Glasgow Surname Project

Individual research record

William Glasgow

c. 1772 – c. 1862

Glasgow-2130 · 1 mapped association

Tennessee→Union, Illinois, United States
View on mapOpen WikiTreeCompareReport a correction

At a glance

Identity & family

Tree links organise the family; documentary status still varies.

1Mapped records
2Close relations
2Evidence items
12Candidate leads
Birth
c. 1772 · Tennessee
Death
c. 1862 · Union, Illinois, United States
Parents
Not recorded
Spouses
Susan (Price) Glassgow
Children
William Price Glassgow
Gender
Male
WikiTree
Glasgow-2130
Research clusters
Worldwide One-Tree profile leads
Mapped descendants
5

Comparison context

These child positions and checks are the subject details used to rank possible parents below.

Naming sequence used by the parentage model

Paternal grandfather positionWilliam Price Glassgow (1816)
Maternal grandfather positionNot identifiable from dated child profiles
Maternal grandmother positionNot identifiable from dated child profiles
Paternal grandmother positionNot identifiable from dated child profiles

Known-position checks: 0 support · 0 conflict. Ordinals retain unnamed children and recognise reused names.

Relationship comparison

Potential parents or duplicates

Compare scored leads with the subject details above—not proof.

Higher-signal leadReview carefullyWeak lead

Possible fathers5 leads

Automated fit30/100
Weak Lead
Dates1747–?Generation25 years age gapRecorded placesScotland · Scotland — exact locality unprovedIndependent clue breadth · 4Age · Same-Sex Generational Naming · Sex-Aware Ordered Naming · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 25-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 69 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1816), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • candidate and subject share the given name William (+4; weak direct parent-child name recurrence, 223 public profiles)

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

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 25-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 69 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1816), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • candidate and subject share the given name William (+4; weak direct parent-child name recurrence, 223 public profiles)
  • candidate's name matches the first dated son William Price Glassgow, the expected father position for a male subject (+4; catalogue rarity 0, William in 223 profiles)

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

Automated fit30/100
Weak Lead
Dates1735–1829Generation37 years age gapRecorded placesMoneymore, Galway, Connacht, Ireland · United States · MoneymoreIndependent clue breadth · 4Age · Same-Sex Generational Naming · 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 81 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1816), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • candidate and subject share the given name William (+4; weak direct parent-child name recurrence, 223 public profiles)

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

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 37-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 81 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1816), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • candidate and subject share the given name William (+4; weak direct parent-child name recurrence, 223 public profiles)
  • candidate's name matches the first dated son William Price Glassgow, the expected father position for a male subject (+4; catalogue rarity 0, William in 223 profiles)

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

Show 3 lower-scoring possible fathers
Automated fit30/100
Weak Lead
Dates1730–?Generation42 years age gapRecorded placesKilwaughter, Larne, County Antrim, Ireland · KilwaughterIndependent clue breadth · 4Age · Same-Sex Generational Naming · Sex-Aware Ordered Naming · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 42-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 86 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1816), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • candidate and subject share the given name William (+4; weak direct parent-child name recurrence, 223 public profiles)

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

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 42-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 86 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1816), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • candidate and subject share the given name William (+4; weak direct parent-child name recurrence, 223 public profiles)
  • candidate's name matches the first dated son William Price Glassgow, the expected father position for a male subject (+4; catalogue rarity 0, William in 223 profiles)

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

Automated fit22/100
Weak Lead
Dates1753–?Generationat least 19 years age gapRecorded placesLivingston, Linlithgowshire, Scotland · Livingston — West LothianIndependent clue breadth · 4Age · Same-Sex Generational Naming · Sex-Aware Ordered Naming · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • candidate's birth is 63 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1816), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • bounded birth date gives a parent-child age gap of at least 19 years (+10; true age remains uncertain)
  • candidate and subject share the given name William (+4; weak direct parent-child name recurrence, 223 public profiles)

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

Show complete scoring
  • bounded birth date gives a parent-child age gap of at least 19 years (+10; true age remains uncertain)
  • candidate's birth is 63 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1816), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • candidate and subject share the given name William (+4; weak direct parent-child name recurrence, 223 public profiles)
  • candidate's name matches the first dated son William Price Glassgow, the expected father position for a male subject (+4; catalogue rarity 0, William in 223 profiles)

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

Automated fit22/100
Weak Lead
Dates1743–?Generationat least 29 years age gapRecorded placesPenicuik, Midlothian, Scotland · Midlothian — exact locality unprovedIndependent clue breadth · 4Age · Same-Sex Generational Naming · Sex-Aware Ordered Naming · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • candidate's birth is 73 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1816), 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)
  • candidate and subject share the given name William (+4; weak direct parent-child name recurrence, 223 public profiles)

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

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 73 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1816), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • candidate and subject share the given name William (+4; weak direct parent-child name recurrence, 223 public profiles)
  • candidate's name matches the first dated son William Price Glassgow, the expected father position for a male subject (+4; catalogue rarity 0, William in 223 profiles)

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

Possible mothers5 leads

Automated fit25/100
Weak Lead
Dates1736–1815Generation36 years age gapRecorded placesKilbirnie, Ayrshire, Scotland · Kilbirnie, Ayrshire, Scotland, United Kingdom · Kilbirnie — AyrshireIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Sex-Aware Ordered Naming · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 36-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 80 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1816), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • a candidate spouse matches the first dated son William Price Glassgow, the expected father position (+3; William in 223 profiles)

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

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 36-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 80 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1816), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • a candidate spouse matches the first dated son William Price Glassgow, the expected father position (+3; William in 223 profiles)

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

Automated fit17/100
Weak Lead
Dates1737–?Generationat least 35 years age gapRecorded placesAyr, Ayrshire, Scotland · AyrIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Sex-Aware Ordered Naming · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • candidate's birth is 79 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1816), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • bounded birth date gives a parent-child age gap of at least 35 years (+10; true age remains uncertain)
  • a candidate spouse matches the first dated son William Price Glassgow, the expected father position (+3; William in 223 profiles)

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

Show complete scoring
  • bounded birth date gives a parent-child age gap of at least 35 years (+10; true age remains uncertain)
  • candidate's birth is 79 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1816), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • a candidate spouse matches the first dated son William Price Glassgow, the expected father position (+3; William in 223 profiles)

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 fit11/100
Weak Lead
Dates1765–?Generationnominally 7 years; approximate dates permit about 15–17 years age gapRecorded placesLocation not supplied — profile holding pointIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Sex-Aware Ordered Naming · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • the nominal 7-year gap is too small, but the approximate birth date permits a narrow biologically viable interval (15–17 years) (+4)
  • candidate's birth is 51 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1816), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)

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

Show complete scoring
  • the nominal 7-year gap is too small, but the approximate birth date permits a narrow biologically viable interval (15–17 years) (+4)
  • candidate's birth is 51 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1816), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)
  • a candidate spouse matches the first dated son William Price Glassgow, the expected father position (+3; William in 223 profiles)

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

Automated fit11/100
Weak Lead
Dates1761–?Generationnominally 11 years; approximate dates permit about 15–31 years age gapRecorded placesLincolnshire, EnglandIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Sex-Aware Ordered Naming · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • the nominal 11-year gap is too small, but the approximate birth date permits a narrow biologically viable interval (15–31 years) (+4)
  • candidate's birth is 55 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1816), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • a candidate spouse matches the first dated son William Price Glassgow, the expected father position (+3; William in 223 profiles)

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

Show complete scoring
  • the nominal 11-year gap is too small, but the approximate birth date permits a narrow biologically viable interval (15–31 years) (+4)
  • candidate's birth is 55 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1816), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • a candidate spouse matches the first dated son William Price Glassgow, the expected father position (+3; William in 223 profiles)

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

Automated fit11/100
Weak Lead
Dates1758–1850Generationnominally 14 years; approximate dates permit about 15–34 years age gapRecorded placesLanarkshire, Scotland · Lanarkshire, Scotland, United Kingdom · Lanarkshire — exact locality unprovedIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Sex-Aware Ordered Naming · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • the nominal 14-year gap is too small, but the approximate birth date permits a narrow biologically viable interval (15–34 years) (+4)
  • candidate's birth is 58 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1816), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • a candidate spouse matches the first dated son William Price Glassgow, the expected father position (+3; William in 223 profiles)

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

Show complete scoring
  • the nominal 14-year gap is too small, but the approximate birth date permits a narrow biologically viable interval (15–34 years) (+4)
  • candidate's birth is 58 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1816), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • a candidate spouse matches the first dated son William Price Glassgow, the expected father position (+3; William in 223 profiles)

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

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

William GlasgowGlasgow-2965

Automated fit43/100
Similar Person
Dates1771–?PlacesLincolnshire, EnglandParent comparisonNo shared parent is indexed
Why it may fit
  • same first and last name (+18)
  • birth years within 1 (+25)

No indexed conflict

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

Conflicts: No indexed conflict

Open side-by-side comparison

Same-name candidate

William GlasgowGlasgow-3212

Automated fit31/100
Similar Person
Dates1858–1859PlacesPeoria, Illinois, United States → Peoria, Illinois, United StatesParent comparisonNo shared parent is indexed
Why it may fit
  • same first and last name (+18)
  • death years within 3 (+5)
  • overlapping locality (+8)

record-derived birth estimates differ by 86; retained without deduction

Full comparison detail
  • same first and last name (+18)
  • death years within 3 (+5)
  • overlapping locality (+8)

Conflicts: record-derived birth estimates differ by 86; retained without deduction

Open side-by-side comparison
How duplicate leads are calculated

Dates are eligibility gates, not merely deductions: chronologically impossible people are excluded. Dates, places, spouses, parent certainty and children's profiles and names are then compared. A high score is a prompt to inspect records, not a merge recommendation.

Open only what you need

Research & records

Life and record timelineChronological mapped occurrences and their underlying sources.1 record
b. 1772

Profile-stated birthplace: Tennessee

Tennessee

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-2130

No sufficiently specific citation match found.

Precision: Country-centre fallback for profile locality

Evidence assessmentWhat is supported, uncertain or disputed in the current case model.3 claims
1Tree Only
1Unknown

Documented or strongly supported

No claims in this category have been formally assessed.

Working hypotheses and conflicts

No claims in this category have been formally assessed.

Research questionsOpen problems, missing bridges and the next records to inspect.0 open

No formal open question is recorded for this person.

Sources and provenanceStructured citations and source-quality classifications.2 sources

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

  1. unknown 1860 United States Federal Census
  2. tree_only WikiTree profile export for Glasgow-2130
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-2130 was captured 2026-08-07T09:54:35+00:00; WikiTree profile revision 2022-02-11.

Profile location claims

EventDateLocationStatus
birth—TennesseeWikiTree profile field
death—Union, Illinois, United StatesWikiTree profile field

Immediate relationship snapshot

RelationshipPersonWikiTree IDDates and places returned
ChildrenWilliamGlassgow-91816-02-18 · Tennessee · 1894-12-20 · Union County, Illinois
SpousesSusanPrice-268431790-00-00 · North Carolina · 1835-06-00 · Carmi, White, Illinois, United States · 0000-00-00

Record-bearing passages

  • Biography William was born about 1772. He passed away about 1862. Sources

    • 1860 United States Federal Census
  • 1850 United States Federal Census - District 2, Union County, Illinois
  • Illinois, Marriage Index, 1860-1920

Profile source citations

  1. 1860 United States Federal Census
Full captured biography text
Biography
William was born about 1772. He passed away about 1862. 
Sources
* 1860 United States Federal Census

1850 United States Federal Census - District 2, Union County, Illinois

Illinois, Marriage Index, 1860-1920
Raw WikiTree biography markup
== Biography ==
William was born about 1772. He passed away about 1862. 
== Sources ==
<references />
* 1860 United States Federal Census

1850 United States Federal Census - District 2, Union County, Illinois

Illinois, Marriage Index, 1860-1920