|
|
||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||
|
Italy Benelux |
|
|
||||||||||
|
Evolutionary Paragenesis
as a Middle Way between Anthropological Monogenesis and Polynenesis Clickable terms are red on the yellow or green background |
|
|||||||||||
|
The
Theoretical Foundations of Anthropology, Ethnology and Prehistoric
Studies |
|
|||||||||||
|
The Paragenetic Model of Human Evolution from
Hominids The
Tenets of Evolutionary Paragenesis Evolutionary
Paragenesis as a Middle Way between Anthropological Monogenesis and
Polynenesis
The
Folktale Typology of Prehistoric Races The
Origins of Human Religious Faiths |
Errors in the Traditional
Classification of Races Principles of Systematic
Evolutionary Taxonomy The Phylogenetic
Trees of Human Stocks The Transition
from Hominids to Hominins Systematic Anthropology |
|
||||||||||
Evolutionary Paragenesis as a
|
|
The basic primary prototype of human species was the black ulotrichous
equatorial race, whose primary seat lay in the tropical rainforests of The most urgent theoretical requirement of
prehistoric studies is to abandon the dogmatic Extinction Theory and replace
it by the flexible accounts of Alinei’s Palaeolithic Survival Theory. It
argues that the human past is not forever dead but it continues to survive in
our blood and chromosomes. Inheritance does not jump wildly by mutations from
one genus to another but preserves all previous mutations and engenders new
subordinated varieties as its subclades. It presupposes the principle of racial interfertility2 maintained by the
so-called ring species (German Rassenkreise)3 admitting temporary mixed mating. Such ring species unite
series of early populations, which can primarily interbreed with each other
but later they fail to beget crossbreds. After a longer period of adaptive
speciation and adding new and new specific mutations they cease to be
interfertile races. Such dilemma
befell the genus of Australopithecinae, who acted as an in-between linking open-air hominins with
rain-forest hominids. Either they were pulled down into the local or regional
gene flow between neighbouring
populations or they separated from their mainstream and restored cohabitation
with the backward rainforest species. At first they coexisted as
interbreedable races but millennia of adaptive isolation made them speciate
into a diverse species and genus. Such a model of genetic mating sheds new light
on the beginnings of all hominids and hominins. It means that all binomial
designations in the genus Homo could live together as interbreedable
subspecies or racial varieties, whereas Paranthropinae and Australopithecinae
lost contact and underwent regressive mutations due to return to the
rainforest thicket. Extract from P. Bělíček: The Synthetic Classification of Human Phenotypes and
Varieties Prague 2018, p. 10-12 |
|
Propositions
of Evolutionary Paragenesis Reconstructions of chief human genetic
lineages lead to the following conclusions: (1) All races of
hominins were interbreedable statistic populations that survived in several
parallel genetic lineages and simultaneous tendencies. Their growth was not a
story of unilinear monogenesis but variegated multi-regional paragenesis
in several parallel lines. (2) There was no
single, unique and god’s chosen champion of sapientisation who exterminated
all alternative races of hominins. Its progress had many regional heralds,
leaders and torch-bringers. (3) Homo sapiens was
not a unique progenitor of humankind but a common evolutionary Middle
Palaeolithic stage of all hominins. Its categorial label covered most
contemporary racial varieties. (4) The assumed independent
species of the genus Homo have to be differentiated into parallel
genetic cultivars and successive evolutionary stages. Homo sapiens was
not a type-specific hominin species but an assimilative phase of most (5) Long-range anthropic
markers (racial phenotypes, folk architecture, clothing style, totemistic
cults) demonstrate that there were no extinct races of hominins that fell
victim to the predatory fads of one victorious sapiensator. There were only
regional minorities absorbed by more advanced populations. (6) The evolutionary
processes of hominisation, sapientisation and gracilisation affected all
genetic lineages of hominids and hominins in equal rates but proceeded at
faster pace in cultural centres and at slower speed in peripheral isolation
(in insular colonies, exotic paradises and rainforest thickets). (7) Anthropopithecinae
could pursue two alternative fates. In open-air centres they integrated as a
subvariety of the genus Homo, in rainforest thickets their progressive
evolution lapsed into regressive devolution and converged to integration with lower apes. (8)
Speciation usually terminated progressive evolution and resulted into a phase
of genetic stagnation. (9) The immigrants in the
Levantine centre mostly promoted and accelerated their genetic potential,
while Australian colonists underwent degenerative changes in contact with
isolated local aborigines. (10) What we discuss as the
alleged independent hominins species were actually intermarriageable human
varieties that lost interfertility and became independent species only later
by isolative speciation. (11) The archaeological
complexes of Oldowans, Clactonians, Mousterians, Denisovans and Acheuleans
did not die out but survived in the living racial varieties of
humankind. (12) The monistic philosophy
of anthropological thought teaches to unite all accessible racial, ethnic,
linguistic, religious and archaeological evidence and treat human varieties
in one integrated whole. Extract
from P. Bělíček: The Synthetic Classification of Human Phenotypes and
Varieties Prague 2018, pp.
22-23 |
|
Arguments for Evolutionary
Paragenesis * The black equatorial race was principally
opposed to the Asiatic or Altaic races living in the boreal zone of Eurasia.
The beginnings were probably shaped in the colder temperate regions of South
Africa. Their earliest antecessors Homo rudolfensis, Homo habilis
and Homo heidelbergensis look like hypothetical taxa but they are
embodied in the surviving racial varieties of the lake-dwelling Kafrids of
East Africa and the cattle-breeding nationality of Khoekhoe Khoids. The
latter group is now restrained only to arid regions of Kalahari Desert but
its residual vestiges can be traced up also in the cupolar beehive huts
typical of their clansmen all over the world. * About 500,000 years ago Homo habilis
emerged in Eurasia as a live carrier of the Levalloisan flake-tool culture.
Archaeologists grudge it the status of an autonomous self-contained
archaeological complex but its spread from * Homo denisoviensis
is now classified as a close relative of classic Neanderthals and dubbed also
as Homo
altaiensis (Altai man) or Homo siberiensis ‘Siberian man’. John D. Croft’s model (Map 1) assumes that
they both descended from Homo heidebergensis drifting from * The prehistoric travels of
Altaic races are hard to discern because they buried their dead by exposition
on the scaffolding or by drowning their corpse in deep waters. Their
religious creeds hindered them from interring their bodies by inhumation in
the earth because their souls had to be sent out on a long travel to a faraway underworld called Tartarus. * The Pygmids and
Lappids disappeared from the sight of palaeoanthropologists on account of
different reasons. They buried their dead forefathers by cremation, carried
their burnt ashes in grass-woven bags and scattered them in rainforest
solitude. The only probable migrations of their stock were the Negrito
diaspora about 62,000 BP in Extract from P. Bělíček: The Synthetic Classification of Human Phenotypes and
Varieties Prague 2018, pp. 22-23 |
|
The
Paragenetic Model of Human Evolution from Hominids The paragenetic model of prehistory presupposes
that most hominins and hominids lived in relative interbreeding and their genetic
distances were much nearer than now. What we denote as detached genera and
species were actually interfertile genetic races, strains, lineages, crosses
and hybrids that later lost mutual interfertility owing to isolation in
different hominoid populations. It is not plausible that they developed by
large jumps from one genus to another, they must have maintained and
preserved their genetic pool through progressive evolutionary metamorphoses. Many
categories of genus and species were only generations, so the extant binomial
and trinomial anthropological classification should adopt a special term for
transient generations. All strains underwent parallel processes of
hominisation, gracilisation and sapientisation by means of radical
revolutions and longer stages of conservative inertia. Hominins split off
hominids and hominoids as a special genetic stream competing with alternative
strains of Paranthropines and Australopithecines. Participation in different
population strains caused intraspecial differentiation. In the following
evolutionary series the symbol means digression while the arrow → implies genetic continuity. It does not
mean direct mother-daugher inheritance but a complex statistic process with
many digressions splitting off the dominant mainstream. The following series
are chief statistic mainstreams that suggest that the Palaeolithic Urrassen
had different ancestors but converged to one of predominant Neolithic racial
varieties. Tall robust
dolichocephalous herbivores with marked crista sagittalis Gigantopithecus
(9 mya) → Ouranopithecus (9 mya) (
Gorillas (9 mya)) → Paranthropus aethiopicus
(2.5 mya) ( Paranthropus robustus (2
mya)) → Australopithecus garhi
(2.5 mya) → Australopithecus sediba (1.8 mya) → Homo gautengensis (1.8
mya) → Homo erectus
(1.8 mya) → Oldowans (1.8 mya). Slender
piscivores with tall and leptoprosopic flattish faces: Proconsul africanus (23 mya) → Kenyanthropus platyops (3.5 mya) → Australopithecus afarensis (3.9–2.9 mya) → Homo
habilis (2.1–1.5 mya) → Homo rudolfensis (2–1.5 mya) →
Levalloisians (0.5 mya). Tall
brachycephalous carnivores and big-game hunters with narrow aquiline noses Australopithecus anamensis (4.5 mya) → Laetoli man → Homo heidebergensis →
Homo rhodensis (0.5 mya) ( Saldanha
man) →
Homo neanderthalensis → Mousterians. Shortsized brachycephalous omnivores: Ardipithecus ramidus (4.4
mya) → Ardipithecus kadabba ( Pan
paniscus (Bonobo)) → Australo-pithecus afarensis (3.9 mya) → Homo habilis →
Sanids → Pygmids ( Homo floresiensis) → Sinids. Table 1. The paragenetic model of racial
diversification |
|
||
2 J. D. Peck, A. Janitz, L. B. Craig: Ethnic and racial differences
in the prevalence of infertility. American Society for Reproductive Medicine,
106, 3, 2016, p. 8.
3
Bernhard Rensch: Über
die Bedeutung des Prinzips geographischer Rassenkreise. Berlin 1932.
1 J. Buettner-Janusch: Physical Anthropology: A Perspective.