DAMNATIO MEMORIAE: A Broader Perspective on Cultural Ritual
1
DAMNATIO MEMORIAE: A Broader Perspective on Cultural Ritual Steffanie Sayce (Anthony Tuck, University of Massachusetts Amherst) INTRODUCTION: As it is regularly used, damnatio memoriae is a modern term for the condemnation of an emperor in Imperial Rome, and is applied almost strictly to the erasure of names on monuments and the defamation of portraiture. It is rare in academic literature that the phrase, constructed by modern scholars and never clearly defined by the Romans, is used in any other reference to the ritual destruction of image, person, polity, or domus, despite the interconnectedness between subjects. From Etruscan predecessors and cultural interaction, to Scipio and Sulla, to Nero and beyond, ritual destruction is an over-arching (and often neglected) feature of aristocratic Italy, expressed most explicitly by the Patricians of Imperial Rome. In this most explicit expression, however, damnatio memoriae is both paralleled in other cultures and profoundly Roman. By analyzing the historical context, the archaeological record, Latin literature, and even the Latin language, a well- rounded and nuanced view of the nature and function of the Roman ritual can be established. CONCLUSION: Image abuse in Imperial Rome did not begin with Caligula, nor did it remain completely in the Imperial realm of portraiture. “Memory sanctions” as Harriett Flower terms the erasure of names and intentional defamation of statuary or damnatio memoriae in the modern vernacular is the archaeologically visible manifestation of aristocratic discontent, political action, and the power of images. Erasure in the Roman Empire was the ultimate insult and assault to identity, as it was the attempt not so much to condemn memory, but eliminate a person from the historical record. Issues of fama and familia, along with immortality and progeny all interrelate in the concept of damnatio memoriae and cultural ideals as communicated through various means dictated how the abuse was expressed. ETRUSCAN ANALOGUES: A long- standing tradition of ancestor cults in central Italy allowed for the presentation and representation of ancestral images as politically potent symbols of power. The use of effigies in the context of burial ritual, from Etruscan votives and cinerary urns to later Roman imagines, lends itself to image abuse because the use in one context enables abuse in another. The established importance of family and authority set up the necessary conditions for Imperial portrait abuse, as Augustus essentially positioned himself as patron to the Roman empire, allowing for the same associations between familial iconography (imagines) and Imperial portraiture to be made. The power implicit in the marble objects, then, at the condemnation of an emperor was abused through literal abuse of portrait and how it represented identity. Pictured Above: Etruscan Bronze Votive Figure Height: 3.8cm Date: 4 th -1 st century BCE Housed at the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston The lack of attributes and dedicatory posture of the figurine both indicate that it is, in effect, an effigy. Pictured Above: Caligula Coin Date: 37-38 CE Sesterces features Caligula on a platform addressing soldiers with a bust of his father Germanicus on the front. A close look at the bottom of the coin shows the C. (Gaius) has been erased from the coin, effectively preserving the image of the father and erasing the condemned Caligula. Pictured Below: The Severan Tondo Diameter: 30.5cm Date: circa 200CE Housed at the Staatliche Museum, Berlin The Severan Tondo, a uniquely preserved wooden panel, preserves a family portrait with the face of Geta obviously erased after his death, and the damnatio memoriae enacted by his brother Caracalla. The two portrait busts above, the left untouched and the right defiled, show the liminal phases of damnatio memoriae as it was enacted on Caligula. Just as the coin and Severan Tondo exhibit the various means through which Imperial portraiture was displayed, public and private, respectively, Imperial statuary is the most commonly identified form of image abuse.
description
DAMNATIO MEMORIAE: A Broader Perspective on Cultural Ritual Steffanie Sayce (Anthony Tuck, University of Massachusetts Amherst). - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Transcript of DAMNATIO MEMORIAE: A Broader Perspective on Cultural Ritual
DAMNATIO MEMORIAE: A Broader Perspective on Cultural Ritual
Steffanie Sayce (Anthony Tuck, University of Massachusetts Amherst)
INTRODUCTION: As it is regularly used, damnatio memoriae is a modern term for the condemnation of an emperor in Imperial Rome, and is applied almost strictly to the erasure of names on monuments and the defamation of portraiture. It is rare in academic literature that the phrase, constructed by modern scholars and never clearly defined by the Romans, is used in any other reference to the ritual destruction of image, person, polity, or domus, despite the interconnectedness between subjects. From Etruscan predecessors and cultural interaction, to Scipio and Sulla, to Nero and beyond, ritual destruction is an over-arching (and often neglected) feature of aristocratic Italy, expressed most explicitly by the Patricians of Imperial Rome. In this most explicit expression, however, damnatio memoriae is both paralleled in other cultures and profoundly Roman. By analyzing the historical context, the archaeological record, Latin literature, and even the Latin language, a well-rounded and nuanced view of the nature and function of the Roman ritual can be established.
CONCLUSION: Image abuse in Imperial Rome did not begin with Caligula, nor did it remain completely in the Imperial realm of portraiture. “Memory sanctions” as Harriett Flower terms the erasure of names and intentional defamation of statuary or damnatio memoriae in the modern vernacular is the archaeologically visible manifestation of aristocratic discontent, political action, and the power of images. Erasure in the Roman Empire was the ultimate insult and assault to identity, as it was the attempt not so much to condemn memory, but eliminate a person from the historical record. Issues of fama and familia, along with immortality and progeny all interrelate in the concept of damnatio memoriae and cultural ideals as communicated through various means dictated how the abuse was expressed.
ETRUSCAN ANALOGUES: A long-standing tradition of ancestor cults in central Italy allowed for the presentation and representation of ancestral images as politically potent symbols of power. The use of effigies in the context of burial ritual, from Etruscan votives and cinerary urns to later Roman imagines, lends itself to image abuse because the use in one context enables abuse in another. The established importance of family and authority set up the necessary conditions for Imperial portrait abuse, as Augustus essentially positioned himself as patron to the Roman empire, allowing for the same associations between familial iconography (imagines) and Imperial portraiture to be made. The power implicit in the marble objects, then, at the condemnation of an emperor was abused through literal abuse of portrait and how it represented identity.
Pictured Above: Etruscan Bronze Votive FigureHeight: 3.8cmDate: 4th-1st century BCEHoused at the Museum of Fine Arts, BostonThe lack of attributes and dedicatory posture of the figurine both indicate that it is, in effect, an effigy.
Pictured Above: Caligula CoinDate: 37-38 CESesterces features Caligula on a platform addressing soldiers with a bust of his father Germanicus on the front. A close look at the bottom of the coin shows the C. (Gaius) has been erased from the coin, effectively preserving the image of the father and erasing the condemned Caligula.
Pictured Below: The Severan TondoDiameter: 30.5cmDate: circa 200CEHoused at the Staatliche Museum, Berlin The Severan Tondo, a uniquely preserved wooden panel, preserves a family portrait with the face of Geta obviously erased after his death, and the damnatio memoriae enacted by his brother Caracalla.
The two portrait busts above, the left untouched and the right defiled, show the liminal phases of damnatio memoriae as it was enacted on Caligula. Just as the coin and Severan Tondo exhibit the various means through which Imperial portraiture was displayed, public and private, respectively, Imperial statuary is the most commonly identified form of image abuse.
