Glasgow Surname Project

Individual research record

Hugh Glasgow

before 1722 – ?

Glasgow-3931 · 4 mapped associations

Tamlaght, County Londonderry, Ireland→Death place unknown
View on mapOpen WikiTreeCompareReport a correction

At a glance

Identity & family

Tree links organise the family; documentary status still varies.

4Mapped records
2Close relations
7Evidence items
12Candidate leads
Birth
before 1722 · Tamlaght, County Londonderry, Ireland
Death
Not recorded · Place not recorded
Parents
William Glasgowuncertain
Spouses
Not recorded
Children
Adam Glasgow
Gender
Male
WikiTree
Glasgow-3931
Research clusters
Descendants of Hugh Glasgow (c.1706)
Mapped descendants
0

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 positionAdam Glasgow (1758)
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
Weak Lead
Dates1700–1759Generationat most 22 years age gapRecorded placesCounty Tyrone, Ireland · Drumearn, Tyrone, Ireland · Cookstown estate areaIndependent clue breadth · 5Age · Contemporaneous Household Conflict · Mapped Proximity · Spouse-Specific Child Window · Two-GenerationExisting-tree context (not an independent clue)Sibling-Household ReplicationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • candidate's birth is 58 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1758), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • subject birth boundary overlaps children attributed to the same parental couple (1721–1735) (+3)
  • the same sex-aware parent-name position recurs independently in sibling households: James Glasgow → James Glasgow (+3)

a different linked father is explicitly uncertain (−6; an existing hypothesis still needs resolving); candidate's household recorded James Glasgow II in Moneymore, County Londonderry, Ireland within 1 years of the subject (−12; no contemporaneous child is indexed in the subject's locality)

Show complete scoring
  • bounded birth date gives a parent-child age gap of at most 22 years (+10; true age remains uncertain)
  • candidate's birth is 58 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1758), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • mapped Moneymore is 24.8 km from the subject's birth-period Tamlaght O'Crilly civil parish (+1; one or both placements are unproved)
  • subject birth boundary overlaps children attributed to the same parental couple (1721–1735) (+3)
  • the same sex-aware parent-name position recurs independently in sibling households: James Glasgow → James Glasgow (+3)

Deductions and cautions: a different linked father is explicitly uncertain (−6; an existing hypothesis still needs resolving); candidate's household recorded James Glasgow II in Moneymore, County Londonderry, Ireland within 1 years of the subject (−12; no contemporaneous child is indexed in the subject's locality)

Automated fit1/100
Weak Lead
Dates1680–1753Generationat most 42 years age gapRecorded placesIreland · Worcester County, Maryland · Ireland — exact locality unprovedIndependent clue breadth · 2Age · Two-GenerationExisting-tree context (not an independent clue)Sibling-Household ReplicationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • candidate's birth is 78 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1758), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • the same sex-aware parent-name position recurs independently in sibling households: James Glasgow → James Glasgow (+3)
  • bounded birth date gives a parent-child age gap of at most 42 years (+10; true age remains uncertain)

a different linked father is explicitly uncertain (−6; an existing hypothesis still needs resolving); same country, but no indexed locality overlap (−10)

Show complete scoring
  • bounded birth date gives a parent-child age gap of at most 42 years (+10; true age remains uncertain)
  • candidate's birth is 78 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1758), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • the same sex-aware parent-name position recurs independently in sibling households: James Glasgow → James Glasgow (+3)

Deductions and cautions: a different linked father is explicitly uncertain (−6; an existing hypothesis still needs resolving); same country, but no indexed locality overlap (−10)

Show 3 lower-scoring possible fathers
Automated fit0/100
Weak Lead
Dates1714–?Generationnominally 8 years; approximate dates permit about 16–18 years age gapRecorded placesKirknewton, Linlithgowshire, Scotland · Kirknewton — West LothianIndependent clue breadth · 2Age · Two-GenerationExisting-tree context (not an independent clue)Sibling-Household ReplicationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • the nominal 8-year gap is too small, but the approximate birth date permits a narrow biologically viable interval (16–18 years) (+4)
  • candidate's birth is 44 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1758), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • the same sex-aware parent-name position recurs independently in sibling households: John Glasgow → Andrew Glasgow (+3)

a different linked father is explicitly uncertain (−6; an existing hypothesis still needs resolving); 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 8-year gap is too small, but the approximate birth date permits a narrow biologically viable interval (16–18 years) (+4)
  • candidate's birth is 44 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1758), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • the same sex-aware parent-name position recurs independently in sibling households: John Glasgow → Andrew Glasgow (+3)

Deductions and cautions: a different linked father is explicitly uncertain (−6; an existing hypothesis still needs resolving); 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
Weak Lead
Dates1712–1782Generationnominally 10 years; approximate dates permit about 16–20 years age gapRecorded placesUphall, Linlithgowshire, Scotland · Kelso, Roxburghshire, Scotland · Linlithgowshire / West Lothian — exact locality unprovedIndependent clue breadth · 2Age · Two-GenerationExisting-tree context (not an independent clue)Sibling-Household ReplicationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • the nominal 10-year gap is too small, but the approximate birth date permits a narrow biologically viable interval (16–20 years) (+4)
  • candidate's birth is 46 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1758), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • the same sex-aware parent-name position recurs independently in sibling households: James Glasgow → James Glasgow (+3)

a different linked father is explicitly uncertain (−6; an existing hypothesis still needs resolving); 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 10-year gap is too small, but the approximate birth date permits a narrow biologically viable interval (16–20 years) (+4)
  • candidate's birth is 46 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1758), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • the same sex-aware parent-name position recurs independently in sibling households: James Glasgow → James Glasgow (+3)

Deductions and cautions: a different linked father is explicitly uncertain (−6; an existing hypothesis still needs resolving); 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
Weak Lead
Dates1706–?Generationnominally 16 years; true gap uncertain age gapRecorded placesStevenston, Ayrshire, Scotland · Stevenston — AyrshireIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Sex-Aware Ordered Naming · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • candidate's birth is 52 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1758), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • bounded birth date gives a parent-child age gap of nominally 16 years; true gap uncertain (+10; true age remains uncertain)
  • candidate's name matches the first dated son Adam Glasgow, the expected father position for a male subject (+12; catalogue rarity 5, Adam in 15 profiles)

a different linked father is explicitly uncertain (−6; an existing hypothesis still needs resolving); candidate is recorded only outside the subject's birth country (−25)

Show complete scoring
  • bounded birth date gives a parent-child age gap of nominally 16 years; true gap uncertain (+10; true age remains uncertain)
  • candidate's birth is 52 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1758), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • candidate's name matches the first dated son Adam Glasgow, the expected father position for a male subject (+12; catalogue rarity 5, Adam in 15 profiles)

Deductions and cautions: a different linked father is explicitly uncertain (−6; an existing hypothesis still needs resolving); candidate is recorded only outside the subject's birth country (−25)

Possible mothers5 leads

Automated fit17/100
Weak Lead
Dates1690–1759Generationat most 32 years age gapRecorded placesGlasgowIndependent clue breadth · 5Age · Contemporaneous Household Conflict · Household · Rare Branch-Name Recurrence · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • candidate's birth is 68 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1758), 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 32 years (+10; true age remains uncertain)

locality comparison is unavailable because one or both profiles lack adequate place data (no deduction); candidate's household recorded James Glasgow in Glencorse, Midlothian, Scotland within 2 years of the subject (−12; no contemporaneous child is indexed in the subject's locality)

Show complete scoring
  • bounded birth date gives a parent-child age gap of at most 32 years (+10; true age remains uncertain)
  • candidate's birth is 68 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1758), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • a known child was born within 2 years of the subject (+3)
  • uncommon given names recur in both otherwise distinct descendant branches: Adam +12 (15 public profiles; subject branch: Adam Glasgow; candidate branch: Adam Glasgow) (+12 total)

Deductions and cautions: locality comparison is unavailable because one or both profiles lack adequate place data (no deduction); candidate's household recorded James Glasgow in Glencorse, Midlothian, Scotland within 2 years of the subject (−12; no contemporaneous child is indexed in the subject's locality)

Automated fit14/100
Chronology-Only Fallback
Dates1680–?Generationat most 42 years age gapRecorded placesEdinburghIndependent clue breadth · 2Age · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • candidate's birth is 78 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1758), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • bounded birth date gives a parent-child age gap of at most 42 years (+10; true age remains uncertain)

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 42 years (+10; true age remains uncertain)
  • candidate's birth is 78 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1758), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)

Deductions and cautions: locality comparison is unavailable because one or both profiles lack adequate place data (no deduction)

Show 3 lower-scoring possible mothers
Automated fit5/100
Chronology-Only Fallback
Dates1690–1760Generationat most 32 years age gapRecorded placesCounty Kildare, Ireland · County Dublin, Ireland · County Kildare — exact locality unprovedIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Household · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • candidate's birth is 68 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1758), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • a known child was born within 8 years of the subject (+1)
  • bounded birth date gives a parent-child age gap of at most 32 years (+10; true age remains uncertain)

same country, but no indexed locality overlap (−10)

Show complete scoring
  • bounded birth date gives a parent-child age gap of at most 32 years (+10; true age remains uncertain)
  • candidate's birth is 68 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1758), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • a known child was born within 8 years of the subject (+1)

Deductions and cautions: same country, but no indexed locality overlap (−10)

Automated fit4/100
Chronology-Only Fallback
Dates1680–1742Generationat most 42 years age gapRecorded placesKilwaughter, County Antrim, Ireland · KilwaughterIndependent clue breadth · 2Age · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • candidate's birth is 78 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1758), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • bounded birth date gives a parent-child age gap of at most 42 years (+10; true age remains uncertain)

same country, but no indexed locality overlap (−10)

Show complete scoring
  • bounded birth date gives a parent-child age gap of at most 42 years (+10; true age remains uncertain)
  • candidate's birth is 78 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1758), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)

Deductions and cautions: same country, but no indexed locality overlap (−10)

Automated fit4/100
Chronology-Only Fallback
Dates1678–1755Generationat most 44 years age gapRecorded placesIreland · Ireland — exact locality unprovedIndependent clue breadth · 2Age · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • candidate's birth is 80 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1758), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • bounded birth date gives a parent-child age gap of at most 44 years (+10; true age remains uncertain)

same country, but no indexed locality overlap (−10)

Show complete scoring
  • bounded birth date gives a parent-child age gap of at most 44 years (+10; true age remains uncertain)
  • candidate's birth is 80 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1758), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)

Deductions and cautions: same country, but no indexed locality overlap (−10)

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

Hugh GlasgowGlasgow-540

Automated fit40/100
Similar Person
Dates1739–1831PlacesCounty Londonderry, Ireland → Pine Creek, Allegheny, Pennsylvania, United StatesParent comparisonNo shared parent is indexed
Why it may fit
  • same first and last name (+18)
  • birth years within 17 (+2)
  • shared recorded place (+20)

uncertain father attachments differ (no deduction)

Full comparison detail
  • same first and last name (+18)
  • birth years within 17 (+2)
  • shared recorded place (+20)

Conflicts: uncertain father attachments differ (no deduction)

Open side-by-side comparison

Same-name candidate

Hugh GlasgowGlasgow-2448

Automated fit36/100
Similar Person
Dates1717–?PlacesKilwinning, Ayrshire, ScotlandParent comparisonNo shared parent is indexed
Why it may fit
  • same first and last name (+18)
  • birth years within 5 (+18)

uncertain father attachments differ (no deduction)

Full comparison detail
  • same first and last name (+18)
  • birth years within 5 (+18)

Conflicts: uncertain father attachments differ (no deduction)

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-3931 · updated 2026-08-09

Glasgow-3931 is the newly created profile for Tamlaght O'Crilly householder entry 1195 in 1740. The return proves a distinct adult Hugh but gives no townland, occupation or relationship. The return supplies no basis for attaching him as father of the unidentified placeholder Glasgow-3905. That tree-only relationship should be removed, and this man must stay separate from the second Hugh at entry 1272.

Life and record timelineChronological mapped occurrences and their underlying sources.4 records
Case-file source findingsSource extracts and analysis regenerated from findings.md.1 section(s)

Source findings

Glasgow-3931 · updated 2026-08-09

SourceFindingAssessment
PRONI T808/15258, pp. 108–109; collector-order transcriptionTwo separate Hugh Glasgow householders appear at entries 1195 and 1272.Direct evidence of two distinct households; no kinship or townland evidence.
Evidence assessmentWhat is supported, uncertain or disputed in the current case model.8 claims
3Derivative
2Tree Only
2Unknown

Documented or strongly supported

Hugh Glasgow was recorded in Tamlaght O'Crilly civil parish (1740).

proved1 linked evidence item

Householder, entry 1195

Hugh Glasgow was recorded in Tamlaght O'Crilly civil parish (1740).

proved1 linked evidence item

Householder, entry 1272

Working hypotheses and conflicts

Hugh Glasgow was possible father or grandfather of Adam Glasgow

possible1 linked evidence item

Entry 1195 proves a separate adult Hugh in the correct parish and a biologically possible generation. It gives no townland, age, wife or child. The former Glasgow-3905 profile is a research placeholder and must not be used as an intervening person.

Case-file assessments

Relationship action

Glasgow-3931 · updated 2026-08-09

  • Remove Glasgow-3905 as this Hugh's child / remove Hugh-3931 as the placeholder's father.
  • Do not infer Inishrush residence or a precise birth from a parish-wide return whose townland is unspecified.
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

Next records to inspect

  1. research assessment — 108-109; Richard John Torrens, collector-order transcription (https://genealogy.torrens.org/BannValley/books/Kilrea/Kilrea07.html), entries 1195 and 1272 (accessed 21 July 2026); W.
Sources and provenanceStructured citations and source-quality classifications.6 sources

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

  1. derivative 108-109; Richard John Torrens, collector-order transcription (), entries 1195 and 1272 (accessed 21 July 2026); W
  2. tree_only William Melanchthon Glasgow, History of the Glasgow Family (https://www.wikitree.com/photo.php/0/0a/Glasgow-590.pdf), pp. 2-3. The narrative was written about 160 years after the reported 1733 marriage and contains a demonstrated error in the younger Hugh's death date.
  3. tree_only WikiTree profile export for Glasgow-3931
  4. unknown Virtual Record Treasury of Ireland, PRONI T808/15258: 1740 Protestant householders return
  5. derivative Kilrea News extracts: Larne declaration dated at Innisrush, 1772
  6. unknown Descendants of Hugh Glasgow (c.1706), family-history scan
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-3931 was captured 2026-08-11T19:49:25+00:00; WikiTree profile revision 2026-08-11.

Profile location claims

EventDateLocationStatus
birth—Tamlaght, County Londonderry, IrelandWikiTree profile field

Immediate relationship snapshot

RelationshipPersonWikiTree IDDates and places returned
ParentsWilliam GlasgowGlasgow-15051708-00-00 · County Antrim, Ireland · 1783-00-00 · Larne
SiblingsJames GlasgowGlasgow-15091737-00-00 · County Antrim, Ireland · 1802-00-00
SiblingsUnknown GlasgowGlasgow-39051740-00-00 · Inishrush, Tamlaght O'Crilly, County Londonderry, Ireland · 0000-00-00
SiblingsJohn GlasgowGlasgow-10221751-00-00 · County Antrim, Ireland · 1852-00-00 · County Antrim, Ireland, United Kingdom

Record-bearing passages

  • Biography Hugh Glasgow was one of two distinct men of that name returned as Protestant householders in Tamlaght O'Crilly parish, County Londonderry, in 1740. In the surviving collector-order transcription this Hugh is entry 1195, between Tole O'Cain and Patrick O'Quin. The second Hugh is entry 1272, between Henry Lennox and Hugh Ellis and immediately followed by James McCullough. PRONI T808/15258, Names of 14,400 Protestant householders, Tamlaght O'Crilly, 1740, pp. 108-109; Richard John Torrens, collector-order transcription (https://genealogy.torrens.org/BannValley/books/Kilrea/Kilrea07.html), entries 1195 and 1272 (accessed 21 July 2026); W. Macafee, surname transcription (https://www.billmacafee.com/1740returns/1740religiousreturnsulstername.pdf), both entries recorded with townland "Not specified".
  • The return proves only that this was a separate adult householder in the parish. It gives no age, occupation, townland, wife, children or relationship to the other Hugh. Research Notes Suggested creation data:

  • Birth: before about 1722, uncertain; place unknown.

    • Residence: Tamlaght O'Crilly parish, County Londonderry, Ireland, 1740; townland unknown.
    • Death: after 1740, uncertain; place unknown.
    • Parents, spouse and children: unknown.
  • The other 1740 Hugh, entry 1272, is the stronger occurrence candidate for Hugh Glasgow because a late family account says Hugh worked for and married into a McCullough family after moving to County Londonderry, while entry 1272 immediately precedes James McCullough. That remains an identity hypothesis, not proof. William Melanchthon Glasgow, History of the Glasgow Family (https://www.wikitree.com/photo.php/0/0a/Glasgow-590.pdf), pp. 2-3. The narrative was written about 160 years after the reported 1733 marriage and contains a demonstrated error in the younger Hugh's death date.
  • This first Hugh is the cleanest current tentative root for the older Adam and Maria naming reconstruction behind Adam Glasgow and John Glasco of Inishrush. If the project represents that model, Unknown Glasgow may be attached as this Hugh's uncertain son and described as possibly named Adam. This is a clustering hypothesis only: the 1740 return names no child and no source states that the two Hugh householders were related.
  • Do not merge this man with Hugh Glasgow or Hugh Glasgow of the east-Antrim cluster. The two Tamlaght entries prove that at least two separate Hugh households existed, and the Antrim profile belongs to a different documentary cluster. Sources

Profile source citations

  1. PRONI T808/15258, Names of 14,400 Protestant householders, Tamlaght O'Crilly, 1740, pp. 108-109; Richard John Torrens, collector-order transcription (https://genealogy.torrens.org/BannValley/books/Kilrea/Kilrea07.html), entries 1195 and 1272 (accessed 21 July 2026); W. Macafee, surname transcription (https://www.billmacafee.com/1740returns/1740religiousreturnsulstername.pdf), both entries recorded with townland "Not specified". source link 1 source link 2
  2. William Melanchthon Glasgow, History of the Glasgow Family (https://www.wikitree.com/photo.php/0/0a/Glasgow-590.pdf), pp. 2-3. The narrative was written about 160 years after the reported 1733 marriage and contains a demonstrated error in the younger Hugh's death date. source link 1
Full captured biography text
Biography
Hugh Glasgow was one of two distinct men of that name returned as
Protestant householders in Tamlaght O'Crilly parish, County Londonderry, in
1740. In the surviving collector-order transcription this Hugh is entry 1195,
between Tole O'Cain and Patrick O'Quin. The second Hugh is entry 1272, between
Henry Lennox and Hugh Ellis and immediately followed by James McCullough. 
PRONI T808/15258, Names of 14,400 Protestant householders, Tamlaght O'Crilly,
1740, pp. 108-109; Richard John Torrens,
collector-order transcription (https://genealogy.torrens.org/BannValley/books/Kilrea/Kilrea07.html), entries 1195 and 1272 (accessed 21 July 2026);
W. Macafee,
surname transcription (https://www.billmacafee.com/1740returns/1740religiousreturnsulstername.pdf), both entries recorded with townland "Not specified".

The return proves only that this was a separate adult householder in the parish.
It gives no age, occupation, townland, wife, children or relationship to the
other Hugh.
Research Notes
Suggested creation data:

* Birth: before about 1722, uncertain; place unknown.
* Residence: Tamlaght O'Crilly parish, County Londonderry, Ireland, 1740;
 townland unknown.
* Death: after 1740, uncertain; place unknown.
* Parents, spouse and children: unknown.

The other 1740 Hugh, entry 1272, is the stronger occurrence candidate for
Hugh Glasgow because a late family account says Hugh worked for
and married into a McCullough family after moving to County Londonderry, while
entry 1272 immediately precedes James McCullough. That remains an identity
hypothesis, not proof. William Melanchthon Glasgow,
History of the Glasgow
Family (https://www.wikitree.com/photo.php/0/0a/Glasgow-590.pdf), pp. 2-3. The narrative was written about 160 years after the reported
1733 marriage and contains a demonstrated error in the younger Hugh's death
date. 

This first Hugh is the cleanest current tentative root for the older Adam and
Maria naming reconstruction behind Adam Glasgow and
John Glasco of Inishrush. If the project represents that model,
Unknown Glasgow may be attached as this Hugh's uncertain
son and described as possibly named Adam. This is a clustering hypothesis only:
the 1740 return names no child and no source states that the two Hugh
householders were related.

Do not merge this man with Hugh Glasgow or
Hugh Glasgow of the east-Antrim cluster. The two Tamlaght
entries prove that at least two separate Hugh households existed, and the Antrim
profile belongs to a different documentary cluster.
Sources
Raw WikiTree biography markup
== Biography ==

'''Hugh Glasgow''' was one of two distinct men of that name returned as
Protestant householders in Tamlaght O'Crilly parish, County Londonderry, in
1740. In the surviving collector-order transcription this Hugh is entry 1195,
between Tole O'Cain and Patrick O'Quin. The second Hugh is entry 1272, between
Henry Lennox and Hugh Ellis and immediately followed by James McCullough.<ref>
PRONI T808/15258, ''Names of 14,400 Protestant householders'', Tamlaght O'Crilly,
1740, pp. 108-109; Richard John Torrens,
[https://genealogy.torrens.org/BannValley/books/Kilrea/Kilrea07.html
collector-order transcription], entries 1195 and 1272 (accessed 21 July 2026);
W. Macafee,
[https://www.billmacafee.com/1740returns/1740religiousreturnsulstername.pdf
surname transcription], both entries recorded with townland "Not specified".
</ref>

The return proves only that this was a separate adult householder in the parish.
It gives no age, occupation, townland, wife, children or relationship to the
other Hugh.

=== Research Notes ===

Suggested creation data:

* Birth: before about 1722, uncertain; place unknown.
* Residence: Tamlaght O'Crilly parish, County Londonderry, Ireland, 1740;
  townland unknown.
* Death: after 1740, uncertain; place unknown.
* Parents, spouse and children: unknown.

The other 1740 Hugh, entry 1272, is the stronger occurrence candidate for
[[Glasgow-548|Hugh Glasgow]] because a late family account says Hugh worked for
and married into a McCullough family after moving to County Londonderry, while
entry 1272 immediately precedes James McCullough. That remains an identity
hypothesis, not proof.<ref>William Melanchthon Glasgow,
[https://www.wikitree.com/photo.php/0/0a/Glasgow-590.pdf ''History of the Glasgow
Family''], pp. 2-3. The narrative was written about 160 years after the reported
1733 marriage and contains a demonstrated error in the younger Hugh's death
date.</ref>

This first Hugh is the cleanest current tentative root for the older Adam and
Maria naming reconstruction behind [[Glasgow-3902|Adam Glasgow]] and
[[Glasgow-3927|John Glasco]] of Inishrush. If the project represents that model,
[[Glasgow-3905|Unknown Glasgow]] may be attached as this Hugh's '''uncertain'''
son and described as possibly named Adam. This is a clustering hypothesis only:
the 1740 return names no child and no source states that the two Hugh
householders were related.

Do not merge this man with [[Glasgow-548|Hugh Glasgow]] or
[[Glasgow-1503|Hugh Glasgow of the east-Antrim cluster]]. The two Tamlaght
entries prove that at least two separate Hugh households existed, and the Antrim
profile belongs to a different documentary cluster.

== Sources ==
<references />