Talk:Swastika/Archive 3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5

Poland law's - not really true

In Poland it is an offence to advertise totalitarist reigimes, like the Nazis or the USSR. The law is also a bit of a dead one, as people don't wear symbols of Nazims rather culturally (though some skinheads do) and symbols of the USSR are quite common on clothing, as everywhere else. Nazi symbols have no special status The up to 2 years is for advertising nazism/communism only. Poland's laws are so liberal that Poland's biggest auction portal (won't advertise it here) is the main marketplace for Nazi stuff, even present day "replicas" - something not possible on ebay for instance. The "Nigdy Więcej" (Never Again) foundation is working to change all this, but at present you could walk through Warsaw with a dangling swastika on your neck and have no problems what saw ever. The Polish law part, based on a strange article from a non-Polish newspaper with a lot of mix-up is just misleading. Or presents some wishful thinking of Never Again activists. I'm not saying such a ban would be bad in a country like Poland, but this is an encyclopedia, not a blog, so it should be accurate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 11:21, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

hindu/hitler centric introduction

swastika was copied by hitler from hindu's becouse he liked the way of hindu treatement's to different casts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 11:26, 3 December 2009 (UTC) I was linked to this article by someone who believed the swastika was INVENTED in india and indeed, although this article mentions much lower the ancient aryan-persian/hittite/celtic use of the symbol, why so much focus on 2 extremes of the symbols use (hitler & hindus)? I think the pre-hindu origin of the swastika which was imported to india by the aryans should be at least as important to the article as hitler and the hindus using it. I know that attributing the swastika to the same ancient aryan/persian group Hitler did may be taboo and some may want it censored, but its origins are really scarcely related to hinduism or india though its use is and the article seems to be pushing that "good hindus invented it, bad hitler stole it" urban legend. Can we have some further mention of the heavy use in celtic culture for example? I am able to scan some photos of swastika-clad ancient celtic shields but the quality is low and I'd like to find some better ones online possibly. Cold polymer 17:38, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

I've just shifted a sentence (which was in an odd spot anyhow) and added another. It's a quick fix, but it should at least clafiry that the symbol wasn't created by Hindus. Feel free to modify it and make it better. -Bbik 18:12, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
The Nazi use of the swastika specifically derives from Indo-Iranian usage and the use of the term 'swastika' is ditrectly derived from it. I think it is important to emphasise that fact. We have no evidence that it was introduced by IE speakers, since IVC seals with thr motif have been located. Paul B 20:10, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

the significance of the symbol in prehistoric times is unknown. We cannot do much more than state that it occurs all over the place, but not as a rule in a context suggesting particular importance. Images of "swastika clad Celtic shields" really do nothing to help us here. For all we know, it was just an ornament. What we are lacking is a clear link to or evolution out of the sun wheel, a symbol which quite clearly does have cultic importance in Bronze Age Europe. I note that we are missing crucial documentation of the first instances we can clearly demonstrate religious significance of the symbol. This development appears to take place in the 3rd century or so in Buddhist the Mauryan Empire. I would be interested in the earliest unambiguous link between the term svastika and the gammadion symbol, and the earliest unambiguously Buddhist context. Apparently, the swastika is "Buddha's heart" in at least the 10th century China, but there is quite a gap between the 3rd c. BC and the 10th c. AD. dab (𒁳) 14:57, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

The swastika was not imported to India by the Aryans. The Swastika was used by people of HInduism, of ancien India (or at least around that area). The Aryans didnt come from another country and go to India. I mean you can make an argument that the Aryans came from India, so if that's the case you cant say they imported it to India. If you dont believe the Aryans came from India, then whereever they came from, they were used by the Aryans, who probably followed Hinduism, or an older form of HInduism, so you can say it came from Hinduism. ARYAN818 (talk) 15:59, 11 September 2008 (UTC)


Bkobres (talk · contribs), the article Comets and the swastika motif is essentially a rehash of your book. Without, it may be noted, citing a single review that would add credibility to the publication. No source cited post-dates your 1992 thesis. Even Sagan's 1985 proposal found no wide resonance, but it is at least notable enough to mention here. I see no reason to go into "bird-comets" on this article, unless some mainstream review of the concept is presented. Comets and the swastika motif itself needs to be reviewed for notability and OR issues. dab (𒁳) 12:31, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

The article has been cited by other researchers. You seem to be a not too careful contributor as you added to Comets and the swastika motif that others were following Sagan and Druyan (1985) when just below Clube and Napier (1982) is mentioned. 13:17, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
Your article is published by the "Society for Interdisciplinary Studies", a clearly fringe organisation devoted to "global cosmic catastrophes". I suppose it may have been cited by other SIS members, I don't know, but I don't suppose it is cited within any mainstream context is it? Paul B 13:54, 3 August 2007 (UTC) is one example. 14:11, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
Right, a pop-article written by a "freshman-sophomore", which is entirely researched from webpages. Paul B 14:19, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

I haven't read any of these books, and am not planning to. But I am more careful than you seem capable of noting: If Clube&Napier have drawn the Swastika connection, we have no reference to that. So far, the article only states that they "reproduced a portion of this silk atlas and suggest that some of the comet drawings were probably related to the breakup of the progenitor of comet Encke and the Taurid meteoroid stream", no mention of swastikas. This whole thing is precariously close to Catastrophism, a topic we justly file under "pseudoscience". dab (𒁳) 14:26, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Clube and Napier are respected astrophysicists who have argued since 1978 for a link between the progenitor of the Taurid meteor complex and civilization/climate downturns during the past 15,000 years (late Pleistocene through Holocene). Their hypothesis is generally referred to as "coherent catastrophism" because there is actual evidence of the comet's breakup, cultural descriptions that can be understood as relating to comet breakup and impact with some of the debris, and there are no supernatural agents or careening planets involved. As for my 15 year old article it still gets cited in various quality works--there is still a religion rooted fringe that looks for 'end days' related material. There are serious cultural researchers working in this area though and it is not wise to label all study of literature suggestive of past impact events as Catastrophism. Bkobres 20:04, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
my question was, do Clube and Napier discuss the swastika (the actual subject of this article)? By all means do feel free to cite reviews of your work in "various quality works" (merely being cited isn't everything, people can also cite you as a horrible example; you'll need to show that some "quality" author has taken your theory seriously). dab (𒁳) 20:20, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
Clube and Napier use the panel from the silk that has the swastika like comet and comment that circle might indicate that the nucleus may have been observed. Sagan and Druyan later refer to this drawing as evidence that the comet had to come close enough for structure to be seen. Swastika is an Indian term. Why would using that particular term be required? I've often referred to it as the 'rolling cross motif.' I'm not sure how you gauge "quality works" but these seem to involve serious research that is available online: Bkobres 21:12, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

In other words the answer is no, apparently. Paul B 10:31, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
Then the idea is from Sagan (1985). Why are we having this discussion, then? Sagan is a perfecly good source, and we should by all means mention his idea. If it deserves an entire dedicated article is another question, but that's a debate for Talk:Comets and the swastika motif. Bob Kobres' idea related to bird feet etc. seems to be his own, and so far no evidence that it has ever been reviewed has been presented. dab (𒁳) 06:53, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I have correspondence from August last year (2006) with R.N. IYENGAR who is actively researching and publishing on comet related observations in ancient Indian literature (JOUR.GEOL.SOC.INDIA, VOL.67, MARCH 2006, pp 289-94). He indicated that he is working on material related to the bird/comet relationship:

I am yet to answer your questions regarding Swastika and Astika of Mahabharata! GaruDa is most probably a comet imagery. Mention of him appears in the more ancient vedic literature. It is taking more time than what I thought initially to put all the points in a proper order. After writing my previous paper on comets of ancient India and finding a clear reference to the Floods and twenty-six comets, I feel there should be a paradigm shift in understanding the Rigveda.

A published idea is not always picked up on right away and the accuracy of a published idea or observation is not determined by popularity! The notion of celestial bird foot-print is not out of the blue, as I've stated:

According to Alfred Hillebrandt in his Vedic Mythology (1981 English edition, vol 2 pp 259-60) there is evidence of the notion of a celestial bird foot-print in early Indian literature. Thus the likelihood of the motif that actually looks like a bird's foot-print, often appears in a cosmic context, and eventually became associated with the term svastikabeing related to that celestial bird is high. Hillebrandt relates that it was the seven Rsis who settled down (in the heavens) to practice tapas and with the five Adhvaryus they guard "the hidden foot print of the bird." He goes on to state:
In this context another point may be mentioned. In verse III.7 7 cited above "the five Adhvaryus" are mentioned along with the seven Rsis; from this juxtaposition it would seem that this designation too does not refer to the professional priests of the sacrificial place but to certain models in the sky who move to and fro as the Adhvaryus do. It seems to me that here we have an allusion to the five planets. Otherwise we seek in vain for a mention of the planets in the hymns of the RV.

bkobres 12:41, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Bkobres, you seem to completely misunderstand what Wikipedia is about. "A published idea is not always picked up on right away and the accuracy of a published idea or observation is not determined by popularity!" -- this is the classic crank position. This may or may not apply to the "bird-comet" thing, but per WP:TRUTH, Wikipedia in fact reports on popularity (viz., in academia), not "truth". You merely succeed in convincing me further that all this falls under WP:FRINGE. dab (𒁳) 13:10, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

As you feel that your opinion is superior there is no point in my wasting time arguing. Sagan was not the first to point out a relationship between comets and the swastika symbol; this priority should go, as Clube and Napier point out, to Ilse Fuhr:




Bkobres 16:47, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I do not think "my opinion" is superior. I am asking you to cite sources for your assertions. What is the problem with that? Don't throw random book titles at me, build a coherent case based on references. I was asking you for a reference that Clube and Napier mention the swastika. You dodged the question by posting some more rambling. Now you deign to let me know that "Clube and Napier point out" that the comet-swaskika connection is due to Ilse Fuhr (1967) -- why thank you! Considering that you could have posted that in a single edit a couple of months ago, I find it hilarious that you should think I have wasted your time. Now, pray, what is it Fuhr tells us on page 36-39 of her 1967 opus? Or would you like to prance around for another week before you let us in on that? dab (𒁳) 08:54, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

It transpires that Fuhr is a Velikovskian catastrophist. This reinforces my impression that Comets and the swastika motif should be treated as a topic of catastrophism, and only be mentioned briefly here in the main swastika article. I would ask you to add your sources to Comets and the swastika motif, and continue this discussion on Talk:Comets and the swastika motif dab (𒁳) 09:09, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

As for your comment regarding Clube and Napier (1982); I said that they included the swastika like comet image but did not refer specifically to it. What they write under the illustration after describing where and when the silk paintings were found is:

Although comets were regarded as grounds for prophecy and divination in ancient times, the charts show that the Chinese people also had rather scientific concepts of them. Thus, the paintings clearly display both tails and heads, some of them even with smaller dots and circles indicating that nuclei could be detected in the comas. Several of them also indicate some degree of inspiration by likenesses to antlers, trees, beetles of candelabra, and it seems associations of this kind could well have been suggested by comets over two thousand years ago.

I doubt that they knew of Fuhr's work in 1982 but they did give her credit in their 1990 publication: The Cosmic Winter, Basil Blackwell Ltd. I apologize for not making that clear above.

Is your basis for labeling Fuhr a Velikovskian correspondence?

If so you will need to include quite a few people--including Sagan!

I've never accepted the ideas of Velikovsky and did not enter into this area of research due to his publications. My focus was and still is on encouraging an Earth defense system as well as accelerated space resource development. Research that I have done on past impact events has been based on the prior work of others who have studied various subjects related to this. I've avoided the publications of Velikovsky because his premise of Venus zooming around as a comet is absurd! In general Velikovsky has caused problems for this area of research and obviously still does. I had been circulating the Bronze-age paper by mail to encourage archaeological research when SIS got wind of it and offered to publish it. I saw no harm in this because the article is clearly about standard comets and asteroids:

Astronomical evidence indicates our ancestors viewed a much more active sky than we. A seemingly nonsensical notion, such as Athena being born fully formed from the head of Zeus, becomes understandable as a description of comet fragmentation. Human belief systems have been greatly influenced by the phenomena attending the progressive break-up, over thousands of years, of this large comet. The idea of a wrathful sky god or star positions influencing events on Earth are legacies of this influence.
Many astronomers believe the 1908 Tunguska impact was from a small piece of Comet Encke. This 15 to 30 megaton event leveled 2000 sq km of dense Siberian forest, but left no crater. Certainly there have been many damaging falls witnessed by people during the 15,000, or more, year period of the comet's fragmentation history. The terminal Bronze Age event was probably just one of several very energetic impacts which likely occurred in this time span.
Our less than seven hour separation from a collision with a near-Earth asteroid (1989FC) in March of 1989 underscores the fact that contemporary civilization could be thrown into a dark age by natural catastrophe. Had 1989FC encountered Earth it would have introduced the energy equivalent of more than 2,000 megatons TNT into the environment, with little or no warning. The object was discovered on photographs days after the close pass. In 1937 an even larger object, Hermes, came almost equally near Earth. Neither of these asteroids is likely to be related to the break-up of the recent large comet referred to above. The estimated population of Earth-orbit-crossing objects greater than half a kilometer in diameter is over 2,000 and its members are from various sources. Obviously our planet gets hit fairly often. What the recent large comet did was increase the likelihood of collision and establish a visible cause/effect relationship in the minds of our ancestors.
The association of disaster (etymologically, dis - evil; aster - star) with comets eventually became generalized beyond direct causal links, giving science oriented investigators reason to classify this ubiquitous notion as mere superstition. Scientific efforts to understand the past were thus rendered purblind to a highly influential natural phenomenon.
It is technically feasible to prevent future impacts by altering the orbits of threatening objects. Unfortunately, there is little widespread support for such an Earth Defense Initiative (EDI) due, in part, to the general belief that humanity has not, in the past, been harmed by impact events.
Archaeologists can play a key role in justifying an EDI by digging in to set the record straight.

As for Fuhr's work cited above, she does use actual drawings of comets (pp 102-103) and I find no reference to Velikovsky in the index or bibliography. The V-W bib. refs. follow:

Vacano, W. O. von. Die Etrusker. Stuttgart 1955.

Virolleaud, C. La deesse Anat-Astarte dans les poemes de Ras-Shamra. (Revue des Etudes Semitiques 1937.)

Virolleaud, C. L'Astrologie Chaldeenne. Suppl. 33.

Voelkl, Lugwig. Zusammenhange der antiken und fruhchristlichen Symbolwelt (Das Munster. 16. Jahrg. Heft 7/8) 1963.

Der Wandteppich yon Bayeux. Phaidon 1957.

Ward, W. Hayes. The Seal Cylinders of Western Asia. Washington 1910.

Watzinger, Denkmaler Palastinas. Leipzig 1933.

As for my hypothesis in regards to astika, a cosmic bird, and it's foot-print, Google Books is becoming quite helpful:,M1,M1

Putting searchable books online is another cause that I've been engaged in for years because it allows earlier ideas and observations to be preserved and available:

Taking time now to have to defend what I contributed in good faith to this article in December of 2004 is not pleasant and I have recently had a similar experience with a article on Consumers' Cooperative business that I actually began! So it looks to me as if removers such as you, Dieter, are apt to be successful in shaping Wikipedia into Encarta-light with "editorially reviewed content that you can trust." Bkobres 20:15, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

I have not removed your material, Bob: it is still online, at comets and the swastika motif. To ask that it should also be here is Wikipedia:Main article fixation. Your first concern should be to establish credibility for the material at the "comets" article, addressing the various {{OR}} and {{fact}} there. If you expect Wikipedia to dedicate a whole article to a short article you wrote in 1992, you are probably asking too much. Needless to say, we can have any number of articles on various cosmic birds and their footprints if references are cited. What is tenuous is their alleged connection to comets and swastikas. dab (𒁳) 11:40, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Do as you will, Dieter. I'm not very enthused about contributing further content to this recent encartnation of Wikipedia, beyond links to books that I've made available online. I'll leave you with some OCR text from this newly available online reference that is pertinent to this and the other article:,M1

Fyl-fot. The Teutonic name of the Svastika or cross with feet, Greek gammadion or "crooked" sign (see Count G. D'Alviella, Migration des Symboles, 1892). This sign, found from Peru to Cornwall, is called Fuel-fut, Fujel-fot, and Fyl-fot, among Aryans, and identified with Thor's hammer, being found on dolmens in Cornwall, and, as a charm against thunder, on bells in Yorkshire (see Bells). It appears to signify the "fowl's foot" (German Vogel "bird"), a "flying foot," alluding to the whirl of the Svastika wheel (see Svastika) It was everywhere a sacred emblem. The Aryan root Plu signifies "to fly." The symbol is also the croix cramponee, or "crook cross," of heralds.,M1

Eagle. The Vfthana, or vehicle, of Vishnu and many other and heaven gods (see Etana), suitably chosen by Christiana also, arry the Logos or Word of Life. It was the emblem of Zeus, ring his thunderbolt, and that of Indra (the Vajra). It slept on the sceptre of Zeus, and plncvil ejfgs in hia lap, recovering his ring, and giving him his darts. It was carried on the standan Imperial Rome, denoting the sky spirit (see Hawk) and messenger Jove (see Rivers of Life, i, p. 134, fig. 53). The eagle stole garments of AphroditS, in aid of Hermes (a dawn myth), and connected with the griffin. The marvellous Saena bird of Zoroastna symbolising wisdom, and the Persian Simurg (in the Bundahlsh) " the ever blessed, glorious, and mighty bird whose wings dim the v sunbeams." As Garuda it is the power of Vishnu (often two-head and the destroyer of serpents. It is also the Arab Rukh (or the Ro but Skandinavians and Franks, when Christians, regarded it as glooc and demoniacal. It has a long mythical history among Turao Hittites, and other tribes from Central Asia, connected with o* and Svastika crosses (see Academy, 18th August 1883). Christ replaced it in brazen beauty in their churches. [The double-head eagle surmounts an Akkadian text at Tell Lolj. It occurs as Hittite sign at Boghaz Keui and Eyuk, in Asia Minor, with Sphynx. It was the ensign of the Seljuk Turks, found in sev cases in Armenia, and also the Garuda bird on coins of the Arsaci in Parthia. The Hittite double-headed eagle supports a pair deities, and seems to be the emblem of Tammuz and Istar as twins of day and night.—Ed.]

Svastika. Swastika. The name of this emblem is derived from the expression Su-asti, or "be thou well." It is a cross with feet, but may have three legs instead of four (see Fylfot). The four-legged emblem is very ancient, being found on the Hittite monument of Ibreez in Lycaonia, at Mycenae, on the pelvis of a naked female image at Troy, on rocks in Cornwall, and in many other ancient ruins.

It is a symbol of the sun, of fire, and of thunder—the hammer of Thor. The Hindus also apply the name to a man standing with legs and arms extended; and this likewise is an early Hittite and Phoenician emblem. The sign seems to represent the wheel of the sun (see Ixion, and Sun); the Hindu parent marks it on the breast and forehead of his babe at birth (see Bombay Rl. Asiatic Socy., iii, 1893); and a Svastika is formed of wheat ears in the natal chamber; the sign (or Kunku) is made with red powder in honour of Ganesa, and Hindu writers place a red Svastika (or Sri-vatsa) at the beginning and at the end of MSS. and books ; it is also sketched in flour on floors, and on garden paths, at wedding fetes. In the ordinary form i-f,, which is called " male," the feet follow the direction of the sun's course in heaven ; this is the Greek Gammadion, the " Croix Cramponee," or Crux Ansata, the Tetra-skele, sometimes formed by two letters S at right angles. The opposite emblem rf is the " female," or Sau-svastika, which is sometimes of evil omen. The Tri-skele (" three legged "), or Triquetra, is a similar emblem with only three legs, and is common on Sicilian coins, as well as in the Isle of Man. This sacred cross was known among Mexicans, and apparently to the mound builders of Ohio in N. America (Prof. Wright, Quarterly Stat. Pal. Ex,pi. Fund, October 1894), and also in Peru, where it occurs on early pottery. It was probably of Turanian origin, but is widely spread, on Indian coins and in Skandinavia alike. In India it is often drawn with long crooks, so as to suggest that originally it was a circle divided into four by cross lines, and representing the sun. Among Buddhists it was made into a Chakra or " wheel of the Law " (see Buddha), and by Tibetans it is called Yun-drun, or " path of life."

It is found in Greece, Krele, Cyprus, and Rhodes, and was the emble of Artemis, and of Athene. It occurs in Thrukia, and in Maga. Grecia—or S. Italy—on fibula: from Cumre, on a Samuite tomb,: Ca-re, and at Capua. It was used, apparently by Christians, in tl Roman catacombs, on garments of priests, and of the " Good Shepherd It was a charm on bells in Yorkshire, and on vases, and arms, Switzerland, and among Saxons and Kelts ; on Gaulish coins from tl 3rd to the 6th centuries AX., and on Roman tombs at Algiers ; on 0 coins of Parthians and Sassanians in Persia, and on old Phoenician seal as well as in Belgium down to our 14th century.

Count d'Alvicila (Migration of Symbols, p. 81) traces this wide spread and ancient symbol from Troy and Mycenae down to the 9l century ax. in Ireland, and finds it in Persia, China, N. Africa, u Skandinavia, in Tibet and Japan. The introduction into Amerii appears to have been due to the Buddhists of our oth century. J Thrakia the Svastika has a central circle, and is accompanied by tl letters MES in Greek. This coin was discovered by Mr P. Garde* and appears to have belonged to the city Mesembria, named from U " midday sun." A Lycian coin of the 6th century ac, also bears tl Triquetra, or three-legged emblem. The Svastika is found throughout Europe, as at Bishop Island on the Oder, or on a vase froi Reichorsdorf, or all round the pulpit of St Ambrose at Mil* There are 1000 instances in the Roman Catacombs, and others on tt walls of Pompeii: on a Keltik urn found at Shropham in Norfolk ; an in the Roman villa at Beading in the Isle of Wight; on Atheoi* Mid Corinthian vases; on coins of Leucas and of Syracuse ; on a mosai in the royal garden at Athens. The Skandinavian S form occurs o the Ogbam stone at Pen-Arthur, in S. Wales, as well as on the alu frontal of the cathedral at Valentia said to have been sent from 01' St Paul's in London in the time of Henry VIII. It is common oi Persian carpets, and found in both Hungary and Ashanti, as well • in Yukatan. The Japanese may still be seen stampiug this embko is the ancients did in Egypt, or in Cyprus. Mr Aynsley regards tbi Sammadion on the tomb of St Agues in Rome as an " old Christian cross." The Triskele at Eryx in Sicily is older than 400 ac. The Svastika on the stones of the Buddhist stupa at Sar-nath (in Banans) may be yet older. It occurs twice in the cells by the " red gate of the mosk at Jaunpur, and used to be seen at Granada; but Moslems disowned it, saying it was placed there by the devil. Hindus often decorate the Svastika with leaves, flowers, and gold. It is recognisd as representing the two lire sticks (see Arani), as Emile Burnouf noticed long ago (see Mr Hewitt, Jorvmal Rl. Asiatic Socy., April 1889, p. 189); and in this connection it has a phallic significance, as remarked by Dr J. G. Miiller (see also Mr R. Sewell, Indian Antiq., July 1881). In S.W. Asia the feet seem to be turned indifferently to right or left {Indian Antiq., April 1886). See Triskelion.

Faiths of Man: A Cyclopædia of Religions by James George Roche Forlong - 1906 vol.II pp 2, 121-122 & vol. III pp 385-387

Recent comets with rotating jets:

Bkobres 18:07, 8 August 2007 (UTC)


Is it true that in some countries they can arrest you for using a Swastika in public? Any information about this? Thanks.

Yes, in Germany. Read the article. Paul B 22:04, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

They can't arrest you for using the old right facing Hindu or Janist symbols, but they can if it resembles the Nazi symbol where it is turned diagonally. FinalWish 02:37, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

The direction is irrelevant. The Nazis also used non-diagonal swastikas, as do neo-Nazis. Paul B 10:03, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

It is true there are non diagonal swastikas [1], although diagonal is clearly the preponderance. I wonder how many were mistakes, or done on purpose; snd if done on purpose what was the intention (protest?) of the artist. Geo8rge 17:34, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Neo Nazis use the wrong swastikas because they are just to stupid to realize what the real nazi swastika symbol looked like so they have been spraying buddhist and hindu symbols everywhere. 02:20, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Censored Swastikas in Germany

Does anyone know where I can get a clean picture of the censored swastika logo? It's like a diamond divided into four diagonal squares. I think one could also be included in this article. Here's some Hellsing cosplayers wearing it : Nicht Vor Mir:. 09:58, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

No they are the only ones, sine they are morons. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:36, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm confused. Does this mean the Argyle pattern is illegal in Germany? Or does it mean that these are an allowed variant of the traditional (forbidden) design? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:38, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Maintainers of this page might be interested in

Navy to mask Coronado's swastika-shaped barracks

Radiator badge of the 1913 Krit automobile (National Auto Museum, Reno NV):

Geo8rge 15:46, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

I remember Microsoft to apologize for having a Swastica in one of their character sets and revoking it, see for example [2] and [3]. Apparently they released Office 2003 with the Swastica ([4]), see picture at [5]. Hence the Swastica at decimal 126 was replaced by a square dot. – Fritz@Joern.De —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:47, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

-is there anyway to get the symbol back? it would be great for a project on WWI to have it crooked like that instead of just these 卍卐 Somebody2D (talk) 19:22, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Sentence Removed

Since World War II, most Westerners have known the swastika as solely a Nazi symbol, leading to incorrect assumptions about its pre-Nazi use in the West and confusion about its sacred religious and historical status in other cultures.

Really? I'm pretty sure the vast majority of people I've come into contact with (I live in New Zealand for what it's worth) are aware that it's an Eastern religious symbol that predates WWII. Having said that, they would certainly associate it primarily with Nazi Germany.

In any case, it's a sweeping unfounded statement. I've removed it. Dissimul 20:47, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Actually I would agree with the (deleted) sentence completely, though I speak from an American prospective. It was only when I met someone from Nepal that I learned about the modern use of the symbol (and use before Nazis) Epthorn 12:58, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

I also agree with the sentence. Okay, awarness of the older use of the swastika is increasing but strong association with the Nazis continues; see this New Zealand article over a swastika symbol on a roof. ['swastika' causes offence] Alisterb (talk) 01:09, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Another sentence removed:

A city in Pakistan is named after this dragon, Takshshila.

The above sentence is completely irrelevant to the subject discussed in the paragraph that it was placed in. (talk) 17:24, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Other statement removed

I deleted a sentence that said something to the effect of "Some critics" believe that a runway pattern resembles a swastika. It's not sourced, other than a photo of the runway pattern and doesn't seem to add anything to the topic at hand.Epthorn 12:59, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Greek geometric era

While this page does touch on the use of the Swastika in Greco-Roman art I think it should be pointed out that the Swastika's biggest moment in Greek art was during the Geometric era, where it as well as other geometric designs dominated over pictoral designs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:27, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Swastikas in Africa

Swastikas are prevelant on raffia textiles from Kuba,Congo.They are also attributed to mirrors. [6] [7] [8]

They are also mentioned in Congo Sculpture "Of special interest are the swastika-like scarifications on her shoulders at back" [9]

Also in Burlington Magazine 1909 [10] 08:51, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Reorganization of subheads

Well, I'm not really into this article, but I'd like to propose some reorganization of the subheads:

We now have:

1 Etymology and alternative names 
2 History 
2.1 Origin hypotheses 
2.2 Archaeological record 
2.3 Historical use 
2.4 Reintroduction of the swastika in the West 
3 Geometry and symbolism 
4 Art and architecture 
5 Religion and mythology 
5.1 Hinduism 
5.1.1 In the news 
5.2 Buddhism 
5.3 Jainism 
5.4 Abrahamic religions 
5.5 Other Asian traditions 
5.6 Native American traditions 
5.7 Pre-Christian Europe 
5.7.1 Baltic 
5.7.2 Celtic 
5.7.3 Germanic 
5.7.4 Sami 
5.7.5 Slavic 
6 Nazi Germany 
7 Taboo in Western countries 
7.1 United States 
7.2 Germany 
7.3 Brazil 
7.4 Satirical use 
7.5 Bona-fide use causing controversy 
8 Contemporary usage 
8.1 Finland 
8.2 South Asia 
8.3 Tajikistan 
8.4 Neopaganism 
9 See also 
10 Multimedia 
11 References 
12 Notes 
13 External links 

I would suggest:

1 Etymology and alternative names 
2 History 
2.1 Origin hypotheses 
2.2 Archaeological record 
2.3 Historical use 
2.4 Swastika in the West 
3 Geometry and symbolism 
4 Art and architecture 
5 Religion and mythology 
5.1 Hinduism 
5.2 Buddhism 
5.3 Jainism 
5.4 Abrahamic religions 
5.5 Other Asian traditions 
5.6 Native American traditions 
5.7 Pre-Christian Europe 
6 Contemporary usage 
7 See also 
8 References 
9 Notes 
10 External links 

Merge the sections of Nazi Germany, Taboo in the West and Reintroduction to the West into a single "In the West" , with main articles on "Western use of the Swastika in the early 20th century", "Use of the Swastika by Nazi Germany" and "Contemporary use of the Swastika"

--Cheers, ŴôôDéļf 04:55, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

While I agree an amount of these sections should be merged, I think it's important that we keep the subsections in the "Pre-Christian Europe" section so things don't get too mixed up. I have used one of these subheaders as a link, as well, and I think it's quite useful for people wanting to refer back to these specific instances as there's an amount of well sourced information in this area and it doesn't do anyone any good to just merge it all together in a jumble in my opinion. :bloodofox: (talk) 00:23, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

The Birds

Bob Kobres is yet again insisting on promoting his pet theory that Swastikas are representations of bird claws, by adding this material into the lead of the article despite its extremely fringe nature. At best it deserves a sentence or two later in the article. I strongly suggest that this material contravenes WP:SYN, since essentially Bob is adding as notes any books that come up with a trawl of Google Books using keywords. In many cases the references are very old (Katherine M. Ball) or do not say what he is using them to support. Thus we have Hewitt's 1907 argument that swastika derives from "su astika", which is then spun into a claim that this links to birds because the "main focus" of "astika" is a bird in Maharbarata. And yet the word "astika" has no connection with birds of itself. This is an elaborate chain of linkage and is therefore OR by reason of synthesis. Paul B (talk) 15:24, 19 November 2007 (UTC):

Bob's text:
However the motif's early association with birds tends to support James Francis Katherinus Hewitt's view, expressed in Primitive Traditional History: The Primitive History and Chronology of India (1907), that: "The name Su astika embodies that of the god Astika or rather as he is also called in the Mahabharata Ashtaka the eighth." The main focus of the Astika parva in the Mahābhārata is Garuda, which is a large mythical bird or bird-like creature. A clue to how the swastika motif came to be associated with both good fortune and birds is provided by Katherine M. Ball on page 226 of Animal Motifs in Asian Art (2004 ed), where she states:

"Another reason given for the cock's being a lucky symbol is due to the homophone chi, which it the same for the characters used for the words "cock" and "fortunate."
"Similar superstitions existed in India, where this fowl is represented by the swastika in both its male and female forms to symbolize the sun-bird moving round the heavens, going north as a hen-bird at the winter solstice, and returning south as the sun-cock at the summer solstice."

The earliest archaeological evidence of a swastika-motif dates from the late paleolithic period (~10,000 BC). It appears on birds carved from mammoth tusk and the motif is etched at the spot where the bird's feet should be. This carving is depicted on page 117 of Joseph Campbell's, Flight of the Wild Gander: Explorations in the Mythological Dimension (2002 ed). An ancient symbol, it occurs in numerous indigenous Asian, European, African and Native American cultures; sometimes as a geometrical motif and sometimes as a religious symbol. It has long been widely used in major world religions such as Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism.

Bob already has free reign over at Swastika origin theories. I was going to address that, but I couldn't find the heart. Or the nerves. It has long become clear that this bird-theory is Bkobres' private obsession and isn't reflected in literature beyond casual observations that sometimes swastikas figure together with birds. I am sure you could also come up with a swastika-lion or a swastika-bear hypothesis if you really put your heart into it. dab (𒁳) 16:24, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
Swastika lion? Google Books gets results in no time [11]. Swastika bears are more difficult to find due to the multiple meanings of the word "bear", but a book called "Free Energy Pioneer" (which "explores secret societies and occult orders, [and] examines the influence of these mysterious techno-occultists") demonstrates that "the seasonal positions of the Little Bear around Drako formed a swastika c4000BC." [12] Humm. I wonder if this finally proves the existence of Space Aryans. Paul B (talk) 19:22, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Paul there is no debate about the motif being related to birds because it is directly associated on recovered artifacts such as the paleolithic bird carving depicted in Joseph Campbell's book. I've been researching this subject since the early 1980s due to learning that the motif was identified as a comet on an ancient Chinese silk unearthed in 1978. This Chinese artifact trumps any prior speculation about the motif because it unambiguously refers to the swastika-like comet as a long-tailed pheasant star (Di-Xing). Much of what is taken as fact in the Wikipedia article seems to come from Wilson's paper, which I placed online in 1999: The Swastika The earliest known symbol, and its migration; with observations on the migration of certain industries in prehistoric times. By Thomas Wilson, (1894) Curator, Department of Prehistoric Anthropology, U.S. National Museum.

J. F. Hewitt (author of: Primitive Traditional History: The Primitive History and Chronology of India) was the Commissioner of Chutia Nagpur and so lived with the Indian people. I think that his opinion regarding the history of the motif as used in India should carry considerable weight. Katherine M. Ball (Animal Motifs in Asian Art) is still in print and used authoritatively so I do don't see where you derive your authority to dismiss these works as fringe. Bkobres (talk) 20:01, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

I added the content that I did because it was obvious that Dieter was not going to update the incorrect assertion that the earliest instance of this motif occurred in the neolithic, even though I had pointed the paleolithic artifact out to him over a month ago:
Also it is not correct to state the etymology of the term swastika as it relates to the early usage of the motif as an established fact. And if there is no room for an alternate notion in the intro, the etymology of the term -swastika- should not be mentioned at all there.
Transactions of the Lancashire and Cheshire Antiquarian Society, page 7
In India they are generally turned to the right, _, and the sign is then called swastika; but when they are turned to the left it is called sauvastika. Both these words have much the same meaning. In his Sanscrit dictionary, Monier Williams gives for sauvastika, "benedictive, salutatory;" and for swastika, " a mystical mark made on persons or things to denote good luck." The words are from roots su — "well" (blessed), and as = " to be." They clearly belong to the third stage of the life of a sign, and were introduced after its primary meaning was lost. Its auspicious use in conjunction with a decorative employment may be seen in the " foot-prints of Buddha" (fig. 27). Here it should be noted that the corresponding name " fylfot," being Anglo-Saxon, is also a late invention; and hence we may conclude that the original denomination in use before the Aryan dispersion is altogether lost. Bkobres (talk) 21:30, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
Bob we can find shapes that look like swastikas wherever we look. The fact that a squiggly shape appears on some ancient object does not make it the "origin of the swastika", anymore than different squiggle would prove that comets, birds (or whatever) were the "origin of the square" or the "origin of the triangle". Also the etymology of the Sanskrit word is completely unrelated to Chinese scrolls and Neolithic or Paleolithic objects, which latter were made thousands of years before Sanskrit existed. If you think a quote from the "Lancashire and Cheshire Antiquarian Society" in 1887 is relevant then I give up. What it says is, however, largely unproblematic (apart from the swastika/sauvastika distinction and the assumption that the motif is an Aryan badge which dates to "before the Aryan dispersion") but seems to have no relation to your claims. Paul B (talk) 00:22, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

We? The motif on the paleolithic carving has been described as a swastika in journal articles as well as by Campbell. Wikipedia is not a dictionary--the article is about the motif; not the term: swastika. Bkobres (talk) 13:33, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

So what? It's about as relevant as the earliest recorded instance of a cross. The point is that it's not in any demonstrable way connected to the Indian motif. And it was you who raised the issue of etymology not me, so why do you suddenly say the article is not about the term? Paul B (talk) 13:45, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
The Wikipedia article as it now stands states that: Archaeological evidence of swastika-shaped ornaments dates from the Neolithic period. This is not a true statement. The motif is clearly seen on a paleolithic artifact and is referred to in published literature on that artifact as a swastika. Do you or do you not accept that the motif found on the paleolithic artifact can legitimately be, and is, referred to as a swastika? Bkobres (talk) 17:06, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
Well, I haven't seen it, so I have no opinion. That page is not visible in google books, but that's not much of a big deal. No-one is going to object to anyone changing "Neolithic" to "Paleolithic" if that's what Campbell calls it. Paul B (talk) 17:13, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

The carving depicted on page 117 of Joseph Campbell's, Flight of the Wild Gander: Explorations in the Mythological Dimension (2002 ed) is indeed visible--just scroll down or use the navigation arrows from page 116. I ask that you also read the accompanying text. Bkobres (talk) 19:55, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

p.117 is not visible, at least not from where I am. I get "p117-220 are not part of this book preview". Paul B (talk) 19:39, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

It seems odd that Google would vary the preview pages by area, but perhaps they do. Did you try searching for -swastika- within the book? Bkobres (talk) 20:54, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

I am on my home computer now, from which I can see it. It's true that Campbell calls it a swastika, but its unlikely that it would be recognised as such in India, since it's an elaborate geometrical sworl on an object covered with similar sworls. Campbell's source is Franz Hancar, writing in Germany in 1939! I guess it was important for somone in that context to ientify swastikas wherever they could. Paul B (talk) 00:03, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

The artifact is also shown here:

The Swastika; Its History and Meaning,

John Prince Loewenstein, Man, Vol. 41, May - Jun., 1941 (May - Jun., 1941), pp. 49-55, doi:10.2307/2793344

This article consists of 8 page(s).

Loewenstein construes the carvings as goddesses rather than birds but still refers to the motif as a swastika. I know of no evidence that the artifact was tampered with for propaganda reasons.

The strongest evidence I've seen thus far that the swastika motif was associated with birds in India is provided by Hewitt's observation on page 145 of Primitive Traditional History:

. . .and the Mori sub-tribe who claim descent from the peacock, to which they offer grain, place the offering near their foot-tracks on a piece of red cloth, and near the offering they draw the mark of the Su-astika, sacred to the flying-star-bird who follows the course of the sun round the heavens.

As I have stated, my interest in this motif stems from its direct (via artifact) association with a comet and the motif's suspected relation to sky-gods in several cultures. The Chinese artifact actually displays drawings that could be considered related to other motifs such as the menorah or celestial tree. Such displays in the sky would be visible to most populations but not necessarily, or likely to be, interpreted in the same fashion. The depiction or stylized drawings of these celestial displays however should be similar and so works of art (particularly that related to religious themes) are apt to be more candid in revealing comet influence than mythological depictions of sky-gods. As a person interested in art and religion perhaps you might have some thoughts about these compositions which are widely separated in time yet seem to retain a common theme:

The Mahabharata is among the more direct comet related mythology, as terms associated with comets (ketu), as well as phenomena associated with an active comet coming near Earth (dust, meteors, thunder, thunder-bolts, darkness, smoke, etc.), are in it and the text can be easily searched here: It is also easy to see how Garuda and Astika are related in the Mahabharata using the etext.

Additional info: Bkobres (talk) 16:21, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Pre-Christian Europe?

The phrase "pre-Christian Europe" is used several times in this article. Is this a valid description? It seems sort of POV to me, based on the assumption, for instance, that Europe is or has ever been uniformly Christian. Opinions? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:09, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

This refers to the historical process of Christianization, as in "prior to the process of Christianization of the native peoples". While the population was Christianized to varying extents depending on where we're talking about, essentially all of Europe was under Christian control, albeit in various factions, after Christianization. :bloodofox: (talk) 00:27, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

East Anglia

The following is a verbatim quote of Davidson (1965:83):

There are many examples of the Swastika symbol from Anglo-Saxon graves of the pagan period, and it is particularly prominent on cremation urns from the cemeteries of East Anglia. On some of these, on display at the Cambridge Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, are depicted with such care and art that it must have possessed special significance as a funeral symbol.

It would be nice to get independent confirmation of this, as well as additional details. Is the "Cambridge Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology" in Cambridge, England, or are we talking about the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology in Cambridge, MA? dab (𒁳) 11:36, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

hm, it turns out that the museum in English Cambridge is called "Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology", not Ethnology. The USian Cambridge one, however, is called Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology. it is unclear which one is intended here, especially since the English museum does collect "local antiquities", while I find no evidence of Anglo-Saxon artifacts in the USian one. This makes the Davidson claim a little bit dubious, and we'll need to find independent confirmation where these "many examples" are on display. dab (𒁳) 12:10, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Here is the direct quote from Davidson relating to the swastika and the Germanic tribes as found Gods and Myths of Northern Europe from 1964:

It was very popular among the Heathen Germans and appears to have been very popular, and appears to have been associated with the symbol of fire. There may be connexion between it and the sun-wheel, well known in the Bronze Age, or it may have arisen from the hammer or the axe to represent thunder, which was accompanied by fire from heaven. Thor was the sender of lightning and the god who dealt out both sunshine and rain to men, and it seems like that the swastika and the hammer sign was connected with him.

The Anglo-Saxons worshipped the thunder god under the name Thunor. Memories of him survive here and there, like the title of High Thunderer, used for the Christian God in a tenth century charter of Edward the Elder. We have many instances of the swastika from Anglo-Saxon graves of the pagan period, and it is particularly prominent on cremation earns from the cemeteries of East Anglia. On some of these, to be seen in the Cambridge Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, it is depicted with such care and art that it must surely have possessed special significance as a funeral symbol. Both the swastika and the hammer symbols are found on stones bearing early runic inscriptions in Norway and Sweden, and some of these call on Thor to protect the memorial and place of burial.

The swastika is also found on weapons and sword scabbards. It can be seen on sword hilts from the peat bogs of Denmark from as early as the third century AD. It is clearly marked on a hilt and a sword belt found at Bifrons, Kent, in a grave of about the sixth century. By the seventh century, the Christian cross also appears on scabbards, and an elaborate one recovered in the river Seine has the cross and swastika side by side.

For the River Seine mention, Davidson sites her work The Sword In Anglo-Saxon England, 1962. Keep in mind this book, a standard when dealing with subjects relating to Germanic paganism, was originally published in 1964 and the museum probably dropped the "Ethnology" part what could have been a number of reasons. Before calling this scholarly and widely accepted and referred to work "dubious", I'd check into this and do some more sniffing around. Considering my own time spent in numerous Scandinavian museums and stones, I don't doubt these objects at all. Since Davidson represents a particularly English focus on this subject matter given that she, herself, was English, and American museums don't hold many pre-Christian Anglo-Saxon artifacts, I'd assume she's referring to the English museum in Cambridge as it was in her day. :bloodofox: (talk) 19:47, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
I assume the same. Obviously, Davidson is a competent scholar. The "dubious" refers to doubts whether we report the circumstances correctly. We should take seriously Davidson's pointed to East Anglian "funeral swastika symbols", but we should try to establish more substance: if the English museum is meant, all we need is an English Wikipedian visiting it and giving us some inventory numbers etc. dab (𒁳) 09:44, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
I have no intention of visiting Cambridge for this sole purpose, but I will look for relevant publications in the British Library next time I am there. Paul B (talk) 09:48, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Hey guys, I was wondering about the specific objects the other day, so I sent an e-mail to the Universy of Cambridge Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology, specifically to Christopher Chippindale, who is their "Reader in Archaeology and Curator with responsibility for British collections". He confirmed to me that the museum had, indeed, changed the name as I suspected. Of course, this isn't enough for Wikipedia if this is brought into question but I will ask him if he knows around when it was changed and maybe we can find something backing it up.
I also questioned him about the artifacts and he wrote: "I am not an Anglo-Saxon medieval specialist - but, yes, I have always believed it was a widespread symbol at this time." He then referred me to: [13] and to click "Search catalogue". He said that one of the numerous Anglo-Saxon pots mentioned may have something about the swastika listed in a short description for one or more of the items, though I suspect the word "swastika" may not necessarily be used. I went through it the other day for a few pages when I had some spare time and was unable to locate the object but I didn't go through all the results I found for "pots" as I didn't have the time. If someone can figure out how to locate it with the seemingly arcane search feature, it would be helpful. Either that or I just missed the obvious.
I would not go to the museum with the notion that these items are necessarily on display. You will probably have to ask someone there about the items if they are not out and obvious as they are quite possibly in storage in the museum, as has been my experience. Ask them about their reserve collection, as a lot of their stuff is going to be in there. However, I have not yet had the chance to go to this specific museum. :bloodofox: (talk) 13:11, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Base of a bowl from Sutton Hoo
A search for "cremation urn" (object) and "anglo-saxon" (period) gives 11 results, with some mention of "square stamps". (The catalogue does not specify whether the stamps were perforated at the edges, but I imagine that has little significance.) [14] (talk) 05:19, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Could this design be an anglo-saxon swastika? (talk) 05:46, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

The artifact depicted appears to be a bird's head type of fourfold symmetry that is often classed with the swastika motif. See:
The Arts in Early England By Gerard Baldwin Brown, 1915, page 281. The plate mentioned is on page 278.,M1

Under the heading ' plate fibulae' may be grouped one or two abnormal pieces, for this name as we have seen is used with a very extensive denotation. The example of which a view is given in No. 3 on PI. XLVIII was found near Milden-hall in Suffolk and belongs to Mr. S. G. Fenton of London. It consists in four birds' heads arranged in a 'swastika' pattern. In the centre there is a square sinking filled with red enamel of the transparent kind, the ' Blut-Email' of Otto Tischler, and the eyes of the creatures were also enamelled. The material is bronze and the size of each side of the square is a little under 2 in. Mr. Reginald Smith signalizes this as one of the earliest pieces of Teutonic work in the country but like the bird fibulae generally it comes from the Gothic east by way of Hungary, where prototypes of it occur. The one which most nearly resembles it was found at Fenek, and Professor Hampel' dates it in the second half of VI,2 so that the Mildenhall piece need not be placed at a very remote epoch.

Bkobres (talk) 23:06, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

I received more information from the museum via correspondence. I was told that there are at least 14 objects in their Anglo-Saxon collection with the swastika. I was given some more examples: "We have one large Anglo Saxon pot (Museum ID/ACCNO number 1948.2475) on display which is decorated with large swastika symbols, and also on display are 2 circular bronze brooches (1948.1320) with swastika decoration."

Further: "Cambridge University Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, its new name (2007) is Museum of Archaeology & Anthropology, and it is one of Cambridge University's museums, based in Cambridge, England." I asked for a specific date and was told that it was probably in the 1960s though they would check up on it. :bloodofox: (talk) 12:37, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

well done. We should take note of this at the article. dab (𒁳) 17:50, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Literature search

Until Paul's next visit to the BL, here's what I could find online:

  • A Corpus of Late Celtic Hanging-Bowls (2005) [15] The occurrence of blobs of red enamel on some East Anglian artefacts and of Germanic pottery themes, such as the swastika (Brown 1981; Scull 1985) on some A bowls is not sufficient to support an argument for production of hanging-bowls in the A-S settled areas on any substantial scale.
  • The Coming of Christianity to Anglo-Saxon England (1991) [16] Many cremation pots of the early Anglo-Saxons have the swastika sign marked on them, and in some the swastikas seems to be confronted with serpents or dragons in a decorative design. This is a clear reference to the greatest of all Thor's struggles, that with the World Serpent
  • An Archaeology of the Early Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms (1997) An urn from Sancton (Figure 6.8) decorated with a swastika contained a whetstone and may be connected with Thunor, the god of thunder and the forge (Reynolds 1980, Timpy 1993)
  • Gods, Heroes, and Kings: The Battle for Mythic Britain (2001) The image of Thor's weapon spinning end-over-end through the heavens is captured in art as a swastika symbol (common in Indo-European art, and indeed beyond); this symbol is—as one might expect—widespread in Scandinavia, but it also is common on Anglo-Saxon grave goods of the pagan period, notably in East Anglia and Kent.
  • H. R. Ellis Davidson, Thor's Hammer, Folklore (1965)
  • Nick Stoodley, From the Cradle to the Grave: Age Organization and the Early Anglo-Saxon Burial Rite, World Archaeology (2000) mentions "swastika and cruciform varieties" of brooches only in passing (p. 463).

From this I conclude that the hypothesis that the swastika represents Thor's hammer, especially in Anglo-Saxon England, has sufficient backing to be mentioned as a serious academic opinion.

here, however, is evidence for controversial debate on the question (Thomas Wilson, 1894)[17]

Some foreign authors have called it Thor's hammer, or Thor's hammer-mark, but the correctness of this has been disputed. (Stephens, "Old Northern Runic Monuments," part ii, p.509; Ludwig Müller, quoted on p. 778 of this paper; Goblet d'Alviella, "La Migration des Symboles," p. 45; Haddon, "Evolution in Art," p. 288.) Waring, in his work, "Ceramic Art in Remote Ages," (p. 12) says: "The Swastika used to be vulgarly called in Scandinavia the hammer of Thor, and Thor's hammer-mark, or the hammer-mark, but this name properly belongs to the mark Y". Ludwig Müller gives it as his opinion that the Swastika has no connection with the Thor hammer. The best Scandinavian authors report the "Thor hammer" to be the same as the Greek tau, the same form as the Roman and English capital T."

This is interesting also to the co-existence and interdependence of Viking Age (pagan) "Mjolnir" and (Christian) cross pendants. dab (𒁳) 10:28, 13 December 2007 (UTC)


This term, used in the article's introduction, seems to be some sort of vandalism (google "drew-sokoly" and you'll see). I removed it. A new translation of the Sanskrit svasti is now needed, if the term is indeed valid.

Jperrylsu (talk) 14:48, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Hakenkreuz vs Swastika as the Nazi symbol

My understanding (this is based on various Indian college texts, so maybe biased POV) was that the Nazis always referred to the symbol in German as the Haukenkreuz 'hooked cross'.

The sanskrit 'Swastika' was adopted much later, after the British noticed the similarities between the hindu Swastika used by the brown-skinned natives of their colony in India and the one used by the rapidly growing Nazi movement in Europe.

It initially came to be used as a sort of derogatory term by the British (and allied powers) to mock the Nazi movement by associating it with Indians.

Later on people like Heinrich Himmler who were part of the minor undercurrent within the Nazi movement fascinated with occultism, re-appropriated the Swastika and other perceived linkages Asia and India to support their theory of pan-Aryanism.

I don't know much about wikipedia, but this is mainstream history as taught in India and probably should be mentioned somewhere as an opposing view. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs)

It's very sad if "Indian college texts" say such nonsense. Yes, it's true that the standard term in German was 'hakenkreuz', but I'm not sure why any one would consider that to be significant. Different languages use different words. The word 'swastika' was well established as the normal word in English well before the Nazis came to power and has nothing whatever to do with any "British" observation that there were "similarities between the hindu Swastika used by the brown-skinned natives of their colony in India and the one used by the rapidly growing Nazi movement in Europe." The adoption of the motif by the Nazis was always tied to its use in India. That what the history of Aryanism is all about. The idea that 'swastika' was a "derogatory term used by the British" is utterly fantastical. See the article on the widespread use of the motif in early 20th C Europe. Yes, it's true that the anti-Christian/Aryanist connection was not the official position of Nazism, but it was still a very significant one, not a "mminor undercurrent". I'm disturbed that such ludicrous misrepresentations can be presented as "mainstream" anywhere. Do you have any actual evidence of this? Paul B (talk) 00:32, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

The gist of Indian college texts tends to fluctuate with the government currently in power (NCERT controversy: it's like Wikipedia edit-warring in print). Hakenkreuz is just the German term for the symbol, much like the Greek term is gammadion. It may be worth noting that Hakenkreuz as a term in heraldry is attested in Adelung, pre-dating the formation of the Nazi party by more than a century. If we can get a precise citation of this alleged Indian textbook nonsense, we might indeed make mention of it both here and at Education in India, if only as a reminder just how important a role Wikipedia fulfils in some places. dab (𒁳) 17:36, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm familiar with a few college-level history syllabi in India, and they certainly say nothing of the kind. They're unlikely to, as the likes of Sumit Sarkar and Bipan Chandra tend to write them. In any case, most European history is taught from readings by Hobsbawm and Toynbee. Relata refero (talk) 20:43, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Something missing?

What about the Theosophical Society? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:11, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Splitting and forking

This article is rather long, does anyone else think some sections should be forked into separate articles? --ErgoSum88 (talk) 07:15, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Top image is poor

The original top image used to be just a hindu swastika. It now includes the nazi swastika. I don't feel that addition was appropriate, or adds anything meaningful to the article. If you are going to do that, then you may as well include every single other variation of the swastika at the top. The nazi variation is not representative. (talk) 22:55, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Yews it is. It's the main meaning in the west. Paul B (talk) 23:04, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Not necessary. They need the full version of the article for reference. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 05:14, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:BiharSeal.jpg

The image Image:BiharSeal.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

The following images also have this problem:

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --12:30, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Does the statuary in the Art and Architecture section show a swastika

The image shown in the Art and Architecture section, does not appear to show any swastikas, but rather shows simple cross-motifs. I've looked it over quite closely and don't see what is being referred to. Since it is unclear (at best) form the entire picture where the swastikas are, I would like to suggest that someone who does know what is being pointed out create a derivative image that shows the exact location referred to.

Archaic kore

-Fenevad (talk) 11:12, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

I think the reference is to the intertwined pattern running vertically down the middle of the sculpture. A 'swastika' appears in the interlinked lines. It's just an unresolvable problem: one person's swastika is another's funny-looking cross or knot pattern. Paul B (talk) 11:26, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
I see now what is meant, but to argue that the intersection of the two solids that come together at those points is a swastika is unclear at best since these are not free-standing motifs. I'll edit the image caption to make this clear in any event. -Fenevad (talk) 11:47, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
I remember on a visit to the National History museum in Sofia asking why a Thracian (or maybe Roman, I can't remember) mosaic had Swastikas in it, and I was told it was used as a symbol for Victoria/Athena Nike? Is this true? Also, it could be a useful picture. Anyone in Bulgaria / Northern Greece who could help? Hrcolyer (talk) 14:52, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

The Swastika symbol and Taekwondo

Please see the world Taekwondo website. The poomsae Ilyeo is represented by the symbol of the swastika in a mirrored form. This is the pattern for 9th Dan and represents "oneness" and the perfect harmony of the body and mind. The movements are played out on the floor in the shape of the symbol. (talk) 15:17, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't see anything —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 04:00, 19 December 2009 (UTC)


there have been a few edits back and forth, so why don't we discuss which is better to use on this article? Lihaas (talk) 14:17, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Well, I'm not sure that there have been. The question is whethwer or not the article should be in UK or US English. There's no obvious reason to support one over the other. Paul B (talk) 12:19, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

About the Neolithic India part

Shouldn't that be mentioned a litlte higher in the article? I mean when someone comes to this article shouldn't that be mentioned pretty fast? Why is it so low? I mean the start of the article talks about how it came from the Neolithic period. Well why not just say India in that sentence? I mean later in the article does it mention India. But why so low? ARYAN818 (talk) 00:02, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

India is mentioned in the very next sentence, so how much higher can it get? There are two separate issues here. One concerns the swastika shape, which is just a pattern that can be found in many cultures and is not specific to India. The other is the swastika symbol, which is strongly linked to India. Joseph Cambell asserts that a "swastika" can be found on a paleolithic artefact, but whether it is one or not is a matter of opinion. [18] I don't know what support there is for the "neolithic India" claim. As far as I know the earliest Indian examples are the Indus seals, but I don't think we know whether the motif used in the IVC directly links to the later Buddhist and Hindu swastika symbols. Paul B (talk) 12:13, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Joseph Campbell isn't a serious source. I am aware of swastika symbols in the Indus script, dating to the Indian Bronze Age, but the "Neolithic India" claim so far remains unreferenced. --dab (𒁳) 11:42, 5 November 2008 (UTC)


Doesn't the swastika also represent seasonal change? I thought that that was why the Nazis used it during WWII, as a symbol for change. Could anyone verify this? Fruckert (talk) 19:31, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Various "new age" writers claim that the symbol is linked to patterns of nature. This dates back to some of the earliest western speculations about its meaning. The indologist Max Müller quoting Eugene Burnouf wrote that there was a difference between the left ansd right facing versions: "the Svastika [right facing] was originally a symbol of the sun, perhaps of the vernal sun as opposed to the autumnal sun, the Suavastika [left facing], and, therefore, a natural symbol of light, life, health, and wealth." The letter was published in Schliemann's book Ilios (1880). I'm sure the Nazis attached all sorts of meanings to it in various publications, but its main meaning was, as Hitler said, that it was an Aryan symbol and therefore it "always has been and always will be anti-Semitic". It's in the article. Paul B (talk) 15:15, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Bangali Swastika

Can anyone know the use and origin of other symbol which known as swastika in Bengal? I look like a stick figure of human. Tnaskar (talk) 17:24, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Well, gee, you added it. Where did you get the information from? Paul B (talk) 19:59, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I am a Bengali Hindu; and we here use this symbol along with swastika only in Bengal as far as I know (I asked lots of my friends). Moreover it is more common than swastika. Unfortunately, Bengal lost her history and whatever remains are mythology and rituals. So, I did not get any proper answer. Tapan (talk) 05:48, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't wht the loss of territory (do you mean Bangladesh?) should have obscured your history. I accept that Begalis call this a 'swastik', but it would be very desirable to have written confirmation. Paul B (talk) 10:34, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, we call it as 'swastik' and even 'swastika' which I mentioned in my earlier post.

Hinduism followed in Bengal is different than rest of India. This enter into Bengal as diffusion of culture unlike rest part of the country where it was ruled. I am not telling that Bengal never have Hindu King but this was very short lived. So when people talk about history of India they generally talk about Aryandom of India ruled by Hindu emperors. Most of the existing historical text are not written in Bengal and have no or very little mention of this place, since these literatures were written to praise the King or queen of that kingdom, and it was obvious why they will write about region which was not a part of their kingdom. In addition to these this region are very prone to cyclone, flood and river movement. Also faced famine many times and human migration. All these causes people of Bengal to forget the past. Tapan (talk) 19:04, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

All this is very good. Understandable even, but for the layman reader (and on an article like this there will be many), I second paul's assertation that we need sources.
They must be somewhere. it doesnt have to be on the internet, could well be offline. Lihaas (talk) 19:45, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

The given photograph in the left show the image of Swastika use in Bengal.

Swastika on the typical Bengali worshiping place call Tulsi Mandap in West Bengal, India.

In prehistoric time human draw the figures of their game on the caves, but in spite of the fact they are good artist they did not draw their figure. This is because they fear that any evil spirit may use their figure and try to harm them. So the human figure in the cave painting are symbolic. Like human figure in Baja Cave, California. Bengali Swastika is one of such human figure.See Rock painting of human figure Tapan (talk)

Having spent time in Bengal, the "stick-figure" Swastika is indeed widespread. I looked high and low for books which addressed this variation but even in Bengal I found none. It is my opinion that being that this is a folk practice (as many practices in Bengali Hinduism are, I see this as a positive thing), there is not as much of a "paper trail" as one would find with the more "Sanskritized" streams of Hinduism; but being a folk tradition does not make it any less worthy of inclusion. I feel that if this falls within the scope of "original research" and is thus objectionable, then this particular issue exposes a glaring flaw in the wiki's model; the loss of common knowledge precluded by only that which is recorded by the academically literate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 05:02, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Merger proposal

I've proposed merging Gammadion into this article. "Gammadion" is just the Greek word of swastika, which is already mentioned here. Steve Dufour (talk) 20:54, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

support already have a listing of the various ones, it would make sense to just add the info here. Lihaas (talk) 12:22, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Support There doesn't seem to be any reason to have 2 articles. ChrisHodgesUK (talk) 17:43, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Oppose Gammadion originated in Greece, while the Swastika seems to have been originally from India/Pakistan and moved throughout some parts of Europe. I've seen separate article of two things that are identical, as long as the purpose and origin is different (e.g. Five-pointed star is separate from Pentagram. Parthian Scribe 08:38, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose There are two topics, each largely devoted to tracing the established train of causation in a separate lineage: one from India thru archeological & anthropological studies to modern Germany; one from Greece into occasional medieval uses. If the plausible theory of common origin (i didn't notice it stated, and i mention it bcz i can imagine it, not bcz i believe it) can be show to be widely accepted by scholars as plausible -- based perhaps on other signs of diffusion from Mesopotamia east, or from Sanskrit speakers west to the Levant, at an early enuf date (i think the current hypothesis is that the concept of writing words rather than drawing mnemonic sequences as opposed to pictographs diffused eastward to the Indus culture), then that minor (even if crucial) connection is worth brief mention in both articles -- but not justification for a merge.
--Jerzyt 08:00, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Support There's even a section in this article about the Greeks' use of the swastika, the information from Gammadion could fit in there easily. Also, it would be more sensible to put the gammadion in the swastika article, as the gammadion is simply a type of swastika, not its own entity. BaboonOfTheYard (talk) 19:38, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Wider article?

I said re "Merger proposal" immediately above "two topics", and i thus deferred discussing a third parallel one not under discussion, and probably not calling for a third article -- tho the almost certain cultural independence of the 3rd type of swastika may be a good reason for a third article that discusses what the three types have in common.
I doubt Amerind swastikas are worth an article, but IMO they deserve mention along with the other two traditions, in a third article (probably initially a stub) that ties those multiple uses together in terms of whatever analysis has been done of basic geometrical figures that seem to have a culture-free appeal to humans.
Bilaterally-symmetrical figures (isosceles triangles and trapezoids, rectangles, pentagrams, hexagrams, and other n-grams, ellipses and ovoids) are special, perhaps bcz so many biological (and some probably gravity-influenced forms -- icicles, many waterfalls, distant storms, and of course stemmed plants) have probably furnished an evolutionary pressure to recognize them -- and to wonder what's wrong when that symmetry is not achieved: "No, i lemme have the one next to the bent one." I think it's well established that choice of mates highly favors symmetry, other things being equal.
My guess is that rotational symmetry (seen in nature only in

  1. the sun and full moon,
  2. cross-sections of fruits or stems,
  3. mostly fortuitous orientations of solid objects produced by plants,
  4. and highly worn pebbles

) has more to do with much of the information processing needed to see them being also valuable for spotting bilateral symmetries (note that images with strict bilateral symmetry with respect to at least two intersecting axes have some kind of rotational symmetry).
I'd guess that rotational symmetry in the absence of bilateral symmetry is hard to encounter without some handicraft or a lot of luck: Other than lying on the ground while a whirlwind passes over your head, it would seem to call for either very unusual physical situations (finding a stream asymmetrical enuf upstream to have a strong vortex in its rapids, but symmetrical enuf downstream to leave it round), or looking end-on at a plant stem that has fairly flexible side-branches, while it's being twirled on its axis fast enuf for the aerodynamic drag to curve those side-branches (or building an analogous structure).
IMO, the survival value (to us and probably many of the vertebrate phylla) of spotting bilateral symmetries has given us (at least) predispositions to treat a rotational symmetry in the absence of a bilateral one (as with a swastika, and the variety of triskelion images at that article) as striking and likely to be magical, and to inspire the invention of them without need of cultural precedents.
Now, mind you, this is IMO all my own ivory-tower OR, but i'm not smart enuf to think of it first. I predict that all these thots have been extensively tested by cog-psych'ists in collaboration with cultural anthropologists, and someone familiar with one or both fields will only have to look for their research.
--Jerzyt 08:00, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Origins versus speculation versus huh?

Regarding: In Life's other secret, Ian Stewart suggests the ubiquitous swastika pattern arises when parallel waves of neural activity sweep across the visual cortex during states of altered consciousness, producing a swirling swastika-like image, due to the way quadrants in the field of vision are mapped to opposite areas in the brain.<ref>Stewart, Ian. ''Life's Other Secret: The new mathematics of the living world'' 1999 Penguin</ref>
   Isn't this a bit far afield? It's been a long long time since studying comparative religion, but I do recall the swastika's origins as an ancient fertility symbol. If you look up at the clouds, sometimes you see a horsey—and you don't even need a state of altered consciousness. We don't make note of that in Horse. —PētersV (talk) 15:20, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Estimated age.

While there's obviously no definitive date for the origin of the swastika, would anyone have a reliable source for the estimated age of the oldest known instance(s) of the symbol? "Neolithic India" suggests 12,000 to 7,000 BCE, but a more precise date would be much appreciated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 04:21, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

"Neolithic India" was completely unsourced, and an apparent driveby-addition. The oldest attestation the article is aware of is from the 5th millennium BC Vinca script. --dab (𒁳) 11:39, 5 November 2008 (UTC)


Swastika was used in Polish army as well as by normal people, for example writers, explorers etc. More information about this can be found in Polish Wikipedia together with references and even photos of swastika usage in Poland. --Krzyzowiec (talk) 21:15, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

alt code

What is it? (talk) 23:29, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Article deterioration

The article has deteriorated badly since I've last seen it. We may want to review past revisions, and perhaps revert to the featured version. --dab (𒁳) 11:40, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Please explain, point out some problems, so they can be fixed. The article has grown while new information has appeared. This has caused problems on the structure and language of the article. The constructive way is to fix those problems, not reverting to a favourite version. Tuohirulla puhu 20:02, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
yes. the problems will become apparent if you look at a deep diff. I have been significantly involved in cleaning out the crap before the article was featured, exporting the cruft to the horrible Western use of the Swastika in the early 20th century. The fact that this article is again beginning to look like the one I just linked is a sure sign that the crap has been piling up again. I submit that "fixing it" will involve removing the additions of random trivia, yet again. --dab (𒁳) 19:17, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Part of the problem was that the ToC structure was completely garbled and unintuitive, encouraging the addition of random trivia in random parts of the article. I hope that my recent edits have solved this. The ToC now proceeds in logical and chronological steps from

  • archaeological record
  • historical use in Asia (Dharmic traditions)
  • historical use in Europe (Antiquity, European folk cultures, Renaissance)
  • historical use in native American traditions
  • early 20th century
  • Nazi usage
  • post-WWII stigmatization in the West
  • continued use in Asia
  • new religious movements

I have also removed some long-standing unreferenced stuff. One of the main problems of this article is that people keep on inserting random trivia related to the countless instances of Western use of the Swastika in the early 20th century. Such additions should be either reverted or moved to the dedicated article on sight in the future. --dab (𒁳) 10:19, 23 January 2009 (UTC)


In the article it mentions that the swastika is widely used in the Baltics. While that is true, the article only refers to Latvia which isn't explicitally stated there. The only way I knew that is because I am Latvian. Does anyone familiar with Lithuanian culture want to write a quick bit about how it is used in Lithuania? Bigbobo1 (talk) 22:29, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Steven Heller on the redemption of the Swastika

I think Steven Heller's book on the Swastika has a significance which A10203040 may have overlooked. First, Heller is one of the foremost experts on graphic design - see Steven Heller (graphic design) for his biography. Second, his book is one of the very few which is devoted to the use of the Swastika itself, in all its manifestations. It comes top of an Amazon search by relevance, for instance. It has been published by a mainstream publisher in the US and in Europe, and has gone to a second edition. Finally, the idea that the Swastika is beyond redemption is its central argument, not just something put in incidentally in one section.

In light of that, I have put the mention back in because it adds something significant to the article; it may be though that it is better not in the title. Sam Blacketer (talk) 20:36, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

I think it should be out of the article altogether. Opinion on a topic is no justification for personal inclusion in a topic. Even if said person has published a number of books on said topic. DavidApi (talk) 22:58, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm not a big fan of Steven Heller, I must admit. He's tiresomely PC on the subject and cuturally crass and parochial. I have read far more of his essays than I care to remember, since he's such a hack of GD writing, and his book is riddled with non sequiturs. Also he seems to change his mind if you read his reviews. As you can gather I'm biassed against him. However, he is notable, but not notable enough to be placed in the lede as he were some sort of Great Guru. There are many other views, and a discussion of then, including Heller's in the sections on reception in the west might be worthwhile. Paul B (talk) 23:46, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
  • PC surely is Political correctness. For others who might, like me, consult the GD entry, (and decide the most plausibly relevant entry there is God damn -- tho it syntactically makes no sense), don't learn your jargon on talk pages: my informant (who hires and supervises graphic designers) has never seen GD used for graphic design at second reference. (FWIW, my informant says "oh, sure" to Seymour Chwast but has never heard of Steven Heller (graphic design).)
    --Jerzyt 01:53, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Too many images

I agree with dab above that this article suffers from bloat and is deteriorating in quality. Not too long ago I removed a bunch of images and put them into a gallery so they would not stack in higher resolutions. Now it seems the problem has returned and even the use of such galleries is questioned. I think galleries should stay, at least people can add their images without cluttering the article... because nobody uses the commons anyway. But that is a whole 'nother discussion. --ErgoSum88 (talk) 18:19, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

we already have a gallery-building effort, at commons:Swastika. People interested in this should work on that page. There is absolutely no need to reproduce the same thing here. --dab (𒁳) 12:01, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

This article should not be objective.

When the author claims:

"It amuses me that the Germans were goose-stepping under Polish symbolism during the second world war. They have unbeknown to themselves bowed to Polish cultural superiority. Most people who have suffered from the excesses of the Nazis will relish this finding!"

It is clear the author has an objective view on this subject. Wikipedia is about non-objective fact finding. We need to remember this and keep our feelings about academic subjects to ourselves. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:57, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

  • The bizarre use of "objective", in the above, is discussed in the next subsection, created contrary to normal WP talk practice, for reasons that escape me. apparently not understanding that we normally use a talk-pg section to keep together the views of different editors on the same aspect of the accompanying article.
    --Jerzyt 02:05
    & 03:21, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Krzyż Swastyka

The person criticising my article on the SWASTIKA (CROSS OF SWASTIK) and criticised me for being OBJECTIVE has confused the concept of OBJECTIVITY and SUBJECTIVITY!!! Please!!! Objectivity is precicely what is reqired!!! My article is indeed OBJECTIVE as it should be!!! The source of amusement at the German unfortunate circumstance is not unfounded. The Germans as a result of their arrogance had been made fools of in a horrible way. The NAZI party is a secret SATANIC organisation that the Germans, or indeed the world, don't understand and which was used to exploit the Germans ability at war, to kill people. These are facts.

My understanding of this symbolism is indeed valid but new and the critic of my article has understood nothing. The end result is that the whole article on the KRZYSZ ŚWIATOWIDA (SWASTYKA) is a childish twaddle, I appoligise for the strong language. It is obvious that the symbol is European based, Hitler would not have borrowed it from the Indians if he wanted to enguage in his superiority twaddle! Unfortunately neither he or his satanic backers or anybody since has any real concept as to what is involved.

I hope that my insights which I have passed on will in spite of everything start to throw some real light on the whole matter. The business of quoting existing literature is no doubt a safety factor for an Encyclopedia and helps introduce stability into the articles. It is however also a severe limitation. It means that the Encyclopedia in some cases takes on a naiive or invalid stand and as a result is never cutting edge knowledge. Unfortunatively it also means that the Encyclopedia can take on a stand that is invalid in the face of new knowledge.

By the way my view was the traditional one such as yours, some dacades back. Then on touring Poland I had the good fortune to view some archeological findings where this cross figures prominantly. The presence of this cross in Polish archeology made me very angry, but the archeologist assured me that the symbol was indeed Slovonic! I did'nt believe him. It is only as I started to study the matter later and after I became interested in the Slovonic faith did I get a deeper understanding and was able to cofirm his decleartion.

The link to India does not surprise me. A lot of the Indian Gods are Polish!!! This is also a long story, so we will leave it for later.

Regards. Antone1 (talk) 17:54, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

I see. What article are we talking about here? Thankfully, none of your discoveries are present on this page. Paul B (talk) 11:09 & :10, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
The article in question is the one just above mine, titled "The article should not be objective". The wording I had used originally, I'm afraid was not very Wiki consistent and was research like and it was given short shrift by the Wiki article guardians. Fair enough. Nevertheless there is a new insight available for those truly interested. The original article, a modification to the main text is now saftely hidden from view, dated the 1st March in the history section. I don't recommend that you read it, as it is driven by a little honest sentiment, in addition it may adversely influence your religion.
I still can't help my amusemsnt at the implications however, Hitler will get the twitches in his grave if he find out in the afterworld.
Antone1 (talk) 14:50, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
  • The reference seems to be to the only contrib in the previous section (parent of this subsection) of the talk page, which Antone1 created a confusing separation from by responding under a subsection heading.
    --Jerzyt 03:11, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Antone1, it is unclear what you want here. Please note that this page is dedicated to discussions pertaining to the improvement of Wikipedia's Swastika article. Postings without any perceptible relevance will be removed, per WP:TALK. Judging from your comments above, you could learn a lot by actually sitting down and just reading the article as it stands at present. Edits such as this one are utterly unacceptable, already because they ignore WP:CITE. Whatever it is you want to add to the article, make sure you have a quotable source you can present first .--dab (𒁳) 16:01, 17 March 2009 (UTC)