But that said, the weekly heritage slot in Mmegi is easily explained. I select an archive photo or heritage document (67 to date) and try and explain its significance and particular interest.

When was it taken? What does it tell us about the occasion? What is happening? Who is present? What are they doing? Uncaptioned photos which were taken even fairly recently may disconcert families who suddenly realise that they have little idea when and where this obviously holiday photo was taken or even the names of many of those present.

They believe that this might be Bene, or Thantshi or Lydia but they cannot be sure. A similar problem faces those confronted with an obviously important heritage photo such as the one I present above.

This is your Christmas teaser; as it was mine. So I give you a starter. Sitting in the front row are Seretse and Ruth. In the back row right is Muriel Sanderson and almost behind Seretse is the great West Indian cricketer, Learie Constantine.  Is it really worth making the effort to discover what this photo is all about? Hm. You would have to be extraordinarily lacking in curiosity if you didn't want to know what brought this varied group together, what they were doing, where were they doing it, when was it and why did someone think that the occasion was so important or interesting that a group photo was needed? Normally, a photo such as this would have the photographer's caption and very basic explanation.

As was the case with Katesa Schlosser's 1959 photo of the Ramotswa church which tells us what she thought important about the photo and therefore why she took it. But times change, and it may be that the unmentioned individual in the back-row of a group photo later turns out to be the most famous of the lot. But how would the photographer have known?

But it may also be that what the caption does not say provides an important clue. That said, most older, unpublished photos lack any explanation and their possibly huge value is irretrievably lost. So I leave you to your detective work.

If this photo was not taken here, it must have been in England. But what could possibly have been the circumstances which brought Seretse and Ruth together with that legendary West Indian cricketer?

If it was THE marriage, how did he get involved and why? It is routinely claimed that photos, as an image of a given moment, cannot lie. Is this so? Out of context, they can be very misleading. Is it therefore the photo or its interpretation which presents the problem?