Glasgow Surname Project

Individual research record

James Glasgow

c. 1789 – 1831-01-13

Glasgow-2439 · 1 mapped association

South Carolina, United States→Death place unknown
View on mapOpen WikiTreeCompareReport a correction

At a glance

Identity & family

Tree links organise the family; documentary status still varies.

1Mapped records
5Close relations
3Evidence items
12Candidate leads
Birth
c. 1789 · South Carolina, United States
Death
1831-01-13 · Place not recorded
Parents
Robert GlasgowunmarkedElizabeth (Kinard) Glasgowunmarked
Spouses
Sarah Glasgow
Children
Archibald C GlasgowSpencer Leonidus Glasgow
Gender
Male
WikiTree
Glasgow-2439
Research clusters
Worldwide One-Tree profile leads
Mapped descendants
16

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 positionArchibald C Glasgow (1817)
Maternal grandfather positionSpencer Leonidus Glasgow (1855)
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 fit17/100
Competing Linked Parent
Dates1739–1831Generation50 years age gapRecorded placesCounty Londonderry, Ireland · Pine Creek, Allegheny, Pennsylvania, United States · Portglenone — regional family-tradition referenceIndependent clue breadth · 6Age · Rare Branch-Name Recurrence · Rare Name Bundle · Spouse · Spouse-Specific Child Window · Two-GenerationSame-spouse child windowSarah (Blair) GlasgowCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • possible 50-year parent-child age gap (+10)
  • candidate's birth is 78 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1817), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • known spouse Sarah (Blair) Glasgow had a bounded, possibly plausible maternal age (32) at the subject's birth (+3)

a different father is already linked but its evidence is unassessed (−15); same country, but no indexed locality overlap (−10)

Show complete scoring
  • possible 50-year parent-child age gap (+10)
  • candidate's birth is 78 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1817), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • subject's birth fits between children attributed to the same parental couple (1780–1792) (+6; other parent Sarah (Blair) Glasgow)
  • known spouse Sarah (Blair) Glasgow had a bounded, possibly plausible maternal age (32) at the subject's birth (+3)
  • uncommon given names recur in both otherwise distinct descendant branches: Archibald +12 (9 public profiles; subject branch: Archibald C Glasgow; candidate branch: Archibald Glasgow); Martha +3 (45 public profiles; subject branch: Martha Amelia Glasgow; candidate branch: Martha E (Glasgow) Smith) (+19 total including +4 multi-name bonus)

Deductions and cautions: a different father is already linked but its evidence is unassessed (−15); same country, but no indexed locality overlap (−10)

Automated fit16/100
Competing Linked Parent
Dates1756–1826Generation33 years age gapRecorded placesNewberry, South Carolina, United StatesIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Two-Generation · Undated LocalityExisting-tree context (not an independent clue)Sibling-Household ReplicationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 33-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate has only broad or undated birth-locality overlap: south (+6)
  • candidate's birth is 61 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1817), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)

a different father is already linked but its evidence is unassessed (−15)

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 33-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 61 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1817), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • candidate has only broad or undated birth-locality overlap: south (+6)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)
  • the same sex-aware parent-name position recurs independently in sibling households: Robert Glasgow → John Glasgow (+3)

Deductions and cautions: a different father is already linked but its evidence is unassessed (−15)

Show 3 lower-scoring possible fathers
Automated fit14/100
Competing Linked Parent
Dates1758–1789Generation31 years age gapRecorded placesCecil, Maryland · Cecil, Maryland.Independent clue breadth · 3Age · Same-Sex Generational Naming · Two-GenerationExisting-tree context (not an independent clue)Sibling-Household ReplicationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 31-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 59 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1817), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • the same sex-aware parent-name position recurs independently in sibling households: Robert Glasgow → James J Glasgow (+3)

a different father is already linked but its evidence is unassessed (−15); locality comparison is unavailable because one or both profiles lack adequate place data (no deduction)

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 31-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 59 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1817), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)
  • candidate and subject share the given name James (+4; weak direct parent-child name recurrence, 224 public profiles)
  • the same sex-aware parent-name position recurs independently in sibling households: Robert Glasgow → James J Glasgow (+3)

Deductions and cautions: a different father is already linked but its evidence is unassessed (−15); locality comparison is unavailable because one or both profiles lack adequate place data (no deduction)

Automated fit14/100
Competing Linked Parent
Dates1753–?Generation36 years age gapRecorded placesDublinIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Spouse · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 36-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • known spouse Ann (Duffy) Glasco had a plausible maternal age (33) at the subject's birth (+7)
  • candidate's birth is 64 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1817), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)

a different father is already linked but its evidence is unassessed (−15); 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 64 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1817), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • known spouse Ann (Duffy) Glasco had a plausible maternal age (33) at the subject's birth (+7)

Deductions and cautions: a different father is already linked but its evidence is unassessed (−15); locality comparison is unavailable because one or both profiles lack adequate place data (no deduction)

Automated fit10/100
Competing Linked Parent
Dates1745–?Generation44 years age gapRecorded placesVirginiaIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Spouse · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 44-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 72 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1817), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • known spouse Mary (Stephenson) Glasgow had a bounded, possibly plausible maternal age (40) at the subject's birth (+3)

a different father is already linked but its evidence is unassessed (−15); locality comparison is unavailable because one or both profiles lack adequate place data (no deduction)

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 44-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 72 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1817), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)
  • known spouse Mary (Stephenson) Glasgow had a bounded, possibly plausible maternal age (40) at the subject's birth (+3)

Deductions and cautions: a different father is already linked but its evidence is unassessed (−15); locality comparison is unavailable because one or both profiles lack adequate place data (no deduction)

Possible mothers5 leads

Automated fit22/100
Competing Linked Parent
Dates1773–?Generation16 years age gapRecorded placesNewberry, South Carolina, United StatesIndependent clue breadth · 5Age · Collateral Naming · Indirect Multi-Factor Convergence · Two-Generation · Undated LocalityCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • possible 16-year parent-child age gap (+10)
  • candidate has only broad or undated birth-locality overlap: south (+6)
  • 3 independent unlinked-profile clue types converge (+5): household chronology, locality, naming

a different mother is already linked but its evidence is unassessed (−15)

Show complete scoring
  • possible 16-year parent-child age gap (+10)
  • candidate's birth is 44 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1817), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • candidate has only broad or undated birth-locality overlap: south (+6)
  • 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): Archibald +12 (9 public profiles; sibling Archibald Glasgow) (+12 total)
  • 3 independent unlinked-profile clue types converge (+5): household chronology, locality, naming

Deductions and cautions: a different mother is already linked but its evidence is unassessed (−15)

Automated fit22/100
Competing Linked Parent
Dates1757–1840Generation32 years age gapRecorded placesIreland · Allegheny, Pennsylvania, United States · County Antrim — exact locality unprovedIndependent clue breadth · 5Age · Rare Branch-Name Recurrence · Rare Name Bundle · Spouse-Specific Child Window · Two-GenerationSame-spouse child windowHugh GlasgowCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 32-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 60 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1817), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • subject's birth fits between children attributed to the same parental couple (1780–1792) (+6; other parent Hugh Glasgow)

a different mother is already linked but its evidence is unassessed (−15); same country, but no indexed locality overlap (−10)

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 32-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 60 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1817), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • subject's birth fits between children attributed to the same parental couple (1780–1792) (+6; other parent Hugh Glasgow)
  • uncommon given names recur in both otherwise distinct descendant branches: Archibald +12 (9 public profiles; subject branch: Archibald C Glasgow; candidate branch: Archibald Glasgow); Martha +3 (45 public profiles; subject branch: Martha Amelia Glasgow; candidate branch: Martha E (Glasgow) Smith) (+19 total including +4 multi-name bonus)

Deductions and cautions: a different mother is already linked but its evidence is unassessed (−15); same country, but no indexed locality overlap (−10)

Show 3 lower-scoring possible mothers
Automated fit16/100
Competing Linked Parent
Dates1775–?Generationnominally 14 years; approximate dates permit about 15–24 years age gapRecorded placesNewberry, South Carolina, United StatesIndependent clue breadth · 5Age · Collateral Naming · Indirect Multi-Factor Convergence · Two-Generation · Undated LocalityCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • candidate has only broad or undated birth-locality overlap: south (+6)
  • 3 independent unlinked-profile clue types converge (+5): household chronology, locality, naming
  • the nominal 14-year gap is too small, but the approximate birth date permits a narrow biologically viable interval (15–24 years) (+4)

a different mother is already linked but its evidence is unassessed (−15); parentage requires the approximate birth estimate to be early enough (no deduction)

Show complete scoring
  • the nominal 14-year gap is too small, but the approximate birth date permits a narrow biologically viable interval (15–24 years) (+4)
  • candidate's birth is 42 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1817), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • candidate has only broad or undated birth-locality overlap: south (+6)
  • 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): Archibald +12 (9 public profiles; sibling Archibald Glasgow) (+12 total)
  • 3 independent unlinked-profile clue types converge (+5): household chronology, locality, naming

Deductions and cautions: a different mother is already linked but its evidence is unassessed (−15); parentage requires the approximate birth estimate to be early enough (no deduction)

Automated fit13/100
Competing Linked Parent
Dates1765–?Generation24 years age gapRecorded placesLocation not supplied — profile holding pointIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Spouse-Specific Child Window · Two-GenerationSame-spouse child windowWilliam GlasgowCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 24-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 52 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1817), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)

a different mother is already linked but its evidence is unassessed (−15); locality comparison is unavailable because one or both profiles lack adequate place data (no deduction)

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 24-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 52 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1817), 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 (1783–1802) (+6; other parent William Glasgow)

Deductions and cautions: a different mother is already linked but its evidence is unassessed (−15); locality comparison is unavailable because one or both profiles lack adequate place data (no deduction)

Automated fit8/100
Competing Linked Parent
Dates1771–1857Generation18 years age gapRecorded placesDobbs, North Carolina · Nashville, Davidson, Tennessee, United StatesIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Broad Geography · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 18-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 46 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1817), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • weak broad-area overlap: carolina (+1; not a locality match)

a different mother is already linked but its evidence is unassessed (−15)

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 18-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 46 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1817), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • weak broad-area overlap: carolina (+1; not a locality match)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)

Deductions and cautions: a different mother is already linked but its evidence is unassessed (−15)

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

James GlasgowGlasgow-1483

Automated fit53/100
Similar Person
Dates1790–1833PlacesGovan, Renfrewshire, Scotland → Govan, Renfrewshire, Scotland, United KingdomParent comparisonNo shared parent is indexed
Why it may fit
  • same first and last name (+18)
  • birth years within 1 (+25)
  • death years within 2 (+10)

No indexed conflict

Full comparison detail
  • same first and last name (+18)
  • birth years within 1 (+25)
  • death years within 2 (+10)

Conflicts: No indexed conflict

Open side-by-side comparison
Automated fit46/100
Similar Person
Dates1788–1849PlacesNewberry County, South Carolina, United States → Abbeville County, South Carolina, United StatesParent comparisonNo shared parent is indexed
Why it may fit
  • same first and last name (+18)
  • birth years within 1 (+25)
  • overlapping locality (+8)

unassessed father attachments differ (−5)

Full comparison detail
  • same first and last name (+18)
  • birth years within 1 (+25)
  • overlapping locality (+8)

Conflicts: unassessed father attachments differ (−5)

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. 1789

Profile-stated birthplace: South Carolina

South Carolina

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-2439

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.7 claims
1Derivative
1Tree Only
1Unknown

Documented or strongly supported

James Glasgow was husband of Sarah Glasgow

strongly_supported1 linked evidence item

Their cemetery inscriptions reciprocally call James the consort of Sarah and Sarah the consort of James.

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.3 sources

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

  1. unknown http://web.bledsoe.net/~danshell/fam00485.htm
  2. tree_only WikiTree profile export for Glasgow-2439
  3. derivative Their cemetery inscriptions
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-2439 was captured 2026-08-07T09:54:35+00:00; WikiTree profile revision 2024-09-19.

Profile location claims

EventDateLocationStatus
birth—South CarolinaWikiTree profile field

Immediate relationship snapshot

RelationshipPersonWikiTree IDDates and places returned
ParentsRobert GlasgowGlasgow-19831763-00-00 · Ireland · 1835-01-17 · Newberry, South Carolina, United States
ParentsElizabeth GlasgowKinard-5721763-00-00 · South Carolina · 1823-11-09 · South Carolina, United States
ChildrenArchibald C GlasgowGlasgow-24401817-09-11 · South Carolina, United States · 1868-03-11 · Newberry, SC
ChildrenSpencer Leonidus GlasgowGlasgow-24411855-09-12 · Newberry, South Carolina · 1936-09-05 · Spruce Pine, Franklin, Alabama, United States
SiblingsRobert GlasgowGlasgow-27691780-00-00 · South Carolina, USA · 1860-00-00 · Giles County, TN, USA
SpousesSarah GlasgowGlasgow-30421794-00-00 · 1847-01-24 · South Carolina, United States · 0000-00-00

Record-bearing passages

Profile source citations

  1. http://web.bledsoe.net/~danshell/fam00485.htm source link 1
Full captured biography text
Biography
James was born about 1787. He was the son of Robert Glasgow and Elizabeth Kinard. He passed away in 1831.
Sources
* http://web.bledsoe.net/~danshell/fam00485.htm
Raw WikiTree biography markup
== Biography ==

James was born about 1787. He was the son of [[Glasgow-1983|Robert Glasgow]] and [[Kinard-572|Elizabeth Kinard]]. He passed away in 1831.
== Sources ==
<references />
* http://web.bledsoe.net/~danshell/fam00485.htm