Francisco J. López Arias
            The Spanish Civil War in Spanish Alternate History: Jesús  Torbado’s En el día de hoylucinadas
            When we talk about alternate history in Spanish literature,  odds are that a great number of the works have one common premise: the victory  of the Second Spanish Republic over the Nationalist forces in the Spanish Civil  War (1936-1939). By now, this scenario has become a commonplace akin to a Nazi  victory or a Confederate victory in English-language alternate history. Fiction  such as Fernando Vizcaíno Casas’s Los rojos ganaron la guerra [The Reds  Won the War, 1989], Manuel Talens’s “Ucronía” [Uchronia, 1994], and Cesar  Mallorquí’s “El coleccionista de sellos” [The Stamp Collector, 1996]—even  mockumentaries such as ¡Viva La República! [Long Live The Republic!,  2008]—have taken the survival of the Second Spanish Republic as their starting  point. It would be naïve, however, to assume that this has always been the  case. In fact, it was not so until 1976.
            On the  15th of October of that year, the Premio Planeta, one of the most renowned  commercial prizes in Spanish literature and second only to the Nobel Prize in terms  of monetary value, was awarded in Barcelona to Jesús Torbado. His winning novel  was En el día de hoy [On This Day, 1976], a “true” alternate history,  set during the first year and a half following the end of the Civil War.1  During this time the Second Spanish Republic must deal with the aftermath of  its victory against Franco’s nationalists, achieved in no small part thanks to  France’s sudden change of heart while the decisive Battle of the Ebro was under  way. This leads to the French dismissal of the “Non-Intervention Agreement,” a  historical pact signed by twenty-seven European countries in 1936. The success  of Torbado’s novel was the first time that a work of alternate history received  recognition from the Spanish literary establishment, paving the way for the  genre’s rise in status within the country’s literary canon. More importantly,  this novel and its Premio Planeta are clear manifestations of the zeitgeist in  Spain at that time.
            This  essay will follow two main methodological paths. First, the tumultuous  historical and political context at the time of the novel’s publishing will be  contrasted against a close reading of the text to show how Torbado takes a  clear stance in the national debate about which political system should be  implemented in Spain after the end of Franco’s dictatorship (which had lasted  from 1939 to 1975). Second, Torbado’s novel will be situated within the  evolution of modern alternate history in Spain, showing how other established  writers soon adopted this literary form without reservation, given that many  prestigious publishing houses put their full weight behind the genre from the  start.
            A Troubled Time: Torbado in the Context of Post-Franco  Spain. A thorough understanding of the circumstances surrounding the  commercial launch of En el día de hoy needs to include the fact of  Franco’s death on 20 November 1975, less than a year before Torbado was awarded  the Premio Planeta. The Spanish political situation could not have been more  tumultuous. After the failure of Prime Minister Carlos Arias Navarro’s  pro-Franco administration, a battle took place in the higher echelons of the  Spanish Government. The reform of Francoism into democracy or, as Torcuato  Fernández Miranda, president of the Consejo del Reino [Council of the Kingdom]  put it,2 “from the law to the law, going through the law” (qtd. in  Prego),3 was embodied by Adolfo Suárez, who had been proclaimed  Prime Minister of Spain in July 1976. With the subtle help of the new King,  Juan Carlos I, Suárez and Miranda confronted the so-called “bunker,” hardline  Francoists opposed to the implementation of democracy, led by José Antonio  Girón and some other members of the Consejo del Reino. In addition, an illegal  opposition that now felt safe enough to launch very public challenges to the  cabinet—headed by the Socialist Workers’ Party (PSOE) and the Communist Party  (PCE), both still illegal—expressed, in increasingly more forceful terms, their  wish for a total break with the regime to rebuild the state.
            While  the lion’s share of popular support was divided between the reformists and the  opposition, events such as those at Montejurra4 and Atocha5  showed that the “bunker” still had a good deal of influence. At this point,  these social and political tensions were, indeed, palpable. For instance, the  cover of the left-leaning newspaper El País of 16 October 1976 reflected  the state of disarray and instability of Spanish politics by featuring  Torbado’s award; the Government’s refusal to accept the reactionary proposals  of the Consejo Nacional del Movimiento [National Council of the Movement]  regarding the Ley de Reforma Politica [Law for the Political Reform] (a bill  that eventually led to the first free elections since the Republic in 1977 6); and there was a threat to outlaw the celebration of the first Spanish  Congress since 1932 of the still-illegal Socialist Party. Even at the Premio  Planeta ceremony honoring Torbado, there were incidents related to the  political climate and the contents of the winning novel. Blanco y Negro [White  and Black], the cultural magazine of the monarchist-leaning newspaper ABC,  offered the following description in its 27 November 1976 issue:
            
              And what occurred was a pitched battle, where there were  slaps delivered by [the host of the ceremony, Ángel María de] Lera’s son to a  journalist covering the event. It all started because the journalist made some  comments aloud, such as “you would not be here” when Lera asked: “what would  have happened if the Republicans had won the civil war?” (“El  ‘show’” 49)
            
            Nonetheless, the desire for democracy was dominant in the  population at large. Already in the latter half of the 1960s a shift in values  was perceptible, and the Regime reluctantly reflected this in its laws. Even  though the 1966 Ley de Prensa [Press Law] made voluntary the hitherto mandatory  first stage of self-censorship (prior to publication), many publishing houses  still submitted their editions to the censors due to fear of repression. The  year 1976 would mark the definitive end of censorship and the birth of freedom  of expression in Spain, even though legal recognition of this fact via the Ley  de Libertad de Expresión [Law for the Freedom of Speech] did not come into  being until 1977.
            The  ideological battle among the three political positions was fought on many  turfs. And in a country where the average citizen had access to only two  state-controlled television networks, literature’s power to disseminate new  ideas could not be ignored. From many different standpoints, ranging from  outright fascism to libertarianism, writers joined Jesús Torbado in taking  advantage of the first breaths of an effectively full but still unofficial  freedom of expression. Thus, also in 1976, Pere Pagès i Elies published (as  Víctor Alba) 1936-1976, Historia de la II República Española [1936-1976:  History of the Second Spanish Republic, 1976] and Fernando Díaz-Plaja published El desfile de la victoria [The Victory Parade, 1976]. Both pioneering  works depict a Spain where the Second Republic was victorious and Franco  nothing more than a footnote in history—instead of its predestined savior, as  the regime liked to market him.
            Nonetheless,  the prompt appearance of alternate-history stories after the effective  establishment of freedom of expression in Spain shows how authors and publishing  houses were already aware not only of the existence of this subgenre but also  of the possibilities that it opened artistically, commercially, ideologically,  and politically. Censorship constituted one of the most important deterrents  for the development of an autochthonous alternate-history subgenre, as well as  for the translation of its foreign titles. According to Manuel L. Abellán, even  though there was not an official list of rules or criteria, there were some  common targets of Francoist censorship, which he summarizes in eight main  points:
            
              a) implicit or explicit references from the Roman Index7
                b) criticism of the ideology or practices of the regime
                c) breaches of public morality
                d) opposition to the premises of the nationalist  historiography
                e) criticism of the civic order
                f) support of non-authoritarian or Marxist ideologies
                g) in principle, prohibition of any work by an author  hostile to the regime. (110-12)
            
            Point d) is crucial to understand the position of censorship  towards alternate history. En el día de hoy, and the other novels that  in 1976 made use of the premise of a Republican victory, refuted Francoist  ideology and openly challenged the motto adorning the peseta coins of the  dictatorship: “Francisco Franco, Caudillo of Spain by the Grace of God.”  Francoist determinism is represented here by God. As Jose Ramón López García  puts it, “the Civil War was unavoidable, necessary and a consequence of  History, and Franco was that essential individual in History, according to the  classical thesis [of the materialistic vision of History] set forth by  Plekhanov” (666), ironically placing Franco and his nemesis, Karl Marx, in the  same light. In its most superficial reading, any alternate history involving a  Republican triumph would negate a staple of the cult of personality in  Francoist Spain: Franco’s destiny as savior of the country and his  predetermined victory in the Crusade against Spain’s enemies via the Civil War.  The regime could not tolerate such an affront. Thus, as López García points  out, even though there had previously been some scarce and isolated  experimentation in this field, such as Nilo María Fabra’s “Cuatro siglos de  buen gobierno” [Four Centuries of Good Government, 1883], Max Aub’s “La  verdadera historia de la muerte de Francisco Franco” [The True Story of  Francisco Franco’s Death, 1960, written during his exile], or Ramón Sierra’s Anales  de la IV República Española [Annals of the IV Spanish Republic, 1967], we  can consider 1976 the true start of the first wave of modern alternate history  in the literature of Spain (654-55).
            In many  instances within Spain’s alternate history, Franco just plays the part of what  Éric B. Henriet called a “clin d’œil” (41-44) or a “wink,” defined as “a  situation, an element, a character that calls to mind the situation of the real  world” (Singles 116).8 An example can be found in Xoan Ignacio  Taibo’s Galician-language alternate-history short story “O leito” [The Bed,  1978], where, in an independent Galicia, Franco is mentioned in passing as a  democratic admiral belonging to the Galician army (96). In many others, such as En el día de hoy, Franco is portrayed as a main or secondary character  whose victory is denied by historical circumstances. One of Torbado’s theses is  that the outcome of the war was irrelevant to the degree of suffering endured  by the common people (165, 171, 187), which is indeed a determinist position  but one grounded in social history. Erasing Franco as the victorious party  during the process that first led to that suffering, however, and then leaving  unclear whether he would come back to run the country after the Nazi invasion,  does question the Francoist strand of historical determinism, which is  principally based on the “Great Man Theory” of historical change. For the  regime, its Generalissimo was always the chosen one, destined by God to fight  and, most importantly, to win against “the Reds.” In a way, while both  Francoism and Torbado’s response to it are deterministic approaches to history,  a methodological transition can be appreciated, whose final result is to deny  the idea of Franco’s influence in history’s predetermined nature. This  evolution, although subtle and limited in scope, is similar to the one that took  place in Germany when the Bielefeld School of historiography superseded the  national political approach in the 1960s.
            Taking a Closer Look: The Construction of Torbado’s  Alternative. En el día de hoy is arguably the most successful  representative of this first wave of alternate history in the Spanish language.  Torbado’s novel provides a picture of Madrid, capital of the Republic, during  the first year and a half after the conclusion of the Spanish conflict,  starting with the victory parade held by the Republican forces and ending with  the Nazi invasion of Spain six months after the Fall of France (1940) in the  Second World War. This picture is painted by following the lives of five main  characters. Four of them are successively put into the spotlight but then  dwindle in importance, without wholly disappearing from the narrative. The  three chapters that make up the book focus in turn on three protagonists, and  each includes subchapters that show the points of view of the others,
            The  first chapter, dated April to September 1939, centers on the fascist antiques  dealer and Jesuit undercover operative Aniceto Ortuño, setting the plot in  motion. In the second part, set from October 1939 to April 1940, a fictionalized  version of Ernest Hemingway, who did not have to leave Spain, and his  photographer Alejo Rubio, become the central focus. Together, they show the  reader the inner workings of some aspects of the Government and the mood of the  Republican intelligentsia, but also relay the state of the lower and middle  classes immediately after the war. Finally, the novel adopts a more moral  approach with the Italian spy Dino Salvatore, the protagonist of the last  chapter, from April to October 1940. Another main character, of course, is  Franco himself; the exiled General is a constant presence, with his subchapters  working as vignettes portraying the living conditions of the remnants of the  defeated Nationalist military. Finally, there is Simplicia “Sim” Rubio, sister  to Alejo and a former prostitute, who makes explicit the main ideological  points and serves as the primary (although not exclusive) link among the main  characters.
            In the  epilogue, Torbado claims to have constructed the narrative “from a neutral  situation—which will probably satisfy neither Trojans nor Tyrians” (361). This  amounts to a Pyrrhic victory for the Republic after France decides to denounce  the “Non-Intervention Agreement” and let weapons for the Republican forces pass  across its borders in the wake of the decisive Battle of the Ebro (14, 220-26).  The reader finds a Spain ravaged by war, much of its population famished. The  Government’s leadership by President Julián Besteiro and Prime Minister  Indalecio Prieto, both socialists, is progressively undermined by the conflicts  in Parliament and on the streets (338-41). This unrest is induced by the  political aspirations of anarchists and communists of every denomination, and  by external Italian sabotage, which culminates in the murder of the communist  leader Dolores “La Pasionaria” Ibárruri at the hands of an anarchist  revolutionary, deceived by Dino (269-71).
            Franco  himself must escape to Portugal and start a new life in exile, first in Cuba  and then in Rome. Nonetheless, the General is soon called to meet Hitler as  part of the Führer’s preparations for World War II, although Torbado leaves  intentionally unclear whether the Nazi war plan will be able to count on Franco  as an asset for the conquest of Spain (253-57, 358). Franco’s officer corps is  scattered among the Portuguese, German, and Italian armies, while his rank and  file (as the reader learns through Franco’s trip in which he is disguised as a  Red Cross ambassador) is mostly confined to concentration camps in French  territory, suffering dismal conditions (299-301). The last we know of him is in  Rome, where, after being chased by a drunk Falange member, Franco realizes that  he has lost the respect of his former subordinates (324-25). As López García  puts it, “Torbado metaphorically kills the figure of the dictator, now  discredited and having lost all his power” (659). By the end of the novel, the  Nazi war machine has already rolled into the north of the Iberian Peninsula,  gaining its first important foothold through the subjugation of northern San  Sebastián. With the Luftwaffe over Madrid’s skies, the Republican Government  prepares to flee to London and join the other Allied governments in exile  (358-59). 
            From  this brief summary, it can be surmised that the counterfactual elements of this  book are fairly straightforward. Its alternate timeline is too short to devise  a reasonable shift in the global geopolitical scenario that could have avoided  the allo-historical and yet very plausible German takeover of an ideologically  antagonistic and strategically important country such as Spain—or even bypassed  World War II altogether. Still, the scenario seems to follow conventional  alternate history to the letter, as conceptualized by Kathleen Singles: “the  point of divergence relies upon the principle of contingency, while the  continuing variance from the normalized narrative of the real past—that is, the  rest of the narrative—relies on the principle of necessity” (133).
            In its  opening pages, the book first makes clear its point of divergence from the  official historical account and then goes on to lay out two basic premises for  its political dimension. The first one deals with the idea that in the event of  a Republican victory nothing would have changed for the lower and middle  classes and, therefore, the degree of their suffering would not be altered by  the new outcome. As a preamble to the story, the reader is presented with an  almost verbatim version of Franco’s last war report, from whose opening words  the novel takes its title, the only difference being the inversion of winners  and losers (10). This shift could be interpreted as simply an eye-catching  introduction to the plot, but it also reinforces the idea of the equivalence of  both factions and the pointlessness of this counterfactual scenario, at least  as seen from the vantage point of the lower and middle classes. If the Republic  uses exactly the same wording as the Nationalists for its last war report, then  it is logical to assume that little has changed from the first months of  Francoism in terms of us versus them, repression and suffering. In fact, the  reader later learns that the Republic still applies repressive measures to  purge fascism, including an increase in the number of “checas” (116), thus  likening this repression to the Francoist repression in our timeline.9  This equivalence of both systems is also perceived by the working class, a  theme further developed through dialogue between characters. Hemingway’s trip  to Medina del Campo contains the bluntest statement, among several examples  (129, 142, 214, 229), coming from the mouth of a veteran of the Spanish  colonial wars in North Africa and of the Civil War: “The ones who rule don’t  want their power to be taken away, and the ones who don’t have power want to  rule. So all of them push us, the ones who don’t understand what is going on,  to murder each other.… They never lose” (164-65).
            The  second main idea is a corollary of the first one: given that the outcome of  their triumphs is equal, adhering to any faction is pointless. Hence, it is  also pointless to be resentful about the primacy, or lack thereof, of one of  those factions; consequently, “Why should we worry about the past? … Let’s go,  everything is over” (15). It is time to forget about the past and start a  process of national reconciliation through the reform of the political system.  This idea is explored via Simplicia’s love life, an allegory serving precisely  the purpose of showing the road that must be taken to achieve this national  rapprochement. Seen by the reader mostly through the eyes of her lovers,  Simplicia, whose name roughly translates as “Simpleton,” represents the Spanish  people.10 She is described as a beautiful thirty-year-old woman who,  despite the miseries of war and thanks to her profession, manages to have  access to commodities that are unavailable to other women of her social status  (18).
            She  soon demonstrates that she is much more than a common prostitute, however;  throughout the novel we are constantly reminded of her cleverness,  resourcefulness, strong personality, sense of self-protection, and  independence. Sim is not the only strong woman in the novel; we are introduced  to many female secondary characters, both drawn from real life, such as Dolores  “La Pasionaria” Ibárruri, as well as purely fictional, such as doña Rosa, madam  and owner of the drinking den La Colmena. They also adopt unconventional gender  roles compared to those dominant during early Francoism, whose main objectives  regarding women were “the exclusion of women from jobs out of their homes, the  ‘moralization’ of customs and the increase of natality” (Iglesias de Ussel and  Flaquer 61). It should be noted that, probably in keeping with the supposed  neutrality of his scenario, Torbado makes a point of ensuring that almost all  of these women have come from backgrounds of either war or prostitution, so are  not products of the progressive measures taken by the Republic. In truth,  during the Civil War and immediately afterwards, many women had to resort to  prostitution as a means of securing food, clothes, and shelter. Although the  Republic did forbid prostitution in 1935 and the Nationalist side, dominated by  a strong Catholic ideology, later banned it officially in 1956, both tolerated  it during the war. This tolerance is portrayed through Simplicia and other secondary  characters, but with Sim it acquires another ideological dimension. If we  equate Simplicia to the Spanish people, then it is the Spanish people who also  are prostituting themselves to obtain social and economic well-being and  security, while those at the top of the State, regardless of their ideology,  wield the true power. 
            In the  novel, Simplicia’s three suitors represent the three different political  options contending for primacy in the Spain of 1976: Aniceto stands for  continuity, Dino stands for reform, and Ramón for a total break. These three  try to court her, just as the same three groups were trying to gain the favor  of the Spanish people for the establishment of the future state. At the start  of the novel, we meet Aniceto and Sim on their way to the victory parade. They  seem to be in a romantic relationship, but the reader soon learns that it is a  shaky partnership, a quid pro quo in which Aniceto is with her for appearances’  sake and for company, whereas Sim hopes to secure a safe and comfortable life  (15-17). Deep inside, she still hopes that her ex-husband Ramón, the father of  her dead child—who has gone to fight the war on the anarchists’ side and is  believed to be long dead (86)—will find her and take her back. As a result, Sim  often goes in and out of Aniceto’s life without any explanation. During a time  when Sim is involved in Aniceto’s life, Dino goes to their home to procure  money for his espionage missions. One conversation is enough for Dino to become  infatuated, but Sim is not ready to commit to him yet (235-58). At this point,  Ramón, who up until now had been nothing more than an idea in Sim’s mind,  reemerges as a real character. We find him living in diverse working-class  slums in Barcelona, spending his days claiming that his luck is going to change  very soon (241). And indeed it does, but for the worse. Dino manages to deceive  Ramón into conducting a terrorist attack against “La Pasionaria” during a  political rally, resulting in her death. Unable to escape, Ramón is arrested and  jailed. Surprised to learn that her husband is still alive after learning in  the news of his involvement in this crime, Sim hurries to visit him in prison.  She soon realizes, however, that she no longer loves Ramón, that her  idealization of him and her unconscious investment in the memory of her dead  child, not true love, were the true source of her feelings (331-32).
            Meanwhile,  Dino begins to harbor feelings of regret about his role in the covert  operations aimed at disrupting Spain to make it an easier target for the spread  of fascism, thus prolonging the suffering of the Spaniards. He finally realizes  that “you cannot play with the life and freedom of another, not even when  someone higher than ourselves ... orders us to do it” (308). This leads Dino to  question “for what reason … he himself had to take part in other people’s  madness” (303) and by extension his whole fascist ideology, eventually  dismissing it entirely and embracing democracy. He runs to Aniceto’s shop to  persuade him to disavow his work in support of fascism, but the only reply he  receives is staunch opposition (305-11). A few hours later, Dino finds Sim in  the most fashionable bar in Madrid, working again as a prostitute. They strike  up a conversation, but this time Sim finds herself seduced by the reformed  fascist, and the story ends with them disappearing together into the darkness  of the night (332-34).
            In this  case, the analogy is very straightforward. Aniceto represents the Francoist  state, which attracts the Spanish people with its sense of security (in fact,  the maintenance of peace was one of the main selling points of late Francoism),  even though they have never been truly comfortable with its being in power. He  is characterized as having the “face of a bishop” (121), referencing the  symbiotic relationship between the Catholic church and the Francoist state,  especially before the Second Vatican Council (Martín de Santa Olalla 127).  Although he takes offense at being called a fascist (14), Aniceto is constantly  looking for guidance in the exiled Nationalist propaganda apparatus (78, 201),  just as the regime denied its fascist ideology and insisted on calling itself  an “organic democracy.” The on-again, off-again relationship between Aniceto  and Sim stands for the variable degrees of support for the regime among  Spaniards, depending on the faction with which they align and the geopolitical  situation of the moment.
            On the  other hand, Ramón, long gone and yet longed for, represents the opposition  heralding the total break with the regime. He is characterized as an idealist  who does not hesitate to leave everything behind to fight for his worldview,  although “he was as likely to say that we were all brothers as he was to say  that bombs should be planted in every road and on every property” (83), a  statement akin to the ideological range shown by the leftist National Front in  charge of the Government during the final days of the Republic. He was thought  to have died in the war when a tunnel collapsed on him (84), just as the  opposition to Franco was thought to be dead after the war ended. His  reappearance mirrors the public reappearance of the leftist underground parties  after a long hiatus in open political activity, and his attack on “La  Pasionaria” and subsequent capture reiterate the internal conflicts among the  left-wing forces in Spain during the twentieth century. Ramón and Sim’s love  child, killed by pneumonia, a viral disease, symbolizes the Republican state  that died due to the rebellion of internal fascist elements. Both characters  are portrayed in a negative light: Aniceto is boring and two-faced while Ramón  is naïve and ignorant, signaling the negative feelings of the author towards  the political ideologies they personify.
            In  contrast, Salvatori, despite his political affiliations at the beginning of the  novel, is depicted in a positive light: sexy, witty, intelligent, resourceful,  well-connected, and politically savvy. His moral development in voluntarily  dismantling his personal politics after a period of violent internal conflict  mirrors that of Italy during World War II, when the Mussolinean state  voluntarily dismantled itself in 1943. The final argument between Aniceto and  Dino marks the irreversible point of separation for the previously cooperating  strains of fascism. Sim’s attitude towards the Italian spy is a clear indicator  of Torbado’s preference for the reformist solution. When Salvatori spouts a  clearly fascist ideology, Sim dismisses him; yet when he becomes repentant and  accepts democracy as the superior system, Sim embraces his love. The transfer  of the positive traits of the character to the reformist solution and the  allegory of the Spanish people supporting a path of reform towards democracy as  the best option of the three available constitute the political dimension of  this novel in particular and of alternate history as a whole, a genre that  “explores the past less for its own sake than to utilize it instrumentally to  comment upon the state of the contemporary world” (Rosenberg 10).
            Behind and Beyond Torbado: More Alternate History. Along  with its potential to be commercially lucrative, the power of alternate history  as a political tool, especially in such a charged context, explains the surge  of counterfactual works at the dawn of the Spanish transition to democracy. In  the specific case of Torbado’s book, Rafael Barral, Planeta’s literary director  between 1973 and 1995, claims that “the publishing house provided a detailed  script to Jesús Torbado, so that, by following it, he would write the novel En  el día de hoy” (Ayén 48). This claim, together with the factors that  surround it, leads one to postulate the existence of a top-down birth of the  first big wave of Spanish-language alternate history, fueled by the surrounding  political circumstances and induced by the big publishing houses such as Argos  Vergara (where Diaz-Plaja published El desfile de la Victoria) and,  especially, Planeta, which would also publish Victor Alba’s 1936-1976,  Historia de la II República Española and Fernando Vizcaíno Casas’s ...Y  al tercer año, resucitó [… And on the Third Year, He Rose Again, 1978].  These publishing houses would use already established writers, who would lend  their reputations to alternate history by means of association, giving the  genre a reputation maintained over time by new works, some from the pens of  widely successful commercial authors such as Manuel Vázquez Montalbán (“50 años  después de la derrota aliada” [50 Years After the Allied Defeat, 1994]) or  highbrow literary authors such as Manuel Talens and his “Ucronía” (1994).
            The  writers of alternate history hailing from science fiction who produced works in  the 1990s and the 2000s, already liberated from the political pressures of the  Spanish Transition after the definitive establishment of democracy in Spain,  and free to disregard external ideological constraints, found themselves able  fully to pursue the implications of the Spanish Civil War, as César Mallorquí’s  “El coleccionista de sellos” [The Stamp Collector, 1996] demonstrates. This was  also true of other points of historical divergence, such as Alexander’s failure  to die poisoned in Babylonia in the case of Javier Negrete’s Alejandro Magno  y las águilas de Roma [Alexander the Great and the Eagles of Rome, 2007] or  the victory of Spain over the United States in their war of 1898, explored by  Juan A. García Bilbao and Javier Sánchez Reyes in their “Fuego sobre San Juan”  [Fire over San Juan, 1999]. Thanks to previous experimentation in the field,  these writers achieved greater recognition than their counterparts in other  literary markets such as the American one, where the inception of the subgenre  was from the bottom up, starting from the niche spaces within science fiction  and climbing to the popular mainstream position that it seems to have achieved  today (Schneider-Mayerson 65).
            Alternate  history in Spain still has a long way to go. Publications within the genre are  not as common as in English, and there is not a well-developed specialized  fandom to which releases of new works can be targeted. Instead, alternate  history is presented to the general public, fully relying on the prestige and  the commercial potential that it has traditionally possessed. This has also  been spurred by the influx of many English-language alternate-history works  entering the Spanish cultural scene both in literature and other media as well  as by the success of television shows such as El Ministerio del Tiempo [The  Ministry of Time, 2015-]. The genre is, once again, attracting the interest of  Spanish audiences. This situation happens to coincide with two major  milestones: 2016 marked the eightieth anniversary of the start of the Civil  War, and 2017 marks the fortieth anniversary of the re-establishment of  democracy in Spain. After such a long time, both the war and Francoism remain  controversial issues that periodically reappear in the news, invariably  igniting national political debate. The intersection can be easily seen, and  the context is certainly ripe for another wave of alternate history. Only the  future will tell if it will become a reality.
            NOTES
            1. “En  el día de hoy” is the beginning of the brief announcement of victory by General  Franco over the Republican forces. Franco’s last war report reads: “On this  day, with the Red Army captive and disarmed, the Nationalist troops have  reached their final military objectives. The war is ended” (qtd. and trans.  Bowen and Álvarez, 111). Also, as noted by Hellekson, in the novel this refers  to a day “that shows the repercussion of changed events years or centuries  after the event has occurred; usually, the characters are unaware they live in  the wrong history” (33). Even though in En el día de hoy the story takes  place only months after the point of divergence from the official account of  history, this definition still applies.
            2. The  Council of the Kingdom was a legal body that advised Franco and, later, his  designated heir, King Juan Carlos I, on decisions within their jurisdiction.  One of its mandates was to offer the Head of State the names of three  candidates for the position of Prime Minister. Under Franco, this was just a  formality, but once he died the control of the Council became decisive for the  outcome of the Transition. It was abolished in the Constitution of 1978.
            3.  Unless stated otherwise, all translations from Spanish are mine.
            4.  Montejurra is the traditional location of the Carlist Party’s annual tribute to  their dead combatants in the Civil War. During the Transition, the Carlist  movement was divided between the traditionalists, close to the “bunker,” and  the left-wing Carlists. In 1976, members of the traditionalist faction opened  fire against some left-leaning Carlists, leaving two dead and many injured.
            5. The  dates 23-29 January 1977 are known in Spain as the Tragic Week. The “bunker”  tried to stop the transition to democracy by creating a mass panic that would  force the Army to carry out a coup d’état. The climax was reached on 24  January, when members of the Apostolic Anticommunist Alliance (La Triple A)  assaulted an office in Atocha, Madrid, and killed five labor lawyers linked to  the Communist Party, injuring another four.
            6. The  National Council of the Movement was a sort of consultative upper house whose  origins lay in the deliberative assembly governing the Spanish Traditionalist  Phalanx of the Committees of the National Syndicalist Offensive (FET de las  JONS), the sole legal party of Francoism.
            7.  Index Librorum Prohibitorum, the Catholic Church’s list of forbidden books.
             8. Note  the distinction between Spanish alternate history that is that written in any  language spoken in Spain and Spanish-language alternate history.
            9.  During the Civil War, the Republic established some internment facilities —checas—that  were used to interrogate, detain, torture, and execute fascist detainees  extrajudicially. They were named after the VCheKa, the first incarnation of the  Soviet state security agency which later would evolve into the NKVD.
            10.  “España,” the Spanish word for Spain, is a feminine noun in the Spanish  language. Since the times of the Roman Republic, the national personification  of Hispania is a woman and, as regards contemporary Spain, almost every  government since 1868 has used this personification for political purposes.
            WORKS CITED
              Abellán, Manuel L. Censura y creación literaria en España  (1939-1976). Barcelona: Ediciones Península, 1980.
            Alba, Victor. 1936–1976. Historia de la II República  Española. Barcelona: Planeta, 1976.
            Aub, Max. La verdadera historia de la muerte de Francisco  Franco. 1960. Segorbe: Fundación Max Aub, 2001.
            Ayén, Xavi. “‘Suárez escribía sus memorias’, revela el  editor Rafael Borrás.” La Vanguardia (18 Jun. 2005): 48.
            Bowen, Wayne H., and José E. Álvarez. A Military History  of Modern Spain: From the Napoleonic Era to the International War on Terror.  Westport, CT: Praeger International, 2007.
            Díaz-Plaja, Fernando. El desfile de la Victoria. Barcelona: Argos, 1976.
            “El ‘show’ de Planeta, con bofetadas incluídas.” Blanco y  Negro (27 Nov. 1976): 49.
            Fabra, Nilo María. “Cuatro siglos de buen gobierno (Novela  de la Edad Modena).” La Ilustración Española y Americana 27.44 (1883):  311-14.
            García Bilbao, Pedro A., and Javier Sánchez-Reyes. “Fuego  sobre San Juan.” Premio UPC 1998. Barcelona: Ediciones B, 2004. 303–414.
            Hellekson, Karen. The Alternate History: Refiguring  Historical Time. Kent, Ohio: Kent State UP, 2001.
            Henriet, Éric B. L’Histoire revisitée: Panorama de  l’uchronie sous toutes ses formes. Paris: Encrage, 2004.
            Iglesias de Ussel, Julio, and Lluís Flaquer. “Familia y  análisis sociológico: el caso de España.” Reis: Revista Española de  Investigaciones Sociológicas 60 (1993): 57-75.
            López García, Jose Ramón. “Las verdaderas historias de las  muertes de Francisco Franco: para una revisión ucrónica del franquismo.” Ensayos  sobre ciencia ficción y literatura fantástica: actas del Primer Congreso  Internacional de literatura fantástica y ciencia ficción. Ed. TeresaLópez  Pellisa and Fernando Ángel Moreno Serrano. Madrid: Asociación Cultural Xatafi,  Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, 2009. 653-73.
            Mallorquí, César. “El coleccionista de sellos.” Premio  UPC 1995. Novela corta de ciencia ficción. Barcelona: Ediciones B, 1996.  31–173.
            Martín de Santa Olalla, Pablo. “La Iglesia durante el  franquismo. Un debate abierto.” Historia del Presente 7 (2006): 127-45.
            Negrete, Javier. Alejandro Magno y las águilas de Roma. Barcelona: Minotauro, 2007.
            Prego, Victoria. “Un Rey en el que muy pocos creyeron.” El  Mundo. 15 Nov. 2015. Online.
              Rosenberg, Gavriel D. The World Hitler Never Made:  Alternate History and the Memory of Nazism. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge UP,  2005. 
            Schneider-Mayerson, Matthew. “What Almost Was: The Politics  of the Contemporary Alternate History Novel.” American Studies 50.3/4  (2009): 63-84.
            Sierra, Ramón. Anales de la IV República Española. Madrid: Afrodisio Aguado Ediciones, 1967.
            Singles, Kathleen. Alternate History: Playing with Contingency  and Necessity. Berlin: DeGruyter, 2013. 
            Taibo, Xoan Ignacio. “O leito: esbozo pra unha Historia que  nunca existiu.” A fundición e outras narracións. Sada: Edicións do  Castro, 1978. 75–104.
            Talens, Manuel. “Ucronía.” Venganzas. Barcelona:  Tusquets, 1994. 25–35. 
              Torbado, Jesús. En el día de hoy. Barcelona: Planeta,  1976.
             Vázquez Montalbán, Manuel. “50 años después de la derrota  aliada.” El País Semanal 5 Jun. 1994. Vespito.net. 27 Oct. 2015.  Online.
            ¡Viva la república! Dir. Jaume Grau. La Sexta. 13 Apr.  2008. Television.
            Vizcaíno Casas, Fernando. Los rojos ganaron la guerra. Barcelona: Planeta, 1989.
            ─────. ...Y al tercer año, resucitó. Barcelona:  Planeta, 1978.