But there was no match through the male line of the family, descended from John of Gaunt, the brother of Richard III’s great-grandfather.
That means that at some point there must have been a child whose presumed father according to the official genealogy was not his real father.
It is due to be reinterred in the city in March next year.
“A false paternity event (or events) at some point(s) in this genealogy could be of key historical significance,” said a paper in the journal Nature Communications by a team led by the University of Leicester geneticist Turi King.
At a press conference in London, Kevin Schurer, a deputy chancellor at the university, said: “What we discovered is that there is a break in the chain ... We don’t know where that break occurred.”
“We are not in any way indicating that Her Majesty (reigning Queen Elizabeth II) should not be on the throne,” he said, adding that the history of the British monarchy took “all kinds of twists and turns”.
The study said the result could question the legitimacy of Henry IV, Henry V, Henry VI and “the entire Tudor dynasty” starting with Henry VII followed by Henry VIII, Edward VI, Mary I and Elizabeth I.
Irrespective, they still are a bunch of incestuous 'bastards'.