VIII 57 THE SHORT ROBE AND THE LONG
1568 Lyon Benoist Rigaud
De souldat simple paruiendra en empire,
De robe courte paruiendra à la longue
Vaillant aux armes en eglise on plus pyre
Vexer les prestres comme l’eau fait l’esponge.
From a simple soldier he will come to be Emperor,
The short robe will come to be the long
A frighteningly brave military adversary, in matters of the church he is even worse,
He persecutes the priests as the sponge mops up water.
This Nostradamus Quatrain VIII 57 was a 1568 Benoist Rigaud new arrival. The use of ‘parvenir’ in both lines of the first couplet is unlike Michel Nostredame’s usual ‘style’ or ‘method’.
(See the Nostradamus Quatrains IX 65 VIII 28 and IX 44 SAMPLING THE ‘68 RIGAUD)
“The short robe will come to be the long” is clearly a reference to Rome where soldiers wore short robes and senators wore long robes.
In Roman numerals, separating-out the first letter of each line yields D-D-V-V (five hundred + five hundred + five + five or 1010). Roman numerals prevented multiplications yet not the use of fractions as that was achieved by duodecimal symbols such as dodrans (minus one quarter) dextans (minus one sixth) and quincunx (five dots on a single die, otherwise five twelfths or five ounces). There was also a common use of chronograms in the Renaissance, communicating the number of the year by rearranging a word made-up from Roman-style letters. Because of the obvious drawbacks of Roman numerals various numerical ‘rules’ were occasionally transgressed in previous centuries. If this had been CI-D-L-V then it would suggest 1555, the year of the first edition by Bonhomme and perhaps the year it was composed.
With hindsight Line 1 alone might have been giving us a preview of Napoleon Bonaparte yet it does not mention France. However, the first couplet will give us the jumbled letters of Napoleon as will the second couplet. In fact Line 2 can succeed independently to collect the words Napoleon or Bonaparte or the Corsican family name Buona Parte whilst Lines 3 and 4 can supply ‘apoleon’, the same sound as ‘Apollyon’ the first Antichrist according to Charles A. Ward.
(See the Nostradamus Quatrain X 24 THIS IS NAPOLEON)
If this is the First French Empire, who in the world could have seen that coming way back in the Sixteenth Century without very special vision?
Line 2, OF ‘courte’, of short length, is not printed completely clearly but if this were instead OF ‘courre’ then that would have meant to slip the dogs off the leash while hunting.
Line 3, OF ‘vaillant’ is ‘value +’ or possessing great quality, which in martial skills could mean powerful in the sense ‘cleverly aggressive-to-brutal’, or else ‘value –’ which means a little less than good in the sense of moral merit. It links with OF ‘valeur’ which is alternately value, cost, valor or goodness. The one best bet in this context is probably ‘frighteningly brave’. OF ‘pire’ meant ‘worse’ but also had technical meanings, e.g. a boom for maintaining water at a fixed level.
Line 4, OF ‘vexer’ means to hurt or torment somebody but in this particular context it meant that the perceived paucity of the priesthood was like a mass drawn into a vacuum, i.e. Napoleon was beside himself and tunnel-visioned in his absorbing interest over their persecution. OF ‘les prêtres’ = those with authority from the Church to administer the sacraments.
Otherwise is this 1010 BC, the agreed year that Bible-hero David became King of Israel aged about 30? He had been a boy shepherd and slew Goliath at around age 20. His name and title ‘Davide Roi Israel’ is incorporated in Line 1. If he existed, and not even a treasury note of account has surfaced yet, he was too bloodthirsty as a young man but reformed later, seeking to please Yahweh and to rule well over his bloody territorial gains. At that time, Egypt was the greatest power in the region by far and much of the historical account of his son Solomon, as credited in the Bible, is unsound seeming at times to duplicate proven Egyptian history almost exactly. To complicate matters further, there was no formal History then as we all know that subject today. It was a literary pursuit. Further, the priests were not so dominant over the people back then but the scribes addressed the Hebrew bible(s) as if they were, i.e. many religious strictures were largely avoided by the tribespeople yet recorded as if a social fait accompli, perhaps as a hopefully unifying factor.
Many Biblical Psalms are attributed to David and contain what should be biographical information of sorts. He may have been a king-priest and so one of the Middle Eastern forerunners of the Messiah(s) which at one point were being anticipated as two separate people, one priestly the other a warrior-king. There is no real proof or account of David being unduly harsh to his priests although he may well have been demanding. Perhaps another instance of Nostradamus recording insights that have been omitted elsewhere in the literature?