524 



SCIENCE. 



[Vol. V., No. 125. 



bel are in cavo-relievo, similar to many of the 

 Assyrian sculptures. Most of these carvings repre- 

 sent sacrifice and adoration. Dr. Habel considers 

 that they represent a period of culture when the 

 people were passing from the worship of the sun and 

 other heavenly bodies to that of man, or the begin- 

 ning of anthropomorphism. One of these mono- 

 liths, which is a stone twelve feet high, three feet 

 wide, and two feet thick, is reproduced in the accom- 

 panying figure. It is supposed to represent a priest 

 offering the sacrifice of a human being. He holds 

 the head in his left hand, and in his right is the 

 knife with which he has severed the head from the 

 body upon which he stands. At the lower part of 

 the stone two attendant figures are represented, each 

 carrying a human head. One of these smaller figures 

 has a skull for a head, and is supposed to symbolize 

 death. This figure also occurs on other of these 

 carved stones. The elaborate ornamentation of the 

 naked body of the priest is characteristic of all the 

 figures given by Habel. In this instance the head- 

 dress is in the form of a crab, and the hair is arranged 

 in a sort of queue, with many decorations appended. 

 The ear has a small ring in the lobe, from which hangs 

 a larger ring. Around the neck is a cord and tassel, 

 and about the waist is an elaborate girdle having at 

 the back the head of an animal. Just below the 

 right knee there is a garter. This occurs on all sim- 

 ilar figures. The left foot is protected by a sandal. 

 In some of the other figures both feet have sandals, 

 and in one both are naked. The curved figures 

 above the right hand of the priest, and below the 

 body of the victim, are supposed to represent speech, 

 as they occur with various modifications in several 

 other carvings. In connection with these singular 

 Central-American works of art, it is of interest to 

 recall the carved shells found in mounds in the 

 United States, and recently figured by Mr. Holmes 

 in the report of the Bureau of ethnology, as the ex- 

 pression of ideas in a similar manner suggests a com- 

 mon origin. 



THE PROPOSED CHANGE IN THE 

 ASTRONOMICAL DAY. 



Two eminent astronomers have recently given 

 their views on the proposed change of the astronom- 

 ical day, and both are inclined to favor the change. 

 This discussion, which is of particular interest to 

 astronomers, is on the sixth resolution of the Prime- 

 meridian conference of Washington, — " that the con- 

 ference expresses the hope, that, as soon as may be 

 practicable, the astronomical and nautical days will 

 be arranged everywhere to begin at mean midnight." 

 The present custom, as we know, is for the astrono- 

 mer to begin his day at noon of the civil day; and we 

 are glad to find given at some length the opinions of 

 such authorities as Struve and Oppolzer. 



Professor Struve, director of the Pulkowa obser- 

 vatory, in a pamphlet 1 of twenty-seven pages, gives a 

 very interesting account of the causes which led to 



1 Die 'beschlusae der Washingtoner meridianconferenz. St. 

 Petersburg, 1885. 27 p. 8°. 



the international conference, and the results which 

 it reached. In regard to the change in the beginning 

 of the astronomical day, he thinks that the question 

 before astronomers is not only of giving up a long- 

 established custom, with consequent changes of rules 

 of many years' standing, but it also involves a serious 

 interruption of astronomical chronology. Without 

 a doubt, the astronomer would have to make a de- 

 cided sacrifice in conforming to the wish of the con- 

 ference ; but, after all, this sacrifice is no greater than 

 our forefathers made when they changed from the 

 Julian to the Gregorian calendar, — a sacrifice to 

 convenience of which we are still made sensible 

 whenever we have occasion to go back to early obser- 

 vations. 



We need have little hesitation in making a similar 

 sacrifice, if it will prevent discordance between the 

 civil and scientific custom of reckoning time, partic- 

 ularly troublesome where astronomical establish- 

 ments come in contact with the outer world. 



Professor Struve states that the Pulkowa observa- 

 tory is prepared to adopt the new time, the only 

 question being as to the epoch when the change 

 should be introduced in the publications of the ob- 

 servatory. He is inclined to recommend that this 

 should be deferred until some agreement can be 

 reached by astronomers, and until the new time is 

 adopted in the Ephemerides. This might be for the 

 year 1890, or perhaps, better still, at the beginning of 

 the next century. 



Professor Oppolzer has contributed a paper on 

 the proposed change of the astronomical day to the 

 March number of the Monthly notices of the Royal 

 astronomical society (vol. xlv. pp. 296-298). He 

 says, "When once such a universal time is intro- 

 duced for all purposes, it is quite natural that the 

 question must arise, if there is indeed so great a ne- 

 cessity to retain in astronomy, and only in astronomy, 

 a different reckoning of time. I fail to see this neces- 

 sity, and I do not think that it would cause any 

 serious trouble or confusion if a change were to be 

 made in our astronomical reckoning; whilst a special 

 mode of reckoning time in one science only, when all 

 others use the generally adopted standard, will, with- 

 out doubt, be a source of error and confusion." He 

 then takes up in some detail the objections urged 

 against the proposed change by Professor Newcomb 

 in a previous communication to the same publica- 

 tion (vol. xlv. pp. 122, 123), and he discusses the 

 changes which would be necessary in the Epheme- 

 rides. Professor Oppolzer proposes to give practical 

 effect to his views by adopting the new reckoning of 

 time in an extensive list of eight thousand solar, and 

 fifty-two hundred lunar, eclipses which he is now 

 preparing for publication. 



It is difficult to see how this matter will finally 

 be decided. It is evidently a question for astrono- 

 mers to settle among themselves; out so far they 

 seem to be very evenly divided. For instance: out 

 of some twenty-seven astronomers whose opinions, 

 more or less decided, have been accessible for a 

 count, thirteen seem inclined to favor the proposed 

 change, while fourteen are opposed to it. And among 



