bastad or not to be bastard thats is the question

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUY6HGqYweQ
very interesting video, childish point of view in a cartoon language but for acuracy i dont know but a source for education maybe

http://historyonyx.blogspot.ca/2011/01/edward-iv-question-of-legiti...

Edward IV: A Question of Legitimacy

Edward IV of England
as evidence from diferent source in history and all info of the web we should change hes father name to Blaybourne real father of Edward-IV

Michael Abney-Hastings, 14th Earl of Loudoun

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/australiaandthepacific/au...

hes word;
I have always known about this – I have lived it," he said. "It does make you think about how things could be different. I am quite happy with how things have turned out. I have made my own life."

Mart, it's a fun story but I don't believe a word of it ;)

Virtually anyone on Geni could (in theory) be the son or daughter of someone other than their assumed father, absent DNA paternity tests. The Blaybourne story has to be seen against the background of a contested succession. Very convenient for the entourage of Henry VI to put it about that their opponent had no claim to the throne, not just because Richard Duke of York had a lesser claim, but because he was a bastard (and - shock! horror!) not even of a nobleman but a base-born archer. Allegations of bastardy were regularly used to support claims to thrones against rivals: Henry V had the King of France declare the Dauphin illegitimate so Henry could inherit; Richard III had his nephews declared (technically) illegitimate; Henry VIII illegitimised Mary.

Mark

mr Swanström it is not a sufisent answer you think it is false?
i like many alternative to view
as my point of view it have alot of consequence in tree
i learn very recently about english mornachy pedegree it is confusing that why i will shearch only surface for a better understanding but not as ading to my tree source
we,,mean where i live and family dont use this kind of pedegree for genealogy

Blaybourne is not the first time it is mentioned i know i will not change anything talking about it for now but ading a profile as illegimate procreator or genitor or... of Edward IV of England should be apropriate

I have seen that documentary before. Very interesting indeed.

Mart, I love conspiracy theories. I read and watch everything I can find. I just don't believe them ;)

Saying that Edward IV was a bastard was just politics. Fascinating politics, but just routine.

That's my opinion. For what it's worth.

Bryn, one of the things I don't like about this documentary is that there are also others. They go back more than a decade. In most of them, Michael Hastings is "surprised" when they tell him he's a descendant. That man must have a very short memory. They can churn out a documentary every few years, and he never remembers how it turns out ;)

so it is a credible story? we dont need to be shy. maybe a contreversy but are we gona stop geni tree to grow?

Blaybourne who was he?
for plantegenet if edward 4 was not a plantagenet it is simple disconect him as pedegree of plantegenet

edward 4 hes father and mother but as consort she dont have any privelege to pedegree not ever in english pedegree...as a french it is very diferent point of view

i dont read much about it is a false history i still shearch

Mart, historians think it is just BS. No one really believes it. It's just a story that helps to sell the news.

We don't want to change Geni based on someone's wild theory. But, yes -- who was Blaybourne? What happened to him? Why did Richard III choose him to take the blame? What did Warwick the Kingmaker say and do? Why did Henry VII suppress the story? What didn't William Shakespeare write a play about it? Those are interesting questions. They would be fun to explore.

Yes true the man who was told that he was a descendant was an older aged man so yes it is likely he may have had memory issues. He passed away about a year and a half ago. Not sure how though. His son Simon is now the supposed "legitimate king." I wonder how history would've been different had that line of descent sat on the throne instead of the current one. The story about Edward IV being legitimate or not is very interesting on both sides of the argument. However some may have said this because maybe they had something against him, such as enemies who wanted to disinherit them. Since he was born in April 1442, His conception would have to be around July 1441, which is pointed out by the documentary that his father was on a campaign from July 14-August 21, 1441. It does make for an interesting debate though. I do believe though that geni will still keep that lineage as it is since there would have to be true and definitive proof saying otherwise. So yeah, I would have to say that it just makes an interesting story.

Geni has to keep the lineage because it's the only one that that be proved from contemporary evidence. Everything else is speculation ;)

legetimate vs illegetimate legetimate is in defenition aceptance by claiming publicy autentification illegitimate= refute refuse declare as false or simply to not give power to legitimacy in any way

some one can be legitimate without dna inverse is possible
thanks for both opinion but it lost me more .i do realise it is a sensible chord i do not have real background in history and to be the more honest i can .to say before geni i was not in history at all just few base simple story. related in school class

now my respond to story vs history opinion
story can be non factual tainted of/or fabrication
history must as in real defenition close ar thrue orthewise is is a story

Blaybourne who are you google may tell me hehehe
thanks boths for opinions i apreciate alot
mart

If Richard Duke of York had been on campaign in France from (say) mid-June 1441, and his wife was in England, we would have to conclude that he was not the father of Edward IV (but everyone else would have concluded the same at the time).

If Blaybourne had been the father, we have to ask ourselves the following questions. Is she likely to have had an adulterous relationship within a week or fourteen days of her husband departing for France? What opportunity did a Duchess of York have for a relationship with an archer (she would have had maids all around her at most times, and an archer cannot have slipped into her bed-room without people knowing about it)? (Anne Boleyn and her so-called lovers may or may not have been framed, but no-one can deny the opportunity there; four out of five of them were Privy Counsellors who could have been carrying a message from the King, so no-one could deny them access). An archer? By definition he was low class.

Mark

you raise good question mr Woodman Mark Lowes Dickinson, OBE.

one thing is sure not insulting anyone but french was and still very open minded about love and relation afaire .in words and phisical so adulterous point of view is a diference

omerta existing at this time loll
about the archer it look solid but i guess its a trap
archer sling arrow to a top not on the ground it is puzzling me
too. it is sure for many time history try to solve this intrigue

i do not see til now somting to contredic those fact about Edward IV .i think i gona read or look video of shakespear i dont know much about him

Blaybourne= english or french or =? real name or fabricate one

if he was an royal archer he was not a low class for french
side

thanks mr Woodman Mark Lowes Dickinson, OBE i gona do shakespear reading hehehe
mart

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Shakespeare

opinion from shakespear. do that man is considered as a funny or serious? he is from a bad reputation or a good one in general speaking? hes a writter but can some one light my candle....i gona be easyer for me to get an understanding cuz right now i am at neutral point...and my opinion diverge
thanks

another thing maybe its false as a selling story book it is said that Edward IV of England was a tall one at 6 feet 4

am looking for tall royalty in both british french to get clue

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blay
blaybourn? was a name? or a defenition??

til now i cant ask to create a profile about a Blaybourn not sufisent answer

Unknown Profile
Elizabeth Woodville, Queen Consort of England

same person?

http://www.geni.com/path/Elizabeth+Woodville+Queen+consort+of+Engla...

so royal blood pass from elizabeth woodville to micheal edward abney hasting i bet 1 cents so

The current wearer of the Crown of this realm is reigning because she descends from the Electress Sophia (viz the Act of Settlement) - whether Edward IV was illegitimate or not is immaterial.

yeah and bless the queen !
but its not the discussion is about i am trying to get mr Michael Lawrence Rhodes .
all is about is the true the royal bloodline view .cause like a write before if a illegimate is born then before him was a real bloodline.
for a moment i was beleive the illegimate king was maybe not he is but related to french only royalty. i guessing i try get clue on that he cant be a bastard not logical at all, his mother was from a noble family and mr Woodman Mark Lowes Dickinson, OBE raise very good questionable answer about the event

Sophia of Hanover

Hello Mart: Since it takes a but a very few unguarded moments on a walk in the maze of gardens who can say? If' it's proved that the Tudors are i-1 as I suspect from the line of Phillip IV of France to Edward IV, then we should know in a matter of weeks about RICHARD III and his bloodline. If it tests I-1 there will be a whole lot of scrambling about to find the source,ie Phillip IV.

If He's R1b1a2a like the Stewarts, then that's a reliable line in England for a couple thousand years and Wales only has a smattering of I-1 or about 5% or less. The Roche line and PERKINS line descends from the FRENCH CONNECTION at Phillip IV so it's going to be very, very interesting to see what the Canadian PLANT yields.... :- ) PS: The writer of the "WHITE QUEEN" Emma Frost agrees with your assessment Mart. But in the words of Hillary Clinton" What, after all this time, does it really matter?" The world has a perfectly good line in German-line of Windsor.

DCR

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiction

"Fiction is the form of any work that deals, in part or in whole, with information or events that are NOT REAL, but rather, IMAGINARY and theoretical—that is, INVENTED by the author."

for now i beleive they where part as a BIGGG family and the secret came with it

not mention other family...in other country they have also old bloodline
i prefere queen elisabeth the second personaly as queen
i could imagine white queen as souvereing .exept in my dreams hehehehe

the fun of geni is to figure out thing we dont understand
mart

Agreed!

Philippe IV of France was R1b-Z381, not I1.

i do admit and sincerly about dna scientifique debate is the sphere of mr Swanström and this is a fair sententia.

Thankyou Justin: That's very good information. I was surely hoping for I-1. So all the Plantagenets after Edward III are R1b? and Z381. That sounds like news. I'll take that into account. DCR