[spoiler]Fair enough. It probably doesn't help that I've studied a fair bit of history and economics, so I was thinking about, for example, that fascists tends to allow private ownership of corporations as long as they work with the government, where the Mongols were much more about the state ownership of means of production. Given that fascists are often contrasted with communists, it very much felt like the Mongols came down on the opposite side of that line, whereas Jiyi's loosening up of civilian relations might paradoxically move him closer to the fascist side of that spectrum, if significant private ownership becomes a thing. But now I'm getting super-technical, and Jiyi yelling "Communist!" would have seemed just as out of place. Good call on the Marians. I'm probably biased there, given that I've studied the Romans a fair bit and like seeing spiritual heirs of theirs in BT, even if I'd rather not live there unless, maybe, if I could be a patrician.
No, the other thing that made me blink, as you say, was more to do with some of the pronoun usage. Now, I totally get singular "they" when, for example, confronting an enemy mech whose pilot you don't have time to stop and quiz on gender identity. But for example there's one point, in the Opera scene, where it says
"The lights dimmed, and a lone figure walked out onto the stage.
A spotlight illuminated them.
Of Course.
It was Jiyi Chistu, dressed in his new uniform..."
Emphasis mine. That brought me up short, thinking "Wait, I thought he was alone. Did I miss something?" went back to the page before, checked, no, but he's always he elsewhere. I was thinking maybe it was a typo, but , well, you know better than I that he and they are sometimes used for the same person. Likewise Khodaverdi seems to change from she to he in different chapters, which I initially thought might be a typo, maybe it was changed in development and some old references slipped through edit, but on reflection maybe Khodaverdi is nonbinary and uses both? I don't know how I'd tell, without adding some awkward "This is my bondsman, who identifies as nonbinary and uses he/she pronouns" line, which doesn't seem like the right answer either. I suppose that's one benefit to a Dramatis Personae, though that has its drawbacks as well (like not being able to surprise us with Nikita Malthus if all the characters are listed up front). There was another place or two as well where I had to stop and reread to figure out if "they" was being used as singular or plural (Kind of a "Wait, Alexis and Teresa, or just one with a singular they?" kind of thing, though I don't recall the exact scenes). Any time like that where I'm stopping to reread and figure out who's being referred to tends to break immersion for me, though I know you're trying to add diversity, not muddy the waters. If I had a solution I'd offer one.
I want to reiterate though that that's technical stuff. The story was great. The Sudeten climax especially had me on the edge of my seat. I knew Hasara wasn't a Mongol, and there had to be more going on there, but still couldn't be sure. The Antares story was good too, but a bit more predictable in where it was going (well, except for Tevish. Good twist there.), so there was a real dynamic of "I have to read this Antares chapter so I can get back to the Sudeten action" going on as I finished it. The epilogue was good too, seeing Bloodnames begin to proliferate again and whatnot.
Edit: Wait. Was Jiyi "them" for a minute because Nikita hadn't recognized him? I mean, now that I type it that seems obvious, and fits the paradigm of using "they" for an unknown like the pilot in an enemy mech. How did that not occur to me until just now?
[/spoiler]
