Noordnederlandse kunstl525 -1580 a m s t e r d a m Kunst

Noordnederlandse k u n s t l 5 2 5 - 1 5 8 0 RIJ K St MUSEUM
am s erda m
Kunst
XdenstoA-^

6®

CO Redactie
=3 J. P. Filedt Kok
CUO W. Halsema-Kubes
_o W. Th. Kloek

•+(X->5

03
O

M e t i n l e i d i n g e n d o o r / w i t h introductions by
B. D u b b e en W. H . V r o o m
David Freedberg
J . R . J . v a n A s p e r e n d e B o e r , M. F a r i e s e n J . P. F i l e d t K o k

Staatsuitgeverij

' s-g r a Ven h a g e

69

Artandiconoclasm, 1525-1580
The case of the Northern Netherlands

David Freedberg

1 T h e o r y : the question of images Christianity (a fact which appealed to the Reformers
of the sixteenth century), but they were rehearsed
By 1525 the main lines ofthe argument about in an infinitude of variations throughout the great
images that was to torment Europe for the rest of Byzantine iconoclastic controversy of the eighth
the century were already firmly drawn. The con- and ninth centuries.® The arguments against images
sequences of the argument had their epicentre in included the notion that since God and Christ wer'e
the Netherlands; but the rumblings and tremors divine and uncircumscrlbable, It was impossible -
would be felt In areas that covered a vast radius, or s a c r i l e g i o u s - t o attempt to represent them In
from the northernmost reaches of Scandinavia to material and circumscribed form; that the very
the straits of Gibraltar and Messina, from the British materiality of the image led to a variety of forms of
Isles In the West to Magyar Hungary and onward concupiscence of the senses; that devotion to
into the Balkans In the East.' Almost everyone now images in some way obstructed real and direct
acknowledges that If there was any single phenome- devotion to saints; that one was dangerously liable
non that may be said to mark the commencement to confuse image with prototype, to venerate the
of the Revolt of the Netherlands, It was the great image itself, rather than what it represented; that It
Iconoclastic events of August, September and was better to have the living image of Christ and his
October 1556.^ But it is all too often forgotten that saints In one's mind and heart than to make dead
the real target of these events - however they may images of them; and so on.^ The most telling argu-
be explained in terms of social, religious and econo- ments in their favour, In the early days, were these:
mic motives-were Images: paintings, sculptures, one could have Images precisely because ofthe
stained glass, prints; and that in the very period incarnation of Christ. The fact that he was made
covered by this exhibition (but especially in the incarnate enabled one to make real Images of him.
second and third quarters of 1565) the long-stan- The honour paid to an image referred directly back
ding arguments about the use and validity of Ima- to its prototype,® and finally - as Gregory the Great
ges, both In the churches and outside them, had was to put it a little l a t e r - Images were the books of
come to a sudden and threatening head. This is the the illiterate.' Those who could not read would
critical background to the present exhibition, along learn the scriptures and the mysteries ofthe faith
with a further equally revealing but in fact more by seeing them represented around them. It would
painful Issue: What actually happened to the Images be hard to overrate the historical significance of this
in 1566 and in the sporadic outbursts of Iconoclasm particular argument. Then, in the middle ages, the
in the 1570s, and why were they attacked? three-fold notion that images served to instruct,
From the very beginning of the century until his edify and strengthen the memory was emphasized
death in 1534, Erasmus expressed some ofthe and elaborated;'" so was the ultimately platonlc
most pertinent aspects ofthe problem ofthe use of idea that the material sign could help the ordinary
both secular and sacred Imagery. Like many others, human mind to ascend to the spiritual."
he criticized provocative imagery and nudity In art; But at the same time the feeling grew that images
he objected to drunken or riotous behaviour in the could be abused. Not only were they improperly
presence of images (especially on saints' days and used for financial gain, they also proliferated exces-
other religious festivals);^ he was gravely concerned sively, rather like relics. Too much money was
about the exploltalon of paintings and sculptures spent on paintings and sculptures rather than
for gain (in the same way that holy relics were investing in the real images of God, the living poor.'^
exploited); and he had deep reservations about the It was just these arguments, with additions, refine-
way in which images were allowed to come in the ments and satirical adornments that were to be
way of more direct relations between man and God. repeated over and over again throughout the six-
It was preferable to pray to him and to implore him teenth century, from the highest to the lowest
without the mediation of Images, relics, and saints levels. In the great princely and royal courts and in
in general.^ In these respects Erasmus was no the humblest sermons. To us, many of these argu-
different from many other Christian humanists: he ments may seem technical and theological, but it is
had no real wish to break with Catholicism, though not hard to imaglae their crucial relevance In an age
he saw the abuses of the established Church and of when criticism ofthe malpractices ofthe church led
its ministers all too clearly. But his criticism was swiftly to much more fundamental christological
firmer in its overall moral stance while at the same and ontological issues. The practical side of these
time more benign and genial. It was more learned, momentous questions was embodied in the
better articulated and more widely read - despite church's use of religious imagery-which ranged so
the persistent but unsuccessful attempts to sup- visibly from sumptuous adornment to the cheaply
press his works. More serious and substantive propagandlstic, from unimaginably splendid altar-
allegations than these, however, were made by the pieces to scruffy broadsheets. And the issues came
three great reformers, as well as by a host of minor to a head In the periodic outbursts of iconoclasm,
and usually more virulent writers, like Andreas from isolated acts in the first two decades of the
Bodenstein von Karlstadt In Wittenberg and Ludwig sixteenth century to the great German and Swiss
Hatzer, the Mennonlte from Zurich.^ The basic movements of the twenties and thirties, the English
arguments against images - especially religious and Scottish one of the forties, the occasional
images - were old. They dated to the days of early French ones of the fifties and early sixties, and the

70

culminating cataclysm of the Netlierlandish expe- took place throughout the German-speaking coun- the absurd multiplication of relics, and in some
riences of 1556. Of all tlie great reformers, Luther tries; and following the final removal of images from cases the problem was identical; he challenged his
was the most benign on the subject of images. He readers to consider how many paintings they knew
was horrified by the outbreal< on iconoclasm instiga- Zurich churches in the previous year, Huldrych to have been reputedly painted by St. Luke, and
ted by his follower Andreas Bodenstein von Karl- pointed to devotions to images of clearly apocry-
stadt in Wittenberg in 1522. For Luther, the key Zwingli gave his views on images most fully in Ein phal saints. How could images which were so mis-
text from the Decalogue Thou shalt not make unto leading serve as books of the illiterate? Or so unbe-
thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing Antwort, Valentin CompargegebenlCompar's coming? After all, prostitutes in their bordellos were
that is in heaven above or that is in the earth often more decently attired than images of the
beneath, or that is in the water under the earth' was initial critique of Zwingli's views is unfortunately Virgin in the temples of the Papists. Christian ima-
to be understood as part of the first commandment, ges-worship had become no better than pagan
and was to be taken specifically in conjunction with now lost). The great Swiss reformer was far less image worship. Men and women could only be
the insistence that Thou shalt have no other God misled by the sensual materiality of images; better
before me'. But in his catechetical writings, and in sanguine about images than Luther, and his views to hear and to attend to the pure word of God.
subsequent Lutheran catechisms the injunction on These kinds of views were not only disseminated
graven images was, in fact, omitted. Whereas for about them were perhaps to be most influential of throughout the Netherlands by the early 1560s,
men like Karlstadt, the first commandment implied they were also reproduced and modified - either
that one should have no images in churches (or, for all for the future development of the reformation.
that matter, in private houses), Luther's primary substantially or only very s l i g h t l y - i n any number of
concern was with the abuse of religious imagery. For him, as for the other Swiss reformers, the treatises and sermons. I have concentrated on
He saw the positive use of illustration both in biblical Decalogue comprised the full biblical text, and thus them because it was precisely these writers who
and in other texts, as a means of instructing the included the whole of the injunction against graven informed and stimulated all the others. But let us
faithful; he was tolerant of religious imagery in images. examine the Netherlandish situation, especially the
churches (although he preferred narrative subjects North Netherlandish situation, at closer quarters.
to devotional ones), and he does not seem to have But in the Ansv^er to Valentin Compar, Zwingli For the whole period we have been examining the
worried too much about secular forms of imagery, assembled his views into a massive indictment problem of images was not only topical but crucial;
whether public or private.'^ against representational art. Men were not suppo- by the time resentment against the Spanish Catho-
What he did object to was the excessive money lic regime came to a boiling-point in the early
spent on adorning churches, and the motives for sed either to worship or to serve images. There 1560s, the image question had reached its most
doing so - such as the assumption that the more critical stage too. It provided every one of those
expensive the material image, the higher the spiri- were far too many of them in churches and in pri- travelling preachers^' who purveyed the doctrines
tual reward. This kind of implicit belief roused the of Luther, Zwingli or Calvin in one form or another
full force of Luther's ire; it was self-evidently better vate places. They led directly to idolatry. Instead of with a target that may have been theoretical and
to spend one's money on clothing the poor.'" From worshipping God, men worshipped strange gods, theological at fts core but was all too visible and
his earliest writings on, Luther returned to these Abgotter. Images were external, material phenome- mutely assailable in every corner of the Nether-
issues, which one might generally subsume under na, leading to false belief, and therefore were no lands. If Erasmus's criticism of the use of images
the problem of the relationship between the proper grew out of his characteristically keen observation
use of images and their abuse. The latter was tanta- more than idols, Gotzen. They were not to be tolera- of their misuse, and of people'sfolly in investingtoo
mount to idolatry. In addition to the issues noted much in them both spiritually and economically,
above, which he began to adumbrate in 1514-15, ted, unless they were strictly confined to the narra- there were other writers in the Netheriands whose
Luther soon made it clear that everyday Christian criticism were considerably more severe and whose
practice had come to lay too much emphasis on the tive representation of historical events. In Eine arguments agreed with the main lines of Reformed
cult of saints at the expense of man's direct rela- kurze christliche Einleitung{A brief Christian thought. In the course of the 1520s, the anonymous
tionship with God. This relationship, between image Introduction), Zwingli had said that these were author of pamphlet Van den Propheet Baruch
worship and the cult of saints, would recur with allowed outside churches, so long as they did not took the apocryphal prophet Baruch's attacks on
increasing intensity throughout the century. Ima- give rise to reverence; but for ecclesiastical, liturgi- the idolatry of the Babylonians as the pretext for a
ges, as he repeatedly reminded his readers, were in sustained and passionate attack on what he saw as
the end no more than mere wood and stone. The cal, and any kind of spiritual purpose they were the idolatry of his own times. He did not mince his
fullest discussion of images comes in the tract words, transforming a basically Lutheran outlook
Wider die himmlischen Propheten von Biidern entirely irrelevant, if not downright idolatrous. into something much more vehement; 'Ende en is
und Sakramenten {Against the heavenly Prop- When the images were finally removed from the niet een groote sotheyt, dat yemant meyndt dat die
hets in the matter of Images and Sacraments) of churches of Zurich, Zwingli rejoiced in the beauty of heylighen gheerne souden hebben dat men haer
1524-25, where Luther takes his clearest stance on their whiteness.'® beelden besocht, die houte ende steenen
the use of images for the purposes of remembrance zijn....Daer wort nu alsoo groote affgoderije mede
and better understanding of the scriptures, and The views of Luther and Zwingli were taken up and ghedaen, als oyt metten afgoden der Heyde-
where he insists that if there were to be any icono- modified by a host of other reformed writers inclu- nen....Ende nu si doot zijn, soo besoectmense, soo
clasm, it had better be carried out in an orderly behangtmense met silver gout ende fluweel, ende
fashion, and by order of the proper authorities.'^ ding Melanchthon, Bugenhagen, Oecolampadius, costelicken cleynodien.als si dies niet en behoeven.
The issue recurred in the most practical sense with Ende die ander levende arme heylighen, diet behoe-
the events of 1566 in the Netherlands. In 1525, the and Bullinger, to say,nothing of the lesser minds like ven, die laetmen naect ende bloot in hongher ende
very year of the completion of the Heavenly Prop- dorst gaen'.^^ ('Is it not great folly that someone
hets, the three 'Godless Painters' of N u r n b e r g - Karlstadt, Hatzer, Thomas Muntzer, Leo Jud and should suppose that the saints would be pleased to
Georg Pencz and Barthel and Sebald Beham - were any number of minor figures. There is no space to have their images visited, that are only wood and
expelled from the town for their radical Protestant go into the refinements - or the vulgarities - they stone....Even greater idolatry is now committed
sympathies, thus providing us with one of the ear- brought to bear on the great debate about images, than ever was the case with the idols of the Hea-
liest instances of the espousal by artists of views then....And now that the saints are dead we visit
which at first sight might seem wholly antithetical to but it is worth recalling them simply as further them, and adorn them with silver, gold and velvet
their calling.'^ In the same year Ludwig Hatzer and precious jewels - even though they do not need
published his radical and apparently very popular indices of the widespread dissemination, from one them. It is the other poor living saints who need
booklet against images entitled Ein Urteil Got- them, and whom we allow to go naked, hungry and
tes.... wie man sich mit alien gotzen und bildnus- corner of Europe to the other, of the kinds of views thirsty....'). Such blunt versions of well-known views
sen halten soil-, " isolated outbreaks of iconoclasm we have been outlining. Whether published in book would be repeated ad infinitum from one side of the
or in pamphlet form, whether heard in sermons in Netherlands to the other. We find them in the Dutch
the greatest churches, in barns, or in the open air,

few people, regardless of class, could have escaped

them; so that everyone had some sense of the

image question, and no one would have been left
untouched by the grand debate about their institu-
tional, spiritual, economic or even social status.
The last of the great reformers to write extensively
about images was Calvin. His key contribution to

the debate may well lie in his insistence that the

injunction against graven images in Exodus 20 and
Deuteronomy 5 was not only an integral part of the
Decalogue (contrary to Catholic and eariy Lutheran
thought) but constituted the substance of the
second commandment. For Calvin there was no

doubt about the biblical injunction against graven

images; and it remained universally valid." Calvin

was also more scathing and more satirical about
the uses and abuses of images, particularly religious
ones. He knew how to poke fun at the standard
Catholic justifications of religious imagery, including

the way in which early and only apparently authentic

documents and councils were used to bolster the

antiquity of the use of pictured images in churches.
The proliferation of images was as meretricious as

Artandiconoclasm

71

relation of BalthasarFriberger's tract on the become dangerously provocative. In the same year notions which people were hearing from local
as the apparance o f t h e Corte lnstruccye{m pastors, from travelling preachers or buying in
• nf 1524 " in the Lutheran Refutacie vant 1554), Jan Gerritsz. Versteghe (= Johannes Anasta- pamphlet form, they could not have missed them in
fSi hSt if oUr ow fatr hd ZewsIan mg l ieaynei samr -oaf tnh ed w, neltl hkenown sius Veluanus), the erstwhile pastor of Garderen, their other cultural manifestation either. Amongst
published the most radical and sustained attack on the most well-known mockers ofthe abuse of ima-
S e schoolmaster and writer, Wlllem Grapheus. images yet, in the book entitled Der Lel<en Wech- ges within the Catholic Church (usually in the form
wyser.^^ Hardly any time at all elapsed before it of a sniping anti-clericalism) were the 'rederijkers',
i n t e k i n g consolation form the wooden statues of was being eagerly bought In Harderwijk; the next whose plays and presentations abounded with
year it was translated from the Gelders dialect into negative references to images. Sometimes the
I n t s G r a p h e u s claimed, 'wlovertredendateerste Dutch, and new editions would appear with conside- sentiments they expressed were wholly Erasmian,
rable frequency between 1591 and 1532.^^ but as the century wore on, they became more
Tpbot gods, dat ons verblet alle vreemde Goden, But it is of course the early editions which interest direct and more scathing - despite the frequent
us here. The work could not have been more sca- placards, from the thirties on, which were issued in
trie dat we ooc geen gellckenlssen noch beelden thing in its condemnation of all Images, and In the an attempt to curbthelroutspokenness.^'All across
programmatic advocacy of their removal. People the Low Countries, but expecially in the South, they
I k e n en solden'Cwe break God's first command- who by then may have been contemplating the performed plays and recited poetry, often on grand
purification of churches to make them suitable for popular occasions like the 'Landjuweelen' In Ghent
ment that forbids all strange Gods and that we Protestant worship of one form or another would in 1539 and in Antwerp in 1561.^® Already in 1533
have found their manifesto in a work like this; and an Amsterdam Chamber of Rhetoricians was sen-
should not make any likenesses or images'). the unequivocal expression of hostility to the Catho- tenced to make a Roman pilgrimage for having
lic use of images would have given them courage, produced a play on the subject of Daniel and Bel
Much more violent notions are expressed in a support and - In all likelihood - a further pretext for (Daniel 14:2-21), with its trenchant reference to the
the destruction of Images. In the course of his book, destruction of idolatrous pagan images, and- -
C a l v i n i s t tract first published in Norwich in 1550: in Verstege was unsparing in his attack both on the perhaps more significantly at that time - to the
cult of saints and the use of image in perpetuating killing of the priests of Bel, in the form of the moc-
commenting on the daily superstition of Image- it. Not a single early church father, he maintained kery of contemporary clergy.^® Another Amsterdam
(wrongly), advocated that saints be honoured in this play, the Tafelspel van Drij Personagien of 1557,
worship, the author sarcastically observes that way; and he caustically observed that the Gregorian insisted that the greatest of all sins was idolatry and
dictum that paintings were the books ofthe illiterate the God put a curse on all those who made likenes-
•want die beelden so langhe als sy Inde beeltsnljders was invalid, since it was nowhere to be found In s e s , w h i l e in the following year the image question
scripture. But the main recommendation regarding was discussed in a dialogue between 'Godlljke
winckel zijn, so en connen sy geen miraculen doen, images in the Lel<en Wechwyserwere avowedly Wijse' ['Godly Sage'] and 'Weereltsche Gheleerde'
'evangelical' and wholly pragmatic: 'Wair dat gepre- ['Woridly Scholar'].'" The former maintained that
tot der tijt toe datse dese fijne ghesellen ghebrocht dlckte evangell nyt helpt, dar sullen gene beelden the image worshippers took away the honour rightly
helpen. 2 War dat evangeli angenomen & gelovet due to God alone by praying to blocks of gold,
hebben In haer hoerachtiche kercke, ende die wurt, dar zynt oick gene beelden nodlch. 3 War dat wood, silver, and stone; the latter rebuffed him by
evangeli nyt gepredickt wurt, dair zynt sie gantz recalling the Gregorian argument and by claiming
cruycen dewijie si zijn onder de goutsmltshanden, scadellcke affgoden. 4 War die beelden afgoden that the veneration of images with candles and so
zynt, dar sal men se uyt den Tempelen werpen on were merely outward signs; 'Godly Sage' accu-
so en is daer gheen heillcheyt in, maer alse dese ende verbranden. 5 Synt sie noch geen affgoden, sed 'Wordly Scholar' and his Ilk of deceiving the
nochtannlch ist nut, dat sie al uyt gewerpen unde world into blatant idolatry.''^ So much forthe Catho-
ypocriten die eens gevinghert hebben, dan moet- verbrandt werden, want sie kunnen ons nymmer lic and even the Erasmian stances....
baten, mar gering elendich schaden under grote In 1 5 6 2 , 1 5 6 4 and 1565, In the crucial years just
men die bonet daer voor at nemen ende die knien affgoden werden, als mennichmal is befonden in before iconoclasm, the Antwerp Chanjber of Rheto-
seer iamerlycke manyren.'^'' (Where the preaching ricians known as the 'Violieren' produced an Apostle
buyyghen, ende sy gaen daer achter bleetende ofthe Gospel does not help, no images will help play by Its subsequently well-known dean, Willem
either. Where the Gospel is accepted and believed, van Haecht. The play gives us some sense of the
ende crijschende achter haer valsche goden'.^®^ ('as no images are necessary. Where the Gospel is not climate of cultural disapprobation in which all art of
preached, they are pernicious Idols. Where images the Netherlands is to be placed in these years. It
long as images remain in the sculptor's workshop are Idols, they should be thrown out of the templen opens with a painter still busy painting the set. A
and burnt. Even If they are not idols, it is right to Calvinist appears, and petulantly tells him that he is
they cannot do any miracles, until the time that throw them out and burn them, since they can wasting his time making pictures forbidden by God;
never help us and only wreak pernicious damage they were all Idols.^^ The painter responds by saying
these fine fellows have brought them into the who- and become great Idols, as has often happened in that the Calvinist had misunderstood the prohibi-
very bad ways.) One could hardly imagine a better tion: it pertained only to the adoration of images,
rish church; the same applies to the cmclfixes in the rallylng-cry for all those who wished to purify the and not to their use as decoration. If they were
churches and make them fit for the preaching of adored or worshipped he would rather they were
goldsmiths shop, when they have no holiness In God's word. destroyed. But God must have given him his talents
for some purpose, and there were always the cases
them; but as soon as these hypocrites finger them, Versteghe put the sentiment with rather disinge- of Bazaleel and Oholiab, the Cherubim on the Ark,
nuous fervour: 'Ditallesdiepangemerckt, isna and the Brazen Serpent as precedents for divinely
they take off their bonnets and kneel and bow myn kleyne verstant nyt wel muegelick, dat rechte sanctioned artisitc activity.'"' There were worse
evangellsche herten, in den gereformierden Tem- forms of idolatry than images, such as greed. All
before them, and they go bleating and screaming plen, noch aide grove gotzen laten biyven, off this, as van Haecht himself acknowledged, was
nyuwen laten maken muegen'.^® (Taking all this consistent with the Lutheran attitude on images;
after their false gods'). In his Apologia of vant deeply Into consideration, it just does not seem and he made his own position on the matter clear
possible to my limited understanding that truly when he named his Calvinist protagonist - whose
schouwenderafgoderije of about 1545, the evangelical hearts could allow all the gross Idols to position on the subject was somewhat overdrawn -
stay or have new ones made'). The best thing would 'Vernuft en Blind' ('Ingenious and B l i n d ' ) . W e may
Anabaptist Dirk Philipsz. attacked the service of be to limit the decoration of churches to the writing pause for a moment to consider at least one of the
of edifying proverbs on the walls (in large letters), or most significant implications of van Haecht's play.
idolatrous images by drawing paralles from the Old to leave them completely white.Everything else The guilds most closely associated with the Cham-
was popish, Babylonian abuse. If these were the
Testament, such as the destruction of idols by

Josiahand Elijah.^'

Parallels like these were frequently to be drawn,
from now on until well after the iconoclasm of
1566, and especially those which demonstrated -
as. for example, the Josiah story was taken to do -
the rightfulness of the removal of images by official
and lawful authorities,^® These views were common-
place. If one could not read them, one could be
sure to hear them in the sermons o f t h e ministers. If
the attitudes of AngelusMemla, the attractively
broad-minded priest from Heenvllet are only known
from his Verantwoordingot 1553 (images could
serve as the 'libri idiotamm', but the money spent
on them was better spent on the poor),^' then we
also know that the Dordrecht priest Marinus Evers-
waert was obliged to renounce before his former
parishioners the view 'dat de beelden der Heiligen
anders niets doen dan de kerken versieren, gelijk tin
toper, metaal of ander hulsraad het huis ver-
siert'Cthat the statues of the saints do nothing but
aecorate the churches just as tin, copper, metal,
and other household materials decorate the hou-
e.) The next year Cornells van der Heyden publls-

M his Carte Instruccye ende Onderwijs in
Which he expressed views almost as moderate as
nose of Merula; his concern, like that of Erasmus,

Z u' than with their abuse. One

"ould neither misbehave like Turks, heathen and

exnrtT procession, nor

adorp th times of danger, nor

issue w ' T ' ' ® ' ® ' ' ® ' ^ o s t e n t a t i o u s l y . T h e

Damnh, ! ® but as the Norwich
P^'^Phlet suggests, it threatened at any point to





74 Artandlcsnocl

already a crowd had gathered in front ofthe church, uren voormiddach, als alle de ambachtslieden verdestrueert dat niet dan een Romp was over-
and with a cry of 'Vivent les gueux', assailed its gewoon sijn naer maeltijt te gaan' ('As a result of gebleven' ('the remaining ornaments and adorn-
images. Within a few hours the images in the three this warning, one could see the clergy in the street, ments which could previously be seen in this
parish churches, five cloisters and a beguinage had carrying all their jewels out of the church, such as church, and with which it was so shiningly adorned,
been destroyed. The high altarpiece ofthe abbey chalices, ciboria and vestments for the mass; this consisted of sumptuous altars, outstanding pain-
was saved as a result of the intervention of the mainly took place around 11 o'clock in the morning, tings and pictures, precious stained glass, magnifi-
magistrate. Then the iconoclasts moved to the when the craftsmen were accustomed to go to their cent organs and so on. Most of these were des-
Arnemuiden, and set about their worl< with the help meals.')." What happened here, as in many other troyed, ruined, and damaged in the outbreaks of
of members o f t h e local population. From IVIiddel- places, was that attempts were made to remove iconoclasm. The High Altar of this church was so
burg and from Vlissingen iconoclasts spread out, and hide the best works of art; but by now it was to assulted and destroyed in the fury that only the
and left a trail of destruction over the whole of the little avail. core of it survived.').®®
island of Walcheren." The chain of events is entirely
typical. A large group of men and women had gathered in In Utrecht iconoclasm was immediately preceded
the Nieuwe Kerk, but there, fortunately, 'veel goede by two characteristic events: first by the Protes-
In Breda the destruction was terrible; and here, in burgers hebben met veel goede woorden het voick tants' demand for places of worship of their own;
the cry of a prominent citizen as he led the uut de kerck gekregen en de kerck vast toegesloten' and second by a sermon just outside the town
iconoclasts in the Church of Our Lady, we have ('by means of many good words a number of good gates, here by a preacher called 'Scheie Gerrif.
some measure of the pitch of sentiment against citizens got the people out of their church, and When members ofthe reformed party met, they
images: 'Smijt alles uit dit pesthuis naar buiten' closed the church shut.').'® The Oude Kerk, on the agreed that 'de afgriselijckheyt van de beelden'
(Throw everything from this plague-house outside'). other hand, suffered badly. There a grain-carrier ('the frightfulness of the images') should be remo-
And then they destroyed the images according to called Jasper took exception to an inscription on a ved from the churches, but promised to deposit
an apparently predetermined plan.'" As for 's-Her- glass panel; 'siet daer hanct in dat glasen bordeken these and other treasures in the Town Hall.®'The
togenbosch, we have considerable evidence for the dat gruwelicke en godlasteriicke gedicht' ('look - official Investigation (of 1567) into the events of
activity, from the end of July on, of a preacher there's a horrible and blasphemous poem hanging these days - here as elsewhere - provides us with
called Cornelis van Diest. There were attempts to on that glass plate.'), he exclaimed, and smashed it ample evidence of the widespread and often impe-
stop him, but he nevertheless managed to enter the to the ground." Upon hearing the noise a group of tuously violent destruction in the town.®® It also
gates and began preaching. Almost immediately youths started throwing stones at the paintings and provides insight into one ofthe many personal
afterwards, on the evening of 22 August, a group sculptures, and began to pull them down. Fortuna- casualties of those days, in its prolonged investiga-
gathered in St. Jans; they sang a psalm in front of tely, some pictures had already been removed from tion into the stance and action of Adriaen de Wael
the rood screen; and then began to smash the the church. The 'schutters' were sent there, but the van Vronensteyn. Despite his repeated (and appa-
images until the 'schutters' finally arrived and imagebreaking grew more fiery yet. Finally the rently justified) insistence that he adhered to the
closed the church. Much was thereby saved. But iconoclasts were appeased, and the church was Old Faith, and despite his attempts to moderate
the remaining churches and cloisters were severely closed.®" On 2 September, as elsewhere in the iconoclastic activity, he was finally executed. In St.
hit, and on 24 August the first sermon was held in country, an official placard arrived from Brussels (it Gertrude's, for example - where there is definite
the purified Cathedral. Still the reformed party was was dated 25 August!) forbidding further icono- evidence of an attempt at systematic and complete
not satisfied, and they demanded four more chapels clasm under pain of death and confiscation, and destruction - he angrily shouted at those icono-
for their services. As in so many places the storm insisting on the immediate repair of the churches clasts who were trying to break some windows
was soon stilled; at least for a while, since when the and their furnishings.®' (presumably with painted glass): 'Ghy schelmen,
townspeople heard ofthe possibility ofthe introduc- wat wilt dij doen? Dat en sijn ymmers gheen beel-
tion of the inquisition there, a renewed and really But the lull was only temporary. Further violent den' ('you rascals, what do you want to do? They
remorseless outbreal< of iconoclasm swept throught assaults on images followed later in the month. On aren't pictures after all.').®' A vigorous altercation
the churches and cloisters of the town.'® 26 September,'the cloister of the Friars Minor was ensued - but the glass was saved. There was much
In Amsterdam there had been a large number of attacked 'met een wonderlijcke furie' ('with astonis- else that he managed to save, including the vaulting
sermons, and the situation was so tense that Brede- hing f u r y ' ) , w h i l e on the next day the Carthusian ofthe church itself. Since it had figures ofthe apost-
rode urgently requested Orange to come to the monastery was similarly invaded. But there, after les painted on it, De Wael tried another approach:
town and put it in order. On the very next morning destroying some glass pictures and books, the 'Wat wilt ghij doen? Laet staen, men sel een schilder
(23 August) a group of merchants appeared in front crowd was persuaded to go home.®® Here as elsew- comen ende laten die beelden uutstrijcken' ('What
of the Stocl< Exchange in the Warmoesstraat with here the Friars Minor suffered particularly, for do you want to do? Leave it alone, we will have a
several pieces of marble and alabaster, purportedly reasons that are still not entirely clear, but possibly painter come and paint the images out'); and was
from some of the freshly destroyed altarpieces in because of their close association with the town successful.'" But Utrecht suffered badly, and the
Antwerp Cathedral. Not surprisingly, this alarmed government and their reported role in the investiga- iconoclasts did their work in the Buurkerk, the
the burgomasters, who immediately instructed the tion of heresy. Mariakerk, St. Nicholas's, St. Gertrude's, the clois-
clergy of the Nieuwe Kerkto remove and hide as ters of the Dominicans and the Friars Minor-and
much as they could of their church furnishings.'® In Delft women were in the forefront of the attack probably St. James's t o o . "
Much of our evidence for the events of these days on the Minderbroeders,®" but there the Oude - and Iconoclasm in Leiden on 25 August was almost as
comes from the eyewitness account of Laurens the N ieuwe Kerk were most gravely at risk. I mages frenzied and as random. A few days earlier the local
Jacobsz. Reael, who, despite his Protestant sympa- that had not been spirited away in time were des- rhetoricians had publicly derided the use of images,
thies and the likelihood that he was actually present troyed, although in the Nieuwe Kerk the magistrate and when the iconoclasts got started, men, women
at the onset of at least iconoclastic outburst himself, filally managed to persuade the Iconoclasts to stop, and children apparently ran in and out ofthe chur-
made no bones of his deep antipathy to the wanton and to prevent them from burning the objects they ches to the cry of 'ook hier moet gebeuren wat
violence of the iconoclasts and - indeed - to the had dragged to the market-place.®® The overall elders geschied is' ('what has happened elsewhere
whole process of destruction. This apparently result of these two horrifying waves of iconoclasm, must be done here too').'^ Although St. Peter's was
inconsistent stance is characteristic of the authors however, was to deprive the churches of town of put under armed guard in the nick of time, the
of any number of contemporary accounts; but it is their most significant furnishings - and especially church of Our Lady, St. Pancras, and even the
entirely consistent with that strand of Erasmian the pictures, organs, and glass. As van Bleyswijck chapter house of St. Pancras were attacked; so, as
thought that we find in Reael himself and in so many was to comment ofthe Oude Kerk one century later: usual, were the Friars Minor. In many places -
other of the leading figures in the drama of those 'De resterende Ornamenten en Cieraden die in probably m o s t - t h e f t of objects from the ransacked
days. Here is Reael's graphic description o f t h e dese Kerck wel eer aenschouwt ende gesien weerde churches was expressly forbidden (whether by the
removal of precious objects for safekeeping: 'Door en waer mede sy aldermeest pronckte ende verciert preachers, the local nobleman, or the organizers of
dese waerschouwinge sach men de geestelijcke was bestonden in overprachtige Altaren, uytne- the iconoclasts); but here in Leiden, although the
persoonen bij de straet geloopen, dragende uut de mende Schilderyen en Tafereelen, kostelijke Council does appear to have allowed guilds and
kerckalle haerjuwelen, als kelcken, ciboria en geschilderde Glasen, magnifycke Orgalen en soo families to remove their altars and paintings to
misgewaden: dit geschiede principael ontrent 11 voorts alle meest in de Beeld-stormeryen vernielt, safety,'^ parts of altars and other church furnishings
geruyneert of geschonden; het hooge Autaer dese
Kerke was in de furie soodanigen aengetast ende





nnrr
77

• •furious','stupid','crazy','senseless','hostile ning wing (now one of the chief glories of the Kunst- in Utrecht.'®^ How it got there we may only guess;
historisches Museum In Vienna) was sawn in two but fortunately It survives in the Parish Church of
rt' 'wild' 'blind','riotous') and so on and so and could be seen In the Hall of the Knights of St, Bingen (see vol. I, fig. 258). The following passage
John of Jerusalem.'''^ The Regular Canons outside in the life of Blocklandt gives one a poignant sense
137 It is not at all surprising to find the rueful Haarlem also owned some works by Geertgen ofthe difficulty of coming to an adequate assess-
(unfortunately unspecified by van Mander), and ment of the work of artists like him, given the effects
; L i o n that many of the works by Pleter Aertsen these too were destroyed, either by soldiers or by of iconoclasm:' Dese schoon dinghen zijn meest
the iconoclasts.""' door blinden Ijver en onverstandlghe raserije in de
l i r e destroyed 'tot jammer der kunst door het oproerlghe Beeldtstorminghe vernielt, en door
All this in a town which, as we have seen, was one of Barbarischen handen den ooghen der Const-lieven-
! L t onverstandf ('a tragic loss to art through the few usually assumed to have been free from den naecomers berooft soo datter weynich is over-
iconoclasm. The doubt as to whether works were ghebleven' ('These beautiful things were mostly
Taving stupidity').'^® Amongst these was the High lost In 1566 or as a result of later military deprada- destroyed by blind zeal and stupid violence in the
tions is entirely characteristic - and justified. One riotous iconoclasm, and stolen from the eyes of
Altar of the NIeuwe Kerk in Amsterdam, with a cannot always attribute loss or destruction to the art-loving posterity by barbaric hands, to such an
dramatic days of 1566. Then there were other extent that very little has remained').'®' For all Its
A/af/V/fyon the centre panel and an Annunciation. disasters, like the great fire of 1576, in which many bluntness of tone, the passage may stand as a
paintings by Jan Mostaert were said to have been motto for the present essay and, Indeed, for the
Circumcision ar^d Adoration ofthe magion the lost.'''® It Is not only our picture of sixteenth century exhibition as a whole.
wings^ a Martyrdom of St. Catherine was appa- Netherlandish painting that is seriously mutilated
because of the events of these years; our view of Its We now know that the destruction was not always
rently'represented on the reverse. Delft had been fifteenth century predecessors is equally deficient, 'barbarisch' and 'onverstandigh'; indeed van Man-
forthe same sad reason. der records with barely veiled pride how many
particularly rich in works by Aertsen: the Carthusian In Amsterdam van Mander records the loss of works were saved, both In the North and South
Jacob Cornellsz. van Oostsanen's apparently very Netherlands, These Included Cornells Enge-
monastery had a Cmc/f/x/ontriptych by him, with a beautiful Descent from the cross as well as the brechtsz, Marlenpoel alterpieces, which were
same artist's Seven works ofmercytrom the spirited away to the safety of the Town Hall In
Nativity and an Adoration ofthe magi on the Oude Kerk (some fragments he reported to have Leiden (and hung too high, according to van Man-
seen at the home of Cornells Suycker in Haar- der, to be properly appreciated).'®" But by the
wings and Four evangelists on the exterior; while lem).'^® Equally distressing was the loss - save one large, as we have seen, he goes to elaborate
small fragment to be seen In the Doelen - of Dirk lengths, despite his Protestant affiliations, to dis-
the Nieuwe Kerk had an Adoration ofthe magi on Barentsz. Fali ofthe rebel angels 'met veelderley tance himself from the acts of the iconoclasts. So
naeckten, seer uytnemende ghehandelt' ('with do the later local chroniclers who supplement the
the High Altar, with an Ecce Homo 'en soo yet many kinds of nudes, really outstandingly done') Information provided by van Mander. Unfortunately
(cat. 250)"", to say nothing of Anthonis Block- we do have to depend on seventeenth century
anders' on the wlngs.'^' All, according to van Man- landt's altarpiece of The death and burial of St. sources for this kind of specific information. Only
Francis, which disappeared from the church o f t h e rarely are there found archival documents like the
der, were lost; but It is worth nothing that two of the Friars Minor.'''® All this lost in addition to the works proud and unusually specific one of around 1568
of Aertsen cited above, to the grave loss of Heems- describing the paintings by Mabuse formerly on the
Evangelists from Delft altarpiece survive (Prinsen- kerck's paintings, and several works by Jan van High Altar of the Abbey of Middelburg;'®® and there
Scorel. are no equivalents in the North to the remarkable
hof. Delft), along with an Adoration ofthe magi contemporary account by Marcus van Vaernewljck
Scorel, Heemskerckand Blocklandt are three of the of Ghent, who provides us with so much first-hand
and a fragment ofthe Nativity (cat. 230-31 and major figures In this exhibition whose work was information about destruction and saving in the
seriously decimated by iconoclasm. So was Jan Southern Netheriands in 1 5 6 6 . W e do of course
229). Vermeyen, whose paintings in Brussels - and espe- have some less specific contemporary chroniclers,
cially In St. Gudule - were either destroyed or like Reael, but they are not, on the whole, especially
Yet another Crucifixion a\tarp\sce by Aertsen used removed 'doord'uytsinnighe beeldstormlnghe' ('by Interested In art. By the time we come to Oudenho-
the mad iconoclasm').''" With Scorel, van Mander ven's 1649 Beschryvlnghe derstadt ende meye-
to be in Warmenhuysen in North Holland, and this is records the loss of some of his prime works in the rye van 's-Hertogenbosch, however, the informa-
following way: 'Maer dat te beclaghen is veel zijn tion is valuable indeed. Thus he records in detail the
what happened to it: 'Dit werck als A° 1566. t'ghe- ander dinghen, t'Crucifix t'Amsterdam, de schoon loss of a number of works by HIeronymus Bosch
deuren t'Utrecht In S. Marlen, oock een schoon and by Jan van Scorel from the St. John's church
meen in zijn raserije was, wiert in stucken geslaghen Tafel ter Goude, bij hem in zijnen besondersten there,'®' and we no longer rub our eyes when we
Tijdt en Fleurghedaen, werden A° 1566 van het read how the unusual high altarpiece by Bosch was
met bijlen, alhoewel de Vrouw van Sonneveldt ontslnnighe ghemeen ghebroken en verbrandt, met replaced by the Ten Commandments written in
noch veel meerfraey dinghen' ('But what is lamen- gold letters.'®® Bythe time Oudenhoven was wri-
t'Alckmaer daer voor boodt 100. pondt: want table is the fact that many of his other works - the ting, this is just the sort of thing that was happening
Crucifixion in Amsterdam, the beautiful wings in St. in England, on much larger scale, and forthe
alsooment uyt de Kerck bracht om haer te leveren Mary's in Utrecht, as well as a beautiful panel In second time in a hundred years.'®'
Gouda, done by him in his very best period and at Dirck van Bleyswijk is the other seventeenth century
vielen de Boeren als uytsinnigh daer op en brachten the height of his abilities - were smashed and bur- town chronicler who provides us with a considera-
ned in 1566 by the senseless common people, ble amount of information about Iconoclasm. In his
die schoon Const te n i e t . ( ' E v e n though the along with many more fine things').'®" In the case of Beschrljvinge der Stadt Delft of 1667 he not only
Blocklandt he is a little more specific: he laments excerpts a considerable amount from van Mander
window of Sonnevelt from Alkmaar offered 100 the loss of several beautiful altarpleces in Delft but also draws on a number of contemporary docu-
including the one mentioned above; but he is mista- ments and records to which he had gained access.
pounds for It, this work was smashed to pieces with ken in recording the loss of the outstanding Martyr- Thus he provides details of the way In which a
dom of St. Jamestmm Gouda, since it is still significant number of ornaments, silver and metal-
axes when the people were raving in 1566; for preserved In the same town (Fig. 7).'®' Then he ware were saved from the churches and cloisters of
goes on to note that there was a large altarpiece of the town,'®" and on occasion he is even able to
when it was being brought from the church to the Assumption ofthe Virgin at the home of correct van Mander - as in his insistence that the
'Jofvrouw van Honthorst dlcht achter den Dom' painting by Pleter Aertsen mentioned by Van Man-
deliver it to her, the peasants mindlessly fell upon it ('Jofrouw van Honthorst just behind the Cathedral')

and brought the beautiful work of art to nothing'.)

Although it may well have been part of Van Man-

der's 'programme' to stress the opposition between

culture (as represented by painting) and non-cultu-

re, the sequence of events is one that we may

recognize from contemporary chronicles. No won-

der that van Mander tells how Aertsen despaired

and dangerously lost his temper with the icono-

clasts: 'Pleter was dickwils ongeduldigh dat zijn

dinghen die hij de Weerelt tot gedachtnis meenden

laten, soo te meten wierden ghebracht, ghebruyc-

kende dickwils met sulcke Const-vijandlghe groote

woorden tot sijn eyghen ghevaer oft perijckel.'

i'Pieter was frequently angry that the works which

he had intended to leave to the world for posterity

were thus brought to nothing, and he frequently

used strong words with these enemies of art to his

own danger and peril.') Aertsen must have been

desperate when he saw what was happening to his

works - to say nothing of how he must have feared

or his livelihood in a country which at least momen-

arily appeared so hostile to art.

t was, of course, not only a matter of hostility, but

so of the general precarlousness and fragility of

ne Situation. Thus van Mander reports that after

ne surrender of Haarlem In 1572 the Spaniards

s t a r e d many of Heemskerck's works - already

mhly decimated by iconoclasm - 'onder decksel

^^n te willen coopen, en nae Spaengien geson-

( under the pretence of wishing to buy them

sent to Spain'); in the same town the great

form I " tot St. Jans, which had

destr^ over the high altar of St. John's, was

oyed, along with one of its wings. The remai-





80

chosen to represent the priests of Bel in the earlier of the sacraments and other aspects of Catholic dinary pertinence of the kinds of issues generated
series as tonsured monks: is this simply anti-cleri- devotion; above is the pope, surrounded by monks in the great debated around him, and in the
cal, or is it more tendentious than that - particularly and bishops, and fastooned with indulgences, cataclysmic events from which he suffered. They
in the light of the abundantly evident idolatry of rosaries and the like, while below the accoutre- are pertinent to our understanding of Dutch history,
these priests and their rightful overthrow?^"' Cer- ments ofthe liturgy (including many images) are pertinent to our understanding of Dutch art, and
tainly almost every one of these series contain being smashed to bits or carted away to destruc- pertinent to the very roots of the way in which we
scenes of the slaughter of idolatrous priests. These tion.^"' The second print shows the removal and think about all art. In the period between 1525 and
are not the only allusions to idolatry and to icono- destruction of images (in the left background), while 1580 every doubt that had ever been raised about
clasm in Heemskerck'swork; there are a number on the right a devil carries the cross and other the artistic endeavour was aired and then subjected
more. And yet for 22 years before he died in 1574 Catholic insignia ('want alle dees cremekie hoort to the most critical scrutiny imaginable. Every
Heemskerck was churchwarden of St. Bavo's in den duyvel toe' ('because all this stuff belongs to aspect of the validity and the worth of art was
Haarlem;^°2 in the Clades ludaeorum series he the devil') reads the inscription). Below the devil, raised and raised again; it was debated, discussed
represented the destruction of the Temples of monks and bishops worship the pope as the whore and argued, in countless treatises, sermons and
Jerusalem by Nebuzaradan again by Titus (destruc- of Babylon seated atop a seven-headed beast on an polemics. In The Netherlands these momentous
tion by enemies of the true religion);^"® and he was a l t a r . O n e assumes there must have been many debates coincided with extraordinary social and
a close friend of Dirck Volckertsz. Coornhert, who others like these; but unfortunately we are left with political pressures, to culminate in a brief but fierce
more than anyone else appears to have staved off the more ambiguous kinds of imagery. Perhaps it assault on images. What resulted, astonishingly,
serious iconoclasm in Haarlem.™ Could it be that was simply safer to leave the matter ambiguous; or was not resignation and defeat, but rather a sustai-
in prints like these Heemskerck was not acctually perhaps it was the effectiveness of the censors that ned and extraordinarily imaginative reevaluation of
advocating the destruction of images, but rather eliminated the more explicit and the more blatantly the Dutch artistic tradition. If ever there was a
suggesting that if the churches were to be purified, subversive visual commentaries. period that testifies most eloquently to commit-
then the process should only be carried out at the There is one artist in whom all these questions ment in the face of criticism it is this one. One might
behest of the rightful authorities - an idea that is come together - and yet remain elusively and have thought that the controversies about images
frequent not only in the major Reformation writers, frustratingly unanswered: Pieter Aertsen. Despite would wither the roots of art, or that iconoclasm
but also in Coornhert himself.^"® One of the most the attention devoted to him in the last fifteen years would remove the evidence of its growth; but that
striking features of all the prints noted above is the - most notably by Jan Emmens - the whole ques- did not happen at all. Not only did art survive; it
emphasis on the presence of the ruler (or the prop- tion of how it is that Aertsen came to paint his flourished. It built innovatively on the past and
het) at each ofthe major iconoclastic events. But remarkable kitchen and genre-pieces (of. cat. 225- prepared the way for a magnificently inventive
whether this puts these images closer to Catholic 28) has still not been entirely resolved.™ One can future. But it would be wrong to see the period
attitudes or rather to those of Luther or Calvin must do no more than speculate on the possibility that at between 1525 and 1580 solely in terms of transi-
still remain unclear. The most likely possibility is least part ofthe motivation (quite possibly uncons- tion: its achievements, as this exhibition so elo-
that the stance is to be aligned with that broad cious) may have been as a result of impatience with quently testifies, stand wholly on their own.
Erasmian strain in Dutch culture to which we have traditional forms of religious art; and that the moti-
already alluded. We now know, as a result of the vation may well have sprung from the influence of ' T h e only general survey still remains the
work of lija Veldman that if there was any artist at Protestant ideas about such forms and their func- unsatisfactory and superficial book by
this time who might be called humanist - both in tions.^'" But we cannot know the answers to these Von Vegh 1915. For more recent
the narrow and the broad senses - it was Heems- questions until we have more biographical imforma- attempts at different kinds of overview,
kerck;^"® and in this respect we may well want to tion (especially concerning the reasons for his see Freedberg 1977 and Freedberg 1986,
come to similar conclusions as those which Mie- return from Antwerp to Amsterdam in 1556) and as well as the excellent selection of essays
dema arrived at in the case of the vastly different further insight into the kinds of works he produced in Warnke 1973.
objects in Oosterend and HardenA/ijk. For all that, after 1566, when commissions for altarpieces were
there is certainly a strong sense in these works by dramatically limited. Certainly we know of his deep ^ Scheerder 1974 provides a sound but all
Heemskerck of the potential idolatrousness - at and unsurprising exasperation at the destruction of too brief general survey. De Jong 1974
least - of images. If there were any images of the his works in that year and after.^^' But what are we provides a good summary in a small
sixteenth century which seem to be making a state- to make o f t h e wholly suprising painting of The compass. F'or good assessments of the
ment in favour of iconoclasm it is these; could it be idolatry of Nebuchadnezzar m'H in Rotterdam general problems and issues involved,
that the artist is here only insisting on the right way (Fig. 20)?^'^ Here is a work which shows the massive see Dierickx 1966, Freedberg 1973 and
of going about it? and clearly idolatrous image erected by the King of the excellent study by Duke/Kolff 1969,
Babylon, while in the background, unmistakably, which although comparatively local gives
It will be apparent from the abundance of questions are the three holy children - Shadrach, Meshach the reader the best possible impression
raised here how difficult it is to come to specific and Abednego - who were prepared to die for their of the main historiographic and sociolo-
conclusions either about particular attitudes or opposition to the idol which so offensively domina- gical issues.
about the precise nature ofthe relationship ted the scene and is so grossly venerated there.
between topical issues and subject matter. If any- It is hard to imagine how the topical significance of ' On these particular aspects of Erasmus'
thing, this is simply an indication of the richly the scene could have gone unnoticed by anyone in criticism, with the relevant sources, see
textured context of thought about images and their the Netherlands in the years covered by this exhibi- Freedberg 1971.
value during the whole period covered by the exhibi- tion (and the same subject was also represented in
tion. If it were easier to unravel single strands then print by Heemskerck);^'" but we are still left with '' F o r t h e s e a n d o t h e r aspects of E r a s m u s '
the fabric would be less rich than it palpably is, and the puzzle of how more precisely a work such as attitude to art, see, inter alia, Giese 1935,
one would be less given to insist on the importance this would have been read and for whom it could p. 257-79, Panofsky 1969, p. 200-27, and
of viewing all images of the period in the context we have been painted. Perhaps it would be as well not Moxey 1977A,p. 122-26.
have been describing. There are of course a number push the possibility of topical reference too tar,
of images of a polemical or satirical nature whose since exactly the same subject was painted by " For the best overview of the reformation
import in not unclear at all; but these - perhaps Aertsen's son, Pieter Pietersz., for the Haarlem debate, see Von Campenhausen 1960.
interestingly - seen to come mostly from the Sou- Guild of Bakers (cat. 229) - for whom the subject K a r l s t a d t ' s Von Abtuhung der Bilder (Wit-
thern Netherlands. It may simply be a question of was oddly, indeed perversely, appropriate - in t e n b e r g , 1522) is available in t h e e d i t i o n
survival, but one looks in vain for prints like Marcus 1575.^'® But those were different times... by H. Lietzmann (Bonn, 1911). For Hat-
Gheeraerts' remarkable Allegory of iconoclasm We still know too little about Pieter Aertsen. His z e r a n d his 1525 b o o k l e t e n t i t l e d Ein
(Fig. 18) or the engraving of 1566 headed " t isal work seems to pose in acute form many of the Urteil Gottes....wie man sich mit alien gotzen
verloren, ghebeden oft ghescheten; ick heb de questions suggested in this last section of our und bildnussen halten soli, see n . 17 b e l o w .
beste canse ghestreken, 1566' (Fig. 19). The first discussion. Even if the case of Aertsen fails to
shows a monstrous face-like landscape, on which provide the answers, no one could deny the extraor- ® The literature on Byzantine iconoclasm
are scattered a variety of scenes showing the abuse is now vast. A good c o m p e n d i u m of
information, with a useful bibliography
and selection of texts is p r o v i d e d by
Bryer/Herrin 1977.

' For the best discussions of these argu-
ments, see Von Campenhausen 1952,
and Kitzinger 1954.

' T h e argument comes of course form St.
Basil, a n d is to be f o u n d in t h e c o u r s e of
his discussion of the essential unity of the
T r i n i t y in t h e De Sptritu Sancto, X V I I l , 4 5





83

^,,K,eyi,„ens-article, as for example, on X-shaped cuts to the eyes and mouths. I derstadRu mersivaal, M i d d e l b u r g , S t a d s a r -
tj' am grateful to Jan Piet Filedt Kok for chief. No. 84. fo. 173; published inMesia-
drawing my attention to this aspect of the ger des sciences historiques, 29 (1855). p.
11" pKK.lle2e0iijj.nn2ttj7ej ene"st'c11. 99e33tc:; ,. p. 6 - 7 . 43. tl fe of painting's history and to the Toledo 416 and more recently in cat. exhib.
111 a in b e r o f m c i , p. 44-4 6 for ho ak (Ohio) Museum of Art for letting me Rotterdam-Brugge. 1965, p. 38L
libers of the s e m have copies ofthe relevant material. In the manuscript now in the library of
'2'-' F u r t h e r discussion of this issue in F r e e d - the University of Ghent (MS.G. 2469),
lis guild- i j c ' "i l935, p . -'l- berg 1986, p. 27-33 and n. 95-99. available as Van de beroerlicke tijden in de
Kleijn iiithe.se plac For further discussion of these aspects of Nederlanden en voornamelijk in Ghendt
e s are neatly iconoclasm, see Freedberg 1986. 1566-68, in V a n \ ' a e r n e w i j c k e d . 1872-
For the fate and fortune of Lucas's trip- 81; and as Van Vaernewljck ed. 1905.
in Theevents iScheerder 1974, p. 87-89. tych during this period, see Rammelman- Perhaps the most spectacular of his
Elsevier 1875. p. 75-76; Dulberg I899A. accounts of the saving of a work of art is
suininarizeci i I. u. 537-39, forwhat he I. p. 33-34; and. above all. Hermesdorf that concerning the Ghent altarpiece.
[e.a. I 1978. p. 325-30, p. 401, n. 58-60 but he also alludes, for example, to the
. 538 'de s r atestantise- (with an important consideration o f t h e painting by Gossaert mentioned in the
ormen van validity of a g r o u p of documents about its previous note (albeit in rather vague
van de N o o r• d n e d e r l a n d s ep etensknech- movement in 1566-77). and p. 411 Docs. terms) and refers to the devastadon in '
van1 d e br ut aa ls te v I and 2 (instructions and payments in Northern places like Leiden.
r i n g .een eidst e rr eu re ii 1577). I n c l u d i n g an Adoration of the magi a n d a
lerh ,v Siege and attack ofBethulia bv Bosch; a n d a
'•'2 For t h e history of t h e r e s t o r a t i o n s a n d Creation of the World with a David and
ling. cheerderl974,p.92. For the final removal of the paint covering Abigail a n d a Solomon and his mother Baths-
God the Father (already detected but not heba (surprisingly on t h e H i g h Altar) also
i' Quoted 1 ,rf«7«flrinMaastr cht, completely 'freed' in or around 1806). by Bosch; a n d a Criicifixion{on t h e altar of
more on the i 101-208 ('Maastr cht see the comprehensive documentation in Saints Peter and Paul) by J a n van Scorel;
Baxl941.II,p. Hermesdorf [e.a. | 1978. p. 328-35 and Van O u d e n h o v e n 1649,' p. 25.
415-17 (restorers' report). Van Oudenhoven 1649, p. 25.
omstreekshetwonderjaar). Cited i n n . 124 above. As recorded, for example, in Phillips
Asquoted in Salomons 1985 p. 9. T h e For further examples, see Hermesdorf 1973, with visual evidence ofjust this
^est of this article (p. 179-90) prov des an [e.a.l. 1978, p. 402. n. 67. as well as Freed- p h e n o m e n o n in fig. 24a. 24b. 28.29a and
excellent short analvsis of the i se and berg 1982. with illustrations and discus- 29b.
sion.
subsidence ofthe particularly fierce Van Bleyswijck 1667. p. 167 and 250.
T h e main relevant source is, of course, Van Bleyswijck 1667. p. 249.
outburst of iconoclasm in this small wea- Het Leven der Doorluchtighe ^ederlandtsche Van Bleyswijck 1667. p. 247-48.
en Hooghduylsche Schilders p u b l i s h e d as fo. T h e r e f e r e n c e is to the g e o g r a p h e r
v i n g town in Netherlands-Limburg. 196-305 of Van Mander, but printed in George Braun; Van Bleyswijck 1667. p.
Alkmaar by Jacob de Meester for Pas- 249.
I- See Duke 1968. schier van Wes[t|busch of Haarlem.
For a sound recent overview of his life Van Blevswijck 1667. p. 250.
i« For the events in H a a r l e m a n d t h e role of (with the appropriate references to ear- Van Bleyswijck 1667. p. 168.
lier sources), see \'an Mander ed. 1973, F'or the commission and f o r t u n a of this
Coornhert. see especiallv Kleijntjens/ project, see Oosterbaan 1973. p. 32-36.
Becker p. 1 -134 ( r e p r o d u c i n g t h e d o c u - H, p. 297-306. F o r t h e Martyrdom of St. Oosterbaan 1973. p. 36-42 givesan excel-
Catherine of 1582 (but c o m m i s s i o n e d by lent anthology of contemporary and
ments of the official investigation and the Courtrai linen-weavers in 1581) still early descriptions ofthe magnificent
in St. Martin's in Courtrai, see Valentiner marble and alabaster altar.
proceedings against him in 1567), with 1931, p. 6-9, and no. 7, reproduced on pi. For Duncanus's book cf n. 44 above.
I. For more on the contents of this book
an excellent summary of his actions and As in Van Mander, fo. 2I0v, 2I3v. 224y, (and on its immediate context) see Freed-
244v. 254r and 254v - to take only a very berg 1973, p. 69-88. as well as Oosterbaan
attitudes on p. XI-XI\'. few ofthe many possible examples (which 1973. p. 157-59 (Oosterbaan also has an
include several o f t h e instances cited in excellent brief account of Duncanus's
I' In addition to the documents cited in the following notes). career on p. 150-63).
"" \'an Mander. fo. 244r. ' ' " F. S c h e n c k , De vetustissimo sacrarum imagi-
Kleijntjens/Becker, see the pages on the "" Ibidem. num usu in Ecclesia Christi catholica, A n t -
werp (1567); briefly discussed in Polman
relation between Coornhert's and the Van Mander, fo. 244y. 1932, p. 412-18. It'is perhaps worth
Ibidem. noting here that Schenck's was the last
iconoclastic position in Saunders 1978- '••2 V a n M a n d e r . fo. 2 4 7 r - a n d this a p a r t burial to be held in the Cathedral at
from 'al d'uytnemende constighe stucken L'trecht; and that on that occasion mem-
79. p. 80-83. die de rasende beeldtstorminge schand- bers of the Reformed community crowd
•" T h e characteristically copious testimon lijc heeft vernielt. so datter nu ter tijt niet into the building in order to sing their
veel van hier te Lande gevonden en wort', version ofthe psalms.
taken before them in eprinted in Van '....eene die oyerble\'en was is doorge- ' ' ' T h e e x t r a o r d i n a r y floods of w o r k s in
saeght en zijn nu twee schoon stucken tot defence of religiotis imagery — in a com-
Hoeck. p. 215-433. den C o m m a n d e u r in de sael van t'nieuw paratively s h o r t space of time - is discus-
ghebouw', Van Mander. fo. 206r. sed atsome length in Freedberg 1973, p.
Van Hoeck. p. 206-07. ith plenty of 'doch door den krijgh oft beeld-stormen 68-96 and 136-65; very briefly in Freed-
vernielt', Van Mander. fo. 206r. berg 1976, especially p. 28-29 and notes;
further evide ceon the foil g pages, "" Van Mander. fo. 229v. 'want zijn huys and usefully but summarily in Polman
d o e a f g h e b r e n d t is met d a t van h e m d a e r 1932, p. 409-18.
as. for example 1 p. 250 in overghebleven was'.
Van Mander. fo. 207v. In Miedema 1978 and Miedema 1980B.
-"-' Van Hoeck, p. 286. Van Mander. fo. 259y. I " Miedema 1978. p. 63.
'•t" V a n M a n d e r . fo. 254v.
See. for example. Kleijntjens/Van Cam- Van Mander. fo. 224v. Miedema 1978, p. 67 (p. 67-69 for the
Van Mander. fo. 236r. texts).
pen 1932 p. 244, which also reproduces Gouda, Museum St. Catherinagasthuis; Miedema 1978. p. 69. T h e New Testa-
Van Mander. fo. 254r. ment subjects may show a significant
the further instructions from the Utrecht Van Mander. fo. 254y. concentradon; they are (on the west side)
Van Mander. fo. 254r-254v. Christ entering ferusalem, Christ driving the
Schoul, u p o n receipt of Alva's missyve, to VanMander. fo. 210v. moneychangers from the Temple, Christ tea-
'....wert principalvck beclaecht een seer ching in the Temple-, (on t h e east side, in
the churchwardens of all the local chur- schoene ryckelycke tafel van de hoogen better chronological order) the .4«nwnoa-
outaer eertyts geschildert by Jasmyn tion. Nativity, Circumcision, a n d Resurrec-
ches. Mabuyze. daer hy vyffthien jaren over tion.
besich geweest hadde: dewelcke gerepu-
DeJongl957.p. 144. teert was to syne de schoenste schilderye Cf. Miedema 1978, p. 67-72, and fig.
van g e h e e l E u r o p a . . . . ' . Register Perpetueel 9-24.
° See. for example, the extraordinary case Miedema 1978, p. 71. For speculation

ofthe painting of the Ten Command-

ments in gold letters on a black g r o u n d

on the surface of a now lost Crucifixion by

Hugo van der Goes in St. [ames's in Bru-

ges. described bv Van M a n d e r . fo. 204v.

\ an Oudenhoven 1649. p. 25. reports

the replacement of a painting bv Bosch

on the High Altar of St. J o h n s in's Herto-

genbosch with the text o f t h e Decalogue

in large gold letters; a n d s^• o n a n d so

forth. It is p e r h a p s w o r t h recalling h e r e

how frequent were the recommendations

that figured imagery be replaced bv text,

as in the case o f t h e r e c o m m e n d a t i o n by

\ e r s t e g h e ( s e e p . 7 1 above) that if one '

had to have something on the walls, one

Should either have stories f r o m scripture,

or edifying savings in large letters ('off

alleen schone sprueken mit grote letteren

an die moeren laten schryven unde gar

«it sonder figuren laten blijven' BRN IV,

289)-which was much better.

Amsterdam. Rijksmusei no. 2815
each panel 101: ,54/,55 . Friedlar der

12'. ^ • n o . 55.

On the history a n d r e s t o r a t i o n of Th

eexxcreHllre"n' *t ^account inp oDhe pBt vr ucvhn. seKeopthsi

' appears from the photographs ofthe
painting in ts stripped state, which were
made by \\ " a m S u h r i n 1959. immedia-
telv before he n d e r t o o k restoration a n d
••epairs. T h e s e p h o t o g r a p h s she iw severe