Most modern historians think the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand started World War I. No doubt the archduke's assassination was the spark that started the "Great War", however, the interlocking alliances, mistrust and miss-communications between the great European powers created WW 1.
I would think that it would be the Battle of the Alamo
The cigar
Washington
It was the most modern war at the time.
This is a really odd question as it assumes that most historians give bogus dates for the start of World War 2 in Europe.
Many modern day historians cite the following ancient historians as the most informative and accurate:1. Tacitus; 2. Herodotus; 3. Polybius; and 4. Thucydides.
Most historians think so.
a disease
Most military historians place the 18th century as the so-called "modern era". In that context, they place the Prussian army under Frederick the Great as the first truly modern European army.
Invaded and destroyed by Mycenaeans.
That he was the most surrealistic among the surrealists.
Aryans spoke an Indo-European language, so most assume that they came from Anatolia. Anatolia is known in modern time as Turkey.
Aryans spoke an Indo-European language, so most assume that they came from Anatolia. Anatolia is known in modern time as Turkey.
Most historians believe thatabout 10,000 years ago, southwestern Asia became the first center of agriculture.
Because most of the records historians have about the Persians were written by Greeks, the history is very skewed (Greeks hated the Persians- they had lots of wars). It's very negatively biased.
I think probably is because the nok people actually used iron based tools for farming and historians most likely found their trading goods as well as their tools
Most veterans and historians think it is the M-1 Grande