WI: Bulgars in southern Italy

So...it may be unknown to many, but, historically, the Bulgar people split in at least two groups. One going in the Balkans, led by Asparukh, who would then form Bulgaria, and another smaller one led by Altzek (yep, my nickname), composed of 9000 elements, going to Italy.
Now, historically, Altzek's Bulgars were slaughtered by the Franks in Germany one night, while camping in Bavaria. Altzek would then continue his journey through the boot with only 700 Bulgars (the last ones remaining) and will then settle in Italy, in the modern-day region of Molise, getting the permission from the local Langobard rulers of Benevento. Now, let us assume Altzek's band of Bulgars isn't slaughtered by the Franks, but fully makes it in one piece in the Langobard domains, all 9000 of them, quite a big population back then.

Now...wich would be the consequences of a Hunno-Sarmatian population in southern Italy, employed as mercenaries (at least) by the local Langobard rulers?
 
Now...wich would be the consequences of a Hunno-Sarmatian population in southern Italy, employed as mercenaries (at least) by the local Langobard rulers?

Look at what the Normans managed to do in a similar situation?

:p

Though of course the Normans are favoured by the ASBs.
 
Are we sure?
I'd like to remind you that the Bulgars weren't pilgrims when they arrived in the 7th century, and they weren't Christians, either.
 
I'd like to remind you that the Bulgars weren't pilgrims when they arrived in the 7th century, and they weren't Christians, either.

It's a huge problem, actually. And my comparison with the Normans was a bit of a joke, really.

They aren't numerous enough to do a Hungary/Bulgaria scenario where they become a Christian kingdom in relatively short order...and Italy always held a little bit of Imperial interest. There may be German troops called in if they make troubles for the Lombards, depending on how bad it is.

On the other hand south Italy could and did contain heterogenous populations for several generations at a time, such as the Lucera muslims.

Of course at the time, the Byzantines also have more of a presence in Italy, could be interesting as the local nobles and the two Empires either try to court the new military power to shift the balance, or else try to get rid of them before they become a problem.

South Italy was somewhat underpopulated at the time, so there's space to settle and grow in numbers, if they manage to make it past the first generation or two.
 
Historically speaking, the (few) Bulgars in southern Italy became gastalds and ruled towns.

I can imagine them becoming vassals of the Langobards.

Also, historically speaking, the Bulgars kept speaking their language (plus Latin) a hundred years after their settlement. We may imagine a Bulgar-influenced Samnium region by 1100s.
 
Historically speaking, the (few) Bulgars in southern Italy became gastalds and ruled towns.

I can imagine them becoming vassals of the Langobards.

Also, historically speaking, the Bulgars kept speaking their language (plus Latin) a hundred years after their settlement. We may imagine a Bulgar-influenced Samnium region by 1100s.

Is there ANY cultural or linguistic Bulgar influence today in Bulgaria? If not, then there wouldnt be in italy, either.
 
In Bulgaria the Bulgars were Slavized.
I wonder if that would happen in Italy.
Would they Latinize like their cousins were Slavized in the Balkans?

Historically, the Bulgars in Italy, although a very small presence, held their language for at least a hundred years, they seemed to be much more "proud" than their cousins. They may repeat this on a bigger scale, could they?

I imagine three options:
1)Bulgar-influenced Italians
2)A Bulgar minority in Italy (would be quite fascinating), maybe evolving like the Chuvash people in Russia, more or less, becoming a minority like the Arbereshe.
3)Completely assimilated Bulgars.
 
Top