As someone here is called Monkey Face then H H could also be a nick name....Her/His Highness, Hairy Hands, who knows. This could even be in the 50s
Hammy Hamster... Keep going back to this, as I hadn't noticed the barbed wire until then. Sue mentioned it could even be 50s (...or very late 40s?). The pose, the angle, all suggests humour, aside from the cryptic inscription on the reverse. It seems rather more carefree than during wartime, so I think Sue is right that it is more likely to be early postwar. The quality of the photo suggests that too. The mortar looks new on those bricks - a temporary building?
They're much bigger than normal house bricks. I wondered at first if they might actually be stone, but they are very regular in size. However, there's UK bias coming in here: our concrete building blocks (or breeze blocks) are usually thinner than they are tall, whereas (according to Wikipedia) the ones used in the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand have the same height and width. See Code: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concrete_masonry_unit Unfortunately the article doesn't seem to mention the size of blocks used in continental Europe, but this might suggest that the photo wasn't taken in the UK. I'm still intrigued by the contraption leaning on the wall.
Is it a holder for brooms? And could the blocks be sandstone? - as you say, they are a bit too regular.
Definitely WW11 era. I thought breeze blocks. Yes I agree it looks like there are some brooms on a holder. The shirt looks to be some sort of khaki shirt.
Could they be those long-handled shovels on a stand, that could be used for beating out small fires? I can remember many years ago, at various places around Epping Forest there used to be such shovels for people to use should they come across a small fire. Maybe it was something to do with fire-fighting after a bomb had fallen. I’m probably way off the mark, but this has been bugging me all day
I've just been going though replies to see if this had been suggested, -could the left arm be completely tattooed or is it weird shadow marking the arm?
I 'think' it's a shadow, Wendy. Again, not entirely sure. This gentleman has now appeared in my parents' wedding album. I'm completely at a loss.
Not that I know of, Wendy. Interesting - I hadn't thought of that. 1962, Ann. The man does look younger in the first image, but... how much younger?
If you put the two images side by side, I think they are the same chap. If your Mum and Dad got married in 1962, then would that make the first photo taken in the 1950's? He looks about 35-40 in the wedding photo, so born about mid 1920's? I'm not much good at guessing people's ages.....
The hairline and high forehead are remarkably similar, they just have to be the same chap some years apart. (I am not going to try and age either picture - I would surely get it wrong)
