![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
How is it that the masonic symbolism of the pyramid is debunked? It is extremely masonic in its aesthetic, the only thing more distinictly masonic in look would be the concept of globes on top of pillars.
I rearranged two of the sections to facilitate discussion of the reverse side of the seal. I deleted the line about Ben Franklin's opinion's on turkeys. It was a joke. What I intended is very serious. Please, discuss the 'murkiness' of the reverse side of the Great Seal in further detail.
The article says, the "Eye of Providence" is out of use during the time of the Great Seal, but can be seen clearly on Washington's Masonic Apron. That seems to directly contradict that the Masons had stopped using it, no? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.43.138.69 ( talk) 23:38, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
I thought Harry Truman interchanged the gripppings of the left and right claws to show olive leaves on the right claw in place of the original layout -- Ipsofacto 16:16, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
It cannot be used 2000 to 2000 times a year as this is the same number. -- Daniel C. Boyer 19:47 28 Jul 2003 (UTC)
It should be mentioned how this violates very basic rules of heraldry (there cannot be an uneven number of pallets, for instance). -- Daniel C. Boyer 19:48 28 Jul 2003 (UTC)
On June 20, 1782, the Continental Congress adopted an "armorial achievement and reverse of the great seal." This act was the same act adopting the great seal. Since the act specified an armorial achievement, why can't we assume that this is, legitimately, the national coat of arms?
The shield has seven white stripes and six red?? Is that a mistake? - Branddobbe 19:40, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC)
Winston Churchill wasn't Prime Minister in 1946, can I amend this sentence accordingly?
LOL. I followed that link you gave, and it says May-July 1945, and 1951 and on. Where is 1946 included then? Actually, Attlee was the PM in 1946. D. F. Schmidt 01:50, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
The Tiffany website claims that in 1885 they designed the current Great Seal used on the back of the one dollar bill (USD). After looking at some of the other seals I'm confused on what is actually considered the Great Seal. Can any else weigh in on how the Tiffany design plays out in the history of the Great Seal? Please see the 1885 section at http://www.tiffany.com/about/timeline.asp?.
Jasenlee 16:44, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
It is said in the article that there is no "coat of arms" per se of the U.S., but a U.S. Army site on awards ( The Institute of Heraldry of the Pentagon) mentions this on the page for the Distinguished Service Medal.
What the heck does this even mean? I went to the September 11 Commission page and looked at their seal, and I didn't see any huge difference between the two, let alone 50 of something added to the latter. It's been there for a year and a half, so I very possibly could be wrong, but someone at the very least needs to elaborate on this. Flannel 19:06, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
Is there anything out there on the eagle's head facing the other way (towards the arrows) when war is declared? I've heard of this before, it even comes up on an episode of the west wing, does anyone know if there is any validity to it? Benw 07:51, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
I'm thinking about adding a section that lists the references to the number 13 in the seal. So far, I know of:
I wasn't sure whether I should put this in, so I'd like an opinion or two. It may not deserve its own section. But... well, my vote is to include it. Twilight Realm 01:13, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
The obverse of the Seal has 7 examples of the #13 as a reference to the Bible's Seven Seals
The reverse of the Seal has
IMHO the 13 stars on the Great Seal of the United States are arranged in a unique shape that has a unique name: "two interlocking tetraktyses". Tetraktys is a shape made of 10 points arranged in 4 rows: 1,2,3,4, the sum of which is 10 which was considered a sacred number by the Pythagoreans. In "two interlocking tetraktyses" the stars (points) are arranged in 5 rows: 1, 4, 3, 4, 1 the sum of which is 13.
Jay Kappraff wrote on his book (Connections, 2001, ISBN: 9810245858 p.4) that while one tetraktys represents the cosmos - two interlocking tetraktyses form the Star of David representing the signs of the zodiac surrounding the 13th point which is the source of life. See: [1] Zeevveez 12:12, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps some mention should be made of the origins of the eagle/arrow iconography in traditional Iroquois folk art? The original "American eagle" held five arrows in its claws, one for each of the Five (later Six) Nations. This can be read about in Ronald Wright's Stolen Continents. Or perhaps there is a more appropriate article on the use of the eagle in symbolic American nationalism? Fucube 04:29, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
Vandalism by I.P. address: 74.128.172.96 was removed.-- Lance talk 14:26, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
In this article, in regards to the pyramid icon, it says 'Where the top of the pyramid should be, the so-called Eye of Providence watches over it.' and 'Two mottos appear: Annuit Cœptis signifies that the Eye of Providence has "nodded at (our) beginnings."'
In the dollar bill article it says 'The separated cap of the pyramid, portraying the all-seeing eye, symbolizes that the United States is still far from finished. The Latin phrase "Annuit Cœptis" ("He [God] has favored our undertaking")'
So, is the top piece of the pyramid the Eye of Providence or the All-seeing eye, and does 'Annuit Cœptis' translate to 'nodded at (our) beginnings' or 'He [God] has favored our undertaking'.-- Jcvamp 06:42, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
Thorough research on the truth of all symbolism is a legitimate matter in the reckoning of whether or not all that is forged together (credit to Ezra Pound and his quote "The Image is more than an idea.") to substantiate the underlying concepts of and a genuine reputation for THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. Every part of the total should contribute to the promises and ideals once in the minds of this nation's Founding Fathers and every patriot then, and those since, guided by Providence, without cunning nor deceit. When the "Eye of Providence" imagery may, in fact, be the symbol of a centuries old secret organization (credit to author CS, geocities.com) called the "Cult of the All-Seeing Eye" (est. 1660s-1710s) there is question enough about why such a symbol has been on the dollar bill for now seventy-four years. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 1111anidea ( talk • contribs) 19:38, 12 October 2009 (UTC) Steve Feld
I am adding a few paragraphs in the "History" section of this article in order to show the process by which the current design was ultimately chosen. Several designs were nominated as the great seal prior to the one ultimately chosen; this history is vital to this article. I have just started so feel free to add or edit if necessary. ( Gaytan 20:11, 26 October 2006 (UTC))
Was the bald eagle a national symbol already at the time of the seals adoption, or did it become the national symbol because of its use on the seal? Incidentally, which came first, the eagle or the egg?-- dave-- 14:22, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
i thought this image was a good addition to the article, but couldnt find a good place to put it, as the article seems overloaded with good images already... here it is for a future day when the copy has been expanded.
popefauvexxiii 19:53, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
I'm confused about the "reverse" of the Seal. Our article on Seal (device) doesn't mention them having reverse sides, ie: they appear to be either stamp-like things or they are signet rings, something that only has a single side. This article suggests that a "seal" is like a coin...but wouldn't that make it hard to actually use for the purpose of "sealing" something? 70.20.238.31 18:58, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
This should certainly be mentioned as it is a significant representation of a group which controls the destiny of America. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 194.221.40.3 ( talk) 13:01, 30 January 2007 (UTC).
Text: "The shield the eagle bears on its breast, though sometimes drawn incorrectly, has two main differences from the American flag. First, it has no stars on the blue chief (though other arms based on it do..."
But the picture shown in the article does have the stars... 64.132.221.211 18:06, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
What does the Latin in Image:Great_Seal_of_US,_Recto_Design,_1782.png mean? Шизомби ( talk) 17:44, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
I did some research, and found that during the revolutionary war, Synagogues in North America donated large sums of money to the continental army, as well as the masons. In one case, one of the richest men in the continent donated every last bit of money he owned to the cause, soon dying a starved beggar. To thank the Jews and Masons, Washington asked that they be added to the seal.
Unfortunately, my internet history was recently deleted in a computer crash, and I no longer have the links to the sites which contain the information. Zib Blooog ( talk) 04:22, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
That Haym Salomon basically financed the Continental Army is fact. The star part of the story is the only part not verified. [see /info/en/?search=Haym_Salomon] 96.232.188.119 ( talk) 07:16, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
OK... seem to have a disagreement on the wording of the symbolism section. Til Eulenspiegel's edit summary says that that my versoin does not match what the source says... I disagree. It may not be a word for word copy, but I think it does match what the source says. So let's discuss. Blueboar ( talk) 13:54, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
Does anyone else think it is a bit silly to repeat the the exact same set of images for the obverse and reverse of the seal in such proximity? We use the exact same images in the infobox as we do just a few paragraphs later in the main text sections about each side. One of these sets should go (probably the reitteration in the main text).
Alternatively, we should find a different set of depictions to use in either the info box or the main text. Blueboar ( talk) 16:42, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
I posted the part about the seal first appearing on paper currency on the 1935 silver certificate. I noted that this was the idea of Vice President Henry Wallace and President Franklin Roosevelt, and that, by the way, they were both Freemasons. I cited this document as a source ( http://209.85.175.132/search?q=cache:cw9kRr3ZkdAJ:www.philadelphiafed.org/publications/economic-education/symbols-on-american-money.pdf+Great+seal+Henry+wallace+silver+certificate&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1). My contribution was deleted without discussion. Here's some more information: There were 9 founding fathers that were Freemasons. Benjamin Franklin, William Ellery, John Hancock, Joseph Hewes, William Hooper, Robert Paine, Richard Stockton, George Walton and William Whipple. George Washington was also a Freemason. (source: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Were_the_founding_fathers_Masons). Here's more: 16% of the signers of the Declaration of Independence were apparently Freemasons, 33% of the signers of the Constitution were apparently Freemasons, and 46% of the Generals in Washington's army were apparently Freemasons (source: http://bessel.org/foundmas.htm) 118.4.190.177 ( talk) 08:24, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
Do we really need this section?... and should it be where it is, if we do need it? I know numerologists and conspriacy theory fans find the repitition of things numbering 13 to have some sort of significance or something... but as far as the Great Seal goes all those thirteen stars, arrows, tail feathers etc. have a much more mundane reason for being there - the US originally had 13 States. Any objections to simply cutting the section? Blueboar ( talk) 12:33, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
The symbolism of the #13 is very important including the 13 letters of E PLURIBUS UNUM. 73.85.203.175 ( talk) 14:47, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
Currently the article states that the outermost stripes on the shield are white, not red; "so as not to violate the heraldic rule of tincture". In what way would another arrangement violate the tincture rule? / B****n ( talk) 05:30, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
Re: the motto: "Novus ordo seclorum". The fact is Charles Thompson explained what he had in mind when he proposed it. Modern day speculations that it should be translated or "interpreted" as either "New World Order" or "New Secular Order" are irrelevant within in the context of this article. Furthermore, these "interpretations" are proposed by fringe conspiracy theorists... even mentioning them in the main text gives undue weight to their fringe theories. At best, such speculations should be relegated to a foot note... but they do not belong in the main text. Blueboar ( talk) 13:25, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
I learned three words in Latin from this obfuscation:
The word seclorum does not mean "secular", as one might assume, but is the genitive (possessive) plural form of the word saeculum, meaning (in this context) generation, century, or age. Saeculum did come to mean "age, world" in late, Christian Latin, and "secular" is derived from it, through secularis. However, the adjective "secularis," meaning "worldly," is not equivalent to
the nominative plural possessive "seclorum," meaning "of the ages."
I wonder if the Italian version of this English article... nah.
Saeculum means "generation, world, or age".
Seclorum is its possessive plural.("worlds'", "ages'", or "generations'"
Secularis is its adjective form. ("worldly", "of an age", "of a generation" (all singular)).
Seclorum, our motto word, has a word relation:.
Saeculum is it's possessive plural. (The 's is implied in the word Seclorum. We would say "Seclorum's")Saeculum has a word relation:
Secularis is its adjective.Ordo translates to "Order".
Novus translates to "New".
Novus Ordo Seclorum translates New Order of the Worlds'.
(Note the apostrophe.)Adjectives only ever accompany the singular form. Children are childlike and trees are all tree-like, and women are womanly. Secularis can modify Saeculum. Worldly world is 'Saeculum Secularis. If Seclorum hypothetically transformed into an adjective, it would be "of the worlds'" (Note the final apostrophe.)
We can translate Of the worlds (without the apostrophe) "world-like worldliness of worlds", or "world of worlds". We can translate Of the worlds' (with the apostrophe) only as "owned by all the worlds" or as the non-word "worlds's". To relate Secularis, to Seclorum would also be best said "of the Worlds" but worlds would not be plural possessive, worlds', it would be simply plural worlds.
The other motto on our Great Seal refers to the eye of providence. Perhaps that's why the use of "worlds'" in the phrase, instead of "worlds".
Note that adjective forms of plural posessives only apply to simulations or in the context of malcreants. (tree-like trees, or worldly worlds.)
"Worldly", "world-like", or "of a world's way", but not "of a worlds' way" It is an adjective form. Adjectives only describe singular forms. Goose-like flight pattern. Adjectives simply don't describe plural forms. They can describe plurals, but when they do the plural is made singular first, and it is understood by the context that it describes plurality. For example, children-like, "like women" are written childlike and womanly.
Secularis aka Secular are both adjectives. They both kinda mean: "worldly":
- "of the world",
- "of the generation"
- "of the age"
"A New worldly order"? No. That would have to have been translated from the Latin "Novus Ordo Secularis": "A New Order, done the way a world does things" which is not the plural possessive, but the singular attribute of the order, describing the type of order. The adjective form of Seclorum describes nothing we say. We have adjectives of singular forms, but not plural forms. We don't say children-like or men-like or buses-like, but "how like a bus" or childlike or womanlike. If we did say "like the way of worlds (plural)", we'd say "world-like" or worldly. It's always singular.
In conclusion, Seclorum does not relate to Secularis, and by extension secular.
- "A New Order Worldly"? No. The simple reason for the "No" answer in both cases here is that our motto word "Seclorum" implies "Worlds" not "world".
- A New Order of the Worlds. Yes.
- "A New Secular Order"?
That would be "Novus Ordo Secularis". What we have is Novus Ordo Seclorum.
All the uses of the word world above can also be replaced by generation or by age'.
Let's try this with our working model, New order of the worlds.New Order of the Ages.
- "A New Order of the Age"? No. (The reason for the wording "of the age" derives from the fact that the adjective of, say, "David" is "of David" or David-like.)
- "A New Age-like Order"? No.
- A New Order of the Ages. OK.
New Order of the Generations.
- "A New Generational Order"? No.
- "A New Order Generationally"? No. (Not even a word "generationally")
- A New Order of the Generations. OK.
Unfortunately, conspiracy has gone mainstream. [2] Nevertheless "Abyssus abyssum invocat". — Cpiral Cpiral 07:04, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi there. Yesterday I added links to step pyramid to this article, but according to this edit, "the specification just says "pyramid" without specifying a type". I beg to differ. Please take a look at following quotes, taken from the current version of the article (emphasis mine):
“ | The 1782 resolution of Congress adopting the arms, still in force (...) blazons the image on the reverse as "A pyramid unfinished. (...)" The pyramid is conventionally shown as consisting of 13 layers to refer to the 13 original states. | ” |
“ | The initial description of the reverse specified thirteen levels to the pyramid, and though the number was left out of the final version, all depictions typically still show thirteen levels. | ” |
“ | For the reverse, Barton used a pyramid of thirteen steps (...) | ” |
These quotes match perfectly the definition at step pyramid:
“ | These pyramids typically are large and made of several layers, or steps, of stone. | ” |
I'd like your opinion on the subject before undoing the edit I mentioned above. Please note that the passage "and though the number was left out of the final version" mentions that the number of steps was left out; not the fact that the pyramid has them.
That edit also removed the links to Frustum (which I had added to the "pyramid unfinished" expressions), with the comment "frustrum links are misleading; that was not the intent." I don't understand how this can be misleading. Frustum is just the name of the geometric shape, and the article itself has a section that refers to the truncated pyramid in the Great Seal. I'd like to readd the links, so your comments would also be appreciated on this issue. Thanks, Waldir talk 12:09, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
I can not support changing "some conspiracy theorists" to "some people". It gives unjust weight then to the conspiracy by making it sound like a mainstream beliefs held by a small though sizable portion of the population. Is there any poll that could be cited that shows the percentage of people that believe the conspiracy is true? Otherwise, if conspiracy theorists is an unjust term, it should be changed to something like "a small yet vocal minority" if the numbers are not certain. It does not appear based on the amount of reliably published material (omitting self publish and personal websites) that such conspiracies are taken with any grain of salt. It is not accurate to compare the number of historians with books from well respected publishing houses against the number of people that can maintain a personal website and post their own thoughts; on any subject it is easy to believe the latter would outnumber the former even if the latter is the minority view.
I would not think to withhold the conspiracy either. Why I do not believe it to be widely believed, I do think it is widely known or at least portions of it are (like what the symbols themselves mean) if not the conspiracy itself is. It would be a bit of an elephant in the room that none wish to address if the material were altogether removed, and could cause confusion to not debunk the false symbolism.
So again, if anyone has ever come across a poll, could they please link it for us. Also, of course, everyone interested herein please contribute your thoughts amongst my ramblings. [tk] XANDERLIPTAK 06:54, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
We seem to be in an edit war over the use of the term "conspiracy theory" in the Speculation section. We have two instances (I have un-wikified the citations so we can see and discuss them):
and
In both sentences we have direct support for the use of the term... in the first, we support the use of "some conspiracy theorists believe" with a website that calls itself "conspiracyarchive" showing this belief. In the second we cite to a reliable third party source that debunks the idea the Great Seal was created by Freemasons, and attributes that idea to... conspiracy theorists.
In fact, I will challenge the IP to find a source that connects Freemasonry to the Great Seal that does not either claim a conspiracy exists or attempt to debunk that theory. Blueboar ( talk) 12:06, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
or
The opinions of other users would be helpful. -
SSJ
t
00:47, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
"Which of these two images of the Great Seal should we use?" Neither. The image of the actual metal Great Seal that is used to imprint upon offical documents with the 19 orbs surrounding the 13 stars above the eagle should be chosen. - Brad Watson, Miami 66.229.56.118 ( talk) 01:47, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
In listing the examples of the #13, I added that E PLURIBUS UNUM is a 13-letter motto. Also, I changed the ancient Latin phrase to all Capital letters - like on the Great Seal. The actual metal Great Seal has 19 clouds surrounding the 13 stars above the eagle. Sometimes the number of clouds/orbs varies in other depictions of the Seal, i.e. the Dollar Bill has 14 blurry clouds. My logical speculation of "Why 19 clouds" is they represent the Metonic cycle of 19 tropical years and Eclipse series of 19 eclipse years. Google Seal #4: S=19 Theory (18.6 algorithm/fractal) - Brad Watson, Miami 66.229.56.118 ( talk) 01:39, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
There Are No Coincidences. Those behind the design of the Great Seal - whether Freemasons or not - were experts on symbolism and gematria: the geometry of the language. There is strong significance to everything on the seal including the 13 letters of E PLUIBUS UNUM and the 19 clouds. 73.85.203.175 ( talk) 14:57, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
Carl: Of course, There Are No Coincidences and there are especially none in the symbolism of The Great Seal where everything is 'put under a microscope' like we are doing now. The Freemasons - Franklin, Washington, Hancock, etc. - were experts in symbolism and gematria. All the important communications in 1776 were encoded, e.g. Culper Spy Ring and alphanumeric ciphers were the most basic. Today, when 5th graders in Philadelphia go on a field trip to Constitution Hall, they're taught, "Liberty(7 letters) Bell(4) symbolizes 7/4 July 4th". The Masons encoded John(4,47) Hancock(7,40) as the only representative of Continental Congress to actually sign the Declaration on 7/4. Charles Thomson(74=T20+H8+O+M13+S19+O+N14) attested it.
Masons don't write down their secrets - they only transmit them orally over the centuries. You don't know that?
BTW, there are 9 tail feathers on the Seal's Eagle symbolizing the 9 Supreme Court Justices. 73.57.35.183 ( talk) 14:03, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
![]() |
An image used in this article, File:Double Eagle 1856 O Reverse.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status
Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
This notification is provided by a Bot -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 22:55, 30 December 2011 (UTC) |
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Thanatos7474 ( talk • contribs) 12:47, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
The arrangement of the 13 stars certainly can be seen as a Magen David/Star of David/Jewish Star/Seal of Solomon. 2601:589:4705:C7C0:D829:A34:F736:2ECD ( talk) 23:47, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
...without citations to allow sources to be checked. Until this is changed, the article cannot be seen as a reliable article on this subject. (For particulars, check any section or paragraph without a citation. I am an educator, and well educated; this information is not common knowledge, and so requires verifiable sourcing.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.146.23.101 ( talk) 05:50, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
User 91.211.103.71 is insistent that we use "he" instead of "it" when referring to the eagle... I have now had to revert to gender neutral language twice (see here). The fact is, we don't know if it is a male or female eagle (it could be either). Blueboar ( talk) 13:13, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
I seem to recall a documentary I saw some time ago (perhaps something from the History Channel, before it turned to aliens to explain everything) that described the symbolism of the Great Seal. Nothing unusual or surprising, probably less than this article explains. But one thing that's not clearly stated anywhere in this article is why the pyramid is unfinished. As I recall, the documentary explained that the pyramid represents our nation, or the work of building our nation, and that it's unfinished because the nation (or the task of building it) is unfinished; I'm not sure how well I can explain it, but as I understand it the idea is that the founding fathers didn't consider their work finished; we are constantly building our nation, and this task will never be completed as long as the nation continues to exist. For me this is the most sublime example of allegory in the Great Seal. If it's true, then it really ought to be explained in the article. Has anybody else heard of this, or know of any sources that might support or refute this symbolism? P Aculeius ( talk) 04:34, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
== The Obverse of the Seal has 7 examples of the #13 - a reference to the Bible's '7 Seals' ==
I edited the following... Symbolism of items numbering 13 -
In honor of the fact that there were originally 13 States in the Union, the inclusion of items consisting of this number is a common motif in the seal. The official description of the seal states that there should be 13 stars in the 'glory' above the eagle's head, 13 stripes on the shield, and 13 arrows (13 arrow stems and 13 arrowheads) in the eagle’s talon. The initial description of the reverse specified 13
levels to the pyramid, and though the number was left out of the final version, all depictions typically still show 13 levels. Also by custom, since 1885 there are 13 leaves and 13 olives on the olive branch. The fact that there are 13 letters in two of the mottos ("e pluribus unum" and "annuit cœptis") seems not to be coincidental (and depends on whether one considers the ligature "
œ" to be one letter or two).
On the obverse of the seal, there are seven examples of the number 13, thus making a reference to the Bible's
Seven Seals...
The obverse of the Seal has 7 examples of the #13 as a reference to the Bible's
Seven Seals
2601:589:4705:C7C0:D829:A34:F736:2ECD ( talk) 23:28, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
Sorry, There Are No Coincidences and especially not in the symbolism of The Great Seal where everything is 'put under a microscope' like we're doing now. Everyone who has ever been involved with the design of the Seal starting with
Benjamin Franklin was well aware of what the function of a seal has been throughout history and is very familiar with the prophetic importance of the Bible's
Seven Seals in
The Revelation 5:1. The reality is that you don't like the fact that The Great Seal makes an encoded reference to the "7 Seals". The seal connection is obvious except to anyone with an agenda that doesn't want to see this connection recognized.
73.57.35.183 (
talk)
14:14, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
Within the section on Notable depictions is a short sub-section on listening devices hidden by the Soviets in a plaque depicting the seal (which was presented to the US Ambassador to the USSR at the time). I have to question whether this short section is really relevant to the topic of this article (the seal). While the placement of listening devices within a plaque may be notable... I am not sure that the plaque itself is notable as a depiction of the seal. Thoughts? Blueboar ( talk) 12:20, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Great Seal of the United States. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 16:46, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Great Seal of the United States. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:27, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
Melanin comes from the Greek meaning black or dark brown (according to etymology).
"The shield had six sections, each representing "the Countries from which these States have been peopled" (using the symbols for England, Scotland, Ireland, France, Germany, and Holland), surrounded by the initials of all thirteen states."
Does the above sentence imply the "melanin people" came from the above countries as well or were they here upon the arrival of those people? 2603:6080:4E01:15F8:4478:D84B:BF7C:B216 ( talk) 21:46, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
I am confused of the actual provenance of E Pluribus Unum. From Walter Isaacson's biography of Benjamin Franklin, page 315, right before the section "Meeting Lord Howe Again", 'Franklin's proposal was to have the motto E Pluribus Unum on the front and an ornate scene on the reverse of Pharoah being engulfed by the Red Sea with the phrase "Rebellion to Tyrants is obedience to God."'
In the second paragraph of "First committee" in this article, it describes the Exodus scene as being Franklin's creation, but not E Pluribus Unum.
The E pluribus unum article says that the motto was suggested by Pierre Eugene du Simitiere. So we have two conflicting accounts. Does anyone have concrete evidence as to who is right? The page greatseal.com was used as a reference for that article, and indeed an excerpt from the Book The Eagle and the Shield included in https://www.greatseal.com/committees/firstcomm/index.html indicates that it was Pierre who came up with the motto. I read the passage from the actual book , and it seems that this conviction is made by the author, Richard Patterson, but until I see a primary source saying it was Pierre who came up with it, I'm not convinced.
Everyone agrees that the motto first appeared on the title page of the annual volume for 1731 of the London magazine the Gentleman's Magazine. I agree with this page, which notes that Franklin’s life as a publisher would have made him very familiar to the magazine. It seems less likely to me that Pierre, who was born in 1737, raised in Geneva and spent time in the West Indies and New York, would have seen a motto published 6 years before he was born in a country he did not spend significant time in. Wackomode41 ( talk) 12:55, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
How is it that the masonic symbolism of the pyramid is debunked? It is extremely masonic in its aesthetic, the only thing more distinictly masonic in look would be the concept of globes on top of pillars.
I rearranged two of the sections to facilitate discussion of the reverse side of the seal. I deleted the line about Ben Franklin's opinion's on turkeys. It was a joke. What I intended is very serious. Please, discuss the 'murkiness' of the reverse side of the Great Seal in further detail.
The article says, the "Eye of Providence" is out of use during the time of the Great Seal, but can be seen clearly on Washington's Masonic Apron. That seems to directly contradict that the Masons had stopped using it, no? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.43.138.69 ( talk) 23:38, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
I thought Harry Truman interchanged the gripppings of the left and right claws to show olive leaves on the right claw in place of the original layout -- Ipsofacto 16:16, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
It cannot be used 2000 to 2000 times a year as this is the same number. -- Daniel C. Boyer 19:47 28 Jul 2003 (UTC)
It should be mentioned how this violates very basic rules of heraldry (there cannot be an uneven number of pallets, for instance). -- Daniel C. Boyer 19:48 28 Jul 2003 (UTC)
On June 20, 1782, the Continental Congress adopted an "armorial achievement and reverse of the great seal." This act was the same act adopting the great seal. Since the act specified an armorial achievement, why can't we assume that this is, legitimately, the national coat of arms?
The shield has seven white stripes and six red?? Is that a mistake? - Branddobbe 19:40, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC)
Winston Churchill wasn't Prime Minister in 1946, can I amend this sentence accordingly?
LOL. I followed that link you gave, and it says May-July 1945, and 1951 and on. Where is 1946 included then? Actually, Attlee was the PM in 1946. D. F. Schmidt 01:50, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
The Tiffany website claims that in 1885 they designed the current Great Seal used on the back of the one dollar bill (USD). After looking at some of the other seals I'm confused on what is actually considered the Great Seal. Can any else weigh in on how the Tiffany design plays out in the history of the Great Seal? Please see the 1885 section at http://www.tiffany.com/about/timeline.asp?.
Jasenlee 16:44, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
It is said in the article that there is no "coat of arms" per se of the U.S., but a U.S. Army site on awards ( The Institute of Heraldry of the Pentagon) mentions this on the page for the Distinguished Service Medal.
What the heck does this even mean? I went to the September 11 Commission page and looked at their seal, and I didn't see any huge difference between the two, let alone 50 of something added to the latter. It's been there for a year and a half, so I very possibly could be wrong, but someone at the very least needs to elaborate on this. Flannel 19:06, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
Is there anything out there on the eagle's head facing the other way (towards the arrows) when war is declared? I've heard of this before, it even comes up on an episode of the west wing, does anyone know if there is any validity to it? Benw 07:51, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
I'm thinking about adding a section that lists the references to the number 13 in the seal. So far, I know of:
I wasn't sure whether I should put this in, so I'd like an opinion or two. It may not deserve its own section. But... well, my vote is to include it. Twilight Realm 01:13, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
The obverse of the Seal has 7 examples of the #13 as a reference to the Bible's Seven Seals
The reverse of the Seal has
IMHO the 13 stars on the Great Seal of the United States are arranged in a unique shape that has a unique name: "two interlocking tetraktyses". Tetraktys is a shape made of 10 points arranged in 4 rows: 1,2,3,4, the sum of which is 10 which was considered a sacred number by the Pythagoreans. In "two interlocking tetraktyses" the stars (points) are arranged in 5 rows: 1, 4, 3, 4, 1 the sum of which is 13.
Jay Kappraff wrote on his book (Connections, 2001, ISBN: 9810245858 p.4) that while one tetraktys represents the cosmos - two interlocking tetraktyses form the Star of David representing the signs of the zodiac surrounding the 13th point which is the source of life. See: [1] Zeevveez 12:12, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps some mention should be made of the origins of the eagle/arrow iconography in traditional Iroquois folk art? The original "American eagle" held five arrows in its claws, one for each of the Five (later Six) Nations. This can be read about in Ronald Wright's Stolen Continents. Or perhaps there is a more appropriate article on the use of the eagle in symbolic American nationalism? Fucube 04:29, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
Vandalism by I.P. address: 74.128.172.96 was removed.-- Lance talk 14:26, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
In this article, in regards to the pyramid icon, it says 'Where the top of the pyramid should be, the so-called Eye of Providence watches over it.' and 'Two mottos appear: Annuit Cœptis signifies that the Eye of Providence has "nodded at (our) beginnings."'
In the dollar bill article it says 'The separated cap of the pyramid, portraying the all-seeing eye, symbolizes that the United States is still far from finished. The Latin phrase "Annuit Cœptis" ("He [God] has favored our undertaking")'
So, is the top piece of the pyramid the Eye of Providence or the All-seeing eye, and does 'Annuit Cœptis' translate to 'nodded at (our) beginnings' or 'He [God] has favored our undertaking'.-- Jcvamp 06:42, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
Thorough research on the truth of all symbolism is a legitimate matter in the reckoning of whether or not all that is forged together (credit to Ezra Pound and his quote "The Image is more than an idea.") to substantiate the underlying concepts of and a genuine reputation for THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. Every part of the total should contribute to the promises and ideals once in the minds of this nation's Founding Fathers and every patriot then, and those since, guided by Providence, without cunning nor deceit. When the "Eye of Providence" imagery may, in fact, be the symbol of a centuries old secret organization (credit to author CS, geocities.com) called the "Cult of the All-Seeing Eye" (est. 1660s-1710s) there is question enough about why such a symbol has been on the dollar bill for now seventy-four years. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 1111anidea ( talk • contribs) 19:38, 12 October 2009 (UTC) Steve Feld
I am adding a few paragraphs in the "History" section of this article in order to show the process by which the current design was ultimately chosen. Several designs were nominated as the great seal prior to the one ultimately chosen; this history is vital to this article. I have just started so feel free to add or edit if necessary. ( Gaytan 20:11, 26 October 2006 (UTC))
Was the bald eagle a national symbol already at the time of the seals adoption, or did it become the national symbol because of its use on the seal? Incidentally, which came first, the eagle or the egg?-- dave-- 14:22, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
i thought this image was a good addition to the article, but couldnt find a good place to put it, as the article seems overloaded with good images already... here it is for a future day when the copy has been expanded.
popefauvexxiii 19:53, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
I'm confused about the "reverse" of the Seal. Our article on Seal (device) doesn't mention them having reverse sides, ie: they appear to be either stamp-like things or they are signet rings, something that only has a single side. This article suggests that a "seal" is like a coin...but wouldn't that make it hard to actually use for the purpose of "sealing" something? 70.20.238.31 18:58, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
This should certainly be mentioned as it is a significant representation of a group which controls the destiny of America. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 194.221.40.3 ( talk) 13:01, 30 January 2007 (UTC).
Text: "The shield the eagle bears on its breast, though sometimes drawn incorrectly, has two main differences from the American flag. First, it has no stars on the blue chief (though other arms based on it do..."
But the picture shown in the article does have the stars... 64.132.221.211 18:06, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
What does the Latin in Image:Great_Seal_of_US,_Recto_Design,_1782.png mean? Шизомби ( talk) 17:44, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
I did some research, and found that during the revolutionary war, Synagogues in North America donated large sums of money to the continental army, as well as the masons. In one case, one of the richest men in the continent donated every last bit of money he owned to the cause, soon dying a starved beggar. To thank the Jews and Masons, Washington asked that they be added to the seal.
Unfortunately, my internet history was recently deleted in a computer crash, and I no longer have the links to the sites which contain the information. Zib Blooog ( talk) 04:22, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
That Haym Salomon basically financed the Continental Army is fact. The star part of the story is the only part not verified. [see /info/en/?search=Haym_Salomon] 96.232.188.119 ( talk) 07:16, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
OK... seem to have a disagreement on the wording of the symbolism section. Til Eulenspiegel's edit summary says that that my versoin does not match what the source says... I disagree. It may not be a word for word copy, but I think it does match what the source says. So let's discuss. Blueboar ( talk) 13:54, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
Does anyone else think it is a bit silly to repeat the the exact same set of images for the obverse and reverse of the seal in such proximity? We use the exact same images in the infobox as we do just a few paragraphs later in the main text sections about each side. One of these sets should go (probably the reitteration in the main text).
Alternatively, we should find a different set of depictions to use in either the info box or the main text. Blueboar ( talk) 16:42, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
I posted the part about the seal first appearing on paper currency on the 1935 silver certificate. I noted that this was the idea of Vice President Henry Wallace and President Franklin Roosevelt, and that, by the way, they were both Freemasons. I cited this document as a source ( http://209.85.175.132/search?q=cache:cw9kRr3ZkdAJ:www.philadelphiafed.org/publications/economic-education/symbols-on-american-money.pdf+Great+seal+Henry+wallace+silver+certificate&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1). My contribution was deleted without discussion. Here's some more information: There were 9 founding fathers that were Freemasons. Benjamin Franklin, William Ellery, John Hancock, Joseph Hewes, William Hooper, Robert Paine, Richard Stockton, George Walton and William Whipple. George Washington was also a Freemason. (source: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Were_the_founding_fathers_Masons). Here's more: 16% of the signers of the Declaration of Independence were apparently Freemasons, 33% of the signers of the Constitution were apparently Freemasons, and 46% of the Generals in Washington's army were apparently Freemasons (source: http://bessel.org/foundmas.htm) 118.4.190.177 ( talk) 08:24, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
Do we really need this section?... and should it be where it is, if we do need it? I know numerologists and conspriacy theory fans find the repitition of things numbering 13 to have some sort of significance or something... but as far as the Great Seal goes all those thirteen stars, arrows, tail feathers etc. have a much more mundane reason for being there - the US originally had 13 States. Any objections to simply cutting the section? Blueboar ( talk) 12:33, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
The symbolism of the #13 is very important including the 13 letters of E PLURIBUS UNUM. 73.85.203.175 ( talk) 14:47, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
Currently the article states that the outermost stripes on the shield are white, not red; "so as not to violate the heraldic rule of tincture". In what way would another arrangement violate the tincture rule? / B****n ( talk) 05:30, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
Re: the motto: "Novus ordo seclorum". The fact is Charles Thompson explained what he had in mind when he proposed it. Modern day speculations that it should be translated or "interpreted" as either "New World Order" or "New Secular Order" are irrelevant within in the context of this article. Furthermore, these "interpretations" are proposed by fringe conspiracy theorists... even mentioning them in the main text gives undue weight to their fringe theories. At best, such speculations should be relegated to a foot note... but they do not belong in the main text. Blueboar ( talk) 13:25, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
I learned three words in Latin from this obfuscation:
The word seclorum does not mean "secular", as one might assume, but is the genitive (possessive) plural form of the word saeculum, meaning (in this context) generation, century, or age. Saeculum did come to mean "age, world" in late, Christian Latin, and "secular" is derived from it, through secularis. However, the adjective "secularis," meaning "worldly," is not equivalent to
the nominative plural possessive "seclorum," meaning "of the ages."
I wonder if the Italian version of this English article... nah.
Saeculum means "generation, world, or age".
Seclorum is its possessive plural.("worlds'", "ages'", or "generations'"
Secularis is its adjective form. ("worldly", "of an age", "of a generation" (all singular)).
Seclorum, our motto word, has a word relation:.
Saeculum is it's possessive plural. (The 's is implied in the word Seclorum. We would say "Seclorum's")Saeculum has a word relation:
Secularis is its adjective.Ordo translates to "Order".
Novus translates to "New".
Novus Ordo Seclorum translates New Order of the Worlds'.
(Note the apostrophe.)Adjectives only ever accompany the singular form. Children are childlike and trees are all tree-like, and women are womanly. Secularis can modify Saeculum. Worldly world is 'Saeculum Secularis. If Seclorum hypothetically transformed into an adjective, it would be "of the worlds'" (Note the final apostrophe.)
We can translate Of the worlds (without the apostrophe) "world-like worldliness of worlds", or "world of worlds". We can translate Of the worlds' (with the apostrophe) only as "owned by all the worlds" or as the non-word "worlds's". To relate Secularis, to Seclorum would also be best said "of the Worlds" but worlds would not be plural possessive, worlds', it would be simply plural worlds.
The other motto on our Great Seal refers to the eye of providence. Perhaps that's why the use of "worlds'" in the phrase, instead of "worlds".
Note that adjective forms of plural posessives only apply to simulations or in the context of malcreants. (tree-like trees, or worldly worlds.)
"Worldly", "world-like", or "of a world's way", but not "of a worlds' way" It is an adjective form. Adjectives only describe singular forms. Goose-like flight pattern. Adjectives simply don't describe plural forms. They can describe plurals, but when they do the plural is made singular first, and it is understood by the context that it describes plurality. For example, children-like, "like women" are written childlike and womanly.
Secularis aka Secular are both adjectives. They both kinda mean: "worldly":
- "of the world",
- "of the generation"
- "of the age"
"A New worldly order"? No. That would have to have been translated from the Latin "Novus Ordo Secularis": "A New Order, done the way a world does things" which is not the plural possessive, but the singular attribute of the order, describing the type of order. The adjective form of Seclorum describes nothing we say. We have adjectives of singular forms, but not plural forms. We don't say children-like or men-like or buses-like, but "how like a bus" or childlike or womanlike. If we did say "like the way of worlds (plural)", we'd say "world-like" or worldly. It's always singular.
In conclusion, Seclorum does not relate to Secularis, and by extension secular.
- "A New Order Worldly"? No. The simple reason for the "No" answer in both cases here is that our motto word "Seclorum" implies "Worlds" not "world".
- A New Order of the Worlds. Yes.
- "A New Secular Order"?
That would be "Novus Ordo Secularis". What we have is Novus Ordo Seclorum.
All the uses of the word world above can also be replaced by generation or by age'.
Let's try this with our working model, New order of the worlds.New Order of the Ages.
- "A New Order of the Age"? No. (The reason for the wording "of the age" derives from the fact that the adjective of, say, "David" is "of David" or David-like.)
- "A New Age-like Order"? No.
- A New Order of the Ages. OK.
New Order of the Generations.
- "A New Generational Order"? No.
- "A New Order Generationally"? No. (Not even a word "generationally")
- A New Order of the Generations. OK.
Unfortunately, conspiracy has gone mainstream. [2] Nevertheless "Abyssus abyssum invocat". — Cpiral Cpiral 07:04, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi there. Yesterday I added links to step pyramid to this article, but according to this edit, "the specification just says "pyramid" without specifying a type". I beg to differ. Please take a look at following quotes, taken from the current version of the article (emphasis mine):
“ | The 1782 resolution of Congress adopting the arms, still in force (...) blazons the image on the reverse as "A pyramid unfinished. (...)" The pyramid is conventionally shown as consisting of 13 layers to refer to the 13 original states. | ” |
“ | The initial description of the reverse specified thirteen levels to the pyramid, and though the number was left out of the final version, all depictions typically still show thirteen levels. | ” |
“ | For the reverse, Barton used a pyramid of thirteen steps (...) | ” |
These quotes match perfectly the definition at step pyramid:
“ | These pyramids typically are large and made of several layers, or steps, of stone. | ” |
I'd like your opinion on the subject before undoing the edit I mentioned above. Please note that the passage "and though the number was left out of the final version" mentions that the number of steps was left out; not the fact that the pyramid has them.
That edit also removed the links to Frustum (which I had added to the "pyramid unfinished" expressions), with the comment "frustrum links are misleading; that was not the intent." I don't understand how this can be misleading. Frustum is just the name of the geometric shape, and the article itself has a section that refers to the truncated pyramid in the Great Seal. I'd like to readd the links, so your comments would also be appreciated on this issue. Thanks, Waldir talk 12:09, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
I can not support changing "some conspiracy theorists" to "some people". It gives unjust weight then to the conspiracy by making it sound like a mainstream beliefs held by a small though sizable portion of the population. Is there any poll that could be cited that shows the percentage of people that believe the conspiracy is true? Otherwise, if conspiracy theorists is an unjust term, it should be changed to something like "a small yet vocal minority" if the numbers are not certain. It does not appear based on the amount of reliably published material (omitting self publish and personal websites) that such conspiracies are taken with any grain of salt. It is not accurate to compare the number of historians with books from well respected publishing houses against the number of people that can maintain a personal website and post their own thoughts; on any subject it is easy to believe the latter would outnumber the former even if the latter is the minority view.
I would not think to withhold the conspiracy either. Why I do not believe it to be widely believed, I do think it is widely known or at least portions of it are (like what the symbols themselves mean) if not the conspiracy itself is. It would be a bit of an elephant in the room that none wish to address if the material were altogether removed, and could cause confusion to not debunk the false symbolism.
So again, if anyone has ever come across a poll, could they please link it for us. Also, of course, everyone interested herein please contribute your thoughts amongst my ramblings. [tk] XANDERLIPTAK 06:54, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
We seem to be in an edit war over the use of the term "conspiracy theory" in the Speculation section. We have two instances (I have un-wikified the citations so we can see and discuss them):
and
In both sentences we have direct support for the use of the term... in the first, we support the use of "some conspiracy theorists believe" with a website that calls itself "conspiracyarchive" showing this belief. In the second we cite to a reliable third party source that debunks the idea the Great Seal was created by Freemasons, and attributes that idea to... conspiracy theorists.
In fact, I will challenge the IP to find a source that connects Freemasonry to the Great Seal that does not either claim a conspiracy exists or attempt to debunk that theory. Blueboar ( talk) 12:06, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
or
The opinions of other users would be helpful. -
SSJ
t
00:47, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
"Which of these two images of the Great Seal should we use?" Neither. The image of the actual metal Great Seal that is used to imprint upon offical documents with the 19 orbs surrounding the 13 stars above the eagle should be chosen. - Brad Watson, Miami 66.229.56.118 ( talk) 01:47, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
In listing the examples of the #13, I added that E PLURIBUS UNUM is a 13-letter motto. Also, I changed the ancient Latin phrase to all Capital letters - like on the Great Seal. The actual metal Great Seal has 19 clouds surrounding the 13 stars above the eagle. Sometimes the number of clouds/orbs varies in other depictions of the Seal, i.e. the Dollar Bill has 14 blurry clouds. My logical speculation of "Why 19 clouds" is they represent the Metonic cycle of 19 tropical years and Eclipse series of 19 eclipse years. Google Seal #4: S=19 Theory (18.6 algorithm/fractal) - Brad Watson, Miami 66.229.56.118 ( talk) 01:39, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
There Are No Coincidences. Those behind the design of the Great Seal - whether Freemasons or not - were experts on symbolism and gematria: the geometry of the language. There is strong significance to everything on the seal including the 13 letters of E PLUIBUS UNUM and the 19 clouds. 73.85.203.175 ( talk) 14:57, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
Carl: Of course, There Are No Coincidences and there are especially none in the symbolism of The Great Seal where everything is 'put under a microscope' like we are doing now. The Freemasons - Franklin, Washington, Hancock, etc. - were experts in symbolism and gematria. All the important communications in 1776 were encoded, e.g. Culper Spy Ring and alphanumeric ciphers were the most basic. Today, when 5th graders in Philadelphia go on a field trip to Constitution Hall, they're taught, "Liberty(7 letters) Bell(4) symbolizes 7/4 July 4th". The Masons encoded John(4,47) Hancock(7,40) as the only representative of Continental Congress to actually sign the Declaration on 7/4. Charles Thomson(74=T20+H8+O+M13+S19+O+N14) attested it.
Masons don't write down their secrets - they only transmit them orally over the centuries. You don't know that?
BTW, there are 9 tail feathers on the Seal's Eagle symbolizing the 9 Supreme Court Justices. 73.57.35.183 ( talk) 14:03, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
![]() |
An image used in this article, File:Double Eagle 1856 O Reverse.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status
Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
This notification is provided by a Bot -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 22:55, 30 December 2011 (UTC) |
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Thanatos7474 ( talk • contribs) 12:47, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
The arrangement of the 13 stars certainly can be seen as a Magen David/Star of David/Jewish Star/Seal of Solomon. 2601:589:4705:C7C0:D829:A34:F736:2ECD ( talk) 23:47, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
...without citations to allow sources to be checked. Until this is changed, the article cannot be seen as a reliable article on this subject. (For particulars, check any section or paragraph without a citation. I am an educator, and well educated; this information is not common knowledge, and so requires verifiable sourcing.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.146.23.101 ( talk) 05:50, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
User 91.211.103.71 is insistent that we use "he" instead of "it" when referring to the eagle... I have now had to revert to gender neutral language twice (see here). The fact is, we don't know if it is a male or female eagle (it could be either). Blueboar ( talk) 13:13, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
I seem to recall a documentary I saw some time ago (perhaps something from the History Channel, before it turned to aliens to explain everything) that described the symbolism of the Great Seal. Nothing unusual or surprising, probably less than this article explains. But one thing that's not clearly stated anywhere in this article is why the pyramid is unfinished. As I recall, the documentary explained that the pyramid represents our nation, or the work of building our nation, and that it's unfinished because the nation (or the task of building it) is unfinished; I'm not sure how well I can explain it, but as I understand it the idea is that the founding fathers didn't consider their work finished; we are constantly building our nation, and this task will never be completed as long as the nation continues to exist. For me this is the most sublime example of allegory in the Great Seal. If it's true, then it really ought to be explained in the article. Has anybody else heard of this, or know of any sources that might support or refute this symbolism? P Aculeius ( talk) 04:34, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
== The Obverse of the Seal has 7 examples of the #13 - a reference to the Bible's '7 Seals' ==
I edited the following... Symbolism of items numbering 13 -
In honor of the fact that there were originally 13 States in the Union, the inclusion of items consisting of this number is a common motif in the seal. The official description of the seal states that there should be 13 stars in the 'glory' above the eagle's head, 13 stripes on the shield, and 13 arrows (13 arrow stems and 13 arrowheads) in the eagle’s talon. The initial description of the reverse specified 13
levels to the pyramid, and though the number was left out of the final version, all depictions typically still show 13 levels. Also by custom, since 1885 there are 13 leaves and 13 olives on the olive branch. The fact that there are 13 letters in two of the mottos ("e pluribus unum" and "annuit cœptis") seems not to be coincidental (and depends on whether one considers the ligature "
œ" to be one letter or two).
On the obverse of the seal, there are seven examples of the number 13, thus making a reference to the Bible's
Seven Seals...
The obverse of the Seal has 7 examples of the #13 as a reference to the Bible's
Seven Seals
2601:589:4705:C7C0:D829:A34:F736:2ECD ( talk) 23:28, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
Sorry, There Are No Coincidences and especially not in the symbolism of The Great Seal where everything is 'put under a microscope' like we're doing now. Everyone who has ever been involved with the design of the Seal starting with
Benjamin Franklin was well aware of what the function of a seal has been throughout history and is very familiar with the prophetic importance of the Bible's
Seven Seals in
The Revelation 5:1. The reality is that you don't like the fact that The Great Seal makes an encoded reference to the "7 Seals". The seal connection is obvious except to anyone with an agenda that doesn't want to see this connection recognized.
73.57.35.183 (
talk)
14:14, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
Within the section on Notable depictions is a short sub-section on listening devices hidden by the Soviets in a plaque depicting the seal (which was presented to the US Ambassador to the USSR at the time). I have to question whether this short section is really relevant to the topic of this article (the seal). While the placement of listening devices within a plaque may be notable... I am not sure that the plaque itself is notable as a depiction of the seal. Thoughts? Blueboar ( talk) 12:20, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Great Seal of the United States. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 16:46, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Great Seal of the United States. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:27, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
Melanin comes from the Greek meaning black or dark brown (according to etymology).
"The shield had six sections, each representing "the Countries from which these States have been peopled" (using the symbols for England, Scotland, Ireland, France, Germany, and Holland), surrounded by the initials of all thirteen states."
Does the above sentence imply the "melanin people" came from the above countries as well or were they here upon the arrival of those people? 2603:6080:4E01:15F8:4478:D84B:BF7C:B216 ( talk) 21:46, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
I am confused of the actual provenance of E Pluribus Unum. From Walter Isaacson's biography of Benjamin Franklin, page 315, right before the section "Meeting Lord Howe Again", 'Franklin's proposal was to have the motto E Pluribus Unum on the front and an ornate scene on the reverse of Pharoah being engulfed by the Red Sea with the phrase "Rebellion to Tyrants is obedience to God."'
In the second paragraph of "First committee" in this article, it describes the Exodus scene as being Franklin's creation, but not E Pluribus Unum.
The E pluribus unum article says that the motto was suggested by Pierre Eugene du Simitiere. So we have two conflicting accounts. Does anyone have concrete evidence as to who is right? The page greatseal.com was used as a reference for that article, and indeed an excerpt from the Book The Eagle and the Shield included in https://www.greatseal.com/committees/firstcomm/index.html indicates that it was Pierre who came up with the motto. I read the passage from the actual book , and it seems that this conviction is made by the author, Richard Patterson, but until I see a primary source saying it was Pierre who came up with it, I'm not convinced.
Everyone agrees that the motto first appeared on the title page of the annual volume for 1731 of the London magazine the Gentleman's Magazine. I agree with this page, which notes that Franklin’s life as a publisher would have made him very familiar to the magazine. It seems less likely to me that Pierre, who was born in 1737, raised in Geneva and spent time in the West Indies and New York, would have seen a motto published 6 years before he was born in a country he did not spend significant time in. Wackomode41 ( talk) 12:55, 1 March 2024 (UTC)