Alewyns Berg Extension No. 669

Farm number: No. 669
District: Calvinia (division)
Extent, as the diagram states it: 539 morgen 58 sq roods
Modern surveyed area: 455.9 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

Described by a document in this collection. 366 km from Klaarstroom.

document A document in the collection describes this ground DOC-0273

What the record holds, in order

1874 document SG diagram 311/1874

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.

NW Alewyns Berg No. 668

Documents

Scan of Surveyor-General diagram, 311/1874, 1874

Surveyor-General diagram, 311/1874, 1874
10054908 669 0.jpg

Research notes

[10 Aug 2026, SRC-363/DOC-0273] A CROWN LAND farm, S.G. 311/1874, surveyed by Wm. de Smidt Junr., examiner L. MarquardM. 539 morgen 58 roods, 1141.02 acres in English measure on the sheet. Bounded N by Alewyns Berg, S by Leeuwen Riet, E by Zoet Water Extension. The face also names Dwars Pad, Driekop, Zoetwater, Leeuwen Riet Extension and the thoroughfare 'from Hantam to Onder Bokkeveld' - the road between the two halves of this district. Extent agrees with the modern polygon to 1.3%. No holder is named: it is Crown land at survey.

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

What the record is missing

Nobody is on record as ever having held this third order · B8 never-held
Alewyns Berg Extension No. 669 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.