R. Sale > 07-01-2022, 08:14 PM
Anton > 07-01-2022, 09:17 PM
Mark Knowles > 07-01-2022, 09:33 PM
(07-01-2022, 09:17 PM)Anton Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Yes... Maybe there is something like this already in existence?Yes, there is or at least in development. I have shared my very large cipher collection with the DECODE database. You cannot make ciphers public without permission of the archives, however they seem to be developing a transcription system to get around it. Beata Megyesi who runs DECODE says they will be presenting it next summer.
MichelleL11 > 07-01-2022, 10:43 PM
(07-01-2022, 09:33 PM)Mark Knowles Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.(07-01-2022, 09:17 PM)Anton Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.Yes... Maybe there is something like this already in existence?
Yes, there is or at least in development. I have shared my very large cipher collection with the DECODE database.
Mark Knowles > 08-01-2022, 06:45 AM
(07-01-2022, 10:43 PM)MichelleL11 Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I'm sure they greatly appreciate the input and I do hope the Florence archives trip bears fruit for you and the DECODE group.
pfeaster > 08-01-2022, 07:43 PM
Mark Knowles > 09-01-2022, 11:55 AM
(08-01-2022, 07:43 PM)pfeaster Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I can see wanting to disregard sources from after ~1438, particularly when they involve developments that seem to have been considered innovative at the time (like the Alberti Wheel). But I wonder how far before ~1404 it's worthwhile to look.
Mark Knowles > 09-01-2022, 12:40 PM
(08-01-2022, 07:43 PM)pfeaster Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.In general, I can't help but think that the VM script doesn't seem to resemble the mainstream ciphers of its own era very closely.I would be inclined to disagree as there do appear to be quite a few symbols in common when one looks overall across the ciphers of that period.
Mark Knowles > 09-01-2022, 12:59 PM
(08-01-2022, 07:43 PM)pfeaster Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.So I'm not surprised to see Mark taking an interest specifically in Florentine diplomatic ciphers, though I don't know if it's for this reason or some other one.What you have written about the Polybius square is definitely interesting.
pfeaster > 09-01-2022, 02:58 PM
(09-01-2022, 12:40 PM)Mark Knowles Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I should have been more specific -- I agree that there are resemblances in the forms of the individual symbols (and you have surely seen more keys and enciphered documents from the period than I have). What seems different is the sheer quantity of types. My impression is that if there was a "typical" advanced diplomatic cipher at the time, it would have had two glyph choices for each consonant, three for each vowel, some other symbols for names and words, and some nulls. Does that seem like a fair assessment? If so, the result -- without some additional strategy thrown into the mix -- should be around sixty distinct symbols (or more) which a reader would need to be reliably able to tell apart.(08-01-2022, 07:43 PM)pfeaster Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.In general, I can't help but think that the VM script doesn't seem to resemble the mainstream ciphers of its own era very closely.I would be inclined to disagree as there do appear to be quite a few symbols in common when one looks overall across the ciphers of that period.