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 _kīmah_ and _kĕsīl_ 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 Babylonians could not give the name of "Fool" to the representation in the sky of their supreme deity, the Hebrews and the Babylonians regarded the constellation in different ways. Several Assyriologists consider that the constellations, _Orion_ and _Cetus_, represent the struggle between Merodach and Tiamat, and this conjecture is probably correct, so far as Babylonian ideas of the constellations are concerned, for Tiamat is expressly identified on a Babylonian tablet with a constellation near the ecliptic.[241:1] But this means that the myth originated in the star figures, and was the Babylonian interpretation of them. In this case, Cetus--that is Tiamat--must have been considered as a goddess, and as directly and immediately the ancestress of all the gods. Orion--Merodach--must have been likewise a god, the great-great-grandson of Tiamat, whom he destroys.