Replacement Model Vs. Multiregional Model

1682 Words7 Pages
Replacement Model vs. Multiregional Model Approximately 195,000 to 300,000 years ago anatomically modern humans evolved from premoderns, we know this to be true but what happened to the premoderns? We know out of Africa anatomically modern humans left Africa to graze and hunt other places. But what happened to those people who they came in contact with? Why did one species push another to edge of extinction? Paleoanthropologists as well as anthropologist have their own individual view of the evolution of the anatomically modern human being. Some paleoanthropologist as well as anthropologist bases their assumptions on the idea that the evolution of the anatomically modern human occurred in just one place, Africa. This model is known as the replacement model. While this is just one theory, a competing theory called the multiregional model. According to author Kenneth Feder, he asserts that “the evolution of modern human being was a geographically broad process, not an event restricted to single region.” In this paper I will examine the two models and give evidence of why the replacement model is a more proficient model to accept as the basis for the evolution of the anatomically modern humans. The replacement model states that from Africa premodern humans evolved into to Homo Sapiens and spread from Africa all the way to Europe and Asia about 100,000 to 200,000 years ago. From modern human migrations out of Africa premodern human beings (Neanderthals) were replaced by a more intelligent and advanced population of anatomically modern human beings. Replacement model asserts that premoderns couldn’t compete with Homo Sapiens, so slowly but surely premoderns became extinct due to the shortage of resources being taken by the more developed Homo Sapiens. Feder suggests that for a time Homo Erectus and Homo Sapiens lived in the same regions as one another but because Homo
Open Document