no image
Privacy Level: Open (White)

John Field (1700 - 1747)

John Field
Born in Deerfield, Hampshire, Massachusetts Bay Colonymap
Ancestors ancestors
Husband of — married [date unknown] [location unknown]
Descendants descendants
Died at age 46 in Connecticutmap [uncertain]
Problems/Questions Profile managers: Sandi Gammon private message [send private message] and Mitchell Starnes private message [send private message]
Profile last modified | Created 16 Feb 2014
This page has been accessed 433 times.


Biography

At the age of 4, John was abducted during the raid; he was later ransomed and returned.

Sources

  • Some Field Family Journeys By Warren James Field, page 210
  • Marriage: "U.S. and International Marriage Records, 1560-1900"
    Source number: 461.000; Source type: Electronic Database; Number of Pages: 1; Submitter Code: JAW
    Ancestry Record 7836 #406503 (accessed 27 May 2022)
    John Field marriage to Ann Field Bagg.




Is John your ancestor? Please don't go away!
 star icon Login to collaborate or comment, or
 star icon contact private message private message a profile manager, or
 star icon ask our community of genealogists a question.
Sponsored Search by Ancestry.com

DNA Connections
It may be possible to confirm family relationships with John by comparing test results with other carriers of his Y-chromosome or his mother's mitochondrial DNA. However, there are no known yDNA or mtDNA test-takers in his direct paternal or maternal line. It is likely that these autosomal DNA test-takers will share some percentage of DNA with John:

Have you taken a DNA test? If so, login to add it. If not, see our friends at Ancestry DNA.



Comments: 3

Leave a message for others who see this profile.
There are no comments yet.
Login to post a comment.
Field-145 and Field-1630 do represent the same person. The profiles for his wife Anna Bagg should be merged - see Bagg-149. The death date on Field-1630 is incorrect.
posted by Lisa Javorka
Field-145 and Field-1630 do not represent the same person because: I completed the other merge of the John Fields, but I am not sure about this one between the new Field-145 and Field-1630. Their wives have the same name but different birth/death dates and locations, as do the Johns. They also have different parents. There is no evidence for a merge beyond the same name.
posted by Jessie Robertson
Field-3398 and Field-1630 appear to represent the same person because: Death date various from source

Field-145 is the man who b 1672 d 1747

posted by Beryl Meehan
edited by Beryl Meehan

Rejected matches › John Field (1700-1762)

F  >  Field  >  John Field

Categories: Raid on Deerfield