Part 27

[9] The probabilities are that they did not, otherwise the information they carried back would have been regarded as much more important than it was considered to be by the king and by all the writers of the time. Ptolemy’s map, on which Africa was made to turn like a horn and project so far to the eastward as to enclose the Indian ocean, was still treated with respect, and the discoveries of Dias seemed at the time as if they tended rather to confirm than to refute this geographical feature. According to the view of those who regarded Ptolemy and Edrisi as safe guides, Dias had sailed along the southern side of the horn, without finding its end, and therefore had not done much more than Diogo Cam and other previous explorers. To-day, with our knowledge, his feat is regarded very differently, but neither the king nor the people considered at the time that it entitled him to any special reward or mark of favour.

[10] The factory of São Jorge da Mina was established in January 1482 by Diogo d’Azambuja, and was the first permanent Portuguese settlement on the western coast of Africa, and the centre of the trade in gold. It was wrested from the Portuguese by the Dutch in 1637, and was held by them until April 1872, when it was transferred to England in exchange for some other territory on the coast. It is now known as Elmina.

[11] Called João Pires, of Covilhão, by Damião de Goes, Pedro de Covilhão by Castanheda and Barros. Modern Portuguese writers follow De Goes in the name. See the _Indice Chronologico das Navegações, Viagens, Descobrimentos, e Conquistas dos Portuguezes nos Paizes Ultramarinos desde o Principio do Seculo XV._ Lisboa, 1841. João Pires on page 69. Barros says of him: “The king, seeing how necessary an acquaintance with the Arabic tongue was for this journey, sent upon this business one Pedro de Covilhão, a gentleman of his household who was well acquainted with it, and in his company another named Affonso de Paiva, and they were sent from Santarem on the 7th of May of the year 1487.”

[12] Probably a misprint.

[13] The German Emperor has since caused an exact copy of it to be erected, substituting granite for marble.

[14] The particulars of this event cannot be ascertained, and it would even be doubtful whether Mondragon really rounded the Cape of Good Hope if it were not expressly stated in a summary of the directions issued by the king for his capture that the robbery of Queimado’s ship took place “no canal de Moçambique.”

[15] I do not mention Sir John Mandeville in the text, because modern criticism has proved that what he states concerning India in his book _The Voiage and trauayle of syr John Maundeuille, knight, which treateth of the way toward Hierusalem, and of maruayles of Inde, with other Ilands and Countryes_ was compiled from earlier foreign writers, though his work was regarded as genuine and trustworthy by Englishmen until recently. Nothing is known of him from contemporary records, and it is even regarded as possible that Mandeville was a pseudonym. In his book he states that he was born at St. Albans, and travelled in the east as far as China between the years 1322 and 1357. It is now believed that he really visited Palestine, and his account of that country is considered as partly based on personal observation, but the remainder of the volume is spurious. The original was written in French. See the _Encyclopedia Britannica_, article Mandeville. Of the numerous copies of the book, in many languages, in the library of the British Museum, the earliest was printed in 1480.

[16] This sketch is drawn chiefly from Motley’s _Rise of the Dutch Republic_ and his _History of the United Netherlands to the Twelve Years’ Truce_--1609, the _Geschiedenis des Vaderlands_, by Mr. W. Bilderdyk, edited by Professor H. W. Tydeman, seven octavo volumes, issued at Amsterdam in 1832 to 1853, _History of the People of the Netherlands_, by Petrus Johannes Blok, Ph.D., four demi octavo volumes (English edition), published at New York and London, 1898 to 1907, (another volume still to appear), _Handboek der Geschiedenis van het Vaderland_, by Mr. G. Groen van Prinsterer, two octavo volumes (second edition), issued at Amsterdam in 1852, _Histoire de Belgique_, by Professor H. Pirenne, of the University of Ghent, second edition of Vol. I published at Brussels in 1902, Vol. II published at the same place in 1903, and Vol. III in 1907, (other volumes still to appear), and _The History of Belgium_, by Demetrius C. Boulger, published at London in 1902. Some other works consulted will be mentioned in notes.

[17] “Belgium ofte Nederland werdt ghemeynelijck verdeelt in zeventhien Provincien, meer om dat de Princen daer over regierende, seventhien Tytelen van de selve hebben ghevoert, als om andere merckelijcke redenen. Want op de ghemeyne vergaderinghen ende by-een-comsten der Staten van den Lande, en pleghen de selve in soodanighen ghetalle niet te verschijnen, maer sommighe sorteerden onder andere, als by exempel: Het Hartoghdom van Limborch met syn appendentien: item het Marck-Graeffschap des H. Rycx ofte van Antwerpen stemden ende contribueerden onder Brabandt, ’t Graeffschap Zutphen maeckte het vierde Quartier van Gelderland: Daer-en-tegens Doornijck ende het Doornijcksche Landt: Item Rijssel, Douay ende Orchies (synde andersints Steden ende Leden van Wals-Vlaenderen) hadden hare stemmen in het bysonder, ende contribueerden apart: Het selve gheschiede oock met Valencyn, dat nochtans een Stad ende Lidt van Henegouwen is.” _Atlas of Mercator and Hondius_, edition published at Amsterdam in 1633. This superb atlas contains a double page map of all the provinces and no fewer than thirty maps of different sections. A copy obtained by me in Holland is in the South African Public Library.

[18] See the superb _Atlas_ of Ortelius, published at Antwerp in 1570. A copy obtained by me at the Hague is now in the South African Public Library. This atlas contains a map of the whole provinces and separate maps of Holland, Zeeland, the Frisian provinces, Flanders, and Brabant. A comparison of the map of the provinces with one of Holland and Belgium to-day will show the great changes that have taken place in the interim.

[19] See Blok’s _History of the People of the Netherlands_, Vol. II, page 263.

[20] There was in the south the large province of Liege, nominally a fief of the Holy Roman Empire, under the government of a bishop, but it was not counted with the others, though enclosed by some of them. It had been conquered by Charles the Headstrong of Burgundy, but on his death became independent again, and maintained a perfect neutrality thereafter, though its borders were not always respected by contending armies. It remained an independent principality until it was annexed to France on the 1st of October 1795, and in 1814 for the first time was joined to the other provinces to form the kingdom of the Netherlands. When Belgium seceded and secured its independence in 1831 Liege became one of its provinces.

[21] The greatest of the southern dioceses was Liege, whose bishop was first settled at Tongres, then at Maastricht, and from A.D. 708 at Liege. In the tenth century the bishops of Liege and Cambrai obtained rights as counts over extensive domains.--BLOK.

[22] The word “king” is used as a convenient one, though Philippe was not _king_ of the Netherlands. He was duke of one province, count of another, lord of the next, and so on, but under these titles he was sovereign of them all.

[23] Blok gives the number, according to a statement of Requesens, as six thousand.

[24] This differs slightly in detail from the account given by Motley, whose authority is so high that it is with reluctance I do not adhere to it in every particular. In this instance I follow the Life of Boisot, as given in _Leeven en Daden der Doorlughtige Zee-Helden_, a quarto volume issued at Amsterdam in 1683.

[25] The treaty contained thirty articles. It is to be found on pages 83 to 88 of Volume II of _A General Collection of Treatys, Manifesto’s, Contracts of Marriage, Renunciations, and other Publick Papers, from the year 1495, to the year 1712_, second edition published in London in 1732.

[26] See pages 89 to 91 of the volume of _Treaties, etc._, already referred to.

[27] Page 92, Vol. II of the _Collection of Treaties, etc._, already referred to.

[28] _General Collection of Treaties, etc._, Vol. II, pages 103 to 119.

[29] _General Collection of Treaties, etc._, Vol. II, pages 120 to 127.

[30] _Collection of Treaties, etc._, Vol. II, pages 128 to 146.

[31] The account of these voyages is taken from _Begin ende Voortgangh van de Vereenighde Nederlantsche Geoctroyeerde Oost Indische Compagnie, vervatende de voornaemste Reysen by de Inwoonderen derselver Provincien derwaerts gedaen_. Two thick volumes, published at Amsterdam in 1646.

[32] The accounts of the voyages that follow have been taken by me from the volumes _Begin ende Voortgangh_ already mentioned, and François Valentijn’s _Oud en Nieuw Oost Indien_, five huge volumes published at Amsterdam in 1726, checked by the narratives in the first three volumes of J. K. J. de Jonge’s _De Opkomst van het Nederlandsch Gezag in Oost Indie_, published at the Hague and Amsterdam in 1862-65. I also made use of the last volume of Diogo de Couto’s _Da Asia_, in order to get the Portuguese version of these events, but obtained very little information in it. His work ends with an account of a Dutch disaster at Achin before the principal voyages were undertaken. Of course the Dutch were to him pirates and rebels.

[33] It is attached to the original journals, now in the archives of the Netherlands. I made a copy of it on tracing linen for the Cape government, as it differs considerably from the chart in the printed condensed journal of the voyage. In other respects also the compilation of the printed journal has been very carelessly executed.

[34] See the last two volumes of De Couto’s _Da Asia_.

[35] The first Buddhist commandment, as given in _The Light of Asia_, reads:

“Kill not, for pity’s sake, and lest thou slay The meanest creature on its upward way.”

[36] Albert died in 1621 and Isabella on the 30th of November 1623, and as they left no children, in 1624 Belgium passed again under the direct government of Spain. By the treaty of Baden on the 7th of September 1714 it was ceded to the emperor Charles VI, and thereafter was generally termed the Austrian Netherlands.

[37] Sections III, XLIX, and L of the treaty of Munster, pages 335 to 367 of Vol. II _General Collection of Treaties, &c._

[38] See pages 188 to 202 of Volume II of _A General Collection of Treaties, &c._

[39] See _A Voyage to East India, &c._ by the Rev. Edward Terry. London, 1655.

[40] The name of the Welshman is not given in the _Report on Manuscripts in the Welsh language_ by the Historical Manuscripts Commission (Vol. I, Part 3), published in London in 1905, from which this extract is taken.

[41] _A Voyage to East India, wherein some things are taken notice of in our passage thither, but many more in our abode there, within that rich and most spacious Empire. Of the Great Mogols, &c., &c. Observed by Edward Terry (then Chaplain to the Right Honorable Sr. Thomas Row, Knight, Lord Ambassadour to the great Mogol) now Rector of the Church at Grunford, in the County of Middlesex._ A foolscap octavo volume of 545 pages, published in London in 1655. Terry says that he went to India the year after Sir Thomas Roe in a fleet of six ships--the _Charles_, of 1,000 tons, the _Unicorn_, almost as big, the _James_, a large ship also, the _Globe_, the _Swan_, and the _Rose_, which were smaller. The fleet left the Thames on the 3rd of February 1615 (old style, 1616 it would be written now that the year commences on the 1st of January), under command of Captain Benjamin Joseph as commodore, and it rode at anchor in Table Bay from the 12th to the 28th of June. His statement concerning the convicts sent out the previous year does not fully agree with the records in the India Office in London, which I consulted to obtain information on this subject, and which I follow as far as they go, though they are defective.

[42] See Valentyn’s great work on India, the last volume of which contains the history of Ceylon and also of Mauritius. See also the volume _Vies des Gouverneurs Generaux_, by J. P. I. du Bois. The account of Pieter Kolbe, in his _Caput Bonæ Spei Hodiernum_, is so distorted by his bitter animosity towards Simon van der Stel as well as towards his son Willem Adriaan that no reliance can be placed upon it. Van der Aa, in his _Biographisch Woordenboek der Nederlanden_, says that Simon van der Stel, son of Adriaan van der Stel and Monica da Costa, was born in Amsterdam, but that is a mistake, and not the only one in the article. See _Biographisch Woordenboek der Nederlanden_, door A. J. van der Aa, Zeventiende Deel, Tweede Stuk, Haarlem, 1874. I copied the article on the Van der Stel family in the above work, and published it in 1911 in the third part of my _Belangrijke Historische Dokumenten over Zuid Afrika_. It will be found on pages 11 and 12 of the volume.

In Johan Saar’s _Account of Ceylon 1647-1657_, this event is related as follows: “To pick a quarrel they (the Hollanders) seized upon four of the best elephants of the King of Candi. He, as a sensible man, sent word to the Hollanders that he had no intention to do anything against them, and he expected them, for their part, to act likewise; he had called them in as friends to be his allies against the Portuguese, and he hoped therefore that they would not settle in his territory. But the Hollanders from the beginning were bent upon war. When the king saw that it could not be avoided, he collected by one of his generals (a Saude, or what we should call a Count) about 60,000 men, chiefly natives, besides a few Portuguese whom he had formerly made captives, and who had entered his service. He would no longer trust the Hollanders.... In the following year (Anno Christi 1646) in the month of May, Mr. van der Stält (Van der Stel) received fresh orders to march with 150 men (picked soldiers), plenty of ammunition, powder, lead, and other materials of war, and also two field guns. He met with the heathen Saude in a small clearing, but as the latter had no orders to fight, because the king was still disinclined to go to war, he withdrew into the forest. The Hollanders opened a heavy fire from their field-guns and fire-arms, so that 400 were killed, and many were wounded. As the Hollanders had taken the offensive, the Saude did not care to act only on the defensive. He therefore came out of the forest, and closing round our people, attacked them with such energy that he cut off the head of Mr. Van der Stel, who had been carried in a palanquin or litter, clad in red scarlet. Of our men, who had numbered 150, they got 103 heads. The rest fled into the jungle and hid themselves as best they could. When the King, who had been near, heard of the onslaught he hurried to the spot, and although he was told that his men had been forced to fight, he showed displeasure. At once he ordered drums to be beaten and proclamation to be made that none of the Hollanders who had fled into the jungle were to be killed, but they were to be brought alive before him; that he would treat them well; and that he would swear by his God that he was innocent of the bloodshed. He then gave directions to have the head of Mr. Van der Stel put into a silver bowl, and covered it with white cloth, and sent it by one of the prisoners to their Captain in the great camp, to say that this was the head of Mr. Van der Stel, and that the King would see his body as well as the other 103 bodies decently buried.”

[44] The instructions and orders of the lord of Mydrecht were copied by me from the original document in the Cape archives, and were published in 1896 in Deel I _Belangrijke Historische Dokumenten_. They occupy pages 1 to 48 of that pamphlet.

[45] “Wij cunnen geensints verstaen dat den Commandeur en die van zijnen Raden voortaen haer eygen thuynen en bestiael sullen hebben of houden, meer als hij off sij tot hun eygen gesin sullen van noden hebben maer gehouden wesen haer daer van t’ ontledigen.” Despatch dated at Amsterdam on the 26th of April 1668, and signed by all of the seventeen directors. In the Cape archives, and copy in those at the Hague.

[46] See the Resolutions of the Assembly of Seventeen, copied by me from the original volumes in the Archives at the Hague, and published in Deel III _Belangrijke Historische Dokumenten over Zuid Afrika_, an octavo volume of 435 pages, printed for the Union Government in 1911.

[47] In secluded parts of South Africa, where it would not be possible to have one made in time after death, this precaution is still taken, but elsewhere the custom has died out. I have known instances of it in Canada also.

[48] Two fragments of a journal kept by Adam Tas have been preserved: one from the 13th of June to the 14th of August 1705, in the archives at the Hague, the other, from the 7th of December 1705 to the 27th of February 1706, in the South African public library in Capetown, and they give a graphic picture of life in the country districts at the time. Whenever a friend came to his house or he went to a friend’s, they at once sat down to chat and drink wine and smoke tobacco, when if the party was large and included wives and daughters, playing cards was resorted to as a pastime. The quantity of coffee and tea consumed was very large. The vicious custom of returning incorrect numbers of cattle and sheep for taxation purposes was already prevalent, and Tas, who was certainly not a dishonest man in other matters, was unable to see that this was a crime deserving punishment. Professor Leo Fouché, of Pretoria, has copied these interesting fragments, and informs me that he intends to publish them.

[49] It was only natural that the Huguenot refugees should be warmly attached to their native country, and long to be able to return to it. It was noticed in England as well as in Holland and Prussia that the French exiles had no hesitation in declaring that if Louis XIV would only restore the edict of Henri IV and pledge himself to observe it faithfully, they would return to the land of their birth and be his most faithful subjects. It was believed that they would not return and profess adherence to the state church while in their hearts remaining Calvinists and secretly practising the Calvinistic form of worship, as many of those who remained behind were doing, but the governments of the countries in which they had taken refuge were at this time suspicious of their attachment under all circumstances. In South Africa the Dutch section of the population--or at least some of them--believed that the Huguenots would not assist to repel a French invasion. It was only when the children born in the lands of refuge grew up that the strong attachment of the Huguenots to France died out.

[50] “Op het rapport van de heeren commissarissen ingevolge van de resolutie commissorial van den 16 deses, geëxamineerd hebbende het wensch van de colonie van de Caap de Bonne Esperance, en het senden van vrije luijden derwaarts breeder in voorn. resolutie ter nedergestelt, is in conformite van ’t geadviseerde goetgevonden en geresolveert de respectieve kameren te authoriseeren omme eenige vrije luijden soo mannen vrouwen als kinderen vrij van kost en transport gelt derwaarts te senden, mitsgaders zorg dragende en lettende dat het soo veel doenlijk is mogen zijn Nederlanders of onderdaanen van dese Staat of van Hoogduijtsch natien geen trafieq ter zee doende, mitsgaders van de gereformeerde of Luyterse godsdienst, hun op de lantbouw of culture der wijnen verstaende, dogh geen franschen, de selve om redenen in voorn. als anders in ’t geheel excuserende.” Résolution of the Assembly of Seventeen adopted on the 22nd of June 1700, copied by me from the original records at the Hague, and published in 1911 on page 2 of _Belangrijke Historische Dokumenten over Zuid Afrika_, Deel III.

[51] See resolution of that date on page 6 of the volume already mentioned.

[52] These instructions are given in the original on page 192.

[53] See the original records of the council of policy in the Cape archives, or my _Abstract of the Debates and Resolutions of the Council of Policy at the Cape from 1651 to 1687_, an octavo volume of 233 pages, published at Capetown in 1881.

[54] “daerop hebben wij naegesien ’t geene wij bij onsen brieff van den 14 Julij 1695 soo raeckende den Landtbouw als het bestiael beijde van de Comp: hebben geschreven, en gemeijnt dat soo wel de voors: Lantbouw, als het aenhouden van het bestiael, geensints een werck is, de Comp: convenierende off dat die haer daermede behoort te bemoeijen, maer dat deselve in tegendeel dat aen de vrijeluijen dient over te laeten soo om die daer door te beter te doen subsisteren ... met uijtsluytinge van Comps: dienaren die soo wel in den politicquen raed, als in den raedt van justitie compareren, en Sessie in deselve hebben, aen dewelcke wij verstaen, dat alle leverantie aen de Comp: sal werden benomen, off haer ontseijt.”--Despatch to the governor and council of policy at the Cape, dated at Amsterdam on the 27th of June 1699, and signed by fifteen of the directors.

[55] This clergyman was of French descent, was educated for the ministry of the Roman catholic church, and had been a monk in the abbey of Boneffe in Belgium. After becoming a Protestant he wrote a book entitled _Dwalingen van het Pausdom_. He could converse in many languages, and was unquestionably a man of high ability and learning, but he was of irascible disposition and wherever he went was engaged in strife. After he left South Africa he became a doctor of laws, and died at a very advanced age at Batavia in 1748, after having been during the preceding nineteen years minister of the Protestant Portuguese congregation at that place.

[56] See the report of the commissioners Pieter de Vos and Hendrik Bekker, signed at Batavia on the 18th of September 1706. Copy in the Cape archives.

[57] As he was an ordinary councillor of India and admiral of the return fleet he was higher in rank than the governor. His commission from the Indian authorities directed him to see that the laws were properly carried out, but he had no power given to him to make any new laws, and of course none to annul or suspend any order of the directors, which even the high Indian authorities could not do.

[58] The first was a grant of the farm now occupied by the English archbishop of Capetown to Commander Jan van Riebeek, before the order of 1668 was issued, the second was the grant of Constantia already mentioned.