Assassination fails against institutions with replaceable leaders

Evidence

The medieval French historian Joinville explains why. Speaking of the head of the Assassin order he says: “He paid tribute to the Templars and to the Hospitalers because they feared nothing from his Assassins, since the leader of the Assassins could gain nothing if he caused the Master of the Temple or the Master of the Hospital to be killed; for he knew very well that if he had one killed another just as good would replace him, and for this reason he did not wish to lose assassins where he could gain nothing by it.” — Bernard Lewis, From Babel to Dragomans, 561

Categorization

• XREF: Ties directly to the reader’s interests in institutions, reputation, and how social capital works — the Assassins exempted the Templars for exactly the reason social-capital theory predicts: killing isn’t worth it when succession is institutionalized. — connects to: Complex bureaucratic warfare can defeat a reformer without identifying a killer — Robert A. Caro, The Power Broker: Robert Moses and the…, 374
• DEFINE: Clarifies why medieval Assassins conspicuously spared the knightly orders — decapitation strategy fails against replaceable leadership.