Chapter 17

THE ENDPRINTED BY WILLIAM CLOWES AND SONS, LIMITED, LONDON AND BECCLES.

FOOTNOTES:[1]Among the sources of information for the next few pages I must mention particularly Arnold’sHistory of Rome, Gibbon’sDecline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Busk’sHistory of Spain and Portugal, and Stephens’History of Portugal.[2]The old library of the Ptolemies was consumed in Cæsar’s Alexandrian war. Marc Antony gave the whole collection of Pergamus (200,000 volumes) to Cleopatra, as the foundation of thenewlibrary of Alexandria. It was kept in apartments of the great temple of Serapis, which was broken down in A.D. 389 by Theophilus, archbishop of Alexandria, “the perpetual enemy of peace and virtue, a bold, bad man, whose hands were alternately polluted with gold and with blood.” The valuable library was pillaged or destroyed. See Gibbon’sDecline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Chapter XXVIII.[3]The Arabs, Persians, and Indians were found at the beginning of the sixteenth century of our era to be well acquainted with the eastern coast as far south as Cape Correntes, and the Arabs and Persians had settlements along the whole of that seaboard. But of this Europeans knew absolutely nothing. Beyond Cape Correntes, in latitude 24° 4´ south, the Asiatics did not venture in their coir-sewn vessels. Here the Mozambique current, from which the cape has its present name, ran southward with great velocity, usually from two to five kilometres an hour, according to the force and direction of the wind, but often much faster. The cape had the reputation also of being a place of storms, where the regular monsoons of the north could no longer be depended upon, and where violent gusts from every quarter would almost surely destroy the mariners who should be so foolhardy as to brave them. The vivid Arab imagination further pictured danger of another kind, for this was the chosen home of those mermaids—believed in also by the Greeks of old—who lured unfortunate men to their doom. There were legends of ships having been driven far beyond it in gales, and having been carried by the current onward to a great ocean in the west, from which they had only with the greatest difficulty returned. The perils the crews had gone through and the hardships they had suffered were magnified as a matter of course, and the dreadful sights that had met their eyes were such as to make the boldest shudder. Of the shore of that awful sea nothing was known, for no one had ever set foot upon it. So Cape Correntes, with its real and fictitious perils, was the terminus of Mohamedan enterprise to the south, though there were men in Kilwa who sometimes wondered what was beyond it and half made up their minds to go overland and ascertain. Had there been a Bantu settlement beyond Inhambane there can be no doubt that their eagerness to procure ivory would have led them on, but black men had replaced the wild aborigines there so shortly before the arrival of the Portuguese that there was not time to make the venture.[4]For information on the discoveries mentioned here I am indebted chiefly to theIndice Chronologico das Navegações, Viagens, Descobrimentos, e Conquistas dos Portuguezes nos Paizes Ultramarinos desde o Principio do Seculo XV, the great historyDa Asiaof João de Barros, Major’sDiscoveries of Prince Henry the Navigator and their Results, and Beazley’sPrince Henry the Navigator, the Hero of Portugal and of Modern Discovery.[5]These islands and even the Canaries had been visited by Genoese ships before they were rediscovered by the Portuguese. But as no use was made of them by the first visitors, and as knowledge concering them was not communicated to the world in general, the Portuguese have a fair claim to be regarded as the real discoverers. In the same way Columbus is rightly credited with the discovery of America, though the Northmen visited its north-eastern coast long before his time.[6]It would be interesting to know the exact day on which Dias sailed, but I have not found it possible to ascertain it. As already observed, before the entrance of Vasco da Gama into the Indian sea the dates of the various discoveries given by Portuguese historians are not implicitly to be relied upon, and as no original journals or logbooks of the early voyages are now in existence, there are no means of verifying them. João de Barros is the only historian known to me who has placed on record the month and year of sailing and of the return of Dias in this voyage, and he does not state the day of departure from the Tagus. His words are: (ElRei Dom João) “determinou de enviar logo neste anno de quatrocentos e oitenta e seis dobrados navios per mar, e homens per terra, pera ver o fim destas cousas.” ... “partiram no fim de Agosto do dito anno.” ... “onde chegáram em Dezembro do anno de quatrocentos e oitenta e sete, havendo dezeseis mezes, e dezesete dias que eram partidos delle.” Barros is the most reliable of all the Portuguese historians of that time, and he was in a position to obtain the particulars of this voyage, which unfortunately he gives so scantily. Neither Damião de Goes in hisChronica do Felicissimo Rei Dom Emanuel da Gloriosa Memorianor Fernão Lopes de Castanheda in hisDescobrimento e Conquista da India pelos Portuguezesmentions the date of the voyage, but both relate other particulars which tend to confirm the opinion that it took place at the time stated by Barros. For instance, Castanheda states that Affonso de Paiva and João Pires de Covilhão commenced their journey from Portugal after the departure of Dias, and he agrees with Barros in giving the 7th of May 1487 as the date on which they left Santarem. The exact dates of Dias passing the Cape of Good Hope eastward, of his reaching the mouth of the Infante river, and of the erection of the landmark São Philippe cannot be ascertained, but these events in all probability occurred in 1487, as making allowance for his detentions when leaving the storeship, at Angra dos Ilheos, and afterwards, Dias can hardly have reached the latitude of the Cape before the beginning of that year. See appendix.[7]See the numerous statements concerning this mythical monarch made by the early Portuguese writers, copied by me and printed, together with English translations, in volumes i, iii, v, vi, and vii of theRecords of South-Eastern Africa. Ultimately the name was applied to the ruler of Abyssinia. Index, Prester John, in Vol. ix, page 474.[8]“On the 21st of November (1825) a heavy south-east gale set in, before which we were carried with great velocity, and in the afternoon saw the remains of the cross erected by Bartholomeu Dias at the southern extremity of Angra Pequena. Passing by it we (H.M.S.Barracouta) anchored in the bay, where, although the wind was directly off shore, yet such was its violence that the whole surface of the water was one vast sheet of foam. Some officers landed with Captain Vidal, for the purpose of examining the cross, and obtaining the latitude and longitude of the point. They found the sand very painful to the eyes, being swept from the surface of the rocks, and almost blinding them as they proceeded to the summit of the small granite eminence on which Bartholomeu Dias erected his cross, as a memento of his discovery of the place. This is said to have been standing complete forty years back, but we found that it had been cast down, evidently by design, as the part of the shaft that had originally been buried in the rock remained unbroken, which never could have been the case had it been overturned in any other way than by lifting it from the foundation. The inducement to this disgraceful act was probably to search for such coins as might have been buried beneath the cross; and it is probable that the destroyers, in order to make some little amende for their desolation, re-erected a portion of the fragments, as we found a piece of the shaft, including the part originally placed in the ground, altogether about six feet in length, propped up by means of large stones, crossed at the top by a broken fragment, which had originally formed the whole length of the shaft. This was six feet above ground, and twenty-one inches beneath, composed of marble rounded on one side, but left square on the other, evidently for the inscription, which, however, the unsparing hand of Time, in a lapse of nearly three centuries and a half, had rendered illegible. In descending by a different and more craggy path, the party suddenly came upon the cross; this was sixteen inches square, of the same breadth and thickness as the shaft, and had on the centre an inscription, but, like the other, almost obliterated.”—Narrative of Voyages to explore the Shores of Africa, Arabia, and Madagascar, performed in H.M. Ships Leven and Barracouta under the direction of Captain W. F. W. Owen, R.N.Two demi octavo volumes, published in London in 1833. The extract given above is to be found in Vol. II, pages 269 and 270. Two fragments of the pillar are now in the museum in Lisbon, and one is in the South African museum in Capetown.[9]The probabilities are that they did not, otherwise the information they carried back would have been regarded as much more important than it was considered to be by the king and by all the writers of the time. Ptolemy’s map, on which Africa was made to turn like a horn and project so far to the eastward as to enclose the Indian ocean, was still treated with respect, and the discoveries of Dias seemed at the time as if they tended rather to confirm than to refute this geographical feature. According to the view of those who regarded Ptolemy and Edrisi as safe guides, Dias had sailed along the southern side of the horn, without finding its end, and therefore had not done much more than Diogo Cam and other previous explorers. To-day, with our knowledge, his feat is regarded very differently, but neither the king nor the people considered at the time that it entitled him to any special reward or mark of favour.[10]The factory of São Jorge da Mina was established in January 1482 by Diogo d’Azambuja, and was the first permanent Portuguese settlement on the western coast of Africa, and the centre of the trade in gold. It was wrested from the Portuguese by the Dutch in 1637, and was held by them until April 1872, when it was transferred to England in exchange for some other territory on the coast. It is now known as Elmina.[11]Called João Pires, of Covilhão, by Damião de Goes, Pedro de Covilhão by Castanheda and Barros. Modern Portuguese writers follow De Goes in the name. See theIndice Chronologico das Navegações, Viagens, Descobrimentos, e Conquistas dos Portuguezes nos Paizes Ultramarinos desde o Principio do Seculo XV.Lisboa, 1841. João Pires on page 69. Barros says of him: “The king, seeing how necessary an acquaintance with the Arabic tongue was for this journey, sent upon this business one Pedro de Covilhão, a gentleman of his household who was well acquainted with it, and in his company another named Affonso de Paiva, and they were sent from Santarem on the 7th of May of the year 1487.”[12]Probably a misprint.[13]The German Emperor has since caused an exact copy of it to be erected, substituting granite for marble.[14]The particulars of this event cannot be ascertained, and it would even be doubtful whether Mondragon really rounded the Cape of Good Hope if it were not expressly stated in a summary of the directions issued by the king for his capture that the robbery of Queimado’s ship took place “no canal de Moçambique.”[15]I do not mention Sir John Mandeville in the text, because modern criticism has proved that what he states concerning India in his bookThe Voiage and trauayle of syr John Maundeuille, knight, which treateth of the way toward Hierusalem, and of maruayles of Inde, with other Ilands and Countryeswas compiled from earlier foreign writers, though his work was regarded as genuine and trustworthy by Englishmen until recently. Nothing is known of him from contemporary records, and it is even regarded as possible that Mandeville was a pseudonym. In his book he states that he was born at St. Albans, and travelled in the east as far as China between the years 1322 and 1357. It is now believed that he really visited Palestine, and his account of that country is considered as partly based on personal observation, but the remainder of the volume is spurious. The original was written in French. See theEncyclopedia Britannica, article Mandeville. Of the numerous copies of the book, in many languages, in the library of the British Museum, the earliest was printed in 1480.[16]This sketch is drawn chiefly from Motley’sRise of the Dutch Republicand hisHistory of the United Netherlands to the Twelve Years’ Truce—1609, theGeschiedenis des Vaderlands, by Mr. W. Bilderdyk, edited by Professor H. W. Tydeman, seven octavo volumes, issued at Amsterdam in 1832 to 1853,History of the People of the Netherlands, by Petrus Johannes Blok, Ph.D., four demi octavo volumes (English edition), published at New York and London, 1898 to 1907, (another volume still to appear),Handboek der Geschiedenis van het Vaderland, by Mr. G. Groen van Prinsterer, two octavo volumes (second edition), issued at Amsterdam in 1852,Histoire de Belgique, by Professor H. Pirenne, of the University of Ghent, second edition of Vol. I published at Brussels in 1902, Vol. II published at the same place in 1903, and Vol. III in 1907, (other volumes still to appear), andThe History of Belgium, by Demetrius C. Boulger, published at London in 1902. Some other works consulted will be mentioned in notes.[17]“Belgium ofte Nederland werdt ghemeynelijck verdeelt in zeventhien Provincien, meer om dat de Princen daer over regierende, seventhien Tytelen van de selve hebben ghevoert, als om andere merckelijcke redenen. Want op de ghemeyne vergaderinghen ende by-een-comsten der Staten van den Lande, en pleghen de selve in soodanighen ghetalle niet te verschijnen, maer sommighe sorteerden onder andere, als by exempel: Het Hartoghdom van Limborch met syn appendentien: item het Marck-Graeffschap des H. Rycx ofte van Antwerpen stemden ende contribueerden onder Brabandt, ’t Graeffschap Zutphen maeckte het vierde Quartier van Gelderland: Daer-en-tegens Doornijck ende het Doornijcksche Landt: Item Rijssel, Douay ende Orchies (synde andersints Steden ende Leden van Wals-Vlaenderen) hadden hare stemmen in het bysonder, ende contribueerden apart: Het selve gheschiede oock met Valencyn, dat nochtans een Stad ende Lidt van Henegouwen is.”Atlas of Mercator and Hondius, edition published at Amsterdam in 1633. This superb atlas contains a double page map of all the provinces and no fewer than thirty maps of different sections. A copy obtained by me in Holland is in the South African Public Library.[18]See the superbAtlasof Ortelius, published at Antwerp in 1570. A copy obtained by me at the Hague is now in the South African Public Library. This atlas contains a map of the whole provinces and separate maps of Holland, Zeeland, the Frisian provinces, Flanders, and Brabant. A comparison of the map of the provinces with one of Holland and Belgium to-day will show the great changes that have taken place in the interim.[19]See Blok’sHistory of the People of the Netherlands, Vol. II, page 263.[20]There was in the south the large province of Liege, nominally a fief of the Holy Roman Empire, under the government of a bishop, but it was not counted with the others, though enclosed by some of them. It had been conquered by Charles the Headstrong of Burgundy, but on his death became independent again, and maintained a perfect neutrality thereafter, though its borders were not always respected by contending armies. It remained an independent principality until it was annexed to France on the 1st of October 1795, and in 1814 for the first time was joined to the other provinces to form the kingdom of the Netherlands. When Belgium seceded and secured its independence in 1831 Liege became one of its provinces.[21]The greatest of the southern dioceses was Liege, whose bishop was first settled at Tongres, then at Maastricht, and from A.D. 708 at Liege. In the tenth century the bishops of Liege and Cambrai obtained rights as counts over extensive domains.—Blok.[22]The word “king” is used as a convenient one, though Philippe was notkingof the Netherlands. He was duke of one province, count of another, lord of the next, and so on, but under these titles he was sovereign of them all.[23]Blok gives the number, according to a statement of Requesens, as six thousand.[24]This differs slightly in detail from the account given by Motley, whose authority is so high that it is with reluctance I do not adhere to it in every particular. In this instance I follow the Life of Boisot, as given inLeeven en Daden der Doorlughtige Zee-Helden, a quarto volume issued at Amsterdam in 1683.[25]The treaty contained thirty articles. It is to be found on pages 83 to 88 of Volume II ofA General Collection of Treatys, Manifesto’s, Contracts of Marriage, Renunciations, and other Publick Papers, from the year 1495, to the year 1712, second edition published in London in 1732.[26]See pages 89 to 91 of the volume ofTreaties, etc., already referred to.[27]Page 92, Vol. II of theCollection of Treaties, etc., already referred to.[28]General Collection of Treaties, etc., Vol. II, pages 103 to 119.[29]General Collection of Treaties, etc., Vol. II, pages 120 to 127.[30]Collection of Treaties, etc., Vol. II, pages 128 to 146.[31]The account of these voyages is taken fromBegin ende Voortgangh van de Vereenighde Nederlantsche Geoctroyeerde Oost Indische Compagnie, vervatende de voornaemste Reysen by de Inwoonderen derselver Provincien derwaerts gedaen. Two thick volumes, published at Amsterdam in 1646.[32]The accounts of the voyages that follow have been taken by me from the volumesBegin ende Voortganghalready mentioned, and François Valentijn’sOud en Nieuw Oost Indien, five huge volumes published at Amsterdam in 1726, checked by the narratives in the first three volumes of J. K. J. de Jonge’sDe Opkomst van het Nederlandsch Gezag in Oost Indie, published at the Hague and Amsterdam in 1862-65. I also made use of the last volume of Diogo de Couto’sDa Asia, in order to get the Portuguese version of these events, but obtained very little information in it. His work ends with an account of a Dutch disaster at Achin before the principal voyages were undertaken. Of course the Dutch were to him pirates and rebels.[33]It is attached to the original journals, now in the archives of the Netherlands. I made a copy of it on tracing linen for the Cape government, as it differs considerably from the chart in the printed condensed journal of the voyage. In other respects also the compilation of the printed journal has been very carelessly executed.[34]See the last two volumes of De Couto’sDa Asia.[35]The first Buddhist commandment, as given inThe Light of Asia, reads:“Kill not, for pity’s sake, and lest thou slayThe meanest creature on its upward way.”[36]Albert died in 1621 and Isabella on the 30th of November 1623, and as they left no children, in 1624 Belgium passed again under the direct government of Spain. By the treaty of Baden on the 7th of September 1714 it was ceded to the emperor Charles VI, and thereafter was generally termed the Austrian Netherlands.[37]Sections III, XLIX, and L of the treaty of Munster, pages 335 to 367 of Vol. IIGeneral Collection of Treaties, &c.[38]See pages 188 to 202 of Volume II ofA General Collection of Treaties, &c.[39]SeeA Voyage to East India, &c.by the Rev. Edward Terry. London, 1655.[40]The name of the Welshman is not given in theReport on Manuscripts in the Welsh languageby the Historical Manuscripts Commission (Vol. I, Part 3), published in London in 1905, from which this extract is taken.[41]A Voyage to East India, wherein some things are taken notice of in our passage thither, but many more in our abode there, within that rich and most spacious Empire. Of the Great Mogols, &c., &c. Observed by Edward Terry (then Chaplain to the Right Honorable Sr. Thomas Row, Knight, Lord Ambassadour to the great Mogol) now Rector of the Church at Grunford, in the County of Middlesex.A foolscap octavo volume of 545 pages, published in London in 1655. Terry says that he went to India the year after Sir Thomas Roe in a fleet of six ships—theCharles, of 1,000 tons, theUnicorn, almost as big, theJames, a large ship also, theGlobe, theSwan, and theRose, which were smaller. The fleet left the Thames on the 3rd of February 1615 (old style, 1616 it would be written now that the year commences on the 1st of January), under command of Captain Benjamin Joseph as commodore, and it rode at anchor in Table Bay from the 12th to the 28th of June. His statement concerning the convicts sent out the previous year does not fully agree with the records in the India Office in London, which I consulted to obtain information on this subject, and which I follow as far as they go, though they are defective.[42]See Valentyn’s great work on India, the last volume of which contains the history of Ceylon and also of Mauritius. See also the volumeVies des Gouverneurs Generaux, by J. P. I. du Bois. The account of Pieter Kolbe, in hisCaput Bonæ Spei Hodiernum, is so distorted by his bitter animosity towards Simon van der Stel as well as towards his son Willem Adriaan that no reliance can be placed upon it. Van der Aa, in hisBiographisch Woordenboek der Nederlanden, says that Simon van der Stel, son of Adriaan van der Stel and Monica da Costa, was born in Amsterdam, but that is a mistake, and not the only one in the article. SeeBiographisch Woordenboek der Nederlanden, door A. J. van der Aa, Zeventiende Deel, Tweede Stuk, Haarlem, 1874. I copied the article on the Van der Stel family in the above work, and published it in 1911 in the third part of myBelangrijke Historische Dokumenten over Zuid Afrika. It will be found on pages 11 and 12 of the volume.In Johan Saar’sAccount of Ceylon 1647-1657, this event is related as follows: “To pick a quarrel they (the Hollanders) seized upon four of the best elephants of the King of Candi. He, as a sensible man, sent word to the Hollanders that he had no intention to do anything against them, and he expected them, for their part, to act likewise; he had called them in as friends to be his allies against the Portuguese, and he hoped therefore that they would not settle in his territory. But the Hollanders from the beginning were bent upon war. When the king saw that it could not be avoided, he collected by one of his generals (a Saude, or what we should call a Count) about 60,000 men, chiefly natives, besides a few Portuguese whom he had formerly made captives, and who had entered his service. He would no longer trust the Hollanders.... In the following year (Anno Christi 1646) in the month of May, Mr. van der Stält (Van der Stel) received fresh orders to march with 150 men (picked soldiers), plenty of ammunition, powder, lead, and other materials of war, and also two field guns. He met with the heathen Saude in a small clearing, but as the latter had no orders to fight, because the king was still disinclined to go to war, he withdrew into the forest. The Hollanders opened a heavy fire from their field-guns and fire-arms, so that 400 were killed, and many were wounded. As the Hollanders had taken the offensive, the Saude did not care to act only on the defensive. He therefore came out of the forest, and closing round our people, attacked them with such energy that he cut off the head of Mr. Van der Stel, who had been carried in a palanquin or litter, clad in red scarlet. Of our men, who had numbered 150, they got 103 heads. The rest fled into the jungle and hid themselves as best they could. When the King, who had been near, heard of the onslaught he hurried to the spot, and although he was told that his men had been forced to fight, he showed displeasure. At once he ordered drums to be beaten and proclamation to be made that none of the Hollanders who had fled into the jungle were to be killed, but they were to be brought alive before him; that he would treat them well; and that he would swear by his God that he was innocent of the bloodshed. He then gave directions to have the head of Mr. Van der Stel put into a silver bowl, and covered it with white cloth, and sent it by one of the prisoners to their Captain in the great camp, to say that this was the head of Mr. Van der Stel, and that the King would see his body as well as the other 103 bodies decently buried.”[44]The instructions and orders of the lord of Mydrecht were copied by me from the original document in the Cape archives, and were published in 1896 in Deel IBelangrijke Historische Dokumenten. They occupy pages 1 to 48 of that pamphlet.[45]“Wij cunnen geensints verstaen dat den Commandeur en die van zijnen Raden voortaen haer eygen thuynen en bestiael sullen hebben of houden, meer als hij off sij tot hun eygen gesin sullen van noden hebben maer gehouden wesen haer daer van t’ ontledigen.” Despatch dated at Amsterdam on the 26th of April 1668, and signed by all of the seventeen directors. In the Cape archives, and copy in those at the Hague.[46]See the Resolutions of the Assembly of Seventeen, copied by me from the original volumes in the Archives at the Hague, and published in Deel IIIBelangrijke Historische Dokumenten over Zuid Afrika, an octavo volume of 435 pages, printed for the Union Government in 1911.[47]In secluded parts of South Africa, where it would not be possible to have one made in time after death, this precaution is still taken, but elsewhere the custom has died out. I have known instances of it in Canada also.[48]Two fragments of a journal kept by Adam Tas have been preserved: one from the 13th of June to the 14th of August 1705, in the archives at the Hague, the other, from the 7th of December 1705 to the 27th of February 1706, in the South African public library in Capetown, and they give a graphic picture of life in the country districts at the time. Whenever a friend came to his house or he went to a friend’s, they at once sat down to chat and drink wine and smoke tobacco, when if the party was large and included wives and daughters, playing cards was resorted to as a pastime. The quantity of coffee and tea consumed was very large. The vicious custom of returning incorrect numbers of cattle and sheep for taxation purposes was already prevalent, and Tas, who was certainly not a dishonest man in other matters, was unable to see that this was a crime deserving punishment. Professor Leo Fouché, of Pretoria, has copied these interesting fragments, and informs me that he intends to publish them.[49]It was only natural that the Huguenot refugees should be warmly attached to their native country, and long to be able to return to it. It was noticed in England as well as in Holland and Prussia that the French exiles had no hesitation in declaring that if Louis XIV would only restore the edict of Henri IV and pledge himself to observe it faithfully, they would return to the land of their birth and be his most faithful subjects. It was believed that they would not return and profess adherence to the state church while in their hearts remaining Calvinists and secretly practising the Calvinistic form of worship, as many of those who remained behind were doing, but the governments of the countries in which they had taken refuge were at this time suspicious of their attachment under all circumstances. In South Africa the Dutch section of the population—or at least some of them—believed that the Huguenots would not assist to repel a French invasion. It was only when the children born in the lands of refuge grew up that the strong attachment of the Huguenots to France died out.[50]“Op het rapport van de heeren commissarissen ingevolge van de resolutie commissorial van den 16 deses, geëxamineerd hebbende het wensch van de colonie van de Caap de Bonne Esperance, en het senden van vrije luijden derwaarts breeder in voorn. resolutie ter nedergestelt, is in conformite van ’t geadviseerde goetgevonden en geresolveert de respectieve kameren te authoriseeren omme eenige vrije luijden soo mannen vrouwen als kinderen vrij van kost en transport gelt derwaarts te senden, mitsgaders zorg dragende en lettende dat het soo veel doenlijk is mogen zijn Nederlanders of onderdaanen van dese Staat of van Hoogduijtsch natien geen trafieq ter zee doende, mitsgaders van de gereformeerde of Luyterse godsdienst, hun op de lantbouw of culture der wijnen verstaende, dogh geen franschen, de selve om redenen in voorn. als anders in ’t geheel excuserende.” Résolution of the Assembly of Seventeen adopted on the 22nd of June 1700, copied by me from the original records at the Hague, and published in 1911 on page 2 ofBelangrijke Historische Dokumenten over Zuid Afrika, Deel III.[51]See resolution of that date on page 6 of the volume already mentioned.[52]These instructions are given in the original on page 192.[53]See the original records of the council of policy in the Cape archives, or myAbstract of the Debates and Resolutions of the Council of Policy at the Cape from 1651 to 1687, an octavo volume of 233 pages, published at Capetown in 1881.[54]“daerop hebben wij naegesien ’t geene wij bij onsen brieff van den 14 Julij 1695 soo raeckende den Landtbouw als het bestiael beijde van de Comp: hebben geschreven, en gemeijnt dat soo wel de voors: Lantbouw, als het aenhouden van het bestiael, geensints een werck is, de Comp: convenierende off dat die haer daermede behoort te bemoeijen, maer dat deselve in tegendeel dat aen de vrijeluijen dient over te laeten soo om die daer door te beter te doen subsisteren ... met uijtsluytinge van Comps: dienaren die soo wel in den politicquen raed, als in den raedt van justitie compareren, en Sessie in deselve hebben, aen dewelcke wij verstaen, dat alle leverantie aen de Comp: sal werden benomen, off haer ontseijt.”—Despatch to the governor and council of policy at the Cape, dated at Amsterdam on the 27th of June 1699, and signed by fifteen of the directors.[55]This clergyman was of French descent, was educated for the ministry of the Roman catholic church, and had been a monk in the abbey of Boneffe in Belgium. After becoming a Protestant he wrote a book entitledDwalingen van het Pausdom. He could converse in many languages, and was unquestionably a man of high ability and learning, but he was of irascible disposition and wherever he went was engaged in strife. After he left South Africa he became a doctor of laws, and died at a very advanced age at Batavia in 1748, after having been during the preceding nineteen years minister of the Protestant Portuguese congregation at that place.[56]See the report of the commissioners Pieter de Vos and Hendrik Bekker, signed at Batavia on the 18th of September 1706. Copy in the Cape archives.[57]As he was an ordinary councillor of India and admiral of the return fleet he was higher in rank than the governor. His commission from the Indian authorities directed him to see that the laws were properly carried out, but he had no power given to him to make any new laws, and of course none to annul or suspend any order of the directors, which even the high Indian authorities could not do.[58]The first was a grant of the farm now occupied by the English archbishop of Capetown to Commander Jan van Riebeek, before the order of 1668 was issued, the second was the grant of Constantia already mentioned.[59]“Alle de Coloniers (goet vlees leverende) sonder dese of geene begunstighde daerinne boven anderen te prefereren, en sulex sonder onderscheijt tot voors: leverantie sal hebben te admitteren. Dan aengesien wij considereren dat voorsz: leverantie onder anderen mede moet geaght werden te sijn een voorregt der vrije Ingesetenen en Coloniers deselve privative competerende met uijtsluijtingh van Comps: dienaren, die met haer Soldije en emolumenten moeten te vreden sijn, en daermede oock genoeghsaem kunnen bestaen, soo verstaen en begeeren wij dat niemant van Comps: dienaren, den gouverneur daer onder mede begrepen, eenigh versch vlees aen Comps: schepen, hospitael etc: sal mogen leveren, direct of indirect, maer ’t selve op den ontfangst deses voortaen alleen door de vrije Ingesetenen moeten geschieden.”—Despatch signed by fifteen of the directors, dated at Middelburg on the 28th of October 1705. In the Cape archives and copy in those of the Netherlands. This order was sent out, because complaints had already been received in Holland that the governor was disregarding the laws on the subject.[60]When trying to excuse his conduct to his friends after all this was made known to the directors and he had been dismissed from the service, the late governor admitted, as he could not deny it, that he had occasionally taken Hertog with him to Vergelegen for the purpose here mentioned. See theKorte Deductie van Willem Adriaen van der Stel: tot destructie ende wederlegginge van alle de klaghten, die eenige vrijluijden van de voorsz Cabo aen de Edele Achtbare Heren Bewinthebberen van de Oost Indische Compagnie over hem hadden gedaen. A foolscap folio volume of 172 pages, published in Holland—the name of the town is not given—soon after his recall and dismissal from the Company’s service. But his opponents proved conclusively that Hertog was there for six or eight months at a time, while drawing pay from the Company, and they published some of his written orders as manager of the place. See theContra Deductie ofte Grondige Demonstratie van de valsheit der witgegevene Deductie by den Ed: Heer Willem Adriaan van der Stel, Geweezen Raad Extraordinaris van Nederlandsch India, en Gouverneur aan Cabo de Goede Hoop, etc., etc., etc.; waar in niet alleen begrepen is een nauwkeurig Historisch Verhaal, van al ’t geene de Heer van der Stel in den jare 1706 heeft werkstellig gemaakt, on de Vrijburgeren aan de Kaab t’ onder te brengen: maar ook een beknopt Antwoort op alle in gemelde Deductie, en deszelfs schriftelijke Verantwoordinge, voorgestelde naakte uitvluchten, abuseerende bewysstukken, en andere zaken meer: strekkende tot Verificatie van’t Klachtschrift, in den jare 1706 aan Haar Wel Edele Hoog Achtbaarheden, de Heeren Bewinthebberen ter Illustre Vergadering van Zeventienen afgezonden; zynde gesterkt door veele authenticque en gerecolleerde Bewysstukken, waar van de origineele of authenticque Copyen in handen hebben de twee Gemachtigden van eenige der Kaapsche Inwoonderen Jacobus van der Heiden en Adam Tas. A foolscap folio volume of 318 pages, published at Amsterdam in 1712. This volume refutes the statements made in theKorte Deductie, and contains some very strong evidence given under oath. It is otherwise interesting, as being the first book entirely prepared in South Africa.[61]In hisKorte Deductiethe late governor asserted that he had purchased over two hundred slaves for his private use. The Company allowed him twenty of its male and female slaves as domestic servants in his residence in the castle, and these he sent to his farm, employing his own instead. He denied making use of other government slaves than these for his private work. He stated that the soldiers and sailors were temporarily detached from the public service, in the manner usual in times of peace, and were paid and maintained by him while they were in his service. The only other soldiers that he admitted as having worked at Vergelegen were those who formed his escort when he went there, and who, he asserted, might better have been occupied during their stay at the farm than have been idle. But see the note on page 218.[62]The quantity of wheat produced at Vergelegen is not given in the archives, but is stated by Bogaert, who is a trustworthy authority, at over eleven hundred muids yearly.[63]In hisKorte Deductiehe stated that by purchasing from farmers and by the natural increase of his stock he had some thousands of sheep and some hundreds of horned cattle, but that he did not know the exact number. Instead of eighteen stations, he asserted that he had eight folds or kraals, but that part of his attempted excuse for his conduct is so palpably misleading that it is of no value whatever. The statistics given here are from those obtained after his recall.[64]“Ondertusschen sullen uE: haer mede op hoede hebben te houden.”—Despatch signed by twelve of the directors, dated at Amsterdam on the 15th of March 1701.[65]He was able to prove that he had paid for some timber drawn from the Company’s magazine, but the evidence of the master of a ship shows how articles could be obtained even where invoices and disbursements were audited. The skipper of one of the Company’s vessels needed a small quantity of iron for repairs, which he drew from the magazine. Before he sailed he was required to sign a receipt for a very much larger quantity, and on his remonstrating he was told that such was the usual custom. He grumbled, but was at length induced to attach his signature to the document. The receipt then became a voucher for the use of so much iron in the Company’s service. Willem Adriaan van der Stel was a poor man when he arrived in South Africa, and could not have established Vergelegen with his own means, although he received large bribes for favours granted. In Tas’s journal it is stated that from the contractor Henning Huising he obtained three thousand sheep, two slaves, and over £833, but no particulars are given as to the nature of the transaction. The bribers may be morally as guilty as the bribed, but with such a man as Willem Adriaan van der Stel there was no other way of getting any business transacted.[66]Such extreme precaution was used to prevent the governor’s movements from becoming known in Holland or India that it is now impossible to ascertain from any documents in the archives which of these statements is correct. The long intervals that frequently occurred during his administration between the meetings of the council of policy, however, prove that the periods named by the burghers were quite possible. In 1700 there was one meeting in January, four meetings in February, one in March, one in April, one in May, one on the 28th of June, one on the 30th of August, and one on the 18th of December. In 1701 there was one meeting in January, three meetings in March, one on the 26th of May, one on the 29th of August, and one on the 30th of December. In 1702 there were only six meetings in all, the first being on the 23rd of May, in 1703 there were only five meetings, and in 1704 the same number. In 1705 there were ten meetings, with an interval of two months in one instance and of nearly three months in another. This is not very important, however, as the time of absence from his post admitted by himself is sufficient to convict him of unfaithfulness to his trust.[67]This grant was of course illegal, as being in opposition to the orders of the directors in 1668, and Elsevier’s making use of it was the ground of his dismissal from the service when the directors became acquainted with the circumstances. There is so little on record concerning it that it is not now possible to say why Simon van der Stel acted as he did, but he may have reasoned that as the lord of Mydrecht would have given ground to the secunde in 1685, if the holder of the situation at that time had chosen to accept it, it would not be wrong to give it to another secunde. This is only supposition, but I cannot think of anything else that would have caused the old governor to overstep his authority in this manner.[68]See letter from the reverend Petrus Kalden to the Classis of Amsterdam, dated 26th of April 1707, given inBouwstoffen voor de Geschiedenis der Nederduitsch-Gereformeerde Kerken in Zuid Afrika, door C. Spoelstra, V.D.M. Volume I, page 56.[69]For these statistics see the sworn depositions of men who had worked for him, printed in theContra Deductie. The charge of not paying the Company its legal dues he took no notice of in his attempt to excuse his conduct, and there is not the slightest trace of such a payment being made in the accounts or other records of the time. The names of over sixty of the Company’s soldiers and sailors who worked for him for considerable periods are given under oath in theContra Deductie, and of them he only accounted for twenty-eight as being paid by him. There is positive proof of his using the Company’s slaves on his farm, but the charge of taking twenty-five for himself and causing them to be written off in the Company’s books as having died must be regarded as doubtful. That the Company’s master gardener, Jan Hertog, was the overseer at Vergelegen, that the workmen there were under his direction, and that he was not away from the place for eight months at a time, was fully proved.[70]See theContra Deductie, pages 126, 180, and 279. Kolbe states that his wife attempted to commit suicide on account of his conduct, but I would be disinclined to accept the evidence of that author unless it was well supported. Tas, however, in his journal, states on information supplied to him that in December 1705 the governor’s wife tried to drown herself by jumping into the fountain behind her residence at the Cape, and that Mrs. Bergh sprang forward and drew her out of the water. She complained that life was a misery to her, owing to what she was obliged to see and hear daily. Of Mrs. Van der Stel so little is known that it would not be right to express an opinion as to whether her conduct towards her husband was or was not such as to provoke him to neglect her for other women, but this can be said with confidence, that the man who was utterly faithless towards his country, his rulers, and one who was weak enough to trust him as Wouter Valckenier had done, may without hesitation be pronounced capable of being equally faithless towards the mother of his children, the most unhappy woman in the settlement.[71]This charge can neither be proved nor disproved by any documents in the Cape archives. But there is one circumstance in connection with it that throws strong suspicion upon the governor, and under any circumstances shows that he paid no attention to the instructions of the authorities in Holland. Their orders of the 27th of June 1699, throwing open to the burghers the cattle trade with the Hottentots, reached Capetown on the 24th of November of the same year; having been brought by the fluteDe Boer, which sailed from Texel on the 17th of July. The governor did not return to the castle from his visit to the Tulbagh basin until the 14th of December,—all his movements when absent on duty are carefully recorded,—and a placaat announcing the will of the directors ought to have been issued on the following day. Instead of that, however, it was not published until the 28th of February 1700, and then only owing to the presence of the commissioner Wouter Valckenier. It was during these two months and a half, as the burghers asserted, that the governor’s agents were engaged in procuring horned cattle and sheep for him by fair means or by foul, and that the Hottentots to a considerable distance from the Cape were despoiled and exasperated. From his general character, as delineated in the archives, one cannot say that he would scruple even at acts of robbery.[72]See letters from the governor and council at the Cape to the governor-general and council of India, dated 18th of March 1706, and to the directors, dated 31st of March and 24th of June 1706, in the Cape archives. The abuse heaped upon the burghers in these documents is enormous, and indicates how weak the governor must have felt his attempted defence to be.[73]This document is in the Cape archives. It is in as good a state of preservation—excepting one leaf—as if it had been drawn up yesterday.[74]See the letter of the governor and council at the Cape to the governor-general and council of India, of the 18th of March 1706. For this and subsequent events to the governor’s recall see the Proceedings of the Council of Policy and the Cape Journal for 1706 and 1707 in the Cape archives.[75]One of the chief privileges secured to the free Netherlanders by their revolt against Spain and the long and successful war that followed was security from confinement except as a punishment for crime. A man suspected of having committed an offence could be arrested on a warrant properly issued by a court of justice, and was then either released on bail or speedily brought to trial, according to the nature of the charge.[76]In a letter to the Indian authorities it is also termed blasphemy.[77]“Maar Edele Gestrenge Heer, de wyven zyn alsoo gevaarlyk als de mans, en zyn niet stil.”—Extract from a letter of the landdrost Starrenburg to the governor Willem Adriaan van der Stel, dated 18th of September 1706. In the Cape archives.[78]See letter from the governor-general and council of India to the governor and council at the Cape, dated 30th of November 1706. In the Cape archives.[79]Tas mentions in his journal under date 19th of June 1705 that he had heard of complaints about the governor having reached the Netherlands, but gives no particulars.[80]“Tot het stellen van de nodige ordres voor de securiteijt van de Caep de bonne Esperance, en daer toe soodanige middelen te adhiberen en in ’t werck stellen, alsmede tot bereijkingh van dat ooghmerck sal nodigh en dienstigh aghten, is goetgevonden te versoecken en committeren, gelijck als versoght en gecommittert werden bij dese, wegens de kamer Amsterdam de heeren Witsen en Hooft, wegens de kamer Zeeland de heer d’Huijbert, en wegens de kameren van ’t zuijder en noorder quartier de heeren van Blois en van Gent, beneffens beijde d’ advocaten van de Compagnie.”—Resolution of the Assembly of Seventeen adopted on the 8th of March 1706, copied by me from the original volume in the archives at the Hague, and published inBelangrijke Historische Dokumenten over Zuid Afrika, Deel III, page 3.[81]SeeBelangrijke Historische Dokumenten over Zuid Afrika, Deel III, page 7.[82]SeeBelangrijke Historische Dokumenten over Zuid Afrika, Deel III, page 7.[83]They can be seen in the letter of the governor and the council of policy to the directors, dated 31st of March 1706, in the archives at the Hague and copy in those at Capetown, also in the printed volume called theKorte Deductie.[84]These rations included three hundred and sixty pounds of flour, a still larger quantity of rice, fresh meat equal to four sheep, twenty pounds of salted beef or pork, a very large quantity of European wine, ale, and spirits, oil, vinegar, four pounds of pepper, two pounds of spices, and twenty-five pounds of butter monthly, besides twenty-five pounds of wax and tallow candles, and as much fuel as he needed. He was supposed to entertain the masters of ships when they were ashore on business, and was therefore provided for so liberally. He was also required to give a dinner to all the principal officers of the fleets returning from India, just before they sailed, which was termed the afscheidmaal, but for this he was paid £41 13s.4d.by the Company. A carriage and horses were also provided for him free of cost, so that he had no forage to purchase. Under these circumstances his excuse seems to be as silly as it was impudent. His actual salary was only two hundred gulden or £16 13s.4d.a month, less than that of a second class clerk in the public service to-day, but he had various fees and perquisites.[85]The other members were Messrs. Lestevenon, De Vries, Corven, Bas, Hooft, Van Dam, Velters, De Witt, Van der Waeijen, Van de Blocquerij, Hoogeveen, Muijssart, Maarseveen, Trip, and Goudoeven. For the actual text of the resolution seeBelangrijke Historische Dokumenten over Zuid Afrika, Deel III, pages 7, 8, and 9.[86]The original letter is now in the Cape archives, and the office copy is in the archives of the Netherlands at the Hague.[87]This appointment of a military man as head of the government was made specially to secure his constant presence in the castle in time of war, as the directors were startled by the conduct of Van der Stel in neglecting his duty as he had done.[88]Biographisch Woordenboek der Nederlanden, door A. J. van der Aa, Zeventiende Deel, Tweede Stuk, published at Haarlem in 1874. Copied by me and published inBelangrijke Historische Dokumenten over Zuid Afrika, Deel III, pages 11 and 12.[89]Better known to English readers as Moselekatse, the Setshuana form of his name. He was the father of the late chief Lobengula.[90]The private, confidential, and semi-official correspondence between Governor Sir Benjamin D’Urban, Colonel H. G. Smith, Lieutenant-Colonel H. Somerset, and many others, was fortunately preserved by the governor and remained in his family’s possession until 1911, when it was most kindly presented by his grandson W. S. M. D’Urban, Esqre., of Exeter, through me to the government of the Union of South Africa. I immediately published one volume of these most valuable papers under the title ofThe Kaffir War of 1835, which can be seen in several of the most important public libraries in Great Britain and the Netherlands as well as in those of South Africa. I copied sufficient for two volumes more, which can be seen typewritten in the South African Public Library, Capetown, under the title ofThe Province of Queen Adelaide, and finally I am now preparing another packet, under the title ofThe Emigration of the Dutch Farmers from the Cape Colony, which will also be deposited in the same institution. It is from these papers that I have derived the information which enables me to enlarge upon the accounts of Louis Triegard and Pieter Lavras Uys which I have given in myHistory of South Africa. I am also indebted to G. C. Moore Smith, Esqre., M.A., of Sheffield, a great nephew of Colonel (afterwards Sir Harry) Smith, for the use of many papers in his possession and for much kindly assistance otherwise rendered to me.[91]He was a lineal descendant of the ruling family of the Amatuli tribe, the remnant of which had been reduced to such a wretched condition that they depended chiefly upon fish for subsistence. This is an article of diet that would only be used by this section of the Bantu in the last extremity of want, but they dared not make a garden or even erect a hut before the arrival of Messrs. Farewell and Fynn in 1824, for fear of attracting notice. Umnini was then a child, and his uncle Matubana was regarded as the temporary head of the little community of three or four hundred souls that had escaped when the remainder of their tribe was destroyed.[92]The petition is in the archive department, a typewritten copy in the South African Public Library. The names attached to it are those of A. Gardiner, Henry Hogle (elsewhere written Ogle), Charles J. Pickman, P. Kew, J. Francis, J. Mouncey, G. Lyons, Charles Adams, James Collis, John Cane, R. Ward, Thomas Carden, Richard King, J. Prince, and Daniel Toohey. On the 29th of March 1836 Lord Glenelg replied refusing to annex Natal. Other European residents, either permanent or occasional, at Port Natal at this time were C. Blankenberg, Richard Wood, William Wood, Thomas Halstead, J. Pierce, John Snelder, Alexander Biggar, Robert Biggar, George Biggar, John Jones, Henry Batts, William Bottomley, John Campbell, Thomas Campbell, Richard Lovedale, John Russell, Robert Russell, John Stubbs, Robert Dunn, G. Britton, James Brown, George Duffy, Richard Duffy, Thomas Lidwell, C. Rhoddam, and G. White.[93]When Mr. Isaacs lived in Natal—October 1825 to June 1831—the Zulus occupied the territory between the Tugela and Tongati rivers, but from this tract of country they were withdrawn in 1834 by Dingan. In 1828 Tshaka was murdered at his residence there. At the port and near the Umzimkulu the Bantu under European chiefs were living. The remainder of the territory was uninhabited except by Bushmen on the uplands and a few cannibals. Mr. Isaacs says: “our settlement, which was somewhat circumscribed, contained upwards of two thousand persons.”—Travels and Adventures, &c., Volume II, page 326.[94]The people under the chief Futu, some of whose kraals were found by Captain Gardiner on the head waters of the Umkomanz river, should not be included in the population of Natal at that time. They were refugees from the north, and frequently moved from one locality to another. Shortly after Captain Gardiner’s visit they retired to the Umtamvuna. Their chief, Futu, was the son of Nombewu, who was killed by Ncapayi, the ferocious leader of the Bacas. Captain Gardiner estimated the people under Futu at different places in Natal at from seven to eight thousand souls. See pages 312et seq.of his volume.[95]SeeThe Annals of Natal, by John Bird, Pietermaritzburg, 1888, Vol. I, page 75.[96]By a Proclamation of the 11th of September 1834 the removal of a slave beyond the border of the colony was punishable by the forfeiture of the slave, a fine of £100, transportation, or imprisonment with hard labour from three to five years. It was based upon an ImperialAct to amend and consolidate the Laws relating to the Abolition of the Slave Trade.[97]Mr. Willem Hendrik Neethling, afterwards landdrost of Klerksdorp, who was living in Lydenburg in 1867 and was then twenty-three years of age, in a communication to President F. W. Reitz which has been kindly lent to me, says: “Wat betreft het verhaal re de twee Blanken die te Lijdenburg aanlandden, is dat eene dwaling. Ik ben in staat UEd. volkomen daarover in te lichten. Het waren geen Europeanen of Caukassiers, maar wel Albinos van het neger ras. Zij waren man en vrouw en twee kinderen. Het derde is te Lijdenburg geboren. De man heette Tjaka, de alombekende slangen tegen-vergift maker. De man was reeds op leeftijd, doch ik schatte de vrouw 27 of 28 jaren oud. Toen het gerucht verspreid werd van de teruggevonden blanken heb ik mij gehaast om ze zelven te zien, en vond uit dat zij Albinos waren, zeer blank, doch met neger type, met de on-ontwikkelde neusbeen, en kroeshaar. Zij kwamen van Kosi-baai, en zijn er weder heen vertrokken. Ik heb se persoonlijk gesproken. Zij waren van staatswege gehaald op geruchten.”[98]Since the publication of myHistory of South Africa, a journal kept by Mr. Erasmus Smit from the 15th of November 1836 to the 31st of January 1839 has been brought to light and in 1897 was printed in Capetown. It forms an octavo pamphlet of one hundred and eight pages. Mr. Smit, a native of Amsterdam, had once been a lay missionary in the service of the London Society, later a schoolmaster at Oliphants Hoek, and was married to a sister of Mr. Gerrit Maritz. He was a man of fifty-eight years of age and infirm in health, but he joined his brother-in-law’s party, and left the colony with it, being engaged to perform religious services in the camp. During the stay of the emigrants at Thaba Ntshu he was exceedingly jealous of the reverend James Archbell, Wesleyan missionary there, whom he suspected of a design of wishing to supplant him. On the 21st of May 1837 Mr. Retief appointed him religious instructor of the emigrants, whereupon he ordained himself and thereafter administered the sacraments and performed all the duties of a clergyman. I have found nothing in his journal that enables me to add to the account of the emigration given in myHistory, but there are in it a few remarks that are of assistance to me in the preparation of this paper.[99]The actual separation into two distinct communions, as we see them to-day, had not then taken place, but the principles underlying the movement were already at work, and had been for many years. There was not as much difference between the two parties as there is in the English episcopal church between the high and the low sections, but it was sufficient to cause those with common sympathies to keep together as much as they could.[100]See pages 451 to 455 of Volume IIIGeslacht Register der Oude Kaapsche Familien, published at Capetown in 1894. The family Uys in 1836 was a very large one, and was widely spread over the Cape Colony.[101]See page 302 of the printed volume of records entitledThe Kaffir War of 1835.[102]This refers to the following occurrence. During the war, while Uys was in the field, a complaint, afterwards proved to be frivolous, was made against his wife to the nearest special magistrate for the protection of apprentices, who issued a warrant, and she was taken to Port Elizabeth to be tried. Upon her innocence being clearly established she was liberated, and an action was then brought before the circuit court against the special magistrate for false imprisonment. The chief justice, who was the circuit judge, and before whom the case was tried, condemned the special magistrate to pay the costs, but these were defrayed for him out of the district treasury, on the ground that otherwise he would be deterred from doing his legal duty when complaints were made to him.—See Chase’sNatal Papers.[103]Sir Benjamin D’Urban provisionally extended the boundary of the colony to the Kraai river, and on the 6th of November 1835 Lieutenant-Colonel Henry Somerset, who visited the north-eastern districts as an agent of the governor, issued a notice that Stephanus Petrus Erasmus was to be fieldcornet of the newly annexed ward. In September of this year one hundred and sixty families were reported to be living on the Stormberg spruit and the Kraai river. See the D’Urban papers in the South African Public Library. A full account of the massacres and robberies by the Matabele will be found in myHistory of South Africa.[104]See hisFifty Years of the History of the Republic in South Africa (1795-1845), published in London in 1899, Volume II, pages 23 to 28.[105]I am unable to add to or amend the accounts of these events given by me a quarter of a century ago in myHistory, except in one particular. The number of men and boys murdered at Umkungunhlovu on the 6th of February 1838 (page 318, volume ii,History of South Africa since September 1795) should be sixty-seven, not sixty-six, and to the names should be added that of Pieter Retief, junior. This is found in Mr. Boshof’s list, but not in most of those made shortly after the event. These vary from each other, and some trouble must be taken to verify many of the names. In a letter from Magdalena Johanna de Wet, widow of Mr. Retief, to her brothers and sisters, dated at Pietermaritzburg on the 7th of July 1840, published in Mr. Preller’s work, she mentions the murder of her son Pieter Retief with his father, and also of Abraham Greyling, her son by a former marriage, at the same time.[106]For the particulars see myHistory of South Africa since September 1795, Volume II, pages 323 to 326.[107]The difficulty of giving a reliable account of all the details of this event is insurmountable, as it is impossible to reconcile the narratives of those who took part in it with each other. I give therefore only the leading features. Readers who may imagine that every incident should be obtained by thorough research are requested to consult the different statements given by Mr. Bird in hisAnnals of Natal, and to believe that others consulted by me long before the publication of that work are equally as conflicting.

FOOTNOTES:

[1]Among the sources of information for the next few pages I must mention particularly Arnold’sHistory of Rome, Gibbon’sDecline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Busk’sHistory of Spain and Portugal, and Stephens’History of Portugal.

[2]The old library of the Ptolemies was consumed in Cæsar’s Alexandrian war. Marc Antony gave the whole collection of Pergamus (200,000 volumes) to Cleopatra, as the foundation of thenewlibrary of Alexandria. It was kept in apartments of the great temple of Serapis, which was broken down in A.D. 389 by Theophilus, archbishop of Alexandria, “the perpetual enemy of peace and virtue, a bold, bad man, whose hands were alternately polluted with gold and with blood.” The valuable library was pillaged or destroyed. See Gibbon’sDecline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Chapter XXVIII.

[3]The Arabs, Persians, and Indians were found at the beginning of the sixteenth century of our era to be well acquainted with the eastern coast as far south as Cape Correntes, and the Arabs and Persians had settlements along the whole of that seaboard. But of this Europeans knew absolutely nothing. Beyond Cape Correntes, in latitude 24° 4´ south, the Asiatics did not venture in their coir-sewn vessels. Here the Mozambique current, from which the cape has its present name, ran southward with great velocity, usually from two to five kilometres an hour, according to the force and direction of the wind, but often much faster. The cape had the reputation also of being a place of storms, where the regular monsoons of the north could no longer be depended upon, and where violent gusts from every quarter would almost surely destroy the mariners who should be so foolhardy as to brave them. The vivid Arab imagination further pictured danger of another kind, for this was the chosen home of those mermaids—believed in also by the Greeks of old—who lured unfortunate men to their doom. There were legends of ships having been driven far beyond it in gales, and having been carried by the current onward to a great ocean in the west, from which they had only with the greatest difficulty returned. The perils the crews had gone through and the hardships they had suffered were magnified as a matter of course, and the dreadful sights that had met their eyes were such as to make the boldest shudder. Of the shore of that awful sea nothing was known, for no one had ever set foot upon it. So Cape Correntes, with its real and fictitious perils, was the terminus of Mohamedan enterprise to the south, though there were men in Kilwa who sometimes wondered what was beyond it and half made up their minds to go overland and ascertain. Had there been a Bantu settlement beyond Inhambane there can be no doubt that their eagerness to procure ivory would have led them on, but black men had replaced the wild aborigines there so shortly before the arrival of the Portuguese that there was not time to make the venture.

[4]For information on the discoveries mentioned here I am indebted chiefly to theIndice Chronologico das Navegações, Viagens, Descobrimentos, e Conquistas dos Portuguezes nos Paizes Ultramarinos desde o Principio do Seculo XV, the great historyDa Asiaof João de Barros, Major’sDiscoveries of Prince Henry the Navigator and their Results, and Beazley’sPrince Henry the Navigator, the Hero of Portugal and of Modern Discovery.

[5]These islands and even the Canaries had been visited by Genoese ships before they were rediscovered by the Portuguese. But as no use was made of them by the first visitors, and as knowledge concering them was not communicated to the world in general, the Portuguese have a fair claim to be regarded as the real discoverers. In the same way Columbus is rightly credited with the discovery of America, though the Northmen visited its north-eastern coast long before his time.

[6]It would be interesting to know the exact day on which Dias sailed, but I have not found it possible to ascertain it. As already observed, before the entrance of Vasco da Gama into the Indian sea the dates of the various discoveries given by Portuguese historians are not implicitly to be relied upon, and as no original journals or logbooks of the early voyages are now in existence, there are no means of verifying them. João de Barros is the only historian known to me who has placed on record the month and year of sailing and of the return of Dias in this voyage, and he does not state the day of departure from the Tagus. His words are: (ElRei Dom João) “determinou de enviar logo neste anno de quatrocentos e oitenta e seis dobrados navios per mar, e homens per terra, pera ver o fim destas cousas.” ... “partiram no fim de Agosto do dito anno.” ... “onde chegáram em Dezembro do anno de quatrocentos e oitenta e sete, havendo dezeseis mezes, e dezesete dias que eram partidos delle.” Barros is the most reliable of all the Portuguese historians of that time, and he was in a position to obtain the particulars of this voyage, which unfortunately he gives so scantily. Neither Damião de Goes in hisChronica do Felicissimo Rei Dom Emanuel da Gloriosa Memorianor Fernão Lopes de Castanheda in hisDescobrimento e Conquista da India pelos Portuguezesmentions the date of the voyage, but both relate other particulars which tend to confirm the opinion that it took place at the time stated by Barros. For instance, Castanheda states that Affonso de Paiva and João Pires de Covilhão commenced their journey from Portugal after the departure of Dias, and he agrees with Barros in giving the 7th of May 1487 as the date on which they left Santarem. The exact dates of Dias passing the Cape of Good Hope eastward, of his reaching the mouth of the Infante river, and of the erection of the landmark São Philippe cannot be ascertained, but these events in all probability occurred in 1487, as making allowance for his detentions when leaving the storeship, at Angra dos Ilheos, and afterwards, Dias can hardly have reached the latitude of the Cape before the beginning of that year. See appendix.

[7]See the numerous statements concerning this mythical monarch made by the early Portuguese writers, copied by me and printed, together with English translations, in volumes i, iii, v, vi, and vii of theRecords of South-Eastern Africa. Ultimately the name was applied to the ruler of Abyssinia. Index, Prester John, in Vol. ix, page 474.

[8]“On the 21st of November (1825) a heavy south-east gale set in, before which we were carried with great velocity, and in the afternoon saw the remains of the cross erected by Bartholomeu Dias at the southern extremity of Angra Pequena. Passing by it we (H.M.S.Barracouta) anchored in the bay, where, although the wind was directly off shore, yet such was its violence that the whole surface of the water was one vast sheet of foam. Some officers landed with Captain Vidal, for the purpose of examining the cross, and obtaining the latitude and longitude of the point. They found the sand very painful to the eyes, being swept from the surface of the rocks, and almost blinding them as they proceeded to the summit of the small granite eminence on which Bartholomeu Dias erected his cross, as a memento of his discovery of the place. This is said to have been standing complete forty years back, but we found that it had been cast down, evidently by design, as the part of the shaft that had originally been buried in the rock remained unbroken, which never could have been the case had it been overturned in any other way than by lifting it from the foundation. The inducement to this disgraceful act was probably to search for such coins as might have been buried beneath the cross; and it is probable that the destroyers, in order to make some little amende for their desolation, re-erected a portion of the fragments, as we found a piece of the shaft, including the part originally placed in the ground, altogether about six feet in length, propped up by means of large stones, crossed at the top by a broken fragment, which had originally formed the whole length of the shaft. This was six feet above ground, and twenty-one inches beneath, composed of marble rounded on one side, but left square on the other, evidently for the inscription, which, however, the unsparing hand of Time, in a lapse of nearly three centuries and a half, had rendered illegible. In descending by a different and more craggy path, the party suddenly came upon the cross; this was sixteen inches square, of the same breadth and thickness as the shaft, and had on the centre an inscription, but, like the other, almost obliterated.”—Narrative of Voyages to explore the Shores of Africa, Arabia, and Madagascar, performed in H.M. Ships Leven and Barracouta under the direction of Captain W. F. W. Owen, R.N.Two demi octavo volumes, published in London in 1833. The extract given above is to be found in Vol. II, pages 269 and 270. Two fragments of the pillar are now in the museum in Lisbon, and one is in the South African museum in Capetown.

[9]The probabilities are that they did not, otherwise the information they carried back would have been regarded as much more important than it was considered to be by the king and by all the writers of the time. Ptolemy’s map, on which Africa was made to turn like a horn and project so far to the eastward as to enclose the Indian ocean, was still treated with respect, and the discoveries of Dias seemed at the time as if they tended rather to confirm than to refute this geographical feature. According to the view of those who regarded Ptolemy and Edrisi as safe guides, Dias had sailed along the southern side of the horn, without finding its end, and therefore had not done much more than Diogo Cam and other previous explorers. To-day, with our knowledge, his feat is regarded very differently, but neither the king nor the people considered at the time that it entitled him to any special reward or mark of favour.

[10]The factory of São Jorge da Mina was established in January 1482 by Diogo d’Azambuja, and was the first permanent Portuguese settlement on the western coast of Africa, and the centre of the trade in gold. It was wrested from the Portuguese by the Dutch in 1637, and was held by them until April 1872, when it was transferred to England in exchange for some other territory on the coast. It is now known as Elmina.

[11]Called João Pires, of Covilhão, by Damião de Goes, Pedro de Covilhão by Castanheda and Barros. Modern Portuguese writers follow De Goes in the name. See theIndice Chronologico das Navegações, Viagens, Descobrimentos, e Conquistas dos Portuguezes nos Paizes Ultramarinos desde o Principio do Seculo XV.Lisboa, 1841. João Pires on page 69. Barros says of him: “The king, seeing how necessary an acquaintance with the Arabic tongue was for this journey, sent upon this business one Pedro de Covilhão, a gentleman of his household who was well acquainted with it, and in his company another named Affonso de Paiva, and they were sent from Santarem on the 7th of May of the year 1487.”

[12]Probably a misprint.

[13]The German Emperor has since caused an exact copy of it to be erected, substituting granite for marble.

[14]The particulars of this event cannot be ascertained, and it would even be doubtful whether Mondragon really rounded the Cape of Good Hope if it were not expressly stated in a summary of the directions issued by the king for his capture that the robbery of Queimado’s ship took place “no canal de Moçambique.”

[15]I do not mention Sir John Mandeville in the text, because modern criticism has proved that what he states concerning India in his bookThe Voiage and trauayle of syr John Maundeuille, knight, which treateth of the way toward Hierusalem, and of maruayles of Inde, with other Ilands and Countryeswas compiled from earlier foreign writers, though his work was regarded as genuine and trustworthy by Englishmen until recently. Nothing is known of him from contemporary records, and it is even regarded as possible that Mandeville was a pseudonym. In his book he states that he was born at St. Albans, and travelled in the east as far as China between the years 1322 and 1357. It is now believed that he really visited Palestine, and his account of that country is considered as partly based on personal observation, but the remainder of the volume is spurious. The original was written in French. See theEncyclopedia Britannica, article Mandeville. Of the numerous copies of the book, in many languages, in the library of the British Museum, the earliest was printed in 1480.

[16]This sketch is drawn chiefly from Motley’sRise of the Dutch Republicand hisHistory of the United Netherlands to the Twelve Years’ Truce—1609, theGeschiedenis des Vaderlands, by Mr. W. Bilderdyk, edited by Professor H. W. Tydeman, seven octavo volumes, issued at Amsterdam in 1832 to 1853,History of the People of the Netherlands, by Petrus Johannes Blok, Ph.D., four demi octavo volumes (English edition), published at New York and London, 1898 to 1907, (another volume still to appear),Handboek der Geschiedenis van het Vaderland, by Mr. G. Groen van Prinsterer, two octavo volumes (second edition), issued at Amsterdam in 1852,Histoire de Belgique, by Professor H. Pirenne, of the University of Ghent, second edition of Vol. I published at Brussels in 1902, Vol. II published at the same place in 1903, and Vol. III in 1907, (other volumes still to appear), andThe History of Belgium, by Demetrius C. Boulger, published at London in 1902. Some other works consulted will be mentioned in notes.

[17]“Belgium ofte Nederland werdt ghemeynelijck verdeelt in zeventhien Provincien, meer om dat de Princen daer over regierende, seventhien Tytelen van de selve hebben ghevoert, als om andere merckelijcke redenen. Want op de ghemeyne vergaderinghen ende by-een-comsten der Staten van den Lande, en pleghen de selve in soodanighen ghetalle niet te verschijnen, maer sommighe sorteerden onder andere, als by exempel: Het Hartoghdom van Limborch met syn appendentien: item het Marck-Graeffschap des H. Rycx ofte van Antwerpen stemden ende contribueerden onder Brabandt, ’t Graeffschap Zutphen maeckte het vierde Quartier van Gelderland: Daer-en-tegens Doornijck ende het Doornijcksche Landt: Item Rijssel, Douay ende Orchies (synde andersints Steden ende Leden van Wals-Vlaenderen) hadden hare stemmen in het bysonder, ende contribueerden apart: Het selve gheschiede oock met Valencyn, dat nochtans een Stad ende Lidt van Henegouwen is.”Atlas of Mercator and Hondius, edition published at Amsterdam in 1633. This superb atlas contains a double page map of all the provinces and no fewer than thirty maps of different sections. A copy obtained by me in Holland is in the South African Public Library.

[18]See the superbAtlasof Ortelius, published at Antwerp in 1570. A copy obtained by me at the Hague is now in the South African Public Library. This atlas contains a map of the whole provinces and separate maps of Holland, Zeeland, the Frisian provinces, Flanders, and Brabant. A comparison of the map of the provinces with one of Holland and Belgium to-day will show the great changes that have taken place in the interim.

[19]See Blok’sHistory of the People of the Netherlands, Vol. II, page 263.

[20]There was in the south the large province of Liege, nominally a fief of the Holy Roman Empire, under the government of a bishop, but it was not counted with the others, though enclosed by some of them. It had been conquered by Charles the Headstrong of Burgundy, but on his death became independent again, and maintained a perfect neutrality thereafter, though its borders were not always respected by contending armies. It remained an independent principality until it was annexed to France on the 1st of October 1795, and in 1814 for the first time was joined to the other provinces to form the kingdom of the Netherlands. When Belgium seceded and secured its independence in 1831 Liege became one of its provinces.

[21]The greatest of the southern dioceses was Liege, whose bishop was first settled at Tongres, then at Maastricht, and from A.D. 708 at Liege. In the tenth century the bishops of Liege and Cambrai obtained rights as counts over extensive domains.—Blok.

[22]The word “king” is used as a convenient one, though Philippe was notkingof the Netherlands. He was duke of one province, count of another, lord of the next, and so on, but under these titles he was sovereign of them all.

[23]Blok gives the number, according to a statement of Requesens, as six thousand.

[24]This differs slightly in detail from the account given by Motley, whose authority is so high that it is with reluctance I do not adhere to it in every particular. In this instance I follow the Life of Boisot, as given inLeeven en Daden der Doorlughtige Zee-Helden, a quarto volume issued at Amsterdam in 1683.

[25]The treaty contained thirty articles. It is to be found on pages 83 to 88 of Volume II ofA General Collection of Treatys, Manifesto’s, Contracts of Marriage, Renunciations, and other Publick Papers, from the year 1495, to the year 1712, second edition published in London in 1732.

[26]See pages 89 to 91 of the volume ofTreaties, etc., already referred to.

[27]Page 92, Vol. II of theCollection of Treaties, etc., already referred to.

[28]General Collection of Treaties, etc., Vol. II, pages 103 to 119.

[29]General Collection of Treaties, etc., Vol. II, pages 120 to 127.

[30]Collection of Treaties, etc., Vol. II, pages 128 to 146.

[31]The account of these voyages is taken fromBegin ende Voortgangh van de Vereenighde Nederlantsche Geoctroyeerde Oost Indische Compagnie, vervatende de voornaemste Reysen by de Inwoonderen derselver Provincien derwaerts gedaen. Two thick volumes, published at Amsterdam in 1646.

[32]The accounts of the voyages that follow have been taken by me from the volumesBegin ende Voortganghalready mentioned, and François Valentijn’sOud en Nieuw Oost Indien, five huge volumes published at Amsterdam in 1726, checked by the narratives in the first three volumes of J. K. J. de Jonge’sDe Opkomst van het Nederlandsch Gezag in Oost Indie, published at the Hague and Amsterdam in 1862-65. I also made use of the last volume of Diogo de Couto’sDa Asia, in order to get the Portuguese version of these events, but obtained very little information in it. His work ends with an account of a Dutch disaster at Achin before the principal voyages were undertaken. Of course the Dutch were to him pirates and rebels.

[33]It is attached to the original journals, now in the archives of the Netherlands. I made a copy of it on tracing linen for the Cape government, as it differs considerably from the chart in the printed condensed journal of the voyage. In other respects also the compilation of the printed journal has been very carelessly executed.

[34]See the last two volumes of De Couto’sDa Asia.

[35]The first Buddhist commandment, as given inThe Light of Asia, reads:“Kill not, for pity’s sake, and lest thou slayThe meanest creature on its upward way.”

[35]The first Buddhist commandment, as given inThe Light of Asia, reads:

“Kill not, for pity’s sake, and lest thou slayThe meanest creature on its upward way.”

[36]Albert died in 1621 and Isabella on the 30th of November 1623, and as they left no children, in 1624 Belgium passed again under the direct government of Spain. By the treaty of Baden on the 7th of September 1714 it was ceded to the emperor Charles VI, and thereafter was generally termed the Austrian Netherlands.

[37]Sections III, XLIX, and L of the treaty of Munster, pages 335 to 367 of Vol. IIGeneral Collection of Treaties, &c.

[38]See pages 188 to 202 of Volume II ofA General Collection of Treaties, &c.

[39]SeeA Voyage to East India, &c.by the Rev. Edward Terry. London, 1655.

[40]The name of the Welshman is not given in theReport on Manuscripts in the Welsh languageby the Historical Manuscripts Commission (Vol. I, Part 3), published in London in 1905, from which this extract is taken.

[41]A Voyage to East India, wherein some things are taken notice of in our passage thither, but many more in our abode there, within that rich and most spacious Empire. Of the Great Mogols, &c., &c. Observed by Edward Terry (then Chaplain to the Right Honorable Sr. Thomas Row, Knight, Lord Ambassadour to the great Mogol) now Rector of the Church at Grunford, in the County of Middlesex.A foolscap octavo volume of 545 pages, published in London in 1655. Terry says that he went to India the year after Sir Thomas Roe in a fleet of six ships—theCharles, of 1,000 tons, theUnicorn, almost as big, theJames, a large ship also, theGlobe, theSwan, and theRose, which were smaller. The fleet left the Thames on the 3rd of February 1615 (old style, 1616 it would be written now that the year commences on the 1st of January), under command of Captain Benjamin Joseph as commodore, and it rode at anchor in Table Bay from the 12th to the 28th of June. His statement concerning the convicts sent out the previous year does not fully agree with the records in the India Office in London, which I consulted to obtain information on this subject, and which I follow as far as they go, though they are defective.

[42]See Valentyn’s great work on India, the last volume of which contains the history of Ceylon and also of Mauritius. See also the volumeVies des Gouverneurs Generaux, by J. P. I. du Bois. The account of Pieter Kolbe, in hisCaput Bonæ Spei Hodiernum, is so distorted by his bitter animosity towards Simon van der Stel as well as towards his son Willem Adriaan that no reliance can be placed upon it. Van der Aa, in hisBiographisch Woordenboek der Nederlanden, says that Simon van der Stel, son of Adriaan van der Stel and Monica da Costa, was born in Amsterdam, but that is a mistake, and not the only one in the article. SeeBiographisch Woordenboek der Nederlanden, door A. J. van der Aa, Zeventiende Deel, Tweede Stuk, Haarlem, 1874. I copied the article on the Van der Stel family in the above work, and published it in 1911 in the third part of myBelangrijke Historische Dokumenten over Zuid Afrika. It will be found on pages 11 and 12 of the volume.In Johan Saar’sAccount of Ceylon 1647-1657, this event is related as follows: “To pick a quarrel they (the Hollanders) seized upon four of the best elephants of the King of Candi. He, as a sensible man, sent word to the Hollanders that he had no intention to do anything against them, and he expected them, for their part, to act likewise; he had called them in as friends to be his allies against the Portuguese, and he hoped therefore that they would not settle in his territory. But the Hollanders from the beginning were bent upon war. When the king saw that it could not be avoided, he collected by one of his generals (a Saude, or what we should call a Count) about 60,000 men, chiefly natives, besides a few Portuguese whom he had formerly made captives, and who had entered his service. He would no longer trust the Hollanders.... In the following year (Anno Christi 1646) in the month of May, Mr. van der Stält (Van der Stel) received fresh orders to march with 150 men (picked soldiers), plenty of ammunition, powder, lead, and other materials of war, and also two field guns. He met with the heathen Saude in a small clearing, but as the latter had no orders to fight, because the king was still disinclined to go to war, he withdrew into the forest. The Hollanders opened a heavy fire from their field-guns and fire-arms, so that 400 were killed, and many were wounded. As the Hollanders had taken the offensive, the Saude did not care to act only on the defensive. He therefore came out of the forest, and closing round our people, attacked them with such energy that he cut off the head of Mr. Van der Stel, who had been carried in a palanquin or litter, clad in red scarlet. Of our men, who had numbered 150, they got 103 heads. The rest fled into the jungle and hid themselves as best they could. When the King, who had been near, heard of the onslaught he hurried to the spot, and although he was told that his men had been forced to fight, he showed displeasure. At once he ordered drums to be beaten and proclamation to be made that none of the Hollanders who had fled into the jungle were to be killed, but they were to be brought alive before him; that he would treat them well; and that he would swear by his God that he was innocent of the bloodshed. He then gave directions to have the head of Mr. Van der Stel put into a silver bowl, and covered it with white cloth, and sent it by one of the prisoners to their Captain in the great camp, to say that this was the head of Mr. Van der Stel, and that the King would see his body as well as the other 103 bodies decently buried.”

In Johan Saar’sAccount of Ceylon 1647-1657, this event is related as follows: “To pick a quarrel they (the Hollanders) seized upon four of the best elephants of the King of Candi. He, as a sensible man, sent word to the Hollanders that he had no intention to do anything against them, and he expected them, for their part, to act likewise; he had called them in as friends to be his allies against the Portuguese, and he hoped therefore that they would not settle in his territory. But the Hollanders from the beginning were bent upon war. When the king saw that it could not be avoided, he collected by one of his generals (a Saude, or what we should call a Count) about 60,000 men, chiefly natives, besides a few Portuguese whom he had formerly made captives, and who had entered his service. He would no longer trust the Hollanders.... In the following year (Anno Christi 1646) in the month of May, Mr. van der Stält (Van der Stel) received fresh orders to march with 150 men (picked soldiers), plenty of ammunition, powder, lead, and other materials of war, and also two field guns. He met with the heathen Saude in a small clearing, but as the latter had no orders to fight, because the king was still disinclined to go to war, he withdrew into the forest. The Hollanders opened a heavy fire from their field-guns and fire-arms, so that 400 were killed, and many were wounded. As the Hollanders had taken the offensive, the Saude did not care to act only on the defensive. He therefore came out of the forest, and closing round our people, attacked them with such energy that he cut off the head of Mr. Van der Stel, who had been carried in a palanquin or litter, clad in red scarlet. Of our men, who had numbered 150, they got 103 heads. The rest fled into the jungle and hid themselves as best they could. When the King, who had been near, heard of the onslaught he hurried to the spot, and although he was told that his men had been forced to fight, he showed displeasure. At once he ordered drums to be beaten and proclamation to be made that none of the Hollanders who had fled into the jungle were to be killed, but they were to be brought alive before him; that he would treat them well; and that he would swear by his God that he was innocent of the bloodshed. He then gave directions to have the head of Mr. Van der Stel put into a silver bowl, and covered it with white cloth, and sent it by one of the prisoners to their Captain in the great camp, to say that this was the head of Mr. Van der Stel, and that the King would see his body as well as the other 103 bodies decently buried.”

[44]The instructions and orders of the lord of Mydrecht were copied by me from the original document in the Cape archives, and were published in 1896 in Deel IBelangrijke Historische Dokumenten. They occupy pages 1 to 48 of that pamphlet.

[45]“Wij cunnen geensints verstaen dat den Commandeur en die van zijnen Raden voortaen haer eygen thuynen en bestiael sullen hebben of houden, meer als hij off sij tot hun eygen gesin sullen van noden hebben maer gehouden wesen haer daer van t’ ontledigen.” Despatch dated at Amsterdam on the 26th of April 1668, and signed by all of the seventeen directors. In the Cape archives, and copy in those at the Hague.

[46]See the Resolutions of the Assembly of Seventeen, copied by me from the original volumes in the Archives at the Hague, and published in Deel IIIBelangrijke Historische Dokumenten over Zuid Afrika, an octavo volume of 435 pages, printed for the Union Government in 1911.

[47]In secluded parts of South Africa, where it would not be possible to have one made in time after death, this precaution is still taken, but elsewhere the custom has died out. I have known instances of it in Canada also.

[48]Two fragments of a journal kept by Adam Tas have been preserved: one from the 13th of June to the 14th of August 1705, in the archives at the Hague, the other, from the 7th of December 1705 to the 27th of February 1706, in the South African public library in Capetown, and they give a graphic picture of life in the country districts at the time. Whenever a friend came to his house or he went to a friend’s, they at once sat down to chat and drink wine and smoke tobacco, when if the party was large and included wives and daughters, playing cards was resorted to as a pastime. The quantity of coffee and tea consumed was very large. The vicious custom of returning incorrect numbers of cattle and sheep for taxation purposes was already prevalent, and Tas, who was certainly not a dishonest man in other matters, was unable to see that this was a crime deserving punishment. Professor Leo Fouché, of Pretoria, has copied these interesting fragments, and informs me that he intends to publish them.

[49]It was only natural that the Huguenot refugees should be warmly attached to their native country, and long to be able to return to it. It was noticed in England as well as in Holland and Prussia that the French exiles had no hesitation in declaring that if Louis XIV would only restore the edict of Henri IV and pledge himself to observe it faithfully, they would return to the land of their birth and be his most faithful subjects. It was believed that they would not return and profess adherence to the state church while in their hearts remaining Calvinists and secretly practising the Calvinistic form of worship, as many of those who remained behind were doing, but the governments of the countries in which they had taken refuge were at this time suspicious of their attachment under all circumstances. In South Africa the Dutch section of the population—or at least some of them—believed that the Huguenots would not assist to repel a French invasion. It was only when the children born in the lands of refuge grew up that the strong attachment of the Huguenots to France died out.

[50]“Op het rapport van de heeren commissarissen ingevolge van de resolutie commissorial van den 16 deses, geëxamineerd hebbende het wensch van de colonie van de Caap de Bonne Esperance, en het senden van vrije luijden derwaarts breeder in voorn. resolutie ter nedergestelt, is in conformite van ’t geadviseerde goetgevonden en geresolveert de respectieve kameren te authoriseeren omme eenige vrije luijden soo mannen vrouwen als kinderen vrij van kost en transport gelt derwaarts te senden, mitsgaders zorg dragende en lettende dat het soo veel doenlijk is mogen zijn Nederlanders of onderdaanen van dese Staat of van Hoogduijtsch natien geen trafieq ter zee doende, mitsgaders van de gereformeerde of Luyterse godsdienst, hun op de lantbouw of culture der wijnen verstaende, dogh geen franschen, de selve om redenen in voorn. als anders in ’t geheel excuserende.” Résolution of the Assembly of Seventeen adopted on the 22nd of June 1700, copied by me from the original records at the Hague, and published in 1911 on page 2 ofBelangrijke Historische Dokumenten over Zuid Afrika, Deel III.

[51]See resolution of that date on page 6 of the volume already mentioned.

[52]These instructions are given in the original on page 192.

[53]See the original records of the council of policy in the Cape archives, or myAbstract of the Debates and Resolutions of the Council of Policy at the Cape from 1651 to 1687, an octavo volume of 233 pages, published at Capetown in 1881.

[54]“daerop hebben wij naegesien ’t geene wij bij onsen brieff van den 14 Julij 1695 soo raeckende den Landtbouw als het bestiael beijde van de Comp: hebben geschreven, en gemeijnt dat soo wel de voors: Lantbouw, als het aenhouden van het bestiael, geensints een werck is, de Comp: convenierende off dat die haer daermede behoort te bemoeijen, maer dat deselve in tegendeel dat aen de vrijeluijen dient over te laeten soo om die daer door te beter te doen subsisteren ... met uijtsluytinge van Comps: dienaren die soo wel in den politicquen raed, als in den raedt van justitie compareren, en Sessie in deselve hebben, aen dewelcke wij verstaen, dat alle leverantie aen de Comp: sal werden benomen, off haer ontseijt.”—Despatch to the governor and council of policy at the Cape, dated at Amsterdam on the 27th of June 1699, and signed by fifteen of the directors.

[55]This clergyman was of French descent, was educated for the ministry of the Roman catholic church, and had been a monk in the abbey of Boneffe in Belgium. After becoming a Protestant he wrote a book entitledDwalingen van het Pausdom. He could converse in many languages, and was unquestionably a man of high ability and learning, but he was of irascible disposition and wherever he went was engaged in strife. After he left South Africa he became a doctor of laws, and died at a very advanced age at Batavia in 1748, after having been during the preceding nineteen years minister of the Protestant Portuguese congregation at that place.

[56]See the report of the commissioners Pieter de Vos and Hendrik Bekker, signed at Batavia on the 18th of September 1706. Copy in the Cape archives.

[57]As he was an ordinary councillor of India and admiral of the return fleet he was higher in rank than the governor. His commission from the Indian authorities directed him to see that the laws were properly carried out, but he had no power given to him to make any new laws, and of course none to annul or suspend any order of the directors, which even the high Indian authorities could not do.

[58]The first was a grant of the farm now occupied by the English archbishop of Capetown to Commander Jan van Riebeek, before the order of 1668 was issued, the second was the grant of Constantia already mentioned.

[59]“Alle de Coloniers (goet vlees leverende) sonder dese of geene begunstighde daerinne boven anderen te prefereren, en sulex sonder onderscheijt tot voors: leverantie sal hebben te admitteren. Dan aengesien wij considereren dat voorsz: leverantie onder anderen mede moet geaght werden te sijn een voorregt der vrije Ingesetenen en Coloniers deselve privative competerende met uijtsluijtingh van Comps: dienaren, die met haer Soldije en emolumenten moeten te vreden sijn, en daermede oock genoeghsaem kunnen bestaen, soo verstaen en begeeren wij dat niemant van Comps: dienaren, den gouverneur daer onder mede begrepen, eenigh versch vlees aen Comps: schepen, hospitael etc: sal mogen leveren, direct of indirect, maer ’t selve op den ontfangst deses voortaen alleen door de vrije Ingesetenen moeten geschieden.”—Despatch signed by fifteen of the directors, dated at Middelburg on the 28th of October 1705. In the Cape archives and copy in those of the Netherlands. This order was sent out, because complaints had already been received in Holland that the governor was disregarding the laws on the subject.

[60]When trying to excuse his conduct to his friends after all this was made known to the directors and he had been dismissed from the service, the late governor admitted, as he could not deny it, that he had occasionally taken Hertog with him to Vergelegen for the purpose here mentioned. See theKorte Deductie van Willem Adriaen van der Stel: tot destructie ende wederlegginge van alle de klaghten, die eenige vrijluijden van de voorsz Cabo aen de Edele Achtbare Heren Bewinthebberen van de Oost Indische Compagnie over hem hadden gedaen. A foolscap folio volume of 172 pages, published in Holland—the name of the town is not given—soon after his recall and dismissal from the Company’s service. But his opponents proved conclusively that Hertog was there for six or eight months at a time, while drawing pay from the Company, and they published some of his written orders as manager of the place. See theContra Deductie ofte Grondige Demonstratie van de valsheit der witgegevene Deductie by den Ed: Heer Willem Adriaan van der Stel, Geweezen Raad Extraordinaris van Nederlandsch India, en Gouverneur aan Cabo de Goede Hoop, etc., etc., etc.; waar in niet alleen begrepen is een nauwkeurig Historisch Verhaal, van al ’t geene de Heer van der Stel in den jare 1706 heeft werkstellig gemaakt, on de Vrijburgeren aan de Kaab t’ onder te brengen: maar ook een beknopt Antwoort op alle in gemelde Deductie, en deszelfs schriftelijke Verantwoordinge, voorgestelde naakte uitvluchten, abuseerende bewysstukken, en andere zaken meer: strekkende tot Verificatie van’t Klachtschrift, in den jare 1706 aan Haar Wel Edele Hoog Achtbaarheden, de Heeren Bewinthebberen ter Illustre Vergadering van Zeventienen afgezonden; zynde gesterkt door veele authenticque en gerecolleerde Bewysstukken, waar van de origineele of authenticque Copyen in handen hebben de twee Gemachtigden van eenige der Kaapsche Inwoonderen Jacobus van der Heiden en Adam Tas. A foolscap folio volume of 318 pages, published at Amsterdam in 1712. This volume refutes the statements made in theKorte Deductie, and contains some very strong evidence given under oath. It is otherwise interesting, as being the first book entirely prepared in South Africa.

[61]In hisKorte Deductiethe late governor asserted that he had purchased over two hundred slaves for his private use. The Company allowed him twenty of its male and female slaves as domestic servants in his residence in the castle, and these he sent to his farm, employing his own instead. He denied making use of other government slaves than these for his private work. He stated that the soldiers and sailors were temporarily detached from the public service, in the manner usual in times of peace, and were paid and maintained by him while they were in his service. The only other soldiers that he admitted as having worked at Vergelegen were those who formed his escort when he went there, and who, he asserted, might better have been occupied during their stay at the farm than have been idle. But see the note on page 218.

[62]The quantity of wheat produced at Vergelegen is not given in the archives, but is stated by Bogaert, who is a trustworthy authority, at over eleven hundred muids yearly.

[63]In hisKorte Deductiehe stated that by purchasing from farmers and by the natural increase of his stock he had some thousands of sheep and some hundreds of horned cattle, but that he did not know the exact number. Instead of eighteen stations, he asserted that he had eight folds or kraals, but that part of his attempted excuse for his conduct is so palpably misleading that it is of no value whatever. The statistics given here are from those obtained after his recall.

[64]“Ondertusschen sullen uE: haer mede op hoede hebben te houden.”—Despatch signed by twelve of the directors, dated at Amsterdam on the 15th of March 1701.

[65]He was able to prove that he had paid for some timber drawn from the Company’s magazine, but the evidence of the master of a ship shows how articles could be obtained even where invoices and disbursements were audited. The skipper of one of the Company’s vessels needed a small quantity of iron for repairs, which he drew from the magazine. Before he sailed he was required to sign a receipt for a very much larger quantity, and on his remonstrating he was told that such was the usual custom. He grumbled, but was at length induced to attach his signature to the document. The receipt then became a voucher for the use of so much iron in the Company’s service. Willem Adriaan van der Stel was a poor man when he arrived in South Africa, and could not have established Vergelegen with his own means, although he received large bribes for favours granted. In Tas’s journal it is stated that from the contractor Henning Huising he obtained three thousand sheep, two slaves, and over £833, but no particulars are given as to the nature of the transaction. The bribers may be morally as guilty as the bribed, but with such a man as Willem Adriaan van der Stel there was no other way of getting any business transacted.

[66]Such extreme precaution was used to prevent the governor’s movements from becoming known in Holland or India that it is now impossible to ascertain from any documents in the archives which of these statements is correct. The long intervals that frequently occurred during his administration between the meetings of the council of policy, however, prove that the periods named by the burghers were quite possible. In 1700 there was one meeting in January, four meetings in February, one in March, one in April, one in May, one on the 28th of June, one on the 30th of August, and one on the 18th of December. In 1701 there was one meeting in January, three meetings in March, one on the 26th of May, one on the 29th of August, and one on the 30th of December. In 1702 there were only six meetings in all, the first being on the 23rd of May, in 1703 there were only five meetings, and in 1704 the same number. In 1705 there were ten meetings, with an interval of two months in one instance and of nearly three months in another. This is not very important, however, as the time of absence from his post admitted by himself is sufficient to convict him of unfaithfulness to his trust.

[67]This grant was of course illegal, as being in opposition to the orders of the directors in 1668, and Elsevier’s making use of it was the ground of his dismissal from the service when the directors became acquainted with the circumstances. There is so little on record concerning it that it is not now possible to say why Simon van der Stel acted as he did, but he may have reasoned that as the lord of Mydrecht would have given ground to the secunde in 1685, if the holder of the situation at that time had chosen to accept it, it would not be wrong to give it to another secunde. This is only supposition, but I cannot think of anything else that would have caused the old governor to overstep his authority in this manner.

[68]See letter from the reverend Petrus Kalden to the Classis of Amsterdam, dated 26th of April 1707, given inBouwstoffen voor de Geschiedenis der Nederduitsch-Gereformeerde Kerken in Zuid Afrika, door C. Spoelstra, V.D.M. Volume I, page 56.

[69]For these statistics see the sworn depositions of men who had worked for him, printed in theContra Deductie. The charge of not paying the Company its legal dues he took no notice of in his attempt to excuse his conduct, and there is not the slightest trace of such a payment being made in the accounts or other records of the time. The names of over sixty of the Company’s soldiers and sailors who worked for him for considerable periods are given under oath in theContra Deductie, and of them he only accounted for twenty-eight as being paid by him. There is positive proof of his using the Company’s slaves on his farm, but the charge of taking twenty-five for himself and causing them to be written off in the Company’s books as having died must be regarded as doubtful. That the Company’s master gardener, Jan Hertog, was the overseer at Vergelegen, that the workmen there were under his direction, and that he was not away from the place for eight months at a time, was fully proved.

[70]See theContra Deductie, pages 126, 180, and 279. Kolbe states that his wife attempted to commit suicide on account of his conduct, but I would be disinclined to accept the evidence of that author unless it was well supported. Tas, however, in his journal, states on information supplied to him that in December 1705 the governor’s wife tried to drown herself by jumping into the fountain behind her residence at the Cape, and that Mrs. Bergh sprang forward and drew her out of the water. She complained that life was a misery to her, owing to what she was obliged to see and hear daily. Of Mrs. Van der Stel so little is known that it would not be right to express an opinion as to whether her conduct towards her husband was or was not such as to provoke him to neglect her for other women, but this can be said with confidence, that the man who was utterly faithless towards his country, his rulers, and one who was weak enough to trust him as Wouter Valckenier had done, may without hesitation be pronounced capable of being equally faithless towards the mother of his children, the most unhappy woman in the settlement.

[71]This charge can neither be proved nor disproved by any documents in the Cape archives. But there is one circumstance in connection with it that throws strong suspicion upon the governor, and under any circumstances shows that he paid no attention to the instructions of the authorities in Holland. Their orders of the 27th of June 1699, throwing open to the burghers the cattle trade with the Hottentots, reached Capetown on the 24th of November of the same year; having been brought by the fluteDe Boer, which sailed from Texel on the 17th of July. The governor did not return to the castle from his visit to the Tulbagh basin until the 14th of December,—all his movements when absent on duty are carefully recorded,—and a placaat announcing the will of the directors ought to have been issued on the following day. Instead of that, however, it was not published until the 28th of February 1700, and then only owing to the presence of the commissioner Wouter Valckenier. It was during these two months and a half, as the burghers asserted, that the governor’s agents were engaged in procuring horned cattle and sheep for him by fair means or by foul, and that the Hottentots to a considerable distance from the Cape were despoiled and exasperated. From his general character, as delineated in the archives, one cannot say that he would scruple even at acts of robbery.

[72]See letters from the governor and council at the Cape to the governor-general and council of India, dated 18th of March 1706, and to the directors, dated 31st of March and 24th of June 1706, in the Cape archives. The abuse heaped upon the burghers in these documents is enormous, and indicates how weak the governor must have felt his attempted defence to be.

[73]This document is in the Cape archives. It is in as good a state of preservation—excepting one leaf—as if it had been drawn up yesterday.

[74]See the letter of the governor and council at the Cape to the governor-general and council of India, of the 18th of March 1706. For this and subsequent events to the governor’s recall see the Proceedings of the Council of Policy and the Cape Journal for 1706 and 1707 in the Cape archives.

[75]One of the chief privileges secured to the free Netherlanders by their revolt against Spain and the long and successful war that followed was security from confinement except as a punishment for crime. A man suspected of having committed an offence could be arrested on a warrant properly issued by a court of justice, and was then either released on bail or speedily brought to trial, according to the nature of the charge.

[76]In a letter to the Indian authorities it is also termed blasphemy.

[77]“Maar Edele Gestrenge Heer, de wyven zyn alsoo gevaarlyk als de mans, en zyn niet stil.”—Extract from a letter of the landdrost Starrenburg to the governor Willem Adriaan van der Stel, dated 18th of September 1706. In the Cape archives.

[78]See letter from the governor-general and council of India to the governor and council at the Cape, dated 30th of November 1706. In the Cape archives.

[79]Tas mentions in his journal under date 19th of June 1705 that he had heard of complaints about the governor having reached the Netherlands, but gives no particulars.

[80]“Tot het stellen van de nodige ordres voor de securiteijt van de Caep de bonne Esperance, en daer toe soodanige middelen te adhiberen en in ’t werck stellen, alsmede tot bereijkingh van dat ooghmerck sal nodigh en dienstigh aghten, is goetgevonden te versoecken en committeren, gelijck als versoght en gecommittert werden bij dese, wegens de kamer Amsterdam de heeren Witsen en Hooft, wegens de kamer Zeeland de heer d’Huijbert, en wegens de kameren van ’t zuijder en noorder quartier de heeren van Blois en van Gent, beneffens beijde d’ advocaten van de Compagnie.”—Resolution of the Assembly of Seventeen adopted on the 8th of March 1706, copied by me from the original volume in the archives at the Hague, and published inBelangrijke Historische Dokumenten over Zuid Afrika, Deel III, page 3.

[81]SeeBelangrijke Historische Dokumenten over Zuid Afrika, Deel III, page 7.

[82]SeeBelangrijke Historische Dokumenten over Zuid Afrika, Deel III, page 7.

[83]They can be seen in the letter of the governor and the council of policy to the directors, dated 31st of March 1706, in the archives at the Hague and copy in those at Capetown, also in the printed volume called theKorte Deductie.

[84]These rations included three hundred and sixty pounds of flour, a still larger quantity of rice, fresh meat equal to four sheep, twenty pounds of salted beef or pork, a very large quantity of European wine, ale, and spirits, oil, vinegar, four pounds of pepper, two pounds of spices, and twenty-five pounds of butter monthly, besides twenty-five pounds of wax and tallow candles, and as much fuel as he needed. He was supposed to entertain the masters of ships when they were ashore on business, and was therefore provided for so liberally. He was also required to give a dinner to all the principal officers of the fleets returning from India, just before they sailed, which was termed the afscheidmaal, but for this he was paid £41 13s.4d.by the Company. A carriage and horses were also provided for him free of cost, so that he had no forage to purchase. Under these circumstances his excuse seems to be as silly as it was impudent. His actual salary was only two hundred gulden or £16 13s.4d.a month, less than that of a second class clerk in the public service to-day, but he had various fees and perquisites.

[85]The other members were Messrs. Lestevenon, De Vries, Corven, Bas, Hooft, Van Dam, Velters, De Witt, Van der Waeijen, Van de Blocquerij, Hoogeveen, Muijssart, Maarseveen, Trip, and Goudoeven. For the actual text of the resolution seeBelangrijke Historische Dokumenten over Zuid Afrika, Deel III, pages 7, 8, and 9.

[86]The original letter is now in the Cape archives, and the office copy is in the archives of the Netherlands at the Hague.

[87]This appointment of a military man as head of the government was made specially to secure his constant presence in the castle in time of war, as the directors were startled by the conduct of Van der Stel in neglecting his duty as he had done.

[88]Biographisch Woordenboek der Nederlanden, door A. J. van der Aa, Zeventiende Deel, Tweede Stuk, published at Haarlem in 1874. Copied by me and published inBelangrijke Historische Dokumenten over Zuid Afrika, Deel III, pages 11 and 12.

[89]Better known to English readers as Moselekatse, the Setshuana form of his name. He was the father of the late chief Lobengula.

[90]The private, confidential, and semi-official correspondence between Governor Sir Benjamin D’Urban, Colonel H. G. Smith, Lieutenant-Colonel H. Somerset, and many others, was fortunately preserved by the governor and remained in his family’s possession until 1911, when it was most kindly presented by his grandson W. S. M. D’Urban, Esqre., of Exeter, through me to the government of the Union of South Africa. I immediately published one volume of these most valuable papers under the title ofThe Kaffir War of 1835, which can be seen in several of the most important public libraries in Great Britain and the Netherlands as well as in those of South Africa. I copied sufficient for two volumes more, which can be seen typewritten in the South African Public Library, Capetown, under the title ofThe Province of Queen Adelaide, and finally I am now preparing another packet, under the title ofThe Emigration of the Dutch Farmers from the Cape Colony, which will also be deposited in the same institution. It is from these papers that I have derived the information which enables me to enlarge upon the accounts of Louis Triegard and Pieter Lavras Uys which I have given in myHistory of South Africa. I am also indebted to G. C. Moore Smith, Esqre., M.A., of Sheffield, a great nephew of Colonel (afterwards Sir Harry) Smith, for the use of many papers in his possession and for much kindly assistance otherwise rendered to me.

[91]He was a lineal descendant of the ruling family of the Amatuli tribe, the remnant of which had been reduced to such a wretched condition that they depended chiefly upon fish for subsistence. This is an article of diet that would only be used by this section of the Bantu in the last extremity of want, but they dared not make a garden or even erect a hut before the arrival of Messrs. Farewell and Fynn in 1824, for fear of attracting notice. Umnini was then a child, and his uncle Matubana was regarded as the temporary head of the little community of three or four hundred souls that had escaped when the remainder of their tribe was destroyed.

[92]The petition is in the archive department, a typewritten copy in the South African Public Library. The names attached to it are those of A. Gardiner, Henry Hogle (elsewhere written Ogle), Charles J. Pickman, P. Kew, J. Francis, J. Mouncey, G. Lyons, Charles Adams, James Collis, John Cane, R. Ward, Thomas Carden, Richard King, J. Prince, and Daniel Toohey. On the 29th of March 1836 Lord Glenelg replied refusing to annex Natal. Other European residents, either permanent or occasional, at Port Natal at this time were C. Blankenberg, Richard Wood, William Wood, Thomas Halstead, J. Pierce, John Snelder, Alexander Biggar, Robert Biggar, George Biggar, John Jones, Henry Batts, William Bottomley, John Campbell, Thomas Campbell, Richard Lovedale, John Russell, Robert Russell, John Stubbs, Robert Dunn, G. Britton, James Brown, George Duffy, Richard Duffy, Thomas Lidwell, C. Rhoddam, and G. White.

[93]When Mr. Isaacs lived in Natal—October 1825 to June 1831—the Zulus occupied the territory between the Tugela and Tongati rivers, but from this tract of country they were withdrawn in 1834 by Dingan. In 1828 Tshaka was murdered at his residence there. At the port and near the Umzimkulu the Bantu under European chiefs were living. The remainder of the territory was uninhabited except by Bushmen on the uplands and a few cannibals. Mr. Isaacs says: “our settlement, which was somewhat circumscribed, contained upwards of two thousand persons.”—Travels and Adventures, &c., Volume II, page 326.

[94]The people under the chief Futu, some of whose kraals were found by Captain Gardiner on the head waters of the Umkomanz river, should not be included in the population of Natal at that time. They were refugees from the north, and frequently moved from one locality to another. Shortly after Captain Gardiner’s visit they retired to the Umtamvuna. Their chief, Futu, was the son of Nombewu, who was killed by Ncapayi, the ferocious leader of the Bacas. Captain Gardiner estimated the people under Futu at different places in Natal at from seven to eight thousand souls. See pages 312et seq.of his volume.

[95]SeeThe Annals of Natal, by John Bird, Pietermaritzburg, 1888, Vol. I, page 75.

[96]By a Proclamation of the 11th of September 1834 the removal of a slave beyond the border of the colony was punishable by the forfeiture of the slave, a fine of £100, transportation, or imprisonment with hard labour from three to five years. It was based upon an ImperialAct to amend and consolidate the Laws relating to the Abolition of the Slave Trade.

[97]Mr. Willem Hendrik Neethling, afterwards landdrost of Klerksdorp, who was living in Lydenburg in 1867 and was then twenty-three years of age, in a communication to President F. W. Reitz which has been kindly lent to me, says: “Wat betreft het verhaal re de twee Blanken die te Lijdenburg aanlandden, is dat eene dwaling. Ik ben in staat UEd. volkomen daarover in te lichten. Het waren geen Europeanen of Caukassiers, maar wel Albinos van het neger ras. Zij waren man en vrouw en twee kinderen. Het derde is te Lijdenburg geboren. De man heette Tjaka, de alombekende slangen tegen-vergift maker. De man was reeds op leeftijd, doch ik schatte de vrouw 27 of 28 jaren oud. Toen het gerucht verspreid werd van de teruggevonden blanken heb ik mij gehaast om ze zelven te zien, en vond uit dat zij Albinos waren, zeer blank, doch met neger type, met de on-ontwikkelde neusbeen, en kroeshaar. Zij kwamen van Kosi-baai, en zijn er weder heen vertrokken. Ik heb se persoonlijk gesproken. Zij waren van staatswege gehaald op geruchten.”

[98]Since the publication of myHistory of South Africa, a journal kept by Mr. Erasmus Smit from the 15th of November 1836 to the 31st of January 1839 has been brought to light and in 1897 was printed in Capetown. It forms an octavo pamphlet of one hundred and eight pages. Mr. Smit, a native of Amsterdam, had once been a lay missionary in the service of the London Society, later a schoolmaster at Oliphants Hoek, and was married to a sister of Mr. Gerrit Maritz. He was a man of fifty-eight years of age and infirm in health, but he joined his brother-in-law’s party, and left the colony with it, being engaged to perform religious services in the camp. During the stay of the emigrants at Thaba Ntshu he was exceedingly jealous of the reverend James Archbell, Wesleyan missionary there, whom he suspected of a design of wishing to supplant him. On the 21st of May 1837 Mr. Retief appointed him religious instructor of the emigrants, whereupon he ordained himself and thereafter administered the sacraments and performed all the duties of a clergyman. I have found nothing in his journal that enables me to add to the account of the emigration given in myHistory, but there are in it a few remarks that are of assistance to me in the preparation of this paper.

[99]The actual separation into two distinct communions, as we see them to-day, had not then taken place, but the principles underlying the movement were already at work, and had been for many years. There was not as much difference between the two parties as there is in the English episcopal church between the high and the low sections, but it was sufficient to cause those with common sympathies to keep together as much as they could.

[100]See pages 451 to 455 of Volume IIIGeslacht Register der Oude Kaapsche Familien, published at Capetown in 1894. The family Uys in 1836 was a very large one, and was widely spread over the Cape Colony.

[101]See page 302 of the printed volume of records entitledThe Kaffir War of 1835.

[102]This refers to the following occurrence. During the war, while Uys was in the field, a complaint, afterwards proved to be frivolous, was made against his wife to the nearest special magistrate for the protection of apprentices, who issued a warrant, and she was taken to Port Elizabeth to be tried. Upon her innocence being clearly established she was liberated, and an action was then brought before the circuit court against the special magistrate for false imprisonment. The chief justice, who was the circuit judge, and before whom the case was tried, condemned the special magistrate to pay the costs, but these were defrayed for him out of the district treasury, on the ground that otherwise he would be deterred from doing his legal duty when complaints were made to him.—See Chase’sNatal Papers.

[103]Sir Benjamin D’Urban provisionally extended the boundary of the colony to the Kraai river, and on the 6th of November 1835 Lieutenant-Colonel Henry Somerset, who visited the north-eastern districts as an agent of the governor, issued a notice that Stephanus Petrus Erasmus was to be fieldcornet of the newly annexed ward. In September of this year one hundred and sixty families were reported to be living on the Stormberg spruit and the Kraai river. See the D’Urban papers in the South African Public Library. A full account of the massacres and robberies by the Matabele will be found in myHistory of South Africa.

[104]See hisFifty Years of the History of the Republic in South Africa (1795-1845), published in London in 1899, Volume II, pages 23 to 28.

[105]I am unable to add to or amend the accounts of these events given by me a quarter of a century ago in myHistory, except in one particular. The number of men and boys murdered at Umkungunhlovu on the 6th of February 1838 (page 318, volume ii,History of South Africa since September 1795) should be sixty-seven, not sixty-six, and to the names should be added that of Pieter Retief, junior. This is found in Mr. Boshof’s list, but not in most of those made shortly after the event. These vary from each other, and some trouble must be taken to verify many of the names. In a letter from Magdalena Johanna de Wet, widow of Mr. Retief, to her brothers and sisters, dated at Pietermaritzburg on the 7th of July 1840, published in Mr. Preller’s work, she mentions the murder of her son Pieter Retief with his father, and also of Abraham Greyling, her son by a former marriage, at the same time.

[106]For the particulars see myHistory of South Africa since September 1795, Volume II, pages 323 to 326.

[107]The difficulty of giving a reliable account of all the details of this event is insurmountable, as it is impossible to reconcile the narratives of those who took part in it with each other. I give therefore only the leading features. Readers who may imagine that every incident should be obtained by thorough research are requested to consult the different statements given by Mr. Bird in hisAnnals of Natal, and to believe that others consulted by me long before the publication of that work are equally as conflicting.

Back to Index Next