I should add that some 36 years ago I fancied a similar sort of eyeknot,
which might be seen as a *double hump* version to this one's single
*hump* (i.e., point of bend SPart, frictional area). (My sort of
"date-stamp ID" for this would be 19781022s11:07; "s" = "Sunday".)
While it's not a clear precedent for KingRobin's knot, it does show
some similar thinking about the knotting mechanism --of putting
a bend ("hump") into the SPart for holding.
verbal instructions:
Make your eye (size it, i.e.),
then form a crossed bight (oblong "loop", if you will)
in the tail and lay that over the SPart, with the crossing
parts (eye-side & tail-side) crossed over the SPart,
going to either side, thus;
bring the tail around under the SPart (through the
eye),
over the eye-leg (the other crossing part, i.e.),
and through/between the crossed parts (of the bight)
and the SPart (c.p. above, SP. below). One hump
is thus formed;
raise a bight/section of SPart up through the crossed
bight laid over it,
and now reeve the tail through this gap (over bight
sides, under raised SPart),
around under bight legs/all, and one more time
through the gap (so, a round turn); this is the
2nd "hump" and the locking of the tail.
One will need to adjust things via the end-side eye-leg,
sizing the above knotting part of the structure such
that a sufficient (but maybe not too much ) bending
of the SPart obtains. Not sure all how easily this can
be done in a sort of eye-sizing adjustment, but I suppose
within reason it can be slid up or down the SPart
before then pulling things snug enough to generate
some significant "humps" to hold --to hold some force.
But even with this 2nd "hump" of friction-building bending
I don't see the knot as assuredly secure. It's a lot of knotting
to do for that, and lacking any clear benefit I'd want to use
something surer or easier (such as a rolling hitch of some
kind, maybe with a *guard* structure (turNip) preceding.
--dl*
====