Posted by andy clayton on June 04, 2002 at 20:19:27 from 195.93.50.164 user cousin_jack.
In Reply to: Re: map of the Lake posted by Dan Lind on June 02, 2002 at 03:09:30:
A nice try at calculating size of lake by multiplying up Swallowdale. but technicaly you're on dodgy ground, as you say the lake 'appears' to be 34 times bigger than the valley, so any error in your original assessment is also multiplied by a factor of 34! I think AR adopts the medieval trick of making the focal features somewhat larger against their surroundings to a) emphasise their importance and b)enable details to become apparant. If the dale were depicted to scale it would only show as a smudge. As AR based the tales on his experiance of Coniston & Windamere, those are the most likely sizes to use in plotting his fictional lake. Interesting to note that the maps of his other books, the broads, the secret water, (and trips to the carribean and flushing) are all remarkably accurate. I wonder what he took as a base(?) If he borrowed them from the Ordnance Survey (my employer!) there is certainly no copyright note!!! The other maps of interest are the Great Northern map and the Missee Lee map, both of which he claims to have tampered with so the true location could not be identfied! I do wonder if they are real places somewhere...