Columbus vs. Erickson

Europe reacted differently to news of Columbus’s discovery in 1493, than it did to news of Leif Erickson’s discovery around the year 1000. There are several reasons why.

During Leif Erickson’s time, Feudal Europe was unconcerned with his discoveries. First, the Europeans had no interest in the natural world. Second, because many wars were going on, which drained the little money the princes had, and because Europe was into agricultural economy, which needed no trade route, the Europeans had neither the means, nor the interest to head out on explorations. Finally, because no one knew these trips would be profitable, there were no risk takers, because the trips were thought to be not profitable.

However, during Columbus’s time, Europe decided to take action on these western routes for several reasons. First, the European scientists’ interest in exploration grew. Second, governments were actually able to invest in these trips, or afford them, for they were bigger and had lots of money. Finally, since Portugal showed that profits, when using a route other than the Silk Road, were huge, Spain and the rest of Europe had the more reason to go and explore the routes by sea.

But the most important fact was that since the Ottoman Turks had taken over the Silk Road and Portugal had taken over the sea route to Asia around Africa, Europe couldn’t go east, so they had only one other option – west! Additionally, since Columbus volunteered to go west, the Rulers did not even pause to think.

These are the reasonable reasons why Europe acted so differently to Columbus’s discovery in 1492, than to Leaf Erickson’s around the year 1000.