Damnatio memoriae

Although the term damnatio memoriae is Latin, the phrase was not used by the ancient Romans, and first appeared in a thesis written in Germany in 1689 by Christoph Schreiter and Johann Heinrich Gerlach.

Because there was an economic incentive to seize property and rework statues, historians and archaeologists have had difficulty determining when official damnatio memoriae actually took place, although it seems to have been quite rare.

In the case of figures such as emperors or consuls it is unlikely that complete success was possible, as even comprehensive obliteration of the person's existence and actions in records and the like would continue to be historically visible without extensive reworking.

The impracticality of such a cover-up could be vast—in the case of Emperor Geta, for example, coins bearing his effigy proved difficult to entirely remove from circulation for several years, even though the mere mention of his name was punishable by death.

[13] Difficulties in implementation also arose if there was not full and enduring agreement with the punishment, such as when the Senate's condemnation of Nero was implemented—leading to attacks on many of his statues[14]—but subsequently evaded with the enormous funeral he was given by Vitellius.

[21] Several apparent damnatio memoriae incidents occurred within the Maya civilization during the Classic period (AD 250–900) as a result of political conflicts between leaders of the local kingdoms.

Though he had a son who eventually ascended to the throne after his death, there was a mysterious decade-long interregnum period in which Pa' Chan did not record the existence of any king.

[23] This has led to the conclusion that if this man truly ruled Paʼ Chan, any records of his existence were destroyed during the reign of Yaxun Bʼalam IV, who notoriously led a massive propaganda campaign throughout his rule to claim legitimacy over the throne, which involved the rewriting of his kingdom's dynastic history and restoration of several historical records of previous kings.

Various viceroys ordered the destruction of monuments and documents depicting certain episodes of pre-Columbian Mesoamerican history and rebels to Spanish rule over the Americas.

This became a tradition among subsequent Mexica rulers, and portraits of Axayacatl and Ahuizotl, two of Moctezuma's successors, were also made throughout the rest of the century (Tizoc's absence may be explained by his sudden death from poisoning).

The markings in the damaged parts show that apparently its destruction was executed with the dropping of a boulder, and that deep holes were drilled "perhaps in order to pry the stone apart or blow it up."

In another notorious instance, Spanish bishop Juan de Zumárraga ordered the destruction of a portrait depicting Nezahualcoyotl, king of Texcoco, on July 7, 1539, along with various other sculptures at the Hill of Texcotzingo "in a manner such that they would no longer be remembered,"[25] a clear example of damnatio memoriae.

During the Mexican War of Independence, which started in 1810, one of the earliest revolutionary leaders, Miguel Hidalgo y Costilla, nowadays remembered as a national Hero, was executed by the Spanish authorities in 1811.

"[26] While complete damnatio memoriae has not been attempted in modern times—naming or writing about a person fallen from favour has never been made subject to formal punishment—less total instances of damnatio memoriae in modern times include numerous examples from the Soviet Union, retouching photos to remove individuals such as Leon Trotsky,[27] Nikolay Yezhov,[28] and even Stalin.

[32] Following a 2015 decision, a process of decommunization in Ukraine successfully dismantled all 1,320 statues of Lenin after its independence, as well as renaming roads and structures named under Soviet authority.

[37] In December 2013, Jang Song-thaek was abruptly accused of being a counter-revolutionary and was stripped of all his posts, expelled from the Workers' Party of Korea (WPK), arrested and executed.

The term is used in modern scholarship to cover a wide array of official and unofficial sanctions through which the physical remnants and memories of a deceased individual are destroyed.

[39][40] Looking at cases of damnatio memoriae in modern Irish history, Guy Beiner has argued that iconoclastic vandalism only makes martyrs of the "dishonored", thus ensuring that they will be remembered for all time.

[44] In case of removal of Soviet monuments in Eastern Europe, the primary reason was that they were established as a symbol of occupation, domination or cult of personality, rather than simple historic mark.

It has been pointed out that all Nazi-established monuments and street names have been removed after World War II which has been perceived as natural reaction after liberation at that time.