It’s not because my little Merlin fangirl heart is hurting. It’s not because there are already a million King Arthur shows and movies in development, either. It’s geography.

Last week, we reported that Fox is planning a retelling of the Arthurian Legends (and hey, who isn’t these days?!): A procedural cop drama titled Camelot, set in New York City.

Here’s the pitch for the new series: “When an ancient magic reawakens in modern-day Manhattan, a graffiti artist named Art must team with his best friend Lance and his ex, Gwen — an idealistic cop — in order to realize his destiny and fight back against the evil forces that threaten the city.”

Aside from the fact that this sounds, almost verbatim, like a Merthur AU fanfic I once read, I have a big damn problem with the setting of this story. (And it’s not just that I would a million times rather see an actual Merlin reincarnation special.)

Because one thing is appropriating iconic British literature heroes like Sherlock Holmes and Peter Pan and moving them across the pond. Another is flat-out stealing one of the country’s most iconic foundational myths and setting it in — of all places — New York City.

King Arthur, of course, was not a real person. But, arguably, he is as important a figure to British history and cultural identity as Henry VIII, Elizabeth I or Winston Churchill — none of whom you would ever change the nationality of when retelling their stories! (By the same token, I’m sure Americans would be appalled if an ostensibly non-parodic film or TV show casually changed the nationality of Abraham Lincoln, Ernest Hemingway or Walt Disney.)

Related: First King Arthur: Legend of the Sword trailer revealed at Comic-Con

The legend of Arthur as we know it today is a construct of various folklore heroes (some of them likely real) including a 2nd century Roman military commander named Lucius Artorius Castus and a 5th century war leader. His story is tied to various real locations, including Tintagel Castle, Mount Etna, Glastonbury Abbey, the Glastonbury Tor, Newport, St David’s, and many others.

The fluidity of the legends have allowed for many different fictional adaptations over the years. Different movies and TV shows have all put their own unique, even modern twists on the tale (like making Merlin a teenager and suchlike). But always has his story been set in Britain, because without Britain, there is no King Arthur.

Common to the tales or Arthur that make up his legend is the construction of Arthur as a rallying point for British pride and strength — while simultaneously serving as a symbol of age-old feuds within the United Kingdom; Cornwall, Wales and Scotland all claim ownership of the figure, with the strongest evidence of a ‘real’ Arthur found in Wales and Brittany (which is now a part of France).

With the Arthurian Legends serving both as a symbol of Britain’s unity and internal conflict, with certain regions actively constructing their identity around him, it is both insulting and ignorant for an American procedural to haul it all across the pond in such flippant fashion, essentially insinuating that the English settlers brought the very spirit of Britain with them, to one day rise and save their country instead of the motherland.

In the Camelot procedural, it seems like born-again Arthur has retained his title as the Once and Future King, who is said to return when Britain (!) needs him most. And no, he didn’t show up for Brexit, but that doesn’t actually give America carte blanche to steal him away and entwine the so fundamentally British legend with the American continent’s own millennia of troublesome history.

After all, doesn’t America have her own stories to tell? Does a drama series really need to steal a British myth and make it their own, to have Arthur King of Britain rise in America to deal with whatever magic has awoken there?

And the fact that this is basically a glorified AU fanfic brought to life just adds insult to injury. It doesn’t mean I won’t watch it, but it is always frustrating to see a part of another country’s history butchered for easy entertainment.

We borrow and steal from each other’s mythologies all the time and always have, that’s just the reality of our global melting pot. But there have to be limits, and for me — for whatever reason — this is it.

Arthur and Britain are one; he exists as a symbol of the country, and the country has built up an identity and culture around the legend of him. You can’t simply rip up the character of Arthur by the roots, ignoring his fundamental ties to British culture and identity, in order to have him serve another nation’s story.