Glasgow Surname Project

Individual research record

Garland Thomas Glasco

1899-05-12 – ?

Glasco-11 · 1 mapped association

Virginia, 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
2Close relations
1Evidence items
10Candidate leads
Birth
1899-05-12 · Virginia, United States
Death
Not recorded · Place not recorded
Parents
Not recorded
Spouses
Jessie B. (Durant) Glasco
Children
Hugh Thomas Glasco
Gender
Male
WikiTree
Glasco-11
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 positionHugh Thomas Glasco (1927)
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 fit27/100
Weak Lead
Dates1856–1941Generation43 years age gapRecorded placesColumbus Township, Bartholomew, Indiana, United StatesIndependent clue breadth · 5Age · Sex-Aware Ordered Naming · Spouse · Spouse-Specific Child Window · Two-GenerationSame-spouse child windowJulia Ann (Beck) GlasgowCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 43-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 71 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1927), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • known spouse Julia Ann (Beck) Glasgow had a bounded, possibly plausible maternal age (38) at the subject's birth (+3)

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

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 43-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 71 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1927), 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 (1883–1902) (+6; other parent Julia Ann (Beck) Glasgow)
  • known spouse Julia Ann (Beck) Glasgow had a bounded, possibly plausible maternal age (38) at the subject's birth (+3)
  • candidate's name matches the first dated son Hugh Thomas Glasco, the expected father position for a male subject (+6; catalogue rarity 1, Hugh in 36 profiles)

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

Automated fit18/100
Weak Lead
Dates1855–1932Generation44 years age gapRecorded placesPennsylvania, United StatesIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Sex-Aware Ordered Naming · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 44-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 72 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1927), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)

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

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 44-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 72 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1927), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)
  • candidate's name matches the first dated son Hugh Thomas Glasco, the expected father position for a male subject (+6; catalogue rarity 1, Hugh in 36 profiles)

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

Show 3 lower-scoring possible fathers
Automated fit33/100
Chronology-Only Fallback
Dates1865–1955Generation34 years age gapRecorded placesBuchanan, Virginia, United States · Richmond, Virginia, United StatesIndependent clue breadth · 5Age · Broad Geography · Household · Spouse · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 34-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • known spouse Margaret Elizabeth (Branch) Glasgow had a plausible maternal age (23) at the subject's birth (+7)
  • candidate's birth is 62 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1927), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)

No indexed conflict; documentary proof still required

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 34-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 62 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1927), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • weak broad-area overlap: virginia (+1; not a locality match)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)
  • a known child was born within 3 years of the subject (+3)
  • known spouse Margaret Elizabeth (Branch) Glasgow had a plausible maternal age (23) at the subject's birth (+7)

Deductions and cautions: No indexed conflict; documentary proof still required

Automated fit31/100
Chronology-Only Fallback
Dates1855–1929Generation44 years age gapRecorded placesBelmont County, Ohio, United States · Moundsville, Marshall County, West Virginia, United States · Belmont County, Ohio, USAIndependent clue breadth · 5Age · Broad Geography · Household · Spouse · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 44-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • known spouse Lauretta Ann (Brutchey) Glasgow had a plausible maternal age (41) at the subject's birth (+7)
  • candidate's birth is 72 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1927), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)

No indexed conflict; documentary proof still required

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 44-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 72 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1927), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • weak broad-area overlap: virginia (+1; not a locality match)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)
  • a known child was born within 8 years of the subject (+1)
  • known spouse Lauretta Ann (Brutchey) Glasgow had a plausible maternal age (41) at the subject's birth (+7)

Deductions and cautions: No indexed conflict; documentary proof still required

Automated fit30/100
Chronology-Only Fallback
Dates1854–1927Generation45 years age gapRecorded placesFincastle, Botetourt, Virginia, United States · Lexington, Rockbridge, Virginia, United StatesIndependent clue breadth · 4Age · Broad Geography · Spouse · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 45-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • known spouse Grace Woodson (McPheeters) Glasgow had a plausible maternal age (43) at the subject's birth (+7)
  • candidate's birth is 73 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1927), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)

No indexed conflict; documentary proof still required

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 45-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 73 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1927), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • weak broad-area overlap: virginia (+1; not a locality match)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)
  • known spouse Grace Woodson (McPheeters) Glasgow had a plausible maternal age (43) at the subject's birth (+7)

Deductions and cautions: No indexed conflict; documentary proof still required

Possible mothers5 leads

Automated fit22/100
Weak Lead
Dates1861–1934Generation38 years age gapRecorded placesColumbus Township, Bartholomew, Indiana, United StatesIndependent clue breadth · 4Age · Sex-Aware Ordered Naming · Spouse-Specific Child Window · Two-GenerationSame-spouse child windowHugh GlasgowCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 38-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 66 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1927), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)

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

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 38-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 66 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1927), 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 (1883–1902) (+6; other parent Hugh Glasgow)
  • a candidate spouse matches the first dated son Hugh Thomas Glasco, the expected father position (+4; Hugh in 36 profiles)

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

Automated fit16/100
Weak Lead
Dates1877–1933Generation22 years age gapRecorded placesKillycurragh, Derryloran, Cookstown, County Tyrone, Ireland, United Kingdom · Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States · Killycurragh townland — Oritor/DerryloranIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Sex-Aware Ordered Naming · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 22-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 50 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1927), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • a candidate spouse matches the first dated son Hugh Thomas Glasco, the expected father position (+4; Hugh in 36 profiles)

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

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 22-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 50 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1927), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • a candidate spouse matches the first dated son Hugh Thomas Glasco, the expected father position (+4; Hugh in 36 profiles)

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

Show 3 lower-scoring possible mothers
Automated fit0/100
Weak Lead
Dates1857–?Generation42 years age gapRecorded placesNova Scotia, CanadaIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Sex-Aware Ordered Naming · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • possible 42-year parent-child age gap (+10)
  • candidate's birth is 70 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1927), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)

candidate is recorded only outside the subject's birth country (−25)

Show complete scoring
  • possible 42-year parent-child age gap (+10)
  • candidate's birth is 70 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1927), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)
  • a candidate spouse matches the first dated son Hugh Thomas Glasco, the expected father position (+4; Hugh in 36 profiles)

Deductions and cautions: candidate is recorded only outside the subject's birth country (−25)

Automated fit0/100
Weak Lead
Dates1851–?Generation48 years age gapRecorded placesPennsylvania, United States · Iowa, United StatesIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Sex-Aware Ordered Naming · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • candidate's birth is 76 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1927), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • less typical 48-year parent-child age gap (+2)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)

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

Show complete scoring
  • less typical 48-year parent-child age gap (+2)
  • candidate's birth is 76 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1927), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)
  • a candidate spouse matches the first dated son Hugh Thomas Glasco, the expected father position (+4; Hugh in 36 profiles)

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

Automated fit0/100
Weak Lead
Dates1839–?Generation60 years age gapRecorded placesSt. John, New BrunswickIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Sex-Aware Ordered Naming · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • candidate's birth is 88 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1927), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)
  • a candidate spouse matches the first dated son Hugh Thomas Glasco, the expected father position (+4; Hugh in 36 profiles)

chronologically conflicting 60-year parent-child age gap (−8); locality comparison is unavailable because one or both profiles lack adequate place data (no deduction); subject lies more than 20 years from the candidate's known child-bearing period (−6; children may be missing)

Show complete scoring
  • candidate's birth is 88 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1927), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)
  • a candidate spouse matches the first dated son Hugh Thomas Glasco, the expected father position (+4; Hugh in 36 profiles)

Deductions and cautions: chronologically conflicting 60-year parent-child age gap (−8); locality comparison is unavailable because one or both profiles lack adequate place data (no deduction); subject lies more than 20 years from the candidate's known child-bearing period (−6; children may be missing)

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.

No sufficiently similar same-name person is currently indexed.

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. 1899

Profile-stated birthplace: Virginia

Virginia

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-11

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.3 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-11
Technical profile and raw captureDataset metadata, machine dossier and captured WikiTree biography.Advanced

WikiTree profile information

Glasco-11

Garland Thomas Glasco

Updated 2014-01-05

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

Machine-readable dossier