Glasgow Surname Project

Individual research record

John Glasgow

before 1899 – 1975

Glasgow-3698 · 1 mapped association

Tarbrax, Inverarity, Forfarshire, Scotland, United Kingdom→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
2Evidence items
12Candidate leads
Birth
before 1899 · Tarbrax, Inverarity, Forfarshire, Scotland, United Kingdom
Death
1975 · Place not recorded
Parents
John GlasgowunmarkedMargaret (McDermott) Glasgowunmarked
Spouses
Bridget O'Bryne
Children
Douglas Pollock GlasgowLiving person (details withheld)
Gender
Male
WikiTree
Glasgow-3698
Research clusters
Scotland One-Tree profile leads
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 positionDouglas Pollock Glasgow (1936)
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 fit3/100
Competing Linked Parent
Dates1873–?Generationat most 26 years age gapRecorded placesLocation not supplied — profile holding pointIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Same-Sex Generational Naming · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • candidate's birth is 63 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1936), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • bounded birth date gives a parent-child age gap of at most 26 years (+10; true age remains uncertain)
  • candidate and subject share the given name John (+4; weak direct parent-child name recurrence, 278 public profiles)

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
  • bounded birth date gives a parent-child age gap of at most 26 years (+10; true age remains uncertain)
  • candidate's birth is 63 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1936), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • candidate and subject share the given name John (+4; weak direct parent-child name recurrence, 278 public profiles)

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 fit3/100
Competing Linked Parent
Dates1845–?Generationnominally 54 years; true gap uncertain age gapRecorded placesSt. John's, Newfoundland ColonyIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Same-Sex Generational Naming · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • candidate's birth is 91 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1936), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • bounded birth date gives a parent-child age gap of nominally 54 years; true gap uncertain (+10; true age remains uncertain)
  • candidate and subject share the given name John (+4; weak direct parent-child name recurrence, 278 public profiles)

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
  • bounded birth date gives a parent-child age gap of nominally 54 years; true gap uncertain (+10; true age remains uncertain)
  • candidate's birth is 91 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1936), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • candidate and subject share the given name John (+4; weak direct parent-child name recurrence, 278 public profiles)

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)

Show 3 lower-scoring possible fathers
Automated fit2/100
Competing Linked Parent
Dates1854–?Generationat most 45 years age gapRecorded placesLocation not supplied — profile holding pointIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Spouse · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • candidate's birth is 82 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1936), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • known spouse Margaret (Patton) Glasgow had a bounded, possibly plausible maternal age (45) at the subject's birth (+3)
  • bounded birth date gives a parent-child age gap of at most 45 years (+10; true age remains uncertain)

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
  • bounded birth date gives a parent-child age gap of at most 45 years (+10; true age remains uncertain)
  • candidate's birth is 82 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1936), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • known spouse Margaret (Patton) Glasgow had a bounded, possibly plausible maternal age (45) 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)

Automated fit2/100
Competing Linked Parent
Dates1849–?Generationat most 50 years age gapRecorded placesNew BrunswickIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Spouse · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • candidate's birth is 87 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1936), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • known spouse Letitia Lane (Leavitt) Glasgow had a bounded, possibly plausible maternal age (47) at the subject's birth (+3)
  • bounded birth date gives a parent-child age gap of at most 50 years (+10; true age remains uncertain)

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
  • bounded birth date gives a parent-child age gap of at most 50 years (+10; true age remains uncertain)
  • candidate's birth is 87 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1936), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • known spouse Letitia Lane (Leavitt) Glasgow had a bounded, possibly plausible maternal age (47) 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)

Automated fit1/100
Competing Linked Parent
Dates1883–1961Generationat most 16 years age gapRecorded placesKirknewton and East Calder, Midlothian, Scotland, United Kingdom · Wanganui, Manawatu-wanganui, New Zealand · Kirknewton — West LothianIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Mapped Proximity · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • candidate's birth is 53 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1936), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • bounded birth date gives a parent-child age gap of at most 16 years (+10; true age remains uncertain)
  • mapped Kirknewton — West Lothian is 14.5 km from the subject's birth-period Tarbrax, Inverarity, Forfarshire, Scotland, United Kingdom (+2; one or both placements are unproved)

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

Show complete scoring
  • bounded birth date gives a parent-child age gap of at most 16 years (+10; true age remains uncertain)
  • candidate's birth is 53 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1936), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • mapped Kirknewton — West Lothian is 14.5 km from the subject's birth-period Tarbrax, Inverarity, Forfarshire, Scotland, United Kingdom (+2; one or both placements are unproved)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)

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

Possible mothers5 leads

Automated fit2/100
Competing Linked Parent
Dates1876–?Generationat most 23 years age gapRecorded placesIndianaIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Household · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • candidate's birth is 60 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1936), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • a known child was born within 2 years of the subject (+3)
  • bounded birth date gives a parent-child age gap of at most 23 years (+10; true age remains uncertain)

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
  • bounded birth date gives a parent-child age gap of at most 23 years (+10; true age remains uncertain)
  • candidate's birth is 60 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1936), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • a known child was born within 2 years of the subject (+3)

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 fit0/100
Competing Linked Parent
Dates1893–?Generationnominally 6 years; approximate dates permit about 15–16 years age gapRecorded placesEdinburgh, Midlothian, Scotland, United Kingdom · EdinburghIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Mapped Proximity · Two-GenerationCurrent 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)
  • candidate's birth is 43 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1936), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • mapped Edinburgh is 29.8 km from the subject's birth-period Tarbrax, Inverarity, Forfarshire, Scotland, United Kingdom (+1; one or both placements are unproved)

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 6-year gap is too small, but the approximate birth date permits a narrow biologically viable interval (15–16 years) (+4)
  • candidate's birth is 43 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1936), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • mapped Edinburgh is 29.8 km from the subject's birth-period Tarbrax, Inverarity, Forfarshire, Scotland, United Kingdom (+1; one or both placements are unproved)
  • same research cluster (+0; grouping is not kinship evidence)

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)

Show 3 lower-scoring possible mothers
Automated fit0/100
Competing Linked Parent
Dates1893–1930Generationnominally 6 years; approximate dates permit about 15–16 years age gapRecorded placesPratt City, Birmingham, Jefferson, Alabama, United States · Decatur Junction, Limestone, Alabama, United StatesIndependent clue breadth · 2Age · Two-GenerationCurrent 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)
  • candidate's birth is 43 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1936), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+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); candidate is recorded only outside the subject's birth country (−25)

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)
  • candidate's birth is 43 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1936), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)

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); candidate is recorded only outside the subject's birth country (−25)

Automated fit0/100
Competing Linked Parent
Dates1893–?Generationnominally 6 years; approximate dates permit about 15–16 years age gapRecorded placesAlabama, United StatesIndependent clue breadth · 2Age · Two-GenerationCurrent 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)
  • candidate's birth is 43 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1936), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+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); candidate is recorded only outside the subject's birth country (−25)

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)
  • candidate's birth is 43 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1936), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)

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); candidate is recorded only outside the subject's birth country (−25)

Automated fit0/100
Competing Linked Parent
Dates1892–?Generationnominally 7 years; approximate dates permit about 15–17 years age gapRecorded placesCincinnati, Hamilton, Ohio, United StatesIndependent clue breadth · 2Age · 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 44 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1936), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+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); 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 (15–17 years) (+4)
  • candidate's birth is 44 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1936), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)

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); candidate is recorded only outside the subject's birth country (−25)

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

John GlasgowGlasgow-3701

Automated fit43/100
Similar Person
Dates1898–?PlacesGovan, LanarkshireParent 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
Automated fit43/100
Similar Person
Dates1900–1961PlacesNew Zealand → New ZealandParent 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
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
Evidence assessmentWhat is supported, uncertain or disputed in the current case model.5 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 632 / 3 / 1
  2. tree_only WikiTree profile export for Glasgow-3698
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-3698 was captured 2026-08-07T09:54:35+00:00; WikiTree profile revision 2025-09-29.

Profile location claims

EventDateLocationStatus
birth—Tarbrax, Inverarity, Forfarshire, Scotland, United KingdomWikiTree profile field

Immediate relationship snapshot

RelationshipPersonWikiTree IDDates and places returned
ParentsJohn GlasgowGlasgow-37051857-03-20 · Edinburgh Parish,Edinburgh,Midlothian,Scotland · 0000-00-00
ParentsMargaret GlasgowMcDermott-42521871-00-00 · England · 1951-05-06 · St. Raphael's Home, Edinburgh, Midlothian, Scotland
ChildrenJohnGlasgow-36971928-00-00 · Forth, Lanarkshire, Scotland, United Kingdom · 0000-00-00
ChildrenDouglas Pollock GlasgowGlasgow-36991936-03-19 · Edinburgh, Midlothian, Scotland · 1977-04-21
SpousesBridgetO'Bryne-171910-00-00 · 0000-00-00

Record-bearing passages

Profile source citations

  1. 632 / 3 / 1

Other external links in the profile

Full captured biography text
Biography
John was born before 1910. 

May be the same person as John Glasgow (1898-) or Unknown Glasgow (1899-)
Sources
* 632 / 3 / 1
https://www.scotlandspeople.gov.uk/record-results/179184061568db11088234e

https://www.ancestry.com/genealogy/records/douglas-pollock-glasgow-24-2fc0sxg
Raw WikiTree biography markup
== Biography ==

John was born before 1910. 

May be the same person as [[Glasgow-3701|John Glasgow (1898-)]] or [[Glasgow-3702|Unknown Glasgow (1899-)]]
== Sources ==
<references />
* 632 / 3 / 1
https://www.scotlandspeople.gov.uk/record-results/179184061568db11088234e

https://www.ancestry.com/genealogy/records/douglas-pollock-glasgow-24-2fc0sxg