Best reference books for knot tying and rope work?

General Discussion
1

I have a copy of Ashley?s, but am looking for others that would be of same reference quality.

What are your top 5 books?

2

Please understand that most general knots books have as
references prior such books, and mistakes have been thus
propagated over decades & centuries!

You might be fine to look next for books germane to some
particular knotting --angling, say-- as complement(s) to
Ashley. Cyrus L. Day’s [u]The Art of Knoting & Splicing is good.
One might find some of the general books worthwhile
less for specific information than for a ready catalogue
of promulgated knots.

Besides books, there are on-line resources,
perhaps most notable is Grog’s Animated Knots
(which was recently updated/revised). Such sites
can be revised more easily than books.

–dl*

3

Just in case there are people out there who do not have access to ABOK in physical form it is freely available online at
ttps://archive.org/details/TheAshleyBookOfKnots/mode/2up
Or at least it was today when I checked.

4

Apart from Ashley I find ’ A Fresh Approach to Knotting and Ropework ’ by Charles Warner to be an indispensable book.

5

For scouting-related knot tying and lashing, it is hard to beat the books by Gerald L. Findley, including the original Rope Works and the expanded Rope Works Plus. These were self-published, but they are available from Amazon. See also his website which shares many of the illustrations and has animations.

  https://ropeworks.biz/

I also find very useful some of the older books that have been inexpensively republished by Dover Publications, including Practical Knots & Ropework by Percy W. Blandford; Practical and Ornamental Knots by George Russell Shaw; and Knotcraft by Allan and Paulette Macfarlan.

6

I have enjoyed “The Encyclopedia of Knots and Fancy Rope Work” by Graumont and Hensel. Lots of knots, but I think Ashley has better instructions.

7
I have enjoyed [u][i]"The Encyclopedia of Knots and Fancy Rope Work" [/i][/u]by Graumont and Hensel. Lots of knots, but I think Ashley has better instructions.
Given the nature of this book, I must wonder what it is you've enjoyed about it?! --practical knots, or decorative?! "Ashley has better instructions" given that in large [u][i]EKFR [/i][/u]has none!

–dl*

8

I,too, enjoyed “The Encyclopedia of Knots and Fancy Rope Work” by Graumont and Hensel. In fact, it was the very first knot book I had seen as a child. Wandering around the library, the blue cover attracted my eyes. I pulled it from the shelf, almost dropped the heavy tome and asked my mother to check it out for me. She told me it would have to wait since I already had my limit of books. So, the next visit there I got to bring it home. This was pre-scout days, so functional knots were yet to be, except for laces and robes ties.
It was all downhill from there. :wink:

9

There needs to be some explanation of what this
"enjoy"ment is, exactly. For Hensel&Gretel’s make-believe
world of knots has

  1. just so much outright rubbish & nonsense in it,
  2. complemented by so little of any sort of explanation of the presented knots,
  3. accented by the often-poor-photos presentations
    (and ambiguous indication of tail vs. SPart),
    that enjoyment is not a proper response,
    unless one sought tragicomedy! :o

But there are some oddball things in there that can lead
one into interesting What-ifs; and sometimes maybe a hint
of clue to who-said-what-where (their specious wealth of
knotting doesn’t come with a bibliography) --such as some
of the origins of the Wot?knot & Bushby’s source “H.”/“Haslope 1901”!

2011 update: The more I've referred and looked into this book, the more disgusted I've become at how appallingly bad it is re any practical knotting. I leave my rating at Two Stars only because there seems to be some value to it asserted by decorative/fancy knot tyers, and I'm not interested in trying to assess that value (though I would ask about whether the accuracy or lack of is any different than the bad state it is for practical knots). Page after page, Plate after Plate of often bad/unclear photographs, one will be continually asking "Why is THIS supposed 'knot' presented?!" Seldom --SELDOM-- does the text provide anything helpful. And the supposed knots mostly exist only in the minds of the authors and these pages; many are quite comical, as are the names given to them. In sharp contrast, Ashley at least provides some information about most of what he presents, and his collection has knots that actually work.
I'm abashed to have taken so long to have realized Hensel & Gretel's book's worth. Too long it had been a big-book on my shelf, too little seriously explored, w/undeserved belief that such a big, long-lived (4th ed.!) book MUST be worthwhile. :(

–dl*

10

Hey Dan.
I don’t think there is any need to explain my enjoyment to you or anyone for that matter. But, I will in a tiny way. I was a child, not familiar with the world of knot tying and that book, being the first of its kind (To Me) sparked an interest, that continues today. Just like a shiny new first bicycle that ultimately lead to many years of “Enjoyment” that also continues today.
The tome may be lacking to some, but, until someone, maybe you(?) does better, perhaps denigrating it on and on could cease.
Do the oddball things in there that can lead one to ponder “What-ifs” constitute enjoyment to you??

Demanding someone to explain Their enjoyment is just wrong and inconsiderate in a public forum. Asking would be more in line with civility.
It is akin to bombing on a person for their taste in Art, Music, Hobbies, etc., Not so cool.

11

Hi SS369, sorry to brutally clip your reply, which changes its intended purpose but the bit I have clipped made me think of how I dived into this hobby.

Somehow I came across some of TIAT videos on youtube for paracord bracelets, and thought that was pretty cool. So I bought a couple of his books.
My interest started to broaden and then I got ABOK.
I have got a few other books from there, usually slightly more specific to my interest at the time, maybe sailing knots, or arborist knots, or what ever had taken my fancy.

However more often than (k)not, now I find myself using the internet as my resource.

So to answer the original posters question, I wouldn’t be looking for an all powerful single resource book, but using ABOK as a jumping point get books that cover the field you are currently interested in, be it decorative, climbing, sailing or what ever.

Just my two strands worth.

Happy knotting.

Greg

12

Please continue brutally clipping - I would like to see a lot more of this kind of brutality.

There are half a dozen or more people (most of whom I like apart from this tendency) who routinely quote previous posts many times larger than their own contribution. There are a couple who NEVER post without quoting, even if they are the very first to respond to the OP (as if I couldn’t just lift my eyes a fraction). I wonder, do some not realize that there’s a Reply button at the top?

Anyway, by all means (everyone) quote where your post would be ambiguous without the quote, but if it’s a big post you’re quoting, please help me out and take the time to pare it down to the relevant text. I can always page up and refer to the original if I want to.

13

I cannot imagine any other engagement you might
have with someone or some firm or some product
in which so much was so badly done and yet you’d
give your opinion of enjoyment!

The tome may be lacking to some, ...
"Lacking"? This is not some artistic preferences issue, it's a straightforward matter of objective presentation of things that are supposed to be "knots" in the commonly understood sense of "these things are *real* and have use(s)..." . And in case after case after ... this massive, long-lived book falls hard on its face in that regard; yet few people seem to appreciate this. Asking them then what the merit they see is is a reach to understand how things are seen --like seeing Jewish outerspace lasers attacking earth and all.

“The Cape Horn hitch is an old-style hitch now seldom seen.”
REALLY, Scott?! !! :o

:wink:

14

Hey Dan, I’ll refrain from using the quote function this time.
Firstly, I wrote that I enjoy>ed< the book as a child and that it did influence me to go further into this realm. And yes, there are probably more things that I enjoy that you or others may not. Not your place to call me or anyone out on it. That’s just flaming as far as I am concerned.
I get that you don’t like or think highly of the book or maybe even the authors, but for whatever reason(s) the book continues to sell. Perhaps like “bad” art or music.

I personally don’t own the book and it has been many years since I browsed it, so, I can’t truly say that it was conceived as a “practical collection” or just a collection of all kinds of things they could find related to knots.

I just rankles me a bit that you harp on this book negatively (often) when the creators are unable to voice anything in defense or explanation, if they would even care to.

You know sometimes things, even if done poorly, can give ideas and/or inspiration to another. If I recall, you have even given voice to having an idea from someone else’s efforts when you judged it lacking.

If the publication is just so very bad, I have to ask, “Why do you keep it in your personal library?” Just burn it already. :-0
So you do better and let us be in judgement of your works.
S

15

I have several books by Heath Robinson starting with a promotional one for a warehouse company in Manchester. I love the “machines” which are crazy but funny in their conception. I too have had a copy of Graumont and Hensel for a few years now (a paperback edition that was very cheap) and I enjoy flipping through it along similar lines to Heath Robinson - the difference being that HR was obviously joking.

At the end of the day I have spent 10 times as much on less interesting books - let’s not get carried away thinking that just because we can see some fanciful rubbish in this one that to Joe Public (whose expertise may be limited to the granny and the overhand) this could be a thing of wonder and pleasure not necessarily bought as a serious tutorial.

Sweeney

16

Apart from free ABoK on Internet Archive (there is a second free version too), there is also A. Hyatt Verrill book on Project Gutenburg.

I have also recently discovered that there are hundreds of books on knotting and rope on Internet Archive available for borrowing: all you have to do is to create a free account and ‘borrow’ (i.e. be able to read online) a book, if available, for a limited time period (then borrow again).

17

I have an interesting find: the Russian equivalent? (maybe not) to the ABoK by Lev Skryagin - Nautical Knots. I don’t read Russian but there are illustrations and the text could be auto-translated to get the jest of it.

I can’t be sure, but I don’t think the book was ever translated into English or has been well known (has it?), which may be interesting as there may be some constructs there that are either unique or at least obscure to the English-speaking audience, but since the author has been surely familiar with ABoK, maybe that’s not the case.

Somebody more familiar with knotting than I am would have to make a judgment on it…

18

I would add to this discussion the excellent web site maintained at PACI by Mark Gommers (who frequently contributes to this forum).
http://www.paci.com.au/knots.php
In addition to his technical paper early in the site, scroll down to the “Historical Content” part for some nice old books, including a copy of the Russian book mentioned in the previous post.

19

Thanks for remarking; I just had a long browse, selectively
dropping texts into a translator (with some of the 2 B expected
comical translations).

  1. I’m puzzled that it cites Ashley’s #1452 as having long been
    known to “furriers”!? And, as indeed the author IS aware of
    ABoK (though yet not awarEnuff to not parrot the nonsense
    count of “3900 knots”), he gives no hint of this knot being
    among those it presents, apparently as a then new discovery!?

  2. Hunter’s bend is directed by synonymy to the realm of hunters,
    and he alleges that Edward got a British patent for it!? Huh, I’m
    pretty sure that the knot was relatively quickly enough found to
    have been presented by Phil Smith some decade plus prior to
    Hunter’s even discovering it that such a patent wouldn’t occur.

A lot of the illustrations appear to have been copied, though
not all --or not by sources I’m familiar with.

–dl*