The Orion, or Researches into the Antiquity of the Vedas c8.45

c8.45

∗ The only other explanation, I know of, is that given by Bentley in his Historical Survey of Hindu Astronomy, pp. 5-27. Bentley divides the zodiac into 27 lunar mansions, beginning with Shravishthâ in the winter solstice, as in the Vedânga Jyotisha. Then he divides it again into 12 tropical months beginning with Mâgha. The beginning of Mâgha and the divisional Shravishthâ thus coincide at this time. Now the beginning of each month must fall back owing to the precession of the equinoxes; and in thus receding if the beginning of *any* month coincided with *any* fixed lunar mansion, on the 6th lunar day, the month, says Bentley, was made to commence the year! But what authority is there in native astronomical works for such an elaborate and artificial theory to determine the commencement of the year? Native astronomers are surely expected to know better the theory on which they commenced their year. Then, according to Bentley's calculation, Âshvina was the first month in 1192 B. C. and Kârtika in 945 B. C. But there is no evidence whatsoever in the Sanskrit literature to corroborate these results. Again why should either of these months not have been called Âgrahâyanika? Bentley supposes that this method was in force till