The article uses the word "invention" several times, and makes it look like the alphabet was created to make Slavs independent from the West, the Byzantine empire, to create division etc.
It fails to mention the fact that, if you compare the earliest forms of Cyrillic to the contemporary Byzantine Greek alphabet, it's 100% identical to the Greek alphabet. The only difference is that Cyrillic added a few letters for Slavic sounds originally not found in Greek: sh, ch, nasal sounds, etc. Cyrillic was originally nothing more than the Greek alphabet with extra characters. Cyrillic and Greek diverged from each other much later, for purely technical reasons (e.g. letter H in cursive was often written as И and later became the norm).
It fails to mention the fact that, if you compare the earliest forms of Cyrillic to the contemporary Byzantine Greek alphabet, it's 100% identical to the Greek alphabet. The only difference is that Cyrillic added a few letters for Slavic sounds originally not found in Greek: sh, ch, nasal sounds, etc. Cyrillic was originally nothing more than the Greek alphabet with extra characters. Cyrillic and Greek diverged from each other much later, for purely technical reasons (e.g. letter H in cursive was often written as И and later became the norm).
So I'm not sure what the point of the article is.