Board Thread:Timeline Discussions/@comment-4923787-20130202175501/@comment-32656-20130607184304

Like I've said before, fact-check when using wikipedia where possible. On the article on the duke himself, it says that he in fact did - and cites sources, including Charlemagne's biographer, that confirm it. More grudgingly than anything, in name only, and only until Charlemagne went away, but he did do it.

"Neutral" in that context is more or less the same as opposing.

No, the Lombards could not. Nor would they try.

Charlemagne would not have done that.

Duke of Rome was an appointee of the Pope for the most part.

South still stronger.

PS are on some maps included in the HRE, but they were not in it. This was actually a point of debate between the two at the time. The Emperors did agree that it was not part eventually, however. But the Emperor did not have any say in the papal lands.

Already said - Italy did not mean the same thing then.

The HRE would not desire that.

If they could do that they would last longer, yes.

Whatever empire there is in India would collapse at some point, and the Europeans would take advantage. Empires like that will always ebb and flow, given time. Only reason why China didn't have more of that happen is that the Europeans both got past that way of action, and couldn't agree on a split.

Remember, India is not culturally unified, at all. No empire that rules it would last forever. And when it goes, slowly like Indian empires do, people will take advantage.

None of those empires came even close to it. None of them could manage it.

Impossible to unify the Rajputs.