I repeat, it was in the 11th century that Rome set up on its own: it broke communion with the rest of the Church by accepting the Frank-championed modified Creed, which it had resisted for centuries, remaining true to the Orthodox Faith. It is also then that it repudiated the settlement of the schism between Rome and Constantinople during the papacy of Nicholas I, a settlement accepted by Pope John VIII, which plainly stated, in complete harmony with the canons of the Holy Ecumenical Councils (e.g. the sixth of Nicea and the twenty-eighth of Chalcedon) that the jurisdiction of the Roman Pope, with the exception of narrowly drawn appeals provisions, was confined to his own patriarchate.
The word "jurisdiction" is tricky. Does the Constitution grant the Supreme Court jurisdiction in matters of state law and if so to what extent? This had to be answered over time. Jurisdiction need not be established without cause, but once it is established then it tends to remain. Do you think that Nicholas I had no reason to take a position different from that of Pope Gregory? From Rome'spoint of view, Constantinople starts out in 380 as the new boy in town and from that point on, steadily acquires power that owe more to politics than to tradition.
Lets not forget that the whole story of Pope Vigilius and Emperor Justinian the Great, makes absolutely no sense if Papal primacy was not accepted in the east.
The_Reader_David: I repeat, it was in the 11th century that Rome set up on its own: it broke communion with the rest of the Church by accepting the Frank-championed modified Creed, which it had resisted for centuries, remaining true to the Orthodox Faith. It is also then that it repudiated the settlement of the schism between Rome and Constantinople during the papacy of Nicholas I, a settlement accepted by Pope John VIII.
Photius rewrote the Pope's letter of reconciliation with him, to Emperor Basil. John VIII demanded an apology from Photius, before he could be accepted as patriarch of Constantinople. Something which Photius would never do. So, Photius cleverly rewrote the Pope's words under the guise of translating them. Pope John was not in a position to weld power over Photius like Nicolas I could, John was in to week a position to deal with the devious Photius, he was in a war with the moors and had only recently returned to Rome. Photius was to intelligent and sly to move against, especially after Ignatius died (Ignatius had been able to control Photius while he lived). In his letter to the Emperor, the Pope's real words were...
Knowing that the Patriarch Ignatius has departed this life and having considered all circumstances mentioned in you letters, we decree that Photius may be forgiven whatever he is known to have done in the past, although he usurped functions that were forbidden him without reference to our see; and we decree this without prejudice to the apostolic statutes or rules of the Holy Fathers; rather do we act on strength of those rules and their manifold authority. Devornak, Photian Schism, p. 183
Photius translated them thus...
We also, by the authority of the Prince of the Apostles, Peter, announce to you with our entire Holy Church, and through you to your dear confreres and co-ministers, the Patriarchs of Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem, and other bishops and priests and to the whole Church of Constantinople, that we agree and consent with you, or rather with God, to your request.... Accept that man [Photius] without hesitation. Let no one seek pretext for refusal in the decision of iniquitous synods that met against him; let no one-as many simple people think they can do-appeal to the decrees of our blessed predecessors, Nicholas and Hadrian, for they never credited what was alleged against the very saintly Photius. Let no one use your signatures against him as a pretext to sever communion with him or with you. Everything is over, everything repudiated, everything annulled and whatever done against him has lost all validity. ibid., pp. 183-184.
Now I hope I'm not the only one who sees the big difference here? But that's not all, when the Pope found out about this a calmly wrote to Photius (Remember, John was to week to actually do anything about Photius, and so were his immediate successors, who were in even worse positions then John)...
It has always been the object of our endeavors , labors and wishes that for the maintenance of the Orthodox faith and for the peace and welfare of all the churches of God for whose care we are responsible, we should strive to reconcile what is scattered, to preserve what is united, and to watch over whatever is wrong or objectionable among the things which the providence of God has commanded to us... Glory, praise and virtue be to Him by whose majesty and praiseworthy grace crooked things are made straight, evil is mended, obstinacy broken, humility exalted, dissension uprooted, goodness intensified, and all scandals thrown aside. Let us therefore not glory in ourselves but in God, rejoice and exult in His mercy who says: "Have confidence, for I overcame the world"; and elsewhere: "You can do nothing without Me." But though we have determined to deal with you in writing and speech with exceptional restraint, it is a wonder to us why so many things that we had decided should have been obviously altered, transformed, and, we do not know through whose mistake or designs, distorted... Therefor, let your wonderful prudence, which is reputed to know humility, not take offence that you should have been asked to sue the Church of God for mercy, but rather to humble yourself that you may be exalted and that you may learn to give brotherly affection to one who showed mercy to you. Ibid., pp. 205-206.
Photius of course ignored the Pope's letter.