Glasgow Surname Project

Individual research record

John Glasgow

c. 1626 – c. 1664

Glasgow-1604 · 1 mapped association

Ayrshire, ScotlandKilwinning, Ayrshire, Scotland

At a glance

Identity & family

Tree links organise the family; documentary status still varies.

1Mapped records
5Close relations
4Evidence items
18Candidate leads
Birth
c. 1626 · Ayrshire, Scotland
Death
c. 1664 · Kilwinning, Ayrshire, Scotland
Parents
Hugh Glasgowuncertain
Spouses
Not recorded
Children
Hew GlasgowJohn GlasgowRobert GlasgowJohn Glasgow M.A
Gender
Male
WikiTree
Glasgow-1604
Research clusters
Scotland One-Tree profile leads
Mapped descendants
49

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 positionRobert Glasgow (1652)
Maternal grandfather positionJohn Glasgow M.A (1653)
Maternal grandmother positionNot identifiable from dated child profiles
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
Dates1582–1647Generation44 years age gapRecorded placesGlasgow, Lanarkshire, Scotland · Duddingston, Edinburghshire, Scotland · GlasgowIndependent clue breadth · 8Age · Household · Rare Branch-Name Recurrence · Rare Name Bundle · Sex-Aware Ordered Naming · Spouse · Tradition Validation · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 44-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • known spouse Deborah (Ivey) Glasgow had a plausible maternal age (37) at the subject's birth (+7)
  • candidate's birth is 70 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1652), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)

a different linked father is explicitly uncertain (−6; an existing hypothesis still needs resolving); same country, but no indexed locality overlap (−10); descendant-name recurrence has no independent household, record, migration or specific-locality anchor (score capped at 39)

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 44-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 70 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1652), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)
  • a known child was born within 6 years of the subject (+1)
  • known spouse Deborah (Ivey) Glasgow had a plausible maternal age (37) at the subject's birth (+7)
  • candidate's name matches the first dated son Robert Glasgow, the expected father position for a male subject (+4; catalogue rarity 0, Robert in 165 profiles)
  • family naming controls: 0 supporting and 1 conflicting known positions (already reflected in naming weight)
  • uncommon given names recur in both otherwise distinct descendant branches: Marion +10 (23 public profiles; subject branch: Marion Glasgow, Marion Glasgow; candidate branch: Marion Glasgow; +2 repetition bonus); Hugh +7 (36 public profiles; subject branch: Hugh Glasgow, Hugh Glasgow; candidate branch: Hugh Glasgow; +4 repetition bonus); Jean +7 (42 public profiles; subject branch: Jean Glasgow, Jean Glasgow; candidate branch: Jean Glasgow; +4 repetition bonus) (+32 total including +8 multi-name bonus)

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); descendant-name recurrence has no independent household, record, migration or specific-locality anchor (score capped at 39)

Automated fit36/100
Weak Lead
Dates1583–?Generation43 years age gapRecorded placesGlasgow, Lanarkshire, Scotland · GlasgowIndependent clue breadth · 9Age · Collateral Naming · Indirect Multi-Factor Convergence · Repeated Marriage Surnames · Sex-Aware Ordered Naming · Spouse · Spouse-Specific Child Window · Tradition Validation · Two-GenerationSame-spouse child windowJonet (Cunningham) GlasgowCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 43-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • 3 independent unlinked-profile clue types converge (+5): collateral network, household chronology, naming
  • candidate's birth is 69 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1652), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)

a different linked father is explicitly uncertain (−6; an existing hypothesis still needs resolving); same country, but no indexed locality overlap (−10)

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 43-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 69 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1652), 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 (1614–1627) (+6; other parent Jonet (Cunningham) Glasgow)
  • known spouse Jonet (Cunningham) Glasgow had a bounded, possibly plausible maternal age (29) at the subject's birth (+3)
  • candidate's name matches the first dated son Robert Glasgow, the expected father position for a male subject (+4; catalogue rarity 0, Robert in 165 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): Marion +8 (23 public profiles; sibling Marion Glasgow) (+8 total)
  • uncommon spouse surnames recur across the subject and candidate branches: Cunningham +4 (+4 total)
  • 3 independent unlinked-profile clue types converge (+5): collateral network, household chronology, naming

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)

Show 3 lower-scoring possible fathers
Automated fit32/100
Weak Lead
Dates1590–1645Generation36 years age gapRecorded placesGlasgow, Lanarkshire, Scotland · South Leith, Midlothian, Scotland · GlasgowIndependent clue breadth · 7Age · Collateral Naming · Household · Rare Branch-Name Recurrence · Rare Name Bundle · Spouse · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 36-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • known spouse Catherine (Fraser) Glasgow had a plausible maternal age (26) at the subject's birth (+7)
  • candidate's birth is 62 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1652), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)

a different linked father is explicitly uncertain (−6; an existing hypothesis still needs resolving); same country, but no indexed locality overlap (−10)

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 36-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 62 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1652), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)
  • a known child was born within 8 years of the subject (+1)
  • known spouse Catherine (Fraser) Glasgow had a plausible maternal age (26) at the subject's birth (+7)
  • uncommon given names recur in both otherwise distinct descendant branches: Agnes +3 (46 public profiles; subject branch: Agnes Glasgow; candidate branch: Agnes Glasgow); George +3 (61 public profiles; subject branch: George Glasgow; candidate branch: George Glasgow) (+10 total including +4 multi-name bonus)
  • candidate's sibling and niece/nephew network repeats names in the subject's descendant line (three rarest at most): Marion +8 (23 public profiles; sibling Marion Glasgow) (+8 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)

Automated fit30/100
Weak Lead
Dates1590–1650Generation36 years age gapRecorded placesLanarkshire, Scotland · Mid Calder, Midlothian, Scotland · Lanarkshire — exact locality unprovedIndependent clue breadth · 6Age · Rare Branch-Name Recurrence · Rare Name Bundle · Same-Sex Generational Naming · Spouse · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 36-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 62 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1652), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • known spouse Bessie (Robertson) Glasgow had a bounded, possibly plausible maternal age (36) 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 already has another child named John Glasgow (Glasgow-1086) without a documented death permitting name reuse (−4; check whether the child profiles duplicate or conflict)

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 36-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 62 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1652), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)
  • known spouse Bessie (Robertson) Glasgow had a bounded, possibly plausible maternal age (36) at the subject's birth (+3)
  • candidate and subject share the given name John (+4; weak direct parent-child name recurrence, 278 public profiles)
  • uncommon given names recur in both otherwise distinct descendant branches: Isobel +14 (5 public profiles; subject branch: Isobel Glasgow; candidate branch: Isobel Glasgow); Alexander +3 (59 public profiles; subject branch: Alexander Glasgow; candidate branch: Alexander Glasgow) (+21 total including +4 multi-name bonus)

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 already has another child named John Glasgow (Glasgow-1086) without a documented death permitting name reuse (−4; check whether the child profiles duplicate or conflict)

Automated fit22/100
Weak Lead
Dates1579–?Generation47 years age gapRecorded placesLinlithgowshire, Scotland · Linlithgowshire / West Lothian — exact locality unprovedIndependent clue breadth · 7Age · Collateral Naming · Household · Rare Branch-Name Recurrence · Rare Name Bundle · Same-Sex Generational Naming · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • possible 47-year parent-child age gap (+10)
  • candidate's birth is 73 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1652), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • a known child was born within 4 years of the subject (+1)

a different linked father is explicitly uncertain (−6; an existing hypothesis still needs resolving); same country, but no indexed locality overlap (−10); candidate already has another child named John Glasgow (Glasgow-3056) without a documented death permitting name reuse (−4; check whether the child profiles duplicate or conflict)

Show complete scoring
  • possible 47-year parent-child age gap (+10)
  • candidate's birth is 73 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1652), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)
  • a known child was born within 4 years of the subject (+1)
  • candidate and subject share the given name John (+4; weak direct parent-child name recurrence, 278 public profiles)
  • uncommon given names recur in both otherwise distinct descendant branches: Jean +7 (42 public profiles; subject branch: Jean Glasgow, Jean Glasgow; candidate branch: Jean Glasgow; +4 repetition bonus); George +3 (61 public profiles; subject branch: George Glasgow; candidate branch: George Glasgow) (+14 total including +4 multi-name bonus)
  • candidate's sibling and niece/nephew network repeats names in the subject's descendant line (three rarest at most): Agnes +3 (46 public profiles; niece/nephew Agnes Glasgow); Alexander +3 (59 public profiles; niece/nephew Alexander Glasgow); Hugh +3 (36 public profiles; niece/nephew Hugh Glasgow) (+9 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 already has another child named John Glasgow (Glasgow-3056) without a documented death permitting name reuse (−4; check whether the child profiles duplicate or conflict)

Possible mothers5 leads

Automated fit39/100
Weak Lead
Dates1589–1635Generation37 years age gapRecorded placesGlasgowIndependent clue breadth · 6Age · Household · Rare Branch-Name Recurrence · Rare Name Bundle · Sex-Aware Ordered Naming · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 37-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 63 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1652), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • a known child was born within 6 years of the subject (+1)

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

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 37-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 63 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1652), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)
  • a known child was born within 6 years of the subject (+1)
  • a candidate spouse matches the first dated son Robert Glasgow, the expected father position (+3; Robert in 165 profiles)
  • uncommon given names recur in both otherwise distinct descendant branches: Marion +10 (23 public profiles; subject branch: Marion Glasgow, Marion Glasgow; candidate branch: Marion Glasgow; +2 repetition bonus); Hugh +7 (36 public profiles; subject branch: Hugh Glasgow, Hugh Glasgow; candidate branch: Hugh Glasgow; +4 repetition bonus); Jean +7 (42 public profiles; subject branch: Jean Glasgow, Jean Glasgow; candidate branch: Jean Glasgow; +4 repetition bonus) (+32 total including +8 multi-name bonus)

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

Automated fit33/100
Weak Lead
Dates1600–?Generation26 years age gapRecorded placesSouth LeithIndependent clue breadth · 5Age · Household · Rare Branch-Name Recurrence · Rare Name Bundle · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 26-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 52 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1652), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • a known child was born within 8 years of the subject (+1)

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

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 26-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 52 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1652), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)
  • a known child was born within 8 years of the subject (+1)
  • uncommon given names recur in both otherwise distinct descendant branches: Agnes +3 (46 public profiles; subject branch: Agnes Glasgow; candidate branch: Agnes Glasgow); George +3 (61 public profiles; subject branch: George Glasgow; candidate branch: George Glasgow) (+10 total including +4 multi-name bonus)

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

Show 3 lower-scoring possible mothers
Automated fit33/100
Weak Lead
Dates1597–?Generationat least 29 years age gapRecorded placesRobertland, Ayrshire, Scotland · Ayrshire — exact locality unprovedIndependent clue breadth · 7Age · Broad Geography · Indirect Multi-Factor Convergence · Repeated Marriage Surnames · Sex-Aware Ordered Naming · Spouse-Specific Child Window · Two-GenerationSame-spouse child windowRobert GlasgowCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • 3 independent unlinked-profile clue types converge (+5): collateral network, household chronology, naming
  • candidate's birth is 55 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1652), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • bounded birth date gives a parent-child age gap of at least 29 years (+10; true age remains uncertain)

No indexed conflict; documentary proof still required

Show complete scoring
  • bounded birth date gives a parent-child age gap of at least 29 years (+10; true age remains uncertain)
  • candidate's birth is 55 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1652), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • same broad administrative area only (+1; not a locality match)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)
  • subject's birth fits between children attributed to the same parental couple (1614–1627) (+6; other parent Robert Glasgow)
  • a candidate spouse matches the first dated son Robert Glasgow, the expected father position (+3; Robert in 165 profiles)
  • uncommon spouse surnames recur across the subject and candidate branches: Cunningham +4 (+4 total)
  • 3 independent unlinked-profile clue types converge (+5): collateral network, household chronology, naming

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

Automated fit32/100
Weak Lead
Dates1610–?Generation16 years age gapRecorded placesMid CalderIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Collateral Naming · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • possible 16-year parent-child age gap (+10)
  • candidate's birth is 42 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1652), 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): Anne +12 (10 public profiles; niece/nephew Anne Glasgow); Agnes +3 (46 public profiles; sibling Agnes Glasgow); Alexander +3 (59 public profiles; sibling Alexander Glasgow) (+18 total)

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

Show complete scoring
  • possible 16-year parent-child age gap (+10)
  • candidate's birth is 42 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1652), 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): Anne +12 (10 public profiles; niece/nephew Anne Glasgow); Agnes +3 (46 public profiles; sibling Agnes Glasgow); Alexander +3 (59 public profiles; sibling Alexander Glasgow) (+18 total)

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

Automated fit22/100
Weak Lead
Dates1611–?Generation15 years age gapRecorded placesInveresk, Midlothian, Scotland · InvereskIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Collateral Naming · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • possible 15-year parent-child age gap (+10)
  • candidate's birth is 41 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1652), 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
  • possible 15-year parent-child age gap (+10)
  • candidate's birth is 41 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1652), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)
  • candidate's sibling and niece/nephew network repeats names in the subject's descendant line (three rarest at most): Anne +12 (10 public profiles; niece/nephew Anne Glasgow); Agnes +3 (46 public profiles; sibling Agnes Glasgow); Alexander +3 (59 public profiles; sibling Alexander Glasgow) (+18 total)

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

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-3145

Automated fit68/100
Similar Person
Dates1626–?PlacesScotland → Ayrshire, ScotlandParent comparisonNo shared parent is indexed
Why it may fit
  • same first and last name (+18)
  • same birth year (+30)
  • shared recorded place (+20)

uncertain father attachments differ (no deduction)

Full comparison detail
  • same first and last name (+18)
  • same birth year (+30)
  • shared recorded place (+20)

Conflicts: uncertain father attachments differ (no deduction)

Same-name candidate

John GlasgowGlasgow-3610

Automated fit62/100
Similar Person
Dates1626–?PlacesKirknewton and East Calder, Midlothian, ScotlandParent comparisonNo shared parent is indexed
Why it may fit
  • same first and last name (+18)
  • same birth year (+30)
  • matching child name: John Glasgow

uncertain father attachments differ (no deduction)

Full comparison detail
  • same first and last name (+18)
  • same birth year (+30)
  • matching child name: John Glasgow

Conflicts: uncertain father attachments differ (no deduction)

Same-name candidate

John GlasgowGlasgow-3015

Automated fit42/100
Similar Person
Dates1618–?PlacesDuddingston, Midlothian, ScotlandParent comparisonNo shared parent is indexed
Why it may fit
  • same first and last name (+18)
  • birth years within 8 (+10)
  • matching child name: John Glasgow

No indexed conflict

Full comparison detail
  • same first and last name (+18)
  • birth years within 8 (+10)
  • matching child name: John Glasgow

Conflicts: No indexed conflict

Same-name candidate

John GlasgowGlasgow-1088

Automated fit42/100
Similar Person
Dates1619–?PlacesGlasgow, Lanarkshire, ScotlandParent comparisonNo shared parent is indexed
Why it may fit
  • same first and last name (+18)
  • birth years within 7 (+10)
  • matching child name: John Glasgow

uncertain father attachments differ (no deduction)

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

Conflicts: uncertain father attachments differ (no deduction)

Show 4 lower-scoring duplicate lead(s)

Same-name candidate

John GlasgowGlasgow-3331

Automated fit42/100
Similar Person
Dates1632–?PlacesBiggar, Lanarkshire, ScotlandParent comparisonNo shared parent is indexed
Why it may fit
  • same first and last name (+18)
  • birth years within 6 (+10)
  • matching child name: John Glasgow

uncertain father attachments differ (no deduction)

Full comparison detail
  • same first and last name (+18)
  • birth years within 6 (+10)
  • matching child name: John Glasgow

Conflicts: uncertain father attachments differ (no deduction)

Same-name candidate

John GlasgowGlasgow-1105

Automated fit34/100
Similar Person
Dates1644–?PlacesLinlithgow, Linlithgowshire, ScotlandParent comparisonNo shared parent is indexed
Why it may fit
  • same first and last name (+18)
  • birth years within 18 (+2)
  • matching child name: John Glasgow

uncertain father attachments differ (no deduction)

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

Conflicts: uncertain father attachments differ (no deduction)

Same-name candidate

John GlasgowGlasgow-1030

Automated fit32/100
Similar Person
Dates1572–?PlacesGlasgow, Lanarkshire, ScotlandParent comparisonNo shared parent is indexed
Why it may fit
  • same first and last name (+18)
  • matching child name: John Glasgow

record-derived birth estimates differ by 54; retained without deduction; uncertain father attachments differ (no deduction)

Full comparison detail
  • same first and last name (+18)
  • matching child name: John Glasgow

Conflicts: record-derived birth estimates differ by 54; retained without deduction; uncertain father attachments differ (no deduction)

Same-name candidate

John GlasgowGlasgow-1561

Automated fit32/100
Similar Person
Dates1579–?PlacesLinlithgowshire, ScotlandParent comparisonNo shared parent is indexed
Why it may fit
  • same first and last name (+18)
  • matching child name: John Glasgow

record-derived birth estimates differ by 47; retained without deduction; uncertain father attachments differ (no deduction)

Full comparison detail
  • same first and last name (+18)
  • matching child name: John Glasgow

Conflicts: record-derived birth estimates differ by 47; retained without deduction; 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-1604

John is the best existing-profile candidate for the father of Rev. John Glasgow M.A. (Glasgow-1073), about 1653, Kilbirnie, but the profile is only a scaffold. Birth about 1626, death about 1664 at Kilwinning, father Glasgow-1603 and the three attached sons all ultimately rest on an Ancestry tree or on records that name only the later fathers.

John Glasgow (Glasgow-3145), about 1626, Scotland/Ayrshire is empty and unsourced, has the exact same estimated birth year, and is attached directly to Midlothian James-991. It is probably a duplicate of Glasgow-1604 or a second artifact of the same imported tree, not independent evidence for another John generation.

The strongest working placement is:

Glasgow-1098 ? Glasgow-1168 -> Glasgow-3193
  ? Glasgow-1603 / omitted Ayrshire generation
    ? Glasgow-1604
      ? Glasgow-1073 (possibly the same man as Glasgow-3375)

Do not add Rev. John as a second contemporary son named John until Glasgow-3375 has been tested as his duplicate. The 1679 and 1689 Kilwinning OPR entries could refer to the minister before his 1690 marriage to Jean Cunningham.

Life and record timelineChronological mapped occurrences and their underlying sources.1 record
b. 1626

Profile-stated birthplace: Ayrshire, Scotland

Ayrshire — exact locality unproved

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-1604

No sufficiently specific citation match found.

Precision: County-level representative point

Evidence assessmentWhat is supported, uncertain or disputed in the current case model.7 claims
2Tree Only
2Unknown

Documented or strongly supported

No claims in this category have been formally assessed.

Working hypotheses and conflicts

John Glasgow M.A was uncertain son of John Glasgow

possible1 linked evidence item

Generation and the Kilwinning-Kilbirnie corridor fit the wider Corsankell branch. John-1604's dates, death and family are tree-derived, so the edge is a topology scaffold, not record proof.

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.3 sources

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

  1. tree_only Ancestry user-submitted tree (https://www.ancestry.co.uk/family-tree/person/tree/26875475/person/152122295783/facts)
  2. tree_only WikiTree profile export for Glasgow-1604
  3. unknown Controlled relationship assessment
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-1604 was captured 2026-08-19T15:34:20+00:00; WikiTree profile revision 2026-08-19.

Profile location claims

EventDateLocationStatus
birthAyrshire, ScotlandWikiTree profile field
deathKilwinning, Ayrshire, ScotlandWikiTree profile field

Immediate relationship snapshot

RelationshipPersonWikiTree IDDates and places returned
ParentsHugh GlasgowGlasgow-16031600-00-00 · 0000-00-00 · Ayrshire, Scotland
ChildrenRobert GlasgowGlasgow-15121652-00-00 · Ayr, Ayrshire, Scotland · 0000-00-00
ChildrenHew GlasgowGlasgow-10661658-00-00 · Kilwinning, Ayrshire, Scotland · 0000-00-00
ChildrenJohn GlasgowGlasgow-33751661-00-00 · Kilwinning, Ayrshire, Scotland · 0000-00-00

Profile categories

Unsourced_Profiles

Record-bearing passages

  • Biography John Glasgow is retained as a useful but uncertain Ayrshire-generation profile. His approximate 1626 birth in Ayrshire, approximate 1664 death at Kilwinning, attached father Hugh Glasgow, and attached sons ultimately derive from an online family tree or from records that name only the later fathers. No independent record currently proves these details as a single identity. Research NotesAttached relationships The father and all three son links are retained as uncertain working relationships:
  • John Glasgow and Barbara Alason were parents at Kilwinning in 1679 and 1689, but no record names Glasgow-1604 as John's father. Glasgow-3375 is a serious duplicate candidate for Rev. John Glasgow M.A.. Rev. John has not been added as a second contemporary son.

    • Robert Glasgow and Margaret Donald had sons at Ayr in 1670–71, but those records do not name Robert's father.
    • Hew Glasgow married Margaret Lachland in 1676 and had children at Kilwinning, but those records do not name his father. Possible duplicate profile John Glasgow, also estimated born about 1626, is probably a duplicate or another artifact of the same imported tree. It supplies no independent evidence for another generation. No merge has been performed; the profiles should remain separate until an original record distinguishes or unites them.
  • The source of the supposed 1664 Kilwinning death has not been identified. The date and place are retained as uncertain research leads, not sourced facts. SourcesResearch lead

Profile source citations

  1. Ancestry user-submitted tree (https://www.ancestry.co.uk/family-tree/person/tree/26875475/person/152122295783/facts) source link 1
Full captured biography text
Biography
John Glasgow is retained as a useful but uncertain Ayrshire-generation profile. His approximate 1626 birth in Ayrshire, approximate 1664 death at Kilwinning, attached father Hugh Glasgow, and attached sons ultimately derive from an online family tree or from records that name only the later fathers. No independent record currently proves these details as a single identity.
Research NotesAttached relationships
The father and all three son links are retained as uncertain working relationships:

* John Glasgow and Barbara Alason were parents at Kilwinning in 1679 and 1689, but no record names Glasgow-1604 as John's father. Glasgow-3375 is a serious duplicate candidate for Rev. John Glasgow M.A.. Rev. John has not been added as a second contemporary son.
* Robert Glasgow and Margaret Donald had sons at Ayr in 1670–71, but those records do not name Robert's father.
* Hew Glasgow married Margaret Lachland in 1676 and had children at Kilwinning, but those records do not name his father.
Possible duplicate profile
John Glasgow, also estimated born about 1626, is probably a duplicate or another artifact of the same imported tree. It supplies no independent evidence for another generation. No merge has been performed; the profiles should remain separate until an original record distinguishes or unites them.

The source of the supposed 1664 Kilwinning death has not been identified. The date and place are retained as uncertain research leads, not sourced facts.
SourcesResearch lead
* Ancestry user-submitted tree (https://www.ancestry.co.uk/family-tree/person/tree/26875475/person/152122295783/facts)
Raw WikiTree biography markup
{{Unsourced}}

== Biography ==
John Glasgow is retained as a useful but uncertain Ayrshire-generation profile. His approximate 1626 birth in Ayrshire, approximate 1664 death at Kilwinning, attached father [[Glasgow-1603|Hugh Glasgow]], and attached sons ultimately derive from an online family tree or from records that name only the later fathers. No independent record currently proves these details as a single identity.

== Research Notes ==

=== Attached relationships ===
The father and all three son links are retained as uncertain working relationships:

* [[Glasgow-3375|John Glasgow]] and Barbara Alason were parents at Kilwinning in 1679 and 1689, but no record names Glasgow-1604 as John's father. Glasgow-3375 is a serious duplicate candidate for [[Glasgow-1073|Rev. John Glasgow M.A.]]. Rev. John has not been added as a second contemporary son.
* [[Glasgow-1512|Robert Glasgow]] and Margaret Donald had sons at Ayr in 1670–71, but those records do not name Robert's father.
* [[Glasgow-1066|Hew Glasgow]] married Margaret Lachland in 1676 and had children at Kilwinning, but those records do not name his father.

=== Possible duplicate profile ===
[[Glasgow-3145|John Glasgow]], also estimated born about 1626, is probably a duplicate or another artifact of the same imported tree. It supplies no independent evidence for another generation. No merge has been performed; the profiles should remain separate until an original record distinguishes or unites them.

The source of the supposed 1664 Kilwinning death has not been identified. The date and place are retained as uncertain research leads, not sourced facts.

== Sources ==
<references />

=== Research lead ===
* [https://www.ancestry.co.uk/family-tree/person/tree/26875475/person/152122295783/facts Ancestry user-submitted tree]