ART. VII-The Trisula Symbol. By WILLIAM SIMPSON, R.I., M.R.A.S. Ir is only lately that the Trisula, or Trident, has attracted attention as a symbol. It so chances that for many years back I have collected matter connected with this subject, and have often wished to put it in form for publication, but want of time has always stood in the way of realizing this desire. Lately contributions dealing with the Trisula have appeared in the Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society from Mr. Sewell and Mr. Pincott,' and I feel urged to add some additional material to what they have given. I shall not be able to reproduce everything that I have gathered up, but my endeavour will be to give what seems to be important, or may throw light on the subject. As to a theory of origin, I have one it has long been formed in my mind, and up to the present I see no reason to reject it; or it might be expressed, that no better theory has as yet, so far as I know, been proposed. The symbol appears to me from what I have collected to have been very widely spread, so very ancient, and assumed such a variety of forms, that its first origin has been lost, and that now only a guess can be made as to its primitive signification. I quite agree with Mr. Pincott that the trisula is not necessarily connected with the chakra or wheel; and that to explain the two together might leave both unexplained, because they are separate symbols. As this paper may in a sense be considered a continuation of the papers by Mr. Sewell and Mr. Pincott, I need not repeat the illustrations they have given. If the number of forms I produce 1 J.R.A.S. Vol. XVIII. p. 364, Vol. XIX. p. 238. Fergusson, Cunningham, and others have touched upon the trisula in their works. Lately Le Comte Goblet D'Alviella, Professeur d'histoire des Religions à l'Université de Bruxelles, has published a short brochure entitled Le Trisûla ou Vardhamâna des Bouddhistes. in this paper are accepted as variations of the trisula, it will have to be admitted that it is one of the most important symbols of the ancient world. I should be inclined to describe it as a universal symbol, for in one form or another it is found in almost all the old systems of mythology. The theory, which appears to me to be the most probable, that the trisula is a development of solar and lunar forms, as symbols of the creative power, would, I suggest, account to a certain extent for this universality. Whether this may be the correct explanation or not, I shall be able to show that a symbol of like form with the trisula had a high significance as a monogram or letter; that a similar form was a prominent feature on sceptres in the hands of gods, priests, and kings; and that, in whatever form it appears, it had a reference to the highest of the divine attributes. While admitting the value of Mr. Sewell's essay on the possible transmission of the trisula from one locality to another, it ought to be remembered that there are other symbols, as well as myths and folklore, which are involved in this consideration; and that the explanation of one point in this broad question is of little value unless it gave us some gleam of light on the whole. If we regard the E of Delphi as a trisula, we require a theory that would suggest to us why it was placed over the gate of a temple in that part of the world, and that trisulas were placed over the gates of stupas or temples in India. This similarity may have been the result of accident, but other examples of myths and folklore might be given which are equally puzzling, but whether they are all the result of chance, or that they imply a more intimate connection between ancient nations than we have yet realized, is a matter I hesitate to venture any opinion upon. The ordinary traffic between nations might account for some of the identities; but it scarcely supplies a sufficient theory as yet to satisfy us regarding all that is known. The first suggestion of identity with the trisula which I shall bring forward is that just alluded to of the Delphic Eì. In an old edition of Plutarch I have, the date of which is 1718, the essay on this subject is entitled, "Of the Word Eì, Engraven over the Gate of Apollo's Temple at Delphi." Plutarch explains that although called Eì, it was only the letter E, the fifth letter of the alphabet. He says there was a golden one of Livia, wife of Augustus, and there was, or had been, a brazen one of the Athenians; to this he adds, "but the first and ancientest of all which is the wooden one." The word "engraven," as used above, would at first suggest that the letter was cut on the gate, but when the material of which it was formed is stated, it becomes more than probable that the symbol was a trisula, in form at least, and that it was placed "over the gate" of the temple. If this identification is accepted, how striking it becomes when compared with the trisulas over the gateways at Sanchi and Bharhut! It has also some force even in the case of the temples of Siva at the present day, where the trident is almost invariably placed, not on the entrance, but on the sikhara or spire. That the Ei of Delphi was a monogram only adds to the resemblance; for Sir Alexander Cunningham and others, although they vary in their interpretation, assume that the Buddhist trisula was also a monogram; 2 and there are other illustrations which can be produced of this symbol in that character. It may be noticed that Plutarch's essay shows the symbol was not clearly understood in his time. Each of the persons he has introduced as discussing its meaning gives a different explanation; in this, Plutarch's essay bears a striking resemblance to the present discussion of the trisula; the writers show very divergent opinions, and as this results from the antiquity of the symbol and absence of direct information, so Plutarch's speakers were evidently in his time in a similar condition, and it would tend to show that then, as now, the symbol was so old, that its origin had been lost, and they See Pl. I. Fig. 19. This is from a Gnostic gem, and as it is a Greek E it may be accepted as accurate enough. 66 It may be worth noting that among the various meanings ascribed to the El, Plutarch seems to adopt that which ascribes to it the sense of Being," as an attribute of the Deity, as if it was intended to express on the part of the worshipper "Thou Art," or "He" that "Is." From this some writers have identified the El with the Hebrew or IE, pronounced Jah, a form of the word Jehovah; the root of which is "to be," "to live," etc. It is easy to account for the transposition of the letters, by supposing that in one case they had been written from right to left, and in the other from left to right. could only speculate regarding its meaning. If we take the explanation which Plutarch gives last as the one he most favours, it would show that he had a high notion of its symbolism. According to this it expressed the idea of Being, of that which is permanent and immutable as the character of the Deity, in opposition to the constant change and variableness which is seen in nature. This rendering would give it a sense very close to that of the celebrated "I am that I am" of the Pentateuch, and entitle it to an exalted rank among symbols. I have another curious coincidence to produce, which is quite as striking as that just described. The Jews were noted for wearing frontlets or phylacteries on their foreheads. A phylactery was made of leather, and contained some passages from Scripture; on the outside of it, visible to the eye, was the Hebrew letter shin or S. In Hebrew, Samaritan, Phoenician, in the Greek, and even in Egyptian hieroglyphics, this letter is formed more or less like a trisula. In the Abyssinian alphabet there are two characters to represent S, and one is a trisula in form; it is named saut, and from being used in the word "Negus," it is called the royal S.3 The late King Johannes, when he became King of the Kings of Ethiopia, made a change in regard to this letter; he adopted the royal S in the spelling of his name. This shows at least that there was some dignity connected with this particular form. The shin on the phylactery is said to be the first letter of the name Shaddai, giving us another instance of this form as a monogram. Some of the Jews in the East still wear these frontlets with this symbol on them, and the coincidence will be seen from a sketch I give of a man's head from Benares. His sectarial mark is a trisula form, painted on the forehead. Of course the Hindu's explanation of the form is not the same as the Jew's; but this need not astonish us, for the symbol is understood differently in each locality where it is found. The striking thing here is that 1 Pl. I. Fig. 13. you may find a man in Jerusalem, and another in Benares, each bearing a trisula-formed symbol on his forehead. The Hindu, whose head I sketched at Benares, said he was a worshipper of "Seeta-Ram," from which it may be concluded that he was a Vaishnava. The symbol in this case is made with two colours; the external strokes and lower part are white, and the central stroke is red. In 1875 I visited Trichinopoly, and the Brahmins of the great temple of Srirangam told me this symbol is called Trinam or Trinama, and when there was a dot below, as in the sketch given,' it was called Tingalynam, and that when the dot was wanting, it was called Watagalynam. This slight difference indicated a difference of faith which was not explained. All the Brahmins had these marks on their foreheads, and they were also to be seen sculptured and painted on the temples. This shows at least that the symbol occupies a prominent position in the worship of Vishnu. On asking what its signification was, it turned out, after much cross-questioning, to be male and female, or Rama and Sita. The external, or white portion, being Rama, and the Brahmins said it represented his feet, and the central stroke, which is red or saffron, represents Sita. On our way from the temple we met a man and his wife; the man had the two white strokes on his brow, and the wife had the single saffron stroke. A Brahmin, who was the friend of one of our party, explained that this was in such a case the correct form. It may be as well to notice here that beyond the similarity of form there is no evidence that these symbols have any connection with the trisula. This will also apply to others which I shall have to bring forward. All I can say is that they are very like each other in their general character, and being important symbols, they ought to be placed in a collection of data bearing on the subject. I am inclined myself to accept them as varieties of the one symbol, but it is impossible to speak with certainty about them. I may mention that the very different explanations which are given of each cannot form an objection to their identity. The 1 Pl. II. Fig. 9. |