Showing posts with label Alternate History. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Alternate History. Show all posts

Thursday, June 14, 2007

Another What-If

Most of the time you'll find what-ifs for an alternate history based on a battle. Why? In part, that's because there's documentation for the battle. In part, the consequences can be seen. This isn't necessarily the case for non-battle causes.

Let's look at ones I've used:
  1. Jutland - it's decisive for the British;
  2. Gallipoli - an enterprising officer doesn't stop on Suvla Beach, but moves inland to capture the critical heights, cutting the Gallipoli Peninsula in two;
  3. Falling Waters - Meade attacks right away;
  4. Minden - Sackville charges;
  5. Rome, 370 AD - modern saboteurs blow up the Senate and Emperor. Okay, not a what-if, but it was how I could generate a new timeline.

The only one I've used in a story that didn't feature a battle was Oswald Mosley becoming British Prime Minister in 1936 (an outgrowth of Edward VIII not abdicating). But it could have happened, and there was a lot of documentation about it.

Picking a Cause Event (CE) that is not based on a battle is harder. The classic one was H. Beam Piper's Aryan Transpacific, where the local shaman took it in his head to go east with the Aryan migration, not west. An off-shoot ended up populating North America. See Lord Kalvan of Otherwhen by Piper, and Tangent by Gina Marie Wylie (you'll find it on the web). People pick battles for their splits because it's easier, the most popular being Gettysburg and Waterloo (and only a few picking Antietam). Let's look at a few others.

  1. Francis II does not die early from an abcess in his ear; this lead to an extended regency and religious civil wars in France.
  2. Nero blames some other small group for problems in Rome, not the Christians. Not sure what this will do, have to dialogue it out sometime.
  3. In 1914 the German Foreign Minister decides not to give Austria-Hungary a blank check on what to do about Serbia. WW1 would probably have still broken out, just not in July/August of 1914.
  4. Julian Apostate (Emperor of Rome) puts on his armor before rushing to lead his troops in a counterattack (when he was subsequently assassinated by a Christian zealot). Christianity might have suffered from a major survival problem with somebody willing to massacre freely.

These are nowhere near exclusive, just ones I could think of off the top of my head. These splits don't have to be the primary cause of a time split in a story, they can just be something that leads to an important plot twist in a story. Most (but not all) revolve around whether somebody would survive. Most admit of some deep currents in the affairs of mankind, but more as a cultural baggage, not of major events. I realize that this suggests mankind has a hand in its own fate, but that's a discussion for some other time.

Friday, May 18, 2007

Comments from E-Mail about the previous posts. First, from Mike Lonie about the Alternate Jutland scenario.

Michael Lonie wrote:

France will want Alsace and Lorraine back. Absent a definite land defeat for Germany she won't get them. Gallia irredenta.

If Italy was upset after the real war at how little those 13 battles of the Isonzo earned her, how mad will she be here? Looks like promising ground for Benny the Moose and his Fascisti. Italia irredenta.

Neither Russia, nor Germany nor Austria-Hungary want a revived Poland. Absent a clear land victory by the allies there won't be one.

The US Army will remain a frontier constabulary fit only for chasing Indians and Mexican bandits into the 1930s and 40s.

Germany will try again in twenty years. "We weren't defeated, it was the Navy who let us down." "Next time we'll do it right." The reform of the German constitution will allow more populist parties to enter the Reichstag, including a small one representing artisans disturbed by economic changes and resentful of the "unnecessary" defeat of the Great War: the National Socialist German Worker's Party.

Is there a Revolution in Russia? The original Revo was intended to make prosecution of the war more effective since the Empress, with her "German sympathies" was impeding the war effort. With what might pass for a victory, and a negotiated peace conference coming up in the Spring of 1917, that would be nipped at the bud. No Lenin and no Bolshevik Revo. Now THERE's a happier prospect. With no alienated Russia separated from Europe Russia can play a constructive part in any new round of crises.


Or maybe an unconstructive one. Maybe the Krauts and Russkies would find their way to a Rapallo anyway.


America marches off into the jazz Age and the Roaring twenties while Europe stagnates because all the belligerents want to go back to the gold standard at prewar rates (which is what Britain did ). No League of Nations, no multilateral economic institutions. Rise of protectionism earlier than in our world. Diminution of trade versus prewar, due to protective tariffs and unrealistic exchange rates. Bad for the Brits. Internally deflation in all the countries keeps economies slowed, leading to labor unrest and low agricultural prices.


For Britain Troubles in Ireland. So what else is new?


Muslim uprisings all over the place in 1919. This actually happened. The Mad Mullah in Somalia fought the Brits, Afghanistan invaded India (now there's chutzpah), trouble in French colonies. Probably even the Turks would have troubles from people like the Wahhabis (Ibn Saud captured Mecca, and massacred the populace there, in 1925).


There will be no end of fun in your world.

---------------

Granted, all of it. I never said it would be a better world, just that it was different. If they didn't solve the problems of Europe in 1914-1919, they won't in this world, either. Some minor points:

No Revolution in Russia. That is one pleasant thought. It is possible that the Grand Duke Michael becomes the heir shortly after the end of the war. He was the Tsar's brother as I recall.

There would have been the Easter Rising in Ireland, so, yes, troubles. What the Brits do about it is another question.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Now from Colin (and my reply) about Space Habitats.

Looks good.

I hope some more people volunteer their informed comments to our discussions.

It would be really great to hear from scholars, field workers and others with hands-on knowledge about technology, historic scenarios, etc.

I'm pretty sure you're doing useful things with your "spare" time these days, rather than wallowing in new technology reports like I do.

Thus, I wonder if you have access to the same sense of advancing developments that I do, and I have to keep prodding at our "optimism/pessimism" discussion.

Bluntly, as far as "optimistic" versus "pessimistic" I just don't see any "there" there.

When I suggest that all sorts of really nifty technology will happen long before the first large long-term space habitat can be constructed, that does not seem like optimism to me. It's a functional requirement. First, and foremost, lots of fancy tech will be required to work and work well before it is even possible to build the habitat. Second, in the time it takes to develop habitat technology, many other technology fields will be leveraged forward by develpments in habitat technology. Third, there is always a continuing general advance of technology, even in the utter depths of WWII or Stalinist postwar Russia.

Time equals progress. It's that simple. You cannot have "X" years pass without "X times TechDevRate" progress.

Treat it as an absolute that there will be no time in the next century when technology does not advance much faster than any of us can truly grasp.

Again, that's not optimism for me. That is observed events extrapolated logically.

For the purposes of story writing, it might be useful to consider that who benefits from developments in technology is entirely separate from who creates the developments.

If you need obnoxious bureaucrats like Sir Humphrey, you have to give them power. Do so. We can both imagine the sort of nation that might produce that future history. Then deal with the frictions the "Sir Humphreys" inevitably create with their fearful, power-seeking ways.

It is not necessary to create a "dark future" in order to have dark actors, dark powers and dark fates.

The world is a big place.

The solar system is a bigger place.

Many different futures will codevelop and exist side-by-side.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
While I wrote "my sandbox, my rules", I think some clarification is in order. I'm not pessimistic about the future. What I am pessimistic about are the institutions we have in place that deals with the changes roaring down the pike. Some of those institutions have a great deal of money and clout. The best example to hand is the X-31. The people making the decision chose the one design that needed a lot of unproven technology and vaporware to work right the first time. Not going to happen.

My personal view is that private enterprise in space is the way to go. But we are going to have to have additional places other than the US and its legal climate. An example is the Arlington Air Show held every summer at Arlington Airport here in Washington. Last year there was a crash. The family of the victim has filed a lawsuit alleging various problems that contributed to the fatality. The large sums of money that they are asking for will put the Airshow out of business. BTW, the lawyer gets 60%. The aircraft was experimental, and accidents happen. The NTSB found the airport and the airshow not culpable, but even defending against this suit will drive the airshow out of business.

The first crash of a rocket plane carrying passengers will be trumpeted by the media, and the lawyers will circle the wreckage like vultures. General Aviation was virtually killed by lawsuits; when a plane crashed, every manufacturer of any part in the aircraft was sued. The theory is that most will settle out of court. The result was that people abandoned General Aviation in droves. Only after a version of tort reform was pushed through by the FAA and the NTSB did this change and Piper, Beech, Gulfstream and a couple of others resume making General Aviation aircraft. But what used to cost $20,000 (or $40,000 in today's dollars) now costs $250-400,000 to guard against the lawsuits that still come.

Tort reform, however, will die as long as at least 40% of the Congress is Democrat - they won't vote to kill their biggest contributors. This does not apply in jurisdictions outside of the US, as has been documented by various Space blogs.

There's also the "for the good of all mankind" clause in the Outer Space Treaty of 1968. My take is that the socialists want nothing to do with Space as it will open things up that they can't control. Their response will be to try to milk it for everything that it's worth. I think of the unelected aristocracy of the EU. They've begun dropping their complaints about Microsoft now that Bill and company have started contributing to "studies" and other lucrative contracts that filter through friends and into their pockets. The best example I've found for a view of the EU is the Mafia.

SSDD - Same Shit, Different Day.

This is the basis for the 'pessimism' that I occasionally show. I have a number of suggestions to end it, but it is better to change the sandbox completely and leave them with their hand out and no way to get a piece of the action.

Now for story purposes, I thought the future outlined in "Fallen Angels" to be a valid one for starters. And that includes the glaciers that suddenly advance despite all of the screaming of the Global Warming crowd. That's part of the background for the habitat of Brin.

Thursday, May 17, 2007

Another What-If

This is an example of creating another alternate history. The story starts with the Battle of Jutland on May 31, 1916. I picked a battle because seemingly trivial decisions could have profound effects on history. In our history Scheer used Option #2, which led to a confrontation with the British Grand Fleet. The High Seas Fleet wasn't as badly hurt in the battle in our history as it was in what followed below (which, by the way, came from a game).

An Alternate North Sea Outcome

It was shortly after 5.30 p.m. on May 31st, 1916, and the commander of the High Seas Fleet, Vice Admiral Reinhard Scheer, was beginning to smell a rat. Before him, just tantalizingly at the maximum range of his guns, were four of Great Britain’s latest dreadnoughts, the 15" gunned Queen Elizabeths. Just ahead of them, barely visible through the intermittent haze, were Admiral Sir David Beatty’s battlecruisers.

His own battlecruisers, under the command of Rear Admiral Hipper, were a few miles ahead, trading shots with the Queen Elizabeths and Beatty’s battlecruisers. Just an hour before those battlecruisers had scored a spectacular success over Beatty, sinking two of his battlecruisers with a loss of only a few destroyers. Beatty, upon seeing the High Seas Fleet advancing to Hipper’s aid, had turned and quite rightly fled. But Beatty was fleeing north, not west or northwest toward his home ports on the English coast. That meant Beatty was falling back on Jellicoe and the 24 dreadnoughts of the British Grand Fleet, the last thing Scheer wanted to face.

Scheer paced the flag bridge of the Friederich der Grösse, weighing his possible courses. As he saw it, he had four choices:

1. He could turn about and return to Wilhelmshaven. However appealing this might be, it was also impossible. People, especially the Kaiser, would say “You had the Tommies on the run. This was exactly in accordance with the strategy the High Seas Fleet has been pursuing: overwhelm isolated portions of the Grand Fleet to achieve parity in numbers. Why, then, when you had the very situation you wanted, did you turn away? Especially when your U-Boats and zeppelins had reported no signs that the Grand Fleet was at sea?” He had to ask himself: did a lack of reports truly indicate a lack of something to report? Was Beatty fleeing north to make him think Jellicoe was at sea? Was he seeing phantoms?

2. He could keep on his present course and hope that a lucky engine room hit would deliver one of those Queen Elizabeths into his hands. His ships could then quickly overwhelm and sink it. Having sunk one of the most modern English battleships, as well as two battlecruisers, he could claim a victory and return home.

3. He could break off to the northeast, circle around Denmark, and head to the Baltic. He could claim he was only following Hipper’s battlecruisers, which were currently steering ENE, and saw nothing of the Tommies. That was probably the prudent thing to do, and if the ships he was chasing disappeared into the mist that was what he would do. He would still be criticized, but if Jellicoe was at sea, he didn’t know it. None of his scouting forces had sighted the British battleships.

4. He could turn west. He stopped his pacing and considered that. He was convinced Jellicoe was close at hand, and from the way Beatty was acting, he was probably somewhere to the ENE and steering a course that would put his 24 battleships between the High Seas Fleet and its bases. A turn to the west would be risky; most of his scouting ships were to the north and northeast at the moment, but except for Hipper they really hadn’t told him much of anything. Sailing west would probably negate any trap the English were setting. And if he then steered south during the night he could return to Wilhelmshaven via one of the southern entrances to the protective minefields around his home port. As an added bonus he could threaten Allied shipping near the English Channel and probably scare the daylights out of the Tommies, forcing them to disperse their fleet even more. That could pay dividends later in the year, giving him even more of a chance to locate and defeat portions of the British fleet. The more he thought about it, the more he liked this option.

Scheer summoned his signals officer. “Inform Fleet Headquarters in Wilhelmshaven. I want a zeppelin reconnaissance of the southern entrances to the minefields. Make it an urgent signal so they’ll act on it right away. Tell them I intend to be there about mid-morning.”

“Aye-aye, sir,” the officer replied as he jotted down the message. “It’ll be sent right away.” He handed the message to a rating to deliver to the radio room, where within 10 minutes the message was encoded and sent on its way.

“We’ll stay on this course a few more minutes,” Scheer went on. “Send a preparatory message to the battle squadrons: we will be turning west in succession. Pass a message to Hipper telling him what’s about to happen. I’ll want him to proceed northeast a little longer, and then turn south. He’s to make for Horn’s Reef on his own.”

“Aye-aye, sir,” the signals officer said for the second time. This message would go by blinker, and he would have to be ready for Hipper’s inevitable questions.

Scheer grunted and peered north with his binoculars. He could explain a lunge to the west to the Kaiser, who would like his thrust toward England. With any luck he could sink a few fishing boats, and maybe some coastal transports, too. Tomorrow morning promised to be a glorious day of shooting. And then he would escape back home, neatly evading the Tommies.

At the Admiralty, in Room 40, the code breakers quickly deciphered Scheer’s message. Captain Jackson, an imperious ass in the minds of most of the occupants of Room 40, had been in earlier demanding to know where Scheer’s ID was, and they had answered that the ID he used when in port was in harbor, where it always was. Scheer always transferred his home port call sign to a land station just before he sailed. They had explained that to Captain Jackson several times, but he had brushed them off as mere clerks.

With the latest message in hand they considered calling him back, but agreed that they’d had enough of Captain Jackson to last the rest of the day. Instead one of the civilians went looking for a different senior officer. He soon found the Royal Navy’s Chief of Intelligence.

That Admiral instantly grasped the import of the intercepted message. After a gruff “thank you” to the civilian, he took the message to the First Sea Lord. The First Sea Lord read it and began issuing orders.

The first was to Commodore Tyrwhitt, who had earlier sortied when Beatty had first encountered Hipper's ships. Now Tyrwhitt was order back to sea with his Harwich Force. He was to be off the southern entrance to the German minefields before first light. Any submarines based in Harwich should accompany him, if possible. The second was to Jellicoe, repeating the intercepted message, and giving the results of the radio direction finders on the origin of that message. As was customary with Admiralty practice, he issued no orders to Jellicoe, assuming he was in a better position than they to put all of the pieces together.

Jellicoe received the message on his flagship HMS Iron Duke at 6.15 p.m. He had not yet seen Beatty, and the pressure for the proper deployment was weighing on him. He knew the Germans were nearby--he could hear heavy gunfire to the south and southwest. The two forces were approaching each other at a combined 50 miles per hour. His battle squadrons were in cruising formation, six parallel columns of four ships each, and he needed to shake them out into a proper line of battle before the Germans came into view.

He had been contemplating a turn to the SE to endeavor to get between the Germans and their bases when the Admiralty’s message arrived; he had already moved one of his destroyer flotillas to the east in preparation. As he studied the compass, he was interrupted by a contact report forwarded to him from Admiral Burney, commanding the starboard-most squadron of battleships. Beatty was in sight bearing nearly south. Within a minute came a second message, this one from Commodore Goodenough of the 2nd Light Cruiser Squadron. He had Scheer in sight.

Goodenough had been stung by a conflict of orders during the action at Dogger Bank, breaking away from the Germans even though he was in contact with their light cruiser screen. He had since decided that a light cruiser squadron’s job was to maintain contact with the enemy, not slavishly follow every pirouette and “bright idea” that forced its way into the heads of his superior officers. Earlier this day he had been the first to spot the High Seas Fleet, and he had maintained contact with the German battleships ever since. When he saw the outlying ships of the Grand Fleet, he immediately sent his updated contact report by blinker.

On the Iron Duke Jellicoe’s smile thinned. He knew where Scheer was, and he was much closer than he’d thought. There appeared to be some errors in navigation between Beatty, Goodenough, and the flagship. But the information from the Admiralty had helped clarify everything. And it gave him an idea for a new plan.

He reviewed the courses in his mind. He knew what he was about to do was a risk, but he thought the potential reward would be well worth it. He motioned to his Signal Officer. “Fleet Course West by Southwest. Notify Beatty. Tell him....” Jellicoe paused. “Tell Beatty that once he clears the head of the fleet he is to sweep to the southwest.”

“Aye-aye, sir,” the signal officer replied. He issued the necessary orders to his yeomen, and the signal flags went up the halyards. At the same time they went out by wireless and blinker.

Jellicoe looked at the compass one more time. “Execute,” he said. Seconds later the Iron Duke sounded a horn to announce a course change, and the ship began to heel. Five other flagships swung with her. As each of the battleships in the six columns came up to the spot where their next-ahead had turned, they swung onto the new course. Alerted by the firing, each of them trained their guns out to port, where they expected to see the Germans.

Beatty was stunned to see the battleships sailing in the opposite direction. He tried to frame his anger in a coherent signal, but when he saw the new orders from Jellicoe, and looked at the plot, he smiled instead. He wasn’t going to lead the Grand Fleet’s battleships, as he'd expected. Instead he was going to remain detached, coming down on the Germans from a different direction. The only fly in that ointment was that the Queen Elizabeths of the 5th Battle Squadron were nowhere to be found. He had fought long and hard to have those fast battleships attached to his command, and now when he needed them Rear Admiral Evan Thomas had fallen behind. He made a note to reprimand Evan Thomas after they returned to port. But that was for the future. Admiral Hood had just joined him, giving him three more battlecruisers. Beatty knew right where Scheer was. He was going to push Hipper to one side, and then be the hammer to Jellicoe’s anvil. It was going to be a glorious day.

The only person left out of all of this calculation was Rear Admiral Evan Thomas in HMS Barham. He had been poorly served by his superior officer this afternoon, forgotten by Beatty in his initial impetuous turn toward the Germans. Later Beatty had overridden his natural intincts and held him on a course to the south far too long; Evan Thomas suspected it was to cover his battlecruisers, but knew there would be no proof. Now, faced with the Grand Fleet coming directly at him, and with no way to get to Beatty without blocking the fire of every one of the ships in the Grand Fleet, he decided he had no choice. He reversed his course, forming up just ahead of the lead battleships of the Grand Fleet. Ironically, this put him in the position originally foreseen by Jellicoe in the Grand Fleet’s Fighting Instructions, leading the battleships rather than trailing the battlecruisers.

The turrets on the Queen Elizabeths swung back around to port. The Germans had disappeared into the mist only a few minutes before, but Evan Thomas knew they were near. He knew that when contact came it would be sudden and at close range. He just wasn’t prepared for how close that range was about to be. As his ship steadied on its new course he thoughtfully directed his intentions to Goodenough, now visible on his starboard bow and told him what was happening with the rest of the Grand Fleet.

Goodenough read the message, stared at the distant shapes of the German fleet--he could see it turning toward him--and passed that information back to Evan Thomas. Then he swung around, prudently keeping his distance from the 12" guns of Scheer’s battleships.

The mists of the North Sea were always a variable, but never so much as on the early evening of May 31st, 1916. In some places it opened out to 15,000 or even 25,000 yards. In other places it closed down to under 4,000 yards. When Scheer made his turn to the west at 6:25 p.m. the visibility to the east from the flag bridge of Friederich der Grösse was measured at anywhere between 2,000 and 15,000 yards. The visibility to the west closed down in another bank of mist; one of Scheer’s officers measured visibility in that direction at 4,500 yards. That proved to be illusory; that particular bank of mist was thinner than anyone could know. Five minutes after entering the mist the König, lead ship of the III Battle Squadron, emerged from the fog directly at a line of British battleships.

HMS Revenge and her eight 15" guns were just 5,000 yards from the König. Revenge was flanked by the other ships of her squadron. It took only a few seconds for the gunnery crews to make minute adjustments to their aim before her guns roared.

The Grösser Kurfurst took the first hit, a 15" shell from HMS Revenge that barely missed the König. The shell plowed into the forecastle of the Grösser Kurfurst, opening the bow to the sea. The Grösser Kurfurst immediately took on several hundred tons of water. Two other shells from that same salvo slammed into König, knocking out one of the forward turrets and starting a severe fire. The other ships of that division of British battleships opened fire seconds later, punching hit after hit into every German ship in sight.

With those hits the carnage began. Shells ripped into the German ships from nearly all directions. One of the early hits smashed the bridge of the König, jamming the helm and starting the ship on a slow turn to port. The ships behind her twisted and turned to avoid the lead battleship, slowing and presenting an even better target to the British.

The Grösser Kurfurst and the Kaiser were soon en extremis, deluged by shells and taking on water in catastrophic progressive flooding. The Kaiserin, already on fire in a dozen places, swerved to starboard, losing weigh and listing heavily. The Markgraf, equally badly hit, collided with the Kaiserin, causing severe flooding in both ships and bringing them to a halt. They were both taken under fire by HMS Agincourt and her 14-12" guns. In six minutes, while firing full 14-gun salvos to confound the critics who claimed the ship would turn turtle if they tried that, the ‘Gin Palace’ pushed 16 hits into the Markgraf, and 10 more into the Kaiserin. With several hits from each salvo the results were devastating.

Within minutes the Grösser Kurfurst, the Kaiser, the Kaiserin, the Kronprinz, the Markgraf, and the Prinz Regent Luitpold were sinking. The Oldenberg, Friederich der Grösse and Ostfriesland stumbled onto the scene and were savaged. At ranges less than 6,000 yards, shells punched through armor, exploding deep within the ships. Fires blazed everywhere, and soon the sea was dotted with German sailors swimming for their lives.

It wasn’t all one-sided. Well-trained German gunnery crews fought back valiantly, trying to dish out a little of what their ships were receiving. Thunderer, St. Vincent, Canada and Temeraire left the line to fight fires and massive flooding caused by German fire. Of those only the Canada would survive rising wind and squalls that descended on the North Sea the next day.

When Friederich der Grösse turned out of the line on fire and listing heavily, Vice Admiral Schmidt, Commander of the High Seas Fleet’s II Battle Squadron, assumed command of the shattered remnants of the German force. He had no choice: he turned east, away from the English. There he ran afoul of Beatty.

Hipper had already turned east, and then south, and was out of sight on his way back to Wilhelmshaven. That left the field clear for Beatty’s ships. They opened fire at 15,000 yards. As had been demonstrated earlier in the day, Beatty’s ships put out a high rate of fire, but most of it missed. Hood’s ships, fresh from gunnery practice at Scapa Flow, locked onto the German ships within a couple of salvos and began hitting and hitting hard. The pre-dreadnoughts Posen and Schlesien, leading the column of German ships, were heavily damaged. They turned back into the mist, feeling lucky to have survived. Posen’s luck ran out later that night. Progressive flooding silenced her engines, and she was found by the British shortly after dawn. The results were inevitable, and motion pictures of Posen sinking by the bow played in English movie theaters for months after the battle. The other ships of her squadron evaded contact by turning north. A severe engagement between both side’s lighter ships brewed up as Schmidt endeavored to escape. The German cruisers and destroyers tried to push their attacks home against Beatty’s heavy ships, torpedoing Princess Royal and forcing him to briefly turn away.

The German I Battle Squadron, minus half their numbers caught up in the naval abbatoir that had consumed III Battle Squadron, got away more by accident than intent. They turned back into the mist, sailed north, somehow slipping between Jellicoe and Beatty. After dark Vice Admiral Schmidt found them and led the survivors around Denmark into the Baltic. Behind him, as darkness shrouded the scene, the German lighter ships tried to make their own independent ways home.

Some followed Hipper directly to Horn’s Reef. That led to a prolonged clash with Beatty’s forces the next morning when Hipper turned to fight and cover the escape of the lighter ships. While that cost Hipper his flagship, Lutzow, the rest of the scouting forces made it into the protection of the minefields. Seydlitz, battered by 23 major caliber hits and a torpedo, hit a mine and had to be towed in sinking condition over the bar. She finally grounded in shallow water, her decks awash and fires consuming the rest. She would still be there at the end of the war.

Other ships found different entrances through the minefields. II Scouting Group, accompanied by a dozen torpedo boats, made the unfortunate decision to use a southern entrance to the minefields. There they clashed with Tyrwhitt’s Harwich Force in the early dawn of the next day. That action cost them the rest of II Scouting Group and six torpedo boats before they got away.

#
The results of the battle were hardly encouraging for Germany. They had met the British in open battle, and had come away decidedly the losers. Ten battleships, several of the most modern design, two battlecruisers, one pre-dreadnought, four light cruisers and 34 torpedo boats were sunk. Thirty other ships of all sizes were badly damaged; some would be in dockyard hands for months. As if to add insult to injury, Admiral Scheer, badly wounded, was rescued from the sinking Friederich der Grösse by the British destroyer HMS Shark.


The British lost three battlecruisers; Indefatigable and Queen Mary had been lost earlier in the day. The Princess Royal put up a struggle against rising wind and water, but finally succumbed. Three battleships, two light cruisers and six destroyers were also sunk. Another 12 battleships, four battlecruisers, one armored cruiser, three light cruisers and five destroyers were damaged.


Jellicoe, upon returning to harbor, sent his worst hit ships to the dockyards, coaled and refilled his magazines, and reported 18 battleships ready for sea on four hours notice. The Germans could only put light forces to sea, and then only two days after they had returned to harbor.


As could only be expected, the newspapers had a field day. The news of the triumph in the North Sea resounded around the world, and Jellicoe was hailed as the new Nelson (much to the chagrin of Admiral Sir David Beatty).


Within a week of the battle the Royal Navy changed their strategy. German U-boats were becoming a major threat to Britain’s economic lifeline. Something had to be done about them, and with the High Seas Fleet out of action for several weeks, the time had come to deal with the U-boats in their lairs.


In the weeks after Jutland the Royal Navy instituted a form of the close blockade that the Germans had expected at the start of the war. Lighter ships, backed by a distant Grand Fleet, patrolled incessantly. Additional minefields were laid, and aggressive patrols covered British minesweepers as they removed German mines. In the ensuing “Battle of the Minefield Exits” the Royal Navy’s destroyers sank at least eight U-boats. Several more that tried to evade the British light ships were lost to British mines. The rest, learning from this, stayed bottled up in their pens. A few got out into the open ocean via the Skaggerak (north of Denmark), but this took such a huge toll on their range that their impact was minimal. A few U-boats operated briefly from ports along the Belgian coast, but those ports were soon closed by mines and patrols. The U-boats had been a major threat to Britain’s economic lifeline, but these steps put an end to that threat.


The psychological shock of the defeat at Jutland was profound. The Kaiser shut himself in his rooms, not to emerge for several days. A feeling of despair swept through Germany. England had proved once more, and decisively, to be the master of the sea. All of Germany’s sacrifices for the naval building programs of the pre-war years were called into question. Questions were raised in the German Parliament about the tremendous expense of the Navy. Influential people were utterly convinced that the Navy, the Kaiser’s pet, had brought Britain into the war against Germany. The Kaiser’s unrelenting calls for a large navy were perceived as blind folly. There was even talk of demanding his abdication and seeking a general armistice.


Other, cooler heads called for Germany to draw down the Fleet in favor of the Army, Germany’s real strength. The war would continue, but after Jutland people acknowledged that Germany would not win the war; at most she could get a negotiated settlement. The bloodbath at Verdun and on the Somme brought death and injury to what seemed like every home in the Fatherland. The tremendous success of the Brusilov Offensive on the Eastern Front in the summer of 1916, coupled with the disaster in the North Sea, brought war weariness to Germany. When Franz Joseph, Emperor of the Austro-Hungarian Empire died at the end of summer, that was the last straw.


On August 30th German emissaries in Switzerland contacted the Allies seeking an end to the fighting. This started a stutter-step of diplomacy that slowly brought the fighting to an end. Negotiations were difficult, and broken off several times. But the diplomats, spurred by their governments, persevered. In mid-December the basic forms of an armistice were hammered out. Fighting ceased on January 1, 1917.


Over the next three months German armies grudgingly gave up their gains in the west, slowly falling back to the original frontier. Allied armies followed at arms length, ready for the fighting to begin anew. There were several clashes that threatened to upset the armistice, but in each case things were worked out. Nobody really wanted the bloodletting to begin again.


One of the sticking points had been Germany’s perceived success against Russia. When it was made clear that there would be no separate peace, and with Austro-Hungary threatening a unilateral peace with Russia, fighting stopped there, too. Russia demanded Germany and Austria-Hungary retreat to the pre-war borders. This was shelved when the Germans put their foot down, and assured that Franz Joseph’s successor did likewise. The armies halted in place, awaiting negotiation of a general peace.


In April of 1917 the diplomats of both sides sat down in Geneva to hammer out a peace treaty. There were faced with several seemingly intractable problems:


1) Italy had lost a lot of men with nothing to show for it. They wanted compensation. Specifically they wanted the Tyrol, Trieste and surrounding lands. Italian politicians were threatening to continue the war if they didn’t get them. Austria-Hungary resisted, and threatened to continue the war against Italy (but not anyone else).


2) President Wilson had his idealistic Fourteen Points, and was shoving them in everyone’s face. This was something nobody in Europe wanted any part of. He had to be kept out of the primary negotiations, but carefully because of the mountain of debt France and the UK owed the US.


3) France was suffering labor unrest brought on by Communists and Socialists. Something had to be done to quiet them. The best solution was probably to give the appearance of victory and a return to normalcy, whatever that proved to be.


4) Germany had a similar problem with social unrest. While the tendency was to ignore Germany’s desires, it was nonetheless painfully clear that this contagion might spread. Everyone remembered the lessons of 1848. The monarchies had paid lip-service to popular democracy, but still distrusted it.


5) Russia wanted a buffer between Germany and Russia. Only France and the Poles wanted to recreate Poland.


6) Various German overseas interests had been snapped up by the British and their ally, Japan. Was that just too bad, or were the British willing to give some back provided they could get something in return?


7) What would be done about the High Seas Fleet that had contributed so mightily to bringing England into the war? This touched on a different question: what to do about Kaiser Wilhelm, who was now seen as too erratic to be a modern monarch.


8) What was to be done with the Ottoman Empire? They were present at Geneva, and they had successfully repulsed all attacks on them. Were they to be allowed to keep them? Who would enforce any changes in the map?


Faced with these questions, the diplomats pulled out the maps and their pencils, ready to redraw the face of Europe for the first time in a century.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


What follows is a discusion I had with Colin about various aspects and fall-out from the above.

Colin’s comments on the “issues” and Bruce’s replies

1) Italy had lost a lot of men with nothing to show for it. They wanted compensation.--Stuff the Italians. They will make foolish noises in Africa and elsewhere. projecting a war in the 1920s in the Balkans, a war that threatened to bring Austria-Hungary back in. Serbian ambitions had to be squashed, too. They were seen as one of the causes of the Great War. This would occupy diplomats in all major European capitals for several years to come. Serbia's attempts to create a Yugoslavia were destined to failure because of the intransigence of Austria-Hungary and Italy.

2) President Wilson had his idealistic Fourteen Points, and was shoving them in everyone’s face. This was something nobody in Europe wanted any part of. He had to be kept out of the primary negotiations, but carefully because of the mountain of debt France and the UK owed the US.--How do you keep Wilson outside the door? Easy. Don’t invite him to the party.--Wilson has no cards on the table. America sent no troops and did not enter the war. --At worst, Wilson will fling ambassadors across the briny. Lovely job, that.--No League of Nations. Maybe a new “Treaty of Westphalia”? Probably. At the very least a new European “arrangement”. This might lead to problems in the next couple of decades as America continues to ramp up industrial strength. Remember, though, the massive debt France and the UK owed the US.

3) France was suffering labor unrest brought on by Communists and Socialists. Something had to be done to quiet them. The best solution was probably to give the appearance of victory and a return to normalcy, whatever that proved to be.--Subtle nuance? Bold-faced lies? Is there a challenge in this? Observation: in our history the French have still not solved this problem.

4) Germany had a similar problem with social unrest. While the tendency was to ignore Germany’s desires, it was nonetheless painfully clear that this contagion might spread. Everyone remembered the lessons of 1848.--Did everyone remember the lessons of 1848? What lessons did they remember? Popular democracy was seen as ‘mob rule’ by the crowned heads of Europe, and popular enthusiasm had both contributed to the war and made it such a bloodbath.--What about reparations? France and Britain do not have the muscle to force this. This problem would vex people for some time. France demanded reparations; the Imperial German government saw no need for reparations as they had been encircled and were only lashing out in self-defense. This would be a thorny issue at the peace conference...until everyone remembered the High Seas Fleet. The German fleet had one last service it could perform for Germany.

5) Russia wanted a buffer between Germany and Russia. Only France and the Poles wanted to recreate Poland.--Regardless of the terms of any treaty, Austria-Hungary will disintegrate soon. Um, perhaps not. Projection that it will move toward a more Federal system rather than fall apart with a clunk.--Will this provide a series of buffer states or a series of provocations?--Yes. Both.

6) Various German overseas interests had been snapped up by the British and their ally, Japan. Was that just too bad, or were the British willing to give some back provided they could get something in return?--This might answer the reparations question.--Germany loses everything and breathes a collective sigh of relief. --All Germans believe their Navy cannot defend a colonial empire. Agreed.

7) What would be done about the Kaiser’s Fleet (and the Kaiser) that had contributed so mightily to bringing England into the war?--Germans scrapping “The Kaiser’s Folly” should have interesting long-term effects.--The Kaiser will abdicate. An heir will be crowned, with MUCH reduced powers. Agreed. The loss of the High Seas Fleet and the overseas empire will be made up by the increase in German shipping. The Crown Prince, a more sober and less erratic monarch than his father, will ascend the throne. The Kaiser will live in genteel retirement writing his memoirs. The German constitution will be revised over a period of years to preclude what happened from 1890-1914.

8) What was to be done with the Ottoman Empire? They were present at Geneva, and they had successfully repulsed all attacks on them. Were they to be allowed to keep them? Who would enforce any changes in the map?--Mustapha Kemal and the other westernized army officers will still have their day.--Greece might be somewhat less inclined toward foolish adventures in Ionia.--Yeah, right. More likely, they will try to be “clever” and really mess things up! Agreed. The ‘Young Turk’ movement will be a flash in the pan. Kemal will make Turkey a secular state. However they will still have their grip over much of the Middle East.

9) What about the world economy? A “Lesser Depression” in the mid-1920s? Yes, but with less impact in the US due to an economy that didn’t get shackled to a war. Various economic problems in the US are resolved by a steady repayment of the loans extended to the UK.

10) Of course, Japan will still commence making a mess in China in 1927 or thereabouts.... There will be rising tensions with the US, and probably very frosty relations tending toward war in the late 20s and early 30s. Japanese militarists in the army wouldn’t stop being expansionistic until it was beaten out of them like it was in 1941-45 by the US in our history.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Note the extra sections. The whole post-war history is a convoluted mess as politicians labored long and hard, driven by popular pressure, to resolve what the fighting had not (and lay the seeds for WW2). But given the above, and some of the discussion, now pick some place and picture how it would be without the massive loss of life of 1917 and 1918, and the outpouring of treasure from the fighting during those two years. What would the world look like?
That's what playing with alternate history is all about.

Friday, February 02, 2007

More on Creating Alternate Histories

There are a couple of schools of thought about the effects of a change in the stream of history. The first is that from the moment of change everything is different. The other is that there is a momentum to historical events, and that the changes will appear over time. Call this the inertia of Temporal Events.

I hold with the second one, and here's why: take the causation event (CE) for the Gina Stone stories, specifically Lord Sackville's Charge. In the first school, a king on an island in the Sulawesi Sea (on the other side of the world) does things different from that moment on because Lord George died and the French Army was destroyed. How would he know, would he care, and what would this do to the range of options open to him? I maintain that there would be no change made by that king, at least right away. Think of it as a domino effect. There will be ripples of decisions made because of Lord George and the men with him who died on August 1, 1759 who would have been alive in our world/history. But that domino effect takes time to reach the Sulawesi Sea.

Another name for the first one is The Butterfly Effect. Forcing a butterfly to change course in the mountains of Mexico means you get some effect on the other side of the world.

A simpler way to put it: everyone who was alive and not impacted by Lord George's Charge are still alive, and the decisions they make in every day life are still the same...for a time. As the ripples circle the globe these changes will appear. George Washington will still be a planter of note, and he will serve with distinction on the frontier. But peace breaking out in 1760 will give him different choices...in 1760 and afterward. The decisions he makes in the American wilderness in September of 1759 will still be the same as in our world.

Now what of other changes? One of the arguments you get with alternate history is that whatever changes you ring in must be linked to your CE. Yes...and no. Having Queen Victoria die in childbirth in 1847 is not required by the death of Lord George Sackville in 1759. But the English succession was fixed on George III (ascending to the throne in 1760). And if we assume Prinny (a logical assumption), then we can also assume Victoria will be around as that's the way things were shaping up. We could argue that this isn't necessarily so, but here I invoke the storyteller's privilege: I want it to work this way for purposes of the story I'm going to tell.

This last is the most important point of this post. If I am a historian involved in speculation, then everything has to flow logically. If I am a storyteller, then after the CE I can play with the history the way I want it. But I must do so in a logical and consistent manner. A French Revolution of some kind was going to break out; the situation in France almost guaranteed it. But the wars that followed can be played with. There might not have been a Napoleon Bonaparte, though it is likely there would have been somebody with his political ambitions (I think it unlikely that that person would have had Napoleon's military ability). And you might not have had the asinine Foreign Secretary running around unleashed in 1814. In fact, for story purposes you could have the French settle down in 1803 or 1804 without a monarchy or an empire. What then? More speculation.

Speaking of that, what of another incident? The Battle of Brienne in 1814. Napoleon's troops came within a whisker of capturing or killing Prussian Field Marshal Blucher and his Chief of Staff Gneisenau. Without his single-minded determination to seize Paris, the Allies might not have been able to succeed in the 1814 campaign. This is even better than 1815 where some historians play with Napoleon beating Wellington. A better scenario would have been Blucher getting captured at the Battle of Ligny--he was ridden over by French cavalry--leaving a general who flat out did not trust the English and Wellington in charge and if in command would have headed for the Rhine as fast as he could. Wellington, knowing the Prussians were retreating, would not have stood on the ridge at Mont St. Jean, but would have headed for the boats as fast as possible.

A third incident? What if an enterprising officer had pushed inland despite orders at Suvla Bay in 1915? He would have seized the high ground in the Gallipoli peninsula, most likely cutting of Liman von Sanders army facing the Anzacs and the French/British troops at the tip of the peninsula. Given that, it's very likely the British could have passed the Dardenelles and the whole history of WW1 (and what happened after) would have changed.

While this is fun, you have to follow several rules. First, make sure that this change could have occurred. The courier carrying orders to Sackville that halted his advance was the only one who practically rode his horse into the ground, and apparently this was the only time he did so. What if he didn't do that this time? Sackville would have been on the unprotected flank of the French Army, with fatal results to the latter (though not necessarily to Sackville). In 1814 the French could have sent a peletoon (platoon) to secure the rear of the chateau Blucher and Gneisenau were using, just like they did several other times in similar situations earlier in the wars. In 1915 an uppity and pushy officer could have ordered his men inland against the nearly non-existent Turkish opposition; there were plenty around, and all that was needed was one who trusted what he saw rather than orders he could see were wrong.

Second, you need to sit down and bat back and forth ideas, preferably with several people. Don't be afraid to be creative; by the way, the more historically informed these people are, the better.

Third, of course, is to either write your speculative paper, or, if a storyteller, now look at what you need to make the story you're writing come out. Here is where you actually have free license. And don't forget that along the way there will be several other possibilities that show up for you. File those, and get on with your story.

Thursday, February 01, 2007

Creating Worlds/Settings/Histories

I've touched on this before, but the other night I was talking with some people in the writing group who wanted to know how I built a complete world. They were referring to the city of New Essex for Counterfeit Line and Different World.

First I referred them to: http://www.strolen.com/content.php?node=1148 for a primer on creating a world for role-playing. This works for novel writing as well. But aside from that....

I start by looking at the story I'm writing. Let's take the Gina Stone stories mentioned above. The portal opens to several alternate history destinations. These were: 1943 Pacific Island, 1895 (New Essex), 1702 Bavaria, 1360 France, ~450 AD Central Bulgaria, ~1900 BC Egypt, ~6000 BC Himalayas, ~25000 BC Brazil. I took these and established a brief footnote for each one (I didn't need to do more if the story didn't need it).

1943 Pacific Island - a very small island in a coral lagoon. There's a crashed US plane on the island. The island acquires a Japanese garrison. This is fairly vanilla, and I didn't need to do much more. The bad guy has a run-in with the Japanese and barely escapes with his life.

1702 Bavaria - part of the War of the Spanish Succession. No change needed. I may still use this.

1360 France - in a ruined castle. No change needed, though I refer to it in passing several times. The Medieval warming period has continued in this alternate timeline (ending a century later). Important to remind the characters of the importance of disease control (the 1360's saw the second wave of the Black Death in our world).

450 Bulgaria - I needed a lush area that I could instead show as somewhat run down. No other change needed.

6000 BC Himalayas - I wanted the picture of the ice sheet from some mountain, that was all. No change needed.

25000 BC Brazil - in the original story the bad guy set up a drug growing operation here. I might still use this idea as it will be one that nobody can track (or at least so they think).

1900 BC Egypt - this was the 12th Dynasty, and I needed a lot of nitty-gritty of daily life. I did a lot of digging into Pharaohs, and dropped a couple more in. This was important to the plot. But I didn't need anything more as Egypt didn't change that much for quite some time.

1895 New Essex - I pondered how there would be no US. The key point obviously had to be that there was no American Revolution. Now a lot of the seeds of the revolution had been sown in the preceding decades. The British viewed the colonies as a source of raw materials to feed the growing industrialization of England. There was also that 'Lord and Master' strain that crops up in the English attitude toward the rest of the world, especially their colonies. This attitude exacerbated the tensions between Parliament and the Colonies.

I began looking at incidents and individuals who helped bring about the rupture. Time after time Lord George Germaine (originally Lord George Sackville) kept showing up. He had been cashiered after the Battle of Minden (August 1, 1759) for not charging the French with his cavalry. Piers Macksey has done a wonderful book on the incident The Coward of Minden. It has to be read along with His Britannic Majesty's Army in Germany During the Seven Years War by Lt. General Sir Reginald Savory. There was more to the incident than just not charging. Sackville was where he couldn't see the French. There was also a confusion of orders, and so on. Read it, the whole thing is fascinating.

So the simple solution was to remove Lord George Germaine (a favorite of the then Prince of Wales and future King George III). Why not have him die heroically leading his men in the climactic attack at Minden, destroying the French Army of Lower Germany? Taken with the loss of Canada at the Battle of the Plains of Abraham in 1759, the destruction of the French fleet that year, and the loss of India, this would knock the French out of the Seven Years War, and probably end the war in Central Germany as the Austrians would have no French ally to tie down the British paid army.

All right, now one more thing: several leading members of Parliament suggested consulting with the colonies on their own defense and letting them find the money rather than simply raising taxes. Germaine had opposed this and managed to kill it. Now he's not there. And the taxes of the time had to be paid in coin (which was scarce). Now we don't have that, the colonies contribute to their own defense, and there is no Revolution.

The rest was simply copying what happened in Canada 80 years later. Except I had to have a growing of the West Coast. That was simple, actually. Instead of subduing the Plains Indians, the British elected to recognize them sort of like they did in India. So no settlers on the Great Plains. Instead you get them in parts of the Rocky Mountains and along the coast (which the Spanish/Mexicans had been settling anyway). And so the British move in (by the way, this almost makes it necessary for Texas to be independent -- think about it and you'll see why).

Now where are the places to settle? Where there's good sea-borne navigation. Where are the cities on the West Coast? At the mouth of rivers, and at natural harbors. Tacoma and Seattle both have great natural harbors, but Seattle has some problems (that were solved by the railroad). So stand that on its head a little. Which site has great communications into the interior, a natural harbor, and would be easy for the railroad to get to (the railroad would be pushing up from Vancouver on the Columbia). The Tacoma area actually comes to mind (as does the Everett area). So put cities at both places. Tacoma would benefit from the railroad first, so it grows sooner/faster. But I chose to put it on the flats around Puyallup and Fife where building is easier, rather than on the Pt. Defiance peninsula.

What about the social customs? To be different I didn't have Queen Victoria on the thrown for more than 10-12 years. She actually had five assassination attempts against her (which I didn't know), but she spent a lot of time being pregnant, at least those first few years. And women died in childbirth, even with the best medical care. That meant a Regency for Edward, and possibly an Edward VIII on the throne by 1895, but with a considerably lessened influence from Albert.

George McDonald Fraser, in his Flashman novels, pointed out that the Victorian attitudes and customs were showing up in the 1840s even without Victoria and Albert, and that Albert was the prig. Accepting this, and without Victoria, I could copy most of the Victorian world, but leave out the more irksome aspects (such as covering piano legs). In this I was helped by a lot of comments from a grandmother of mine who remembered the society she grew up in.

The physical layout of the town was the least work. I simply took a map of the Fife/Puyallup area and imposed a grid. The rest were details, like what color the houses were, whether the streets in certain parts of town were paved, and what life looked/smelled/sounded like in certain neighborhoods.

Simple, really, and most of this was worked out on the fly, not before-hand.