This document proposes investigating the interface between surveyor Ambrose Armstrong's mapping of the Grand Ronde Valley for the Oregon General Land Office and Lt. William Hazen's military mapping of Fort Yamhill and the Grande Ronde Indian Reservation from 1856-1857. It notes discrepancies between their works, such as Armstrong not depicting the fort and Hazen not acknowledging the land surveys, despite their contemporaneous work in the area. It aims to understand if they deliberately avoided interfacing to protect Native American archaeological sites from harm, as Armstrong had previously omitted descriptions to safeguard artifacts.

1. 1
presents
An Investigation into the Interface – or Otherwise -- of the Oregon G.L.O. Cartography
of Ambrose N. Armstrong
and the Military Service Mapping of Lt. William Babcock Hazen --
Together in the Grand Ronde Valley
and at Fort Yamhill in the Grande Ronde Indian Reservation
1856-57
A research project proposed for support through the Sterling Fellowship, 2013
Administered by the Oregon Historical Society
Submitted by Roch Steinbach
for

2. 2
Ambrose N. Armstrong and the G.L.O.: The Lost Stone Citadel of the Yamhills
By 1852 the Oregon General Land Office (G.L.O. ) was contracting for surveys of the Willamette and Tualatin valleys.
Contracts for surveying the Grand Ronde valley were entered beginning in 1854, and most of these contracts were
awarded to one Ambrose N. Armstrong, an aggressive explorer of the most difficult terrain in northwestern Oregon.
Armstrong was also – it would appear -- conversant and friendly with the Oregon Indians. As we shall see, Armstrong
learned something of native lore in his surveying – and perhaps even a few traditional secrets. During the period of his
surveying around in the coastal mountains of Yamhill County, Armstrong wrote a monograph – a short book – entitled
Oregon :
Comprising a Brief History and Full Description of the Territory of Oregon and Washington.
(Chicago, 1857)
It is available at the Internet Archive.
At the end of his book, Armstrong provides a chapter of unflattering frontier ethnography on a number of the Indian
tribes of Oregon – but does not mention a word of the Yamhills, or the tribes of the Willamette Valley – whom he must
have encountered during his field work in the area of Yamhill and Tillamook Counties. He does not mention Grande
Ronde or Fort Yamhill,
However ….

3. 3
It must have been to Armstrong that members of the Yamhill Indian tribe disclosed the location of their ancient and
ruined stone citadel, high on the summit of Stony Mountain, in Yamhill county, which -- they believed -- had once
perched near the shores of a prehistoric lake… Lake Willamina. Today, the site commands an ideal and expansive view
south by south-east, of the Gopher valley – the traditional territory of the same Yamhill tribe – and the landscape beyond
it, in the valley of the South Yamhill River. Armstrong wrote this down -- the history of the Yamhills -- to include as
part of his book on Oregon, just mentioned.
Or so, at least, says Frank J. Smith, a little-known figure, who collected historical material on steamboating in the
Willamette valley. Smith reports, that Armstrong gave a detailed account of this lost fortress, in the manuscript text of
his book – written in 1855. However, the story did not appear in Armstrong’s published volume, which dates to 1857.
The story survives only in Smith’s transcribed text of Armstong’s manuscript.  Frank J. Smith papers, OHS MS. 1431.
Why was this important
passage on Native American
archeology removed from
Armstrong’s manuscript, and
all reference to the Yamhill
Indians likewise omitted from
his book?
We can only speculate: that it
may have been, for instance, to
guard the location of the ruins
of the stone fortress, from
youthful vandalism or
mayhem. It also has to be
wondered, whether silence
was invoked, to protect the site
from more actively malicious
members of the White
community who might wish to
obliterate any and all remnants
of the ancestral dignity of
Native Americans.
Whatever may have been the
reasons for this cover-up, it
does raise the issue of
deliberate though benevolent
subterfuge on the part of
Ambrose Armstrong, and
potentially on the part of
others -- pioneers working in
association with him, to
defend the ancient traditions of
the Native Americans of
Oregon.
This brings us closer to the
core issue I would like to
investigate with the possible
support of a Sterling
Fellowship ….
… because…

4. 4
Ambrose Armstrong was awarded most Oregon G.L.O. contracts for survey, for townships in the upper valley of the
South Yamhill river - including at Grand Ronde Valley itself.
Indeed, under Contract No. 55, (1855) Armstrong surveyed T. 5 S. 8 W. , W.M T., a township which – acording to the
U.S. G.L.O. itself, “… is embraced in the Indian Reserve as per instructions dated July 3rd
, 1857”; as well as T. 6 S. R. 8
W. , W.M., another township which “is embraced in the Indian Reserve as per instructions dated July 3rd
, 1857.” ,
Armstrong also surveyed neighboring townships 6 S. R. 7 W., W.M , and T. 5 S. R. 6 W. , W.M., under Contract No.
55; and T. 5 S. R. 8 W., W.M under Contract No. 46 (1854)).
In a nutshell …
Ambrose Armstrong was
point man at the Oregon
G.L.O. for survey of the
Grande Ronde Indian
Reservation.
IN ADDITION to
Armstrong’s standard
G.L.O. contracts Nos. 46
and 55, blanketing the South
Yamhill River valley and
the Grand Ronde,
Armstrong received – under
Contract No. 55 a unique
“pink-ribbonned” set of so-
called Special Instructions
for the conduct of the
survey.
These G.L.O. Special
Instructions to Ambrose
Armstrong are dated
February 25, 1855…
although the last digit of the
year seems to be
overwritten.
They are, well -- let’s say –
anything but special: they
simply recite, basically
chapter and verse, the
boilerplate standards of the
Secretary of the Interior’s
Manual of Instructions to
Surveyors General – and
would appear to add nothing
to what Armstrong already
would have undertaken in
fulfilling the contract.

5. 5
The same file includes Armstrong’s field notes for the survey of T 4 S. R. 6, W.M., BUT! While those fancy pink-
ribboned Special Instructions are dated 1855, Armstrong’s surveying field notes are dated 1852… 
 T 4 S. R. 6, W.M.
October 14th
, 1852
And – meanwhile -- under the official records, and on the cadastral survey maps  maintained by the B.L.M., --
successor to the G.L.O. -- Armstrong appears to have actually run the survey of T 4 S. R. 6 W.M. not in 1852, when his
field notes are dated, nor in 1855 when the Special Instructions issued, but in 1854, under Contract No. 46.
Are these merely simple clerical and administrative errors – compounded in the drafting of Armstrong’s contracts?
Could Armstrong have surveyed this township … two years before the G.L.O. got around to issuing contracts on the
South Yamhill river? Perhaps! If he had real “Special Instructions.” Or are we justified in suggesting there has been
some concerted operation by Armstrong and his associates at the G.L.O., to completely OBFUSCATE something –
namely the location of the stone fortress -- for the sake of preserving a priceless artifact of the Native American
archeological heritage?
It’s all confusing enough to make one want to do the actual fieldwork … if only just to try to recover your sanity …

6. 6

7. 7
The images on these pages were taken during the month of May, 2013, by the author and this applicant for the Sterling
Fellowship. They show an area of scattered Doug fir, spruce and vine maple forest, near the summit of Stony Mountain
-- a high peak in the Coast Range, overlooking the canyon of Deer Creek which drains Gopher Valley – the ancestral
territory of the Yamhill Indians in Yamhill County – all precisely in T. 4 S. R. 6 W., W.M. – the township represented
by Armstrong’s field survey notes, in OHS MS 367. Massive blocky boulders are oddly deposited on the mountaintop.
This is indeed something unusual in the geology of the Coast Mountains …

8. 8
Are these blocky boulders the remains of the Lost Stone Citadel of the Yamhills – as Armstrong described it, in 1855?
The question in unanswerable without professional archeological work: some 160 years’ of deadwood, leaves and forest
duff have been deposited on Stony Mountain, since Armstrong trudged through. But it’s clear that the raw materials for
just such an ancient Native American construction are here, to justify the name of the mountain, and to validate –
potentially -- Armstrong’s stories …
But one thing that the stones on Stony Mountain do establish, I submit, is that surveyor Ambrose Armstrong and
Charles King Gardiner -- and others associated with the Oregon G.L.O. -- were prepared to undertake and enter into a
fairly involved level of benevolent documentary subterfuge, in order to protect the location of these stones – believing
them to be actual archeological remains, AS DESCRIBED by Armstrong, in the MS text of his book (as referenced by
Frank Smith, OHS MS. 1431) but omitted from the finished publication. So, these pioneers created, in effect, a
documentary puzzle that would not yield to any simple solutions
Now, let’s look at some of Ambrose Armstrong’s work in the area of the Grand Ronde Indian Reservation ….

9. 9
Ambrose N. Armstrong and the Cartography of the Grande Ronde Reservation
When we think of Army field maps executed by on-duty
officers and regulars during the course of their assignments, we
expect, effectively, a quick sketch by way of reference – of the
type of drawing that might fit onto the page of a staff sergeant’s
diary or journal, or perhaps some loose-leaf sheet, that that
could be folded once or twice and tucked into a notebook.
One such sketch map of the pertinent region that corresponds to
our general expectations, is the Sketch of Indian Reservation
on the Western Coast of Oregon as drawn by Lt. John Charles
Bonnycastle, dated to 1855. An image appears at right. It is,
let’s say, about as precise as we could expect under the
circumstances of its execution – Lt. Bonnycastle not being a
member of the Army Corps of Topographical Engineers, and
not having been provided with any equipment, nor assigned to
conduct a scientific survey. The map is informative -- and
informed -- on the generalities of the location of the 1855
Coastal Indian Reservation - for instance in showing a
southern boundary along the Fourth Standard Parallel of the
surveys being run by Oregon G.L.O. but it remains clearly a
sketch, and not a document of measured distances – nothing
approaching a survey map.
Another map closer to the core of this proposed investigation is
the more precisely drawn map of the perimeter of Fort Yamhill
in the Grand Ronde Valley. Shown at left, this sketch map
has been dated to 1858, and attributed to Col James W.
Nesmith, who was Superintendent of Indian Affairs for
Oregon and Washington, from 1853 to 1859.
The Nesmith map accurately locates Fort Yamhill, showing
its perimeter layout in Secs. 7, 8, 17 & 18 in T. 6 S. R. 7 W.,
W.M. The map gives us an idea, that in fact the landscape of
the Grand Ronde Valley was scientifically surveyed – at least
during the tenure of Col. Nesmith…
But in fact, T. 6 S. R. 7 W., W.M., is a township that – as
was carefully noted above -- was surveyed under Contract
No. 55, by Ambrose N. Armstrong.
Ambrose Armstrong was the one man who knew …. more
thing than the ordinary man, about the affairs of the Oregon
Indians, and of the Indians of the South Yamhill valley in
particular. Armstrong -- who wouldn’t directly state those
things, but wanted to indicate them, indirectly, by stratagem
constructed in collaboration with officials at the Oregon
G.L.O. And, unlike Lt. Bonnycastle and Col. Nesmith,
Armstrong was no amateur surveyor ….

10. 10
 Area of Nesmith map
Above, is the G.L.O. cadastral survey map for Township 6 South Range 7 West, Willamette Meridian, prepared
according to Armstrong’s surveys.
By way of comparison, I have marked the area of Col. Nesmith’s map – which is dated to 1858 – with a red square over
sections 7, 8, 17 & 18, at the upper left of this G.L.O. cadastral. A fainter pink line running North-South just at the
edge of the square marking the area of the Nesmith map, represents the eastern perimeter of the Grande Ronde
Reservation lands… “the lands embraced in townships 5 and 6 south, of range 8 west, and parts of townships 5 and 6
south, of range 7 west, Willamette district, Oregon, as indicated in the accompanying plat, be withdrawn from sale and
entry, and established as an Indian reservation for the colonization of Indian tribes in Oregon, and particularly for the
Williamette tribes, parties to treaty of January, 1855.” Or, as the cadastral reads….
One can see, Armstrong must have known more about Grand Ronde, than even the Superintendent of Indian Affairs.
And this is only one of many sections he surveyed. Ambrose Armstrong was all over those Reservation lands …
for years….

11. 11
Lt. William B. Hazen’s A Map of Grand Ronde – A Portion of the G.R.I.R. O.T.
.
Both Lt . J. C. Bonnycastle, who drew the Sketch of [the Coastal] Indian Reservation on the preceding pages, and
Col. Nesmith who is credited with the smaller map of the Reservation set into the survey grid, drew reference sketches or
diagrams of the areas to which they were posted.
Lt. William Babcock Hazen was also an officer – Second Lieutenant, initially in the Fourth infantry, then the Eighth –
who, like Lt. Bonnycastle, was assigned to Fort Yamhill during the period of the establishment of the Grand Ronde
Reservation. Hazen was acting assistant quartermaster at the Fort during most of this period. His map shows
important military features of the fort, including the block house, the laborers camp, agency quarters, mission buildings,
and so forth. It also shows the many separated encampments of the Native Americans, each according to tribe.
But unlike the others, Lt. Hazen’s Map of Grand Ronde is a cartographical singularity. It is an absolute airborne
birdseye view, looking straight down on the Grand Ronde Valley and documenting the scene – in natural, social and
political context -- in the most minute detail: and – especially -- rendering every feature of the topography in a multiplicity
of super-fine hachures – full hachures mingled with hairline hachures – and stipples, dashes and fancy pen-and-ink work.
And blades of grass jotted down at perfectly regular intervals. And when Hazen made his map, he had the effective
charge of Fort Yamhill on his shoulder --and yet, his Map of Grand Ronde is completely unlike any ordinary officer’s
sketch of his command post during a war, in a fort charged with guarding hundreds of Native Americans? Because in
fact …

12. 12
All that detail serves no professional military purpose whatsoever. It’s a complete waste of time. In fact, it seems
virtually impossible that Lt. Hazen’s map could actually be an official Army or other military document.
Did Lt. Hazen literally lose the forest …. in the trees?
L
Upper lefthand corner of Lt. Hazen’s map ….

13. 13
Did Lt. Hazen have official use for this degree of detail – every line perfectly executed, as if by a trained engraver?
Lower righthand corner of Lt. Hazen’s map …

14. 14
Conclusions
Between, on the one hand, the highly precise professional and scientific surveying of Ambrose N. Armstrong, and, on the
other hand, the almost obsessively detailed work of professional soldier, Lt. William Babcock Hazen, there is a
remarkable, contemporaneous, two-man coverage of the entire Grande Ronde Valley, and the area of the Reservation.
But there also some kind of failure of interface..
Armstrong and Lt. Hazen were in the Grande Ronde Valley and within the Reservation district, during the same period –
most particularly, from 1856-57 -- yet there is no sign of Fort Yamhill anywhere on Armstrong’s works for the G.L.O.,
and no suggestion on Lt. Hazen’s map, that he knew of external G.l.O. surveys. How can this be? Would not
Armstrong’s measurements have been utterly relevant to everything related to Lt. Hazen’s duties? Would Armstrong
avoid the chance to learn the plans of officials at Fort Yamhill?
Furthermore, Lt. Hazen obviously had a deep interest in topography, and in its precise rendering in cartographical form.
That fascination would have made conversation and an exchange of ideas with Armstrong irresistible: the two men would
have become close companions —at least for a time. But there seems to be no interface.
Meanwhile, on Lt. Hazen’s map, there are a number of blunders or omissions, which stand out against the highly detailed
penmanship. For instance, in the legend at the right of the map, there are references to two “Military Sites” which are
said to be “mentioned in the reports” of two other officers at Fort Yamhill: in particular Lt. S, and Lt. B. – for Lt. Phil
Sheridan, and Lt. John C. Bonnycastle – the same who made the Sketch of the [Coast] Indians Reservation, shown
above. It is not acceptable military practice, to identify active duty officers at the fort, with a single initial -- not on any
official Army document. Lt. Hazen, who seemingly had endless hours to scratch thousands upon thousands of tiny
hachures on his map, didn’t have the room or the time to spell out the full name of fellow officers whose reports he was
referencing, in a military context, on a military map ….. Or to finish the legend, by indicating where “H” and “I” were …
Legend of Lt. Hazen’s map …

15. 15
QUESTIONS and PROPOSALS for RESEARCH
This application only begins to broach the questions which are raised by the strange failure of interface, between the
unusual military cartography of Lt. W.B. Hazen, and his Map of Grand Rond – A Portion of the G.R.I.R.O.T., on the
one hand, and the professional G.L.O. survey work of Ambrose N. Armstrong at Grand Ronde, on the other.
One or two things seem evident: that Armstrong knew the Native Americans intimately, and had learned closely guarded
details of their oral history; that he, in collaboration with sympathetic officials at the Oregon G.L.O., was successful in
protecting that secret, by scrambling the documentary components of the story – until such time as those components
could be identified and unscrambled -- and the Lost Stone Citadel relocated.
Armstrong thoroughly surveyed the South Yamhill river valley – the area where the G.R.I.R.O.T. would soon be located
– and after it, the emigrant cities of Sheridan and Willamina. But Armstrong’s professional work in the valley does not
directly speak of what else he might have learned about the history of pre-history of this reach of the South Yamhill
River Valley.
Nevertheless, the failure of Armstrong’s work, to interface with Lt. Hazen’s is …. trying to tell another story.
If only these stones could speak ….
Until they do, we’ll just have to apply very careful methods of textual and cartographic analysis. We can help.
Roch Steinbach WRITING FOR September 30, 2013

16. 16
Partial Bibliography
John T. Apperson Papers, Mss 18
Benjamin Burden Branson Papers, Mss 964
William H.C. Bowen Papers, Mss 1514
Issac Ball Papers, MS 498
Matthew Deady Papers, Mss 48
James Dunn letter to Preston, Mss 1512
Robert J. Hendricks, Innnng Haaaaa! (Book)
Anson G. Henry letters, Mss 638
Lafferty letter to Preston, Mss 914
Leonard C. Hosford Papers, Mss 2195
History of Grand Ronde (Pamphlet) 979.131 H673
Galloway Family Papers, Mss 730
John Gordon Lewis, History of the Grand Ronde Military Blockhouse (book)
James D. Miller Papers, Mss 2074
John F. Miller papers, Mss 2297
B. J. Pengra letters, MSs 1500
John B. Preston Letters, Mss 914
The Sheridan Sun [microform].
Vertical File : Oregon Cities - Sheridan.
Phillip H. Sheridan Papers -- letter , MS 1500
Frank J. Smith Papers, Mss 1431
Spencer Family papers, Mss 524
D. P. Thompson Company Records, Mss 1681,
Fort Yamhill Blockhouse Plans – 1931, Ms 3100
Yamhill County, Oregon Collection, Mss 1285
Confederated Tribes of Siletz records -- Mss 442
Joel Palmer Papers, Mss 114.