期刊名称：Bijdragen en Mededelingen betreffende de Geschiedenis der Nederlanden
印刷版ISSN：0165-0505
电子版ISSN：2211-2898
出版年度：2016
卷号：131
期号：1
页码：1-22
DOI：10.18352/bmgn-lchr.10184
出版社：Koninklijk Nederlands Historisch Genootschap
摘要：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.
