Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú

Notes and Queries  permalink

This land

• Message 1. 

  Posted by Dinah Shore (U14984316) on Wednesday, 11th April 2012

  "between the village shop and the river."
  
  The David and Charles Ambridge map (1986) does not show the shop.
  
  The Archers Map of Ambridge (Old House Books, 1994) show the village shop at the top of the village green, with lots of houses between it and the river.
  
  As does the map on the front of The Book of the Archers (Michael Joseph, 1994)
  
  The Magnetic North map (1999) has moved the shop to the other side of the village green, and at the bottom end of the green. There is a small field between it and the river.
  
  BUT the Ambridge Panorama, which has a timeline up to July 2000 , has 4 houses built on this space!
  
  So.
  
  No land for the Fields in Trust,

  Link to this forum: This land

  Report message1

• Message 2

  , in reply to message 1.

  Posted by Elnora Cornstalk (U5646495) on Wednesday, 11th April 2012

  What's the land opposite 'Glebelands' on the current Village Map, Dinah? Could this be what they meant? If not, those four houses look substantial!

  Link to this forum: This land

  Report message2

• Message 3

  , in reply to message 2.

  Posted by Tayler Cresswell - Host (U14232848) on Thursday, 12th April 2012

  Hi both
  
  The land in question is shown on the website map between the shop and the Am
  
  Dinah, I can see what you mean about the cover of the Book of the Archers, but there is a patch of land between the Am and the houses there. It's not so clear in The Archers Encyclopaedia (which may be the same as your Archers Panorama map?) which does show houses that look to back on to the Am.
  
  Tayler
  

  Link to this forum: This land

• Message 4

  , in reply to message 3.

  Posted by Dinah Shore (U14984316) on Thursday, 12th April 2012

  But the /later/ map, the Ambridge Panorama, shows the 4 houses have gardens down to the river.
  
  As does the map/panorama frontispiece of The Archers Encyclopaedia, published a year later, 2001.
  
  How can these have been knocked down? And yet have children playing all over them?
  
  
  
  And the moving village shop needs some explanation, as well.
  
  
  The disney map on here is just awful.

  Link to this forum: This land

  Report message4

• Message 5

  , in reply to message 4.

  Posted by Chris Ghoti (U10794176) on Thursday, 12th April 2012

  The map in the front of The Book of the Archers (1994) has north to the right of the page rather than to the top, I think. As far as I can make out, when it is marked at all the village shop is the first building to the left of the green as you approach it from St Stephen's church in each map, and hasn't moved relative to the church.
  
  There is no doubt that the most recent map (apart from the mess on this website), the one in the front of The Archers Encyclopaedia 2001, does show a row of four houses, plus two houses beyond them, on the land between the village shop and the river Am.
  
  I would have thought that the Archivist, whose job it surely ought to be to point out stories which would be inconsistent with previously-published work, ought to have been given a copy of this most recent published map -- I do not regard the thing on this site as being in any way reliable, and she ought to be encouraged not to rely on it.
  

  Link to this forum: This land

  Report message5

• Message 6

  , in reply to message 5.

  Posted by rick_yard_withdrawn (U14573092) on Saturday, 14th April 2012

  The shop must be on wheels, the same as the Cat & Fiddle.....

  Link to this forum: This land

  Report message6

• Message 7

  , in reply to message 3.

  Posted by Organoleptic Icon (U11219171) on Saturday, 14th April 2012

  Tayler surely people are fundamentally mistaken to think that Borsetshire/Ambridge has the same geographic properties as the rest of the Midlands - like persistence of location and spacing.
  
  As it exists in the interstices of Warwickshire and Herefordshire it inevitably has a fluid geography, in which locations can move, and spaces open up between formerly contiguous locations.
  
  This is why I never look at maps; preferring my mental image of the geography as well as of thew faces of actpersons engages.

  Link to this forum: This land

  Report message7

• Message 8

  , in reply to message 5.

  Posted by Mieteka (U14938651) on Saturday, 14th April 2012

  You had to mention the archivist, didn't you Chris?
  
  I am now waiting for Samantha to have one of her legendary encounters with him. Sigh. How I miss Humph.

  Link to this forum: This land

  Report message8

• Message 9

  , in reply to message 8.

  Posted by Chris Ghoti (U10794176) on Saturday, 14th April 2012

  The archivist was a female called Camilla, last I heard.
  
  She was called a continuity-girl at one point by someone, but I got stick when I repeated that.
  
  (Query: is anyone ever called a continuity-woman? Or a continuity-boy or -man? Strange, really.)

  Link to this forum: This land

  Report message9

• Message 10

  , in reply to message 9.

  Posted by Organoleptic Icon (U11219171) on Saturday, 14th April 2012

  She was called a continuity-girl at one point by someone, but I got stick when I repeated that.
  
  (Query: is anyone ever called a continuity-woman? Or a continuity-boy or -man? Strange, really.) 
  
  Good point. No-one objects to "Best boy" - who might be 60 or more.
  
  There is a tendency in the femi world to seek out things to be offended by.

  Link to this forum: This land

  Report message10

Back to top