Government

Medieval Bulgarian government developed across two separate empires whose territories shifted around the Danube and the Balkans. The First Bulgarian Empire, conventionally dated from 681 to 1018, was followed by Byzantine rule until the restoration of Bulgarian power in 1185. The Second Bulgarian Empire lasted until the Ottoman conquests of the late fourteenth century. Their territory and offices changed through expansion, conquest and restoration.

On this page6 sections

Royal authority changed with religion and political tradition

Both empires were monarchies in which ruling families claimed hereditary authority. Early rulers are conventionally called khans; ninth-century inscriptions preserve the title kanasybigi, whose exact interpretation is debated. Christian Boris used the title knyaz, or prince, while Simeon claimed imperial rank and his successor Peter secured Byzantine recognition in 927. The title tsar derived from Caesar and expressed that imperial standing.

The First Empire’s ruler commanded the army and exercised judicial and, during the pagan period, priestly authority. But his power was not always unchecked. Leading noble families could constrain the ruler, and a People’s Council, described as including both nobles and the armed people, could meet over matters of state. In 766, such a council deposed Khan Sabin after he pursued peace with Byzantium. Omurtag’s Chatalar inscription, by contrast, presents the ruler as divinely appointed, showing how royal claims could emphasize sacred authority even as political power was negotiated with other groups.

The Second Empire’s tsars also claimed imperial and autocratic authority, sometimes styling themselves faithful emperors and autocrats of all Bulgarians. The phrase all Bulgarians became especially important as the empire lost territory: it asserted a ruler’s authority over Bulgarians who lived beyond his current political borders. In practice, however, the strength of the monarchy depended on the ruler’s circumstances and ability to command the nobility, the army, and the provinces.

First Empire offices joined military command and government

In the First Empire, the kavhan was generally considered the highest-ranking official after the monarch. The office combined responsibilities that later governments might divide among several officials: the kavhan could command the army, conduct diplomacy, advise the ruler, act as regent or co-ruler, and exercise judicial authority. The precise duties are difficult to reconstruct, and may have varied over time. The office appears to have been associated with a prominent noble family, whose members served across successive reigns.

Inscriptions name Isbul as kavhan under the ninth-century rulers Malamir and Presian and describe him accompanying the ruler in campaigns. His prominence in official monuments shows a senior deputy publicly associated with royal achievements. The ichirgu-boila was another leading officer with military responsibilities. In dated campaign inscriptions, these officers could command parts of the field army.

Military and administrative offices were closely linked to the aristocracy. In the First Empire, the highest posts were drawn from the boilas, the leading noble class; the later form of the name was bolyar. Another aristocratic rank, the bagains, stood below them. The title tarkhan appears in inscriptions, but its exact place in the social ranking is uncertain. The ruler’s reliance on powerful families made them partners in government as well as potential rivals.

Provincial administration and service in the First Empire

As the First Empire expanded, rulers sought firmer control over territories where local Slavic communities had initially retained their own chiefs and customs. From the early ninth century, centralization increasingly replaced local autonomy. When groups in the west sought Frankish overlordship in the 820s, Omurtag replaced their leaders with governors of his own. This was one way rulers used appointments to limit the chance that local authorities would break away.

Provincial commanders connected the court with distant territories. The title komes, rendered comita in Latin, appears in the sources; the Cometopuli brothers who later led western resistance were known as the sons of such an official. Their rise shows how a regional command could supply the resources and family standing from which a new centre of royal authority developed.

Service and obligations helped connect communities to the state. Early agreements with Slavic groups included tribute in kind and the provision of foot soldiers, while some groups were settled in frontier areas to help defend them. Most peasants in the First Empire were personally free, though rural communities could bear collective responsibilities. From the tenth century, the number of peasants dependent on noble or church estates increased.

The Second Empire developed a different court and provincial system

Government in the Second Empire drew on Byzantine court and administrative practice after the long interval of Byzantine rule. Titles expressed both service and rank: some named officials’ responsibilities, while others honoured relatives or allies of the dynasty.

The emperor stood at the head of government. The great logothete was a senior official involved in administration and royal documents, while a protovestiarios was associated with the ruler’s treasury and resources. High titles such as despot and sebastokrator commonly honoured imperial relatives; the medieval title despot denoted rank at court. Leading nobles and churchmen participated in decisions and could influence who held the throne.

The empire was divided into provinces whose number and boundaries changed with its territory. The emperor appointed provincial governors, known as dukes or kefalia, terms derived from Byzantine titles. Provinces were subdivided into districts called katepanika, administered by katepans under the governors. The capital, Tarnovo, formed an administrative unit under the emperor’s direct authority. These arrangements connected local government to the court, but they did not prevent powerful nobles from building independent or semi-independent bases of authority as central rule weakened.

Military leadership likewise depended on trusted commanders, often described as voivodas. A ruler could delegate an army or a regional defence to an officer while retaining supreme command. Cuman cavalry supplied an important part of some early Second Empire armies, and Cuman leaders entered noble and dynastic networks through service and marriage.

Church leaders and rulers negotiated authority

In the First Empire, Christianization reshaped the relationship between the court and the church. Boris I sought an autonomous Bulgarian Church rather than allowing either Rome or Constantinople to control it. Around 870, the church was recognized as an autonomous archbishopric under the nominal jurisdiction of Constantinople; in 927, its patriarchate was officially recognized. Royal patronage from the late ninth century promoted Slavic clergy, books and worship. The church thus became an institution with its own leadership, while its status and language were also matters of royal policy.

Second Empire rulers likewise treated church status as a matter of diplomacy and political authority. Kaloyan negotiated with Pope Innocent III for recognition of his rank and the Bulgarian Church. In 1204, a papal representative crowned him king and named Archbishop Basil primate. The arrangement was largely political: Bulgarians retained their Orthodox rites, and the union with Rome did not change church practice. The Bulgarian Patriarchate was formally recognized again in 1235.

The patriarch also held a place in government during the Second Empire. He sat on the State Council, or Sinklit, and could serve in a regency. When an emperor was a child, a regency could include the empress mother, the patriarch, and senior members of the ruling family. Church leaders could therefore participate directly in governing, although the emperor claimed authority over both secular and religious affairs.

Succession and noble power shaped political stability

Hereditary monarchy did not guarantee an uncontested transfer of power. In the First Empire, rivalries among leading families and disputes over relations with Byzantium contributed to periods of instability. Boris I deposed and blinded his son Vladimir after Vladimir tried to restore paganism. The example shows that an heir’s position could depend on political and religious choices as well as family descent.

In the Second Empire, an infant emperor could rule under a regency, and it became customary in the fourteenth century for a reigning emperor’s sons to receive imperial titles as co-rulers or junior emperors. But succession could still be contested. During a crisis in 1257, the boyar Constantine Tikh emerged as emperor; in 1280, leading nobles chose George I Terter. Later, Ivan Alexander’s appointment of his son Ivan Sratsimir as ruler of Vidin and designation of Ivan Shishman as heir contributed to a divided realm. By the late fourteenth century, the growing power of regional rulers had weakened the authority of the central court, leaving the empire politically fragmented as the Ottoman conquests advanced.