This paper aims to open the discussion about historian’s emotions during the research process that has mostly been covered up. It does not pretend to be a thorough account of the topic but a modest essay that might encourage other researcher to reflect on their experiences. Firstly, we briefly describe the current situation in a few neighboring disciplines. Secondly, we explain how we understand emotions and use the terms emotion, feeling and sentiment. Thirdly, we discuss the reasons why most historians keep silent about their feelings. Fourthly, with two examples, we illustrate how historians have written about their emotions. Fifthly, we present a model of emotional phases of research by the Danish social psychologist Steinar Kvale and evaluate its relevance to historical research. Then we look at the causes and/or objects of feelings of students or beginning scholars in cultural history. Finally, we suggest some ways we historians could make our scholarly community emotionally a more supportive one. It might be good to remember that our discussion concerns primarily the Finnish academic world, and the situation in other countries might be slightly different.

In addition to establishing an exclusive governance system in a vast area of the earth, The Antarctic Treaty is of great importance also in terms of aiming to keep a region away from military activities. In order to carry Antarctica’s dedication to peace and science to future generations, it is necessary to avoid the militarization of the Continent. However, factors such as the ever-growing need for the Continent’s resources, increasing human activities in the Continent due to global warming, and the advancing use of dual-use scientific/military equipment due to technological developments pose a danger as the militarization of the Continent and the Southern Ocean. In this study, the risk of the recent activities of the parties to create a security dilemma and the potential of the security dilemma to increase the Continent’s militarization are analysed.