In Revelation 2:11 a "loud voice like a trumpet" mentions to St. John "the seven churches...Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, and Laodicea." The bulk of traditional sources date the book of Revelation to the reign of the Roman emperor Domitian (AD 81–96), which evidence tends to confirm. Saint Peter died between AD 64 and 68. St. Peter would have founded the Roman Church 13 to 32 years prior to the John's writing "Revelation," yet Rome is not mentioned.
You omitted an important phrase in that verse: "which are in Asia." This makes all the difference as the reader is then informed that John is limiting the discussion to a particular region. The thought you've presented could as easily be applied to Jerusalem, Antioch of Syria, Samaria, Galatia, Corinth, etc.
Yes, Revelation 1:4 identifies them as the seven churches in Asia. I should have referenced 1:11 not 2:11; my error. The location of Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum is Greece; that of Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, and Laodicea is what is now Turkey. It still stands that the Church of Rome which claims to be the mother of Christians is not mentioned at all.
Smyrna ( I haven't checked the other churches) although described by Wikipedia as "Smyrna was a Greek city " is in modern day Turkey. I thought it sounded familiar from my reading about the Greek-Turkish war of 1921-22. It is now known as Izmir.
Ephesus, Smyrna, andPergamum are all in Asia Minor. At the time Revelation was written they were Greek cities and had been for a long time but they were in Asia Minor.
I'm not 100% sure on this, but I believe that St. John was writing primarily to the churches under (or formerly under) his own apostolic/episcopal jurisdiction.
I don't think Rome has ever based its preeminence on its chronology. Rather on its authority as the see of the imperial city and its founders, St. Peter, the "bedrock" of the Church.
I really do not see your point. The Scripture clearly talks of churches in Asia. When that was written their geographical references may have been different to ours in the twenty-first century, but by no stretch of the imagination could Rome ever be said to be in Asia. Thus when listing cities in Asia you are not going to find Rome in the list. This is an Anglican forum so I do not think you will get much more than agreement if you want to argue the Bishop of Rome lacks the supreme canonical authority over the entire Christian Church which he claims. However, you will find a lot of nuanced arguments if you believe Rome should not be considered by Christians to be primus inter pares.