Reading this piece of news I’m surprised the Inuit are still extant. Likewise the inhabitants of Tierra del Fuego.
My commitment to naturism extends only as far as removing my clothes before getting into bath or bed, or in specialised circumstances beyond the scope of this post. If I was a naturist I would restrict my unclothed activities to temperatures above 21% C. (70% F.) But that’s just me. Nevertheless:
(1) What is the minimum temperature necessary inside an igloo to support consistently naked members of the Inuit? I guess that much may depend on external weather conditions, which doubtless get worse the further north one goes, especially in the northern hemisphere winter. Also the construction of the igloo would probably come into play, and the hardiness of the Inuit race could be a factor as well.
(2) What sociological influences could possibly have compelled the Inuit (or anybody else for that matter) to wander about naked in relatively low temperatures? Similarly, why would the indigenes of Tierra del Fuego wish to go around without clothes (momentarily ignoring the shields) in what seems to be a very hostile environment, meteorologically speaking?
I haven’t read the Wiki article, but ISTM the igloo needs to be cold enough so as not to melt.
Robert Flaherty’s classic film Nanook Of The North purports to show the daily life of an Inuit family. Actually, it was staged. (For example, the ‘family’ were ‘actors’.) But given the limitations of motion picture equipment at the time, who could blame him? It’s not as if he could have shot it with a Filmo or a Bolex. In any case, I believe he used staged footage to show ‘actual’ – if dramatised – events.
So, nudity. In one scene the family prepare for bed. They remove their clothes and get into their sealskin blankets. So I suppose you could say that nudity was common in igloos, if only because they slept nude.
Snow houses, or igloos, were not permanent homes in the Arctic; they were built for temporary protection while hunting or traveling. The Wiki article does not cite for its claim as to nudity for the Inuit, but I suppose it could be possible. Between body heat and the heat from the seal-oil lamp, igloos could be comfortably warm. Disrobing in order to repair clothing or for for ease of movement inside the igloo would seem reasonable.
The iglulik or snowhouse (iglu or igloo is the general term for any house) could get remarkably warm. Packed snow is an excellent insulator and with body heat in the sometimes crowded conditions and with heat from seal oil lamps used for cooking and light, it could get quite toasty. They sat or lay on shelfs covered with furs, so it’s not like they were sitting on exposed ice. In fact it was so warm inside that explorer Vilhjalmur Stefansson once wrote half-seriously that the Inuit inhabited a subtropical climate, at least when indoors. Many white visitors commented on the fact that women often went topless inside the iglulik, even in the dead of winter. Among the commentators was Jo Peary who was quite scandalized by the fact.
The iglulik was a very temporary building. The heat-cold cycles would melt the snow and refreeze it, and in each such cycle the snow would lose more of its insulating power.
a story about igloos (as told to me by a soldier who had had artic survival training in the US army):
He said they learned to build a snow cave for survival, take a candle and hold it up to the ceiling, which melts the outer layer to into a mirror-like surface, and reflects body heat.
Then they stripped naked inside the cave, because it warmed up enough that they would start to sweat .
(This can be dangerous–if you are wet with sweat, it can freeze on your body under your clothes when you step outside.)
no cite–but I believed him at the time. Anybody know if I was whoosed?
Agreed. A good friend of mine goes ‘on the land’ every winter for about two weeks to a month, and she confirms that it is quite warm, so long as the oil stove/lamp is burning.
Good god, someone outside of my family knows Vilhjalmur and quotes him (he was my mom’s cousin).
As you are probably aware, he was actually born William Stephenson, but changed his name in college because he thought it sounded more in keeping with his Icelandic heritage and was more fitting for an explorer.
Stefansson was the architect of a couple of disastrous Arctic expeditions that resulted in the deaths of nearly half of the Karluk Expedition and all but one of the ill-fated Wrangell Island expedition members, an Alaska Native by the name of Ada Blackjack. I highly recommend reading the book “Ada Blackjack” by Jennifer Niven.
As to the construction, as some have noted, they are temporary housing. Built from snow or ice blocks.
I’ve been in many a very long time ago, and expect they are not often used these days. Anyway, once built, they are smoothed inside. Once a small fire is lit (they leave a hole at the very top for smoke & CO2 to escape), the lamp and the body heat soon melt the inside walls enough to form a very smooth glaze of ice, which seals it completely. Fresh air comes in from the low doorway.
With only a couple of people and a lamp, it really is very warm and comfy, and very few, if any clothes are needed.
When getting up in the middle of the night to make a pit stop, it is important to clear your head enough to remember to put on lots of clothes and your mukluks before going out in to the sub-zero temperatures. It only took me one forgetful time to have that ingrained in my memory.
I didn’t notice this before. He was actually my grandfather’s first cousin, so he’s my first cousin twice removed. We use the term ‘cousin’ pretty loosely in that family since it’s so huge.
As there’s now more than enough info on igloos, I’d like to comment on the behalf of the southern hemisphere. True, the indigenes of Tierra del Fuego were naked and this is well documented. There aren’t too many of them anymore, but this is due to European-borne illnesses and hostility of the new settlers, before Europeans came the Fuegians lived apparently without much clothes for thousands of years. It’s clear that they survived that way, but that didn’t mean their life was good.
Darwin’s thorough account of Tierra del Fuego explains the situation well. The climate is harsh; Beagle sails round Cape Horn at Christmas time which is summer solstice, and still it’s cold, damp, windy, and there’s snow in the mountains. Later during one winter visit he recounts the mean temperatures: 50 degrees Fahrenheit in summer and 33 F in winter. Anyway the native Fuegians are naked or wear just a loincloth. They apparently could resist the coldness and strong winds at daytime when being on the move. Having lived in such a climate for their whole lives, it seems Fuegians could adjust to it provided the temperatures were above freezing, which they are for almost the whole year in the lowlands. At night they had shelter, quickly constructed wigwams which evidently gave enough protection for them to survive over colder nighttime. It seems to me from Darwin’s description that the main reason for this nakedness was the poverty of the land which did not provide its inhabitants enough clothing material. They had to live without, and succeeded in that because the climate influenced by sea did not get too cold.
It seems that various clothing options were available (guacano, seal and otter skins) but they were either in short supply or not seen as essential to survival.
The Fuegians had no life in the sense that we understand the concept. They were true ‘savages’ living in a hostile environment and would practise cannibalism of their own (old) people when food was in short supply. Altogether a disturbing account.
Studies of feral children have shown that human reaction to temperature is largely the result of conditioning. Victor of Aveyron, for example, who lived his entire childhood in the wild before being captured, was perfectly happy to stay outside in the nude in subzero temperatures. At the other extreme, other feral children have been known to pluck potatoes from cooking fires with their bare hands without apparent pain or injury.
My dad lived with the Innuit for a decade or so in the 1920’s/1930’s*. Igloos were temp or survival shelters. Innuit did not go nude- however, they didn’t have any special nudity taboos either. If there was a reason they needed to remove their clothes in front of others, they did. OTOH, they didn’t have many strangers, just about everyone was “family”- they even “adopted” my Dad.
Outside, Innuit wore “parki’s and mukluks” made of sealskin and the like. Very warm, and more practical than many early artic explorers garb.
My Grandparents were sent by the US gov’t to teach and trade with the “eskimo”.
If you live in a place that is really cold, and you have to go outside to hunt, then you are going to be wearing nice warm clothes.
If you have a nice snug shelter, then those clothes are going to be too warm indoors.
If you are in an igloo, then you are there because you are on a hunting trip, so even if you own light weight clothing, maybe you didn’t want to be burdoned with transporting it, and if you don’t have any taboos about nudity, then why would you bother?