That too....or maybe not. Only one way to know for certain.....
View attachment 1152483
First we number them according to their length, 1,2,3. Then we decode #2 and it tells us that #1 contains the locality of the vault and that #3 offers us the names and residences of the parties involved.
Wait a minute, how does #2 know that we have arranged #1 & #3 in the correct order?
Later, our unknown author even presents his #1 as being the locality of the vault and his #3 as offering us the names and residences of the parties involved, and yet there is no possible way he could know this for sure, and yet he is certain. This is placing quite a bit of blind confidence in #2, unless you already possessed the knowledge and your claim of numbering them according to their length is pure BS.
This is why you have to pick apart the details in the story so the little deceptions in the details can be exposed. Imagine, with absolutely no instruction at all, our author got these ciphers numbered in correct order simply by numbering them according to their length - and then #2 was smart enough to make the distinction.
I guess #2 contained smart technology beyond its years!
......You're still missing the real "duper" in what you're suggesting. How then, after supposedly determining which cipher was cipher number 2, did the unknown author determine which of the remaining ciphers were cipher #1 and cipher #3? You still have 2 "unknown" ciphers left that are only classified by the unknown author's numbering of them, not the original coder. All the alleged original coder has told us is that cipher number 1 offers the location and that cipher number 3 offers the residences. What he didn't do is tell you which of the remaining ciphers was number 1 & 3, "only your unknown author has told you this." Do you understand the issue now? 
If only Ward and Sherman could have known how their limited publication has led so many down the rabbit hole!
If only Ward and Sherman could have known how their limited publication has led so many down the rabbit hole!
We DO know that SHERMAN went "mad" with BI-POLAR disorder; taken to Western State Hospital (for the "INSANE") by the Sheriff; SHERMAN died there & is buried in Roanoke, Virginia.
At no time did your alleged coder of the ciphers detail or number the ciphers in any order, this is why the unknown author was supposedly forced to number them according to their length so that the ciphers did maintain some measure of arrangement and order. "If he had not done this then by his own admission none of the ciphers would have been numbered 1,2, or 3 and there would have been no recognizable order at all." So you see, it is only your unknown author who has numbered the ciphers and placed them in numerical order, not the original coder, so how then, is it possible that the clear text of C2 knew exactly how the unknown author was going to arrange the ciphers? Clearly there is only one way this could happen, and that is only if the unknown author already knew what was in C2 before he numbered the other two ciphers. You must remember, the clear text for C2 was supposedly written years before the unknown author ever took possession and numbered the ciphers.
You would do yourself well not to place too much trust and blind faith in things that you clearly don't understand. What Jean has suggested isn't even consistent with the written story, but rather only his own personal desires and lack of understanding in the details offered him in the pamphlet. All one has to do is to read the story, what I am telling you is laid out in black and white in the unknown author's own words, and by his own admissions. "There is no possible way that the unknown author could have known for certain which of the remaining ciphers held the residences and which held the location unless he already knew what was in the clear text for C2 before he numbered the remaining ciphers." You should have no trouble understanding the real issue at hand now. Don't allow your own blind faith in this tale to lead you down a rabbit hole so easily.
PS: The only other way the unknown author could be certain that he had the two remaining ciphers accurately identified is if he had already decoded them and/or he already knew what was contained in each. And if this is the case, then why doesn't the presented key and ciphers work when we attempt to apply the same decoding process he claims that he applied? There can only be one possible answer here as well.
...and THAT is the truth of the matter.
Cryptography, my friend, the problem is that you are far too focused on what I have put into writing and far too little focused on what the unknown author put into writing. Like Jean, you are a committed true believer despite the other facts before that you failed to realize before you committed, and so you keep trying to justify your obvious error. The good news is that you're not alone in this situation as many-many before you have passed down this same difficult road to reality. I fully suspect that we have all been there at some point in this mystery, which is why so many of us know differently today.
I can't lead a dying horse to water but I can tell you that my resources in this mystery run deep and that I have been at this a very long time now. And if you think this first round of reality is hard to accept, well, it's only the beginning as there is even more difficult realities awaiting you. Why would you want to pursue a treasure, or a story, that you can't even prove is real? First you have to establish that the story is authentic and credible. Have you done that for yourself? Or, are you just riding on the coat tails of other true believers?
PS: I assume you are of the impression that both of the remaining two ciphers were coded using the same process/design, when clearly they were not. This is just another of those stark realities that's going to come into play as you continue to cuddle the fantasy you're cuddling now.
