[jason taylor]

Arthur:

Despite ruling over a larger realm than any pre-starflight empire the Prince of the Caledonians is not called a king. As Caledonian historians of constitutional theory know there was an argument that the title King would be a claim to all realms once held or claimed by a British King (including France and India) and so the title prince was chosen. However the reason according to Caledonian legend the rightful High King of All Britons and by extension all Caledonians is Arthur The Once and Future King, who still awaits his return. According to legend the illegitimate son, or nephew or daughter (depending on the story) of Arthur deposited the regalia of Camelot at Avalon which is now known as the Isle of Iona. Most of this was lost but according to tales the Stone of Scone was the very one from which Excalibur was taken. This by the way provided a minor diplomatic kerfuffle between the Prince and the Pariochial King of Britain on Terra over the rightful possession.

Because this the title "King" is a title held in high esteem. No mere man will hold it (though lower case "king" is allowed for a chief as he is "head of kin": it is often considered uncommonly pretentious though). The monarch of the Principality of Caledonia reigns under the title "Prince". Similarly there is no "MacArthur" Clan in the Registry of Nobles and Gentry and never has been for many a generation, even though the Prince might logically claim that surname if the legend is followed through (in fact the MacArthur dynasty did just that in the past). The present Monarchs rule as MacEdward in memory of the victor in the last succession crises. Implications of a claim to Arthur's throne are not illegal. They are just regarded as to hubristic for a gentleman.

Arthurian legend is encouraged and several versions of the epic are played in poetry, song and opera. It is of course regularly performed by the Shanachie Academy. The whole idea is an appeal to Caledonian tradition which takes an aesthetic delight in heroic lineage and does not care much if some of it is fictional as long as the proper distinction between history and legend is maintained. When cynics point out that this is a propaganda gambit Caledonians shrug their shoulders because they know perfectly well that it is. A living head of state only serves his purpose incompletely because his flaws are obvious. A legendary one is simply an extension of the custom of making clan founders out of legendary heroes some of which have nothing to do with the clan who took their name. In fact there was competition to be granted such titles as Chief MacBruce. But no one bears the name MacArthur, even the Prince.

It must be acknowledged for historical accuracy that Arthurian enthusiasm has not been around for all of the history of the Principality to such a degree. However it has long been part and parcel of the fondness for ancient British folklore.