Uncandid Camera Part 2 (or wherever we got up to)

Greetings all!! Once again, sorry for the slowness of updating - I've been a bit distracted by other royals to concentrate on Queen Victoria, but now that's all changed and I'm back with some more photos I'd never seen before. Right then, without further ado, let's go to our favourite year, 1854.



So here they all are (minus Beatrice, of course) outside Buckingham Palace in 1854. Left to Right: Helena, Alice, Affie, Vicky, Arthur, Albert, Victoria, Bertie and Louise. I might've got Helena and Louise muddled up, so please forgive me. Oh yes, and there's a 10-1 chance that the random pram contains Leopold. Anyhoo, nice grouping don't you think, though Albert does of course look about 80 feet taller than everybody else, but again, that's normal. Well, here're some assorted zoomings in.



Well here we are, el-zoomed. Here (I think) we have Helen, Alice, Affie, Vicky and Arthur (in his dress...haha!) all looking somewhat mutinous (well I would be if I had to wear that little lot, with the exception of Affie's socks, which I would be incredibly happy to troll around in merrily.) Nice palm tree in the background too. Onward and downwards men (and women...)



Another zoom containing: Arthur, Albert, Victoria and Bertie - I accidently chopped Louise off...sorry... Anyway, we get to see the Queen's dress, which looks like it's been attacked by those crimping scissors I used to play with when I was little, just a REALLY big pair. Nice stripy embellishments though. Well I think that's just about exhausted that one, so on we go to some which I've already posted, but too small to see properly.



Ta daaa!! I posted this a while ago before I realised that I could zoom in and so this is the full length zoom, so we can see the LOVELY dress and somewhat unnervingly decorated chair. I do love this photo, but it does seem to be taken just before a display of lion taming using that chair. Hm. Ah well, here's an extra zoomy zoom of the same photo.



Other than the mild look of terror, I'd say that this is quite a pretty photo, wouldn't you? Very middle class as always, but nowt wrong with that say I. Anyway, let's pop over to 1857 just for a bit for something which interested me.



Yes, that IS a very scary carpet, but if you can drag your eyes away from it for just one second... yes, I know it's hard, but you can at least try. Good. Now, this was taken in 1857 at the Manchester Exhibition of Art Treasures, whatever that was. Well it probably was one of the Great Exhibiton "spin-offs" that happened all through the 1850s, naming no names of course *cough* Paris *cough*. Cue intense expressions. In all fairness, I bet they're listening to a really long, incredibly boring speech and are just trying to stay awake. From Left to Right we have: Epic chair, Victoria, Albert, blurred Vicky, Bertie, Affie. I don't know who the blurred individuals advancing upon them are, but Albert seems to be giving them SERIOUS evils don't you think? Interesting photo I thought. Anyway, on to 1860.



Well here we have a very zoomed in version of another photo I posted ages ago that was also a bit small. Note the little lines all over the photo that indicate it's been torn up and stuck back together again/folded. Anyway, that's one hell of a shawl isn't it? Lots of rhetorical question in this so far...hm...I must be turning into Cicero (let's hope not, eh?) Again, another look of horror. Hm. Perhaps it's the old story about advancing triffids again? I don't know. Ah well, let's end on a high with what I like to know as the "Swishy Photo". You'll see why if you scroll down.



Gubbins of gubbiness first: taken in 1889. That's it. Anyway, I like this photo, as she does look like she's having quite a good time swishing her dress (which I've just noticed looks like fur...hm...each to their own I s'pose...) If I lived back then, I'd be tempted to float about merrily in all those petticoats and swish and swoosh to my heart's content and if humble moi could do that, QV could, because she was the Queen and could do whatever she bloody well liked. Paraphrased from Blackadder there. :)

Well that's all for now, but be back soon with a special children's post, just for Whyte Fairy, my ever-faithful reader, as it was her birthday this week, so she deserves a birthday collection of photos. Ta ra for now. :)

Scribblings from an Unearthed Mole

How do. Anyway, I mentioned potential links to stories involving several folks from 'istory earlier in this blog, so here are the links, as well as pictures, blurbs, commentary and the usual nutterism that tends to lurk around these parts.

First up, we have my personal favourite: "O Tempora! O Mores!" which I'll now try to explain a bit about. Baaaaasically, I was researching Nicholas II and Alexandra for photo porpoises, when I went along my normal route of learning his family tree and that was when I realised that he had a brother, George, who had died in 1899 from TB. Hm, thunk I, so many young royals died young and unmarried, so why not make up George's story if he'd married before 1899? Here he is, by the way. He was in the Navy, hence the fake rock and the uniform



Well, as I'd been watching too much Lark Rise to Candleford at the time, I was a bit obsessed with Oxfordshire and rural accents, so I decided not only to tell the story from the perspective of someone other than George, but also to make his wife a blacksmith's daughter from Oxfordshire. Ta da, one Elspeth Gwendolyn Victoria Higgins. Now I know that it was basically IMPOSSIBLE for a Russian Grand Duke to marry a commoner (and an English one at that) but why not? It's my imagination anyway.

Well, that's the general scene set, but the title is Latin and Cicero (I'd expect nothing less...) and means: "Oh these times! Oh this conduct!" which sums up the story quite well, I think. Pretty much Elsie (as Elspeth is known) works at a library, goes to Windsor Castle, gets engaged to about a billion princes and then...well I'll leave you to read about that.

The vast amount of characters do get a wee bit confusing, so I'll pop a Dramatis Personae into the next post to help you all.

Now, the LINK: http://www.fictionpress.com/s/2815735/1/O-tempora_O_mores
(You'll have to copy and paste it into the long white box at the top of your screen, as links never work for me on computers.)
Enjoy.

Uncandid Camera Part I

Well I'm back with a vengance now and so it's time to get on with the blog. This little collection includes photos I have never, ever seen before (officer) so if they're new to you as well - cheer with me. : )



Ok, this photo was taken in 1854 by none other than the simply wonderful Roger Fenton, he of Crimean fame. Well I have actually seen this photo before, but never this clearly or the whole thing. Well, I know the Queen looks very grumpy (either that or hypnotised by Sir John Russel and a harpsichord) but it's quite a nice photo, despite the really creased sheet in the background (you'd have thought they'd be able to afford an iron, I mean honestly, O tempora, o mores* as Cicero would put it.) Yes, well, on to the actual never seen before ones.




Yes, now this one -eeeekkkk!!!!! I got so excited about this because not only had I never seen it before or even known of its existence, but also it's a companion to none other than the infamous White Top Hat Photo of earlier. Sorry it's so small, but I couldn't find a bigger version on tinternet, sozzles. Anyhoo, I think Victoria looks very young here, don't you? Mind you, as it's still 1854, she was only 35, but NO MATTER, my point still stands. Er...yes, well, I think I know what I'm talking about (hah!) so let's whizz forwards a bit to the next picccccy.



Yes, well this one's evidently from the set a couple of pictures ago, as that sheet's still not been ironed (even a Corby trouser press would do it... I live near Corby actually...oooh...) yes, well, this one's entitled: "Where's all the furniture gone?" as Albert does look rather scared (maybe the plants on the right are triffids and ate all the other furniture??) but I digress. This is 1854 AGAIN and also by Roger Fenton. I think the photographer may have taken this while running away from the triffids, which may explain the glare. Mind you, I thought that Albert looked a little less glarey in this photo than most of the others. Ach weeelll, on to one which made me chuckle.



I think he's just noticed the triffids. Not to mention the UNIRONED SHEET OF A DIFFERENT HUE!! That won't fool the professionals. Yes, well it's STILL 1854 (snore, bump, ouch) and Roger Fenton's still hanging around the place. A rather pointless comment is look at the ring. See it? Well done, have a Smartie. Well, in the truly amazing series Edward VII (Edward the King in America I think) Robert Hardy (who I always get muddled up with Thomas Hardy - yes, I am indeed a few sandwhiches short of a picnic basket, alas) plays Prince Albert and wears a ring just like that on his little finger. Yes, well, sorry to have wasted all your precious seconds of reading time, but it's something I thought the Nation should be aware of y'know. Yes, well, onwards mad dogs and Englishmen (and anyone else, provided it's not midday.)




Ok, I admit that I have seen this one before as well (I'm really not very good at this am I?) but I thought I'd put it up here, as some people have been led to believe that the lady on the far right is the Duchess of Kent. She's not. She is, in fact, Mary the Duchess of Gloucester and (at the time of this photo) the last living daughter (and possibly child) of George III. Well, from left to right, we have Bertie looking supremely bored; the Queen wearing a lampshade on her head; Alice doing her favourite pose with her hand on her chin (I've tried it myself...I just look like I'm trying to fix my head back on) and Mary, who looks just as bored as Bertie to be honest. On we go then.




Now I genuinely had never seen this photo before, except for once and that was in a newspaper, but it was stuck to a notice board with some woman standing in front of it, so I couldn't see it properly. It was about an exhibition of photographs, just like this one, which has started, but is IN ABERDEENN!!!! As that's about a million miles away from me, I was distraught that this photo was taunting me almost from behind the Woman, but then I stumbled across it on the Nation Portrait Gallery website and was joyful. I rather like this photo (ok, so I've never hated a photo yet, but you get my meaning) though she does look very, very scared about something (another clan of triffids perhaps?) and at least these curtains look in better shape than the sheets from earlier. It's not a particularly flattering photo (go to the aforementioned website to zoom in and you'll see what I mean) but that's one grooovy carpet. Oh yes, it's from 1860 by the way, as is the above one (I think - it could be 1859, but I'm not sure.) Yep, well, onto one that EVERYONE knows about.




So, here we are in about 1863 (I know John Brown didn't come south until 1864, but this looks suspiciously like bonnie porridge land to me) and I know it looks just like the one that everyone's seen before, but it's not. Observe (I love that word - it makes me feel so clever) the fact that Victoria's looking almost directly at the camera, whereas in the other one she's looking...somewhere else...yeah...I'm good at this. Well anyway, here it be and there it be and on we go.




Yes, it's one of the many, many, MANY photos taken of Victoria with Noble the collie (or this one could be Sharp actually...) but either way, it's a dog and about 1868. Ish. It could be a bit earlier come to think of it, but oh welldey well. Methinks le dog whose name I can't decide has spotted some more triffids and is about to Get Out Of There. Yes, well I'm pretty sure now that this dog is Sharp, as the next photo will show.




Yay! It's Noble the collie!! Yes, well, he was Queen Victoria's favourite collie and his fluffiness (ooh! It's a word!) does imply that the dog above isn't him, but Sharp, who looked very similar I think, but had a shorter coat. I thought I'd pop him in here, just because he's rather nice and even got his own inscription on his tombstone from the queen (when he died...obviously...) Yes, well, let's just go.




Getty Images says that this is from 1872, which is why the date of the one with Sharp is so late. I'm trying to work out whether that's the same dress in both pictures - I think it is, but the hem's changed a bit. Now I've got that bit out of the way, it's time to analyse. Yes, well there isn't really that much to say here, except that they've finally got round to ironing the curtains and er...it's inside? Yes, well I haven't got a vast amount to say off the top of my head, so let's toddle off to something a little less taxing on "Ma little grey cells."




"Gladstone slips on a real banana skin as his political enemies celebrate by performing the Can-can in mufti." That's the caption for this cartoon from Uncyclopedia, which is actually t'riffic if you have the time to take a gander, but it's still funny even if you don't. This is, of course, William Gladstone, our Prime Minister (or First Lord of the Treasury if you want to be really picky - technically the first 'Prime Minister' to be addressed thus was Stanley Baldwin in 1937, before that they were known as 'the First Lord of the Treasury' formally and Prime Minister was originally a name of insult) for simply AAAGES during the 19th century. So there you have it, all that pointless information crammed into one tiny head (and I do actually have a remarkably small head) now released upon the world.

So goodbye, take care and always carry a lightbulb. Adios, until the next time. : )


*"Oh these times! O this conduct!", In Catilinam I. Yay.

New Look Vikipedia - OOOOOooooooh!!

Yes, well, in case you hadn't already noticed, there's been a little revamp of this particular blog, inspired by Whyte Fairy's one, which was actually so fab that I had to find out where her background came from and...yes, well, I spent three hours yesterday selecting pictures to go along the edges and my cunning plot is to reach the bottom. Mwa ha haaaaa. Anyway, here's the link to the place where I got the header and a lot of the icons: http://http://blo64rt.blogspot.com (ok, I know it's not a link, but copy and paste it, as links and pasting them have some sort of vendetta against me - them and tarantulas, but that's something completely different...)

Go and look peoples, 'tis wunderbar. :)

Oh yes, and just as a taster of things to come, here's the promised photo of Queen Victoria in her specs:



Personally, I'd have gone for some Eric Morecambe style ones, but I don't suppose they were around back then...this is about 1899 I reckon, but I'm literally just using my insanely fast 5-second analysis, so if you know better, pray do tell and I'll correct it. Yes, well the dress post may have to go on hold for a while, as I've discovered a vast cache of UNSEEN photographs (well, unseen by me at least) that I'm desperate to share with the nation as a whole. Oh yes, and I'm off up Lunnun way tomorrow to go and see the exhibition at Buckingham Palace, hence the near delirious excitement in my voice...well, typing. :DDD

Have a nice day and I'll see you...oh er...this isn't an email is it? Ah well, HAVE A NICE LIFE PEOPLE READING THIS!! Please do. Anyhoo, I'm orf now to sort through me photos, so ta ta and I'll be back soon. :)

"You SHALL go to the ball Cinders!" Er...what?

Hello again everyone and Wilkommen to the next bit. Pray do ignore the title, as I was typing under the influence of sherbert. Anyhoo, here are the promised dress photos.



This is the earliest surviving dress of Queen Victoria's and she wore it when she was about twelve, so that would've been around 1831. The mannequin does look a bit creepy, but it's quite a pretty dress and very...lacy. Well I think that that's aboot it, so on to he next one.



This is, I have to say, incredibibbly funky, mais oui? Tartan, tartan, tartan even before the Balmoral days. Well I'm guessing again here, but I'd say Victoria was about fifteen or sixteen when she wore this, as it goes down to the floor and just generally looks more mature. I can't quite get over the amazing tartannesss, so while I recover, here's one from a lot of years later.



10th February 1840. There's a date to put in your diary (if you're reading this in the past that is) as it's the day that Queen Victoria married Prince Albert. Ok, just ignore the mannequin, who looks like a corpse, and just concentrate on le dress. Pretty non? Thanks to Victoria, now pretty much everyone wears a white dress at their wedding, as all the girls getting married back then wanted to copy her style (man) and you can see why...from the helpful piccy by my fave Winterhalter, back again to give us this lurverly painting.



Next we toddle off to a particularly bad photo of a particularly nice dress and tiara-ra-ra. Now personally I think that the person who took these photos was either very tall or on stilts, as they're all at a really unflattering angle aren't they? The small child with the bob could be Bertie or Affie, but I have no idea which (probably Bertie, as he went to the partay in the mahoosive greenhouse.) Again, there's a Winterhalter to add gravitas and a better impression of what it looked like on and with all the jazzy jeweeeeelllsssssss, etc. This portrait, called 'The First of May' in 1851, depicts the Duke of Wellington (who was actually Irish by the way), Prince Albert being distracted by some pottery triffids while presenting his wife with the bill for all their bus expeditions in the posing of photos, Prince Arthur holding some premature mistletoe (I know it's not, but y'know) and the Queen wondering what on earth they were going to do with yet ANOTHER casket.





Please excuse me for a second. WWWWRRRRRAAAAAGGGGGHHHHHHH!!!! Thank you. Now, the reason for that little outburst was because I've actually SEEN this dress with my own eyes (as opposed to anybody else's...) in Lunnun at the triffic exhibition there. I love, love, LOVE this dress and desperately want one of my own (a bit longer though, I think I'm a bit tall to pull that particular one off) to wear around the house, around the world and in general. Well, I'll stop gabbling now and let you just absorb the wonder that is that dress. :)))



Ok, I've decided to leaf it there for a bit, as I need to go and make some lunch, but stay tuuuned for more. Oh yes, and expect some links to several stories I've written involving all my favourite (and some of my least favourite) royals to appear razzer qvickly. Adios amigos. :)

"Say Gorgonzola!" Mopping Up

Yes, well, as the title may suggest, this is just a pile of photos I've recently discovered and want to share with the nation, complete with my (haphazard) dating system (called A Brain) and comments as per usual. So, from 1910 last post, here we zoom right back to...um...well here really:




I think that this was taken in about 1850, but for reasons I'll tell you in a minute. First I'd better explain the photo, or rather lack of a head in Queen Victoria's case. This is because she closed her eyes at the wrong moment and so a pretty unflattering photo was the result, so she rubbed out her face using her thumb. As for the childrens, they are as follows: Alice (it could be Vicky, but you'll see why I think it's her in a minute), Bertie, the Queen, Helena (head on Victoria's knee), Vicky, Affie. So ta and da about that one and let's skedaddle onto the next one, taken in the same year.



Before anything, I just have to say how much I love Bertie's expression in this photo. There, done, now the explanation about the first photo. I think that Vicky looks like the one I've labeled Vicky in the top one (which is why I did it) and Alice looks like Alice (as opposed to Wordsworth or someone.) Again, Helena appears to have collapsed on her mother's knee, but this time Affie's noticed and looks confused. No danger of any unflattering eye-closing in this one for the queen, as a bonnet's obscured her face completely from view. Left to right: Alice, Helena, Affie, the Queen, Bertie, Vicky. Onwards we go then.



I had to include this one, as it's gone down in my head's history as "The White Top Hat Photo" and I don't know why, but it just makes me laugh. I think it's a combination of the hat, stance and Albert's grumpy expression. I'd date this at about 1854, but it could be a few years earlier...or later...well that was good dating wasn't it? Anyway, on to the photo that made me sing with happiness when I found it.




Hahahahaaa!!! It's the famous degeurrotype I've heard about so many times in books, but never actually seen, as all my searches were in vain. However, it suddenly sprang from nowhere when I was looking for something completely different and very nearly made my day. Anyway, I was very excited and then my new book arrived from Amazon. With this photo in. To spare anyone else out there the angst of trawling all the photo websites they can think of looking, here it is. This is, of course, the photo taken before Vicky (the Princess Royal's) wedding. According to the queen, she was so nervous and shook so much that she was blurred on the final picture. Vicky looks understandably nervous (she was only 17 and younger than me, me who can hardly walk down a corridor without crashing into walls) but Fritz (the Crown Prince of Prussia) was a good man and they both adored each other. Well, let's dash through the snow to 1859 (this is 1858 by the way.)



Yet another 1850s photo where Albert looks fed up with life in general and Victoria isn't facing the camera. Again, the shrubbery has excelled itself and is almost dominating the photo. This is, I think, part of the set that Lady Day took in the Isle of Wight (see another photo thread for one of the other photos in the set) in 1859. There isn't a lot more to say about this one to be honest, but again it's domestic and rustic and...other words ending in "tic".



In the same Set of Dreams, we have this one of Victoria on her own. She looks pretty distracted by something (Lord Palmerston playing 'I've Got A Lovely Bunch of Coconuts' on the harmonica perhaps?) but it gives us a good view of her dress. Another relatively pretty one (though I don't know the actual colour) and isn't as enormously crinoliney as the others (yes spellcheck, it's a word.) Well shall we continue? Very well, on we go.



Here we have Victoria and her youngest daughter, Beatrice. As this is 1859, 'Baby' would have been about two, which again gives us food for height thought. It looks to me as if the Queen's telling Beatrice to keep still, as she's balanced on a rather groovy chair (all right, probably without the "groovy") and an even gaudier carpet. This is, again, one of a set, which I didn't know when I first saw it, but (as you'll see) I do know now. Well, let's go to the next one.



Et so we come to le end of this particular "Mopping Up" post, but if I find anything else, expect something to come soon. Now this photo was also taken in 1859 at the same time as the one above it. I had never seen this photo before and I rather like it, despite the fact that both of them look pretty scared, which is very excusable when you notice the Giant Pork Pie creeping out from behind the Queen and the really, really uneven floor (could it be carpet-covered lava?) Well no, it couldn't, otherwise they wouldn't still be sitting there (stop talking brain, stop typing fingers.)

And there we have it folks, or rather "folk". This may be the end of this particular foray through time, but they'll certainly be more, starting (I think) with a selection of dresses and then...well who knows? The world is my lobster as far as this blog's concerned (yes, yes I know, but I don't like oysters.)

Toodle-oo for now.
: )

"Say Cheese!" Part 5

Hello there, ich habe returned (see, my German's even worse than my French) along with some photos of the very last years of the Victorian Era. So, without further ado, let's jet off to the 1890s and this photo.



Well here we have George V's children (some of them) in about 1897 with their Great-Grandmother. From left to right: Bertie (future George VI), David (future Edward VIII), Mary (the Princess Royal) and Queen Victoria. I quite like this photo (I know I say that a lot, but it's true) especially as it's sort of an "action shot". Oh yes, and does anyone else think that the queen's wearing glasses? I know that her eyesight was very bad by this point and there are a few photos hanging around where she's wearing them, but it's a bit hard to tell in this one. I know it looks like Bertie's wearing a skirt and that's simply because he is. Boys wore skirts in those days for reasons best kept to themselves and I knew this fact at the very young age of six. I know this because I recently found an old school exercise book of mine with the title: "The Victorians" and all I had written, in very large letters, was: "THE BOYS WORE DRESSES!!" so there we are. Now, on with the show and the next photo.



Now here we are, a little more grown up and you'll be glad to know that Bertie's come out of the cross-dressing stage and into the Sailor Suit Era. From left to right: Bertie, Mary, David, Henry, the Queen. This was taken in 1900 (according to a book I can't remember the name of and assorted date calculations.) An interesting thing about this photo, which I read in another book I can't remember the name of, was that there's someone else in this picture, but we can't see them. Apparently, Queen Victoria was so frail (she was getting on a bit after all) that she daren't hold her great grandson in case she dropped him, so a lady in waiting (I can't remember which one) hid behind her chair and held her elbow so she didn't drop Henry. That's probably why he looks somewhat confused. I know that Bertie looks bigger than David, but they're definitely labeled right, as David's wearing long trousers, which Bertie wouldn't be old enough to (another odd Victorian boy-dressing thing.) Now, I think I should put a warning about the next two photos: MORBID WARNING, ACHTUNG, MORBIDITY, which is surprisingly a word. Let's go to 1901 now.








Now it's pretty safe to say that this is the last ever photograph taken of Queen Victoria. She died on 22nd January 1901 surrounded by her children and grandchildren (as the famous bulletin reads.) It's quite sad, but in a way it's rather nice, as she'd wished for her death in the early 1860s so she could be with Albert and now she is. Note the two pictures of Albert: the one on the wall behind the bed is of him on his deathbed and I don't recognise the other one, but it could be by Winterhalter. She was dressed in her wedding veil and surrounded by momentos, not to mention flowers.

The new king, Edward VII only outlived her by nine years and died on the 6th May 1910. There's a deathbed picture of him too and it's only really from this angle that you can see how much he and his mother looked like each other (in the nose especially) which is why I have these pictures on my computer.





And so our little voyage through the photographic history of Queen Victoria comes to an end. There will be one more post with extra photos that I've found recently, but couldn't put in before now from assorted eras and also some of dresses I found on Getty Images. So until then, have a nice day and I hope you've learnt something from this little lot - I've become quite attached to them, so much so, in fact, that occasionally I forget they're dead...that can be awkward.

: )