Glasgow Surname Project

Individual research record

William Glasgow

1763 – 1816

Glasgow-3324 · 2 mapped associations

Larne, County Antrim, Ireland→County Antrim, Ireland, United Kingdom
View on mapOpen WikiTreeCompareReport a correction

At a glance

Identity & family

Tree links organise the family; documentary status still varies.

2Mapped records
6Close relations
5Evidence items
12Candidate leads
Birth
1763 · Larne, County Antrim, Ireland
Death
1816 · County Antrim, Ireland, United Kingdom
Parents
James GlasgowprobableJanet Shutterconfident
Spouses
Elizabeth (Stewart) Glasgow
Children
Elizabeth GlasgowJane Shutter GlasgowMary Glasgow
Gender
Male
WikiTree
Glasgow-3324
Research clusters
East Antrim/Kilwaughter cluster
Mapped descendants
3

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 positionNot identifiable from dated child profiles
Maternal grandfather positionNot identifiable from dated child profiles
Maternal grandmother positionMary Glasgow (1783)
Paternal grandmother positionJane Shutter Glasgow (1798)

Known-position checks: 1 support · 0 conflict. Ordinals retain unnamed children and recognise reused names.

Estimate and relationship notes
  • The export reports 0 children but 3 named child profiles are recoverable from this export.

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 fit7/100
Competing Linked Parent
Dates1730–?Generation33 years age gapRecorded placesKilwaughter, Larne, County Antrim, Ireland · KilwaughterIndependent clue breadth · 5Age · Indirect Multi-Factor Convergence · Same-Sex Generational Naming · Two-Generation · Undated LocalityCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 33-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate has only broad or undated birth-locality overlap: larne (+6)
  • 3 independent unlinked-profile clue types converge (+5): household chronology, locality, naming

a different father is strongly supported (−30; Probable; distinctive Shutter name)

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 33-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 53 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1783), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • candidate has only broad or undated birth-locality overlap: larne (+6)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)
  • candidate and subject share the given name William (+4; weak direct parent-child name recurrence, 223 public profiles)
  • 3 independent unlinked-profile clue types converge (+5): household chronology, locality, naming

Deductions and cautions: a different father is strongly supported (−30; Probable; distinctive Shutter name)

Automated fit0/100
Competing Linked Parent
Dates1756–1826Generationnominally 7 years; approximate dates permit about 16–17 years age gapRecorded placesCounty Antrim, Ireland · Gilder's Creek, Newberry Co., S Carolina · County Antrim — exact locality unprovedIndependent clue breadth · 2Age · Broad GeographyCurrent 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 (16–17 years) (+4)
  • weak broad-area overlap: antrim (+1; not a locality match)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)

a different father is strongly supported (−30; Probable; distinctive Shutter name); parentage requires the approximate birth estimate to be early enough (no deduction); candidate-to-earliest-child interval of 27 years is implausible for two generations (−8)

Show complete scoring
  • the nominal 7-year gap is too small, but the approximate birth date permits a narrow biologically viable interval (16–17 years) (+4)
  • weak broad-area overlap: antrim (+1; not a locality match)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)

Deductions and cautions: a different father is strongly supported (−30; Probable; distinctive Shutter name); parentage requires the approximate birth estimate to be early enough (no deduction); candidate-to-earliest-child interval of 27 years is implausible for two generations (−8)

Show 3 lower-scoring possible fathers
Automated fit0/100
Competing Linked Parent
Dates1756–1826Generationnominally 7 years; approximate dates permit about 16–17 years age gapRecorded placesNewberry, South Carolina, United StatesIndependent clue breadth · 1AgeCurrent 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 (16–17 years) (+4)

a different father is strongly supported (−30; Probable; distinctive Shutter name); parentage requires the approximate birth estimate to be early enough (no deduction); candidate-to-earliest-child interval of 27 years is implausible for two generations (−8); candidate is recorded only outside the subject's birth country (−25)

Show complete scoring
  • the nominal 7-year gap is too small, but the approximate birth date permits a narrow biologically viable interval (16–17 years) (+4)

Deductions and cautions: a different father is strongly supported (−30; Probable; distinctive Shutter name); parentage requires the approximate birth estimate to be early enough (no deduction); candidate-to-earliest-child interval of 27 years is implausible for two generations (−8); candidate is recorded only outside the subject's birth country (−25)

Automated fit0/100
Competing Linked Parent
Dates1750–1822Generationnominally 13 years; approximate dates permit about 16–23 years age gapRecorded placesMoneymore, County Londonderry, Ireland · Rockbridge, Virginia, United States · MoneymoreIndependent clue breadth · 2Age · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • the nominal 13-year gap is too small, but the approximate birth date permits a narrow biologically viable interval (16–23 years) (+4)
  • candidate's birth is 33 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1783), a marginal two-generation interval (+1)

a different father is strongly supported (−30; Probable; distinctive Shutter name); parentage requires the approximate birth estimate to be early enough (no deduction); same country, but no indexed locality overlap (−10)

Show complete scoring
  • the nominal 13-year gap is too small, but the approximate birth date permits a narrow biologically viable interval (16–23 years) (+4)
  • candidate's birth is 33 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1783), a marginal two-generation interval (+1)

Deductions and cautions: a different father is strongly supported (−30; Probable; distinctive Shutter name); parentage requires the approximate birth estimate to be early enough (no deduction); same country, but no indexed locality overlap (−10)

Possible Father

Jacob GlaskoGlasko-5

Automated fit0/100
Competing Linked Parent
Dates1750–1824Generationnominally 13 years; approximate dates permit about 16–23 years age gapRecorded placesRhode Island · Griswold, New London, Connecticut, United StatesIndependent clue breadth · 2Age · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • the nominal 13-year gap is too small, but the approximate birth date permits a narrow biologically viable interval (16–23 years) (+4)
  • candidate's birth is 33 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1783), a marginal two-generation interval (+1)

a different father is strongly supported (−30; Probable; distinctive Shutter name); parentage requires the approximate birth estimate to be early enough (no deduction); candidate is recorded only outside the subject's birth country (−25)

Show complete scoring
  • the nominal 13-year gap is too small, but the approximate birth date permits a narrow biologically viable interval (16–23 years) (+4)
  • candidate's birth is 33 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1783), a marginal two-generation interval (+1)

Deductions and cautions: a different father is strongly supported (−30; Probable; distinctive Shutter name); parentage requires the approximate birth estimate to be early enough (no deduction); candidate is recorded only outside the subject's birth country (−25)

Possible mothers5 leads

Automated fit12/100
Competing Linked Parent
Dates1736–?Generation27 years age gapRecorded placesCounty Antrim, Ireland · New Town — LarneIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Time-Specific Locality · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 27-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate has a supported 1736 Child of Hugh Glasgow at New Town / Larne in the subject's birth locality, 27 years from the subject's birth (+15)
  • candidate's birth is 47 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1783), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)

a different mother is marked confident (−25; WikiTree: confident parent)

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 27-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 47 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1783), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • candidate has a supported 1736 Child of Hugh Glasgow at New Town / Larne in the subject's birth locality, 27 years from the subject's birth (+15)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)

Deductions and cautions: a different mother is marked confident (−25; WikiTree: confident parent)

Automated fit12/100
Competing Linked Parent
Dates1735–?Generation28 years age gapRecorded placesCounty Antrim, Ireland · New Town — LarneIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Time-Specific Locality · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 28-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate has a supported 1735 Child of Hugh Glasgow at New Town / Larne in the subject's birth locality, 28 years from the subject's birth (+15)
  • candidate's birth is 48 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1783), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)

a different mother is marked confident (−25; WikiTree: confident parent)

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 28-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 48 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1783), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • candidate has a supported 1735 Child of Hugh Glasgow at New Town / Larne in the subject's birth locality, 28 years from the subject's birth (+15)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)

Deductions and cautions: a different mother is marked confident (−25; WikiTree: confident parent)

Show 3 lower-scoring possible mothers
Automated fit3/100
Competing Linked Parent
Dates1732–?Generation31 years age gapRecorded placesKilwaughter, Larne, County Antrim, Ireland · KilwaughterIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Two-Generation · Undated LocalityCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 31-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate has only broad or undated birth-locality overlap: larne (+6)
  • candidate's birth is 51 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1783), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)

a different mother is marked confident (−25; WikiTree: confident parent)

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 31-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 51 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1783), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • candidate has only broad or undated birth-locality overlap: larne (+6)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)

Deductions and cautions: a different mother is marked confident (−25; WikiTree: confident parent)

Automated fit3/100
Competing Linked Parent
Dates1728–?Generation35 years age gapRecorded placesKilwaughter, Larne, County Antrim, Ireland · KilwaughterIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Two-Generation · Undated LocalityCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 35-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate has only broad or undated birth-locality overlap: larne (+6)
  • candidate's birth is 55 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1783), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)

a different mother is marked confident (−25; WikiTree: confident parent)

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 35-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 55 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1783), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • candidate has only broad or undated birth-locality overlap: larne (+6)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)

Deductions and cautions: a different mother is marked confident (−25; WikiTree: confident parent)

Automated fit0/100
Competing Linked Parent
Dates1757–1791Generationnominally 6 years; approximate dates permit about 15–16 years age gapRecorded placesHarford (then Baltimore) County, Maryland · Harford County, MarylandIndependent clue breadth · 1AgeCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • the nominal 6-year gap is too small, but the approximate birth date permits a narrow biologically viable interval (15–16 years) (+4)

a different mother is marked confident (−25; WikiTree: confident parent); parentage requires the approximate birth estimate to be early enough (no deduction); candidate-to-earliest-child interval of 26 years is implausible for two generations (−8); locality comparison is unavailable because one or both profiles lack adequate place data (no deduction)

Show complete scoring
  • the nominal 6-year gap is too small, but the approximate birth date permits a narrow biologically viable interval (15–16 years) (+4)

Deductions and cautions: a different mother is marked confident (−25; WikiTree: confident parent); parentage requires the approximate birth estimate to be early enough (no deduction); candidate-to-earliest-child interval of 26 years is implausible for two generations (−8); 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-1223

Automated fit59/100
Similar Person
Dates1765–1820PlacesSwinton and Simprin, Berwickshire, Scotland → Kirknewton and East Calder, Midlothian, Scotland, United KingdomParent comparisonSame parent name; profile identity unproved
Why it may fit
  • same first and last name (+18)
  • birth years within 2 (+25)
  • death years within 4 (+5)

unassessed father attachments differ (−5)

Full comparison detail
  • same first and last name (+18)
  • birth years within 2 (+25)
  • death years within 4 (+5)
  • same parent name without a shared profile ID: James Glasgow (+2)
  • matching child name: Elizabeth Glasgow

Conflicts: unassessed father attachments differ (−5)

Open side-by-side comparison

Same-name candidate

William GlasgowGlasgow-2915

Automated fit33/100
Similar Person
Dates1760–?PlacesScotland → Cookstown, County Tyrone, IrelandParent comparisonSame parent name; profile identity unproved
Why it may fit
  • same first and last name (+18)
  • birth years within 3 (+18)
  • same parent name without a shared profile ID: James Glasgow (+2)

unassessed father attachments differ (−5)

Full comparison detail
  • same first and last name (+18)
  • birth years within 3 (+18)
  • same parent name without a shared profile ID: James Glasgow (+2)

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

Latest case researchThe current conclusion from the durable research case file.Updated

Current conclusion

Glasgow-3324 · updated 2026-08-11

PRONI D300/1/5/49 contains a grant of probate and copy will for William Glasgow of Larne, with the will dated 6 December 1815. This is the highest-value surviving record for testing William's wife, children, occupation and relationship to the older Larne household. The catalogue description alone does not expose its clauses.

A 28 November 1804 lease to William Glasgow of Larne, farmer, is a strong identity candidate but contains no exposed family statement. Parentage under James-1509 and Janet Shutter remains unproved until the register, monument or will wording is read.

A published 1899 transcription of the Larne Parish Churchyard monument directly proves William's wife Elizabeth and daughters Jane Shutter, Eliza and Mary. The distinctive name Jane Shutter Glasgow makes the proposed descent from James Glasgow and Janet Shutter substantially stronger than a naming-pattern guess; the parentage is probable, while the monument relationships within William's own household are direct evidence.

An 1824 renewal of a Larne lease first made to William and Hugh Glasgow in 1736 names the new tenant as Elizabeth Glasgow, widow of Larne. She is a strong candidate for this William's reported wife, but the catalogue does not name her late husband. Read together with William's surviving 1815 will, the renewal is a specific route to proving or rejecting the proposed descent from Hugh-1503.

Life and record timelineChronological mapped occurrences and their underlying sources.2 records
1763–1816

Larne-labelled profile

Larne

The profile supplies Larne but no more granular Irish location.

Profile location leadunknown
Source and mapping detail

WikiTree profile export for Glasgow-3324

No sufficiently specific citation match found.

Precision: Settlement centrepoint

1816

Belfast probate; residence Larne

Larne

The year and residence match the existing 1763–1816 Larne profile.

Probate indexunknown
Source and mapping detail

WikiTree profile export for Glasgow-3324

Candidate matched on record type, year; inspect before treating it as the underlying record.

Precision: Settlement centrepoint

Case-file source findingsSource extracts and analysis regenerated from findings.md.1 section(s)

Source findings

Glasgow-3324 · updated 2026-08-11

SourceFindingAssessment
PRONI D300/1/5/49Grant of probate and copy will of William Glasgow of Larne; will dated 6 December 1815.Surviving original/official copy and priority relationship source; clauses not yet transcribed.
Registry of Deeds memorial 417496, vol. 607, p. 541, deed 28 November 1804, registered 26 April 1809; secondary abstractJane and Alexander Holmes leased William Glasgow of Larne, farmer, a south-side New Street tenement.Direct occupation/residence in derivative abstract; no kinship and same-name risk remains.
Archived Kilwaughter chronologyReports William born 1763 in the James Glasgow/Janet Shutter household.Derivative household claim; inspect PRONI MIC/1B/6 and St Cedma stone.
Bigger and Hughes, Larne Parish Churchyard inscriptions, *Ulster Journal of Archaeology* 6 (1900), p. 47Jane Shutter Glasgow, daughter of William, died 21 April 1799 aged nine months; William died 5 October 1816 aged 53; his wife Elizabeth died 17 September 1832 aged 60; daughters Eliza and Mary died in 1839 and 1844.Direct published monument transcription proving William, wife Elizabeth and the three daughters. It strongly supports, but does not independently prove, William's proposed Shutter ancestry.
PRONI D300/2/1/100/69 and D2977/3A/4/81/72B, 9 August 1824Renewal to Elizabeth Glasgow, widow of Larne, of the lease first granted to William and Hugh Glasgow in 1736.Strong widow/property-succession candidate; not yet a proved identification with William-3324's wife.

The monument-derived household is:

PersonMonument evidenceAssessment
Jane Shutter Glasgow Glasgow-3987Died 21 April 1799 aged nine months; called William's daughter.Proved daughter.
Eliza Glasgow Glasgow-3988Died 25 April 1839 aged 37; called daughter of William and Elizabeth.Proved daughter; probably the derivative 1802 Elizabeth entry, pending the original register.
Mary Glasgow Glasgow-3989Died 18 October 1844 aged 37; called daughter of William and Elizabeth.Proved daughter. The Mary employed as First Larne Presbyterian sexton in 1829 is a plausible but unproved identity match.
Evidence assessmentWhat is supported, uncertain or disputed in the current case model.9 claims
3Unknown
2Tree Only

Documented or strongly supported

No claims in this category have been formally assessed.

Working hypotheses and conflicts

William Glasgow was probable son of James Glasgow

probable1 linked evidence item

The published Larne monument calls infant Jane Shutter Glasgow William's daughter. This strongly corroborates the derivative 1762 James-Janet marriage and c.1763 William placement, but does not explicitly name William's parents.

Research questionsOpen problems, missing bridges and the next records to inspect.4 open

Which records prove the subject's identity across events?

No current conclusion recorded.

Missing bridge: Not specified

Which original or indexed records identify the parents?

No current conclusion recorded.

Missing bridge: A contemporary record explicitly identifying the parent or parents.

Which spouses and children are directly supported by records?

No current conclusion recorded.

Missing bridge: Not specified

What conflicts or same-name conflations must be resolved?

No current conclusion recorded.

Missing bridge: Not specified

Sources and provenanceStructured citations and source-quality classifications.4 sources

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

  1. unknown Repository : Public Record Office for Northern Ireland PRONI Reference : D300/1/5/49
  2. unknown 1763 – Birth of William Glasgow (1763 – 1816, wife Elizabeth). Infant daughter, Jane Shutter Glasgow, 1798-1799, indicates this William is son of James Glasgow b. 1737. Wife of William = Eliza? They are buried in St. Cedma's.
  3. tree_only WikiTree profile export for Glasgow-3324
  4. unknown published Larne monument
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-3324 was captured 2026-08-11T11:27:28+00:00; WikiTree profile revision 2026-08-11.

Profile location claims

EventDateLocationStatus
birth—Larne, County Antrim, IrelandWikiTree profile field
death—County Antrim, Ireland.WikiTree profile field

Immediate relationship snapshot

RelationshipPersonWikiTree IDDates and places returned
ParentsJames GlasgowGlasgow-15091737-00-00 · County Antrim, Ireland · 1802-00-00
ParentsJanet ShutterShutter-461740-00-00 · 0000-00-00
ChildrenMary GlasgowGlasgow-39891783-00-00 · 0000-00-00
ChildrenJane Shutter GlasgowGlasgow-39871798-07-00 · 1799-04-21
ChildrenElizabeth GlasgowGlasgow-39881802-08-30 · 0000-00-00
SiblingsJames GlasgowGlasgow-39861773-00-00 · Larne, County Antrim, Ireland · 1831-00-00
SpousesElizabeth GlasgowStewart-723801765-00-00 · 0000-00-00

Record-bearing passages

  • Biography William was born in 1763. He was the son of James Glasgow and Janet Shutter. He passed away in 1816. Research Notes Grant of probate of will of William Glasgow, Larne, Co. Antrim and copy will dated 6 December 1815. Repository : Public Record Office for Northern Ireland PRONI Reference : D300/1/5/49

  • 15. William3 Glasgow, b. 1763, 6. 1816, m. Elizabeth, had daughters Jane, Eliza and Mary. Buried St. Cedma's Cemetery in Larne. This could be the William Glasgow, captain of the "William," advertised in the Belfast News Letter 1792-1799. Sources

    • 1763 – Birth of William Glasgow (1763 – 1816, wife Elizabeth). Infant daughter, Jane Shutter Glasgow, 1798-1799, indicates this William is son of James Glasgow b. 1737. Wife of William = Eliza? They are buried in St. Cedma's.
  • https://web.archive.org/web/20101124184247/http://lifesweaving.com/Glasgow/Kilwaughter/Timeline.html

Profile source citations

  1. Repository : Public Record Office for Northern Ireland PRONI Reference : D300/1/5/49
  2. 1763 – Birth of William Glasgow (1763 – 1816, wife Elizabeth). Infant daughter, Jane Shutter Glasgow, 1798-1799, indicates this William is son of James Glasgow b. 1737. Wife of William = Eliza? They are buried in St. Cedma's.

Other external links in the profile

Full captured biography text
Biography
William was born in 1763. He was the son of James Glasgow and Janet Shutter. He passed away in 1816.
Research Notes
Grant of probate of will of William Glasgow, Larne, Co. Antrim and copy will dated 6 December 1815. Repository : Public Record Office for Northern Ireland
PRONI Reference : D300/1/5/49 

15. William3 Glasgow, b. 1763, 6. 1816, m. Elizabeth, had daughters Jane, Eliza and Mary. Buried St. Cedma's Cemetery in Larne. This could be the William Glasgow, captain of the "William," advertised in the Belfast News Letter 1792-1799. 
Sources
* 1763 – Birth of William Glasgow (1763 – 1816, wife Elizabeth). Infant daughter, Jane Shutter Glasgow, 1798-1799, indicates this William is son of James Glasgow b. 1737. Wife of William = Eliza? They are buried in St. Cedma's.

https://web.archive.org/web/20101124184247/http://lifesweaving.com/Glasgow/Kilwaughter/Timeline.html
Raw WikiTree biography markup
== Biography ==

William was born in 1763. He was the son of [[Glasgow-1509|James Glasgow]] and [[Shutter-46|Janet Shutter]]. He passed away in 1816.


== Research Notes ==

Grant of probate of will of William Glasgow, Larne, Co. Antrim and copy will dated 6 December 1815.<ref>Repository :	Public Record Office for Northern Ireland
PRONI Reference :	D300/1/5/49</ref>

15. William3 Glasgow, b. 1763, 6. 1816, m. Elizabeth, had daughters Jane, Eliza and Mary. Buried St. Cedma's Cemetery in Larne. This could be the William Glasgow, captain of the "William," advertised in the Belfast News Letter 1792-1799. 

== Sources ==
<references />
* 1763 – Birth of William Glasgow (1763 – 1816, wife Elizabeth). Infant daughter, Jane Shutter Glasgow, 1798-1799, indicates this William is son of James Glasgow b. 1737. Wife of William = Eliza? They are buried in St. Cedma's.

https://web.archive.org/web/20101124184247/http://lifesweaving.com/Glasgow/Kilwaughter/Timeline.html