
The tiny hidden symbol on every dollar bill... but no one knows what it is
Some say it's a spider. Others insist it's an owl. And for conspiracy theorists, it's a symbol tied to secret societies like the Freemasons or the Illuminati.
The tiny shape, smaller than a grain of rice, sits just above the large '1' in the top right corner on the front of the bill. At first glance, it looks like a speck of ink. But under a magnifying glass, it appears to have a round head and small limbs.
It's been there for nearly a century, but the US Treasury has never explained what it is, or why it was included. There's no official record, no designer has claimed it, and no known purpose has ever been published.
Currency experts say it's likely just part of the guilloche, the swirling, decorative pattern printed across the bill to prevent counterfeiting. But the shape near the '1' is slightly different from the others. It appears partially enclosed, making it stand out from the rest.
But without a definitive answer, theories have flourished online.
'I hear it's Moloch, the owl god worshipped at Bohemian Grove,' one Reddit user joked. 'It must be true.'
Another said, 'I was told it was a spider when I was young, long before I had internet access.' One person even wrote, 'That's an owl. It's a Freemason symbol.'
Ralph Benko, chairman of The Capitalist League and an expert on currency history, said: 'The unknown engraver who designed the dollar bill took the secret, if there is one, to his grave. I fancy it as a tiny owl.'
Financial websites like Sunmark Credit Union have also listed it among the dollar's many 'hidden details,' describing it as either an owl or a spider.
Meanwhile, YouTubers and amateur sleuths have dissected the mark in videos, comparing it to similar flourishes on the bill, but nothing else quite matches the odd little blob near the '1'.
Legally, the $1 bill's design hasn't changed since the 1920s, and by law, it can't be updated, meaning that mark has quietly passed from wallet to wallet, generation after generation, for nearly 100 years.
Some tie the mystery to other well-known symbols on the bill, like the pyramid and all-seeing eye, both long associated with Masonic symbolism and secret codes. But there's no historical evidence linking the tiny figure to any society, just whispers and wild guesses.
The psychological phenomenon at play is called pareidolia, when the brain sees familiar patterns, especially faces, in random images. It's the same reason people spot Jesus in toast or see faces on Mars.
This trick is called pareidolia, a psychological phenomenon where your brain tries to make sense of chaos by forcing familiar patterns onto it, especially faces.
It is not a glitch. It is actually your brain working. Humans evolved to be hyper-aware of faces, because spotting them quickly helped with survival, whether it was recognizing a threat, an ally, or a potential mate.
The design of the $1 note has not changed since the 1920s, and legally, it can not be redesigned under current law.
That means this strange mark has been sitting on every bill for nearly a century, passed down through wallets and pockets, whispered about in classrooms, and dissected in Reddit threads and YouTube videos.
Some tie the shape to older, more established dollar bill conspiracies. The pyramid and all-seeing eye on the back of the bill are well-documented symbols with Masonic origins, and their placement has long fueled speculation about secret codes or hidden meanings.
But there is no historical evidence linking the tiny front-side figure to any known society.
Still, online, the theories keep growing. 'Looks like a baby kraken to me,' joked one Reddit user.
Another claimed, 'That's the spider who spun the webs. Dad showed me as a child.' One even said, 'It's Jesus Christ watching you throw it at somebody's daughter.'
Other guesses include Mothman, Cthulhu, or a miniature chupacabra. The list of theories is endless, but no one actually knows what it is.
What is confirmed: the mark is not a printing error. It is not random damage. It is in the same exact spot on every single $1 bill, part of the original design approved by the Bureau of Engraving and Printing nearly a century ago.
It is part of the original design, which was finalized by the Bureau of Engraving and Printing nearly a century ago and no designer ever publicly claimed the element or explained its purpose.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Times
29 minutes ago
- Times
Drivers to be given up to £3,750 to switch to electric cars
Motorists will be given up to £3,750 to switch to electric cars as ministers seek to boost demand to meet net zero targets. Drivers buying new EVs with a list price of under £37,000 will be eligible for the discount. The government had set aside £650 million for the grants, which will not be means tested. The level of subsidy will be tiered with the most 'environmentally sustainable' models, including those made in Britain, receiving the biggest grants. Chinese-made EVs such as BYDs, which are already among the cheapest on the market, would be excluded, sources said. Manufacturers will be required to apply for their electric cars to be part of the grant scheme. They will apply the discount at the point of sale and recoup the money from the Treasury. The Electric Car Grant scheme is due to run until 2029. The reduction in the headline cost of cars will help reduce the down payments or monthly repayments that motorists face, given that 80-90 per cent of new cars in the UK are bought on finance. 'This EV grant will not only allow people to keep more of their hard-earned money — it'll help our automotive sector seize one of the biggest opportunities of the 21st century,' Heidi Alexander, the transport secretary, said. 'And with over 82,000 public chargepoints now available across the UK, we've built the infrastructure families need to make the switch with confidence.' The £37,000 cap means that almost half of all new electric vehicles will be eligible, according to the EV news site, including versions of the Mini Countryman E, Citroen ë-C4 and Skoda Elroq. All Tesla and Polestar models will be excluded because their list price is above the threshold. All electric BMWs, Audis and Mercedes will also be excluded. Such a level of subsidy on new EVs was last available between 2016 and 2018 when motorists switching to pure-electric cars could claim £4,500 towards the purchase. It was reduced to £3,500 in October 2018. Grants for private EV buyers were then gradually lowered before being scrapped altogether in 2022, when the Conservatives claimed they had 'successfully kickstarted the electric car market'. Just 15,474 pure-electric cars were registered in 2018, according to the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT). Last year the figure was 381,970, representing almost 20 per cent of the new car market. Despite the huge increase, the figures mask a big fall in consumer demand for EVs, with the registration figures buoyed by commercial fleet buyers. Private buyers accounted for 19.8 per cent of purchases of pure-electric cars. The decision to bring back grants is designed to help make Labour's plans to ban the sale of new pure-petrol and diesel cars in 2030 achievable. Its plans have already been watered down to allow the sale of plug-in hybrids, which can be powered by a petrol or diesel engine and battery, until 2035. The move will also help the industry meet the zero-emission vehicle mandate (ZEV), which stipulates the proportion of green vehicles manufacturers must sell. It is 28 per cent this year, rising to 80 per cent by 2030. Ginny Buckley, the chief executive of said sales to private buyers 'had stalled' in recent years. A survey of 11,000 UK drivers last November found that 76 per cent were put off by upfront EV costs. Range-anxiety — when motorists may worry about whether they will run out of charge during long journeys — has historically been a significant factor preventing people making the switch. There are now more than 82,000 public chargers and the Department for Transport has earmarked £63 million to bolster charging for motorists without driveways. Howard Cox, the founder of FairFuelUK, which has campaigned against the proposed 2030 ban, said: 'The government is hell bent on their net zero fantasy at all costs knowing full well that EVs are still not the majority of road users' desired first choice. So they are now to spend more of our taxpayers' cash on reducing the huge price of these rich man's toys.' His comments were rejected by Dan Caesar, the chief executive of Electric Vehicles UK, the trade body, who said nine out of ten people who switched to EVs never returned to conventional fuel. He said: 'The targeted incentive programme is a significant step forward in encouraging consumers to buy battery electric vehicles, and to make them more accessible. While battery-only EVs are much cheaper to buy and run than most realise, surveys show that cost misperceptions are the primary reason for hesitance. 'A generous grant, of this nature, gives a new group of interested buyers, who might have thought that going electric was beyond them, a gentle nudge into what is great tech.' Mike Hawes, the chief executive of the SMMT, said: 'Today's announcement of the return of government support for the purchase of electric vehicles is a clear signal to consumers that now is the time to switch. 'Rapid deployment and availability of this grant over the next few years will help provide the momentum that is essential to take the EV market from just one in four today, to four in five by the end of the decade.' Best for affordable fun: Fiat Grande Panda Price: From £21,035 OTR Quoted range: 199 miles* 0% APR? TBC (on sale this summer) Best for city slickers: Hyundai Inster 42kWh Price: From £23,505 OTR Quoted range: 203 miles* 0% APR? Yes, plus £1,000 deposit contribution Best for compact cool: Renault 5 E-Tech 150hp 52kWh Price: From £26,995 OTR Quoted range: 253 miles* 0% APR? Yes Best for families: Vauxhall Grandland Electric Price: From £36,455 OTR Quoted range: 318 miles* 0% APR? No Best for the masses: Ford Puma Gen-E Price: From £29,995 OTR Quoted range: 234 miles* 0% APR? Unclear Best for a comfy ride: Citroen ë-C4 Price: From £27,650 OTR Quoted range: 219 miles* 0% APR? No Best of (perceived) British: Mini Countryman E Price: From £33,005 OTR Quoted range: Up to 286 miles* 0% APR? Unclear * Combined WLTP lab test figure. Expect real world range to vary depending on conditions.


Reuters
30 minutes ago
- Reuters
Diageo calls tequila purity allegation 'baseless' as US lawsuit proceeds
July 14 (Reuters) - Diageo (DGE.L), opens new tab on Monday filed an initial response to a lawsuit accusing the spirits giant of misleading U.S. consumers about the purity of some of its popular tequila brands, calling the claim "baseless". The company, which also owns whisky brands such as Johnnie Walker, said in the filing the complaint provides no evidence to support the claim that its Casamigos and Don Julio tequilas are not "100% agave". All bottled tequilas of these brands labeled as "100% agave" are made from 100% Blue Weber agave and undergo a rigorous production and independent, multi-step certification process, the company said. One of the lawyers for the plaintiffs, Steve Berman of Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro, said he does not have a response yet, while Robert Tolchin of The Berkman Law Office did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment. In May, a class action filed in federal court in Brooklyn accused the company of falsely advertising Casamigos and Don Julio tequilas as "100% agave," claiming they contained other alcohols and failed to meet U.S. or Mexican standards for pure tequila. Two similar lawsuits were filed against Diageo in California and Florida in the same month, with one alleging that some versions of Casamigos and Don Julio contained between 33% and 42% agave-derived ethanol, citing carbon isotope testing commissioned by the plaintiff. Diageo has called the claims "outrageous and categorically false", adding it will "vigorously defend" the quality of its tequilas in court. The lawsuits highlight a broader industry dispute over tequila purity, with "additive-free" claims prompting pushback from Mexico's Tequila Regulatory Council (CRT). The CRT has warned some producers using the "additive-free" label that their export licenses could be revoked unless the claim is removed from packaging and marketing, according to a copy of one letter sent to a brand and seen by Reuters. The CRT called the "additive-free" label misleading, noting that tequila can legally contain additives such as colorants and sweeteners up to 75 grams per liter of sugars or similar ingredients, according to official Mexican regulations.


Reuters
32 minutes ago
- Reuters
US withdraws from tomatoes agreement with Mexico
WASHINGTON, July 14 (Reuters) - The U.S. Commerce Department said on Monday it was withdrawing from a 2019 deal suspending an anti-dumping duty investigation on fresh tomatoes from Mexico, and that it will issue duties of 17.09% on most of those imports from the U.S. neighbor. Antidumping duties are calculated to measure the percentage by which Mexican tomatoes have been sold in the United States at "unfair prices," the Commerce Department said in its statement. President Donald Trump on Saturday had separately threatened to impose a 30% tariff on imports from Mexico starting on August 1, after weeks of negotiations with the major U.S. trading partner failed to reach a comprehensive trade deal. Mexico's agriculture ministry and economy ministry did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Mexico said in April it was confident that it can renew the tomato agreement with the United States. Washington had said in April that it intended to withdraw from the deal. The agreement, which regulates Mexican tomato exports to the U.S. in a bid to allow U.S. producers to compete fairly, was first struck in 1996 and last renewed in 2019 to avert an anti-dumping investigation and end a tariff dispute. U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said on Monday that "for far too long our farmers have been crushed by unfair trade practices that undercut pricing on produce like tomatoes." According to official figures, Mexico exported $3.3 billion of tomatoes last year, the vast majority to the U.S.