Again, processes of interaction between physical forms, intersubjective and subjective realities are thrown into relief. These emerge from the questions inspired by Maltwood’s interpretations of landscape and the process through which she arrives at these interpretations. She describes herself as tracing the route of King Arthur’s knights in their quest fro the Grail as they traverse the Glastonbury countryside. She then observed that these routes, when correlated on a map, delineate, through the configurations of landscape, the signs of the Zodiac.

Interestingly, in relation to questions of imaginative perception and interpretation, some of the Zodiacal signs to which she attributes the landscape formations do not correspond to the conventional Zodiacal images but to images which may be related, through association, with the signs to which they are depicted as related in Maltwood’s pictographic scheme. She has developed different conceptions of the origin and significance of these images. She first described them as Later she .

The questions raised by these conceptions are highlighted by the fact that other Zodiacs have been “discovered” in other parts of England, through processes different from those that that led to Maltwood’s serendipitous discovery. That implies, therefore, that the tracing of the routes of the Arthurian knights that led to Maltwood’s discovery represents only one approach through which this “discovery” could have emerged.(SEE MANDALA AND LANDSCAPE-SOAS LIB.)