Page 169 - J. C. Turner - History and Science of Knots

A History of Life Support Knots 159

and springy under a shock load. Neither became popular, indeed I have seen
no other reference to them. The knots look complicated to tie. Knotting is
usually of minor interest to climbers; they do not wish to spend much time
learning new knots unless the advantages are substantial and manifest.

Fig. 14. Sennit Bend Fig. 15. Reever Bend
The remaining knots were developed as mid loops for attaching the mid-
dleman to the rope. The Rover Loop (Fig. 13) was stronger in one direction
than another; indeed at its best it was the strongest knot tested. While it
might be possible for the middleman to make a reasoned guess about the most
likely direction of pull, the extra fuss seemed a bit of a nuisance. Moreover,
while the knot made an excellent end loop if applied in the right direction,
again care had to be taken in tying the knot. The authors did not therefore
recommend it very strongly and it has never been much used in climbing; the
name was given to the knot because it could be used anywhere in the rope.
Ashley [3] lists the knot as #1043, saying that it is very strong and secure
as either end or mid loop, and labels it `probably original', having apparently
missed Wright and Magowan's paper; of course, even earlier reports may yet
be found, since it is very difficult to sustain a claim to have originated a simple
knot.

Fig. 16. Half-Hitch Loop Fig. 17. Alpine Butterfly Loop
The Half-Hitch Loop (Fig. 16) and the Alpine Butterfly Loop (Fig. 17)
are very similar in structure; the difference is that in the latter the two Half
Hitches are interlaced. The authors found the Alpine Butterfly, named for a
fancied resemblance in some configurations to the insect, to be close to ideal,