
> It can't be " anyone".
That's a much more complicated debate than it seems.
At this point it is very uncertain that it was Richard III who was illegitimate. If you read just the popular news you won't see the raging debate and many theories about exactly where the break occurred. And debate even about whether it was just one illegitimacy.
It would have been a fascinating history/ archeology project for GB to collect DNA from all past kings and queens in order to understand old DNA.
I understand what you are saying.
I am just hopeful. Egyptology has showed us mysteries can be cleared after thousands of years and I think there is so much to discover scientifically in GB.
Some background reading for future reference:
https://ancestralfindings.com/y-dna-enigma-richard-iii/
http://nerdalicious.com.au/history/the-problems-of-richard-iiis-y-c...
I'm shown as related to Richard III and am MtDNA J1c2c2, which I suppose correlates to what the lineage describes. The thing is, if you are related to Richard III, you are likely related to the Plantagenets through multiple relatives, as a lot of cousins married. In other words, Edward III can be your 18th, 19th, AND 20th great grandfather! Since my connection is through the female line, my YDNA isn't going to mean much for any clarifications of anything at all.
Talking about cousin marriage - Richard III married his own first cousin once removed. His brother George married her sister (and did it first). There's a nasty little catch there that *could* have caused as much trouble as Edward IV's clandestine marriage(s): Richard had obtained a Papal dispensation to marry his cousin - but *not* his sister-in-law (an even more frowned-upon relationship in medieval canon law).
A series of tragedies rendered the question moot: their son died, Anne died, andthen Henry VII's army rubbed Richard out.