The twelve signs are to him simply thirty degrees of the space (12 times 30 equal 360), bearing the names of the constellations which once occupied them. Nay, he, as a rule, still imagines in some sense that the signs (constellations) are still there, and that the power and potency of the twelve signs is derived from the stars which occupy the Zodiacal band of the skies. But this is not so, as any ordinary astronomer well knows. This single fact, i.e., the gradual shifting of the constellations, the DISPLACEMENT, let us say, of the starry influx from one sign to another without any ALLOWANCE being made in the astrologer's rules for any such change, has been one of the greatest obstructions to the popular spread of the art among EDUCATED MINDS. Argues the scientist: The "fiery influence of Aries," if depending upon the stars of that constellation, ought now to be shedding forth their caloric from the sign Pisces, and Aries ought to be lumbering along with the earthy Taurine nature. So, also, the lords of these signs ought to be changed, but that they are not can be proved by the fact that our earliest records of that dim, historic past show, equally as well as your latest "text-book," that Mars is the lord of Aries--a fiery planet in a fiery sign; but astrologers still say that Pisces is watery and Aries fiery, WHICH IS NOT THE CASE, IF THE STARS HAVE ANY INFLUENCE AT ALL. It is not necessary," say these logical thinkers, "to learn your abstruse science if we can demonstrate that the very basis upon which your conclusions rest is in every sense fundamentally false." The scientific facts of the case are as follows: The influence of the twelve signs, as described by astrologers, is a delusion, because in all ages they are reported the same; whereas WE KNOW that every 2,160 years each sign retrogrades to the extent of thirty degrees, and, as your art does not make allowance for this, it is false. For, if the influence of the twelve signs does not emanate from the stars occupying the space of those signs, it must emanate from nothing--a doctrine well suited, no doubt, to musty old sages of your superstitious Chaldea, but quite out of court in our progressive age--the last decade of our cultured and scientific nineteenth century. So far, so good. And so the world rolls along its bright pathway in the heavens, little heeding the logical conclusions of an exact science. But to an initiate of those inner principles of our planet's constitution all these mental conflicts have a meaning and a purpose within Nature's divine economy; for it is neither wise nor expedient that the masses, with popular science in the lead, should grasp the truths which Mother Nature reserves ALONE for her own devoted priests.