onedreamer
Dragon
First of all, you should read what you have written. [...]
... Imperator Auguste, quibus principaliter mundus hic regitur, auctoritas sacrata pontificum et regalis potestas, in quibus tanto gravius pondus est sacerdotum quanto etiam pro ipsis regibus hominum in divino reddituri sunt examine rationem. nosti etenim, fili clementissime ...
I don't have the full text untransalated unfortunately, but Gelasius refers to Anastasius as Emperor and Augustus. This is not exactly what I claimed to be able to produce since I was not entirely familiar with the formal address used in those times; however, I believe that it can be inferred rightly from the context of the situation and what is written in the Latin that he is referring to Anastasius as the Roman Emporer.
I don't see the adjective Roman actually. He calls him Emperor, not Roman Emperor, nor Emperor of the Romans.
Btw, in this period Rome and Constantinopolis were still in good terms. During the M.A., Constantinopolis took steps in the opposing direction of Rome.
Secondly, my point of discussing the adoption of the Greek as the official tongue of the Byzantine court was to emphasize the fact that there was a period of time between the collapse of the West and evolution of the East into what we generally think of as Byzantine. People should realize that the Byzantine empire lasted for a thousand years, and making these blanket statements regarding its entire existence is in my opinion very silly.
Why do you call me "people" ? And what blanket statement ? Please provide quotes, so that I can correct myself where I am mistaken, if I am. I had agreed with Umarth early in this thread that the process of de-romanization the ERE went through was a gradual one, and that one of its focal points was the adoption of Greek as official language...
If you limited your statements to a later period I would have to agree with comments along the lines of noone thinking of the easterners as Romans, but you didn't make any such qualifications.
I did do it...
As for the trolling, I found some of the previous remarks you were attempting to pass of as fact to be rather infuriating.
I'm not passing things as facts. I am actually surprised that many posters in this thread disregard the widely accepted Historians thoughts and write statements such as "The Roman Empire and the Byzantine Empire are the same thing". I generally have my own thoughts on historical facts because History has many faces, and generally don't quote wiki, but in this case I did it because the same persons who generally follow Historians thoughts and quote wiki are completely disregarding both on this matter, yet they do not provide any reason why they do it.