Glasgow Surname Project

Individual research record

Edward William Glasgow

1838 – ?

Glasgow-3502 · 1 mapped association

North 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
1838 · North Carolina, United States
Death
Not recorded · Place not recorded
Parents
Edward GlasgowunmarkedNancy (Coburn) Glasgowunmarked
Spouses
Mary Barnhill (Moore) Glasgow
Children
Annie Clayton GlasgowEdward Glasgow
Gender
Male
WikiTree
Glasgow-3502
Research clusters
Worldwide One-Tree profile leads
Mapped descendants
2

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 positionEdward Glasgow (1868)
Maternal grandfather positionNot identifiable from dated child profiles
Maternal grandmother positionAnnie Clayton Glasgow (1869)
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 fit26/100
Competing Linked Parent
Dates1800–1869Generation38 years age gapRecorded placesNewberry, South Carolina, United States · Georgia, United StatesIndependent clue breadth · 6Age · Broad Geography · Collateral Naming · Household · Spouse · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 38-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 68 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1868), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • a known child was born within 3 years of the subject (+3)

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

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 38-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 68 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1868), 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)
  • a known child was born within 3 years of the subject (+3)
  • known spouse Elizabeth (Unknown) Glasgow had a bounded, possibly plausible maternal age (43) at the subject's birth (+3)
  • candidate's sibling and niece/nephew network repeats names in the subject's descendant line (three rarest at most): Edward +12 (13 public profiles; niece/nephew Edward Buchanan Glasgow) (+12 total)

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

Automated fit21/100
Competing Linked Parent
Dates1805–1858Generation33 years age gapRecorded placesHuntington Township, Ross, Ohio, United States · Adair County, Missouri, United StatesIndependent clue breadth · 5Age · Household · Rare Branch-Name Recurrence · Spouse · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 33-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • known spouse Isabella (Glenn) Glasgow had a plausible maternal age (28) at the subject's birth (+7)
  • candidate's birth is 63 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1868), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)

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

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 33-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 63 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1868), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)
  • a known child was born within 3 years of the subject (+3)
  • known spouse Isabella (Glenn) Glasgow had a plausible maternal age (28) at the subject's birth (+7)
  • uncommon given names recur in both otherwise distinct descendant branches: Edward +14 (13 public profiles; subject branch: Edward William Glasgow, Edward Glasgow; candidate branch: Edward Glasgow; +2 repetition bonus) (+14 total)

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

Show 3 lower-scoring possible fathers
Automated fit20/100
Competing Linked Parent
Dates1800–?Generation38 years age gapRecorded placesSouth Carolina, United StatesIndependent clue breadth · 4Age · Broad Geography · Collateral Naming · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 38-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 68 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1868), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • weak broad-area overlap: carolina (+1; not a locality match)

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

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 38-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 68 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1868), 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)
  • candidate's sibling and niece/nephew network repeats names in the subject's descendant line (three rarest at most): Edward +12 (13 public profiles; niece/nephew Edward Buchanan Glasgow) (+12 total)

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

Automated fit19/100
Competing Linked Parent
Dates1817–1863Generation21 years age gapRecorded placesWake Co., North Carolina, United States · Weakley, Tennessee, United StatesIndependent clue breadth · 4Age · Spouse · Two-Generation · Undated LocalityExisting-tree context (not an independent clue)Rare Sibling-Name PatternCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 21-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate has only broad or undated birth-locality overlap: north (+6)
  • candidate's birth is 51 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1868), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)

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

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 21-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 51 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1868), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • candidate has only broad or undated birth-locality overlap: north (+6)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)
  • known spouse Emily Jane (Newman) Glasgow had a plausible maternal age (15) at the subject's birth (+3)
  • candidate's other children share uncommon given names with the subject's recorded siblings: Ann +3 (41 public profiles) (+3 total)

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

Automated fit18/100
Competing Linked Parent
Dates1815–1863Generation23 years age gapRecorded placesVirginia, United States · Randolph, North Carolina, United StatesIndependent clue breadth · 5Age · Household · Local Sibling Birth · Two-Generation · Undated LocalityCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 23-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate has only broad or undated birth-locality overlap: north (+6)
  • candidate's birth is 53 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1868), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)

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

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 23-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 53 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1868), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • candidate has only broad or undated birth-locality overlap: north (+6)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)
  • a known child was born within 6 years of the subject (+1)
  • candidate has another child, William Monroe Glasgow, born 6 years from the subject in the same specific birth locality (+4; possible sibling-household clue)

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

Possible mothers5 leads

Automated fit20/100
Competing Linked Parent
Dates1815–?Generation23 years age gapRecorded placesSouth Carolina, United StatesIndependent clue breadth · 4Age · Broad Geography · Collateral Naming · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 23-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 53 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1868), 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 23-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 53 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1868), 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)
  • candidate's sibling and niece/nephew network repeats names in the subject's descendant line (three rarest at most): Edward +12 (13 public profiles; niece/nephew Edward Buchanan Glasgow) (+12 total)

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

Automated fit20/100
Competing Linked Parent
Dates1802–1863Generation36 years age gapRecorded placesNewberry, South Carolina, United StatesIndependent clue breadth · 4Age · Broad Geography · Collateral Naming · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 36-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 66 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1868), 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 36-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 66 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1868), 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)
  • candidate's sibling and niece/nephew network repeats names in the subject's descendant line (three rarest at most): Edward +12 (13 public profiles; niece/nephew Edward Buchanan Glasgow) (+12 total)

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

Show 3 lower-scoring possible mothers
Automated fit17/100
Competing Linked Parent
Dates1814–?Generation24 years age gapRecorded placesNorth Carolina, United States · North CarolinaIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Two-Generation · Undated LocalityCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 24-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate is associated with the subject's stated birthplace, but not by a reliable near-contemporary record (+10)
  • candidate's birth is 54 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1868), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)

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

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 24-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 54 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1868), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • candidate is associated with the subject's stated birthplace, but not by a reliable near-contemporary record (+10)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)

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

Automated fit17/100
Competing Linked Parent
Dates1807–?Generation31 years age gapRecorded placesNorth Carolina, United States · Davidson, Tennessee, United StatesIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Two-Generation · Undated LocalityCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 31-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate is associated with the subject's stated birthplace, but not by a reliable near-contemporary record (+10)
  • candidate's birth is 61 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1868), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)

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

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 31-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 61 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1868), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • candidate is associated with the subject's stated birthplace, but not by a reliable near-contemporary record (+10)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)

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

Automated fit17/100
Competing Linked Parent
Dates1800–1884Generation38 years age gapRecorded placesNorth Carolina, United States · Brownsville, Haywood, Tennessee, United StatesIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Two-Generation · Undated LocalityCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 38-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate is associated with the subject's stated birthplace, but not by a reliable near-contemporary record (+10)
  • candidate's birth is 68 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1868), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)

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

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 38-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 68 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1868), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • candidate is associated with the subject's stated birthplace, but not by a reliable near-contemporary record (+10)
  • 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.

Automated fit12/100
Similar Person
Dates1856–1883PlacesGiles, Tennessee, United States → Pulaski, Giles, Tennessee, United StatesParent comparisonNo shared parent is indexed
Why it may fit
  • same first and last name (+18)
  • birth years within 18 (+2)
  • child given-name pattern overlaps: Edward

unassessed father attachments differ (−5); unassessed mother attachments differ (−5)

Full comparison detail
  • same first and last name (+18)
  • birth years within 18 (+2)
  • child given-name pattern overlaps: Edward

Conflicts: unassessed father attachments differ (−5); unassessed mother attachments differ (−5)

Open side-by-side comparison

Same-name candidate

Edward GlasgowGlasgow-2508

Automated fit8/100
Similar Person
Dates1863–?PlacesMissouri, United StatesParent comparisonNo shared parent is indexed
Why it may fit
  • same first and last name (+18)

record-derived birth estimates differ by 25; retained without deduction; unassessed father attachments differ (−5); unassessed mother attachments differ (−5)

Full comparison detail
  • same first and last name (+18)

Conflicts: record-derived birth estimates differ by 25; retained without deduction; unassessed father attachments differ (−5); unassessed mother 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. 1838

Profile-stated birthplace: North Carolina, United States

North Carolina, United States

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-3502

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
2Derivative
1Tree Only

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.3 sources

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

  1. derivative "United States, Census (Slave Schedule), 1860", FamilySearch (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:WK5L-2KZM : Thu Jul 18 11:10:48 UTC 2024), Entry for E W Glasgow and , 1860.
  2. derivative "United States, Census, 1860", FamilySearch (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:MD64-TTG : Sun Jan 19 09:09:32 UTC 2025), Entry for E W Glasgo and Nancy Glasgo, 1860.
  3. tree_only WikiTree profile export for Glasgow-3502
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-3502 was captured 2026-08-07T09:54:35+00:00; WikiTree profile revision 2025-04-24.

Profile location claims

EventDateLocationStatus
birth—North Carolina, United StatesWikiTree profile field

Immediate relationship snapshot

RelationshipPersonWikiTree IDDates and places returned
ParentsDr Edward GlasgowGlasgow-20741795-00-00 · Cookstown, County Tyrone, Ireland · 1860-04-08 · Hamilton, Martin, North Carolina, United States
ParentsNancy GlasgowCoburn-26531800-00-00 · 0000-00-00
ChildrenEdward GlasgowGlasgow-35031868-00-00 · North Carolina, United States · 1917-02-08 · Martin, North Carolina
ChildrenAnnie Clayton GlasgowGlasgow-35041869-00-00 · North Carolina, United States · 1961-09-18 · Plymouth, Washington, North Carolina, United States
SiblingsAnn GlasgowGlasgow-35051834-00-00 · England, United Kingdom · 0000-00-00
SpousesMary Barnhill GlasgowMoore-975541844-00-00 · 0000-00-00

Record-bearing passages

Profile source citations

  1. "United States, Census (Slave Schedule), 1860", FamilySearch (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:WK5L-2KZM : Thu Jul 18 11:10:48 UTC 2024), Entry for E W Glasgow and , 1860. source link 1
  2. "United States, Census, 1860", FamilySearch (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:MD64-TTG : Sun Jan 19 09:09:32 UTC 2025), Entry for E W Glasgo and Nancy Glasgo, 1860. source link 1
Full captured biography text
Biography
Edward was born in 1838. He is the son of Edward Glasgow.

Slaveowner in 1860 "United States, Census (Slave Schedule), 1860", FamilySearch (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:WK5L-2KZM : Thu Jul 18 11:10:48 UTC 2024), Entry for E W Glasgow and , 1860.
Sources
* "United States, Census, 1860", FamilySearch (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:MD64-TTG : Sun Jan 19 09:09:32 UTC 2025), Entry for E W Glasgo and Nancy Glasgo, 1860.
Raw WikiTree biography markup
== Biography ==

Edward was born in 1838. He is the son of [[Glasgow-2074|Edward Glasgow]].

Slaveowner in 1860<ref>"United States, Census (Slave Schedule), 1860", FamilySearch (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:WK5L-2KZM : Thu Jul 18 11:10:48 UTC 2024), Entry for E W Glasgow and , 1860.
</ref>
== Sources ==
<references />
* "United States, Census, 1860", FamilySearch (https://www.familysearch.org/ark:/61903/1:1:MD64-TTG : Sun Jan 19 09:09:32 UTC 2025), Entry for E W Glasgo and Nancy Glasgo, 1860.