BUITENPOSTEN-L ArchivesArchiver > BUITENPOSTEN > 2005-02 > 1107316671
From: DRobertson <>
Subject: Vir Marie Meyer : Mansell Upham's "The Soetkoek Syndrome . . ."
Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2005 05:57:51 +0200
Dit is wat Mansell Upham op September 28, 2004 na Buitenposten gestuur het.
>From: "Mansell upham" <>
>Subject: Re: [Buitenposten] de Beer X Blom?
>Hier is my uiteensetting (in Engels o.a.) van die De Bero-probleem wat ek al
>in 2001 geskryf het.
>The Soetkoek Syndrome - the dangers of 'wishful linking' & perpetuating
>when sharing ancestors and genealogical data
>When recording one's genealogical research, certain factual inaccuracies
>become so indelible, they become accepted as gospel. The problem ramifies
>when the facts concern an ancestor whose prolific progeny is not restricted
>to any one section of South African society.
>One such set of inaccuracies still doing the rounds - especially in
>cyberspace - is the assumption that:
>(1) the Rev. Pierre Simond's bachelor brother-in-law the sergeant
>Bérault and the allegedly bigamous [See G. Con de Wet, Die Vryliede en
>Vryswartes in die Kaapse Nedersetting, p. 177] shepherd Louis de Péronne /
>Peront / de Pierron / Pirone / de Pironne (from Nazareth, Flanders) were
>one and the same person; and that
>(2) 'he' was the father of Catharina de Beer (whom Heese later calls
>Catharina de Bero [J.A. Heese & R.T.M. Lombard, South African Genealogies,
>Vol. 1, p.499]) the wife of Magere Barend [ie 'meagre Barend'] [ Barent
>Pietersz. Blom in de wandeling Magere Barent ganaamt (see J.L.M. Franken,
>Die Hugenote aan die Kaap, p. 130)] and founding mother of one of the Cape's
>old colonial clans: the family BLOM.
>Catharina de Beer's paternity has been attributed in error to a baptismal
>entry found in the register of the Groote Kerk in Cape Town under the date 5
>November 1684. We shall return to this baptism at the end of the article.
>The myths emanate from an article written in 1976 by the late Dr J.A. Heese.
> Entitled 'Louis de Berault en 'Juffrouw Coon', the article was featured in
>Familia [Vol. XIII, No. 3 (1976) pp. 70-71.]. In this article Heese
>attempted to identify the 3 children listed by historian George McCall Theal
>("Louis de Pierron, with wife and three children") that Colin Graham Botha
>[The French Refugees at the Cape, p. 6. Heese incorrectly states p. 71 [sic]
>in his article.] incorrectly assumed to be the children of the childless,
>Juffrouw Coon, alias Alexandrina Maxwal / Maxvel(t) / Maxwell. Also found
>as Sandrina Jacobs [ Sandrina Jacobs, huisvrouw van Joannes Coon CA: VC
>603 : Lidmaatregister], she was the widow of Johannes Coon (from
>Heese also wondered whether Maria Magdalena de Piron, alias Maria Berou (who
>married firstly, Jacob Mostert and secondly, Cornelis Brits de Oude), was
>not perhaps a sister to Catharina de Beer. He also noted another likely
>contender for Juffrouw Coon's purportedly 'adopted' children presumably
>'fathered' by her husband by different slave women: Jacob Steijn - voorzoon
>of the manumitted wife of the founding father of the Steyn family in South
>The original myth has been further complicated by the fact that already in
>1919 Colin Graham Botha [See pp. 61, 80 & 81.] originally confused the
>unmarried Louis de Bérault with Lodewijck François Beroo / Boureau / Brureau
>/ Bureau / Buro / Burou / Burouw, alias Lodewijk Francen (from Brussels).
>This confusion of identities was subsequently clarified in 1981 by Maurice
>Boucher [French speakers at the Cape: The European background, pp. 273 &
>272] and in 1989 by Margaret Cairns ['Alexandrina Maxwell: Juffrouw Coon -
>her second marriage', Familia, pp. 54-56].
>The shared parentage of Maria Magdalena de Péronne and her brother Bernardus
>has been confirmed in 1991 by William de Villiers ['Marie le Fèvre',
>Familia, Vol. XXVIII 1991 No. 3, p. 182]. She appears to have been the
>younger of Louis de Péronne's 2 children and was probably the unnamed child
>baptised at Drakenstein on 14 December 1695:
> Le 14 Decembre  Il y a eut deux enfans baptize l'un de Louis Peront
>& l'autre de Cobus Vandray, je nay point eut de billiet ny des uns, ny des
>autre pour le mettre a vitesse dans mon livre [Fransch Doopboek beginnende
>met 29 Aug[ustu]s 1694. Eindegende met 5 Maart 1713 N:[umer]o1. Colin
>Graham Botha (p. 102) mis-transcribes the baptismal entry as follows: Le
>14 decembre.- Ily [sic] a eut deux enfans baptize l'un de louis peront &
>l'autre de Cobus Vandray, je nay point eut de billiet ny de vris [sic]. ny
>des autres pour Le Mettre a Notisse [sic] dans mon livre ]
>I have translated this entry into English as follows:
> On 14 December  there were two infants baptised, the one of Louis
>Peront and the other of Cobus Vandray. I no longer have the certificates,
>neither the one nor the other, in order to enter these immediately into my
>Worth noting is that Maria Magdalena de Péronne was resident behind the
>Blaauw Berg at the Kleine Zoute Rivier already by 1720. At the time of her
>1st husband's decease she was living in een opstal gelegen agter de
>Blauweberg aan de Zoute Revier ... [CA: MOOC 8/4 (Inventory: Jacob Mostert
>& Maria Magdalena Peron dated 21 December 1723) No. 49]. This would have
>been on the farm known today as Vaatjie. Her prolific descendants were to
>populate the Blaauw Berg and beyond for many generations after.
> Despite any piecemeal debunking thus far of the myths surrounding
>de Beer, the misleading genealogical data appearing in standard genealogical
>reference works will continue to predominate for a long time to come [See,
>for example, J.A. Heese & R.T.J. Lombard, South African Genealogies (Human
>Sciences Research Council, Pretoria 1986), Vol. 1 under the names de Bearau
>[sic] (p. 222), Blom (p. 307) & Bureau (p. 499. See also H.F. Heese, Groep
>Sonder Grense (Die rol en status van die gemengde bevolking aan die Kaap,
>1652-1795) (University of the Western Cape, Bellville 1984) under the names
>Barre [sic] (p. 42) & Blom (p. 44 )].
>The baptism of 1684
>Reviewing the original baptism of 5 November 1684 purportedly that of
>Catharina de Beer shows that a misreading took place. Careful scrutiny and
>transcription of the baptismal entry reveals the following [DRC/A: G1 1/1,
> eodem dito [ie the same aforesaid = den 5 November ]
>[ouders] Kees de Boer en Catharina
>[de getuigen] Marytie van Juffr.[ouw] Beroo
>For Kees de Boer, Heese had read Louis de Bor. For Marytie van Juffr.
>Beroo, Heese read Marytjie.
>The Catharina in question was the daughter of Kees de Boer and his wife
>Catharina van Malabar. Kees de Boer was the free-burgher Cornelis Claesz
>(from Utrecht). Kees is the diminutive for Cornelis. Thanks to the
>existence of the Groote Kerk marriage entry (9 July 1683) for his Cape-born
>stepdaughter Adriaentie Gabriels, we can link the man and the nickname. The
>child Catharina and her siblings all went by their father's patronymic
>Cornelisz or Cornelissen. It was this Catharina who married Robbert Jansz
>van Hoorn (from Bommel), alias Robbert Janse. Her non-existence in published
>form, resulted in genealogical compilations such as De Villiers/Pama and
>Heese/Lombard misallocating Kees de Boer's daughter to the genealogy of Jan
>Cornelisz (from Oudbeyerland), alias Jan Bombam.
> Catharina (baptised Trijntje on 12 May 1675), eldest daughter of Jan
>Bombam by his first wife Catharina Hermansz (from Rhelnen), appears to have
>died in infancy and was not the Catharina who married Robbert Jansz van
>Hoorn as stated incorrecetly in the afore-mentioned genealogical
>publications. This is confirmed by the differing patronymics. Both Jan
>Bombam's son Cornelis, and daughter Anna, were recorded and used the
>patronymic Jansz while Catharina is consistently recorded with the
>patronymic Cornelisz. The opgaaf rollen of 1682 and 1688 further confirm
>where Jan Bombam is recorded with only one daughter. This singular daughter
>would have been Anna Jansz and the most likely inference would be that the
>eldest daughter Trijntje had died in infancy. In her will Anna Jansz only
>makes mention of her surviving father and her brother [CA: 1/STB 18/1 No 3
>joint will of Jan Jacobsz: van Dijck & huijsvrouw Annetie Jans dogter van
>Jan Cornelis van Out Beijerlant dated 17 March 1699]. No other surviving
>siblings appear to have existed.
>We should not be surprised, then, by the fact that it was in the house of
>Catharina Cornelisz and Robbert Jansz van Hoorn that her sister Aeltje
>Cornelisz was brutally deprived of her lover's company when he was murdered
>by the free-shoemaker Jan Adam Pugel (from Corbach). Aeltje Cornelisz had
>been wife to Heinrich Jansen Heyder (from Erfurt) and was then houvrou
>(concubine) to the murdered Jacobus van den Berg (from Breskens) [CA: CJ 783
>Nos. 6 & 9].
>This puts us back to where we were in 1976 with still no indisputable
>baptism for Catharina de Beer. Frustrated descendants of Catharina de Beer,
>like myself, must look elsewhere for evidence of her parentage.
>To all those frenetic pirana-like, Pokémon-esque data-collecting /
>data-collating, multiplicating / multiplacating instant genealogists who
>blindly accept genealogical information off the Internet and copy from
>secondary sources, a word of caution: refrain from also perpetuating this
>myth whilst playing with your genealogical software. Try not to proliferate
>cyberspace and virtual reality unnecessarily Always go back to the
>original records and verify
|Vir Marie Meyer : Mansell Upham's "The Soetkoek Syndrome . . ." by DRobertson <>|