Downloaded from Brill.Com09/30/2021 10:57:49AM Via Free Access Chapter 7 1566: the Beeldenstorm and Its Aftermath

Ruben Suykerbuyk - 9789004433106 Downloaded from Brill.com09/30/2021 10:57:49AM via free access Chapter 7 1566: The Beeldenstorm and Its Aftermath Destructions and Descriptions Because of their defiantly Catholic character, sacrament houses became one of the primary targets of the violent iconoclastic attacks of 1566.1 Many of the magnificent examples that had been con- structed after 1520 were dramatically torn down, giving rise to both vivid and horrifying descriptions by contemporaries. In his descrip- tion of the first phase of iconoclasm in the Low Countries (between 10 and 20 August 1566, in the Flemish Westkwartier), Marcus van Vaernewijck narrates with awe how an army of around 3000 members travelled in small gangs from village to village and destroyed the interior of every church they crossed on their path.2 One of the gangs went to the ‘rich and very powerful Abbey of the Dunes (…) where they broke the sacrament house made of marble, touchstone and alabaster, which had been commissioned by the previous abbot [Robert II Leclercq]’ (fig. 122).3 A stone fragment of a Last Supper (fig. 126) that has been identified as coming from the structure illus- trates how the iconoclasts went about: the figures were meticulously deprived of their heads and hands, just like at so many other places where representations of human figures were disarmed of their po- tentially most dangerous, i.e. recognizable and speaking features. The sacrament house that was donated by Andries Seys in Ghent and built between 1553 and 1555 befell the same fate. In his diary, merchant Cornelis van Campene described its destruction and emphasized that it had been ‘donated shortly before’.4 These examples should caution against a too univocal interpretation of the Beeldenstorm as nothing more than a destruction of the religious Figure 127, detail material culture of a preceding, medieval era that was definitively Anonymous, Man in over. The demolition of these imposing structures made as clear a Geuzen costume, with statement as their donation had only a few years before. Authors medal, The Hague, such as Van Campene and Van Vaernewijck still knew the names of Nationaal Archief, prominent donors, and several of them or their close relatives must Collectie Handschriften have been still alive when these large-scale destructions took place. van het voormalige Moreover, objects in churches often were directly linked to the pri- Rijksarchief in vate lives of donors, such as the epitaphs of Strijrode and Spieken in Zuid-Holland, 3.22.01.02, inv. 1462 © Ruben Suykerbuyk, 2020 | doi:10.1163/9789004433106_009 This is an open access chapter distributed under the terms of the CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license. Ruben Suykerbuyk - 9789004433106 Downloaded from Brill.com09/30/2021 10:57:49AM via free access 242 Chapter 7 Figure 126 Anonymous, Fragment of a Last Supper from the sacrament house, c. 1540–1565, Koksijde, Abdijmuseum Ten Duinen photo: Lambert J. Derenette Zoutleeuw. All of this adds a very personal touch to the iconoclastic attacks. The same goes for the creators of these objects, because even the most recent works, made by artists that were still alive, were subjected to fierce attacks during the Wonderyear. Throughout his Schilder-Boeck (1604), Karel van Mander gives many examples of paintings that he ranked among the most artful creations of the mid-sixteenth century that were ‘smashed by desecrating hands, to the distress of Art, by fierce stupidity’.5 Such was the case with a large altarpiece painted by Pieter Aertsen for a church in Warmenhuizen, near Alkmaar in Holland. Van Mander writes that a prominent lady from Alkmaar tried to prevent the triptych’s destruction by offering 100 pounds, but ‘just when it was taken out of the church to hand it over to her, the peasants furiously threw themselves on it and anni- hilated the beautiful art’.6 Our knowledge of Aertsen’s religious oeuvre is limited, which in part is certainly the result of the large-scale destructions in the various sixteenth-century waves of iconoclasm. Van Mander even recounts that it drove the painter ‘beside himself with despair that the things he meant to leave the world in memory were nullified like that’.7 But Aertsen was of course far from the only artist who wit- nessed his production being devastated. Frans Floris is another case in point, with regard to whom it has even been suggested that the psychological shock caused by the sight of his own artworks being Ruben Suykerbuyk - 9789004433106 Downloaded from Brill.com09/30/2021 10:57:49AM via free access 1566: The Beeldenstorm and Its Aftermath 243 destroyed might well explain his diminished output after 1566.8 One of his absolute masterpieces must have been the Assumption of the Virgin, on which he worked from 1561 to 1564, for the high altar of the church of Our Lady in his hometown Antwerp, which at the time had only recently been elevated to the rank of cathe- dral. Just like Aertsen’s altarpieces, this work was allegedly severely damaged when iconoclasts ransacked the church on 20 August 1566. Reporting that it was broken into pieces, Van Mander especially praised the work’s composition, while an anonymous chronicler mostly deplored its artful and costly character.9 In Zoutleeuw, on the contrary, Floris’ and Aertsen’s creations were spared. And although sacrament houses were violently attacked by iconoclasts all over the Low Countries, the structure in Zoutleeuw remained standing. How was this possible? While research on the so-called Wonderyear (spring 1566–spring 1567) has largely focused on Protestant action or governmental reaction, this chapter argues that local Catholic agency was of equally vital importance during this period.10 The Wonderyear: Facts and Theories 1566 saw the convergence of a number of slumbering tensions. A broad resistance against the harshness of the central government’s heresy laws was joined by the nobility’s and political elites’ profound discontent with King Philip II’s centralizing politics. This combina- tion created the unique political and religious climate that would characterize the Wonderyear.11 The traditional starting point is 5 April 1566, when over 200 armed members of the confederate less- er nobility organized a march on Brussels and presented governess Margaret of Parma with a petition to abolish the Inquisition and sus- pend the edicts against heresy. The overall tone of the text was mod- erate and loyal, but the action in itself was absolutely revolutionary.12 Many inhabitants of the Habsburg Low Countries were hopeful, but tensions immediately ran high and in cities such as Antwerp and Brussels a permanent watch was installed. From this point onwards, the events became international news and foreign observers kept close track of the developments in the Low Countries.13 Governess Margaret of Parma panicked and proclaimed a moderation a few days later, in anticipation of an official answer from King Philip II. This apparent tolerance was soon misinterpreted, and inhabitants who had been banned for religious reasons in previous years now re- turned to their home country. Shortly after, Calvinists came out into Ruben Suykerbuyk - 9789004433106 Downloaded from Brill.com09/30/2021 10:57:49AM via free access 244 Chapter 7 the open and organized massively attended hedge-preachings out- side many cities. These sermons gradually took on a militant tone, and were soon attended by an armed audience.14 Thus, during the summer of 1566, Calvinism grew rapidly from a persecuted under- ground church into a large, popular and increasingly well-organized movement. One such sermon was delivered on 10 August by Sebastiaan Matte in Steenvoorde (Flanders). Matte urged the crowd to break the images and other religious objects in the nearby convent of Saint Lawrence, which was ritually celebrating its patron saint’s day with a procession. This particular event is traditionally identified as the start of the Beeldenstorm: in the week following Matte’s sermon, many sacred places in the Westkwartier in the south-west of the County of Flanders were attacked by wandering bands of iconoclasts under the guidance of Calvinist preachers. The intense iconoclastic attacks in Antwerp on 20 August were a crucial turning point, since they functioned as a catalyst for further destruction. Important cities such as Ghent and Tournai soon followed, and the fury spread to Holland, before finally reaching the northernmost provinces in September and October 1566 (compare with map 5).15 The interpretation of these iconoclastic events has evolved sig- nificantly over time. The most notorious view is probably that of Marxist historian Erich Kuttner, who analyzed the Beeldenstorm as a dramatic expression of class struggle, identifying slumbering socio- economic tensions as its main trigger. His methods and interpretation of the events were soon met with fierce criticism, but other economic readings were still advocated afterwards.16 Herman Van der Wee, for example, made a crucial and nuancing contribution to the debate by pointing to the essential role of the middle-classes. As a result of both economic and climatologic factors, their prosper- ity was threatened quite suddenly during the early 1560s, which Van der Wee interpreted as an important push-factor towards Calvinist teachings.17 These economic interpretations were able to account for the arising of unrest, but they cannot explain the particular actions and the form they took.18 Iconoclasm was no haphazard vandal- ism, but instead targeted specific objects, such as sacrament houses, and was symbolically charged, as the many mock trials against images illustrate. Furthermore, the example of Aertsen’s altarpiece in Warmenhuizen demonstrates that iconoclasts refused sums of money, and that at other places they would rather urinate into sacred vessels instead of stealing and selling them.

Load more