1742 Fortuijn van Bengalen

Details
Name on Document:
Fortuijn van Bengalen
Date:
1742-01-04
Document Type:
Sentence
Primary Charge:
arson
Secondary Charge:
--
Summary

This example of slave arson targeted the house of a farmer who was not the slave’s owner, but against whom he held a particular grudge. The case is revealing for what it shows about the difficulties in the formation of personal bonds or relationships by slaves, and the links between the slaves and Khoi workers in the area.1

Fortuijn was captured by slaves on the farm of Pieter Venter, a place to which he had escaped from his owner. He knew the farm well, since he had previously had a relationship there with Christijn van de Caab (we do not know if he had then lived on the same farm with her). Venter sent him back to his owner, but he was allowed to go free by the Khoi who was ordered to accompany him. He later returned, supposedly in search of tobacco, but also to see Christijn. She now rejected him, partly because she had another man, but also because, as she stated, her owners did not ‘understand’ such a relationship, or did not approve of it.2 His attempt to set fire to Venter’s house was motivated by this obstacle to their continued relationship, and by Venter and his wife’s previous capture and beating of him.

Fortuijn was burnt alive for what the authorities considered to be a heinous crime which threatened the whole region. Slave emotional relationships were certainly not considered to be any excuse.

Footnotes

  1. The documents in this case also include the eijscheijschLiterally ‘claim’ or ‘demand.’ This is strictly speaking the eijsch ende conclusie without the final part about sentencing, but the term is often used as a shorthand for the whole document. and testimonies by Fortuijn van Bengalen, and the farmers Pieter Venter and Pieter Loubser (CJ 347, ff. 1-19). Christijn van de Caab’s testimony is included here for the details it gives of the problems in her relationship with Fortuijn. These initial testimonies are recorded in the Stellenbosch district records, 1/STB 3/8.

  2. This may, of course, have been a convenient excuse on her part.

CJ 347 Criminele Process Stukken, 1742, ff. 18-19v.
Translation Dutch

Today, 26 December 1741, there appears before me, Arnold Schephausen, secretary of Stellenbosch and Drakenstein, in the presence of the witnesses named below, Christijn van de Caab, bondswoman of the farmer Pieter Venter, about 25 years old, who, on the requisition of the landdrost, Sieur Pieter Lourensz, declares it to be true:

That one evening, about a month ago now, without knowing the exact day, the deponent, on her owner’s farm, situated at Riebeeks-Kasteel, named Allesverloren, went outside with a bucket to collect water at the pump which stands close behind the house on the farm of her master. On her arrival there, the deponent saw a certain slave, Fortuijn van Bengalen, belonging to the farmer Abraham de Villiers, and with whom she had previously had a relationship, who called out to her: “Stijn, Stijn, come here”, whereupon she, being very frightened, said: “Oh God, Who is here?”, to which the said Fortuijn answered her: “What are you doing, screaming like that?”, to which she replied: “What are you doing here? You must not come here again, I don’t wish to have a relationship with you any longer, because my baasbaasIn seventeenth-century Dutch this was used both in the sense of ‘head’ (e.g. ‘head carpenter’) and ‘master’. In South Africa the second meaning developed further, and thus baas came to be a synonym for meester (‘master’). It was the form that slaves (and Khoikhoi) would use to address male Europeans. and juffrouwjuffrouwStrictly speaking this contraction of jonkvrouw was the form of address for a noble lady (as with jonker, the contraction of jonkheer, ‘lord’), but at the Cape it was more generally used by settlers for women with some social status. Moreover, in the eighteenth century this was also the term slaves used to address their female owners, alongside nonje. do not understand it”, returning then to the house with the bucket of water; without her having seen or spoken to that jongenjongenLiterally ‘boy.’ In Dutch it was common to use this word also to refer to male servants, irrespective of age. At the Cape, however, this usage was extended to slaves and then became exclusive, so that jongen (also in the deflected form jong) came to mean ‘male slave’, such that Afrikaans lost the use of the word to mean ‘boy’ and instead uses seun (from Dutch zoon) for both ‘boy’ and ‘son.’ In this primary meaning, the word has become obsolete in modern Afrikaans, except for the archaic terms tuinjong (‘garden boy’) and plaasjong (‘farm boy’), in the sense of male workers of colour. Fortuijn afterwards when he was brought as prisoner to the farm of her owner by the same’s son.

The deponent declares finally that it was on that very night when she had spoken to the aforementioned slave Fortuijn, that her master’s residence was set alight during the night.

There being nothing else to declare, the deponent asserts to be convinced of the accuracy of her statement as in the text, while offering to subsequently confirm this, her deposition, at any time, if so required.

Thus recorded on the farm of the burgher Pieter van Taak, named Kloovenburg, situated at Riebeek-Kasteel, in the presence of the soldier Jan Philipsz Ploegsteert from Osnaburg1 and the sailor Borchart Wenke from Delmenhorst, requested hereto as witnesses of the faith, who have properly signed the original of this, together with the deponent and me, the secretary.

Verification

There appears before us, the undersigned deputised heemradenheemradenThe origin of this word is uncertain, but is connected to the Dutch words heem (‘homestead’) and raad (‘councillor’). This was the title of a free burgher who served on the Collegie van Heemraden in the rural districts of the Cape, usually for a term of two years., expressly qualified for this purpose by the honourable Council of Justice, Christijn van de Caab, bondswoman of the farmer Pieter Venter, who declares to fully persist with this, her given deposition, which had been read out word by word, clearly and plainly; therefore having no desire that anything should be added to or taken from it.

Thus verified on the farm of the aforementioned burgher Pieter van Taak on 27 December 1741 before Monsieurs Gerhard van der Bijl and Hendrik van der Merwe, qualified for this as delegates by the aforementioned honourable Council, who have properly signed the original of this, together with the deponent and me, the secretary.

Which I declare, [signed] A. Schephausen, secretary.

Footnotes

  1. Sic for Osnabrück.

Huijden, den 26e December 1741, compareerde voor mij, Arnold Schephausen, secretaris van Stellenbosch en Draakensteijn, in ’t bijweesen van de naartenoemene getuijgen, Christijn van de Caab, lijfeijgene van den landbouwer Pieter Venter, oud omtrent 25 jaaren, dewelke, ter requisitie van den landdrost sieur Pieter Lourensz, verklaarde hoe waar is:

Dat zij comparante op haar lijfheers plaats, geleegen aan Riebeeks Casteel, genaamt Alles Verlooren, nu omtrent een maand geleeden, sonder den preciesen dag te weeten, op een avond naar buijten gaande met een emmer na de pomp, dewelke digt agter het woonhuijs van haar comparantes meesters plaats staat, om waater te haalen, zij comparante bij haare aankomst aldaar gesien heeft, seekeren slaaf, Fortuijn van Bengalen, toebehoorende den landbouwer Abraham de Villiers, en bij dewelke zij bevoorens gehouden heeft, die haar toeriep: Stijn, Stijn, kom hier!, waarop zij comparante seer verschrikt sijnde, seijde: O God! Wat is hier? waarop gemelte Fortuijn haar antwoorde: Wat doe jij soo te schreeuwen?, daar zij comparante op repliceerde: Wat doe ghij hier? Gij hoeft hier niet weêr te koomen; ik begeer bij jouw niet meer te houden, want mijn baas en juffrouw die verstaan het niet; begeevende haar voorts naar dit gesegde met een emmer met water naar huijs, sonder dat zij comparante dien jongen Fortuijn naderhand meerdere gesien ofte gesprooken heeft, als wanneer deselve op de plaats van haar lijfheer, door desselfs zoon, gevankelijk is gebragt geworden.

Laatstelijk betuijgt de comparante dat het dien eijgensten avond is geweest, dat zij den slaaf Fortuijn, voormeld, aan de pomp gesprooken heeft, wanneer des ’snagts haar meesters woonhuijs in brand geraakt is.

Anders niet verklaarende, geeft de comparante voor reedenen van weetenschap als in den text, met presentatie dit, haar gedeposeerde, ten allen tijden, des gerequireert werdende, nader te sullen gestand doen.

Dat aldus passeerde op de plaats van den burger Pieter van Taak, geleegen aan Riebeeks Casteel, genaamt Klovenburg, ten overstaan van den soldaat Jan Philipsz Ploegsteert van Osnabrug1 ende den mattroos Borchart Wenke van Delmenhorst, als getuijgen van geloove hiertoe versogt, die de minute deeses, beneevens de compte ende mij, secretaris, meede behoorlijk hebben onderteekent.

Recollement

Compareerde voor ons, ondergetekende gecommitteerde heemraaden, als hiertoe door den edelagtbaren Raad van Justitie expres gequalificeert, Christijn van de Caab, lijfeijgene van den landbouwer Pieter Venter, dewelke deese, haare gegeevene verklaaring, van woorde tot woord [sic] klaar ende duijdelijk voorgeleesen sijnde, verklaarde daarbij volkomen te persisteeren, oversulx niet begeerende datter iets meer bijgevoegt ofte van gedaan werden sal.

Aldus gerecolleert op de plaats van den burger Pieter van Taak, voormeld, den 27e December 1741 voor de messieurs Gerhard van der Bijl en Hendrik van der Merwe, als gecommitteerdens, door voormelten edelagtbaren Raad hiertoe gequalificeert, die de minute deeses, beneevens de comparante ende mij, secretaris, meede behoorlijk hebben onderteekent.

’Twelk ik getuijge, [get.] A. Schephausen, secretaris.

Footnotes

  1. Sic for Osnabrück.

CJ 786 Sententiën, 1736-1743, ff. 377-83.
Translation Dutch

Since, from the voluntary and verified confession of Fortuijn van Bengalen, bondsman of the farmer Abraham de Villiers, 28 years old at a guess, currently their honours’ prisoner, given without torture or force of bonds, of irons, or even the least threat of suchlike, and from other documents serving the case, it has appeared evident:

That towards the end of the month of November of the past year, without being able to name the exact date, the prisoner, after at first having deserted from his master for a week and a half, came during the night to the lower farm of the farmer Pieter Venter in order to seek some tobacco from the slaves living there, who then took him prisoner and brought him to their master on the higher farm, who had him tied up by a certain Hottentot, named Adam, who was living at that time with the prisoner’s master, and sent him down to his home farm.

That when the prisoner and the aforementioned Hottentot had arrived close to the Paardeberg, the latter lay down after first freeing the prisoner, and saying: “I shall sleep, if you want to get away, you could do so, if you want to stay, you could do so too”, whereupon the prisoner yet again repaired to his master’s farm, named De Leeuwenvalleij, behind Riebeek Kasteel, where he had previously been assigned.

That the prisoner, while the slave whom his master had left at that place was out in the veld with the sheep, then climbed into the house through an open window and stole from there half a bucket of flour, a tea kettle and a dried leg of mutton, with which he proceeded to the Berg River at the so-called Sanddrift, from where, late in the afternoon, he went to the home farm of the farmer Pieter Venter in order to speak to a woman slave of the same, named Christijn, with whom the prisoner had had a relationship for a while.

That the prisoner, arriving there in the evening, went to sit at a pump which stands behind the house of the aforementioned Venter, where the aforesaid woman slave Christijn (after the prisoner had sat at that place for about an hour, coming to collect a bucket of water) got a fright upon seeing him, and said to him: “I don’t wish to have anything to do with you any more, you must never come here again in your life, I have another man”, proceeding then, without saying anything more, with the bucket of water to the house.

That the prisoner, after the aforementioned Christijn had left, lit a pipe of tobacco and, while smoking it, became dejected because this meijdmeijdLiterally ‘girl.’ This word developed among the same lines as jongen, the word coming to mean ‘female slave.’ However, its trajectory diverged from that of jongen in that it eventually was used more widely to refer to indigenous women, so that meid still survives in modern Afrikaans as a pejorative term for women of colour. As with jongen, the word was no longer available to refer to European girls, but instead of the difference between girl and daughter disappearing, the diminutive form, meijsje (Afrikaans, meisie), came to be used for ‘girl.’ had left him, as well as getting angry, not only because the said Venter had him taken prisoner and tied him up, but also because, some time ago, the same’s wife, upon catching the prisoner in her house, had beaten him with a broomstick and burnt his cap. Which is when he decided to set the residence of the aforementioned Pieter Venter on fire, which the prisoner did in fact do that very night, making to this end a little flue from an old cloth which was lying by the pump, and having set the same on fire with his pipe, he went with it to the said house, where he stuck the burning flue under the roof, which is quite low, into the thatch. After the roof was in flames for up to a width of nearly one and a half fathoms,1 the fire was extinguished by the said Pieter Venter and some other people, who, together with his wife and children, were lying asleep in the very room where the prisoner had started the fire, and amongst whom the heemraadheemraadThe origin of this word is uncertain, but is connected to the Dutch words heem (‘homestead’) and raad (‘councillor’). This was the title of a free burgher who served on the Collegie van Heemraden in the rural districts of the Cape, usually for a term of two years. Pieter Laubser woke up first because of the heavy smoke and fumes that were in the house. The prisoner, as soon as he had done this, removed to his hiding place at the aforesaid Sanddrift, where he, after staying there for about four days, was taken prisoner by the burghers Claas Laubser and Hendrik Venter, and was subsequently delivered into the hands of justice by the aforementioned Pieter Venter and the same’s son, after he had already confessed, upon being questioned by the same on his home farm, to have committed this arson.

And since a heinous atrocity such as the one committed by the prisoner, through which not only the ruin of a farmer, but at times even the downfall of a whole district could be dreaded, cannot remain unpunished in a country where law and justice are observed, but should on the contrary be punished in an exemplary fashion as a warning and deterrent to other similar malefactors.

Thus it is, that the honourable Council of Justice of this Castle, serving today, having seen and read with attention the written criminelen eijsch ende conclusie, drawn up and delivered for and against the prisoner by the landdrost, Sieur Pieter Lourensz, by reason of his office, besides having noted the same’s voluntary and verified confession, and everything else which further served the case and could have moved their honours, practising justice in the name and on behalf of the high and mighty Lords States General of the free United Netherlands and, having judged the prisoner, Fortuijn van Bengalen, is sentencing him with this: to be taken to the place where criminal sentences are usually executed here, there to be handed over to the executioner and, standing upright, to be tied with a chain to a stake and to be burnt alive; the remains of the corpse burnt to death are to be taken to the outside place of execution, there to be placed upon a wheel with an iron pot above the head (denoting the arson), to remain like this until being consumed entirely; with sentencing to the costs and expenditure of justice.2

Thus done and sentenced in the Castle of Good Hope on 4 January 1742, as also pronounced and executed on the 6th thereupon.

Let the execution be done, [signed] H. Swellengrebel.

[signed] R. Tulbagh, P. Reede van Oudshoorn, R.S. Allemann, Ns. Heijning, Cl. Brand, Js. Möller, Corns. Eelders, Js. de Grandpreez, Am. Decker, W. v. Kerkhoven, D. d’Aillij, Dl. Pfeil, G. la Febre, J. Cruijwagen.

Mij praesent, [signed] D.G. Carnspek, secretary.

Footnotes

  1. About 3 metres.

  2. This sentence was recommended in the eijscheijschLiterally ‘claim’ or ‘demand.’ This is strictly speaking the eijsch ende conclusie without the final part about sentencing, but the term is often used as a shorthand for the whole document., CJ 347, f. 8v and recorded in the regtsrollenregtsrollenLiterally ‘rolls of justice’, the minutes of the proceedings of the Council of Justice., CJ 24, ff. 1-2. The significance of an iron pot as a symbol of arson is unclear. Fortuijn’s burning alive was observed by Francis d’Abbadie, a visiting French captain, who commented that ‘he was not long in pain, as he was Presently suffocated by the fiersness [sic] of the flames’, Boucher 1982: 75-6.

Nademaal uijt de vrijwillige gerecolleerde confessie van Fortuijn van Bengalen, lijfeigen van den landbouwer Abraham de Villiers, oud naar gissing 28 jaaren, thans ’s heeren gevangen, buijten pijn of dwang van banden, van ijsers, dan wel de minste bedreijging van dien, gedaan, en andere stucken ter saken diendende, evidentelijk is gebleeken:

Dat hij gevangen in ’t laatst van de maand November des gepasseerden jaars, sonder den precisen datum te kunnen opnoemen, na bevorens een week of anderhalft van zijn meester gedrost geweest te zijn, des nagts gekomen is op de onderste plaats van den landbouwer Pieter Venter, ten eijnde bij d’ aldaar sig bevindende slaven wat tobak te soeken, dewelke hem alsdoen gevangen genomen en bij haare meester op de bovenste plaats gebragt hebben, die hem gevangen vervolgens hebbende doen vleugelen door sekeren Hottentot, Adam genaamt, dewelke ter dier tijd bij zijn gevangens meester woonagtig was, naar desselfs woonplaats heeft opgezonden.

Dat hij gevangen met voormelde Hottentot omtrent de Paardeberg gekomen zijnde, denselven sig aldaar op de grond soude nedergelegt en, na hem gevangen los gemaakt te hebben, tegens hem gesegt hebben: Ik zal slapen, wilt gij heen gaan, dat kunt gij doen, en wilt gij blijven, dat kunt gij ook doen; waarop hij gevangen sig weederom naar zijn meesters plaats agter Ribeeks [sic] Casteel, genaamt de Leeuwenvalleij, alwaer beschijden was, heeft terug begeeven.

Dat hij gevangen, terwijl seekeren slaaf, die zijn gemelde meester aldaar hadde leggen, sig met de schapen in het veld bevond, alsdoen door een openstaande venster in huijs is geklommen en vervolgens daaruijt heeft gestolen: een halve emmer meel, een theeketel, en een droge bout schapenvleesch, waar mede hij gevangen sig begeeven heeft naar de Berg Revier, bij de sogenaamde Sanddrift, vanwaar hij des agtermiddags laat naar de woonplaats van den landbouwer Pieter Venter is gegaan, om een slavinne van deselve, Christijn genaamt, bij dewelke hij gevangen eenige tijd conversatie gehad hadde, te spreken.

Dat hij gevangen des avonds aldaar gekomen zijnde, bij een pomp, dewelke agter het huijs van voormelde Venter staat, is gaan sitten, alwaar voorsegde slavinne Christijn (nadat hij gevangen daar ter plaatse omtrent een uur geseeten hadden) gekomen is om een emmer met water te halen, dewelke hem gevangen siende, verschrikte, en teegens hem seijde: Ik wil met jouw niet meer te doen hebben, gij moet jouw leven niet weer komen, ik heb een ander man, begevende haar voorts, sonder meer te spreken, met de emmer met water naar huijs toe.

Dat hij gevangen, nadat de meergemelde Christijn weggegaan was, een pijp tobak heeft opgestoken, en onder het roken van deselve mismoedig werdende omdat die meijd hem verlaten hadde, alsmeede quaad zijnde, niet alleen omdat gemelde Venter hem hadde doen gevangen neemen en vleugelen, maar ook dat desselfs huijsvrouw hem gevangen eenigen tijd bevorens in haar huijs attrapeerende, met een beusemstok geslagen en zijn muts verbrand hadde, alsdoen voorgenomen heeft het woonhuijs van dikwils genoemde Pieter Venter in de brand te steeken, hetwelk hij gevangen ook dien eijgenste nagt heeft verrigt, maakende ten dien eijnde een pluijsje van oud doek, hetwelk bij de pomp lag, en hetselve bij de pijp in brand gestoken hebbende, heeft hij gevangen sig daar meede naar het gemelde woonhuijs begeven, alwaar hij het brandend pluijsje onder het dak, hetwelk heel laag is, in het riet stak, welk dak, nadat het reets ter breete van omtrent anderhalf vadem in de ligte vlam gestaan hadde, is die brand egter door gemelde Pieter Venter en eenige andere personen, dewelke neffens desselfs huijsvrouw en kinderen, in de ijgenste camer alwaar hij gevangen hetselve in den brand gestoken hadde, te slapen lagen, en onder dewelke den heemraad Pieter Laubser, door de sterke rook en damp die er in huijs was, ’t eerste wakker wierd, nog geblust geworden, begeevende hij gevangen soo dra sulx verrigt hadde, sig naar zijn schuijlplaats aan de Sanddrift, voormeld, alwaar hij, naar een dag of vier sig opgehouden te hebben, door de burgers Claas Laubser en Hendrik Venter gevangen genomen, en door meergemelde Pieter Venter en desselfs soon, nadat hij aan denselven ter zijner afvraging op desselfs woonplaats reets bekent hadde dien brandstigting begaan te hebben, vervolgens in handen van de justitie is overgelevert.

Ende gemerkt sulk een enorme gruweldaad bij den gevangen begaan, waardoor niet alleen de ruine van den landman, maar bij wijlen selfs den ondergang van een geheele colonie soude te dugten staan, in een land waar regt en justitie gehandhaaft word, geensints ongepunieert kan blijven, maar in teegendeel ten spiegel en afschrik van andere diergelijke boosdoenders exemplaarlijk moet werden gestraft.

Soo is het, dat den edelagtbaren Raad van Justitie deeses Casteels, ten dage dienende, aandagtelijk hebbende geleesen ende geresumeert den schriftelijken criminelen eijsch ende conclusie door den landdrost, sieur Pieter Lourensz, ratione officii, op ende jeegens den gevangen gedaan ende genomen, wijders geleth op desselfs vrijwillige gerecolleerde confessie, en op alle hetgene voorts ter sake dienende was en haare Edel Agtbaarhedens konde doen moveren, doende regt uijt name ende van weegens de hooghmoogende heeren Staaten Generaal der vrije Vereenigde Neederlanden, den gevangen Fortuijn van Bengalen hebben gecondemneert, gelijk haare Edel Agtbaarhedens denselven condemneren mits deesen: omme gebragt te werden ter plaatse alwaar men alhier gewoon is criminele sententiën te executeren, en aldaer den scherpregter overgelevert zijnde, overeijnd staande, met een ketting aan een paal gebonden, also levendig verbrand te werden, sullende het restant van het doodgebrande lichaam naar het buijten geregt werden gebragt, omme aldaar met een eijsere pot boven ’t hoofd (denoterende de brandstigting) op een rad gesteld, so lange te blijven setten, totdat hetselve verder ten eenemaal verteert zal weesen, met condemnatie in de costen en misen van justitie.

Aldus gedaan ende gesententieert in ’t Casteel de Goede Hoop, den 4e Januarij 1742, mitsgaders gepronuntieert ende g’executeert, den 6e daaraanvolgende.

Fiat Executie, [get.] H. Swellengrebel.

[get.] R. Tulbagh, P. Reede van Oudshoorn, R.S. Allemann, Ns. Heijning, Cl. Brand, Js. Möller, Corns. Eelders, Js. de Grandpreez, Am. Decker, W. v. Kerkhoven, D. d’Aillij, Dl. Pfeil, G. la Febre, J. Cruijwagen.

Mij praesent, [get.] D.G. Carnspek, secretaris.

Places
Berg River where 30-1 after he stole from a farm
Riebeeks-Kasteel where 30-91's farm was located