17-10-2026, 09:52 AM
There have been concerns that my cipher, the VBM, is anachronistic. I disagree. I refer to the work of Leon Battista Alberti (1404–1472), the humanist, architect, and cryptographer.
Could Alberti have written the VMS? In theory, yes. No, I am not claiming that he did.
His life:
Alberti’s service in the papal chancery began in 1432. It is plausible that he encountered ciphers in that environment, although the beginning of his own cryptographic work has not been established. An earlier interest in cryptography would be chronologically compatible with the VMS.
I could not establish whether he spoke German, i don't think so.
I have examined his work for features that fit the VBM. The English renderings below are paraphrastic translations from the Latin. (I used an AI for this, which I cross-checked with another one, since I don't speak a word of Italian. I hope this means there aren't any mistakes.)
The Bartoli page references are taken from the page-transition markers in the Latin edition.
1. Several signs for one letter — XI; p. 209
Several ordinary or unusual signs may, individually or joined in groups of two, three, or more, have the value of a single letter.
VBM connection: Both alternative encodings and sequences of several signs representing a single plaintext unit are provided for. In my model, this concerns the consonant clusters as well as the vowel bridges/bigrams.
2. One sign for a consonant pair — XI; p. 209
Conversely, a single sign may express several letters, particularly those frequently joined in pairs: consonants following S or preceding L or R.
VBM connection: This corresponds to the basic principle of jointly encoding consonant combinations. The examples explicitly concern pairs. The step towards consonant clusters of three letters is a small one.
3. Several substitute signs for frequent letters — X; p. 208
Several different signs should be available for frequent vowels and consonants, for example E and R. These signs should be alternated when writing.
VBM connection: Here we can recognise the homophonic distribution of vowels, as in the vowel bigrams.
4. Simplification of spelling — X; p. 208
I write “arrogans” with a single R, do not double letters, omit U after Q and omit H, and distinguish consonantal V from vocalic V.
VBM connection: This fits the normalisation before encoding that I have repeatedly pointed out. Alberti recommends it for concealment; it does not automatically follow that the entire inventory becomes smaller.
5. Consonants belong to different vowels — VIII; p. 206
Such a sequence occurs when two consonants stand between two vowels, with one belonging to the preceding vowel and the other to the following vowel.
VBM connection: This is the clearest structural linguistic parallel to my C₁/C₂ assignment. Alberti is initially describing language here, rather than a corresponding encoding procedure. But this is precisely the principle underlying the VBM.
6. Rearrangement within the line — XI; pp. 209–210
The first letter may be placed in the last position of the line, the second in the penultimate position, and the fourth in the second position. The remainder follows an agreed order.
VBM connection: What is documented is a permutation within a line-based framework. This passage provides a historical point of reference for rearrangements and thus a direct indication of possible LAAFU effects, especially, perhaps, the Line Start Markers (LSM) and Line End Markers (LEM). This is particularly interesting because it could explain a distinctive feature of the VMS—please note the conditional.
7. Linguistic observations used to improve the cipher — III–IX; pp. 201–208
These observations also serve to make one’s own ciphers less transparent and harder for investigators to understand.
VBM connection: The deliberate use of letter frequencies and qualitatively described neighbouring relationships is therefore explicitly envisaged.
Sources: Leon Battista Alberti, De componendis cifris, III–XI, You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.; Bartoli’s Italian translation, La cifera, in Opuscoli morali, Venice, 1568. Also: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view..
There is direct provision for vowels to be written as bigrams. What is absent is the encoding of those vowel bigrams by placing a space between their components. The rest of the VBM is, however, documented at least as a possibility.
Whether Alberti really revealed all his secrets in his writings is more than doubtful. This is such a specialised and evidently “ingenious” technique that he would certainly have kept it to himself.
So: No, the VBM is not anachronistic—it fits, at its core, the cipher techniques of the fifteenth century. Exactly when Alberti developed the individual ideas listed above is unclear, but certainly well before he wrote these works. The extent to which the VMS scribe could have known these techniques is the undocumented part of the story. But Alberti, too, is unlikely to have “invented” everything himself; he would have encountered some of it through his work in the papal environment.
The chronological proximity at least supports the conclusion that the VBM was not anachronistic.
Could Alberti have written the VMS? In theory, yes. No, I am not claiming that he did.
His life:
- 1404, Genoa: Born into a Florentine family living in exile. Childhood, before approximately
- 1415/16: Genoa, followed by Venice.
- From approximately 1415/16, Padua: Education under the humanist Gasparino Barzizza.
- By 1421–1428, Bologna: University studies; degree in canon law in 1428.
- 1428–1432: His whereabouts are not continuously documented; an early stay in Florence is assessed differently by biographers.
- 1432–1434, Rome: Work in the papal chancery.
- 1434–1436, Florence: With the court of Pope Eugene IV.
- 1436–1438, Bologna: Again with the papal court.
- 1438–1439, Ferrara: In connection with the Council, followed by a return to Florence.
- 1439–1443, Florence.
- 1443–1472: Rome as his principal base, interrupted by journeys and stays elsewhere, including Florence, Ferrara, and Mantua. His presence in Mantua is documented in 1459.
Alberti’s service in the papal chancery began in 1432. It is plausible that he encountered ciphers in that environment, although the beginning of his own cryptographic work has not been established. An earlier interest in cryptography would be chronologically compatible with the VMS.
I could not establish whether he spoke German, i don't think so.
I have examined his work for features that fit the VBM. The English renderings below are paraphrastic translations from the Latin. (I used an AI for this, which I cross-checked with another one, since I don't speak a word of Italian. I hope this means there aren't any mistakes.)
The Bartoli page references are taken from the page-transition markers in the Latin edition.
1. Several signs for one letter — XI; p. 209
Several ordinary or unusual signs may, individually or joined in groups of two, three, or more, have the value of a single letter.
VBM connection: Both alternative encodings and sequences of several signs representing a single plaintext unit are provided for. In my model, this concerns the consonant clusters as well as the vowel bridges/bigrams.
2. One sign for a consonant pair — XI; p. 209
Conversely, a single sign may express several letters, particularly those frequently joined in pairs: consonants following S or preceding L or R.
VBM connection: This corresponds to the basic principle of jointly encoding consonant combinations. The examples explicitly concern pairs. The step towards consonant clusters of three letters is a small one.
3. Several substitute signs for frequent letters — X; p. 208
Several different signs should be available for frequent vowels and consonants, for example E and R. These signs should be alternated when writing.
VBM connection: Here we can recognise the homophonic distribution of vowels, as in the vowel bigrams.
4. Simplification of spelling — X; p. 208
I write “arrogans” with a single R, do not double letters, omit U after Q and omit H, and distinguish consonantal V from vocalic V.
VBM connection: This fits the normalisation before encoding that I have repeatedly pointed out. Alberti recommends it for concealment; it does not automatically follow that the entire inventory becomes smaller.
5. Consonants belong to different vowels — VIII; p. 206
Such a sequence occurs when two consonants stand between two vowels, with one belonging to the preceding vowel and the other to the following vowel.
VBM connection: This is the clearest structural linguistic parallel to my C₁/C₂ assignment. Alberti is initially describing language here, rather than a corresponding encoding procedure. But this is precisely the principle underlying the VBM.
6. Rearrangement within the line — XI; pp. 209–210
The first letter may be placed in the last position of the line, the second in the penultimate position, and the fourth in the second position. The remainder follows an agreed order.
VBM connection: What is documented is a permutation within a line-based framework. This passage provides a historical point of reference for rearrangements and thus a direct indication of possible LAAFU effects, especially, perhaps, the Line Start Markers (LSM) and Line End Markers (LEM). This is particularly interesting because it could explain a distinctive feature of the VMS—please note the conditional.
7. Linguistic observations used to improve the cipher — III–IX; pp. 201–208
These observations also serve to make one’s own ciphers less transparent and harder for investigators to understand.
VBM connection: The deliberate use of letter frequencies and qualitatively described neighbouring relationships is therefore explicitly envisaged.
Sources: Leon Battista Alberti, De componendis cifris, III–XI, You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.; Bartoli’s Italian translation, La cifera, in Opuscoli morali, Venice, 1568. Also: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view..
There is direct provision for vowels to be written as bigrams. What is absent is the encoding of those vowel bigrams by placing a space between their components. The rest of the VBM is, however, documented at least as a possibility.
Whether Alberti really revealed all his secrets in his writings is more than doubtful. This is such a specialised and evidently “ingenious” technique that he would certainly have kept it to himself.
So: No, the VBM is not anachronistic—it fits, at its core, the cipher techniques of the fifteenth century. Exactly when Alberti developed the individual ideas listed above is unclear, but certainly well before he wrote these works. The extent to which the VMS scribe could have known these techniques is the undocumented part of the story. But Alberti, too, is unlikely to have “invented” everything himself; he would have encountered some of it through his work in the papal environment.
The chronological proximity at least supports the conclusion that the VBM was not anachronistic.
![[+]](https://www.voynich.ninja/images/collapse_collapsed.png)