448 WILLIAM THALBITZER. 
over-prominent place; strangely enough, however, he omits from his 
description (р. 382) JoHnan PETERSEN's large and valuable private col- 
lection, acquired by the State for the Museum — at the request of the 
Director —, in the year 1910, when the collector was in Copenhagen 
on leave, after 18 years’ residence in his official capacity at Ammas- 
salik. This collection is nevertheless probably superior in several respects 
to RYDER's, having been made after careful preparation, with the chance 
of fortunate finds, and by one excellently acquainted with the natives 
of the place. JoHAN PETERSEN’s name is mentioned, it is true, but his 
collection deserved special note in this connection, quite as well as RÜT- 
тег’; and Rosıng’s collections of a single speciality (amulets)!. 
Plan and Contents of the Work. 
р. 383. — Hr. THOMSEN here asserts, in his somewhat lofty style, 
that “The task entrusted to the Editor... was briefly and plainly 
this...” etc. He also refers to “the confusion which is thus apparent 
in the plan of the work”. Now what does Hr. THomsen know of the 
task which was entrusted to me after my return from my investiga- 
tions in East Greenland? It should already be evident to him, from 
the foregoing, that he had but an incomplete and partly incorrect idea 
of the same. And if I were to make public the plan of the whole work, 
including the translated edition of HoLm's book, which I laid before the 
Committee, at the request of the Chairman, on the occasion of the Com- 
mittee Meeting in April 1907, and which, after having been accepted 
and recommended to the consideration of the Carlsberg Fund, was 
further supported by the same until the publication of my work in 1914 
— he would be forced to take another view of “the task entrusted”’ 
to me from the very commencement”. АП that he states with regard 
to this (p. 383—384) shows, that he considers the task too great, and 
that he at the same time does not know what he is talking about. 
The matter dealt with in my work is, as the mere table of contents 
will suffice to show, arranged on clear and distinct lines. The confusion 
which my critic finds therein must be due to the quality of his 
own intelligence. I followed a principle similar to that observed by 
С. Hozx in his original edition; viz: that of placing the ethnographical 
1 Jouan PETERSEN’S collection is casually mentioned in a footnote later 
on (p. 394). 
2 My work contains, in the first place, what it was intended to contain 
according to the plan laid down. As regards the anthropology, I may 
refer to the section: Contributions to the Anthropology of the East Green- 
landers, by Soren HANSEN, in my book (1914) pp. 149-179. In the 
second place, the work contains in certain respects more material than 
the original scheme could possibly have anticipated. How can the work 
have deteriorated from the fact that the material in course of treatment 
grew richer and more up to date? 
