Lot A (Varsche Fontein No. 27 Ptn 1)

· on record 1913 · show on the map

The farm's own history, the grant, the original survey, sits on that page.

Farm number: No. 27
Portion: 1
Also recorded as: Lot ADIAGRAMpart of VarschefonteinFAMILY, worked today as one unit with Portion 4
District: Prince Albert
Extent, as the diagram states it: 1731 morgen 181 sq roods

This parcel has no matched survey polygon, so it cannot be drawn on the map. That is a gap in the cadastre match, not an absence from the record.

Why this farm is here

A piece of a farm already in this model. Not yet placed on the map.

parcel Cut out of Varsche Fontein
border Shares a boundary with Groot Rivier (Varsche Fontein No. 27 Ptn 2) Groot Rivier (Varsche Fontein No. 27 Ptn 2)
border Shares a boundary with Plaat Fontein (Varsche Fontein No. 27 Ptn 3) Plaat Fontein (Varsche Fontein No. 27 Ptn 3)

What the record holds, in order

1913 boundary change subdivision: from Varsche Fontein
1913 ownership owner not named in the record
transfer · confidence medium

Research notes

cut from Varsche Fontein 1913; SG Dgm 2087/1913; deed 1913-169-11114

[13 Aug 2026] Renamed to the one form this model uses for every portion - the portion's own name, then the parent farm, its number and the portion in brackets - so that a name is legible in a list, a search result and a map popup without the reader having to know which farm number is which. It read "Lot A (Varsche Fontein Ptn 1)" before. Nothing about the ground changed.

[13 Aug 2026, FAMILY] Worked today as one unit with Portion 4 (PAR-000018) under the name Varschefontein - The documented parcel is kept separate at his instruction. NOTE WHAT THE CADASTRE SAYS ABOUT THIS: there is no polygon for Portion 1 in the Surveyor-General pull and no Portion 1 row in the 2023 valuation roll, so this portion has stopped existing as a separate registered unit - which is what "considered one unit" looks like in the record.

The research behind this page, kept separate from it: dated working notes, open questions, and what is not yet settled.

What the record is missing

A tenure with no one in it second order · B7 no-owner
OWN-000010 records a transfer on Lot A (Varsche Fontein No. 27 Ptn 1) from 1913 and names no party. Either the holder was never read off the document, or the publishing rule withheld them, the page cannot tell you which, and neither can this.

What would settle it Re-read DOC-0005.

Found by breaks.py reading the model against itself, not written by hand, each one is a shape of missing record, not a fault in the data. The whole set is on the questions page.