1
Thumbs Up |
Received: 52,720 Given: 43,625 |
Thumbs Up |
Received: 6,880 Given: 7,415 |
They're probably swarthier than Anatolian Turks, but they aren't really swarthy as a whole. Its well known they're darker than all European ethnic groups so its not like they get whitewashed here. I never heard them being called "blonde Mongols". Maybe that title is given to Siberian or Volga Turks.
Thumbs Up |
Received: 52,720 Given: 43,625 |
Thumbs Up |
Received: 239 Given: 117 |
--------------------------
Last edited by Massagetae; 03-18-2018 at 10:11 PM.
Thumbs Up |
Received: 8,898 Given: 2,957 |
What needs to be understood is that Central Asia was ethnically very mixed since prehistory, and there is no consensus on what original Turks looked like. All modern Turks have very diverse genetics and Y-DNA. What could be said is that those who were in the north were more northern-shifted, those in south were southern-shifted. "Blonde mongoloids" is not entirely false. Oghurics, Oghuz and Kipchaks had genetic affinity with Steppe people and were more northern shifted than Anatolians, had higher Baltic and North Atlantic.
Thumbs Up |
Received: 239 Given: 117 |
------------------------
Last edited by Massagetae; 03-18-2018 at 10:11 PM.
Thumbs Up |
Received: 52,720 Given: 43,625 |
Thumbs Up |
Received: 4,273 Given: 1,063 |
Central Asia is whitewashed speically Tajikistan and Uzbekistan , many look Nepali
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks