from knotsaver...
about the #1062, please notice that the connection of it and the "false" Zeppelin was noticed (I don't know if for the first time) by Mandeville in KM #18 p.12 and it was in his Alphabend the letter/bend "N" ("the Neat 2c New ( Cf. A(BoK) 1062)".
Okay - will amend paper and cite Mandeville - thank you.
I'll note that Percy mis-illustrated (and more?) the so-called
zeppelin knot as the "false" in a book, which might have
pre-dated IGKT.
I also need details of the background of the Zeppelin eye knot. I know Xarax always points out that if you have tied a bend you by definition have also tied its corresponding eye knot. I have never quite agreed with this position...I think the eye knot version of a bend is a related derivative. For a start - one is an eye knot while the other is an end-to-end joining knot. Loading profile is also different. Hoping that roo can assist - he seems to know a lot about this corresponding eye knot (and it is also featured on his website).
Well, this is simply the case if one envisions that,
when tying by forming one end's part first and
then reeving into this the 2nd end, one will have
formed a
potential eye knot if using the 1st
one's tail as the "2nd end" --a structure will exist
at least when devoid of eye-loading (when who-knows
will happen).
(I don't see this as other than obvious --hardly earth-shaking
insight (any more than "Asher's, Law of Loop, Hitch, & Bight").)
As for "reading Budworth's works," one must realize that
there are a whole batch of B.-authored books (for a while
it seemed like several-per-annum!), and some are not
really/entirely of his mind --he has both been called in
to substitute where another author went in communicado,
and to have someone finish for him when his health
sidelined him (and publisher had deadlines --goodness,
can't wait to get yet one more Knots-101 book out to join
the worthless masses!).
--dl*
====
