Earlier European discovery of the Americas

Sure. Why, though? The technology has been there for the better part of three millennia and the required experience at least for a thousand years, if not more. If Europeans had a reason to want to cross the Atlantic, they could have. Provide one, and you've got it.
 
And it needs to be something not more easily obtained at home, or something that would take actual looking - like gold - to find (that may be a reason AFTER Europeans make the crossing to make more, but they won't cross in search of something they have no reason to expect will be there).
 
And it needs to be something not more easily obtained at home, or something that would take actual looking - like gold - to find (that may be a reason AFTER Europeans make the crossing to make more, but they won't cross in search of something they have no reason to expect will be there).

Maybe make a sugarcane species native to the Americas? If any of the local people's have figured out refining it, then the early explorers can trade for initially rather than having to transplant it.
Bam huge incentive.
 
Just before the Black Death Europe's population was booming, if America was discovered before then simple land hunger could do the trick.
 
Maybe make a sugarcane species native to the Americas? If any of the local people's have figured out refining it, then the early explorers can trade for initially rather than having to transplant it.
Bam huge incentive.

What's the incentive to cross in the first place?

Not "Why do they keep crossing" but "Why do they try to cross the Atlantic at all"?
 
Original incentive could be anything. After all, Colombus was a crank who operated from a totally wrong set of beliefs. He just had that mix of drive and geographical ineptitude. If you don't have people looking for Avalon, Prester John, Ys, or similar, a ship blown off course which manages to return leads to a story that grows in the telling.

As for what keeps them coming back -Paradise?

If they initially encounter a tribe who takes to christianity, conversion could be a powerful motivator to the religous mindset. Once the diseases hit the natives, you have an alternative to the crusades as a place to dump surplus sons. A lot of their siblings may have come as missionaries, the chruch was also a popular place for them.
 
Original incentive could be anything. After all, Colombus was a crank who operated from a totally wrong set of beliefs. He just had that mix of drive and geographical ineptitude. If you don't have people looking for Avalon, Prester John, Ys, or similar, a ship blown off course which manages to return leads to a story that grows in the telling.

How about instead of assuming that medieval Europeans were morons who had money they wanted to get rid of we look at the actual reason why people tried it OTL?

And a ship blown off course with nothing but sailor's tales isn't really going to inspire a lot.

Especially when it's very unlikely to make it all the way to the Americas (it's one thing rounding the bulge of Africa, but that's sometime off from OTL voyages in its own right).
 
Last edited:
How about instead of assuming that medieval Europeans were morons who had money they wanted to get rid of we look at the actual reason why people tried it OTL?

Because they were morons who had money they wanted to get rid of? Thats actually a suitable description of Colombus, after he finally got his funding. He was trying to find India, and never accepted that he didn't find it. Despite his contemporaries having a fairly good idea of the distance he'd have to go. He was looking for spices, which he didn't find in the Americas.

OTL, the Americas were discovered trough total error. Thats why people tried it.

And a ship blown off course with nothing but sailor's tales isn't really going to inspire a lot.

Because no-one has gone off looking for Eldorado, Atlantis, Shangri-La, the Northwest Passage, Agartha or Troy?

Especially when it's very unlikely to make it all the way to the Americas (it's one thing rounding the bulge of Africa, but that's sometime off from OTL voyages in its own right).

And through history, only a couple of ships have ever been blown of course?

Elfwine, you need to shape up.

You don't score points by jumping into threads with "nothing would change" or poorly reasoned rationales for why someones idea for a POD is unworkable. And that basically seems to be your reason for being on this forum. If you don't think an idea works in its present form, suggest a way you think it will work.
 
Well, voyages of discovery are to a sense their own purpose and the Portuguese were pretty good at this, arguably getting as far as the Sargasso Sea. Part of the problem was that fear of being becalmed or of being lost etc would lead them to come back.

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
Because they were morons who had money they wanted to get rid of? Thats actually a suitable description of Colombus, after he finally got his funding. He was trying to find India, and never accepted that he didn't find it. Despite his contemporaries having a fairly good idea of the distance he'd have to go. He was looking for spices, which he didn't find in the Americas.

OTL, the Americas were discovered trough total error. Thats why people tried it.

OTL, the Americas were discovered by looking for a shorter route to somewhere people knew existed. They weren't just randomly sailing about.

But hey, let's dismiss that because presenting Columbus as a moron avoids thinking about why anyone would want to listen to him and fund him.

Because no-one has gone off looking for Eldorado, Atlantis, Shangri-La, the Northwest Passage, Agartha or Troy?
The Northwest Passage is another example of trying to find a shortcut, not random sailing for the lulz. As for the Eldorado, Atlantis, Shangri-La, Agartha and Troy: What governments spent money on those things and when?

And through history, only a couple of ships have ever been blown of course?
Blown that far off course and surviving to come back?

Elfwine, you need to shape up.

You don't score points by jumping into threads with "nothing would change" or poorly reasoned rationales for why someones idea for a POD is unworkable. And that basically seems to be your reason for being on this forum. If you don't think an idea works in its present form, suggest a way you think it will work.
Shape up? Very funny.

I'm not trying to "score points", and my reason for being on this forum is being interested in plausible alternate history. Not in suggesting that medieval Europeans would just randomly sail off into the blue based on myths and legends nevermind that there's no reason to.

As for ideas not working: I don't think there's a reason for them to do it on purpose. Columbus got lucky in pursuit of something else, the Portuguese seem to have had much the same thing - but the latter requires speeding up the pace of the voyages down the coast of Africa and the former is chancy when the existing routes work fine.

Is it possible? Yes. Is it likely? No. And unlikely, human-directed events (such as Edward II going on crusade, or a 13th century discovery of the New World) need some motive behind them.
 
Last edited:
OTL, the Americas were discovered by looking for a shorter route to somewhere people knew existed. They weren't just randomly sailing about.

But hey, let's dismiss that because presenting Columbus as a moron avoids thinking about why anyone would want to listen to him and fund him

First off, places people knew existed at the time included entirely imaginary places like Prester Johns kingdom. Thats part of the point, their list of places that they knew existed was not as firm as ours. Second, it was well known that the distance was much bigger than Colombus believed. His actions can quite accuratly be described as moronic.

And it would hardly be the first time rulers were taken in by a charismatic, but wildly incorrect presentation.

The Northwest Passage is another example of trying to find a shortcut, not random sailing for the lulz. As for the Eldorado, Atlantis, Shangri-La, Agartha and Troy: What governments spent money on those things and when?

We don't need governments to fund an initial contact. That wasn't the case with the Basques or the Vikings. The question was why first contact could happen. It need not initially be government-sponsored.

Blown that far off course and surviving to come back?

Yes. First off, that is how the Vikings discovered North America. Second, once you go back a bit in time, navigation skills become poor. When blown out of sight of land, it was quite possible to get very, very lost. Third, a storm can damage a wooden ship to the point where beating against the wind is impossible, or steering very restricted. Fourth, when you get back to medieval times, ships ability to beat against the wind was very limited out of the box. Once you get into the northeasterly trade winds, your ability to go back could be very poor.

Now, this is not a high-probability scenario, but once you start looking at how many ships were potential candidates over time, the cumulative odds of such a low-probablity event happening seems acceptable.

I'm not trying to "score points", and my reason for being on this forum is being interested in plausible alternate history.

I am not the first to point out that the manner in which you go about that is unduly negative.

Not in suggesting that medieval Europeans would just randomly sail off into the blue based on myths and legends nevermind that there's no reason to.

Thats actually what happened in OTL though. Also, don't underestimate that people in the ancient world was just as prone to error as we are today, or acting on assumption-sets that seem alien today.

As for ideas not working: I don't think there's a reason for them to do it on purpose. Columbus got lucky in pursuit of something else, the Portuguese seem to have had much the same thing - but the latter requires speeding up the pace of the voyages down the coast of Africa and the former is chancy when the existing routes work fine.

Colombus had a reason to do it on purpose, it was just a very wrong one. Presumably the Basques had a reason. The Vikings was blown off course, the Porugese were looking for something else, and intermittent trade with gold-rich Mali could lure ships down the dangerous coast of Africa. Added benefit of making the Canaries more useful as a base.

Is it possible? Yes. Is it likely? No. And unlikely, human-directed events (such as Edward II going on crusade, or a 13th century discovery of the New World) need some motive behind them.

It happened to Colombus, the Portugese, and the Basques. As well as the Vikings. The fact that it happened that many times in a short timespan, indicate that it was likly. At this time. Shiptech had developed and the Europeans had started to look outwards. But the fact that we had that many independent contacts at this time, means that the odds had been rising for centuries. And that the Americas were probably on overtime.

I am not sure what you are objecting to here. That people in ancient times had a shakier idea about geography than we do? That they also made errors, or acted on reasons of religon that seems counterintuitive today? That rulers were occasionally taken in by conmen or charismatic nutters? Or that navigation and manuverability of ships were poor by todays standards?
 
Last edited:
The obvious something is land, especially if you are a younger son. If you want a good cast of characters and a possible link have a good sales job from Greenland resulting in the sons of Tancred D'Hauteville going west not south.

Though tbh I expect it requires better ships to make the journey attractive to anyone capable of exploiting the situation, but with the need the shipping will follow.
 
Thats actually what happened in OTL though. Also, don't underestimate that people in the ancient world was just as prone to error as we are today, or acting on assumption-sets that seem alien today.

So Columbus being funded in pursuit of a better route to profit is the same as searching for something that may or may not even exist because . . .

I'm responding to this part alone because I am quite at a loss as to the basis of your attitude that medieval Europeans are just going to throw money away - either kings (or powerful nobles), or merchants that have even less reason to be quixotic.

Could it happen? Sure. People do stupid things. But it would take a pretty good argument (by someone at the time) to justify it, which is about all this has in common with Columbus.

And it's rather interesting that this: http://geography.about.com/od/historyofgeography/a/presterjohn.htm refers to "countless" explorations, but besides Master Philip can't or won't name a single one.

Color me very skeptical.
 
The obvious something is land, especially if you are a younger son. If you want a good cast of characters and a possible link have a good sales job from Greenland resulting in the sons of Tancred D'Hauteville going west not south.

Though tbh I expect it requires better ships to make the journey attractive to anyone capable of exploiting the situation, but with the need the shipping will follow.

Now that would be interesting, although I'm not sure why it would be particularly appealing to sail to - and stay in -Greenland as opposed to somewhere considerably more fortune-producing.

I mean, you could have them spin a story of cities with streets paved with gold, but what happens when no such cities are found?

The d'Hautevilles were a lot of things, but not quixotic.
 
Well, if the Duke and his posse were closing in and the only way to flee was by sea.

I agree it would take one hell of a sales job to forego the fleshpots of Apulia or Spain, or Ireland or anywhere to cross the Atlantic. But Greenland, nah. If they were off I suspect they could go all the way if for no other reason than there is nothing worthy of the steel of a D'Hauteville and insufficient women for the seargents in Greenland.

If not William Iron Arm then for sure Guiscard.

So maybe the Duke closes in, a priest with a good appreciation of what a band of Norman knights would to do Greenland mentions real life pagans and a shrine to St Michael, as well as the wine, furs, Christians needing succour, pagans, lands for the taking, pagan lands even.
 
First off, places people knew existed at the time included entirely imaginary places like Prester Johns kingdom. Thats part of the point, their list of places that they knew existed was not as firm as ours. Second, it was well known that the distance was much bigger than Colombus believed. His actions can quite accuratly be described as moronic.

And it would hardly be the first time rulers were taken in by a charismatic, but wildly incorrect presentation.



We don't need governments to fund an initial contact. That wasn't the case with the Basques or the Vikings. The question was why first contact could happen. It need not initially be government-sponsored.



Yes. First off, that is how the Vikings discovered North America. Second, once you go back a bit in time, navigation skills become poor. When blown out of sight of land, it was quite possible to get very, very lost. Third, a storm can damage a wooden ship to the point where beating against the wind is impossible, or steering very restricted. Fourth, when you get back to medieval times, ships ability to beat against the wind was very limited out of the box. Once you get into the northeasterly trade winds, your ability to go back could be very poor.

Now, this is not a high-probability scenario, but once you start looking at how many ships were potential candidates over time, the cumulative odds of such a low-probablity event happening seems acceptable.



I am not the first to point out that the manner in which you go about that is unduly negative.



Thats actually what happened in OTL though. Also, don't underestimate that people in the ancient world was just as prone to error as we are today, or acting on assumption-sets that seem alien today.



Colombus had a reason to do it on purpose, it was just a very wrong one. Presumably the Basques had a reason. The Vikings was blown off course, the Porugese were looking for something else, and intermittent trade with gold-rich Mali could lure ships down the dangerous coast of Africa. Added benefit of making the Canaries more useful as a base.



It happened to Colombus, the Portugese, and the Basques. As well as the Vikings. The fact that it happened that many times in a short timespan, indicate that it was likly. At this time. Shiptech had developed and the Europeans had started to look outwards. But the fact that we had that many independent contacts at this time, means that the odds had been rising for centuries. And that the Americas were probably on overtime.

I am not sure what you are objecting to here. That people in ancient times had a shakier idea about geography than we do? That they also made errors, or acted on reasons of religon that seems counterintuitive today? That rulers were occasionally taken in by conmen or charismatic nutters? Or that navigation and manuverability of ships were poor by todays standards?

Columbus wasn't a moron, he was basing his assumptions on the Ptolemaic universe, which was widely beleived it then, it's anachronistic to say an idea is stupid just because it has since been disproven. Was everyone stupid before Newton proved gravity??

The basque and Viking explorations are perfect examples of what would not create lasting contact because they didn't. The reason Columbus' voyage created a lasting link was because it was funded by a powerful and expansionistic royal European government who had a vested interest in getting around a powerful enemy.
 

ingemann

Banned
A reason for keeping contact with America could be if a Norse major settlement (at least the size of Iceland in population) existed there. Now you just need a reason for the Norse to establish a settlement there and keeping it going, until it's big enough to be viable on it own.
 

Dirk_Pitt

Banned
How about have an earlier end to the reconquista in Spain? Wasn't it the finishing off of the Moors one of the reasons that the Spanish Crown funded Columbus?
 
Nobody's being very clear about this, and Umbral seems to be ill-informed of it, so I'll state this for those who don't know:

Columbus got financing to sail west for India because the fall of Constantinople to the Muslims meant that the old trade routes to India and China were cut off. He was not sent because Isabella had money to burn. His plan was insane, which is why nobody funded it until the city fell and the issue of finding a new route to the East became urgent.
 
Top