Options

The letter ‘K’ as a mark of origin?

Index
The letter ‘K’ as a mark of origin?
The letter ‘K’ as a mark of origin?

Petrasti > 30-01-2026, 04:41 PM

If we look at the manuscript and the letters, we see the k, which is transcribed as ‘k’ in EVA. As the letters have similarities with the Latin script, the ‘k’ as such is also recognised as ‘k’. (of course it could be something else, so any issue is debatable until the final solution). In EVA the ch is transcribed as "ch", which I personally see differently, because if the ch is a "ch", we would have to find some more words that are written with "c". But these are rare. So if the scribes used the letter “K” as a consonant instead of the “C”, the question is, in which region was a "K" used instead of a "C"? Or in which language in the period between 1380-1460 was the “K” used instead of the “C”? So it doesn't matter whether we start from a natural language or a cipher, even with a cipher the question is the same: why did the scribes use the “K” and not the “C”? If it were a Latin script, wouldn't the “K” be predominantly a “C”? The same applies to the Romance languages, as they were modelled on the Latin script tradition.
RE: The letter ‘K’ as a mark of origin?

Stefan Wirtz_2 > 30-01-2026, 05:03 PM

… and that is why I call those transcriptions most irritating and misleading…
RE: The letter ‘K’ as a mark of origin?

Petrasti > 30-01-2026, 05:41 PM

This is less about transliteration in EVA and more about what we recognize as "K" k and not "C". If a German speaker were to write a cipher or an unknown language phonetically, K would be dominant in German, since C is rare. But what would Spaniards or Italians in the Romance languages do? That's the question I'm asking. If K is recognized by us as K and also transliterated as k in EVA, in which linguistic area were these writers active if K is the dominant letter?
RE: The letter ‘K’ as a mark of origin?

Koen G > 30-01-2026, 05:48 PM

But why would we recognize it as K? If anything it may look something like a tall "cl" ligature or something along those lines. Who writes "K" like that?
RE: The letter ‘K’ as a mark of origin?

RobGea > 30-01-2026, 06:37 PM

(30-01-2026, 05:41 PM)Petrasti Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.in which linguistic area were these writers active if K is the dominant letter?

You could check wikipedia letter frequency.[1]

Code:
Language Letter_K frequency (%). Finnish 4.973% Hungarian 4.85% Turkish 4.683% Polish 3.411% Danish 3.395% Icelandic 3.314% Swedish 3.14% Czech 2.894% Dutch 2.25% German 1.417% English 0.772% French 0.074% Welsh 0.0396% Spanish 0.026% Portuguese 0.015% Italian 0.009%
Data from wikipedia
[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Letter_frequency
RE: The letter ‘K’ as a mark of origin?

Petrasti > 30-01-2026, 06:40 PM

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but the fact is: the manuscript dates from the Middle Ages, between 1400 and 1430, and is of European origin based on the images, possibly from the region of Northern Italy because of the battlements. The scribe and language or cipher are unknown (these are the basics). Some letters correspond to the Latin letters a and o, while others are unknown. If there are a and o, q and y that we find in Latin, why shouldn't there be a t or k? Yes, of course, there's no definite equivalent; these are simply possibilities until the puzzle is solved. Nevertheless, the question remains: if we can identify letters, why shouldn't it be a k k or a t t? Or, what could the equivalent of C be?
RE: The letter ‘K’ as a mark of origin?

nablator > 30-01-2026, 06:43 PM

(30-01-2026, 06:40 PM)Petrasti Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.if we can identify letters

Can we? It wouldn't be the most mysterious manuscript in the world if we could.
RE: The letter ‘K’ as a mark of origin?

Petrasti > Yesterday, 12:38 AM

I understand your question, but that wasn't what I was getting at. And yes, I recognize the 'a' and 'o' in the manuscript as Latin letters, but what we don't know is what the letters stand for. My question was therefore hypothetical, since the spelling in medieval manuscripts might possibly differentiate origins through the function of the 'K' or 'C'.
RE: The letter ‘K’ as a mark of origin?

JoJo_Jost > Yesterday, 08:32 AM

(Yesterday, 12:38 AM)Petrasti Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I understand your question, but that wasn't what I was getting at. And yes, I recognize the 'a' and 'o' in the manuscript as Latin letters, but what we don't know is what the letters stand for. My question was therefore hypothetical, since the spelling in medieval manuscripts might possibly differentiate origins through the function of the 'K' or 'C'.

I think what the previous answers were trying to say, but clearly did not, which is typical for this forum, is the following:
Your question suggests that this should be some kind of substitution cipher.

Most people here assume that it CANNOT be a substitution cipher. This has to do with statistical analysis, but also with the fact that substitution ciphers are very easy to crack – if normal language were used. For many here, that would be child's play. And since the world's best cryptologists have not managed to crack this code, the prevailing opinion is that it cannot be a substitution cipher. Especially since there are indeed some irregularities in the statistical analyses that clearly contradict this. A substitution cipher would have to be able to explain these, which is difficult.

But I think that the fact that no one has cracked it yet is no proof of anything, and statistics are just statistics. It is common knowledge how easily certain little things can influence statistics. So...
RE: The letter ‘K’ as a mark of origin?

Stefan Wirtz_2 > Yesterday, 01:46 PM

(Yesterday, 08:32 AM)JoJo_Jost Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.[..]
Your question suggests that this should be some kind of substitution cipher.
Most people here assume that it CANNOT be a substitution cipher.

Most people here assume that the source language of VMS is Latin, Italian or some sort of German(ic). Being locked into this, they do not even notice that there was a bunch of other languages and writing systems in Europe and elsewhere, so

(Yesterday, 08:32 AM)JoJo_Jost Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.… is that it cannot be a substitution cipher. Especially since there are indeed some irregularities in the statistical analyses that clearly contradict this.
But I think that the fact that no one has cracked it yet is no proof of anything, and statistics are just statistics. It is common knowledge how easily certain little things can influence statistics. So...

Funny thing, simple brute force deciphering would have worked for substitution as well as for any clever enciphering - if the „experts“ with their computers had regarded ALL possible languages existing at VMS time. I am afraid they hadn‘t.

(Yesterday, 08:32 AM)JoJo_Jost Wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I think what the previous answers were trying to say, but clearly did not, which is typical for this forum,

Correct. But here you are contributing to that, aren‘t you?

No reply yet clearly remarked that there is no reason to assume by the transcription(!) letter ˋk´, which is not meant to be a ˋk´ or any other letter at all, suggests a letter ˋk´ in the text is represented by that transcription, or a ˋc´ or ˋm´ or ˋsch´ or anything.
k DOES represent something: if it is a character, or syllable or a number - we don‘t know.
Next Oldest Next Newest

The letter ‘K’ as a mark of origin?

Index

The letter ‘K’ as a mark of origin?

RE: The letter ‘K’ as a mark of origin?

RE: The letter ‘K’ as a mark of origin?

RE: The letter ‘K’ as a mark of origin?

RE: The letter ‘K’ as a mark of origin?

RE: The letter ‘K’ as a mark of origin?

RE: The letter ‘K’ as a mark of origin?

RE: The letter ‘K’ as a mark of origin?

RE: The letter ‘K’ as a mark of origin?

RE: The letter ‘K’ as a mark of origin?