Glasgow Surname Project

Individual research record

William Brown Glasgow

1815-07-23 – 1876-01-07

Glasgow-1001 · 1 mapped association

Berwick-upon-tweed, Northumberland, England, United Kingdom→Kendal, Westmorland, England, United Kingdom
View on mapOpen WikiTreeCompareReport a correction

At a glance

Identity & family

Tree links organise the family; documentary status still varies.

1Mapped records
1Close relations
4Evidence items
12Candidate leads
Birth
1815-07-23 · Berwick-upon-tweed, Northumberland, England, United Kingdom
Death
1876-01-07 · Kendal, Westmorland, England, United Kingdom
Parents
Not recorded
Spouses
Not recorded
Children
George Glasgow
Gender
Male
WikiTree
Glasgow-1001
Research clusters
England One-Tree profile leads
Mapped descendants
5

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 positionGeorge Glasgow (1848)
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 fit33/100
Weak Lead
Dates1779–?Generation36 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
  • plausible 36-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • known spouse Janet (Thomson) Glasgow had a plausible maternal age (32) at the subject's birth (+7)
  • candidate's birth is 69 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1848), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)

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

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 36-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 69 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1848), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • known spouse Janet (Thomson) Glasgow had a plausible maternal age (32) 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: locality comparison is unavailable because one or both profiles lack adequate place data (no deduction)

Automated fit28/100
Weak Lead
Dates1792–?Generation23 years age gapRecorded placesMidlothian — exact locality unprovedIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Sex-Aware Ordered Naming · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 23-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 56 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1848), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • candidate's name matches the first dated son George Glasgow, the expected father position for a male subject (+6; catalogue rarity 1, George in 61 profiles)

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

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 23-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 56 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1848), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • candidate's name matches the first dated son George Glasgow, the expected father position for a male subject (+6; catalogue rarity 1, George in 61 profiles)

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

Show 3 lower-scoring possible fathers
Automated fit16/100
Weak Lead
Dates1771–?Generation44 years age gapRecorded placesLincolnshire, EnglandIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Same-Sex Generational Naming · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 44-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 77 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1848), 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 77 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1848), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)
  • 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 fit14/100
Weak Lead
Dates1805–1846Generationnominally 10 years; approximate dates permit about 16–20 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
  • the nominal 10-year gap is too small, but the approximate birth date permits a narrow biologically viable interval (16–20 years) (+4)
  • candidate's birth is 43 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1848), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • candidate's name matches the first dated son George Glasgow, the expected father position for a male subject (+6; catalogue rarity 1, George in 61 profiles)

parentage requires the approximate birth estimate to be early enough (no deduction); locality comparison is unavailable because one or both profiles lack adequate place data (no deduction)

Show complete scoring
  • the nominal 10-year gap is too small, but the approximate birth date permits a narrow biologically viable interval (16–20 years) (+4)
  • candidate's birth is 43 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1848), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • candidate's name matches the first dated son George Glasgow, the expected father position for a male subject (+6; catalogue rarity 1, George in 61 profiles)

Deductions and cautions: parentage requires the approximate birth estimate to be early enough (no deduction); locality comparison is unavailable because one or both profiles lack adequate place data (no deduction)

Automated fit9/100
Weak Lead
Dates1783–1873Generation32 years age gapRecorded placesSymington, Lanarkshire, Scotland, United Kingdom · Lanarkshire — exact locality unprovedIndependent clue breadth · 5Age · Household · Same-Sex Generational Naming · Spouse · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 32-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • known spouse Margaret (Graham) Glasgow had a plausible maternal age (32) at the subject's birth (+7)
  • candidate's birth is 65 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1848), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)

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

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 32-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 65 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1848), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • a known child was born within 5 years of the subject (+1)
  • known spouse Margaret (Graham) Glasgow had a plausible maternal age (32) 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: candidate is recorded only outside the subject's birth country (−25)

Possible mothers5 leads

Automated fit11/100
Weak Lead
Dates1790–1871Generation25 years age gapRecorded placesBallymoney, County Londonderry, Ireland, United Kingdom · Tamlaght O'Crilly civil parishIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Collateral Naming · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 25-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 58 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1848), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • candidate's sibling and niece/nephew network repeats names in the subject's descendant line (three rarest at most): Edwin +14 (7 public profiles; niece/nephew Edwin C Glasgow) (+14 total)

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

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 25-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 58 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1848), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • candidate's sibling and niece/nephew network repeats names in the subject's descendant line (three rarest at most): Edwin +14 (7 public profiles; niece/nephew Edwin C Glasgow) (+14 total)

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

Automated fit1/100
Weak Lead
Dates1775–1839Generation40 years age gapRecorded placesPennsylvania · Cadiz, Harrison, Ohio, United StatesIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Sex-Aware Ordered Naming · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 40-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 73 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1848), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • a candidate spouse matches the first dated son George Glasgow, the expected father position (+4; George in 61 profiles)

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

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 40-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 73 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1848), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • a candidate spouse matches the first dated son George Glasgow, the expected father position (+4; George in 61 profiles)

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

Show 3 lower-scoring possible mothers
Automated fit0/100
Weak Lead
Dates1803–?Generationnominally 12 years; approximate dates permit about 15–22 years age gapRecorded placesUpper CanadaIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Sex-Aware Ordered Naming · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • the nominal 12-year gap is too small, but the approximate birth date permits a narrow biologically viable interval (15–22 years) (+4)
  • candidate's birth is 45 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1848), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • a candidate spouse matches the first dated son George Glasgow, the expected father position (+4; George in 61 profiles)

parentage requires the approximate birth estimate to be early enough (no deduction); candidate is recorded only outside the subject's birth country (−25)

Show complete scoring
  • the nominal 12-year gap is too small, but the approximate birth date permits a narrow biologically viable interval (15–22 years) (+4)
  • candidate's birth is 45 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1848), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • a candidate spouse matches the first dated son George Glasgow, the expected father position (+4; George in 61 profiles)

Deductions and cautions: parentage requires the approximate birth estimate to be early enough (no deduction); candidate is recorded only outside the subject's birth country (−25)

Automated fit0/100
Weak Lead
Dates1777–?Generation38 years age gapRecorded placesLanarkshire — exact locality unprovedIndependent clue breadth · 5Age · Contemporaneous Household Conflict · Household · 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 71 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1848), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • a known child was born within 1 years of the subject (+3)

candidate is recorded only outside the subject's birth country (−25); candidate's household recorded Alexander Glasgow in Newton Village, Midlothian, Scotland, United Kingdom within 1 years of the subject (−12; no contemporaneous child is indexed in the subject's locality)

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 38-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 71 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1848), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • a known child was born within 1 years of the subject (+3)
  • a candidate spouse matches the first dated son George Glasgow, the expected father position (+4; George in 61 profiles)

Deductions and cautions: candidate is recorded only outside the subject's birth country (−25); candidate's household recorded Alexander Glasgow in Newton Village, Midlothian, Scotland, United Kingdom within 1 years of the subject (−12; no contemporaneous child is indexed in the subject's locality)

Automated fit28/100
Chronology-Only Fallback
Dates1788–1867Generation27 years age gapRecorded placesFranceIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Spouse-Specific Child Window · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 27-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • subject's birth fits between children attributed to the same parental couple (1804–1827) (+6)
  • candidate's birth is 60 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1848), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)

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

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 27-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 60 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1848), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • subject's birth fits between children attributed to the same parental couple (1804–1827) (+6)

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 fit53/100
Similar Person
Dates1813–1875PlacesWythe County, Virginia, United States → Story County, Iowa, United StatesParent comparisonNo shared parent is indexed
Why it may fit
  • same first and last name (+18)
  • birth years within 2 (+25)
  • death years within 1 (+10)

No indexed conflict

Full comparison detail
  • same first and last name (+18)
  • birth years within 2 (+25)
  • death years within 1 (+10)

Conflicts: No indexed conflict

Open side-by-side comparison

Same-name candidate

William GlasgowGlasgow-1463

Automated fit43/100
Similar Person
Dates1816–?PlacesEdinburgh, Edinburghshire, Scotland, United KingdomParent comparisonNo shared parent is indexed
Why it may fit
  • same first and last name (+18)
  • birth years within 1 (+25)

No indexed conflict

Full comparison detail
  • same first and last name (+18)
  • birth years within 1 (+25)

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. 1815

Profile-stated birthplace: Berwick-upon-Tweed, Northumberland, England, United Kingdom

Berwick-upon-Tweed, Northumberland, England, United Kingdom

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

One-Tree profile leadoriginal
Source and mapping detail

WikiTree profile export for Glasgow-1001

Candidate matched on record type, year, place; inspect before treating it as the underlying record.

Precision: Geocoded profile locality

Evidence assessmentWhat is supported, uncertain or disputed in the current case model.2 claims
2Original
2Tree 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.4 sources

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

  1. original Baptism: "England, Select Births and Christenings, 1538-1975" Original data: England, Births and Christenings, 1538-1975. Salt Lake City, Utah: FamilySearch, 2013; FHL Film Number: 1469107 (accessed 22 December 2023) William Glasgow baptism on 23 Jul 1815, son of William Alexander Glasgow & Elizabeth Rachel, in Berwick-upon-Tweed, Northumberland, England.
  2. original Marriage: "England, Select Marriages, 1538-1973" Original data: England, Marriages, 1538-1973. Salt Lake City, Utah: FamilySearch, 2013; FHL Film Number: 1471687 (accessed 22 December 2023) William Brown Glasgow marriage to Dinah Bell in 1845 in Kendal, Westmoreland, England.
  3. tree_only https://www.ancestry.com.au/family-tree/person/tree/54190469/person/13628911300/facts
  4. tree_only WikiTree profile export for Glasgow-1001
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

WikiTree biography, citations and relationship snapshot

Glasgow-1001 was captured 2026-08-07T09:54:35+00:00; WikiTree profile revision 2023-12-22.

Profile location claims

EventDateLocationStatus
birth—Berwick-upon-Tweed, Northumberland, England, United KingdomWikiTree profile field
death—Kendal, Westmorland, England, United KingdomWikiTree profile field

Immediate relationship snapshot

RelationshipPersonWikiTree IDDates and places returned
ChildrenGeorge GlasgowGlasgow-5621848-00-00 · Kendal, Westmorland, England, United Kingdom · 0000-00-00

Record-bearing passages

  • Biography William was born in 1815. William, son of William Alexander Glasgow and Elizabeth Rachel, was baptised on 23 July 1815 in Berwick-upon-Tweed, Northumberland, England. Baptism: "England, Select Births and Christenings, 1538-1975" Original data: England, Births and Christenings, 1538-1975. Salt Lake City, Utah: FamilySearch, 2013; FHL Film Number: 1469107 (accessed 22 December 2023) William Glasgow baptism on 23 Jul 1815, son of William Alexander Glasgow & Elizabeth Rachel, in Berwick-upon-Tweed, Northumberland, England.
  • William, son of William Brown, married Dinah Bell in 1845 in Kendal, Westmoreland, England. Marriage: "England, Select Marriages, 1538-1973" Original data: England, Marriages, 1538-1973. Salt Lake City, Utah: FamilySearch, 2013; FHL Film Number: 1471687 (accessed 22 December 2023) William Brown Glasgow marriage to Dinah Bell in 1845 in Kendal, Westmoreland, England.

  • He passed away in 1876. Sources

Profile source citations

  1. Baptism: "England, Select Births and Christenings, 1538-1975" Original data: England, Births and Christenings, 1538-1975. Salt Lake City, Utah: FamilySearch, 2013; FHL Film Number: 1469107 (accessed 22 December 2023) William Glasgow baptism on 23 Jul 1815, son of William Alexander Glasgow & Elizabeth Rachel, in Berwick-upon-Tweed, Northumberland, England.
  2. Marriage: "England, Select Marriages, 1538-1973" Original data: England, Marriages, 1538-1973. Salt Lake City, Utah: FamilySearch, 2013; FHL Film Number: 1471687 (accessed 22 December 2023) William Brown Glasgow marriage to Dinah Bell in 1845 in Kendal, Westmoreland, England.
  3. https://www.ancestry.com.au/family-tree/person/tree/54190469/person/13628911300/facts source link 1
Full captured biography text
Biography
William was born in 1815. William, son of William Alexander Glasgow and Elizabeth Rachel, was baptised on 23 July 1815 in Berwick-upon-Tweed, Northumberland, England. 
Baptism:
"England, Select Births and Christenings, 1538-1975" 
Original data: England, Births and Christenings, 1538-1975. Salt Lake City, Utah: FamilySearch, 2013; FHL Film Number: 1469107 
 (accessed 22 December 2023) 
William Glasgow baptism on 23 Jul 1815, son of William Alexander Glasgow & Elizabeth Rachel, in Berwick-upon-Tweed, Northumberland, England.

William, son of William Brown, married Dinah Bell in 1845 in Kendal, Westmoreland, England. 
Marriage:
"England, Select Marriages, 1538-1973" 
Original data: England, Marriages, 1538-1973. Salt Lake City, Utah: FamilySearch, 2013; FHL Film Number: 1471687 
 (accessed 22 December 2023) 
William Brown Glasgow marriage to Dinah Bell in 1845 in Kendal, Westmoreland, England.

He passed away in 1876. 
Sources
* https://www.ancestry.com.au/family-tree/person/tree/54190469/person/13628911300/facts
Raw WikiTree biography markup
== Biography ==
William was born in 1815. William, son of William Alexander Glasgow and Elizabeth Rachel, was baptised on 23 July 1815 in Berwick-upon-Tweed, Northumberland, England.<ref>
'''Baptism''':
"England, Select Births and Christenings, 1538-1975"<br/>
Original data: England, Births and Christenings, 1538-1975. Salt Lake City, Utah: FamilySearch, 2013; FHL Film Number: 1469107<br/>
{{Ancestry Record|9841|114661706}} (accessed 22 December 2023)<br/>
William Glasgow baptism on 23 Jul 1815, son of William Alexander Glasgow & Elizabeth Rachel, in Berwick-upon-Tweed, Northumberland, England.
</ref>

William, son of William Brown, married Dinah Bell in 1845 in Kendal, Westmoreland, England.<ref>
'''Marriage''':
"England, Select Marriages, 1538-1973"<br/>
Original data: England, Marriages, 1538-1973. Salt Lake City, Utah: FamilySearch, 2013; FHL Film Number: 1471687<br/>
{{Ancestry Record|9852|12271211}} (accessed 22 December 2023)<br/>
William Brown Glasgow marriage to Dinah Bell in 1845 in Kendal, Westmoreland, England.
</ref>

He passed away in 1876. 
== Sources ==
<references />
* https://www.ancestry.com.au/family-tree/person/tree/54190469/person/13628911300/facts