News:

The Best Fishing Forum In The UK.
Do You Have What It Takes To Be A Member?

Main Menu
Please consider a donation to help with the running costs of this forum.

Traditional Tying

Started by Wildfisher, January 14, 2008, 10:16:38 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Wildfisher

Quote from: breac uaig on January 16, 2008, 09:17:08 PM
when did you last see a merlin

Now, I know a wee side glen in the eastern Cairngorms where there is usually a pair of Merlin most summers. Trouble is the bastards move so fast it may well be  difficult to draw a bead on them, so I'll probably have to stick with .D. 's substitutes for  my dark watchetts!   :D

.D.

What about  a Greenwell's Glory then. As trad as it gets.

OK, we'll assume it's OK to substitute Starling (or a similar grey feather) for Blackbird.

Now, I'd use light olive Danvilles Flymaster for the body.

The original dressing asked for yellow silk waxed to an olive shade with (crucially :roll:) cobbler's wax.

They didn't have Danvilles Flymaster in that particular shade way back when: but it looks much the same.

So, i've substituted a synthetic for the natural material used in the original dressing.

Is it no longer a traditional wet fly?
Is it no longer a Greenwells Glory, but a Greenwells variant?

I think it is still a Greenwells Glory.

Any offers?


.D.


.D.

Quote from: Sandfly on January 16, 2008, 11:22:29 PM
If you go back even further to 1886  Pritt gives the dressing using a feather from a Jackdaws neck as you stated or the outside of a Coots wing. Therefor I would not need to use feathers from a Merlin  :shock: .

No matter what the pattern was I could not justify using feathers from rare species just for the sake of a fly  :wink:

Davy.

Yes, and he also used Water Vole rather than Mole in his Little Dark Watchet to which you refer. The point being that they used what was available and suitable for the job. I'm equally sure other eminent anglers from the same era would each have had their own favoured feathers: for the same fly.




.D.

Wildfisher

Quote from: .D. on January 16, 2008, 11:33:36 PM
I think it is still a Greenwells Glory.

Yup, I agree, it most certainly is.

If I paint my Ford Mondeo Estate with BMW  paint, unfortunately   it remains  a  Ford.   :D

scotfly

Quote from: .D. on January 16, 2008, 11:33:36 PM
The original dressing asked for yellow silk waxed to an olive shade with (crucially :roll:) cobbler's wax.

Actually that was one of the first variations of the original  :D
Careful where you step boys we're in a minefield!! :lol:

scotfly

Couldn't find it, but I have now.
This is the reference I used.
http://www.flyfishinghistory.com/greenwells_glory.htm

.D.

Quote from: scotfly on January 16, 2008, 11:41:32 PM
Actually that was one of the first variations of the original  :D
Careful where you step boys we're in a minefield!! :lol:


Yes, I notice that you are sidestepping the more pertinent point: that silk (probably waxed duller: they usually waxed their thread in those days didn't they?) is used in the original. If you use synthetic thread are you still tying a Greenwells Glory?

.D.

haresear


Stuff that for a carry on. To me, grey feathers are just grey feathers (although starling is admittedly, nice on wee flies). Olive hair/fur is just.........

Several spools of Pearsall's Gossamer available cheaply  from me :lol:

I suppose you could say I'm not a traditionalist :lol:

Alex
Protect the edge.

scotfly

Quote from: .D. on January 16, 2008, 11:51:35 PM

Yes, I notice that you are sidestepping the more pertinent point: that silk (probably waxed duller: they usually waxed their thread in those days didn't they?) is used in the original. If you use synthetic thread are you still tying a Greenwells Glory?

.D.

I didn't sidestep the issue, I was just getting ready for work and didn't have time to deal with  your shamefull admittance  :lol:
To answer you, for me it is a Greenwell's Glory variation. But, being honest to say a fly is not traditional because we've used a modern thread or even a different colour of thread is being extremely pedantic and reading some of the replies to Fred's post leads me to the conclusion that this forum is littered with pedants, even some extremist pedants  :wall2
A thought occurred to me this morning  :shock: What if we classify as follows....

For the "broad minded"...
Traditional style patterns - Tied using whatever material with whatever thread to look vaguely like something traditional.

For the "pedants"...
Traditional tying - Tied using traditional methods and materials
Traditional patterns - Tied as close copies of patterns or style of traditional flies

For the "extremist pedants!"...
Authentic traditionally tied traditional patterns - Tied as exact copies of the originals using only authentic materials, hooks, tools and methods as stipulated by the originator of the fly.


Wildfisher

don't beat about the bush Dennis, just come right out and say what you think!   :biglaugh;

folk who just spin don't have 1/2 this much fun..........................:biglaugh;

Go To Front Page