3274: Arthurian Connector

Arthurian Connector

|< < Prev #3274 (July 20, 2026)

Title text: Most coffee shops have a descendant of Sophia of Hanover on staff for this, but just as I was about to ask for help, a previously unknown heir of Uther Pendragon who was ordering a muffin tripped on my laptop cord.

|< < Prev Random Explanation

Explanation

This is one of 40 incomplete explanations: This page was created by a watery bint. Don't remove this notice too soon. If you can fix this issue, edit the page!

The comic references the fables of King Arthur. In Arthurian legend, whoever can remove The Sword in the Stone is the lawful king of Britain. Arthur is an orphan being raised in secret, and is even unaware of his own status; he notices the sword, removes it, and is proclaimed king. The sword is sometimes identified as Excalibur, although in other versions Excalibur was acquired by King Arthur from the Lady of the Lake. The most familiar version of this story is The Sword in the Stone by T. H. White which is based on Le Morte d'Arthur by Sir Thomas Malory. The animated musical film by Walt Disney is a well-known version of this fairytale based on White's book. While Arthur was the true King of Britain, this throne is now subsumed into the crown of the United Kingdom.

This comic ran the day that Andy Burnham became the new Prime Minister of Great Britain.

This is the next installment in the series of Cursed Connectors and presents Cursed Connectors #158: The Arthurian, with one side having a sword, presumably Excalibur, and the other side with an anvil (being the main alternative to a stone, as the object into which the famed sword is embedded, in some common variations of the story). Randall says this connector can only be unplugged by a "rightful heir to the British throne", which would make this very difficult to unplug. There are only about 5,000 documented individuals who are somewhere in the line of royal succession, worldwide. And it is even more problematical if it is only the current first-heir-in-line (or even the current extant true monarch) that can accomplish this task, only allowing a further successor to take on the task after more deaths (or births, or perhaps even meaningful DNA tests) significantly alter the 'top end' of the list.

Since the Act of Settlement 1701, only descendants of Sophia of Hanover, granddaughter of James VI, can inherit the British throne. In the title text, Randall claims that coffee shops have "a descendant of Sophia of Hanover" to help unplug the connector (as they would be a rightful heir to the British throne). This would be impossible, though, as there are hundreds of thousands of coffee shops in the world and, as noted, only about 5,000 descendants of Sophia of Hanover. But this was "unneeded", as someone descended from Uther Pendragon (the father of Arthur), an even rarer occurrence, tripped and helped him unplug the connector.

In the original fable, the true succession was technically unknown at the time of the challenge, and certainly was not governed by the Act Of Settlement (that would not exist for several more centuries), with a combination of the politics of the time and 'might makes right' being a more typical precursor for any such assumption of power. This demonstration that the previously largely unknown/unknowing Arthur was the true king was therefore largely dependant upon everyone accepting, in the first place, the authority of the scenario that set up the performative nature of there being a sword to free from the stone/anvil. This then has the effect of persuading enough of the people, including those who might previously have entirely conflicting ideas as to who is worthy, of the 'fact' of Arthur's kingship. The situation with this connector, however, vests the authority in people who are already marked as worthy (in some manner, with respect to established legislation and/or lore), giving them something that they can do because they are already an official successor.

Furthermore, only Arthur was capable of the original sword-extraction, not even any others who (at least in the total absence of Arthur) might normally have been able to lay claim to the kingdom. Whereas it is explicitly the case that this connector may be disconnectable by many possible candidates, and even across multiple possible historic justifications/precedences.

The Sword in the Stone has also been referenced in 1521: Sword in the Stone, 2164: Glacier, and 2578: Sword Pull.

Apparently, there is no mystical restriction upon connecting the connector in the first place, perhaps due to the anvil/'stone' coming with a prepared hole ready to receive the sword. Although most versions of the legend involve some significant magical or physical power to have embedded the sword into its resting place in the first instance, which has been noted by others.

Transcript

This is one of 29 incomplete transcripts: Don't remove this notice too soon. If you can fix this issue, edit the page!

[A single-panel comic showing a strange-looking cable connector.]

[Header text]:

Cursed Connectors #158:

The Arthurian

[Below the header, a cable plug shaped like a sword in a scabbard/hilt design is shown above a socket shaped like an anvil mounted on a block.]

[Footer text:]

(Can only be unplugged by a rightful heir to the British throne)

  Add comment        Create topic (use sparingly)       Refresh 

Discussion

Coincidentally, today's SMBC Comics also has a connection to Excalibur. I think Zach did a better job than Randall. Barmar (talk) 20:11, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

I let the basic introductory "Sword In The Stone" stuff stand (already complicated enough with the mythical confusion over swords-in-objects vs. "Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords", as the primary basis for a system of government), although clearly this comic (probably via Disney's simplified take, that might have helped that gain more traction in 'popular folklore') seems more inspired by the equally legendary "Sword In An Anvil (Stood Upon A Stone)" variation of the legend. So I added something about that being a common variation of the Stone version. Also added a link to a Pratchett quote about how the ability to embed the sword-in-the-<whatever> is perhaps yet more impressive, and indeed is a subtle blink-and-you-miss-it plot point later in the very same book.

Plus, as an additional Pratchett-themed note, though not really qualified enough to be worthy of being embedded in the Explanation (irrevocably or not!), he also wrote a short story "Once And Future" in which 'Mervin' the time-traveller finds himself fulfilling the role of Merlin in attempting (with an interesting twist, and not only in how he does this) to identify a suitable 'Arthur'. I don't know if there's an online-readable version of this, but a visit to a book shop might find you lucky, if you're that bothered. 92.23.5.92 21:24, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

Estimating the number of coffee shops in the world seems like a classic Randall whatif problem, though judging by this page, it also seems clear that it would quickly devolve into typical pedantic disputation, since that page includes Dunkin' Donuts, very clearly a donut shop that happens to serve coffee, which is totally different from a coffee shop that, as many do, happens to serve donuts. 24.53.143.204 22:05, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

The problem is that it's a very dynamic situation. 92.23.5.92 22:09, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

I wonder if a Jacobite descendant would be able to get the job done. If nothing else, it would go a ways towards easing the coffee shop situation. 71.120.6.104 22:52, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

The sword in the stone being referenced in 2164 is a stretch I think. 110.145.224.178 00:19, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

It's literally in the alt text. DL Draco Rex (talk) 01:13, 21 July 2026 (UTC)
        Add comment