WI: English Fund Columbus

kernals12

Banned
Christopher Columbus went to many different places asking for money for his voyage. One of them was England where his brother Bartholemew asked King Henry VII for funds but was of course turned down. So, what if Henry had chose differently? I imagine this has enormous impacts on the Americas. I could be speaking Dutch or French right now.
 
Christopher Columbus went to many different places asking for money for his voyage. One of them was England where his brother Bartholemew asked King Henry VII for funds but was of course turned down. So, what if Henry had chose differently? I imagine this has enormous impacts on the Americas. I could be speaking Dutch or French right now.
Seems the English would settle Massachusest, assuming they voyage actually worked and used English lands to set off from.
 
I would first be skeptical that his voyage is even successful. A different financier would result in Columbus using different ships than OTL and having a different point of departure. Who's to say they don't disappear over the horizon from England and are never heard from again?
 

kernals12

Banned
I would first be skeptical that his voyage is even successful. A different financier would result in Columbus using different ships than OTL and having a different point of departure. Who's to say they don't disappear over the horizon from England and are never heard from again?
I do, this is my ATL
 
Henry VII was notoriously tight with money (unlike Henry VIII).

He did finance John Cabot, but IIRC, this was only after Columbus' first expedition.
 
Maybe with no war of the roses you could have England more in the capacity of exploiting early colonialism and discoveries.
 
Well, Colombus did finally managed to have funding from Catholic Kings after they crushed Nasrid Grenada, in the misdt of "oh, what the heck, why not after all?" while Portugal was focused on circumnavigating Africa (something Castille kinda promised not to do).
Even if England had relatively little to gain on joining the Indian train bandwagon, if you could have something similar happening, namely an important victory, a sense of historical change, important treasury, in three words a state of grace in England, then maybe you could have Colombus being funded in a same scale than IOTL, because its planned expedition remain not that well thought and open to a lot of criticism : as @Analytical Engine said, Henry VII and his Parliament held tightly their treasury.
 
Assuming Columbus sails more or less westwards from England and consequently ends up landing in OTL's Maritimes or New England, would we see a slower push to explore and colonise the New World? These areas had no states as wealthy as the Aztec or Incan Empires to plunder, so exploration might seem less potentially lucrative than IOTL, at least until the Europeans do get down to Central America.
 
one thing I've wondered about... if the English had indeed financed Columbus, might they convince him to take the 'Viking route'... Iceland/Greenland/Vinland, instead of the southern Azores/Caribbean route?
 
Assuming Columbus sails more or less westwards from England and consequently ends up landing in OTL's Maritimes or New England, would we see a slower push to explore and colonise the New World?
Admitting Colombus manages to sail to Maritimes and come back, I'd expect his first perception of the lands being slightly different from what he had IOTL. Even with a lot of willful blindess, the region would fit even less any wild description of Cipangu. Maybe he'll think being ashore of Tartaria and China most definitely southwards, where he would probably go if he manages to pull other expeditions.
Note that, while he wouldn't met strong states, he would meet with the chiefdoms that followed the decline of medieval Mississipian civilization, with villages and a relatively more structured society than in Caribbeans in the form of confederacies or complex chiefdoms in some places, Haudenosee confederacy or the Miqmaq ensemble that seems to have been relatively tied together. In short, Colombus' expedition would be an earlier Cabot, with a slightly earlier opening to fur and fishing trade (contrary to what is sometimes advanced, there's no real trace of European fishing this west in Atlantic, safe in the northern part, when it blossomed after Cabot).
Maybe European trade and fishing would reach Virginia/Carolina earlier than IOTL, but I wouldn't expect much change on the region.

Ironically, Castille could launch another expedition (the equivalent of Cabot's but in reverse) to reach "Tartaria", maybe ending up in Florida and eastern Caribbeans.
Discovery of Brazil was only a matter of time as Portuguese circumnavigated Africa, IMO.

I doubt you'd have much immediate changes, except that Castille may, due to a delayed start, enter in the region differently and without certainty about conquest of Mexico, and even less about Peru. But that's true of any PoD in the late XVth/early XVIth.

one thing I've wondered about... if the English had indeed financed Columbus, might they convince him to take the 'Viking route'... Iceland/Greenland/Vinland, instead of the southern Azores/Caribbean route?
This road was essentially forgotten, mostly because it was fairly uninteresting from financial or trade point of views.Even if someone went into accounts, they would be unimpressed at mention of wood, ice and more wood. The end-goal there was still Indias, not old tales from people seen as semi-Barbarians.
 
This road was essentially forgotten,
uh, was it? I've read different.. basically that people knew about it, but as you say, had no real reason to take that route. But now we have someone deliberately trying to get from east to west, and we have a route that is known. Which also bring up the question of just how well known the ocean currents were known for the north Atlantic... if Columbus doesn't go the Viking route, do people know enough to take the other sailing routes?
 
uh, was it? I've read different.. basically that people knew about it
Seaway to Greenland was known, even if significantly irrelevant (European fishing presence near Iceland and Greenland followed different directions IRRC.
But Vinland was, at best, listed as some island Scandinavian did visit (it evolved, IRRC, into "Windland" in late medieval English), and even there considered as semi-legendary. With time, it was as relevant as Antilla, or Brazil, or legendary islands in the Atlantic. Even if Columbus believed this (we have no trace he did), I think you can imagine the reaction of Henry VII if you ask him to fund an expedition about a semi-Barbaric tale of a western island where there is, wonders, self-harvesting grain and wine.

Which also bring up the question of just how well known the ocean currents were known for the north Atlantic... if Columbus doesn't go the Viking route, do people know enough to take the other sailing routes?
Fishing in North Atlantic from western Europe existed at this point, up and including Greenland seas, so I'd expect Colombus may actually have less issues than his IOTL transoceanic crossing, at least up to a point. Especially since Columbus possibly went to Iceland IOTL, although it's not that attested.
 
Seaway to Greenland was known, even if significantly irrelevant (European fishing presence near Iceland and Greenland followed different directions IRRC.
But Vinland was, at best, listed as some island Scandinavian did visit (it evolved, IRRC, into "Windland" in late medieval English), and even there considered as semi-legendary. With time, it was as relevant as Antilla, or Brazil, or legendary islands in the Atlantic. Even if Columbus believed this (we have no trace he did), I think you can imagine the reaction of Henry VII if you ask him to fund an expedition about a semi-Barbaric tale of a western island where there is, wonders, self-harvesting grain and wine.


Fishing in North Atlantic from western Europe existed at this point, up and including Greenland seas, so I'd expect Colombus may actually have less issues than his IOTL transoceanic crossing, at least up to a point. Especially since Columbus possibly went to Iceland IOTL, although it's not that attested.
well, Columbus is heading off into the unknown no matter what route he takes; I was thinking that the Viking Route had at least two known waypoints; but I don't insist on it. He could sail down the fishing routes just as well, as Cabot did later...
 
Problem is Henry VII was really stingy with money, and couldn't really fund Chris with the kind of money he was asking for. Yes, there was Cabot, but that was after Chris showed the way was kinda sorta feasible.

Not to mention that the science of the time said the distance to Asia (discounting the Americas) was far longer than Chris was saying it was, so there was a fear that the entire expedition would just sink into the ocean with nothing to show for it. Chris got lucky because there turned out to be the Americas in the middle.

Basically the political will in Westminster was simply not there, and the scientific consensus at the time would call it a suicide mission.
 
For everyone suggesting the old Norse route, let us keep in mind how the Norse died off on Greenland. They had a good run, but the Norwegian kings made it that only a single ship could go there each year, so that they could buy up all the ivory and furs cheap. They didn't even bother trying to send another ship when it sank and ivory was less valuable. At this point Greenland didn't Europeans (don't think the Danes came over yet) and the seaways are probably still filled with ice. Anyone know the general climate of Europe around this period?
 
Problem is Henry VII was really stingy with money, and couldn't really fund Chris with the kind of money he was asking for. Yes, there was Cabot, but that was after Chris showed the way was kinda sorta feasible.

Not to mention that the science of the time said the distance to Asia (discounting the Americas) was far longer than Chris was saying it was, so there was a fear that the entire expedition would just sink into the ocean with nothing to show for it. Chris got lucky because there turned out to be the Americas in the middle.

Basically the political will in Westminster was simply not there, and the scientific consensus at the time would call it a suicide mission.
Wouldn't that be an argument for taking the Viking route to Vinland, replenishing supplies along the way and continuing west from Vinland (which would turn out to be not possible, of course)
 
Wouldn't that be an argument for taking the Viking route to Vinland, replenishing supplies along the way and continuing west from Vinland (which would turn out to be not possible, of course)
Problem is most of that route is dominated by the Dano-Norwegians, and might touch off a diplomatic crisis, possibly leading to war with much of Scandinavia (and England had a brisk Hansa trade at the time), which costs money, which Henry was not willing to spend.

Columbus got lucky with the Spanish, as they were willing to front up the capital, and were willing to piss off Lisbon or Christiana or Copenhagen.

Now the story might be different if Henry VII dies, and either of his sons come to the throne, but not before.
 
There's also the fact that Columbus could easily hit Greenland, go "oh fuck" and turn around and run home if he does the Viking route.
 
Top