probably they were never so prominent as in the famous Neanderthal calvaria. The frontals are fairly full, and the forehead therefore only moderately receding. The highest point of the skull is in the fore part of the parietal region. The temporal ridge is not strongly marked, but extends abnormally high up on the side of the skull. The right parietal is somewhat inflated at its anterior and lower part, and this inflation is continued on to the adjoining lower part of the frontal, causing a prominent stephanic region. Towards its hinder part likewise the parietal is prominent. The occipital bone forms a well-marked boss or probole at the back of the skull, its upper part being directed well forward as well as upward ; and this portion, together with the median and hinder ends of the parietals, forms a distinctly flattened area."
Its dimensions, so far as could be determined by measurements, are thus given in millimetres : circumference, 540 ; length, 205; breadth, 130(?); height, 137(?); cephalic index, 64; from which it will be seen that this skull is extremely dolichocephalic, indeed more so than that of Neanderthal or those of Spy.
Dr Garson summed up the special characters of the skeleton as follows :— the short stature, the very dolichocephalic skull, the prominent glabella and superciliary ridges, and the well-marked ridges of the skull generally, the absence of prominence of the chin, and the large size of the last molar tooth, which was as large as, if not larger than, the first molar. The large size of the head of the femur was also peculiar.
Under these circumstances it is manifest that no important deductions can be founded on the anatomical characters of the Galley Hill skull beyond the fact that, like the other well- attested Quaternary skulls, it is dolichocephalic, and shows similar peculiarities both as regards the receding forehead and the angular prominence of the occiput. It is a more highly developed skull than the more recently discovered specimens of the Neanderthal-Spy race, such as those of Chapelle-aux-Saints, Moustier, Krapina, Quina, etc. But if any cranial expansion is to be allowed for mental development during the Palæolithic period, which lasted for incalculable ages, such differences are to be expected in fossil skulls. The Galley Hill skull seems to me to have a parallel in that of Brünn (see p. 171) with respect to their osteological characters. The greater prominence in their frontal portion may, therefore, 'be accounted for by their belonging to a later age than most of the recorded examples of the Neanderthal-Spy race.
