If the Swastika was a symbol of a religion in India and migrated as such in times of antiquity to America, it was necessarily by human aid. The individuals who carried and taught it should have carried with it the religious idea it represented. To do this required a certain use of language, at least the name of the symbol. If the sign bore among the aborigines in America the name it bore in India, Swastika, the evidence of contact and communication would be greatly strengthened. If the religion it represented in India should be found in America, the chain of evidence might be considered complete. But in order to make it so it will be necessary to show the existence of these names and this religion in the same locality or among the same people or their descendants as is found the sign. To find traces of the Buddhist religion associated with the sign of the Swastika among the Eskimo in Alaska might be no evidence of its prehistoric migration, for this might have occurred in modern times, as we know has happened with the Russian religion and the Christian cross. While to find the Buddhist religion and the Swastika symbol together in America, at a locality beyond the possibility of modern European or Asiatic contact, would be evidence of prehistoric migration yet it would seem to fix it at a period when, and from a country where, the two had been used together. If the Swastika and Buddhism migrated to America together it must have been since the establishment of the Buddhist religion, which is approximately fixed in the sixth century B. C. But there has not been as yet in America, certainly not in the localities where the Swastika has been found, any trace discovered of the Buddhist religion, nor of its concomitants of language, art, or custom. Adopting the theory of migration of the Swastika, we may therefore conclude that if the Swastika came from India or Eastern Asia, it came earlier than the sixth century B. C. If a given religion with a given symbol, both belonging to the Old World, should both be found associated in the New World, it would be strong evidence in favor of Old World migration--certainly of contact and communication. Is it not equally strong evidence of contact to find the same sign used in both countries as a charm, with the same significance in both countries?