Residents of Late Nineteenth-Century Port Districts: A Comparative Dataset from Antwerp and Boston, 1880–1900

1 Context

Port districts, located near docks and shipping infrastructure, underwent major transformation in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries due to expanding maritime trade, industrialization and global mobility (Milne, 2016). These areas attracted seafarers, migrants and other transients seeking shelter, work and entertainment in boarding houses, taverns and brothels, which often contributed to their infamous reputation (Burton, 1991; Beaven, 2025). Yet, the role of local residents in shaping the daily life and character of these neighbourhoods remains understudied beyond the usual focus on hospitality and prostitution (Loockx, 2025).

To address this gap, a historical dataset was created using Belgian population registers from Antwerp and U.S. census records from Boston, MA, two major port cities on opposite sides of the North Atlantic. In both countries, the nineteenth century saw increasing demand for systematic population data (Figure 1). Belgium introduced continuous population registers in 1846, recording household composition and residence history (Gutmann & van de Walle, 1978). In the United States, the nominative census of 1850 marked a shift to individual-level household data (Greenwood, 1990; Thorvaldsen, 2019).

Figure 1

Population registers and census records offer rich demographic and occupational data on men, women and children, enabling comparative analysis of local communities in port districts. The resulting dataset bridges maritime, urban, labour and migration history, contributing to debates on social structure, gender, mobility and everyday life. It also provides empirical evidence to reassess port districts beyond their associations with maritime labour, transience and vice, highlighting the complexity and rootedness of their resident populations (Loockx, 2025).

2 Dataset Description

3 Method

Steps

Selection process

Antwerp and Boston serve as a valuable and underexplored North Atlantic comparison. While their port districts fulfilled similar functions, they followed different trajectories in urban development, industrialization and migration (Rosenberg, 2004; Glaeser, 2005; Van Damme et al., 2022). The years 1880 and 1900 were selected as they marked peak decades of global maritime activity and trade expansion, driven by the rise of steam-powered commercial shipping, transoceanic migration and industrial connectivity (Steel, 2011; Osterhammel, 2014; Paine, 2014). The year 1890 was not included because the U.S. federal census returns for Massachusetts, including Boston, were destroyed in a 1921 fire, which precludes systemic cross-city comparison.

In each city, the port districts’ main thoroughfares were identified for their historical concentration of spaces emblematic of waterfront culture (Hugill, 1967): Schipperstraat, Vingerlingstraat and Oudemansstraat in Antwerp, and North Street in Boston (Figure 2). Whereas Belgian population registers were continuously updated (Gutmann & van de Walle, 1978), U.S. census records offered only decennial snapshots (Greenwood, 1990), which explains why the dataset includes only individuals registered in 1880 and 1900. Because the U.S. census was not organized by street, Enumeration Districts (EDs) were identified using the Unified ED Finder.¹ Only the section from Cross Street to the harbour—mainly within Ward 6—was included. In Antwerp, the full street lengths were covered.

Figure 2

Database construction

Antwerp’s population registers were accessed through the Antwerp City Archives (FelixArchief) and Boston’s census records via digitized documents on FamilySearch.² All pages were organized and transcribed in Microsoft Excel. The population registers offered detailed information including name, sex, places of birth, age or birthdate, marital status and occupation. Census records provided comparable variables, with some additional variables, such as race and parents’ birthplaces (see Appendix).

Several standardized fields were added to enable structured analysis and cross-city comparison (see Appendix). Unique IDs were assigned to individuals, address (ID house) and household (ID family). When only age or birth year was recorded, the missing value was calculated (Age). Since population registers did not systematically record birth regions, this information was added manually based on birthplace. A binary variable (Head?) was included to identify household heads. In the U.S. census, this was consistently noted; in the Antwerp 1880 records, by contrast, it had to be inferred based on household order, where the head typically appeared first, followed by the spouse, children and other members. Finally, individuals were classified as adults or children using an age threshold of fifteen (Adult/child), reflecting the compulsory education laws in Massachusetts at the time (Goldin & Katz, 2011), which provides a reasonable standardised cut-off across both contexts. The age variable in the dataset, however, allows users to apply different thresholds if desired.

Occupational categories

Occupations were categorized using standardized labels to allow for meaningful analysis across gender and city contexts. Separate classification systems were applied for men and women over the age of fifteen, reflecting differences in terminology and labour patterns. For men, categories captured the range of work recorded in the sources used, including maritime labour (e.g. shipping crew, port labourers), service-related jobs (e.g. hospitality), skilled and unskilled manual labour (e.g. artisans) and administrative roles (e.g. clerical, protective services). “No occupation” and “not specified” were used where applicable (see Table 1).

Table 1

Occupational categories of male workers (individuals aged fifteen and older).

OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY	DESCRIPTION
Shipping crew	Seafarers and others working aboard ships
Port labourers	Those involved in handling goods or maintaining ships
Other labourers	Unspecified or general labourers
Hospitality services	Men working in boarding houses, taverns, restaurants
Artists	Musicians, performers and other creative professions
Sales	Commercial agents, salesmen and real estate agents
Retail	Shopkeepers, grocers, peddlers and small-scale vendors
Wholesale	Merchants and traders engaged in large-scale or bulk sales
Artisans and specialized workers	Skilled workers who practice a craft, trade or precision work
Subordinate and unspecialized workers	Assistants, apprentices and general helpers working under skilled workers or in support roles across various industries
Protective service workers	Police officers, soldiers and firemen
Clerical workers	Clerks, office workers and administrative employees
Other	Categories not fitting into the main categories
No occupation	Men explicitly recorded as having no occupation
Not specified	Entries where no occupation was listed or the description was illegible or unclear

Occupational categories for women aged fifteen and older were designed to reflect the types of work most commonly recorded, with attention to gendered differences in employment and classification (see Table 2). Categories include both wage labour (e.g. domestic service, textile and clothing work, hospitality services, retail, general labour), as well as roles more difficult to classify, such as prostitution. “Housewives” were listed separately, as married women were often recorded without formal occupations—even if they continued to work—highlighting the challenges of investigating female labour roles (Horrell & Humphries, 1995). “No occupation” and “not specified” cover missing, illegible or blank entries.

Table 2

Occupational categories of female workers (individuals aged fifteen and older).

OCCUPATIONAL CATEGORY	DESCRIPTION
Domestic service	Women employed in domestic roles
Textile and clothing workers	Dressmakers, seamstresses and other workers in clothing, textile or sewing industries
Hospitality services	Boarding housekeepers, innkeepers and others in hospitality
Retail	Women involved in small-scale trade or shop work
Prostitution	Women identified as sex workers
Hairdressers	Women working in hairdressing
Labourers	General or unspecified female labourers
Housewives	Women engaged in general housework
Other	Occupations not fitting into the main categories
No occupation	Individuals explicitly recorded as having no occupation
Not specified	Entries where no occupation was listed or left blank

4 Reuse Potential

This dataset is well-suited for scholars in maritime, urban, social and labour history, as well as historical demography. Structured for comparative analysis across two cities and two time points, it supports studies of household composition, occupational structures, gendered labour and child demographics in the late 19^th and early 20^th centuries. The data can also be cross-referenced with shipping records, migration databases or other sources to explore mobility patterns or validate findings.

Its comparative potential lies in the fact that Antwerp and Boston, as North Atlantic port cities, were shaped by similar global forces such as trade, migration and maritime labour. These shared dynamics often produced comparable structural conditions in their waterfront districts, including patterns of land use, economic activity and exposure to transient populations (Hein, 2011). At the same time, each city followed its own trajectory shaped by local governance, national policies and migration patterns (Loockx, 2025). The dataset allows researchers to explore how global pressures played out differently across local contexts, making it suitable for both direct comparison and broader analysis across other port districts with analogous profiles.

The temporal structure of the dataset also enables diachronic comparisons that can inform broader historical inquiries into how port districts have changed over time. This makes the data valuable not only for research on the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, but also for scholars interested in the long-term transformation of maritime neighbourhoods. As port cities underwent transformations in port infrastructure, urban redevelopment and changing patterns of mobility and work during the twentieth and twenty-first centuries (Hoyle, 2000), the dataset offers a historical baseline against which to assess these shifts. It may therefore support future investigations into the evolving social composition and the broader dynamics of urban change.

Additionally, researchers in digital humanities, urban studies or migration studies may find it especially useful for teaching or collaborative projects requiring micro-level population data. Its structure and metadata make it suitable for classroom use, including GIS mapping, demographic analysis or historical interpretation.

Some limitations reflect the nature of the sources, including inconsistent enumeration and varying practices for recording temporary residents. The dataset is confined to selected streets and does not represent entire city populations, but it nonetheless provides a rich empirical foundation for various historical and interdisciplinary inquiries, with ample potential for exploring the complexities of port city life across time and space.

Competing Interests

The author has no competing interests to declare.