SINCE moving to Greenland in 1906, I have had ample opportunity of 

 observing certain Antennaria-îorms in my immediate neighbourhood, 

 which have hitherto all been understood to be variations of A. alpina (L.) 

 Gaertn. When studied growing under natural conditions, they show 

 constant heredity and in consequence the genus must, here at least, 

 be considered polymorphous. As I have only a very limited access to 

 literature, the older especially, and scarcely any whatever to collections, 

 I am well aware, that in trying to prove it, my view may be found defec- 

 tive. I may however at once point out, that the Botanical Museum at 

 the University of Copenhagen has shown me the great courtesy of lending 

 me for my studies the greater part of its collections of this genus, and I 

 wish to thank the director for this exceptional favour, which is so much 

 greater on account of the difficulties of communication between Green- 

 land and Denmark. 



When, in spite of these drawbacks, I nevertheless venture to state 

 my views concerning these plants, it is in the hope of calling attention 

 to them, so that a search may be made for them elsewhere, particularly 

 in the parts of North America nearest Greenland. 



From quotations by Willdenow and others, it appears, that Lin- 

 naeus as well as prelinnean authors like Bauhin, Scopoli and Haller 

 considered the plant, now called Antennaria alpina (L.) Gaertn., to be 

 different from A. dioeca, which is so commonly distributed throughout 

 Europe. The nearest successors to Linnaeus, Willdenow, Wahlen- 

 berg and others, kept the two species separate, at the same time doub- 

 ting the correctness of doing so (Willdenow in Linné, Spec. Plant. 

 Ed. 4 post Reichardtianum 5, T. 3, P. 3, Berolini 1800, pag. 1883; Wah- 

 lenberg: Flora Lapponica, Berolini 1812, pag. 202). Wahlenberg says 

 thus 1. c, that he considers it a "species mere facticia vel arbitraria"", 

 and adds ''vix diibito quin sit sola degeneratio praecedentis {seil. A. dioecae) 

 atque eodem mare gaudeaf\ The fact of female flowers only being found, 

 necessarily roused the doubts of earlier scientists; occasionally plants, 

 apparently male plants, had already then been found, but on closer 

 examination this was proved erroneus, and Robert Brown was able 

 to state positively (A supplement to the Append, to Capt. Parry's Voyage 

 LI. 20 



