I was talking with someone recently about the Voynich and I mentioned that I thought that Giovanni Fontana's works were the closest parallel for that time to the Voynich manuscript.
They rightly asked why Giovanni Fontana wrote his books in cipher. I said that I wasn't sure, but that it was probably to keep his ideas secret. The obvious point being that it sounds very plausible that the author of the Voynich manuscript wrote his book in cipher for the same reason that Giovanni Fontana did.
Now obviously if you don't think it is written in cipher then this is an irrelevancy.
I don't know if Fontana explains why he wrote his books in cipher, but it might give some useful insight into the motivations of the author of the Voynich.
Opinions on Fontana's reasons for enciphering his works could be interesting.
It's a simple substitution cipher. A mnemonic one. It takes 10 minutes to break it.
I don't think it was created for secrecy. It was used in manuscripts that showcase his engineering ideas. I think the cipher is a way to demonstrate his abilities when combined with the engineering diagrams.
In this blog I demonstrate the mnemonic techniques used in Fontana's cipher, some of which I believe I was the first to record.
Fontana explicitly wrote about mnemonics, so his mnemonic cipher fits right in. As I pointed out in the blog summary, I think his cipher was a way to demonstrate the use of mnemonics (and to showcase his skills):
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
Hi Mark. I did a bit of reading about Giovanni Fontana a couple of years ago. I'm not finding the source for this right offhand, so I'll have to dig for it, but the impression I got was that Fontana encrypted for the sake of encryption. His encrypted work was a demonstration of a technology, much like a prototype or a portfolio piece.
There have been a couple of recent threads about the VMs possibly having been a masterpiece or demonstration of a team of artisans' skills. And while I agree with the conclusions in that thread that this wasn't an artistic masterpiece, it could very well have been a cryptological one. The visual parallels Ellie Velinska drew between the VMs and Trithemius' cryptological masterpiece Steganographia made me take a long pause.
It's not uncommon for medieval substitution ciphers to have mnemonic elements. When some of the letters are merely mirrored, it makes it easy to learn and to remember. Some of Hildegard's cipher characters are like this.
What stands out about Fontana's mnemonics (and this is why it caught my attention) is that the mnemonics are so utterly systematic. It's clearly not a coincidence or casual approach.
(29-12-2020, 08:37 PM)Mark Knowles Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Opinions on Fontana's reasons for enciphering his works could be interesting.
Hi, Mark:
I always thought that John Friedman's discussion of medieval scientific ciphers was well founded in his paper talking about John de Foxton's use of cipher in his Liber Cosmographae.
You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view.
He says, after a paragraph summarizing aspects about the cipher, about Fontana's motivations:
[
attachment=5079]
Although I do get the logic, I am not convinced the VM and Fontana's work share similar motivations. Certainly the outcome has been quite different for the two manuscripts -- one got Fontana a job (if I remember correctly), the other, it still can't be read.
I think it is important to distinguish between what Fontana said his motivations were and what some might hypothese his motivations were. I don't know if there are direct quotes from Fontana on this matter that anyone knows of where he elaborates on his motivation. Do the enciphered texts state his reasons for enciphering them? Are there contemporaries who knew him who state the reasons why they believe Fontana enciphered his work?
Perhaps the modern level of knowledge has shifted the perspective somewhat. What is now seen as simple would have been seen differently by those few who could read, and considered the interpretation of the sacred glyphs to be a religious experience. Get the old gray cells revved up a bit.
Whatever techniques were applied by an author were apparently thought to be worthwhile and sufficient by their users for the task at hand. Why indeed?
Mnemonic techniques are integral to interpreting the illustrations of the VMs. However, they only work when there is a memory to be activated. When there is no memory, nothing happens. If the connection is flawed, things go astray. In order to reestablish the historical memory, things need to be seen as they were in a relevant historical period. [VMs approx. 1400-1450]
The recovery of medieval historical and traditional information has aided in a better understanding of VMs illustrations. These establish our understanding of the author's memories. Without them, we're going nowhere. The recovery of the nebuly line establishes its use as a cosmic boundary, for example.
Mnemonic techniques require mnemonic objects properly interpreted. It is similar to heraldic canting. There is a greater sophistication in some of the VMs illustrations than has been previously recognized. Much of what has been set aside as accidental similarity could be alternately interpreted as sophisticated ambiguity. The best path forward is established as different investigations approach congruity.
MichelleL11 ' Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I always thought that John Friedman's discussion of medieval scientific ciphers was well founded in his paper talking about John de Foxton's use of cipher in his Liber Cosmographae.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.
He says, after a paragraph summarizing aspects about the cipher, about Fontana's motivations:
Although I do get the logic, I am not convinced the VM and Fontana's work share similar motivations. Certainly the outcome has been quite different for the two manuscripts -- one got Fontana a job (if I remember correctly), the other, it still can't be read.
It is true that there were much more sophisticated ciphers used at the time than Fontana's, however the knowledge of ciphers was probably quite restricted to a small number of people. It is the case that his cipher skills could impress those unfamiliar with ciphers, though do we have any evidence that his cipher skills helped him gain employment? I know he did deliver a diplomatic message for the Doge of Venice, which was quite probably enciphered, and I wonder if this is how he became acquainted with ciphers.
It has long been my perspective that the difference in the sophistication of the Voynich and Fontana ciphers was a function in the difference in knowledge of ciphers of the two authors not their motivations. To me that means Fontana didn't know a lot about ciphers whilst the author of the Voynich had cutting edge knowledge of ciphers, which most likely went out of usage. (I believe the sophistication of the 1425 diplomatic ciphers in the Florence archive makes the relative simplicity of Fontana's cipher apparent.)
(29-12-2020, 09:15 PM)-JKP- Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.It's a simple substitution cipher. A mnemonic one. It takes 10 minutes to break it.
I don't think it was created for secrecy. It was used in manuscripts that showcase his engineering ideas. I think the cipher is a way to demonstrate his abilities when combined with the engineering diagrams.
Is it your contention that simple substitution ciphers were never used for secrecy? Looking at 14th century diplomatic ciphers it appears that they used simple substitution ciphers for secrecy then.
(29-12-2020, 09:25 PM)RenegadeHealer Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I did a bit of reading about Giovanni Fontana a couple of years ago. I'm not finding the source for this right offhand, so I'll have to dig for it, but the impression I got was that Fontana encrypted for the sake of encryption. His encrypted work was a demonstration of a technology, much like a prototype or a portfolio piece.
The visual parallels Ellie Velinska drew between the VMs and Trithemius' cryptological masterpiece Steganographia made me take a long pause.
That is a motivation "Encryption for the sake of encryption", but do we have a Fontana quote saying as much.
What kind of visual parallels with
Trithemius are you referring to and do you have a link?