The Preface: Reigns, Sects, & Religions (Part I)
In Nostradamus’ letter of preface, on the second page (275 words in ), he wrote, “, & non tant seulement du temps present, mais aussi de la plus grande part du futeur, de mettre par escrit, pource que les regnes, sectes, & religions feront changes si opposites, voire au respect du present diametralement, que si je venoir à referrer ce que à l’advenir sera, ceux de regne, secte, religion, &”.
That amounts to 52 words.
This literally translates to state, “, & not so much only of the time present, but likewise to there
more great part to the future, with to set through writing, because that them governments,
sects, & religions will be causing changes so opposites, to see in the respect of the present
diametrically, that any I to view in to refer this which at them to happen will be, those to rule,
faction, religion, &”.
To put this in a poetic style for better understanding, it presents in this manner:
& not so much only of the time present,
but likewise to there more great part to the future,
from to set by writing,
because that them governments,
sects,
& religions will be causing changes so opposites,
surely with the comparison to the present diametrically (or oppositely, in opposition to)
that as I arrive at to report this which in them to happen will be,
those with rule,
faction,
religion,
In this manner of presentation, it becomes clearer to see that one word was written as a stand-alone statement at two places. That one word is “secte.” That French word can be translated to mean, “a sect, or faction; a rout or troupe; a company of one opinion (most commonly a bad opinion).” In the 1611 Old English translation dictionary, “rout” and “troupe” are references to “people of the lowest class” rallied together as a force, as “troops,” and as opposed to an orderly militia with a commander of rank and proper upbringing.
From that view of the definition parameters, when placed with the context of “regnes” and “religions” (as it appears both times, once in the plural and once in the singular), the intention of using the word “sect” is to show people of common upbringing, who are equally influential as kings, princes, popes, and bishops. The exception is that one of a “sect” is not directly connected to Jesus Christ, as bloodline descendants (royalty) or body-line descendants (dedicated service to Christ through the Church). This important contextual meaning must be grasped.
From this perspective, one must next look to a deeper level (one degree deeper), where the lack of capitalization bears significance. In the language used by Nostradamus, one must learn to recognize a difference between a “King” and a “king” (“Roy” versus “roy” – Old French spellings for Roi, roi). As such, there would be significance had Nostradamus written the capitalized word “Regnes,” as such recognition (capitalization) would be to place importance on a “Kingdom, Realm, or Sovereign domain” of a born to “rule King.” The quatrains do offer capitalized versions of “Regne” (example quatrain III-49), but both letters only display the word spelled in the lowercase. This level of deeper inspection allows one to see the meaning intended from “regnes” as being away from a royal implication (stemming from “realm”) and towards a more generalized statement of “rule, government, and the continuance of (the hierarchy designed to meet) a manner of government.”
With those observations, one can then see how the “stutter” of a comma being followed immediately by an ampersand (implying, “and and”) is a systemic placement that indicates a separate thought is being made (comma), which is one of special importance (ampersand). The comma-ampersand conjunction is then a “break point” throughout both letters of instruction, as an indicator of significance that is important to the theme within The Prophecies. These themes are stated in the preface and explained further in the letter to Henry II. In the example stated above, the combination of “regnes, sects, and religions” is placed into two important and separate theme statements.
In the first theme statement, the word “religions” is not found. That word is actually the first word of the second separate series, while still linking to the first separate series by the placement of an ampersand. In a secondary sense, an ampersand does imply continuation as an additional (“and”) thought. The comma separates “religions” from “sects.” However, “and”, as implied by the comma’s placement, is importantly added to the next separate statement (as the ampersand’s primary function), by introducing that something of significance is to follow, relative to the precedent. That makes the addition (“and”) that is introduced be an important theme about “religions” (the first word).
Through this deduction, one sees the first theme is about the “sects,” while the second theme is about the “religions.” This means the element of “reigns” is relative to those two “realms” of influence. This is an indirect way of stating that true “kingdoms,” where “Kings rule,” is not a focus of The Prophecies. This can be deduced because this information comes from the preface, which is an overview of what can be found within the text that follows (ten “Centuries” of quatrains).
From this analysis, one can see the series of words between ampersands 1 and 2 shows an importance of theme that states a focus of The Prophecies (“from to set by writing”). This focus has little to do with the “times” of Nostradamus’ “present” (“not so much alone”), as did his yearly Almanacs. The preface is instead focusing on The Prophecies being about “more great part to the future”. This “future” is so important “to put” down “by writing because that (the future)” will be one brought on by “them.” This plural pronoun is then identified as “governments,” specifically those of the “future” set aside as being “governments” by “them,” relative to “sects.”
It is important to maintain a separation of thought that keeps one from drifting into a modern use of “sect,” as a word relative to “religions.” While that is true of the divisions within Christianity that had already begun by 1555 (the Church of England split, as well as the Lutheran split), these are still to be considered the plural of “religions,” not “sects.” The word “secte” has to be seen through the modern definition of “sect.” That states, “A group of people forming a distinct unit within a larger group by virtue of certain refinements or distinctions of belief or practice.” It can thereby also relate to the definition, “A faction united by common interests or beliefs.” The Latin root is then also implied, as “A course; or school of thought.”
The best way to describe a “secte” of the 16th century is as being a group whose influence was granted by either the State or Church, due to need. This then represents groups of people with special talents, such as are known to have been demonstrated by artists like Michelangelo, architects like Brunelleschi, composers like Josquin, inventors like Leonardo da Vinci, philosophers like Machiavelli, physicists-mathematicians-alchemists-scientists like Newton, and astrologers like Nostradamus. These men were directed to produce works for the enjoyment of the people, with the understanding known that their works were expected to meet standards of morality. The State and Church, jointly, oversaw this morality, as recognized agents acting as direct influences for keeping the people connected to God and Christ (“reigns” made possible through the “religion” Christianity). While the individuals represented individual “sects,” all within each “sect” of a common talent were allowed the freedom to interpret sovereign instructions within the parameters of their natural talents.
By the later centuries, and especially by the time the 20th century arrived, the “sects” of influentially talented individuals had grown to replace the need for a royal decree to influence the masses. The advent of revolution had replaced the “Kingdoms” and “Sovereign rulers,” as predetermined by royal birth, with “governments” based on a variety of philosophies. Thus, the influential element named in these segments in the preface, as “sects,” or “factions,” is forecast to become (in “times future”) those who would replace kings and princes as “rulers” over nations.
We know that modern “governments” differ by having focused on being “sects” of philosophies, in particular those that have risen since the overthrow of “Sovereign kingdoms.” Their philosophies of self-government have increasingly promoted some form of “government” that allows the common man to hold the power of “reigns.” These philosophies present this transition of power as a natural evolution of humanity. In a hind sighted historic view of this change, historians have termed this “diametrically opposite” change as the Age of Reason, or the Age of Enlightenment. Such a title signifies a period when humanity began to “think” for itself, and see the “light” of grandiose principles.
This is actually describing an Age of Philosophy, where the Greek root meaning of “philosophos” means, “lover of wisdom.” This change towards “wisdom” ruling is a central theme of The Prophecies. This theme is stated here, in the preface, for the purpose of stating that theme as what is central to The Prophecies.
Along this line of thought, Nostradamus would write later in the preface, “, & from such height (or sublimity, altitude), not least that there natural clarity & according to nature clearness would yield them Philosophers (or Lovers of wisdom) so assured ones, that [the assurance of nature] being the means of them principles (or maxims) to there first reason had attained from more profound chasms with more high doctrines.”
Placed in a poetic style, this more easily reads as:
& of such height (or sublimity, altitude),
not least that there natural clarity
& according to nature clearness would yield them Philosophers (or Lovers of wisdom) so assured ones,
that [the assurance of nature] being the means of them principles (or maxims) to there first reason had
attained from more profound chasms with more high doctrines.
This explains this theme of “sects” by terming the most important influence being (capitalized, to indicate importance) “Philosophers,” who would use “reason” as a way of bringing on the “first” to use the power of thought to take positions of “such height” as is rulership over nations. Their elements of reason will have been nothing new, as their concepts were “first” pondered by the Greeks, who never crossed the “chasms” that separated thinkers from rulers, even though their “profound” thought yielded “more high doctrines” (ethics) than those who would come after Nostradamus’ “times.”
In quatrain III-67, the main theme states, “Une nouvelle secte de Philosophes,” which translates to state, “One unheard of before (or new, strange, rare) sect (or faction) of Philosophers”. This main theme statement of a quatrain is supporting both the segment explaining a theme to be found within the quatrains that is focusing on “sects,” while also supporting the explanation of that theme (in the same preface), where the “sects” are called (capitalized to denote importance) “Philosophers”. The connecting of these elements is not coincidence, as each supports one another as expressing the same central theme.
Seeing this, certainly from a wider “whole view” perspective (having an idea what the quatrains hold, as well as the rest of the preface and other letter), one can then see how the ampersand that signifies importance is directly relative to the word “religions” (in the second segment) while also playing a role in relationship to “sects”. This relativity is not so much the “factions” that would spring up as new “religions” (although that does play a secondary role), but instead to the “separate” (use of a comma before the ampersand) relationship “religions” would play as power brokers in “governments” controlled by “sects,” rather than “reigns.” One must also recognize the study of “religions” falls under the general heading of “Philosophy.”
This relationship seen, one can then focus entirely on the “main theme” of this second segment that states, “religions will be making changes as such opposite ones.” This says that “religions” of “times future” will cease being a, “Belief in and reverence for [God] regarded as creator and governor of the universe; and, A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader (Christ for Christians).” Instead, the presumption is the way “religions” have been allowed to project themselves (especially through “televangelism”) evil money-grubbing corporations. This “change” has led many away from “religions” and towards the teachings of “Philosophers,” who promote a “separation” of Church and State (an “opposite” position), rather than a joint rule, shared by Church and State (the condition in 1555).
This view is expanded in the second series of words, which state, “surely in the comparison to the present diametrically.” The word “dimetralement,” when translated as “diametrically,” bears the definition, “exact opposite; contrary.” This confirms that the “changes as such opposite ones” does not mean a simple shift away from the methods of “religions” in 1555 (“in the present”), but to the “exact opposite” of how “religions” were during the times of Nostradamus.
While the specifics of “religions” could be discerned in a comparison-contrast method, to show the similarities and differences that existed in “religions” of the 16th century, one must realize the importance of the Roman Catholic Church, and the “sects” of that “religion,” versus other “religions” that were not allowed to exist freely in Europe. From this broader perspective, one can then look to the general characteristics of those “religions” of European Christianity that have since become “exactly opposite” from the positions held in “times” past.
This is a confirmation of the “comma ampersand” division, where a “separation” is “emphasized.” This is the separation of Church and State, such that “religions” were seen to play absolutely no role in influencing the people through the “realms” of royal personages. The advent of the “sects,” most importantly those “Philosophers” of “governments” headed by the influential of the commoners (“sects”), would lessen the role of the Church to the point of extinction. By separating the “vine of Christ” from the tree of wealth (the wealth of a nation, through the value of its land and that production, plus the wealth provided by a work force of citizens [slaves to the State]), the vine would eventually wither and die. In the late 20th century, this “diametrically opposite” position was publicly questioned by the New York Times (and later Time magazine), when it boldly asked, “Is God Dead?”
Such a question during Nostradamus’ time would have meant severe punishment to the one feeling strong enough to publish such rubbish. In our times, however, it is common place to see the absurd placed in print, under the protection of the “Philosophers” who demanded not only separation of Church and State, but freedom of the press and the right to publicly speak freely. The right to speak freely is the cornerstone of propaganda, and the way the “Philosophers” influence the masses to think the way they want the people to think.
The Church acted as the moral police in the 16th century, while also working in concert with royals (whose right to “rule” was ordained by God). The Kings were born with the right of “rule” through a royal bloodline (via Christ). The removal of royal heads (via the axe and guillotine) thus freed thrones for common leaders [“sects”], and made it possible to reduce the Church’s influence. People were no longer required to be Christian, as they were “freed” to voluntarily go to Church and pay tithes.
By the time 400 years had passed, so many people had stopped paying tithes to the Church it had become economically bankrupt. This led to a corruption of moral values, where the Church sold its soul for “thirty pieces of silver,” laundering crime money for the ability to stay in business. These generalities have indeed occurred, which proves Nostradamus prophesied that downfall of the Church. This prophecy becomes an important theme of the “times” of the “future,” which the preface introduces as what will be found in The Prophecies.
The next series of words state, “that [a reference back to the diametrical] as I arrive at to report this which in them will happen to be.” This is then a statement about how Nostradamus came to know this element of the future as a certainty. This will need further clarification, because his statements about what “will happen” were unknown at the time. It would take 400 years to fully develop this theme to the level of “surety,” thus this statement is beyond the scope of rational thought to believe he calculated things would be differently, when they had existed similarly for the 1,200 years prior (minimally).
In this translation, the combined form “l’advenir” has been represented as “them to happen,” or alternatively it could be read as, “them to come to pass.” The plural has to be seen in the abbreviated “l’,” because this makes a statement relative to that stated prior, and also that to be stated next, which included those identified as “reigns, sects, and religions.” Still, while collectively they represent the plural “them,” individually each can be seen in the singular, as “it to come to pass.”
This singular number is relative to the individual statements that follow, with the first being, “those of government,” where the plural is indicated as the many who will play roles in the singular sense of “rule.” This then specifically states that The Prophecies indeed tells of “those of government,” who also will “rule” nations “diametrically opposite” in “times future,” than “Kingdoms” were “ruled” in the past. The stories of “those of reigns” (in the lowercase meaning non-royal rulers) will be told through the linking of quatrains together.
At this point, Nostradamus repeated his isolated use of the word “secte,” this second time in the singular number. This stand-alone statement (separated by commas) has been translated as “faction,” instead of “sect.” This is because the prior statement, leading up to this stand-alone statement, tells of “those with government,” such that the reader is next told there will be different forms of “government” over the different nations. When one understands the definition of the word “faction,” such that it means, “A group of persons forming a cohesive, usually contentious minority within a larger group,” one is then being told the nature of the world’s “government” at the “future times” of The Prophecies.
This is a statement of oligarchies foreseen, where the majority of the people are controlled by the minority. This state existed in the times of Nostradamus, but the forms of “rule” were monarchical. It was expected that a minority of the population was of royal birth, and thus predestined by God to be in line to the thrones of Europe. However, these were not “factions,” or “sects.” The advent of the common man to the “height” of “rule” over nations is projected to occur by conscious efforts to manipulate the people to replace monarchies with oligarchies, while being sold a “bill of goods” about the “Philosophy” under which all are to be united.
This means that a “faction” is the oligarchy called Democracy, where one leader comes from one party that is actually a minority of the whole, requiring “independent” voters be swayed to surrender their independence to follow one of a named minority. A “faction” is then, likewise, the form of oligarchy practiced in the Soviet Union, Communist China, and the residual Russian Federation, where the “Philosophy” tells all people they are equal, all while those in power reap tremendous wealth at the expense of the poor who are powerless. Certainly, Europe in the 20th century found a “faction” in the oligarchy that was the Nazi Party, representing a “Philosophy” named Fascism. This is how one must read this one-word presentation of “secte,” because this is the history of the world, once kings began being beheaded, allowing “those” from the common class to rise as the most driven “faction with reign.”
From this one word, “secte,” Nostradamus has detailed much of the first part of The Prophecies. Multiple quatrains separate from the whole, to reconnect together in story fashion, telling of the heads of these “factions” and their deeds. These stories tell of “those” who will come “to reign” brutally upon their own nations, as well as the world. Included in these are some tyrants of World War II (Hitler, Stalin, and Franco), with the establishment of “puppet rulers” in the Middle East and North Africa (Saddam Hussein, Muammar Kaddafi, the Shah of Iran). These are known to have been positioned by those “free” nations of Europe termed “greats,” which are the United States, Great Britain, and France. All of those stories reference the one word stated in this section of the preface, as the actions of “those with government,” who represent minority “factions.”
With that one word making its own statement about “those with government” being “factions,” this element of “faction” is then furthered through the one-word statement “religion.” This is an important statement about how each “faction” will be generally classified, based on its predominant “Philosophy,” as to how each adheres to some form of “religion.” The Western forms of “government” have laws based on the remnants of Christian doctrines, with a majority of their citizens still claiming Christianity as their “religion.” Still, those of the Middle East, as well as across Africa, and in Eastern Europe (closest to Turkey/Greece) are strongly connected to the “religion” of Islam. Those two “religions” have a history of conflict, which includes the small “sect” known as Judaism, which is also a distinct “religion.” To the opposite extreme, the Communist nations of Eastern Europe, the former Soviet Union, and China, adhere to strict principles (“Philosophies”) of atheism, which is a lack of “religion.” This one-word statement is then telling the reader how “religion,” specifically those “diametrically opposite” the others, will play a major role in the “future times” of The Prophecies.
Nostradamus Blog 