162 PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL MUSEUM. vol.46. 



The attitude assumed by most European writers, especially the 

 older ones, on the relationships of the fossil bisons of the northern 

 parts of the eastern and the western hemispheres is well illustrated by 

 the language of J. F. Brandt.* This author, having studied the rich 

 materials in the St. Petersburg Academy, expressed himself unhesitat- 

 ingly as regarding Bison priscus Bo j anus and Bos latifrons Fischer as 

 identical with Bison honasus of Europe. He further affii'med that, 

 notwithstanding the contradiction which he had to expect in America, 

 he identified Bison latifrons (Harlan) and Bison antiquus Leidy, to- 

 gether with Bos priscus Bo j anus, as mere races of one primitive form. 



It is very probable that to-day few naturalists would deny that all 

 these forms have descended from a common and not far removed 

 ancestor. There is, however, in our time, hardly one who will affirm 

 that the European bison is the same species as the North American 

 animal; and there are few who will contend that our Bison latifrons, 

 with its immense horns, was specifically identical with the short- 

 horned Bison honasus of Europe, or even with the forms that have 

 been included under the name Bison priscus. 



It is only recently that an effort has been made to establish distinct 

 species and subspecies on the materials which have been found from 

 the British Isles to Eastern Siberia in Pleistocene deposits. In 1909 ^ 

 La Baume, in an interesting paper on fossil and subfossil oxen of the 

 Old World, discussed ten skulls of Bison priscus, and presented 

 numerous measurements. Some of these skulls he figured. They 

 had been collected in as nearly as many localities, scattered from the 

 Rhine to eastern Siberia. He concluded that, as regards the measure- 

 ments of the skulls themselves, there appeared to exist no great 

 differences, but he appreciated the fact that there existed very great 

 differences among the horn-cores of the different skulls which had 

 been described by the various European writers. On pages 52-54 

 he gives a brief history of the several attempts which had been made 

 to explain these differences ; and he shows in a striking way the dif- 

 ficult position in which these writers had placed themselves in their 

 resolution to regard all these forms of bisons as belonging to a single 

 species. La Baume expresses this conclusion: "It is impossible to 

 refer to geographical varieties all the variations in the form of the 

 horn-cores of Bison priscus; since very different sorts of horn-cores 

 are found within very narrowly restricted regions and, on the other 

 hand, horn-cores from widely removed localities agree completely." 

 The writer quoted did not attempt to establish any new species, 

 regarding it as necessary to await the accumulation of additional and 

 better materials. 



1 Verb. russ. mineral. Ges., ser. 2. vol. 2, pp. 137, 150. 



« Schriften naturf. Ges. Danzig, n. s., vol. 12, Heft. 3, pp. 45-80. 



