A numbered Beaufort opgaafrol of 1822 - Cathrina Carolina Pisani at 13, and her mother Diena Johanna Craffort remarried at 19

church register · an original record · consulted 2026-08-23

This citation is incomplete. Supplied as a screenshot. The ark and film/image numbers were never captured, so the original cannot be ordered from this entry alone. Recorded as a gap rather than tidied up: a citation that cannot be followed is a research question, not a formatting one.

Type

church register

Repository

FamilySearch, film # 008145114; Cape Province OPGAAFROLLEN (census-tax), filmed by the Genealogical Society of Utah at the Government Archives, Cape Town, project S-AF 20 B.

Reference

Film # 008145114, IMAGE 440 OF 592. The film number and image count are read off the viewer chrome in the screenshot and are solid. WHAT THE DOCUMENT IS, IS NOT: Frans described it as 'Beaufort 1822' and no target card, heading or year is visible in the crop. Its FORM is a numbered list of adults, some paired with 'en' and some standing alone - which is the shape of a LIDMATELYS (communicant roll) or an opgaafrol, not of a baptism or marriage register. Collection, congregation, record type and year all [TO VERIFY]. 5a-ii.

Consulted

2026-08-23

The citation as it was given

Supplied by , as a phone screenshot of the FamilySearch viewer, with the words 'Beaufort 1822'. | THE ENTRIES VISIBLE, transcribed as read: '13 Cathrina Carolina Pisani | 14 [?] [?Alexander] [?] | 15 Daniel Florie d'oude en Johanna Maria le Roux | 16 Daniel Jacobus Florie | 17 David Stephanus Florie en Maria Aucamp | 18 Louis Phillippus Florie en JOHANNA MARIA OOSTHUIZEN | 19 Adriaan van Wyk d'oude en DIENA JOHANNA CRAFFORT | 20 Jacobus Marthinus van den Banks en Magdalena Maria Koortse | 21 Johannes Hermanus Koortse | 22 Daniel Jeremias Roux en Magdalena Susanna van Wyk'. FLORIE is this hand's form of FOURIE. Entry 14 is cut by the viewer's toolbar and is not read. | *** TWO NAMES ON ONE PAGE ANSWER TO ROWS THIS PROJECT ALREADY HOLDS, AND THEY ARE MOTHER AND DAUGHTER. *** PER-000272 is CATRINA CAROLINA ELIZABETH PISANI, b.1790, d.1824~, whose own row says 'daughter of the Venetian and DINA JOHANNA CRAFFORD' - and PER-000271 is DINA JOHANNA CRAFFORD, 1771~-1846. Entry 13 is the daughter and entry 19 the mother, six lines apart. | *** AND THE MOTHER IS REMARRIED. *** Entry 19 pairs her with ADRIAAN VAN WYK D'OUDE, a man not in this model. Alviso Louis Almoro Pisani (PER-000269) has no recorded death date; if this is the same Dina Johanna Crafford then he was dead or gone by 1822, which is the first thing this project has that bears on when. | *** IT ALSO PUTS THE PISANIS IN THIS DISTRICT. *** Every trace held until 23 Aug 2026 was at the Cape in the 1780s. That morning BWB-223-10 turned up a LOUIES ALMERO PISANI standing witness at Beaufort West in August 1839 (LEAD-0286); this is a Pisani at Beaufort SEVENTEEN YEARS EARLIER. Two independent sightings, and the family is on this ground rather than only in the naming of it. | NOTHING IS MATCHED - 9 forbids an Afrikaans name alone - but a MOTHER AND DAUGHTER matching a mother and daughter, on one page, is the shape LEAD-0289 relies on too. LEAD-0290. | ALSO: entry 18 marries a LOUIS PHILLIPPUS FLORIE to a JOHANNA MARIA OOSTHUIZEN. Not in this model and not matched. | [SAME FILM AND SAME DOCUMENT AS SRC-558], which is images 454-455 of film 008145114 and carries a LEENINGS PLAATS column on the facing leaf. That column is what identifies the record as a roll rather than a church list, and it applies to this opening too. | *** [23 Aug 2026, LATER THE SAME EVENING] THE RECORD TYPE IS NO LONGER [TO VERIFY]. IT IS AN OPGAAFROL, ON ITS OWN COLUMN HEADINGS. *** Image 458 is headed 'Namen der In- en Opgezetenen BOVEN DE 16 JAAREN en van hunne Vrouwen' - the exact header SRC-522 records verbatim for the George opgaafrol of 1811 - and image 459 carries the column heads 'Quad[raat] MORGEN | Quad[raat] ROEDEN | LEENINGS PLAATSEN'. Extent in morgen and roods, and the loan place, ruled against a list of taxable adults over sixteen. The COLLECTION and the YEAR are still [TO VERIFY] - no target card has been seen - but WHAT the document is no longer rests on inference. | *** [23 Aug 2026, LATE] THE YEAR IS IN DOUBT AND THIS IS THE HONEST STATE OF IT. *** NO. 3385; PROJECT NUMBER S-AF 20 B; ROLL NUMBER 1. LOCALITY OF RECORD CAPE PROVINCE. TITLE OF RECORD OPGAAFROLLEN / CENSUS - TAX. VOLUME/S J 5. YEAR/S INCLUDED 1819.' | THAT CARD SAYS 1819, NOT 1822 - BUT IT MAY NOT BE THIS FILM'S CARD. It reads ROLL NUMBER 1, and SRC-522's card, for the George roll of 1811, reads ROLL NUMBER 12 on FILM # 008145124 in the same project S-AF 20 B, same operator, same film unit 3385. If roll 12 is film ...124 then roll 1 is film ...113 and FILM 008145114 IS ROLL 2 - a different volume and possibly a different year. | SO THE YEAR OF THIS ROLL IS [TO VERIFY] AND '1822' IS FRANS'S DESCRIPTION OF THE FILE, WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT 5a-ii SAYS NOT TO LET BECOME A CITATION. The reading of the pages is unaffected - the names, the line numbers and the leenings-plaatsen alignments are read off the images and stand. WHAT IS UNSETTLED IS THE DATE ON THEM. | WHAT SETTLES IT: the target card at the head of FILM 008145114 itself, at or near image 1. It will give VOLUME/S and YEAR/S INCLUDED for this roll. LEAD-0293. | THE CARD IS WORTH HAVING ANYWAY: it establishes the SERIES beyond doubt - Cape Province OPGAAFROLLEN, census-tax, J-numbered volumes, filmed at the Cape Town government archives in 1978 - which is the collection these three sources could not name this morning. | *** [23 Aug 2026, RESOLVED WITHIN THE HOUR] THE YEAR IS 1822 AND THE CARD BELONGED TO A DIFFERENT ROLL. *** [FAMILY] Latter three was 1819. previous ones was 1822. The target card transcribed above - ROLL NUMBER 1, VOLUME J 5, YEAR 1819 - is the card for the 1819 roll he sent alongside it (SRC-560), not for this film. The arithmetic that raised the doubt was right about the ROLLS and wrong about which images it applied to. *** THE DOUBT WAS STILL WORTH RAISING: the card genuinely reads 1819, and a card and a description disagreeing is exactly the shape 5a-ii warns about. It took one sentence to settle and would have taken a rewrite to unpick later. *** WHAT REMAINS, and it is small: the target card at the head of FILM 008145114 has not itself been seen, so 1822 rests on Frans's attribution rather than on the film's own card. He distinguished the two rolls deliberately, which is a considered statement and not a passing label. LEAD-0293.

Kept verbatim. This project contradicts published genealogies and corrects a family's own oral tradition, so every claim has to be checkable by someone who was not in the room.

Nothing in the model cites this source yet.