§779 The Spanish civil war (1936-1939): V-51.

V-51 (§779):

Peoples of Dacia, of England and Poland,
And of Bohemia shall make a new league:
To pass beyond the pillar of Hercules,
Those of Barcelona and Aragon shall set up a cruel intrigue.

(La gent de Dace, d'Angleterre & Polonne
Et de Bohesme feront nouvelle ligue:
Pour passer oultre d'Hercules la colonne,
Barcins, Tyrrens dresser cruelle brigue.)

NOTES: The pillar of Hercules: « The Straits of Gibraltar.» (Dufresne, 1995, p.169).

Barcins: « Inhabitants or natives of Barcino, Barcelona (Spain).» (Le Pelletier, II, p.420); « BARCINO, The name which Barcelona bore at the time of the Romans’ invasion into Spain.» (Landais).

Tyrrens: = Tyrrene (§507, III-62) = Tiryns = « 
Τίρυνς [Tiruns], Tiryns, a city of Argolis.» (Pillon); « TYRINTHE, Son of Argus and grand-son of Jupiter, founder of the city of Tiryns. – Anc. geogr. A city of Argolis [Argolis may suggest Aragon], near the Gulf of Argolis. Hercules had his residence there.» (Landais). This north-eastern region of the Peloponnesus can represent, in the context of the quatrain where the Iberian Peninsula is the point in question, that of the Peninsula by geographical analogy: Aragon and Catalonia, the provinces of Republican Spain during the Civil War (cf. Duby, p.126, Chart A and p. 127, Chart D). This type of geographical analogy is also found in the quatrain IX-10 (§738) concerning « Fois & Pamyes contre Tholose Carcas (Foix and Pamiers against Toulouse and Carcassonne)».

Or, the interpretation of the term ‘Tyrrens’ by Le Pelletier (II, p.471), followed by Dufresne (id., p.168), as Sagunto (Sagonte) is not historically supported, for the ancient name of Sagunto for the Iberians was « Arse » (cf.
GeoCenter, Euro Atlas Spain Portugal, 2000, p.105, Ze 110); « It is evident that those who at first identified themselves with Arse, passed then to the stage where they came to recognize themselves as Sagontins (Sagontians), the observation for which the monetary legends give an essential support.» (Ripollès et Llorens, 2002, p.25-26).

Peoples of Dacia, of England and Poland, And of Bohemia shall make a new league: To pass beyond the pillar of Hercules: « The first three verses treat of a military alliance rounding up Rumania (Dacia), England, Poland and the ex-Czechoslovakia as well as of their troops jumping over the Straits of Gibraltar in order to intervene in the Spanish civil war. Now, the year 1936 has certainly seen this particular regrouping of nations under the name of “international Brigades”, offering a helping hand to the Republicans opposed to the fascists of Franco. La Chronique du XXe siècle (the Chronicle of the XXth century) (Larousse) tells us about it in the following terms: “The Brigades, created at the end of October, 1936, are composed of a majority of communists, but also of libertarians, of socialists. The French are there some 10,000, the Italians and the Germans about 5,000, the Americans more than 3,000, the Czechs [Peoples of Bohemia] and the Englishmen [Peoples of England] more than 2,000, the Yugoslavs, Canadians and Austrians more than 1,000. The Swiss, Irish, Cubans and representatives of other countries have participated there, too. The movement, spontaneous at the origin, has been rapidly undertaken by the communist parties and by USSR, which, after having received a reserve of gold of the bank of Spain, furnished it with officering and materials.”» (Dufresne, 1995, p.169); « The Russians also sent 1,000 pilots and about 2,000 other specialists, but no large units. They regarded Spain mainly as an international propaganda exercise, and their effort went into organizing the international brigades. Altogether 40,000 foreigners fought for the Republic, 35,000 in the brigades, though never more than 18,000 at any one time. In addition there were 10,000 doctors, nurses and civilian specialists. The largest contingent, about 10,000, came from France, followed by 5,000 Germans and Austrians, 5,000 Poles [Peoples of Poland], 3,350 Italians, about 2,500 each from Britain and the United States, 1,500 each from Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia, 1,000 each from Scandinavia, Canada and Hungary, and smaller contingents from over forty other countries [Peoples of Dacia, etc.].» (Johnson, 1991, p.330).

Those of Barcelona and Aragon shall set up a cruel intrigue
: This prediction seems to refer mediately to the Russian intervention full of Stalin’s political intrigues in Republican Spain based in Catalonia and Aragon: « Franco made better usages of his human and material resources because he fought a military war, and the Republicans fought a political war. He was a master of the nuts and bolts of war: topography, training, infrastructures, logistics, signals, air control. No genius but very thorough and calm; he never reinforced failure and he learnt from mistakes... In one sense finance was the key to the war, and Franco and his advisers handled it shrewdly. Their greatest achievement was to maintain a respectable paper currency without the benefit of the nation’s gold reserves and central banking system. By contrast, the Republicans handled their finances with consummate folly. They started with one of the greatest gold reserves in the world: 700 tons, worth £162 million (or $788 million). Instead of using this to raise loans, or for direct payments in the ‘hard’ arms markets of the capitalist countries of the West, while getting arms from the Russians on credit, they handed over more than two-thirds of their gold to Stalin... Still more disastrous, from the Republic’s point of view, was Stalin’s insistence, while being paid in gold on the nail, on a political price for supplying arms at all. The moment the fighting started, and the need for arms became desperate, the influence of the Spanish
CP rose dramatically. This might not have mattered so much if it had led an independent existence. In fact it was controlled through the Russian embassy, by NKVD (People’s Commissariat of Internal Affairs) and OGPU (Special Government Political Administration) units under Alexander Orlov – who himself went in mortal terror of Yezhov – and by such Comintern figures as the French witch-hunter André Marty, whose face, wrote Hemingway, ‘had a look of decay, as if modelled from the waste material you find under the claws of a very old lion’. It is not clear to this day how anxious Stalin was to win the war; but in any event he was determined to control the Republican side. The Communists – that is, Stalin’s secret police – took over Republican Spain. The result was one of the major political tragedies of the century. It is clear that, if the army had not staged a putsch in July 1936, sooner or later Spain would have had to endure a civil war fought among the Left. It broke out in Barcelona in the spring of 1937, with the Communists fighting the POUM (Workers’ Party of Marxist Unification) and the anarchists. The immediate pretext, as in the wider civil war, was a political murder, of a leading Communist, Roldán Cortada, shot on 25 April, possibly by an anarchist ‘control patrol’, possibly by the Comintern agent Ernö Gerö. Both sides had private armies, secret police forces, gangs of murderous thugs. The moment Negrín was installed as nominal premier, the Communists took over the Interior Ministry and all the key police and paramilitary posts, and moved forward to a règlement des comptes. The purge coincided with Stalin’s massacre of his own party in Russia, and it bore all the marks of his methods. The CP-controlled Madrid police forced two captured Falangists to prepare a fake plan for a Madrid rising by Franco’s much-vaunted ‘Fifth Column’, and they forged a letter to Franco, on the back of this plan, from Andrés Nin, the POUM leader. A great mass of forged documents implicating the POUM in a fascist betrayal was put in a suitcase left in Gerona, then ‘discovered’ by police. On 14 June, Orlov, as head of the Spanish NKVD, probably acting on direct instructions from Stalin, ordered the arrest of all POUM leaders. This was despite the protests of the Communist members of the cabinet (the non-Communist members, least of all Negrín, were not even informed). The Commander of the 29th POUM division was recalled from the front for ‘consultations’ and arrested too. The detained men were taken straight to carefully prepared interrogation-centres and torture-chambers, most of them underground but including the former Barcelona convent of St Ursala, known as ‘the Dachau of Republican Spain’. Efforts by the cabinet to secure Nin’s release were quite unavailing. But Stalin’s plans to make him the centre of a Spanish show-trial were frustrated, since Nin, the model for Orwell’s hero Goldstein in Nineteen Eighty-Four, preferred to die under torture rather than confess. (He was eventually murdered by Orlov in the park of El Pardo, later Franco’s palace.) During the rest of 1937 and well into 1938, many thousands of POUM members, and indeed other Leftists of all descriptions, were executed or tortured to death in Communist prisons. They included a large number of foreigners, such as Trotsky’s former secretary, Erwin Wolff, the Austrian socialist Kurt Landau, the British journalist ‘Bob’ Smilie and a former lecturer at Johns Hopkins University, José Robles. Among those who just managed to escape were Orwell and Willy Brandt, the future German Chancellor.» (Johnson, id., p.333-335).

« It was one of Spain’s many misfortunes at this time that her Civil War coincided with the climax of Stalin’s great terror. Many of the Barcelona murders had little to do with Spain’s internal politics but were, rather, the backlash of events in Moscow and Leningrad. Thus Robles was executed because, as interpreter of General Jan Antonovich Berzin, head of the Russian military mission to Spain, he knew too much about Berzin’s recall and liquidation as part of Stalin’s purge of the army. Stalin was having his leading agents killed all over the world in 1937-8. And, as in Russia, virtually all the creatures who helped him to take over the Left in Spain, and then to terrorize it, were murdered in turn. The head of the
NKVD’s foreign department was cornered in his own office in Paris in February 1938 and forced to take syanide. Of those who organized arms supplies to Spain, Evhen Konovalek was killed in Rotterdam in May 1938, Rudolf Clement was found, a headless corpse, in the Seine, and Walter Krivitsky, boss of Soviet military intelligence in Western Europe, was chased for three years by Stalin’s hit-men until they got him in Washington on 10 February 1941. In addition to General Berzin, Stalin murdered Michael Koltzov, the famous Pravda Spanish correspondent, Arthur Stashevsky, head of the economic mission to Spain, and Antonov Ovseenko, Consul-General in Barcelona, who was told he was being recalled to Moscow to be made Minister of Justice, a joke characteristic of Stalin’s gallows-humour. The only man who escaped Stalin was the arch-killer Orlov himself, who defected, wrote an account of all he knew, informed Stalin that he had arranged to have it published immediately if he died violently, and so was left in peace, publishing his tale after Stalin’s death. It may be asked: how was it that the atrocities against the Left in Barcelona [Those of Barcelona and Aragon shall set up a cruel intrigue] did not cause a wave of revulsion against Stalinism throughout the world? One factor was luck. On 26 April 1937, the day after Cortada’s murder in Barcelona detonated the internal crisis, forty-three aircraft of the Condor Legion bombed the historic Basque town of Guernica, whose famous oak tree had shaded the first Basque parliament. About 1,000 people were killed and 70 per cent of the buildings destroyed. It was not the first bombing of a town by either side, and Guernica was a legitimate target, though the object of the raid was terror. It was decided upon by Colonel Wolfgang von Richthofen, the Legion’s Commander, in consultation with Colonel Juan Vigón, Mola’s Chief of Staff. [General Mola, cynosure of the militant Right (id., p.322).] There is no evidence Mola knew about it beforehand; Franco certainly did not; and the Germans did not know of the town’s historical significance. For the Comintern propagandists – the best in the world – it was a stroke of uncovenanted fortune, and they turned it into the most celebrated episode of the entire war. Picasso, who had already been asked to do a large painting for the Spanish pavilion at the Paris World Fair, leapt at the subject, and the result was later taken to the New York Metropolitan. Guernica helped to push a whole segment of Western opinion, including the magazines Times and Newsweek, over to the Republican side. In the subsequent hullabaloo, the echoes of which could still be heard in the 1980s, when the painting was solemnly hung in the Prado, the sounds of mass-slaughter in Barcelona went unheard.» (Johnson, id., p.335-336).

« The way in which Guernica was used to screen the destruction of the
POUM was typical of the brilliance of the Comintern propaganda, handled by two inspired professional liars, Willi Muenzenberg and Otto Katz, both later murdered on Stalin’s orders. Throughout the Spanish war, Stalinism was assisted not only by superb public relations but by the naïvety, gullibility and, it must also be said, the mendacity and corruption of Western intellectuals, especially their willingness to overlook what W.H.Auden called “the necessary murder”. When Orwell escaped and sought to publish an account of the POUM scandal, “Spilling the Spanish Beans”, in the New Statesman, its editor, Kingsley Martin, turned it down on the grounds that it would damage Western support for the Republican cause. But when Orwell’s exposure appeared in the New English Weekly, it attracted little notice. The intellectuals of the Left did not want to know the objective truth; they were unwilling for their illusions to be shattered. They were overwhelmed by the glamour and excitement of the cause and few had the gritty determination of Orwell to uphold absolute standards of morality, or the experience of the horrors that occurred when relative ones took their place. Many of them treated ‘the Party’ with abject subservience. Besides, the Communists controlled access to Republican Spain. To get there a British writer, for instance, needed a letter from the head of the CP, Harry Pollitt, who worked closely with Victor Gollancz, the leading left-wing publisher, whose Left Book Club dominated the market. The poet W.H.Auden was saved by his ‘Pollitt letter’ from a prison sentence when he was arrested for indecency in a Barcelona Park. A visit to ‘our’ Spain was essential to the self-respect of a progressive intellectual. Just as the Germans, Russians and Italians used Spain to test their new military equipment – exploitation by hardware – so writers went there to acquire material for their next novel or poem, what might be termed exploitation by software. André Malraux, whose novel about the Chinese revolution, La Condition humaine (1932), had made him world famous, went to Spain hoping for a sequel, which duly appeared as L’Espoir (1938). He brought with him a squadron of slow Potex bombers, which created a noisy splash in the papers but did little damage to the nationalists, and anyway had to be crewed by Spaniards. The commander of the Republican fighters, García Lacalle, wrote that Malraux’s people were ‘writers, artists, photographers, women, children and I don’t know what – everything but aviators’. Hemingway was in Spain too, ‘researching’ For Whom the Bell Tolls. Fancying himself hard-boiled and experienced in the cynicism of war, ‘Papa’ was easily duped. When his friend Dos Passos became worried about the disappearance of Robles, whom he knew well (he had in fact already been murdered), Hemingway was tipped off by his ‘amigo’ in counter-espionage, the sinister Pepe Quintanilla, that Robles was a spy, and at once assumed he was guilty. He attributed Dos Passos’ ‘continued belief in Robles’ loyalty to the good-hearted naïvety of a “typical American liberal attitude’” – but of course it was Hemingway who proved naïve.» (Johnson, id., p.336-337).

« After the destruction of the
POUM, Republican morale declined steadily. In these circumstances, Franco opted for a war of attrition throughout the appalling winter of 1937-8, and in April he cut Republican Spain in two. Thereafter it was really a matter of time only, with Franco taking no chances and insisting on overwhelming superiority. By the autumn Stalin had tired of the war, had extracted the last ounce of propaganda value out of it, had completed his purges and was already thinking of a new deal, either with the Western democracies or, more likely, with Hitler. He had also got all the Republic’s gold. So he cut off aid, and Franco was able to open his last Catalonian offensive, just before Christmas, confident that the end was near. Barcelona fell on 28 January 1939, and Madrid on 28 March. Franco had fought the war without passion, and when he heard it was over he did not even look up from his desk.» (Johnson, id., p.338).
© Koji Nihei Daijyo, 2018. All rights reserved.

§780 General Franco against the Leftist Government (1936-1940): IX-16.

IX-16 (§780):

Of a castle Franco shall leave the assembly,
The ambassador shall make a split:
Those of Ribiere shall be in the conflict,
And in the great abyss shall deny the entry.

(De castel Franco sortira l'assemblee,
L'ambassadeur non plaisant fera scisme:
Ceux de Ribiere seront en la meslee,
Et au grand goulfre desnieront l'entree.)

NOTES: Vlaicu Ionescu, having criticized with reason Stewart Robb’s interpretation of the quatrain (Robb, 1961a, p.38-39), gives us a fully elaborate one, following Centurio's preceding explanation "IX-16 (1936f) Franko and Rivera, the two names of our contemporary history in one verse, Franko relieved his soldiers from Alcazar of Toledo. He brought a schism in Spain through the civil war." (Centurio, 1953, p.194): « General Franco, having Castile as his base and the Castle of Alcazar in Toledo as his general headquaters (de castel), shall make a split of regime in opposing the Republican government (Franco fera scisme). The ambassador of this government shall leave the League of Nations (l’assemblee) frustrated (non plaisant). The members of the family of Primo de Rivera (ceux de Ribiere) shall engage themselves body and soul in the strife of Franco (seront en la meslee). Once liberated, Spain shall maintain her neutrality in refusing to enter (desnieront l’entree) the great whirlwind of the World War (au grand goulfre).» (Ionescu, 1976, p.454).

Castel: « castel,
V. chastel.» (Daele); « chastel, sm. château (a castle).» (Daele).

Scisme: « Schisme.
Division (a division). On écrit aussi scisme et cisme (One spells also scisme and cisme(Huguet).

Of a castle Franco shall leave the assembly, The ambassador shall make a split: These verses are « a hyperbaton of the phrase: Of a castle Franco shall make a split, The ambassador shall leave the assembly. Franco has made a split in the true sense of the term, for he has separated from the already existent government in Spain and from its ideology, clearly oriented toward the Communism... The assembly here mentioned is surely the League of Nations. It is known that the Republican government had as its ambassador to the League a certain De Vayo, who was seeking [in vain] to obtain the intervention of the great powers in favour of his cause...» (Ionescu, id., p.452-453).

L'ambassadeur sortira l'assemblee: = [Literally] L'ambassadeur expulsera l'assemblee (The ambassador shall expel the assembly) = [En fait] L'ambassadeur sortira de l'assemblee (The ambassador shall get out of the assembly); « 1939 May: 8th, Spain leaves the League.» (Williams, 1968, p.470).

Those of Ribiere shall be in the conflict: « The expression “those of Ribiere” refers not to the Italian Riviera, but to those of the family of Primo de Rivera, the son of the dictator of the same name, who was the founder of the famous Falange, a powerful nationalist organization, which supported the movement of Franco during the whole span of the war. José Antonio Primo de Rivera was assassinated by the communists. The two nephews of the former dictator, having been military chiefs under Franco, were killed on the battlefield. At last the daughter of the former dictator, Pilar Primo de Rivera, led a national organization of women, and another son, Miguel, occupied for a long time high offices of the state led by Franco. Immediately after the war, Franco reorganized the Falange, which constituted the base of the new government. The new chief of the Falange, Ramon Serrano Suñer, brother-in-law of Franco, became Minister of Internal Affairs... In truth, all of the family of Primo de Rivera had important roles in Franco’s fight.» (Ionescu, id., p.453).

And in the great abyss shall deny the entry: = And [Franco and his government] shall deny the entry in the great abyss: « Hitler was less lucky with Spain. Franco was determined to keep out of war, which he saw as the supreme evil, and especially a war waged by Hitler in association with Stalin, which he felt incarnated all the evils of the century. He declared strict neutrality in September 1939. He advised Mussolini to keep out too. As the price for entering the war he pitched his demands impossibly high: Oran, the whole of Morocco, huge territories in West Africa, massive quantities of war supplies and equipment to attack Gibraltar and defend the Canaries. When he met Hitler at Hendaye on 23 October 1940 he not only increased these demands but greeted his German benefactor with icy coldness verging on contempt. As he was himself a professional soldier, and Hitler an amateur – not even a gentleman, a corporal! – he treated Hitler’s customary military tour d’horizon with unconcealed contempt. They talked, wrote Hitler’s interpreter Paul Schmidt, ‘to or rather at one another’ until two in the morning and failed to agree on anything whatever. Hitler later told Mussolini he would rather have two or three teeth out than go through that again.» (Johnson, 1991, p.366).
© Koji Nihei Daijyo, 2018. All rights reserved.

§781 General Franco against the Leftist Government (2) (1936-1940): VI-19.

VI-19 (§781):

The true flame shall swallow up the country of Spain,
That shall want to involve the Innocents in the fires of war:
Immediately after the assault the army shall have become inflamed,
When in Seville shall be seen a monster like an ox.

(La vraye flamme engloutira la dame,
Que vouldra mettre les Innocens à feu:
Pres de l'assault l'exercite s'enflamme,
Quant dans Seville monstre en bœuf sera veu.)

NOTES: The true flame: = The real flame of war, i.e. the Spanish Civil War. V. Ionescu’s interpretation of the expression as ‘the forces of the true faith of Spain (les forces de la vraie foi de l’Espagne)’ (Ionescu, 1976, p.454) is too narrow, interpolative and one-sided, ‘a true flame’ being never ‘a flame of truth’. This flame is not but the total event of firing crash between the Republicans and the Nationalists in Spain.

La dame (the lady): = The State of Spain. In fact, of 23 usages of the terms dame, Dame and dames in the Prophecies of Nostradamus, 17 refer literally to particular feminine persons and 6 figuratively to sovereign countries as follows: II-44: France under Napoleon I, II-87: France under Louis XVIII, V-9: a country in general, VI-19: Spain, VII-18: France defeated by Prussia in 1870 and X-25: French Empire of Napoleon I. V. Ionescu’s interpretation of the term as ‘the Communism (le communisme)’ (Ionescu, id.) is totally erroneous because there is no such usage found in the Prophecies of Nostradamus. The meaning of the term dame[s] in the Prophecies of Nostradamus is either [a] particular woman [women] or an independent country.

Que: = Qui (a nominative relative pronoun), whose antecedent is the true flame. The nominative relative pronoun “qui” is replaced frequently by “que” in the Prophecies of Nostradamus according to the exceptional usages of the
XVIth century: « As regards the relative pronoun, the most noteworthy feature is the use of que for qui in the nominative, first as a singular, and later as a plural pronoun as well.» (Rickard, p.70). Cf. ung monarque qu'en paix & vie ne sera longuement (§490, I-4), Celui qu'aura la charge de destruire temples & sectes (§261, I-96), Le chef qu'aura conduit peuple infini (§428, I-98) and L'arbre qu'avoit par long temps mort seché (§603, III-91) and also I-99, II-10, III-54, III-94, V-38, VI-15, VIII-28, VIII-88, IX-29, X-10 and X-22.

Feu (fire): = « Combat, guerre (Combat, war).» (Petit Robert); « mettre à feu (to put on fire) to involve [a country, a city] in the fires of war.» (Suzuki).

The true flame shall swallow up the country of Spain, That shall want to involve the Innocents in the fires of war: « Spanish Civil War, 1936-9 [The true flame shall swallow up the country of Spain]; arose from the resentment of the Army leaders at the growing socialist and anti-clerical tendencies of the Popular Front Republican Government of President Azana. The Civil War began by a revolt of military commanders in Spanish Morocco on July 18th, 1936. The Government remained in control of Madrid, Barcelona, Bilbao and Valencia; Cadiz, Saragossa, Seville and Burgos declared for the insurgent nationalists. Spain became an ideological battleground for fascists and socialists from all countries... Some three-quarters of a million lives were lost in the course of the Civil War [That shall want to involve the Innocents in the fires of war].» (Palmer, p.262-263); « The day Madrid surrendered [28 March 1939], Hitler denounced Germany’s 1934 treaty with Poland, having occupied the whole of Czechoslovakia a week before. It was obvious that a European war was inevitable and imminent. Franco’s reaction was a brutal attempt to seal off Spain not only from the coming catastrophe but, as far as possible, from the whole of the twentieth century. Spain had a long tradition of crude social engineering and internal crusades. In the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries it had expelled in turn vast numbers of Moors, Jews and Protestants. By such macro-persecution it had avoided the Reformation and the horrors of the Wars of Religion. The failure to adopt similar methods of drastic extrusion had permitted the French Revolution to enter and thus crucified the country for fifteen years of civil war, as Goya’s drawings bore eloquent testimony. Now the invasion by post-Christian totalitarian culture had brought another three years of martyrdom [That shall want to involve the Innocents in the fires of war]. On the Nationalist side, 90,000 had been killed in action; 110, 000 Republican soldiers were dead; there were a million cripples; 10,000 died in air-raids, 25,000 from malnutrition, 130,000 murdered or shot behind the lines [That shall want to involve the Innocents in the fires of war]; now 500,000 were in exile, half never to return. The destruction of treasure had been immense, ranging from the famous library of Cuenca Cathedral to Goya’s earliest paintings in his birth-place, Fuentodos.» (Johnson, 1991, p. 338-339).

Pres de l'assault (Immediately after the assault): The preposition près (near) can signify an immediate past as well as a near future: e.g. Pres de Verbiesque conflit mortelle guerre (Near Serbia a conflict, a mortal warfare) (§747, VIII-48); it is worth remarking that the phrase « Pres de Verbiesque » may mean a postwar near future, for the preposition « près (near) » is capable of expressing a proximate past or future in time (e.g. « Heure indue? Monsieur voit qu’il est aussi près du matin que du soir (An undue hour? ... it is as near the morning as near the evening) » (BEAUMARCH.) (Petit Robert)) besides a proximity in space and the word « Verbiesque » with its original sense of verbiage, wordiness, all talk, just words and majuscule initial can designate an International Organization of conference in general, the League of Nations to come after the Great War as Ionescu ingeniously comments so (Ionescu, id., p.378). This is why Nostradamus employed the seemingly odd word Verbiesque at first to make a message of Near Serbia as the original place of the Great War. « près de ... near [in time]: Cet événement est encore trop près de nous (That event is yet too proximate to us).» (Ibuki).

Immediately after the assault the army shall have become inflamed: « After the murder of the monarchist deputy C
ALVO SOTELO (13 Jul. [1936]) [Immediately after the assault] the counter-revolution initiated the 1936-9 Spanish Civil War. [18] Jul. 1936 Military uprising [the army shall have become inflamed] of the generals SANJURIO, GODED, FRANCISCO FRANCO (1892-1975), MOLA, QUEIPO DE LLANO. It was supported by monarchists, Catholics and the Fascist Falange, which had been founded in 1933 by JOSÉ ANTONIO PRIMO DE RIVERA (1903-36), son of the dictator.» (PenguinAtlas 2, p.161).

: « The city of Seville was among the first centres that rallied to the army of Franco, thanks to General Llano, one of the most eminent figures of the movement of liberation. This city represents here – by synecdoche – the whole nationalist Spain.» (Ionescu, 1976, p.455); « The Civil War began by a revolt of military commanders in Spanish Morocco on July 18th, 1936. The Government remained in control of Madrid, Barcelona, Bilbao and Valencia; Cadiz, Saragossa, Seville and Burgos declared for the insurgent nationalists.» (Palmer, id.).

An ox
: A metaphor for military strength, to the detriment of Ionescu’s interpretation as ‘a symbol of the anti-Christian, communist heresy, Baal’ (Ionescu, id.); « ox n. strong as an ox: extremely strong.» (Obunsha).

Monstre en bœuf
(a monster [extremely strong] like an ox): Ionescu’s interpretation of the preposition ‘en’ as ‘contre (against)’ (the prodigious hero who shall fight against Baal – the Bull God, symbol of heresy) (Ionescu, id., p.454-455) is grammatically impossible because the French preposition ‘en’ has no such meaning and the Latin preposition ‘in’, to which he reduces it straightway with a meaning of ‘contre (against)’, does not correspond one by one to the French ‘en’. His is an example of the abuse of the so-called Latinism in Nostradamus. His another abuse of the same genre is found in his interpretation of the quatrain IX-100 (Ionescu, id., p.324).

(When): = Quand, as in the quatrains V-46, V-59, V-67, V-83, VI-21 and VI-32.

When in Seville shall be seen a monster like an ox
: « [24] Jul. 1936 Establishment of the supreme military command (Junta de Defensa Nacional), which appointed Sep. 1936 General Franco as head of government of the Spanish state and commander-in-chief of the armed forces. The F
RANCO government was recognized by Germany and Italy in 1936; by France, Britain and the U.S.A. in 1939, after the ultimate defeat of the republic following three years of bitter fighting. Although Spain joined the Anti-Comintern pact (Apr. 1939), she [la dame (the lady)] remained neutral during the 2nd World War.» (PenguinAtlas 2, p.161).

A monster like an ox: « Franco’s philosophy is worth examining briefly because it was so remote from all the prevailing currents of the age, both liberal and totalitarian. The soldier-statesman he most resembled was Wellington, a figure much admired in Spain. Franco thought war a hateful business, from which gross cruelty was inseparable; it might sometimes be necessary to advance civilization. He was in the tradition of the Romans, the crusaders, the conquistadors, the tercios of Parma. In Africa his Foreign Legionaries mutilated the bodies of their enemies, cutting off their heads. But they were under strict discipline: Franco was a harsh, but just and therefore popular commander. He saw Spanish Christian culture as unarguably superior; he found ‘inexplicable’ the Moroccan ‘resistance to civilization’. Later, putting down the Asturian miners, he was puzzled that, while ‘clearly not monsters or savages’, they should lack ‘that respect for patriotism or hierarchy which was necessary for decent man’. His own motivation he invariably described as ‘duty, love of country’. For Franco, the army was the only national institution, ancient, classless, non-regional, apolitical, incorrupt, disinterested. If it was oppressed, it mutinied, as it had done since the sixteenth century and as recently as 1917; otherwise it served. Everything else in Spain was suspect. The Church was soft. Franco was croyant – he made the sceptical Mola pray for ammunition supplies – and he deliberately courted the approval of the hierarchy by setting up an ‘ecclesiastical household’, but he was in no sense a clericalist and never took the slightest notice of ecclesiastical advice on non-spiritual matters. He hated politics in any shape. The Conservatives were reactionary and selfish landowners. The Liberals were corrupt and selfish businessmen. The Socialists were deluded, or worse. He exploited the two insurrectionary movements, the Falange and the Carlists, amalgamating them under his leadership, but their role was subservient, indeed servile. Franco was never a fascist or had the smallest belief in any kind of Utopia or system. At his headquarters only one politician had influence: his brother-in-law, Ramón Serrano Suñer, and he was a functionary. Franco said: ‘Spaniards are tired of politics and of politicians.’ Again: ‘Only those who live off politics should fear our movement.’ He spent his entire political career seeking to exterminate politics. Franco made better usages of his human and material resources because he fought a military war, and the Republicans fought a political war. He was a master of the nuts and bolts of war: topography, training, infrastructures, logistics, signals, air control. No genius but very thorough and calm; he never reinforced failure and he learnt from mistakes....» (Johnson, 1991, p. 330-331).
© Koji Nihei Daijyo, 2018. All rights reserved.

§782 The firmness of Franco leading to Republican unconditional surrender (1936-1939): VI-64.

VI-64 (§782):

They shall not keep any fixed pact,
All the containers shall come by deceit:
He protests against a peace and armistice by land and sea,
On the front of Barcelona the army taken by diligence.

(On ne tiendra pache aucune arresté,
Tous recevans iront par tromperie:
De paix & tresve terre & mer proteste,
Par Barcelone classe prins d'industrie.)

NOTES: Pache: = A pact. « pache, pacte, accord, convention (a pact, accord, convention).» (Godefroy).

A fixed pact: = The Non-Intervention Agreement of 1936.
« BIRTH OF THE "NON-INTERVENTION" POLICY The policy of non-intervention in Spain which was adopted on the initiative of France, and of which Great Britain subsequently became the leading advocate, was put into effect six weeks after the outbreak of the Civil War. The object of the promoters of the policy was to prevent the Spanish conflict from expanding into an open war between Great Powers on an arena extending far beyond the bounds of the Iberian Peninsula and at the same time to safeguard the independence of the Spanish nation and its freedom to decide its own destiny. But as the Spanish Republican Government pointed out, their unhappy country itself became the theatre of an international war in fact. Disappointing as the results of the Non-Intervention Agreement were to prove in practice, it is probably true to say that at no time did the danger that the conflagration would spread all over Europe appear as acute as it had seemed during the first five or six weeks of the Civil War. Says Prof. Toynbe, "The States of Europe might still be standing uncomfortably, close to the edge of the precipice; but the facts that the Governments had entered into an agreement not to intervene in Spain and that they continued to pay lip-service to the principle of non-intervention (even though some of them were engaged at the same time in evading to the best of their ability the obligations into which they had entered), indicated that even the most aggressive-seeming among them were genuinely afraid of taking the final-step which might plunge them into the abyss." (Sur. Int. Aff. l937, Vol. II Page 222). Since French sympathies or at any rate the sympathies of most of the supporters of the Popular Front - were naturally with the Spanish Republicans, the French Government might have been expected to take the line that there was no reason for refusing to let the legally constituted Government of Spain have munitions, and other supplies which they needed to help them in putting down an insurrection. But, the decision, as is now well-known, was taken against this course. But, in the meantime, an incident occurred, ( the landing of Italian air-craft on the French Moroccan soil, which has already been alluded to) which definitely proved that foreign nations were intervening to the advantage of the Nationalists. M. Blum and his colleagues came to the conclusion that if the danger of a general ideological war was to be averted and the trouble confined within the frontiers of Spain, something more was required than a unilateral decision on their part to withhold supplies from one party to the conflict. They realized indeed, that in view of the Republican sympathies of their supporters it would be impossible for them to implement their own decision not to send supplies to Spain unless some check could be imposed on the flow of foreign munitions to the Spanish Nationalists. So, a proposal for an agreement to refrain from intervening in the Spanish Civil War by sending supplies of war material to either party was made by the French Government to Governments of Great Britain and Italy on the 1st August 1936. The British Government’s response to this French demarche was prompt and favourable. In a note of the 4th August, they showed their willingness and suggested that other States which had a special interest in the Spanish question (chiefly, Germany, Russia and Portugal) he included in the negotiations. In the hope of speeding up the negotiations the French Government circulated the draft text of a declaration on the 6th August. This provided for a formal renunciation of intervention, direct or indirect, in the Spanish civil war and laid it down that the export to Spain of all war material, including aircraft of all kinds and not excepting, material which had been ordered before the civil war began, should be prohibited by the signatories and that there should be an exchange of information regarding the measures taken by the various Governments to put this prohibition into effect. The prohibition of export of war material from France to Spain was put into effect on the 9th August. (The prohibition on the transit of material through France did not become effective until the 8th September.) The French suggestion was approved by all; but in diplomatic language an approval does not necessarily mean acceptance of concrete terms; and the 'Fascist' Powers now gave the first example of tactics which were to become so unpleasantly familiar later. By delaying their definitive acceptance or refusal to a suggestion they protracted the negotiations without allowing them to break down and laid themselves open to the suspicion that they were deliberately trying to gain time in the hope that the help which they were giving to the Nationalists might turn the scale in the latter’s favour before a decision which might limit activities on their behalf has been taken. On the 5th August, the French diplomatic representative in Moscow was informed that the Soviet Government were prepared to accept the principle of non-intervention in Spain, but that they considered it essential that Portugal should be a party to the Agreement, and the foreign assistance to the rebels should cease immediately; By the 10th August the Soviet Government had signified their approval of the draft text of an agreement which the French Government had forwarded to them. The attitude of Italy was less favourable. Italy declared to adhere in principle to the thesis of nonintervention. The Italian Government asked whether ‘moral solidarity’ with one of the parties to the agreement (as expressed in public demonstrations, etc.) did not constitute a noisy and dangerous form of intervention; and what methods of control over the observance or non-observance of the undertaking not to intervene in Spain were contemplated. For the Italian suggestions, there was a strong suspicion in France that they were put forward in a deliberately obstructionist spirit. The Italian reply to the French proposals was therefore not of a nature to encourage the hope of a successful outcome of the negotiations at an early date. On the 9th August, the German charged Affaires in London gave the British Government a formal assurance that no war material was being sent or would be sent to the Spanish Nationalists from Germany and that German warships in Spanish waters would not take any action which could be interpreted as showing sympathy with or giving support to the Nationalists. Herr Von Neurath was also said to have assured the French Ambassador, when the latter broached the subject of non-intervention, that Germany’s policy towards Spain was one of strict neutrality. The German Foreign Minister's first response to the French proposal was said to have been favourable but in the subsequent diplomatic conversations in Berlin the German attitude became stiffer. By the middle of August, in addition to Great Britain, Russia was the only other State, within the group whose adherence was considered essential, which had yet returned a definite favourable reply. On the 15th August declarations were exchanged in Paris by which the French and British Governments placed on record their decision to abstain vigorously from all intervention direct or indirect, in the internal affairs of Spain and announced that they intended to prohibit the export direct or indirect, the re-export and the transit to any destination in Spain, the Spanish possessions or the Spanish Zone of Morocco, all arms, munitions and materials of war, as well as of all aircraft, complete or in parts and of all warships. Finally, they pledged themselves to put these measures into force as soon as the Governments of Germany, Italy, the U.S. S. R. and Portugal had adhered to the declaration. A statement from Foreign Office in London declared: "It should he realized that the maintenance of a strict and impartial attitude of non-intervention is essential if the unhappy events in Spain are to be prevented from having serious repercussions elsewhere. British subjects who assist either side in Spain by land, sea or air, are not only running grave risks for themselves, but are rendering it more difficult to arrive at the proposed agreement. They must not expect to receive any assistance or support whatever in difficulties which they may meet with during such enterprises, which run counter to the objects which His Majesty’s Government are seeking to attain." (Toynbee, op. cit. p.240). On the 17th August, the German Government had notified the French Government their willingness to accept the terms laid down in the Anglo-French declaration as soon as some little demands were fulfilled. On the 21st August, Italy "allowed herself to be persuaded" not to make the prohibition of 'moral solidarity’ an essential condition for their acceptance of an agreement to forbid the supply of war materials to Spain and they adhered to the Anglo-French declaration on the same terms as Great Britain, and France themselves. On the 21st August, also, the Portuguese Government declared in writing their acceptance not to intervene in the Spanish conflict. But they hedged their acceptance about with so many reservations that they retained very considerable freedom of action. On the 23rd August, the Government of the U.S.S. R. notified the French Government of their formal adherence to the declaration on the usual condition of reciprocity. On the 24th August, the German Government, informed the French Government that in view of the fact that the other interested Governments had now accepted the French Proposals, they themselves would waive the condition that their negotiations over the Lufthansa machine must first be concluded and would put into force immediately the measures for which the declaration provided. The twenty-one Governments which ultimately accepted the Non-Intervention Agreement, in addition to the six specially interested Powers were: Albania, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Greece, Hungary, The Irish Free State, Yugoslavia, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Rumania, Sweden and Turkey. It will be noticed that the only European State which was absent from the list was Switzerland, and the Swiss Federal Government had informed the French Government that, while they felt precluded by the permanent neutrality of the Swiss Confederation from participating in the suggested joint declaration: they had on their own initiative taken certain measures designed to secure the same object. As soon as the successful conclusion of the first phase of the non-intervention negotiations had been ensured by the adherence of Germany to the agreement, the French Government had taken a further step. They had invited the Powers to take part in further discussions and had suggested that the most convenient method of arranging for the exchange of information which was an integral part of their plan, might be the establishment of a Committee in London, composed of representatives of all the parties to the agreement. Up to 5th September, all States except Portugal whose attendance was of the first importance, had consented to serve in the Committee. The delay in accepting the French proposals for a Non-Intervention Agreement, and the reservations which accompanied Portugal’s final acceptance, had shown how reluctant Dr. Salazar’s Government were to tie their hands in any way and it was said that, considerable diplomatic pressure from France and Great Britain had been needed to secure the issue in Lisbon, of the decree that placed an embargo on the export on transit of war materials to Spain. By the beginning of September the Portuguese Government had indicated that they might agree to be represented on the Non-Intervention Committee if its scope and competence were more clearly defined; and after the German acceptance had been received it was decided to summon the first meeting of the Committee on the 9th September in the hope that by that time French and British influence in Lisbon would have elicited a definite acceptance. But Portugal was an absentee when the first meeting of the Non-Intervention Committee took place on the 9th September and it was not until the end of September that the combined influence of France and Great Britain exercised not only through diplomatic channels but also through the medium of conversations at Geneva between Mr. Eden and the Portuguese Foreign Minister, was successful in inducing the Portuguese Government to waive their objections to representation on the Non-Intervention Committee.» (Scharma, 1946, p.59-67).

On ne tiendra pache aucune arresté: = On ne tiendra aucune pache arresté[e].

Recevans: = Containers. « Recevant, (subst.) Récipient (Container, receptacle).).» (Huguet).

They shall not keep any fixed pact, All the containers shall come by deceit: « In the two first verses the point in question is the foreign intervention in Spain and the efforts made by the powers to prevent and control it.» (Ionescu, 1976, p.456); « During the battles over Madrid which began in October [1936], the conditions of war changed. Primarily, the relief from Germany and Italy augmented. These two countries recognized the Franco Government on November 18, and therefore took part in the camp of Franco at the risk of their prestige. In November and December Germany sent the ‘Condor Legion’ of her air force in addition to aircraft and tank corps, and then from Italy arrived her ground ‘Volunteer Troops’. Secondly, the U.S.S.R began to grant aids to the Spanish Republic. The U.S.S.R. searching for a security against Germany did not want to confront Great Britain and France by her aids to the Republic nor to face a pro-German regime in place of the Republic in case of its defeat, but as self-fancied leader of anti-Fascism she could not deny the demands of the Republic. Moreover, the campaigns of her solidarity with Spain served to boost the morale of the nation depressed through Stalin’s Great Purge. At the beginning of October the U.S.S.R. declared not restricted by the Non-Intervention Agreement and began to transport relief supplies.» (Tateishi, 2000, p.297-298); « The failure of the efforts made by France and Great Britain to check the internationalization of the conflict is obvious.» (Trémolières IV, p.96).

Sea battle: « Cape Palos 5-6 March 1938 While the Republican navy became listless, the Nationalist navy was extremely active. Concentrated at Palma, on Majorca, Nationalist ships, strongly supported by Italian aircraft, blockaded the Republican coast and escorted convoys of Italian war matériel to the mainland. On 5 March 1938 a strong force of three Nationalist cruisers supported by destroyers and minelayers put to sea to escort an inbound convoy. At 1:00
AM on 6 March the Nationalist ships steamed headlong into Vice-Admiral Luis González Ubieta’s Republican force of cruisers, destroyers, and Soviet-supplied torpedo boats, originally despatched to attack the Nationalist base at Palma. Dodging a Republican torpedo attack, the Nationalist squadron tried to disengage, preferring to delay the action until daybreak, but Ubieta pursued and, at 2:15 AM, his ships opened fire off Cape Palos, near Cartagena. As the cruisers fought an inconclusive and inaccurate long-range gunnery duel, three Republican destroyers crept unobserved into torpedo range of them. Each ship fired a spread of four torpedoes, at least two of which hit the Nationalist cruiser Baleares, flagship of Vice-Admiral Manuel de Vierna, between her two forward turrets. The explosion detonated her forward magazines and wrecked the forepart of the ship, including her bridge, which disintegrated with the loss of all inside, including Vierna. As the smouldering remains of Baleares wallowed in the water, slowly sinking, the remaining Nationalist ships fled. Out of crew of 1,206, 441 survivors were eventually rescued by British destroyers. Cape Palos was the largest naval battle of the Spanish Civil War, and a significant victory for the Republicans, but the Nationalist blockade remained intact.» (Grant, 2011, p.795).

Proteste: = Il [Franco] proteste (He [Franco] protests).

A peace and armistice by land and sea: « The thirteen points in outline of May, 1938, by the premier of the Republic Negrín made clear her end of war in proposing the withdrawal of foreign troops, the decision of regime by referendum, the guarantee of the freedom of religion, agrarian reforms, etc., tried to elicit a change of policy toward Spain from Great Britain and France in insisting upon her moderate policies, and offered to Franco the conditions of peace.» (Tateishi, id., p.304).

He protests against a peace and armistice by land and sea
: « But neither Great Britain and France nor Franco did respond to his propositions, and his clear definition of the end of war could not strengthen the Republican unity... Franco with the menace of all-out assault insisted upon a capitulation without conditions to the bitter end.» (Tateishi, id., p.304-307).

On the front of Barcelona the army taken by diligence
: = In Catalonia the Republican army defeated by the Nationalists diligently commanded by General Franco; « Ebro 24 July-16 November 1938. After an initial success in their last-throw offensive at Ebro, the Republicans were once again driven back by Nationalist forces, suffering huge losses. Aided by German and Italian planes, the Nationalists claimed a decisive victory, which sealed the fate of the Spanish Republic. Having managed to defend Valencia against Nationalist attacks, the Republicans attempted to restore contact with Catalonia with an offensive over the Ebro River. The attack, led by communist General Juan Modesto, once again took the Nationalists by surprise, bringing the Republicans early success. Eighty thousand Republican soldiers crossed the river in boats and attacked General Juan Yagüe’s Nationalist troops, inflicting substantial damage. Upon reaching the town of Gandesa, however, the Republicans met fierce resistance. The rocky terrain offered little cover for the fighters, and German and Italian planes were easily able to target Republican positions. Determined to annihilate the Republicans, General Franco ordered large reinforcements to join the battle, which was to last for over three months. Even when it became clear that they could not win, the leader of the Spanish Republic, Juan Negrín, was unable to withdraw troops as few options remained for the increasingly desperate Republic. In one of the war’s hardest fought battles, both sides incurred huge losses, but for the Republicans these losses were unsustainable. Ebro was the last major battle of the Spanish Civil War. Following the defeat, the Republicans continued to concede territory to the Nationalists until 1 April 1939, when General Franco declared the war over, signifying the end of the Spanish Republic.» (Grant, id., p.797); « Franco in April [1938] cut Republican Spain in two. Thereafter it was really a matter of time only, with Franco taking no chances and insisting on overwhelming superiority. By the autumn Stalin had tired of the war, had extracted the last ounce of propaganda value out of it, had completed his purges and was already thinking of a new deal, either with the Western democracies or, more likely, with Hitler. He had also got all the Republic’s gold. So he cut off aid, and Franco was able to open his last Catalonian offensive, just before Christmas, confident that the end was near. Barcelona fell on 28 January 1939, and Madrid on 28 March. Franco had fought the war without passion, and when he heard it was over he did not even look up from his desk.» (Johnson, 1991, p.338).

Classe prins d'industrie (the army taken by diligence): V. Ionescu’s interpretation following that of Centurio "classe d'industrie = Industriearbeiterklasse (a class of industrial workers)" (Centurio, 1953, p.142-143) of the phrase « classe d'industrie (the class of industry) » as « la classe prolétaire (the proletarian class) » seems illogical because the most ordinary meaning of the term: the class of industry is probably that of enterprisers or capitalists rather than that of workers: « industry friction between labor and industry » (Obunsha); « industry the conciliation of labor and industry » (Koine). And in truth, however, the term classe in this context means army and that of industrie diligence: « Classe (classis). Flotte.» (Huguet); « classis, an army. a. On land (very ancient). b. At sea, a fleet.» (Smith-Lockwood) « INDUSTRIE. 1° Vx: Habileté à exécuter qqch (ability, skill to do something).»
(Petit Robert); « Industrie. Activité, habileté, soin (Industry. Activity, ability, care). – D’industrie. Avec intention, à dessein (By industry. By intention, on purpose).» (Huguet).

The diligence of General Franco: « He exploited the two insurrectionary movements, the Falange and the Carlists, amalgamating them under his leadership, but their role was subservient, indeed servile. Franco was never a fascist or had the smallest belief in any kind of Utopia or system. At his headquarters only one politician had influence: his brother-in-law, Ramón Serrano Suñer, and he was a functionary... Franco made better usages of his human and material resources because he fought a military war, and the Republicans fought a political war. He was a master of the nuts and bolts of war: topography, training, infrastructures, logistics, signals, air control. No genius but very thorough and calm; he never reinforced failure and he learnt from mistakes....» (Johnson, 1991, p.331); « Reasons for the nationalist victory were that Franco was extremely skilful in holding together the various right-wing groups (army, church, monarchists and Falangists); the republicans were much less united (anarchists and communists actually fought each other for a time in Barcelona).» (Lowe, 1988, p.175).
© Koji Nihei Daijyo, 2018. All rights reserved. 

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 218 in the 20th [1901-2000] (§731-§948).

Latest journals