The Preface: Reigns, Sects, & Religions (Part II)
After Nostradamus made the one-word statement “religion,” he proceeded to write another segment, again set off by the comma ampersand combination, before concluding this line of thought with a period mark. This stream of thoughts leads to a connecting but separate stream that ends with another period mark. This second two-segment flow of words ends with four series of words written in Latin, making a Biblical quote attributed to Jesus. That quote acts to show how one can connect Biblical prophecy to The Prophecies of Nostradamus, and the prophecy of “reigns, sects, & religions.”
This section states, “foy trouveroient si mal accordant à leur fantasie auriculaire, qu’ilz viendroient à damner ce que par les siecles advenir on cognoistra estre veu & apperceu. Considerant aussi la sentence du vray Savueur: Nolite sanctum dare canibus, nec mittaris margaritas ante porcos, ne conculcent pedibus & conversi dirumpant vos.”
This Old French translates to state, “faith (or trust, belief in, loyalty, fee simple) could be finding as evil agreeable (or well-fitting, consenting with) their judgment (or opinion, imagination, image of things conceived in the mind) auricular [of the ear – sense of hearing and the perception of what is heard; but also ear-shaped, and of the auricle of the heart], that they could be coming at to condemn (or to damn, to give judgment against – to death) this which through them centuries to happen one will know to be perceived (or beheld, seen, viewed, heeded, regarded ) & discerned (or perceived, marked, noted, heeded). Considering (or weighing in the mind, pondering, thinking upon) also there sentence (or saying, decree,
judgment, advice given in a matter) from the true (or truth) Savior:
The Latin literally can state, “Refuse holy doing dogs, nor give up pearls before swine, indeed will trample under feet & turn around again they destroying you [pl.].”
To place all of this in a poetic presentation for easier comprehension, the entire section reads:
faith could be finding as evil consenting with their image of things conceived in the mind the perception of what is heard,
that they would be coming in to condemn to death this which through them centuries to happen one will know to be heeded,
& discerned.
Weighing in the mind eve as there advice given from him truth Savior:
Refuse sacred doing dogs,
nor give up pearls before swine,
indeed will trample under feet
& turn around again they destroying you.
Relative to the Latin, the words written by Nostradamus are very similar to the quote Jesus made, as found in the Book of Matthew, in chapter 7, verse 6. The Latin Vulgate translation of the original Greek is said to be, “nolite dare sanctum canibus neque mittaris margaritas vestras ante porcos ne forte conculcent eas pedibus suis et conversi disrumpant vos.” The exact matches to what Nostradamus wrote are found in the bold type. Obviously, this is not the same wording, and the inclusion of punctuation makes it have a somewhat different meaning, while clearly intended to highlight that quote from Jesus Christ.
Beginning with the series of words that immediately follows the section referencing “reigns, sects, & religions,” one must understand what was written leading up to that Biblical “paraphrase.” In a rather lengthy series, Nostradamus wrote, “faith could be finding as evil consenting with their image of things conceived in the mind the perception of what is heard,” where the first word directly points back to the last word of the previous section, meaning “faith” is the core element of “religion.”
The second word of this series, “trouveroient,” is the Old French spelling of the third person plural form of the conditional present, now spelled “trouveraient.” The third person plural indicates a general grouping of “many,” a non-specific number of multiplicity, with the conditional present making a statement about what should, would, or could occur to “them.” This is then applied to the root infinitive, “trouver,” which means, “to find; invent, contrive, devise; light on, meet with, take in the manner; and also to obtain, get, and/or procure.”
This means that the matter of “faith would be contriving,” as much as it means, “faith will be meeting with,” and “faith will be obtaining.” This is then known to be relative to all who fall under the category of “faith,” which means those who claim a particularity of “religion.”
When this is then related back to the plural number word last introduced, “ceux,” meaning “those of reign,” one sees how this is an important separate series (set off by a comma ampersand combination). This “stutter” is placing focus on the misuse of “religion,” such that the ones in power will claim to be a mirror of the “religion” the people respect, as if chosen by God to “govern.” From a sense of “loyalty” to their “religion,” the people will put their “faith, and trust” in “those” common men. However, “those” people seeking the power of “rule” will have “faith” that “would be contriving,” to get the people’s (“those being ruled”) “confidence.” After gaining that “trust,” the people “could (and should) be finding” (from the obvious results caused by “those with government”) it all to be a misuse of “faith.”
The words that follow in the series states what “those findings will be,” as they are said to be “so evil,” “as bad,” and/or as a conditional “if so be that sick (harmed, pained, hurtful),” then the cause is “agreeable” or “well fitting unto.” This is then stating the “mal” (the word has many translation possibilities, all “bad”) condition that would, could, or should be is based on how willing one is to let go of their (plural) “faith” in God and Christ, and turn it over to a “faith” in man. It says that the degree of “evil” that will set upon the world “would be” equal to the degree that “evil” is “consented with,” or “acceptable.”
Nostradamus then wrote that this acceptance, or “accordance,” will be made easier “with their fantasy.” Here, the plural word “their” appears to support the plural conditional present, as an explanation that the “contriving” will be through “their imagination,” “their affection,” “their judgment,” and/or “their representation of things conceived in the mind.” This is then stating how “faith” will be gained through imaginative ways “so wrong” (from “si mal”), or so far from the truth, based on the “Philosophies” of men’s minds (“representations of things conceived in the mind”). It is a statement that it will be “so sick” that people will fall for such “fantasies,” such as the right of commoners to “govern” themselves without kings or queens. It will be “so evil” to see them as possessing the right to separate “religion” from the everyday affairs of the people. It also will be “as harmful” to see the illusion of equality being a right that allows everyone the luxury of achieving to the height of “rule.” Additionally, it says it “would be found so shrewd” how “those” seeking the right to replace the “Kingdoms” and “Church” “would find” the right of freedom, at all costs, to be the most lasting selling point.
The last word in this series then states “auriculaire,” which in general means, “of the ear,” as the equivalent to the English word “auricular.” This gives the word a meaning that represents a sense of hearing, and thus it tells that “their representation of things conceived in the mind,” which are “as evil,” are not forced upon the people unwillingly. It says that “those with reign” quests will use the art of suggestion and persuasion to woo the public to behead kings and queens, while impoverishing the Church through separation. It even implies how things said to the ear will touch the heart (“auricle”), as increasing a flow of blood to the brain, swelling the head with delusions of grandeur, that “all men are created equal.”
Still, there is a less obvious meaning to “auriculaire,” which relates back to the first word of this series, “faith,” and the last word of the previous section, “religion.” This meaning directly connects this “evil” as attacking the Roman Catholic Church, where an “auriculaire” is a term used to denote a “confessional.” In this sense, it shows a “trust” and “confidence” the people “would be finding so wrong” is one’s adaption to being “agreeable in their representation of things conceived in the mind,” to the point of no longer needing to confess sins. The placement of “auriculaire” means the people of “faith,” in the future presented in The Prophecies, “would be finding” “those of government” as the “counselor, listener, good advisor” (from acceptable translations of the Latin word “auricularius”), instead of the Church.
This use of “auriculaire” is significant in the sense that Nostradamus wrote versions of the word “ogmion” in three quatrains (V-80, VI-42, and VIII-44), after beginning a section in the letter to Henry with the words, “Le Galique ogmium.” The word “ogmios” (as well as “ogmius”) is rooted to the name Ogmios, found in Celtic mythology (also in Irish mythology, as Ogma). Ogmios is said to be similar to the Greek hero Hercules (or Heracles), only older, and much less physically fit. The power of Ogmios comes from his oration skills, and his abilities to persuade men to follow him to the underworld (Hell, or the diametrically opposite direction from Heaven). Depictions of Ogmios show an old man walking, with silver chains attached to his tongue and linking to the ears of those following him. It does not take much imagination to see how political figures are usually the least fit men of older age, while their words send nations to commit deeds of doom. I believe this is how one should read this last series of words, as “faith” in men,
versus “faith” in the Church, or more importantly, in God.
This knowledge allows one to progress to the next series of words, seeing them as addressing this element of “hearing,” while also referring to the plural “they,” or “them.” This combination is found in the first word, “qu’ilz,” which combines two words as one, through abbreviation. This says, “that they,” which is a direct reflection back on “that” just stated, while being a direct indication of the plural number associated with “that.”
This reflection made, the focus is then placed on “what they” (from “que ils”) will cause from “their representation of things conceived in the mind,” by having planted seeds “so evil” into the “ears” of the faithful. Those actions “would be coming, arriving, approaching, or drawing near unto” the point of condemnation. This is stated to be “in to damn,” where the preposition “à” is stating that seed is “in, with, at, and to” the listeners, having “come from” (variation of “viendroient à”) those spreading the seeds by mouth. The word “damner” is the infinitive verb meaning, “to damn, condemn, give judgment against, and adjudge to death,” where “death” is the verdict in all cases.
In essence, those words are making the statement that the most dangerous times told of in The
Prophecies are conditional. It states how this future “would they be coming,” under the condition that “those of rule” should act in ways stated to be “so evil” and the people will lose their “faith” in “religion.” If the people fall for the suggestions of the “new Philosophers” (“their representations of things conceived in their mind”), then at that time the people (in particular those of Christianity) “would be coming with” those bending their ears, as ones “to draw near unto death.” Thus, the condition makes it dependent on that outcome.
On the other hand, “should” it be that after “that bending of the ear they” (the “new Philosophers”) will propose moving away from “religion,” once becoming “those with rule,” the people can postpone the “condemnation to death” by themselves being the plural number “they,” who “would be coming in to damn to death” “those with rule.” This becomes a critical point in the storyline of The Prophecies, as the stories told in the quatrains, and reviewed in the letter to Henry, are based on the former (“to condemn to death” everyone) rather than the later (“to condemn to death” the “new Philosophers with rule”).
With this perspective in mind, Nostradamus then stated, “this” (the “damnation”) will be known to be “that damnation,” where such a distinction is made to show it as one of significance. This is due to the fact that this use of “que” (“which, who, whom; [interrogative] what, how, why; [adverb/conjunction] then, because, unless”) is not referencing some “that” previously stated. Thus, it becomes “that to damn,” and “that” is historically known because the following states, “by them (a reference to the plural number from above) centuries (reference to multiple periods of 100 years) to happen” (or “to come to pass”). This is a reference to the previous section’s use of the same word (“advenir,” “to happen”) telling what is ahead, which has been known for “centuries” to be awaiting humanity.
Due to the length of time known, one can assume (from the previous section ending with the word “religion”) that this “condemnation” is relative to Biblical prophecy of what will “come to pass.” This is then a connection to biblical eschatology and The Prophecies. This links The Prophecies to the same divine source that is recognized as the only source knowing what “will come to pass,” relative to “condemnation.” That source is God, who speaks through Jesus [making one a Christ].
To explain the meaning of what is “to happen,” Nostradamus then wrote that “one will know” (or “will understand, be assured of; be well acquainted with; discern, apprehend, perceive; acknowledge, or avow”) to be seen.” This is an indication that “one” who has the power “to condemn” is an entity who “would be coming at to damn,” being “one” who “will be known,” and “one” who has been “seen” before. However, because the time frame for this “coming” will have been “centuries,” this “one” can “be” none other than Jesus Christ. Jesus has been “seen” as a human, during his time on earth; but Jesus has also been “seen” by John of Patmos (The Revelation), and by Nostradamus (The Prophecies), such that Christians have “known” for “centuries” of the return of Christ. He will return to open the seals and unleash the four
horsemen of the Apocalypse, which along with comes Death.
At this point, Nostradamus placed an ampersand, which acts to signal an important statement is to follow; but, unlike the comma ampersand combination, a lone ampersand has a secondary purpose, which is to act like an ampersand and join with the word before it. This union, as something AND something else, comes after the information following the ampersand is seen in its own light of importance first.
There is only one word that follows the ampersand, before it has another punctuation mark following it. That one word is similar to the word prior (“veu”), as both share some of the same uses as past tense descriptions of what has been looked upon. The word “apperceu” bears the translation possibilities of “perceived, discerned, marked, noted, heeded, and spied.” This means there is a similarity, yet with the intention being to show a level of deeper reflection upon what has been “seen.” From this understanding, one can see a difference in those who have actually laid eyes upon Jesus (the man) or encountered the presence of Jesus as a Holy Spirit.
The difference is to show the importance of those who have “faith” (the first important word of this section) in Jesus, without having ever laid eyes upon him or his spirit. This is not necessarily a belief in Jesus, or a belief in his return, but it is an indication that this is “discerned, marked, and noted” by believers and non-believers alike. Therefore, as a one-word statement, following a word stating “knowledge” that “will be” (“cognoistra”), it speaks of widespread awareness of the End Times having been long projected.
When this stand-alone statement is understood, one can then combine the two words surrounding the ampersand. The words “veu & apperceu” are then stating a combination of similarities of sight. Together, they represent the physical sense of the eyes AND the “sixth sense,” which is most relative to a higher feeling, said to be intuition or psychic knowledge. This is a combination of “religious” dogma “AND” unfounded “faith.” Still, when read as “seen AND heeded,” the statement is relative to the guidance factor of “religions,” and those of “faith.” The return of Christ is “perceived” from the words written into the books of the Holy Bible, but to protect the people the Church has made sure the people “heeded” those words. The words tell what “will be know to come to pass,” should this important (ampersand use)
element of “discernment” not be in place. The removal of “religion” as the core of “faith” means the advent (from “advenir”) of “sects” with “reign” will leave this practice of protecting the people voided. Instead, the “sects” will be “seen” by the common folk as still protecting the masses, “AND” the “sects” will have “noted” how much “faith” the people have in “them,” to do whatever “they” say, to the benefit of “them.”
Following “apperceu,” Nostradamus placed a period mark, which indicates the end of a line of thought. This line of thought has included the theme to The Prophecies (in the first section reviewed). That theme is the changing, in the “times future,” to “diametrically opposite” conditions regarding “reigns, sects, & religions.” In the second section, Nostradamus has addressed how that theme is the same as that found in the Holy Bible. While the theme of “condemnation” and “return” (the End Times), and is consistent with several Biblical books, it makes a significant statement about The Revelation (a mirror book to The Prophecies, thus a mirror theme). There, John is told to write a letter to the seven churches [“religions”] and tell them how they will have bent to the will of the common people, rather than stay true to their
purpose for God and Christ. These are the main points of these two sections.
This line of thought is then relative to the capitalized first word of the next series of words, which begins a new line of though, relative to the line of thought just stated. That capitalized word then states the importance of “Considering.” This is the present participle form of the infinitive verb “considerer,” which means, “to consider, advise upon, think of; examine, ponder, perpend [to consider carefully], revolve [to be held in the mind and considered in turn], or weigh in the mind.” This is then making the important statement about the condition of Christianity having become a major world “religion” without the vast majority having “seen” Jesus Christ, but having “heeded” his teachings, through the “religion” making that its foremost purpose. The spread of Christianity was through “Pondering” the words of Christ, as remembered by those who had firsthand “knowledge” of his life.
As the beginning of a new line of thought, one is then asked to realize the previous line of thought, while also taking the time “to Perpend” what is about to be stated. As such, it is utilizing the future’s penchant for “their representation of things conceived in the mind,” and bringing one’s mind to an important level of thought on this new focus.
This “Considering” should be done along with the realizing of the themes of The Prophecies, as the word attached to “Considerant” is “aussi,” meaning, “also, likewise, as, and/or even as.” This means one should “Ponder” this new line of thought “likewise,” and “as” relevant to the past statements of theme.
The remainder of this series, leading to a colon, says, “here judgment from the truth (or true, unfeigned, right, just, certain, undoubted, sure) Savior.” This translation is based on the word “la” being translated as “là,” meaning, “there, here, or then.” This is a direction of place, where from Nostradamus’ perspective “there” is the “future times,” while “here” is relative to this point in the themes of The Prophecies when it will be most important to be “Considering” this information, making “then” be that same “time” of the “future.” The word translated as “judgment” comes from the French word “sentence,” which can be read as that, but not as a statement of grammar. It is a statement of “judgment,” where a “sentence” is defined as “A penalty meted out.” This “opinion delivered” (viable alternate translation of “sentence”) is then stated to be “of the truth,” as well as “from the true Savior.” The capitalization of the word “Savior” is an importance bestowed on the title known by all Christians to be Jesus Christ.
At the end of this series of words, Nostradamus placed a colon, which means that which follows is an example, or a clarification of the “judgment” that must be “Considered,” as coming from the “Savior,” Jesus Christ. At this time, following the colon, Nostradamus switched languages (as well as the publisher switching fonts to ensure a switch is “seen”). He began writing in Latin, which must be seen as the official language of Rome, specifically the official language of the Roman Catholic Church. As the language of the Church, the use of all instances of Latin in The Prophecies (as indicated by the uses of Latin in the preface) is to show a higher perspective, one relative to “religion,” as of divine origin.
Tag Archives: Nostradamus & Religions
The Main Theme of the Preface by Nostradamus (Part II)
Filed under Nostradamus
The Main Theme of the Preface by Nostradamus (Part I)
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.
Filed under Nostradamus
Nostradamus Blog 