New Study on Bourbon DNA by Gerard Lucotte

[Almanza]

You are right in this. But my understanding is that what make sure whichone "male" lineage is must be one's Y-DNA only. That's the challenge of Pr Lucotte findings about the Bourbon royal dynasty

 

[eastara]

Which is why I find it darkly humorous when Family Tree DNA advertise their Y DNA kit by saying that a Y chromosome is like a surname, you get it from your father. Except that's not quite the case where I live.

Seeing as this thread has been derailed enough, let me elaborate a little. My surname is the same as my father's, but his is different from that of his own father. My grandfather also has a different surname from his own father, etc. It may be a regional thing, considering that there are old Bulgarian families who have kept their names through the decades (centuries?).

For me, the paper trails ends in the mid-19th century. What about you?

Although the Y hromosome, the male haplogroup respectively, is only a small part of the human genome it can prove a common relationship much deeper in time, than the autosomes. mtDna is not very helpful since even one difference could separate a few hundred, if not thousands years apart. Autosomal relatives after third cousins are usually speculative, even more in populations that have experienced a severe bottleneck or practised endogamy. If you don't have the paper trail you can not prove if this is a real relative or not. However with the Y STR and SNP match the connection is undeniable.
Regarding the nation as a whole, only the deep testing of the male lines like the Big Y tests could prove origin and migrations in historical times. Or if you are really descending from a certain royal.

 

[Venko2257]

In order to shift things back to the topic at hand, I have all known studies relating to the subject with a brief explanation about what was found:

1) Genetic genealogy reveals true Y haplogroup of House of Bourbon contradicting recent identification of the presumed remains of two French Kings - https://www.nature.com/articles/ejhg2013211 - Prince Sixte-Henri of Bourbon-Parma, Prince Axel of Bourbon-Parma and Prince Joao Henrique of Orleans-Braganza are all established to be Y-DNA haplogroup R-Z381*. It differs, however, from those of the presumed head of King Henri IV and also of the supposed blood of King Louis XVI.

2) Comparison Between the Y-Chromosome STR Profiles of Hughes de Bourbon and Other Members of the House of Bourbon - https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2573698 - Hughes de Bourbon, a patrilineal descendant of Karl Wilhelm Naundorff, who was supposedly "King Louis XVII", belongs to R1b1a2a1a1, thus G. Lucotte is willing to consider him as an agnate of the House of Bourbon.

3) The DNA Y-STRs Profile of Louis XVI (1754-1793) - https://www.ijsciences.com/pub/article/1005 - The Y-DNA profile of King Louis XVI is similar enough to that of the three currently living Bourbons above, but he does not seem to have been closely related to Karl Wilhelm Naundorff.

4) The Y-SNP Z-381 Is a Patrilineal DNA Marker of the Royal Bourbon Family of France - https://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?PaperID=90376 - Prince Sixte-Henri of Bourbon-Parma has been found to be DF98, so he belongs to the so-called "Kings' Cluster", alongside the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha.

 

[Farkha]

One of the bourbons was tested on 37 markers. Predictor showed 99% DF98-S18823 But I have never seen anyone talk about this

 

[Venko2257]

One of the bourbons was tested on 37 markers. Predictor showed 99% DF98-S18823 But I have never seen anyone talk about this

You are the first one!

Do you know anything more about this? Because I believe that the initial study in 2013 was done with 37 markers. The most recent one (that I know of) was for 67 markers.
Sixte-Henri of Bourbon-Parma was the test subject and he is DF98 (part of the Kings' Cluster).

 

[Farkha]

Yes of course I know something else. This is an old test, for 38 markers At the Portuguese from the Bourbons. Joao Henrique of Orleans Braganza. You have a link in the post by the way, too. I just entered the data into the nevgen predictor and got the result

 

[Farkha]

every year, even every month, the predictor is updated, improves the data. Therefore, it is necessary to recheck old materials on new predictors.

 

[Venko2257]

Yes of course I know something else. This is an old test, for 38 markers At the Portuguese from the Bourbons. Joao Henrique of Orleans Braganza. You have a link in the post by the way, too. I just entered the data into the nevgen predictor and got the result

Ah, so it was him. Thanks for the reply!

 

[Anne Frances Spackman]

Could someone please explain thoroughly all of this about the specific STR's with regard to the current and past Bourbon-Parma lines? It seems to me that the current Bourbon-Parma y-line is actually patrilineally descended from the royal house of Wettin/Saxe-Coburg, and that no one has actually proved that Louis XVI was an r1b rather than a g2, even though someone supposedly tested the dna of the heart of his son Louis XVII. With regard to the controversy over the relic of the presumed blood sample of Louis XVI and the actual y-line dna of the latter senior Bourbon Kings: weren't the Bourbons supposed to be descended from the Capetian y-line, which was J1a2b1b2c1, so already there was a false paternity event somewhere along the line from the time of the original Capetian Kings to the time of the later Bourbon Kings descended from Henri IV and Louis XIII. The male y-line was possibly R1b1a1b1a1a1c1a1 somewhere along the line after a false paternity event as members of the cadet branches of Bourbon-Parma and also Orleans-Braganza have this R1b1a1b1a1a1c1a1 y-line. But, did the father of Louis XVI, Louis XVIII, and Charles X? Or were they all a G2a like the presumed relic of Louis XVI's blood, so that is a real question. And, even if the presumed head of Henri IV wasn't really that of the king, though it may have been, it does not mean that the presumed blood sample of Louis XVI wasn't really his blood. Someone has the heart of Louis XVII, son of Louis XVI, and scientists have confirmed that it truly is Louis XVII's heart through the mitochondrial dna, but for some reason, they won't tell anyone what Louis XVII's y-dna was, to solve the mystery of whether it was G2a or R1b1a1b1a1a1c1a1. They must know what it actually is. After reading extensively on the subject, I also think that it might be possible that Marie Leszczyńska was unfaithful to Louis XV (as he definitely was to her), though I don't like to suggest it, and that the biological father of her son Louis Ferdinand may well have been Louis George Simpert, Margrave of Baden-Baden who was in love with her and whose sister became the wife of Louis d'Orleans. Louis George Simpert's grandfather was Ferdinand Maximilian, Hereditary Prince of Baden-Baden, and his grandmother was Princess Louise of Savoy, whose mother was Marie de Bourbon. If Louis Ferdinand wasn't the biological son of Louis XV, this could explain why the presumed blood sample of Louis XVI was G2a if truly the presumed blood sample came from the executed king, and it obviously differs from the current y-lines of the cadet branches of the House of Bourbon-Parma. I also think that there might have been another illegitimacy in the Bourbon lines, that it is possible that the genetic father of Louis XIV Dieudonne could actually have been someone other than Louis XIII, as I have read that relations between her and her husband Louis XIII had cooled for years when she suddenly conceived an heir was it 23 years into their marriage at age 36 or 37. In any event, there are rumors of affairs in history, but no one can corroborate these rumors most of the time, even today, considering that much of the dna of the kings and of the aristocracy is not available for genetic testing. However, if Louis XIV was actually not the biological son of Louis XIII, the y-lines of the subsequent Bourbon Kings would definitely not match the presumed sample of Henri IV's dna.

 

[Venko2257]

Hi Anne! Welcome to the forum!

Following the death in rather suspicious circumstances of Louis Henri, Prince of Condé (1756 - 1830), all legitimate agnates of the Capetian dynasty have been descendants in the male line of Louis XIII (1601 - 1643) via his two sons with Anne of Austria (1601 - 1666), his wife. As it has been suggested before, the king may or may not have been gay, thereby calling into question the biological paternity of these sons, Louis XIV (1638 - 1715) and Philippe I, Duke of Orléans (1640 - 1701). In post #43 above, I included a link to the 2014 study, the one that apparently proved that the Sun King and his younger brother were in all likelihood sired by one and the same man; I don't see any issues with accepting that person as having been their legal father as well.

Unfortunately, the elder line from Louis XIV went extinct with the childless death of Henri, Count of Chambord (1820 - 1883), a grandson of Charles X of France (1757 - 1836), who was a younger brother of Louis XVI (1754 - 1793). Referring once again to post #43 above, a 2016 study by Gerard Lucotte et al. suggested that Louis XVI indeed belonged to the same Y-DNA haplogroup as the living Bourbons of 2014.

I must admit that I was not familiar with the theory that Louis XV (1710 - 1774) had been cuckolded by his own wife, Marie Leszczyńska (1703 - 1768), with the Margrave of Baden-Baden mentioned above. While I am more or less satisfied that R1b is indeed the "correct" haplogroup of the Bourbons (though perhaps not of all the Capetians, living or dead), I must admit how strange it is that G2 was established as the genetic line for both the alleged head of Henry IV of France (1553 - 1610) and the blood-soaked handkerchief of the unfortunate Louis XVI. Indeed, was there any issue with establishing the Y-DNA haplogroup of the latter's son, Louis XVII (1785 - 1795), from his heart? Maybe they just weren't looking specifically for that one, though who knows.

 

[Anne Frances Spackman]

Hi Anne! Welcome to the forum!

Following the death in rather suspicious circumstances of Louis Henri, Prince of Condé (1756 - 1830), all legitimate agnates of the Capetian dynasty have been descendants in the male line of Louis XIII (1601 - 1643) via his two sons with Anne of Austria (1601 - 1666), his wife. As it has been suggested before, the king may or may not have been gay, thereby calling into question the biological paternity of these sons, Louis XIV (1638 - 1715) and Philippe I, Duke of Orléans (1640 - 1701). In post #43 above, I included a link to the 2014 study, the one that apparently proved that the Sun King and his younger brother were in all likelihood sired by one and the same man; I don't see any issues with accepting that person as having been their legal father as well.

Unfortunately, the elder line from Louis XIV went extinct with the childless death of Henri, Count of Chambord (1820 - 1883), a grandson of Charles X of France (1757 - 1836), who was a younger brother of Louis XVI (1754 - 1793). Referring once again to post #43 above, a 2016 study by Gerard Lucotte et al. suggested that Louis XVI indeed belonged to the same Y-DNA haplogroup as the living Bourbons of 2014.

I must admit that I was not familiar with the theory that Louis XV (1710 - 1774) had been cuckolded by his own wife, Marie Leszczyńska (1703 - 1768), with the Margrave of Baden-Baden mentioned above. While I am more or less satisfied that R1b is indeed the "correct" haplogroup of the Bourbons (though perhaps not of all the Capetians, living or dead), I must admit how strange it is that G2 was established as the genetic line for both the alleged head of Henry IV of France (1553 - 1610) and the blood-soaked handkerchief of the unfortunate Louis XVI. Indeed, was there any issue with establishing the Y-DNA haplogroup of the latter's son, Louis XVII (1785 - 1795), from his heart? Maybe they just weren't looking specifically for that one, though who knows.

Hi, Venko.

I do think it very possible that the genetic father of Louis XIV and his brother Phillippe might have been the same man, as the y-lines of male Bourbon descendants today seem to indicate, though there could have been a false paternity event here if the biological father of both men was not Louis XIII who might have been gay; perhaps the biological father of the Sun King and his brother was from the house of Wettin somehow or R1b1a1b1a1a1c1a1? Interesting that Anna named her first son "god-given". Even if there was a false paternity event that changed the Bourbon y-line here, it is also true that with cousins marrying within the Bourbons and Hapsburgs, etc, the modern living Bourbon descendants are still genetically linked to Henri IV Bourbon as well as the Capetians and other French high nobility. And, they may all share the same y-line as Louis XIV.

I am hesitant to admit why I have been reading so extensively about the Bourbons and other royal houses and why all things considered, I have come up with my own hypothesis in order to answer the question of how the presumed sample of Louis XVI's blood could have been G2 and not R1b1a1b1a1a1c1a1; I looked at this study: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3992573 and I realized that any false paternity event in the Senior line of Bourbon Kings if it occurred must have done so after Louis le Grand Dauphin 1661 in the Senior line only or after his son Louis Duke of Burgundy. I had recently done a full genome dna test, and I asked my father to do one after my results returned, which connected my father genetically with Louis XVI (he shares chromosomes with the presumed sample of Louis XVI). I looked at the results of his dna analysis and my own, as I had been wondering how I was seemingly so closely and recently dna-related to so many Hapsburgs, Wettins, Bourbons, Oldenbergs, Savoie, family Gaston de Foix so recently among many others (a lot of shared dna). I then read extensively on the history of Bourbons and French and European aristocratic houses and their histories; how and where exactly could the y-line have changed also I wondered from R1b1a1b1a1a1c1a1 to G2? I realized from the dna results I had received and from reading that there were few Bourbon wives who seemed at all unfaithful to their husbands in biographies; I concluded that the only place where there could have been a false paternity event was in the case of the biological father of Louis Ferdinand if he wasn't actually the biological son of Louis XV, but possibly the son of Louis George Simpert, hereditary prince of Baden-Baden, who was from the house of Zähringen, whose grandfather was Ferdinand Maximilian of Baden-Baden and whose grandmother was Louisa of Savoy (her mother was Marie de Bourbon). I couldn't find any other possible break in the y-line through a false paternity event, and no other obvious liaisons with Bourbon wives and admirers. And, Louis George was descended from many royal and noble houses, including Oldenburg and Hapsburg, Shleswig-Holstein (or modern Romanov), Savoie, as well as Bourbon, Capet, with several Rurikid and royal /aristocratic Germanic ancestors (some of which seemed to match the dna results of my father; my father is according to dna results also genetically related to the mtdna of Emperor Leopold I of Austria and other Hapsburgs, though he did the test for me since I asked him to take it and has only glanced at it with little interest himself. Leopold's descendants include Louis XVI, Louis XVIII, and Charles X among others). I realize that many people will not believe that the biological father of Louis Ferdinand could be Louis George Simpert and may dislike that I suggest it at all; I assure you that I do not mean to offend anyone on Earth by asserting this as a possibility, that Louis XV might not have been the biological father of Louis Ferdinand, which might be why Louis XVI (and the last Bourbon Kings in the Senior line possibly) had a G2 y-line. In my opinion, it changes nothing in the current Bourbon lines of succession at all, if the Senior line which came to an end in the male line, had a more recent false paternity event in it. The other cadet branches go back further than Louis XV to Phillipe son of Louis XIII and the sons of Louis le Grand Dauphin.

Louis George, Margrave of Baden-Baden was in love with Marie Leszczyńska I read, but she married of course Louis XV which was the highest honor for her, though she was I think 9 years older than Louis XV. I wonder if she might have been in love with Louis George and couldn't marry him as she did not have a sufficient dowry. After this, her father and/or others negotiated a marriage for her with Louis XV. At some point, she might have been unfaithful one time to her husband, however, though I do not like to suggest it. In any event, please do not take offense anyone at my hypothesis. It is only that.

 

[Venko2257]

Thanks for the comprehensive reply, Anne! Don't worry, no offense has been taken!

Now, while I personally am convinced that the Houses of Bourbon and of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha (the only known tested branch of the House of Wettin that I'm aware of) are of very close common agnatic origin, both belonging to the Kings' Cluster, I doubt that one could be considered to descend from the other and vice versa. As far as I remember, Louis XIV's mother had had several stillbirths before him, so him being christened God-given was perfectly in order and should not have implied anything about his paternity. Something similar happened with the Count of Chambord I mentioned in my previous post, though the rumours about his own paternity had more to do with him being posthumously born.

The G2 result for King Louis XVI was based on what essentially was a dirty cloth, so I'm prepared to dismiss it. The only thing I find odd is the putative head of King Henri IV, which was also G2. It just doesn't make any sense that G2 would be replaced by R1b, then the line would miraculously return to being G2 again. As you also say, what haplogroup Louis XVI was is irrelevant today, as both Capetian pretenders descend from a younger grandson of Louis XIV, i.e. from the paternal uncle of Louis XV.

 

[Anne Frances Spackman]

Very nice reply. And I think that the Capetian pretenders of today have the strongest claim, legal and sentimental, to the throne of France if it ever returns to being a monarchy, regardless of whether or not there was a false paternity event in the Senior line of Bourbons before it came to an end. But, I do believe strongly that this happened as I said, just as it did in the case of John of Gaunt of Lancaster, who wasn't after all likely the biological son of Edward III of England.
Moreover, I guess I wasn't clear when I said "House of Wettin" in my last post that I meant all houses connected agnatically to the Wettins belonging to the King's Cluster, as Saxe-Coburg and Gotha as well as Saxe-Coburg Saalfeld and other cadet branches if I am not mistaken all trace back to the royal house of Wettin in earlier centuries. Here is a link to a page that talks about some of the British royal family y-testing:
https://www.surnamedna.com/?articles=y-dna-of-the-british-monarchy
where it claims that someone has tested a Saxe-Coburg Saalfeld relative of the Windsors:
"This finding comes from tests of two descendants of Prince Franz Herzong von Sachsen-Coburg-Saalfeld (1750-1806).
Figure 4 illustrates the genealogy connection between a Coburg Prince and the Windsor Monarchs. The test participant is a second cousin, twice removed to King George VI (1895-1952) with a known TMRCA of 166 years."
I find it interesting that the current Bourbon y-dna is agnatically related to the originally Saxon line of Wettin/Saxe-Coburg and Gotha as you put it. I don't see how this is possible for the earliest Capetians and Bourbons and cadet branches to have descended from a common ancestor to the house of Wettin, though of course much happened in pre-history of which we are not currently aware. I think more likely that the Bourbon Kings and nobles didn't "descend from Wettin" but that their original y-line was replaced by a house of Wettin y-line at some point in history, after the establishment of the Capetian dynasty. I think that it is always possible that a Bourbon noble before the cadet line became the royal line with the death of Henri III Valois and the coronation of Henri IV from a cadet line of Bourbons going back to Saint-Louis could have been cuckolded by his wife. But if Henri IV of France was really a G2, then this replacement of G2 with r1b most likely happened here, with Louis XIII and Anna Hapsburg, and the biological father of both of Louis XIII's sons would have been a royal member of the house of Wettin/Saxe Coburg. Because yes, if Henri IV really was a G2, how otherwise could the y-line go from G2 to R1b, and then back to G2 as I conjectured. But, there are other royals with the G2 y-line.
For example, G2 is also Richard III's of Britain's y-line and though a very rare y-haplogroup, I think that many of the connections between royal houses in pre-history were obviously lost. I would be interested to find out if anyone knows the y-line of the house of Zähringen and whether or not it is a G2 as well. Also, my father's and my dna analysis as well said we are both are related to the Polish Lubomirski family which I hadn't even heard of when I received my dna results in August of 2024, and I found a Lubomirski ancestor in Marie Leszczyńska's ancestry. Just incidentally, my father is almost entirely British (Scottish, actually), and my grandfather told me when I was about 14 that we might have some French ancestry, as there was a woman in our family long ago who had fled from the guillotine in France and come to Scotland. The story was passed down through our family, but I had not thought whatsoever until about five months ago that she could have been a Bourbon or the illegitimate child of one.

 

[Chlodovechus]

There is also this report, which studied hair samples from Louis XVI. https://www.ijsciences.com/pub/article/1005

"We have obtained, for the first time, the Y-STRs profile of the King of France Louis XVI (1754-1793). His genomic DNA was extracted from his authentic hairs, that were studied by optic and electronic microscopy. Louis XVI’s Y-STRs profile is very similar to those of three living Bourbons previously published , differing from them by three Y-STRs allele values only. Dating estimates of the divergence time of the common ancestor (Louis XIII) between Louis XVI and the living Bourbons correspond to the observed genealogical time."

R-Z381 is more than 4000 years old so House of Bourbon and House of Wettin are probably not that closely related.

Should be interesting to test a male descendant from the House of Braganza. The only other branch from the Capetian dynasty still living today.

 

[Anne Frances Spackman]

So now, in order to corroborate the above findings, could Ernst Brinkmann and Jean-Jacques Cassiman also officially release the y-dna of Louis XVII's heart that they had to have ascertained when they studied it; there is no way that they didn't determine it with dna analysis at the same time as the mtdna. Why wouldn't they have? Absolutely unbelievable if they didn't, no matter what was officially reported about this, that they just didn't bother to see what his y-dna was. It was the chance of a lifetime to have his heart and do all of the dna testing on it that they could. I hate to say it, but, their not making any statement about Louis XVII's y-dna at the same time as they released his official mtdna just seems like a silent cover-up so as not to contradict the official story that the Bourbons past and present since Louis XIII and possibly before that were all r1b. According to Wikipedia, "Ernst Brinkmann of Münster University and Belgian genetics professor Jean-Jacques Cassiman of the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, conducted mitochondrial DNA tests using a strand of the hair of the boy's mother, Marie Antoinette, and other samples from her sisters Maria Johanna Gabriela and Maria Josepha, their mother, Empress Maria Theresa, and two living direct descendants in the strict maternal line of Maria Theresa, namely Queen Anne of Romania and her brother, Prince André of Bourbon-Parma, maternal relatives of Louis XVII. The tests proved both that Naundorff was not the dauphin, and the heart was that of Louis-Charles. Of these results, historian Jean Tulard wrote: "This [mummified] heart is ... almost certainly that of Louis XVII. We can never be 100 per cent sure but this is about as sure as it gets"."

According to this nih study about the actual y-haplogroup of the Bourbons: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3992573/

"Y-chromosomal analysis on the already identified heart of Louis XVII, the son of Louis XVI, might further remove all doubts about the identification of the blood sample considered to be of Louis XVI and might also solve any controversy about the paternity of Louis XVI of this child." There is no way that anyone should believe that they simply buried the heart of Louis XVII without determining first what his y-dna was. By not officially saying that his y-dna was indeed R1b at the same time that they released the results of his mtdna analysis, I can't help but wonder if it was actually G2. Other clever people out there might also wonder about this as well.

 

[Venko2257]

I'm not sure about John of Gaunt (1340 - 1399), but I have heard about his younger brother, Edmund of Langley, 1st Duke of York (1341 - 1402), that his son Richard of Conisburgh, 3rd Earl of Cambridge (1385 - 1415), may not have been sired by his legal father, which is why the Y-DNA haplogroup of Richard III of England (1452 - 1485), an agnatic descendant of the Earl of Cambridge, may differ from that of the Dukes of Beaufort.

I don't know about the House of Baden, but this suggests that its Y-DNA haplogroup may indeed be known. It should be noted that the branch of Baden-Baden has been extinct since 1771, so this may complicate matters.
As for Louis XVII, I did belatedly find a study from 2019, which seems to have proven that he was indeed his father's son and so was R1b too, though it isn't said like that.

The Y-STRs profile obtained is strictly identical to
that of Louis XVI (Lucotte et al. , 2016). This
establishes that Louis XVI is the biological father of
Louis XVII.
Numerous rumours, since the beginning, doubted
about Louis XVI paternity of his children. We
demonstrate here that Louis-Charles (Louis XVII) is
truly Louis XVI’s son.

Thanks Chlodovechus! Yeah, it would be interesting if they were to test a member of the House of Braganza, but I'm pretty sure that there will be no match. After all, the point of diversion was at Robert II of France (c. 972 - 1031); that's a lot of generations to take into account!

Edit: I had originally written that the first Duke of York had been the one with the spurious paternity. Silly me.

 

[Anne Frances Spackman]

Yes, I had also read about possible false paternity events in the Plantagenets/Angevins, as I am descended from Catherine Carey, daughter of Mary Boleyn, and she had an affair with Henry VIII. Washington Lawrence Barnett was my 3 X great-grandfather, and his ancestor John West Colonial Governor of Virginia was the grandson of Catherine Carey who might be the biological daughter of Henry VIII and not William Carey. Henry VIII's mother, Elizabeth of York was the daughter of Edward IV (whose brother was Richard III. Presumably, the two men had the same Y-line dna). My dna analysis said I am related to Richard III through both his y-line and mtdna; the mtdna was also shared though by many Beaufort descendants of Katherine Roet Swynford, but the y-line had to come from Richard III or Edward IV or an agnatic male relative. However, I am legally descended from John of Gaunt at least 10 times (but possibly up to 13-17 times), but also 1 time (and probably 4 more times) from his brother Lionel of Antwerp. And another ancestor of mine was quite possibly descended from Thomas Woodstock, another son of Edward III. If I am descended after all from Henry VIII then I am also legally descended from Edmund of Langley most likely as well, so all of this was interesting to me in my genealogy efforts. And, I am dna verified related to Anna/Agnes of Antioch de Chatillon for sure, whose dna is known, and she was an ancestress of Philippa of Hainaut, mother of John of Gaunt, Edmund of Langley, Lionel, and Thomas, as well as many European royals and aristocrats including Capetians and members of the house of Anjou. However, here is something interesting from wikitree, "In view of the well-known liaison [between Isabel of Castile, Duchess of York, and John Holland, Earl of Huntingdon, half-brother of Richard II], the possibility that her lover (and not the dull and negative Edmund of Langley) was the father of the duchess's younger (and favourite) son, Richard of York, cannot be ignored." So perhaps the false paternity event was a generation later and Edmund of Langley was indeed the biological son of Edward III? But his legal son Richard may not have been his own biological son. As for John of Gaunt, there is some speculation that ( I read this somewhere a while back, but I will have to find an exact source for you later), since Edward III didn't attend the christening of his legal son John of Gaunt, that he knew that John was not actually his biological son, and there were rumors about this during John's lifetime, that he was actually a bastard. It is not entirely certain from examining the modern Beaufort dna and that of Richard III from the modern parking lot burial that John of Gaunt was not the biological son of Edward III, but I have read that it is just highly unlikely that John of Gaunt actually was Edward III's biological son. And, some have questioned whether or not any of Edward III's children were his biological children, but they were all still legally his children with legal rights of inheritance. Philippa of Hainaut was also descended from the Plantagenets/Angevin and Henry II of England.
As for the house of Baden, which if I am not mistaken descends from the house of House of Zähringen Swabian nobility whose cadet branches were Baden and Teck, I wonder if there are some agnatic descendants out there, though the cadet line of Baden as you say went dead in the y-line in 1771; I had read that as well. I had seen the link as well but have not bought the book to determine possible y-lines. I have wondered also about looking to see if there are any living Warenne cousins of the Plantagenets/Angevins somewhere, male descendants of Hamelin, illegitimate but recognized son of Geoffrey d'Anjou Plantagenet or his son William de Warenne 6th Earl of Surrey in case any dna group out there could try to determine the Angevin/Plantagenet y-line, though again, after more than 800 years, it is hard to say that it would be the actual y-line of the early Angevins/Plantagenets.
I will have to read some more about the Braganzas. Why wouldn't it be worthwhile to dna test them? Incidentally, it is hard finding information and peerage books about some royal/aristocratic houses from Spain and Portugal today, as I have looked for them. I started looking when I discovered to my surprise that I have a lot of Iberian dna relatives (from houses de Correia, de Medrano, Pacheco, and Toledo de Alba), and at first I had no idea who any of these families were. I know less about them, though a few are related to the Bourbons and Hapsburgs through marriages.

 

[Venko2257]

Thanks Anne, though you don't need to copy the contents of your previous posts!

Baden-Baden was actually the senior line of the House of Baden (or Zähringen) until its extinction in 1771, when it was succeeded there by its cadet branch of Baden-Durlach. The latter would have expired dynastically in 1830, had it not been for the demorganatisation of the children from the second and unequal marriage of the first Grand Duke of Baden. The family still exists in the male line, though it hasn't been reigning since late 1918.

I wouldn't exactly say it's pointless to test the Braganzas, it's just that so many generations have passed that it's very unlikely they'll have the same Y-DNA haplogroup as the Bourbons. Besides, there have been rumours of NPEs there too. A recent example is Miguel I of Portugal (1802 - 1866), as some believe that his biological father may have been the Marquis of Marialva.

 

[Anne Frances Spackman]

Thanks, Venko! Sorry, didn't mean to copy the post. It was an accident. Very interesting. I found a recent descendant: https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Baden-120 and this about the last Grand Duke of Baden: https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Zähringen-39
There don't seem to be many males of this house left, however, though it has many descendants through daughters.
Interesting about Miguel I of Portugal; he was descended from Louis le Grand Dauphin Bourbon from his mother and also from a daughter of Louis XV and Marie Lecczinska, even if he was not the biological child of his legal father, but if indeed he was a biological son of Joao Braganza, then he descended through his father also from Mariana Bourbon and through her Louis le Grand Dauphin Bourbon as well as from the Capetian Braganzas. So any false paternity event might have changed the male y-line if it happened, but he is definitely many times descended from the Bourbons as cousins married. It looks like the Marquis of Marialva, D. Pedro Jose Joaquim Vito de Menzes Coutinho, 6th Marquis of Marialva, also had some distant Bourbon ancestry as he was descended from Henri de Bourbon-Malause, vicomte de Lavedan, born in 1544, son of Jean Capet de Bourbon, vicomte de Lavedan and also descended from Jean d’Albret, Vicomte de Tartras and Jeanne-Catherine de Rohan, daughter of Marguerite de Montfort and granddaughter of Joan of Navarre, Queen of England. He was also descended from Claude de Lorraine, duc de Guise and Antoinette de Bourbon-Vendome, from King John II de Valois of France born in 1319, King Saint Louis IX of France, the houses of Anjou, Castille, Châtillon, and Aragon as well. So, the Marquis of Marialva also descended from the Capetians and other noble and royal French and Spanish houses without having the Capetian y-line himself.

 

[Venko2257]

I can't think of much else with which to contribute to this thread at the moment, though I'll offer the following.

The Bourbon-Busset family descends in the male line from the Capetian dynasty, specifically from the eldest son of Louis de Bourbon, Bishop of Liège (1438 - 1482). As his clerical title suggests, he was not exactly meant to ever marry while in that capacity, so his sons have been considered illegitimate. Of course, being born out of wedlock does not affect anyone's Y-chromosome, so I believe it would be worthwhile to genetically investigate this somewhat obscure branch of the dynasty.

If it (unbelievably) turns out to be R1b as well, then we could be sure that not only this was the Y-DNA haplogroup of Louis I, Duke of Bourbon (1279 - 1341), a grandson in the male line of Louis IX of France (1214 - 1270), but also that a long list of wives were faithful to their respective husbands.