Byzantine Emperor Leo V 'the Armenian', despite reinstating iconoclasm, is considered a compentant administrator even by his critics. IOTL, he was assassinated by followers of Michael II, and the resulting rebellion of Thomas the Slav may have played a part in the subsequent Muslim conquests of Sicily, Southern Italy and Crete.
Suppose Leo isn't assassinated and Michael is executed. Leo has four sons and a 30-year truce with the Bulgarians, but Iconoclasm has been weakened since the days of Constantine V. Might he or one of his successors be convinced to give up Iconoclasm? Would the Bulgarians still convert to Christianity? Iconoclasm or no iconoclasm, Leo still tried to associate himself with the Isaurian dynasty. Should something happen to his wife, Theodosia, might he remarry to Constantine VI's daughter Euphrosyne, the way Michael II did IOTL?
I'm just throwing out points.
Suppose Leo isn't assassinated and Michael is executed. Leo has four sons and a 30-year truce with the Bulgarians, but Iconoclasm has been weakened since the days of Constantine V. Might he or one of his successors be convinced to give up Iconoclasm? Would the Bulgarians still convert to Christianity? Iconoclasm or no iconoclasm, Leo still tried to associate himself with the Isaurian dynasty. Should something happen to his wife, Theodosia, might he remarry to Constantine VI's daughter Euphrosyne, the way Michael II did IOTL?
I'm just throwing out points.