Central Asians are swarthy

**Human10101** · 01-20-2022, 11:00 AM

Originally Posted by Kyp

No they don't look like Bashkir. Neither Bashkirs nor Turkmens are perfect fit for medieval turks.

Many Turkmens CAN look like Bashkirs but many Bashkirs look like Turkmens too (vice versa). I'd say Medieval Turks northeast of the Aral sea probably looked intermediate between Bashkirs and Turkmens.

Bashkirs have Uralic admix which makes them lighter. Turkmens actually dont have that much South Asian admix according to a recent study. They were identified as one of two groups in the region that lack additional influx of an Indus Valley Population along with Yagnobi Tajiks who formed an exception among the Tajiks in this regard.

Also Turkmens are not mixed with Mongolians.

Can you link this study?

**Kyp** · 01-20-2022, 11:17 AM

Originally Posted by Human10101

Can you link this study?

Sure. If you ignore the "turkmens are turkified Iranians" crap there is actually some good information in it:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-04144-4

**Zoro** · 01-20-2022, 11:41 AM

Here are the main differences I’ve seen between Turkmen and Bashkirs using IBS and lower level IBD (not as good as Beagle ):

1- Bashkir are high up the Turkmen list but the reverse is not true meaning Turkmen are more of an “outlier” Turkic. So what causes this?
2- Bashkir share much more with Uralics. Mansi and Komi very high up the Bashkir list.
3- Iranics such as Kurds and Azeris very high up the Turkmen list meaning Turkmen have very high Iran-Chl and other W. Asian types of admixtures compared to Bashkir. This causes Iranics to look more Turkmen than Bashkir
4- Mongols are quite a bit lower down on Turkmen than Bashkir list. This is due to these more “exotic” Iranic components of ancestry Turkmen have that Bashkirs and other Turkics don’t have as much of.

Highest mixing between Turkic hordes from the east and Iranics occured close to Iran hence Turkmen were born

**Zoro** · 01-20-2022, 12:03 PM

I’ve seen this before where a population is high up some population’s list but the reverse is not true. Actually this gives excellent clues to the history of the population.

For ex African Americans (AA). AAs are low on the list of IBS for both Europeans and Africans but when we look at the list for AAs W. Europeans and W.Africans are high on the list. On a PCA AAs are far from both Africans and Europeans but for AAs even they’re far W. Europeans and W. Africans are closest to them.

Same situation Turkmen and Bashkir. If you can imagine islands. Let’s say Austealia is Iranics and Antarctica is Mongols. In this case the far islands midway between Antarctica and Australia would be the outliers who have 50% Iranic and 50% Mongol. The high percentage of both Mongol and Iranic causes them to be so far from both continents

**Avicenna** · 01-20-2022, 02:40 PM

Originally Posted by Hektor12

There are reasons.

>They were mixed with Irano-Afghans and Mongolians after we moved to west. So unfortunately higher south and southeast asian components.
>Their lifestyle is mostly semi-nomadic, they spend a lot of time under sun which makes them ultra-tanned.
>They like dark pigmentation more (: This is funny but in some regions they "like" unibrows and even join their eyebrows if needed. This might be a factor motivating them to look darker imo.

Originally they should look Bashkir-like and indeed many do.

I think it's mainly due to a nomadic lifestyle . These are afghan Uzbeks living in Turkey and their skin tone don't look different from Anatolian Turks

**Tellmewhy** · 01-20-2022, 03:06 PM

In fact, East Asian component of Eurogenes K13 is also a very southern shifted component since it peaks in China-Vietnam border, which is in a pretty southern shifted locations of Northern Hemisphere.