Monday, March 24, 2008

Barbarians, slaves, and prisoners

Michael Gilleland, in his observations at the gym, informs us - and he's got citations from Xenophon, Seneca, Plato, as well as the classicist C.P. Jones - that in the ancient world, only "three classes of persons wore tattoos in ancient times — barbarians, slaves, and prisoners." He writes:
It's curious how at the gym one can observe people, in their pastimes and their adornments, voluntarily adopting practices that used to be visited on prisoners as punishments.
The ancients, so far as one can tell from these writers, considered it as a given that only those three classes of people would have tattoos. No reasons are given. And in our wonderful modern world, only a generation ago, the only people with tattoos were prisoners, bikers, and military men, which might be said to represent a certain form of barbarism.

Can reasons be given? Most younger people nowadays seem to consider them merely a form of decoration, while those of us from my generation - I was born in the same year Thomas Mann and Albert Einstein died - are appalled.

Before one can consider tattoos to be in the realm of those classes, one has to believe that there is a distinction to be made between barbarism and civilization. When prisoners and bikers inscribe tattoos on themselves, they are clearly imitating barbarians, specifically their bellicosity and antinomianism. The ancients must have associated those qualities with barbarians, hence anything specifically associated with them, such as tattoos, were barbarous. And slaves did not, of course, have any choice in the matter.

Barbarian societies are relatively egalitarian. Their leaders rule by consensus, and every able-bodied man is a warrior. Since no one has more money than any other, they cannot use wealth to display status, like the Romans or Greeks would. In this the barbarians resemble prisoners and bikers, and their tattoos functioned to make the individual stand out as big and bad.

However, since the distinction between civilized and barbarian has attenuated, and only reactionaries would dare to think one society better than another, tattoos have proliferated. They're a form of display for the barbarous.

Labels:

17 Comments:

At 3/24/2008 08:19:00 AM, Anonymous JH said...

Many of the peoples thought of
as barbarian by the Roman's
and Greeks had a fairly stratified
(though not as much as Rome)
society as shown by burial practices
and the concept of the treasure "horde". The difference is that
the strafications were within an
extended tribal or kinship group.

 
At 3/24/2008 09:45:00 AM, Blogger Brent Lane said...

Dennis,

Having been born in roughly the same time frame (some 5 years later) as you, I share your aversion to 'body art', not only tatoos but piercings (which to my eyes are even more primitive and tribal).

Whenever someone asks me if I would consider a tatoo, I like to tell them that it's been my experience that the oridinary process of aging is painful and disfiguring enough for me.

 
At 3/24/2008 10:20:00 AM, Anonymous Peter said...

Many people who get tattoos consider them to be distinctive expressions of their own unique personalities. Tattoos have long since lost this function. Today they are instead "expressions" of cows-at-the-slaughterhouse-chute mindless herd conformity.

 
At 3/24/2008 10:55:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think on women especially, tatoos look hideous. The older the woman gets, the more nasty it looks.

Whale-tails or splatter pads, the tats on a womans lower back that are put there so they can be seen when she wears low-rider pants, scream "slut who has slept with 100 men in her nasty apartment" to me.

There is nothing more attractive that a pretty, shapely woman in classy, well-fitting clothes with tastefully applied blush and eye-liner with subtle jewelry, but skank-hos in low rider jeans and the beginnings of a peter belly with a ring in the protruding navel, scuffy shoes and a cheap tube top and a tatoo on each shoulder and a whale-tail with clunky jewelry and bed-head hair look skank skank skank

 
At 3/24/2008 11:28:00 AM, Anonymous dearieme said...

John Morris on the barbarian invasions of Roman Gaul:-
"The rich barbarian became Roman, the poor Roman was barbarised."

 
At 3/24/2008 06:25:00 PM, Anonymous Fred S. said...

Dennis,

When attacking the lack of propriety and class in contemporary society, it's probably best not to criticize from your perspective as a Boomer. After all, it was with the Boomers' coming of age (1965-75) that many phenomena which had previously roiled about society's muddy depths (crime, drug-abuse, childlessness, shiftlessness, solipsism) irrupted into the mainstream.

I agree with you, but speak for yourself, as, generationally-speaking, you haven't a leg to stand on.

 
At 3/24/2008 07:26:00 PM, Anonymous Martin said...

"Fred S. said...

Dennis,

When attacking the lack of propriety and class in contemporary society, it's probably best not to criticize from your perspective as a Boomer. After all, it was with the Boomers' coming of age (1965-75) that many phenomena which had previously roiled about society's muddy depths (crime, drug-abuse, childlessness, shiftlessness, solipsism) irrupted into the mainstream."

I am quite willing to impute the onset of most of society's rot to the boomers (I am a late boomer myself). It should be noted that the tattoo phenomenon seemed to have started with the Gen Xers. Perhaps, having boomers as parents, many of whom had themselves tried so hard to shock their square WWII era parents, the Xers sought out a new level of extreme, which which to shock their parents. How do you shock someone who lived in a Haight flop-house, getting high, and throwing pigs blood at cops? Cut and pierce yourself, I guess.

And having made a fetish out of generational rebellion and doing your own thing, the boomers really didn't have a leg to stand on when they told their little darling that he shouldn't get a tattoo.

With Gen Y, it seems not so much an act of rebellion, as just self-expression.

I think one of the most egregious kinds of self-indulgence, also begun by the boomers, and really embraced by Gen Xers are the idiot names they choose for their children - Haden, Jaden, Braden, etc. Or, the trend of naming girls with the last names of 19th century Presidents - Taylor, Madison. What's next? A little girl named Fillmore, or Van Buren?

I quite agree with the sentiment on this board that tattoos are disgusting, especially on women. It's especially heartbreaking to see a young, pretty girl, a natural work of art whom no artifice of man could improve, defile herself with some ugly, dollar-green splotch.

 
At 3/24/2008 10:20:00 PM, Blogger mnuez said...

Eh, you guys have no imagination or sense of joie de vivre. Me any my Communist buddies all sport numerous tattoos (in fact I'm getting a really neat one around my cock, this weekend) and it's a sign of our individuality. That's what Socialism is all about, individuality and freedom from Capital.

mnuez

 
At 3/24/2008 10:22:00 PM, Blogger mnuez said...

If you even considered for a moment that the previous comment was real then you have some serious biases regarding all matters left-oriented. Milgram may be dead, but Mnuez lives.

:-)

 
At 3/25/2008 05:50:00 AM, Anonymous Martin said...

"mnuez said...

If you even considered for a moment that the previous comment was real then you have some serious biases regarding all matters left-oriented."

No mnuez, I didn't believe the previous post was real. I have learned not to believe anything you say.

 
At 3/25/2008 07:02:00 AM, Blogger mnuez said...

You break my heart Marty. You. Break. My. Heart.

Seriously, cause all this time I been here sitting, hoping and praying: "Will Marty take me seriously? Does Marty read what I have to say with interest? Does he consider me a serious interlocutor? Does he believe me??"

Marty, I'm'a here cryin' cause you burnded me. You burnded me bad. You don't believe ANYTHING I say! Ow, that's gonna leave a mark.

Awright, now for the majority of the readers here who happen not to be dumbfucks incapable of even composing a rational insult:

Look, I'm not one of you. If you regard yourself (as many of you appear to) as Proud Capitalists who will brook no criticism from one who believes that we need to return to the principles of FDR (in general) and/or the majority of civilized nations around the globe TODAY then I'm simply not one of you. My identity (unlike many others here) is not caught up in being critical of cut-throat capitalism but if your identity is caught up in being its panting defender then I'm clearly not a member of your tribe.

Nonetheless -

You're smart , - otherwise you wouldn't be here. You know a little something about matters intellectual, about facts, ideas, people and discoveries and you have at least some curiosity in coming across information outside of that which you already know. That being the case, would you respond like MoronMarty who pouts that he "learnt not to believe anything you say".

This dumbfuck isn't saying that I've sneakily filled his head with inaccurate facts and figures. He isn't saying that I'm one to regularly engage in pranks and could therefore not be trusted. The above comment of mine on this thread was the very first "experiment" I've ever done and it was followed by the admittance to such within seconds of it being posted.

No, Marty means that I'm of another tribe. I criticize words (that he doesn't even understand) that he worships and regards as essential to his identity. I'm simply therefore The Enemy. I'm on the other side of his baby game of Tug Of War. His intellectual life is an infantile thing.

Sadly I find this to be true for most bloggers. I hoped however that here, among the more intelligent blogs, I'd find higher quality folk - people eager to read spirited and intelligent points of view other than the ones they already consider to be party of their mental furniture.

Hey, here's to hoping.

P.S. If this comment is the first you've heard of me, I recently posted a rather lengthy piece at the tail-end of a thread on this here blog. If you don't require for the survival of your sanity an unwavering belief in the purity and sacred nature of "The Free Market", you may be interested in reading it.

http://mangans.blogspot.com/2008/03/global-warming-regime-freedoms-greatest.html#comments
here

mnuez
www.mnuez.blogspot.com

 
At 3/25/2008 07:36:00 AM, Blogger Audacious Epigone said...

Interesting tidbit from the OT, Leviticus 19:28:

"Do not cut your bodies for the dead or put tattoo marks on yourselves."

'Body art' was seen as a (possibly disingenious) way of raising a person or object to the point of reverence, a sort of soft idolatry.

It is often pointed out in demonstrating how mean/partisan/secular the clergy traveling with Raymond and company into the Levant were through pointing out that a clergyman named Baldwin, who had a cross tatooed on his head, became the first abbot of St Mary in Jerusalem after the success of the First Crusade.

 
At 3/25/2008 07:44:00 AM, Blogger Brent Lane said...

"I think one of the most egregious kinds of self-indulgence, also begun by the boomers, and really embraced by Gen Xers are the idiot names they choose for their children - Haden, Jaden, Braden, etc. Or, the trend of naming girls with the last names of 19th century Presidents - Taylor, Madison. What's next? A little girl named Fillmore, or Van Buren?
"

Yes, why can't those oh-so-trendy GenX parents stick with the traditional girls' names that their depression-era grandparents applied to their daughters.

Like "Stanley Ann".

 
At 3/25/2008 08:02:00 AM, Blogger Dennis Mangan said...

"When attacking the lack of propriety and class in contemporary society, it's probably best not to criticize from your perspective as a Boomer."

I probably should have said "Those of us from my generation *and class*". Fact is, I don't know anyone who has tattooed children nor anyone of my age who approves of them, though undoubtedly there are plenty.

"skank skank skank"

Very useful word, that. It's a word that describes phenomena that we see all around us, but that most people are afraid to use. Too "judgmental".

 
At 3/25/2008 08:44:00 AM, Anonymous green mamba said...

Mnuez, you're so special and smart, a true iconoclast! *rolleyes*

Seriously, I've found some of your posts at Sailer's and on your own blog engaging in the past, but lately you've crossed the treshhold into annoying self-indulgence and egomania. Just a little friendly advice: dial it down.

 
At 3/25/2008 08:58:00 AM, Anonymous Happy Talk said...

RE: mnuez

I'm with Martin on this, mnuez wastes precious electrons on self indulgent blather.

RE: skank

I'm with Dennis all the way here. Skank is an indespensible word in this debased age. Entire sections of the dictonary will need to be resurrected to fully describe the willful pervasive folly, ugliness and horror of our times.

 
At 3/26/2008 05:53:00 AM, Anonymous Martin said...

mnuez:

"Awright, now for the majority of the readers here who happen not to be dumbfucks incapable of even composing a rational insult:"

Is "dumbfuck" a rational insult? I wrote what I wrote, mnuez, because I have read much of what you've written at isteve. You are, as I recall, the person who was shocked, amazed, dumbfounded, that a black-and-white movie could be any good. Hey, ever seen "Citizen Kane"? And I am supposed to take you seriously as a cultural critic?

Oh, and by the way, I'd put my education (and smarts for that matter) up against yours anytime.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home