The Encrypted Book Nobody Can Solve.

I read about this manuscript before and its a difficult one. in short its 2 sided afair really. It gives many, but not really enough, tell tale signs of it being a fully fledged language but is complex enough for it to be a strange endeavour for somebody to knock together for fun.

the level of detail in places is astonishing, yet the contents don't appear to be specific enough for it to be a text of pre-determined design. Ie, not just a book of medicine or horticulture. Additionally some of the plants and the like just never existed, or are mish-mashes of several plants, and its odd that someone so obviously learned for the time would not bother cataloging the contents of "such an important" manuscript more properly.

All these in my entirely uneducated opinion make me believe its some noble persons sons/daughters fun book - assuming you believe it was written by one person :)

B@
 
voynich_manuscript.png

XKCD for every occasion!
 
Things like this must be a nightmare to solve, can't see how you'd really ever know if you'd been successful. Unlike breaking some modern code/encryption when you could clearly see if you'd got it right or not.

Tefal said:
isn't an unbreakable code relatively simple?
Click to expand...

Sounds like you were thinking is a bit like what's known as a one time pad, not greek though.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-time_pad

If done properly can't be broken (apparently), has a key size the same as the text you are enciphering, but you have to use a unique key and never use it again.

Use the same key again to encipher something else and you've just messed it up :p

If you like this sort of thing I'd recommend a book called The Code Book by Simon Singh.
 
Last edited:
Moredhel said:
-awesome- idea. I'm gonna make a huge document of absolute gibberish and leave it somewhere for archaeologists to find in 2000 years and think "wtf?!"
Click to expand...

Or say you're an alchemist and you add this book into your library of other coded works (most alchemists used various codes), and make in exceptionally enticing so that anyone who stole your work would waste months if not years trying to break your secrets :p
 
I once dreamt the broken code translated to an ancient Rick Roll.

I woke up in a cold sweat that night.
 
Well there's a great deal more info out there on the net. My article is more of a brief overview, really. Great mystery, though.

I just can't figure out my writing style, though. Most people say it's good, with some loving it and others hate it...
 
Forde said:
I just can't figure out my writing style, though. Most people say it's good, with some loving it and others hate it...
Click to expand...

There's a quote I once read which goes along the lines of "write for yourself and a few people will care for it, write for others and no-one will care for it" - unfortunately I can't find it at the moment to credit the author but I think it's a valuable point to remember. You don't have to be loved by everyone, as this quote I've just found should illustrate "better to write for yourself and have no public, than to write for the public and have no self." - Cyril Connolly.
 
Forde said:
Well there's a great deal more info out there on the net. My article is more of a brief overview, really. Great mystery, though.

I just can't figure out my writing style, though. Most people say it's good, with some loving it and others hate it...
Click to expand...

As Greenlizard0 posted earlier:

Forde said:
The manuscript’s plain cover belies the mysteries that it embraces. Strange characters adorn the 240 sun-yellowed vellum pages. Their rise, fall and fluidly curving forms grace each folio with a tidy elegance. Captured by a quill pen and a (mostly) un-erring hand, translation of the words...
Click to expand...

You start well but seem to be banging the reader over the head with an overwhelming attempt to be poetic. The highlighted part above is where you take it that one step too far (imo), it reads like you went back over your work and inserted unnecessary sentences to bring the word count up.
 
B@Th*nG said:
All these in my entirely uneducated opinion make me believe its some noble persons sons/daughters fun book - assuming you believe it was written by one person :)

B@
Click to expand...

In the article there is a quote from Prescott Currier saying "The two most important findings that I think I have made are the identification of more than one hand and the identification of more than one ‘language", which seems to be an opinion that's reinforced if you look around online. Not so much of opinion either, more of an 'educated theory'.

I for one thought the language used in the article was pretty effective. The in-depth description of 'how' the words were written formed a sense of knowledge of how much care and precision went into the physical writing of the tome. Which, in my personal opinion, support theories that it's more than just a childs "fun book". Well written i'd say.
 
Interesting subject matter, but the article is very poorly written. Descriptive language is fine, in moderation. Tone it down.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom