Heritage Impact Assessment for the Services Upgrade in Alexander Bay, Namakwa Magisterial District, Northern Cape

HERITAGE IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR THE SERVICES UPGRADE IN ALEXANDER BAY, NAMAKWA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT, NORTHERN CAPE

(Assessment conducted under Section 38 (1) of the National Heritage Resources Act (No. 25 of 1999))

Prepared for

Doug Jeffery Environmental Consultants (Pty) Ltd P O Box 44, Klapmuts 7625 Phone: 021 875 5272, Fax:021 875 5515 Email: [email protected]

09 April 2010

Prepared by

Jayson Orton

Archaeology Contracts Office Department of Archaeology University of Cape Town Private Bag Rondebosch 7701

Phone (021) 650 2357 Fax (021) 650 2352 Email [email protected] EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Archaeology Contracts Office was asked by Doug Jeffery Environmental Consultants (Pty) Ltd to conduct a Heritage Impact Assessment for the renewal of services in Alexander Bay, in the Namakwa Magisterial District. The proposed project entails installation of water and electrical services throughout the town area, as well as construction of a sewage pond and a reservoir.

Alexander Bay is a small mining town located in the far north of Namaqualand alongside the Orange River. It formed as a result of the discovery of diamonds in the area in the 1920s and experienced most of its growth in the mid-20th century. The surrounds are generally very barren and sandy with the Orange River being critical to survival.

Archaeological sites are known throughout Namaqualand but are far more prevalent close to the coast where they take the form of shell middens. The majority contain little besides shell but some can have significant quantities of cultural material. Palaeontological finds occur in the deep sands along the coast. Historical material is not well documented in Namaqualand but relates primarily to mission stations and early faming activities.

The town was surveyed with all relevant finds and features being photographed. Positions were taken by GPS as appropriate. The road leading to the river mouth was also checked in order to gauge the potential of finding significant shell middens in the town area. A full series of aerial photographs was sourced to allow an analysis of the spatial development of the town and background research was also undertaken.

Impacts to palaeontology will be very unlikely given that the majority of the town lies over an area of igneous rock. Fossils would not be preserved in such sediments.

Archaeological material in and around the town was found to be very sparse, only taking the form of stone artefacts of indeterminate age scattered on the surface. All are of very low significance. No marine shell was seen anywhere in the town area, although middens were found to be common between the town and the coast. However, cultural material on these sites was extremely sparse.

The majority of buildings were found to date to the 1950s and 1960s when most construction was carried out. There are a fair number, though, that are older, with the first dating to the 1930s. The town has a character typical of Namaqualand company towns but few buildings are considered to have high significance in and of themselves. Formally constructed roads are all modern and not covered by the NHRA.

A graveyard is present but this will not be affected by the development. The chance of uncovering unmarked pre-colonial burials exists, and should this occur an impact of high significance will be experienced.

No significant visual impacts will occur.

2 and an archaeologist will need to be contracted to mitigate as appropriate. Finds should not be disturbed in any way after discovery. Full-time archaeological monitoring is not considered necessary. • If any structures (buildings or other infrastructure) are to be demolished their age and significance must be determined such that any required permits might be obtained. • SAHRA should be consulted to check whether a permit is required for the electrical work. Being maintenance-related, this is unlikely.

Contents

1. INTRODUCTION ...... 5 2. HERITAGE LEGISLATION ...... 6 3. DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT ...... 6 4. HERITAGE CONTEXT ...... 7 5. METHODS ...... 10 5.1. Limitations ...... 10 6. FINDINGS ...... 10 6.1. Palaeontology...... 10 6.2. Archaeology ...... 12 6.2.1. Site 1 ...... 12 6.2.2. Site 2 ...... 13 6.2.3. Site 3 ...... 14 6.3. History ...... 15 6.4. Built environment ...... 17 6.4.1. Town development ...... 17 6.4.2. Structures ...... 23 6.4.3. Roads ...... 38 6.5. Graveyard and burials ...... 39 6.6. Cultural landscape ...... 39 6.7. Visual impacts ...... 40 7. CONCLUSIONS & ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS ...... 41 7.1. Palaeontology...... 41 7.2. Archaeology ...... 41 7.3. Built environment ...... 42 7.4. Graves and burials ...... 42 7.5. Visual impacts ...... 42 8. RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 42 9. REFERENCES ...... 43 10. INVESTIGATION TEAM ...... 46

4 1. INTRODUCTION

The Archaeology Contracts Office was asked by Doug Jeffery Environmental Consultants (Pty) Ltd to conduct a Heritage Impact Assessment for the renewal of services in Alexander Bay, in the Namakwa Magisterial District (Figure 1). The client had initially asked for advice from the ACO, whereupon Mr Tim Hart suggested that archaeological impacts were a potential concern and that archaeological monitoring might be required1. Mr Hart’s letter was sent by the client to SAHRA (South African Heritage Resources Agency) who in turn requested the HIA.

2816CD&DA Velddrif (Mapping information supplied by - Chief Directorate: Surveys and Mapping. Website: w3sli.wcape.gov.za)

Figure 1: Map showing the location of the study area.

The proposed development is mostly sub-surface with water, sewage, storm water pipes and electrical cabling being replaced as required. A new pond will also be built for the sewage treatment works. With one exception, all work is within the town area to the north of Oranje, Delwers and Kwart Roads; no work will be carried out within the mine area to the south. The

1 “Renewal of services at Alexander Bay – Heritage Concerns”. Letter to Doug Jeffery Environmental Consultants, 22 January 2010.

5 only component to be outside the town is a new reservoir that will be built on the bank of the Orange River near the border post. No new pipeline will be associated with this. Figure 1 shows the location of the study area.

The services renewal will take place in two phases with all water-related work being carried out first. This will only be bulk services with new pipes being laid within the road reserves and occasionally under the roads as required. No work will take place inside buildings. The deepest trenches will be up to 4 m beneath the surface. The second phase of the project entails replacement of electrical cabling. In this phase it may be necessary to conduct limited work inside some of the buildings in order to comply with legal requirements.

2. HERITAGE LEGISLATION

The National Heritage Resources Act (NHRA) No. 25 of 1999 protects a variety of heritage resources including palaeontological, prehistoric and historical material (including ruins) more than 100 years old (Section 35), human remains (Section 36) and non-ruined structures older than 60 years (Section 34). Landscapes with cultural significance are also protected under the definition of the National Estate (Section 3 (3.2d)).

The project is a stand alone heritage impact assessment and therefore the heritage authority is required to make the final decision.

3. DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT

Owing to the nature of the project a full description of the whole town will be provided below, and here only a brief overview is presented. The study area comprises the town of Alexander Bay in the north-western corner of South Africa. It lies on the bank of the Orange River with the southern- and northernmost parts being 2.8 km and 5.9 km from the sea respectively. The town is between about 10 m and 30 m above sea level. It is split into two areas (for historical reasons that will be explained below) and is composed mainly of residential dwellings with a scattering of commercial/retail, educational and sports facilities (Figure 2). Most activity is currently in the north town which has the feel of a typical residential suburb. Many trees are present which contributes to this atmosphere and a small golf course abuts the southern edge of this area (Figure 3). The southern town is less densely populated with many buildings lying empty. Its primary residential component is a small area off the southwest corner. It has little greenery. To the southeast of the south town is a complex of buildings that lies within the mine area and is excluded from this project.

6 North town

South town

Mine complex

Figure 2: Aerial photograph showing the three development clusters that comprise Alexander Bay.

Figure 3: View towards the north town from the golf course.

4. HERITAGE CONTEXT

Here I present a general outline of archaeological and historical information for the Namaqualand region. Given the generally sparse nature of the research carried out, I have been very broad in my description. Specific details concerning the development of the town of Alexander Bay area are presented in the findings section below.

Fossil heritage occurs in the area in the form of mineralised shells and bones that have been uncovered during mining operations and examples are on display in the Alexander Bay Museum. Raised beaches have also been noted along the coast and consist of pebbles and water worn shells.

Although little researched until relatively recently, the existence of shell middens on the coast of Namaqualand has been known since the 18th century travels of Robert Jacob Gordon. In August 1779 Gordon commented on the many shells and the remains of huts that littered the dunes (Cullinan 1992). In the early years of the 20th century Winifred Hoernlé (Carstens et al. 1987) also visited the area remarking on the archaeology present. In her diary she remarks that “all along the river there are evident signs of Bushman occupation for their shells are to be found in heaps on every side while here and there a piece of pot crops up too (Carstens et al. 1987:65). She comments that middens are plentiful along the shore but that nothing of interest is found on them. Recent impact assessments along the Namaqualand coast have revealed just how remarkably rich the pre-colonial archaeology is there, although many middens do indeed contain nothing but shell and the occasional quartz flake (Halkett 2003; Orton 2005, 2007b; Orton & Halkett 2005, 2006; Webley, in prep.). Many thousands of shell middens occur, with some containing a rich array of finds including stone artefacts, pottery, bone tools, ostrich eggshell beads and animal bones.

Human burials occur widely and along the coast are completely unmarked. They are seldom found by archaeologists with the vast majority being dug up during diamond mining. Hoernlé (Carstens et al. 1987) also remarks on burials. She found a skeleton eroded out onto the surface near Kortdoorn and saw many stone-covered mounds along the river which she suspected to be graves. Upon excavating one of them she found a skeleton lying on its left side with the knees brought up beneath the chin. The skeleton was 5 feet below the surface and covered with three large, flat stones.

Since the advent of archaeological mitigation in coastal Namaqualand, academic research has also commenced. Without this the large body of excavated material would not otherwise be fully and properly studied. Already one doctoral thesis has been finished (Dewar 2007) and published (Dewar 2008) and another is in preparation (Orton, in prep.). An earlier thesis examined mainly inland sites but also included the very important coastal site of Spoeg River Cave (Webley 1992b). Several academic journal articles have also been produced concerning coastal and near-coastal sites (Dewar et al. 2006; Dewar & Jerardino 2007; Jerardino et al. 1992; Orton 2007c, 2008; Orton et al. 2005; Webley 1992a, 2002, 2007). With archaeological research in Namaqualand being so youthful every contribution is valuable.

Further inland, both in the Richtersveld and in central Namaqualand, research has been underway for slightly longer, primarily through the efforts of Lita Webley (1984, 1986, 1990, 1992b, 1997, 2001, 2007; Brink & Webley 1996; Miller & Webley 1994; Webley et al. 1993) but including contributions by Smith et al. (2001) and Orton and Halkett (in press; Orton 2007a).

With the diamond mining that has taken place in Namaqualand since the early decades of the 20th century there can be no doubt that many thousands of archaeological sites have been destroyed. Although the above makes it seem as though much research has taken place in Namaqualand, the region is vast and the number of publications is tiny by comparison with parts of the Western Cape, for example.

Historical research in Namaqualand is minimal, since there is rather less recent archaeology here than is the case further south. Historical sites, primarily in the form of ruins from the 19th and 20th centuries, are sparsely spread over the landscape, while a few contact period sites have been documented (Orton 2009; Webley 1984, 1986). These latter are sites inhabited by

8 indigenous hunter-gatherers or herders but that include evidence of contact with European colonists. Historical material almost certainly all relates to early European mission stations and farmers of the region; the first mission station was established at Leliefontein in 1816 (Shaw 1840), although Johann Schmelen and others were preaching in the area from about 1812 (Trüper 2006).

The following account of activities in the Richtersveld area during the historical period is compiled from Carstens et al. (1987), Davenport (2010), Fleminger (2008) and Williamson (2000). The first travellers to the Orange River included elephant hunters such as Jacobus Coetzee in 1660. The earliest European penetration of the Richtersveld via the coastal route was by William Paterson and Colonel Gordon in 1779. Dr E Richter, an inspector of the Rhenish Mission Society, visited the area in 1830. The area was subsequently named after him. A mission station was established at Kuboes in the mid 19th century.

Captain James Edward Alexander (geographer and explorer) visited the Sendelingsdrift area in 1837 and prospected for copper at Kodas. He explored the south bank of the Orange from the mountains of the Richtersveld to the sea, and proposed transporting copper down the Orange River by barge to the mouth, and then by ship to Europe. There is an inscription to this effect at the Baaken mine. A few years later, on 21 March 1846, the South African Mining Company was formed. They sent Thomas Fannin to the Orange River to survey the area and begin mining the copper deposits. He started an open cast mine that is now thought to be the oldest commercial mine in South Africa. Although the ore was rich and the progress good, the company faded away, probably due to logistical difficulties, the harsh environment and the lack of finance. In 1847 the British extended their control to the Orange River and the Richtersveld was included in the Namaqualand district. By the 1890s, the inhabitants of the Richtersveld demanded clarity regarding their ownership of the land. Eventually in 1934 a formal “ticket of occupation” was issued by the government giving the indigenous groups communal rights to the land which was technically still held in trust by the state. The Richtersveld then became a “coloured reserve” under a management board.

It is interesting that although copper was mined in the mid-19th century by the colonists and long before that by the prehistoric inhabitants of the area (Goodwin 1956), diamonds were only discovered by Europeans in the early 20th century. In 1908 Dr Bernhard Dernburg discovered diamonds in southern Namibia (Davis 2008) and the area became known as the ‘Sperrgebiet’. Earlier, someone called Pohle had been the first to recognise the potential for finding diamonds in the Orange River. He had reasoned that since the river ran past the Kimberley diamond fields it must be carrying the gems downstream, but his limited prospecting yielded no result (Coetzer 1997). It was only in 1925 that the first Namaqualand diamond was discovered. It came from a site 10.5 km south of Port Nolloth and was found by Jack Carstens on 15th August using very rudimentary techniques (J. Carstens 1962; P. Carstens 2001). He continued his work to the south, since his father had found nothing around Alexander Bay from prospecting between 1899 and 1901. Subsequently, in November 1926, Dr Ernst Reuning, a geologist employed by Dr Hans Merensky, found the first diamonds at Alexander Bay (P. Carstens 2001). It was near the ruins of an old stone house used in the 1830s by Alexander as a copper store that Merensky noted an outcrop of shingle containing oysters. He had earlier noted the co-occurrence of oysters and diamonds to the south and set Reuning to work at that location. This spot was at the northern end of the so-called “Oyster line” which was a very rich source of diamonds. Earlier, a solicitor from Springbok named Israel Gordon, his two brothers and two others had first found diamonds near Alexander Bay. On 28th December 1926 Reuning and Merensky visited their claims and came to an agreement with the Gordon syndicate for 6 months of work on their claims but

9 within a few days made a formal offer to puchase the property. This was accepted and Merensky obtained it for £17 500. Merensky then appealed to the state to prevent public digging at Alexander Bay and on 22 February 1927 the government banned prospecting on Crown land and, amidst much wheeling and dealing, began planning the establishment of the state diggings there (Rudd & Watson 1956 in P. Carstens 2001). It took over all mining operations there in 1928 (Keyser 1972).

5. METHODS

A survey of the town and surrounds was conducted on 15th and 16th March 2010. All buildings examined from the road as we drove up and down all the streets. In some areas it was necessary to gain a better understanding of certain areas and these were covered on foot. The survey drawings provided by the engineers were examined to look for those areas where trenches will cross undeveloped land and these were covered by foot as well. All finds and features were photographed and archaeological sites had their positions recorded by means of a hand-help GPS receiver on the WGS84 datum.

5.1. Limitations

The vast majority of the trenching will occur along the roads, primarily along the gravelled verges. These areas are covered by gravel sourced mainly from the mines and offer scant opportunity for adequate archaeological survey.

6. FINDINGS

6.1. Palaeontology

Following Keyser (1972), most of the town of Alexander Bay appears to lie over schists (Figure 4). John Pether (pers. comm. 2010) notes these to be Oranjemund Formation metasediments which are of no palaeontological interest. These rocks were noted exposed at the surface in a few areas during the ground survey. At the south edge of the town, where sediments cover the basal rocks, one encounters the ‘Oyster Line’ and ‘River Line’ reported by Wagner and Merensky (1928). These are shown in Figure 5. The former was a marine terrace which was particularly rich in diamonds and was discovered through an earlier observation to the south that diamonds and oyster shells co-existed. These two features have never had their precise relationship described which would be of value (Pether, pers. comm. 2010). However, through an overlay of Figure 5 in Google Earth, it appears that they were situated to the south of the town, probably more or less in the area currently occupied by the mine complex. However, it should be noted that this hand-drawn map was very difficult to match up to the aerial photograph and minor inaccuracies are virtually guaranteed. We do also know that no mining has ever taken place beneath the town itself. This means that whatever remains of these palaeontological features should not be impacted by the proposed service renewal project.

A visit to the Alexander Bay Museum showed that various fossil mammal bones and marine mollusc shells had been found during the course of mining operations in the area. However, as intimated above, the town lies over bedrock and the trenching would not further impact such fossils.

Figure 4: Map from Keyser (1972: between pp 8-9) showing the geology. The stippled area in the centre is schist and the approximate location of the current town is shown by the red oval.

Figure 5: Map of the Alexander Bay area from Wagner and Merensky (1928: fig. 2) showing the location of diamond-bearing deposits and the ‘Oyster Line’ and ‘River Line’ )in the centre of the image.

6.2. Archaeology

In the few areas that could be meaningfully surveyed stone artefacts were found in three places (Figure 4). No other finds were associated with the stone artefacts.

6.2.1. Site 1

This site is located on the crest of a low hill on the eastern edge of the town. It is not really a site in the conventional sense but a very low density scatter of artefacts; only four were found. All are in silcrete and are generally heavily weathered (Figure 5). They were found among the dense gravel that coats the hills of the area owing to their natural erosion (Figure 6). These artefacts might well relate to the Middle Stone Age.

Figure 4: Aerial photograph showing the locations of the three artefact scatters.

Figure 5: Dorsal (above) and ventral (below) Figure 6: View of the context of the artefacts found at Site 1. views of the four artefacts at Site A. Scale in cm.

6.2.2. Site 2

This scatter of artefacts is better considered a site since almost all are of the same material, a very dark quartzite, and occur in a restricted area (Figure 7). The artefacts are on a very different substrate to Site 1, it is soft and silty with very little gravel. One artefact (at top right

13 in Figure 7) was weathered and pertains to an older period, while the rest were relatively fresh and could be either Later of Middle Stone Age. This site lies very close to the town security gate.

Figure 7: Stone artefacts from Site 2. Scale in cm. Figure 8: View of the context at Site 2.

6.2.3. Site 3

This scatter of artefacts was found alongside the Orange River at the proposed location of a new oxidation pond for the waste water treatment works.

Figure 9: Stone artefacts from Site 3. Scale in cm. Figure 10: View of the context at Site 3.

From the background heritage review presented in Section 4 above, it is clear that shell middens did occur widely in the vicinity of the Orange River mouth and for some way inland along its banks. As a test of the frequency of middens between the shoreline and the town we noted their occurrence along both sides of the road to the beach. This should give an idea of what to expect around the town area. The result was as shown in Figure 11. Very brief observations at five or six of these sites showed most to contain just shell, with occasional stone artefacts seen on one only. It is clear that much midden material is distributed along the edge of the river and it is likely that many more middens were present in the mining area. Sadly, and to the best of our knowledge, none have ever been mitigated. The distribution

14 appears to end suddenly just south of the town and it is interesting to note that no shell was seen in the vicinity of the planned oxidation pond west of Oranje Road. How to interpret this against the descriptions of Hoernlé (Carstens et al. 1987) is difficult. It seems unlikely though that significant shell middens would be intersected by trenching in the town area. The following reasons can be advanced: 1. Most of the town area is heavily disturbed by 80+ years of activity; 2. No shell was seen anywhere in the town study area; and 3. Of those middens closer to the coast that were checked, none were found to contain highly significant material. The only aspect of research value would appear to be the shellfish assemblages.

Figure 11: Aerial photograph showing the locations of shell middens noted along the road between the town and the beach. The area of reduced distribution is where the road runs lower in the river flood plain. The very southern tip of the town is visible at the top of the picture.

The Alexander Bay Museum also displays many items of archaeological interest. These include a Caucasian skull from a burial found near the coast, numerous Early Stone Age hand-axes and a wide variety of Later Stone Age material. The latter includes pottery, grindstones, flaked artefacts, ostrich eggshell fragments, beads and flasks, two almost complete pots and many undecorated potsherds including lugs and bosses. One of the nearly whole pots has many holes along the edges of the breaks. These were used for repairing them by tying the cracks closed. Most of this archaeological material apparently comes from four localities within the mining area and close to the coast. Unfortunately all contextual information has been lost.

6.3. History

15 The town of Alexander Bay is not very old, having been founded in the late 1920s after the discovery of diamonds in the area. Initial development was very slow with the major impetus seemingly occurring in the 1960s. It seemed to be difficult to find information on the early town but Table 1 lists some of the events that shaped the development of Alexander Bay and also various other snippets of information relevant to this study. Most information was gleaned from Coetzer (1997) unless otherwise stated. It is likely that the town was named after Sir James Alexander, but Coetzer (1997) suggests the possibility that the name derives from a merchant named Alexander who came later.

Table 1: Timeline of events and information relating to the development of the town of Alexander Bay.

1926 Diamonds discovered in the area. Senior official in Alexander Bay was still living in a temporarily erected house of wood and iron but 1930 with a veranda. Although they had electricity in Alexander Bay, living conditions were still uncomfortable. 1930 New buildings: Hospital, bathrooms for caretakers, store2. 1931 New buildings: Carpenter’s shop, houses for caretakers, guest rooms. New buildings: House for general manager (Mr Grobler), house for assistant general manager (Mr 1932 Auret), house for engineer. 1933 New building: House for post master. 1935 New buildings: House for Mr Claasen, house for Messrs Green and Campbell. Due to poor living conditions, competent workers were not being attracted to the town. Consideration 1937 was given to improving conditions and a major change was the erection of married quarters in the early 1940s. In the 1940s married people began squatting at Kortdoorn, several kilometres from Alexander Bay. Kortdoorn was a squatter camp that formed as a result of an acute housing shortage after 1948, 1948 although we know from Winifred Hoernlé’s (Carstens et al. 1987) travel diary that there was already a small settlement there in 1912. 1948 On 31 December 1948 there were 37 houses in the “Binnekamp” and 23 houses in the Buitekamp”3. A ruling was introduced that people leaving the service of the SAD (State Alluvial Diggings) lost their 1949 right to accommodation but some refused to leave. 1959 There was such a shortage of housing that they decided that they would only employ single people. There was a shortage of 100 houses in the “Binnekamp”. Two reasons for this were the financial investment required to provide houses and the uncertainty over the continued existence of the SAD. 1961 This doubt discouraged huge financial outlays and maintained the housing shortage.

The mine erected a notice that no new dwellings could be built in Kortdoorn and police were 1961 instructed to enforce this regulation. When people left the camp new residents were not allowed to take their place. Mr D.B. Smit (manager) wrote to the Namaqualand divisional council in Springbok to say that he 1962 lacked the power to evict squatters and remove their houses and they also did not have funds available to improve the health conditions in Kortdoorn. The Namaqualand divisional council in turn wrote to the Dept of Mining to find housing for the 1962 Kortdoorn inhabitants as their living conditions were too poor. P.W. Botha visited Kortdoorn and was so concerned by the situation that he asked the Minister of 1962 Mining (Mr Diederichs) to provide a low cost housing scheme. Diederichs replied that the camp was outside of the proclaimed area of the mining town and that he was thus not responsible for them. 1963 Tenders were requested for the erection of prefabricated houses. 1963 Additions to houses were allowed only if absolutely essential. 67 prefabricated houses were erected for the workers of the SAD in an area that became known as 1964 4 Lankgewag .

2 These new buildings (1930 to 1935) were listed by Coetzee (1997) as “die eerste en vroegste bouwerk” in Alexander Bay. 3 Binnekamp refers to the southern town which at that stage was within the mining area. Buitekamp, the northern town, was outside the mine. 4 This appears to be the area known locally as Oranjesig (P. Cloete, pers. Comm.. 2010) and marked on the 1:50 000 map (Figure 1) as Muisvlakte.

16 1968 More prefabricated houses were constructed and the last squatters left Kortdoorn. People were finding their 3 bedroom prefabricated houses to be too small and they began asking 1969 permission to build rooms on or to enclose the stoeps. In some circumstances these additions were permitted. 1971 More prefabricated houses began being erected to deal with the housing shortages. From 1978 onwards the three areas adjoining the northeast corner of the town were added (P. Cloete, 1978 pers. comm. 2010). Old sash windows were removed from most buildings about 1980 and replaced with windows ~1980 manufactured in Alexander Bay. This was due to the cost and difficulty of repairing and maintaining them.

6.4. Built environment

The largest part of this assessment relates to the built environment, which, in general, is fairly recent.

6.4.1. Town development

The information in Table 1 speaks of very little town development prior to the 1960s, despite the number of mine workers living in the vicinity. The bulk of the town seems to have sprung up during the 1960s as a response to the acute housing shortages and poor living conditions being experienced. However, it is known from Mr P. Cloete (pers. comm. 2010) that Grobler Street is the oldest residential street in the south town and in north town Malmokkie and Kronkel are oldest streets. In Figures 12 to 15 the spatial development of the north town is examined through early aerial photography sourced from the Chief Directorate: Surveys and Mapping.

Figure 12: 1937 aerial photograph of the north town. Figure 13: 1943 aerial photograph of the north town. A the houses of Kronkel Street form the obvious row of few more houses are present in Malmokkie Street and six in the middle and south of them Malmokkie Street the first four houses have appeared in Pioniers Street is under development. At this early stage there is to the east. already a tennis court (white rectangle at top) in the north town.

Figure 14: 1955 aerial photograph of the north town. Figure 15: 1964 aerial photograph of the north town. Malmokkie Street has been extended, some house Many more areas have been filled in and a small area have appeared between Frikkie Snyman Street and has been laid out to the east. The row of houses in the Oranje Road at the northern edge of town. The major northwest corner of this area is Eland Street. A sports addition is the new roads in the southern part, the long field has also appeared in the northwest. row of houses is Namakwa and the shorter row Vygie.

Figure 16: 1978 aerial photograph of the north town. Figure 17: 2005 Aerial photograph of the north town. The small settlement to the east has grown and, in Many intervening gaps have been filled and the new the centre of the picture, the school has appeared. areas in the northeast have been added in. It is notable that the original part of town developed organically while the newer areas are more rigidly laid out.

One can see that the early development of the north town was quite organic and had no formal structure until the 1950s when Namakwa and Vygie Streets were laid out (Figure 14). The more formal layout was continued around 1964 with the expansion of the area around Eland Street and again after 1978 when the areas in the northeast appeared. It is interesting to note that, despite the chronic housing shortages that plagued the town in the mid-20th

18 century, they still chose to raise the area east of Eland Street for a new school and sports fields (Figure 17). It is clear from a comparison of Figures 14 and 15 that it is only a small proportion of buildings that are greater than 60 years of age. Figures 18 to 23 show the same photographic sequence for the south town. Although not part of the study area, I have included the power station building and mine complex in the southern and south-eastern part of the pictures.

Figure 18: 1937 aerial photograph of the south town and mine. Significant buildings in the town include the mess (large white roof left of centre near the top), the a church/bioscope and the recreation club (two dark roofs east of the mess). The small cluster at far east, north of the mining area, is likely the old ‘Diggers Camp’. The large structure to the south of the town is the power station. At the southeast corner of the white area of ground in the town the tennis court is just visible as a pale rectangle oriented north-south. The cluster of buildings in the far west were apparently the single quarters.

Figure 19: 1943 aerial photograph of the south town and mine. Little appears to have changed since 1937. A few houses have been added between the mess and tennis court. Changes have occurred around the power station but it is difficult to tell whether these are largely trees or buildings. The current mine complex has yet to appear in the southeast corner of this view.

Figure 20: 1955 aerial photograph of the south town and mine. Major additions have occurred. The roughly hexagonal street layout is Merensky and the area in the southwest is being developed. The squash court and a second tennis court5 have appeared to the west and south of the original tennis court and a sports field was added further west. Some of the single quarters buildings in the west have now been removed. Also, the ‘Diggers Camp’ in the mine has been replaced with the bigger structures that form part of the current mine complex.

5 This was apparently added in 1949 (Coetzer 1997).

Figure 21: 1964 aerial photograph of the south town and mine. Little has changed in the main town area except that the suburb in the southwest has grown further. Additions have also been made to the mine complex.

Figure 22: 1978 aerial photograph of the south town and mine. Roads have been formalised and another sports field has been added in the west. Unfortunately the scale of this photograph is such that little detail can be determined.

Figure 23: 2005 aerial photograph of the south town and mine. The mine area has expanded to include new structures and fields

Development in the south town was less organic than in the north and the main impetus came in the 1950s. Little remains of the 1943 town and mine complex as structures seem to have been removed to make way for bigger ones that could accommodate more people.

Both the north and south towns have been developed such that most houses have streets both in front of and behind them. This obviously wastes space as double the number of roads are thus required but it is nonetheless a curious feature of mine towns in the region: Kleinzee, Koiingnaas and Alexander Bay, all company towns6, are built in this way. One possible reason for this is related to the climate of the area. It is a cool region owing to its proximity to the sea and the frequent mists that coat the landscape. Perusal of the town reveals that this layout allows almost all houses to be north-facing and it is notable that on some streets the houses are built at an angle to the road so as to make them face north (Figure 24). Interestingly, Koiingnaas is also very organic in layout, while Kleinzee’s layout is largely grid- based.

6 The concept of the ‘company town’ will be explained in Section 6.5 below.

Figure 24: Aerial photograph of a section of the south town showing the directions in which houses face. The furthest right row (Merensky Street) has had the houses angled to increase the degree to which they face north.

6.4.2. Structures

The majority of structures in the town are less than 60 years of age and many buildings have been altered over the years in order to accommodate more people. Here I present a selection of buildings and groups of buildings that seem most significant from a heritage point of view.

North town: Kronkel Road (pre-1937)

The houses in this street are amongst the oldest in Alexander Bay. They are small cottages with very low pitched roofs (Figures 25 – 27). Verandas have been enclosed to create extra rooms and on one house removal of an older window was evident (Figure 28). There also seem to have been additions to them over the years.

Figure 25: View of Kronkel Street in 1948. The photograph is labelled “married quarters” in Coetzer (1997:161).

Figure 26: A house in Kronkel Street with an addition on the right hand end.

Figure 27: A house in Kronkel Street. Figure 28: An older window removed.

North town: Malmokkie Road (1930s & 1940s)

Some of the houses in this street are as old as those in Malmokkie. Four of the six were present in 1937 and five in 1940 (Figure 29) and 1943. The sixth was filled in before 1955. All were originally built with open verandas but these were later enclosed (Figures 30 – 32). The row of houses was extended to the north where they border on Orange Road.

Figure 29: View of Malmokkie taken in 1940 (Coetzer 1997:60).

Figure 30: View of Malmokkie as it stands today. The left hand house is second from left in Figure 28 and the next one (with the green roof) fills the space behind the electricity pole in Figure 28.

Figure 31: House in Malmokkie. Figure 32: House in Malmokkie.

North town: Oranje Road (pre-1937)

The central portion of this building (Figures 33 – 34) appears on the 1937 aerial photograph along with one tennis court (Figure 12). Following Coetzer (1997:188), it must have been built after 1935 (Figure 35). In the 1943 photograph the taller and narrower eastern portion has been added, while in 1955 we see the western wing and a second tennis court. Tennis was already being played in Alexander Bay from the 1930s and a new court is recorded as having been added in the north town in 1947 (Coetzer 1997). This matches the photographic sequence.

Figure 33: View towards the northwest showing the three portions of the building.

Figure 34: View towards the northeast showing Figure 35: The tennis court in 1935 with the the three portions of the building. general manager’s house in the background.

North town: Pioneers Road (pre-1943)

This is another early set of houses. This row of four houses are all different but were built between 1937 and 1943 (Figures 36-39). The middle two have curly gables typical of suburban houses built in the 1930s and 1940s in Cape Town (for example), while the others display the low pitched roofs that characterise much of Alexander Bay. All four had open verandas that have been enclosed at a later date.

Figure 36: No. 1 Pioniers Road. Figure 37: No. 2 Pioniers Road.

Figure 38: No. 3 Pioniers Road. Figure 39: No. 4 Pioniers Road.

26 On the curve of Pioniers Road and facing east is a completely different type of house (Figure 40). It first appears on the 1955 aerial photograph and it is one a of a few buildings that, despite their 1950s characteristics and construction dates, seem to include some art deco features (see Craven (2010) for further details). This must be a throwback of sorts, since the art deco period ended with the 1930s.

Figure 40: View of the front of the east-0facing house on Pioniers Road that includes Art Deco features.

North town: Gariep Street (pre-1964)

Just one house exists in Gariep Street (Figure 41). According to P. Cloete (pers. comm. 2010) this house is an older house and used to be a shop. Coetzer (1997) refers to the ‘Gariep Winkel’ which started in 1953 and was expanded in 1959 and 1984. However, there does not appear to be any evidence of a building on the, admittedly slightly fuzzy, 1955 aerial photograph. What one can see, though, is a bright patch on the ground, presumably the result of many feet. This suggests the shop might have been in a very small, possibly temporary structure. Coetzer (1997) states that an application was made to expand the shop in 1956 and that this happened in 1959. It may have been that this expansion involved a major building episode such that the present structure essentially dates to that year. Although definitely younger than 60 years, this structure has unique architectural characteristics in terms of the remainder of the town and is thus regarded as being of significance. It is one of those buildings that include some art deco features. Being a shop, it was also a central point in the town where no doubt many an informal meeting occurred.

Figure 41: The single house in Gariep Street with its unique, seemingly art deco characteristics.

27 North town: Namakwa Street (pre-1955)

These houses were built from the early 1950s onwards and most of the row is present by 1955. They are the first of this area of east-west running streets (Figures 42 – 44). The house at the east end is different to the others and was added slightly later (Figure 42). It nevertheless has strong 1950s qualities, again with a suggestion of Art Deco in its entrance portico.

Figure 42: House in Namakwa Street. Figure 43: Slightly later house in Namakwa Street.

Figure 44: View towards the west on Namakwa Street.

North town: Vygie Street (pre-1964)

The first few houses along the east end of Vygie Street were present already in 1955, while many more are there by 1964. Although these buildings are less than 60 years old, they have a very distinct character and are very typical of small houses in the town (Figure 45 – 46). The long lintel running just above the door and window on the right hand side of the Figure 45 house once more suggests an open veranda that was later enclosed.

Figure 45: View towards the southwest along Vygie Figure 46: The front of one of the houses in Vygie Street. Street.

South town: Mess (Menasie Street, pre-1937)

The old mess building is located among a complex of buildings that are probably the most significant in the development of the town. It and the others in the complex were built very early on and fulfilled important functions in the life of the town and mine. The mess building is architecturally unique in Alexander Bay. Its context has changed a bit since its early days as shown by Figures 47 and 47. New walls and buildings have been built to the west blocking the view of its impressive façade. Although the front of the building retains much of its original look, the railings are missing (Figure 48) and all the windows and doors were replaced in recent years. Figure 50 shows the building from its north side.

Figure 47: An undated photograph of the mess from the Figure 48: Photograph showing a similar view as Alexander Bay Museum. It is probably quite early but is Figure 46. The erosion of context is clear. almost certainly pre-1955.

Figure 49: View of the façade of the mess showing Figure 50: View of the northern aspect of the mess Missing railings and replaced windows. building.

South town: Church and recreation club (pre-1937)

These two structures lie just to the east of the mess and also form part of the significant complex. The western one of the two is the old church building that also functioned as a cinema (Figure 51). The building is unusual in that it is built in a similar style to many of the smaller buildings with low pitched roofs and with its long side as the “front” (as indicated by the veranda), but yet it incorporates some features typical of a church. An interesting feature is the open veranda built on the northern side of the building. This presumably indicates the greater social function that the church building had as people would have been spending enough time there to warrant the shaded stoep. As was the case throughout the town, this stoep also got enclosed at some point in time (Figures 52 & 53). Sadly the context of this building has also been eroded somewhat through the addition of another building very close by on its western end. It is difficult to tell from the aerial photographs when the addition to the east side was added (Figures 52 & 54) but it was certainly not there in 1943. The end of the church without this building in place can be seen in Figure 55.

The state of disuse in which both the mess and church find themselves is a strong indication of how social life has changed through the years. People used to be more community focused and now much of life is spent in one’s personal dwellings.

Figure 51: View of the north side and east end of the old Figure 52: Photograph showing a similar view as church building taken pre-1955. Source: Coetzer (1997:62). That in Figure 50.

Figure 53: View of the enclosed veranda along Figure 54: View of the church from the southwest. the northern side of the church building.

Figure 55: A funeral procession in 1940 outside the church (Coetzer 1997:90).

The old recreation club is now so heavily modified that the original structure is barely visible from the outside. All of the original area is still present but various additions have been made to it, mostly between 1955 and 1964.

Figure 56: Aerial view of the recreation club showing the original structure (red dashed outline) and all its additions.

31 South town: Grobler Street (pre-1937)

To the south east of the main row of houses in Grobler Street is a single house standing separate from the others. It is the oldest in the street pre-dating 1937. It also follows the style typical of the early residential buildings in the town (Figure 57) but has had various additions made to it through the years and also had an older window removed (Figure 58). This building may well have had an important function given its age. It might well be one of the houses built during the early 1930s, possibly even that for Mr Grobler, the general manager (see Table 1).

Figure 57: View of the southeast house in Grobler Street. Figure 58: The rear of the house showing additions.

South town: Single quarters (pre-1937)

This peculiar complex of buildings in the far western part of the south town contains a fair amount of variety even though the buildings are remarkably consistent in size and scale. The variety is unusual given the frequent consistency among other clusters of buildings. Construction methods vary with two being of wood with a covering of chicken wire that was then plastered (Figures 59 & 60).

Figure 59: View of one of the wood, chicken wire and Figure 60: Close-up showing the construction method plaster buildings. and materials of the Figure 58 building.

32 The other still existing structures are all of masonry (Figures 61 & 62). The interior of one was examined and found to contain woodwork in good condition (Figure 63). These buildings were apparently single quarters and were likely among the earliest formal residential buildings in the town.

Figure 61: One of the masonry single quarters Figure 62: Another single quarters building in a very buildings. different style.

Figure 63: The interior of one of the single quarters buildings showing wooden floors and wood panelled walls.

South town: Reservoir, Oranje Street (pre-1937)

This old water reservoir lies west of Oranje Street and to the northeast of the cricket field (Figure 64). A second structure lies immediately alongside the reservoir but it is younger and not of any significance (Figure 65). It is made of breeze blocks and appears to be a pump house that must have pumped river water to the reservoir. The reservoir is round and had a roof over it, presumably to keep sand and dust out, but only the supporting beams are still in place.

Figure 64: Old water reservoir. Figure 65: Pump house alongside reservoir.

South town: Church Street (pre-1943)

This little row of houses are among the more interesting in the south town and are part of the complex that I regard as being of high significance. They are not as old as the other buildings in the complex (mess, church and recreation club), having first appeared only on the 1943 aerial photograph (Figure 13). They were a row of three identical cottages, each of which has had an addition to its north end maintaining the symmetry (Figures 66 to 69). The aerial photographs lack sufficient clarity to be able to tell when these additions were made. The embossed plaster work surrounding the windows on the original structures is not present on the additions, but sash windows have been used. Very unusually, the sash windows are still in place and the northern and central ones still retain open verandas. They have a low pitched roof, but a slope break indicates that the veranda was added to the front (Figure 68). The 1943 aerial photograph shows these houses as very deep so I am confident that the verandas were present then, although it is not know whether they were built at the same time as the rest of the cottages. The houses are in disuse and sadly are falling into neglect with the result that the interior woodwork is also losing condition.

Figure 66: The front of the northernmost cottage in the row. Its addition is the right hand part. At left is the addition to the middle cottage.

Figure 67: View of the row looking towards the southwest

Figure 68: The south end of the southern cottage. The slope break in the roof where the veranda joins is evident.

Figure 68: The rear of the southern cottage.

35 Although not examined during the survey, the aerial photographs reveal that the structure to the north of this row of cottages was already present by 1937, but it appears to have been smaller then than what it is now. Although hard to tell, it looks as though the additional length was not present at least until 1964. The municipal-type building between the cottages and the mess first appears in the 1955 aerial photograph.

South town: Squash and tennis courts, Delwers Road (pre-1955)

P. Cloete (pers. comm. 2010) informed us that this peculiar building (Figure 69) was a squash court, although strangely Coetzer (1997) makes no mention of squash in his list of sports played at Alexander Bay. Although certainly present on the 1955 photograph, the squash court building may have been present already in 1943. Although no markings remain, the concrete area to the north of the squash court is apparently a tennis court. A second court was added in 1949 (Coetzer 1997) and this appears very clearly on the 1955 aerial photograph. It is unclear when the addition that extends onto part of the courts was built.

Figure 69: View towards the southwest showing the tennis courts in the foreground and the squash court building behind it to the left.

South town: Grobler Street (pre-1955)

Grobler Street is said to be the first residential street of houses built in the south town (P. Cloete, pers. comm. 2010) but this presumably relates only to the row of houses running east-west along the main alignment of the road. They first appear on the 1955 aerial photograph indicating construction between 1943 and 1955, the period when most building occurred in the south town. It has houses. The Grobler Street houses conform to the typical local style conveying similar character to those in Kronkel and Malmokkie Roads in the north town. Again, all have had their verandas enclosed to create more living space (Figure 70).

Figure 70: View towards the southwest towards the houses of Grobler Street.

36 South town: Merensky Road (pre- 1955)

Merensky Road is the one that forms the very prominent hexagonal shape on the 1955 and later aerial photographs and encloses the core of the south town. The houses are not special in any way and are merely typical of the town. The general atmosphere pervading both this and other nearby streets is very similar to what one experiences in other west coast company towns7.

Figure 71: View towards the northwest on Merensky. Figure 72: View southwest along Skilpad with two Norfolk Pines creating a sense of gateway to the area.

South town: Harmonie Road (pre- 1955)

This is another more recent street within the south town. The house in Figures 73 and 74 is illustrated for the corner windows it contains. This feature again recalls the Art Deco period when corner windows were introduced (Brorson n.d.).

Figure 73: The easternmost house on Harmonie Road. Figure 74: Window detail.

7 The ‘company town’ concept is explained in Section 6.5 below.

37 South town: Hospital Street (pre- 1955)

The first component of the hospital appears on the 1955 aerial photograph and was built during the period of maximum development of the south town. It is difficult to tell when the many other buildings and additions were built, but in 1964 the hospital appears to be very similar to its original shape.

Figure 74: The hospital as viewed from the northwest. The faded red roof is one of the original structures with the brighter red indicating newly added portions.

6.4.3. Roads

Roads will be the aspect of the built environment most affected by the proposed service renewal. Road layouts in Alexander bay have changed through the years as the town has grown (see Figures 12 to 23 above). The proposed project will not introduce any new changes to the roads and their fabric is all modern (Figure 75). It is likely that during much of Alexander Bay’s history the surfaces were all gravelled. An interesting fact related to roads in the town is that they had no names prior to 1962. All houses in the town were merely numbered consecutively. According to Coetzer (1997), residents of each street were invited to submit names for their streets and the best were chosen in each case.

Figure 75: View southwest on Merensky Road showing the typical current road surfacing found in Alexander Bay.

38 6.5. Graveyard and burials

A graveyard is present on the western side of the south town opposite the intersection of Kerk and Oranje (Figure 76). The earliest grave stone seen dates to 1933. Although obscured by vegetation growth on later photographs, the graveyard is just faintly visible inside the town fence on the 1937 and 1943 aerial photographs. It has seen regular use since the 1930s with many recent gravestones also present. A curious practice here involves digging of graves in batches by machine then building brick walls inside them to prevent them caving in. This is due to the difficulties of digging into the substrate and the graves are covered with a wooden board and left until needed (Figure 77). The majority of graves have formal headstones but other graves simply have a cement slab covering them.

Figure 76: View of the graveyard looking towards the southwest. Figure 77: Unused graves.

Unmarked prehistoric burials can be encountered almost anywhere where the is sandy substrate suitable for excavation. They are not necessarily associated with archaeological sites. As noted above, Hoernlé (Carstens et al. 1987) commented on burials she found along the river. While one was eroded onto the surface, others were covered by stone mounds. It might be possible that such mounds were removed during construction of the town and that burials could still be encountered within the town area.

6.6. Cultural landscape

The cultural landscape in Alexander Bay is obviously recent dating from the 20th century. It is one associated integrally with the discovery and exploitation of diamonds. Alexander Bay is an example of what is known as a ‘company town’. This reflects the fact that all property and buildings are owned by a single company and that all or most residents are directly or indirectly dependent on that company for their income (Wikipedia 2010). Typical settings involved extractive industries were where a single company had established a monopoly. Alexander Bay, Kleinsee and Koiingnaas are all typical South African examples based around diamond mining. The current service renewal project stems from the fact that Alexcor is seeking to break up the company town and have Alexander Bay become a municipal town.

The town layout discussed in Section 6.4.1 above has resulted in a bizarre type of streetscape. One finds oneself confronted on one side by the often quite attractive front facades of houses and on the other by drab back doors and walls (Figure 78). This pattern applies to parts of Kleinsee and Koiingnaas as well and, as discussed previously, is no doubt due to a desire to have houses facing north.

Figure 78: View east on Weshoek Street. These houses are those of Park Street and one sees only the back of them from Weshoek.

Another feature of Alexander Bay’s streets is the prevalence of wooden fences rather than formal walls. This helps create a warmer atmosphere and is far less hostile in character. Many mature trees are present in both the north and south towns but the majority occur in the north. Most are fairly young though and none have any obvious heritage significance. The aerial photographs show many trees and tree lines to have been planted between 1943 and 1955 and remnants of these are present in several areas. Some have been removed to make way for development and others have been planted more recently. All are fast-growing alien species with Rooikrantz, gum trees, manatoka, Brazilian peppers being commonly encountered. Tree lines are of either Rooikrantz or gum trees. Scattered palm trees and Norfolk Pines are the only trees with any great height (Figure 79).

Figure 79: The south-eastern part of Hospitaal Street showing tall palms and Norfolk Pines.

6.7. Visual impacts

The planned developments are almost exclusively subsurface, which means that visual impacts will be minimal. The new sewage pond in the west will not be high and will be located between Oranje Road and the existing waste water treatment infrastructure. As such, it is in keeping with land use in the immediate area and is away from the built up areas.

40 The main visual impact will be from the proposed reservoir near the border post. This reservoir will, however, be built immediately alongside an existing reservoir on an artificially created platform and in a severely degraded environment (Figure 80). Several other items of infrastructure are also present in this area and, given this precedent, it is not expected that the new reservoir will create any significant visual intrusion.

Figure 80: Aerial photograph from Google Earth showing the location of the new reservoir (red dot).

7. CONCLUSIONS & ASSESSMENT OF IMPACTS

7.1. Palaeontology

The bulk of the proposed development will be subsurface meaning that potential impacts would largely be to palaeontology and/or archaeology. As noted above, palaeontological impacts are considered highly unlikely.

7.2. Archaeology

Archaeological impacts are more likely to occur. The survey revealed no archaeological material of any significance, at least on the surface, but the possibility of encountering subsurface material cannot be ruled out. This material could take two forms: either stone artefacts similar to those encountered on the surface and which would be of very low significance, or in situ shell middens similar to those seen southwest of the town along the river and closer to the beach. In and of themselves, such middens would be of low to medium significance depending on what associated materials were present. However, given the distinct lack of artefacts and other cultural material on those middens visited, it seems highly unlikely that very significant sites would be intersected by the proposed trenching. Furthermore, not one single fragment of marine shell was seen in the vicinity of the town during the survey. Archaeological monitoring is thus not considered necessary and further evaluation might only become necessary if dense shell midden material was encountered. The value of rescuing high quality shell midden data is high given that no previous mitigation

41 work has been carried out in the Alexander Bay mining area and that many hundreds of archaeological sites must have been lost during the mining process.

7.3. Built environment

The pipeline aspect of the project will not affect any components of the built environment. However, the second phase involving electrical upgrades might require work within buildings. Given that none are older than the 1930s, all building fabric is essentially modern and not of significance in and of itself. Thus it is only the overall appearances of structures that are of concern. Electrical work inside buildings will not have any effect on the overall appearances provided that surfaces are made good and that joinery is not badly damaged. The potential impacts are thus considered to be of very low significance. Given that this work can be seen as essential maintenance, a permit is unlikely to be required for this work. However, this should be confirmed with SAHRA prior to commencement.

If any buildings or other structures are to be demolished their age will need to be established such that any required permits can be obtained.

Impacts to roads are not in any way significant and in any case the formally constructed roads are less than 60 years of age and not covered by the legislation.

7.4. Graves and burials

No impacts to the graveyard are expected by the proposed development. However, unmarked pre-colonial graves are a source of concern as these can be encountered almost anywhere where there is suitable substrate. Any human remains encountered, whether pre- colonial or historical, will result in impacts of high significance.

7.5. Visual impacts

The only visual impact foreseen is in the vicinity of the new reservoir area. The site houses an existing reservoir and other infrastructure and the addition will not change the status quo in any way.

8. RECOMMENDATIONS

Subject to the approval of SAHRA, it is recommended that the proposed development be allowed to proceed but with the following conditions: • An ECO or other responsible individual should be aware of the possibility of encountering middens and graves, particularly along the river. Should any human remains or dense shell middens be encountered these should be reported to SAHRA and an archaeologist will need to be contracted to mitigate as appropriate. Finds should not be disturbed in any way after discovery. Full-time archaeological monitoring is not considered necessary. • If any structures (buildings or other infrastructure) are to be demolished their age and significance must be determined such that any required permits might be obtained. • SAHRA should be consulted to check whether a permit is required for the electrical work. Being maintenance-related, this is unlikely.

42 9. REFERENCES

Brink, J. & Webley, L. 1996. Faunal evidence for pastoralist settlement at Jakkalsberg, Richtersveld, northern Cape Province. Southern African Field Archaeology 5: 70-78.

Brorson, S. n.d. http://www.brorson.com/BronxWeb/GrandConcourse1.html. Accessed 08 April 2010.

Carstens, P. 2001. In the company of diamonds: De Beers, Kleinzee and the control of a town. Athens: Ohio University Press.

Carstens, P, Klinghardt, G & West, M. 1987. Trails in the thirstland: the anthropological field diaries of Winifred Hoernlé. Centre for African Studies No 14/1987.

Carstens, J. 1962. A fortune through my fingers. Cape Town: Howard Timmins.

Coetzer, P. 1997. Baai van diamante: die geskiedenis van Alexanderbaai 1926 tot 1989. Bloemfontein: Universiteit van Vrystaat.

Craven, J. 2010. http://architecture.about.com/od/artdeco/ss/artdeco.htm. Website accessed on 26 March 2010.

Cullinan, P. 1992. Robert Jacob Gordon 1743-1795: the man and his travels at the Cape. Cape Town: Struik Winchester.

Davenport, J. 2010. http://www.miningweekly.com/article/a-brief-history-of-south-africas-first- mining-company-2010-01-15. Website accessed on 19 March 2010.

Davis, C. S. 2008. Colonialism and Antisemitism during the 'Kaiserreich:' Bernhard Dernburg and the Antisemites. Leo Baeck Institute Year Book 53: 31-56.

Dewar, G. 2007. The archaeology of the coastal desert of Namaqualand, South Africa: a regional synthesis. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Cape Town.

Dewar, G. 2008. The archaeology of the coastal desert of Namaqualand, South Africa: a regional synthesis. Oxford: British Archaeological Reports International Series 1761.

Dewar, G., Halkett, D., Hart, T., Orton, J. and Sealy, J. 2006. Implications of a mass kill site of springbok (Antidorcas marsupialis) in South Africa: hunting practices, gender relations and sharing in the Later Stone Age. Journal of Archaeological Science 33: 1266-1275.

Dewar, G. & Jerardino, A. 2007. Micromammals: when humans are the hunters. Journal of Taphonomy 5: 1-14.

Fleminger, D. 2008. Richtersveld: cultural and botanical landscape. Southbound: Johannesburg.

Goodwin, A.H.J. 1956. Metal working among the early Hottentots. South African Archaeological Bulletin 11: 46-51.

43 Jerardino, A.M., Yates, R., Morris, A.G. & Sealy, J.C. 1992. A dated human burial from the Namaqualand coast: observations on culture, biology and diet. South African Archaeological Bulletin 47: 75-81.

Halkett, D. 2003. A report on the archaeological mitigation program at De Beers Namaqualand Mines March 2002 to June 2003. Unpublished report prepared for De Beers Namaqualand Mines. Archaeology Contracts Office, University of Cape Town.

Keyser, U. 1972. The occurrence of diamonds along the coast between the Orange River, estuary and the Port Nolloth Reserve. Bulletin of the Geological Survey of South Africa 54: 1-23.

Miller, D. & Webley, L. 1994. The metallurgical analysis of artefacts from Jakkalsberg, Richtersveld, Northern Cape. Southern African Field Archaeology 3: 82-93.

Orton, J. 2005. A report on the second excavation season at DP2004/014 in the BMC mining area, Namaqualand. Unpublished report prepared for De Beers Consolidated Mines Ltd. Archaeology Contracts Office, University of Cape Town.

Orton, J. 2007a. Excavations at four sites near Jakkalsberg in the Richtersveld. The Digging Stick 24(1): 9-13.

Orton, J. 2007b. Mitigation of archaeological sites within the Buffels Marine, Buffels Inland and Koingnaas Complexes, Namaqualand, August to September 2007. Unpublished report prepared for Yzerfontein Seaside Estates. Archaeology Contracts Office, University of Cape Town.

Orton, J. 2007c. The sampling of ephemeral shell scatters in Namaqualand, South Africa. South African archaeological Bulletin 62: 74-78.

Orton, J. 2008. A late Pleistocene microlithic Later Stone Age assemblage from coastal Namaqualand, South Africa. Before Farming [Online Version] 2008/1: article 3.

Orton, J. 2009. Archaeological mitigation on erven 13 and 14, Hondeklipbaai, Namakwa Magisterial District, Northern Cape. Unpublished report prepared for HKB Eiendomme BK. Archaeology Contracts Office, University of Cape Town.

Orton, J., Hart, T. & Halkett, D. 2005. Shell middens in Namaqualand: two hunter-gatherer sites at Rooiwalbaai, Northern Cape Province, South Africa. South African Archaeological Bulletin 60: 24-32.

Orton, J. & Halkett, D. 2005. A report on the archaeological mitigation program at De Beers Namaqualand Mines, August to September 2004. Unpublished report prepared for De Beers Consolidated Mines NM. Archaeology Contracts Office, University of Cape Town.

Orton, J. & Halkett, D. 2006. Mitigation of archaeological sites within the Buffels Marine and Koingnaas Complexes, Namaqualand, September 2005 to May 2006. Unpublished report prepared for De Beers Consolidated Mines NM. Archaeology Contracts Office, University of Cape Town.

44 Shaw, B. 1840. Memorials of South Africa. London: Adams & Co.

Smith, A.B., Halkett, D., Hart, T. & Mütti, B. 2001. Spatial patterning, cultural identity and spatial integrity on open sites: evidence from Bloeddrift 23, a pre-colonial herder camp in the Richtersveld, Northern Cape province, South Africa. South African Archaeological Bulletin 56: 23-33.

Trüper, U. 2006. The invisible woman Zara Schmelen: African mission assistant at the Cape and in Namaland. Basel: Basler Afrika Bibliographien.

Wagner, P.A. & Merensky, H. 1928. The diamond deposits on the coast of Little Namaqualand. Transactions of the Geological Society of South Africa 31: 1-41.

Webley, L. 1984. Archaeology and ethnoarchaeology in the Leliefontein Reserve and surrounds, Namaqualand. Unpublished MA Dissertation, University of Stellenbosch.

Webley, L. 1986. Pastoralist ethnoarchaeology in Namaqualand. In: Hall, M. & Smith, A.B. (eds) Prehistoric pastoralism in southern Africa. South African Archaeological Society Goodwin Series 5: 57-61.

Webley, L.E. 1990. The use of stone ‘scrapers’ by semi-sedentary pastoralist groups in Namaqualand, South Africa. South African Archaeological Bulletin 45: 28-32.

Webley, L.E. 1992a. Early evidence for sheep from Spoeg River Cave, Namaqualand. Southern African Field Archaeology 1: 3-13.

Webley, L.E. 1992b. The history and archaeology of pastoralism and hunter-gatherer settlement in the north-western Cape, South Africa. Unpublished PhD thesis: University of Cape Town.

Webley, L. 1997. Jakkalsberg A and B: the cultural material from two pastoralist sites in the Richtersveld, Northern Cape. Southern African Field Archaeology 6: 3-19.

Webley, L., 2001. Excavations at /hei-/khomas (Vaalhoek) in the Richtersveld, Northern Cape. Southern African Field Archaeology 10: 46–74.

Webley, L. 2002. The re-excavation of Spoegrivier Cave on the West Coast of South Africa. Annals of the Eastern Cape Museums 2: 19-49.

Webley, L. 2007. Archaeological evidence for pastoralist land-use and settlement in Namaqualand over the last 2000 years. Journal of Arid Environments 70: 629-640.

Webley, L., Archer, F. & Brink, J. 1993. Die Toon: a late Holocene site in the Richtersveld National Park, northern Cape. Koedoe 36 (2): 1-9.

Wikipedia. 2010. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Company_town. Accessed 07 April 2010.

Williamson, G. 2000. Richtersveld: The enchanted wilderness. Umdaus Press: Hatfield.

45 10. INVESTIGATION TEAM

Fieldwork: J. Orton C. Starke

Background research: C. Starke

Report: J. Orton