Cecily Neville, Duchess of York - Is Edward IV of England, really the Son of Richard Plantagenet Third Duke of York?

A popular misconception based on a very poor understanding of English history.

The idea that Edward IV was not the son of Richard, 3rd Duke of York was just one of many pieces of propaganda during the Wars of the Roses. As claims to land and titles were based on blood during that time period, the easiest way to eliminate an enemy was to say he or she was not the son or daughter of their father, and thus, not a legitimate candidate for a title. The same happened with the Lancastrian Prince of Wales at the time, Edward of Westminster. The Yorkists loved to claim that he was not Henry VI's son in the same way the Lancastrians loved to say Edward IV was not Richard of York's son. Neither should be taken seriously today, as they really are just six hundred year old pieces of propaganda.

Propaganda through @ through i do not take this seriously???

Never the less... I think the final DNA findings on Richard Plantagenet 3rd. Duke of York should give us a better answer between historic Propaganda and The Truth.

Cecily Neville is my 18th great aunt.

Cecily Neville is my 16th Great Aunt

Emily has it right (of course). It's also worth noting that the current royal family has the throne because Parliament gave it to the Protestant heirs of Sophia of Hanover in the 1701 Act of Settlement, not because they're the senior heirs of anyone.

Before that, Henry VII had the throne by right of conquest, not because he was the Lancastrian heir. The Spanish and Portuguese royal families arguably had a better claim that he did.

It certainly helped, but wasn't essential to Henry's title, that his wife was the Yorkist heir (although she was arguably illegitimate, which would have made Margaret Pole the senior Yorkist heir).

It's also worth noting that if Edward IV was illegitimate it doesn't mean his brother Richard III was illegitimate (or vice versa),

Fun to play "what if" but it doesn't change anything. The kings and queens who held the throne held it. We can't change history. It doesn't matter whether we think their claims were good or bad. And the current royal family will keep the throne, no matter what the DNA test show.

The MaleTudor DNA is not yet settled, although some would say it has been by the Henry Carey R1b haplogroup. If it turns out to be I-1 then there is every reason to see the dynastic struggle of the OLDER haplogroup bloodlines like G and I-1 trying to regain control from the USURPER French lines of 1066. The last gasp being I-1 Sir John Dudley's reach for the throne through Queen Jane and his son Guilford Dudley. F and G sub-Clades emerged before I-1 and that clade emerged about 40,000 years back. FYI: Henry IV had the Tudor's cornered in the great Conway Castle 1400-1401 same time as Maredudd Tudor was rising against Bolingbroke. Estimated Birth of Owen Tudor 1401. Just a coincidence that he was brought to court age 9 and served Henry V as a page and then Major Domo of the Kings Chamber. There is absolutely no reason for that relationship to Queen Catherine of Valois to have been accepted except that Owen Tudor was an unacknowledged Royal by Henry IV at Conway. DCR

Mr. Cota: I think Justin is Correct, there will be absolutely no change to the current Royal Family despite whatever the DNA reveals. My uncle was a grandson of Edward III and because of an NPE one of my siblings is also. It means nothing these days, and is just as likely to cause a Family FIght in what I have observed. Nice thought however.

http://www.geni.com/path/Edward-III-of-England+is+related+to+Ernest...

Hello Cousin Dale... I am not professing any radical changes, but possible adjustments to the charts verifying some questionable and supporting other family lines which in my opinion would be good.
BTW... In the present chart format, I too am related to Edward III as a 18th. Grandson.

Greetings Back Alfred: Looks like our ancestral link is at Mason-Brooks ca 1632 in Ma. of all places. I am keenly interested in those early days of Ma. as my 6th ggrand parents arrived in the same era. As a great grandson of Edward III you are very much more well connected than I. The ideas that need airing are exactly as you present, but there is resistance to NEW ways of thinking about how to arrive at the truth. So keep asking those questions, it's the tangent angle that often proves the point. Nice to see you here, are you in California?

Hello Dale.... Presently I am in California researching as usual. Yes... Perhaps my first and middle names, Alfred and then, Edward are no accident?
Yes... My Great Grandmother, Jessie H. Mason-Cota does goes directly to Capt. Hugh Mason of MA. :)