GdwnsnHo
Banned
British Isles weren't united till the beginning of the 18th century. I said an Islamic Iberia would push the discovery back two centuries. By that time, naval technology could have advanced to the point where the journey isn't necessarily suicidal. So we're not actually disagreeing.
Which is why Muslim Iberia does not discover America. England doesn't because she has plenty of opportunities for expansion in the British Isles, France, and the Low Countries. France the same. No Portugal, no priority to get around the Muslim world.
I'm aware of that (and I'm aware we aren't entirely disagreeing), but my point is that in a longer Medieval period (which IMO kinda would have to involve changes with Charlemagne, and as such making OTL British Isles involvement in France unlikely). The problem for the English is that whilst they are strong enough to unite the British Isles, combined they aren't really strong enough to intervene against Franco-German Empire, not without a decent casus belli like a claim on the throne to draw local support - so they don't really have any avenues locally. Perhaps they would get involved in Scandinavia, which would involve Iceland, which would enable easy expansion into Greenland, and the Vinland Saga become easy to explore (assuming British successes), for even eccentrics.
I think LSCatilina responded to some of your other points better than I could, so yay.
But the technology existed to sail around Africa since the Phoenicians. There's a reason it took 2000 years for someone to actually do it.
Well, you mention this - but opinion is split on whether or not Necho II of Ancient Egypt hired the Phoenicians to circumnavigate Africa. The story is oral tradition, for whatever that means to you. Just FYI.