Anyway, I would like to tell you something else. I just received my papers. I hope you remember my and your comments about Hancock's "Romaivi." I will use Latin letters here for the sake of legibility. To refresh your memory, according to Hancock, the Byzantines called themselves "Romaivi" - which is absurd. The ancient Greek "Romaioi" (pronounced [ro'ma'yo'i], today [ro'me'i]) is the plural of Romaios ([ro'ma'yos], today [ro'me'os]) which means "a male Roman person" and comes from the Greek (or Hellenic, if you prefer) word for Rome - "Roma." The Byzantines called themselves Romans - that is, "Romaioi" and not "Romaivi." To distinguish between Romans and Byzantines, in Modern Greek the word "latinikos" (Latin) is broadly used to define "Roman" as an adjective. I am all too well aware of everything you commented about the origin of the word "Rumelia" and do not need to consult Dr. Erdinc or anyone about the matter. It indeed comes from those "Romaios" and "Roma" - not from "Romaivi" or any such nonsense of a word. The invented word "Romaivi" cited by Hancock, like the many other mistakes he makes in an attempt to show knowledge in everything, ruins his otherwise very informative and interesting book, thus (maybe undeservedly) casting a shadow of doubt on the other more "central" points that he makes. Therefore, I would suggest to you in good faith not to use this edition of his book or use it only with extreme caution. That is the point I wanted to make.