Tattoos in antiquity

The reasons for which one might tattoo his body are varied. Currently, the most
popular explanation is decoration. The tattoos themselves come in a myriad of different
forms, colors, and subjects. These may range from religious icons to a portrait of a
favorite pet. Since there is a certain bond among those who are tattooed, group
identification may be a major motivation for tattooing. As a testament to this fact, prison
tattoos are widely practiced as a method by which convicts associate themselves publicly
with a gang. Tattoos bind outcasts together, partially because the practice is still regarded
as socially unacceptable.
This same social disapproval was present in Greco-Roman times. Authors such
as Herodotus, Xenophon, and Lysias describe tribes outside their personal social confines
as employing tattoos to their fullest extent, in the form of full-body suits. These authors
always express surprise that tattoos denoted high social status in these other societies.

From this and many other authors, it can be concluded that in both Greek and Roman
societies, tattoos held a more derogatory status. If fact, they were primarily practiced in a
punitive capacity. There are numerous sources that refer to the use of tattoos to mark
slaves, criminals, and prisoners of war. These marks were usually placed on the forehead
for easy identification of these “undesirables,” until 316 AD when Constantine outlawed
the practice and suggested tattoos be placed on the hands or calves. Akin to its use in
slavery, tattooing was common among religions from eastern countries and in the temples
of those religions when they were transplanted to Rome and Greece. Slaves were known
to join these cults and place themselves in the service of the god rather than remain with
their worldly master. The tattoos placed on the body upon entrance were used as
markings that signified both ownership by the god as well as a membership in the cult
group. Along the same lines, military soldiers and workers often tattooed themselves
with the sign of their legion or one of many other significant marks, such as important
battles in which they had fought. However, Constantine outlawed this practice during his
reign after he converted to Christianity.
Ancient Greek and Roman societies viewed tattooing as a foreign and barbaric
custom. Greeks first learned the art from the Persians who used it in its punitive capacity.
They also frequently came into contact with peoples who tattooed their bodies in a
decorative and regal fashion, such as the Thracians and Mossunoiki. Even though the
Greeks viewed tattooing as a lower and unfit custom, these tribes saw it as a privilege
often reserved for royalty and important persons. The Romans shared the view of
tattooing as barbaric. When coming into contact with the Gallic and Briton peoples,
Caesar tells of his battles with a strange people, blue with tattoos of many shapes.
Despite Roman society painting the tattoo as vulgar, soldiers arrived back in Rome with
tattoos adorning their arms and legs. These soldiers cast off the traditional view of
tattoos being reserved for unwanted and undeserving people such as slaves and criminals
and embraced the pure decorative nature of permanent body modification.
Among tattooed people today, decorative tattooing is celebrated with increasing
frequency among various societies. While there is still a trace of the old social shame,
the art of tattooing is in the process of gaining more respect and social acceptability.



Now it is not uncommon to see both a grandmother and her grandchild sporting a trendy
design.
Chapter 1: Early History
The early history of tattooing in the Mediterranean is widely unknown due to the
scarcity of literature and physical evidence. Some speculate that ritual deep tissue
cuttings were done as far back as the Stone Age as a form of relief for ailments or
magical exorcisms.1 However, these ideas are not based on facts.
Instruments of tattooing in the Upper Paleolithic (10,000 BC – 38,000 BC) have
been uncovered in Europe and consist of a clay and red ochre disk with sharp bone
needles inserted in the top.2 To mark an individual, pigment was inserted into the disk,
which functioned as a reservoir3, while the needles pushed it into the desired area of skin.
Statues bearing incised markings were found with the implements,4 thus leading to the
conclusion of their function.
The earliest documented case of tattooing was discovered in September of 1991,
when archeologists uncovered the “Iceman” in the Alpine mountains on Finail Peak
between Italy and Switzerland.5 When unearthed and dated, “Ötzi” was found to have
lived in the Bronze Age (circa 3300 BC) and died while caught in a blizzard.6 His body
1 Samuel M. Steward, Bad Boys and Tough Tattoos: A Social History of the Tattoo With
Gangs, Sailors, and Street-Corner Punks (New York: Harrington Park Press, 1990), 183.
2 Steve Gilbert, Tattoo History: An Anthology of Historical Records of Tattooing
Throughout the World (New York: Juno Books, LLC, 2000), 11.
3 Ibid.
4 Ibid.
5 Brenda Fowler, Iceman: Uncovering the Life and Times of a Prehistoric Man Found in
an Alpine Glacier (New York: Random House, 2000), 20.
6 Jean-Chris Miller, The Body Art Book: A Complete, Illustrated Guide to Tattoos,


was subsequently covered with ice and perfectly preserved in the permafrost of a glacier.
He was so well preserved that when hikers found the body, they thought it was a recently
lost climber.7 His tattoos were evident from the first sighting. Altogether, 42 distinct
tattoos arranged in 14 groups of vertical lines or crosses adorn his body.8 (Fig. 1) They
consist of:
· Four groups of vertical stripes on the lower back parallel to the left
side of the spine. The upper and lower most groups consist of four
marks while the two groups in the middle are made up of three
each.
· One grouping of four vertical lines on the lower back on the right
side of the spine.
· A cross on the inside of the right knee and calf consisting of inch
long sections.
· Three groups of three lines on the right ankle.
· Seven short vertical lines on the left calf.
· A cross and two groups of vertical lines, one of four and the other
of two, on the left ankle
All the marks except the elements of the crosses ranged from 2.8 – 3.0 cm in length and
2 –3 cm in width. (36) Upon first inspection, it was thought that two concentric bands
were tattooed around his left wrist, but it was later found that these markings were
Piercings, and Other Body Modifications (New York: Berkley Books, 1997), 7.
7 Fowler, “Iceman,” 3-16.
8 Ibid., 36, 98, 205.



created by pressure from a wrapping around it. (98) This information, as well as proof of
the marks as tattoos, was gained by photographing the body under infrared light. This
yielded the fact that pigment was underneath the skin, thus disproving the earlier thought
that the marks occurred from branding. (205) When Dutch investigators studied the
pigment, they concluded that it was soot. Fowler believes the tattoo process of that time
consisted of spreading soot on the area to be marked and puncturing the skin so that some
of the pigment would enter the dermis. (205) This method differs from today’s technique,
but is still feasible.
There is much speculation as to the meaning and purpose of the Iceman’s tattoos.
One certain fact is that they did not serve a decorative purpose, as the bulky clothes he
must have worn to survive in the winter climate would have covered them. (200) The
markings could denote his rank or position in his tribe. Perhaps they show that he served
as a shaman or religious leader9, for there have been correlations between tattooing and
religious office in other cultures. However, the most probable and popular idea is that the
marks served as remedies for pain.10 Whether this is done as a preventative or curative
capacity, the marks are placed upon the body in common places of pain such as the joints
and lower back. Krutak remarks that the tattoos are close to traditional points of
acupuncture.11 The mummy was found to have arthritis, thus giving credibility to this
idea.12
Tattooing was also accepted and often practiced in ancient Egypt. Literature
9 Miller, “The Body Art Book,” 7.
10 Gilbert, “Tattoo History,” 11.
11 Lars Krutak, “The Arctic,” in Tattoo History: An Anthology of Historical Records of
Tattooing Throughout the World (New York: Juno Books, LLC, 2000), 183-185.
12 Fowler, “Iceman,” 205.



presents limited evidence except for a line in the papyrus Bremer-Rhind, which reads,
“Their name is inscribed into their arms as Isis and Nepthys”.13 Gilbert explains, “The
hieroglyph mentenu that is here translated as ‘inscribed’, has a very general meaning that
may also be translated ‘etched’ or ‘engraved’. This may be in reference to tattooing.”
(13) However, the most compelling evidence comes from excavated mummies. Due to
the preservative nature of mummification, some bodies have been uncovered with tattoos
still visible.
The same sorts of tattoos as the Iceman’s were found on the mummy of Amunet,
an Egyptian priestess of the god Hathor at Thebes during Dynasty XI (2160-1994 BC).14
Parallel lines on her arms, thighs, and stomach, as well as an oval pattern below her navel
were tattooed on her body. (11) Our knowledge of tattooing practices of the time tell that
these marks were either made with golden needles15 or an instrument of sharpened fish
bones placed in a wooden handle.16
The function of Amunet’s tattoos is unknown, but could have served purposes
similar to those of the Iceman’s. As a priestess, she must have been privy to religious
rituals that might have involved tattooing, making the marks magical in nature. It has
been suggested that the marks on her stomach might have been placed there to relieve
pain or induce pregnancy.17 The elliptical pattern on her lower abdomen strengthens this
suggestion of a connection with fertility or sexuality, as it extends as far as her pubic
13 Gilbert, 13.
14 Gilbert, “Tattoo History,” 11.
15 R.W.B. Scutt and Christopher Gotch, Art, Sex, and Symbol: The Mystery of Tattooing
(New York: A.S. Barnes and Co., Inc., 1974), 14.
16 C.P. Jones, “Stigma: Tattooing and Branding in Graeco-Roman Antiquity,” Journal of
Roman Studies (Vol. 77, 1987), 144.
17 Scutt and Gotch, “Art, Sex, and Symbol,” 24.



area.18 Similar patterns of marks are found on female statuettes dubbed “Brides of the
dead” found in the tombs of male Egyptians. Their function was to arouse the man’s
sexuality so that he would be ensured resurrection,19 thus lending credibility to the
sensuality of Amunet’s tattoos.
This sensuality is also seen on the mummies of two dancing girls found under the
Hathepsut temple in 1922.20 These dancing girls were found to have an image of the god
Bes tattooed on their thigh, the first non-geometric pattern.21 These markings were
identical to some found on wall paintings. Bes was the god of wild orgies and was
represented as a mischievous little ape in the afore mentioned wall paintings.22 However,
these paintings depicted Bes’ image on both men and women, contradicting the trend of
tattoos being restricted to women.
All of the Egyptian mummies found with tattoos have been female, thus leading
some to speculate that these were marks denoting prostitution of some kind.23 The stigma
from our own culture that only “loose” women have tattoos has undoubtedly colored this
perception. Nevertheless, Amunet was referred to as the “concubine to Mentuhotep II”,
so this idea cannot be fully dismissed.24
Along with the “Brides of the dead”, Egyptian art provides some insight into the
tattooing practice. The wall paintings containing dancing girls sporting Bes’ image
18 Miller, “The Body Art Book,” 7.
19 Gilbert, 11.
20 Scutt and Gotch, “Art, Sex, and Symbol,” 24.
21 Gilbert, “Tattoo History,” 13.
22 Ibid.
23 Judith Illes (2000, Dec. 1), “Tattoos in Ancient Egypt,” in Tour Egypt Monthly, 6, Vol.
1. Retrieved April 8, 2003 from http://www.egyptmonth.com/mag11012000/mag4.htm,
para. 14.
24 Ibid.


furnishes just one example. Gilbert says:
Designs that apparently represent tattoos are seen on paintings of both
men and women in Egyptian art and statues of Egyptian kings who
reigned toward the end of the New Kingdom are engraved with
hieroglyphs and images of Egyptian gods that probably represent
tattooing. (11)
Additional male and female mummies with tattoos have been discovered in Lybia,
but the male mummies sport the most interesting findings.25 Some were found to possess
images of sun worship, while others were tattooed with pictographs of the goddess Neith.
These mummies were found in the tomb of Seti I, dating from around 1300 BC.26 This
find, with its proximity to ancient Egypt demands the reconsideration of the supposed
restriction of tattooing to females.
During a similar time period as Amunet’s, the Israelites began cutting and
marking their hands and arms when a family member died.27 This occurred during a span
of 2000 years (3500-1500 BC) and then tapered off about 1250 BC. Steward reports that
Jewish “believers often had the tau… tattooed on their foreheads as a protective sign.”
He goes on to say that this mark was linked to, “’mark of Cain’ (inscribed so that Cain
would be kept alive to suffer for his crime)…”28 However, Leviticus 19.28, stating, “Do
not cut your bodies for the dead or put tattoo marks on yourselves,”29 effectively stopped
the practice of tattooing by branding it as pagan.
25 Gilbert, “Tattoo History,” 13.
26 Ibid.
27 Steward, “Bad Boys and Tough Tattoos,” 186.
28 Ibid.
29 Charles Caldwell Ryrie Ed., Ryrie Study Bible (Chicago: Moody Press, 1986), 182.


Chapter 2: Process and Removal
Before looking at the instances and reasons for tattooing in ancient times, we
should first consider the terms with which they were described. The Greek verb for
tattooing is sti/zein, “to prick”. To describe the mark made by the “pricking” process,
the noun stigma and its cognates are used. After Rome absorbed Greece into the
empire, they adopted the practice and the noun used to describe the resulting marks.
However, the verbs of tattooing used in Latin have no connection to sti/zein; instead
they used alternate words such as inscribo, imprimo, and inuro, meaning “to inscribe”,
“to imprint”, and “to brand” respectively.30 Although inuro involves the application of
heated iron to the skin, it is logical to assume from the context in some passages that
tattoos are meant. However, during this same period, stigma came to mean a true
“branding” of the skin, and by the 9th century, this meaning had completely replaced the
original “pricking”.31
The process of tattooing in the ancient world was often painful and deadly,
especially when preformed on an unwilling subject.32 The first tattoos were performed by
cutting into the skin or branding it with heated iron, followed by rubbing ink (me/lan,
atramentum) into the wound.33 Later, needles were employed to perform the act.34 Black
ink was most commonly used, however many colors could be utilized.35 When the
30 C.P. Jones, “Stigma and Tattoo,” in Written on the Body (London: Reaktion Books,
2000), 11.
31 Jones, “Stigma: Tattooing and Branding,” 151.
32 Ibid., 143.
33 Scutt and Gotch, “Art, Sex, and Symbol,” 14.
34 Jones, “Stigma: Tattooing and Branding,” 141.
35 Ibid.

tattoos involved designs of some kind, as opposed to the more common text, the reverse
of ready-made patterns were cut into a stenciling device, which was then lined with
charcoal powder and placed on the skin. The powder would stick to the skin, providing
an outline for the tattooer to follow.36 This same stenciling tactic is still used today.
After the injury caused by one of the methods had healed, a completed tattoo remained.
However, lack of sanitation often resulted in an infection, ultimately leading to death.37
When the punitive use of tattooing is taken into account, this risk added to the sentence.
Hemogenes even refers to a murder conviction of a man who had chosen to tattoo an
adulterer because the implementation of the punishment caused his death.38
Aetius, a 6th century AD physician, wrote about the tattooing process in his
Corpus Medicorum Graecorum and included a recipe for the ink used:
On tattoos (peri\ stigma/twn). They call ‘tattoos’ that which is inscribed on
the face or some other part of the body, for example on the hands of soldiers, and
they use the following ink:39 Egyptian pine wood and especially the bark, one
pound; corroded bronze, two ounces; gall, two ounces; virtriol, one ounce. Mix
well and sift. Grind the corroded bronze with vinegar and mix it with the other
ingredients to make a powder. Soak the powder in two parts of water and one
part of leek juice and mix thoroughly.40 Apply by pricking the places with
needles, wiping away the blood, and rubbing in first juice of leek, and then the
preparation.41
Here Aetius attests to bleeding, which clearly shows that the act was dangerous, as
modern tattoos involve almost no blood at all.
However dangerous the tattooing process, those who lived through it, usually
36 Ibid.
37 Jones, “Stigma: Tattooing and Branding,” 143.
38 Ibid.
39 Ibid., 142.
40 Gilbert, “Tattoo History,” 15.

slaves and criminals, wanted them removed upon being freed. This resulted in business
for doctors willing to take on the daunting task of removal. Once again, Aetius writes a
prescription for the removal of stigmata:
In cases where we wish to remove such tattoos, we must use the following
preparations… [There follows two prescriptions, one involving lime and gypsum
(ti/tanoj) and sodium carbonate, the other pepper, rue, and honey.] When
applying, first clean the tattoos with nitre, smear them with resin of terebinth, and
bandage for five days. On the sixth prick the tattoos with a pin, sponge away the
blood, and then spread a little salt on the pricks; then after an interval of ten
stadioi [presumably the time taken to travel this distance], apply the aforesaid
prescription and cover it with a linen bandage. Leave on for five days, and on the
sixth smear on some of the prescription with a feather (?); (the tattoos) are
removed in twenty days, without great ulceration and without scar.42
There is no doubt that the removal process must have been as painful, if not more, than
the original tattooing. However, many other authors prescribe alternate recipes for
removal such as scum on the bottom of a chamber pot mixed with “very strong vinegar”
(Archigne), pigeon feces mixed with vinegar and applied as a poultice “for a long time”
(Marcellus), and Cantharides “Spanish Fly” (a dried beetle) mixed as powder with sulfur,
wax, and oil (Scribonius Largus).43 All of these recipes involve corrosive elements that
would have caused the sloughing of skin, thus removing the pigment in layers through a
controlled inflammation.44 These removal procedures must have had dangers of their
own, as Scribonius Largus wrote about a man who visited many doctors in hopes of
removing his tattoos before finding one who was willing to do the procedure.45 However,
the abundance of writings dedicated to the subject of tattoo removal is a strong testament
to the commonality of this procedure, and thus the existence of tattooing in large
42 Ibid., 143.
43 Gilbert, 15.
44 Ibid.
45 Jones, “Stigma: Tattooing and Branding,” 143.

numbers.
The earliest reference to removal of tattoos is more myth than medicine.
Asclepius of Epidarus was said to have removed the tattoos on the forehead of Pandarus
from Thessaly through a dream where the god tied a bandage around his head.46 When
Pandarus removed the bandage, the tattooed letters, evidence of his slavery/criminality,
had miraculously been removed and placed on the bandage. In gratitude for the miracle,
Pandarus hired Echedorus to make a devotion to the god. However, Echodorus took the
money without providing the service, and as a consequence, he had a dream where
Asclepius tied a bandage around his head, thus transferring Pandarus’ tattoos to him.
Jones concludes that “Whatever the facts behind this account, the bandage recalls Aetius’
prescription for removing tattoos, and perhaps the priests of Asclepius performed an early
version of this operation on Pandarus.” (144)
46 Ibid., 144.

Chapter 3: Decorative Tattoos
Tattoos were commonly practiced among many tribes neighboring the Greeks and
Romans, leading these two cultures to consider the custom as barbarian. It is interesting
to consider why these two societies rejected a practice that was frequently employed
around them. Whatever the reason, ancient Greco-Roman authors wrote about their
contact with, as well as myths about, tattooed tribes.
The Greek word sti/gma was first employed to describe the dark spots on
snakes. Hesiod writes about the twelve snakes contained on the shield:
sti/gmata d (w(/j e0pe/fanto i0dei=n deinoi=si dra/kousin.
And it was as though there were spots upon the frightful snakes. 47
Pausanius also uses the descriptive quality of sti/gma while describing the snake
that killed Aepytus while he was hunting:
kata/ e1xin e0sti\ to\n mikro/taton, te/fra| e0mferh/j,
sti/gmasin ou/ sunexe/si pepoikilme/noj.
It is like the smallest kind of adder, ash colored, with spots speckled all
over. 48
He also uses this word to refer to the spots on a griffin, likening them to those on
a leopard:
47 Hesiod, Scutum 166
48 Pausanius, Description of Greece: Arcadia, 8.4.7

h1dh de\ kai\ a1lla h1kousa, toi=j gruyi\ sti/gmata o9poi=a
kai\ tai=j parda/lesin ei]nai
I have also heard that griffins have spots as the same sort as leopards.49
It is unclear how sti/gma made the transition to describing tattoos, but it is clear
that by the 6th century BC, Asius of Samos uses it in this new context.50 The new
meaning took hold and many Greek authors used it to describe their contact with other
cultures. Strabo records that the Iapodes in the eastern Alps were tattooed like the
Thracians,51 who will be discussed later. Xenophon remarks that the Agaphirs tattooed
their bodies and faces according to their nobility, while the Dinlin and Kyrgyz tribes
tattooed the bravest of their members as a privilege.52
Diodorus mentions the Mossynoecians, giving a description of the tattoos
themselves:
a3pantaj d 0 e0k paido\j sti/gmasi to/n te nw=ton kai\ ta\
sth/qh katapepoiki/lqai.
From childhood they are all tattooed in various colors on both their back
and breast.53
Here he attests to the fact that many colors were used in decorative tattoos. Xenophon
also talks about this tribe in his Anabasis, saying that the designs tattooed on the children
were floral (pa/nta e0stigme/nouj a0nqe/mia).54 It is curious that these tribes
49 Pausanius, Description of Greece: Arcadia, 8.2.7.
50 Jones, “Stigma: Tattooing and Branding,” 147.
51 Ibid., 146.
52 Scutt and Gotch, “Art, Sex, and Symbol,” 25.
53 Diodorus, Library 14.30.7.
54 Xenophon, Anabis 5.4.32.

would decoratively tattoo their children, as the skin would stretch and disfigure the
designs as they grew.
The answer to this question may lie in Hippocrates’ Airs, Waters, Places.
Xenophon mentions that the Mossynoecians were “soft and white to an extraordinary
degree (a9palou\j kai\ leukou\j sfo/dra)”.55 According to Hippocrates, the
Scythians shared similar integumentary characteristics, as well as being tattooed. He is
thus quite certain of the reason why this tribe tattooed themselves:
Skuqe/wn ga\r tou\j pollou/j, a3pantaj o3soi Noma/dej,
eu9rh/seij kekaume/nouj tou/j te w1mouj kai\ tou\j
braxi/onaj kai\ tou\j karpou\j tw=n keirw=n kai\ ta\ sth/qea
kai\ ta\ i0sxi/a kai\ th\n o0sfu=n di0 a1ll 0 ou0de\n h2 dia\
th\n u9gro/thta th=j fu/sioj kai\ th\n malaki/hn. ou0 ga\r
du/nantai ou1te toi=j to/coij suntei/nein ou1te tw=|
a0konti/w| e0mpi/ptein tw=| w1mw| u9po\ u9gro/thtoj kai\
a0toni/hj. o9ko/tan de\ kauqe/wsin, a0nachrai/netai e0k
tw=n a1rqrwn to\ polu\ tou= u9grou=, kai\ e0ntonw/tera
ma/llon gi/netai kai\ trofimw/tera kai\ h0rqrwme/na ta\
sw/mata ma=llon.
The majority of the Scythians, all that are Nomads, you will find have
their shoulders branded, as well as their arms, wrists, breast, hips, and
loins, simply because of the moistness and softness of their constitution.
For owing to their moistness and flabbiness they have not the strength
55 Ibid.

either to draw a bow or to throw a javelin from the shoulder. But when
they have been branded the excess of moisture dries up from their joints,
and their bodies become more braced, more nourished, and better
articulated.56
Earlier he states that this “flabbiness” is due to the constant frigid weather in their land,
now Russia. According to Hippocrates, the Scythians were:
to/n te u9dateino\n e3lkontej kai\ paxu/n, ta/ te u3data
pinontej a0po\ xio/noj kai\ pagetw=n, tou= te talaipw/rou
a0peo/ntej.
…breathing a moist, thick atmosphere, drinking water from ice and snow,
and abstaining from fatigue.57
The conditions must have restricted their physical activity, and Hippocrates concludes
that this added excess moisture into their bodies. Since the Mossynoecians lived in a
proximal region, the coast of the Black Sea, it would not be surprising if the reason both
tribes practiced tattooing is related to the removal of this moisture. However,
Hippocrates’ hypothesis of the reasons behind Scythian tattooing is highly unlikely and
probably only reflects his personal beliefs.
An interesting aspect of Hippocrates’ account of the Scythians is his use of the
verb kauqe/in, meaning “to brand.” Initially, one might take this to mean that the
Scythians branded themselves in the same way as cattle. However, a Scythian tomb
discovered in the Pazyryk mound at Altai in 1948 by Russian anthropologist Sergei
56 Hippocrates, De aera, aquis, locis 20. Translation by W.H.S. Jones.
57 Hippocrates, De aera, aquis, locis 19. Translation by W.H.S. Jones.
Ivanovich Rudenko contradicts this assumption with physical evidence.58 This grave
contained the body of a chief who died around the age of 50 and was adorned with many
tattoos. (Fig. 2-4) The tomb had been covered by glacial ice, which kept most of the skin
preserved for about 2000 years, allowing the tattoos to be seen clearly.59 Gilbert
describes the tattoos as:
…an interlocking series of designs representing a variety of fantastic
beasts. The best-preserved tattoos were a donkey, a mountain ram, two
highly stylized deer with long antlers and an imaginary carnivore on the
right arm. Two monsters resembling griffins decorate the chest, and on
the left arm are three partially obliterated images that seem to represent
two deer and a mountain goat. On the right front leg, a fish extends from
the foot to the knee. A monster crawls over the right foot, and on the
inside of the shin, is a series of four running rams that touch each other to
form a single design… In addition, the chief’s back is tattooed with a
series of small circles in line with the vertebral column. This tattooing
was probably done for therapeutic reasons. (14)
Although this mummy was found in Central Asia, it is logical to assume that the Black
Sea Scythians, to whom Hippocrates refers, performed a similar, if not the same
tatttooing practice. Therefore, while this proves that Hippocrates’ was correct in his
description of full-body decoration, it is clear that his use of kauqe/in must be taken to
mean tattooing.
The Scythians may have influenced the tattooing customs of other tribes,
including the Thracians- a tribe to whom much of the Greek tattoo literature is dedicated,
probably due to its proximity to Greece. Clearchus states that when the Scythians
conquered the Thracians, the Scythian women tattooed the Thracian women as a
punishment, but the Thracian women “decorated the rest of their bodies in order to turn
58 Gilbert, “Tattoo History,” 15.
59 Ibid.

‘the stamp of violence and shame’ into an ornament.” 60
However, many authors refer to Thracian women being elaborately tattooed in
connection with the Orpheus myth. Supposedly, after Orpheus seduced many of the men
in the tribe, the women retaliated by killing him, which was then followed by their
tattooing.61 This story is depicted on 40 vases dated from the 4th century found by
German archeologist Konrad Zimmerman. Jones describes one that, “depicts a Thracian
woman slaying Orpheus; on her right shoulder she is tattooed with an animal, perhaps a
deer, and on the inside of her left forearm with a pattern of diagonal lines.”(145) A redfigure
lekythos circa 460 BC, Jones explains, shows a Thracian woman with rosettes on
her ankle and elbow as well as “V-shaped marks down her right forearm.”62 However,
Jones neglects a vase clearly showing the tattoos of two Thracian women slaying
Orpheus.63 The woman on the left stabs him with a spear while the woman on the right
prepares to hit him with a large rock. Both women’s arms are decorated with lines of
individual marks running down the length from shoulder to wrist. The right woman’s
tattoos are clearly in the shape of a “V”, and while the other woman’s tattoos are
indistinguishable, they are most likely in the same form. These V-shaped marks also
appear on the underside of the forearms. In addition, they are also apparent on the front
side of the upper arm on the stamnos’ women. It is curious as to why their tattoos take
this shape.
Explanations for the tattooing of the Thracian women include the use of force on
60 Jones, “Stigma: Tattooing and Branding,” 145.
61 Ibid.
62 Jones, “Stigma and Tattoo,” 3.
63 J.D. Beazley, “Attic Red-Figure Vase-Painters: ARV2,” (Oxford: Clarendon Press).

behalf of the Thracian husbands so that their wives, “having blue marks in their flesh
should not forget the detestable crime (e0n xroi\ sh/mat0 e1xousi/kua/nea
stugerou= mh\ lela/qointo fo/nou)”.64 The self-inflicted marks may arise from
mourning for Orpheus or as a warning to those who might similarly try and seduce their
men. (145) However, this myth may hold some inconsistencies colored by the Greeks’
own views of the custom.
Whatever the reason behind the Thracian tattoos, it is clear that the tribe prized
their body art and used it in its decorative function. Herodotus was the first to remark on
the Thracian view of tattooing when he wrote that for them:
kai\ to\ me\n e0sti/xqai eu0gene\j ke/kritai, to\ de\
a1stikton a0genne/j.
To be tattooed is considered a mark of good birth, and not to be is a mark
of bad.65
Specific reference to women and girls is given in both the Dissoi Logoi, which states that
“for the Thracians it is an adornment for girls to be tattooed,”66 and in Dio Chrysostomus’
14th oration, where he draws the conclusion that the more tattoos a woman had and the
more elaborate they were, the higher her status:
ta\j gunai=kaj ta\j e0leuqe/raj stigma/twn mesta/j, kai\
tosou/tw| plei/ona e0xou/saj sti/gmata, kai\ poikilw/tera
o3sw| a2n belti/ouj kai\ e0k beltio/nwn dokw=sin
The free women, covered with tattoos, and having the more such tattoos
64 Jones, “Stigma: Tattooing and Branding,” 145. Quoting Phanocles fr. 1. 25-9.
65 Herodotus, 5.6.2.
66 Jones, “Stigma: Tattooing and Branding,” 145.

and the more elaborate in proportion to their social status and that of the
families to which they belong.67
In this light, the tattoos might have served a beautifying function perhaps to
attract the opposite sex, either by sheer beauty or the display of wealth and status
contained within the tattoos. However, not only were Thracian women tattooed, but the
men as well, as Jones concludes, “Lysias refers contemptuously to a certain Theocritus
‘son of Elaphostictus (Deer-tattooed)’, and he probably means that the man’s father was a
Thracian, tattooed with a deer…”(145)
Northern tribes like the Gauls, Goths, Teutons, Iberians, Britons, Scots, and Picts
practiced tattooing to a great degree. These tribes often named or were named according
to their body art.68 St. Isidore of Seville states:
The Scots (Scotti) derive their name in their own language from their
painted bodies, because these are marked with various designs by being
pricked with iron needles with ink on them… and the Picts (Picti) also are
thus named because of the absurd marks produced on their bodies by
craftsmen with tiny pinpricks and juice extracted from their local grasses.69
The Britons also named themselves according to their word “Breizard”, meaning,
“painted in many colors.” (26) There is no doubt as to complexity of their body art, as we
learn from Herodian:
ta\ de\ sw/mata sti/zontai grafai=j poiki/laij kai\ zw/|wn
pantodapw=n ei0ko/sin: o3qen ou0de\ a0mfie/nnuntai,
i3na ske/pwsi tou= sw/matoj ta\j grafa/j.
They tattoo their bodies with various patterns and pictures of all sorts of
67 Dio Chrysostomus, Orationes 14.19.
68 Scutt and Gotch, 26.
69 Ibid.

animals. Wherefore they do not wear clothes, so as to not cover the
pictures on their bodies.70
There are many possible reasons behind decorative tattooing in these tribes, but
war is definitely one of them. According to Caesar:
Omnes vero se Britanni vitro inficiunt, quod caeruleum efficit colorem,
atque hoc horridiores sunt in pugna aspectu.
All the Britons, indeed, dye themselves with woad, which produces a blue
color, and makes their appearance in battle more terrible.71
These tattoos must have been more frightening due to the lack of clothing worn by the
Britons on the battlefield. This intimidation tactic worked, but there are reports that
soldiers were often intrigued by the tattoos of the northern tribes and often came back to
Rome with souvenir tattoos on their hands and arms.72 The trend took hold and spread
throughout the army to the extent that soldiers tattooed themselves with memorial marks
such as the sign of their legion and important battles in which they had fought. Some
even tattooed their faces with protective signs, hoping that they would provide strength
and courage during battle. This last mark constitutes the religious aspects of ancient
tattooing.
70 Herodian, 3.14.7.
71 Caesar, Bellum Gallicum 5.14.
72 Victoria Lautman, The New Tattoo (New York: Abbeville Press, Inc., 1994), 10.

Chapter 4: Religious Tattoos
Soldiers were not the only Romans to decorate themselves with marks endowed
with special powers. Some were tattooed to commemorate a deity or special event or to
protect themselves from evil. However, religious tattooing was not as common in ancient
Greco-Roman society as it is today. The majority of ancient references to spiritual
markings come from the eastern Mediterranean in Egypt and Syria.
As discussed in chapter 1, Egyptian priestesses were often tattooed in intricate
patterns. There is no specific reference to the function of these tattoos, but it is
reasonable to assume that they served in some religious role. Herodotus confirms the
practice of religious tattooing in Egypt when he describes the temple of Herakles on the
Nile:
h}n de\ e0pi\ th=j h0io/noj to\ kai\ nu=n e0sti 9Hrakle/oj
i9ro/n, e0j to\ h2n katafugw\n oi0ke/thj o3teu w}n
a0nqrw/pwn e0piba/lhtai sti/gmata i9ra/, e9wuto\n didou\j
tw=| qew=|, ou0k e1cesti tou/tou a3yasqai.
There was, and is now, a holy temple of Herakles on the coast; to which a
fleeing servant of any man can be tattooed with certain sacred marks,
giving himself to the god, making it impossible to enslave him.73
According to Herodotus, the function of this temple is to provide a sort of
“freedom” to subjugated people through asylum. However, in exchange for this relative
freedom, they must dedicate themselves to the god, essentially trading one form of
73 Herodotus, 2.113.1.

servitude for another. As we will see, a major function of tattoos in ancient Greece and
Rome was to mark slaves. This reinforces the idea that this form of religious tattooing
denoted voluntary slavery to the god.
Although Herodotus does not say where the tattoo belonging to this cult was
placed on the body, Lucian’s discussion of a similar practice in Syria may offer some
insight. Lucian describes a Syrian religion in the Ptolemaic period whose members
devoted themselves to the goddess Atargatis, commemorating her through their tattoos:
Sti/zontai de\ pa/ntej, oi9 me\n e0j karpou/j, oi9 de\ e0j
au0xe/naj: kai\ a0po\ tou=de a3pantej 0Assu/rioi
stigmathfore/ousin.
All of them are tattooed, some on the wrist and others on the neck. And
from that, all Assyrians are tattooed.74
While branding was a common practice among the Syrians, Lucian’s use of sti/zein
clearly denotes that followers of Atargatis were tattooed. Jones presents a hypothesis as
to the form of these tattoos:
A papyrus of the mid-second century contains a description of a runaway
slave from Bambyke (Hierapolis), where the “Syrian goddess” Atargatis
had her great sanctuary. The slave was “tattooed on the right wrist with
two barbarian letters”, and Ulrich Wilcken brilliantly proposed that the
two letters represented the Syrian initials of Atargatis and her consort
Hadad.75
This papyrus further connects Lucian and Herodotus’ writings. The similarity between
the practices of tattooing in these cults is probably due to their proximity to each other.
Early Christianity also possessed a sense of religious slavery to Christ. In his first
74 Lucian, De Syria dea 59.1.
75 Jones, “Stigma: Tattooing and Branding,” 144.

epistle to the Corinthians, Paul states:
o9 ga\r e0n kuri/w| klhqei\j dou=loj a0peleu/qeroj kuri/ou
e0stin. o9moi/wj o9 e0leu/qeroj klhqei\j dou=lo/j e0stin
Xristou=.
For he who was called in the Lord while a slave is the Lord’s freedman.
Likewise he who was called while free is Christ’s slave.76
The same exchange of slavery for a sort of freedom presented in Herodotus is echoed
here. Although Paul is speaking of physical enslavement in the first sentence, both
express the same idea; all men, free or not, are imprisoned by sin, and through the
acceptance of Christ, essentially becoming his slave, they are freed.
Paul takes the connection of slavery with Christ one step further when he claims
to have “the marks of Jesus (ta\ sti/gmata tou= 0Ihsou=)”,77 stemming the
current association of stigmata with the suffering of Jesus. It is certain that these
“tattoos” are metaphorical and probably refer to marks of abuse he suffered due to
persecution.78 However, Paul was certainly aware of the practice of tattooing slaves and
thus chose here to define his relationship with Christ as one of master/servant through his
use of sti/gma. This sentiment continued into the 5th century when Victor of Vita
reported that during the Vandal persecution of 480 AD, a Manichaeanian monk in North
Africa was found, having tattooed “Mani, the disciple of Jesus Christ” on his thigh.
During this same era, Procopius of Gaza recorded that many Christians chose to be
tattooed on the wrist or arm with a cross or the name of Jesus Christ, showing both their
76 Paul, I Corinthians 7: 22.
77 Paul, Galatians 6: 17.
78 Jones, “Stigma: Tattooing and Branding,” 150.

dedication to Christianity and solidarity with each other.
All three of these religions demonstrate the use of tattooing as a group-identifying
power. Most religions stress some sort of sacrifice on behalf of the follower, and the
endurance of the pain of tattooing may fulfill this requirement. This pain and the
resulting mark provide a shared experience and feature for the religion’s followers. This
also may create a sense of equality among members, as every follower, regardless of their
position, goes through the same process. Through a shared “bondage” to a deity,
followers of a religion feel a kinship, which inherently desires a physical manifestation.
The tattoo serves as a badge of their religion, a public declaration of their beliefs. In a
world of so many different faiths, such a mark would distinguish followers of one
religion from the “other”, and provide an easy means of identification among fellow
believers. Such a symbol could facilitate the creation of a support group of followers,
which, in turn, would produce a sense within the individual of being part of a whole. In
addition, the permanence of a tattoo displays one’s lifelong commitment to the religion
and thus to his fellow believers.

Chapter 5: Slave Tattoos
Two theories preside over how the practice of tattooing developed in every
culture around the world. By the first theory, “Psychic Unity”, the process of decorating
the body is inherent in every society and therefore each culture developed the practice
separately.79 The other theory hypothesizes that tattooing began in Egypt and was spread
through the passage of culture around the Mediterranean, up through Europe and out to
the east through Russia and into Japan and China, from where the Polynesian cultures
adopted it.80 Although this seems highly unlikely, a clear path can be traced from Egypt
to the Persians, from whom the Greeks adopted the practice.
The Persian view of tattooing was penal in nature. As relating to slavery, Persians
used it as punishment for those who committed an offense against their masters.81
Herodotus writes of an instance, after a storm has destroyed his first bridge at the
Hellespont, when Xerxes:
to\n 9Ellh/sponton e0ke/leuse trihkosi/aj e)pike/sqai
ma/stigi plhga\j kai\ katei=nai e)j to\ pe/lagoj pede/wn
zeu=goj. h)/dh de\ h)/kousa w(j kai\ stige/aj a(/ma tou/toisi
a)pe/pemye sti/contaj to\n 9Ellh/sponton. e)nete/lleto de\
w}n r(api/zontaj le/gein ba/rbara/ te kai\ a)ta/sqala: w}
pikro\n u(/dwr, despo/thj toi di/khn e0pitiqei= th/nde, o(/ti
min h)di/khsaj ou)de\n pro\j e)kei/nou a)/dikon paqo/n. kai\
79 Scutt and Gotch, “Art, Sex, and Symbol,” 22.
80 Illes, “Tattoos in Ancient Egypt,” para. 5.
81 Jones, “Stigma: Tattooing and Branding,” 146.

basileu\j me\n Ce/rchj diabh/setai/ se, h)/n te su/ ge
bou/lh|? h)/n te mh/:
ordered three hundred lashes of the whip to be applied to the Hellespont
and a pair of fetters to be thrown into the water. And indeed I have also
heard that with these he sent tattooers to tattoo the Hellespont. The
punishers were ordered to say, “O cruel water, your master imposes this
penalty upon you because you wronged him when he has not wronged
you; and King Xerxes will cross you whether you like it or not.”82
While it is strange that Xerxes would tattoo a body of water, this passage is nevertheless
a perfect example of Persian slave tattooing. Here Xerxes treats the Hellespont as a slave
by punishing it in the same way as he would a human slave, having it fettered and
tattooed. This is evident in the rhetoric used, referring to Xerxes as the Hellespont’s
master (despo/thj). The tattooing of slaves for transgressions against their masters is
solidified here with the statement that the Hellespont has “wronged” Xerxes.
However, Herodotus also writes of an exception to the rule that slaves must
misbehave to be tattooed. During the First Persian War, the Persian King Darius
imprisoned Histiaeus of Miletus at Susa, leaving his son-in-law Aristagoras to rule. At
the same time Aristagoras planned a revolt of Ionians against Darius, Histiaeus’
messenger arrived with a tattooed head (to\n e0stigme/non th\n kefalh\n):
o9 ga\r 9Istiai=oj boulo/menos tw=| 0Aristago/rh|
shmh=nai a0posth=nai a1llwj me\n ou0damw=j ei}xe
a0sfale/wj shmh=nai w3ste fulassomene/wn tw=n
82 Herodotus, 7.35.

o9dw=n, o9\ de\ tw=n dou/lwn to\n pisto/taton
a0pocurh/saj th\n kefalh\n e1stice kai\ a0ne/meine
a0nafu=nai ta\j tri/xaj, w9j de\ a0ne/fusan ta/xista,
a0pe/pempe e0j Mi/lhton e0nteila/menoj au0tw=| a1llo
me\n ou0de/n, e0pea\n de\ a0pi/khtai e0j Mi/lhton,
keleu/ein 0Aristago/rhn curh/santa/ min ta\j tri/xaj
katide/sqai e0j th\n kefalh/n. ta\ de\ sti/gmata e0sh/maine,
w9j kai\ pro/tero/n moi ei1rhtai, a0po/stasin.
For Histiaeus wanted to signify to Aristagoras that he should revolt; and
having no other safe way of doing so, for the roads were guarded, he
shaved and tattooed marks on the head of his most trustworthy slave, and
waited till the hair grew back; since it grew quickly, he sent him to
Miletus having commanding him with nothing other than when he came to
Miletus to urge Aristagoras, having shaved his hair, to examine his head.
The tattoos indicated revolt, as I have already said.83
Here in fact, the slave had to be the most trustworthy (pisto/taton), as Histiaeus’
message was of utmost importance. Jones clarifies the message, saying, “Polyaenus is
able to report the message, ‘Histiaeus to Aristaogras: make Ionia revolt’, and Nicephorus
Ouranius in the late tenth century says, ‘He pricked (e0ke/nthsen) letters with pin and
ink’.”84 Nicephorus might have felt the need to clarify that the process of tattooing was
used in this instance, as branding was also often used at this time in Persia.85 However, it
83 Herodotus, 5.35.3.
84 Jones, “Stigma: Tattooing and Branding,” 146.

is easy to infer that the message was tattooed because branding would have damaged the
hair folicles, rendering the hair unable to grow back and therefore leaving the message
exposed. This story also shows a link between Persia and Greece regarding the transfer
of tattooing practices, as the slave was tattooed in Susa and then traveled to Greece.86
The Persians undoubtedly influenced the Greek perspective of tattooing, in that
when the Greeks adopted the practice, they also adopted the stigma attached to it. As in
Persia, Greek tattooing was exclusively used to mark undesirables, the majority of whom
were slaves. Dio Chrysostomus even describes a slave as “one who has fetters or has
been tattooed (pe/daj e1xwn tij h2 e0stigme/noj)”.87 This of course is
reminiscent of Xerxes and the Hellespont. In fact, penal slave tattooing “seems to have
been usual in the Hellenistic period.”88
Although it is tempting to assume that slaves were tattooed for identification as
their master’s property, this was not the case. Appanius of Alexandria provides an
example of the main reason for slave tattooing:
9Resti/wni de\ oi0ome/nw| mo/nw| feu/gein oi0ke/thj
ei3peto lanqa/nwn, a)na/qreptoj me\n au)tou=
9Resti/wnoj kai\ polla\ pro/teron eu} paqw/n, dia\ de\
moxqhri/an u(/steron e0stigme/noj.
When Restio fled, thinking that he was alone, a slave, who
was brought up by Restio and had been very well treated
by him formerly, but had lately been tattooed for bad
86 Ibid.
87 Dio Chrysostomus, Orationes 14.19.
88 Jones, “Stigma: Tattooing and Branding,” 148.

conduct, secretly followed him.89
A slave’s bad behavior (moxqhri/an) was subject to his master’s definition of the
term and consequently, a tattoo could be applied for any degree of wrongdoing. As such,
a master’s cruelty could theoretically be gauged by the number of tattoos his slaves had,
as in Bion the Borysthenite’s description of his father “as a freedman ‘who had not a
face, but a narrative on his face (suggrafh\n e0pi\ tou= prosw/pou), the mark of
his master’s harshness.’”90 However, this could be a reflection of his inadequacy as a
slave.
Two examples where slaves are threatened with tattooing on account of their bad
behavior occur in Herodas’ Mimes. The first happens when the delinquent slave-girl
Kydilla does not fulfill her mistress’ orders:
ou0 soi\ le/gw, au1th, th=i w}de kw}de xaskeu/shi;
ma=, mh/ tin 0 w1rhn w}n le/gw pepoi/htai,
e1sthke d 0 ei1j m 0 o0reu=sa karki/nou me/zon...
lai/mastron, ou1t 0 o0rgh/ se krhgu/hn ou1te
be/bhloj ai0nei=, pantaxh=i d 0 i1sh kei=sai.
martu/romai, Ku/dilla, to\n qeo\n tou=ton,
w0j e1k me kai/eij ou0 qe/lousan oi0dh=sai:
martu/romai, fh/m 0: e1sset 0 h0me/rh kei/nh
e0n h}i to\ bre/gma tou=to twusurej knh/shi.
Am I not speaking to you, who gape this way and that? Ah, she has paid
no heed to what I say, but stands there staring at me more than a crab...
89 Appian, Bella Civilia 4.6.43.
90 Jones, “Stigma: Tattooing and Branding,” 148.

Glutton, no woman pious or impure praises you as good, but everywhere
you are valued equally. I make this god my witness, Kydilla, that you
inflame me though I do not wish to swell up. I make him witness, I say:
that day will come when you will scratch your filthy head.91
Although Herodas does not use sti/zein in this passage, the use of kna=n can be
interpreted as the desire to scratch the irritation caused by a fresh tattoo.92 After the
mistress’ outburst, her companion immediately tries to defuse the situation by writing off
Kydilla’s indignant behavior as inherent in all slaves with the statement, “She is a slave,
and a slave’s ears are blocked with sluggishness (dou/lh 0 sti, dou/lhj d 0 w}ta
nwqri/h qli/bei)”.93 If this episode is characteristic of master/slave relationships, it is
not difficult to understand how a slave might accumulate many tattoos over his lifetime.
Herodas’ 5th Mime describes the dealings between a mistress, Bitinna, and her
slave, Gastron, who also happens to be her lover. The inequality of this relationship is in
Bitinna’s favor when she discovers that Gastron has been unfaithful. For punishment,
she orders him to be tied up and whipped, telling him that he, “must realize that [he is] a
slave (dei= s 0 o0teu/nek 0 ei0j dou=loj)”.94 He begs her forgiveness, suggesting
that she tattoo (sti/zon) him if he is ever untrue again. Eventually she concedes and
orders, “Kosis the tattooer to come to me with his needles and ink (Ko/sin te/ moi
ke/leuson e0lqei=n to\n sti/kthn /e1xonta rafi/daj kai\ me/lan)”.95 When a
slave-girl tries to change Bitinna’s mind, she exclaims:
91 Herodas, Mimes 4.42-52. Translation by I.C. Cunningham.
92 Jones, “Stigma: Tattooing and Branding,” 143.
93 Herodas, Mimes 4.53.
94 Herodas, Mimes 5.28.
95 Ibid. 5.65-66.

a0ll 0 e0pei/per ou0k oi}den,
a1nqrwpoj w1n, e0wuto/n, au0ti/k 0 ei0dh/sei
e0n tw=i metw/pwi to\ e0pi/gpamm 0 e1xwn tou=to.
But since, though a man, he does not know himself, he will soon know
when he has this inscription on his forehead.96
The inscription referred to is most likely “know thyself (gnw=qi sauto/n)”.97 Taken
with her previous statement that Gastron must understand that he is a slave, the tattoo
here not only serves as a punishment, but as also a permanent reminder of his social
status.98 Here the true meaning of tattooing as a punishment is realized; it is used as a
mark of degradation that constantly reminds the wearer that he is under another’s
authority.99
But slave owners’ authority did not go unchecked. A fragment of a 3rd century
legal code restricts the power of slave owners by stating that they “may not ‘sell slaves
for export, nor tattoo (sti/zein)’ them. The ban seems only to have applied to good
slaves, however, for another clause, referring to ones convicted of crimes, lays down that
the injured party ‘shall give him not less than a hundred lashes of the whip and tattoo his
forehead (stica/tw to\ me/twpon)’.”100
Of course, the worst crime a slave could commit was running away, essentially
depriving their master of property. The best instance of this occurs in Petronius’
96 Ibid. 5.77-79.
97 Jones, “Stigma: Tattooing and Branding,” 140.
98 Mark Gustafson, “The Tattoo in the Later Roman Empire and Beyond,” in Written on
the Body (London: Reaktion Books, 2000), 24.
99 Ibid.
100 Jones, “Stigma: Tattooing and Branding,” 148.

Satiricon, when Encolpius and Giton, trapped on a ship, discuss the various ways to
escape their estranged lovers. Their friend Eumolpus, the poet, suggests that they
disguise themselves:
Mercennarius meus, ut ex novacula comperitis, tonsor est: hic continuo
radat utriusque non solum capita, sed etiam supercilia. Sequar ego
frontes notans inscrptione sollerti, ut videamini stigmate esse puniti. Ita
eaedem litterae et suspicionem declinabunt quaerentium et vultus umbra
supplicii tegent.
My slave, as you learned by his razor, is a barber. Let him shave the head
of each of you this minute, and your eyebrows as well. Then I will come
and mark your foreheads with some neat inscription, so that you look like
slaves punished by tattooing. These letters will divert inquisitive people’s
suspicions, and at the same time conceal your faces with the shadow of
punishment.101
Stigmate certainly refers to a “tattoo” made with the ink Eumolpus, as a writer, brought
on board.102 Its use in connection with puniti and inscriptione shows that punitive tattoos
usually consisted of text describing the offense or punishment carried out. This is
confirmed when the duo quickly agree to the plan:
Implevit Eumolpus frontes utriusque ingentibus litteris et notum
fugitivorum epigramma per totam faciem liberali manu duxit.
Eumolpus covered both our foreheads with enormous letters, and scrawled
101 Petronius, Satyrica 103. Translation by M. Heseltine.
102 Jones, “Stigma: Tattooing and Branding,” 139.

the usual mark of runaway slaves all over our faces with a generous
hand.103
The actual tattoo referred to as notum fugitivorum epigramma, in itself showing that
marking runaway slaves with tattoos was common practice, is suggested by a scholion to
Aeschines as, “Stop me! I am a runaway” (ka/texe/ me, feu/gw).104 This inscription
is undoubtedly connected to the iron collars placed on recaptured runaways that read,
“Stop me, because I am a runaway, and return me to my master” (tene me quia fugi, et
revoca me domino meo).105
Jones references other instances of fugitive slave tattooing in many other ancient
sources:
In the world of [Aristophanes’] Birds what is normally considered ugly will be
beautiful, and a “tattooed runaway” (drape/thj e0stigme/noj) will be
called a spotted francolin. In the Frogs, Pluto sends a message by
Aeschylus to Cleophon and the others in the world above: “tell them to
come quickly to me here and not to linger; if they haven’t arrived soon, by
Apollo I’ll tattoo (sti/caj) them, fetter them with Adeimantus the son of
Leukolophus, and soon send them below ground”; that is, Pluto will treat
these petty politicians as runaways. subjecting them at the same time to a
tattoo and fetters, a pair of penalties also conjoined in Herodotus’ anecdote
about Xerxes.106
The practice of tattooing slaves, however, could burden those who were freed.
Claudian writes in 399 of Eutropius’ council:
Pars humili de plebe duces; pars compede suras
cururaque signati nigro liventia ferro
iura regunt, facies quamvis inscripta repugnet
103 Petronius, Satyrica, 103.
104 Jones, “Stigma: Tattooing and Branding,” 148.
105 Gustafson, “The Tattoo,” 26.
106 Jones, “Stigma: Tattooing and Branding,” 147.

seque suo prodat titulo.
Some from the lowly commoners are generals; some magistrates - though
their calves and ankles are still marked, black and blue from the iron
fetters, and though their faces are inconsistent with their office and betray
their true identity.107
Their “true identity” is most certainly that they were slaves at one time, attested to by
ferro and inscripta, which we have seen denotes the usual slave punishment. However,
not many freedmen reached the level of status to which Claudian refers. Usually, any
mark showing one’s undesirable past regulated them to the bottom of society, as seen in
the Augustan lex Aelia Sentia, which, according to Gaius, states:
qui servi dominis poenae nomine vincti sint, quibusve stigmata inscripta
sint, deve quibus ob noxiam quaestio tormentis habita sit et in ea noxa
fuisse convicti sint, quive ut ferro aut cum bestiis depugnarent traditi sint,
inve ludum custodiamve coniecti fuerint, et postea vel ab eodem domino
vel ab alio manumissi, eiusdem condicionis liberi fiant, cuius condicionis
sunt peregrini dediticii.
slaves who have been chained by their masters for punishment, or who
have been tattooed with an inscription, or who have been tortured under
interrogation on account of wrongdoing and have been convicted of that
wrongdoing, or who have been handed over to fight with a sword or with
the beasts, or who have been sent off to a gladiatorial school or to prision,
and afterwards have been manumitted either by their master or by another,
107 Claudian, In Eutropium 2.342-45. Translation by Gustafson.

become free men of the same status as foreigners who have surrendered.108
The class of peregrini dediticii, as explained by Gustafson, was a status “with no political
rights... Thus these slaves could not become citizens, as was customary upon
manumission, but would rather have the status of... the lowest possible category of free
non-citizens.”109 Thus, it is evident that the permanence of a tattoo doomed the wearer to
a low social status for the rest of his life.
When all the occurrences of slave tattooing are compared, it is evident that the
head, more specifically the brow (me/twpon, frons), was the most common site for
placement.110 The possible reasons for this are many. The ancient Mediterranean world
operated on a face-to-face basis, making the forehead a virtual billboard for one’s guilt.
Gustafson also suggests, “Not only does it defy most attempts at concealment, but the
face is also commonly viewed as a reflection of one’s person, of the self, of the soul”.111
As such, many who were tattooed sought to hide their marks, despite the inherent
difficulty of the location. The Satyricon again provides an example; when Encolpius and
Giton are shorn, they are discovered and Eumolpus claims them as his slaves, stating that,
“they had long, dirty hair... Besides, I did not want the marks of tattooing to be
obstructed by their hair; they should to show in full for everyone to read (horridos
longosque habebant capillos... simul ut notae quoque litterarum non adumbratae
comarum praesidio totae ad oculos legentium acciderent).”112 He proceeds to lie as to
108 Gaius, Institutiones 1.13.
109 Mark Gustafson, “Inscripta in fronte: Penal Tattooing in Late Antiquity,” Classical
Antiquity (Vol. 16, 1997), 87.
110 Jones, “Stigma: Tattooing and Branding,” 143.
111 Mark Gustafson, “Inscripta in fronte,” 92.
112 Petronius, Satyrica 105.

the reason Encolpius and Giton were tattooed, even though the newly revealed, clearly
visible mark is self-explanatory.
Although most slaves who received tattoos desired to remove or concealed them,
one group prized them and as such, submitted to the needle willingly. Gladiators often
tattooed their faces in conjunction with other body parts with religious or mystic
strengthening tattoos as a physical mark of their bravery.113 These symbols, like those
worn by the Britons, frightened others in battle and distinguished the gladiator adorned
with them from all the others. In fact, tattoos could further a gladiator’s career, and as
slaves, their tattoos seemed to be above the normal stigma of degradation.114
At first, military tattoos were souvenirs from battle, but it became part of the entry
process for both soldiers and military workers (fabricenses) during the late empire.115
Ambrose, a bishop of Milan in the later 4th century wrote, “charactere domini
inscribuntur et servuli et nomine imperatoris signatur milites” (Young slaves are
inscribed with their master’s mark, and soldiers are marked with the emperor’s name).116
Vegetius disagrees, saying that the tattoos took the form of the emblem indicating their
unit (puncta signorum).117 Jones notes that, “A constitution of 398 lays down that
‘stigmata, that is, a public mark, must be made on the arms of fabricenses in the manner
of recruits, so that in this way at least they may be recognized if they hide.’”118 Even
113 Rochelle Caviness (2000, Aug. 1), “Tattoos and the Romans,” in Suite101.com,
Retrieved Sept. 7, 2002 from http://www.suite101.com/article.cfm/ancient_rome/44866,
para. 6.
114 Ibid.
115 Gustafson, “Inscripta in fronte,” 95.
116 Ambrose, De obitu Valentiniani 58.5-7.
117 Vegetius, 1.8, 2.5.
118 Jones, “Stigma: Tattooing and Branding,” 149.

though soldiers and military persons were marked with their profession, essentially slaves
of the state, for the rest of their lives, they too seemed to have escaped the social stigma
associated with tattoos.

Chapter 6: Criminal tattoos
There was little distinction between slaves and criminals in the social mindset of
ancient Greeks and Romans. Both groups had no rights and were subjugated under the
political and social structure of the time. Therefore, it is not surprising that they were
punished in the same manner.
When Encolpius and Giton are finally confronted with their past lovers in the
Satyricon:
Tryphaena lacrimas effudit decepta supplico -- vera enim stigmata
credebat captivorum frontibus impressa -- sciscitarique submissius coepit,
quod ergastulum intercepisset errantes, aut cuius tam crudeles manus in
hoc supplicium durassent... concitatus iracundia prosiliit Lichas et “O te”
inquit “feminam simplicem, tanquam vulnera ferro praeparata litteras
biberint. Utinam quidem hac se inscriptione frontis masculassent.
Tryphaena, thinking that the marks on our foreheads were real prisoners’
tattoos, cried bitterly over our supposed punishment, and proceeded to
inquire more gently what prison had stayed us in our wanderings, and
what hand had been so ruthless as to inflict such marks upon us... Lichas
leapt forward in a transport of rage and cried, “You silly woman, as if
these letters were made by the scars of the branding-iron. I only wish they
had defiled their foreheads with that kind of inscription.119
This passage is confusing; ferro refers to branding the skin with hot iron, while
119 Petronius, Satyrica 105-106. Translation by M. Heseltine.

litteras biberint probably denotes tattooing.120 Since it has previously been established
that the marks put on Encolpius and Giton’s heads must be tattoos due to the use of ink,
the process of tattooing should still be assumed here. However, the fact that ink and iron
are mentioned together may give credence to the manner of tattooing proposed by Scutt
and Gotch, which is to induce the pigment into the skin by means of hot iron.121
Regardless of how the marks were applied, in shape they were the “usual marks
of runaways”, which is curious when taking into account that Tryphaena immediately
thinks the pair were put in a prison; this provides clear evidence that both groups were
punitively tattooed. Whether or not the tattoos for each group were identical, the ancient
mind did not distinguish between them.
This penal tattooing seems to have hit a high point in the Hellenistic period.
While some legal sources refer to tattooing on the hands and legs, the abundance of
literature refers to face, once again showing the connection to slavery. However, Galen
presents an interesting departure from this norm, suggesting that the body part that
committed the crime should receive the tattoo; for example, a thief’s hands should bear
the mark.
Additionally, other authors refer to tattooing criminals for punishment. The tattoo
usually specified the crime committed. Gustafson notes two sources that include the
actual text of the tattoo: “Plautus makes reference to a “literate” thief whose forehead is
lettered (it seems) with FVR, clearly indicating his offense. Cicero indicates that the
letter K was the mark put on the head (caput) of those convicted of calumnia (that is,
120 Jones, “Stigma: Tattooing and Branding,” 140.
121 Refer to Chapter 3.

making a false accusation).”122 Similarly, Plato advocates tattooing and banishing
criminals and also provides a reason as to why this type of punishment was used:
o(\j d' a)\n i9erosulw=n lhfqh|=?, e0a\n me\n h}| dou=loj
h2 ce/noj, e0n tw=| prosw/pw?| kai\ tai=j +xersi\ grafei\j
th\n sumfora\n kai\ mastigwqei\j o(po/saj a2n do/ch?| toi=j
dikastai=j, e)kto\j tw=n o(/rwn th=j xw/raj gumno\j
e)kblhqh/tw: ta/xa ga\r a2n dou\j tau/thn th\n di/khn
ge/noit' a)\n belti/wn, swfronisqei/j. ou) ga\r e0pi\ kakw=|
di/kh gi/gnetai ou)demi/a genome/nh kata\ no/mon, duoi=n
de\ qa/teron a)perga/zetai sxedo/n: h2 ga\r belti/ona h2
moxqhro/teron h{tton e0ceirga/sato to\n th\n di/khn
parasxo/nta.
Whoever is caught robbing a temple, if he be a foreigner or
a slave, his misfortune, having been tattooed on his
forehead and on his hands, and having been whipped as
much as the judge decrees, cast him out naked beyond the
borders of the country; for, after paying this penalty, he
might be punished into a better life. For no sentence that
is legally imposed aims at evil, but it brings about, as a
rule, one or other of two results: it makes the person who
suffers it either better or less bad.123
Plato may have hoped that the tattoos applied as punishment would inspire a kind of
122 Gustafson, Inscripta in fronte, 93.
123 Plato, Leges 854D.

internal rehabilitation for criminals, as if the implementation of the mark would make the
severity of one’s crime more “real” to them. However, he neglects the social impact of a
tattoo and does not acknowledge that the criminal will not have the chance to ascend to a
higher, improved life in a society, like those of ancient Greece and Rome, who will shun
him.
However, not all punishments were used with such high hopes for the reform of
criminals. Suetonius writes how the emperor Caligula tattooed people for his own
amusement:
Multos honesti ordinis deformatos prius stigmatum notis ad
metalla et munitiones viarum aut ad bestias condemnavit
aut bestiarum more quadripedes cavea coercuit aut
medios serra dissecui...
Many men of honorable rank were first deformed with
tattoos and then condemned to the mines, building roads,
or to be thrown to the wild beasts, or caged them on all
fours, like animals, or cut them in half with a saw...124
Most of the evidence attesting to the practice of criminal tattooing appears in
conjunction with those condemned to work in the mines (metalla).125 Those who received
this sentence were usually slaves and low-class individuals.126 This brings new light to
Suetonius’ account, as Caligula’s punishment must have been an extra hard blow to those
of high class, being subjected to the punishment of lower classes and slaves. Criminals’
124 Suetonius, Gaius Caligula 27.3.
125 Gustafson, “Inscripta in fronte,” 79-97.
126 Ibid. 87.

foreheads were tattooed before they were sent to work in the mines and as sources refer
to these people as metallici, the tattoo they received was probably “metallica damnatio”,
“metallum”, or some sort of abbreviation such as MET or MD.127
Examples of tattooing criminals and then sending them to work in the mines
usually come from the late empire. An edict of Diocletion and Maximian against the
Manichees in 302 bears the same indifference to class status seen above in Suetonius. It
decreed that all charged, no matter their status, would be sent to metalla and thus tattooed
in the process as a sign of their punishment.128 Similarly, Hilary, bishop of Poitiers,
reports that in 360 Constantius II condemned and tattooed the foreheads of catholic
bishops with the phrase, “condemned to the mines (metallicae damnationis titulo).”129
However, the practice of punitive face tattooing was banned with an edict issued
by Constantine:
Si quis in ludum fuerit vel in metallum pro ciminum derehensorum
qualitate damnatus, minime in eius facie scribatur, cum et in manibus et
in suris possit poena damnationis una scriptione comprehendi; quo facies,
quae ad similitudinem pulchritudinis caelestis est figurata, minime
maculatur.
If someone has been condemned to a gladiatorial school to the mines [or
quarries] for the crimes he has been caught committing, let him not be
marked on his face, since the penalty of his condemnation can be
expressed both on his hands and on his calves, and so that his face, which
127 Ibid. 97.
128 Gustafson, “Inscripta in fronte,” 88.
129 Ibid. 82.

has been fashioned in the likeness of the divine beauty, may not be
disgraced.130
Constantine mentions the mines specifically, giving credence to the fact that metallici
were probably tattooed. The fact that this edict was issued verifies the practice of
tattooing as widely spread to the point that there was a need to restrict it.
This edict was probably not followed strictly. In addition to the example of
Constantine II stated above, three more instances carry the practice as far as the 9th
century. Boethius writes in 523 that two men, arrested for fraud and sentenced to exile,
sought sanctuary in a church, only to be ordered by the Ostrogothic king, Theoderic, to
leave the city of Ravenna or be tattooed on the forehead and driven out. (eduxit uti ni
intra praecriptum diem Ravenna urbe decederent notas insigniti frontibus pellerentur).131
It is probable that an additional sentence to the mines was inferred. The second example
comes from Theophranes in 793. He states that Constantine VI tattooed Armeniakonian
rebel leaders’ foreheads with “Armeniakon traitor” and ordered them to be paraded in
front of him.132 Lastly, the Emperor Theophilus in the 9th century convicted 2 idolaters,
the Graptoi, “the inscribed” brothers, Theodorus and Theophanes, “had their faces
tattooed and poured ink into the marks and the tattoos formed letters” comprising 12 lines
of poetry that explained both their crime and punishment.133
130 Theodosian Code 9.40.2. Translation by Gustafson.
131 Gustafson, “Inscripta in frontes,” 84.
132 Ibid.
133 Ibid.

Chapter 7: Prisoner of War Tattoos
The practice of tattooing prisoners of war differed little from that of slaves and
criminals. While shame and domination of the individual were the primary goals, the
tattooers additionally intended to humiliate their captives’ whole community. Tattooing
members of a conquered people furnished the nation with a reminder of the power they
once confronted, in effect discouraging them from fighting the same force again.
After the Thebans lost the battle at Thermopylae in 480 B.C., they went as
suppliants to the Persians, swearing that they were led into the war against their will.
Herodotus goes on to say:
w(/ste tau=ta le/gontej periegi/nonto: ei}xon ga\r kai\
Qessalou\j tou/twn tw=n lo/gwn ma/rturaj: ou) me/ntoi ta/
ge pa/nta eu)tu/xhsan: w(j ga\r au)tou\j e)/labon oi9
ba/rbaroi e)lqo/ntaj, tou\j me\n tina\j kai\ a)pe/kteinan
prosio/ntaj, tou\j de\ pleu=naj au)tw=n keleu/santoj
Ce/rcew e1stizon sti/gmata basilh/ia, a)rca/menoi a)po\
tou= strathgou= Leontia/dew.
By this appeal they survived, and the Thessalians bore
witness to their words. They were not, however,
completely successful. For when the barbarians took hold
of them approaching, they killed some of them even as
they drew near. By Xerxes command, most of them were
branded with the king’s marks, starting with the general

Leontiades.134
The “king’s mark” is most likely the name of Xerxes. This was probably done to shame
the Thebans and to provide a permanent reminder to them and, everyone with whom they
came in contact, that they had been conquered. The same reasons for slave tattooing
apply here. Xerxes probably wanted to send a message to other’s in Greece that they
were or soon would be under his authority.
Similar concepts are seen in other references to war tattooing. In Plutarch’s
description of the Samian revolt against Athens in 441 BC, Pericles besieges the Samians
and takes the harbor, trapping his enemy. When an Athenian armament arrives, Pericles
feels comfortable enough to take some of his army away from the harbor in order to fight
a Phoenician ship that is arriving to help the Samians. While a large part of the Athenian
force is gone, the Samians take advantage of the opportunity and engage the remaining
Athenians. Victorious, they destroy many ships, gather supplies, and capture many of the
opposing forces:
Oi9 de\ Sa/mioi tou\j ai0xmalw/touj tw=n 0Aqhnai/wn
a)nqubri/zontej e)/stizon ei0j to\ me/twpon glau=kaj: kai\
ga\r e0kei/nouj oi9 0Aqhnai=oi sa/mainan... pro\j tau=ta
ta\ sti/gmata le/gousi kai\ to\ 0Aristofa/neion h0|ni/xqai:
Sami/wn o( dh=mo/j e0stin w(j polugra/mmatoj.
The Samians retaliated upon the Athenians by tattooing
their prisoners on the forehead with owls. For the
Athenians had once branded some of them with the

samaena. [A description of the ship follows] To these
tattoos, they say, the verse of Aristophanes made riddling
reference: For oh! how lettered is the folk of the
Samians!135
This instance presents a problem, as it not logical that one side would tattoo those they
took captive with the emblem of the prisoners’ own country. Most likely, Plutarch
simply mixed up the marks, as other sources referring to the revolt switch the tattoos to
reflect the more reasonable order.
135 Plutarch, Pericles 26.4.
Chapter 8: Metaphorical Stigma
“I am being tattooed to death with a stick!” (e)gw\ d' a)po/lwla stizo/menoj
bakthri/a|) claims Xanthius in Aristophanes’ Wasps.136 Clearly he does not mean that
he is undergoing the procedure of tattooing, but rather that his master is beating him with
a staff. As such, he refers to the resulting bruises as tattoos, both characteristically being
black and blue.
Similar statements regarding tattoos in a metaphorical sense occur in ancient
Greco-Roman literature, and almost always refer to the association between punishment
and stigma. Cicero states, “Finally, let it be written on the brow of each and
every one, what he feels about the republic” (Sit denique inscriptum in
fronte unius cuiusque quid de re publica sentiat).137 While Cicero in no
way expects the entire public to be tattooed so as to reflect their
thoughts about the government, his point concerning the vulnerability
of the Roman senate to conspiracy is well made.
Jones observes other instances of metaphorical tattooing thus:
From the tattooing of delinquents and of prisoners of war
must come the metaphorical application of stigma to a
mark of disgrace or ridicule. The earliest example is also
the most remarkable, an anonymous fragment of early
Hellenistic elegy in which the poet, or perhaps a speaker in
his poem, addresses an enemy. The speaker... threatens to
tattoo his enemy on the crown of the head (korufh=i) with the stone of
Tantalus, and on... the forehead ([e0pa/nwq 0 o0]fru/wn) with the
Calydonian boar... Suetonius observes that Catullus’ poetry put ‘perpetua
stigmata’ on Julius Caesar, and in exactly the same way Socrates the
136 Aristophanes, Vespae 1296. Translation by C.P. Jones.
137 Cicero, In Catilinam 1.32.

ecclesiastical historian talks of the ‘perpetual stigmata (sti/gmata
dihnekh=)’ which Julian’s Misopogon had placed on Antioch. In his
speech In Defense of the Four, Aelius Aristides accuses Plato thus: ‘you
never tattooed (e1sticaj) any of your own slaves, but you have as good
as tattooed the most honored of the Greeks’.
These references characterize the transition of stigma from describing physical marks to
social ones. Plutarch’s Alcibiades perfectly displays this evolution with the description
of ostracism, which was sometimes used when the people wanted to be rid of a wealthy
or influential person on account of their jealousy regarding this individual. In this story,
Alcibiades and Nicias join forces to divert the people’s scorn of their influence from
themselves by placing it on Hyperbolus an outspoken man, not well received in the
community, who tried to pit the former two against each other. Through their
collaboration, both Alcibiades and Nicas escape ostracism, while Hyperbolus is banished
from the city. However, since other great men such as Thucydides and Aristides were
ostracised before him, Hyperbolus boasts about his fate as being one filled with
greatness, regardless of his sordid personality. As such, Plutarch quotes Plato, the comic
poet, as saying somewhere:
kai/toi pe/praxe tw=n prote/rwn me\n a1cia.
au9tou= de\ kai\ tw=n stigma/twn a0na/cia.
ou0 ga\r toiou/twn ei1nek 0 o1strax 0 eu9re/qe.
And indeed he suffered a fate worthy of those before, a fate unworthy of
him and his tattoos. For the ostrakon was not created for such as him.
It is doubtful that the sti/gmata in this passage refer to physical tattoos on Hyperbolus.
Instead, they are metaphors for his social standing as an outsider. Plato’s quote further
characterizes Hyperbolus as an undesirable by saying that the ordinance of ostracism was

too good for him. Thus, through its final transition to the metaphorical, stigma retained
its characteristic associations with shame and retribution.

Conclusion
Tattooing in ancient Greco-Roman literature is denoted by stigma, which first
described the spots on snakes, then the traditional marks of tattoos, and finally a social
idea. The practice of tattooing in the ancient Mediterranean passed among civilizations
as they made the contact with one another, starting with the Egyptians, to the Persians,
Greeks, and ultimately the Romans. These last three cultures viewed decorative tattooing
as a barbarian custom that was practiced among neighboring tribes, including the
Scythians, Britons, and the Thracians. As the Roman Empire grew and absorbed these
cultures, tattooing came to be practiced in various forms. Religious tattooing primarily
occurred in the eastern Mediterranean, where followers displayed their devotion to a godby permanently marking their skin. However, most literature explaining the use of
tattoos in Greece and Rome refers to the practice’s social function in marking
“undesirables” of three categories: slaves, criminals, and prisoners of war. All three of
these groups were tattooed as punishment by the conquering force, as well as subjugation
into their assigned roles in society. While tattooing is no longer practiced for punitive
reasons and decoration is now the most common motivation for tattoos, remnants of
social disapproval remain attached to tattoos in modern society. Those in the tattooed
community can only hope that, in the future, those who are not yet adorned with tattoos
will soon “know themselves”.

Appendix
Fig. 1 Dorsal view of Ötzi, the Iceman, marked with placement of tattoos. Reproduced
by kind permission of Lars Krutak.
Fig. 2 Frontal and dorsal view of the tattoos on the Scythian chief. Reproduced by kind
permission of Phoenix Arabeth.

Fig. 3 Tattoo of mountain ram on the right arm of the Scythian chief. Reproduced by
kind permission of Scott Gilbert,
Fig. 4 Fish tattoo on the right shin of the Scythian Chief. Reproduced by kind
permission of Scott Gilbert.