Damnatio Memoriae
There is one punishment which has been used from time to time in history which, if it is completely successful, then by definition nobody knows about it.
The oldest known attempts at Damnatio Memoriae - literally, "Damnation of Memory," trying to completely erase someone from the historical records - were made in ancient Egypt. In some cases the attempt to wipe out the memory of past rulers and entire dynasties who were out of favour with their successors was largely successful for thousands of years and we only know it happened because in the past couple of centuries archaeology and science have rediscovered evidence of those affected.
When general Horemheb became ruler of Egypt he attempted to obliterate the memory of the entire "Armana period" which had lasted more than thirty years and included the reigns of at least four and possibly five Pharoahs. Only with the rediscovery of the remains of the city we now call Armana and of the tomb of one of the forgotten Pharoahs, the boy-king Tutanhkamun, did knowledge of this epoch re-emerge.
It was the Romans who actually invented the formal name and laws for the practice, although it appears to have been pretty rare in ancient Roman times.
With modern means to doctor records, the practice re-emerged with a vengeance under 20th century totalitarian states, particularly soviet Russia, as George Orwell brilliantly satirised in his novel "1984."
Islamic extremists in the middle east, first from the Taleban and more recently those who describe themselves as "Islamic State" have been destroying the artifacts of previous cultures, and seeking to expunge any record that people in the region once followed a multiplicity of faiths and beliefs.
Our own society has recently acquired a different version of damnatio memoriae, which has come into being when a formerly revered person is exposed as having done something horrible such as treason, or most often child abuse or sexual assault.
As has happened to Rolf Harris in the past few days, see http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31711252 or to Jimmy Saville, see http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-york-north-yorkshire-19889974 we have begun to withdraw honours and destroy or remove monuments to those we no longer believe deserve them.
Where someone has been convicted by due process of law of a horrible offence, or where there is clear evidence that were they still alive they would be, this is almost certainly the right thing to do.
I hope, however, that the scope with which we apply our own form of damnatio memoriae will not be allowed to creep wider to those we disagreed with, or whose views or legacy are merely out of fashion. That is precisely what Horemheb attempted more than three thousand years ago and what the Jihadists have been doing. It would be petty, vindictive, and above all, an assault on truth which made our society poorer in spirit.
The oldest known attempts at Damnatio Memoriae - literally, "Damnation of Memory," trying to completely erase someone from the historical records - were made in ancient Egypt. In some cases the attempt to wipe out the memory of past rulers and entire dynasties who were out of favour with their successors was largely successful for thousands of years and we only know it happened because in the past couple of centuries archaeology and science have rediscovered evidence of those affected.
When general Horemheb became ruler of Egypt he attempted to obliterate the memory of the entire "Armana period" which had lasted more than thirty years and included the reigns of at least four and possibly five Pharoahs. Only with the rediscovery of the remains of the city we now call Armana and of the tomb of one of the forgotten Pharoahs, the boy-king Tutanhkamun, did knowledge of this epoch re-emerge.
It was the Romans who actually invented the formal name and laws for the practice, although it appears to have been pretty rare in ancient Roman times.
With modern means to doctor records, the practice re-emerged with a vengeance under 20th century totalitarian states, particularly soviet Russia, as George Orwell brilliantly satirised in his novel "1984."
Islamic extremists in the middle east, first from the Taleban and more recently those who describe themselves as "Islamic State" have been destroying the artifacts of previous cultures, and seeking to expunge any record that people in the region once followed a multiplicity of faiths and beliefs.
Our own society has recently acquired a different version of damnatio memoriae, which has come into being when a formerly revered person is exposed as having done something horrible such as treason, or most often child abuse or sexual assault.
As has happened to Rolf Harris in the past few days, see http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31711252 or to Jimmy Saville, see http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-york-north-yorkshire-19889974 we have begun to withdraw honours and destroy or remove monuments to those we no longer believe deserve them.
Where someone has been convicted by due process of law of a horrible offence, or where there is clear evidence that were they still alive they would be, this is almost certainly the right thing to do.
I hope, however, that the scope with which we apply our own form of damnatio memoriae will not be allowed to creep wider to those we disagreed with, or whose views or legacy are merely out of fashion. That is precisely what Horemheb attempted more than three thousand years ago and what the Jihadists have been doing. It would be petty, vindictive, and above all, an assault on truth which made our society poorer in spirit.
Comments
I mean "we asked 100 people to name an Egyptian Pharaoh"
You said Horemheb - our survey said UUUUHHHHHH UUUUUUHHHH.
the top answers were
Tutankhamen
Ramesses II
Akhenaten
Cleoplatra
Khufu
Khafre
Menkaure
So we see Horemheb actually helped both Tutankhamen and Akhenaten achieve immortality.
Cleo had to star in a few movies :)
all tut and akhenaten had to do was be forgotten for a time while the heat was on.
The fact that King Tut's tomb was hidden well enough to be ultimately found by archaeologists rather than ordinary grave robbers might also have something to do with it ...
Tut's tomb was well hidden, but originally no more or less so than any other. Over time it was buried with chippings and things from the construction of other tombs. Largely because horemheb had erased him from history, simply it was forgotten he was there. Later workmens huts were built there as further construction continued, doublessly not in the knowledge of what lay beneath. Of course the tomb robbers of antiquity came along and robbed all the tombs, but not tut's. It was hidden so well exactly because he was erased from history. The robbers never thought to look too hard for it, why would they?, they had forgot he was there.
It was not untill carter pieced it together that anyone thought to look, and so he was found, the inscriptions and other things unleased akenaten and his wife (the second most famous woman of ancient Egypt) Nefertiti and as a result Tut became the best known Pharaoh of them all.
All thanks to Horemheb.