THEORY OF THE EARTH. 237 



blem of the sun, considered in some one of its ef- 

 fects or of its general phenomena, and without 

 reference to the months when it passes, whether 

 into the sign, or to its opposite ? 



Lastly, What if the names had heen given in 

 an abstract manner to the divisions of space or 

 time, as they are now given by astronomers to 

 what they call the signs, and had not been appli- 

 ed to the constellations or groups of stars, but at 

 a period determined by chance, so that nothing 

 could be concluded from their signification* ? 



In these suggestions there is, without doubt, 

 enough to give an ingenuous mind a distaste for 

 seeking to find in astronomy proofs of the anti- 

 quity of the nations. But were these alleged 

 proofs as certain as they are vague and destitute 

 of any satisfactory result, what could be concluded 

 from them against the great catastrophe, which 

 has left monuments amply demonstrative in other 



sed signa quoque universa zodiaci ad naturam solisjure refe- 

 runtur, 8?c. It is only in the explanation of the Lion and 

 Capricorn, that he has recourse to some phenomenon relative 

 to the seasons ; the Cancer itself is explained in a general 

 point of view, and with reference to the obliquity of the 

 sun's march. 



* See the Memoir of M. Guignes on the Zodiacs of the 

 Eastern Nations, in the Memoirs of the Academy of Belles 

 Lettres, vol. xlvii. 





