Deel van Minnies Kraal Nr. 112
Minnies Kraal Nr. 112 Gdlt 5
5/112 op die kadaster · op rekord 1955 · wys op die kaart
Die plaas se eie geskiedenis — die toekenning, die oorspronklike opmeting — sit op daardie bladsy.
- Plaasnommer
- Nr. 112
- Gedeelte
- 5
- Op die kadaster
- 5/112, gedeeltegeregistreer as MINNIES KRAAL
- Distrik
- Prince Albert
- Grootte, soos die kaart dit stel
- 922.0071 morgen
- Moderne opgemete oppervlakte
- 781.8 ha
Die historiese grootte en die moderne opgemete oppervlakte is twee aparte metings en word hier nie aangebied asof hulle mekaar bevestig nie. Die eerste is wat 'n landmeter op 'n kaart geskryf het, gewoonlik in morg. Die tweede is wat die moderne kadaster teken.
Waarom hierdie plaas hier is
'n Stuk van 'n plaas wat reeds in hierdie model is. 24 km van Klaarstroom.
- perseel Uitgesny uit Minnies Kraal Nr. 112
- grens Deel 'n grens met Klipfontein A Nr. 174 Klipfontein A Nr. 174
- dokument 'n Dokument in die versameling beskryf hierdie grond DOC-0216
Wat die rekord hou, in volgorde
-
Augustus 1955–September 1955
document
SG diagram 8736/55
T/A 2305/1956
- undated boundary change subdivision: from Minnies Kraal Nr. 112
Begrens deur, soos die kaart hulle noem
- NW Annex Koppies Kraal
- N Restant van Minnies Kraal
- W Restant van die plaas KOPJES KRAAL
- NE Gedeelte 6
- E Gedeelte 4
- SW Restant van die plaas KLIPFONTEIN A
- S Gedeelte 1 van die plaas KLIPFONTEIN A
Ook begrens deur, soos die moderne kadaster dit teken
Grond wat aan hierdie plaas raak op die Landmeter-generaal se huidige poligone en wat geen kaart wat hier gehou word, noem nie. Afgelei uit die meetkunde, nie van 'n dokument afgelees nie.
- NE Minnies Kraal Nr. 112
- NE Minnies Kraal Nr. 112 Gdlt 6
- E Minnies Kraal Nr. 112 Gdlt 4
- S Klipfontein Oost (Klipfontein A Nr. 174 Gdlt 1)
- SW Klipfontein A Nr. 174 Restant
- W Kopjes Kraal Nr. 123 Restant
- NW Kopjes Kraal
- NW Oude Muure
Dokumente
Kadaster
Die Landmeter-generaal se kaartindeks vir hierdie perseel
Die Landmeter-generaal se kaartindeks vir die hele plaas — waar die oorspronklike opmeting van hierdie grond lê.
Navorsingsnotas
[3 Aug 2026, SRC-252] SG Dgm 8736/55, "Gedeelte 5 van die plaas MINNIES KRAAL Nr 112, PRINCE ALBERT", 922.0071 morgen (about 790 ha). Surveyed August-September 1955 by S.J. Maarschalk, Landmeter; approved by the Landmeter-Generaal 16 January 1956. Coordinates on Stelsel Lo 23. The parent diagram is No. 8731/1955, attached to T/A 1956-2300 - the same 1955 survey campaign that produced SRC-206, the sheet that settled this farm's number as 112. Leer No. 5/169/23; M.S. No. E.2090/55. Endorsed 112/5; this sheet attached to T/A No. 2305/1956. Its neighbour list is the useful part: KOPJES KRAAL and its ANNEX on one side, KLIPFONTEIN A on the other. Both are farms this project already holds - Kopjes Kraal No. 123 is documented from 1859 to 1934, and Klipfontein A is PAR-000083 - so Minnies Kraal is now placed by its neighbours rather than by a name alone. NO POLYGON: the downloaded cadastre holds the parent farm only, and this project does not pin a portion it cannot match.
[4 Aug 2026] plc_id was blank, so match_cadastre.py skipped this row entirely - it matches only within a registration division and a blank plc_id yields no division. Set to PLC-000001, Prince Albert.
*** [4 Aug 2026] sg_farm_key WAS 'NO-POLYGON' AND THAT WAS FALSE. *** The sentinel asserts that this ground has no cadastral counterpart, which is what 5 reserves it for - a vernacular name like Drooge Kloof that no diagram ever carried. This parcel is not that: the Surveyor-General publishes its polygon under the exact key its own farm and portion number imply, and it was sitting in geo/prince_albert_*.geojson the whole time. The sentinel is cleared so match_cadastre.py can do its job. Reasoning from absence, stated as fact - the same mistake as Drooge Kloof and Modderdrift, both recorded in 5a.
[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 "Minnies Kraal Portion 5 (No. 112 Ptn 5)" before. Nothing about the ground changed.
Werknotas, hier gewys omdat dit 'n private navorsingsbou is.
Die werksnotas op hierdie werf word in Engels gehou en word nie vertaal nie. Hulle verander met elke navorsingsessie, en 'n vertaling sou uit pas raak met die oorspronklike. Alles anders — die stories, die getranskribeerde dokumente en die koppelvlak — is in Afrikaans.
Wat die rekord kortkom
-
“Gedeelte 6” is named as a neighbour 5 times and we hold no parcel for it
second order · B3 unheld-farm
5 separate surveys in this model put Gedeelte 6 on the boundary of ground we do hold (PAR-000154, PAR-000155). It has no parcel of its own here, so nothing is known about who held it or when, while it borders farms at the centre of the project.
What would settle it The Surveyor-General's farm index for the registration division will give it a farm number and a diagram; the cadastre pull in `data/fetch_cadastre.py` then places it on the map.
-
“Restant van Minnies Kraal” is named as a neighbour 2 times and we hold no parcel for it
third order · B3 unheld-farm
2 separate surveys in this model put Restant van Minnies Kraal on the boundary of ground we do hold (PAR-000154, PAR-000155). It has no parcel of its own here, so nothing is known about who held it or when, while it borders farms at the centre of the project.
What would settle it The Surveyor-General's farm index for the registration division will give it a farm number and a diagram; the cadastre pull in `data/fetch_cadastre.py` then places it on the map.
-
Nobody is on record as ever having held this
third order · B8 never-held
Minnies Kraal Nr. 112 Gdlt 5 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.