As I mentioned here and indeed here a few days ago, my usually-Early-Renaissance-focused thoughts have of late been turning slowly to the Zodiac Killer Ciphers, in particular to the unsolved 340-character cipher known as “Z340”. Unusually as cipher mysteries go, we also have an earlier cipher called “Z408” (no prizes for guessing its length) by the same person, one that was quickly cracked (using the crib “KILL”). Z408 turned out to be a homophonic simple substitution cipher (but with spelling mistakes, copying mistakes, and a few subtly odd features); and there are plenty of good reasons to think that Z340 will share many of these same basic aspects (but made somewhat harder to crack).

Even though it was originally a crib which helped to crack it, Z408 has other weaknesses, most notably the way it sequentially cycles through homophones (“multiple ciphertext shapes for the same plaintext character”). For example, plaintext ‘t’ maps to the four ciphertext homophones HI5L, and appears in the text as the sequence HI5LHI5ILHI5LHI5LHI5LHI5LI5LHL5IIHI. If you count each successful letter-to-letter transition matching the modulo-4 sequence [HI5L] as a 0.25 success event (=26) and each non-match (=8) as a 0.75 failure event, I believe you get a raw probability of less than 1 in a billion (i.e. of at least 26 successes from 34 events). Please check my maths, though – I used this online binomial calculator with N = 35-1, k = 26, p = 0.25, q = 0.75. For more on these homophone sequences, Zodiac ciphermeister Dave Oranchak kindly pointed me at a full list of Z408 homophone sequences.

Incidentally, the top few match counts are:-
e -> ZpW+6NE – N = 54-1, k = 38
t -> HI5L – N = 35-1, k = 26
s -> F@K7 – N = 20-1, k = 15
o -> X!Td – N = 27-1, k = 13
n -> O^D( – N = 23-1, k = 20
i -> 9PUk – N = 44-1, k = 35
a -> GSl8 – N = 26-1, k = 10

It would be great to tell you how statistically significant these sequences are, but I know enough stats to know that it’s not quite as easy as it looks (for a start, we’re preselecting the best order of letters to use) – any passing statisticians, please feel free to leave a comment. I’m also quite surprised that nobody has apparently tried to use this weakness as a direct way to find the Z340 cipher’s homophones (in fact, John Graham-Cumming also blogged about this in June this year), but – as I’ll show shortly – I suspect trying just that on its own wouldn’t be enough.

Taking a brief step sideways, I’m always intrigued by mistakes in ciphers, because these often point to how the cipher was constructed. One interesting feature (but which I’m still trying to understand to my own satisfaction) is the solid triangle cipher shape in Z408, and how it appears to encipher different letters at different times. The view often put forward elsewhere is that this varied due to copying errors, perhaps arising because the Zodiac Killer’s pen was too thick, causing him to misread his draft version. As for me, I’m not so sure, because the solid triangle decrypts to a curious sequence:-
* “A” in “bec-A-use”
* “S” in “mo-S-t dangerous”
* “A” in “an-A-mal”
* “S” in “mo-S-t thrilling”
* “A” in “with -A- girl”
* “S” in “if it i-S-”
* “E” in “my slav-E-s”
* “A” in “my -A-fterlife”

Of these, only the “A” in “an-A-mal” is possibly a copying error (“I” is enciphered by an empty triangle shape) as compared to just a spelling mistake (the Zodiac Killer has plenty of those). But even that seems a little unlikely when the whole ASASAS[E]A pattern that emerges – so very similar to the homophonic sequences discussed above – is pointed out. I haven’t yet figured out what this implies, but it’s pretty interesting, right?

Moving on to the uncracked Z340 cipher, I have to say that what strikes me most is the difference between its top half (lines 1-10) and its bottom half (lines 11-20). It turns out that back in 2009, FBI codebreaker Dan Olson pointed out to Tom at zodiackiller.com that lines 1-3 and 11-13 contained very few repeats: other people have wondered whether this points to some kind of block-level transposition going on. Me, I suspect there’s a far stronger inference to be made: that even though they share nearly all the same character shapes, I’m pretty sure that the top and bottom halves of Z340 use completely different cipher letter assignments, and hence may well need to be cracked independently. Further, I suspect that the Zodiac may well have intended to send them out separately (Z408 was sent as three independent sections), but (for some reason) ended up sending them both as a single cipher.

[Incidentally, I also don’t believe that the last few letters of the bottom half of Z340 are genuinely part of the ciphertext to be cracked: they seem to spell “ZODAIK”, which is just a touch too coincidental for me. 🙂 ]

Right now, I think that a constructive first big step would be to search for statistically significant homophone sequences in the top and bottom halves of Z340, because we can be reasonably sure that the most frequent letters will probably have four or more homophones, just as with the Z408 cipher: trying this out may well yield some surprisingly revealing results. Any takers at the FBI? 😉

And who better than Kemal S, an ironically elitist dilettante who digs sketchy coffee houses, Sufis, and Hermeticism? For the first time in a very long while indeed, I’m relieved to find a nice post on the Voynich Manuscript from someone with sufficient culture and wit to appreciate its enraging crosstalk without lapsing into Wikipedia-esque cut’n’paste brainlessness. Bless you, K, even if I’m unable to stretch to your standard fees (“Coffee, a kiss, and a back massage”, allegedly).

Notes for passing researchers: “Kashf al-Asrar al-Makhfiya” translates roughly as “Key to the secrets of the hidden ones”; while even though كتاب كنـز أسرار translates as “Treasure book secrets”, the manuscript name listed is [Makhtut] Ibn Sina Kanz Al-Asrar, a medieval grimoire attributed to Ibn Sina (i.e. Avicenna) but which actually looks to me more like handwritten copies of Powerpoint presentations taken by a bored Arabic MBA student. Finally, Malik ibn Anas was a real 8th century Imam and teacher, but I would be somewhat surprised if a dourly sagacious religious authority such as him wrote a “Kitab al-Sirr” (book of the secret)… but I guess you never know. 😉

Of late, I’ve been gradually getting into the whole culture surrounding the Zodiac Killer cipher. One pretty good source of information is ZodiacKiller.com, where to my great surprise I found a link to a November 2007 Daily Star article (how did I ever miss this?), claiming that troubled dance-pop queen Britney Spears was heavily into the whole Zodiac Killer mystery, and “is convinced she can crack the case as many people believe the culprit is still alive”.

Like, ummm, wowza.

If this Daily Star story is indeed true (hint: the answer’s probably in the question), then what’s next? Justin Timberlake retaliating by publishing a critical monograph on Le Livre Des Sauvages? Madonna announcing her own transcription of the Rohonc Codex? Or – possibly most likely – Christina Aguilera actually solving the Tamam Shud mystery but still selling fewer tour tickets than Britney?

Watch this space, cipher mystery pop funsters…

Slowly but inexorably, the Voynich curve is a-changing: as the meme continues to extend its two-way taproots into mainstream culture during 2011, more artists and novelists are seeing its unreadability and inscrutability as sources of neo-postmodernist inspiration. Simultaneously, discussion of the manuscript is sprawling into many different languages and cultures (such as Romanian, according to Google Trends): yet these forays are typically only for bloggers to plant a brightly coloured flag on top of the Voynich iceberg, rather than exploring the vast volume of cryptographically frozen material beneath.

All of which is to say that hit counts count for little: if you’re looking to dig up interesting stuff on the Voynich Manuscript, Google is now only rarely of any use (and don’t start me on Bing, we’d be here all night). Which is of course a shame, but I thought I ought to point it out anyway.

Regardless, here’s a sporadic unreality check for you, broadcast live and direct from the often-moribund world of Voynichiana: all the VMs news that’s fit to deny. Enjoy!

(1) Klaus Schmeh has been busy (presumably) finishing up his upcoming book on cipher mysteries (and more on that when it arrives). To help prepare the ground for that, he’s done a number of 10-minute talks on the VMs in German, including this one on YouTube from Science Slam Ulm which even included a number of Powerpoint visual jokes, and a more crypto-oriented presentation from Science Slam Bochum. Oh, and also at Science Slam Hamburg, Muenster, Ulm, Koeln, etc. Unmissable stuff, if you happen to be a German-speaking Voynichophile (and you weren’t already in one of the audiences).

(2) “Baroque pop” band Borrowed Beams of Light have released an album called Stellar Hoax, apparently inspired by the Voynich Manuscript. More on that here.

(3) Zbigniew Banasik’s Manchu Voynich theory has been partially revived (if not yet actually resuscitated), with a Reddit post by ‘daruka’.

(4) Sad news: the Voynich Monkeys archive of the main Voynich mailing list has apparently eaten its last banana. Is anyone planning to step forward to produce a new Internet-accessible archive? It’s not as if anything of great consequence has been posted there in the last few years (ducks beneath large plexiglass screen, winking to camera), but its absence is a bit of a shame, all the same. 🙁

(5) Meanwhile, a Japanese Voynich researcher continues to repost interesting emails from the early (and far more productive) days of the Voynich mailing list, not really sure why. For me, it’s an odd feeling to find your own emails randomly popping up on the Web some eight years delayed, rather like the start of Carl Sagan’s Contact. Does anyone happen to know what’s going on in Japan, Voynich-wise?

(6) And finally… no plans for a Voynich Summer 2011 pub meet as yet, sorry! I’m currently holding down three jobs simultaneously, which (mathematically) would seem to leave me roughly -40 free hours each week. Hence the recent low post rate on Cipher Mysteries! Hopefully this will change for the better soon: but in the meantime, a virtual Voynich toast to you all – cheers!

A certain Corey Starliper of Tewksbury, Mass claimed last month (July 2011) to have finally solved the famous-but-uncracked “340” (i.e. 340-glyph long) message sent in 1969 to the San Francisco Chronicle by the Zodiac Killer. Bless ‘im, but his so-called solution boils down to opportunistically choosing between multiple Caesar shifts, while modifying words and adding in extra ones where it all goes a bit Pete Tong.

Hence it should be no great surprise to most Cipher Mysteries readers that, however sincerely Mr Starliper believes his solution to be correct, I’m sure it’s basically a crock. However, the best thing about it is that it inspired Dave Oranchuk to post up a nice page demolishing it (though I personally wouldn’t call it a “hoax”, but rather a fairly typical example of the kind of self-convincing non-cryptology we’ve all seen countless times).

I don’t normally post on the Zodiac Killer ciphers (I’m more of a Renaissance guy myself), but plenty of people do find it interesting: to me, it has a home-grown 2d transposition feel to it, a bit like a lo-tech d’Agapeyeff cipher. Incidentally, I rather like Dave Oranchuk’s Zodiac webtoy, which lets you try out all kinds of crypto toolbox stuff on it (and indeed on various other ciphers). Enjoy! 🙂

Here’s a curious object I hadn’t seen until a few days ago that fulfils pretty much all the cipher mystery criteria: unknown symbols (check), mysterious drawings (check), wobbly provenance but still genuinely old (check), a well-respected person making a fool of himself by radically misinterpreting it (check), etc.

The book known as “Le Livre des Sauvages” is (or was) MS 8022 in the Bibliotheque de l’Arsenal in Paris, and was the subject of an 1860 study by a solid (if not actually stolid) apostolic missionary to North America, Abbe Em. Domenech. Unfortunately, Domenech’s plausible-sounding theory (that this was a kind of curious Native American document) found itself torpedoed almost immediately by a whole bunch of German critics, who pointed out a good number of German words (the ‘ss’ is a bit of a giveaway) inserted into the pages in a rather unsophisticated hand:-

1. anna; 2 et; 3. maria; 4. ioanness; 5. will; 6. gewald; 7.grund; 8. et; 9. word; 10. gern; 11. heilig; 12. hass; 13.gewullsd; 14. wurssd; 15. nicht wohl; 16. ssbot (spott); 17. unschuldig; 18; richen schaedlich; 19. feirdag; 20. heilig ssache; 21. winiger (weniger); 22. bedreger (betrueger); 23. zornig gessdeld; 24. gott mein zeuge; 25. bei gott.

So, by about 1865 the mainstream opinion of Le Livre Des Sauvages became that its bizarre pictures and odd text were merely the doodlings of a German-speaking child, “[un] cahier de barbouillages d’un enfant” in the words of one critic, and his conclusion that “Ceci est d’une veritie incontestable” is where things basically remained until the present day.

But (as I’m sure you’ve already guessed) I’m not actually so sure. You don’t have to go far through Le Livre Des Sauvages before you build up an idea of the – clearly adult, I’d say, and clearly disturbed – pictorial language in its pages. Basically, its mouthless stickfigures seem to me to have been constructed mainly to express the male author’s numerous troubled sexual obsessions.

At this point, just in case you think I’m perhaps projecting my own psychodramas onto some poor book’s blank cryptographic screen, it’s time to include some graphic images from Le Livre. Look away now if you’re easily offended!

The author’s thoughts clearly range from down days (p.6)…

…to up days (p.7)…

…to, let’s say, cooperative days (p.31)…

…and indeed very cooperative days (p.31)…

Other recurrent themes involve putting things in certain places (p.33)…

…quite the wrong kind of ‘petting’ (p.50)…

…and, let’s say, delivering on his promises (p.37)…

Helpfully, the author puts many of these together in a single (apparently night-time) sequence which presumably shows how many of these activities go together for him, starting with having certain thoughts on his mind (p.70):-

And so on, for several hundred pages (I kid you not). Parallel to all this visual angst, there are (as you can see in some of the above pictures) small snatches of cipher-like material. So yes, this is almost certainly a cipher mystery, though not one for which I can find a decent modern archival reference, nor an codicological study.

But frankly, unless a cipher historian with a particularly strong interest in psychosexual hangups steps forward, I don’t think anyone is going to try, ummm, hard to decipher this little oeuvre: basically, even if you can’t read the words, you probably can get the overall picture. 🙂

Fate dealt Stanley Picker a strange card that day: he just happened to be ambling past the burning library on his way home from work as the rampaging mob surged out into the street pushing trolleys of rare books and manuscripts.

Amidst all this mayhem, Stanley only had eyes for the odd little cipher manuscript balanced precariously on top of one of the piles of books being noisily wheeled past him. He could not possibly have known that it was better known as “MS 666”, nor that the library had marked it down as a “shorthand diary” (nor how strangely correct this was); nor indeed could he have known that its provenance led back through Aleister Crowley (yes, the Great Beast himself) and onwards to dark places heaven (or perhaps hell) only knows.

Though at that precise moment Stanley believed he was picking up the book, who can say for certain that in some hard-to-fathom fashion it was not in fact picking him up? In the way that Marxist historians insist that factory machinery consumes the workers that operate it, do not cipher mysteries similarly consume the historians, researchers and other passing fools who apply themselves to their unfathomable challenges? It could be said that poor Mr Picker was not really the picker: rather, the small book was pursuing its own dangerous agenda, one to which he was quite oblivious.

And so it was that, with the swiftest of surreptitious shuffles, the tiny volume silently disappeared under Stanley’s work coat. Now it would be free, far from the tyranny of the library’s dull lighting and (surely its #1 pet hate) that bow-tied moron Edward Jackinder with his narrow eyes and scratchy facial hair who kept trying to decipher it.

Back at his house, Stanley opened out his new-found meta-linguistic trophy on the kitchen table and started to examine it. School had left him not only with a profound distrust of gym teachers but also with reasonably functional Maths and language skills: so it didn’t take him long to realize that his prize appeared to be written in an unknown European language (though admittedly one all of its own).

But the strangest thing about it was that every time he returned to its final page, there appeared to be slightly more text. At first, he of course thought he might have been mistaken, but as the days crawled by, the writing gradually reached the bottom and started at the top of the next one. He found himself talking to the diary, trying to verbalize both his curiosity and his growing unease with its ongoing metamorphosis: his mornings now brought crippling headaches, stopping him from going into work.

At the same time, Jackinder was grimly pursuing the book’s smokey trail: though he could make out the thief’s jacket on the CCTV footage, and had worked out where the man must work, nobody at that supermarket seemed able to identify him from the images. It was almost, he mused, as if the man was being silently erased, painted out of the picture one obscuring daub at a time.

But a few weeks later, Jackinder caught sight of him buying milk in a corner shop not far from the library. In a strange way his face had become thinner, much greyer since the theft – but the resemblance was unmistakeable, beyond any shadow of a doubt. Deliberately putting down his basket, Jackinder narrowed his eyes even more than usual and resolved to follow and confront this wretched criminal.

Yet the two didn’t have far to go to reach the flat marked “S. Picker”: and as the man stumbled up his steps, almost fell over the threshold to the house, and left the front door wide open behind him, Jackinder knew something was badly wrong. Hesitantly, he followed him inside the open plan apartment, finding Stanley laying on the sofa near-dead and – mirabile dictu, his heart wanted to shout – MS 666 open on the kitchen table, its pages turning lightly in a late Summer breeze. Yet… what was this madness? The ill-looking thief had apparently vandalized the manuscript, even adding his own fake cipher text to the final page. That was wrong on so many levels, he mused: really, what kind of an idiot would do such a thing?

This wasn’t really going to plan, Jackinder thought to himself as he slowly straightened up. In his mind’s eye, he had simply intended to wield the mighty sword of academic righteousness, by finding this stolen book and returning it triumphantly to the library. As he stood there holding MS 666 in his very own hands, the problem was that he now realized that he had quite another option – to take it for himself. Picker was lying there in pain, utterly unaware that Jackinder had even entered the flat behind him: Jackinder could do precisely what he liked, and nobody need ever know.

Slowly, almost unwillingly, Jackinder felt his hands sliding the book inside his jacket, and his feet walking slowly out through the door and down the street. He didn’t know where he was going or even why, but a strange new sense of purpose – an almost deadly elation, in fact – was consuming him, driving him ever forward.

He could not possibly have known, but the further Jackinder walked, the more writing was now appearing inside MS 666: but this time it was not just a single page, but a whole new chapter.

I got back from holiday yesterday to find that ciphermysteries.com’s hosting account had silently been suspended. Aargh! webhostingpad claimed that there had been a “load spike” for the home page… but… here are the stats for the site:-

Having been well and truly Slashdotted before, I can say that that ain’t no spike. So, I’m very sorry for the brief interruption to service, but hopefully all is well now!

…where I’ve been filming in Venice and Milan for a Voynich documentary to come out (I guess) in late 2012. So, I’m very sorry if I’ve been somewhat quiet of late, but this process has involved a fair amount of behind-the-scenes preparation to try to get the most out of all the different locations.

Apart from nearly getting sunstroke in the 35-degree heat one of the days, 🙁 it turned out to be a thoroughly great experience. The crew were all fantastic to work with (even at the end of a 12 hour working day), while the impressive historical and technical experts assembled by the production team were also a pleasure to meet and work with. What’s more, in all the different filming locations, we managed to gain access to unusual corners of places that normally remain locked to visitors, and this turned up a good number of historical surprises I for one wasn’t expecting at all… but more on all those once the programme has aired.

You may be wondering whether this documentary will somehow resolve all the unanswered questions about the Voynich Manuscript. Errrrm… of course not, that would be ridiculous. Even so, the things I saw were historical eye-openers for me (and I’ve seen a lot of stuff), and I very much hope you will enjoy the ride! 🙂

Please bin yesterday’s Cipher Mysteries post on the Beale Papers – a lesson in what happens when you try to write both code and a blog post in the middle of the night. Here are the corrected stats:-

Declaration of Independence: initial letter distribution

(A,12.82%) (B,3.66%) (C,4.05%) (D,2.82%) (E,2.75%) (F,4.73%) (G,1.45%)
(H,5.88%) (I,5.11%) (J,0.76%) (K,0.31%) (L,2.60%) (M,2.14%) (N,1.45%)
(O,10.92%) (P,4.50%) (Q,0.08%) (R,3.05%) (S,4.81%) (T,19.16%) (U,2.14%)
(V,0.15%) (W,4.50%) (X,0.08%) (Y,0.08%) (Z,0.00%)

Beale 1 + modified DOI: initial letter distribution

(A,14.15%) (B,5.30%) (C,5.50%) (D,3.54%) (E,4.13%) (F,4.32%) (G,1.18%)
(H,3.73%) (I,4.72%) (J,0.79%) (K,0.79%) (L,2.95%) (M,1.77%) (N,2.36%)
(O,9.23%) (P,3.73%) (Q,0.00%) (R,1.77%) (S,6.09%) (T,18.27%) (U,0.98%)
(V,0.00%) (W,4.72%) (X,0.00%) (Y,0.00%) (Z,0.00%)

Beale 2 + modified DOI: initial letter distribution

(A,5.64%) (B,1.44%) (C,2.49%) (D,6.42%) (E,13.50%) (F,2.75%) (G,1.97%)
(H,4.85%) (I,7.21%) (J,0.26%) (K,0.13%) (L,4.19%) (M,0.79%) (N,9.04%)
(O,8.26%) (P,1.57%) (Q,0.00%) (R,5.24%) (S,6.29%) (T,9.04%) (U,3.15%)
(V,2.36%) (W,1.70%) (X,0.52%) (Y,1.18%) (Z,0.00%)

Beale 3 + modified DOI: initial letter distribution

(A,12.62%) (B,4.53%) (C,5.18%) (D,3.40%) (E,5.99%) (F,2.43%) (G,2.10%)
(H,3.88%) (I,3.07%) (J,0.49%) (K,0.16%) (L,2.27%) (M,2.43%) (N,2.10%)
(O,8.25%) (P,2.27%) (Q,0.16%) (R,5.02%) (S,5.34%) (T,21.68%) (U,0.49%)
(V,0.00%) (W,6.15%) (X,0.00%) (Y,0.00%) (Z,0.00%)