Damnatio memoriae, literally translated as “damnation of memory”, was practiced by earlier civilizations than even the Romans. For example, a similar practice in ancient Egypt closely resembles its counterpart in Rome – for, like in Rome, statues of those who had fallen from public grace would be attacked, disfigured and hidden away from the public. For example, the monuments of the pharaoh Akhenaten during the Eighteenth Dynasty of Europe were hidden and his name was struck from the list of pharaohs, due to his deviation from traditional Egyptian polytheism.[1] The image above is believed to be the sarcophagus of Akhenaten, due to the damage inflicted and attempts at erasure of the royal cartouches (Wikimedia Commons).
Damnatio memoriae, literally translated as “damnation of memory” was most certainly present in ancient Roman society. However, this term is modern and did not exist in antiquity; the Romans did not refer to the erasures and condemnations of memory as such.[2] In broad terms it may be defined as:
“a practice designed to limit or to destroy the memory of a citizen who was deemed unworthy of being a member of the community.”[3]
Damnatio memoriae was the process of the manipulation of memory and representation, of historical censure and condemnation, stemming from accusations of maiestas (treason) or perduellio (aiding an enemy of Rome. in time of war). The process could be applied to any member of Roman society who was perceived to have done wrong, from ordinary citizens and members of Roman civic society, to members of the Imperial family. Many examples of damnatio memoriae upon members of the Imperial family survive, largely due to their positions in society. In a similar manner to its application in ancient Egypt, the branding of damnatio memoriae could result in a plethora of varying actions on the presence of the individual on art and architecture: the name of the person could be erased from inscriptions and any lists they were included in, books or works authored by the individual could be confiscated and destroyed, and portraits of the individual could be destroyed or disfigured.[4] Other items that could be affected, but were only applicable to members of the Imperial family and the equestrian class, were coins. However, due to the large quantity that were made and distributed throughout the Roman Empire, it was nearly impossible to alter all of them. One example of a successful damnatio upon a coin is that of Lucius Sejanus’, whose coins were minted in 31 CE upon his consulship. The image below demonstrates how the name of Sejanus was removed from the coin as a result of his damnatio (Wikimedia Commons).
In the case of images of the condemned, the areas that were most often targeted were the sensory organs, such as the eyes, nose, mouth and ears. This type of damage would enable the damage to be differentiated from incidental damage, which is more random than the intentional concentration of damage seen as a result of damnatio memoriae. The condemnations could be given by the Senate, the emperor, or the army.[5]
[1] Tracy Robey, “The Long History of Damnatio Memoriae and the Destruction of Monuments,” Pictorial, last modified August 16, 2017, https://pictorial.jezebel.com/the-long-history-of-damnatio-memoriae-and-the-destructi-1797860410
[2] Harriet Flower, “Rethinking “Damnatio Memoriae”: The Case of Cn. Calpurnius Piso Pater in AD 20,” Classical Antiquity 17, no. 2 (1998): 156, JSTOR.
[3] Ibid., 155.
[4] Ibid.
[5] Eric Varner, “Portraits, Plots and Politics: “Damnatio memoriae” and the Images of Imperial Women,” Memoirs of the American Academy of Rome 46 (2011): 43, JSTOR.