as a clinical psychologist, a social worker, and numerous "free-lance" writers. Scholars from other disciplines also published a variety of arctic histories, as have non-Canadian historians studying at the Scott Polar Research Institute (SPRI) at Cambridge University²⁴. A number of American historians are also producing some excellent work.

Recent quantitative studies also suggest that Canada's academic historians are less interested in the Arctic than their peers in the United States and Scandinavia²⁵. The effect of this apathy is demonstrated in another study conducted by the Association of Canadian Universities for Northern Studies. In a statistical analysis of Northern Training Grant recipients from 1987 to 1995, only 33 awards were granted for history students out of a total of 2,659. Moreover, the last four years (1992-1995) indicated a marked decline with only 7 awards for historical research, compared to 25 in the previous four years²⁶.

There are also signs that interest in the "north" generally is in decline among members of the historical profession. A once thriving ‘northern history group,' established in the early 1980s, no longer meets at the Conference of Learned Societies, and their bi-annual newsletter was replaced several years ago by a column in the Native History Study Group newsletter²⁷. Either the expressed interest in northern history peaked in the mid-1980s, or else was fragmented by the now popular social-contact histories of northern Indians.

Meanwhile, written interpretations of Inuit oral history have not progressed as expected. Although taping of elders' stories is ongoing, major effort will be required to preserve, catalogue and duplicate the tapes as protection against accidental loss or damage. Written translations also are needed, if southern historians are to incorporate an Inuit perspective into their studies without costly field research. On a more positive note, a group of Inuit educators met this summer at Pond Inlet to prepare a history text for their elementary students, based on the taped interviews of Inuit elders²⁸.

There are a number of possible explanations for Canadian academic historians' dwindling interest in the Arctic. Without written interpretations of Inuit oral history, a southern scholar must look to new inter-disciplinary approaches and methodologies, involving lengthy field trips, team studies and perhaps the learning of a new language, Inuktitut. For historians trained to study conventional archival and other primary sources, this requires a major break from tradition. Working against acceptance of these changes are increased teaching loads and reduced research funds resulting from recent cutbacks. The latter becomes a primary consideration when faced with the high cost of arctic air travel, accommodation and translation. This factor alone would be a major deterrent for doctoral students contemplating theses in arctic history. Anthropologists and geographers, on the other hand, are already acclimatized to both field work and team studies. In most cases, knowledge of arctic history is a prerequisite for their primary research, thus it is natural that they should begin writing histories to fill a void left by their colleagues in history.

Another limiting factor relates to the maturity of arctic historians and their move to administrative positions. Others have retired or about to be retired, with cutbacks at most universities limiting hopes of replacements.

These and other issues can only be addressed by the historical profession: ie. how best to incorporate an Inuit perspective in academic histories and what role, if any, the historical profession should play in encouraging the Inuit to write their own history. Ultimately, the importance of independent research and publications should be re-examined.

Canadian Arctic historiography is clearly at a crossroads, with various alternatives open for consideration as we approach the next millennium. A ‘do nothing' approach will likely leave interpretation of our arctic heritage to popular historians, anthropologists, geographers, non-Canadian scholars and consultants. At first glance, there seems to be a valid argument that Inuit history is best left to the anthropologists who have proven their expertise. The counter argument reflects on the potential consequences of leaving the academic historians ‘out of the loop,' notably their ability to place Inuit history within its proper context into the overall writing of Canadian history. Another consideration would be the effect on undergraduate course offerings in arctic history: the domino effect on how arctic history is taught in public and secondary schools, and subsequently understood by succeeding generations.

While some form of affirmative action may be necessary, historians cannot rely entirely on the largesse of government to resolve their problems. In the past, the federal government has provided generous support to promote Canadian literature, art, music, film and theatre as a means of protecting our cultural heritage. Similar initiatives have been directed towards preserving Inuit heritage and cultural traditions, including funding for the art and craft industry, for communications, special events, oral history projects, local museums and interpretative centres. Some government departments and agencies have sponsored their own arctic studies, projects and publications.²⁹ The Museum of Civilization, in particular, has made an outstanding contribution to public knowledge of Inuit heritage through their archaeological studies, collection of artifacts, publications and special events. Much larger sums have been supported arctic research in the physical and biological sciences, economic and political development, and land claims' settlements. For a variety of reasons, partly by its lack of initiative, the historical profession has not been a major beneficiary. To gain entry now will mean competing with other disciplines for access to decreasing research funds.

There are no simple answers. The problems associated with arctic research are defined by our geography: a large country, with a relatively small, scattered population, and with modest financial resources. A typically Canadian problem may require a traditionally ‘Canadian' solution, one that blends centralized efficiencies with decentralized realities. With vision, cooperation and ingenuity, a multi-disciplinary effort could be far more effective and provide long-term cumulative benefits for all concerned. Blueprints for the future must be affordable, but they need not be only band-aid solutions.

As a first step, why not consolidate our scattered resources and create a an adjunct and coordinating body for existing arctic research institutes across Canada? -- at a central location, with access to major archival sources, and with direct air connections to both the Eastern and Western Arctic?

Why not resurrect an idea that has emerged many times in the past, and establish a Canadian Arctic or Polar Research Centre, along the lines of the Scott Polar Research Institute at Cambridge?³⁰ -- a centre providing post-graduate courses and research facilities?

Why not begin with a focus on graduate courses in Inuit studies? -- creating exchange teaching and learning linkages with the Inuit Studies courses at Nunavut Arctic College?

Why not be creative? And coordinate the centre with a number of existing degree granting institutions (rather than one university) to develop partnership programs in post-graduate, doctoral, and post-doctoral Inuit studies? Both in Canada and abroad? In this way, post-graduate courses could be taught at the centre, and accepted towards post-graduate degrees at participating universities.

Why not coordinate the centre's activities to provide financial support and at the same time enhance the role of existing research institutions, such as the Arctic Institute of North America (AINA) at the University of Calgary; GETIC at the Universite Laval, the Canadian Circumpolar Institute at the University of Alberta, the proposed Rupert's Land Institute at the University of Manitoba, the Nunavut Research Institute in Iqaluit, and so on?

Why not work with these and other institutions to further develop and enhance their existing data bases of arctic and Inuit research, literature and expertise? -- and at the same time, provide a more efficient means to disseminate that knowledge to public and private agencies?³¹

Why not develop a core of academic expertise affiliated with the centre, -- cooperating with their counterparts at the Scott Polar Research Institute, the Arctic Centre at the University of Lapland in Finland, the Dansk Polarcenter in Denmark, the Institute of Arctic Studies at Dartmouth College, New Hampshire, and the International Arctic Social Sciences Association, towards developing more comparative circumpolar studies?

Why not be opportunistic? -- utilizing the abandoned buildings of the decommissioned Rockcliffe military base in Ottawa, now sandwiched between the National Research Council and the Aviation Museum for offices, classrooms, lecture halls, meeting rooms, cafeteria, lab facilities, libraries, archival storage, and for student and visitor accommodation?

Why not create an outreach program connected to Nunavut Arctic College, and to Aurora College in the Western Arctic, to assist Inuit in developing their own expertise in all aspects of arctic science, social science and the humanities?

As a specific example, why not develop a graduate studies program with a field work component designed to assist Inuit students in learning both how to preserve, store and catalogue their taped oral histories, and how best to transcribe their oral history for dissemination throughout the Arctic, and the world at large? Senior graduate students might teach semester courses at the two Arctic Colleges in environmental science, biology, zoology, archaeology and anthropology. Exchange programs might evolve in which Inuit would instruct southern students about their traditional knowledge. Such programs would have a trickle-down effect to benefit both northern and southern students at all levels of education.

Why not be innovative and flexible in developing Inuit post-secondary education programs? For example, might we consider utilizing a one-on-one apprenticeship model, instead of the traditional university requirements of essays and exams?

As a first step, a working group might be set up, consisting of no more than five, senior arctic scholars to represent a cross section of disciplines and research institutions. The objective would be to study the concept of a polar research centre, to set down the objectives and time frame, and to bring forward recommendations with regards to structure, programmes, name, physical requirements, human resources, and funding. The initial priority would be to create and promote a post-graduate Inuit studies program. Receiving those recommendations would be Canadian universities, Inuit representatives, territorial and federal government officials, charitable foundations, and the private sector. Although the working group might be funded by government on an ‘expenses only' basis, its success will be determined by the degree of initiative and cooperation shown by the academic community in the initial planning process.

If the concept is considered feasible, then the federal government might be asked to consider a matching grants program for the creation of a Canadian Polar Research Centre, as a millennium project, to facilitate north-south and east-west interaction in advancing knowledge and interest in our Arctic regions, beginning with a focus on Inuit Studies. Canadian Inuit would be both benefactors and beneficiaries, as would academic historians and other scholars, by having direct access to inter-disciplinary research in Inuit studies. With commitment and vision, anything is possible. These are just thoughts - possible blueprints for the future.

References
1. For further discussion on the nature of history, see E.H. Carr, What is History? (Harmondsworth, England: Penguin Books, 1964).

2. Aside from a few articles, chapters in books, and government publications, Canadian scholars seemed content to have British and American historians interpret exploration in the Canadian Arctic.

3. For a more detailed explanation, see S.D. Grant, "Imagination and Spirituality: the Written Narratives and the Oral Tradition," in Echoing Silence: Papers on Arctic Narratives, (Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press, 1997)

4. The notable exception was Vilhjalmur Stefansson, whose books were published in Britain and the United States. Although the Canadian government funded his arctic expedition (1913-1918), Stefansson strongly resisted attempts to influence his press reports, lectures and publications. For a list of government reports, see the "Biographical Essay" in Morris Zaslow, The Opening of the Canadian Frontier (Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1971): 321.

5. As examples, see A.E. Millward, ed., Southern Baffin Island: An Account of Exploration, Investigation, and Settlement during the Past Fifty Years, (Ottawa: Department of the Interior, 1930); and W.C. Bethune, ed. Canada's Eastern Arctic: Its History, Resources, Population and Administration, (Ottawa, Department of the Interior, 1934). Others appeared in the 1940s and 1950s.

6. W.L. Morton, "The 'North' in Canadian Historiography," Transactions of the Royal Society, Series 4:8 (1970): 40. 7..Morris Zaslow, The Opening of the Canadian North, 1890-1914 (Toronto: McClelland and Stewart, 1971).

8.T.H.B. Symons, "The Arctic and Canadian Culture," in Morris Zaslow, ed. A Century of Canada's Arctic Islands, 1880-1980. (Ottawa: Royal Society of Canada, 1981): 327-8. .

9.Ibid., p. 331.

10.Notable exceptions were the promising studies by Philip Goldring: "Inuit Economic Responses to Euro-American Contacts: Southeast Baffin Island, 1824-1940," Historical Papers, (Ottawa: CHA, 1986); and "Religion, Missions, and Native Culture," Journal of the Canadian Church Historical Society, 26:2 (1986).

11. See Marc-Adelard Tremblay and Carole Levesque, Quebec Social Science and Canadian Indigenous Peoples: An Overview of Research Trends, 1960-1990, Polaris Papers Number 11, Canadian Polar Commission (August 1997); also "Les Savoirs Autochtones du Nord Canadien: Une Bibliographie annotee des ouvrages de langue Francais," prepared for the Canadian Polar Commission, April 1997.

12. Notably, Stuart MacKinnon (History, University of Alberta); Richard Diubaldo (History, Concordia University); William Waiser (History, University of Saskatchewan); Gerry Nixon (History, Royal Roads Military College). 13. For example, I.S. MacLaren, Professor of History at the University of Alberta, Kenneth Coates, University of Northern British Columbia, and Shelagh Grant, Trent University.

14. These include Kenneth Coates (then History, University of Victoria), William R. Morrison (then, History, Lakehead University); Robert Page and Shelagh Grant (both in History, Trent University); Morris Zaslow (retired History, University of Western Ontario).

15. Richard Diubaldo, "The North: Bibliographical and Research Considerations," Fram: the Journal of Polar Studies, 1:2 (1984) 496.

16. (Edmonton: Hurtig Publishers, 1976).

17. Susan Cowan, ed., We don't live in snow houses now. (Ottawa: Canadian Arctic Producers, 1976). 18. Peter Pitseolak and Dorothy Harley Eber, People from Our Side: A Life Story with Photographs and Oral Biography. (Montreal: McGill-Queen's Press, first edition 1975) revised edition 1993.

19. Father Guy Mary-Rousseliere, Qitdlarssuaq: The Story of a Polar Migration, English translation (Winnipeg: Wuerz Publishing, 1991). First published in French in 1980.

20. Dorothy Eber Harley's second publication utilized Inuit oral history to describe Inuit participation in the whaling industry: When the Whalers Were Up North: Inuit Memories from the Eastern Arctic. (Montreal: McGill-Queen's Press, 1989).
21. The state of northern historiography by Canadian authors (academic and others) is covered in more detail in Bruce W. Hodgins and Shelagh D. Grant, "The Canadian North: Trends in Recent Historiography," Acadiensis, 16:1 (Autumn 1986): 173-188.

22. See Trevor Levere, Science and the Canadian Arctic: A Century of Exploration, 1818-1918 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993); and Peter Kulchyski and Frank Tester, Tammarniit (Mistakes): Inuit Relocation in the Eastern Arctic, 1939-1963 (Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press. 1994). Levere is a historian, currently teaching at the Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology, at Victoria College, University of Toronto. His initial research for this book was carried out at the SPRI. Kulchyski is a historian, teaching in the Native Studies Department at Trent University; Tester's background is primarily in sociology and social work, and is currently a professor in the School of Social Work at the University of British Columbia.

23. Aside from personal knowledge, recent bibliographies were used to identify arctic and northern history publications. If unknown, the Canadian Historical Association's Directory of Members was consulted to verify the authors' primary discipline.

24. Perhaps the best arctic history appearing in the last four years was Beau Riffenburg's, The Myth of the Explorer: The Press, Sensationalism, and Geographical Discovery. (London: Belhaven Press, 1993). A close second was the book noted above, by historian Trevor Levere who is currently teaching at the University of Toronto. Both were products of study at the Scott Polar Research Institute and both were published by associated presses. 25. International Directory of Arctic Social Scientists, compiled by Ernest S. Burch Jr. (Arlington, Virginia: National Science Foundation, 1997). 26. R. King et al., "Northern Studies Humanities Research Survey Final Report," (Ottawa: Canadian Polar Commission, 1996): 29.

27. Correspondence with the editor of the Native History Study Group, subsequent to the presentation ceremony, reports that the author of the Northern History column, Dr. Charlene Porsild, has, or will be, moving to Nebraska.

28. Personal information from Martha Kyak, instructor in Teachers' Education at Arctic College, October 1997.

29. Over the years, federal agencies have contributed to arctic historiography, either by hiring historians directly, or by offering contract work to university scholars on sabbatical, to work on internal studies and government publications. Like any study written for private or public agencies, these do not constitute independent scholarship. Moreover, a good number remain unpublished, thus inaccessible to the general public.

30. The idea of an arctic research centre was discussed as early as the 1930s, and resulted in the creation of the Arctic Institute of North America in 1945. Initially dependent upon government support and contract work, it has nevertheless provided excellent support for arctic research. Similarly, through its journal, Arctic, and other publications, it has provided an effective means of disseminating arctic knowledge to the public. But the AINA was not set up as a teaching or degree-granting institution. Dr. Peter Adams MP has more recently promoted the concept of a Canada Polar House. 31. The Arctic Institute of North America has already developed a comprehensive data base of arctic research and publications. In cooperation with the AINA, a central agency might assist in up-dating the system to facilitate receipt and distribution of information, nationally and internationally.