"1066 conveys it all to an educated person. Same with "November 22, 1963".
I'm an educated person, but that date meant nothing to me. I had to google it to discover it was the dark day in history that both C.S Lewis Aldous Huxley died. (Oh - and some American politician too.)
I know this may be heretical to many, but you can be educated without knowing the exact dates of every assassination across the world in the last 80 years. (Or perhaps the idea is that educated people would know exact dates in American history but be ignorant of the rest of the world?)C'mon - admit it. How many of the following dates would instantly 'convey all' to you:
* May 10, 1838 MS: John Wilkes Booth is born
* August 21, 1983 MS: Benigno Aquino is killed in Manila
* June 1, 2001 MS: King Berenda is killed in Nepal
* May 21, 2002 MS: Abdul Ghani Lone killed in Kashmir
All of those were political assasinations which 'rocked the world' (at least as much as Kennedy's), but I suspect that without googling, most would be unrecognisable. Why should these dates be any less recognisable to an educated person than 22nd November 1963 ?Besides, if only educated people can enjoy the book, aren't you limiting sales a bit !?
This is not home Jeopardy.. This isn't even a contest, pissing or otherwise. The CONTEXT of the comment was on a SYNOPSIS you don't have to explain 1066 or 11/22/63 in lurid detail.
Overexplaining the obvious is a huge flaw in many starting out writers, and in synopses, it eats words. In case I do need to overexplain myself: some things are self explanatory.