Other Pasts, Different Presents, Alternative Futures

Black (War and Technology), an experienced military historian at the University of Exeter, U.K., contributes a spirited entry to the increasingly productive conversation over the scholarly and political value of what-ifs—explorations of what might have happened instead of what did. This is the most robust defense of historical counterfactuals to date, and should be read in concert with Richard J. Evans’s Altered Pasts, a criticism of the genre. Black goes so far as to accuse historians of being ahistorical in avoiding what-if arguments. Despite somewhat herky-jerky prose, the book digs deeply into the complexities of what-ifs and, in Black’s view, their abundant utility—to say nothing of their being natural to every thinking being and intrinsic to all argument. Black is at his best when analyzing counterfactual takes on war, diplomacy, and grand policy, even with their limitations. For instance, he argues, they’re critical to military planning, for they permit “the imagining of alternate realities or possibilities as a learning tool for strategic thinking.” His chapter on counterfactual thinking about the future is unique in the literature. For those interested in this fascinating subject, Black’s book is indispensable. [em](Aug.) [/em]