Fig. 27.
DETAIL OF GREEK GEOMETRIC VASE
IN THE BRITISH MUSEUM.
Swastika, right, with solar geese.
Goodyear, “Grammar of the Lotus,”
pl. 353, fig. 173.
D’Alviella[76] presents several figures in support of his contention. The first (a) is on a fibula from Etruria ([fig. 190] of this paper). His explanation is that the small circle of rays, bent at right angles, on the broad shield of the pin, represents graphically the rotary movement of the sun, and that the bent arms in the Swastikas on the same object are taken from them. It seems curious that so momentous a subject as the existence of a symbol of a great god, the god of light, heat, and thus of life, should be made to depend upon an object of so small importance. This specimen ([fig. 190]) is a fibula or pin, one of the commonest objects of Etruscan, Greek, or Roman dress. The decorations invoked are on the broad end, which has been flattened to protect the point of the pin, where appears a semicircle of so-called rays, the two Swastikas and two possible crosses. There is nothing about this pin, nor indeed any of the other objects, to indicate any holy or sacred character, nor that any of them were used in any ceremony having relation to the sun, to any god, or to anything holy or sacred. His fig. b is [fig. 88] in this paper. It shows a quadrant of the sphere found by Schliemann at Hissarlik. There is a slightly indefinite circle with rays from the outside, which are bent and crooked in many directions. The sphere is of terra cotta; the marks that have been made on it are rough and ill formed. They were made by incision while the clay was soft and were done in the rudest manner. There are dozens more marks upon the same sphere, none of which seem to have received any consideration in this regard. There is a Swastika upon the sphere, and it is the only mark or sign upon the entire object that seems to have been made with care or precision. His third figure (c) is taken from a reliquaire of the thirteenth century A. D. It has a greater resemblance to the acanthus plant than it has to any solar disk imaginable. The other two figures (d and e) are tetraskelions or ogee Swastikas from ancient coins.
Fig. 28.
GREEK GEOMETRIC VASE.
Swastika with solar geese.
Goodyear, “Grammar of the Lotus,”
pl. 353, fig. 172.
D’Alviella’s next argument[77] is that the triskelion, formed by the same process as the tetraskelion, is an “incontestable” representation of solar movement. No evidence is submitted in support of this assertion, and the investigator of the present day is required, as in prehistoric objects, to depend entirely upon the object itself. The bent arms contain no innate evidence (even though they should be held to represent rotary or gyratory motion) representing the sun or sun gods. It is respectfully suggested that in times of antiquity, as in modern times, the sun is not represented as having a rotary motion, but is rather represented by a circle with diminishing rays projecting from the center or exterior. It seems unjustifiable, almost ridiculous, to transform the three flexed human legs, first appearing on the coins of Lycia, into a sun symbol, to make it the reliable evidence of sun worship, and give it a holy or sacred character as representing a god. It is surely pushing the argument too far to say that this is an “incontestable” representation of the solar movement. The illustrations by d’Alviella on his page 71 are practically the same as [figs. 224 to 226] of this paper.
Count d’Alviella’s further argument[78] is that symbols of the sun god being frequently associated, alternated with, and sometimes replaced by, the Swastika, proves it to have been a sun symbol. But this is doubted, and evidence to sustain the proposition is wanting. Undoubtedly the Swastika was a symbol, was intentional, had a meaning and a degree of importance, and, while it may have been intended to represent the sun and have a higher and holier character, yet these mere associations are not evidence of the fact.
D’Alviella’s plate 2, page 80, while divided into sections a and b, is filled only with illustrations of Swastika associated with circles, dots, etc., introduced for the purpose of showing the association of the Swastika therewith, and that the permutation and replacing of these signs by the Swastika is evidence that the Swastika represented the sun. Most of the same illustrations are presented in this paper, and it is respectfully submitted that the evidence does not bear out his conclusion. If it be established that these other symbols are representatives of the sun, how does that prove that the Swastika was itself a representative of the sun or the sun god? D’Alviella himself argues[79] against the proposition of equivalence of meaning because of association when applied to the Crux ansata, the circle, the crescent, the triskelion, the lightning sign, and other symbolic figures. He denies that because the Swastika is found on objects associated with these signs therefore they became interchangeable in meaning, or that the Swastika stood for any of them. The Count[79] says that more likely the engraver added the Swastika to these in the character of a talisman or phylactery. On page 56 he argues in the same line, that because it is found on an object of sacred character does not necessarily give it the signification of a sacred or holy symbol. He regards the Swastika as a symbol of good fortune, and sees no reason why it may not be employed as an invocation to a god of any name or kind on the principle, “Good Lord, good devil,” quoting the Neapolitan proverb, that it will do no harm, and possibly may do good.
Prof. Max Müller[80] refers to the discovery by Prof. Percy Gardner of one of the coins of Mesembria, whereon the Swastika replaces the last two syllables of the word, and he regards this as decisive that in Greece the meaning of the Swastika was equivalent to the sun. This word, Mesembria, being translated ville de midi, means town or city of the south, or the sun. He cites from Mr. Thomas’s paper on the “Indian Swastika and its Western Counterparts”[81] what he considers an equally decisive discovery made some years ago, wherein it was shown that the wheel, the emblem of the sun in motion, was replaced by the Swastika on certain coins; likewise on some of the Andhra coins and some punched gold coins noted by Sir Walter Elliott.[82] In these cases the circle or wheel alleged to symbolize the sun was replaced by the Swastika. The Swastika has been sometimes inscribed within the rings or normal circles representing what is said to be the four suns on Ujain patterns or coins ([fig. 230]). Other authorities have adopted the same view, and have extended it to include the lightning, the storm, the fire wheel, the sun chariot, etc. (See Ohnefalsch-Richter, p. 790.) This appears to be a non sequitur. All these speculations may be correct, and all these meanings may have been given to the Swastika, but the evidence submitted does not prove the fact. There is in the case of the foregoing coins no evidence yet presented as to which sign, the wheel or the Swastika, preceded and which followed in point of time. The Swastika may have appeared first instead of last, and may not have been a substitution for the disk, but an original design. The disk employed, while possibly representing the sun in some places, may not have done so always nor in this particular case. It assumes too much to say that every time a small circle appears on an ancient object it represented the sun, and the same observation can be made with regard to symbols of the other elements. Until it shall have been satisfactorily established that the symbols represented these elements with practical unanimity, and that the Swastika actually and intentionally replaced it as such, the theory remains undemonstrated, the burden rests on those who take the affirmative side; and until these points shall have been settled with some degree of probability the conclusion is not warranted.