Published marine sediment core records and new information from terrestrial aeolian deposits from the surroundings of Igaliku Fjord, south Greenland, have been used for a tentative reconstruction of multi-decadal to centennial scale changes in the intensity of regional atmospheric circulation since the Medieval Warm Period. The marine data show that aeolian activity over southern Greenland was generally enhanced in the Medieval Warm Period between c. AD 900 and c. AD 1300. The preliminary data from the onshore aeolian deposits suggest that wind activity was strongest after AD 1000, reaching a peak close to AD 1300, after which atmospheric circulation intensity decreased. A comparison with the marine data shows that this decrease coincides with increased advection of Polar Water by the East Greenland Current at the beginning of the Little Ice Age. The aeolian sediment record suggests foehn wind activity displaying multi-decadal oscillations in the range of known north Atlantic climate oscillations. The intensity of erosional processes in south Greenland has previously often been attributed to farming activities initiated after AD 1000 by the Norse who disappeared a few hundred years later. Our findings suggest, however, that erosion in this area is mainly related to marked variations in wind strength.

The earliest winter scientific station established in the Antarctic was in 1883 as part of the first International Polar Year (IPY) programme. Subsequently, to the IPY of 2007–2009, scientific stations have been deployed on 139 sites (103 on the Antarctic continent, 36 on the peri-Antarctic islands), by 24 countries for a cumulative total of 2666 winters to that of 2008. This paper summarises the winter dates, locations, and national status of all stations in the region. It thus includes all winter stations of the three IPYs and those of the International Geophysical Year (1957–1958). The positions of 120 of these winter stations are south of 60°S, the boundary of the Antarctic Treaty of 1959 (although many of them predate the Treaty).

This article critically examines the assumption that the men of Sir John Franklin's last Arctic expedition died because, influenced by the characteristic British cultural prejudices of their time, they refused to employ Inuit survival skills. Since no detailed records from this expedition have ever been found, there is no direct evidence about the attitudes held or actions taken by its members. The article therefore draws on another source: the very extensive British periodical and newspaper coverage of the Franklin search. The writers who contributed to this literature knew even less than is now known about the events of the last Franklin expedition, but their speculations about the probable fate of the lost explorers reflect the beliefs about the Arctic and its people that prevailed at the time. Especially during the early 1850s, the great majority of periodical writers believed that Franklin and his men had gone native in order to survive. It is therefore evident that there was no cultural stigma attached to adopting the Inuit way of life in times of need.

Russian and Australian primary sources were examined in an attempt to reconstruct the voyage of the first composite Soviet Antarctic expedition to Antarctica and from thence to Leningrad [St Petersburg]. This expedition had the aim of constructing a base for the Soviet International Geophysical Year (IGY) commitment. In a time of cold war tension and unresolved Antarctic claims, the Australian and New Zealand governments were wary of Soviet intentions and barely tolerated visits by Soviet expeditions. However, in their interactions with Australians and New Zealanders, the Soviets were careful to underline the friendly nature of their visits and avoided any sensitive political questions. The two governments’ apparent lack of enthusiasm for Ob and Lena entering their ports after fulfilling their task in Antarctica is contrasted with the generally more enthusiastic attitude of the Australian and New Zealand scientists and expedition members, with whom the Soviet personnel came into contact, some of whom developed lasting scientific relationships with the visitors.

This paper focuses on the evolution and development of the legal scope of governance and the right to autonomy in the Arctic context by considering contemporary indigenous internationalism through a legal lens and by employing examples from the Arctic indigenous peoples of Greenland and Nunavut. It argues that depending on national policy, partnerships, and relations, there are possibilities for considering direct international representation, and the participation of autonomous sub-national units or indigenous peoples, as a part of the right to autonomy/self-government or internal self-determination. Since indigenous peoples have a limited legal personality and capacity in international law, the states of which they are a part can take special measures to accommodate their needs.

This article examines how US policy makers relate to the European Arctic as an oil and gas region, and more specifically to Norway's efforts to promote the region through its high north policy. The ‘high north’ is defined as the Norwegian and Russian sectors of the Barents Sea. The Norwegian assumption that northern oil and gas is of interest to the international community is tested by analysing and explaining the character of the US approach, with an assessment of whether Norway has succeeded in influencing how the USA views the high north as an energy region. Norway has managed to raise the awareness of the high north as an energy region in Washington, but the interest in the topic has been moderate. Moreover, Norwegian policy makers in the first phase of the high north initiative have misinterpreted US officials' definition of the situation in which Washington's foreign energy policy is developed. Ironically, Norway's ‘exemplary’ energy policy has led to less response than was initially expected, whereas Russia seems to be of significantly greater interest for the USA. With its relatively small resource potential, straightforward investment climate and unclear high north strategy, Norway and its high north do not stand out as very interesting to the USA, which tends to direct more attention to cases in which its oil and gas companies work under more uncertain investment framework conditions in regions with huge energy resources.

Biophysical changes underway in the Arctic have stirred a remarkable surge of interest and concern in many quarters, including non-Arctic states and non-state actors. This article explores the implications of these developments for the pursuit of governance in the region. Many reactions to this situation are more alarmist than alarming. But recent developments do provide an excellent opportunity to reassess the effectiveness of existing arrangements and to enquire about the need for new forms of governance. The article does not support the claims of those who argue that a comprehensive, legally binding Arctic treaty (or even an Arctic Charter) is required at this time. Rather, it argues the case for a somewhat messier but more effective tripartite governance complex featuring an agreement to set aside without extinguishing claims to extended continental shelf jurisdiction on the part of the littoral states, an effort to adjust the character of the Arctic Council to meet emerging needs in the Arctic, and a push to devise issue-specific regulative regimes to address concerns involving shipping, fishing, and off-shore oil and gas development.

The generally accepted date of birth of F.R.M. Crozier is 17 September 1796. On the basis of a fresh scrutiny of the evidence, it is suggested that 16 August 1796 is more probable.

This note draws attention to the fact the formal motion presented at the first International Geophysical Year (IGY) Antarctic Conference, recommending that the aims of the conference were exclusively scientific was proposed by the Chilean delegation.