Transcriptions » Recently created summaries of historical documents

Users of Open Archives can have a summary made of the transcriptions created using handwriting recognition.
Both artificial intelligence tasks are not perfect, but often more than sufficient to make the historical document understandable. In the transcripts, names are underlined in green and clickable (to search the personal entries on Open Archives for the name in question), the recognized dates have a light gray background and recognized place names have a light purple background.


View transcript 


View transcript 


View transcript 


On 21 October 1723, a report from Macassar discussed several issues involving local rulers, trade restrictions, and political tensions.

View transcript 


On 21 October 1723, officials in Macassar wrote about ongoing disputes involving the Dutch East India Company (VOC) and the kingdom of Bone, ruled by its king (referred to as "his highness"). Several key issues were raised:

The VOC expressed frustration, noting that the king’s actions contradicted his earlier claims of loyalty and gratitude toward the Company. They urged the tomilalangs to report these matters to the king and investigate the abuses of power, warning that such violations could damage relations between Bone and the VOC.

View transcript 


On 21 October 1723, officials in Macassar received orders to handle a dispute fairly regarding rice deliveries. The issue involved bundles of rice called bossen, which local farmers (boniers) in Maros had made larger than the standard size used by the Dutch East India Company (VOC). This caused confusion during inspections.

A new problem arose when the Boneese chief in Maren ordered farmers in Peso to stop paying the VOC their 10% rice tax (tiende) until further notice. The VOC first asked the tomilalangs to intervene, but they claimed ignorance. After repeated requests failed, the VOC sent Pieter van der Snippe and Hendrik Duirveld to the King of Bone.

The outcome of these actions remained uncertain at the time. The VOC noted all farmer complaints since 6 June but avoided detailing them further in this report.

View transcript 


On 21 October 1723, officials in Macassar sent a report to Governor-General Henric Zwaardecroon and the Council of the Dutch East Indies in Batavia. The letter included:

The letter was approved by A. Luijken, the secretary, and sent via the ship Pantsjallang, which had left Macassar on 6 June 1723 under the supervision of Pieter Alexandersz.

The main points of the report were:

View transcript 


View transcript 


On 5 October 1723, officials in Macassar sent a report to Governor-General Henric Zwaardecroon and the Council of the Dutch East India Company (VOC) in Batavia. The letter, signed by Governor Johannes Philippus Sipman and five other officials, covered two main topics: staffing needs and a poor rice harvest.

The letter was sent via the proa (local boat) of citizen Hendrik Zandyk, along with other documents, to Batavia for further action.

View transcript 


View transcript 


On 9 August 1723, a report was sent from Macassar regarding debts, expenses, and timber supplies for the Dutch East India Company (VOC):

Regarding sappanwood (a valuable dye wood) for 1724:

The report concluded that all three rulers were unable (or unwilling) to provide sappanwood for the VOC in the coming year.

View transcript 


View transcript 


On 9 August 1723, a report from Macassar noted several ships arriving due to weather or supply needs:

Another report, signed by H. Walburg on 27 April 1723, listed additional arrivals:

View transcript 


In 1723, several ships traveled between Macassar and other ports, carrying goods, people, and animals. Here’s what happened:

Ships that arrived included:

View transcript 


On 9 August 1723, a letter from Macassar noted that local kings had agreed not to cut any sappanwood (a valuable red dye wood) in 1724. However, about 3,000 piculs (a weight measure) of uncollected sappanwood remained—2,000 piculs in Dompo (on the trading post Cambo) and 1,000 piculs in Macassar. The writer, A.n Walburg, respectfully requested that authorities arrange for this wood to be retrieved the following year.

A separate note listed ships traveling between Batavia (modern Jakarta) and the East Coast of Java from August 1722 to July 1723:

View transcript 


View transcript 


In 1701, a report from Macassar discussed the case of Aron Teko, a local ruler causing trouble for the Dutch East India Company (VOC). The situation was complicated because of past agreements and the behavior of other local leaders.

View transcript 


On 13 April 1723, a letter was written from Makassar addressing several issues:

View transcript 


View transcript 


This summary covers official records from Maccassar (modern-day Makassar, Indonesia) sent to Batavia (modern-day Jakarta) in 1723 by the Dutch East India Company (VOC). The documents were transported by ships like the Kiefhoek and the Patsjall.

The records also included:

View transcript 


In 1701, a report from Macassar was received in Goa on 14 November 1741, detailing gifts sent by the English leader of Banjar to the King of Goa and Carain Bontosoengo. These gifts were accompanied by a letter, which had already been responded to earlier that month. The letter was secretly delivered by a trusted person from Macassar, who traveled quietly without a pass from Goa to Banjar. The contents of the letter remained unknown, as they were kept confidential.

The report also mentioned that, over the past five years, the Portuguese in Timor had occasionally sent gifts to the people of Macassar. However, the Dutch East India Company (VOC) had not been informed about these exchanges. Around four years earlier, a messenger named Mangarij, supposedly Portuguese, had arrived with gifts that included small boxes, pearls, and possibly gunpowder in jars. These jars were not opened, so their exact contents remained uncertain.

The governor thanked Raja Bonij for his openness and recalled reading about similar Portuguese gifts in records from 3 August 1697. He noted this information in his private records, signed by Cornelis Beernink.

In another letter dated 11 November, it was reported that Abraham Holscher, a merchant, had arrived two days before the letter was written. The governor had already responded to an earlier letter from 16 August, but he still needed to reply to a secret letter addressed specifically to him. He trusted that the response would be handled carefully.

The governor also discussed a murder case involving Arouteko and Dain Manbam, which took place on 1 May 1700. The courts of Bonij and Soping had handled the case lightly, suggesting that Raja Bonij might have known about the murder beforehand. The governor believed that Raja Bonij wanted to protect the accused due to their connections, while the VOC aimed to enforce local laws strictly. The governor noted that most allies, except Raja Tello, would follow Raja Bonij's lead in public meetings. He decided not to consult the allies publicly to avoid influencing their opinions, as fear still lingered from past conflicts.

The VOC had urged the courts of Bonij and Soping to resolve the case and punish the murderer appropriately. However, since Aron Lonij refused to pass judgment and the Queen of Soping remained neutral, no other allies could interfere. This left the VOC to handle the matter independently.

View transcript 


In 1701, a report from Macassar revealed tensions between local leaders, the Dutch East India Company (VOC), and the English. Key details included:
View transcript 


In 1701, a report from Macassar revealed concerns about secret dealings between the English and local rulers. The text describes a meeting involving key figures:

The text highlights growing tensions between the Dutch and English over trade influence in Macassar, with local rulers caught in the middle.

View transcript 


In 1701, a conflict in Macassar (now Makassar) involved two nobles: Arou Teko and Dain Manbanij. The dispute began when Arou Belo accused Arou Teko of murdering his brother. Though the case had initially been settled, tensions rose again when Arou Belo threatened to attack Arou Teko openly. The local governor, Cornelis Deernink, tried to calm the situation and urged Arou Belo to wait for a legal decision. However, the case dragged on due to:

Arou Teko claimed he had justifiable reasons for his anger toward Dain Manbanij and his wife, Saena, accusing them of exchanging love letters while Dain Manbanij was away. Though Dain Manbanij denied any improper relationship, the situation remained suspicious. A temporary peace was brokered by Macassarese mediators, but it didn’t last. Cornelis Deernink believed Arou Teko was at fault for taking justice into his own hands, especially since Dain Manbanij—though of mixed noble and common heritage—did not deserve to be judged by Arou Teko.

The governor considered three possible punishments for Arou Teko:

He stressed that Arou Teko could not go unpunished if justice was to be served for Dain Manbanij’s allies and the royal family.

Later, on August 19, 1701, the King of Boni sent an urgent message to the governor through his clerk, Marcus Santbeek. The king revealed secret intelligence:

The king also mentioned he had avoided visiting the Dutch fort to prevent causing alarm, given the governor’s wife’s illness. He urged swift action against the British threat.

View transcript 


In 1701, Dutch officials in Macassar (now Makassar) dealt with a serious conflict involving local rulers and a murder case. The key figures included:

On January 8, 1701, the governor met with Radja Tello in the VOC’s garden to discuss the case. Radja Tello explained that Arou Teko had killed Dain Mabanij after a reconciliation, which was a betrayal. According to local laws, Arou Teko deserved the death penalty, but the VOC had delayed the execution. Radja Tello warned that further delays risked angering the VOC’s allies, especially the Soping court, who felt justice had not been served.

Radja Tello also noted that while the governor had the authority to enforce the sentence, local rulers expected the VOC to respect their laws. He suggested three possible punishments for Arou Teko:

Cornelis Beernink agreed with most allies that Arou Teko must be punished, though Radja Loubou preferred a heavy fine instead. Beernink believed Radja Boni was secretly pleased the VOC was handling the issue, as he had avoided acting himself. Beernink urged swift action to maintain the VOC’s reputation as a strong ally.

On September 1, 1701, the governor met privately with the king of Boni in the VOC’s garden. The king admitted the case had dragged on too long but claimed he had tried to resolve it. He implied that Dain Mabanij’s family should have sought immediate revenge under local customs. The governor pressed the king for his official stance on Arou Teko’s punishment, but the king avoided giving a clear answer.

The VOC was frustrated that Radja Boni kept delaying, forcing them to take the lead. They feared that if they didn’t act firmly, their local allies would lose trust in them.

View transcript 



Previous pageNext page

Find your ancestors and publish your family tree on Genealogy Online via https://www.genealogieonline.nl/en/