Talk:George III

Semi-protected edit request on 24 December 2025

The first paragraph under the ILLNESS section should be modified. At the very end of the paragraph it briefly notes with citation (https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4953321/) that porphyria was likely not a correct diagnosis, and yet the paragraph makes it seem like the now-debunked hypothesis was the main explanation for George III’s illness.

Suggested wording with citations:

"By this time, George's health was deteriorating, and he exhibited symptoms of a mental illness characterized by acute mania. Until the mid-20th century, his condition was generally regarded as psychological. In 1966, Ida Macalpine and Richard Hunter advanced a physiological explanation, attributing the illness to the blood disorder porphyria, a theory that gained traction despite some initial skepticism. Later, a 2005 study of George’s hair revealed high levels of arsenic, which can disrupt metabolism and was proposed as a possible trigger for porphyria, though its source remains uncertain. This interpretation entered popular culture through works such as Alan Bennett’s The Madness of George III and Nicholas Hytner’s film adaptation."

"However, from 2010 onward, this theory has been increasingly challenged. Timothy Peters’s peer-reviewed analysis (https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4953321/) highlighted serious flaws in Macalpine and Hunter’s methodology, showing that they were “highly selective in their reporting and interpretation of his signs and symptoms” and that a porphyria diagnosis “cannot be sustained.” For example, they emphasized symptoms like muscular weakness, vocal hoarseness, cataracts, obstructive jaundice, abdominal pain, and discolored urine as indicative of porphyria—but ignored substantial contrary evidence. Peters notes that the famous “blue urine” episode cited by Macalpine and Hunter could have been explained by the King’s ingestion of extract of gentian, a medication he began three days earlier. Peters concludes that Macalpine and Hunter distorted the evidence and neglected significant contradictory data. As a result, the porphyria theory—once treated as nearly settled—has been substantially discredited, and most recent scholarship favors a psychiatric diagnosis, most likely bipolar disorder."

One additional addition to the page under CULTURAL DEPICTIONS: The character of George III appears briefly in Bridgerton Season 2. Missmonchichi (talk) 17:46, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide additional reliable sources that support the change you want made, and phrase changes in a "Change X to Y" form, not "Please change X" Note: this is unlikely to get approved as is if reopened due to essay-like text.FMRadio :3_{(chat | edits | she/her)} 19:44, 24 December 2025 (UTC)

physician to the household of George III

There does not seem to be any mention of James Lind on this page. As he was the royal physician, mention of him seems relevant to illness and a few other minor topics. I would suggest an editor add a link to the "See Also" section. SloppyTots (talk) 16:41, 27 March 2026 (UTC)

Add Gallery section with Lehnsbriefe seal image ~2026-19230-63 (talk) 02:40, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

Gallery sections are deprecated. DrKay (talk) 07:25, 28 March 2026 (UTC)

The coat of arms are incorrect in that section.

If you look at the photos of examples of the coat of arms, there are three that are the same picture when in fact the coat of arms changed during these periods ~2026-21542-47 (talk) 08:08, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

Some of the changes, such as the style of the Hanover crown, are quite small and need a close look. AntientNestor (talk) 08:38, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

Longevity

George III is no longer the longest-reigning Monatch in British history. The longest King, yes, but Queen Elizabeth II surpasses him in both length of reign, and (I think?) age of death.

Someone with more specific knowledge and better editing credentials than me should take a look. Ffynnonwiz (talk) 09:18, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

The article says that already: "At the time of his death, he was the longest-lived and longest-reigning British monarch, having reigned for 59 years and 96 days; he remains the longest-lived and longest-reigning male monarch in British history."; "both his life and his reign were longer than those of any of his predecessors and subsequent kings; only queens Victoria and Elizabeth II lived and reigned longer." DrKay (talk) 09:58, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

If you're going to make claims like that, you need to qualify them properly.

Perhahaps with something like "although Queen Elizabeth II both reigned and lived longer" Ffynnonwiz (talk) 13:01, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

I literally wrote "Elizabeth II lived and reigned longer" above, which is directly copied from the article. It is qualified properly, as I very clearly and explicitly showed: "At the time of his death ... male monarch ... than his predecessors and subsequent kings ... queens Victoria and Elizabeth II lived and reigned longer". DrKay (talk) 13:22, 2 May 2026 (UTC)