Glasgow Surname Project

Individual research record

Frank Glasgow

c. 1845 – ?

Glasgow-645 · 1 mapped association

Birthplace unknown→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
2Close relations
3Evidence items
12Candidate leads
Birth
c. 1845 · Place not recorded
Death
Not recorded · Place not recorded
Parents
Not recorded
Spouses
Mary (Reick) Glasgow
Children
Frank William Glasgow
Gender
Male
WikiTree
Glasgow-645
Research clusters
Scotland 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 positionFrank William Glasgow (1869)
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 fit49/100
Moderate Lead
Dates1817–1881Generation28 years age gapRecorded placesBlair County, Pennsylvania, United States · Glasgow, Cambria County, Pennsylvania, United States · Blair County, Pennsylvania, USAIndependent clue breadth · 5Age · Rare Branch-Name Recurrence · Spouse · Spouse-Specific Child Window · Two-GenerationSame-spouse child windowSarah J (Leamer) GlasgowCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 28-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • known spouse Sarah J (Leamer) Glasgow had a plausible maternal age (25) at the subject's birth (+7)
  • candidate's birth is 52 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1869), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)

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

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 28-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 52 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1869), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • subject's birth fits between children attributed to the same parental couple (1844–1861) (+6; other parent Sarah J (Leamer) Glasgow)
  • known spouse Sarah J (Leamer) Glasgow had a plausible maternal age (25) at the subject's birth (+7)
  • uncommon given names recur in both otherwise distinct descendant branches: Frank +14 (11 public profiles; subject branch: Frank William Glasgow, Frank Glasgow; candidate branch: Frank James Glasgow; +2 repetition bonus) (+14 total)

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

Automated fit49/100
Moderate Lead
Dates1807–1886Generation38 years age gapRecorded placesBrush Creek Township, Adams, Ohio, United States · Washington, Washington, Iowa, United StatesIndependent clue breadth · 5Age · Rare Branch-Name Recurrence · Spouse · Spouse-Specific Child Window · Two-GenerationSame-spouse child windowMargaret Elizabeth (Black) GlasgowCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 38-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • known spouse Margaret Taylor (Lowry) Glasgow had a plausible maternal age (31) at the subject's birth (+7)
  • candidate's birth is 62 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1869), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)

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

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 38-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 62 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1869), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • subject's birth fits between children attributed to the same parental couple (1830–1849) (+6; other parent Margaret Elizabeth (Black) Glasgow)
  • known spouse Margaret Taylor (Lowry) Glasgow had a plausible maternal age (31) at the subject's birth (+7)
  • uncommon given names recur in both otherwise distinct descendant branches: Frank +14 (11 public profiles; subject branch: Frank William Glasgow, Frank Glasgow; candidate branch: Frank Morrison Glasgow; +2 repetition bonus) (+14 total)

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

Show 3 lower-scoring possible fathers
Automated fit39/100
Weak Lead
Dates1810–?Generation35 years age gapRecorded placesSouth Carolina, United States · South CarolinaIndependent clue breadth · 5Age · Household · Rare Branch-Name Recurrence · Spouse · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 35-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • known spouse Mary Caroline (Thompson) Glasgow had a plausible maternal age (32) at the subject's birth (+7)
  • candidate's birth is 59 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1869), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)

locality comparison is unavailable because one or both profiles lack adequate place data (no deduction); descendant-name recurrence has no independent household, record, migration or specific-locality anchor (score capped at 39)

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 35-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 59 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1869), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • subject's birth fits within the candidate's overall child-bearing span (1839–1856) (+3; children are not tied to one spouse)
  • known spouse Mary Caroline (Thompson) Glasgow had a plausible maternal age (32) at the subject's birth (+7)
  • uncommon given names recur in both otherwise distinct descendant branches: Frank +14 (11 public profiles; subject branch: Frank William Glasgow, Frank Glasgow; candidate branch: Frank Lee Glasgow; +2 repetition bonus) (+14 total)

Deductions and cautions: locality comparison is unavailable because one or both profiles lack adequate place data (no deduction); descendant-name recurrence has no independent household, record, migration or specific-locality anchor (score capped at 39)

Automated fit23/100
Weak Lead
Dates1830–1906Generationnominally 15 years; approximate dates permit about 16–35 years age gapRecorded placesBrush Creek Township, Adams, Ohio, United States · Seattle, King, Washington, United StatesIndependent clue breadth · 5Age · Household · Rare Branch-Name Recurrence · Spouse · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • the nominal 15-year gap is too small, but the approximate birth date permits a narrow biologically viable interval (16–35 years) (+4)
  • known spouse Phebe Ann (Robertson) Glasgow had a plausible maternal age (16) at the subject's birth (+3)
  • candidate's birth is 39 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1869), a marginal two-generation interval (+1)

parentage requires the approximate birth estimate to be early enough (no deduction); locality comparison is unavailable because one or both profiles lack adequate place data (no deduction)

Show complete scoring
  • the nominal 15-year gap is too small, but the approximate birth date permits a narrow biologically viable interval (16–35 years) (+4)
  • candidate's birth is 39 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1869), a marginal two-generation interval (+1)
  • a known child was born within 7 years of the subject (+1)
  • known spouse Phebe Ann (Robertson) Glasgow had a plausible maternal age (16) at the subject's birth (+3)
  • uncommon given names recur in both otherwise distinct descendant branches: Frank +14 (11 public profiles; subject branch: Frank William Glasgow, Frank Glasgow; candidate branch: Frank Morrison Glasgow; +2 repetition bonus) (+14 total)

Deductions and cautions: parentage requires the approximate birth estimate to be early enough (no deduction); locality comparison is unavailable because one or both profiles lack adequate place data (no deduction)

Automated fit35/100
Chronology-Only Fallback
Dates1821–1886Generation24 years age gapRecorded placesScott Township, Adams, Ohio, United States · Iowa City, Johnson, Iowa, United StatesIndependent clue breadth · 4Age · Spouse · Spouse-Specific Child Window · Two-GenerationSame-spouse child windowMalinda Ann (Best) GlasgowCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 24-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • known spouse Malinda Ann (Best) Glasgow had a plausible maternal age (22) at the subject's birth (+7)
  • candidate's birth is 48 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1869), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)

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

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 24-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 48 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1869), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • subject's birth fits between children attributed to the same parental couple (1844–1859) (+6; other parent Malinda Ann (Best) Glasgow)
  • known spouse Malinda Ann (Best) Glasgow had a plausible maternal age (22) at the subject's birth (+7)

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

Possible mothers5 leads

Automated fit42/100
Moderate Lead
Dates1820–1865Generation25 years age gapRecorded placesPennsylvania, USAIndependent clue breadth · 4Age · Rare Branch-Name Recurrence · Spouse-Specific Child Window · Two-GenerationSame-spouse child windowJohn S GlasgowCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 25-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 49 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1869), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • subject's birth fits between children attributed to the same parental couple (1844–1861) (+6; other parent John S Glasgow)

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

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 25-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 49 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1869), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • subject's birth fits between children attributed to the same parental couple (1844–1861) (+6; other parent John S Glasgow)
  • uncommon given names recur in both otherwise distinct descendant branches: Frank +14 (11 public profiles; subject branch: Frank William Glasgow, Frank Glasgow; candidate branch: Frank James Glasgow; +2 repetition bonus) (+14 total)

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

Automated fit42/100
Moderate Lead
Dates1809–1851Generation36 years age gapRecorded placesAdams, Ohio, United StatesIndependent clue breadth · 4Age · Rare Branch-Name Recurrence · Spouse-Specific Child Window · Two-GenerationSame-spouse child windowJoseph Montgomery GlasgowCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 36-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 60 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1869), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • subject's birth fits between children attributed to the same parental couple (1830–1849) (+6; other parent Joseph Montgomery Glasgow)

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

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 36-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 60 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1869), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • subject's birth fits between children attributed to the same parental couple (1830–1849) (+6; other parent Joseph Montgomery Glasgow)
  • uncommon given names recur in both otherwise distinct descendant branches: Frank +14 (11 public profiles; subject branch: Frank William Glasgow, Frank Glasgow; candidate branch: Frank Morrison Glasgow; +2 repetition bonus) (+14 total)

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 fit39/100
Weak Lead
Dates1813–?Generation32 years age gapRecorded placesTennessee, United StatesIndependent clue breadth · 4Age · Household · Rare Branch-Name Recurrence · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 32-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 56 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1869), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • subject's birth fits within the candidate's overall child-bearing span (1839–1856) (+3; children are not tied to one spouse)

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

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 32-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 56 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1869), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • subject's birth fits within the candidate's overall child-bearing span (1839–1856) (+3; children are not tied to one spouse)
  • uncommon given names recur in both otherwise distinct descendant branches: Frank +14 (11 public profiles; subject branch: Frank William Glasgow, Frank Glasgow; candidate branch: Frank Lee Glasgow; +2 repetition bonus) (+14 total)

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

Automated fit28/100
Chronology-Only Fallback
Dates1824–?Generation21 years age gapRecorded placesBotetourt, Virginia, United StatesIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Spouse-Specific Child Window · Two-GenerationSame-spouse child windowJoseph GlasgowCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 21-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 45 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1869), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • subject's birth fits between children attributed to the same parental couple (1839–1862) (+6; other parent Joseph Glasgow)

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

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 21-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 45 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1869), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • subject's birth fits between children attributed to the same parental couple (1839–1862) (+6; other parent Joseph Glasgow)

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

Automated fit28/100
Chronology-Only Fallback
Dates1824–?Generation21 years age gapRecorded placesIreland, United KingdomIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Spouse-Specific Child Window · Two-GenerationSame-spouse child windowAndrew GlasgowCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 21-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 45 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1869), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • subject's birth fits between children attributed to the same parental couple (1842–1846) (+6; other parent Andrew Glasgow)

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

Show complete scoring
  • plausible 21-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 45 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1869), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • subject's birth fits between children attributed to the same parental couple (1842–1846) (+6; other parent Andrew Glasgow)

Deductions and cautions: 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

Frank GlassgoGlassgo-12

Automated fit18/100
Similar Person
Dates1877–?PlacesTownship 5 Hayesville, Franklin, North Carolina, United StatesParent comparisonNo shared parent is indexed
Why it may fit
  • same first and last name (+18)

record-derived birth estimates differ by 32; retained without deduction

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

Conflicts: record-derived birth estimates differ by 32; retained without deduction

Open side-by-side comparison
Automated fit18/100
Similar Person
Dates1881–1952PlacesNew Brighton, Beaver County, Pennsylvania, United States → New Castle, Lawrence County, Pennsylvania, United StatesParent comparisonNo shared parent is indexed
Why it may fit
  • same first and last name (+18)

record-derived birth estimates differ by 36; retained without deduction

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

Conflicts: record-derived birth estimates differ by 36; retained without 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

Life and record timelineChronological mapped occurrences and their underlying sources.1 record
b. 1845

Kin-inferred from child Frank William Glasgow’s birthplace: Scotland, United Kingdom

Scotland, United Kingdom

One-Tree export profile fields are search leads, not sources; relationships are shown only where the export supplies parent links. This map placement is an estimate from kin and is not a directly recorded location for this person.

Kin-inferred One-Tree profile leadunknown
Source and mapping detail

WikiTree profile export for Glasgow-645

No sufficiently specific citation match found.

Precision: Kin-inferred relationship locality

Evidence assessmentWhat is supported, uncertain or disputed in the current case model.3 claims
2Unknown
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. unknown A source for this information is needed.
  2. unknown Scotland. 1901 Scotland Census. (accessed 18 Jul 2022) Reels 1-446. General Register Office for Scotland, Edinburgh, Scotland; Fraserburgh; ED: 5; Page: 23; Line: 8; Roll: CSSCT1901_67
  3. tree_only WikiTree profile export for Glasgow-645
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-645 was captured 2026-08-07T09:54:35+00:00; WikiTree profile revision 2022-07-19.

Immediate relationship snapshot

RelationshipPersonWikiTree IDDates and places returned
ChildrenMr. Frank William GlasgowGlasgow-6441869-12-23 · Scotland, United Kingdom · 1937-03-09 · Aberdeenshire, Scotland, United Kingdom
SpousesMary GlasgowReick-271845-00-00 · 0000-00-00

Record-bearing passages

  • Biography Frank was born about 1845. Frank Glasgow ... A source for this information is needed.
  • 1901 Scotland Census shows parents and siblings.
  • Frank Glasgow 32 Head Rachel Glasgow 31 Wife Elsie Glasgow 8 Daur (Daughter) Frank Glasgow 6 Son William Glasgow 4 Son James Glasgow 2 Son Scotland. 1901 Scotland Census. (accessed 18 Jul 2022) Reels 1-446. General Register Office for Scotland, Edinburgh, Scotland; Fraserburgh; ED: 5; Page: 23; Line: 8; Roll: CSSCT1901_67 Sources

Profile source citations

  1. A source for this information is needed.
  2. Scotland. 1901 Scotland Census. (accessed 18 Jul 2022) Reels 1-446. General Register Office for Scotland, Edinburgh, Scotland; Fraserburgh; ED: 5; Page: 23; Line: 8; Roll: CSSCT1901_67
Full captured biography text
Biography
Frank was born about 1845. Frank Glasgow ... A source for this information is needed. 

1901 Scotland Census shows parents and siblings.

 Frank Glasgow 32 Head 
 Rachel Glasgow 31 Wife 
 Elsie Glasgow 8 Daur (Daughter) 
 Frank Glasgow 6 Son 
 William Glasgow 4 Son 
 James Glasgow 2 Son 
 Scotland. 1901 Scotland Census. (accessed 18 Jul 2022) Reels 1-446. General Register Office for Scotland, Edinburgh, Scotland; Fraserburgh; ED: 5; Page: 23; Line: 8; Roll: CSSCT1901_67 
Sources
Raw WikiTree biography markup
== Biography ==

Frank was born about 1845. Frank Glasgow ... <ref>A source for this information is needed.</ref>

 
1901 Scotland Census shows parents and siblings.

        Frank Glasgow 32 Head 
        Rachel Glasgow 31 Wife 
        Elsie Glasgow 8 Daur (Daughter) 
        Frank Glasgow 6 Son 
        William Glasgow 4 Son 
        James Glasgow 2 Son 
 <ref>Scotland. 1901 Scotland Census. (accessed 18 Jul 2022) Reels 1-446. General Register Office for Scotland, Edinburgh, Scotland; Fraserburgh; ED: 5; Page: 23; Line: 8; Roll: CSSCT1901_67</ref>       
      


== Sources ==

<references />