Jesus told Satan, "Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God." If christians assume Jesus had lived by that model, the only reasonable interpretations of such an inference are probably (1) that he read and followed the Hebrew scriptures obediently or (2) that he heard and followed the supernatural voice of God his Father.
Therefore, from a traditional point of view, reconstructing Christ's life in Nazareth could seem to put one heavily at risk of endorsing strong legalism and/or profound mysticism. I don't know the early fathers hardly at all, so I'm looking for help there, but I have heard from reliable sources that Martin Luther, for one, was staunchly opposed to both.
I'm just wondering if that's (partly) why christian scholarship has traditionally leaned on the term "silent years". What do you think? Seriously - am I imagining things?