The Rilke Cryptogram

https://scienceblogs.de/klausis-krypto-kolumne/files/2015/07/Rilke_000_001.jpg

In one copy of a 1942 edition of German historian Gert Buchheit’s biography of Rainer Maria Rilke, someone has glued a typewritten and hectographed alphanumeric text. The text fills 33 pages with 18,760 characters in groups of four. Analysis shows that it’s less ordered than English or German but more ordered than random text. To date, no one has been able to make sense of it.

Here’s the cryptogram itself, and here’s an analysis.

From Klaus Schmeh’s Encrypted Book List.

06/21/2026 UPDATE: Reader Logan Swiecki-Taylor writes:

I have a note on the aforementioned post.

The cryptography community (including the author of that very blog, Klaus Schmeh, security expert Tobias Schrödel, and statistician Floe Foxon) essentially ‘solved’ the mystery by figuring out exactly what it is: It is literally ‘Keyboard Mashing.’

The text was generated by someone mindlessly sliding their fingers across a German QWERTZ typewriter.

  • Groups like qwer, tzui, and cvbn are just straight lines across the keys.
  • Groups like cxsw and mju7 are diagonal swipes.
  • Statistical analysis published in the journal Cryptologia in 2022 mathematically proved that the physical distances between the keys pressed are too short to be random or to be any known substitution cipher. It is intentional ‘lazy typing.’

The pages in the book were printed using a ‘hectograph’ (an early duplication method used for making a few dozen copies of a document). The prevailing consensus among historians is that this was practice material for radio operators learning Morse Code.

Military radio operators needed to practice transmitting and receiving meaningless letter sequences because actual encrypted military communications (like Enigma messages) look like random 4-letter or 5-letter blocks. Instead of going through the tedious mathematical effort of properly encrypting a real message just for a training exercise, an instructor simply rolled their fingers across a typewriter to generate pages of fake ‘ciphertext’ and printed copies for the class to practice their Morse transmissions.

Timeline of crypto community decipher

January 2018: The Initial Clue (Crowdsourcing)

The mystery was first brought to public attention in early 2018 when the book’s owner, Dr. Karsten Hansky, shared the pages with German crypto-historian Klaus Schmeh. Schmeh posted it on his popular cryptography blog on January 10, 2018, listing it as an ‘unsolved World War II cryptogram.’

On that exact same day, an astute blog commenter going by the name ‘Gerd’ pointed out that military Morse code training typically used random gibberish so that students couldn’t simply ‘guess’ words if they missed a letter. He suggested that it was just a practice text.

2020: The ‘Keyboard Mashing’ Realization

Over the next couple of years, Schmeh, alongside German IT security expert Tobias Schrödel and other blog readers, looked closer at the letter groupings. They noticed the high frequency of spatial sequences (like qwer and aswq) and realized the text wasn’t randomly generated with dice or cryptography, but by someone simply rolling their fingers around a German QWERTZ typewriter. Schmeh eventually published an update officially re-classifying the mystery as ‘probably solved’ and removing it from his list of unsolved ciphers.

August 2022: The Mathematical Proof

The final nail in the coffin came from academia. In August 2022, a data scientist and statistician named Floe Foxon published a peer-reviewed paper titled ‘A treatise on the Rilke cryptogram’ in the journal Cryptologia.

Foxon mapped the letters of the cryptogram to a standard 1940s German typewriter layout. Using statistical analysis, Foxon mathematically proved that the physical distances between the consecutive keystrokes were drastically shorter than what would occur in natural language, a known substitution cipher, or true randomness.

Thanks, Logan. The solution is even more interesting than the puzzle!

Misc

  • Ajoritsedabi Oreghoyeyere Memaridieyin Okorodudu played basketball for Bucknell in 1980.
  • Spike Milligan said his father’s last word was “Aaargh!”
  • It’s illegal to take a lion to the movies in Baltimore.
  • In 2007 the UK Association of Chief Police Officers’ spokesman on knife crime was named Alfred Hitchcock.
  • “I banged the door with such a slam, / It sounded like a wooden d–n.” — Frederick Locker-Lampson

Descent

Bycocket is an obsolete word for a kind of cap or headdress. Its entry in the Second Edition of the Oxford English Dictionary contains this woeful note:

Through a remarkable series of blunders and ignorant reproductions of error, this word appears in modern dictionaries as ABACOT. In Hall’s Chron. a bicocket appears to have been misprinted abococket, which was copied by Grafton, altered by Holinshed to abococke, and finally ‘improved’ by Abraham Fleming to abacot (perhaps through an intermediate abacoc); hence it was again copied by Baker, inserted in his Glossarium by Spelman, and thence copied by Phillips, and so handed down through Bailey, Ash, Todd, etc., to 19th century dictionaries (some of which provide a picture of the ‘abacot’), and even inserted in dictionaries of English and foreign languages.

The OED defines abacot as a “variant of bycocket”.

A Curious Letter

In 1768, Benjamin Franklin proposed a new alphabet, warning that without a phonetic scheme to stabilize spelling and pronunciation, “our writing will become the same with the Chinese as to the difficulty of learning and using it.” He composed this letter as a sample of his idea:

https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Wrigtings_of_Benjamin_franklin/JGjvMBJDBN8C?hl=en&gbpv=1&pg=PA169&printsec=frontcover

He explains everything (and answers the imagined objections above) in this essay.

06/03/2026 UPDATE: Reader Jason Taff notes:

The word ‘I’ is pronounced as a diphthong in English, and it’s transcribed as such in that text. But the first vowel of the diphthong in the text matches the ‘schwa’ vowel in the last syllable of ‘Kensington’, whereas modern English pronounces that first sound to match the sound in the word ‘not’ (which appears later in the text).

This is precisely a remnant of what’s called the Great English Vowel Shift that separates Chaucerian English from Shakespearean English. It had started in Shakespeare’s time (1600’s), but hadn’t fully progressed to its modern version in Franklin’s time (1700’s). This text is a snapshot record of that change in progress!

(Thanks, Jason.)

One World

https://picryl.com/media/paris-postcard-aleconte-15-7fa0f2

Al-longs, ong-fong der lar Part-ree-e-yer,
Ler joor der glwore ait arr-ee-vay.

— Lyrics to La Marseillaise rendered in phonetic French for British soldiers in World War I, from Frank Scudamore’s “Parley Voo”!!, 1915 (via Tony Augarde’s Wordplay, 2011)

Mouthful

In 1641, a syndicate of Puritan clergymen published a pamphlet upholding the Presbyterian theory of the ministry.

They published it under the memorable pseudonym Smectymnuus, an acronym derived from the initials of the five authors: Stephen Marshall, Edmund Calamy, Thomas Young, Matthew Newcomen, and William Spurstowe.

The Oxford English Dictionary still recognizes the wonderful word Smectymnuan, meaning any of these authors or one who accepted their views.

Dark Matter

Merriam-Webster points out something I’d never noticed: In many languages, the word for night consists of the word for eight preceded by the letter N:

English: N + eight = Night
German: N + acht = Nacht
French: N + huit = Nuit
Spanish: N + ocho = Noche
Italian: N + otto = Notte
Portuguese: N + oito = Noite

It’s a coincidence. Romance languages derive their words for eight and night from the Latin octo and noctem, and the Germanic languages get them from the Old High German ahto and the Germanic naht. In each case the similarity of the sounds is just happenstance.

(Thanks, Sharon.)

Snunkoople

In each of these pairs of nonsense words, which is funnier?

  • quingel vs. heashes
  • prousup vs. mestins
  • finglam vs. cortsio
  • witypro vs. octeste
  • rembrob vs. sectori
  • pranomp vs. anotain
  • fityrud vs. tessina

If you’re like most people, you’ll find the first word in each pair funnier than the second. In a 2015 study, University of Alberta psychologist Chris Westbury found that the difference is explained surprisingly well by Shannon entropy, which here measures the unlikelihood of each combination of letters: Outlandish specimens such as yuzz-a-ma-tuzz, oobleck, truffula, and sneetch, all from Dr. Seuss, seem funnier than, say, clester, which might plausibly be a real word. (Schopenhauer had argued that humor results from the violation of expectations.)

“The results show that the bigger the difference in the entropy between the two words, the more likely the subjects were to choose the way we expected them to,” Westbury said. Indeed, the most accurate subject chose correctly 92 percent of the time. “To be able to predict with that level of accuracy is amazing. You hardly ever get that in psychology, where you get to predict what someone will choose 92 percent of the time.”

Interestingly, Westbury had to omit vulgar-sounding nonwords (whong, dongl, shart, focky, clunt) before he even got started — these were so consistently considered funny that they would have interfered with the rest of the examination.

(Chris Westbury, et al., “Telling the World’s Least Funny Jokes: On the Quantification of Humor as Entropy,” Journal of Memory and Language 86 [2016]: 141-156.)

The Silver Rule

“When asked by a disciple if there were one single word which could serve as a principle of conduct for life, Confucius replied, ‘Perhaps the word reciprocity will do. Never impose on others what you would not choose for yourself.'” — Analects

“To a Lost Sweetheart”

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Whistlers_Mother_high_res.jpg

When Whistler’s Mother’s Picture’s frame
Split, that sad morn, in two,
Your tense words scorched me like a flame —
You shrieked, “Ah, glue! Get glue!”

O Glue! O God! there was not glue
Enough in all the feet
Of all the kine the wide world through
To hold you to me, Sweet!

Don Marquis