Discussion: How far could've the Norse gone in the Americas?

[GameBawesome]

As we know, the Norse were great seafarers, sailing from the Baltic to the North Sea, all the way to Greenland. They also made it to Americas, mostly around modern Newfoundland, or as they possibly called it, Vinland. However, this didn't last long, as Norse settlement disappeared, possibly due to conflicts with the Native Americans.

This leaves the alternate historical discussion of what if the Norse was successful in their venture, and a continued Norse presence in the Americas around Newfoundland. or Vinland. However, one thing I want to discuss here, is how FAR could the Norse have gone throughout the Americas? How far could their sailing techniques and sailing technology take them in the New World?

Here is a map of Norse Settlement in the Americas, from @Crazy Boris:

So given their location, how far could the Norse have gone, and where to? Could they sail inland through the St. Larwence River into the Great Lakes? Could they sail down the Eastern Coast? If they did, could they sail to the Caribbean and into the Gulf of Mexico?

 

[tex mex]

As we know, the Norse were great seafarers, sailing from the Baltic to the North Sea, all the way to Greenland. They also made it to Americas, mostly around modern Newfoundland, or as they possibly called it, Vinland. However, this didn't last long, as Norse settlement disappeared, possibly due to conflicts with the Native Americans.

This leaves the alternate historical discussion of what if the Norse was successful in their venture, and a continued Norse presence in the Americas around Newfoundland. or Vinland. However, one thing I want to discuss here, is how FAR could the Norse have gone throughout the Americas? How far could their sailing techniques and sailing technology take them in the New World?

Here is a map of Norse Settlement in the Americas, from @Crazy Boris:
View attachment 766531

So given their location, how far could the Norse have gone, and where to? Could they sail inland through the St. Larwence River into the Great Lakes? Could they sail down the Eastern Coast? If they did, could they sail to the Caribbean and into the Gulf of Mexico?

Mexico.
Peru.
Brazil.
Chile.

 

[Godot]

As we know, the Norse were great seafarers, sailing from the Baltic to the North Sea, all the way to Greenland. They also made it to Americas, mostly around modern Newfoundland, or as they possibly called it, Vinland. However, this didn't last long, as Norse settlement disappeared, possibly due to conflicts with the Native Americans.

This leaves the alternate historical discussion of what if the Norse was successful in their venture, and a continued Norse presence in the Americas around Newfoundland. or Vinland. However, one thing I want to discuss here, is how FAR could the Norse have gone throughout the Americas? How far could their sailing techniques and sailing technology take them in the New World?

Here is a map of Norse Settlement in the Americas, from @Crazy Boris:
View attachment 766531

So given their location, how far could the Norse have gone, and where to? Could they sail inland through the St. Larwence River into the Great Lakes? Could they sail down the Eastern Coast? If they did, could they sail to the Caribbean and into the Gulf of Mexico?

I don't know how far south they'd go, since every mile they go from the north is a mile they go from resupplying.

If we assume that their settlements in Vinland succeed more as compared to OTL, I could imagine them going through the rivers and ending up in the great lakes area, not unlike how they came to settle parts of Ruthenia and Rus.

 

[CHKeeley]

I do wonder if the case for the utility of Norse longships are overstated when it comes to inhabiting the Americas. Over time, if we assume a small Norse settler community with only very isolated trade with Greenland, then most trade connections will be with the Algonquin peoples in the surrounding regions. Norse communities didn't range far and wide because of some innate wanderlust - it exploded in the late 8th century due to very lucrative trade opportunities in the richer southern peripheries of the North Sea as well as for younger sons to make names for themselves and win wealth abroad. If we suppose a relatively simple polity consisting of tens of villages and independent farmsteads linked together by economic and familial ties and ruled by an Althing style system, then there is hardly the population or societal stratification needed for large scale raiding. Or long distance trading for that matter given that there is not much to be found farther down the Atlantic seaboard that could not be obtained at the regional level. The population pressures that gave rise to the "explorers and raiders" thing wouldn't be found in a small Norse foothold in the Americas. At least not for over a century if the population doesn't see constant influx from Scandinavia which most of these scenarios tend to assume won't happen. People usually compare their behavior in Europe to this situation, but its completely different because its different societal structures and extremely low population here. By the time the population begins to solidify, the labor intensive process of constructing the large longships might seem useless in comparison to the comparatively easy-to-construct canoes and small vessels that characterized Algonquin seafaring technique at the time. These local techniques be adapted slowly, at first perhaps only used for bands of hunters or a small trading expedition, but over time they could make increasingly be adopted over the traditional heavy ocean-faring vessels. Especially as efficient for inland travel because of the extremely shallow draft of the canoes and the innumerable small streams and rivers across North America which would enable faster travel. The initial decades of the settlements would be the best time to get these ranging expeditions as the Norse attempt to get their bearings on the continent, establish who has what and lives where, and generally live in the way their fathers did. At the same time though, these are the most critical years for warrior age males to be available at the homesteads and villages. The potential for raids from the Beothuk, Mikmaq, or others peoples is real and with such a low population it would literally mean destruction. I can't imagine the few military aged men available just deciding to galavant around for months at a time during this critical period. It's one of the same reasons that the solitary frontiersman was not often a character found in early English settler colonies - that came later when the polity was established, manpower was in excess, and there was not enough to go around. Anyways, as time goes (generations, I mean) then this behavior becomes more likely but by this time I think the adoption of indigenous naval technology for everyday use becomes more likely.

What I'm trying to say with all this is that these Norse settler communities won't be frozen time capsules of 10th century vikings - they will adapt to their new conditions and adopt the most sensible forms of native material culture. The small canoe styles make more sense for the context in which these Norsemen will find themselves. While cool as shit, it doesn't make much sense for them to just range all the way down to the Gulf or the Caribbean. To do what? Strike out thousands of miles by sea for just the potential of finding neat stuff to buy? Norse traders and later raiders made these trips in Europe because they were plugged in to Roman trade goods since the height of the empire and generally had interactions with neighboring European societies and their oceanic trade. On the American continent, they are quite literally in a new world and their immediate trade and diplomatic needs would be satisfied by the polities of the Gulf of St Lawrence and I would imagine over time they would adapt to indigenous forms of travel.

 

[omnidirectional]

I always wanted to do something with the idea of a few hybrid Norse-Skraeling kingdoms around the Great Lakes which they call the Five Seas and New England. Eventually their excess second sons and warriors do mercenary fighting in Mesoamerica and overthrow some Mayan city states' rulers but go native as local rulers.

 

[Lalli]

Mexico.
Peru.
Brazil.
Chile.

I doubt that they could reach even Rio Grande. Perhaps Hudson River and with some luck Great Lakes. It should remembered that Vikings had not great numbers of settlers and they needed some supplies. Futhermore natives might had caused some problems.

 

[Arkenfolm]

Not much further south than the lower St. Lawrence and Cape Cod, since those are the areas with the nearest dense agricultural populations in one area who the Norse could buy or sell grain and purchase all the furs, slaves, etc. they'd ever need. Even if they'd explore further, their presence would be nothing more than a curiosity of little impact because the trade goods don't change. Same reason the Norse never went further into modern Russia than the area of modern Arkhangelsk.

 

[chornedsnorkack]

I don't know how far south they'd go, since every mile they go from the north is a mile they go from resupplying.

Resupplying with what?
Food and wood they can resupply along the way.
The one thing that they need to stop and settle for resupplying - but CAN resupply if they do - is iron.

If we assume that their settlements in Vinland succeed more as compared to OTL, I could imagine them going through the rivers and ending up in the great lakes area, not unlike how they came to settle parts of Ruthenia and Rus.

But in Rus, they went on to move on from Ladoga and Ilmen... all the way across Europe and Black Sea to Constantinople. Then why cannot the Varyags also move across North America and Mexican Gulf to Tollan and Chichen Itza?

By the time the population begins to solidify, the labor intensive process of constructing the large longships might seem useless in comparison to the comparatively easy-to-construct canoes and small vessels that characterized Algonquin seafaring technique at the time. These local techniques be adapted slowly, at first perhaps only used for bands of hunters or a small trading expedition, but over time they could make increasingly be adopted over the traditional heavy ocean-faring vessels. Especially as efficient for inland travel because of the extremely shallow draft of the canoes and the innumerable small streams and rivers across North America which would enable faster travel.

The Norse already have small shallow draught boats. They have no need to adapt native technologies. What the natives don´t have is sailing ships, and this gives the Norse much bigger range on sea and big lakes.

Not much further south than the lower St. Lawrence and Cape Cod, since those are the areas with the nearest dense agricultural populations in one area who the Norse could buy or sell grain and purchase all the furs, slaves, etc. they'd ever need. Even if they'd explore further, their presence would be nothing more than a curiosity of little impact because the trade goods don't change. Same reason the Norse never went further into modern Russia than the area of modern Arkhangelsk.

But east of Arkhangelsk was sparsely settled area. South of Ladoga was not.
The Norse are bringing a valuable and unknown trade product: iron. And they have sailing ships. They might trade at Cape Cod, and let the natives forward some iron in chainwise trade... but since the Norse have deepwater sailing ships the natives do not have, it will be much more efficient for the Norse to just sail around Cape Cod and trade beyond as well.

 

[Arkenfolm]

The Norse are bringing a valuable and unknown trade product: iron. And they have sailing ships. They might trade at Cape Cod, and let the natives forward some iron in chainwise trade... but since the Norse have deepwater sailing ships the natives do not have, it will be much more efficient for the Norse to just sail around Cape Cod and trade beyond as well.

The natives have nothing to pay the Norse for their iron except for furs/hides, food (game, grain), and slaves. They have very limited quantities of manufactured goods of any sort, and even the copper artifacts produced by the Mississippians (which IIRC were pretty rare east of the Great Lakes and Appalachia) wouldn't be valuable enough to justify frequent expeditions. It would be a long and difficult journey for minimal gain.

 

[Gloss]

Not much further south than the lower St. Lawrence and Cape Cod, since those are the areas with the nearest dense agricultural populations in one area who the Norse could buy or sell grain and purchase all the furs, slaves, etc. they'd ever need. Even if they'd explore further, their presence would be nothing more than a curiosity of little impact because the trade goods don't change. Same reason the Norse never went further into modern Russia than the area of modern Arkhangelsk.

But that only applies initially, if the Norse establish themselves their populations are going to quickly rise and become larger than their immediate neighbours in the matter of 2 centuries at most.
It's very different from Russia whose Slavic population were higher, denser and more organized already.

 

[arctic warrior]

The problem is the lack of manpower; it is well illustrated in the Saga's when the locals decide to they expell the Norse because of numbers. The difficult thing is getting the numbers from Scandinavia, Iceland and Greenland to move to NA. With the onset of climatic change 1300+ the chances are even less.
A gamechanger could be smallpox; it was in Scandinavia at the time so could theoretically be brought to Greenland and on to NA prior to 1300. With deteriorated bad weather a settler colony of the ca 5,000 Greenlandic Norse may do it.

 

[PrinceofApathy]

They would have to give up their insistence on sheep farming in favor of fishing/whaling.

 

[chornedsnorkack]

They would have to give up their insistence on sheep farming in favor of fishing/whaling.

Sheep farming would be useful! The Indians of Eastern North America had no weaving (that was cotton growers, south in Mexico). Northeast had furs and then bark cloth.
Woollen textiles, like Hudson Bay point blankets, would have been a valuable sale to Indians. And the Hudson Bay Company ended up controlling Rupert´s Land with what, 1500 people of their own. The Indians could unite to expel the Norse but for what - to stop buying iron and wool?

 

[PrinceofApathy]

Sheep farming would be useful! The Indians of Eastern North America had no weaving (that was cotton growers, south in Mexico). Northeast had furs and then bark cloth.
Woollen textiles, like Hudson Bay point blankets, would have been a valuable sale to Indians. And the Hudson Bay Company ended up controlling Rupert´s Land with what, 1500 people of their own. The Indians could unite to expel the Norse but for what - to stop buying iron and wool?

Sure, but part of why they floundered in Greenland was because they refused to give up their ways. Sheep farming and agriculture just don't work in Greenland, but marine harvesting obviously does. They would need to consolidate themselves in Greenland before branching out. Once they managed to get past that obstacle, that's a different story.

 

[Jürgen]

Sure, but part of why they floundered in Greenland was because they refused to give up their ways. Sheep farming and agriculture just don't work in Greenland, but marine harvesting obviously does. They would need to consolidate themselves in Greenland before branching out. Once they managed to get past that obstacle, that's a different story.

Seeing as every single other Scandinavian society practiced fishing (and Norwegian, Norn and Icelanders more than most) , I must admit the idea that Greenlandic Norse didn’t fish seem pretty ridiculous to me.

 

[PrinceofApathy]

Seeing as every single other Scandinavian society practiced fishing (and Norwegian, Norn and Icelanders more than most) , I must admit the idea that Greenlandic Norse didn’t fish seem pretty ridiculous to me.

Oh I'm sure they did, but AFAIK archeologists suggest it wasn't to the extent needed to survive. Correct me if I'm wrong though.

 

[HB of CJ]

They might make it down to the NE coast of the USA. Getting back home would be a concern. They would need better round trip ships.

 

[Dathi THorfinnsson]

I don't know how far south they'd go, since every mile they go from the north is a mile they go from resupplying.

Hunh?

At a 3% growth rate, populations double in 25 years. Add in extra immigration from Europe in the first century or so, and intermarrying with locals, and in a couple of centuries you will likely have vinlandic settlements down Florida and west to Minnesota.

No single trip needs to be longer than a couple hundred miles.

 

[Gabingston]

Hunh?

At a 3% growth rate, populations double in 25 years. Add in extra immigration from Europe in the first century or so, and intermarrying with locals, and in a couple of centuries you will likely have vinlandic settlements down Florida and west to Minnesota.

No single trip needs to be longer than a couple hundred miles.

I'm wondering what affect a Vinland spanning the entire North American east coast would have on Europe. Surely they'd find out about this new land to the west.

 

[Dathi THorfinnsson]

I'm wondering what affect a Vinland spanning the entire North American east coast would have on Europe. Surely they'd find out about this new land to the west.

Of course they'll 'find out about this new land'. There will be regular contact.
While trade might not be much of a thing until ocean tech gets better, bishops and some priests will certainly be crossing the ocean.

As for other powers shoehorning in on the Norse, they've got the only Atlantic crossing worthy ships in Europe, and will for long enough to get a good foothold on most of the northeast of the continent.
No, the biggest speed bump will be locals who pick up iron working, horse back riding and sheep herding, and can grow to match the Norse ruled settlements.