A toast to Queen Vicki and her panties
It was in London’s Victoria and Albert Museum that many years ago I saw a sight that haunts me to this day.It was a pair of Queen Victoria’s underpants. I don’t know how they got them and wondered if some 19th century pervert had rummaged through her laundry hamper. But, the point is, they were huge! You could have accommodated a troop of Boy Scouts in them.
Not only were they huge – they were crotchless!
Did that mean that the Queen of Britain and her Empire was a bit on the kinky side and always ready for action? Well, maybe she was. There was that John Brown rumor, after all. But, it was for another reason that they were gusset-less.
Ladies of the day wore commodious skirts, sometimes hooped, and mightily difficult to hitch up when nature called. Consequently, they would mere stand in place – hopefully somewhere out on the lawn, maybe near the croquet pitch, and simply pee down their legs. Neither very sanitary or esthetically dainty, and I don't mean to be indelicate here, but sometimes a gal has to do what she has to do.
I only mention all of this stuff because today, in Canada, and elsewhere in the Commonwealth, it is Victoria Day.
So, here’s a toast to the old Queen and her voluminous knickers. Long may they both reign, in our hearts, at least.
Labels: The Queen's nether garment
posted by Ian Lidster at
7:39 PM
17 Comments:
I always wonder about stuff like that and what they did back then for their "monthly infirmary." Maybe it's better not to know.
It iS a very curious subject.
I wonder, did the lawn keeper have the same trouble keeping the lawn alive, as one does with dogs, er, pee?
Ian, we are NOT amused. How dare you say Queen Victoria was huge; she was a woman of traditional build! Indeed, the gall of the man and a commoner too!
If you set foot in London it will be off to the tower for you, my lad, and hanged by the neck (by HRM's knickers) until you are sorry.
(So that's why ladies liked playing croquet in those days! I never knew that little fact.)
Wow. That fact has given me a bit of a funny feeling in my tummy... crotchless panties. Oh my.
Redolent post.
One would most definitely NOT be amused to have one's undergarments the object of so much curiousity, especially of the commoner type.
One suspects that this might be a hanging offence.
Although, one is quite partial to hirsute, handsome gentlemen of good breeding.
So you'll probably get off with a warning this time, Ian.
I'm seriously shocked. I had no idea they were behaving like that all the way up to Victoria's time! Definitely not long ago enough for that sort of thing, the shame!
What a wonderful post! Why even *wear* panties if that's going to be the case? That's my question. I love the way you commemorated the day!
Ah. And today watching Mrs Brown - all that moving about, marking her territory, so to speak!!
I do believe though, that WE are the only country in the Commonwealth (or world, I guess for that matter) who does celebrate this [ig]noble woman.
I did not need to know that Ian.
Ah, Ian, you are a collector of the oddest facts.
So I wonder, did the Ladies of Victorian England have less trouble with athlete's foot?
So THAT was Victoria's secret!
lol... only you could pull this off with aplomb, ian :)
I'm with Angela - the underpants seem pretty superflous in that case. And I also have to say here, ewww.
Ewwwwwwwwwwwww.
But here in Quebec it was Patriot's day. Or something....
The Queen's bloomers???
I am still lol!
Great post, Ian.
Hahaha, some interesting thoughtful exploitation here... that is great... most of the royal women of way back, were quite large and from my understanding were indeed ready for action... great post! nice place to visit...:))))
Tomorrow 30th July, 2008 Queen Victoria's drawers, Nightdress and Chemise are going on the block in the UK. I'm going to bid for them. So there Ian, put that in yer pipe and smoke it. And by the way I have the photo's of them
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home