This is probably a stupid question. But if the Scandinavians

Except the Nords tended to not account information written so its very possible any record of it was oral and lost by the death of the settlers there.

>>3320170
Or wasn't lost, see The Vin saga

No, you wouldn't

It was well documented. Medieval geographers disagreed on how far away it was from Greenland and what exactly it was like but they all knew it was there.

Why make a thread when a quick Google search could've told you this? You're just going to get a bunch of incorrect answers

>>3320165
They even shot a movie about this, anon

File: 99b345e7cf330c7c62382e609f29bb29.jpg (95KB, 736x434px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 736x434px

Plenty of European people had myths and stories about lands to the west, why would anyone take the viking one seriously in particular?

Viking discovery of Vinland reached even the Vatican libraries.

Nobody in Europe cared.

Then Columbus came and said he had discovered another route to India, and Europe exploded with interest.

>>3320170
This is wrong, the King of Norway even corresponded with English academics about where exactly Vinland was.

>>3320199
This is also wrong, Vinland was accepted to be real, people just disagreed on its exact location and what it was like.

Why respond to a thread when you don't know anything about the subject?

>>3320214
It was accepted as not worth the bother of finding, might as well be Hy-Brasil or Atlantis

>>3320165
Yes, and it did. Columbus himself is said to have sailed to the parish of Rif in Iceland to search for documents about Vínland.

>>3320165
Adam of Bremen knew about it, but it was pretty irrelevant at this time in history. It was when people thought it was India that shit got serious