So I actually went and researched the source and text of some of the original documents which mentioned the Picts and discovered that the quotes were but a small part, and once expanded not only confirmed that the Picts were tattooed, but described the process (they used sharp iron tools (needles?) and a natural plant-based ink called woad, which is apparently (in some forms) highly hallucenic by the way... sort of a very strong PCP type drug).
Most of the misquotes were taken from books 9 and 14 of the Etymologies of Isidore of Seville (560-636).
In the Chronica de Origine Antiquorum Pictorum (The Pictish Chronicle), an otherwise confusing text, he writes:
"Picti propria lingua nomen habent a picto corpore; eo quod, aculeis ferreis cum atramento, variarum figurarum sti(n)gmate annotantur."
Which means:
"The Picts take their name in their own tongue from their painted bodies; this is because, using sharp iron tools and ink, they are marked by tattoos of various shapes."
Painted and tattooed!
When I bring this up to a very smug historian in the "Women of the Ink" documentary, you can actually see his proper British jaw drop.
Article comments
1 - ross hart
I would just like to show my appreciation in your work involving my former country men, being part of a counrty which has so much more history than most is a great feeling, thanks for your intrest in scotland
2 - redbaron
perhaps marked by iron refers to ritual branding and or scarification?
3 - Vicki Bartholomew
I'm very happy to still see interest in the pictish race, i myself am trying to keep a little piece of the pictish people alive by trying to get as many of their designs tattoo'd on me as possible, so far i have the kelpies and also a crecent and V-rod design, i also intend to get the Z-rod and a few others!