Robert CowleyRecensioni

Some ”What If”s are 5/5s, some 4/5s for being too on the light side or, on the contrary, close to typical academic ramble, and some are fascinating (the best is the WW1 scenario written by Cowley himself, the editor of the book). The total is somewhere between 4 and 5, but closer to 4 for me (I am European) because it is too American-centered: way too much about the Independence War and Civil War, which gets really boring.

The path untrodden, counterfactual reality, or simply alternate history. Twenty-five of the 20th Century’s eminent historians look at what might have been in the essay anthology What If? 2 edited by contributor Robert Cowley.

The twenty-five essays range from 424 B.C. in Ancient Greece to the 1948 Elections in the United States covering a variety of topics though for roughly 300 of the 430 pages covered the time between 1912 and 1948. Unlike the previous volume, many of the essays focused on the actual event than going into an alternative scenario or would briefly speculate about things happening differently in the last two paragraphs. The essays that focused on the assignment that were good were Thomas K. Rabb’s essay on Charles I dying in 1641 of the plague and adverting the English Civil War, Alistair Horne’s fanciful piece on Napoleon III not taking Otto von Bismark’s bait to advert the Franco-Prussian war, George Feifer’s essay on Lenin on influencing the Russian Revolution, and Richard B. Frank’s essay on if the United States hadn’t dropped the atomic bombs.

What If? 2: Eminent Historians Imagine What Might Have Been is an interesting set of essays, a lot are knowledgeable for someone who doesn’t know specific points talked about however the “alternate” aspect was lacking compared to the previous collection.

I was a bit disappointed in this collection, but it was mostly a personal taste. Some of the writers’ styles were not to my liking. But several of the stories seemed to fall short of their promise, focusing more on the history around their chosen event and just suggestions of alternate sequences of events. The history of the potato was very interesting and the author raised some real question about what could have happened if any of a number of events had varied, but he did not write any real alternate stories. I felt this story didn’t deliver what the book promised.

Some of the stories worked very well, exploring Churchill’s politics and his influence on WWII.

Overall, I suspect the scope of speculative fiction doesn’t work well with the short story format.

Að mörgu leyti áhugaverðar pælingar í þessu riti. Virtir fræðimenn og rithöfundar koma með innlegg um hvernig atburðir hefðu getað þróast með öðrum hætti en þeir gerðu í heimssögunni. Flest eiga þessi innlegg sameiginlegt að höfundarnir skoða hvort góðar líkur hafi verið á að atburðir þróuðust á annan veg og koma svo með getgátur um hvernig heimssagan hefði breyst.
Pælingarnar eru mistrúverðugar og áhugaverðar en einna skemmtilegust þótti mér frásögnin af því hversu afdrifarík áhrif kartaflan hafði á þróunina í Evrópu. Spánverjar fundu hana í Suður-Ameríku og kynnu notkun hennar í Evrópu eftir landafundina. En ef þeir hefðu ekki gert það hvað þá? Áhrif hennar eru ótrúlega mikil og bent er á að tilvera Prússlands byggðist til að mynda mikið til upp á kartöflunni því herir Prússlands átu lítið annað en kartöflur.

I found the first essay unsatisfying and put the book aside for a while.
I struggled to finish it and still found it unsatisfying. The histories visited were, admittedly, well presented. But if a reader was to believe the salesmanship of the book's title, he or she would be sadly disappointed. Naively, I was hoping for an historian's opine of "This is what I believe could have happened given all my investigation into the times addressed." I wished for that and didn't get it. All I got was a good brief history and a question: "What if?"
Apparently, this was not the book for me. I looked in the wrong section of the bookstore. I'm off to the fiction section and will look for Harry Turtledove.

The path untrodden, counterfactual reality, or simply alternate history. Twenty of the late 20th Century’s eminent historians look might have been in the essay anthology What If? edited by contributor Robert Cowley.

The twenty essays range from 701 B.C. Assyrian siege of Jerusalem to Berlin and China early in the Cold War in the middle of the 20th Century, some deal with one event but some deal with several scenarios (i.e., the American Revolution, American Civil War, the beginning of World War I, and the early Cold War in/around Berlin). In addition to the essays were 14 sidebars from other contributors. Of the single scenario essays among the best was Ross Hassig’s “The Immolation of Hernan Cortes” and James M. McPherson’s “If the Lost Order Hadn’t Been Lost” while the two worst were Victor Davis Hanson’s “No Glory That Was Greece” and close second was Lewis H. Lapham “Furor Teutonicus: The Teutoburg Forest, A.D. 9”.

What If?: The World’s Foremost Military Historians Imagine What Might Have Been is an good collection of counterfactual historical events and what the alternate history would have been for the world.½

the old old stories are not that interesting because I know nothing about them.
it is interesting how luck is involved so much.

I like the alternate history genre, but like these essays more for what they tell me about what happened then for any of their speculation about what might have been. Perhaps it's that most seem to come down on the side of Pangloss that this is the best of all possible worlds.

Good short bursts of reading that give perspective

A third and final collection of erudite essays on historical might-have-beens, edited by Robert Cowley. Aside from two pieces reproduced from the first What If? book ('What the Fog Wrought' and 'If the Lost Order Hadn't Been Lost', which are both excellent), these are all new essays, and whether they explore underappreciated moments in American history ('His Accidency' John Tyler, for example, or the Northwest Conspiracy) or more bread-and-butter speculations that nevertheless remain fresh (what if no Pearl Harbor, or Dallas 1963, or Watergate?), they are all fascinating to read. After three books, I am still charmed and completely unfatigued by the studious-yet-racy style of many of the essays, and it is a shame that there has not been a fourth collection ('what if no 9/11?', for example) when the writing and the concept are both so consistently strong.

Focusing solely on the United States, this third book lacks some of the richness and variety of the two eon-spanning volumes that preceded it, but the short history of the American republic has been one so eventful that there is still much fruitful what-if territory to be explored in this bounteous land of opportunity.

alternative history / counterfactual
(Tufts Course — Winter 2011)
insignificant event — unforeseen consequences
1) Disease — Wild Card! 1918 Influenza
2) Weather — Storms — G.W. crossing Delaware
Always "German Question" — P. 155 — Short rest / good bkft change history choices made By harried man
3) Animosity — Gambles work
Genghis Kahn — Mongols — hated culture / cities / elite —
power by proven abilities not birth
Words — Xenophobic — hatred of foreigners
draconian — evil

Historians and inquisitive laymen alike love to ponder the dramatic what-its of history. In these twenty never-before-published essays, some of the keenest minds of our time ask the big, tantalizing questions:

Where might we be if history had not unfolded the way it did?
Why, how, and when was our fortune made real?

The answers are surprising, sometimes frightening, and always entertaining..

A fairly adequate compilation of essays of alternate possibilities (or as some might cal them "what ifs") within the realm of the United States (and things pertaining to said government/geography). I read the two previous What If? essay anthologies, and found them a bit more interesting. While this one was good, I feel the last several essays definitely trailed off (the post-WWII years on essays). I think my only true complaint about the actual book was that in some cases it was a bit difficult to see where exactly they were veering off into uncharted (what if) territory, and where it strayed from fact to fiction. (No clean break in paragraphs, no "hey this is not really what happened from here on out", and even in some cases doing it mid-paragraph with no explanation, so it takes you about two-three paragraphs or even a page or two to realize "wait a second..... we never nuked Russia....." and your brain catches up and realizes where they veered off the real timeline.

Another excellent collection of counterfactual historical essays edited by Robert Cowley. All are well-written and well-argued (some, naturally, more than others); the topics are all well-chosen and the book is certainly not a waste of your time. Counterfactual history exercises are often sniffed at, but Cowley successfully argues for the legitimacy of the approach: "There is no better way of understanding what did happen in history than to contemplate what very well might have happened. Counterfactual history has a way of making the stakes of a confrontation stand out in relief." (pg. xvii).

By mapping out contrary routes, the historians here shatter the complacency regarding what "we have come to accept as the natural course of world history" (pg. 102) and, in doing so, throw into sharp emphasis just how important certain factors were to a certain event, and how important a certain event was to historical developments. The counterfactual scenarios are all thought-provoking and some are scarily real and immediate. Anything that challenges complacency about the inevitability of things – not least the Disneyland moral that good always triumphs over evil just because – is very welcome in our worrying times. (The undermining of Brexit, the impact of mass migration, the assault on political freedoms… we can't just assume our worldview will be safe just because it is right.) The readability and high scholarship of the book is just a massive bonus to this timely reminder.

A compelling collection of articles from some of our finest military historians, speculating on how the course of history might have changed had certain events turned out differently. Far from indulging in "idle parlour games" – which, as the introduction notes, was the phrase used by E. H. Carr to dismiss counterfactual history – What If? is intellectually rigorous and often chillingly plausible. Outcomes of some of the various speculations include: a world in which the Abrahamic religions of Christianity and Islam never emerged; a Europe ravaged by the Mongols, killing off all potential of an Enlightenment; a colonial USA still beholden to the British Empire; a separate Confederate States of America after Robert E. Lee's victory in the American Civil War; a Japanese invasion of Hawaii in World War Two after a crushing American defeat at Midway; and the atomic destruction of Berlin after a failed D-Day invasion.

As editor Robert Cowley suggests in his introduction, these are about more than just historians and anoraks indulging in their hobbies; What If? throws into sharp relief just how much of the historical course of events – which often seems so inevitable in retrospect – actually rests on a knife edge. Above all, we are reminded of the importance of the element of chance and luck: if Ogadai Khan had not died and the Mongol invasion of Europe had continued under his leadership; if the British officer who had George Washington in his gunsights had pulled the trigger; if the American dive-bombers at Midway had stumbled across the Japanese carriers just a few minutes too late. It is particularly remarkable to note just how close and how often the American War of Independence came to disaster (those jammy Yanks). To further underline this, a persistent theme in the articles comprising What If? is the fickleness of the weather: preventing Cornwallis from retreating at Yorktown; saving Washington at Brooklyn Heights; allowing a 36-hour window of storm-free weather for the D-Day landings to take place. As Cowley notes in one introduction: "Often, in military history, the dominoes fall where the wind blows them." (pg. 341).

I did have one of two minor qualms about the book – with a keen emphasis on 'minor'. There were a few more spelling mistakes than I would have expected; not a great deal but enough for me to remark on it. I found Cowley's habitual use of the word 'us' – meaning the Americans – in his introductions to the articles a bit irritating, and I found Thomas Fleming's article on the American Revolution a bit jingoistic at times. Speculating on a British victory, for example, he says: "Within a year or two at most, Americans would have been on their way to becoming replicas of the Canadians, tame, humble colonials in the triumphant British empire, without an iota of the independent spirit that has been the heart of the nation's identity." (pg. 166). I found this to be a little bit silly and a somewhat provincial view of American exceptionalism; in reality, the Canadians have as much a claim to be 'the land of the free' as their rebellious neighbours.

Overall, however, I thoroughly enjoyed the book; I don't indulge my passion for military history as much as I used to and What If? really got the juices flowing again. I picked it up expecting to only enjoy the later articles about modern history (which is more my area) but the ones that have stuck in my mind are the ones on ancient history. Here, there is more wiggle-room for speculations and tangents, for the sole reason that they took place so long ago, and consequently they allow us to imagine a world fundamentally different from the one we live in now. To give just one thought-provoking example: the close-fought naval battle at Salamis. Previously, Ancient Greek democracy had judged citizenship based on ownership of land. Victory at Salamis was won by landless oarsmen and sailors, leading to a more universal interpretation of citizenship (pg. 33). How different would our inheritance of Greek democracy have been if this battle had not been won? What would be our Western principles of governance, law and society? It is incredible to speculate on the world we might be living in if a certain storm hadn't subsided, a certain bullet hadn't missed, or a certain man hadn't been in the right place at the right time. What If? shows, to quote the Duke of Wellington, just how 'near-run a thing' a lot of crucial historical turning points have been. In this respect the book provides a valuable – and entertaining – service. It helps us understand the dynamics of history: its ebbs and flows, its twists and turns that make it such an enduringly fascinating subject.

Overall a very thought provoking book, and most entries were interesting. My favorites were various combatants making moves on Jerusalem, and the backstory on the consolidation of the Hebrew religion during the exile to Babylon. I also like the piece by Stephen Sears on the alternate outcomes of the early battles of the Civil War such as Bull Run and Chancellorsville.

The contrast of styles by the various contributors was very interesting.½

Spijtig dat er weer niet-historici een bijdrage leverden. Vooral het ontbreken van feiten stoort en niet alleen bij de niet-historici. De verklaringen van de historici zijn wel plausibel. Toch maken ook zij de dingen soms ongeloofwaardig door chauvinistisch te zijn. Het Engeland van Elisabeth was bvb. heel wat minder dan wat de schrijfster over het stuk met de Spaanse armada beweert. Tenslotte kan de vertaling van plaatsnamen beter.½

This has some good points but others are quite weak as Alternate starting points. The section on WWI alternatives was very interesting, but I don't think the complete lack of a socialist / communist alternative history is anything but American Exceptionalist hope. the idea that Hitler may have won the European War is very intriguing. The last good one is the view of China divided into a North and South , one Communist, the other Nationalist, is also worth exploring further.

This is a set of essays dealing with issues that might have gone in two or more directions if one or two things had turned out differently. The twenty-five essays cover topics ranging from the absence of Socrates due to a possible death in battle, past the execution as an heretic of Martin Luther, to the lack of potatoes in the history of European population expansion. It's an interesting read due to the number and eminence of the essayists. Another possible use is as a primer of historical methods used by the essayists, if one were doing a course on their works.

Quite fascinating mainly, but you really have to be a history buff and own a great detailed background knowledge, since background info is rarely given.

Overall average; several chapters are very interesting

Il libro mi ha un po’ deluso, o meglio, non ha soddisfatto le mie aspettative. Parla molto (troppo per i miei interessi) degli Stati Uniti d’America, tra guerra d’indipendenza e guerra di secessione. Abbastanza comprensibile visto che quasi tutti gli autori sono statunitensi. Quello che mi ha disturbato, o in ogni caso non mi ha fatto apprezzare il libro nel complesso, è che tutti i momenti critici che sono stati presi in esame ( i “se” che hanno deciso la storia) sono nelle battaglie. Mi piace moltissimo la storia ma quella militare, la storia delle battaglie, non mi è mai interessata, in particolare se i fatti accaddero in posti che non so piazzare su una carta geografica (e tantomeno mi interessa imparare a piazzarli). Se avessi potuto sfogliarlo un po’, probabilmente, non lo avrei acquistato.

I was a bit disappointed in this collection, but it was mostly a personal taste. Some of the writers' styles were not to my liking. But several of the stories seemed to fall short of their promise, focusing more on the history around their chosen event and just suggestions of alternate sequences of events. The history of the potato was very interesting and the author raised some real question about what could have happened if any of a number of events had varied, but he did not write any real alternate stories. I felt this story didn't deliver what the book promised.

Some of the stories worked very well, exploring Churchill's politics and his influence on WWII.

Overall, I suspect the scope of speculative fiction doesn't work well with the short story format.

Generously illustrated with black and white photographs, the emphasis here is on a tactical turning point of W W I-- Ludendorff's genius for generalship had the fatal flaw of deficient logistics. The German failure to move into the areas that they had weakened as well as the time lost when their troops ran amuck combined to defeat Ludendorff's gamble in France. The war is neither glorified nor sentimentalized here. Nevertheless, its discomforts and the horror and exhaustion of the trench war are well caught in superbly selected brief passages from the outstanding diaries and memoirs of German and English soldiers. This is the kind of short book that whets the appetite for further reading. The suggested reading list includes some of the quality adult fiction and non-fiction titles available. There are organizational charts of German and Allied forces and an index.

'Not an anthology, not a collection; this is more of a very well-written sampler. The essays (or parts of chapters or articles or whatever they are) stand alone, but are arranged and do cover, the duration of the Civil War. Subjects include Lincoln's beginning strategies and Fort Sumter, Southern strategies, the Battle of Mulvern Hill, George Thomas and the war record of the Conferderate Navy's Shenandoah. Each topic provided incentive to read more at some later time.½

This book is very entertaining and is very thought provoking because it explains the close calls in our world’s history. The book, containing many essays written by notable historians, takes us from the fated battle of Salamis in 480 B.C to the Chinese Communist Revolution in the late 1940’s. A very small portion is attributed to American history, while most of the book is about the broader picture of world impact.
The historians, who are interviewed at their areas of expertise, dive into complicated and oft times confusing ‘what ifs’ and their outcomes. These scenarios introduce amazing insight on what could have been and what should have been. None of these scenarios are fantastic and are very realistic to their nature. Each article is interesting as it sheds light on some of the moments in history that are taken for granted. For any history lover, this is a fun and interesting book to read.
Though captivating and interesting to the last, some of the articles are confusing and hard to understand. I suppose that the interesting material that is drawn from this book makes up for some of the confusing details.
Not one article is over twenty pages long and is not so specific and detailed that you get dizzy looking at it. The book simply shows a broad picture of the world’s history and how it could have been different.½