> Did you know the "sword in the stone" theory? The one that effectively
> boils down to "it was a typo"?
>
> I don't remember dates, but wat you have is an early manuscript being
> copied a few centuries later. The early script had an abbreviation
> (parchment being expensive) that if you had an "ono" you represented it
> by using a single "o" with a dot over it. Later copyist either didn't
> know this, or missed the dot. He wrote that Arthur took the sword "ex
> saxo" - from the stone. Original had him taking it "ex saxono" - from
> the Saxon.
I hadn't heard that one - where did you hear of it?
RR
It is by my order and for the good of the state that the bearer of this has
done what he has done.
- Richelieu