There are two separate points here I think. The first is simple, although there are plenty of exceptions, travel stories written in the first person – fiction or non-fiction – tend to have a greater level of natural detail observation. The second is something of a banana-skin for writers of fiction, dishonest writers of non-fiction and many in the creative arts.

Those of us who spend our waking hours trying to understand the natural world can spot the difference between a fake and the genuine article quite easily and take some relish in doing it. I do not think that it is a coincidence that some of the great works of fiction contain evidence of an accurate understanding of natural phenomena. Moby Dick is one good example.

In my book I am covering another example, concerning the moon, that would probably escape the casual reader of Treasure Island. Lazy (or tired?!)artists and writers can be tempted to abuse the fictional licence however. I read a children’s story last night that contained a picture of a moon that could not have been seen by the characters in the story. Although the suspension of disbelief was tested for me a little, no, I did not ruin the story for my kids over this point and in many ways it does not matter. I do suspect however that that particular story will go out of print before Treasure Island does.

‘In Orion these [stars] are Rigel, Betelgeuse and Bellatrix; in Canis Major there is Sirius – and even Canis Minor, which essentially consists of only two stars, has the very bright Procyon. These are familiar names, but not perhaps for astronomical reasons. Bellatrix and Sirius are probably better known now as characters in J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter books, while Betelgeuse was the title of a Tim Burton film, albeit with a different spelling [Beetlejuice].