It is conceded that the duplication of the cross by different or distant peoples is no evidence of migrations of or contact between these peoples, however close their relations might have been. The sign of the cross itself was so simple, consisting of only two marks or pieces intersecting each other at a right or other angle, that we may easily suppose it to have been the result of independent invention. The same conclusion has been argued with regard to the Swastika. But this is a _non sequitur_. First, I dispute the proposition of fact that the Swastika is, like the cross, a simple design--one which would come to the mind of any person and would be easy to make. For evidence of this, I cite the fact that it is not in common use, that it is almost unknown among Christian peoples, that it is not included in any of the designs for, nor mentioned in any of the modern European or American works on, decoration, nor is it known to or practiced by artists or decorators of either country.[308] For the truth of this, I appeal to the experience of artists and decorators, and would put the question whether, of their own knowledge, by their own inventions, they have ever discovered or made Swastikas, or whether their brother artists have done so, and if they answer in the affirmative, I would ask whether those cases were not rare. It may be granted that when the Swastika has been seen by an artist or decorator it is easily understood and not difficult to execute, but, nevertheless, I insist that its invention and use among artists and decorators during the centuries since the Rennaissance is rare.