marzipanandminutiae:

“how did Victorian women use the bathroom in all those layers?”

crotchless underwear. from the 1820s to the 1920s, underwear had open crotch seams (not in a sexy way)

so they just had to pull up their skirts and push their drawers open and make sure their chemises were out of the way and there you go

Edit: a sex toy blog liked this post, so I would just like to reemphasize how totally normal and non-sexual these drawers were with a photo (1890s example)

see all that fabric? no way is anyone seeing your bits without effort, open crotch or no open crotch. not to mention that you’re wearing at least 3 layers over it and a chemise under it that will show through the gap. this is not the same as modern crotchless panties. honestly every time I mention this people either think it’s gross or naughty

I would add that the “can can” was invented during the crotchless panty period, and that (despite there being opposing sources on whether the dancers wore special underthings) I like to think that was the reason that there were literal police raids on clubs where the can can was performed.

If I recall correctly, the issue with the can-can wasn’t what the dancers were wearing as much as what they weren’t wearing…

Then again, police raids bring that special frisson you need to get in the punters at the Moulin Rouge.

So, Marvel editorial looks like it keeps trying to make Emma Frost into “mutant hitler” now since they couldn’t do it with Cyclops. But what exactly did she do wrong except for those sentinels at the end of IvX? She destroyed a toxic gas cloud… Are we supposed to care about the Inhumans’ made-up religion and byzantine culture? Is it okay to demand that others die for the sake of a religion they don’t even follow?

I mean, I’m no fan of Marvel editorial, but the Sentinels and the trying to kill all the Inhumans and the mind-controlling everyone are kind of a red line, no?

Can you think of any military campaigns that are equal to the Greyjoy invasion of the North in its stupidity and impracticality?

Caligula’s invasion of the English Channel?

Who do you think built Moat Cailin? And why was it allowed to fall into such a state of disrepair that only three out of twenty towers are left standing (even the Wall could manage 3/19!). Even if a southern invasion hasn’t been as much a risk during the last three centuries, it still seems like a nearly criminal amount of negligence considering the amount of safety it provides the North, essentially nullifying any sort of southern land invasion.

The Starks built it.

In terms of why:

It’s still devastatingly effective even without the towers, so it’s questionable how impactful any neglect is. If 200 archers can hold the Neck against an army, how much more defensive multiplier do you need?
It’s not clear how much use Moat Cailin has seen in a long, long time. Balon mentions ten thousand years of armies smashing themselves against it, but we don’t have any other historical examples post the immediate Andal invasion of anyone attempting it. Catelyn mentions that the wooden keep rotted away a thousand years ago, which gives us a rough date as to when the Moat was regularly in use.
The Starks had other security threats to worry about – the Ironborn, the wildlings, the Arryns, etc. – that Moat Cailin wouldn’t help with.

Do you think Ramsay had already killed Roose, Walda and their baby when he sent the Pink Letter?

Probably not.

Do you think that Robb’s will is relevant given that Arya, Bran and Rickon are alive and Sansa has escaped the Lannisters? Robb made his will thinking that Arya, Bran, and Rickon were dead and Sansa was still a hostage.

It’s the last will and testament of the King in the North, sealed and witnessed before his horrific murder – some people are going to care very much. Others not so much.

How can the Shadrich get Sansa out of the Vale with all the knights present for the tourney?

“Get in the car and hold this here gun, Sansa!”

“You’ll never catch us alive, coppers!”

How do you think Ser Shadrich is planning to get Sansa out of the Vale?

Something like this:

Cause he’s the Mad Mouse, see? And the Mad Mouse ain’t afraid of anyone, yeah, see? Ya get that, copper?

How expensive was wine in medieval times and was there a similar variation in price between average, good and excellent wines as we see in the modern era? Would you classify wine as luxury finished trade-goods (what about olive oil…)? – Thank You, RSAFan.

Borrowing from

Kenneth Hodges’ Medieval Price List:

Wine:
  Best Gascon in London         4d/gallon   1331        [2]     194
  Best Rhenish in London        8d/gallon     "          "       "
Wine:
  Cheapest                      3d-4d/gal   Late 13 cen [3]     62
  Best                          8d-10d/gal    "          "       "

So yes, there are variations, both in terms of overall vintage quality and in terms of desirable regional vintages. (It gets a little complicated by the fact that wine was one of those things where you tended to see royal monopolies, privileges, and excise taxes the most, so for example Hodges notes that there were “three London taverns with the exclusive right to sell sweet wines (hippocras, clarry, piments)” in the 1360s, which naturally would have raised the prices of those drinks considerably. For reference: 4 pence a gallon in 1331 works out to £11 a gallon in today’s money.

As for how to classify those things, it’s tricky. On the one hand, they’re not untouched natural resources (that would be grapes), and they’re clearly more value-added than grape juice. On the other hand, there’s a limit to how much value you can add – it’s not like manufacturing steel or cloth, there’s only so many steps between vine and table. And historically, the wine for wool trade tended to favor the economic development of the latter…

If the glovers were royals , why did they become a masterly house and not a lordly ?