Traveling Marks

[carolina pyrate]

Hello all I've been wondering how common was tatooing with pyrates and sailors of the era?

[Calico James Flint]

I too have been wondering this as well. It seems to me that I once saw a picture of a sailor of the period or slightly later that had sailed in Polynesia and had the traditional facial and leg tats of the Polynesian warriors, ie., the smack comb tats, similar to : http://www.mooreatattoo.com/ , just not as elaborate. I can't recall where I saw this, I think it was on NPR several years ago, so I can't say for sure the time period, but I was thinking of doing some temporary facial tats in this manner for myself, or look into possible Indian Tattooing, as I wear the Buffalo "jesus sandals" and have incorporated an India voyage into my character.

Great subject!

[JoshuaRed]

Tattooing among European seamen was virtually unheard of until the late 18th century. It just wasn't popular the way we wish it was. In all the period texts I've read, and all the period art I've studied I have yet to find one actual example of a GAOP sailor sporting a typical nautical tattoo.

With that said, I do think that it's entirely feasible that Europeans who spent time among indigenous tribes who did tattoo, might well end up doing it to endear themselves to those tribes, but it was FAR from the norm.

[Capt. Bo of the WTF co.]

OK, I've stayed out of this debate a long time, but just this once, because Joshua said it so plain, I wish to back him up. I was in the US Navy, and spent some time in San Fransico, and went to every shop I could find asking about early sailor tatoos. The consensus among ALL the professionals in the bay area was that seamen/sailors did not begin sporting tattoos as commonplace until well into the 1850's. Prior to that time it was a rarity. Think of the infectuous nature of tattoing of that day and ask yourself, how many men would risk the time or could risk the time to heal up before returning to work? There are alot of fantasies of tatooed sailors, but it is just that... fantasy. The real bulk of sailors getting tatooed, came much later in the 19th and early 20th century. sorry guys, thats from professionals themselves.

[JoshuaRed]

Thanks Bo! Well said. It wasn't until the British navy was regularly visiting the South Pacific in the later years of the 18th and the turn of the 19th C that tattooing even had the beginnings of being a fad. And it wasn't really commonplace until well into the 19th, as Bo said.

[Dusi Sparrow]

Makes sense to me Capt. Bo. At least it's an open wound and I don't think they could take time off only to get a tattoo.

[Zephaniah W Nash]

A follow-up question along the same lines would be how prevalent tattooing was among folks on land during the same time period...?

If that were more common, then you might find at least a few people who came to sea a bit later in life with ink. Still not enough to make it in any way common, I would think, but possibly enough to at least give the modern mythology at least a bit of reality.

Plus, I've seen at least two movies in which treasure maps had been tattooed onto scalps, so it's gotta be true!

[Captain Jim]

While tattooing was not common among most Europeans, there was one group that stood out. From Tattoo History: a Source Book, by Stephen G. Gilbert (italics mine):

A typical example is the French explorer Gabriel Sagard-Thêodat's account of tattooing among the Hurons, written in 1615:

But that which I find a most strange and conspicuous folly, is that in order to be considered courageous and feared by their enemies [the Hurons] take the bone of a bird or of a fish which they sharpen like a razor, and use it to engrave or decorate their bodies by making many punctures somewhat as we would engrave a copper plate with a burin. During this process they exhibit the most admirable courage and patience. They certainly feel the pain, for they are not insensible, but they remain motionless and mute while their companions wipe away the blood which runs from the incisions. Subsequently they rub a black color or powder into the cuts in order that the engraved figures will remain for life and never be effaced, in much the same manner as the marks which one sees on the arms of pilgrims returning from Jerusalem.

It has for centuries been the practice to get a Jerusalem Cross as a mark of having visited the Holy Land, and these were not unknown in England but were reported to be more common on the continent.

One other note: Tattooing among North American natives was commonplace and yet was not as well recorded as the Cook expedition to Polynesia’s record of tattooing in 1769. It was after the return of Cook that tattooing among sailors caught on and by 1862 the Prince of Wales (the future Edward VII) got a Jerusalem cross, followed by several other tattoos and the floodgates of European tattooing opened.

[Captain Jim]

And of course let us not forget Jeoly, the Painted Prince that William Dampier bought and brought back to England to display.

[Captain Jim]

There is mention of one period sailor, Lionel Wafer, Surgeon in Dampier. The following exerpt is taken from the Gutenberg Project version.

Footnote in Dampier: Later they were there joined by Lionel Wafer, the surgeon, who had been severely injured by an explosion of powder during the transit, and was left with other stragglers in the charge of friendly Indians, with whom he remained some five months. Wafer, by reason of his medical skill, lived "in great splendour and repute," and was so "adored" by his hosts that they tattooed him "in yellow, red, and blue, very bright and lovely." When he rejoined his friends at La Sound's Key he was at first not recognised, and then with hilarity.

Sounds like they tattooed a Tweety Bird on his chest.

[Capn_Enigma]

3 posts in a row: Talking a bit to ourselves today, are we?

[Dorian Lasseter]

That's great Jim,

Too bad they do not describe what the tattoos are....

Could very likely have been a tweety bird...

I do like that they give the colours, as most folks believe that early tattoos were only in black or dark blue...

Also anyone who spent any reasonable amount of time with the Acadians might very well get tattooed to prove their strength as a warrior...

[Captain Jim]

3 posts in a row: Talking a bit to ourselves today, are we?

I was on a roll. Now to get back to work so I will have a job tomorrow.

I was thinking the same thing, Mr. Lassiter, except for the "hilarity" with which Wafer was recieved. The tattoos must have been quite extensive, as he was not recognised right away.

Reading further in Dampier, he states that the crews spent much time ashore, dining, sleeping (both for rest and pleasure), and celebrating with the natives. All of these activities are described in some detail and yet no mention is made of adopting or rejecting the custom of tattooing. The question is whether it was not mentioned because it was so common or was so rare as to escape notice? Tattooing of the Polynesians was not rare, Dampier even going so far as to buy a native for display back in England. But why the lack of any other mention? Frustrating it is.

[Rumba Rue]

probably because it hurt like hell!

[AllByMeOnesies]

OK, I just had to laugh at the remarks about the sailors not getting tattoos because they were afraid of infection, etc. If that be the truth, it sure didn't frighten 'em away from the brothels.

[Jib]

I finished a book on the Bounty not more than a month ago. Although it was after the GAOP it did mention that many of the Bounty Sailors got tattoos while amoung the South Pacific tribes. Many choose to have the date of when they landed on the various islands as a traveling mark while other had different art based upon local designs. Fletcher Christain himself was said to "inked" while amoung the natives.

[JoshuaRed]

In the film The Bounty, there is a cool scene with Mel Gibson as Fletcher, getting tattooed by some island beauties. He's perpetually on the verge of passing out from the pain, and mean ol' Capn Bligh reprimands him, demands he put his wool uniform on at once, over the raw tattoo and report to the ship. OUCH!

[Dusi Sparrow]

OK, I just had to laugh at the remarks about the sailors not getting tattoos because they were afraid of infection, etc. If that be the truth, it sure didn't frighten 'em away from the brothels.

An open wound and sex are two different things. I guess I'd choose sex. Plus there were condoms already. But I don't think they used them at the time.

[Monterey Jack]

OK, I've stayed out of this debate a long time, but just this once, because Joshua said it so plain, I wish to back him up. I was in the US Navy, and spent some time in San Fransico, and went to every shop I could find asking about early sailor tatoos. The consensus among ALL the professionals in the bay area was that seamen/sailors did not begin sporting tattoos as commonplace until well into the 1850's.

I wasn't in the navy, but spent a helluva lot of time on the docks and pubs in the port of San Francisco, as I lived about ten minutes up the road. The opinion of several of the seamen mirrors that of the tattoo artists you talked to. Its interesting to note how many sailors are actually well-versed in certain aspects of maritime history. More of the older guys, who now operate the fishing boats outside the bay. The newer guys who just want to catch a tat without really "earning" it usually go for tribal "flash" and haven't a clue as to what the origins of the art actually are. The older guys usually just nod and act impressed, but I've seen a few get really in the younger guys faces over it. Guess it's "tribal" in more than just the country of origin.....

[Captain Every]

I think there is another question connected with: how did pirates (or any other sailors) looked upon natives, who really used to tatoo themselves. That is, if sailors treated the native tribes as savages, potential slaves etc., which rather looks like truth, I think, then why the formers should want to decorate themselves in the native way? One shouldn't be inclined to look the same as a slave, should he? And as for Dampier, if he'd tried to make money by showing in England the tatooed "native prince" he bought, then tatooing, it seems to me, wasn't common and rather ought to be considered something strange (though the tatooes of the "prince" certainly were exotic and uncommon ones in any case).

[Capn_Enigma]

[..] if sailors treated the native tribes as savages, potential slaves etc., [..], then why the formers should want to decorate themselves in the native way?

Because it

a ) is decorative,

b ) in the case of a facial tattoo, gives a rather fierce look to the bearer and

c ) bears witness to the bearer's ability to endure pain, even if it isn't necessary.

And as for Dampier, if he'd tried to make money by showing in England the tatooed "native prince" he bought, then tatooing, it seems to me, wasn't common and rather ought to be considered something strange

This is a moot point, as circuses and "freak shows" displayed - albeit heavily - tattooed people even in the sixties of the 20th century, when tattooing was much more commonplace.

[Captain Every]

"...why the formers should want to decorate themselves in the native way?"

Because it

a ) is decorative,

b ) in the case of a facial tattoo, gives a rather fierce look to the bearer and

c ) bears witness to the bearer's ability to endure pain, even if it isn't necessary.

Well, I do agree but not in the whole... Speaking of decorations, we should place ourselves to the GAoP people positions, not today's. If we now have not any racial prejudicies (well, some do have still, don't they?), it's not the matter considering XVII-XVIII centuries. What was better for them, not for us, to look decorative (or fierce) or to look like savages??? That's the question to me! Is there something in documental sources considering this problem?

As for the ability to endure pain... I don't think it sounds convincing... The life in the GAoP provided a great deal of opportunities to prove it without tattooing oneself! Speaking of risk, maybe we should suppose the brothels mentioned above were arranged for sailors' chance to show they don't afraid infections? I still beleive they searched for something more there!

[Fox]

A note on Wafer's tattoos: According to Wafer's own account the ink (or "paint" as he calls is) eventually washed off, so it seems more likely that he was painted rather than tattooed.