Is this Number 29 Hanbury Street?

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • richardh
    Inspector
    • Apr 2010
    • 1166

    #1

    Is this Number 29 Hanbury Street?

    Found this and wondered if it really is 29 Hanbury Street:
    Download stock image by English Photographer - The interior of 29 Hanbury Street,1888 - High quality fine art images, pictures, photos and videos from Bridgeman Images. Experts in licensing art, culture and history images.

    Attached Files
    JtRmap.com<< JtR Interactive Map
    JtRmap FORM << Use this form to make suggestions for map annotations
    ---------------------------------------------------
    JtR3d.com << JtR 3D & #VR Website
    ---------------------------------------------------
  • Enigma
    Detective
    • Aug 2019
    • 309

    #2
    Hi Richard. If memory serves, this photo has been posted before. The consensus at the time was that it is the hallway at 29 Hanbury Street. The doorway to the back yard can been seen immediately at the right of the stairs.

    Regards, Gazza
    Why a four-year-old child could understand this report! Run out and find me a four-year-old child, I can't make head or tail of it.

    Comment

    • Wickerman
      Commissioner
      • Oct 2008
      • 14864

      #3
      Richard.

      This book by a previous Casebook member, Phil Hutchinson, contains a number of internal photo's of No.29 Hanbury St.



      The one you question is one of four internal photo's of the passage, from the book.
      Regards, Jon S.

      Comment

      • richardh
        Inspector
        • Apr 2010
        • 1166

        #4
        Thanks for confirming.
        JtRmap.com<< JtR Interactive Map
        JtRmap FORM << Use this form to make suggestions for map annotations
        ---------------------------------------------------
        JtR3d.com << JtR 3D & #VR Website
        ---------------------------------------------------

        Comment

        • jmenges
          Moderator
          • Feb 2008
          • 2241

          #5
          Correction:

          The photo posted is not from the Whitby-Green collection and does not appear in the books Then & Now or Location Photographs.
          It is just taken from a similar angle as Whitby’s photograph.

          JM
          Last edited by jmenges; 11-09-2023, 06:23 PM.

          Comment

          • Christian
            Sergeant
            • Apr 2019
            • 661

            #6
            Originally posted by richardh View Post
            Found this and wondered if it really is 29 Hanbury Street:
            Download stock image by English Photographer - The interior of 29 Hanbury Street,1888 - High quality fine art images, pictures, photos and videos from Bridgeman Images. Experts in licensing art, culture and history images.
            Incredible photo-no way is this image is from 1888!! Would love to know who took image and true date!!

            Comment

            • Al Bundy's Eyes
              Chief Inspector
              • Sep 2019
              • 1776

              #7
              Originally posted by Christian View Post

              Incredible photo-no way is this image is from 1888!! Would love to know who took image and true date!!
              If Christian says no way then no way it is, he's a less frequent contributor but he knows his photos. Out of curiosity Christian, what rules it out?
              Thems the Vagaries.....

              Comment

              • Elamarna
                Commissioner
                • Sep 2014
                • 5806

                #8
                Originally posted by Christian View Post

                Incredible photo-no way is this image is from 1888!! Would love to know who took image and true date!!
                I don't believe anyone is claiming it's from 1888.

                It's much later. Mid 20th century I believe.

                Steve

                Comment

                • Wickerman
                  Commissioner
                  • Oct 2008
                  • 14864

                  #9
                  One of the photo's of Hanbury St. has a stamp - Kodak Limited London, September 1961, on the back.
                  Regards, Jon S.

                  Comment

                  • Christian
                    Sergeant
                    • Apr 2019
                    • 661

                    #10
                    Brilliant thanks for clarifying.
                    Originally posted by Wickerman View Post
                    One of the photo's of Hanbury St. has a stamp - Kodak Limited London, September 1961, on the back.

                    Comment

                    • Christian
                      Sergeant
                      • Apr 2019
                      • 661

                      #11
                      Originally posted by Al Bundy's Eyes View Post

                      If Christian says no way then no way it is, he's a less frequent contributor but he knows his photos. Out of curiosity Christian, what rules it out?
                      The image posted is far to crisp and clean to be 1888 !!! It is an incredible photo
                      Also what looks like conduit for electric gives a hint!!
                      Last edited by Christian; 11-11-2023, 11:16 AM.

                      Comment

                      • Wickerman
                        Commissioner
                        • Oct 2008
                        • 14864

                        #12
                        From what I've read elsewhere, Hanbury Street was pulled down in 1970, so that the limit for any other photo's.

                        I mention this because the photo in O.P. is unnaturally bright, and in Phil Hutchinson's book there is the same photo, but all his internal photo's are very dark.
                        This photo may belong to a different photographer than the set bought by Hutchinson. So I should point out, the collection published by Hutchinson dates to Sept. 1961, this one above although of the same view could have been taken by someone else on a different date, but still no later than 1970.
                        Regards, Jon S.

                        Comment

                        • PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1
                          Inactive
                          • Sep 2022
                          • 3067

                          #13
                          Originally posted by Wickerman View Post
                          From what I've read elsewhere, Hanbury Street was pulled down in 1970 ...

                          I read that number 29 was demolished in 1969, not long after James Mason visited it.

                          Comment

                          • Wickerman
                            Commissioner
                            • Oct 2008
                            • 14864

                            #14
                            That was 1967, wasn't it, the James Mason documentary?
                            Hanbury was a long street, it could have began demolition in one year and continued into the next?
                            Regards, Jon S.

                            Comment

                            • PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1
                              Inactive
                              • Sep 2022
                              • 3067

                              #15
                              Originally posted by Wickerman View Post
                              That was 1967, wasn't it, the James Mason documentary?
                              Hanbury was a long street, it could have began demolition in one year and continued into the next?
                              That is correct.

                              1967.

                              My understanding is that only the north end of the street, which as Long said was nearest to Brick Lane, was demolished.

                              Number 29 was replaced by Truman Brewery.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X