Help with Surviving Vinland Ideas

[Umbral]

A few points, if I may:

The big obstacles to Norse success in Vinland OTL were:

1) It was at the end of a very long supply chain where the population base grew smaller for every step. Norway at maybe half a million people, Iceland at 20-30 000, Greenland maxed out at 5000.

Some incentive is needed to get people to move.

2) It did not distinguish itself positivly over the competition. Vinland, from what was known of it, offered pretty much the same as Northern Russia and the wild east, but in a far more inconvenient location involving a long dangerous voyage.
If you really wanted to fight off natives and set up your own hall (and many did) you could do it in Ireland or something, with lots of your own people backing you up, rather than alone in Vinland.

Vinland needs something to recommend it over the competition.

That being said, settlers would have some distinct advantages once the settlement started:

-The natives would suffer a disease shock, and have little ability to resist for a while.

-The Norse settlers would have far more climate-appropriate coping skills than the OTL settlers from the UK, they had far less urban backgrounds, and came from a line of people that had settled questionable lands in the north for generations.

-The little climatic optimum was just getting started, and for the next 200 years, the climate would be getting warmer and more fertile, favoring the Norse agiculture.

-The people of greenland seems to have been motivated to move, and may have gone south en masse if it seemed possible to do so, providing an extra immigration boost.

Requirements-
Viking Paganism Survives to the current day
They could be briefly conquered, but I'd rather they didnt
A Last Battle of Viking Culture in Europe

If anyone is curious btw, my final result is for Vinland to be a Constitutional Monarchy with Mercentilist Tendencies, and with a history of renting out Mercenary Armies.

For viking paganism, Eriks wife seems to have been the driving force for christianity in Greenland. If she fails to survive the trip to Greenland it may well start out more strongly pagan. Having a reputation as a the last pagan realm may encourage immigration from the religous and entrench paganism. At the cost of increasingly hostile relations with Europe as time passes.

Both. I was thinking that Vinland is being constantly, but slightly secretly colonized by Vikings for a solid 200 years or so before Norway falls apart. Also gives time for Vinland to have a concept of Gunpowder

I actually had a thought about a mini-TL where the western settlment was abandoned in a mass migration to Northern Canada, and a town established. Hostile relations with the natives eventually caused it to fail before contact with european explorers, leaving only stories.

The best way to ensure a successful colony, I think, would be an initial alliance with a local tribe.

Personally I think a viking colony in the Gulf of st. Lawrence will quickly own the local seas, and will be able to travel and trade around the great lakes rather quickly. Unless hostiles stop them at chocepoints. They will get rich in local terms from trading, and range wider and faster than the locals in a few generations.

 

[AmIndHistoryAuthor]

Hurons and Iroquois both started growing corn ~1300. (as evidenced by pollen found in archaeological digs). So, no maize culture is MUCH later than Vinland.

I think we've had this discussion more than a few times before. You seem so willing to rely on what western scientists think they know rather than going to the people far more likely to know, Natives themselves.

Often it's "scientific" methods that are lacking. Early archaeologists rather foolishly decided to carefully wash away any possible traces of food residues on the items they excavated.
http://www.rps.psu.edu/0101/corn.html

So all we can say is western educated scientists so far haven't caught up to what the Iroquois already know. Corn came to the Iroquois fairly early. It's one of the central teachings of their traditions, the Three Sisters, that describes corn, beans, and squash as being part of their very origins.

 

[Dathi THorfinnsson]

I think we've had this discussion more than a few times before. You seem so willing to rely on what western scientists think they know rather than going to the people far more likely to know, Natives themselves.

Often it's "scientific" methods that are lacking. Early archaeologists rather foolishly decided to carefully wash away any possible traces of food residues on the items they excavated.
http://www.rps.psu.edu/0101/corn.html

So all we can say is western educated scientists so far haven't caught up to what the Iroquois already know. Corn came to the Iroquois fairly early. It's one of the central teachings of their traditions, the Three Sisters, that describes corn, beans, and squash as being part of their very origins.

Yes, and what people 'know' is often false. Oral histories are wonderful things, but they change.

You can't grow plants without pollen being distributed and showing up in the soil around, and that's what is lacking before ~1300, in particular.

 

[Nikephoros]

Since I couldn't stay away from AH.com even if I tried, I just had to respond.

I think we've had this discussion more than a few times before. You seem so willing to rely on what western scientists think they know rather than going to the people far more likely to know, Natives themselves.

Well, then how about you direct us to a study conducted by an enrolled member of an Iroquois tribe that shows us how early corn was grown. Otherwise, I'm gonna have to chalk that up to some faux-Indian pseudo-history.

Often it's "scientific" methods that are lacking. Early archaeologists rather foolishly decided to carefully wash away any possible traces of food residues on the items they excavated.
http://www.rps.psu.edu/0101/corn.html

Here's a quote from the article that you yourself posted:

The lab results, however, turned up a fourth possibility: no maize residue at all. None on the Point Peninsula pots, and, surprisingly, none on the Iroquois pots either. “So much for changing the world,” Schulenberg jokes. Yet her negative result had accomplished something: “What I’ve done is show that the models need to be revised.

No corn residue at all? Please explain how that supports your assertion. Granted, it shows that the traditional views of science might be incorrect, but it isn't proof at all, infact, it's the opposite.

So all we can say is western educated scientists so far haven't caught up to what the Iroquois already know. Corn came to the Iroquois fairly early. It's one of the central teachings of their traditions, the Three Sisters, that describes corn, beans, and squash as being part of their very origins.

So one should take legend, especially oral legend, as scientific proof?

So Oddyseus actually met cyclops, sirens, a witch who turns men into swine? I seriously doubt it.

 

[Umbral]

If there is disagreemement among scholars, I think it is fine to state that "I'll ssume option A (or whatever) is right" For AH purposes. We are not here to settle the disputes of the scholars, after all.

 

[chornedsnorkack]

2) It did not distinguish itself positivly over the competition. Vinland, from what was known of it, offered pretty much the same as Northern Russia and the wild east, but in a far more inconvenient location involving a long dangerous voyage.

From Sweden or Norway.

From Greenland, Northern Russia is inconveniently far away. Newfoundland is rather closer.

If you really wanted to fight off natives and set up your own hall (and many did) you could do it in Ireland or something, with lots of your own people backing you up, rather than alone in Vinland.

If you go to Ireland or Finland to keep kine and sow barley and oats then the natives are already doing the same, and better than you. They are numerous, and do not want you to take their land.

If you go to Newfoundland, you can keep kine and sow barley and oats also. But even before the natives catch your diseases, they have never heard of barley and oats, and they are too far north to grow maize. Thus, they are hunter-gatherers, and far fewer in number than the natives of Ireland or Finland.

The best way to ensure a successful colony, I think, would be an initial alliance with a local tribe.

And a small colony of Norse can take up a modest plot of land and supply the neighbouring local bands with grain, cheese and iron.

Personally I think a viking colony in the Gulf of st. Lawrence will quickly own the local seas, and will be able to travel and trade around the great lakes rather quickly. Unless hostiles stop them at chocepoints. They will get rich in local terms from trading, and range wider and faster than the locals in a few generations.

There is no chokepoint on Atlantic coast.

The first chokepoint on Saint Lawrence is the rapids between Montreal and Cornwall.

The lack of maize pollen on Saint Lawrence can show that the area was not settled by maize growing Iroquois. But what is harder to check is whether Iroquois may have lived somewhere else, such as being the people who did grow maize, beans and squash in Ohio valley.

 

[Nikephoros]

From Sweden or Norway.

From Greenland, Northern Russia is inconveniently far away. Newfoundland is rather closer.

Good point, but the population of Greenland wasn't that high to begin with. Nor was there really enough there for them to supply themselves with on their trips to colonize Vinland.

If you go to Ireland or Finland to keep kine and sow barley and oats then the natives are already doing the same, and better than you. They are numerous, and do not want you to take their land.

But they also have money. (To a degree, and not really "money" persay)

If you go to Newfoundland, you can keep kine and sow barley and oats also. But even before the natives catch your diseases, they have never heard of barley and oats, and they are too far north to grow maize. Thus, they are hunter-gatherers, and far fewer in number than the natives of Ireland or Finland.

But you can practice agriculture in many places. Why choose far away Newfoundland?

And a small colony of Norse can take up a modest plot of land and supply the neighbouring local bands with grain, cheese and iron.

Perhaps

The lack of maize pollen on Saint Lawrence can show that the area was not settled by maize growing Iroquois. But what is harder to check is whether Iroquois may have lived somewhere else, such as being the people who did grow maize, beans and squash in Ohio valley.

Well, agricultural products are as likely, no scratch that, MORE likely to spread than people, and possibly quite faster.

 

[chornedsnorkack]

But they also have money. (To a degree, and not really "money" persay)

Yes, but what do the Norse have to offer?

But you can practice agriculture in many places. Why choose far away Newfoundland?

Because it is the closest place that is nearly vacant. Everywhere in Old World where Old World crops and animals can be grown, somebody already did, with the minor exception of the belt that is really, really marginal and bad for this, like Northern Norway or White Sea area.

Well, agricultural products are as likely, no scratch that, MORE likely to spread than people, and possibly quite faster.

Depends.

How fast was maize spreading, in 1st and 2nd millennium North America?

 

[Bavarian Raven]

There isn't any bog iron on the Island of Newfoundland. Trust me on this one

not to mention that some of the smaller islands (ie, bell island...) have had or still have iron mines on them (albiet small ones) but still...

 

[Jared]

How fast was maize spreading, in 1st and 2nd millennium North America?

According to this researcher here, maize had reached the western end of Lake Ontario by sometime between 500 to 1000 AD.

Some of his published research sounds like it was much more widespread around the lower Great Lakes around this time, but I don't have access to a uni library to read the full article.

This website here also claims that maize, beans and squash were spreading through the Great Lakes region during the first millenium AD, although the changeover to full-time farmers along the Great Lakes doesn't seem to have happened until roughly 1000 AD.

 

[chornedsnorkack]

So... where could the boundary be around year 1000 on Atlantic coast?

As the Norse sail up St. Lawrence, the first chokepoint is Lachine Rapids. Montreal Island is a convenient base to colonize.

The spread of maize agriculture through Great Lakes is described as a slow process, as maize, squash and beans were changed and bred to adapt to cooler climate. At that rate, it would have been time enough for the maize-growing people to spread with their fields and encroach on hunter-gatherers. It is said that maize reached New York State by 1 AD and Ontario by 500 AD.

Now, if the Norse farmers of Montreal island find the chokepoint of Saint Lawrence rapids sparsely settled, they can portage overland and settle Thousand Islands. Build Viking ships to sail Lake Ontario, and reach the western end and Niagara river... and there they encounter maize farmers.

It takes a thorough change of lifestyle for a Newfoundland Beothuk hunter-gatherer to learn farming barley from their Norse friends, or for a St. Lawrence Valley Mikmaq hunter-gatherer to learn farming maize from their Iroquois friends.

But if Norse barley-growers and Iroquois maize-growers meet on Lake Ontario, it would be relatively easy for the Norse to learn to grow maize, or for Iroquois to learn to grow barley.

Which can have effects...

 

[Umbral]

From Sweden or Norway.

From Greenland, Northern Russia is inconveniently far away. Newfoundland is rather closer.

Indded. As I said, the population of Greenland is close and motivated. But this plays into my other point, we're at the end of a long supply chain population-wise, and we don't have the number of settlers we really need.

If you go to Ireland or Finland to keep kine and sow barley and oats then the natives are already doing the same, and better than you. They are numerous, and do not want you to take their land.

If you go to Newfoundland, you can keep kine and sow barley and oats also. But even before the natives catch your diseases, they have never heard of barley and oats, and they are too far north to grow maize. Thus, they are hunter-gatherers, and far fewer in number than the natives of Ireland or Finland.

Yes. However, this was not a distinction known among the Norse. They knew there were hostile natives, skrælings, but not anything about them having less population-density or poorer weapons than the Norse. As far as they knew, Vinland was pretty similar to Northern Russia, better climate but with more hostile natives and further away.

Now, one good voyage of explorers taking place just after the initial native die-off could have changed that.

There is no chokepoint on Atlantic coast.

Sorry, I wasn't clear. I was seeing the Norse trade over a very wide area withion a few generations, including the Atlantic coast, Greenland, the Great Lakes, rivers etc. And refered to chokepoints within this large area.

If the Norse get a good grip on a base initially, which is not impossible they should be trading over a very, very large area in a few generations. They may grow rich in local terms from this. If fact, we could see the Norse being culturally dominant or influential over a very large area. And not only will things take off when they meet the Maize growers, but a lot of other things will as well. The Americas really lacked what the Norse could offer: fast transport and exchange of ideas over a large area.

Consider if the europeans half a millennuim later is met by Native ships before they make landfall.

 

[chornedsnorkack]

Indded. As I said, the population of Greenland is close and motivated. But this plays into my other point, we're at the end of a long supply chain population-wise, and we don't have the number of settlers we really need.

How many do we really need?

Yes. However, this was not a distinction known among the Norse. They knew there were hostile natives, skrælings, but not anything about them having less population-density or poorer weapons than the Norse. As far as they knew, Vinland was pretty similar to Northern Russia, better climate but with more hostile natives and further away.

But they also had the example of northern Norway. Where the native Sami hunter-gatherers did have low population density. And the Norse could settle down, trade and get along with Norse in long term.

With some intelligence, they could figure out the example to apply.

Sorry, I wasn't clear. I was seeing the Norse trade over a very wide area withion a few generations, including the Atlantic coast, Greenland, the Great Lakes, rivers etc. And refered to chokepoints within this large area.

And my point is that on Atlantic coast there are no chokepoints. The Indians have small boats and canoes, but they probably cannot do much to challenge a Norse ship in open water.

A ship sailing south from L´Anse aux Meadows can enter any river or estuary and sail up to fall line. Which means that the trade with Skraelings would tend to be distributed between many small markets at fall line and lower courses and mouths of small rivers.

But what would be logical stopping point on Atlantic coast as well is the belt where maize growers have only just arrived.

So long as they are exploring an area where only hunter-gatherers live, the native population is small. They can stake out lands for farming settlements - land is cheap to conquer or buy - and they can trade, but because of sparse population, the volumes of trade will be modest.

When they reach far south, with long established and dense population of maize growers, they can trade at large scale. But settling down will be hard: the numerous natives will not readily part with their lands.

And also, their plants and animals, adapted to chilly summers of North Europe, will grow poorly in the long and hot summers suited for maize. I suspect that this was one reason why English had difficulties taking root in Virginia, while Massachusetts fared better: their agriculture was easier to apply in the cooler climate of Massachusetts since it had closer resemblance to England.

But if the Norse settle in a region where maize growing has only just become established and the population of maize growers is still small, they have certain advantages.

The longer established, more numerous maize growers are far away not to demand the same lands, but close enough for easy trade.

And as I mentioned, the Norse can learn maize growing and teach European crops to natives.

If the Norse get a good grip on a base initially, which is not impossible they should be trading over a very, very large area in a few generations. They may grow rich in local terms from this. If fact, we could see the Norse being culturally dominant or influential over a very large area. And not only will things take off when they meet the Maize growers, but a lot of other things will as well. The Americas really lacked what the Norse could offer: fast transport and exchange of ideas over a large area.

Mississippi Culture did have large trade networks.

But exactly those trade networks already in place would mean that, for example, Norse iron tools produced in Montreal Island or Wolfe Island can quickly be traded all the way to Gulf of Mexico and up Missouri. While wealth from those networks flows back.

Will the Norse take control of the whole network?

 

[Dan1988]

Mississippi Culture did have large trade networks.

But they didn't reach what is now Atlantic Canada, did they?

 

[chornedsnorkack]

But they didn't reach what is now Atlantic Canada, did they?

Where did they reach, as of 1000?

Erik the Red can sail as far as Lachine Rapids without leaving his ships. Going up Saint Lawrence, precisely where do Norse and their iron tools first meet Mississippi Culture trade networks (not the culture itself)?

After Lake ntario, the next portage is that of Niagara Falls, between Lewiston/Queenston and Grass Island Pool. Will the Norse settle there?

Note that when the Norse meet numerous, maize growing Skraelings... while they did bring Norse women along to Iceland, Greenland and Vinland, as well as England, Ireland, France, Russia, in Europe they showed that they were quite ready to intermarry with locals.

In England, France and Russia, the locals were numerous and had a widespread and useful language to teach to the mixed blood offspring. But if the Norse meet many different Indian tribes and have a prestigious culture of their own, in a century you could meet people with Norse names and Norse mothertongue who are 15/16 Indians. In five centuries...

 

[Dathi THorfinnsson]

According to this researcher here, maize had reached the western end of Lake Ontario by sometime between 500 to 1000 AD.

Some of his published research sounds like it was much more widespread around the lower Great Lakes around this time, but I don't have access to a uni library to read the full article.

This website here also claims that maize, beans and squash were spreading through the Great Lakes region during the first millenium AD, although the changeover to full-time farmers along the Great Lakes doesn't seem to have happened until roughly 1000 AD.

Hmmm... Thanks for the link. Yes, that seems solid evidence for maize grown in the area that early. And googling, I found a few more reports like that. OTOH, the palynology seems to clearly show that corn wasn't being grown until ~1300. Something's wrong here. My GUESS is that maize was a minor crop until 1300, so there wasn't significant amount of pollen.

Another study showed a significant shift from animal protein to plant about 1300, which would also be consistent with a shift from hunter-gardener to fulltime agriculture.

Note that they did have several other crops (before and after maize), there's a Chenopodium sp. they used, and some sunflowers, etc.

 

[Dan1988]

Where did they reach, as of 1000?

Well, I know this much - the Mississippian culture does not have any descendants in the Northeast, so I think we know where it stopped. The Mississippian culture was mainly in the US South and Midwest. For example: the Cherokee and Muscogee are descended from the Mississippian culture, but the Mi'kmaq/L'nu and the Haudenosaunee are not. And as for the Innu/Beothuk - it is most likely that they are descendants of the Maritime Archaic tradition since a couple of years prior to the Vinland expedition the Innu/Beothuk had displaced the Dorset culture from what are now both the Island of Newfoundland and southern Labrador (because the Dorset culture in those areas lacked harpoons, which meant that they were limited whatever fish they could catch along the shore instead of catching seals and thus had no means of defending themselves).

Erik the Red can sail as far as Lachine Rapids without leaving his ships. Going up Saint Lawrence, precisely where do Norse and their iron tools first meet Mississippi Culture trade networks (not the culture itself)?

The area of modern southwest and central Michigan through that direction.

After Lake ntario, the next portage is that of Niagara Falls, between Lewiston/Queenston and Grass Island Pool. Will the Norse settle there?

If they can get past Lachine, that is - and make friends among the local Aboriginals. I still think that the Island of Newfoundland (which would work as Hvítramannaland, or Ireland the Great/Albania, in the eyes of the Norse due to similarities between it and Ireland) would probably be a main settlement centre. If we want to go for a Christian Vinland, one of the central settlements on the Island could be the main centre of Christianity, which could potentially be named to reflect such - for example, after Níðárós (now Trondheim) in Norway, or a name cognate to Elfdalian's Tjyörtjbybynn /tsʏœrtsbʏbʏn:/ (the Church Village). In any case, whatever Aboriginals the Norse might come up with are also "newcomers" to the area as well, who hunt seal and walrus and caribou, among other things, not grow maize.

Note that when the Norse meet numerous, maize growing Skraelings... while they did bring Norse women along to Iceland, Greenland and Vinland, as well as England, Ireland, France, Russia, in Europe they showed that they were quite ready to intermarry with locals.

And each other, too.

In England, France and Russia, the locals were numerous and had a widespread and useful language to teach to the mixed blood offspring. But if the Norse meet many different Indian tribes and have a prestigious culture of their own, in a century you could meet people with Norse names and Norse mothertongue who are 15/16 Indians. In five centuries...

Actually, what could happen is that, yes, the end result could be equivalent to Métis people, but what would happen is that a mixed language (similar to Michif, a French-Cree mixed language) or even a creole language would develop, and the development of Old West Norse would reflect that development.

There are basic differences: most Aboriginal languages are polysynthetic and agglutinative that heavily rely on evidentiality (so that it's isn't, for example, just "Mary had a little lamb", but "Mary may have a little lamb, but I'm not certain of it" [also a good example of the dubitative mood]), while most Indo-European languages (such as the Scandinavian ones) are synthetic and fusional that heavily rely on time to make distinctions. What could happen, therefore, is probably a hybrid with heavy Aboriginal influence, which could easily affect the development of Old West Norse. For example, Innu-aimun has only three short vowels /a/, /i/, /u/ and four long vowels /â/, /e/, /î/, /û/, each one having allophones of their own. Thus, it is very likely that the front rounded vowels /y/ and /ø/ of Old West Norse would be replaced by /î/ and /e/ in the resulting language; at the same time, due to Innu-aimun's process of nasal assimilation, the nasal vowels of Old West Norse would be retained. Also, there would also be some major simplifications in the morphology - for example, masculine and feminine genders would merge into an animate "common" gender (as in Danish, Swedish, and Norwegian Bokmål), a major merger of stem classes in the noun, the division of the 3rd person into a "proximative" (topical) and "obviative" (non-topical, sometimes called the 4th person) in pronouns, an expansion of verbal categories so as to take evidentiality into account, and probably a very rich derivational morphology.

The reason for this is simple - with Métis people, they would have command of both their native Aboriginal language and another language. If we take Michif as an example, the maternal language (in this example, Cree) provides the grammatical system whilst the paternal language (in this example, French) provides the lexicon. The men are most likely immigrants (and thus not around most of the time), and children tend to know their mother's language better. It would be no different in the case of the Norsemen.

 

[cryptogirl]

Iceland around OTL 1000 CE was on the brink of civil war over the adoption of Christianity, and lawspeaker Þorgeir Þorkelsson Ljósvetningagoði was appointed to mediate the dispute. After he meditating a fur blanket for a day and a night, he determined that Iceland would become officially Christian but paganism would continue to be tolerated.

An interesting POD would be if he had decided that Iceland become Christian, but points west would be be reserved as pagan. On this OTL, you'd have a good impetus for pagan Icelanders moving west to Greenland and Vinland, and distancing themselves politically from Christian Scandinavia. Just a thought.

Also, I wonder if there might be some way to merge Norse berserkers with indigenous Wendigo and Adlet legends - creating fierce warrior societies that would form the seed of the mercenary troops that will ultimately emerge.

Oh, and I wouldn't stress too much over the great maize debate: as long as it's halfway plausible and it helps develop your narrative, do what you like. This is AH after all! ^_^

Just some thoughts

 

[chornedsnorkack]

Well, I know this much - the Mississippian culture does not have any descendants in the Northeast, so I think we know where it stopped. The Mississippian culture was mainly in the US South and Midwest. For example: the Cherokee and Muscogee are descended from the Mississippian culture, but the Mi'kmaq/L'nu and the Haudenosaunee are not. And as for the Innu/Beothuk - it is most likely that they are descendants of the Maritime Archaic tradition since a couple of years prior to the Vinland expedition the Innu/Beothuk had displaced the Dorset culture from what are now both the Island of Newfoundland and southern Labrador (because the Dorset culture in those areas lacked harpoons, which meant that they were limited whatever fish they could catch along the shore instead of catching seals and thus had no means of defending themselves).



The area of modern southwest and central Michigan through that direction.

Yes, but I asked specifically about their trade networks.

If they can get past Lachine, that is - and make friends among the local Aboriginals.

The Varyags got across the rapids of Volkhov, the long water divide between Lovat and Dnepr, and the rapids of Drepr. All the while confronted by locals who could use all the same cultivated plants, domestic animals and metals.

Once the Vikings are on the Erie, the next three Great Lakes are open to them. For a viking ship built on upper Niagara, the reefs of Limekiln Crossing of Detroit river and shoals of Saint Clair Lake are easy.

Where next?

Closest Mississippi culture area is Ohio River valley. But the water divide between Erie Lake and Ohio River, while generally easy, does not have any specifically favourable portages.

Whereas at the southern end of lake Michigan, the Chicago Portage goes straight to Illinois River, American Bottom, Cahokia and Mississippi valley.

Will the Vikings find any major Mississippi Culture settlement at Chicago itself?

To the north, they have the Saint Mary Rapids portage to Superior and the copper deposits there.

I still think that the Island of Newfoundland (which would work as Hvítramannaland, or Ireland the Great/Albania, in the eyes of the Norse due to similarities between it and Ireland) would probably be a main settlement centre.

Yes, probably.

For a surplus inhabitant of Iceland or Greenland, Newfoundland would be the closest and most practical place to go and farm. The island is slightly bigger than Iceland, but with better climate - just slightly warmer summer, flatter and lower landscape, tall-growing forests...

Few Norse would go past Newfoundland compared to those who settle down there.

If we want to go for a Christian Vinland, one of the central settlements on the Island could be the main centre of Christianity, which could potentially be named to reflect such - for example, after Níðárós (now Trondheim) in Norway, or a name cognate to Elfdalian's Tjyörtjbybynn /tsʏœrtsbʏbʏn:/ (the Church Village).

Iceland, with 20 000...30 000 souls from 11th century on, sent out 1000 settlers to Greenland in 986, and more in later years. It would be easy for Iceland to send 100 emigrants each year to Newfoundland through 11th century, so 10 000 souls in total, plus their natural increase - by 1100, there would be more Norse in Newfoundland than in Iceland.

Iceland got a bishop in 1056. In 1106, northern Iceland got a separate Bishop of Holar. And in 1126, Greenland got a separate bishop.

In late 11th century, founding a bishopric in Newfoundland would be likely, for a Christian Vinland. And the size and population would quickly warrant extra bishops - plus bishops in the far away Norse trading settlements in Cape Breton, Montreal, Massachusetts...

Actually, what could happen is that, yes, the end result could be equivalent to Métis people, but what would happen is that a mixed language (similar to Michif, a French-Cree mixed language) or even a creole language would develop, and the development of Old West Norse would reflect that development.

There are basic differences: most Aboriginal languages are polysynthetic and agglutinative that heavily rely on evidentiality (so that it's isn't, for example, just "Mary had a little lamb", but "Mary may have a little lamb, but I'm not certain of it" [also a good example of the dubitative mood]), while most Indo-European languages (such as the Scandinavian ones) are synthetic and fusional that heavily rely on time to make distinctions. What could happen, therefore, is probably a hybrid with heavy Aboriginal influence, which could easily affect the development of Old West Norse. For example, Innu-aimun has only three short vowels /a/, /i/, /u/ and four long vowels /â/, /e/, /î/, /û/, each one having allophones of their own. Thus, it is very likely that the front rounded vowels /y/ and /ø/ of Old West Norse would be replaced by /î/ and /e/ in the resulting language; at the same time, due to Innu-aimun's process of nasal assimilation, the nasal vowels of Old West Norse would be retained. Also, there would also be some major simplifications in the morphology - for example, masculine and feminine genders would merge into an animate "common" gender (as in Danish, Swedish, and Norwegian Bokmål), a major merger of stem classes in the noun, the division of the 3rd person into a "proximative" (topical) and "obviative" (non-topical, sometimes called the 4th person) in pronouns, an expansion of verbal categories so as to take evidentiality into account, and probably a very rich derivational morphology.

The reason for this is simple - with Métis people, they would have command of both their native Aboriginal language and another language. If we take Michif as an example, the maternal language (in this example, Cree) provides the grammatical system whilst the paternal language (in this example, French) provides the lexicon. The men are most likely immigrants (and thus not around most of the time), and children tend to know their mother's language better. It would be no different in the case of the Norsemen.

It is not so important whether the men are "immigrants". What is more important is what they do once they have arrived.

If the Norse in Vinland become full-time traders, wandering around rivers and forests then, yes, they have little opportunity to teach their children.

If, however, they stake out small and demarcated plots of land (like isles of Boularderie, Orleans, Montreal, Wolfe, Aquidneck...), and engage in intensive agriculture there (fields and haymaking) while the more extensive roaming occupations like providing fish and game meat are left to their Skraeling trade partners and in-laws, they stay around home somewhat longer at agricultural work.

Did the people of Normandy end up speaking standard French like the French of Picardy and Ile de France never conquered by Norse, or a Norse-French creole language?

What about Orkneys and Shetlands, which must have had Celtic settlers since Neolithic?

 

[Thinker1200]

All of these awesome ideas make me wanna try writing a TL now. Too bad i really suck at writing.