Deleting Bulgaria

Suppose the the Bulgars never invade/settle in the Balkans, and the land of Bulgaria remains dominated by its Greco-Slavic population that looks toward Constantinople. How does this affect the Byzantines, and the state of their empire in Europe?

Without Bulgaria, does a cyrillic analogue still come to be as a result of missionary activity, or do the south Slavs instead adopt the Greek alphabet wholesale?

Tyg said:

Suppose the the Bulgars never invade/settle in the Balkans, and the land of Bulgaria remains dominated by its Greco-Slavic population that looks toward Constantinople. How does this affect the Byzantines, and the state of their empire in Europe?

Without Bulgaria, does a cyrillic analogue still come to be as a result of missionary activity, or do the south Slavs instead adopt the Greek alphabet wholesale?

Click to expand...

???
OTL "the land of Bulgaria remains dominated by its Greco-Slavic population" looked "toward Constinople". They were Orthodox, imitated Byzantine fashion, etc.

Cyril and Methodius weren't in Bulgaria, but in Great Moravia, if that's what you're thinking of, so changes in Bulgaria are irrelevant to the missionary work, and hence the alphabet.

Thirdly, the alphabet they invented is probably Glagolitic, not Cyrillic.

Fourthly, have you LOOKED at Cyrillic and Greek? They DID adopt the Greek alphabet wholesale, with a handful of new letters for sounds that weren't in Greek. If you look at mediaeval Greek and Cyrllic, most of the letter forms are identical.

Dathi THorfinnsson said:

???
OTL "the land of Bulgaria remains dominated by its Greco-Slavic population" looked "toward Constinople". They were Orthodox, imitated Byzantine fashion, etc.

Click to expand...

I meant to suggest that without Bulgaria there wouldn't have been an independent political center of power in regular competition with Constantinople, or at least not one that had the same level of power or scale.

Maybe it'd be more accurate to suggest that no separate Bulgarian identity survives/exists in the Balkans, and ask about the effects of that.

Cyril and Methodius weren't in Bulgaria, but in Great Moravia, if that's what you're thinking of, so changes in Bulgaria are irrelevant to the missionary work, and hence the alphabet.

Click to expand...

Would Slavic conversions or missionary work have changed significantly absent the Bulgarian empire?

Fourthly, have you LOOKED at Cyrillic and Greek? They DID adopt the Greek alphabet wholesale, with a handful of new letters for sounds that weren't in Greek. If you look at mediaeval Greek and Cyrllic, most of the letter forms are identical.

Click to expand...

I confess I've never seen medieval Cyrillic script, and my thinking was comparing the situation to those parts of Europe that adopted Latin script for the vernacular language. It's obviously not something I'm well-informed about.

Sorry if these were absurd questions, this isn't a period I know well. Have mercy on my ignorance.

What Dathi said, really. No Bulgaria may mean that no Slavic state uses the term "Tsar", as it was the Bulgarians who kicked that off. I think Imperial control of the Balkans will probably collapse with or without the Bulgars, but it'll likely be reasserted more quickly in the eighth century, which frees up more resources for Italy and Syria. Though this shouldn't be exaggerated, the Balkan front was always a backwater compared to Anatolia until the twelfth century.

This is of course assuming that the Empire survives the years around 700 at all without Bulgar assistance!