Download and Read online, DOWNLOAD EBOOK, [PDF EBOOK EPUB ], Ebooks

download, Read Ebook EPUB/KINDE, Download Book Format PDF

Sociology in Belgium: A Sociological History 1st

Edition Raf Vanderstraeten

OR CLICK LINK
https://textbookfull.com/product/sociology-in-
belgium-a-sociological-history-1st-edition-raf-
vanderstraeten/

Read with Our Free App Audiobook Free Format PFD EBook, Ebooks dowload PDF
with Andible trial, Real book, online, KINDLE , Download[PDF] and Read and Read
Read book Format PDF Ebook, Dowload online, Read book Format PDF Ebook,
[PDF] and Real ONLINE Dowload [PDF] and Real ONLINE
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Muslim History and Social Theory: A Global Sociology of

Modernity 1st Edition Dietrich Jung (Auth.)

https://textbookfull.com/product/muslim-history-and-social-
theory-a-global-sociology-of-modernity-1st-edition-dietrich-jung-
auth/

Consumption: A Sociological Analysis 1st Edition Alan

Warde (Auth.)

https://textbookfull.com/product/consumption-a-sociological-
analysis-1st-edition-alan-warde-auth/

The History of Sociology in Britain: New Research and

Revaluation Plamena Panayotova

https://textbookfull.com/product/the-history-of-sociology-in-
britain-new-research-and-revaluation-plamena-panayotova/

American Sociological Association Style Guide 7th

Edition American Sociological Association

https://textbookfull.com/product/american-sociological-
association-style-guide-7th-edition-american-sociological-
association/
Sociology in action a Canadian perspective Second
Edition Symbaluk

https://textbookfull.com/product/sociology-in-action-a-canadian-
perspective-second-edition-symbaluk/

Theoretical Chemistry in Belgium A Topical Collection

from Theoretical Chemistry Accounts 1st Edition Benoît
Champagne

https://textbookfull.com/product/theoretical-chemistry-in-
belgium-a-topical-collection-from-theoretical-chemistry-
accounts-1st-edition-benoit-champagne/

Ten Lessons In Introductory Sociology 2nd Edition

Kenneth A. Gould

https://textbookfull.com/product/ten-lessons-in-introductory-
sociology-2nd-edition-kenneth-a-gould/

Deviance and Social Control A Sociological Perspective

Michelle L. Inderbitzin

https://textbookfull.com/product/deviance-and-social-control-a-
sociological-perspective-michelle-l-inderbitzin/

Hooligans, Ultras, Activists: Polish Football Fandom in

Sociological Perspective 1st Edition Rados■aw
Kossakowski

https://textbookfull.com/product/hooligans-ultras-activists-
polish-football-fandom-in-sociological-perspective-1st-edition-
radoslaw-kossakowski/
SOCIOLOGY TRANSFORMED
Series Editors: John Holmwood and
Stephen Turner

SOCIOLOGY
IN BELGIUM
A Sociological History

Raf Vanderstraeten
Kaat Louckx
 Sociology Transformed

Series Editors
John Holmwood
School of Sociology and Social Policy
University of Nottingham
Nottingham, UK

Stephen Turner
Department of Philosophy
University of South Florida
Tampa, FL, USA

“What has sociology been like in a small but profoundly divided nation? In
their concise analysis of the Belgian case Raf Vanderstraeten and Kaat Louckx
depict how this particular national tradition has been entangled in a changing
international environment. From its privileged relationship to France and the
Netherlands, it developed a more Anglo-American orientation, while retaining
some of its most salient ties to national institutions. This is a vivid, sociological
portrayal of its entire history, from Quetelet to the present.”
—Johan Heilbron, author of The Rise of Social Theory and French Sociology
The field of sociology has changed rapidly over the last few decades.
Sociology Transformed seeks to map these changes on a country by
country basis and to contribute to the discussion of the future of the
subject. The series is concerned not only with the traditional centres of
the discipline, but with its many variant forms across the globe.

More information about this series at

http://www.springer.com/series/14477
 Raf Vanderstraeten · Kaat Louckx

Sociology in Belgium
A Sociological History
Raf Vanderstraeten Kaat Louckx
Department of Sociology Department of Sociology
Ghent University University of Chicago
Ghent, Belgium Chicago, IL, USA

Sociology Transformed
ISBN 978-1-137-55662-2 ISBN 978-1-137-55663-9 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-55663-9

Library of Congress Control Number: 2017947735

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2018

The author(s) has/have asserted their right(s) to be identified as the author(s) of this work
in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the
Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights
of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction
on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and
retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology
now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are
exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and
information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication.
Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied,
with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have
been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published
maps and institutional affiliations.

Cover illustration: © saulgranda/Getty

Printed on acid-free paper

This Palgrave Pivot imprint is published by Springer Nature

The registered company is Macmillan Publishers Ltd.
The registered company address is: The Campus, 4 Crinan Street, London, N1 9XW,
United Kingdom
 Contents

1 Sociology in Belgium 1

2 Religion 23

3 Language 59

4 Publications 93

5 Epilogue 125

Index 131

v
 List of Figures

Fig. 3.1 Number of French- and Dutch-speaking sociology

graduatesin Belgium, 1967–1990
(three yearly moving numbers) 82
Fig. 4.1 Growth of the number of researchers in
Flanders, 1982–2016 (1982 = 100) 101
Fig. 4.2 Average number of authors per article
(three yearly moving averages) 106
Fig. 4.3 Proportion of male authors
(three yearly moving averages) 108
Fig. 4.4 Proportion of authors from Belgium or the Netherlands 110
Fig. 4.5 Publications in SSCI-journals (absolute numbers) 113
Fig. 4.6 Barycentres for the places of publication of
books in the social sciences and humanities and
of the Flemish universities 117

vii
 Prologue

Although the rise and the institutionalization of the social sciences are
closely entangled with long-term processes of nation-building and state-
formation, specific national traditions within the social sciences cannot
be understood within their specific national context only. These national
traditions are embedded within more encompassing settings; they are
challenged and made possible by cross-national transfers and the transna-
tional circulation of scholars and ideas.
This book is an attempt to internationalize a national history of soci-
ology. It aims to internationalize the history of sociology in Belgium in
two different, but interrelated ways: by considering the factors that dif-
ferentiate the history of sociology in Belgium from other national his-
tories, and by tracing more general patterns which this history owes to
transnational exchanges and developments. By exploring this complex
transnational setting, we believe that sociologists will gradually become
able to properly analyse the social structures that shape their own orien-
tations and their own work.
In order to understand the long-term trajectory of sociology in
Belgium, this book will focus on the structural conditions and their his-
torical transformation from the nineteenth until the twenty-first century.
It will make use of historical-sociological analyses to shed light on the
various ways in which complex social structures define the kinds of socio-
logical knowledge that are or are not valued in Belgium. In this sense,
this book is intended to constitute a contribution to the sociology of

ix
x Prologue

sociology. It aims to come to a better self-understanding of sociology in

Belgium and elsewhere.
This book builds upon work that has for the main part been con-
ducted during the last decade. In this period of time, we had occasion to
present our analyses in a substantial number of seminars, workshops and
conferences. We would like to thank the many friends, family and col-
leagues who made themselves available for the discussion of various top-
ics presented in the following text. Without their supportive feedback,
this book would not have been what it now is.
 CHAPTER 1

Sociology in Belgium

Abstract This chapter starts with a sketch of the sociopolitical context

within which sociology developed in Belgium. Afterwards three core
aspects of the history of sociology are discussed: the rise of social sci-
ence and the social statistics of Adolphe Quetelet in the mid-nineteenth
century, the different ideological settings or pillars within which the
first sociological institutes emerged in the period around 1900, and the
expansion of the Dutch- and French-speaking scientific communities in
the period after the Second World War. The final section presents a short
discussion of the merits and the characteristics of a reflective sociological
approach, of a sociological history of sociology.

Keywords Social statistics · Adolphe Quetelet · Institut de Sociologie

Solvay · Société Belge de Sociologie

We can only acquire an understanding of sociology as it developed

in Belgium by bringing together various lines of thought. To intro-
duce the approach taken in this book, this chapter first provides a brief
sketch of the sociopolitical context within which sociology developed in
Belgium. Afterwards, we discuss three core aspects of the development
of sociology in Belgium: the rise of social science and the social statis-
tics of Adolphe Quetelet in the mid-nineteenth century, the different
ideological contexts within which the first sociological institutes emerged
in the period around 1900, and the expansion of the Dutch- and

© The Author(s) 2018 1

R. Vanderstraeten and K. Louckx, Sociology in Belgium, Sociology
Transformed, https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-55663-9_1
2 R. Vanderstraeten and K. Louckx

French-speaking scientific communities in the period after the Second

World War. The final section of this chapter presents a short discussion
of the main characteristics of the reflective sociological approach upon
which this book is based.

L’Union Fait La Force?

After a turbulent era, characterized by much political unrest within large
parts of Europe, the Kingdom of Belgium gained political independence
in 1830. Its rather complex political and legislative structure, which took
shape in recent decades, is the result of a series of tensions and conflicts,
some of which antedated the foundation of the Belgian state. Language
and religion have played a key role in Belgium’s history, in the ways in
which the new Kingdom has tried to establish itself as a ‘modern’ nation-
state and distinguish itself from its neighbours. Perhaps Rogers Brubaker
had Belgium in mind when he argued that ‘language and religion are
arguably the two most socially and politically consequential domains of
cultural difference in the modern world’ (2013, p. 2).
After the Belgian Revolution, the new Kingdom adopted the motto
L’union fait la force (unity makes strength). As historians argue, the
motto first of all referred to the unification of progressive Liberals
and conservative Catholics in opposition to the Netherlands and its
Protestant King. But different interpretations were later added: it is
now mostly said to refer to the unity of the different language com-
munities on the territory of the Belgian state, especially of the Dutch-
speaking part (called Flanders) and the French-speaking part (Wallonia).
However, the deliberate use of this motto cannot conceal the fact that
both politico-religious and linguistic differences have led to divisive
forms of conflict and diversity on Belgian territory during a period of
about two centuries.
In Europe, the collapse of Napoleonic France in 1815 brought an
end to about 25 years of nearly continuous war. The Congress of Vienna
aimed to provide long-term peace by settling critical issues arising from
the French Revolutionary Wars and the Napoleonic Wars. Its objective
was not simply to restore old boundaries and hence to confirm France’s
loss of the territories it had recently annexed; it also was to resize the
main powers so they could balance each other off and remain at peace.
In 1815, a United Kingdom of the Netherlands was formed, which
included the former Dutch Republic in the north as well as the so-called
 1 SOCIOLOGY IN BELGIUM 3

Southern or Catholic Netherlands, which comprised most of present-

day Belgium and Luxembourg, but which had been annexed by France
in 1794.
Despite the objectives of the Congress of Vienna, the United
Kingdom of the Netherlands was but a short-lived kingdom. It col-
lapsed after the 1830 Belgian Revolution and secession. Various
social differences had created obstacles for the unification policies of
King William I of the Netherlands. Especially religious matters (the
Protestant North versus the Catholic South) were important in the
conflict preceding the separation of Belgium and the Netherlands,
which explains the focus on ideological unity in Belgium in the years
after the separation. Language issues also played a role in the conflict
that led to the Belgian secession. French was spoken in Wallonia and
by a large part of the bourgeoisie in Flemish cities; ‘Frenchification’
had also been intensive in the years after the annexation by France.
But Flanders was part of the Dutch-language territory in Europe
and the language policy of the Dutch King in the years after 1815
had aimed at (re-)uniting the two regions (North and South) under
a common Dutch language. After the Revolution, Belgium’s ‘found-
ing fathers’ meant to appease linguistic unrest by ­ constitutionally
­declaring ‘the use of the languages optional’.
In practice, however, French was clearly perceived as the more
prestigious language. Although the majority of the Belgian popula-
tion was Flemish-speaking, French quickly replaced Dutch in all offi-
cial domains and official functions. French was not only the language
of Enlightenment, progress and modernity; it was above all also a
symbol for the national struggle for independence from the Dutch
King. Knowledge of French subsequently also became an essential
requirement for social mobility in the new nation-state. During the
late-nineteenth and twentieth century, however, tensions between the
different linguistic communities resurfaced within Belgium. A broad
variety of administrative rearrangements gradually resulted from bitter
linguistic and socio-political conflicts. In the second half of the last
century, these conflicts gave way to the division of the Belgian state
into different political and legislative entities primarily defined on the
basis of language.
Present-day Belgium counts approximately 11 million inhabitants. It
is a federal state, consisting of four different political entities constituted
on the basis of language. In Flanders, the northern part of Belgium,
4 R. Vanderstraeten and K. Louckx

with approximately 58% of the population, the official language is Dutch,

but the variety of Dutch spoken here has also been called ‘Flemish’,
‘Flemish Dutch’, ‘Belgian Dutch’ or ‘Southern Dutch’. The French-
speaking community is located in the south and called Wallonia (with
about 32% of the population). The small German-speaking community
is situated in the east (0.6%), while the Dutch-French bilingual com-
munity of the capital of Brussels is in the centre of the country (9.5%).
The different regional governments have legislative power in present-
day Belgium; their jurisdictional frontiers, being language borders, are
defined in the Belgian Constitution. As we will see time and again, how-
ever, the creation of linguistically homogeneous administrative and polit-
ical entities also resulted in the communicative ‘isolation’ of the different
language communities.
Ideological and linguistic differences constitute important socio-
cultural cleavages within Belgium—despite its national motto. These
differences and cleavages also built and build the context within which
sociology developed and develops. As we will see in the following chap-
ters, the heterogeneous sociocultural and academic structures have
given rise to the development of different sociologies in Belgium. It is
­difficult to speak of sociology in Belgium as a single unit; we will rather
­analyse the ways in which sociology has been conceived and structured in
Belgium as plural. On the following pages, we will pay ample attention
to the rise of different communities of sociologists on Belgian territory.
We will analyse how the conditions within which sociological knowledge
is fabricated in Belgium influence(d) the kinds of sociological knowledge
that are or are not fabricated in Belgium.

Adolphe Quetelet
It is often said that ‘progress’ and ‘improvement’ were among the
favourite words of the modern world (e.g. Headrick 2000; Slack
2014). The eighteenth and nineteenth centuries were characterized
not only by a growing thirst for knowledge, but also by a strong faith
that more knowledge would lead to the betterment of humankind.
The scientific search for knowledge was thought to lead to controlled
progress. The very idea of a science of society (‘science sociale’) that
emerged in Europe in the late-eighteenth and early-nineteenth cen-
turies also incorporated instrumental connotations; it clearly linked
scientific ambitions with public policy. This idea of ‘social science’
 1 SOCIOLOGY IN BELGIUM 5

carried practical and reformist connotations as a ‘rational’ guide to

public policy and social reconstruction.
Protagonists of this idea often made use of the analogy with natural
science. Many of the initiatives taken in the course of the nineteenth cen-
tury recurred to the natural sciences as a model for social analysis. In a
variety of circles, the technical and material advances that came from the
applications of the natural sciences gave rise to a corresponding expecta-
tion of the social advances that would follow the construction of a ‘posi-
tive’ science of society—expectations that were only intensified by those
natural scientists who furthered their claims to public recognition and
support by hinting at the likely benefits once the scientific method was
extended into the domain of social behaviour. Science was at the heart
of this positivist ‘ideology’ of progress (see Head 1982; Goldman 2002).
Social science, as it was first institutionalized in Belgium, embodied a
peculiar form of a science of government. It was considered legitimate
insofar as it focused on problems of government, paying particular atten-
tion to issues of social stability and moral order. The Higher Education
Act of 1835 allowed Belgian universities to organize a programme in
political and administrative sciences, but also stressed its dependence on
existing legal study programmes (Gerard 1992, pp. 1–8). A few years
later, in 1843, the Belgian Royal Academy created a class for the moral
and political sciences. As its French counterpart, the Belgian Academy
thereby built on the view that social science was a branch of an overarch-
ing ‘moral science’, which would provide indirect but useful support to
the national government and other factions of the ruling elites (Vincent
2007; Heilbron 2015, p. 211).
Outside the academic system, several ‘state servants’ also expressed
an interest in the elaboration of a science of society. Adolphe Quetelet’s
project of a ‘physique sociale’ (social physics), which was started in the
late 1830s in Belgium, offers a clear illustration of the modern belief in
the applicability of science to all fields of human endeavour. Quetelet
(1796–1874) was trained as a mathematician, but rapidly expanded
his horizon. He became a teacher of mathematics, physics and astron-
omy. He also investigated a range of demographic phenomena, such as
birth and death rates, as well as so-called ‘moral’ statistics, such as mar-
riages, suicides and crimes. His modus operandi was to assemble as many
numerical observations as he could and then look for patterns or regu-
larities and averages (‘l’homme moyen’ or the ‘average man’). With the
help of statistics, he hoped to find and understand those patterns, and
6 R. Vanderstraeten and K. Louckx

to use that understanding to predict the future and eventually control the
‘social body’ (Louckx 2014).1 He not only hoped to formulate the laws
of society comparable to the laws of physics (hence: social physics), but
also believed to be able to improve social politics on this scientific basis.
Quetelet is often identified as one of the founding fathers of empiri-
cal sociology (Headrick 2000, pp. 80–84; Donnelly 2015). However, as
important as Quetelet’s own analyses of social statistics may have been
his contributions to the establishment of a bureaucratic apparatus that
could take care of the production of these statistics. Quetelet became a
tireless promoter of data collection based on standardized methods and
definitions. He was an institution builder, who devoted much effort to
the diffusion and implementation of such standardized data collection.
Some ten years after Belgium gained independence, he organized the
Commission Centrale de Statistique, which became the central agency for
the collection and publication of administrative statistics in Belgium. In
1846, he organized the first nationwide population census, participation
in which was obligatory for all residents. After 1846, censuses followed
at regular, mostly ten-yearly intervals in Belgium; Quetelet remained
in charge of the censuses taken in 1856 and 1866. In 1853, Quetelet
also organized, hosted and presided over the first Congrès International
de Statistique, which launched the development of many methodologi-
cal standards and uniform nomenclatures. For more than two decades,
sessions of this Congress were actively attended by high-level state
servants from around the world. Indeed, ‘those who attended pushed
their governments to adopt a standard template for census making on
the Queteletian model’ (Curtis 2002, pp. 20–21). The International
Statistical Institute, which was founded in 1885, currently still presents
itself as the heir of Quetelet’s Congress.

1 In several regards, the views of Comte and Quetelet are quite similar. Remarkably, how-

ever, Comte and Quetelet, who were contemporaries, did not refer to each other’s work.
“Ils sont entièrement indépendants. Quetelet a ignoré Comte, Comte a voulu ignorer
Quetelet” (Lottin 1912, pp. 366–367). Émile Durkheim later maintained that Quetelet’s
theory felt short of explaining how “the average man” and its statistical laws could exert
any force on individuals. Quetelet’s theory rested in Durkheim’s well-known view on an
inaccurate observation, because it required social forces to act on individuals at an evenly
distributed rate. Durkheim instead recurred to collective forces to explain variations in sui-
cide rates (Durkheim 1897).
 1 SOCIOLOGY IN BELGIUM 7

The nineteenth-century rise of administrative statistics, in Belgium

as elsewhere, underpinned a new discourse about society. This admin-
istrative statistics helped ‘imagining’ a new sort of object, which could
be both the target of scientific research and of policy interventions. It
helped identifying social problems, such as pauperism or vagrancy, and
suggesting strategies for addressing them (Louckx 2014, 2017a, b;
Louckx and Vanderstraeten 2014, 2015). Its increasing prominence also
encouraged definitions of social science in terms of its practical applica-
tions. Social physics and sociology inevitably became perceived as rem-
edy, in the medical imagery employed so often in this context, for social
pathology (see also Goldman 1987, 2002).
Quetelet’s work led to a number of other initiatives. Edouard
Ducpétiaux (1804–1868), for example, who was a member of the
Commission Centrale de Statistique, undertook family budget stud-
ies of the working class in Belgium (Ducpétiaux 1855).2 In 1862,
the Association Internationale pour le Progrès des Sciences Sociales
(International Association for the Progress of the Social Sciences) was
founded in Brussels. The Association explicitly sailed under the flag of
the social sciences; it laid claim to scientific credentials in its investiga-
tions. But it provided first and foremost a forum for liberal politicians
interested in social ‘enlightenment’ and likeminded policy-oriented rec-
ommendations. It was dissolved in 1867, but reappeared shortly in the
1890s under the name of Association Belge pour le Progrès Social (Belgian
Association for Social Progress). Even if their impact may be considered
to have been minor, the very existence of these associations provides
proof of the ‘modern’ belief in the authority of scientific knowledge
and the legitimacy of politics on the basis of facts and hard data (de
Bie 1983; Vanthemsche 1994; Goldman 2002, 2007; Van Dijck 2008,
pp. 63–65).
In the last decades of the nineteenth century, the introduction of soci-
ology in university curricula started to generate much debate in Belgium.
No doubt, this was to an important degree the result of developments
in neighbouring countries, especially France, where, building on the
positivist project of Auguste Comte, scholars as Émile Durkheim and
René Worms had been able to shift sociology to the centre of academic

2 Karl Marx used Ducpétiaux’ work as a source of information on Belgium in the 25th

chapter of the first book of Das Kapital (Marx 1867).

8 R. Vanderstraeten and K. Louckx

interest. The openness towards sociology in academic circles in Belgium

was limited, however. Often preference was here also given to the term
‘social science’, as Comte’s neologism ‘sociology’ was associated with
socialism and state interventionism. To understand the arduous intro-
duction and expansion of sociology in Belgium, some differentia specifica
of the Belgian academic and sociocultural context need to be taken into
account.

Brussels and Louvain

Opportunities for the new discipline were provided by the expanding
universities, which offered a widening range of career trajectories and a
larger degree of autonomy from governmental affairs. At the end of the
nineteenth century, however, the ‘academization’ of sociology still met
with much resistance. The rector of the University of Liège, for example,
discussed the creation of a programme in the social and political s­ciences
at the start of the academic year 1884/1885. However, he did not see
a place for sociology in this programme—as sociology had yet failed to
fulfil any of its promises: ‘Elle n’est guère jusqu’ici qu’une table des mat-
ières dont il reste à remplir les chapitres’ (Trasenster 1884, p. 9).3 His
colleagues shared his reservations. The inaugural address of the rector of
the University of Brussels, Eugène Van der Rest, presented at the start of
the academic year 1888/1889 was titled ‘La Sociologie’. Van der Rest
explicitly referred to the writings of Comte, Spencer and Durkheim, but
also questioned the usefulness of the all-encompassing aspirations of a
discipline directed at ‘la vie sociale toute entière’ (1888, p. 33; see also de
Bie 1985, pp. 22–33). At the start of the next academic year, he repeated
and specified his preference for a curriculum in which the applied, policy-
oriented social sciences rather than sociology would prevail (Van der Rest
1889; see also Giddings 1891).
With its programme in political and social sciences, set up in 1889,
the ‘free-thinking’ University of Brussels was the first in Belgium to pro-
vide for a social science curriculum (Wils 2005, pp. 276–277; Wils and
Rasmussen 2012, pp. 1277–1278). By and large, this interfaculty pro-
gramme aimed at supporting the development of ‘moderate’ solutions

3 “It [sociology] is thus far but a table of contents of which the chapters remain to be

written”.
 1 SOCIOLOGY IN BELGIUM 9

to the sociopolitical problems of modern, industrializing states. Its

main architects, including Van der Rest, were close to the liberal tradi-
tion. Although a course on sociology was deliberately not included, the
programme provided a home to the socialist intellectuals Hector Denis
(1842–1913) and Guillaume De Greef (1842–1924). Both defended at
that time the need for a socialist and sociological approach of the socio-
economic system. De Greef, for example, wrote in his introduction to
sociology, originally published in 1886: ‘At the present time, the unity
of socialism and positive science is an established fact; what remains to
be done is to tighten and perfection this unity and to draw the legitimate
conclusions’ (1911, p. 229).4
Before this sociological project could really take off, however, the
University of Brussels itself went through a crisis. The immediate cause
was the cancellation by the Academic Board of the University of a pro-
jected lecture series by the French geographer and anarchist Elisée
Reclus, but more lasting ideological and political differences also played
a key role (Van Rooy 1976; Noël 1988). In 1894, the crisis resulted in
the foundation of a dissident Université Nouvelle (New University) that
was supported by a variety of socialists and progressive liberals. De Greef,
who had given up his position at the University of Brussels as a way to
protest against the ‘Reclus affair’, became its rector.
Although its departmental infrastructure was unstable, the Université
Nouvelle gave ample room to philosophy and the social sciences (Despy-
Meyer and Goffin 1976; Despy-Meyer 1994). Many foreign schol-
ars were invited to teach: apart from the brothers Élie, Élisée and Paul
Reclus, scholars such as Gabriel Tarde, René Worms, Marcel Mauss and
Maurice Halbwachs gave lectures in Brussels in the era around 1900.5
The position of the Université Nouvelle remained precarious, however.

4 “A l’heure actuelle, l’union du socialisme et de la science positive est un fait accompli; il

ne s’agit plus que de la rendre de plus en plus intime et parfaite et d’en tirer les conclusions
légitimes”. De Greef’s introduction into sociology was reviewed by Durkheim (1886); his
writings were translated into several languages. For an early assessment of his whole socio-
logical oeuvre, see also Douglas (1926).
5 Tarde, for example, provided an introductory course on sociology in 1896/1897,

while Worms gave a series of lectures on the sociological thought of Auguste Comte in
1909/1910. An overview is presented in Despy-Meyer and Goffin (1976), although it
seems probable that not all of the scheduled lectures actually took place. Overall, how-
ever, the lecture programme of the Université Nouvelle was strongly inspired by Comtean
positivism.
10 R. Vanderstraeten and K. Louckx

While its degrees were not officially recognized in Belgium, only a few
Belgian students enrolled. The dissident institution counted each year
only around 100 students, about half of which were foreigners (Despy-
Meyer 1973, p. 8). Like many other experiments in internationalism
from that period, the Université Nouvelle did not outlive the First World
War (see Pyenson and Verbruggen 2009; Van Acker 2014; Verbruggen
and Carlier 2014). It neither had much lasting impact in Belgium,
although some of its parts were in 1919 re-integrated into its ‘mother
institution’, the Université Libre de Bruxelles.
At the end of the nineteenth century, the conflicts at the Brussels
University also initiated responses from the industrial chemist and pol-
itician Ernest Solvay (1838–1922). Solvay, who had witnessed the cri-
sis at the University of Brussels as a member of its Academic Board,
belonged to the progressive wing of liberalism, which kept close con-
tacts with socialist intellectuals. He shared their belief in the capacity
of science to develop blueprints for a better and fairer organization of
the ‘social fabric’, although his own vision remained definitely liberal in
outlook. Concerned about social progress and social innovation, he put
much emphasis on the maximization of people’s ‘productive capacity’.
To elaborate his ideas scientifically, he founded in 1894 the Institut des
Sciences Sociales and appointed three collaborators who had sharply pro-
tested against the decision taken by their university in the Reclus affair:
Denis and De Greef, as well as Émile Vandervelde (1866–1938). Solvay
also contributed actively to his own research institute; in the Annales de
l’Institut des Sciences Sociales, he published repeatedly on socio-economic
and monetary questions (Crombois 1994, pp. 24–33).
Despite initial intellectual excitement on both sides, the experiment
across political divides did not last. From around 1900 onwards, Solvay
began to reorganize his Institut. After having appointed Émile Waxweiler
(1867–1916), Solvay also started the construction of an art nouveau
building in the Leopold Park in Brussels that was to house a new Institut
de Sociologie Solvay. Waxweiler, who had been trained as an engineer
and who had been active in liberal politics in his student years, became
its director. He had also visited the USA and become impressed by the
work of Frederick Taylor on scientific management. With support from
Solvay, Waxweiler could accord grants to researchers who were willing
to explore themes that fitted the interests of Waxweiler and Solvay (see
Popelin 1986, pp. 59–67; Crombois 1995). After some bitter exchanges,
the collaboration between Solvay (and Waxweiler), on the one hand, and
 1 SOCIOLOGY IN BELGIUM 11

Denis, De Greef and Vandervelde, on the other, came to an end (for the
official statements of both sides, see Dejongh 1901; Hanssens 1901; see
also de Bie 1983, pp. 134–140). Solvay reproached his former collabora-
tors that they had been unwilling to get rid of their ideological preju-
dices, their ‘doctrines régnantes’ (Hanssens 1901, pp. 22–23).
At the end of the nineteenth century, however, the University
of Brussels was not the only one in Belgium to introduce a social sci-
ence curriculum. In different ways, and at different places, the Catholic
University of Louvain also reacted to the late-nineteenth-century hype
surrounding sociology. In 1892, thus shortly after the ‘free-think-
ing’ University of Brussels, the Catholic University set up its School
for Political and Social Sciences. The School was closely related to the
Faculty of Law of the university. But it did not provide much place for
sociology; the School’s courses were in large part juridical and policy
oriented, directed towards the administration of the state. The theoreti-
cal ambitions of the newcomer were particularly criticized. Its director,
Jules Van den Heuvel, stated his reservations without much hesitation
in a letter, dated October 1896, to the rector magnificus of the Catholic
University: ‘At present, sociology is most often but a poor philosophy
hidden behind long quotes of picturesque customs and mores’ (cited in
Gerard 1992, p. 30).6 Some empirical research was introduced, however,
although it mainly built on the ‘monographic’ method of family-budget
studies as developed by the Catholic French social scientist Frédéric Le
Play. In the spirit of Le Play, the ‘monographs’ or case studies of the liv-
ing conditions of family households had to provide for moral exemplars
for Catholics (see Heilbron 2015, pp. 56–57). In this spirit, it was also
argued that social policy had to be based on such moral exemplars (e.g.
Brants 1906).
In the Higher Institute of Philosophy in Louvain, the social thought
of Comte and Durkheim also received some attention. The Philosophy
Institute, founded in 1889, was devoted to the revival of the philosophy
of St. Thomas Aquinas (as stimulated by Pope Leo XIII). It had the aim
to formulate a modern answer to the attacks of positivism against tra-
ditional religion and philosophy. With some support from this institute,

6 “Or la sociologie n’est le plus souvent aujourd’hui qu’une pauvre philosophie

dissimulée derrière de longues citations de coutumes et de mœurs plus ou moins

pittoresques”.
12 R. Vanderstraeten and K. Louckx

the lawyer and politician Cyrille Van Overbergh (1866–1959) founded

in December 1899 the first sociological association in Belgium, the
Société Belge de Sociologie. In order to defend and legitimize his initiative
vis-à-vis Catholic ‘philosophers’, Van Overbergh distinguished between
three types of sociology and three corresponding ‘Weltanschauungen’:
liberal, socialist and Catholic. He dismissed both the individualist (lib-
eral) and the collectivist (socialist) approach. Instead the Société Belge
de Sociologie had to further the development of Catholic sociology.
Catholicism was, in his view, both a theoretical system and a civilizational
project ‘qui s’affirme dans ses effets bienfaisants à travers dix-neuf siècles
d’histoire’ (Van Overbergh 1900, p. 179).7 On this sound basis, sociol-
ogy could be given a Catholic interpretation. In his view, it could be an
important source of inspiration for the elaboration of Catholic doctrines,
of Catholic Social Teaching. The writings of Comte and Durkheim
might even be incorporated into a Catholic, neo-Thomist criticism
of Marxist and liberal views of modern society (see Wils 2001, 2005;
Wijns 2003).
A more systematic interest in sociology emerged only gradually in
Louvain. Resistance to positivist accounts of ‘absolute truths’ remained
dominant for quite some time. But the growth of a Catholic ‘pillar’,
i.e. a network of Catholic organizations in different sectors of society
(education, health care, mass media, etc.) and for different parts of the
population (workers, farmers, women, youth, etc.), gradually led to an
increased interest in sociology. Similar expectations emerged in the sec-
ular pillars within Belgium. The ideological tensions within Belgium
left their mark on the institutionalization of sociology. The competing
Weltanschauungen dominated during the formative years of sociology
in Belgium—and much thereafter. Sociology has long remained associ-
ated with ideology, whether of secular or of Catholic orientation; this
ideologically divided landscape has heavily defined the history of sociol-
ogy within Belgium. We will deal with the structures and consequences
of these ideological tensions and cleavages in more detail in the next
­chapter of this book.

7 “which shows itself in its benevolent effects throughout a history of nineteen

centuries”.
 1 SOCIOLOGY IN BELGIUM 13

Flanders and Wallonia

In the early-twentieth century, Belgium had four universities: the state
universities in Ghent and Liège (which had both been founded by the
‘enlightened’ Dutch king in 1817) and the private ones in Louvain and
Brussels. The Catholic University of Louvain had been re-established
in 1834, i.e. shortly after Belgium’s independence; it had originally
been founded in 1425, but was abolished in 1797 under French rule.
The ‘free-thinking’ University of Brussels had also been established in
1834 and was expected to constitute an ideological counterpart to the
University of Louvain. As already indicated, the ideological tensions and
divisions within Belgium—especially between Brussels and Louvain—
had a strong impact on the early development of a broad range of aca-
demic disciplines, including sociology. In the course of the twentieth
century, however, linguistic tensions and divisions would increasingly
become important. For most disciplines, different scientific communities
would develop in Wallonia (Walloon or French) and in Flanders (Flemish
or Dutch).
Since 1830, the language of instruction in the Belgian universities had
been French, also in those institutions located on that part of its terri-
tory where most people spoke ‘Flemish Dutch’ (Louvain and Ghent).
Under political and public pressure, the University of Ghent adopted
in 1930 Dutch as the medium of instruction. Some years later both the
universities of Louvain and Brussels also started to offer courses taught
in Dutch (or Flemish). But teaching in French continued in Louvain
and Brussels. In fact, French programmes are generally considered to
have been predominant at both universities until the 1950s or 1960s
(e.g. Verhoeven 1982).
The predominant position of French reflected broader socio-eco-
nomic divergences. Social status in the entire nation-state has long
largely depended on knowledge of the French language, as Belgium was
dominated by an industrialized and powerful Walloon part and a mainly
French-speaking nobility and bourgeoisie in the Flemish part of the
country. However, the structure of the university system also contributed
to the perpetuation of the dominance of French over the majority, i.e.
the Dutch- or Flemish-speaking part of the Belgian population.
No doubt, the linguistic conflicts were intensified by the expansion of
the university system. As a consequence of the increased attendance at
the level of secondary education and the expansion of the student finance
14 R. Vanderstraeten and K. Louckx

system for higher education, the total number of university students

had started to increase at an unprecedented rate in the period after the
Second World War. However, the expansion of the Catholic University
of Louvain, which was situated in the midst of Flemish territory, brought
with it the expansion of Francophone presence on Flemish territory. This
development triggered bitter resistance in Flanders—both inside and
outside Leuven (Louvain is the French and Leuven the Dutch name of
the same city). It led in the late-1960s to the so-called Louvain ques-
tion, which brought about the fall of the Belgian government and trig-
gered a series of constitutional reforms that transformed Belgium into a
federal state based on internal language borders. The ‘Louvain question’
also led to the division of the Catholic University into two autonomous
entities, a Dutch-speaking one in Leuven and a French-speaking one
for which a new site was developed in Wallonia (Louvain-la-Neuve, i.e.
the ‘new Louvain’). To avoid new ideological conflicts, the University
of Brussels was at that time also divided into independent French and
Flemish institutions.
The division of the universities of Leuven and Brussels in 1968 was
made possible by University Expansion Acts, which allowed for the
expansion of the existing universities, as well as the creation of new
ones. The university system expanded rapidly afterwards. By the 1970s,
new universities had emerged in Antwerp, Hasselt, Brussels, Mons
and Namur, while the University of Leuven was also allowed to estab-
lish a new site in Kortrijk. As the split of the universities of Louvain and
Brussels signifies, this expansion process took place within a new political
context, within which Belgium had been divided into different language
regions, and within which the political responsibility for education was
being relegated to the regional level. In the latter part of the twentieth
century, the linguistic divisions became more prominent than the ideo-
logical ones within Belgium.
This process of expansion accompanied by linguistic partitioning
also marked the development of sociology within Belgium. The differ-
ent universities tried to outbalance each other. Collaboration at the
national level was troublesome. The first Belgian sociological association
was the aforementioned French-speaking and Catholic Société Belge de
Sociologie. It was set up in 1899 and counted 37 members at the start
of the twentieth century. But it disappeared before the First World War
when its key members became involved in other activities and contexts.
It probably did not have much impact beyond its own Catholic network.
 1 SOCIOLOGY IN BELGIUM 15

Throughout Belgium, sociology did not fare well institutionally in the

interwar era. When a second Société Belge de Sociologie was established
shortly after the Second World War, its founding members even seem to
have been unaware of the existence of a forerunner with the same name,
as one of them later publicly testified (de Bie 1986, p. 225).8
Although the second Société was (again) a French-speaking schol-
arly association, its ideological and geographical scope was broader.
Sociologists of all four Belgian universities were involved. The main
stimulus for the establishment of the new association came from the
Social Sciences Department of UNESCO—and the funding it could dis-
tribute to national research associations and consortia (de Bie 1986, pp.
227–230). However, the interuniversity collaboration among sociolo-
gists did not last long. Ideological and linguistic differences reappeared
soon. A rivalling organization of Flemish sociologists was founded in
1962 (Organisatie voor Vlaamse Sociologen). In 1975, the Société created
a French- and Dutch-speaking division: the Association des Sociologues
Belges de Langue Française (ASBLF), on the one hand, and the Vlaamse
Vereniging voor Sociologie (VVS), on the other. Although the Société was
now meant to function as an umbrella organization at the national level
that could also take care of the link with international organizations, it
disappeared only a few years later.
Since the late 1970s, there no longer exists a national forum for soci-
ology within Belgium. There is neither a national association, nor a
national journal for sociology.9 Regular national conferences are no
longer organized, although particular ‘social challenges’ or ‘social prob-
lems’ are occasionally still used/constructed to bring together social
scientists from different parts of Belgium. In Flanders and Wallonia, soci-
ology and many other scholarly disciplines have developed in different

8 De Bie later examined the first Société Belge de Sociologie in more historical detail, espe-

cially focusing on the internal conflicts that led to its abolition. He was critical in his own
way. In his view, Cyrille Van Overbergh, the most active member of this association, was
not a real sociologist (de Bie 1988; see also Wijns 2003).
9 In this regard, Belgium is different from some other small and linguistically het-

erogeneous countries, such as Switzerland. For sociology, there does exist a multilingual
national Swiss journal of sociology: Schweizerische Zeitschrift für Soziologie / Revue Suisse de
Sociologie / Swiss Journal of Sociology, which publishes work written in German, French or
English. While we do not want to overstate the ‘unifying’ relevance of this journal for the
Swiss community of sociologists, it is evident that the absence of national communication
platforms hinders the organization of scholarly interaction at the national level.
16 R. Vanderstraeten and K. Louckx

directions. As we will see in more detail in the third and fourth chapters
of this book, different kinds of international research networks have also
become institutionalized in both linguistic communities: while French-
speaking researchers in Belgium are generally well connected with research-
ers in other French-speaking parts of the world (France, Québec), Flemish
researchers primarily orient themselves to researchers in the Netherlands,
Scandinavia and the Anglo-Saxon world (see Vanderstraeten 2010).
The linguistic divisions have become dominant in Belgium in the sec-
ond half of the last century. For most fields of study, including sociology,
there are distinct Dutch- and French-speaking communities of specialists
in Belgium. At the same time, the ideological tensions did not disappear
on both sides of the language border. Although seven universities now
offer sociology programmes in Belgium, no national research community
emerged. Both the linguistic and ideological divisions have led to a parti-
tioning of the academic system in a broad variety of scholarly disciplines.
The image of sociology in Belgium, which currently imposes itself most
forcefully, is one of a ‘provincialized’ sociology. We will trace this devel-
opment in more detail in the following chapters.

Outline of the Book

While the history of science and technology in Belgium has received
systematic attention in recent decades (e.g. Halleux et al. 2001), reflec-
tions on the history of sociology in Belgium remain scarce. Moreover,
several of the available contributions have been written for specific com-
memorative purposes, such as jubilees of particular institutes. Some have
also been written by ‘protagonists’, who look back at their own life and
career within the academia or describe the situation they have become
familiar with (e.g. Van Goethem 1947; De Jonghe 1976; Vilrokx 1977;
Dumon 1981; Voyé and Dobbelaere 1994; Coenen-Huther 2002,
2006). While these contributions are often of interest in their own right,
none of them provides a systematic sociological reflection on the history
of sociology or the social sciences within Belgium. This might also be
said about a recent compilation of biographical articles on ‘forgotten’
sociologists and anthropologists in the French-speaking part of Belgium
(published in a 2014 issue of the journal Anamnèse).
Hitherto only the ‘birth’ or ‘genesis’ of sociology in Belgium has been
described and analysed in considerable detail. Throughout a long schol-
arly career, which lasted from the 1940s until the 1980s, the sociologist
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
PLATE XX.
PAIR OF COTTAGES.

Variation of Former Plan.—This plate shows the development

and variation of the inside houses of the block of four shown on Plate
xiv., with a superior arrangement of larder, and with projecting coals.
The long sloping roof has been hipped back to give a pleasing line,
especially in perspective.
The Long Sloping Roof.—The long sloping roof, a feature
frequently introduced at Bournville, has several advantages. If it
were not employed, and the front walls were carried up level with the
ceiling line of the bedroom, the proportions of the elevation would not
be so happy, while an additional expense would be incurred by the
extra brickwork. Such a height, moreover, would be wholly
unnecessary. In the case of cottages with the long sloping roof the
height of bedrooms to the point of intersection of roof and wall need
only be 5 ft. 6 ins. Ample ventilation is obtained by the simple
insertion of a 9 in. by 7 in. air-brick on the outside wall, and a
Sheringham ventilator or Tobin tube within, about 5 ft. 6 ins. from the
floor, the cost of the latter being about 3s., and of the former a little
more. The long sloping roof can rarely be treated tastefully without
boldly projecting the eaves. The projection gives a verandah in front
of the house which affords a pleasant shelter. Wooden posts may be
used as supports, and by training climbing plants up them, and
allowing them to festoon, a really delightful summer bower may be
formed. As the roof is broad, pantiles may be used with safety so far
as good taste is concerned: bold roof, bold covering. By omitting the
gutters at the dormer eaves a pleasing effect is gained, and gutters
are quite unnecessary with an eaves projection. The cheeks of the
dormers should be dressed with lead. The cottages in question are
whitewashed, and have a tarred plinth of about 2 ft. to prevent the
unsightliness of mud splashes.
 FRONT ELEVATION
GROUND PLAN
BEDROOM PLAN
PLATE XX.
PAIR OF COTTAGES.
SEE PAGE 30.

The Large Living Room.—In view of the gain to health of one

spacious living room over the parlour plan, a number of these
cottages has been built in varying design at Bournville, and no
difficulty has been found in letting them. There has been, however,
considerable discussion with regard to their convenience to the
artisan in other districts where they have been introduced. Although
cottages in the past had no third room, there having been, as here,
one large comfortable room (often with the ingle nook) and a small
kitchen at the back—all the accommodation really required—yet at
the present time many artisans are not content without the useless
parlour, which they appear to think adds dignity to the house, but
which is used by them chiefly as a store-room for gim-cracks. There
is, perhaps, a reasonable objection to a single large living room on
the part of a particular class who let the front room to a lodger.
Nevertheless, for a model village or a garden city it is strongly
recommended that the plan should be adopted freely, and the
preference for the useless front room in small cottages discouraged.
Total cost of the example given, including all extras, £268 per
cottage.
Laying out of gardens, £10 each.
Cubical contents, 28,587 ft., at 4½d. per foot cube, £536, or £268
per cottage.
Instances of the last two types of cottages dealt with appear in the
view given on Plate iv.
PLATE XXI.
PAIR OF COTTAGES.

PLATE XXI.
PAIR OF COTTAGES.
SEE PAGE 32.

The smaller cottage shown here is planned on similar lines to the

foregoing, but with the additional accommodation of an attic, and bay
windows to the two storeys. This is an instance of how a smaller
cottage may be joined to a larger one in treating a corner site, the
larger one on the corner giving importance to each road.
PLATES XXII., XXIII., I. (FRONTISPIECE), XXIV., XXV., AND XXVI.
BLOCKS OF FOUR.

PLATE XXII.
BLOCK OF FOUR COTTAGES.
SEE PAGE 32.
 PLATE XXIII.
BLOCK OF FOUR COTTAGES.
SEE PAGE 32.
 PLATE XXIV.
BLOCK OF FOUR COTTAGES.
SEE PAGE 32.

These plates show examples of cottages in blocks of four rather

larger in size than the last type, and treated in different materials.
Plate xxvi. shows the details of the cottages on Plate xxv.
 PLATE XXV.
BLOCK OF FOUR COTTAGES.
SEE PAGE 32.
 PLATE XXVI.
DETAIL VIEW.
SEE PAGE 32.
PLATE XXVII.
PAIR OF COTTAGES.

FRONT ELEVATION
GROUND PLAN
BEDROOM PLAN
PLATE XXVII.
PAIR OF COTTAGES.
SEE PAGE 33.

Plate xxvii. gives the plan and elevation of a pair of cottages also
having similar accommodation to those with the long sloping roofs
shown on Plate xx. The cost, however, is here considerably reduced
by each house having a side entrance, and by the omission of the
ingle nook, verandah and bay, while the living room, though smaller,
is not a passage room. By approaching the stairs from the lobby, not
only is more privacy secured, but the space beneath is made
available in the kitchen for a “Cabinet” bath, which is so placed as to
occupy it when in use instead of projecting into the kitchen. The
planning is simple and square, which, with the omission of bays and
the introduction of plain casements, all helps to reduce the cost.
The accommodation is:—
Ground Floor.
Living Room, 12 ft. 4 ins. × 16 ft. Kitchen, 10 ft. 3 ins. × 11 ft. 6 ins. Lobby.
Larder, w.c. and Coals.
Bedroom Floor.
First Bedroom, 12 ft. 4 ins. × 16 ft. Second Bedroom, 7 ft. 8 ins. × 11 ft. 6 ins.
Third Bedroom, 8 ft. × 8 ft. 3 ins. Linen Closet.
Total cost, including all extras, £250 per cottage.
Laying out of gardens, £10 each.
Cubical contents, 24,000 ft., at 5d. per foot cube, £500, or £250
per cottage.
PLATE XXVIII.
PAIR OF COTTAGES.

FRONT ELEVATION
GROUND PLAN
BEDROOM PLAN
PLATE XXVIII.
PAIR OF COTTAGES.
SEE PAGE 34.

This plate shows the plan and elevation of a pair of cottages

having the parlour in addition to the living room and scullery. The
living room, which should always be the larger, is here the full width
of the house. The measurements are:—
Ground Floor.
Living Room, 11 ft. 5 ins. × 16 ft. 6 ins. Parlour, 11 ft. 4 ins. × 13 ft. 3 ins.
Scullery, Outside Larder, w.c. and Coals.
Bedroom Floor.
First Bedroom, 11 ft. 4 ins. × 13 ft. 3 ins. Second Bedroom, 8 ft. 6 ins. × 11 ft.
5 ins. Third Bedroom, 7 ft. 8 ins. × 8 ft. 6 ins. Linen Closet.
Total cost, including all extras, £230 per cottage. Cubical contents,
33,918 ft. at 3¼d. per ft. cube. £460, or £230 each. (Built in 1899.)
The stairs in this instance descend to the entrance lobby, but they
may be planned the other way about in order to avoid the necessity
of traversing the parlour to get to the bedrooms, and to insure
children crying upstairs being heard in the living room or the scullery.
This, however, would necessitate the cutting of 3 ft. off the large front
bedroom, while the respective spaces for the larder and the lobby
below would be reversed, the position of the former being
undesirable.
Ordinary roofing tiles and common bricks have been used. The
living room is boarded, and the scullery quarried.
It might be pointed out that there is but little scope for variety of
plan in these smaller cottages. The variations must be obtained in
the treatment of elevations. As already stated, to build cheaply the
main point is to get the walls as long and straight as possible.
 FRONT ELEVATION
BLOCK OF THREE COTTAGES.

PLATES XXIX. AND XXX.

BLOCK OF THREE COTTAGES.
 GROUND PLAN
BEDROOM PLAN
PLATE XXIX.
BLOCK OF THREE COTTAGES.
SEE PAGE 35.

Plate xxix. and the accompanying scale-drawing give the plan and
elevation of a block of three cottages, a sketch of which appears in
Plate xxx. The inner one occupies an exact third of the land, and is
double fronted. By putting the inner one with its axis to the front, an
equal garden-space is given to all the houses without incurring a re-
division of the land.
 PLATE XXX.
BLOCK OF THREE COTTAGES.
SEE PAGE 35.

The inner and left-hand houses have practically the same

accommodation, but the right-hand has several advantages: there is a
wider hall, the living room is not a passage room, while the kitchen is
reached from the hall, and the wash-house is entered from the yard.
Accommodation of left-hand and inner houses.
Ground Floor.
Parlour, 11 ft. 4 ins. × 15 ft. 3 ins. Living Room, 10 ft. × 14 ft. 6 ins. and bay.
Scullery, 10 ft. × 6 ft. and recess for Bath. Coals, Tools, and w.c.
Bedroom Floor.
First Bedroom, 11 ft. 4 ins. × 15 ft. 3 ins. Second Bedroom, 7 ft. 6 ins. × 14 ft. 6
ins., and bay. Third Bedroom, 7 ft. 5 ins. × 11 ft. 6 ins. Fourth Bedroom, 9 ft. 6
ins. × 6 ft. (middle house only). Linen Closet.

Cost of left-hand and inner houses, including all extras, £293 per
cottage. (Built in 1904.)
 The right-hand house, owing to the extra conveniences, works out
at rather more.
In the middle house the recess between the range and small
window makes a very convenient space for a writing table, especially
if curtains are dropped from a rod to screen it off, its proximity to the
range making it a warm and cosy retreat in winter. There is a bay
window to the living room of the outside houses.
Two of the houses in this block are fitted with Cornes’ Patent
Combined Scullery-Bath-Range and Boiler, described on page 52,
and the third with the “Cabinet” bath.
The elevation, with the forecourt formed by the projection of the two
outside houses, may be made very pleasing. From the perspective it
will be seen that the inner house is covered with rough-cast, making
an agreeable contrast with the outer ones of plain brickwork. Rough-
cast, while fairly economical, is very effective, and helps to brighten
the forecourt. The projection of the outer houses affords a break, the
abruptness of which does not attract attention, but which gives an
opportunity of stopping the rough-cast, which would otherwise have to
be carried round to the back of the whole block.
It is not advisable to introduce a variety of colour upon exteriors.
Colour is best disposed in masses—that is, it should be treated
broadly, not distributed in isolated portions, or in sharply contrasting
tints. (See page 59.)
The roof of this block is of green slates of varying sizes, diminishing
towards the ridge.
Aspect in the placing of the house is here studied as well as the
site. The axis runs south-west and north-east, and the front
commands a pleasing perspective of one of the principal Bournville
roads, and an admirable view of the Lickey Hills in the distance.
D E S C R I P T I O N S O F P L AT E S
XXXI.-XXXIII.
PLATE XXXI.
PAIR OF COTTAGES (SHALLOW SITE).

PLATE XXXI.
PAIR OF COTTAGES.
SEE PAGE 38.

The view shown in this plate illustrates the treatment of a shallow

corner site, the block being a pair of semi-detached, double-fronted
cottages. The plan is similar to the middle house of the foregoing
block.

PLATE XXXII.
PAIR OF COTTAGES.
 PLATE XXXII.
PAIR OF COTTAGES.
SEE PAGE 38.

A pair of cottages also planned on the same lines as the middle

house shown in Plate xxix. and the foregoing shallow-site pair, but
placed at right angles instead of lengthwise, and occupying a corner
position.

PLATE XXXIII.
PAIR OF COTTAGES.