▁ident ifiable ▁as ▁the ▁perpet r ator ' s ▁home . ▁This ▁would ▁in ▁turn , ▁er ase ▁the ▁perpet r ator ' s ▁very ▁existence . ▁▁ ▁In ▁ancient ▁Rome , ▁the ▁practice ▁of ▁dam nat io ▁mem oria e ▁was ▁the ▁condem n ation ▁of ▁Roman ▁el ites ▁and ▁em per ors ▁after ▁their ▁death s . ▁If ▁the ▁sen ate ▁or ▁a ▁later ▁em peror ▁did ▁not ▁like ▁the ▁acts ▁of ▁an ▁individual , ▁they ▁could ▁have ▁his ▁property ▁seized , ▁his ▁name ▁er ased ▁and ▁his ▁stat ues ▁re work ed . ▁Because ▁there ▁is ▁an ▁economic ▁in cent ive ▁to ▁se ize ▁property ▁and ▁re work ▁stat ues , ▁histor ians ▁and ▁arch ae olog ists ▁have ▁had ▁difficulty ▁determ ining ▁when ▁official ▁dam nat io ▁mem oria e ▁actually ▁took ▁place , ▁although ▁it ▁seems ▁to ▁have ▁been ▁quite ▁rare . ▁ ▁Comp ounding ▁this ▁difficulty ▁is ▁the ▁fact ▁that ▁a ▁completely ▁successful ▁dam nat io ▁mem oria e ▁results by ▁definition in ▁the ▁full ▁and ▁total ▁er asure ▁of ▁the ▁subject ▁from ▁the ▁historical ▁record . ▁In ▁actual ▁practice ▁however ▁it ▁is ▁unlikely ▁that ▁such ▁complete ▁success ▁was ▁possible ▁except ▁in ▁cases ▁where ▁the ▁individual ▁in ▁question ▁was ▁of ▁limited ▁contemporary ▁not ability , ▁as ▁even ▁compreh ensive ▁ob liter ation ▁of ▁the ▁person ' s ▁existence ▁and ▁actions ▁in ▁records ▁and ▁the ▁like ▁would ▁continue ▁to ▁be ▁histor ically ▁visible ▁without ▁extensive ▁re working . ▁The ▁imp ract ical ity ▁of ▁such ▁a ▁cover -