While there's a lot timelines about the viability of a Vinland colony I'm more interested in how it would effect later European colonial efforts? Given how disconnected Scandinavia was to the rest of Europe its possible that news of the new land wouldn't make too much headway in western Europe and Vinland is mostly left to its own devices. So lets assume that the age of discovery happens at a similar date to OTL how might American colonization be affected by a strong Norse American presence (potentially still being largely pagan if your feeling slightly feeling ASBy) as well as a native population more resistant to European diseases and with slightly improved technology though norse trade/interactions?
How would a successful Vinland affect later European colonization
- Thread starter Billy the Goat
- Start date
Given the vikings landing in 1000 ad, in my opinion the biggest effect from this would be earlier exposure of the natives to old world diseases. Giving them time to actually build immunity and even have populations recover from the initial contact. They have 400+ years between the vikings and Columbus. In addition the filtering from the Norse of metallurgy and domesticated animals would also help the natives a lot as they would have time to adapt to these and have them spread. So I think this new world would have a much larger native population and no sweeping European colonies that conquered everything.
Honestly, it would be the introduction of various animals that would do it. However, what they would be would depend. Icelandic horses would be a given along with goats, both serving as prominent introduction to the area. This along with the exchange of ideas. Such as Native Americans being introduced to the idea of crossbows, examples of a writing system and so on. And as notes, building up immunity.
Now, the devil is in the details. It probably wouldn’t take long for horses to spread out and survive over, with the Great Plains looking a bit like the Steppes. As for the Appalachia, would still be used, but not as heavy. Horses would be the main beast of burden since I don’t think they’d be able to domestic muskox.
But there would be the build-up to disease, the spreading of ideas for certain weapons, structures, items and things like writing and new animals.
Metallurgy… most likely not. North America is pretty devoid of tin barring northern Mexico. If the vikings did explore the continent among the coast line and did make it Mesoamerica, then the idea of metal weapons there could be planted to see much greater usage of bronze weapons and leading to the development of iron weapons, especially if they discover the deposits in OTL Utah. As for Vinland, they could use the Iron deposits in Michigan, which would really enable them to become pretty powerful along with their native allies.
If the knowledge of metalworking made it down over to South America, mainly the Inca, then they could definitely grow and hold out thanks to the tin in Bolivia and go from there. Alot of the stuff would be tweaked, but a fair bit of potential there.
Alot of the writing systems here would be based off of the futhark writing system brought by the Vinlanders.
So yeah, I imagine the natives would be able to survive and thrive alot longer. Subjugation may still occur, but resembling more what happened to Southeast Asia or India maybe, and that’s at most. Likely more a complex web of alliances, deals and spheres of influence.
OTL the Norse settlers in Vinland and Greenland were mostly Christians. If their descendants establish some form of Christianity across the region, the natives have a better diplomatic situation relative to the first wave of Catholic explorers. Wars of invasions against fellow Catholics are harder to justify to your own monarch. If the latter English, Dutch and Swedes are Protestant, they may seek to convert the locals to Protestantism.
But ITL, the natives would have at least some resistance to European diseases. They would know the forging of iron and steel, have a writting system and potentially a more centralized, Norsified (?) government. So overall, they are much better positioned to defend themselves than they were OTL.
But ITL, the natives would have at least some resistance to European diseases. They would know the forging of iron and steel, have a writting system and potentially a more centralized, Norsified (?) government. So overall, they are much better positioned to defend themselves than they were OTL.
There was a discussion about a moderately successful Vinland a while back. I recommend checking it out, it's very, very interesting
Long term developments of a moderately successful Vinland colony? (read OP post please people)
Another Vinland WI thread I guess, but rather than the endless discussions (if you could call them that) of whether Vinland would become a veritable China overnight that bypasses Newfoundland altogether or forever be condemned to be a bunch of poor fishermen and shepherds, there was even that...
www.alternatehistory.com
Thing with diseases is that it wouldn't cause almost any affect outside of neighboring areas. You have remember that North America was extremely sparsely populated. Any lethal epidemics would burn itself pretty quickly since it can't spread almost anywhere. Locals would suffer but for example in Mexico no one wouldn't notice anything.
It would lead to a far stronger Norse presence in the Americas, because the ultimate effect of any successful Vinland is to greatly strengthen the position of Greenland and to a lesser degree Iceland by giving them an easy source of timber and iron. Likely also trained warriors too, since there will be more clashes against the natives and likely others in the region, and that will be very helpful in repelling Inuit attacks in Greenland. Therefore, the Greenland settlements all remain and Iceland is slightly richer, meaning Norway or whichever nation has the Norwegian crown is far stronger entering the age where improved ships actually permit colonisation.
As for the natives, it depends just how big the colony is. There will be a formation of a mixed-race Metis population who will probably be the main conduit between Norse and indigenous culture. I think you'd see a syncretic cult based on Christianity in many native groups, although perhaps only practiced by a single society or clan grouping who may or may not have Norse ancestry. Given enough time, they might adopt herding sheep (the wool would be very useful), but I don't really see cattle or horses being too widespread. The latter two animals were too valuable to be readily traded and since American Indians are lactose intolerant, they wouldn't really be able to use dairy products (which the Norse preferred their cattle for). Horses are also pretty pointless in a forest, very rare in Greenland and Iceland, and even if a wealthy Indian bought a horse from a Norseman, he wouldn't know what to do with it besides slaughter it for food, which in Norse culture was considered a great offering.
Biggest impact is we'd see a native culture looking more like the 17th century Algonquian and Iroquoian cultures, which had changed greatly in the 16th century because of the introduction of European trade goods (mostly from Spain). They'd have slightly bigger, more organised populations and would almost certainly be using iron tools and clothed in colorful woolen robes (see old paintings of native chiefs for what I mean, these robes were made from cloth purchased from Europeans). These would likely be purchased from the Norse, but it's very plausible for a caste of Metis smiths to form. Likewise, I imagine they'd be using Norse-derived looms--weaving was a skill every Norse woman had, so if we imagine some Metis girls being raised by their Norse grandmothers or aunts instead of their "heathen" mothers, that's where the skill transfer would come from.
Their religion would be syncretic Christianity, which may either be widespread or limited to a single clan group of Norse-descended people. Some of this syncretic Christianity might be incredibly unorthodox, even by the standards of syncretic religion.
If anything came over, it would be minor diseases with long incubation times like mumps or whooping cough, both of which are very unlikely to be fatal but would cause a slight rise in infant mortality and likely famine because it would interrupt seasonal activities and sicken everyone at once. Chickenpox would also likely arrive via shingles, and that would be far more dangerous because it's very infectious and in adults can cause death. If you had hypothetical epidemics of all three diseases in the Americas, I estimate 5-10% of people would die from disease and famine. Chickenpox is interesting too in that it would almost certainly remain endemic because the virus can cause shingles later in life, and that can spread to the uninfected as chickenpox.
The effect would probably be beneficial in that it might give native cultures a sense of how to control infectious disease as well as what treatments work and what treatments don't against novel diseases. I bring that up because sweat baths were responsible for many deaths because they both spread disease and overheated people with high fevers which when jumping into cold water afterwards, would produce shock and almost certain death.
As for the natives, it depends just how big the colony is. There will be a formation of a mixed-race Metis population who will probably be the main conduit between Norse and indigenous culture. I think you'd see a syncretic cult based on Christianity in many native groups, although perhaps only practiced by a single society or clan grouping who may or may not have Norse ancestry. Given enough time, they might adopt herding sheep (the wool would be very useful), but I don't really see cattle or horses being too widespread. The latter two animals were too valuable to be readily traded and since American Indians are lactose intolerant, they wouldn't really be able to use dairy products (which the Norse preferred their cattle for). Horses are also pretty pointless in a forest, very rare in Greenland and Iceland, and even if a wealthy Indian bought a horse from a Norseman, he wouldn't know what to do with it besides slaughter it for food, which in Norse culture was considered a great offering.
Biggest impact is we'd see a native culture looking more like the 17th century Algonquian and Iroquoian cultures, which had changed greatly in the 16th century because of the introduction of European trade goods (mostly from Spain). They'd have slightly bigger, more organised populations and would almost certainly be using iron tools and clothed in colorful woolen robes (see old paintings of native chiefs for what I mean, these robes were made from cloth purchased from Europeans). These would likely be purchased from the Norse, but it's very plausible for a caste of Metis smiths to form. Likewise, I imagine they'd be using Norse-derived looms--weaving was a skill every Norse woman had, so if we imagine some Metis girls being raised by their Norse grandmothers or aunts instead of their "heathen" mothers, that's where the skill transfer would come from.
Their religion would be syncretic Christianity, which may either be widespread or limited to a single clan group of Norse-descended people. Some of this syncretic Christianity might be incredibly unorthodox, even by the standards of syncretic religion.
I think people underestimate the difficulty in teaching a radically different culture a skill like animal domestication. It generally took many years and far more direct contact than just a few trading missions. Even if we assume the colonies in Vinland and Markland are self-sustaining and grow to max population density (probably tens of thousands given the climate), that's still not a lot of people.
It's not, it's found in the southern Appalachians (Carolinas through northeastern Alabama), the same region where copper was historically mined by the Mississippians. Vinland wouldn't need the iron deposits in Michigan because there's ample bog iron in Newfoundland and Labrador. I suspect domestic metallurgy would spread to native cultures given enough time (at least 200 years, probably closer to 300-400 years), via the Metis population. Basic skills were widely known in Norse culture, so Metis individuals or even enterprising wanderers (who probably wouldn't show up before the colony is at its population limit) might know enough to kickstart local industry. It would certainly remain a closely guarded secret, limited to a particular clan group (IIRC this occurs among some African ethnic groups).
Greenland was pretty much epidemic free. IIRC the only suspected epidemic came from Iceland and may have been responsible for the decision to abandon the colony.
If anything came over, it would be minor diseases with long incubation times like mumps or whooping cough, both of which are very unlikely to be fatal but would cause a slight rise in infant mortality and likely famine because it would interrupt seasonal activities and sicken everyone at once. Chickenpox would also likely arrive via shingles, and that would be far more dangerous because it's very infectious and in adults can cause death. If you had hypothetical epidemics of all three diseases in the Americas, I estimate 5-10% of people would die from disease and famine. Chickenpox is interesting too in that it would almost certainly remain endemic because the virus can cause shingles later in life, and that can spread to the uninfected as chickenpox.
The effect would probably be beneficial in that it might give native cultures a sense of how to control infectious disease as well as what treatments work and what treatments don't against novel diseases. I bring that up because sweat baths were responsible for many deaths because they both spread disease and overheated people with high fevers which when jumping into cold water afterwards, would produce shock and almost certain death.
I think this is a misunderstanding, Scandinavia was very well connected with Europe and the rest of the world, mainly due the Vikings and their later generations.
However due to climate change, the contacts will se a dramatic decline from the start of the 14th century, the start of the ''Little Iceage''. This climate change caused the disbanding of the Greenland settlements ( changing the Green-land in an ice land) and the was ultimate the source of the Great Famine , 1315-1317, in Europe and well documented in England.
Even the contact with Europe encounter a sharp decline it will probably keep contact on the same scale as with Iceland.
This means that there will be knowledge in Europe of a land far West over seas. On the otherhand this will not prevent Columbus sailing West to find a short cut to India in 1492.
As mentioned in older discussions. The external growth of a Vinland settlement will mainly come from the farmers sons who were excluded from inheritence, essential all boys after the oldest son. This could led to a mix with women of the Amercan tribes.
In OTL the primairy reason of settlement-trade post in the North of America, was the abundance of fish and fur. The fur could be a valuable trade commodity with Europe.
In OTL the primairy reason of settlement-trade post in the North of America, was the abundance of fish and fur. The fur could be a valuable trade commodity with Europe.
This is commonly stated (I think because it makes a good fable for today's world and our own issue with climate change), but it doesn't seem to be the main factor from the Norse sources. The climate in 14th/15th century southwestern Greenland was not cold enough to make agriculture infeasible, since hay could still be produced and cattle and sheep raised. What did change in that period was the arrival of the Inuit, who with their superior mobility (as timber was scarce and the Inuit used skin boats) continually raided the Norse farmsteads (in the process acquiring what they otherwise would've traded for) to the point there was no reason to stick around and the Norse settlers left.
Were there a significant trade with Vinland to bring timber and good-quality iron, matters would've likely turned out differently.
Unfortunately, fur was also a major commodity of medieval Scandinavia that along with Eastern Europe, was capable of meeting medieval Europe's demands.
I don't know if Icelandic horses (what I assume would be the primary source of horses in Vinland) would be useful for cavalry so I imagine the Vinlanders would develop an infantry based military. But I don't know much about horse breeding so I assume that these could be bred and trained for different purposes but it would take time.
I also think the introduction of the horse might cut the Mississippian Era short as many Native Americans would abandoned their agricultural city states in favor of hunting bison as they did in OTL. There was also an article that described the bison hunting strategy was unsustainable in the long term as horses compete with bison for grass in addition to being overhunted. So the bison could go extinct, by the time Europeans arrive, unless some tribes domesticate them first. But I think Vinlandic sheep would be a more likely replacement as it's already a domestic animal and I imagine they would easier to control and cheaper to maintain than a heard of bison.
I also think the introduction of the horse might cut the Mississippian Era short as many Native Americans would abandoned their agricultural city states in favor of hunting bison as they did in OTL. There was also an article that described the bison hunting strategy was unsustainable in the long term as horses compete with bison for grass in addition to being overhunted. So the bison could go extinct, by the time Europeans arrive, unless some tribes domesticate them first. But I think Vinlandic sheep would be a more likely replacement as it's already a domestic animal and I imagine they would easier to control and cheaper to maintain than a heard of bison.
Last edited:
I mean, it depends where they live. If it's near the coast on the eastern side of the Appalachina, then we will see the continuation of the city states. For the Great Plains, I think it might vary there between what they'd want to do there. We could have it to where there is a boom of horse riding culture before there is a bust. I don't see buffalo becoming extinct, but I do see like ups and downs of cycles, which would force life style changes to them.
And yeah, same with sheep as well.
Yeah I agree with this. I should’ve been more specific but when I said Mississippian, I really meant to say Cahokia (middle Mississippian) and the Oneota. I actually do think that the South Appalachian Mississippians could likely grow increasingly urbanized.
But I still think that bison going extinct is a very real possibility because we can expect a sharp population decline. And if the bison population doesn't recover by the time Europeans reestablish contact then a second Columbian exchange will likely be a death blow.
Fair though the natives wouldn't have guns and it would be 300-400 years to adjust and figure it out from there.
While I agree the Ameridian population would be larger, I think we could still see large Conquests.
As while Disease was important, Europeans probably would still have superior techniques and most importantly, the Conquests in OTL were made with tens of thousands of native allies that would still be there. Maybe the Spanish would just have to treat the native allies better than they did in OTL.
Last edited:
The article I read said that the plains tribes of OTL didn't use guns to hunt bison. Those were expensive and were saved for raids and battles. Hunting bison with bows and arrows seemed to work just fine. And I'm not saying that extinction is set in stone, just that it's a strong possibility.
I don't think the Bison will go extinct. There were tens of millions of them, and they were only driven to near-extinction by mass hunting with guns to starve out the plains tribes and diseases coming from Cattle, neither of which will be factors for a long time (if at all for the first one). Bison populations will still likely decline significantly, but I'm pretty confident in saying that they won't go extinct.
I think it would look more like Sub-Sahara Africa than India or Southeast Asia.
Remember, the latter had millennia to develop the way they had and the Native Americans would only have 3-400 years before more Europeans show up. And remember, they would still need to recover from an apocalyptic event where at least 2/3 of their population was wiped out by disease and its not like they would know that they would need to beeline for these new technologies.
Now, the Americas, as far as geography goes, are certainly better off than Sub-Sahara Africa, so they would develop, but it wouldn't be guaranteed to be at a particularly fast rate.
Again, losing 2/3 of your population would lead to total societal collapse and they would effectively be starting again at square one.
Except one of the points would be the earlier introduction of disease and thus building up some antibodies and resistance there...