[split] Diplomatic ciphers

[-JKP-]

...


e.g.

#%#$#

could be blocks 

#%# followed by $#

or

#% followed by #$#

where

#%#       ->     a

$#          ->      t

#%          ->      z

#$#        ->       q

So the whole "word" could map to either

at          or         zq

Yes, it could be a verbose code. That's all you need to say and people on the forum will understand you. We've talked about verbose codes.

[Mark Knowles]

JKP: My slight acquaintance with what you term janus pairs or common biglyphs in addition to the repeated words, which I can only really understand as being nulls, was one reason I thought about what we are calling here block or multiglyphs. As well as of course the fact that introducing this verbosity factor could then lead it to fit more closely with a diplomatic style cipher.

[Mark Knowles]

JKP: Well I am not familar with the different terminology used by different people, I have expressed things in my own terms. However all I am doing is taking principles that we find in diplomatic ciphers of the period and putting a slightly different spin on them. That is why I have been using the term atypical diplomatic ciphers rather than using a more long winded( or otherwise non-specific) term like homophonic substitution cipher with verbose codes, nulls and a glossary to use your terminology(even this to me is arguably less clear.)

[Mark Knowles]

JKP: If you prefer I could use the term "verbose diplomatic cipher" or "enhanced diplomatic cipher" or "modified diplomatic cipher".

[Mark Knowles]

JKP: I am keen not to reinvent the wheel. So using the term "diplomatic cipher" (early 15th century) describes a whole set of properties. Then what I am interested in is a development or modification of that style of cipher which more closely fits what we see in the Voynich. This could be by adding new features to the cipher or modifying existing features of the cipher. or both. Also the term "diplomatic cipher" points to what I see as the point of origin or source of the cipher, which in my research is relevant.

[-JKP-]

You could, Mark, but I don't think the VMS text has anything in common with diplomatic ciphers. They might both be substitution codes, but almost all medieval ciphers were substitution codes, so that's a very thin commonality.

More important than what it's called, however, is how it works. If you can demonstrate how the VMS text works, that would get our attention. Then you can call it Elvis or Peekaboo or whatever you like, it won't matter, what will matter is the translation.

[Mark Knowles]

JKP: So the idea of a diplomatic cipher with a kind of verbosity is one kind of development, but one I find fairly persuasive, especially as it would actually constitute a very small change to the standard diplomatic cipher, but seems to be consistent with a number of by pre-existing thoughts.

[Mark Knowles]

JKP: You seem to have been preoccupied with terminology not me, so no need to be rude.

I know you don't think it has anything in common with diplomatic ciphers, but I do. Diplomatic ciphers are substitution codes with a specific range of substitution methods or features. I listed a set of commonalities, which most or all other substitution codes of the time do not share. If this has not got your attention why have you been posting comments then? Ultimately, if you are not interested don't waste my time by commenting.

[-JKP-]

JKP: You seem to have been preoccupied with terminology not me, so no need to be rude.

I know you don't think it has anything in common with diplomatic ciphers, but I do. Diplomatic ciphers are substitution codes with a specific range of substitution methods or features. I listed a set of commonalities, which most or all other substitution codes of the time do not share. If this has not got your attention why have you been posting comments then? Ultimately, if you are not interested don't waste my time by commenting.

I'll not post comments. Enjoy.

[Mark Knowles]

JKP: Tell me about other ciphers of the period that you are aware of that are homophonic, use nulls, have a glossary, use letter pair mapping and any other features we see in diplomatic ciphers. There are substitution ciphers and there are substitution ciphers, saying we are just talking about substitution ciphers doesn't cover the specific kinds of substitution features.

---

JKP: Ok, as usual you would have saved me a lot of time in the first place if you had not commented given that you did not want to give it any attention.