Newsgroups: soc.history.science,comp.ai.philosophy,alt.cyberspace,soc.history.moderated
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!oitnews.harvard.edu!rutgers!uwm.edu!spool.mu.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news.mathworks.com!news.bluesky.net!news.sprintlink.net!noc.netcom.net!netcom.com!lhb
From: dzik@access.digex.net (Joseph Dzikiewicz)
Subject: Re: What if x had lived longer?
Message-ID: <lhbDA3FE1.31M@netcom.com>
X-Submission-Address: soc-history-mod@bcm.tmc.edu
Sender: lhb@netcom22.netcom.com
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
References: <3r8mn1$ohg@nntp5.u.washington.edu> <3ra7us$kcb@shell1.best.com> <3rcf5k$339@cnn.Princeton.EDU>
X-Admin-Address: history-mod@best.com
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 1995 04:06:01 GMT
Approved: lhb@netcom.com
Lines: 18

In article <3rcf5k$339@cnn.Princeton.EDU>,
Bill Hilbrich <hilbrich@magellan.cloudnet.com> wrote:

>If YOU were a very accomplished and respected World Leader that realized 
>that you might be nearing a downward plunge, would you accept the offer 
>of an arranged death to insure your place in history. . 

This seems to presuppose that the increased lifespans of these
individuals could not have mattered, as you propose that the primary
differences were in their own reputations.

This does raise the question of a martyr effect in which presidents
(or other leaders) gain a halo from an untimely death.  I'd agree that
all of our assassinated presidents benefitted from this (including
Garfield and McKinley, though their halos have largely worn off by now -
read histories of the period, however, and you see glowing reviews of
the two men).  Though I do think that Lincoln's reputation today is
more because of what he did then how he died.
