The argument in this paper on the migration of arts or symbols, and with them of peoples in prehistoric times, is not intended to be exhaustive. At best it is only suggestive.

There is no direct evidence available by which the migration of symbols, arts, or peoples in prehistoric times can be proved, because the events are beyond the pale of history. Therefore we are, everybody is, driven to the secondary evidence of the similarity of conditions and products, and we can only subject them to our reason and at last determine the truth from the probabilities. In proportion as the probabilities of migration increase, it more nearly becomes a demonstrated fact. It appears to the author that the probabilities of the migration of the Swastika to America from the Old World is infinitely greater than that it was an independent invention.

The Swastika is found in America in such widely separated places, among such different civilizations, as much separated by time as by space, that if we have to depend on the theory of separate inventions to explain its introduction into America we must also depend upon the same theory for its introduction into the widely separated parts of America. The Swastika of the ancient mound builders of Ohio and Tennessee is similar in every respect, except material, to that of the modern Navajo and Pueblo Indian. Yet the Swastikas of Mississippi and Tennessee belong to the oldest civilization we know in America, while the Navajo and Pueblo Swastikas were made by men still living. A consideration of the conditions bring out these two curious facts: (1) That the Swastika had an existence in America prior to any historic knowledge we have of communication between the two hemispheres; but (2) we find it continued in America and used at the present day, while the knowledge of it has long since died out in Europe.

The author is not unaware of the new theories concerning the parallelism of human development by which it is contended that absolute uniformity of man’s thoughts and actions, aims and methods, is produced when he is in the same degree of development, no matter in what country or in what epoch he lives. This theory has been pushed until it has been said, nothing but geographical environment seems to modify the monotonous sameness of man’s creations. The author does not accept this theory, yet he does not here controvert it. It may be true to a certain extent, but it surely has its limitations, and it is only applicable under special conditions. As a general proposition, it might apply to races and peoples but not to individuals. If it builds on the hereditary human instincts, it does not take into account the will, energy, and reasoning powers of man. Most of all, it leaves out the egoism of man and his selfish desire for power, improvement, and happiness, and all their effects, through the individual, on human progress. In the author’s opinion the progress of peoples through consecutive stages of civilization is entirely compatible with his belief that knowledge of specific objects, the uses of material things, the performance of certain rites, the playing of certain games, the possession of certain myths and traditions, and the carrying on of certain industries, passed from one country to another by migration of their peoples, or by contact or communication between them; and that the knowledge, by separate peoples, of the same things, within reasonable bounds of similarity of action and purpose, and with corresponding difficulty of performance, may well be treated as evidence of such migration, contact, or communication. Sir John Lubbock expresses the author’s belief when he says,[315] “There can be no doubt but that man originally crept over the earth’s surface, little by little, year by year, just, for instance, as the weeds of Europe are now gradually but surely creeping over the surface of Australia.” The word migration has been used by the author in any sense that permitted the people, or any number thereof, to pass from one country to another country, or from one section of a country to another section of the same country, by any means or in any numbers as they pleased or could.

The theory (in opposition to the foregoing) is growing in the United States that any similarity of culture between the two hemispheres is held to be proof of migration of peoples. It appears to the author that these schools both run to excess in propagating their respective theories, and that the true condition of affairs lies midway between them. That is to say, there was certain communication between the two hemispheres, as indicated by the similarities in culture and industry, the objects of which could scarcely have been the result of independent invention; while there are too many dissimilar arts, habits, customs, and modes of life belonging to one hemisphere only, not common to both, to permit us to say there was continuous communication between them. These dissimilarities were inventions of each hemisphere independent of the other.

An illustration of the migration to America is the culture of Greece. We know that Greek art and architecture enter into and form an important part of the culture of Americans of the present day; yet the people of America are not Greek, nor do they possess any considerable share of Greek culture or civilization. They have none of the blood of the Greeks, nor their physical traits, nor their manners, habits, customs, dress, religion, nor, indeed, anything except their sculpture and architecture. Now, there was undoubtedly communication between the two countries in so far as pertains to art and architecture; but it is equally true that there has been no migration of the other elements of civilization mentioned.

The same thing may be true with regard to the migrations of prehistoric civilization. There may have been communication between the countries by which such objects as the polished stone hatchet, the bow and arrow, the leaf-shaped implement, chipped arrow- and spear-heads, scrapers, spindle-whorls, the arts of pottery making, of weaving, of drilling and sawing stone, etc., passed from one to the other, and the same of the Swastika; yet these may all have been brought over in sporadic and isolated cases, importing simply the germ of their knowledge, leaving the industry to be independently worked out on this side. Certain manifestations of culture, dissimilar to those of the Old World, are found in America; we have the rude notched ax, the grooved ax, stemmed scraper, perforator, mortar and pestle, pipes, tubes, the ceremonial objects which are found here in such infinite varieties of shape and form, the metate, the painted pottery, etc., all of which belong to the American Indian civilization, but have no prototype in the prehistoric Old World. These things were never brought over by migration or otherwise. They are indigenous to America.

Objects common to both hemispheres exist in such numbers, of such infinite detail and difficulty of manufacture, that the probabilities of their migration or passage from one country to another is infinitely greater than that they were the result of independent invention. These common objects are not restricted to isolated cases. They are great in number and extensive in area. They have been the common tools and utensils such as might have belonged to every man, and no reason is known why they might not have been used by, and so represent, the millions of prehistoric individuals in either hemisphere. This great number of correspondences between the two hemispheres, and their similarity as to means and results is good evidence of migration, contact, or communication between the peoples; while the extent to which the common industries were carried in the two continents, their delicacy and difficulty of operation, completes the proof and forces conviction.

It is not to be understood in the few foregoing illustrations that the number is thereby exhausted, or that all have been noted which are within the knowledge of the author. These have been cited as illustrative of the proposition and indicating possibilities of the argument. If a completed argument in favor of prehistoric communication should be prepared, it would present many other illustrations. These could be found, not only among the objects of industry, utensils, etc., but in the modes of manufacture and of use which, owing to their number and the extent of territory which they cover, and the difficulty of accomplishment, would add force to the argument.