Richard Stanfield
British civil engineer (1863–1950)
Richard Stanfield (23 June 1863 – 10 October 1950) was a British civil engineer active in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.
Early life
Born in England on 23 June 1863, Stanfield was educated at the Manchester Grammar School, Manchester. In around 1877 he began an apprenticeship with the firm John Chadwick and Sons.
In 1883, he won a Senior Whitworth Scholarship and then studied mine engineering at the Royal School of Mines in London under Professor Thomas Minchin Goodeve.
He also studied metallurgy and assaying under Professor Sir William Roberts-Austen. He won the Bessemer Gold Medal for his class.
Career
He became Professor of Mechanics and Engineering at Heriot-Watt College in 1889. In 1908 he helped to design the new laboratories for his department, under the sponsorship of Lord Rosebery. He was consultant to the Royal Highland and Agricultural Society of Scotland from 1900 to 1930. In 1906 he helped to organise the Motor Reliability Trials for the Scottish Automobile Club in which 84 cars took place: this was one of the first organised shows of vehicles in Britain.
Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Richard Stanfield” is british civil engineer (1863–1950). The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Richard, Stanfield and British, not as a finished interpretation.
Why this record matters
The phrase “british civil engineer (1863–1950)” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.
Biographical claims are most persuasive when dates, appointments and relationships can be traced to records created close to the events described. The source revision retrieved here is dated Mar 10, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q56226105. 1 of 1 selected statements include explicit references; 0 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 1863, 1950, 1877 and 1883.
Public reputation and documentary evidence do not always develop together; absence from a summary is not evidence of historical absence. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Read biographical claims against dates, named institutions and the cited references. Distinguish a subject’s later reputation from evidence produced during their lifetime.
- Establishing names and roles
- Building a first chronology
- Locating cited institutions
Personal papers, civil or court records, institutional files and the scholarship cited by the source.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Richard Stanfield”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Richard Stanfield primary sources, Richard Stanfield archive and Richard research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Richard Stanfield”?
- Which primary records establish identity, chronology and institutional ties?
- How has the subject’s reputation changed across later accounts?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Richard Stanfield” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.