Glasgow Surname Project

Individual research record

John Glasgow

before 1572 – ?

Glasgow-1030 · 1 mapped association

Glasgow, Lanarkshire, ScotlandDeath place unknown

At a glance

Identity & family

Tree links organise the family; documentary status still varies.

1Mapped records
6Close relations
10Evidence items
12Candidate leads
Birth
before 1572 · Glasgow, Lanarkshire, Scotland
Death
Not recorded · Place not recorded
Parents
Robert Glasgowuncertain
Spouses
Jonet (Mathie) Glasgow
Children
George GlasgowJohn GlasgowJonet GlasgowThomas Glasgow
Gender
Male
WikiTree
Glasgow-1030
Research clusters
Scotland One-Tree profile leads
Mapped descendants
11

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 positionJohn Glasgow (1619)
Maternal grandfather positionGeorge Glasgow (1627)
Maternal grandmother positionJonet Glasgow (1622)
Paternal grandmother positionNot identifiable from dated child profiles

Known-position checks: 0 support · 1 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
Dates1540–1586Generationat most 32 years age gapRecorded placesGlasgow, Lanarkshire, Scotland · High Street, Merchant City, Glasgow, Lanarkshire, Scotland · GlasgowIndependent clue breadth · 9Age · Indirect Multi-Factor Convergence · Local Sibling Birth · Rare Branch-Name Recurrence · Rare Name Bundle · Spouse · Spouse-Specific Child Window · Two-Generation · Undated LocalitySame-spouse child windowMargaret (Herbison) GlasgowCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • candidate is associated with the subject's stated birthplace, but not by a reliable near-contemporary record (+10)
  • 3 independent unlinked-profile clue types converge (+5): household chronology, locality, naming
  • candidate's birth is 79 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1619), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)

a different linked father is explicitly uncertain (−6; an existing hypothesis still needs resolving); the subject's current profile explicitly says its birth details are unproved (score capped at 39)

Show complete scoring
  • bounded birth date gives a parent-child age gap of at most 32 years (+10; true age remains uncertain)
  • candidate's birth is 79 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1619), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • candidate is associated with the subject's stated birthplace, but not by a reliable near-contemporary record (+10)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)
  • subject birth boundary overlaps children attributed to the same parental couple (1569–1585) (+3; other parent Margaret (Herbison) Glasgow)
  • candidate has another child, George Glasgow, born 3 years from the subject in the same specific birth locality (+6; possible sibling-household clue)
  • known spouse Margaret (Herbison) Glasgow had a bounded, possibly plausible maternal age (32) at the subject's birth (+3)
  • uncommon given names recur in both otherwise distinct descendant branches: Jonet +16 (15 public profiles; subject branch: Jonet Glasgow; candidate branch: Jonet Glasgow, Jonet (Glasgow) Stewart; +4 repetition bonus); George +3 (61 public profiles; subject branch: George Glasgow; candidate branch: George Glasgow) (+23 total including +4 multi-name bonus)
  • 3 independent unlinked-profile clue types converge (+5): household chronology, locality, naming

Deductions and cautions: a different linked father is explicitly uncertain (−6; an existing hypothesis still needs resolving); the subject's current profile explicitly says its birth details are unproved (score capped at 39)

Automated fit16/100
Weak Lead
Dates1542–1571Generationnominally 30 years; true gap uncertain age gapRecorded placesScotland · Stevenston, Ayrshire · Scotland — exact locality unprovedIndependent clue breadth · 5Age · Household · Rare Branch-Name Recurrence · Spouse · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • candidate's birth is 77 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1619), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • known spouse Margaret (Smith) Glasgow had a bounded, possibly plausible maternal age (32) at the subject's birth (+3)
  • bounded birth date gives a parent-child age gap of nominally 30 years; true gap uncertain (+10; true age remains uncertain)

a different linked father is explicitly uncertain (−6; an existing hypothesis still needs resolving); same country, but no indexed locality overlap (−10); the subject's current profile explicitly says its birth details are unproved (score capped at 39)

Show complete scoring
  • bounded birth date gives a parent-child age gap of nominally 30 years; true gap uncertain (+10; true age remains uncertain)
  • candidate's birth is 77 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1619), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)
  • subject's birth fits within the candidate's overall child-bearing span (1565–1580) (+3; children are not tied to one spouse)
  • known spouse Margaret (Smith) Glasgow had a bounded, possibly plausible maternal age (32) at the subject's birth (+3)
  • uncommon given names recur in both otherwise distinct descendant branches: Jonet +12 (15 public profiles; subject branch: Jonet Glasgow; candidate branch: Jonet (Glasgow) Logan) (+12 total)

Deductions and cautions: a different linked father is explicitly uncertain (−6; an existing hypothesis still needs resolving); same country, but no indexed locality overlap (−10); the subject's current profile explicitly says its birth details are unproved (score capped at 39)

Show 3 lower-scoring possible fathers
Automated fit15/100
Weak Lead
Dates1540–1576Generationat most 32 years age gapRecorded placesScotland · Hirmanscheillis, Midlothian, Scotland · Scotland — exact locality unprovedIndependent clue breadth · 9Age · Collateral Naming · Contemporaneous Household Conflict · Household · Same-Sex Generational Naming · Sex-Aware Ordered Naming · Spouse · Tradition Validation · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • candidate's birth is 79 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1619), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • a known child was born within 3 years of the subject (+3)
  • known spouse Margaret (Hutcheson) Glasgow had a bounded, possibly plausible maternal age (22) at the subject's birth (+3)

a different linked father is explicitly uncertain (−6; an existing hypothesis still needs resolving); same country, but no indexed locality overlap (−10); candidate's household recorded Katherine Glasgow in Hirmanscheillis, Midlothian, Scotland within 3 years of the subject (−12; no contemporaneous child is indexed in the subject's locality); the subject's current profile explicitly says its birth details are unproved (score capped at 39)

Show complete scoring
  • bounded birth date gives a parent-child age gap of at most 32 years (+10; true age remains uncertain)
  • candidate's birth is 79 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1619), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)
  • a known child was born within 3 years of the subject (+3)
  • known spouse Margaret (Hutcheson) Glasgow had a bounded, possibly plausible maternal age (22) at the subject's birth (+3)
  • candidate and subject share the given name John (+4; weak direct parent-child name recurrence, 278 public profiles)
  • candidate's name matches the first dated son John Glasgow, the expected father position for a male subject (+4; catalogue rarity 0, John in 278 profiles)
  • family naming controls: 0 supporting and 1 conflicting known positions (already reflected in naming weight)
  • candidate's sibling and niece/nephew network repeats names in the subject's descendant line (three rarest at most): Jonet +12 (15 public profiles; niece/nephew Jonet (Glasgow) Pady); George +3 (61 public profiles; niece/nephew George Glasgow) (+15 total)

Deductions and cautions: a different linked father is explicitly uncertain (−6; an existing hypothesis still needs resolving); same country, but no indexed locality overlap (−10); candidate's household recorded Katherine Glasgow in Hirmanscheillis, Midlothian, Scotland within 3 years of the subject (−12; no contemporaneous child is indexed in the subject's locality); the subject's current profile explicitly says its birth details are unproved (score capped at 39)

Automated fit39/100
Resolve Child Duplicate First
Dates1550–1598Generationat most 22 years age gapRecorded placesGlasgow, Lanarkshire, Scotland · High Street, Merchant City, Glasgow, Lanarkshire, Scotland · GlasgowIndependent clue breadth · 7Age · Collateral Naming · Common Grandparent Birth-Order Naming · Indirect Multi-Factor Convergence · Spouse · Two-Generation · Undated LocalityExisting-tree context (not an independent clue)Matching Child ProfileCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • candidate is associated with the subject's stated birthplace, but not by a reliable near-contemporary record (+10)
  • 3 independent unlinked-profile clue types converge (+5): household chronology, locality, naming
  • candidate's birth is 69 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1619), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)

a different linked father is explicitly uncertain (−6; an existing hypothesis still needs resolving); candidate parentage depends on resolving a matching existing child profile first; the subject's current profile explicitly says its birth details are unproved (score capped at 39)

Show complete scoring
  • bounded birth date gives a parent-child age gap of at most 22 years (+10; true age remains uncertain)
  • candidate's birth is 69 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1619), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • candidate is associated with the subject's stated birthplace, but not by a reliable near-contemporary record (+10)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)
  • candidate already has child profile John Glasgow (Glasgow-3296), which the similar-person scorer matches to the subject at 42/100 (+0; resolve that possible duplicate before treating the subject as an additional child)
  • known spouse Margaret (Graham) Glasgow had a bounded, possibly plausible maternal age (22) at the subject's birth (+3)
  • candidate's sibling and niece/nephew network repeats names in the subject's descendant line (three rarest at most): Jonet +12 (15 public profiles; niece/nephew Jonet (Glasgow) Pady); George +3 (61 public profiles; niece/nephew George Glasgow) (+15 total)
  • the subject would fill the first son position among the candidate's dated children, and the candidate's linked father John Glasgow shares the subject's common given name (+2; Scottish grandparent-name pattern, John in 278 public profiles; WikiTree: confident parent; weak alone)
  • 3 independent unlinked-profile clue types converge (+5): household chronology, locality, naming

Deductions and cautions: a different linked father is explicitly uncertain (−6; an existing hypothesis still needs resolving); candidate parentage depends on resolving a matching existing child profile first; the subject's current profile explicitly says its birth details are unproved (score capped at 39)

Automated fit9/100
Resolve Child Duplicate First
Dates1540–1598Generationnominally 32 years; true gap uncertain age gapRecorded placesScotland · Kirknewton, Linlithgowshire, Scotland · Scotland — exact locality unprovedIndependent clue breadth · 7Age · Collateral Naming · Common Grandparent Birth-Order Naming · Contemporaneous Household Conflict · Household · Spouse · Two-GenerationExisting-tree context (not an independent clue)Matching Child ProfileCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • candidate's birth is 79 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1619), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • a known child was born within 3 years of the subject (+3)
  • known spouse Jonet Glasgow had a bounded, possibly plausible maternal age (32) at the subject's birth (+3)

a different linked father is explicitly uncertain (−6; an existing hypothesis still needs resolving); same country, but no indexed locality overlap (−10); candidate parentage depends on resolving a matching existing child profile first; candidate's household recorded James Glasgow in Inveresk, Midlothian, Scotland within 3 years of the subject (−12; no contemporaneous child is indexed in the subject's locality); the subject's current profile explicitly says its birth details are unproved (score capped at 39)

Show complete scoring
  • bounded birth date gives a parent-child age gap of nominally 32 years; true gap uncertain (+10; true age remains uncertain)
  • candidate's birth is 79 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1619), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)
  • candidate already has child profile John Glasgow (Glasgow-1561), which the similar-person scorer matches to the subject at 48/100 (+0; resolve that possible duplicate before treating the subject as an additional child)
  • a known child was born within 3 years of the subject (+3)
  • known spouse Jonet Glasgow had a bounded, possibly plausible maternal age (32) at the subject's birth (+3)
  • candidate's sibling and niece/nephew network repeats names in the subject's descendant line (three rarest at most): Jonet +12 (15 public profiles; niece/nephew Jonet (Glasgow) Pady); George +3 (61 public profiles; niece/nephew George Glasgow) (+15 total)
  • the subject would fill the first son position among the candidate's dated children, and the candidate's linked father John Glasgow shares the subject's common given name (+2; Scottish grandparent-name pattern, John in 278 public profiles; Open; low; weak alone)

Deductions and cautions: a different linked father is explicitly uncertain (−6; an existing hypothesis still needs resolving); same country, but no indexed locality overlap (−10); candidate parentage depends on resolving a matching existing child profile first; candidate's household recorded James Glasgow in Inveresk, Midlothian, Scotland within 3 years of the subject (−12; no contemporaneous child is indexed in the subject's locality); the subject's current profile explicitly says its birth details are unproved (score capped at 39)

Possible mothers5 leads

Automated fit39/100
Weak Lead
Dates1540–?Generationat most 32 years age gapRecorded placesGlasgowIndependent clue breadth · 8Age · Indirect Multi-Factor Convergence · Local Sibling Birth · Rare Branch-Name Recurrence · Rare Name Bundle · Spouse-Specific Child Window · Two-Generation · Undated LocalitySame-spouse child windowWilliam GlasgowCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • same specific indexed locality despite wider place-label differences: glasgow (+10)
  • 3 independent unlinked-profile clue types converge (+5): household chronology, locality, naming
  • candidate's birth is 79 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1619), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)

the subject's current profile explicitly says its birth details are unproved (score capped at 39)

Show complete scoring
  • bounded birth date gives a parent-child age gap of at most 32 years (+10; true age remains uncertain)
  • candidate's birth is 79 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1619), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • same specific indexed locality despite wider place-label differences: glasgow (+10)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)
  • subject birth boundary overlaps children attributed to the same parental couple (1569–1585) (+3; other parent William Glasgow)
  • candidate has another child, George Glasgow, born 3 years from the subject in the same specific birth locality (+6; possible sibling-household clue)
  • uncommon given names recur in both otherwise distinct descendant branches: Jonet +14 (15 public profiles; subject branch: Jonet Glasgow; candidate branch: Jonet Glasgow, Jonet (Glasgow) Stewart; +2 repetition bonus); George +3 (61 public profiles; subject branch: George Glasgow; candidate branch: George Glasgow) (+21 total including +4 multi-name bonus)
  • 3 independent unlinked-profile clue types converge (+5): household chronology, locality, naming

Deductions and cautions: the subject's current profile explicitly says its birth details are unproved (score capped at 39)

Automated fit39/100
Weak Lead
Dates1535–?Generationat most 37 years age gapRecorded placesGlasgowIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Two-Generation · Undated LocalityExisting-tree context (not an independent clue)Exact Sibling Profiles · Parental Couple Structure · Sibling Parental CoupleCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • candidate is already linked as parent of 1 exact subject sibling profile (+16): Margaret (Glasgow) Edstoun
  • same specific indexed locality despite wider place-label differences: glasgow (+10)
  • candidate's birth is 84 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1619), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)

the subject's current profile explicitly says its birth details are unproved (score capped at 39)

Show complete scoring
  • candidate is the spouse of the linked opposite-sex parent (+8; tree couple clue)
  • bounded birth date gives a parent-child age gap of at most 37 years (+10; true age remains uncertain)
  • candidate's birth is 84 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1619), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • same specific indexed locality despite wider place-label differences: glasgow (+10)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)
  • candidate is already linked as parent of 1 exact subject sibling profile (+16): Margaret (Glasgow) Edstoun
  • the candidate and the subject's linked father Robert Glasgow are jointly recorded as parents of 1 exact sibling profile (+10; strong couple-structure clue)

Deductions and cautions: the subject's current profile explicitly says its birth details are unproved (score capped at 39)

Show 3 lower-scoring possible mothers
Automated fit39/100
Weak Lead
Dates1530–?Generationat most 42 years age gapRecorded placesGlasgowIndependent clue breadth · 6Age · Indirect Multi-Factor Convergence · Local Sibling Birth · Rare Branch-Name Recurrence · Two-Generation · Undated LocalityCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • same specific indexed locality despite wider place-label differences: glasgow (+10)
  • 3 independent unlinked-profile clue types converge (+5): household chronology, locality, naming
  • candidate's birth is 89 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1619), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)

the subject's current profile explicitly says its birth details are unproved (score capped at 39)

Show complete scoring
  • bounded birth date gives a parent-child age gap of at most 42 years (+10; true age remains uncertain)
  • candidate's birth is 89 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1619), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • same specific indexed locality despite wider place-label differences: glasgow (+10)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)
  • candidate has another child, Robert Glasgow I, born 10 years from the subject in the same specific birth locality (+4; possible sibling-household clue)
  • uncommon given names recur in both otherwise distinct descendant branches: Jonet +12 (15 public profiles; subject branch: Jonet Glasgow; candidate branch: Jonet Glasgow) (+12 total)
  • 3 independent unlinked-profile clue types converge (+5): household chronology, locality, naming

Deductions and cautions: the subject's current profile explicitly says its birth details are unproved (score capped at 39)

Automated fit36/100
Weak Lead
Dates1555–?Generationat most 17 years age gapRecorded placesGlasgowIndependent clue breadth · 6Age · Child Naming · Indirect Multi-Factor Convergence · Local Sibling Birth · Two-Generation · Undated LocalityCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • same specific indexed locality despite wider place-label differences: glasgow (+10)
  • 3 independent unlinked-profile clue types converge (+5): household chronology, locality, naming
  • candidate's birth is 64 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1619), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)

the subject's current profile explicitly says its birth details are unproved (score capped at 39)

Show complete scoring
  • bounded birth date gives a parent-child age gap of at most 17 years (+10; true age remains uncertain)
  • candidate's birth is 64 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1619), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • same specific indexed locality despite wider place-label differences: glasgow (+10)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)
  • candidate has another child, Robert Glasgow, born 11 years from the subject in the same specific birth locality (+2; possible sibling-household clue)
  • candidate's given name recurs among another recorded child (+5; Jonet occurs in 15 public profiles)
  • 3 independent unlinked-profile clue types converge (+5): household chronology, locality, naming

Deductions and cautions: the subject's current profile explicitly says its birth details are unproved (score capped at 39)

Automated fit28/100
Weak Lead
Dates1560–?Generationnominally 12 years; approximate dates permit about 15–22 years age gapRecorded placesGlasgowIndependent clue breadth · 5Age · Child Naming · Indirect Multi-Factor Convergence · Two-Generation · Undated LocalityCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • same specific indexed locality despite wider place-label differences: glasgow (+10)
  • 3 independent unlinked-profile clue types converge (+5): household chronology, locality, naming
  • the nominal 12-year gap is too small, but the approximate birth date permits a narrow biologically viable interval (15–22 years) (+4)

parentage requires the approximate birth estimate to be early enough (no deduction); the subject's current profile explicitly says its birth details are unproved (score capped at 39)

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 59 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1619), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • same specific indexed locality despite wider place-label differences: glasgow (+10)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)
  • candidate's given name recurs among another recorded child (+5; Jonet occurs in 15 public profiles)
  • 3 independent unlinked-profile clue types converge (+5): household chronology, locality, naming

Deductions and cautions: parentage requires the approximate birth estimate to be early enough (no deduction); the subject's current profile explicitly says its birth details are unproved (score capped at 39)

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.

Same-name candidate

John GlasgowGlasgow-1561

Automated fit48/100
Similar Person
Dates1579–?PlacesLinlithgowshire, ScotlandParent comparisonNo shared parent is indexed
Why it may fit
  • same first and last name (+18)
  • birth years within 7 (+10)
  • matching child names: George Glasgow, John Glasgow

uncertain father attachments differ (no deduction)

Full comparison detail
  • same first and last name (+18)
  • birth years within 7 (+10)
  • matching child names: George Glasgow, John Glasgow

Conflicts: uncertain father attachments differ (no deduction)

Same-name candidate

John GlasgowGlasgow-3296

Automated fit42/100
Similar Person
Dates1590–1650PlacesLanarkshire, Scotland → Mid Calder, Midlothian, ScotlandParent comparisonNo shared parent is indexed
Why it may fit
  • same first and last name (+18)
  • birth years within 18 (+2)
  • overlapping locality (+8)

uncertain father attachments differ (no deduction)

Full comparison detail
  • same first and last name (+18)
  • birth years within 18 (+2)
  • overlapping locality (+8)
  • matching child name: John Glasgow

Conflicts: uncertain father attachments differ (no deduction)

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

Latest case researchThe current conclusion from the durable research case file.Updated

Current conclusion

Glasgow-1030

Father assessment: William Glasgow (about 1540) is uncertain and no longer the leading reconstruction. The profile's stated reason for the attachment is contradicted by direct records: the two men who witnessed John's son's 1619 baptism were not brothers. George was the proved son of William, while Robert was the proved son of Ninian.

The strongest alternative is that John was the otherwise unidentified brother named in Ninian Glasgow's 1613 testament, and therefore another son of Robert Glasgow, fisher (about 1520). That would make the 1619 witness Robert Glasgow (about 1583) John's nephew. This fits the records better than calling both witnesses John's brothers, but no source yet identifies the 1618 husband by occupation, father or inherited property. Retain the current relationship as uncertain unless the record-defined John is created and the identity question is resolved; do not merge the men on this evidence alone.

Life and record timelineChronological mapped occurrences and their underlying sources.1 record
b. 1572

Profile-stated birthplace: Glasgow, Lanarkshire, Scotland

Glasgow

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 Glasgow-1030

No sufficiently specific citation match found.

Precision: Settlement centrepoint

Case-file source findingsSource extracts and analysis regenerated from findings.md.1 section(s)

Source findings

Glasgow-1030

SourceFindingAssessment
Glasgow High Kirk OPR 644/1, baptism of John, 13 May 1619, transcribed in the captured profileJohn and Jonet Mathie's son John was baptised with George Glasgow, Mathew Will and Robert Glasgow as witnesses. The entry does not call George or Robert uncles or brothers.Direct evidence that the three adult Glasgows belonged to the same social or kin network; it does not state their exact relationships.
Robert Renwick, ed., *Abstracts of Protocols of the Town Clerks of Glasgow*, vol. 9, protocols 2903 and 2916, 15 July and 1 September 1586George was expressly William Glasgow's son and heir; Margaret Herbesoun was George's mother.Direct evidence placing George in William's household.
NRS, Glasgow Commissary Court, CC9/7/5 (1607) and CC9/7/9 (1613), transcribed in the captured Robert profileJonet Meik and Ninian Glasgow each expressly called Robert their son.Direct evidence placing the other 1619 witness Robert in a different household. George and Robert therefore cannot both have been John's brothers as the live biography claims.
NRS, Glasgow Commissary Court, CC9/7/9, testament of Ninian Glasgow, made 10 January 1613Ninian left a new gown to Johne glasgw his brother. Ninian's 1596 burgess admission calls him the second son of Robert Glasgow, fisher and burgess.Direct proof of a separate John, son of Robert the fisher, alive in 1613. Chronology and Robert's presence at the 1619 baptism make this man the leading identity candidate for John-1030, but do not prove the identity.
Renwick, *Abstracts of Protocols*, vol. 6, protocols 1903-1904 (12 February 1572/73), and vol. 7, protocol 2002 (19 December 1573)A John Glasgow, fisher, held land adjoining Robert Glasgow and witnessed Robert's property transaction; later Robert and John were witnesses together and both were described as fishers.Proves a close namesake association but does not identify this John as Robert's son. Multiple adult Johns were active, and nothing carries the 1573 fisher into John-1030's marriage or child's baptism.
J. D. Marwick, ed., *Extracts from the Records of the Burgh of Glasgow*, vol. 1, 1573-1642Complete surname-variant search found no entry identifying John by occupation, property, father or brother.Negative search. The published extracts do not supply the missing identity bridge.
Evidence assessmentWhat is supported, uncertain or disputed in the current case model.10 claims
6Derivative
2Tree Only
2Unknown

Documented or strongly supported

No claims in this category have been formally assessed.

Working hypotheses and conflicts

John Glasgow was possible same man as Robert Glasgow

possible1 linked evidence item

Ninian named brother John in 1613, and Ninian's proved son Robert witnessed John-1030's son's 1619 baptism. This nephew-uncle model explains the witness group, while direct records disprove the profile's claim that George-1099 and Robert-1027 were both John's brothers. No record yet identifies the 1618 husband by occupation, property or father.

Case-file assessments

Exact relationship reconstruction

Glasgow-1030

PersonTreatment
William Glasgow (about 1540), Glasgow-3522Current father; mark uncertain. The 1619 witnesses do not prove this parentage.
Margaret Herbesoun, Herbison-439Current mother; mark uncertain because her maternity follows only from the unproved William placement.
George Glasgow (about 1569), Glasgow-10991619 baptismal witness and possible collateral; not proved as John's brother.
Robert Glasgow (about 1583), Glasgow-10271619 baptismal witness and possible nephew if John was Ninian's brother; not John's proved brother.
John, son of Robert Glasgow, fisher (about 1520), Glasgow-1096Record-defined man alive in 1613; Glasgow-1030 is the best existing-profile identity match, although the equation remains uncertain. Do not create a duplicate or merge another John unless further evidence disproves this match or directly proves the identity.
Research questionsOpen problems, missing bridges and the next records to inspect.4 open

Which records prove the subject's identity across events?

No current conclusion recorded.

Missing bridge: Not specified

Which original or indexed records identify the parents?

No current conclusion recorded.

Missing bridge: A contemporary record explicitly identifying the parent or parents.

Which spouses and children are directly supported by records?

No current conclusion recorded.

Missing bridge: Not specified

What conflicts or same-name conflations must be resolved?

No current conclusion recorded.

Missing bridge: Not specified

Sources and provenanceStructured citations and source-quality classifications.9 sources

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

  1. unknown 24 (), entry dated 23 October 1596: “Glasgow, Ninian, B
  2. unknown Robert Renwick, ed., Abstracts of Protocols of the Town Clerks of Glasgow, vol. 6, protocols 1903–1904, 12 February 1572/73 (https://archive.org/details/abstractsprotoc01renwgoog/page/n121/mode/2up); vol. 7, protocol 2002, 19 December 1573 (https://archive.org/details/abstractsprotoc00robegoog/page/n52/mode/2up).
  3. derivative “Scotland, Marriages, 1561-1910”, database, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:XYWK-WMQ : 11 February 2020), Johne Glasgow, 1618.
  4. derivative “Scotland, Births and Baptisms, 1564-1950”, database, FamilySearch (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:VQHV-12T : 16 September 2021), Johne Glasgow in entry for Johne Glasgow, 1619. Mother recorded as Jonat Mathei.
  5. derivative “Scotland, Births and Baptisms, 1564-1950”, database, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:VQHV-375 : 11 February 2020), Johne Glasgow in entry for Jonet Glasgow, 1622.
  6. derivative “Scotland, Births and Baptisms, 1564-1950”, database, FamilySearch (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:VQHK-3WB : 16 September 2021), Johne Glasgow in entry for George Glasgow, 1627.
  7. derivative “Scotland, Births and Baptisms, 1564-1950”, database, FamilySearch (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:X1Y9-V87 : 16 September 2021), Johnne Glasgow in entry for Euphame Glasgow, 1634.
  8. tree_only John Glasgow Research Page on WikiTree
  9. tree_only WikiTree profile export for Glasgow-1030
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-1030 was captured 2026-08-19T15:04:19+00:00; WikiTree profile revision 2026-08-19.

Profile location claims

EventDateLocationStatus
birthGlasgow, Lanarkshire, ScotlandWikiTree profile field
marriage1618-01-25Glasgow, Lanark, ScotlandWikiTree relationship field

Immediate relationship snapshot

RelationshipPersonWikiTree IDDates and places returned
ParentsRobert GlasgowGlasgow-10961520-00-00 · Glasgow, Lanarkshire, Scotland · 1575-02-07 · High Street, Merchant City, Glasgow, Lanarkshire, Scotland
ChildrenJohn GlasgowGlasgow-10881619-05-13 · Glasgow, Lanarkshire, Scotland · 0000-00-00
ChildrenJonet GlasgowGlasgow-10891622-09-26 · Glasgow, Lanarkshire, Scotland · 0000-00-00
ChildrenThomas GlasgowGlasgow-31871627-00-00 · Edinburgh, Midlothian, Scotland · 0000-00-00
ChildrenGeorge GlasgowGlasgow-10901627-02-02 · Glasgow, Lanarkshire, Scotland · 0000-00-00
SiblingsMargaret EdstounGlasgow-36130000-00-00 · 1580-11-08 · Whitburn, Linlithgowshire, Scotland
SiblingsNinian GlasgowGlasgow-31881550-00-00 · Glasgow, Lanarkshire, Scotland · 1613-05-08
SpousesJonet GlasgowMathie-1591597-00-00 · Glasgow, Lanark, Scotland · 0000-00-00 · 1618-01-25

Profile categories

Glasgow_Name_Study

Record-bearing passages

  • Biography This profile is the best existing-profile match for the otherwise unidentified John Glasgow named as brother of Ninian Glasgow in Ninian's 1613 testament. If the match is correct, John was a son of Robert Glasgow, fisher and burgess of Glasgow. The 1618 husband is not identified by occupation, father or inherited property, so the identity remains uncertain.
  • The record-defined man's relationship is established by two records. Ninian was admitted burgess and guild brother of Glasgow on 23 October 1596 as the “second son to Robert G., fisher, burgess.” In his testament, made at Glasgow on 10 January 1613, Ninian left “Johne glasgw his brother ane new gowne.” Taken together, these records establish that Robert Glasgow had another son named John and suggest that John was the elder or first son; they do not prove that the record-defined John was the 1618 husband represented by this profile. James R. Anderson, ed., Burgesses & Guild Brethren of Glasgow, 1573-1750 (Scottish Record Society, 1925), p. 24 (https://archive.org/details/scottishrecordso43scotuoft/page/24/mode/2up), entry dated 23 October 1596: “Glasgow, Ninian, B. and F., as second son to Robert G., fisher, burgess”; National Records of Scotland, Glasgow Commissary Court, CC9/7/9, images 142–145, testament testamentar and inventory of Ninian Glasgow, made 10 January 1613 and confirmed 8 May 1613: “Item to Johne glasgw his brother ane new gowne.”
  • John was alive when Ninian made his testament on 10 January 1613. The records establishing the relationship do not state John’s age, occupation, residence, wife or children.
  • A John Glasgow, fisher, appears in Robert Glasgow’s immediate property and occupational network during 1572 and 1573. On 12 February 1572/73, Robert Glasgow and Margaret Rowand dealt with a tenement adjoining land belonging to John Glasgow, who also witnessed the transaction. On 19 December 1573, Robert and John witnessed another transaction and were described collectively as fishers. Robert Renwick, ed., Abstracts of Protocols of the Town Clerks of Glasgow, vol. 6, protocols 1903–1904, 12 February 1572/73 (https://archive.org/details/abstractsprotoc01renwgoog/page/n121/mode/2up); vol. 7, protocol 2002, 19 December 1573 (https://archive.org/details/abstractsprotoc00robegoog/page/n52/mode/2up).
  • These protocols provide strong evidence of a close property and occupational association between Robert and the John described as a fisher. They do not, however, identify John as Robert’s son. As more than one adult John Glasgow was active in the burgh, the fisher remains an identity candidate rather than a proved identification.
  • John’s date and place of death are unknown. He died after 10 January 1613. Possible Marriage and Children This John is the leading identity candidate for the John Glasgow who married Jonet Mathie, recorded as Jonat Mathen, on 25 January 1618 in Glasgow. “Scotland, Marriages, 1561-1910”, database, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:XYWK-WMQ : 11 February 2020), Johne Glasgow, 1618.
  • The couple had the following children christened in the High Church of Glasgow:
  • John Glasgow, christened 13 May 1619. The witnesses included George Glasgow, Robert Glasgow and Mathew Will. “Scotland, Births and Baptisms, 1564-1950”, database, FamilySearch (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:VQHV-12T : 16 September 2021), Johne Glasgow in entry for Johne Glasgow, 1619. Mother recorded as Jonat Mathei.

    • Jonet Glasgow, christened 26 September 1622. “Scotland, Births and Baptisms, 1564-1950”, database, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:VQHV-375 : 11 February 2020), Johne Glasgow in entry for Jonet Glasgow, 1622.
    • George Glasgow, christened 4 February 1627. “Scotland, Births and Baptisms, 1564-1950”, database, FamilySearch (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:VQHK-3WB : 16 September 2021), Johne Glasgow in entry for George Glasgow, 1627.
    • Euphame Glasgow, christened 30 March 1634. “Scotland, Births and Baptisms, 1564-1950”, database, FamilySearch (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:X1Y9-V87 : 16 September 2021), Johnne Glasgow in entry for Euphame Glasgow, 1634. The cited Edinburgh index is also used for Euphame's proposed placement in the otherwise coherent family of Rev. John Glassford and Jonet Morriel. It cannot support both fathers, so her identification here remains uncertain pending examination of the original image.
  • The proposed identification is supported by the appearance of Ninian’s proved son, Robert Glasgow, as a witness at the 1619 baptism. If the father was Ninian’s brother John, Robert would have been witnessing the baptism of his cousin.
  • This is a plausible and ordinary family relationship, but it is not conclusive. Neither the 1618 marriage entry nor the children’s baptismal entries state John’s occupation, property holdings or father. Research NotesBirth Estimate John was born before Ninian’s burgess admission on 23 October 1596. Because Ninian was described as Robert’s second son, John was probably the elder son. If the attached father identification is correct, John must also have been born before Robert’s reported death in 1572; the structured “before 1572” date is a conditional outer boundary, not a recorded birth year.
  • No record currently establishes John’s date or place of birth. Glasgow is probable because Robert was a burgess there and the known records concern the Glasgow burgh, but the place remains uncertain.
  • If the John Glasgow described as a fisher in the 1572–73 protocols was Robert’s son, John was already an adult by that period and was probably born no later than the early 1550s. That identification has not yet been proved and should not be used to assign a precise birth date. Mother John’s mother has not been identified.
  • Robert Glasgow’s documented spouse Margaret Rowand is a possible mother, but no located record explicitly identifies her as John’s mother. She should therefore not be attached as his mother without further evidence. Identity Analysis The evidence establishes the existence of a John Glasgow who was:
  • the fisher associated with Robert Glasgow in 1572–73;

    • the John Glasgow who married Jonet Mathie in 1618; or
    • another contemporary man of the same name.
  • The strongest candidate is the John who married Jonet Mathie. Ninian’s son Robert Glasgow witnessed the baptism of that John’s son in 1619. This would be consistent with Robert acting as witness for the child of his uncle.
  • The other Glasgow witness at the 1619 baptism was George Glasgow. George was a proved son of a different William Glasgow. The two witnesses therefore cannot both be used as evidence that George, Robert and the child’s father John were brothers, as previously proposed.
  • The baptismal witnesses support a broader kinship network, but witness status alone does not define the precise relationship.
  • The former placement under William Glasgow and Margaret Herbesoun relied on treating George and Robert, the 1619 witnesses, as John's brothers. Direct records show that George was William's son while Robert was Ninian's son. That parent pair is not currently attached and should not be restored as proved; it remains only an uncertain former hypothesis. Profiles Not to Merge Without Further Evidence This record-defined John should not be merged with another John Glasgow solely on chronology or name similarity.
  • John Glasgow is the leading identity candidate, but the identification remains unproved unless this is already that profile.

    • John Glasgow is also chronologically possible but lacks a direct identity bridge.
    • John Glasgow of Hirmanscheillis cannot be Ninian’s brother named in the 1613 testament because he died in November 1576.
  • A further record linking John to an occupation, property, spouse, child or explicit patronymic is needed to resolve the identity securely. Sources

    • John Glasgow Research Page on WikiTree

Profile source citations

  1. James R. Anderson, ed., Burgesses & Guild Brethren of Glasgow, 1573-1750 (Scottish Record Society, 1925), p. 24 (https://archive.org/details/scottishrecordso43scotuoft/page/24/mode/2up), entry dated 23 October 1596: “Glasgow, Ninian, B. and F., as second son to Robert G., fisher, burgess”; National Records of Scotland, Glasgow Commissary Court, CC9/7/9, images 142–145, testament testamentar and inventory of Ninian Glasgow, made 10 January 1613 and confirmed 8 May 1613: “Item to Johne glasgw his brother ane new gowne.” source link 1
  2. Robert Renwick, ed., Abstracts of Protocols of the Town Clerks of Glasgow, vol. 6, protocols 1903–1904, 12 February 1572/73 (https://archive.org/details/abstractsprotoc01renwgoog/page/n121/mode/2up); vol. 7, protocol 2002, 19 December 1573 (https://archive.org/details/abstractsprotoc00robegoog/page/n52/mode/2up). source link 1 source link 2
  3. “Scotland, Marriages, 1561-1910”, database, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:XYWK-WMQ : 11 February 2020), Johne Glasgow, 1618. source link 1
  4. “Scotland, Births and Baptisms, 1564-1950”, database, FamilySearch (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:VQHV-12T : 16 September 2021), Johne Glasgow in entry for Johne Glasgow, 1619. Mother recorded as Jonat Mathei. source link 1
  5. “Scotland, Births and Baptisms, 1564-1950”, database, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:VQHV-375 : 11 February 2020), Johne Glasgow in entry for Jonet Glasgow, 1622. source link 1
  6. “Scotland, Births and Baptisms, 1564-1950”, database, FamilySearch (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:VQHK-3WB : 16 September 2021), Johne Glasgow in entry for George Glasgow, 1627. source link 1
  7. “Scotland, Births and Baptisms, 1564-1950”, database, FamilySearch (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:X1Y9-V87 : 16 September 2021), Johnne Glasgow in entry for Euphame Glasgow, 1634. source link 1
  8. John Glasgow Research Page on WikiTree
Full captured biography text
Biography
This profile is the best existing-profile match for the otherwise unidentified John Glasgow named as brother of Ninian Glasgow in Ninian's 1613 testament. If the match is correct, John was a son of Robert Glasgow, fisher and burgess of Glasgow. The 1618 husband is not identified by occupation, father or inherited property, so the identity remains uncertain.

The record-defined man's relationship is established by two records. Ninian was admitted burgess and guild brother of Glasgow on 23 October 1596 as the “second son to Robert G., fisher, burgess.” In his testament, made at Glasgow on 10 January 1613, Ninian left “Johne glasgw his brother ane new gowne.” Taken together, these records establish that Robert Glasgow had another son named John and suggest that John was the elder or first son; they do not prove that the record-defined John was the 1618 husband represented by this profile. James R. Anderson, ed., Burgesses & Guild Brethren of Glasgow, 1573-1750 (Scottish Record Society, 1925), p. 24 (https://archive.org/details/scottishrecordso43scotuoft/page/24/mode/2up), entry dated 23 October 1596: “Glasgow, Ninian, B. and F., as second son to Robert G., fisher, burgess”; National Records of Scotland, Glasgow Commissary Court, CC9/7/9, images 142–145, testament testamentar and inventory of Ninian Glasgow, made 10 January 1613 and confirmed 8 May 1613: “Item to Johne glasgw his brother ane new gowne.” 

John was alive when Ninian made his testament on 10 January 1613. The records establishing the relationship do not state John’s age, occupation, residence, wife or children.

A John Glasgow, fisher, appears in Robert Glasgow’s immediate property and occupational network during 1572 and 1573. On 12 February 1572/73, Robert Glasgow and Margaret Rowand dealt with a tenement adjoining land belonging to John Glasgow, who also witnessed the transaction. On 19 December 1573, Robert and John witnessed another transaction and were described collectively as fishers. Robert Renwick, ed., Abstracts of Protocols of the Town Clerks of Glasgow, vol. 6, protocols 1903–1904, 12 February 1572/73 (https://archive.org/details/abstractsprotoc01renwgoog/page/n121/mode/2up); vol. 7, protocol 2002, 19 December 1573 (https://archive.org/details/abstractsprotoc00robegoog/page/n52/mode/2up). 

These protocols provide strong evidence of a close property and occupational association between Robert and the John described as a fisher. They do not, however, identify John as Robert’s son. As more than one adult John Glasgow was active in the burgh, the fisher remains an identity candidate rather than a proved identification.

John’s date and place of death are unknown. He died after 10 January 1613.
Possible Marriage and Children
This John is the leading identity candidate for the John Glasgow who married Jonet Mathie, recorded as Jonat Mathen, on 25 January 1618 in Glasgow. “Scotland, Marriages, 1561-1910”, database, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:XYWK-WMQ : 11 February 2020), Johne Glasgow, 1618. 

The couple had the following children christened in the High Church of Glasgow:

* John Glasgow, christened 13 May 1619. The witnesses included George Glasgow, Robert Glasgow and Mathew Will. “Scotland, Births and Baptisms, 1564-1950”, database, FamilySearch (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:VQHV-12T : 16 September 2021), Johne Glasgow in entry for Johne Glasgow, 1619. Mother recorded as Jonat Mathei. 
* Jonet Glasgow, christened 26 September 1622. “Scotland, Births and Baptisms, 1564-1950”, database, FamilySearch (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:VQHV-375 : 11 February 2020), Johne Glasgow in entry for Jonet Glasgow, 1622. 
* George Glasgow, christened 4 February 1627. “Scotland, Births and Baptisms, 1564-1950”, database, FamilySearch (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:VQHK-3WB : 16 September 2021), Johne Glasgow in entry for George Glasgow, 1627. 
* Euphame Glasgow, christened 30 March 1634. “Scotland, Births and Baptisms, 1564-1950”, database, FamilySearch (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:X1Y9-V87 : 16 September 2021), Johnne Glasgow in entry for Euphame Glasgow, 1634. The cited Edinburgh index is also used for Euphame's proposed placement in the otherwise coherent family of Rev. John Glassford and Jonet Morriel. It cannot support both fathers, so her identification here remains uncertain pending examination of the original image.

The proposed identification is supported by the appearance of Ninian’s proved son, Robert Glasgow, as a witness at the 1619 baptism. If the father was Ninian’s brother John, Robert would have been witnessing the baptism of his cousin.

This is a plausible and ordinary family relationship, but it is not conclusive. Neither the 1618 marriage entry nor the children’s baptismal entries state John’s occupation, property holdings or father.
Research NotesBirth Estimate
John was born before Ninian’s burgess admission on 23 October 1596. Because Ninian was described as Robert’s second son, John was probably the elder son. If the attached father identification is correct, John must also have been born before Robert’s reported death in 1572; the structured “before 1572” date is a conditional outer boundary, not a recorded birth year.

No record currently establishes John’s date or place of birth. Glasgow is probable because Robert was a burgess there and the known records concern the Glasgow burgh, but the place remains uncertain.

If the John Glasgow described as a fisher in the 1572–73 protocols was Robert’s son, John was already an adult by that period and was probably born no later than the early 1550s. That identification has not yet been proved and should not be used to assign a precise birth date.
Mother
John’s mother has not been identified.

Robert Glasgow’s documented spouse Margaret Rowand is a possible mother, but no located record explicitly identifies her as John’s mother. She should therefore not be attached as his mother without further evidence.
Identity Analysis
The evidence establishes the existence of a John Glasgow who was:

* a son of Robert Glasgow, fisher and burgess;
* a brother of Ninian Glasgow; and
* alive on 10 January 1613.

The evidence does not directly establish whether this John was:

* the fisher associated with Robert Glasgow in 1572–73;
* the John Glasgow who married Jonet Mathie in 1618; or
* another contemporary man of the same name.

The strongest candidate is the John who married Jonet Mathie. Ninian’s son Robert Glasgow witnessed the baptism of that John’s son in 1619. This would be consistent with Robert acting as witness for the child of his uncle.

The other Glasgow witness at the 1619 baptism was George Glasgow. George was a proved son of a different William Glasgow. The two witnesses therefore cannot both be used as evidence that George, Robert and the child’s father John were brothers, as previously proposed.

The baptismal witnesses support a broader kinship network, but witness status alone does not define the precise relationship.

The former placement under William Glasgow and Margaret Herbesoun relied on treating George and Robert, the 1619 witnesses, as John's brothers. Direct records show that George was William's son while Robert was Ninian's son. That parent pair is not currently attached and should not be restored as proved; it remains only an uncertain former hypothesis.
Profiles Not to Merge Without Further Evidence
This record-defined John should not be merged with another John Glasgow solely on chronology or name similarity.

* John Glasgow is the leading identity candidate, but the identification remains unproved unless this is already that profile.
* John Glasgow is also chronologically possible but lacks a direct identity bridge.
* John Glasgow of Hirmanscheillis cannot be Ninian’s brother named in the 1613 testament because he died in November 1576.

A further record linking John to an occupation, property, spouse, child or explicit patronymic is needed to resolve the identity securely.
Sources
* John Glasgow Research Page on WikiTree
Raw WikiTree biography markup
{{One Name Study|name=Glasgow}}

== Biography ==

This profile is the best existing-profile match for the otherwise unidentified John Glasgow named as brother of [[Glasgow-3188|Ninian Glasgow]] in Ninian's 1613 testament. If the match is correct, John was a son of [[Glasgow-1096|Robert Glasgow]], fisher and burgess of Glasgow. The 1618 husband is not identified by occupation, father or inherited property, so the identity remains uncertain.

The record-defined man's relationship is established by two records. Ninian was admitted burgess and guild brother of Glasgow on 23 October 1596 as the “second son to Robert G., fisher, burgess.” In his testament, made at Glasgow on 10 January 1613, Ninian left “Johne glasgw his brother ane new gowne.” Taken together, these records establish that Robert Glasgow had another son named John and suggest that John was the elder or first son; they do not prove that the record-defined John was the 1618 husband represented by this profile.<ref name="Ninian">James R. Anderson, ed., ''Burgesses & Guild Brethren of Glasgow, 1573-1750'' (Scottish Record Society, 1925), [https://archive.org/details/scottishrecordso43scotuoft/page/24/mode/2up p. 24], entry dated 23 October 1596: “Glasgow, Ninian, B. and F., as second son to Robert G., fisher, burgess”; National Records of Scotland, Glasgow Commissary Court, CC9/7/9, images 142–145, testament testamentar and inventory of Ninian Glasgow, made 10 January 1613 and confirmed 8 May 1613: “Item to Johne glasgw his brother ane new gowne.”</ref>

John was alive when Ninian made his testament on 10 January 1613. The records establishing the relationship do not state John’s age, occupation, residence, wife or children.

A John Glasgow, fisher, appears in Robert Glasgow’s immediate property and occupational network during 1572 and 1573. On 12 February 1572/73, Robert Glasgow and Margaret Rowand dealt with a tenement adjoining land belonging to John Glasgow, who also witnessed the transaction. On 19 December 1573, Robert and John witnessed another transaction and were described collectively as fishers.<ref name="Protocols">Robert Renwick, ed., ''Abstracts of Protocols of the Town Clerks of Glasgow'', vol. 6, protocols 1903–1904, [https://archive.org/details/abstractsprotoc01renwgoog/page/n121/mode/2up 12 February 1572/73]; vol. 7, protocol 2002, [https://archive.org/details/abstractsprotoc00robegoog/page/n52/mode/2up 19 December 1573].</ref>

These protocols provide strong evidence of a close property and occupational association between Robert and the John described as a fisher. They do not, however, identify John as Robert’s son. As more than one adult John Glasgow was active in the burgh, the fisher remains an identity candidate rather than a proved identification.

John’s date and place of death are unknown. He died after 10 January 1613.

=== Possible Marriage and Children ===

This John is the leading identity candidate for the John Glasgow who married '''[[Mathie-159|Jonet Mathie]]''', recorded as Jonat Mathen, on 25 January 1618 in Glasgow.<ref name="Marriage1618">“Scotland, Marriages, 1561-1910”, database, ''FamilySearch'' (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:XYWK-WMQ : 11 February 2020), Johne Glasgow, 1618.</ref>

The couple had the following children christened in the High Church of Glasgow:

* [[Glasgow-1088|John Glasgow]], christened 13 May 1619. The witnesses included George Glasgow, Robert Glasgow and Mathew Will.<ref name="John1619">“Scotland, Births and Baptisms, 1564-1950”, database, ''FamilySearch'' (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:VQHV-12T : 16 September 2021), Johne Glasgow in entry for Johne Glasgow, 1619. Mother recorded as Jonat Mathei.</ref>
* [[Glasgow-1089|Jonet Glasgow]], christened 26 September 1622.<ref name="Jonet1622">“Scotland, Births and Baptisms, 1564-1950”, database, ''FamilySearch'' (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:VQHV-375 : 11 February 2020), Johne Glasgow in entry for Jonet Glasgow, 1622.</ref>
* [[Glasgow-1090|George Glasgow]], christened 4 February 1627.<ref name="George1627">“Scotland, Births and Baptisms, 1564-1950”, database, ''FamilySearch'' (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:VQHK-3WB : 16 September 2021), Johne Glasgow in entry for George Glasgow, 1627.</ref>
* [[Glasgow-1167|Euphame Glasgow]], christened 30 March 1634.<ref name="Euphame1634">“Scotland, Births and Baptisms, 1564-1950”, database, ''FamilySearch'' (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:X1Y9-V87 : 16 September 2021), Johnne Glasgow in entry for Euphame Glasgow, 1634.</ref> The cited Edinburgh index is also used for Euphame's proposed placement in the otherwise coherent family of Rev. John Glassford and Jonet Morriel. It cannot support both fathers, so her identification here remains uncertain pending examination of the original image.

The proposed identification is supported by the appearance of Ninian’s proved son, [[Glasgow-1027|Robert Glasgow]], as a witness at the 1619 baptism. If the father was Ninian’s brother John, Robert would have been witnessing the baptism of his cousin.

This is a plausible and ordinary family relationship, but it is not conclusive. Neither the 1618 marriage entry nor the children’s baptismal entries state John’s occupation, property holdings or father.

== Research Notes ==

=== Birth Estimate ===

John was born before Ninian’s burgess admission on 23 October 1596. Because Ninian was described as Robert’s second son, John was probably the elder son. If the attached father identification is correct, John must also have been born before Robert’s reported death in 1572; the structured “before 1572” date is a conditional outer boundary, not a recorded birth year.

No record currently establishes John’s date or place of birth. Glasgow is probable because Robert was a burgess there and the known records concern the Glasgow burgh, but the place remains uncertain.

If the John Glasgow described as a fisher in the 1572–73 protocols was Robert’s son, John was already an adult by that period and was probably born no later than the early 1550s. That identification has not yet been proved and should not be used to assign a precise birth date.

=== Mother ===

John’s mother has not been identified.

Robert Glasgow’s documented spouse Margaret Rowand is a possible mother, but no located record explicitly identifies her as John’s mother. She should therefore not be attached as his mother without further evidence.

=== Identity Analysis ===

The evidence establishes the existence of a John Glasgow who was:

* a son of [[Glasgow-1096|Robert Glasgow]], fisher and burgess;
* a brother of [[Glasgow-3188|Ninian Glasgow]]; and
* alive on 10 January 1613.

The evidence does not directly establish whether this John was:

* the fisher associated with Robert Glasgow in 1572–73;
* the John Glasgow who married Jonet Mathie in 1618; or
* another contemporary man of the same name.

The strongest candidate is the John who married Jonet Mathie. Ninian’s son [[Glasgow-1027|Robert Glasgow]] witnessed the baptism of that John’s son in 1619. This would be consistent with Robert acting as witness for the child of his uncle.

The other Glasgow witness at the 1619 baptism was George Glasgow. George was a proved son of a different William Glasgow. The two witnesses therefore cannot both be used as evidence that George, Robert and the child’s father John were brothers, as previously proposed.

The baptismal witnesses support a broader kinship network, but witness status alone does not define the precise relationship.

The former placement under [[Glasgow-3522|William Glasgow]] and [[Herbison-439|Margaret Herbesoun]] relied on treating George and Robert, the 1619 witnesses, as John's brothers. Direct records show that George was William's son while Robert was Ninian's son. That parent pair is not currently attached and should not be restored as proved; it remains only an uncertain former hypothesis.

=== Profiles Not to Merge Without Further Evidence ===

This record-defined John should not be merged with another John Glasgow solely on chronology or name similarity.

* [[Glasgow-1030|John Glasgow]] is the leading identity candidate, but the identification remains unproved unless this is already that profile.
* [[Glasgow-1561|John Glasgow]] is also chronologically possible but lacks a direct identity bridge.
* [[Glasgow-3181|John Glasgow of Hirmanscheillis]] cannot be Ninian’s brother named in the 1613 testament because he died in November 1576.

A further record linking John to an occupation, property, spouse, child or explicit patronymic is needed to resolve the identity securely.

== Sources == 
<references />

* [[Space:John_Glasgow|John Glasgow Research Page on WikiTree]]