18 THE AMERICAN BISONS. 
In 1830 Fischer also gave the name Jaéifrons to a species of fossil bison 
described from remains found in Siberia, which he appears to have regarded 
as new, without, however, apparently being aware that the same name had 
been already given to fossil bison remains from America, or that the name- 
priscus had been proposed for the extinct bison of Europe, he referring to 
only Cuvier’s works in his discussion of the subject. 
In 1832 H. v. Meyer, recognizing the fossil bison as a species distinct from 
the aurochs, gave references to the literature of the subject, and a list of the 
countries in which its remains had been found. He alludes to it under the 
name “ Bos ( Bison) priscus Bojanus,” referring it for the first time to Hamilton- 
Smith’s “subgenus ”’ Bison. Meyer appears also to have been the first author 
who associated the name priscus with either Bos or Bison. Neither of these 
generic terms were used by Bojanus in connection with the specific name 
priscus, although Bojanus is almost invariably cited as the author of this 
association.* 
Owen, in 1843, used the name Urus, in a generic sense, for the bison, 
without reference, however, to Bojanus, Owen employing it in this sense 
entirely independently of any previous author. 
In 1842 Dr. Harlan referred a fragment of jaw, having very much 
worn teeth, found in digging the Brunswick Canal, Georgia, to the genus 
Sus, believing it to represent a new species of that genus, which he called 
_ Sus americanus. The same specimen was afterwards referred to Lopliodon by 
Professor Owen, who still later regarded it as forming a new genus, which he 
abest, indigenam, Rhinocerotis staturae belluam. Uri prisci nomine, aliis auctoribus iam recepto, desig- 
namus.”—WNov. Act. Acad. Nat. Curios, Vol. XII, Part ii, p. 427. ‘The date usually quoted for Bojanus’s 
name of priscus is 1825, which is the date of writing ; the volume is dated 1827. 
* The phraseology used by Bojanus, as already shown, was “Urus priscus,” but only once have I been 
able to find the name Urus priscus Bojanus given among the synonymes of any species of Bison. Meyer, 
in 1832, wrote “Bos (Bison) priscus Bojanus,” and in 1835, simply “Bos priscus Bojanus,” evidently citing 
Bojanus as the authority for only the specific name. In 1846 Owen, in his synonymy (Brit. Fossil Mam. 
and Birds, p. 491) of Bison priscus, wrote “ Bos (Bison) priscus Bojanus, Nov. Act. Acad. Nat. Cur., t. 
XU”! In 1854 Richardson said, “ Bojanus, in 1825, bestowed the name of Bos (Bison) priscus on the 
fossil species ” (Zool. Voy. Herald, p. 31), while Dr. J. E. Gray, in 1852, in his synonymy of the genus 
Bison, cites “ Bison Bojanus, N. Act. Acad. Nat. Cur., XIII”; but Bojanus, as above stated, did not use 
the word Bison at all in a generic sense in the article in question. Lilljeborg is the only author who has, so 
far as I have seen, given the references to Bojanus properly. In his Fauna éfver Sveriges och Norges 
Ryggradsdjur (Upsala, 1874), p. 877, under Bos bonasus Linné, he cites Bojanus as follows: “ Urus 
nosiras L. H. Bosanus. De uro nostrate ejusque sccleto, Commentatio; Nova Acta Physico-Medica 
Acad. Caesar. Leop. Carol. Nat. Curios., T. XIII, pars Ida, pag. 413, — 1827.” He also gives “ Urus 
priscus, IDEM: ibm, pag. 427.” 
