Pl, and Jim, you two tend to forget that there are others watching, and monitoring your own edits, and comments as well. There is little "positive" about your contributions Peter, nor your hateful comments Jim. People can read, and I don't consider either of you honest "scholars" or editors. Your own words, and your edits are being scrutinized. So is your lack of good faith, among other failures to be balanced, kind, and true to history. So, keep up the very bad work on Nostradamus that both of you continue to do such as proclaiming that he is not an astrologer. Even a child who has read anything about the author of Les Propheties knows Michel Nostradamus was an astrologer - except, Peter Lemesurier, and Jiim62sch - who profess to be the KEY to all things known about Nostradamus, but who cannot even read a simple horoscope, nor chart of the celestial bodies. Perhaps this accounts for your bad translations, and even worse biographical "knowledge" of Nostradamus, of course, called an astrophile because he practiced astrology as a "hobby." Great work PL, but it doesn't hold water. Word has been out on Peter Lemesurier for years about his lack of astrological knowledge, and even less on Nostradamus, and most scholars avoid his work because of the errors, and poor scholarship to boot. This reflects even on the German-version of Nostradamus which PL has "edited." One of the worst cases of scholarship on an encyclopedia on this subject; which is why he keeps putting out numerous books on Nostradamus. Why is this? Is not one enough since he knows so much?