Stillson or Cow

Mahk,

Look in illustration 56 from Verrill's book. Isn't the upper/right knot what we call a 'girth hitch' ? The lower/left hitch is what??? How do they get a 'Lark's hitch' out of that? If I understand correctly, a LH is one with a toggle installed, right ?

Look at #47. See anything that looks familiar? See the crossed round turns to the right of the bar?
 
[ QUOTE ]
Look in illustration 56 from Verrill's book. Isn't the upper/right knot what we call a 'girth hitch' ? The lower/left hitch is what??? How do they get a 'Lark's hitch' out of that? If I understand correctly, a LH is one with a toggle installed, right ?

[/ QUOTE ]

Tom;

Here is the link again to Verrill (provided by Spydey) so that people don’t have to look for it :


1917 book "Knots, Splices, and Rope Work" by A. Hyatt Verrill



The upper/right knot is what we would call a girth hitch. The lower/left is a Double Strap Hitch (Ashley #1695), also described as a double ring hitch, a Ring Hitch that has been doubled (Ashley #60 and #1862).

I think you’re correct, a Lark’s Head (not Hitch) should have a toggle. Verrill does show this in illustrations 30 and 31. Oddly he later shows the knots that you mentioned (both in illustration 56) and also calls them ‘Lark’s Heads’. This is one of the discrepancies that I referred to in one of my earlier posts. It seems that Verrill followed the author of ‘ The Book of Knots ’ (which was published under the pseudonym Tom Bowling) which applied literal translations of common French names to knots that already had longstanding English names. Ashley says “Being the first book in the field, it was given a prominence far beyond its merit, which was slight… Much of the confusion that now exists in the terminology of knots may be traced to this one ‘source’.” Rusch-Fischer says “It was the first book published in English on the subject and it [is] the source of most of the confusion about knots down to this day.”


Note that Verrill’s illustration #55 shows a Clove Hitch, but it is called a ‘Waterman’s Knot’. This is one of the errors that Ashley says also appeared in ‘Bowling’s’ book.

Also see Verrill’s illustration #58. It shows a Bowline, formed correctly, but a mirror image of how many people would actually tie the Bowline. Illustrations #59a-d show how to tie the Bowline, but the completed knot is the mirror image of #58. That is, #58 shows one view, then #59 shows the mirror view. This would be very confusing for someone who is actually trying to learn how to tie the Bowline by following the text. Ashley remarks that this mirroring of images also occurs in ‘Bowling’ and is probably “…owing to the engraver’s process.” (p. 11).



[ QUOTE ]
Look at #47. See anything that looks familiar? See the crossed round turns to the right of the bar?

[/ QUOTE ]


In #47 the ‘crossed round turns’ to the right of the bar are reminiscent of a French Prusik—it certainly isn’t “…a number of half-hitches taken at intervals around the object…” which he states in the text, and shows correctly in #46.

Ashley does have some inconsistencies, but he still seems to be the best reference.
 
Mahk,

Thanks for the Verrill link. In Figures 34 and 35, he reverses the directions of his half hitches. I learned to tie 2 half-hitches in the same direction. So aren't they really girth hitches too, one around an object, one around the standing part?
 
The name "Lark's Head" is a literal translation of the French name "tete d' alouette". This name goes back to The Book of Knots by Tom Bowling in 1870. This was a translation of a French work. Ashley decried the use of translated French names for knots that had English names for centuries.

Ashley uses the names Ring Hitch and Bale Sling Hitch, depending on the shape of the object the hitch is tied around! Geoffrey Budworth follows Ashley's naming, even to the extent of giving separate names to the same hitch, tied in the same way, around different objects on page 105 of the Ultimate Encyclopedia of Knots!

The name Girth Hitch is an established name based on a Middle English root word.

Ashley showed the Cow Hitch loaded on one strand. That seems to be the consensus among other knot books, although some books show the Cow Hitch loaded on both ends. When I tried the Cow Hitch on a carabiner it held. When I tied it around a much larger cylinder, it almost fell off.

Many rockclimbing books and websites use the name Lark's Foot Hitch. This originates with a typographical error in the book Modern Rope Techniques by Bill March in 1973. March probably meant to say Lark's Head, but he showed the hitch used for a foot loop and wrote Lark's Foot. March's book was influential and other climbing texts copied his error.
 
Great post Bob T

But what about the Pedigree Cow Hitch? Anyone heard of this knot?
 
Verrill's #34 would be a Cow Hitch (because the load is on only one part of the line, following Ashley). Verrill's #35 is a Cow Hitch around the standing part of the line (called Reverse Hitches by Ashley #1713). If the tail of the Cow Hitch on the standing part of the line is to the inside, then the knot is a Lobster Buoy Hitch (Ashley #1714).

I also learned to tie Two Half-Hitches in the same direction, and they could keep going, three, four, five...Note that Two Half-Hitches form a Clove Hitch around the standing part of the rope (Ashley #1710). If the Clove Hitch is formed so that the tail is on the inside the knot is a Buntline (#1714).
 
A few refreances show to give the reverse that becomes a Cow and not Clove to alleviate some twisitng influences.

i was jsut backing up Tom; becuase i think that Ring Hitch for Cow is / has been used. In fact on farm and factory dock; it is what i learned as a Ring Hitch ; made to a ring or "D" ring with rope, flat webbing or leather strapping; we really didn't have closed loops except for hoisitng cables and slings that probably would not fit thru the tie down rings); unless we tied 'em; then never reeved them thru to choke. Then, Cyrus Day's book was my first real knot book; and the referance seemed consistent. i can go with Ring for Girth and not Cow.

"Lark's" is one of the most confusing terms i've found; referances can be found for Lark's, Lark's Head and Lark's Foot i believe. And each seems to have different forms. One of which is the Cow, or the siezed Cow in fig.#56. i would not call this a Girth strategy, because only 1 leg is loaded; the other is stopper/siezing? This toggles about as well as a Girth or Becket toggles; for confident hold and quick releases.

Mahk(to your last question to me); i was speaking of the other Half Hitch form that more closely resembles a Marl; in that both form overhands when slipped off the mount/spar. Both Half Hitch forms give pinch to nip, but neither as immediate or severe as a real Hitch. In this Half Hitch we serve the line around the spar and make a Hitch around Standing; as if to begin a Timber(regular, not fig. 8 path). Notice the nip is now indirect/ buffered Standing Part Force trapping Bitters. The Half Hitch with better nip; just places the nipped Bitter out 180 from pull/opposite side of spar; like where you would finish a Timber; like in the 2nd from last of my previous drawing. This is the best nip i think for Cow/Clove too, though not as neat and takes extra line. But if you need to dispose of the line, i nip a bight in this maximum(?) nip position and feel gooder about it. In fact i think of a Timber as this Better Nipped Half; with previous windings/ like a loose splice(the wraps giving extra security by lesseing pull on Bitters and making up for less than convex positions of contact, some vibration prooofing). The Better Nipped Half is shown in the ABoK bible as #1663 on spar and again in #1877 on hook. The pull side seems to pull away from mount where we usually nip/sieze, this opposite/ better nip side seems to seat in (and looking at a spar like a square model; the sides jsut pinch in, but are not inline with the initiating pull). In my above drawing i added more specific positions to that examination and not jsut approximately 6o'clock from pull(Standing Pull as 12o'clock) but rather 5 or 7o'clock depending on/ specialized to the flow direction of the force around the mount/spar as conducted by the rope device. My models of mechanical force usually take such an electrical or water through conducting/directing device imagery. i really think forces are forces, and this is the way to view them for most clarity.

I've seen the reverse Bowline before here and figured it could be because of the times, 3 strand rope; and the lay of the 3 strand. If left hand laid; i think this would be the proper form? Either way the Bitter tail is inside the loop; keeping with the SheetBend to self to form eye analagy; and the Standing pull taking place 1st on the Bitters, to nip the easiest/ most reduced force position 1st, with the maximum initiating Standing Part pull. In the Square Family this would be the Thief side; and incorrect because it would pit the Standings against the Bitters to destabilize; becuase there is no lock or reduction, so we jsut pit the equal and opposite pulls of the Standings against each other. But, when we make a Hitch with one of the bights to form a SheetBend, then we have a lock, then we can Pit the Standing of 1 agaisnt the Bitters of the other safely.
 
[ QUOTE ]

But what about the Pedigree Cow Hitch? Anyone heard of this knot?

[/ QUOTE ]

I found the Pedigree Cow Hitch in three of Geoffrey Budworth's books. He attributes it to Harry Asher's The Alternative Knot Book. It is a Cow Hitch with the tail tucked under the coils to secure it. It is similar to Ashley #1683, except the tuck is made with the tail going in the opposite direction. I just tried both of these. They are more secure than the plain Cow Hitch, but not what I would call even moderately secure. They are insecure when tied around large smooth cylinders.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Ever notice how the cow is tied differently in Tree Climber's Companion (pg 77) vs.Art and Science of Practical Rigging (pg. 53)? Either way looks ok but the final half hitch and the tucks are quite different.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you look, the final half hitch IS the same on each...the only difference is how they dealt with the left over tail after they tied the knot. But this is a purely aesthetic preference not really affecting how the knot performs.

Either way, in both books, the knot is shown with only one half hitch. I always put 2.

Knot names drive me nuts. There needs to be latin names for knots! Actually, the names don't drive me nuts. I like knowing all the different names. What DOES drive me nuts is when people argue over knot names. (but you guys aren't arguing in this thread....this is a good discussion). I think we all know what each of us is talking about when we use the term Cow hitch OR Stilson hitch.

love
nick
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Ever notice how the cow is tied differently in Tree Climber's Companion (pg 77) vs.Art and Science of Practical Rigging (pg. 53)? Either way looks ok but the final half hitch and the tucks are quite different.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you look, the final half hitch IS the same on each...the only difference is how they dealt with the left over tail after they tied the knot. But this is a purely aesthetic preference not really affecting how the knot performs.

[/ QUOTE ]


I don't think so Nick. Look again. Here is my response, copied from an earlier post.


[ QUOTE ]
The form shown in ASPR is called a Cow Hitch with a Better Half. ‘Better’ because it is considered more secure. The difference between the two is that in the TCC version the tail forms the half hitch by going in the same direction that it did when it came through the bight. In the ASPR version the tail forms the half hitch by going in the opposite direction that it did when it came through the bight. That is, in the TCC version the tail goes through the bight from left to right and then forms the half hitch by going from left to right. In the ASPR version the tail goes through the bight from left to right and then forms the half hitch by going from right to left. The ASPR version (the ‘Better Half’) is considered more secure because when the block is loaded the tail of the half hitch (which is the tail of the whole knot) is loaded against the bight thus securing the whole knot.

[/ QUOTE ]


[ QUOTE ]
Either way, in both books, the knot is shown with only one half hitch. I always put 2.

love
nick

[/ QUOTE ]


Can't hurt.
 
i kinda like 2 - 1/2 hitches also; my base security model being a Round Turn + 2 Half Hitches.

But, in Cow + Half Hitch; we do have a Muenter around tree/ mount + extra friction + reeved back through bight of Muenter + the single Half Hitch in the books. Sio, even here we are already past the Round Turn + 2 Half Hitches i think.

Similarily; an Anchor Hitch + 1 Half Hitch is really a Round Turn + 1 Half Hitch around the Round Turn (=Anchor) + The single, final Half Hitch ususally pictured. So, once again fits or exceeds the Round Turn + 2 Half Hitches model/ thumb rule. A Halyard; is a Double Round Turn (3 instead of 2 turns) Anchor, then bend tail back over last Turn and under the first 2 that have most force in them. Pretty secure, but finish with stopper if upset or loaded/unloaded a lot. i still like 2 dead stops in system; but try to count them fairly.

"You are going to war; all ways have a backup,
2 is 1, and 1 is none" DI in GI Jane.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom