Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!ernie.berkeley.edu!tedrick
From: tedrick@ernie.berkeley.edu (Tom Tedrick)
Newsgroups: net.crypt
Subject: Re: Cryptology vs. Cryptography
Message-ID: <12418@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>
Date: Sun, 16-Mar-86 00:43:29 EST
Article-I.D.: ucbvax.12418
Posted: Sun Mar 16 00:43:29 1986
Date-Received: Mon, 17-Mar-86 03:22:36 EST
References: <12202@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> <12213@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>
Sender: usenet@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: tedrick@ernie.berkeley.edu.UUCP (Tom Tedrick)
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 17
Keywords: DoD and Bismarck

>Besides, US DoD definitions are not always relevant to reality.  They
>call themselves "Department of DEFENSE", for example.

Yes, I was going to make a similar point.

Actually, no self-respecting Berkeley mathematician would dare
admit taking the DoD seriously :-)

> [ ... ] In this sense,
>"cryptology" was a virtually non-existent field until the mid-twentieth
>century.  Cryptography was used in the general sense until the early
>part of this century.  But this was possible without any confusion
>because cryptanalysis was such an unknown field. 

That explains it. I never liked the 20th century much :-) Most of my
reading was centered around earlier periods. I gave up hope for
civilization when Bismarck was booted out of office :-)