1742 Jan Hendrik Hop
Given the Company’s fear of slave resistance in the late 1730s, and the uncertainties of the frontier districts, it is not surprising that the Stellenbosch authorities showed concern at reports that Jan Hendrik Hop had left his slaves unsupervised and with unrestricted access to guns and ammunition on his farm in the Piketberg region. Hop had a number of farm properties, doubtless as a form of investment, and did not reside on this one. Although it was not in itself unusual for burghers in the eighteenth century to own more than one farm (often including loan farms and cattle posts in the pastoral regions), the fact that there was no member of the owner’s family or knechtknechtLiterally ‘male servant,’ but because most European knechten at the Cape were used as slave overseers, this original meaning gradually eroded and the word ended up meaning primarily (as in modern Afrikaans), ‘farm foreman.’ to supervise the slaves was exceptional and was noticed, undoubtedly with some concern, by the other settlers.
The testimonies by neighbouring farmers add interesting details, including that the slaves were planning to go and hunt in the veld, that some were fearful of being shot at by ‘Dutchmen’ but were intimidated by one of their number who threatened them with the kind of whipping that an owner usually gave, and that slaves did not usually wear white shirts. Dress, as much as gun ownership, defined status in the colony.1
There is no record that this case was taken further, but doubtless Hop was given a warning by the landdrost.2
Footnotes
-
There were numerous plakkatenplakkatenAn ordinance or decree of the Council of Policy read in public places and posted on buildings. The name is derived from the seal, a ‘placaat’, which was impressed on the document containing an ordinance. strictly prohibiting slaves from carrying any fire-arms, for example Kaapse Plakkaatboek I: 246-47 (1688); II: 45 (art. 36-7, 1715), 120 (art. 59, 1727) and 136 (art. 7, 1728). ↩
-
There is no record of this case in the Council of Justice regtsrollenregtsrollenLiterally ‘rolls of justice’, the minutes of the proceedings of the Council of Justice. or criminal case documentation, CJ 24 and CJ 347. Hop was part of the burgher elite, being a burgher councillor, captain of the militia, and serving on the board of the Orphan Chamber (Hoge 1946: 173), which might explain the leniency towards him. ↩
1/STB 3/9 Criminele Verklaringen, 1740-1746, unpaginated.
Today, 26 November 1742, there appears before me, Arnold Schephausen, secretary of Stellenbosch and Drakenstein, in the presence of the witnesses named below, the burgher Daniël Bokkelenberg, who, on the requisition of the landdrost, Sieur Pieter Lourensz, declares it to be true:
That during this current year, without knowing the actual date, while riding with the burgher Albert van Zeijl to his farm, situated down in the Lang Vallei, the deponent rode up with the same to the post of the former burgher councillor, Sieur Jan Hendrik Hop, situated at Piketberg, and known in common parlance as the Drogerijskloof, where at this time there was stationed nobody but the slaves of the said Sieur Hop.
That at that time the deponent saw in an open-standing room some rifles, as well as trap guns, with which was also a bandolier with a powder-horn and a shot-locker; while the deponent, on several previous occasions, has seen that there were also powder and bullets at that place.
The deponent also declares that, some time ago, he understood from the burgher Erasmus Smit that one Sunday, when the same was riding past the aforesaid farm of Sieur Hop, he had seen two jongensjongensLiterally ‘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. shooting with guns at a target, and that he had asked a Hottentot 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.’, who came to him from the house, who were shooting there at a target, to which the same answered him that it was two jongensjongensLiterally ‘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..
There being nothing further to declare, the deponent asserts to be convinced of the accuracy of his statement as in the text, while offering to subsequently confirm this, his deposition, at any time with solemn oaths, if it may be required.
Thus recorded at Stellenbosch in the presence of the deputy Jan Hendrik Narb and the messenger of the court Jan van Ellewe, requested hereto as witnesses of faith.
This mark X was made by Daniël Bokkelenberg with his own hand.
As witnesses, [signed] Jan Hendrik Narb, J. van Ellewe.
With my cognisance, [signed] A. Schephausen, secretary.
1/STB 3/9 Criminele Verklaringen, 1740-1746, unpaginated.
Today, 26 November 1742, there appears before me, Arnold Schephausen, secretary of Stellenbosch and Drakenstein, in the presence of the witnesses named below, the burgher Nicolaas Pilletje, who, on the requisition of the landdrost, Sieur Pieter Lourensz, declares it to be true:
That during the previous year 1741, the deponent was riding from the farm of the burgher Abraham Mouton to his home, and when he came to the farm of the former burgher councillor, Sieur Jan Hendrik Hop, in the Bergvallei, he saw an ox-wagon standing there, next to which were some of Sieur Hop’s slaves, who were waiting there to ride into the veld to shoot game, having with them two guns and a bandolier.
That the deponent asked one of these slaves, who was the keeper of this post and named Alexander:1 “Where do you want to go to with this wagon”, to which the same answered: “I want to ride into the veld to shoot game”, to which the deponent replied: “You may not do that; after all, it is forbidden”, to which this slave answered the deponent most impudently: “What? I shall ride into the veld”.
That thereupon the deponent heard, while riding away, that the other slaves said to the aforementioned Alexander: “We don’t want to ride into the veld, there is that Dutchman2 who has seen us, and who would no doubt chase after us and would shoot us dead in the veld”, to which the aforementioned Alexander replied: “What, you will go with me, or I shall tie you onto the ladder and beat you”, but the deponent could not hear anything further about what had happened between them, as he was continuing on his way home.
The deponent finally declares as well that, on several occasions, he had seen some rifles, both on the farm of said Sieur Hop in the Bergvallei as well as at Piketberg, where there were stationed only slaves of the aforementioned Sieur Hop.
There being nothing further to declare, the deponent asserts to be convinced of the accuracy of his statement as in the text, while offering to subsequently confirm this, his deposition, at all times with solemn oaths, if it may be required.
Thus recorded at Stellenbosch, in the presence of the deputy Jan Hendrik Narb and the messenger of the court Jan van Ellewe, requested hereto as witnesses of faith.
NP (these letters were put down by Nicolaas Pilletje with his own hand).
As witnesses, [signed] Jan Hendrik Narb, J. van Ellewe.
With my cognisance, [signed] A. Schephausen, secretary.
1/STB 3/9 Criminele Verklaringen, 1740-1746, unpaginated.
Today, 24 December 1742, there appears before me, Arnold Schephausen, secretary of Stellenbosch and Drakenstein, in the presence of the witnesses named below, the farmer Erasmus Smit, who, on the requisition of the landdrost, Sieur Pieter Lourensz, declares it to be the whole truth:
That now some time ago, without knowing exactly when, the deponent was riding from his farm, situated at Het Kruis, to that of the burgher Jacobus Gildenhuijsen, situated at Piketberg and, passing the farm of the former burgher councillor, Sieur Jan Hendrik Hop, at Piketberg, he saw that shots were being fired from the corner of the corral on this farm, whereupon he asked a Hottentot 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.’, who resided with the said Sieur Hop and who was looking after the ewes and their lambs close by the house: “Who is shooting there?”, to which the same answered him: “Those are two jongensjongensLiterally ‘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.”, to which he replied: “Are those jongensjongensLiterally ‘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., they are after all wearing white shirts”, and she again: “Yes! That is Galenje and Latijn, they are shooting at a target”, whereupon the deponent proceeded from there to the aforesaid Gildenhuijsen.
The deponent also declares that he is aware, and has also often seen, that the slaves who are stationed without a knechtknechtLiterally ‘male servant,’ but because most European knechten at the Cape were used as slave overseers, this original meaning gradually eroded and the word ended up meaning primarily (as in modern Afrikaans), ‘farm foreman.’ on the farm of said Sieur Hop have rifles among them, as well as bandoliers.
There being nothing further to declare, the deponent asserts to be convinced of the accuracy of his statement as in the text, while offering to confirm this, his deposition, at all times with solemn oaths, if that may be required.
Thus recorded at Stellenbosch in the presence of the deputy Jan Hendrik Narb and the messenger of the court Jan van Ellewe, requested hereto as witnesses.
[signed] Rasmes Smet [sic].
As witnesses, [signed] Jan Hendrik Narb, J. van Ellewe.
With my cognisance, [signed] A. Schephausen, secretary.
Footnotes
Huijden, den 26e November 1742, compareerde voor mij, Arnold Schephausen, secretaris van Stellenbosch en Draakensteijn, in ’t bijweesen van de naartenoemene getuijgen, den burger Daniël Bokkelenberg, dewelke, ter requisitie van den Landdrost, sieur Pieter Lourensz, verklaarde de waarheijd te zijn:
Dat hij comparant in dit loopende jaar, sonder den eijgentlijken tijd te weeten, met den burger Albert van Zeijl naar sijn plaats, geleegen onder in de Lange Valleij, rijdende, met denselven aangereeden is op de post van den oud burgerraad, sieur Jan Hendrik Hop, geleegen aan de Piquetbergen, in de wandeling genaamd de Drooge Rijs Kloof, alwaar ter dier tijd niet anders als slaaven van gemelten sieur Hop laagen.
Dat hij comparant alsdoen, in een camer die open stond, gesien heeft, eenige schietgeweeren, alsmeede stelroers, waarbij insgelijk een bandelier met een kruijthooren en kogel[…]1 was, hebbende hij comparant verscheijde maalen tevooren gesien aldaar ook kruijt en kogels waren.
Nog betuijgt den comparant dat hij eenige tijd geleeden van den burger Erasmus Smit verstaan heeft dat denselven op een Sondag, voormelten plaats van sieur Hop voorbij rijdende, gesien hadde, dat er twee jongens met geweer na een teijken schooten, en dat hij een Hottentotsmeijd, die van het huijs bij hem quam, gevraagt hadde, wie dat daar na een teijken schoot, daarop deselve hem op geantwoord hadde, dat het twee jongens waren.
Voorts niet meer verklaarende, geeft den comparant voor reedenen van weetenschap als in den text, met presentatie van dit sijn gedeposeerde, ten allen tijden, als ’t mogte vereijscht werden, met solemneelen eede nader te willen bevestigen.
Dat aldus passeerde aan Stellenbosch, ten overstaan van den substituut Jan Hendrik Narb ende den boode Jan van Ellewe, als getuijgen van geloove hiertoe versogt.
Dit merk X heeft Daniël Bokkelenberg eijgenhandig gestelt.
Als getuijgen, [get.] Jan Hendrik Narb, J. van Ellewe.
In kennisse van mij, [get.] A. Schephausen, secretaris.
1/STB 3/9 Criminele Verklaringen, 1740-1746, unpaginated.
Huijden, den 26e November 1742, compareerde voor mij, Arnold Schephausen, secretaris van Stellenbosch en Draakensteijn, ter presentie van de naargenoemde getuijgen, den burger Nicolaas Pilletje, dewelke, ter requisitie van den landdrost, sieur Pieter Lourensz, verklaarde de waarheijd te zijn:
Dat hij comparant in ’t jongst gepasseerde jaar 1741 van de plaats van den burger Abraham Mouton naar huijs willende rijden, en bij de plaats van den oud burgerraad, sieur Jan Hendrik Hop, in de Bergsvalleij, komende, aldaar een ossewaagen heeft sien staan, waarbij sig eenige slaaven van denselven sieur Hop bevonden, die daar waren, in ’t veld te rijden om wild te schieten, bij hun hebbende twee geweers en een bandelier.
Dat hij comparant aan een van die slaaven, welke posthouder aan de Piquetbergen en Alexander genaamt is, gevraagt heeft: Waar wil je met die waagen na toe gaan; daar denselven op antwoorde: Ik wil in ’t veld rijden om wild te schieten; daar hij comparant op repliceerde: Dat mag jij immers niet doen, ’t is verbooden; daar dien slaaf hem comparant seer brutaal op antwoorde: Wat? Ik sal in ’t veld rijden.
Dat hij comparant daarop in ’t wegrijden gehoort heeft dat de andere slaaven teegens voormelten Alexander seijden: Wij willen niet in ’t veld rijden, daar is die Duijtsman, die heeft ons gesien, en sal ons altemets agteraan jaagen, en sal ons in ’t veld doot schieten; daar voormelten Alexander op repliceerde: Wat? Jouluij sult mee gaan, of ik sal jouluij op de leer binden en slaan; hebbende hij comparant voorts niet meer kunnen hooren wat tusschen haarlieden is voorgevallen, doordien sijn weg naar huijs vervolgde.
Laatstelijk betuijgt den comparant nog dat hij diverse maalen, soo op de plaats van gemelten sieur Hop in de Bergvalleij [sic] als de Piquetbergen, eenige geweers heeft gesien, alwaar anders niet lagen als slaaven van meergeszeijde sieur Hop.
Anders niet verklaarende, geeft den comparant voor reedenen van weetenschap als in den text, met presentatie dit, sijn gedeposeerde, ten allen tijden, als ’t vereijscht mogte werden, met solemneelen eede nader te sullen gestand doen.
Dat aldus passeerde aan Stellenbosch, ten overstaan van den substituut Jan Hendrik Narb ende den boode Jan van Ellewe, als getuijgen van geloove hiertoe versogt.
NP (deese letteren heeft Nicolaas Pilletje eijgenhandig gestelt).
Als getuijgen, [get.] Jan Hendrik Narb, J. van Ellewe.
In kennisse van mij, [get.] A. Schephausen, secretaris.
1/STB 3/9 Criminele Verklaringen, 1740-1746, unpaginated.
Huijden, den 24e December 1742, compareerde voor mij, Arnold Schephausen, secretaris van Stellenbosch en Draakensteijn, in ’t bijweesen van de naartenoemene getuijgen, den landbouwer Erasmus Smit, dewelke, ter requisitie van den landdrost, sieur Pieter Lourensz, verklaarde, de waarachtige waarheijd te zijn:
Dat nu eenigen tijd geleeden, sonder precies te weeten wanneer, hij comparant van sijn plaats, geleegen aan het Kruijs, naar die van den burger Jacobus Gildenhuijsen, leggende aan de Piquetbergen, willende rijden en de plaats van den oud burgerraad sieur Jan Hendrik Hop aan de Piquetbergen passeerende, gesien heeft dat er op die plaats, op de hoek van de kraal, met geweer geschooten wierd, waarop hij comparant een Hottentotsmeijd, welke bij gemelten sieur Hop woonagtig was, en die dichte bij het huijs de lammerschaapen oppaste, heeft gevraagt: Wie schiet daar? Daar deselve hem comparant op antwoorde: Dat zijn twee jongens; daar hij comparant op repliceerde: Sijn dat jongens, sij hebben immers witte hemden aan?; en sij wederom: Ja! Dat is Galenje en Latijn, die schieten na een teijken; waarop hij comparant sig van daar vervolgens na voorseijde Gildenhuijsen heeft begeeven.
Nog getuijgt den comparant dat hem bewust is, en ook dikwils gesien heeft, dat de slaaven, welke op de plaats van gemelten sieur Hop, sonder knegt leggen, geweers onder haar hebben, alsmeede bandeliers.
Anders niet verklaarende, geeft den comparant voor reedenen van weetenschap als in den text, met presentatie, als ’t mogte vereijscht werden, dit, sijn gedeposeerde, ten allen tijden met solemnelen eede te sullen bevestigen.
Dat aldus passeerde aan Stellenbosch, ten overstaan van den substituut Jan Hendrik Narb ende den boode Jan van Ellewe, als getuijgen hiertoe versogt.
[get.] Rasmes Smet [sic].
Als getuijgen, [get.] Jan Hendrik Narb, J. van Ellewe.
In kennisse van mij, [get.] A. Schephausen, secretaris.
Footnotes
-
This illegible word was probably ‘kogelbak’. ↩