All of your examples should use "historic." The difference between the two words is:
"Historic" refers to something that is significant because of its history, or to something that "made" history. Athens is a historic city because of the accomplishments throughout its history; a chair or building are historic because of the significance of their style or events that took place there; a victory is historic because it is unusual and therefore "makes" history.
"Historical" refers to something that is simply from history. Usually, you would use it for a document, i.e. "historical records."
As another example: You could describe the Treaty of Versailles with either word, but you would be saying two different things. If you said "the Treaty of Versailles was historic," you would be saying that the agreement, the conclusions, the ideas contained in it were significant in history. If you said "the Treaty of Versailles is historical," you would be saying that the document itself, the piece of paper, was written in the past.
[Addition by TrevorD]
The explanation above is supported by the following definitions from the Oxford Dictionary:
Famous or important in history, or potentially so. [emphasis added]
Of or concerning history or past events.
The first entry above also includes the following explanation about the difference between historic and historical:
Historic and historical are used in slightly different ways. Historic means ‘famous or important in history’, as in a historic occasion, whereas historical means ‘concerning history or historical events’, as in historical evidence: thus a historic event is one that was very important, whereas a historical event is something that happened in the past.