#its weird not having a queen of england | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

wileys-russo · 1 year ago

Note

“You look better in red” ficlet mayhaps🫶🏼

you look better in red

"no!" you laughed, shaking your head firmly from where you lay on the bed. "baby!" millie whined, stomping her foot like a toddler as she glared down at you. "please." the blonde pouted as you again shook your head.

"what am i then? chopped liver?" mary scoffed, crossing her arms and glaring at the taller girl beside her. "no! i just thought it would work best with three of us." millie huffed, having spent the last half an hour begging you to do a tiktok with her as you promptly refused.

"go on then snakehips. time's a tickin!" you teased, propping yourself up on one elbow and tapping your watch as your girlfriend gave you a mean stare and set up her phone to record.

you were away on england camp for the olympic qualifiers and of course that meant millie and mary had to record as many tiktoks as they could, millie dubbing herself the tiktok princess to marys tiktok queen.

"oi those are my shorts!" you realised as your girlfriend hiked her hoodie up a little, your favourite pair of shorts snugly wrapped around her muscular thighs. "our shorts baby." millie corrected, blowing you a kiss as mary fake gagged.

"best not stretch them with your tree trunk thighs or we'll be havin words." you warned her sternly, mary now ooohing. "ow mills!" the girl huffed as the chealsea player punched her, the timer starting as the music went.

"go on girls!" you cheered with a clap as they both started to dance, stifling your laughter behind your hand as they both went the wrong way and crashed into one another.

this seemed to be a common trend as the two of them routinely argued back and forth about who was doing which part, at least ten takes in and still not able to use a single one. "would you stop laughin!" millie scowled at you as you buried your face in a pillow to muffle the noise.

"sorry! just its like you've both got two left feet. like big clumsy giants!" you clutched at your stomach, now the laughter was free flowing it was unable to stop. "right! if it's so easy then you do it love, go on!" your girlfriend gestured, her and mary stepping back as you shrugged.

you made sure the camera wasn't recording as you clicked play on the sound, counting yourself in and starting to dance, both girls jaws dropping as you didn't miss a beat or a single move. "ta da!" you finished, giving them both a sarcastic jazz hands.

"mary get out." millie mumbled, jaw slack as she stared at you with a familiar look in her eyes. "what?" the keeper frowned, unsure if she'd heard correctly. "out, get out." millie spoke, jumping to her feet and pouncing at you, hand gripping the back of your neck and pulling you into a bruising kiss.

"ergh alright at least wait till i'm gone before you suck face!" mary groaned, grabbing her jacket and hurrying out of the room as millies large hands groped at you. "baby that was so hot." the taller girl mumbled into your mouth.

"don't laugh! i'm tryin to kiss ya here that's not very romantic." millie frowned as you pushed her away, body vibrating with amusement. "you are honestly like a teenage boy, the most weird and simple things turn you on bright!" you teased, shoving her suddenly as she fell back onto the bed.

"go on then baby. dance for me!" the older girl smirked, shuffling back to rest on her elbows as her eyes scanned you up and down hungrily. "you already got a free show. sorry love i'm a one trick pony!" you grinned, sending her a wink.

"alright! well then i guess i'll just have to dance for you." millie sighed, grabbing your hand and tugging you down on the bed, rolling on top of you and attacking your face with kisses before she stood.

"might want to get a head start and take your shorts and shirt off baby, cause this dance is gonna knock your socks off!" millie blew you a kiss and wiggled her finger guns, backing up as you raised your eyebrows at her confidence.

"count me in, from five." she flicked through her phone before she turned her back to you, pulling her hood up to cover her messy bun of hair. "oh my god." you sighed as pony blasted from her phone and you counted her in from five.

"millie!" you laughed as she turned, starting to body roll and bite her lip, mouthing along to the words. "call me magic millie baby." she flipped her hood off, dropping to the floor and rolling her body like a stripper as you laughed.

"baby this is not hot." you bit down on your lip as she wiggled and bucked her hips on the floor, shaking her head so much that her bun was clinging on for dear life to her head.

"scuse me, no talking from the audience." she warned, jumping up to her feet and quickly stripping herself of her hoodie, tossing it so it landed on your face. "keepsake darlin, from me to you." she winked and blew you a kiss as you peeled it off of you and dropped it to the floor.

"do we have a volunteer? oh you look willing for a good time!" mary yelled out, pointing to you and starting to stalk her way over. "millie!" your stomach hurt from laughing so hard as she stood in between your legs, grabbing the back of your neck and pressing your face into her stomach, rolling her body up and down as she continued to sing along.

"you want me? you can't have me!" millie yelled in a funny accent, suddenly shoving you away from her as she turned around and wiggled her bum at you.

you wolf whistled and broke out into cheers as the song ended and she dropped to her knees, peace signs in the air. "now that, that was dancing." millie breathed out, admittedly a little puffed from the effort.

"shut up and kiss me you big dopey idiot."

#millie bright x reader #woso #woso fanfics #woso blurbs #woso imagine #millie bright #woso x reader #engwnt

329 notes · View notes

hollowed-theory-hall · 5 months ago

Note

do you think it’s strange that the uk monarchy is, as far as i remember, never mentioned in the books? it seems so weird to me since, for better or worse, it’s such an integral part of the concept of “britishness” - even if wizarding society seems pretty removed from muggle society, the monarchy has such a long history that it seems weird for the two societies to not intermingle in it. has wizarding society cut ties with it after the issue of the statute of secrecy? how many of the crown jewels are actually magical items? how *noble* is the house of black, really? were there ever kings or queens who were wizards?

there’s so many questions i have about this! such a world building plot hole!

Ok, so there are a lot of questions here and I'll try to answer them to the best of my ability. I will note there are a bunch of my own headcanons in this post. They are based on what we know about Wizarding History and what I know about irl UK history but they are still headcanons.

So, we know the Ministry of Magic was founded in 1707 after the Statue of Secrecy was enacted in 1692. The ministry was an immediate response to said statute since wizards needed a more uniform government to enforce their secrecy and cover up any slip ups. This means that before the Statue of Secrecy, the muggle government or monarchy earlier was the governing force for wizards as well as muggles. Yes, the Wizengamot already existed, but it seemed to behave differently from how it does in the modern ministry.

I wrote about the Wizengamot and how I believe it works along with some of its history here although I learned more UK history since, so this post is more accurate on the history front.

Now, I hope you won't mind me going into some medieval history of the UK in general, since the monarchy has changed over time, and in the early Middle Ages, the UK was comprised of multiple smaller kingdoms. Wales had 3 big kingdoms, but also a bunch of smaller ones (there were also warlords that took over abandoned Roman fortresses after the Romans left Britain in eastern Wales), England had the Anglo-Saxons settling in after the Romans left and creating multiple Anglo-Saxon kingdoms (like Wessex and Marcia). Scotland and Ireland were similarly divided. There were the biking invasions and a whole Viking kingdom in north-east England that's referred to as "The Dane Law". England did unite under King Aethelstan eventually, but with all these fractured kingdoms and warlords, I'm sure there were some wizards among them. Then, of course, there is the Norman monarchy and nobility established after the Norman conquests, which officially settled in 1066.

My point with all of this history is that like muggle society, wizarding society changed and evolved and that the monarchy in Britain wasn't the same throughout the entirety of history. So, the status of wizards and wizard nobility changed based on the specific time period we are discussing. But let's look at post-normans pre-Statue of Secrecy wizarding high society, and for that the Pottermore article about the Malfoy family is incredibly helpful:

Like many other progenitors of noble English families, the wizard Armand Malfoy arrived in Britain with William the Conqueror as part of the invading Norman army. Having rendered unknown, shady (and almost certainly magical) services to King William I, Malfoy was given a prime piece of land in Wiltshire, seized from local landowners, upon which his descendants have lived for ten consecutive centuries.

(from Pottermore)

Most nobility in England after the conquest were normans close to William who arrived with him and were given muggle noble titles, lands, and status. irl, the first Peverell in England, William Peverell was similarly given lands as he was said to be a son of William the Conqueror. That being said, some Anglo-Saxon nobility (mostly from the south of England since the northern Anglo-Saxon nobility were mostly killed after their rebellion) were kept in place by William as long as they swore fealty to him. Families like the Blacks and Longbottoms (both having Anglo-Saxon surnames) are likely among this leftover Anglo-Saxon nobility.

Now besides the muggle nobility, which is very much aware of wizards and even includes wizards (like the Malfoys, Peverells, Lestranges, and the Gaunts) we have the Wizangamot. The Wizaengamot, which I wrote more about in the post I linked, have likely been around and acted as a council of wizard nobility alongside the muggle one before the Norman invasion since around when Hogwarts was founded (around 990). The Blacks and Longbottoms (and the Notts who also have a Germanic name dating to the Dane Law I referenced earlier and King Knut who ruled that portion of England) were probably in this council.

We also know the Malfoys aren't in the Wizengamot in the books, meaning the circles of nobility for each council were different. This is easily explained by the Wizengamot being there earlier and being Anglo-Saxon rather than Norman. The name Wizangamot is, in itself, from old English which supports this speculation.

Since the Wizengamot continued existing after the conquest, I assume William the Conquerer left it as it is, wanting to ally himself with the local wizarding community rather than going to war with them. Wizards are, after all, really fucking useful, and irl he did keep some of the Anglo-Saxon nobility, so that's in character.

I think, after the conquest the Wizengamot either grew in the number of families there or that the families that opposed William were replaced with Norman wizard nobles that William trusted to represent him in the magical community.

The same Pottermore article about the Malfoy family also notes:

Historically, the Malfoys drew a sharp distinction between poor Muggles and those with wealth and authority. Until the imposition of the Statute of Secrecy in 1692, the Malfoy family was active within high-born Muggle circles, and it is said that their fervent opposition to the imposition of the Statute was due, in part, to the fact that they would have to withdraw from this enjoyable sphere of social life. Though hotly denied by subsequent generations, there is ample evidence to suggest that the first Lucius Malfoy was an unsuccessful aspirant to the hand of Elizabeth I, and some wizarding historians allege that the Queen’s subsequent opposition to marriage was due to a jinx placed upon her by the thwarted Malfoy.

(from Pottermore)

This means the monarchy throughout history was well aware of wizards and that the magical nobility was also muggle nobility and allowed in the same circles, but not vice versa. It seems to me, that the Malfoys had a muggle noble title from William I, and once the Statue of Secrecy was enacted they lost their title since they weren't also Wizarding nobility (Wizengamot members). (The Malfoys did keep all their money though).

Considering what Pottermore implies, it seems to me, there is a high chance of some crown jewels being magical. I mean, Lucius Malfoy I proposed to Queen Elizabeth I, and in my headcanon the aforementioned Willaim Peverell is the father of the three brothers of the Deathly Hallows, and in this headcanon, William Peverell is a half-blood wizard. Point is, yeah, the monarchy was well aware of wizards and seemed to have been in an alliance with the Wizengamot and the magical community. Although, I'm sure attitudes changed over time and differed from monarch to monarch with some being closer to the Wizarding community than others, but in general the Wizengamot and the wizarding community as a whole were under the governance of the muggle monarch.

It's actually possible there were a few wizards who ruled the UK (or any of the earlier kingdoms that eventually united) across the Isles's history. I think it's even likely if we're being honest. Egbert the Egregious, for example, might've been a king of Kent or Wessex (two of the older kingdoms before England united) as kings of the same name are recorded in both.

Once the Statue of Secrecy was enacted the wizards drew away from muggle society and wizards who held muggle noble titles likely lost them. But we know some muggles are aware of wizards' existence. We see at the beginning of HBP that the muggle Prime Minister is informed of wizards' existence and obliviated when they leave office. If I had to bet, the monarch (and perhaps more in the royal family) are similarly aware that wizards exist but aren't really involved. Like, the monarch probably knows but is only informed when something in the Wizarding World spills out to the muggle one. So, the monarch knows wizards exist, but not much more than that.

As for how noble the House of Black really was, I mentioned I believe they were nobles of the Wizengamot and Anglo-Saxon nobility before the Normans. I think all magical families in the Wizengamot that were around before the Normans would be considered: "Noble and Ancient". We see the Blacks being referred to as "The Noble and Most Ancient House of Black" compared to the Gaunts who are just: "House of Gaunt" which is how wizard nobility from after the conquest would be titled in my headcanon.

The name Gaunt is one that arrived in Britain with the Normans as stated in a survey of England's land done by William after the conquest (this survey is known as the "Doomsday Book" and it essentially details which land belongs to which lord. The book names both Norman lords and Anglo-Saxon ones and is a super useful historical document. It occasionally even mentions which Anglo-Saxon lord was deposed for the sake of a new Norman one). Gilbert de Ghent (standardized spelling wasn't a thing yet), named in said survey was the nephew of King William I's wife and as such received lands. A lot of them, actually:

"Few among the Conqueror's companions of arms were so splendidly rewarded as Gilbert de Ghent, who held one hundred and seventy-two English manors."

(Manors refers to actual manors, but also the land surrounding them. Basically, it refers to a family seat)

As the Gaunts were so favored, it's likely William I placed his nephew's family (who I headcanon at least some are wizards) in the Wizengamot. I believe the Slytherins married into the Gaunt family around the same time to add legitimacy to the Gaunts' status in the wizarding community.

The Malfoy Family that doesn't have a magical noble title and lost their muggle one is just referred to as: "Malfoy Family" and never "House of Malfoy" which again, to me, suggests this is how these titles work.

The aforementioned Doomsday Book does mention a William Black with 5 manors in Devon. William Peverell, as a son of King William I is mentioned to have 153 manors given to him and another 75 to Ranulf Peverell (not sure of the familial relationship). Reginald Cnut (older spelling of Nott) is also mentioned in the Doomsday Book to have 26 manors. Malfoy is a name JKR made up and isn't mentioned in the Doomsday Book or any other survey of UK landowners done in the Middle Ages. I did read a legend about one Guy Le Strange who participated in a tournament at Castle Peverell around 1083 and won the hand of Mellette, the niece of William Peverell. Although the Lestranges are not mentioned in the Doomsday Book and this legend likely dates from the 13th century a good 200 years after the supposed events it details.

So, to summarise, wizards don't seem to have or ever had a royal family of their own but there were most likely wizard royals throughout the various kingdoms that existed in history. Some wizards do have a noble status that I headcanon/speculate is connected to their status as members of the Wizengamot. These Wizengamot titles were also muggle titles and there were wizards with muggle titles that weren't part of the Wizengamot. These wizards probably interacted very closely with the muggle nobility and even shared family trees and were all probably considered half-blooded if you asked a Death Eater. After the Statue of Secrecy, the muggle titles became irrelevant and stopped being used leaving only the Wizarding titles behind (I headcanon "Ancient and Noble houses" refers to Anglo-Saxon nobility, and just "noble houses" refers to Norman nobility among wizards). The UK monarch likely is informed about the wizarding world to a similar degree as we see the muggle prime minister is informed. Blood purity probably only became relevant after the Statue of Secrecy as before that we see intermarriages with muggle royalty and nobility being practiced (I talked a bit about the timing of the witch hunts and the Statue of Secrecy here).

Sorry for the nerdy history talk, but, I answered this after a few weeks of medieval UK research and I have so many thoughts about medieval wizarding society in Britain.

#harry potter #hp #hp meta #hollowedtheory #hollowedheadcanon #hp headcanon #asks #anonymous #anon asks #wizarding world #wizarding society #wizengamot #wizarding history #wizarding politics

63 notes · View notes

sepdet · 3 months ago

Text

[9.11.24] Seth Meyers summarizes Trump's presidency and everything he's done since in an incredible 60 second monologue.

Transcript below.

This monologue is from the end of Late Night with Seth Meyers on 9/11, the day after the Hartus-Trump debate. As Seth Meyers speaks at his desk, an inset video slideshow on the left shows images to match his words, either newspaper headlines or photos or short video clips.

Seth begins:

Donald Trump's entire argument, aside from weird lies about eating dogs and windmills and Hannibal Lecter, boils down to one thing. When he left office, things were awesome.

[Screen changes temporarily to clip of the debate with Trump speaking]: I created one of the greatest economies in the history of our country. We did a phenomenal job with the pandemic. We handed them over a country where the economy and where the stock market was higher than it was before the pandemic came in. Nobody's ever seen anything like it. [End of clip]

Back to Seth:

Ah, yes, I remember the halcyon days of 2020, when the economy was soaring and toilet paper was plentiful, and we weren't all wiping our mail down with Clorox, and filming our TV shows at home without our hair and makeup teams leaving us all looking like ghosts haunting a Dickensian orphanage. [ British accent] "Please help me! I've been trapped here ever since I died from eating spoiled gruel!"

[ Normal voice ] I can't believe I have to remind some people of this, but Donald Trump's presidency did not end well. Just in case you need it, here's a quick refresher. This shouldn't take too long.

Seth: Donald Trump was the first president since Herbert Hoover to oversee a net job loss. Unemployment soared, and the economy shrank by more than 3%. Corporate profits went up while manufacturing jobs declined. Home prices soared by nearly 30%. The national debt rose by nearly $8 trillion. Crime spiked. The number of Americans without health insurance rose by 3 million, and the number of presidents who have humped American flags went from 0 to 1.

He undercut the nation's response to a deadly pandemic that spiraled out of control because he ignored warnings about it, lied about its severity, disbanded agencies that were tasked with preparing for it, promoted sham treatments for it, said we could stop it by injecting disinfectant, and promoted a quack doctor who believes demon sperm is real, insulted servicemembers and feuded with Gold Star families, saluted a North Korean general, got reprimanded by the Army for desecrating Arlington National Cemetery in violation of federal law, and made the Queen of England disappear.

Said he had the best memory in the world, then forgot he said he had the best memory in the world, got laughed at by the United Nations, including the Germans, got impeached for threatening to withhold military aid from Ukraine, and encouraged Russia to interfere in our elections.

He doctored a weather map with a Sharpie to lie about the path of a hurricane, threw paper towels at hurricane victims, called Hannibal Lecter his wonderful man. A chief of staff called him an idiot. His national security adviser called him a dope. A secretary of state called him a moron. He got on a plane with toilet paper stuck to his shoe and didn't know how to close an umbrella.

He took millions from foreign officials, including a possible $10 million bribe from Egypt, brushed dandruff off the shoulder of the president of France. He staged a months-long coup attempt, stoked a violent insurrection, tried to coerce

Republican officials, into overturning the election, claim dead people were voting and Democrats were selling mail ballots, got impeached a second time.

He brought a crazy pillow salesman to the White House, and his lawyer gave a press conference at a landscaping company.

He lost the popular vote twice, got indicted four times, convicted of 34 felony counts, falsified business records to pay hush money to a porn star who said she spanked him in the ass with "Forbes" magazine. He was found guilty of fraud and libel and sexual abuse, possibly farted and definitely fell asleep in court.

Bragged about overturning Roe v. Wade, said he was against a Florida abortion ban, then said he was for the Florida abortion bill. Called the CEO of Apple Tim Apple, called Elon Musk "Leon Musk," said Nikki Haley was the Speaker of the House on January 6th, claimed the price of bacon goes up because the windmills blow, shark attacks are caused by electric boat batteries, again said Hannibal Lecter was dead and real, wonderful, even though he's fake and famously a bad guy, insists he's not weird by saying the word "weird" 11 times in 30 seconds, which is, let's admit it, super weird.

Became the first president -- [photo at this point shows Trump staring straight at the sun without eclipse glasses before the 2017 eclipse]

And, guys, we ran out of time, but there were a bunch more things.

#us politics #video #transcribed #late night with seth meyers #seth meyers #donald trump

11 notes · View notes

runwayrunway · 11 months ago

Text

No. 55 - British Airways, Part One - British (European) Airways and British (Overseas) Airways (Corporation)

British Airways.

Starting this post was harder than actually writing it. It's hard to start a post about British Airways, because it's a deceptively weird airline. If you very precisely altered my memory, kept my knowledge of the United Kingdom and of flag carriers but erased all I knew about British Airways and asked me to speculate about the UK's flag carrier, what I came up with would look absolutely nothing like British Airways. British Airways is weird. It was weird when it came into existence in 1974. It's weird now. It's a completely typical airline in terms of things like...routes and safety and in-flight meals and...I don't know...contribution to human rights abuses. But that's not what I talk about here.

The story of British Airways' livery is interesting. It's messy. It's political. All of that comes in due time. More than most other airlines, it just can't keep to a livery for too long - and that's when it even has a livery. In its early youth, British Airways couldn't really figure itself out at all. And in its even earlier youth...well, actually, British Airways isn't that old. It's also not the UK's first flag carrier.

image: British Airways

There is a reason that two of British Airways' fleet of retro liveries wear wordmarks that say other names. To discuss the history of the British Airways livery, I have to first begin by discussing the fact that British Airways...is a weird airline.

British Airways. IATA code BA, ICAO code BAW, callsign SPEEDBIRD. Flag carrier of the United Kingdom.

Honestly a better logo than at least 40% of actual airlines.

Well, it's actually a subsidiary of the unimaginatively named International Airlines Group, Europe's third-largest airline holding company, below Ryanair and the Lufthansa Group but ahead of Air France-KLM. IAG is a member of the oneworld alliance and is the parent company of British Airways, Iberia, Aer Lingus, Vueling, and LEVEL, and just last year acquired Air Europa and began the process of absorbing it away from SkyTeam. To anyone who may have had the thought enter their head: yes, they do now basically have a monopoly on Spanish airlines. To any Spaniards reading, my condolences. At least you still have EasyJet.

Their largest shareholder is Qatar Airways, so when you really think about it British Airways is kind of a subsidiary of Qatar Airways a little bit. Their share is still only 25%, though, so that actually just completely isn't true, but in a vibes sense it feels that way from the outside looking in. Of course, all these airlines have maintained their own identities and operate independently. This is not a LATAM situation. British Airways adopted its present-day livery long before it merged with Iberia to form the IAG in 2011. I'm still not totally sure why they did that. Maybe they wanted to one-up Air France. Iberia's not exactly KLM, but - no, this is not that post.

British Airways. I've always thought it was a little bit strange that it was called that. Few places love reminding the world they're at least nominally still a monarchy more than England. KLM isn't the only airline with 'Royal' in the name - Royal Air Maroc, Royal Jordanian Airlines, and Royal Brunei Airlines are just a few other examples. And yet the United Kingdom has never had an airline, at least not a major one, named anything like The Queen's Royal Air Fleet, which is what I would have expected of them. No. British Airways.

There's not much gravitas to that, is there? Not really any punch. Nothing making it better than Air France. 'British Airways' is a pretty sterile name for a flag carrier.

Their callsign is SPEEDBIRD, though. And that's not sterile. That's awesome. That's Europe's equivalent to Pan Am's CLIPPER or China Airlines' DYNASTY, just pure style. But what is a speedbird, other than a really cool name for a jet?

This is a speedbird. Rather, this is the logo for Imperial Airways. Not to be confused with the very strangely named 1964-1986 Californian commuter airline Imperial Airlines, Imperial Airways was a very early precursor to what British Airways is now. In the inter-war years it served destinations like South Africa, Hong Kong, and Australia - the sorts of places two dozen or so wealthy individuals of power might have reason to go quickly. Unlike Imperial Airlines, Imperial Airways had a very fitting name.

So here's another weird thing about British Airways: it's young. Really young for what it is. Most flag carriers are pretty old, and the few exceptions are airlines founded in the 21st century to replace flag carriers which went defunct in the 90s and on, like Brussels Airlines or ITA Airways. Even when you discount centenarians like KLM and Finnair, most of the names you'd recognize in the rest of the world (and plenty you probably haven't heard of) existed by the 1940s, with the major Axis powers being forced to reboot theirs in the 50s. Even the places Imperial Airways served, despite not having the resources of an empire at their disposal, have far older flag carriers. British Airways didn't exist until 1974, making it younger than my mother, the Boeing 747, the Twin Towers, 2001: A Space Odyssey, and the moon landing.

The primary reason for this was, as far as I can tell, bureaucratic shuffling about, but I'm not especially well-versed or interested in the history of UK corporations so that's where I'll leave this bit off. It is possible, and indeed likely, that someone reading this has the urge to say that I'm being uncharitable and that British Airways is functionally just BOAC or BOAC is just functionally Imperial Airways (or maybe nobody thinks that - I simply don't know enough about the corporate side of it to confidently dismiss the possibility of this indeed being the case). It's just not relevant because I'm ultimately here to talk about the airline as an entity in the public eye that has a livery, and in this sense Imperial Airways, British Airways, and the intermediate steps are fully distinct. So, for my taste, British Airways began operations less than a month before the release of the novel "Carrie". That's strange. British Airways is strange.

Still, even though in most other cases the process was significantly faster, very few flag carriers we'd recognize today were founded outright in their current state.

This timeline, compiled by Yesterday's Airlines, documents the 'family tree' of airline mergers that has built up today's British Airways. It actually goes back far earlier. Debatably it began with manufacturer Airco and its subsidiary airline Aircraft Transport and Travel, founded in 1916. Though it went under in 1920, its assets were repurposed by Daimler Airway (singular), which was one of the four airlines (mostly all subsidiaries of aircraft manufacturers) which in 1924 became Imperial Airways. That's right, even the building blocks on this chart are themselves built from blocks!

There are plenty more long-forgotten airline mergers beneath where this graphic cuts off, but this is all to say that the speedbird emblem originated with Imperial Airways, and it has floated to the top of this soup of assorted vaguely British brands, many of which nobody has thought about in decades. Speedbird aside, British Airways resembles basically none of its component parts in any ways that aren't just explained by them both being British, and Airways.

The speedbird was created by notable art deco designer Theyre Lee-Elliott, who created several pieces of iconography and many graphics and posters for the UK government, among other things, like the first-edition cover of "A Farewell to Arms" that an English teacher of mine once had as a poster on her wall. Much of his early work was for airlines, and the speedbird happened to stick.

Left poster isn't anachronistic - 'British Airways' was the name of a late-30s airline, itself merged from three other airlines, which would go on to join Imperial Airways as one of the components of BOAC.

Airlines didn't really have liveries as we know them now back when the speedbird was invented, so it would lie dormant as an emblem used on posters and signage for a little while. It was the only part of Imperial Airways' identity which survived when, in 1939, it merged into the British Overseas Airways Corporation.

'British Overseas Airways Corporation' has the same nostalgic punch to it as 'Pan American World Airways'. It was almost always just called BOAC, though, even in the wordmarks of its airplanes. When BOAC came into being the airplane livery was not what it is today. They began with just a painted tail and cheatline, scarcely worth showing or commenting on.

image: RuthAS Okay, I'll show it, but I don't think it needs any further comment.

There's only one BOAC livery that was really recognizable a BOAC livery. It was still fairly boring. More like BOA(rin)C(g). (That one needs work.)

The only interesting thing about the BOAC livery, to me, is the way that sort of face mask shape combined with the tail almost gives it a sort of diagonal symmetry - the front with a blue dip below the white center, the end with a peak above it. It is a very efficient and deceptively effective, potentially unintentionally, use of geometry. I also appreciate the restraint of sticking to blue and white and leaving out red. The minimal nature of it increases the geometric feeling, really saving this livery from my complete disdain. The speedbird logo is really well-centered on the tail, feeling almost like a diagonal slash cut right through it, and I like the use of greyish gold instead of white, which makes it appear less jarring while still being clearly visible. For its day, these positives are certainly not to be fully ignored, though saying that this is a pretty alright 60s white-and-blue cheatline livery is not that high of a compliment. It is cleanly done but in no way exceptional, with a neat bit of art deco angularity to it that you really only notice if you stare at pictures of airplanes as a hobby.

On the other hand, it has a nothing wordmark that honestly just irritates me by breaking up that big clean white block in the same way an old scratch breaks up the flatness of an iPhone screen and it does that thing I hate where a cheatline sort of just...trails off under the tailplane that a fair number of 747 liveries do. It feels like they just couldn't think of anything to do with the end of the plane, which is never what you want from a livery, especially not from an airline that takes itself as seriously as BOAC did. It also uses the isolated tail block, which is a design feature I dislike. At least the extreme matteness of BOAC's midnight-blue-on-white makes it a bit less awful, and the white forward trim is a nice touch.

On balance, I'll give it a BOAC-. That is referring, of course, to the face mask livery, which I think is straddling the fence between 'adequate' and 'forgettable'. I truly have so little to say about the earlier liveries that I'm not going to even give them a grade.

The BOAC livery briefly flew again in 2019 (which British Airways claims to be centenary based on the foundation of Aircraft Transport and Travel, except I've mainly seen that said to be 1916 and most people's consensus is that British Airways was founded in 1974 and no earlier) when it was painted on the 747-400 registered G-BYGC. She was the last 747 to fly for British Airways, just a year after the livery was applied, and there were plans to preserve her in the heritage livery which never materialized. Sadly, she was scrapped in late 2023.

But there was that speedbird on the tail! The speedbird was so damn iconic that it was even BOAC's callsign. So where did it go?

We'll get to that. There's more to British Airways than BOAC.

BOAC was state-owned, and it held a place of national prominence...so it was the flag carrier, right?

Sort of. It was a flag carrier. BOAC was the UK's Pan Am, specializing in long-distance international flights (hence 'overseas' in the name). There was also British South American Airways, a short-lived national carrier which was absorbed into BOAC after two years, with its most notable contributions to history being the disappearances of its planes Star Tiger and Star Ariel, but a significantly more enduring brand was BEA.

This initial logo, also the work of Theyre Lee-Elliott, had a key motif to accompany BEA's slogan, 'the key to Europe'. I adore it. I like BEA a lot.

While initially founded as an offshoot of BOAC (which I suppose was the singular flag carrier from 1939 to 1946), British European Airways Corporation specialized in, as the name implied, flights within Europe (and other relatively nearby destinations). It was something of a VASP-and-VARIG situation. Nobody ever called it BEAC, though, even though it sounds like 'beak' and birds are a whole thing, because...flying...well, look, we can all understand, in retrospect, that one of the great tragedies of aviation history is that I wasn't there to have ideas. That said, maybe it's a good thing I never planted this seed, because their callsign was BEALINE, which is...just the most adorable thing I think I've ever heard. It genuinely makes me smile. It may be my favorite ever callsign.

They did eventually change their official name to just British European Airways. Sort of a shame, if you ask me - you could have been twinsies. Ah, well. Also a shame is the perplexing choice to shelve their rather nice and meaningful original logo and replace it with what I can generously describe as 'a square' in 1957. I think SAS did it better. I can't rule out that I just hate it because the old one was so much better, though. I've seen far uglier, but again - this is a square.

image: Adrian Pingstone

When it's on the livery, it's not even well-aligned! And it's difficult to imagine negotiating this onto an aircraft tail, even when dealing with a generously square fin like the Trident's. (BEA loved their Tridents, which were essentially designed for the airline's operations, and operated 70 of the 117 airframes completed. This makes me like them, because I love the Trident too.) That said, I think that if you're using a logo that is just the name of your airline, putting it on the tail rather than the front side fuselage is a bold move. Today it rarely pays off, but in the era of cheatlines and half-bare planes it actually avoids the issues of legibility and vertical space that a lot of other contemporary liveries struggled with.

Still, the square. It will simply never not look strange to have two straight vertical lines on a fin that's more or less diagonal to them, and I'm not sure how that could be fixed. They did the best they could, I think, but this was just doomed from the start.

On the other hand, I do enjoy its placement within the cheatline. It helps keep a sense of pace but doesn't break up the line, and it just feels like it clicks into place in a way I love. I like the continuity with the black line at the tip of the horizontal stabilizer, and I like that the white paint doesn't extend down as far as on a lot of liveries of the time, leaving the cheatline to taper above the Trident's rear-mounted engines instead of underlying them as many other airlines' did.

This logo and livery were designed by Mary de Saulles, who was trained as an architect rather than a graphic designer. I think it shows in the very simple shapes and lines present here, and it also shows in the fact that despite it technically not doing anything too unusual the BEA livery was very distinctive when actually on the apron.

BEA's liveries weren't terribly more innovative than BOAC's at first glance. But their black-and-red 60s livery was actually, deceptively, a standout of the era.

images: Ralf Manteufel | Adrian Pingstone

The red wings on BEA's aircraft were absurdly stylish. There are dozens of reasons involving weight and heat and aerodynamic properties that prevent airlines from painting the wings on their airliners anything but a very dull drab, and I despise it, but when even the all-black Air New Zealand plane has white wings it begins to feel like it's just not possible to do anything else. Actually, it is hypothetically possible, though expensive, as long as you avoid the leading edges, though I'm sure the margins for shape and weight of a wing are far more precise on a 787 than they were on a Viscount. Still, I can't help but wish airlines would swallow the costs of painting wings (not like liveries aren't already a needless expense if you're trying to really optimize), because just look at this. It's absolutely stunning. It brings BEA's livery all the way from completely forgettable to by far the most eye-catching in the approach pattern.

And, you know what? I'll give them a BEA for that.

It might seem like a bit of a strange evaluation when I spent two paragraphs complaining about that square, but just imagine being on the ground and seeing a Comet landing, the lack of underwing pylons leaving that big red wing, like the lining of a cloak. That's a real Riyadh Air first impression. So while yes, the square is a square and certain aspects of the livery's implementation on various models range from forgettable to clunky, I am disregarding all of that, because this is like Dracula showing up to a board meeting. They are literally flying Louboutins.

BEA's livery and branding evolved over time in a way BOAC just didn't. BOAC never had anything I would identify as a 'rebranding' - it sprang fully formed from the Queen's (or something) head and stayed in its pristine state until the day it abruptly vanished. This was not quite the case for BEA.

image: Adrian Pingstone This is a preserved airframe, hence the very anachronistic car models in the foreground. Still, the livery is accurate.

Their final livery, introduced 1968, was this - the 'speedjack' livery. The speedjack is, more specifically, that delightfully pointed Union Jack emblem on the tail. I do like the speedjack itself, being one of the only decent uses of a Union Jack base I've ever seen. It feels obvious yet brilliant to turn the intersecting lines of the flag into an arrow shape. Unfortunately, far more was changed than just the logo.

My beloved flying Louboutin was gone. They still sometimes had the red wings at this point, but in every other way it was a new livery. I actually find that something is lost here, because the old BEA livery had red but not blue, and the BOAC livery had blue but not red, so they were sort of a matching set. Also, um, that wordmark is legitimately hideous.

It's a bit less horrible when it's not red letters on a white background, at least. And it does have a forward slant, a continuity...but this lacks the brilliance of Lee-Elliott's key or the charm of the de Saulles square.

The speedjack, logo, and livery were created by FHK Henrion, whose work has appeared on this blog before, though I failed to mention it. He designed the KLM crown logo!

...a logo I used to think was fine until learning about the absolute beauty they had from 1930 to 1938. Henrion designed the totally palatable 1961 version, and further modifications were made by the firm Henrion, Ludlow & Schmidt, with at least the 1991 change being the work of Ludlow. It's certainly gone downhill, but maybe I just think that because of how much I adore the 1930 iteration.

image: Piergiuliano Chesi

As for BEA - at the very least they kept the red wings. This is sort of a double-edged sword, though. This livery was, overall, far less distinct from its surroundings than the de Saulles livery, and the addition of the lighter blue to the fuselage really dulls the impact of the red against the stark black it used to share the airframe with. It just feels...flat. Neutered. Like an interim livery when one airline has bought out another and the paint jobs are changed out piecemeal. (And I think a red-only speedjack on a black tail would look fantastic, for the record.)

The details aren't much better. The cheatline feels almost too thin for the cockpit windows and the tiny wordmark makes the white fuselage feel as empty as it is without the little BEA logos making sure that isn't what you're focused on. Some models, like the Trident Three and Super One-Eleven, get their status indicated by text on the tail that looks like the default font of a word processor. It's just sloppy. Henrion's effort went to the speedjack, where a firm which specializes in image identity generally would be directed, and some interest was taken in the wordmark, but the livery itself feels like a pieced-together afterthought.

This gets a grade of...please just go back. I want to say D+.

How much of that grade comes from genuine dislike of the Henrion livery versus just thinking it's worse than what came before, I don't know, but it's one of the most immediate downgrades I've ever seen and the attempt to keep the most striking feature of the old livery while sapping it of its power feels almost insulting. It feels messy and pieced-together, and it's angling dangerously close to having the same approximate color layout as the old SAS livery - you know, the only thing that's ever failed the Star Alliance Test.

And, at least from the side, and from farther away, it really doesn't fail the Star Alliance Test. It's serviceable, and I wouldn't be nearly this harsh on it if I didn't know what came before. But I've committed to a chronology of what would become British Airways, so I have to mention both, and that includes looking at them, reading about their design processes, and forming detailed opinions of them. This livery was just doomed by its predecessor.

Even British Airways seems to agree with me, given that when they painted an A319 (G-EUPJ) in a BEA retro livery they chose the older black-and-red. Some liveries are simply iconic. Some simply aren't.

And, yes - the wings are red. At least, the bottom is. The top was forced to remain grey for reasons of 'reflectivity', which is fairly vague. Still, this should be a sign to other airlines - your planes will make an impression from below, and that impression could be as powerful as the one BEA used to make.

image: Ben Brooksbank

BEA, at its height, flew more passengers than any other airline in Europe. It had subsidiaries, including...Cyprus Airways. (Yes, the same one that's still the flag carrier of Cyprus. That's its own story.) They even operated helicopters.

image: RuthAS Cursed? You decide.

And then, as the 70s began, the decision was made to merge the two state-owned airlines - something which I would personally have done earlier, and apparently people did try to do earlier but were prevented from doing by...politics. You know, just a couple people with titles that begin with 'Secretary of' passive-aggressively fighting over financial things. In 1974, what was probably inevitable finally became a reality.

image: Piergiuliano Chesi

It takes a while to repaint a full airframe. When two airlines merge the change is often done bit by bit, making sure the wordmark's right but not bothering with the rest. In 1975, G-AWZA, pictured here, still wore the speedjack, but the wordmark above her cheatline said something new entirely, and a new airline was using the callsign SPEEDBIRD.

And this is where I will conclude today, thwarted by image limit. Of course, being the person I am, I couldn't help but make my return for the new year not just a two-parter but a three-parter. Having dispensed with the British Airwayses that weren't British Airways, part two will cover the British Airways of the surprisingly recent past.

In the meantime thank you to all readers, old and new. I'm thrilled to be back from my break, and I hope you'll stick around for another year of Runway Runway.

#tarmac fashion week #region: west/central europe #region: united kingdom #grade: a #grade: c-#grade: d+#british airways #british european airways #boac #double sunrise #era: 1950s #era: 1960s #era: 1970s #klm royal dutch airlines #imperial airways #long haul

37 notes · View notes

iam-lnt · 28 days ago

Note

I am also really interested in the relationship between King Louis XIII and Queen Anne d'Autriche. I feel like their relationship developed over time.

Do you have any art of them? Or a headcanon of them that involves Frain from Hetalia? Anything!!!

I would love to hear from you <3 Hope you don't mind 🥹

relationship between Louis 13 and Anne of Austria? then what's better than *dramatic drum roll* *wip out book* LES TROIS MOUSQUETAIRES!!!

okay. got a bit excited there from getting ask from you. ahem.

frankly Louis 13 and Anne's time period wasn't exxaaaccttly what I know best about, but The Three Musketeer definitely covers much of it...along with drama, war, and England (yes France and England were fighting again, surprise surprise). Anyhow the book is really fun to read AND its plot is developed upon Anne of Austria and her *spoiler* lover, soooooo here ya go! It's a pretty long novel but I got hook onto it like a TV series bc yes, the writing is that entertaining to read.

Art tho....if you're asking about Louis and Anne then....no 🥲 I did have some from Louis 14 period and French Revolution period tho lmao! It's cool to do historical clothes studies

AND onto your typical Frain brainrots! I don't have much but here's two I can contribute:

Whatever's going on between them gotta be centered around 17c-18c, aka Louis 13/14 and their Spanish Queens. like....yeah, they're that married and unitedly sticking middle fingers at England

Lacking historical information here but when they're kids at *insert time period*, Antonio likes to protect Fran seeing that chibi Francis is sooooo pretty. But Tonio kiddo you underestimated Fran and his abilities (in all senses), probably a mistake to make as they grew up together and *insert relationship develop plot* *smirks*

I got a question for you too lol was going to put it here but I'm coming to your askbox later 😏 and btw I definitely won't mind you talking w me, I got this weird feeling that if we know each other irl we'd be good friends (is that creepy im sorry kdsalfhakdh)

#ask box pile #random otter rattles

7 notes · View notes

blackgumball · 6 months ago

Text

okay weird pull but you know how people say that taylor swift is so popular because her work is so bland. she’s uninterested in making any sort of statement or breaking any sort of mould, so her work is so palatable and widely relatable that it becomes so popular among so many people? (real quick psa im a tswift hater so i dont listen to her music, this is a recycled opinion from a more educated hater than me)

i am beginning to feel a similar way about bridgerton. its premise relies on the idea of a diverse regency england, but it becomes clearer and clearer to me every day that the show is meant for white people. all the bridgertons are white, so every love story will either be swirl or just a white relationship (shoutout to polin ig). not saying that poc dont enjoy the show (we obviously do) but there’s this vocal white audience that keeps harassing actors of colour whenever a decision is made that they dont like. or that strays from the books (which is soooo insane literally the moment they cast rege jean page your dumb cracker asses shouldve realised that the show wasnt gonna care about being book accurate ESPECIALLY since julia quinn basically said out loud that every character in her books would be racist.)

and the show Clearly isn’t interested in pushing any boundaries. look at fucking cressida cowper. given, i have no idea whether her character is going to return to the show, but the way they handled her was so muddled and fucked up that i wondered why they even bothered? they bring her in, humanise her, and then cart her off with this terrible fate. why? if anything, it made eloise and colin far less likeable (eloise, because it seemed like she didnt care about the fate of the only person who treated her with respect after she was “ruined”, and colin, because it made him seem shortsighted, naïve, self centred, and pitifully stupid). i complain because i think eloise is right. the women in this period were stifled. they were not able to study as extensively as their brothers, not able to travel by themselves, kept from sex education into their adulthood, and married off to random men (sometimes against their will, as it was for danbury, charlotte, almost cressida, and arguably daphne). you set such a sexual show in a deeply unsexy time. there’s romance in cressida escaping, being cunning and able to run. it also would’ve made the show more DRAMATIC. it straight up doesnt make sense for cressida to learn whistledown’s identity and not go immediately to the queen. why not have her escape, and let the bridgertons deal with the consequences? i don’t know. they seemed to take the stupid way out.

and then there’s the lower classes, who we rarely see outside of the women bridgerton men fuck with no/low commitment, paperboys, and printers. i’ve said before how i think it’s hideous that the lives of these women aren’t explored outside of their role as sex objects. season one at least explored the tension between anthony and sienna, who he loved but couldn’t commit to (im very glad she got out of there. im glad she respected herself enough to cut ties w him). also in season one, we see how the servants of the bridgerton house played a role in saving daphne from marrying that gross dude, but it feels like that role has vanished from subsequent seasons. maybe they know that seeing how none of the lords and ladies and other rich pricks of mayfair can’t fend for themselves is a turn off for the modern person (remember when anthony and daphne couldn’t use a stove in s1? i got the ick bad). but by ignoring this massive demographic, the show proves its disinterest in exploring the pitfalls and prejudices of the society it is set in.

its a show where women who want to escape their circumstances are villainised for their attempts and where the lives of the poor are either ignored or used to threaten the privileged. you occasionally have a sienna or a theo, but through knowing them, we are never left with the sense that society should change. they may try that next season. i know benedict is supposed to fall in love with A Poor.

i want the show to be good. i want the show to be interesting. i want all the fans who think that it can’t be good unless it’s explicitly relatable to straight white women to get over themselves (or at least go back to tswift and tsitp). i want to watch the show and not feel as though all the female characters are trapped. i want to LIKE ELOISE. some things i dislike about the show are impossible to change, but i guess i just have to hope it can be better. actually start pushing against the constraints of the genre, why not? you’re already one of the most popular shows on TV, you can risk making good television.

#she speaks #hater tag #bridgerton #i say this all as a fan!#i unfortunately cannot pretend as though i don’t like this show. it’s clear by now that i do

13 notes · View notes

alrightsnaps · 8 months ago

Note

what do you think they’re going to do without Lady Whistledown to narrate in s4? Like still keep Julie Andrews because who doesn’t love her???? But I feel like just like in the books, having the gossip paper was such a nice outline for the story.

i agree that it was a great narrative device (as were the letter excerpts in frannie’s story imo).

problem is, shondaland doesn’t know the meaning of the words narrative device. she couldn't simply use LW to provide an outline for the love stories. nope, she just had to made up some weird detective storyline for eloise and a feud with the fucking queen of england! you can't make that shit up istg.

so LW went from a cute narrative tool (elevated by the voice of the julie andrews!) to an annoying subplot that needs to be put to bed asap. not just that, but it even stopped serving its purpose (moving the story forward) once whistledown’s identity is revealed. while in s1 LW is involved in daphne and simon’s romance and continuously reports on their love story, in season 2 there's a complete disconnect between the narrator and the main story. whistledown is completely useless and barely reports on kate and anthony.

now, i have no idea what deal shondaland has made with julie andrews, but i assume they’re keen to keep her on the show for the long run. after all, any appeal whistledown holds to the audience is just that: her iconic narration.

my guess is that if they manage to bag her for the rest of the series, one of two scenarios will come to pass:

a) penelope will remain as a regular for the rest of the show, as bridgertons come and go, to report on every sibling’s story.

it sounds tedious and boring, her arc as LW is already tired as hell and i’ve no idea how they can possibly keep up with shoving her down the audience's throats....but i wouldn't put it past them.

we know production loves her character and i don't see why NC would leave a show that's shown its willingness to treat her as the main star, no matter whose turn it is to lead a season. they could always make her a fixture among the matrons and have her doing promo with ruth, golda and adjoa all the way to gregory’s love story.

b) (the more sustainable but not necessarily more likely scenario)

a new lady whistledown takes over and julie andrews’ voiceover remains.

penelope is outed as lady whistledown, chaos ensues for a while until the queen forgives her and sings her praises (we know it's gonna happen cause they're dying to redeem penelope without her working to earn it), giving pen her happily ever after. roll credits.

except... just as the season ends, a new whistledown paper comes out! someone has decided to continue what was pen started and keep reporting on the ton’s shenanigans; conveniently providing an excuse for julie andrews to stick around for the rest of the bridgerton family's love stories (this is just how gossip girl ended btw!)

this scenario i’m not necessarily against, in that i love julie andrews as a narrator (who doesn't?).

it's just that i don't trust shonda to treat whistledown as a narrator without making up more shitty subplots, as if this is pretty little liars and we need to find the identity behind A. i don't want to watch hyacinth going on a merry chase to uncover new whistledown’s identity!

i just want to listen to dame julie andrews narrate regency love stories in her posh accent, and absolutely nothing more. is that too much to ask?

#my asks #asked and answered #bridgerton

19 notes · View notes

beesmygod · 1 year ago

Text

BLOODBORNE LORE Q+A PART 6: the founding of pthumeru, the discovery by byrgenwerth, and the fishing hamlet

part 1

part 2

part 3

part 4

part 5

---

BLOCK #LONG POST/ TO NOT SEE THESE HUGE POSTS

shawn asked me a question about the mensis ritual and mergo and the process of trying to answer it in short became a catastrophic failure.

this is going to be a nightmare (hehehuhehehe) to try to explain in broad strokes to people who don't know bloodborne or even to people who do, but i'm going to do my best. anyone who tells you they know what happened or they have "solved" the mensis ritual is a liar. the timeline is muddy and deliberately vague, up to and including how long ago everything happened. i have educated guesswork but that's it.

i will post pure speculation in italics and important nouns in bold. i am peppering this with as many wiki links as possible to back up my claims. not gonna lie this looks like a fucking MAD magazine editor went to town on it or like the timecube website submitted a guest article.

but much like how you need to first make the universe in order to make an apple pie, we must first talk about the history of yharnam before we can talk about its newest resident, mergo.

---

untold eons ago, a race known as the pthumerians served the great ones as they slumbered. after becoming exposed to the deliberately vague notion of "the eldritch truth" (it is unclear if this is a specific phenomenon, like the secret to their longevity, or simply the knowledge of the great one's existence), they developed a unique and startling appearance: pallid skin, black eyes, and slacking jaws. i mean, they also lived underground so they look like underground creatures do. either way, they are distinctly inhuman humanoids.

this civilization became lost, but did not die; they continued to serve the "gods" underground, excavating tombs and chambers without rest. over time, they elected a leader, yharnam, pthumerian queen, who was given a ring imbued with special meaning by the great ones indicating her commitment to bearing a special child, a child of blood (the ramifications of this are not known). she still wears the ring today.

arguably, a civil war breaks out in pthumeru, (as evidenced by the armors left by what must have been early cainhurst knights, but i have not looked into this enough to be satisfied) that results in a schism that pushes some pthumerians to the surface, where they become the modern day royalty of cainhurst. the cainhurst royalty and the pthumerian royalty both aspire to have a child of blood and have knights that work explicitly to further this goal, putting them at odds with each other. today's cainhurst royalty maintains some of the "pthumerian look" but not to such an exaggerated degree, with the resemblance fading with each removed generation.

pictured above are the canonical cainhurst royalty and their descendants in order of relation from left to right: annalise, queen of the vilebloods (top left), lady maria (top middle), arianna, woman of pleasure (right; she is also the most distant descendant). the bottom image is concept art of lady maria during her boss fight with a more exaggerated look that did not make it into the game.

---

anyway: a bazillion years later or whatever. the cainhurst royals rule over a land that includes the victorian england-ish city of yharnam, named for the forgotten queen of pthumeru. the main appeal of yharnam is its proximity to a university of bold, weird research.

the school of byrgenwerth and its scholars were once an archeological and historical research center. however, during the course of their studies they discovered a vast labyrinth beneath the school where (if the first location they discovered was the same as ours this would be the pthumerian labyrinth) they encountered ancient humanoids, women with the ability to re-animate corpses, an perpetually burning dog who somehow still lives and, most intriguing of all, a creature that defied all understanding. further investigation revealed an unspecified "holy medium", ritual blood, which does not coagulate. this is the ritual blood found in old yharnam on the altar.

further investigation of the labyrinth was halted by the first encounter with a beast. here is a longer post about that encounter and my evidence that leads me to believe it occurred.

this is where things get really fuzzy as to which event happened first. im going to post this part without italics because all the events do happen. its just not clear in what order.

in order to combat these newfound beasts gehrman, a student of byrgenwerth (as he has dialogue where he refers to willem as "master"), took up self-styled arms (the first trick weapons) and became the first hunter. he was followed by a collection of self-styled mercenaries that would come to be known as "the old hunters". there is evidence of the old hunters having once been in the labyrinth as you can summon one to help you fight and the bell descriptions reveal that they were used by the first hunter after discovering them in the labyrinth.

the miraculous healing abilities of the old blood (the origins of which are not specified but i can show you my guesswork later lol) in the labyrinth became known to the students at byrgenwerth. the blood is used to combat the beasts by use of invigorating injections. blood is plentiful and works quickly to heal.

byrgenwerth also begins study and collection of the "phantasms" present (or were once present) in the labyrinth. the discovery of the augur of ebrietas, a slug that summons flailing tentacles of unknown origin, and the arcane properties of pearl slugs drives the school's continued plunges into the depths in spite of the danger posed. part of this research involved discovering the parasitic qualities of these creatures, which could inhabit eyes.

while continuing to investigate the ruins, byrgenwerth became aware of a fishing village where a washed up carcass of a monster was teeming with otherworldly parasites and a stillborn fetus. the parasites had caused the villagers to transform into fish-like monster people not dissimilar to the monster on the coast. the villagers seem alright with this change and actively cultivate millions of the parasites for daily use, such as especially potent lamp oil [1].

upon arrival to the village, the school and its hunters helped themselves to a little bit of genocide just for fun. villager's heads were treppaned open in the search for "eyes on the inside" (a visual metaphor for insight as well as a literal phenomenon) and the monstrous corpse was desecrated by the byrgenwerth researchers who took her child (as the villagers of the fishing hamlet chant) and one of the orphan's three umbilical cords, the one lined with eyes.

i know we find this in a weird place later. we'll get there.

but this wasn't just some pile of fish goo they were fucking with, it was the corpse of the great one, kos (or as some say, kosm). kos's wrath and retribution would come in due time. this event triggered the creation of the hunter's nightmare, a sort of eternal, bloody hell for hunters who participated in the massacre and those who become "blood drunk" where the must relive the event for all eternity. notable hunters trapped in the nightmare from the time of the old hunters include ludwig (not yet notable), laurence (looking awful but he had a busy couple of years before he wound up there), some named NPC hunters such as yamamura and gratia, and lady maria.

lady maria, gehrman's apprentice, could not tolerate her role in the fishing hamlet massacre and threw her beloved weapon into the fishing village well. she, with others, joined laurence when he split from byrgenwerth to found the healing church. its not explicit that the fishing village massacre was the reason for the split, as there were ideological differences (and family matters) brewing that also came to a head, but a one sided genocide seems like a matter that would cause a splinter between one faction that is ruthless in its methods and another that appears to be in the business of healing.

but thats a whole other post.

---

uhhh this took a very long time but once im done with this i will never have to type it ever again. the next one covers the healing church in its entirety and should end with the arrival of our hunter in yharnam as the city fully slides into chaos. thank you for reading. or not. its none of my business.

---

https://www.reddit.com/r/bloodborne/comments/3uq6wq/interesting_lamp_in_the_hamlet_spoilers_maybe/ which leads to this image: https://i.imgur.com/zVJbcJ2.jpg

#bloodborne #long post/#lore

51 notes · View notes