Toan Le

April 25, 2015

Anth 1020- 007
Professor: Teresa Potter

Research Paper- Modern Human Origin

Where did modern humans come from? Who did we evolve from?
These are the most complex and interesting questions that human kind has asked.
From many researches, fossil records and genetic evidence, naturally there have been
many theories postulated in an attempt to answer these questions; but there are only two
of them seem like possible: Regional Continuity theory and the Replacement theory.
In each theory, there has different thoughts of human origin deduced from evidences
found. So in this research paper, I will discuss and describe more about each theory with
the evidences that it had (fossil records, DNA sequences and archaeological sites) to see
which theory model is more possibility.
Before analyzing these two theories, we have to know what these theories say
first. The Regional Continuity model, also called the Multi-regional Hypothesis, was
developed by Milford Wolpoff. Frankz Weidenreich, however, was the first one who
postulated the idea of the model in 1940 when he found out the considerable similarities
between the archaic Peking man fossils and the modern humans in China. Then Wolpoff
along with Alan Thorne developed the Weidenreichs idea. The model says that
anatomically modern humans evolved from pre-moderns in multiple areas
simultaneously. This was caused by migration and intermarriage between groups that
made gene flow keep pre-modern humans as a single and variable species with regional

traits. While the Stringers and Andrewss Replacement theory, in contrast, says that
modern humans evolved from 1 speciation, H. Heidelbergensis, in Africa. Then they
spread out of Africa to explore, colonize and replace pre-modern human by killing or outcompeting.
To convince and support their ideals, both of the models gave us value evidences
from fossil records, DNA sequences and archaeological sites. With the Regional
Continuity model, there has lack of supporting evidences. They think the oldest modern
human fossil records were found in many regions in the world and there were no modern
or pre-modern chronological overlap. They used fossil records found in Australia and
Asia as main evidence for such regional continuity. They showed the similarities of these
fossils with modern human structure such as the facial structure found in Dali cranium,
China or the cheekbones. But their fossil records are not strong enough to satisfy
scientists and anthropologists. For a proponent of the multi-regionalist theory, this
indicates an intermediate stage between earlier archaic hominids (i.e. Homo erectus found
at sites such as Lantian, China) and later Holocene populations living after 10,000 BC.
However, the conditions of these fossil materials were poorly preserved and, in the case
of the Dali cranium, highly mutilated through post-depositional weight loading. There are
also no fossil materials dating from between 100,000 and 30,000 BC this gap
undermines the multi-regional hypothesis as it indicates a lack of any modern Chinese
anatomical features from before 100,000 years ago (Edwards, 2012). They also gave
some genetic evidences when they found out DNA from modern humans are similar to
pre-modern DNA. Wolpoff explained Gene flow can be likened to that of individuals
swimming in a pool although they maintain their individuality, they are often

influenced by the spreading ripples made by the activity of other people in the water.
This, they suggest, is the equivalent of genes flowing between populations. (Wolpoff,
1992).
In the contrast, the Replacement theory has stronger and more satisfied
evidences. There are numerous assumptions that are endorsed by the Out of Africa 2
model, the first of which predicts that the earliest fossils of Homo sapiens sapiens will
only be found in Africa along with any transitional fossils, marking the evolutionary
process of these modern humans. Such fossils will not be found outside this area.
Secondly, this model suggests that modern-day human populations may not necessarily
share lineages or links with the earlier populations that inhabited the same region. This
idea stems from the notion that the new populations of modern humans that inhabit an
area will replace any archaic Homo species that occupy this region, thus establishing a
new lineage of descent (Pettitt, P 2009c:128-129). Evidence in support of these ideas
exists through multiple sources, showing the clear superiority of this theory in contrast
with the multi-regionalist model. The model believes the oldest fossils of Homo sapiens
sapiens are only in Africa along with other transitional fossils: the Omo Kibishs skull has
age at 195,000 year ago. Following this, the replacement theory claims that modern
humans evolved in Africa from the ancestral hominids, then travelled out of Africa. This
model seems possible with many strong evidences. A 36,000-year-old skull from South
Africa provides the first fossil evidence that modern humans left Africa 70,000 to 50,000
years ago to colonize Eurasia, new research suggests. (National Geographic News,
2007). Also the model states differently from the Regional Continuity model that there
had modern and pre-modern chronological overlap. Furthermore, with the genetic

evidences, DNA from modern humans was different from pre-modern DNA. In the
following decade, more genetic data both from recent human people and Neanderthal
fossils were collected supporting the Recent African Origin model. The idea gained
momentum and with it the view that when modern humans began to leave Africa
around 60,000 years ago they largely or entirely replaced other archaic human species
outside the continent. (Natural History Museum).
In conclusion, even though both of these models have completely different
thoughts and ideas about the modern human origin, all these two can be possible with
their evidences in fossil records and genetic evidences. However, in my opinion, if I put
these models on weighbridge, I think the Replacement theory is more possibility than
the Regional Continuity theory. Basing on stronger, more detail evidence, the
Replacement theory makes me more satisfied. This is also most of scientists and
anthropologists thought. However, everything can happen, thats the reason why we have
to keep research and study to find out more evidence to find the true.

Work cited
Wolpoff, M and Thorne, A (1992). The Multi-Regional Evolution of Humans Scientific
American, 28-33
Edward, Shophie (2012) Analysis of Two Competing Theories on the Origin of Homo
sapiens sapiens: Multiregional Theory vs. the Out of Africa 2 Model. Retrieved from
http://anthrojournal.com/issue/october-2011/article/analysis-of-two-competing-theorieson-the-origin-of-homo-sapiens-sapiens-multiregional-theory-vs-the-out-of-africa-2model
National Geographic News (2007) Skull Is First Fossil Proof of Human Migration
Theory, Study Says
Natural History Museum. Where Did Modern Humans Come from? Retrieved from
http://www.nhm.ac.uk/print-version/?p=/nature-online/life/human-origins/modernhuman-evolution/where/index.html