"Traditional" means traditional...

[KnifeHead]

I couldn't agree more wholeheartedly here. You have captured here exactly what I tried to state in my initial post.

I will give you a quick example of what I think pretty much hits the nail on the head with proper terminology is being lost.. On another knife forum I had a discussion with a much younger member than I about a vintage pocket knife that he insisted was a Coke Bottle pattern.. Well, OK 'maybe' I said if it was produced in the last 20 or so years.. But, this particular knife was built at the turn of the century circa 1890's - 1902 and therefore it was known as a Fiddle Back pattern.. Well, he was determined and also uneducated as well. He continued and continued. Finally, I took it to email so as not to embarrass the lad and I offered him proof which was documented in several well established and historically correct knife references, not the least of these among them was Levine's 4th Ed.. Suffice it to say he thanked me in the end for the history lesson.


Anthony

Anthony,
I dig a Fiddleback & kinda despise the name CokeBottle
Did you happen to mention to this fella,that you did not think there was a Coke Bottle in 1899 ?
-Vince

This is a good example of popularized traditional names. I would consider them both correct and traditional. But seriously, swell-center folding hunters look more like a coke bottle than a fiddle or even a beaver tail...geeesh. But I will clear all this up in the new forum where they will simply be called "watchamacallits". There, it's working already.

 

[Paul 883215]

If the knife companies can't get it straight how are beginers supposed to???

Maybe a good place to start would be starting a "This is not a (insert name from the knife company) it's a (insert proper name)" thread. Doing this would at least organize the information for those of us who want to learn.

Paul

 

[KnifeHead]

New Rule: To save money, the "Whatchamacallit Cutlery" sub-forum is being moved off-shore and will only feature (nondescript) stainless steel (but must refrain from referring to same as "surgical", "plus" or any other previous incarnations of so-called proprietary steels).

Of course this may ruin the patina discussion but we have to cut costs where we can.

Also, since these knives will be delivered razor sharp, there will be no further need for sharpening discussion. The edge retention, as you know, is legendary and never needs resharpening.

All of the "whatchamacallit" patterns will hereinafter be described simply as pocketknives to prevent confusion. You can, however, refer to the number of blades (but not the style of blade.)

The Traditional Forum is now closed.

Kerry, you're up...

I think "pocketknives" is too.....confining. I get kinda claustrophobic from the thought that these whatchamacallits have to be confined to the pocket. I know, let us form a committee to discuss the possibility of coming up with a new form of whatchamacallit conveyance that won't be so stuffy and dark and full of lint.

 

[KnifeHead]

If the knife companies can't get it straight how are beginers supposed to???

Maybe a good place to start would be starting a "This is not a (insert name from the knife company) it's a (insert proper name)" thread. Doing this would at least organize the information for those of us who want to learn.

Paul

We don't have that exactly but we have this ongoing thread here that is helpful. http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=527126

 

[aplehr1]

I only started taking an interest in traditional knives a few months ago, and there is only one reason I go on any forum - to learn. I agree that if someone presents themselves as an expert, or tries to argue what should be called what - it is only common courtesy to present reference material, pics, etc. But if I buy, am interested in buying, or reviewing a knife that Case calls a "canoe", for instance - I will refer to it by the name the manufacturer has given it. If I make a mistake, I expect someone will correct it - people on forums are good at that.

I'm not sure OP, who you're most frustrated with. Manufacturers who give knives names not consistent with tradition? Posters who are careless in what they call certain patterns? Both equally? Well, if you don't agree with the names manufacturers give their knives - call or write them and complain. It's my hunch though, that the majority of people who frequent the traditionals forum are here to learn. I can count the number of patterns I recognize on one hand, I am in no position to argue with anybody.

So I'm glad to hear that this forum is a place for both experts, and for noobs like me. I have seen more than one forum shut down because the "experts" had no patience for those less knowledgeable. Soon only the "experts" were left - then no one.

I am very grateful for everyone here. Everything I have learned about traditional knives - I have learned here. It is a hobby I enjoy for many reasons, not the least of which being the history and tradition involved.

Adam

 

[Blues]

I think "pocketknives" is too.....confining. I get kinda claustrophobic from the thought that these whatchamacallits have to be confined to the pocket. I know, let us form a committee to discuss the possibility of coming up with a new form of whatchamacallit conveyance that won't be so stuffy and dark and full of lint.

 

[KnifeHead]

And this is why you are the Super Moderator. This is exactly what I been talkin bout, right there.

 

[Blues]

And this is why you are the Super Moderator. This is exactly what I been talkin bout, right there.

Sizzle!

Loser!

Bye-bye!

 

[Blues]

Kerry, shouldn't the title of this thread be "Traditional" means "Whatchamacallit"?

It's all very confusing. Kind of like looking into a mirror reflecting another mirror and back and forth and back and forth and on and on until down into the rabbit hole we go...

 

[sunnyd]

Kerry, shouldn't the title of this thread be "Traditional" means "Whatchamacallit"?

It's all very confusing. Kind of like looking into a mirror reflecting another mirror and back and forth and back and forth and on and on until down into the rabbit hole we go...

Elliot,

If I may be so bold, I think Kerry's title 'Traditional means Traditional', serves us pretty well here.. Perhaps Whatchamacallit means "NewWhatchamacallit Traditionals".?.


Anthony

 

[Peter Parker]

I'm here to learn and have fellowship with like minded folks and yes I certainly expect to be corrected! I think I'm being kind to myself when I say I figure I'm about middle of the road on traditional knowledge!

 

[Will Power]

Nomenclature is vital, as pointed out without it language becomes redundant and all meaning is lost. A general tendency in the information age.....

Trying to be accurate about pattern names and using them correctly is also an important way of ensuring that future generations of knife collectors understand what these patterns are, when they were applied and perhaps why. Otherwise, looking at patterns might become like staring cluelessly at hieroglyphics from a lost civilization. What are they??

I liked the Cokebottle/Fiddleback example, very valuable. Actually, knife manufacturers of ALL people have much less excuse for a lax approach to pattern names, they must have considerable picture/catalogue archives after all. The other day I was commenting on a knife in another section of the forum. I admired it and referred to it as an Equal End, BL himself corrected me by stating that he believed it was an Anglo-Saxon an old but seldom heard of pattern. I was grateful for the correction, he was even cordial about it......

 

[kamagong]

To get in the mood for this change, I think I will change my ID to KutleryThoughts, burn incense and wear lots of silk stuff and practice saying "OOOOHHHHHmmmmmmm" a lot.

I feel that I have to point out that the proper, traditional spelling is Om or Aum (also Au&#7747.

Thanks for starting this thread. I admit to calling knives by names that are historically inaccurate. But I think a large part of the problem starts with the manufacturers. Let's take GEC for example. Their model #73, I gather is roughly based off Remington's 1173 Bullet Trapper. But instead of calling it a trapper, they chose to call it a scout. In this case, GEC is causing the confusion because the term scout is already used to describe a specific type of knife. People who talk about this knife can do one of three things -- they can either follow GEC's nomenclature and call it a scout, or they can call it a trapper. I like to just avoid the issue altogether and just call it a #73. But whatever choice is made the waters have already been muddied and even if we reach consensus on this forum of enthusiasts, there are still many more non-knifenuts out there who will continue to erroneously refer to the #73 as a scout.

- Christian

 

[Modoc ED]

I'd like to introduce this into this conversation. Pictured is the Blade Forums "2010 Forum Knife". The reason I chose this knife is because everyone in the forum is pretty much familiar with this knife whether they have one or not because of all the threads/post about it over the last year or so.

Based on what I know or think I know, I'd say that the pictured knife is:

First and foremost a Jack knife. Second a Double-End Jack knife. Third a Swell-Center Jack Knife. Fourth it has a Moose Blade configuration (some may say Texas Jack).

Then again, one source says all double-end jack knives are built on either cattle knife or premium stock knife handle frames. Does that mean that we should somehow attach Cattleman/Stockman to the name of this knife? How about Bull-Head (equal end - double end)?

So, I'd like to ask KnifeHead -- "what is the proper name for our "2010 Forum Knife"? Me, I just call it the 2010 Forum Double End Moose knife.

This is a serious question not some type of gotcha question.

 

[KnifeHead]

Nomenclature is vital, as pointed out without it language becomes redundant and all meaning is lost. A general tendency in the information age.....

Trying to be accurate about pattern names and using them correctly is also an important way of ensuring that future generations of knife collectors understand what these patterns are, when they were applied and perhaps why. Otherwise, looking at patterns might become like staring cluelessly at hieroglyphics from a lost civilization. What are they??

I liked the Cokebottle/Fiddleback example, very valuable. Actually, knife manufacturers of ALL people have much less excuse for a lax approach to pattern names, they must have considerable picture/catalogue archives after all. The other day I was commenting on a knife in another section of the forum. I admired it and referred to it as an Equal End, BL himself corrected me by stating that he believed it was an Anglo-Saxon an old but seldom heard of pattern. I was grateful for the correction, he was even cordial about it......

This event must be marked by a pile of rocks by the side of the road or some such thing....remarkable!

 

[kamagong]

So, I'd like to ask KnifeHead -- "what is the proper name for our "2010 Forum Knife"? Me, I just call it the 2010 Forum Double End Moose knife.

Thanks for bringing this up Ed, it's been a question that I've also wondered about. Because of the confusion I just refer to it as the 2010 Forum Knife.

- Christian

 

[Blues]

This event must be marked by a pile of rocks by the side of the road or some such thing....remarkable!

(BTW, I traditionally find BRL to be helpful to our members without any of the purported and attributed crustiness. :thumbup: Yes, I understand he has his moments, as do we all.))

 

[KnifeHead]

I'd like to introduce this into this conversation. Pictured is the Blade Forums "2010 Forum Knife". The reason I chose this knife is because everyone in the forum is pretty much familiar with this knife whether they have one or not because of all the threads/post about it over the last year or so.

Based on what I know or think I know, I'd say that the pictured knife is:

First and foremost a Jack knife. Second a Double-End Jack knife. Third a Swell-Center Jack Knife. Fourth it has a Moose Blade configuration (some may say Texas Jack).

Then again, one source says all double-end jack knives are built on either cattle knife or premium stock knife handle frames. Does that mean that we should somehow attach Cattleman/Stockman to the name of this knife? How about Bull-Head (equal end - double end)?

So, I'd like to ask KnifeHead -- "what is the proper name for our "2010 Forum Knife"? Me, I just call it the 2010 Forum Double End Moose knife.

This is a serious question not some type of gotcha question.

I defer all questions concerning the above pattern to this thread....thank you. http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=665730


I'm sorry to dodge this one but if you notice in the thread that I linked, some patterns seem to be harder to nail down, due to the fact that they have been called many different things. All I know is it falls into the catagory of swell-center, double-end "jack", not a "trapper" in my mind because if the blades used. Trappers usually have slimmer blades. I think "Bullhead" is the oldest popular name given to this pattern, or as Charlie suggested "Bullmoose" are ok but I can't say with any certainty what is most proper for that pattern other than swell-center, double-end jack.

 

[Blues]

Thanks for bringing this up Ed, it's been a question that I've also wondered about. Because of the confusion I just refer to it as the 2010 Forum Knife.

- Christian

If you go by LGIV, (and I can't think of a good reason not to), it's a Bull-Head.

An equal-end, double-end knife based upon the cattle pattern. An image of such a knife, a Winchester, (with blades in reversed configuration) is on page 190 of LGIV as I recall.

However, under the new rules established by Kerry, this knife would henceforth be known as a two bladed whatchamacallit.

 

[wagglebee]

However, under the new rules established by Kerry, this knife would henceforth be known as a two bladed whatchamacallit.

Actually, I think it would be a black and chrome two bladed whatchamacallit.