SH Archive New England in the Crimea

SH.org OP Username
inquisitor
SH.org OP Date
2019-04-24 01:09:16
SH.org Reaction Score
11
SH.org Reply Count
11

Archive

Old SH Archive
Joined
Sep 8, 2020
Messages
17,737
Reaction score
3,164


Disclaimer: if this is in the wrong section, please feel free to advise me otherwise.

Before there was New England in America, there was New England in the Crimea. After William of Normandy conquered England in 1066, many Saxon nobles fled east. The English landed in Constantinople and were granted land by Emperor Alexios Komnenos on the northeastern shore of the Black Sea, in the Crimea. There is apparently some scholarly support for this story.

Side note: the Crimean peninsula is often called Chersonesus (lit. peninsula) or Chersonesus Taurica (a truncation of Tartaria or maybe Tartauria?) among the Greeks, and interestingly enough New England in America has its own Chersonese - the Delmarva or Delaware peninsula. A document in the name of King Charles II refers to the Delaware peninsula as the 'Chersonese'. Check out the map above, the orientation of placenames seems a little funky. The topography looks consistent with the modern Crimea, but the placenames are situated in a way that would make it difficult to read upright.

Do any of our English or British forum members know about this? Is it taught in schools or is it a complete unknown? Anyone here from Crimea know about this legend? Something about this story doesn't seem to add up, as interesting as it is.

From Wikipedia,
New England (medieval)
It would seem that most of the evidence for the Crimean England is based on toponymy in the region, where places appear to have been given names that evoke London and the Saxons.
Note: This OP was recovered from the Wayback Archive.
Note: Archived Sh.org replies to this OP are included in this thread.
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: KorbenDallas
Date: 2019-04-24 04:08:23
Reaction Score: 0
Very interesting. We sure do have some weird maps out there like this New England one, or California located in the North of North America, or Chersonesus located in South America. Today Chersonesus is located in Crimea, just like this New England was back then.

never mind the Atlantis
atlantis_1.jpg

California
Cali.jpg
Hemisphaerium Ab Aequinoctiali Linea Ad Circulum Poli Arctici #1
Hemisphaerium Ab Aequinoctiali Linea Ad Circulum Poli Arctici #2
Aditionally, Greek Philippopolis was located in the south of South America.
philippopolis.jpg
And of course we have Cairo vs Babylon, and the Jerusalem map saga.
kd_separator.jpg
It does look like some major map shuffling was done at some point. New England in Russia/Ukraine is definitely bizarre, no mater what explanation they provided.
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: tupperaware
Date: 2019-04-24 05:13:07
Reaction Score: 1
CHRIST WAS BORN IN THE CRIMEA. THERE BLESSED VIRGIN DIED
Fomenko has interesting things to say about strange Christian happenings in the Crimea starting around when the Saxon nobles fled deep East.

CHRIST WAS BORN IN THE CRIMEA. THERE BLESSED VIRGIN DIED

А.Т.Fomenko, G.V.Nosovskiy " CHRIST WAS BORN IN THE CRIMEA. THE BLESSED VIRGIN DIED THERE TOO The Holy Grail is a Cradle of Jesus, which was kept in Crimea for a long time. King Arthur is a reflection of Christ and Dmitry Donskoy"

Chufut-Kale - Wikipedia

Jew or Not Jew: Crimean Karaites
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Red Bird
Date: 2019-04-24 14:07:34
Reaction Score: 0
Khazars, pseudo Hebrews and real time Jews. The Kabbalah loves to claim davidic bloodlines leading to Jesus. Most modern Jewish’ dna goes back to khazars and is not Semitic. In fact very little true Hebrew dna has been found at all. Some believe someday they’re going to try to pull out the Antichrist from this ‘David/Jesus’ line.
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: jd755
Date: 2019-04-24 15:26:43
Reaction Score: 0
Map oddities aside why would 'fleeing Saxons' (not in the least bit convinced there were any Saxons on this island nor Romans and Normans for that matter) why would they leg it to the Black Sea area and not go back to Saxony?
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: inquisitor
Date: 2019-04-24 22:47:42
Reaction Score: 1
I'm not sure, but the explanation for Saxons in the Crimea goes like this - when William of Normandy conquered England, a small group of disenfranchised Saxon nobles went to Constantinople in 1071 but the chief noble, Seward, was imprisoned around that time so it has been proposed that they went to Constantinople a little later with Edgar the Etheling in 1091, when Emperor Alexios sought military assistance. As a reward, he [Alexios] granted the nobles land on the northern shore of the Black Sea and the rest, as they say, is history.

This was my first thought. When I was looking for clues about some of the legends in my family, whoever was left behind in Europe claimed my family were exiled and went to Cherson (the city), assuming it to be in the east while in fact the opposite had happened - they fled under threat of death to Pennsylvania in 1696 where lo and behold, they settled in another city (Philadelphia) resting near the so-called 'Chersonese' - the Delaware peninsula. Both cities are relatively inland from their respective peninsulae. I'm thinking the 'New England' in the Crimea is possibly just a phantom of New England in the Americas. Or maybe the Crimean New England was indeed the original, and the geography was transmigrated over to the New World similar to the proposal by Felice Vinci that Trojan myths came from the Baltic and their placenames were transferred to the Mediterranean?

There are several other Chersoneses around the world including S. America (as you mentioned) and also the Aurea Chersonesus, which is known today as the Malay peninsula.
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: maxresde
Date: 2019-04-25 02:22:00
Reaction Score: 1
I read several articles about this. I thought they were linked from stolenhistory? Maybe in another thread somewhere.

As I recall these were, as it says above, a pretty big group of people from the losing side of the Norman invasion of England. They were supposed to have kind of wandered around looking for somewhere to go when they left England. As I recall, they heard that the Byzantine Empire was having some trouble, so they thought they would go get in on it.

They showed up I guess more or less unannounced and helped out the Byzantines.

In return the Emperor told them they could have whatever land they could get ahold of up around the Crimea. It had been part of the Byzantine Empire, but had kind of slipped out of their control.

The articles I read said that this Saxon polity in the Crimea persisted at least for several centuries as some kind of dependency of the Byzantine Empire, and the men there were accustomed to to serve in the military of the empire as kind of their own ethnicity or nationality.

I think ultimately they were supposed to have been absorbed into the larger local population.
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: jd755
Date: 2019-04-25 05:55:39
Reaction Score: 0
Thanks to the both of you. Never heard or rather read of these wandering defeated Saxons being so well received by a Byzantium Empire but not that that in itself holds any significance lots of the tales of the past remain unread.

Still the question persists. The Saxons on the island of Britain, according to stories and history's recorded retold in books, were not in the least bit isolated from Saxony. It makes no sense, to me, to stay and fight the invaders, get defeated, lose everything aka land and power then set off in some gypsy caravan type affair wandering the continent after a short sea journey assuming the victorious Normans gave them safe passage across the channel or a long sea journey if they didn't, where did they get the wherewithall to pay for their passage is an even more fundamental questions, assuming of course the tales of commerce are true.

A much reduced, defeated, dispossessed band of Saxon nobility wandering and becoming hero's in a land, far far away as the explanaton for Christianity in the Black sea area whilst most of the surviving Saxons of all classes stayed on the now Norman controlled island has a ring of untruth about it. When Christianity is mentioned back then its a euphemism for Roman Catholicism, as far as I can tell.
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: inquisitor
Date: 2019-04-25 07:35:26
Reaction Score: 0
I agree. I always understood the Saxons to have remained in England even after the Normans established their regime. I'm not sure about the nuances, but from what I can tell these disenfranchised nobles may have only represented a small minority of English nobles who objected to Norman rule; they would have joined the Varangian Guard. As for returning to Saxony, that's a good question. I am not familiar with the history of continental Saxony around this time to have a formulated hypothesis. If these disenfranchised nobles did exist and did migrate, why not simply go further north away from the power center in the south of England? I also cannot find much detail about what precise trouble occurred that Alexius would seek out the assistance of the Saxons (or Varangians).

I don't think these Saxons would have had anything to do with Christianity in the Crimea (apart from themselves being Christians), as the area would have already been converted in the 980s per official history by the Rus. That region would have been Christianized before the East-West schism and these Saxons would have arrived after the fact. I am skeptical that the East-West schism happened in 1054 and not later, but nonetheless it does beg the question of whether or not these would have been Catholics or Orthodox, as the East-West schism would have already happened by the time they arrive in the east, coming from the west they would have been Catholic in an Orthodox land; meaning they would either stick out like a sore thumb or convert to Orthodoxy. Alternatively, if the East-West schism happened much later then it would have been a non-existent issue.

I might dig a little further into this, to see if there might be some genetic evidence for this migration. From what I thought, the predominating population in the Crimea consisted of Rus, [Pontic] Greeks, [Crimean] Goths, Armenians, and some smaller ethnic groups. Nothing about Saxons or Anglo-Saxons aside from this little side-story that has been left to pick up dust in the corner of history.
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: codis
Date: 2019-04-25 07:58:04
Reaction Score: 1
Just to note it here - I fully agree. Being able to express this view is one of the reasons I enjoy being on this forum. In must other places, you immediately reap a torrent of "antisemite !" NPC slurs. And better never mention Palestinians are Semites ...
But, being embedded in official history, I'm not sure of the Khazar story line either.
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: Red Bird
Date: 2019-04-25 14:05:35
Reaction Score: 0
Ha. Right! I wrote this about dna proof, then thought, if dna is real. Can’t find right now the weird story of the ‘founders’.
 
Note: This post was recovered from the Sh.org archive.
Username: maxresde
Date: 2019-04-25 21:06:58
Reaction Score: 0
I don't think this should be very suprising or controversial. It seems pretty usual that some of the losing side will often move somewhere else. Like after the American revolution a lot of loyalists moved to Canada or other British possessions. After the Civil War there was a group of Confederates that moved to Brazil rather than live under the Northern government. Their descendants are still down there, basically absorbed into Brazilian society by now, just like these Saxons probably were. Same thing, the losers in the Chinese civil war moved to Taiwan and took over, forming a kind of ruling class over the local population. As to why they wouldn't go back to Saxony, it is not like when they left everyone kind of held their place in case they might decide to come back in a couple hundred years. There was probably no room for them all to turn back up all of a sudden.
 
Vikings had travelled for centuries to Byzantine. Their stories as preferred Bodyguards earning gold in a Christian land would be attractive.
DNA? difficult with over 1.5 million Europeans taken to build an Islamic Slave Army that eventually conquered Byzantine itself. WIlliam left no options for Anglo Saxons to move North. He decimated Yorkshire and Northumberland and met the Scots at Falkirk where his overwhelming force led to a bloodless coup. Hence most of the Clan names in Scotland are derived from Normans. I doubt that William would have allowed such a large force to exist within his kingdom and they probably did try their luck elsewhere before deciding to make their long journey. (No evidence whatsoever but William was merciless against any English opposition). Thanks to all for your learned contributions.
 
Tips
Tips
Please respect our Posting Rules.
Back
Top