Rondabel No. 124 Ptn 8

8/124 on the cadastre · on record 1947 · show on the map

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

Farm number: No. 124
Portion: 8
On the cadastre: 8/124, portionregistered as RONDABLE
District: Prince Albert
Extent, as the diagram states it: 160,2089 morge
Modern surveyed area: 139.5 ha

The historic extent and the modern surveyed area are two separate measurements and are not presented here as confirming each other. The first is what a surveyor wrote on a diagram, usually in morgen. The second is what the modern cadastre draws.

Why this farm is here

A piece of a farm already in this model. 15 km from Klaarstroom.

parcel Cut out of Rondabel
document A document in the collection describes this ground DOC-0188

What the record holds, in order

September 1947 document SG diagram 9001/1947
S.G.T. 1444
undated boundary change subdivision: from Rondabel

Also bordered by, as the modern cadastre draws it

Ground that touches this farm on the Surveyor-General's current polygons and that none of the diagrams held here names. Derived from the geometry, not read off a document.

SE Rondabel
SE Visgat (Rondabel No. 124 Ptn 2)
SW Rondabel No. 124 Remainder
W Rhemhoogte No. 125
NW Rhemhoogte No. 125 Ptn 8
NW Swartskraal (Rhemhoogte No. 125 Ptn 6)

Documents

catalogued, no scan held

Surveyor-General diagram, 9001/1947, September 1947
SCAN334 124 8.jpg

Cadastre

Surveyor-General diagram index for this parcel

Surveyor-General diagram index for the whole farm — where the original survey of this ground sits.

Research notes

[1 Aug 2026] IN THE MODEL FROM THE CADASTRE PULL ONLY. The Surveyor-General has a polygon for it and this project has no document that names it, so it carries geometry, an extent and a name and no history. It is here because RONDABEL IS A CORE FARM of this project and the map was showing the parent outline with four of its nine modern parcels named, which reads as an absence in the record and is not one. It was absent purely because nobody had made the row, not because anything was missing from the pull: data/geo/prince_albert_farm_portions.geojson has held this polygon all along and match_cadastre.py can only match parcels that exist. Cadastre: 167.2 ha, LPI C06100000000012400008. The model already holds Ptn 3 Brand Kraal (PAR-000042), Ptn 5 Hartebeest Voedpad (PAR-000043), Ptn 6 Elandsfontein (PAR-000044) and Ptn 7 Klein Elandsfontein (PAR-000045), each off its own diagram. This row has no diagram behind it and no name beyond the cadastre's. [TO VERIFY] what it was called and who held it, from the Rondabel deduction tables and the CSG diagram index.

[3 Aug 2026, SRC-222] 160,2089 morge, surveyed September 1947 by J.F.E. Hartwig as an Onderverdelingskaart under Art. 24(b) of Act 9 of 1927. The Traka River forms part of the boundary. Its sheet names Rondabel's ORIGINAL diagram, 502/1867, attached to title P.A.Q. 1-21.

[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 "Rondabel Portion 8 (No. 124 Ptn 8)" before. Nothing about the ground changed.

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

Nobody is on record as ever having held this third order · B8 never-held
Rondabel No. 124 Ptn 8 is in the model and drawn on the map, and carries no ownership record of any kind, not a grant, not a transfer, not an occupation.

What would settle it The Surveyor-General's diagram for the farm number names the grantee and the date; the deed reference on it opens the transfer chain.

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.