WI Native Americans/First Nations adopt crops and technologies from the Vikings.

We know the experiences of the French nosing around St. Lawrence in 17th century.
But Iroquois League was founded by Hiawatha in 16th century. 11th century Norse will not confront cooperative 17th century Iroquois league, and they will not need to bypass St. Lawrence by the route up Ottawa river to Hurons like the French did. Rather, they can portage straight up St. Lawrence to Lake Ontario, and among the disunited pre-Hiawatha Iroquois tribes they are likely to find some friends and guides.
This assumes that they are willing to listen to them.

Probably the easiest thing for the Indians to adopt should be the crops. Sure, not the hunter-gatherers like Beothuk, Mikmaq or Montagnais - the change in lifestyle is big. No, I mean farmers. People who already plant maize, pumpkin and squash in spring are not making a huge lifestyle change to plant barley as the fourth. And if it is a tribe who is already struggling to adapt, having recently migrated to St. Lawrence fro further South and finding that maize sometimes fails in chilly summers... well, barley might come across well.
If I recall correctly, corn hadn't crossed the Mississippi yet at this point, let alone reached the eastern seaboard and St. Lawrence Seaway. Though, I'm willing to give that the benefit of the doubt. I'll agree that barley might seem appealing to them, especially those familiar with the EAC.

Those dogs were sled, hair, hunting, being watchdogs and for eating. There was and is nothing found originally in North America for herding.
Agreed. However, herding is a natural behavior for wolves, and huskies of all types, not taught by humans, I remember reading an article that made a convincing case for humans learning herding by analogy with the way wolves tended herds of deer and horses. Therefore, I feel justified in saying they already have the capacity for herding, but didn't have the impetus or example to follow. Also, it occurs to me that, goats at least, probably don't need much defense in the way of defense by dogs, they're fairly capable of defending themselves. As for the other use of herd dogs, have you ever heard of anything other than shepherd dogs? Goats don't need the same amount of control to stick together and on track as sheep, nor do most herd animals. I don't know what goes on with sheep, but they're complete idiots compared to other herd animals.
 
On to my own thing, I believe that iron-working, or at least metalworking, would be relatively easily adopted by the natives, especially to the Copper Culture. Nomads are often surprisingly good metalworkers, I point to the example of the Germanic tribes before the Migration Period, they were at least equally talented as the Romans at the time, if not better. By the end of the period, they were indisputably more skilled than the Romans had been at their height. Metal is light, compared to stone, doesn't require anything not available on the move, and will last far longer than stone, wood, or bone tools, being easier (read: possible) to repair.
 
No Norse crop is useful to Eastern Seaboard indigenous nations, calorically speaking given the lack of plow and the warm temperate continental climate + the prestige Maize will remain a critical component in indigenous food ways.

The pony, cow, goat but especially pig will be the greatest asset in a Chestnut and Oak Rich Forrest landscape.

Iron Metallurgy diffusion to "copper Indians" around Michigan and Minnesota would be interesting to see, from there one can go down the Mississippi River to further it's spread.

Still it may remain a prestigious good used ornamentally.
 
It took more than a millennium for iron working to spread from Anatolia to Northern Europe, this was a Europe with extended trade routes, and where there was a massive supply of bog iron. Agriculture took even longer to spread and the results was massive genetic admixture between the farmers and native hunter gartners.
 
This assumes that they are willing to listen to them.


If I recall correctly, corn hadn't crossed the Mississippi yet at this point, let alone reached the eastern seaboard and St. Lawrence Seaway. Though, I'm willing to give that the benefit of the doubt. I'll agree that barley might seem appealing to them, especially those familiar with the EAC.


Agreed. However, herding is a natural behavior for wolves, and huskies of all types, not taught by humans, I remember reading an article that made a convincing case for humans learning herding by analogy with the way wolves tended herds of deer and horses. Therefore, I feel justified in saying they already have the capacity for herding, but didn't have the impetus or example to follow. Also, it occurs to me that, goats at least, probably don't need much defense in the way of defense by dogs, they're fairly capable of defending themselves. As for the other use of herd dogs, have you ever heard of anything other than shepherd dogs? Goats don't need the same amount of control to stick together and on track as sheep, nor do most herd animals. I don't know what goes on with sheep, but they're complete idiots compared to other herd animals.
Yeah, however huskies, especially pre-contact were and are used as hunting dogs and there is a higher than likely chance that they would eat the animals that they were in charge of. In fact huskies according to many arctic explorers had no problems with cannibalism. Let me put it this way huskies that we know today are not the same animals, and given that there would be 0 incentive to change that because horses are shit on the arctic tundra in mid-January that is not likely to change any time soon.

When comes to goats they like to climb and that is the problem with them. Yes they would do wonderful in places with out major climbing predator, which is not the case with North America. They are also well known for escaping pens. Goats were brought to America as a way to supplement the milking needs of people that could not afford dairy cattle. Goats are the poor man's cow. They also keep horses happy as companions and will also lead sheep. Those are the main reasons why people brought goats with them. They are smart, crafty animals that are as bad as pigs and cats to keep from going feral. Now don't get me wrong Canadian lynxes will not be an issue as they are not likely to prey on them, but bobcats and mountain lions further south will be an issue. As well as black bears, wolves and venomous snakes. Wolves and black bears evolved in that area to eat 1600 pound moose, everything the Europeans have will be food.
American Indian dogs are your classic pharia dog breed, a breed that survives because it is occasionally useful on the hunt, for pulling sleds and travois and alerting people of threats through barking. They are not attack dogs. Those got eaten already by everything else. The Vikings have the advantage of Iron and steel weapons and actual decent hunting and guard, war and herding dogs. As well as horses to chase the threats down and kill them. I think if the Vikings actually put in the effort to colonize New Foundland and neighboring regions they might have a chance.

Edit I should also add wolverines are also going to be a main predator as well, and that I am aware that goats are used for meat, hair, hide and as pack animals. In Northern Europe being used as dairy animals have been the main use of goats. The wooded areas of Europe and the Eastern US are not the best place to let animals roam free without protection. It has been the reason why many large predators went extinct, that and habitat loss and loss of prey.
 
Last edited:
No Norse crop is useful to Eastern Seaboard indigenous nations, calorically speaking given the lack of plow and the warm temperate continental climate + the prestige Maize will remain a critical component in indigenous food ways.

I largely agree with this, but I do think that the natives may still incorporate European plants into mixed-crop fields initially. From there, the end of the medieval warm period will see the northern frontier of maize agriculture retreat southward, but agriculture will remain with the focus being grains that the Norse grew in Greenland-maybe not wheat, but barley and oats could become major grains for the Micmaq.

Regarding horses, while not nearly as useful in the northeast as in the Great Plains, they are still potentially useful for integrating into a hunting lifestyle and therefore IMO would spread much faster than other livestock, as more culturally conservative groups would still find use for them. A switch to a more pastoralist focused lifestyle will take longer.
 
I largely agree with this, but I do think that the natives may still incorporate European plants into mixed-crop fields initially. From there, the end of the medieval warm period will see the northern frontier of maize agriculture retreat southward, but agriculture will remain with the focus being grains that the Norse grew in Greenland-maybe not wheat, but barley and oats could become major grains for the Micmaq.

Regarding horses, while not nearly as useful in the northeast as in the Great Plains, they are still potentially useful for integrating into a hunting lifestyle and therefore IMO would spread much faster than other livestock, as more culturally conservative groups would still find use for them. A switch to a more pastoralist focused lifestyle will take longer.

The plow won't be adopted in the same ways I also want to say that without the earthworms that changed the soil ecosystem of North America forever those grains from the old world just won't work outside of alluvial soils.

Corn is calorically the superior crop with a better input output ratio.
 
Agreed. However, herding is a natural behavior for wolves, and huskies of all types, not taught by humans, I remember reading an article that made a convincing case for humans learning herding by analogy with the way wolves tended herds of deer and horses. Therefore, I feel justified in saying they already have the capacity for herding, but didn't have the impetus or example to follow. Also, it occurs to me that, goats at least, probably don't need much defense in the way of defense by dogs, they're fairly capable of defending themselves. As for the other use of herd dogs, have you ever heard of anything other than shepherd dogs? Goats don't need the same amount of control to stick together and on track as sheep, nor do most herd animals. I don't know what goes on with sheep, but they're complete idiots compared to other herd animals.
Cattledogs are a thing, not for defense of the herd particularly but for moving a herd even short distances they provide a huge benefit and the longer you have to move your cow the more useful they get.
 
Cattledogs are a thing, not for defense of the herd particularly but for moving a herd even short distances they provide a huge benefit and the longer you have to move your cow the more useful they get.
I was unaware of that, thank you.

Okay, depending on the time period we're talking for the interchange, changes what the Norse have to offer in the first place, and I think we need to cover that. Are we talking the height of Norse settlement? Then we have about a thirty year span in the twelve hundreds where thay'll have cows, sheep, goats, and horses, by the late twelve hundreds they had lost most or all of their cattle, they never had large amounts of horses, and bones in their middens, combined with isotopes in their own bones, find they were surviving almost entirely off of goat, sheep, and seafood by later periods. As far as I have read, their sagas never make mention of them having brought dogs, though they may have considered it unimportant, and I haven't found any source mentioning the discovery of dog bones near their settlements, though, again, they may have considered it unimportant. Now, population estimates vary, but the range, at it's height is generally held to be between 2000-10000, recent work preferring the lower end, now, I tend to take population estimates with a heaping grain of salt(looking at you hundred million people in NA guess...), but I'm usually willing to accept a number within a range provided, so I'd put their population at the height of settlement at about 4000, based on the number of confirmed houses, 625, and guesses at the average household side. That, plus a couple hundred in Vinland, is a very low population, compared to Iceland, which at the time had approximately the population it does now, with nearly a millenium of agricultural advances, to me meaning they would've been unlikely to trade or gift them. You want a really in-depth discussion of this, check out Lands of Ice and Mice, by DirtieCommie(hope I spelled that right) and DValdron. In historical situations, you'd need a reason for all the Greenlanders to pick up and move to Vinland, then slowly get assimilated by the natives who would completely, massively, out number them. Maybe the king of Norway being a complete imbecile before Greenland was completely dependent on trade with Europe for its survival, and passing his law requiring trade to come directly through Norway, rather than being allowed to stop off at Iceland. During hood weather, a trip to Iceland and back was a few weeks, an equivalent trip to Norway was a few months round trip at best, and with no chance to make effective repairs on the way if neccessary. If a king passed that law, say, a century earlier, when trips to Vinland were still being made, and Greenland still supported trees, I could see the abandoned Greenlanders pulling up their roots and heading, quite literally, to greener pastures, especially if they had less aggressive contact with the native Americans.

The plow won't be adopted in the same ways I also want to say that without the earthworms that changed the soil ecosystem of North America forever those grains from the old world just won't work outside of alluvial soils.

Corn is calorically the superior crop with a better input output ratio.
You're ignoring one minor detail here, as I have mentioned before, corn likely hadn't reached this far yet except as a trade good. People were eating corn, but until about the 12-1300s, they weren't growing it yet, certainly not as far north as the Norse would be having contact with them.
 
.


You're ignoring one minor detail here, as I have mentioned before, corn likely hadn't reached this far yet except as a trade good. People were eating corn, but until about the 12-1300s, they weren't growing it yet, certainly not as far north as the Norse would be having contact with them.

As a trade good and as a prestigious good no doubt related to ceremony corn will never lose its place in all but the most hostile environments.

The late woodland period was the time of Mississippian cultural diffusion into the Eastern seaboard and it ended in 1000ce.
 
That doesn't seem all that easy. You're talking about three significant portage. Its one thing to portage a canoe, quite another to portage a decent-sized ship with trade goods.
If only this discussion had involved some group known for going by decent-sized ship with trade goods from Scandinavia to Miklagard via a not actually
connected river system and for whom it was kind of not exactly unknown to portage them...
 
I think the OP is possible. It is not a high-probability thing, but it is possible enough for a POD.

I believe you'd need a native tribe that was in some kind of trouble, the kind where you see that something needs to be done. Back then, changing how stuff was done was a pretty high-threshold thing for most peoples. And things going well never motivated anyone to change how they do stuff. And you'd need a leadership with good individual chemistry with some Norse leader.

Then you'd need some Norse group leaving Greenland for Vinland. It seems that happened more than we knew, but never in large enough numbers to get to the tipping point. By the time climate deteriorated enough that large numbers debated leaving, they seem to have lost the ability to. Personally, I think the fact that they needed to go to north America for timber was a factor, they couldn't replace ships without ships.

Of course, a lot depends on which tribe and which technologies.
Once we are there, some technologies are easier to transfer, and some are more attractive than others. Horse riding is pretty intuitive. Once you see it, its pretty clear whats going on. Iron working is pretty attractive, the weapons and tools you can make, as well as the trade potential is a massive leap.

I think the big tech here is going to be the ships though. The Norse were pretty much the peak of shipping and navigation tech at the time, and its was developed for conditions very similar to North America. The quantum leap in trade, exchange of ideas and communication as well as food production... thats would be the big game changer.
 
There was a pre maize agricultural complex in Eastern North America. It included sunflowers and giant ragweed. The ragweed was quickly dropped and the three sisters added. I don't think that adding the Norse crops would be a problem.
 
You're ignoring one minor detail here, as I have mentioned before, corn likely hadn't reached this far yet except as a trade good. People were eating corn, but until about the 12-1300s, they weren't growing it yet, certainly not as far north as the Norse would be having contact with them.
The first Viking attack in western coast of North Sea had been in 793. By 844, they had reached Cadiz and by 860, Sicily.
If 11th century Norse visit Nova Scotia, sell a few iron knives to Mikmaq in return for furs and game, and find their hosts having a few corn cobs imported from far south, they will sail south. If they find Massachusetts Bay people still being hunter-gatherers and importing their corn, they can keep going, and find corn grown on Chesapeake Bay.
 

Teejay

Gone Fishin'
That doesn't seem all that easy. You're talking about three significant portage. Its one thing to portage a canoe, quite another to portage a decent-sized ship with trade goods.

The Norse were masters when it came to porting their long ships along considerable distances.
 
Top