tattoos

[Silkie McDonough]

This may be related to the blue color ...or not.

When I was a kid I managed to stab myself in the leg with a led pencil. to this day I have a dot on my leg that is blueish where the wound was.

[Patrick Hand]

See ... I don't agree with that.... I have two tattoos on my right arm that I did with India ink ( I'm left /sinister handed) and both of them are still black.....

This is all quessing..... but to use gun powder (black powder), and I figure you'd have to mix it with water to make a sorta ink..... rubbing the grains into a cut wound.... just dosent sound like it would make a good mark/tattoo.....

I've read about Mountain Men, tattooing themselves at the yearly Rendezvous..... (I forgot about Indains doing tattoos earlier as Callinsh has posted...) but What I read is that they cut the skin..... not use neadles to get the ink in......( I also read that they were drinking a LOT... so some of them ended up with a bunch black scars......)

Now I'm wondering how well tattooing with black powder and a needle would work.... hey... I ain't going to get an exacto knife and cut open some skin fer a tattoo...... (maybe that is why all the Indain designs were so liniar... instead of curvy.......it's easier to cut straight lines.......)

I still don't think any Pyrate had a "Time flyes when yer having Rum " tattoo on his arm tho............

[callenish gunner]

25 years ago I had a flintlock pistol blow a breechplug and the resulting explosion gave me some blue dots tatttooed on the back of my right hand that stayed there for 16-17 years they have finally faded to virtually nothing but from day one they had a blue colour .....Iwould guess it would also depend on the skin and the depth of the colouration

[blackbonie]

See ... I don't agree with that.... I have two tattoos on my right arm that I did with India ink ( I'm left /sinister  handed) and both of them are still black.....

This is all quessing..... but to use gun powder (black powder), and I figure you'd have to mix it with water to make a sorta ink..... rubbing the grains into a cut wound.... just dosent sound like it would make a good mark/tattoo.....

I've read about Mountain Men, tattooing themselves at the yearly Rendezvous..... (I forgot about Indains doing tattoos earlier as Callinsh has posted...) but What I read is that they cut the skin..... not use neadles to get the ink in......( I also read that they were drinking a LOT... so some of them ended up with a bunch  black scars......)

Now I'm wondering how well tattooing with black powder and a needle would work.... hey... I ain't going to get an exacto knife and cut open some skin fer a tattoo...... (maybe that is why all the Indain designs were so liniar... instead of curvy.......it's easier to cut straight lines.......)

I still don't think any Pyrate had a "Time flyes when yer having Rum " tattoo on his arm tho............

i have a tattoo i did with a razor blade and rubbed in ink i did when i was 15 (over 15 years ago).it was still there and just as dark when i covered it just a few years ago.

no indian ink doesnt turn blue,but the old tattoo ink wasnt indian ink and did turn bluish.i see it all the time on old guys.

i dont know how gun powder would work in a real tattoo machine,never saw the point,but if its smooth enough with no graininess at all im sure it would work,otherwise the smallest amount of grit would get between the needles and keep it from flowing smoothly. good luck in finding someone to do it for you tho

. and just because it was done long ago doesnt mean its a good idea.they used to drink from goblets made with lead didnt they?

[Bully MacGraw]

For early tatoos on Europeon's in New France, look at Frontier Folk http://frontierfolk.net/mb/ There is detailed information under the NewFrance area. There are photos of the used tools

Ed

[Patrick Hand]

That page had a lot of information..... thanks for posting it.....

[The Chapman]

I'm seeing a lot of reference to branding as visible sign or record of a conviction for criminal behavior; interestingly, equally as much for public information as for future reference in the case of recidivism.

There are a lot of references to 'marks', without further description. In the case of slaves, at least in some circumstances and areas, it was not at all uncommon to brand or scarify a human being in exactly the same way one would mark, say, a cow or other personally owned animal.

In France, the fleur-de-lis was a brand applied to convicted criminals on various parts of the body.

For what it's worth:

"Adultery, also, was punished in this way [tattooed] in some parts of Britain, and ‘bad characters’ were marked BC. . . In 1717, branding was abolished in the Army and replaced with tattooing. .. with the letter ‘D’ deserter’"

(Ronald Scutt, Art, Sex and Symbol, 1974, p. 162)

Virginia, c. early 1700s:

COMMITTED to Suffolk Jail, on Suspicion of being a Convict Servant, a Man about five Feet eight or nine Inches high; he has brown Hair, of a fair Complexion with Freckles, says he is a Weaver by Trade, and that he came from Glasgow, but gives various Accounts of himself. Likewise a Negro Man about the same Height, well set, and very black; says he is a Freeman, and at other times says he has a Master, but will not tell his Master's Name. The Negro has not any Marks that I remember.

WILLIAM GRANBERY, Jailer.

[theM.A.dDogge]

i have ta second mr gunner about the gunpowder turnin yer skin blue...got peperered a few times doin wild west...yeah do that too....had blue "frecckles" for nearly 5 years before finally faded......oh yeah...gunpowder turns a nice shade of blue under the skin...wonder if thats where "black and blue" came from ...oh never mind... i remove the question

[Patrick Hand]

"The Chapman", don't forget the branding they did to the "less than desirables"..... the letter A forAdultry... and B for Blasthomy...... aaargh ain't Church and Religion soo much fun......

i have ta second mr gunner about the gunpowder turnin yer skin blue.

I slightly dissagree.... but hey... untill I do a gunpowder tattoo. I can't prove it...... Minor quibble..... but OK... it's a blueish black...... I argue it's more black than blue..... but ....dang.... more quibbling about the exact shade....

Yah.. it has a bluish tint..... but I still say it's more black than blue....

After Bully MacGraw's post to the other board..... now I'm really thinking about it.....(just maybe not on my hand like I first posted....)

[blackbonie]

be sure to show us pics when you get done.

and again in 5 years before you get it removed/fixed

(remember gun powder coloration is much harder to remove than real ink and especially india ink)

[Calico Jack]

Without reprising nine pages of the thread, has anyone cited Hogarth? I've been going through Hogarth's paintings and engravings, in regards to costuming [1730s stuff, just-post GAoP], and note a couple of images with revealed tattoos. A tattooed child [a six pointed star upon the abdomen] in the Rake's Progress series, and a former criminal [cross and initials on the bicep] in the Four Stages of Cruelty series [the latter from 1750, the former from 1734.

[MadRose]

A quick google scholar search revealed this:

"There is ample evidence that tattooing has continuously survived in civilized societies, including Europe, at some low level of prevalence, from the earliest recorded times to the present. The evidence that European, and later American, seafarers had a continuous tradition of tattooing from early times into the modern period is fragmentary, but he inference is strong that the custom persisted among seafarers who comprised a subset of the lower classes.

"Most of modern literature on the subject, however, takes the view that tattooing of European (and American) seafarers in modern times resulted from the "rediscovery" of the practice at the time of the late 18th-century Pacific voyages...."

The article goes on to mention Cook: "but the conventional view that the practice of modern seafarer tattooing itself started with the Cook voyages is probably incorrect."

...Tattooing replaces branding for certain offenses in 1717

The sailors on the Bounty were not tattooed in Tahitian patterns, which suggests that the practice wasn't all that new at the time.

The paper goes on for 35 pages, but mostly seems to be about the later 18th century and early 19th.

The tattoos recorded are interesting -- mostly seem to be hearts and initials.

The Tattoos of Early American Seafarers, 1796-1818, by Ira Dye

Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society © 1989 American Philosophical Society

[Misson]

I've been reading Wafer's account and I think what he has to say about tattoos is quite enlightening. To wit:

"...we had four Women to carry our Provision, and my Cloaths, which were only a Linnen Frock and pair of Breeches. These I saved to cover my Nakedness, if ever I should come among Christians again; for at this time I went naked as the Savages, and was painted by their Women; but I would not suffer them to prick my Skin [a real tattooing], to rub the Paint in, as they use to do, but only to lay it on in little specks." (A New Voyage and Description of the Isthmus of America, Lionel Wafer and George Parker Winslow, p. 58)

"The four English Men with me were presently known and caress'd by the Ships Crew; but I sat a while cringing upon my Hams among the Indians, after their Fashion, painted as they were, and all naked but but only about the Waist, and with my Nose-piece (of which more hereafter) hanging over my Mouth. I was willing to try if they would know me in the Disguise; and 'twas the better part of an Hour before one of the Crew, looking more narrowly upon me, cry'd out, Here's our Doctor... I did what I could presently to wash off my Paint, but 'twas near a Month before I could get tolerably rid of it, having had my Skin so long stain'd with it, and the Pigment dried on in the Sun: And when it did come off, 'twas usually with the peeling off of Skin as well." [emphasis mine] (Wafer and Winslow, p. 64-5)

Two points from the above:

First, a comment about the Nose-piece; the indians he was living with wore a crescent-shaped nose ring which covered part of their mouth. Wafer noted that it had to be lifted when eating and drinking and was quite impractical - suggesting, in combination with the fact that he ran around in similar clothes (or lack thereof), that he had allowed himself to be tattooed as a part of looking like his hosts - he had really "gone native." Note particularly the comment about his concerns about coming "among Christians again."

Second, I emphasize a point in the second quote to show that Wafer wanted to be rid of his "temporary" tattoo as soon as he was recognized as a member of the crew. This suggests to me that it was not generally acceptable.

As has been noted, another crewmen was apparently not quite so wise and "suffered them to prick their Skin" which they then wanted removed. Here is the passage as it relates to tattooing in its' entirety:

"The Women are the Painters, and take a great delight in it. The Colours they like and use most are Red, Yellow and Blue, very bright and lovely. They temper them with some kind of Oil, and keep them in Calabashes [dishes made from Calabash tree fruit hulls] for use; and ordinarily lay them on the Surface of the Skin with Pencils of Wood, gnaw'd at the end to the softness of a Brush. So laid on, they will last some Weeks, and are rewnew'd continually. This way they painted me. [see above quote]

But finer Figures, especially by their greater Artists, are imprinted deeper, after this manner. They first with the Brush and Colour make a rough Draught of the Figure they design; then they prick all over with a sharp Thorn till the Blood gushes out; then they rub the place with their Hands, first dipp'd in the Colour they design; and the Picture so made in indelible. But scarce one in forty of them is painted this way.

One of my Companions desired me once to get out of his Cheek one of these imprinted Pictures, which was made by the Negroes, his Name was Bullman; which yet I could not effectually do, after much scarifying [making small incisions and then drawing blood from them using heated bleeding bowls placed on the skin to create a vaccuum] and fetching off a great part of the Skin." (Wafer and Winslow, p. 136-7)

There is an interesting point here - Wafer has been describing tattooing by the Indians and this other fellow has gotten tattooed by "Negroes" somewhere else. So that lends a bit of credence to a wider variety of tattooing opportunities available to seamen.

Three points against this being common come to mind, however.

First, Wafer goes to great pains to describe the tattooing process which suggests that it was uncommon enough to rate two pages in his book.

Second, even among the indians, Wafer notes that "scarce one in forty of them is painted this way." Of course, this doesn't indicate why this practice was rare; it could have been because it was too time consuming (although time wasn't something the indians seemed particularly concerned about as Wafer notes elsewhere) or there weren't a lot of "greater Artists." Still, all of these are points against sailors having great opportunity to be permanently tattooed.

Third, the fact that Bullman wants the tattoo removed is an indication that it was not a desirable thing to have, as I noted above. Of course, it was on his cheek, which would be frowned upon even today when tattoos have gained more popularity.

As a side note, this suggests to me that Bullman may have been drunk when he got it, although this is pure conjecture on my part. Sailors seem to have tried to spend a great deal of their time drunk based on various medical journals I have come across (mostly discussing the variety of opportunities for men to injure themselves in novel ways due to drunkenness on ships.) Even today, many people I know who have "suffered to be tattooed" got their first tattoo in just such a manner.

All in all, Wafer's comments suggest that tattooing of sailors happened during the GAoP, but it was neither common nor generally acceptable. This corresponds to other things I have read on the topic and discussed on forums elsewhere. It doesn't seem to support the idea of sailors running around all over the seas wearing tattoos unabashedly as might be inferred elsewhere.

[Kenneth]

Now that there is some evidence, Maybe we could argue about what tattoo will be accepted by the real True educated professional Living Historians!

[Misson]

As noted above, I find that tattoos were more of an extraordinary than an ordinary sailor's lot. However, I think you'd have to search long and hard (and most likely fruitlessly) for any reference to a specific tattooed pattern. Every pirate board I've posted on has people dying to find specific evidence of such because they want to believe the Hollywood mythos. The writings from the time aren't usually specific on points like that. If you read through the Wafer quotes, all you get is

"But finer Figures, especially by their greater Artists, are imprinted deeper, after this manner. They first with the Brush and Colour make a rough Draught of the Figure they design; then they prick all over with a sharp Thorn till the Blood gushes out; then they rub the place with their Hands, first dipp'd in the Colour they design; and the Picture so made in indelible. But scarce one in forty of them is painted this way."

Note here that a specific design is a scarce thing. Given that tattooed sailors were probably scarce, a scarce practice among scarce practices probably makes designs very rare indeed. (This appear to have been due to how time-consuming designs were - see my previous post.)

Still, I have found four references to tattoo artists from around period. The first is Wafer and the primitive Central American Indian artists. The second is Wafer's reference to Bullman and the African Tribal tattoo artists. The third is from the Bounty mutineers (about which I was recently reading, although the book was not a period account) where the men were tattooed by the natives on Tahiti. (As I recall it, Fletcher Christian had his arse tattooed black among other things. You may find more info on the tattoos of the Bounty, but it is unfortunately 75 years out of period, so still not completely accurate.)

The last are reference to Chinese tattoos, although I haven't actually read any specific accounts of this (mostly because my reading habits on period events do not bend in that direction) I do note that those who argue most strenuously for tattooed sailors during period often bring China up, so I am guessing there must be evidence to support it. However, China is not an area for GAoP pirates, so I don't think it would be as likely as some of the other places, depending on the life of the tattooed sailor. More on that later.

So if you're a Caribbean pirate, you're probably stuck with Wafer's accounts if you use my little list. I think he said he had his torso tattooed red. If I remember, I'll dig out the book and see if I can find it for you. I would expect the "figures" that native women in Central America would paint would be based on their culture and experience. I can't imagine it would be like a tattoo parlor where you would go in with a design and gleam in your eye. I also expect that the figures would be rather roughly drawn, even with the native skill Wafer lauds because they were using gnawed wood for brushes and thorns for needles to create them. No details are given on the African method, although it probably isn't a stretch to says that they would run in a similar vein. Note that this is all supposition. If I were searching for potential intricate tattoo designs from such cultures, I'd look at the artwork we have of theirs from that period. Tattoos are essentially skin art, after all. You might also try and find reference to types of war paint (for lack of a better term) or other reasons that one would festoon their body with designs in the more primative cultures. Tattoos could be a way of revealing your inner self or making yourself appear fierce to potential adversaries to avoid a fight. (Remarkably like the reason for creating a pirate flag, actually.)

Remember too that the number of colours a relatively primitive tribe would have access to would probably be limited. I'm sure the folks who hotly debate period correct dye colours around here could fill you in more on that particular point. (And they're dealing with dyes from the 'civilized' world where there would be more impetus to expand the range of colours available.) You could also extrapolate a bit and expect that the colours they would use would show to best advantage on their skin colour - the Indians and Africans having darker skin than Europeans would and probably would prefer darker colours. If you were serious in your interest in period correct tattoos, you could even research the types of materials that the tribe whom your character would have been inked by would have access to and match those colors. (This would make for a fascinating book if well researched.)

One interesting thing I find from Edward Barlow's Journal is that the man went all over the 'civilized' world during his 40+ years of sailing - the Caribbean, Europe, the colonies, India, China and so forth. He says several times that it was his intent to see the world, so this makes sense. However, this was probably also, in part at least, because he had to ship aboard whatever vessel would pay him. So it is conceivable that a sailor could have been all round the world and been exposed to many of the places listed. (Well, like Barlow, probably not the South Pacific so much - that was still being explored during period and so had little or no trade. Even the Bounty's mission in the late 18th c. was exploratory in nature, designed to bring Breadfruit plants to Europe.)

A privateer at this time could wind up anywhere - many privateers were both privateering and exploring and there are several accounts of them wandering the world. However, a true pirate (being someone who took any ship regardless of nationality) would seem to me to have less opportunity for travel. They had to skulk about in areas that were less policed - the Caribbean and Africa seem to have been where I've come across the most accounts during the GAoP. Since travel to the South Pacific seems to have been limited at this time, there would be no point in going there.

So, after all that, I would expect tattooed pirates to have relatively primitive designs done by Central American or African artists depicting the things that such people would have experienced and thought about. As Wafer tells it, you get the distinct impression that tattooing was sort of an honorary tribal thing and not a planned, "Put an anchor on me forearm!' sort of affair. At least that's my impression from what I've read so far.

[Dorian Lasseter]

A privateer at this time could wind up anywhere - many privateers were both privateering and exploring and there are several accounts of them wandering the world. However, a true pirate (being someone who took any ship regardless of nationality) would seem to me to have less opportunity for travel. They had to skulk about in areas that were less policed - the Caribbean and Africa seem to have been where I've come across the most accounts during the GAoP. Since travel to the South Pacific seems to have been limited at this time, there would be no point in going there.

Mission,

I'm surprised at you statement above about privateers not going to the S. Pacific. Especially since you've done much research with Wafer.

Granted this is but one ship...

A Brief history of the "Batchelors Delight;

About 1680, it was obvious that Charles II would never have any legitimate children and would therefore be succeeded by his loathsome brother James. About 45 or 50 young Englishmen therefore decided to make their fortunes outside the country while they could still leave. They got hold of a ship, which they renamed Batchelors Delight, John Cook (later replaced when Cook died by buccaneer Edward Davis) and as surgeon Lionel Wafer, both of whom had vast experience at sea around the world. When they proposed going “privateering” (meaning “a-pirating”) in the Caribbean, Wafer protested the danger of capture there, and proposed the west coast of Latin America as a safer alternative.

After about eight years of successful activities from Chile to California (during which time they also managed to discover New Zealand, which they called Davisland), they decided they had enough treasure, and headed for home. They had heard that James II had been thrown out by Parliament and replaced by his daughter Mary with her husband William. Drawing short straws, the various pirates were dropped off in English colonies with their shares of the treasure, so as not to draw attention to themselves. Wafer and Davis and John Hingson had not been in Virginia more than a day when they were arrested under suspicion of piracy (someone had presumably recognized Davis from his previous voyages). After two years in jail at Jamestown pending trial, they were sent to London, where the judge struck a plea bargain: they could have their freedom in return for surrendering half their loot to King William & Queen Mary for some charitable purpose. The monarchs gave the money to found the College of William & Mary in what is now Williamsburg, Virginia.

They spent eight years, as stated successful years in the pacific...

Sorry for the slight hijack...

[Misson]

Perhaps I should have broken that out better. I dismissed the privateers rather quickly, although I actually implied that the privateers are the only ones that would have been in the Pacific since many of them were also explorers. Wafer was part of several legitimate privateering voyages. After reading a few privateering journals, I am inclined to differentiate them from what I refer to as 'true pirates.' True pirates took vessels of any nation, often including England. From what I've read, their activities were often quite localized. (Although not always.)

Note that when Wafer refers to capture, he's probably refers to capture by the French or the Dutch (they being at war with both of them in 1680) or possibly the Spanish. I am a trifle unsure of the Spanish sentiment toward the English in 1680 as that is not what I am reading for. However, Morgan was governor of Jamaica at that time and the Spanish thought he was the devil incarnate. The English were a war-going lot at this time, which is part of the reason that the privateers existed. In his book, Edward Barlow often notes that the merchants were afraid of being taken by ships of nations they were presently at war with. (In fact, Barlow got taken by the Dutch during the second or third Dutch-Anglo war.) So fear of capture is not always the same thing as being brought to justice for piracy. (Although it is difficult to say what an enemy might do to a known privateer.)

Now, on to point, I dug out Wafer and noticed that he actually talks about the colours of tattoos that the Darien Isthmus indians painted, which I was about to quote, when I noticed that I had already quoted it previously.

"The Women are the Painters, and take a great delight in it. The Colours they like and use most are Red, Yellow and Blue, very bright and lovely. They temper them with some kind of Oil, and keep them in Calabashes..." (Wafer, p. 136)

He also describes war paint (so it wasn't that bad a description):

"The Men [of the tribe], when they go to War, paint the Faces all over with Red; and the Shoulders, Breast, and the rest of the Bodies, here with Black and there with Yellow, or any other Colour at pleasure, in large Spots; all which they wash off at Night in the River before they go to sleep." (Wafer , p. 137)

So this sort of goes against my conjecture that they would be tattooed for such. He also describes the designs they paint, so I am going to have to eat my Patrick Hand original hat on my notion that they didn't record the tattoo designs as well (although it is not made clear whether these are tattoos or painted on designs):

"Both these [rare light skinned Indians] and the Copper-colour'd Indians use painting their Bodies, even of the Sucking Children sometimes. They make Figures of Birds, Beasts, Men, Trees, or the like, up and down in every part of the Body, more especially the Face: But the figures are not extraordinary like what they represent, and are of differing Dimensions, as their Fancies lead them." (Wafer, p. 136)

Lastly, I'm not sure where I saw it said that he painted his chest red, as I can't seem to find it. However, he does say this:

"[My clothes} I saved to cover my Nakedness, if ever I should come among Christians again; for at this time I went naked as the Savages and was painted by their Women; but I would not suffer them to prick my Skin, to rub the Paint in, as they use to do, but only to lay it on in little Specks." (Wafer, p. 58)

It seems to me I have typed that in before, so a search of Twill may dig up the quote about the red on his chest. Or it may not.

Onto Fletcher Christian and the tattooing of the crew of the Bounty. Again, this is a recent novel, I have never read the period accounts of the mutiny, so make of it what you will. It's from Dea Birkett's book Serpent in Paradis which is about her visit to the island of Pitcairn. I'm afraid there's not much there, but here's what it says,

"Freed from the restraints of shipboard discipline, the officers and crew amused themselves wrestling with the island men and flirting with the island women. Christian had his buttocks blackened with a tattoo. Able-bodied seamen Thomas Ellison, still a teenager, simply had a date scratched on his right arm - October 25, 1788. It was the day they had first sited Oro-Hena, the highest peak in Tahiti, which shadows Matavai Bay." (Birkett, p. 10)

So at least those natives took requests for tattoo designs - if by 'scratched' the author means tattooed. Somewhere recently I read that several men from the Bounty were tattooed on Tahiti, though.

[Misson]

So fear of capture is not always the same thing as being brought to justice for piracy. (Although it is difficult to say what an enemy might do to a known privateer.)

By George, if I didn't come across a comment in Barlow's Journal on this! Barlow got into an argument with a disagreeable merchant ship's commander who wound up sending him aboard English man-of-war where he found out all sorts of things that were going on in whatever war they were involved in at the time (there were so many...)

"[1702] ...and many times it happens that [French] privateers are met with and taken by our frigates, by which means the hostages [of the privateers] get their liberty and save ship and goods likewise, and many times arrive at home before their ships, when good luck attends them."

Of course, he doesn't say what happens to the privateers, but I thought it was interesting that it came up so soon after my commenting on it. *Sigh* I've finished this book. I am really going to miss it. I wish I had it in my library.

[Misson]

And yet another one! So there are descriptions out there and I'll just shut up on that point and report them as I find them. This is from Dampier. Note that Dampier never mentions tattooed sailors specifically - I don't think - but he does describe his tattooed prince (which he bought) and hints at something else that might interest you:

"He [Prince Jeoly - the 'painted prince'] told me also, that his Father was Raja of the Island where they lived: That there were not above Thirty Men on the Island, and about one Hundred Women: That he himself had Five Wives and eight Children, and that one of his Wives painted him.

He was painted all down the Breast, between his Shoulders behind; on his Thighs (mostly) before; and in the Form of several broad Rings, or Bracelets round his Arms and Legs. I cannot liken the Drawing to any Figure of Animals, or the like; but they were very curious, full of great variety of Lines, Flourishes, Chequered-Work, &c. keeping a very graceful Proportion, and appearing very artificial, even to Wonder, especially that upon and between his Shoulder-blades. By the Account he gave me of the manner of doing it, I understand that the Painting was done in the same manner, as the Jerusalem Cross is made in Men's Arms [OK, that sounds like a reference to a tattoo on a non-native to me although not specifically for a sailor - it apparently has a long history which you can learn more about on the web], by pricking the Skin and rubbing in a Pigment. But whereas Powder is used in making the Jerusalem Cross, they at Meangis use the Gum of a Tree beaten to Powder, called by the English, Dammer, which is used instead of Pitch in many parts of India." (Dampier, p. 344)

Dammer gum seems to able to be made in black and white, so it could potentially be made into different colors. Further research is left as an exercise to the reader.

"In a little printed Relation that was made of him when he was shown for a Sight in England, there was a romantick Story of a beautiful Sister of his a Slave with them at Mindanao [Which I believe is where they took him on board]; and of the Sultan's falling in Love with her; but these were Stories indeed. They reported also that the Paint was of such Virtue, that Serpents, and venimous Creatures would flee from him, for which reason, I suppose, they represented so many Serpants scampering about in the printed Picture that was made of him [probably on the ground; serpents in his tattooes would disagree with the above quote from Dampier.] But I never knew any Paint of such Virtue; and as for Jeoly, I have seen him as much afraid of Snakes, Scorpions, or Centapees, as my self." (Dampier, p. 346)

[callenish gunner]

as i had referenced earlier on this thread the travelers bound for jeruesalem were tattooed by the muslims as sign of passage that they had paid for the priviledge of entering the holy city after the crusades.

[MadL]

Already started here on th' West Coast but th' HISTORY Channel be doing a feature on TATTOOS!

Ok, so they not spoken o' pirates, nor even English sailors in particular, but they have found an Ice age man with tattoos and an ancient Peruvian woman who was covered in tattoos. It be quite interesting so ye may want t' check yer local guide. They even talking about "Sewn In Tattoos" and the example they show used a sailor's type needle (sure hope a gail don't pick up!)

[RustyNell]

Wish I'd seen that History Channel show will have to look for it on the net.

My opinion only.... though I have no proof of anything.... considering quite often pirate crews were made up of men from different ships, some often pressed from ships that were taken as prizes, from different countries and cultures some were often even slaves...and seeing as tattooing is ritualistic in some countries, and was around LONG BEFORE the GAoP. Depending on the job a man did on board, I don't think we could be absolutely positive that there were NO tattoos on any of the men, just because we have no written evidence. Though we can't assume there were. I'm sure in certian company they would hide them if they had any, it of course would give away their class or status. What I'm trying to say is there was no tattoo removal back then so should a man have one prior to being a sailor, having been a tribesman or the like he couldn't have had it removed.

[MadL]

O'course they had Tattoo Removal!!! Have naught heard o' th' one called Blackbeard?!! He could remove a tattoo off a gnat's arse with only minimal scar'n he could....just don't sneeze or he may remove something a bloke did naught want removed!

[Poopdeck Pappy]

1)The words HOLD and FAST were tattooed on the knuckles to help hold line

2)Full rigged ship for sailing around Cape Horn

3)The pig and the rooster are tattooed on either the calves or the top of the feet, to prevent a sailor from drowning,. These animals were originally carried on most ships in wooden crates. When a ship goes down these crates would float and then catch currents and wash ashore with the other debris from the ship, making the pigs and roosters often the only souls to survive a shipwreck

4) A sailor would get a swallow tattoo for every 5000 miles he had sailed

5)Crosses on the soles of one's feet to ward off hungry sharks.

6)A turtle standing on its back legs (shellback) for crossing the equator and being initiated into King Neptune's Court

[Mission]

1)The words HOLD and FAST were tattooed on the knuckles to help hold line

2)Full rigged ship for sailing around Cape Horn

3)The pig and the rooster are tattooed on either the calves or the top of the feet, to prevent a sailor from drowning,. These animals were originally carried on most ships in wooden crates. When a ship goes down these crates would float and then catch currents and wash ashore with the other debris from the ship, making the pigs and roosters often the only souls to survive a shipwreck

4) A sailor would get a swallow tattoo for every 5000 miles he had sailed

5)Crosses on the soles of one's feet to ward off hungry sharks.

6)A turtle standing on its back legs (shellback) for crossing the equator and being initiated into King Neptune's Court

And your period source for this is?