Talk:United States one-dollar bill

Numismatics B‑class High‑importance

	Numismatics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Numismatics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of numismatics and currencies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NumismaticsWikipedia:WikiProject NumismaticsTemplate:WikiProject Numismaticsnumismatic articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Design

It would be interesting to learn why the current one dollar bill still features the older design.

Live people on currency

True or false: it was legal to put live people on currency back in 1862. (This question came into my mind because it says that Salmon Chase was on the first $1 bills and he was alive in 1862. 66.32.149.224 23:17, 9 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, he put himself on a LOT of the money to further his political carreer. Rick Boatright 23:22, 11 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

It appears Chase was on the $10,000 bill (series 1918), but as he died in 1873, I haven't actually seen a $1 bill from that period.

It's not illegal now, nor has it ever been, to put live people on currency. It's just a very strong tradition not to Nik42 08:57, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Masons/Illuminati

What's with the paranoid talk about the Masons and the Illuminati? This seems totally out of place and delusional at best. -Branddobbe 08:16, May 11, 2004 (UTC)

It's a consperacy theory that baiscly goes that the Illuminati and/or the free masons are responisible for the pyrimid on the back of the 1DB. It's not out of place, and it deserves mention.

Consperacy theory? Actually, a new book, The Secret Symbols of the Dollar Bill, by David Ovason, details the extent of Masonic symbolism on the one dollar bill. There is nothing conspiratorial about this. It is fact. http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0060530448/qid=1111984112/sr=8-1/ref=pd_csp_1/103-9777372-3472619?v=glance&s=books&n=507846

Actually, I noticed the US Declaration of Independence year 1776 which is written on the pyramid is also listed in the Illuminati article as the founding year, but I wasn't sure whether to include this. (It should be in the parenthesized 'The following is speculation' section, if anywhere.) --IByte 20:49, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I suppose these comments reflect something which has been chopped out of the article entirely. A shame, as a brief mention of the conspiracy theory would be of interest to casual people, not just tin-hat wearers. -- Jon Dowland 12:40, 8 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

* I agree, that's the content I came here looking for right now.

- looks like someone read Angels & Demons. --71.224.68.150 04:26, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I also came looking for information regarding masonic symbolism in the dollar bill. It should not be excluded.66.188.136.207 08:28, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

i was looking for it also if that help, why on earth would the origins of one of the main features of the bill be excluded?

Kindly explain the removal of information from Eye of Providence. If anything it makes more sense at this article. Dan 05:51, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The reason why I removed it was because I believe copying and pasting large chunk of text is bad. I'm not disputing the accuracy of the text. But let's say someone find a mistake and correct it, but on one copy only. Then the two copies would contradict each other, which causes mass confusion. Now I didn't do a straight revert. I provided a link to the most appropriate place for further information. The one-dollar bill has George Washington on it. But we can't put his whole biography here, right? --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 12:54, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Like I said, it doesn't seem like the most appropriate place at all. If anything it would make more sense to move the text here, delete that passage from Eye of Providence. Dan 17:00, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So the solution that will make us both happy is to move the text here and provide a link the other direction. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 19:04, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is the phrase "recent separation" appropriate for something that happened over 200 years ago?

Is the phrase "recent separation" appropriate for something that happened over 200 years ago?
Bobblewik (talk) 19:44, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)

In archaeological terms, yes :) Sjc 19:45, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)

The Eagle's claws

It holds an olive branch and arrows in its claws, symbolizing "we want peace, but are ready to fight".

It occurs to me that the order doesn't seem binding. It could just as well mean "we want to fight, but are ready for peace". :-) JRM 02:35, 2004 Dec 6 (UTC)

The Seal

I'm noticing a lot of back-and-forth peddling and sneaky vandalism on the symbolism of the seal. Ideally I'd like it if we could just leave it out and refer to Great Seal of the United States, but I guess that's not going to happen. So I'd urge everyone to watch the articles and make sure they stay in sync on the matter; the content of Great Seal of the United States should get priority over what this article says, and any change should be suggested there. JRM · Talk 22:47, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Again on "Saeclorum"

Regarding the spelling of the word ("saeclum" seems to be correct, especially in poetry -- seclum a little less so), I don't see why on Earth the meaning of the phrase should change from "of the worlds" to "of the ages" just because of the U. It appears to me that both spellings are acceptable for the same meaning, which encompasses both "worlds" and "ages." Also, the dedicated page linked in this article doesn't differentiate meaning on the basis of spelling. I say that remark should be removed. Opinions? Aside 00:14, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Edits

I made some significant edits to the article, which may draw some controversy due to the row over my One dollar Federal Reserve Note article. Regardless of what happens to that one, I attempted to improve this article by generalizing the introduction to the article, including information about the first U.S. $1 note, and cleaning up the explanation of the $1 FRN. Hope everyone likes it, let me know either way. Paul 09:56, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The current edition of U.S. one dollar bill (with the history) looks nice. Only suggestions I'd make right now: 1) if the pictures are thumbnails, I'd suggest increasing the size by about 50 pixels so that a little more of the detail comes through; 2) put in a few blank lines in the history for easier reading. A question: historically, is there significance in the changeover from engraved notes and offset printed notes (if I recall correctly, it was announced in 1982 or 1983)? B.Wind 03:09, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Number 13

Some of those symbolic 13s look more like coincidences to me - especially the last one, about the average of the number of letters in "NOVUS ORDO SECLORUM" (17) and "MDCCLXXVI" (9). Was the motto really chosen to have 17 letters, just because the date had 9 letters and the original number of states was 13? I think not. This needs a supporting reference, if there is any true significance in it. Mtford 17:37, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Really, this is just an observation on the manipulation of numbers. I have removed it.

--Kurt 05:01, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hats?

The article says there are 13 hats pictured on the note. Where? --Spblat 05:21, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

rising sun?

The shadow cast by the pyramid from the rising sun represents the undiscovered lands to the west. The sun, which is rising, represents that a new nation has begun.

where's the rising sun? Where's the shadow? Where's the compass thet tells us where on the picture is east and west so we can tell if the sun is rising or setting? --androl (talk) 22:40, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

other claims

13 total letters/digits in both 1776 (4) and its Roman Numeral equivalent MDCCLXXVI (9)

that's too much numerology. MDCCLXXVI should have 13 letters to be interesting

13 horizontal stripes at the top of the shield

I count 12 (see big image) count the white stripes!!

what about some sentences about other numbers that can be found?

14 clouds around the stars
12 lines at the top of the shield
18 vertical lines on the shield
9 tail feathers of the eagle
17 long feathers on each wing of the eagle
17 letters in "of the United States"
12 letters in "the great seal"
17 letters in "novo ordo seclorum"
12 letters in "Annuit Cœptis"
9 letters in "MDCCLXXVI"
14 berries on the front of the bill

yes but if you add all the letters in the words they add up to 13 squared

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.178.7.169 (talk) 20:28, 25 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

--androl (talk) 22:40, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Contradiction

This is about the physical size of the notes. Please discuss at Talk:Large-sized note. --ChoChoPK (球球PK) (talk | contrib) 08:29, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dollar Bill Game

There is absolutely no reason why this game should be present. It has been removed twice thus far because it deserves to be absent. Please delete it if you see it as part of the article, or give a good reason why it should be there if you wish to restore it.

Hidden symbols.

can someone please provide a picture of the 2 "Spiders"?

Supposedly the 2 spiders are one the bottom of the front of the bill. There is a black triangle around them.

I have to disagree with the owl. I think it looks like a spider, I don't see how it can be perceived as an owl.

I think that the 2 spiders and the owl are actually one and the same thing - part of the pattern of the bill. When you look immediately above the owl the curves look exactly the same as the curves above the spiders. The only difference is that "the owl" is hidden behind the the leaves and the frame around "1". Moreover, when you look towards the outer ends of the the bill, parts of two other "spiders" appear(the other parts of them are again hidden by the frames of the lower "1"'s).

Reptilian or alien eye

It needs to be explained why the dollar bill of the United States carries a non-human eye. There is no way in the world that is portrayed to be an human eye. It looks extraterrestrial or alien, why on earth is it on the dollar bill?? It needs to be explained, and there is no way you can say that's a human eye. The whole thing is just weird. Quite frightening that the dollar bill of the richest and most powerful nation in the world carries a picture of an alien, without any explanation to be retrieved anywhere but in conspiracy websites.

 Actually, I believe it's been proved to be a porpoise eye. RubyQ (talk) 05:39, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Illustration Style

Does anyone know the name for the illustration style used on all of the dollar bills? Does it have a specific name or is it just a type of line drawing? --Maxhawkins 20:26, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is what I was looking for: Guilloche pattern --Maxhawkins 17:19, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Informal terms

I removed a bunch of the "informal terms" that are slang for a U.S. dollar in general and not for a one-dollar bill in particular, and thus belong in the article for United States dollar and not here. A good way of testing which article it belongs in is by asking yourself whether "a bunch of [word]" means "a lot of money" or "a lot of one-dollar bills". The only words on that list that pass this test are "one" and "single". -Branddobbe (talk) 01:13, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bring format in line with other FRNs

I see how the other notes ($2-$100) have a large picture of the note. Can we bring the $1 to that format too? Wd1040 (talk) 01:21, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The large picture on the other notes is a result of a series of redesigns that began in 2003. Actually, the $2 bill uses the smaller portrait as well. The $1 and $2 bills have not been redesigned because counterfeiting isn't as serious a problem with these small notes as it is with higher-value notes. An important anti-counterfeiting feature is the note's familiarity. When a new design is introduced, it is initially more difficult for people to spot counterfeits because they don't know how the note is supposed to look. For this reason note designs generally aren't changed unless there is a compelling reason. —D. Monack ^talk 07:03, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Masonic Reference ala Star of David

This topic refers to the section titled "Reverse of current $1 bill."
This topic specifically refers to the following excerpt: "Furthermore, if a star of David is made on the pyramid, the letters will spell out the word "Mason" in reference to the group of Free Masonry."

Here are my observations/suggestions:
1. Different word choice and better writing may improve the clarity of this concept.
2. An illustration may also improve clarity.
3. "Mason" is a five letter word. The star of David has 6-points. An upside down 5-point star better illustrates this concept. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hardas5a (talk • contribs) 02:52, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately this is a widely held myth... it's a parlor trick that does not actually work except in very small scale (ie it seems to work when you use a very broad tiped felt pen and a very small rendition of the Seal, but not if you use fine tipped pens and a larger version).

Then we have the problem that the Star of David is a regular hexagram, ie all the angles and sides are the same (as is the 5 pointed star traditionally associated with the occult ... that is a regular pentagram)... unfortunately, if you lay a regular hexagram (or pentagram) over the seal, the trick does not work... and if you go the other way and connect the letters M-A-S-O-N you end up drawing a lopsided, irregular figure where some sides and angles end up being shorter than others (and which has no mystic symbolism at all). In short, when you examine this trick closely, it doesn't actually work. Best not to mention it.Blueboar (talk) 18:45, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Low value

Why no mentioning of its extreme low value for a note? 77.99.57.229 (talk) 00:05, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why hasn't the 1 dollar bill ever gotten the modern anti-counterfeiting features that the larger denominations use?

Is the US Treasury department just that confident that it won't matter? Will (Talk - contribs) 18:37, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty much. No one is going to waste a lot of time counterfeiting singles. Second, a number of vending machines accept ones and no other bills. Adding the security measures would make the machines obsolete. Schoop (talk) 18:08, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Spider?

I'm removing the following picture from the article. It's not even mentioned in the text, and it's just ridiculous. The comment below it is: "There is a tiny figure in the upper right hand corner of the obverse that has been interpreted as a spider or an owl." With a yellow circle around what is clearly a part of the background lines. I'm going to be bold and deem it unnotable, but here's the picture if anyone has any reasonable argument for bringing it back. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:United_States_one_dollar_bill,_obverse,upper_right.JPG Salvar (talk) 05:38, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, completely agree. I was going to look to see if there were actually any reliable references about the origin of that meme before I removed it, but haven't found any yet. Basically seems to be the equivalent of a Rorschach inkblot test using the pattern of the background hatching. Carl Lindberg (talk) 22:41, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Banknotes before 1923

Some of the banknotes need to switch to the "PD-US" tag, because any works released prior to January 1, 1923 automatically enter the public domain in the United States.

Added section on the U.S. one-dollar bill "conspiracy"? + General article cleanup.

I'm going to create a section in the article devoted exclusively to the conspiracy theories (or facts?) connected to the numerology and Masonic symbolism allegedly used in the U.S. $1 bill. This isn't a measure to put the conspiracy theories/facts in a small corner, but to clean up the article and only include official uses of symbolism in the main sections of the article. (In a nutshell, I'm leaving the main body of the article to facts confirmed by the U.S. Government and the Federal Reserve.) BrenMan 94 (talk) 15:13, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Most of it belongs in Great Seal of the United States, where it already is, other than a brief mention and a pointer. Unless there is stuff specific to the dollar bill. Most or all of that paragraph should be removed, agreed, and the mention in the first sentence on the reverse of the bill. Carl Lindberg (talk) 15:41, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I'll just do a general cleanup of the article until a separate section is needed. BrenMan 94 (talk) 16:15, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(Il)legality of high-resolution productions here?

I believe that at least the high-resolution scans of the current $1 bill here may be illegal. One item that points toward that conclusion is the text at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:United_States_one_dollar_bill,_reverse.jpg, which says that color reproductions of U.S. currency are legal if "All negatives, plates, positives, digitized storage medium, graphic files, magnetic medium, optical storage devices, any any other thing used in the making of the illustration that contain an image of the illustration or any part thereof are destroyed and/or deleted or erased after their final use" (emphasis mine). It can't exactly be true that the digital files used to produce high-resolution, exact-size (a trait illegal in itself), two-sided (ditto) color prints are destroyed if these files keep sitting around on Wikipedia's servers.

President Lethe (talk) 04:37, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Owl face on ONE dollar bil and all other American dollar bills are seen from a distance

Why is there no mention of the OWL that is visible when one takes the dollar a few feet away. It is pretty obvious. Take a carefui look. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.229.83.49 (talk) 03:47, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See #Spider?. Carl Lindberg (talk) 08:00, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you people taking away the facts?

Why is there no mention of the Owl, i agree, this is Wikipedia, and people come to it to research every aspect of things that they look up on it, we must have every single aspect of the Dollar Bill noted. As well as commentary on it, conspiracy beliefs, and other things. Every fact should be seen and read. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.21.128.205 (talk) 23:43, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Star of David

If you look at the Reverse side of the bill, you will see an eagle which holds 13 arrows, and a branch with 13 leafs on it. Above this eagle are 13 stars which can be connected to form the star of david..........every time i mention this in the edit, somebody deletes it. Is my spelling off? If not, i would like an explaination as to why this should not be mentioned. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.71.65.144 (talk) 09:27, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A six-pointed star not composed of six lines is not a Star of David (study some history of heraldry, for example); your posts are pointless and unsourced. --Orange Mike | Talk 02:22, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fine with me.....but it DOES form a hexagram, why shouldn't we mentioned this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.71.65.144 (talk) 05:46, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It indeed shows an unfinished Star of David. Just like the unfinished Pyramid. That is, because the USA was founded by Freemasons as the "New JerUSAlem".

When the capstone comes down, and the pyramid is complete, the Messiah emerges (out of the "New JerUSAlem").

The Eye_of_Providence is that of the Messiah. In Hebrew, the USA is called Artzot HaBrit, the "Lands of the Covenant".It is... really complex. But, always remember 2 Corinthians 11:14. 23:14, 27 October 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.201.17.154 (talk)

And when I write "Messiah" I mean the Antichrist. 178.201.17.154 (talk) 16:31, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Image

Scanning/photocopying United States currency is illegal. --138.110.206.101 (talk) 00:33, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]