Is it possible that he stopped short in his completion of this
marvellous cipher? Can we believe that he who openly spoke from the
first of symbols "_quintuple at most_," was content to use so large a
number of infolding letters when he could possibly do with less? Why,
the last condition of excellence in a cipher which he himself laid down,
namely, that it should "bee without suspicion," would be endangered by
a larger number than was actually necessary. It is by repetition of
symbols that the discovery of secret writing is made; and in a cipher
where, manifestly, the eye or the ear or the touch or the taste must be
guided by such, and so marked and prolonged, symbols, the chances of
discovery are enormously increased. Doubtless, then, he did not rest in
his investigation and invention until he had brought his cipher to its
least dimensions; and it was for some other reason or purpose that
he thus tried to divert the mind of the student from his earlier
suggestion. It will probably be proved hereafter that more than one
variant and reduction to lower dimensions of his biliteral cipher was
used between himself and his friends. When the secrets of that
"Scrivenry" which, according to Mr. W. G. Thorpe in his interesting
volume, "The Hidden Lives of Shakespeare and Bacon," Bacon kept at work
in Twickenham Park, are made known, we shall doubtless know more on the
subject. Of one point, however, we may rest assured, that Bacon did not
go back in his pursuance of an interesting study; and the change from
"Quintuple at most" of the infolding writing of 1605, to "Quintuple
at least," of 1623, was meant for some purpose of misleading or
obscuration, rather than as a limitation of his original setting forth
of the powers and possibilities of his great invention. It will some
day be an interesting theme of speculation and study what use of his
biliteral cipher had been made between 1605 and 1623; and what it was
that he wished to conceal.
That the original cipher, as given, can be so reduced is manifest. Of
the Quintuple biliteral there are thirty-two combinations. As in the
Elizabethan alphabet, as Bacon himself points out, there were but
twenty-four letters, certain possibilities of reduction at once unfold
themselves, since at the very outset one entire fourth of the symbols
are unused.
APPENDIX B
ON THE REDUCTION OF THE NUMBER OF SYMBOLS IN BACON'S BILITERAL CIPHER
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account