Should have my simple system Rudall register up soon, just sorting the HTML prior to publishing. Found this in my list though, two flutes with the same serial number. Which is correct. I should think David M.'s is the correct serial number?
Rudall & Rose no. 1900
Christies - Lot 149:
A rosewood and silver-mounted flute branded Rudall and Rose/London No.1900, with eight keys with pewterplugs, the sounding length 22¼in. (56.6cm).
Estimate: £300 - £500 ($480 - $800) – Sold for £293 ($468) Sale 6928 19 June 1995. London, South Kensington
Rudall & Rose no. 1900
.A boxwood Rudall & Rose no. 1900 with a large embouchure hole. Owned by DM. Sighted on C&F site Oct 31, 2005 (ref. C&F 2nd Nov. 2005 - Patent head Rudall & Rose on E-bay thread) See even above where Christies describe Rudall & Rose no. 1900 as a rosewood and silver-mounted flute sold in 1995?
rudall 1900 is boxwood btw
have no clue what you listed from christies.
i’ve reviewed every main-hoiuse auction since 1965 and this one is not in my record.
Thanks David, I copied and pasted the text as I found it on Christies’ site some months ago when I started my list of Rudall serial numbers. Christies must have got the number wrong, or maybe it turned out to be a fake Rudall as they haven’t given an address in the stamp description, just “Rudall and Rose/London No.1900”. It sold as you can see in June 1995. Anyway I know you have no. 1900.
“Christies - Lot 149:
A rosewood and silver-mounted flute branded Rudall and Rose/London No.1900, with eight keys with pewterplugs, the sounding length 22¼in. (56.6cm).
Estimate: £300 - £500 ($480 - $800) – Sold for £293 ($468) Sale 6928 19 June 1995. London, South Kensington”
amusing.
clearly wrong.
and it’s a sale book i have been through…but not this entry.
okay…sleuthing time!