[ QUOTE ]
That's a good illustration.
Here is a post that I wrote for the original ISA discussion forum in January of 1999.
****
...
Arborists are Johnny-Come-Latelys to rigging and rope work. It is necessary to look back every once in a while to see what our ancestors did and take those skills forward in whole, not just by pieces. Naming knots correctly and tieing them correctly is just as important as making collar cuts and not over-pruning trees.
[/ QUOTE ]
Here I will like to steer in a different direction: going back raises issues not only
of accuracy (of the historical record--knot books are notoriously bad), but of
materials
(what worked in laid hemp might well be a poor choice in double-braided polyester).
One should not have to reinvent the wheel where it exists, but the wagon wheel
is less than ideal for even a bicycle, let alone a car. Today there is more to be gained
by looking
laterally, broadly, vs. parochially (within one's own domain).
Still, one must keep in mind ***
material***:
the Fisherman's knot is used widely but Dave Richard's testing found it to slip in low-elongation
nylon kernmantle ropes; similarly for the Sheet Bend; and, by Lyon Equipment, for the
Clove hitch, which gets much use in climbing kernmantle. Fishermen will laugh & scoff
at the notion of a Bowline being liable to loosen; but there are some dead & injured
rockclimbers from just that happening (possibly from not well tied knots, but ... ).
-->
materials!
As for "naming knots correctly", that is a tough nut to crack--what's
correct?
("(dbl) fisherman's knot" for the (Strangle/Dbl.Oh.) noose hitch to a ring/'biner is NOT,
but ... .) When dealing with just a few knots--ten to twenty--, it can seem pretty easy
to have a set of distinct knot names; but with a broad view it is not so easy at all.
I think that it will be easier to come up with an identification system for knot experts
to use for discrimination, but the terms won't be appropriate for use in practice.
It's gonna be hard to escape the confusion. But the least we can do is try to not add
to it (as with the "dbl.fish." misnomer cited).
Here's an image of a compound Reverse Groundline H. which I referred to previously,
found out "in the wild" of actual use (mightly sparkly cordage, though!).
http://charles.hamel.free.fr/knots-and-c...au/target9.html
Materials: the binding cord is a 16-strand braided nylon (well, I've not burn-tested any,
but presumably: can be a bit stretched when put on, then shrink tighter in use)
which flattens on compression of wrapping, and lies nicely flat around the object;
try this same structure with cord with a firmly round cross-section and it'll suck!
The Marling H. is also used, sort of, in the commercial-fishing realm for binding, in conjunction
with follow-on Half-hitches: working left-to-right, say, the
marl is put in but then
the end is brought back leftwards in a series of Half-hitches, with the last one's ending
by continuing rightwards with the cord to the next binding point. And that compound
knotted structure looks much like this (but this I'm pretty sure is just HH.'s running
with the flow. (Notice how in going in ONE direction with the HH.s here that the cord is raised
away from the object, unflat, and suffers more abrasion; with the RGHitch, the HH.s
reverse direction each time and stay flat--pretty well even when stacked back'n'forth!)
Re materials: the netting is a PP kernmantle (parallel core fibres), knotted with Sheet bend-like
net-knots; the pale blue (typical!) headrope however is flat-fibre coextruded PP/PE (I believe).
http://charles.hamel.free.fr/knots-and-c...u/target21.html
Yet you won't find these knots in your local knots books: why not?!
(Neither in Ashley nor Day, for that matter, really!)
Because most popular-knots-books authors do their *research* in other books
(copying mistakes and all, sometimes)!
Oops, sorry--yes indeed, What was the question?
*kN*