the plot would make sense because the centuries are similar.
In Yolen's spellbinding twist on the Round Table legend, Morgause feels that her 17-year-old son Gawaine belongs on the throne of England. As she attempts to install him there, she tangles with both the court wizard and Gawaine himself. The author makes Gawaine the emotional lynchpin of the story; he mistrusts his mother and is wholly devoted to the only slightly older King Arthur. Portrayed here as the North Witch, Morgause detests Arthur (her half-brother, according to Arthurian lore), who she feels has usurped the throne. Morgause sends three of Gawaine's brothers back with him to Arthur's court under a diplomatic pretext, and Merlinnus, learning that one of Morgause's sons intends to assassinate Arthur, manufactures the tale of a sword lodged in a block of stone (which, of course, will prove Arthur's fated place upon the throne to a kingdom that has yet to fully embrace him). Yolen constructs a fascinating history linking Morgause to Merlinnus, and breathes fresh life into well-established characters; their encounters crackle with the vitality of overheard conversations. The dynamic between Merlinnus and Arthur is especially well realized: the former a shrewd, resourceful, fatherly man battling the discomforts of age, the latter a restless young king who merely tolerates the mundane responsibilities of monarchy ("Arthur had never met a chair he liked. Or a sport he disliked"). Yolen has explored Arthurian legend before, but her latest foray is a standout in this enormous canon. Ages 12-up. (May)
<span>
</span>
Answer:
Ferdinand Magellan is best known for being an explorer for Portugal, and later Spain, who discovered the Strait of Magellan while leading the first expedition to successfully circumnavigate the globe. He died en route and Juan Sebastián del Cano completed it.
Explanation:
Answer: Bandwagon
Bandwagon fallacy assumes that the opinion of the majority is always right. It is also called an <em>appeal to popularity</em>, or <em>argumentum ad populum</em>. The problem with this line of thinking is that this type of argument only proves that a position is "popular," but it says nothing about whether it is "true." In this case, the argument offered for eating Lunch Nibbles is simply that everyone is doing it, instead of discussing the actual benefits of Lunch Nibbles.
