King Charles III is diagnosed with cancer

Serryah

Executive Branch Member
Dec 3, 2008
9,127
2,123
113
New Brunswick
Damn, in training for 70 years and on the job for…not long it seems. Hope he comes out the other side well & healthy.

Probably a cancer that started in the prostate and may still be that, or it's metastasized from somewhere else. If the former, it's not so bad depending on how early stage it is. If the later... prognosis would not be good.

Cancer sucks regardless of who you are; I hope it's something easily dealt with.
 

Blackleaf

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 9, 2004
48,572
1,686
113
I'm thinking that it doesn't seem too serious. If it was serious we probably would have been told. If the doctors told him he had just months to live we probably would have been told. But then again who knows? Maybe we aren't yet being told the full story.
 

Blackleaf

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 9, 2004
48,572
1,686
113
Probably a cancer that started in the prostate and may still be that, or it's metastasized from somewhere else. If the former, it's not so bad depending on how early stage it is. If the later... prognosis would not be good.

Cancer sucks regardless of who you are; I hope it's something easily dealt with.

A doctor interviewed on Sky News says that when a man undergoes prostate surgery, like the King, pieces of the prostate are sent to a lab and studied and if the man has cancer they're able to detect it by looking at the samples of prostate. I'm not a doctor so I don't know if they detect pancreatic cancer or can detect cancer anywhere in the body from that.
 

Blackleaf

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 9, 2004
48,572
1,686
113
Or whatever name he chooses upon coronation, typically one of his four personal names (William Arthur Philip Louis).

Yeah. He'll be either King William V, King Arthur (which would be quite cool), King Philip or King Louis.

If it's any of the latter three he won't have the "I" put after his regnal name until when, or if, there's a second king that uses any of those names.
 

Blackleaf

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 9, 2004
48,572
1,686
113
Biden "expresses concern" for King Charles III.

Trump says "We all pray the King has a fast and full recovery."


Prince Harry arrives at Clarence House in London to visit his father.

The Sussexes may have to cancel their planned visit to Canada.

 
Last edited:

Blackleaf

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 9, 2004
48,572
1,686
113
Correction: I meant to say prostate cancer, not pancreatic cancer.
 

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
56,199
7,402
113
Washington DC
Yeah. He'll be either King William V, King Arthur (which would be quite cool), King Philip or King Louis.

If it's any of the latter three he won't have the "I" put after his regnal name until when, or if, there's a second king that uses any of those names.
He'd be Arthur II.

Joking. I know Arthur, did he exist, was before the line of English royalty.
 

Blackleaf

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 9, 2004
48,572
1,686
113
He'd be Arthur II.

Joking. I know Arthur, did he exist, was before the line of English royalty.

The numbers of British monarchs only go back to the reign of William I - or William the Conqueror as he is commonly known. He was the ruler of Normandy and he invaded England in 1066 after his cousin Edward the Confessor, King of England, died and passed the Throne to his brother-in-law, who became Harold II. William invaded England, killed King Harold II at Hastings, and became King William I. So whatever number a British monarch has only dates from William I.

Scotland had no Queen Elizabeths before Elizabeth II. But just after she became Queen it became law that if a new monarch took a name that either nation has had more monarchs by that name than the other one, then the higher number will stand - so when Elizabeth became Queen she was Queen Elizabeth II, as Scotland never previously had a Queen Elizabeth. England has had two King James but Scotland has had six, so a future King James would be King James VII.

If King Arthur existed, then he existed before William the Conqueror. Plus he wasn't king of all England. The Anglo-Saxon kingdoms unified to form England in 927 under King Aethelstan - the first King of All England.

Therefore, if William decided to use Arthur he'd be King Arthur.

Likewise, even though England has had a King Harold I and a King Harold II, a future King Harold would be just King Harold, because the previous two were before King William I.

King Charles I (reigned 1625-49) and King Charles II (reigned 1660-85) were both King of England and Scotland and neither had previously had a King Charles, so our current monarch is Charles III.
 
Last edited:

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
56,199
7,402
113
Washington DC
The numbers of British monarchs only go back to the reign of William I - or William the Conqueror as he is commonly known. He was the ruler of Normandy and he invaded England in 1066 after his cousin Edward the Confessor, King of England, died and passed the Throne to his brother-in-law, who became Harold II. William invaded England, killed King Harold II at Hastings, and became King William I. So whatever number a British monarch has only dates from William I.

Scotland had no Queen Elizabeths before Elizabeth II. But just after she became Queen it became law that if a new monarch took a name that either nation has had more monarchs by that name than the other one, then the higher number will stand - so when Elizabeth became Queen she was Queen Elizabeth II, as Scotland never previously had a Queen Elizabeth. England has had two King James but Scotland has had six, so a future King James would be King James VII.

If King Arthur existed, then he existed before William the Conqueror. Plus he wasn't king of all England. The Anglo-Saxon kingdoms unified to form England in 927 under King Aethelstan - the first King of All England.

Therefore, if William decided to use Arthur he'd be King Arthur.

Likewise, even though England has had a King Harold I and a King Harold II, a future King Harold would be just King Harold, because the previous two were before King William I.

King Charles I (reigned 1625-49) and King Charles II (reigned 1660-85) were both King of England and Scotland and neither had previously had a King Charles, so our current monarch is Charles III.
Best evidence is that Arthur was a Brittonic (what are now the Welsh) chieftain fighting the invading Anglo-Saxons in the fifth or sixth century CE. His army probably numbered less than 300, they certainly didn't wear plate armour, nor fight with couched lances (the "lance" of the day is what we'd call a spear). He almost certainly existed, but his reputation has grown far beyond the man.

Brits do love their legends. I'm told that when Britain most feared invasion in WWII, groups gathered at Arthur's alleged grave at Glastonbury to pray for the return of "Rex quondam et futuris," calls were floated to beat Drake's Drum, and the McLeod offered to wave the Fairy Flag and call up an army of fairies to defend Britain.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Blackleaf

Blackleaf

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 9, 2004
48,572
1,686
113
Best evidence is that Arthur was a Brittonic (what are now the Welsh) chieftain fighting the invading Anglo-Saxons in the fifth or sixth century CE. His army probably numbered less than 300, they certainly didn't wear plate armour, nor fight with couched lances (the "lance" of the day is what we'd call a spear). He almost certainly existed, but his reputation has grown far beyond the man.

Brits do love their legends. I'm told that when Britain most feared invasion in WWII, groups gathered at Arthur's alleged grave at Glastonbury to pray for the return of "Rex quondam et futuris," calls were floated to beat Drake's Drum, and the McLeod offered to wave the Fairy Flag and call up an army of fairies to defend Britain.

Yeah. These are all things that are supposed to happen when Britain is in danger of invasion: the return of Prince Arthur and his army, the beating of Drake's drum etc. Drake's drum has been heard to mysteriously beat when the country is in peril - is it the ghost of Queen Elizabeth I's favourite warning us that his beloved country is in danger - but King Arthur has yet to return. This is an ancient land.

The most recent report of Drake's drum beating was in 1940.
 

Blackleaf

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 9, 2004
48,572
1,686
113
During a meeting with charity workers at Salisbury Cathedral, Queen Camilla says the King is doing "extremely well"



The Heir to the Throne Prince William, 41, thanks the British public for their well-wishes for his father and his wife Catherine, the Princess of Wales, who has also been in hospital, during a gala dinner for the London Air Ambulance...


During the dinner, the Prince of Wales met American actor Tom Cruise and joked with him: "Don't steal our helicopters!" Cruise was there to support the London Air Ambulance.

In more serious matters, the prince also reiterated the need for more helicopters for the service

 
Last edited:

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
56,199
7,402
113
Washington DC
Yeah. These are all things that are supposed to happen when Britain is in danger of invasion: the return of Prince Arthur and his army, the beating of Drake's drum etc. Drake's drum has been heard to mysteriously beat when the country is in peril - is it the ghost of Queen Elizabeth I's favourite warning us that his beloved country is in danger - but King Arthur has yet to return. This is an ancient land.

The most recent report of Drake's drum beating was in 1940.
The version I've heard is that beating Drake's drum will cause his fleet to rise from the bottom to defend England. We won't comment on how well a 16th-century sailing vessel would fare against even the lightest of 21st-century warships.

I like the legends, though.