In reference to the column “Has anyone actually ever been tarred and feathered?” from 29-Apr-1988, Jesus tells a story in the new testament of the Bible (The Message version) about a man who planted a vineyard and turned it over to farmhands to mind it. Later, when he sent servants to check out the progress, one of the servants was “tarred and feathered.” (Mark 12, v. 4)
Perhaps this represents the earliest form of this type revelry.
Please provide a link to the column you’re referring to. It’s standard practice here in CCC.
(The reference is to http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a3_020.html)
No.
I was not familiar with “The Message”, but a quick look at it shows that calling it a “translation” is a bit generous. “Tarred and feathered” isn’t in the Greek at all.
Out of curiosity, then… what is?
I believe the conventional term is “paraphrase”. A rather loose paraphrase, in this case.
I think maybe the full question was supposed to be interpreted as “What is in the Greek then?”.
Heh, indeed it was. I should have quoted just the bit I wanted answered.
KJV
In Greek
You take it from here.
The KJV is very close to the Greek. The only place you might get “tarred and feathered” from is the “shamefully handled”, but the Greek just doesn’t refer to a specific act.
Thanks. I remember that scene, now. I’d never heard “The Message’s” translation before.
To be fair, the KJV is occasionally guilty of the same thing. Matthew 27:44, “The thieves also, which were crucified with him, cast the same in his teeth,” is just about as free and easy. On the other hand, it’s one of the very few translations that honestly renders “one that pisseth against the wall” (a Hebrew idiom for “male human”) at 1 Samuel 25:22 and 1 Samuel 25:34.
But “The Message” is just full of loose wording. Not exactly inaccurate, as far as the general meaning goes, but way off if you want any idea of the original Hebrew or Greek wording.
On the “didn’t die out until after World War I” tip, it didn’t die out until considerably later than that - if at all.
Publicity hound John Vincent was tarred and feathered by anonymous members of the local BASE jumping community for flagrant site-burning within living memory, and BASE didn’t get going until the latter half of last century.
Sure, even they probably thought it was retro at the time, but it definitely happened.
Maybe this should be in a new thread, but what is the purpose of the feathers?
I remember discussing this with an English teacher while reading Huck Finn. I thought the idea was that the calamus (quill?) of the feather would stick into the burned skin causing more irritation. Like rubbing salt into a wound. The bit about the sagebrush makes it sound like the point would be to make it difficult to clean off.
You have to remember that in sociological terms, this come under the heading of “Jes’ a bunch of good ol’ boys havin’ a little fun.” The feathers make the victim look ridiculous, and at the same time provide a subliminal impression that the tar is there just to stick the feathers on, and not as an instrument of torture.
mrsmuckers, welcome to the SDMB. 
We’re not being mean. We just grind info like corn, in bulk quantities. The result is carefully processed, with good results.
What edition of the Bible did your paraphrased quote come from?
He said it in the first place – it’s called “The Message”. It’s available online, which is why, even though I never heard of it before, I was able to diagnose it as heavily paraphrased.
For what its worth, I have and read from “The Message” at times as well. if you google it, you’ll find all kinds of “controversy” over it, by and large from hardcore conservatives vs. more "liberal’ christians, and the big argument is that the paraphrase is too “loose” or, more basically, it IS just a paraphrase, and not a translation, and so it shouldn’t be used.
My take on it is I think it can help a person (re)think particular verses. I’ve mainly read the NIV, and it is refreshing to read a verse w/ different wording. I think the back cover of the message says it best as far as the intentions of this paraphrase:
“One of the most striking features of the New Testament is that it was written in the street language of the day-- the idiom of the playground and marketplace, not the formal, lofty languaged of government decrees and historical documents. Written in the rhythms and idiom of contemporary language-- the way you’d talk with friends, write a letter, or discuss politics-- the message brings out the expressive, earthy flavor of the new testament.”
this verse in question (mark 12:4) is a good example… blueletterbible.org has a greek concordance which is nice because it’s word for word (phrase for phrase) so you can see what greek word corresponds to what english word.
the “handled shamefully” (or 'tarred and feathered" in message) corresponds to
Pronunciation Guide
atimoo {at-ee-mo’-o}
I think , as stated by the Message’s “intent”-- it makes perfect sense to use the phrase “tarred and feathered” , as that would certainly be one way to send someone away visible dishonored/marked with disgrace. (NIV just says “treated shamefully”). also note that this greek word is only used one time, and it occurs in this verse… so , again , it seems pretty worthwhile to use a “zany” (para)phrase like tarred and feathered because it also is a pretty rare/specialized term.
anyway… my $0.02 on the whole thing, and perhaps a pitch for the message- w/ a grain of salt- I do think its worth reading the message in conjunction w/ other translations, but it is a good study tool, or as I said, a way to help a person re-think a verse.
Oh, you want the the next thread over…
All very well, but–it makes it useless in answering the question, “How old is the practice of tar-and-feathering?” which is how it came up here in the first place.
Again, I’m not sure this should be in a new thread, but I did find one site that conflicts with Cecil’s statement:
emphasis mine
I’m interested in the possibility that it was a British punishment before it was American. (Assuming this site has any credibility.)