Biggest impact of Horses arriving early in the Americas?

The modern introduction of horses to the americas came starting mostly in the 16th century. Suppose that the vikings on their early expeditions had brought horses with them and those horses got loose and eventually spread wild essentially throughout the continent?

What impact would that have had on the indigenous americans coming into contact with horses some 4 or 5 centuries early? as well as their later interaction with the europeans?
 
I'm not sure it would be possible, at least not without really important changes.
You'll need much larger settlements, comparable to Greenland, in order to have local breeding of horses (and in this case, much more likely ponies than horses).

Trouble is, you didn't have much incitative to settle American coasts : easily pissed natives, no really easily accessible hinterland, lack of direct contact with Europe to furnish the settlement needs (settlers and material to create settlements), and a poor interest for everything that wasn't directly needed in Greenland (as wood).

Without changing that (and boy it would be hard), you'll have at best some ponies that would either be taken back in Greenland at the disappearance of temporary settlements, or a too small population to be viable.
 
Assuming for the point of your POD that some Indians managed to gain a breeding herd of horses AND learned some animal husbandry/riding skills (perhaps from captive vikings?) there would probably still not be a large horse culture at the place of their introduction to the Americas.

Unlike the Great Plains, the northeast is rocky and densely forested, not really good riding land. Yes, according to Charles Mann John Smith rode a horse at breakneck speed through the forests, but John Smith was quite frankly a big liar and his personal narrative is not reliable.

So what would horses be used for? Status, quite possibly with big men keeping horses as a sign of wealth. Moving stumps and boulders out of fields would probably be a big one. Possibly food, though the herd would have to get very large for that (though with Indians protecting them from predators, they're liable to reproduce exponentially).

The labor that horses save and their use as status symbols could more of the Mississippian cultures survive, with the environmental problems that led to their collapse IOTL instead serving as the catalyst that forces them to adopt horses ITTL. And, of course, once horses reach the Great Plains we will see the rise of cultures that are almost entirely dependent on them.

European re-contact would introduce new horses to the Americas, but would also introduce infectious diseases of livestock which could threaten the American herds, so as per OTL European settlements will remain an important source of horses when they're re-established.
 
Horses would be huge, and immensely valuable, if they can get a good start. Draft animals and animal manure can significantly advance agriculture, and animal hide from domestic animals (for clothing, if nothing else), can allow much larger populations. (Ive seen an interesting argument, for instance, the the OTL Iroquoians were population limited by the number deer available for clothing.)

However, for horses to be of use in the wooded north east, you need an agricultural society. And none of the cultures the Norse could reach were fully agricultural at that point.

SO. Have the Norse settle down, trade and intermarry with the Micmac (probably the easiest), who in turn settle down with a full agricultural package (oats, rye, linen, sheep, horses, cattle). War parties use horses on raids, and gradually the Micmac expand and become a large nation/league/confederation.

Meanwhile the rye/oat/barley package expands south and west while the maize/squash/bean package moves north and east. Soon the two meet, and domestic animal get added to those cultures, possibly preventing the collapse of the northern Moundbuilders.

From there, horses make it to the Plains, where they are useful without agriculture.
 
Top