History of Dharmashastra (Ancient and Mediaeval Religious and Civil Law in India) v6.c82.335.5

v6.c82.335.5

Webb in ‘Names of stars’⁸⁴³ who very strenuously argues against the Babylonian origin of the Zodiacal signs and holds that the Zodiac as we know it is a Greek invention and that Cleostratus who according to Pliny was concerned in forming it lived about 520 B. C. In spite of the vehemence of Webb's arguments, in my humble opinion, he is far from convincing and for the present at least the Babylonian origin of the Zodiacal signs has to be accepted The passage of Pliny on which Webb relies is differently understood by Prof. J K. Fotheringham.⁸⁴⁴ The latest work of Sarton on ‘History of Science’ (1953) holds that the Zodiac had been distinguished by Babylonian astronomers a thousand years before Cleostratus and all that Cleostratus probably did was to divide those constellations into twelve equal lengths of the ecliptic i. e. the twelve signs of the Zodiac A somewhat amusing argument has been advanced by Hickey⁸⁴⁵ that the fact that there are in the sky no animals (figures) suggestive of Egypt or India such as the hippopotamus and the elephant seems to rule out those countries as sources Is there any logical necessity that certain animals must be introduced in a system of Zodiacal signs if that system originated in a certain country that may be the home of dozens of wild and tame animals? Are all the principal animals of Mesopotamia or of Greece included in the seven animals that figure as signs, if one of the above two was the origin of the present Zodiacal signs?