Ko(>nI FoKh (INCLUDES EAST TIJRKANA, ILERET) 145
and inferior to these lateral ridges, are bilateral long,
s/i compressed tuberosities (quite unlike anything
noted in any other specimen studied). Nuchal line is
faint, visible along inferior surfaces of the keel-like
ridges. Superior to the midline swelling and these
ridges is a shallow sulcus. (Technically, the mid-
line structure is part of a torus defined by sulci above
and below; but it is certainly not an occipital torus as
conventionally defined.)
Lambdoid sutures angle gently up from point
above the strange “lateral occipital tuberosities” to an
apparently peaked lambda; in turn, it appears these
tuberosities apparently lie well posterior to where the
parietal notch would have been. The intervening
space would have been occupied by a fairly short pari-
etomastoid suture. Occiput itself very broad and short.
Basiocciput broad and flat with little (if any) flexion
between basisphenoid and basiocciput. Anterior mar-
gin of foramen magnum is elevated into a rim. Fora-
men distorted, but would have been quasi-circular. L
occipital condyle partially preserved and would have
been quite long, compressed. Area of pterygoid plates
obscured; behind, quite shallow articular fossae exten-
sive in both lateral and a/p directions.
Externally, the dental arcade formed a smoothly
curving U shape; internally, palate narrows posteriorly
(thus the alveolar crest of cheek tooth region is not par-
allel sided, but broadens posteriorly). Alveolar margin
also extremely broad from side to side, in proportion to
roots of anterior teeth (as reflected by alveolae) but out
of proportion posteriorly to the single preserved (sec-
ond) molar on R. Incisive foramen single, large, and sit-
uated behind alveolar margin. Anterior plane of palate
long and sloping; palate shallow in front but very deep
at region of M1 and behind. Bilaterally, two grooves for
palatine nerve and artery are distinct and well excavated.
Anterior tooth alveoli best preserved on the L. I1
root would have been massive in all directions; I2 root
would not have been as long m/d but was as wide b/l. C
alveolus gigantic; root tip would have exceeded inferior
margin of nasal aperture. P1 and P2 root systems would
have been almost as long, although narrower m/d. Space
between R and LI1 alveoli was wide. On the R, two
root canals of PI root system are visible; in preserved
portion of LP1 alveolus, there is a deep anterior groove
and a shallower posterior one. M2 is preserved on the R
but damaged posteriorly; its pulp cavity is huge and the
roots bifircate well below neck. Crown fairly heavily
worn, but enamel is only slightly perforated (on proto-
cone). Paracone was quite large, metacone quite com-
pressed m/d; base of protocone extends into center of
tooth, almost eliminating trigon basin. Preprotocrista
very thick; goes around paracone. Thick postprotocrista
went to base of metacone. Hypocone hardly distin-
guished at base from protocone. Very thick crest courses
from hypocone around to metacone, encircling a very
deep, distinct talon basin. Slight lingual slope to tooth.
Six isolated teeth, in various states of preservation,
also associated with 3733, and bear the same number.
Possible LM1 or M2 (identified as RM1): Broken
crown missing roots as well as much of lingual surface
and region of hypoconulid, which would have been
buccally placed. Tooth moderately worn; relatively short
m/d and broad b/l; enamel not notably thick. Meta-
conid delineated by deep grooves. Buccal slope very
pronounced; occlusal area constricted compared to base
of crown. LM1 (or M2): Crown only, buccally damaged,
very worn on protocone and hypocone, exposing den-
tine. Deep grooves delineating either side of metacone.
M2 not good match for preserved RM2 in KNM-ER
3733 cranium. Very reduced hypocone, not squared off
lingually, has deep sukus-like talon basin and a deep
groove delineating distal side of paracone. Protocone
worn through to dentine. LP2: Crown only, but had
two root canals. Fairly extensive posterior fovea with
some enamel wrinkling; anterior fovea less developed
but also wrinkled. Paracone and metacone worn flat; no
accessory styles. FW Much bulkier than LP2; anterior
fovea damaged but would have been compartmental-
ized. Posterior fovea larger than anterior; longer m/d
but less wide b/l than in RP2 just described. Enamel
wrinkled. W2: Crown, missing lingual hale what re-
mains seems comparable to LP2 just described.KNM-ER 3734. Partial L mandibular corpus with
C-M2 and small piece of M3. All teeth very worn,
narrow, and tiny. Corpus largely featureless. Root of
ramus suggests it would have hidden only a small part
of M3 in side view. Relatively large mental foramen
lies under P2. C crown very small and low; distal
slope much longer than mesial. P1 and 2 bear small
metaconids and protoconids, small anterior fovea, and
elongate heel. Molars worn rather flat; must have had
hypoconulids.Probably Nonhominid
KNM-ER 1590. Many small cranial vault pieces,
reassembled into larger pieces, notably parietals
including coronal and sagittal sutures. Also several
isolated teeth, not all from same individual.