For that matter, pretty much nothing in there is actually true – I suspect the thing was originally written as humor, and got passed off as history later on. It’s entirely folk etymology though.
I think Snopes debunked it, too.
Ok, my apologies for said previous post. It was a spam I got a long time ago. I should have prefaced the post with - “For amusement purposes only”.
That would have saved some of us from a bit of grumbling and gnashing of teeth, ccwaterback. 
Incidentally, I have often wondered why “Victorian” is used as an adjective in the U.S., and, for all I know, in Canada too. My point being merely that in the U.S., well, there was no need to pay attention to queen Vicky, was there. No matter, just a vague wonder.
At least this thread should encourage me to stop being lazy and bother to clean my small non-Victorian flat with electric vacuum cleaner, and “count my blessings” etc
Here’s is the snope’s equivalent where they dissect and discredit in their typical arrogant fashion.
http://www.snopes.com/language/phrases/1500.htm
(Sorry about the hijack, I have started a “snopes” thread in the IMHO forum.)