Masonic symbolism in the British £2 coin

Originally posted by Trinityman

Originally posted by buddhaLight
And here is one with some visual aids.

Why did you superimpose the G on the dome? Quite apart from the fact that it isn't there, everyone who knows anything about freemasonry knows that the G is not used in England.

No particular reason actually. I saw that the size and the placement of the dome was just right to put the G on. I know it's far fetched...

Originally posted by buddhaLight
No particular reason actually. I saw that the size and the placement of the dome was just right to put the G on. I know it's far fetched...

Actually your superimposition has been quite helpful, and has helped me to see things a little more clearly.

1. It is clear to me that the lines drawn are actually spotlights. They all seem to start at a given point and fan out, as a beam of light would. Therefore any masonic symbolism on the coin would be secondary, and in addition to the spotlights (as opposed to instead of the spotlights).

2. Even given the above, although the Compasses are shaped correctly, I have trouble with the Square. In order to do its job properly (e.g. lay levels and prove horizontals) a Square must be a certain shape. It must have an angle of exactly 90 degrees, and the two sides must be parallel (in other words it must be of an equal width fully along its length). The two main spotlights at the front of the coin image fulfill neither of these criteria. Compare the picture below to the coin image to see what I mean:



I think its fair to say that the spotlights are in a position similar to that of a masonic square and compass when open, but what is at question is the likelihood of this being by chance rather than by design. Given the symmetrical nature of both images, and the options open to the designer, and the points already raised in this thread including mine own above, I would suggest it is by chance alone. Although I acknowledge possible subliminal influences on the designer as to "pleasing angles", as the spotlights do seem to fall naturally as they are and do look good.

But that may be just me

Originally posted by Trinityman
2. Even given the above, although the Compasses are shaped correctly, I have trouble with the Square. In order to do its job properly (e.g. lay levels and prove horizontals) a Square must be a certain shape. It must have an angle of exactly 90 degrees, and the two sides must be parallel (in other words it must be of an equal width fully along its length). The two main spotlights at the front of the coin image fulfill neither of these criteria.

True. Although the proportions at first sight look correct, the square is not a square.
This is what makes me now unsure about it actually being an image of freemasonry.

I agree that it could be completely innocent. Or that it could be unintentionally placed there by a freemason who sub-consciously found the lines aesthetically pleasing.

However, lets re-cap what has been found so far...

1) I, a freemason, find a £2 coin in my pocket.
2) I notice on the reverse that it bears a resemblance to a square and compass.
3) I ask a bloke at work where that place is and he replies 'St. Paul's'.
4) I back this up on wiki and look into St. Paul's.
5) I find St. Paul's was designed and built by a famous architect and Freemason in Sir Christopher Wren.
6) I discover St. Paul's has some masonic symbolism and architecture in its make-up.
7) St. Paul's also contains artefacts or segments from ancient buildings linked to Freemasonry.

I've been looking really hard for further information (i.e significant anniversaries, distinct symbolism, secret vaults) but to no avail so far.

I've discovered (for myself, not the world) that it is considered to be the first Protestant Cathedral. Is it still protest? I ask this because it was a Catholic friend of mine who could so easily name the building.

I still reckon there's more to be had from this.

If we can be so free to connect dots like people did on the dollar bill.
Then we can create a perfect square by connecting it like this.

Originally posted by boyg2004
I've discovered (for myself, not the world) that it is considered to be the first Protestant Cathedral. Is it still protest? I ask this because it was a Catholic friend of mine who could so easily name the building.

As the Cathedral Church of the Diocese of London, yes, it's still quite Protestant. I don't believe the Church of England would have it any other way.

www.stpauls.co.uk...

Your perspective is wholly North American as the high degrees are very real in Europe, Africa and Latin America. The idea that there is nothing higher than the Master Mason is a bit of nonsense that evolved out of the 1813 Duke of Sussex de-Christianization of the Craft and severing of rites and ostracizing of the high grades in England and in Ireland (courtesy of the Duke of Leinster who was himself a 95 in Memphis) all for the sake of regulating the craft as a point of power in the trinity of the church and the crown. The usual Hanoverian usurpation of things already in existence just as they did with Rosicrucianism after being initiated by Little and the Scotts...they turned around and set up a High Council and told the Scotts to petition them for a charter for Metro College. How nice. Meanwhile, the cohesive systems that developed a person spiritually were broken apart from the craft grades. The Swedes and others were present and voiced their disaproval...thus their lack of adherence to this day. The Americans misunderstand the idea and instead of realizing that the 3 degrees and the HRAM were declared all of Craft Masonry, they think it is all of Masonry in general and so you have Master Masons who think they are entitled to anything and you have a strong culture of good ol boy Americans (one that is clashing with the more spiritually inclined Generations X, Y and Z i America) bastardizing systems and not working them, degrading them to ivory tower dinner clubs for Grand Masters...while other Masons around the world work on higher planes for healing and reintegration with Deity.


reply to post by Appak