Follow up: Were there any sects in early Christianity with such traditions?

I'm roleplaying a "snuff" addict for my "Inventing the Constitution" class, and have been instructed to "pretend to partake in snuff liberally" throughout the Constitutional Convention. What did it look like? What would it be carried in? Was it tobacco or opium? How would a user use it, and how often? Thanks!

Additional note: the specific character is moderate Nationalist Oliver Ellsworth from Connecticut.

I assume American football finds its origins in rugby, and the south, but how did become what it is today?

Trying to just envision trench warfare here. If soldiers successfully forced enemies to fall back past the reserves, what was beyond that? Did the enemies all just die? Did they have an HQ of some kind?

I know there is artillery at the furthest line of defense, but was there an HQ that had to be raided? Were the artillery lines enforced, like cement turrets where you could throw a grenade into?

In literature, Homer implies that Trojans and Greeks keep similar gods, albeit being different cultures. I also noticed on a map of Neo-Assyrian Ninevah there was a temple to Hermes. I'm afraid my ignorance prevents me from forming a well worded question, but I was hoping someone could discuss how and why a god might "spread" beyond its indigenous culture in the late Bronze Age.

Is there any perspectives or resources that show an anti view in Prince Rivers time. Im doing a research

I found some information who stated that cohorts were 1st introduced during manipular legion and it was made up from 3 maniples (1 hastati, 1 priceps and 1 triarii and some velites), a smaller, but more mobile combined force usefull during the campaigns in Iberia.

Sorry if this sounds stupid but from what I've read dukes are generally high up on the nobility scale, but could they create an earldom? Would a duke rule over a earl or a baron or did they basically have sovereignty in their own domains.

I learned this a little while ago so I may not be repeating exactly what I was taught, but I believe my teacher said that the Pope did not denounce Hitler because he feared Hitler would attack/destroy the church, or in some other way greatly undermine the power or authority of the church. Was this a realistic fear, or an excuse for not denouncing Hitler?

At what moment in history did people realize the time was diferent in different parts of the world and what effect did this have?

I wrote the question kinda weirdly but I loosely remember a question regarding how withdrawing from battle might be seen as cowardice in history and someone replied that Templars couldn't withdraw while a Christian banner was still raised or something along those lines? I think the answer added that it was only for fully armored knights and it didn't apply to Sergeants or fighters with less armor.

I tried searching for it but couldn't find it.

I was on a recent Tarantino spree and I couldn’t help but notice in Django Unchained it appears as if Django, the slave, is tasting beer for the first time. This scene is fairly early in the movie, it occurs when Django and Schultz go to the bar. This scene interested me, how accustomed to alcohol were slaves? Did slaves brew or make any alcohol? What were the slave masters’ opinions on the entire matter. I know from reading an excerpt from Fredrick Douglas that slaves would consume alcohol on certain special occasions, but it does not mention how they obtain It. Was alcohol consumption as common among slaves as it were the owners?

The Romans had an obsession with displaying virtue; in the later Republic, young successful men would order busts that made them seem older, more wrinkled, as age was a sign of wisdom. Augustus may have changed the trend of worshiping the past by introducing youthful hopeful traits into his busts and statues (most notably Augustus of Prima Porta), yet he kept the typical Roman appearance - a bland short cut on his head and a clean shave.

From what I've learned in my Arts history and Roman history classes, lavish hairstyling, or any sign of obsession about outward appearance was seen as overly effeminate, and Roman men sought the appearance of a soldierly scholar, embellishing Roman virtues. Beards were looked down on as being barbaric, and a Gallic feature to be avoided (like the Roman fear of wearing trousers).

The busts and statues of Marcus Aurelius and his son Commodus strike me as being completely detached from canon of Roman sculpting. They have lushious curls on their hair, magnificent beards, and their likeness is captured in very relaxed, emotional poses. Marcus Aurelius was a great emperor, yet his appearance in these sculptures is relaxed, indifferent, a departure from the stoic, thinking faces we see on late Republic busts like that of Cicero. So clearly, the style was not meant as a reflection of the character of Marcus Aurelius.

So I wonder, where did this change in Roman sculpting canon begin? Why did it become popular? Was it a symptom of the decadence of the middle and late Empire that Gibbon would have us believe, or was it inspired by the Greeks, like many other Roman canons?

And if so, has there been any analysis of these inscriptions to help us better understand how quickly different parts of the Roman Empire were Christianized?

I’ve been fascinated by this era (4th to 6th century), especially in relation to the Christianization of the Roman Empire. It seems notoriously difficult to estimate the growth of Christianity, or even find any guesses as to when Christians became the majority. I’m basically trying to find any concrete evidence which might give me a clearer picture.

I understand that some Arab governments, most notably of Iraq and Syria, were exceptionally antisemitic, stripping Jews of citizenship before or after 1948 and sometimes encouraging popular violence against Jews like the notorious Baghdad pogrom during WW2.

Was this kind of violent antisemitism exceptionally brutal, or typical of the young Arab governments created after WW1? Were Arab governments seeking to expel their generally ancient and assimilated Jewish populations, or did any seek to prevent this huge exodus? Did any Arab leaders work to preserve these Jewish communities and separate anger at Israel from fury against the entire Jewish people?

Reading through "Burr" and I'm shocked at the brutal criticism directed at Washington, Jefferson, and other Revolutionary War figures.

Also, is there any evidence supporting the book's insinuation that Martin Van Burren is Aaron Burr's illegitimate son?

I know that throughout the ages when battle field doctors were treating patients cleanliness was highly gained for saving lives, but was the inhumane experiments of Nazi prisoners benifitical for future medical procedures?

Yes I'll get hate, but I do not condone what happened nor do I want it to in the future. My question is for curiosity if the experiments received.

The long hair, the flowery dresses, the ripped jeans, the circular sunglasses, love beads? Who created the hippy look? Were these taken from a particular fashion designer or a broader cultural trend?

I’m doing a historiography paper on Catherine the Great’s political career and I’d like add how the polish view on her.

Looking for some source material to use in a classroom essay assignment about Dunkirk. Any primary sources you have about Dunkirk and its significance to the eventual Axis defeat would be great!

EDIT: I am a teacher, assigning the essay. Not a student, writing the essay.

Thanks.