Niccoli Ottavia writes in chapter six on “Astrology and Prophecy: The Flood in piscibus”[ Pisces, February planetary alignment, 1524] that “early sixteenth century the divinatory arts, prophecy, and scrutiny of the signs of God had pressed upon the nature or transmitted to men through visions,” which, “seemed to form a complex culture nucleus somehow perceived as a unit by the populari who participated in that culture.” As the public became semi-literate in Italy the populari participated in cultural phenomena associated to astrological science. With the first publishing of Johann Stöffer’s Ephemerides in 1499 (reprinted at Venice in 1522) a debate was launched by academics which eventually spilled over to the common people, some who were mere soothsayer astrologers. Stöffer [Stoffler] associated the “multiple planetary conjunctions”, as a bundle of planets as group in the zodiac sign of Pisces, as catastrophe. Stöffer never mentions a connection to some inundation or a flood, Ottavia intends. However, Eugene David Smith relates that“[H]is calculations led him to the absurd prediction, however, that the Deluge would be repeated in the year 1524. Eugene David Smith, in his work “History of Mathematics Vol., I, General Survey of the History of Elementary Mathematics” (1924) intends that “The announcement stirred all of Europe, and the number of schemes to protect the race was legion. The people of Toulouse even went so far as to build an ark.” Niccoli argument helps us understand the events that change the discourse or assumption by non-professional astrological interpreters. The professor of The University of Tübingen was a mathematician, albeit, focusing soley on astronomy. He was the “first to show how the Julian calendar could be brought into harmony with astronomical events.” Niccoli writes, “[A]s has been observed [ that is previously this seems to happen all the time], the quarrel soon took a nonprofessional turn and involved not only astrologers but also physicians, theologians, and philosophers, all of whom would of course have encountered astrology during the course of their university studies.” Niccoli correctly argues to look at the social strata to not “weigh these people’s contributions to the question [of the interpretation]. Citing different social classes, Niccoli links the urban lower classes as a specific case. What appears to have happened is that semi-thinking astrologers linked the Pisces stellium to apocryphal inundations or massive European floods which would kill most people. Stöffer exclaimed only that a “large number of catastrophes would take place in 1524.” Ignoring the gnostic or interdisciplinary interpretations of astrology, such as keywords as deep, far reaching, ocean related and penetration of mysteries of life, the populous perceived the easiest way to interpret a rather complicated zodiac sign. As Niccoli intends, “[P]erdiction of the flood in piscibus had a vast and far-reaching resonance. Rumer spread from town to town by the common and soon clerical and lay persons were spreading fearful discourse. I intend, much of this fear had been awaken because of the Italian Wars. People living in rural Italian areas, then sometimes would see a massive army marching through their lands, and they had never seen this or heard of this in their generation. Niccoli argues, as rumor spread of these unprofessional interpretations of the stellium “ a case of collective panic” ensured. However, this case may be, a question must be asked in how empirically evident did the Italian Wars factor into apocalyptic foreboding. It has long been established the sixteenth century seers, judicial astrologers, and street prophets were somehow irrational whereas the elite could launch massive military expeditions and wreak havoc all over Europe for capricious whims of the European courts.
The sixteenth century English, prominent in historical astrological writings during the Middle Ages, seemed to lose interest, as Thorndike mentions in his “Magic and Science,” in chapter III, in which Keith Thomas in his book “Religion and the Decline of Magic” (1971) observed. “Such difficulties were only dimly apprehended in England at the beginning of the sixteenth century, when astrological activity seems to have been at a relatively low ebb. In the Middle Ages there had been many prominent English astrological authors, but their numbers fell off sharply during the fifteenth century and did not revive for over a hundred and fifty years.’”
“The prognostications in circulation during the early sixteenth century were therefore largely of foreign origin. There was, for example, no English contribution to the large literature produced by the conjunction in 1524 of all seven planets in the watery sign of Pisces, even though rumours of the impending deluge in that year are said to have induced Prior Bolton of St Bartholomew’s, Smithfield, to build himself a house on Harrow Hill and stock it with provisions to withstand the threat of inundation.” “
After the fiasco of the predictors of the 1524 fear mongering of a world flood, skepticism arose in official circles. Niccoli writes “[A]s the imperial army made its way through Italy in 1529-1530, the pressure of events prompted a new rash of prophet (less energetic than before, however) that even infected official preaching. Such was the case of the Spanish Dominican Tommaso Nieto, who preached in 1529 in the Duomo in Milan when Spanish troops and Landsknechten were bivouacked in the city (“whose fury anyone was indeed fortunate to reign in,” Burigozzo commented, as he outlined a miserable but all too familiar picture of the violence and indignities to which the people were subjected by the Spanish and the Lanzi). In April of that year Nieto organized a general procession to ask God to forsake his castigations, and as the months passed and tension mounted in the city, his sermons assumed a prophetic tone, remaining so vague, however (“for he was considered our prophet by the greater part of the people, and thus he prophesied and said, ‘ Stay, do not fear, it will not be, or it will be’”), that they give the impression – at least in Burigozzo’s report of them – of aiming at little more than social control and quieting a nervous public opinion (“giving them to hear comforting rubbish”). Nieto’s message was more pointed in a sermon that he gave on 5 September 1529, after the embassy had left Milan to confer with Charles V at Piacenza (“there they were to settle the affairs of Christendom”). Probably on the basis of that rumor, Neito
gave a most desperate sermon with great threats, not so much for Mila as for all Christendom; but he said that Milan would have the beginning of the renovation of the Church, and for this reason it must be first afflicted and the last renewed; and he said much, particular about the great carnage that will soon come to pass. And he said that it was not he who was speaking, no, but by the mouth of the Holy Ghost...and [that] there was no cause to marvel at what he said, and furthermore, he said to me, “Write, when you are at home.” And at the end of his sermon he had [everyone] cry misericordia two times.
“The interconnections between politics and prophecy are clear in this passage, particularly in the relationship between the emperor’s approach as he traveled toward Belonga, and the expectation of “la renovazion de la ecclessia.” In point of fact, as we shall see in a later chapter, the accent in the last burst of prophecy that occurred, precisely, in 1530 gradually shifted from the imminence of God’s chastisement to proclamation of a peaceful reform of the Church by means of a long-awaited emperor who would inaugurate a new Golden Age.”
After the 1524 flood predictions, and the reaction against pseudo-prophets, the focus turned toward the “’pseudoprophet’ of Saxony ‘who will predict falsities,’ who ‘will promise that lust is no sin,’ who ‘under the guise of sanctity will seduce the people with new and permissive laws,’ and with his ‘ lasciviousness and false laws will work to subject...the Christian people.’” The false prophet, of course, had been widely predicted. “[S]everal decades before Luther began to preach,” “the great conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn in 1484 (with its various interpretations) and the controversy concerning Antonio Arquato’s De Eversione Europae are events too well known to merit further discussion here,” Niccoli argues. Andrea Bernardi, the barber chronicler form Forlì, gives living testimony to the circulation of these and other similar prognostications. In the waning days of 1484, Bernardi draws form a prognostication for the year 1485 written by the astrologer Marco Scribanario the disquieting conviction of the imminent rise of ‘new prophets who will make marvelous demonstrations of faith and of religion,’ adding that ‘ in many places temples and oratories will be destroyed.’ Both Scribanario and Andrea Bernardi based their predictions on the conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn in the sign of the Scorpion.” While no verification exists to analyze their foundational arguments, empirically Hans Luder ( Martin Luther, [10 November 1483, jul?], Eisleben, Germany, Holy Roman Empire) Huldrych Zuingli ( 1 January 1484, jul?) and Joachim von Watt (a.k.a. Jochim Vadian 29 November 1484 jul?; married Martha Grebel on 18 August 1519, jul?) were prominent and vital reformationists. On Saturday, December 27 of the Gregorian Calendar at Rome [12e29, 41n54], these planets of Jupiter (29 degrees of SCO and 26 minuets), Saturn (26 SCO 25) demonstrated a classical ‘grand-conjunction,’ as Scribanario and Andrea Bernardi had addressed. This conjunction was seen only in the morning at Rome and in Italy ( other places too) In late November and December of 1484. During a Sun, Venus, Jupiter and Saturn stellium, and Mercury also in the same sign of Scorpio, on 1 November 1484 (greg.; 19 October 1484 Julian Calendar) these planets could not be seen in conjunction with the naked eye. Vadian was at the beginning of the Swiss Reformation and was a friend to Huldrych Zuingli. In turn, with Luther the pre-Protestant reformatinists gave way to Protestant proper on these findings. Predestination with judicial astrological applications became a standardized reevaluation upon apocalyptic exposes.
Monsters, as symbols of modernity, help sooth the souls from associating real pain. There were many other deformities of this time which, in the case for Italy, became “segni—generic signs of divine wrath and of God’s will, thus warnings of a catastrophic future. But they were also indications that a merciful Providence [in this sense, predestination] offered to humankind so that if people were sufficiently inspired by piety they could disentangle themselves from events and read the true significance of history. The monsters display probably the clearest form of one of the prophecy’s most prominent characteristics during these years. As a global culture, prophecy provided the key to a unified interpretation of nature, of the supernatural, and of human history. This is why contemporary chronicles often ended by pointing to the monsters, which they took to be signs equal to the task of expressing their age,” Niccoli observes. These pagan observations addressed a symbolic link with the surrounding socio-politico-economic environment. An animal or human, deformed with two heads, related a symbolic socio-politico-economic split within the greater European community. [[NOSTRADAMUS SON]
“What is striking about this account, beyond its most visible spectacular aspects (the large stone with which the hermit beats his chest, in imitation of current iconography of St. Jerome), is its fidelity to a pattern we have seen several times before. Just like the learned Augustinian, Baura, fifteen years earlier, he promised destruction and castigation of Rome and to Italy, the coming of the Turks and their victory over Christian forces, their eventual conversion, and the renewal of the Church. These themes can also be found in prophetic works in vernacular verse such as the Prophetia de santo Anselmo or the Prophetia trovata in Roma intagliata in marmoro, which had begun to circulate some twenty years earlier. One could,” Niccoli intends, “certainly cite other texts that follow the same or an analogous pattern. We could also hypothesize direct knowledge of them on the part of the hermit (we know, for example, that Brandano read and used a Venetian vernacular edition of the Pronosticato of Johannas Lichtenberger). Furthermore, 1530 was the date that completed the fifty-first generation after the birth of Christ in the calculations that Girolamo of Verona presented in 1513 to the faithful of Venice, basing his predictions on Joachim of Fiore. The date had for some years circulated in other contexts as the moment at which the Church was to be totally renewed. In the last analysis, though, it seems more fruitful to place the preaching of this itinerant prophet (in Orvieto in particular) within the tense and confused atmosphere of Italy after the sack of Rome in 1527 and before the Congress of Bologna in 1529-1530.”
Reform of the Church made it possible for the Church to see prophecy as a social, economic and political threat.
“The astrologer Silvestro Lucarelli reported that in Rome most people, if not everyone, and people of all social conditions feared the flood: “Plurimos, ne dicam omes, ac cuiusque conditionis homines, diluvium valde pertimescere.”” Niccoli correctly derives the communication channel in regards to its hierarchy. “In descending order of the social and cultural hierarchy, we find Latin treaties, epistolary communications, annual works of prognostication in Latin, brief works and annual prognostications in the vernacular, and, finally, oral transmission. All these means of transmission except the last, which remains hypothetical, can be documented.” preaching, however, was an effective means of dissemination in regards to oral traditions. “Giacomo Tiburzi, a physician in Pergola, in the duchy of Urbino, wrote in November 1523 that in earlier years the flood had been “ab astrologis praenunciato, a circulatoribus in foro decantato, ac a viris religiosis in rostris universo audiente populo divulgato.” Tiburzi uses rhetoric to gain a universal public recognition that the flood will be an inundation. Yet, Francesco Guicciardini writes a letter to Cesare Colombo on the 25th of January 1524 and is not concerned, because he had known about these predictions for a while. His response Colombo reveals his sentiments: “everything is asleep here, I dearly hope that either the deluge or some explosion in Lombardy will soon wake us up.”
The pseudo-prophet warnings of the 1480s became more significant prior too and after the 1524 alignment in Pisces. Between Rome and Germany anonymous tracts were disseminated issuing warnings of God’s chastisement in the age of Atheism. In paganisitc terms, these were Oman reports. [Omen reports have links to planetary cycles, observations of old in Babylonian astrology (cylinder clay-tablets, The Venus Tables, etc... sec 13 MN Thesis) To the Catholic, Luther argued God allowed sin of various sorts, many of the so-called seven deadly sins. Luther responding to correspondence from certain Catholic individuals bore some of the consternation. Certainly this was the first efforts at the Counter-Reformation, but propaganda of animal symbolism to frame an opponent to an attribute of none-human or a belittling argument that one animal is better than another, simply had been in history since its beginnings. Set off by creation of Omen reports, a “deformed fetus found in the uterus of a cow in Waltersdorf near Frieberg in Saxony on 8 December 1522 [jul?]”and this became the tool to frame Luther’s argument that indeed the Catholic Church had incurred God’s wrath. Luther’s mentor, and Lutheran- doctrinal creator, Melanchthon created a story called the pop-ass, another deformity reported as recovered for interpretation through divination “on the banks of the Tiber in 1496.” Large folds of flesh on the calves’ neck was dried and sent to Duke Frederick of Saxony. He remarked, “apud quem nunc visitur,” a contemporary witness noted.” This was then associated to a monk’s cowl by “Duke Heinrich von Meissen’s insulting remark on the parentage of monks, the final words give an accurate idea of how immediately the monster of Saxony was put into a context of religious polemics.”
Under the stress of the divination ( dividing in this specific sense), Germans accused Italians with monster imagery, while the Italians fought back and used animal seniority imagery. “When the Dominican theologian Johannes Cochlaeus, writing in April 1523, answered a piece that Luther had written against him ( Adversus armatum virum Cokleum, composed early in the February of the same year), he did so by imitating the spirit of medieval marginalia and feigning an absurd and ridiculous combat between a snail and a Minotaur.”
It symbolism spoke of God sending monsters to earth as a way of showing humans his wrath. Woodcuts, anonymous pamphlets, and rhetoric illustrated this anti-Lutheran connection, but both sides of the religious argument became an open field of propaganda.
Assassination attempt page 240
1559 The Formation of the Huguenots. The word was meant to discourage, outrage, a mark, and it was adopted. Just like the word, Christians was adopted but was first used to identify fanatics of Jesus’ cults who were wished upon the accuser to have them crucified like Jesus. Thus Christians were a derogatory word, just as the Huguenots was a derogatory word.
“By June 1559 the Huguenots in the provinces had already been organizing and arming themselves in anticipation of a large-scale drive by the king to crush religious dissent in the southwest. Sporadic violence had already occurred in the south, and any effort to destroy the Reformation by military means would have required a major effort and entailed much hard fighting.” (p. 260 Frederic J.)
[ now on to another subject]
Popular Printed Prophecies ( Ch.4 Ottavia , p 5 the cheapness)
Rabelais and Nostradamus were jealous of the aristocracy, Oriental antiquity.
The Church’s Role in the Middle Ages
“Reform and Heresy were twins. The Dark Ages and its fissiparous Churches, dominated by kings and aristocrats, repeatedly threatened by inner anarchy and external pressure of barbarians, produced very litter heresy. The Christianity of the epoch gave security: it protected its adherents in life and offered them hope at death. The pre-Gregorian world ‘enjoyed a secure understanding of the holy [spirituality of humans ?]. In resided not in men but in places, objects and rituals under the custody of a priesthood whose value resided not in the ephemeral acknowledgement of personal virtue.” (p. 391)
“But Leo IX, Gregory VII and the other heroes of the reform had let a genie out of its bottle. They had insisted on the sacred character of the priesthood and the necessity of lives matching the vocation of the clergy, and thus had put before the membership of the Church the notion of individual responsibility.” (pp. 390-391) [mjm – This is opposed to collective responsibility which was intertwined the system of confraternities and convents and monasteries.]
Lambert argues that “[H]ostility was compounded by the West’s lack of experience of heresy.” (p. 391) It was not that Nostredame was predisposed by the Catholic Church as a non-combatant promulgator of social distresses, but that heresy was suppressed by what Lambert intends was the ‘tabula rasa of the Dark Ages.” (p. 391)
Malcolm Lambert, Medieval Heresy: Popular Movements from the Gregorian Reform to the Reformation, 2nd. ed. (Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1992), p.
The Third Testament and Provence Heretics. ( poor against Ruthlessness)
“The heretics of the late Middle Ages were more intimately associated with elite groups than Catharism had ever been, with its lack of substantial clerical support and its paucity of intellectuals. The heresy of the Beguins in the Franciscan province of Provence and the fraticelli in Italy in the early fourteenth century sprang out of the internal struggles of the Franciscan order over their observance of poverty, [meaning that because the poor people needed to react against the hierarchy and prophecy was the key] fanning out into the lay world [ meaning Nostredame as a lay person] through the institution of the Third Order, aided by the powerful and enigmatic personality of Petrus Johannis Olivi, a Janus figure [ looking both forwards and backwards] looking, on the one hand, to the orthodox Franciscan tradition, an academic teacher of high quality, and on the other to cloudy, mystical circles of excitable laymen and women. Working on the mind of Olivi was the magnetic concept of a third status in history, shortly to open, bringing after tribulation a time of new happiness and blessing for mankind, the fruit of the meditations of Joachim of Fiore in the second half of the twelfth century. He released an idea of great potency in the Church, which, when mishandled and misunderstood, gave a spur of heresy and rebellion.” (p. 393)
Pierre Jean Olivi (Latin: Petrus Johannis)(born at Sérignan, Dioceses of Beziers, 1248-9; died at Narbonne, 14 th March, 1298)
baccalaureate at Paris
defended his position ot the General Chapter of Montpellier (1287)
Olivi’s Postilla in Apocalypsim, and the theologians marked out sixty sentences, chiefly Joachimstical extravagances.
Pierre Jean Olivi advocated the doctrine of poverty, and to collect monies to take care of the poor, the sick, their clothing, and construction of their convents, and their books. His tomb was desecrated by theologians and the Catholic Church still denounces some of his writings. –mjm Olivi, a Janus figure, was also a bottom to top type of character. Nostredame wanted to be buried in a Franciscan tomb/ church. The connection of the outcast is obvious. and the backlash against the outcast is obvious.
Ficino’s work on estoteria ( Libiri de vita) may not be wholly confined to one group or idea of the Italian Renaissance. “The broad background of the Venetian probing into the unknown may have been responsible for the fact that at the threshold of the 16th century there existed on Venetian territory several more or less secret and humanistic associations. One of them was the Achademia Prioli, named after the well-known patrician and Maecenas Niccolo Prioli in whose house on the island of Murano its members would gather (as attested for 1495), especially for literary discussions and poetic recitals. It receded into the shade before the famous, but scholarly much more exclusive ‘Aldine Academy’ or ‘New Academy’ (Neaccademia) which gathered in the house of the celebrated publisher Aldus Manutius. Its exclusively was guaranteed by the prohibition of the use of any other language than Greek at the meetings. Finally, amoung the Venetian artists there existed many closed associations whose costumes, names, rules, and meeting halls had esoteric features.”
“Hermetical or ‘alchemistic’ associations [ mjm interdisciplinary] in their proper sense are more difficult to trace, but they played an important role in that critical period of the Renaissance. All genuine ‘ Hermetical’ work was assumed to be creative, and as such essential individual.”
“The astrological prognoses of the expected critical events were mostly based on conjunctions of Jupiter and Saturn, i.e. on the same kind of phenomena as those which were associated with the birth of Christ. Such conjunctions –close or, mostly, loose – occur every twenty years, and it was especially the one expected in November 1484 (in Scorpion), and, even more, the ‘Great Conjunction’ which was dated to the 10th June [ is this Julian or Gregorian? must be Julian, so make corrections!] (12 th May according to Copernicus, who was close to the truth) 1504 (in Cancer) that aroused the most alarming anticipations in all of Central and Western Europe. It was believed, however, that the consequences of each conjunction would become apparent only twenty years later. In accordance with this doctrine, the emergence of Luther in 1517 and the gradual development of his religious revolution in the following years were later put in connection with the Great Conjunction of 1504. It was a striking conformity to the cross-road character of the Renaissance, as the critical point of choice between the way of integration and that of dissolution, that the prophet whose appearance the conjunctions were supposed to presage was assumed by some to be a beneficent one, founder of the new Golden Age, a new ‘reign of Saturnus,’ while others saw him [Luther] as a ‘pseudo-prophet,’ and Antichrist, who would institute a ‘new and cursed religion.
These were the three planets, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn, who had visited Jesus’ birth. Noel Tyl, gave Jesus’ birth as today’s 1 March -5 BCE, as is the mysterious date 1 March 1555 given in Nostre Dame’s [ which letter], a Ficino’ transference information to codify that Nostredame was apprised to the correct calendar dates for Judicial Astrology applications. Like Nostredame’s signet ring depicting the Solar symbol opposed to the Three Maji in his own horoscope, the information gleaned from this empirical data communicated a high-advanced understanding of time and space.
Lorens Videl explains that Nostredame did not know Latin or Greek, but pretended too by insertions of phrases and/or a few oddly placed sentences in his publications to make it appear as he had foreign language skills. Taking this observation into account, we can draw conclusions to what sources Nostredame could actually read. If a book was published fully in Latin or Greek could Nostredame actually understand anything at all? This is a pertinent question. (See file MN Prime Sources, Printing publications...etc)
It should be noted that under Catherine de’ Medici royal edicts had increased, under the names of her sons, numerously in comparison to François or Henri. Although many pertained to the religious war management it demonstrated that education and production of academic output had reached greater heights in the realm, as well as indicating the flourishing of higher education, as was the case at Geneva, with Calvin’s College(s). Simply the recording of legal documents illustrates the higher production output of a mass populous engaged in civic administration. Still, the printing press has to be factored in, but it was not the sole cause of the flourishing of civilization.
Freak of America, Socrates
Idealism, and abstractness defied the concepts laid out by Socrates via Plato, and helps describe the United States of America as the freak nation. It was something unique, built upon mediumship which blended the reality classes of elite and peasant – rather the normative leadership/government and the worker/peasant classes. Realism was more associated to the normative ethnic centralist states. Idealism bared the fruit of goodness, and discovery of freedom, where as restriction and realism defined more subjective reality. Objectional abstractness created the idealism inherent in the illusion of goodness to all, and through this illusion absolute good appeared. It was the adoption of Plato’s Republic for the emerging Italian states that brought back Socrates and Plato in limited fashion to western civilization. Plato’s canon did not receive wide acceptance into the later nineteenth century.
Joachim de Fiore revived the semblance of the lower classes rising up and preaching imminent doom from the eastern invaders. The Mongols had initiated the Church Schism because of their seeking out European rulers in which to make alliances in battle and conquest. The Roman Church which had no military simply split over allegiances. This splitting also symbolized the divide of the illusion of unity, remade the Italian countryside, redefined western Christendom, and steered progression toward the proto-modern age (proto-renaissance).
Lurent Videl’s attack on Nostredame concluded the obvious: Nostredame did not know Latin. It is speculated that Nostredame Latin Correspondence was initially written in French and then translated out of French to Latin by his son, for prosperity. This could have been some of the belongings bequeathed to his [ daughter] in the chest. Also, in these correspondences, some replies ask Nostredame to write in Latin rather than his French, reluctantly, Nostredame decries the extended time it would take to get the reply back to the sender. If not knowing Latin, Nostredame could not have read or comprehended the sources suggested by Linguist Peter Lemesurier. These include, Bishop Bemechobus ( a.k.a. presumably as Pseudo-Methodius –Syrian , seventh century copier and editor of Methodius later stages of the Roman Empire decline); The Tiburtine Sibyl ( Syrian, ninth century); ‘St Augustine of Hippo’ ( actually the tenth-century Adso of Montier-en-Der); ‘St Serverus’ (in fact a fifteenth – century composition); Johann Lichtenberger ( a composite collection from various named sources, first printed in 1488 [where? and by whom?]); A set of papal prophecies ( fourteenth century); Telesphorus of Cosenza ( fourteenth century); another composite source combining ( among others) St. Brigid of Sweden, St Hildegard of Bingen, the Cretan Sibyl, the Hermit Reynard and the celebrated Abbot Joachim of Fiore; Joannes de Vatiguerro ( sixteenth century); Joachim of Fiore himself ( twelfth-century [ doesn’t Fiore live until the 13 th cent?); ‘St Vincent’ ( actually a sixteenth – century compilation from St Thomas Aquinas and other sources); ‘St Catuldus’ ( actually a sixteenth century prophecy); Jerome of Ferrara ( Savanarola –late fifteenth century); Fra Bonaventura (sixteenth century); Johannes de Rupescissa ( Jean de la Roquetaillade – fifteenth century); St Brigid of Sweden ( fourteenth century). Again, Joachim of Fiore was a main source consulted by Nostreadamus. Here, Fiore sought to understand the world around him, far outreaching his contemporaries in cyclical and pan-western spaces. Such as the historical question of connecting the Bible prophets to the Mongolian invasions. If Nostradamus could not read Latin, then how could have used Fiore as lengthy and in-depth as Lemesurier intends? The conjecture remains that if Nostredame did not know Latin, then these sources could have been Nostredame’s sources – unless he has someone read them to him or had them in published form in translation already?
How Lemesurier links the sources to Nostredame. (1) [Dedicatory 1558; sec, B 20, Lemesurier graphical demarcations] “The said reign of the Antichrist,” is a phrase used by many Europeans, especially during the great schism—and two pope period. However, Lemesurier links Nostredame’s knowledge to have only been acquired from the historical writings on Hermit Reynard and St Brigid. Next the phrase, “shall last only,” Lemesurier claims as a plagiarism by Nostradamus of ‘St Vincent.’ Without footnotes, articulation, parenthetic explanation, one can only guess what Lemesurier intends as a plagiarism? If the phrase ‘shall last only,’ or ‘shall only last,’ or ‘only last shall,’ or ‘last only shall,’ are copyrights of ‘St Brigid,’ then the saint should be very wealthy as these interchangeable ideas of a single thread of thought for this phrase has been used by billions of people. In fact billions of people are in fact plagiarizers’. It is Lemesurier’s intentions to link each phrase, composite, or full sentences ( in which there certainly are borrowed) to sources other than Nostredame.
Lemesurier intends that Richard Roussat’s chronology of planetary ages ( uniquely himself Lemsurier intends, in fact which are not of his but by his borrowing of earlier sources) are plagiarized by Nostreadamus. For example, Nostradamus claims there will be a ‘new age’ for the ‘year of 1792.’ This was the year that France created a new calendar and the first-wide-spread social movement defined perhaps the modern age of mass-protesting against the central authorities. Roussat says that a new age will begin in two years, very close to each other ( which means age(s) are redefined!, as they occur in great lengths of time) – thus he could not make up his mind. He mentions 1798 and 1791. The reason he mentions two days is that Roussat borrows from someone else, in which he could not make up his mind. The comparison to ‘periods of time’ portend a perpetual Piscean alignment of planets. First, an observation could be well deduced form the 1524, in which we know Nostredame had written at length-on, and the 1798 similar assembly of planets of our solar system that appear under the zodiacal position of Pisces. In 1524, France’s funding helped found New York and North America, certainly some plot of land that became hugely important as decades, years and centuries had went by on a linear time-scale. It may not be too hard to consider that others’ knew of this well before Nostredame, as this zodiacal- Piscean assembling had been pontificated upon by past starhistorians. In addition, Richard Roussat [Connection to (I., LI) is ] intends a new age will commence in the year of “[...] mil sept cens et deux.” [1702!] Furthermore, James Laver intends that Roussat plagiarized Turrel’s and this information comes from Eugene Barest, in which Lemesurier relies on without attributing the qualified and relevant information. On page 200 of Bareste’s Nostreadamus book, he intends that Roussat used many other sources without attribution. Why Lemesueier does not bring this to his intended audience is speculative, and has garnered him a modus operandi by some of his critics.
Homilies and Its Apocrypha (Marin Sanuto’s Diary in Homily)
Martin Luther and St. Paul.
Condemnation by the Fifth Lateran Council condemned dated apocalyptic literature associating its use to human error. “The Council’s decisions, as is known, laid down guidelines for the persecution of preachers who,
“[P]erverting the multiple sense of the Holy Scripture...preach terrors, threats, imminent catastrophes...daring to affirm that they speak through the inspiration and impulse of the Holy Ghost...so that simple people, who are the most disposed to be tricked, easily turn to many errors.”
Success of preachers from the classes of “semplici, the volgo, and the laity in general” certainly frightened the high culture. Prophecy of doom and gloom used by the common to advance a social cause created the backlash by the prelate. Marin Sanuto described in his diary, according to Niccoli’s interpretation “prophetic preaching had actual or potential political implications that were difficult to control and could be serious enough to interfere with ‘le cosse di Stado.” Such implications,” Niccoli continues, “were all the more dangerous because preaching could provide them with a sounding board among a large public of low social status. Sanudo also had little sympathy for the limited literary quality of a homiletics that had no connection with “high-culture.” Yet it should be noted, even though Niccoli does not make allusions to this, but by 1520 Martin Luther had made an impact on the common and clergy in which sermons attest to a new movement in Venice. “Maestro Andrea Baura of Ferrara, a hermit of Saint Augustine, preached in Venice from the balcony of Palazzo Loredan, overlooking Campo Santo Stefano. Marin Sanudo, whose ear was, as always, attuned to every religious event that had social implications, recorded his homily in these terms:
On Campo San Stephano there was a sermon by Master Andrea of Ferrara that drew a large crowd. The square was full, and he was up on the balcony of the Pontremolis’ house...and he spoke ill of the pope and of the Roman curia. This man follows the doctrine of Fra Martin Luther, [ who] in Germany is a most learned man who follows St. Paul and is much opposed to the pope, for which he is excommunicated by the Pope.”
Luther’s success against the Pope came from the foundation of the lay attacking the pontificate schism that laid the foundations for public criticism of the established hierarchy. While apocryphal prophecy played a key role in establishment, there was a price to pay for those who employed it. “Pietro Baura, who was present as pontifical secretary, later suggested to Gradenigo, privately and on his own initiative, that he have Baura imprisoned, and other requests in the same vein reached the Venitian Signoria from the papacy in the next two weeks. An answer arrived from Venice, neither his conclusion nor other things against the Holy See have been or will be printed.” Baura went into hiding with help from protectorate “Alfonso d’Este, where, toward the end of the year, he dedicated the work to Cardinal Corner. The piece was, somewhat disconcerting, entitled Apostolicae potestatis contra Martinum Lutherum defensio, and thus was a defense of papal power against Luther. Was this a politic change of mind or a cover up? In either case, the situation seems to have been resolved, and as early as 23 March 1521 a pontifical brief arrived in Venice authorizing Baura to return to preaching.”
How could a homeless person hold up the most powerful military in Europe, and possibly one of the most powerful armies of its age?
Wilson asks, “And just whose almanac was responsible for holding up the mighty King of Spain and his entire fleet? In the English-language version of Nostradamus’ Almanac for 1559’ can be found his weather forecast for August, the very time that Philip wanted to set sail through the unpredictable English Channel and Bay of Biscay. This indeed reads most alarmingly:
August 7: Changing of weather
August 8: Treacherous for shipping
August 9: Bewailing for [ships’] captains.
August 11-12: For shipping, cold, evil weather
Au gust 13: Changeable. Tempest
August 14: Cold, changeable weather
August 15: Drowning
August 16: Shipwreck
Chronically over-cautious and, about virtually everything, King Philip heeded these warnings, as a result of which his fleet’s departure from Antwerp, was seriously delayed for what turned out to be an utterly groundless fear. This is historically attested too by no less an authority than Sir Thomas Challoner, England’s envoy in the Spanish Netherlands, who on August z6, 1559 drily reported from Antwerp back to London:
On Friday last [i.e. August z] the king [Philip] embarked with his whole fleet towards Spain, with an easterly wind, very small, next to a calm, but such as most gladly he embraced, as irked of his long abode here. The number of his ships was twenty Spanish and Biskaynes, thirty hulks, Hollanders, and forty sail of less sort. The first part of Spain he can recover he will land at... The foolish Nostradamus, with his threats of tern pests and shipwrecks this month, did put these sailors in great fear [italics Wislon].”
Heresy is rather political in its normative sense. This is not the view of most investigators of the medieval age. Some of them were predisposed to the Church before their investigations Malcolm Lambert, in his revised work, “Medieval Heresy, Popular Movements From the Gregorian Reform to the Reformation” (1992), rather than identifying it as political -- instead relates mainly political examples that were connected to paid church positions and these fights resuming over these coveted positions. Of course, this intends a simplistic and idealistic definition. “It takes two to create a heresy; the heretic, with his [or hers] dissident beliefs and practices [could be politically motivated from an economic sense]; and the Church [the want-to-be controllers of ideology, for economic purposes], to condemn his [or hers] views and to define what is orthodox doctrine.” The Church had not prosecuted heresy, because it rather had no control or need too prior to the eleventh century, in general. As Lambert mentions, but does not articulate, scholarly debate and literate examples of skepticism followed heresy persecutions; this is qualified in that literacy was rather non-existent for centuries. For example, Lambert claims that “Northern Italy was the land of heresy par excellence because of its social pressures and intellectual vitality, and because its cities prized their independence so highly that they preferred to tolerate heretics rather than surrender to the demands of the bishops and popes.” Northern Italy and its burgeoning Venice metropolis, due to contact with the outside world, simply took in multi-intellectual thoughts, including gnosis-eastern orthodox practices. Venice’s shipping empire fostered literacy and science rates as nobles and well-to-do merchants taught their offspring how to read, write and statistics for trade purposes. When Europe was rather poor as a whole, the Church had no need to discipline in this manner, such as control the populous by controlling thought and discourse. While it is not until the fourteenth century that we get reliable statistics that in certain northern European regions literacy rates skyrocketed with private schools (convents, monasteries, private residence) among the lay persons, the eleventh century the spoken discourse of ideas had begun in earnest. Heresy grew out of people understanding the arguments against the Church. This is why prosecution contained elements of socio-political and economic values. The Templers were not simply a group movement of heretics; they were economically competitive with the Church and had business ideas as well as spiritual ideas that did not proponed the position of the Church. The Church’s goal was to keep the civilization of western Europe from becoming what it feared the most – educated to the become imperialists. The control of heresy simply was a control over the human beings uncontrollable animalistic proclivities. When Rome fell from control, European states rose with their ideologies of conquer the world and smash the indigenous ‘other.’ The Age of Reason simply coincided with the Age of Material Domination.
Lyons, France, was the originator of the medieval heresy center.
“No Capetian king of France had ever burned heretics, and there had been no capital punishment for heresy in the West for centuries, since the execution of Priscillian of Avila in 383 [ACE]. Priscillian was suspect of the dualist heresy of Manichaeism, which excited fear and anger among both Christians and pagans; but in fact the official reason for burning him was witchcraft.” The next heretic persecution according to Lambert then occurred in 1022 “outside the walls of Orléans. Here, again, at Orléans, Lambert cites, it “was a center of education.” As political, there was a “long running battle for power between Robert the Pious, king of France, and his rival, Eudes II, Count of Blois, who needed the city to establish links between his holdings in the Sancerrois and his counties of Blois, Chartres and Tours. He who controlled the bishopric was a fair way towards controlling the city and its surrounding territory.” Eudes II promoted his churchman Odalric and Robert his, Thierry. Intrigue scandal and maneuvering for position lasted for years. This lead to Eudes promoting a non-churchman, Aréfast, who was linked with the dukes of Normandy in alliance with Eudes II of Blois and he tried to fool the general clergy he was religious be performing religious duties – not too convincing. It turned out he was a skeptic, and was put there for power holding reasons. His group was burnt by the King, Queen Constance and the bishops who ousted the imposter in a “cottage outside the walls of Orléans.” The justification was rather a denial of Church’s correct doctrine. However, the underlying reality was solely economic, political and regarded the social aspects of societal agency. As with Philip II in the sixteenth century, he put the Spanish Inquisition on monarchal dissenters – who stirred up trouble in the streets or meeting houses. The Catholic Monarchs used the inquisition to rid Spain of its non-Christians; however, their eradication program was legitimized by their cultural decrees. Simplistic historiographies lack a case of understanding and link religious intolerance to a socio-political and economic reality. This is rather emotive and infactual. Aréfast even questioned how the men he had under him came to be positioned as heretical. If an opposing view side, which is from a political-economic and social – power center did not like one; the entire claim was emotive utterances. That is to say, just claim that this person or that group is working for the Devil. There is no need to justify anything crime at all. It is rather tantamount to the injustices that were perpetrated against intellects under Mao Tse-tung and his cultural revolution(s). Anyone who had a non-normative idealism was simply identified as the enemy. Here, in this case, the stronger person identifies the enemy as the devil. Religious persecution may not have been solely religious.
Many skeptics and paranormal critics intend that Nostredame is a manufactured prophet, simply by twisting his words to fit contemporary events, and for the more notable fact that no-one has ever predicted in advance a prophecy by Nostredame – albeit a fallacy at large. James Randi, who is among the fiercest paranormal skeptics, holds these views about Nostredame’s collection of works.
In 1558 Nostredame published his third installment of Les Propheties. While the omnibus 1568 edition is our prime source, one such copy exists at the French National Library; we have a decent idea of what Nostredame had written. In a passage by Nostredame from an open letter to the king of France, a clear time-frame of seventy-three years and seven months is clearly understood. The aforementioned 1568 wording and this 1605 edition following texts are exactly the same. Therefore, Nostredame while addressing the French King wrote, “[...] la neufue Babylone, fille miƒerable augmentée par l'abomination du premier holocauƒte, & ne tiêdra tant ƒeulemêt 73. ans, 7. mois [...].” (The new Babylon, [that] miserable daughter, [will be] augmented by the abomination of the first Holocaust, and will not last more than 73 years and 7 months). Certain commentators, investigators, and scholars link the term holocaust to the twentieth century. Thereby affirming that the term was not used prior as an identifier to wars and genocide, as it was applied during the twentieth – century. Historically, the term holocaust was applied to animal sacrifices and feasts that accompanied religious rituals. During the dehumanization period of the twentieth century, the Hebrews were framed under the term Holocaust during the genocidal pursuits of World War II.
In this section of the Epistle, we must guess at which century he is speaking too. However, he mentions a great revolution in the month of October, and in the sixteenth century terminology Nostredame writes: “[...] & ƒera au mois d'Octobre que quelque grande tranƒlation ƒera faite, [...]”. ( ...and will be during the month of October, a great revolution will be made).
In a few places in the Epistle, the phrases, ‘Rois d'Aquilôn,’ ‘nôbre d'Aquilon’, ‘non freres Aquilonaires’ are mentioned. These were normative phrases for the upper eastern European and trans-European regions.
Nicodemus Boyer cites, “[...] Et iceluy temps grâdes voiles Biƒantines aƒƒociees aux Liguƒtiques par l'appuy& puiƒƒance Aquilonaire, donnera quelque empeƒchement que des deux Cretenƒes ne leur ƒera la Foy tenuë.” as the case for the twentieth century events. In a note on page 216 he describes the use of the old form “Ligurians,” as the “Peidmontese of Genoese of Northern Italy,” but qualifies the statement in that the designation used by Nostredame is “merely a synecdoche referring to the whole Italian nation.” Aquilon, Nostredame used both for his Almanacs and Les Propheties, is literally used to describe “The Northern Country” as Russia. J. A. Chavigny went further and described “’Aquilon’ in the future centuries in North and East Europe and in North and Central Asia.” Yet published pamphlets of the time, often described like later modern newspapers for their quick information digestion, the “‘Newe Zeytung’ (“The Newspaper”) published by Georg Kreydlein in Nuremberg, Germany, 1561 and 1578,” claimed to have fulfilled the prophecies Nostredame had written in his 1559 Almanac, as too the condemnation of Ivan Vasilievich, more commonly known as Ivan the Fearsome in his day (Ivan Groznyi, mistranscribed as ‘terrible,’ by his enemies and adopted by later seventeenth century historiographers, which has stuck due to popular media.). In the presage for the year of 1559, in Nostredame’s Almanac for the same year, he had written, “Peste, chaut, feu, Roy d'Aquilon l'enseigne.” Nostredame simply states that under the banner of the king of the northern far reaches (of Europe) that plague, fire and heat will be empirical for this year. A pirated copy of the 1559 Almanac published at Paris simply has this presage for the year of 1559 on its cover. What is of concern is that Nostredame is consistently pointing out the regions or locations and using the same identifiers – thereby Aquilon has been identified as Russia proper. In addition, Kreydlein’s attempt to validate Nostradamvs also recognizes the Muscovite kingdom from the term Aquilon.
Ph. D Nicodemus E. Boyer whose mammoth book Dr. M. “Nostradamus: 1999, The Seventh Month, Volume I, Adolf Hitler, The Black Horseman, and The Millennium in 2000” (1985) has been largely ignored or even has been noticed. His price tag a rather ridiculous amount for about $250 dollars, consisting of a small tree in paper weight, contains popular as well as informative history. Boyer correctly predicted the fall of the Soviet Union while writing this manuscript during the late 1970s and early 1980s. This book was published in 1985, indicating that he had already understood the passage in the Epistle to King Henri II’s expression of the great Aquitaine, irreligious society that was the abomination of God and its end would happen in June of 1991. Note Odd A. Westad’s figures and arguments for begin and end dates and keep in mind that Imperial Russia was still under the Julian Calendar, placing their revolution under the Gregorian Calendar as not in late October (as the October Revolution is thusly named) but on the 7th of November.
“The Soviet Union (or the Communist Power in Russia) is predicted to last for “only” 73 years and 7 months. Since the October Revolution (according to the new calendar) was accomplished on November 7, 1917, Communism is supposed to fall in Russia on June 7, 1991, or around that time. This part of the prophecy is another proof that New Babylon is an allegorical symbol of the Soviet Union (that is community organizers, inexperienced) and not a real person. For a women (a “miserable daughter”), 73 years and 7 months would be quite long life (especially from Nostradamus’ point of view, since in the Middle Ages the average human life expectancy was about 30 years), whereas for a country or a particular form of government (in this case, the “New Babylon” or Russia ruled by a government which keeps its Jews and other nations in captivity and rarely grants exit permits to leave “Babylon”), however this is a relatively a short period of existence, and to emphasize that, Nostradamus uses the word “only.” [...].
Boyer repeats this claim in text and notes throughout his work; as well as intertwine various histories in his argumentations. According to Odd A. Westad, the events of June 1989 are an acceptable date for the collapse of the Soviet Union.
Vlaicu Ionescu VIII who after analyzing Nostredame’s Epistle to King Henri II, as Lemesurier writes “did successfully manage to pinpoint the collapse of the Soviet Union well in advance.” Now that the illusion has been dispelled, we look toward to understanding for whom has the power and what is the power. Boyer admits that Garencières is full of misprints and he chooses to use Benoist Regaud’s 1568 edition for his source, confirming his use of the accepted prime source used by all the academics. He notes mistakes in Erica Cheetham and Leoni’s texts, citing the preservation of the earliest source that gives way to proper treatment of anagrams.
In chapter ten of Odd Arne Westad’s book, “The Global Cold War: Third World Intervention and the Making of Our Times” (2003), the Director of Cold War Studies at the London School of Economics and Political Science (used as a textbook at the University of California, Berkeley for the history class -- History 124b ) intends the real fall of U.S.S.R. communism was the coup of August 1991. Boyer intends that Communism will finally end in June of the year of 1991, as he predicted it in his published work in 1985. His discrepancy of two months results in the protracted siege of the communist headquarters in 1991, which led to the final decision to disband the Marxist model of interventionary revolution that was consistent with the U.S.S.R. ideology in August.
Westad intends that the coup attempt in August 1991, in reality, finally ended U.S.S.R. communism.
As Westad claims, “There is in no doubt, however, that right up to the unsuccessful coup in August 1991, which in reality destroyed the Communist party, Gorbachev used his inherited powers to intervene abroad where and when he thought necessary.” While interventionalism continued, as it does with the U.S.A. in Iraq currently, however, Marxism was finally disbanded in Russia as the victorious “state” ideology.
While Boyer’s figures begin in November of 1917 ( extrapolated Gregorian calendar) , The Bolshevik Revolution is commonly referred to as the October Revolution that we understand as Marxist-Leninist Revolution, beginning Soviet Union proper – and therefore, August 1991 runs a month off in adjustment, in proper Nostradamus phraseology. Nostradamus as we know mentions “October” as the key month. Therefore, for Nostradamus dateframe, May of 1991 would identify the timeframe and signify the official end of Communism in Russia – if we choose to accept this interpretation. By pushing the date with inclusion of events of October 1917, Boyer had concluded that June of 1991 marked the correct finalization of the Communist Party. Boyer’s figures represent a two-month window that skeptics would call significant. As explanation, many skeptics believe that any perdition for the future should quality as represented as printed media today. As example, in newspapers, the ‘nut graph’: who, what, why where, and when, which all are accompanied by intricate specifics, such as origins of circumstances’, continues time linkages, personal identification of all players involved, etc… Yet, we also must keep in mind that Westad cites repeatable historiography which differs to the exact month of the end point of the Soviet Union by contending authorities. However, whatever is sure about these discrepancies the actual collapse is agreed upon as the events that unfolded in the spring to fall time frame of the year of 1991 ( Gregorian Calendar).
Communism (Type Marxist-Leninism, then Totalitarian under Stalin, then adopted Maoism after Stalin) which sprang from Russia (along with U.S. ideology formulated under F.D.R.’s globalistic doctrine of spreading “Americanism”) shaped the world in radical ways. No-less than most of the decolonized nations after WWII adopted socialist/communist revolutionary doctrines and played a decisive role in the battle for world territory between the U.S.S.R. and the U.S.A. up till 1990s – when the U.S.A. appears to have succeeded to the lone position of dominant ideological player of earth. Despite Stalin’s temporary World War II reinstatement of the Russian Church, communism stuck to its material atheism(s), as contrasted against the Christianized west. After the war, Russian veterans of Soviet Russia relate that localized churches were nothing more than Marxist indoctrination centers. The Abomination of the Church, as explained by Nostredame was rather unprecedented in a time in which he lived. The Wars of Religion only exacerbated the dominance of religion in general as a trajectory into modernity.
Lewis S. Feuer (1912-2002), an ex-Marxist conservative professor of philosophy whose work emphasized sociology, taught at the University of California at Berkeley and the University of Virginia intends that “Marxism has many of the characteristics of a religion: essentially based on faith and not "truly" empirical. But unlike religions such as Christianity, Marxism promises fulfillment in earthly life, rather than in an afterlife.” Thus we get the common Thomas More “Utopian” model, the model used by Engels and Marx. While Marx was trained as a philosopher, before changing focuses into capitalism, in which he knew little to nothing and for while he had co-written the Communist Manifesto, we are unsure of if he contemplated Plato’s Republic, as Plato’s Laws were not well known at this time. In fact, on only recently has Plato’s Laws been treated in modern academia. During the proto-renaissance, Plato’s Republic was the most observed ascripted of political and government speaks and practices in northern Italy.
A stylometry and statements by Diogenes Laertius (3.37) and Aristotle (Pol. 2.6) confirm that The Laws were of Plato’s final work. This intends a further investigation toward an ethical and just society, where collectivism was argued by Plato as the correct prescription of a good society.
In The Republic there is a standard two-class society -- whereas in The Laws, the classless society revolved around a set of distinctive communion and traditional ownership criteria, and rather mirrors a more classical egalitarian system of governance argued in More’s Utopia. The belief of establishing heaven on earth is rather emotive and well desired by good people who believe in justice. Yet, the criticisms, argued by empiricism by some in the scholarly community, remain scientific—which in an of its self is non-absolute. Therefore, correctly observed, a religious criteria of faith in the system is compared to faith in an invisible utopian concept of life after death and an invisible creator in monotheism.
“In fact, Marx and Engels often acknowledged the religious nature of Marxism, especially in Engels' "Study of Early Christianity", contained in the book.” “He also discusses the somewhat contradictory stance of Marxism toward ethics -- Marx denies that ethics play a role in his philosophy at all, yet Marxism effectively imposes a widely-based ethical view on its adherents.” Apologists for Marx have some decent arguments. First, he has been mis-interpreted by what we call Marxists. James A. Gregor, a professor of Political Science at the University of California, at Berkeley, makes a statement that there are around 1,000 Marxist interpretations, none exactly as another. He intends, and rightly so, Marx is not Marxism. I intend these are re adjustments to concepts to paradoxes not fully solved by Marx.
Most scholars intend that the abstract and idealism of Hegal was changed in Marx reformulations to than of reality, whereas materialism was replaced by the spiritualism as the base of reality. Therefore we do not create with our ideas (St. John the Apostle, Gospel, Bible, e.g. contemporary gnostic philosophy of that time), we are created by materialistic realities. Marx was not unique in materialism creating our histories, as this was a standard view in the German schools of that time and reflected in Jacob Burkhart’s work on the Italian Renaissance, art, and literature, as it pertained to the growth of individualism.
By switching the argument from the creator to the created, we have standardized leftist ideology. Therefore, the subject defers the blame of existence onto an objective reality/ideal. Yet, Burkhart contrasts Marx in a single ideological standpoint. Materialism created the individual in Burkhart’s view, while community and collectivism created the communal realities of survival – the individual will according to Marx’s argument on the mystery of where does the mode of production come from.
Marx took his views from More. In Utopia, a work deeply influenced by Plato’s Republic, according to More’s own admission, is rather qualified. More studied at the University of Oxford (Studied for two years 1492 - 1494), in what was the Augustinian canons abode at the Canterbury Hall (Later The ‘Christ Church’, Latin: Ædes Christi, the temple or house of Christ, 1546). Utopia, a popular book based upon ideas from Columbus’ voyages of the new world, in the concept of an isolated island, thereby no outside influence could disturb its pristine circumstances, except a flotilla of barbarians, and by choosing this new world location, a rather prophetic circumstance in its own right, was based upon contemporary criticism of European states of that time (published in 1516, a novel in Latin). Yet this work also reflected a monastic communalism, as it pertained to the Pauline letters of the New Testament, specifically to the Acts of the Apostles. Also, More’s influences of rhetory and idealism can be also linked to Aristotle and with Roman rhetorical influences such as Cicero, Quintilian, as epideictic oratory. And finally, some describe his psychology to his ascetical practices, including self-punishment involving pain. Utopia became a rather popular work, which spread More’s name to the main continent as an intellectual thinker. Therefore the work’s legacy endured. Engels and Marx did not use Plato’s Laws, but More’s work to reformulate a modern conception of communism gave an economic criterion for modes of production. Simply communism was already a movement during Engel’s and Marx’s avocations. Engels was simply asked by a communist league to produce their manifesto – in which Marx was brought in by Engels to edit this work for its final production.
For More, some scholars intend he promoted religious toleration in Utopia. However, More promoted a non denominal religious social-prescription. Certianly the protestant movement and the international influence happing during the Golden Age simply resolve to these findings.
Great divisions and continual changes written by Nostredame mark the contests between Karl Marx’s socialism-to-communism and classical liberalism – laissez-faire economics. Not only do scholars intensify the twentieth century contests and great divisions of these two ideologies, but Boyer speaks much about Nostradamus phraseology on classical Greek phrases of “the coming to power of the common people.” This expression, promoted by Le Pelletier, from Nostredame’s Proem of 1555, Les Propheties, where Nostredame writes, “le commun avénement,” portends to a rather unknown world view during Nostredame’s time. More’s book, while widely read was taken as purely fictional. Patriarchism and Monarchal Christendom were the intending political trajectories during the sixteenth century in Europe. Machiavelli, while not promoted publically, was coveted reading material for most monarchs and princes during the sixteenth century. Protestants advocated Christian monarchs, and Christian ruling princedoms. The idea of the rule of the common people was literally unknown. This projection is given to Nostredame’s son Cæsar, in the form of prose prophecy.
Qui a eƒté la cauƒe de faire retirer ma langue au populaire; & la plume au papier, puis me ƒuis voulu eƒtendre declarant pour le commun aduenemêt, par obstruƒes & perplexes ƒentences des cauƒes futures, meƒmes les plus vrgentes, & celles que j'ay apperçeu, quelque humaine mutation qu'advienne ne ƒcandaliƒer l'auriculaire fragilité, & le tout eƒcrit ƒougz figure nubileû, plus que du tout prophetique, comgien que,
“This is what caused me to refrain from public utterance and prevented my putting pen to paper. Besides, I had determined to go as far as declaring in abstruse and puzzling utterances the future cause of the ‘common advent’ [i.e. the coming of the common people to [political-economic and social ] power], even those truly cogent ones that I have foreseen. Yet least whatever human changes may be to come should scandalize delicate ears, the whole thing written in nebulous form, rather than as a clear prophecy of any kind.”
“Abscondisti hæc à ƒapientibus, & prudentibus, id eƒt, potentibus et regibus, et enuc[s]leafti ea exiguis et tenuibuis:” [“thou has hidden these things from the wise and prudent, i.e. the mighty and kings, and has revealed them to the small and weak’]
Here Nostredame reveals a future time period when the egalitarian and common people will return to power, and he is expressing to his son how this is a sensitive message. Evidently, this was not seen as the proper type of mentality. As noted, by Lemesurier, revealed by Mario Gregario, the Republican preacher Savonarola remained a popular figure to Nostredame’s contemporaries.
The claim that Nostredame is a stout monarchist remains qualified. It appears the hypocrisy in that persecuted by the monarchial mechanisms (zealot inquisitioners, and academic ideologues), he also complained about the Cabans.
Ibid., Niccoli, Prophecy and People in Renaissance Italy, pp. 140- 143. Also, Soffler’s commentary on the Sphere of Proclus was published posthumously in 1534, see p. 327, n. 2., The curious case is discussed in Bayle’s Dictionaire, under Stofler, in Smith, Eugene David, “History of Mathematics Vol. I, General Survey of the History of Elementary Mathematics” ed. 2 (Boston: Ginn and Company, 1951), first published by David in 1924; “The people of Toulouse even went so far as to build an ark,” relating to the events of the 1524 stellium.
Smith, Eugene David, “History of Mathematics Vol. I, General Survey of the History of Elementary Mathematics” ed. 2 (Boston: Ginn and Company, 1951), p. 327. Johann Stöffler was born at Justingen, Swabia, 10 December 1452 [Jul cal?]; died at Blaubeuern, 16 February 1531.
Ibid., p. 141. Physicians, theologians, philosophers and street urban prophets simply mistaken Pisces to flooding because it is communicated as a water sign, and the 12th home sign. At this time Jupiter co-ruled the house, and he is associated to irrigating the earth, in ancient times. Unfortunately the ancient viewed the inundations with the Muses, the Pleiades which traveled passed the zodiac sign of Pisces at this time.
Thorndike, Magic and Science, iii, pp. 104-18, 143-5, 325-46;iv, pp. 98, 145-6; R.T. Gunther, Early Science in Oxford, ii (Oxford, 1923), pp. 42-67; G. Hellmann, ‘Versucheiner Geschichte der Wettervorhersage im XVI. Jahrhundert’, Abhandlungen der Preussischen Alcademie der Wisscnschaften, l’Physikalisch—Mathematische Klasse, 1924, p. 18. in Keith Thomas, “Religion And The Decline Of Magic” ( New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1971), n. 1. p. 288.
Niccoli, Ottavia, Prophecy and People in Renaissance Italy, trans., Lydia G. Cochrane (New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1990), p. 136. n. 35, “In connection with these events, see at least Eugenio Garin, ‘il pronostrico dell’Arquato sulla distruzione dell’Europa,’ in his L’età nuova. Ricerche di storia della cultura dal XII al XVI secolo (Naples: Morano, 1969), pp 105-11. Zambelli,’Fine del mondo’ reviews the bibliograghy on the topic ( to which I might add Jean Deny, ‘Les Pseudo-peophéties concernant les Turcs au XVIe siècle,’ Revue des études islamiques 10 : 201-220, esp. ‘La Prediction d’Antonio Torquato, ‘ 207-216) and treats the expectation of a pseudoprophet in the context of polemics concerning the flood (pp. 313-23); “I might note, however, that when Arquato states (probably still in the Quattrocento), ‘ veniet a septentrione heresiarcha magnus,’ he was without a doubt basing his prediction on the planetary conjunction,” even if he did not say it explicitly,” p. 136, in text.
Marco Scribanario (o Scibanari), Bolognese – laureato, received accreditation for two fields, one in medicine and one in philosophy in the year of 1513; then studied at the University of Bologna, intermittently from 1513- 1530, received accreditation for lettering in astronomical topics. For this topic’s work by Scirbanario see, “Esso apre con 24 presupposti astologici. Il primo, la congiunzione Giove-Saturno in Scorpione nel 1484, il secundo l’eclissi di Sole in Bilancia nel 1493, il terzo la congiumzione Marte-Saturno in Pesci all’inizio del 1496, il quarto l’eclissi di Sole del 7 marzo 1494, il quinto l’opposizione dei luminari il 10 marzo. Sette presupposti si occupano dei pianeti, i restanti dodici dei segni. Seguono dodici capitoli di previsioni, iniziando dai reccolti e finendo con la meteorologia, mentre quelli intermedi sono dediti ad argomenti quali gli studenti e i mercanti, le signore, i Veneziani, Fiorentini, e i Bologesi,” in Enzo Barillà, “Tesori nascosti: una raccolta bolognese di pronostici....”[EO51] (Ricerca ’90, accessed 1 February 2009), pp. 20-21, available online www.cirodiscepolo.it/Articoli/barrillà51.pdf; Internet.
Ibid., n. 76, Also in circulation, but, from what I can gather, only in manuscript, was a Profizia dell’anno 1180 nell’indizione noma per il Serenissimo e clarissimo Re di Jerusalem pacifico Signor del Regno di Cipri ad Urbano P., which was probably the direct source of the Prophetia trouvata in Roma. The
Ibid., pp. 141-142, note 7, Silvestro Lucarelli, Prognosticon anni MDXXIV quo opiniones pseudastrologorum diluvium et siccitatem praesentis anni falso praedicentium improbantur (Rome: [ Francesco Minizio Calvo], 1534, fol. A iv. .
Ibid., pp. 141-142, note 4 & 8, cited in Allesandro Pastore, “Un corrispondente sconoscuito di Pietro Pomponazzi, Il medico Giacomo Tiburzi de Pergola e le sue lettere,” Quaderni per la storia dell’Università di Padova 17 (1984): 67-88, esp. p. 77, which stresses the widespread expectations of the flood in the region around Ancona [...] Pronostrico di Maestro Constantino de S. Maria in Georgio phisico excellentissimo sopra la significatione de li Eclipsi de la Luna e convento e congregation de li pianeti nel signo de Pesce: “Impresso in Ancona: per maestro Bernardino Guiraldo de Vercelli. Anno D.ni MDXXIII a di primo de Mese de Agosto.” On this publication and on the efforts of the printer Bernardino Guerralda to publicize the flood, see Filippo M. Giochi and Alessandro Mordenti, Annali della tipografia in Ancona 1512 -1799 (Rome: Edizioni di storia e letteratura, 1980), pp. xxx-xxxvi,, 20-22, 30, 32-33.
Ibid., Niccolò Machiavelli, Lettere, ed Franco Gaeta (Milan: Feltrinelli, 1961), p. 409; available in English as The Letters of Machiavelli, tr. and ed. Allen Gilbert (New York: Capricorn Books, 1961), p. 201; Francesco Guicciardini, Carteggi, ed. Roberto Palmarocchi, 17 vols. (Bologna: Nicola Zanichelli, 1938-), vol. 7, p. 59.
Johann Georg Schenck, Monstrorum historia memorabilis (Frankfurt, 1609), p. 98. “Apperently Schenck was citing a broadsheet similar to a colored drawing conserved in the Universitätsbibliotek of Würzburg, citing in WKG, vol. 4, pt. 3, p. 10. A sheet containing the same text in French must have fallen into the hands of the Bourgeois of Paris, who describes it in the same terms: Journal d’un Bourgeois de Paris sous le regne de Francios Premier (1515-1536), ed. Ludovic Lalanne (Paris: J. Renouard et c., 1854), p. 95., in Niccoli, n. 3, pp. 122-123.
n. 11, p. 125, pp. 295-306, WKG, vol. 1. , Fritz Saxl, “ Illustrated Pamphlets on the Reformation, “ in his Lectures, 2 vols.(London: Wartburg Institute, University of London, 1957), n. 8, partial entry, for more studies on Luther’s Monsters see n. 8, p. 124, Ottavia, Prophecy and People in Renaissance Italy.
Wasiutyński, Jeremi, The Solar Mystery, An Inquiry Into the Temporal and the Eternal Background of the Rise of Modern Civilization (Oslo, Norway: Solum Forlag, Preutz Grafisk A.S., Larvik, 2003), p. 35
Lemesurier, Peter, The Illustrated Prophecies, The New and Authortative Translation to Commemorate Nostredamus’ 500 th Anniversary (Hants, U.K. : John Hunt Publishing Ltd., 2003), pp. 388 - 389. These are the sources Lemesurier writes and believes Nostredame had the competence in Latin to read and understand them. This view contrasts Lemesurier’s commentary on Nostradamus’ value as a linguist when addressing Lurent Videl’s claim against Nostradamus, that the Seer did not know Latin, and was faking it by terse passages in his dedication letters in his work ‘Les Propheties.’
Bareste inquires that Roussat borrows information from Turrel, a source no longer assessable, as many texts were burnt during the French Revolution to rid the society of the epistemic overlords – the aristocracy. Apparently, this was still known during the young republic and Bareste seems to be akin to developing the story further, see, Sur les registres de le Bibliothèque de Sainte-Geneviève, il est porte dans l’V, nº 698.—Le seul examplaire de la Bibliothèque royal est rangé dans le G, 1260. En téte des premiers feuillets du Livres de l’Estat , se trouve le privlédge du roi, daté dn 9 Juillet 1549. et signé Guynaud. – Cet ouvrage est cité par l’Oracle pour 1840, p. 29.
‘sera la quatrième et dernière station de l’altitudinaire firmament. Toutes ces chouses considérées et calculées, concluent les astrologues que si le monde iusques-là dure, (qu’est à Dieu tant congneu,) de très-grands et admirables mutations [Pisces is part of the mutable sings, thus lexiograghy of mutations, by Turrel, Roussat and Nostradamvs] et altercations seront au monde;’ in Bareste, Eugène “Nostradamus,” ed. Maillet (Rue de L’est, 31, Paris: Chez Rous Les Marchands de Nouveates, 1840), note and, pp. 198- 199.
Roussat, Richard, Le Livre de l’estat et mutations des temps...( Lyon: 1555) reduced passage quoted in James Laver, “Nostradamus or the Future Foretold,” 5th ed. (Guildford, Surrey, G.B.: George Mann Books, 1981), p. 141.
Conciliorum Oecumenicorum Decreta, ed. Guiseppe Alberigo et al. (Bolonga: Istituto per le scienze religiose, 1973), pp. 635-37, in Niccoli, Ottavia, “Prophecy and People in Renaissance Italy,” trans., Lydia G. Cochrane (New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1990), p. 104.
Mariano Sanuto, Diarii, 58 vols (Venice: R. Deputazione Veneta di storia patria, 1879- 1903), vol. 29, col. 495, also vol. 19, cols. 348-49, 383, in Niccoli, Ottavia, “Prophecy and People in Renaissance Italy,” trans., Lydia G. Cochrane (New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1990), pp. 89, 104.
Ibid., Wilson’s translation out of sixteenth century contemporary English. n. 1, cf. Nostradamus, An Almanacke for the yeare of oure Lorde God 1559. Quoted in Brind’Amour, Nostradamus Astrophile..., op. cit., p. 35.
Lambert, Malcolm, Medieval Heresy, Popular Movements from the Gregorian Reform to the Reformation, 2nd, ed. (Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, 1992), p. 12. I simply added in what should have been stated. The Church was a political body given the administration by the western leaders who listened to the people. As Lambert points out consistently, the people cheered at the demise of heretics, even though they probably had no idea of the truth behind such claims by the authorities.
Nostredamvu, Michel, A L’INVICTISSIME TRES-PVISSANT & tres chrestien Henry Roy de France Second, Michel Nostradamus Son tres humble & tres-obiessant Seriteur & Subiet, victoire & felicité , in Nostradamvs, Michel, LES PROPHETIES DE M. MICHEL NOSTRADAMVS: Medecin du Roy Charles IX. & l’un des plus excellens Astronomes qui furent iamais (Lyon: V. Seve, c. 1605). cf, transcription by Lemesurier, Peter, The Nostradamus Encyclopedia : The definitive reference guide to the work and world of Nostradamus (New York : Godsfeild Press, 1997), pp. 238-242.
‘Translation’ was meant by late European medieval terminology of a government change by some force. Today ‘revolution’ is used. Revolution was strictly used in the academic sphere for terminology of the Aristotelian Universe ( see my middle age science pages) – therefore solely connected to astronomy/astrology ‘alone.’ It is quite possible the reason we use ‘Revolution’ instead of translation today, was Nostradamus’ articulation of cyclic history. Revolutions, therefore, are normative happenings of history. They have different forms, but the end result and the predictable, at least tacitly resulted, and there will be another one in repetition which will some day in some region of the world take place – therefore it was, is and will be perpetual. Apparently the systems of privileges in the Carolingian period was similar to the later ‘overlord’ feudal period, in which the common observed that government was basically similar with small divergences, but it was translated in different linguistic terminology. Therefore, it was normal to think that an incoming administration (meaning of the various types of ruling titles and ranks) was a translation from the former – as saying in concept, the streets remain the same, only the name changes. The French Revolution, and Nostradamvs’ insistence that life was perpetually-cyclical in his writings, citizens understood that revolutions were going to start taking place as normative ‘translations’ of government systems, as slowly the populations of the earth grew and at repetitive cycles of history for the masses that had became discontent with their ruling bodies. At least now, the heavens reflected the earth, or the terminology matched, as above so below, or more fittingly, the incorruptible, now had changed to the corruptible as into its mirror image –revolutions were now incorruptible – they would happen as normative earthy assurances.
Ibid., Nostradamvs, The Prognostication for the yeare of oure Lorde 1559, see also Chavigny’s commentary on this almanac, cited above. Boyer, op. cit., presage 34, p. 135, accompanied by a reproduction of the woodcut of Geoge Kreydlein’s 1561, & 1578 two page article on the invasion by the king of Rus’ on Livonia (Latvia and Estonia). according to Boyer, this newspaper affirmed the “fulfilment of some of the Prophecies by Michel Nostradamus concerning the invasion of Livonia by the pillaging, murdering and looting army of Ivan the Terrible,” p. 135. note, The Oprichniki descended on Novgorod in 1570 and Ivan held trials in June of that year; apparently disputed reasons -- some linking these events to religious matters, and others linking these events to political separation matters. See my in-depth study on Ivan for more information.
“Unfortunately, little reliable and specific information is preserved concerning the years 1559-1564, which formed the interval between the period Ivan’s personal selected council -- the “chosen council,” see Platonov, S. F., Ivan the Terrible, trans. & ed., Joseph L. Wieczynski (Gulf Breeze, Florida: Academic International Press, 1974), p. 112. quote used in McDonald, Michael J., Muscovite Imperialism [RU01] 16th Century Russia, August 2007. “In 1558 Ivan took a military contingent and began the Livonian war with great success. The Livonian war, although in the early years was an astounding success, due to many factors, the war became an expensive endeavor. It not only sapped vital Muscovite monitory resources, but good quality men who could have served well as managers in the southern or eastern lands. The problems in the financing of the eastern management deteriorated during the 1560s and onward.,” McDonald.
Ibid., Guinard, The Predictions and Almanachs of Michel Nostradamus by Robert Benazra, trans., Matyas Becvarov, & see cover with Par Guillaume le Noir, rue sainct Iaques, à la Rose blanche couronnée, reproduced by Patrice Guinard.
Boyer, born in Latvia, one of the Baltic states that were independent, democratic republics at the time of author’s childhood. He is a Chemist who has shown a prolific capacity and lively curiosity in diverse fields of knowledge including history, astronomy, cosmology, religion and literature. He lived through Stalin, and Hitler. He lectures at universities and published works in literary magazines and several novels. He is fluent in German, and Lativian languages, and received his Doctor in Divinity in 1977, and while in California, he took several graduate courses in Roman and Baltic history, p. pp. 9-13.
Nicodemus E. Boyer, PH.D., Dr. M. Nostradamus: 1999, The Seventh Month, Adolph Hitler. The Black Horseman, and the Millennium In 2000,” vol. 1, (Des Plaines, Il: Studeophile Publishers, 1985). This was a work to be in four parts.
Ibid., Boyer, Nostradamus: 1999..., p. 215. This is but one page of many that expedites this confession of the fall of the Soviet Union, as dated and confirmed in confidence. Cf., p. 214. How do we know? The Babylon kept the Jews captive as well as “Babylon, see Daniel 9:2, captives were later freed by Persian King Cyrus. In contrast to the humane, cheerful Greek gods, the Babylonian gods such as Marduk [ Zeus equivalent, Jupiter or Satan] were cruel and bloodthirsty. “Septentrion” stands for its synonym “Aquilon” (the northern country; Russia with the conquered satellite states) which appears in numerous quatrains and several other paragraphs of the Epistle to King Henry,” p. 201.
see Westad, Odd Arne, The Global Cold War: Third World Interventions and the Making of Our Time (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007). This book is used by Academia. November 1917 to June 1991 is Boyer’s prediction (Westad’s figures has U.S.S.R.’s communism ending in August, but holds uncertainty by his adoption of multi-time frames from authoritative sources).
Professor Charles Postel, Sp. 2008. Westad’s book claims to be the greatest book on the Cold War, a personal claim by him in his introduction. However deep into the text he admits is area of focuses is more defined on the dates between the later ‘60s’ to the 1980s in regards to the issues of the Cold War.
see Stanford Philosophy online directory and key search ’Plato;’ Stalley (1983, p. 3). On authenticity, see Guthrie (1987, pp. 321-2), for discussions of stylometry, see Brandwood (1976, pp. xvi-xviii), (1990), Brandwood in Kraut (1992, pp. 90-120), Kahn (1996, especially pp. 36-70), Keyser (1991), (1992), Ledger (1989), Nails (1992) and Young (1994). (Palo Alto: Stanford University, 2008, accessed 25 May 2009), available from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/plato-utopia/notes.html#4; Internet.
Le Pelletier: “the coming to power of the common people.” In Ward’s translation: “the vulgar advent”; in French, le commun avénement [Preface] :” Perhaps, as Boyer suggests, Communism is implied, which he intends to elaborate and discuss his findings in several quatrains and discuss in this book., p. 107.
Nostradamvs, Michel, PREFACE DEM. MICHEL NOSTRA- DAMUS A SES Propheties. As Cæsarem Nostradamum filium Vie & Felicité in “LES PROPHETIES DE M. MICHEL NOSTRADAMVS: Medecin du Roy Charles IX. & l’un des plus excellens Astronomes qui furent iamais” (Lyon : V. Seve, c. 1605), inscrp., édition for esti[m] née., Voyez La bibliotheque instructive de M. De Bure; Et le Dictionaire [ref/or des] Corre[s?][or] Corres varnes de M. Gamond, n. b. Par Vincent Seue de Beaucaier ed Languedoc, dés le 19, Mars 1605. au Chasteau de Chantilly, maison de Monfeigneur le Connestable de Montmorency.
Hermes Trismegistus (Latin Mercurius ter Maximus) is a amalgam (synchronism) of the Greek god Hermes (Roman/Mercury) and the Egyptian god Thoth ( also commutated as comparable to the god Mercury). Cicero provides the only valuable folk-lore for historians. He surmises that ‘Thrice-Great Hermes’ (i.e. TI-RI-SE-RO-E, trisheros ( the trice or triple hero ) trice-wise, was possibly writing during the Hellenistic Age, or compiled at that time. “The first mention of Hermes with the triple appellation of great (‘greatest and greatest and great’) is in a record of a meeting of the council of the ibis cult in Hermopolis in 172 BC. Cicero, Ovid and Apuleius knew of him. The later was formerly credited with the translation of the Greek text of Asclepius into Latin.”
Neoplatonist Iamblichus wrote a letter to Porphyry of Tyre (A Phoenician NeoPlatonic Philosopher, who edited and published Plontinus’ Enneads (the collection of the work of Plontinus, Porphyry’s teacher) , the only copy, and whose Latin Philosophy Textbooks, were the main sources for pedagogy in the Middle Ages) in the third century A.C.E, explaining “It is to him that our ancestors in particular dedicated the fruits of their wisdom, attributing all their own writing to Hermes. And if we, for our part, receive from this god our due share of favour you [ Iamblichus calls Hermes a god] , for your part, do well in laying before the priests questions about theology.”
During the Middle Ages, the Hermetic Tradition, as it was framed, had lost its date and seemed positioned to be a founding original idea of monothism, in the mystical sense. That means it was most possibly written somewhere about the beginning of humans. This view ended by classical scholar and philologist Issac Casaubon with his study of Ficino’s transcription of Corpus Hermeticum and of the classical tests such as Cicero’s. He links Moses’ possible friend to an anonymous intellectual whose identity comes down to us simply as Hermes Trismegistus. The theme of monotheism, law and order and goodness – all linked to complex ideas of time and space, make relevant a competing narrative during the Early Modern Age – to that of the predominating Protestant western movement.
Trismegistus advocates in Ascepius (c. 300-100 BCE) that religion brings civilization and order to the universe, as reflected by the secondary nature of man whose image if fostered by their reflection of the Gods (in this case the Heavens, communicated as symboligical and time-and-space, as the ultimate reality), the first nature of the universe, in their activities to celebrate ‘life,’ not death. In fact, the failure of archeology and anthropology to decipher hieroglyphics or find adequate amounts of records to interpret the past resolves to create a vast history of 2,500 years of existence to mere child stories. There is no evidence that Egyptians were obsessed with death, or passionate to death-cults. The opposite is quite true. The Egyptian periods recommend a celebration of life and their entombing reflects more of an effort toward posterity and remembrance of them rather than the normative academic view of reading themselves for the afterlife – as pronounced the prescriptive in the Book of the Dead. Most common people could not afford the expensive entombing. Also there is no evidence that entombing was practiced in the region called Egypt during its 2,500 existence. The hero motif in Trismegistus is a rational explanation that the height of humankind is to aspire to goodness. Goodness in Trismegistus’ case is self-sacrifice and planning for the future of souls to be born on earth – that come from Heaven. Goodness is contrasted against Barbarianism, which takes its motif of anti-monotheism, and in most cases Atheism. When the common refrain from Goodness, i.e. religious subscription, civilization falls to the barbarians; the barbarians in turn, destroy the races and turn against civilization by way of primitiveness and violence.
Religion in Asclepius is complex as well as simple. As complex, religion is a reflection of the heavens onto the earth, as man tries to bring order by mimicking the objects in the heavens. This is why the Giza Plateau is constructed toward the reflection of the belt-stars of Orion, as has been noticed for some time. As simple, religion also for Trismegistus is producing lasting and great works of art. These are not priorities to the barbarian/atheist. The barbarian/atheist for Trismegistus is a life of instant gratification, predicated upon the desires of the body and not on the ideals as aspirations of the future.
Trismegistus, as in the later Mosaic tradition of Josephus, chastises idolatry of Egyptian Statue worship, incorporating the thesis that paganism was an invented religion and not the true religion of unity of time and space. In Asclepius 22, the author chastises that “[...] humanity has made its gods in the likeness of its own features.” As the dialogue continues, Trismegistus replies to the interlocutor [Asclepius] that “These [ Egyptian] statues are made alive by consciousness, and they are filled with breath. They do mighty deeds. They have knowledge of the future which they predict through oracles, prophets, dreams and in many other ways. They bring illness to men and cure to them. They give sadness and happiness according to merit. Do you not realize, Asclepius, that Egypt is the image of Heaven; or to speak more precisely, all things which are set in motion and regulated in heaven have been transferred, or have descended, into Egypt? More truthfully still, out land is the temple of the whole cosmos.” While Trismegistus chastises futurologistical proclivities, the continuance of Asclepius 24 is where Trismegistus invites the reader to take head of his main prophecy of this book. Trismegistus writes:
“Yet since the wise should know all that is to come, it is right that you should not be ignorant of something else. A time will come when it appears that the Egyptians have worshipped God with a pure mind and sincere devotion in vain [meaning abandoning goodness]. All their holy worship will turn out to be without effect and will bear no fruit. For the gods will withdraw from earth to heaven and Egypt will be deserted. The land which used to be the seat of religion will be abandoned by the gods and become void of their presence. Not only will foreigners, pouring into the region and covering this land [immigration looking for work, money and a better standard of life] , neglect religion [ actually here this translates into not adopting the Egyptian traditions, but securing their own in a foreign land], but what is worse, religion, duties to the gods and the divine worship will prohibited with penalties prescribed by so-called laws. This holy land, this home of sanctuaries and temples, will be filled with sepulchers and the dead [the cult of the dead as not a tradition, but a consequence of inter-traditional-immigration]. O Egypt, Egypt [a lament], only stories of your religion will survive, and these your children will not believe. Only words carved in stone will narrate your pious deeds. Scythians, Indians or other such will inhabit Egypt; it will be people by barbarian neighbours. The gods will return to heaven and abandon men, who will then all die. Thus Egypt, deprived of gods and men, will become a desert.
Now I speak to you, most holy river. I tell of your future. You will be filled with a torrent of blood, right up to your banks, and these you will burst through. Not only will your sacred waters be polluted with blood, but your banks will burst open, and the dead will far outnumber the living. Anyone who survives will be recognized only by his language as Egyptian. From his actions one would take him to be a foreigner.”
Was this a window forecast? In the year 30 B.C.E., Cleopatra, the last of the ruling line of Ptolemys, committed suicide to escape torture and imprisonment by Roman general Octavianus. Egypt ceased to exist as any nominal autonomous state. The Eighteenth Dynasty ( 1550-1292 BCE) could be considered a classical era of the New Kingdom, where women became rules, and monotheism as it related to a single deity form of religion was promulgated by Neferkheperurewaenre (d. 1336, or. 1334). As with western and some eastern Roman civilization scholars, these monotheistic programs doomed Roman society. It actually [mjm—acutely] inflicted ethics, mores, and responsibility, upon a humanimalistic-ruled Roman Empire. After guilt set in, and the foreigners immigrated to find work and a better form of life, they brought their traditions with them – thus the Trismegistian contention. Goodness, the Egyptian tradition, according to Trismegistus, was ended by immigration of other ethnicities who did not adopt their adopted home’s traditions – but promulgated their own through common and judiciary law or the use of force.
Trismegistus provided the Gnostics with translation problems in regards to idiomatic or common expressions – which now are a part of doctrine. Trismegistus predates Christianity, but the terminology-discourses are somehow constant within the teachings’ of Jesus. Gnosticism took on its meaning as post-Christ era; the Christian heresiologists sought to Orthodox Christianity, and conflicted in faith and ideas with the Gnostics, forcing them to move toward the east. Gnosticism, the term is confused with the idea of Gnostic. Therefore, Gnosticism was supposedly believed to be post- Jesus Christ until the publishing of the Nag Hammandi Codices. However, this was never the case if one read Cicero, Ovid or Apuleius. This case may entail that there still is an argument over what really is ‘knowledge.’
Clement Salaman in his introduction to the translation of Asclepius writes, “Christianity in the first and second centuries AD was permeated by the views of the Gnostic sects, for these sects found it easy to convert to Christianity. The Gnostics, like the Hermetic cult, arose in Egypt, although there was a rather different form of Gnosticism which spread from Persia and Syria. There are some striking similarities between Gnostic and Hermetic beliefs.” Salaman defers toward practices, his main emphasis lay in discourses. As practicing and beliefs, he states, “The Gnostics derived their name from their view of knowledge [ mjm—really?]. This was not something that was to be learnt form a book, or heard from another person, but it was received through ‘gnosis’ :
Gnosis, Greek for ‘knowledge,’ has its connotations in the Byzantine and Hellenistic age as attempting to oppose rational and/or teleological thought. It is absolute as opposed to relative (subjective-relativity); it is eternal truth, as opposed to relative truth. It key concepts pertain to understanding the infinite, divine and the uncreated. Its historical concept is cyclical rather than linear – which is rational thought and teleological projection. However, under the connotation, Gnosis is higher a higher form than knowledge. This is because knowledge has its connotation to power, juridical power, and earthly relevance. It can assume an aspect of transcendental – that is to say, transcending knowledge and arriving at understanding – a higher form of thought than knowledge. One aspect of Gnosis is critical thinking and facts. For example, under Postmodernism, facts are limitations to knowledge. This is because that each knowledge will carry a perspective – thereby forming a truism that there are competing narratives – and no-one can hold the supreme or ultimate truth. Gnosis on the other hand seeks to break this paradox. In order to do this, it has to arise above or move beside its competitor, knowledge.
Gnosis can be considered self-knowledge, where its parameters are outside the community, group-think, or institution. Therefore, gnostics find it difficult to express themselves in normative academia. The goal to enlightenment is personal, a personal journey, and cannot be achieved by group-think. Therefore, it is highly liberal in the traditional sense of the word – thus meaning individualistic and freedom to expand the mind and take risks in thinking.
In the Nag Hammandi Collection, there are four scrolls containing Hermes Trismegistus’ Hermetic works: Asclepius 21-29; The Discourse of the Eight and Ninth; [ TWO MORE] This information tells that gnosticism predates Christianity and more specifically the Biblical events of the New Testament. Scholars are still in debate over how to subjectively categorize the use of the discipline of Gnosticism. In modern day parlance, urban language is a coded language used to communicate between the inner city common classes, as a way to communicate between groups who want to disguise their speak from authorities or normative language-traditions. However, I claim, and gnostic understanding helps in this regard, this sub-language is commonplace not to regions on the earth of even time periods. To demonstrate this, I will use Salaman’s insight into gnostic-language correlations to Biblical-language.
Salaman explains, “The word ‘drunkenness’ acquired the non-classical meaning of being so immersed in worldly affairs that the words of Truth cannot be heard. Jesus says in the Gnostic Gospel of Thomas, ‘ I found them all drunk; I found none of them athirst.’ Hermes enquires, ‘Whither are you being carried, O men, drunk as you are, having swallowed neat the word of ignorance?’” “Aion is another word which carried a meaning perculiar to Hermetists and Gnostics alike. In Classical Greek is meant ‘a long time’, ‘everlasting time’, ‘eternity’. In Hermetic and Gnostic writing it also meant ‘absolute’, ‘the supreme diety’. In The Discourse of the Eight and Ninth, explains that gnosis means ‘the second birth.’ “[T]he nature of the Hermetic text is also significant. One of these is the The Discourse of the Eight and Ninth (Spheres) which contains a passage describing gnosis or second birth. This gnosis, as is usual in the Hermetica, is accompanied by a hymn of praise. The discourse is followed by another piece which consists of a hymn of praise probably connected to Discourse. It contains these words. ‘ We rejoice because we were in the body [ the emotions] you made us divine [ both understanding of emotions and thinking] through your knowledge.’” I disagree with Salaman’s interpretation of this passage. He claims, “In other words, these two texts contain the essence of both Gnosticism and Hermeticism: union with the Supreme while still in the body, an event which was characteristically accompanied by praise.” This, a type of transcendental practice, possibly of meditation on difficult concepts and associated to praise in hymn format tells us little of what content was desired or achieved. Still, Salaman understands that Gnostic sects were not uniformly constructed. Each had their own adopted knowledge bases. He says, “ Although the Gnostic sects held wildly different views from each other, there was nevertheless a core of beliefs which was common to most, and much of this core, shorn of its Christian clothing, is found in the Hermetica. The essential gnosis was the oneness of the Supreme.” Surprisingly, Salaman reaches a key development in the break-away sects of higher knowledge. The commonality was an expression against the establishment. It was a sort of a protest, against the normative convictions of academic and institutional norms of those days. Hierarchy, in the form of the Roman Empire, and classism was opposed now by a sect that sought to understand that we are all humans of one class. In order to accomplish this feat, our heritage and tradition needed a single viewpoint – the gift of religion itself. The distribution of resources lay in the idealism of all-for-one. This is rather trans-nationalistic, or universalistic and powerful in influence and promoting a commoner movement.
The Order of the Templers were founded upon a period when Western Europe had dramatically decided to forge its own course and leave the past behind. The ideology of group-think, communal suffering, and listless boredom, devolved into mass starvation and death, they later speculated on their past. After a considerable rough winter, and mass starvation, the Catholic Church took the opportunity to help a king of the Eastern Roman Empire fight- off Turcoman-groups and as well as take an opertunity to rally the peasants and commoners to react to the Islamic trade blockages ( not pilgrim blockages to Jerusalem!) which denied trade, such as from Aleppo and North Africa, to south western Europe – that had been in place to keep the westerners from becoming powerful as with the period of Rome. Communicated that the Turcoman-groups about 100 years earlier had destroyed the Christian Temple built on the orders of the wife of Constantine (who funded it) decided to retake Jerusalem. The first crusade, the most successful of the ten (or twelve?) attempts, exhibited the commoners rise to wealth and power – usually associated to berth-right (nobility or clergy). The group later known as the Templers brought back science of stone-cutting, mining, and transport, from Moslem and natives on their journeys from the Middle East. The nobility had a need to build great works by using this new technology of stone. They built Gothic cathedrals, more elaborate and sturdy castles, and most importantly war fortifications. This job-market made some commoners very rich – which placed ideas of self agency at their most desired sentiments. In order to achieve a rise to power, the individual had to be formulized and promulgated as an ideology – against the communal-group think. In effect, by destroying the Templers, the Catholic Church destroyed what it had created in the first place. However, as memory turns out to be a double edged sword, the Order(s) continued to be refashioned in many ways and in many different lands. Yet, the theme remained the same – the commoner against the Aristocracy. They understood that good looks, pedigree, pageantry and the promulgation of stupid, promoted the Elite to rise above the stratus-classes of the commoner and rule. The class warfare found an avenue of strength in esoteric ideas, founded upon models such as Prometheus’ who took fire [esoteric (inter disciplinary) knowledge] from the gods and gave it to man.
R. Swinburne Clymer, M.D., condensed history of the Fraternitas Rosæ Crucis, or Rosy Cross, in the work, “The Book of Rosicrciæ” (1947), demonstrates that secret orders, certainly of the 20th century in this case, relied more on searching for individuals of history that attained the mysteries of an “Arcane” science than the actual implementing of the scientific data fields needed to achieve the power desired. The critique of the Fraternitas Rosæ Crucis underscored the need to reemploy in academia the field of interdisciplinary studies – a type of reordering of the cosmos – based upon super intellectuals regarded as occultists or mystics of the past. In this reordering, each sub- group of human beings had ‘actions’ to be communicated as their ‘missions.’ The subplots were how to integrate Judeo-Christian mysticism and a Hermetic discipline into a unifying field of discourse – able to act as a guideline to reorder society. This attempt proved a highly independent world view of liberty of the human being as contrasted against a fatalistic communal view of group think.
( such as Stanislas De Guaita (b. 1861, arrived in Paris at the end of the year of 1882), who studied with Grand Master Livy. Livy’s interpretation on his views of the Hermetic teachings but decided that an esoteric discipline did not reach the results desired quickly enough. He “associated himself with Papus, i.e., Dr. Gerard Encausse, who was at that time under the Neophyteship of Peter Davidson, one of the greatest of modern Initiates,” Clymer intends.
, where as group think provided the foundation for destruction of that order, they argued, which masters over the centuries of reincarnation tried to protect that order.
Rose Criox ( Door) (p. 65)
Saint Yves D’Alveydre (d. Versailles, February, 1909; More of a Christian Mystic than an Hermetic Initiate (p. 79) , turned down London’s offer to head up the Order of the Rose, or to be a member of one of the branches of L’Ordre du lis and is known through his published works. “His Mission of the Jews (1884) has an object the reconciliation of Science with every form of Religion [ a gnostic branch of thought ]. The author causes to enter again into the framework of the Judeo-Christian Tradition, the principle acquisition of modern science, illustrating science’s insufficiency and lack of balance by its distain of Esotericism.” In his work, The Mission of the Workers (1887), [ a reaction to a communist movement of continual class-warfare], he again, like Andrea and Lippard, gave careful consideration to the enlightenment of the people through a system of instructions, open to all, and upon a basis of exact equality to all, UPON THE RESPONSIBILITY of ALL, and wholly opposed to sectarianism. He was an idealist in that he forsaw a period when those selected to represent the people would be agents of a National Consceince based in a Universal [Free to all] Religion.” The The Nazarene of Lippard in America and Christianopolis of Andrea of Germany were attempts at “social reorganization based upon the trinity: Man, Nature, God; man co-operating with Divinity of the Cosmic Father in the perfection of the Cosmos to the benefit of all creatures in the Universal Life.” Both envisioned a well-ordered and established-State which had three functions: (a) The instructive and guiding principle powers established in the State which should be in the nature of Free Will in acceptance of Science and Religion; (b) the Legislative power and Judicial enforcement thereof and (c) the Economic control by assuring fair dealings between men. Except in the military, the State should be no more nor less than the executive force of the Will of the Nation or its people.” These ideals were certainly the perceptual conceptions of the founding ideas of the esoteric founders of the United States of America. The federal government’s only role was to assess foreign threats. However, after states began to bicker over financial costs of river management, the Federal State stepped in to socialize central to perimeter funding and legal measures. Creating the rationalization that rather than freedom, the parent (Capital government) rules over the child (states). Noting an impurity of communal restriction against liberty ( e.g. an emancipation from any controlling entity), in August of 1884, in an Order’s headquarters W. P. Phelon formed an exoteric [ as opposed to esoteric] organization and was known as The Hermetic Brotherhood of Atlantis, Luxor and Elphantæ. Clymer continues with discussing their core beliefs.
“In its Preamble it establishes these tenants: Whereas it is a matter of knowledge that the real is invisible to our personal sense, but can be reached by our spirit forces and senses, and is out birthright to seek and possess, in fulfillment of the promise that man should govern his environments, slave to none.” [n.b. the opening Chapters of Genesis, where God tells man to take domain over the earth and all that is in it!]. The contentious italics form a single cohesive affirmation. In briefness, Man must be totally free from human- constructed restriction. This preamble suggests that naturalists, and environmentalists, had already been on the public and social scenes. Most of the left-wing movements had considered nature something more enduring and cherished than human beings. Slavery, in this case, was seen as bondage in an interdisciplinary understanding. Government control over ones life is to the Initiate or Brother a bondage perspective. Clymer continues revealing the preamble: Whereas Unity of thought [ group think, or robot] and harmony [ conflict produces growth!] of action annihilates time, bringing most speedy results, in the affairs of life begotten of thought.” [ mjm analyze this graph]
“Resolved that we, uniting ourselves with the Brethren of Wisdom, seek assistance of individualization existence on all and every plane, seen and unseen, past, present and future, in order to attain that point where spiritual power my be made available for our help, strength and comfort, while undergoing the troubles of the incarnated [soul] and the woes of pervious Karma. [mjm here eastern philosophy or mysticism is adopted in interdisciplinary formations].
“Resolved that we will search for the powers of the ancient Initiates by every means within our reach, leading toward the light [ thinking, spiritualism, non-materialism ] and away from the darkness [ bodies desire, materialism [mjm—not that materialism creates sin which creates Karma as opposed to Dharma]] of the shadow. For this end we assent to the organic Law transcribed from the tablets in the Great Temple of Luxor given as direction and for the guidance of all true seekers of Light.”
Albert Faucheux, born at Paris, 12 October 1838, “who later assumed the name of F. Ch. Barlet, had come into contact with Davidson and enrolled as a Neophyte.”
Much of the initial ideas for founding the fraternity ( or order) came at a vengeance against the Catholic Church for murdering Supreme Grand Master deMolay and his associates for things,” Clymer intends,” of which none of the Initiates were guilty.” The “Initiates,” as they called themselves, as ‘sons of the Templers” produced thirty-seven justifications as a Confession of their order. The Brethren or Initiates trace their links to America to “General Hitchcock,” who allegedly turned down an offer to run Grand Dome of the Fraternitas; Fraternity, Brotherhood, Order and Temple of the Rosy Cross.
The idea and scope is to understand the beginning and ending of states, of nations, and of movements of human beings. In a sense, to try to mimic the great scientists’ ideas (i.e the mystics such as Jesus, etc...) laid down in texts which were largely not read by academia – because of their vagueness and lack of inductive data.
In a community, everyone is supposed to endorse the same world view. Communism promulgated practices the same principles.
Social engineering: rage, fighting back, protests, outrage, feelings over thinking, all form a social morphology predicated upon class-warfare perceived different spectrums of ideas.
Some people are coddled by their parents, who are little dictators, and as these children grow up some are quite bright and efficient. But when they get to U.C. Berkeley, they become lost as the philosophy is to allow the child to be no more – they child is not told what to do from moment to moment. They are given free reign and at the same time asked to complete tasks of a grown up. This is daunting, in that they loose the mother and father dictator and must fend for themselves. Students that appear self disciplined arrive at better odds of success that a child told over and over they are the best, brightest, and coddled and loved by the family/community they had once came. Democracy always implies self-discipline. But children from coddled families are not self disciplined but slaves to their dictatorial parents in which they love because their families reassure them of their love –despite the self-imposed discipline by the family hierarchy. The child who lived in the feelings of re assurance are then thrust into a pool or sea of others, and must find a way to swim or they will sink. They do not have mommy or daddy, grandpa or grandma telling them moment to moment to study or go to school. Therefore, the undisciplined make up excuses and blame others for their lack of self-control. They lack foresight for they had no need for this because the family had always looked out for them; they lack time-management, and lack respect for others who already have this discipline. Therefore cheating, skirting, and blaming others becomes that so familiar easy way to rationalize their failures – projected at them by societies champions. They turn to hate and rage.
For example, Buddhist practice that a mind (thinking) over any desires of the body will be the ultimate (and ethical) experience and that an universal love solves the worlds’ suffering. The Serial sex killer prefers the body’s desires as the ultimate experience – despite the feelings of his or hers victims’. The Serial sex killer finds that their individualistic need must be met before they accept or continue to reject universal love. They blame society, or even themselves, claiming they cannot control their urges. The perceive victimization. These people have no responsibility, do not prefer it, and cannot live within it.
They vote and need communism, or a nanny-state to tell them how to think and feel. It is too difficult for them to think or practice universal love.
Marsilio Ficino’s personal work, Books On Life (1 August 1489, jul.) ( later renamed to Three Books on Life by others after Ficino combined the three works), were preliminarily titled by him individually as “On a Healthy Life,” “On a Long Life,” and “On life from the Heavens.” He later combines each of these works into one edition and fears a reprisal but expresses a need for transference – a word he makes up and is in a dispute between scholars to what it implies. Carol V. Kaske and John R. Clark, who follow in the literary appraisal of this work by scholars Klibansky, Panofsky, and Saxl; D.C. Allen, Chastel, Garin, Kristeller, Marcel, Plessner, Shumaker, Walker, Yates, and Zanier and called it “a strange work” as well as others.” Eugenio Garin, in his work Medioevo e Rinascimento (Bari, 1945), states this work as “strange and most complex.”
According to Martin Plessner, “both in simple numbers of editions (nearly thirty) and in the length of time over which these editions kept appearing (last ed. 1647) [.] [T]his pair of works earned Ficino his place in Sarton’s list of seventy-seven best-selling authors of scientific incunabula.”
As with Nostredame editions, forged dates also were found in the earliest editions of De vita. “The editio princeps (Florence 1489)” were followed by multiple publishings at Bologna (1490, 1501), Venice (1498), and an undated edition by “Georg Wolff and Johann Pilippi, Paris c. 1494, [and] may have been the second printing of De vita, but is heavily dependant upon comparing the editio princeps, in which this work described here relies on, and was transcribed, translated, and commented upon by Carol V. Kaske and John R. Clark; a work begun in 1972 as “a group project for a seminar in Renaissance Latin given by the late James Hutton of Cornell University.” “Johann Amerbach seems to have been responsible for two editions of De vita at Basel, c. 1489-1495 and c. 1497.” In 1529 at Basel, a man named Andreas Leenius prepared a new edition of De vita, combining it for the first time with Ficino’s Epidemiarum antidotus.” Leenius admits to correcting the text, but some had accused him of corrupting the text.
In the letter That Freedom from Care and Tranquility of Mind Are Necessary for Life,” a distraction or purposeful seeding of confusion to trick his critiques [detractors] , he equates philosophy to two types of dogs, while affirming Socrates’s views on what is a philosopher’s characteristics – as Socrates who had said in the Republic, “Most aptly,” in response to an enquiry of the general role of what is a philosopher. Dogs are “hunters,” Ficino states, because like dogs, they always labor, they hunt and as Ficino puts it, “panting to encircle the truth.” He differentiates the two forms of dogs, however. He states, “For people who philosophize are either legitimate or illegitimate, and both are dogs. Curiously, Plato made no distinction. The former, indeed, keenly track out the truth and, when found, hold onto it with their teeth [meaning treasuring it, not sharing it if they do not want too!]. But the later bark, bite, and mangle in defense of opinion [e.g. under pressure from a community to accept the majority opinion]. Among philosophers the dogs claim so much for themselves that not only have the infiltrated into any sect, but they have at some point made a sect of their own with their very name –“Cynic” [pun on Greek word for dog].” He then accuses the Florentine Academy of having “its dogs.” It is well to note, that “Plato does not distinguish the legitimate from the illegitimate dogs.” This is in part that Plato had to conform and live his life, whereas Socrates left life with his guns blazing, so-to-speak of a common cowboy expression.
After this statement, he implores that his work in these three books might be saved against the suppressors and detractors, without using these words, and then changes a stance by intending that he believes nothing of the sort of what is contained in them – while praising some normative Catholic conscripts. The most notable detraction is the methodology, as Nostredame would accept. Here, in this letter to the public, he condemns this practice; I will allude too it, but for the ‘transferee,’ this is the sentence to look out for and is quite meaningful. “Anxious inquiry about the future quickly transfers you yourself into the past.” The French Janus, as Chavigny titled his work to explain Nostre Dame’s role as scientist, explicates the normative cyclical expressions into which the esoteria, or in this case, the philosophizing takes place. While Florence Academy remained indentured to opinion and group-think, the individual here seeks to encounter a more pure expression of understanding life. In some ways the philosopher was more liberated, liberal and free than his counterparts the stoics, or professors of Athens. All topics and methods are not suppressed by group decision-making, nor are they treated too openly. The question remains here, as to whom is this work prescribed? Admittedly to the public, by consumption, but also as a vehicle to ‘transfer’ an official forbidden discourse by the elite to a common receptor (an individual(s) who can understand it!).
Ficino (b. 19 October 1433, Jul. Monday, d. at Careggi, 1 October 1499 jul.) was born at Figline Valdarno (43n37, 11e28, elevation 413 f), today a comune (municipality) in the Provence of Florence, in the Italian region of Tuscany. It is located 25 km southeast of Florence. At Figline Valdarno on the 19th of October of the year of 1433, the Sun rose at 6:39 am (LMT) and set at 5:05 pm (LMT). The duration of sun-light was 10 hours and 27 minuets and the phase of the Moon was a waxing crescent moon. On this day, Regulus rose at Figline Valdarno around 1:03 am (LMT) and set about 2:40 pm (LMT). Regulus’ PED was almost 22 degrees of Leo while Ficino’s Jupiter was about 18LEO35 ( actually his Jupiter was closer to Alfard’s PED, which indicated with Jupiter in its natal positon had led to legal trouble and a possible judicial sentence. However, this aspectum portends too some favorable gain and strong passions ) and in opposition to Saturn of 12AQU02, if we use 1:00 pm of Local Mean Time (Universal Time 12:14:08; Sidereal Time 15:25:59). Neptune, in which Ficino did not know of the planets and we use it for his horoscope, at his death date, was in aspect within a one degree of a conjunction to the PED of the star Regulus. Jupiter, here, while at 20LEO during the release of Libri de vita (1489) had moved retrograde to 19LEO54 on the 1st of October of 1499, still using his birth town. With Jupiter with Regulus, Robson states “success in the Church,” and general “high preferment” and “fame.” Chiron’ s natal position of 20PIS35 was opposed to Venus’ natal position at 20VIR06, in which Ficino had not known. As well, Algol’s ~ 18 TAU, PED, in the horoscope was squared to Ficino’s Jupiter at 18Leo35.
Ficino’s own belief of his negative horoscope pertain to the Jupiter and the Saturn opposition, the position of Mars at 29CAP46 in a square to the 04SCO52 Sun, as well as 12AQU02 Saturn to the Sun’s natal position. The Mercury position of 28SCO05, and in the tenth house, and possible natal conjunction to the MC, is powerfully sextiled to Mars in rising – and still underneath the horizon -- and, if using the Placidus system, Equal House system, and or the Regiomontanus house system.
Mercury’s nearly ten-degree and wide- square from a Jupiter position probably was never interpreted correctly by Ficino. While this square traditionally indicates persons not entirely honest, it rather can be reinterpreted as other being not entirely honest to the owner of the nativity. It could also indicate navigating through a myriad of illusions, lies, and misconceptions. Yet, a more mature reading is one that grapples with powerful judicial knowledge. The square tends to fetter out the mysteries of the illusionary trine. This is why power/knowledge is aptly linked to the Mercury square Pluto aspetum.
Uranus at 05TAU18r, not known to Ficino, but still in two T-square aspectums to the Sun’s double squares to Mars and Saturn indicate extremely hard and vigilant effort at one’s career and life’s pursuits. It is a positive symbol, non-the-less, when we look to the future of our production and our effort. However, at the time of living through these double squares of malefics to the Sun, in some traditional conceptions, the melancholy described by Finico is rather explained.
Ficino’s natal Sun’s PED star was Izar, that is to say Epsilon (ε) Bootes, a binary star, 3 and 6, pale orange and bluish green, lying of the lions of the Ploughman (Bootes). Ficino believed he was born under a Saturnine horoscope, and directly linked it to the symbolism of the Moon, Mars and Saturn’s relationship with the zodiac sign of Capricorn. However, “[A]ccording to Ptolemy, the influence of the constellation is like that of Mercury and Saturn, though the star Arcturus is like Mars and Jupiter. It is said to bring prosperity from work, strong desires, a tendency to excess, a fondness for rural pursuits, together with some liking for occultism. The Kabalists associate it with the Hebrew letter Teth and the 9th Tarot Trump, “The Hermit.”” When a person deals with the esoteric subject matter, then engage in inter disciplinary productions. These productions involve intense critical thinking. Thereby, the solution to melancholy derives from the pursuit of critical analysis which describes the melancholy exhibited in the observations of Ficino’s moods.
However, looking toward house placements, Ficino tells us his parents did not record his birth-data upon his arrival but related to him decades later in memory. He was never sure of the exact time or sure that his parents remembered the exact time he was born. In a letter to Preninger to answer an enquiry on De vita, Ficino remarks that his father, although a doctor, did not record his birth, and he had to rely on reminiscing later in life to guess – telling him he was born twenty-one hours after sunset or twenty-one hours of the 19th of October – two different dates altogether.
Carol V. Kaske and John R. Clark note in Contra Marcel, p. 125. that “Prof. David Pingree has kindly plotted for me the precise hour of Ficino’s birth and the exact positions then occupied by all the planets. Most interesting for our purposes, Saturn was in the twelfth degree of Aquarius, Mars in its zero degree [ actually it was at 29CAP46 ( data above)], Jupiter in the nineteenth of Leo [actually at 18LEO35], and Venus in the twenty-first degree of Virgo [actually at 20VIR06].” In fairness, the astrological programs before Astrodiesnt were inferior to the new NASA ephemerides used in creating the database I use here. However, still, during Ficino’s period, the ephemerides had incorrect data on the inner planets, such as Mercury and Venus, as well as the Climata, which predated longitude. Yet, the outer planets and the luminaries were quite accurate. Stars held about one degree to minuets in exactitude during the later fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. In addition, Calculus was not invented to correct the cusps of the houses correctly. There had been too many obstacles for Ficino to have known his true horoscope.
For example, Oronce Finé (b. 20 December 1494, Briançon, d. 8 August 1555, Paris), Latin: Orontius Finnaeus (or Finaeus), Italian: Oronzio Fineo, a French Mathematician and cartographer. Education: Paris, College of Navarre) in his Climata book gave the coordinates of Bologna as 45 degrees of parallel. The actual latitude is 44n29. He gave the city of Venice a climata of 45 degrees as well, when the actual latitude is at 45n27. Sicili, Italy, Finé gave the climata at 37 degrees of north whereas the actual latitude is at 36n47. So according to Ficino’s admission to Preninger because Preninger enquired that Book II of De Vita was solely about Ficino’s horoscope and his sentiments toward a Saturnine character, the actual birth-chart would equate to 2:05 pm on the 19th of October of 1433, using the Julian calendar, because he was born during its use (thus correlating to the 28th of October of the year of 1433, under the Gregorian calendar in today’s useage; Figline Valdarno, Italy, Monday, 19 October 1433, Julian Calendar; 2:05 LMT; Universal Time 13:19:08; Sidereal Time 16:31:10).
In this horoscope, Regulus’ PED is within about one degree on the descendant (Placidus, Regiomontanus, Equal house, and Porphyry ) making it quite powerful indeed. Ironically, Ficino places little emphasis on the position of stars in a horoscope. Yet, Ficino tells us his Scorpion Sun lay in the “ninth position,” in which we take that to be of the ninth-house. In Regiomontanus or Equal house systems, the Sun’s placement falls into the eighth-house. Yet, Porphyry’s system places the Sun within the ninth-house. What this entails is that house-systems mean little at all here. However, it was important to Ficino’s belief in his own melancholy. The Ascendant is at 21AQU07 and Ficino recognizes that Aquarius is in its mid-section of his ascendant. However, what is more important here, is that Ficino places more emphasis on the meaning of the ascendant than his scorpion Sun. Ptolemy specifically stated to use the Sun as any other point as a planet would have signified. Mars and Saturn, on the other hand, is what Ficino focuses upon too in relation to the ascendant’s position to these planets that had already risen. Both are in the twelfth house. From this perspective, we understand why he sought to focuses upon the ascendants and its corresponding adjunct houses. Ficino’s moon has no hard aspects, and is debilitated in the eleventh house – in which Ficino recognized. However, sense the house systems are less important, according to me; Ficino’s life was not all that cumbersome. In fact, on occasion and citing his melancholy, Ficino did resume a positive outlook on his horoscope. It was only after the papal commission and investigation and trial did Ficino actually made complaints about his astrology chart.
Ficino claims his father was a celebrated physician to Cosimo de’ Medici, who took him into his household and became a life-long patron. Ficino was made the tutor of Cosimo’s grandson Lorenzo de’ Medici. He also became a tutor of Giovanni Pico della Mirandola, another Italian humanist philosopher and scholar. Ficino grew up and lived around extreme wealth, and could only appreciate the freedoms and lustfulness and debauchery, associated to the commoner life or the middle classes, while he became a priest and was dedicated to the art of literacy and languages.
Ficino’s Moon was connected to the PED of Beta (β ) Lyra, or the more common Arabian star name Sheliak, Shelyak, or Shiliak (Al Shiyāk, translated as ‘tortoise,’ referring to the legendary origin of the instrument with Lyra [...], originally from Greek Sambyke, ‘a kind of harp,’ Steve Gibson, Starnames, in Anne Wright’s Fixed States in Longitude Order). This star, according to “Ptolemy, is like Venus and Mercury. It is said to give an harmonious, poetical and developed nature, fond of music and apt in science and art, but inclined to theft.” Ficino wrote in a letter dated the 7th of November of the year of 1492, to Filippo Valori that he was born under Saturn, and therefore the planet was his “significator.” Since Saturn is in the twelfth house, and therefore visible in regards to the position on the horizon, and its co-ruler ship to Aquarius (at that time!), he places its significance as an overwhelming attribute of his body and soul. In a letter to Pico (Op., p. 888) further assumes that because Saturn is in Aquarius “ the lord of the figure” – that is, the most dignified planet in the sky at the moment” he will eventually write to Giovanni Cavalcanti and claim “Saturn seems to have impressed the seal of melancholy on me from the beginning, as he is, almost in the midst of my ascendant Aquarius, he is influenced by Mars, also in Aquarius [ actually it is on the cusp, but in the end of Capricorn to be precise], and the Moon in Capricorn. He [ Saturn that is] is in square aspect to the Sun and Mercury in Scorpio, which occupies the ninth house [of Jupiter and Chiron]. But Venus in Libra and Jupiter in Cancer have, perhaps, offered some resistance to this melancholy nature.” Today, Saturn is regulated to the tenth house only, and Uranus has taken up its former position as ruler of the sign of Aquarius. Yet, Pisces is the ruler of the twelfth house, and Ficino makes no retribution to combining a more multi-interpretational or complex horoscopic narrative. Ficino represented someone steep into believing the traditional norms of Ptolemaic astrology. Venus and Jupiter as soley good, and Mars and Saturn as solely malefic – and only by investigation the esoteria, at time Ficino recognized that Saturn ruled science, and therefore was not wholly malefic, and Jupiter ruled social government, which while he was alive was in the midst of total chaos across Europe. Empirically, Ficino fought against the deep critical thinking paradoxes and after his trial chose to allow himself to relive the community of the norm and accept Jupiter and Venus as the sole benefices of any horoscope.
Ficino’s reflections of his horoscope by sending letters to his associates, increased after he is brought up on charges by the papal commission. Also in the letter to Preninger he claims that “Martem in eodem [scilicet Aquario] carcerem duodecima tenuisse” is an elliptical way of saying that Mars was in the twelfth place [twelfth house] or mundane house which signified prisons according to Ficino’s authorities.” Ficino was acquitted, but never wrote again on medicine. Since Ptolemy associates a quartile as discordant, and the Mercury and Saturn have such an aspect as Ficino explains, he places more emphasis on his melancholy demeanor.
The Moon in opposition to Pluto attends to passionate increases of emotions into his personal life. Ficino only could rely on the progression of astrological study from his peering into Tetribiblios and common traditions. In stead of questioning Ptolemy’s findings, he whole heartedly indoctrinates himself to associate the planet’s house signs and zodiac signs to his personal life’s outlook. However, he was never sure where he was born in the first place. In a letter to John of Hungary, Ficino changes stance on his Saturnine – natal horoscope sentiments offering an opposite view that Saturn is quite beneficial to him. First, it aloud him to reintroduce the classics back into western civilization, and second, it directly linked him to the Golden Age, which was discoursed at that time in western Europe.
It is quite possible Ficino had the star Anteres close to his Midheaven. And as well, Ficino never makes the connection to Saturn and to Mars in the twelfth house in connection to hidden things in which action, his Mars, and organization and mastery, his Saturn, would intend as these attributes to these Saturnine qualities of science. If we use the perceived time, as Ficino had understood it from a reminiscence from his parents, than Jupiter and Neptune’s ( he had no knowledge of Neptune) mid-point with a close relationship with the setting star of that day, Regulus, would be conjunct the descendant and describe the overwhelming success of uncovering what Saturn’s chronological and organization skill of the hidden things, and Mars’ actionary passion, revealed the mastery into which the Neo-Platonism, and philosophy Ficino excelled at and left the world his contributions finalized. Ficino would not have known about Neptune, but certainly would have known the star Regulus and Jupiter’s prime position on the angles. Finally, the Dog star Sirius, makes a nominally and approximate one-hundred and twenty degree harmonious aspect to the star Izar and his natal Sun in the zodiac sign of Scorpio, also associated to secrets, the past, and resurrection – e.g., what Ficino is most acclaimed for by resurrecting Hermes T., and the Platonic corpus. There is no doubt that Ficino understood some of these aspects, yet allowing others to know what he had done remained a contentious revelation to the Church’s overwhelming doctrine of free-will and its marriage to Aquinas’ group-think ideology. By the time Ficino finished composing all three sections of De vita, the Florence Academy had been formulating rigidity and rejecting Plato in favor of the dominant Aristotle. Ficino’s work most certainly inflicted Nostre Dame. However, we can only guess at the made-up word Ficino uses, that is to say, ‘transference.’
Not syncretism, because the commonality is stressed, not the typology ( or seemingly opposed ideologies) – yet these are a vague points and must be re-addressed. Synchronism in this case is the relationship of common events. This was purely a Gnostic proclivity. We may think of it as interdisciplinary, were many different things are contemplated to be linked in commonality rather than their uncommonality.
Asclepius, ‘The Perfect Discourse of Hermes Trismegitus,’ ed., & trans., Clement Salaman (London: Gerald Duckworth & Co. Ltd., 2007), p. 25., Introduction by Salaman, & note 28, p. 49, Brian P. Coenhaver, Hermetica, pp. xiv-xv.
Marsilio Ficino, Latin Translations went through eight incunable editions before the year of 1500, and a further twenty-two by 1641., see George Sarton, “The History of Science,” in reviewing Walter Scott, “Hermetica,” in Isis, 8.2. (May 1926:343-346), p. 345. note: French, incunable (plural incunables; Latin from incunabula ‘swaddling-clothes, cradle’ (connotations mean early) are applied to books published before 1501 in Europe. These would have been coming off the early printing –presses. see Nerciat rubbed shoulders with D. H. Lawrence, the Large Paper set of de Sade (illustrated by Austin Osman Spare) jolsted an incunable Hermes Trismegistus, and ten different editions of L’Historie d’Or [The Golden (age of ) History] were piquant bedfellows to De la Bodin’s Démonomanie des Sorciers –Kyril Bonfiglioli, something Nasty in the Woodshed (Penguin Books, 2001, p. 435).
Classical scholar Issac Casaubon (b. 18 February 1559 [greg.?], d. 1 July 1614 [Jul.?] in De rebus sacris et ecclesiastics exercitationes XVI (1614), that these texts which were believed to be written around 2,000 BCE, were in fact most possibly composed in 300 BCE. This was reflected in the dialogue formats and neo-platonic phrasing. Casaubon’s thesis is monotheism, and Moses’ laws.
Ibid., Asclepius, p. 78. c.f. Marsilio Ficino, Three Books on Life, vol. II, eds. trans., Carol V. Kaske and John R. Clark ( New York: The Renaissance Society of America, 1989), Book III, Chap., XXVI, p. 389, ref. Asclepius, 24a and 37-38 and sldo cited in Enneads. 4.3.11. “These are gid-making, or better, statue animating, passages...,” n. 8, p. 457. This particular book is volume 57 of the Medieval & Renaissance Texts and Studies, partly “funded by grants from “Pegasus Limited for the Advancement of Neo-Latin Studies and from the Hull Fund of Cornell Universit” – “have helped defray costs of publicaiton,” p. VI. This book has the Medieval Latin on the left and the English translation on the right sides of thse pages.
Max Müller, in his criticism of western religion, in his work, Lectures on the Origins of Growth of Religion: As illustrated by the Religions of India (London: Longmans, Green and CO., 1878), coined a term called Henotheism, where a single deity is worshipped, but the acceptance of other possible existence of other deities are plausible. However, Catholicism and other denominations of Christanity have similar viewpoints. Saints for example, in the Catholic tradition, all have different qualities an individual can call upon, thus making India not unique, nor Catholicism. Thus I use monotheism as the term here, which is more accurate. Akhenaten was forced to contend with tradition, whereas his force of separation was his single deity that answered to non-other deity. Müller simply confuses the point of otherworldly intervention, which is a big part of the Christian – Catholic tradition. Protestantism, greatly clouded philologists’ and Orientalists’ true understanding of Christianity’s past during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.
Ibid., Clymer, The Book of Rosicrciæ, p. 84. Gerard Encausse, later became known as Papus, from The Nuctameron of Apollonius of Tyana, was born at La Corogne, Spain, 13 July 1865, or a French father, and a mother of Valladolid Spain. His parents moved to Pairs in 1868, p. 84.
Ibid., Ficino, De vita, eds., trans., Carol V. Kaske and John R. Clark, Editorial introduction, n. 9, p. 7. “The Plotinus manuscript (P), although dated 12 November 1490, seems to contain an unrevised text of the first six chapters of De vita 3.” N. 1,p.72, “The title De triplici vita first appears in the verses of Amerigo Corsini appended to the end of De vita in the Florence 1489 editio princeps and subsequently in Laurenziana MS 73, 39, fol. 174v, and in many later editions of the work. Although De triplici vita has often been cited as the title, Ficino himself simply refers to his work as Liber or Libri de vita (Op., pp. 841,1; 904-10 passim; 929, 4; 935, 4; 995, 3; 958, 1). See Paul Oskar Kristeller, ed., Supplementum Ficinianum, 2, vols. (1937; reprinted Florence, 1973....”
Marsilio Ficino, An Apologia Dealing with Medicine, Astrology, the Life of the World, and the Maji Who Greeted the Christ Child at His Birth, 15 September 1489, at Caregii, Italy, personal letter to Piero del Nero (d. 1512), Piero Guiciardini and Piero Solderini, (play on the word Peter linked to ‘rock’ in Matt. 16:18 [ foundation of Roman Catholicism tradition] in Marsilio Ficino, Three Books on Life, vol. II, eds. trans., Carol V. Kaske and John R. Clark ( New York: The Renaissance Society of America, 1989), p. 459.
Ibid., Ficino, That Freedom from Care and Tranquility of Mind Are Necessary for Life,” personal letter for publishing, 16 September 1489 [ jul.] at Careggi, with transcription of MS commentary by Amerigo Corsini, calling the work “ a book on the triple life,” pp. 403, 405.
This date calculated to the Julian Calendar, corresponds to the 28th of October of the year 1433. The Julian day number is 2244762, 14 Chesvan, 5194, the Jewish Calendar and 13 Rabia, I, 837 of the Islamic calendar.
Robson, p. 32, in “The Fixt Stats in Longitude Order” (Constellation of Words: Anne Wright, 2008 , accessed online, 2 August 2009), available from http://www.constellationofwords.com/stars/Stars_in_longitude_order.html :Internet.
ref. Orance Finé, Science et estrologie au XVI siecle, et son horloge planetarie 2v. :ill; 23 cm. (Paris: bibliothèque de Sainte-Geneviève, 1544 (?)), reprinted ( in full?) in 1971 by Denise Hillard and Emmanuel Poulle.
Ibid., Ficino, Three Books on Life, Introduction, Ficino’s ominous horoscope, p. 20. Note 10, Letter to Cavalcanti, Op., p. 773. “I have adapted my trans. from the trans. of the London School of Economic Science, Letters, 2:33-34.”
Ibid., Ficino, Three Books on Life, Introduction, Ficino’s ominous horoscope, p. 20. Letter to Preninger, Op., p. 901, 2; see 1.7.45, Op, p. 499 and n. 5, see Kristeller, “Il Ficino studente a Balogna,” pp. 195-96, in “Per la biografia di Marsilio Ficino, “ in Studies in Renaissance Thought and Letters, correcting the tradiion repeasted even by Garin, Prosatori latini, p. 929. As to his practive, he is listed amoung the doctors of Florence in a chronicle entry of 1479, Della Torre, p. 177.
Like Nostredamus’ social ascendancy, Henricus Cornelius Agrippa ab Nettesheym forged his career upon reputation rather than the Church, Medicine, arts or academia. Possibly born 14 September 1486 [ Julian Cal.], Agrippa’s father’s name appears on the matriculation documents to the University of Cologne as “ Henricus de Nettesheym, citizen of Colongne.” His undergraduate years were from 1491 (14 July, Julian, Enters the University of Cologne) and latter undergraduate years 1499 to 1502 and was still living at Cologne in 1502. By 1533 and the publishing of De occulta philosphia, he directed vitriol toward the Aristotle and Averroes pagan philosophers methods used by the Doctors, which then attacked the normative academic climate. Trying out the University of Paris, possibly before 28 March 1507 [ Jul.] he either left for inability to gain a welathy patron or he has contentions with Occamite nominalism and the teaching methods of Duns Scotus. Returning to Cologne, like so many others, including Nostredame, Agrippa set off to search for his career, going off to Spanish territories, making stops at Avignon between April and December 20, of the year of 1508. He set out searching for ancient sources of wisdom, which is why he is regarded as a founder of secret confraternities – claims by historians and biographers from his early correspondences. “Agrippa and his young associates in France and later in Italy, if not quite a Hermetic religious sect, did form a fairly well defined secret group of investigators of an ancient wisdom thought to be concealed in such texts as the Hermetic literature, the Cabala, and Orphic hymns, and Neoplatonic philosophy. [ do note] This connects Ficino who ‘transference,’ which connects to Nostredame’s. Neoplatonic philosophy intended the eternity of the soul as did the normative writings of Plato on Socrates’ belief in reincarnation. When the Agrippa group moved to Avignon in late 1508, the papal focus now on the Roman Renaissance, esoteric studies were more permissible now in Southern France. One of Agrippa’s French friends was a French humanist enthusiast Symphorien Champier, who published texts of Hermes Trismegistus, Ludovico Lazzarelli, and Jacques Lefèvre d’Étaples. Lefèvre who led the French occultist movement at Avignon included Champier, Bouelles, Brie, and Ganay – all who “shared the occultist enthusiasms of late fifteenth century Italian humanism, though with far greater reservations than the Italians showed.” In applied science, Agrippa argued that the intellect cannot get to the truth or God, that rational thought never can attain power of the divine, but intends the mind can attain “worldly things.” However, by 1509 Agrippa was doubting natural science in its relation to astrology, which was being heavily attacked at this time, and a precursor to doomsayers of intending major conjunctions ( such as the near future 1524 Pisces stellium). Still this made his occult system, according to Charles G Nauert, Jr. a “weak link in his whole occult system.” This is because “[H]is thoughts since at least 1516 had assumed an increasing tendency to stress simple, Biblical Religion; and religious coloration of his thought was working to the detriment of human reason and of at least some of the occult sciences” [ that implied application rather than theory]. After reading Erasmus, Luther and Lefèvre d’Étaples, by 1526 Agrippa changed toward simplistic rationalism, and further away from the higher levels of knowledges of the occult. Yet, it was “[A]rchetype God” [ in this sense, archetypes of hierarchy] in which the ancient was linked to the present in the world view in De occulta philosophia. In fact, magic, the conscript for all esoteric disciplines as Agrippa defined the word [ including astrology and alchemy] merely pertains to a methodology, sometimes of a “tripartite nature of magic and its correspondent to three divisions of philosophy, terrestrial, celestial and ceremonial, and sometimes of a two-fold division natural magic and ceremonial magic. Like Leonardo Da Vince, the world was a living organ and all of the universe was connected, closely, “for the superior rules its immediate inferior and is ruled by its own superior; and at the top of this hierarchy, the Archetype, God reigns supreme, transmitting His power down through the entire system.” In this view historical times meant little to nothing, except that linking the ancient to the present was a skilled intellectual pursuit derived by applied science which was not the normative science of Aristotle.
Egyptian days were enduring to prognostics during the “Middle Ages onwards.” László Sándor Chardonnenes’ investigation into Anglo-Saxon prognostication manuscripts of England claims “There is no other genre of unlucky days that is so frequently attested in medieval manuscripts as in the Egyptian Days.” Originally documents from the royal palace of Nineveh, written in an Accadian dialect of the Turanian language, specific to the lower regions of the Euphrates (obsolete by the seventh century B.C.E., certain days called Dies Egyptiaci were believed unlucky demarcated by astrologers of these times. The poet Hesiod in his third book of poems, “Works and Days,” a type of metrical almanac, “distinguished lucky days from others; and gives advice to farmers regarding the most favorable days for the various operations of agriculture.” “Why the name ‘Egyptian Days’ was given to this prognostic genre has not been resolved. Augustine and Ambrose remain silent on the point.” “Marinus [ of Neapolis (c. 450-c 500 )] called them “the unlucky days of the Egyptians,” thereby implying that the Egyptian themselves invented them. Thorndike remarked that “there seems to be no doubt that these days were a relic of the unlucky days in the ancient Egyptian calendar.” Chardonnenes further states that “[T]he system of Egyptian Days does not correspond to the Egyptian system of lucky and unlucky days, which were more prolific. The lucky and unlucky days of the Egyptians vary from seven to fifteen days per month in one Egyptian calendar.”
How were these days viewed in the Middle Ages? Bartholomaeus Anglicus (c. 1190-1250), for instance, claimed that the Egyptian Days commemorate the plagues sent upon the Egyptians: “ Of those days one is Egyptian, the other is not. That day is Egyptian on which God sent some kind of plague over Egypt. Hence, as there are twenty-four Egyptian Days, it is clear that God sent more plagues over the Egyptians than the ten which are more famous than the others. They are placed in the church calendar, not because something should be left undone on those days more than on others, but so that we be reminded of the miracles of God.””
“Magic papyri often says that the rites must not be tried on certain days; for then hostile forces would make them useless, gods stronger than those called on were in the ascendant [of the locality or chart]. The notion of lucky and unlucky days went far back, and was the one area in which, apart from medicine with its mixture of practical lore and majic, any kind of systematisation was applied to omens. The concern of the priests with calendars for festival purposes lay behind such devision of days into good and bad. We find copies of calendars in which each day is devided into three parts, and every part is marked as lucky and unlucky. Other papyri tell us why certian days are lucky or unlucky or only partly so.”
Cicero calls astrology, as divination, ( De Div. i 52.): quoted in Lindsay, Jack, Origins of Astrology, p. 1 : “The Egyptians and Babylonians reside in vast planes where no mountains obstruct their view of the entire hemisphere, and so they have applied themselves mainly to that kind of divination called astrology.” While Lindsay cites the possibility of obstruction of the view by occasional sand storm, the Egyptiand and Babylonians had a clear horizon view in which to calculate the various planets, luminaries, extra solar bodies, and mathematically chart oppositions ( possibly and parans). Yet Lindsay quotes Ptolemaios had remarked that records as lists of eclipses had been preserved for a period of “900 years ( from about 747 BC in the reign of Nabonassar) while there was no such reliable material about planets.”
What are Omens: They are empirical observations set to memory, set to oral or set to written record keeping to assist in data streams of reliable chronological or systematic organization of natural and unnatural phenomena.
Sky – Omens to science (astronomy/astrology)
“Reply first of all, whitest Nero, to the first, that the most ancient priests of long ago were doctors as well as astronomers, as indeed the histories of the Chaldeans, the Persians, and the Egyptions testify.” ( Ficino, Apology, 387 [ Latin text, 537]). Prists were doctors and astronomers, basically also medieval of pre-humanists? These were multidisciplinary fields, indicating educated class.
“Although we have already mentioned [Sir James George (b. 1854 –d. 1938)] Frazer’s position that magical activities rest on a mistaken relationship between real cause and their perceived effects – a view that indispensably relies on [ Sir] Edward Tylor [(b. 1832 –d. 1917)] – we have not yet confronted his most significant contribution to the study of magic. It is easy to exaggerate the importance of Frazer’s insight into the nature of magical operation. But for the more than a century anthropologists, classicists, and scholars in related disciplines have been unable to displace his fundamental notion of sympathetic magic, even if they have legitimately criticized and largely rendered effete the assumption upon which it rests. In The Golden Bough (1890), a Herculean effort that eventually filled twelve volumes, Frazer sketched an overarching view of magical behavior that he called sympathetic and which branched into two directions: “first, that like produces like [ Newtonian physics for force – attraction], or than an effect resembles its cause; and, second, that things which have once been in contact with each other continue to act on each other at a distance after the physical contact has been severed.”
Today, modern physicists are working on transportation, the type we saw in the Television serious Star Trek, where teleportation can move a human being from one location to another be dissembling the atoms of the body and at a different location reassembling the body. Also, these experiments using sound-wave particles that come together, pass information than part from one another – go their separate ways – but remain changed in some information sphere are being investigated at this time. Since we do not know what to call these things that exchange information, we call them freaky particles. The idea behind Frazer’s work is detailing the Ancient Greek completion between ‘binding magic,’ that is to reassemble the dualism of the divine essence and the divinity of the pantheonic gods, the divinity of daemons, and divinity of understanding the unnatural world from a pre-Socratic philosophical time period in Greco history.
What is a Seer/Purifier
archaic age of the purifier/seer. This was the argument later in Greece that professional physicians and doctors who were more reputed could not cure-all and religious or shamans had some success and “less repute,” as a standard arrogance of the establishment. These outsiders were called purifier/seers. They had secret knowledges. See Empedocles of whom Hippocritis ( the Healer/Doctor) drew his four humors from this person’s writings. and Plato copies this Empedocles too! –mjm notes [ shevling at Doe Stacks BF 1591 C75 2008 MAIN
INVESTIGATE: seeMN File astrology Fold. VIII
Aratus (315 – 245 BCE) in his Phaenomena ("Appearances")
Al Rescha knot of heaven, was moving away from the spring equinox. The processional aberration imbued a need to outline constellations by Aratus in a poem that classified “48 ancient constellations of western cartography.” ( Brady) source for Ptolemy’s Almagest.
“””Yet all was not plan sailing for this little star. By the time of Erhard Ratdolt, a German printer working in Venice who produced the first printed star atlas in 1482, it was ignored. Ratdolt based his images on the later Greek poet Hyginus (64BCE – 17 CE) whose work Poeticon Astronomicon did not mention the knot. (see figure 1).
[Right. Figure 1 - The constellation Pisces from Erhard Ratdolt’s 1482 version of the Poeticon Astronomican, void of any connecting knot.]
However, in 1515 when Albrecht Durer, the German artist and mathematician, produced two polar projections of the celestial sphere, he carried on Aratus’ description and displayed the two fishes of Pisces held together by a large knot. (See figure 2).””” Bernadette Brady’s newsleter, 2009 [[[Visual Astrology Newsletter, April 2009
Tuesday, April 14, 2009 10:15 AM "The Knot of Heaven, Its story and its history," Bernadette Brady MA ( In personal email group]
Paolo Zambelli, ed., “Cornelio Agrippa di Nettesheim: Testi scelti,” in Testi umanistici su l’Ermentismo, ed. Eugenio Garin et al. ( Rome, 1955), pp. 110-11; cf. eadem ed., “Agrippa di Nettesheim, Dialogus de homine, “ Rivista critica di storia della filosofia, XIII (1958), 53., in Ibid., Nauert, note. 28, p. 19.
Ibid., Nauert, p. 19., n. 29 , “for discussions linking the whole concept of Renaissance, as viewed by contemporaries, with the attempt to revive Neoplatonic philosophy and the variuos occult traditions associated with it, see Kristeller, Philosophy of Marsilio Ficino, pp. 20-29, and D. P. Walker, “The Prisca Theologia in France, “ Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, XVII (1954), 204-59.”
see pp. 336-92. Paulys Realencyclopädie (Wissowa et al. 1894-78: suppl. III. 22-23, s.v. Aegyptiaci, dies-), remarkably, lacks any information but references the work of Mommsen (1863:374) and Schmitz (1877:307-20). Other reference works do have substantial entries: DuCange et al. (1937-38: III. 106-07, s. v. Dies Aegptiaci); Hoffmann-Krayer, Bächtold-Stäubli et al. (1927-42: I.223-26, s.v. Ägyptische Tage; IV. 928-29, s.v. Kalendar §3a; V. 192, s.v. Konzil; VIII.564, s.v. Stunde; VIII. 1436-37, s.v. Unglückstag §2); Granlund et al. (1956-82: XII.591-93, s.v. Olycksdagar); Simpson and Weiner (1992: s.v. dismal A. I, B. 1; Egyptian A.1.b.). sources cited in n. 1, in Chardonnenes, László Sándor, “Anglo-Saxon Prognostics, 900-1100, study and texts,” eds., Han van Ruler, et al. (Leiden: Koninklijke Brill NV, 2007), p. 330.
Ibid., Chardonnenes, Anglo-Saxon Prognostics..., pp. 332-333, Thorndike (1923-58: I. 686), A History of Magic and Experimental Science during the First Thirteen Centuries of our Era. 8 vols. ( New York: Columbia UP).
Ibid., Chardonnenes, Anglo-Saxon Prognostics..., p. 333. see n. 14, Chabas (1865), Budge (1899:224-28), Dawson (1926:263). Papyri containing Egyptian calendars of lucky and unlucky days date back to c. 1500 BC. The days in these calendars were subdivided into three parts. Each part of the day is either good or bad, so a day can be entirely lucky or unlucky, or a combination thereof (see Thorndike 1923-58: I.686). Some texts on the twenty-four Egyptian Days feature hours which are especially dangerous, though such texts are not as frequently attested as hourless ones (see p. 362). There is also a twelfth-century Syriac version of the Egyptian Days, translated from the Greek, in which there are thirty-three unlucky days per year (cf Budge 1913: II. 557). Two Greek texts are in Salmasius (1648: 816-18).
Marsilii Ficini, Apologia quaedam, in qua de medicina, astrologi, vita mundi; item de Magis qui Christum statim natum salutaverunt [ An Apologia Dealing with Medicine, Astrology, the Life of the World, and the Maji Who Greeted the Christ Child at His Birth], XV. Septembris, MCCCCLXXXVIIII. In argo Caregio, in Marsilio Ficino, Three Books on Life, vol. II, eds. trans., Carol V. Kaske and John R. Clark ( New York: The Renaissance Society of America, 1989), p. 387 [Latin text, 537].
Copyright ©· All Rights Reserved · My Website