What do you think?
Rate this book
Greenhill's Alternate Decisions
Hitler Triumphant: Alternate Decisions of World War II
Based on a series of fascinating What ifs posed by leading military historians, this compelling new alternate history recontructs the moments during World War II which could conceivably have altered the entire course of the Second World War and led to a German victory. Based on real battles, actions and characters, each scenario has been carefully constructed to reveal how, at points of decision, a different choice or minor incident could have set in motion an entirely new train of events altering history forever. Scenarios in this volume include the fall of Malta in 1942 and the likely consequences and the possibility of Halifax making peace with Hitler.
256 pages, Hardcover
First published July 15, 2006
26 people are currently reading
196 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 28 of 28 reviews
May 18, 2020
As someone who enjoys reading both history and alternate history, I enjoyed this collection of stories, first published in 2006. Most of the stories are written as straight military history, giving details on the military units involved, which I think can bog down the story. But I understand the authors are trying to show how plausible their scenarios are.
The best story is "Peace in Our Time," by Britisher Charles Vasey. This is written as a memoir by someone who had served at the Fuehrer's headquarters. He writes about attending the Fuehrer's funeral in Berlin on 2 June 1970. He reflects on Germany's victory brought about by this man and wonders if Germany would have won if its first fuehrer had not died in 1943. But he decides that even if Adolf Hitler had not died and been replaced by Luftwaffe head Herman Goering, German victory was inevitable! So we're given a very interesting scenario in which Goering achieves the victory that we know in our real history that Hitler could not.
Reading some of these scenarios, it's hard to believe that Hitler did not try any of the alternate actions. In David Keithly's " Black Cross, Green Crescent, Black Gold," Hitler decides against attacking Russia in 1941 and decides instead to concentrate on defeating the British in North Africa. Axis forces are able to take the Suez Canal and drive on into the Middle East to seize the "black gold" there, the oil wells in Iraq and Persia (Iran). As the Germans push on to the British colony of India from the west, the Japanese invade India from the east. The two forces meet on the Indus River by the end of 1942. Churchill resigns and a new Prime Minister opens negotiations for peace...
Another scenario is about a possibility that I have wondered about...what if the Allies tried an invasion of France in 1943, as they had promised Stalin? Stephen Badsey gives quite an answer in his "Ike's Cockade." "Cockade" is the code-name for Eisenhower's plan to land on the Cotentin peninsula and seize the major French port of Cherbourg. Things go well at first... but it all ends in disaster. Looks like it was better to wait till 1944 for the landing in France....
As all the scenarios show--and an important point about alternate history-- it is that nothing in history is inevitable. I enjoyed considering the possible realities that, happily, in the case of the eleven scenarios in this book, did NOT happen.
The best story is "Peace in Our Time," by Britisher Charles Vasey. This is written as a memoir by someone who had served at the Fuehrer's headquarters. He writes about attending the Fuehrer's funeral in Berlin on 2 June 1970. He reflects on Germany's victory brought about by this man and wonders if Germany would have won if its first fuehrer had not died in 1943. But he decides that even if Adolf Hitler had not died and been replaced by Luftwaffe head Herman Goering, German victory was inevitable! So we're given a very interesting scenario in which Goering achieves the victory that we know in our real history that Hitler could not.
Reading some of these scenarios, it's hard to believe that Hitler did not try any of the alternate actions. In David Keithly's " Black Cross, Green Crescent, Black Gold," Hitler decides against attacking Russia in 1941 and decides instead to concentrate on defeating the British in North Africa. Axis forces are able to take the Suez Canal and drive on into the Middle East to seize the "black gold" there, the oil wells in Iraq and Persia (Iran). As the Germans push on to the British colony of India from the west, the Japanese invade India from the east. The two forces meet on the Indus River by the end of 1942. Churchill resigns and a new Prime Minister opens negotiations for peace...
Another scenario is about a possibility that I have wondered about...what if the Allies tried an invasion of France in 1943, as they had promised Stalin? Stephen Badsey gives quite an answer in his "Ike's Cockade." "Cockade" is the code-name for Eisenhower's plan to land on the Cotentin peninsula and seize the major French port of Cherbourg. Things go well at first... but it all ends in disaster. Looks like it was better to wait till 1944 for the landing in France....
As all the scenarios show--and an important point about alternate history-- it is that nothing in history is inevitable. I enjoyed considering the possible realities that, happily, in the case of the eleven scenarios in this book, did NOT happen.
February 10, 2015
-En tierra de nadie, aunque con alguna cosilla interesante.-
Género. Relatos (aunque no lo son exactamente en la mayoría de los casos; siga leyendo, por favor).
Lo que nos cuenta. Aproximación a posibles devenires contrafactuales de la Segunda Guerra Mundial desde un tipo de ucronía que suele (no en todos los casos ni totalmente) acercarse más al ensayo breve que al relato propiamente dicho, con todos sus trabajos escritos especialmente para este libro, generalmente militar pero con espacios para lo político, con un repaso al final de cada uno de los textos respecto a las circunstancias reales que son manipuladas en cada caso, con una traducción que sugiere con frecuencia que el responsable no estaba muy ducho en cuestiones relativas a la Segunda Guerra Mundial ni en lo militar en general (en ocasiones, ni en la traducción propiamente) y que nos muestran las consecuencias de la desaparición de distintos líderes sobre las naciones que dirigían o sobre las tropas que mandaban, la ejecución de la Operación Félix, los efectos de una política italiana distinta respecto a su Armada, acciones militares de envergadura en Oriente Próximo y Medio, el uso en profundidad de los Fallschirmjäger en el Ostfront, la ejecución de Barbarroja sin ningún cambio sobre la marcha de forma que se alcance Moscú, la toma de Malta y sus consecuencias, además de una prematura invasión aliada de Francia.
¿Quiere saber más de este libro, sin spoilers? Visite:
http://librosdeolethros.blogspot.com/...
Género. Relatos (aunque no lo son exactamente en la mayoría de los casos; siga leyendo, por favor).
Lo que nos cuenta. Aproximación a posibles devenires contrafactuales de la Segunda Guerra Mundial desde un tipo de ucronía que suele (no en todos los casos ni totalmente) acercarse más al ensayo breve que al relato propiamente dicho, con todos sus trabajos escritos especialmente para este libro, generalmente militar pero con espacios para lo político, con un repaso al final de cada uno de los textos respecto a las circunstancias reales que son manipuladas en cada caso, con una traducción que sugiere con frecuencia que el responsable no estaba muy ducho en cuestiones relativas a la Segunda Guerra Mundial ni en lo militar en general (en ocasiones, ni en la traducción propiamente) y que nos muestran las consecuencias de la desaparición de distintos líderes sobre las naciones que dirigían o sobre las tropas que mandaban, la ejecución de la Operación Félix, los efectos de una política italiana distinta respecto a su Armada, acciones militares de envergadura en Oriente Próximo y Medio, el uso en profundidad de los Fallschirmjäger en el Ostfront, la ejecución de Barbarroja sin ningún cambio sobre la marcha de forma que se alcance Moscú, la toma de Malta y sus consecuencias, además de una prematura invasión aliada de Francia.
¿Quiere saber más de este libro, sin spoilers? Visite:
http://librosdeolethros.blogspot.com/...
May 21, 2017
Phillip K. Dick's The Man in the High Castle is a science fiction story about what life would be like in the United States if the Axis powers had won World War II, and Germany occupied the eastern third of the United States while Japan occupied the western third. In eleven different essays by eleven different military historians, Hitler Triumphant offers plausible counterfactual ways in which Nazi Germany could indeed have won the war. This is probably not for everyone's tastes--the writing is often technical and full of military jargon, and presupposes a certain level of knowledge on the reader's part of actual historical events. It is also sometimes rather dry, and would best be enjoyed by history and World War II buffs. But I found it fascinating.
February 25, 2026
In the space of a couple of days, I read this book twice. Reading this book twice was less an act of reentering a text and more an immersion into such a speculative chamber of history where the familiar architecture of World War II stands but its interiors are wholly reorganized.
As someone who has spent years moving between canonical histories and literary reinterpretations of the past, I approached the book with a combination of inquisitiveness and restraint.
Alternate history, at its worst, can descend into gimmickry—a parlour game of inverted outcomes—but at its best, it becomes a powerful intellectual exercise that exposes the fragility of what we call inevitability. Tsouras’s anthology belongs firmly to the latter category. It is not just about imagining Nazi victory; it is about questioning the unwarranted hinge-points upon which the 20th century turned.
The book has the following chapters:
1) May Day
2) Peace in Our Time
3) The Spanish Gambit
4) Navigare Necesse Est, Vivere Non Est Necesse
5) The Health of The State
6) Black Cross, Green Crescent, Black Gold
7) Wings Over the Caucasus
8) To the Last Drop Of Blood
9) The Stalingrad Breakout
10) For Want of an Island
11) Ike’s Cockade
What struck me instantaneously, and more so on the second reading, is how profoundly World War II still exerts a gravitational pull on the modern imagination. Even in our contemporary era defined by asymmetrical conflicts and ideological fragmentation, the Second World War remains the last conflict that fits the classical mould of epic struggle. The war persists in our cultural bloodstream not only through scholarly monographs but through cinema, memoir, and collective mythmaking.
One senses that this enduring fascination arises from clarity: vast armies, identifiable leaders, decisive campaigns, and moral polarity. In contrast, modern warfare—diffuse, shadowy, and morally ambiguous—rarely offers the same narrative coherence.
This cultural nostalgia becomes the emotional soil from which books like this one grow.
Yet the anthology complicates that nostalgia rather than feeding it. It reminds us that the war’s moral clarity coexisted with a professional admiration among soldiers that sits uneasily with our retrospective judgments. Mainstream historians like Antony Beevor or Max Hastings often acknowledge this tension, but they do so within the boundaries of documented fact.
Tsouras and his contributors, however, push that tension into the realm of possibility. By entertaining scenarios where German operational brilliance might have tipped the scales, the book forces the reader to confront an uncomfortable truth: the outcome we now treat as inevitable was once deeply uncertain.
In this sense, the book shares intellectual DNA with works like Philip K. Dick’s ‘The Man in the High Castle’ or Robert Harris’s ‘Fatherland’, yet it differs sharply in tone and ambition. Those novels operate primarily in the domain of speculative fiction, using alternate history as a vehicle for philosophical reflection or dystopian atmosphere. Tsouras’s collection, by contrast, is grounded in military plausibility.
Each essay functions like a thought experiment rooted in logistics, command decisions, intelligence failures, and geopolitical contingencies.
The speculative element is not fantastical but procedural. These are not alternate worlds built from scratch; they are alternate pathways branching from moments that almost happened.
Reading it as a long-time student of history, I found myself continually comparing it with mainstream historiography. Traditional histories often operate retrospectively, arranging events into coherent narratives that imply causality and inevitability.
Even when historians explicitly reject teleology, the structure of narrative history tends to smooth chaos into sequence. Alternate history disrupts that illusion. By isolating key decision points—Churchill’s leadership, ULTRA intelligence, Mediterranean strategy, the Eastern Front—the book divulges how history is less a river than a delta, splitting into myriad channels before congregating into what we later call destiny.
The opening premise of the anthology, especially when reframed in contemporary language, is profoundly unsettling: that the war’s outcome hinged repeatedly on human choice rather than structural inevitability. This challenges deterministic models of history, particularly those influenced by Marxist or materialist frameworks that privilege impersonal forces over individual agency.
Tsouras’s volume unapologetically re-centres the individual—leaders, generals, even moments of hesitation or resolve—as the pivot of history. It is a view that feels almost old-fashioned, yet in the context of World War II it regains persuasive force.
The war was shaped not only by industrial capacity but by personalities: Churchill’s defiance, Hitler’s obsessions, Stalin’s paranoia, Roosevelt’s patience. Remove or alter one temperament and the geometry of the war shifts.
One of the anthology’s most compelling aspects is its refusal to present alternate history as a constant counterfactual timeline. Instead, each chapter stands alone, like a prism refracting a different colour from the same beam of history. This structural choice enhances the intellectual seriousness of the book.
Rather than constructing a single, internally consistent alternate universe—a common trope in speculative fiction—the anthology embraces multiplicity. Each essay becomes a meditation on contingency, reminding the reader that history does not branch once but endlessly.
The chapter imagining a Britain led by Lord Halifax instead of Churchill is emblematic of the book’s method. It does not rely on sensationalism but on sober political plausibility. The suggestion that Britain’s wartime posture might have softened under different leadership forces readers to reconsider the cult of inevitability surrounding Churchill. In mainstream histories,
Churchill’s rise often feels destined, even mythic. Here, however, we are reminded how narrow the corridor of history truly was. Leadership, the book insists, is not merely symbolic; it is structural.
Equally fascinating is the exploration of intelligence—particularly the hypothetical loss of Allied cryptographic advantage. In conventional histories, ULTRA often appears as one factor among many. But when the anthology removes that advantage, the war’s strategic equilibrium tilts dramatically.
This narrative strategy is one of the book’s great strengths: by subtracting a single variable, it exposes the hidden scaffolding supporting the Allied victory.
The Mediterranean chapters were, for me, among the most surprisingly enlightening. Mainstream Anglo-American histories tend to treat the Mediterranean theatre as secondary to the Eastern Front or Normandy. Yet alternate scenarios involving Gibraltar, Malta, or Italian naval modernization reveal how much strategic potential lay dormant in that region.
By reimagining Italy not as a liability but as a competent ally, the essays challenge entrenched caricatures. This revisionist impulse aligns the anthology with a broader historiographical trend that seeks to reassess the operational capabilities of Axis powers without succumbing to moral relativism.
Perhaps the most haunting sections are those dealing with the Eastern Front. The fall of Moscow, the salvation of the Sixth Army, the exploitation of airborne forces—these scenarios carry a particular emotional charge because they feel so close to plausibility.
The Eastern Front was, after all, the crucible in which the war’s fate was largely forged. Reading these chapters, one becomes acutely aware of how thin the margins sometimes were. A delayed winter, a different command decision, a successful breakout—small deviations loom large when magnified by hindsight.
Yet the book never devolves into triumphalist fantasy. On the contrary, it maintains an undercurrent of moral sobriety. Even while acknowledging German military proficiency, the essays never lose sight of the regime’s monstrous ideological core. This balance is crucial.
One of the dangers of alternate history is that it can inadvertently aestheticize the very forces it seeks to analyze. Tsouras’s anthology walks that tightrope carefully, allowing professional admiration for military competence without diluting ethical judgment.
Comparatively, when placed alongside mainstream historians like Ian Kershaw or Richard Evans, the anthology feels less authoritative but more provocative. It does not aim to replace archival scholarship; rather, it complements it by destabilizing certainty.
If traditional history tells us what happened and why, alternate history asks a more unsettling question: what if it had not? In that sense, the book functions almost pedagogically. It trains the reader to think historically rather than merely absorb history.
On a personal level, the second reading deepened my appreciation of the book’s philosophical undercurrent. Beneath the operational details lies a meditation on choice.
History, the anthology suggests, is not a monolith but a crossroads. Each battle, each decision, each hesitation represents a fork in the road not taken. This idea resonates strongly with literary approaches to history, where narrative and contingency intertwine.
As someone who teaches literature as well as reads history, I found this convergence particularly compelling. The book occupies that liminal space where historiography meets storytelling.
At the same time, its tone occasionally betrays its early-21st-century origins. There is a lingering sense of the post-9/11 world in its framing—the implicit comparison between total war and modern terrorism, between conventional heroism and contemporary asymmetry.
This contextual layer adds another dimension to the reading experience. The anthology is not only about the 1940s; it is also about how the early 2000s imagined the 1940s. In that sense, it becomes a historical artifact in its own right—a reflection of how one era reinterprets another to make sense of its anxieties.
In the end, what lingers after finishing the book—twice—is not any single scenario but a lingering chill. The realization that the world we inhabit emerged from a narrow corridor of outcomes is both humbling and unsettling.
Alternate history, when done well, does not merely entertain; it destabilizes self-satisfaction. It reminds us that the past was once open, that the future was once undecided, and that history is less a monument than a moment perpetually in motion.
In comparison with both alternate-history fiction and mainstream military historiography, ‘Third Reich Victorious’ occupies a fascinating middle ground. It lacks the psychological depth of literary counterfactuals and the empirical rigor of academic history, yet it compensates with intellectual daring. It invites readers to step outside the comfort of inevitability and confront the fragile architecture of reality itself.
For me, as a reader shaped by both classrooms and libraries, the book ultimately functions as a reminder of history’s most unsettling lesson: that the world we know is only one version among many that might have been.
And in that realization lies the true power of Tsouras’s anthology—not in rewriting the past, but in reminding us how precariously it was written in the first place.
Most recommended.
As someone who has spent years moving between canonical histories and literary reinterpretations of the past, I approached the book with a combination of inquisitiveness and restraint.
Alternate history, at its worst, can descend into gimmickry—a parlour game of inverted outcomes—but at its best, it becomes a powerful intellectual exercise that exposes the fragility of what we call inevitability. Tsouras’s anthology belongs firmly to the latter category. It is not just about imagining Nazi victory; it is about questioning the unwarranted hinge-points upon which the 20th century turned.
The book has the following chapters:
1) May Day
2) Peace in Our Time
3) The Spanish Gambit
4) Navigare Necesse Est, Vivere Non Est Necesse
5) The Health of The State
6) Black Cross, Green Crescent, Black Gold
7) Wings Over the Caucasus
8) To the Last Drop Of Blood
9) The Stalingrad Breakout
10) For Want of an Island
11) Ike’s Cockade
What struck me instantaneously, and more so on the second reading, is how profoundly World War II still exerts a gravitational pull on the modern imagination. Even in our contemporary era defined by asymmetrical conflicts and ideological fragmentation, the Second World War remains the last conflict that fits the classical mould of epic struggle. The war persists in our cultural bloodstream not only through scholarly monographs but through cinema, memoir, and collective mythmaking.
One senses that this enduring fascination arises from clarity: vast armies, identifiable leaders, decisive campaigns, and moral polarity. In contrast, modern warfare—diffuse, shadowy, and morally ambiguous—rarely offers the same narrative coherence.
This cultural nostalgia becomes the emotional soil from which books like this one grow.
Yet the anthology complicates that nostalgia rather than feeding it. It reminds us that the war’s moral clarity coexisted with a professional admiration among soldiers that sits uneasily with our retrospective judgments. Mainstream historians like Antony Beevor or Max Hastings often acknowledge this tension, but they do so within the boundaries of documented fact.
Tsouras and his contributors, however, push that tension into the realm of possibility. By entertaining scenarios where German operational brilliance might have tipped the scales, the book forces the reader to confront an uncomfortable truth: the outcome we now treat as inevitable was once deeply uncertain.
In this sense, the book shares intellectual DNA with works like Philip K. Dick’s ‘The Man in the High Castle’ or Robert Harris’s ‘Fatherland’, yet it differs sharply in tone and ambition. Those novels operate primarily in the domain of speculative fiction, using alternate history as a vehicle for philosophical reflection or dystopian atmosphere. Tsouras’s collection, by contrast, is grounded in military plausibility.
Each essay functions like a thought experiment rooted in logistics, command decisions, intelligence failures, and geopolitical contingencies.
The speculative element is not fantastical but procedural. These are not alternate worlds built from scratch; they are alternate pathways branching from moments that almost happened.
Reading it as a long-time student of history, I found myself continually comparing it with mainstream historiography. Traditional histories often operate retrospectively, arranging events into coherent narratives that imply causality and inevitability.
Even when historians explicitly reject teleology, the structure of narrative history tends to smooth chaos into sequence. Alternate history disrupts that illusion. By isolating key decision points—Churchill’s leadership, ULTRA intelligence, Mediterranean strategy, the Eastern Front—the book divulges how history is less a river than a delta, splitting into myriad channels before congregating into what we later call destiny.
The opening premise of the anthology, especially when reframed in contemporary language, is profoundly unsettling: that the war’s outcome hinged repeatedly on human choice rather than structural inevitability. This challenges deterministic models of history, particularly those influenced by Marxist or materialist frameworks that privilege impersonal forces over individual agency.
Tsouras’s volume unapologetically re-centres the individual—leaders, generals, even moments of hesitation or resolve—as the pivot of history. It is a view that feels almost old-fashioned, yet in the context of World War II it regains persuasive force.
The war was shaped not only by industrial capacity but by personalities: Churchill’s defiance, Hitler’s obsessions, Stalin’s paranoia, Roosevelt’s patience. Remove or alter one temperament and the geometry of the war shifts.
One of the anthology’s most compelling aspects is its refusal to present alternate history as a constant counterfactual timeline. Instead, each chapter stands alone, like a prism refracting a different colour from the same beam of history. This structural choice enhances the intellectual seriousness of the book.
Rather than constructing a single, internally consistent alternate universe—a common trope in speculative fiction—the anthology embraces multiplicity. Each essay becomes a meditation on contingency, reminding the reader that history does not branch once but endlessly.
The chapter imagining a Britain led by Lord Halifax instead of Churchill is emblematic of the book’s method. It does not rely on sensationalism but on sober political plausibility. The suggestion that Britain’s wartime posture might have softened under different leadership forces readers to reconsider the cult of inevitability surrounding Churchill. In mainstream histories,
Churchill’s rise often feels destined, even mythic. Here, however, we are reminded how narrow the corridor of history truly was. Leadership, the book insists, is not merely symbolic; it is structural.
Equally fascinating is the exploration of intelligence—particularly the hypothetical loss of Allied cryptographic advantage. In conventional histories, ULTRA often appears as one factor among many. But when the anthology removes that advantage, the war’s strategic equilibrium tilts dramatically.
This narrative strategy is one of the book’s great strengths: by subtracting a single variable, it exposes the hidden scaffolding supporting the Allied victory.
The Mediterranean chapters were, for me, among the most surprisingly enlightening. Mainstream Anglo-American histories tend to treat the Mediterranean theatre as secondary to the Eastern Front or Normandy. Yet alternate scenarios involving Gibraltar, Malta, or Italian naval modernization reveal how much strategic potential lay dormant in that region.
By reimagining Italy not as a liability but as a competent ally, the essays challenge entrenched caricatures. This revisionist impulse aligns the anthology with a broader historiographical trend that seeks to reassess the operational capabilities of Axis powers without succumbing to moral relativism.
Perhaps the most haunting sections are those dealing with the Eastern Front. The fall of Moscow, the salvation of the Sixth Army, the exploitation of airborne forces—these scenarios carry a particular emotional charge because they feel so close to plausibility.
The Eastern Front was, after all, the crucible in which the war’s fate was largely forged. Reading these chapters, one becomes acutely aware of how thin the margins sometimes were. A delayed winter, a different command decision, a successful breakout—small deviations loom large when magnified by hindsight.
Yet the book never devolves into triumphalist fantasy. On the contrary, it maintains an undercurrent of moral sobriety. Even while acknowledging German military proficiency, the essays never lose sight of the regime’s monstrous ideological core. This balance is crucial.
One of the dangers of alternate history is that it can inadvertently aestheticize the very forces it seeks to analyze. Tsouras’s anthology walks that tightrope carefully, allowing professional admiration for military competence without diluting ethical judgment.
Comparatively, when placed alongside mainstream historians like Ian Kershaw or Richard Evans, the anthology feels less authoritative but more provocative. It does not aim to replace archival scholarship; rather, it complements it by destabilizing certainty.
If traditional history tells us what happened and why, alternate history asks a more unsettling question: what if it had not? In that sense, the book functions almost pedagogically. It trains the reader to think historically rather than merely absorb history.
On a personal level, the second reading deepened my appreciation of the book’s philosophical undercurrent. Beneath the operational details lies a meditation on choice.
History, the anthology suggests, is not a monolith but a crossroads. Each battle, each decision, each hesitation represents a fork in the road not taken. This idea resonates strongly with literary approaches to history, where narrative and contingency intertwine.
As someone who teaches literature as well as reads history, I found this convergence particularly compelling. The book occupies that liminal space where historiography meets storytelling.
At the same time, its tone occasionally betrays its early-21st-century origins. There is a lingering sense of the post-9/11 world in its framing—the implicit comparison between total war and modern terrorism, between conventional heroism and contemporary asymmetry.
This contextual layer adds another dimension to the reading experience. The anthology is not only about the 1940s; it is also about how the early 2000s imagined the 1940s. In that sense, it becomes a historical artifact in its own right—a reflection of how one era reinterprets another to make sense of its anxieties.
In the end, what lingers after finishing the book—twice—is not any single scenario but a lingering chill. The realization that the world we inhabit emerged from a narrow corridor of outcomes is both humbling and unsettling.
Alternate history, when done well, does not merely entertain; it destabilizes self-satisfaction. It reminds us that the past was once open, that the future was once undecided, and that history is less a monument than a moment perpetually in motion.
In comparison with both alternate-history fiction and mainstream military historiography, ‘Third Reich Victorious’ occupies a fascinating middle ground. It lacks the psychological depth of literary counterfactuals and the empirical rigor of academic history, yet it compensates with intellectual daring. It invites readers to step outside the comfort of inevitability and confront the fragile architecture of reality itself.
For me, as a reader shaped by both classrooms and libraries, the book ultimately functions as a reminder of history’s most unsettling lesson: that the world we know is only one version among many that might have been.
And in that realization lies the true power of Tsouras’s anthology—not in rewriting the past, but in reminding us how precariously it was written in the first place.
Most recommended.
August 21, 2019
Counter factual alternatives in WW2
If you already enjoy asking ‘What if Hitler’s plane had blown up in mid air?’ these more developed scenarios will be just up your street, though many historians of WW2 will equally froth at the mouth reading how something that didn’t happen could have effected something else that also didn’t happen to produce a third scenario that also didn’t happen. But what I like is how these serious imaginings highlight the fragility of what actually happened: history as chaos theory perhaps. And it certainly acts as a counter to the assumption that what actually happened was bound to happen, reminding those of us who know what happened that the protagonists most certainly did not, dealing with infamous flux of known unknowns interacting with unknown unknowns. Give it a try, especially if you hate history for too often seeming to be presented as little more than one damn thing after another.
If you already enjoy asking ‘What if Hitler’s plane had blown up in mid air?’ these more developed scenarios will be just up your street, though many historians of WW2 will equally froth at the mouth reading how something that didn’t happen could have effected something else that also didn’t happen to produce a third scenario that also didn’t happen. But what I like is how these serious imaginings highlight the fragility of what actually happened: history as chaos theory perhaps. And it certainly acts as a counter to the assumption that what actually happened was bound to happen, reminding those of us who know what happened that the protagonists most certainly did not, dealing with infamous flux of known unknowns interacting with unknown unknowns. Give it a try, especially if you hate history for too often seeming to be presented as little more than one damn thing after another.
February 24, 2017
I picked this up because prominent boardgamer Charles Vasset, wrote one of the stories. His is one of the only decent reads, most are very poorly done. The editor does really one of the only other decent ones supposing that Paulus has a nervous breakdown, Von Seylitz takes command and is able to breakout of Stalingrad, with Manstien devoting extra divisions to the relief, it it probably the only plausible story that has the Germans a chance of winning the war. All others stories count on too many hypotheticals happening together, suppose Gudieran isn't stopped at Dunkirk AND Churchill is killed to Halifax becomes prime minister, sure those two things combined means it is likely that the British come to peace terms, but good alternate history doesn't rely on too many things coming together it is just one single change: and everything that flows from that.
May 13, 2016
Very interesting concept. This is a collection of (counterfactual) historical essays/articles. I thought the concept was very novel, and I have read some 'alt history' novels in the past. Even so, I didn't find this as engaging as I would have hoped. The first few were fun and well-done, and while the quality didn't drop off a cliff, I found successive chapters far less engrossing than the first few. A few of the chapters ended abruptly with little resolution behind a recounting of the actual historical events.
Cutting out a few of the chapters and expanding the remaining ones may have made for something I enjoyed more.
Cutting out a few of the chapters and expanding the remaining ones may have made for something I enjoyed more.
July 13, 2019
Based on a series of fascinating What ifs posed by leading military historians, this compelling new alternate history reconstructs the moments during World War II which could conceivably have altered the entire course of the Second World War and led to a German victory. Based on real battles, actions and characters, each scenario has been carefully constructed to reveal how, at points of decision, a different choice or minor incident could have set in motion an entirely new train of events altering history forever. Scenarios in this volume include the fall of Malta in 1942 and the likely consequences and the possibility of Halifax making peace with Hitler.
May 22, 2019
11 chapters of uneven quality by 11 different authors, including one from the editor. The trouble for the non-professional (or if amateur, inexpert) reader is that detailed accounts of troop movements are of little interest if you don't know enough about what really happened to notice the differences and appreciate their significance.
The most interesting proposition, by Paddy Griffith, was that - following an easy victory in Crete - Hitler could have endorsed an airborne blitzkrieg to capture, ultimately, the Baku oilfields.
Others, only too plausible, include the falls of Malta, Gibraltar and Moscow, and the Stalingrad breakout - none of which rely on flights of fancy.
The most interesting proposition, by Paddy Griffith, was that - following an easy victory in Crete - Hitler could have endorsed an airborne blitzkrieg to capture, ultimately, the Baku oilfields.
Others, only too plausible, include the falls of Malta, Gibraltar and Moscow, and the Stalingrad breakout - none of which rely on flights of fancy.
July 28, 2015
Uneven collection of counterfactual essays presenting alternate outcomes of World War II. Some even have fake bibliographies!
"May Day" by Nigel Jones, about the Premiership of Lord Halifax, is both plausible and depressing. Another good one is "The Spanish Gambit" about the successful Axis attack on Gibraltar, and "Wings Over the Caucasus" about the airborne seizure of the Soviet oil fields.
But most of the others fall short, and are not convincing.
"May Day" by Nigel Jones, about the Premiership of Lord Halifax, is both plausible and depressing. Another good one is "The Spanish Gambit" about the successful Axis attack on Gibraltar, and "Wings Over the Caucasus" about the airborne seizure of the Soviet oil fields.
But most of the others fall short, and are not convincing.
March 12, 2016
fun but uneven read. once again the marketing is very misleading for this compilation as Germany doesn't even technically win at all in half the scenario s presented they just Lose a different way or get obliterated by a h-bomb. that said, the other half of the scenarios are written in a dynamic and exciting wah and as a history aficionado I genuinely enjoyed them. Mr. Tsouras had the exact same issue with his book that covers the Pacific war with Japan.
December 2, 2016
I expect anthologies to be uneven, and this was no exception. While the first half or so the essays were well-reasoned and engrossing, the quality declined pretty sharply as the book went on.
I'm not very aware of what's out there in terms of WWII alternate histories, so I can't really say how well this does (or doesn't) stack up. The Man In The High Castle was much better, but it's an unfair comparison as this book makes no attempt or pretense to resemble Dick's novel.
I'm not very aware of what's out there in terms of WWII alternate histories, so I can't really say how well this does (or doesn't) stack up. The Man In The High Castle was much better, but it's an unfair comparison as this book makes no attempt or pretense to resemble Dick's novel.
January 11, 2018
I was not too impressed with this series of ‘alternative’ works. First, several of the stories had too many changes, whereas alternative history works best if hinged on one or two changes from fact. Second, because these were written by military historians, they go into great detail about the units that could be involved, which is not interesting to me. Third, after all that, there was little consequence of the change studied, beyond ‘Hitler won’ or ‘Germany held out for a few more years.’
September 24, 2008
I'm a nut about alternative history -- what might have happened.
This book includes several takes by various historians on how the Allies could've lost.
You realize that events often turn on one random happening, on a bit of luck. Change that one thing and the whole path of history turns into something very different.
This is horror. I mean, the fascists screwed up. Fortunately.
This book includes several takes by various historians on how the Allies could've lost.
You realize that events often turn on one random happening, on a bit of luck. Change that one thing and the whole path of history turns into something very different.
This is horror. I mean, the fascists screwed up. Fortunately.
March 27, 2018
One very interesting short story, others were too "military-oriented" for me as I am not a military historian. Details of troop movements and actions caused me to skip over many pages to see how everything ended up. A nice touch is the "In Reality" section at the end of each story which explains what really happened.
A fine book for people interested in the military minutiae of WWII battles.
A fine book for people interested in the military minutiae of WWII battles.
March 17, 2018
El presente volumen lo forman once contrafactuales sobre la SGM escritos por profesionales de la historia militar y por lo tanto son una fuente estupenda de información sobre el conflicto y muy interesante para aquellos a los que nos gusta leer ucronías. Tampoco es que descubran la pólvora, la mayoría de los casos aparecen iguales o muy similares en otros libros del género. En cualquier caso el libro es muy atractivo, y lo sería mucho más con una buena traducción, que no es el caso. En resumidas cuentas, para mí un tres estrellas por el contenido, que se quedaría en una o ninguna si juzgásemos la edición chapucera que hizo Tempus en su día y la ausencia absoluta de una traducción o una revisión de la misma con conocimientos de historia y terminología militares.
February 25, 2019
Andy's review
Downloaded this as I had read (& enjoyed) Over The Top by the same editor. All the chapters were very plausible, & I especially enjoyed Chapter 2 (with its twist right at the end) & Chapter 6. Altogether an excellent read.
Downloaded this as I had read (& enjoyed) Over The Top by the same editor. All the chapters were very plausible, & I especially enjoyed Chapter 2 (with its twist right at the end) & Chapter 6. Altogether an excellent read.
September 8, 2020
This is my first experience with serious alternate history. The contributors seem very accomplished as far as research and grasp goes. But there was no effort done at all to edit this. There are grammar mistakes everywhere which makes me wonder how seriously they want me to take their work.
April 14, 2021
Very interesting. Some of scenarios were scary with how close they were to reality. Others were rather far fetched and a third group which was clearly written with other historians in mind. Still if you love this era there will be something there for you.
July 29, 2018
This is a collection of alternate histories about WWII. I _like_ alternate histories. This one was so full of minute details of battles and military jargon that I gave up on it.
May 5, 2023
Very well documented, very detailed and thorough historical what-if scenarios.
Also very boring.
Also very boring.
June 3, 2016
A series of essays written by top historians and military analysts that discuss alternate realities that could have happened if some pivotal moments had ended differently.
I have to agree with other reviewers in that this book started wonderfully, but slowly began to get less so. I'm not certain why. Perhaps some entries were too detailed and not in a good way. Maybe this is something that shouldn't be read at one sitting, instead spreading the stories out. I lean toward the latter on that. 3.5 out of 5.
I have to agree with other reviewers in that this book started wonderfully, but slowly began to get less so. I'm not certain why. Perhaps some entries were too detailed and not in a good way. Maybe this is something that shouldn't be read at one sitting, instead spreading the stories out. I lean toward the latter on that. 3.5 out of 5.
May 19, 2011
As a ardent reader of the alternative history genre, I must say I thoroughly enjoyed "Hitler, Triumphant." This ebook took a different approach to Alt Hist by providing the reader with a documentary style of work. It read as a summary of Adolph Hitler and his accomplishments (mind, in the Alt Hist) world. The ebook is well written and held my interest. I certainly recommend it to anyone interested in the Alternate History genre.
May 19, 2011
11 relatos sobre el mundo tras la victoria de Hitler. No logré pasar del 4º. Se requiere estómago y una voluntad firme. No es que sea malo, sino que las implicaciones son bastante horrorosas y me cuesta disociar ciertos personajes de su rol histórico. Tengo que darle una segunda lectura y terminarlo... cuando se me haya pasado el empacho de libros de la segunda guerra mundial (de esta y de otras realidades)
November 3, 2013
This was an interesting take on alternate history, instead of being one cohesive novel it was eleven distinct stand-alone chapters. There were even alternate reality footnotes and citations (which were marked with an asterisk so an unwary reader doesn't go off hunting for non-existent source material). Even if you aren't a fan of alternate history if you are a WWII buff you really should read this book.
February 24, 2008
For me, this book was not as interesting as others in the genre - not sure why. Some of these essays kind of dragged. It was still a worthwhile read, though. Alternate history is, in general, a fascinating area in that so many events could easily have happened in other ways.
April 9, 2010
I've always enjoyed the genre of alternative history, but this book never grabbed me like others have. It tended to be over resourced with information which made the entire story long winded and boring. It read more like a text book then a novel. I'd pass this one up.
August 22, 2018
Terrefic alternate stories by professional historians who knows their subkects. Two of them concern Fascist Italy. In one of them the italian navy has a aircraft carrier ans is bolder and in the second Mussolini dies in a aircrash and Italy avoids joigning the war.
In all the one that concern Nazi Germany , Germany wins or have a armistice. In one of them Goering succeed Hitler(following Hitler dying in a plane crash).Goering avoids the Kursk offensive and in 1944, with more tanks and the problem of the Panther ironed out repulsed the Bargation offensive.
In one of them Chruchill plane is shot down and Halifax becomes prime minister. Another one mentions that Von Seylindz replace Paulus and makes a breakthrought of Stalingrad without telling Hitler and with the help of Von Manstein.
There are pthers story and this is just a sample of those page turning sgtories.
In all the one that concern Nazi Germany , Germany wins or have a armistice. In one of them Goering succeed Hitler(following Hitler dying in a plane crash).Goering avoids the Kursk offensive and in 1944, with more tanks and the problem of the Panther ironed out repulsed the Bargation offensive.
In one of them Chruchill plane is shot down and Halifax becomes prime minister. Another one mentions that Von Seylindz replace Paulus and makes a breakthrought of Stalingrad without telling Hitler and with the help of Von Manstein.
There are pthers story and this is just a sample of those page turning sgtories.
Displaying 1 - 28 of 28 reviews