Summarizing with 3 posts on CARM:
Yes. True. But. I'm putting my bets on it's an (note "an", i.e. not the same) abbreviated first name Note the period. Kirk looked it up and found that it is used for a political party. So far, there is no sensible first name.
forums.carm.org
The key fellow is the author of the:
1836 book
1847 book
Kuriakos
from Thessaloniki,
---- active in the
Greek Revolution
Greek Orthodox church
age fits (1802 makes sense for first book at 34 years old)
connected to Alexandros Sturtzas, who pre-purchased the 1836 book, a key member of Team Simonides
publishing in Odessa
We hope to have the 1847 book available shortly, and that may tell us more about his Greek Orthodox connections.
The list above gives us a compelling match to the Simonides narrative, as we await the 1847 information and any additional bio this author should have.
Not everybody has an easy to find bio, but the two books authored, and his name and city, certainly help.
Nikolos Farmakidis noticed some other information from the 1836 book that would be interesting, but the details are awaiting, because the 1847 book is the key issue now.
This is rather a compelling list of hits to the Simonides narrative.
==================================
Kyriakos / Kallinikos publishing in Odessa in 1836 and 1847 puts an extra authenticity sheen on the Autographa and Spoudaion/Symmiga publications of 1853/1854 (and the related Simonides lithography to Odessa, as given by John Eliot Hodgkin, where we might be helped by the hidden Forging Antiquities Project materials.)
Kallinikos could easily be the man of the hour to push those publications through, since he would be very familiar with the Odessa printing houses, which published his two books.
We have seen that the claims of Autographa and Spoudaion/Symmiga not being authentic in Odessa/Moscow in the 1850s rests mostly on mistaken argumentation, such as Luciano Canfora emphasizing that Simonides was not in those cities in 1853/54. Oops, he never claimed to be, that is why Kallinikos was arranging the publishing.
The TNC attempt with one of the date marks looked quite weak as well.
So are there any good arguments against the Autographa and Spoudaion not being published in Odessa and Moscow in 1853/54?
Once we eliminate the major circular one (there was no Kallinikos) which looks to be kaput.
And we eliminate the Canfora geography-chronology attempt, which is puzzling in its ineptness. (Canfora is often excellent, so this is pointed out quizzically.)
And I would expect that if any of that material was actually published a decade later during the Sinaiticus controversies, it would have a ton of artificial support for the Sinaiticus production, but that is not there. Tentative conclusion, it was truly an 1853-54 publication.
If the Autographa and Spoudaion are authentic in Odessa and Moscow in 1853/54 with Kallinikos involvement, that supports the Simonides narrative on Sinaiticus. We might want to start reconsidering the degree of support and the many elements affected.
Now, to be fair, we await the 1847 book, so we are not asking for much scholarship engagement until that is properly included in the mix.
And if the Forging Antiquities Project finally became transparent and came clean about their materials, that would greatly assist.
