What if Jefferson hadn’t purchased the Louisiana Territory from Napoleon?
Mental Floss recently blogged about alternate histories that have been written and suggested. They selected seven (plus a few) examples. I have always been intrigued by alternate histories, but ultimately repelled. As an intellectual exploration it is a pretty fascinating idea, and I think it could be a useful exercise for the classroom, but when these are published on the bookstore shelves and the politi-rags, they are always emotionally-charged, political tirades.
They are also, in my opinion, very seldom probable. It is as though the authors are unhappy about X in their current world and Y in the past and it is just easiest to link them together (or so I simplify, in this case). Curiously, I’ve never been a big fan of time-travel story-lines, either. I think it is a related affront to the way my brain works. The factors, the details, the extenuating circumstances inevitably spoil any attempted plots for me, because of all the loose ends.
Naturally, I do think the occasional alternate history considerations in my classes and conversations, but even so I seldom suggest actual alternatives so much as I question whether certain events would have transpired at all given fundamental changes. In the end, I find that the political motivations obscure intelligent historical thought. The bias certainly leaves a thick stench over the content, at least that’s the odor prompting me to turn up my nose. It was a bitter realization when I first encountered alternate histories in the book store in high school: I was immediately excited but after reading the back and perusing the table of contents immediate disappointment followed. The political agendas override the potential of the intellectual exercise.
Brush off the dust! History now! 