I would be grateful for a bit of help.
I am trying to identify this cane rod.
3 sections. 2 are bamboo and the tip section is a spliced split cane.
No makers mark, but the rod has a name and date- M Marrop ( or Harrop ? ) and the date - 01/04/37
low bell rings.
It looks similar to a Eggington rod I have seen on another site, but not sure??
It is in a rod bag with a leather base.
One of the more knowledgeable members will be able to help I'm sure. It's similar in construction to a rod by Abbey I've just refurbished, but the handles wrong. Also the brass collar at the top of the handle looks the same as the one on some of my Allcocks rods. Either way it'll make nice Roach rod. Good luck with the identification.
Marc. (Prince of Durham)
“A life that partakes even a little of friendship, love, irony, humor, parenthood, literature, and music, and the chance to take part in battles for the liberation of others cannot be called 'meaningless'...”
I have a similar rod. However, it is not from a well known maker. My dad gave it to me years ago. He bought it new from a guy who made them in a small workshop behind his house. I'm wondering if yours is something similar.
Are those ferruleless cane-to-cane- joints?
If so, and bearing in mind that Harrop is a Cheshire-Lancashire-centred name, I'd guess it's a shed job*, made by a serious matchman for serious matchmen.
Look at the rather "agricultural" splice in the tip section - why waste effort feathering it off?
The high number of tiny rod-rings on the tip, where they really matter - every millimetre of wire really earning its keep.
The almost naked nodes - big makers selling bling would cover each node with half an inch of whipping, and the attendant blob of pointless varnish.
I await more informed comment eagerly; it used to be possible to pick these up on ebay for about the price of a curry, and most were anonymous. My favourite light, cane float-rod is one such, now sporting modern, lightweight, go-faster rings that really liberate the blank. That fountain appears to have run dry; I haven't seen a decent one for ages, other than collect only from the faraway North.
The only fairly well-known (down here in outer London) makers were a Mr. Emmens, who built the rod Dick Walker used on the Beane, and W.A. Allcock, whose "Princess" is the only cane-to-cane mass-offering I can recall.
* "Shed job" is absolutely NOT meant in a derogatory way - some of the London roach-pole's finest makers worked minor miracles in sheds, and an awful lot of tackle shops up and down the country had either a workshop or back shed where quiet weekdays were put to good use.
Edit- I see MGs posted much the same thought while I was typing.
"Write drunk, edit sober" - Hemingway.
Hemingway didn't have to worry about accidentally hitting "submit" before he edited.
Excellent! Probably as light as most glass rods.
When I did mine up, I was advised to use real silk, for the whippings over the female joints and the splice in particular, and wet the whippings and let them dry thoroughly (and, so doing, shrink) before varnishing, to make the sockets as strong as possible. Despite being intended for small roach, it's coped with chub to a couple of pounds, and the curve was quite alarming!
"Write drunk, edit sober" - Hemingway.
Hemingway didn't have to worry about accidentally hitting "submit" before he edited.
