14. The Bishop says,[1] “The first astronomers were not calculators, but observers. Now the Moon is seen in the Zodiac, and her place is obvious to the eye of the most rude observer: the Sun is not seen in it, and its place is only known by comparison and calculation. Thus the division of the Zodiac with respect to the Moon was probably among the earlier results of attention to the heavenly appearances, and its division with respect to the Sun among the results comparatively later.” This is probable; but it seems to follow that it could not have been invented by the Greeks till they were far advanced in science; and if this be admitted, it seems absolutely incompatible with the ignorance of the Greek authors of its origin. Their fabulous nonsense clearly proves their ignorance, but Phornutus and other authors admit it. In several passages, Bishop Doyly[2] states quite enough to prove that the Zodiac could be invented neither by the Chaldeans, by whom he always means the Babylonians, nor by the Egyptians, nor the Greeks. It is absolutely certain that the inventors of the Neros and the Metonic cycle must have been infinitely more learned than any of these three at any period of their histories before the birth of Christ. It is also proved from the number of the pillars in the Druidical circles of Britain, that the builders of them must have been acquainted with these cycles. The Phenniche and Phan, noticed in Chap. V. sect. xiv. Chap. VI. sect. xxv. of the Celtic Druids, and the note on it, Appendix, p. 307, prove that the Irish were acquainted with these cycles.
15. It has been observed by Bishop Doyly,[3] “That we may rest assured that the duodecimal division of the Zodiac was formed in correspondence with the twelve lunations of the year. Since the Sun completed one apparent period while the Moon completed twelve periods, the distribution of the Zodiac into twelve parts, so as to afford one mansion for the Sun during each of the twelve revolutions of the Moon, was by far the most obvious and natural.” This is remarkably confirmed by what I have just now observed, and by the well-known historical fact that the Indians, the Chinese, Persians, Arabians, Egyptians, and Copts, had a lunar Zodiac divided into twenty-eight parts, called the mansions of the Moon, from immediate reference to the Moon’s motion through the several days of her period. The universality of this division is a proof of its extreme antiquity.[4]
16. Again the Bishop says, “As has been already mentioned, the appointment of the twelve signs of the Zodiac was probably a result of some advanced state of astronomy: men must then have been not merely observers of the heavenly appearances, but must have begun to calculate and compare with some degree of science. Now we have every reason to know that many nations, the Chaldeans and Egyptians especially, were diligent observers in astronomy from very early times. They partitioned out the sphere into many constellations; noted the risings and settings of the stars; kept accounts of the eclipses, &c.; and, in many instances, determined the calendar with surprising exactness, considering the means which they employed. But then these means were such as to shew that they had made little or no advance in the science of astronomy, properly so called, Lalande mentions a number of particulars respecting the early efforts of the Chaldeans and Egyptians in astronomy, which seem to prove decidedly that they had made no progress beyond rude observation, although they certainly accomplished, in this manner, more than could have been supposed. Among other things, he mentions,[5] that the Chaldæans ascertained the duration of the year by the very artificial method of measuring the length of a shadow of a raised pole. The Egyptians, too, settled their years merely by observing the risings and settings of stars.[6] He thinks the latter have been unduly celebrated for astronomical knowledge, because we hear of them only from the Greeks, who were comparatively ignorant. He expressly calls the astronomy of the Egyptians very moderate, 600 years B. C.”[7] All this shews that the science of the Babylonians and Egyptians was but the débris of former systems, lost at that time by them, as it is known to have been in later times lost by the Hindoos.
17. Hyde gives the following account of the lunar mansions among the Arabians: “The stars or asterisms they most usually foretold the weather by, were those they call Anwâ, or the Houses of the Moon. These are twenty-eight in number, and divide the Zodiac into as many parts, through one of which the moon passes every night: as some of them set in the morning, others rise opposite to them, which happens every thirteenth night.” To these the Arabs ascribe great power.[8]
18. All these superstitions appear to us very foolish, but yet we retain some of them. How many Englishmen believe that the Moon regulates the weather, or rather how few disbelieve it! A moment’s reflection ought to teach them, that if the moon had any influence, it would be exerted regularly and periodically, like that upon the tides. But
- ↑ Remarks on Œd. Jud. p. 189.
- ↑ Ibid. p. 191.
- ↑ Ibid. p. 190.
- ↑ Sir W. Jones’s Works, Vol. I. p. 330; Hyde on the Tables of Ulug. Beg.; Bailly’s Astron. Anc. pp. 109, 126, 476, 475, 491; Goguet, Vol. II. p. 401.
- ↑ See Lalande’s Astron., Vol. I. p. 89.
- ↑ Ib. 93.
- ↑ Ib. p. 102; Doyley, p. 192.
- ↑ Hyde in Not. ad Tabulas Stellar.; Ulugh Beigh, p. 5; Sale’s Prel. Disc., p. 41.
