Ben Franklin v. the Bald Eagle


It’s an odd curiosity of early American history. In a letter to a family member, the coauthor of the Declaration of Independence decides to throw shade at his nation’s new symbol. Why he did this may seem a little perplexing at first. But context is important, especially here. So let’s try to better understand where Benjamin Franklin was coming from in his criticism of the bald eagle.

The Bald Eagle as a U.S. Symbol

The founding father’s 1784 missive was written only about a year and a half after the United States adopted the bald eagle as part of the country’s Great Seal.1 In a bit of historical trivia, Franklin served on the first of three committees dedicated to creating the design.2 Later, he used the seal while acting as a U.S. ambassador in France.3 However, during his post there is also when he penned that infamous letter to his daughter, Mrs. Sarah Bache.

In that piece of overseas correspondence, Franklin declares, “I wish the bald eagle had not been chosen as the representative of our country.”4 Then the Philadelphian sage states three reasons for his objection, two specifically relating to the creature’s “bad moral character” and a third regarding the popularity and pervasiveness of eagles in general. Overall, he asserts (or appears to) that the bald eagle is an unfit symbol for a democratic republic free of monarchic rule and aristocratic ties.

Examining Franklin’s Case

For Exhibit A, he accuses the bald eagle of being a lazy cheat, apt to forcing the osprey, by means of harassment, to relinquish its catch. And, indeed, Franklin is right about the raptor’s behavior. Though bald eagles will hunt their own fish, they frequently bully food away from other birds. This is evident in the Grand Prize-winning photo from this year’s Audubon Photography Awards; that stunning picture captures a bald eagle ambushing great blue herons.

Thievery, however, is the smallest of problems Franklin has with the bald eagle. Moving on to Exhibit B, he seizes upon what he considers its greatest fault, calling the raptor a “rank coward,” prone to fleeing from “a little king bird, not bigger than a sparrow.” What Franklin meant by “king bird” is not clear,5 but there is some truth in his anecdotal statement. When mobbed by smaller feathered creatures, such as crows and sparrows, many raptors do choose to fly off rather than fight. Bald eagles and other avian predators have little to gain in these situations other than aggravation. Nevertheless, despite being rooted in some truth, Franklin’s description is still quite misleading and incomplete.

Bald eagles are generally aggressive birds. As the founding father acknowledges, they confront and hassle ospreys for their fish. Yet he conspicuously fails to mention that bald eagles also will tangle with their own kind. For instance, they are known to engage in bloody territorial battles. In addition, these raptors will assault other large birds. Not long ago, one attacked a Canada goose, the skirmish documented in a series of photographs.

Franklin’s last gripe regards eagles by and large, and could be related to the birds’ popularity as heraldic figures. His Exhibit C dismisses the bald eagle simply because eagles in general are “found in all countries.” Though he does not build on this point, what the founding father may be alluding to is the eagle’s extensive history as an emblem of ancient empires and aristocratic cultures. For Franklin, such imperial associations, though involving other species, possibly make the bald eagle—and even the golden eagle for that matter—an inappropriate symbol for a democratic nation.

Is There a Better Bird?

When dismissing the bald eagle, Ben Franklin looks to another bird, one he considers “much more respectable.” This is the turkey. Despite conceding the fowl “a little vain and silly,” Franklin asserts that it is fearless enough to defend its farmyard from “a grenadier of the British guards.” Sure, a laughable claim for some, but wild turkeys have indeed been known to attack humans, sometimes even going after mailmen and police officers. The domesticated variety aren’t as intimidating, but don’t underestimate them.

The gobbler has had its share of fans, John James Audubon being the most high-profile. He used the male wild turkey’s image, along with the motto “America My Country,” for his personal seal.6 Yet, unlike Franklin, Audubon had positive things to say about the bald eagle. In his Birds of America, he describes the raptor as a “noble bird” of “great strength, daring, and cool courage.”7 Why shouldn’t both the wild turkey and the bald eagle, large and formidable creatures found throughout much of the United States, be deserving of respect?

The bald eagle/turkey debate unfortunately has long taken on a life of its own. Many people want to choose sides; however, I’d highly recommend not doing so without considering the subject and context of Franklin’s letter. First, he never advocates replacing the bald eagle on the U.S. Great Seal with the turkey. Second, his missive was prompted not by an issue he had with the seal, but by a controversial plan of the Society of the Cincinnati, an American Revolutionary War veterans group. Franklin was concerned that this organization would become, in his words, “an order of hereditary knights.” His letter is devoted to this topic, and the tangents he makes (such as the one involving the bald eagle) are all related to his attack on the organization’s proposal.

What specifically provoked Franklin’s ire was the Society of the Cincinnati’s plan “of establishing ranks of nobility” by bequeathing membership and medals to the current members’ descendants. Like the Great Seal, the medals do feature an eagle. Perhaps Franklin would not have even aired his opinions on the bald eagle or the turkey if not for those medals. The reason he appears to bring up the matter at all is to concur with other critics that the group’s design “looks more like a turkey,” something—if you take Franklin’s words at face value—he actually favors. Perhaps, though, he was being facetious.

A Winning Verdict

Since Franklin’s letter heavily mingles wit, charm, and wisdom, it is questionable at times whether he is being wholly serious or, in parts, satirical. Consider, too, that he was living an ocean away from his fellow citizens. Isn’t it possible that he may have attempted to stir some controversy over the Great Seal to maximize attention to his letter? After all, he clearly had a much more important matter in mind than avian emblematic figures.

Ultimately, let’s not make too much out of Franklin’s commentary on the bald eagle and the turkey. Both are beautiful birds in their own ways and worthy of celebration year-round and during the Fourth of July!


  1. U.S. Dept. of State, Bureau of Public Affairs. “The Great Seal of the United States.” Washington, DC: U.S. Dept. of State, 2003. p. 1:
  2. U.S. Dept. of State, Bureau of Public Affairs. p. 2.
  3. Anderson, SH. The Most Splendid Carpet. Philadelphia, PA: National Park Service, U.S. Dept. of the Interior, 1978:
  4. Rising, G. “Benjamin Franklin Talks Turkey” [article includes Franklin’s letter in its entirety]. Nature Watch University at Buffalo:
  5. The “king bird” and similar epithets (e.g., “regulus” and “little king”) have been used since antiquity to describe wren species. However, a better candidate in this case is the eastern kingbird. Since Franklin is also using the term as a metaphor for the British king, he could have had some other bird in mind.
  6. Rhodes, R. John James Audubon: The Making of an American. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2004. p. 273.
  7. Audubon, JJ. “White-headed Eagle,” The Birds of America. National Audubon Society:


17 thoughts on “Ben Franklin v. the Bald Eagle

  1. I’m not fond of either as a national bird! I know it’s supposed to be something majestic, but perhaps if nations toned things down a bit, we would be better served…(K)

    1. There are definitely a lot more pressing issues facing the world than which bird a country chooses as its national symbol. Nonetheless, that we humans still identify with and reach out to other animals, I think, is a positive sign. It can be a doorway or gateway for an interest in and appreciation of nature and conservation, things that of course extend well beyond national borders.

  2. The problem with changing our national bird to the turkey today is that the poor turkey has gained a wholly undeserved reputation for being stupid, incompetent, and who knows what else. I suspect everyone in the country has been on the receiving end of the expression: “You turkey!”

    On the other hand, that might be reason enough to choose the turkey. Everyone would have at least one thing in common with his or her fellow citizens. 🙂

    I think the eagle is a fine national bird, but I do have quite a bit of admiration for the wild turkey. Those critters are quck, smart, and able to turn and disappear on a dime. Anyone who’s tried turkey hunting — even with a camera — knows how wily they can be. They’re so much the definition of “now you see them, now you don’t” that there’s even a great song that uses them as a mainstay of the chorus. Have you ever heard “Long Gone”?

    A great post for Independence Day. I hope yours was a good one.

    1. Much agreed. The poor turkey definitely doesn’t get much respect. I wonder if a big part of it has to do with the fact that it is game fowl. Many folks don’t think very highly either of chickens, pheasants, and ducks. The turkey’s calls likely don’t help bolster support, but I enjoy them. They are a bird worth celebrating (though I wouldn’t recommend replacing the bald eagle as the national bird).
      Great comments as usual! Thanks for reading my post. I hope your had a great Fourth of July!

      1. I had a quiet, enjoyable Fourth — thanks for asking. I just noticed the way you’ve arranged your sources at the end of the post. There are times when I need to do that, as well as linking.

        Speaking of — I just clicked on the link for the song, and it played. If you try again and it doesn’t work for you, I’ve added the link as a comment at the very bottom of my About page. You can find that here. It’s such a wonderful song, I hope it does open. It’s done by an independent Texas duo that isn’t on YouTube or other streaming services, so CD to mp3 to link is the only option.

      2. It turns out the audio problem was on my end. After some troubleshooting, I was able to fix the issue. I enjoyed the song—it had several bird references. Thanks for including the link! As for the source listings at the end of my posts, I like to include them so others can locate the info (and learn more if interested), as well as to give credit where it’s due. It takes more time to include the citations, but I think doing so is worth it. I’m glad you noticed and appreciate them!

  3. The obvious compromise (after all it’s politics) is the turkey vulture, soars like an eagle, looks like a turkey. We’ll just have to ignore that it likes roadkill.

  4. I am now imagining a new American heraldic coat of arms with a turkey and a bald eagle on either side, à la the UK’s unicorn and lion! 🙂

    1. It’s a great bird! I can definitely understand why it’s Australia’s national representative. Of course, you all have lots of other interesting ones, too—the kookaburra, black swan, king parrot, southern cassowary, satin bowerbird, etc.

      1. Yeah, we do have lots of other birds, but would you want them as your national representative? Of course, I might pick the Kookaburra, as it has a great sense of humour, constantly laughing at us silly humans…lol. 😉

Comments are closed.