Was this a significant issue among the Roman Christians? Did Christian emperors ever describe the guilt they might have felt?

Allow me to elaborate. In politics we hear about "pork barrel spending" and how congresspeople try to "bring home pork" to their constituents. I just got to thinking: is this because pork used to be more expensive? It seems pretty ubiquitous these days.

And how many still spoke latin after that?

I'm not well versed on the historiography of (or even the approach to) contemporary history. I've also had professors express to me that unless it happened 40 years ago it's not technically history, but I'm curious about the field (if it even exists in the way that I'm thinking it does). If 'contemporary history' is too broad of a topic, I guess I'm more interested in a general political and social history of the present day.

At what point in history did travel and communication become fast enough that adjustments for time of day needed to be made?

I've heard multiple times that Hitler regarded the English and French as equals, and viewed the Russians and slavs as inferior. How did he feel about the Spanish?

I realized that many people we now consider native had superseded past peoples who occupied that particular land, which raises this question. from the pelasgians to native americans

I am doing a presentation on the evolution of American weapons of war, my part is to do weapons from WW1 & WW2. I was trying to find out if america used chemical weapons in WW1 but couldn't find any information on it. Although I did find that during WW1 chemical weapons such as tear gas, mustard gas, phosgene, and chlorine gas were used, but I'm not sure if America used these or not.

I noticed that the Chinese, the Celts/Germans, and the Muslims are the only cultures that would use these interlacing ribbon-like knots as a predominant feature in architecture, printing, and fabrics, with only very minor differences in style and artistic choices. Was there some kind of common culture "seed" that would have caused this to happen?

Apparently Aboriginal Australians arrived on the continent between 40,000 and 60,000 years ago. Since that time, is it known how their lifestyle or technology changed? I know that Aboriginal Australians are often stereotyped as being "primitive", but I was curious to know what sort of adaptations they created to suit their environment.

I'm writing an economics paper on the caribbean and one if the books I'm using as a source has an interesting table in the back that details the demographics of each island in the early 1800s. This isn't really relavent to my research but I found the category of people that they label as "free non-whites" to be very interesting.

All of the British islands are shown as having a large slave majority but most also have significant populations of free nonwhites. In Barbados, for example, they (in 1834) made up 6.5% of the population and 7.5% of all nonwhites.

My first set of questions about this group more generally and I apologize if this topic has been covered before.

How would these people have gained their freedom? Would most have bought it? Would most slaveowners have been willing to sell slaves their freedom for a fair price? Would they have been freed after long years of service as a "humanitarian" gesture by their owner?

What really shocked me were the numbers for the spanish caribbean. According to the source, in Puerto Rico only 14.8% of nonwhite people were slaves and slaves were only 7.1% of the population. That means that 85.2% of nonwhites were free and free people of color were a whopping 44.5% of the population. What explains this huge difference between Barbados and Puerto Rico? Were spanish slaveowners more likely to manumit their slaves? I know spanish colonies were more open to race mixing than British ones, does this have anything to do with it? Would spanish slaveowners free their children with slaves?

I am writing an article for a magazine at my school about gene dilution, and I am using the feudal practice of claiming titles based on Salic law as my introduction. Who was the most distant, at least partially successful, known claimant to a inherited feudal title? By partially successful, I mean that his claim was either taken seriously by many, or he was able to start a conflict based on it.

I know that they were outnumbered one to three by the Persians, so how did they manage such a decisive victory?

Other than through military might backing an ambitious duke, or annexation by a neighbouring domain, was there a law of succession that applied when no legal heir could be found?