In modern scholarship, the term damnatio memoriae denotes the posthumous punishment inflicted upon an individual during the Roman Empire. Its victims were, for the most part, emperors and members of the imperial family, though senators, equestrians and even prominent municipal citizens could be targeted. This ‘condemnation to oblivion’ assumed a variety of forms, ranging from the prohibition of mourning and the interdiction of the use of the condemned individual’s praenomen within the family to the effacement of the name from public archives and spaces and the destruction of portraiture. Notwithstanding the definitions furnished by legal sources and by earlier scholarship – foremost among them the seminal study of F. Vittinghoff (Der Staatsfeind in der römischen Kaiserzeit. Untersuchungen zur Damnatio Memoriae [1936]) – numerous questions concerning the principles, procedures and modes of enforcement underlying this practice remain to be elucidated.
The present volume seeks to advance a more nuanced and contextually grounded understanding of the phenomenon. It builds upon and engages critically with prior studies, notably those of H. Flower (The Art of Forgetting: Disgrace and Oblivion in Roman Political Culture [2006]), F. Krüpe (Die Damnatio Memoriae: A Case Study of Publius Septimius Geta, 198–211 ad [2011]), D. Calomino (Defacing the Past: Damnatio and Desecration in Imperial Rome [2016]) and C. Crespo Pérez (La condenación al olvido (damnatio memoriae): Public Disgrace in Roman Politics, 1st–4th Centuries ad [2014]). Above all, the volume represents the culmination of a research programme spanning some two decades and devoted to the victims of abolitio memoriae. The programme rests upon a systematic catalogue of inscriptions bearing traces of abolitio memoriae throughout the empire, assembled in a database currently under construction. This work has been complemented by sustained reflection on memory and its uses in the Roman world, informed by anthropological, sociological and philosophical perspectives and taking as its point of departure the influential concept of ‘collective memory’ (M. Halbwachs). This programme has previously resulted in several edited volumes by the same scholars, addressing the place of memory within Roman political culture and society.
Following a foreword outlining the institutional framework of the project and a brief introduction situating the historical and conceptual context and methodological orientations, the volume is organised into three parts. Comprising 27 chapters by ten scholars, the volume addresses questions of methodology, erasure on milestones and a broader range of contexts subsumed under the rubric of ‘mémoires en actes’. Each part is prefaced and concluded by a brief editorial synthesis. Several chapters, authored by the volume’s editors, take the form of catalogued entries on documentary evidence illustrating the theme under discussion. A concise epilogue draws together the contributions and situates them within the wider research programme. The volume includes indexes of names, places and sources. It is, on the whole, carefully produced, though the poor quality of certain photographic reproductions – at times too small or of insufficient resolution to be legible – is regrettable.
In the first part Benoist sets out the rationale for favouring the term abolitio memoriae over the more familiar damnatio memoriae. The preferred terminology extends beyond the strictly juridical dimension of the practice to encompass its broader place within a political culture that mobilised both memory and forgetting, while accommodating the formal diversity of its manifestations. Lefebvre traces the development of this mode of condemnation from the late Republic through its subsequent institutionalisation over the first century of the empire, foregrounding two episodes: the defeat of Mark Antony and the trial of Cn. Calpurnius Piso. Rather than addressing the legal framework strictly construed, Daguet-Gagey examines the pivotal role of the Senate and, in particular, its interaction with the princeps within the condemnation procedure, whether directed against a predecessor or a political adversary. The final chapter of this section (Lefebvre) illustrates the diversity of epigraphic erasure practices, encompassing the promulgation of directives ordering the deletion of an emperor’s name – occasionally executed erroneously – alternatives to outright erasure, including instances of reuse, and cases involving victims external to the domus Augusta.
The eight contributions of Part 2 are concerned with milestones. As instruments of political communication and markers of authority situated beyond the epigraphic sphere typically associated with urban contexts, milestones were frequently subject to erasure and reinscription; such interventions, however, cannot invariably be attributed to a deliberate programme of abolitio memoriae but may instead reflect considerations of economy or routine updating. This category of evidence accordingly raises distinct methodological challenges, compounded by the often uneven quality of existing editions. Examining the milestones of the Via Nova XVIII in Galicia, Lefebvre revisits the implementation of Domitian’s abolitio memoriae: the erasure of his name, more systematic here than in other regions of Hispania, suggests a particularly zealous campaign, possibly directed by the procurator per Asturiam et Callaeciam then in office, with the assistance of the legio VII Gemina. X. Dupuis re-examines a milestone from Timgad (AE 1981, 902), arguing that the erasure relates to the mention – uncommon on such monuments – of one of Elagabalus’ wives, whose name was presumably effaced following her repudiation.
Two contributions concern Maximinus Thrax: one, by O. Rebhi, addresses the form and context of erasures in the African provinces; the other, by S. Destephen, revisits the Anatolian evidence to offer insight into the emperor’s numerous milestones across the empire and into their local contexts, noting that the relevant regulations were applied more systematically in the vicinity of Ancyra. The practice of erasing and reinscribing imperial names in response to successive changes of ruler during the third and fourth centuries – the phenomenon of milliaires palimpsestes identified by P. Salama – is examined by S. España-Chamorro for Hispania, by Benoist for Gaul (excluding Aquitania) and the Germanic provinces, and by Hoët-van Cauwenberghe for Achaia, whose analysis draws comparisons with attested instances of damnatio memoriae. Extending this discussion of milestones, J.-B. Yon offers a survey of chiselled inscriptions from Arabia, Palestine and Syria, drawing attention to further victims such as Avidius Cassius and the legio III Gallica, while noting that the names of Zenobia and Odaenathus remained conspicuously unaffected.
Part 3 comprises ten chapters organised in three thematic clusters. The first assesses the impact of abolitio memoriae upon the naming of festivals and cities, where imperial names reflected privileged relationships with particular communities. Hoët-van Cauwenberghe examines references to the Kommodeia and the Alexandreia in Achaia, observing that the former were not invariably erased and were subsequently reinstated, whereas the latter were suppressed more systematically. This inquiry is complemented by an analysis of the Kommodeia across some dozen cities of Asia Minor, in which G. Frija demonstrates that the enforcement of measures following Commodus’ abolitio memoriae proved largely ineffective, with the exceptions of Miletus and Ephesus. Daguet-Gagey examines the erasure or retention of an imperial name within civic titulature in the case of Severus Alexander, drawing upon two inscriptions from Tarsus and Thignica.
The second cluster addresses the chiselling out of military unit names, wholly or in part, as a further index of the indirect effects of imperial abolitio memoriae. P. Faure, examining the civil war of 193–197, observes that the sanctions imposed upon the legions were predominantly military rather than political, resulting in the punishment of individual officers or soldiers rather than the disbandment of entire units; cases of outright abolitio memoriae, such as those affecting the legio III Gemina or the legio III Augusta, constituted exceptions to this pattern. Dupuis, in turn, offers a meticulous study of the erasure of the name of the latter unit (disbanded between 238 and 253) in Africa, demonstrating that it was considerably less systematic than has generally been assumed, sparing sacred and funerary inscriptions and even certain monumental texts. A similarly differentiated pattern of erasure characterises the treatment of epithets derived from the names of condemned emperors in the case of the legio II Parthica (Lefebvre), occurring less frequently at Apamea, a temporary operational camp, than at Albanum and varying according to the material and typology of the monuments concerned.
The third cluster addresses the abolitio memoriae inflicted upon women of the domus Augusta, whether as a collateral consequence of sanctions imposed upon an emperor or as the result of an independent decision. M. Dondin-Payre examines the case of Drusilla, sister of Caligula and deified in 38 ce, whose name was sometimes erased following her brother’s posthumous condemnation, though her cult persisted, as though her divine status had shielded her from oblivion. Lefebvre presents a series of case studies concerning Statilia Messalina, Lucilla, Iulia Maesa, Iulia Soaemias and Iulia Mamaea, illustrating the considerable diversity of circumstances and material manifestations involved. This final section further offers the volume’s only two excursions beyond epigraphy: an analysis by P.D. Conesa Navarro of the sculptural forms taken by the abolitio memoriae of Plautilla, based on three Italian portraits attributed to the daughter of Plautianus; and a study by E. Berlaire Gues of how the Severan princesses are treated in the works of Cassius Dio, Herodian and the Historia Augusta, where their portrayal frequently serves to reinforce critical discourse concerning the memory of the emperor at the centre of the narrative.
The principal strength of the volume lies in its approach to the condemnation of memory through a meticulous material history that combines systematic compilation with the critical, contextualised analysis of epigraphic evidence. Such an approach affords a nuanced characterisation of the diverse means by which an official decision, emanating from the centre of imperial power, was implemented – shaped by technical choices made at the local level but equally by the perceptions of the actors, whether governmental or administrative personnel, civic communities or private individuals, who acted, or declined to act, as agents or intermediaries of that decision. These actions and the material traces they left behind undoubtedly attest to a memory that the authorities sought to impose across the landscape of the empire; yet they reveal that this memory was far from uniform, as evidenced by the markedly uneven application of the relevant provisions, whether through negligence or by deliberate design. The variable haste with which particular names were effaced admits of multiple interpretations: does it signal a reluctance reflecting a specific attachment to the condemned individual, as suggested by the retention of imperial names within official documents conferring benefits? Or does it, conversely, constitute a means of ensuring that, notwithstanding the passage of successive generations, the identity of the victim should remain recognisable – thereby endowing the act of erasure with what the editors term a ‘valeur pédagogique’ or, closer to Roman culture, transforming it into the vehicle of an exemplum?
Altogether, through its sustained analysis of the concrete epigraphic manifestations of these ‘pratiques dynamiques de l’oubli’ (p. 59), the volume illuminates not merely the display of power, whether imperial or local, or simply the formation of a collective memory of Rome’s imperial history, but also the complex relationship with that power and reactions to it – thereby shedding valuable light on some of the mechanisms by which the empire was constituted.
