Pre-Columbian knowledge confirmed: A monk in 14th-century Italy wrote about the Americas

How definitive is the source? Its sounds quite vague and like others have said perhaps mythologizing the unknown areas to the west was common.

It also seems even if true it couldn't have had much bearing on Columbus. He sailed from Spain and ran into the West Indies, which is a long way from “sailors who frequent the seas of Denmark and Norway”.
 
As some people have pointed out, Columbus's goal was not to discover/explore a New World, but to plot a sea trade route to East Asia. That's where the money was. For quite some time, America was not the 'Land of Opportunity' but 'annoying thing that is in the way'.

Columbus vastly underestimated the size of the globe and overestimated the breadth of Asia. Whether he deliberately fudged the numbers or was just wrong I don't know, but he needed his numbers to be right for the expedition to be logistically feasible. A 15th century ship sailing from Spain to Japan directly, assuming no America in the way, could technically make the journey; the crew would just starve to death well before they reached their destination. Ferdinand and Isabella took Columbus's proposal to scholars and they told the monarchs that Columbus's figures were wrong, because they were.

In light of that, knowledge of some vague landmass out west from Norse accounts isn't that intriguing. "Oh, these undetermined lands might possibly, maybe, be a useful stopping point on the Indies" doesn't exactly inspire much confidence or interest. Furthermore, consider the Norse accounts. The Norse were up in the north Atlantic. Newfoundland isn't exactly geographically well-situated for a shipping route between Spain and Japan (assuming no America), and it's hardly suited to support, by its own resources, the victualing needs of trading flotillas.

In addition, the Norse were operating in the north Atlantic, which doesn't do sailors in the central Atlantic any good. Columbus was the beneficiary of a century of Portuguese exploration of the winds and currents of the central Atlantic as they worked their way around Africa. Knowing that one needs to head south to the Canaries, then swing west, rather than just heading west straight out of Cadiz or A Coruna, to catch the good winds, is not something that could be learned from Norse accounts, nor that the return journey requires heading north to and coming back via the latitude of the Azores.
 

Crazy Boris

Banned
As some people have pointed out, Columbus's goal was not to discover/explore a New World, but to plot a sea trade route to East Asia. That's where the money was. For quite some time, America was not the 'Land of Opportunity' but 'annoying thing that is in the way'.

Columbus vastly underestimated the size of the globe and overestimated the breadth of Asia. Whether he deliberately fudged the numbers or was just wrong I don't know, but he needed his numbers to be right for the expedition to be logistically feasible. A 15th century ship sailing from Spain to Japan directly, assuming no America in the way, could technically make the journey; the crew would just starve to death well before they reached their destination. Ferdinand and Isabella took Columbus's proposal to scholars and they told the monarchs that Columbus's figures were wrong, because they were.

In light of that, knowledge of some vague landmass out west from Norse accounts isn't that intriguing. "Oh, these undetermined lands might possibly, maybe, be a useful stopping point on the Indies" doesn't exactly inspire much confidence or interest. Furthermore, consider the Norse accounts. The Norse were up in the north Atlantic. Newfoundland isn't exactly geographically well-situated for a shipping route between Spain and Japan (assuming no America), and it's hardly suited to support, by its own resources, the victualing needs of trading flotillas.

In addition, the Norse were operating in the north Atlantic, which doesn't do sailors in the central Atlantic any good. Columbus was the beneficiary of a century of Portuguese exploration of the winds and currents of the central Atlantic as they worked their way around Africa. Knowing that one needs to head south to the Canaries, then swing west, rather than just heading west straight out of Cadiz or A Coruna, to catch the good winds, is not something that could be learned from Norse accounts, nor that the return journey requires heading north to and coming back via the latitude of the Azores.
What I'm thinking is that if Colombus knew about the norse accounts, he would have assumed Vinland & co. to just be part of Asia, and its location would back up his ideas about the size of the continent and the ocean
 
Ferdinand and Isabella took Columbus's proposal to scholars and they told the monarchs that Columbus's figures were wrong, because they were.
Why didn't they turn him down then?
What I'm thinking is that if Colombus knew about the norse accounts, he would have assumed Vinland & co. to just be part of Asia,
He wouldn't know how far down they extended though.
The safest course of action would be to find a patron where he could follow the Norse route as exactly as possible.
 
Why didn't they turn him down then?
They did originally. It took years of lobbying to get the Catholic Monarchs to change their mind. And the reason they did is that due to financial arrangements, the first expedition cost the Spanish crown very little. The ships, for example, were provided by the town of Palos to pay for a fine they owed to the crown. So it was a case of very long odds, but the slim possibility of a big payoff while the loss would be an annoying Genoese and the crown's equivalent of some loose change they found in the couch. In that case, why not take the bet?
 
What I'm thinking is that if Colombus knew about the norse accounts, he would have assumed Vinland & co. to just be part of Asia, and its location would back up his ideas about the size of the continent and the ocean
Columbus visited Iceland in 1477.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/oct/13/americas-origin-myth-and-its-reputation-at-risk
The fact is that Christopher Columbus visited Iceland in 1477-78, and learned of a western landmass named “Markland”. Seeking funds from King Ferdinand of Spain, he told the king that the western continent really did exist, it even had a name – and Columbus adapted “Markland” into the Spanish way of speaking, which requires an initial vowel “A-”, and dropped “-land” substituting “-ia”.

Thus “A-mark-ia”, ie “America”. In Icelandic, “Markland” may be translated as “the Outback” – perhaps a fair description.

See Graeme Davis, Vikings in America (Birlinn, 2009).
Colin Moffat
Kingston upon Thames, London
 
Last edited:
If the Zeno brothers really did try to sail west, I wonder how they managed that without royal sponsorship.

Adam of Bremen for one.

Well, it's noteworthy that the stories and tales of western lands were still around three hundred years later, and known on the other side of Europe to boot. This Galvano Fiamma is far closer in space and time to Columbus and the Italian navigators who followed him, than Adam was.

In light of that, knowledge of some vague landmass out west from Norse accounts isn't that intriguing. "Oh, these undetermined lands might possibly, maybe, be a useful stopping point on the Indies" doesn't exactly inspire much confidence or interest. Furthermore, consider the Norse accounts. The Norse were up in the north Atlantic. Newfoundland isn't exactly geographically well-situated for a shipping route between Spain and Japan (assuming no America), and it's hardly suited to support, by its own resources, the victualing needs of trading flotillas.

If there were lands in the north west of Europe, it could stand to reason that there might be lands to the south of it, also to the west of Europe!

Knowing that one needs to head south to the Canaries, then swing west, rather than just heading west straight out of Cadiz or A Coruna, to catch the good winds, is not something that could be learned from Norse accounts, nor that the return journey requires heading north to and coming back via the latitude of the Azores.

Wonder why we never heard of doomed expeditions or lost explorers who tried to head west directly to check it out.
 
So if these legends and tall tales were known to seamen, that means earlier Columbuses could have existed, right? We could presuppose any navigator who found a willing sponsor could have gone west. Hence the potential for more timelines.

Between this and the Toscanelli map, Columbus’ idea of sailing west goes from being a bit of a crapshoot it’s easy to assume it as at first to actually being kind of a brilliant idea and it’s 100% understandable why he decided to risk it.

I’m surprised no one thought to try it before him now.
Well just knowing someone went there and back again once or twice is not sufficient; it matters how risky and harrowing their voyage was, how low the chances are of surviving the round trip.

Navigational technology was advancing fast in the late medieval to early modern transitional era. The kinds of ships available even in say 1400 would be a poor bet for reliable transAtlantic crossings even by the "known" northern route, let alone striking across the middle of the North Atlantic in the lower latitudes leading to the Antilles. FWIW, if they gradually learned a lot empirically about Atlantic winds and currents, the way home again to places as far flung from each other as Norway to Iberia would be to join the Gulf Stream, which runs fairly close to a Great Circle route toward Britain--veering off one way on sea lanes well known in Viking times takes one to Norway, veering south, to France and Spain and Portugal.
Furthermore, consider the Norse accounts. The Norse were up in the north Atlantic. Newfoundland isn't exactly geographically well-situated for a shipping route between Spain and Japan (assuming no America), and it's hardly suited to support, by its own resources, the victualing needs of trading flotillas.
Actually if one picks up a globe and takes a look at it, the Great Circle Route from say Madrid to Canton runs--in its short part, inland along the Silk Route! The nearest passages by sea would, if only some kind of canal connected the Med to the Red Sea (and some form of low draft canal involving diverted river waters did exist from the Red Sea to the Nile in ancient times) run through the Med, into the Red Sea and Indian Ocean through the straits, around Southeast Asia to China and Japan from the south--indeed if one keeps going east instead of turning north at Vietnam, one is in the Spice Islands.

It was of course because the Ottoman conquest of Constantinople consolidated the power of the Sultanate and raised costs of goods imported the traditional ways that Europeans were looking for alternate routes, and again simply holding a globe in hand, a northeastern passage past Scandinavia and the White Sea along the Siberian Arctic coast would be a heck of a lot shorter than a "straight" shot to east Asia through some imaginary passage through any part of the Americas. It was impossible of course because of sea ice; if we can envision some climatic POD (which would consign it to ASB forum of course) making the Siberian coast navigable, then that would be the true alternate passage. Or a geographic POD (just as ASB of course) in which the coast of northern Asia receded far enough south to provide a navigable channel--we'd have to be careful not to wipe out Beringeria of course lest we prevent the colonization of the Americas.

Given the impassibility of the Northeast Passage, the choices boiled down to looking for some passage west past the Americas, hopefully indeed taking advantage of them for reprovisioning at the very least, or the Portuguese project of the Southeast Passage around South Africa into the Indian Ocean.

There is no deep geologic principle stipulating western continents as big as the two Americas have to extend so inconveniently from one set of iceberg-beset polar waters to the other without any breaks permitting crossing from Atlantic to Pacific. In fact the Central American isthmus formed only relatively recently geologically speaking; it would not be a tremendous geological POD to have OTL Panama or Oaxaca be an island-spotted shallow strait; this would suffice to keep the hydrology of the Gulf Stream largely operational while closely spotted islands could permit some exchange of fauna between north and south America, and yet ships of moderate draft could sail right through.

To get from Pacific waters just off Central America to East Asia is another hard trick, given the way currents and winds run one has to plunge through waters where islands are small and far between and keep sailing an awful long way even if one does have the luck and navigational skill to know where the islands are for reprovisioning. But having reached such locations as Melanesia, the Philippines or New Guinea, one can fairly easily then sail north and trade in Chinese or Japanese (or Korean) ports directly--if the respective Emperors of these strong realms will let you!

OTL in fact what Spain settled on was shipping silver (most valued by the Asian empires) and gold across the southern Pacific from Mexico to Manila, where Chinese traders would form the link bringing Chinese and other far Eastern goods to market, and trade the precious metals for these goods as well as filling out the galleon hulls with some Filipino craftworks and local produce, and then sail these Manila Galleons along the Great Circle which going eastward run with the currents, north right past the East Asian ports whose rulers would imprison them if they were in a good mood, or just kill them if not, on past the islands and peninsulas of northeast Asia (maritime Siberia) and south of the Aleutians and Alaska generally, to run into the American far northwest and turn south with the coastwise currents and winds past California back to Mexican ports such as Acapulco, which closed the circle. This circle trade in turn was routed on to Europe via the trade routes to Mexico; basically it turned Mexican and South American mined silver and gold into East Asian goods for the Spanish market. It was quite a good thing for Spain that Mexico existed to be plundered as well as serve as an intermediate provisioning point!

The moral of the story being that direct routes as the high-subsonic stratospheric jumbo jet flies (when indeed they too are not strongly diverted to handle jet streams!) are only sometimes of use and generally speaking just one way, due to the key importance of winds and currents. And yes, it would be nice if the sea route were not so long that reprovisioning need not be a thing, but since we are after all talking about global circumnavigation here, they are long and it is a bloody good thing there is somewhere to reprovision after all.
 
So if these legends and tall tales were known to seamen, that means earlier Columbuses could have existed, right? We could presuppose any navigator who found a willing sponsor could have gone west. Hence the potential for more timelines.
Maybe, but there was one huge issue in Europe nearly contemporary to the book's writing that would throw a wrench in that--the Black Death.

Europe was reaching something of a dearth of agricultural land before the Death broke out--I wonder if, in a No Black Death scenario, you might not see a new Migration Period as a large pulse of European peasant migrants shower the eastern seaboard of North America, driven by rumors of unclaimed land, rather than the OTL model of Spanish conquistadors followed (much later) by English planters.
 
I remember reading somewhere that Columbus reasoned there was something to the west based on how frequently driftwood reached the Canary Islands from that direction. Is that true?
 
Maybe, but there was one huge issue in Europe nearly contemporary to the book's writing that would throw a wrench in that--the Black Death.

Europe was reaching something of a dearth of agricultural land before the Death broke out--I wonder if, in a No Black Death scenario, you might not see a new Migration Period as a large pulse of European peasant migrants shower the eastern seaboard of North America, driven by rumors of unclaimed land, rather than the OTL model of Spanish conquistadors followed (much later) by English planters.
More likely they'd just move east since Eastern had plenty of land and combined with new advances in technology, would have the numbers to eventually overwhelm the steppe tribes. OTL, this was one of the main migration valves for the Germans, aided by events like the Habsburg-Ottoman Wars depopulating some areas of the Balkans.
 
That's funny. I was just doing my annual re-reading of the wiki pages about Vinland and related topics (the subject of Great Ireland/White Men's Land has always been of interest to me) and came across the claim that Markland was briefly mentioned by a Genoese monk. I was surprised by it and hadn't remembered seeing it before, but assumed I just missed it. I even looked at the paper but missed the date. Funny to see it was actually just an extremely recent finding.

Though very interesting, it doesn't really change much. It's just a vague rumor of an island out in the Atlantic, one of dozens of such reports prior to the discovery of the Americas. Recalls the 4 or 5 different duplications of Greenland. The North Atlantic was a very mysterious place to Europeans, but one of little concrete interest.

I find the description of Markland as being a land of cyclopean megaliths interesting, though. Seems very clearly to be a misunderstanding of the adjacent "Helluland," a land of giant stone slabs, which somehow got conflated into being buildings of stone slabs rather than cliffs and rock faces.

Wasn't there a recently-discovered Asian map from around this era that depicted part of the coast of the Pacific Northwest, including Alaska?
I think that's the alleged Marco Polo map. I haven't looked into it in a while, but from what I recalled it was pretty reaking of a hoax.

Columbus math is bad. Everybody knew Asia is a lot farther than what Columbus think.

Remember that expedition is to find route to Asia, which Columbus failed, not about finding Islands on the West.
Isn't the theory that Columbus actually knew the true distance but lied because the distance he cited would be easier to gain royal support with?
The exact size of Asia was unknown, and in fact from the estimated extent of Cathay, Cipangu, and the (east) Indies, Columbus actually probably would have reached them, or at least come close. See the Erdapfel Map, published 1492, as compared to the real map. It wasn't purely a misunderstanding of the exact size of the globe (though that was a factor) but also an overestimation of the size of Asia, which was not unreasonable since they knew basically nothing about Asia beyond Persia.

b3119b5cf143913ba0f4f02de1b3f9b0--globes-martin-omalley.jpg


I understand that English sailors were fishing off the grand Banks in the 1400s too.
Basques were early too, as early as the high Middle Ages if I remember correctly.
Both these have been alleged and there is some circumstantial evidence in support of it, but never been proven.

How definitive is the source? Its sounds quite vague and like others have said perhaps mythologizing the unknown areas to the west was common.

It also seems even if true it couldn't have had much bearing on Columbus. He sailed from Spain and ran into the West Indies, which is a long way from “sailors who frequent the seas of Denmark and Norway”.
I agree it seems a real stretch to say it inspired Columbus, and while it's obviously mythologized the similarity of the name makes it seem pretty obvious that this reflected a genuine, albeit flawed, transmission of knowledge from the North Atlantic to the Mediterranean.

What I'm thinking is that if Colombus knew about the norse accounts, he would have assumed Vinland & co. to just be part of Asia, and its location would back up his ideas about the size of the continent and the ocean
This is not unreasonable - if I recall correctly, there was some pre-Columbian Norse speculation that Greenland was a promontory of Tartaria. Presumably the same would hold for Vinland.

One of the more harebrained alternate etymologies I've heard.

If the Zeno brothers really did try to sail west, I wonder how they managed that without royal sponsorship.
The answer is "They didn't." Though assuming they had, they actually did have noble sponsorship from Zichmi. And it's not like it took Royal charter to island hop from the Orkneys to the Shetlands/Faroes to Iceland to Greenland and then beyond.
 
One thing to point out is that the concept of America as a new whole continent was never coined before Columbus and it was not realized until the first or second decade of the 16th century.

From the early Middle Ages (and probably even before) there were lots of accounts of 'land masses' (islands, whatever...) in the Atlantic, most of them just legendary (i.e. Antilia) and other real supported by Norse/monks/Basques occasional visits. However, the fact of a quite widespread assumption that there were land masses west of Europe does not mean that they were conceived as a new continent, in the sense of a huge land mass (the concept of 'continents' was quite vague in the Middle Ages anyway).

Probably Columbus and other European sailors of the time assumed that they would probably find intermediate islands if they tried to sail westwards (they could call them Vinland, Markland, Newfoundland, Antilia, Satanazes...some based on reality, others not...there were no much interest on them) but there is absolutely no proof that existed any belief on the existence of a huge land mass inbetween, dividing the expected ocean mass in two oceans (Atlantic and Pacific).
 
No, I mean it’s conceivable that such figures could exist in alternate history because there was foreknowledge about the lands of the Norse voyages in medieval Europe that could be pursued, not that such a figure did actually exist.

This board has a good amount of Muslim discovery of the Americas timelines, but few pre-Colombian European discovery timelines, besides the Norse. One notable exception is @carlton_bach ’s The Vivaldi Journeys, which I hope will return one day.

Okay, I see what you mean.

I stand by my assertion, though, that you probably could not have gotten a Columbus significantly before OTL. Again, it’s not just technological development, but also economic and political circumstances. I am no expert, but my basic understanding of the series of events is that European traders and explorers such as Marco Polo, utilizing the Silk Road, had piqued Western interest in various Eastern products and wares as early by the time of the Age of Exploration (and not just the nobility, but the early capitalist class as well), but political developments such as the fall of the Byzantine Empire to the Ottomans had threatened the viability of overland routes. As such, the Iberian kingdoms, recently invigorated by the completion of the Reconquista, funded expeditions to discover overseas routes to the Indies and China and such. As such, when the Americas were discovered as an inadvertent byproduct of these ventures, there was incentive to stick around and try to extract some profit from these new colonies. Obviously the Old World and the New World were going to coincide again regardless, but it might have been under utterly different circumstances that would have been as conducive to a total transformation of the Americas (I maintain that the degree to which this Hemisphere was Europeanized was a rather low probability outcome: the conquistadors were fairly lucky in quickly subduing both the Aztec and Inca empires).

To replicate those circumstances, for, say, a powerful Morocco or a surviving, stable al-Andalus... maybe have the Crusades firmly establish a permanent Frankish hegemony in the Holy Land, or perhaps allow the Norman Kingdom of Africa survive, or perhaps both! With the Moors now largely cut off from the rest of Dar al-Islam, at least through the Mediterranean, perhaps they would eagerly throw themselves into the task of reestablishing contact by westward sea routes, and then...
 
Columbus style transoceanic voyages even a decade or few decades earlier before 1492 might be interesting. Could have implications on Europe. Certainly the history of Iberia would be transformed, at least by absence.
 

Crazy Boris

Banned
Columbus style transoceanic voyages even a decade or few decades earlier before 1492 might be interesting. Could have implications on Europe. Certainly the history of Iberia would be transformed, at least by absence.
I’d be really interested in seeing how Ahuizotl would handle European contact with the Aztecs instead of Moctezuma. It would probably be a lot more exciting with either a series of battles across central Mexico or with any Spanish lucky enough to survive a crushing attack bringing back tales of the great warriors of the triple alliance. Or, should the Tlaxcalteca stay out of it, we could see potentially amiable relations between Madrid and Tenochtitlan, at least for a brief while.
 
Top