Were the Picts really painted?

[chuckster]

Everyone who is familiar with Pictish or Celtic history is aware of the tradition of Pictish warriors decorating their bodies with paint, scarification, or tatoos. Roman accounts of the Picts support these stories, but did the Romans really know what they were talking about? If you watch Braveheart or King Arthur, you see Celtic or Scottish warriors painting themselves blue before a battle, which I presume the scriptwriter believes is a throwback to Pictish tradition. I have seen beautiful works of art showing painted and tatooed Pictish men and even women with beautiful patterns of spirals and sacred animals on their bodies. While this is the artist's account of how he/she thinks the Picts may have looked, I see no evidence he/she really knew for sure what they looked like. I have not been able to find any reliable accounts of what the Picts actually did to decorate their bodies, if anything. Are there any believable accounts of the Picts decorating their bodies, or is this simply another of the series of mysteries about these people?

P.S. I hope this is an appropriate place to ask this question. If not, pls let me know and I will gladly apologize.

[Kitsune]

There is not that much known about the Picts that is certain, chuckster. As you said, the word "Picti" originates from the Latin word for "painted". But otherwise not much is known, because the Picts died out before the year 800 AD. Even their language is lost.
A fundamental question is for example wether the "Picti" were a Celtic people. Some historians believe this to be the case. Others dispute this. They point out that the "typical Pict" is described as small and wiry with a slighty darker skin tone. But "typical Celts" are usually tall (especially for the Romans) and fair skinned. Another point is that the Romans in their desciptions seem to differentiate between Celts or Gauls on the one hand and picts on the other. So they usually use sentences like "the Celts and the Picts did this and that" as if the Picts would be something different than Celts.
So it could be that the Picts are a completely different people, possibly the remnants of the race that lived on the British islands before the Celts settled there.
Wether they truly painted themselves? The Romans seem to claim that they would do this. And why not? To apply dyes to one skin is done in many cultures all over the world, (Indians, Africans, many Asians, Australian Aborigines...) so there is no reason why this should not be so.

[LtVacan]

And the blue paint in "Braveheart" has nothing to do with Picts. Ancient Celtic warriors painted themselves blue.

It is doubtful that it occurred in Scotland in the 1300s, but I guess its possible that some Highlanders did paint themselves IF they knew about the ancient traditional Celtic warfare from 1000 years (and more) before their own time.

[liberation]

The paint was called woad. It had a disinfectant quality.

[AROUETLJ]

NO NO NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! In the middle ages, Scottish soldier fought like anyone else, and were armed and clothed in exactly the same way. We have contemporary illuminations and chronicles to prove it. No one was painted. Besides, "Picts" is the general Roman term for Scots north of Hadrian's wall, and by Robert the Bruce's time, they wouldn't have called themselves, or been called, Picts.

[budgie]

Ditto for the above on the middle ages. As for the paints - the only credible accounts from 2,000 years ago are those of the Romans so we might as well assume they were being straight.

[AROUETLJ]

I've even heard stories of patriotic Scottish Painted Warriors being turned away at "Battle of Bannockburn" reenactment events.

[Mastermind]

I am not faliliar with the term in the French language, but when France built their first real iron battle ships, they used a design system they called "Fierce Face"...that is, make the ship look mean and serious so as to put a fright into the enemy. This designe principle has been around since the beginning of human warfare, I would guess. I would think the attempt to "paint" a more frighteneing face and to "camoflage" more youthful and childlike features on a warrior's face would be practical and almost universal among warrior classes. I don't know if the Scots did this. But, I would really be surprised if they did not do it to some degree. If for no other reason than to inspire men with the reminders of their fierce heritage.

[DeltaWhisky58]

http://my.net-link.net/~rowan/crafts/woad/dyerwoad.gif

Woad (http://my.net-link.net/~rowan/crafts/woad/woadpage.html) is not a paint, it is a dye produced from the Woad plant Isatis tinctoria. Follow the link and read all about it, just don't believe the crap in movies like Braveheart.

The Picts who used woad were in the very early days - by medieval times Scottish warriors were little different from those elsewhere, except perhaps the true Clansmen from the north and western highlands.

[AROUETLJ]

Some of you need an injection of common sense. Do you think your average Medieval Scotsman went around reading passages from Roman historians about his painted ancestors, assuming they were his ancestors? By the same token, French medieval soldiers should have anointed their hair with quicklime like their Gaulish ancestors.

[liberation]

http://my.net-link.net/~rowan/crafts/woad/dyerwoad.gif

Woad (http://my.net-link.net/~rowan/crafts/woad/woadpage.html) is not a paint, it is a dye produced from the Woad plant Isatis tinctoria. Follow the link and read all about it, just don't believe the crap in movies like Braveheart.

The Picts who used woad were in the very early days - by medieval times Scottish warriors were little different from those elsewhere, except perhaps the true Clansmen from the north and western highlands.

Thats why the link referred to wode BODY PAINT.

[Captain Cabinet]

Going slighty off topic... I heard that the Picts and Scots were two different races (maybe race isn't the right word), that the Scots came from Northern parts of Ireland, and pretty much took over what is know known as Scotland from the Picts. Is there any truth in this?

[Count Lippe]

NO NO NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! In the middle ages, Scottish soldier fought like anyone else, and were armed and clothed in exactly the same way. We have contemporary illuminations and chronicles to prove it. No one was painted. Besides, "Picts" is the general Roman term for Scots north of Hadrian's wall, and by Robert the Bruce's time, they wouldn't have called themselves, or been called, Picts.

I'm not an expert, but today's Scots were Irish and Wiking settlers. The naitive Picts must have either been killed, or assimilated. Kilts and other "traditionally scottish" things did not exist in the medieval times. They fought and wore the same clothes as everyone else.

[AROUETLJ]

Exactly! I didn't want to say it because I'd get a barrage of insults from Scots on the forum, but "Scottish Culture" is largely a 17th/18th century phenomenon. In the middle ages, Scots were culturally indistinguishable from Englishmen south of the Border. The Scottish Wars of the middle ages were a kingdom vs kingdom conflict, and not, as Hollywood tries to present them, an "Opressed People vs Evil Oppressor". It was only after the Reformation that a real cultural divide began to appear between the Catholic Scottish pretenders to the crown, and the Protestant British monarchy. I also think it is very unlikely that Sophie Marceau would have let William Wallace or Robert the Bruce shag her, but that is another story.

[DeltaWhisky58]

Going slighty off topic... I heard that the Picts and Scots were two different races (maybe race isn't the right word), that the Scots came from Northern parts of Ireland, and pretty much took over what is know known as Scotland from the Picts. Is there any truth in this?

Largely correct - Lowland Scotland in any case, but yes.

[DeltaWhisky58]

Exactly! I didn't want to say it because I'd get a barrage of insults from Scots on the forum, but "Scottish Culture" is largely a 17th/18th century phenomenon. In the middle ages, Scots were culturally indistinguishable from Englishmen south of the Border. The Scottish Wars of the middle ages were a kingdom vs kingdom conflict, and not, as Hollywood tries to present them, an "Opressed People vs Evil Oppressor". It was only after the Reformation that a real cultural divide began to appear between the Catholic Scottish pretenders to the crown, and the Protestant British monarchy. I also think it is very unlikely that Sophie Marceau would have let William Wallace or Robert the Bruce shag her, but that is another story.

What you say is partially true, but the big difference is the distinction between the Lowland and Highland Scots. The Lowland Scots were more akin to their English neighbours than those from the Highlands.

[AROUETLJ]

Yes, I should have been more precise. The whole "Highland" thing was used as a propaganda tool for recruitment purposes and as a way of unifying Scotland after the devastating wars of the mid-18th century. It was at this time that the concept of "Scottish culture" became firmly implanted in Britain.

[California Joe]

Plus they talk funny.

[DeltaWhisky58]

I dinnae, but Argyll does, dunno about Royal! ;-) p-)

[miguelencanarias]

Painting your face with historically uncorrect paints, wearing kilts not to be seen until centuries later... the things one has to do to go to bed with Sophie Marceau.

I understand the man, I would do that and much more if required.

[Scotus]

What you say is partially true, but the big difference is the distinction between the Lowland and Highland Scots. The Lowland Scots were more akin to their English neighbours than those from the Highlands.

This thread really sums up why we Gaels tend to keep a low profile. Everyone thinks they are experts on our history and heritage - and within the last decade, either because they hated Braveheart, or they loved it.

Scottish identity is confused with a Gaelic identity, England is confused with Britain, the Anglo-Norman William Wallace is unconsciously confused with Gaelic warrior Angus Og MacDonald of Islay (who did sport tartan gear and carry a huge sword). And everyone and their uncle wants a piece of the pie.

Like so many things, the people who are most brazen and opinionated about the subject are people with no connection to it and little knowledge.

Braveheart confuses Gaelic warriors with Anglo-Norman Scottish medieval armies. Unfortunately, people seem only able to accept that one existed to the deletion of the other. Scottish nationalists and the US Scottish heritage movement appropriate Gaelic warriors as "Scottish," while many UK citizens speak of the Anglo-Norman kingdom of Scotland as if the contemporaneous and separate Gaelic Kingdom of the Isles did not exist.

But both of these existed. And we are tremendously weary of the ignorance surrounding the subject. Ask any of those who think they understand our history about Coll Ciotach, Iain Spaingeach, Mairi MacLeod, what a Birlinn was or what a Claidheamh da laimh is, and they will only give a blank stare.

This is the second time on these forums that I am reminded of the song An Té a Chaill a' Ghàidhlig. I won't be surprised when none of the "experts" understand the humour.

[oldsoak]

Having Scottish friends who know a little about Scottish history round for a bite to eat and something warming opens my eyes every time . Wallace was not as popular as some might believe and not a nice chap either - and that was to his fellow countrymen. - I must confess to being ignorant of a lot of things north of the border, but as they have time and I have whisky, learning a thing or two after a days fishing will be a pleasure.

[ArchDeacon]

Having Scottish friends who know a little about Scottish history round for a bite to eat and something warming opens my eyes every time . Wallace was not as popular as some might believe and not a nice chap either - and that was to his fellow countrymen. - I must confess to being ignorant of a lot of things north of the border, but as they have time and I have whisky, learning a thing or two after a days fishing will be a pleasure.

Now here's a man who knows how to enjoy life....Cheers!

[Limeyfellow]

Mel Gibson has already said in interviews that his inspiration behind the paint in Braveheart was to do with the Native Americans and nothing to do with Scotland. I still can not forgive him however for doing a Battle of Stirling Bridge without a friggin bridge.