Social agency therefore was fostered by anger, rage and action –a doing rather than contemplation. It was an action related to a conflict of ideas. Lesley Coote, whose focuses studies on prophecy and public affirms in late medieval England, commenting the connection between the community and the local ruler ship emphasizes the use of verbs as a transformation medium as a general role in prophetic discourse. Lesley Coote in her essay “A Language of Power,” focusing on late medieval England related “[I]n prophetic language the emphasis is always on moving and doing.” Using P. Field’s study “Romance and Chronicle” (London, Barrie and Jenkins, 1971) the idea of short declarative sentences and active verbs with coordinating conjunctions is paratactic which expresses a “sequence of actions, perceptions of facts.” Coote continues, “[W]riters of prophetic texts, like Geoffrey of Monmouth, Oxford scholar and author of the Prophecia Merlini, did not have to write in this same manner because they lacked the Latin skills needed to write in a more sophisticated way. They chose to write this way because parataxis was also used in writing of annals, the chronological record of events. In annalistic writing the simplicity of statements made in parataxis adds to the overall impression of ‘plain truthfulness’ which the writer requires, as the event he is presenting in his annal are what he [or she] perceives to have been historical truth, and he [or she] wishes the reader to share in this perception. In annals the verbs are mostly in historic tense. The writer wishes to tell the reader that he is writing ‘annals of the future,’ that is, he [or her] is recording future events faithfully, and that what he [or she] says is truth.”
Ottavia Niccoli, in his book “Prophecy and People in Renaissance Italy” (1987), argues that social, economic and political instability brought about the prophetic genre into use for various applications during a forty year period in relation to the Italian Wars. Militaries moving through towns and regions frightened the common people He observed that when peacefulness resumed in Italy the genre disappeared. Niccoli remains careful to frame Italian prophecy in the light of pure “instrument of propaganda.” Rather than taking the viewpoint of a particular class – because propaganda will be identified in different manners by which class refers to a prophecy as propaganda-- Niccoli intends “too exclusive an emphasis on propaganda is in some measures insufficient. First, the very variability in the functions of prophetic material makes it evident that propaganda was not its only purpose. But that is not all. Thomas A. Kselman’s study of miracles, prophecies, and visions in nineteenth-century France has shown that a purely political approach to these problems, analyzing them in terms of instruments for and symptoms of the conflicts between church and state, is deceiving and reductive, just as any study of “mentality” that neglects the political, instrumental, and intellectual context represents a distorted reflection of reality.” Niccoli continues:
“Like other phenomena that served to bind together or patch up connections between the popular would and ecclesiastical and, on occasion, political institutions, prophecy was a unified and complex entity requiring evaluation both for its specificity and for the relational networks that it created. In fact, during the years in question, prophecy seems to have constituted a unifying sing connecting nature to religion and religion to politics and coordinating all the scattered shreds of culture that in the end turned out to be an integral way of knowing embracing observation of nature, political analysis, and religious reflection. If God is the lord of history and of the cosmos, to seek in the orribeli segnali of nature and in the voices of the prophets signs of this judgment of human history becomes at once a scientific, political, and religious process.”
Prognostication is exactly what the word implies. A compleintersubjective discipline of many different knowledge apparatuses in which the practitioners will bring together discursive subject matter and begins to organize it and link it into relative significant to help explain the problems associated to its time. Gnostic practitioners tended to use what we might call today interdisciplinary learning.
László Sándor Chardonnenes in his work “Anglo-Saxon Prognostics, 900-1100, study and texts” (2007) reveals the origins of Anglo-Saxon prognostications which he intends had many usages, including but not limited too, social and economic planning, time management (compustical or medical contexts and/or calendar), medical practices, health issues, transmission of vernacular language, ancient knowledge, folkloric customs, religious history, dream interpretations, human birth management, and social planning. Chardonnenes argues that prognostication was classified under a single descriptive context called, “superstition,” while at the same time prognostication was not connected to all contexts of classification under the typology of superstition. “Based upon [ Dieter] Harmening’s book Superstitio” (1979), Chardonnenes intends, “I have outlined a threefold typology of superstitious practices: observation, divination and magic. Observation requires an observer, divination requires participant to disclose what is to be observed, and magic requires a participant who must follow a strict protocol to influence the future.” Chardonnenes does not cover magic contained in these books for reasons that he intends was for propaganda. That is to say, magic does not belong to prognostics because it tends to practice an influence on the future by a regime of non-collative scientific data. After listing evidence of its practices of the time, similar to today’s practices, he summarizes the following: “Moreover, magic is not merely a means to foresee the future. More often than not it is a way to influence the future, i.e. to accomplish a desired result in the time to come. There are no prognostics which belong to this group of superstitions, which is why I shall not discuss magic further.” However, Chardonnenes argues that “[P]rognostication seems to occupy a place somewhere between observation and divination.” Yet, is this the case? Often incorrect data separation of critical criteria associated with each sub-station above is categorized by combining two incorrectly as one as Chardonnenes argues. As example, Chardonnenes argues against assuming magic and observation/ divination are one in the same, as Thorndike claimed. If a scientist claims a probability which over a set of data of which is tested over a period of time predicts a future outcome to place his observations into a formulaic pre-theory or theory itself, this is not magic -- is it? Chardonnenes illustrates through textual analysis that star passages indicate omens in the summer as with the Dog Days, or the lunaries or Anglo-Saxon moon books indicate the last day of the lunar month is dangerous for blood letting.
Chardonnenes work is inductive and when he makes the claim for typology, borrowing from Harmening ‘s work, and refutes Thorndike’s observation, this is probably due to association to the inductive observation of Anglo-Saxon prognostications form 800- 1200 C.E. in which he had worked. This could be explained in that Chardonnenes found no evidence for “astrologia superstitiosa” (judicial astrology).” He extrapolates, that “When Aldhelm (c. 639-709) wrote his De laude uirginitatis, he would have been familiar with the concepts of both natural and judicial astrology through learning. It is unlikely, however, that he, or any other Anglo-Saxon for that matter, had first-hand experience with judicial astrology.” “While astrology with an aim to predict the future was known in classical times and in Byzantine, Syriac and Arabic cultures, it surfaced first in Western Europe through Arabic science via Cordoba and Catalonia in France, in the late tenth, and eleventh centuries.” Chardonnenes concludes the possible reason why judicial astrology was not incorporated into the Anglo-Saxon prognostications was “[P]rophecy is a type of divination which is condoned by the church since many aspects of the religious experience are tied up with prophecy.” Yet, I intend the mere reason that judicial astrology was not based in any pre-renaissance prognostication works is that this type of superstition needed the evaluation of historical events in which renaissance incorporated into its meaning. The bringing back of knowledge in the form of classical literature laid the foundations for the return of judicial astrology. Therefore, Chardonnenes correctly argues that monasteries had epistemic dominance on this genre of superstition. Chardonnenes intends, “Subsequently, texts on judicial astrology made their way to England via ties with continental monasteries (Fleury and Chartres, for instance), presumably already in the eleventh century Anglo-Norman manuscripts Wellcome, MS 21 and Sloane 2030. This agrees with earliest English examples of judicial astrology I have encountered in the form of zodiacal prognostics, in the twelfth-century manuscripts Egerton 821.”
Chardonnenes argues that Spain via the African and Near East had indeed preserved the ancient divination and observation of judicial astrology P.I.H. Naylor argues that for whatever reason, Jews were ‘forced into the position of astrologers, mathematicians and doctors.” “Alfonso X, the wise King of Leon and Castille,” brought western and eastern knowledge of astrology, mathematics, and doctors, into “the academic limelight.” At Toledo, Naylor, “One Issac Ibn Sid, a reader at the Synagogue of Toledo, edited the famous Astronomical Tables which were for centuries called the Alfonsine Tables and standardized astronomical and other calculations right through the Middle Ages.”
At Marseille, Abraham Ben Hiyya after learning astrology at the port city moved to Barcelona influencing professional astrology. (p. 65, Naylor)
This observation intends that Latin manuscripts of prognostications were used more for calendar glosses for bloodletting lunary computi.
in the medieval age was classified under a single descriptive word called “superstation.” Today the word has a negative social connotation in light of modern scientific rationalization. However, little was known today of the complexities of rationalization during the medieval age.
For Italy “printed prophecies circulated widely and in large numbers” due to the political and religious disintegration that occurred during the first decades of the sixteenth century” [...].
Nostredame was aware of the social troubles by the Reformation? In Nostredame’s second installment of These Prophecies by Nostradamus, 1557, he related his understanding of the defragmenting of the unified European states. In Century VI.XV, Nostredame illustrates the betrayal of Elector Prince Frederick after the Diet of Worms of 1521. Nostredame writes that Charles V, who is the rightful ruler of the Holy Roman Empire, is betrayed by Frederick who “spirited away Martin Luther to the castle of Wartburg.” In Nostredame’s first installment of These Prophecies by Nostradamus, (1555), of century II, quatrain ten, he warns that religious upheavals will result in a reversal of social class order, and that a few will be pleased to remain in their traditional social classes. This of course, will be an “age that’s upside-down” While this poem carries a monarchist tone, with its affirmation on line one, “Before too long shall all change for the worse:” this message could be coded for revolutionary reactions. The last line is not just a prediction, but an empirical historical observation that people who are suppress will not remain in their proper classes if they see themselves as repressed.
The ideal that humans were supposed to be a community contrasted the reality that humans reacted against this ideal. As a Christianized Jew, many of them suppressed their origins, and some even tried to forget them. Increasingly over Nostredame’s life anti-Semitic feelings, legal measures and literature framed the Jews as the scrooge of mankind. In the Old Testament, amply evidence became known that a certain times Jews had formulized moralistic and ethical value systems in which were then adopted into a pan-religious framework organized into compendium of writings called the Book. The conflict of non-Jews adopting these ideas formed the reaction that one group had begun this trend, which we can loosely frame as human rights in a moralistic settings. The fact that social gospels sprung up alongside the Reformation brought to the forefront old traditional arguments of hierarchal society and the benefits and limitations of allowing all humans the right of knowledge. Knowledge was considered dangerous in the hands of the common. One of those dangers was the complex system of ‘superstition.” After the age of reason, superstition took on the connotations of irrationality. Mostly in part because of ignorance to its founding systemic values and critical scientific applications – everything that was unexplainable was categorized in a classification of superstition. Modern science usurped the ‘observational’ properties of superstition while at the same time using its critical criteria to argue predestination under a new typology and classification. Superstition used scientific observation as one of its grounding principles. Its means of methodology was to comprise a data field in which to speculate and prognosticate possibly with another form of superstition --divination. While turning back to observation, its subtype was comprised of gathering data on “signs” and “times.” Signs could mean a host of symbolic observable social-political and economic trends. These were then aligned against the standards of a prescience or science in this case of a constant data field of the medieval age. The medieval age existed when manuscripts were expensive and difficult to ascertain. Prescience is predicated upon retrieval historical data in which superstition under the observable phenomena is based. This the printing press, so vital an application to spreading economic charity known as the indulgence, as well as the classical books which contained classical superstition. History books from the fourth century era, the Greek era, and Roman times, revealed to many premodern scientists a new wealth of information in which to comprise these Early Modern European data fields. The only problem was that this novel information into the hands could become dangerous and shift the focus of hierarchal control from top to bottom, back to top and repeated until the middle class concept was born out a comprise centuries later.
To the best of a practitioner source, they then used observation to see patterns in history. These patterns, someone like modern science’s aim today to dominate the economic zones while communicating a better future for all mankind, is no different than the medieval age practitioners.
Superstition was also lumped into medieval age propaganda, which uses limited data fields and is subject to influencing the future by the concept we know today as power/knowledge. It some respects it could be the manipulation of information which creates knowledge with the intention to change the future. We know this today as modern propaganda. Magic falls into this propaganda typology whereas observation does not –however both were redefined into the single classification of superstition and the commencement of the age of reason.
Further research into the life and ideas of Nostradamus is communicated by some top scholars who have contributed to the field of Nostradamia. There still remains lengthy works not investigated. Part of this is due to the painstaking breadth of work and a lack of academic enthusiasm for such an expensive effort. This could be explained in that the mere real reason lay in the early twenty-first century’s conclusion by a few academics that reacted to an onslaught proliferation of said claims of predestination by a widely, disconnected, diverse and classless group of Nostradamians, we finally know Nostradamus.
The field of Nostradamus comes in two main groups and to some extent each of these groups deviate into sub-groups. First, there is the widely and prosperous popular Nostradamus industry. This group tends to look at a body of material produced by Nostradamus in a relatively short span of his life. From 1555 to 1558 Nostradamus produced a series of poems and prose writings in which after completing the set of 1,000 [ not all of them recovered] poems and two explanatory letters, he went silent on the subject. The Nostradamus industry so relevant in popular media and society remains regulated to four years of Nostradamus’ life. But does this explain who Nostradamus was or why he had written “These Prophecies by Nostradamus?” The main focus upon Nostradamus within this first group intends if Nostradamus had foretold the history of the world. I intend these writings were an adjunct to a larger historical process related to class dynamics which played out in Nosrtadamus’ life. As these sub-forms, there are reactionary and proactionary groups in regards to the main focus. These reactionary groups begun during Nostradamus’ life and intend skepticism and adverse. The proactionary groups intend the opposite demarcating localities of special interests and often reacting to the skeptics. These forces of all these groups began immediately around the time Nostradamus finished this work – and continue today.
The Second group begun in 1840, at Paris, with inquires of Eugène Bareste on medieval pre-sources of Nostradamus. Bareste, while today considered as a part of the first group, revealed vital source information which became the foundation of the second group’s investigations. The most significant of Bareste’s offerings is Nostradamus’ use of the Mirabilis Liber. This book was a collection of (unfettered) apocryphal writings and was most likely published in 1522, on the onslaught of the famous 1524 planetary alignment which brought great concern to a score of astrologers and street prophets. A good source for understanding this episode in Italian and Renaissance history can be read through the work of Ottavia Niccoli’s book, “Prophecy and People in Renaissance Italy, ” trans., Lydia G. Cochrane into English (New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1990). Increasingly thus onward, sparse scholastic enquiries remained until the early twentieth century. Graf Carl von Klinckowstroem (1884-1969), a mystic investigator, can be accredited with collecting much of the prime sources used today. He believed Nostradamus was a fictional character, because there must have been at least twenty such Nostradamus running around in the sixteenth century. During the twentieth century, Nostredame had become an international superstar. Previously, his fame came from Europe, but with various vague but dated poetry and prose writings, his fame increase with the advent of mass-communication. France, like so many other nations reacted to the adoption by other countries of their dispossessed mage, and began to reestablish Nostredame in light of the factual evidence instead of the stupendous interpretations of Nostredame’s writings. Rummaging the archives, around Europe, slowly but steadily transcriptions and transliterations began appearing for scholars to assess. With the advent of the Internet progressing to a more user friendly medium, the 1990s saw an explosion of new investigations into Nostradamus. Increasingly, access to Nostradamus information became readily available from anywhere around the world. In 1990, James Randi, a former stage magician and paranormal skeptic, spent a year in France collecting data for his book, “The Mask of Nostradamus” (1990). Randi’s two significant claims were Nostredame was a twentieth century-manufactured prophet and in order for one to prove Nostredame’s predictive skills one must demonstrate it today. As the Internet increased a user friendly interface, by 1995 a world Nostradamus community was born. Eventually by 2003 a new view became solidified within the scholarly community at the dismay of the first group.
Conclusive evidence now surmised Nostradamus was “quack” who pushed drugs and later plagiarisms from other quacks and malcontents. Mythmaking became a term endured to not only Nostradamus, but directed at his two main biographical sources – his first son and his ‘alleged’ secretary. A more substantial inclusion intended professional career-men as Nostradamus contemporaries’ attacks had shed a truer light on just who was Nostradamus. One such published attack intends, in the modern sense, Nostradamus was a contemporary John Dillinger – a character moving from town to town robbing and fleecing southern French citizens. Three main published attacks and a scurry of lesser substantive attacks all intend Nostradamus was ignorant, and better yet a charlatan. A few anonymous attacks took the line of a filthy Jew, better off dead than alive. These sources were a gold-mine to the scholarly community. These attacks, rather than the two main biography sources mentioned, helped considerably in forming a more factual basis upon Nostradamus and his life. In a sense Nostradamus was stripped down to a mere fraudulent middle class citizen. Someone who came from a well off family, received an inheritance and when this ran out began to publish books in full consciousness of defrauding the public -- all because he was just intelligent enough to understand the political currents and a political need for some spiritual and/or some mystical guides – in order to become rich. Yet, is this factual?
While it should be noted, all scholars pick and choose what they feel is helpful out of Cæsar Nostradamus and Jean-Aime de Chavigny’s biographies and writings. This paper will not rely on these sources at all. Therefore, what are left are Michel Nostradamus’ own words and other circumstantial evidence. Some of these words are in the form of correspondence. They are left to us by his firstborn male, who had them in his possession, but due to the approaching closure of his life and in poverty sold them to secure some funds but communicated as myth for prosperity. Nostradamus’ published works are another source. Suspect as they are, and as these scholars intend, what is left besides the contemporary attacks? And, a few letters and account which are prime sources, is that Nostradamus’ own account of his own life and work. If we cannot account for Nostradamus’ own words, we must conclude as Klinckowstroem had prior, he had never existed.
It is only through Chavigny’s bereft biography that we know of Nostradamus’ birth date, written physical description, religious preference, mental capacity and mental framework. In regards to physical descriptions, it is only by César Nostradamus in which we have a physical portrait of the old man. Also, César wrote his own book on the history of Provence, which had brought him some financial sustainability indicating he may not have been as well off as some scholars had claimed that Nostradamus’ will had left his family rich in which they did not have to seek employment. It is here we know that Nostradamus was born at Saint-Rémy-de-Provence. Nostredame reveals on little details of his family. In one letter Nostredame reveals his great-grandfather’s name who gave him a gift of a plainsphere. In other correspondence, only few other mentions of his broth Jéhan revels that Nostredame doesn’t communicate with his parent’s large family or leave us a record that he did. In Jewish tradition tight-knit families remain a normative observation. Certainly this claim is not absolute and generally as Jews have had family problems as with the rest of society in history. However, Nostredames’ silence speak louder to us that he had repressed his feelings or true relationship toward his family by the absence in his writings. It is important to understand this, as I intend, he possible did not have a traditional upbringing, and therefore he remained outside of the family fold, to which both possibilities exist in that he may have preferred this pathway in which explains that he may have not fit the mold of his parent’s eyes. The reason he may have suppressed this revelation toward his own personal past was possible future attacks upon his own characteristics resulting from the fame he knew intuitionally that would come to him.
The remaining biographical material is then parsed by all scholars to fit their particular arguments. Scholars intend that to both of them, Nostradamus was their hero. If they created these myths, as these scholars intend, we cannot take their descriptions on account of any bibliography at all. We simply do not know what Nostradamus looked like or when or where he was born. Instead we can only rely on Nostradamus’ words and all other circumstantial sources.
This paper argues Nostradamus was not rich, not intelligent but self taught, was not a negative person for wanting to life a respectable life, and did not get along with his family.
Notably in Nostradamus historiography, British linguist, writer, turned historian and Nostredame expert Peter Lemesurier made it his goal to bring to the English speaking world many of Nostredame’s unknown writings. This way, English speaking people, such as I, and others, can therefore read the many of the prime source and evaluate Nostredame in light of current research. This paper uses these badly needed translations in which others can update and reinterpret Michel Nostredame.
He explains for eight years he had wandered in different countries gathering local knowledge, learning Latin and pharmaceutics. This admission tells us a unique personal reflection. Nostredame is forging a self-made image. He is educating himself, and without a patron or funding. He is not at Montpellier studying Medicine with Rabelais but is living the life of a day-laborer and traveling or wandering. Peter Lemesurier in his biography “The Unknown Nostradamus” (2003) and his translated extracts from The Treatise on Cosmetics and Confitures alludes to a passage Nostredame intended for his audience revealing his failure to succeed at Medical School: “I found myself unable perfectly to attain the summit of the supreme doctrine” ... and so I did what the one who represented the summit of the Latin tongue [Virgil?] said: 'Et egressus sylvis vicina coegi' [Latin: 'And having left the forest I constrained the neighbourhood' -- i.e. I ransacked the local knowledge?], and proceeded to complete my studies up to the present time, which is the thirty-first year of my vocation [the text actually says 'vacation'!], which we know as 1552.” This would indicate if we take Chavigny’s birth data of December 14th, 1503, that Nostradamus was nineteen years old when he began to educate himself or took on the role of an apothecary. This was considered a day-labor job, no higher in social class than a midwife, and affirms his admittance of a struggling career-man.
Brind'Amour published an expelling document originally researched by Leroy, from the Montpellier, Liber scolasticorum. Archivist and critical researcher, Robert Benazra suggests either this was a prank but its contents nevertheless are valuable to researchers. Its date, October 3d, 1527, marks Nostredame’s own admission to his wandering years: “1521 to the year 1529.” Benazra intends that these apothecaries were banned from entering the medical school on grounds as it was considered a manual labor. This evidence comes from Guillaume Rondelet, “who had scratched out his entry,” while adding his justification at the margin.
Rondelet gives three justifications: First, Nostredame was an “apothecary;” Second, Nostredame was a “quack;” And thirdly, Nostredame spoke “ill of doctors.” In Nosrtedame’s Proem of his date of completion in 1552, we derive some of his autobiographical material, of his treatise already mentioned, he admits to his younger life as a wandering apothecary. An apothecary simply gathered natural plants and provided them to a pharmacist, sometimes acting in the same role as distributor. Basically, it paid little to nothing, was considered one of the most poverty stricken careers, and it was an unclean job. Anyone of middle to higher class abhorred the thought of meting out such a living. We often here in the states see the poor standing out on the street corner, usually starving and in desperate need to work. They are paid in daily wages, sometimes not paid for work, and jobs are shortly lived. Jobs consist of moving heavy objects, yard cleanup, menial tasks and dirty jobs. It is difficult not to understand that Nostredame wandered in such conditions, either helping out on a farm, part of day-labor crews who were hired for temporary work before moving on to the next adventure. It is understandable that Nostredame would not relate this episode in his life, but it is critical to understand his later actions that derive from this speculation. In our own time, we can safely say that at times in Nostredames’ life he was homeless. This carries a psychological burden on those who have not had such a life. It scares them and their reactions, as Rondelet are predictable.
Rondelet simply has evidence of herb-merchants who deal with Nostredame’s plant-gathering. More interesting is his nonconformist opinions on doctors and other apothecaries as he had met during his journeys’. These passages are found in the Proem. [need to cite] Nostredame mentions Rondelet by name, but holds no ill will toward him. As with his admittance of failing to become a doctor in this Proem, this helps explain his re-application. Nostredame attempted to be admitted regardless of social-class rules. Yet, on a closer evaluation, the application for entry into Montpellier doesn’t seem to be serious as one would expect.
Nostredame’s own application, which appears in the Liber scolasticorum marks the 23rd of October 1529 as the date of application, details his efforts at (re)admittance to the institution. This has confused scholars for decades. Chavigny is the only one who claims Nostredame attended the university. César and Nostredame do not mention this as history. [Alumnus (or alumni) of Montpellier address Nostredame in letters as “doctor.”] In 1530 François Rabelais enrolled at Montpellier, receiving his baccalaureate in 1531, and his doctorate in 1537. Yet, Nostredamus historiography is replete with alumni of Montpellier. Nostredame’s personal letters (collections) contain many alumni seeking correspondence. Rabelais published two poems for Nostradamus. However, Nostredame’s doctorate is not recorded in the Montpellier archives. Nostredame’s free translation of Galen’s medical treaties along with his other writings I intend pertains to a person not qualified as a scholar. Nostredame seems not have had the scholastic training needed to succeed at a University. As Lemesurier intends, this helps to explain his adoption of Hippocrates’ non-conformist views as it appears in Virgil’s Aeneid quoted by Nostredame in this cosmetics and cookbook preface. Hippocrates states, “The universities do not teach everyone, so a doctor must seek out old wives, gypsies, magicians, wandering tribes, former brigands and similar outlaws, and learn from them. A doctor must be a traveler.” Lemesurier’s translation of Virgil’s Latin phrase from the cosmetics and cookbook is suggestive of what Nostredame meant: “And having got out of the woods, I collected whatever I found around me.” This is more of an admittance of a social failure rather than pride of being admitted into a social community of scholars. Nevertheless, this also confirms a Nostredame sentiment found in the Proem, as well as his correspondence. Nostredame repeatedly speaks on how he is writing to the common public about these ancient medical thoughts and recipes. Nevertheless his prognostications represent communicating contemporary media through the medium of projection. Under social climates of uncertainty, persons have a need rectify the intending emotional responses evolving around them.
Why we can paint Nostredame as a non-conformist, certainly this was the only path open to him. Certainly Rondelet’s second claim (quack) is derived from gossip about Nostredame’s educational methods. Being self taught meant one was of a lower class. Educating the lower class predisposed an institution to class revolution. Apothecaries aspired as medicos (which were not ranked as doctors or physicians). Medicos and midwives as it has been suggested simply were equally viewed and valued as lower class positions. Yet, as Lemesurier claims, Paracelsus who derided the college institutions while in his youth was seeking out “famous teachers at various universities.” Nostredame reacted to college exclusion, Lemesurier claims, by seeking out “famous doctors and healers,” in hopes “to learn from their experience.” This claim comes from Nostredame lauding of Julius Cesar Squaliger’s medical knowledge. However, Lemesurier only takes an educational guess that Nostredame had become Scaliger’s personal apothecary and correspondent. While the relationship between the two does exist, Scaliger had disagreed with Nostredame too in print, no evidence supports Lemesurier’s claim. Nostredame just claims he was “indebted” to “Squaliger” more than anyone else. However, Nostredame’s incessant lauding of many famous figures places Squaliger’s accolades in doubt. Nostredame, according to legend, had settled in Agen and married women and had two children in which the most famous citizen who tutored Rabelais, and “Rabelais’ Montepeller tutor Jean Schyron.” These few years (two-and-a- half to three-years) are the only break between a wandering lifestyle of Nostedame from a young age to the time he permanently settles at Salon in a few years shy of his mid-forties. As we will see it was the death of Francios I (31 March 1547; Titles, King of France, Duke of Brittany, Duke of Valois, and Count of Angoulème; Father Charles of Angoulème, Mother Louise of Savoy; burial Saint Denis Basilica, France) and the ascension of Henri II that compels Nostredame to stardom. Certainly Lemesurier is correct Nostredame is collecting knowledge from doctors, as name-dropping supposes to later gain importance – but what does this say about class mobility? Because Nostredame was denied twice into admissions of Montpellier or as I claim his academic training or capability was not sufficient for its time, he must be regulated to manual labor for the rest of his life? Certainly Videl points out the obvious that Nostredame had started late in life, meaning his education.
[[ “Yet great scholars have thought this nomenclature not unworthy [ of] their attention, ---Grotius, Scaliger, Hyde, and out own Whitney, among others, devoting much of their rare talent to its elucidation [...]” This subject is the enquiry into star names and constellations – their lore. mjm—Nostradamus was connected to Scaliger who had worked on star-names and lore.
Rabelais, Erasmus, Luther and many others, while scholars in their own right, spoke negatively of these university teachers of their day. Lemesurier makes the connection that Hippocrates, Paracelsus and Nostredame gathered knowledge from university graduates and spoke negatively on some of them, but were not graduates themselves. However, all these persons, both graduates and non graduates were too in varying degrees either social or academic critics. The matter, in Nostredame’s case, is simply class mobility. Yet, a more correct interpretation is that Nostredame is in full knowledge of reincarnation and has to get the training to write in the future the ground work for his future reincarnation job of human management.
After medical school, Rabelais finished his Pantagruelique Pronostication (1533) when Nostredame left Avignon, moving through Boudreaux and Toulouse in which he found his way to Agen. It is here in Nostradamus historiography that a few years before Scaliger’s family settled that Nostredame had married and had two children. For the first time, Nostredame had a traditional life, a family and had worked at various jobs. However he left Agen, after being deposed by the region’s inquisitors in which he wife and children behind, only returning after their deaths in 1535 due to some type of epidemic. Yet, Nostredame does not mention these accounts or acknowledge any first wife or children. What is curious is another six years of his life that is unaccounted for before he is summoned as he says to fight another plague outbreak. Nostredame picks up with his autobiography. “[I]n 1546 I was recruited and hired by the city of Aix-en-Provence, whose senate and people installed me there to save the city at a time when the Plague was so great and so horrific.” Indeed this was the time Nostredame became in south of France a little known. His local celebrity, self made doctor, garnered him a beautiful young wife, whom he must have met during these troubled times. Nostredame writes extensively on the plague, which is all verified, and gruesome to say the least. However, what is not suggested was what transpired there which explains why Nostredame considered himself a doctor thereafter! Aix the capital of Provence was hit hard. In Marseilles, local doctors did not respond either. At Aix, “Celebrated Toulouse doctor Augier Ferrier” declared to the local doctors too: “Get out fast, stay well away, come back late.” Apparently the non-doctor was registered by the city’s “financial accounts for June 1546,” earning in today’s money about $900 dollars and some change upon completion. What is curious is that nine-hundred dollars in today’s money would not cover one months rent in a small apartment, let alone accomplish all the other financial burdens. If we logically push the argument, Nostredame is poor and took on the role as ‘Plague Doctor’ for reasons of necessity as well as a visual symbol of his French citizenry. The 1540’s Provence also attests to social mobility for conversos who more than likely took advantage of the horrific epidemic times. While most likely Frenchmen who had attained a Ph. D degree simply sought to save their own life; this led to a vacuum in which needed to be filled at the mundane level. Increasingly, Paris was becoming anti-Semitic, and a series of papal bulls, issued by Pope Paul IV called Cum nimis absurdum in 1555, worsened economic conditions for Jews in Avignon. While in 1524 Clement VII replaced the rouelle with a yellowed colored hat to off set stigmatism, Luther’s anti-Jewish sentiments resonated in pockets of Protestantism, as Nostredame’s ethnic roots were used as a vehicle of hate against him in 1558’s anonymous attack Monsterdamus. Most Jews either hid or disowned their identity, but it did not leave their psyches! Despite Nostredame going to a local Church as it has been assumed, his roots and identity were known to some to be in contention to proper religiosity. Jews were idolaters, Jews killed Jesus according to immature historical polemicals, and were legally shut out of Christendom by which they held specific jobs and lived in specific communities. Being a Christianized-Jew did not seem to mask anti-toleration in the 1540s. It was necessary for Nostredame’s paternal side of the family to petition François I to legalize the family as French subjects. This seemed a necessity as anti-Jewish pressures from Rome, Germany and Spain surmounted pressure upon the French Crown. Rome tried to placate the Catholics in Germany who swayed between Luther’s anti-Jewish sentiments and Protestantism. Rome had to take the anti-Jewish sentiment to placate the Spanish Catholic sentiment in the Holy Roman Empire. François I countered by legitimizing citizen rights of certain known Jewish families –thus he did before he died. While Luther positioned his princes to distance themselves from Roman hegemony, Charles V also needed to be cautious. Empirically we understand this took place with Martin Luther’s extremely anti-Semitic rant that argued the Jews should either give up their lands, and work in menial day-labor jobs or die. The Catholic Church traditionally had accepted the Jews who had been kicked out of Spain by the Catholic Monarchs. They were allowed sanctuary in southern France. Partially this was economic and partially this was racism, pure and simple. By Christian standards in which Luther wrote under, he forewent his own tolerant argued religious positions and dammed himself to hell. For Luther, religion was purely political and not spiritual which helps explain why he never formulated a doctrine of Lutheranism.
Ibid., Coote, p. 25. “[P]rophetic manuscripts such as [...] Bodmer’s manuscript of Les Prophéties de Merlin were kept hidden from view in jealously guarded private collections until the mid-twentieth century, p. 5, see n. 17, on Merlin see A. Berthelot, Les Prophéties de Merlin (cod. Bodmer 116) Cologny-Genève, Foundation Martin Bodmer, 1992), p. 9. The manuscript was in the hands of Maggs Brothers, see L.A. Paton, Les Prophéties de Merlin (2 vols, New York & Oxford, D.C. Health and Co., Oxford University Press, 1926-7), vol. 1, p. 9.
Thomas A. Kselman, Miracles and Prophecies in Nineteenth-Century France (New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press, 1983), pp. 5-7. in Ottavia Niccoli, Prophecy and People in Renaissance Italy, p. xv.
Chardonnenes, László Sándor, Anglo-Saxon Prognostics, 900-1100, study and texts, eds., Han van Ruler, et al. (Leiden: Koninklijke Brill NV, 2007), p. 107. This book in addition to other universities is published by Princeton University in the series called Brill’s Studies in Intellectual History. This book is a part of vols. 3 & 153.
Ibid., Chardonnenes, Anglo-Saxon Prognostics, 900-1100, p. 107. Chardonnenes continues in note 53 on Thorndike’s comparisons. “prediction of the future and attempting to influence events go naturally together”, and also “that arts of divination cannot be separated either in theory or practice form magic arts.” I strongly disagree with this notion, because there is a fundamental difference in purpose between observation/divination and magic: even though all may end up influencing the future, this is not the primary aim of observation and divination.
Chardonnenes, Anglo-Saxon Prognostics, n., 53 p. 107, Thorndike (1923-58: I. 512) wrote that “prediction of the future and attempting to influence events go naturally together”, and also “that arts of divination cannot be separated either in theory or practice form magic arts.” I strongly disagree with this notion, because there is a fundamental difference in purpose between observation/divination and magic: even though all may end up influencing the future, this is not the primary aim of observation and divination.
Chardonnenes, Anglo-Saxon Prognostics, n., 80 p. 112, Harmening (1979: 181-82) “Systems of propitious and unpropitious times, such as Dog Days [ Sirius’s passage through a defined period of the summer months, denoting hot-weather, and its associated environmental reactions] , lunaries and sunshine prognostic, are classed under observation rather than under divination, because their ulterior astrological basis derived from natural astrology, not judicial astrology. Prognostication in the form of Egyptian Days and Dog Days was a calendar matter in Anglo-Saxon England.” England had adopted the Sirius calendar from Egyptian and Sumerian traditions as it marked passage to the New Year which was related to the Nile inundation. However, as with the procession of the equinoxes, as noted by Ptolemy, of an 8 degree discrepancy in data from Egyptian traditions, he advocated to changing the astronomical calendar form the Tropical [4 seasons] in which he had lost the debate. Thereby, approximately every 72 years, the background stars regress about 1 degree in which creates a further discrepancy between the tropical- invisible Zodiac demarcation which is a local Solar System boundary used as a data barrier and its background of local galaxy stars which also move in discrepancy to linear perspective, forcing the distance which is the determining factor of discrepancy between measurements needed for a scientific data field. However, as Albert Einstein proved space bends light and the fact that stars are only relatively understood to be in their positions from the earth’s standpoint, the data field for matching planets against stars of imaginary lines in the sky is mute. We have no understanding but our primitive evaluation of observation in history books – in which astrologers derive their modern interpretations and significations for superstitious reading. However, in favor the astrologers despite the discrepancy of movement of background stars, the imaginary data field of the tropical zodiac remained a constant in which a pretheatrical field for collecting constant data has been consistent, despite the illogical or irrationality of the bending of time and space.
Chardonnenes, Anglo-Saxon Prognostics, p. 112-113. see footnotes 81-85, p. 113 for analysis for this claim in prime sources of letters and documents. Chardonnenes states, on note 81., that, “Michael Herren informed me that Aldhelm derived his knowledge of judicial astrology from Cicero’s De diuination.
Ibid., Chardonnenes, Anglo-Saxon Prognostics, n., 82 p. 113. “Burnett (1197: 2-5). Byzantine, Syriac and Arabic astronomical learning showed a marked interest in judicial astrology. For an overview of the introduction (1997) and the following: Haskins (1915), Singer (1917:108-09; 1928:71-85), Thorndike (1923-58: I.697-718), Bonser (1963: 156-57), Talbot (1967: 24-37), Wedel (1968:49-89), Rubin (1974:189-92), Jones (1984:64), North (1968a: 1986b:96-107, 114-22), Kieckhefer (1989:86, 116-50), Hugonnard-Roche (1996), Getz (1998: 36-44).” This list here can help people look into these sources that had drawn upon other sources for how predictive superstition astrology had come to Europe.
Ibid., Chardonnenes, Anglo-Saxon Prognostics, p. 113. Chardonnenes goes on to say “A lemma in a gloss or glossary must not be considered evidence of the contemporary existence of the conventions implied by the lemma. Old English words for astrology, for instance, do not prove the existence of judicial astrology in Anglo-Saxon England. Moreover, the vocabulary of superstition must be related to evidence of superstitious practices. In case of astrology, eighteen interpretamenta have been attested, but there is no evidence, documentary or otherwise, that judicial astrology was ever practiced in Anglo-Saxon England,” p. 113, see also note 85.
Nostradamus, M., II.XV, partially of line two, trans., Lemesurier, in Lemesurier, Peter, “The Illustrated Prophecies, The New and Authortative Translation to Commemorate Nostredamus’ 500 th Anniversary” (Hants, U.K. : John Hunt Publishing Ltd., 2003), p. 217.
Bareste, Eugène “Nostradamus,” ed. Maillet (Rue de L’est, 31, Paris: Chez Rous Les Marchands de Nouveates, 1840), The celebrated Miraculous Book, so important to the second group during the 1990s and onward is first mentioned as a prime source for Nostradamus in this work. [ this is my findings]. Also, Albumazar (pp. 203-205) is also a vital source for Nostradamus, in which we derive some of Nostradamus’ ideas. It was James Laver‘s work “Nostradamus or the Future Foretold,” 5th ed. (Guildford, Surrey, G.B.: George Mann Books, 1981) which helped to communicate this book’s existence. U.C.L.A. has an original copy in which I scoured for the relevant information.
To prove his thesis, Klinckowstroem went around the world collecting Nostradamus prime sources. Klinckowstroem’s legacy lives on today as these two late early editions of Nostradamus’ Les Propheties...etc., are secured in the archival institution of the University of California systems, donated from his vast collection. These would be: Les propheties de M. Michel Nostradamus : dont il y a en a trois cents qui n'ont jamais ete imprimees ; ajoutees de nouveau par l'auteur, imprimees par les soins du Fr. Jean Valliex ... In 2 pts., the 2d with special t.p. (imprint same as that of main title): Les propheties de M. Michel Nostradamus, centuries VIII. IX. X. qui n'ont encores jamais etes imprimees, antedated A Lyon: Per Pierre Rigaud, 1566; [Klinckowstroem suggestion of published dates from 1610-15], actual published date is 1611; actual publisher is Vallier, Jean, of the Convent de Salon des Mineurs conventuels de Saint Francois, 168 p. ; 15 cm., Klinckowstroem no. 22 (Zeitschrift fur Bucherfreunde, N.F., 4. Jahrg., p. 371), &
John Herbert Dillinger (June 22, 1903- July 22, 1934) gained notoriety as a midwestern bank robber who was a prominent public figure during the public enemy era (1931-1935) in the history of The United States of America.
Laurent Videl, Declaration des abus, ignorances et seditions de Michel Nostradamus (Avignon, Roux & Tremblay, 1558). This work confirmed that César’s epistle appeared in public at least by 1557 or 1558. Videl simply argues passages from it. Videl lived in Avignon in which he accuses Nostredame of speaking ill of him on some subject. Videl’s libelous, confused, and polemic book warns Christians that “Jesus Christ warned us to beware of you.” [p. 243.] see reproduced translation extracts of Declaration des abus, by Lemesurier in The Unknown Nostradamus, 2003, see appendix f, sec. ii, pp. 236-248. Videl via Deuteronomy 18 provides a death threat in this work, while later in this book he claims he means no harm to Nostredame. [ “not only have you misled and deceived the common people, but also the great lords, whom you have caused to admire you through your disordered ramblings, and who have all let pass your tall stories or simply failed to be on their ground against them.” p. 246. Lemesurier claims this was a popular book. The only prophecy this astrologer and doctor intends in this work is a prediction against Nostredame. He states that two weeks after Nostredame dies, the world will forget all about him. ]
Chavigny, Jean-Aime, “La Premiere Face Du Janus Francois, Contenant Sommarement Les Troubles, guerres civiles & autres choses memorables advenues en la France & ailleurs des l'an de salut MDXXXIIII jusques a l'an MDLXXXIX fin de la maison Valesienne. Extraite Et Colligee Des Centuries Et Autres Commentaires De M. De Nostradame... A La Fin Est Adiouste Un Discours de l'advencement a la Couronne de France...Le tout fait en Francois & Latin...,” section ii., [ his biography] (Lyon: Heirs of Pierre Roussin, 1594), pp. 336.
Histoire et Chronique de Provence. This work intends many antidotes which have been related in numerous books down to the present age. Most notably, Nostradamus reading of King Henri II and Catherine de’ Medicis children at Blois, and Nostradamus inspection of King Charles XI during Catherine’s grand tour of southern France—among the many more biographical entries which comprise much of Nostradamus historiography.
Michel Nostredame was born to two possible Jewish converses who were not national citizens but desired to be so. A signed document by Francios I recognized two Nostredame figures as finally being accepted as French citizens in [ see Ian Wilson]
Ibid., Traité des fardemens et confitures, and having wished to imitate the lonely shade of Paulus Aigineta, 'Non quod velim conferre magna minutis' [Latin: 'Not that I would wish to confer greatness on the small'].
from the Bibliothèque Interuniversitaire de Montpellier, registre S 2, f° 87. Cf. Bibliothèque Interuniversitaire de Montpellier, Registre S2, f° 87. Voir Marcel Gouron, Documents inédits sur l'Université de Médecine de Montpellier (1495 - 1559) : les débuts de la médecine légale à Montpellier à la fin du XVème siècle in Montpellier Médical, 1956, Volume 50, p. 375. Voir la reproduction photographique dans les Cahiers Michel Nostradamus, n° 2, p. 20 et la transcription de Pierre Brind'Amour, Nostradamus astrophile, Editions Klincksieck, 1993, p. 114. in Robert Benazra, “L'étudiant en médecine Michel de Nostredame (1521-1533)” (Centre Universitaire de Recherche en Astrologie, 2003, accessed 4 January 2008), available from http://cura.free.fr/xxx/26benaz4.html; Internet.
Wilson, Ian, Nostradamus: The Evidence (London: Orion House, 2002), p. 23. Nostredame would write praising many famous people from the Faculty of Medicine at Montpellier, including Rondelet in his Traité des fardemens et des confitures, note 15, op. cit., Confitures, ch, XXX. Nostredame mentions Antione Saporta who succeeded Rondelet as Chancellor (1560-1566) in 1566; as well as mentioning Honoré de Chastel.
Ibid., L'étudiant en médecine, Benazra, cf. Dr. Edgar Leroy, Nostradamus, ses origines, sa vie, son oeuvre (Bergerac: Imprimerie Trillaud, 1972), et réédition Jeanne Lafitte, 1993, p. 58, Held at the Bibliothèque Interuniversitaire de Montpellier (Liber scolasticorum), registre S 19, f° 105 v., reproduction in Benazra, “L'étudiant en médecine...”
Ibid., Lemesurier, The Unknown Nostradamus, p.26. Virgil’s Aeneid quote is not cited or does Lemesurier reveal where this quote by Nostredame comes from of his writings. It comes from the Proem in Traité des Fardemens et des Confitures.., first published in 1555.
Ibid., Lemesurier, The Unknown Nostradamus, p.26., op. cit., trans., Lemesurier of Nostredame, M., Excellent et moult utile opuscule, 1555. Lemeurier further compares ‘Paracelsus,’ (Theophrastus Bombastus von Hohenheim), who took to the road in the same year (1529) never attaining an institutional medical training and became one of the most famous lectures on Medicine ( University of Basel) – describes the same rationalization of forgoing institutional thought, p. 26. Therefore, Virgil’s Aeneid quote of Hippocrates can apply in history to both Paracelsus’ and Nostredame’s methodology on acquiring knowledge and disseminating it to the public.
Ibid., Traité des Fardemens et des Confitures, trans., Lemesurier, “Some may mock me for recording such a minor detail, which all apothecaries know about. But my main aim has been to set it down in writing for common folk and for ladies who are curious to find out, and indeed for all kinds of people,” Part 2 Chapter XXVII.
Lemesurier cites his family name as the noble family Della Scala; Ian Wilson contends it as Scaligeri, a family which came from the tiny Alpine town of Rive in northern Italy, and migrated to Agen, France in 1524., see Wilson, Ian, Nostradamus: The Evidence (London: Orion House, 2002), p. 31.
Giulio Cesare della Scala (b. 1484) a.k.a. Julius Caesar Scaliger migrated to Agen in 1525  where he had publically disagreed with Erasmus, Rabelais, Cardano and Nostredame. Scaliger was considered a ‘violent polemicist.’ Ibid., Lemesurier, The Unknown Nostradamus, p.27. in 1531 Scaliger had written a virulent pamphlet attacking Erasmus, in which Rabelais then wrote to Erasmus confirming his origins, and his bad reputation, his decent medical knowledge, but also as a ‘complete atheist,’ p. 34, note 13, quoted in translation in Donald M. Frame, Complete Works of François Rabelais (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991), p. 746.
Allen, Richard Hinckley, Star Names, Their Lore and Meaning ( Dover Publishing, 1963; 563 pp.), p.1, Introduction., Allen (born in 1838, Buffalo, New York, d. 1908, Northhampton Massachusetts) was a gifted Polymath and amateur naturalist. He pursued astronomy, sought to popularize it, according to the ancient traditions of star-names and lore of constellations. First published in 1899 as “Star-Names and Their Meanings.” This book is not a useful reference, but a first of its kind to intertwine both east and west ancient literature and studies of heavenly meanings and symbols. It has Greco-Roman, Babylonian, Indian, Arabic, and Chinese traditions. However this work was completed before the major archeological findings brought in an increase of knowledge of the past. The book is dedicated to Hubert Anson Newton and William Dwight Whitney, Senior professor in Yale University – they encouraged Allen to pursue this topic.
The simple fact that François Rabelais wrote against prophets, prognosticators and soothsayers by 1532 the first editions of Pantagruel (1532), then his Pantagruelique Pronostication (1533)...etc. eds.,.. Gargantua (1534) should end all arguments that he was writing explicitly against Nostredame. Nostredame does not begin to compose his first prognostication Almanach until the year of 1549. There is also no evidence that Nostredame is communicating or producing any such predictions at this time. Nostredame is simply engaged in medicine and gathering knowledge, as evidence as going to Agen. There is no such documented evidence that they knew of each other or were mentioned by each other. What is known is that in both their writings the same famous Montpellier faculty is mentioned by naming thus one verifying to the other’s account.
Nostredame married at Toulouse to Henriette d’Encausse (which is suggested but not documented) around the year of 1533. The children’s names are not known. cf. Wilson, The Evidence, pp. 42-43; Nostredame does not mention this at all. Either it was too painful or it is not fact. Nonetheless, it is legend.
There are three main speculations; Scaliger called them, Huguenot chemist, Victor Saracen who worked in the vicinity who later in the presence of the Catholic authorities denounced Nostredame, or an off-handed remark to a sculptor that was later questioned as insensitive to Christianity. All three of these stories are non- corroborated -- so therefore we do not know. What is certain is that the authorities were called to question Nostredame who simply fled and left his wife and children. But we also must take care to understand that Nostredame left his second wife, going to Italy more than once, for to gather knowledge and find printers, leaving behind wife and children.
In 1528 Nostredame helped out the Bourdeax citizens fight the plague and this epidemic (not officially called the plague) allowed Nostredame to come in to assist in fighting it which seemed to be permissible in light of the previous charges.
Ibid., see Wilson, The Evidence, pp. 42-43., It is only through the account of his secretary Chavigny in his Brief Discourse ....[ need cite] do we have mention of a wife, unnamed, and a boy and a girl, with no indication of an epidemic killing them; or Nostredame being summoned by the inquisition. It is only King François I’s roaming unofficial inquisition in which may have forced Nostredame to roam about in the mid to late 1530s. Chavigny only claims that Nostredame tired of Agen, and then practiced medicine in cities such as Bordeaux, Toulouse, Norborne and Carcassonne after his wife and children died. Yet, as Wilson points out, these were only towns on the logical road from Saint-Rémy to Agen – certainly Nostredame had to pass through them. Nostredame confirms this history in his Traité des fardemens et des confitures (1555), ch. XXX, op. cit., note 6 Wilson, p. 43; cf. Nostredame dedicates Part 1 Chapter XXVI to the “Most Reverend Monsignor the Lord Bishop of Carcassonne, Ammanien de Foys [...],”Traité des fardemens et des confitures, trans., Lemesurier.
Ibid., p. 45, Wilson points out that Jéhan, the newly appointed civic lawyer of Aix, instigated the summoning of various medicos and doctors to fight outbreaks at Aix-en-Provence. As well, in Traité des fardemens et confitures, Nostredame picks up his life and writes how “at Vienne, just south of Lyons, “ he resumed an acquaintance with a Montpellier alumnus (degree 1531) Françios Valériolle, who as Wilson points out settled at Vienne in 1544, leaving permanently to Arles to help fight the plague at least by late 1544.
These were patches of identification. Nostredame later incorporated the symbols of his rouelle into his Christian coat of arms the symbols of his family’s patch—which were needed to be worn as identification of Jewish heritage.
Martin Luther had published a 65,000-word treatise entitled On the Jews and Their Lies (German: Von den Jüden und iren Lügen; in modern spelling Von den Juden und ihren Lügen) in 1543. Luther had multiple complaints against the Jews which possibly came from arguments previously from the Spanish court; at least one of them was to demote academic positions and regulate Jewish financial ascendancy. While not arguing or commanding their complete and utter destruction, he suggests that they work manual labor jobs and live in poverty. Luther’s reaction was economic as well as psychological. For as too economics and psychological needs of Luther as according to his reaction with this work, The Italian Wars and the Protestant and Catholic princely wars nearly ruined the social fabric of the German peasantry, in which peasants revolted misconstruing what Luther had manipulated of the scriptures and he had to advocate their destruction to save the archives and artifacts of the past, he argued. Most Jews were considered outcasts, either self imposed or inferred; they held jobs such as money lending, trade and education in which were higher paying jobs than most commoners held. They had not known that non-Roman/Latin soldiers made up much of the ranks that destroyed the Holy Temple at Jerusalem in 70 ACE. There is no evidence that the Jews had purposely killed Jesus in which a denial of the savoir damned them to everlasting servitude to Caucasian Europeans. Luther did not understand these histories of the ancient world, but relied on misconceptions born out of stupendous tales. Luther needed an enemy, and when the Catholics began to counter his actions, he turned toward a new enemy of that of the Jews. The evidence is that this turn of focuses took place late in his life and not when he had focused upon direct attacks against Rome.
However, in a needed time when degreed Christian French doctors were fleeing to Marseille to save their lives, Nostredame took the opportunity to climb the social latter. At the same time, the local reactories toward the establishment subsisted in lower classes using paganistic means to fight back against repression. Anti-sentiment grew in the 1540s and 1550s and most of the Jews had fled to Provence, to escape the repression and now the Catholic Church was trying to appears the Protestants by making rules against Jews in Sothern France. If François I did not legitimize Nostredame’s father and grandfather in the 1540s, Nostredame would not have been allowed to operate in the confines that he had achieved. Nostredame is simply living in a complex world where it was falling apart and rules and legist were issued as reactionary or appeasement policies in which diminished most, not all, Jewish agency.
All we have of the extensive account of the Aix 1546 plague comes from Nostredame. The celebrated historiography that Nostredame was praised for his efforts is not far fetched. Nostredame, a committed Hippocratic reader, confirmed his duty while these real doctors hid for safety. Suggesting the Aix population was ungrateful would be suspect. Nostredame simply acted in a position of authority, commanding others. Nonetheless, his efforts were appreciated and he married a young widow. Nostredame assumed an unofficial doctor’s degree from then on elevating his social status as the country would take a dramatic turn in ideology.
It was also in 1547 that François I died and rebellious Henri II became king at the age of twenty-eight. The ideological shift was immediate. The Pavia ransom had nearly bankrupted France, and Henri had to reorganize the administrations while modernizing the French military. Both Pope Paul III (d. 1549) and Julius III contended the Concordat of Bologna of 1516, and refused to renew the indults for the pays d’obédiance, one of the most significant being that of the Provence territory. The ideological shift increased with Julius’ reign and Provence laid open for want of control. Charles V’s brilliant plan to infuse Spanish migrants to southeast of France, continued by his son Philip, to dream of opening the ancient Roman road from Spain to Italy, increase the metropolitanism which defined the freedom of Provence at this time.
Julius reacted with the papal “Bull convening the Council of Trent of November 1550.” “The Bull convening the Council of Trent of November 1550 [ this is the second stage, no?] triggered a sharp outburst from Henry, who regarded it as proof of Julius’s defection to the imperial camp.” As a rebellious king, Henri II began to marginalize Rome. François I had aligned with the Florence, Rome and Ottomans, “Henri II continued the policy of aligning with the “German Lutherans [ & bankers, and for trade benefits] and the Turks,” fought with Julius III, once threatening to give the throne of France to Philip, son of Charles V. Therefore, Henri II began to allow to some extent Protestant nobles and clergy to assemble and hold positions. Henri adopted his father’s beliefs that civil strife derived from the lower-classes, which often garnered Henri in French historiography as a naive king. Nonetheless, there was this new found freedom associated with the Western Europe chaos. Protestants, Evangelicals, and Anabaptists began to filter into France. Henri II ignored the religious issues of the nobility, allowing any state religious program into the realm as long as they worked for French interests. It is the only way to understand how Notsredame came to importance. Henri II had no motive to help Charles V stamp out the Protestant threat in Germany. Henri II as the Chivalric king was going to rule the world. For a short window of time, there was this idealism toward self-fashioning of heroic individuals all amid the chaos of intending political realism– and both Henri II and Nostredame are prime examples of this time.
While northern France, Germany and parts of Italy were virtual war-zones, after 1557 Philip II had a brilliant plan. He hispanisized southern France in efforts to open up the ancient Roman road from Spain to Italy.
There was this new found freedom associated with the Western Europe chaos. It is the only way to understand how Notsredame
These events scientifically help to explain his development as a reactionary personality. Because Nostredame lacked a medical license, and lacked the proper education, he simply concluded that it was society’s fault. Nostredame’s only other choices were residual poverty or a self fashioned writer.
Nostredame’s own confession relates to us a manual labor career man, who when called upon had helped assist in fighting various plagues and epidemics. He in his Traité des Fardements et des Confitures attests to a life of struggle. Both his brothers became publically respected and financial successful. Everyone he had met had called him basically a loser.
Nostredame continued a gradual escalation of social class as an academic critic. In order to do so, Nostredame wrote to the public instead of the academics. Orus Apollo, a recently discovered manuscript in which we now have cursive evidence of Nostredame’s handwriting, was produced in 1541. This work exemplifies a self effort toward a real career. This helps to explain that after returning from Italy in 1549, he set down to begin a publishing career which helped define the era which Philip II’s ambassador Alva told the king “was lunacy”, and as well helped to close it down.
Yet, the second edition of Nostredame’s Cosmetics and Cookbook, entitled Traité des Fardements et des Confitures (1555) provides us with Nostredame’s justification for being called a medical doctor. There are thirty-four preparations for cosmetics, and according to Liberte E. LeVert, a section written separate in which can be considered an early French modern cookbook. Besides, illustrated in the Proem, these classical references to poets, philosophers, artists, medical persons, historians, architects, etc...all bolster a self educated man’s credentials. Reactionaries to inclusive name-dropping forgo evidence that Erasmus, Luther and a belly of other intellects used name dropping to bolster their educational credentials. Still, the Proem gives us a limited autobiography. The conversations on the plague describe success and failures of Nostredame’s methods; but more importantly it describes someone who was engaged in the community of France and modern ideas. Why would this be important?
Nostredame mentions Marsilo Ficino in the first edition of his “Cosmetics and Cookbook.” He had linked this first to his views on Scaliger, then “two years later” deleting the occult reference to Scaliger’s intelligence by replacing it with Cicero and Galen. Yet, this information places Nostredame at Agen, and at the same time provides hints to his ideas incorporated in Les Propheties later on, in understanding that Ficino “published in 1471” a “Latin translation of the Hermetica,” in which Wilson claims Scaliger had a copy. Nonetheless, Nostredame having failed to be included into institutional education, began to self educate himself, even at the point of embarrassment. However, fraudulently allowing himself to be called doctor or physician is qualified. It is the social claim which begs to differ. While Nostredame was excluded by his class status, he eventually reacted by elevating himself to nobility-equivalent by his use of knowledge of apocalyptic writings. [put discussion on prophets] The social critique here intends that by exclusion a reaction takes place when allotted freedom is persistent in chaotic environments.
Nostredame rose to prophetic important as the religious instability significantly escalated. As fear gripped Europe, Nostredame used this empirical apparatus to launch window forecasts ( yearly or bi-annual, Almanachs), then introducing traditional pre-apocrypha. Nostredamus used the ‘traditional pre-apocrypha’ as a ladder to social-class elevation in which allowed the field of sociological criticism to analysis this human characteristic. That characteristic lay in want. Nostredamus’ fame only skyrocketed after 1555, five years after his first Almanach. Summoned to court of veiled threats to the French Monarchy, exacerbated rumor discourse that Nostredame had arrived; Nostredame became sick as a result to his trepidations of being excruciated. However, it appeared Henri II was in need of information rather than retribution against seemly endless threats by scores of street prophets and ill – wishers. Nostredame tells us that upon his last night in Paris, he had been suspiciously propositioned to explain his divinatory methods in which he replied that he would leave Paris on the morrow, possibly an un recorded promises to no longer further engage in such agitation toward authority. This becomes quite evident, at least in the 1557 almanac, reproduced in part by Chavigny’s manuscript but referenced in a selected few quotes from private English collections of this almanac (not of the pirated edition, in existents today) in the book Religion and the Decline of Magic by Keith Thomas (New York, 1971). Nostredame only mentions the victorious French position, as other ambiguities lay open to interpretation of the more relevant bottom to top struggles existing on all lands in Europe at this time. Empirically Nostredame became a champion of French hegemony as evident in his promotion of Henri II. This allowed Nostredame to continue in light of threats against his own monarchy earlier in 1555. Thus the dedication to Henri II is a plausible outcome of his near death experience at Paris. Simply dedicating his most auspicious work, rather fashioned a remarkable turn around in attitude toward his host country.
It was only Les Propheties de Michel Nostradamvs which caught the attention of the royal courts of Europe. This book was apparently more sophisticated and expensive then his discounted almanachs. It was the Almanachs, which brought the royal attacks, but his claim in Les Propheties of his writings having more weight after he was gone than alive that really spurned-on the attacks. Nostredamus was simply ascending toward aristocratic elitism by engaging in the novel printing press, the freedom of expression, and this new prophetic trend. By relating large and far-reaching natural and human endeavors, Nostredame was trumping epistemic dominance over all authority figures. In fact, so ambitious the endeavor, his passion was only equaled to Luther’s predestinational stance. Luther wanted emancipation of Germans from Rome and parsed sola scriptura to justify predestinated salvation ; and still Nostredamus wanted emancipation from low class-status by adopting [ self made mouth peace of the pagan Sybille [ Monarch]) the biblical tradition of apocryphal writings and apocryphal methods. For Luther, it was personal ambition and noble-class admiration. To Nostredame, it was personal ambition and common class admiration. Lemesurier does not relate this view, but affirms Nostredame “re-expressed in succinct and memorable form” these “apocalyptic prophecies,” in “a language understanded of the People.” John Calvin in the same manner intended predestination was conferred upon humans in regards to their varying success of materialism. However, while all wrote under a religious context, Nostredame incorporated paganistic discourse into his symbolism as means of rationalizing the human condition. Nonetheless, Nostredame wrote to his audience under the presumed confidence of predestination. Nostredamian John Hogue contends this view, however, a more significant number of Nostradamus scholars intend predestination.
“The following period of the Reformation centered around the analysis of divinely inspirited prophecies. During the Reformation the word prophecy acquired different dimensions and a new emphasis.” No longer, and according to Catholic tradition were prophets moralizers who helped communities’ spiritual needs with warnings, and moral behavior tales, Nostredame’s incessant claim of ‘rightly divine revelations,’ coming from God did this genre reach its peak. In 1523-‘25 when the Luther and Erasmus titanic battle over predestination pursued its predictable course, the failure of the doomsday prophets and astrologer had revealed a need for a reassessment of social tactics. As Thomas explains, in regards to Italian 1524 prophet failures of the inundations widely predicted all over by Europeans’ best astrologers and soothsayers, rationalism and spiritualism replaced the medieval mentality of totality of reliance on omens, symbolism and current standards of misconstruction. A more sober and effective rationalization began influencing astrologers who hesitated to predict such far reaching apocrypha accounts. Embarrassed, probably because no actionary aspect was understood at the time, meaning that all the significance lay in the deep understanding of the mysteries of earth as cognitional pedagogy in which was not understood and accounts for the massive pan-European failure, these movements of esoteria began to turn away from standard medial traditions and begin to place a rationalization into their empirical studies. Logics began to replace traditional separations between spiritual and rationalization (Aquinas’s demarcations). In order to understand our world in esoteric formulations, one needed to take out these separations and combine the interdisciplinary functionalities so evident in Nostredame’s methodology, as well as others. The sixteenth century was never a status function so evident in historiographies so apropos to their periods, but a fluid progression constitution a quickening change that slowed down a reversed itself upon the advent of these first few decades into seventeenth century. These heights of literary achievement, Cervantes, Shakespeare, and Rabelais passed into the quiet catacombs of obscurity as feudalism returned to normal in western France. From the seventeenth century commencement until the advent of the actionary 1789 dissimilarly planetary alignment in the same zodiac sign did things remain status.
When in 1558, during which time Nostredame was composing his 1559 Almanac, he began to be attacked. This tells us he is having an impact on competitors and receiving a wider audience. At the same time, his reputation laid heavily on the events in which would transpire over the course of 1559. The January présage began with its first line reading in English as “The great to be no more, ayne in the Christhall.” While lines like “Sudden fall, never, never shall rise,” reveal, as with other présages noting a demise of some monarch’s tragic death, the chance to claim epistemic dominance to this new prophetic emphasis on predestination remained suspect. Nostradamus does not link the death to his king in his almanack, in which this crucial edition should have exposed. Instead he focuses on another work for the significance of a lunar eclipse (September 1559) as a vehicle to attack his enemies. Therefore, the 1559 almanache, what is revealed is common knowledge then projected over a short period of time which relates to current French accomplishments of the previous year. In line two for November’s présage, Nostredame relates that “The great great shall go out of France.” And in fact, that is what they did. Nobles and clergy were fleeing Paris to Genève by 1558, in favor of Protestantism or to avoid the Parisian instability, as the political consequences from losing to the Spanish Army at Saint-Quinton would then fix. Line four for November’s présage continues this theme: “rescuse the peace by decietfal assurance.” “Henry clearly needed peace if he hopped to deal with heresy with the freedom and force that was needed.” (p. 241) In May 1558, “he had expressed himself on the point; thus the influence of Montmorency on the decisions of the fall of 1558 to make peace may not have been as decisive as often argued. Having made peace in April 1559,” [Nostredame’s English Almanack – the only surviving copy claims peace] Henri II sought to concern himself with the Huguenots. But was Henri II as ambitious in pursuit of his heretics as nominally argued? Nostedame would have understood the decline in heresy cases at Toulouse from 1555 to 1558 [Toulouse, need to find Toulouse and if Nostredame could have empirically understood this trend] and simply deduced logical understanding for this trend. Also, the defeat at Saint- Quentin, and the subsequent Treaty of Cateau-Cambrésis allowed Henri II to bring in unemployed soldiers and focuses them on Lutheran rabble-rousers while at the same time appeasing his own German soldiers and German merchants. While this indicated a certain peace, it almost surly led to the empirical evidence of emigration in which Nostredame simply logically assumed. Not for the fact that in early 1557 Henri II had asked Rome for placement of its Holy Office in efforts to trump local parliamentary resistance to the King’s wishes. It was only the local parliamentary resistance to persecuting the ‘radicals’ in which Henri II sought to accomplish. Henry had established a trend of imprisoning heretics, as a cooling off period before releasing them back out into public based on their word. Some reformed, while others simply fled out of French, mainly to Genève. [ is this deceit or rescue by deciet?]. Yet, the Catholic trend was evident after the peace treaty. Therefore, Nostredame wisely dedicated this Almnach to “Jacques Marie Sala.”
Yet, there is even a more astounding piece of evidence which entails ships, seafaring and expanding the French realm which appear in the 1559 Almanach. Nostredame intends, “France shall greatly grow, triumph, be magnified, and much more so its Monarch.” François I, accredited with establishing New York (known as La Nouvelle Angoulême) and Henri II simply continued this trend by expanding French influence onto a Brazilian colony. Nicolas de Villegaignon, a Knight of Malta, who had “commanded a fleet that had brought Mary Stuart to France in 1549,” sailed in July of 1555 to today’s modern Rio de Janeiro. The 1559 Almanack attended to the trends put forth with common knowledge that from 1557 through 1558, which was considered part of French pride of global expansion. The universal poem which heads up these monthly poems in these Almanacks on line two simply states, “Sectes, holy thinges beyond the sea more polished.” [need correct cite, this is from Chavigny’s manuscript] It was only the death of the King that matters of colonizing efforts fell to the wayside, as political and religious strife would indicate these matters at home were of supreme importance. Nostredame simply claimed, and while Henri II was alive, on line four of this universal poem France would grow with prestige: “To erect a signe of victory, the cyty Henripolis.” It would be the Russian and French trading companies in partnership that would seed North American’s puritan population.
Nostredame’s failure to predict the king’s death should have ended his career. He did reproduce later a dedicatory letter sent to him by Jean de Vauzelles, which referred to his 1555 poem I.XXXV of which is the first attempt (1562) at linking his poems in Les Propheties to actual events claiming predestination came with a counter claim. Linguist Pierre Brind’Amour further cites that Nostredame pretended to link poem III.LV to the king’s death in this same “Prognostication nouvelle for 1562” Certainly this began a tradition that Chavigny would not only continue but take to new levels. The 1562 almanack also carried another significant event. Turning away from the Protestant trend and almanack dedications, Nostredame had dedicated this almanack of 1562 to Pope Pius IV. This rather showed the shift in religious power at Salon and as well as the central authority, in which Nostredame writes he first decided to stay on pain of death at Salon as the townspeople fled the Protestant uprisings, but decided to flee with his family to Avignon in which he had rented a house for one year – “””but returned in three months”””. To complicate issues, he is imprisoned [ see cura free 26ben for information] at the Castle of Marignane by his friend and “Governor of Provence, Claude duc de Tende” – who then wrote court asking what to do with him. However, despite relating the obvious, that Nostredame or his new young Lyon printers had forgotten the new imprimatur law, when publishing his new prognostications for 1562. [ what is the difference?] Tende wrote back to court relating the news of his arrest and of a promise Nostredame made to him while in prison that he would no longer be publishing his “almanacs or prognostications.” Curiously, Tende does not relate that Nostredame’s printers or Nostredame had forgotten to get permission to this new law – something that would probably have been permissible. Further, Nostredame is out of prison before the allotted time of the mail service that could reach Paris and back to producing his almanacks, as Lemesurier intends, as if nothing ever happened. [cite] Evidently, Nostredame pointing out that he could predict a major leader’s death should have been rather bold and auspicious red flag to the local and national authorities. The fact that no-one is paying attention or that Nostredame doesn’t stay in jail, illustrates that he has gained social mobility. It is either this empirical evidence or that France, or as Europe, is exploding and small manners are rather pushed aside more pertinent issues.
Machiavelli and Guicciardini both communicated respect for prophets of their day that linked superstitious data derived from classical works of which empirically accounted for some modern “interconnected references” between different classes. Ottavia writes, “[I]n the early sixteenth century a fascination with portents doubtlessly reflected the renewed interest in classical culture (in particular, in Cicero’s De divinatione); at the same time, however, strange occurrences were part of the system of signs of the culture that came to be called divinatio popularis. Ottavia writes the peculiar phenomena of the sixteenth century revealed more its “open circulation and exchange of its content through different social and cultural strata.” “Such transfers did not occur only from high to low [classes]; quite the contrary. Fragments of a system of prophetic signs that clearly pertained to popular culture appeared, taken out of context, within the higher culture, finally to be used even for political ends – as can be seen repeatedly in Rome under Leo X. More generally speaking, we might say until 1530 ecclesiastical high culture accepted and freely manipulated materials from folklore.” Ottavia, while not discussing Nostredame in his work, observes how social climbing linked to the dissemination of “cultural content through various strata of society,” which, Ottavia relates, “were usually accompanied by a change in their social and political functions.” While Ottavia admits that this view was derived though Jean-Claude Schmitt’s work “Les Traditions folkloriques dans la culture médiévale...” (1981) in concerning the medieval culture, he emotes “but it is certainly valid for the beginning of the modern era as well.” Furthermore, Ottavia intends it is “more complicated, however. At times one has an impression of parallel traditions, analogues in content but on different cultural levels; not truly independent of one another but with points of coincidence and reciprocal encroachment.”
“As Machiavelli said in a well-known passage of his Discourses:
How it comes about I know not, but it is clear both from ancient and modern cases that no serious misfortune ever befalls a city or province that has not been predicted either by divination or revelation or by prodigies or by other heavenly signs.”
Guicciardini also declared it believable “that now is like the past [and] that great things have been signified ahead of time by great prodigies.” “Both ancient and modern cases”; “now is like the past”: For men of the Renaissance, the classical world was not closed tight, nor was it an object of mere archeological investigation.” It became more comprehensible [that is to say understanding the past as its reflection of their present] with the aid of signs manifested even in latter times that repeated their ancient predecessors. The monsters represented both an element from classical tradition and part of folklore. Nor did these two different aspects necessarily signify independent and separate levels of culture, particularly since even in the ancient world interest in prodigies was considered part of popular superstition.” “All these considerations enter into my reasons for emphasizing the channels of transmission for prophecy and the people who served to spread its message.
However in Guicciardini’s work The History of Florence the inductive monograph of cause and effect of Florentine destiny did not allow the politician turned historian to understand the concept “history repeats itself.” The inductive cause and effect methodology he used forbade generalizations within the Florentine context. This can be explained in that Guicciardini used St. Augustine’s teleological conscript of history. This model does not allow Guicciardini to look back in time and pose the question by observing repetitive historical criteria which would be gathered by empirical as well as analytical methods of complex data assembly – all from ancient data sources from the classical books being republished. A prime example to illustrate Guicciardini limitations, which can be seen as rationalization of something uninvestigated was his concept of Fortuna. This concept utilized resulted as looking outside the Florentine monograph model and into political events of which then had affected the city of Florence indirectly or directly. Fortuna is clearly illustrated once again when Emperor Maxmillian’s ships are destroyed by winds while en-route to fight against Florence. Fortuna, in Guicciardini’s definition, is an unexplained natural change of a course of events. Therefore cause and effect does not quite logical apply, but more appropriately chance. This discrepancy disregards a pure scientific model for writing history. If science explains all, then Fortuna remains fatalistic. However, how could science explain nature’s premonition that described chance.
In addition, Fortuna is framed in the Florentine perspective and fatalism is tacitly understood to be associated with Emperor Maxmillian’s ships. Fortuna is therefore an incorrect usage of a historical descriptive of the reality of events. In scientific terms the winds were bad luck in the perspective of the Emperor’s projects. However, luck is Fortuna, in a lesser quality. It would be considered an irrational definition of supernatural intervention, whereas Guicciardini intersubjects the notion of good-luck with Florentines as the preferred city (as opposed to others) and frames Emperor Maxmillian and his people as not quite humanly advanced and even framing them with a tinge of barbarianism. Therefore, the analysis intends that Guicciardini was only in the prestages of gathering data in which he then did not analyze across a set of observational data. Therefore, Guicciardini saw history as a chain of events moving forward, where there is a cause, then an effect, and then that effect becomes the cause of another effect, etc. Karl Marx adopted this worldly view, believing after socialism the eventual end of the world would be single class community of brotherly cooperation ( a.k.a. Communism, his non- elaborated version of it). However, along the way some sort of unexplained occurrence changes the course of history, and to Guicciardini this was fortuna. Modern science such as meteorology is a predictive application, and classified as scientific. It seeks to predict the irrational, under the confines of accepted scientific controls. However, meteorologist’s success rates remain consistently uncertain at any particular locality. Therefore, when meteorologist’s success rates fail to forecast the information relayed to the public on any given service, Fortuna will apply to describe science as an unstable scientific predictive tool.
One of the fallacy arguments in Guicciardini comes from political biasness. For example in Chapter nine, he emotes that under Lorenzo de’ Medici (1 January 1449 – 9 April 1492, a.k.a. Lorenzo il Magnifico), Florentines experienced perfect peace. Then because of Lorenzo’s death the city “fell into such calamities and misfortunes.” While Lorenzo had political aspirations for his family, stemming from his grandfather Cosimo thus wanting to ascend to nobility, Florentines at this time had no real military. They needed to make alliances, according to historians. Yet, in reality, the reason Florence fell into calamities where the intending growth of militarism of the later fifteenth century and onward. In fact the calamites were reflected from outside contending political forces which pressured Florentine’s to change in a manner in which they were not predisposed too. Lorenzo controlled Florence with favorites and economically supported apparatuses of pacifism. He had accomplished this by making loans and appeasement payments to potential invasion threats. This was not communicated in Guicciardini’s work. Instead as a successful diplomacy observation, Guicciardini intends that Lorenzo’s character was more a factor than economic appeasement. This is important in that once the money ran out, the stage was set for the reformer Girolamo Savonarola. According to Roberto Ridolfi, Savonarola did not foster a dispute with Lorenzo, but that the outcome simply was a need for a reassessment of options to change and figure out what to do with Florence’s financial troubles. Savonarola believed it was an intervention of God who was displeased with wantonness of the Florentines. The Bonfire of the Vanities was communicated to resolve this issue and get back to basic spiritual needs and the correct course of life. The Republics formed in the 1350s in northern Italy had been basic spiritual and economic success and Savonarola intended to bring this back into Florentine modernity. However, at the commencement of the Spanish Miraculous Year (1492), or the commencement of what we call now the Age of Exploration, the Italian Wars began to be planned and would commence within a few years. Florence a successful renaissance pilgrimage at this point helped communicate the heights of culture and wealth, which spurred on the hopes of a Roman Renaissance and jealous invasion for economic subjugation by the western European powers – all which had strong militaries. Guicciardini claim that Florentine diplomacy died with Lorenzo is simply not the case. Lorenzo appeased the foreign threats and the banks had become almost solvent. There was no more money for diplomacy – which was in reality buying time from foreign invasion.
What Florence needed was a militarism ideology, which came in the form of various reformers. Florentines predisposed to peace in a general context resisted change. After Machiavelli had returned from Rome to Florence his job was to assist in the assembling of a Florentine militia. The historical question remains that diplomacy is never an absolute policy toward peace when the rest of the European powers are expanding, developing and administrating new militia models with a focus upon subjugating ones locality. These outside forces had one goal of economic subjugation in mind. The only way to defend it was self-sufficiency and not relying on outside diplomacy. This is simply how Nostredame would think of the situation for historicism. Florence rose and it needed to fall because it did not have a powerful standing military. Nostredame would view Lorenzo’s role as some peacetime superhuman character as opposed to incompetent successors as a historical fallacy argument. Simply history resolves around a set of cycles, and in cases of civil prosperity will eventually succumb to civil poverty. Internal and external outside factors both played compromising roles in this outcome. The fact that Florence fell out of control of its own destiny into the hands of foreign control was all so evident of understanding history in cycles. Once Florence fell, the loci of prosperity had switched to Rome and thus the commencement of the Roman Renaissance.
By using the inductive method Guicciardini limits the understanding of this necessity toward change – which was a reaction against change which then created the calamity of which he written. The death of Lorenzo was not the cause of calamity of Florence; it was the pre-Italian war period in which would soon explode. De’ Medici was powerful trade magnets who enjoyed running peacetime economics as political ascendancy in the background of Florentine politics – they were never a military power. Therefore, predestination could not be understood by Guicciardini and this explains the failure of his attentions. Nostredame simply did not use the pitfalls associated with Guicciardini’s inductive analysis. Outside forces are treated as irrational by Guicciardini, while at the same time rationalizing a local of data and ignoring extra-local data which would explain the fall of Florence.
To sum up Guicciardini’s hysterical writing on Florence during the Italian renaissance we proposes that this narrative is straightforward, and thusly contributes the semi-model he used which explains his linear cause and effect in a monographic and mono-perspective format. While his inductive method tells much of the relationships of individuals in which cause and effect apply in the microcosm ( a city as a single local in Europe), the deeper and wider ranging historical problems were not and could not be fully analyzed by him. Therefore, it is incorrect to place Lorenzo on a pedestal of positive sentiment and his successors in a dim light when Guicciardini forwent the comparative prescience applications in which Nostredame had engaged.
Wallmann, Johannes. "The Reception of Luther's Writings on the Jews from the Reformation to the End of the 19th Century", Lutheran Quarterly, n.s. 1 (Spring 1987) 1:72-97. Wallmann writes: "The assertion that Luther's expressions of anti-Jewish sentiment have been of major and persistent influence in the centuries after the Reformation, and that there exists a continuity between Protestant anti-Judaism and modern racially oriented antisemitism, is at present wide-spread in the literature; since the Second World War it has understandably become the prevailing opinion." ( Wikipedia, “On the Jews and Their Lies,” unedited writing, accessed October 2008, available online). see also, In 1519 Luther challenged the doctrine Servitus Judaeorum ("Servitude of the Jews"), established in Corpus Juris Civilis by Justinian I in 529. He wrote: "Absurd theologians defend hatred for the Jews. ... What Jew would consent to enter our ranks when he sees the cruelty and enmity we wreak on them—that in our behavior towards them we less resemble Christians than beasts?" Luther quoted in Elliot Rosenberg, But Were They Good for the Jews? (New York: Birch Lane Press, 1997), p.65. Luther read Der gantze Jüdisch Glaub (The Whole Jewish Belief) in 1539.[n., 2, Obermann, Heiko. Luthers Werke. Erlangen 1854, 32:282, 298, in Grisar, Hartmann. Luther. St. Louis 1915, 4:286 and 5:406, cited in Michael, Robert. Holy Hatred: Christianity, Antisemitism, and the Holocaust. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006, p. 113.][n., 26, Johnson, Paul. A History of the Jews, p. 18. ] “The antisemitic book had been published in 1530 by Anton Margaritha, a convert from Judaism to Christianity who had become a Lutheran. Josel of Rosheim held a public debate with Margaritha in the same year before Charles V and his court at Augsburg [n., 3: Michael, Robert. Holy Hatred: Christianity, Antisemitism, and the Holocaust. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2006, p. 112.] at which Josel was decisively victorious, resulting in Margaritha's expulsion from the Empire.”
Historiography from contemporary events till today, grant Nostredame as a ‘ Plague Doctor.’ Of course, this would not be a degree of Doctor as such granted completing the graduate program at Montpellier. This would explain why his almanacks and some books had bestowed the title of either doctor or physician on them. Nostredame simply did not conform to tradition or in fact cared.
The Concordat of Bologna remained a large issue between Rome and Henri II, and Henri pulled out all French prelates from Rome. Julius III pleaded but did not press the issue toward a schism. French interests suffered as a result to benefit on electoral power to Spain, but Paul IV’s assertion to the Holy See alleviated such a disaster. Nevertheless, the rift with Rome increased Henri’s alliance and tolerance to heretical English royals and nobility, i.e. the 1550 proposed marriage of Elizabeth, Henri’s oldest daughter (5 ylds) and Edward VI, which infuriated Julius.
Henri II, unlike his wife Catherine de’ Medici an ardent student of Machiavelli and Giciarrdini, was the last chivalric idealist monarch of France. see also Ibid., Baumgartner, Henry II, King of France 1547-1559 , p. 125. Even after the Affaire of the Placards, the “wellborn had little to fear from the heresy courts.”
This showed that common French peasants as Nostradamus had social or political sway over Frances most powerful person, Regent Catherine de’ Medici. Simply the thought is astounding, and describes more of a free time, a time of change from feudal privilege to social mobility based upon ideas, then the later era which began in the early seventeenth century – where feudalism and hierarchy returned in full force to France.
Guinard, Patrice, Corpus Nostradamus 19: Excellent & moult utile Opuscule, Analyse du Traité des Fardements et des Confitures (C.U.R.A. International Astrology Research Center: Corpus Nostradamus, 2006, accessed 24 February 2009), available from http://cura.free.fr/dico3/604B-TFC-edc.html; Internet
The Prophecies and Enigmas of Nostradamus, by Nostradamus, ed. & trans., Liberté E. LeVert (Glen Rock, New Jersey: Firebell Books, 1979), p. 258., “Nostradamus, M., “La Façon & maniere de faire toutes confictures is one of the earliest cookbooks printed in France.” “One remarkable aspect of Nostradamus’s recipes, in which he differences from most works of his period, is the great exactitude with which he presents instructions, describing each stage of preparation in the most minute detail. Precise times, degrees of boil, thickness of portions are all given. As a result of this detail Nostradamus’s jams and jellies are as practicable today as they were four hundred year ago. The recipes too, are by no means outlandish, as is sometimes the case with Renaissance cookery. All can be enjoyed by a modern palate.,” p. 258.
Nostradamus, M., Traité des fardemens et confitures..., op. cit., 1557 edition., note 20, p.41, cf., edition 1555 ‘un second Marcile Ficin en Philosophic Platonique,” in Wilson, Ian, Nostradamus: The Evidence (London: Orion House, 2002), p. 35. This change came about because Scaliger attacked almost everyone he had known, and he also attacked Nostredame, indicating from his viewpoint Nostredame was an ignorant gossiper.
While this piece doesn’t use Chavigny’s work, he cites Nostredame learning medicine and occult practices from Scaliger, post- 1529 in his work, Chavigny, Brief Discorse sur la Vie de M. Michel de Nostredame..., published at Paris in 1596, and made available in a facsimile reprint by Eric Visier, Nostradamus au XVIe Siecle, 10 Facsiliés, available from the Nostradamus Museum, Salon-de-Provence, note 14, p. 14, op. cit., note 8, p. 31, in Wilson, Ian, “Nostradamus: The Evidence” (London: Orion House, 2002), p. 31.
While Scaliger attacked everyone from Erasmus, Rabelais, etc..., his attack on Nostredame carried more weight. It is not hard to conclude that Nostredame pushed the relationship and Chavigny simply placed the importance on Scaliger’s invitation. Nostredame’s first edition on his Cosmetics and Cookbook intend his real sentiments were the former.
See John Calvin, Institutio Christianae Religionis, vol. iii. Calvin intends that fallen humanity is morally and spiritually unable to follow God or escape their condemnation before him and that only by divine intervention in which God must change their unwilling hearts can people be turned from rebellion to willing obedience. Textually it is Calvin’s “efficacious grace” argument that he confirms that only God has Free-Will and not humans. While Calvin disagreed with Luther over some of the sacramental inclusions to a spiritual life, his predestination argument remains confirmed to this Protestant tradition – which relies mainly on the thirteen Pauline letters in the New Testament.
Nostradamus, M., An almanacke for the yeare of oure Lorde God, 1559. Composed by Mayster Mychael Nostradamus, Doctour of Physike (London [printed on 20 February 1559]: Poules church-yarde: Henry Sutton, for Lucas Haryson, 1559, accessed 21 February 2009 from The University of California, Berkeley), p. 2 in Early English Books Online, “ProQuest LLC,” available from http://gateway.proquest.com/openurl?ctx_ver=Z39.88 2003&res_id=xri:eebo&rft_id=xri:eebo:image:4611; Internet. This is the only prime source to come down to us today. No other copies survive. However, Chavigny fills in some of the detail from his manuscript (1589) reproduced by Chavignard called, “Recueil des présages prosaïques,” but only the first four chapters found in Bernard Chevignard's “Présages de Nostradamus” (Editions du Seuil, June 1999 ), pp. 500. [[[see also, cf. http://ramkat.free.fr/nerg4.html#ref3 ]] In this work, Recueil Chavigny also revealed the poems contain two sets as compliments or parallels, as well as claiming the first prognostication reveals the whole trend for the year. It only predicts ‘a great one will be no more.” And such vagueness seems to point out the obvious point that Nostredame did not predict the major disaster of the king’s death and its subsequent consequences (religious wars). cf. Chavigny, Recueil des Presages prosaïques, 1589, pp.117-119, "Antwerpiae", s.d., ff.A2r-A5v. extracts reproduced in English in Patrice Guinard, “Essai de reconstitution de l'Almanach pour l'an 1559,” 2007, available from http://cura.free.fr/dico-a/709F-CN75.html; Internet.
Ibid., Nostradamus, M., An almanacke for the yeare of oure Lorde God, 1559, pp. 1-9. For his entry on July 12th of July 1599, Nostredame wrote “Aue Rex Victor.” That should end all arguments that he had predicted King Henri II’s death.
In April 1559, Henri heard the news that the well-respected bishops of Nevers, Jacques Spifame, had fled to Geneva. His trial over comments related to rejecting communion, in which Henri II had heard the comment in 1558, placed the bishop under investigation. However, Spifame had resigned his bishopric and had already fled to Geneva in 1558. Nostredame was already alert to this emigration of prelates and nobles, including Merchants. see “Acta Consistorialia, “ BN, Fonds latin 12559, fol. 23: ANG, 14: 182-83: Forbes, Transactions, I: 199; André Delmas, “Le procès et la mort de Jacques Spifame,” Bibliothèque d’humanisme et renaissance, 5 (1994), 105-37, in Ibid., Baumgartner, Frederic J., Henry II, King of France 1547 -1559 , p. pp. 242-243: “Notes to Pages 243-247,” note 39, p. 236.
Ibid., Baumgartner, Henry II, King of France 1547 -1559, p. 241. At Paris there was a necessity to bring peace in 1557. September 5th, 1557 students at a nearby theological school attacked “some 400 ‘ Lutherans’” celebrating the Lord’s Supper “on the rue of Saint-Jacques,” p. 237. Baumgartner argues with considerable claims that Henri II did not have the manpower to engage the Protestant heresy in his realm, due to preoccupation to fighting the Spanish military. It is also in early 1557 that Henri or Pope Paul IV began to “establish the Holy Office in his realm,” p. 233. This was due to Parliament heresy jurisdiction, in that each county a certain autonomy favored protestant judges – indicated there was no absolute monarchy in France at this time. Yet, it was in ideas that the King of France could pull his weight by aligning with the dominant religious power, which in a letter from “Henry to his ambassador de Selve in Rome, “ he had told de Selve to ask the pope for a brief establishing the Inquisition,” p. 233., op. cit., Ribier, Lettres, 2: 667-78, Ibid., Baumgartner, note 11, p. 324 in
Ibid., Baumgartner, Henry II, King of France 1547 -1559, note 3, p. 324. ‘Based on Histiore ecclésiastique, I: 44: Baird, Rise of Huguenots, I: 287., in Toulouse there were 447 heresy cases from 1551 to 1554; from 1555 to 1558 there were 120, declining to seven cases in 1558. Mentzer, Heresy Proceedings, p. 170.”
In regards to the complex issues of peacemaking, Henri had to side with the Lutherans to some extent, many in the national army were German mercenaries, and the local preliminaries refused stack inquisition judges (1558), helping to understand France was not autocratic at this time, although in theory, the king has the ultimate power. German bankers financed him and continued in loans at this time which were being depleted due to Charles then Philip’s efforts. [ page 235 needs elaboration] “In June 1557 ambassadors from four Swiss cantons arrived at the court to complain that several of the ministers of an Alpine region occupied by the French had been executed. Needing friendly relations with the Swiss, Henry agreed to allow the residents of the valley to practice their religion, since they had held it before they fell under French jurisdiction, but no ministers were allowed to preach. In early 1558 merchants from Protestant lands appealed to Henry that the Inquisition de denied jurisdiction over them. Again the king agreed in order not to drive them off, especially the German bankers at Lyon who were making such vast loans to him,” Ibid., Baumgartner, Henry II, King of France 1547 -1559, p. 235.
Benazra, Robert, The Predictions and Almanachs of Michel Nostradamus, trans., Matyas Becvarov. in Guinard, Patrice, “Almanachs & Pronostications” (C.U.R.A. International Astrology Research Center: Corpus Nostradamus, 2006, accessed 24 February 2009), available from http://cura.free.fr/docum/26ben-en.html;Internet. “On 14 August 1558, a few days after finishing the writing of the Almanach pour 1559 as Nostradamus tells us, he dedicated to Jacques Marie Sala (Jacopo Maria Sala), vicar to Cardinal Alessandro Farnese, an addendum, written in reponse [sic] to his detractors. The piece is entitled: Les Significations de l'Eclipse, qui sera le 16. Septembre 1559,” cf. Recueil des présages prosaïques, Livre IV, pp. 161-166 (pp. 376-383 in the Chevignard edition), and RCN, p. 30. See also Chomarat, p. 31, plate no. 9 and p. 32, notice 37. We should also mention the facsimile reprint of 1904 by Henri Douchet in Méricourt-l'Abbé (Somme) and that of Chevignard (pp. 443-460), note 32.
Italian explorer, Giovanni da Verrazzano (c. 1485 – c. 1528), was commissioned by François I hoping to find the Orient and collect valuables to finance his military, in which he sailed who recorded in his log a "Norman Villa," passing up the coast from the an area between Florida and Terranova, including several landfalls, one at New York Bay (April 17, 1524, naming it “Santa Margarita” after François’ sister Maruerite, Countess d’Alençon and later Queen of Navarre.), and then onto to Nova Scotia, naming various places for French prestige – although, after he returned the name La Nouvelle Angoulême for the land area of New York was dedicated to his patron, François I. By the mid-1950s, New York inhabitants began to overturn the Henry Hudson, English mythologies, for of the founding of their city in which they traced it back to its first explore and subsequently began to name bridges and locals in memory. In 1534, “François, yet again sent Jacques Cartier on the first of three voyages to explore the coast of Newfoundland and the St. Lawrence River.” Therefore, in 1555, this new attempt established yet again, a common knowledge that the world was expansive and attempts to further the realm, as had been locally in Europe and North Africa had been renewed. Nostredame was simply projecting the current events of his day.
Ibid., Baumgartner, Henry II, King of France 1547 -1559, pp. 235 -236. Villegaignon returned in 1559 “to find more colonists.” It is not clear to Baumgartner if Henri’s efforts were to found a colony to exile Protestants or to generally expand France’s ideological prestige. However, Baumgartner this mission was wildly known throughout the kingdom, in regards to Pride. This is more evidence Nostredame is using contemporary current events to project state trends as a way to bolster his reputation. “The colony was known as La France Antarctique, which was intended to serve for all of South America,” p. 236. On the second voyage, Jean Calvin handpicked “two ministers and seven laymen to journey to Brazil.” These were efforts by the colonists who sent letters to the Protestant leader, p. 236. The first reinforced fort was named after Gaspard de Coligny, called thusly Fort Coligny. On the return of the first voyage, departing in late 1556 “ten Indians” were brought back, “as well as a minister to get Calvin’s opinion on several of the disputed points of theology. The Indians were given to Henri, who distributed them among his favorites.” p. 237.
Was Fulke Cox’s attack on prognostication publishing a logical argument or did it communicate preference to a particular religious view with intentions silence criticism? Was the book advocating laws to silence speech through published discourse? How affective were its political suggestions and religious affirmations?
Ibid., Nostradamus, M., An almanacke for the yeare of oure Lorde God, 1559, pp. 1-9. c.f., Bernard Chavignard, “Présages de Nostradamus” (Éditions Du Seuil, Juin 1999), annexe n° 5, p. 461, “To Erect a signe of victory, the cyty of Henripolis,” ref. Henry Sutton for Lucus Haryson...,” Also see Chavigny’s confirmation from Chavignard’s reproduction on page 132, as “ Dresser trophée, cite d’Henripolis,” cf., in Recueil, IV, I, p. 116, and Henripolis is capitalized, HENRIPOLIS; also see Janus, p., 46 as capitalized; for more see Chavignard’s footnotes and annotations, p. 132.
Wilson, Ian, Nostradamus: The Evidence (London: Orion House, 2002), p. 129. Lemesurier is incorrect, that linking the prophecies by Nostredame had begun with Chavigny after Nostredame
s death. It simply begun with Nostredame, as evident here, reproducing this vital letter, in which probably had been communicated by Nostredame to Vauzelles, who then wrote back and agreed, in which Nostredame produced the letter to claim he had in fact predicted King Henri II’s death. Also, Cesar would use this 1562 Almanack as evidence that his father had predicted in fact the King’s death in tournament combat.
Two books of the first edition survive today which contain the first series of Les Propheties (what Nostredame is mainly known for today, an original vision of 1,000 poems, called quatrains). These first poems and prose were published by Macé Bonhomme, in 1555 at Lyon. The Albi edition was republished in 1996 by Pierre Brind’Amour at Geneva. cf. Pierre Brind’Amour, Nostradamus, Les Premières Centuries ou Prophecies (edition Macé Bonhomme de 1555), Edition et commentaire de l’Epître à César et des 353 premiers quatrains (Genève: Librairie Droz S.A., 1996), pp. 99-100. The other edition was found at the State Library at Vienna. see also Peter Lemesurier, The Illustrated Prophecies, The New and Authortative Translation to Commemorate Nostredamus’ 500th Anniversary (Hants, U.K. : John Hunt Publishing Ltd., 2003), p. 17. In English translation by Lemesurier: “The younger lion shall surmount the old ‘ Midst martial battlefield in single combat. His eyes he’ll put out in a cage of gold – Two forces joined – and then a death most cruel.” see also Lemesurier, The Unknown Nostradamus, p. 102.
Pierre Brind’Amour, Nostradamus, Les Premières Centuries ou Prophecies (edition Macé Bonhomme de 1555), Edition et commentaire de l’Epître à César et des 353 premiers quatrains (Genève: Librairie Droz S.A., 1996), p. 100.
Peter Lemesurier, The Illustrated Prophecies, The New and Authortative Translation to Commemorate Nostredamus’ 500th Anniversary (Hants, U.K. : John Hunt Publishing Ltd., 2003), pp. 117- 118. English translation by Lemesurier: “ The year when the One-Eye power in France shall gain The Court shall undergo vexations trouble: By Blois’s great lord his bosom-friend is slain, The Kingdom placed in doubt and trouble double,” p. 117.
Antione Volant and Pierre Brotot published the Almanac which had the dedicator letter to Vauzelles at Lyon, but according to Ian Wilson, Nostradamus, The Evidence (p. 159) it was the Paris copies which appeared on the street which contained no privilege assigned by the local authority (often a Bishop). cf. Robert Benazra, “The Predictions and Almanacks of Michel Nostradamus,” trans., Matyas Becvarov (Centre Universitaire de Recherche en Astrologie, 2003, accessed 4 March 2009), available from http://cura.free.fr/docum/26ben-en.html; Internet. see note 48, cf. [Chavigny, Nostredame’s secretary] Recueil des présages prosaîques, Livre VII, pp 319-332; RCN, and Chomarat, pp. 36-37, notice 49. The privilege is dated 31 October 1561. The Paris copies could have been pirated copies, as was the case in which Nostredame was accustomed too by this time.
Ibid., Lemesurier, The Unknown Nostradamus, p.124. Article 26 of the Edict of Orleans of 31 January 1561, after all had been rather vague about it,” as quoted “And against whoever shall have made or composed the said Almanachs [ it said] our Judges shall proceed extraordinarily, and by corporal punishment,” p. 124.
Niccolo Machiavelli, Discorsi sopra la prima deda di Tito Livio, ed. Corrado Vivanti (Turin: G. Einaudi, 1972), I, 56, pp. 194-95; quoted from The Discourses , tr. Leslie J. Walker, revised by Brian Richardson, ed. Bernard Crick (Harmondsworth: Penguin Books, 1970), p. 249, in Niccoli, Ottavia, “Prophecy and People in Renaissance Italy,” p. xiii.
Ibid., Niccoli, Ottavia, Prophecy and People in Renaissance Italy, p. xiii. Francesco Guicciardini to Goro Gheri, 19 January 1518, in Guicciardini, Carteggi, ed. Roberto Palmarocchi, 17 vols. (Bolonga: Nicola Zanichelli, 1938-1955, vol. 2. p. 240.
see "Wars of Italy," in The Oxford Dictionary of the Renaissance, Gordon Campbell (Oxford University Press 2003, 2005. The Oxford Dictionary of the Renaissance: (e-reference edition, Oxford University Press. UC – accessed at U.C. Berkeley Library, 8 October 2008), available from (oxford); Internet. “Wars of Italy (1494–1559): Italy was the main theatre of the series of wars sometimes described in a wider European context as the Habsburg–Valois Wars. The chief protagonists were Spain, France, the Holy Roman Empire [Charles V, and/or Carlos I] , the Swiss Confederation, England, and the various states of Italy, and in the later stages Denmark, Sweden, and the Ottoman Empire became involved. At the heart of the conflicts there were dynastic rivalries between the Habsburgs and the Valois and territorial disputes between France and the duchy of Burgundy over Flanders, Artois, and the Netherlandish territories of the duchy, between France and the Empire over Milan, and between France and Spain over the kingdom of Naples, Roussillon, and Cerdagne. The reason that Italy became the main theatre of the wars was that the fragile comity of its principal states (Milan, Venice, Florence, Genoa, Savoy, the Papal State, and the kingdom of Naples) was destroyed by territorial ambitions that were often advanced by calling on the assistance of other European states.”
Copyright ©· All Rights Reserved · My Website