Glasgow Surname Project

Individual research record

Caleb Glasgow

c. 1740 – 1804-12-24

Glasgow-830 · 1 mapped association

Currituck, North Carolina, British Colonial America→Pasquotank County, North Carolina, United States
View on mapOpen WikiTreeCompareReport a correction

At a glance

Identity & family

Tree links organise the family; documentary status still varies.

1Mapped records
3Close relations
5Evidence items
12Candidate leads
Birth
c. 1740 · Currituck, North Carolina, British Colonial America
Death
1804-12-24 · Pasquotank County, North Carolina, United States
Parents
William GlasgowunmarkedSusannah (Dauge) Glasgowunmarked
Spouses
Not recorded
Children
Dorcas (Glasgow) Pugh
Gender
Male
WikiTree
Glasgow-830
Research clusters
Worldwide One-Tree profile leads
Mapped descendants
1

Comparison context

These child positions and checks are the subject details used to rank possible parents below.

Naming sequence used by the parentage model

Paternal grandfather positionNot identifiable from dated child profiles
Maternal grandfather positionNot identifiable from dated child profiles
Maternal grandmother positionDorcas (Glasgow) Pugh (1783)
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 fit0/100
Competing Linked Parent
Dates1734–?Generationnominally 6 years; approximate dates permit about 16–16 years age gapRecorded placesNorth Leith, Midlothian, Scotland · South LeithIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Two-Generation · Undated LocalityCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • candidate has only broad or undated birth-locality overlap: north (+6)
  • the nominal 6-year gap is too small, but the approximate birth date permits a narrow biologically viable interval (16–16 years) (+4)
  • candidate's birth is 49 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1783), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)

a different father 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 (16–16 years) (+4)
  • candidate's birth is 49 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1783), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • candidate has only broad or undated birth-locality overlap: north (+6)

Deductions and cautions: a different father 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
Dates1733–?Generationnominally 7 years; approximate dates permit about 16–17 years age gapRecorded placesIrvine, Ayrshire, Scotland · Irvine — AyrshireIndependent 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 (16–17 years) (+4)
  • candidate's birth is 50 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1783), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)

a different father 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 (16–17 years) (+4)
  • candidate's birth is 50 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1783), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)

Deductions and cautions: a different father 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 3 lower-scoring possible fathers
Automated fit0/100
Competing Linked Parent
Dates1733–?Generationnominally 7 years; approximate dates permit about 16–17 years age gapRecorded placesKilclone, County Meath, IrelandIndependent 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 (16–17 years) (+4)
  • candidate's birth is 50 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1783), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)

a different father 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 (16–17 years) (+4)
  • candidate's birth is 50 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1783), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)

Deductions and cautions: a different father 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
Dates1731–1793Generationnominally 9 years; approximate dates permit about 16–19 years age gapRecorded placesKilwaughter, Larne, County Antrim, Ireland · Newberry, South Carolina, United States · KilwaughterIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Broad Geography · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • the nominal 9-year gap is too small, but the approximate birth date permits a narrow biologically viable interval (16–19 years) (+4)
  • candidate's birth is 52 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1783), 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); parentage requires the approximate birth estimate to be early enough (no deduction)

Show complete scoring
  • the nominal 9-year gap is too small, but the approximate birth date permits a narrow biologically viable interval (16–19 years) (+4)
  • candidate's birth is 52 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1783), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • weak broad-area overlap: carolina (+1; not a locality match)

Deductions and cautions: a different father is already linked but its evidence is unassessed (−15); parentage requires the approximate birth estimate to be early enough (no deduction)

Automated fit0/100
Competing Linked Parent
Dates1730–?Generationnominally 10 years; approximate dates permit about 16–30 years age gapRecorded placesLivingston, Linlithgowshire, Scotland · Livingston — West LothianIndependent clue breadth · 2Age · Two-GenerationCurrent 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 (16–30 years) (+4)
  • candidate's birth is 53 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1783), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)

a different father 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 10-year gap is too small, but the approximate birth date permits a narrow biologically viable interval (16–30 years) (+4)
  • candidate's birth is 53 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1783), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)

Deductions and cautions: a different father 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)

Possible mothers5 leads

Automated fit10/100
Competing Linked Parent
Dates1715–1765Generation25 years age gapRecorded placesPortglenone — regional family-tradition referenceIndependent clue breadth · 3Age · Household · Two-GenerationCurrent relationshipNot currently linked as parent
Strongest signals
  • plausible 25-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 68 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1783), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • a known child was born within 1 years of the subject (+3)

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
  • plausible 25-year parent-child age gap (+18)
  • candidate's birth is 68 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1783), a compatible grandparent-generation interval (+4)
  • a known child was born within 1 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
Dates1734–?Generationnominally 6 years; approximate dates permit about 15–16 years age gapRecorded placesKirknewton, Linlithgowshire, Scotland · Kirknewton — West LothianIndependent 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 49 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1783), 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 49 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1783), 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)

Show 3 lower-scoring possible mothers
Automated fit0/100
Competing Linked Parent
Dates1734–1743Generationnominally 6 years; approximate dates permit about 15–16 years age gapRecorded placesKilbirnie, Ayrshire, Scotland · Kilbirnie — AyrshireIndependent 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 49 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1783), 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 49 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1783), 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
Dates1733–?Generationnominally 7 years; approximate dates permit about 15–17 years age gapRecorded placesCounty Antrim, Ireland · KilwaughterIndependent 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 50 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1783), 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 50 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1783), 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
Dates1733–1808Generationnominally 7 years; approximate dates permit about 15–27 years age gapRecorded placesFalkirk, Stirlingshire, Scotland · Falkirk, Stirlingshire, Scotland, United Kingdom · Stirlingshire — exact locality unprovedIndependent 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 (15–27 years) (+4)
  • candidate's birth is 50 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1783), 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 (15–27 years) (+4)
  • candidate's birth is 50 years before the subject's earliest dated child (1783), 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

Caleb GlasgowGlasgow-220

Automated fit23/100
Similar Person
Dates1781–1818PlacesCurrituck, North Carolina, United States → Currituck, North Carolina, United StatesParent comparisonSame parent name; profile identity unproved
Why it may fit
  • same first and last name (+18)
  • overlapping locality (+8)
  • same parent name without a shared profile ID: William Glasgow (+2)

record-derived birth estimates differ by 41; retained without deduction; unassessed father attachments differ (−5)

Full comparison detail
  • same first and last name (+18)
  • overlapping locality (+8)
  • same parent name without a shared profile ID: William Glasgow (+2)

Conflicts: record-derived birth estimates differ by 41; retained without deduction; unassessed father attachments differ (−5)

Open side-by-side comparison

Same-name candidate

Caleb GlasgowGlasgow-363

Automated fit19/100
Similar Person
Dates1726–1781PlacesCarrituck, North Carolina → Currituck, North Carolina, United StatesParent comparisonSame Father Profile; Relationship Evidence Is Unassessed
Why it may fit
  • same first and last name (+18)
  • birth years within 14 (+2)
  • overlapping locality (+8)

death years differ by 23 (−18)

Full comparison detail
  • same first and last name (+18)
  • birth years within 14 (+2)
  • overlapping locality (+8)
  • same father profile; relationship evidence is unassessed: William Glasgow (+9)

Conflicts: death years differ by 23 (−18)

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. 1740

Profile-stated birthplace: Currituck, North Carolina, British Colonial America

Currituck, North Carolina, British Colonial America

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-830

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.8 claims
3Unknown
2Tree 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.5 sources

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

  1. tree_only "Family Tree," database, FamilySearch (http://familysearch.org : modified 03 April 2020, 08:17), entry for Caleb Glasgow(PID https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/4:1:K815-XBS); contributed by various users.
  2. unknown Will of Caleb Glasgow, dtd 20 September 1803
  3. unknown Research on Dauge and Glasgow families, dtd March 1969
  4. unknown See also: https://www.genealogy.com/ftm/g/r/a/Frances-M-Graykrueger/WEBSITE-0001/UHP-0131.html
  5. tree_only WikiTree profile export for Glasgow-830
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-830 was captured 2026-08-07T09:54:35+00:00; WikiTree profile revision 2023-12-21.

Profile location claims

EventDateLocationStatus
birth—Currituck, North Carolina, British Colonial AmericaWikiTree profile field
death—Pasquotank County, North Carolina, United StatesWikiTree profile field

Immediate relationship snapshot

RelationshipPersonWikiTree IDDates and places returned
ParentsWilliam GlasgowGlasgow-4281685-00-00 · Norfolk, Independent Cities, Colony of Virginia · 1747-00-00 · Currituck, Currituck, Province of North Carolina
ParentsSusannah GlasgowDauge-191715-01-10 · Currituck, Province of North Carolina · 1778-00-00 · Norfolk, Virginia, United States
ChildrenDorcas PughGlasgow-3681783-01-08 · Pasquotank County, North Carolina, United States · 1858-12-27 · Marion, Indiana, United States
SiblingsCaleb GlasgowGlasgow-3631726-00-00 · Carrituck, North Carolina · 1781-00-00 · Currituck, North Carolina, United States
SiblingsAbiahGlasco-391738-00-00 · Currituck, Currituck, North Carolina · 1759-00-00 · Pasquotank County, NC
SiblingsElizabethGlasco-401741-00-00 · Currituck, Currituck, North Carolina · 0000-00-00
SiblingsLowdenner GlasgowGlasgow-7711744-00-00 · Currituck, Currituck, North Carolina · 0000-00-00

Record-bearing passages

Profile source citations

  1. "Family Tree," database, FamilySearch (http://familysearch.org : modified 03 April 2020, 08:17), entry for Caleb Glasgow(PID https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/4:1:K815-XBS); contributed by various users. source link 1 source link 2
  2. Will of Caleb Glasgow, dtd 20 September 1803
  3. Research on Dauge and Glasgow families, dtd March 1969
  4. See also: https://www.genealogy.com/ftm/g/r/a/Frances-M-Graykrueger/WEBSITE-0001/UHP-0131.html source link 1
Full captured biography text
Biography
Caleb was born about 1740. He married Ruth Sawyer. He was a soldier in the Revolutionary War. He passed away in 1804. 
* Fact: Probate (1808) Pasquotank, North Carolina, United States
Sources
* "Family Tree," database, FamilySearch (http://familysearch.org : modified 03 April 2020, 08:17), entry for Caleb Glasgow(PID https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/4:1:K815-XBS); contributed by various users.
* Will of Caleb Glasgow, dtd 20 September 1803
* Research on Dauge and Glasgow families, dtd March 1969
* See also: https://www.genealogy.com/ftm/g/r/a/Frances-M-Graykrueger/WEBSITE-0001/UHP-0131.html
Raw WikiTree biography markup
== Biography ==
Caleb was born about 1740. He married Ruth Sawyer. He was a soldier in the Revolutionary War. He passed away in 1804. 
* Fact: Probate (1808)  Pasquotank, North Carolina, United States
== Sources ==
<references />
* "Family Tree," database, <i>FamilySearch</i> (http://familysearch.org : modified 03 April 2020, 08:17), entry for Caleb Glasgow(PID https://familysearch.org/ark:/61903/4:1:K815-XBS); contributed by various users.
* Will of Caleb Glasgow,  dtd 20 September 1803
* Research on Dauge and Glasgow families,  dtd March 1969
* See also: https://www.genealogy.com/ftm/g/r/a/Frances-M-Graykrueger/WEBSITE-0001/UHP-0131.html