Individual research record
Wilson Crossier Glasgow
c. 1772 – 1817-09-11
Glasgow-1982 · 1 mapped association
At a glance
Identity & family
Tree links organise the family; documentary status still varies.
- Birth
- c. 1772 · Kilwaughter, Larne, County Antrim, Ireland
- Death
- 1817-09-11 · Newberry, South Carolina, United States
- Parents
- James GlasgowsupportedMary (Crosier) Glasgowsupported
- Spouses
- Mary (McCracken) Glasgow
- Children
- Robert GlasgowRuth GlasgowJames J Glasgow
- Gender
- Male
- WikiTree
- Glasgow-1982
- Research clusters
- East Antrim/Kilwaughter cluster
- Mapped descendants
- 40
Comparison context
These child positions and checks are the subject details used to rank possible parents below.
Naming sequence used by the parentage model
Known-position checks: 0 support · 0 conflict. Ordinals retain unnamed children and recognise reused names.
Relationship comparison
Potential parents or duplicates
Compare scored leads with the subject details above—not proof.
Possible fathers5 leads
Possible Father
James GlasgowGlasgow-1509
- candidate has a supported 1766 Registry of Deeds memorial 204122 in the subject's birth locality, 6 years from the subject's birth (+22)
- plausible 35-year parent-child age gap (+18)
- the same sex-aware parent-name position recurs independently in sibling households: Archibald Glasgow → James Glasgow; Robert Glasgow → James Glasgow (+6)
a different father is strongly supported (−30; Strongly supported; concordant record transcriptions)
Show complete scoring
- plausible 35-year parent-child age gap (+18)
- candidate's birth is 63 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1800), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
- candidate has a supported 1766 Registry of Deeds memorial 204122 in the subject's birth locality, 6 years from the subject's birth (+22)
- same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)
- subject's birth fits within the candidate's overall child-bearing span (1763–1773) (+3; children are not tied to one spouse)
- candidate has another child, James Glasgow, born 1 years from the subject in the same specific birth locality (+6; possible sibling-household clue)
- candidate's name matches the first dated son James J Glasgow, the expected father position for a male subject (+4; catalogue rarity 0, James in 224 profiles)
- the same sex-aware parent-name position recurs independently in sibling households: Archibald Glasgow → James Glasgow; Robert Glasgow → James Glasgow (+6)
- 3 independent unlinked-profile clue types converge (+5): household chronology, locality, naming
Deductions and cautions: a different father is strongly supported (−30; Strongly supported; concordant record transcriptions)
Possible Father
Robert GlasgowGlasgow-12
- plausible 23-year parent-child age gap (+18)
- the same sex-aware parent-name position recurs independently in sibling households: Archibald Glasgow → Robert Glasgow; Robert Glasgow → Robert Glasgow (+6)
- candidate's birth is 51 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1800), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
a different father is strongly supported (−30; Strongly supported; concordant record transcriptions); same country, but no indexed locality overlap (−10); candidate's household recorded William Glasgow in Rockbridge, Virginia, United States within 6 years of the subject (−12; no contemporaneous child is indexed in the subject's locality)
Show complete scoring
- plausible 23-year parent-child age gap (+18)
- candidate's birth is 51 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1800), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
- a known child was born within 4 years of the subject (+1)
- known spouse Peggy (Wright) Glasgow had a bounded, possibly plausible maternal age (24) 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)
- the same sex-aware parent-name position recurs independently in sibling households: Archibald Glasgow → Robert Glasgow; Robert Glasgow → Robert Glasgow (+6)
- uncommon given names recur in both otherwise distinct descendant branches: Edward +14 (13 public profiles; subject branch: Edward Buchanan Glasgow, Edward Buchanan Glasgow; candidate branch: Edward Lincoln Glasgow; +2 repetition bonus); Ruth +12 (15 public profiles; subject branch: Ruth Glasgow; candidate branch: Ruth Ann (Glasgow) Bamford); Eliza +10 (23 public profiles; subject branch: Eliza A Glasgow; candidate branch: Eliza Jane (Glasgow) McNeil, Eliza Jane (Glasgow) Nelson; +2 repetition bonus) (+44 total including +8 multi-name bonus)
Deductions and cautions: a different father is strongly supported (−30; Strongly supported; concordant record transcriptions); same country, but no indexed locality overlap (−10); candidate's household recorded William Glasgow in Rockbridge, Virginia, United States within 6 years of the subject (−12; no contemporaneous child is indexed in the subject's locality)
Show 3 lower-scoring possible fathers
Possible Father
James GlasgowGlasgow-3991
- plausible 24-year parent-child age gap (+18)
- known spouse Jane Glasgow had a plausible maternal age (22) at the subject's birth (+7)
- candidate has only broad or undated birth-locality overlap: larne (+6)
a different father is strongly supported (−30; Strongly supported; concordant record transcriptions)
Show complete scoring
- plausible 24-year parent-child age gap (+18)
- candidate's birth is 52 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1800), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
- candidate has only broad or undated birth-locality overlap: larne (+6)
- a known child was born within 4 years of the subject (+1)
- candidate has another child, Ann Glasgow, born 4 years from the subject in the same specific birth locality (+6; possible sibling-household clue)
- known spouse Jane Glasgow had a plausible maternal age (22) at the subject's birth (+7)
- candidate's name matches the first dated son James J Glasgow, the expected father position for a male subject (+4; catalogue rarity 0, James in 224 profiles)
- the same sex-aware parent-name position recurs independently in sibling households: Archibald Glasgow → James Glasgow; Robert Glasgow → James Glasgow (+6)
- 3 independent unlinked-profile clue types converge (+5): household chronology, locality, naming
Deductions and cautions: a different father is strongly supported (−30; Strongly supported; concordant record transcriptions)
Possible Father
James Glasgow IIGlasgow-1024
- possible 51-year parent-child age gap (+10)
- the same sex-aware parent-name position recurs independently in sibling households: Archibald Glasgow → James Glasgow; Robert Glasgow → James Glasgow (+6)
- candidate's birth is 79 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1800), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
a different father is strongly supported (−30; Strongly supported; concordant record transcriptions); same country, but no indexed locality overlap (−10); subject lies more than 20 years from the candidate's known child-bearing period (−6; children may be missing)
Show complete scoring
- possible 51-year parent-child age gap (+10)
- candidate's birth is 79 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1800), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
- known spouse Mary (Harkness) Glasgow had a bounded, possibly plausible maternal age (47) at the subject's birth (+3)
- candidate's name matches the first dated son James J Glasgow, the expected father position for a male subject (+4; catalogue rarity 0, James in 224 profiles)
- the same sex-aware parent-name position recurs independently in sibling households: Archibald Glasgow → James Glasgow; Robert Glasgow → James Glasgow (+6)
- uncommon given names recur in both otherwise distinct descendant branches: Francis +12 (11 public profiles; subject branch: Francis M Glasgow; candidate branch: Francis Thomas Glasgow Sr.); Eliza +8 (23 public profiles; subject branch: Eliza A Glasgow; candidate branch: Eliza Jane (Glasgow) McNeil); Joseph +7 (39 public profiles; subject branch: Joseph P Glasgow; candidate branch: Joseph Glasgow, Joseph Montgomery Glasgow; +4 repetition bonus) (+35 total including +8 multi-name bonus)
- descendant branches share only a broad migration destination country (+1; weak alone): united states
Deductions and cautions: a different father is strongly supported (−30; Strongly supported; concordant record transcriptions); same country, but no indexed locality overlap (−10); subject lies more than 20 years from the candidate's known child-bearing period (−6; children may be missing)
Possible Father
John GlasgowGlasgow-1022
- plausible 21-year parent-child age gap (+18)
- 3 independent unlinked-profile clue types converge (+5): household chronology, locality, naming
- candidate's birth is 49 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1800), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
a different father is strongly supported (−30; Strongly supported; concordant record transcriptions)
Show complete scoring
- plausible 21-year parent-child age gap (+18)
- candidate's birth is 49 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1800), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
- mapped Glenleslie townland is 29.2 km from the subject's birth-period Kilwaughter (+1; one or both placements are unproved)
- same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)
- a known child was born within 7 years of the subject (+1)
- uncommon given names recur in both otherwise distinct descendant branches: George +5 (61 public profiles; subject branch: George Washington Glasgow; candidate branch: George Glasgow, George Glasgow; +2 repetition bonus); Joseph +3 (39 public profiles; subject branch: Joseph P Glasgow; candidate branch: Joseph Glasgow) (+12 total including +4 multi-name bonus)
- descendant branches share only a broad migration destination country (+1; weak alone): united states
- 3 independent unlinked-profile clue types converge (+5): household chronology, locality, naming
Deductions and cautions: a different father is strongly supported (−30; Strongly supported; concordant record transcriptions)
Possible mothers5 leads
Possible Mother
Rachel GlasgowGlasgow-1501
- plausible 34-year parent-child age gap (+18)
- candidate has a supported 1738 Daughter of Robert Glasgow and Rachel Wilson in the subject's birth locality, 34 years from the subject's birth (+15)
- 3 independent unlinked-profile clue types converge (+5): household chronology, locality, naming
a different mother is strongly supported (−30; Strongly supported; combined direct transcription)
Show complete scoring
- plausible 34-year parent-child age gap (+18)
- candidate's birth is 62 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1800), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
- candidate has a supported 1738 Daughter of Robert Glasgow and Rachel Wilson in the subject's birth locality, 34 years from the subject's birth (+15)
- 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): Wilson +14 (4 public profiles; niece/nephew Wilson Crossier Glasgow); George +3 (61 public profiles; niece/nephew George Glasgow) (+17 total)
- 3 independent unlinked-profile clue types converge (+5): household chronology, locality, naming
Deductions and cautions: a different mother is strongly supported (−30; Strongly supported; combined direct transcription)
Possible Mother
Ann Taggard GlasgowGlasgow-1500
- plausible 39-year parent-child age gap (+18)
- candidate has a supported 1733 Daughter of Robert Glasgow and Rachel Wilson in the subject's birth locality, 39 years from the subject's birth (+7)
- 3 independent unlinked-profile clue types converge (+5): household chronology, locality, naming
a different mother is strongly supported (−30; Strongly supported; combined direct transcription)
Show complete scoring
- plausible 39-year parent-child age gap (+18)
- candidate's birth is 67 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1800), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
- candidate has a supported 1733 Daughter of Robert Glasgow and Rachel Wilson in the subject's birth locality, 39 years from the subject's birth (+7)
- 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): Wilson +14 (4 public profiles; niece/nephew Wilson Crossier Glasgow); George +3 (61 public profiles; niece/nephew George Glasgow) (+17 total)
- 3 independent unlinked-profile clue types converge (+5): household chronology, locality, naming
Deductions and cautions: a different mother is strongly supported (−30; Strongly supported; combined direct transcription)
Show 3 lower-scoring possible mothers
Possible Mother
Ruth (Gregory) GlasgowGregory-3163
- plausible 35-year parent-child age gap (+18)
- candidate's birth is 63 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1800), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
- weak broad-area overlap: carolina (+1; not a locality match)
a different mother is strongly supported (−30; Strongly supported; combined direct transcription); candidate is recorded only outside the subject's birth country (−25)
Show complete scoring
- plausible 35-year parent-child age gap (+18)
- candidate's birth is 63 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1800), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
- weak broad-area overlap: carolina (+1; not a locality match)
- candidate's given name recurs among another recorded child (+5; Ruth occurs in 15 public profiles)
- uncommon given names recur in both otherwise distinct descendant branches: Francis +12 (11 public profiles; subject branch: Francis M Glasgow; candidate branch: Francis Marion Glasgow); Isaac +12 (13 public profiles; subject branch: Isaac N Glasgow; candidate branch: Isaac Wesley (Glascow) Glasgow); Ruth +12 (15 public profiles; subject branch: Ruth Glasgow; candidate branch: Ruth Glasgow) (+44 total including +8 multi-name bonus)
Deductions and cautions: a different mother is strongly supported (−30; Strongly supported; combined direct transcription); candidate is recorded only outside the subject's birth country (−25)
Possible Mother
Rosannah (Barclay) GlasgowBarclay-56
- possible 16-year parent-child age gap (+10)
- candidate's birth is 44 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1800), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
- a known child was born within 4 years of the subject (+1)
a different mother is strongly supported (−30; Strongly supported; combined direct transcription); same country, but no indexed locality overlap (−10); candidate's household recorded William Glasgow in Rockbridge, Virginia, United States within 6 years of the subject (−12; no contemporaneous child is indexed in the subject's locality)
Show complete scoring
- possible 16-year parent-child age gap (+10)
- candidate's birth is 44 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1800), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
- a known child was born within 4 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: Edward +14 (13 public profiles; subject branch: Edward Buchanan Glasgow, Edward Buchanan Glasgow; candidate branch: Edward Lincoln Glasgow; +2 repetition bonus); Ruth +12 (15 public profiles; subject branch: Ruth Glasgow; candidate branch: Ruth Ann (Glasgow) Bamford); Eliza +10 (23 public profiles; subject branch: Eliza A Glasgow; candidate branch: Eliza Jane (Glasgow) McNeil, Eliza Jane (Glasgow) Nelson; +2 repetition bonus) (+44 total including +8 multi-name bonus)
Deductions and cautions: a different mother is strongly supported (−30; Strongly supported; combined direct transcription); same country, but no indexed locality overlap (−10); candidate's household recorded William Glasgow in Rockbridge, Virginia, United States within 6 years of the subject (−12; no contemporaneous child is indexed in the subject's locality)
Possible Mother
Jane GlasgowUnknown-763421
- plausible 22-year parent-child age gap (+18)
- 3 independent unlinked-profile clue types converge (+5): household chronology, locality, naming
- candidate's birth is 50 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1800), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
a different mother is strongly supported (−30; Strongly supported; combined direct transcription)
Show complete scoring
- plausible 22-year parent-child age gap (+18)
- candidate's birth is 50 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1800), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
- weak broad-area overlap: antrim (+1; not a locality match)
- a known child was born within 4 years of the subject (+1)
- candidate has another child, Ann Glasgow, born 4 years from the subject in the same specific birth locality (+6; possible sibling-household clue)
- a candidate spouse matches the first dated son James J Glasgow, the expected father position (+3; James in 224 profiles)
- 3 independent unlinked-profile clue types converge (+5): household chronology, locality, naming
Deductions and cautions: a different mother is strongly supported (−30; Strongly supported; combined direct transcription)
How parent leads are calculated
Automated leads use birth surnames—not married surnames—as parental eligibility, role-specific biological age limits, bounded and approximate-date uncertainty, household chronology, specific time-aware localities, mapped distance, tenancy succession, migration destinations and sex-aware Scottish naming positions across generations. People already attached as the subject's parents stay in the identity summary and are excluded from this alternative-candidate list, regardless of relationship confidence. The main calibration uses clues available on disconnected profiles; existing parent and sibling links are retained as comparison context rather than treated as transferable evidence. Common ordered names and grandparent-to-child echoes receive a small non-zero weight, so a John or James match can support several independent criteria without producing a lead alone. Rare names, repeated bearers and bundles across otherwise distinct branches receive substantially more weight according to catalogue frequency. An exact migration place is weighted by its rarity and repetition across both branches; a shared destination country is worth only one point. Extra weight is added only when at least three independent clue types converge: naming, locality, specific migration, household chronology or collateral networks. Sparse profiles retain a clearly labelled chronology-only fallback instead of disappearing. Countries, states, counties and research clusters do not count as a shared locality, and fallback, broad representative or kin-inferred coordinates are excluded from distance scoring. Shared descendant profiles are removed before branch-name comparison. A candidate already recorded as a parent-in-law is excluded. A confident or independently supported parent is treated as settled; uncertain and unassessed attachments remain open to alternative comparison. A different linked parent, an uncle/aunt or grandparent path, and a matching existing child profile prevent an alternative from being classified as a strong direct-parent lead until the underlying tree conflict or duplicate is resolved. Familiar forms such as Bessie are normalised. Surname remains an eligibility filter worth zero points.
Naming customs, shared farms and occupations are circumstantial. Children, spouses and collateral relatives may be missing, and tree-derived family networks are not independent evidence. Scores rank research leads; they do not prove parentage.
No sufficiently similar same-name person is currently indexed.
How duplicate leads are calculated
Dates are eligibility gates, not merely deductions: chronologically impossible people are excluded. Dates, places, spouses, parent certainty and children's profiles and names are then compared. A high score is a prompt to inspect records, not a merge recommendation.
Open only what you need
Research & records
Latest case researchThe current conclusion from the durable research case file.Updated
Current conclusion
James Glasgow's will and the 1817 equity case strongly support Wilson as a son of James and Mary. Mary McCracken is strongly supported as Wilson's wife. Mary's 1837 will gives Ruth one-seventh, Mariah one-sixth of the remainder, and the residue to her “other five children”; Hiram is separately named as trustee. This establishes seven children in total. The current Robert Glasgow-2298 attachment is probable from the matching real-estate party list but not yet explicit. James J Glasgow-2738 is excluded from this child group.
Life and record timelineChronological mapped occurrences and their underlying sources.1 record
Profile birth location: Kilwaughter, Larne, County Antrim
Kilwaughter-labelled project profile; later emigrant.
Source and mapping detail
WikiTree profile export for Glasgow-1982
No sufficiently specific citation match found.
Precision: Village/parish representative point
Case-file source findingsSource extracts and analysis regenerated from findings.md.1 section(s)
Source findings
| Source | Finding | Assessment |
|---|---|---|
| James Glasgow's 1775 will | Names Wilson among James's six children. | Direct derivative will transcription. |
| Mary Glasgow's 1837 will, Will Book N, p. 1 | Identifies Mary as Wilson's widow; names Ruth and Mariah, names Hiram as trustee, and divides the estate into seven child-shares. | Direct derivative will transcription. |
| Gilders Creek Cemetery survey and photographs | Wilson's stone calls him Mary's husband; Mary's calls her Wilson's wife. | Direct gravestone transcription with linked photographs. |
| Wilson Glasgow real-estate index, packet 1-13 | Lists Mary, Robert, Ruth, Naomi, Matilda, Hiram, Almina and Maria in Wilson's estate. | Probable full child group; exact relationships require the packet. |
Ruth is now profiled as Ruth Glasgow (Glasgow-3999), following the merge of Unknown-596970 and correction of her birth surname. Her 1802–1863 dates match the Gilders Creek Ruth, and she was the widow of Absolom Glasgow before Mary's 1837 will. Both parent links remain uncertain because the original real-estate packet would provide the best final identity check. Mariah, Hiram, Naomi, Matilda and Almina have no matching profiles in the current live WikiTree search. Do not merge Naomi with the same-generation Naomi whose stone calls her a daughter of Archibald and Mary Glasgow.
Hiram is independently distinguishable as the Newberry man who died in 1847; his estate is indexed as estate 1953, box 77, package 196. Mary's will directly calls him her son.
James J Glasgow-2738 is not one of Wilson and Mary's seven apparent children. The will's child count matches the seven names in Wilson's real-estate index, and James is absent. The FamilySearch child list is also demonstrably conflated: it assigns Fleming Bates Glasgow, reportedly born in 1823, to Wilson, who died in 1817.
The web transcription gives Mary's will as dated 28 November 1837 but also says “recorded” 1 July 1837, an impossible sequence. Treat the July date as a transcription error pending inspection of Will Book N; proof on 22 October 1838 is chronologically coherent.
Evidence assessmentWhat is supported, uncertain or disputed in the current case model.15 claims
Documented or strongly supported
Wilson Crossier Glasgow was son of James Glasgow
James's will and the equity complaint both list Wilson among James's children.
Wilson Crossier Glasgow was son of Mary (Crosier) Glasgow
The equity complaint and sworn answer place Wilson among the children of James and his widow Mary; Wilson's distinctive middle name is supportive but not the basis of the conclusion.
Wilson Crossier Glasgow was husband of Mary (McCracken) Glasgow
Mary's 1837 will is identified as that of Wilson's widow, while her photographed cemetery inscription calls her Wilson's wife.
Glasgow-1982 was husband of McCracken-3711, and their documented children include Ruth, Mariah and Hiram.
Reciprocal grave inscriptions identify the spouses; Mary's 1837 will names Ruth and Mariah, names Hiram as trustee, and divides the estate into seven child-shares.
Working hypotheses and conflicts
Robert Glasgow was probable son of Wilson Crossier Glasgow
The Wilson Glasgow real-estate index lists widow Mary and seven associated people including Robert; Mary's will says she had seven children but names only Ruth, Mariah and Hiram. Robert's exact relationship requires the packet.
James J Glasgow was son of Wilson Crossier Glasgow
Mary's will creates seven child-shares; Wilson's estate index lists seven apparent children—Robert, Ruth, Naomi, Matilda, Hiram, Almina and Maria—and omits James. The FamilySearch list also assigns Wilson a child born in 1823, six years after Wilson's death.
Glasgow-2298 was probably a son of Glasgow-1982 and McCracken-3711.
The Wilson Glasgow real-estate index lists widow Mary and seven associated people including Robert; Mary's will says she had seven children but does not name Robert.
Glasgow-2738 was not a son of Glasgow-1982 and McCracken-3711.
Mary's will establishes seven children and Wilson's real-estate index supplies seven apparent child names. James is absent. The FamilySearch list also assigns Wilson a child born six years after Wilson died.
Research questionsOpen problems, missing bridges and the next records to inspect.3 open
Which records prove the subject's identity across events?
The will, equity case, reciprocal gravestones and estate indexes form a coherent Newberry identity.
Missing bridge: The will, equity case, reciprocal gravestones and estate indexes form a coherent Newberry identity.
Which spouses and children are directly supported by records?
Mary McCracken is strongly supported as spouse; Ruth and Mariah are named as daughters and Hiram as a son. The seven-child count matches the seven apparent children in the estate index; the packet is needed for explicit kin terms for the remaining names.
Missing bridge: Mary McCracken is strongly supported as spouse; Ruth and Mariah are named as daughters and Hiram as a son. The seven-child count matches the seven apparent children in the estate index; the packet is needed for explicit kin terms for the remaining names.
What conflicts or same-name conflations must be resolved?
The will transcription gives an impossible recorded date before execution, and two same-generation Naomis must not be merged without the estate packet.
Missing bridge: The will transcription gives an impossible recorded date before execution, and two same-generation Naomis must not be merged without the estate packet.
Next records to inspect
- Newberry real-estate packet 1-13 — Determine which listed parties were Wilson and Mary's seven children and resolve the duplicate Naomi problem.
- Newberry estate 651 box 28 package 58 — Identify Wilson's heirs and administrator relationship from the original packet.
Sources and provenanceStructured citations and source-quality classifications.15 sources
Source or provenance: quality describes the record layer, not every conclusion drawn from it.
- derivative Newberry District, South Carolina, will of James Glasgow, dated 4 June 1775; transcription (https://web.archive.org/web/20101124184247id_/http://www.lifesweaving.com/Glasgow/Paper_JGlasgowWill.html).
- derivative "United States Census, 1800," FamilySearch (record (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:XHRC-7BB)), Wilson Glasgow, Newberry District, South Carolina; citing NARA microfilm publication M32, roll 50, p. 75.
- unknown Gilders Creek Cemetery survey (https://genealogytrails.com/scar/newberry/gilders_creek_cem.htm), Newberry County, South Carolina, entries for Wilson and Mary Glasgow.
- derivative Newberry County estate index (https://genealogytrails.com/scar/newberry/estates1785-1949/22.htm), Hiram Glasgow, 1847, estate 1953, box 77, package 196.
- derivative Newberry District, South Carolina, Will Book N, p. 1, will of Mary Glasgow, widow of Wilson Glasgow, dated 28 November 1837 and proved 22 October 1838; transcription (https://web.archive.org/web/20101124184247id_/http://www.lifesweaving.com/Glasgow/Paper_WilsonGlasgowWife.html). The displayed recording date of July 1837 precedes execution and is evidently a transcription error.
- derivative Newberry County, South Carolina, real-estate packet 1-13, estate of Wilson Glasgow; index (https://genealogytrails.com/scar/newberry/realestate.html), entries for Wilson Glasgow and Mary, Robert, Ruth, Naomi, Matilda, Hiram, Almina and Maria.
- tree_only WikiTree profile export for Glasgow-1982
- derivative James's will
- unknown Controlled relationship assessment
- derivative Mary's 1837 will
- derivative The Wilson Glasgow real-estate index
- unknown https://web.archive.org/web/20101124184247id_/http://www.lifesweaving.com/Glasgow/Paper_WilsonGlasgowWife.html
- unknown https://genealogytrails.com/scar/newberry/gilders_creek_cem.htm
- unknown https://www.genealogytrails.com/scar/newberry/realestate.html
- unknown https://genealogytrails.com/scar/newberry/realestate.html
Technical profile and raw captureDataset metadata, machine dossier and captured WikiTree biography.Advanced
WikiTree profile information
Glasgow-1982
Wilson Crossier Glasgow
Updated 2026-08-12
Dataset: ONT_Glasco_2026-08-18T16_05.json · generated 2026-08-20
WikiTree biography, citations and relationship snapshot
Glasgow-1982 was captured 2026-08-19T11:32:40+00:00; WikiTree profile revision 2026-08-12.
Profile location claims
| Event | Date | Location | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| birth | — | Kilwaughter, Larne, County Antrim, Ireland | WikiTree profile field |
| death | — | Newberry, South Carolina, United States | WikiTree profile field |
Immediate relationship snapshot
| Relationship | Person | WikiTree ID | Dates and places returned |
|---|---|---|---|
| Parents | James Glasgow | Glasgow-1144 | 1731-05-24 · Kilwaughter, Larne, County Antrim, Ireland · 1793-00-00 · Newberry, South Carolina |
| Parents | Mary Glasgow | Crosier-512 | 1737-00-00 · Ireland · 1822-10-10 · Newberry, South Carolina, United States |
| Children | Mariah McCracken | Glasgow-3994 | 1800-00-00 · 0000-00-00 |
| Children | Robert Glasgow | Glasgow-2298 | 1800-00-00 · Newberry, South Carolina, United States · 1869-00-00 · Georgia, United States |
| Children | Ruth Glasgow | Glasgow-3999 | 1802-05-26 · 1863-04-25 · Newberry, South Carolina, United States |
| Children | Matilda Glasgow | Glasgow-3997 | 1805-00-00 · 0000-00-00 |
| Children | Naomi Glasgow | Glasgow-3998 | 1805-00-00 · 0000-00-00 |
| Children | Almina Glasgow | Glasgow-3996 | 1810-00-00 · 0000-00-00 |
| Children | Hiram Glasgow | Glasgow-3995 | 1810-00-00 · 1847-00-00 |
| Siblings | John Glasgow | Glasgow-1146 | 1756-00-00 · County Antrim, Ireland · 1826-12-11 · Gilder's Creek, Newberry Co., S Carolina |
| Siblings | Robert Glasgow | Glasgow-1983 | 1763-00-00 · Ireland · 1835-01-17 · Newberry, South Carolina, United States |
| Siblings | Archibald Glasgow | Glasgow-2304 | 1769-00-00 · 1818-07-22 · Newberry, South Carolina, United States |
| Siblings | Margaret Kinard | Glasgow-3977 | 1773-00-00 · 0000-00-00 |
| Siblings | Rachel McCrackin | Glasgow-3978 | 1775-00-00 · 0000-00-00 |
| Spouses | Mary Glasgow | McCracken-3711 | 1777-00-00 · 1838-03-23 · Newberry, South Carolina, United States · 0000-00-00 |
Profile categories
Estimated_Birth_Date Glasgow_Name_Study
Record-bearing passages
- Biography Wilson Crossier Glasgow was born about 1772, calculated from his gravestone age. His present Irish birthplace has not been verified by an inspected birth or baptism record.
- Wilson was a son of James Glasgow and Mary Crosier. James's 1775 will named Wilson among his children. Newberry District, South Carolina, will of James Glasgow, dated 4 June 1775; transcription (https://web.archive.org/web/20101124184247id_/http://www.lifesweaving.com/Glasgow/Paper_JGlasgowWill.html).
- In 1800 Wilson headed a household in Newberry District, South Carolina. "United States Census, 1800," FamilySearch (record (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:XHRC-7BB)), Wilson Glasgow, Newberry District, South Carolina; citing NARA microfilm publication M32, roll 50, p. 75.
- Wilson married Mary McCracken. Their reciprocal gravestone inscriptions identify them as husband and wife. Gilders Creek Cemetery survey (https://genealogytrails.com/scar/newberry/gilders_creek_cem.htm), Newberry County, South Carolina, entries for Wilson and Mary Glasgow.
- Wilson died on 11 September 1817, aged about 45, and was buried at Gilders Creek Cemetery in Newberry County. John Glasgow administered his estate. Newberry County estate index (https://genealogytrails.com/scar/newberry/estates1785-1949/22.htm), Wilson Glasgow, 1817, estate 651, box 28, package 58. Research Notes Children Mary's 1837 will gave their daughter Ruth one-seventh of her property, daughter Mariah one-sixth of the remainder, and the residue to her “other five children.” Their son Hiram was appointed trustee for Mariah. The wording establishes seven children in total. Newberry District, South Carolina, Will Book N, p. 1, will of Mary Glasgow, widow of Wilson Glasgow, dated 28 November 1837 and proved 22 October 1838; transcription (https://web.archive.org/web/20101124184247id_/http://www.lifesweaving.com/Glasgow/Paper_WilsonGlasgowWife.html). The displayed recording date of July 1837 precedes execution and is evidently a transcription error.
- The index to Wilson's real-estate packet lists Mary with Robert, Ruth, Naomi, Matilda, Hiram, Almina and Maria. This is the widow plus seven apparent children and matches the will's child count, although the original packet is still needed for explicit kin terms. Newberry County, South Carolina, real-estate packet 1-13, estate of Wilson Glasgow; index (https://genealogytrails.com/scar/newberry/realestate.html), entries for Wilson Glasgow and Mary, Robert, Ruth, Naomi, Matilda, Hiram, Almina and Maria.
- {| class="wikitable" ! Child ! Evidence and identification |- | Robert Glasgow | Named in Wilson's real-estate packet index. His existing WikiTree identification remains probable pending inspection of the packet. |- | Ruth Glasgow, 1802–1863 | Explicitly called Mary's daughter in her will. The existing profile currently has an unknown birth surname, but its dates and Newberry burial match Ruth Glasgow at Gilders Creek. She was the widow of Absolom Glasgow. |- | Naomi Glasgow | Named in Wilson's real-estate packet index. She has not been identified with a separate WikiTree profile. She was not Naomi Glasgow, whose memorial identifies different parents. |- | Matilda Glasgow | Named in Wilson's real-estate packet index; no matching WikiTree profile has yet been identified. |- | Hiram Glasgow, about 1810–1847 | Explicitly called Mary's son in her will and appointed trustee for Mariah. His Newberry estate was administered in 1847. Newberry County estate index (https://genealogytrails.com/scar/newberry/estates1785-1949/22.htm), Hiram Glasgow, 1847, estate 1953, box 77, package 196. |- | Almina Glasgow | Named in Wilson's real-estate packet index; no matching WikiTree profile has yet been identified. |- | Mariah Glasgow | Explicitly called Mary's daughter and the wife of William McCracken in Mary's will. She is apparently the Maria named in Wilson's real-estate packet index; no matching WikiTree profile has yet been identified. |}
- James J Glasgow was proposed elsewhere as another son. He is not included in the matching seven-child estate group and was not attached here. The same FamilySearch family also includes Fleming Bates Glasgow, reportedly born in 1823, six years after Wilson's death. That online child list combines more than one family. Y-DNA The Y-DNA result presently displayed on this profile should not be treated as proof of descent from Wilson. Kit 200475 belongs to a documented paternal line descending from Robert Glasgow, born in 1749; no record has connected that Robert as a descendant of Wilson. Sources
Profile source citations
- Newberry District, South Carolina, will of James Glasgow, dated 4 June 1775; transcription (https://web.archive.org/web/20101124184247id_/http://www.lifesweaving.com/Glasgow/Paper_JGlasgowWill.html). source link 1
- "United States Census, 1800," FamilySearch (record (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:XHRC-7BB)), Wilson Glasgow, Newberry District, South Carolina; citing NARA microfilm publication M32, roll 50, p. 75. source link 1
- Gilders Creek Cemetery survey (https://genealogytrails.com/scar/newberry/gilders_creek_cem.htm), Newberry County, South Carolina, entries for Wilson and Mary Glasgow. source link 1
- John Glasgow administered his estate. Newberry County estate index (https://genealogytrails.com/scar/newberry/estates1785-1949/22.htm), Wilson Glasgow, 1817, estate 651, box 28, package 58. source link 1
- Newberry District, South Carolina, Will Book N, p. 1, will of Mary Glasgow, widow of Wilson Glasgow, dated 28 November 1837 and proved 22 October 1838; transcription (https://web.archive.org/web/20101124184247id_/http://www.lifesweaving.com/Glasgow/Paper_WilsonGlasgowWife.html). The displayed recording date of July 1837 precedes execution and is evidently a transcription error. source link 1
- Newberry County, South Carolina, real-estate packet 1-13, estate of Wilson Glasgow; index (https://genealogytrails.com/scar/newberry/realestate.html), entries for Wilson Glasgow and Mary, Robert, Ruth, Naomi, Matilda, Hiram, Almina and Maria. source link 1
- Newberry County estate index (https://genealogytrails.com/scar/newberry/estates1785-1949/22.htm), Hiram Glasgow, 1847, estate 1953, box 77, package 196. source link 1
Full captured biography text
Biography
Wilson Crossier Glasgow was born about 1772, calculated from his gravestone age. His present Irish birthplace has not been verified by an inspected birth or baptism record.
Wilson was a son of James Glasgow and Mary Crosier. James's 1775 will named Wilson among his children. Newberry District, South Carolina, will of James Glasgow, dated 4 June 1775; transcription (https://web.archive.org/web/20101124184247id_/http://www.lifesweaving.com/Glasgow/Paper_JGlasgowWill.html).
In 1800 Wilson headed a household in Newberry District, South Carolina. "United States Census, 1800," FamilySearch (record (https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:XHRC-7BB)), Wilson Glasgow, Newberry District, South Carolina; citing NARA microfilm publication M32, roll 50, p. 75.
Wilson married Mary McCracken. Their reciprocal gravestone inscriptions identify them as husband and wife. Gilders Creek Cemetery survey (https://genealogytrails.com/scar/newberry/gilders_creek_cem.htm), Newberry County, South Carolina, entries for Wilson and Mary Glasgow.
Wilson died on 11 September 1817, aged about 45, and was buried at Gilders Creek Cemetery in Newberry County. John Glasgow administered his estate. Newberry County estate index (https://genealogytrails.com/scar/newberry/estates1785-1949/22.htm), Wilson Glasgow, 1817, estate 651, box 28, package 58.
Research Notes
Children
Mary's 1837 will gave their daughter Ruth one-seventh of her property, daughter Mariah one-sixth of the remainder, and the residue to her “other five children.” Their son Hiram was appointed trustee for Mariah. The wording establishes seven children in total. Newberry District, South Carolina, Will Book N, p. 1, will of Mary Glasgow, widow of Wilson Glasgow, dated 28 November 1837 and proved 22 October 1838; transcription (https://web.archive.org/web/20101124184247id_/http://www.lifesweaving.com/Glasgow/Paper_WilsonGlasgowWife.html). The displayed recording date of July 1837 precedes execution and is evidently a transcription error.
The index to Wilson's real-estate packet lists Mary with Robert, Ruth, Naomi, Matilda, Hiram, Almina and Maria. This is the widow plus seven apparent children and matches the will's child count, although the original packet is still needed for explicit kin terms. Newberry County, South Carolina, real-estate packet 1-13, estate of Wilson Glasgow; index (https://genealogytrails.com/scar/newberry/realestate.html), entries for Wilson Glasgow and Mary, Robert, Ruth, Naomi, Matilda, Hiram, Almina and Maria.
The reconstructed child group is:
{| class="wikitable"
! Child
! Evidence and identification
|-
| Robert Glasgow
| Named in Wilson's real-estate packet index. His existing WikiTree identification remains probable pending inspection of the packet.
|-
| Ruth Glasgow, 1802–1863
| Explicitly called Mary's daughter in her will. The existing profile currently has an unknown birth surname, but its dates and Newberry burial match Ruth Glasgow at Gilders Creek. She was the widow of Absolom Glasgow.
|-
| Naomi Glasgow
| Named in Wilson's real-estate packet index. She has not been identified with a separate WikiTree profile. She was not Naomi Glasgow, whose memorial identifies different parents.
|-
| Matilda Glasgow
| Named in Wilson's real-estate packet index; no matching WikiTree profile has yet been identified.
|-
| Hiram Glasgow, about 1810–1847
| Explicitly called Mary's son in her will and appointed trustee for Mariah. His Newberry estate was administered in 1847. Newberry County estate index (https://genealogytrails.com/scar/newberry/estates1785-1949/22.htm), Hiram Glasgow, 1847, estate 1953, box 77, package 196.
|-
| Almina Glasgow
| Named in Wilson's real-estate packet index; no matching WikiTree profile has yet been identified.
|-
| Mariah Glasgow
| Explicitly called Mary's daughter and the wife of William McCracken in Mary's will. She is apparently the Maria named in Wilson's real-estate packet index; no matching WikiTree profile has yet been identified.
|}
Ruth, Mariah and Hiram are directly identified as Mary's children. Robert, Naomi, Matilda and Almina complete the seven-name group in Wilson's estate, exactly matching Mary's stated child count. The original real-estate packet should still be inspected before describing its wording as direct proof of each relationship.
James J Glasgow was proposed elsewhere as another son. He is not included in the matching seven-child estate group and was not attached here. The same FamilySearch family also includes Fleming Bates Glasgow, reportedly born in 1823, six years after Wilson's death. That online child list combines more than one family.
Y-DNA
The Y-DNA result presently displayed on this profile should not be treated as proof of descent from Wilson. Kit 200475 belongs to a documented paternal line descending from Robert Glasgow, born in 1749; no record has connected that Robert as a descendant of Wilson.
SourcesRaw WikiTree biography markup
{{Estimated Date}}
{{One Name Study|name=Glasgow}}
== Biography ==
'''Wilson Crossier Glasgow''' was born about 1772, calculated from his gravestone age. His present Irish birthplace has not been verified by an inspected birth or baptism record.
Wilson was a son of [[Glasgow-1144|James Glasgow]] and [[Crosier-512|Mary Crosier]]. James's 1775 will named Wilson among his children.<ref name="JamesWill">Newberry District, South Carolina, will of James Glasgow, dated 4 June 1775; [https://web.archive.org/web/20101124184247id_/http://www.lifesweaving.com/Glasgow/Paper_JGlasgowWill.html transcription].</ref>
In 1800 Wilson headed a household in Newberry District, South Carolina.<ref name="Census1800">"United States Census, 1800," FamilySearch ([https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:XHRC-7BB record]), Wilson Glasgow, Newberry District, South Carolina; citing NARA microfilm publication M32, roll 50, p. 75.</ref>
Wilson married [[McCracken-3711|Mary McCracken]]. Their reciprocal gravestone inscriptions identify them as husband and wife.<ref name="GildersCreek">[https://genealogytrails.com/scar/newberry/gilders_creek_cem.htm Gilders Creek Cemetery survey], Newberry County, South Carolina, entries for Wilson and Mary Glasgow.</ref>
Wilson died on 11 September 1817, aged about 45, and was buried at Gilders Creek Cemetery in Newberry County.<ref name="GildersCreek" /> John Glasgow administered his estate.<ref name="EstateIndex">[https://genealogytrails.com/scar/newberry/estates1785-1949/22.htm Newberry County estate index], Wilson Glasgow, 1817, estate 651, box 28, package 58.</ref>
== Research Notes ==
=== Children ===
Mary's 1837 will gave their daughter Ruth one-seventh of her property, daughter Mariah one-sixth of the remainder, and the residue to her “other five children.” Their son Hiram was appointed trustee for Mariah. The wording establishes seven children in total.<ref name="MaryWill">Newberry District, South Carolina, Will Book N, p. 1, will of Mary Glasgow, widow of Wilson Glasgow, dated 28 November 1837 and proved 22 October 1838; [https://web.archive.org/web/20101124184247id_/http://www.lifesweaving.com/Glasgow/Paper_WilsonGlasgowWife.html transcription]. The displayed recording date of July 1837 precedes execution and is evidently a transcription error.</ref>
The index to Wilson's real-estate packet lists Mary with Robert, Ruth, Naomi, Matilda, Hiram, Almina and Maria. This is the widow plus seven apparent children and matches the will's child count, although the original packet is still needed for explicit kin terms.<ref name="RealEstate">Newberry County, South Carolina, real-estate packet 1-13, estate of Wilson Glasgow; [https://genealogytrails.com/scar/newberry/realestate.html index], entries for Wilson Glasgow and Mary, Robert, Ruth, Naomi, Matilda, Hiram, Almina and Maria.</ref>
The reconstructed child group is:
{| class="wikitable"
! Child
! Evidence and identification
|-
| [[Glasgow-2298|Robert Glasgow]]
| Named in Wilson's real-estate packet index. His existing WikiTree identification remains probable pending inspection of the packet.
|-
| [[Unknown-596970|Ruth Glasgow]], 1802–1863
| Explicitly called Mary's daughter in her will. The existing profile currently has an unknown birth surname, but its dates and Newberry burial match Ruth Glasgow at Gilders Creek. She was the widow of [[Glasgow-1145|Absolom Glasgow]].
|-
| Naomi Glasgow
| Named in Wilson's real-estate packet index. She has not been identified with a separate WikiTree profile. She was not [[Glasgow-3979|Naomi Glasgow]], whose memorial identifies different parents.
|-
| Matilda Glasgow
| Named in Wilson's real-estate packet index; no matching WikiTree profile has yet been identified.
|-
| Hiram Glasgow, about 1810–1847
| Explicitly called Mary's son in her will and appointed trustee for Mariah. His Newberry estate was administered in 1847.<ref name="HiramEstate">[https://genealogytrails.com/scar/newberry/estates1785-1949/22.htm Newberry County estate index], Hiram Glasgow, 1847, estate 1953, box 77, package 196.</ref>
|-
| Almina Glasgow
| Named in Wilson's real-estate packet index; no matching WikiTree profile has yet been identified.
|-
| Mariah Glasgow
| Explicitly called Mary's daughter and the wife of William McCracken in Mary's will. She is apparently the Maria named in Wilson's real-estate packet index; no matching WikiTree profile has yet been identified.
|}
Ruth, Mariah and Hiram are directly identified as Mary's children. Robert, Naomi, Matilda and Almina complete the seven-name group in Wilson's estate, exactly matching Mary's stated child count. The original real-estate packet should still be inspected before describing its wording as direct proof of each relationship.
[[Glasgow-2738|James J Glasgow]] was proposed elsewhere as another son. He is not included in the matching seven-child estate group and was not attached here. The same FamilySearch family also includes Fleming Bates Glasgow, reportedly born in 1823, six years after Wilson's death. That online child list combines more than one family.
=== Y-DNA ===
The Y-DNA result presently displayed on this profile should not be treated as proof of descent from Wilson. Kit 200475 belongs to a documented paternal line descending from [[Glasgow-12|Robert Glasgow]], born in 1749; no record has connected that Robert as a descendant of Wilson.
== Sources ==
<references />