§859 The superpowers’ settlement of post-war nine countries; the Catholics persecuted in Eastern Europe (1943-1955): I-81.

I-81 (§859):

Nine of human troops shall be put aside
separated by judgment and council:
Their destiny shall be divided in percentage.
Kap. Thita lambda dead, banished astray.

(D'humain troupeau neuf seront mis à part
De jugement & conseil separés:
Leur sort sera divisé en depart
Καπ. Θ
hita λambda mors, bannis esgarés.)

NOTES: Nine of human troops shall be put aside separated by judgment and council: Their destiny shall be divided in percentage: The Allies’ conferences concerning the post-war settlement of nine countries (Germany, Austria, Yugoslavia, Greece, Hungary, Bulgaria, Rumania, Poland and Czechoslovakia) shall decide their destiny in proportion to the occupiers’ politico-military influences upon them;

« Accord of the occupying powers as to the administration of Germany. June 5 [1945]. Declaration of the four powers (USA, USSR, Great Britain and France) in Berlin. The European consultative Commission, which started its works on January 14, 1944, in London, envisaged without delay, at the instigation of the British, a division of Germany into occupation zones and not into several countries. On 12 September, 1944, the Big Three sign the protocol concerning the occupation zones in Germany in the frontiers of the Reich of December 31, 1937, as well as the administration of the Greater Berlin. These accords were ratified at Yalta. Stalin accepted, equally, on this occasion of the Big Three’s conference that France would be the fourth occupation power and seated at the Allied Control Council. He added there a condition: that the territory of the French occupation zone should be deducted from those of the British and American zones.» (Kaspi, 1980, p.517).

« The division of Germany (1945-9) Germany was divided into four zones by the Soviet Union in the east, Britain in the north, France in the west and the US in the south. All German territories east of the Rivers Oder and Neisse were placed under Polish and Soviet administration. Despite initial endeavours at cooperation, which only succeeded in a few circumstances such as the Nuremberg Trials, the Soviet zone became administered increasingly separately from the other three… East Germany (1949-90) The German Democratic Republic (GDR) was founded in the Soviet eastern zone on 7 October 1949, in response to the foundation of the FRG. Led by Ulbricht, who transformed it into a Communist satellite state of the Soviet Union, the GDR’s economy suffered from its transformation into a centrally planned economy, and from the dismantling of industries by the Soviet Union. Disenchantment with the dictatorial regime and the slow economic recovery compared to West Germany sparked off an uprising of over 300,000 workers on 17 June 1953, which was crushed by Soviet tanks. However, the country’s viability continued to be challenged by the exodus of hundreds of thousands of East Germans to West Berlin every year. To enable East Germany’s continued existence, the Berlin Wall was built on 13 August 1961 as a complement to the existing impenetrable border between East and West Germany... West Germany (since 1949) the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG) was founded on 23 May 1949, and after a narrow election victory Adenauer became its first Chancellor. Aided by a rapid economic recovery masterminded by Erhard, the new democracy won general acceptance and support. This stability was further strengthened by Adenauer’s policy of integration into the Western alliance, e.g. through European integration and the joining of NATO, which enabled the speedy gain of full sovereignty for the new state from the Western allies.» (
Palmowski, p.256).

« Austria at the end of the war. April 27, 1945. The former Federal Chancellor, a Social-Democrat, Karl Renner formed an Austrian government recognized by the Occidental powers on July 7, 1945. This government enjoyed a liberty of decision otherwise limited by the inter-Allied Control Council which ordains in unanimity. Austria has been finally shared in four occupation zones like Germany.» (Kaspi, id., p.502-505); « Austria: Allied occupation (1945-55) In 1945, Austria was occupied in four zones by the Allies (USSR, USA, UK, and France), who encouraged the readoption of the 1920 Constitution under the leadership of Renner, and the formation of political parties. Renner had persuaded the Allies to regard Austria not as a perpetrator, but as Nazism’s ‘first victim’, a perception that became a founding myth for post-war Austria. On 25 November 1945 the first parliament was elected, which resulted in an absolute majority for the conservative Austrian People’s Party (Österreichische Volkspartei, ÖVP). Through large-scale nationalizations of heavy industries, banks, and energy suppliers, and through Marshal Aid, the economy was soon on the path to recovery… Austrian State Treaty (15 May 1955) The treaty, signed by the Soviet Union, the USA, Britain, and France, formally recognized the second Austrian republic and agreed that occupation forces would withdraw within five months. Unlike in Germany, whose eastern half the Soviet Union had integrated into its Communist sphere of influence, the USSR agreed to vacate its Austrian zone of occupation, in return for reparation payments, and Austrian adherence to a strict policy of neutrality.» (
Palmowski, p.42-43).

« Accompanied by Anthony Eden, General Sir Hastings Ismay, his chief-of staff, and Field-Marshal Sir Alan Brooke, the C.I.G.S., the Prime Minister travelled via Naples, Cairo, and Simferopol’ and arrived in Moscow on the evening of October 9 [1944]. At 2200 hours, he and Eden were conducted to Stalin’s office. Stalin, accompanied by Molotov, was waiting for him. And in the absence of Averell Harriman [US ambassador in Moscow], the four men lost no time in making a preliminary survey of the world situation. Doubtless Harriman would not have objected to their decision to invite the Polish government to send a delegation to Moscow. But perhaps he would have thought that Churchill was unduly compromising the future as well as the U.S.A. if he had heard him tell Stalin: “Let us settle about our affairs in the Balkans. Your armies are in Roumania and Bulgaria. We have interests, missions, and agents there. Don’t let us get at cross-purposes in small ways. So far as Britain and Russia are concerned, how would it do for you to have ninety per cent predominance in Roumania, for us to have ninety per cent of the say in Greece, and go fifty-fifty about Yugoslavia ?” And even more so if he had seen Churchill make in writing a proposal which had never ben agreed by London and Washington. Churchill in fact, while his words were being translated, scribbled on a half sheet of paper:
      Russia……….90 %
      The others…...10%
      Great Britain...90 %
      (in accord with U.S.A.)
    Yugoslavia……..50-50 %
    Hungary………..50-50 %
      Russia……….75 %
      The others…...25%”
Stalin ticked the paper passed to him by Churchill, who wrote: “It was all settled in no more time than it takes to set down.”» (Bauer, 1979, p.586).

Poland: « On October 13, the Polish delegation of the government-in-exile, consisting of its Prime Minister, Stanislas Mikolajczyk, Professor Grabski, and Foreign Minister Tadeusz Romer started discussions with Stalin Molotov, Chuchill, Eden, and Harriman, who had been instructed to keep strictly to his rôle as observer. They intended to reach an agreement on two questions: firstly, the eastern frontier of Poland; and secondly, the formation of a unified Polish government, including the London government’s representatives and members of the Lublin “National Committee”. Although they expected to make some territorial sacrifices to the Soviet Union, Milolajczyk and his colleagues were aghast when they discovered that the Teheran agreement (which had been concluded behind their backs by the “Big Three”) had prescribed the Curzon Line as their country’s frontier; thus 48 per cent of Polish territory would be surrendered to the U.S.S.R. without the population involved being consulted about the transfer. The Polish prime minister’s protests against the acquiescence which was being demanded of him left Stalin cold and uncompromising. After this session, the British and Poles met. Churchill described to Mikolajczyk the advantage which would compensate Poland for the sacrifice he was calling upon her to make: “But think what you will get in exchange. You will have a country. I will see that a British ambassador is sent to you. And there will also be an ambassador from the United States, the greatest military power in the world… ” “If you accept the Curzon line, the United States will devote themselves most actively to the reconstruction of Poland and will doubtless give you large loans, perhaps even without your having to ask for them. We will help you too, but we will be poor after this war. You are obliged to accept the decision of the great powers.” Otherwise it would be the end of Poland… » (Bauer, id., p.587).

: « December 12, 1943. The Soviet Union signs with Czechoslovakia a treaty of friendship, of mutual assistance and of cooperation for the post-war period. Under the impression of the traumatism suffered at Munich, Beneš [President of Czechoslovakia 1935-8, 1945-8] has deployed the greatest efforts in relation to the Occidentals and to the USSR from the beginning of his exile, in order to secure the continuity of the State of Czechoslovakia. In October 1939, in fact, a Czechoslovak National Committee was formed in London. In July 1941, immediately after Germany attacked the USSR on 22 June, the Soviet ambassador in London, Maïski, advises Beneš of the USSR’s desire of an independent Czechoslovakia and refusal of meddling with her internal affairs. On July 18, 1941, Maïski signs with the Czechoslovak Foreign Minister, Jan Masaryk, son of the father, founder of the first Czechoslovak Republic Tomáš Masaryk, a treaty recognizing Czechoslovakia as an independent and sovereign country in her frontiers before Munich. The British and American governments recognize soon after the Czechoslovak government.» (Kaspi, 1980, p.390-391).

 « Obviously, in October 1944, Churchill and Eden no longer had any illusions about the future direction of Marshal Tito7s policy, in spite of the Anglo-American arms deliveries which had saved him from defeat and death. Moreover, in this division of spheres of influence, it was clear that Churchill had completely forgotten Albania, on which Greece had some claims.» (Bauer, id., p.586).

Kap. Thita lambda
: « An anonymous contributor, writing in the number of November 1724 of the Mercure de France, is of opinion that these letters are the abbreviation of the name Καθολικ
οῖ : the quatrain may announce the persecution of the Catholics.» (Brind’Amour, 1996, p.162).

Kap. Thita lambda dead, banished astray: The Catholics in the Eastern Europe shall be persecuted under the communist regime; « This method is based upon the writing system of the ancient Hebraic language, where the vowels are missing. We named this method “anagram by syncope or permutation of vowels” [Ionescu, 1976, p.144]. In the present case, it is a syncope of vowels:
Κ, Θ, Λ are the consonants that form the ironwork of the word ΚαΘοΛιΚ(ός, , òν) ‘catholic’. The last verse tells therefore the persecutions suffered by the Christians beyond the Iron Curtain (dead, banished astray). In general, the term “Catholic” is used for the Roman Church. Equally, the Church of the East or Orthodox is – by its proper title – “Catholic”. For, since the Schism of the East, there have been the two Churches: Greco-Catholic and Romano-Catholic. In order to underline the equal reality of the one and the other of the two Churches, issuing from the original Christianity, Nostradamus employs the Greek letters. Thus, the implication of the Greek Church is evident.» (Ionescu, 1976, p.606-607).

« The Second World War had for its prelude the Conference of Munich where the Great Powers at the moment decided the future of Czechoslovakia even without consulting her government and imposed their solution upon her, which widely opened the doors of the Danubian world to Hitler. The Second World War was finished by the application of the decisions made in the course of another international Conference, that of Yalta, where the new Great Powers, the USA, the UK and the USSR, decided in the same voluntary ignorance of the vows of the population to place the countries of Eastern Europe in the sphere of Soviet influence. Thus was born at Yalta this Eastern Europe as we understand it today in our political jargon, an Europe of the East, to which belongs the totality of the Danubian and Balkan States, Poland as well as a part of the former territory of the Reich that had been attributed to the USSR as occupation zone and became in 1949 German Democratic Republic. Thereafter, Eastern Europe was going to live under the shadow of Moscow.» (Bogdan, 1990, p.374-375);

« The attitude of the Communist power in regard to the religion and the Church was different according to the countries. In Bulgaria and Rumania, where the population in large majority was orthodox, the new power immediately made rally to it the leaders of the Church in playing with their traditional hate against Rome and at the same time with the necessity of unity around the Patriarchate of Moscow, entirely devoted to the Soviet State. The Orthodox Church of Serbia adopted from the start the same attitude of submission in regard to Tito’s regime. Everywhere, the recalcitrant elements of the Orthodox clergy were removed from their parishes with the complicity of the hierarchy, relegated into monasteries, even imprisoned. In Rumania, the suppression of the Uniate Church in 1948 scarcely seemed appreciated by the faithful and the clergy who continued clandestinely their activity in suffering often persecutions.» (Bogdan, 1990, p.438-439).

« In the Catholic countries, the situation showed different. The Catholic Church, by virtue of its ties with Rome and its centralized structure, constituted a considerable force, which, if it was not neutralized or at least not controlled by the State, risked being the point of rallying of the opposers against the regime. As early as 1945-1946, a number of priests and monks as well as remarkable personalities of the Catholic world had been arrested and condemned for “collaboration” and “anti-Soviet activities”, as it was the case in Yugoslavia with Mgr. Stepinac. The repeated public protestations of the Catholic Church against the blows to the religious liberty, against the encroachments of the temporal upon the spiritual, against the abuses of the regime, triggered off from the end of 1948 physical persecutions of a certain number of prelates. Tens of thousands of Hungarians who hurried to hear the sermons of the cardinal Mindszenty and hundreds of thousands of Poles who gathered at the Marian sanctuary of Czestochowa could not but confirm the Communist leaders in their idea of striking hard and sharp. The arrest of the cardinal Mindszenty on December 26, 1948, under the inculpation of complot against the Republic, of espionage and trade of money, his trial, in the course of which he appeared physically broken and avowed his “crimes” not without reticences, his condemnation to a life imprisonment, aroused an intense emotion in the country. In order to avoid the worst, the Hungarian episcopate made a concession, and on April 30, 1950, the Archbishop Grösz resigned himself to signing with the government an accord which guaranteed officially the liberty of cult and the grant of financial aid to the Church in exchange of the recognition of the Socialist State by the Church secured by way of oath of fidelity. It was in fact a market of dupes. A week after the conclusion of this compromise, the Hungarian government pronounced the dissolution of almost all of the religious Orders; more than 10,000 monks and nuns were dispersed, a large number of them confined in the labour camps. At the beginning of the next year, the Archbishop Grösz was in his turn arrested and condemned to 15 year imprisonment. In the same year in Czechslovakia, those of bishops who had not been arrested in 1950 were arrested in their turn and especially the archbishop of Prague, Mgr. Beran was apprehended on March 10, 1951. In Poland, in the same year, the police arrested the bishop of Kiekce Mgr. Kaczmarek and the former archbishop of Lvov, Mgr. Baziak. Also in the same year, all the Catholic bishops of Rumania were imprisoned in their turn. The high clergy was not the only victim of these physical persecutions. The low clergy was submitted everywhere to these torments of every kind, the prelates were arrested, the seminaries were closed.» (Bogdan, id., p.439-441).
© Koji Nihei Daijyo, 2019. All rights reserved.

§860 Collapse of the Ottoman Empire; Independent countries in the Middle East (1920-1948): III-97.

III-97 (§860):

The new law shall occupy the new territory,
Towards Syria, Judea, & Palestine:
The grand barbarous empire shall collapse,
Before Phebe shall have finished its age.

(Nouvelle loy terre neufve occuper
Vers la Syrie, Judee, & Palestine:
Le grand empire barbar corruer,
Avant que Phebés son siecle determine.)

NOTES: The new law shall occupy the new territory, Towards Syria, Judea, & Palestine: The grand barbarous empire shall collapse: « Out of the World War I came Syria, Palestine, Mesopotamia, etc., all carved out of the Turkish Empire.» (Lamont, 1944, p.133).

The new law: The administration of a territory through the conference and decision of the League of Nations.

The new territory: The ex-Ottoman districts, apart from the Republic of Turkey (1923): Syria as mandate of France (1920) and Judea and Palestine as mandate of Great Britain (1920).

The grand barbarous empire
: = The Ottoman Empire, “barbarous” signifying “not Christian”, i.e., “Moslem”. Cf. Ovason, 1997, p.127.

: « Corruer, latinisme par plaisanterie. Tomber (Latinism by joke. To fall).» (Huguet); « cor-ruō, ruere, ruī. Intrans.: to fall in a heap or in ruins, collapse, sink to the ground.» (Smith-Lockwood).

The grand barbarous empire shall collapse
: « Ottoman Empire, Early history. … after the two Balkan Wars it had lost most of its European possessions by 1914. Collapse. Despite its unique track record of losing wars, the Ottoman Empire participated in World War I on the side of the Central Powers, whereupon it also lost its Arab empire. The severe terms of the Treaty of Sèvres, which determined the partition of the Turkish heartland of Anatolia, the creation of a separate state of Armenia, and the loss of further territory to Greece, aroused intense Turkish nationalism. This was translated into a liberation movement under Kemal (Atatürk), whose conquests were consolidated in the Treaty of Lausanne. He then destroyed the twin pillars of the Ottoman Empire by abolishing the Sultan, and the unity between the state and the Muslim religion. On 29 October 1923, the Republic of Turkey was proclaimed in its stead.» (Palmowski, p.519-520).

Syria: « Early history (up to 1970). A part of the Ottoman Empire from 1517, during World War I it was occupied by British troops, with active Arab help. Immediately after the Arab leader, Faisal (Faisal I), was rewarded for his support by being made King of Syria, he had to give up his throne, as the Treaty of Sèvres transformed it into a French League of Nations Mandate. French rule was relatively unpopular, leading to a number of uprisings. In World War II, its French colonial administration followed the Vichy government, so that in July 1941 British and Free French forces occupied the country. De Gaulle declared Syria’s independence for 28 September 1944, though effective autonomy was not achieved until the complete withdrawal of British and French forces on 17 April 1946.» (Palmowski, p.660-661).

Lebanon: « Before independence (1918-43). A part of the Ottoman Empire since 1516, it came under French control in 1918, and was declared a French League of Nations Mandate on 1 September 1920. This Mandate entailed a large increase in the country’s territory to its present size, which brought the number of Muslims to near parity with that of the Maronite Christians who dominated the country’s political and economic establishment. Its constitution of 1926, which shaped its political system for the rest of the century, was based on that of the French Third Republic. Political representation was awarded by religious group, to each according to its size. In the Chamber of Deputies, Maronite Christians were to be represented relative to Muslims at a ratio of six to five. The main offices of state were also reserved for different religions and sects, so that the President was to be a Maronite Christian, the Prime Minister a Sunni Muslim, the Speaker a Shi’ite Muslim. National compromise (1943-1960s). Released into independence in 1943, the new state still had an extremely underdeveloped sense of nationhood. By this time the Maronites, who had benefited considerably from French administration, looked to Western culture, while Muslims felt more Syrian than Lebanese. Upon independence, it was agreed that the current political system should be maintained, while each group should refrain from extremism, i.e. the Maronites accepted that Lebanon was an Arab country, while Muslims turned their attention away from other Arab states.» (Palmowski, p.397).

Israel: « Origins (up to 1947). The idea was propagated most successfully by Herzel, who argued that peaceful and harmonious coexistence between Jews and Gentiles had proved to be impossible, and that Jews could only be free from persecution and discrimination in their own state. In response, a number of Jews began to emigrate to Palestine to press for Jewish claims there, while the World Zionist Organization (WZO) was set up in 1897 in order to convince world opinion and political leaders the necessity of a Jewish state in Palestine. In 1917 the WZO persuaded the British government to set up a Jewish Legion which helped rid Palestine of Ottoman Turkish rule. Led by Weizmann, the WZO achieved a major diplomatic success with the Balfour Declaration, which for the first time accepted the legitimacy of a Jewish state in Palestine. When this failed to materialize after World War I, the WZO encouraged further Jewish emigration into Palestine, and won from the local British authorities important concessions relative to self-rule through the Jewish Agency. Initially, the Jewish settlers coexisted peacefully and harmoniously with the indigenous, partly nomadic Arab population. However, as both Arabs and Jews saw their hopes for early independence dashed, an increasing sense of Arab nationalism emerged, particularly as the Jewish influx continued. Sporadic attacks against Jewish settlements occurred from 1920, in response to which the Jews created their own defence organizations. Meanwhile, the Jews created their own administrative and political structures. Tensions between Arabs, Jews, and the British authorities mounted in the period 1940-8, when almost 100,000 new settlers arrived (illegally) in Palestine. Independence (1947). Ultimately, Britain was unable to resolve its contradictory promise of independence for Jews and Arabs, and in 1947 returned its Mandate to the UN, which recommended a partition of the country between Jews and Arabs. On the basis of this plan, Ben-Gurion declared Israel’s independence on 14 May 1948. The following day, the country was attacked by an Arab coalition consisting of the armies of Egypt, Transjordan, Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq. In its War of Independence, the young state managed to defend itself, and even to extend its borders.» (Palmowski, p.333).

: = « Phebe = Phoebe [= Φοίβη]. [Greek myth.] Artemis (Diana) as Goddess of the Moon.» (Obunsha). The apparent form of Phebés seems to be masculine as « Phoebus. [Greek myth.] Surname of Apollo as God of the Sun.» (Obunsha), but the masculine term “Le Phybe [= ó Φοῖβος]” of Nostradamus in the quatrain X-55 (§72) contains the apparently feminine form of ‘Phybe’, which means that Noatradamus plays with the exchange of word gender in his Prophecies; « Roberts and Cheetham read Phebe as meaning the Sun, no doubt confusing the Phoebe with that of Phoebus ApolloPhebe is merely another name for Phoebe, the Moon.» (Ovason, 1997, p.127-128).

Before Phebe shall have finished its age
: = Before “Twenty years of the reign of the Moon past” (I-48, §941) = Before the year 2000 A.D. In this context, the year 1920 as beginning of mandate is too early, and the mandate is not independence, then the year 1946 of independence of Syria and Lebanon, that of 1948 of Israel may be more pertinent, and the new law may be more fitting in with the United Nations as to Israel. In order to determine the meaning of this phrase, Ovason relies first on the arcane theory of the Planetary Rulers, which delimits his sphere of search before 1879, the time of the end of the Moon’s rule and he concludes that “this quatrain III.97 is revealed as having nothing to do with the modern period, and nothing to do with Israel” (Ovason, id., p.127-128), but the essential hint for the answer to the phrase is already in another quatrain [I-48, §941] of Nostradamus himself, which is to be consulted in the first place.

In this perspective, also, the term “Jud.” (§874, II-60) and “Judee” (§860, III-97) can designate both “Israel, a newly founded country through the United Nations” and this terminology is integral because the ancient kingdom of Judea and the modern Israel occupy almost the same territory.

V. Ionescu (1976, p.670-671), too, correlates this quatrain solely with the foundation of Israel, but it excludes the existence of Syria and Palestine, and his interpretation of “the grand barbarous empire” as “the German Third Reich of Hitler” cannot explain its relation to the Middle East. The point of view that can converge into one unified event the four clauses: 1° the new law, 2° the new territory, 3° the grand barbarous empire and 4° Syria, Judea and Palestine would be the two step administrations of the international organizations of ours, and above all, without the premise of the British mandate the foundation of Israel would have been nearly impossible.
© Koji Nihei Daijyo, 2019. All rights reserved.

§861 350 years of the British Empire by colonization (1600-1947): X-100.

X-100 (§861):

The grand empire by England shall be,
The All-River of more than 300 years.
She shall dispatch grand troops by sea and land,
The Lusitans shall not be content with it.

(Le grand empire sera par Angleterre,
Le pempotam des ans plus de trois cens.
Grandes coppies passer par mer & terre,
Les Lusitains n'en seront pas contens.)

NOTES: Le grand empire sera par Angleterre, Le pempotam des ans plus de trois cens: The construction will be as follows: Le grand empire par Angleterre sera le pempotam des ans plus de trois cens = The grand empire by England shall be the All-River of more than 300 years.

The grand empire by England: = « the British Empire. Another name for England which has obtained territories abroad since the 16th century. Her territories in her prime attained one quarter of the globe.» (EH, VIII, p.1163); Her colonies (not always at a time): the West Indies, North America, Guyana, Ireland, India and its surroundings, the Southern, North-Eastern and South-Western Africa, Yemen, Australia, New Zealand, Malay, Borneo, New Guinea, the Falkland Islands and St. Helena (cf. EH, VIII, p.1163, Chart: Principal territories of the British Empire in 1775 and 1914); « British Empire. The colonies, protectorates, and territories brought under British sovereignty from as early as the sixteenth century. In the late nineteenth century, some in Britain still harboured dreams of expanding the Empire, such as Rhodes [Cecil John] and Milner [Alfred], who wanted to create a unified Cape-to-Cairo dominion in Africa. However, the South African (Boer) War (1899-1902) damaged Britain’s confidence in its Empire. In many areas, control had never advanced beyond indirect rule… » (Palmowski, p.88-89).

Pempotam: A neologism of Nostradamus consisting of the Greek πᾶν (pān, all; N of pān becoming M before P, and PAN and PEM are identical in pronunciation in French) and
ποταμός (potamos, river; POTAM is an apocope of POTAMOS), representing the British colonies all over the globe because of the existing rivers there. Though the Greek POTAMOS can signify also a SEA (cf. Bailly, s.v.; Leoni, 1982, p.442-443), a river always connotes the land where it runs, but a sea doesn’t. And naturally, this neologism also implies « la suprématie des mers (supremacy of the seas) » (Fontbrune, 1939, p.257) or « le roi des mers (the king of the seas) » (Le Pelletier, I, p.162), through which England obtains many river-flowing lands abroad. This double meaning fits in very nicely with the third line: « She shall dispatch grand troops by sea and land ».

Most of our predecessors simply follow Le Pelletier who says that the word Pempotam is composed of the Greek πᾶν and the Latin potens = tout-puissant (omnipotent) (Le Pelletier, id.). But the text of Nostradamus has another example of the word Pempotam meaning the Great Britain* and at the same time another word PEMPOTANS (§699, VIII-97), which may exclude Le Pelletier’s easy translation of PEMPOTAM into PANPOTENS.

* ... approchera de maison ce que paravant estoit & est grande cité comprenant le Pempotam la mesopotamie de l'Europe a quarante cinq, & autres de quaranteung, quarantedeux, & trentesept, & dans iceluy temps & en icelles contrees la puissance infernale mettra à l’encontre de l’eglise de Jesus Christ la puissance des adversaires de sa loy, qui sera le second antechrist, lequel persecutera icelle eglise & son vray vicaire par moyen de la puissance des Roys temporelz, (… what before was and is a grand city including the Pempotam and the Mesoptamia of Europe** [France’s centre Paris’ heart the island of Cité is between the two ramifications of the Seine] approaches a house in the years 37-45 [i.e., the political and military shrinking of the Great Britain and the Republic of France suffering from the Blitzkrieg of the Nazi Germany in the years immediately preceding the WWII and of the WWII], and in this time and in these districts the infernal power shall oppose against the Church of Jesus Christ the power of its law’s adversaries, who shall be a second Antichrist*****, who shall persecute this Church and its true Vicar by means of the power of the temporal Kings, (№3,
Adresse à Henri II, p.18).

** Cf.
§273, VIII-70; §474, VII-22 and §820, III-99; Another usage of Nostradamus: « la cité libre, constituee & assize dans une autre exigue mezopotamie (the free city, constituted and situated in another tiny Mesopotamia)» (№3, Adresse à Henri II, p.12).

And, though the word PEMPOTANS (VIII-97) may be considered to be composed of pan + potent as Le Pelletier will pretend so, its component POTANS alludes in reality to POTENCE (potency) = BÉQUILLE (crutch, stand) = GIBET (scaffold) (Bloch & Wartburg, s.v. POTENCE). In fact, the quatrain VIII-97 has a theme of Paris Commune in 1871 (cf. Vignois, 1910, p.329), resulting in the instant firing of almost all the Communards (17,000 only in Paris) (« tous au gibet » “all to the scaffold” = Pempotans ) (cf. Seignobos, 1921b, p. 313).

The start of “more than 300 years”: = 1600; « Elisabeth, on the throne in 1558, reigned in 1588, when the Invincible Armada of Philip II, king of Spain, was destroyed by Drake, Vice-Admiral of England. It is from this epoch that dates the maritime preponderance of England.» (Le Pelletier, id., p.161-162). This interpretation of Le Pelletier most popular among the Nostradamus researchers is evidently based upon that of the term “pempotam” as “the supremacy of the seas”, but its original and true meaning is as it were a “global colonization”, whose real inception by England was in 1600, when the English East India Company was established with patent; « English Colonization Activities. Henry VII [1485-1509], having denied his aid to Columbus’ project, gave the patent to the Italian Cabot, father [1450-1498] and son [1477-1557], to make them explore the North-West passage [in 1497, 98], instigated by the discovery of Columbus. They discovered Nova Scotia and Labrador of the North America. Then, in the first half of the 16th century explorations by the North-East passage arrived in Russia to trade, but could not find the way to Asia. In the times of Elizabeth I, the English were accustomed to raid Spanish and Portuguese merchant fleets to plunder their cargoes. Hawkins [1532-1595] and Drake [c.1540-1596] represented these adventurous pirate-merchants, who founded the basis of the English marine preponderance. And in the later years of the Elizabethan reign, the English spread over every part of the world, Drake into the Pacific, Gilbert [Humphrey: 1539-1584] into the Northern Atlantic, some chasing Negroes in Africa and others travelling from the Russian steppes till Asia, trading with Turks and Greeks, working in this way up to the foundation of the East India Company and the North American colonies.» (Maekawa and Horikoshi, 1984, p.274).

« THE DISASTERS OF SIR HUMPHREY GILBERT While the queen and her adventurers were dazzled by the glittering prospects of mines of gold in the frozen regions of the remote north, Sir Humphrey Gilbert, with a sounder judgment and a better knowledge, watched the progress of the fisheries, and formed healthy plans for colonisation. It was not difficult for Gilbert to obtain a liberal patent (June 11th, 1578), formed according to the tenor of a previous precedent, and to be of perpetual efficacy, if a plantation should be established within six years. To the people who might belong to his colony, the rights of Englishmen were promised; to Gilbert, the possession for himself or his assigns of the soil which he might discover, and the sole jurisdiction, both civil and criminal, of the territory within two hundred leagues of his settlement, with supreme executive and legislative authority. Thus the attempts at colonisation, in which Cabot and Frobisher had failed, were renewed under a patent that conferred every immunity on the leader of the enterprise, and abandoned the colonists themselves to the mercy of an absolute proprietary. Under this patent, Gilbert began to collect a company of volunteer adventurers, contributing largely from his own fortune to the preparation. Jarrings and divisions ensued, before the voyage was begun; many abandoned what they had inconsiderately undertaken; the general and a few of his assured friends among them his step-brother, Walter Raleigh [in command of the Falcon] put to sea in 1579; one of his ships was lost; and misfortune compelled the remainder to return. The vagueness of the accounts of this expedition is ascribed to a conflict with a Spanish fleet, of which the issue was unfavourable to the little squadron of emigrants. Gilbert attempted to keep his patent alive by making grants of lands. None of his assigns succeeded in establishing a colony; and he was himself too much impoverished to renew his efforts. But the pupil of Coligny was possessed of an active genius, which delighted in hazardous adventure. To prosecute discoveries in the New World, lay the foundation of states, and acquire immense domains, appeared to the daring enterprise of Raleigh as easy designs, which would not interfere with the pursuit of favour and the career of glory in England. Before the limit of the charter had expired, Gilbert, assisted by his brother, equipped a new squadron. The fleet embarked under happy omens; the commander, on the eve of his departure, received from Elizabeth a golden anchor guided by a lady, a token of the queen's regard; a man of letters from Hungary accompanied the expedition; and some part of the United States would have then been colonised, had not the unhappy projector of the design been overwhelmed by a succession of disasters. Two days after leaving Plymouth (June 13th), the largest ship in the fleet, which had been furnished by Raleigh, who himself remained in England, deserted, under a pretence of infectious disease, and returned into harbour. Gilbert was incensed, but not intimidated. He sailed for Newfoundland; and, entering St. Johns, he summoned the Spaniards and Portuguese, and other strangers, to witness the feudal ceremonies by which he took possession of the country for his sovereign. A pillar, on which the arms of England were infixed, was raised as a monument; and lands were granted to the fishermen in fee, on condition of the payment of a quit-rent. The "mineral-man" of the expedition, an honest and religious Saxon, was especially diligent; it was generally agreed that " the mountains made a show of mineral substance”; as there were so many foreign vessels in the vicinity, the precious ore was carried on board the larger ship with such mystery that the dull Portuguese and Spaniards suspected nothing of the matter. The colony being thus apparently established, Sir Humphrey Gilbert embarked in his small frigate, the Squirrel, which was, in fact, a miserable bark of ten tons; and, taking with him two other ships, proceeded on a voyage of discovery to the southward. One of these vessels, the Delight, was soon after wrecked among the shoals near Sable Island; and of above one hundred men on board, only twelve escaped. Among those who perished were the historian and the mineralogist of the expedition; a circumstance which preyed upon the mind of Sir Humphrey, whose ardent temper fondly cherished the hope of fame and of inestimable riches. He now determined to return to England; but as his little frigate, as she is called, appeared wholly unfit to proceed on such a voyage, he was entreated not to venture in her, but to take his passage in the Golden Hinde. To these solicitations the gallant knight replied, " I will not forsake my little company going homeward, with whom I have passed so many storms and perils." When the two vessels had passed the Azores, Sir Humphrey's frigate was observed to be nearly overwhelmed by a great sea; she recovered, however, the stroke of the waves, and immediately afterwards the general was observed by those in the Hinde, sitting abaft with a book in his hand, and calling out, "Courage, my lads! we are as near heaven by sea as by land!" The same night this little bark, and all within her, were swallowed up in the sea, and never more heard of. Such was the unfortunate end of the brave Sir Humphrey Gilbert, who may be regarded as the father of western colonization, and who was one of the chief ornaments of the most chivalrous age of English history.» (HH, XXII, p.496-497).

« English Colonization Activities to East India. The activities toward Asia were submitted mainly to the East India Company established in 1600. It sent its first merchant fleet to Asia in 1601. But the trades with East Asia had been already nearly monopolized by the Portuguese and the Dutch, whom the English rivalled. In the end they featured the trades with the mainland of India, and gradually obtained their bases in the Western India (Surat), Persia (Hormuz) and the area about the Red Sea, and later in Madras (1640), Bombay (1661) and Calcutta (1686).» (Maekawa and Horikoshi, 1984, p.274).

« English Colonization Activities in North America. The activities in North America were performed by the enterprising companies with Royal patent, and in the beginning of the 17th century colonies were established in Newfoundland, Virginia (1607) and the Islands of Bermuda (1612). In particular many Puritans and Catholics immigrated into North America, fleeing from the Anglican coercion under the Stuarts in quest of freedom of faith. Above all, a group of Puritans called Pilgrim Fathers in the Mayflower landed on Plymouth in 1620 and established the colony of New England, and in 1630 a number of Puritans immigrated and built the colony of Massachusetts.» (Maekawa and Horikoshi, id.).

Of these first English colonizing enterprises and colonizations, the establishment of the East India Company in 1600 shall be the most remarkable opening of the English global colonization because the vast colonies of North America had become independent already in the second half of the 18th century, whereas the East India Company was succeeded by the British Crown itself through the India Act of 1858 after the Indian Mutiny (1857-8) and the independence of India (“known as the ‘Jewel in the Crown’ of the British Empire at the beginning of the twentieth century” [Palmowski, p.313]) in 1947 is considered to mark the real end of the British Empire. The time span 1600-1947 fits in just with the prediction of Nostradamus: more than 300 years of the pempotam, the concept of the term ‘pempotam (= all-rivers = all the lands = the global colonization)’ being different from that of the ‘world hegemony’, with which shall deal the quatrains X-98 (§862) and II-78 (§877).

The end of “more than 300 years”: = 1937-1945. This epoch is discovered in the paragraph above cited telling the shrinking of the Pempotam: « ... approchera de maison ce que paravant estoit & est grande cité comprenant le Pempotam la mesopotamie de l'Europe a quarante cinq, & autres de quaranteung, quarantedeux, & trentesept, & dans iceluy temps & en icelles contrees…, (… what before was and is a grand city including the Pempotam and the Mesoptamia of Europe approaches a house in 45, others of 41, 42, and 37, and in this time and in these districts,..) » (№3,
Adresse à Henri II, p.18), where the numbers 45, 41, 42 and 37 with a preposition « a » (à) [at, in] or « de » [of] « a quarante cinq, & autres de quaranteung, quarantedeux, & trentesept, » are considered to be designating the years because the next expression is clearly given as “in this time (dans iceluy temps)”. And these years are evidently 1937-1945, the context describing the WWII.

And by the expression « a grand city … approaches a house » is meant precisely the British Empire reduced to her own HOMELAND in losing almost all the colonies after the WWII.  This Decolonization, whose typical and greatest event is the independence of India in 1947, is the theme of the related quatrains (II-60, V-11 and X-99 [§874-§876]), whereas the quatrain X-98 (§862) treats the French hegemony and colonialism.

The Lusitans
: = The colonialists in general, the Portuguese having been the first of them; « VOYAGES OF EXPLORATION. Christopher Columbus’s voyage across the Atlantic in 1492 sparked an unprecedented opening-up of the world – first by the Portuguese and Spanish – then by the Dutch, English, and French. By 1700, European explorers and colonizers had established themselves globally.» (DKHistory, p.172); « … and the voyages of exploration soon became tidal waves of colonization, reaching most part of the globe… » (Parker, 2010, p.216).

The Lusitans shall not be content with it
: The colonialists are avaricious in general; « European explorers were motivated by glory, Christian zeal, and – above all – gold, spices, and slaves. The goal was the East, source of legendary riches. “I and my companions suffer from a disease of the heart which can be cured only by gold.” (Hernán Cortés, Spanish explorer, on his quest to defeat the Aztecs, 1519).» (DKHistory, id.).

V. Ionescu considers the line 4 as the beginning and the line 3 as the end of the British hegemony (Ionescu, 1987, p.73). But, the digital exhibition of the term of ‘global colonization’ (‘more than 300 years’) generously granted even with the proper name of ‘the grand empire by England’ by the Prophet needs, we think, no more additional information about its two boundaries, which is to be researched by the interpretative readers. Above all, his attribution of the phrase “Grandes coppies passer par mer & terre” to the USA entails a difficulty because the army of the UK was not defeated immediately by that of the USA (its factual event is probably the fall of Singapore in February 1942***, preceded by the sinking of Admiral Phillips’ Force Z including the Prince of Wales and the Repulse****). From the viewpoint of the theme (the British world colonization) of the quatrain, the line 3 tells its effective means (military strength), and the line 4 its real motive (colonization).

« Singapore, fall of (World War II) (8-15 Feb. 1942) The largest British army and naval base in Asia and Australia with around 80,000 British, Australian, and Indian troops under A. E. Percival in 1941, Singapore was equipped with strong coastal defences. However, no fortifications had been built against attack from its Malayan hinterland, which was also under British control. After swiftly overrunning Malaya, Japanese forces under General Yamashita massed opposite the island of Singapore at the beginning of February 1942. During the night of 7/8 February armoured landing craft crossed the Strait of Johore, followed by many swimming Japanese troops, surprising the garrison of Australian troops opposite. The defenders blew up the single causeway connecting Singapore with its hinterland and retreated. The causeway was quickly repaired by the Japanese who, supported by the superiority of their air force, moved on to the island. On 15 February, Percival surrendered. The fall of Singapore, long perceived as an invincible fortress of the British Empire, symbolized more than any other event the real weakness of Britain’s pretensions to defend and control her vast Empire. This provided an important stimulus to colonial independence movements after World war II, and foreshadowed the process of decolonization after 1945.» (Palmowski, p.619); « the Tridental taken (prins le Tridental) » (§805, V-62).

**** Cf. « Vessels sunk (Nefz parfondrées) » (§805, V-62); « A camp … gnats (Camp … cousins) » (§863, V-85).

***** Antichrist: « ANTÉCHRIST or rather ANTICHRIST. According to the Epistles of John, the Christians of the end of the 1st century did not wait for the return of the Christ before the arrival of an Anti-Christ [ἀντίχριστος], namely, following the Greek etymology, of a false replacement of the Christ. On the other hand, the second Epistle to the Thessalonians precedes Advent of the Christ by that of a “Man of lawlessness, Son of destruction” who shall be the instrument of Satan to provoke a general apostasy, ruin the religions and proclaim himself God (2Th 2, 3-9)... The Antichrist and the Man of lawlessness are not but a single figure upon which the posterior centuries have projected their successive fears.» (Monloubou, p.39-40); Un si faulx antechrist (§796, X-66): = « An Antechrist so deceitful and so unfaithful – Hitler.» (Ionescu, 1976, p.545); « Concerning our times, the Prophet considers three Antechrists: Stalin (quatrains VI-49 [§882], X-1 [§884] and X-65 [§883]), Hitler (X-66 [§796]) and Mao Tse-Tung (VIII-77 [§900]). These dictators have in common some distinctive traits: 1. They imposed a totalitarian regime with a great cruelty. 2. The number of their victims amounts to tens of millions (by wars, executions and prisons). 3. They made “cultural revolutions” in opposing the religion and the tradition of their country. 4. They provoked the hatred and the conflict among races and social classes. 5. They erected themselves as superhuman entities and encouraged the cult of their personality.» (Ionescu, 1987, p.451-452). There appears in the Dedication to Henry II (№3, pp.3-23; №10, pp.153-173) five examples of the word Antechrist/antechrist, whose two of the paragraphs 44-46 (following Le Pelletier’s paragraphing) refer to Stalin because the passage includes the name ‘Atila [Attila]’ and the event of ‘October Revolution’, another two of the paragraphs 93-95 to Hitler because the region of Europe and the supposed years 37-45 [WWII] are told there, and the remaining one of the paragraph 107-109 also to Hitler, there being exposed the Roman occupation by ‘the antechrist, the infernal prince’ in the hottest battle in the Christian countries probably after Mussolini’s fall.
© Koji Nihei Daijyo, 2019. 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