How Amsterdam Recovered From a Deadly Outbreak — in 1665

Following an epidemic of bubonic plague that wiped out 10% of the population, Amsterdam’s economy
quickly rebounded, a new study shows.

By Feargus O'Sullivan

12:00 GMT+7, 14 tháng 4, 2021

headshot of Feargus O'Sullivan

Feargus O'Sullivan is a writer for CityLab in London, focused on European infrastructure, design and
urban governance.

(This is the first of three stories that look at how cities and their economies recovered from historic
epidemics.)

For two years in the mid-1600s, Amsterdam experienced a shock that may now seem familiar.

The city was ravaged by a deadly epidemic of bubonic plague. As graveyards in poorer districts started to
fill, the wealthy scattered to their country houses, while those that remained did their best to keep
healthy through social distancing. Sick people were banned from markets, inns and churches, while
infected houses warned off visitors with a sign hung outside — a bunch of straw tied with three bands.
These measures may have helped, but they weren’t enough to stop the plague. By the time the epidemic
petered out in 1665, the disease had claimed 24,000 Amsterdammers — around 10% of the population.

In percentage terms, Amsterdam’s brush with the plague was more deadly than anything coronavirus
has yet caused. But the experiences of the 17th century still uncomfortably echo those of many cities in
the 21st: a highly contagious disease stalling the economy, highlighting social inequality, restricting
travel and obligating citizens to curb their interactions with each other.

As some parts of the world tentatively enter the coronavirus recovery period, a new study examining
Amsterdam’s post-epidemic return to normality might also foreshadow what contemporary cities can
expect in the near future. By looking at the 17th century housing market, the study finds that prices did
indeed dip sharply as the economy floundered during the plague seasons. As death rates fell, however,
things stabilized with surprising speed, followed by a period of urban innovation that ultimately had
positive effects.

The study, which also examines the economic effect of cholera in 19th century Paris, complicates the
vision of how cities have been affected historically by epidemics. It shows that rather than being
waylaid, cities can actually prosper after serious health crises. They do so, the study suggests, partly
because the shock can force through changes that create better living conditions more conducive to
prosperity.