Iconoclasts Anonymous: Why did it take Historians so long to identify the Image-breakers of 1566?
This article asks why until the mid-twentieth century both Catholic and Protestant interpretations of the iconoclasm converged on the anonymising of the iconoclasts of 1566. It argues that, while a greater availability of sources, better source criticism and international debates helped eventually to give the iconoclasts a face, the main reason why it has took so long for the image-breakers to lose their anonymity was that it was in no one’s interest to identify the culprits. For centuries, Protestants considered the iconoclasm an embarrassment, and preferred to dismiss its perpetrators as ‘ra... Mehr ...
Verfasser: | |
---|---|
Dokumenttyp: | Artikel |
Erscheinungsdatum: | 2016 |
Verlag/Hrsg.: |
Koninklijk Nederlands Historisch Genootschap
|
Schlagwörter: | Iconoclastic Fury / Iconoclasm / History / Low Countries / Belgium |
Sprache: | Englisch |
Permalink: | https://search.fid-benelux.de/Record/base-28939297 |
Datenquelle: | BASE; Originalkatalog |
Powered By: | BASE |
Link(s) : | https://bmgn-lchr.nl/article/view/6431 |
This article asks why until the mid-twentieth century both Catholic and Protestant interpretations of the iconoclasm converged on the anonymising of the iconoclasts of 1566. It argues that, while a greater availability of sources, better source criticism and international debates helped eventually to give the iconoclasts a face, the main reason why it has took so long for the image-breakers to lose their anonymity was that it was in no one’s interest to identify the culprits. For centuries, Protestants considered the iconoclasm an embarrassment, and preferred to dismiss its perpetrators as ‘rabble’, while Catholics in the Southern Netherlands tended to dismiss them as foreigers, manipulated by the nobility. Their anonymity was lifted through the intervention of German historian Erich Kuttner, whose main thesis was proven wrong, but at last triggered serious research into the identity of the iconoclasts, as well as alternative explanations of their motives. This article is part of the special issue 'Beeldenstorm'. ‘Iconoclasts Anonymous’. Waarom duurde het zo lang voordat historici de beeldenstormers van 1566 identificeerden?Dit artikel werpt de vraag op waarom zowel katholieke als protestantse geschiedschrijvers tot de tweede helft van de twintigste eeuw zo weinig belangstelling hadden voor de identiteit van de beeldenstormers van 1566. Hoewel bredere beschikbaarheid van bronnenmateriaal, betere bronnenkritiek en internationale debatten uiteindelijk hielpen om de beeldenstormers een gezicht te kunnen geven, betoogt dit artikel dat het eeuwenlang vooral in niemands belang was om de daders te identificeren. Protestanten vonden de herinnering aan de Beeldenstorm erg pijnlijk en maakten daarom anoniem arm ‘gespuis’ tot zondebok, terwijl katholieken in de Zuidelijke Nederlanden ze het liefst wegzetten als de buitenlandse werktuigen van opstandige edellieden. Hun anonimiteit werd opgeheven door de interventie van de Duitse historicus Erich Kuttner, wiens interpretatie weliswaar niet houdbaar bleek, maar wiens werk wel ...