When you recount history, you should use the simple past. However, the present perfect is by no means incorrect. This is especially so when discussing authors and artists, for it is common to discuss them as if they were alive. They are not alive, of course, but their works are. Although the artist has gone, his/her name becomes a proxy for the art itself. Thus, you can say "Shakespeare has given us magnificent plays". This is doubly true when discussing broad categories, like "poets", rather than individual authors. Thus you would say "the great poets have written works that we treasure". That sounds better than the simple past.

Use the Simple Past since these aren't recent events and they have no connection to the present.

Either one can be correct depending on what meaning you are trying to express. "Wrote" tells us that it happened in the past. The "has written" form, called the "present perfect," suggests something in the recent past which is connected to something that is happening now. 1) is a question of history and not grammar. We know that Mary Shelley wrote "Frankenstein" in the 1800s. Because of that fact, the correct answer is "wrote." We would say, for example, that "Mary Shelley wrote 'Frankenstein' and Bram Stoker wrote 'Dracula.'" 2) is trickier. If A translated "Frankenstein" a long time ago, we would say "translated." But if it is a new translation, we might say "has translated." Examples: "Arthur Koestler wrote 'Darkness at Noon' in German and Daphne Hardy translated it into English." "Daphne Hardy translated 'Darkness at Noon' in 1941. She was under pressure, and she was not a professional translator. But now, Philip Boehm has translated it again. Reviewers say the new translation is wonderful."