Board Thread:Timeline Discussions/@comment-4923787-20130202175501/@comment-32656-20130426011955

Yes, very much depends on that.

No, they could not - too inefficient by comparison. The difference in output means that a change will eventually happen.

"Italian" would not exist.

Hellenic means "Greek." That empire would, in fact, not be Greek. It doesn't work as a name.

The Eastern Empire isn't doomed. The existence of the other two states alone means that is not the case - the factors that started the fall of the Byzantines otl would not exist here.

Turks may not even go that direction, too. With the changes, who knows? They could go northwest rather than southwest for all we know.

It would not stick. That would be like Stalin adopting a version of "Hitler" as a name.

Most celebrities don't change their names. Despite her marriages, Drew Barrymore's last name s still just Barrymore, and has never changed. You see this a lot with professionals, or famous people.

The strait is only 9 miles wide at narrowest, and much of it is in the ten mile range for size. For all purposes, it is a land connection.

It is possible for them to remain centralized.

It is unlikely that he could have gotten more. That area of India is hard to take, truth be told. Barbarians would have finished the empire off irregardless a couple kings later, so the point is largely moot.