Urban History, Page 1 of 24 © Cambridge University Press 2018 doi:10.1017/S0963926818000561 The great rebuilding of Amsterdam (1521–1578) ∗ GABRI VAN TUSSENBROEK Heritage Department of the Municipality of Amsterdam, Herengracht 482, 1017 ES Amsterdam, the Netherlands/University of Amsterdam, Faculty of Humanities, Dept of Art History, Turfdraagsterpad 15–17, 1012 XT Amsterdam, the Netherlands abstract: In 1452, approximately three-quarters of Amsterdam was destroyed by fire. Despite attempts by the city government to encourage citizens tobuild using brick and pan tiles, the city was mainly rebuilt with timber-framed buildings. Only in 1521 did petrification of Amsterdam’s buildings gradually start to become more widespread, coinciding with an enormous increase in the total number of houses. The great rebuilding of Amsterdam led to a sustainable renewal of the housing stock, of which some houses have survived to the present day. This article investigates the reasons for the delay in building with brick, based on building archaeological research, bylaws and investigation of the 1562 tax register. It shows the mechanisms of transforming a wooden city into a brick one and reveals the effects on living conditions in the final stages of the rebuilding process inthe sixteenth century. Introduction Over the years, the emergence and growth of cities in the Low Countries has been discussed in detail in many publications.1 Political events, economic change and catastrophes affected expansion; once cities had reached a certain size, changes occurred in spatial planning, early timber buildings were gradually turned into stone ones, buildings increased in height and as settlements prospered, more differentiated functions arose. ∗ I would like to thank Heidi Deneweth, Clé Lesger and Ivan Kisjes for their support during the work on this article. I would also like to thank the two anonymous peer reviewers for their supportive and helpful comments on an earlier version of this article. 1 E. Taverne and I. Visser (eds.), Stedebouw. De geschiedenis van de stad in de Nederlanden van 1500 tot heden (Nijmegen, 1993); R. Rutte and J.E. Abrahamse, Atlas of the Dutch Urban Landscape. A Millennium of Spatial Development (Bussum, 2014); R. Rutte en B. Vannieuwenhuyze, ‘Stadswording in de Lage Landen van de tiende tot vijftiende eeuw. Een overzicht aan de hand van vijfhonderd jaar ruimtelijke inrichting’, Bulletin Koninklijke Nederlandse Oudheidkundige Bond, 113 (2014), 113–31; K.A.-M. Zweerink, Ruimtelijke transformaties van de steden in het Randstadgebied (12de–20ste eeuw). Een vergelijkende analyse van de stadsplattegronden (Delft, 2017). Cf. R. Rutte, ‘Historical atlases, urban monographs, and research on the spatial transformation of Dutch cities’, OverHolland, 8 (2009), 116–31. Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Amsterdam, on 09 Dec 2018 at 10:42:01, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0963926818000561 2 Urban History Cities were far from equal in this respect, however.2 Amsterdam’s case is a good illustration of this thesis, since – in the metropolitan landscape of the Low Countries – it was a relative latecomer in comparison to the other towns. Current historiography suggests that major urban fires were a driving force behind petrification processes as well as changes in layout and use.3 Almost without exception, disasters such as floods, hurricanes, earthquakes and fires have led to the immediate rebuilding of cities.4 However, the way in which social groups responded to disasters and organized reconstruction during different eras varied widely.5 Cities regulated private construction in their own way, aiming to reduce the risk of fire, conserve the layout of streets and promote architectural6 beauty. On top of that, the availability of building materials and issues such as the type of subsoil directly impacted construction techniques and structures, i.e. spatial solutions to the problem of reconstruction were differentiated by the natural environment.7 Alongside the physical evidence constituted by still extant late medieval houses, municipal bylaws are also considered an important category of sources for studying the petrification process.8 These bylaws provide a heterogeneous image. In some towns in the Netherlands, subsidies were granted for the use of non-flammable building materials as early as the fourteenth century. This was the case in Deventer (1339), Zutphen (1365), Utrecht (1368) and Arnhem (1386).9 In the west of the country, the petrification process seems to have taken place later, as the dates ofthe relevant bylaws from Rotterdam (1431), Leiden (1450), Amsterdam (1452), Dordrecht (after 1457), Harderwijk (1470) and Zierikzee (1485) reveal.10 In 2 G. Borger et al., ‘Twaalf eeuwen ruimtelijke transformatie in het westen van Nederland in zes kaartbeelden: landschap, bewoning en infrastructuur in 800, 1200, 1500, 1700, 1900 en 2000’, OverHolland, 10/11 (2011), 5–124. 3 C. Ferragud and J.V. García Marsilla, ‘The great fire of medieval Valencia (1447)’, Urban History, 43 (2016), 500–16; K. De Jonge, ‘“Stedenbouwkundige aspecten”. Verwoesting als motor voor de beheersing van de stedelijke ruimte in de Zuidelijke Nederlanden tot in de achttiende eeuw’, in Destruction et reconstruction de villes, du moyen âge a nos jours/ Verwoesting en wederopbouw van steden, van de Middeleeuwen tot heden. Actes/ handelingen, Gemeentekrediet, historische uitgaven in 8°, 100 (Brussels, 1999), 385–409. 4 D. Schott, ‘Katastrophen, Krisen und städtische Resilienz: Blicke in die Stadtgeschichte’, Informationen zur Raumentwicklung, 4 (2013), 297–308. 5 M. Körner (ed.), Stadtzerstörung und Wiederaufbau. Schlussbericht / Destruction and Reconstruction of Towns. Final Report / Destruction et reconstruction des villes. Rapport final (Bern, Stuttgart and Vienna, 2000), 80. 6 T.R. Slater and S.M.G. Pinto (eds.), Building Regulations and Urban Form, 1200–1900 (London and New York, 2018). 7 G. van Tussenbroek, ‘Timber-framed town houses in the northern Netherlands before 1600: construction and geographical distribution’, Vernacular Architecture, 48 (2017), 44–62. 8 H. Deneweth, ‘Building regulations and urban development in Antwerp and Bruges, 1200– 1700’, in Slater and Pinto (eds.), Building Regulations, 115–38. 9 G.M. de Meyer and E.W.F. van den Elzen, De verstening van Deventer. Huizen en mensen in de 14e eeuw (Groningen, 1982), 2. 10 R. Meischke, ‘Huizen en keuren’, in R. Meischke, De gotische bouwtraditie. Studies over opdrachtgevers en bouwmeesters in de Nederlanden (Amersfoort, 1988), 208–62, at 240; R. Tijs, Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. University of Amsterdam, on 09 Dec 2018 at 10:42:01, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0963926818000561 The great rebuilding of Amsterdam (1521–1578) 3 other cities in the west of the country, brick walls were only prescribed in the sixteenth century as was the case in Hoorn (1513), Schoonhoven (1518), Schiedam (1533), Breda (1534) and Den Briel (1548).11 In general, the petrification process in Dutch towns seems to have occurred fromthe east to the west (Figure 1). These sources are difficult to interpret because the preserved building fabric from this period has hardly ever been used as reference material in order to ascertain whether these bylaws were actually effective. Standards and practices have seldom been compared, so it is an unanswered question whether these written sources really reflect reality. Building archaeological and dendrochronological surveys in Amster- dam indicate that the bylaws did not, in fact, reflect reality. From the 1520s on, houses were renewed, whilst houses from before that year are virtually absent. After an earlier, smaller fire in 1421, three-quarters of Amsterdam was subsequently destroyed in a large fire that started on 25 May 1452 (Figure 2). Alongside an unknown number of houses, 14 monasteries were affected and the New Church, the Chapel of the Heilige Stede and the town hall also suffered damage.12 Various sources indicate that the fire was devastating. Rental contracts were revised13 and, perturbed by the events in Amsterdam, the municipality of Leiden immediately banned wooden façades from their city and provided grants to this end.14 In order to support Amsterdam in repairing the damage, Duke Philip the Good granted the citizens of Amsterdam a tax exemption,15 on condition that the city’s houses be rebuilt with side walls of brick and hard roofing, instead of hazardous reeds, while a bylaw dated 31 May 1452 prohibited the construction of timber side walls and thatched roofs.16 Although the rebuilding may well have started directly after the fire was extinguished, there are hardly any houses to be found in Amsterdam that Tot Cieraet deser Stadt. Bouwtrant en bouwbeleid te Antwerpen van de middeleeuwen tot heden. Een cultuurhistorische studie over de bouwtrant en de ontwikkeling van het stedebouwkundig beleid te Antwerpen van de 13de tot de 20ste eeuw (Antwerp, 1993), 100. 11 Tijs, Tot Cieraet deser Stadt, 100. 12 B. Speet, ‘Verstening, verdichting en vergroting’, in M. Carasso-Kok (ed.), Geschiedenis van Amsterdam tot 1578. Een stad uit het niets (Amsterdam, 2004), 74–107, at 88. 13 J.C. Breen, ‘Topographische geschiedenis van den Dam te Amsterdam’, Jaarboek Amstelodamum, 7 (1909), 99–196, at 113; J.F.M. Sterck, De Heilige Stede in de geschiedenis van Amsterdam (Amsterdam,