I read somewhere that Vegetius mentioned that Roman soldiers were marked with tattoos. I was wondering if anyone could expand a bit on the topic.
Printable View
I read somewhere that Vegetius mentioned that Roman soldiers were marked with tattoos. I was wondering if anyone could expand a bit on the topic.
I read somewhere that roman legionaries had tattoos, but that was in the later period (third century AD i think).
I think I´ve read that somewhere too, but as I recall it was the German and other foreign members of the Legions that were tattooed, not actual Italian legionaries. Not that there were many of those in the third century AD anyway.
I was under the impression that Romans believed that tattoos, hair product, and to a lesser extent facial hair, were barbaric. But it would make sense for a 3rd century Germanic soldier in the employ of the Empire to have tattoos.
I know Roman soldiers were tattoed to avoid them deserting.
There is also the scene in The Gladiator when Maximus removes the SPQR tattoo
from his shoulder. But movies dont care about historical accuracy.:thumbsdown:
But I do get the impression that part was respectful to accuracy. I dunno. Not very familiar with Imperial-era armies. There's just nothing -happening-. Guard, guard, guard, occasional German raid, guard, guard, guard.
As an aside, I've read the Late Roman "barbarisation" of the army wasn't really very literal - most of the recruits still came from within the Empire - but rather cultural. The military had became uncoupled from the civilian life already when the old militia system withered; in the centuries afterward it had quite enough time to develop a culture entirely of its own, and if I've understood correctly that took to consciously affecting "barbarian" (or in any case, what Roman stereotypes regarded as "barbarian") customs, modes of dress, fashions etc. to further distinguish itself as "a world apart" - and of course also due to the associations such paraphenelia had with the toughness, ferocity etc. the Romans regarded as characteristical of the "barbarians".
Hmm, I never really looked at it that way. I wonder if career soldiers today experience that kind of feeling. Especially with the never ending cycle of deployments that the armed forces in the U.S. face.
I can tell you during my time in the service we all got tattooedQuote:
Originally Posted by mjmehrer07
but we were infantry soldiers,
tankers and artillery love tattoos also
kind of bonding thing, kind of a look at me i am so bad ass thing
btw my time only ended 2 years ago so might be different rules now
Basically same sort of thing, I'd imagine. With the obvious difference that these guys were in for the long haul - whatwasit, twenty or something years of service for most arms ? That's the better part of a young man's life spent right there, largely isolated from normal society and often enough exposed to gruesome violence...
Very few of us Infantrymen don't have at least one tattoo. A lot of guys got the crossed-rifles(myself included) which is the branch insignia of the Infantry.
I've also got "VAE VICTIS" on my right collar bone and when I come back from the upcoming deployment, I'll get TYN FIAN DWMA FIATUA on my left collar bone.
Snite
This is a private message for members of the U.S. Armed Forces ONLY.
Please skip it if you wish to make unkind comments.
Guys - and gals. Thank you for your service.
You can return to your regularly scheduled thread now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sgsandor
I am in the Marine Corps and I can tell you that the rules with tattoos have changed with the Marines. Marines are no longer allowed to get tattoos below the elbows. People can not be recruited that have tattoos already below there elbows. Marines that already have "sleeves" are grandfather claused.
what's a grandfather clause?
Probably another name for the ex post facto principle where those who do things before a law is made are not able to be prosecuted after the law is in effect. Its quite nice.
You are quite correct sir.