Note 52 — PART I (continued 2)

This fact is admitted (see art. “Zodiac,” sub-heading “first sign,” Encyclopædia Britannica). But it is a fact opposed to the hitherto received opinion touching the necessary connexion of the equinoctial point and of the initial point of the Zodiac. “A prehistoric reform” of the calendar is supposed, and corrections of the ancient texts to suit this reform, are suggested. Until traces of such reform and corrections can be shown to exist, the evidence of the tablets may still be cited as pointing to a year counted from the sun’s entry into Aries, in the earliest ages of Babylonian civilization.