alternatehistory.com

This question raised its head over night due to my dream about Viking ironclads entering the Black Sea to attack the Rus fleet in the late nineteenth century.

I would think one consequence would be that Vinland obviously takes a fair share of adventuring Norse, maybe reducing the forces entering the Mediterranean so that they never amount to enough to conquer Sicily etc. I think there is still going to be Rurikarian Rus, since the Norse were coming down from the North, and raids turning into settlements such as Normandy look logical.

Possibly though, the existence of a long-lasting and eventually stable Vinland is going to have detrimental effects upon Anglo-Saxon Britain as there is another Viking power in the mix, and we might see the Anglo-Norse of Canute etc becoming the norm, with the resurgance of the Anglo-Saxons quashed beneath this blend of cultures.

Without Sicilian Norse are we even going to get the First Crusade, and without it we would not get the Fourth Crusade, and thus the Eastern Roman Empire would continue to fight its own wars with its own strengths or weaknesses, but without the Crusader states ever having come into existence, would the Muslim assault be stronger or weaker?

Now, I don't think that in medieval times Vinland will ever rise to a greater strength than Norway, and I think it will probably also be a target for a take-over, especially of someone like Canute who wants to unify all Norse realms.

Longer-term I would see it has to absorb the native Indian tribes (never called Indians in this timeline, what would be a generic name for them?) and forge a unified nation.

Apologies for any chronological inconsistencies, I wrote this just after getting up, with no access to Wikipedia etc

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
Top