Why do zodiac constellations not look like their names? I am trying to answer the question of one of my youngest students (who is not yet in school), and although going through books, wikipedia etc. I do not have a good answer to his question yet:

Why does none of the 12 zodiac constellations look their respective name?

Joe Rao: Why Don’t Constellations Look Anything Like What They’re Named? offers the following explanation which does not convince my student:

Remember, of course, that a few thousand years ago there was not much to entertain people once the Sun went down. They would go outside under the cover of darkness, look up at the stars, and weave stories or tales about people, animals, and mythical beasts, and use the patterns of stars as illustrations.

The best answer I have so far:

The zodiac names are old, and the constellations have been looking back then more like their actual names.

I am not sure how accurate that answer is and whether there is any better explanation, that's why I am asking the simple question here.
References

History of Zodiac constellations (Wikipedia)
https://www.lpi.usra.edu/education/skytellers/constellations/
Who says they don't? Surely it just depends on how you play &quot;join the dots&quot;? The human brain will make out patterns where it wishes and what things look like is largely in the eye of the beholder.
The second explanation isn't true. Although the relative positions of the stars do change, they have not changed very significantly over a period of 3000 years, certainly not enough to change the basic shape of the constellations.