A blog post dated yesterday (26th September 2009) contains a discussion with German fantasy author Susanne Gerdom. Curiously, she says:

Die “Voynich-Verschwörung” spielt nun leider in Prag, und das ist inzwischen bei Fantasyautoren beinahe so en vogue wie Vampire und Elben.

I was so surprised at what the first half appeared to be saying that I asked Philip Neal: very kindly (and quickly), he pinged back his translation:-

The “Voynich Conspiracy” is now on show in Prague – unfortunately – and in the mean time it is nearly as modish with fantasy authors as vampires and elves.

So… it would seem that “Voynich-Verschwörung” is a reference to some kind of play / show / exhibition running in Prague. But if so, I’ve never heard of it; and (as you’ve probably worked out by now) I’m perpetually listening out for anything like that. Has anybody any idea what this is referring to? Please leave a comment if you happen to find out!

A Voynich Manuscript-themed episode of Franco-Belgian comic book The Adventures Of Jhen has just (September 2009) come out. Entitled “La Sêrênissime“, this takes the eponymic late-medieval hero Jhen from Milan in 1432 on to Venice: unsurprisingly, he is “en quête d’un certaine livre“, as it says here.

la-serenissime

The comic has a nice ligne claire style, and evokes both Venice from the air and St Mark’s Basilica, which (considering that’s what I think is at the centre of the nine-rosette page) is either great research or a splendid coincidence. I’ve only seen a few sample pages from Jean Pleyers’ website (click on the [Actualities] button on the left of his screen to get to the samples) so far, but it does look like quite a nice thing to buy if you’re looking to expand your collection of Voynichiana. I’m sure Dennis will be pleased! 🙂

Well, Kevin Knight gave his Voynich lecture (it’s the one I mentioned a few days ago), and an attendee (Jeffrey Shallit) has been kind enough to post a high-speed précis of what Kevin Knight said onto his “Recursivity” blog. Of course, since you already know the basics, I can strip that down even further. 🙂

As I mentioned before, Kevin Knight’s approach is based around using expectation maximization to try to algorithmically categorize the letters in the alphabet into one of two clusters – basically, vowels and consonants. However, despite the looming vowel-like presence of ‘a’, ‘e’, ‘i’, and ‘o’ (that so convinces linguists), this approach fails to produce “anything particularly meaningful” for Voynichese.

His more recent research has tried the same trick but with words instead of letters. According to Jeffrey Shallitt’s post:-

When you do so, you get two clusters: the words in the “herbal”, “astrological”, and “pharmacological” sections predominantly fall into one cluster, and the words in the “biological” and “cosmological” sections predominantly fall into another.

However, Knight’s attempts to further subdivide these two clusters failed to produce any (linguistically) helpful clusters.

I think that while this is manifestly unhelpful to linguistic VMs theories, it may yet prove to be codicologically very productive. My position is that Voynichese evolved over time, and that the VMs itself was composed in a number of writing phases: it may well be that the clusters that are emerging are clusters in time, not in content. Could it be that this kind of cluster analysis could be used to reconstruct the developmental arc of Voynichese?

I hope that Kevin Knight decides to make his clustering results available, so that they may be assessed in the context of quite different (non-linguistic) ways of looking at it…

I just saw (via H-ITALY) an announcement for an online peer-reviewed journal from Stanford:

We are delighted to announce the publication of a new digital journal, Republics of Letters. This peer-reviewed, open-access publication is dedicated to the study of knowledge, politics, and the arts, from Antiquity to the present, with an emphasis on the early-modern period.

Its first issue has a splendidly accessible article by Anthony Grafton called “A Sketch Map of a Lost Continent: The Republic of Letters”, a broad-brush outline of the historical and political development of the Republic of Letters (Respublica Literarum) from 1500 all the way to the Enlightenment. If you only know a little bit about this fascinating subject, I’d recommend his overview as a really good high-level starting point.

Grafton is always good value for money: but I note with suspicion a number of Simon Schama-esque TV tropes edging into his prose – for example, his “Pedantic Park” metaphor seems peculiarly strained and gratuitous in print, far more suited to being used as a throwaway TV documentary conceit to be consumed and instantly forgotten. Perhaps our Princeton Professor has plans, who knows?

Just to let you know that a Voynich Manuscript radio interview I gave a few days ago (either download it, or click on the Flash Player play button [half a screen down on the right] to hear it) has just gone live on the Red Ice Creations website. They wanted me to chat about all things Voynich… and an hour later I eventually ran out of steam. 🙂

Pretty much all the fashionable VMs research topics you’d expect to me to crank out – Wilfrid Voynich, John Dee, Rudolf II, Rene Zandbergen, Sinapius, Newbold, dating, TV documentaries, the nine-rosette page, page references, the evolution of Voynichese, cipher history, Trithemius, Leon Battista Alberti, unbreakable ciphers, intellectual history, books of secrets, Brunelleschi’s hoist, enciphered machines, Voynich Bullshit Index, Quattrocento intellectual paranoia, patents, even quantum computing! – get covered, so there should be something there for nearly everyone. 🙂

And if that’s not enough for you, Red Ice Radio has a 45-minute follow-on interview with me in their member-only area: this covers cryptology, intractability, alchemy, Adam Maclean, hoax theories, Gordon Rugg, Cardan grilles, postmodernism, astronomy, astrology (lunar and solar), calendars, Antonio Averlino / Filarete, canals, water-powered machines, (not) the head of John the Baptist, Alan Turing, Enigma, Pascal, the Antikythera Mechanism, Fourier analysis, Ptolemaic epicycles, Copernicus, Kepler, Kryptos sculpture, Tamam Shud, Adrenalini Brothers, steganography, copy vs original, wax tablets, even al-Qaeda!

OK, I’m not a professional broadcaster, and it’s all impromptu (so there are a handful of pauses), but it does bring plenty of Voynich-related stuff that’s appeared here over the last 18 months together into a single place. Enjoy!

Are you a male Caucasian, 51-60, living near upstate NY, and interested in a non-speaking, “wizard-esk” (I guess “-esque”) acting role in a vaguely Voynich Manuscript-related film to be filmed 15th-25th October 2009?

Well… Phill Allison, a directing major at the NYC school of visual arts, is holding “auditions / meetings” in Valatie on 8th-11th October 2009 for this role, so feel free to step forward: his short film (for his thesis) is called “The Voynich Manuscript Project”, and is “the story of two brothers who live with their father in a strange reality on the cusp of religious transformation“, and who “discover a mysterious manuscript in the woods“.

Hmmm… male, Caucasian, 51-60, doesn’t speak much, interested in a mysterious manuscript, perpetually on the cusp of finding something amazing / enlightenment… sounds like a pretty good e-fit for plenty of the Voynich researchers out there. Or have I just given the punchline away? :-p

I think you can split history books into three basic types:-

  • Books that retell us what we already know – i.e. a missed opportunity
  • Books that tell us about things we didn’t know – i.e. a pleasant surprise
  • Books that change our minds about things we thought we knew – i.e. gold dust

It should therefore already be no surprise to you that I place Jim Amelang’s excellent (1998) “The Flight of Icarus: Artisan Autobiography in Early Modern Europe” firmly in the thirdmost of these categories: it’s one of those books that not only places depth-charges beneath a whole sequence of tacit assumptions about history you weren’t previously aware that you had, but also presses the big red button to blow them up right in your face.

Structurally, while Amelang’s work is a hugely broadened study of early modern artisan autobiographical works that grew out of his initial research into the milieu of the Barcelonan tanner Miquel Parets (d.1660), what I think he brings to the party is a sensitivity to the nuances of the cultural and social life of basically ordinary working people that is wholly lacking in nearly all similar books. Amelang repeatedly demonstrates his ability to nimbly avoid back-projecting contemporary conceptions of such easily-misused notions as public, private, citizenship, the people, fact, fiction, authorship, emphasis, silence, insider, and outsider onto his early modern target period: ultimately, the result of his careful scholarship (which focuses on the particular but with flashes of the general) is that readers come to find their own subtle prejudices being uncomfortably brought to the fore.

For me, “Icarus” is at its very best in Chapter Four (‘Allegiances’) – thanks to Amelang’s extensive raking over of the Barcelonan notarial archives, this builds up a dauntingly complex picture of the web of allegiances and connections around Miquel Parets – the etiquette and practice of god-parents, dowries, executors, competitors, guilds, notarial witnesses, politics, neighbours, religion, meetings, friends, loyalties, etc. It could be argued that Amelang’s weakest parts are where he tries to draw parallels with later autobiographies by members of disadvantaged or minority groups (specifically women, slaves, etc) by referring to works grounded in (for example) full-on feminist ideologies: all the same, there is still a little meat to be had there, though it is clearly a somewhat less sustaining soup than he boils up elsewhere.

Given the huge scope of his final project, it is unsurprising that there are numerous other autobiographical works omitted from the list of works given: the three that kept springing to my mind are Marin Sanudo’s epic 58 volumes of diaries, Antonio Averlino’s libro architettonico (which, for all its fictional side, has been stripmined by historians for decades), and even John Dee’s angelic diaries (which have similarly been subjected to unrelenting analysis as a kind of implicit autobiography). All three follow Amelang’s template, where the early modern artisan hopes to effect personal-transformation-from-an-outsider-to-an-insider-through-intense-creativity (p.48).

At the end of it, it felt to me as though Amelang’s sustained focus on artisanal autobiographical writings had brought him to his own Zen moment. That is, I got the impression that the process of looking for his subjects’ prejudices through close reading had forced him to confront (and overcome) his own tacit historical prejudices about early modern life, and to produce a genuinely even-handed view of what life was actually like for people in their own context. And how many historical books can you think of that come remotely close to that?

Apparently, Chapter 41 of “The Lost Symbol” namechecks a handful of cipher mysteries, which probably explains the Dorabella Cipher search query spike I noticed over the last few days. So, a minor mystery solved (for a change), I’d guess:-

“…after [Langdon’s] experiences in Rome and Paris, he’d received a steady flow of requests asking for his help deciphering some of history’s great unsolved codes—the Phaistos Disk, the Dorabella Cipher, the mysterious Voynich Manuscript.”

Of course, only a cryptological schmuck taking Elonka’s famous list of unsolved codes & ciphers at face value would put Dorabella right up there with the VMs – so that must have been added by the copy-editors, right?

PS: here’s a recent blog entry on a proposed solution to the Dorabella Cipher.

It’s been a good while coming, but here it (finally) is: my page arguing for an earliest date for the VMs of 1440 (if Florence) or 1450 (if not).

Though it may not at first seem much of a conclusion, this is an argument based not on possibilities but on placing an artefact within an overall history of drawing technique – an argument about what the Voynich Manuscript actually is, and in which visual traditions we can place its drawings – a poster child for “Voynich Research 2.0”, in other words.

In the last two days, Cipher Mysteries has had a spate of (mainly American) visitors looking for things related to the Dorabella Cipher, so perhaps a TV documentary on Elgar has just aired there? Please leave a comment if you happen to know what triggered this mini-wave, I’d be interested to know!

Anyway, it would seem to be time to discuss a recently-proposed solution (it’s #12 on this page) to the Dorabella Cipher by Tim Roberts, whose interesting unsolvedproblems.org site you may have seen along the way (George Hoschel Jr’s Voynich “cookbook” solution is there, for example). Here’s his suggested cipher key (rearranged slightly for the CM blog layout):-

ladypenny-key

Applying this key to the ciphertext yields something like…

P.S. Now drocp beige weeds set in it – bu
re idiocy – one endtire bed! Luigi Ccibu
nud lu'ngly tuned liuto studo two.

…which Tim Roberts interprets as…

P.S. Now droop beige weeds set in it – pure idiocy – one entire bed!
Luigi Ccibunud lovingly tuned liuto studo two.

He adds a number of notes (for example, that “Luigi Cherubini was a famous Italian composer who was admited by Elgar“) and conjectures (“that Dora may have stumbled over the name […] and Elgar was teasing her a little“) to support his key and reading: but I’ll instead be mainly focusing on teasing out my own cipher / cryptological commentary.

Firstly, it should be pointed out that even though there would seem to be 8 x 3 = 24 possible letters in the cipherbet, only twenty of them appear in the (all-too brief) ciphertext. Hence four of the letters in the key phrase here are completely conjectural…

L - D P E N N Y
W R - T I G I C
 O S U - B Y W -

…and so his proposed plaintext omits the letters A, F, H, J, K, M, P, Q, V, X, Z. (Note that in the clever spreadsheet he uses, cell K9’s lookup formula for the “u” in “lungly” has been hacked to read “v”, so revert it to =LOOKUP(K8,$C$5:$D$28) if you plan to use this yourself to try stuff out).

Of course, the oddest factor here is the absence of the letter A. Though George Perec’s (1969) “La Disparition” and its English translation “A Void” are well-known examples of novels without the letter “E”, Perec was actually inspired by Ernest Vincent Wright’s (1939) E-less “Gadsby“: even so, that was still some years later than Elgar. Incidentally, writing constrained by an arbitrary rule is known as a lipogram, and people keep writing them: apparently Adam Adams’ (2008) novel “Unhooking a DD-Cup Bra Without Fumbling” is E-free. Not something Ebeneezer Goode would appreciate… 🙂

Secondly, the way that certain letters within the claimed cipher key recur makes me rather uneasy. “I” appears five times (the last two are removed), “N” appears four times (the last two are removed) while “Y” appears three times (the first and last are removed).

Tim Roberts tries to counter these objections (see here), but I have to say that even if you can get from “LADYPENNYWRITINGINCODEISSUCHBUSYWORK” to “LADPENNY” – “WRITIGIC” – “OSUHBYWK”, it does still seem rather arbitrary to me.

Thirdly, though the “L-DPENNY” set of eight starts out with a nice anticlockwise rotational pattern (U, L, D, R), this clips to clockwise in the second half (UL, UR, DR, DL); similarly, “WR-TIGIC” runs anticlockwise (R, U, L, D) followed by a non-rotational set (UR, DR, UL, DL); while “OSU-BYW-” jumps all over the place (R, L, UL, DL, DR, U, D, UR).

So, even if Dora Penny had been given the correct cipher key, how on earth would she ever have guessed the order of the ciphertext letters to go with it? Yes, short subsections of it are ordered: but why on earth would the letters not have matched the eight natural sequential rotation positions?

* * * * * * *

OK: it should be clear from the above that I don’t think this is the solution – sorry, Tim. All the same, I think that there is a genuinely good idea here lurking here: which is that perhaps the cipher key is a phrase written down as is (i.e. without any duplicate letters removed). Though impractical for a long plaintext, this might be fine for a short plaintext such as the Dorabella ciphertext. In which case, we have only 16 (8 clockwise + 8 anticlockwise, assuming it matches 1 loops, 2 loops, 3 loops in turn) basic sets of frequency curves to match candidate key phrases to:

5 3 5 2 3 7 4 0 / 11 4 1 2 6 8 1 0 / 8 1 0 7 4 1 0 4
0 5 3 5 2 3 7 4 / 0 11 4 1 2 6 8 1 / 4 8 1 0 7 4 1 0
4 0 5 3 5 2 3 7 / 1 0 11 4 1 2 6 8 / 0 4 8 1 0 7 4 1
(etc)

Something to think about, anyway! 😮