<p>In the more modern images of the constellation Gemini it more looks like a twin:</p>
<p><a href="https://i.sstatic.net/V0jDl.jpg" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/V0jDl.jpg" alt="Gemini 1" /></a></p>
<p>But in the old images when ancient people mentioned it, it doesn't look like a twin at all. But it was still called Gemini (Latin for twin).</p>
<p>How did ancient people see a twin in it?</p>
<p><a href="https://i.sstatic.net/4NrGB.jpg" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/4NrGB.jpg" alt="Gemini 2" /></a></p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-08-06T07:26:06.663Z
You do know that you can see the stars without an app, and there are no lines at all? See https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/questions/54187/where-are-modern-constellation-lines-defined/54192#54192  The "traditional" lines are not the patterns draw by "ancient people".  They didn't draw any lines at all. If you look at ancient sky maps, they draw actual lifelike pictures.  The terms that the skyportal app uses has confused you.
James K
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-08-07T10:32:10.843Z
The all I can see with my city lights are just 2 bright stars, Castor and Pollux :) And yes, it looks natural to call them Twins. The other stars around them are much dimmer.
Heopps
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-08-07T13:23:07.137Z
The constellation looked essentially unchanged at 2000 BC compared to 2000 AD. You can easily check this by going into the Stellarium app and setting the date to -2000. The stellar proper motions as measured by the Hipparcos satellite are in their database. You can confirm that there is a change in sky position for high proper motion stars by looking at Procyon. You are just misinterpreting two different pictures from two different sources.
AtmosphericPrisonEscape
<constellations><naming>
How did ancient people call this still a twin?
Snack Exchange
# How did ancient people call this still a twin?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2023-08-06)

In the more modern images of the constellation Gemini it more looks like a twin:

[![Gemini 1](https://i.sstatic.net/V0jDl.jpg)](https://i.sstatic.net/V0jDl.jpg)

But in the old images when ancient people mentioned it, it doesn't look like a twin at all. But it was still called Gemini (Latin for twin).

How did ancient people see a twin in it?

[![Gemini 2](https://i.sstatic.net/4NrGB.jpg)](https://i.sstatic.net/4NrGB.jpg)

**Tags:** constellations, naming

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: You do know that you can see the stars without an app, and there are no lines at all? See https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/questions/54187/where-are-modern-constellation-lines-defined/54192#54192  The "traditional" lines are not the patterns draw by "ancient people".  They didn't draw any lines at all. If you look at ancient sky maps, they draw actual lifelike pictures.  The terms that the skyportal app uses has confused you.  
> **username_2**: The all I can see with my city lights are just 2 bright stars, Castor and Pollux :) And yes, it looks natural to call them Twins. The other stars around them are much dimmer.  
> **username_3**: The constellation looked essentially unchanged at 2000 BC compared to 2000 AD. You can easily check this by going into the Stellarium app and setting the date to -2000. The stellar proper motions as measured by the Hipparcos satellite are in their database. You can confirm that there is a change in sky position for high proper motion stars by looking at Procyon. You are just misinterpreting two different pictures from two different sources.  

---

## 0 answers

