ture. In so far as the signs are visible, they are identically 

 the same with our own. And in the centre we have what 

 cannot be mistaken for the three great northern constellations, 

 the Great Bear, the Little Bear, and the Dragon ; in the latter 

 of which is the polar star, giving [to the epoch of] the 

 original the date of about two thousand years B.C. Again, in 

 the representation of the Indian zodiac, found in an ancient 

 pagoda by Mr. John Call, and sent by him to Dr. Maskelyne, 

 the signs differ merely enough to shew similarity without de- 

 sign : and here also the equinoctial and solsticial points are 

 fixed. They are evidently between the Eam and Bull, Virgin 

 and Lion; thus giving to the original of this zodiac an an- 

 tiquity of about two thousand three hundred years B.C. 

 The equinoctial point is now nearly out of the Fish : two 

 thousand one hundred and sixty years ago it was just leaving 

 the Ram ; two thousand one hundred and sixty years before 

 then, it was just leaving the Bull ; and two thousand years 

 previously, it was in the first degrees of Taurus. In an ancient 

 zodiac taken from an old manuscript found in Java, the simi- 

 larity again is very remarkable; only, in the place of the 

 Twins we have a Butterfly ; instead of the Archer a Bow and 

 Arrow (as in the Indian zodiac) ; instead of the Capricorn we 

 have the Goat and the Fish as two separate animals ; instead 

 of the Water Bearer we have the Indian Waterpot ; and in- 

 stead of two fishes we have but one for the sign of Pisces. 

 We are assured by Cassini that the Chinese zodiac is precisely 

 similar, and by Bailly, that even that of Iroquois Indians is 

 nearly the same. I ask you not now to consider the proof 

 herein afforded of the dispersion of mankind from a common 

 country, in which some original zodiac must have existed. 

 But I ask you to consider seriously what must have been the 

 antiquity of that science, the very strongest proof of the culti- 

 vation of which lies in the existence of a generally received 

 zodiac. If in them we recognise a date extending nearly to 

 the deluge, can we suppose that no simple zodiac existed prior 

 to that great event ? 



