About us
AN INTRODUCTION TO FIELD GENEALOGIES
by
Thomas C. Field, Ph.D.
Genetic testing has brought a lot of precision to genealogical research, but some people incorrectly believe that it is an easy way to buy into genealogy; plunk your money down and someone will tell you whom you are related to. Unfortunately, this is not true, and what you purchase with genetic testing is a data set whose interpretation can, if you are lucky, place you in a category with other testers. Most people who join a surname project are probably motivated by an interest in attaching their test results to the names of living and/or dead relatives, and to accomplish this, they need to draw on traditional genealogical techniques.
Fortunately, the Field surname has a number of printed genealogies that can be drawn on to build a framework around your genetic testing results. This framework will increase the test’s usefulness in analysis, and increase the likelihood that other people will recognize you as a possible match. This is an introduction to Field genealogies, and how they can be used to improve the use of your testing results. I will start with probably the best-known work, Field Genealogy by Frederick Clifton Pierce, published in 1901. I will follow that review with an appraisal of other printed works, and discuss how their lineages differ from the Pierce’s interpretation. The genealogies are commercially printed ones that I have encountered in my own work, and I am hoping that members of the project will know of other publications that they can contribute that will expand my list.
The Field Genealogy by Frederick Clifton Pierce, published in 1901, is probably the most extensive chronicle of the Field family in the United States, and is the resource most Fields will initially turn to in putting together a family genealogy. This two-volume work resulted from the efforts of three men, John Spafford Field who inspired the work; Pierce who wrote it, and Marshal Field who paid for its distribution to every public library in the country. Because of Marshal Field, of Fields Department Store fame, this work is still easily available across the country today; your public library is likely to have it on its shelves. Osgood Field, a family genealogist with antiquarian interests who lived in England for many years, also made significant contributions to the knowledge of the Field family inEngland prior to the founding of American colonies, and much of his contribution is included as well.
The genealogy was ambitious in scope, attempting to record “all the Field family in America, whose ancestors were in this country prior to1700.” In addition, the work covers some family branches that remained in England. The genealogy records not only family lineages, but includes many family records and stories that make it a joy to read for anyone with a history mind-set. For a novice Field genealogist, this is a great place to begin work. If you can find a link to this work, you will find a trail leading back to medieval England. If the link exists, you instantly have the framework for a multi-generational family genealogy; however, it is a framework that must be accepted with a dose of skepticism. The premise of the work is that the entire family descended from a single person, Hubertus De la Field, who came from Alsace-Lorraine to England with William theConqueror in 1066. This is a legend that is repeated in other genealogies as well, but verifying the story with any 11th century documentation has been thus far lacking. The legend of Hubertus, and several other stories related therein have been criticized since the book was published, and with the advent of Y-chromosome testing in recent years, it has been demonstrated that the lineages fall into different Y-chromosome haplogroups, and thus cannot descend from a single man.
The Field Genealogy can be obtained today from sources other than public libraries. The first volume of the work is available in paperback from booksellers, and searchable versions of both volumes are available online: https://archive.org/details/fieldgenealogy01pier,and https://archive.org/details/fieldgenealogybe02inpier. These files can also be opened as pdf files that can be downloaded to your computer. The second volume of the work, containing the write-up of the most recent generations and the indices, is where most novice genealogists are likely to find an entry into the pedigree, if one is lacking a family history to begin with. These titles, and the indices are also available at Ancestry.com in a searchable format.
Once you have a copy of the work, finding your own personal entry into it can be daunting. The first thing you need is an ancestor’s name that falls within the time frame of the genealogy, which for the Field Genealogy is prior to 1900. The ancestor does not need to be the most recent ancestor likely to be in the genealogy. It may actually be easier to find a person further back in time because the genealogy is not as thorough in covering the generations closest to the publication date. For example, my grandfather, born in 1856, is not listed, but my great grandfather born in 1828 is. Initially, all you are looking for is an entry point into the genealogy that will identify an ancestor and provide his index number in the genealogy. Once you have found an entry index number, you can search forward and backward through the family history using unique index numbers rather than names, which are likely used repeatedly, often within the same generation.
The obvious place to look first for your ancestor is the index is at the back of the second volume. The Field Genealogy has two indices, one listing all the Field family by given name, and a second listing surnames of people other than Field. As an example, if you are looking for a Zobiah Field, you will find him listed on page 173, which is very useful, and lucky for you. In contrast, if you are seeking something about a William Field, you will find over 400 pages listed, which is essentially worthless. So, if you have a choice of Fields to search for, you want the to start with the one with the most unusual first name. A second way to find an entry point is to search for the maiden name of a Field spouse using the second Index of Other Names. For example, if your great grandmother was an Armstrong, you will have to search only nine pages to see if you have a match.
Once you have located an ancestor, you will find that his name is associated with an index number. This number is unique to this person in the genealogy, and will generally be listed twice, first when he is listed as a child under his father’s family, and second when he is listed as the head of his own family. Thus, you can follow the lineage forward and backward by following unique index numbers rather than the given names that are usually repetitive. In some cases, an index number will be listed only once, and this is usually because nothing further is known about that individual, so the person is listed as the offspring of his parents, but not again.
The search of the index trail can be made manually, although this can be tedious as succeeding generations have increasing numbers of members requiring many pages of description between the first listing under th eparent and the second as head of his own family. It is much easier to use an electronic version of the genealogy, either on the Internet or from a copy downloaded to your computer. In either case, the search can be done using the search function on your computer. For some reason unknown to me, the search function seems to work better when I download the genealogies to my computer, but doing so requires a lot of computer memory, and this may not be the preferred search method for everyone.
An additional advantage to using the search function is that you can search for geographic locations in the genealogy. Your only known ancestor may have been a John Field, and you have no idea who his wife was, but you know they lived in Oshkosh, WI. A search for this location may lead you to the information you seek, and it is not likely to be a lengthy search as is the case with common given names.
Once you have successfully followed your lineage through thegenealogy, you can create a reference table that will make finding theinformation in the future much easier. Below is an example from my own family as delineated in the Field Genealogy.
From F.C. Pierce, Field Genealogy
Name Generation Field Genealogy Reference
Page Ref. #
Roger Del Feld b:1240 1 1 66
Thomas Del Feld b: 1278 2 3 66
John Del Feld b:1300 3 5 66
Thomas Del Feld b 1330 4 8 67
Thomas Del Feld b: 1360 5 13 68
William Field b: ? 6 21 69
William Feld b: ? 7 30 70
Richard Felde b: ? 8 35 70
John Field b: 1520 9 42 73
William Feild b: 1570 10 67 83
Hon. John Field b: ? 11 121 101
John Field b: abt 1645 12 167 121
Richard Field b: 1677 13 231 172
Zebulon b: 1707 14 380 235
Capt. Zebulon b: ? 15 772 350
Abizer Field b: ? 16 1589 536
Abizer Field b: 1784 17 3044 823
George Field b: 1828 18 4623 823
Ordonio Lazelle Field b: 1856 19
Thomas Lazelle Field b: 1893 20
Thomas Chappell Field b: 1943 21
This approach to creating a genealogy will work only if you know some of your ancestors, and they are listed in whatever genealogy you are searching. If this is not the case, you will need to start a different kind of search. One method that is successful for many is to join Ancestry.com and search the census records, other records and public family trees to build a skeletal family tree that you can then begin to verify.
Pierce’s Field Genealogy attempts to identify all the Fields immigrating to the American colonies prior to 1700, and provides much history of the family in England as well as some lineages of the family who did not emigrate, following some English branches into the 1700’s. The work is derived from a vast number of sources, most of which lack citation, particularly the lineages of immigrants prior to their arrival in America.
Volume one dwells primarily on the histories of immigrants to Massachusetts and Rhode Island: Zechariah, John, William, Robert and Thomas Field, all arriving before 1667. Volume two continues with the families discussed in the first volume, and adds a New Hampshire/Maine branch of the family descending from Darby and Robert Field who came to Boston in the 1630’s. Volume two also provides descriptions of two southern lineages. The Virginia branch descends from William and James Field who came independently to Virginia in the 1620’s, and the Virginia/Kentucky branch descending from a Henry Field who arrived in Virginia in 1635 according to the genealogy. Thus, this voluminous work, the most complete record of the Field family in America, follows the descendants of just ten early immigrants to the New World. This, of course, is too simple to be true, and Pierce must have realized that as large as his work was, it had not captured the entire history of immigrant Fields in America prior to 1700. In comparison to the number of immigrants followed by Pierce, the Immigrant Servants Database (http://www.pricegen.com/immigrantservants/search/simple.php/) list fourteen Fields who came to the southern colonies prior to 1736, most of whom are not found in the Field Genealogy. In addition to the limited scope of Pierce, some of its lineages are contradictory and disputed. Nonetheless, if one can find a link to someone in this genealogy, it is a good place to begin a research project. It is by far the most extensive, available, and most easily searched of the available works, despite its deficiencies. Whatever you find here should be validated with an additional paper trail, and/or genetic testing.
The next genealogies I will mention concerns the family of Zechariah Field, the first Field immigrant to Massachusetts in 1629. These genealogies exist in a variety of forms written by Henry Martyn Field and perhaps partially by others between 1860 and 1889. None was formally published but at least two private printings in book form are known. The primary publication is the Record of the Family of the Rev. David D.Field, D.D. by Henry M. Field. Two versions of this work printed in 1860 and 1880 (after D.D. Field’s death) are: https://ia800304.us.archive.org/25/items/familyofrevdavid00infiel/familyofrevdavid00infiel_bw.pdf and https://ia802306.us.archive.org/19/items/recordoffamilyof00fiel/recordoffamilyof00fiel_bw.pdf. These records contain much information about this branch of the family, but because of the narrative style in which they are written, they are difficult to use for genealogical research. A more useable document to research this lineage was anonymously printed in 1894 as The Field Family of Hatfield, Massachusetts (https://ia801708.us.archive.org/6/items/genealogyoffield00unse/genealogyoffield00unse.pdf).
The primary purpose of Henry M. Field’s monograph is a description of the descendants of Zechariah Field, but the author also wrote an appendix to the main work that builds a common family tree for several of the early New England immigrant Fields. The appendix was printed separately from the 1860 version of the main document, and part of the appendix was included in the 1880 printing. This appendix is more consequential to Field genealogists than the family history to which it is attached. The 1890 version of the appendix, printed as a lone document is found at: https://ia802607.us.archive.org/13/items/fieldsinenglanda00fiel/fieldsinenglanda00fiel_bw.pdf.
Most of the appendix discusses the lineage of Robert Field rather than the lineage of Zechariah Field about whom the main document is written. Robert is the first family to settle on Long Island. The appendix is the justification for a speculative lineage of Robert based on testimonies of living Field family members recalling stories of links among early New England immigrants. All of these reminiscences were written in the 18th and 19th century about events the occurred in the 17th century or earlier, and the existence of any validation of the pedigree is unknown. The product of this discourse is a family tree that shows the early immigrants, Zechariah, John, William, Robert, and Thomas Field, all descending from Sir John Field, an astronomer who lived in Yorkshire, England in the 16th century. The reason that this is consequential to Field genealogists is that this is the lineage adopted by Pierce in the Field Genealogy for Zechariah, John, William and Thomas, but not Robert, about whom the appendix is primarily written. For Robert, a different lineage is found in the Field Genealogy, one that does not connect with Sir John Field. This contradiction was ostensibly created by the differing traditional histories of two influential Field families, both deeply interested in family history, vying for their version of history occupying a place in Pierce’s work. Pierce ostensibly could not mediate a mutually agreeable lineage, so he placed both versions in his work. Robert Field’s lineage as found in the Field Genealogy will be discussed in my review of a later genealogy written by Osgood Field.
Harriet Brownell’s Genealogy of the Fields of Providence, Rhode Island (https://archive.org/details/genealogyoffield00brow) was privately printed in 1878. This book, written by a descendant of an old Rhode Island family, presents the genealogies of two early immigrants, John (~1616 -1686) and William Field (? -1665) who came to Providence in the 1630’s. The route by which they reached Providence is unknown, although a speculation is offered by Pierce in the FieldGenealogy. William had no known offspring, so his family is traced from Thomas Field, William’s nephew and heir, who is first mentioned in the provincial records in 1667. The lines of descent are indexed in the same manner as Pierce’s Field Genealogy so it can be searched using the search tool on a computer, but this is a much smaller work than Pierce’s, so it is generally easier to simply scroll through the pages to find what you are looking for.
Unfortunately, Brownell also discusses the relationships among early New England immigrants in her introduction to the book, and this commentary is not helpful to people interested in this subject. The most troubling of her statements is that Osgood Field supported the idea that immigrants, Zechariah, Robert, John, and William Field, all descended from the astronomer Sir John Field. This is the opposite of Osgood Field’s position published in the New England Historical and Genealogical Register and elsewhere several times between 1863 and 1895, bracketing the printing date of Brownell’s book.
Osgood Field’s last work, The Fields of Sowerby, privately printed in 1895, can be viewed and downloaded from https://ia801404.us.archive.org/7/items/fieldsofsowerbyn00fiel/fieldsofsowerbyn00fiel_bw.pdf. This work attempts to traces the family history of Robert Field who received a patent in Flushing, Long Island in 1645. It is based on the most thorough use of primary source documents from medieval England and colonial New England of all the Field genealogies, but the cited material is sufficiently scant that circumstantial evaluations are still used to connect some family links, and to identify individuals, the most troubling being that of Robert Field himself. According to the narrative, Robert Field, son of William Feild and Susan Midgley, grandson of Christopher Feld and Grace Gradeheighe, came with Richard Saltonstall and the Winthrop fleet to Massachusetts in 1630 when Robert was around the age of 25. No record of this story has been found, however, and Osgood Field presumes that the Robert Field who appears in Newport, RI in 1638 is the same person born to William Field and Susan Midgley and that he in fact came to Massachusetts with Winthrop, and that he moved to Long Island in 1645. We do know that a Robert Field lived in Newport in 1638, but we do not know where he came from, and there is evidence in the colonial records of Rhode Island that he still lived there in 1653, which contradicts Osgood’s chronology.
This book is useful because it identifies the primary documentation of the family (or families) that remained in western Yorkshire during the 19th century, and it relates the family history of the Robert Field of Flushing, LI from the late 17th century well into the 19th century, as the family spread to other parts of New York, and into New Jersey and New Hampshire. Much of the history is in a narrative form, with some lineages, but no index such as found in Pierce or Brownell.
The last genealogy I will discuss is Delafield: The Family History, privately printed by John Ross Delafield in 1945. Volume 1 can be downloaded from: https://www.scribd.com/document/170542516/Delafield. Volumes 1 and 2 can be viewed at Ancestry.com. This is an extensive documentary of the Delafield family begun by the author in 1908 in response to a criticism of the legitimacy of the family history that begins before the family’s immigration to England from Europe in the 11th century, and to Ireland from England in the 12th century.
The connection between the Field and Delafield families appears to arise from the legend of Hubertus de la Feld who came to England with William the Conqueror and soon thereafter settled lands in what is now Lancashire. I do not know the origin of this story, but it appears in Burke’s 1837 edition of A Genealogical and Heraldic History of the Landed Gentry (https://ia800208.us.archive.org/20/items/genealogicalhera01inburk/genealogicalhera01inburk_bw.pdf) where three pages are devoted to the Delafield family (page 542) along with a description of their coat-of-arms: a gold cross on a field of black. The only mention of the Field family in this edition is to the marriages of a few Fields to other families of note. In Burke’s 1846 edition, the Delafield family of Fieldston, Ireland is given a page noting their descent from Hubertus, and separately the Field family of Yorkshire is given half a page with no connection to the Delafield family and no heraldic description. The Yorkshire lineage descends from John Feild (b: bef. 1571) to families in Shipley, Horton, Heaton, and Hipperholm, Yorkshire. It is a mystery to me how the story of Hubertus, bearing his shield with cross of gold, was absorbed by American genealogists seeking to define a family with a coat-of-arms described as three silver wheat sheaves on a field of black, but the legend has been uncritically presented in all the Field genealogies I have discussed. Despite the lack of explanation, the incorporation of the Delafield genealogy in a Field(s) surname project is still germane because in both lineages some families have shortened their surnames in recent generations, and descendants of these families identify by the surnames of Field or Fields today.