In "Origins" by Eric Partridge (Routledge & Kegan - 1963), we find that the American New York was so named in honour of the Duke of York, brother of King Charges II, by the English troops who captured the city in 1664 from the Dutch, who called it New Amsterdam. The Dukes of York get their name from the city of York, formerly Yeork, originating from Eoforwic.
The same book contains three possible roots for the English names York and Yorkshire: one is that Yorkshire derives from the old Eoforwicsir, the shire (from scir, official business, administration, then administrative division and then county) of Eoforwic (York) - a popular version of the name of the ancient Latin capital Eboracum or Eburacom, using the name Eofor = Boar, that in current English means wild or domestic pig, non-castrated, proper for reproduction (in Portuguese varrão, in French verrat); another suggests a transliteration of Ebórakon from the ancient Greek; yet another links it to the Gaulish noun "Eburos", the name of a plant of the yew family. In this case, Yorkshire would mean the "region of the yews". Of the three, we immediately consider the first as the most probable as we shall see bellow.
Let us look at the relationship between Eoforwic and the word "approcher". We shall divide the latter in two: "app" and "rocher". In French, "app" has its own meaning: it is the abbreviation for apposition, in Portuguese the apposed or continued, a grammatical rule in which a substantive word or expression is immediately followed by another substantive word or expression that better characterizes or defines it (Example: Paris, capital of France). "Rocher", rochedo (rock) in Portuguese, is meaningful but is not related to what we know about New York. And what if we divide the word another way, as "ap" and "procher"? The first part tells us nothing but the second, if we simply exchange two letters (Green Language, anagram technique - see box), in "procher" to "porcher", it immediately acquires great relevance. "Porcher" means swineherd, he who looks after or owns pigs or wild boars. In this case, the writer used the ancient meaning of the English York, telling us that the chief, owner or person in charge of that city also gave his name to the new city. This connection, still perceptible today in the large industry of the English York, is the cause for which, for centuries, the French "enemies" have been talking of the excellent "jambon de York", and the Spanish "jamón de York".
We can see the intelligence of the Master working at its best when, through antonomasia (see box) he tells us in this second line: "Fire to approach York, the great new city = great New York". The word "approcher" therefore has more than one meaning. The second "p" of "app", abbreviation of apposed or continued, is also the first of the word "porcher". Obviously, if the word had been written with three "p", it would have called too much attention. So unless we are wrong and it is no more than a set of enormous coincidences, this 2nd line contains, in an extraordinarily dissimulated way, the name of the city where the main events took place.

3rd line - Instant grand flamme esparse sautera

"In an instant a great scattered flame will leap up" - These would be the great and sudden flames of flights 11 and 175 crashing into the twin towers, but also the other scattered flames = spread out over great distances, at the Pentagon, flight 77 and Shanksville, flight 93. If there is something hidden in this line, we were unable to find it.

4th line - Quand on voudra des Normans faire preuve

"When one will want to demand proof of the Normands" - It is difficult to conciliate this line with the other three lines that describe the horrors seen by the whole world live on television. And nevertheless we may be able to find here the names of those currently held responsible for the events of 11 September. We will try to show you how.
The biggest problem, but also the solution, is in the Normans, in relation to whom there is an attempt to prove something. In other verses of the Centuries, there are examples of what appears to be the same word and variations thereof, as follows:

In VI-16 we have the line: Par les Normans de France & Picardie
In VII-10: Par mer & terre de Gallois & Normans
In IX-7: Si mieux doit estre Roy Breton ou Normand
In IX-30: Peril Normande au goulfre Phanatique
In X-51: Par ceux du siege Picards, Normans, du Maisne

Possibly, these nostradamic Normands are more than they appear to be. Presuming that the differences are not merely composition errors, they should be considered - until proof to the contrary - as possibly having different values or meanings, as can be inferred from the study of the aforementioned Green Language (see box).
The clue that we intend to follow now takes us to the same Larousse dictionary as mentioned above. A small note alludes to something related to the Normands: "Réponse de Normand: réponse ambiguë" - "Normand response: ambiguous response". This does not mean that the Normands are liars but rather that one of their characteristic traits is to be indirect - a characteristic of many other different human groups in various countries. In fact, the Centuries are an example of that ambiguity, also required to write this work. Therefore, the Normands of the 4th line, more than one, do not respond clearly to the questions asked.
But are these people Normands? Probably not, but rather someone with this characteristic of the Normands, these Normans should also be written with the letter d, Normands. Who are the people said to be strongly related with the events of 11 September, who for the past years and up to the present date have given such ambiguous answers regarding their role in grave events and whose responsibility half of the world would like to prove? Let's see: Osama bin Laden and Mullah Omar. How can the 4th line contain their names? They are precisely in the name Normans itself, as the following diagram demonstrates: