Damnatio Memoriae: Erasing History in Ancient Rome

• Damnatio Memoriae was an ancient Roman practice.
• It involved erasing a person’s memory from official records.
• It continues today in politics, social media, and historical reinterpretation.

Damnatio memoriae is a Latin phrase that means “condemnation of memory”. This term involves the act of wiping out someone’s memory from official records, inscriptions, and documents. It was quite common back in ancient Rome and was deployed as a means of penalizing those who had discredited Rome.

The effects of damnatio memoriae could be seen far from Rome and could include the destruction of depictions, the removal of names from inscriptions and documents, and even large-scale rewritings of history. In this section, we will provide a brief explanation of damnatio memoriae and discuss its significance in ancient Roman culture.

Historical Context

Damnatio memoriae was rarely an official practice. Since the historical record would contain no mention of the person, a truly effective damnatio memoriae would go unnoticed. However, since all political figures had allies as well as enemies, it was difficult to implement the practice completely. For example, the senate wanted to condemn the memory of Caligula, but Claudius prevented this. The senate declared Nero to be an enemy of the state, but Vitellius organized a sizable funeral in his honor after he passed away.

While statues of some emperors were destroyed or reused after their deaths, others were erected. Historians sometimes use the de facto phrase damnatio memoriae when the condemnation is unofficial. Some people who suffered damnatio memoriae were Sejanus, who conspired against Emperor Tiberius in 31; and later Livilla, who was revealed to be his accomplice.

The only known emperors to receive an official damnatio memoriae were Domitian and later the co-emperor Geta, whose memoria his brother co-emperor, Caracalla, condemned in 211. Among the other emperors who suffered damnatio memoriae are some of the best-known figures from Roman history, including Caligula and Nero.

The practice of damnatio memoriae was not completely successful in wiping out the memory of an individual. The effects of the official denunciation could be seen far from Rome, and the notoriety of the condemned individuals often persisted. The practice of damnatio memoriae was more than a form of casual, politically-motivated vandalism, carried out by disgruntled individuals, since the condemnation required approval of the Senate.

The public figures who were subjected to damnatio memoriae:

Emperor Geta’s Damnatio Memoriae

The accounts of Cassius Dio and the discoveries of archaeologists, epigraphists, and papyrologists show that Geta’s damnatio memoriae following his murder by his brother Caracalla was one of the most systematic in all of Roman history.

Caracalla not only ordered the removal of depictions and the name of his brother from public monuments throughout the empire, as was customary, but he also had coins bearing Geta’s image melted down and searched the archives for documents, even ancient ones, containing Geta’s name to have them erased or altered.

Even private documents were affected, and the possessions of those whose wills mentioned Geta’s name were confiscated. Poets avoided giving the name Geta to characters in their comedies, as had been common since Terence’s Adelphoe of Terence and Phormio. The cognomen Lucius Lusius Geta, prefect of Egypt in 54, was even chiseled off an inscription.

Significance in Ancient Roman Culture

The practice of damnatio memoriae held considerable importance in ancient Roman society, carrying implications for broader society.

The Social and Political Side

By manipulating narratives in a society heavily reliant on written records and inscriptions, Roman authorities were able to not only punish individuals through this practice but also control and shape public perception.

Destruction of Depictions and Rewriting of History

Damnatio memoriae frequently led to the destruction or alteration of depictions and historical records. Statues, paintings, and artworks featuring the condemned were often destroyed or modified to erase their presence, and at times, entire buildings and monuments were demolished.

Long-Lasting Effects

Efforts to erase a person’s memory through damnatio memoriae didn’t always succeed. The condemned individuals’ notoriety often endured, with their stories carried on through oral and written accounts. In some instances, a person’s memory was eventually revived or rehabilitated after a period of damnatio memoriae.

Symbolic Sense

The practice of damnatio memoriae had a symbolic meaning behind it. It was a way of controlling the narrative and shaping public opinion.

Control of the Narrative

Damnatio memoriae was a way for the Roman government to control the narrative and shape public opinion. It involved erasing a person’s memory to control how they were remembered, preventing them from becoming symbols of resistance in a society where written records and inscriptions held considerable influence over public memory.

Comparison to Other Forms of Punishment

Damnatio memoriae can be compared to other forms of punishment and social control, such as censorship and propaganda. However, damnatio memoriae is unique in that it involves the erasure of a person’s memory from history rather than just the suppression of their ideas or opinions.

Symbolic Meaning

From one perspective, it embodies the government’s might in steering public perception and dictating the story. On the other hand, it underscores how easily memories can vanish and emphasizes the significance of protecting them. It is a powerful symbol of the state’s ability to shape reality.

Damnatio Memoriae in Ancient Egypt

You can actually spot similar practices in various other cultures, like ancient Egypt, where they tried to wipe someone’s name and memory from existence.

In ancient Egypt, the practice of damnatio memoriae was known as “condemnation of memory” and was a form of iconoclasm. Iconoclasm involves the removal or destruction of visual representations or symbols linked to a specific individual or collective entity. In the context of ancient Egypt, its one common use was to obliterate any historical recollection connected to prior rulers or ruling dynasties.

Hatshepsut, who ruled Egypt from 1473 to 1458 BC, faced an aggressive campaign to erase her memory by her successor, Thutmose III. He destroyed her statues and inscriptions and removed her name from official records, possibly to eliminate recognition of a female ruler and strengthen his own claim to the throne.

During the 18th dynasty, the Egyptian pharaoh Akhenaten sought to institute a monotheistic religion centered on the sun god Aten. Following his demise, successors like King Tutankhamun aimed to eliminate his memory by erasing references to him and his religious changes.

The practice of damnatio memoriae in ancient Egypt is similar to the practice in ancient Rome in that it involved the erasure of a person’s memory from official accounts and documents. However, the reasons for damnatio memoriae in ancient Egypt were often different, and the practice was often used as a means of erasing the memory of a previous ruler or dynasty.

Other Historical Examples

• The Cadaver Synod
• The prohibition in Ephesus from mentioning the name of Herostratus, the arsonist of the Temple of Artemis.
• The restoration of the portrait of Doge Marino Faliero of Venice after his failed coup d’état.
• After the failure of the Pazzi conspiracy in Florence, the surviving members of the Pazzi family were subjected to this sentence.
• The condemnation of Jan Hus.

Modern Applications and Relevance

Damnatio memoriae, although an ancient Roman practice, has found modern applications and continues to be relevant.

Politics

This concept still plays a vital role in shaping what we collectively remember and how we control the stories we tell. In politics, we encounter damnatio memoriae when statues and monuments of figures or ideologies get taken down. Another place we witness this is in the impeachment and removal of public officials from their posts.

Social Media

The rise of social media has also brought about new forms of damnatio memoriae, as individuals and organizations can now be “canceled” or have their online presence erased. It showcases the might of popular sentiment and the repercussions of not conforming to societal standards. The social media platforms wield the authority to mold public sentiment and manage storytelling, just like the damnatio memoriae.

Historical Revisionism

It has also been employed as a mechanism for historical revisionism, where the recollection of specific events or people gets modified to conform to a particular storyline. This occurs in various situations, including Holocaust denial and the idealization of historical figures while understating their controversial deeds.

Stalinist Purges

In the era of Joseph Stalin’s rule in the Soviet Union, especially during the Great Purge of the 1930s, individuals who had fallen out of favor with the government faced a sort of “damnatio memoriae.” This entailed a campaign to wipe out their presence from photographs, records, and historical accounts. It aimed to eliminate the memory of those who had been purged, often facing harsh consequences like execution or forced labor in camps.

Scientific Knowledge

The concept of damnatio memoriae isn’t just a dusty historical thing; it has some relevance in the world of science too. In the context of using conversational AI in scientific research, complex ethical dilemmas arise. This includes things like the scientific bias in the data.

Conclusion

Damnatio memoriae was an ancient Roman custom aimed at erasing a person’s memory from official records and inscriptions as a punishment for sullying Rome’s reputation. This practice continues today in politics, social media, historical reinterpretation, and more, shaping how individuals are remembered and their historical heritage.