Alexander Glasgow

Current conclusion

The original 1847 marriage establishes Alexander as a full-age labourer of Glenleslie, son of **John Glasgow, labourer**. The live profile and current catalogue now represent that record-defined father as [[Glasgow-4056|John Glasgow]]. The earlier attachment to [[Glasgow-867|John of Lisnagaver]] is superseded; it was chronologically incompatible with that man's memorial age. Naming the father does not prove a connection to John of Glenleslie `Glasgow-1022` or to Alexander-951.

The 1851 household supports a distinct Glenleslie couple, Alexander and Mary Ann, with son John. This Alexander is a weaker but unexcluded candidate for the 1888 Gortahar death. The family's later movements are unresolved. A live-source review on 13 September found no identifiable original for Mary Anne Martin’s asserted 1882 death and an unrelated-looking Sydney marriage description involving Mary Ann Cupid. That unsourced death year cannot presently exclude her husband from a married death in 1888.

Source findings

| Source | Finding | Assessment |
| --- | --- | --- |
| [Marriage of Alexander Glasgow and Mary Anne Martin, 6 April 1847](https://www.irishgenealogy.ie/files/civil/marriage_returns/marriages_1847/09322/5375567.pdf) | Alexander, full age, bachelor and labourer, lived at Glenleslie; father **John Glasgow, labourer**. Witnesses were Peter Richmond and John Montgomery. | Direct father-name and residence evidence; it does not identify the father with a WikiTree profile. [Local copy](sources/alexander_glasgow_mary_ann_martin_marriage_1847.pdf). |
| [1851 census, Glenleslie household 35](https://www.census.nationalarchives.ie/pages/1851/Antrim/Kilconway/Dunaghy/Glenleslie/35/) | Alexander was reported as 35 and an agricultural labourer; wife Mary Ann and son John were in the household. | Supports birth about 1816 and continuity with the 1847 groom. |

Parentage correction

The earlier John-867 attachment is superseded by the record-defined father [[Glasgow-4056|John Glasgow, labourer]]. The marriage proves the father's name and occupation; it does not connect him to an older Glenleslie or Lisnagaver pedigree. John-1022 remains a different, unproved possible identification, not a source-supported extension.

Cluster significance

This record independently proves that the given name Alexander occurred in the
Dunaghy/Glenleslie Glasgow network. That makes a wider relationship with
[[Glasgow-3904|older Alexander Glasgow]]'s Lisnagaver branch more plausible,
but does not establish the connecting generation.

Gortahar death-candidate comparison — 13 September 2026

The original [16 May 1888 Alexander Glasgow death at Gortahar](https://www.irishgenealogy.ie/files/civil/deaths_returns/deaths_1888/06179/4766466.pdf),
entry 348, describes a married labourer aged 84, informed by daughter Mary
Glasgow of Gortahar (the forename was read as Nancy until 6 October 2026). This man could not be distinguished from the Glenleslie
Alexander by occupation alone. However, the Glenleslie man's 1851 age of 35
implies about 72 in 1888, a larger discrepancy than the seven-year discrepancy
for [Alexander Glasgow-951](https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Glasgow-951). No located
record connects Glasgow-2385 to Gortahar or the Elder household, or gives him a
daughter Mary.

Glasgow-951 remains the best-supported probable identification because his
daughter Mary married Robert Elder of the later Gortahar family, Robert
succeeded to Alexander's Lisnagaver lot 25, and daughter Mary Elder informed
widow Mary Glasgow's 1892 death at Gortahar. These connections are indirect;
neither death explicitly names the other deceased as spouse. Glasgow-2385 is
a genuine but weaker candidate, not conclusively excluded. Do not transfer the
1888 death to him on the shared name and occupation.

The reported 1882 death of wife Mary Anne Martin remains unverified. The 13 September live WikiTree API review of [Martin-93219](https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Martin-93219) found no identifiable original death citation; the biography instead includes an 1848 Sydney marriage involving Mary Ann Cupid. Do not equate those women or use the unsupported 1882 date to exclude the husband. Even a proved first-wife death would require checking remarriage.

Next identity record — 13 September 2026

The live [John Martin Glasgow profile (Glasgow-2826)](https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Glasgow-2826) reports a John Martin Glascow–Mary Gibson marriage on 10 November 1870, citing [FamilySearch QGYQ-ZW9Z](https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:QGYQ-ZW9Z). This is a specific lead for the Glenleslie son’s later household, not yet an inspected marriage or proved identity. The copied Coleraine/County Offaly location is inconsistent and is not adopted. The original could identify father, occupation and residence, but omission of a deceased label would not by itself prove Alexander alive. FamilySearch returned a challenge instead of the record in the bounded lookup; the primary entry remains required.

The bounded follow-up also reached the IrishGenealogy homepage, but direct retrieval returned a Cloudflare challenge and no civil-entry image was obtained. The next query is John/John Martin Glascow, marriage 10 November 1870, other person Mary Gibson; try Glasgow as the recorded-name variant and leave location unrestricted until the inconsistent copied place is resolved. This was an access failure, not a negative civil-index result.

Glenleslie identity follow-up — 13 September 2026

The reported [John Martin Glascow–Mary Gibson marriage of 10 November 1870](https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:QGYQ-ZW9Z) remains an unverified lead for the Glenleslie son. The civil original was not retrieved in this pass; search-engine absence and an access failure are not evidence against the marriage. Search without adopting the contradictory copied Coleraine/County Offaly location. A compatible father, residence and occupation could locate this family after 1851; the result would not by itself identify the 1888 Gortahar decedent.

Only after identifying the son’s family locality should the wife’s alleged 1882 death be used as a bounded target. An earlier wife’s death would still require checking remarriage before excluding a later married death. [The current comparison and next tests](/people/glasgow-951.html#next-research) retain this man as a weaker, unexcluded alternative.