Systematic methodology	Systematic ethnology		Systematic anthropology	Systematic linguistics	Population geogenetics			Systematic poetics		Systematic fokloristics
Reformatorium	Prehistoric tribes		Prehistoric races	Prehistoric languages	Population ethnogenetics			Literary genres		Prehistoric folklore
Racial taxonomy Ethnical taxonomy	Europids Nordids	Indids Littoralids		Caucasoids Elamitoids	Negrids Melanids		Tungids Pelasgids	Cimbroids Turanids	Ugro-Scythids Uralo-Sarmatids		Lappids Sinids
Spain France	Italy Benelux	Britain Celts		Scandinavia	Germany		Balts Slavs	Greece	Anatolia
The Paragenetic Model of Human Evolution from Hominids 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

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