An English gentleman, versed in prehistoric archæology, visited me in the
summer of 1894, and during our conversation asked if we had the Swastika
in America. I answered, "Yes," and showed him two or three specimens of
it. He demanded if we had any literature on the subject. I cited him De
Mortillet, De Morgan, and Zmigrodzki, and he said, "No, I mean English or
American." I began a search which proved almost futile, as even the word
Swastika did not appear in such works as Worcester's or Webster's
dictionaries, the Encyclopædic Dictionary, the Encyclopædia Britannica,
Johnson's Universal Cyclopædia, the People's Cyclopædia, nor Smith's
Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities, his Greek and Roman Biography
and Mythology, or his Classical Dictionary. I also searched, with the same
results, Mollett's Dictionary of Art and Archæology, Fairholt's Dictionary
of Terms in Art, "L'Art Gothique," by Gonza, Perrot and Chipiez's
extensive histories of Art in Egypt, in Chaldea and Assyria, and in
Phenicia; also "The Cross, Ancient and Modern," by W. W. Blake, "The
History of the Cross," by John Ashton; and a reprint of a Dutch work by
Wildener. In the American Encyclopædia the description is erroneous, while
all the Century Dictionary says is, "Same as fylfot," and "Compare _Crux
Ansata_ and _Gammadion_." I thereupon concluded that this would be a good
subject for presentation to the Smithsonian Institution for "diffusion of
knowledge among men."
The principal object of this paper has been to gather and put in a compact
form such information as is obtainable concerning the Swastika, leaving to
others the task of adjustment of these facts and their arrangement into
an harmonious theory. The only conclusion sought to be deduced from the
facts stated is as to the possible migration in prehistoric times of the
Swastika and similar objects.
No conclusion is attempted as to the time or place of origin, or the
primitive meaning of the Swastika, because these are considered to be lost
in antiquity. The straight line, the circle, the cross, the triangle, are
simple forms, easily made, and might have been invented and re-invented in
every age of primitive man and in every quarter of the globe, each time
being an independent invention, meaning much or little, meaning different
things among different peoples or at different times among the same
people; or they may have had no settled or definite meaning. But the
Swastika was probably the first to be made with a definite intention and a
continuous or consecutive meaning, the knowledge of which passed from
person to person, from tribe to tribe, from people to people, and from
nation to nation, until, with possibly changed meanings, it has finally
circled the globe.
There are many disputable questions broached in this paper. The author is
aware of the differences of opinion thereon among learned men, and he has
not attempted to dispose of these questions in the few sentences employed
in their announcement. He has been conservative and has sought to avoid
dogmatic decisions of controverted questions. The antiquity of man, the
locality of his origin, the time of his dispersion and the course of his
migration, the origin of bronze and the course of its migration, all of
which may be more or less involved in a discussion of the Swastika, are
questions not to be settled by the dogmatic assertions of any individual.
Much of the information in this paper is original, and relates to
prehistoric more than to modern times, and extends to nearly all the
countries of the globe. It is evident that the author must depend on other
discoverers; therefore, all books, travels, writers, and students have
been laid under contribution without scruple. Due acknowledgment is hereby
made for all quotations of text or figures wherever they occur.
Quotations have been freely made, instead of sifting the evidence and
giving the substance. The justification is that there has never been any
sufficient marshaling of the evidence on the subject, and that the former
deductions have been inconclusive; therefore, quotations of authors are
given in their own words, to the end that the philosophers who propose to
deal with the origin, meaning, and cause of migration of the Swastika will
have all the evidence before them.
Assumptions may appear as to antiquity, origin, and migration of the
Swastika, but it is explained that many times these only reflect the
opinion of the writers who are quoted, or are put forth as working
hypotheses.
The indulgence of the reader is asked, and it is hoped that he will
endeavor to harmonize conflicting statements upon these disputed questions
rather than antagonize them.