Norse North America

[Mario]

In History there are events that happen by chance, but others not.

The colonization of the Americas is an event that happened when it was possible, not earlier or later (significatively).

Apart of the Norse, it's possible that other civilizations would manage to arrive to America before Columbus or even before the Norse (the fact that this is not documented doesn't imply that it didn't happen) but would have they been able to colonize or settle?

The Norse would never mixed with the Indian population like later European did, because it was simply difficult to accept for their culture. Of course, isolated cases could happen, but not at a significant scale.

Norse were not invaders in the sense of ruling foreign civilizations. They used to ransack them or occupying for a while, but did not create stable empires. They mostly settled inhabited (or almost) areas rather than populated ones.

 

[Evilprodigy]

I don't know enough about the other points to comment so I'll respond to the ones I can.

Why not Niagara? The mouth of Niagara is a natural harbour, Niagara has abundant fresh water and power, and the portage, from navigable lower course of Niagara at Lewiston/Queenston escarpment to the navigable Grass Island Pool on the brink of the Cascades is just 11 km. OTL, Niagara was a frontier since 1783... but in any TL where anyone ends up with both banks, whether USA, British North America, New France or Vinland Norse, why not a megacity on Niagara?

Everything on Lake Ontario has abundant Fresh water, until industrial pollutants start getting added that is. The natural harbour of Toronto is many many times larger than in Niagara. I can easily see Niagara becoming an important city but I can't see it become a megacity or primary port because it's harbour is nowhere near as large. For 11th century Norse this might not matter but after colonization really kicks off and population grows more and more I just can't see Niagara being able to handle all of the sheer bulk.

Also ample power doesn't matter, I'm assuming you are referring to the Hydroelectric plant there, if not please ignore the rest of this small paragraph. The power plant in Niagara isn't going to matter until people actually use electricity and that's not for another 900ish years. Even then Electricity is literally one of the fastest things we know of, it isn't very hard to move energy generated by the dam to the rest of North America so long as it's on the electrical grid.

OTL French sent La Salle expedition to Mexican Gulf in 1680s, when there were just 12 000 souls in Quebec.

In my post I am not referring to the colonization of the Mississippi as in stuff in the states of Louisiana and Mississippi. The context of the discussion was the Northern Mississippi portage stuff in Illinois and those north central states, not New Orleans. That's an entirely different discussion and besides the fact that the French already knew that there was stuff there. The Norse won't have that knowledge or the same level of long distance travelling ships. To get to the Gulf they would take much more time and would need more way points all along the American Eastcoast.

 

[Malta]

Wouldn't the Norse have to deal diplomatically with the hundreds of tribes of the interior?

 

[chornedsnorkack]

Everything on Lake Ontario has abundant Fresh water, until industrial pollutants start getting added that is. The natural harbour of Toronto is many many times larger than in Niagara. I can easily see Niagara becoming an important city but I can't see it become a megacity or primary port because it's harbour is nowhere near as large.

Come to think of, OTL Buffalo is fairly significant.
Toronto Harbour was originally 870 ha, infilled to 490 ha, right?

For 11th century Norse this might not matter but after colonization really kicks off and population grows more and more I just can't see Niagara being able to handle all of the sheer bulk.

In my post I am not referring to the colonization of the Mississippi as in stuff in the states of Louisiana and Mississippi. The context of the discussion was the Northern Mississippi portage stuff in Illinois and those north central states, not New Orleans. That's an entirely different discussion and besides the fact that the French already knew that there was stuff there.

Yes. But La Salle was still the first there... and it was too far north for de Soto.

Yes, the Norse trying to travel overland to Mississippi will have to deal diplomatically with the local tribes. The question is, what the outcome of negotiations might be?

 

[Evilprodigy]

Come to think of, OTL Buffalo is fairly significant.

That's on Lake Erie though. It would be less accessible than stuff in Lake Ontario that's directly connected to the St. Lawrence. It's also insanely smaller than Toronto, so I am unsure if it would be any more important ITTL than IOTL.

Toronto Harbour was originally 870 ha, infilled to 490 ha, right?

I don't know what you are asking. ha? Is that a unit of measurement?

Yes. But La Salle was still the first there... and it was too far north for de Soto.

They still knew there was stuff there. Like how Europeans knew India was to the East and China was even further east the French knew there was stuff in the Gulf, that it existed, because the Spanish regularly travelled around there shipping gold out of Veracruz. ITTL Norse have no idea what they are getting into when they explore further south, they would be the first sailors to ever see any of these territories.

Yes, the Norse trying to travel overland to Mississippi will have to deal diplomatically with the local tribes. The question is, what the outcome of negotiations might be?

How much information do we have on the region in this time anyways? It's scarce even when talking about the 1600s and 1700s, hundreds of years before is going to be even worse.

Though IIRC since the tribes were not as unified in this time before the Confederacy perhaps the Norse could take the route of supporting one tribe over another local one to gain their trust and then use them as suppliers for the fur trade. The French did that with the Huron against the Iroquois but that was a time where the tribes were semi-organized at least.

 

[Simreeve]

I don't know what you are asking. ha? Is that a unit of measurement?

Hectare: 100 metres squared, or the equivalent area but with different proportions. 1 ha is roughly equal to 2½ acres.

 

[chornedsnorkack]

That's on Lake Erie though. It would be less accessible than stuff in Lake Ontario that's directly connected to the St. Lawrence. It's also insanely smaller than Toronto, so I am unsure if it would be any more important ITTL than IOTL.

IOTL, the population of Buffalo was 360 000 in 1900, being 8th largest city in the whole USA - and Toronto, in the same year, was 230 000.

 

[Evilprodigy]

IOTL, the population of Buffalo was 360 000 in 1900, being 8th largest city in the whole USA - and Toronto, in the same year, was 230 000.

A source I just grabbed says Buffalo was 352,400 and Toronto was 208,000. Not much different but it helps back your point up. This was information I was unaware of. Also according to my source Buffalo hit it's peak in the 40s and 50s at almost 600,000 (Toronto was 660,000) but is now (according to wikipedia) 259,000 and Toronto is... 2,615,000.

It seems the last 50 years has treated these cities very differently and I have to say I am now very much lost as to which one would be more important for the Norse.

 

[chornedsnorkack]

Buffalo is either way the east end of the Upper Great Lakes - unobstructed deep waterway through Erie, St. Clair, Huron and Michigan all the way to Chicago. (Naturally there were shallows at the mouths of Detroit and St. Clair; these were OTL dredged late 19th century, but with natural depth about 2 m, were not a problem for Norse ships drawing 1,5 m or less).

Since the Merkins OTL did not hold lower St. Lawrence, lake Ontario was no use for them. A branch canal to Rochester, and that was all.

Which is why the Merkins built Erie Canal, which was the outlet for whole Great Lakes, and Midwest Mississippi basin. It was Erie Canal that made New York a megacity.

Erie Canal was 560 km, Albany to Buffalo. Whereas the whole St. Lawrence Rapids, Ogdensburg to Montreal, is 190 km. Plus the other crossing, Niagara Scarp - but Welland Canal is just 42 km, using no part of Niagara river.

In view of these advantages, if the same government were to hold both sides of Great Lakes and both St. Lawrence and Mohawk routes, I suggest they still would not bother building Erie Canal. They would concentrate on Montreal in preference to New York or Albany. Sure, Hudson would be important, and Champlain canal would probably get build, but Erie... what for?

 

[yourworstnightmare]

The problems are the following:

1. The Native Americans. The reason Vinland failed. The Norse colonists were probably just too few to be able stay if the natives got hostile. And the places the colonists/ explorers came from i.e. Iceland and newly colonized Greenland were just not populated enough for anything else than really small expeditions happening.

2. Scandinavia has never been that populated. And this is why Norse settler colonies won't really work. There aren't enough Norse to create a settler population of viable size. Large settler populations are come from over population back home, which pushes people to migrate. While Scandinavians migrated to Atlantic islands and Greenland during this time (because of political troubles, not a population boom) these were islands and much easier to settle. It wasn't before the 1800s that Scandinavia became crowded and people were pushed to migrate.

 

[chornedsnorkack]

2. Scandinavia has never been that populated. And this is why Norse settler colonies won't really work. There aren't enough Norse to create a settler population of viable size.

The fewer than 1000 souls of Western Settlement of Greenland was a viable size.

 

[caliburdeath]

What if you had them bring over a ton of Irish slaves?

 

[Evilprodigy]

What if you had them bring over a ton of Irish slaves?

Their Catholics. They wouldn't have other Catholic slaves.

 

[caliburdeath]

Their Catholics. They wouldn't have other Catholic slaves.

They were half catholic, half pagan roughly, right? A rich pagan and his entourage decide to go to Vinland (or found a new colony on the mainland, which we could call 'Vast/Vestland') and take a lot of Irish slaves or thralls (were thralls and slaves the same thing?).

 

[Evilprodigy]

They were half catholic, half pagan roughly, right? A rich pagan and his entourage decide to go to Vinland (or found a new colony on the mainland, which we could call 'Vast/Vestland') and take a lot of Irish slaves or thralls (were thralls and slaves the same thing?).

The reason Greenland and Vinland were found in the first place was because the king wanted to spread Catholicism. Even if the people aren't totally Catholic the government was and no Catholic in their right mind would look at their pagan neighbour with a slave only because he's Catholic and tolerate that kind of action.
This is also long after the Raiding age ended, since Scandinavia had become more or less unified by Christian rulers and was directing energy towards political goals of the king such as the invasions of England by Harald Hardrada, Sweyn Forkbeard, Cnut the Great, and William the Conquorer or the invasions of Finland by Sweden and the invasions of Norway by Denmark by Sweyn Forkbeard and Cnut the Great.

 

[Ravenflight]

Great Lakes Settlements

Hi Guys,

Thanks for your comments on Toronto/Buffalo/Niagara. I really appreciate it. I think we have to look at where it (the founding city) is being colonised and that reflects on why and by whom. For instance a huge natural harbour could be considered by those who can forsee the need for such a thing (i.e. the British and French who knew about deep(er) draft ships. I don't think the Norse would think of such a thing. Something that protected a couple of hundred longships with wide beachings would be preferable to something that could anchor a similar number of tallships.

So with that in mind, I think I'd pick Niagara or Buffalo, particularly with the populations discussed earlier. I do not discount the Toronto site, and see what has been mentioned of the 'water transport' benefits. I think that would be a secondary site (tertiary after Montreal/Quebec) that would be easily colonised from the successful Buffalo/Niagara site.

 

[Delvestius]

The reason Greenland and Vinland were found in the first place was because the king wanted to spread Catholicism. Even if the people aren't totally Catholic the government was and no Catholic in their right mind would look at their pagan neighbour with a slave only because he's Catholic and tolerate that kind of action.
This is also long after the Raiding age ended, since Scandinavia had become more or less unified by Christian rulers and was directing energy towards political goals of the king such as the invasions of England by Harald Hardrada, Sweyn Forkbeard, Cnut the Great, and William the Conquorer or the invasions of Finland by Sweden and the invasions of Norway by Denmark by Sweyn Forkbeard and Cnut the Great.

A pagan Jarl or Petty King would give little regard to a Christian ruler, and a rogue warlord could probably muster a sizable pagan fleet with lots of Irish slaves.

 

[Uruk]

The problems are the following:
2. Scandinavia has never been that populated. And this is why Norse settler colonies won't really work. There aren't enough Norse to create a settler population of viable size. Large settler populations are come from over population back home, which pushes people to migrate. While Scandinavians migrated to Atlantic islands and Greenland during this time (because of political troubles, not a population boom) these were islands and much easier to settle. It wasn't before the 1800s that Scandinavia became crowded and people were pushed to migrate.

Ever heard about the Danelaw and Normandy?

 

[Delvestius]

Ever heard about the Danelaw and Normandy?

Also Dublin, the Shetland Islands, Russia...

 

[Ravenflight]

Ever heard about the Danelaw and Normandy?

Also Dublin, the Shetland Islands, Russia...

I was going to suggest those but tought 'ah stuff it, couldn't be bothered, I don't need to convince anyone...'. Glad someone else did.