When one is growing up, one often hears different stories, legends, myths, ect. One of these such stories if the one of King Arthur. We have all heard many versions of the story, but the one that most know is that of Disney's The Sword and the Stone. As we watch the movie we begin to wonder if this really happened. Was there really a King Arthur? Was Excalibur a magical sword that Arthur pulled from the stone? Was there really a Merlin? Of course, there are many more questions that one might ask, but these three are the ones we will try to answer.
             First we must decide if Arthur ever really existed. One source says that Arthur was a war hero and whose praises were sung in poems by the Celts. Arthur was born in the mist of battle and he was mortally wounded in battle. This is similar to the Arthurian Legend, which states that Arthur was victorious in battle, and was mortally wounded in a battle. The legend also states that Arthur was the ruler of Camelot, and he was a wise and powerful king. On the other hand, we have Arthur as king of different lands depending on the origin of the story. But most all of them agree that Arthur did have a magical sword, and some say that there was no sword in the stone.
             That brings us into out next topic; did Excalibur ever really exist? The legend says that Arthur pulled a sword, Excalibur, out of a stone, which determined that he was the rightful heir to the throne. However, this action is said not to be found in historical texts. But many sources have come to give an explanation as to why this is so. One possibility is that the Latin word saxo means stone, and the Germanic invaders who took over the country is Saxon. Since Arthur was a great military leader, it is said that he defeated the Saxon leader and by taking his sword is a sign of power. So, in the copying of the text, the copier could have forgotten to add the "n" to Saxon and thus translated is as &qu
             ...