I’ve ranked my Top 10 Wars of history, essentially by combination of iconic status and idiosyncratic preference. But how do they rank by plausibility of their alternate history victory scenarios, ranked from most plausible to least plausible – that is, how plausibly could the war have gone the other way?

Well, they rank almost entirely differently as it turns out, with the exception of one entry from my Top 10 which remains in the same place ranking (in tenth place).

There are some anomalies – one in particular – in my alternate history rankings, because of the discrepancy between their historical plausibility by which I’ve ranked them and their fictional popularity or profile, albeit I tended to reflect that discrepancy by awarding my X-tier or wild tier ranking. If I had done my alternate history rankings solely by their fictional popularity or profile, that one entry in particular would be so far above the rest as to basically be its own list, but sadly for it, the historical plausibility of its fictional alternate history scenarios lags far behind their popularity or profile.

Interestingly, the alternate history rankings divide neatly into halves. The first five entries are the most plausible or those for which the alternate history scenarios even seem more plausible than the actual historical outcome. In other words, it seems more plausible for the war to have gone the other way than the one it actually did. The second half or least plausible entries are the reverse – where alternate history scenarios of victory by the other side seem so much less plausible than the historical outcome, notwithstanding their popularity or profile in fiction for my wild-tier entries.

 

S-TIER (GOD-TIER)

 

(1) GREEK-PERSIAN WARS

 

It was tough to choose the top spot for alternate history plausibility as there were at least three entries where the actual outcome seemed more implausible than the alternatives or just downright miraculous for the victors. However, I went with the Greek-Persian Wars as the highest ranking in this respect – particularly given that there were two of them, with two of the most famous battles won by the Greeks against the odds, one in each war, the battle of Marathon and the naval battle of Salamis. The Greeks themselves attributed their victory at Marathon to divine intervention, with the god Pan winning it for them. Io Pan! Io Pan Pan!

I mean, the world’s largest empire in territorial extent at the time – as well as the largest empire by percentage of world population ever – against the small and fractious Greek city states, with some even remaining neutral?  It seems no contest, particularly when that empire conquered the Greek cities of Ionia in Asia Minor and subjugated or defeated states such as Thrace in Europe

 

(2) ALEXANDER’S CONQUEST OF PERSIAN EMPIRE

 

From one Greek-Persian war to the next, it was a close call for top spot for alternate history plausibility between the OG classical Greek-Persian Wars and Alexander’s conquest of the Persian Empire. Both had historical outcomes that seemed more implausible than the alternatives or just downright miraculous by winning against all odds.

Alexander’s conquest also has the additional factor of being one of those wars that hinge on one man as commander or conqueror, such that the historical outcome seems impossible without that man.

In the end, the classical Greek-Persian Wars just edged out Alexander’s conquest as the former involved a fractious coalition of small Greek city states while Alexander was fortunate enough to have the larger and more concrete state of Macedonia he inherited from his father – and even more so the army his father had forged into the instrument of a hegemonic power.

Stil, it is hard to imagine anyone other than Alexander with the audacity or ability to achieve the same conquests. What if there was no Alexander? There almost wasn’t, with his lucky escape from death in the Battle of Granicus River, which would have seen his historic conquests nipped in the bud.

At the other end, there is the alternative history scenarios of what Alexander might have achieved if he had not died at only 32 years of age at the height of his conquests.

 

(3) SPANISH CONQUEST OF AZTEC EMPIRE

 

The Spanish Conquest of the Aztec Empire was the third of my close contenders for top spot as wars where the actual outcome seems the implausible alternate history victory scenario.

In some ways, the Spanish Conquest of the Aztec Empire seems even more implausible than the classical or Hellenic Greek-Persian Wars. There are simply no parallels to just how lopsided Spanish victory was in their conquest of the Aztec Empire, conquering an empire of millions in less than three years with forces numbering only in the hundreds – or three thousand at their most numerous. And like the conquests of Alexander, much of the Spanish Conquest of the Aztec Empire seemed to hinge on the character of Cortez as commander.

However, in the end the Spanish Conquest slipped down to third place behind the other two entries, because if Cortez hadn’t happened when and how he did – say the Cuban governor Velasquez had succeeded in apprehending him – then something like his conquest of the Aztec Empire would have happened at some point, what with that empire poised on the precipice of revolt and the Americas poised on the precipice of pestilence.

That reflects that Cortez and his Spanish forces effectively led a revolt by far more numerous native American allies – compounded by the Spanish advantages in guns and steel, or above all germs, and yet further by the Aztec disadvantage of “an inherently unstable system vulnerable to a loss of prestige under even moderate challenges”.

 

A-TIER (TOP TIER)

 

(4) MONGOL CONQUESTS – MONGOL INVASION OF EUROPE

 

I ranked the Mongol Conquests just below my god-tier of alternate history plausibility. For the Mongol Conquests, the actual historical outcome seems the implausible alternate history victory scenario, both at their starting point to occur at all and at their finishing point of defeat or withdrawal from the high tide of their conquest.

You have the starting point of the Mongol Conquests, so incredibly exploding out of nowhere. Well, perhaps not out of nowhere. The Mongols – and the nomadic herding tribes on horseback in the Eurasian steppes in general – consistently punched far above their weight in wealth or population as noted by historians Azar Gat, John Keegan, and Walter Scheidel’s “steppe effect”.

Still, the Mongol Conquests are one of a select elite of wars that seem to hinge on one man as commander or conqueror, begging the alternate history question of the great man theory of history – what if that great man didn’t happen? Without Temujin, better known as Genghis Khan, to unite the Mongols and lead them to empire, would the Mongol Conquests have ever begun?

And then there’s the finishing point at the high tide of the Mongol Conquests – when the Mongols seem an unstoppable juggernaut, particularly in their invasions of Europe. Could the Mongols have conquered Europe? The actual historical outcome, the Mongol withdrawal from Europe, seems so much more implausible than the alternatives, particularly when tied with the interpretation that the Mongols withdrew from the historical stroke of fortune for Europe of the Great Khan’s death. However, I tend to agree with interpretations that “the Mongol invasion concluded when the geography was no longer in their favor” – the limits or fringes of the steppe effect as it were.

 

(5) HUNNIC WARS – HUNNIC INVASION OF ROMAN EMPIRE

 

It seemed only fitting to rank the Huns in the same tier as the Mongols for alternate history plausibility, where the actual outcome of the Hunnic invasion of the Roman Empire seems the implausible alternate history victory scenario. The Hunnic defeat at the Battle of Catalaunian Fields seems genuinely miraculous (for the Romans) as does the Hunnic withdrawal from Italy the following year, except the latter even more so from the sheer papal mojo of Leo as Roman imperial envoy.

Indeed, the Huns and Mongols closely resemble each other in their conquests or invasions in Europe.  The former were a more substantial presence in Europe, both in the seat of their empire and their furthest advances westwards, although the latter had far more extensive conquests in the rest of Eurasia. That extends even to the uncanny resemblance that both appeared to withdraw from further European conquests with the historical stroke of fortune of the death of their supreme leader, Attila for the Huns and the Great Khan Ogedai for the Mongols – although the impact of the former was greater and more immediate with the dissolution of the Hunnic empire.

However, historians debate whether the Battle of the Catalaunian Fields was indeed a Hunnic defeat, and whether it was indeed of historical importance in any event. Similarly, historians debate the actual reasons and historical importance for the Hunnic withdrawal from Italy. There’s the arguments or interpretations that Attila’s interest in the Roman Empire was only to the extent of raiding and tribute, albeit on a grand scale, rather than conquest. Hence the Mongol Conquests just edge out the Hunnic invasions of the Roman Empire in my alternate history plausibility rankings.

 

 B-TIER (HIGH TIER)

 

(6) PUNIC WARS – SECOND PUNIC WAR

 

And now we move to alternate history rankings where the historical outcome seems the most plausible, although the Punic Wars also seem to offer tantalizing glimpses of an alternate history of Carthaginian victory. That’s mostly from Hannibal’s tactical military genius in the Second Punic War, although perhaps the better Carthaginian prospect of victory was in the First Punic War, had Rome not adapted itself to Carthaginian naval superiority.

Ultimately however, they’re just glimpses, given Rome’s adaptability and unmatched ability to raise armies, with even Hannibal’s tactical genius just a flash in the pan of Roman victory. Reading Roman military history often prompts me to see the Romans as the Soviet Union of ancient history – winning through the manpower to replace one legion after another.

 

(7) VIETNAM WAR

 

Another alternate history ranking where the actual outcome seems the most plausible, except perhaps for the timing of it.

At best, modern counter-insurgency has become the subject of intense debate as to whether there are effective or viable strategies for victory by the side countering the insurgency. Even those who propose there are concede that such strategies are necessarily narrow, limited, or operate within hard constraints of discipline and restraint.

At worst, it has become a trope for notoriously difficult prospects of success. The Princess Bride film even adapted it for the iconic gag of breaking the rule “never get involved in a land war in Asia” as the most famous of classical blunders. Funnily enough, military historian H.P. Willmott observed as much in earnest by arguing that Japan was the only Asian country the United States could defeat.

As such, alternative history scenarios usually propose the United States “winning” by not being engaged or involved at all, or at least in lesser degrees. Willmott opined specifically with respect to Vietnam that potential defeat was inherent in the concept of a limited war as one of the limitations.

Occasionally you see alternate history glimpses of American victory, if only leaving behind an enduring state as in the Korean War. I’ve seen scenarios argued with various degrees of plausibility as to how the United States might have “won” the war – that tend to be clustered near its starting point or its finishing point, with the former being more persuasive for obvious reasons.

 

X-TIER (WILD TIER)

 

(8) SECOND WORLD WAR

 

Yes, we’ve come to my wild tier for alternative history victory scenarios, and what else to top it but the Second World War?

After all, it’s the big one for alternate war…and it isn’t.

That’s because of the discrepancy between the fictional depictions of its alternate history victory scenarios and their historical plausibility.

Alternate history scenarios for German victory in the Second World War are the most prolific and popular of all alternate history scenarios – in fiction, such that it has whole anthologies and its own entry in the Encyclopedia of Science Fiction (“H!tler Wins”).

And yet, such alternate history scenarios seem so much less plausible than the actual historical outcome of Allied victory – so much so that German victory seems an incredible long shot from the outset, only getting longer the further you go into the war. Indeed, the more plausible alternate history scenarios would seem to involve the Allies doing better than they actually did, including posing the question of how Germany was able to start the war at all. The most plausible alternate history scenarios of German “victory” are those that involve Germany not fighting the war in the first place.

There are alternate history scenarios for Japanese victory in the Second World War but they tend to be only as a consequence or side effect of German victory – often with things looking grim between the two of them after their shared victory (as in The Man in the High Castle, where Germany is planning to attack Japan).

As for alternate history scenarios for Italian victory…I’ll just leave it here like the joke it is. Come to think of it, the whole Axis seems like set-up for a joke, albeit with a black sense of humor for its casualties and destruction – “Germany, Italy, and Japan walk into a war…”

And really, Germany should not regard itself as all that different from Italy when it comes to alternate history victory scenarios – as I like to quip, paraphrasing the witticism that the Soviet Union was just Upper Volta with rockets in the Cold War, Nazi Germany was just Italy with rockets in the Second World War.

 

(9) COLD WAR

 

The Cold War is something of an alternate history scenario paradox, hence its wild tier ranking second only to, well, the Second World War.

On the one hand, its historical outcome of American victory also seems the most plausible, particularly with American superiority at the start and end of the Cold War.

On the other hand, the Cold War offers a plethora of alternative history scenarios, both fictional and counterfactual. In a conflict extending for half a century (or longer if you calculate it from the formation of the Soviet Union in 1917), there’s a lot of scope for American miscalculations or mistakes, more or greater than those that occurred in history, to potentially affect that outcome with varying degrees of plausibility.

Alternate history scenarios for the Cold War are not quite as prolific or popular in fiction as those for the Second World War – but seem more plausible. Firstly, because the communist bloc dominated the heartland of Eurasia, with greater population and resources beyond the Axis in WW2. Secondly, as historian Paul Johnson observed, the impatience of H!tler “made him so dangerous in the short term and so ineffectual in the long term (the very reverse of the Soviet strategists).”

Uniquely among my top ten entries (and for all but a handful of wars in contemporary history), the Cold War also has those alternate history scenarios where everybody loses – the scenario of the Cold War turning hot with a nuclear exchange.

 

(10) AMERICAN INDIAN WARS – SIOUX WARS

 

What the Second World War and Cold War are to alternate history in SF, the American Indian Wars are to alternate history in fantasy.

No, seriously – stay with me on this one.

For sheer historical implausibility, I would rank the American Indian Wars in general and the Sioux Wars in particular in F-tier or bottom tier, as my top ten entry with the least plausible alternate history victory scenarios.

Perhaps if the native American tribes had been more united, perhaps if they had more allies among other nations willing or able to aid them against the United States in the long term, and above all, perhaps if they had fought against the colonies from the very outset or the Americans had lost the Revolutionary War, things might have been different for them but it seems an impossibly long shot against the pervasive defeats of similar peoples throughout history – and indeed in the same historical period throughout the world elsewhere.

However, I rank it in wild tier for the profile of the Ghost Dance in fantasy – a profile that earns its own entry in the Encyclopedia of Fantasy as a theme in that genre. For example, the definitive war in fantasy, Tolkien’s War of the Ring, is won by a version of ghost dance, with a quest ultimately relying on and succeeding through the providence of a higher power.

In history, versions of the ghost dance recur in wars fought by those facing overwhelming material odds against them and hence resorting to supernatural means or their ideological equivalent in an attempt to win or delusions of victory – cough triumph of the will for the Axis in WW2 cough.

In history, ghost dances almost always in dead silence, not least the Ghost Dance. “In fantasy, where magic exists, and where gods may intervene to help the worthy at the last moment, versions of the Ghost Dance may underlie particularly moving moments when the weak and the honest humble their innumerable foes, or perhaps escape into an otherworld through a portal opened by the pattern of the dance.”