Inuit in the Antarctic and Subantarctic

Bobbbcat2

Bobbbcat2

What if a European nation, wanting to strengthen claims on a part of Antarctica or a Subantarctic island like Kerguelen, South Georgia, the New Zealand Subantarctic Islands, Heard and Mcdonald Islands, Bouvet Islands, the Crozet Islands, the South Sandwich Islands or the Prince Edward Islands, settles (forced relocation or on their on will) Inuit from North America to one of these locations? How would the Inuit fare in these environments? Would the colony last until the modern era?

Using Inuit to claim land has happened in OTL https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Arctic_relocation
 
Last edited:

Arkenfolm

Bobbbcat2 said:
What if a European nation, wanting to strengthen claims on a part of Antarctica or a Subantarctic island like Kerguelen, South Georgia, the New Zealand Subantarctic Islands, Heard and Mcdonald Islands, Bouvet Islands, the Crozet Islands, the South Sandwich Islands or the Prince Edward Islands, settles (forced relocation or on their on will) Inuit from North America to one of these locations? How would the Inuit fare in these environments? Would the colony last until the modern era?

Using Inuit to claim land has happened in OTL https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Arctic_relocation
Click to expand...

The further south you go, the worse chances there are for the Inuit, since there's less likely to be friendly ships docking there to resupply the colony. I'd imagine in some cases, there'd be shipwrecks of whalers and such there, or just whalers looking to loot the place as some unscrupulous men did with the castaway huts on many of those islands.

But I think on all the islands you mentioned, outside of Bouvet Island which is pretty impoverished in terms of native plants and has an even worse climate than the other islands, the Inuit would do just fine, and maybe even better than the OTL High Arctic relocation (although they'd still have the problem of disease, the lengthy initial voyage, etc.). I'd say the best chance for them is to build missions on the islands instead of just dumping Inuit there, since it gives the government (and the private individuals/groups funding the missions) some reason to care about the place and send ships there, plus reduces the chance that passing whalers might steal food/goods, and increases the odds that interaction with passing ships will have positive benefits. The biggest problem is the expense of setting up these missions/colonies to begin with, when if you wanted a mission, you'd just build one where the Inuit already live. Maybe the missions are funded in large part by the government?
 

The Tai-Pan

It is easy to look at the Antarctic and say "Hey, it's cold just like the Arctic!" but they are radically different landscapes and biomes. The various native groups that dwell in the far north have, over painstaking centuries, assembled a lifestyle and techniques to survive in some of the harshest places on Earth and they are tuned to do very specific things in very specific places. Much of that would be useless if you dump them at the other end of the planet. All their intricate knowledge of the animals, plants, migration patterns, navigational tools, exacting knowledge of local climate, and geography would be worthless, indeed a hindrance.

The Arctic is a ring of land that surround a frozen pole of sea ice (at least for now, climate change). The land, at some parts of the year, is actually very rich in both animals and plants, if you know what to look for. The sea ice is a varying landscape but, at various points can provide seals and other food sources if you know how to get them. Most importantly however, the land is always there, a place to regroup, winter over, or even retreat to if you have to. Antarctica is the reverse, you have (generally) bare, wild seas and then a harsh, mostly frozen land. Even where it is bare, the Dry Valleys of Anarticia are probably the most inhospitable landscapes on Earth. It would never work unless you set up a base and regularly delivered food, supplies and such. If you do that, why bother with Natives? Just send a scientific base, as we did in OTL.
 

Arkenfolm

The Tai-Pan said:
It is easy to look at the Antarctic and say "Hey, it's cold just like the Arctic!" but they are radically different landscapes and biomes. The various native groups that dwell in the far north have, over painstaking centuries, assembled a lifestyle and techniques to survive in some of the harshest places on Earth and they are tuned to do very specific things in very specific places. Much of that would be useless if you dump them at the other end of the planet. All their intricate knowledge of the animals, plants, migration patterns, navigational tools, exacting knowledge of local climate, and geography would be worthless, indeed a hindrance.

The Arctic is a ring of land that surround a frozen pole of sea ice (at least for now, climate change). The land, at some parts of the year, is actually very rich in both animals and plants, if you know what to look for. The sea ice is a varying landscape but, at various points can provide seals and other food sources if you know how to get them. Most importantly however, the land is always there, a place to regroup, winter over, or even retreat to if you have to. Antarctica is the reverse, you have (generally) bare, wild seas and then a harsh, mostly frozen land. Even where it is bare, the Dry Valleys of Anarticia are probably the most inhospitable landscapes on Earth. It would never work unless you set up a base and regularly delivered food, supplies and such. If you do that, why bother with Natives? Just send a scientific base, as we did in OTL.
Click to expand...

The sub-Antarctic islands are much closer to the climate of the native lands of the Inuit, although they are much warmer in the winter (except for South Georgia, which is more polar). They do not lack in edible plants (including seaweed like cochayuyo) and ample amounts of fish, seals, and whales. Compared to Ellesmere Island, surviving on Kerguelen or the New Zealand Subantarctic Islands would be relatively easy if relocation occurred.
 
Bobbbcat2

Bobbbcat2

The Tai-Pan said:
It is easy to look at the Antarctic and say "Hey, it's cold just like the Arctic!" but they are radically different landscapes and biomes. The various native groups that dwell in the far north have, over painstaking centuries, assembled a lifestyle and techniques to survive in some of the harshest places on Earth and they are tuned to do very specific things in very specific places. Much of that would be useless if you dump them at the other end of the planet. All their intricate knowledge of the animals, plants, migration patterns, navigational tools, exacting knowledge of local climate, and geography would be worthless, indeed a hindrance.

The Arctic is a ring of land that surround a frozen pole of sea ice (at least for now, climate change). The land, at some parts of the year, is actually very rich in both animals and plants, if you know what to look for. The sea ice is a varying landscape but, at various points can provide seals and other food sources if you know how to get them. Most importantly however, the land is always there, a place to regroup, winter over, or even retreat to if you have to. Antarctica is the reverse, you have (generally) bare, wild seas and then a harsh, mostly frozen land. Even where it is bare, the Dry Valleys of Anarticia are probably the most inhospitable landscapes on Earth. It would never work unless you set up a base and regularly delivered food, supplies and such. If you do that, why bother with Natives?
Click to expand...

I'm very aware of all of this and I was focusing on places like South Georgia and Kerguelen, which have more comparable conditions to the Arctic, Kerguelen actually has a large introduced reindeer population.

The Tai-Pan said:
Just send a scientific base, as we did in OTL.
Click to expand...

I was meaning that this would be in the 1800s or maybe early 1900s, I don't know what a scientific base in Antarctica would even do in those times.
 
Bobbbcat2

Bobbbcat2

metalinvader665 said:
The sub-Antarctic islands are much closer to the climate of the native lands of the Inuit, although they are much warmer in the winter (except for South Georgia, which is more polar). They do not lack in edible plants (including seaweed like cochayuyo) and ample amounts of fish, seals, and whales. Compared to Ellesmere Island, surviving on Kerguelen or the New Zealand Subantarctic Islands would be relatively easy if relocation occurred.
Click to expand...

Beat me to it.
 

Escape Zeppelin

A bunch of the places listed in the prompt were inhabited at the turn of the last century. Whaling stations in the area were a common and economically profitable way to establish claims.

The best POD for this prompt would be to have the whaling companies struggle to attract workers and then turn to Inuit under the premise they were experienced whalers and were comfortable with the extreme cold.
 
Bobbbcat2

Bobbbcat2

Escape Zeppelin said:
A bunch of the places listed in the prompt were inhabited at the turn of the last century. Whaling stations in the area were a common and economically profitable way to establish claims.

The best POD for this prompt would be to have the whaling companies struggle to attract workers and then turn to Inuit under the premise they were experienced whalers and were comfortable with the extreme cold.
Click to expand...
If they can't attract non-Inuit workers they probably can't attract Inuit workers either. Maybe a combination of this scenario and my scenario of strengthening territorial claims?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top