§ 654. Napoleon III and Pius IX

19th century:
§654. Napoleon III and Pius IX (1859.12.22): VIII-27.

VIII-27:
The road upon which one furnace on the other,
Out of the desert huge barrel placed a brave and gorgeous.
The script of an emperor the phoenix
Seen in the one what does not belong to any other.


(La voye auxelle l'une sur l'autre fornix
Du muy deser hor mis brave & genest
L’escript d’empereur le fenix
Veu en celuy ce qu'a nul autre n'est.)

Keys to the reading:
Auxelle: = à + laquelle, due to analogy with “ auquel = à + lequel “ and “auxquelles = à + lesquelles “, signifying simply UPON-WHICH, or WHERE. If it means “ Latin auxiliarus [auxiliaris, auxiliarius], auxiliary”, as Leoni proposes it (1982, p.354), it cannot afford any syntactical bridge between “la voye, the road ” and “l’une sur l’autre fornix, one furnace on the other". In reality, the French “auxiliaire” and English ”auxiliary” are the most rare cases of preserving intact the Latin origin “au-XILI-aris” notwithstanding the overwhelming linguistic pressure of regular transformation, under which “auxiliaris” ought to have been changed into somehow “ossiliaire” (ossiliary) (cf. Scheler, p.113, 163-164), so that they will resist any other trial of transcription such as “-XELLE-”. In such a perspective, too, R. Présvost‘s reading (1999, p.181) “voye aurelle, Via Aurelia”, followed by Patrice Guinard (2011, p.54), is entirely wide of the mark, and it is ridiculous that Prévost seems to want to dictate anew to Nostradamus “drave (darnel)” for “brave” and “vœ (vow)” for ”veu” in addition to “aurelle” (such a French word does not exist !) for “auxelle";

La fornix: At first, the meaning of the word fornix of the first line is not readily suggesting. It should be noted that the gender of the word here is feminine, but masculine in dictionaries: “fornix,icis, m.[fornus] 1 vault, dome, a shape like a bow. 2 arch. 3 a triumphal arch.” (TanakaH). Then, we check the word fornus: “ = furnus.” (TanakaH). So, we check the word furnus: “furnus,ī, m. [fornax] baking furnace.” (TanakaH). This being masculine too, then, we see the word fornax: “fornāx, ācis, f. [fornus = furnus] 1 fireplace, furnace 2 kitchen-range, blast furnace. ”(TanakaH). At last, we get the feminine word “furnace” implied by the feminine word “fornix” of the quatrain. The English “furnace”, itself deriving from “fornax”, may signify through our history of literature an "ordeal". So, “The road upon which one furnace on the other” can represent the road full of ordeals, which in fact Napoleon III had followed in his early days. When young he was forced into exile by the downfall of his uncle Emperor Napoleon (cf. §618,VI-16; §625,IX-89; §630,VII-43; §634,IV-65; §635,VIII-53);

Le muy deser: A French word like “muy” does not exist, but it may be “muid”, a huge barrel, the pronunciation of the former and the latter being the same (cf. Vignois, 1910, p.256). Moreover, the alphabet “y” in the impression of the 16th century was the same as “i”, and one can borrow “d” for “muid”from the beginning of “deser” immediately following it. And “deser”, whose figure called “apocope” in grammar being frequent in the Prophecies of Nostradamus (e.g. “muy” for muyd (here), “mor” for mort (I-81,II-70), “gran” for grand (II-26, II-66), “escri” for escrit (VIII-56), “diver” for divers (VI-17), “couver” for couvert (VI-17), “descouver” for descouvert (VIII-26), etc.), is certainly “desert”. Now, “le deserteur de la grand forteresse, the deserter of the grand fortress” of §634,IV-65 was an expression for Louis-Napoleon who deserted and escaped the castle of Ham in 1846. So, “le muy deser, the desert huge barrel” is for the desolate castle of Ham deserted by Louis-Napoleon.

Genest: = genêt, a plant called "broom" with numerous yellow flowers in shape of butterflies, which represents another aspect of Louis-Napoleon in addition to his proved "bravery". It may differ from an ordinary image of his, biassed throgh the public opinion after the collapse of the second empire largely influenced by a famous novelist such as Victor Hugo who especially hated Napoleon III, “a traitor to French Republicans”. He was " a presence with pomp" through closer look in the diagnosis of Nostradamus (cf. § 634,IV-65; § 635, VIII-53). Hugo's descriptions of the emperor in Napoleon the small (1852) gives us an image of this kind in relief if we exclude the negatives due to the famous author’s personal repugnance to the emperor. It is no wonder that a glimpse of the quality had already emerged in his youth. The word “genest = genêt” is entirely distinct from “genet”, miniature horse from Spain.

Du muy deser hor mis brave & genest: The construction is as follows: [Un] brave & [brillant comme]genest [sera] mis hor du muy deser, A brave and gorgeous [shall be] placed out of the desert huge barrel [by his domestic, Charles Thelin], the success of his flight having been essentially owing to Thelin, who had prepared a cabriolet for the prince and had obtained the permission from the commander of the castle of his going out of the castle to journey to Saint-Quentin, and the prince in the disguise of a workman accompanying him (cf. Torné-Chavigny, 1860, p.84-85). On the other hand, the option: "hor + mis = hormis, except" is not admissible, because the preposition "de" of "du muy" wants necessarily "hor" for the sake of a compound preposition "hor [= hors] de, out of", "hor" being a simple apocope of "hors" with the same pronounciation. Moreover, Nostradamus writes in the evident cases the preposition “hormis, except” as “hors mis” (II-31, II-37 and II-39) or “ormis” (VI-4), which exclude the option “hor mis”.

L’escript d’empereur: The script of an emperor, a pamphlet published in Paris on December 22, 1859, entitled Pope and Congress (Vignois, id.), drafted by his vassal under the instructions of Napoleon III (cf. Seignobos, 1921b, p.14). A script, “what was written”, cannot indicate an edict, “what was proclaimed”, and Nostradamus himself, in his Prophecies, distinguishes between the two terms rigorously: except the one (V-72) with the meaning of “publication”, five uses of the term “edict (édit or édict)” signify in the same way “official decrees or orders of a supreme power comparable to the edicts of a monarch" (I-40, II-7, IV-18, V-97, X-945), on the other hand, six examples of the term “script (escrit, escript, escris)” refer to "an engagement document" (IV-57), "an epitaph" (VIII-28), "a description in the book of Fate" (VIII-56), "a consensus document of political parties” (IX-8), "inscriptions of the Rosetta Stone"(IX-32), and "a booklet, which is regarded as attributable to Napoleon III";

Le fenix: = (the) phoenix, a symbol of “Jesus Christ in resurrection” in the Western civilisation under Christianity, a renewal of the old Eastern legend. Here it symbolizes, of course, the pope;

Ce qu’a nul autre n’est: = Ce qui n’est à nul autre, what does not belong to any other, namely, a monopolistic spiritual powers of the pope compared with the temporals of political sovereigns.

Summary:
The script of an emperor the phoenix Seen in the one what does not belong to any other : «Neither the curses of the Vatican nor the wrath of the ultramontanes all over Europe could retard in the least degree the march of events. Although the confederation decided upon at Villafranca and Zurich was never made a fact, owing to the disinclination of Austria and the pope to institute the necessary reform; the neutral attitude maintained by England and France yet materially assisted Italy to realise her dream of national unity. Towards the end of 1859 a pamphlet published in Paris entitled Pope and Congress first startled the world with the thought that it was time the temporal power of the pope should cease, that his rule ought hereafter to be confined to the precincts of Rome itself. This naturally threw the whole Catholic world in an uproar, and elicited from the pope repeated violent denunciations, yet in the course of time the idea became an accomplished fact. Napoleon had never forgotten that the holy father had refused him consecration at the time of his coronation. The union of the middle Italian states with Sardinia was the forerunner of all those “annexations” which was soon to transform completely the character of the peninsula. Napoleon was willing to permit the expansion of the upper Italian kingdom provided Savoy and the countship of Nice be ceded to France. From the time of Cavour's resumption of his place in the ministry in January, Napoleon and the crafty minister exerted every art known to diplomacy to bring about the end they had in view. At last in March, 1860, the popular vote was obtained which gave Savoy and Nice to France and made Tuscany, Parma, Modena, and the Roman legations a part of the kingdom of Sardinia. The pope excommunicated all who had taken part or even connived at this despoliation of Rome; but the papal bull, once so formidable a weapon, had in the course of time lost much of its early terrors. The 2nd of April witnessed the opening of the first Italian parliament, in which were representatives not only from Sardinia and Lombardy, but from Tuscany, Modena, Parma, and the Roman legations. “ Our fatherland is no longer the Italy of Rome,” declared the crown speech, “ nor of the Middle Ages; neither shall it be the arena wherein shall meet for combat the ambitions of all nations. Now and forever it is the Italy of the Italians.”» (HH, IX, p.606-607)

Discussion:
The interpretation of this quatrain by J.-Ch. de Fontbrune (1980, p.299) is too full of grammatical miskakes to be treated seriously. At first, “auxelle” is not “Latin auxillium, aide (aid), secours (succour)”, and “fornix” is in no way “fornication (fornication)”, for the Latin “fornix” in the sense of a “brothel” is masculine compared with the feminine “fornix” of the text, and the construed text “one brothel upon the other” does not necessarily imply “carnal relations among anyones”. Secondly, “muy (= mui)” is never a “form of the present and the perfect of mouvoir (to move)”, which should be “meu”, “mû” or “mue”, and “muy deser” is not to be falsified into “muy de fer (the movement of iron = S.S.)”. Thirdly, “genest” is not Greek and does not need to be Greek. In the end, the metaphor “phoenix” in its Christian tradition does not fit to an essentially anti-Christian “Mein Kampf” of Hitler he recalls in his analysis.
________________________________________
© Koji Nihei Daijyo, 2012. All rights reserved.
関連記事
スポンサーサイト
Profile

Koji Nihei Daijyo

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

Latest journals
Category
Link