The power of the social framework: dissidence, morals and community after iconoclasm
2.7 Comparison and concluding remarks
The historiography on the iconoclasm of 1566 and the Wonderyear has illustrated its importance as a turning point in the political history of the Low Countries. Other studies have stressed the violence and the destructions of the rioters, the increased spread of the Reformed religion during the Wonderyear or the severe punishments for all kinds of dissidence that followed with the coming of Alva to the Netherlands. This chapter has focussed on the community of Ghent and illustrated the importance of civic peace as a shared value in times of religious and political strife.
Political confusion had a role in the societal dynamics as well. The confusion during the Wonderyear in Ghent lead to a limited form of religious co-existence in Ghent. Certain demands for restraint in the persecution of heretics had permeated the various political levels of the government and became more or less official during this period.333 But already before the semi-official acceptance of hedge preaching by the higher authorities, people with very different opinions on religious and theological matters had lived together in Ghent. From a Catholic viewpoint accepting heresy in the town or in a country was a great danger that would destabilize society. However, in practice more overarching values than doctrine seemed of importance for the continuation of civic life in Ghent.
Loyalty to the community and care for the poor, for example, were regarded highly. The
331 Soen, ‘De Reconciliatie van “Ketters” in de Zestiende-Eeuwse Nederlanden (1520-1590)’, 339; Pollmann, Catholic Identity and the Revolt of the Netherlands, 1520-1635.
332 Soen, ‘De Reconciliatie van “Ketters” in de Zestiende-Eeuwse Nederlanden (1520-1590)’, 349–50.
333 Pollmann, ‘Countering the Reformation in France and the Netherlands: Clerical Leadership and Catholic Violence 1560-1585’, 89. In the Netherlands this tolerance more or less entered politics from the bottom up.
line between what was heresy and what was not, was sometimes blurry. Anti-clericalism was widespread, and among traditional Christians in the Netherlands it was common to criticize abuses within the church. This made that reformed ideas were not as novel or shocking to Catholics as one might think. Because criticism was already part of the local Catholic tradition, the reformed ideas did not immediately polarize the people of Ghent, but simply added more options to the already colorful variety of religious practices.334
Of course, iconoclasm came as an enormous shock for the Catholic community. But as members of the Reformed Church tried to distance themselves of these destructions, those guilty of iconoclasm were treated differently from those who had dissident religious opinions. More often iconoclasts were described as outsiders of the community which helped to put the minds at rest as this meant the danger did not come from within.
It felt just that the destructive acts of marginal vandals had to be punished. The repression of people only because of their (heretical) ideas was another story. Although heresy was considered a problem, it was according to De Boer, not understood as an voluntarily attack. Furthermore, most people of Ghent had neighbours or family members who were attracted in some degree to the Reformed ideas. This made it emotionally harder for ordinary Catholics to support suppression of heresy. Furthermore persecution would break apart their community and familial ties more abruptly than the ideological differences seemed to do. Another factor that furthered a practical form of tolerance and stopped polarization between Catholics and Reform minded in Ghent was the policy of Alva. His uncompromising posture, the harsh treatment of dissidents judged by the Council of Blood and the annoying presence of Spanish soldiers were the cause of the Spanish yoke becoming the common enemy of most citizens of Ghent.335
The people of Ghent clearly had strong convictions about civic peace and about religion which they intended to follow even if the authorities gave different orders. The fact that their convictions seem to us un-confessional, ambiguous and even fluid, in the light of what happened later, does not mean that they were not strongly held opinions that actively guided the decisions of the men and women of Ghent. The composure of the citizens of Ghent in the 1560’s were in fact in line with Ghent’s rebellious past that was marked by many revolts against its sovereign prince. It was considered virtuous for the inhabitants of the Low Countries to revolt against the magistracy when they considered its policy corrupt. Passive obedience to contested local regulations was thus not the rule
334 This does not mean that there were no incidents between Protestants and Catholics during the Wonderyear.
Marnef has shown with the case of Antwerp that Catholics did take actions against the spread of Protestantism:
Marnef, ‘Multiconfessionalism in a Commercial Metropolis: The Case of 16th-Century Antwerp’, 78–80.
335 Pollmann, Catholic Identity and the Revolt of the Netherlands, 1520-1635, 89–90.
in Ghent.336 The rejection of a majority to defend the churches against iconoclasts or denounce heretical neighbours was an active choice. As long as the political context allowed for it, these local perspectives on community enabled to a certain extent religious co-existence.
The lack of a principled or legal basis for tolerance was the weakness of the relative freedom that dissidents enjoyed during the Wonderyear. The legal basis had started to fall away by the end of 1566. In the beginning of 1567, also the Ghent citizenry was put under pressure to officially align with the Catholic Church and the Law. Pragmatism seemed to be the most important motivation for the majority that yielded to these demands.
Ghent was not totally unique, but in other places in the Low countries other motivations and dynamics influenced the room for religious dissidents and the viewpoint of citizens on their community. Antwerp stood out in the Netherlands for the presence of large groups of religious dissidents. This was a direct result of Antwerp’s position as most important harbour and economic centre in Western Europe. Merchants from all over the world set foot here. The magistracy of Antwerp made active efforts to limit the persecution of Calvinists and Lutherans in order to not hinder trade. Also the growing middle group that had ideas that fluctuated between Catholicism and Protestantism pushed the city towards a more open policy. Marnef, who focussed in his study mainly on the political achievements, has argued that also here, the Wonderyear became an experiment of religious co-existence. However, on the local field he saw mainly an increase of tension. In fact, he claims that it were mainly the antagonisms between the various religions that impeded the multi-confessional try-out. Although, there were also in Ghent unfriendly encounters and clashes between Catholics and Reformed - as we will discuss further in this thesis- there seems to have been less polarization among the Ghent citizenry.337
In Lille, the reaction to the spread of the Reformation and the coming of iconoclasm was very different from Anwerp and Ghent. Lille had been relatively early, in the 1550’s, a centre for Calvinism. The famous preacher Guy de Brès boasted about the boldness with which could be preached in Lille. He also tried to set up a Reformed hierarchy in Lille and preached the Calvinist faith in other cities as well. By 1561, Protestant preachings were extremely popular and attracted up to one thousand listeners. But as Protestantism became more popular especially in neighbouring textile villages where up to one third of the population was said to be Protestant, the Lille magistracy, fearing social and political
336 Van Bruaene, ‘A Breakdown of Civic Community? Civic Traditions, Voluntary Associations and the Ghent Calvinist Regime (1577-84)’, 276; Boone and Prak, ‘Rulers, Patricians, and Burghers: The Great and the Little Traditions of Urban Revolt in the Low Countries’.
troubles in their city, took more measures against the spread of heresy. When the news of iconoclastic riots reached Lille in the summer of 1566, the magistrate immediately took precautions and was able to prevent destructions within the city walls. Even though there were sympathisants of the Reformed religion and iconoclasm in Lille, something the aldermen were very aware of, Lille presented itself as an orthodox Catholic town. Some of its citizens even attacked an individual man who they believed to be an iconoclast and brought him to the provincial governor begging him to execute justice. As there was no proof of this, he was set free. These actions don’t just reveal the state of alarm among the population, but also a sense of conviction and value of community that was more clearly linked with Catholicism than it was in Ghent.338
Lille’s position thus resembled more places in France where violence between the adherents of the different confessions was very common. In Antwerp, Ghent and other areas in the Netherlands were not as high. Pollmann has explained this by pointing to the difference in attitudes of the clergy.339
338 Duplessis, Lille and the Dutch Revolt. Urban Stability in an Era of Revolution 1500-1582, 175–83, 212–19.
339 Pollmann, ‘Countering the Reformation in France and the Netherlands: Clerical Leadership and Catholic Violence 1560-1585’, 83–88, 117–20. France is an exception. In the sixteenth century biconfessional cities could be found in Germany, Poland, Bohemia and Moravia. The role of the clergy in Ghent will be discussed in the following chapters.