Farm 215

215 on the cadastre · on record 1990–2003 · show on the map

Farm number: No. 215
On the cadastre: 215, whole farmregistered as FARM
District: Prince Albert
Extent, as the diagram states it: 10710,1590 hektaar
Modern surveyed area: 8822.7 ha

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

Why this farm is here

Ground a written history is set on. 43 km from Klaarstroom.

story A written history is set on this ground Cut, and then stitched
parcel Ground cut out of this farm: Waterval (Farm 215 Ptn 1)
parcel Ground cut out of this farm: Farm 215 Ptn 2 (cancelled)
parcel Ground cut out of this farm: Farm 215 Ptn 3
…and 2 more, listed in full further down this page.

Stories

about this farm Cut, and then stitched
This project holds 124 boundary acts: 96 subdivisions and 20 consolidations. Sorted by date they tell one story with a turning point. The district cut ground for a hundred and fifty years; from 1970 it has only stitched.

What the record holds, in order

1990 boundary change consolidation: from Spreeuw Fontein & Toornits Kraal (Spreeufontein No. 26)
1990 boundary change consolidation: from Spreeufontein No. 26 Ptn 2
1990 boundary change consolidation: from Jansenskraal No. 104
1990 boundary change subdivision: becomes Waterval (Farm 215 Ptn 1)
September 1990 document SG diagram 7373/1990
T53114/91
September 1990 document SG diagram 7373/1990 (sheet 2)
September 1990 document SG diagram verso 7373/1990 (verso)
2003 boundary change consolidation: becomes Farm 222

Ground cut out of this farm

Waterval (Farm 215 Ptn 1) 1/215 · 5428.0 ha
Farm 215 Ptn 2 (cancelled)
Farm 215 Ptn 3 3/215 · 296.4 ha

Bordered by, as the diagram names them

N Gedeelte 1 van Rietfontein Nr 12
N Restant van Rietfontein Nr 12
NE Gedeelte 2 van Antjes Fontein Nr 14
NE Restant van Antjes Fontein Nr 14
NW Restant van Spreeuw Fontein Nr 26
W Bokfontein Nr 94
SW Caroluspoort Nr 105
E Leeukraal Nr 24
SE Gedeelte 1 van Zeekoegat Nr 22
S Restant van Jansenkraal Nr 104

Also bordered by, as the modern cadastre draws it

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

N Waterval (Farm 215 Ptn 1)
N Rietfontein No. 12
N Rietfontein No. 12 Ptn 2
NE Antjesfontein No. 14
E Leeukraal No. 24 (consolidated)
SE Farm 222
S Farm 215 Ptn 3
SW Farm 241
W Bokfontein No. 94 (formerly Waterfall)
NW Vredendal (Spreeufontein No. 26 Ptn 1)
NW Lot B (Spreeufontein No. 26 Ptn 4)
NW Rietfontein No. 12 Ptn 1

Documents

catalogued, no scan held

Surveyor-General diagram, 7373/1990, September 1990
11531339 farm 215.jpg

catalogued, no scan held

Surveyor-General diagram, 7373/1990 (sheet 2), September 1990
11531340.jpg

catalogued, no scan held

Diagram verso, 7373/1990 (verso), September 1990
11531341.jpg

Cadastre

Surveyor-General diagram index for this parcel

Research notes

[3 Aug 2026, SRC-202/DOC-0168] A 1990 CONSOLIDATION OF TEN COMPONENTS, and the first of them is THE REMAINDER OF SPREEUW-FONTEIN NR 26 - PAR-000005, one of the five farms this site has written up. Two more components are Spreeufontein pieces: the Restant of Gedeelte 2 and Gedeelte 6. So this row is where Spreeufontein ended up. It also hands us two things we did not have for that farm: its remainder diagram, KAART 1/1903, and its ORIGINAL GRANT, GRONDBRIEF NR P.A.Q. 6-1. The other seven components are Bokfontein 94 (two), Antjes Fontein 14 Ged 4 "Lower Diepkloof", Smal Deel 23 Ged 1 "Upper Diepkloof", Ganse Kraal 25 (Ged 1 and the Restant, the latter on an 1873 grant Pr.A.Q. 4-7), and Gedeelte 5 "Gans Vlei" of JANSEN'SKRAAL NR 104 (PAR-000057). THE VERSO RECONCILES: 10710,1590 ha less Ged 1 (5445,7438), Ged 2 (1728,8890) and Ged 3 (295,9807) leaves 3239,5455 ha of remainder. These 1990-2018 consolidations are the MODERN successors of farms this project tracks. They are recorded because they say where the old farms went and because their neighbour lists corroborate our own; they are not themselves part of the family story.

[3 Aug 2026] RENAMED to the project's standard form for a farm that has no name. The cadastre publishes these as literally 'FARM' and their own diagrams call them 'Die Plaas Nr 215' / 'FARM NO. 241', so there is no name to lose - only a house style to settle. The diagram's own wording is kept above.

[10 Aug 2026] THE RECORDS GIVE THIS FARM NO NAME, and that is a finding rather than a gap. Its own Surveyor-General diagrams call it only 'die Plaas Nr 215' [SRC-354, SRC-355], and the neighbouring farm on the same sheets is likewise only 'Die Plaas Nr 222'. The cadastre's P_FARMNAME for it is the bare word FARM. So 'Farm 215' is what the record says, not a placeholder this project failed to fill.

The research behind this page, kept separate from it: dated working notes, open questions, and what is not yet settled.

Open questions

Nine diagram sheets named in the model that no longer exist on disk priority 2 · LEAD-0095
Re-pull nine Surveyor-General sheets whose archive references this model records but whose images were never kept. What do their versos carry?

What would settle it Re-pulling the nine files. Each then gets its OWN DOC- row per 8, never a second filename on an existing row.

What the record is missing

“Caroluspoort Nr 105” is named as a neighbour 4 times and we hold no parcel for it second order · B3 unheld-farm
4 separate surveys in this model put Caroluspoort Nr 105 on the boundary of ground we do hold (PAR-000134, PAR-000136, PAR-000184, PAR-000185). It has no parcel of its own here, so nothing is known about who held it or when, while it borders farms at the centre of the project.

What would settle it The Surveyor-General's farm index for the registration division will give it a farm number and a diagram; the cadastre pull in `data/fetch_cadastre.py` then places it on the map.
Nobody is on record as ever having held this third order · B8 never-held
Farm 215 is in the model and drawn on the map, and carries no ownership record of any kind, not a grant, not a transfer, not an occupation.

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

Found by breaks.py reading the model against itself, not written by hand, each one is a shape of missing record, not a fault in the data. The whole set is on the questions page.