Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site spar.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!whuxl!whuxlm!akgua!mcnc!philabs!prls!amdimage!amdcad!decwrl!spar!freeman
From: freeman@spar.UUCP (Jay Freeman)
Newsgroups: net.astro
Subject: Re: re:re Female Planets
Message-ID: <190@spar.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 19-Apr-85 13:56:19 EST
Article-I.D.: spar.190
Posted: Fri Apr 19 13:56:19 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 22-Apr-85 02:33:11 EST
References: <1295@drusd.UUCP>
Reply-To: freeman@max.UUCP (Jay Freeman)
Organization: Schlumberger Palo Alto Research, CA
Lines: 21
Summary: 


#### sacrificial offering to the line-eater ####

The issue of constellation boundaries and types is particularly
interesting in connection with the zodiac:  The word means
"circle of life" -- that's "zo-" as in "zoology" and "-dia-" as
in "diameter"; and indeed, all the classic constellations along the
plane of the ecliptic are animate objects.  [The "-c" is a tribute
to a computer language developed at Bell labs. :-) ]

Except for one!  Libra -- the scale of justice -- may well have been
the most recent addition to the zodiacal constellations.  It was clearly
formed from part of its neighbor, the Scorpion:  The names of
its prominent stars still mean "northern claw" and "southern claw".

And the modern constellation boundaries mix things up a little more.
One can sometime perplex a believer in astrology by mentioning that
so-and-so was born when the sun was in Ophiuchus. :-)

Along the classic zodiac, I count eight male figures (Gemini is two),
one female, and a bunch of known-but-to-themselves.