The following is BILL GATES genealogy, do you have any opinion? ?
MR. GATES is descendant of KING EDWARD I (24th) and MOHAMMED ‘THE PROPHET’ (48th)
Descendant, register. BILL GATES 49, Mary Maxwell 48, James Willard Maxwell 47, James Willard Maxwell 46, Louisa Mary Woodworth 45, Emeline Keeler Brush 44, George Phillips Brush 43, Hannah Phillips 42, Samuel Phillips 41, George Phillips 40, George Phillips 39, Sarah Appleton 38, Samuel Appleton 37, Mary Isaac 36, Margery Whetehill 35, Richard Whetehill 34, Margaret Worsley 33, Rose Trevor 32, Angharad Puleston 31, Lowri Verch Gruffudd Fychan 30, Elen Verch Thomas 29, Thomas ap Llewellyn 28, Eleanor of Bar 27, Eleanor of England 26, KING EDWARD I OF ENGLAND 25, Eleanor of Provence Berenger 24, Raymond V of Provence Berenger 23, Alfonso el Castro 22, Alfonso II of Aragon 21, Petronilla of Aragon 20, Ramiro II of Aragon 19, Sancho V of Aragon 18, Ramiro I of Aragon 17, Sancho III of Pamplona 16, Garcia IV of Navarre 15, Sancho II of Pamplona 14, Garcia III of Pamplona 13, Toda Aznarez 12, Oneca 11, Aurea 10, Lope of Saragoza 9, Musa II of Saragoza 8, Musa of Saragoza 7, Aisha 6, Abdul Aziz ‘Emir of Spain’ 5, Umm 4, Aisha 3, Roccija 2, MOHAMMED ‘THE PROPHET’ 1.
Source :
http://www.wargs.com/other/gates.html
Dowling Family Genealogy
http://wc.rootsweb.ancestry.com
Gary Lewis Family Tree
http://awt.ancestry.com
David Hughes, five descent-lines from Mohammed ‘The Prophet of Islam’, april 8, 2004.
http://archiver.rootsweb.ancestry.com
That Bill Gates or anyone, even of humble means, would have some royal ancestry doesn’t surprise me. However, I am a little doubtful of lines going back to Mohamed the Prophet.
One thing, information in family trees on any website, free or fee, must be viewed with caution. You frequently will see different info on the same people from different subscribers. Then you will see the same info on the same people from different subscribers, but that is no
proof the information is correct. A lot of foolish people copy without verifying. The trees are seldom documented and if they are they are poorly documented.
Most people do good to get back to the 1600s. Now if they have a line that makes connection to a royal or noble line, they might get back to the first millennium. One thing, surnames were not used in Europe until the last millennium.
In England, most had one by the end of the 14th century. Still it was a few more centuries in many cases before the same surname was passed down through the generations. They were not taken or assigned so much to identify a person as a member of a family but for taxation purposes.
They were based on a)being the son of someone b)their occupation c)where they lived d)some characteristic about them. When they got through it wasn’t impossible for legitimate sons of the same man to have a different surname and still each could have shared their surname with others not in their family. Some will say we are all related if we go back far enough. However, the root person of your surname might not be the same as the root person of someone else with your surname.
But before they did have a surname you were at a loss trying to figure out which John was the John you were looking for in the same village.
I have been giving the warning about online family trees for about 2 years on this board. A few weeks ago I put in the name of one of my grandfather’s uncles. I was just interested in seeing if someone else had information on the family that I could make contact with. I already know quite a lot about them. This uncle was married 3 times and he was widowed twice. I found he married his second wife(she was the sister of the first) in Newton, Sussex County, New Jersey. LOL She had to really be a prize for a farmer from Gonzales County, Texas to travel to New Jersey in 1891 to marry her. Then I found out that me, my younger sister and my brother-in-law were all dead. No date of death was given but we all died in Newton, Sussex County, New Jersey. Now the only time my sister and I had ever been in NJ was back in 1956 when we traveled through it going to and from New York with our family. So we have been dead for 52 years.
I have checked further and found out on both sides of my family that family married and died in Newton, Sussex County, New Jersey. Since my ancestry in primarily southern American colonial except for a few exceptions, and they all entered through southern ports, I was very surprised.
Now if this family tree had been submitted to any of the other websites, Rootsweb, FamilySearch.org, Genealogy.Com,GeneTree etc. it would have been accepted. If you disagree with anything someone has on one of your family members the owners of the websites will tell you that is between you and the other subscriber. You can make up a fictitious family tree and it will be accepted.
Errors have multipled due to online family trees.
Too many people think it is important to have as many people as possible in their tree rather than have a good verifiable family tree. The tree that had all the wrong info on my family had almost 150,000 names. There is absolutely no way one person can get verifiable information on that many people in 25 years or more. It would cost a fortune.
Bill Gates might be descended from Mohamed the Prophet but you can’t say for sure just because you saw it in a tree online or in any of the genealogy websites.
Every Islamic monarchy traces their lineage to Mohammad and a lot of Muslims do it too. So my guess would be that bill might have had some Muslim relative who just lied about it (Emir of Spain). How is a Berber related by blood to an Arab?
I’d say he’s pretty typical. Approximately, 80 percent of the population of England descends from Edward III, who fathered 12 children, which also means that a large percentage of the descendants of English settlers in the United States also are descendants of Edward III. Edward III was the grandson of Edward I. Muhammad, who had 13 wives or concubines, most probably appears on every family tree in the Western World.
I’d also hazard a guess that genealogists have been able to verify Bill Gates’ descent from Edward III, but to document descent from the sixth or seventh century is a bit of a stretch.
Caveat: The further back any given individual is able to trace his or her family tree, the more likely he or she will be able to claim descent from royalty.
More to the point, however, William “Bill” Henry Gates, III was the son of a prominent attorney while his maternal grandfather, J. W. Maxwell, was a national bank president. If a man asked to marry your daughter, wouldn’t you be more interested in what he did and his own reputation as well as what his parents did than in any possible famous or infamous ancestors?