Method of analysing text in Nostradamus Prophecies
This page brings together (lightly edited) extracts from my pages that set out information about my methods and the reasons underlying their selection.
The question of language.
Question -January 6, 1999: G.C. in Belgium
..I dropped by your pages on the anagram analysis of his [Nostradamus] texts.
Although I'm convinced he used 'some' kind of coding system, and why not anagrams, I have real doubts about the 'hidden messages' you found in the first quatrains. Let me explain:
The MAJOR error you seem to have made is using a lexicon in ENGLISH! Why on earth would Nostradamus have hidden his messages in English, if he himself was French and the major language used in sciences at his time was Latin?
Maybe you could find some interesting results if you used the texts from the original French first version printed in Avignon (France) in 1556, and compare it to a lexicon made up of French or Latin words used at Nostradamus time, not our modern age-language...
Sorry to have disappointed you, but if you insist on presenting your material as some sort of scientific method, you should always check your sources.
Answer to Question.
G., your message, far from disappointing me produces other, more positive feelings. You are not the first to realise the enormity of choosing modern English for the analysis for this was part of my pre-thinking into the problem. My choice was not accidental but the result of a process of logic. A logic that finally suggests that any coding is more likely to be in the language of the decoder than that of Nostradamus time.
If the research concerns code by an ordinary person of the sixteenth century whose language base was French and Latin a researcher would be assuming too much if he used some other language. But, if the hypothesis is in relation to a persons prophetic abilities, it is actually contradictory to presume that the author of the code could not have used future language. This same logic applies to the exclusion of modern persons works from the coded message (e.g Wagner).
If you can validly assume that Nostradamus could not have used ideas available in the future then you must conclude he could not see the future. The assumption makes for a self-fulfilling hypothesis.
But in reality it is almost absurd to suggest that if a person could see the future and the decoder of his work, he would not build it in a manner consistent with that future reader.
Take for example the assumptions in "The BIBLE CODE" by Michael Drosnin , Weidenfel, 1997, in which a being of vastly superior abilities purportedly builds an exact mathematics code in an ancient document that successfully incorporates every possible happening into the future. The author then denies this superior being the skill of linguistics and in particular future linguistics, by insisting that the code only works by using the ancient tongue and language at the time of its being coded. This assumption appears more like that of prejudicial scholarship rather than one consistent with the hypothesis.
In conclusion I would observe that my assumptions do not imply NOSTRADAMUS was able to see the future, but that if I am to investigate his code, my hypothesis must embrace all avenues others claim were available to him, not just those available to ordinary persons. It is only by assumptions consistent with the hypothesis that we can have any assurance in the cornerstone of science; the cornerstone of 'disproof'.
My analysis in English should fail for many, many reasons and it is why they do not that is the more relevant and interesting question.
Addendum October 8th 2002
Over a period of time I have added to the ideas expressed in 1999. One of the additions is the relevance of Nostradamus source. The source, according to Nostradamus, is an inspired, divine power. It is too shallow to think this source spoke to Nostradamus in French because the source was of French origin. This divine source spoke to Nostradamus in his 'native language' which happened to be French but if he had been African it would have been in that language. If there is any credibility to Nostradamus powers it cannot be divorced from the capacity of his source. It inspired him to see the future and was quite capable of inspiring Nostradamus writings to be read in the future in the format suited to the decoder. This does not mean to say that it was but there is no reason to preclude the possibility. If anyone knows the rules that apply to reading the future please advise if they preclude any particular languages.
Finally I would add an analogy. Logic suggests that if you drop a lead ball and a glass ball of the same size from the same height that the lead ball will hit the ground first. This is not the case and they hit the ground at the same time. Nowadays, we can accept that result and explain it mathematically but the point is, reason does not lead us to the reality, it is observation that is paramount. My observations do not allow us to preclude the possibility that the code is in English.
Another aspect in my preplanning was a recognition of the problems associated with sixteenth century written and printed documents. There is a need for modern approaches that reduce the weaknesses of that centuries technology.
The method of split anagrams was chosen as a method worthy of use for it has the potential to remove the problem of unreliable lettering and wording where messages are repeated. This mechanism also offers good coding qualities where multiple coding is desired.
The following is Erika Cheetham's statement on the originality and reliabilty at the commencement of 'The Final Prophecies of NOSTRADAMUS'
"The French text of the quatrains reproduces as closely as possible that of the original edition of 1568 (Benoist Rigaud, Lyon. Any printing faults and errors of that edition are therefore also reproduced here."
I have relied on her version because the time she has given, her access to original sources and her expertise level appear such that I see no need to reinvent a less well rounded wheel.
Pattern disciplines- July 4, 2002.
It is easy to fall into the trap of thinking the powerful confluence of a set of events are due to pattern and not coincidence. It is just as easy to be blind to a real pattern. My difficulty is in maintaining the balance between objectivity and the evidence that confronts me. One of the methods is to state my doubts even though in my deepest thoughts I do not feel that it can be any more than coincidence. I cannot ignore that these strange connections have occurred but they are not proof and even if many of my projections proved accurate it does not necessarily mean that my writings are prophetic. In fact if there is a pattern it most probably implies my words are meant to be anti-prophetic.
There is another issue to be borne in mind. Much of what I write is possible and has a moderate level of probability. Therefore even if at some future time events occur that suggest otherwise, it does not form a firm basis for belief by me or anyone else in what I write. It needs more than a small amount of chance events to establish such a thesis.
I have stated that deep within I do not think it possible for there to be an ability for an individual to see into the future without a new technology. I hold another conviction that is not diminished by these current observations. That is there is a strange pattern in Nostradamus. I am also convinced that these observations I make in this website establish existence of patterns. These things are not contradictory. I can assume a pattern without assuming anything about its reality, its source or its prophetic qualities. I can use this assumption to put further pressure on the analyses and by so doing reduce ambiguity and vagueness.
The real test would be if there was no escape from failure for any of my interpretations, no excuses, no vagueness. This is what I work towards, a set of rules that reduce ambiguity and my search is strengthened by my writings. It has a been a concern to me that I can interpret some verses in more than one way but I believe that this is being reduced by the development of the following rules of analysis . These rules are logical and powerful. The concept of a web is the centrepiece of these rules and its elements are these
The prime thread is the theme in Nostradamus verse.
The second major thread is the strength of the internal verse links.
The third major thread is the continuity of thought in any line
The web must be the strongest possible set of connections between each of the threads.
The interpretation should be a powerful illumination of Nostradamus phrasing in the verse or another in the web.
The web shall be linked by confirmation in other verses but shall not be repetitive.
The web is at its strongest when the key words of which it is composed are as structurally tight as possible.
The web is strengthened by the practical logic of its concepts.
I will illustrate these points with verse V.36 that I initially included as a verse on war (line 2 has a whole anagram of enemy and invader) but rejected that idea by examining its content. It seemed more logical for it to be from another topic, that of medicine.
Verse V.36 says:
Sister the brother by a shared whim
Will mix the rose and the mineral
On the placenta given to the slow old woman
In tasting the death will be simple and rural
De soeur le frere par
Viendra mesler rosee en myneral
Sur la placente donne a vielle tardifue
Meurt le goustant sera simple et rural
The theme is medical practice, Nostradamus is talking of a medication capable of producing death. The old woman is probably a practitioner of the medical arts and the procedure is probably that of abortion.
My interpretation is as follows:
rules of a safer dose prefer sulfate antimulsifiers
Evil end in error so rely on my real names seen
Rule is if Sulfur placed in vein, die later, not alleviate
Simple test arteries pulse regulates true amounts uterus implants.
This new version talks of refined rules for the use of sulphur to act as an abortive agent but it must be placed in arteries taking the agent away from the heart, not veins. Placed in veins it causes death. The test for the right vessel is the pulse.
Rule 1 is obeyed for both Nostradamus words and mine apply to the theme of death from a medication applied to procure an abortion.
Rule 2 is supported by the strength of the internal links e.g.'safer dose' to 'sulfate emulsifiers', 'veins' to 'arteries', 'simple test' to 'pulse' etc. (I could not find any such pattern to support the concept of war)
Rule 3, relating to the continuity of thought in the lines, is evident in all four lines and they develop a consistent theme for the whole verse
I applied rule 4 in choosing the medical theme in preference to the war theme for it is is the stronger of the two.
Rule 5 is obeyed for it clearly is about the same theme as Nostradamus words. The theme of death from a medication is supported but it supplies the detail of how it happens and names the medicines involved and a test to avoid such deaths.
The themes are linked for the brother and sister are the veins and arteries, the old woman is the means of inept administration of the medicine. The theme of mixing two components relates to the confusing of veins for arteries. The placenta and uterus implant are another linked pair both related to birth. These shared themes illustrate rule 3 .
As this is my first verse on medication it does not yet fulfil the requirements of rule 6.
Line 4 has as its anagrams "meurt legousant" which is 'regulate amounts". The phrases 'arteries pulse' and 'simple test' are also found in closely knit lettering. This is Rule 7 put into practice.
It is quite a logical idea that injecting a drug into veins instead of arteries might cause death. The misreading of information is just as logical. It is also logical that Nostradamus would have had great interest in this topic. This is Rule 8 in action.
All these rules can be seen in greater detail in the foregoing analyses.
Some themes-July 18, 2002.
The work I am doing moves towards dentification of formulae, These are some that seem relevant:
|under water= submarines|
|voices= communication technology|
|prophecy= people involved in Nostradamus message|
|sea battle= future war in the Persian Gulf|
|monster= atom bomb|
|flame & fire= energy source|
|laws= parliamentary action|
|temple= modern icons such as vehicles and commerce|
|treasure= petroleum and other fuels needed for modern economy|
|great nation= America|
|Empire= Countries in Old Persian Empire= Iran, Iraq, Turkey, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Egypt, Jordan, Syria etc|
|porphyry column= modern skyscraper|
|rock or stone= mineral especially radioactive minerals|
Aim of search- July 10, 2002.
The work I am presenting is evolving into five issues which seem central to my inquiries. These are:
Are there hidden patterns in Nostradamus' writings?
Are there clearly identifiable stories in any patterns that exist?
Do such stories have any connection with the future?
What is the meaning of the stories if they are prophetic/non-prophetic?
Who or what is the source of the messages?
I believe I am building a strong case for pattern but human beings see pattern easily, this is one of the strengths of sentient life-forms. We have an innate ability to build pictures of the universe through our senses and our brain. The issue is not really whether there are patterns but how strong are they and what do they pattern?
I also believe that I am building a strong case that there is a coherent story. I am reducing the error rate of including wrong verses and using a web technique to resolve ambiguities in eligible words.
End of Paper