Mox, that was my point more precisely worded. They are NOT expecting anyone to do ANY amount of research, but rather to take their word for it.
On the Napoleon thing, the semantics of the word 'hundreds' when referring to years is what upset me.
Since they're going to allow that 'generation of Napoleon's day' can go forward a hundred and something years, wouldn't the reverse be true? In fact, wouldn't people born a hundred years BEFORE Napoleon also be referred to as the 'generation' of Napoleon's day? Did Napoleon's life start with the French Revolution? Of course not! Therefore, 40 years prior to the French Revolution, what would that generation have been called? Pre-Napoleonic?
OK, so technically it wasn't TWO HUNDRED years, which would allow you to all it 'hundreds.'
However, it was more than a hundred years. This leaves them at least one hundred years of wiggle room when playing with the 1914 date, since they are invoking this example.
THAT was my point, thank you for making my thoughts more lucid.
They love wiggle room.
Lisa