Glasgow Surname Project

Individual research record

William Glasco

c. 1831 – ?

Glasco-108 · 1 mapped association

Delaware, United States→Death place unknown
View on mapOpen WikiTreeCompareReport a correction

At a glance

Identity & family

Tree links organise the family; documentary status still varies.

1Mapped records
1Close relations
1Evidence items
12Candidate leads
Birth
c. 1831 · Delaware, United States
Death
Not recorded · Place not recorded
Parents
Not recorded
Spouses
Not recorded
Children
W C E B Glasco
Gender
Male
WikiTree
Glasco-108
Research clusters
Worldwide One-Tree profile leads
Mapped descendants
1

Comparison context

These child positions and checks are the subject details used to rank possible parents below.

Naming sequence used by the parentage model

Paternal grandfather positionW C E B Glasco (1866)
Maternal grandfather positionNot identifiable from dated child profiles
Maternal grandmother positionNot identifiable from dated child profiles
Paternal grandmother positionNot identifiable from dated child profiles

Known-position checks: 0 support · 0 conflict. Ordinals retain unnamed children and recognise reused names.

Relationship comparison

Potential parents or duplicates

Compare scored leads with the subject details above—not proof.

Higher-signal leadReview carefullyWeak lead

Possible fathers5 leads

Automated fit39/100
Weak Lead
Dates1793–?Generation38 years age gapRecorded placesLocation not supplied — profile holding pointIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Sex-Aware Ordered Naming · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 38-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 73 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1866), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)

locality comparison is unavailable because one or both profiles lack adequate place data (no deduction); descendant-name recurrence has no independent household, record, migration or specific-locality anchor (score capped at 39)

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 38-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 73 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1866), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)
  • candidate's name matches the first dated son W C E B Glasco, the expected father position for a male subject (+18; catalogue rarity 9, W in 3 profiles)

Deductions and cautions: locality comparison is unavailable because one or both profiles lack adequate place data (no deduction); descendant-name recurrence has no independent household, record, migration or specific-locality anchor (score capped at 39)

Automated fit29/100
Weak Lead
Dates1799–1855Generation32 years age gapRecorded placesKillycurragh, Derryloran, Cookstown, County Tyrone, Ireland · Sandusky, Ohio, United States · Killycurragh townland — Oritor/DerryloranIndependent clue breadth · 5Age · Same-Sex Generational Naming · Spouse · Spouse-Specific Child Window · Two-GenerationSame-spouse child windowNancy (Glendinning) GlasgowCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 32-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • known spouse Nancy (Glendinning) Glasgow had a plausible maternal age (28) at the subject's birth (+7)
  • candidate's birth is 67 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1866), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)

same country, but no indexed locality overlap (−10)

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 32-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 67 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1866), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • subject's birth fits between children attributed to the same parental couple (1824–1844) (+6; other parent Nancy (Glendinning) Glasgow)
  • known spouse Nancy (Glendinning) Glasgow had a plausible maternal age (28) at the subject's birth (+7)
  • candidate and subject share the given name William (+4; weak direct parent-child name recurrence, 223 public profiles)

Deductions and cautions: same country, but no indexed locality overlap (−10)

Show 3 lower-scoring possible fathers
Automated fit24/100
Weak Lead
Dates1806–1880Generation25 years age gapRecorded placesMontgomery, New York, United States · Gloversville, Fulton, New York, United StatesIndependent clue breadth · 5Age · Household · Same-Sex Generational Naming · Spouse · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 25-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • known spouse Elizabeth (Archer) Glasgow had a plausible maternal age (20) at the subject's birth (+7)
  • candidate's birth is 60 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1866), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)

same country, but no indexed locality overlap (−10)

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 25-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 60 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1866), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)
  • a known child was born within 4 years of the subject (+1)
  • known spouse Elizabeth (Archer) Glasgow had a plausible maternal age (20) at the subject's birth (+7)
  • candidate and subject share the given name William (+4; weak direct parent-child name recurrence, 223 public profiles)

Deductions and cautions: same country, but no indexed locality overlap (−10)

Automated fit23/100
Weak Lead
Dates1811–1897Generation20 years age gapRecorded placesCookstown, County Tyrone, Ireland, United Kingdom · Jonesville, Hillsdale, Michigan, United States · CookstownIndependent clue breadth · 4Age · Same-Sex Generational Naming · Spouse · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 20-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • known spouse Eliza Glasgow had a plausible maternal age (17) at the subject's birth (+7)
  • candidate's birth is 55 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1866), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)

same country, but no indexed locality overlap (−10)

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 20-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 55 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1866), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • known spouse Eliza Glasgow had a plausible maternal age (17) at the subject's birth (+7)
  • candidate and subject share the given name William (+4; weak direct parent-child name recurrence, 223 public profiles)

Deductions and cautions: same country, but no indexed locality overlap (−10)

Automated fit21/100
Weak Lead
Dates1779–?Generation52 years age gapRecorded placesLocation not supplied — profile holding pointIndependent clue breadth · 4Age · Same-Sex Generational Naming · Spouse · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • possible 52-year parent-child age gap (+10)
  • candidate's birth is 87 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1866), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • known spouse Janet (Thomson) Glasgow had a plausible maternal age (48) at the subject's birth (+3)

locality comparison is unavailable because one or both profiles lack adequate place data (no deduction)

Show complete scoring
  • possible 52-year parent-child age gap (+10)
  • candidate's birth is 87 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1866), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)
  • known spouse Janet (Thomson) Glasgow had a plausible maternal age (48) at the subject's birth (+3)
  • candidate and subject share the given name William (+4; weak direct parent-child name recurrence, 223 public profiles)

Deductions and cautions: locality comparison is unavailable because one or both profiles lack adequate place data (no deduction)

Possible mothers5 leads

Automated fit28/100
Chronology-Only Fallback
Dates1807–?Generation24 years age gapRecorded placesKilreaIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Spouse-Specific Child Window · Two-GenerationSame-spouse child windowDaniel GlasgowCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 24-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 59 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1866), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)

locality comparison is unavailable because one or both profiles lack adequate place data (no deduction)

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 24-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 59 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1866), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)
  • subject's birth fits between children attributed to the same parental couple (1824–1834) (+6; other parent Daniel Glasgow)

Deductions and cautions: locality comparison is unavailable because one or both profiles lack adequate place data (no deduction)

Automated fit28/100
Chronology-Only Fallback
Dates1800–?Generation31 years age gapRecorded placesWayne County, OhioIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Spouse-Specific Child Window · Two-GenerationSame-spouse child windowAlexander GlasgowCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 31-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 66 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1866), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)

locality comparison is unavailable because one or both profiles lack adequate place data (no deduction)

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 31-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 66 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1866), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)
  • subject's birth fits between children attributed to the same parental couple (1830–1835) (+6; other parent Alexander Glasgow)

Deductions and cautions: locality comparison is unavailable because one or both profiles lack adequate place data (no deduction)

Show 3 lower-scoring possible mothers
Automated fit26/100
Chronology-Only Fallback
Dates1795–?Generation36 years age gapRecorded placesGlasgowIndependent clue breadth · 4Age · Common Grandparent Birth-Order Naming · Spouse-Specific Child Window · Two-GenerationSame-spouse child windowAlexander Glasgow EsqCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 36-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 71 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1866), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • subject's birth fits between children attributed to the same parental couple (1820–1832) (+6; other parent Alexander Glasgow Esq)

locality comparison is unavailable because one or both profiles lack adequate place data (no deduction); candidate already has another child named William James Glasgow (Glasgow-969) without a documented death permitting name reuse (−4; check whether the child profiles duplicate or conflict)

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 36-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 71 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1866), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • subject's birth fits between children attributed to the same parental couple (1820–1832) (+6; other parent Alexander Glasgow Esq)
  • the subject would fill the second son position among the candidate's dated children, and the candidate's linked father William shares the subject's common given name (+2; Scottish grandparent-name pattern, William in 223 public profiles; WikiTree: relationship status unmarked; weak alone)

Deductions and cautions: locality comparison is unavailable because one or both profiles lack adequate place data (no deduction); candidate already has another child named William James Glasgow (Glasgow-969) without a documented death permitting name reuse (−4; check whether the child profiles duplicate or conflict)

Automated fit25/100
Chronology-Only Fallback
Dates1800–?Generation31 years age gapRecorded placesCookstownIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Household · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 31-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 66 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1866), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • a known child was born within 3 years of the subject (+3)

locality comparison is unavailable because one or both profiles lack adequate place data (no deduction)

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 31-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 66 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1866), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • a known child was born within 3 years of the subject (+3)

Deductions and cautions: locality comparison is unavailable because one or both profiles lack adequate place data (no deduction)

Automated fit24/100
Chronology-Only Fallback
Dates1798–?Generation33 years age gapRecorded placesGlasgowIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Household · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 33-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 68 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1866), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • another recorded child shares the subject's birth year (+2; possible twins or date uncertainty)

locality comparison is unavailable because one or both profiles lack adequate place data (no deduction)

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 33-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 68 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1866), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • another recorded child shares the subject's birth year (+2; possible twins or date uncertainty)

Deductions and cautions: locality comparison is unavailable because one or both profiles lack adequate place data (no deduction)

How parent leads are calculated

Automated leads use birth surnames—not married surnames—as parental eligibility, role-specific biological age limits, bounded and approximate-date uncertainty, household chronology, specific time-aware localities, mapped distance, tenancy succession, migration destinations and sex-aware Scottish naming positions across generations. People already attached as the subject's parents stay in the identity summary and are excluded from this alternative-candidate list, regardless of relationship confidence. The main calibration uses clues available on disconnected profiles; existing parent and sibling links are retained as comparison context rather than treated as transferable evidence. Common ordered names and grandparent-to-child echoes receive a small non-zero weight, so a John or James match can support several independent criteria without producing a lead alone. Rare names, repeated bearers and bundles across otherwise distinct branches receive substantially more weight according to catalogue frequency. An exact migration place is weighted by its rarity and repetition across both branches; a shared destination country is worth only one point. Extra weight is added only when at least three independent clue types converge: naming, locality, specific migration, household chronology or collateral networks. Sparse profiles retain a clearly labelled chronology-only fallback instead of disappearing. Countries, states, counties and research clusters do not count as a shared locality, and fallback, broad representative or kin-inferred coordinates are excluded from distance scoring. Shared descendant profiles are removed before branch-name comparison. A candidate already recorded as a parent-in-law is excluded. A confident or independently supported parent is treated as settled; uncertain and unassessed attachments remain open to alternative comparison. A different linked parent, an uncle/aunt or grandparent path, and a matching existing child profile prevent an alternative from being classified as a strong direct-parent lead until the underlying tree conflict or duplicate is resolved. Familiar forms such as Bessie are normalised. Surname remains an eligibility filter worth zero points.

Naming customs, shared farms and occupations are circumstantial. Children, spouses and collateral relatives may be missing, and tree-derived family networks are not independent evidence. Scores rank research leads; they do not prove parentage.

Automated fit48/100
Similar Person
Dates1822–1897PlacesDelaware, United States → Missouri, United StatesParent comparisonNo shared parent is indexed
Why it may fit
  • same first and last name (+18)
  • birth years within 9 (+10)
  • shared recorded place (+20)

No indexed conflict

Full comparison detail
  • same first and last name (+18)
  • birth years within 9 (+10)
  • shared recorded place (+20)

Conflicts: No indexed conflict

Open side-by-side comparison

Same-name candidate

William GlascoGlasco-65

Automated fit48/100
Similar Person
Dates1831–1898PlacesBracken, Kentucky, United States → Elk, Kansas, United StatesParent comparisonNo shared parent is indexed
Why it may fit
  • same first and last name (+18)
  • same birth year (+30)

No indexed conflict

Full comparison detail
  • same first and last name (+18)
  • same birth year (+30)

Conflicts: No indexed conflict

Open side-by-side comparison
How duplicate leads are calculated

Dates are eligibility gates, not merely deductions: chronologically impossible people are excluded. Dates, places, spouses, parent certainty and children's profiles and names are then compared. A high score is a prompt to inspect records, not a merge recommendation.

Open only what you need

Research & records

Life and record timelineChronological mapped occurrences and their underlying sources.1 record
b. 1831

Profile-stated birthplace: Delaware, USA

Delaware, USA

One-Tree export profile fields are search leads, not sources; relationships are shown only where the export supplies parent links.

One-Tree profile leadunknown
Source and mapping detail

WikiTree profile export for Glasco-108

No sufficiently specific citation match found.

Precision: Country-centre fallback for profile locality

Evidence assessmentWhat is supported, uncertain or disputed in the current case model.2 claims
1Tree Only

Documented or strongly supported

No claims in this category have been formally assessed.

Working hypotheses and conflicts

No claims in this category have been formally assessed.

Research questionsOpen problems, missing bridges and the next records to inspect.0 open

No formal open question is recorded for this person.

Sources and provenanceStructured citations and source-quality classifications.1 source

Source or provenance: quality describes the record layer, not every conclusion drawn from it.

  1. tree_only WikiTree profile export for Glasco-108
Technical profile and raw captureDataset metadata, machine dossier and captured WikiTree biography.Advanced

WikiTree profile information

Dataset: ONT_Glasco_2026-08-18T16_05.json · generated 2026-08-20

Machine-readable dossier