Is this Number 29 Hanbury Street?

[richardh]

Found this and wondered if it really is 29 Hanbury Street:
https://www.bridgemanimages.com/en/e...h/asset/869698

[Enigma]

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

[Wickerman]

Richard.

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

https://www.amazon.ca/Jack-Ripper-Location-Photographs-Collection/dp/B01K30XGRK

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

[richardh]

Thanks for confirming.

[jmenges]

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

[Christian]

Found this and wondered if it really is 29 Hanbury Street:
https://www.bridgemanimages.com/en/e...h/asset/869698

Incredible photo-no way is this image is from 1888!! Would love to know who took image and true date!!

[Al Bundy's Eyes]

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?

[Elamarna]

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

[Wickerman]

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

[Christian]

Brilliant thanks for clarifying.

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

[Christian]

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!!

[Wickerman]

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.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

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.

[Wickerman]

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?

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

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.