I must admit that I had high hopes for this talk. It struck me as a key approach into understanding the original use of stars and constellations. Unfortunately I found the presentation rather poor and lacking in depth. This may, of course be that very little is recorded and much is supposition. Still it would have been nice to have discussed the non Greek/Roman names, and indeed the times of year that the constellations would have contained the sun when originally created.

Perhaps the most intriguing aspect was the possible requirement to reanalyse the Zodiacal signs as precession slowly changed the time of year that the sun would pass through each one. So that 3000 years on from an original four a new set had to be defined. Given the amount of shelf space given over to books on astrology in today's bookshops it seems surprising that this doesn't occur more in ancient texts discovered.

- Colin Maynard