|
|
|
kern
Using The List of Creepy Coincidences as an Educational Opportunity
Kevin Kern
The University of Toledo
Kathren Brown
Bowling Green State University
|
IT HAPPENS EVERY YEAR, several times, in fact. It may be that an
e-mail comes, that a student raises his or her hand in class, or
that a friend is chatting with you at a restaurant, and presents
you with The List. All United States historians know The
List. In its most common form, it dares a history teacher to
explain a set of "creepy coincidences" between Abraham Lincoln and
John F. Kennedy. Standard items in the list include "Lincoln was
elected to Congress in 1846, Kennedy was elected to Congress in
1946." "Lincoln was elected president in 1860, Kennedy was elected
president in 1960." "The names Lincoln and Kennedy each contain
seven letters." "Both presidents were shot in the head, on a Friday,
before a major holiday." "Both were assassinated by and succeeded
by Southerners." "Both successors were named Johnson, born in years
ending in '08." "Both assassins were known by three names, born
in years ending in '39, and assassinated before being tried." "Booth
ran from a theater and was caught in a warehouse, Oswald ran from
a warehouse and was caught in a theater." And of course the most
famous (and ironically, the only patently false) item, "Lincoln
had a secretary named Kennedy, and Kennedy had a secretary named
Lincoln."
1
|
1
|
|
As history teachers, dealing with The List is an occupational hazard that we greet with increasing irritation as the years go by. Leaving aside for a moment the misleading, erroneous, and simply fatuous nature of many of these "creepy" observances, it is the ahistorical nature of the entire exercise that is particularly galling to many of us in the historical community. This often leads us to dismiss the person presenting us with it with comments ranging from indifference to disdain. Neither of these is a satisfactory response, serving only to perpetuate The List to yet another generation. The result is often either mistaken triumph ("See, he couldn't explain it!") or hurt feelings ("Well, I just thought that you'd be interested, being a historian and all") on the part of The List's current champion. When confronted with it yet again recently, therefore, my colleague and I decided to view it instead as a valuable opportunity to help others explore 1) the difference between historical trivia and historically relevant facts and 2) the importance of using historical methods when evaluating historical data. |
2
|
|
The appeal and persistence of The
List may have several roots. For many, the coincidences themselves
are striking as being "spooky." Others have political motives, suggesting
that these "links" between individuals show importance—for
example, as a demonstration that Kennedy was somehow from the same
mold as the near-universally-revered Lincoln. Still others imply
that greatness itself has certain "mystical" attributes and that
this list demonstrates how those attributes unite the two men. This,
in turn, may explain the heavy reliance on the numerology of the
names and dates concerning the presidents and their assassins, as
well as the symmetrical ordering of words (e.g., theater to warehouse,
warehouse to theater; secretary named Lincoln, secretary named Kennedy).
Although entertaining, such mysticism does not address in any historically
significant way the substantive facts or issues regarding their
presidencies and is easy to demonstrate as pure nonsense. |
3
|
|
As silly as such lists may be, though, they still may cause serious consequences in the mind of the casual history student, confusing him or her by presenting entertaining "facts" as being historically significant. Partly this is because the lists pick two already respected historical figures and compare similar trivia. Since the readers assume the two men are historically meaningful, they conclude the "creepy coincidences" are meaningful by association. This gives them a warped view of historical methods as well as the nature of historical study itself. Most of the facts in The List are, of course, true. But could not a comparable list of "creepy" coincidences be found between any two randomly-selected presidents? |
4
|
|
Because one of us has an unnatural
affinity for our much-neglected thirteenth president and the other
has a great-grandfather with an unsettling physical resemblance
to our thirty-third, we chose Millard Fillmore and Harry S.Truman
as our test presidents. No science, no research, just a random selection
of two political figures. After one afternoon perusing various presidential
websites acquired by standard search engines
2
—and using the same tenuous logic and creative wording as that
of The List—we came up with the following "creepy" list
of our own: |
5
|
|
Millard Fillmore and Harry S. Truman: Amazing Coincidences?
- Fillmore's pioneer father owned a failing farm, and Fillmore helped him run it as a young man. Truman's pioneer father owned a failing farm, and Truman helped him run it as a young man.
- After leaving the farm, Fillmore had an unsuccessful stint in the clothing industry (an apprentice to a fuller, he left before his contract date and spent the ensuing years trying to pay off his debt). After leaving the farm, Truman had an unsuccessful stint in the clothing industry (a haberdasher, he went out of business and spent the next fifteen years trying to pay off his debts).
- Fillmore joined his major party (Whigs) in 1834. Truman joined his major party (Democrats) in 1934.
- Fillmore was an extremely successful politician, losing only one election in his political career prior to reaching the presidency (Governor of New York). Truman was an extremely successful politician, losing only one election in his political career prior to reaching the presidency (Jackson County Court Judge).
- Fillmore was a New Yorker placed on the national ticket to balance a presidential candidate from the South. Truman was a Southerner placed on the national ticket to balance a presidential candidate from New York.
- Fillmore succeeded a war-hero general (Zachary Taylor) and was succeeded by a man named Franklin (Pierce). Truman succeeded a man named Franklin (Roosevelt) and was succeeded by a war-hero general (Dwight D. Eisenhower).
- Fillmore came to the presidency following the death of the previous president who was stricken on a Thursday with the illness that killed him. Truman came to the presidency following the death of the previous president who was stricken on a Thursday with the illness that killed him.
- Fillmore rose to the presidency soon after a major holiday (4th of July). Truman rose to the presidency soon after a major holiday (Easter).
- Fillmore came to the presidency during a period of national crisis, and saw it to its conclusion a few months later in September (The Compromise of 1850). Truman came to the presidency during a period of national crisis, and saw it to its conclusion a few months later in September (The Japanese peace treaty).
- Fillmore left office without his party's nomination in 1853, highly unpopular. Truman left office without his party's nomination in 1953, highly unpopular.
- Fillmore was highly critical of the president elected in 1860, but actively supported his successor, President Johnson. Truman was highly critical of the president elected in 1960, but actively supported his successor, President Johnson.
- Fillmore was born on a Tuesday and died on the 8th (March). Truman was born on the 8th (May) and died on a Tuesday.
- (And to match the false "fact" regarding Lincoln and Kennedy's secretaries, we offer): A prominent politician named John Kennedy served as Secretary of the Navy under Fillmore. A prominent politician named John Kennedy served in the Navy under Truman.
|
|
We found more than forty "connections"
like this,
3
but in the interests of space, we believe that these are more than
sufficient to demonstrate the irrelevance of The List and
all other such pseudo-historical demonstrations of data-massaging.
In all such lists, there is no attempt to explain the significance
of these coincidences. They serve as nothing more than fodder for
conspiracy theorists and historical trivia buffs. It is ironic,
therefore, that these coincidences can actually prove quite useful
in teaching legitimate historical methods to our students in secondary,
entry-level survey, or higher-level history classes. Start with
The List and the attendant enthusiasm it seems to rouse,
and use it as a departure point for a class project. Assign groups
of students pairs of significant historical figures and have them
come up with their own lists of "creepy" coincidences. Students
should be directed to find any possible links between their people.
The figures themselves need not be presidents or drawn from American
history—in fact, people who have the least in common might
prove to be the best examples of how silly these lists can be. (For
example, try using pairs of people born in the same year, such as
Adolf Hitler and Charlie Chaplin, Hideki Tojo and George S. Patton,
or Isoroku Yamamoto and Eleanor Roosevelt). |
6
|
|
After the groups present their findings, lead a discussion on historical methods and how they can be used to prevent the misinterpretation of historical data. Ask students about the relevance of their links and what, if anything, their findings teach about the role of their assigned individuals in history. Not only will this exercise teach your students how to separate the trivial from the significant, but it also can be the springboard for a discussion of the value of analytical historical research. And (best of all), the next time someone sends you The List, you will have something to send back. |
7
|
|
Notes
1 Other items in similar
lists include "both enjoyed sitting in rocking chairs," "both
liked to quote from the Bible," "both were involved in famous
political debates," "both were named for their grandfathers,"
"the wives of both were with them when they died," as well as
other even more tortuous connections. A relatively complete list
is located at http://www.autotechweb.com/triviaone/AP0701.htm.
For the record, Lincoln never had a secretary named Kennedy.
2 The main sources
were http://www.interlink-cafe.com/uspresidents,
http://www.trumanlibrary.org,
http://www.autotechweb.com/triviaone,
http://www.ipl.org/ref/POTUS,
http://www.americanpresident.org,
and http://www.starship.python.net/crew/manus/Presidents. In addition,
an extremely useful online perpetual calendar (for discovering
common weekdays of disparate historical events) resides at http://www.wiskit.com/calendar.html.
3
Including a number of "boths" to rival the original list (e.g., "both were first-born sons," "both served as postmasters," "both became lawyers despite failing to graduate from college," "both served in Congress over a ten-year period," "both were elected Vice-President on November 7," "both were offered honorary degrees from Oxford after retiring," etc.)
|
Content in the History Cooperative database is intended for
personal, noncommercial use only. You may not reproduce,
publish, distribute, transmit, participate in the transfer or
sale of, modify, create derivative works from, display, or in any
way exploit the History Cooperative database in whole or in part
without the written permission of the copyright holder.
|