At last – your chance to own Vicky’s knickers!
A pair of Queen Victoria’s ample silk boxer shorts is going to auction. No reserve! They expect them to go for £1,000 to £2,000, but hoping for the best. The last pair to go on sale went for £10,000.
Also, some stockings and a chemise. Circa 1890.
Victoria was five feet nothin’. Those bloomers are 52″ around. And her chemise? Got a 66″ bustline.
Her Majesty’s smalls from his era have come on the market fairly often, reason being she willed most of them to her favorite servants. How would you put that, exactly? “Dear parlour maid. In recognition of your many years of faithful service, please accept this our third best pair of used panties.”
I dunno. Rich people are weird.
Posted: October 2nd, 2014 under britain, personal.
Comments: 15
Comments
Comment from drew458
Time: October 2, 2014, 10:37 pm
“Rich people are weird”. And kinky? Not sure how them bloomers is supposed to be worn, but they look rather, um, open up the middle there. Like, what, do you get one “bloom” per thigh and they only sort of wrap around mostly?
Comment from S. Weasel
Time: October 2, 2014, 10:40 pm
Yeah, they look like real low riders, don’t they? I have no idea how those are supposed to work.
Comment from Sigivald
Time: October 2, 2014, 10:58 pm
I believe the draw-string gathers them in much smaller than their open diameter, and likewise the legs are meant to be quite loose.
Likewise the chemise is meant to not be form fitting; it’s an under-shirt.
(I knew doing historical re-creation might be useful eventually…
HRM Victoria just wasn’t that big around, even if she was somewhat plump later in life, if photographs are any judge.)
Comment from Some Poet
Time: October 3, 2014, 12:33 am
I paid ten thousand quid for Queen Victoria’s smalls
You know there was many a girl who’d told me
I wouldn’t get in any woman’s pants at all
However as you can see
I’m in these pretty nice
For even the Queen Mother’s knickers has a price.
Comment from P2
Time: October 3, 2014, 12:44 am
Victoria’s Secrets?… No wonder they were not amused……..
Comment from gettimothy
Time: October 3, 2014, 12:48 am
Streak marks included?
Comment from mojo
Time: October 3, 2014, 12:50 am
Ladies maids, most likely. Too personal for a housemaid. Victoria believed strongly in propriety.
Comment from Stark Dickflüssig
Time: October 3, 2014, 1:19 am
52″?!
Sir Mix-a-Lot (OBE, etc etc) call your agent!
Comment from Hugegenic
Time: October 3, 2014, 5:17 am
Hello colleagues, how is all, and what you wish for to say concerning this piece of writing, in my view its really remarkable in favor of me.
Comment from Wolfus Aurelius
Time: October 3, 2014, 2:46 pm
When I glanced at the headline, I thought, “Victoria Beckham’s panties????” But no, it’s just my luck for it to be the late queen’s bloomers. Ah, well . . .
Comment from Davem123
Time: October 3, 2014, 3:47 pm
Hello Hugegenic, all is remarkable, and we all agree in this articles opinion of favorability toward your own self.
Regarding the drawers in question, one hopes that the garments were washed properly before their gifting. On the other hand, failure to have done so raises the possibility of cloning our own copy of the Queen. I’m starting to see the outline of a ripping-good sci-fi / steampunk novel.
Comment from S. Weasel
Time: October 3, 2014, 7:23 pm
Meh. Sorry about the spam getting through the filter. Blog is being hammered by spam (my email too — yours?).
I’ve stripped them of their links, so they’re safe to play with if you like.
Write a comment
Beware: more than one link in a comment is apt to earn you a trip to the spam filter, where you will remain -- cold, frightened and alone -- until I remember to clean the trap. But, hey, without Akismet, we'd be up to our asses in...well, ass porn, mostly.<< carry me back to ol' virginny