Current conclusion

[Compare the Larne, Inishrush and American family reconstruction](/people/glasgow-951.html#larne-reconstruction), including the alternative immediate-parent routes and their source tests.

### Larne father hypothesis — 13 September 2026

The identifiable older Larne ropemaker, James `Glasgow-1509` (reported 1737),
is a tested possible father of Adam. A c.1758 birth for Adam gives an ordinary
age-21 interval, and Adam's proved son James is limited positive naming support.
The reported 1762 Janet Shutter marriage is later than Adam's birth, so it cannot
establish Adam's mother. No record connects the Larne trade/property sequence to
Inishrush or names Adam as James's child. The local 1740 Hugh households and the
older Adam-and-Maria naming model remain live alternatives. `Glasgow-3905` stays
an explicitly uncertain placeholder; this hypothesis does not license a merge
or a relationship edit.

If older Alexander `Glasgow-3904` belongs in Adam's generation, a sibling route
is chronologically cleaner than the current son route: a 1737 father could have
sons c.1758 and c.1770, while Adam was too young to father Alexander under the
stored estimate. Neither relationship is proved.

### Alexander parentage check, 13 September 2026

No new inspected record identifies [Alexander Glasgow (Glasgow-951)](https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Glasgow-951)
as a child of Adam. A bounded search for newly accessible archival and newspaper
references returned no usable primary-record connection; this is not a complete
archive search. Adam's unnamed 1831 household members remain unidentified.
Keep Adam `Glasgow-1622`, father of the James named in the 1851 marriage, distinct
from this elder Adam unless an identifying record establishes their relationship.
The existing gravestone, tithe and freehold evidence does not fill the Alexander
parentage gap. See the [dated search audit](2026-09-13_alexander_parentage_check.md)
for the exact scope and access limitations.

### Master reassessment, 5 September 2026

Adam's 1831 household totals do not identify any member beyond the head. The
third male must not be called Alexander, younger Adam, either James, or a person
known to have left before 1834. The competing published denomination columns
also require the original return; “Other Protestant Dissenters” is withdrawn.

Only the monument-defined wife Rose, son James and daughter Eliza, together
with Nancy's notice calling her Adam's sixth daughter, are secure family
placements. The later plot 29 sequence James–Rose Anne–Adam does not identify
which James held it or prove descent from elder Adam. Alexander's parents remain
unresolved, and the 1831 household cannot support attaching him here.

Adam Glasgow is directly documented at Inishrush in 1831 and by the family
gravestone. The gravestone names wife Rose, son James and daughter Eliza; Nancy's
1842 marriage notice calls her Adam's sixth daughter. Adam's father is not known.

A newly inspected original newspaper supplies a stronger land fact. On 3 October
1831 Adam served notice to register at the Magherafelt General Sessions on
2 January 1832 as the
holder of a £10 freehold comprising `Houses and Lands` in Inishrush, barony of
Loughinsholin. The notice proves that Adam claimed a legally qualifying interest
in the Inishrush property; it does not show that registration was accepted or
name his landlord, predecessor, relatives or lease lives.

The original 1833 tithe page gives Adam a gross survey area of 11 Irish or
Plantation acres, equivalent to about 17.82 statute acres. A later James Glasgow
occupied Inishrush plot 29, measuring 19 acres 2 roods 10 perches (19.5625
statute acres), but both James `Glasgow-3903` and James `Glasgow-1623` were then
alive. The revision succession to Rose Anne strongly favours the younger James,
whose wife was Rosanna Barkley. Plot 29 must therefore not be assigned to Adam's
proved son or treated as inheritance of Adam's tithe farm without a further
identifying record.

Keep only the proved child edges: James `Glasgow-3903`, Eliza `Glasgow-3906`,
and Nancy `Glasgow-3907` as Adam's daughter with maternity uncertain. Nancy's
ordinal proves at least four additional unidentified daughters. Adam `Glasgow-1622`,
older Alexander `Glasgow-3904` and Robert `Glasgow-1367` are not proved children.
Rose is chronologically contradicted as mother of older Alexander and Robert and
must remain uncertain while the competing identities are resolved.

Of the three proposed additional sons, Adam `Glasgow-1622` is the strongest
working hypothesis. His proved son James was a farmer of Inishrush, the repeated
name and chronology fit, and the three males in target Adam's 1831 household can
coherently be reconstructed as elder Adam, proved son James `Glasgow-3903`, and
younger Adam. This is not a unique reconstruction: the census names no household
members, and younger Adam's circa-1780 birth is itself estimated. Retain the edge
only as uncertain unless a church, lease, probate or estate record names both
generations.

Alexander `Glasgow-3904` remains only a weak paternal possibility. Making him
father of Daniel by about 1795/96 requires Alexander to have been born by roughly
1775-78, leaving two unusually short successive generations from Adam, born about
1758. Rose cannot be Alexander's mother on that chronology. Robert `Glasgow-1367`
is weaker still: his original 1851 census says he was born about 1778/79 in County
Antrim, when Rose was about twelve, and places his documented family at
Glenleslie. No record bridges him to Inishrush.

Retain the parent placeholder `Glasgow-3905` as an explicitly uncertain
structural link until the branch can be placed beneath a source-identified
ancestor. It is not a documented person or proof of Adam's father. Do not place
it beneath Robert `Glasgow-1143`; no record provides that bridge.

The API provenance resolves the placeholder question: Adam's profile was created
at 12:11:11 UTC on 16 July 2026, followed by `Glasgow-3905` at 12:43:34. The
latter's own biography says it was created only as a research placeholder. It is
not a second record for Adam and should not be merged into him. WikiTree merges
are for two profiles representing the same person. Preserve the placeholder only
as an uncertain topology aid, without inferred identity or vital facts.

The catalogue's former top candidates were inflated by exact Inishrush points
assigned to profiles whose sources provide only County Tyrone, County
Londonderry, or `not far from Portglenone` traditions, and by treating unproved
children as naming controls. Those mapped locations have been corrected. The
best surviving record-defined father-generation leads are now the two 1740
Tamlaght O'Crilly Hugh households, including [Hugh Glasgow, entry
1195](https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Glasgow-3931). Neither is
identified as Adam's father.

After correction and rebuild, the five displayed automated father leads are
[James Glasgow II](https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Glasgow-1024)
(39), [Robert Glasgow](https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Glasgow-1143)
(39), [Hugh Glasgow](https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Glasgow-548)
(32), [James Glasgow](https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Glasgow-1025)
(32), and [Adam Glasgow](https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Glasgow-1475)
(30). None is a strong result after source review:
James-1024 has no record connecting his family to Adam; Robert-1143's 1738/9 lease,
congregational chronology and 1817 equity evidence define a Kilwaughter family
whose surviving children were James and Ann; Hugh-548 is a late-tradition family
head whose three reported sons do not include Adam; James-1025 belongs to the
Drumearn cluster with no Inishrush bridge; and Adam-1475 is the record-defined
1706 Stevenston child with no evidence of Irish migration. The scores are useful
name/network prompts, not evidence that any of these men was Adam's father.

The current working tree now places Daniel Glasgow and his will-proved brother
Thomas as plausible sons of Alexander Glasgow and Rosanna Shaw. If Alexander was
Adam's son, Daniel would be Adam's possible grandson rather than his son.

Source findings

### Belfast News-Letter marriage notice, 1 February 1842

A contemporaneous original notice independently confirms the same marriage and father wording: [Belfast News-Letter, 1 February 1842, p. 3](https://www.newspapers.com/image/390552842/), original checked 5 October 2026. The notice corroborates the already documented marriage/father link; no new birth, mother, or identity inference is added.


The 1767 John's family record is important collateral evidence: his documented
children include [Rose Ann Glasgow](https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Glasgow-821),
[Adam Glasgow](https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Glasgow-3373),
[James Glasgow](https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Glasgow-1165),
[John Glasgow](https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Glasgow-1617), and
[Arthur Glasgow](https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Glasgow-1608). His sons' order
Adam-James-John and daughter Maria's position support (indirectly) an older
Adam and Maria as the shared parents of John and this Adam. The 1847 letter's
"Adam" cannot be Adam-3902, who died in 1844; it most plausibly refers to
John's son Adam-3373, adding evidence of continued contact within the
Inishrush family network.

The apparently promising PRONI collection `T1762`, “Glasgow family and
Presbyterian papers,” has already been resolved through its item-level hierarchy.
Its sole Glasgow-family item is a solicitor's copy of the will and codicil of
William Glasgow, farmer of Oritor, County Tyrone, concerning Oritor lands; no item
description names Adam, John, Inishrush or Tamlaght O'Crilly. It is not an open
Inishrush lead. The Presbyterian Historical Society's `G61` Glasgow envelope is an
enquirers' correspondence file rather than an exposed original record and still
requires content inspection before it can affect the tree.

| Source | Finding | Assessment |
| --- | --- | --- |
| [*Londonderry Sentinel*, 8 October 1831, p. 3, article 44, row 97](https://www.britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk/viewer/bl/0001480/18311008/044/0003); [Loughinshollen list heading](https://ulsterlees.azurewebsites.net/records/census/); [image audit](../Glasgow-3905/sources/adam_glasgow_contemporary_newspaper_audit_2026-08-10.md) | In a list of notices for freehold registration at the Magherafelt General Sessions on 2 January 1832, `Adam Glasgow, Innisrush` claimed `Houses and Lands` in Innisrush, barony of Loughinsholin, worth £10. His notice is dated 3 October 1831. | Direct contemporary evidence of Adam's claimed legal interest in the Inishrush farm. It is an application notice, not proof of successful registration, and names no landlord, predecessor, kin or measuring life. |
| [PRONI `D1201/53`](../Glasgow-3905/sources/proni_D1201_53_inishrush_encumbered_estate_rental_1853.md), 14 April 1853 | The Encumbered Estates rental concerns the Hercules and Eliza Ellis estate at Inishrush, Shilling Hill and Drumane. The online collection index returns 35 Inishrush entries but no Glasgow. | This identifies a real post-Adam estate rental but probably a different portion of the intermixed townland. It must not be treated as evidence that Adam lacked an Inishrush holding. |
| [1831 census householder transcription](https://www.billmacafee.com/1831census/1831derrycensusnames.pdf), record 28190 | Adam Glasco headed Inishrush household 91: three males and five females. MacAfee's transcription calls the household Presbyterian, while Torrens places the figures under Roman Catholic. | Direct household evidence for the total only. The return names no internal members or relationships, and the conflicting denomination columns require the original image. |
| [PRONI FIN/5/A/254B, Tamlaght O'Crilly tithe book, 5 November 1833](../Glasgow-3927/sources/FIN_5_A_254B_tithe.pdf), image 20, manuscript folio 16, Inishrush no. 1 (duplicate full-page scan in [FIN/5/A/254A](../Glasgow-3927/sources/FIN_5_A_254A_tithe.pdf), images 42-44); [National Archives of Ireland, tithe acreage guidance](https://titheapplotmentbooks.nationalarchives.ie/search/tab/aboutmore.jsp) | The original tithe book lists `Adam Glasgow` first among 58 Inishrush landholders and gives a gross survey area of 11 Irish/Plantation acres, about 17.82 statute acres. No John Glasgow appears in the complete townland list. | Direct original-image evidence for Adam's landholding. It rules out a joint Adam-John tithe holding but not kinship: the 1831 census proves that John headed a separate Inishrush household, and tithe liability did not include every resident or householder. |
| [PRONI `VAL/12/B/34/10A`](../Glasgow-3905/sources/val12b_34_10a_inishrush_plot29.jpg), 1860-63, and [`VAL/12/B/34/10D`](../Glasgow-3905/sources/val12b_34_10d_plot29_james_roseanne_adam.jpg) | An unidentified James Glasgow occupied plot 29 at 19a 2r 10p; he was later replaced by Rose Anne. Both local James profiles were living at the first valuation, while Rose Anne closely matches Rosanna Barkley, wife of younger James `Glasgow-1623`. | The acreage is close to Adam's converted tithe holding, but identity and parcel continuity are unproved. The succession favours the younger James and prevents assigning plot 29 to proved son `Glasgow-3903`. |
| [Tamlaght O'Crilly 1831 census transcription](https://genealogy.torrens.org/BannValley/church/Tamlaght/1831census_3.html), entry 1019, with the [identity audit](../Glasgow-822/findings.md) | A separate John Glasco headed Inishrush house 2 with four males and four females. After married eldest daughter Rose and deceased son James are removed, John's Bible family supplies exactly four expected males; only one of five possible females needs to have left home. | Strong identity support for Glasgow-822, but not kinship. Published denomination transcriptions conflict and the original is required. Adam and John remain possible brothers or cousins. |
| [Tamlaght O'Crilly Lower gravestone](https://www.oneirishrover.com/tamlaght-graveyard/) | Rose, wife of Adam, died 31 July 1833 aged 66; Adam died 30 June 1844 aged 86; James was their son and Eliza their daughter. | Direct family and vital evidence. |
| [1842 marriage notice](https://cotyrone.com/~inthenews/marriages-notices-1840-42/) | Nancy, sixth daughter of Adam Glasgow of Inishrush, married John Kyle of Tyanee on 14 January 1842. | Direct father statement and proof that Adam had at least six daughters. |
| [John Glasgow family Bible](https://hiltner.com/mckeown/getperson.php?personID=I368&tree=tree1) and [Scotland's People naming guidance](https://www.scotlandspeople.gov.uk/help-and-support/guides/forenames) | John's sons occur as Adam, James, John and Arthur. The first three positions match the traditional paternal-grandfather, maternal-grandfather and father sequence, with father John correctly repeated third. Maria is the second daughter, the paternal-grandmother position. | Older Adam and Maria are the leading candidate names for John and target Adam's shared parents. This is patterned indirect evidence, not a parent statement. |
| [John's 1847 letter](https://www.hiltner.com/mckeown/documents/John%20Glasgow%20letter%20to%20Jane%20Glasgow%20Gray%203-20-1847.pdf) and [James Glasgow-Rosanna Barkley marriage, 17 March 1851](../Glasgow-1622/sources/irishgenealogy_1851_james_glasgow_rosanna_barkley_marriage.pdf) | McCaivey reported that a James Glasgow had fathered a child by a daughter of Henry Barkly. The later marriage identifies a 38-year-old Inishrush farmer James, son of another Adam Glasgow, marrying Rosanna Barkley, daughter of Henry Barkley. | The exact names, generation and localities identify the report far more strongly with the younger James `Glasgow-1623`, not Adam's older son James `Glasgow-3903`. The letter therefore cannot support kinship between John and target Adam without a separate relationship record. |
| [First Kilrea Presbyterian marriage register, 6 October 1825](https://genealogy.torrens.org/BannValley/church/KilreaP1/Marriages/1825.html) | Mary Patton of Tyanee, daughter of John Patton and **Margaret Glasgow**, married Wilson Gordon. | Margaret is a documented Glasgow woman in the same Portglenone–Tyanee network. A marriageable daughter by 1825 makes her a plausible sister or cousin of Adam and John; identifying her as Adam's daughter would require an unusually early birth and is not supported by the entry. |
| [Original 1851 marriage of James Glasgow and Rosanna Barkley](../Glasgow-1622/sources/irishgenealogy_1851_james_glasgow_rosanna_barkley_marriage.pdf) compared with the [1831 Inishrush census](https://genealogy.torrens.org/BannValley/church/Tamlaght/1831census_3.html) | James, born about 1812/13 and resident at Inishrush, named his father as farmer Adam Glasgow. Target Adam's household had three males, coherently compatible with elder Adam, proved son James and a younger son Adam. | Best cumulative support for `Glasgow-1622` as an additional son. It remains circumstantial because the census gives no names or ages and the marriage gives the father's own residence and parentage neither. |
| [1923 Tamlaght O'Crilly burial-plot notice and vestry report](https://www.oneirishrover.com/tamlaght-vestry/) | Parishioners were invited to register and map burial-plot claims on 7–8 September 1923. The same year's vestry reporting names Adam D. Glasgow on the select vestry and Adam Glasgow as secretary. | Concrete later surname occurrences and a specific missing register/map. They do not identify either man with `Glasgow-2419` or prove descent from elder Adam. |
| Project tree snapshot for [Adam Glasgow (Glasgow-2419)](https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Glasgow-2419) | Defines a later family, born about 1853, with wife Eliza and American-born sons Adam D. and Henry. | A bounded later research unit only; no inspected record joins it to either Inishrush James or to elder Adam. |

Direct-link audit with John Glasgow

A deeper search found no accessible record explicitly calling Adam and John
brothers or naming a shared parent. The strongest new evidence concerns John's
identity, not the relationship: a separate McKeown Bible records that John-822's
grandson was born at Inishrush in 1821 and baptised by Rev. Joseph Orr, the
Drimbolg minister. This independently connects John-822's family to the local
John recorded by that congregation in 1809 and 1827.

The full Adam gravestone names Rose, Eliza, James and grandson William but no
John; the complete 1847 letter contains no kinship term for Adam or James; and
the available 1801 part-Inishrush lease names other head lessees. The original
1799 newspaper image does **not** place `Adam Glasco` at Cloughole: it prints no
address or ditto mark after his name. The apparent grouping was produced by
flattening separate newspaper columns in a derivative HTML abstract. The
signatory could be Adam of Inishrush, but the county-level entry cannot prove
identity or residence. The 1796 flax-premium list's sole County Londonderry
Glasgow was a John at Desertoghill, a possible but unproved earlier record of
John-822.

Accordingly, uncertain brother remains the best connected placement because of
their ages, the two same-townland households, John's naming pattern and the
continuing family-news network. Cousin remains a live alternative. This is not a
confirmed relationship.

Relationship to the Hugh-Melanchthon line

If John and Adam were brothers, the complete naming pattern points to shared
parents called **Adam and Maria**: John's first three sons were Adam, James and
John, while his second daughter was Maria. This model does not fit either
[John Glasgow (`Glasgow-549`)](https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Glasgow-549) or
[Robert Glasgow (`Glasgow-550`)](https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Glasgow-550) as
the father without treating the first-son pattern as an exception. Both men are
chronologically possible direct fathers, but no record distinguishes them.

An intervening older Adam cannot be a son of John-549 or Robert-550 and then the
father of Adam born about 1758: the generations are too compressed. The two
working models are therefore alternatives, not cumulative claims:

1. John-549 or Robert-550 directly fathered Adam and John; or
2. an older Adam and Maria directly fathered them. That older Adam could have
   descended from the other Hugh recorded in Tamlaght O'Crilly in 1740, or been
   an omitted son or close nephew of Hugh-548, but cannot have been a son of
   John-549 or Robert-550 before fathering Adam in 1758.

Private family details withheld.

The original Melanchthon narrative adds a material geographic bridge: it says
Hugh-540's eldest son John was born in 1780 on the family farm in County
Londonderry, `not far from` Portglenone. Together with the 1740 Hugh in the
Ellis/McCullough collector cluster and the 1772 parish Hugh, this makes descent
from or close collateral relationship to Hugh-548's family highly probable.
It does not identify the precise father. The older-Adam/Maria model is the best
internal fit to John's Bible. Entry 1272 is the better candidate for Hugh-548
because it immediately precedes Ellis and McCullough; the other 1740 Hugh offers
a cleaner collateral root for older Adam/Maria. If the choice is restricted to
the traditional brothers John-549 and Robert-550, both are possible but no
record or naming evidence securely distinguishes them.

John's complete Bible family contains no son named Hugh: his sons were Adam,
James, John and Arthur. This is useful negative naming evidence against an
immediate father named Hugh, but not against a more remote Hugh ancestor. His
daughter Margaret later had a son Hugh Wycoff Walkinshaw in 1840, so Hugh was
not wholly absent from John's descendants. Adam-3902's child list is incomplete:
the gravestone proves James and two daughters, while Nancy's description as his
sixth daughter proves several missing children. It is therefore not yet possible
to say that Adam had no son Hugh.

An unidentified son of John-549 or Robert-550 cannot be inserted between either
man and Adam-3902: men born about 1735-1737 could not have a son old enough to
father Adam in 1758. If John-549 or Robert-550 belongs above Adam, he must be
Adam's direct father. A chronologically viable missing-link alternative is an
otherwise unrecorded son Adam of Hugh-548 who married Maria and directly fathered
Adam-3902 and John-822, but this conflicts with the late family account's explicit
statement that Hugh-548 had only three sons. The other 1740 Hugh remains the
cleaner tentative root for an older Adam/Maria household.
| [Genes Reunited descendant account](https://www.genesreunited.co.uk/boards/board/general_topics/thread/465937) plus Daniel Glasgow's original 1871 will | The account names Alexander and Rosanna as Thomas's parents; Daniel's will calls Thomas his brother. | Makes Alexander/Rosanna plausible parents of both brothers. It does not directly identify Alexander as Adam's son. |

Tree effect

The parish-wide 1831 transcription contains only two Glasgow/Glasco households
in Tamlaght O'Crilly: Adam at Inishrush house 91 and John at Inishrush house 2.
Their separation by roughly 89 house numbers means the census does not show
them as immediate neighbours, but the absence of any other Glasgow household in
the return makes a close family or collateral relationship more plausible. This
is supportive locality evidence, not a parent or sibling record.

Daniel was reassessed on 17 July 2026 with Thomas and the Alexander/Rosanna
model as uncertain research relationships. Adam's biography must not present
Daniel as his son. Older Alexander `Glasgow-3904` remains an uncertain
relationship to Adam and a weak research hypothesis.

The record-defined Inishrush John is a strong identity match to `Glasgow-822`,
but his relationship to Adam remains unproved. Do not place either man beneath
the structural placeholder `Glasgow-3905`.

Preserve an older Adam and Maria as the leading candidate names for the shared
parents in Research Notes. Do not create or attach them as proved people until a
record names the relationship.

Current conclusion — newspaper identity review, 6 October 2026

- [Belfast News-Letter, 1842-02-01, p.3](https://www.newspapers.com/image/390552842/): Mr Adam Glasgow, of Inishrush, county Derry (bride's father) — **probable** match. 'Of Inishrush' is a unique designation in 1842, and Adam-3902 (d. 1844) is already Nancy's linked father. The later Adam of Inishrush (Glasgow-2419, b. 1853) is excluded by chronology. His son Adam-1622 (b. c.1794) is a much weaker alternative. [Independent check 6 October 2026: downgrade — 'Of Inishrush' is not unique. Adam Glasgow-1622 is a separate, record-defined Adam (named as father of James, 38, farmer of Inishrush, in the 1851 marriage). The local findings keep him distinct, and his being 3902's son is 'not proved'. A sixth daughter marrying in 1842 fits Adam-1622 (b. by c.1792) at least as well as 3902 (b. c.1758, wife Rose b. 1767; Nancy's guessed 1822 birth is impossible for Rose). 3902 is favoured as the 1831 freeholder and 1833 sole tithe occupier, but a competitor survives.]

Relationship assessment — Adam and the Lisnagaver family, 6 October 2026

The ropemaker hypothesis above is unchanged: James Glasgow-1509 as Adam's father is a working hypothesis with no record.

It does not by itself connect the Lisnagaver family. Alexander Glasgow-951's probable father is John Glasgow, farmer. Adam was born between 1 July 1757 and 30 June 1758 by the Tamlaght stone as transcribed (died 30 June 1844 aged 86), so he is too young to be John farmer's father if Samuel Glasgow-2908, born about 1789 to 1791, was John farmer's son. The earlier routes to Alexander through older Alexander Glasgow-3904 and younger James Glasgow-3986 are withdrawn as routes; any Larne connection must join above John. The comparison of the ropemaker with Adam is a collateral question.

No relationship is changed. [Full comparison](/people/glasgow-951.html#larne-reconstruction).

Source findings

### Findmypast sweep — 7 October 2026

- **New: Valuation Office field book, 9 May 1832.** Findmypast's *Ireland Valuation Office Books* indexes **Adam Glascow** at **Inishrush**, Tamlaght O'Crilly, barony of Loughinsholin, in a **Field Book** with valuation date **9 May 1832** (National Archives of Ireland `OL/4/1093`, film `MFGS/54/52`; record `IRE/CENSUS/VALUEBOOKS/1849510`, image IRE/CENSUS/1821-51/007250657/00373 in a book running images 00342–00401). This is about eighteen months earlier than the 1833 tithe book and is independent of it. The index gives no lessor, acreage or valuation; read the image for those. No other Glasgow, Glasco or Glascow appears in the Valuation Office Books for Inishrush or Tamlaght O'Crilly.
- **Adds detail to the known 1831 census entry.** Findmypast's own index of the 1831 return has two copies of Adam's entry (`IRE/CENSUS/1821-1831/154457` and `/267001`, from two different microfilm copies, images 007246494/00092 and 007246634/00412). Both give Innisrush, house 91, folio 44, one family, **3 males and 5 females, 8 Presbyterians**. This is a third index reading that agrees with MacAfee rather than Torrens on denomination. It is still an index; the original return should settle the column.
- Searches that found nothing: British Newspaper Archive name searches for "Adam Glasgow" or "Adam Glasco" with Innisrush, and a broad "Adam Glasgow" search filtered to before 1870, found no notice of this Adam. In those results "Adam Glasgow" before 1870 was the Irish Presbyterian missionary Rev. Adam Glasgow (India), who is a different man.

Unresolved — 1844 death notice, recorded 16 July 2026

No abstract or index found to date reports Adam's death or names his father, brother, birthplace or earlier residence. The IGRS Smythe-Wood newspaper abstracts (Series A and B, about 11,600 mainly Ulster entries, mainly 1800–60) contain no person surnamed Glasgow; the [Londonderry Sentinel death index, G, 1829–69](https://cotyrone.com/colondonderry/burial/CoLondonderry-DeathsSentinel-G-1829-1869.html) has no Adam. These are abstract and index negatives, not page-by-page searches. The British Newspaper Archive name searches of 7 October 2026 (above) also found nothing, but name searches of OCR text can miss short notices.

The first issues after his death on 30 June 1844 are the targets for reading page by page: *Northern Whig* 1 or 4 July, *Belfast News-Letter* 2 or 5 July, *Londonderry Standard* 3 or 10 July, and *Londonderry Sentinel* and *Coleraine Chronicle* 6 July 1844 (the Chronicle's surviving run begins 13 April 1844). The NIFHS CD *The Coleraine Chronicle: Births, Marriages and Deaths 1844–1869* (David A. Beck) was not accessible. Query log: `../Glasgow-3905/sources/newspaper_adam_glasgow_audit_2026-07-16.tsv`.

Recorded in `research/Glasgow-3905/agent_descendant_cluster.md` (16–17 July 2026); carried into this file on 7 October 2026.

Next records — Vintners estate leases and the 1796 freeholder registration, recorded 16 July 2026

Inishrush lay in the Vintners' Proportion, managed for the Conolly estate by agent John Spotswood of Bellaghy. Patrick Tohill's study *The Tohill Family of Ballymacpeake Upper* (2017 draft, pp. 17, 22, 27; a derivative account citing TCD Conolly papers `MS 3980/1350`) quotes Spotswood's letter of 9 June 1800: "I registered 234 freeholders on this estate in May 1796". Tohill states that Conolly extended leases from 31 to 41 years in 1788 and added three lives in 1796 to qualify tenants for the 1800 election, and that the 1775–93 rentals name only head tenants. This is estate context for Adam's 1831 freehold and for the 1799 declaration signed by an Adam Glasco whose identity with this Adam is unproved; it does not show that Adam was one of the 1796 freeholders. No Glasgow occurs in Tohill's searchable text.

Published extracts for neighbouring Ballynacross from the townland-ordered Vintners lease book (PRONI `D1062/1/5`, c.1730–1826; [extracts](https://www.billmacafee.com/estates/bellaghy/ballynacross.htm)) show it naming replacement lives with ages and relationships, for example a son aged two in 1798 and a grandson aged twelve in 1802. The Inishrush entries have not been seen. The 1860 valuation manuscript (`../Glasgow-3905/sources/val12b_34_10a_inishrush_plot29.jpg`) shows the James Glasgow of plot 29 holding directly from the Conolly successors (Earl of Strafford, Viscount Clancarty and Marchioness of Lothian), not from an Ellis middleman, so the Vintners lease series is the right place to look. Targets in order: rentals `T2825/C/19/1-13` (1795–1801) and Spotswood's correspondence `T2825/C/18/1-67`; then `D2094/50-51, 68, 75-76, 78` and the lease book `D1062/1/5`; then `D1062/1/2` and `D1062/1/13`; the County Londonderry yeomanry musters `T1021/3`. None is online.

Recorded in `research/Glasgow-3905/agent_ulster_archives.md` (16 July 2026); carried into this file on 7 October 2026.

Source findings — Derry diocesan will calendar searched, recorded 17 and 21 July 2026

A full-text search of William Macafee's [*Co. Londonderry Wills, Derry Diocese, 1612–1857*](https://jamesonnetwork.com/smj/data/derrywills.pdf), an index of more than 3,800 entries, found no Glasgow testator. The index covers Tamlaght O'Crilly and includes Thomas Macaw of Inishrush, probated 1846, so Adam's parish is within its scope. A second search of the same calendar ([billmacafee.com copy](https://www.billmacafee.com/wills/derrywills.pdf)) under Glasgow, Glasco, Glasgo, Glascow, Glassgow, Glaskow, Glascho and Glesgow also found none. This is an index negative: it does not prove that Adam left no will. The PRONI will calendars, which begin in 1858, return no Inishrush Glasgow before the later family (see `../Glasgow-3905/findings.md`).

The calendar does not cover the separate Derry administration-bond index or the Derry and Raphoe diocesan grant book (1812–51). Adam died in 1844, inside the grant book's span, so a grant could still name an administrator; those are the next records.

Recorded in `research/Glasgow-3905/agent_published_manuscripts.md` (17 July 2026) and `research/Glasgow-822/source-audits/direct-link-loop-2026-07-21.md` (21 July 2026); carried into this file on 7 October 2026.

Source findings — neighbouring names in the 1799 declaration, checked 10 August 2026

In the original [*Belfast News-Letter*, 27 September 1799, p. 1, article 50](https://www.britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk/viewer/bl/0000038/17990927/050/0001), `Adam Glasco` stands in the continuous sequence: Henry Hendry; Hugh Walkinshaw; Adam Glasco; Alexander M'Clelland; Thomas Orr; T. Donnelly, Moyagol; John Higgins, ditto. No residence or ditto mark follows Adam's name. The neighbouring names are recorded so that the original order, not the flattened Kinsleuth abstract, is used in any later associate analysis. They do not by themselves place Adam at Inishrush; identity with Adam of Inishrush remains plausible but unproved. Seen as the original newspaper image.

Recorded in `research/Glasgow-3905/sources/adam_glasgow_contemporary_newspaper_audit_2026-08-10.md` (10 August 2026); carried into this file on 7 October 2026.