Sheliak Lawyer
Banned
Indeed people can't comprehend the state wasn't always the mover and shaker it is today.
Could the America's have been settled by the Europeans in the middle-ages?
- Thread starter Malone
- Start date
Ultimately, the establishment of a colony has to have significant, and more importantly, long term resources. There's unlikely to be a great benefit reaped quickly from European Colonization of North America. This would mean you need state-level coffers and more importantly, a significant group of people in the home country dedicated to supporting the material needs of the new settlement.
Ultimately, I don't know if someone who was pushed enough to the political or social periphery that they'd try to explore could muster the proper levels of depth and length of support necessary. Edit: clarification on "they'd try to explore (rather than seize the more traditional paths of advancement closer to home, as was historical in our timeline)..."
Look at how long it took North American settler-colonies OTL to become profitable/self-sustaining, and then subtract 200-300 years worth of technology, including lengthening the voyages back to Europe (likely with reduced capacity and frequency).
I'd be interested in a poll that asks about the state vs. person thing, especially one that defines which aspects you're referring to. I happen to be if the mind that people are the products of historical forces at their specified time, but that gets wayyy too philosophical to be a fun discussion, and I'm certainly not set on the idea. Ultimately, though, aren't rulers and their associated states largely indistinguishable for the laypeople of history, i.e., a large majority of site users? I'd imagine that leads to a lot of the discussion and confusion on its own.
More importantly, states can predate and last beyond a single person's death. There's a greater period of time and more events/effects to associate with a state or cultural structure--compare a Chinese dynasty with a specific ruler. It's also kind of difficult to pin overarching economic conditions or human-made disasters on one person (Side note: this is what bugs me about US Presidential comments/promises about "the economy"!!). Neither a state nor a person causes the weather, but a state's food distribution system can sure muck things up so a drought becomes a famine. I think it's reasonable to argue (or in my case, assume without looking at sources!! uh oh) that states more often have those kinds of effects-- I'm not an absolutist and I'm sure there are great examples of a king's folly causing an otherwise avoidable famine.
I am on the complete other end of the spectrum and disagree. For the most part, I am highly orthodox in my readings of history. My posts on this site demonstrate this. I know there is differences of opinions on this in my field as well as yours.
Though, I am not familiar with you, assuredly, you demonstrate the same. Let us leave this here thus, or start a thread where we can cordially discuss such things (that thread though may not be advisable).
Perhaps, perhaps not. However, many opinions of the current age are essentially, with more public spending to a particular project, the desired effect will come.
England had its successful first colony in 1607 which had 26,000 people by 1640, 50,000 by 1650, by 1700 it had 250,000 people, and by 1770 it had over 2,100,000 people. So in just 33 years it became a significant force that could potentially survive Native raids and be capable of possibly surviving if it isn't attacked by European powers and maintains decent relations with Natives, in less than a century it became large enough to be all but impossible for Natives in North America to wipeout, and in 163 years it became large enough that Britain was largely holding its colonization efforts back.
If a few colonies get initial success and backing/protection for 33 years they can reach 25,000+, which is large enough that even if they all tend to get cutoff around that point, that at least one colony surviving somewhere at at some point on its own isn't unrealistic, and if one colony with 25,000 people survives by itself for a century it could potentially double its population on its own every 25 years to get to 400,000 people and be all but unconquerable to depopulated Natives.
Individually they aren't very likely to succeed, but with hundreds of years to work with it isn't unrealistic for one colony to make it and begin that exponential growth. A colony doesn't ever have to be profitable for a mother country or financier for the colony to be created and succeed. It just needs enough people to stay alive long enough to have enough babies for a few generations.
BlondieBC
Banned
Cod. There were regular cod fishing on the Grand Banks by Spanish and probably English fishermen before Columbus. IMO, the easiest ways to get European settlement is to buff the Norse (other threads on this) or to have the cod fishermen set up some permanent settlements. Easy to defend places like Martha's Vineyard. The will then go to the mainland to trade for things needed such as timber and furs. Eventually, these trips will allow the European disease to spread in the new world, and this will open up land for easy settlement.
So once you have fishing ships capable of sailing to the new world and fishing, you can start the ATL in the year of your choice.
May be cliche - ehh, but anyways:
Harold beats Harald. Harald escapes in defeat and ignominy, never to be seen from again (ooo, ahh, much spooky, such mystery)
Harold beats William. William escapes in defeat and ignominy, and resettles the bulk of the Normans in Sicily. In penance for that loss the Normans crusaded and conquered North Africa from Cyrene to Tunis.
Harold triumphs in victory and glory, and continues to grow England's economy. England's happy-go-lucky ways forge the British Isles Gemot, an ever tightening political confederacy backed by a weird protestant/orthodox Anglo-Celtic Church (trust me, this is totally legit). Ship building advances in England for defense, and to facilitate trade in the Baltic and Mediterranean Seas. Finally, Anglocelt fishermen sailing in advanced caravels find a new world west of the Grand Banks in AD1300. The vast land, Hanunah (Turtle Island, OTL North America), is sparsely populated by friendly communities of Algonquians and Catawba, who are eager to trade with the new comers.
Some decades later Anglocelt sailors exploring the great southern peninsula (OTL Florida) of Hanunah encounter longships (oh no, who could have seen this coming?!?!). Contact is soon made with the Mabilla Althing. The Mabilla are a league of developed city-states spread throughout the southeast of Hanunah, who used longships to maintain a trading network across the Caribbean Sea, and even southwest across Zipacna (Demon Earthquake Crocodile, Central American Isthmus) to the mountain kingdoms in Abyala (Land of Vital Blood, South America). It is a literate culture that prized industry, hygiene, and education. The Mabilla’s origin was a synthesis of Mississippians with Scandinavian refugees who had fled the Plague of Vinland (Vinland is the original Scandinavian settlement around the modern day Canadian Maritime Provinces).
Anglocelt explorers brought to Britain codices and new food crops. The codices, written in Mabillan futhark, concerned subjects such as astronomy, mathematics, medicine, and history. New food crops spurred on population growth in the British Isles, and settlement of Hanunah provided an outlet for the growing Anglocelt people.
Now the nice happy-go lucky Anglocelts brought a certain plant back with them that makes them really happy-go-lucky (oh snap, am I going there? yes I’m doing it!). This gets added to the braziers in the Angloceltic Rite. Angloceltic missionaries had been hard at work in Eastern Europe, and have close ties to Greek Orthodoxy. Happy-go-lucky plant spreads to Byzantines, then stumbled upon by Turks who are now more hungry than hangry. Slowly but surely a Happy-Go-Lucky Planet emerges (Life goal: peace in Middle East – accomplished! you’re welcome, someone had to do it).
6/14/2017 EDIT – Words in blue added, or respelled. Don't post at 3AM kids. PuffyClouds
Harold beats Harald. Harald escapes in defeat and ignominy, never to be seen from again (ooo, ahh, much spooky, such mystery)
Harold beats William. William escapes in defeat and ignominy, and resettles the bulk of the Normans in Sicily. In penance for that loss the Normans crusaded and conquered North Africa from Cyrene to Tunis.
Harold triumphs in victory and glory, and continues to grow England's economy. England's happy-go-lucky ways forge the British Isles Gemot, an ever tightening political confederacy backed by a weird protestant/orthodox Anglo-Celtic Church (trust me, this is totally legit). Ship building advances in England for defense, and to facilitate trade in the Baltic and Mediterranean Seas. Finally, Anglocelt fishermen sailing in advanced caravels find a new world west of the Grand Banks in AD1300. The vast land, Hanunah (Turtle Island, OTL North America), is sparsely populated by friendly communities of Algonquians and Catawba, who are eager to trade with the new comers.
Some decades later Anglocelt sailors exploring the great southern peninsula (OTL Florida) of Hanunah encounter longships (oh no, who could have seen this coming?!?!). Contact is soon made with the Mabilla Althing. The Mabilla are a league of developed city-states spread throughout the southeast of Hanunah, who used longships to maintain a trading network across the Caribbean Sea, and even southwest across Zipacna (Demon Earthquake Crocodile, Central American Isthmus) to the mountain kingdoms in Abyala (Land of Vital Blood, South America). It is a literate culture that prized industry, hygiene, and education. The Mabilla’s origin was a synthesis of Mississippians with Scandinavian refugees who had fled the Plague of Vinland (Vinland is the original Scandinavian settlement around the modern day Canadian Maritime Provinces).
Anglocelt explorers brought to Britain codices and new food crops. The codices, written in Mabillan futhark, concerned subjects such as astronomy, mathematics, medicine, and history. New food crops spurred on population growth in the British Isles, and settlement of Hanunah provided an outlet for the growing Anglocelt people.
Now the nice happy-go lucky Anglocelts brought a certain plant back with them that makes them really happy-go-lucky (oh snap, am I going there? yes I’m doing it!). This gets added to the braziers in the Angloceltic Rite. Angloceltic missionaries had been hard at work in Eastern Europe, and have close ties to Greek Orthodoxy. Happy-go-lucky plant spreads to Byzantines, then stumbled upon by Turks who are now more hungry than hangry. Slowly but surely a Happy-Go-Lucky Planet emerges (Life goal: peace in Middle East – accomplished! you’re welcome, someone had to do it).
6/14/2017 EDIT – Words in blue added, or respelled. Don't post at 3AM kids. PuffyClouds
Last edited:
Cod could work. On the whole, the better your naval tech is the less valuable cargo it is profitable to haul around. There was supposed to have been a native cultural complex around the Great Lakes area that used copper and probably had some silver and gold. The Caribbean natives that Columbus met did have gold.
Gold and silver are valuable enough to transport by almost anything and are sexy enough that people would go to great lenght to acquire them. But if cod is profitable, then someone would do that. Did OTL fishermen establish permanent settlements?
I don't think we would see much noble third sons going "I'm going to sink a lot of money in an expedition that is probably going to get me killed, and if it is successful will allow me to live as a dirt-grubbing farmer in the middle of nowhere." Most sane people would prefer to blow that money on blackjack and hookers, instead.
Gold and silver are valuable enough to transport by almost anything and are sexy enough that people would go to great lenght to acquire them. But if cod is profitable, then someone would do that. Did OTL fishermen establish permanent settlements?
I don't think we would see much noble third sons going "I'm going to sink a lot of money in an expedition that is probably going to get me killed, and if it is successful will allow me to live as a dirt-grubbing farmer in the middle of nowhere." Most sane people would prefer to blow that money on blackjack and hookers, instead.
I think the most interesting possiblity (I think this is possible), is to take a look at Medieval New England.
Vinland was meant to have emerged in the 1000s. Medieval New England emerged in the late 11th Century.
Rather than go east, and seek the protection of the Roman Emperor, they could choose to instead go and follow those Vikings. Considering it was meant to have been a significantly larger expedition, they could well take control of the entirety of Newfoundland before settling in to try and survive the first few years.
There is an issue (of course), with the early days of survival, and adapting to the harsher climate - but if they can survive the first year or two, then there can be further expeditions southwards to trade.
Interestingly, this out of the way place will probably be trading iron, or using local gold deposits (I know, apparently there are some), to buy goods that are needed in The West. That wouldn't lead to a particularly vibrant economy, until they go south and start trading with tobacco-growing tribes in N.America, setting up homesteads or small plantations that rely on local tribes for safety. This is where they start making money, with tobacco and sugar fuelling an economy.
Weirdly, I think this might lead to a Anglo-Saxon dominated new world, but with far more native communities. Newfoundland as a position is well placed to supply a naval fleet, and once the tobacco/sugar economy gets going, funding a fleet that tries to pull a Monroe Doctrine isn't impossible.
Plus, without a few centuries of ship developments, the 'New Englanders' control the best route to the New World., with the best incentive to develop better ships, whilst Spain hasn't united yet, and France isn't really in a good place to get involved. Portugal could get involved, which is an interesting prospect - but they still need to emerge from the Reconquista, and may either not exist, or double down on the Africa route.
Although, this Anglo-Saxon Vinland is starting to develop a Geordie accent in my head. An unexpected side effect of this is a more economically important N.Scotland or Ireland early on, which could really mess with how the islands develop.
TL;DR - its hard to get an organised expedition, but that is one. It'll be a hard job, but an interesting TL nonetheless.
Vinland was meant to have emerged in the 1000s. Medieval New England emerged in the late 11th Century.
Rather than go east, and seek the protection of the Roman Emperor, they could choose to instead go and follow those Vikings. Considering it was meant to have been a significantly larger expedition, they could well take control of the entirety of Newfoundland before settling in to try and survive the first few years.
There is an issue (of course), with the early days of survival, and adapting to the harsher climate - but if they can survive the first year or two, then there can be further expeditions southwards to trade.
Interestingly, this out of the way place will probably be trading iron, or using local gold deposits (I know, apparently there are some), to buy goods that are needed in The West. That wouldn't lead to a particularly vibrant economy, until they go south and start trading with tobacco-growing tribes in N.America, setting up homesteads or small plantations that rely on local tribes for safety. This is where they start making money, with tobacco and sugar fuelling an economy.
Weirdly, I think this might lead to a Anglo-Saxon dominated new world, but with far more native communities. Newfoundland as a position is well placed to supply a naval fleet, and once the tobacco/sugar economy gets going, funding a fleet that tries to pull a Monroe Doctrine isn't impossible.
Plus, without a few centuries of ship developments, the 'New Englanders' control the best route to the New World., with the best incentive to develop better ships, whilst Spain hasn't united yet, and France isn't really in a good place to get involved. Portugal could get involved, which is an interesting prospect - but they still need to emerge from the Reconquista, and may either not exist, or double down on the Africa route.
Although, this Anglo-Saxon Vinland is starting to develop a Geordie accent in my head. An unexpected side effect of this is a more economically important N.Scotland or Ireland early on, which could really mess with how the islands develop.
TL;DR - its hard to get an organised expedition, but that is one. It'll be a hard job, but an interesting TL nonetheless.
BlondieBC
Banned
I don't think so. I think they landed on island to dry and salt the cod for the return trip. But to be fair, the evidence is very limited. We know it was profitable enough that by the 1480's or so, the Spanish had created a taxing position to tax the imported fish, but we really can't be sure they were not mostly coming from somewhere such as the waters of Iceland or Greenland.
Now that I have some time to think on it, seems like the Norse settlers in Greenland did not consume fish for some reason. So if we have the Greenland Norse maintain their fishing traditions of the Vikings, they can have a larger population and may avoid dying out. I think roughly, anyone writing an ATL here needs to roughly hit these bullet points.
1) Reason to sail to area (Norse or Spanish Cod fishermen)
2) Reason to settle (Norse)
3) Establishment of regular trade routes that will eventually allow European diseases to arrive. The Norse routes were probably too infrequent/indirect for this item. Greenland had a tendency to trade with Iceland. Iceland traded with UK or Norway. UK with Norway. Disease spread better if you can have a direct voyage from European population centers to a decent size town in the new world.
4) Disease spreads to natives.
5) Land opens up for easy/large-scale settlement. Settlers arrive on existing trade routes.
No, Greenlanders ate fish. And Greenlanders probably did not die out, rather the plague made a lot Europeans to die out, and when various reasons made life in Greenland increasingly difficult they just migrated back to Iceland or Norway.
Drip-drop disease transfer would probably be good for the natives. A reasonably fast ship (or many in quick succession) originating from a large port town with _all_ the diseases that crosses the ocean fast enough for disease to have no time to burn out will cause multiple epidemics at the same time. The resulting collapse of society will undoubtedly add to the death toll.
If we have one disease crossing over and killing a lot of people but not enough to collapse society or incapacitate all caregivers and then going endemic with some time for the population to recover before the next one crosses over, the New World would probably look significantly different. It's possible, of course, that some of the diseases would just be so incredibly nasty that society would collapse anyway.
EDIT
Anyway, for anything to happen you are going to need both the means and the motive. And the motive needs to be good enough or the means are going to be spent on something else. Religious persecution or (the belief of) incredible riches are always good.
Drip-drop disease transfer would probably be good for the natives. A reasonably fast ship (or many in quick succession) originating from a large port town with _all_ the diseases that crosses the ocean fast enough for disease to have no time to burn out will cause multiple epidemics at the same time. The resulting collapse of society will undoubtedly add to the death toll.
If we have one disease crossing over and killing a lot of people but not enough to collapse society or incapacitate all caregivers and then going endemic with some time for the population to recover before the next one crosses over, the New World would probably look significantly different. It's possible, of course, that some of the diseases would just be so incredibly nasty that society would collapse anyway.
EDIT
Anyway, for anything to happen you are going to need both the means and the motive. And the motive needs to be good enough or the means are going to be spent on something else. Religious persecution or (the belief of) incredible riches are always good.
Last edited:
ben0628
Banned
Perhaps the Hanseatic League wishes to beat it's Southern Italian economic competitor's and funds and expedition west to find China? The League had huge influence over the Kingdom of Norway at one point during the middle ages, so the chances of finding out about Greenland/Vinland and what lays beyond it seem pretty good. The League is also wealthy and powerful so funding the expedition wouldn't be too hard.
All you need is for smallpox to get introduced to the North American native population, you'll also get tuberculosis for sure as this was endemic in Europe - it usually killed slowly, and often did not kill the carrier. OTL once smallpox was introduced to the natives in an area, the usual trade and interaction between villages was quite sufficient to spread it well beyond where the initial focus of infection was. Measles is another disease that, once it arrived, would be devastating. Obviously an epidemic would only travel so far from the initial site, speed of travel and trade routes were not as extensive as they were in Europe when the Black Plague spread (this is 14th century) so you'd have a high tide mark demarcating how far the epidemic spread. In time, the European settlers/traders would "advance" far enough to repeat the cycle. Getting one of these really bad diseases to North America could happen with the first settlers, or any time thereafter as all of these diseases tended to be present most of the time at some level, spiking from time to time.
There's an excellent book that explores this very issue. Children of the First man is an enjoyable tale that spans 800 years or so and looks at an early medieval tribe of welshmen that do this and get absorbed within a few generations.
https://www.amazon.com/Children-First-JAMES-ALEXANDER-Thom/dp/0449149706
Actually that.
The problem with Europe of the 11th century is that it's very different from Europe of Columbus in one crucial aspect:
- there was no shortage of land suitable for agrarian purposes in Europe in the 11th century on wards. There were uncultivated lands everywhere (forests mostly, even not far from Paris) and there was actually some kind of competition for the settlers in Europe - a farmer can get 10-15-20 years of exception from taxes/fees if he ventures to clear up some uncultivated territory and settle there for good.
So what is the incentive for a farmer to move across the ocean (which is insanely dangerous)?
And I guess even the local Indians dying from the European diseases won't help here.
So you're right your only bet is refugees from Europe.
The worse wars might help, I mean the conflicts on the scale of Hundred Years' War or Wars of the Roses or something.
But even then those European refugees were welcome in Europe - there were always European countries and monarchs to welcome them, as I said, there were plenty of uncultivated lands suitable for agriculture.
Those Russian settlements were mostly 'step by step' migration, a few hundred miles or so being the longest distance, then the next generation moved another few hundred miles and so on. That's a great difference from the giant leap across the Atlantic into the New World.
The Russians could move more than a few hundred miles if fleeing from the Mongols.
And here yes, the deeper penetration of the Mongols into Europe might serve as a nice incentive for the Europeans to flee anywhere.
If the Mongols had stayed in Hungary, the geography of their raids might be similar to those:
The European population would be pushed into the British Isles and Scandinavia and from there to America...
Last edited:
As I see it, you *did* have motive and opportunity but at the wrong time.
John of Gaunt was one of the richest men ever. He was also a supporter of John Wycliffe, the man who started the Lollard revolution - which wasn't nearly as big as Luther's but was Proto-Protestant. had Lollardism had the chance, you could have seen many shipped off to colonies in the New World, but the timing was all wrong and they never got off the ground.
In my "Sweet Lands of Liberty," I posit that colonies could have come from Waldensians being stronger, though that part probably wasn't as plausible it was still possible, but it would be more likely if it happened together with a John of Gaunt being there. (Instead, I have a POD of the Duke of Savoy having his daughter cured of a disease after being prayed for by Waldo - isntead of a Catholic priest who was sick that day - and so he becomes the protector of Waldo the way Luther had a protector which helped it grow.)
So, if webomcine some things,, with a minor noble supporting Waldensians but not one big enough to protect them, and if he's rich enough, he could finance a voyage to, say, Massachusetts Bay and they could survive on the fish and maize and other stuff learned from the native - that noble might even venture over himself and become King.
The bigger question is, how many would there be? As noted by others, 5,000 Waldenisians might make the trip in 1200, but then while there might be some trickling in later, it's mostly going to be local increase; look at how long it took some of Europe's powers to settle North America and really expand.
At this point, after 100 years you might get some contact back to Europe at times, though not much - just enough to ship items back that are useful like maize or potato. Then, in the Great famie of 1315-1317, you might have more Europeans moving over - the only problem is I think I read that NOrth America also had lots of trouble, but perhaps they then go further sound. (IIRC I think this was part of how I had them expand in SLoL)
You might be better off *not* having communication because of the Black Death in the late 1340s-early 1350s. If it's not brought over till later, perhaps fewer people die of it. the overcrowded conditions of Europe could send some over before, though on a scale like those of New England of the 1630s. Same with the period 1360 or so and on. By 1500 when John Cabot sailed for England OTL you probably have an explorer in 1498 finding lands of 100,000 or so, mostly proto-Protestants, spreading from Newfoundland (which someone mentioned earlier as a very good idea) to let's say the New Jersey area, not too far south but far enought hat it's kind of spread out.
That's the best case scenario for Middle Ages colonies, I think.
John of Gaunt was one of the richest men ever. He was also a supporter of John Wycliffe, the man who started the Lollard revolution - which wasn't nearly as big as Luther's but was Proto-Protestant. had Lollardism had the chance, you could have seen many shipped off to colonies in the New World, but the timing was all wrong and they never got off the ground.
In my "Sweet Lands of Liberty," I posit that colonies could have come from Waldensians being stronger, though that part probably wasn't as plausible it was still possible, but it would be more likely if it happened together with a John of Gaunt being there. (Instead, I have a POD of the Duke of Savoy having his daughter cured of a disease after being prayed for by Waldo - isntead of a Catholic priest who was sick that day - and so he becomes the protector of Waldo the way Luther had a protector which helped it grow.)
So, if webomcine some things,, with a minor noble supporting Waldensians but not one big enough to protect them, and if he's rich enough, he could finance a voyage to, say, Massachusetts Bay and they could survive on the fish and maize and other stuff learned from the native - that noble might even venture over himself and become King.
The bigger question is, how many would there be? As noted by others, 5,000 Waldenisians might make the trip in 1200, but then while there might be some trickling in later, it's mostly going to be local increase; look at how long it took some of Europe's powers to settle North America and really expand.
At this point, after 100 years you might get some contact back to Europe at times, though not much - just enough to ship items back that are useful like maize or potato. Then, in the Great famie of 1315-1317, you might have more Europeans moving over - the only problem is I think I read that NOrth America also had lots of trouble, but perhaps they then go further sound. (IIRC I think this was part of how I had them expand in SLoL)
You might be better off *not* having communication because of the Black Death in the late 1340s-early 1350s. If it's not brought over till later, perhaps fewer people die of it. the overcrowded conditions of Europe could send some over before, though on a scale like those of New England of the 1630s. Same with the period 1360 or so and on. By 1500 when John Cabot sailed for England OTL you probably have an explorer in 1498 finding lands of 100,000 or so, mostly proto-Protestants, spreading from Newfoundland (which someone mentioned earlier as a very good idea) to let's say the New Jersey area, not too far south but far enought hat it's kind of spread out.
That's the best case scenario for Middle Ages colonies, I think.
Wood
Yes there is. Think of the people who went there, Icelanders and Greenlanders. Both of those places have a big demand for wood and the Norwegian supply is threatened by a possible embargo.
There is also the significant amount of Walrus and their ivory around even if there was a source in Greenland would help.
Except I don't think anyone in their right minds would think people from Europe would colonize Vinland/America. I don't get why people constantly assume that Europe is the only source of colonists, Iceland and Greenland would be much better for recruitment. They both have more than enough of a population surplus to get a small foothold, the natives on Newfoundland were less numerous than the Greenland colony so get Greenland settlers that move as well as Icelandic ones and even if they don't outnumber all native presence on the Island they will in a region of it and the Beothuk were hardly unified.
Point being there is no need to include Europe into any of the equations.
If they did then why would the Europeans bother coming and not just trade for it?
Well there is going to be a non-stop(if slow paced) immigration wave from Iceland and Greenland to America, there may be settlers from somewhere like Shetland and Orkney who then come to settle on Iceland because of now vacant space.
Don't forget the Basque.