Atlas van België, Blad 22: Bevolking per gemeente

Summary

This commentary to Sheet 22 of the Atlas of Belgium analyzes the geographical distribution of Belgium’s population by municipality on the basis of the 1947 General Population Census. Unlike Sheet 21, which maps population density by relating inhabitants to municipal area, Sheet 22 represents the absolute population of each municipality with a proportional circle placed at its administrative center, using a scale of one square millimeter per 1,225 inhabitants. The method highlights both demographic concentration and an important administrative effect: the visual pattern depends partly on the historically variable size and number of municipalities. It would have been preferable to map individual settlements, but Belgian statistics were not collected at that level. The map reveals a pronounced contrast across the Sambre–Meuse–Vesdre corridor. Northern Belgium contains the major urban agglomerations of Brussels, Antwerp, Ghent and others, as well as concentrations along river valleys and numerous populous municipalities in dispersed-settlement regions. Coastal resorts form an almost continuous chain, whereas the sparsely populated polder zone contains many very small municipalities. Within Flanders, the map distinguishes sandy Flanders, characterized by relatively few but populous municipalities, from the sand-loam transition zone, a contrast that is less evident on a conventional density map. The industrial belt extending through the Borinage, the Centre, Charleroi, Liège and Verviers appears as a succession of dense agglomerations closely associated with industrial establishments. South of this belt, the elevated and weakly populated regions are marked by sparse rural municipalities whose territorial size varies considerably. Similar population totals may therefore conceal very different settlement forms, municipal areas and densities. The study evaluates physical, economic and social explanations for these regional patterns. Relief, soils, forests and other environmental conditions show partial correlations but cannot account consistently for the number, extent and population of municipalities; comparable environments may display opposite municipal structures. Agricultural specialization, the expansion of pasture, farm fragmentation, farm size and productivity likewise offer only limited explanations. Some correspondences exist—for example between smaller farms and denser rural populations—but exceptions in Haspengouw, the Brabant plateau, the Herve country, Flanders, Condroz and the Ardennes prevent any deterministic conclusion. Dispersed industrialization, especially north of the Sambre–Meuse–Vesdre line, primarily increases municipal populations rather than determining territorial boundaries. Demographic change and migration are also considered. Natural increase formerly affected municipal totals, but migration and daily commuting had become increasingly decisive. Cheap and rapid transport, growing private mobility and attachment to rural residence enabled workers to remain in villages or outer suburban municipalities while working in major urban and industrial centers, thereby limiting central-city growth and enlarging surrounding communities. The article concludes that present physical, economic and social conditions cannot by themselves explain Belgium’s municipal population geography. Its structure is fundamentally historical, reflecting the long-term occupation of the land, inherited settlement forms, administrative divisions and past events. A satisfactory explanation therefore requires a genetic and historical study of settlement development, although the available evidence remains too fragmentary for definitive reconstruction.