May I first ask what happened to Europe on your map? Was it Germany or France who became continental hegemon or what?
Actually that map is not very related expect the greenland part.But that an interesting scenario anyway.I could imagine the Britonics and russian trying to colonise alaska and rupert's land and encountering norse people instead of just nativesSelucid Empire, Carthage controlled Egypt, Hellenized Mesopotamia, Kingdom of Pergamum, Antigonid Dynasty looses macedonia, a united Greek State replaces it. Roman Republic remains in Latium. And judging on the Centralization based on Germany I would say a Gallic-Greek-German Superstate.
How about this, The Scandinavians fleeing the mass German influx following its conquest, flee to Greenland. Scandinavians begin conquering surrounding regions for more fishing. Europeans consider the Scandinavians to be almost mythological in the sense that they just disappeared to the West.
When the Europeans finally begin to colonize the America's the Scandinavians will be powerful enough to control the commerce of the burgeoning colonial economy. Likely the Greenlandic will not begin viking activity's simply because its been a few centuries since it was done.
Naval Empire of Vinland. That's the only thing possible, IMO, but it would more likely control parts of continental Canada than the northern islands.
Here's the problem.
Greenland is less populous than Iceland.
Greenland + Iceland is less populous than Newfoundland.
Greenland + Iceland + Newfoundland is less populous than Nova Scotia.
I can buy two countries uniting and taking the name of the smaller one. But having it happen three times in succession? That's difficult to grasp.
I can believe in some guy ruling the (then-discovered part of the) green area at some point under the title "Lord of Greenland". But not in the twentieth century, and certainly not continuously from the Medieval Warm Period until then. There's also the question: why isn't Markland included?