Ancestry did not show this they just did a vague chart without actually tracing which generations connected Pattinson to Dracula (a fictional character based on Vlad the Impaler) to make their claim. Yet all the news media prints it anyway without questions them! Why?

No reigning English monarch is a descendant of the Basarab family, which produced Vlad Dracula. King George V of England’s wife, Mary of Teck, is however a descendant of Hungarian aristocratic nobility through her paternal grandmother, Klaudina Zsuzsánna Rhédey de Kis-Rhéde. The current royal family are her descendants.

Although the current reigning English monarchy does NOT descend from the Basarab family, there is a connection to Vlad Dracula through his wife. She was a noblewoman from the Szilágyi de Horogszeg family. Klaudina Rhédey (as well as myself) is also a descendant of the same Szilágyi de Horogszeg family. Klaudina and Vlad’s wife would be 2nd cousins 15 times removed.

There’s a documented connection to Vlad’s wife, but no English monarch shares (known) ancestry with Vlad Dracula.

Now, Pattinson and the princes are cousins according to your chart.

You don’t show the intermediate generations between the “Pickerings of York” and Pattinson – do you have proof of his descent from them using original sources and direct evidence? Likewise, there may be generations not shown between the “Pickerings of York” and the princes.

A cousin of my cousin is not necessarily also my cousin. They have to have a common ancestor.

I can see a newspaper writer and editor making theis mistake out of ignorance, but for a respected genealogy company to do it is shameful.

Do you have any original sources with direct evidence of a common ancestor for Pattinson or Vlad? If not, you should retract that allegation.