Read The Great Arc for Free Online Page A

triangulation. But here arose another and still greater problem. The earth, although round, had been found to be not perfectly round. Astronomers and surveyors in the seventeenth century had reluctantly come to accept that it was not a true spherebut an ellipsoid or spheroid, a ‘sort-of sphere’. Exactly what sort of sphere, what shape of spheroid, was long a matter of dispute. Was it flatter at the sides, like an upright egg, or at the top, like a grapefruit? And how much flatter?
    Happily, by Lambton’s day the question of the egg versus the grapefruit had been resolved. In the 1730s two expeditions had been sent out from France, one to the equator in what is now Ecuador and the other to the Arctic Circle in Lapland. Each was to obtain the length of a degree of latitude by triangulating north and south from a carefully measured base-line so as to cover a short arc of about two hundred miles. Then, by plotting the exact positions of the arc’s extremities by astronomical observations, it should be possible to obtain a value for one degree of latitude. Not without difficulty and delay – the equatorial expedition was gone for over nine years – this was done and the results compared. The length of a degree in Ecuador turned out to be over a kilometre shorter than that in Lapland, in fact just under 110 kilometres compared with just over 111. The parallels of latitude were thus closer together round the middle of the earth and further apart at its poles. The earth’s surface must therefore be more curved at the equator and must be flatter at the poles. The grapefruit had won. The earth was shown to be what is called an ‘oblate’ spheroid.
    There remained the question of just how much flatter the poles were, or of how oblate the spheroid was; and of whether this distortion was of a regular or consistent form. This was the challenge embraced by the French savants and by William Roy in the late eighteenth century. Instruments were becoming much more sophisticated and expectations of accuracy correspondingly higher. The pioneering series of triangles earlier measured down through France was extended south into Spain and the Balearic Islands and then north to link across the English Channel with Roy’s triangles as they were extended up the spine of Britain. The resultant arc was much the longestyet measured and, despite a number of unexplained inconsistencies, provided a dependable basis for assessing the earth’s curvature in northern latitudes, and so the spherical excess.
    Lambton was now proposing to do the same thing in tropical latitudes, roughly midway between the equator and northern Europe. But like his counterparts in Europe, he played down the element of scientific research when promoting his scheme and stressed the practical value that would arise from ‘ascertaining the correct positions of the principal geographical points [within Mysore] upon correct mathematical principles’. The precise width of the Indian peninsula would also be established, a point of some interest since it was now British, and his series of triangles might later be ‘continued to an almost unlimited extent in every other direction’. Local surveys, like Mackenzie’s, would be greatly accelerated if, instead of having to measure their own base-lines, they could simply adopt a side from one of Lambton’s triangles. And into his framework of ‘principal geographic points’ existing surveys could be slotted and their often doubtful orientation in terms of latitude and longitude corrected. Like an architect, he would in effect be creating spaces which, indisputably sound in structure, true in form and correct in position, might be filled and furnished as others saw fit.
    He could, however, scarcely forbear to mention that his programme would also fulfil another ‘desideratum’, one ‘still more sublime’ as he put it: namely to ‘determine by actual measurement the magnitude and figure of the earth’. Precise knowledge of