Beaufort opgaafrol of 1822, images 454-455 - eleven households of this family on one opening, with VROLYKHEID against line 16 in the LEENINGS PLAATS column
tax roll · an original record · consulted 2026-08-23
- Type
- tax roll
- 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, IMAGES 454 (the household list) and 455 (the facing leenings-plaats column), of 592. The film and image numbers are read off the viewer chrome and are solid. THE COLLECTION AND CONGREGATION ARE NOT: no target card, heading or year is visible in either crop, and 'Beaufort 1822' is Frans's description of the file, not a citation. *** WHAT THE DOCUMENT IS, HOWEVER, IS NOW ARGUABLE FROM ITS OWN STRUCTURE: *** a numbered list of householders on the left leaf and a column headed LEENINGS PLAATS on the right, line for line. That is the exact shape SRC-459 describes for the George opgaafrol - households enrolled by number, with the LANDERYEN on the facing page. Recorded as a tax roll on that reasoning; the collection stays [TO VERIFY].
- Consulted
- 2026-08-23
The citation as it was given
Supplied by [FAMILY] Image 454, then image 455 with the words 'Vrolikheid alligns with line 16', then 'Column is leenings plaats'.. | *** ELEVEN LINES, AND EVERY FAMILY NAME ON THEM IS ALREADY IN THIS MODEL. THIS IS THE DENSEST SINGLE PAGE THE PROJECT HAS. *** Transcribed as read: '12 [?Georg] Bernhardus [?] en Anna Margaretha Vlotman | 13 Johannes Nieuwenhuizen | 14 Petrus Lambertus Nieuwenhuizen | 15 Johannes van Eck en Aletta [?Susanna] Nieuwenhuizen | 16 JACOBUS JOHANNES OOSTHUIZEN EN ANNA MAGDALENA STRYDOM | 17 DANIEL JACOBUS STRYDOM EN ANNA MAGDALENA CALITS | 18 JAN HENDRIK STRYDOM | 19 CORNELIS ANDRIES OOSTHUIZEN EN JOHANNA MAGTELD PETRONELLA STRYDOM | 20 PIETER FREDRIK STRYDOM en Cornelia Maria Lindeque | 21 JAN LOUIS VENTER JUNIOR EN DINA MAGDALENA OOSTHUIZEN | 22 ROELOF OOSTHUIZEN EN HESTER MARIA CATHARINA STRYDOM'. | THE MATCHES, none of them asserted but all of them exact on given names, surnames and pairing: 16 = PER-000208 x PER-000209; 17 = PER-000337 x PER-000338; 18 = PER-000592 (b.1804, so eighteen); 19 = PER-000015 x PER-000138; 20 = PER-000704 (b.1800); 21 = PER-000590 x PER-000142; 22 = PER-000147 x PER-000591. | *** WHAT IT ESTABLISHES, AND IT IS THE EARLIEST FAMILY HOLDING IN THE KOUP THIS PROJECT HAS. *** Line 16 carries VROLYKHEID in the LEENINGS PLAATS column. Jacobus Johannes Oosthuizen therefore held Vrolykheid as a LOAN PLACE IN 1822 - eleven years before Stretch surveyed the loan farm for him in August 1833, and NINETEEN YEARS before the quitrent grant of 15 April 1841 (OWN-000022, Bf.W.Q.5-1B). | *** IT SETTLES LEAD-0288 OUTRIGHT. *** Line 22 names ROELOF OOSTHUIZEN AND HESTER MARIA CATHARINA STRYDOM as a couple - the pairing that lead was opened on this morning from two 1838 witness lists. | *** AND IT CONFIRMS LEAD-0283 A THIRD TIME. *** Line 17 writes the mother ANNA MAGDALENA CALITS. SRC-556's register wrote CALES; the reading of SRC-554 here and FamilySearch's index both wrote CARELSE and were both wrong. Calits, Cales, Calitz - one family, and PER-000338 stands. | *** IT ALSO RESOLVES WHICH JAN LOUIS VENTER. *** Line 21 writes JUNIOR, so it is PER-000590 (b.1790) and not his father PER-000120 (b.1754). | THE WHOLE BLOC IS ADJACENT ON ONE OPENING: two Oosthuizen brothers, their Strydom wives, the Strydom parents-in-law, two more Strydom brothers, a third Oosthuizen brother, and a Venter married to their sister - lines 16 to 22 without a break. That is what 9a's 'two weddings' and STO-0046 describe, seen in a roll rather than inferred from marriages. | *** [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.