What was their explanation for why those measures worked or didn't work?

I’m talking about the cliché depiction of a caveman/woman wearing a leopard print loincloth or sash-thingy, with a big wooden club, (sometimes even fighting like dinosaurs and stuff?), and a prominent hunched posture and thick brow. Obviously the last example probably comes from Neanderthal skeletons, but I’m curious as to where the others originate from. I hope this was a specific enough question lol.

Something I've seen often in TV shows is that Germans, around 1943 and 1944, speak openly about the war being a lost cause. Was this really something that was known? As far as I know the press was controlled tightly, and would have made it difficult to get any real information.

I know that the majority of battles were not fights to the death. Often one side would rout and flee after a certain point. But, hypothetically, if me and my mates know we're in a hopeless situation and we have enough control over ourselves to not run immediately, would we fair better if we dropped our weapons and surrendered? How likely would it be for us to receive quarter, and if we did, what would probably happen to us next? Should I have just tried to run instead?

As a side question, how would this change if I was a knight or nobleman?

I have read several times that the Roman empire was akin to a protection racket. They would come with their armies, extract tribute, and more or less leave you alone to govern yourself. I would imagine that one of the governor's duties was to extract said tribute and protect the province from other cartels. But is there more to it than that? What would, say an average provincial citizen in Gaul experience before, during, and after Roman occupation? Would the poor provincials consider themselves roman?

Being a Hindu guy, I want to know how the Hitler was influenced by the Hindu Swastika (i guess it's hindu). Could you please share some of the interesting facts about it?

France's coast seems to have been super well fortified and I'm curious if it was just too much of a logistical challenge to cover the distance through Russia. Or perhaps Japan just would not have allowed troops to pass through safely, fearing the US would attack Manchuria once inside the USSR.

Hello, I’m not sure if this is the right place to ask this but I’m just throwing darts right now. So I’m a history major with a minor in education, and I’m hearing a lot of horror stories about the salary of a teacher, especially in my state. This is precisely the reason my major is history, in case I can’t pay the bills with my teaching job, I can find something related to my bachelors in History. However, I hear alot of horror stories about not finding a good job with history also. I’m just wondering if anyone can assure me that I’m not majoring in the wrong thing, because I love history but I also love the idea of supporting myself. If anyone could tell me of some good jobs I could get with a Bachelors in History I’d appreciate it. Thanks

I can’t imagine they’d go through the trouble of wrapping it in oilskin cloth. I haven’t been able to find a period depiction of their rain kit.

The Guano islands act allowed for America to claim any island with Guano deposits. But what was Guano actually used for? Why was this such a critical resource for America to obtain?

So, I get that it's a poetic description, but it seems unclear to me what it's supposed to evoke because the only context I can really imagine the sea having a color like wine is when it's at sunset and the color of the sky is being reflected in the water. But that doesn't really apply in the contexts where it is used by Homer.

I've often heard it said that the Berkeley, Alden, and Swinton families are the only ones with unbroken traceable lineages in the paternal line from pre-Norman English forebears. However, reading visitation pedigrees of the English gentry, they note many families coming into possession of their estates as far back as the time of the Plantagenets. My question is, how badly did the former English nobility lose when the Normans conquered the kingdom? Were former nobles and such reduced to the level of peasants and serfs? with the exception of those three aforementioned families? I've read that during the Protestant Ascendancy in Ireland, a good deal of the former Catholic gentry were still able to keep their high social position, but were simply made head-tenants on their former estate, paying rent to an Anglican landlord. Was that the same situation in Norman England, or was the former English aristocracy completely socially erased?

I’m trying to challenge my own views. I mean, more specifically, criticisms of Marxist conceptions, class struggle, his method, etc. Thanks.

I know the term was first used during the Peninsular War in the 1800s, but there are also so many instances it was used before it had a name.

edit: Sorry I botched the title. The question was supposed to be: Was there any outrage across the French populace to a song celebrating the fall of Napoleon winning a contest intended to promote European unity?