The Swastika Part 24

As we do not find it represented in America on aboriginal religious monuments, on ancient G.o.ds, idols, or other sacred or holy objects, we are justified in claiming that it was not here used as a religious symbol; while, as it is found only on trinkets, sh.e.l.ls, copper plaques, spindle-whorls, metates, pottery bowls, jugs, bottles, or vases; as we find it sometimes square, sometimes spiral, now outside, now inside, of bowls and jars, etc.; at one time a small rectangular figure and at another of extensive convolutions covering the side of the vase; as we find it on the tools of the workmen, the objects in everyday use, whether in the house or the shop, used indiscriminately by men and women, or on gaming implements or dance rattles, the contention seems justifiable that it was used as an ornament or as a charm for good luck and not as a religious symbol. Yet we know it was used on certain ceremonial occasions which may themselves have had more or less a sacred character.

Thus, after the fullest examination, we find the Swastika was confined to the commoner uses, implements, household utensils, and objects for the toilet and personal decoration. The specimens of this kind number a hundred to one of a sacred kind. With this preponderance in favor of the common use, it would seem that, except among the Buddhists and early Christians, and the more or less sacred ceremonies of the North American Indians, all pretense of the holy or sacred character of the Swastika should be given up, and it should (still with these exceptions) be considered as a charm, amulet, token of good luck or good fortune, or as an ornament and for decoration.

VI.--THE MIGRATION OF SYMBOLS.

MIGRATION OF THE SWASTIKA.

The question of the migration of the Swastika and of the objects on which it was marked, which furnished its only means of transportation, remains to be considered. It is proposed to examine, in a cursory manner perhaps, not only the migration of the Swastika itself, but some of these objects, spindle whorls especially, with a view to discover by similarity or peculiarity of form or decoration any relationship they may have had with each other when found in distant countries and used by different peoples.

Thus, we may be able to open the way to a consideration of the question whether this similarity of Swastikas or other decorations, or of the objects on which they were placed, resulted from the migration of or contact or communication between distant peoples, or was it accidental and the result of independent discoveries and duplicate inventions--an evidence of the parallelism of human thought?

Dr. Brinton, in a communication before the American Philosophical Society,[307] starts out with a polemical discussion upon the subject of the migration of the Swastika and its possible American migration, as follows:

My intention is to combat the opinion of those writers who, like Dr.

Hamy, M. Beauvois, and many others, a.s.sert that because certain well-known Oriental symbols, as the Ta Ki, the Triskeles, the Svastika, and the cross, are found among the American aborigines, they are evidence of Mongolian, Buddhistic, Christian, or Aryan immigrations previous to the discovery by Columbus, and I shall also try to show that the position is erroneous of those who, like William H. Holmes, of the Bureau of Ethnology, maintain "that it is impossible to give a satisfactory explanation of the religious significance of the cross as a religious symbol in America."

In opposition to both these views, I propose to show that the primary significance of all these widely extended symbols is quite clear, and that they can be shown to have arisen from certain fixed relations of man to his environment, the same everywhere, and hence suggesting the same graphic representations among tribes most divergent in location and race, and, therefore, that such symbols are of little value in tracing ethnic affinities or the currents of civilization.

I am sorry to be compelled to differ with Dr. Brinton in these views. I may not attempt much argument upon this branch of the subject, but whatever argument is presented will be in opposition to this view, as not being borne out by the evidence. Of course, the largest portion of the discussion of this subject must consist of theory and argument, but such facts as are known, when subjected to an a.n.a.lysis of reason, seem to produce a result contrary to that announced by Dr. Brinton.

It is conceded that the duplication of the cross by different or distant peoples is no evidence of migrations of or contact between these peoples, however close their relations might have been. The sign of the cross itself was so simple, consisting of only two marks or pieces intersecting each other at a right or other angle, that we may easily suppose it to have been the result of independent invention. The same conclusion has been argued with regard to the Swastika. But this is a _non sequitur_.

First, I dispute the proposition of fact that the Swastika is, like the cross, a simple design--one which would come to the mind of any person and would be easy to make. For evidence of this, I cite the fact that it is not in common use, that it is almost unknown among Christian peoples, that it is not included in any of the designs for, nor mentioned in any of the modern European or American works on, decoration, nor is it known to or practiced by artists or decorators of either country.[308] For the truth of this, I appeal to the experience of artists and decorators, and would put the question whether, of their own knowledge, by their own inventions, they have ever discovered or made Swastikas, or whether their brother artists have done so, and if they answer in the affirmative, I would ask whether those cases were not rare. It may be granted that when the Swastika has been seen by an artist or decorator it is easily understood and not difficult to execute, but, nevertheless, I insist that its invention and use among artists and decorators during the centuries since the Rennaissance is rare.

It is argued by Zmigrodzki that the Swastika on so many specimens, especially the Trojan spindle-whorls, having been made regularly, sometimes turning one way, sometimes another, sometimes square, other times curved, goes to show the rapidity with which the sign was made, that it did not require an artist, that its use was so common that it had become a habit and was executed in a rapid and sketchy manner, as evidenced by the appearance of the marks themselves upon the whorls. He likens this to the easy and unconsidered way which men have of signing their names, which they are able to do without attention. He likens it also to the sign of the cross made by Roman Catholics so rapidly as to be unnoticed by those who are unaware of its significance. With this line of argument, Zmigrodzki reasons that the Swastika was in its time confined to common use and thus he accounts for the number of ill-formed specimens.

This only accounts for the comparatively few ill-formed specimens, but not for the great number, the ma.s.s of those well formed and well drawn.

Instead of the Swastika being a sign easily made, the experience of the writer is the contrary. A simple cross like the Latin, Greek, St.

Andrew's, and other common forms may be very easy to make, but a really good specimen of the Swastika is difficult to make. Any one who doubts this has only to make the experiment for himself, and make correctly such a specimen as fig. 9. While it may be easy enough to make the Greek cross with two lines of equal length intersecting each other at right angles, and while this forms a large proportion of the Swastikas, it is at its conclusion that the trouble of making a perfect Swastika begins. It will be found difficult, requiring care and attention, to make the projecting arms of equal length, to see that they are all at the same angle; and if it is bent again and again, two or three turns upon each other, the difficulty increases. If a person thinks that the Swastika, either in the square or the ogee curves or the spiral volutes, is easy to make, he has but to try it with paper and pencil, and, if that is his first attempt, he will soon be convinced of his error. The artist who drew the spirals for this paper p.r.o.nounces them to be the most difficult of all; the curves are parabolic, no two portions of any one are in the same circle, the circle continually widens, and no two circles nor any two portions of the same circle have the same center. To keep these lines true and parallel, the curve regular, the distances the same, and at the same time sweeping outward in the spiral form, the artist p.r.o.nounces a most difficult work, requiring care, time, and attention (fig. 295). Even the square and meander Swastikas (figs. 10, 11) require a rule and angle to make them exact. All this goes to show the intention of the artist to have been more or less deliberate; and that the object he made was for a special purpose, with a particular idea, either as a symbol, charm, or ornament, and not a meaningless figure to fill a vacant s.p.a.ce.

Yet it is practically this difficult form of the cross which appears to have spread itself through the widest culture areas, extending almost to the uttermost parts of the earth. All this is foundation for the suggestion that the Swastika was not the result of duplicate invention or independent discovery, that it is not an ill.u.s.tration of parallelism in human thought, but that it was transmitted from person to person, or pa.s.sed from one country to another, either by the migration of its people, by their contact or communication, or by the migration and transmission of the symbol and the sign itself. Pushing the argument of the difficulty of its making, to account for the rarity of the design, it is alleged that in modern times the Swastika is practically unknown among Christian peoples.

It pa.s.sed out of use among them nigh a thousand years ago and has been supplanted by every other imaginable geometric form. The fret, chevron, herringbone, crosses, and circles of every kind, spirals, volutes, ogees, moldings, etc., have all remained in use since neolithic times, but no Swastika. The latest use mentioned in the literature upon this subject appears to have been in the arch-Episcopal chair in the cathedral at Milan, which bears the three ancient Christian crosses, the Latin cross, the monogram of Christ, and the Swastika, of which the first and last are carved in alternates around the pedestal of the chair. Yet the knowledge of the Swastika has been perpetuated in some countries and its use has not died out all over the world; therefore, examples of its use in modern times should be noted in order to prevent misapprehension and contradiction. The double Greek fret made with two continuous lines (fig.

139) forms a pseudo Swastika at each intersection, although we have seen that this is not a real but only an apparent Swastika (p. 783). This is used in modern times by carpet and linen weavers as borders for carpets and tablecloths, and by tile makers in similar decoration. The Swastika mark has continued in use among the Orientals; the Theosophists have adopted it as a seal or insignia; the j.a.panese (fig. 30), the Koreans (p.

799), the Chinese (fig. 31), the Jains (figs. 33, 34), and, among the North American Indians, the Navajo (pl. 17), and those of the Kansas Reservation (pls. 15 and 16). It is not used by European peoples in modern times, except in Lapland and Finland. The National Museum has lately received a collection of modern household and domestic utensils from Lapland, some of which bear the marks of the cross and one a churn, the lid of which bears a possible Swastika mark. Through the kindness of Professor Mason and Mr. Cushing, I have received a drawing of this (fig.

344). Theodor Schvindt, in "Suomalaisia koristeita,"[309] a book of standard national Finnish patterns for the embroideries of the country, gives the Swastika among others; but it is cla.s.sed among "oblique designs"

and no mention is made of it as a Swastika or of any character corresponding to it. Its lines are always at angles of 45 degrees, and are continually referred to as "oblique designs."

The Swastika ornaments Danish baptismal fonts, and according to Mr. J.

A. Hjaltalin it "was used [in Iceland] a few years since as a magic sign, but with an obscured or corrupted meaning." It arrived in that island in the ninth century A. D.[310]

[Ill.u.s.tration: Fig. 344. MODERN CHURN LID WITH DESIGN RESEMBLING SWASTIKA.

Lapland. U. S. National Museum.]

The Swastika mark appears both in its normal and ogee form in the Persian carpets and rugs.[311] While writing this memoir, I have found in the Persian rug in my own bedchamber sixteen figures of the Swastika. In the large rug in the chief clerk's office of the National Museum there are no less than twenty-seven figures of the Swastika. On a piece of imitation Persian carpet, with a heavy pile, made probably in London, I found also figures of the Swastika. All the foregoing figures have been of the normal Swastika, the arms crossing each other and the ends turning at right angles, the lines being of equal thickness throughout. Some of them were bent to the right and some to the left. At the entrance of the Grand Opera House in Washington I saw a large India rug containing a number of ogee Swastikas; while the arms crossed each other at right angles, they curved, some to the right and some to the left, but all the lines increased in size, swelling in the middle of the curve, but finishing in a point. The modern j.a.panese wisteria workbaskets for ladies have one or more Swastikas woven in their sides or covers.

Thus, it appears that the use of the Swastika in modern times is confined princ.i.p.ally to Oriental and Scandinavian countries, countries which hold close relations to antiquity; that, in western Europe, where in ancient times the Swastika was most frequent, it has, during the last one or two thousand years, become extinct. And this in the countries which have led the world in culture.

If the Swastika was a symbol of a religion in India and migrated as such in times of antiquity to America, it was necessarily by human aid. The individuals who carried and taught it should have carried with it the religious idea it represented. To do this required a certain use of language, at least the name of the symbol. If the sign bore among the aborigines in America the name it bore in India, Swastika, the evidence of contact and communication would be greatly strengthened. If the religion it represented in India should be found in America, the chain of evidence might be considered complete. But in order to make it so it will be necessary to show the existence of these names and this religion in the same locality or among the same people or their descendants as is found the sign. To find traces of the Buddhist religion a.s.sociated with the sign of the Swastika among the Eskimo in Alaska might be no evidence of its prehistoric migration, for this might have occurred in modern times, as we know has happened with the Russian religion and the Christian cross. While to find the Buddhist religion and the Swastika symbol together in America, at a locality beyond the possibility of modern European or Asiatic contact, would be evidence of prehistoric migration yet it would seem to fix it at a period when, and from a country where, the two had been used together. If the Swastika and Buddhism migrated to America together it must have been since the establishment of the Buddhist religion, which is approximately fixed in the sixth century B. C. But there has not been as yet in America, certainly not in the localities where the Swastika has been found, any trace discovered of the Buddhist religion, nor of its concomitants of language, art, or custom. Adopting the theory of migration of the Swastika, we may therefore conclude that if the Swastika came from India or Eastern Asia, it came earlier than the sixth century B. C.

If a given religion with a given symbol, both belonging to the Old World, should both be found a.s.sociated in the New World, it would be strong evidence in favor of Old World migration--certainly of contact and communication. Is it not equally strong evidence of contact to find the same sign used in both countries as a charm, with the same significance in both countries?

The argument has been made, and it has proved satisfactory, at least to the author, that throughout Asia and Europe, with the exception of the Buddhists and early Christians, the Swastika was used habitually as a sign or mark or charm, implying good luck, good fortune, long life, much pleasure, great success, or something similar. The makers and users of the Swastika in South and Central America, and among the mound builders of the savages of North America, having all pa.s.sed away before the advent of history, it is not now, and never has been, possible for us to obtain from them a description of the meaning, use, or purpose for which the Swastika was employed by them. But, by the same line of reasoning that the proposition has been treated in the prehistoric countries of Europe and Asia, and which brought us to the conclusion that the Swastika was there used as a charm or token of good luck, or good fortune, or against the evil eye, we may surmise that the Swastika sign was used in America for much the same purpose. It was placed upon the same style of object in America as in Europe and Asia. It is not found on any of the ancient G.o.ds of America, nor on any of the statues, monuments, or altars, nor upon any sacred place or object, but rather upon such objects as indicate the common and everyday use, and on which the Swastika, as a charm for good luck, would be most appropriate, while for a sacred character it would be singularly inappropriate.

The theory of independent invention has been invoked to account for the appearance of the Swastika in widely separated countries, but the author is more inclined to rely upon migration and imitation as the explanation.

When signs or symbols, myths or fables, habits or customs, utensils, implements or weapons, industries, tools or machinery, have been found in countries widely separated from each other, both in countries bearing characteristics so much alike as to make them practically the same objects or industries, and which are made in the same way, they present a question to which there are only two possible solutions: Either they are independent discoveries or inventions which, though a.n.a.logous, have been separately conceived, or else they have been invented or discovered in one of the countries, and pa.s.sed to the other by migration of the object or communication of the knowledge necessary to form it, or by contact between the two peoples. Of these inventions or discoveries said to have been made in duplicate, each of which is alleged to have sprung up in its own country as a characteristic of humanity and by virtue of a law of physics or psychology, it is but fair to say that in the opinion of the author the presumption is all against this. Duplicate inventions have been made and will be made again, but they are uncommon. They are not the rule, but rather the exception. The human intellect is formed on such unknown bases, is so uncertain in its methods, is swayed by such slight considerations, and arrives at so many different conclusions, that, with the manifold diversities of human needs and desires, the chances of duplicate invention by different persons in distant countries, without contact or communication between them, are almost as one to infinity.

The old adage or proverb says, "Many men of many minds," and it only emphasizes the differences between men in regard to the various phenomena mentioned. There are some things sure to happen, yet it is entirely uncertain as to the way they will happen. Nothing is more uncertain than the s.e.x of a child yet to be born, yet every person has one chance out of two to foretell the result correctly. But of certain other premises, the chances of producing the same result are as one to infinity. Not only does the human intellect not produce the same conclusion from the same premises in different persons, but it does not in the same person at different times. It is unnecessary to multiply words over this, but ill.u.s.trations can be given that are satisfactory. A battle, a street fight, any event happening in the presence of many witnesses, will never be seen in the same way by all of them; it will be reported differently by each one; each witness will have a different story. The jurors in our country are chosen because of the absence of prejudice or bias. Their intellect or reason are intended to be subjected to precisely the same evidence and argument, and yet how many jurors disagree as to their verdict? We have but to consider the dissensions and differences developed in the jury room which are settled, sometimes by argument, by change of conviction, or by compromise.

What would be the resources of obtaining justice if we were to insist upon unanimity of decision of the jury upon their first ballot or the first expression of their opinion and without opportunity of change? Yet these jurors have been charged, tried, and sworn a true verdict to render according to the law and evidence as submitted to them. There is no doubt but that they are endeavoring to fulfill their duty in this regard, and while the same evidence as to fact, and charge as to law, are presented to all of them at the same time, what different impressions are made and what different conclusions are produced in the minds of the different jurors.

Ill.u.s.trations of this exist in the decisions of our Supreme Court, wherein, after full argument and fair investigation, with ample opportunity for comparison of views, explanations, and arguments, all based upon the same state of facts, the same witnesses; yet, in how many cases do we find differences of opinion among the members of the court, and questions of the gravest import and of the most vital character settled for the whole nation by votes of 8 to 7 and 5 to 4? The author has examined, and in other places shown, the fallacy of the rule that like produces like. Like causes produce like effects is a law of nature, but when the decision rests upon the judgment of man and depends upon his reason and his intellect, our common knowledge testifies that this law has no application. When the proposition to be determined has to be submitted to individuals of widely separated and distinct countries between whom there has been neither communication nor contact, and who have received no suggestion as to their respective ideas or needs, or the means of satisfying them, it seems to the author that no rule can be predicated upon the similarity of human condition, of human reason, or of human intellect, certainly none which can be depended on to produce the same conclusion.

Consideration of the facility with which symbols, signs, myths, fables, stories, history, etc., are transmitted from one people to another and from one country to another, should not be omitted in this discussion. It may have slight relation to the Swastika to mention the migrations of the present time, but it will give an idea of the possibility of past times.

In this regard we have but to consider the immense number of articles or objects in museums and collections, public and private, representing almost every country and people. We there find objects from all quarters of the globe, from the five continents, and all the islands of the sea.

Some of them are of great antiquity, and it is a matter of wonderment how they should have made such long pa.s.sages and have been preserved from destruction by the vicissitudes of time and s.p.a.ce. We have but to consider how money pa.s.ses from hand to hand and is always preserved to be pa.s.sed on to the next. Every collection of importance throughout the world possesses a greater or less number of Greek and Roman coins antedating the Christian era. We have an excellent ill.u.s.tration of those possibilities in the word "halloo," commonly rendered as "h.e.l.lo." A few years ago this word, was peculiar to the English language, yet an incident lately occurred in the city of Washington, within sight of my own residence, by which this word, "h.e.l.lo," has traveled the world around, has spread itself over land and sea, has attached itself to and become part of most every spoken language of civilization, and without much consideration as to its meaning; but being on the procrustean bed of imitation, there are people, foreigners, who believe that the telephone can be only made to respond when the demand is made "h.e.l.lo!"

MIGRATION OF CLa.s.sIC SYMBOLS.

Count Goblet d'Alviella, in "La Migration des Symboles," traces many ancient symbols from what he believes to be their place of origin to their modern habitat. The idea he elucidates in his book is indicated in its t.i.tle.

_The sacred tree of the a.s.syrians._--This he holds to be one of the oldest historic symbols; that it had its origin in Mesopotamia, one of the earliest civilized centers of the world. Beginning with its simplest form, the sacred tree grew into an ornate and highly complex pattern, invariably a.s.sociated with religious subjects. Two living creatures always stand on either side, facing it and each other. First they were monsters, like winged bulls or griffins, and after became human or semihuman personages--priests or kings, usually in the att.i.tude of devotion. The Count says the migration of both these types can be readily traced. The tree between the two monsters or animals pa.s.sed from Mesopotamia to India, where it was employed by the Buddhists and Brahmins, and has continued in use in that country to the present time. It pa.s.sed to the Phenicians, and from Asia Minor to Greece. From the Persians it was introduced to the Byzantines, and during the early ages, into Christian symbolism in Sicily and Italy, and even penetrated to the west of France. The other type--that is, the tree between two semi-human personages--followed the same route into India, China, and eastern Asia, and, being found in the ancient Mexican and Maya codices, it forms part of the evidence cited by the Count as a pre-Columbian communication between the Old World and the New. He argues this out by similarity of the details of att.i.tude and expression of the human figure, the arrangement of the branches of the sacred tree, etc.

_The sacred cone of Mesopotamia._--This was worshipped by the western Semites as their great G.o.ddess, under the image of a conical stone. Its figurative representation is found alike on monuments, amulets, and coins.

On some Phenician monuments there is to be seen, super-added to the cone, a horizontal crossbar on the middle of which rests a handle. This shape bears a striking resemblance to the _Crux ansata_ (fig. 4), and, like it, was a symbol of life in its widest and most abstract meaning. The resemblance between them is supposed to have caused them to have been mistaken and employed one for the other in the same character of symbol and talisman. It is alleged that the Ephesian Artemis was but the sacred cone of Mesopotamia anthropomorphized, although, with the halo added to Artemis, the allegation of relationship has been made in respect of the _Crux ansata_.

_The Crux ansata, the key of life._--This is probably more widely known in modern times than any other Egyptian symbol. Its hieroglyphic name is _Ankh_, and its signification is "to live." As an emblem of life, representing the male and female principle united, it is always borne in the hands of the G.o.ds, it is poured from a jar over the head of the king in a species of baptism, and it is laid symbolically on the lips of the mummy to revive it. From Egypt the _Crux ansata_ spread first among the Phenicians, and then throughout the whole Semitic world, from Sardinia to Susiana.

_The winged globe._--This was a widely spread and highly venerated Egyptian symbol. From Egypt it spread, under various modifications, throughout the Old World. It is formed by a combination of the representations of the sun that have prevailed in different localities in Egypt, the mythology of which ended by becoming a solar drama. Two uraeus snakes or asps, with heads erect, are twisted round a globe-shaped disk, behind which are the outstretched wings of a hawk, and on its top the horns of a goat. It commemorates the victory of the principle of light and good over that of darkness and evil. It spread readily among the Phenicians, where it is found suspended over the sacred tree and the sacred cone, and was carried wheresoever their art was introduced--westward to Carthage, Sicily, Sardinia, and Cyprus, eastward to Western Asia. Very early it penetrated on the north to the Hitt.i.tes, and when it reached Mesopotamia, in the time of Sargonidae, the winged circle a.s.sumed the shape of the wheel or rosette, surmounted by a scroll with upcurled extremities and with a feathered tail opening out like a fan, or a human figure in an att.i.tude sometimes of benediction, sometimes warlike, was inscribed within the disk. Then it was no longer exclusively a solar emblem, but served to express the general idea of divinity. From Mesopotamia it pa.s.sed to Persia, princ.i.p.ally in the anthropoid type. It was, however, never adopted by Greece, and it is nowhere met with in Europe, except, as before stated, in the Mediterranean islands. When Greece took over from Asia symbolic combinations in which it was originally represented, she replaced it by the thunderbolt. But the aureole, or halo, which encircles the heads of her divinities, and which Christian art has borrowed from the cla.s.sic, was directly derived from it.

_The caduceus._--This is one of the interesting symbols of antiquity. It appears in many phases and is an excellent ill.u.s.tration of the migration of symbols. Its cla.s.sic type held in the hand of Mercury and used to-day as a symbol of the healing art--a winged rod round which two serpents are symmetrically entwined--is due to the mythographers of later times, and is very remote from its primitive form. In the Homeric hymn it is called "the golden rod, three-petaled of happiness and wealth," which Phoebus gave to the youthful Hermes, but on early Greek monuments the three leaves are represented by a disk surmounted by an incomplete circle. In this shape it constantly appears on Phenician monuments; and at Carthage, where it seems to have been essentially a solar emblem, it is nearly always a.s.sociated with the sacred cone. It is found on Hitt.i.te monuments, where it a.s.sumes the form of a globe surmounted by horns. Numerous origins and manifold antecedents have been attributed to it, such as an equivalent of the thunderbolt, a form of the sacred tree, or a combination of the solar globe with the lunar crescent. Some examples seem to indicate a transition from the sacred tree surmounted by the solar disk, to the form of the caduceus of the Hitt.i.tes. Our author believes it was employed originally as a religious or military standard or flag, and that it was gradually modified by coming in contact with other symbols. Some a.s.syrian bas-reliefs display a military standard, sometimes consisting of a large ring placed upon a staff with two loose bandelets attached, sometimes of a winged globe similarly disposed. This a.s.syrian military standard may be the prototype of the labarum, which Constantine, after his conversion to Christianity, chose for his own standard, and which might equally well have been claimed by the sun worshipers. Under its latest transformation in Greece, a winged rod with two serpents twined round it, it has come down to our own times representing two of the functions of Hermes, more than ever in vogue among men, industry and commerce. It has survived in India under the form of two serpents entwined, probably introduced in the track of Alexander the Great. It was also met with in that country in earlier times in its simpler form, a disk surmounted by a crescent, resembling our astronomical sign for the planet Mercury. This earliest type of the caduceus, a disk surmounted by a crescent, appears at a remote date in India, and seems to have been confounded with the trisula.

_The trisula._--This form of the trident peculiar to the Buddhists was of great importance in the symbolism of the Hindus; but whether it was an imitation of the type of thunderbolt seen on a.s.syrian sculptures, or was devised by them spontaneously, is uncertain. Its simplest form, which is, however, rarely met with, is an omicron ([Greek: o]) surmounted by an omega ([Greek: o]). Nearly always the upper portion is flanked by two small circles, or by two horizontal strokes which often take the appearance of leaves or small wings. The points of the omega are generally changed into small circles, leaves, or trefoil; and the disk itself is placed on a pedestal. From its lower arc there fall two spires like serpents' tails with the ends curving, sometimes up and sometimes down. This is a very complex symbol. None of the Buddhist texts give any positive information in regard to its origin or meaning, and few symbols have given rise to more varied explanations. The upper part of the figure is frequently found separated from the lower; sometimes this is plainly a trident superposed upon a disk-shaped nucleus. The trident may possibly have symbolized the flash of lightning, as did Neptune's trident among the Greeks, but more probably it is the image of the solar radiation. Among the northern Buddhists it personifies the heaven of pure flame superposed upon the heaven of the sun. Though undoubtedly a Hindu emblem, its primitive shape seems to have early felt the influence of the caduceus, while its more complex forms exhibit a likeness to certain types of the winged globe. Still later the trisula was converted by Brahmanism into an anthropoid figure, and became the image of Jagenath. The vegetable kingdom was also laid under contribution, and the trisula came into a resemblance of the tree of knowledge. Although we have learned the probable signification of its factors in the creeds that preceded Buddhism, we know very little about its meaning in the religion that used it most, but it is a symbol before which millions have bowed in reverence. The plastic development of the trisula shows with what facility emblems of the most dissimilar origin may merge into each other when the opportunity of propinquity is given, and there is sufficient similarity in form and meaning.

_The double-headed eagle on the escutcheon of Austria and Russia._--Count D'Alviella tells the history of the migration of the symbol of the double-headed eagle on the escutcheon of Austria and Russia. It was originally the type of the Garuda bird of southern India, found on temple sculptures, in carved wood, on embroideries, printed and woven cloths, and on amulets. It first appears on the so-called Hitt.i.te sculptures at Eyuk, the ancient Pteria in Phrygia. In 1217 it appeared on the coins and standards of the Turkoman conquerors of Asia Minor.

In 1227-28 the Emperor Frederick II undertook the sixth crusade, landing at Acre in the latter year, and being crowned King of Jerusalem in 1229.

Within thirty years from these dates the symbol appeared on the coins of certain Flemish princes, and in 1345 it replaced the single-headed eagle on the armorial bearing of the holy Roman Empire. Thus, the historic evidence of the migration of this symbol, from the far east to the nations of the west by direct contact, would seem complete.

_The lion rampant of Belgium._--This lion was incorporated into the Percy or Northumberland escutcheon by the marriage of Joceline of Louvain, the second son of G.o.dfrey, the Duke of Brabant, to Agnes, the sister and heir of all the Percys. The Counts of Flanders, Brabant, and Louvain bore as their coat of arms the lion rampant facing to the left, which is the present coat of arms of the King of Belgium. The story is thus told in Burke's "Peerage" (1895): Agnes de Percy married Joceline of Louvain, brother of Queen Adeliza, second wife of Henry I, and son of G.o.dfrey Barbalus, Duke of Lower Brabant and Count of Brabant, who was descended from the Emperor Charlemagne. Her ladyship, it is stated, would only consent, however, to this great alliance upon condition that Joceline should adopt either the surname or arms of Percy, the former of which, says the old family tradition, he accordingly a.s.sumed, and retained his own paternal coat in order to perpetuate his claim to the princ.i.p.ality of his father, should the elder line of the reigning duke become extinct. The matter is thus stated in the old pedigree at Sion House: "The ancient arms of Hainault this Lord Jocelyn retained, and gave his children the surname of Percy."

The migration of this lion rampant is interesting. It was in the twelfth century the coat of arms of the King of Albania. Phillippe d'Alsace, the eldest son of Thierry d'Alsace, was Count of Flanders, sixteenth in succession, tracing his ancestry back to 621 A. D. The original and ancient coat of arms of the Counts of Flanders consisted of a small shield in the center of a larger one, with a sunburst of six rays. Phillippe d'Alsace reigned as Count of Flanders and Brabant from 1168 to 1190 A. D.

He held an important command in two crusades to the Holy Land. During a battle in one of these crusades, he killed the King of Albania in a hand-to-hand conflict, and carried off his shield with its escutcheon of the lion rampant, which Phillippe transferred to his own shield, took as his own coat of arms, and it has been since that time the coat of arms of the Counts of Flanders and Brabant, and is now that of Belgium. The lion in the escutcheon can thus be traced by direct historic evidence through Northumberland, Flanders and Louvain back to its original owner, the King of Albania, in the twelfth century. Thus is the migration of the symbol traced by communication and contact, and thus are shown the possibilities in this regard which go far toward invalidating, if they do not destroy, the presumption of separate invention in those cases wherein, because of our ignorance of the facts, we have invoked the rule of separate invention.

_Greek art and architecture._--It has come to be almost a proverb in scientific investigation that we argue from the known to the unknown. We might argue from this proverb in favor of the migration of the Swastika symbol and its pa.s.sage from one people to another by the ill.u.s.tration of the Greek fret, which is in appearance closely related to the Swastika; and, indeed, we might extend the ill.u.s.tration to all Greek architecture.

It is a well-known fact, established by numberless historic evidences, that the Greek architecture of ancient times migrated--that is, pa.s.sed by communication and contact of peoples, and by transfer of knowledge from one man to another, and from one generation to the succeeding generation, until it became known throughout all western countries. The architects of Rome, Vicenza, Paris, London, Philadelphia, Washington, Chicago, and San Francisco derive their knowledge of Grecian architecture in its details of Doric, Ionic, and Corinthian styles by direct communication, either spoken, written or graphic, from the Greek architects who practiced, if they did not invent, these styles.