§ 613.Herschel's universe, Discovery of Neptune and French Interregnum

19th century:
§613. Herschel's universe (1785), Discovery of Neptune (1846) and French Interregnum (1848): IV-33.

IV-33:
Jupiter joining Venus more closely than the Moon
Appearing in its white plenitude:
Venus hidden, Neptune under the whiteness,
Hit by Mars across the grainy branch.


(Jupiter joint plus Venus qu'à la Lune
Apparoissant de plenitude blanche:
Venus cachée soubs la blancheur Neptune,
De Mars frappé par la granée branche.)

Keys to the reading:
plus Venus: Ellipsis for plus à Venus (Ionescu, 1976, p.697);

de Mars frappé: « According to the language of the astrologers, the words 'being in difficulty' means exclusively 'opposition'.» (Centurio, 1953, p.95);

la granée branche: The French adjective 'grané' may have two senses, «ladre, en parlant d'un porc (suffering from bladder worms, cysticerci)» (Godefroy) or «grainy (Lat. graneus)». And the expression 'la granée branche' can indicate through its double sense: 'the branch outlined like a bladder' and 'the grainy branch' the characteristic image often called 'Herschel's universe', outlined like a bladder or compiled branches and fully containing innumerable small black spots like grains, which represents a section, nearly vertical, of the Galaxy, proposed by Sir William Herschel in 1785 and positively confirmed in its essence 140 years later by Edwin Hubble.

Herschel says, «Hitherto the sidereal heavens have, not inadequately for the purpose designed, been represented by the concave surface of a sphere, in the center of which the eye of an observer might be supposed to be placed. A surface of a globe or map will but ill delineate the interior parts of the heavens.» (Herschel, I, p.157-158)

«A very remarkable circumstance attending the nebulae and clusters of stars is, that they are arranged into strata, which seem to run on to a great length... the milky way, which undoubtedly is nothing but a stratum of fixed stars. It is very probable, that the great stratum, called the milky way, is that in which the sun is placed, though perhaps not in the very center of its thickness.» (id., p.160)

«We may see that our nebula is a very extensive, branching, compound Congeries of many millions of stars.» (id., p.252) Cf. his Figure 4 (id., p.251).

In this context, Ionescu's adoption of a variant with no bibliographic support 'la gravée blanche' (a white gravel) is wrong, though his conclusion of 'the Milky Way' is correct (cf. Ionescu, 1976, p.697f.);

par la granée branche: Across the Milky Way whose axis is from Gemini to Sagitarius. Cf. Ionescu, 1983, p.224: «this axis of Gemini to Sagitarius being cut almost at right angles by the opposition Mars - Neptune».

Summary and Discussion:
This quatrain seems to be essentially lighted by Centurio (1953, p.94-95), followed by Ionescu (1976; 1983) and by Guinard (2000-2011), when he writes: « Before the German astronomer Gall at his Berlin Observatory on the 23rd of September, 1846, had recognized the planet, which had been predicted to him by a French astronomer Leverrier, an Englishman had become aware of it, but he held it to be a Nova, i.e., a new fixed star unknown till then. This discovery, almost by chance, of the planet Neptune, which was seen for the first time by an English astronomer Challis on the 4th and the 12th of August, 1846, Nostradamus describes with its essential or indeed very remarkable circumstances that may indicate the point of time. Challis could not progress without hindrance his first observation of a supposed Nova further, because the full Moon of the 7th of August, 1846, prevented him from doing so. This is what Nostradamus relates with no possibility of misunderstanding; the weak light of the long-distance planet came litterally within the full brightness of the Moon... And it is unthinkable to refill a falling comma before Neptune, because the full Moon cannot cover the planet Venus, which is found always in the vicinity of the Sun.»

Generally speaking, the astronomical conditions roughly described in the quatrain can indicate many possible dates including that of the 7th of August, 1846. And practically, it is recommendable that we should adopt the first of the theoretically possible and predictable conjunctions of Neptune with the full Moon after its discovery and naming, because one cannot refer to any conjunction of a planet named Neptune not yet discovered and identified with the full Moon.

Therefore, the case proposed by Centurio, namely that of the 7th of August, 1846 is invalid and to be excluded, Neptune being not yet discovered and identified by anyone at the moment.

The lucky fact of observation of Neptune by Challis on the 4th and the 12th of August, 1846, was confirmed only in retrospect, and it is on the 23rd, or most precisely at the very beginning (0h 15min) of the 24th of September, 1846, that the German astronomers Galle and D'Arrest at the Berlin Observatory found the planet at last, after having received previous evening a letter from the French mathematician Leverrier communicating his final prediction of the position of the supposed planet.(cf. Kollerstrom, 2011).

Now, there would be no astronomer who dares to survey the night sky near the Full Moon except for a special purpose, and there is no astronomical failure where there is no obserbation of the sky. So, during the full Moon and its surrounding days Challis must have stopped surveying the sky, then it is not due to the full Moon that Challis could not progress his research.

In fact, he seized the object in the sky on the 4th and the 12th of August, 1846, just immediately before and after the full Moon of the 7th of the month.

The recent historical investigations about the event of discovery of Neptune tells us that Challis failed in recognizing the planet because of the lack of precision of the calculated prediction of the position of the supposed planet supplied to him by his colleague Adams, whereas the eminent precision of the prediction calculated by the French mathematician Leverrier made it exceedingly easy for the German staff at Berlin to identify the new planet immediately after their receiving the letter of prediction from Leverrier. And the naming of the new planet as Neptune was made upon the proposal of it by Leverrier himself in his letters dated the 1st of October, 1846, addressed to European observatories. Challis and Adams proposed their idea of the name Oceanus ten days after in vain. (cf. Kollerstrom, 2011).

Thus, the event of discovery and naming of Neptune was especially the French prize and an English remorse.

Why the French prophet Nostradamus needs to take in consideration a scientific failure of the English with Herschel's merit on the Galaxy in this quatrain to the disfavor of his compatriots in neglecting the latter ?

We should prefer an interpretation of this quatrain granting the supreme merit of the French mathematician Leverrier in the event, which is already implied in the verses with the too explicit announcement of the name of the new planet Neptune.

This nominal demonstration does presuppose the truly effected discovery, identification and naming of Neptune, through which we can refer for the first time to a conjunction of Neptune with the full Moon as described in the quatrain; the theme of the quatrain IV-33 is a conjunction of this sort itself, not the failure of the English astronomical team. And the first of these conjunctions immediately after the dates of its discovery and naming would be the most appropiate for the quatrain, recollecting the vivid memory of the event, and the most fascinating to the world, deserving also a predictive mention of Nostradamus.

Then, the first possible and predictable conjunction of Neptune with the full Moon accompanied by the circumstances described in the quatrain after the dates of its discovery and naming is that of the night of the 14th of August, 1848.

Moreover, this date is pregnant with political nuances, especially meaningful to France in the interregnum between the collapse of the July monarchy (February) and the entry of the President Louis-Napoleon (December).
_________________________________________________
© Koji Nihei Daijyo, 2011. All rights reserved.
スポンサーサイト

§ 614.Louis-Philip's reign losing popularity

19th century:
§614. Louis-Philip's reign losing popularity (1846-1848): III-73.

III-73:
When the lame shall come into power,
The competitor shall have him as a bastard relation:
He and his reign shall cause such a wide indignation,
That it shall be too late for him to recover.


(Quand dans le regne parviendra le boiteux
Competiteur aura proche bastard:
Luy & le regne viendront si fort rogneux,
Qu'ains qu'il guerisse son fait sera bien tard.)

Keys to the reading:
The lame: Louis-Philip following the duke of Bordeaux in royal legitimacy;

the competitor: the duke of Bordeux having the legitimate right to pretend to the French throne.

Summary:
« When the quasi-legitimate shall come to the throne, the competitor (Duke of Bordeux) shall be a proximate relation of the man who shall oppose the right of fact to that of birth. The quasi-legitimate and his government shall become so corrupt that it shall take too much time before they shall have recovered. The reform taken as remedy shall entail the fall of Louis-Philip. » (Torné-Chavigny, 1860, p.22).

Louis-Philip in difficulty through diplomatic inconsistency: « The views and interests of the two cabinets were well understood by the ministers on both sides, when Queen Victoria in the autumn of 1842 paid a visit to the French monarch at the chateau d'Eu in Normandy, which was followed next spring by a similar act of courtesy on the part of Louis Philippe to the queen of England in the princely halls of Windsor. Fortunately the pacific inclinations of the two sovereigns were aided by the wisdom and moderation of the ministers on both sides; and under the direction of Lord Aberdeen and Guizot a compromise was agreed on of the most fair and equitable kind. It was stipulated that the king of France should renounce all pretensions, on the part of any of his sons, to the hand of the queen of Spain; and, on the other hand, that the royal heiress should make her selection among the princes descendants of Philip V, which excluded the dreaded competition of a prince of the house of Coburg. And in regard to the marriage of the duke of Montpensier with the infanta Dona Luisa Fernanda, Louis Philippe positively engaged that it should not take place till the queen was married and had had children. On this condition the queen of England consented to waive all objections to the marriage when these events had taken place; and it was understood that this consent on both sides was to be dependent on the hand of the queen being bestowed on a descendant of Philip V and no other competitor. The sagacious Louis Philippe now discovered a certain half-idiotic cousin of Isabella of Spain, deficient in every power both of body and mind; and in a secret and underhand manner he celebrated the wedding of this miserable being with the queen; and immediately afterwards that [1846.10.10] of his son with the handsome, blooming, and wealthy Luisa Fernanda, who, in addition to her present possessions, which were very large, carried to her husband the succession to the Spanish crown, in the absolute impossibility of any issue from her sister's unhappy marriage. Hard feeling and political opposition were roused by this degrading trickery - and England learned, with a sentiment of regret and compassion, that Guizot, whose talents and character had hitherto commanded her respect, had been deluded by the crowned tempter at his ear to defend his conduct on the quibble that the marriages were not celebrated at the same time - some little interval having occurred between them - and that this was all he had promised. Suspicion and jealousy took the place of the former cordial relations. Losing the fervent friendship of the only constitutional neighbour on whom it could rely, France, like a beggar with its bonnet in its hand, waited at the gates of Austria and Russia, and begged the moral support of the most despotic of the powers. The moral support of Austria and Russia there was but one way to gain, and that was by an abnegation of all the principles represented by the accession of Louis Pnilippe, and an active co-operation in their policy of repression.

« At this time the Swiss broke out into violent efforts to obtain a reform. Austria quelled the Swiss aspirations with the strong hand, and took up a menacing attitude towards the benevolent pontiff, Pius IX. France was quiescent; and the opposition rose into invectives, which were repeated in harsher language out of doors.

« The stout shopkeeper who now occupied the throne of Henry IV thought that all the requirements of a government were fulfilled if it maintained peace with the neighbouring states. Trade he thought might flourish though honour and glory were trampled under foot. He accordingly neglected, or failed to understand, the disaffection of the middle class, whose pecuniary interests he was supposed to represent, but whose higher aspirations he had insulted by his truckling attempts to win the sympathy of the old aristocracy and the foreign despots. Statesmen like Thiers and Odilon Barrot, when the scales of office fell from their eyes and the blandishments of the sovereign were withdrawn, perceived that the parliamentary government of the charter had become a mockery, and that power had got more firmly consolidated in royal hands under these deceptive forms than in the time of the legitimate kings. A cry therefore suddenly rose from all quarters, except the benches of the ministry, for electoral and parliamentary reform; and there was also heard the uniformly recurring exclamation, premonitory of all serious disturbance, for a diminution of the taxes. The cries were founded on justice, and urged in a constitutional manner. Corruption had entered into all the elections; parliamentary purity had become a byword under the skilful manipulation of the purse-bearing king; and the expenses of the country far exceeded its income, owing to the extravagant building of forts and palaces, with which, in the years of his prosperity, he had endeavoured to amuse the people. » (HH, XIII, p.77-79).

Rising discontent (1847-1848): « The state of the budget, which was threatened with a yearly deficit, increased the difficulty of the situation which was still further aggravated by a scarcity of provisions. The method of taxing corn made it difficult to provision the country, a matter which was never easy in times previous to the construction of railways. There was a succession of bad harvests, and in the winter of 1847 a famine resulted. There were riots in all directions, and bands of men tramped through the country. At Buzançais, cases of death from starvation occurred. Thus everything combined to make the people dissatisfied with the government. And there was indeed little to be said in its favour. It had achieved nothing and no progress had been made. " To carry out such a policy as this," said Lamartine, " a statesman is not required, a finger-post would do." And one of the moderate party summed up the work done by this ministry as: "Nothing, nothing, nothing."

« In short, this strange result was all that Guizot could boast. Little by little public opinion unanimously turned against him, and the more unpopular he became, the more solid became his majority in the chamber, thanks to the system, which, placing the country in the hands of a handful of rich men, made the elections a mere mockery. Then a universal outcry arose, and the demand for progress and democracy seemed to be concentrated on one point: "electoral reform."

« Guizot opposed an obstinate refusal to this demand. Yet very little was asked for - not universal suffrage (and Guizot said " the day for universal suffrage will never come "), but some reform, however slight it might be. Guizot refused to give the vote even to jurymen and academicians ! The opposition appealed to public opinion. Banquets were organised in many different places for the discussion of reform, at Paris, then at Colmar, Strasburg, Soissons, St. Quentin, and Mâcon. » (HH, XIII, p.79).

The banquet of 1848: « It could not be denied that the excitement was singularly out of proportion to the idea which was its ostensible cause. The spirit of democracy in France had been aroused. Lamartine's book Les Girondins added the charm of lyric poetry to the recollections of the Revolution. The spectacle offered by the July monarchy had gradually influenced the great poet to espouse the cause of popular progress. In his striking speech at the banquet of Mâcon, which was organised as a tribute to him in honour of his Girondins in the midst of a violent thunderstorm which had not deterred a crowded audience from coming to hear him speak, he threatened Guizot's retrograde government with "a revolution of scorn."

« The year 1848 opened with heated debates, in the course of which Guizot's whole policy was denounced. A banquet on a vast scale was organised in Paris immediately after for the purpose of forwarding electoral reform. A large piece of ground enclosed by walls near the Champs-Élysées had been taken for the occasion.

« The ministry, with less tolerance than it had shown in the preceding year, claimed the right to forbid this banquet. This involved the question of the liberty of holding public meetings. This right had never yet been contested, but Guizot wished to take one more retrograde step.

« Orleanists, liberals, republicans, and legitimists all united in defending their rights. Parliament rang with the vehement discussions which ensued and in which Ledru-Rollin showed all his great oratorical powers. In spite of the threats of the government, it was decided to meet at the Madeleine and proceed from there to the banquet. The very evening before the banquet was to take place this plan was changed for fear of bringing about a massacre. It was stated in the morning papers that the meeting was put off, and instead of the demonstration which they had been obliged to abandon, the opposition members signed a vote of censure on Guizot. But the people nevertheless assembled at the appointed time in front of the Madeleine.

« History repeats itself strangely. It had been the chief anxiety of Louis Philippe to avoid another 1830, and yet he was now about to undergo, in every detail, the experience of Charles X. The rising of the people to support the claims of the opposition, but soon leaving these behind them; a disturbance indefinite at first, but developing into a fierce struggle; a king obstinate at first, then willing to make one concession after another, but never agreeing to make them until it was too late; then the flight across France and the departure for England: such was the history of both these revolutions.

« Two things increased Louis Philippe's confidence: Firstly, he had not violated the letter of the law. Though he had in a measure twisted the revolution of 1830 to his own purposes, he had done so by ruling his ministers, and by gaining over the electoral body. He did not realise that he was in the long run preparing a lasting disgrace for himself. His fall was none the less certain because instead of violating the rights of the people he had merely distorted them. His fall would only be the more petty for that. Secondly, he had in Paris, what Polignac had so signally lacked, a strong and numerous army.

« Had he not easily succeeded in suppressing all risings which had taken place ? He forgot that troops which are always firm and always victorious when dealing with the revolt of part of a nation, are useless when the people as a whole are actuated by the same opinion. Under such circumstances revolution pervades the air and paralyses the powers of the army. The troops hesitate, and sometimes recede. However this may be, on the 22nd of February, while the deputies of the opposition were preparing to ask Guizot's majority to pass a vote of censure on Guizot, an enormous crowd surged round the Madeleine, the populace began to parade the streets, and columns were formed at various points.» (HH, XIII, p.79-80).
__________________________________________________
© Koji Nihei Daijyo, 2011. All rights reserved.

§ 615.Revolution in 1848; Mehemet-Ali of Egypt

19th century:
§615. Frustrated revolution satisfied in 1848; Mehemet-Ali of Egypt (1805-1848): I-40.

I-40:
The false waterspout dissimulating folly,
Byzantium shall make a change of laws:
Out of Egypt shall come he who wishes to loosen
The edict changing money and alloy.


(La trombe faulse dissimulant folie
Fera Bisance un changement de loys:
Hystra d'Egypte qui veult que l'on deslie
Edict changeant monnoyes & aloys.)

Keys to the reading:
Trombe (waterspout): This term is used only twice in The Prophecies (cf. Torné-Chavigny, 1861, p.267), and the example in the quatrain I-57 (§361: la trombe tremblera) designates the first French revolution (1791-1793). This meaning of revolution is absolutely valid also here;

La trombe faulse (The false waterspout): the revolution of July in 1830, which entails a Bourbon monarchy of second grade focusing on the oligarchic riches, excluding the crucial interests of the republicans;

folly: the firece revolutional emotion with few result in 1830;

Byzantium: a historical metaphor for Paris. «The word Bisance designates Paris in several quatrains.» (Torné-Chavigny, id., p.253) In fact, Bisance and its derivatives (Bizantin, Bizant, Bisantinois) in The Prophecies have in total 16 uses, whose 9 (II-49, V-25, V-47, V-54, V-70, VI-21, VI-53, VIII-83, X-62) for the Ottoman Empire, 5 (I-40, V-80, V-86, VII-36, IX-30) including I-40 for Paris, and 1(IV-38) for Greece and 1(VIII-51) for Russia;

Byzantium shall make a change of laws: the revolution of February in France in 1848, being inferred from the simultaneity of the quasi-autonomous development of Egypt under a remarkable leader, Mehemet Ali.

The edict changing money and alloy: One of the most vital rights of sovereignty of a state. The lack of it leaves Egypt of Mehemet Ali in vassalage to the Porte.

Summary:
The revolution of July in 1830, which entails a Bourbon monarchy of second grade focusing on the rich bourgeois, excluding the political initiative of the republicans, recurs in February, 1848, rejuvenating its radical emotion with the gain of the second French Republic.

« Having become practically independent of the Ottoman Empire, Egypt begins to modernize herself in the 19th century, under the impulsion of Mehmet Ali and of his successors, and she extends, from 1820 forth, her domination over Sudan, where Islamization grows rapid.» (Duby, 2008, p.276)

Chronology of Egypt under Mehemet Ali:
1805 The Porte appoints Mehemet Ali as viceroy (governor) of Egypt.
1805- '10 Mehemet Ali modernizes his army according to French consultants.
1811 Mehemet Ali massacres Mamelukes, existent rulers of Egypt, at Cairo.
1823- '27 Mehemet Ali aids the Sultan confronting Greece seeking for independence.
1827 Egyptian fleet conducted by Ibrahim Pasha, his son, completely defeated at Navarino by allied powers (France, England and Russia).
1828 Egyptian army retreats from Greece.
1831- '32 Egyptian troops take Syria.
1833 The Porte recognises independence of Egypt with a concession of Syria and Aden.
1839 Turkish army and fleet thoroughly defeated by Mehemet Ali's; Intervention of the powers in favour of Turkey.
1840 Quadruple Alliance formed [1840.7.15] by Russia, Britain, Prussia and Austria in support of Turkey. Its diplomatic offers refused by Mehemet Ali expecting French aid to be obtained through warlike policies of Minister Thiers.
1841 France joins Quadruple Alliance.

«Intervention of the powers: As Louis Philippe's disinclination to war was well known, the allied powers, without troubling themselves overmuch about the wild cry of protest in France, the warlike preparations of Minister Thiers, or the demand for the frontier of the Rhine, began hostilities against Mehemet Ali, who had refused his submisson, trusting to France. An Anglo-Austrian fleet sailed for the Syrian coast; Beirut and Acre were taken, and Alexandria was bombarded by the English commodore Napier. Mehemet Ali, after the fall [1840.10.28] of the Thiers ministry, fully realised his mistake and had to be glad even to preserve the hereditary pashalik of Egypt, in return for the evacuation of all Syria, Arabia, and Crete, the restoration of the Turkish fleet, and the payment of a yearly tribute; this favour he owed to England, who wished thereby to make him a friend and to assure for herself the passage through Suez.» (HH, XXIV, p.454)

«The Firman of Investiture [1840.12.10]: The following are the principal rights which the firman granted the viceroy (this title was henceforth used for the governor of Egypt): hereditary dominion over Egypt in the family of Mehemet Ali, subject to the right of investiture and appointment by the Porte of every succeeding viceroy; independence - incomplete and circumscribed - of the internal administration of the country; appointment of all civil officials, and appointment of military officers up to the rank of colonel; conclusion of non-political treaties and conventions with foreign states; and limitation to a definite sum (300,000 pounds sterling) of the tribute to be paid the Porte, substituting the earlier statute, according to which tribute was determined in each instance proportionately to the revenues of the country. The former abuse had necessarily resulted in the domination of Turkish agents, and in vexations of all sorts. In opposition to these concessions, however, stood a mass of restrictions, whereby the Porte sought to protect and strengthen its sovereignty. We have already spoken of the investiture of every new viceroy by the Porte. Other clauses provided for the limitation of the army to eighteen thousand men and of the fleet to a few war-ships; for the levying of taxes in the name of the sultan; and for the conformity of laws, of coinage, even of army uniforms to those in the rest of the empire. These regulations were not always strictly observed, but they could always furnish, and more than once have furnished, the Porte with a convenient pretext for oppressing its Egyptian vassal.» (HH, XXIV, p.454)

«The Last Days of Mehemet Ali: Mehemet Ali had attained much, although by no means all, of what he had made the object of his life and policy. Despite the defeat [1840.11.3 in Syria] he had undergone in the last catastrophe, when he was an old man of seventy-two [born in 1769], he had yet been able to recover himself. But now his strength was exhausted; broken in mind and body by such powerful exertion and excitement, he showed a rapidly increasing debility which developed into mental derangement. In the year 1844 his son was called to take part in the government, and in January, 1848, it became necessary for the Porte to invest Ibrahim Pasha with Egypt in place of his father. Mehemet All, who through his energy and wisdom, through the greatness and strength of his character, through his administrative talents and his dominating will, through his broad vision and his great efforts, had far exceeded all oriental and some European regents of his time, who had freed Egypt from unworthy debasement, and had attracted to it the eyes of the whole political world, who had enabled this old and formerly respected land of culture to work up again in modern times to a position among civilised lands - Mehemet Ali passed his last days in mental imbecility, and died alone, at the age of eighty, on August 2nd, 1849, at his castle Shubra near Cairo. At the time of his death the second successor, Abbas Pasha, had already entered upon his governmental career, as Ibrahim Pasha had died ten months after his appointment.» (HH, XXIV, p.454-455)
_______________________________________________________
© Koji Nihei Daijyo, 2011. All rights reserved.

§ 616.Louis Philip's abdication after resignation of Guizot

19th century:
§616. Louis Philip's abdication after resignation of Guizot (1847-1848): IV-64.

IV-64:
The failing in bourgeois clothes,
Shall come to try the King with his offense:
Fifteen soldiers the most part Vstagois,
The last life & a chief of his properties.


(Le deffaillant en habit de bourgois,
Viendra le Roy tempter de son offense:
Quinze souldartz la pluspart Vstagois,
Vie derniere & chef de sa chevance.)

Keys to the reading:
The failing in bourgeois clothes: The minister of Louis-Philip, Guizot, a bourgeois, in his crisis of fall at the end of 1847;

Fifteen : the number suggesting the sixteen corpses in a carriage and at the same time that of fifty persons killed or wounded of the insurgents (See below);

Vstagois: the anagram of A S. Guizot (For Mr. Guizot) (Dr. de Fontbrune, 1976, p.151);

the most part Vstagois: the most part of the national guard was for the government of Guizot;

Chevance: biens (properties) (Ibuki) ;

The last life & a chief of his properties: the last days of Louis-Philip in exile, only as an owner of his private properties;

Fifteen soldiers the most part Vstagois, The last life & a chief of his properties: The construction should be as follows: Royal soldiers under the control of Guizot [shall give] the last life [to] fifteen & [to] the chief of his own properties by their general charge, where the words “fifteen” and “the chief” are considered to be in the oblique case (cas-régime) without preposition, and the verb “shall give (donneront)” must have been omitted..

Summary:
The minister of Louis-Philip, Guizot, a bourgeois, in his crisis of collapse at the end of 1847, came to advise the King in vain with the policy offensive to him, in proposing some republicans as new members of the ministry in order to prevent a revolt of the opposition (cf. Muel, 1895, p.208).

Confronted with the insurrection of the people supported by some legions of the national guard, Louis-Philip dismissed Guizot February 23rd, 1848. But the count of Molé nominated in place of Guizot could not arrive at the composition of a new cabinet: « the news of the dismissal of the ministers was welcomed with joy in Paris, but the republican opposition did not consider this concession sufficient. In the evening, Armand Marrast gave to a group of people who were under the windows of the National, a passionate discourse, in which he awoke all the energies of the multitude, in crying out that you had to be no more occupied with the vacant ministers, but that our strikes should mount to the throne.» (Muel, id., p.214)

« About nine o'clock in the evening, a column of demonstrators from the place of the Bastille marched in growing ever bigger till the building of the foreign affairs in the street of the Capucines. A battalion number 14 of the line under the commandment of the colonel Courrant lumping at that point of the street intercepted its passage to protect the ministry against the insurrection. The column was headed by officers and sub-officers of the national guard and the men carrying torches, armed with pikes, pistols and sticks.» (Muel, id., p.214)

A few seconds of crash and the street filled with the dead, the expiring, the wounded (cf. id., p.214-215). «The general charge killed or wounded about fifty persons. The crowd in panic fled into lateral streets; the troop, itself frightened, was disbanded. It was half past nine in the evening. The people stopped a carriage in passing, and loaded it with sixteen corpses.» (Charléty, 1921b, p.392) «Some of the insurgents picked up the bodies, sixteen in number, they said, and placed them in a carriage found there.» (Muel, id., p.215)

« Some men then improvised a sort of theatrical background for the massacre, with the genius that Parisians certainly possess for giving dramatic effect even to their most painful emotions. A cart was stopped, and the corpses were placed upon it; men walking beside it carried torches which illumined the ghastly cargo. The procession passed on through Paris while a man standing on the cart lifted up and showed to the people the dead body of a woman whose face was horribly mutilated by bullets. This frightful spectacle aroused a frenzy of rage throughout the city and Paris was again plunged into civil war.» (HH, XIII, p.82)

« The real battle was that of the 24th. On this occasion the king had placed Marshal Bugeaud in command of the royal forces. Bugeaud was the best of the African generals, but at the same time he was the one whose name was most dreaded by the people; he had the reputation of having gained some most bloody victories over insurgents on former occasions. This time Paris was covered with barricades; the fighting continued all the morning. Whenever the army seemed likely to yield or retreat, the king, who but a short time since was so full of confidence, and to whom the marshal had promised a brilliant victory, made some fresh concession. First he agreed that Thiers should form a ministry, then Odilon Barrot, as if the shades of difference which separated the centre of the chamber from the left-centre or the left-centre from the dynastic centre were of any importance in this mortal struggle between the people and the monarchy.» (HH, XIII, p.82)

The king abdicates and takes flight: « All these flimsy negotiations were going on amidst the smoke of battle. Now Thiers, now Odilon Barrot was to be seen rushing from one barricade to another announcing the king's last concession. Ministerial episodes mingled with the episodes of battle, and raised their weak voice amid the thunder of the cannon. Then, one after another, these political personages gave up what was an impossible task; and, like Charles X, Louis Philippe abdicated in favour of a child, his grandson, the count de Paris. The battle at this moment was brought to an end by its most bloody episode: the attack on the château d'Eau opposite the Palais Royal. The people on one side and the municipal guard on the other showed, at this point, indescribable energy, and fought with the courage of desperation. Bullets were dealing out death all around, and all the staunchest republicans were there, including Caussidiere, Albert, and Lagrange. By two o'clock the people had earned the victory. Louis Philippe and his family fled from the Tuileries. There was some difficulty in finding a cab to take him as far as St. Cloud. The crowd allowed this fallen King to pass, while behind him, the people for the third time invaded the Tuileries where they wrote, " Death to robbers ! " The duchess of Orleans had gone with her son to the chamber. The sight of a child and an unhappy woman, surrounded by sympathy, might induce the people in a moment of emotional excitement to agree to the maintenance of the monarchy. Some seemed ready to accept a regency. Lamartine felt the weakness and inadequacy of such a solution of the difficulty. Meantime the crowd was taking possession of the palace. The duchess of Orleans followed the old king into exile. The latter was going abroad like Charles X, but he had more to make him anxious. He was obliged to conceal himself, was often suspected, and sometimes had not enough money to supply his needs. When at last he reached the little Norman port which was his destination he found a stormy sea, and could not for a long time get any vessel to take him across the Channel; finally, having disguised himself, he secured a passage from Havre on board an English ship.» (HH, XIII, p.82-83)

A republican ministry: « On leaving the chamber the leaders of the people had gone to the Hotel-de-Ville. Crowds assembled from every direction, crying out in favour of ten different ministries at the same time; contradictory lists were made, but in the end the government was composed of Lamartine, Dupont de l'Eure Arago, Ledru-Rollin, Crémieux, Marie, Garnier-Pagès, the deputies of the Left benches to whom were added later Louis Blanc, Albert a working-man, Flocon, and Armand Marrast.» (HH, XIII, p.83)
________________________________________
© Koji Nihei Daijyo, 2011. All rights reserved.
Profile

Koji Nihei Daijyo

Author:Koji Nihei Daijyo
We have covered 143 quatrains (§588-§730) concerning the World Events in the 19th century after Napoleonic ages [1821-1900] in the Prophecies of Nostradamus, and 219 in the 20th [1901-2000] (§731-§949).

Latest journals
Category
Link