Pete Hegseth, a prominent figure in conservative media and a Fox News anchor, has garnered significant attention not just for his political commentary but also for his extensive and striking tattoos. These aren’t subtle pieces of body art; they are bold declarations etched onto his skin, sparking debate and drawing considerable scrutiny, particularly concerning their potential alignment with far-right ideologies and Christian nationalism. This exploration delves into the intricate world of Hegseth’s tattoos, examining their historical roots, deciphering their symbolism, and understanding the controversy they ignite in the broader socio-political landscape.
Pete Hegseth's tattoos, including the Crusader cross on his chest and “Deus Vult” on his bicep.
Royal Ink and Crusader Crosses: A Historical Echo
The story of Christian pilgrimage tattoos in Jerusalem provides a fascinating backdrop to understanding one of Hegseth’s most prominent pieces: the Jerusalem Cross emblazoned across his chest. In 1862, Prince Albert, the future King Edward VII of England, received a tattoo in Jerusalem, a tradition continued two decades later by his son, the future King George V. Both royals were inked with the Jerusalem Cross by the same local tattooist, marking their pilgrimage to the Holy Land. This cross, also known as the Crusader’s Cross, is distinct with its square shape and four smaller crosses nestled within each quadrant.
This historical context highlights the long-standing tradition of Christian pilgrims acquiring tattoos in Jerusalem as souvenirs and symbols of their faith journey. The Jerusalem Cross, in this traditional context, represents piety, pilgrimage, and connection to the Holy Land. However, the sheer scale and placement of Hegseth’s Jerusalem Cross tattoo deviate significantly from these historical pilgrim tattoos. Experts like Matt Lodder, an art history and tattoo scholar, note the striking difference in size, emphasizing that Hegseth’s tattoo is a much more elaborate and time-consuming piece than the quick, simple Jerusalem Cross tattoos historically acquired by pilgrims. This amplified size and visibility suggest a deliberate statement, moving beyond a personal memento into a more public declaration of identity.
Chi-Rho: Ancient Christogram and Militant Undertones?
Adjacent to the Jerusalem Cross, the Chi-Rho symbol, one of the earliest forms of a Christogram, is visible on Hegseth’s chest. This symbol, formed by the first two letters of “Christ” in Greek, is often seen as a benign and traditional Christian symbol, akin to the Alpha and Omega. However, the Chi-Rho carries a deeper historical resonance, particularly its association with Emperor Constantine’s conversion to Christianity in the 4th century CE.
Legend recounts that Constantine, before the Battle of the Milvian Bridge in 312 CE, had a vision instructing him to adopt the Chi-Rho symbol for victory. Following his army’s triumph under this banner, Constantine played a pivotal role in establishing Christianity as the dominant religion of the Roman Empire. Historians like Mike Horswell point out that for those attuned to such historical associations, the Chi-Rho can evoke a narrative of Christian militancy and triumph, linked to a pivotal moment in Christian history where faith and military conquest intertwined. While the Chi-Rho can be interpreted simply as a declaration of Christian faith, its historical context allows for a reading that aligns with a more assertive, even militant, expression of Christianity.
“Deus Vult”: The Crusader Battle Cry – Unambiguous Militancy
Perhaps the most contentious tattoo in Hegseth’s collection is the “Deus Vult” inscription emblazoned across his bicep. Latin for “God Wills It,” Deus Vult served as the battle cry of the Crusaders during the medieval Crusades. Unlike the Jerusalem Cross or Chi-Rho, “Deus Vult” lacks a widely accepted secondary, peaceful interpretation. Its historical roots are firmly entrenched in the context of religious warfare and the Crusades, a period marked by violence and conflict in the name of Christianity.
While some attempts have been made to downplay its militant connotations, historians like Thomas Lecaque and Eleanor Janega firmly assert that “Deus Vult” unequivocally signifies Crusader enthusiasm and religious militancy. It is a direct invocation of a historical period associated with religiously motivated violence, making it a potent and unambiguous symbol in the context of Christian militancy. The choice to permanently inscribe “Deus Vult” carries a clear message, resonating with historical narratives of religious war and potentially signaling an endorsement of similar ideologies in a contemporary context.
American Heritage and Nationalist Symbols: A Blended Narrative
Beyond the overtly religious symbolism, Hegseth’s tattoos incorporate prominent elements of American history and national identity. The opening phrase of the U.S. Constitution, “We the People,” the year “1775” in Roman numerals (marking the start of the American Revolutionary War), the “Join, or Die” snake, an American flag intertwined with an AR-15 rifle, crossed muskets, and his regiment patch are all part of this inked tableau.
These symbols, individually, represent aspects of American patriotism, history, and military service. However, when combined with the Christian and Crusader imagery, they contribute to a broader narrative of Christian nationalism. This fusion suggests a worldview where American identity is inextricably linked with a particular interpretation of Christianity, often characterized by a militant, assertive, and exclusionary stance. The inclusion of the AR-15 alongside the American flag, in particular, adds a layer of contemporary political messaging, resonating with debates around gun rights and potentially aligning with a more aggressive interpretation of American patriotism.
Far-Right Echoes and Plausible Deniability: Navigating Symbolism
The confluence of these symbols – Crusader crosses, “Deus Vult,” Chi-Rho in a militant context, and American nationalist imagery – has drawn criticism and accusations of aligning with far-right ideologies. The internet and media outlets have been quick to point out the prevalence of these symbols within far-right communities, from rallies like Charlottesville to manifestos of extremist figures.
However, Hegseth and his defenders often employ the strategy of “plausible deniability.” This tactic relies on the multiple interpretations some of these symbols can hold individually. For instance, the Jerusalem Cross can be framed as a symbol of pilgrimage, or the Chi-Rho as a simple Christogram. This allows for a deflection of criticism by focusing on the seemingly benign individual meanings, while ignoring the cumulative effect and historical context when these symbols are combined, especially on one person’s body.
Ben Elley, a researcher specializing in far-right online radicalization, highlights this tactic, noting that while individual symbols might have innocent interpretations, their collection creates a picture commonly seen within far-right communities. The strategic ambiguity allows for signaling to specific audiences while maintaining a degree of deniability when confronted with broader criticism. This tightrope walk between signaling and denial is a hallmark of how far-right symbolism often operates in the public sphere.
Expert Perspectives: History as a Weapon
Experts in history, religious studies, and political extremism offer crucial insights into deciphering Hegseth’s tattoos. Historians like Charlotte Gauthier emphasize that the power of these symbols lies in their cultural and psychological associations, regardless of historical accuracy. The perception and contemporary understanding of these symbols within society are what matters most in conveying a message.
Thomas Lecaque, who studies the intersection of apocalyptic religion and political violence, states unequivocally that “Deus Vult” has no interpretation outside of Crusader enthusiasm, dismissing any attempts to sanitize its meaning. Eleanor Janega echoes this, describing it as a call to religious violence linked to a historically horrific period. These expert perspectives underscore the unambiguous militancy inherent in certain symbols and challenge attempts to dilute or reinterpret their historical and contemporary significance.
Andrew Elliott, an author on medievalism and politics, points to the longing for an “invented past” and a “sense of belonging to an in-group” as key drivers behind the adoption of such historical symbolism by far-right groups. This manufactured historical narrative serves to create a sense of continuity, authenticity, and shared identity among adherents, often rooted in a romanticized and inaccurate vision of the past.
Conclusion: Inked Ideologies and Unmistakable Signals
Pete Hegseth’s tattoos are far more than mere aesthetic choices; they are carefully curated declarations of identity and ideology. While individual symbols might be open to multiple interpretations in isolation, their combination, scale, and context on Hegseth’s body paint a clear picture of alignment with Christian nationalism and potentially far-right sentiments. The prominent display of Crusader symbolism, coupled with American nationalist imagery, sends a potent and unmistakable signal.
The denials and attempts at plausible deniability ring hollow when juxtaposed with the historical weight and contemporary usage of these symbols, particularly “Deus Vult” and the militant interpretations of the Chi-Rho and Jerusalem Cross in this context. Expert analysis consistently points towards a reading that emphasizes religious militancy, historical revisionism, and a worldview that sees conflict and division as inherent to the Christian and Western experience.
As a public figure with significant media influence, Hegseth’s choice to display these tattoos carries weight and consequence. They serve as a visual articulation of his beliefs, communicating directly to his audience and contributing to the broader discourse surrounding Christian nationalism and its place in contemporary society. Understanding the symbolism embedded in Hegseth’s tattoos is crucial for critically analyzing his public persona and the ideologies he represents.
