I read Guns of the South twice. That was my introduction to “alternate history”. I ended up with about 15 of his books, all in hardback, and eventually just gave them all away. I got them at estate sales so I didn’t pay much.
The problem was that I just felt like I was being strung along. I just lost interest when a story that I though could have been covered in one - or maybe two - books, just dragged on and on through multiple books. The series about the Alien attack in the middle of WWII was really great for one or two books, though.
The amorality of his books also got to me.
Yeah— felt the same way about his stuff— stringing along (part of a book a year contract of linked “issues” no doubt). Turtledove his nom de plume- his parents- unknown, grandparents Romanian jewish immigrants prior to his birth in 1949. His history theses are written under Harry Norman Turtledove (which is odd, as it cannot be his real name). Anti-Nazis make great Leftist libs who fellow travel- whole generation of them. So now the AOCs and ultra Marxist are getting rid, as they always do— the socialist fellow travellers (as they are not true to the purist Commies with their doublespeak).
Guns of the South he made the interlopers from the future being Boer Afrikaners “white supremacists” so called exporting back in time AK 47s and other modern tech to the 1860’s. Which really would have changed the outcome of Gettysburg and the final northern campaign. He cast Robert E. Lee in a very different light than the current “re-writers” of the Communist Left who have cherry picked apocryphal tales of Lee’s pro-slavery (which he was not, and he was anti-Secession until he had to make a choice of his State vs. the military force which would invade to represent a political philosophy anathema to the post-Colonial colonies. Turtledove cast Lee as being against the “nazi” Afrikaners- in poetic license inasmuch as Marx wrote his manifesto in pamphlets in 1848 and Das Kapital was out in 1867. The nazis had not come into being yet relative to the 1860’s US, but the beginnings of the laborite anarcho-communist revolts were ascendant by 1870s in Europe.
As in all cases- not to jump to the commie dialect— wars have been fought over largely economic issues and lately globalist spats.
Amorality is a commonality in alt-history type writers— who are fantasists of being... “in control” of others (just like the inner heart of all progressive Lefist libs— totalitarians in thin disguise). Another one is S.M. Stirling and his Nantucket time travel series (which is huge amongst preppers— everyone thrust into early 1800’s from modern times). He descends into his dream (like a lot of these) medieval peasantry, lords ladies and these in criminal tribal gangs. Interesting series without the amorality which is un-needed in the script.
Best in alt- history is Newt Gingrich alternate Gettysburg military history— a real “if only” and “what if” factually based historical war game that would have been likely outcome had it happened (the Longstreet strategery winning).
Another helpful novel (based as it is on EMP weapons destroying US infrastructure— thrusting back to 1800’s, but machinery still able to work, unlike Stirling’s anti-physics— is, “One Second After” 2009 by American writer William R. Forstchen. Quite realistic and vulnerablities pointed out dramatically (the drug gangs running out of food in Charlotte— come up the highway to raid the mountain people). No amorality but searches for retention of morality in extemis.