Here is an interesting article about cordage, from Hakai Magazine. Enjoy!
https://www.hakaimagazine.com/features/the-long-knotty-world-spanning-story-of-string/
Well found Tom, and thanks for bringing it to us.
The author suggested that we are homo cordage, I believe tho’ that we are homo 4C - that is - Conversation, Cutting, Cordage and Conflagration. Without that quartet we would still very much be scrabbling around the forest floor - or extinct…
Derek
… article …
… with the same parroted nonsense about
"The Ashley Book of Knots, an encyclopedic illustrated guide
to more than 3,500 practical and decorative knots "
Well this is a discouraging response to my first post here in twelve years. I hope others will find some merit in the article. Cheers.
That’s an interesting article tomh. I hadn’t seen it previously. Thanks for posting.
alpineer
Well, sorry for the tone, and thanks for alerting us to this
article. But there are things about knotting that should
change --and should’ve changed (for the better) long ago.
What should be more discouraging to you and anyone
concerned with knotting is that after not merely twelve
years but now nearly 3/4 century is that grossly miscounting
–and continual echoes-- of how many knots are in this
long-sold/-read/-reviewed book!
While it’s not all simple a count to make --certainly
tickling the problem of what constitutes a knot
and a different knot–, it is on the order of a rather
objective issue.
I hope others will find some merit in the article. Cheers.An article in which an embedded video by a "rigger" presents the infamous [i]squaREef knot[/i] as the way to join two ends of like rope (something so strongly warned [i]against[/i] in that very book with over 3,500 knots, which it's said he sometimes consults!), and then who presents the [i]sheet bend[/i] as (a) the way to join dissimilar rope ends, and (b) in the inferior, opposite-ends orientation (fairly well known to be less secure)!
That OUGHT to make one wonder … ! ???
–dl*
So, (would) has anyone in the guild (like to) undertak(en) a proper count of the knots in ABoK?
Tom, it’s a nice article, I read it a while back. The most interesting part is the interest on the part of the archaeologists, such that we might in the future learn more about the history of cordage and perhaps knots.
This now has the makings of a good discussion, and I thank you. I believe the only source of the ‘over 3900 knots’ trope is the front cover blurb of ABOK itself, and I see that it’s been used since at least 1963 (when it was 3800). Of course, it’s the number of entries (rounded) and not the number of knots, so yes it is incorrect - but if it increases appeal and sales, so be it I say. I doubt anyone has returned the book upon discovering the discrepancy.
The blurb would be the publisher’s doing, so if it is a problem that needs solving, perhaps it should be taken up with them?
That said, it would be a most interesting project to catalogue the entries into knots and non-knots, and to address the duplications, alternate names, etc. Somewhat related: one of my favourites is a knot in ABOK which is structurally identical to the Munter Hitch, but can’t be reasonably called such. Anyone know which one I’m referring to?
A decade ago I tried to initiate such a project --to wit:
http://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=1006.msg6785#msg6785
My first complaint is that the [u]ABoK Index gives page
vs. #'d-prg. citations/numbers. This is problematic in that
of course the latter are more specific AND there are
cases where the index’d item occurs more than once
on a given page (and w/o explicit reference to these
multiple places, one might be missed upon finding
another).
Also, it occurred to me that the Index could do more
than give mere location : it could also indicate what
sort of information --generally, at least-- was to be
found there (from a mere mention of some knot in
discussion of other things, to some fuller information
about the knot).
(I vaguely recall musing about more than just two such
categories, and some graphical means to distinguishing
them --partly in order or presentation (e.g., list the
fullest treatments first, then others in some order),
but with some indicator of the nature of the groups
(for if >2 classes possible, even if one presumes that
the primary info class is always present, there’d need
to be indication of what the other citations were for,
where not all classes were present). )
Somewhat related: one of my favourites is a knot in ABOK which is structurally identical to the Munter Hitch, but can't be reasonably called such. Anyone know which one I'm referring to?Ashley's [i]"crossing knot"[/i] fits the bill, at least for one of the states of the meso barcaolo / Italian knot / Munter hitch / Halbmastwurfsicherung (German, meaning "what-a-mouth-full!") --i.e., not in the braking state but where the ends head in opposite directions.
(It’s a bit of a philosophical problem as to whether
one considers this structure as a knot.)
–dl*
That’s the one, of course. There are several rabbit-holes to go down at once with this one, but it does make things interesting!