Path: senator-bedfellow.mit.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!server3.netnews.ja.net!jura.cc.ic.ac.uk!not-for-mail
From: Anthony Mayer <
[email protected]>
Newsgroups: soc.history.what-if,alt.history.what-if,soc.answers,alt.answers,news.answers
Subject: soc.history.what-if FAQ (October 2002)
Followup-To: soc.history.what-if
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2002 11:46:24 +0100
Organization: Imperial College, London, UK
Lines: 953
Approved:
[email protected]
Message-ID: <
[email protected]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: scud.doc.ic.ac.uk
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: jura.cc.ic.ac.uk 1033987584 6242 146.169.4.139 (7 Oct 2002 10:46:24 GMT)
X-Complaints-To:
[email protected]
NNTP-Posting-Date: 7 Oct 2002 10:46:24 GMT
User-Agent: Pan/0.11.1 (Unix)
X-Comment-To: ALL
Xref: senator-bedfellow.mit.edu soc.history.what-if:530184 alt.history.what-if:93993 soc.answers:17212 alt.answers:64232 news.answers:239004
Archive-name: history/what-if
Last updated: 9 August 2002
Version: 4.36
Posting-Frequency: Monthly
Copyright: (c) 2002 Anthony Mayer
"Frequently" Asked Questions
in
soc.history.what-if
This document is maintained (and copyright) by Anthony Mayer. Substantial
portions are drawn from earlier versions copyright 1994-1997 by Robert B.
Schmunk and 1997-2002 by Craig Neumeier, and are used with permission. It
may be freely distributed electronically provided that this copyright
notice is attached.
If you wish to make a suggestion for corrections or additions, please
e-mail the maintainer directly at
[email protected]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
0. Recent Changes
-none-
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table of Contents
0. Recent Changes
1. Introduction
2. What is alternate history?
3. Are there any rules about posting to soc.history.what-if? 4. Are
there any forbidden subjects?
a. Ban on Politics
b. Non-alternate-history Fiction
c. Future History
d. Secret History
e. Historical "Revisionism"
5. Are there any subjects which require special care? 6. What is a
"double-blind what-if" and how should I respond? 7. What does "... in
the Sea of Time" mean? 8. What are the Alien Space Bats?
9. What does <abbreviation> mean?
10. What are the most common what-ifs? 11. What are some common
historical errors I should avoid?
a. Could Operation Sealion have succeeded? b. Could the American
Indians have repelled the Europeans? c. Did the Chinese just use
gunpowder for fireworks? d. Did Christianity destroy Greek science
and the Roman Empire? e. Did the US come within one vote of
adopting German as its
official language?
12. Are the posts to soc.history.what-if archived somewhere? 13. Can
anybody recommend a good book about alternate history? 14. What
alternate histories should I read? 15. What about this book?
a. S.M. Stirling's next books
b. Harry Turtledove's next books
c. Robert Sobel's For Want of a Nail
d. GURPS Alternate Earths
16. Is there an (on-line) alternate history book list? 17. What are the
Sidewise Awards?
18. Are there other alternate history discussion areas? 19. Are there
any alternate history web sites?
+ Minor modification to this entry
++ Significant modification to this entry
+++ New entry
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Introduction
soc.history.what-if is a newsgroup for the discussion of history divergent
from that of our own. A very common example would be "What if the South
won the U.S. Civil War?"
The newsgroup was created in late May 1995, after the usual Usenet
discussion (RFD) and voting (CFV) periods. It assumes the role previously
filled by the newsgroup alt.history.what-if. The older newsgroup was not
correspondingly scheduled for removal, and still sees some traffic,
although it is now considerably less active than soc.history.what-if.
Please post *only* to soc.history.what-if in order to reach the widest
possible audience while eliminating the confusion which usually results
from cross-posting.
The soc.history.what-if charter, as written by its proponent (Richard
Gadsden, now at
[email protected]) after the discussion period ended,
is:
The soc.history.what-if newsgroup will be open to discussion of
alternate history. This is "what-ifs" regarding specific historical
events.
Specifically, but not exclusively:
+ Historical events - what could have happened if they had been
different?
+ How could this have happened differently (i.e. discussion of how the
divergence could have occurred, not of what its consequences would
be.)
Note: the following topics are not to be discussed: + Revisionism
regarding the Holocaust or Turkish/Armenian massacres
(post to alt.revisionism). "What if the Holocaust had not happened?"
is a legitimate question.
+ Future history - "What if the President were assassinated tomorrow?" +
Alternate history in fictional worlds - "What if Luke had failed to
destroy the Death Star?"
Many Usenet FAQs (Frequently Asked Questions answer lists) usually begin
with several paragraphs on netiquette, i.e., proper behavior on posting to
newsgroups. Rather than do that here, I will just recommend that if you
have not already done so, you should *immediately* go to the newsgroup
news.announce.newusers and read the posting entitled "A Primer on How to
Work With the Usenet Community". After that, please read it again.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. What is alternate history?
"Alternate history" essays/stories are the "what ifs" of history,
describing events that could have happened but did not. (The terms
"allohistory," "alternative history," "counterfactual" and "uchronia" all
have advocates, but "alternate history" is the accepted name in English.)
A typical example is the question, "What if had Napoleon won at Waterloo?"
Most alternatives concern human history, but there are some examples of
alternate natural history, making changes in geology or ecology.
You may find such questions asked in science fiction literature, wargaming
magazines, and history and economics journals. However, it can also be
occasionally found in such mainstream publications as Time magazine or
Entertainment Weekly, and an occasional alternate history novel will crack
the New York Times bestseller list and maybe even get made into a movie
(e.g., Robert Harris' FATHERLAND).
In science fiction, alternate histories are a subset of parallel worlds
and alternate universe stories, in which some emphasis has been put on an
historical element. If those terms are meaningless to you, note that a
parallel world may have no historical or physical similarity to our own. A
common example is for someone in our world to be mysteriously transported
to a "magical" world. Alternate history fiction, on the other hand,
requires that the world described be visibly the same as ours up to some
specific point in history, after which things begin to get different.
The boundaries are not firm: many alternate histories throw in magic --
or, to put it another way, many "historical fantasy" novels, especially
recently, use AH trappings. Similarly, alternate histories often have
slightly different physical laws than our universe -- most commonly to
allow time travel, since AH in science fiction began as an outgrowth of
time-travel stories.
Academic historians tend not to treat alternate histories, or "counter-
factuals" with much respect, although this has changed somewhat in recent
years, especially in military history (see Question 13). When historians
do make a serious attempt at treating alternate history, they can be
amazingly ignorant of its use in science fiction (e.g., the introduction
to Polsby, Nelson W. (ed.), WHAT IF? EXPLORATIONS IN SOCIAL-SCIENCE
FICTION [Lewis 1982]).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Are there any rules about posting to soc.history.what-if?
Since soc.history.what-if is an unmoderated newsgroup, there are no
enforceable rules. There is no official style guide. On the other hand, we
aspire to, and have often achieved, a high level of netiquette.
Please do not post binary files (images and the like). General Usenet
rules restrict them to newsgroups with "binaries" in their title, to
conserve bandwidth on slower servers.
The level of historical knowledge possessed by posters to this newsgroup
varies, and many new subscribers can feel intimidated by the level of
detail in some postings. Please don't let that prevent you from posting;
often, that detail is put in specifically to help people who don't know as
much about a specific subject join the discussion. Donald Tucker has
extensive posting tips at his website (see Question 19).
Some hints to keep in mind:
a) When you ask a what-if question, it is a good idea to attempt to
provide some (partial) answer of your own. Some posters consider it
rude to post a question alone, and all of us are *much* more likely to
respond to suggested results than just bare points of divergence.
b) In advancing a timeline that might result from a historical
divergence, don't be afraid to explain why you think certain things
would happen. It often helps to provide some historical background
rather than just stating that such-and-such would happen, followed by
a-later-event and then something-even-later.
c) If a major change is made to history, almost everything from that
point on will be different. So before you ask what difference your
change would make to the outcome of WWII, make sure that you could
reasonably expect there to *be* a WWII in the new timeline. (If you
change the American Civil War, you can make a case for it. If you get
rid of Jesus Christ, forget it.)
d) Be prepared to defend your assertions; i.e., don't state something is
true without being able to provide evidence. Some "common knowledge"
about the past is actually untrue (whether it be because of television,
the blandness of grade school textbooks, or myth-makers such as Parson
Weems), and posters to this newsgroup are more than willing to tell you
so. (See also Question 11.)
e) On the other hand, it is not considered necessary to cite sources
unless/until someone challenges you. Preferred newsgroup practice is
to ask for the source of an interpretation you don't agree with rather
than immediately blasting it as wrong. (Errors of fact may be corrected
more directly.) Attacking someone else's level of knowledge is rude,
even if true, and will win you no friends.
f) Don't forget to say *why* something happens differently. For
instance, someone might ask "What if World War I never happened?",
perhaps seeking out opinions on how that might result in the non-rise
of fascism and presumably no World War II. But an honest answer means
also considering such important factors as the European arms race
during the decades prior to World War I and imperial Germany's search
for colonial territories, and how they would have to be altered so that
the war doesn't occur.
It is perfectly acceptable to ask for help in getting the result you
want, e.g. if you know you want to keep Bismarck and still avoid WWI.
g) Really huge WI's, such as changes to human nature ("What if people
had no aggressive instincts?") generally do not produce any useful
comments. They are too big to handle; there's not really much to say
apart from "everything would be different."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Are there any forbidden subjects?
Yes. The newsgroup charter (see question 1) rules some subjects out of
bounds explicitly. These are really just special cases of the general
restriction of the newsgroup to its proper topic, specified only because
they had previously caused problems in alt.history.what-if or other
history newsgroups. In all cases, there is a more appropriate Usenet group
for these subjects: this is a newsgroup for the discussion of alternate
history.
4.a. Ban on Politics
Since real-life contemporary politics is neither historical nor
alternative, arguments about it are off-topic here. This does not mean
that all political discussion is forbidden -- your beliefs on politics
naturally affect what you see as reasonable in an AH. But once a
discussion becomes an argument about which beliefs about politics are
correct, it usually skirts, and often falls under, the Ban.
Since blatantly off-topic political flamewars have frequently
disfigured the newsgroup in the past, a large set of posters will serve
notice if you violate the BoP. Please try not to be offended if this
happens to you: take it to e-mail (or, theoretically, to talk.politics)
if you wish to continue the discussion.
4.b. Non-alternate-history Fiction
The word "history" appears in the newsgroup name. Thus, questions like
"What if Luke Skywalker had not destroyed the Death Star?" which
involve entirely fictional (non-alternate history) universes are not
appropriate. There is certainly a better newsgroup for such questions
(e.g. rec.arts.sf.starwars.misc, in the case of Luke and the Death
Star).
4.c. Future History
The newsgroup is for discussing history that has already happened.
Questions such as "What if George W. Bush were assassinated tomorrow?"
have been asked and argued, and will probably continue to arise. But,
again, there are more appropriate newsgroups for such discussion, most
probably alt.history.future (or, in some cases, a specialist group such
as talk.politics.assassination), although propagation of a.h.f seems to
be limited. You may need to specifically request it be carried at your
site; contact your newsmaster or newsadmin.
4.d. Secret History
"Secret history" involves the revelation that something that we think
we know about the past is untrue. It is not alternate history: it
leaves history unchanged, and the present is certainly still the
present. (Why what we know is untrue may vary, but in most secret
history stories there's some sort of a conspiracy at work to hide the
truth from the masses.) A related side-issue is whether a purportedly
non-fiction book (e.g., Baigent et al.'s HOLY BLOOD, HOLY GRAIL, or one
of the Von Daniken books) can also be secret history. In any case, for
purposes of the soc.history.what-if newsgroup, secret history is
off-topic -- whether admittedly invented or supposedly non-fictional.
There are many newsgroups which might be the appropriate venue, such as
rec.arts.books or rec.arts.sf.written, another soc.history group,
alt.conspiracy, or some specialized alt. group.
4.e. Historical "Revisionism"
Genuine revisionist history is a respectable intellectual undertaking,
but arguments *exclusively* concerned with real history belong on
soc.history.moderated or some other group in the soc.history hierarchy.
Denial of the facts of the Nazi Holocaust or the Turkish massacres of
Armenians (or any other examples of 20th- century genocide) is neither
intellectually respectable nor on-topic for this group. The newsgroup
created specifically to argue the point is alt.revisionism; such
arguments are out of place here.
Holocaust deniers have turned up on the newsgroup before, and no doubt
will again. Please do not get drawn into an argument which will just
raise tempers and waste time and bandwidth: if you just can't bear not
to respond, post *once* and then stop. (Do not be fooled by their habit
of posting under many fake usernames, either.) Take the argument to
private e-mail if you must continue it further, rather than continuing
to post to the newsgroup. Experience shows that ostracism is a more
effective tactic than argument for getting these people to leave. And,
as far as anyone can tell, they have never converted any of our
readers, so it is not necessary to be concerned about leaving them
unanswered when deciding who should go in your killfile.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Are there any subjects which require special care?
Almost any topic can unexpectedly rouse tempers; the Ban on Politics
exists because of sad experience. However, even perfectly on-topic
discussions of alternate history can be inflammatory when contrary
beliefs, political or otherwise, are involved. The record in SHWI
indicates that clashing patriotisms are especially prone to cause
problems. Alternate histories, and still more questions of real history,
require special attention to courtesy when they touch on such matters. For
example, arguments about who "really" won the War of 1812 will produce
nothing but wasted bandwidth and bruised feelings. (Prodding touchy
patriots on purpose is a type of troll. Don't.)
One should also be willing to accept that arguments can reach an impasse
beyond which nothing can be gained by pursuing them. A few specific topics
have long since reached the impasse stage on the newsgroup as a whole.
Besides the War of 1812, these include: who should properly be considered
Chinese (especially when the Mongols or Tibetans are brought up), the
possibility of European (meaning chiefly British) intervention in the
American Civil War, and especially the related subject of American vs.
British ironclads during that era.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. What is a "double-blind what-if" and how should I respond?
A "double-blind" WI is one that pretends to be posted from an alternate
history. Frequently, but not always, this takes the form of asking "what
if" about something from real history, treating it as if it hadn't
happened, e.g. "What if England had resisted Napoleon successfully?"
Sometimes it will be clear what the author wants to pretend happened
instead, sometimes not.
Preferred style for responses is to pretend to be from the same alternate
history as the initial post. Feel free to add details to the fictitious
history in your response, but try not to contradict anything someone has
already said, unless you can do it in character ("The idea that the Empire
nearly fell apart under Napoleon VI is a vicious lie spread by Francophobe
neo-radicals!").
Note that the existence of double-blinds means you should hesitate before
correcting a post which seems to be making a really flagrant error about
history -- while theoretically possible that an author really doesn't know
that Napoleon never invaded Britain, it is much more likely to be a
double-blind what-if, in which case "correcting the error" will just make
you look silly.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
7. What does "... in the Sea of Time" mean?
It's a reference to S.M. Stirling's ISLAND IN THE SEA OF TIME (book one of
the Nantucket Trilogy), which sends 1998 Nantucket back to 1250 B.C.
through some unexplained mechanism and follows its inhabitants' subsequent
careers.
The book's publication sparked a large set of threads asking about the
impact of sending various areas or groups back in time. It is now a
newsgroup tradition to give any such time-travel question a subject
heading "[whatever] in the Sea of Time", or just "ISOT."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
8. What are the Alien Space Bats?
Newsgroup shorthand for complete disbelief in some suggested historical
reasoning: "alien space bats would be a more believable explanation."
For a while, they were being pressed into service for questions about the
effects of impossible events actually happening, but their primary use
remains for attacks on unrealism in timelines (Alison Brooks' page, see
Question 19, gives the canonical example). They are still occasionally
invoked as a quirky deus ex machina for impossible AHs, because no one has
come up with anything better.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
9. What does <abbreviation> mean?
There are several abbreviations common to much of Usenet which are not
described here. There are also a few that seem to be rare outside this
newsgroup, however:
ACW = American Civil War
AH = alternate history (not to be confused with A-H, Austria-Hungary) ASB
= alien space bats; see Question 8 ATL = alternate timeline
BoP = Ban on Politics; see Question 4.a. It is also used as a verb; to
BoP someone is to invoke the Ban
DBWI = double-blind what-if; see Question 6 ISOT = "In the Sea Of Time";
see Question 7 ObWI = "Obligatory What-If", a throwaway AH idea included
in an
otherwise off-topic post
OTL = our timeline; a synonym for real history POD, PoD = point of
divergence; the moment when an AH starts to differ
from real history
WI = what-if; used as a synonym for a particular alternate history *or*
for a particular question
YWUA = "You Wake Up As," or, what would the reader do if s/he replaced
a given historical figure with all current knowledge intact.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. What are the most common what-ifs?
Evelyn Leeper's 1999 count using the Uchronia database (see Question 16)
found that World War II was about twice as popular as the American Civil
War, which was about twice as popular as World War I/Russian Revolution.
The last was significantly ahead in a group that also included Waterloo,
the Armada, Kennedy's assassination and the Cuban Missile Crisis. This
roughly matches findings by the late AH buff Mark Keller.
Soc.history.what-if duplicates the literature in the popularity of WWII
and the American Civil War. Certain specific aspects of both conflicts
have been argued into the ground on the newsgroup without reaching
consensus (see Question 5). Some of the most famous points of divergence
(e.g. Gettysburg and Sealion) are probably not such good choices to change
the wars' outcomes as is frequently believed, and in any case have been
debated so often that many participants will show more interest in
exploring other possibilities.
Beyond that, it is hard to say what topics come up most often, or (what is
not the same thing) which sorts of questions are likely to spark a good
discussion. For some reason, several of the newsgroup's most long- lived
and productive threads have concerned alternate versions of the discovery
and settlement of the American continents. But it is not possible to
predict what idea will produce a good thread (e.g. perhaps the best
discussion we ever had came out of a "double-blind" about civilization
being in tropical instead of temperate zones).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. What are some common historical errors I should avoid?
There are a number of historical issues that are still hotly debated, on
the newsgroup and in the historical profession. (Question 5 mentions some
that have been debated enough for the newsgroup to tire of them.) However,
a few ideas which are simply mistaken show up frequently in the alternate
history literature and on the newsgroup. Note that particular outcomes
desired can often be obtained by using a different, usually earlier, point
of divergence. Good results can also come from challenging the group to
come up with a plausible justification for some specific event.
11.a. Could Operation Sealion have succeeded?
Not with the existing situation in 1940: Germany lacked the necessary
resources to force the English Channel, and even transporting and
supplying ground forces of the necessary size would have been
difficult, probably impossible. Alison Brooks and Ian Montgomerie have
posted extended arguments to this effect; see their webpages (Question
19). A plausible Nazi defeat of Great Britain requires changing
something other than just going ahead with Sealion.
11.b. Could the American Indians have repelled the Europeans?
No, nor any other people from the Old World who might have discovered
the New. Even apart from a considerable technical edge (guns, but also
metal working, shipbuilding, etc.), the Europeans had a decisive
advantage because of their diseases. Due to their late settlement of
the continents and lack of domesticated animals, the native Americans
lacked any immunity to most Old World diseases, which meant a
catastrophic population collapse (definitely higher than 50%, and
perhaps more than 90%) in the first generations following contact.
Deaths on a similar scale will necessarily follow *any* extensive
contact between the hemispheres.
11.c. Did the Chinese just use gunpowder for fireworks?
Despite persistent stories to the contrary, the Chinese did use
gunpowder for weapons. They used bombs from the tenth century AD,
rockets from the tenth and eleventh, and even cannon from the
thirteenth. Cannon seem to have diffused to Europe by the 1320s, and
China lost its lead in gunpowder weaponry probably in the 1400s.
11.d. Did Christianity destroy Greek science and the Roman Empire?
Opinions differ about whether Christianity was a contributing factor to
the decline of the Roman Empire, but it is agreed that there were, at
least, many other factors of greater importance -- after all, the
Christian Roman Empire (Byzantium) lasted longer than the pagan Empire
and Republic put together. Christianity definitely did not destroy the
classical scientific tradition, which was moribund by the 1st century
BC and long dead by the time Christianity was significant enough for
anyone important to notice it.
11.e. Did the US come within one vote of adopting German as its
official language?
No. This urban legend seems to be based on a 1795 petition to print
some laws in German as well as (not instead of) English. During the
debate, a motion to adjourn and consider the matter later failed by one
vote. No vote was taken on the actual proposal. Later that year,
Congress voted to issue federal laws in English only; the vote tally
does not seem to have been recorded.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. Are the posts to soc.history.what-if archived somewhere?
There is no soc.history.what-if archive site, although there are a number
of threads saved on Ian Montgomerie's website (see Question 19), thanks to
Randy McDonald. Most of them are from late 2000 forward, but some are
older.
The web search engine Google has a nearly-complete Usenet archive,
including every post made to soc.history.what-if and its predecessor
alt.history.what-if. Use their advanced search page:
http://groups.google.com/advanced_group_search
------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. Can anybody recommend a good book about alternate history?
About alternate history itself? There are a number of anthologies, but
only one also includes non-fiction material about the genre, to wit an
essay and a bibliography (by Gordon B. Chamberlain). It is:
Waugh, Charles, G., & Martin H. Greenberg (eds), ALTERNATIVE
HISTORIES: ELEVEN STORIES OF THE WORLD AS IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN (Garland
1986)
Unhappily, the book was only published in hardback and can be difficult to
find. The most likely place for you to locate it is at a reasonably
well-stocked public or university library.
Several dissertations have been written about alternate history as a
literary sub-genre. One has been published in revised form:
Hellekson, Karen, THE ALTERNATE HISTORY: REFIGURING HISTORICAL TIME
(Kent State University, 2001).
The other dissertations remain unpublished, and not all appear to be
available even as microfilm prints from the University of Michigan.
Collins, William Joseph, PATHS NOT TAKEN: THE DEVELOPMENT, STRUCTURE,
AND AESTHETICS OF THE ALTERNATIVE HISTORY (University of California,
Davis 1990).
Gevers, Nicholas, MIRRORS OF THE PAST: VERSIONS OF HISTORY IN SCIENCE
FICTION AND FANTASY (University of Cape Town 1997).
McKnight, Ed, ALTERNATIVE HISTORY: THE DEVELOPMENT OF A LITERARY GENRE
(University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill 1994) available from UMI
Dissertation Services as order number 9508228.
The proceedings of a 1995 Berkeley conference have been published as
COUNTERFACTUAL THOUGHT EXPERIMENTS IN WORLD POLITICS: LOGICAL, METHODO-
LOGICAL, AND PSYCHOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES, eds. Philip E. Tetlock and Aaron
Belkin (Princeton 1996). The papers focused on how counterfactual
arguments should be generated, used, and judged by students of world
politics.
A British historian, Niall Ferguson, edited VIRTUAL HISTORY: ALTERNATIVES
AND COUNTERFACTUALS (Picador 1997, etc) a collection of articles on
"counterfactuals" written by and for academic historians. This book
discusses and defends alternate history as a tool for understanding real
history; it is not interested in alternate history as a genre of fiction.
It includes a lengthy introduction in which Ferguson tries to justify
alternate history as a tool for historical studies.
A better recent book of the same type (though without a general
introduction) is WHAT IF? THE WORLD'S FOREMOST MILITARY HISTORIANS IMAGINE
WHAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN (Putnam 1999), edited by Robert Cowley. Expanded from
a special issue of MHQ: THE JOURNAL OF MILITARY HISTORY, the book almost
deserves its subtitle, assembling by far the most formidable array of
historians ever to consider alternate histories.
WHAT IF? is only the most prominent of a number of recent academic AH
books or collections based on military history; see the next Question. It
was successful enough for a sequel, WHAT IF? 2: EMINENT HISTORIANS IMAGINE
WHAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN (Putnam, 2001), which concentrates on non-military
alternatives.
Finally, arguments for and against "counterfactual" history as a tool for
historians and (especially) history teachers may be found in Alexander
Demandt's HISTORY THAT NEVER HAPPENED: A TREATISE ON THE QUESTION, WHAT
WOULD HAVE HAPPENED IF--? (MacFarland 1993), translated by Colin D.
Thompson from the third edition of the original German (Vandenhoek &
Ruprecht 1984, etc).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
14. What alternate histories should I read?
Everyone has different tastes; asking for suggestions on the newsgroup
will usually get several quite different responses. Some of the most
widely acknowledged classics of the field are:
Benford, Gregory, & Martin H. Greenberg (eds), HITLER VICTORIOUS:
ELEVEN STORIES OF THE GERMAN VICTORY IN WORLD WAR II (Garland 1986,
etc) [an anthology including several classic stories]
de Camp, L. Sprague, LEST DARKNESS FALL (Ballantine 1949, etc)
Dick, Philip K., THE MAN IN THE HIGH CASTLE (Putnam's 1962, etc)
Dixon, Dougal, THE NEW DINOSAURS, AN ALTERNATE EVOLUTION (Grafton
1988, etc)
Garrett, Randall, LORD DARCY (SFBC 1983, etc); omnibus of MURDER AND
MAGIC (Ace 1979); TOO MANY MAGICIANS (Doubleday 1967, etc); and LORD
DARCY INVESTIGATES (Ace 1981)
Kantor, Mackinlay, IF THE SOUTH HAD WON THE CIVIL WAR (Bantam 1961)
Moore, Ward, BRING THE JUBILEE (Farrar, Straus & Young 1953, etc)
Piper, H. Beam, LORD KALVAN OF OTHERWHEN (Ace 1965, etc; vt GUNPOWDER
GOD, Sphere 1978; available in THE COMPLETE PARATIME Ace 2001)
Roberts, Keith, PAVANE (Hart-Davis 1968, etc)
Sobel, Robert, FOR WANT OF A NAIL: IF BURGOYNE HAD WON AT SARATOGA
(Macmillan 1973; Greenhill 1997)
Spinrad, Norman, THE IRON DREAM (Avon 1972, etc)
Squire, J.C. (ed), IF IT HAD HAPPENED OTHERWISE: LAPSES INTO IMAGINARY
HISTORY (Longmans, Green 1931; exp Sidgwick & Jackson 1972; St.
Martin's 1974); rev as IF: OR, HISTORY REWRITTEN (Viking 1931;
Kennikat 1964)
Stirling, S.M., THE DOMINATION (Baen 1999); omnibus of MARCHING
THROUGH GEORGIA (Baen 1988); UNDER THE YOKE (Baen 1989); and THE STONE
DOGS (Baen 1990)
Turtledove, Harry, AGENT OF BYZANTIUM (Congdon & Weed/Contemporary
1987, etc; exp Baen 1994)
Turtledove, Harry, and L. Sprague de Camp, DOWN IN THE BOTTOMLANDS
(AND OTHER PLACES) (Baen 1999) [includes Turtledove's title story, plus
the classic "Wheels of If" by de Camp & Turtledove's sequel]
Turtledove, Harry, THE GUNS OF THE SOUTH: A NOVEL OF THE CIVIL WAR
(Ballantine 1992, etc)
The science fiction goes in and out of print, and they can be difficult to
find unless you have a friend with a personal library of SF classics. Note
that Kantor, Sobel, and the Squire anthology are not SF or even fiction;
they are essays in "imaginary history." Such books are more likely to be
found in libraries which view SF as beneath their dignity.
The following books were published recently enough to be easily findable,
and have all received at least some favorable attention. As with the
classics above, some are "pure" alternate history, but others involve time
travel, magic, or some other marginal element.
Barnes, John, FINITY (Tor 1999)
Baxter, Stephen, VOYAGE (HarperCollins UK 1996, etc)
Bear, Greg, DINOSAUR SUMMER (Warner 1998)
Blom, Suzanne Alles, INCA: THE SCARLET FRINGE (Tor/Forge 2001)
Dreyfuss, Richard and Harry Turtledove, THE TWO GEORGES (Tor 1996,
etc)
DuBois, Brendan, RESURRECTION DAY (Putnam 1999, etc)
Flint, Eric, 1632 (Baen 2000)
Fry, Stephen, MAKING HISTORY (Hutchinson 1996, etc)
Garfinkle, Richard, CELESTIAL MATTERS: A NOVEL OF ALTERNATE SCIENCE
(Tor 1996, etc)
Gentle, Mary. ASH: A SECRET HISTORY Series (Avon/Eos 1999-2000, etc)
Harris, Robert, FATHERLAND (Hutchinson 1992, etc)
Keyes, J. Gregory, AGE OF UNREASON Series (Ballantine 1998-2001, etc)
McAuley, Paul J., PASQUALE'S ANGEL (Morrow 1995, etc)
Newman, Kim, ANNO DRACULA Series (Simon & Schuster 1992-1998, etc)
Niles, Douglas and Michael Dobson, FOX ON THE RHINE (Tor/Forge 2000)
Sargent, Pamela, CLIMB THE WIND (Harper Prism 1998, etc)
Stirling, S.M., NANTUCKET Trilogy (ROC 1998-2000)
Stirling, S.M., THE PESHAWAR LANCERS (ROC 2002)
Stroyar, J.N., THE CHILDREN'S WAR (Pocket 2001)
Turtledove, Harry, HOW FEW REMAIN: A NOVEL OF THE SECOND WAR BETWEEN
THE STATES (Ballantine 1997, etc)
Turtledove, Harry, THE GREAT WAR/AMERICAN EMPIRE Series (Ballantine
1998-)
Turtledove, Harry, WORLDWAR Series (Ballantine 1994-2001)
Wilson, Robert Charles, DARWINIA (Tor 1998, etc)
Some decent alternate history anthologies which are currently available
are:
Dozois, Gardner & Stanley Schmidt (eds), ROADS NOT TAKEN: TALES OF
ALTERNATE HISTORY (Del Rey 1998)
Greenberg, Martin H. (ed), THE WAY IT WASN'T: GREAT STORIES OF
ALTERNATE HISTORY (Carol 1996)
Shainblum, Marc and John Dupuis (eds), ARROWDREAMS: AN ANTHOLOGY OF
ALTERNATE CANADAS (Nuage 1998)
Stirling, S.M., DRAKAS! (Baen, 2000)
Turtledove, Harry and Roland J. Green (eds), ALTERNATE GENERALS (Baen
1998)
Turtledove, Harry and Martin H. Greenberg, THE BEST ALTERNATE
HISTORY STORIES OF THE 20TH CENTURY (Ballantine/Del Rey 2001)
Finally, thanks to the recent mini-boom in "non-fiction" alternate history
centering on military AH, it needs its own section of recently published
or republished books. Greenhill/Stackpole apparently intends to publish at
least one such volume every year. See also Question 13.
Deutsch, Harold and Dennis Showalter, WHAT IF? STRATEGIC ALTERNATIVES
OF WWII (The Emperor's Press, 1997)
Hite, Kenneth, Craig Neumeier and Michael S. Schiffer, GURPS
ALTERNATE EARTHS (Steve Jackson Games 1996) and GURPS ALTERNATE EARTHS
2 (Steve Jackson Games 1999)
Macksey, Kenneth, INVASION: THE GERMAN INVASION OF ENGLAND, JULY
1940 (Macmillan 1980, etc)
Macksey, Kenneth (ed), THE HITLER OPTIONS (Greenhill 1994, etc)
North, Jonathan (ed), THE NAPOLEON OPTIONS (Greenhill 2000)
Talley, Steve, ALMOST AMERICA: FROM THE COLONISTS TO CLINTON: A
"WHAT IF" HISTORY OF THE U.S. (HarperCollins 2000)
Tsouras, Peter G., DISASTER AT D-DAY: THE GERMANS DEFEAT THE ALLIES,
JUNE 1944 (Greenhill 1994)
Tsouras, Peter G., GETTYSBURG: AN ALTERNATE HISTORY (Greenhill 1997)
Tsouras, Peter G., ed., RISING SUN VICTORIOUS: THE ALTERNATE HISTORY
OF HOW JAPAN WON THE PACIFIC WAR (Greenhill 2001)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. What about this book?
15.a. S.M. Stirling's next books.
Stirling, an occasional participant on SHWI since 1997, had said that he
was working on two more books about his controversial Domination of the
Draka AH, a historical prequel and a sequel to DRAKON. They have been
postponed from their original schedule. With the publication of THE
PESHAWAR LANCERS, his next AH project will probably be THE TIME OF THE RED
DEATH, set after a plague in 1766.
15.b. Harry Turtledove's next books.
Turtledove is currently working on AMERICAN EMPIRE, a sequel trilogy to
THE GREAT WAR (now complete), a series about WWI in a CSA-wins world. He
has contracted to edit ALTERNATE GENERALS II (for Baen). NAL/ROC has also
announced a contract for RULED BRITANNIA, set after a successful Spanish
Armada and IN THE PRESENCE OF MINE ENEMIES, about a Naziworld.
15.c. Robert Sobel's For Want of a Nail.
FOR WANT OF A NAIL: IF BURGOYNE HAD WON AT SARATOGA is probably the most
detailed alternate history of all time, written by a real historian with a
number of publications in American business history. Taking the form of a
lengthy (400+ pages) academic history of the two sister nations which
result, it has a full scholarly apparatus including hundreds of
references, all of them (except for a few books from prior to the point of
divergence) completely invented. Long out of print, FOR WANT OF A NAIL was
republished by Greenhill in late 1997.
15.d. GURPS Alternate Earths
This is a collection of six alternate histories written for Steve Jackson
Games' role-playing game GURPS. Three of the timelines are relatively
"standard" choices (CSA, Nazis, Roman Empire); three are unusual (Aztecs,
Christian Japan, 1920s pulp science). It has a page at the SJ Games
website
http://www.sjgames.com/gurps/books/AltEarths/
There is a sequel GURPS ALTERNATE EARTHS 2, six more worlds tending to
more unusual choices in its scenarios (American Revolution, Ming China,
Vikings, scientific Muslims, Revolution of 1688 and a paratime empire)
http://www.sjgames.com/gurps/books/altearths2/
There are currently no plans for additional volumes.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. Is there an (on-line) alternate history book list?
There sure is, maintained by Robert B. Schmunk (
[email protected]). He used
to maintain this FAQ, too, so he couldn't praise it as it deserves: it is
*very* impressive, one of the best specialist bibliographies on the Net
and far superior to any printed AH resource. The URL is
http://www.uchronia.net/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. What are the Sidewise Awards?
The Sidewise Awards were created in 1995 to honor the best alternate
histories published each year. There are a "long form" (a novel or series)
and "short form" award. Nominees (the finalists from all published AH) are
selected during the calendar year subsequent to complete publication, and
the winners from that short list announced at Worldcon (the World Science
Fiction Convention). The Sidewise Awards have a web page at
http://www.uchronia.net/sidewise/
which lists previous winners & nominees, and the works that have been
suggested to the judges for the current year. It also gives contact
information for the judges if you want to make a nomination.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. Are there other alternate history discussion areas?
Yes. The other Usenet newsgroups with some level of official interest in
alternate history are alt.tv.sliders (about the alternate-worlds TV show),
rec.arts.sf.written (the correct venue for discussion of the plot,
characters, or literary merit of most published alternate histories), and
the specialty group alt.books.harry-turtledove.
As of April 2000, there is a freeform online role-playing game, "SHWI In
the Sea Of Time," a mailing list in which a number of SHWI participants
are constructing an ATL based on their actions after being sent back to
1800 with personal computers but no other equipment:
http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/SHWI-ISOT
There are at least two general electronic mailing lists. One is a Yahoo!
group; send an e-mail to Alternatehistory-subscribe@ yahoogroups.com. The
other, "Time in Fictions," is a bilingual French- English mailing list for
discussion of time travel and related themes in all media. TiF is linked
to the non-professional French magazine LA CLEPSYDRE. Further information
and registration is available at
http://clepsydre.free.fr/
There are also e-lists devoted to two authors best known for their
alternate histories. To subscribe to Videssos, the Harry Turtledove
Discussion List, send a blank e-mail to videssos-subscribe@
yahoogroups.com. To subscribe to the S.M. Stirling Discussion List, send a
blank e-mail to
[email protected]
There are web-based alternate history forums at Del Rey's alternate
history site and Ian Montgomerie's personal site (see Question 19).
On other networks, there is an alternate history category of the Science
Fiction Round Table (SFRT1) on GEnie -- ask some other user how to go
about signing up. There is also a "what-if" conference on CiX, an
electronic conferencing system in the UK, accessible from the Web at
https://web.conferencing.cix.co.uk/Secure/confprocs.aspx?conf=what-if
The BBC Online discussion boards also host a what-if list as a spin-off
from an alternative history radio programme:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/cgi-perl/h2/h2.cgi?state=view&board=history.whatif
Off the Net completely, there is a paper APA "Point of Divergence": Jim
Rittenhouse's page (see question 19) has a description and contact
information.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. Are there any alternate history Web sites?
Several; too many, in fact, to conveniently list them all. Fortunately,
most of the better pages have links to other sites. The most obvious place
to begin is the Uchronia site, which has an extensive links page as well
as the definitive AH bibliography (see Question 16) and information on the
Sidewise Awards (see Question 17):
http://www.uchronia.net/
There is a (small) alternate history web ring at
http://www.webring.org/cgi-bin/webring?ring=althistory&list
The Alternate History Travel Guides grew out of an old newsgroup thread:
http://www.ahtg.net
The other sites listed here are all alternate history pages which belong
to current or past contributors to soc.history.what-if. The contents tend
toward original material rather than information on published alternate
histories.
Stephen Abbott:
http://www.metro2000.net/~stabbott/AH.htm
Alison Brooks & David Flin:
http://www.flin.demon.co.uk/
Logan Ferree:
http://spiritualist.alternatehistory.com/
Tom Gehring [also hosts material by Johnny Pez]:
http://www.geocities.com/althist/index.html
Andrew Goldstein [hosted by Donald Tucker, q.v.]:
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/4123/andrew.htm
Doug Hoff:
http://www.althist.com/
Anthony Mayer:
http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~aem3/history.html
Ian Montgomerie:
http://www.alternatehistory.com/entry.html
Bucky Rea:
http://www.suite101.com/welcome.cfm/alternative_history
Jim Rittenhouse [includes information on the alternate history
APA "Point of Divergence"]:
http://www.marmotgraphics.com/althistory/index.html
Marcus Rowland ["Forgotten Futures" shareware RPG based on 19th- and
early 20th-century scientific romances, some explicitly AH]:
http://www.ffutures.demon.co.uk/
Donald Tucker [includes a lengthy alternative/supplementary FAQ]:
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/4123/main.htm#Alternate
Erwin Wodarczak:
http://www.wodarczak.net/althist/
