Demographic Crisis (17th Century)

In the 17th century, demographic growth in Europe came to a halt. This stagnation was so significant and accompanied by such severe shocks that it can be described as a demographic crisis. This crisis was a persistent characteristic of 17th-century demographic history. Its cyclical recurrence interrupted population growth. These fluctuations cannot be explained by the emergence of new behavioral patterns, a decline in birth rates (birth control), or improved mortality rates (better living conditions).

The following three reasons are often cited to explain the demographic crisis: wars, food shortages, and plague.

The Thirty Years' War, the "world war" of its time, raged in the 17th century. The demographic consequences of war-related destruction were already known from earlier periods.

Some researchers believe that food shortages were the fundamental cause of the century's demographic problems. They argue that the main issue was the sharp increase in grain prices. This led to malnutrition, consumption of non-nutritious food, and high mobility, which in turn increased mortality rates. Other researchers attribute famines to climate change (the "Little Ice Age") rather than high grain prices. They point out that mortality rates were high even in areas where grain shipments could have provided relief (Provence, Normandy, Brittany), and that peak mortality occurred before grain price surges.

Others associate the demographic crisis with epidemics. The 17th century was marked by frequent recurrences of the plague; in Western Europe, it represented the last major era of the disease. Bubonic plague entered Europe via Mediterranean ships or Middle Eastern connections, with a mortality rate of 20%. The epidemic did not affect all families equally. In Hampton, in 1603, there were 119 deaths, 99 of which were due to plague. These victims came from 20% of the parish families, while half of the parish families were unaffected by the epidemic.

Although the plague did not discriminate by age, gender, or social status, it was observed that male victims outnumbered females. In 1600 and 1625, twice as many men died as women. Age distribution also showed significant differences, with a notable number of deaths occurring in childhood (from age five to adolescence). The proportion of victims among the poor was also higher. This was primarily due to the poor living conditions in slum areas (rats, fleas) and the lack of protective measures (such as isolation) available to the wealthy. Wealthy individuals often moved to rural estates before the epidemic reached their area. Those who stayed behind and became infected desperately tried to survive. Those who attempted to leave their homes were threatened with being shot. Food and drink, such as bread, meat, and wine, were thrown to them, often snatched up in desperation by others in the household. Families abandoned the sick, isolating them in a remote room.

Morals became polarized, with some indulging in excess while others turned to deep religious devotion. Measures against the epidemic included closing city gates and cleaning roads, as the movement of armies and merchants was a primary cause of disease spread. Before the 19th century, medicine was powerless against the plague. Although it could not yet be cured, its spread was eventually halted through proper food supplies, quarantine measures, and disinfection.

Overall, it is difficult to assess the role of the plague in halting population growth. The disappearance of the plague did not immediately reduce mortality rates. Between 1690 and 1715, new epidemics, such as dysentery, emerged. Dysentery alone reduced the population by 10% in just two years.

A new negative demographic trend also emerged in the 17th century: a decline in fertility. Before 1647, families had an average of 6.4 children, which dropped to 4.2 between 1647 and 1700 (in Colyton). This was attributed to the rapid rise in the age at marriage. Women in this area, who had already been marrying at a relatively late average age of 27, now married at 30.

In France and England, the average age at marriage exceeded 25 between 1600 and 1649. In Geneva, men married at an average age of 29.1, and women at 25. Late marriages had economic reasons, as young people sought financial independence and aimed to establish a foundation for it beforehand, which took time. In 1683, 83% of women aged 24–30 in the Caudine Valley were married; by 1716, this had dropped to 23%.

While we have considerable data on demographic changes outside Europe, attempting to draw a global overview remains futile.

Pierre Leon "Les crises démographiques et le role des peste" in Histore economique et soziale de monde, Tome 2., Paris, 1978 ford. Taubert Mariann