User blog comment:Lepricon6/Plot (No Isabella)/@comment-32656-20121218044949

The contention that they spoke European languages to the explorers like that is entirely without any proof. Nor is there any proof that the fisherman talked to the natives at all, or observed them, prior to Columbus.

The only things that there is any evidence of, Vikings aside, is that fisherman fished the Grand Banks. That's it.

The King of France held no interest, whatsoever, in a voyage. Even with no Spain, that would not change.

The Columbus brothers concentrated their efforts in Portugal, Spain, the Italian states, and England otl for good reason.

If the Iberian states do not fund him, the English would have - they were, by accounts, close to doing it otl.

...The natives states are still, realistically, going to collapse. The conquistadors had rather little to do with them falling otl - disease, rather, was the culprit. Which wouldn't change.

You're also assuming that the French and English were nicer than the Spanish and Portuguese to the natives. Not true, either.