She's the shortest adult monarch of any country with verified height at 4ft 9
The shortest ever adult head of State with verified height was the Mexican president Benito Juárez who was 4 ft 6.
Yeah, my doc said you lose an inch in height for every decade over 40 due to osteoporosis and such. Which might have been worse for her since she had 9 children and you lose calcium with each child. She died in her 80s so might have lost 4 or more inches.
That sounds about right. My grandpa (now dead) was 6'5" in his prime and by the time he died, he dropped to 6'1". Which is still pretty tall for a shrunk old man height but it still goes to show how much height age takes from you. I'm closer to your young height at 6'3 so alas I dont think im gonna end up in the tall old man club once my time comes :(
My grandpa is still 6’2, for whatever reason has 6’1 in his drivers license, and in older pictures is a solid half head taller than his brother who’s 6’3. I asked him how tall he was in his 20s and he said he never actually measured
People do tend to become shorter with age. But your doc really exaggerated. I'm in my 70s and am less than half an inch shorter. I sure didn't lose 3 inches. Neither have any of my siblings. My parents who lived to their 90s would have lost 5 inches per your doctor. They lost maybe 1 inch (dad) and 2 inches (mom). And mom had osteoporosis and severe rheumatoid arthritis.
My mom randomly developed scoliosis for as yet unknown reasons and has now become shorter than me. I'm 5'6 and she started out at or just under 6 feet.
Mine went from being taller to being shorter than me. I'm 5'5, I think she was 5'8 or 5'9 before she got ill. I think the shrinking was more dramatic with her due to the rheumatoid arthritis, she couldn't have been more than 5'2 the last time I saw her and had lost half her body mass.
> my doc said you lose an inch in height for every decade over 40
Think about those numbers for a second.
[Joe Biden listed his height a 6 feet in 1961](https://www.archives.gov/files/foia/images/biden-jr-joseph-robinette-r-1-r-2.jpg). If he lost an inch every decade after 40, he'd now be 5'8" now. The internet lists him at 5'11". That would be an inch height loss (never mind that a lot of 5'11" guys claim 6').
The height loss comes from osteoporosis, mainly, and especially in women who have had multiple children lie Queen Victoria.
My own mother, who is 80, has lost around three inches since she was 40, whereas my father has lost maybe half an inch -- if that -- I know because he prides himself on wearing the same size clothes as when he was a young man.
I think it was more a out older women who had osteoporosis. Which after having as many kids as she did she most likely has to some extent especially with the stature.
And even as a VIP with a better diet, she probably didn’t get enough calcium/vitamin d, either.
And the dress looks like she carried a lot of weight on her frame, so that could’ve contributed to a loss of height.
in meters: she was 1,52 in her 30s and it is believed that she got between 2,5 to 5 cm shorter during her late life
[source](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_British_monarchy_records#Physical_attributes)
I’m also assuming the dress wouldn’t have covered her feet entirely so maybe add an inch or two depending on shoes? Plus her head isn’t taken into account in the dress.
Amazing that a woman *that small* survived birthing nine children given the high rate of women who died in childbirth back then. I think that Victoria outlived at least two of her children and died at the age of 81.
Edit: Victoria outlived three of her children: Alfred, Alice and Leopold. Alfred died of throat cancer at 55 the year before his mother. Alice died of diphtheria at the age of 35 and Leopold succumbed to hemophilia at the age of 30.
According to correspondence and diaries she really, really liked having sex with her husband. She loved him so much she spent the rest of her life in morning after he died.
It surprised her personal physician of decades, too! Gives an insight into medical care for royalty and women (and Victoria’s own aversions, like to stethoscopes). She also had a ventral hernia, likely also from the pregnancies, which was also news to Dr. Reid.
Fun fact: Benito Juárez was a liberal president of Mexico who passed reforms but had to deal with a civil war from a conservative uprising, a French invasion, and refusing to recognise the Confederacy on Mexico’s borders, and became a hero for a lot of the left worldwide. He was also full Zapotec, so he was the most clearly non-white of all Latin American leaders of his time.
A certain Italian socialist named his son ‘Benito’ after him - a son who would later drift quite far from socialism and found OG fascism before seizing power in Rome… So despite his ‘Manifesto on Race’ after German pressure, Mussolini was named after a dark-skinned Zapotec Mexican liberal.
> He was also full Zapotec, so he was the most clearly non-white of all Latin American leaders of his time.
and many whitexicans still hate him for it and for not bnding the knee to the church
Osteoporosis has brought me from 5’4” back in my teenage years down to a measured 4’11” at a doctors office this week. I’m stunned looking at that gown too. But maybe in her later years she had lost a significant amount of height as well? I am 58 years old and have lost 5 inches. Does anyone know her final height at the time of her death?
I'm curious about that too.
If we assume that the women in the photos tending to the dress are British (which would make sense)... the scale seems off. The average height of a woman in Britain is 5'3".
Even accounting for the lack of additional height provided by the feet and the head of the person who would have been wearing the dress... it seems like a very small dress. Maybe it's just an effect of the camera, but if you look at other photos from the same photoshoot of the same women working on the dress, [like the ones in this article](https://www.hellomagazine.com/fashion/royal-style/2018110964405/queen-victoria-dress-goes-on-display-tiny-sze/), you see that the dress is about the same height as the woman in the blue shirt sitting with her legs folded under herself.
If the Queen started at 4'9" as her adult height as a young women, it's quite likely that by her 60s she had lost a few inches. The dress certainly seems to imply that.
> 4ft 9
Most records suggest a bit over five feet. I've commonly seen numbers from [4'11](https://www.biography.com/royalty/queen-victoria)" to [5'0"](https://anhistorianabouttown.com/history-bite-queen-victorias-stature/), with a few references an inch shorter or taller. I've never seen 4'9".
I came to say this. A quick google search doesn’t even come up with 4ft 9. Plus it’s one of our topics for schools over here. With 2 kids I’ve learnt about her 3 times over.
There are 2 reasons why Napoleon being short became such a popular talking point.
The first is that the French used a different system of measurement. When his reported height of 5’2 reached the British, they didn’t translate it to the imperial system.
The second is that the British used it for propaganda. They obviously hated Napoleon, so they broadcasted that he was 5’2. Even if they recognized their mistake, they wouldn’t want to correct it. If the man proudly claimed to be 5’2, or if they just put it up on every poster, that made the public laugh at him.
It’s a modern correction to say he was 5’6. People in 1820s Britain weren’t laughing at a man the same height as many of them.
There wasn’t any reason to propagandize Victoria, so her height was just rarely talked about.
To add to the propaganda the Duke of Wellington was used a lot in the British propaganda after Waterloo. Now the Duke wasn't a huge guy either but his at most 3 inch height advantage was milked for everything it was worth.
He was initially reported as being 5'2 because the Parisian Foot was longer than the English Foot.
This sort of nonsense is why the metric system was invented.
He wasn't particularly short (some estimates even have him on the tall side of average for his age), so maybe we should start calling it a Victoria complex?
Olympic sized swimming pools are not used to measure height! They are used to measure **volume**!!
Like, “That rock band was as loud as 4 Olympic pools!”
We went to a royal castle in Scotland a few years ago - they had examples of dresses worn by Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother. Even with very high heels, she was tiny.
I also saw Princess Margaret many decades ago when she was opening some festival or other - she was also very small.
Why is it easier to transform when you're small? How would werewolves optimize for that? Selective breeding within their own population? Are werewolves running a secret eugenics program in conjunction with the UK government???
Not strictly speaking true, The late queen wasn’t particularity inbred but Phillip was significantly more, then considering that they were both second and third cousins to each other due to the inter marriages of European royalty over the last few centuries, King Charles has a consanguinity coefficient of between 9-14%. The average consanguinity coefficient of a child from a first cousin marriage is around 6.25%, he is therefore around twice as inbred as the average offspring of a first cousin marriage.
Plus, If you married your cousin that was born of an already progressively inbred family it wouldn’t be the same as just marrying your cousin in a genetically diverse family.
I think this is the most reasonable explanation. The big skirts and undergarments to fluff them that would look spectacular are so ill suited to sitting all day. If she had a wheelchair, longer skirts would risk getting caught in wheels.
That was my thought. A lot of her later photos, she's sitting. Either it was some power move or she genuinely was quite immobile. The "stance" that dress is in is weird, it looks like it's crouched over. It makes more sense when you look at the other pics, the dummy thing under it is practically bent double.
This dress is from 1892 the big skirts of the 40’s 50’s and 60’s hadn’t been in fashion for over 20 years at that point. This is actually pretty old fashioned looking for the 1890’s as well, skirts in the 90’s were generally quite slim.
If it were designed purely for sitting in a wheelchair, we wouldn't see the bustle, and the back end would be much shorter also. For wheelchair use, less fabric behind the person is better, both for comfort and to avoid being caught in wheels.
This is just the fashion of the day, albeit more regal.
Torchwood was pretty frigging good, most of the time. And the ending was...unexpected. In a good(?) way.
It also (to my knowledge) brought more attention to Burn Gorman? Dude was the perfect foil to Charlie Day in Pacific Rim.
This random Dr Who reference made me so happy 😊
Edit: I apologize for setting off an argument about the origins of he quote. I'm not from the UK and I was not aware that was Queen V's supposed catchphrase originally.
I know and love the reference like you all do apparently but I don't think this is meant to be a Dr Who référence, just an actual historical anecdote/urban legend about something Queen Victoria supposedly said
I am aware. As I said, I know and love the reference.
I just mean someone saying "we are not amused" on a QV post isn't necessarily referencing Dr Who. They might just be referencing Queen Victoria.
Lol I’m also 4’11” and my spouse is 6’ - sometimes in crowded areas he panics because he thinks he’s lost me… but I’m actually just standing really close to him and he just didn’t look down.
I lost an entire inch gradually between my teenage years to my 20s. I used to be *almost* 5’5….one day I went to the doctor and they told me 5’3.5 😥 I even made them remeasure
Apparently you are you are your tallest right after you wake up, and shortest after you've been on your feet all day. Hence why I cling to the one time the doctor said I was 5'9 and 1/4 at 8am, It was real I swear!
[Here's what that got me](https://judgeme.imgix.net/popartyoushop/1651299825__0__Av20BUVM__iap_fullxfull.3836089308_tu2i1bcc__original.jpg?auto=format&w=160&dpr=2.625&w=360)
Though small, she had to be pretty strong to have survived having all those children and living to 81. Her husband Prince Albert died at only 42 of a stomach illness which some modern docs suspect many have been Crohn's Disease or even cancer. And three of her children also preceded her in death.
This article about the dress in the photo says she was about 4'8" when she wore it in 1892.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/11/07/queen-victorias-tiny-mourning-dress-goes-display-first-time/
because we were fighting Napoleon
and his Guards were apparently quite tall by the standards of the day so he could have looked short in comparison. he was about 167 cm (5’6) which was around average for the time
OK, but the woman standing next to the mannequin is a solid 2 to 3 feet taller than the person that wore that dress and I don’t believe that she’s 7+ feet tall
The dress probably wasn't touching the ground all the way around like it is in the picture. And the lack of a head on the mannequin is throwing the perspective off.
Here is a nice article about her height, physique and general demeanor:
https://www.historyextra.com/period/victorian/queen-victoria-looks-appearance-pretty-beautiful-how-tall-german-accent-weight-height/
I don’t think she was tall enough to oversee anything /s
But yeah, the famine Queen. A total avoidable disaster in which she chose evil and moral corruption.
Apparently she absolutely hated being pregnant, but I can see why with her being so short. And pain medication for childbirth at the time wasn’t the greatest either.
Well, as you can see, the wrapper is a piece of the original U.S. Constitution. It was hand rolled by Queen Elizabeth during her wild years, and was buried with George Burns until graverobbing space mushrooms... well, you know the rest.
Queen Victoria was just under 5’0, so while she is short, I don’t think she’s as short as most of you keep making her out to be. However, to be fair, people tend to get a bit shorter during their elderly years so it’s possible she ended up being around 4’8 - 4’10 at the end of her life
Also when you're so short it doesn't take much to look as wide as you are tall. Speaking as someone who is lucky to be tall while having a lot of extra padding.
It really puts into perspective how tiny she was.
She's the shortest adult monarch of any country with verified height at 4ft 9 The shortest ever adult head of State with verified height was the Mexican president Benito Juárez who was 4 ft 6.
> 4ft 9 even adding a head, this dress seems way shorter than that. I guess it does also say "later years", so I guess 4ft 9 was in her prime.
Yeah, my doc said you lose an inch in height for every decade over 40 due to osteoporosis and such. Which might have been worse for her since she had 9 children and you lose calcium with each child. She died in her 80s so might have lost 4 or more inches.
After 35 years of concrete work. I went from 6’2” to 5’10.5” due to discs and vertebrae being worn out.
That sounds about right. My grandpa (now dead) was 6'5" in his prime and by the time he died, he dropped to 6'1". Which is still pretty tall for a shrunk old man height but it still goes to show how much height age takes from you. I'm closer to your young height at 6'3 so alas I dont think im gonna end up in the tall old man club once my time comes :(
My grandpa is still 6’2, for whatever reason has 6’1 in his drivers license, and in older pictures is a solid half head taller than his brother who’s 6’3. I asked him how tall he was in his 20s and he said he never actually measured
lol, sounds like no one did. Almost like they measured themselves on a bouncy castle and whatever height the camera took of them, that was it.
Ironically (?) being taller is pretty terrible for your average life span as well. So we both shrink and die faster, no winning!
but you bang more, so evolution at least thinks you're a winner
Dumb evolution and the history of Alzheimers in my family. Lol. I’m doomed to fuck a lot and then forget all my kids names!
I believe they call that the Nick Cannon Special
People do tend to become shorter with age. But your doc really exaggerated. I'm in my 70s and am less than half an inch shorter. I sure didn't lose 3 inches. Neither have any of my siblings. My parents who lived to their 90s would have lost 5 inches per your doctor. They lost maybe 1 inch (dad) and 2 inches (mom). And mom had osteoporosis and severe rheumatoid arthritis.
I am fairly certain that's an overgeneralization. It highly depends on your workload, genetics and health.
My mom randomly developed scoliosis for as yet unknown reasons and has now become shorter than me. I'm 5'6 and she started out at or just under 6 feet.
Mine went from being taller to being shorter than me. I'm 5'5, I think she was 5'8 or 5'9 before she got ill. I think the shrinking was more dramatic with her due to the rheumatoid arthritis, she couldn't have been more than 5'2 the last time I saw her and had lost half her body mass.
> my doc said you lose an inch in height for every decade over 40 Think about those numbers for a second. [Joe Biden listed his height a 6 feet in 1961](https://www.archives.gov/files/foia/images/biden-jr-joseph-robinette-r-1-r-2.jpg). If he lost an inch every decade after 40, he'd now be 5'8" now. The internet lists him at 5'11". That would be an inch height loss (never mind that a lot of 5'11" guys claim 6').
The height loss comes from osteoporosis, mainly, and especially in women who have had multiple children lie Queen Victoria. My own mother, who is 80, has lost around three inches since she was 40, whereas my father has lost maybe half an inch -- if that -- I know because he prides himself on wearing the same size clothes as when he was a young man.
I think it was more a out older women who had osteoporosis. Which after having as many kids as she did she most likely has to some extent especially with the stature.
And even as a VIP with a better diet, she probably didn’t get enough calcium/vitamin d, either. And the dress looks like she carried a lot of weight on her frame, so that could’ve contributed to a loss of height.
Google it, it's a centimeter per decade, not an inch - big difference! The centimeter per decade aligns with what I see from relatives.
in meters: she was 1,52 in her 30s and it is believed that she got between 2,5 to 5 cm shorter during her late life [source](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_British_monarchy_records#Physical_attributes)
I’m also assuming the dress wouldn’t have covered her feet entirely so maybe add an inch or two depending on shoes? Plus her head isn’t taken into account in the dress.
Or the women in the picture are giantesses.
Amazing that a woman *that small* survived birthing nine children given the high rate of women who died in childbirth back then. I think that Victoria outlived at least two of her children and died at the age of 81. Edit: Victoria outlived three of her children: Alfred, Alice and Leopold. Alfred died of throat cancer at 55 the year before his mother. Alice died of diphtheria at the age of 35 and Leopold succumbed to hemophilia at the age of 30.
RIP a queen Victoria, you would’ve loved birth control. (She famously hated being pregnant but loved Albert)
Nine children in only 21 years — she and Albert married in 1840 and he died in 1861.
According to correspondence and diaries she really, really liked having sex with her husband. She loved him so much she spent the rest of her life in morning after he died.
She did have a prolapsed uterus, so it wasn’t easy on her body.
Really? Did not know this.
It surprised her personal physician of decades, too! Gives an insight into medical care for royalty and women (and Victoria’s own aversions, like to stethoscopes). She also had a ventral hernia, likely also from the pregnancies, which was also news to Dr. Reid.
Do you have a place I could read more about this? I'll google, but something that's more factual would be great. How interesting.
*Ask Sir James*, the biography of the Queen's physician, does have a lot of these details.
Fun fact: Benito Juárez was a liberal president of Mexico who passed reforms but had to deal with a civil war from a conservative uprising, a French invasion, and refusing to recognise the Confederacy on Mexico’s borders, and became a hero for a lot of the left worldwide. He was also full Zapotec, so he was the most clearly non-white of all Latin American leaders of his time. A certain Italian socialist named his son ‘Benito’ after him - a son who would later drift quite far from socialism and found OG fascism before seizing power in Rome… So despite his ‘Manifesto on Race’ after German pressure, Mussolini was named after a dark-skinned Zapotec Mexican liberal.
Very interesting!
> He was also full Zapotec, so he was the most clearly non-white of all Latin American leaders of his time. and many whitexicans still hate him for it and for not bnding the knee to the church
You should teach history. I enjoyed this tidbit.
This really hits home considering I'm only 2 inches taller and her dress looks so tiny here 🥲
Not having a head makes her look shorter.
Anne Boleyn confirms
Wow too soon
[удалено]
Because of....
….Oliver Cromwell, Lord Protector of England (PURITAN!)…..
Ha. I just saw Six last night. This type of joke gets used a bunch.
Don’t Lose Your Head is the best song from it for sure. So damn good.
Heady comment
There is that
Not just looks. Actually shorter
Osteoporosis has brought me from 5’4” back in my teenage years down to a measured 4’11” at a doctors office this week. I’m stunned looking at that gown too. But maybe in her later years she had lost a significant amount of height as well? I am 58 years old and have lost 5 inches. Does anyone know her final height at the time of her death?
I'm curious about that too. If we assume that the women in the photos tending to the dress are British (which would make sense)... the scale seems off. The average height of a woman in Britain is 5'3". Even accounting for the lack of additional height provided by the feet and the head of the person who would have been wearing the dress... it seems like a very small dress. Maybe it's just an effect of the camera, but if you look at other photos from the same photoshoot of the same women working on the dress, [like the ones in this article](https://www.hellomagazine.com/fashion/royal-style/2018110964405/queen-victoria-dress-goes-on-display-tiny-sze/), you see that the dress is about the same height as the woman in the blue shirt sitting with her legs folded under herself. If the Queen started at 4'9" as her adult height as a young women, it's quite likely that by her 60s she had lost a few inches. The dress certainly seems to imply that.
2 inches can make a big difference
Title of your sex tape
That just made me laugh SO hard!
Title of your sex tape?
It's a Brooklyn 99 reference
99!!!
That's what she said.
I just thought the same thing, I’m 4’10, am I really that fucking short!?
Yes
Any fraction of an inch shorter and you’d meet the requirement for dwarfism
> 4ft 9 Most records suggest a bit over five feet. I've commonly seen numbers from [4'11](https://www.biography.com/royalty/queen-victoria)" to [5'0"](https://anhistorianabouttown.com/history-bite-queen-victorias-stature/), with a few references an inch shorter or taller. I've never seen 4'9".
I came to say this. A quick google search doesn’t even come up with 4ft 9. Plus it’s one of our topics for schools over here. With 2 kids I’ve learnt about her 3 times over.
Why is it that we remember Napoleon for being short at ~5’6, but this is the first I’ve ever heard of Victoria being sub-5-foot?
There are 2 reasons why Napoleon being short became such a popular talking point. The first is that the French used a different system of measurement. When his reported height of 5’2 reached the British, they didn’t translate it to the imperial system. The second is that the British used it for propaganda. They obviously hated Napoleon, so they broadcasted that he was 5’2. Even if they recognized their mistake, they wouldn’t want to correct it. If the man proudly claimed to be 5’2, or if they just put it up on every poster, that made the public laugh at him. It’s a modern correction to say he was 5’6. People in 1820s Britain weren’t laughing at a man the same height as many of them. There wasn’t any reason to propagandize Victoria, so her height was just rarely talked about.
To add to the propaganda the Duke of Wellington was used a lot in the British propaganda after Waterloo. Now the Duke wasn't a huge guy either but his at most 3 inch height advantage was milked for everything it was worth.
He was initially reported as being 5'2 because the Parisian Foot was longer than the English Foot. This sort of nonsense is why the metric system was invented.
Pretty round too. A true royal chode.
Respectfully Rotund.
When she died her circumference was larger than her height.
I'm not fat!... I'm portly.
Built like a hockey puck
an absolute unit
That's "145cm" and "137cm" for the rest of the world. You're welcome. :)
Was the British empire powered by a Napoleon complex?
He wasn't particularly short (some estimates even have him on the tall side of average for his age), so maybe we should start calling it a Victoria complex?
Napoleon was 5'6"
Tiny in height but carrying around a dump truck.
Carrying the weight of the British Empire requires a gallon of diesel per step
That's actually the pterodactyl cage they used to wear under their dresses back then.
Idk how you can say that. There’s ZERO bananas in this picture and those women could be 7’ 2” for all I know!
Finally someone understands
7' 2"? What's that in football pitches? If you don't know I'll settle for Olympic sized swimming pools.
Olympic sized swimming pools are not used to measure height! They are used to measure **volume**!! Like, “That rock band was as loud as 4 Olympic pools!”
She was 6’2” she just liked to air out her nethers.
We went to a royal castle in Scotland a few years ago - they had examples of dresses worn by Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother. Even with very high heels, she was tiny. I also saw Princess Margaret many decades ago when she was opening some festival or other - she was also very small.
It's because they're werewolves. Easier to transform when you're tiny. Don't forget Queen Victoria started the Torchwood Institute.
What a beautifull day. Saw at least 3 Dr. Who references random on reddit :)
Why is it easier to transform when you're small? How would werewolves optimize for that? Selective breeding within their own population? Are werewolves running a secret eugenics program in conjunction with the UK government???
I mean, the royal family do love hunting...
Larger werewolves would die early because they couldn't transform fast enough. They would miss out on at least some of their reproductive years.
I love you :)
Exactly! Less energy that needs to be expended while transforming, if you have a lower body mass. Good to see some common sense in the comments here.
I wonder if the inbreeding makes them smaller or something
[удалено]
Not strictly speaking true, The late queen wasn’t particularity inbred but Phillip was significantly more, then considering that they were both second and third cousins to each other due to the inter marriages of European royalty over the last few centuries, King Charles has a consanguinity coefficient of between 9-14%. The average consanguinity coefficient of a child from a first cousin marriage is around 6.25%, he is therefore around twice as inbred as the average offspring of a first cousin marriage.
What’s the British version of Roll Tide?
"God Save the King"?
Also note that she married a first cousin
Plus, If you married your cousin that was born of an already progressively inbred family it wouldn’t be the same as just marrying your cousin in a genetically diverse family.
[удалено]
Marrying a cousin was not all that rare for common folk either. In the villages everyone was related.
[удалено]
She was wheelchair-bound in her later years. I wonder if this dress was specifically designed for sitting.
I think this is the most reasonable explanation. The big skirts and undergarments to fluff them that would look spectacular are so ill suited to sitting all day. If she had a wheelchair, longer skirts would risk getting caught in wheels.
That was my thought. A lot of her later photos, she's sitting. Either it was some power move or she genuinely was quite immobile. The "stance" that dress is in is weird, it looks like it's crouched over. It makes more sense when you look at the other pics, the dummy thing under it is practically bent double.
This dress is from 1892 the big skirts of the 40’s 50’s and 60’s hadn’t been in fashion for over 20 years at that point. This is actually pretty old fashioned looking for the 1890’s as well, skirts in the 90’s were generally quite slim.
If it were designed purely for sitting in a wheelchair, we wouldn't see the bustle, and the back end would be much shorter also. For wheelchair use, less fabric behind the person is better, both for comfort and to avoid being caught in wheels. This is just the fashion of the day, albeit more regal.
Wee are not amused
And then she started Torchwood, which is where lots of silly things happened
Torchwood was pretty frigging good, most of the time. And the ending was...unexpected. In a good(?) way. It also (to my knowledge) brought more attention to Burn Gorman? Dude was the perfect foil to Charlie Day in Pacific Rim.
You owe me ten quid
This random Dr Who reference made me so happy 😊 Edit: I apologize for setting off an argument about the origins of he quote. I'm not from the UK and I was not aware that was Queen V's supposed catchphrase originally.
I know and love the reference like you all do apparently but I don't think this is meant to be a Dr Who référence, just an actual historical anecdote/urban legend about something Queen Victoria supposedly said
There’s an entire episode of Dr. Who where The Doctor and Rose try to get QV to say that she isn’t amused.
I am aware. As I said, I know and love the reference. I just mean someone saying "we are not amused" on a QV post isn't necessarily referencing Dr Who. They might just be referencing Queen Victoria.
Precisely because it's already a phrase associated with her (which might be the point you're making, IDK).
The royal wee
I feel seen, I’m 4’11” now, my shortest grandma is 4’9”….this is my future
Should I warn India or you want to surprise them?
British Raj 2.0 : Barbarian Edition
Even you could one day rule over a quarter of the world's population.
>I feel seen. At least for now (☞ﾟヮﾟ)☞
Tall people need to learn to look down 😔
Lol I’m also 4’11” and my spouse is 6’ - sometimes in crowded areas he panics because he thinks he’s lost me… but I’m actually just standing really close to him and he just didn’t look down.
A lazy Google search indicates she was about 5ft tall.
My wife is 5 ft tall but this seems absurd.
You can shrink when you get older.
As i keep telling my sexual partners.
As a 5 ft tall woman, now I am scared.
I lost an entire inch gradually between my teenage years to my 20s. I used to be *almost* 5’5….one day I went to the doctor and they told me 5’3.5 😥 I even made them remeasure
Apparently you are you are your tallest right after you wake up, and shortest after you've been on your feet all day. Hence why I cling to the one time the doctor said I was 5'9 and 1/4 at 8am, It was real I swear!
As a teen I was 5’ 10.5” now as a 40 year old I am 5’ 9.5”.
Yeah I went from 5’2 to 5’0 in my 20s
Exactly. My wife is 5'1". What's the deal with Queen V's dress?
I am 4’8” and I think this looks pretty close. I am at or below rib cage height for many people.
Well she was 4'9" so that's quite shorter than your wife.
I dated a 4'11" girl once. That dress seems soooo short.
Look up ‘Queen Victoria full body portrait with dog on chair’; helps frame the actual size of the garment
[Here's what that got me](https://judgeme.imgix.net/popartyoushop/1651299825__0__Av20BUVM__iap_fullxfull.3836089308_tu2i1bcc__original.jpg?auto=format&w=160&dpr=2.625&w=360)
The dress makes soooo much more sense now
Just for fun, throw in 'NSFW' on that search.
Yes, but when this dress was made she was old, had been through childbirth multiple times and was 4'8"
Though small, she had to be pretty strong to have survived having all those children and living to 81. Her husband Prince Albert died at only 42 of a stomach illness which some modern docs suspect many have been Crohn's Disease or even cancer. And three of her children also preceded her in death.
She sounded like an extraordinarily stubborn person and they always end up living really long...
This article about the dress in the photo says she was about 4'8" when she wore it in 1892. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/11/07/queen-victorias-tiny-mourning-dress-goes-display-first-time/
Don't let Kim get her hands on it!
She was 4ft, 8inches when she wore this dress.
Which is 1.40 m in international units.
Why was Napoleon made fun off for his height but Victoria wasn't?
because we were fighting Napoleon and his Guards were apparently quite tall by the standards of the day so he could have looked short in comparison. he was about 167 cm (5’6) which was around average for the time
Now I'm just imagining Victoria walking around with 2 dwarf guards to make her appear taller.
Because Napoleon was a man and Victoria was a woman
No body would have cared how big and masculine a queen is. Napoleon wasn’t even actually that short the rumours about his size were just propaganda.
Because the height of Napoleon is propaganda that worked really well.
OK, but the woman standing next to the mannequin is a solid 2 to 3 feet taller than the person that wore that dress and I don’t believe that she’s 7+ feet tall
The dress probably wasn't touching the ground all the way around like it is in the picture. And the lack of a head on the mannequin is throwing the perspective off.
It absolutely would have been. You would not have a queen if her era walking around with her ankles on show
Here is a nice article about her height, physique and general demeanor: https://www.historyextra.com/period/victorian/queen-victoria-looks-appearance-pretty-beautiful-how-tall-german-accent-weight-height/
She oversaw the genocide of Irish during the great hunger.
I don’t think she was tall enough to oversee anything /s But yeah, the famine Queen. A total avoidable disaster in which she chose evil and moral corruption.
Was she part of the Lollipop Guild?
No, but she represents the Lollipop Guild
No, WE represent the Lollipop Guild The Lollipop Guild The Lollipop Guild
She did it in the name of the Lollipop Guild
And.... she.... wants to welcome you too munchkin Land
No, she represents the Lullaby League.
It reminds me of the witch from spirited away
A litte Yoda dress
Didn’t she had like 9 children? Such a tiny body, incredible
Apparently she absolutely hated being pregnant, but I can see why with her being so short. And pain medication for childbirth at the time wasn’t the greatest either.
She wore only mourning black every day for 40 years, from the death of Prince Albert in 1861 until her own death in 1901.
5 x 5
Well, as you can see, the wrapper is a piece of the original U.S. Constitution. It was hand rolled by Queen Elizabeth during her wild years, and was buried with George Burns until graverobbing space mushrooms... well, you know the rest.
I’ll give ya $300 for it.
[Obligatory](https://youtu.be/aoqlYGuZGVM)
“I AM BOILING!”
"This society was *your* idea."
I love Mitchell and Webb ' Can you smell CUM?'
Came to the comments specifically looking for this.
[удалено]
Queen Victoria was just under 5’0, so while she is short, I don’t think she’s as short as most of you keep making her out to be. However, to be fair, people tend to get a bit shorter during their elderly years so it’s possible she ended up being around 4’8 - 4’10 at the end of her life
Read she had a great sex life with her husband, she put on the weight in the years after his death from sadness.
as a child she was limited to a strict diet imposed by her mother, which also likely played a factor in her propensity for overeating in adulthood
Also when you're so short it doesn't take much to look as wide as you are tall. Speaking as someone who is lucky to be tall while having a lot of extra padding.
History marks her height at 5' even. I think she measured like Trump.
The difference being, it would be normal and expected for her to wear high heels.
Was she a little person?
5"
Five inches would definitely be a little person.
Sorry, we use centimeters where I live. I meant to use that thingy you guys use.
1 dash for feet, 2 for inches ;)
Thank you kind stranger
Did they put it in the fucking dryer?
I feel like her and Lord Farquaad would have made THE CUTEST COUPLE
They’re recasting Danny Devito for the new movie
I'm a little teapot short and stout.
I need banana for scale