This is more of a historical theory question perhaps. I know that regional history is not always taught outside that region and that, like with the example of the Native American and Manifest Destiny, history is written by the "winner".
However, despite the geographical limitations of history, has any criteria been found that looks at whether certain types of events are more... historically "memorable" than others?
Edit: removed one list it was distracting and not really pertinent.
I'm.. not entirely sure what you're asking. Are you asking about why certain events figure greater into public memory? Are you asking about why some event are taught more frequently than others? Are you asking about why we consider some events more important? The list does not help much, since it's not even entirely events (e.g. "Mayans").
The way I understand your question, you are interested in why certain events are studied more than others?
The history of memory has some interesting insights into this including that historical events can be used in different ways, like for political purposes or personal/ family stories. For instance, the book The Presence of the Past by Roy Rosenzweig and David Thelen looks at how common Americans use history in different ways in their every day lives. Most of them agreed on large events, such as the outcome of presidential elections, but they had different ideas about what it meant for them, their families, or the country. And some people viewed events as more memorable than others for a variety of reasons.
I hope this somewhat answers your question.