Recent content by Peter

I find this unlikely for two reasons: 1) I don't know of any case where this happened, and the Norse seem like an unlikely candidate to be the first. 2) I would suspect there would be a cultural preference for marrying their own. After all, why not marry the second-daughter? Of course there...

Well, I agree. I do however think they would settle the parts of North America friendly to their form of agriculture. They would probable be way slower though then historical settlers to adopt maize-growing and any other (?) native crop, lacking the kind institutions that would facilitate those...

What if the Danube basin (conquered by Charlemagne) stays ruled by Germans rather then Magyars, and then subsequently germanises rather then magyarises (similar to Germany east of the Oder). What would the results be? Mega-Austria? German domination of the Balkans?

With their toolkit and the magic of exponential growth the Vinlanders would conquer North America in just a few centuries, given that they intitally managed to establish a settlement large enough to be self-sufficient in food-production and is large enough for them to have all the know-how (i.e...

Lol @ people comparing the CSA with Congo. Its a country full of Anglo-Saxons. Of course it will be rich. Or the Anglo-Saxons will be, at any rate. Like today. Geography doesn't mean shit. It's the people that makes a country, whether in Rhodesia, Scotland or Australia.

lolllolzozl

Yes, but most people, even on this site, lazily (including the person accusing Hitler of being lazy) prefers war-time caricature then actual historical study. Yes, of course Hitler was a humourless, unintelligent, lazy, mad, un-charismatic, short, socially retarded, corrupt, ridiculous...

Indeed, if contact with Iceland isn't cut off this process would be even faster. At this point Iceland is still something of a frontier country and as soon as a Vinland colony has been properly established thousands of Icelanders are likely to set sail (with boats made from Vinland timber)...

The Icelandic age of settlement lasted roughly 50 years. By the end of that period the population is estimated to be 60 000. http://www.hurstwic.org/history/articles/daily_living/text/Demographics.htm The actual number of migrants though are estimated at only 15 000-20 000. This strongly...

Btw there was never more then 10 000-15 000 Iroquois. So speaking of densely populated is hardly correct.

Iceland was founded by people escaping Christianity. Around the same time that the Vinland settlement was attempted the Icelandic pagans, under Norwegian pressure, finally accepted White Christ, as he was called, but only grudgingly. Have them fight instead, defeating their Christian...

And shields and spears and swords, with horses and shield walls and other formations.

The Vikings weren't their peasants descendants of later centuries. They were trained since childhood in the use of arms. A free man were required to own weapons. That's what separates him from a slave. From wiki: These arms were also indicative of a Viking's social status. As war was the most...

Besides the Vinlanders would most likely reform their agricultural techniques somewhat in response to new conditions. The Scandinavian tradition of having your land divided into a dozens of small plots for fairness sake doesn't make any sense when you leave the old, over-populated village...

That I'm sure Vinlanders wouldn't mind a battle, and were quite good at it. Yes, tech improved, but compared to the natives they are still so very far ahead. Its like the 1950s vs the 1850s instead of the 2000s vs the 1850s.