Talk:History of tattooing
|WikiProject Body Modification||(Rated Start-class, High-importance)|
High School Essay?
It looks like someone copy & pasted their high school essay on the history of tattoos into the bottom of this article. It mostly states what was already written and only covers ancient western historical perspectives on tattoos. I'd remove it wholesale. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 18:31, 17 September 2008 (UTC) how bad does getting a tattio hurt
Winston Churchill's mother, Lady Randolph Churchill, not only had a tattoo of a snake around her wrist, which she covered when the need arose with a specially crafted diamond bracelet, but had her nipples pierced as well.
The snake tattoo is well-documented , but the latter looks dubious. It's repeated on a number of blogs and tattoo sites, and I know that 'bosom rings' were in fashion in the 1890s - but it still looks a bit urban mythy, like Prince Albert's alleged Prince Albert. Are there are any reliable sources for this? 22.214.171.124 00:57, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
"Tattooing spread among the upper classes all over Europe in the 19th century, but particularly in Britain where it was estimated in Harmsworth Magazine in 1898 that as many as one in five members of the gentry were tattooed. There, it was not uncommon for members of the social elite to gather in the drawing rooms and libraries of the great country estate homes after dinner and partially disrobe in order to show off their tattoos."
I find this entire claim dubious, as well. Why are the volume and issue numbers of the Harmsworth Magazine not cited? Do any other sources support this claim?
Jewish reaction to tattoos
The article repeats the claim that “some” Jewish cemeteries will not allow the burial of someone who has been tattooed. I’ve heard this claim before, and heard it debunked; if true it requires a reference, if false, deletion. JCSalomon (talk) 14:28, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Wikiproject Body Modification
I'm trying to start a Wikiproject on Body Modification, if anyone wants to join go here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Proposals/Body_Modification ScarTissueBloodBlister (talk) 02:41, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
Where are any of the sources?
"Tattooing for spiritual and decorative purposes in Japan is thought to extend back to at least the Jōmon or Paleolithic period (approximately 10,000 BCE)" This is either deliberately misleading or simply badly worded - as I understand it, the period in question extended from 10,000-300BCE, which is quite a long time.... nowhere can I find evidence that tattoos were actually being done in Japan as early as 10,000BC. Headbeater (talk) 16:33, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
I think this article should be reorganized?
I was trying to find out when tattooing may have been started. At the top of the article it says "since at least neolithic times" and the picture is an artifact from Romania, c. 4900-4750 BC, but that is about all it says on the subject.
Then it has a history of tattooing in ancient cultures, but doesn't really go in depth anywhere. What country did they maybe start in? How did it spread throughout the world? What exactly do we know about the history?
Was tattooing reintroduced to Europe or not?
The "Europe" section currently says about the aftermath of Cook's journey to Polynesia: "In the process sailors and seamen re-introduced the practice of tattooing in Europe and it spread rapidly to seaports around the globe." Then later, the "Reintroduction in the Western world" section says: "That tattooing was somehow "reintroduced" to the Western world following European voyages to Polynesia is a myth. Tattooing has been consistently present in Western society from the modern period stretching back to Ancient Greece." These two statements seem to be contradicting each other. The second claim cites two sources, but they are both books, and the page numbers are not mentioned. I can't fact-check them. I find the claim that tattooing was "consistently" present in Europe since ancient times until the 18th century specious, and it seems likely that Cook at least found something novel about what the Polynesians were doing. Either way, the article currently contradicts itself, and it should be fixed. Any suggestions for solutions? --Ornilnas (talk) 19:16, 5 April 2017 (UTC)