alendar. The rising of Orion at sunset--his acronical rising--was early
in December, about the time when the coldest season of the year begins.
The astronomical meaning of the "bands of Orion" would therefore be the
rigour in which the earth is held during the cold of winter.

It is possible that the two great stars which follow Orion, _Sirius_ and
_Procyon_, known to the ancients generally and to us to-day as "the
Dogs," were by the Babylonians known as "the Bow-star" and "the
Lance-star"; the weapons, that is to say, of Orion or Merodach. Jensen
identifies Sirius with the Bow-star, but considers that the Lance-star
was Antares; Hommel, however, identifies the Lance-star with Procyon. In
the fifth tablet of the Babylonian Creation epic as translated by Dr. L.
W. King, there is an interesting account of the placing of the Bow-star
in the heavens. After Merodach had killed Tiamat--

75. "The gods (his fathers) beheld the net which he had made,
76. They beheld the bow and how (its work) was accomplished.
77. They praised the work which he had done [ . . . ]
78. Then Anu raised [the . . .] in the assembly of the gods.
79. He kissed the bow, (saying), 'It is [ . . . ]'!
80. And thus he named the names of the bow, (saying),
81. '_Long-wood_ shall be one name, and the second name [shall
be . . . ],
82. And its third name shall be the _Bow-star_, in heaven [shall
it . . . ]!'
83. Then he fixed a station for it."

Dr. Cheyne even considers that he has found a reference to these two
stars in Job xxxviii. 36--

"Who hath put wisdom in the inward parts (Lance-star),
Or who hath given understanding to the heart (Bow-star)."

But this interpretation does not appear to have been generally accepted.
The same high authority suggests that the astronomical allusions in Amos
may have been inserted by a post-exilic editor, thus accounting for the
occurrence of the same astronomical terms as are found in Job, which he
assigns to the exilic or post-exilic period. This seems a dangerous
expedient, as it might with equal reason be used in many other
directions. Further, it entirely fails to explain the real difficulty
that _k[=i]mah_ and _k[)e]s[=i]l_ have not been found as Babylonian
constellation names, and that their astronomical signification had been
lost by the time that the "Seventy" undertook their labours.

Quite apart from the fact that the Babyl