SKULL OF SHANIDAR II — STEWART 529 



less worn than those of Shanidar I and the latter lacks exostoses of 

 this sort. In any case, as far as I know at present, this is the earliest 

 example of alveolar exostoses to come to light. 



DENTITION 



As explained at the beginning, all the lower teeth with the exception 

 of the right central incisor were recovered. Three of the upper teeth 

 are missing: a canine (left?), a lateral incisor (left?), and a central 

 incisor (right ?).° The uncertainty about the position of these upper 

 teeth is due to the difficulty of identifying some of the front teeth 

 that were recovered. The damage to the midface at the time of 

 discovery reduced some of the teeth to fragments and all the pieces 

 were not recovered. Plate 9, figure 1, shows the occlusal surfaces of 

 the upper teeth according to the best identification that could be made 

 under the circumstances. By comparison with the corresponding view 

 of the lower teeth (pi. 6, fig. 1) it is evident that in both jaws tooth 

 wear increases from the third molars forward to the incisors. Also, 

 in the upper jaw wear is greatest on the lingual cusps, whereas in the 

 lower jaw it is greatest on the buccal cusps. The teeth of the two 

 sides appear to be worn about equally. 



The teeth of Shanidar II can be compared with those of Shanidar I 

 only in a general way, because of the difference in wear. So worn 

 are all the teeth of Shanidar I that the exposure of dentine is com- 

 plete in all cases and in a few (first molars, canines, incisors) little 

 or no enamel remains. A notable fact, however, is the rather uniform 

 size of the lower molars in both specimens. The upper molars are 

 shorter and broader, and the upper third molars have undergone 

 slight reduction in the proximo-distal diameter. This is shown by the 

 following measurements (in millimeters) of the Shanidar II molars: 



Proximo-distal diameter Bucco-UiKjual diameter 



R 10. ,, r R 11. ,,3 f R 12. „ f R 10. 7 



^' ^ L 10.0 ^^— -{l 12:0 ^^'-—II 12.0 ^^— -|L 11.0 



L 10.5 |L 12.2 [L 12.5 [L 11.2 



L 10.5 [L 11.3 [L 12.0 [L 11.0? 



Even more remarkable is the size of the lower incisors in both Shani- 

 dar specimens; they are very large bucco-lingually as compared with 

 corresponding modern teeth. The lower lateral incisors of Shanidar 



•After this paper was completed, I accidentally discovered three loose upper anterior 

 teeth among some postcranial fragments of Shanidar I. It seems likely that these are 

 the missing teeth of Shanidar II, but more study is needed to settle this point. 



