![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Another Way to Draw Celtic Knots
Aug. 10th, 2024 05:38 pmCeltic knots are usually drawn using a grid, wherein you connect the squares in your chosen pattern, leaving space at the corners for the empty area between the cords, and at times adding breaks to change the direction of the cord and create interesting patterns. This method works very well. The drawbacks are that constructing these grids can become tedious, and without a recipe or a lot of experience, it’s difficult to design particular patterns without getting tangled up.
I recently came across this video by Ian Seven describing another way. Rather than starting the drawing from a grid, you begin with a geometrical shape. This has several advantages. For me, it’s more comprehensible, and easier to imagine what the final result will look like. I don’t get as confused about where to break the lines, whether I’m weaving them correctly, etc. It also marries nicely with sacred geometry. You can create a knot that has the energy of the figure you start with.
That’s rather hard to do using the grids, because the final knots often don’t look like the figure, and in fact as you’ll see they end up shifting it to occupy what used to be its negative space. Perhaps more interestingly, I’ve figured out a way to use this method in reverse to tease out the geometrical basis of an existing knot. Let’s say you encounter a knot you like in a book, on a picture of an artifact, etc. By marking out the crossing points and following a few rules, you can determine whether the knot is based on a pentagram with a triangle extending from the bottom, nested squares, or a hexagon with a square inside and a line extending into the infinite, for example.
HOW THE METHOD WORKS
Use a pencil. Start with a simple figure. It doesn’t get any more basic than a straight line, so that’s where I’ll begin. Place an X in the middle of the line segment. Make sure the arms of the X intersect the line at a 45/135 degree angle, as shown. This X represents a crossing point for the cord.
Now extend those arms more or less in the direction they are already pointing (some fudging and curving is OK). Loop the line back to one of the other arms of the X. Do NOT cross the line over itself except at an X. Do Not go through the same arm of an X twice. For the straight line, there’s only one way to do this, and it results in an infinity symbol.
Let this line be the middle of your cord. Now draw the two outsides of the cord equidistant from the middle guideline. When you reach the first X, decide if the cord crosses over or under. Whichever you chose, alternate from there. So if you go over when you first encounter the X, you will go under at the next X. This ensures an alternating weave throughout the design if you followed the rules. Use a pen for drawing the outside of the cords. The wider you draw them, the less negative space you will hav between them, and vice versa.
Finally, erase the pencil marks.
With a straight line, we see that the knot formed (or technically, an unknot) has the energy of extending into infinity. In fact, from this standpoint a straight line and circle are the same. Dion fortune notes in The Cosmic Doctrine that all straight lines curve back to their starting point eventually, so a line is a segment of the circumference of a circle.
When we try it with two X’s on a set of parallel lines (which can be considered the same as a vesica piscis energetically), it gets more difficult. Sometimes you can make a figure by tracing a single flowing line, and other times it’s appropriate to draw two (or more) closed loop figures—in this case, a pair of circles or ovals. You can make the loops as tight or as open as you like, curved to any degree, even pointed, so long as the other rules are met. When we trace out the cord, we find we have two crossing points, a pair of closed loops intersecting. The vesica piscis is apparent in the center.
This same procedure is followed for any figure. Use every arm of the X exactly once, an only cross the lines at an X, and you will have an over-under pattern knot that’s based on that geometrical construction. In the figure, I’ve included a triangle and a square to take us up to four crossings. Now you have more options for how to connect each figure. There is definitely more than on way to create a square, for example.
This brings us to another rule that we were following all along, but which becomes more important now. Each line with an X should be roughly the same length for this method to work out cleanly.
Tip: once you have your single guideline drawn, you can help define your negative space by tracing out the exact shape of that negative space inside of it. Make it small, and your cord will be thick. Make it big, and your cord will be thin.
VARIATIONS
If you want to make things more interesting, you can create a segment in the middle of a line and place an X on each length of the segment. Now I can make a triangle with six crossings instead of three. Or I can make a rectangle, dividing the long sides until they equal the short sides.
As mentioned, the loops can run at whatever degree you like, and you can make them very rounded, jagged, or anything in between.
In many of the knots I broke down from other artists, I noticed that they didn’t exactly follow a figure, but instead removed a crossing to add interest and break up a pattern. For example, instead of placing an X on each side of a pentagon, I can place a circle on one, which indicates that I am removing that crossing. No lines will overlap on that side of the figure. You lose some of the pentagonal energy, depending on how you do it, but retain a certain essence and add a stimulating surprise for the eye.
You can see in the figure that when I segment a line, it can be look at as such, or as a number of smaller figures with crossings omitted by a circle.
REVERSE-ENGINEERING A KNOT
Find a knot you like and place a sheet of tracing paper, or thin regular paper, over it. Make an X at each point where the cord crosses. Make sure the arms point more or less in the direction that the cords first run before they start to curve.
This is essentially your geometric X pattern without the figure underneath. Now things get tricky. We know that 1) every line should be about the same length, and 2) the X should intersect the underlying line at 45/135 degrees. Those X’s should be at about the middle of a line. There are two ways they could run through a given X, so it will take some sleuthing, intuition, and trial and error to figure out which is correct. Corners will lie between to X’s at an angle to both. A long stretch of multiple X’s is likely a clue to a straight line that has been segmented.
Play around with the drawing, adding faint lines in pencil until you’ve fit every X to a side of a figure. If there appear to be any odd-shaped or broken figures, remember that the artist may have removed a crossing. If it looks like there should be a square here, but you have only three crossings and a loop, add a circle for a broken crossing and see if it doesn’t complete the expected figure. Remember that usually these knots are made from multiple figures tacked on to one another, such as a square with a triangle to the left and to the right, sharing their bases with the sides of the square.
In my experiments, this method is reliable, but frustrating on complex figures. There are probably multiple correct answers in some cases. Start with easier knots and work your way up. It makes for a fascinating puzzle.
CONCLUSION
The grid method is an excellent way to drawn certain knots. I think the geometrical freehand method is a fine complement. It works well with sacred geometry and for creating or detecting a knot with a certain geometrical basic. The weakness is that it perhaps requires more artistry than the grid method, which for a non-artist like me is difficult. The negative space between cords is tougher to handle, though very flexible in the hands of a skilled artist. Large, complex weaves may be tougher to create with this method. Experiment, and let me know if you find anything cool.C/cut>
I recently came across this video by Ian Seven describing another way. Rather than starting the drawing from a grid, you begin with a geometrical shape. This has several advantages. For me, it’s more comprehensible, and easier to imagine what the final result will look like. I don’t get as confused about where to break the lines, whether I’m weaving them correctly, etc. It also marries nicely with sacred geometry. You can create a knot that has the energy of the figure you start with.
That’s rather hard to do using the grids, because the final knots often don’t look like the figure, and in fact as you’ll see they end up shifting it to occupy what used to be its negative space. Perhaps more interestingly, I’ve figured out a way to use this method in reverse to tease out the geometrical basis of an existing knot. Let’s say you encounter a knot you like in a book, on a picture of an artifact, etc. By marking out the crossing points and following a few rules, you can determine whether the knot is based on a pentagram with a triangle extending from the bottom, nested squares, or a hexagon with a square inside and a line extending into the infinite, for example.
HOW THE METHOD WORKS
Use a pencil. Start with a simple figure. It doesn’t get any more basic than a straight line, so that’s where I’ll begin. Place an X in the middle of the line segment. Make sure the arms of the X intersect the line at a 45/135 degree angle, as shown. This X represents a crossing point for the cord.
Now extend those arms more or less in the direction they are already pointing (some fudging and curving is OK). Loop the line back to one of the other arms of the X. Do NOT cross the line over itself except at an X. Do Not go through the same arm of an X twice. For the straight line, there’s only one way to do this, and it results in an infinity symbol.
Let this line be the middle of your cord. Now draw the two outsides of the cord equidistant from the middle guideline. When you reach the first X, decide if the cord crosses over or under. Whichever you chose, alternate from there. So if you go over when you first encounter the X, you will go under at the next X. This ensures an alternating weave throughout the design if you followed the rules. Use a pen for drawing the outside of the cords. The wider you draw them, the less negative space you will hav between them, and vice versa.
Finally, erase the pencil marks.
With a straight line, we see that the knot formed (or technically, an unknot) has the energy of extending into infinity. In fact, from this standpoint a straight line and circle are the same. Dion fortune notes in The Cosmic Doctrine that all straight lines curve back to their starting point eventually, so a line is a segment of the circumference of a circle.
When we try it with two X’s on a set of parallel lines (which can be considered the same as a vesica piscis energetically), it gets more difficult. Sometimes you can make a figure by tracing a single flowing line, and other times it’s appropriate to draw two (or more) closed loop figures—in this case, a pair of circles or ovals. You can make the loops as tight or as open as you like, curved to any degree, even pointed, so long as the other rules are met. When we trace out the cord, we find we have two crossing points, a pair of closed loops intersecting. The vesica piscis is apparent in the center.
This same procedure is followed for any figure. Use every arm of the X exactly once, an only cross the lines at an X, and you will have an over-under pattern knot that’s based on that geometrical construction. In the figure, I’ve included a triangle and a square to take us up to four crossings. Now you have more options for how to connect each figure. There is definitely more than on way to create a square, for example.
This brings us to another rule that we were following all along, but which becomes more important now. Each line with an X should be roughly the same length for this method to work out cleanly.
Tip: once you have your single guideline drawn, you can help define your negative space by tracing out the exact shape of that negative space inside of it. Make it small, and your cord will be thick. Make it big, and your cord will be thin.
VARIATIONS
If you want to make things more interesting, you can create a segment in the middle of a line and place an X on each length of the segment. Now I can make a triangle with six crossings instead of three. Or I can make a rectangle, dividing the long sides until they equal the short sides.
As mentioned, the loops can run at whatever degree you like, and you can make them very rounded, jagged, or anything in between.
In many of the knots I broke down from other artists, I noticed that they didn’t exactly follow a figure, but instead removed a crossing to add interest and break up a pattern. For example, instead of placing an X on each side of a pentagon, I can place a circle on one, which indicates that I am removing that crossing. No lines will overlap on that side of the figure. You lose some of the pentagonal energy, depending on how you do it, but retain a certain essence and add a stimulating surprise for the eye.
You can see in the figure that when I segment a line, it can be look at as such, or as a number of smaller figures with crossings omitted by a circle.
REVERSE-ENGINEERING A KNOT
Find a knot you like and place a sheet of tracing paper, or thin regular paper, over it. Make an X at each point where the cord crosses. Make sure the arms point more or less in the direction that the cords first run before they start to curve.
This is essentially your geometric X pattern without the figure underneath. Now things get tricky. We know that 1) every line should be about the same length, and 2) the X should intersect the underlying line at 45/135 degrees. Those X’s should be at about the middle of a line. There are two ways they could run through a given X, so it will take some sleuthing, intuition, and trial and error to figure out which is correct. Corners will lie between to X’s at an angle to both. A long stretch of multiple X’s is likely a clue to a straight line that has been segmented.
Play around with the drawing, adding faint lines in pencil until you’ve fit every X to a side of a figure. If there appear to be any odd-shaped or broken figures, remember that the artist may have removed a crossing. If it looks like there should be a square here, but you have only three crossings and a loop, add a circle for a broken crossing and see if it doesn’t complete the expected figure. Remember that usually these knots are made from multiple figures tacked on to one another, such as a square with a triangle to the left and to the right, sharing their bases with the sides of the square.
In my experiments, this method is reliable, but frustrating on complex figures. There are probably multiple correct answers in some cases. Start with easier knots and work your way up. It makes for a fascinating puzzle.
CONCLUSION
The grid method is an excellent way to drawn certain knots. I think the geometrical freehand method is a fine complement. It works well with sacred geometry and for creating or detecting a knot with a certain geometrical basic. The weakness is that it perhaps requires more artistry than the grid method, which for a non-artist like me is difficult. The negative space between cords is tougher to handle, though very flexible in the hands of a skilled artist. Large, complex weaves may be tougher to create with this method. Experiment, and let me know if you find anything cool.C/cut>
no subject
Date: 2024-08-18 11:47 am (UTC)I considered buying the Ashley Book of Knots on having to return my library copy years ago - it's a complete joy - but they were too expensive.
You have reminded me how much I'd like one :) I might go looking again.
no subject
Date: 2024-08-18 06:19 pm (UTC)