This is a modern-English version of Finger-ring lore : historical, legendary, anecdotal, originally written by Jones, William, F.S.A..
It has been thoroughly updated, including changes to sentence structure, words, spelling,
and grammar—to ensure clarity for contemporary readers, while preserving the original spirit and nuance. If
you click on a paragraph, you will see the original text that we modified, and you can toggle between the two versions.
Scroll to the bottom of this page and you will find a free ePUB download link for this book.
FINGER-RING LORE
LONDON: PRINTED BY
SPOTTISWOODE AND CO., NEW-STREET SQUARE
AND PARLIAMENT STREET
LONDON: PRINTED BY
SPOTTISWOODE AND CO., NEW-STREET SQUARE
AND PARLIAMENT STREET
FINGER-RING LORE
FINGER-RING MYTHS
HISTORICAL, LEGENDARY, ANECDOTAL
HISTORICAL, LEGENDARY, ANECDOTAL
BY
WILLIAM JONES, F.S.A.
BY
WILLIAM JONES, F.S.A.
WITH NUMEROUS ILLUSTRATIONS
WITH MANY ILLUSTRATIONS
London
CHATTO AND WINDUS, PICCADILLY
1877
London CHATTO AND WINDUS, PICCADILLY 1877
TO
MY WIFE:
To My Wife:
Bon Cœur: Sans Peur.
Good Heart: Fearless.
PREFACE.
I had intended to confine my observations exclusively to the subject of ‘ring superstitions,’ but in going through a wide field of olden literature I found so much of interest in connection with rings generally, that I have ventured to give the present work a more varied, and, I trust, a more attractive character.
I meant to focus only on 'ring superstitions,' but while exploring a lot of older literature, I found so much interesting information about rings in general that I decided to make this work more diverse and, hopefully, more engaging.
The importance of this branch of archæology cannot be too highly appreciated, embracing incidents, historic and social, from the earliest times, brought to our notice by invaluable specimens of glyptic art, many of them of the purest taste, beauty, and excellency; elucidating obscure points in the creeds and general usages of the past, types for artistic imitation, besides supplying links to fix particular times and events.
The significance of this branch of archaeology cannot be overstated, as it includes historical and social events from the earliest times, highlighted by invaluable examples of glyptic art, many of which are of the highest taste, beauty, and excellence. It clarifies obscure aspects of past beliefs and customs, serves as inspiration for artistic imitation, and provides connections to establish specific times and events.
In thus contributing to the extension of knowledge, the subject of ring-lore has a close affinity to that of numismatics, but it possesses the supreme advantage of appealing to our sympathies and affections. So Herrick sings of the wedding-ring:
In contributing to the expansion of knowledge, the topic of ring lore is closely related to numismatics, but it has the significant advantage of connecting with our emotions and feelings. So Herrick sings of the wedding ring:
[Pg viii]
And as this round
Is nowhere found
To flaw, or else to sever,
So let our love
As endless prove,
And pure as gold for ever!
[Pg viii]
And since this group
Is never broken
Or split apart,
Let our love be.
Be endlessly proven,
And pure as gold forever!
It must be admitted that in many cases of particular rings it is sometimes difficult to arrive at concurrent conclusions respecting their date and authenticity: much has to be left to conjecture, but the pursuit of enquiry into the past is always pleasant and instructive, however unsuccessful in its results. One of our most eminent antiquarians writes to me thus: ‘We must not take for granted that everything in print is correct, for fresh information is from time to time obtained which shows to be incorrect that which was previously written.’
It should be acknowledged that with many specific rings, it can be challenging to reach consistent conclusions about their age and authenticity: a lot has to be based on guesswork, but exploring the past is always enjoyable and educational, even if it doesn't lead to clear results. One of our leading historians wrote to me: ‘We shouldn’t just assume that everything in print is accurate, because new information occasionally comes to light that proves previous writings were wrong.’
My acknowledgments are due to friends at home and abroad, whose collections of rings have been opened for my inspection with true masonic cordiality.
My thanks go out to friends both near and far, whose collections of rings have been shared with me openly and warmly.
I have also to thank the publishers of this work for the liberal manner in which they have illustrated the text. Many of the engravings are from drawings taken from the gem-room of the British, and from other museums, and from rare and costly works on the Fine Arts, not easily accessible to the general reader. Descriptions of rings without pictorial representations would (as in the case of coins) materially[Pg ix] lessen their attraction, and would render the book what might be termed ‘a garden without flowers.’
I also want to thank the publishers of this work for the generous way they’ve illustrated the text. Many of the images are from drawings taken from the gem room of the British Museum, as well as other museums, and from rare and expensive works on the Fine Arts that aren’t easily accessible to the average reader. Describing rings without visual representations would (like with coins) significantly[Pg ix] reduce their appeal and make the book feel like ‘a garden without flowers.’
In conclusion I will adopt the valedictory lines of an old author, who writes in homely and deprecatory verse:
In conclusion, I will use the farewell lines of an old author, who writes in simple and self-deprecating verse:
FOR HERDE IT IS, A MAN TO ATTAYNE
TO MAKE A THING PERFYTE, AT FIRST SIGHT,
BUT WAN IT IS RED, AND WELL OVER SEYNE
FAUTES MAY BE FOUNDE, THAT NEVER CAME TO LYGHT,
THOUGH THE MAKER DO HIS DILIGENCE AND MIGHT.
PRAYEING THEM TO TAKE IT, AS I HAVE ENTENDED,
AND TO FORGYVE ME, YF THAT I HAVE OFFENDED.
For it's difficult for a man to create something perfect at first glance, but when it's read and looked over carefully, flaws might be discovered that were never apparent, even though the creator has done his best. I ask them to accept it as I intended, and to forgive me if I have caused any offense.
CONTENTS.
CHAPTER | PAGE | |
I. | Earliest Period Rings | 1 |
II. | Ring superstitions | 91 |
III. | Secular Investiture by the Ring | 177 |
IV. | Rings Related to Church Practices | 198 |
V. | Engagement and Wedding Rings | 275 |
VI. | Token Rings | 323 |
VII. | Memorial and Funeral Rings | 355 |
VIII. | Posy, Inscription, and Motto Rings | 390 |
IX. | Customs and Incidents Related to Rings | 419 |
X. | Amazing Rings | 457 |
Appendix | 499 |
ILLUSTRATIONS.
PAGE | |
Egyptian gold signet-ring | 2 |
Egyptian bronze rings | 4 |
Egyptian signet-rings | 6 |
Egyptian porcelain ring | 9 |
Egyptian mummy, rings on the fingers of an | 10 |
Egyptian gold ring from Ghizeh | 11 |
Etruscan ring with chimeræ | 15 |
Roman-Egyptian ring | 15 |
Modern Egyptian rings | 17 |
Modern Egyptian ring with double keepers | 17 |
Etruscan ring representing the car of Admētus | 19 |
Etruscan rings with serpents and beetle | 19 |
Etruscan ring with scarabæus | 20 |
Etruscan ring with representation of two spirits in combat | 20 |
Etruscan ring with intaglio | 21 |
Greek and Roman rings | 22 |
Late Roman rings | 23 |
Ring found at Silchester | 24 |
Ring of a group pattern | 24 |
Ancient plain rings | 24 |
Iron ring of a Roman knight | 25 |
Roman ring, crescent-shaped | 26 |
Roman ring of coloured paste | 28 |
Gallo-Roman ring representing a cow or bull | 29 |
Roman thumb-ring | 29 |
Roman ring, with a representation of Janus | 32 |
Roman ring, with figures of Egyptian deities | 32 |
Roman ring, with busts; from the Musée du Louvre | 33 |
Roman ring, with head of Regulus | 34 |
Roman rings from Montfaucon | 36, 37, 38 |
Roman ring in the Florentine Cabinet | 39 |
Roman ‘memorial’ gift-rings | 41 |
Anglo-Roman | 41 |
Anglo-Roman and Roman rings | 42 |
Roman rings found at Lyons | 43 |
Roman bronze ring of a curious shape | 44 |
Roman key-rings | 45 |
Roman rings, with inscription and monogram | 47 |
Roman ‘legionary’ ring | 47 |
[Pg xiv]Roman ‘legionary’ ring | 48 |
Roman amber and glass rings | 48 |
Byzantine ring, from Montfaucon | 49 |
Byzantine ring, found at Constantinople | 49 |
Rings from Herculaneum and Pompeii | 49 |
Roman bronze ring | 50 |
Roman ‘trophy’ ring | 50 |
Roman ring, from the Museum at Mayence | 50 |
Roman key-rings | 51 |
Roman, late, from the Waterton Collection | 52 |
Anglo-Saxon rings | 53 |
Early British (?) ring found at Malton | 54 |
Ring of King Ethelwulf | 54 |
Anglo-Saxon rings | 58 |
Early Saxon rings found near Salisbury | 59 |
South Saxon ring found in the Thames | 60 |
Ancient Irish rings found near Drogheda | 61 |
Early Irish gold ring | 62 |
The ‘Alhstan’ ring | 62 |
Anglo-Saxon ring found near Bosington | 63 |
Rings found at Cuerdale, near Preston | 64 |
Rings in the Royal Irish Academy | 65 |
Spiral silver ring, found at Lago | 66 |
Ring found at Flodden Field | 66 |
Figured ring supposed to represent St. Louis | 67 |
Rings found in Pagan graves | 68 |
Rings of the Frankish and Merovingian periods | 69, 70 |
Gold ‘Middle Age’ ring, from the Louvre | 71 |
Rings on the effigy of Lady Stafford | 72 |
Enamelled floral ring | 75 |
‘Merchant’s Mark’ rings | 75, 87 |
Ring of the sixteenth century | 76 |
Ring of Frederic the Great | 76 |
Venetian ring | 76 |
Italian diamond-pointed ring | 76 |
Italian symbolical ring | 77 |
Venetian ring | 78 |
East Indian ring, with drops of silver | 78 |
Indian rings | 79 |
Spanish ring | 79 |
‘Giardinetti’ or guard rings | 79 |
French rings of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries | 80 |
‘Escutcheon’ ring, French | 81 |
French rings | 81, 82, 83 |
Moorish rings | 82 |
Bavarian peasant’s ring | 84 |
Thumb-rings | 89, 90, 139 |
Divination-rings | 101, 102 |
Roman amulet-rings | 104, 105, 107 |
Astrological ring | 108 |
Zodiacal ring | 110 |
Amulet rings | 126, 138, 141, 151, 152 |
Charm-rings | 133, 153 |
Talismanic rings | 134, 135, 136 |
Cabalistic rings | 139, 147 |
Mystical rings | 140 |
Rings of the Magi | 143 |
Rings with mottoes, worn as medicaments | 148 |
[Pg xv]Rings, Runic | 150 |
Toadstone rings | 157, 158 |
Cramp rings | 163, 165 |
Serjeant’s ring | 190 |
Ring of the ‘Beef Steak’ Club | 193 |
The Fisherman’s Ring | 199 |
Ring of Thierry, Bishop of Verdun | 204 |
Ring of Pope Pius II. | 206 |
Papal rings | 208 |
Episcopal rings | 217, 226, 230, 231 |
Episcopal thumb-ring | 219 |
Ring of Archbishop Sewall | 225 |
Ring of Archbishop Greenfield | 225 |
Ring of Bishop Stanbery | 226 |
Decade ring with figure of St. Catherine (?) | 249 |
Decade thumb-ring | 249 |
Silver decade ring | 250 |
Decade ring found near Croydon | 250 |
Decade signet-ring | 251 |
Decade rings | 251, 252 |
Decade ring of Delhi work | 253 |
Trinity ring | 254 |
Religious rings | 254, 255, 256, 260, 261, 262, 263 |
‘Paradise’ rings | 257 |
Reliquary ring | 257 |
Early Christian rings | 258, 259, 268, 269, 270, 271, 272, 273 |
Ecclesiastical ring | 264 |
Pilgrim ring | 264 |
Roman key-rings | 294 |
Hebrew marriage and betrothal rings | 299, 300, 302 |
Byzantine ring | 304 |
Betrothal ring | 307 |
Half of broken betrothal ring | 309 |
Jointed betrothal ring | 314 |
Gemmel ring, found at Horselydown | 316 |
Ring with representation of Lucretia | 318 |
Wedding-ring of Sir Thomas Gresham | 319 |
Gemmel ring | 319 |
‘Claddugh’ ring | 320 |
Betrothal ring with sacred inscription | 321 |
Devices on wedding rings | 322 |
The ‘Devereux’ ring | 338 |
The ‘Essex’ ring | 342 |
Old mourning ring | 360 |
Memorial rings, Charles I. | 366, 367, 370 |
Royalist memorial ring | 370 |
Memorial and mortuary rings | 373 |
Squared-work diamond ring found in Ireland | 380 |
Mortuary rings at Mayence | 381, 382 |
Gold rings from Etruscan sepulchres | 383 |
Ring found at Amiens | 383 |
Ring found in the tomb of William Rufus, Winchester Cathedral | 385 |
Ring discovered in Winchester Cathedral | 385 |
Ring of Childeric | 386 |
Motto and device rings | 390, 406 |
Posy-ring | 391, 417 |
Inscription rings | 410, 411, 412, 417 |
New Year’s gift ring | 421, 422 |
Poison-rings | 433 |
Dial-rings | 452, 453 |
Signet-ring of Mary, Queen of Scots, and the Darnley ring | 460 |
[Pg xvi]Supposed ring of Roger, King of Sicily | 465 |
The Worsley seal-ring | 467 |
Ring of Saint Louis | 469 |
Ring-devices of the Medici family | 472, 473 |
Ring found at Kenilworth Castle | 474 |
Heraldic ring | 481 |
Martin Luther’s betrothal and marriage rings | 481, 482, 483 |
Shakspeare’s ring (?) | 484 |
Initials of Sir Thomas Lucy, at Charlecote Hall | 486 |
Ivory-turned rings | 488 |
Squirt ring | 494 |
FINGER-RING LORE.
RING FINGER LEGENDS.
CHAPTER I.
RINGS FROM THE EARLIEST PERIOD.
Rings from the earliest era.
The use of signet-rings as symbols of great respect and authority is mentioned in several parts of the Holy Scriptures, from which it would seem that they were then common among persons of rank. They were sometimes wholly of metal, but frequently the inscription was borne on a stone, set in gold or silver. The impression from the signet-ring of a monarch gave the force of a royal decree to any instrument to which it was attached. Hence the delivery or transfer of it gave the power of using the royal name, and created the highest office in the State. In Genesis (xli. 42) we find that Joseph had conferred upon him the royal signet as an insignia of authority.[1] Thus Ahasuerus transferred his[Pg 2] authority to Haman (Esther iii. 12). The ring was also used as a pledge for the performance of a promise: Judah[Pg 3] promised to send Tamar, his daughter-in-law, a kid from his flock, and for fulfilment left with her (at her desire) his signet, his bracelet, and his staff (Genesis xxxviii. 17, 18).
The use of signet rings as symbols of significant respect and authority is mentioned in several parts of the Holy Scriptures, suggesting that they were common among people of high rank. They were sometimes made entirely of metal, but often the inscription was on a stone, set in gold or silver. The impression from a monarch's signet ring gave any document it was attached to the weight of a royal decree. Therefore, handing it over or transferring it allowed the use of the royal name and created the highest office in the State. In Genesis (xli. 42), we see that Joseph was given the royal signet as a symbol of authority. Thus, Ahasuerus transferred his[Pg 2] authority to Haman (Esther iii. 12). The ring was also used as a guarantee for fulfilling a promise: Judah[Pg 3] promised to send Tamar, his daughter-in-law, a kid from his flock, and to ensure he would follow through, he left her (at her request) his signet, his bracelet, and his staff (Genesis xxxviii. 17, 18).
Darius sealed with his ring the mouth of the den of lions (Daniel vi. 17). Queen Jezebel, to destroy Naboth, made use of the ring of Ahab, King of the Israelites, her husband, to seal the counterfeit letters ordering the death of that unfortunate man.
Darius used his ring to seal the entrance of the lion's den (Daniel vi. 17). Queen Jezebel, wanting to eliminate Naboth, used her husband Ahab's ring, the King of the Israelites, to seal the fake letters that ordered the death of that unfortunate man.
The Scriptures tell us that, when Judith arrayed herself to meet Holofernes, among other rich decorations she wore bracelets, ear-rings, and rings.
The Scriptures tell us that when Judith got ready to meet Holofernes, she wore various beautiful decorations including bracelets, earrings, and rings.
The earliest materials of which rings were made was of pure gold, and the metal usually very thin. The Israelitish people wore not only rings on their fingers, but also in their nostrils[2] and ears. Josephus, in the third book of his ‘Antiquities,’ states that they had the use of them after passing the Red Sea, because Moses, on his return from Sinai, found that the men had made the golden calf from their wives’ rings and other ornaments.
The earliest rings were made from pure gold, and the metal was typically very thin. The Israelites not only wore rings on their fingers but also in their nostrils and ears. Josephus, in the third book of his ‘Antiquities,’ mentions that they started using them after crossing the Red Sea, because when Moses returned from Sinai, he found that the men had made the golden calf from their wives’ rings and other jewelry.
Moses permitted the use of gold rings to the priests whom he had established. The nomad people called Midianites, who were conquered by Moses, and eventually overthrown[Pg 4] by Gideon (Numbers xxxi.), possessed large numbers of rings among their personal ornaments.
Moses allowed the priests he appointed to wear gold rings. The nomadic people known as the Midianites, who were defeated by Moses and later overthrown[Pg 4] by Gideon (Numbers xxxi.), had many rings as part of their personal decorations.
The Jews wore the signet-ring on the right hand, as appears from a passage in Jeremiah (xxii. 24). The words of the Lord are uttered against Zedekiah: ‘though Coniah the son of Jehoiakim, King of Judah, were the signet on my right hand, yet would I pluck thee thence.’
The Jews wore the signet ring on their right hand, as noted in a passage from Jeremiah (xxii. 24). The Lord's words are directed at Zedekiah: ‘even if Coniah, the son of Jehoiakim, King of Judah, were like a signet on my right hand, I would still remove you from there.’
We are not to assume, however, that all ancient seals, being signets, were rings intended to be worn on the hand. ‘One of the largest Egyptian signets I have seen,’ remarks Sir J. G. Wilkinson, ‘was in possession of a French gentleman of Cairo, which contained twenty pounds’ worth of gold. It consisted of a massive ring, half an inch in its largest diameter, bearing an oblong plinth, on which the devices were engraved, 1 inch long, 6⁄10ths in its greatest, and 4⁄10ths in its smallest, breadth. On one side was the name of a king, the successor of Amunoph III., who lived about fourteen hundred years before Christ; on the other a lion, with the legend “Lord of Strength,” referring to the monarch. On one side a scorpion, and on the other a crocodile.’
We shouldn't assume that all ancient seals, being signet rings, were designed to be worn on the hand. “One of the largest Egyptian signets I’ve seen,” notes Sir J. G. Wilkinson, “was owned by a French gentleman in Cairo and contained twenty pounds’ worth of gold. It was a massive ring, half an inch wide at its largest diameter, featuring an oblong plinth where the designs were engraved, 1 inch long, 6/10ths at its widest, and 4/10ths at its narrowest breadth. On one side was the name of a king, who succeeded Amunoph III and lived about fourteen hundred years before Christ; on the other side was a lion, with the inscription ‘Lord of Strength,’ referring to the king. One side had a scorpion, and the other side featured a crocodile.”
This ring passed into the Waterton Dactyliotheca, and is now the property of the South Kensington Museum.
This ring became part of the Waterton Dactyliotheca and is now owned by the South Kensington Museum.
Egyptian Bronze Rings.
Egyptian Bronze Rings.
Rings of inferior metal, engraved with the king’s name, may, probably, have been worn by officials of the court. In the Londesborough collection is a bronze ring, bearing on[Pg 5] the oval face the name of Amunoph III., the same monarch known to the Greeks as ‘Memnon.’ The other ring, also of bronze, has engraved on the face a scarabæus. Such rings were worn by the Egyptian soldiers.
Rings made of lower-quality metal, engraved with the king’s name, were likely worn by court officials. The Londesborough collection includes a bronze ring featuring the name of Amunoph III on[Pg 5] its oval face, the same king known to the Greeks as ‘Memnon.’ Another bronze ring has a scarab engraved on its face. Egyptian soldiers wore such rings.
In the British Museum are some interesting specimens of Egyptian rings with representations of the scarabæus,[3] or beetle. These rings generally bear the name of the wearer,[Pg 6] the name of the monarch in whose reign he lived, and also the emblems of certain deities; they were so set in the gold ring as to allow the scarabæus to revolve on its centre, it being pierced for that purpose.
In the British Museum, you can find some fascinating examples of Egyptian rings featuring images of the scarab, or beetle. These rings usually have the name of the wearer,[Pg 6] the name of the monarch during whose reign they were made, and symbols of certain gods; they were designed so that the scarab could rotate around its center, as it was drilled for that purpose.
Colonel Barnet possesses an Egyptian signet-ring formed by a scarabæus set in gold. It was found on the little finger of a splendid gilded mummy at Thebes. In all probability the wearer of the ring had been a royal scribe, as by his side was found a writing-tablet of stone. On the breast was a large scarabæus of green porphyry, set in gold.
Colonel Barnet has an Egyptian signet ring made with a scarab beetle set in gold. It was discovered on the little finger of an impressive gilded mummy in Thebes. It’s likely that the person who wore the ring was a royal scribe since a stone writing tablet was found beside him. On the chest was a large scarab beetle made of green porphyry, also set in gold.
The Rev. Henry Mackenzie, of Yarmouth, possesses an Egyptian scarabæus, a signet-ring, set with an intaglio, on cornelian, found in the bed of a deserted branch of the Euphrates, in the district of Hamadân in Persia. The engraving is unfinished, the work is polished in the intaglio, and the date has therefore been supposed not later than the time of the Greeks in Persia, circa 325 B.C.
The Rev. Henry Mackenzie from Yarmouth has an Egyptian scarab, a signet ring with an engraving on cornelian, found in a dried-up branch of the Euphrates River in the Hamadan region of Persia. The engraving is incomplete, and the intaglio is polished, suggesting it dates back to around the time of the Greeks in Persia, circa 325 B.C.
Egyptian Signet-rings.
Egyptian Signet Rings.
The representations here given illustrate the large and massive Egyptian signet-ring, and also a lighter kind of hooped signet, ‘as generally worn at a somewhat more recent period in Egypt. The gold loop passes through a small figure of the sacred beetle, the flat under-side being engraved with the device of a crab.’
The images provided show the large and heavy Egyptian signet ring, as well as a lighter, more contemporary style of hooped signet that was commonly worn later in Egypt. The gold loop goes through a small figure of the sacred beetle, with the flat underside engraved with a crab design.
[Pg 7]In the British Museum, in the first Egyptian Room, is the signet-ring of Queen Sebek-nefru (Sciemiophris). ‘Sebek’ was a popular component of proper names after the twelfth dynasty, probably because this queen was beloved by the people. On Assyrian sculptures are found armlets and bracelets; rings do not appear to have been generally worn.
[Pg 7]In the British Museum, in the first Egyptian Room, is the signet ring of Queen Sebek-nefru (Sciemiophris). ‘Sebek’ became a popular part of names after the twelfth dynasty, likely because this queen was well-liked by the people. Assyrian sculptures show armlets and bracelets, but rings don’t seem to have been commonly worn.
At a meeting of the Society of Biblical Archæology, in June 1873, Dr. H. F. Talbot, F.R.S., read an interesting paper on the legend of ‘Ishtar descending to Hades,’ in which he translated from the tablets the goddess’s voluntary descent into the Assyrian Inferno. In the cuneiform it is called ‘the land of no return.’ Ishtar passes successively through the seven gates, compelled to surrender her jewels, viz. her crown, ear-rings, head-jewels, frontlets, girdle, finger- and toe-rings, and necklace. A cup full of the Waters of Life is given to her, whereby she returns to the upper world, receiving at each gate of Hades the jewels she had been deprived of in her descent.
At a meeting of the Society of Biblical Archaeology in June 1873, Dr. H. F. Talbot, F.R.S., presented an engaging paper on the legend of "Ishtar descending to Hades," in which he translated from the tablets the goddess's voluntary journey into the Assyrian Inferno. In cuneiform, it’s referred to as "the land of no return." Ishtar passes through the seven gates, forced to give up her jewels, including her crown, earrings, head jewelry, headdresses, girdle, finger- and toe-rings, and necklace. A cup filled with the Waters of Life is given to her, allowing her to return to the upper world, regaining the jewels she lost at each gate of Hades.
Mr. Greene, F.S.A., has an Egyptian gold ring, formerly in the possession of the late Mr. Salt, belonging to the nineteenth dynasty, probably from the Lower Country, below Memphis. It is engraved with a representation of the goddess Nephthis, or Neith. Another gold ring of a later period, from the Upper Country, dates, probably, from the time of Psammitichus, B.C. 671 to 617.
Mr. Greene, F.S.A., has an Egyptian gold ring that used to belong to the late Mr. Salt. It’s from the nineteenth dynasty, likely from the Lower Country, south of Memphis. It features an engraving of the goddess Nephthis, or Neith. There’s also another gold ring from a later period, coming from the Upper Country, that dates back to the time of Psammitichus, B.C. 671 to 617.
In the collection of Egyptian antiquities formed by the late R. Hay, Esq., of Limplum, N.B., were two Græco-Egyptian gold rings, found, it is conjectured, in the Aasa-seef, near Thebes. One of these is of the usual signet form, but without an inscription; the other is of an Etruscan pattern, and is composed of a spiral wire, whose extremities[Pg 8] end in a twisted loop, with knob-like intersections. Both these objects are of fine workmanship, and are wrought in very pure gold. Sir J. G. Wilkinson, in ‘Manners and Customs of the Ancient Egyptians,’ remarks: ‘The rings were mostly of gold, and this metal seems always to have been preferred to silver for rings and other articles of jewellery. Silver rings are, however, occasionally to be met with, and two in my possession, which were accidentally found in a temple at Thebes, are engraved with hieroglyphics, containing the name of the royal city. Bronze was seldom used for rings; some have been discovered of brass and iron (of a Roman time), but ivory and blue porcelain were the materials of which those worn by the lower classes were usually made.’
In the collection of Egyptian artifacts put together by the late R. Hay, Esq., of Limplum, N.B., there were two Greco-Egyptian gold rings, believed to have been found in the Aasa-seef, near Thebes. One ring has the usual signet shape but lacks an inscription; the other features an Etruscan design and is made of a spiral wire with ends that twist into loops and have knob-like intersections. Both pieces are expertly crafted and made of high-quality gold. Sir J. G. Wilkinson, in 'Manners and Customs of the Ancient Egyptians,' notes: ‘Most rings were made of gold, and this metal was typically preferred over silver for rings and other jewelry. However, silver rings can sometimes be found, and I have two that were accidentally discovered in a temple at Thebes, which are engraved with hieroglyphics that include the name of the royal city. Bronze was rarely used for rings; some have been found made of brass and iron (from Roman times), but ivory and blue porcelain were typically used for those worn by the lower classes.’
The Rev. C. W. King observes: ‘I have seen finger-rings of ivory of the Egyptian period, their heads engraved with sphinxes and figures of eyes cut in low relief as camei, and originally coloured.’
The Rev. C. W. King notes: 'I have seen ivory finger rings from the Egyptian period, with their tops engraved with sphinxes and figures of eyes carved in low relief like cameos, and originally painted.'
The porcelain finger-rings of ancient Egypt are extremely beautiful, the band of the ring being seldom above one eighth of an inch in thickness. Some have a plate in which in bas-relief is the god Baal, full-faced, playing on the tambourine, as the inventor of music; others have their plates in the shape of the right symbolical eye, the emblem of the sun, of a fish of the perch species, or of a scarabæus. Some few represent flowers. Those which have elliptical plates with hieroglyphical inscriptions bear the names of Amen-Ra, and of other gods and monarchs, as Amenophis III., Amenophis IV., and Amenmest of the eighteenth and nineteenth dynasties. One of these rings has a little bugle on each side, as if it had been strung on the beaded work of a mummy, instead of being placed on the finger.[Pg 9] Blue is the prevalent colour, but a few white and yellow rings, and some even ornamented with red and purple colours, have been discovered. It is scarcely credible that these rings, of a substance finer and more fragile than glass, were worn during life, and it seems hardly likely that they were worn by the poorer classes, for the use of the king’s name on sepulchral objects seems to have been restricted to functionaries of state. Some larger rings of porcelain of about an inch in diameter, seven-eighths of an inch broad, and one-sixteenth of an inch thick, made in open work, represents the constantly-repeated lotus-flowers, and the god Ra, or the sun, seated and floating through the heavens in his boat.
The porcelain rings from ancient Egypt are incredibly beautiful, usually only about one-eighth of an inch thick. Some have a plate featuring the god Baal in bas-relief, facing forward and playing the tambourine as the inventor of music; others have plates shaped like the symbolic right eye, symbolizing the sun, a perch fish, or a scarab beetle. A few even depict flowers. Those with elliptical plates and hieroglyphic inscriptions bear the names of Amen-Ra and other gods and rulers, like Amenophis III, Amenophis IV, and Amenmest from the eighteenth and nineteenth dynasties. One of these rings has a small bugle on each side, as if it had been strung on the beaded work of a mummy instead of being worn on a finger.[Pg 9] Blue is the most common color, but a few white and yellow rings, and some adorned with red and purple, have also been found. It's hard to believe these rings, made of a material more delicate than glass, were actually worn in life, and it's unlikely they belonged to poorer individuals since items with the king’s name seem to have been reserved for state officials. Some larger porcelain rings, about an inch in diameter, seven-eighths of an inch wide, and one-sixteenth of an inch thick, feature intricate designs of the repeatedly depicted lotus flowers and the god Ra, or the sun, seated and floating through the heavens in his boat.
At the Winchester meeting of the Archæological Institute in 1845 a curious swivel-ring of blue porcelain was exhibited, found at Abydus in Upper Egypt; setting modern. It has a double impression: on the one side is the king making an offering to the gods, with the emblems of life and purity; on the other side the name of the monarch in the usual ‘cartouche,’ one that is well known, being that of Thothmes III., whom Wilkinson supposes to have been the Pharaoh of Exodus. It is worthy of remark that this cartouche is ‘supported’ by asps, which are usually considered to be the attributes of royalty.
At the Winchester meeting of the Archaeological Institute in 1845, a fascinating blue porcelain swivel-ring was displayed, discovered at Abydos in Upper Egypt. It shows two impressions: on one side, the king is offering to the gods, accompanied by symbols of life and purity; on the other side is the king's name in the typical ‘cartouche,’ which is well-known as that of Thothmes III., whom Wilkinson believes was the Pharaoh during the Exodus. It's notable that this cartouche is ‘supported’ by asps, which are generally seen as symbols of royalty.
Egyptian Porcelain Ring.
Egyptian Porcelain Ring.
The annexed engraving represents an Egyptian ring, en pâte céramique, from M. Dieulafait’s ‘Diamants et Pierres Précieuses.’
The attached engraving shows an Egyptian ring, in ceramic paste, from M. Dieulafait’s ‘Diamonds and Precious Stones.’
The signet of Sennacherib in the British Museum is made of Amazon stone, one of the hardest stones known to the lapidary, and bears an intaglio ‘which,’ observes the[Pg 10] Rev. C. W. King, ‘by its extreme minuteness, and the precision of the drawing, displays the excellence to which the art had already attained.’
The signet of Sennacherib in the British Museum is made of Amazon stone, one of the hardest stones known to gem cutters, and features a carving that, as noted by the[Pg 10] Rev. C. W. King, ‘by its incredible detail and the precision of the design, shows the level of skill that the art had already reached.’
On a mummy-case in the British Museum is a representation of a woman with crossed hands, covered with rings; the left hand is most loaded. Upon the thumb is a signet with hieroglyphics on the surface, three rings on the forefinger, two on the second, one formed like a snail shell, the same number on the next, and one on the little finger. The right hand carries only a thumb ring, and two upon the third finger.
On a mummy case in the British Museum, there’s an image of a woman with her hands crossed, adorned with rings; her left hand has the most. On her thumb, there’s a signet featuring hieroglyphics, with three rings on her forefinger, two on her middle finger, one shaped like a snail shell, the same amount on her ring finger, and one on her pinky. The right hand has only a thumb ring and two on the middle finger.
Rings on the fingers of a Mummy.
Rings on the fingers of a mummy.
Sir J. G. Wilkinson observes: ‘The left was considered the hand peculiarly privileged to bear these ornaments; and it is remarkable that its third finger was decorated with a greater number than any other, and was considered by them, as by us, par excellence, the ring-finger, though there is no evidence of its having been so honoured at the marriage ceremony.’
Sir J. G. Wilkinson notes: ‘The left hand was seen as the special hand for wearing these decorations; and it's interesting that its third finger was adorned with more than any other finger, and was regarded by them, just like us, par excellence, as the ring finger, although there's no proof that it was honored in the marriage ceremony.’
The same author mentions that rings were a favourite decoration among the Egyptians; women wore sometimes[Pg 11] two or three on the same finger. They were frequently worn on the thumb. Some were simple, others had an engraved stone, and frequently bore the name of the owner; others the monarch in whose time he lived, and they were occasionally in the form of a snail, a knot, a snake, or some fancy device. A cat—emblem of the goddess Bast, or Pasht, the Egyptian Diana—was a favourite subject for ladies’ rings.
The same author notes that rings were a popular accessory among the Egyptians; women sometimes wore[Pg 11] two or three on the same finger. They were often worn on the thumb. Some rings were simple, while others had an engraved stone, typically featuring the owner’s name; some displayed the name of the ruler during that time, and they sometimes took the shape of a snail, a knot, a snake, or other decorative designs. A cat—symbolizing the goddess Bast, or Pasht, the Egyptian Diana—was a common motif for women’s rings.
Egyptian Gold Ring, from Ghizeh.
Egyptian Gold Ring from Giza.
One of the oldest, if not the most ancient ring known, is supposed to be that in the collection of Dr. Abbot, of Cairo, now preserved with his other Egyptian antiquities at New York. It is thus described by him:—‘This remarkable piece of antiquity is in the highest state of preservation, and was found at Ghizeh, in a tomb near the excavation of Colonel Vyse, called Campbell’s tomb. It is of fine gold, and weighs nearly three sovereigns. The style of the hieroglyphics within the oval make the name of that Pharaoh (Cheops, Shofo) of whom the pyramid was the tomb. The details are minutely accurate and beautifully executed. The heaven is engraved with stars; the fox or jackal has significant lines within its contour; the hatchets have their handles bound with thongs, as is usual in the sculptures; the volumes have the strings which bind them hanging below the roll—differing in this respect from any[Pg 12] example in sculptured or painted hieroglyphics. The determinative for country is studded with dots, representing the land of the mountains at the margin of the valley of Egypt. The instrument, as in the larger hieroglyphics, has the tongue and semi-lunar mark of the sculptured examples; as is the case also with the heart-shaped vase. The name is surmounted with the globe and feathers, decorated in the usual manner; and the ring of the cartouche is engraved with marks representing a rope, never seen in the sculptures; and the only instance of a royal name similarly encircled is a porcelain example in this collection, inclosing the name of the father of Sesostris. The O in the name is placed as in the examples sculptured in the tombs, not in the axis of the cartouche; the chickens have their unfledged wings; the cerastes its horns, now only to be seen with a magnifying glass.’
One of the oldest, if not the most ancient, rings known is thought to be the one in Dr. Abbot's collection in Cairo, which is now kept with his other Egyptian artifacts in New York. He describes it as follows: ‘This remarkable piece of antiquity is in excellent condition and was found at Giza, in a tomb near the excavation of Colonel Vyse, called Campbell’s tomb. It is made of fine gold and weighs nearly three sovereigns. The style of the hieroglyphics inside the oval reveals the name of the Pharaoh (Cheops, Shofo) whose pyramid serves as his tomb. The details are incredibly precise and beautifully crafted. The heavens are engraved with stars; the fox or jackal has important lines within its shape; the hatchets have their handles bound with thongs, as is typical in the sculptures; the volumes have their binding strings hanging lower than the scroll—this differs from any [Pg 12] example in sculpted or painted hieroglyphics. The determinative for the country is dotted, representing the mountainous land at the edge of the valley of Egypt. The instrument, like in larger hieroglyphics, has the tongue and semi-lunar mark of the sculpted examples, just like the heart-shaped vase. The name is topped with the globe and feathers, decorated in the usual way; and the ring of the cartouche is engraved with marks that look like a rope, which is not seen in sculptures; the only other instance of a royal name circled like this is a porcelain example in this collection, enclosing the name of the father of Sesostris. The O in the name is positioned like in the examples carved in the tombs—not at the center of the cartouche; the chicks have their undeveloped wings; and the cerastes has its horns, which can only be seen with a magnifying glass.’
In a lecture to the deaf and dumb in St. Saviour’s Hall, Oxford Street, London (October 1875), on ‘Eastern Manners and Customs,’ amongst various relics exhibited was the hand of a female mummy, on one finger of which was a gold ring, with the signet of one of the Pharaohs.
In a lecture for the deaf and mute at St. Saviour’s Hall, Oxford Street, London (October 1875), on ‘Eastern Manners and Customs,’ several artifacts were shown, including the hand of a female mummy, which had a gold ring with the signet of one of the Pharaohs on one of its fingers.
A gold ring exhibited at the exhibition of antiquities at the Ironmongers’ Hall, in 1861, had hieroglyphics meaning ‘protected by the living goddess Mu.’
A gold ring displayed at the antique exhibition at the Ironmongers’ Hall in 1861 had hieroglyphics that meant ‘protected by the living goddess Mu.’
Among some interesting specimens of Egyptian rings exhibited at the South Kensington Loan Exhibition of 1872 I may mention an antique ring of pale gold, with a long oval bezel chased in intaglio, with representation of a sistrum (timbrel, used by the Egyptians in their religious ceremonies), the property of Viscount Hawarden; an antique ring of pale gold (belonging to Lady Ashburton), formed of a slender wire, the ends twisted round the[Pg 13] shoulders, upon which is strung a signet, in form of a cat, made of greenish-blue glazed earthenware.
Among some interesting pieces of Egyptian rings displayed at the South Kensington Loan Exhibition of 1872, I want to highlight an antique ring made of pale gold with a long oval bezel intricately carved, featuring an image of a sistrum (a type of tambourine used by the Egyptians in their religious ceremonies), which belonged to Viscount Hawarden. There's also an antique ring of pale gold (owned by Lady Ashburton), made from a slender wire, with the ends twisted around the[Pg 13] shoulders, on which is strung a signet shaped like a cat, made of greenish-blue glazed pottery.
From the collection of R. H. Soden Smith, Esq. F.S.A., an ancient pale gold ring, with revolving cylinders of lapis-lazuli, engraved with hieroglyphics; the shoulders of the hoop wrapped round with wire ornament.
From the collection of R. H. Soden Smith, Esq. F.S.A., an ancient pale gold ring, featuring revolving cylinders of lapis lazuli, engraved with hieroglyphics; the shoulders of the band are wrapped with decorative wire.
The Waterton Collection contains Egyptian rings of various descriptions: one of silver, with revolving bezel of cornelian representing the symbolical right eye. Several rings of glazed earthenware; one of gold, very massive, with revolving scarab of glazed earthenware, partially encased in gold. A gold ring, the hoop of close-corded work, revolving bezel with blood-stone scarab, engraved with Hathor and child. The same engraving is on a gold signet-ring, with vesica-shaped bezel, and upon a white-metal ring, where the figures are surrounded by lotus-flowers. Another gold signet-ring is engraved with the figure of Amen-ra; a probably Egyptian white-metal ring, with narrow oblong bezel, engraved with a frieze of figures, and winged Genii, divided by candelabra.
The Waterton Collection features a variety of Egyptian rings: one made of silver, with a rotating bezel of carnelian depicting the symbolic right eye. Several rings are crafted from glazed pottery; one is a very heavy gold ring with a rotating scarab made of glazed pottery, partially surrounded by gold. There's also a gold ring with a tightly woven band and a rotating bezel featuring a bloodstone scarab, which is engraved with Hathor and a child. The same engraving appears on a gold signet ring with a vesica-shaped bezel, as well as on a white metal ring, where the figures are surrounded by lotus flowers. Another gold signet ring is engraved with the image of Amen-ra, and there’s a likely Egyptian white metal ring with a narrow oblong bezel, etched with a frieze of figures and winged genies, separated by candelabra.
Several of the Egyptian rings in the Museum of the Louvre at Paris date from the reign of King Mœris. One of the oldest rings extant is that of Cheops, the founder of the Great Pyramid, which was found in a tomb there. It is of gold, with hieroglyphics.
Several of the Egyptian rings in the Louvre Museum in Paris date back to the reign of King Mœris. One of the oldest rings still in existence is that of Cheops, the builder of the Great Pyramid, which was discovered in a tomb there. It's made of gold and features hieroglyphics.
The Egyptian glass-workers produced small mosaics of the most minute and delicate finish, and sufficiently small to be worn on rings.
The Egyptian glass workers created tiny mosaics with incredible detail, small enough to be worn on rings.
Dr. Birch, in a very interesting paper communicated to the Society of Antiquaries, at the meeting of November 17, 1870, observes, with regard to the scarabæi and signet-rings of the ancient Egyptians, that the use of these curious[Pg 14] objects (the exhibition comprising upwards of five hundred scarabs from the collection of Egyptian antiquities formed by the late R. Hay, Esq., of Sinplum, N.B., to which I have alluded) dates back from a remote period of Egyptian history. ‘As it is well known, they were not merely made in porcelain, but also in steatite, or stea-schist, and the various semi-precious stones suitable for engraving, such as cornelian, sard, and such-like.’ In the time of the twelfth dynasty the cylindrical ring, also found in use among the Assyrians and Babylonians, came into vogue. The hard stones and gems were of later introduction, probably under the influence of Greek art, for the ancient Egyptians themselves do not appear to have possessed the method of cutting such hard substances. A few, however, exist, which are clearly of great antiquity—as, for example, a specimen in yellow jasper now in the British Museum.
Dr. Birch, in a fascinating paper presented to the Society of Antiquaries at the meeting on November 17, 1870, notes that regarding the scarabs and signet rings of ancient Egyptians, the use of these intriguing[Pg 14] objects (the exhibition features over five hundred scarabs from the collection of Egyptian antiquities owned by the late R. Hay, Esq., of Sinplum, N.B., which I've mentioned) dates back to a distant period in Egyptian history. "As is well known, they were made not only in porcelain but also in steatite, or stea-schist, and various semi-precious stones suitable for engraving, such as carnelian, sard, and similar materials." During the twelfth dynasty, the cylindrical ring, also used by the Assyrians and Babylonians, became popular. The hard stones and gems emerged later, likely influenced by Greek art, as the ancient Egyptians themselves didn't seem to have the technique for cutting such hard materials. A few, however, clearly exist that are of significant antiquity—such as a specimen in yellow jasper currently in the British Museum.
The principal purpose to which these scarabs were applied was to form the revolving bezel of a signet-ring, the substance in which the impression was taken being a soft clay, with which a letter was sealed.
The main purpose of these scarabs was to create the rotating bezel of a signet ring, using a soft clay to make the impression that sealed a letter.
It is singular that some of these objects have been found in rings fixed with the plane engraved side inwards, rendering them unfit for the purposes of sealing. It is well known that the use of these scarabs was so extensive as to have prevailed beyond Egypt, being adopted by the Phœnicians and the Etruscans.
It’s interesting that some of these objects have been found in rings with the engraved side facing inward, making them unsuitable for sealing purposes. It's well known that the use of these scarabs was so widespread that it extended beyond Egypt, being adopted by the Phoenicians and the Etruscans.
On this subject the Rev. C. W. King remarks that gold rings, even of the Etruscan period, are very rare, the signets of that nation still retaining the form of scarabæi. ‘The most magnificent Etruscan ring known, belonging once to the Prince de Canino, and now in the matchless collection of antique gems in the British Museum, is formed of the[Pg 15] fore-parts of two lions, whose bodies compose the shank, whilst their heads and fore-paws support the signet—a small sand scarab, engraved with a lion regardant, and set in an elegant bezel of filagree-work. The two lions are beaten up in full relief of thin gold plate, in a stiff archaic style, but very carefully finished.’
On this topic, Rev. C. W. King notes that gold rings, even from the Etruscan period, are quite rare, with the signets from that time still taking the shape of scarabs. “The most impressive Etruscan ring known, which once belonged to the Prince de Canino and is now part of the incredible collection of antique gems at the British Museum, features the fore-parts of two lions, whose bodies make up the shank. Their heads and fore-paws hold the signet—a small sand scarab, engraved with a lion regardant, and set in a beautiful bezel of filigree work. The two lions are crafted in full relief from thin gold plate, in a rigid archaic style, but with great attention to detail.”
The Waterton Collection contains a gold ring of Etruscan workmanship, of singular beauty. It is described by Padre Geruchi, of the Sacred College, as a betrothal or nuptial ring. It has figures of Hercules and Juno placed back to back on the hoop, having their arms raised above their heads. Hercules is covered with the skin of a lion, Juno with that of a goat.
The Waterton Collection includes a stunning gold ring made by the Etruscans. Padre Geruchi from the Sacred College describes it as a betrothal or wedding ring. The ring features figures of Hercules and Juno facing each other on the band, with their arms raised above their heads. Hercules is draped in a lion's skin, while Juno wears a goat's skin.
![]() |
![]() | |
Etruscan, with Chimeræ. | Roman-Egyptian. |
Fairholt, in ‘Rambles of an Archæologist,’ describes an ancient Etruscan ring in the British Museum, with chimeræ on it opposing each other. The style and treatment partake largely of ancient Eastern art. There is also in the same collection a remarkable ring having the convolutions of a serpent, the head of Serapis at one extremity and of Isis at the other; by this arrangement one or other of them would always be correctly posited; it has, also, the further advantage of being flexible, owing to the great sweep of its curve. Silver rings are rarer than those of gold in[Pg 16] the tombs of Etruria, and iron and bronze examples are gilt.
Fairholt, in ‘Rambles of an Archaeologist,’ describes an ancient Etruscan ring in the British Museum featuring opposing chimeras. The style and design are heavily influenced by ancient Eastern art. The same collection also includes a remarkable ring shaped like a serpent, with the head of Serapis at one end and the head of Isis at the other; this design ensures that one of them is always correctly positioned. It also has the added benefit of being flexible because of its wide curve. Silver rings are less common than gold ones in[Pg 16] Etruscan tombs, and examples made of iron and bronze are gilded.
All the Hindoo Mogul divinities of antiquity had rings; the statues of the gods at Elephanta, supposed to be of the highest antiquity, had finger-rings.
All the Hindu Mogul deities from ancient times wore rings; the statues of the gods at Elephanta, believed to be the oldest, had finger rings.
The Rev. C. W. King describes a ring in the Waterton collection, of remarkable interest—apparently dating from the Lower Empire, for the head is much thrown up, and has the sides pierced into a pattern, the ‘interrasile opus, so much in fashion during those times. It is set with two diamonds of (probably) a carat each: one a perfect octahedron of considerable lustre, the other duller and irregularly crystallised. Another such example might be sought for in vain throughout the largest cabinets of Europe.’
The Rev. C. W. King describes a ring in the Waterton collection that is very interesting—likely from the Lower Empire period, as the head is quite raised and has sides that are pierced into a pattern, the ‘interrasile opus,’ which was very popular at that time. It features two diamonds of (probably) about a carat each: one is a flawless octahedron with considerable shine, while the other is duller and has an irregular shape. Finding another example like this would be impossible in even the largest collections in Europe.
After the conquest of Asia Alexander the Great used the signet-ring of Darius to seal his edicts to the Persians; his own signet he used for those addressed to the Greeks.
After conquering Asia, Alexander the Great used Darius's signet ring to seal his edicts for the Persians; he used his own signet for those meant for the Greeks.
Xerxes, King of Persia, was a great gem-fancier, but his chief signet was a portrait, either of himself, or of Cyrus, the founder of the monarchy. He also wore a ring with the figure of Anaitis, the Babylonian Venus, upon it. Thucydides says that the Persian kings honoured their subjects by giving them rings with the likenesses of Darius and Cyrus.
Xerxes, King of Persia, was a big fan of gems, but his main signet featured a portrait, either of himself or Cyrus, the founder of the monarchy. He also wore a ring with the image of Anaitis, the Babylonian goddess of love. Thucydides mentions that the Persian kings honored their subjects by giving them rings with the likenesses of Darius and Cyrus.
The late Mr. Fairholt purchased in Cairo a ring worn by an Egyptian lady of the higher class. It is a simple hoop of twisted gold, to which hangs a series of pendant ornaments, consisting of small beads of coral, and thin plates of gold, cut to represent the leaves of a plant. As the hands move, these ornaments play about the finger, and a very brilliant effect might be produced if diamonds were used in the pendants.
The late Mr. Fairholt bought a ring in Cairo that once belonged to an upper-class Egyptian woman. It’s a plain twisted gold band with a series of dangling decorations made up of small coral beads and thin gold plates shaped like plant leaves. As the hand moves, these decorations dance around the finger, and it would create a striking effect if diamonds were used in the pendants.
[Pg 17]The rings worn by the middle class of Egyptian men are usually of silver, set with mineral stones, and are valued as the work of the silversmiths of Mecca, that sacred city being supposed to exert a holy influence on all the works it originates.
[Pg 17]The rings worn by the middle-class men in Egypt are typically made of silver, adorned with gemstones, and are appreciated for the craftsmanship of the silversmiths from Mecca, a holy city believed to have a sacred influence on everything it produces.
Modern Egyptian Rings.
Modern Egyptian Rings.
A curious ring with a double keeper is worn by Egyptian men. It is composed entirely of common cast silver, set with mineral stone. The lowermost keeper, of twisted wire, is first put on the finger, then follows the ring. The second keeper is then brought down upon it: the two being held by a brace which passes at the back of the ring, and gives security to the whole.
A curious ring with a double keeper is worn by Egyptian men. It is made entirely of ordinary cast silver, set with a mineral stone. The lower keeper, made of twisted wire, is first placed on the finger, then the ring follows. The second keeper is then lowered onto it: the two are held together by a brace that goes around the back of the ring, securing the entire piece.
Modern Egyptian Ring,
with Double Keepers.
Modern Egyptian Ring, with Double Keepers.
Tavernier states in his ‘Travels’ that the Persians did not make gold rings, their religion forbidding the wearing of any article of that metal during prayers, it would have been too troublesome to take them off every time they performed their devotions. The gems mounted in gold rings, sold by Tavernier to the King, were reset in silver by native workmen.
Tavernier mentions in his 'Travels' that the Persians didn't wear gold rings because their religion prohibited wearing any item made of that metal during prayers, as it would be too inconvenient to remove them each time they prayed. The gems set in gold rings, which Tavernier sold to the King, were reset in silver by local craftsmen.
[Pg 18]The custom of wearing rings may have been introduced into Greece from Asia, and into Italy from Greece. They served the twofold purpose, ornamental and useful, being employed as a seal, which was called sphragis, a name given to the gem or stone on which figures were engraved. The Homeric poems make mention of ear-rings only, but in the later Greek legends the ancient heroes are represented as wearing finger-rings. Counterfeit stones in rings are mentioned in the time of Solon. Transparent stones when extracted from the remains of the original iron-rings of the ancients are sometimes found backed by a leaf of red gold as a foil.[4] The use of coloured foils was merely to deceive and impose upon the unwary, by giving to a very inferior jewel the finest colour. Solon made a law prohibiting sellers of rings from keeping the model of a ring they had sold.
[Pg 18]The practice of wearing rings might have been brought to Greece from Asia, and to Italy from Greece. Rings served both decorative and practical purposes, as they were used as seals, known as sphragis, which referred to the gem or stone that had designs engraved on it. The Homeric poems only mention earrings, but later Greek stories depict ancient heroes wearing finger rings. Fake stones in rings are noted during the time of Solon. Transparent stones, when found in the remnants of the ancient iron rings, are sometimes backed with a layer of red gold as a foil. [4] The use of colored foils was simply a trick to fool the unsuspecting by giving a low-quality gem a beautiful appearance. Solon established a law forbidding ring sellers from keeping the model of a ring they had sold.
The Lacedæmonians, according to the laws of Lycurgus, had only iron rings, despising those of gold; either that the King devised thereby to retrench luxury, or not to permit the use of them.
The Spartans, following the laws of Lycurgus, only had iron rings, looking down on gold ones; either because the King wanted to cut back on luxury or because he didn’t want them to be used.
The Etruscans and the Sabines wore rings at the period of the foundation of Rome, 753 B.C.
The Etruscans and the Sabines wore rings during the founding of Rome, 753 BCE
The Etruscans made rings of great value. They have been found of every variety—with precious stones, of massive gold, very solid, with engraved stones of remarkable beauty. Among Etruscan rings in the Musée Nap. III. the table of one offers a representation, enlarged, of the story of Admētus, the King of Pheræ in Thessaly. He took part in the expedition of the Argonauts, and sued for the hand of Alcestis, the daughter of Pelias, who promised him to her on condition that he should come to her in a chariot drawn[Pg 19] by lions and boars. This feat Admētus performed by the assistance of Apollo, who served him, according to some accounts, out of attachment to him, or, according to others, because he was obliged to serve a mortal for one year, for having slain the Cyclops.
The Etruscans created incredibly valuable rings. They have been discovered in every style—featuring precious stones, crafted from solid gold, very sturdy, and with beautifully engraved stones. Among the Etruscan rings in the Musée Nap. III., one of the pieces displays an enlarged depiction of the tale of Admētus, the King of Pheræ in Thessaly. He was part of the Argonauts' expedition and sought to marry Alcestis, the daughter of Pelias, who promised her to him on the condition that he arrive in a chariot pulled by lions and boars. Admētus accomplished this with the help of Apollo, who, according to some stories, assisted him out of friendship, while others say it was because he had to serve a mortal for a year due to having killed the Cyclops.
Etruscan (Admētus).
Etruscan (Admētus).
Representation of Admētus.
Representation of Admetus.
Etrusca.
Etruscan.
Among rings taken out of the tombs there are some in the form of a knot or of a serpent. They are frequently found with shields of gold, and of that form which we call Gothic, that is elliptical and pointed, called by foreigners ogive, with raised subjects chiselled on the gold, or with onyxs of the same form, but polished and surrounded with gold.[Pg 20] There are some particular rings which appear more adapted to be used as seals than rings, and they have on the shields, relievos of much more arched, and almost Egyptian, form.[5]
Among the rings found in tombs, some are shaped like knots or serpents. They are often discovered alongside gold shields that have the Gothic design, which is elliptical and pointed, referred to by foreigners as ogive, featuring raised designs carved into the gold, or with onyx in the same shape but polished and surrounded by gold.[Pg 20] There are also specific rings that seem more suited to function as seals rather than as rings, and they have shields with much more curved and almost Egyptian designs. [5]
Etruscan.
Etruscan.
Etruscan.
Etruscan culture.
Among the antique jewels at the Bibliothèque Nationale at Paris are two fine specimens of Etruscan rings. One is of gold, on which is a scarabæus in cornelian; the stomach of the scarabæus is engraved hollow and represents a naked man holding a vase. The other is a gold ring found in a tomb at Etruria, of which the bezel, sculptured in relief, could not serve as a seal. The subject is a divinity combating with two spirits, a representation of the eastern idea of the struggles between the two principles of good and evil, such as are found on numerous cylinders that come from the borders of the Euphrates and the Tigris. This analogy between the religious ideas of the Etruscans and those of the most ancient monuments of the East is not[Pg 21] astonishing when it is shown that the Etruscans, the ancient inhabitants of Italy, were originally from Asia. The following engraving represents an intaglio on a scarabæus ring, of fine workmanship, preserved in Vienna.
Among the antique jewels at the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris are two stunning examples of Etruscan rings. One is made of gold, featuring a scarab in cornelian; the scarab's underside is hollowed out and depicts a naked man holding a vase. The other is a gold ring discovered in a tomb in Etruria, and its bezel, carved in relief, cannot be used as a seal. The design shows a deity battling two spirits, illustrating the Eastern concept of the struggle between good and evil, similar to those found on many cylinders from the regions of the Euphrates and the Tigris. This connection between the religious beliefs of the Etruscans and the oldest monuments of the East is not[Pg 21] surprising when we consider that the Etruscans, the early inhabitants of Italy, originally came from Asia. The following engraving depicts an intaglio on a scarab ring, exquisitely crafted, and preserved in Vienna.
At a meeting of the Archæological Institute (May 3, 1850) the Dowager Duchess of Cleveland exhibited a curious Roman ring of pure gold (weight 182 grains), of which an illustration is given in the Journal of the Institute (vol. vii. p. 190). ‘It was found, with other remains, at Pierse Bridge (Ad Tisam), county of Durham, where the vestiges of a rectangular encampment may be distinctly traced. The hoop, wrought by the hammer, is joined by welding the extremities together; to this is attached an oval facet, the metal engraved in intaglio, the impress being two human heads respectant, probably male and female—the prototype of the numerous “love seals” of a later period. The device on the ring is somewhat effaced, but evidently represented two persons gazing at each other. This is not the first Roman example of the kind found in England. The device appears on a ring, apparently of that period, found on Stanmore Common in 1781. On the mediæval seals alluded to, the heads are usually accompanied by the motto “Love me, and I thee,” to which, also, a counterpart is found among relics of a more remote age. Galeotti, in his curious illustrations of the “Gemmæ Antiquæ Litteratæ,” in the collection of Ficoroni, gives an intaglio engraved with the words “Amo te, ama me.”’
At a meeting of the Archaeological Institute (May 3, 1850), the Dowager Duchess of Cleveland showcased an intriguing Roman ring made of pure gold (weighing 182 grains), which is illustrated in the Journal of the Institute (vol. vii. p. 190). “It was discovered, along with other artifacts, at Pierse Bridge (Ad Tisam), in County Durham, where the remains of a rectangular camp can still be clearly seen. The band, shaped by hammering, is joined by welding the ends together; attached to this is an oval face with intaglio engraving featuring two human heads facing each other, likely male and female—the inspiration for the many ‘love seals’ that appeared later. The imagery on the ring is somewhat worn, but clearly shows two figures looking at one another. This is not the first Roman ring of this kind found in England. A similar design appears on a ring, seemingly from that era, discovered on Stanmore Common in 1781. The medieval seals mentioned typically accompany the saying ‘Love me, and I thee,’ which also has counterparts found among artifacts from an even earlier time. Galeotti, in his fascinating illustrations of the ‘Gemmæ Antiquæ Litteratæ,’ in Ficoroni’s collection, presents an intaglio engraved with the phrase ‘Amo te, ama me.’”
Etruscan.
Etruscan.
[Pg 22]The following engravings represent: A ring in the Musée du Louvre, with a lion sculptured by a Greek artist, in an oriental cornelian; the reverse has an intaglio of a lion couchant. The second, from the Webb Collection, is that of an ancient Greek ring, of solid gold, with the representation of a comic mask in high relief. The other, a gold ring with a bearded mask, Roman, in the Waterton Collection at the South Kensington Museum—also in high relief—has the shoulders thickened with fillets, engraved with stars.
[Pg 22]The following engravings show: A ring in the Louvre featuring a lion sculpted by a Greek artist, made from an oriental cornelian; the back has an intaglio of a reclining lion. The second piece, from the Webb Collection, is an ancient Greek ring made of solid gold, with a high-relief depiction of a comic mask. The last one is a Roman gold ring featuring a bearded mask, found in the Waterton Collection at the South Kensington Museum—also in high relief—with the shoulders thickened with fillets and engraved with stars.
![]() |
![]() |
![]() | ||
Greek. | Greek. | Roman. |
A singular discovery of Roman relics was made in 1824 at Terling Place, near Witham, Essex, by some workmen forming a new road; the earth being soaked by heavy rains the cart-wheels sank up to their naves. The driver of the cart saw some white spots upon the mud adhering to the wheels, which proved to be coins. On further search a small vase was discovered in which had been deposited with some coins, two gold rings, which are interesting examples of late Roman work; and representations of these, by Lord Rayleigh’s permission, were given in the ‘Journal of the Archæological Institute’ (vol. iii. p. 163) and are here shown. One of the rings is set with a colourless crackly crystal, or pasta, uncut and en cabochon; the other with a paste formed of two layers, the upper being of a dull smalt colour, the[Pg 23] lower dark brown. The device is apparently an ear of corn.
A unique discovery of Roman artifacts happened in 1824 at Terling Place, near Witham, Essex, when some workers were building a new road; the ground was so saturated from heavy rains that the cart wheels sank deep into the mud. The cart driver noticed some white spots on the mud sticking to the wheels, which turned out to be coins. Upon further searching, they found a small vase containing some coins and two gold rings, which are notable examples of late Roman craftsmanship. With Lord Rayleigh’s permission, images of these were published in the ‘Journal of the Archæological Institute’ (vol. iii. p. 163) and are shown here. One of the rings is set with a clear crackly crystal, or pasta, that is uncut and en cabochon; the other features a paste made of two layers, with the upper layer being a dull smalt color and the lower being dark brown. The design appears to represent an ear of corn.
Late Roman.
Late Roman Empire.
The Hertz Collection contained a well-formed octahedral diamond, about a carat in weight, set open in a Roman ring of unquestionable authenticity.
The Hertz Collection featured a nicely shaped octahedral diamond, weighing about a carat, set in an open Roman ring of undeniable authenticity.
At the Loan Exhibition of Ancient and Modern Jewellery at the South Kensington Museum, in 1872, John Evans Esq., F.S.A., contributed a series of seven rings, gold and silver, Roman, set with antique stones; one very massive, of silver and gold, set with intaglio on nicolo onyx; one with an angular hoop, and another with beaded ornaments.
At the Loan Exhibition of Ancient and Modern Jewelry at the South Kensington Museum in 1872, John Evans Esq., F.S.A., provided a collection of seven rings made of gold and silver from the Roman era, featuring antique stones; one was quite large, made of silver and gold, set with an intaglio on nicolo onyx; one had an angular band, and another was decorated with beaded designs.
‘Though,’ remarks Mr. Fairholt, ‘a great variety of form and detail was adopted by Greek and Roman goldsmiths for the rings they so largely manufactured, the most general and lasting resembled a Roman ring, probably of the time of Hadrian, which is said to have been found in the Roman camp at Silchester, Berkshire. The gold of the ring is massive at the face, making a strong setting for the cornelian, which is engraved with the figure of a female bearing corn and fruit. By far the greater majority of Roman rings exhumed at home and abroad are of this fashion, which recommends itself by a dignified simplicity, telling by quantity and quality of metal and stone its true value,[Pg 24] without any obtrusive aid.’ Sometimes a single ring was constructed to appear like a group of two or three upon the finger. Mr. Charles Edwards, of New York, in his ‘History and Poetry of Finger Rings,’ has given an example of this kind of ring. Upon the wide part of each are two letters, the whole forming ‘ZHCAIC,’ mayst thou live!
‘Although,’ says Mr. Fairholt, ‘the Greek and Roman goldsmiths created a wide variety of styles and details for the rings they produced in large numbers, the most common and enduring type looks like a Roman ring, likely from the time of Hadrian, which is reportedly found in the Roman camp at Silchester, Berkshire. The gold of the ring is substantial at the face, providing a strong setting for the carnelian, which is engraved with the image of a woman holding corn and fruit. The vast majority of Roman rings uncovered both locally and internationally are made in this style, which is appreciated for its dignified simplicity, indicating its true worth through the quantity and quality of the metal and stone,[Pg 24] without any flashy embellishments.’ Sometimes a single ring was designed to look like a set of two or three on the finger. Mr. Charles Edwards of New York, in his ‘History and Poetry of Finger Rings,’ provides an example of this kind of ring. On the wide section of each are two letters, altogether forming ‘ZHCAIC,’ mayst thou live!
![]() |
![]() | |
Ring found at Silchester. | Group Pattern. |
‘The simplest and most useful form of rings, and that by consequence adopted by people of all early nations, was the plain elastic hoop. Cheap in construction and convenient in wear, it may be safely said to have been generally patronised from the most ancient to the most modern times.’ An engraving by Mr. Fairholt represents ‘the old form of a ring made in the shape of a coiled serpent, equally ancient, equally far-spread in the old world, and which has had a very large sale among ourselves as a decided novelty. In fact, it has been the most successful design our ring-makers have produced of late years.’
‘The simplest and most useful type of rings, which was consequently adopted by people in all early societies, was the plain elastic hoop. Affordable to make and easy to wear, it can confidently be said to have been widely favored from ancient times to the present day.’ An engraving by Mr. Fairholt shows ‘the traditional design of a ring shaped like a coiled serpent, also very old and widespread in the ancient world, which has become quite popular among us as a noticeable novelty. In fact, it has been the most successful design our ring-makers have created in recent years.’
Ancient Plain Rings.
Vintage Plain Rings.
The statues of Numa and Servius Tullius were represented with rings, while those of the other Kings had none;[Pg 25] which would induce the belief that the use of rings was little known in the early days of Rome. Pliny[6] states that the first date in Roman history in which he could trace any general use of rings was in A.U.C. 449, in the time of Cneius Flavius, the son of Annius. Less than a century before Christ, Mithridates, the famous King of Pontus, possessed a museum of signet-rings; later, Scaurus, the stepson of the Dictator, Sylla, had a collection of signet-rings, but inferior to that of Mithridates, which, having become the spoil of Pompey, was presented by him to the Capitol.
The statues of Numa and Servius Tullius were depicted wearing rings, while the statues of the other Kings did not have any;[Pg 25] this suggests that the use of rings was not well-known during the early days of Rome. Pliny[6] mentions that the first instance in Roman history where he found any widespread use of rings was in A.U.C. 449, during the time of Cneius Flavius, the son of Annius. Less than a century before Christ, Mithridates, the well-known King of Pontus, had a collection of signet rings; later, Scaurus, the stepson of the Dictator Sylla, also had a collection of signet rings, but it was not as impressive as Mithridates', which, after becoming a prize of Pompey, was given to the Capitol by him.
In Rome every freeman had the right to use the iron ring, which was worn to the last period of the Republic, by such men as loved the simplicity of the good old times. Among these was Marius, who, as Pliny tells us, wore an iron ring in his triumph after the subjugation of Jugurtha. In the early days of the Empire the jus annuli seems to have elevated the wearer to the equestrian order. Those who committed any crime forfeited the distinction, and this shows us the estimation in which the ring, as an emblem of honour, was regarded.
In Rome, every free man had the right to wear the iron ring, which was a symbol linked to the simpler, more virtuous times of the past. Among those who cherished this tradition was Marius, who, as Pliny recounts, wore an iron ring during his triumph after defeating Jugurtha. In the early days of the Empire, the jus annuli seems to have granted the wearer membership in the equestrian class. Those who committed any crime lost this distinction, highlighting how the ring was valued as an emblem of honor.
Iron Ring of a
Roman Knight.
Iron Ring of a Roman Knight.
We are told of Cæsar that when addressing his soldiers after the passage of the Rubicon he often held up the little finger of his left hand, protesting that he would pledge even to his ring to satisfy the claims of those who defended his cause. The soldiers of the furthest ranks, who could see but not hear him, mistaking the gesture, imagined that he was promising to each man the dignity of a Roman Knight.
We hear about Cæsar that when he spoke to his soldiers after crossing the Rubicon, he often raised the little finger of his left hand, insisting that he would even pledge his ring to meet the demands of those who supported him. The soldiers at the back, who could see him but not hear him, misinterpreted the gesture and thought he was promising each of them the honor of being a Roman Knight.
Gold rings appear to have been first worn by ambassadors[Pg 26] to a foreign State, but only during a diplomatic mission; in private they wore their iron ones.
Gold rings seem to have been initially worn by ambassadors[Pg 26] on diplomatic missions to a foreign state, but in their personal lives, they opted for iron rings.
In the course of time it became customary for all the senators, chief magistrates, and the equites to wear a gold seal-ring. This practice, which was subsequently termed the jus annuli aurei, or the jus annulorum, remained for several centuries at Rome their exclusive privilege, while others continued to wear the iron ring. In Plutarch’s Life of Caius Marius he mentions that the slaves of Cornutus concealed their master at home, and hanging up by the neck the body of some obscure person, and putting a gold ring on his finger, they showed him to the guards of Marius, and then wrapping up the body as if it were their master’s, they interred it.
Over time, it became the norm for all senators, top officials, and the equites to wear a gold seal-ring. This practice, later known as the jus annuli aurei or jus annulorum, remained their exclusive right in Rome for several centuries, while others continued wearing iron rings. In Plutarch’s Life of Caius Marius, he notes that the slaves of Cornutus hid their master at home, hung the body of some unknown person by the neck, put a gold ring on his finger, showed him to Marius's guards, and then wrapped the body up as if it were their master’s and buried it.
Magistrates and governors of provinces seem to have possessed the privilege of conferring upon inferior officers, or such persons as had distinguished themselves, the right of wearing a gold ring. Verres thus presented his secretary with a gold ring in the assembly at Syracuse.
Magistrates and governors of provinces had the privilege to grant inferior officers or individuals who had distinguished themselves the right to wear a gold ring. Verres, for example, gave his secretary a gold ring during the assembly in Syracuse.
Roman.
Roman.
Montfaucon mentions in his ‘Antiquity Explained’ (English Edition, 1722, vol. iii. p. 146), a Greek seal-ring, which has the shape of a crescent. An illustration is here given of a similarly-formed Roman ring, with the letters Q. S. P. Q., Quintanus Senatus Populusque, from the ‘Gemmæ Antiquæ Litteratæ.’
Montfaucon talks about a Greek seal ring in his book ‘Antiquity Explained’ (English Edition, 1722, vol. iii. p. 146) that is shaped like a crescent. An illustration is provided here of a similarly shaped Roman ring, featuring the letters S.P.Q., which stand for Quintanus Senatus Populusque, from the ‘Gemmæ Antiquæ Litteratæ.’
Some wore rings of gold, covered with a plate of iron. Trimalchion wore two rings, one upon the little finger of his left hand, which was a large gilt one, and the other of gold, set with stars of iron upon the middle of the ring-finger.[Pg 27] Some rings were hollow, and others solid. The Flamines Diales could only wear the former.
Some wore gold rings covered with a layer of iron. Trimalchion had two rings, one on the little finger of his left hand, which was a large gilt one, and the other made of gold, featuring iron stars set on the middle of the ring finger.[Pg 27] Some rings were hollow, and others were solid. The Flamines Diales were only allowed to wear the hollow ones.
During the Empire the right of granting the privilege of a gold ring belonged to the emperors, and some were not very scrupulous in conferring this distinction.
During the Empire, the authority to grant the privilege of a gold ring was held by the emperors, and some were not very careful about giving this honor.
Severus and Aurelian granted this privilege to all Roman soldiers; Justinian allowed all citizens of the empire to wear such rings.
Severus and Aurelian gave this privilege to all Roman soldiers; Justinian permitted all citizens of the empire to wear these rings.
But there always seems to have been a difficulty in restricting the use of the gold ring. Tiberius (A.D. 22) allowed its use to all whose fathers and grandfathers had property of the value of 400,000 sestertia (3,230l.). The restriction, however, was of little avail, and the ambition for the annulus aureus became greater than it had ever been before.
But there always seems to have been a challenge in limiting the use of the gold ring. Tiberius (CE 22) permitted its use for everyone whose fathers and grandfathers owned property worth 400,000 sestertia (3,230l.). However, the restriction had little effect, and the desire for the annulus aureus grew stronger than ever before.
Juvenal, in his eleventh ‘Satire,’ alludes to a spendthrift who, after consuming his estate, has nothing but his ring:—
Juvenal, in his eleventh ‘Satire,’ refers to a spendthrift who, after wasting his fortune, has only his ring left:—
At length, when nought remains a meal to bring,
The last poor shift, off comes the Knightly ring,
And sad Sir Pollio begs his daily fare,
With undistinguished hands, and fingers bare.
At last, when there's nothing left to eat,
The last resort, the Knightly ring comes off,
And sad Sir Pollio asks for his daily meal,
With unremarkable hands and bare fingers.
Martial attacks a person under the name of Zoilus, who had been raised from a state of servitude to Knighthood, and was determined to make the ring, the badge of his new honour, sufficiently conspicuous:—
Martial criticizes a person named Zoilus, who had risen from being a servant to becoming a knight, and was intent on making the ring—the symbol of his new honor—very noticeable:—
Zoile, quid tota gemmam præcingere libra
Te juvat, et miserum perdire sardonycha?
Annulus iste tuus fuerat modo cruribus aptus;
Non eadem digitis pondera conveniunt.
Zoile, why do you dress up the whole gem with a book?
Do you like ruining the poor sardonyx?
This ring used to fit your legs well;
The weights on the fingers don't align.
The keeping of the imperial ring (cura annuli) was confided to a state keeper, as the Great Seal with us is placed in custody of the Lord Chancellor.
The responsibility of keeping the imperial ring (cura annuli) was entrusted to a state keeper, similar to how the Great Seal is held by the Lord Chancellor.
[Pg 28]With the increasing love of luxury and show, the Romans, as well as the Greeks, covered their fingers with rings, and some wore different ones for summer and winter, immoderate both in number and size.[7] The accompanying illustrations represent a huge ring of coloured paste, all of one piece, blue colour—one of the rings of inexpensive manufacture in popular use among the lower classes. It is smaller on one side, to occupy less space on the index or little finger.
[Pg 28]With the growing love for luxury and display, both the Romans and the Greeks adorned their fingers with rings, sometimes wearing different ones for summer and winter, indulging excessively in both the number and size. [7] The included illustrations show a large ring made of colored paste, all from a single piece, in blue color—one of the inexpensive rings commonly worn by the lower classes. It is smaller on one side to take up less space on the index or little finger.
Roman.
Roman.
The following illustrates a supposed Gallo-Roman ring of outrageous proportions, similar to those complained of by Livy (xxxiii., see Appendix), for their extravagant size. It is of bronze, and supposed to represent a cow or bull seated, with a bell round the neck.
The following shows a supposed Gallo-Roman ring of outrageous proportions, similar to those criticized by Livy (xxxiii., see Appendix) for their excessive size. It's made of bronze and is thought to depict a cow or bull sitting down, wearing a bell around its neck.
Heavy rings of gold of a sharp triangular outline were worn on the little finger in the later time of the Empire. A thumb-ring[Pg 29] of unusual magnitude and of costly material is represented in Montfaucon. It bears the bust in high relief of the Empress Plotina, the consort of Trajan: she is[Pg 30] represented with the imperial diadem. It is supposed to have decorated the hand of some member of the imperial family. The Rev. C. W. King mentions a ring in the Fould Collection (dispersed by auction in 1860), the weight of which, although intended for the little finger, was three ounces. It was set with a large Oriental onyx, not engraved.
Heavy gold rings with a sharp triangular shape were worn on the little finger in the later period of the Empire. An unusually large thumb ring[Pg 29] made of expensive material is shown in Montfaucon. It features a high-relief bust of Empress Plotina, the wife of Trajan, depicted wearing the imperial diadem. It is thought to have adorned the hand of a member of the imperial family. The Rev. C. W. King mentions a ring from the Fould Collection (sold at auction in 1860) that, while designed for the little finger, weighed three ounces. It was set with a large, unengraved Oriental onyx.
Supposed Gallo-Roman.
Supposed Gallo-Roman culture.
Roman Thumb-ring.
Roman thumb ring.
Juvenal alludes to the ‘season’ rings:—
Juvenal refers to the ‘season’ rings:—
Charged with light summer rings his fingers sweat,
Unable to support a gem of weight.
Charged with light summer rings, his fingers sweat,
Unable to hold a gem of weight.
The custom of wearing numerous rings must have been at a comparatively early period: it is alluded to both by Plato and Aristophanes. According to Martial, one Clarinus wore daily no less than sixty rings: ‘Senos Clarinus omnibus digitis gerit,’ and, what is more remarkable, he loved to sleep wearing them, ‘nec nocte ponit annulos.’ Quintilian notices the custom of wearing numerous rings: ‘The hand must not be overloaded with rings, especially with such as do not pass over the middle joints of the finger.’ Demosthenes wore many rings and he was stigmatised as unbecomingly vain for doing so in the troubled times of the State.
The practice of wearing many rings must have started quite early, as mentioned by both Plato and Aristophanes. Martial notes that a man named Clarinus wore no less than sixty rings daily: "Senos Clarinus omnibus digitis gerit," and what's even more surprising is that he liked to sleep with them on, "nec nocte ponit annulos." Quintilian points out the trend of sporting multiple rings: "The hand shouldn’t be overloaded with rings, especially those that don’t fit over the middle joints of the finger." Demosthenes also wore many rings, and he was criticized for being vain during turbulent times for the state.
Seneca, describing the luxury and ostentation of the time, says: ‘We adorn our fingers with rings, and a jewel is displayed on every joint.’
Seneca, describing the luxury and showiness of the time, says: ‘We decorate our fingers with rings, and a gem is flaunted on every joint.’
As a proof of the universality of gold rings as ornaments in ancient times, we are told that three bushels of them were gathered out of the spoils after Hannibal’s victory at Cannæ. This was after the second Punic war.
As proof of how universally gold rings were used as jewelry in ancient times, it's said that three bushels of them were collected from the spoils after Hannibal's victory at Cannae. This was after the second Punic War.
According to Mr. Waterton it is believed that gems were not mounted in rings prior to the LXII. Olympiad.
According to Mr. Waterton, it's thought that gems weren't set in rings before the 62nd Olympiad.
Nero, we are informed, during his choral exhibitions in[Pg 31] the circus, was attended by children, each of whom wore a gold ring. Galba’s guard, of the Equites, had gold rings as a distinguishing badge.
Nero, we learn, during his choral performances in[Pg 31] the circus, was accompanied by children, each wearing a gold ring. Galba’s guard, known as the Equites, had gold rings as a distinctive badge.
Rock crystal appears to have been much in use among the Romans for making solid finger-rings carved out of one single piece, the face engraved with some intaglio serving for a signet.
Rock crystal seems to have been widely used by the Romans to create solid finger rings carved from a single piece, with the face engraved with an intaglio that served as a signet.
‘All those known to me,’ remarks the Rev. C. W. King in ‘Precious Stones,’ &c., ‘have the shank moulded into a twisted cable; one example bore for device the Christian monogram, which indicates the date of the fashion. It would seem that these rings superseded and answered the same purpose as the balls of crystal carried at an earlier period by ladies in their hands for the sake of the delicious coolness during the summer heat.’
‘All the people I know,’ says Rev. C. W. King in ‘Precious Stones,’ &c., ‘have the shank shaped like a twisted cable; one example featured the Christian monogram, which shows the date of the style. It seems that these rings replaced and served the same purpose as the crystal balls that ladies used to carry in their hands for their refreshing coolness during the summer heat.’
Stone rings were in common use, formed chiefly of chalcedony. ‘It is most probable,’ remarks the Rev. C. W. King, ‘that the first ideas of these stone rings were borrowed by the Romans from the Persian conical and hemispherical seals in the same material. Some of these latter have their sides flattened, and ornamented with divers patterns, and thus assume the form of a finger-ring, with an enormously massy shank and very small opening, sufficient, however, to admit the little finger. And this theory of their origin is corroborated by the circumstance that all these Lower Roman examples belong to the times of the Empire, none being ever met with of an early date.’
Stone rings were commonly used and were primarily made of chalcedony. "It is very likely," notes Rev. C. W. King, "that the Romans borrowed the initial concept of these stone rings from the Persian conical and hemispherical seals made of the same material. Some of these seals have flattened sides and are decorated with various patterns, giving them the shape of a finger-ring, with a thick band and a very small opening, just enough for the little finger to fit through. This theory of their origin is supported by the fact that all these Lower Roman examples date back to the times of the Empire, with none found from an earlier period."
Silver rings were common: Pliny relates that Arellius Fuscus, when expelled from the equestrian order, and thus deprived of the right of wearing a gold ring, appeared in public with silver rings on his fingers.
Silver rings were common: Pliny mentions that Arellius Fuscus, when he was kicked out of the equestrian order and lost the right to wear a gold ring, showed up in public with silver rings on his fingers.
Among the ancient jewels in the Bibliothèque Nationale[Pg 32] at Paris is a fine Roman ring, of which the bezel, a cornelian graved hollow, represents a Janus with four faces.
Among the ancient jewels in the Bibliothèque Nationale[Pg 32] in Paris is a beautiful Roman ring, which has a bezel made of carved cornelian that shows a Janus with four faces.
Roman.
Roman.
Another Roman ring, also of gold, is attributed to the epoch of the Emperor Hadrian. The three golden figures represented on it are those of Egyptian deities, which have suffered under the hands of a Roman jeweller. It is, however, possible to distinguish them as one of the most important of the Egyptian Pantheon; that is to say, Horus, Isis, and Nephtys. Isis-Hathor is shown with cow’s ears; she has near her Horus-Harpocrates, her son, who is crowned with the schent; the mother and child rise from a lotus flower: on the left is Nephtys, crowned with a hieroglyphic emblem, accidentally incomplete, but the signification of which is the name even of this divinity, ‘the lady of this house.’
Another Roman ring, also made of gold, dates back to the time of Emperor Hadrian. The three golden figures on it represent Egyptian deities, altered by a Roman jeweler. However, it's possible to identify them as some of the most significant figures in the Egyptian pantheon: Horus, Isis, and Nephtys. Isis-Hathor is depicted with cow ears; next to her is Horus-Harpocrates, her son, who is wearing the schent; the mother and child emerge from a lotus flower. On the left is Nephtys, wearing a hieroglyphic emblem that is accidentally incomplete, but it signifies her name, ‘the lady of this house.’
Roman.
Roman.
Montfaucon, in his ‘L’Antiquité Expliquée,’ describes a ring with a gem engraved representing Bellerophon, Pegasus, and the Chimæra. The hero, riding on his famous horse, in the air, throws a dart at the monster below, whose first head is that of a lion, the goat’s head appears on her back, and her tail terminates in a large head of a serpent. This ring was found on the road to Tivoli, among some ashes of a dead body.
Montfaucon, in his ‘L’Antiquité Expliquée,’ describes a ring with a gemstone engraved with Bellerophon, Pegasus, and the Chimæra. The hero, riding on his famous horse in the air, throws a dart at the monster below, whose first head is that of a lion, the goat’s head appears on her back, and her tail ends in a large serpent's head. This ring was found on the road to Tivoli, among the ashes of a dead body.
Representation of a ring
ornamented with busts
of divinities. From the
Musée du Louvre.
Representation of a ring
decorated with busts
of deities. From the
Musée du Louvre.
Montfaucon gives the contents of a Roman lady’s jewel box cut upon the pedestal supporting a statue of Isis, and amongst other rich articles for female decoration are, for her little finger, two rings with diamonds; on the next finger a ring with many gems (polypsephus), emeralds, and one pearl. On the top joint of the same finger, a ring with an emerald. The Roman ladies were prodigal in their display of rings: we read that Faustina spent 40,000l. of our money, and Domitia 60,000l. for single rings. Greek women wore chiefly ivory and amber rings, and these were less costly and numerous than those used by men.
Montfaucon describes the contents of a Roman lady’s jewelry box, which is engraved on the pedestal of a statue of Isis. Among other fancy items for female adornment, there are two diamond rings for her little finger; on the next finger, a ring with several gems (polypsephus), emeralds, and one pearl. On the top joint of the same finger, there’s a ring with an emerald. Roman women were extravagant in their display of rings: we read that Faustina spent 40,000 l. of our money, and Domitia 60,000 l. on individual rings. Greek women primarily wore ivory and amber rings, which were less expensive and less numerous than those worn by men.
The Rev. C. W. King remarks of Roman rings that if of early date, and set with good intagli, they are almost invariably hollow and light, and consequently are easily crushed. Cicero relates of L. Piso, that ‘while prætor in Spain he was going through the military exercises, when the gold ring which he wore was, by some accident, broken and crushed. Wishing to have another ring made for himself, he ordered a goldsmith to be summoned to the forum at Cordova, in front of his own judgment-seat, and weighed out the gold to him in public. He ordered the man to set down his bench in the forum, and make the ring for him in the presence of all, to prove that he had not employed the gold of the public treasury, but had made use only of his broken ring.’
The Rev. C. W. King notes that early Roman rings, especially those with quality intaglios, are usually hollow and light, making them prone to being crushed. Cicero tells the story of L. Piso, who, while serving as praetor in Spain, was participating in military exercises when his gold ring accidentally broke and got crushed. Wanting a new ring made, he called a goldsmith to the forum in Cordova, in front of his own judgment seat, and publicly weighed out the gold for him. He instructed the goldsmith to set up his bench in the forum and make the ring there in front of everyone to demonstrate that he hadn’t used any gold from the public treasury, but only the material from his broken ring.
The signs engraved on rings were very various, including portraits of friends and ancestors, and subjects connected with mythology and religion. In the reign of Claudius no[Pg 34] ring was to bear the portrait of the emperor without a special licence, but Vespasian, some time after, issued an edict, permitting the imperial image to be engraven on rings and brooches. Besides the figures of great personages, there were also representations of popular events: thus, on Pompey’s ring, like that of Sylla, were three trophies, emblems of his three victories in Europe, Asia, and Africa. After the murder of this great general, his seal-ring, as Plutarch tells us, was brought to Cæsar, who shed tears on receiving it. The Roman senate refused to credit the news of the death of Pompey, until Cæsar produced before them his seal-ring.
The designs engraved on rings were diverse, featuring portraits of friends and ancestors, as well as themes related to mythology and religion. During Claudius's reign, no[Pg 34] ring could display the emperor's portrait without a special license, but later on, Vespasian issued an edict allowing the imperial image to be engraved on rings and brooches. In addition to images of prominent figures, there were also depictions of popular events: for instance, Pompey’s ring, like Sylla’s, showed three trophies, symbols of his victories in Europe, Asia, and Africa. After this great general was murdered, his seal-ring was brought to Cæsar, who reportedly wept upon receiving it. The Roman Senate refused to believe the news of Pompey’s death until Cæsar presented them with his seal-ring.
Head of Regulus,
between cornucopiæ.
Head of Regulus,
between plenty.
On the ring of Julius Cæsar was a representation of an armed Venus, as he claimed to be a descendant of the goddess. This device was adopted by his partisans; on that of Augustus, first a sphinx; afterwards the image of Alexander the Great, and at last, his own portrait, which succeeding emperors continued to use.[8]
On Julius Caesar's ring was an image of an armed Venus, as he claimed to be a descendant of the goddess. His supporters took up this symbol; for Augustus, it was initially a sphinx; later, the image of Alexander the Great, and finally, his own portrait, which later emperors continued to use.[8]
Among the ancients the figures engraved on rings were not hereditary, and each assumed that which pleased him. Numa had made a law prohibiting representations of the[Pg 35] gods, but custom abrogated the ordinance, and the Romans had engraved in their rings not only figures of their own deities, but those of other countries, especially of the Egyptians. The physician Asclepiades had a ring with Urania represented upon it. Scipio the African had a sphinx; Cornelius Scipio Africanus, younger son of the great Africanus, wore the portrait of his father, but as his conduct was unworthy of the character of his illustrious sire the people expressed their disgust by depriving him of the ring. Sylla had a Jugurtha; the Epicureans, a head of Epicurus; Commodus, an Amazon, the portrait of his mistress Martia; Aristomenes, an Agathocles, King of Sicily; Callicrates, a Ulysses; the Greeks, Helen; the Trojans, Pergamus; the inhabitants of Heraclia, a Hercules; the Athenians, Solon; the Lacedæmonians, Lycurgus; the Alexandrians, an Alexander; the Seleucians, Seleucus; Mæcenas, a frog; Pompey, a dog on the prow of a ship; the Kings of Sparta, an eagle holding a serpent in its claws; Darius, the son of Hystaspes, a horse; the infamous Sperus, the rape of Proserpine; the Locrians, Hesperus, or the evening star; Polycrates, a lyre; Seleucus, an anchor.
In ancient times, the designs engraved on rings weren't hereditary, and each person chose what they liked. Numa created a law against depicting the[Pg 35] gods, but tradition ignored this rule, and Romans had images of not just their own gods but also those from other cultures, especially the Egyptians. The physician Asclepiades had a ring featuring Urania. Scipio the African had a sphinx; Cornelius Scipio Africanus, the younger son of the great Africanus, wore a portrait of his father, but because his behavior was unworthy of his father's legacy, the people showed their disapproval by taking away his ring. Sylla had a Jugurtha; the Epicureans, a head of Epicurus; Commodus, an Amazon, representing his mistress Martia; Aristomenes, Agathocles, King of Sicily; Callicrates, Ulysses; the Greeks, Helen; the Trojans, Pergamus; the people of Heraclia, Hercules; the Athenians, Solon; the Lacedæmonians, Lycurgus; the Alexandrians, Alexander; the Seleucians, Seleucus; Mæcenas, a frog; Pompey, a dog on a ship’s prow; the Kings of Sparta, an eagle holding a serpent; Darius, son of Hystaspes, a horse; the notorious Sperus, the abduction of Proserpine; the Locrians, Hesperus, or the evening star; Polycrates, a lyre; and Seleucus, an anchor.
The Rev. C. W. King, in ‘Antique Gems,’ informs us that ‘the earliest mention of a ring-stone in relief occurs in Seneca, who, in a curious anecdote which he tells (“De Beneficiis,” iii. 26) concerning the informer Maro and a certain Paulus, speaks of the latter as having had on his finger on that occasion a portrait of Tiberius in relief upon a projecting gem, “Tiberii Cæsaris imaginem ectypam atque eminente gemma.” This periphrasis would seem to prove that such a representation was not very common at the time, or else a technical term would have been used to express that particular kind of gem-engraving.’
The Rev. C. W. King, in ‘Antique Gems,’ tells us that ‘the first recorded mention of a ring-stone in relief appears in Seneca, who shares an interesting story (“De Beneficiis,” iii. 26) about the informer Maro and a certain Paulus. He describes Paulus as wearing a portrait of Tiberius in relief on a raised gem at that time, “Tiberii Cæsaris imaginem ectypam atque eminente gemma.” This description suggests that such a representation wasn’t very common back then, otherwise a specific term would have been used to describe that type of gem engraving.’
[Pg 36]Among the discoveries made during some excavations at Canterbury in 1868 was a Roman ring of exceedingly pure gold, the stone being a very fine and highly-polished onyx, engraved with a Ganymede.
[Pg 36]Among the discoveries made during some digs at Canterbury in 1868 was a Roman ring made of very pure gold, featuring a beautifully polished onyx stone, engraved with an image of Ganymede.
At a meeting of the Archæological Institute at Norwich in 1847 a fine gold Roman ring found at Caistor was exhibited, set with an intaglio on onyx, the subject being the Genius of Victory. The following illustrations of engraved Roman rings are taken from Montfaucon’s ‘L’Antiquité Expliquée’:—
At a meeting of the Archaeological Institute in Norwich in 1847, a beautiful gold Roman ring discovered at Caistor was displayed. It featured an intaglio on onyx, depicting the Genius of Victory. The following illustrations of engraved Roman rings are taken from Montfaucon’s ‘L’Antiquité Expliquée’:—
![]() |
![]() | |
Gold ring, with head of Trajan, radiated. |
Silver ring, with head of the Empress Crispina. | |
![]() |
![]() | |
Head of the Emperor Gordian III. | Iron ring, with head of Socrates. | |
![]() |
![]() | |
Gold ring, with name, Vibianæ. | Iron ring, representing a shepherd and goat. | |
[Pg 37] | ||
![]() |
![]() | |
Jupiter Serapis. | Galba. | |
![]() |
![]() | |
Pan and Goat. | Hygeia. | |
![]() |
![]() | |
Mercury. | Bust, with inscription ‘Lucilla Acv. Sta. Virgo,’ formerly in the collection of St. Geneviève; added to the splendid Cabinet of Antiquities at Paris in 1796. |
The following engraving (from Gorlæus) refers to the story of Masinissa and Sophonisba, well known to classical readers. She was betrothed at a very early age to the Numidian prince, but was afterwards married to Syphax, B.C. 206. This warrior, in a battle with Masinissa, was conquered, and Sophonisba became a prisoner to the Numidian[Pg 38] prince, who, won by her charms, married her. Scipio, fearing her influence, persisted in his immediate surrender of the princess, and Masinissa, to spare her the humility of captivity, sent her a bowl of poison, which she drank without hesitation, and thus perished.
The following engraving (from Gorlæus) tells the story of Masinissa and Sophonisba, a tale familiar to classical readers. She got engaged at a very young age to the Numidian prince but eventually married Syphax, BCE 206. This warrior was defeated by Masinissa in battle, and Sophonisba became a prisoner of the Numidian prince, who, captivated by her beauty, married her. Scipio, worried about her influence, demanded the immediate surrender of the princess. To spare her the shame of captivity, Masinissa sent her a bowl of poison, which she drank without hesitation, leading to her death.
Ring with figures of
Masinissa and Sophonisba.
Ring featuring the images of
Masinissa and Sophonisba.
The portraits of Caligula and Drusilla, in an iron ring, made to turn from one side to the other (Gorlæus):—
The portraits of Caligula and Drusilla, in an iron ring, designed to turn from one side to the other (Gorlæus):—
Caligula and Drusilla.
Caligula and Drusilla.
A representation of Victory, suspending a shield to a palm-tree (Gorlæus):—
A depiction of Victory, holding up a shield against a palm tree (Gorlæus):—
Roman ring of ‘Victory.’
Roman ring of 'Victory.'
With regard to the engraved representations on rings,[Pg 39] Clemens Alexandrinus gives some advice to the Christians of the second century: ‘Let the engraving upon the stone be either a pigeon, or a fish, or a ship running before the wind, or a musical lyre, which was the device used by Polycrates; or a ship’s anchor, which Seleucus had cut upon his signet; and if it represents a man fishing, the wearer will be put in mind of the Apostle, and of the little children drawn up out of the water. For we must not engrave on them images of idols, which we are forbidden even to look at; nor a sword, nor a bow, being the followers of peace, nor drinking goblets, being sober men.’ (See Chapter IV., ‘Rings in connexion with ecclesiastical usages,’ religious rings.) The Rev. C. W. King remarks that ‘the practice of engraving licentious subjects on rings was very prevalent in Ancient Rome. Ateius Capito, a famous lawyer of the Republic, highly censured the practice of wearing figures of deities on rings, on account of the profanation to which they were exposed.’
With regard to the engraved designs on rings,[Pg 39] Clemens Alexandrinus offers some guidance to Christians in the second century: ‘Let the engraving on the stone be either a dove, a fish, a ship sailing in the wind, or a musical lyre, which was the symbol used by Polycrates; or an anchor, like the one Seleucus had engraved on his signet; and if it depicts a man fishing, the wearer will be reminded of the Apostle and the little children pulled from the water. For we should not engrave images of idols on them, which we are forbidden even to look at; nor a sword, nor a bow, as we are followers of peace, nor drinking cups, as we strive to be sober.’ (See Chapter IV., ‘Rings in connexion with ecclesiastical usages,’ religious rings.) The Rev. C. W. King notes that ‘the practice of engraving indecent subjects on rings was very common in Ancient Rome. Ateius Capito, a well-known lawyer of the Republic, strongly criticized the practice of wearing figures of deities on rings because of the disrespect they encountered.’
Roman.
Roman.
The same distinguished writer mentions an antique gold ring now in the Florentine Cabinet, set with a cameo, which evidently shows that it belonged to some Roman sporting gentleman, who, as the poet says, ‘held his wife a[Pg 40] little higher than his horse,’ for it is set with a cameo-head of a lady, of tolerable work in garnet, and on the shoulders of the ring are intaglio busts of his two favourite steeds; also a garnet with their names cut in the gold on each side—Amor and Ospis. On the outside of the shank is the legend Pomphonica, ‘success to thee, Pomphius,’ very neatly engraved on the gold.
The same famous writer talks about an old gold ring currently in the Florentine Cabinet, featuring a cameo that clearly indicates it once belonged to a Roman sportsman who, as the poet puts it, ‘held his wife a[Pg 40] little higher than his horse.’ The ring is adorned with a cameo of a lady, crafted decently in garnet, and the sides of the ring showcase intaglio busts of his two favorite horses, along with garnets that have their names engraved in gold on each side—Amor and Ospis. On the outer band, there’s the inscription Pomphonica, meaning ‘success to you, Pomphius,’ elegantly engraved on the gold.
In the possession of Captain Spratt is a remarkably fine specimen of early Greek work, a large ring of thin gold, set with an intaglio on very fine red sard, oval, of most unusual size, representing a figure of Abundantia beside an altar; the edge of the setting slightly bended; the stone held in its position by thin points of gold. This most important gem is in its original gold setting, and was purchased in June 1845 at Milo, where it had been found the previous year, within a short distance of the theatre, near the position in which the Venus of Milo had been discovered about thirty years previously.
Captain Spratt owns an exceptionally fine example of early Greek craftsmanship—a large, thin gold ring featuring a beautifully carved intaglio of a rare oval red sard that depicts a figure of Abundantia next to an altar. The edge of the setting is slightly bent, and the stone is held in place by small gold points. This significant gem is in its original gold setting and was purchased in June 1845 in Milo, where it was discovered the previous year, not far from the theater, close to where the Venus of Milo had been found about thirty years earlier.
Such was the value attached by the Romans to the setting of gems in rings, that Nonius, a senator, is said to have been proscribed by Antony, for the sake of a precious opal, valued at 20,000l. of our money, which he would not relinquish.
Such was the importance the Romans placed on setting gems in rings that Nonius, a senator, is said to have been exiled by Antony for a valuable opal worth 20,000l. in today’s money, which he refused to give up.
The taste for engraved gems, ‘grew,’ observes the Rev. C. W. King, ‘into an ungovernable passion, and was pushed by its noble votaries to the last degree of extravagance. Pliny seriously attributes to nothing else the ultimate downfall of the Republic; for it was in a quarrel about a ring at a certain auction that the feud originated between the famous demagogue Drusus, and the chief senator Cæpio, which led to the breaking out of the Social War, and to all its fatal consequences.’
The desire for engraved gems, as noted by Rev. C. W. King, grew into an uncontrollable obsession, driven by its passionate admirers to extreme levels of extravagance. Pliny even suggests that this obsession was the primary cause of the Republic's eventual downfall; it all started with a dispute over a ring at an auction that sparked a conflict between the well-known politician Drusus and the leading senator Cæpio, which ultimately led to the outbreak of the Social War and its devastating results.
[Pg 41]In the Braybrooke Collection is a gold Roman finger-ring, with two hands clasping a turquoise in token of concord: this device, a favourite one in mediæval times, has thus an early origin. In the same collection is a beautiful Romano-British gold ring, chased to imitate the scales of a serpent, which it resembles in form: the eyelet-holes have been set with some coloured gem, or paste, now lost.
[Pg 41]In the Braybrooke Collection, there’s a gold Roman finger ring featuring two hands clasping a turquoise as a symbol of unity. This design, popular in medieval times, actually has early origins. Also in the same collection is a stunning Romano-British gold ring, engraved to look like the scales of a serpent, which it resembles in shape. The eyelet holes were once set with a colored gem or paste, but that part is now missing.
Sometimes the decoration of a ring was not confined to a single gem. Valerian speaks of the annulus bigemmis, and Gorlæus gives specimens; one, the larger gem of which has cut upon it the figure of Mars, holding a spear and helmet, but wearing only the chlamys; the smaller gem is incised with a dove and myrtle-branch. Engraved are two examples of the emblematic devices and inscriptions adopted for classic rings when used as memorial gifts. The first is inscribed,—‘You have a love-pledge,’ the second,—‘Proteros (to) Ugiæ,’ between conjoined hands.
Sometimes the decoration of a ring wasn't limited to just one gem. Valerian talks about the annulus bigemmis, and Gorlæus provides examples; one features a larger gem with the figure of Mars, holding a spear and helmet, but only wearing a chlamys. The smaller gem is engraved with a dove and a myrtle branch. Two examples of the symbolic designs and inscriptions used for classic rings as memorial gifts are also engraved. The first reads, "You have a love-pledge," and the second says, "Proteros (to) Ugiæ," between two hands clasped together.
Roman ‘memorial’ gift-rings.
Roman 'memorial' rings.
The annexed illustration represents a jewelled ring of gold, considered to be of Roman work. It is formed with[Pg 42] nine little bosses, set with uncut gems, emeralds, garnets, and a sapphire: one only, supposed to be a blue spinel, is cut in pyramidal fashion.
The attached illustration shows a gold ring decorated with jewels, believed to be of Roman origin. It features[Pg 42] nine small knobs, inlaid with uncut gems, including emeralds, garnets, and a sapphire; only one, thought to be a blue spinel, has a pyramidal cut.
Anglo-Roman.
Anglo-Roman.
A similar ring, of gold, found in Barton, Oxfordshire, may, probably, be ascribed to the same period of the Roman rule in Britain. Weight 3 dwts. 16 grains. (‘Archæological Journal,’ vol. vi. p. 290.)
A similar gold ring found in Barton, Oxfordshire, might have belonged to the same period of Roman rule in Britain. Weight 3 dwts. 16 grains. (‘Archæological Journal,’ vol. vi. p. 290.)
![]() |
![]() | |
Anglo-Roman. | Roman. |
The Roman ring here given must have been inconvenient to the wearer from its form, but may have been used as a signet. Rings were chiefly used by the Romans for sealing letters and papers; also cellars, chests, casks, &c.[9] They were affixed to certain signs, or symbols, used for tokens, like what we call tallies, or tally-sticks, and given in contracts instead of a bill, or bond, or for any sign. Rings were also given by those who agreed to club for an entertainment, to the person commissioned to bespeak it, from symbola, a reckoning; hence, symbolam dare, to pay his reckoning. Rings were also given as votive offerings to the gods.
The Roman ring described here must have been uncomfortable for the wearer due to its shape, but it might have been used as a signet. Romans mainly used rings for sealing letters and documents; they also sealed cellars, chests, casks, etc. They were attached to specific signs or symbols used as tokens, similar to what we now call tallies or tally-sticks, which were given in contracts instead of a bill, bond, or any other sign. Rings were also given by those who agreed to share the cost of an event to the person tasked with arranging it, from symbola, meaning a reckoning; hence, symbolam dare, to pay his part. Additionally, rings were offered as votive gifts to the gods.
In 1841 a curious discovery was made at Lyons of the[Pg 43] jewel-case of a Roman lady containing a complete trousseau, including rings: one is of gold, the hoop slightly ovular, and curving upward to a double leaf, supporting three cup-shaped settings, one still retaining its stone, an Arabian emerald. Another is also remarkable for its general form, and still more so for its inscription, ‘Veneri et Tvtele Votvm,’ explained by M. Comarmond as a dedication to Venus, and the local goddess Tutela, who was believed to be the protector of the navigators of the Rhine; hence he infers these jewels to have belonged to the wife of one of those rich traders in the reign of Severus.
In 1841, a fascinating discovery was made in Lyons of the[Pg 43] jewelry box of a Roman woman containing a complete trousseau, including rings: one is made of gold, with a slightly oval hoop that curves upward to a double leaf, supporting three cup-shaped settings, one of which still has its stone, an Arabian emerald. Another ring is notable for its overall shape, and even more so for its inscription, ‘Veneri et Tvtele Votvm,’ which M. Comarmond explains as a dedication to Venus and the local goddess Tutela, who was thought to protect the navigators of the Rhine; thus, he concludes that these jewels belonged to the wife of one of those wealthy traders during the reign of Severus.
Roman rings, found at Lyons.
Roman rings, discovered in Lyon.
Boeckh’s Inscriptions (dating from the Peloponnesian War) enumerate in the Treasury of the Parthenon, among other sacred jewels, the following rings: an onyx set in a gold ring; ditto in a silver ring; a jasper set in a gold ring; a jasper seal, enclosed in gold, seemingly a mounted scarabæus; a signet in a gold ring, dedicated by Dexilla (the two last were evidently cut in the gold itself); two gem signets set in one gold ring; two signets in silver rings, one plated with gold; seven signets of coloured glass plated with gold (i.e. their settings); eight silver rings, and one gold piece, fine (probably a Daric), a gold ring of 1½ drs. offered by Axiothea, wife of Socles; a gold ring with one gold piece, fine, tied to it, offered by Phryniscus, the Thessalian; a[Pg 44] plain gold ring weighing ½ dr. offered by Pletho of Ægina (a widow’s mite).
Boeckh’s Inscriptions (from the time of the Peloponnesian War) list in the Treasury of the Parthenon, among other sacred treasures, the following rings: an onyx set in a gold ring; the same in a silver ring; a jasper set in a gold ring; a jasper seal, enclosed in gold, looking like a mounted scarab; a signet in a gold ring, dedicated by Dexilla (the last two were clearly cut from the gold itself); two gem signets set in one gold ring; two signets in silver rings, one plated with gold; seven signets of colored glass plated with gold (i.e. their settings); eight silver rings, and one fine gold piece (probably a Daric), a gold ring of 1½ drs. offered by Axiothea, wife of Socles; a gold ring with one fine gold piece tied to it, offered by Phryniscus, the Thessalian; a[Pg 44] plain gold ring weighing ½ dr. offered by Pletho of Ægina (a widow’s mite).
Fabia Fabiana, a Roman lady, offered in honour of her granddaughter Avita, amongst other costly gifts, two rings on her little finger with diamonds, on the next finger a ring with many gems, emeralds and one pearl; on the top joint of the same ring, a ring with an emerald. ‘The notice of the two diamond-rings and the emerald-ring on the top joint of the ring-finger are,’ remarks the Rev. C. W. King, ‘very curious. The pious old lady had evidently offered the entire set of jewels belonging to her deceased grandchild for the repose of her soul.’
Fabia Fabiana, a Roman woman, made a generous offering in honor of her granddaughter Avita, which included several expensive gifts, such as two diamond rings for her little finger, a ring with multiple gems and a pearl for the next finger, and an emerald ring on the top joint of the same finger. "The mention of the two diamond rings and the emerald ring on the top joint of the ring finger is," notes Rev. C. W. King, "quite interesting. The devout elderly lady clearly offered the entire set of jewels from her late grandchild to ensure her soul finds peace."
Roman.
Roman.
The annexed engraving represents a remarkably fine Roman bronze ring of a curious shape. The parts nearest the collet are flat and resemble a triangle from which the summit has been cut. The peculiarity of the ring is an intaglio, here represented, cut out of the material itself, representing a youthful head. The two triangular portions which start from the table of the ring are filled with ornaments, also engraved hollow. Upon it is the word Vivas, or Mayest thou live; probably a gift of affection, or votive offering.
The attached engraving shows a beautifully crafted Roman bronze ring with a unique shape. The parts closest to the collet are flat and look like a triangle with the top cut off. The ring has a distinctive intaglio, depicted here, carved from the material itself, showing the head of a young person. The two triangular sections that extend from the top of the ring are decorated with hollow engravings. Inscribed on it is the word Cheers, or Mayest thou live; likely a token of affection or a votive offering.
In many of the Roman keys that have been discovered[Pg 45] the ring was actually worn on the finger. The shank disappears, and the wards are at right angles to the ring, or in the direction of the length of the finger.
In many of the Roman keys that have been discovered[Pg 45], the ring was actually worn on the finger. The band disappears, and the wards are at right angles to the ring, or aligned with the length of the finger.
Roman ‘Key-rings.’
Roman 'Keychains.'
When a person, at the point of death, delivered his ring to anyone, it was esteemed a mark of particular affection. The Romans not only took off the rings from the fingers of the dead, but also from such as fell into a very deep sleep or lethargy. Pliny observes: ‘Gravatis somno aut morientibus religione quadam annuli detrahuntur.’ Some have conjectured that Spartian alludes to this custom where, taking notice in the Life of the Emperor Hadrian of the tokens of his approaching death, he says: ‘Signa mortis hæc habuit: annulus in quo Imago ejus sculpta erat, sponte de digito lapsus est.’ The ring, with his own image on it, fell of itself from his finger. Morestellus thinks they took the rings from the fingers for fear the Pollinctores, or they who prepared the body for the funeral, should take them for themselves, because when the dead body was laid on the pile they put the rings on the fingers again, and burnt them with the corpse.
When a person is dying and gives their ring to someone, it’s seen as a sign of deep affection. The Romans not only removed rings from the fingers of the dead but also from those who fell into a deep sleep or coma. Pliny notes: ‘Gravatis somno aut morientibus religione quadam annuli detrahuntur.’ Some believe Spartian references this tradition when he mentions in the Life of Emperor Hadrian the signs of his impending death, stating: ‘Signa mortis hæc habuit: annulus in quo Imago ejus sculpta erat, sponte de digito lapsus est.’ The ring, which had his image on it, fell off his finger on its own. Morestellus suggests they took the rings off the fingers to prevent the Pollinctores, the ones who prepared the body for burial, from taking them for themselves. When the dead body was placed on the pyre, they would put the rings back on the fingers and burn them with the body.
The custom of burning the dead lasted to the time of Theodosius the Great, as Gothofredus states. Macrobius, who lived under Theodosius the Younger, says the custom of burning the dead had quite ceased in his time.
The practice of cremating the dead continued until the era of Theodosius the Great, according to Gothofredus. Macrobius, who lived during the time of Theodosius the Younger, mentions that the custom of cremation had completely ended by then.
The Romans commonly wore the rings on the digitus[Pg 46] annularis, the fourth finger, and upon the left hand, but this custom was not always observed. Clemens Alexandrinus remarks that men ought to wear the ring at the bottom of the little finger, that they might have their hand more at liberty. For Pliny’s account of this, and other ring customs, I refer the reader to the Appendix at the end of this volume.
The Romans typically wore rings on the digitus[Pg 46] annularis, the fourth finger, and on the left hand, but this custom wasn't always followed. Clemens Alexandrinus notes that men should wear the ring at the base of the little finger to have their hand move more freely. For Pliny’s description of this and other ring traditions, I direct readers to the Appendix at the end of this volume.
The clients of a Roman lawyer (remarks Fosbroke), usually presented him, as a birthday present, with a ring, which was only used on that occasion.
The clients of a Roman lawyer (Fosbroke notes) typically gifted him a ring as a birthday present, which was only worn on that special day.
Rings were given among the Romans on birthdays—generally the most solemn festival among them, when they dressed and ornamented themselves, with as much grandeur as they could afford, to receive their guests. Persius alludes to the natal ring in his first Satire, in which a ring, richly set with precious stones, figures as a part of the ceremonial.
Rings were exchanged among the Romans on birthdays—usually their most important celebration, when they would dress up and adorn themselves as extravagantly as they could to welcome their guests. Persius refers to the birthday ring in his first Satire, where a ring, lavishly decorated with gems, plays a role in the ceremony.
The gladiators often wore heavy rings, a blow from which was sometimes fatal. The ring of the first barbarian chief who entered and sacked Rome was a curious cornelian inscribed ‘Alaricus rex Gothorum.’
The gladiators often wore heavy rings, and a hit from one could sometimes be deadly. The ring of the first barbarian chief who came in and looted Rome was an unusual carnelian inscribed ‘Alaricus rex Gothorum.’
In the famous Castellani Collection of Antiques, now in the British Museum, are some splendid specimens of Roman rings: one with an uncut crystal of diamond, a stone of great rarity, and highly prized; also a minute votive ring set with a cameo, which probably adorned the finger of a statuette; a curious double ring for two fingers. The early Christian rings are very remarkable; one has a crossed ‘P’ in gold, formerly filled with stones or enamel; another has an anchor for device, and one a ship, emblematic of the Church.
In the well-known Castellani Collection of Antiques, now housed in the British Museum, there are some amazing examples of Roman rings: one features an uncut diamond crystal, a very rare and highly valued stone; there's also a small votive ring set with a cameo, which likely decorated the finger of a statuette; and a unique double ring designed for two fingers. The early Christian rings are particularly notable; one has a crossed 'P' in gold, which was once filled with stones or enamel; another displays an anchor as its symbol, while one depicts a ship, representing the Church.
Amongst the Greek rings in this superb collection is the most splendid intaglio, on gold, ever discovered; the bust of[Pg 47] some Berenice or Arsinoe side by side with that of Serapis; the ring itself, plain and very massive, is, as the Rev. C. W. King observes, ‘a truly royal signet.’
Among the Greek rings in this amazing collection is the most magnificent intaglio, on gold, ever found; the bust of[Pg 47] some Berenice or Arsinoe next to that of Serapis; the ring itself, simple and very heavy, is, as Rev. C. W. King notes, ‘a truly royal signet.’
A ring in the Londesborough Collection bears the Labarum, the oldest monogram of Christianity, derived from the vision in which Constantine believed he saw the sacred emblem, and placed it on his standard with the motto, ‘In hoc signo vinces.’ This ring came from the Roman sepulchre of an early Christian.
A ring in the Londesborough Collection features the Labarum, the earliest monogram of Christianity, based on the vision in which Constantine thought he saw the holy emblem, and put it on his standard with the motto, ‘In hoc signo vinces.’ This ring was found in the Roman tomb of an early Christian.
An engraving of another ring in the same collection of massive silver is inscribed Sabbina, most probably a love-gift.
An engraving of another ring in the same collection of massive silver is inscribed Sabrina, most likely a gift of love.
Roman.
Roman.
The following represents a bronze ‘legionary’ ring, of oval form, with flattened bezel, supposed to be Early Christian; obtained from Rome (‘Arch. Journal,’ vol. xxvi. p. 146):—
The following is a bronze ‘legionary’ ring, oval in shape, with a flat top, believed to be Early Christian; obtained from Rome (‘Arch. Journal,’ vol. xxvi. p. 146):—
Roman ‘Legionary’ ring.
Roman 'Legionary' ring.
[Pg 48]Another, of the same description, is more elaborate:—
[Pg 48]Another one like this is more detailed:—
![]() |
![]() | |
Roman ‘Legionary’ ring. | Roman. |
The collections of our English antiquaries contain numerous specimens of Roman rings. At Uriconium several have been found of very varied materials. Rings formed of bone, amber,[10] and glass were provided for the poorer people, as was the case in ancient Egypt.
The collections of our English historians include many examples of Roman rings. At Uriconium, several have been found made from a variety of materials. Rings made of bone, amber,[10] and glass were made available for the poorer people, just like in ancient Egypt.
Roman amber and glass rings.
Roman amber and glass rings.
In the later period of the Roman empire a more ostentatious decoration of rings, derived from Byzantium, became common. In Montfaucon we find illustrations of this change from the classical simplicity of earlier times.
In the later period of the Roman Empire, a more showy style of ring decoration, influenced by Byzantium, became common. In Montfaucon, we see illustrations of this shift from the classical simplicity of earlier times.
[Pg 49]A specimen of this character is given by Montfaucon:—
[Pg 49]A example of this type is provided by Montfaucon:—
Byzantine.
Byzantine Empire.
The annexed represents a gold ring, probably of the fifth or sixth century, found at Constantinople (‘Arch. Journal,’ vol. xxvi. p. 146):—
The attached shows a gold ring, likely from the fifth or sixth century, discovered in Constantinople (‘Arch. Journal,’ vol. xxvi. p. 146):—
Byzantine.
Byzantine Empire.
In the Museum at Naples are two fine specimens of rings discovered at Herculaneum and Pompeii, illustrations of which are here given from the work of M. Louis Barré, ‘Herculaneum et Pompeii’ (Paris, 1839-40):—
In the Museum in Naples, there are two beautiful examples of rings found at Herculaneum and Pompeii, illustrated here from M. Louis Barré's work, ‘Herculaneum et Pompeii’ (Paris, 1839-40):—
Rings from Herculaneum and Pompeii.
Rings from Herculaneum and Pompeii.
A bronze ring is curious from having similar ornaments to those of the horse-furniture discovered some years ago at Stanwick, on the estates of the Duke of Northumberland in Yorkshire, and which are analogous in the character of their[Pg 50] design to those found in Roman places of sepulture in Rhenish Germany.
A bronze ring is interesting because it has decorations similar to those of horse gear that was found a few years ago at Stanwick, on the estates of the Duke of Northumberland in Yorkshire, and which are comparable in their[Pg 50] design to those discovered in Roman burial sites in Rhenish Germany.
Roman.
Roman.
Representation of a ‘trophy’ ring in the Museum of the Hermitage, St. Petersburg; the figure of a lion on the convex; on the reverse a trophy:—
Representation of a ‘trophy’ ring in the Hermitage Museum, St. Petersburg; the figure of a lion on the front; on the back a trophy:—
![]() |
![]() | |
‘Trophy’ ring. | Roman ring (from the Museum at Mayence). |
In the Waterton Collection are some valuable and curious specimens of Greek and Roman art in ring-manufacture. These are composed of gold, silver, bronze, iron, lead, earthenware, amber, vitreous paste, jet, white cornelian, lapis-lazuli, chrysoprase, &c. Amongst these will be seen some interesting Roman rings for children; one engraved with a rude figure of Victory, found at Rietri, in 1856, diam. 9⁄16 in. In the same collection are bronze ‘legionary’ rings—perhaps the number of a ‘centuria,’ some corps employed about Rome, where all the rings of this character connected with the collection have been found.
In the Waterton Collection, there are some valuable and interesting examples of Greek and Roman art in ring-making. These include materials like gold, silver, bronze, iron, lead, earthenware, amber, glass paste, jet, white carnelian, lapis lazuli, chrysoprase, etc. Among these, you can find some notable Roman rings for children; one features a rough engraving of Victory, discovered at Rietri in 1856, with a diameter of 9⁄16 in. The collection also contains bronze ‘legionary’ rings—possibly indicating the number of a ‘centuria,’ from a group stationed around Rome, where all the rings of this type linked to the collection have been found.
[Pg 51]Among the ‘votive’ rings in this collection, is one in the form of a shoe, inscribed Felix, of bronze.
[Pg 51]Among the 'votive' rings in this collection is one shaped like a shoe, engraved with the name Felix, made of bronze.
There are also specimens of rings with the key on the hoop, to which I have alluded in the chapter on ‘Betrothal and Wedding Rings.’ One has a fluted pipe; another has a key with two wards; in another the key is riveted on the hoop.
There are also examples of rings with the key on the band, which I mentioned in the chapter on ‘Betrothal and Wedding Rings.’ One has a fluted pipe; another has a key with two slots; in another, the key is attached to the band.
Roman Key-rings.
Roman Keychains.
The earthenware rings are of brown or red. The amber rings are of mottled deep red, set with green paste. Those in vitreous paste are of pale blue, transparent yellowish and transparent brown. A ‘jet’ ring belongs to the late Roman period. A white cornelian ring has a smaller part of the hoop cut down, so as to form an oval bezel, on which is engraved a standing figure of Æsculapius. A gold ring, Roman, set with oval intaglio, on cornelian, of a trophy consisting of a horse’s head bridled, and two Gallic shields crossed, with the name of Q. Cornel Lupi, is the seal of Quintus Cornelius Lupus, commemorating a victory over the Gauls: the setting is modern. Another gold ring, with oval bezel, set with an intaglio on yellow sard, has a youthful bust, full-faced; on one side a spear,[Pg 52] on the other side, in Greek letters, ‘Hermai.’ A gold ring with nicoli onyx is inscribed ‘Vibas Luxuri Homo Bone.’
The earthenware rings are brown or red. The amber rings are a mottled deep red, accented with green paste. The ones made from vitreous paste come in pale blue, transparent yellowish, and transparent brown. A ‘jet’ ring is from the late Roman period. A white cornelian ring has a smaller section of the hoop trimmed down to create an oval bezel, which features an engraving of a standing figure of Æsculapius. A Roman gold ring has an oval intaglio set into cornelian depicting a trophy that includes a bridled horse's head and two crossed Gallic shields, along with the name Q. Cornel Lupi; this is the seal of Quintus Cornelius Lupus, celebrating a victory over the Gauls, though the setting is modern. Another gold ring, with an oval bezel and set with an intaglio on yellow sard, shows a youthful bust facing forward; one side has a spear, [Pg 52] and the other side features the Greek letters ‘Hermai.’ A gold ring with nicoli onyx is inscribed ‘Live Luxuriously, Good Man.’
Some of the ‘Early Christian’ rings in the same collection are very interesting. These are of silver, bronze, and lead. One of silver has an octagonal bezel engraved with the Agnus Dei; another, of bronze, has a square bezel inscribed ‘Vivas in Deo’; a bronze ring with oval bezel is chased with a lamb, the shoulders and hoop chased so as to represent a wreath of palms; another, of bronze, has a projecting octagonal bezel, engraved with a dove and a star, the hoop formed so as to resemble a wreath. A massive bronze ring has the bezel engraved with the figure of an orante; on the hoop is also a sigillum engraved with a cross. One ring, of lead, has a flattened bezel rudely incised with a cross.
Some of the ‘Early Christian’ rings in the same collection are really interesting. These are made of silver, bronze, and lead. One silver ring has an octagonal top engraved with the Agnus Dei; another bronze ring has a square top inscribed ‘Live in God’; a bronze ring with an oval top is decorated with a lamb, and the shoulders and band are designed to look like a wreath of palms; another bronze piece has a protruding octagonal top, engraved with a dove and a star, with the band shaped like a wreath. A large bronze ring features the image of an orante on the top; the band also has a sigillum engraved with a cross. One lead ring has a flat top crudely carved with a cross.
The following engraving represents the fore-finger, from a bronze statue, of late Roman workmanship, on which a large ring is seen on the second joint. A similar custom prevails in Germany.
The following engraving shows the index finger from a bronze statue of late Roman craftsmanship, featuring a large ring on the second joint. A similar custom is found in Germany.
Late Roman (from the Waterton Collection).
Late Roman (from the Waterton Collection).
The latest ‘surprise’ in regard to rings is that in connection with Dr. Schliemann’s discovery of antiquities upon the presumed site of Troy. The Doctor, in June 1873, after indefatigable exertions in excavating, came upon a trouvaille consisting of ancient relics of great rarity, value, and importance, including finger-rings, of which, as I have[Pg 53] mentioned, the Homeric writings make no mention. These were found among a marvellous assemblage of bronze, silver, and gold objects, which lay together in a heap within a small space. This seemed to indicate that they had originally been packed in a chest which had perished in a conflagration (most of the articles having been exposed to the action of fire), a bronze key being found near them. The period to which these objects belong is the subject of much controversy, but their origin must date from a very remote period.
The latest 'surprise' regarding rings relates to Dr. Schliemann's discovery of ancient artifacts at what is believed to be the site of Troy. In June 1873, after tireless efforts in excavating, he came across a trouvaille of ancient relics that are extremely rare, valuable, and significant, including finger rings, which, as I have[Pg 53] mentioned, are not referenced in Homer's writings. These were found among an amazing collection of bronze, silver, and gold items, all grouped together in a small area. This suggests they were originally stored in a chest that was lost in a fire (most of the items showed signs of being scorched), with a bronze key found nearby. The time period of these objects is still debated, but they clearly originate from a very ancient era.
Among our British, Saxon, and Mediæval ancestors, rings were in common use. Pliny (‘Hist. Nat.’ lib. xxxiii. c. 6) mentions, that the Britons wore the ring on the middle finger. In the account of the gold, silver, and jewellery belonging to Edward the First is mentioned ‘a gold ring with a sapphire, the workmanship of St. Dunstan.’ Aldhelm, ‘De Laud. Virg.’, describes a lady with bracelets, necklaces, and rings set with gems on her fingers. Rings are frequently mentioned in the Anglo-Saxon annals. They appear to have been worn then on the finger next to the little finger, and on the right hand—for a Saxon bard calls that the golden finger—and we find recorded that a right hand was once cut off on account of this ornament.
Among our British, Saxon, and Medieval ancestors, rings were commonly worn. Pliny (‘Hist. Nat.’ lib. xxxiii. c. 6) notes that the Britons adorned the middle finger with rings. In the inventory of the gold, silver, and jewelry belonging to Edward the First, there is mention of “a gold ring with a sapphire, crafted by St. Dunstan.” Aldhelm, ‘De Laud. Virg.’, describes a woman with bracelets, necklaces, and rings set with gems on her fingers. Rings are often referenced in the Anglo-Saxon chronicles. They seemed to be worn on the finger next to the little finger and on the right hand—because a Saxon bard called that the golden finger—and it is recorded that a right hand was once severed because of this ornament.
Anglo-Saxon.
Anglo-Saxon
Early British (?) ring, found at Malton.
Early British (?) ring, discovered at Malton.
It was not uncommon for Saxon gold rings to have the name of the owner for a legend. Some of the rings of the Anglo-Saxon period which have been discovered would not discredit the workmanship of a modern artificer. One of the most interesting relics of enamelled art which is exhibited in the medal room of the British Museum is the gold ring of Ethelwulf, King of Wessex (A.D. 837-857), the father of Alfred the Great. It was found in the parish of Laverstock, Hampshire, in a cart-rut, where it had become much crushed and defaced. Its weight is 11 dwts. 14 grains. This ring was presented to the British Museum by Lord Radnor, in 1829. Ethelwulf became later in life a monk at Winchester, where he had been educated, and he died there. No[Pg 55] reasonable ground can be alleged for doubting the authenticity of this ring.[11]
It was common for Saxon gold rings to have the owner's name engraved on them. Some of the rings from the Anglo-Saxon period that have been found show craftsmanship that rivals modern artistry. One of the most fascinating artifacts of enamel art displayed in the medal room of the British Museum is the gold ring of Ethelwulf, King of Wessex (A.D. 837-857), who was the father of Alfred the Great. It was discovered in the parish of Laverstock, Hampshire, in a cart-rut, where it had become significantly damaged and worn. Its weight is 11 dwts. 14 grains. This ring was donated to the British Museum by Lord Radnor in 1829. Ethelwulf later became a monk at Winchester, where he had been educated, and he died there. No reasonable evidence can be provided to doubt the authenticity of this ring.[Pg 55]
Ring of Ethelwulf.
Ethelwulf's Ring.
M. de Laborde, in his ‘Notice des Émaux, &c., du Louvre,’ considers the character of the design and ornament to be Saxon; and there is every reason to suppose it was the work of a Saxon artist.
M. de Laborde, in his ‘Notice des Émaux, &c., du Louvre,’ believes the design and ornamentation are Saxon, and there's every reason to think it was created by a Saxon artist.
In connexion with this valuable relic is the gold ring of Æthelswith, Queen of Mercia, the property of the Rev. W. Greenwell, F.S.A., by whom it was exhibited at a meeting of the Society of Antiquaries in January 1875. On this occasion, A. W. Franks, Esq., Director of the Society, made the following observations:—‘This ring is one of the most remarkable relics of antiquity that has appeared in our rooms for many years past.
In connection with this valuable relic is the gold ring of Æthelswith, Queen of Mercia, owned by Rev. W. Greenwell, F.S.A., who showcased it at a meeting of the Society of Antiquaries in January 1875. During this event, A. W. Franks, Esq., Director of the Society, made the following comments:—‘This ring is one of the most remarkable relics of antiquity that has appeared in our rooms for many years.’
‘It was ploughed up in Yorkshire, between Aberford and Sherburn in the West Riding, and it is said that the fortunate finder attached it to the collar of his dog as an ornament. It is of gold, weighing 312 grains; the outer surface is engraved, and partly filled up with niello. In the centre of the bezel is the Agnus Dei, accompanied by the letters A.D. The second letter has a stroke passing through it, so as to resemble the Saxon th. If this stroke is not to be considered a simple contraction, it may be intended for ἀρνὸς or ἀρνίον Φεοῦ. In the half circle on each side are conventional animals or monsters; the whole is surrounded by a border of dots, much worn in places. The most remarkable part of the ring, however, is the inscription within, which is in letters large in proportion to the surface they occupy, and which read Eathelsvith Regna. These[Pg 56] letters, excepting the two last, are in double outline. The engraver seems to have miscalculated the space necessary, and has left out one letter towards the end and given the NA in single lines; or, perhaps, the I and the N are combined in a monogram.
‘It was dug up in Yorkshire, between Aberford and Sherburn in the West Riding, and it's said that the lucky finder attached it to his dog's collar as a decoration. It's made of gold, weighing 312 grains; the outer surface is engraved and partly filled with niello. In the center of the bezel is the Agnus Dei, alongside the letters CE The second letter has a stroke through it, resembling the Saxon th. If this stroke isn't just a simple contraction, it could be intended for ἀρνὸς or ἀρνίον Φεοῦ. On each side, there's a half-circle of conventional animals or monsters; the whole thing is surrounded by a border of dots, which are worn in spots. However, the most striking part of the ring is the inscription inside, which uses letters that are large relative to the space they take up, reading Eathelsvith Kingdom. These[Pg 56] letters, except for the last two, are outlined twice. The engraver seems to have miscalculated the space needed, leaving out one letter towards the end and writing the NA in single lines; or, perhaps, the I and the N are combined in a monogram.
‘The inscription is perfectly genuine, and we have, therefore, before us the ring of Queen Æthelswith. The only person to whom, with any probability, this inscription can be applied is Æthelswith, daughter of Ethelwulf, and wife of Burgred or Burhred, King of Mercia. She was thus sister to Alfred the Great. According to the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, under the year 853 (854), Burhred, King of the Mercians, prayed in that year King Ethelwulf to aid him in reducing the North Welsh to obedience, which he did; the Easter after which King Ethelwulf gave his daughter in marriage to Burhred. She appears as witness to the charter of Burhred in 855 and 857, and 866 and 869 (Kemble’s Codex, cclxxvii., cclxxviii., cclxxx., ccxci., ccxii., ccxcix.). In 868 we have a charter giving to her faithful servant Cuthwulf land in Lacinge. About 872-4 she is witness to a charter of Æthelred, Duke of Mercia. In 888 (889) we learn from the “Anglo-Saxon Chronicle” that she died:—“And Queen Æthelswith, who was King Alfred’s sister, died on the way to Rome, and her body lies at Pavia.”
‘The inscription is completely authentic, so we have in front of us the ring of Queen Æthelswith. The only person this inscription is likely referring to is Æthelswith, daughter of Ethelwulf and wife of Burgred or Burhred, King of Mercia. She was also the sister of Alfred the Great. According to the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, in the year 853 (854), Burhred, King of the Mercians, asked King Ethelwulf for help in bringing the North Welsh under control, which he did; the Easter after that, King Ethelwulf married his daughter to Burhred. She is mentioned as a witness to Burhred's charters in 855, 857, 866, and 869 (Kemble’s Codex, cclxxvii., cclxxviii., cclxxx., ccxci., ccxii., ccxcix.). In 868, there's a charter granting her loyal servant Cuthwulf land in Lacinge. Around 872-874, she is a witness to a charter from Æthelred, Duke of Mercia. In 888 (889), the "Anglo-Saxon Chronicle" tells us that she passed away: “And Queen Æthelswith, who was King Alfred’s sister, died on the way to Rome, and her body lies at Pavia.”
‘She was daughter of Ethelwulf by Osburh, daughter of Oslac, the King’s cup-bearer, and must have been many years older than her brother Alfred, as he was only five years old at the time of her marriage.
‘She was the daughter of Ethelwulf and Osburh, who was the daughter of Oslac, the King’s cup-bearer. She must have been many years older than her brother Alfred since he was only five years old when she got married.
‘With regard to the inscription within the ring, it may be noticed that it exhibits scarcely any traces of wear, while the edges of the ring show marks of having been long worn. The engraving (which illustrates this explanation in the[Pg 57] “Proceedings of the Society”) moreover, scarcely looks like the work of a goldsmith. I would, therefore, suggest that the Queen had probably offered this ring at some shrine, and the priests connected with the shrine had engraved her name within the ring, to record the royal giver. It could scarcely have been deposited in her tomb, as she is recorded to have been buried at Pavia.’
‘Regarding the inscription inside the ring, it's noticeable that it shows hardly any signs of wear, while the edges of the ring are clearly marked from extended use. The engraving (which is illustrated in the [Pg 57] “Proceedings of the Society”) also doesn’t really look like the work of a goldsmith. Therefore, I would suggest that the Queen probably offered this ring at some shrine, and the priests associated with the shrine engraved her name inside the ring to note the royal giver. It’s unlikely that it was placed in her tomb, as she is recorded to have been buried in Pavia.’
In the rings of King Ethelwulf and his daughter, certain symmetrically-placed portions of the design are not filled with niello. These may (observes Mr. Franks) have been enriched with some coloured mastic now perished. It has been habitual to describe the inlaying of Ethelwulf’s ring as blue enamel, which is certainly an error. Enamel was very seldom employed by the Anglo-Saxon jeweller, and enamel and niello could with difficulty be applied to the same object, on account of the different heat at which these two substances melt.
In the rings of King Ethelwulf and his daughter, there are certain symmetrically placed areas in the design that aren’t filled with niello. Mr. Franks notes that these might have originally been enhanced with some colored mastic that has since decayed. It’s common to refer to the inlay of Ethelwulf’s ring as blue enamel, but that’s definitely a mistake. Enamel was rarely used by Anglo-Saxon jewelers, and it would be difficult to use enamel and niello on the same piece because they melt at different temperatures.
An illustration of the remarkable ring of the Queen of Mercia is displayed on the cover of this work.
An image of the impressive ring of the Queen of Mercia is shown on the cover of this book.
Rings were given in Anglo-Saxon times to propitiate royal favours. Thus, towards the end of the tenth century, Beorhtric, a wealthy noble in Kent, left in his will a ring worth thirty mancuses of gold that the queen might be his advocate that the will should stand. In the Braybrooke Collection is a plain silver ring, inscribed on the top of the exterior of the hoop, with the Anglo-Saxon word ‘Dolȝbot,’ the meaning of which is, compensation made for giving a man a wound, either by a stab or blow. This ring is ornamented by a simple wavy line, and dots, as if to represent a branch, and was found in Essex. From its size, probably a woman’s ring—perhaps for injury, or the death of her husband.
Rings were given in Anglo-Saxon times to win royal favors. So, towards the end of the tenth century, Beorhtric, a wealthy noble in Kent, included in his will a ring valued at thirty mancuses of gold to ensure that the queen would support his wishes regarding the will. The Braybrooke Collection features a plain silver ring, engraved on the top of the outer band with the Anglo-Saxon word ‘Dolȝbot,’ which means compensation for causing a wound, either from a stab or a blow. This ring has a simple wavy line and dots, resembling a branch, and was discovered in Essex. Given its size, it was likely a woman's ring—possibly related to an injury or the death of her husband.
[Pg 58]There are various nielloed rings of the Saxon period; notably a gold ring with an inscription, and partly in runes, meaning ‘Alhreds owns me, Eanred engraved (or wrought) me,’ now in the British Museum, which also has a gold ring with two facets, found in the river Nene, near Peterborough, engraved in the Archæological Institute Proceedings for 1856.
[Pg 58]There are different niello rings from the Saxon period; especially a gold ring with an inscription, partly in runes, that says ‘Alhreds owns me, Eanred engraved (or made) me,’ which is currently in the British Museum. The museum also has a gold ring with two sides, discovered in the river Nene, near Peterborough, recorded in the Archæological Institute Proceedings for 1856.
Anglo-Saxon.
Anglo-Saxon.
Plain wire rings were used by the South Saxons; specimens have been obtained in Anglo-Saxon grave-mounds in England, and others, identical in form, in the old Saxon[Pg 59] cemeteries in Germany. Mr. Fairholt says: ‘In the museum at Augsburg are several, which were found in cutting for the railway near that city. One of the plain wire rings’ (the first of our illustrations) ‘was exhumed from a tumulus on Chartham Downs, a few miles from Canterbury, in 1773, by the Rev. Bryan Faussett, who says: “The bones were those of a very young person. Upon the neck was a cross of silver, a few coloured earthen beads, and two silver rings with sliding knots.” The second illustration—a wire ring, twisted so as to resemble a seal ring—was discovered in a Saxon cemetery on Kingston Downs, Canterbury.’
Plain wire rings were used by the South Saxons; examples have been found in Anglo-Saxon burial mounds in England, and others, identical in shape, in the old Saxon[Pg 59] cemeteries in Germany. Mr. Fairholt states: ‘In the museum at Augsburg, there are several rings that were found during railway excavation near that city. One of the plain wire rings’ (the first of our illustrations) ‘was unearthed from a burial mound on Chartham Downs, a few miles from Canterbury, in 1773 by the Rev. Bryan Faussett, who notes: “The bones belonged to a very young person. Around the neck was a silver cross, a few colored clay beads, and two silver rings with sliding knots.” The second illustration—a wire ring, twisted to look like a seal ring—was found in a Saxon cemetery on Kingston Downs, Canterbury.’
Early Saxon rings, found near Salisbury.
Early Saxon rings, discovered close to Salisbury.
The simplest form of finger-ring worn by our ancestors, consisted of a band of metal, merely twisted round to embrace the finger, and open at either end. One of these rings found upon the finger-bone of an early Saxon, in excavating at Harnham Hill, near Salisbury, was found on the middle finger of the right hand of a person of advanced age. Sometimes several rings were found on one hand. Among the bones of the fingers of the left hand of an adult skeleton was found a silver ring of solid form, another of spiral form, and a plain gold ring. Mr. Akerman, who superintended these researches, says: ‘Similar rings have been found at Little Wilbraham, at Linton Heath, at Fairford, and other[Pg 60] localities. They are, for the most part, of a uniform construction, being so contrived that they could be expanded or contracted, and adapted to the size of the finger of the wearer.’
The simplest form of finger ring worn by our ancestors was just a band of metal, twisted around to fit the finger and open at both ends. One of these rings, discovered on the finger bone of an early Saxon during excavations at Harnham Hill near Salisbury, was found on the middle finger of the right hand of an older person. Sometimes, multiple rings were found on one hand. Among the bones of the fingers of the left hand of an adult skeleton, a solid silver ring, a spiral ring, and a plain gold ring were found. Mr. Akerman, who oversaw these findings, states: ‘Similar rings have been found at Little Wilbraham, at Linton Heath, at Fairford, and other[Pg 60] locations. They mostly have a consistent design, allowing them to be expanded or contracted to fit the size of the wearer's finger.’
South Saxon ring,
found in the Thames.
South Saxon ring,
found in the Thames.
In the Waterton Collection is a very curious South Saxon ring, described as ‘an elongated oval with a circular centre; within the circle is the conventional figure of a dragon, surrounded by four convoluted ornaments, reminding one of the prevailing enrichments so lavishly bestowed on old Runic ornaments, at home and abroad. Four quaintly-formed heads of dragons occupy the triangular spaces above and below this centre. The ground between the ornaments has been cut down, probably for the insertion of niello or enamel colour.’ It was found in the Thames at Chelsea in 1856.
In the Waterton Collection, there's an intriguing South Saxon ring, described as “an elongated oval with a circular center; within the circle is the typical figure of a dragon, surrounded by four intricate designs, reminiscent of the lavish embellishments commonly found on old Runic ornaments, both locally and internationally. Four uniquely shaped dragon heads sit in the triangular spaces above and below this center. The area between the designs has been carved down, likely for the addition of niello or enamel color.” It was discovered in the Thames at Chelsea in 1856.
At a meeting of the Royal Archæological Institute in June 1873 Mr. J. J. Rogers exhibited some Anglo-Saxon bronze rings which were found in a cave, in the parish of St. Keverne, Cornwall.
At a meeting of the Royal Archaeological Institute in June 1873, Mr. J. J. Rogers displayed some Anglo-Saxon bronze rings that were discovered in a cave in the parish of St. Keverne, Cornwall.
The Duke of Northumberland possesses a beautiful ring of pale-coloured gold (weight 157 grains), set with a ruby-coloured gem, surrounded with filagree work, the hoop beaded with small circles, punched, as on work of the Saxon age. It was discovered, about 1812, by a boy who was ploughing, near Watershaugh, Northumberland, and found the ring fixed on the point of his ploughshare.
The Duke of Northumberland has a stunning ring made of light-colored gold (weighing 157 grains), set with a ruby-colored stone, surrounded by intricate filigree work, and the band is decorated with small circles, similar to designs from the Saxon era. It was found around 1812 by a boy plowing near Watershaugh, Northumberland, who discovered the ring stuck on the tip of his plowshare.
In the collection of R. H. Soden Smith, Esq., F.S.A., is a curious Anglo-Saxon ring, found about ten feet below the surface of the ground, in making Garrick Street, Covent[Pg 61] Garden. It is of gold, the hoop nearly half an inch wide, with a broad oval bezel, expanding to 13⁄16 inches; the gold pale, alloyed with silver. The whole is overlaid with funiform wire ornaments and granulated work; on the bezel are four curves of beaded filagree radiating from the centre ornament, and having smaller bosses of similar work between.[12]
In the collection of R. H. Soden Smith, Esq., F.S.A., there is an intriguing Anglo-Saxon ring that was discovered about ten feet underground while constructing Garrick Street, Covent[Pg 61] Garden. It's made of gold, with the band measuring nearly half an inch wide and a broad oval bezel that expands to 13⁄16 inches; the gold is pale and mixed with silver. The entire piece is decorated with wire ornaments and granulated designs; on the bezel, there are four curved lines of beaded filigree radiating from the central ornament, with smaller knobs of similar design in between.
Spiral elastic band rings of Anglo-Saxon work have been found in considerable numbers in excavations. Douglas, in his ‘Nenia Britannica,’ describes many specimens under this term, found by him in the graves of Anglo-Saxon tribes.
Spiral elastic band rings from Anglo-Saxon times have been discovered in large quantities during excavations. Douglas, in his ‘Nenia Britannica,’ describes many examples of these found in the graves of Anglo-Saxon tribes.
Ancient Irish rings, found near Drogheda.
Ancient Irish rings discovered near Drogheda.
In the earlier history of Ireland we find instances of a wonderful development of artistic skill in goldsmith work. The Royal Irish Academy possesses some beautiful specimens of rings. The Londesborough Collection includes two remarkable rings which were found with other gold ornaments near the remarkable tumulus, known as ‘New Grange,’ a few miles from Drogheda. They were accidentally discovered in 1842 by a labouring man, within a few yards to the entrance of the tumulus, at the depth of two feet from the surface of the ground, and without any covering or protection from the earth about them. Another labouring[Pg 62] man, hearing of this discovery, carefully searched the spot whence they were taken, and found a denarius of Geta. The stone set in both rings is a cut agate.
In Ireland's early history, we see examples of an incredible development of artistic skill in goldsmithing. The Royal Irish Academy has some beautiful rings in its collection. The Londesborough Collection includes two noteworthy rings that were found with other gold ornaments near the impressive tumulus known as ‘New Grange,’ just a few miles from Drogheda. They were accidentally discovered in 1842 by a laborer, just a few yards from the entrance of the tumulus, two feet below the surface and without any covering or protection from the surrounding earth. Another laborer, hearing about this find, carefully searched the area where they were discovered and found a denarius of Geta. The stone set in both rings is a cut agate.
Aildergoidhe, son of Muinheamhoin, monarch of Ireland, who reigned 3070 A.M., is traditionally said to have been the first prince who introduced the wearing of gold rings into Ireland, which he bestowed on persons of merit who excelled in knowledge of the arts and sciences.
Aildergoidhe, son of Muinheamhoin, king of Ireland, who ruled in 3070 A.M., is said to have been the first prince to introduce the wearing of gold rings in Ireland, which he awarded to individuals of distinction who excelled in the arts and sciences.
Early Irish gold ring.
Early Irish gold ring.
The engraving (from the ‘Archæological Journal,’ June 1848), represents a gold ring twisted, or plaited, of early Irish work, in the fine collection of antiquities of Edwin Hoare, Esq., of Cork.
The engraving (from the ‘Archaeological Journal,’ June 1848) shows a twisted or braided gold ring from early Irish craftsmanship, part of the impressive collection of antiquities owned by Edwin Hoare, Esq., from Cork.
The ‘Alhstan’ ring.
The ‘Alhstan’ ring.
The Alhstan ring, engraved and described in the ‘Archæologia’ (vol. iv. p. 47), is in the Waterton Collection. Some observations on this very remarkable ring are given by that learned antiquary, the Rev. Mr. Pegge. It was found by a labourer on the surface of the ground at Llysfaen in Caernarvonshire. It is of good workmanship, and weighs about an ounce. It bears the inscription of Alhstan, which was a common Saxon name. Mr. Pegge appropriates the[Pg 63] ring to the Bishop of Sherborne of that name, because the dragon of Wessex, apparent in the first lozenge, was not only the device on the royal standard of Wessex, but the Bishop of Sherborne had often conducted armies under it, having been much engaged in affairs of war. The prelate died in 867, in the beginning of the reign of Ethelred I.
The Alhstan ring, described and illustrated in the ‘Archæologia’ (vol. iv. p. 47), is part of the Waterton Collection. Some comments on this very notable ring are provided by the knowledgeable antiquarian, Rev. Mr. Pegge. It was discovered by a worker on the surface of the ground at Llysfaen in Caernarvonshire. It is well-made and weighs about an ounce. It features the inscription of Alhstan, which was a common Saxon name. Mr. Pegge attributes the[Pg 63] ring to the Bishop of Sherborne of that name because the dragon of Wessex, visible in the first lozenge, was not only the symbol on the royal standard of Wessex, but the Bishop of Sherborne had frequently led armies under it, having been heavily involved in military matters. The bishop passed away in 867, at the beginning of Ethelred I's reign.
Anglo-Saxon ring, found near Bosington.
Anglo-Saxon ring found near Bosington.
In the Journal of the British Archæological Association (vol. i.) is a cut of an Anglo-Saxon gold-ring, discovered at Bosington, near Stockbridge; it is of considerable thickness, ornamented with rich chain-work, and has in its centre a male head, round which is inscribed ‘Nomen Ehlla Fid in xpo,’—my name is Ella; my faith is in Christ. It is now in the Ashmolean Museum at Oxford.
In the Journal of the British Archaeological Association (vol. i.) is an image of an Anglo-Saxon gold ring found at Bosington, near Stockbridge. It is quite thick, decorated with intricate chain work, and features a male head in the center, surrounded by the inscription ‘Nomen Ehlla Fid in xpo’—my name is Ella; my faith is in Christ. It is currently housed in the Ashmolean Museum at Oxford.
In 1840 at Cuerdale, near Preston, some curious discoveries of coins and treasure were made, considered to have been deposited about the year 910, and the ornaments such as were worn about the time of Alfred, or somewhat earlier. These included several rings, representations of which are given in the ‘Archæological Journal’ (vol. iv. p. 127). One is merely a piece of metal hammered flat, thinner and narrower at the ends, and formed into a circle; the ends lapping over, but without any fastening. It is entirely without ornament. In some specimens the metal is hammered and bent into the form of a ring, in the same manner as the flat one. Two rings are formed exactly like some armlets, found at the same time; the punch has had a triangular point, and triangles conjoined at their bases having been struck side by side, parallel rows of sunk lozenges have been produced. Another ring has been hammered into a small four-sided bar, then twisted, and ultimately formed into a ring, the ends of which meet, but have not been united. In another ring two wires have been hammered into a roundish form, tapering towards the ends, which have been tied together. Each wire has been ornamented by transverse blows of a blunt chisel, and has the appearance[Pg 65] of being also twisted; these two have been twined together to form one ring.
In 1840 at Cuerdale, near Preston, some interesting discoveries of coins and treasures were made, believed to have been buried around the year 910, alongside ornaments that were worn during the time of Alfred or slightly earlier. These included several rings, representations of which can be found in the ‘Archæological Journal’ (vol. iv. p. 127). One is just a piece of metal hammered flat, thinner and narrower at the ends, shaped into a circle; the ends overlap, but there’s no fastening. It has no decoration. In some examples, the metal is hammered and bent into the shape of a ring, similar to the flat one. Two rings are made exactly like some armlets discovered at the same time; the tool used had a triangular point, and by striking triangles connected at their bases side by side, parallel rows of recessed diamonds were created. Another ring has been hammered into a small square bar, then twisted, and finally shaped into a ring, with the ends meeting but not joined together. In another ring, two wires have been hammered into a rounded shape, tapering towards the ends, which have been tied together. Each wire has been decorated with transverse blows from a blunt chisel, giving it the appearance[Pg 65] of being twisted as well; these two have been intertwined to form one ring.
In a communication from Mr. Worsaae, of Copenhagen, to the ‘Archæological Journal,’ he observes that the triangular pattern with three or four points on the Cuerdale rings differs totally from the designs on Celtic, Roman, or Saxon remains, and which never seems to occur on any objects found in the interior or southern parts of Europe. ‘To the instances which Mr. Hawkins has already cited of similar patterns on silver objects found in Denmark and in Finland, I can only add that I have seen precisely similar objects with the same pattern in Ireland, Prussia, and Sweden, and that in the interior of Russia, in tumuli in the neighbourhood of Moscow, the same patterns have been found on rings. In nearly every instance these ornaments have been found along with oriental or Cufic coins, as in the case at Cuerdale.’ Mr. Worsaae is of opinion that they are of eastern origin, and were brought to the north in the same way as the oriental coins.
In a message from Mr. Worsaae in Copenhagen to the ‘Archæological Journal,’ he points out that the triangular design with three or four points on the Cuerdale rings is completely different from the patterns seen on Celtic, Roman, or Saxon artifacts, which never seem to appear on items found in the central or southern regions of Europe. “In addition to the examples that Mr. Hawkins has already mentioned of similar patterns on silver pieces found in Denmark and Finland, I can only add that I have seen exactly the same objects with the same design in Ireland, Prussia, and Sweden, and that in central Russia, in tumuli near Moscow, the same designs have been discovered on rings. In almost every case, these decorations have been found alongside oriental or Cufic coins, just like what we found at Cuerdale.” Mr. Worsaae believes they are of eastern origin and were brought to the north in the same way as the oriental coins.
In the collection of antiquities of the Royal Irish Academy there are two curious specimens of rings; one, like a ferule, fluted both externally and internally, so as to resemble seven plain rings, attached to one another; and their weight is 9 dwts.
In the collection of antiquities at the Royal Irish Academy, there are two interesting examples of rings; one looks like a ferule, with fluting on both the outside and inside, resembling seven simple rings linked together; and it weighs 9 dwts.
Rings in the Royal Irish Academy.
Rings in the Royal Irish Academy.
[Pg 66]The other is a five-sided bar of gold, flat on the inside near the finger, and angular externally; weight 1 oz. 12 dwts. 6 grs. This might be denominated a torque ring.
[Pg 66]The other is a five-sided gold bar, flat on the inside near the finger, and angular on the outside; weight 1 oz. 12 dwts. 6 grs. This could be called a torque ring.
The following illustration represents a spiral silver ring, found at Largo, weighing 120 grs. It is shaped, apparently, by the hammer. The edges are serrated. A spiral ring found with Saxon remains in Kent, engraved by Douglas in his ‘Nenia,’ and another found in the Isle of Wight, represented in the ‘Winchester’ volume of the Archæological Association, may be compared with the present example.
The following illustration shows a spiral silver ring, discovered in Largo, weighing 120 grams. It seems to have been shaped by a hammer. The edges are jagged. A spiral ring found alongside Saxon remains in Kent, depicted by Douglas in his ‘Nenia,’ and another found on the Isle of Wight, shown in the ‘Winchester’ volume of the Archæological Association, can be compared with this example.
Spiral silver ring.
Twisted silver ring.
Dr. Mantell has a massive gold ring, supposed to have been worn on the finger, formed of two square bars rudely twisted together, and gradually diminishing in size towards the extremities, where they are united together. It was ploughed up at Bormer, in Sussex, and was presented to Dr. Mantell by the Earl of Chichester. It is represented in Horsfield’s ‘History of Lewes,’ plate iv. Similar rings of this description, but differing in the fashion of the twist, have been noticed as found in Britain. The resemblance between these ornaments and the gold ‘ring-money’ of the interior of Africa is exceedingly curious.
Dr. Mantell has a huge gold ring, said to have been worn on the finger, made of two square bars twisted together in a rough manner, getting smaller towards the ends where they are joined. It was discovered at Bormer in Sussex and was given to Dr. Mantell by the Earl of Chichester. It's shown in Horsfield’s ‘History of Lewes,’ plate iv. Similar rings of this kind, though with different twisting styles, have been found in Britain. The similarity between these ornaments and the gold ‘ring-money’ from inland Africa is quite fascinating.
Ring: Flodden Field.
Ring: Flodden Field.
The annexed engraving (from the ‘Archæological Journal,’ vol. iii. p. 269) represents a gold ring, belonging to Sir Noel Paton, F.S.A., Scotland, reported to have been found on the field of Flodden: weight 8 dwts. 17 grs. Other rings of a similar form have been[Pg 67] discovered, and ‘they appear to offer some analogy with the torc of the Celtic age.’
The attached engraving (from the ‘Archaeological Journal,’ vol. iii. p. 269) shows a gold ring that belonged to Sir Noel Paton, F.S.A., Scotland, which is said to have been found on the Flodden battlefield: weight 8 dwts. 17 grs. Other rings with a similar design have been[Pg 67] discovered, and they seem to have some similarity with the torc from the Celtic era.
The annexed illustration represents a remarkably fine ring engraved in Chifflet’s ‘Anastasis Childerici’ (1655), on the same page as that of the Childeric ring (described in the chapter on ‘Memorial and Mortuary Rings’), for purposes of comparison, in carrying out his original theory, that the supposed bees of Childeric were, by gradual transition, converted into the figure known as the fleur de lys of a later monarchy, as he endeavours to illustrate by numerous diagrams, but he omits to say where this ring marked ‘sapphirus’ was originally found. It is a mere supposition that the figure represents St. Louis, but in Montfaucon’s ‘Monuments de la Monarchie Française’ (Paris, 1729), in a long disquisition on the origin, &c., of the fleur de lys, on referring to plate xxiii. tom. ii. p. 158, where St. Louis ‘instruit ses enfans,’ his shield is noticed as bearing for the first time three fleurs de lys.
The attached illustration shows a beautifully crafted ring featured in Chifflet’s ‘Anastasis Childerici’ (1655), on the same page as the Childeric ring (discussed in the chapter on ‘Memorial and Mortuary Rings’), for comparison purposes. Chifflet aims to support his original theory that the supposed bees of Childeric gradually evolved into the figure known as the fleur de lys of a later monarchy, an idea he tries to clarify with various diagrams. However, he does not mention where the ring marked ‘sapphirus’ was originally discovered. It is only a guess that the figure represents St. Louis, but in Montfaucon’s ‘Monuments de la Monarchie Française’ (Paris, 1729), in a lengthy discussion about the origin, etc., of the fleur de lys, reference to plate xxiii. tom. ii. p. 158 notes that St. Louis ‘instruit ses enfans’ and his shield is mentioned as displaying three fleurs de lys for the first time.
Sandford, in his ‘Genealogical History’ (pp. 270, 289), says that Henry the Fifth, being Prince of Wales, ‘did bear azure, 3 flowers de lys or, for the Kingdom of France, reducing them from semée to the number 3, as did Charles VI., the present King.’
Sandford, in his ‘Genealogical History’ (pp. 270, 289), states that Henry the Fifth, while he was Prince of Wales, ‘wore blue with 3 flowers de lys or, representing the Kingdom of France, reducing them from semée to the number 3, just like Charles VI., the current King.’
Among the old Northmen rings were generally worn by[Pg 68] rich people and persons of rank. Such rings are frequently found in barrows of pagan date, and from their nature and quality it is easy to determine that they were generally of very simple workmanship; the reason of which, undoubtedly, was that they were used instead of money in commercial transactions, and had, therefore, not unfrequently to be cut asunder. Still, rings of more artistic workmanship are sometimes found in pagan graves.
Among the old Northmen, rings were usually worn by[Pg 68] wealthy individuals and people of high status. These rings are often discovered in burial mounds from the pagan era, and based on their style and quality, it’s clear that they were typically made with very simple designs. This simplicity likely comes from their use as a form of currency in trade, meaning they often had to be cut apart. However, there are still some rings with more artistic craftsmanship that are occasionally found in pagan graves.
![]() |
![]() | |
Gold. | Bronze. | |
![]() |
![]() | |
Gold, enamelled and inlaid. | Gold. | |
![]() |
![]() | |
Gold. | Gold. |
[Pg 69]The preceding cuts are taken from examples in the Royal Museum, Copenhagen, of the curious twisted spiral rings alluded to, found in the graves of the old Northmen.
[Pg 69]The previous examples are from the Royal Museum in Copenhagen, showcasing the unusual twisted spiral rings mentioned, which were discovered in the graves of the ancient Norse.
Charlemagne sealed all his acts with his ring. That of his son Louis le Débonnaire had for inscription XPE. PROTÈGE HELLDOVICUNI. IMPERATOREM.
Charlemagne sealed all his documents with his ring. His son Louis the Pious had the inscription XPE. PROTECT HELLDOVICUNI. EMPEROR.
From the reign of Hugh Capet each King had his particular seal-ring. St. Louis had for device a ring interlaced with a garland of lilies and daisies, in allusion to his name and that of his queen.
From the reign of Hugh Capet, each King had their own distinct seal ring. St. Louis's ring featured a design interwoven with a garland of lilies and daisies, referencing both his name and that of his queen.
Two curious rings of early date are here represented: one a seal-ring of the Frankish period, found near Allonnes (Sarthe) bearing the monogram Lanoberga; the other, of gold, Merovingian, found in Vitry-le-Français, supposed to be a conjugal ring, with inscription.
Two interesting early rings are shown here: one is a seal ring from the Frankish period, discovered near Allonnes (Sarthe) featuring the monogram Lanoberga; the other is a gold Merovingian ring found in Vitry-le-Français, believed to be a wedding ring, engraved with an inscription.
![]() |
![]() | |
Frankish period. | Merovingian. |
The annexed illustration represents a gold ring, in the Bibliothèque Nationale at Paris, with the initials S. R., and supposed by the Abbé Cochet (‘La Normandie[Pg 70] Souterraine’) to mean ‘Sigebertus Rex,’ but which of the three Sigeberts, Kings of Austrasia (the name given, under the Merovingians, to the eastern possessions of the Franks), cannot be conjectured.
The attached illustration shows a gold ring from the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris, featuring the initials S. R.. Abbé Cochet (‘La Normandie[Pg 70] Souterraine’) believes it stands for ‘Sigebertus Rex,’ but it's unclear which of the three Sigeberts, Kings of Austrasia (the name used for the eastern lands of the Franks during the Merovingian period), is being referred to.
Merovingian.
Merovingian dynasty.
To a similar period may, perhaps, be ascribed the ring found near Blois, represented in the following engraving:—
To a similar period, the ring found near Blois might also be attributed, as shown in the engraving below:—
Merovingian.
Merovingian dynasty.
The annexed cuts represent a gold signet-ring, inscribed ‘Heva,’ and a seal-ring, both of the Merovingian period.
The attached images show a gold signet ring engraved with ‘Heva’ and a seal ring, both from the Merovingian era.
Merovingian.
Merovingian dynasty.
A remarkable ring of the Merovingian period, now in the collection of R. H. Soden Smith, Esq., F.S.A., was exhibited at the Archæological Institute in 1874. It is a massive gold ring, with oval bezel 1¼ inches long, by 1 inch in width, set with an antique polished chalcedony of two layers, the edges bevelled. The setting is rather more than a quarter of an inch deep, and is formed of a band of gold, supported by perpendicular ridges, made by folding another thick band, or ribbon, of gold; a double row of pellets of gold, and others on the shoulder of the hoop, add to the rich effect of the whole. The hoop is a somewhat rude angular band,[Pg 71] with a zigzag punched ornament round it. This ring was found in the neighbourhood of Bristol.
A remarkable ring from the Merovingian period, now in the collection of R. H. Soden Smith, Esq., F.S.A., was displayed at the Archaeological Institute in 1874. It's a heavy gold ring with an oval bezel that measures 1¼ inches long and 1 inch wide, set with a polished antique chalcedony that has two layers and bevelled edges. The setting is slightly over a quarter of an inch deep and is made of a band of gold, supported by vertical ridges created by folding another thick band, or ribbon, of gold. A double row of gold pellets and more on the shoulder of the hoop enhance the overall richness. The hoop is a somewhat rough angular band,[Pg 71] with a zigzag punched decoration around it. This ring was found near Bristol.
It was in the Middle Ages, however, after a period of comparative mediocrity, that the greatest degree of perfection in goldsmiths’ work, and especially in rings, began to display itself. In the reign of Edward III. (1363), so great was the extravagance in dress and decoration that an Act was passed to repress the evil. All persons under the rank of Knighthood, or of less property than two hundred pounds in land and tenements, were forbidden to wear rings, and other articles of jewellery.
It was during the Middle Ages, after a period of relative mediocrity, that goldsmiths' work, particularly in rings, began to reach its highest level of perfection. In the reign of Edward III (1363), the extravagance in clothing and decoration was so excessive that a law was enacted to address the issue. Everyone below the rank of Knighthood, or with less than two hundred pounds in land and property, was prohibited from wearing rings and other jewelry.
Gold ‘Middle Age’ ring,
from the Louvre.
Gold ‘Middle Age’ ring,
from the Louvre.
In the ‘Vision of Pierce Ploughman,’ written, it is supposed, about this date, the poet speaks of a richly-adorned lady, whose fingers were all embellished with rings of gold, set with diamonds, rubies, and sapphires.
In the ‘Vision of Pierce Ploughman,’ believed to have been written around this time, the poet describes a beautifully dressed lady, her fingers adorned with gold rings featuring diamonds, rubies, and sapphires.
In a parchment roll of Prayers to the Virgin in the Library of Jesus College, Oxford, which formerly belonged to Margaret of Anjou, there is a portrait of that queen who is represented wearing two rings on each finger except the least, placed on the middle as well as the third joint of the fingers—a fashion probably introduced by her, and shown[Pg 72] in the curious portrait of this queen on the tapestry at Coventry.
In a roll of Prayers to the Virgin located in the Library of Jesus College, Oxford, which used to belong to Margaret of Anjou, there is a portrait of that queen. She is depicted wearing two rings on each finger except the pinky, placed on both the middle and third joints of her fingers— a style she probably introduced, as shown[Pg 72] in the intriguing portrait of this queen on the tapestry at Coventry.
In later ages we find the same practice of ornamenting the fingers with several rings. In the description of a Scottish woman of the middle of the sixteenth century, attributed to Dunbar, we find:—
In later times, we see the same trend of decorating fingers with multiple rings. In the description of a Scottish woman from the mid-sixteenth century, attributed to Dunbar, we find:—
On ilkune fyngar scho weirit ringis tuo
Scho was als proud an ony papingo.
On her fingers she wore two rings
She was as proud as any parrot.
Queen Elizabeth had an immoderate love for jewellery; and the description given of her dresses covered with gems of the greatest rarity and beauty reads like a romance. For finger-rings she had a remarkable fondness. Paul Hentzner, in his ‘Journey into England,’ 1598, relates that a Bohemian baron having letters to present to her at the palace of Greenwich, the queen, after pulling off her glove, ‘gave him her right hand to kiss, sparkling with rings and jewels—a mark of particular favour.’
Queen Elizabeth had an intense love for jewelry, and the description of her dresses adorned with rare and beautiful gems sounds like a story. She had a special fondness for rings. Paul Hentzner, in his ‘Journey into England,’ 1598, recounts that a Bohemian baron presented letters to her at the palace of Greenwich. The queen, after removing her glove, ‘extended her right hand for him to kiss, sparkling with rings and jewels—a sign of special favor.’
Rings on the effigy of Lady Stafford.
Rings on the statue of Lady Stafford.
In Bromsgrove Church, Staffordshire, are the fine monumental effigies of Sir Humphrey Stafford and his lady (1450)—remarkable alike for the rich armour of the knight[Pg 73] and the courtly costume of the lady. She wears a profusion of rings; every finger, except the little finger of the right hand, being furnished with one. They exhibit great variety of design. The two hands are lifted in prayer.
In Bromsgrove Church, Staffordshire, there are impressive monumental sculptures of Sir Humphrey Stafford and his wife (1450)—notable for the detailed armor of the knight[Pg 73] and the elegant attire of the lady. She is adorned with numerous rings; every finger, except for the little finger on her right hand, has one. They show a wide variety of designs. The two hands are raised in prayer.
‘In the Duke of Newcastle’s comedy,’ observes Mr. Fairholt, ‘the “Country Captain” (1649), a lady of title is told that when she resides in the country a great show of finger rings will not be necessary: “Show your white hand, with but one diamond, when you carve, and be not ashamed to wear your own ringe with the old posie.” That many rings were worn by persons of both sexes is clear from another passage in the same play, where a fop is described, ‘who makes his fingers like jewellers’ cards to set rings upon.’
‘In the Duke of Newcastle’s comedy,’ notes Mr. Fairholt, ‘the “Country Captain” (1649), a titled lady is informed that when she’s in the countryside, there’s no need for a big display of rings: “Show your white hand, with just one diamond, when you carve, and don’t be ashamed to wear your own ring with the old motto.” It’s obvious that many rings were worn by both men and women from another part of the same play, where a dandy is described as ‘someone who makes his fingers look like jewellers’ cards to display rings on.’
The same custom prevailed in France. Mercier, in his ‘Tableau de France,’ mentions that at the close of the eighteenth century enormous rings were worn. The hand of a woman presented a collection of rings, ‘et si ces bagues étaient des antiques, elles offriraient un échantillon d’un cabinet des pierres gravées.’ He adds that ‘the nuptial ring is now unnoticed on the fingers of women; wide and profane rings altogether conceal this warrant of their faith.’
The same tradition was common in France. Mercier, in his 'Tableau de France,' notes that at the end of the eighteenth century, huge rings were worn. A woman's hand displayed a variety of rings, "and if these rings were antiques, they would provide a sample from a collection of engraved stones." He adds that "the wedding ring is now overlooked on women's fingers; large and ostentatious rings completely hide this symbol of their commitment."
So important a business was the making of rings that it was separated from the ordinary work of the goldsmith, and became a distinct trade.
Making rings was such an important business that it became separate from the usual work of the goldsmith and turned into its own distinct trade.
In the sixteenth century, among the various articles carried by the pedlar rings were reckoned. In Heywood’s ‘Four PP (A Newe and a very mery Enterlude of a Palmer, a Pardoner, a Potycary, and a Pedler),’ the Potycary addresses the Pedler:—
In the sixteenth century, among the various items carried by the traveling salesman, rings were included. In Heywood’s ‘Four PP (A New and Very Merry Play about a Pilgrim, a Pardoner, a Apothecary, and a Peddler),’ the Apothecary speaks to the Peddler:—
What the devyll hast thou there at thy backe?—
What the devil do you have there behind you?—
[Pg 74]to which he replies:—
to which he responds:—
What dost thou not knowe that every pedler
In all kinde of trifles must be a medler?
Gloves, pinnes, combes, glasses unspotty’d,
Pomanders, hookes, and lases knottyed;
Broches, rynges, and all maner of bedes.
What don't you know that every peddler
In all kinds of trinkets has to be a meddler?
Gloves, pins, combs, spotless glasses,
Pomanders, hooks, and knotted laces;
Brooches, rings, and all kinds of beads.
The instances in which brooches and rings are mentioned together are numerous. In Scott’s edition of Sir Tristrem (pages 23, 28) we find:—
The instances where brooches and rings are mentioned together are numerous. In Scott’s edition of Sir Tristrem (pages 23, 28) we find:—
Who gaf broche and beighe (ring)?
Who but Douk Morgan?
A loud thai sett that sleigh
With all his winning yare
With broche and riche beighe.
Who gave the brooch and ring?
Who but Douk Morgan?
A loud celebration that slays
With his winning charm
With brooch and rich ring.
In the Chester Mystery Plays the shepherds do not know what to present to the Babe of Bethlehem, and Secundus Pastor says:—
In the Chester Mystery Plays, the shepherds are unsure of what to bring to the Baby of Bethlehem, and Secundus Pastor says:—
Goe we nere anon, with such as we have broughte,
Ringe, broche, ner precious stoune,
Let us see yf we have oughte to proffer.
Let's head over right away with what we've brought,
a ring, a brooch, or a precious stone,
let's see if we have anything to offer.
And the ‘first boye’ adds:—
And the 'first boy' adds:—
Nowe Lorde for to geve thee have I no thinge,
Neither goulde, silver, broche, ner ringe.
Now, my Lord, I have nothing to give you,
Neither gold, silver, brooch, nor ring.
In the old ballad of Redisdale and Wise William the lady is enticed with rich presents:—
In the old ballad of Redisdale and Wise William, the lady is tempted with lavish gifts:—
Come down, come down, my lady fair,
A sight of you i’ll see,
And bonny jewels, broaches, rings,
I will give unto thee.
Come down, come down, my beautiful lady,
I want to see you.
And pretty jewels, brooches, rings,
I'll give it to you.
to which she replies:—
she replies:—
If you have bonny broaches, rings,
Oh, mine are bonny tee,
[Pg 75]Go from my yettes, now, Reedisdale,
For me ye shall not see.
If you have pretty brooches and rings,
Oh, mine are cute too,
[Pg 75]Leave my gates now, Reedisdale,
You won't see me again.
Of the later period of ring decoration there are some splendid specimens in various collections. Mr. Fairholt, in his ‘Facts about Finger-rings,’ has given illustrations and descriptions of two rings of this character in the Londesborough Collection. One is decorated with floral ornament, engraved and filled with green and red enamel colours. The effect on the gold is extremely pleasing, having a certain quaint sumptuousness peculiarly its own. The other specimen, a signet-ring, bears a ‘merchants’ mark’ (see notice of ‘Merchants’ marks’ at the end of this chapter) upon its face.
Of the later period of ring decoration, there are some amazing examples in various collections. Mr. Fairholt, in his ‘Facts about Finger-rings,’ has provided illustrations and descriptions of two rings of this kind from the Londesborough Collection. One is decorated with floral designs, engraved and filled with green and red enamel. The effect on the gold is very pleasing, giving off a unique and charming richness. The other example, a signet ring, displays a ‘merchants’ mark’ (see notice of ‘Merchants’ marks’ at the end of this chapter) on its face.
![]() |
![]() | |
Enamelled floral ring. | ‘Merchant’s’ ring. |
In the same collection is a ring, doubtless a gage d’amour, the hoop of which is richly decorated with quaint floriated ornaments, cut upon its surface, and filled in with the black composition termed niello, once extensively used by goldsmiths in enriching their works. This beautiful ring is inscribed within the hoop, ‘Mon Cor Plesor,’—‘my heart’s delight.’
In the same collection is a ring, probably a gage d’amour, the band of which is beautifully adorned with unique floral designs carved into its surface and filled with a black material known as niello, which goldsmiths once used widely to enhance their creations. This stunning ring is engraved on the inside of the band with ‘Mon Cor Plesor,’—‘my heart’s delight.’
There are two very beautiful examples of sixteenth century rings, one in the Londesborough Collection, which has a ruby in a very tall setting, enriched by enamel. The sides of the hoop are highly decorated with flowers and scroll ornament, also richly enamelled. The other ring is in the Waterton Collection, gold, enamelled, set with a large[Pg 76] turquoise in the centre, and surrounded by six raised garnets. This ring is said to have subsequently belonged to Frederick the Great, King of Prussia, whose cipher is upon it.
There are two stunning examples of sixteenth-century rings. One is from the Londesborough Collection, featuring a ruby in a tall setting, accented with enamel. The sides of the band are beautifully decorated with flowers and scroll patterns, also richly enameled. The other ring belongs to the Waterton Collection; it's made of gold, enameled, and has a large[Pg 76] turquoise in the center, surrounded by six raised garnets. This ring is said to have later belonged to Frederick the Great, King of Prussia, whose initials are on it.
![]() |
![]() | |
Ring: Sixteenth Century. | Ring of Frederick the Great. |
Rings of Italian workmanship of a late period are remarkably beautiful. Venice particularly excelled in this art. In the Londesborough Collection is a fine specimen. The four claws of the other ring in open-work, support the setting of a sharply-pointed pyramidal diamond, such as was then coveted for writing on glass. The shank bears a fanciful resemblance to a serpent swallowing a bird, of which only the claws connecting the face remain on view.
Rings made by Italian artisans from a later period are exceptionally beautiful. Venice, in particular, shined in this craft. A fine example can be found in the Londesborough Collection. The four prongs of the other ring in openwork support the setting of a sharply pointed pyramidal diamond, which was highly sought after for writing on glass. The band has a whimsical resemblance to a snake swallowing a bird, with only the claws connecting the face visible.
![]() |
![]() | |
Venetian. | Italian diamond ring. |
The annexed engraving represents a gold symbolical ring of the sixteenth century, enamelled, of various colours.
The attached engraving shows a gold symbolic ring from the sixteenth century, enameled in different colors.
Italian.
Italian cuisine.
Two rings are described by Mr. Fairholt of a peculiar construction. One, of Venice work, is set with three stones in raised bezels; to their bases are affixed, by a swivel, gold pendant ornaments, each set with a garnet. As the hand moves, these pendants fall about the finger, the stones glittering in the movement. This fashion was evidently borrowed from the East, where people delight in pendant ornaments, and even affix them to articles of utility.
Two rings described by Mr. Fairholt have a unique design. One, made in Venice, features three stones set in raised settings; attached to their bases by a swivel are gold pendants, each set with a garnet. As the hand moves, these pendants swing around the finger, making the stones sparkle with movement. This style was clearly inspired by Eastern fashion, where people love pendant decorations and even attach them to useful items.
![]() |
![]() | |
Venetian. | East Indian. |
The Indians prefer rings with large floriated faces spreading over three fingers like a shield. When made for the wealthy, in massive gold, the flower leaves are of cut jewels, but the humbler classes are content with them in cast silver. Representations are here given of these rings.
The Indians prefer rings with large floral designs that span three fingers like a shield. For the wealthy, these rings are made in solid gold with flower petals made from cut jewels, while the less affluent are satisfied with them crafted in cast silver. Examples of these rings are shown here.
Indian.
Indian.
In Southern Europe, where jewellery is deemed almost an essential of life and the poorest will wear it in profusion, though only made of copper, the rings are curious[Pg 79] and elaborate. A Spanish ring, of the early part of the last century, has a heart, winged and crowned, in its centre: the heart is transfixed by an arrow, but surrounded by flowers. It may possibly be a religious emblem. Another Spanish ring, of more modern manufacture, has a very light and elegant design. The flowers are formed of rubies and diamonds, and the effect is extremely pleasing. Such work may have originated the ‘giardinetti’ rings, specimens of which are seen in the South Kensington Museum. Two are there described as English work of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. They appear to have been used as ‘guards,’ or ‘keepers,’ to the wedding-ring, and are of pleasing floriated design, and of very delicate execution.
In Southern Europe, where jewelry is considered almost essential to life and even the poorest people wear it abundantly, even if it's just made of copper, the rings are interesting and intricate[Pg 79]. A Spanish ring from the early part of the last century features a heart that is winged and crowned at its center: the heart is pierced by an arrow and surrounded by flowers. It could be a religious symbol. Another more modern Spanish ring has a very light and elegant design. The flowers are made of rubies and diamonds, creating an extremely pleasing effect. This craftsmanship may have inspired the ‘giardinetti’ rings, examples of which can be found in the South Kensington Museum. Two of these are described as English work from the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. They seem to have been used as ‘guards’ or ‘keepers’ for the wedding ring, featuring an attractive floral design and very delicate craftsmanship.
Spanish.
Spanish.
‘Giardinetti’ rings.
'Giardinetti' chimes.
Annexed are representations of some remarkably fine rings (French) dating from the close of the fourteenth century or the commencement of the fifteenth.
Annexed are images of some exceptionally fine rings (French) from the late fourteenth century or the early fifteenth.
French.
French.
[Pg 80]A handsome ring, of silver gilt, representing St. George and the Dragon, belongs to the end of the fifteenth century. There is a border of roses and fleurs-de-lys around the saint.
[Pg 80]A beautiful ring made of gilded silver, featuring St. George and the Dragon, dates back to the late fifteenth century. It has a border of roses and lilies surrounding the saint.
![]() |
![]() | |
French. | French. |
The following examples of French art of the sixteenth century are in the Museum of the Louvre:—
The following examples of sixteenth-century French art are in the Museum of the Louvre:—
French.
French.
[Pg 81]The annexed illustration represents an escutcheon ring (from Viollet le Duc) of the Middle Ages, and is thus described by M. Chabouillet in his ‘Catalogue Général.’ The Cabinet of Medals at Paris possesses a ring dating from the commencement of the fifteenth century, if one may judge from the form of the letters, and that of the helmet engraved on the seal. The ring is of massive gold; the arms, engraved hollow on the seal, represent a shield, charged with a dragon, carrying (perhaps) some prey in his jaws. On the two sides of the intaglio are two names—Marin, Pixian. On the sides of the ring are two inscriptions in relief, one only of which is legible, and this is taken from St. Luke—‘Jesus autem transiens per medium illorum ibat.’
[Pg 81]The attached illustration shows an escutcheon ring (from Viollet le Duc) from the Middle Ages, and is described by M. Chabouillet in his ‘General Catalogue.’ The Cabinet of Medals in Paris has a ring that dates back to the early fifteenth century, as suggested by the style of the letters and the design of the helmet engraved on the seal. The ring is made of solid gold; the arms, engraved in relief on the seal, depict a shield featuring a dragon, possibly holding some prey in its jaws. On either side of the intaglio are two names—Marin, Pixian. The sides of the ring have two inscriptions in relief, only one of which is clear, taken from St. Luke—‘Jesus autem transiens per medium illorum ibat.’
‘Escutcheon’ ring. French.
'Coat of arms' ring. French.
The accompanying are from Chabouillet’s ‘Orfévrerie de la Rénaissance,’ in the Fould Collection (dispersed by auction in 1860).
The following are from Chabouillet’s ‘Orfévrerie de la Rénaissance,’ in the Fould Collection (which was sold off at auction in 1860).
French.
French language.
[Pg 82]These engravings are from Labarte’s ‘Orfévrerie du XV. et XVI. Siècles’:—
[Pg 82]These engravings are from Labarte’s ‘Goldsmithing of the 15th and 16th Centuries’:—
![]() |
![]() | |
French. | French. |
The following represent rings in the Musée Sauvageot, of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries; one is elaborately wrought of chiselled iron, of French manufacture—date, 16th century.
The following are rings in the Musée Sauvageot from the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries; one is intricately crafted from engraved iron, made in France—date, 16th century.
French.
French.
The annexed are two fine specimens of comparatively modern date; one ending in volutes near the bezel, the other enamelled white, red, green, and blue—a turquoise, with diamonds and rubies in settings.
The attached pieces are two excellent examples from a relatively modern time; one features volutes near the bezel, while the other is enamelled in white, red, green, and blue—a turquoise—adorned with diamonds and rubies in settings.
French.
French.
[Pg 83]Mr. Fairholt mentions two characteristic specimens of modern French ring-work; one a signet ring, the face engraved with a coat of arms. At the sides two Cupidons repose amidst scroll-work partaking of the taste of the Rénaissance. The same peculiarity influences the design of the second ring; here a central arch of five stones, in separate settings, are held by the heads and outstretched wings of Chimæras, whose breasts are also jewelled. Both are excellent designs.
[Pg 83]Mr. Fairholt talks about two distinctive examples of modern French ring design; one is a signet ring with a face engraved with a coat of arms. On the sides, two Cupidons are nestled within scrollwork that reflects the style of the Rénaissance. The same feature influences the design of the second ring; here, a central arch with five stones, each in its own setting, is held by the heads and outstretched wings of Chimæras, whose chests are also decorated with jewels. Both designs are excellent.
Modern French.
Modern French.
Moorish.
Moorish style.
In the Londesborough Collection is a triplicate of Moorish rings, which will enable us to understand their peculiarities. One has a large circular face composed of a cluster of small bosses, set with five circular turquoises and four rubies; the centre being a turquoise, with a ruby and turquoise alternating round it. This ring is of silver.[Pg 84] Another, of the same material, is set with an octangular bloodstone, with a circular turquoise on each side. There is, also, a silver signet ring, bearing the name of its original owner, engraved on a cornelian.
In the Londesborough Collection, there’s a set of three Moorish rings that help us understand their unique traits. One has a large circular face made up of a cluster of small knobs, featuring five circular turquoises and four rubies; the center is a turquoise, with a ruby and a turquoise alternating around it. This ring is made of silver.[Pg 84] Another ring, also silver, has an octagonal bloodstone with a circular turquoise on each side. There’s also a silver signet ring that has the name of its original owner engraved on a cornelian.
Bavarian.
Bavarian.
In the South Kensington Museum is a massive and heavy brass ring, with octagonal bezel armed with five projecting points, used as a weapon by peasants in Upper Bavaria from about the year 1700 to the present time.
In the South Kensington Museum, there is a large and hefty brass ring with an octagonal bezel that has five protruding points. This ring was used as a weapon by peasants in Upper Bavaria from around the year 1700 to today.
The Indians prefer rings with large floriated faces, spreading over three fingers like a shield. When made for the wealthy in massive gold, the flower leaves are of cut jewels, but the humbler classes, who equally love display, are content with them in cast silver. Such a ring is in the British Museum, where there are also two specimens of rings beside it such as are worn by the humbler classes.
The Indians like rings with large floral designs that stretch across three fingers like a shield. For the wealthy, these rings are made of solid gold with flower petals made from cut jewels, while the less affluent, who also enjoy a bit of showiness, are satisfied with them in cast silver. There’s one such ring in the British Museum, along with two examples of rings worn by the lower classes.
A curious gold ring, bearing the impress a ‘merchant’s mark,’ was exhibited by Mr. Sully at a meeting of the Archæological Institute of November 1851. It was found at St. Anne’s Well, near Nottingham, and the date is about the time of Henry VI. From a representation in the ‘Journal’ the impress appears to be composed of the orb of sovereignty, surmounted by a cross, having two transverse bars, like a patriarchal cross. The extremities of the lower limbs terminate with the Arabic numerals, 2—0, the cipher being transversed by a diagonal stroke, as frequently written in early times. On one side of the hoop is seen the Virgin and Child, on the other the Crucifix; these were originally enamelled. Within is inscribed—Mon Cur avez. Weight 7 dwts. 21 grs.
A curious gold ring, featuring a ‘merchant’s mark,’ was presented by Mr. Sully at a meeting of the Archaeological Institute in November 1851. It was discovered at St. Anne’s Well, near Nottingham, dating back to the time of Henry VI. From an illustration in the ‘Journal,’ the mark seems to consist of the orb of sovereignty topped by a cross, which has two horizontal bars, resembling a patriarchal cross. The ends of the lower arms end with the Arabic numerals, 2—0, the cipher being crossed by a diagonal line, as often written in ancient times. One side of the band shows the Virgin and Child, while the other displays the Crucifix; these were originally enamelled. Inside is engraved—My heart has. Weight 7 dwts. 21 grs.
[Pg 85]A brass signet-ring found in the Cathedral Close at Hereford, bears for impress a kind of merchant’s mark, a cross, with the lower extremity barbed like an arrow, between the initials G. M.—now in the possession of the Dean of Hereford.
[Pg 85]A brass signet ring discovered in the Cathedral Close at Hereford features a merchant's mark: a cross with the bottom end shaped like an arrow, positioned between the initials G. M.—currently kept by the Dean of Hereford.
In the Braybrooke Collection is a bronze signet-ring with a merchant’s mark within a cable border: the mark may be intended to represent a buoy, which would accord well with the border, supposing it to be a trader’s cipher; the hoop is likewise twisted to imitate the strands of a rope. This ring was found in the Thames.
In the Braybrooke Collection is a bronze signet ring featuring a merchant’s mark inside a twisted border: the mark might be designed to look like a buoy, which fits well with the border, assuming it’s a trader’s symbol; the band is also twisted to resemble the strands of a rope. This ring was discovered in the Thames.
In the same collection is a massive gold thumb-ring engraved as a signet, with a merchant’s mark within a rude shield. The shoulders of the hoop are chased with Marguerite flowers, which were commonly adopted in the reign of Henry VI., in honour of the queen-mother, and may indicate the date of the ring. It was found at Littlebury, Essex, in 1848. In the same collection is a large gold thumb-ring, with a round hoop and signet, on which is engraved the letter E of Longobardic form, within delicately-cusped tracery, surmounted by a coronet. The hoop is inscribed externally with the words in. on. is. al. (in one is all): probably intended for a charm, of which so many forms are found upon rings of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries.
In the same collection is a large gold thumb-ring engraved as a signet, featuring a merchant’s mark inside a simple shield. The shoulders of the band are decorated with Marguerite flowers, which were commonly used during the reign of Henry VI in honor of the queen-mother, possibly indicating the ring's date. It was discovered at Littlebury, Essex, in 1848. Also in the same collection is another large gold thumb-ring, with a round band and signet engraved with the letter E in Longobardic style, surrounded by delicate tracery and topped with a coronet. The band is inscribed on the outside with the words in. on. is. al. (in one is all): likely meant as a charm, which is common in rings from the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries.
In the Londesborough Collection is the fine specimen (to which I have alluded in a previous page) of a signet-ring bearing a ‘merchant’s mark.’
In the Londesborough Collection is the fine example (which I mentioned on a previous page) of a signet ring featuring a 'merchant's mark.'
‘The marks,’ observes Mr. Fairholt, ‘varied with every owner, and was as peculiar to himself as the modern autograph; they were a combination of initials, or letter-like devices, frequently surmounted by a cross, or a conventional[Pg 86] sign, believed to represent the sails of a ship. The marks were placed upon the bales of merchandise, and were constantly used where the coat armour, or badge of a nobleman or gentleman entitled to bear arms would be placed. The authority vested in such merchants’ rings is curiously illustrated in one of the historical plays on the life and reign of Queen Elizabeth, written by Thomas Heywood, and to which he gave the quaint title: “If you know not me, you know nobody.” Sir Thomas Gresham, the great London merchant, is one of the principal characters, and in a scene where he is absent from home, and in sudden need of cash, he exclaims: “Here, John, take this seal-ring, bid Timothy send me presently a hundred pound.” John takes the ring to the trusty Timothy, saying: “Here’s his seal-ring; I hope a sufficient warrant.” To which Timothy replies: “Upon so good security, John, I’ll fit me to deliver it.” Another merchant in the same play is made to obtain his wants by similar means:—
‘The marks,’ notes Mr. Fairholt, ‘varied with each owner and were as unique to him as a modern signature; they were a mix of initials or letter-like symbols, often topped with a cross or a conventional[Pg 86] sign, thought to represent the sails of a ship. The marks were placed on cargo bales and were regularly used in the same way a nobleman or gentleman's coat of arms or badge would be displayed. The authority held by these merchants’ rings is interestingly illustrated in one of the historical plays about Queen Elizabeth’s life and reign, written by Thomas Heywood, which he whimsically titled: “If you know not me, you know nobody.” Sir Thomas Gresham, the prominent London merchant, is a key character, and in a scene where he is away from home and suddenly needs cash, he exclaims: “Here, John, take this seal-ring, tell Timothy to send me a hundred pounds right away.” John takes the ring to the reliable Timothy, saying: “Here’s his seal-ring; I hope it serves as good enough proof.” To which Timothy responds: “With such solid security, John, I’ll be ready to deliver it.” Another merchant in the same play uses similar methods to meet his needs:—
———receive thou my seal-ring:
Bear it to my factor; bid him by that token
Sort thee out forty pounds’ worth of such wares
As thou shalt think most beneficial.
———take my seal-ring:
Bring it to my agent; tell him to use that as a signal
To arrange for forty pounds’ worth of goods
That you think will be the most useful.
The custom must have been common to be thus used in dramatic scenes of real life. These plays were produced in 1606.’[15]
The practice must have been widely used in dramatic scenes of real life. These plays were produced in 1606.’[15]
[Pg 87]‘Merchants’ marks, which appear to have been imitated from the Flemings during the reign of Edward the Third, and became very common during the fifteenth and early part of the sixteenth century, both on seals and signet-rings, offer a somewhat curious field for research, and are often very useful in identifying the persons by whom domestic and parts of ecclesiastical edifices on which they occur were built. They were more generally used in the great seaports of England than in the south—a fact which is readily accounted for by the frequent intercourse between those ports and Flanders. It may be observed also that such marks belonged chiefly to wool-factors, or merchants of the staple.’—Archæological Journal for March 1848.
[Pg 87]‘Merchant marks,’ which seem to have been copied from the Flemish during the reign of Edward III, became quite common in the fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries, both on seals and signet rings. They provide an interesting area for research and are often very helpful in identifying the individuals who built the domestic and parts of the ecclesiastical structures where they appear. These marks were used more widely in England’s major seaports than in the south, a situation easily explained by the frequent trade between those ports and Flanders. It should also be noted that these marks primarily belonged to wool merchants or staple merchants.’—Archæological Journal for March 1848.
Merchants’ rings.
Merchant rings.
In the collections of our English antiquaries are numerous specimens of thumb-rings, and in the chapter on[Pg 88] ‘Ecclesiastical Usages in Connection with Rings’ I have mentioned several of particular interest, notably an effigy with a signet-ring of remarkable size represented as worn over both the thumbs. Dr. Bruce found some thumb-rings along the line of the Roman wall.
In the collections of our English antiquarians, there are many examples of thumb rings, and in the chapter on[Pg 88] ‘Ecclesiastical Usages in Connection with Rings,’ I have noted several that are particularly interesting, especially a statue with a remarkably large signet ring shown worn on both thumbs. Dr. Bruce discovered some thumb rings along the Roman wall.
The custom of wearing thumb-rings is alluded to by Chaucer, in the ‘Squire’s Tale,’ where it is said of the rider of the brazen horse who advanced into the hall, Cambuscan, that ‘upon his thumb he had of gold a ring.’ Brome, in the ‘Antipodes,’ 1638, and also in the ‘Northern Lass:’ ‘A good man in the city wears nothing rich about him but the gout, or a thumb-ring.’
The tradition of wearing thumb rings is mentioned by Chaucer in the 'Squire’s Tale,' where it refers to the rider of the bronze horse who entered the hall, Cambuscan, who 'had a gold ring on his thumb.' Brome, in 'Antipodes,' 1638, and also in 'Northern Lass,' writes: 'A good man in the city wears nothing flashy except for gout or a thumb ring.'
In the ‘Archæological Journal’ (vol. iii. page 268) is a representation of a curious thumb-ring, which supplies a good example of the signet thumb-ring of the fifteenth century. It is of silver, alloyed, or plated with baser metal and strongly gilt. The hoop is grooved spirally, and the initial H is engraved upon it; weight 17 dwts. 18 grs. It was found in 1846, in dredging in the bed of the river Severn, at a place called Saxon’s or Saxton’s Lode.
In the 'Archaeological Journal' (vol. iii. page 268) is a depiction of an interesting thumb-ring that serves as a great example of the signet thumb-ring from the fifteenth century. It's made of silver, mixed or coated with a cheaper metal, and is heavily gilded. The band is spirally grooved, and the initial H is engraved on it; it weighs 17 dwts. 18 grs. It was discovered in 1846 while dredging in the bed of the River Severn, at a location known as Saxon’s or Saxton’s Lode.
Signet rings of this kind were worn by rich citizens, or persons of substance not entitled to bear arms. Falstaff bragged that in his earlier years he had been so slender in figure that he could readily have crept through an ‘alderman’s thumb-ring,’ and a ring thus worn—probably, as more conspicuous—appears to have been considered as appropriate to the customary attire of a civic dignitary at a much later period. A character in the Lord Mayor’s show in 1664 is described as ‘habited like a grave citizen—gold girdle and gloves hung thereon, rings on his fingers, and a seal-ring on his thumb.’
Signet rings like these were worn by wealthy citizens or well-off individuals who weren't allowed to bear arms. Falstaff boasted that in his younger days he was so slim that he could easily slip through an ‘alderman’s thumb-ring,’ and a ring worn this way—likely more noticeable—seems to have been regarded as fitting for the typical outfit of a city official for a much longer time. A character in the Lord Mayor’s show in 1664 is described as ‘dressed like a serious citizen—gold belt and gloves hanging, rings on his fingers, and a seal-ring on his thumb.’
In Labartes ‘Hand-book of the Fine Arts in the Middle[Pg 89] Ages’ is a representation of a fine thumb-ring, of Hindoo workmanship, cut out of a single piece of jade, decorated with gold filagree, and incrusted with rubies.
In Labarte's "Handbook of the Fine Arts in the Middle[Pg 89] Ages," there’s a depiction of a beautiful thumb ring, made by Hindu artisans, crafted from a single piece of jade, adorned with gold filigree, and set with rubies.
A magical thumb-ring of gilt, bearing the figure of a toad, and of German workmanship of the fourteenth century is in the Londesborough Collection, and is described in the chapter on ‘Ring Superstitions.’ The annexed representation is from a ring in the same collection.
A magical gold thumb-ring featuring the image of a toad, crafted in Germany in the fourteenth century, is part of the Londesborough Collection and is detailed in the chapter on ‘Ring Superstitions.’ The accompanying image is from another ring in the same collection.
Thumb-ring.
Thumb ring.
The figure of a morse ivory thumb-ring of an Earl of Shrewsbury, belonging to Dr. Iliff, is given in the ‘Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries’ (December, 1859), in which it is fully described. On this is engraved various coats of arms, surrounded by the Garter, and ensigned with an earl’s coronet. A list of the quarterings is also given.[16]
The image of a carved ivory thumb-ring from an Earl of Shrewsbury, owned by Dr. Iliff, is featured in the ‘Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries’ (December, 1859), where it is thoroughly described. It’s engraved with different coats of arms, surrounded by the Garter, and topped with an earl’s coronet. A list of the quarterings is also included.[16]
In the Braybrooke Collection is a massive latten thumb-ring, with a signet engraved with I.H.S. and three tears below; the words, ‘in Deo Salus’ are inside the hoop. They are from the Penitential Psalms, and in union with the tears. Date from the thirteenth century.
In the Braybrooke Collection, there's a large latten thumb-ring with a signet engraved with I.H.S. and three tears below; the phrase ‘in Deo Salus’ is inside the hoop. These are from the Penitential Psalms and are linked to the tears. It dates back to the thirteenth century.
In a portrait of Lady Anne Clifford, the celebrated[Pg 90] Countess of Pembroke, she wears a ring upon the thumb of her right hand.
In a portrait of Lady Anne Clifford, the famous[Pg 90] Countess of Pembroke, she wears a ring on the thumb of her right hand.
To the practice of English ladies wearing, formerly, the wedding-ring on the thumb I have alluded in the chapter on ‘Betrothal and Wedding-rings.’
To the practice of English ladies wearing the wedding ring on their thumb, I referred to it in the chapter on ‘Betrothal and Wedding-rings.’
Dr. Thomas Chalmers wore the ring of his great-great-great-grandfather, John Alexander, on his thumb.
Dr. Thomas Chalmers wore the ring of his great-great-great-grandfather, John Alexander, on his thumb.
‘Oriental rings,’ remarks the Rev. C. W. King, ‘exactly like the ancient in shape, and made of cornelian, chalcedony, and agate, with legends in Arabic on the face, for the use of signets, are by no means uncommon in collections. They are of large size, being designed to be worn on the thumb of the right hand, in order to be used in drawing the bow-string, which the Orientals pull with the bent thumb, catching it against the shank of the ring, and not with the two first fingers, as is the practice of English archers.’
‘Oriental rings,’ notes Rev. C. W. King, ‘are shaped just like the ancient ones and made from carnelian, chalcedony, and agate, featuring Arabic inscriptions on the surface for use as signets. They're fairly common in collections. These rings are quite large, intended to be worn on the thumb of the right hand so they can aid in drawing the bowstring. In the East, archers pull with the bent thumb, using it against the ring's shank, rather than with the first two fingers, as English archers do.’
Brass Thumb-ring.
Brass thumb ring.
A brass seal-ring large enough for a man’s thumb was found in Hampshire some years ago, and is noticed in the ‘Gentleman’s Magazine’ vol. liv.
A brass seal ring big enough for a man's thumb was discovered in Hampshire a few years back, and it's mentioned in 'Gentleman's Magazine' vol. liv.
CHAPTER II.
RING SUPERSTITIONS.
Ring superstitions.
A mysterious significance has been associated with rings from the earliest periods, among various nations. They were supposed to protect from evil fascinations of every kind, against the ‘evil eye,’ the influence of demons, and dangers of every possible character; though it was not simply in the rings themselves that the supposed virtues existed, but in the materials of which they were composed, in some particular precious stone that was set in them, as charms or talismans, in some device or inscription on the stone, or some magical letters engraven on the circumference of the ring.
A mysterious significance has been attached to rings since ancient times across various cultures. They were believed to protect against all kinds of evil, the 'evil eye,' the influence of demons, and numerous dangers; however, it wasn’t just the rings themselves that were thought to have these powers, but also the materials they were made from, any specific precious stones set in them as charms or talismans, certain designs or inscriptions on the stones, or magical letters engraved around the ring's edge.
The ring worn by the high-priest of the Jews was of inestimable value, chiefly, according to a tradition, of its celestial virtues; and the ring of Solomon, as Hebrew legends state, possessed powers which enabled him to baffle the most subtle of his enemies.[17] Some curious particulars respecting this ring will be found in Josephus (lib. viii. ch. 2),[Pg 92] which, however, are considered as interpolations. According to this he witnessed the healing of demoniacs by one Eleazar, a Jew, in the presence of the Emperor Vespasian, by the application of a medicated ring to the nostrils of the patient. The Jew recited several verses connected with the name of Solomon, and the devils came forth through the noses of the patients. ‘It was to this great prince the honour of this discovery is attributed, as well as other magical operations, and without him it would be improbable to obtain success.’[18] The signet-ring of Solomon had the mystic word schemhamphorasch engraved upon it, and procured for him the wonderful shamir, which enabled him to build the temple. Every day at noon it transported him into the firmament, where he heard the secrets of the universe. This continued until he was persuaded by the devil to grant him his liberty, and to take the ring from his finger; the demon then assumed his shape as King of Israel, and reigned three years, while Solomon became a wanderer in foreign lands.
The ring worn by the Jewish high priest was incredibly valuable, mainly because of its supposed heavenly powers, according to tradition. The ring of Solomon, as Hebrew legends suggest, had abilities that allowed him to outsmart even his most cunning enemies. Some interesting details about this ring can be found in Josephus (lib. viii. ch. 2), which are, however, considered to be later additions. In this account, he witnessed the healing of demoniacs by a Jew named Eleazar in front of Emperor Vespasian, using a special ring applied to the patients' nostrils. Eleazar recited several verses associated with Solomon’s name, and the demons exited through the patients’ noses. "This great prince is credited with this discovery and other magical feats, and without him, success would be unlikely." The signet ring of Solomon had the mystical word schemhamphorasch engraved on it and provided him with the miraculous shamir, which allowed him to build the temple. Every day at noon, it took him into the sky, where he learned the universe's secrets. This continued until he was convinced by the devil to let him go and to take the ring off his finger; the demon then took on his appearance as the King of Israel and ruled for three years, while Solomon roamed foreign lands.
According to an Arabian tradition, King Solomon, on going to the bath, left his ring behind him, which was stolen by a Jewess, and thrown by her into the sea. Deprived of his miraculous amulet, which prevented him from exercising the judicial wisdom for which he was celebrated, Solomon abstained for forty days from administering justice, when he at length found the ring in the stomach of a fish that was served at his table. Many curious fictions on this subject are related by Arabian writers in a book called ‘Salcuthat,’[Pg 93] devoted to the subject of magical rings, and they trace this particular ring of Solomon in a regular succession from Jared, the father of Enoch, to the ‘wisest of men.’[19]
According to an Arabian tradition, King Solomon left his ring behind when he went to take a bath. A Jewish woman stole it and threw it into the sea. Without his magical ring, which gave him the exceptional wisdom he was famous for, Solomon refrained from administering justice for forty days. Eventually, he found the ring inside the stomach of a fish that was served at his table. Many fascinating stories on this topic are told by Arabian writers in a book called ‘Salcuthat,’ [Pg 93] which focuses on magical rings, and they trace this particular ring of Solomon back through a line from Jared, the father of Enoch, to the ‘wisest of men.’[19]
Old legends state that Joseph and the Virgin Mary used at their espousals a ring of onyx or amethyst. The discovery is dated from the year 996, when the ring was given by a jeweller from Jerusalem to a lapidary of Clusium, who indicated its origin. The miraculous powers of the ring having been found out by accident, it was placed in a church, when its efficacy in curing disorders of every kind was remarkable—trifling, however, in comparison with its singular power of multiplying itself. Similar rings were claimed as the genuine relic by many churches in Europe at the same time, and received the same devout homage.
Old legends say that Joseph and the Virgin Mary used a ring made of onyx or amethyst at their wedding. This discovery dates back to the year 996, when a jeweler from Jerusalem gave the ring to a stonecutter in Clusium, who noted its origin. The miraculous powers of the ring were discovered by chance, and it was placed in a church, where it was remarkably effective in curing all sorts of ailments—though this was insignificant compared to its unique ability to multiply itself. Many churches in Europe claimed to have similar rings as the authentic relic and received the same devoted honor.
This superstition of the ‘Virgin’s Ring’ still prevails in Catholic countries. Thus, the correspondent of the ‘Standard’ newspaper, in an article contributed to that journal on ‘Art in Perugia’ (Sept. 4, 1875), writes:—‘We went into the Duomo, or cathedral of Perugia. It is not among the churches most worth visiting. Several other churches contain far more, and more interesting works of art in various kinds. The “Nuptial Ring of the Virgin Mary,” which is the treasure on which the Chapter of Perugia most prides itself, is not to be seen. A sacristan whom I innocently asked to show it to me, looked at me and spoke to me as much as if I had requested him to show me round the wondrous scene described by the Seer of the Apocalypse. He told me, indeed, when his first astonishment at my ignorant audacity had somewhat calmed down, that the ring could be seen if I would “call again” on St. Joseph’s day next, on which solemnity it is every year exhibited from a high[Pg 94] balcony in the church to the kneeling crowds of the faithful from all the country-side. Meanwhile it was locked away behind innumerable bars and doors, the many keys of which are in the keeping of I do not know how many high ecclesiastical authorities.
This superstition about the 'Virgin's Ring' is still common in Catholic countries. A correspondent for the 'Standard' newspaper wrote an article titled 'Art in Perugia' on September 4, 1875, saying:—‘We went into the Duomo, or cathedral of Perugia. It isn't one of the churches you should prioritize visiting. Several other churches have much more and more interesting artworks. The “Nuptial Ring of the Virgin Mary,” which the Chapter of Perugia is most proud of, isn’t on display. A sacristan I naively asked to show it to me looked at me as if I had asked him to guide me through the incredible scenes described by the Seer of the Apocalypse. Once his initial astonishment at my bold ignorance faded a bit, he told me that the ring could only be seen if I would “call again” on St. Joseph’s Day next, when it is displayed from a high[Pg 94] balcony in the church to the kneeling crowds of the faithful from the surrounding area. In the meantime, it was locked away behind countless bars and doors, with many keys kept by an unknown number of high ecclesiastical authorities.
‘The ring itself, a plain gold circlet—large enough, apparently, for any man’s thumb, and about six times as thick as any ordinary marriage-ring (I have seen an accurate engraving of it)—is, of course, in no wise worth seeing. But the casket in which it is kept—a very remarkable specimen of mediæval goldsmiths’ work—is, by all accounts, very much so. However, it is not to be seen, not even on St. Joseph’s day, to any good purpose.’
‘The ring itself, a simple gold band—big enough, it seems, for any man's thumb, and about six times thicker than a regular wedding ring (I've seen a detailed engraving of it)—is, of course, not really worth looking at. But the box it's kept in—a truly impressive example of medieval goldsmithing—definitely is. However, it can't be seen, not even on St. Joseph’s day, for any meaningful reason.’
I may add that the celebrated painting of the Marriage of the Virgin, by Perugino, was formerly in this chapel of the cathedral, called ‘Del Santo Anelo,’ or the Holy Ring, but was removed, with many other spoils, after the treaty of Tolentino, and is now in the Museum of Caen, in Normandy.
I should mention that the famous painting of the Marriage of the Virgin by Perugino used to be in this chapel of the cathedral, known as ‘Del Santo Anelo,’ or the Holy Ring, but it was taken, along with many other treasures, after the treaty of Tolentino, and is now in the Museum of Caen, in Normandy.
In the old Mystery of the ‘Miraculous Espousal of Mary and Joseph,’ Issachar, the ‘Busshopp,’ says:—
In the old Mystery of the ‘Miraculous Espousal of Mary and Joseph,’ Issachar, the ‘Busshopp,’ says:—
‘Mary; wole ye have this man
And hym to kepyn, as yo lyff?’
Maria.—‘In the tenderest wyse, fadyr, as I kan,
And with all my wyttys ffyll.’
Ep’us.—‘Joseph; with this rynge now wedde thi wyff,
And be her hand, now, thou her take.’
Joseph.—‘Ser, with this rynge, I wedde her ryff,
And take her’ now her’ for my make.’[20]
"Mary, will you take this man"
"And keep him for as long as you live?"
Mary.—‘In the most loving way, father, as best I can,
And with all my knowledge.
Priest.—‘Joseph; now with this ring, wed your wife,
And take her by the hand now.
Joseph.—‘Sir, with this ring, I wed her right,
And take her now as my partner.__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__
The planet Jupiter was considered by the Hebrews propitious for weddings, and the newly-married gave rings on those occasions, on which the words Mazal Tob were[Pg 95] inscribed, signifying that good fortune would happen under that star.
The planet Jupiter was seen by the Hebrews as lucky for weddings, and newlyweds exchanged rings during those ceremonies, with the words Mazal Tob inscribed, indicating that good fortune would come under that star.
A remarkable gold talismanic ring, supposed, on satisfactory grounds, by Colonel Tod (author of ‘Annals and Antiquities of Rajast’han’) to be of Hindu workmanship, was found some years since on the Fort Hill, near Montrose, on the site of an engagement in the reign of the unfortunate Queen Mary. This ring had an astrological and mythological import. It represented the symbol of the sun-god Bal-nat’h, around which is wreathed a serpent guardant, with two bulls as supporters, or the powers of creative nature in unison, typified in the miniature Lingam and Noni—in short, a graven image of that primæval worship which prevailed among the nations of antiquity. This is ‘the pillar and the calf worshipped on the fifteenth of the month’ (the sacred Amavus of the Hindus) by the Israelites, when they adopted the rites of the Syro-Phœnician adorers of Bal, the sun. Colonel Tod considered that this curious relic belonged to some superstitious devotee, who wore it as a talisman on his thumb.
A remarkable gold talisman ring, believed by Colonel Tod (author of ‘Annals and Antiquities of Rajast’han’) to be made by Hindus, was discovered a few years ago on Fort Hill, near Montrose, at the site of a battle during the reign of the unfortunate Queen Mary. This ring had astrological and mythological significance. It featured the symbol of the sun-god Bal-nat’h, surrounded by a serpent guardant, with two bulls as supporters, representing the creative powers of nature coming together, exemplified by the miniature Lingam and Noni—in short, a depiction of the ancient worship once common among early civilizations. This is ‘the pillar and the calf worshipped on the fifteenth of the month’ (the sacred Amavus of the Hindus) by the Israelites, who adopted the practices of the Syro-Phœnician worshippers of Bal, the sun. Colonel Tod believed this intriguing artifact belonged to some superstitious devotee who wore it as a talisman on his thumb.
According to Zoroaster, Ormuzd represented the Good Principle, and Ahrimanes the Evil. The former is seen on ancient sculptures, holding, as an emblem of power, a ring in one hand.
According to Zoroaster, Ormuzd symbolized the Good Principle, while Ahrimanes represented Evil. The former is depicted in ancient sculptures, holding a ring in one hand as a symbol of power.
All the Hindu Mogul divinities are represented with rings. The statues of the gods at Elephanta have, amongst other ornaments, finger-rings.
All the Hindu Mogul deities are depicted wearing rings. The statues of the gods at Elephanta feature, among other decorations, finger rings.
From Asia, legends connected with rings were introduced into Greece, and numberless miraculous powers were ascribed to them. The classical derivation of the ring was attributed to Prometheus, who, having incurred the displeasure of Jupiter, was compelled to wear on his finger an[Pg 96] iron ring, to which was attached a fragment of the rock of the Caucasus.
From Asia, legends about rings made their way to Greece, and countless miraculous powers were attributed to them. The traditional story of the ring comes from Prometheus, who, after angering Jupiter, was forced to wear an[Pg 96] iron ring, to which a piece of the Caucasus rock was attached.
To adorn the finger-ring with inlaid stone
Was first to men by wise Prometheus shown,
Who from Caucasian rock a fragment tore,
And, set in iron, on his finger wore.
To decorate the ring with an inlaid stone
Wise Prometheus was the first to show to men,
Who ripped a piece from the Caucasian rock,
And wore it set in iron on his finger.
The ring of Gyges, King of Lydia, rendered the wearer invisible when the stone turned inwards[21] (so also the ring of Eluned, the Lunet of the old English romance of Ywaine and Gawaine, and in several German stories). The ring of Polycrates the tyrant, which was flung into the sea to propitiate Nemesis, was found, like that of Solomon, inside a fish served at his table. The story is thus related by Herodotus. Amasis, King of Egypt, after Polycrates had obtained possession of the island of Samos, sent the tyrant a friendly letter, expressing a fear of the continuance of his singular prosperity, for he had never known such an instance of felicity which did not come to calamity in the long run; advising, therefore, Polycrates to throw away some favourite gem in such a way that he might never see it again, as a[Pg 97] kind of charm against misfortune. Polycrates took the advice, and, sailing away from the shore in a boat, threw a valuable signet-ring—an emerald set in gold—into the sea, in sight of all on board. This done he returned home and gave vent to his sorrow. It happened five or six days afterwards that a fisherman caught a fish so large and beautiful that he thought it well deserved to be presented to the King. So he took it with him to the gate of the palace, and said that he wanted to see Polycrates. On being admitted the fisherman gave him the fish with these words: ‘Sir King, when I took this prize I thought I would not carry it to market, though I am a poor man who lives by his trade. I said to myself, it is worthy of Polycrates and his greatness, and so I brought it here to give to you.’ The speech pleased the King, who replied: ‘Thou didst well, friend, and I am doubly indebted both for the gift and the speech. Come now and sup with me.’ So the fisherman went home, esteeming it a high honour that he had been asked to sup with the King. Meanwhile the servants, in cutting open the fish, found the signet of their master in the stomach. No sooner did they see it than they seized upon it, and, hastening to Polycrates with great joy, restored it to him, and told him in what way it had been found. The King, who saw something providential in the matter, forthwith wrote a letter to Amasis telling him all that had happened. Amasis perceived that it does not belong to man to save his fellow-man from the fate which is in store for him. Likewise, he felt certain that Polycrates would end ill, as he prospered in everything, even finding what he had thrown away. So he sent a herald to Samos, and dissolved the contract of friendship. This he did that when the great and heavy misfortune came he might escape the grief which[Pg 98] he would have felt if the sufferer had been his loved friend. Polycrates died in the third year of the 64th Olympiad. This seal-ring was taken later to Rome, where Pliny relates that he saw and handled it. The Emperor Augustus had it inserted in a horn of gold, and placed it in the temple of Concord, in the midst of other golden objects of great value. The seal is represented to have been as large as a crown piece, in shape a little oblong. The subject was a lyre, around which were three bees in the upper part; at the foot was a dolphin on the right, and the head of a bull on the left—the lyre, the emblem of poetry; the bees, industry; the bull, production; and the dolphin, a friend to man.
The ring of Gyges, King of Lydia, made the wearer invisible when the stone turned inward. The same is true for the ring of Eluned, the character from the old English romance of Ywaine and Gawaine, as well as in several German tales. The ring of the tyrant Polycrates was thrown into the sea to appease Nemesis but was found, like Solomon’s ring, inside a fish served at his table. This story is recounted by Herodotus. Amasis, King of Egypt, after Polycrates acquired the island of Samos, sent the tyrant a friendly letter expressing concern about the sustainability of his remarkable luck, since he had never known any instance of fortune that didn’t lead to disaster eventually. He advised Polycrates to discard a cherished gem in such a way that he would never see it again as a kind of protection against misfortune. Polycrates followed the advice, sailing away from shore in a boat and throwing a valuable signet ring—an emerald set in gold—into the sea, all while being watched by those on board. After this, he returned home and mourned his loss. Five or six days later, a fisherman caught a fish so large and beautiful that he believed it deserved to be presented to the King. He took it to the palace gate and requested an audience with Polycrates. Once admitted, the fisherman presented the fish and said, “Sir King, when I caught this prize, I thought it wouldn’t be right to sell it, even though I’m a poor man who makes a living by fishing. I figured it was worthy of Polycrates and his greatness, so I brought it to you.” The King was pleased by the fisherman’s words and replied, “You did well, friend, and I’m grateful for both the gift and your kind words. Come and have dinner with me.” The fisherman left feeling honored to be invited to dine with the King. Meanwhile, the servants, while preparing the fish, discovered the signet ring in its stomach. As soon as they saw it, they seized it and hurried to Polycrates, joyful to restore it to him and explain how it was found. The King, seeing this as a sign from the gods, quickly wrote to Amasis to tell him everything that had transpired. Amasis realized that it’s not possible for one person to save another from the fate awaiting them. He was also certain that Polycrates would meet a sad end since he thrived in all things, even finding what he had discarded. So, he sent a messenger to Samos and ended their friendship. He did this so that when the inevitable misfortune came, he could avoid the pain he would feel if his dear friend suffered. Polycrates died in the third year of the 64th Olympiad. This signet ring was later taken to Rome, where Pliny wrote that he saw and held it. Emperor Augustus had it set in a gold horn and placed it in the temple of Concord among other valuable golden items. The seal was said to be as large as a crown coin and somewhat oval in shape. The design featured a lyre, with three bees above it; at the base, there was a dolphin on the right and a bull’s head on the left—the lyre representing poetry, the bees symbolizing hard work, the bull representing productivity, and the dolphin being a friend to mankind.
Some years ago, it was reported that this remarkable seal-ring was found by an inhabitant of Albano in a vineyard, but this story has never been confirmed.
Some years ago, it was reported that this amazing seal ring was discovered by a resident of Albano in a vineyard, but this story has never been confirmed.
Apart from the superstitious inferences deduced from the singular recovery of the ring, the fact itself may be probably accepted. The Rev. C. W. King, in ‘Precious Stones, Gems, and Precious Metals,’ observes: ‘There can be little doubt that this tale of the “Fish and the Ring” is true. Fish, especially the mackerel, greedily swallow any glittering object dropped into the sea; and within my own recollection, one when opened was found to contain a wedding-ring.’[22]
Aside from the superstitious conclusions drawn from the unusual recovery of the ring, the fact itself can likely be accepted. The Rev. C. W. King, in ‘Precious Stones, Gems, and Precious Metals,’ notes: ‘There’s little doubt that this story of the “Fish and the Ring” is true. Fish, especially mackerel, eagerly swallow any shiny object that's dropped into the sea; and in my own memory, one that was opened was found to have a wedding ring inside.’[22]
Legends of the fish and the ring are found in most countries: the ancient Indian drama of Sacontala has an incident of this character. In the armorial bearings of the see of Glasgow, and now of the city, the stem of St. Kentigern’s tree is crossed by a salmon bearing in its mouth a ring. The legend attached to this is related in ‘Jocelin’s Life of[Pg 99] St. Kentigern.’ In the days of this saint, a lady having lost her wedding-ring, it stirred up her husband’s jealousy, to allay which she applied to Kentigern, imploring his help for the safety of her honour. Not long after, as the holy man walked by the river, he desired a person who was fishing to bring him the first fish he could catch, which was accordingly done, and from its mouth was taken the lady’s ring, which he immediately sent to her, to remove her husband’s suspicions. So runs the legend; but a more truthful explanation of the arms of St. Mungo attributes the ring to the episcopal office, and the fish to the scaly treasures of the river at the foot of the metropolitan cathedral.[23]
Legends about the fish and the ring exist in many countries: the ancient Indian play Sacontala includes a story like this. In the coat of arms for the archdiocese of Glasgow, and now for the city, the trunk of St. Kentigern’s tree is crossed by a salmon holding a ring in its mouth. The legend connected to this is told in ‘Jocelin’s Life of[Pg 99] St. Kentigern.’ In the time of this saint, a woman lost her wedding ring, which made her husband jealous. To ease his jealousy, she went to Kentigern, begging for his help to protect her honor. Soon after, while the holy man was walking by the river, he asked a fisherman to bring him the first fish he caught, which was done, and from its mouth, the lady’s ring was taken. He sent it to her right away to clear her husband’s doubts. That's the legend; however, a more accurate explanation of the arms of St. Mungo connects the ring to the office of the bishop and the fish to the scaly treasures of the river near the metropolitan cathedral.[23]
An Italian legend ascribes as an omen of the downfall of the Venetian republic that the ring cast into the Adriatic by the Doge, in token of his marriage to the sea, was found in a fish that was served up at his table a year after the custom had been observed.
An Italian legend suggests that as a sign of the decline of the Venetian republic, the ring thrown into the Adriatic by the Doge, symbolizing his marriage to the sea, was discovered in a fish served at his table a year after the tradition was enacted.
A popular ballad of old, called the ‘Cruel Knight, or the[Pg 100] Fortunate Farmer’s Daughter,’ represents a knight passing a cot, and hearing that the woman within is in childbirth. His knowledge in the occult sciences informs him that the child to be born is destined to become his wife. He endeavours to evade the decrees of fate, and, to avoid so ignoble an alliance, by various attempts to destroy the child, but which are defeated. At length, when grown to woman’s estate, he takes her to the sea-side, intending to drown her but relents; at the same time, throwing a ring into the sea, he commands her never to see his face again, on pain of death, unless she can produce the ring. She afterwards becomes a cook in a gentleman’s family, and finds the ring in a cod-fish as she is dressing it for dinner. The marriage takes place, of course.
A well-known old ballad, called the ‘Cruel Knight, or the[Pg 100] Fortunate Farmer’s Daughter,’ tells the story of a knight who passes by a cottage and hears that the woman inside is giving birth. His knowledge of the occult tells him that the baby will be destined to be his wife. He tries to escape this fate and avoid such a dishonorable marriage by making several attempts to kill the child, but all his efforts fail. Eventually, when she grows up, he takes her to the seaside with the intention of drowning her but has a change of heart. At the same time, he throws a ring into the sea and forbids her to ever see him again, under penalty of death, unless she can find the ring. Later, she works as a cook for a gentleman's family and discovers the ring inside a cod while preparing it for dinner. Naturally, they get married.
The monument to Lady Berry in Stepney Church bears:—paly of six on a bend, three mullets (Elton) impaling a fish, and in the dexter chief point an annulet between two bends wavy. This coat of arms, which exactly corresponds with that borne by Ventris, of Cambridgeshire, has given rise to the tradition that Lady Berry was the heroine of the above story. The ballad lays the scene of the events in Yorkshire, but incidents of the ring and the fish are, as I observed, numerous.[24]
The monument to Lady Berry in Stepney Church shows:—six vertical stripes on a diagonal band, with three stars (Elton) next to a fish, and in the top left corner, a ring between two wavy diagonal lines. This coat of arms, which matches exactly with the one used by Ventris from Cambridgeshire, has led to the belief that Lady Berry was the heroine of the earlier story. The ballad sets the events in Yorkshire, but as I noted, there are many references to the ring and the fish.[24]
The various arts employed by the ancients in ‘divination’ were many. The annexed illustrations, representing divination rings, are taken from Liceti, ‘Antiqua Schemata’ (Gemmarium Annularium); the two figures on one ring are trying eagerly to discover future events in a crystal globe. Crystallomancy included every variety of divination by means of transparent bodies. These, polished and enchanted, signified their meaning by certain marks and figures.
The different methods used by ancient people for 'divination' were numerous. The accompanying illustrations, showing divination rings, are taken from Liceti, 'Antiqua Schemata' (Gemmarium Annularium); the two figures on one ring are eagerly trying to see future events in a crystal ball. Crystallomancy included all types of divination using transparent objects. These objects, polished and enchanted, conveyed their meanings through specific marks and symbols.
[Pg 101]The serpent held by the female figure refers to ophiomancy, the art which the ancients pretended to, of making predictions by serpents. According to the ophites, who emanated from the Gnostics, the serpent was instructed in all knowledge, and was the father and author of all the sciences.
[Pg 101]The snake held by the female figure represents ophiomancy, the ancient practice of making predictions using serpents. According to the ophites, who originated from the Gnostics, the serpent possessed all knowledge and was the creator and source of all sciences.
Divination ring.
Fortune-telling ring.
The hieroglyphic ring represents a sphinx, the monster described by the poets as having a human face with the body of a bird or quadruped, the paws of a lion, the tail of a dragon, &c. It was said to propose riddles to those it met with, and destroyed those who could not answer them. Upon this they consulted the oracle, to know what should[Pg 102] be done. It answered that they could not be delivered until they could solve this riddle: ‘What creature is that which has four feet in the morning, two at noon, and three towards night.’ Œdipus answered that it was a man, who, in his infancy, crawled on all fours, until he was sufficiently strong to walk; then went on two legs, until old age obliged him to use a staff to help and support him. On this the monster is said to have dashed out its brains against a rock.
The hieroglyphic ring represents a sphinx, a creature described by poets as having a human face with the body of a bird or a four-legged animal, the paws of a lion, and the tail of a dragon, among other features. It was said to pose riddles to those it encountered and would destroy anyone who couldn’t answer them. Because of this, they consulted the oracle to find out what should[Pg 102] be done. The oracle replied that they could not be saved until they solved this riddle: ‘What creature has four feet in the morning, two at noon, and three in the evening?’ Œdipus answered that it was a man, who crawls on all fours as a baby, walks on two legs as an adult, and uses a staff in old age for support. Upon hearing this, the monster is said to have dashed its brains out against a rock.
Divination ring.
Fortune-telling ring.
The star over the head of the sphinx in the engraving represents the divination by stars practised by the Cabalists.[Pg 103] The stars vertical over a city or nation were so united by lines as to form resemblances of the Hebrew letters, and thus words which were deemed prophetic. Burder remarks that the rise of a new star, or the appearance of a comet, was thought to portend the birth of a great person; also that the gods sent stars to point out the way to their favourites, as Virgil shows, and as Suetonius and Pliny actually relate in the case of Julius Cæsar.
The star above the sphinx in the engraving symbolizes the star divination practiced by the Kabbalists.[Pg 103] The stars directly above a city or nation were connected by lines to resemble Hebrew letters, creating words that were considered prophetic. Burder notes that the emergence of a new star or the sighting of a comet was believed to signal the birth of a significant figure; furthermore, the gods sent stars to guide their favorites, as Virgil illustrates, and as Suetonius and Pliny recount in the case of Julius Caesar.
The cup or vase represented in the engraving near the sphinx refers to the divination by the cup, one of the most ancient methods of discovering future events by crystalline reflection. The divining cup of Joseph shows that its use was familiar in Egypt at that remote period.[25]
The cup or vase shown in the engraving near the sphinx relates to divination by the cup, one of the oldest ways to predict future events through crystalline reflection. Joseph's divining cup indicates that this practice was well-known in Egypt back then.[25]
Charmed rings found easy believers among the Greeks[Pg 104] and the Romans, and were special articles of traffic. Such objects, made of wood, bone, or some other cheap materials, were manufactured in large numbers at Athens, and could be purchased, gifted with any charm required, for the small consideration of a single drachma.
Charmed rings easily convinced the Greeks[Pg 104] and the Romans, and were popular items for trade. These objects, made of wood, bone, or other inexpensive materials, were produced in large quantities in Athens, and could be bought, customized with any desired charm, for just one drachma.
In the ‘Plutus’ of Aristophanes, to a threat on the part of the sycophant, the just man replies ‘that he is proof against evil influences, having a charmed ring.’ Carion, the servant, observes ‘that the ring would not prevail against the bite of a sycophant.’ The ring was probably a medicated one, to preserve from demons and serpents.
In Aristophanes' 'Plutus,' in response to a threat from the sycophant, the just man says he's immune to bad influences because he has a magical ring. Carion, the servant, points out that the ring won't protect him from a sycophant's sting. The ring was probably some kind of medicated one, meant to protect against demons and snakes.
The following engraving from Gorlæus represents a human head with an elephant’s trunk, &c., holding a trident, an amulet against the perils of the sea:—
The following engraving from Gorlæus shows a human head with an elephant's trunk, etc., holding a trident, a charm against the dangers of the sea:—
Amulet ring: Roman.
Roman amulet ring.
The council of ravens, prophetic birds (and attributes of Apollo), or crows, which were used as symbols of conjugal fidelity:—
The council of ravens, prophetic birds (and symbols of Apollo), or crows, which represented marital loyalty:—
Amulet ring: Roman.
Roman amulet ring.
[Pg 105]A silver ring on a sardonyx, engraved with the figure of a sow, as a propitiatory sacrifice:—
[Pg 105]A silver ring on a sardonyx, engraved with the image of a pig, used as an offering for appeasement:—
Amulet ring: Roman.
Roman amulet ring.
In Lucian’s ‘Philopseudes,’ in a dialogue called the Ship or Wish, a man is introduced who desires that Mercury should bestow a ring on him to confer perpetual health and preservation from danger.
In Lucian’s ‘Philopseudes,’ in a dialogue called the Ship or Wish, a man is introduced who wants Mercury to give him a ring that grants him everlasting health and keeps him safe from harm.
Benvenuto Cellini, in his ‘Memoirs,’ mentions the discovery in Rome of certain vases, ‘which appeared to be antique urns filled with ashes; amongst these were iron rings inlaid with gold, in each of which was set a diminutive shell. Learned antiquarians, upon investigating the nature of these rings, declared their opinion that they were worn as charms by those who desired to behave with steadiness and resolution either in prosperous or adverse fortune. I likewise took things of this nature in hand at the request of some gentlemen who were my particular friends, and wrought some of these little rings, but I made them of steel, well-tempered, and then cut and inlaid with gold, so that they were very beautiful to behold; sometimes for a single ring of this sort I was paid above forty crowns.’
Benvenuto Cellini, in his ‘Memoirs,’ talks about the discovery in Rome of certain vases that looked like ancient urns filled with ashes. Among them were iron rings inlaid with gold, each set with a tiny shell. Scholars, upon examining these rings, concluded that they were worn as charms by people who wanted to maintain composure and determination in both good and bad times. I also took on projects like this at the request of some friends and crafted some of these small rings. However, I made mine out of well-tempered steel, cutting and inlaying them with gold, making them really beautiful to look at. Sometimes, I received over forty crowns for a single ring like this.
In Rome there were altars to the Samothracian deities, who were supposed to preside over talismans. The people of that island were extensive manufacturers of iron rings, to which they attached supernatural qualities.
In Rome, there were altars dedicated to the Samothracian gods, who were believed to oversee talismans. The people of that island were skilled makers of iron rings, to which they attached special powers.
[Pg 106]On ancient Mexican rings and seals set with precious stones are constellation representations, as, for example, Pisces. Those people awaited their Messiah, or Crusher of the Serpent, during the conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn, in the same zodiacal sign of Pisces, the protecting sign of Syria and Palestine.
[Pg 106]Ancient Mexican rings and seals set with gemstones feature representations of constellations, like Pisces. Those people were waiting for their Messiah, or the Crusher of the Serpent, during the conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn, both in the zodiac sign of Pisces, which is the protective sign of Syria and Palestine.
Pliny informs us that the ancients set additional value on articles made of jet, such as rings, buttons, &c., from a notion that it possessed the virtue of driving away serpents—a belief which existed also in the days of the Venerable Bede, who, describing the various mineral productions of Britain, says: ‘It has much excellent jet, which is black and sparkling, glittering at the fire, and, when heated, drives away serpents.’ Some examples of jet rings have been found at Uriconium.
Pliny tells us that ancient people valued items made of jet, like rings and buttons, because they believed it had the power to repel snakes—this belief continued in the time of the Venerable Bede, who described the different minerals in Britain, saying: ‘It has a lot of excellent jet, which is black and shiny, sparkling in the fire, and when heated, drives away snakes.’ Some jet rings have been discovered at Uriconium.
A portrait of Alexander the Great, set in a gold or silver ring, and carried about on the finger, was supposed by the Greeks to ensure prosperity to the wearer; as a reverse, one of the omens announcing the fall of Nero was the presentation to him of a ring engraved with the Rape of Proserpine, being a symbol of death.[26]
A ring featuring a portrait of Alexander the Great, made of gold or silver, was thought by the Greeks to bring the wearer good fortune. Conversely, one of the signs predicting Nero's downfall was when he received a ring engraved with the Rape of Proserpine, which symbolized death.[26]
Spartian includes among the omens of Hadrian’s coming death the falling off from his finger of his ring, ‘which bore a likeness to himself,’ as he was taking the auspices on a New Year’s day, and so obtaining a foreshadowing of the events of the coming year.
Spartian mentions one of the signs of Hadrian’s impending death was when his ring, ‘which looked like him,’ fell off his finger while he was taking the auspices on New Year’s Day, giving him a preview of the events for the year ahead.
[Pg 107]A portrait of Hadrian, engraved with Mercury in a magic ring (Gorlæus):—
[Pg 107]A portrait of Hadrian, engraved with Mercury in a magic ring (Gorlæus):—
Amulet ring: bust of Hadrian.
Hadrian bust amulet ring.
Heliodorus describes a precious stone as set in the King of Ethiopia’s ring, one of the royal jewels, the shank being formed of electrum and the bezel flaming with an Ethiopian amethyst, engraved with a youthful shepherd and his flock—an antidote to the wearer against intoxication.
Heliodorus describes a precious stone set in the King of Ethiopia's ring, one of the royal jewels. The band is made of electrum, and the top shines with an Ethiopian amethyst, engraved with a young shepherd and his flock—providing the wearer with protection against intoxication.
Philostratus relates how Chariclea escaped unharmed from the funeral pyre on which she was condemned to be burnt by the jealous Arsace, from having secreted about her the espousal-ring of King Hydaspes, ‘which was set with the stone called Pandarbes, engraved with certain sacred letters’ and antagonistic to fire.
Philostratus tells how Chariclea managed to escape unscathed from the funeral pyre where the jealous Arsace had condemned her to be burned, after she secretly carried the wedding ring of King Hydaspes, 'which was set with a stone called Pandarbes, engraved with some sacred letters' and resistant to fire.
In the British Museum is a remarkable collection of ornaments of the Roman period connected with the worship of the Deæ Matres, discovered in the county of Durham, or in some adjoining district in the beginning of this century. Among these are several rings which have been elaborately described by Mr. Edward Hawkins in the ‘Archæological Journal’ for March 1851 (vol. viii.), with illustrations.
In the British Museum, there's an impressive collection of Roman period ornaments related to the worship of the Deæ Matres, found in County Durham or a nearby area at the start of this century. Among these are several rings that Mr. Edward Hawkins has detailed in the 'Archaeological Journal' for March 1851 (vol. viii.), along with illustrations.
In the Waterton Collection are some specimens of Gnostic Roman rings, of the third century: one, of silver, is set with an intaglio on bloodstone of an Abraxas figure,[Pg 108] with head of a jackal. The others have Gnostic emblems and inscriptions.
In the Waterton Collection, there are some examples of Gnostic Roman rings from the third century: one silver ring features an intaglio on bloodstone depicting an Abraxas figure,[Pg 108] which has the head of a jackal. The others display Gnostic symbols and inscriptions.
Astrological rings in connexion with mythological representations were worn by the ancients.
Astrological rings connected to mythological representations were worn by ancient people.
The accompanying engraving from Gorlæus represents the sun and stars. According to the Gnostic theories, the properties of the sun on the destinies of men were numerous and important. The mystical virtues of the most precious stones were under the solar influence.
The engraving from Gorlæus shows the sun and stars. According to Gnostic theories, the sun had many significant effects on people's destinies. The mystical qualities of the most valuable gemstones were influenced by the sun.
Astrological ring.
Zodiac ring.
Planetary rings were formed of the gems assigned to the several planets, each set in its appropriate metal: thus, the Sun, diamond or sapphire in a ring of gold; the Moon, crystal in silver; Mercury, magnet, in quicksilver; Venus, amethyst in copper; Mars, emerald in iron; Jupiter, cornelian in tin; Saturn, turquoise in lead.
Planetary rings were made of the gems designated for each planet, each set in its corresponding metal: the Sun had a diamond or sapphire in a gold ring; the Moon had crystal in silver; Mercury was represented by magnet in mercury; Venus had amethyst in copper; Mars had emerald in iron; Jupiter had carnelian in tin; and Saturn had turquoise in lead.
From the remotest antiquity every planet in the heavens was believed to possess a virtue peculiar to itself. Each presided over some kingdom, nation, or city; then, extending its influence to individuals, it decided their personal appearance, temperament, disposition, character, health, and fortune, and even influenced the several members and parts of the body. After this, it ruled plants, herbs, animals, stones, and all the various productions of nature. Southey, in the ‘Doctor’ (vol.[Pg 109] iii. p. 112), commenting on the exhibition of the Zodiacal signs in the ‘Margarita Philosophica,’ a work of the sixteenth century, observes: ‘There Homo stands naked, but not ashamed, upon the two Pisces, one foot upon each; the fish being neither in air nor water, nor upon earth, but self-suspended, as it appears, in the void. Aries has alighted with two feet on Homo’s head, and has sent a shaft through the forehead into his brain. Taurus has quietly seated himself across his neck. The Gemini are riding astride a little below his right shoulder. The whole trunk is laid open, as if part of the old accursed punishment for high treason had been performed on him. The Lion occupies the thorax as his proper domain, and the Crab is in possession of his domain. Sagittarius, volant in the void, has just let fly an arrow which is on its way to his right arm. Capricornus breathes out a visible influence that penetrates both knees. Aquarius inflicts similar punctures upon both legs. Virgo fishes, as it were, at his intestines, Libra at the part affected by schoolmasters in their anger, and Scorpio takes the wickedest aim of all.’
From ancient times, every planet in the sky was thought to have its own unique power. Each one governed a kingdom, nation, or city and extended its influence to individuals, determining their looks, personality, temperament, character, health, and fortune. It even affected different parts of the body. Additionally, it ruled over plants, herbs, animals, stones, and all of nature's creations. Southey, in the ‘Doctor’ (vol.[Pg 109] iii. p. 112), notes the display of the Zodiac signs in the ‘Margarita Philosophica,’ a sixteenth-century work: ‘There Homo stands naked, but not ashamed, on the two Pisces, one foot on each; the fish neither in air nor water, nor on earth, but apparently suspended in the void. Aries has landed with both feet on Homo’s head, shooting an arrow through his forehead into his brain. Taurus has comfortably settled across his neck. The Gemini are riding low, just below his right shoulder. The whole trunk is exposed, as if he has undergone part of the old, accursed punishment for treason. The Lion claims the thorax as his territory, while the Crab occupies his domain. Sagittarius, soaring in the void, just released an arrow heading for his right arm. Capricornus emits a visible influence that affects both knees. Aquarius inflicts similar stabs on both legs. Virgo seems to be fishing through his intestines, Libra targets the area impacted by angry teachers, and Scorpio aims the most malicious shot of all.’
The old astrological definition of the Zodiac seems to be this—that it was the division of the great circle of the heavens into twelve parts. These twelve parts are divided into those called northern and commanding (the first six), and those called southern and obeying (the remaining six). The other constellations of the two hemispheres are not unconsidered in astrology, but those of the zodiac are more important, because they form the pathway of the sun, the moon, and the planets, and are supposed to receive from these bodies, as they roll through their spaces, extraordinary energy.[27]
The old astrological definition of the Zodiac seems to be that it divides the vast circle of the sky into twelve sections. These twelve sections are split into those called northern and commanding (the first six), and those called southern and obeying (the last six). The other constellations in both hemispheres are still considered in astrology, but the zodiac constellations are more significant because they represent the path of the sun, the moon, and the planets, and are believed to receive from these celestial bodies, as they move through their orbits, exceptional energy.[27]
[Pg 110]The following illustration from Liceti, ‘Antiqua Schemata Gemmarum Annularium,’ represents Jupiter, Mercury, Pallas, and Neptune surrounded by the signs of the Zodiac:—
[Pg 110]The following illustration from Liceti, ‘Antiqua Schemata Gemmarum Annularium,’ shows Jupiter, Mercury, Pallas, and Neptune surrounded by the Zodiac signs:—
Zodiacal ring.
Zodiac ring.
[Pg 111]Among the various modes of enquiring by magical means as to who should succeed to the Roman emperorship during the reigns of Valentinian and Valens, we are told that the letters of the alphabet were artificially disposed in a circle, and a magic ring, being suspended over the centre, was believed to point to the initial letters of the name of him who should be the future emperor. Theodorus, a man of most eminent qualifications and high popularity, was put to death by the jealousy of Valens on the vague evidence that this kind of trial had indicated the first letters of his name. Gibbon remarks on this point that the name of Theodosius, who actually succeeded, begins with the same letters which were indicated in this magic trial.
[Pg 111]During the reigns of Valentinian and Valens, there were various methods of using magic to find out who would take over the Roman emperorship. One such method involved arranging the letters of the alphabet in a circle, with a magic ring suspended over the center, which was believed to point to the initial letters of the name of the future emperor. Theodorus, a highly qualified and popular man, was killed out of jealousy by Valens based on the flimsy evidence that this type of trial indicated the first letters of his name. Gibbon notes that the name of Theodosius, who actually became emperor, starts with the same letters that were revealed in this magical trial.
This ring mystery, the Dactylomancia (from two Greek words signifying ring and divination), was a favourite operation of the ancients. It was preceded by certain ceremonies, and the ring was subjected to a form of conjuration. The person who held it was arrayed in linen, a circlet of hair was left by an artistic barber on his head, and in his hand[Pg 112] he held a branch of vervain. An invocation to the gods preceded the ceremony.
This ring mystery, the Dactylomancia (from two Greek words meaning ring and divination), was a popular practice among the ancients. It was preceded by specific rituals, and the ring underwent a kind of magical incantation. The person holding it was dressed in linen, had a stylish circlet of hair left by a skilled barber on his head, and in his hand[Pg 112], he held a branch of vervain. An invocation to the gods was said before the ceremony.
The ‘suspended ring,’ another mode of divination practised at a later period, is thus described by Peucer among various modes of hydromancy: ‘A bowl was filled with water, and a ring suspended from the finger was librated in the water, and so, according as the question was propounded, a declaration, or confirmation of its truth, or otherwise, was obtained. If what was proposed was true, the ring, of its own accord, without any impulse, struck the sides of the goblet a certain number of times. They say that Numa Pompilius used to practise this method, and that he evoked the gods, and consulted them in water this way.’
The "suspended ring," another form of divination practiced later on, is described by Peucer among various methods of hydromancy: "A bowl was filled with water, and a ring was suspended from the finger and balanced in the water. Depending on the question asked, a response indicating its truth or falsehood was received. If the question was true, the ring would, on its own, without any push, tap the sides of the bowl a certain number of times. They say that Numa Pompilius used to practice this method and that he would call upon the gods and consult them in water this way."
The ring suspended over a monarch was supposed to indicate certain persons among those sitting round the table, and if a hair was used, taken from one of the company, it would swing towards that individual only. An ancient method of divining by the ring is similar in principle to the modern table-rapping. The edge of a round table was marked with the characters of the alphabet, and the ring stopped over certain letters, which, being joined together, composed the answer.
The ring hanging over a ruler was meant to point out specific people among those sitting at the table, and if a hair was used, taken from someone in the group, it would swing toward that person only. An old way of telling fortunes with the ring is similar in principle to today’s table-rapping. The edge of a round table was marked with the letters of the alphabet, and the ring would stop over certain letters, which, when put together, formed the answer.
In another method of practising Dactylomancy, rings were put on the finger-nails when the sun entered Leo, and the moon Gemini, or the sun and Mercury were in Gemini and the moon in Cancer; or the sun in Sagittarius, the moon in Scorpio, and Mercury in Leo. These rings were made of gold, silver, copper, iron, or lead, and magical characters were attached to them, but how they operated we are not informed.
In another way of practicing Dactylomancy, rings were placed on the fingernails when the sun moved into Leo and the moon into Gemini, or when the sun and Mercury were in Gemini and the moon was in Cancer; or when the sun was in Sagittarius, the moon in Scorpio, and Mercury in Leo. These rings were made of gold, silver, copper, iron, or lead, and had magical symbols connected to them, but we aren't told how they worked.
Another mode of water divination with the ring was to throw three pebbles into standing water, and draw observations from the circles which they formed.
Another way of water divination using the ring was to toss three pebbles into still water and make observations based on the circles they created.
[Pg 113]Divination by sounds emitted by striking two rings was practised by Execetus, tyrant of the Phocians.
[Pg 113]Divination using the sounds made by striking two rings was used by Execetus, the tyrant of the Phocians.
In the enchanted rings of the Greeks the position of the celestial bodies was most important. Pliny states that all the Orientals preferred the emerald jasper, and considered it an infallible panacea for every ill. Its power was strengthened when combined with silver instead of gold. Galen recommends a ring with jasper set in it, and engraved with the figure of a man wearing a bunch of herbs round his neck.[28] Many of the Gnostic or Basilidian gems, evidently[Pg 114] used for magical purposes, were of jasper. Apollonius of Tyana, in Cappadocia, who flourished in the first age of the Christian era, and who fixed his residence in the temple of Æsculapius, considered the use of charmed rings so essential to quackery that he wore a different ring on each day of the week, marked with the planet of the day. He had received a present of the seven rings from Iarchas, the Indian philosopher.[29]
In the mystical rings of the Greeks, the positioning of celestial bodies was crucial. Pliny mentions that all the people of the East preferred emerald jasper, believing it to be a guaranteed cure for every ailment. Its effectiveness increased when paired with silver instead of gold. Galen advises wearing a ring with jasper set in it, engraved with the image of a man with a bunch of herbs around his neck.[28] Many of the Gnostic or Basilidian gems, clearly[Pg 114] used for magical purposes, were made of jasper. Apollonius of Tyana, from Cappadocia, who lived during the early Christian period and made his home in the temple of Æsculapius, believed that using enchanted rings was so vital to deceitful practices that he wore a different ring each day of the week, marked with that day’s planet. He had received all seven rings as a gift from Iarchas, the Indian philosopher.[29]
[Pg 115]It was a belief among the Poles that each month of the year was under the influence of a precious stone. Thus January was represented by the garnet, emblem of constancy and fidelity; February, the amethyst, sincerity; March, bloodstone, courage and presence of mind; April, diamond, innocence; May, emerald, success in love; June, agate, health and long life; July, cornelian, contented mind; August, sardonyx, conjugal felicity: September, chrysote, antidote against madness; October, opal, hope; November, topaz, fidelity; December, turquoise, prosperity. These several stones were set in rings and other trinkets, as presents, &c.
[Pg 115]The Poles believed that each month of the year was linked to a precious stone. So, January was symbolized by the garnet, which represented loyalty and fidelity; February, the amethyst, for sincerity; March, bloodstone, for courage and clear thinking; April, diamond, for purity; May, emerald, for success in love; June, agate, for health and longevity; July, carnelian, for a peaceful mind; August, sardonyx, for marital happiness; September, chrysolite, as a protection against madness; October, opal, for hope; November, topaz, for loyalty; and December, turquoise, for prosperity. These stones were crafted into rings and other jewelry as gifts, etc.
In the early and middle ages it was not only generally believed that rings could be charmed by the power of a magician, but that the engraved stones on ancient rings which were found on old sites possessed supernatural properties, the benefits of which would be imparted to the wearer.
In the early and middle ages, people widely believed that rings could be enchanted by a magician’s power. They also thought that the engraved stones on ancient rings found in old sites had supernatural properties that would benefit the person wearing them.
The great potentate Charlemagne, we are told by old French writers, was, in his youth, desperately in love with a young and beautiful woman, and gave himself up to pleasure in her society, neglecting the affairs of State. She died, and Charles was inconsolable at her loss. The Archbishop of Cologne endeavoured to withdraw him from her[Pg 116] dead body, and at length, approaching the corpse, took from its mouth a ring in which was set a precious stone of remarkable beauty. It was the talisman which had charmed the monarch, whose passionate grief became now immediately subdued. The body was buried, and the Archbishop, fearing lest Charles might experience a similar magical effect in another seducer, threw it into a lake near Aix-la-Chapelle. The virtue of this marvellous ring was not, however, lost by this incident, for the legend relates that the monarch became so enamoured of the lake that his chief delight was in walking by its margin, and he became so much attached to the spot that he had a palace erected there, and made it the seat of his empire.
The great ruler Charlemagne, as old French writers tell us, was deeply in love with a young and beautiful woman during his youth and indulged in pleasure while neglecting the affairs of State. When she died, Charles was heartbroken over her loss. The Archbishop of Cologne tried to pull him away from her lifeless body, and eventually, he approached the corpse and retrieved a ring from her mouth with a precious stone of remarkable beauty set in it. This was the talisman that had captivated the king, and his intense grief was instantly calmed. After the body was buried, the Archbishop, worried that Charles might fall under the spell of another enchanting woman, tossed the ring into a lake near Aix-la-Chapelle. However, the magic of the ring did not vanish with that act, as legend says that the king became so enchanted by the lake that he found great joy in strolling along its shores. He was so taken with the place that he had a palace built there and made it the center of his empire.
In the Persian Tales a king strikes off the hand of a sorceress (who had assumed the appearance of his queen), which had a ring upon it, when she immediately appears as a frightful hag.
In the Persian Tales, a king cuts off the hand of a sorceress (who had taken on the look of his queen), which was wearing a ring, and she immediately transforms into a terrifying old witch.
The charmed ring of Aladdin plays a wonderful part in the ‘Arabian Nights’ Entertainments.’
The magical ring of Aladdin has a special role in the 'Arabian Nights' stories.
One of the earliest ring superstitions in our own country, is that connected with the life of Edward the Confessor. In the mortuary chapel of this saintly monarch in Westminster Abbey are fourteen subjects in relievi, represented on the frieze of the screen on the western side, of incidents in the King’s life, in which the legend of the ‘Pilgrim’ (derived from a chronicle written by Ælred—a monk, and, later, abbot of Rievaulx, who died in 1166—but taken almost entirely from the life of St. Edward, by Osbert or Osbern, of Clare, prior of Westminster). is curiously displayed. The whole length of this sculpture is thirty-eight feet six inches by three feet in height. The relief is very bold, the irregular concave ground being much hollowed out behind. The[Pg 117] compartment relating to the ring represents St. John, in the garb of a pilgrim, asking alms of the King. The figures are much injured. The monarch occupies the centre of the compartment, and a pilgrim or beggar is before him on the spectator’s right hand. Behind the King is a figure holding a pastoral staff—probably an ecclesiastic—and in front of whom, between the King and himself,—is an object not easily defined, but which appears like a basket. This design is interesting, from the back-ground being entirely filled in by a large and handsome church. This refers to the subject mentioned by Ælred, of the King being engaged in the construction of a church in honour of St. John, when the pilgrim appeared and asked alms.
One of the earliest ring superstitions in our country is linked to the life of Edward the Confessor. In the mortuary chapel of this saintly king in Westminster Abbey, there are fourteen scenes, depicted on the frieze of the screen on the western side, showing moments from the King’s life, where the legend of the ‘Pilgrim’ is uniquely illustrated. This legend comes from a chronicle written by Ælred—a monk and later abbot of Rievaulx, who died in 1166—but it is largely based on the life of St. Edward by Osbert or Osbern of Clare, prior of Westminster. The entire length of this sculpture measures thirty-eight feet six inches by three feet in height. The relief is very striking, with the irregular concave background being deeply hollowed out. The compartment related to the ring shows St. John, dressed as a pilgrim, asking the King for alms. The figures are quite damaged. The monarch is positioned in the center of the compartment, with a pilgrim or beggar in front of him on the viewer’s right. Behind the King stands a figure holding a pastoral staff—likely an ecclesiastic—and in front of him, between the King and himself, is an object that is difficult to identify but appears to be a basket. This design is noteworthy because the background is completely filled with a large and beautiful church. This refers to the story mentioned by Ælred, about the King working on the construction of a church in honor of St. John when the pilgrim appeared and asked for alms.
According to the legend, King Edward was on his way to Westminster, when he was met by a beggar, who implored him in the name of St. John—the apostle peculiarly venerated by the monarch—to grant him assistance. The charitable King had exhausted his ready-money in alms-giving, but drew from his finger a ring, ‘large, beautiful, and royal,’ which he gave to the beggar, who thereupon disappeared. Shortly afterwards, two English pilgrims in the Holy Land found themselves benighted, and in great distress, when suddenly the path before them was lighted up, and an old man, white and hoary, preceded by two tapers, accosted them. Upon telling him to what country they belonged, the old man, ‘joyously like to a clerk,’ guided them to a hostelry, and announced that he was John the Evangelist, the special patron of King Edward, and gave them a ring to carry back to the monarch, with the warning that in six months’ time the King would be with him in Paradise. The pilgrims returned and found the King at his palace, called from this incident ‘Havering atte Bower.’ He recognised[Pg 118] the ring, and prepared for his end accordingly. On the death of the Confessor, according to custom, he was attired in his royal robes, the crown on his head, a crucifix and gold chain round his neck, and the ‘Pilgrim’s Ring’ on his finger. The body was laid before the high altar at Westminster Abbey (A.D. 1066). On the translation of the remains of Henry the Second, the ring of St. John is said to have been withdrawn, and deposited as a relic among the crown jewels.[30] During the reign of Henry III. some repairs were made at the tower, and orders were given for drawing in the chapel of St. John two figures of St. Edward holding out a ring and delivering it to St. John the Evangelist.
According to the legend, King Edward was on his way to Westminster when he encountered a beggar, who pleaded with him in the name of St. John—the apostle particularly honored by the king—to grant him help. The generous king had run out of cash for charity but took off a ring from his finger, ‘large, beautiful, and royal,’ which he gave to the beggar, who then vanished. Shortly after, two English pilgrims in the Holy Land found themselves lost and in serious trouble when suddenly the path in front of them was illuminated, and an old man, white and gray-haired, came to them, followed by two candles. When they told him where they were from, the old man, ‘joyfully like a scholar,’ led them to an inn and revealed that he was John the Evangelist, the special patron of King Edward. He gave them a ring to take back to the king, with a warning that in six months, the king would join him in Paradise. The pilgrims returned and found the king at his palace, which became known as ‘Havering atte Bower’ because of this incident. He recognized[Pg 118] the ring and prepared for his end accordingly. Upon the death of the Confessor, following tradition, he was dressed in his royal robes, wearing the crown, with a crucifix and gold chain around his neck, and the ‘Pilgrim’s Ring’ on his finger. His body was laid before the high altar at Westminster Abbey (CE 1066). When Henry the Second’s remains were transferred, it is said that St. John’s ring was removed and kept as a relic among the crown jewels.[30] During Henry III's reign, some repairs were made at the tower, and orders were given to paint two figures of St. Edward holding out a ring and giving it to St. John the Evangelist in the chapel of St. John.
As a proof, also, how this beautiful legend was engrafted on the popular mind in after ages, we find it stated in the account of the coronation of Edward II. (1307), that the King offered, first a pound of gold, made like a king holding a ring in his hand, and afterwards a mark, or eight ounces of gold, formed into the likeness of a pilgrim putting forth his hand to receive the ring, a conceit suggested by the legend of the Confessor. So great was the sanctity in which this monarch (who was influenced by childish and superstitious fancies) was held, that Richard II., whenever he left the kingdom, confided the ring which he usually wore to the custodian of St. Edward’s shrine.
As evidence of how this beautiful legend became ingrained in people's minds over the years, we see in the account of Edward II's coronation (1307) that the King first offered a pound of gold, shaped like a king holding a ring in his hand, and later a mark, or eight ounces of gold, made to look like a pilgrim reaching out to receive the ring. This idea was inspired by the legend of the Confessor. The profound respect for this monarch, who was swayed by childish and superstitious beliefs, was such that Richard II, whenever he left the kingdom, entrusted the ring he usually wore to the keeper of St. Edward’s shrine.
[Pg 119]‘It appears,’ observes Mr. Edmund Waterton (‘Archæological Journal,’ No. 82, 1864), ‘that St. Edward’s ring was deposited with his corpse in his tomb. His translation took place on the third of the ides of October (October 13), A.D. 1163, ninety-seven years after the burial. This ceremony was performed at midnight, and on opening his coffin the body was found to be incorrupt. On this occasion the Abbot Lawrence took from the body of the sainted king his robes and the ring of St. John; of the robes the abbot made three copes, as appears from the following entry in the catalogue of the relics of the saint. The abbot also gave the ring to the abbey: “Dompnus Laurentius quondam abbas hujus loci ... sed et annulo ejusdem (Sancti Edwardi) quem Sancto Johanni quondam tradidit, quem et ipse de paradiso remisit, elapsis annis duobus et dimidio, postea in nocte translationis de digito regis tulit, et pro miraculo in loco isto custodiri jussit.” The same manuscript (“De Fundacione ecclesie Westm.” by Ric. Sporley, a monk of the abbey, A.D. 1450), contains the indulgences to be gained by those who visited the holy relics:—“Ad annulum Sancti Edwardi vj. ann. iijc. xi. dies.” No further mention has been found of St. Edward’s ring.’[31]
[Pg 119]‘It seems,’ notes Mr. Edmund Waterton (‘Archaeological Journal,’ No. 82, 1864), ‘that St. Edward’s ring was buried with his body in his tomb. His remains were moved on October 3rd (October 13), A.D. 1163, ninety-seven years after the burial. This ceremony took place at midnight, and when they opened his coffin, they found his body to be incorrupt. On this occasion, Abbot Lawrence took the sainted king's robes and the ring of St. John from the body; from the robes, the abbot made three copes, as indicated by the following entry in the catalogue of the saint’s relics. The abbot also gave the ring to the abbey: “Dompnus Laurentius quondam abbas hujus loci ... and also the ring of the same (St. Edward), which he once gave to St. John, and which he himself sent from paradise, after two and a half years, later taking it on the night of the translation from the king's finger, and ordered it to be kept here as a miracle.” The same manuscript (“De Fundacione ecclesie Westm.” by Ric. Sporley, a monk of the abbey, A.D. 1450) contains the indulgences available to those who visited the holy relics:—“For St. Edward’s ring, 6 years, 300 days, and 11 days.” No further mention of St. Edward’s ring has been discovered.’[31]
Another legendary story, in connection with saintly interposition, is related in the annals of Venice. Moreover, it forms the subject of a painting, attributed (though with some doubt) to Giorgione, ‘St. Mark staying, miraculously, the tempest,’ in the Accademia Picture Gallery at Venice.
Another legendary story, connected to saintly intervention, is found in the records of Venice. It also serves as the subject of a painting, attributed (though somewhat uncertainly) to Giorgione, ‘St. Mark Miraculously Calming the Storm,’ in the Accademia Gallery in Venice.
‘In the year 1341, an inundation of many days’ continuance had raised the water three cubits higher than it had ever before been seen at Venice; and during a stormy night, while the flood appeared to be still increasing, a poor fisherman[Pg 120] sought what refuge he could find by mooring his crazy bark close to the Riva di San Marco. The storm was yet raging, when a person approached and offered him a good fare if he would but ferry him over to San Giorgio Maggiore. ‘Who,’ said the fisherman, ‘can reach San Giorgio on such a night as this? Heaven forbid that I should try!’ But as the stranger earnestly persisted in his request, and promised to guard him from all harm, he at last consented. The passenger landed, and having desired the boatman to wait a little, returned with a companion, and ordered him to row to San Nicolo di Lido. The astonished fisherman again refused, till he was prevailed upon by a further assurance of safety and excellent pay. At San Nicolo they picked up a third person, and then instructed the boatman to proceed to the Two Castles at Lido. Though the waves ran fearfully high, the old man had by this time become accustomed to them, and moreover, there was something about his mysterious crew which either silenced his fears, or diverted them from the tempest to his companions. Scarcely had they gained the Strait, than they saw a galley, rather flying than sailing along the Adriatic, manned (if we may so say) with devils, who seemed hurrying with fierce and threatening gestures, to sink Venice in the deep. The sea, which had been furiously agitated, in a moment became unruffled, and the strangers, crossing themselves, conjured the fiends to depart. At the word the demoniacal galley vanished, and the three passengers were quietly landed at the spots where each, respectively, had been taken up.
In 1341, a long-lasting flood had raised the water three cubits higher than ever seen before in Venice. During a stormy night, as the flood seemed to keep rising, a poor fisherman[Pg 120] searched for any refuge he could find by mooring his beaten-up boat near the Riva di San Marco. While the storm was still raging, a person approached and offered him a good fare if he would ferry him over to San Giorgio Maggiore. “Who,” said the fisherman, “can reach San Giorgio on a night like this? Heaven forbid I should try!” But as the stranger insisted and promised to keep him safe, he finally agreed. The passenger got off, asked the boatman to wait for a moment, and returned with a companion, instructing him to row to San Nicolo di Lido. The astonished fisherman again refused until he was persuaded by further promises of safety and good pay. At San Nicolo, they picked up a third person and then directed the boatman to take them to the Two Castles at Lido. Although the waves were extremely high, the old man had by then gotten used to them, and there was something about his mysterious passengers that either calmed his fears or distracted him from the storm to focus on them. As soon as they reached the Strait, they saw a galley speeding along the Adriatic, manned (if we can call it that) by devils, who seemed determined to sink Venice. The violently agitated sea instantly became calm, and the strangers crossed themselves, commanding the fiends to leave. At the command, the demonic galley vanished, and the three passengers were safely dropped off at the places where they had been picked up.
The boatman, it seems, was not quite easy about his fare, and before parting, he implied, pretty clearly, that the sight of the miracle would, after all, be bad pay. ‘You are right, my friend,’ said the first passenger; ‘go to the Doge[Pg 121] and the Procuratori, and assure them that, but for us three, Venice would have been drowned. I am St. Mark; my two comrades are St George and St. Nicholas. Desire the magistrate to pay you; and add that all the trouble has arisen from a schoolmaster at San Felice, who first bargained with the devil for his soul, and then hanged himself in despair.’
The boatman didn't seem too satisfied with his payment, and before they parted ways, he made it pretty clear that witnessing the miracle wouldn’t be worth much. “You’re right, my friend,” the first passenger said. “Go to the Doge[Pg 121] and the Procuratori, and tell them that without the three of us, Venice would be underwater. I'm St. Mark; my two companions are St. George and St. Nicholas. Ask the magistrate to pay you; and mention that all this trouble started with a schoolmaster at San Felice, who first struck a deal with the devil for his soul, and then hanged himself in despair.”
The fisherman, who seemed to have, all his wits about him, answered that he might tell that story, but he much doubted whether he should be believed; upon which St. Mark pulled from his finger a gold ring, worth about five ducats, saying:—‘Show them this ring, and bid them look for it in my Treasury, whence it will be found missing.’ On the morrow the fisherman did as he was told. The ring was discovered to be absent from its usual custody, and the fortunate boatman not only received his fare, but an annual pension to boot. Moreover, a solemn procession and thanksgiving were appointed in gratitude to the three holy corpses which had rescued from such calamity the land affording them burial.’
The fisherman, who seemed to be completely alert, replied that he could tell that story, but he doubted anyone would believe him. In response, St. Mark took a gold ring worth about five ducats from his finger and said, “Show them this ring and tell them to look for it in my Treasury, where it will be found missing.” The next day, the fisherman did as instructed. The ring was found to be missing from its usual place, and the lucky fisherman not only received his payment but also an annual pension. Additionally, a grand procession and a day of thanks were organized in honor of the three holy bodies that had saved the land where they were buried from such disaster.
Pope Hildebrand, one of the prime movers of the Norman invasion of England, excommunicated Harold and his supporters, and despatched a sacred banner, as well as a diamond ring enclosing one of the Apostle Peter’s hairs, to Normandy.
Pope Hildebrand, a key player in the Norman invasion of England, excommunicated Harold and his supporters, and sent a holy banner along with a diamond ring containing one of the hairs of Apostle Peter to Normandy.
The mediæval romances abound in allusions to the wonderful virtues of rings. These were cherished conceits among the old writers. In the fabulous history of Ogier le Danois the fairy Morgana gives that hero a ring, which, although at that time he was one hundred years old, gives him the appearance of a man of thirty. After a lapse of two hundred years Ogier appears at the court of France,[Pg 122] where the secret of his transformation is found out by the old Countess of Senlis, who, while making love to him, draws the talisman from his finger, and places it on her own. She instantly blossoms into youth, while Ogier as suddenly sinks into decrepitude. The Countess, however, is forced to give back the ring, and former appearances are restored, but as she had discovered the virtues of the ring, she employs thirty champions to regain it, all of whom are successfully defeated by Ogier.
The medieval romances are full of references to the amazing powers of rings. These were popular themes among old writers. In the legendary tale of Ogier the Dane, the fairy Morgana gives the hero a ring that, even though he is one hundred years old, makes him look like a thirty-year-old man. After two hundred years, Ogier shows up at the court of France,[Pg 122] where the secret of his transformation is discovered by the elderly Countess of Senlis, who, while flirting with him, takes the talisman from his finger and puts it on her own. She instantly becomes youthful, while Ogier rapidly ages. However, the Countess is forced to return the ring, and their former appearances are restored. But now that she knows the ring's powers, she hires thirty champions to get it back, all of whom Ogier defeats.
In the ‘Vision of Pierce Plowman’ (about 1350) the poet speaks of a woman whose fingers were all embellished with rings of gold, set with diamonds, rubies, and sapphires, and also Oriental stones or amulets to prevent any poisonous infection.
In the ‘Vision of Pierce Plowman’ (about 1350), the poet describes a woman whose fingers were adorned with gold rings, featuring diamonds, rubies, and sapphires, and also Oriental stones or amulets to guard against any poisonous infection.
In the romance of ‘Sir Perceval of Galles’ the knight obtains surreptitious possession of a ring endowed with mysterious qualities:—
In the story of ‘Sir Perceval of Galles,’ the knight secretly acquires a ring with mysterious powers:—
Suche a vertue es in the stane
In alle thys werlde wote I nane,
Siche stone in a rynge;
A mane that had it in were,
One his body for to bere,
There scholde no dyntys hym dere,
Ne to the dethe brynge.
Such a virtue is in the stone
In all this world, I know of none,
Such a stone in a ring;
A man who had it on him,
Would endure no blows,
Nor be brought to die.
So in ‘Sir Eglamour of Artois’:—
So in 'Sir Eglamour of Artois':—
Seyde Organata that swete thynge
Y schalle geve the a gode golde rynge
With a fulle ryche stone,
Whedur that ye be on water or on londe,
And that rynge be upon yowre honde,
Ther schall nothyng yow slon.
Seyde Organata, that sweet thing
I will give you a good gold ring
With a very valuable gem,
Whether you are on water or on land,
And that ring will be on your hand,
Nothing can hurt you.
The ring, a gift to Canace, daughter of King Cambuscan, in the ‘Squire’s Tale’ of Chaucer, taught the language of birds, and also imparted to the wearer a knowledge of[Pg 123] plants, which formed an important part of the Arabian philosophy:—
The ring, a gift to Canace, daughter of King Cambuscan, in the ‘Squire’s Tale’ of Chaucer, taught the language of birds and also gave the wearer knowledge of[Pg 123] plants, which was a key element of Arabian philosophy:—
The vertue of this ring, if ye wol here,
Is this, that if hire list it for to were,
Upon hire thomb, or in hire purse it bere,
There is no fowle that fleeth under haven,
That she ne shal wel onderstond his steven (language)
And know his mening openlie and plaine,
And answere him in his langage againe,[32]
And every gras that groweth upon rote,
She shal eke know and whom it wol do bote,
All be his woundes never so depe and wide.
The power of this ring, if you want to hear,
Is this: if she wants to wear it,
On her thumb, or carry it in her purse,
There is no bird that flies under heaven,
That she won't fully understand its call
And know its meaning clearly and plainly,
And respond to it in its language again,[32]
And every blade of grass that grows from a root,
She will also know and whom it will help,
No matter how deep and wide its wounds may be.
In the romance of Ywain and Gawaine (supposed to have been written in the reign of Henry VI.), when the knight is in perilous confinement, a lady looks out of a wicket which opened in the walls of the gateway, and releases him. She gives him a ring:—
In the romance of Ywain and Gawaine (thought to have been written during the reign of Henry VI), when the knight is in dangerous captivity, a lady peeks out from a small opening in the wall of the gateway and sets him free. She gives him a ring:—
I sal leue the her mi ring,
Bot yelde it me at myne askyng,
When thou ert broght of al thi payn,
Yelde it than to me ogayne:
Als the bark kills the tre,
Right so sal my ring do the;
When thou in hand hast the stane,
Der (harm) sal thai do the nane;
For the stane es of swilk might,
Of the sal men have na syght—
I will leave the ring here for you,
But give it back to me when I ask,
Once you've overcome all your pain,
Then return it to me again:
Just as the bark destroys the tree,
So my ring will do the same to you;
When you have the stone in your hand,
No harm will come to you, understand;
For the stone has such great power,
That it won't let anyone see its hour—
[Pg 124]thus possessing the power ascribed to the ring of Gyges. In a story of the ‘Gseta Romanorum’ a father, on his death-bed, gives a ring to his son, the virtue of which was that whoever wore it would obtain the love of all men.
[Pg 124]thus having the power attributed to the ring of Gyges. In a tale from the ‘Gseta Romanorum,’ a father, on his deathbed, gives a ring to his son, which had the ability to make anyone who wore it be loved by all.
In chapter x. of the same work the Emperor Vespasian marries a wife in a distant country, who refuses to return home with him, and yet declares that she will kill herself if he leaves her. In this dilemma the emperor orders two rings to be made having wonderful efficacious properties; one represents on a precious stone the figure of Oblivion, and the other bears the image of Memory. The former he gives to the empress, the latter he keeps himself. Chapter cxx. contains the story of the legacy of King Darius to his three sons. The eldest receives his inheritance, the second all that had been acquired by conquest, and the third a ring, a necklace, and a rich mantle, all of which possess magical properties. He who wore the ring gained the love and favour of all; the collar obtained all that the heart could desire, and whoever laid down on the mantle would be instantly transported to any part of the world he might desire to visit.
In chapter x. of the same work, Emperor Vespasian marries a wife in a distant country, who refuses to come back with him but claims she will kill herself if he leaves her. Faced with this dilemma, the emperor orders two rings to be made with incredible powers; one features the figure of Oblivion on a precious stone, and the other displays the image of Memory. He gives the first ring to the empress and keeps the second for himself. Chapter cxx. tells the story of King Darius’s legacy to his three sons. The eldest receives his inheritance, the second gets everything acquired through conquest, and the third is given a ring, a necklace, and a lavish cloak, all of which have magical properties. Whoever wears the ring earns the love and favor of everyone; the necklace grants all that the heart desires, and anyone who lies down on the cloak is instantly transported to any place in the world they wish to go.
In the romance of ‘Melusine,’ the heroine, when about to leave the house of her husband, gives him two rings, and says: ‘My sweet love, you see here two rings which have both the same virtue, and know well for truth, so long as you possess them, or one of them, you shall never be overcome in pleading, nor in battle, if your cause be rightful, and neither you nor others who may possess them shall ever die by any weapons.’
In the story of ‘Melusine,’ the heroine, just before leaving her husband’s house, gives him two rings and says: ‘My dear love, you see these two rings that both have the same power, and know this for sure: as long as you have them, or even just one of them, you will never lose in arguments or in battle, as long as your cause is just, and neither you nor anyone else who has them will ever be killed by any weapons.’
The ring given by the Princess Rigmel to Horn possessed similar properties, as also the ring in the ‘Little Rose-garden,’ given by the Lady Similt to her brother Dietlieb.
The ring given to Horn by Princess Rigmel had similar qualities, just like the ring from the ‘Little Rose-garden,’ which was given by Lady Similt to her brother Dietlieb.
[Pg 125]In Orlando’s ‘Inamorata’ the palace and gardens of Dragontina vanish at Angelica’s ring of virtue, which also enables her to become invisible.
[Pg 125]In Orlando’s ‘Inamorata,’ the palace and gardens of Dragontina disappear at Angelica’s ring of virtue, which also lets her become invisible.
Now that she this upon her hand surveys,
She is so full of pleasure and surprise,
She doubts it is a dream, and, in amaze,
Hardly believes her very hand and eyes.
Then softly to her mouth the hoop conveys,
And, quicker than the flash which cleaves the skies,
From bold Rogero’s sight her beauty shrouds,
As disappears the sun concealed in clouds.
Now that she looks at this on her hand,
She is overwhelmed with joy and surprise,
She wonders if it's a dream, and, in awe,
She can hardly believe her own hand and eyes.
Then gently brings the ring to her mouth,
And, faster than a flash that splits the sky,
From bold Rogero’s view, her beauty is hidden,
Like the sun disappearing behind clouds.
Lydgate, in his ‘Troy book’ (1513), relates how Medea gives to Iason, when he is going to combat the brazen bulls, and to lull to sleep the dragon that guarded the golden fleece, a ring, in which was a gem charmed against poison, and would render the wearer invisible. ‘It was a sort of precious stone,’ says Lydgate, ‘which Virgil celebrates, and which Venus sent her son Æneas that he might enter Carthage.’
Lydgate, in his ‘Troy book’ (1513), describes how Medea gives Jason a ring before he faces the bronze bulls and tries to put to sleep the dragon guarding the golden fleece. This ring had a gem that was enchanted to protect against poison and made the wearer invisible. "It was a type of precious stone," Lydgate says, "which Virgil praises and that Venus gave to her son Aeneas so he could enter Carthage."
In the metrical romance of ‘Richard Cœur-de-Lion,’ King Modard gives him:—
In the poem 'Richard Cœur-de-Lion,' King Modard gives him:—
Two riche rings of gold:
The stones wherein be full bold.
Hence to the land of Ind,
Better than they shalt thou not find.
For whoso hath that one stone,
Water ne shall him drench none.
That other stone whoso that bear
Fire ne shall him never dere (hurt).
Two rich rings of gold:
The stones in them are quite bold.
Take them to the land of India,
You won’t find anything better than these.
For whoever has that one stone,
Water will never soak them.
Whoever carries that other stone
Fire will never harm them.
In ‘Floire and Blanceflor’ the latter, drawing from her finger a ring containing a small talisman, says to her lover: ‘Floire, accept this as a pledge of our mutual love; look on it every day; if thou seest its brilliancy tarnished, it is a sign that my life or my liberty is in danger.’
In ‘Floire and Blanceflor,’ she takes a ring with a small talisman from her finger and says to her lover, ‘Floire, take this as a promise of our love; look at it every day; if you see its shine fade, it’s a sign that my life or my freedom is in danger.’
[Pg 126]In another part of the story, when going in search of Blanceflor, who has been carried away, Floire receives a ring from his mother: ‘Have now, lief son, this ring: whilst thou preservest it neither fire shall burn, nor water drown, nor weapon injure thee, and all thy wants shall be instantly supplied.’
[Pg 126]In a different part of the story, while searching for Blanceflor, who has been taken away, Floire gets a ring from his mother: ‘Here, dear son, take this ring: as long as you keep it with you, neither fire will burn you, nor water drown you, nor weapon harm you, and all your needs will be immediately met.’
In the ‘Archæologia’ (vol. xix. p. 411) is a notice of a gold ring found in the ruins of the palace at Eltham, in Kent, bearing on the side edges of the interior the following inscription:—
In the ‘Archæologia’ (vol. xix. p. 411) is a notice of a gold ring found in the ruins of the palace at Eltham, in Kent, bearing on the side edges of the interior the following inscription:—
Qui me portera ecploitera
Et a grant Joye revendra.
Who wears me shall perform exploits,
And with great Joy shall return:
Qui me portera ecploitera
Et a grant Joye revendra.
Whoever carries me will achieve great feats,
And will return with immense Joy:
implying that the ring was an amulet, and may, possibly, have been presented to some distinguished personage when setting out for the Holy Land in the time of the Crusades. The ring is set with an oriental ruby and five diamonds, placed at equal distances round the exterior.
implying that the ring was an amulet and may have been given to some distinguished individual setting out for the Holy Land during the Crusades. The ring features an oriental ruby and five diamonds, placed evenly around the outside.
Amulet ring.
Charm ring.
The inscription is in small Gothic characters, but remarkably well-formed and legible. The shape of the ruby[Pg 127] is an irregular oval, while the diamonds are all of a triangular form and in their natural crystallised state.
The inscription is in tiny Gothic letters, but surprisingly well-made and easy to read. The ruby[Pg 127] is an uneven oval shape, while the diamonds are all triangular and in their natural crystallized state.
An emerald ring was thought to ensure purity of thought and conduct. In ‘Caltha Poetarium, or the Humble Bee,’ by T. Cutwode (1599), Diana is represented adorning the heroine of the piece:—
An emerald ring was believed to guarantee pure thoughts and behavior. In ‘Caltha Poetarium, or the Humble Bee,’ by T. Cutwode (1599), Diana is shown decorating the heroine of the story:—
And, with an emerald, hangs she on a ring
That keeps just reckoning of our chastity:
······
And, therefore, ladies, it behoves you well
To walk full warily when stones will tell.
And, with an emerald, she hangs on a ring
That keeps track of our purity:
······
So, ladies, it’s wise for you
To tread carefully when stones can reveal the truth.
In the ballad of ‘Northumberland betrayed by Douglas,’ Mary, a Douglas that dabbled in sorcery, shows the chamberlain of Earl Percy, James Swynard, the foes of the former in the field, through the ‘weme’ (hollow) of her ring:—
In the ballad of ‘Northumberland betrayed by Douglas,’ Mary, a Douglas who practiced witchcraft, shows the Earl Percy's chamberlain, James Swynard, the enemies of the former on the battlefield through the ‘weme’ (hollow) of her ring:—
I never was on English ground,
Ne never sawe it with mine eye,
But as my book it sheweth me,
And through my ring I may descrye.
I’ve never been on English soil,
I've never seen it with my own eyes,
But as my book shows me,
And through my ring, I can see.
The treachery of Earl Douglas is thus foreshadowed, and the chamberlain returns sorrowfully to his master with the news of what he had seen. Earl Percy, however, is determined to keep his hunting appointment with Douglas:—
The betrayal of Earl Douglas is hinted at, and the chamberlain returns sadly to his master with the news of what he witnessed. Earl Percy, however, is set on keeping his hunting appointment with Douglas:—
Now nay, now nay, good James Swynard,
I may not believe that witch ladye;
The Douglasses were ever true,
And they can ne’er prove false to me.
Now no, now no, good James Swynard,
I can’t believe that witch lady;
The Douglasses were always true,
And they can never let me down.
The ‘witch-ladye’ who effects such powerful influences with her magic ring is, nevertheless, rewarded for her warnings:—
The 'witch-lady' who has such a strong impact with her magic ring is, however, rewarded for her warnings:—
[Pg 128]
He writhe a gold ring from his finger
And gave itt to that gay ladye;
Sayes ‘it was all that I cold save
In Harley woods where I cold bee’ (where I was).
[Pg 128]
He took off a gold ring from his finger
And handed it to that happy lady;
He said, ‘it was all that I could save
In Harley Woods, where I could be (where I was).
A ring story in which the Venus of antiquity assumes the manners of one of the Fays, or Fatæ of romance, is quoted by Sir Walter Scott in his notes to the ‘Minstrelsy of the Scottish Border.’ It is related by Fordun in his ‘Scotichronicon,’ by Matthew of Westminster, and Roger of Wendover. In the year 1058 a young man of noble birth had been married at Rome, and during the period of the nuptial feast, having gone with his companions to play at ball, he put his marriage-ring on the finger of a broken statue of Venus in the area to remain while he was engaged in the recreation. Desisting from the exercise he found the finger on which he had placed the ring, contracted firmly against the palm, and attempted in vain either to break it, or to disengage his ring. He concealed the circumstance from his companions, and returned at night with a servant, when he found the finger extended and his ring gone. He dissembled the loss and returned to his wife; but whenever he attempted to embrace her he found himself prevented by something dark and dense, which was tangible, though not visible, interposing between them, and he heard a voice saying: ‘Embrace me, for I am Venus whom you this day wedded, and I will not restore your ring.’ As this was constantly repeated, he consulted his relations, who had recourse to Palumbus, a priest skilled in necromancy. He directed the young man to go at a certain hour of the night to a spot among the ancient ruins of Rome, where four roads met, and wait silently until he saw a company pass by; and then, without uttering a word, to deliver a letter which[Pg 129] he gave him to a majestic being who rode in a chariot after the rest of the company. The young man did so, and saw a company of all ages, sexes, and ranks, on horse and on foot, some joyful and others sad, pass along; among whom he distinguished a woman in a meretricious dress, who, from the tenuity of her garments, seemed almost naked. She rode on a mule; her long hair, which flowed over her shoulders, was bound with a golden fillet, and in her hand was a gold rod with which she directed the mule. In the close of the procession a tall majestic figure appeared in a chariot adorned with emeralds and pearls, who fiercely asked the young man what he did there. He presented the letter in silence, which the demon dared not refuse. As soon as he had read, lifting up his hands to heaven, he exclaimed: ‘Almighty God, how long wilt thou endure the iniquities of the sorcerer Palumbus?’ and immediately despatched some of his attendants, who, with much difficulty, extorted the ring from Venus, and restored it to its owner, whose infernal bands were thus dissolved.[33]
A ring story where the ancient Venus takes on the traits of one of the Fays or Fatæ from romance is mentioned by Sir Walter Scott in his notes to the ‘Minstrelsy of the Scottish Border.’ It’s recounted by Fordun in his ‘Scotichronicon,’ by Matthew of Westminster, and Roger of Wendover. In 1058, a young nobleman got married in Rome, and during the wedding feast, he went with his friends to play ball. He placed his wedding ring on the finger of a broken statue of Venus to keep it safe while he enjoyed the game. When he returned, he found the finger, where he had put the ring, firmly pressed against the palm, and no matter how hard he tried, he couldn’t break it or take off his ring. He kept this a secret from his friends and went back at night with a servant, only to find the finger extended and his ring missing. He pretended to be unaffected by the loss and returned to his wife; however, whenever he tried to embrace her, he felt a dark, heavy presence blocking them. He heard a voice saying: ‘Embrace me, for I am Venus whom you wed today, and I will not give back your ring.’ As this happened repeatedly, he sought advice from his relatives, who turned to Palumbus, a priest skilled in necromancy. He instructed the young man to go at a specific hour to a spot among the ancient ruins of Rome, where four roads intersect, and wait quietly until he saw a group pass by. Then, without speaking, he was to hand a letter he gave him to a majestic figure riding in a chariot at the end of the group. The young man followed the instructions and witnessed a crowd of people of all ages and backgrounds, some happy and others sad, passing by; among them was a woman in revealing clothing who appeared almost naked. She rode on a mule, her long hair flowing over her shoulders, held back with a golden band, and carried a gold rod to guide the mule. At the end of the procession, a tall figure in a chariot decorated with emeralds and pearls appeared and harshly asked the young man what he was doing there. The young man silently handed over the letter, which the figure accepted. After reading it, he lifted his hands to heaven and exclaimed: ‘Almighty God, how long will you tolerate the wickedness of the sorcerer Palumbus?’ He immediately sent some attendants, who, with great effort, retrieved the ring from Venus and returned it to its owner, breaking the spell that had bound him.[33]
[Pg 130]Another mediæval story is founded on the same myth, but purified and Christianised. A knight is playing at ball and incommoded by his ring. He therefore removes it, and places it for safety on the finger of a statue of the Blessed Virgin. On seeking it again he finds the hand of the finger clasped, and is unable to recover his ring; whereupon the knight renounces the world, and, as the betrothed of the Virgin, enters a monastery.
[Pg 130]Another medieval story is based on the same myth but has been refined and adapted to Christian beliefs. A knight is playing ball and is bothered by his ring. So, he takes it off and safely places it on the finger of a statue of the Blessed Virgin. When he goes to look for it again, he finds that the hand of the statue is clenched, and he can't get his ring back; as a result, the knight gives up his worldly life and, as the Virgin's betrothed, joins a monastery.
Gifts of rings to the Virgin were common in the Middle Ages. Monstrelet relates that at the execution of the Constable of France, Louis de Luxembourg, in the reign of Louis XI., he took a gold ring set with a diamond from his finger, and, giving it to the Penitentiary, desired he would offer it to the image of the Virgin Mary, and place it on her finger, which he promised to perform.
Gifts of rings to the Virgin were common in the Middle Ages. Monstrelet recounts that during the execution of the Constable of France, Louis de Luxembourg, in the reign of Louis XI, he took a gold ring set with a diamond from his finger and gave it to the Penitentiary, asking him to offer it to the image of the Virgin Mary and place it on her finger, which he promised to do.
Mr. J. Baring Gould, in his ‘Curious Myths of the Middle Ages,’ relates a legend by Cæsarius of Heisterboch of a similar character to that of Venus and the ring. A certain clerk, Philip, a great necromancer, took some Swabian and Bavarian youths to a lonely spot in a field, where, at their desire, he proceeded to perform incantations. First, he drew a circle round them with his sword, and warned them on no consideration to leave the ring.
Mr. J. Baring Gould, in his ‘Curious Myths of the Middle Ages,’ tells a legend by Cæsarius of Heisterboch that’s similar to the story of Venus and the ring. A clerk named Philip, who was a skilled necromancer, took some young men from Swabia and Bavaria to a secluded area in a field, where he began to perform incantations at their request. First, he used his sword to draw a circle around them and warned them never to leave the ring.
Then, retiring from them a little space, he began his incantations, and suddenly there appeared around the youths a multitude of armed men brandishing weapons, and daring[Pg 131] them to fight. The demons, failing to draw them by this means from their enchanted circle, vanished, and there was seen a company of beautiful damsels, dancing about the ring, and by their attitudes alluring the youths towards them. One of them, exceeding in beauty and grace the others, singled out a youth, and, dancing before him, extended to him a ring of gold, casting languishing glances towards him, and, by all the means in her power, endeavouring to attract his attention and kindle his passion. The young man, unable to resist any longer, put forth his finger beyond the circle to take the ring, and the apparition at once drew him towards her, and vanished with him. However, after much trouble, the necromancer was able to recover him from the evil spirit.
Then, stepping back a bit from them, he started his incantations, and suddenly a crowd of armed men appeared around the young men, brandishing weapons and daring them to fight. The demons, unable to lure them out of their enchanted circle this way, disappeared, revealing a group of beautiful young women dancing around the ring, trying to entice the young men with their movements. One of them, more beautiful and graceful than the others, singled out a young man, danced in front of him, and offered him a gold ring, casting sultry glances his way and doing everything she could to grab his attention and spark his desire. The young man, unable to resist any longer, reached his finger out beyond the circle to take the ring, and the apparition immediately pulled him toward her before vanishing with him. However, after much effort, the necromancer managed to retrieve him from the evil spirit.
‘The incident of the ring,’ remarks Mr. Gould, ‘in connexion with the ancient goddess, is certainly taken from the old religion of the Teutonic and Scandinavian peoples. Freyja was represented in her temples holding a ring in her hand; so was Thorgerda Hördabrúda. The Faereyinga Saga relates an event in the life of the Faroese hero Sigmund Brestesson, which is to the point. “They (Earl Hakon and Sigmund) went to the temple, and the earl fell on the ground before her statue, and there he lay long. The statue was richly dressed, and had a heavy gold ring on the arm. And the earl stood up and touched the ring, and tried to remove it, but could not; and it seemed to Sigmund as though she frowned. Then the earl said: ‘She is not pleased with thee, Sigmund, and I do not know whether I shall be able to reconcile you; but that shall be the token of her favour, if she gives us the ring which she has in her hand.’ Then the earl took much silver, and laid it on her footstool before her, and again he flung himself before her, and[Pg 132] Sigmund noticed that he wept profusely. And when he stood up he took the ring, and she let go of it. Then the earl gave it to Sigmund and said: ‘I give thee this ring to thy weal; never part with it;’ and Sigmund promised he would not.”
‘The incident of the ring,’ notes Mr. Gould, ‘related to the ancient goddess, definitely comes from the old beliefs of the Teutonic and Scandinavian peoples. Freyja was depicted in her temples holding a ring in her hand; so was Thorgerda Hördabrúda. The Faereyinga Saga tells of an event in the life of the Faroese hero Sigmund Brestesson, which is relevant. “They (Earl Hakon and Sigmund) went to the temple, and the earl fell to the ground before her statue, and there he lay for a long time. The statue was richly adorned and wore a heavy gold ring on its arm. The earl stood up and touched the ring, trying to remove it, but couldn’t; and Sigmund thought she frowned. Then the earl said: ‘She is not pleased with you, Sigmund, and I don't know if I'll be able to make you right with her; but that will be the sign of her favor if she gives us the ring she holds.’ Then the earl brought a lot of silver and laid it at her footstool, and once more he threw himself before her, and[Pg 132] Sigmund noticed that he was weeping heavily. When he stood up, he took the ring, and she released it. Then the earl handed it to Sigmund and said: ‘I give you this ring for your good; never part with it;’ and Sigmund promised he wouldn’t.”
‘This ring occasions the death of the Faroese chief. In after years King Olaf, who converts him to Christianity, knowing that this gold ring is a relic of paganism, asks Sigmund to give it to him: the chief refuses, and the king angrily pronounces a warning that it will be the cause of his death. And his word falls true, for Sigmund is murdered in his sleep for the sake of the ring.’
‘This ring leads to the death of the Faroese chief. Later on, King Olaf, who converts him to Christianity, asks Sigmund for the gold ring, knowing it's a relic of paganism. The chief refuses, and the king angrily warns that it will cause his death. His words come true, as Sigmund is murdered in his sleep because of the ring.’
There was no limit to the credulity of believers in the mystic in the middle and even in later ages. Sir Walter Scott, in his ‘Demonology and Witchcraft,’ remarks that the early dabblers in astrology and chemistry, although denying the use of all necromancy—that is, unlawful or black magic—pretended always to a correspondence with the various spirits of the elements, on the principle of the Rosicrucian philosophy. They affirmed that they could bind to their service, and imprison in a ring, a mirror, or a stone, some fairy sylph or salamander, and compel it to appear when called, and render answers to such questions as the viewer should propose.’[34]
There was no limit to the gullibility of believers in the mystical during the middle ages and even afterward. Sir Walter Scott, in his ‘Demonology and Witchcraft,’ points out that early enthusiasts of astrology and chemistry, while denying the practice of necromancy—that is, illegal or dark magic—always claimed to have a connection with the various spirits of the elements, based on Rosicrucian philosophy. They claimed they could summon and trap a fairy, sylph, or salamander in a ring, mirror, or stone, forcing it to appear when called and provide answers to any questions the seeker asked. [34]
In the reign of Henry VIII. (1533) Jones, the famous, or rather infamous, ‘Oxford Conjurer,’ told his dupe, Sir William Neville, that amongst other marvels he could make rings of gold which would ensure the favour of great men to those who wore them. He said ‘that my lord cardinal (Wolsey) had such,’ and he promised one to Sir William and his brother.[35]
In the time of Henry VIII (1533), Jones, the well-known—and perhaps better known for being notorious—'Oxford Conjurer,' told his gullible target, Sir William Neville, that among other wonders, he could create gold rings that would guarantee the favor of powerful people to anyone who wore them. He claimed that 'my lord cardinal (Wolsey) had one' and promised to make one for Sir William and his brother.[35]
[Pg 133]It is not a little curious that Henry VIII. himself, the despoiler of monasteries, and, to a certain extent, the uprooter of many superstitious practices, placed such faith in the traditional virtues of a jewel that had for ages decked the shrine of Thomas à Becket at Canterbury that he caused it to be placed in a ring, which he constantly wore afterwards, in the manner of those times, on his enormous thumb. The last time that this jewel appears in history is among the ‘diamonds’ of the golden collar of his daughter Queen Mary, who, although a bigoted Roman Catholic, did not scruple to wear the spoils of a shrine. This jewel was called the ‘royal of France’ having been presented to the shrine of the murdered Archbishop by King Louis VII. in 1179.[36]
[Pg 133]It's quite interesting that Henry VIII, the one who dissolved monasteries and, to some extent, eradicated various superstitious practices, had such belief in the traditional value of a jewel that had adorned the shrine of Thomas à Becket at Canterbury for centuries. He had it set into a ring that he wore regularly on his oversized thumb, just like people did back then. The last mention of this jewel in history is found among the 'diamonds' of the golden collar of his daughter, Queen Mary, who, despite being a staunch Roman Catholic, had no qualms about wearing items taken from a shrine. This jewel was referred to as the 'royal of France' because it was given to the shrine of the slain Archbishop by King Louis VII in 1179.[36]
Charm-rings.
Charm bracelets.
Religious charms were of exhaustless variety. In the Braybrooke Collection is a bone charm-ring, surmounted by a circular signet, on which is engraved the crucifix, with[Pg 134] our Saviour upon it, and the two Maries standing on either side of the stem: round the edge of the signet is the inscription ‘In hoc signo vinces,’ headed with a small cross.
Religious charms came in endless variations. The Braybrooke Collection features a bone charm-ring topped with a circular signet, which is engraved with the crucifix, displaying our Savior on it, with the two Marys standing on either side of the stem. Around the edge of the signet is the inscription ‘In hoc signo vinces,’ marked with a small cross.
In the ‘Journal of the Archæological Institute’ (vol. iii. p. 358) is an account of a curious magical ring, found on the coast of Glamorganshire, near to the ‘Worm’s Head,’ the western extremity of the county, where numerous objects have been found at various times on the shifting of the sand, such as fire-arms, an astrolabe, and silver dollars. This ring is of gold, much bent and defaced, and inscribed with mystic words both inside and outside the hoop.
In the ‘Journal of the Archæological Institute’ (vol. iii. p. 358), there's a report about an intriguing magical ring discovered along the coast of Glamorganshire, close to the ‘Worm’s Head,’ the western edge of the county. Many items have been discovered there over time due to shifting sands, including firearms, an astrolabe, and silver dollars. This ring is made of gold, quite twisted and damaged, and is engraved with mysterious words on both the inside and outside of the band.
Talismanic ring.
Lucky ring.
‘The talismanic character of these mysterious words seems to be sufficiently proved by comparison with the physical charms given in an English medical MS., preserved at Stockholm, and published by the Society of Antiquaries. Amongst various cabalistic prescriptions is found one “for peynys in theth.... Boro berto briore + vulnera quinque dei sint medecina mei + Tahebal + ghether (or guthman) + + + Onthman,” &c. The last word should probably be read Guthman, and it is succeeded by five crosses, probably in allusion to the five wounds of the Saviour.’ It is[Pg 135] supposed that this ring and the other remains alluded to indicate the spot where a Spanish or Portuguese vessel was wrecked about two hundred years ago.
‘The magical nature of these strange words seems to be clearly shown when compared to the physical charms in an English medical manuscript, kept in Stockholm and published by the Society of Antiquaries. Among various mysterious prescriptions, there’s one “for pain in the head.... Boro berto briore + wounds may be my medicine + Tahebal + ghether (or guthman) + + + Onthman,” etc. The last word should probably be read as Guthman, followed by five crosses, likely referring to the five wounds of Christ.’ It is[Pg 135] believed that this ring and the other referenced remains mark the location where a Spanish or Portuguese ship was wrecked about two hundred years ago.
The following engraving, from the ‘Archæological Journal’ (vol. iii. p. 267), represents another cabalistic ring, found in Worcestershire, and the property of Mr. Jabez Allies. It is of base metal, plated with gold, and is, apparently, of the fourteenth century.
The following engraving, from the ‘Archæological Journal’ (vol. iii. p. 267), shows another mystical ring, found in Worcestershire, and owned by Mr. Jabez Allies. It is made of cheap metal, covered with gold, and seems to be from the fourteenth century.
Talismanic ring.
Lucky ring.
In the ‘Archæological Journal’ (vol. v. p. 159) is an engraving and description of a curious talismanic ring, with an inscription showing stronger evidence of oriental origin than any heretofore noticed, the Greek letters theta and gamma occurring twice in the legend. The discovery of this relic, which is of gold, weighing 56 grains, was singular. It was found in digging up the roots of an old oak-tree which had been blown down by a violent wind in 1846, on a farm called the ‘Rookery,’ in the parish of Calne, Wiltshire, belonging to Mr. Thomas Poynder, who thinks that the spot where the ring was found was in the track of the fugitive Royalists, after the battle at Rounday Hill, near Devizes, on their retreat towards Oxford, where the King’s head-quarters were stated to be at that time. This curious[Pg 136] ring is divided into eight compartments, with a row of three little rounded points, or studs, between each. The hoop is bent irregularly, so that the inner circle presents seven straight sides, but the angles thus formed do not correspond precisely with the external divisions.
In the ‘Archaeological Journal’ (vol. v. p. 159), there’s an engraving and description of a fascinating talismanic ring, with an inscription that shows stronger signs of Eastern origin than any previously noted, featuring the Greek letters theta and gamma appearing twice in the legend. The discovery of this gold relic, weighing 56 grains, was unusual. It was found while digging up the roots of an old oak tree that had been toppled by a fierce wind in 1846, on a farm called ‘Rookery’ in the parish of Calne, Wiltshire, owned by Mr. Thomas Poynder. He believes that the location where the ring was discovered was along the path of fleeing Royalists after the battle at Rounday Hill, near Devizes, on their way back to Oxford, where it was reported that the King’s headquarters were at that time. This intriguing[Pg 136] ring is divided into eight sections, with a row of three little rounded points or studs between each. The hoop is bent irregularly, so the inner circle has seven straight sides, but the angles formed don’t exactly match the external divisions.
Talismanic ring.
Talisman ring.
Talismanic ring.
Lucky ring.
A talismanic ring of gold found in Coventry Park in 1802, represents in the centre device Christ rising from the sepulchre, and in the background are shown the hammer, sponge, and other emblems of the Passion. On the left is figured the wound at the side, with an inscription ‘the well of[Pg 137] ewerlastingh lyffe.’ In the next compartment, two smaller wounds, with ‘the well of confort,’ ‘the well of gracy,’ and afterwards two other wounds inscribed ‘the well of pitty,’ ‘the well of merci.’
A gold talismanic ring discovered in Coventry Park in 1802 features Christ rising from the tomb at its center, with the hammer, sponge, and other symbols of the Passion in the background. On the left side, there’s an image of the wound in his side, along with the inscription ‘the well of[Pg 137] everlasting life.’ In the next section, there are two smaller wounds, labeled ‘the well of comfort,’ ‘the well of grace,’ and then two more wounds inscribed ‘the well of pity,’ ‘the well of mercy.’
From some small remains it is evident that the figure of our Saviour, with all the inscriptions, had been filled with black enamel, whilst the wounds and drops of blood issuing from them were appropriately distinguished by red. On the inside of the ring is the following inscription: ‘Wulnera quinq’ dei sunt medecina mei, pia crux et passio x̄pi sunt medecina michi, Jaspar, Melchior, Baltasar, ananyzapta tetragrammaton.’
From some small remains, it's clear that the figure of our Savior, along with all the inscriptions, had been filled with black enamel, while the wounds and drops of blood coming from them were marked in red. On the inside of the ring, there's the following inscription: ‘Wulnera quinq’ dei sunt medecina mei, pia crux et passio x̄pi sunt medecina michi, Jaspar, Melchior, Baltasar, ananyzapta tetragrammaton.’
In the ‘Archæologia’ (vol. xviii.) it is stated that Sir Edward Shaw, goldsmith and alderman of London, by his will (circâ 1487), directed to be made sixteen rings of ‘fyne gold, to be graven with the well of pitie, the well of mercie, and the well of everlasting life.’
In the ‘Archæologia’ (vol. xviii.), it is mentioned that Sir Edward Shaw, a goldsmith and alderman of London, by his will (around 1487), ordered the creation of sixteen rings made of fine gold, to be engraved with the well of pity, the well of mercy, and the well of everlasting life.
It is, perhaps, impossible now to explain the import of the legends which occur on certain mediæval rings, and devices which are probably, in many cases, anagrammatic, and the original orthography of the legend corrupted and changed in others; but they, no doubt, had a talismanic meaning. A gold ring found in Rockingham Forest in 1841 has inscribed on the outer side, guttv: gutta: madros: adros; and in the inner side, vdros: udros: thebal. A thin gold ring discovered in a garden at Newark in 1741 was inscribed with the words Agla: Thalcvt: Calcvt: Cattama.
It’s probably impossible now to explain the significance of the legends found on certain medieval rings, and the designs that are likely, in many cases, anagrams, with the original spelling of the legends altered in others; but they certainly had a magical meaning. A gold ring discovered in Rockingham Forest in 1841 is inscribed on the outer side with guttv: gutta: madros: adros; and on the inner side with vdros: udros: thebal. A thin gold ring found in a garden at Newark in 1741 was inscribed with the words Agla: Thalcvt: Calcvt: Cattama.
The mystic word, or anagram, Agla is engraved on the inner side of a silver ring (of the fourteenth century) found in 1846 on the site of the cemetery of St. Owen’s, which stood on the west site of Gloucester, a little without the south gate, and was destroyed during the siege of 1643. On[Pg 138] the outside of the ring is engraved + Ave Maria, and within appear the letters Agla, with the symbol of the cross between each letter. The weight of the ring is 20 grs. The term Agla designated in the East a wand of dignity or office, and may possibly have been used in connection with magical or alchemical operations.
The mystical word, or anagram, Agla is engraved on the inner side of a silver ring from the fourteenth century, which was found in 1846 at the site of the cemetery of St. Owen’s. This cemetery was located on the west side of Gloucester, just outside the south gate, and was destroyed during the siege of 1643. On[Pg 138] the outside of the ring is engraved + Hail Mary, and on the inside are the letters Agla, with a cross symbol between each letter. The ring weighs 20 grams. The term Agla referred to a wand of dignity or office in the East and may have been used in connection with magical or alchemical practices.
There is a notice of a curious magical ring against leprosy in the ‘Archæologia’ (vol. xxi. p. 25, 120). In the Londesborough Collection is a ‘religious,’ or ‘superstitious’ ring of silver, the workmanship of which dates it at the end of the fifteenth century, and which is supposed to have been worn as a charm against St. Vitus’s dance. To a circular plate are attached three large bosses, and, between each, two smaller bosses, all the nine of which are hollow, and were filled, apparently, by some resinous substance. On the three larger bosses are engraved the letters S. M. V. (Sancta Maria Virgo) in relief.
There’s a mention of an interesting magical ring for leprosy in the ‘Archæologia’ (vol. xxi. p. 25, 120). In the Londesborough Collection is a ‘religious’ or ‘superstitious’ silver ring, crafted in the late fifteenth century, which is thought to have been worn as a charm against St. Vitus’s dance. The ring features a circular plate with three large raised areas, and between each of those, there are two smaller raised areas, all nine of which are hollow and seem to have been filled with some kind of resinous substance. The three larger raised areas are engraved with the letters S. M. V. (Sancta Maria Virgo) in relief.
In the same collection is a gold ring of the same century, the face engraved with St. Christopher bearing the infant Saviour, worn as a charm against sudden death, more particularly by drowning.
In the same collection is a gold ring from the same century, the face engraved with St. Christopher holding the infant Savior, worn as a charm against sudden death, especially from drowning.
It is very delicately engraved. The circle is formed by ten lozenges, each of which bears a letter of the inscription, ‘de boen cuer.’
It’s very finely engraved. The circle is made up of ten diamond shapes, each of which has a letter from the inscription, ‘de boen cuer.’
Amulet rings.
Charm rings.
Sir John Woodford is in possession of a gold ring found on the field of Azincourt, which bears the inscription Buro.[Pg 139] Berto. Beriora. These mystic words occur likewise in the charm against tooth-ache given in the Stockholm MS. (‘Archæological Journal,’ vol. iv. p. 78).
Sir John Woodford has a gold ring that was found on the battlefield of Azincourt, which has the inscription Buro. Berto. Beriora. These mysterious words also appear in the charm for toothache found in the Stockholm MS. (‘Archæological Journal,’ vol. iv. p. 78).
A thumb-ring was discovered a few years since in the coffin of an ecclesiastic, in Chichester Cathedral, set with an Abraxas gem,[37] an agate; the deceased churchman, it may be well believed, had worn it guiltless of all knowledge of Alexandrine pantheism. The ring was of gold, and was found on the right-hand thumb-bone of a skeleton, the supposed remains of Seffrid, Bishop of Chichester, A.D. 1125.
A thumb ring was found a few years ago in the coffin of a clergyman at Chichester Cathedral, set with an Abraxas gem, an agate; it’s safe to assume that the deceased churchman wore it without any awareness of Alexandrine pantheism. The ring was made of gold and was located on the right-hand thumb bone of a skeleton, believed to be the remains of Seffrid, Bishop of Chichester, A.D. 1125.
Cabalistic ring.
Mystical ring.
A very large ring, bearing great resemblance to the episcopal ring, was occasionally worn as a thumb-ring by the laity. In the Londesborough Collection is a fine specimen. It is somewhat roughly formed of mixed metal, and has upon the circular face a conventional representation of a monkey looking at himself in a hand-mirror. This is[Pg 140] surrounded by a cable-moulding, and on each side is set two large stones. The outer edge of this ring is also decorated with a heavy cable-moulding; inside, next the figure, is the cross and sacred monogram, placed on each side of the mystic word anamzapta, showing it to be a charm-ring.
A really large ring, looking very similar to an episcopal ring, was sometimes worn as a thumb ring by everyday people. In the Londesborough Collection, there’s a great example. It’s somewhat roughly made of mixed metal, and has a design on the circular face of a monkey looking at itself in a hand mirror. This is[Pg 140] surrounded by a cable-molding, and on each side are two large stones. The outer edge of this ring is also decorated with a heavy cable-molding; inside, next to the figure, is the cross and sacred monogram, placed on each side of the mystical word anamzapta, indicating that it is a charm ring.
Another mystical ring in the same collection is inscribed, on an oval boss, hETh; the workmanship, probably English, of about the fifteenth century. This ring was bought at Ely. Heth was the sacred name of Jehovah. Dr. Dee and similar Gnostics composed several mystical arrangements founded on these four letters.
Another mystical ring in the same collection is inscribed, on an oval boss, hETh; the craftsmanship, likely English, dates back to around the fifteenth century. This ring was purchased at Ely. Heth was the sacred name of Jehovah. Dr. Dee and other Gnostics created several mystical arrangements based on these four letters.
Mystical ring.
Magic ring.
The Londesborough Collection has also a massive thumb-ring, having the tooth of some animal as its principal gem, supposed to have mystic power over its possessor. It is set all around with precious stones to ensure its potency.
The Londesborough Collection also features a large thumb ring with the tooth of an animal as its main gem, believed to have mystical power over its owner. It's surrounded by precious stones to boost its effectiveness.
Mystical ring.
Magic ring.
The last leaf of the ‘Theophilus’ MS. of the fourteenth century has: ‘Against the falling sickness, write these characters upon a ring; outside, + ou. thebal gut guthani; inside, + eri gerari.’
The last leaf of the ‘Theophilus’ MS. of the fourteenth century has: ‘For epilepsy, write these characters on a ring; outside, + ou. thebal gut guthani; inside, + eri gerari.’
[Pg 141]A ring that had belonged to Remigius, being dipped in holy water, furnished, it is said, a good drink for fever and other diseases.
[Pg 141]A ring that used to belong to Remigius, when dipped in holy water, was said to provide a healing drink for fever and various other illnesses.
The sacred names of ‘Jesus,’ ‘Maria,’ and ‘Joseph’ were formerly inscribed on rings, and worn as preservatives against the plague. Rings simply made of gold were supposed to cure St. Antony’s fire, but if inscribed with magical words their effect was irresistible.
The sacred names of ‘Jesus,’ ‘Maria,’ and ‘Joseph’ were once engraved on rings and worn as protection against the plague. Rings made purely of gold were believed to cure St. Antony’s fire, but if they were inscribed with magical words, their power was irresistible.
A representation is annexed of an amulet ring found near Oxford, about 1805, bearing an inscription Sca. Bar., Sancta Barbara. The legend of St. Barbara calls her a patroness against storms and lightning.
A representation is attached of an amulet ring discovered near Oxford, around 1805, featuring the inscription Sca. Bar., Sancta Barbara. The legend of St. Barbara identifies her as a protector against storms and lightning.
Amulet ring.
Amulet ring.
The following engraving represents an amulet wedding-ring, conjectured to be the figure of St. Catherine with her wheel, being an emblem of good fortune; the other being probably, St. Margaret (with the church), an emblem of her faith, wisdom, constancy, and fortitude: time of Richard II.
The following engraving shows a wedding ring amulet, thought to depict St. Catherine with her wheel, symbolizing good luck; the other likely represents St. Margaret (with the church), symbolizing her faith, wisdom, perseverance, and strength: during the time of Richard II.
Amulet ring.
Charm ring.
Rings in which pieces of what was asserted to be the ‘true[Pg 142] cross’ were placed are sometimes met with in old writings. St. Gregory states that his sister wore one of this kind. That this belief was not always credited is seen in the case of an exchange of rings between a bishop and an abbot in the annals of St. Alban’s Abbey. This occurred in the reign of Richard II., when the Bishop of Lincoln (Beaufort) gave his to John, fifth abbot of St. Alban’s, for one containing a piece of the true cross, and was therefore earnestly prized and begged for by the bishop. Whether the prelate had his misgivings as to the alleged sanctity of the splinter, or considered the garniture of the ring too plain, he very soon after informed the abbot that his own ring was the most valuable of the two, and the difference in value must be paid to him in money. In his zeal for his material interests the bishop overlooked the assurances of friendship which the exchange conveyed, and the abbot was obliged to give him five pounds.
Rings that contained pieces of what was claimed to be the 'true cross' are sometimes found in old texts. St. Gregory mentions that his sister wore one like this. The fact that this belief wasn’t always accepted is evident in the story of a ring exchange between a bishop and an abbot recorded in the annals of St. Alban’s Abbey. This took place during the reign of Richard II, when the Bishop of Lincoln (Beaufort) gave his ring to John, the fifth abbot of St. Alban’s, in exchange for one that contained a piece of the true cross, which the bishop valued greatly and requested fervently. Whether the bishop had doubts about the claimed holiness of the splinter or thought the ring’s design was too simple, he shortly after told the abbot that his own ring was worth more, and he expected to be compensated for the difference in money. In his pursuit of financial gain, the bishop ignored the friendship that the exchange represented, and the abbot had to pay him five pounds.
Relics of martyrs and saints were frequently inserted in rings: in the Londesborough Collection is a silver reliquary, probably intended for the thumb. It has a heart engraved on a lozenge, the reliquary being enclosed beneath. It was found in the ruins of the abbey of St. Bertin, at St. Omer.
Relics of martyrs and saints were often placed in rings: in the Londesborough Collection, there is a silver reliquary, likely meant for the thumb. It features a heart engraved on a lozenge, with the reliquary held beneath it. It was discovered in the ruins of the abbey of St. Bertin, in St. Omer.
In the possession of Lady Fitz Hardinge is a remarkable reliquary ring, of admirable workmanship, probably of the tenth century, perhaps Anglo-Saxon, but possibly of Irish (Celtic) origin. It is of gold with very large expanded bezel, cruciform or quatrefoil, 1⅞ in. wide. In the centre is a raised boss, intended, possibly, to contain a relic, as the ring is, no doubt, ecclesiastical; from this radiates four monsters’ heads, similar to those on early Irish work, marked with thin lines of niello, the eyes formed of dots of[Pg 143] dark glass pastes, the whole edged with fine corded ornament.
In Lady Fitz Hardinge's possession is an impressive reliquary ring, expertly crafted, probably from the tenth century, possibly Anglo-Saxon or even Irish (Celtic) in origin. It is made of gold with a very large, expanded bezel shaped like a cross or quatrefoil, measuring 1⅞ inches wide. At the center is a raised boss that likely held a relic, as the ring is undoubtedly ecclesiastical; from this, four monster heads radiate, resembling those found in early Irish art, accented with thin lines of niello and with the eyes made from dots of dark glass pastes, all bordered with fine corded decoration.
In the collection of Mr. R. H. Soden Smith is a reliquary gold ring, having suspended on the bezel side a small gold relic-case, chased with two crosses, and edged with beaded work of the twelfth century.
In Mr. R. H. Soden Smith's collection, there is a gold reliquary ring that has a small gold relic case hanging from the bezel side. The case is engraved with two crosses and bordered with beaded designs from the twelfth century.
Mr. Fairholt describes a curious Venetian ring, the bezel formed like a box to contain relics. The face of the ring has a representation of St. Mark seated, holding his gospel and giving a benediction. The spaces between this figure and the oval border are perforated, so that the interior of the box is visible, and the relic enshrined might be seen.
Mr. Fairholt describes an intriguing Venetian ring, with the bezel shaped like a box to hold relics. The face of the ring features an image of St. Mark sitting down, holding his gospel and giving a blessing. The spaces between this figure and the oval border are perforated, allowing the interior of the box to be seen, revealing the relic inside.
Liceti, a Genoese physician of the seventeenth century, who wrote a book on rings, ascribed the want of virtue in medicated rings to their small size, observing that the larger the ring or the gem contained in it, the greater was the effect. He endeavoured to prove that the Philistines, when they were punished for touching the ark of Israel, wore rings on their fingers with the image of the disease engraved on them by way of expiation.
Liceti, a Genoese doctor from the seventeenth century, who wrote a book about rings, believed that the lack of power in medicated rings was due to their small size. He noted that the larger the ring or the gem in it, the more significant the effect. He tried to demonstrate that the Philistines, when they were punished for touching the ark of Israel, wore rings on their fingers with images of the disease carved into them as a form of atonement.
Rings of the Magi.
Magi's Rings.
The names of the Three Kings of Cologne constituted a popular charm against diseases and evil influences in the Middle Ages. The late Crofton Croker, in his description of the rings in the Londesborough Collection, mentions one dating from the fourteenth, or early in the fifteenth century, engraved outside with these names: Gasper: Melchior: Baltazar: in. God. is. a. r.—the latter words, probably,[Pg 144] implying ‘in God is a remedy.’ The three Kings were supposed to be the Wise Men (according to the legend, three Kings of Arabia) who made offerings to our Saviour. Their bodies travelled first to Constantinople, thence to Milan, and, lastly, to Cologne, by various removals.[38] These[Pg 145] three potent names have continued as a charm even to a late period; for, in January 1748-9, one William Jackson, a Roman Catholic, and a proscribed smuggler, being sentenced to death at Chichester, had a purse taken from his person, containing the following scrap:—
The names of the Three Kings of Cologne were a popular charm against illness and evil forces in the Middle Ages. The late Crofton Croker, in his description of the rings in the Londesborough Collection, mentions one from the fourteenth or early fifteenth century, engraved on the outside with these names: Gasper: Melchior: Baltazar: in. God. is. a. r.—the last words likely meaning ‘in God is a remedy.’ The three Kings were believed to be the Wise Men (according to legend, three Kings of Arabia) who brought gifts to our Savior. Their remains were first transported to Constantinople, then to Milan, and finally to Cologne, through various relocations.[38] These[Pg 145] three powerful names have remained a charm even into later times; for instance, in January 1748-9, a man named William Jackson, a Roman Catholic and an outlawed smuggler, was sentenced to death at Chichester and had a purse taken from him that contained the following scrap:—
Sancti tres Reges,
Gaspar, Melchior, Baltasar,
Orate pro nobis nunc et in hora
Mortis nostræ.
Sancti tres Reges,
Gaspar, Melchior, Baltasar,
Pray for us now and at the hour
of our demise.
The paper on which this invocation was written had touched the heads of the Three Kings at Cologne.
The paper this invocation was written on had touched the heads of the Three Kings in Cologne.
In ‘Reynard the Fox,’ the hero of that satirical work, describing the treasure he pretends to have discovered for the sole benefit of his royal master and mistress, says: ‘Oon of them was a rynge of fyne gold, and within the rynge next the fyngre were wreton lettres enameld wyth sable and asure, and there were three Hebrew names therein, y coude not myself rede ne spelle them, for I onderstand not that language, but mayster Abryon of Tryers, he is a wise man, he onderstandeth wel al maner of langages, and the virtue of al maner of herbes. And yet he byleveth not in God, he is a Jewe, the wysest in conynge, and specyally he knoweth the virtue of stones. I shewed him thys ryng, he sayd that they were the thre names that Seth brought out of Paradys, when he brought to his fader Adam the oyle of mercy. And whomsoever bereth on hym thyse thre names, he shal never be hurte by throndre ne by lyghtning, ne no wytchcraft shal have no power over hym, ne be tempted to doo synne; and also he shall never take harme by colde though he laye thre wynters long nyghtes in the felde though it snowed, stormed, or froze never soo sore, so grete myghte have these wordes.’
In 'Reynard the Fox,' the main character of that satirical story, while describing the treasure he claims to have found for the benefit of his royal master and mistress, says: “One of them was a fine gold ring, and inside the ring next to the finger were letters enameled in black and blue, and there were three Hebrew names in it. I couldn’t read or spell them myself because I don’t understand that language, but Master Abryon of Tryers, he’s a wise man; he understands all kinds of languages and the properties of all kinds of herbs. And yet he doesn’t believe in God; he is a Jew, the smartest in knowledge, and especially he knows the power of stones. I showed him this ring, and he said that they were the three names that Seth brought out of Paradise when he gave his father Adam the oil of mercy. And whoever wears these three names will never be harmed by thunder or lightning, nor will any witchcraft have power over him, nor will he be tempted to sin; and he will also never suffer from the cold even if he lays in the field for three winter nights during heavy snow, storms, or freezing temperatures—such is the power of these words.”
[Pg 146]The stone set in the ring and its wonderful properties are then enumerated, and the conclusion is: ‘I thought in myself that I was not able ne worthy to bere it, and therefore I sent it to my dere lord, the Kyng, for I knew hym for the moost noble that now lyveth, and also all our welfare and worship lyeth on hym, and for he shold be kepte fro al drede, nede, and ungeluck.’
[Pg 146]The stone in the ring and its remarkable properties are then listed, and the conclusion is: ‘I thought to myself that I was neither able nor worthy to wear it, so I sent it to my dear lord, the King, because I knew him to be the most noble living man, and all our well-being and honor depend on him, and so that he should be kept safe from all fear, need, and misfortune.’
While the names of saints were employed for the prevention or relief of bodily ailments, those of ‘devils’ were made the agency for criminal objects; thus we read in Monstrelet’s ‘Chronicles,’ that in the plea of justification made by the Duke of Burgundy for the assassination of Louis, Duke of Orleans, in 1407, he accused the latter of having conspired against the King of France by means of sorcery. Among other things a ring was made use of ‘in the name of devils.’ A monk undertook this ‘who performed many superstitious acts near a bush, with invocations to the devil.’ Two evil spirits appeared to him in the shape of two men, one of whom took the ring, which had been placed on the ground, and vanished. After half an hour he returned, and gave the ring to the monk, ‘which to the sight was the colour of red, nearly scarlet,’ and said to him: ‘Thou wilt put it into the mouth of a dead man in the manner thou knowest,’ and then vanished. The monk obeyed these instructions ‘thinking to burn the lord our King.’
While people used the names of saints to prevent or relieve physical ailments, those of "devils" were associated with criminal acts. In Monstrelet’s ‘Chronicles,’ we read that during the justification plea by the Duke of Burgundy for the assassination of Louis, Duke of Orleans, in 1407, he accused Orleans of plotting against the King of France through sorcery. Among other things, a ring was used "in the name of devils." A monk took on this task and performed several superstitious acts near a bush, invoking the devil. Two evil spirits appeared to him as two men; one of them took the ring that had been placed on the ground and disappeared. After about half an hour, he returned and gave the monk the ring, which looked red, almost scarlet, and said, "You will put it into the mouth of a dead man the way you know how," and then vanished. The monk followed these instructions, "thinking to harm our lord the King."
Mr. Fairholt describes a mechanical ring, of mystic signification, as one of the most curious rings in the Londesborough Collection. The outside of the hoop is perfectly plain, and is set with a ruby and amethyst. Upon pressing these stones a spring opens, and discovers the surface covered with magical signs and names of spirits; among them Asmodiel, Nachiel, and Zamiel occur, a similar series[Pg 147] occupying the interior of the hoop. Such a ring might be worn without suspicion of its true import, looking simplicity itself, but fraught with unholy meaning. It was, probably, constructed for some German mystic philosopher, at a time when students like Faust devoted themselves and their fortune to occult sciences, believing in the philosopher’s stone, the elixir of life, and the power given to man to control the unseen world of spirits.
Mr. Fairholt describes a mechanical ring with a mysterious significance as one of the most fascinating rings in the Londesborough Collection. The outer part of the band is completely plain and set with a ruby and an amethyst. When these stones are pressed, a spring opens, revealing a surface covered in magical symbols and names of spirits; among them are Asmodiel, Nachiel, and Zamiel, with a similar series[Pg 147] inside the band. This ring could be worn without any suspicion of its true meaning, appearing completely simple, yet filled with dark significance. It likely was made for some German mystic philosopher during a time when scholars like Faust dedicated themselves and their resources to occult sciences, believing in the philosopher's stone, the elixir of life, and the ability to control the invisible world of spirits.
Cabalistic ring.
Mystical ring.
Among the charges brought against Joan of Arc were that she had charmed rings to secure victory over her enemies.
Among the accusations against Joan of Arc was that she had enchanted rings to ensure victory over her foes.
The ancient physicians and empirics employed numerous charms for the cure of diseases, and the practice was common among the medical professors of the middle and lower Roman empire. Marcellus, a physician who lived in the reign of Marcus Aurelius, directs the patient who is afflicted with a pain in the side to wear a ring of pure gold, inscribed with some Greek letters, on a Thursday, at the decrease of the moon. It was to be worn on the right hand if the pain was on the left side, and vice versâ. Trallian, another physician, living in the fourth century, cured the colic and all bilious complaints by means of an octangular ring of iron, on which eight words were to be engraved, commanding the bile to take possession of a lark! A magic diagram was to be added. He tells us that he had great[Pg 148] experience in this remedy, and had considered it extremely foolish to omit recording so valuable a treasure, but he particularly enjoined keeping it a secret from the profane vulgar, according to an admonition of Hippocrates, that sacred things are for sacred persons only. He recommends also a cure for the stone by wearing a copper ring with the figure of a lion, a crescent, and a star, to be placed on the fourth finger; and for the colic in general a ring with Hercules strangling the Nemæan lion.
The ancient doctors and folk healers used many charms to treat illnesses, and this practice was widespread among medical professionals in the early and later Roman Empire. Marcellus, a physician from the time of Marcus Aurelius, advised patients suffering from side pain to wear a pure gold ring inscribed with Greek letters on a Thursday during the waning moon. If the pain was on the left side, the ring was to be worn on the right hand, and vice versa. Trallian, another physician from the fourth century, treated colic and all gallbladder issues with an octagonal iron ring, engraved with eight words commanding the bile to take control of a lark! A magical diagram was also to be included. He noted that he had significant experience with this remedy and thought it extremely silly to not document such a valuable treasure, but he specifically warned that it should be kept secret from the uninitiated, following Hippocrates' advice that sacred things are meant for sacred people only. He also suggested a remedy for kidney stones by wearing a copper ring featuring a lion, a crescent, and a star, placed on the fourth finger; and for colic in general, a ring depicting Hercules battling the Nemean lion.
Michaelis, a physician of Leipsic, had a ring made of a sea-horse’s tooth, which he applied to all diseases indiscriminately,[39] but jasper was the favourite substance employed when a particular disorder was in question.
Michaelis, a doctor from Leipsic, had a ring made from a sea-horse's tooth, which he used for all kinds of illnesses, [39] but jasper was his preferred choice when dealing with a specific condition.
Rings with Mottoes, worn as Medicaments.
Rings with Mottos, worn as Remedies.
Galen mentions a green jasper amulet belonging to the Egyptian King Nechepsus, who lived 630 years before the Christian era. It was cut in the form of a dragon surrounded with rays, and worn to strengthen the organs of digestion.
Galen talks about a green jasper amulet that belonged to the Egyptian King Nechepsus, who lived 630 years before the Christian era. It was shaped like a dragon surrounded by rays and was worn to boost the digestive organs.
The numerous magical properties of the jasper made it a favourite among the Gnostic or Basilidian gems.
The many magical qualities of jasper made it a favorite among the Gnostic or Basilidian gems.
At a meeting of the Society of Antiquaries in March[Pg 149] 1875 Mr. Robert Ferguson, M.P., &c., exhibited among other rings, one of yellow metal, with Anglo-Saxon runes;[40][Pg 150] diameter 11⁄10 inch. It bears an inscription similar to the Cumberland specimen now in the British Museum. The ring is said to have belonged to a Major Macdonald, in 1745, and was obtained by Mr. Ferguson from his descendant. Mr. Ferguson has since presented this ring to the British Museum.
At a meeting of the Society of Antiquaries in March[Pg 149] 1875, Mr. Robert Ferguson, M.P., showcased several rings, including one made of yellow metal featuring Anglo-Saxon runes;[40][Pg 150] with a diameter of 11⁄10 inch. It has an inscription similar to a specimen from Cumberland that is currently in the British Museum. The ring is said to have belonged to a Major Macdonald in 1745 and was acquired by Mr. Ferguson from his descendant. Mr. Ferguson has since donated this ring to the British Museum.
A somewhat similar ring, the property of the Earl of Aberdeen, is described in the ‘Archæological Journal’ (vol. xxi. p. 256) bearing the Runic inscription, ‘whether in fever or leprosy, the patient be happy and confident in the hope of recovery.’
A similar ring, owned by the Earl of Aberdeen, is described in the ‘Archaeological Journal’ (vol. xxi. p. 256) with the Runic inscription, ‘Whether in fever or leprosy, may the patient be happy and confident in the hope of recovery.’
Runic.
Runes.
The accompanying illustration represents a Dano-Saxon ring worn as a charm against the plague, and bearing an inscription thus rendered:—
The illustration shows a Dano-Saxon ring that was worn as a charm to protect against the plague, featuring the following inscription:—
Raise us from dust we pray to thee;
From pestilence O set us free,
Although the grave unwilling be.
Raise us from dust, we pray to you;
From sickness, O set us free,
Even if the grave is reluctant.
Dano-Saxon Runic ring.
Dano-Saxon runic ring.
At the proceedings of the Royal Society of Antiquaries at Copenhagen, in 1838, a gold ring with a Runic inscription, found in Fionia, was exhibited. The words röd eg lagd álaga[Pg 151] may be rendered ‘I guide the chain of destiny,’ and show that its Scandinavian possessor considered it an amulet.
At the meeting of the Royal Society of Antiquaries in Copenhagen in 1838, a gold ring with a Runic inscription, discovered in Fionia, was displayed. The words röd eg lagd álaga[Pg 151] can be translated as ‘I guide the chain of destiny,’ indicating that its Scandinavian owner viewed it as an amulet.
Rings of lead, mixed with quicksilver, were used against headaches and other complaints.
Rings made of lead, combined with mercury, were used for headaches and other ailments.
In the ‘Récueil des Historiens de France’ we read that Passavant, Bishop of Mans, possessed a ring which had belonged to Gulpherius de Lastour, during the Crusades, which was very precious, and cured a great number of sick persons.
In the ‘Récueil des Historiens de France,’ we read that Passavant, Bishop of Mans, owned a ring that had belonged to Gulpherius de Lastour during the Crusades. This ring was very valuable and healed many sick people.
A gold ring of the fourteenth century, in the Londesborough Collection, has an inscription which, freely translated, is ‘May you be preserved from the evil eye!’
A gold ring from the fourteenth century, part of the Londesborough Collection, has an inscription that roughly translates to, ‘May you be protected from the evil eye!’
In the Shrewsbury Museum is a small iron ring, with an intaglio representing a fawn springing out of a nautilus-shell. It was discovered at Wroxeter. This and similar devices the Rev. C. W. King ascribes as probable charms against the ‘evil eye.’
In the Shrewsbury Museum, there's a small iron ring featuring an intaglio of a fawn jumping out of a nautilus shell. It was found at Wroxeter. The Rev. C. W. King attributes this and similar items as likely charms to protect against the 'evil eye.'
This superstition still prevails extensively in the East, and is also entertained in many parts of Europe. That it was well known to Romans we have the authority of Virgil: ‘Nescio quis teneros oculus mihi fascinat agnos’ (Ecl. iii.).
This superstition is still widely believed in the East and is also held in many parts of Europe. We have the authority of Virgil to confirm that it was well known to the Romans: ‘Nescio quis teneros oculus mihi fascinat agnos’ (Ecl. iii.).
The following engraving (from the Collection Chabouillet) represents a Greek amulet ring, adopted by the Etruscans and Romans, and which offers, by the stone and setting, the figure of an eye. These rings were movable, and turned on the axis.
The following engraving (from the Collection Chabouillet) shows a Greek amulet ring, used by the Etruscans and Romans, which features an eye design through the stone and setting. These rings were movable and rotated on the axis.
Amulet against the ‘evil eye.’
Protection against the 'evil eye.'
[Pg 152]The great preservative against this was the wearing of a ring, with the figure of a cockatrice, supposed to proceed from a cock’s egg under various planetary and talismanic influences. The Londesborough thumb-ring has two cockatrices cut in high relief upon an agate.
[Pg 152]The main protection against this was wearing a ring featuring the image of a cockatrice, believed to come from a rooster's egg influenced by various planets and magical powers. The Londesborough thumb-ring has two cockatrices carved in high relief on an agate.
Amulets against the ‘evil eye.’
Protection charms against the evil eye.
The deadly power of the cockatrice is alluded to by Shakspeare in ‘Twelfth Night’ and in ‘Romeo and Juliet’—
The lethal power of the cockatrice is referenced by Shakespeare in 'Twelfth Night' and in 'Romeo and Juliet'—
Say thou but I,
And that base vowel I shall poison more
Than the death-darting eye of cockatrice.
Just say I
And that simple vowel I will do more harm
Than the deadly gaze of a cockatrice.
So Dryden says:—
So Dryden says:—
Mischiefs are like the cockatrice’s eye;
If they see first, they kill; if seen, they die—
Mischiefs are like the cockatrice’s eye;
If they see first, they kill; if seen, they die—
alluding to the counter-action, that if the creature was seen by a person first, without being perceived by it, the cockatrice died from the effect of the human eye. The figure of the bird merely gave security against the evil eye; it had no other effect, and for this purpose various engraved stones were used. Thus a ring in the Londesborough Collection has in its centre a Gnostic gem with cabalistic figures, believed able to avert the dreadful glance.
alluding to the counter-action, that if the creature was seen by a person first, without being noticed by it, the cockatrice died from the effect of the human eye. The image of the bird only provided protection against the evil eye; it had no other function, and for this purpose, various engraved stones were used. Thus, a ring in the Londesborough Collection features a Gnostic gem in its center with cabalistic figures, believed to be able to ward off the terrible glare.
In the same collection is a massive thumb-ring, having the tooth of some animal as its principal gem, supposed to[Pg 153] have mystic power over the fortunes of its possessor. It is set all round with precious stones of talismanic virtues.
In the same collection is a large thumb-ring featuring the tooth of some animal as its main gem, believed to[Pg 153] hold mystical power over its owner's luck. It's surrounded by precious stones with talismanic qualities.
A dove, with a branch of olive in its mouth, engraved in pyrites, and mounted in a silver ring, ensured the wearer the utmost hospitality wherever he went, possessing the power of fascination. A fair head, well combed, with a handsome face, engraved on a gem, secured joy, reverence, and honour.
A dove with an olive branch in its mouth, carved in iron pyrite, and set in a silver ring, guaranteed the wearer the best hospitality wherever they went, having the power to charm. A beautiful head, neatly styled, with a handsome face, engraved on a gem, earned joy, respect, and honor.
Rings made of the bones of an ostrich were assumed to be of rare virtue.
Rings made from ostrich bones were thought to have special value.
Charm-ring.
Charm ring.
Annexed is a representation of a silver charm-ring in the South Kensington Museum; the hoop is spirally fluted, widening towards the bezel, which is set with a tooth; the shoulder of the ring is pierced in floriated German work of the eighteenth century.
Annexed is a depiction of a silver charm ring in the South Kensington Museum; the band is spirally fluted, widening toward the bezel, which is set with a tooth; the shoulder of the ring is pierced in floral German work from the eighteenth century.
In the Waterton Collection are several rings of hoof—probably that of an ass—enclosed in gold, and considered a remedy for epilepsy. From Cardan (de Venenis) we learn, among other means for a physician to find out whether a patient is ‘fascinated,’ that of a ring made of the hoof of an ass, put on his finger, growing too large for him after a few days’ wearing. It seems that among the Indians and Norwegians the hoof of the elk is regarded as a sovereign cure for the same malady. The person afflicted applies it to his heart, holding it in his left hand, and rubbing his ear with it.
In the Waterton Collection, there are several rings made of a hoof—likely from a donkey—set in gold, which are believed to help with epilepsy. From Cardan (de Venenis), we learn that one way for a doctor to determine if a patient is ‘bewitched’ is by placing a ring made from a donkey's hoof on their finger, which will grow too large for them after a few days of wearing it. It seems that among Native Americans and Norwegians, the hoof of an elk is seen as a powerful cure for the same condition. The affected person holds it against their heart with their left hand while rubbing their ear with it.
Brand, in his ‘Popular Antiquities,’ states that in Berkshire a ring made from a piece of silver collected at the Communion is supposed to be a cure for convulsions and fits of every kind. If collected on Easter Sunday its efficacy[Pg 154] is greatly increased. Silver is not considered necessary in Devonshire, where a ring is preferred made out of three nails or screws that have been used to fasten a coffin, and that have been dug out of the churchyard. It is curious to notice that, according to Pliny, the ancients believed that a nail drawn out of a sepulchre and placed on the threshold of a bed-chamber door would drive away phantoms in the night.
Brand, in his ‘Popular Antiquities,’ mentions that in Berkshire, a ring made from silver collected during Communion is believed to cure convulsions and all sorts of fits. If it's collected on Easter Sunday, its effectiveness[Pg 154] is said to increase significantly. In Devonshire, silver isn't considered necessary; instead, a ring made from three nails or screws taken from a coffin is preferred, which have been dug up from the churchyard. Interestingly, Pliny notes that the ancients thought that a nail pulled from a grave and placed at the threshold of a bedroom door could ward off spirits during the night.
In Lucian’s ‘Philopseudes’ one of the interlocutors states ‘that since an Arabian had presented him with a ring made of iron taken from the gallows, together with a written charm, he had ceased to be afraid of the demoniacs, who had been healed by a Syrian in Palestine.’
In Lucian’s ‘Philopseudes,’ one of the characters says, “Since an Arabian gave him a ring made of iron from the gallows, along with a written charm, he no longer feared the possessed, who had been cured by a Syrian in Palestine.”
In the ‘Gentleman’s Magazine’ for 1794 we are told that a silver ring will cure fits when it is made from five sixpences collected from as many bachelors, to be conveyed by the hands of a bachelor to a smith that is a bachelor. None of the persons who gave the sixpences were to know for what purpose, or to whom they gave them. The ‘London Medical and Physical Journal’ for 1815 notices a charm successfully employed in the cure of epilepsy, after the failure of various medical means. It consisted of a silver ring contributed by twelve young women, and was to be constantly worn on one of the fingers of the patient.
In the ‘Gentleman’s Magazine’ from 1794, it says that a silver ring can cure seizures if it's made from five sixpences collected from five bachelors, and it should be delivered by a bachelor to a smith who is also single. None of the people who gave the sixpences were supposed to know the purpose or to whom they were giving them. The ‘London Medical and Physical Journal’ from 1815 mentions a charm successfully used to treat epilepsy after various medical treatments failed. It was made of a silver ring contributed by twelve young women and was meant to be worn constantly on one of the patient’s fingers.
In ‘Notes and Queries’ (vol. i. 2nd series, p. 331) we find a Gloucestershire ring prescription for epilepsy, which shows the persistence of credulity even in the present enlightened period. ‘The curate of Hasfield, going into the house of a parishioner whose daughter was afflicted with epileptic fits, was accosted by the mother of the damsel in a most joyous tone: “Oh! sir, Emma has got her ring.”[Pg 155] The good curate, fearing that the poor girl might have stooped to folly, and that this was an intimation that her swain intended to make an honest woman of her, sought an explanation, which was afforded in the following prescription:—“Why, you see, sir, our Emma has been long troubled with the fits, and she went to the church door, and asked a penny from every unmarried man that went in, till she got twenty-four. She then took them to a silversmith in Gloucester, who promised to get them changed for ‘Sacrament’ money (which he said he could easily do, as he knew one of the cathedral clergy). And with that money, sir, he made her a silver ring, and Emma is wearing it, and has not had a fit since.”’
In ‘Notes and Queries’ (vol. i. 2nd series, p. 331) we find a Gloucestershire ring remedy for epilepsy, which shows that belief in superstitions persists even in today's enlightened age. ‘The curate of Hasfield, entering the home of a parishioner whose daughter suffered from seizures, was greeted by the girl's mother in a very cheerful tone: “Oh! sir, Emma has got her ring.”[Pg 155] The kind curate, worried that the poor girl had indulged in folly and that this might mean her suitor intended to marry her, asked for clarification, which was provided in the following explanation:—“Well, you see, sir, our Emma has been struggling with the fits for a long time, and she went to the church door and asked for a penny from every unmarried man who entered, until she collected twenty-four. She then took them to a silversmith in Gloucester, who promised to exchange them for ‘Sacrament’ money (which he said he could easily do, as he knew someone from the cathedral). And with that money, sir, he made her a silver ring, and Emma is wearing it and hasn’t had a fit since.”’
In Somersetshire it is a popular belief that the ring-finger, stroked along any sore or wound, will soon heal it. All the other fingers would poison the finger instead of healing it. It is still an article of belief in some persons that there is virtue enough in a gold ring to remove a stye from the eye, if it be rubbed with it.
In Somersetshire, it's a common belief that if you gently stroke a sore or wound with your ring finger, it will heal quickly. The other fingers are thought to be harmful instead of helpful. Some people still believe that a gold ring has the power to get rid of a stye in the eye if you rub it with the ring.
Although silver appears to be the happy medium chiefly in these wonderful cures, yet we are told that Paracelsus had a ring made of a variety of metallic substances, which he called electrum, and which not only cured epilepsy, but almost every other complaint.
Although silver seems to be the go-to option mainly in these amazing cures, we’re informed that Paracelsus had a ring made of different metallic substances, which he called electrum, and that not only cured epilepsy but nearly every other ailment.
At the meeting of the ‘Society of Antiquaries’ (June 12, 1873) a very interesting collection of so-called Tau (T) rings were exhibited by Octavius Morgan, Esq., F.R.S., F.S.A. These, bearing the mystical emblem of the T (tau), are by no means of frequent occurrence, and it is not likely that so many were ever brought together before. The tau was early esteemed a sacred symbol, and was considered to be the mark placed on the forehead, as mentioned in the[Pg 156] Bible. ‘I have,’ remarks Mr. Morgan, ‘in my collection a champlevé enamel of the thirteenth century, where the “man in the linen garment,” as mentioned in Ezekiel ix., is represented marking the T on the forehead of the faithful children of Israel. A mystical virtue was attached to this T, and, in company with the word ANANIZAPTA—which, being faithfully translated from the Chaldee, according to the Rev. C. W. King, means, “Have mercy on us, O Judge”—was thought a most powerful prophylactic against epilepsy.’
At the meeting of the ‘Society of Antiquaries’ (June 12, 1873), a really interesting collection of Tau (T) rings was displayed by Octavius Morgan, Esq., F.R.S., F.S.A. These rings, featuring the mystical T (tau) symbol, are quite rare, and it’s unlikely that so many have ever been gathered in one place before. The tau was early on regarded as a sacred symbol, believed to be the mark placed on the forehead, as mentioned in the[Pg 156] Bible. “I have,” Mr. Morgan notes, “in my collection a champlevé enamel from the thirteenth century, where the ‘man in the linen garment,’ as mentioned in Ezekiel ix, is shown marking the T on the foreheads of the faithful children of Israel. A mystical significance was attached to this T, and, along with the word ANANIZAPTA—which, when accurately translated from the Chaldee, as the Rev. C. W. King points out, means ‘Have mercy on us, O Judge’—was believed to be a very effective protective charm against epilepsy.”
A description of these curious rings will be found in the ‘Proceedings of the Society’ (vol. vi. No. 1, pp. 51, 53).
A description of these interesting rings can be found in the ‘Proceedings of the Society’ (vol. vi. No. 1, pp. 51, 53).
A toadstone ring (the fossil palatal tooth of a species of Ray) was supposed to protect new-born children and their mothers from the power of the fairies; and this continued a late-day superstition, for Joanna Baillie, in a letter to Sir Walter Scott, mentions one having been repeatedly borrowed from her mother for that purpose. It was believed also to be a specific in cases of diseased kidney, when immersed in water which was drunk by the patient.
A toadstone ring (the fossilized palatal tooth of a type of Ray) was thought to protect newborns and their mothers from fairy magic. This belief persisted into more recent times, as Joanna Baillie noted in a letter to Sir Walter Scott that one had been borrowed from her mother multiple times for that reason. It was also believed to be a cure for kidney disease when soaked in water that the patient would then drink.
In the inventory of the Duke de Berry is mentioned ‘une crapaudine assize en un annel d’or;’ also, in the inventory of the Duke of Burgundy, we find ‘deux crapaudines, l’une en ung anneau d’or, l’autre en ung anneau d’argent.’ These were highly esteemed for their magical properties, as I have remarked, and were probably also worn to prevent the administration of poison, being supposed to indicate its presence by perspiring and changing colour. Fenton, who wrote in 1569, says, ‘Being used in rings they give forewarning of venom.’ In Ben Jonson’s ‘Fox’ (ii. 5) it is thus alluded to:—
In the inventory of the Duke de Berry, there is mention of "a toadstone set in a gold ring;" also, in the inventory of the Duke of Burgundy, we find "two toadstones, one in a gold ring, the other in a silver ring." These were highly valued for their supposed magical properties, as I’ve noted, and were likely worn to guard against poisoning, believed to indicate its presence by sweating and changing color. Fenton, who wrote in 1569, states, "When used in rings, they warn of poison." In Ben Jonson’s "Fox" (ii. 5), it is referenced like this:—
Were you enamoured on his copper rings,
His saffron jewel, with the toadstone in’t?
Were you in love with his copper rings,
His yellow jewel, with the toadstone in it?
[Pg 157]Lupton, in his ‘Thousand Notable Things,’ says that the stone (which, according to Fenton, was most commonly found in the head of a he-toad) was not easily attained, for the toad ‘envieth so much that man should have that stone. To know whether the stone called crapaudina be the right or perfect stone or not, hold the stone before a toad so that he may see it, and, if it be a right and true stone, the toad will leap towards it, and make as though he would snatch it from you.’
[Pg 157]Lupton, in his ‘Thousand Notable Things,’ says that the stone (which, according to Fenton, was most often found in the head of a male toad) was hard to get because the toad was so eager for a human to have it. To find out if the stone called crapaudina is the genuine or perfect stone, hold it in front of a toad so he can see it, and if it is a true stone, the toad will jump towards it and act like he wants to grab it from you.
Silver toadstone ring
(fifteenth century).
Silver toadstone ring
(15th century).
An ingenious method of obtaining the stone is given by the same writer: ‘Put a great or overgrown toad (first bruised in divers places) into an earthen pot; put the same into an ant’s hillock, and cover the same with earth, which toad at length the ants will eat, so that the bones of the toad and stone will be left in the pot.’ A mediæval author, however, states that the stone should be obtained while the toad is living, and this may be done by simply placing upon him a piece of scarlet cloth, ‘wherewithal they are much delighted, so that, while they stretch out themselves as it were in sport upon that cloth, they cast out the stone of their head, but instantly they sup it up again, unless it be taken from them through some secret hole in the same cloth.’
An clever way to get the stone is described by the same writer: ‘Put a large or oversized toad (first bruised in various places) into an earthen pot; place that pot in an ant hill and cover it with dirt. Eventually, the ants will eat the toad, leaving the bones of the toad and the stone in the pot.’ A medieval author, however, claims that the stone should be collected while the toad is still alive, and this can be done by simply laying a piece of red cloth over it, ‘which they are very attracted to, so that as they stretch out on that cloth for fun, they expel the stone from their head, but quickly swallow it again unless it is taken from them through some hidden hole in the cloth.’
The scarlet, however did not always perform this miracle, for Boethius relates how he watched a whole night an old toad he had laid on a red cloth to see him cast forth the stone, but the toad was stubborn, and left him nothing to ‘gratify the great pangs of his whole night’s restlessness.’
The scarlet, however, didn't always work this miracle, as Boethius recounts how he spent an entire night watching an old toad he had placed on a red cloth to see it pass the stone, but the toad was unyielding and gave him nothing to "ease the intense discomfort of his entire night's restlessness."
The Londesborough Collection contains two remarkable[Pg 158] specimens of rings connected with toad superstition, thus described by Mr. Fairholt: ‘The first is of mixed metal, gilt, having upon it the figure of a toad swallowing a serpent. There is a mediæval story of a necromancer introducing himself to another professor of magic by showing him a serpent-ring, upon which the latter, who did not desire anyone to interfere with his practice, produced his toadstone ring, observing that the toad might swallow the serpent, thereby intimating his power to overcome him. The second ring is curious, not only as containing the true toad-stone, but the stone is embossed with the figure of a toad, according to the description of Albertus Magnus, who describes the most valuable variety of this coveted gem as having the figure of the reptile engraved on it.’
The Londesborough Collection contains two remarkable[Pg 158] specimens of rings connected with toad superstition, as described by Mr. Fairholt: ‘The first is made of mixed metal and is gold-plated, featuring the image of a toad swallowing a serpent. There’s a medieval story about a necromancer introducing himself to another magic practitioner by showing him a serpent-ring. The second practitioner, not wanting anyone to interfere with his work, produced his toadstone ring and mentioned that the toad might swallow the serpent, implying his ability to overpower it. The second ring is interesting not only because it has the genuine toad-stone, but also because the stone is embossed with a toad's figure, as noted by Albertus Magnus, who describes the most prized version of this sought-after gem as having the image of the reptile engraved on it.’
Toadstone rings.
Toadstone rings.
Prætorius mentions that a member of the German house of Alveschleben received a ring from a ‘Nixe’ to which the future fortunes of his line were to be attached.
Prætorius mentions that a member of the German house of Alveschleben received a ring from a ‘Nixe’ that was meant to be linked to the future fortunes of his lineage.
The turquoise ring of Shylock, which he would not have given for a ‘wilderness of monkeys’ (‘Merchant of Venice,’ scene i.), was probably more esteemed for its secret virtues than from any commercial value, the turquoise, turkise, or turkey-stone having, from remote periods, been supposed to possess talismanic properties. Fenton, in his ‘Secret[Pg 159] Wonders of Nature’ (1569), thus describes the stone: ‘The turkeys doth move when there is any peril prepared to him that weareth it.’
The turquoise ring of Shylock, which he wouldn’t trade for a ‘wilderness of monkeys’ (‘Merchant of Venice,’ scene i.), was likely valued more for its hidden powers than its actual market value, as turquoise, or turkey-stone, has been believed to have magical properties since ancient times. Fenton, in his ‘Secret[Pg 159] Wonders of Nature’ (1569), describes the stone like this: ‘The turkeys move when there is any danger threatening the person wearing it.’
Dr. Donne alludes to
Dr. Donne refers to
A compassionate turquoise, that doth tell,
By looking pale, the wearer is not well.
A compassionate turquoise, that reveals,
By appearing pale, the wearer isn't well.
Among the virtues of the turquoise is one which would spare us the shame of a divorce-court, as it was believed to take away all enmity, and to reconcile man and wife. Holinshed, speaking of the death of King John, says: ‘And when the king suspected them (the pears) to be poisoned indeed, by reason of such precious stones as he had about him cast forth a certain sweat, as it were bewraeing the poison, &c.’ The turquoise was a supposed monitor of poison from this circumstance.
Among the benefits of the turquoise is one that could save us from the embarrassment of a divorce, as it was thought to eliminate all hostility and bring couples back together. Holinshed, discussing the death of King John, states: ‘And when the king suspected the pears to be poisoned, he sweated from the precious stones he had on him, as if revealing the poison, etc.’ Because of this, the turquoise was believed to warn against poison.
‘With the Germans the turquoise is still the gem appropriated to the ring, the “gage d’amour,” presented by the lover on the acceptance of his suit, the permanence of its colour being believed to depend upon the constancy of his affection. Inasmuch as this stone is almost as liable to change, and as capriciously as the heart itself, the omen it gives is verified with sufficient frequency to maintain its reputation for infallibility’ (The Rev. C. W. King, on ‘Precious Stones,’ &c.).
‘With the Germans, turquoise is still the gem chosen for the ring, the “gage d’amour,” given by the lover when his proposal is accepted. The lasting quality of its color is believed to reflect the steadiness of his love. Since this stone can change almost as easily and unpredictably as the heart itself, the prediction it makes is confirmed often enough to keep its reputation for accuracy.’ (The Rev. C. W. King, on ‘Precious Stones,’ &c.).
Camillus Leonardus, in the ‘Mirror of Stones,’ describes the carbuncle as ‘brandishing its fiery rays on every side, and in the dark appearing like a fiery coal. It is esteemed the first among burning gems.’
Camillus Leonardus, in the ‘Mirror of Stones,’ describes the carbuncle as ‘shining its fiery rays all around, and in the dark looking like a glowing coal. It is regarded as the top among burning gems.’
The ancients supposed this stone to give out a native light without reflection, and they ranked it fifth in order, after diamonds, emeralds, opals, and pearls. The virtue of the carbuncle was to drive away poisonous air, repress luxury, and[Pg 160] preserve the health of the body. The wonderful light emitted from the stone is one of the most prolific resources of romance among old writers.
The ancients believed this stone emitted its own light without needing to reflect anything, and they placed it fifth in rank, after diamonds, emeralds, opals, and pearls. The power of the carbuncle was to dispel toxic air, curb excess, and[Pg 160] maintain the body's health. The amazing light produced by the stone is one of the most abundant sources of romance in ancient literature.
Shakspeare alludes to the superstition in ‘Titus Andronicus’ (Act ii. sc. 4).
Shakespeare refers to the superstition in ‘Titus Andronicus’ (Act ii. sc. 4).
Martius. Lord Bassianus lies embruèd here
All on a heap, like to a slaughtered lamb,
In this detested, dark, blood-drinking pit.
Quintus. If it be dark, how dost thou know ’tis he?
Martius. Upon his bloody finger he doth wear
A precious ring that lightens all the hole,
Which, like a taper in some monument,
Doth shine upon the dead man’s earthy cheeks,
And shows the rugged entrails of the pit.
Martius. Lord Bassianus is lying here, covered in blood,
All in a pile, like a killed lamb,
In this despised, dark, bloody pit.
Quintus. If it’s dark, how do you know it’s him?
Martius. On his bloody finger, he wears,
A special ring that brightens the entire area,
Like a candle in a monument,
It glows on the deceased man's dusty cheeks,
And shows the rough insides of the pit.
Ben Jonson and Drayton also refer to the same superstition.
Ben Jonson and Drayton also mention the same superstition.
The change of colours[41] in stones, portent of evil, was a deep-set superstition in most parts of the world. In the Scotch ballad of ‘Hynd Horn’ we find:—
The change of colors[41] in stones, seen as a sign of evil, was a long-held superstition in many parts of the world. In the Scottish ballad of ‘Hynd Horn’ we find:—
[Pg 161]
And she gave to me a gay gold ring
With a hey lillelu and a how lo lau,
With three shining diamonds set therein,
And the birk and the brume blooms bonnie.
······
What if these diamonds lose their hue,
With a hey lillelu and a how lo lau,
Just when my love begins for to rew,
And the birk and the brume blooms bonnie.
For when your ring turns pale and wan
With a hey lillelu and a how lo lau,
Then I’m in love with another man,
And the birk and the brume blooms bonnie.
······
Seven long years he has been on the sea,
With a hey lillelu and a how lo lau,
And Hynd Horn has looked how his ring may be,
And the birk and the brume blooms bonnie.
But when he looked this ring upon,
With a hey lillelu and a how lo lau,
The shining diamonds were pale and wan,
And the birk and the brume blooms bonnie.
Oh! the ring it was both black and blue,
With a hey lillelu and a how lo lau,
And she’s either dead or she’s married,
And the birk and the brume blooms bonnie.
[Pg 161]
And she gave me a cheerful gold ring
With a hey little you and a how do you do,
With three sparkling diamonds set inside,
The birch and the broom bloom beautifully.
······
What if these diamonds lose their shine,
With a hey little you and a how low you go,
Just when my love starts to renew,
The birch and the broom are beautifully in bloom.
For when your ring turns pale and dim
With a hey little one and a howdy there,
Then I’m in love with another guy,
The birch and the broom bloom beautifully.
······
Seven long years he has been at sea,
With a hey little one and a how are you,
And Hynd Horn has wondered how his ring may be,
The birch and the broom bloom beautifully.
But when he looked at this ring,
With a hey little you and a how low wow,
The sparkling diamonds were pale and dim,
The birch and the broom flower beautifully.
Oh! the ring was both black and blue,
With a hey lillelu and a how lo lau,
And she’s either dead or she’s married,
The birch and the broom flower beautifully.
A curious passage occurs in a letter addressed by Lord Chancellor Hatton to Sir Thomas Smith, preserved among the Harleian MSS., relating to an epidemic then prevailing: ‘I am likewise bold to commend my humble duty to our dear mistress (Queen Elizabeth) by this letter and ring, which hath the virtue to expel infectious airs, and is (as it letteth me) to be worn between the sweet duggs, the chaste nest of pure constancy (!). I trust, sir, when the virtue is known it shall not be refused for the value.’
A curious passage appears in a letter from Lord Chancellor Hatton to Sir Thomas Smith, found in the Harleian MSS., discussing an epidemic at the time: ‘I am also bold enough to express my humble duty to our dear mistress (Queen Elizabeth) through this letter and ring, which has the power to dispel infectious air, and is (as it seems to me) meant to be worn between the sweet breasts, the chaste nest of pure loyalty (!). I hope, sir, that once the power is recognized, it will not be declined for its worth.’
‘Medijcinable’ rings for the cure of the falling sickness[Pg 162] and the cramp are mentioned in the Household Books of Henry IV. and Edward IV.; the metal they were composed of was what formed the King’s offering to the Cross on Good Friday, that day being appointed for the blessing of the rings.
‘Medijcinable’ rings for the cure of epilepsy[Pg 162] and cramps are mentioned in the Household Books of Henry IV and Edward IV; the metal they were made of was what the King offered to the Cross on Good Friday, a day designated for the blessing of the rings.
The following entry occurs in the account of the seventh and eighth years of Henry IV. (1406). ‘In oblacionibus domini regis factis adorando crucem in capella infra manerium suum de Eltham, die parasceves, in precio trium nobilium auri, et v. solidorum sterlyng, xxv. s.’
The following entry appears in the record of the seventh and eighth years of Henry IV. (1406): ‘In the offerings made by the Lord King while worshiping the cross in the chapel within his manor at Eltham, on Good Friday, at the price of three gold nobles and five shillings sterling, twenty-five shillings.’
‘In denariis solutis pro eisdem oblacionibus reassumptis, pro annulis medicinalibus inde faciendis, xxv. s.’
‘In cash paid for the same offerings returned, for making medicinal rings, 25 shillings.’
A ring considered to possess some healing or talismanic virtues was also termed, in mediæval Latin, vertuosus. Thus Thomas de Hoton, rector of Kyrkebymisperton, 1351, bequeathed to his chaplain ‘j. zonam de serico, j. bonam bursam, j. firmaculum, et j. anulum vertuosum. Item, domino Thome de Bouthum, j. par de bedes de corall, j. annulum vertuosum.’
A ring thought to have healing or protective qualities was also called, in medieval Latin, vertuosus. So, in 1351, Thomas de Hoton, the rector of Kyrkebymisperton, left his chaplain "1 silk robe, 1 good purse, 1 cloak, and 1 virtuous ring. Also, to Sir Thomas de Bouthum, 1 pair of coral beads, 1 virtuous ring."
Andrew Boorde, who lived in the reign of Henry VIII., alluding to the cramp-rings, says, in his ‘Introduction to Knowledge,’ the ‘Kynges of England doth halow every yere crampe rynges, ye whych rynges worn on one’s finger doth helpe them whych have the crampe.’ And, again, in his ‘Breviary of Health’ (1557), he writes: ‘The kynge’s majesty hath a great helpe in this matter in halowynge crampe rings, and so given without money or petition, ye which rynges worne on one’s finger doth helpe them,’ &c. This ceremonial was practised by previous sovereigns. Hospinian gives an account of the proceedings, and states that they took place on Good Friday, and originated from the famous ‘pilgrim’ ring of King Edward the Confessor. According[Pg 163] to tradition the sapphire in the British crown came from this ring, the possession of which gave English sovereigns the power of procuring an efficacious blessing to the cramp-rings. Gardiner, in 1529, received a number of cramp-rings to distribute among the English embassage to the Pope, ‘the royal fingers pouring such virtue into the metal that no disorder could resist it.’[42]
Andrew Boorde, who lived during the reign of Henry VIII, refers to cramp rings in his ‘Introduction to Knowledge,’ stating that “the Kings of England bless cramp rings every year, and wearing these rings on one’s finger helps those who have cramps.” In his ‘Breviary of Health’ (1557), he adds, “The king’s majesty greatly aids this matter by blessing cramp rings, which are given without charge or request; wearing these rings on one’s finger helps them,” etc. This ceremony was also practiced by earlier monarchs. Hospinian describes the process and notes that it occurred on Good Friday, originating from the famous ‘pilgrim’ ring of King Edward the Confessor. According to tradition, the sapphire in the British crown came from this ring, and possessing it gave English monarchs the power to bless cramp rings effectively. In 1529, Gardiner received several cramp rings to distribute among the English ambassadors to the Pope, with “the royal fingers pouring such virtue into the metal that no ailment could resist it.”[Pg 163]
Silver Cramp-ring.
Silver cramp ring.
The superstitious belief in the efficacy of cramp-rings was by no means, as we have seen, confined to the ignorant and uneducated classes; even Lord Berners, ambassador to the Emperor Charles V., writing to ‘my Lord Chancellor’s Grace’ from Saragossa (June 30, 1518), says, ‘If your Grace remember me with some crampe-ryngs, ye shall doe a thing muche looked for, and I trust to bestowe theym well, with Goddes grace, who evermore preserve and increase your most reverent estate.’
The belief in the effectiveness of cramp-rings wasn't limited to just the uneducated; even Lord Berners, the ambassador to Emperor Charles V., wrote to ‘my Lord Chancellor’s Grace’ from Saragossa (June 30, 1518), saying, ‘If your Grace remembers me with some cramp-rings, you will do something much anticipated, and I hope to use them wisely, with God's grace, who always preserves and enhances your esteemed position.’
The late Cardinal Wiseman (‘Notes and Queries,’ vol. vii., 1st series, p. 89) had in his possession a manuscript containing both the ceremony for the blessing of the cramp-rings, and that for the touching for the King’s evil. At the commencement of the manuscript are emblazoned the arms of Philip and Mary. The first ceremony is headed ‘Certain Prayers to be used by the Quene’s Heignes in the Consecration of the Crampe-rynges.’ Accompanying it is an illumination, representing the queen kneeling, with a dish[Pg 164] containing the rings to be blessed on each side of her. The second Ceremony is entitled ‘The ceremonye for ye Heling of them that be diseased with the Kynge’s Evill.’ This manuscript was exhibited at a meeting of the Archæological Institute, June 6, 1851.
The late Cardinal Wiseman (‘Notes and Queries,’ vol. vii., 1st series, p. 89) had in his possession a manuscript containing both the ceremony for blessing the cramp rings and the one for the touching for the King’s evil. At the beginning of the manuscript, the arms of Philip and Mary are displayed. The first ceremony is titled ‘Certain Prayers to be used by the Queen’s Highness in the Consecration of the Cramp Rings.’ It includes an illustration showing the queen kneeling, with a dish[Pg 164] holding the rings to be blessed on either side of her. The second ceremony is called ‘The Ceremony for the Healing of Those Affected by the King’s Evil.’ This manuscript was presented at a meeting of the Archæological Institute on June 6, 1851.
In Burnet (vol. ii. p. 266 of ‘Records’) there is the whole Latin formula of the consecration of the cramp-rings. It commences with the psalm ‘Deus misereatur nostri.’ Then follows a prayer invoking the aid of the Holy Spirit: the rings then lying in one basin or more, a prayer was said over them, from which we learn that the rings were made of metal, and were to expel all living venom of serpents. The rings were then blessed with an invocation to the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and signed frequently with the cross. In the last benediction the prayer is made ‘that the rings may restore contracted nerves.’ A psalm of benediction follows, and a prayer against the frauds of devils. ‘The Queen’s Highness then rubbeth the rings between her hands, saying the prayer implying that as her hands rub the rings, the virtue of the holy oil wherewith she was anointed might be infused into their metal, and, by the grace of God, might be efficacious.’ The remainder of the curious ceremony concluded with holy water being poured into the basin with further prayers. This ceremonial was practised by previous sovereigns, and discontinued by Edward VI. Queen Mary intended to revive it, and, in all probability, did so, from the manuscript to which I have alluded as having belonged to the late Cardinal Wiseman.[43]
In Burnet (vol. ii. p. 266 of ‘Records’), there is the complete Latin formula for the consecration of the cramp rings. It starts with the psalm ‘Deus misereatur nostri.’ Next is a prayer asking for the help of the Holy Spirit: the rings, placed in one or more basins, are blessed with a prayer that reveals they were made of metal and were meant to drive out all living venom from serpents. The rings were then blessed while calling upon the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and were frequently marked with a cross. In the final blessing, there's a prayer that the rings ‘may restore contracted nerves.’ A psalm of blessing follows, along with a prayer against the deceptions of devils. ‘The Queen’s Highness then rubs the rings between her hands, reciting a prayer that as her hands rub the rings, the power of the holy oil with which she was anointed may be infused into their metal, and, by God’s grace, be effective.’ The rest of the intriguing ceremony concluded with holy water being poured into the basin along with additional prayers. This ceremony was performed by previous monarchs and was discontinued by Edward VI. Queen Mary intended to bring it back and likely did so, according to the manuscript I mentioned that belonged to the late Cardinal Wiseman.[43]
The annexed cut represents a cramp-ring of lead,[Pg 165] simply cast in a mould, and sold cheap for the use of the commonalty. It belongs to the fourteenth century.
The attached image shows a lead cramp-ring,[Pg 165] which was just poured into a mold and sold at a low price for everyday people. It dates back to the fourteenth century.
Lead Cramp-ring.
Lead Cramp Ring.
A curious remnant or corruption of the use of cramp-rings at the present time is noticed by Mr. Rokewode, who says that in Suffolk the use of cramp-rings as a preventive against fits is not entirely abandoned: ‘Instances occur where young men of a parish each subscribe a crooked sixpence to be moulded into a ring for a young woman afflicted with that malady.’
A strange leftover or distortion of the use of cramp-rings today is pointed out by Mr. Rokewode, who mentions that in Suffolk, the custom of using cramp-rings to prevent seizures isn't completely gone: ‘There are cases where young men from a village all pitch in to make a crooked sixpence into a ring for a young woman suffering from that condition.’
The use of galvanic rings for the cure of rheumatism belongs to our own time, and is by no means extinct; however, we have no right to class this practice among our superstitions. After all, faith works wonders!
The use of galvanic rings to treat rheumatism is a modern practice and definitely still in use; however, we shouldn't categorize this method as a superstition. After all, belief can work miracles!
Particular rings were worn on certain days from superstitious motives; thus in the inventory of Charles V., in 1379, a ring with a cameo representing a Christian subject is thus described:—‘annel des vendredis, lequel est néellé et y est la croix double noire de chacun costé, où il y a ung crucifix d’un camayeux, Saint Jean et Notre-Dame, et deux angeloz sur les bras de la croix, et le porte le roy continuellement les vendredis.’
Particular rings were worn on specific days for superstitious reasons; for example, in the inventory of Charles V. from 1379, a ring with a cameo depicting a Christian theme is described as: ‘ring for Fridays, which is enameled and has a double black cross on each side, with a crucifix made of cameo, Saint John and Our Lady, and two angels on the arms of the cross, which the king wears continuously on Fridays.’
Evil portents with regard to rings prevailed in the reign of Elizabeth. The queen’s coronation-ring, which she had worn constantly since her inauguration, having grown into her finger, necessitated the ring being filed off, and this was regarded as an unfavourable augury by many, who, doubtless, attributed any untoward event that occurred at this period to an omen. Few were more credulous in such matters than the strong-minded (in most respects) queen herself, who was a firm believer in the still popular superstition of ‘good luck.’
Evil signs about rings were common during Elizabeth's reign. The queen’s coronation ring, which she had worn constantly since her crowning, had become stuck on her finger and had to be filed off. Many people interpreted this as a bad omen, likely linking any unfortunate events that happened during this time to it. Few were more superstitious in such matters than the strong-minded (in most ways) queen herself, who firmly believed in the still-common superstition of ‘good luck.’
[Pg 166]Long after this period, however, there were not wanting believers in the supernatural efficacy of charmed rings; there was even a charge against the Puritans of having contributed to foster the popular delusion. In the ‘Scourge,’ a series of weekly papers which appeared between 1717 and 1718, alluding to May 29, the writer says of the Roundheads: ‘Yet these priests of Baal had so poisoned the minds of the populace with such delusive enchantments that from rings, bodkins, and thimbles, like the Israelitish calf of gold, would start up a troop of horse to reinforce the saints.’
[Pg 166]Long after this time, there were still people who believed in the supernatural power of charmed rings; some even accused the Puritans of encouraging this popular illusion. In the ‘Scourge,’ a weekly publication that ran from 1717 to 1718, referencing May 29, the writer comments on the Roundheads: ‘Yet these priests of Baal had so influenced the minds of the public with such misleading enchantments that from rings, bodkins, and thimbles, like the golden calf of the Israelites, a cavalry would rise up to support the saints.’
Even to a comparatively late period the belief in the Gnostic amulets was current in our own country. Immediately after the battle of Culloden the baggage of Prince Charles Edward fell into the hands of the Duke of Cumberland’s army, and many private and curious articles came into the possession of General Belford—amongst others a stone set in silver attached to a ring, which probably the superstitious Prince may have obtained on the Continent as a charm, and carried it as a protection in the hazardous enterprise in which he was engaged. It was a ruby blood-stone, having on one face the figure of Mars, with the inscription beside it, I A w. On the other face was a female naked figure, probably Isis, with the inscription, A T I T A.
Even until a relatively recent time, people in our country believed in Gnostic amulets. Right after the battle of Culloden, Prince Charles Edward’s baggage was captured by the Duke of Cumberland’s army, and many private and interesting items ended up with General Belford—among them a stone set in silver on a ring, which the superstitious Prince likely got in Europe as a charm and wore for protection during his risky endeavors. It was a ruby bloodstone, featuring the figure of Mars on one side, with the inscription I A w next to it. On the other side was a naked female figure, likely Isis, with the inscription A T I T A.
The ancient superstition of securing the favour of the great by wearing certain precious stones appears in the East by the aid of a talismanic ring—simply, however, of silver, without the assistance of a jewel. In Herbelot’s ‘Customs of the Mussulmans of India’ a formula is given for the making of these rings: ‘Should anyone desire to make princes and grandees subject and obedient to his will he must have a silver ring made, with a small square tablet[Pg 167] fixed on it, upon which is to be engraved the number that the letters composing the ism represent, which in this case is 2.613. This number by itself, or added to that of its two demons, 286 and 112, and its genius, 1,811—amounting in all to 4,822—must be formed into a magic square of the solacee or robace kind, and engraved. When the ring is thus finished, he is, for a week, to place it before him, and daily, in the morning and in the evening, to repeat the ism five thousand times, and blow on it. When the whole is concluded he is to wear the ring on the little finger of the right hand.’
The old belief in winning the favor of the powerful by wearing specific gemstones appears in the East with the use of a simple talismanic silver ring, without needing any gems. In Herbelot's 'Customs of the Mussulmans of India,' there’s a formula for making these rings: “If someone wants to make princes and nobles submissive and obedient to his will, he should have a silver ring made with a small square tablet[Pg 167] attached, where the number that corresponds to the letters of the ism should be engraved, which in this case is 2,613. This number alone, or added to that of its two demons, 286 and 112, along with its genius, 1,811—totaling 4,822—should be formed into a magic square of the solacee or robace type and engraved. Once the ring is finished, it should be placed in front of him for a week, and each morning and evening, he should repeat the ism five thousand times and blow on it. After everything is completed, he should wear the ring on the little finger of his right hand.”
The losing of a ring given as a pledge of affection was considered in former times, as it is not unfrequently now, to be an omen of mishap. The widow of Viscount Dundee, the famous Claverhouse, was met and wooed at Colzium House, in Stirlingshire, by William Livingstone (afterwards Viscount Kilsyth). As a pledge of his love he presented her with a ring, which she lost, next day, in the garden; and this giving rise to sad presentiments, a large reward was offered for its finding and restoration. Strange it may seem, but Lady Kilsyth was killed in Holland with her infant, by the fall of a house, and their bodies were brought to Scotland and interred at Kilsyth. In 1796 the tenant of the garden in which the ring was lost discovered it, when digging for potatoes, in a clod of earth. At first he regarded it as a bauble, but the moment the inscription became apparent the tradition came fresh to his recollection, and he found it was the identical ring of Lady Kilsyth. It was of gold and about the value of ten shillings; nearly the breadth of a straw, and without any stone. The external surface is ornamented with a wreath of myrtle, and on the[Pg 168] internal surface is the legend: ‘Zovrs onlly & euver.’ This ring came into the possession of the Edmonstone family.
Losing a ring given as a symbol of love was seen in the past, just as it often is today, as a sign of bad luck. The widow of Viscount Dundee, the well-known Claverhouse, was courted at Colzium House in Stirlingshire by William Livingstone (who later became Viscount Kilsyth). To show his love, he gave her a ring, which she lost the next day in the garden. This led to feelings of dread, and a substantial reward was offered for its return. Oddly enough, Lady Kilsyth was killed in Holland along with her infant when a house collapsed, and their bodies were brought back to Scotland and buried at Kilsyth. In 1796, the tenant of the garden where the ring was lost found it while digging for potatoes, buried in a clod of earth. At first, he thought it was just a trinket, but as soon as he saw the inscription, the old story came back to him, and he realized it was the very ring belonging to Lady Kilsyth. It was made of gold and worth about ten shillings, nearly as wide as a straw, and had no stone. The outer surface was decorated with a myrtle wreath, and on the[Pg 168] inner surface was the inscription: ‘Zovrs onlly & euver.’ This ring eventually became part of the Edmonstone family’s collection.
In Sir John Bramstone’s autobiography (1631) it is related that his stepmother dropped her wedding-ring off her finger into the sea, near the shore, when she pulled off her glove. She would not go home without the ring, ‘it being the most unfortunate that could befall anyone to lose the wedding ring.’ Happily for her comfort, the ring was found.
In Sir John Bramstone’s autobiography (1631), it’s mentioned that his stepmother accidentally dropped her wedding ring into the sea while taking off her glove near the shore. She refused to go home without it, believing that losing a wedding ring was the worst thing that could happen to anyone. Fortunately for her, the ring was found.
Rings bursting on the fingers, as an ill-omen, is thus alluded to in the Scotch ballad of ‘Lammilsin’:
Rings bursting on the fingers, seen as a bad sign, is mentioned in the Scotch ballad of ‘Lammilsin’:
····
The Lord sat in England
A drinking the wine.
I wish a may be weel
Wi’ my lady at hame;
For the rings of my fingers
They’re now burst in twain.
····
The Lord sat in England
Enjoying some wine.
I hope everything is okay
With my partner at home;
Because the rings on my fingers
Now split in two.
In the ‘State Trials’ (vol. xiv., Case of Mary Norkott and John Okeman) is a curious instance of superstition connected with the marriage-ring. It was a case of murder, and the victim, at the touch of the person accused of the crime, ‘thrust out the ring or marriage-finger three times, and pulled it in again, and the finger dropped blood upon the grass.’ Sir Nicholas Hyde said to the witness: ‘Who saw this beside you?’ The answer was: ‘I cannot swear what others saw; but, my Lord, I do believe the whole company saw it, and if it had been thought a doubt, proof would have been made of it, and many would have attested with me.’
In the ‘State Trials’ (vol. xiv., Case of Mary Norkott and John Okeman), there's an interesting example of superstition related to the wedding ring. It was a murder case, and the victim, when touched by the person accused of the crime, "pushed the wedding ring off their finger three times, then pulled it back on, and blood dripped from the finger onto the grass." Sir Nicholas Hyde asked the witness, "Who else saw this besides you?" The reply was, "I can't swear to what others saw; but, my Lord, I truly believe the whole group witnessed it, and if there had been any doubt, it would have been proven, and many would have supported my testimony."
The breaking of a ring was of ominous import. Atkinson, in his ‘Memoirs of the Queen of Prussia,’ says: ‘The[Pg 169] betrothal of the young couple (Frederic and Sophia Charlotte, first King and Queen of Prussia) speedily followed. I believe it was during the festivities attendant upon this occasion that a ring worn by Frederic, in memory of his deceased wife, with the device of clasped hands, and the motto “à jamais,” suddenly broke, which was looked upon as an omen that this union, likewise, was to be of short duration.’
The breaking of a ring was seen as a bad sign. Atkinson, in his ‘Memoirs of the Queen of Prussia,’ states: ‘The[Pg 169] engagement of the young couple (Frederic and Sophia Charlotte, the first King and Queen of Prussia) quickly followed. I believe it was during the celebrations for this occasion that a ring worn by Frederic, in memory of his late wife, featuring the design of clasped hands and the motto “à jamais,” suddenly broke, which was interpreted as a sign that this union would also be short-lived.’
The breaking of a wedding-ring is still regarded in some parts of England as an import that its wearer will soon be a widow. A correspondent of ‘Notes and Queries’ found this superstition current in Essex a few years ago. A man had been murdered in that county, and his widow said: ‘I thought I should soon lose him, for I broke my wedding-ring the other day, and my sister lost her husband after breaking her ring. It is a sure sign’!
The breaking of a wedding ring is still seen in some parts of England as a sign that the wearer will soon be a widow. A writer for 'Notes and Queries' discovered this superstition in Essex a few years ago. A man had been murdered in that county, and his widow said, "I thought I would lose him soon because I broke my wedding ring the other day, and my sister lost her husband after breaking her ring. It’s a sure sign!"
It was an olden superstition that the bending of the leaves to the right or to the left of the orpine plants, or Mid-summer men, as they were called (Telephium), would never fail to tell whether a lover was true or false. In an old poem, the ‘Cottage Girl,’ we find:—
It was an old superstition that the leaves bending to the right or left of the orpine plants, or Mid-summer men, as they were called (Telephium), would always reveal whether a lover was loyal or not. In an old poem, the ‘Cottage Girl,’ we find:—
Oft on the shrub she casts her eye,
That spoke her true love’s secret sigh;
Or else, alas, too plainly told
Her true love’s faithless heart was cold.
Often she gazes at the bush,
That reveals her true love’s hidden sigh;
Or, sadly, too clearly shown
Her true love’s unfaithful heart was cold.
In 1801 a small gold ring was exhibited at the Society of Antiquaries (found in a ploughed field near Cawood, in Yorkshire) which had for a device two orpine plants joined by a true-love knot, with a motto above: ‘ma fiance velt,’ my sweetheart wills, or is desirous. The stalks of the plants were bent to each other, in token that the parties represented by them were to come together in marriage. The[Pg 170] motto under the ring was: ‘Joye l’amour feu.’ From the form of the letters it appeared to have been a ring of the fifteenth century.
In 1801, a small gold ring was displayed at the Society of Antiquaries (found in a plowed field near Cawood, in Yorkshire) featuring two orpine plants connected by a true-love knot, along with a motto above: ‘ma fiance velt,’ which means my sweetheart wills, or desires. The stalks of the plants were bent toward each other, symbolizing that the parties represented by them were meant to come together in marriage. The[Pg 170] motto underneath the ring was: ‘Joye l’amour feu.’ Based on the style of the letters, it seemed to be a ring from the fifteenth century.
The ring conferring divination powers on the wedding-cake is thus alluded to in the ‘St. James’s Chronicle’ (1799):—
The ring that gives divination powers to the wedding cake is mentioned in the ‘St. James’s Chronicle’ (1799):—
Enlivening source of Hymeneal mirth,
All hail the blest receipt that gave thee birth!
Though Flora culls the fairest of her bowers,
And strews the path of Hymen with her flowers,
Nor half the raptures give her scatter’d sweets,
The Cake far kinder gratulation meets.
The bridesmaid’s eyes with sparkling glances beam,
She views the cake, and greets the promised dream;
For, when endowed with necromantic spell,
She knows what wondrous things the cake will tell.
When from the altar comes the pensive bride,
With downcast looks, her partner at her side,
Soon from the ground these thoughtful looks arise
To meet the cake that gayer thoughts supplies.
With her own hands she charms each destined slice,
And through the ring repeats the trebled thrice.
The hallow’d ring, infusing magic power,
Bids Hymen’s visions wait the midnight hour;
The mystic treasure placed beneath her head
Will tell the fair if haply she will wed.
These mysteries portentous lie conceal’d
Till Morpheus calls and bids them stand reveal’d;
The future husband that night’s dream will bring,
Whether a parson, soldier, beggar, king,
As partner of her life the fair must take,
Irrevocable doom of Bridal-cake.
Lively source of wedding joy,
All praise the blessed recipe that gave you life!
Though Flora gathers the prettiest flowers,
And scatters blossoms along the path of love,
Not even half the bliss comes from her scattered blooms,
The Cake brings much kinder congratulations.
The bridesmaid’s eyes shine with eager glances,
She looks at the cake and welcomes the dear dream;
For, when touched with a magical charm,
She knows the amazing secrets the cake will reveal.
When the thoughtful bride comes from the altar,
With downcast eyes, her partner by her side,
Soon those pensive looks lift
To greet the cake that sparks happier thoughts.
With her own hands, she enchants each destined slice,
And through the ring, repeats the threefold chance.
The sacred ring, filling with magic power,
Promises love's visions wait for midnight;
The mystical treasure placed beneath her pillow
Will show the girl whether she’ll soon wed.
These significant mysteries lie hidden
Until sleep calls and bids them be revealed;
The future husband that night's dream will bring,
Whether a priest, soldier, beggar, or king,
As her life partner the girl must choose,
An unchangeable fate of the Bridal-cake.
Rowe, in his ‘Happy Village’ (1796), says ‘the wedding-cake now through the ring was led.’
Rowe, in his ‘Happy Village’ (1796), says ‘the wedding cake was now led through the ring.’
The connection between the bride-cake and wedding-ring is strongly marked in the following custom, still retained in Yorkshire, where the former is cut into little square pieces,[Pg 171] thrown over the bridegroom and bride’s head, and then put through the ring.
The link between the wedding cake and the wedding ring is clearly shown in this custom, still practiced in Yorkshire, where the cake is cut into small square pieces,[Pg 171] tossed over the couple's heads, and then passed through the ring.
In the North slices of the bride-cake are put through the wedding-ring, and they are afterwards laid under the pillows at night to cause young persons to dream of their lovers. Douce’s manuscript notes say: ‘This is not peculiar to the north of England, but seems to prevail generally; the pieces of cake must be drawn nine times through the wedding-ring.’
In the North, slices of the wedding cake are passed through the wedding ring, and then they're placed under the pillows at night to help young people dream of their partners. Douce’s manuscript notes say: ‘This isn't just found in the north of England; it seems to be common everywhere; the cake pieces need to be pulled through the wedding ring nine times.’
In Brand’s ‘Popular Antiquities’ we read: ‘Many married women are so rigid, not to say superstitious, in their notions concerning their wedding-rings, that neither when they wash their hands, nor at any other time, will they take the ring off the finger; extending, it should seem, the expression of “till death do us part” even to this golden circlet, the token and pledge of matrimony.’ There is an old proverb on the subject of wedding-rings, which has, no doubt, been many a time quoted for the purpose of encouraging and hastening the consent of a diffident or timorous mistress:—
In Brand’s ‘Popular Antiquities’ we read: ‘Many married women are so strict, if not superstitious, about their wedding rings that they won’t take the ring off even when washing their hands or at any other time; it seems they extend the saying “till death do us part” to this golden band, which is a symbol and promise of marriage.’ There’s an old saying about wedding rings that has surely been quoted many times to encourage and speed up the agreement of a shy or hesitant partner:—
As your wedding-ring wears,
Your cares will wear away.
As your wedding ring shows signs of wear,
Your worries will fade away.
A charm-divination on October 6, St. Faith’s day, is still in use in the north of England. A cake of flour, spring water, salt, and sugar, is made by three girls, each having an equal hand in the composition. It is then baked in a Dutch oven, silence being strictly preserved, and turned thrice by each person. When it is well baked it must be divided into three equal parts, and each girl must cut her share into nine pieces, drawing every piece through a wedding-ring which has been borrowed from a woman who has been married seven years. Each girl must eat her pieces of cake while she is undressing, and repeat the following verses:—
A charm-divination on October 6, St. Faith’s day, is still practiced in the north of England. Three girls make a cake using flour, spring water, salt, and sugar, with each one contributing equally to the mixture. It’s then baked in a Dutch oven, and silence must be maintained throughout the process, with each girl turning the cake three times. Once it’s baked, it has to be divided into three equal parts, and each girl must cut her portion into nine pieces, threading each piece through a wedding ring borrowed from a woman who has been married for seven years. Each girl has to eat her pieces of cake while getting undressed and recite the following verses:—
[Pg 172]
O good St. Faith, be kind to-night,
And bring to me my heart’s delight;
Let me my future husband view,
And be my visions chaste and true.
[Pg 172]
Oh good St. Faith, please be kind tonight,
And bring me the one who brings me joy;
Let me see my future husband,
And may my dreams be pure and real.
All three must then get into one bed, with the ring suspended by a string to the head of the couch. They will then dream of their future husbands.
All three must then get into one bed, with the ring hanging by a string from the head of the couch. They will then dream of their future husbands.
A very singular divination practised at the period of the harvest-moon is thus described in an old chap-book: ‘When you go to bed place under your pillow a Prayer-book open at the part of the Matrimonial Service, “With this ring I thee wed;” place on it a key, a ring, a flower, and a sprig of willow, a small heart-cake, a crust of bread, and the following cards: the ten of clubs, nine of hearts, ace of spades, and the ace of diamonds. Wrap all these in a thin handkerchief of gauze or muslin, and on getting into bed cross your hands and say:—
A unique form of divination practiced during the harvest moon is described in an old chapbook: ‘When you go to bed, place an open Prayer book under your pillow at the section of the Matrimonial Service, “With this ring I thee wed;” on it, place a key, a ring, a flower, a sprig of willow, a small heart-shaped cake, a piece of bread, and the following cards: the ten of clubs, nine of hearts, ace of spades, and the ace of diamonds. Wrap all these in a thin gauze or muslin handkerchief, and when you get into bed, cross your hands and say: —
Luna, every woman’s friend,
To me thy goodness condescend;
Let me this night in visions see
Emblems of my destiny.
Luna, every woman's friend,
Please show me your kindness tonight;
Let me see in my dreams
Symbols of my future.
If you dream of storms, trouble will betide you; if the storm ends in a fine calm, so will your fate; if of a ring, or the ace of diamonds, marriage; bread, an industrious life; cake, a prosperous life; flowers, joy; willow, treachery in love; spades, death; diamonds, money; clubs, a foreign land; hearts, base children; keys, that you will rise to great trust and power, and never know want; birds, that you will have many children; and geese, that you will marry more than once.’
If you dream of storms, trouble will come your way; if the storm ends in a calm, so will your fate. If you see a ring or the ace of diamonds, it signifies marriage; bread means a hardworking life; cake suggests a successful life; flowers represent joy; willow indicates betrayal in love; spades signify death; diamonds mean wealth; clubs relate to a foreign land; hearts warn of unworthy children; keys suggest you'll achieve great trust and power and will never experience want; birds indicate you will have many children; and geese mean you will marry more than once.
There is an old superstition on the colours of stones in ‘keepsake’ rings:—
There’s an old superstition about the colors of stones in ‘keepsake’ rings:—
[Pg 173]
Oh, green is forsaken
And yellow’s forsworn,
But blue is the prettiest colour that’s worn.
[Pg 173]
Oh, green is abandoned
And yellow’s rejected,
But blue is the most beautiful color that’s worn.
A correspondent of ‘Notes and Queries’ observes that in the district about Burnley it is common to put the wedding-ring into the posset, and, after serving it out, the unmarried person whose cup contains the ring will be the first of the company to be married.
A writer for ‘Notes and Queries’ notes that in the area around Burnley, it’s common to place the wedding ring in the posset. After serving it, the single person whose cup has the ring will be the first among the group to get married.
In Ireland it is a popular belief that finding the ring in a piece of Michaelmas pie would ensure the maiden possessor an early marriage.
In Ireland, many people believe that finding a ring in a slice of Michaelmas pie would guarantee that the girl who finds it will get married soon.
The following notice of an advertisement is extracted from an Oxford paper of 1860, and republished in ‘Notes and Queries’ (3rd series, vol. x. p. 19): ‘Important Notice!—The largest cake ever made in Oxford, weighing upward of 1,000 pounds, and containing 30 gold wedding and other rings, in value from 7s. 6d. to Two Guineas each! To be seen for sale at No. 1 Queen Street, Oxford, from Thursday, December 27th, until Saturday, January 5th, 1861, when it will be cut out at the low price of 1s. 2d. per pound (this quality frequently sold for wedding-cake). Persons at a distance desirous of purchasing may rely upon prompt attention being given to their favours.
The following notice of an advertisement is extracted from an Oxford paper of 1860, and republished in ‘Notes and Queries’ (3rd series, vol. x. p. 19): ‘Important Update!—The largest cake ever made in Oxford, weighing over 1,000 pounds and containing 30 gold wedding and other rings, valued from 7s. 6d. to Two Guineas each! It will be available for sale at No. 1 Queen Street, Oxford, from Thursday, December 27th, until Saturday, January 5th, 1861, when it will be sold for the low price of 1s. 2d. per pound (this quality often sold as wedding cake). People from afar who wish to purchase can expect prompt attention to their requests.
‘N.B.—J. Boffin will feel obliged if persons obtaining the gold rings will favour him with their names.’
‘N.B.—J. Boffin would appreciate it if anyone who gets the gold rings could provide him with their names.’
A wide-spread superstition or fancy prevails with regard to the use of a gold ring at weddings. Mr. Wood, in his ‘Wedding Day in all Ages and Countries,’ observes ‘that the Irish peasantry have a general impression that a marriage without the use of a gold ring is not legal. At a town in the south-east of Ireland, a person kept a few gold wedding-rings for hire, and when parties who were too poor to[Pg 174] purchase a ring of the necessary precious metal were about to be married, they obtained the loan of one, and paid a small fee for the same, the ring being returned to the owner immediately after the ceremony. In some places it is common for the same ring to be used for many marriages, which ring remains in the custody of the priest.’
A common superstition exists about using a gold ring at weddings. Mr. Wood, in his ‘Wedding Day in all Ages and Countries,’ notes that the Irish peasantry generally believe that a marriage without a gold ring isn’t legal. In a town in the southeast of Ireland, someone rented out a few gold wedding rings. When couples who couldn’t afford to buy a ring were about to get married, they would borrow one and pay a small fee, returning the ring to the owner right after the ceremony. In some areas, it’s normal for the same ring to be used for multiple marriages, with the ring kept by the priest.
Mr. Jeaffreson says: ‘I have known labourers of the eastern counties of England express their faith in the mystic efficacy of the golden arrabo in language that in the seventeenth century would have stirred Puritan auditors to denounce the Satanic bauble and its worshippers with godly fervour.’
Mr. Jeaffreson says: 'I've heard workers from the eastern counties of England talk about their belief in the magical power of the golden arrabo in a way that, back in the seventeenth century, would have prompted Puritan listeners to passionately condemn the Satanic trinket and its worshippers.'
Pegge, in his ‘Curialia,’ alludes to the superstition that a wedding-ring of gold rubbed on a stye upon the eyelid was a sovereign remedy, but it required to be rubbed nine times.
Pegge, in his ‘Curialia,’ refers to the superstition that rubbing a gold wedding ring on a stye on the eyelid is a guaranteed cure, but it needs to be rubbed nine times.
Mr. W. R. S. Ralston, in his ‘Songs of the Russians,’ mentions some curious superstitions in connexion with rings in that country.
Mr. W. R. S. Ralston, in his ‘Songs of the Russians,’ mentions some interesting superstitions related to rings in that country.
A custom exists in Russia of catching rain that falls during a thunderstorm in a basin, at the bottom of which rain has been placed. In the Riazan Government, water that has been dropped through a wedding-ring is supposed to have certain merits as a lotion; and at a Little-Russian marriage the bride is bound to give the bridegroom to drink from a cup of wine in which a ring has been put. From the mention of a ring made in the ‘Dodola Songs,’ and in others referring to storm and rain, it is supposed that a golden ring, in mythical language, is to be taken as a representation of the lightning’s heavenly gold.
A tradition in Russia involves catching rain that falls during a thunderstorm in a basin, where rain has already been collected. In the Ryazan region, water that has fallen through a wedding ring is believed to have special qualities as a lotion; and at a Little-Russian wedding, the bride must give the groom a drink from a cup of wine that contains a ring. The reference to a ring in the 'Dodola Songs,' along with other songs related to storms and rain, suggests that a gold ring, in mythical terms, symbolizes the heavenly gold of lightning.
In the olden time the celestial divinities were supposed to be protectors and favourers of marriage, and the first[Pg 175] nuptial crown was attributed to that heavenly framer of all manner of implements who forged the first plough for man. And so, in some of the songs, a prayer is offered up to a mysterious smith, beseeching him to construct a golden nuptial crown, and out of the fragments of it to make a wedding-ring, and a pin with which to fasten the bridal veil.
In ancient times, the gods were seen as protectors and supporters of marriage, and the first[Pg 175] wedding crown was credited to the divine creator of all tools, who made the first plow for humans. In some songs, a prayer is directed to a mysterious blacksmith, asking him to create a gold wedding crown, and from its pieces, to fashion a wedding ring and a pin to secure the bridal veil.
There comes a Smith from the Forge, Glory!
The Smith carries three hammers, Glory!
Smith, Smith, forge me a crown, Glory!
Forge me a crown both golden and new, Glory!
Forge from the remnants a golden ring, Glory!
And from the chips a pin, Glory!
In that crown will I be wedded, Glory!
With that ring will I be betrothed, Glory!
With that pin will I fasten the nuptial kerchief, Glory!
A Smith comes from the Forge, Glory!
The Smith carries three hammers, Glory!
Smith, Smith, make me a crown, Glory!
Make me a crown that's both golden and new, Glory!
Create a golden ring from the scraps, Glory!
And from the shavings, a pin, Glory!
In that crown, I'll be married, Glory!
With that ring, I'll be engaged, Glory!
With that pin, I'll secure the wedding handkerchief, Glory!
When a lover leaves his mistress for a time, he gives her a golden ring (pérsten’, a signet-ring, or one set with gems—from perst, a finger) and receives from her a gold ring in exchange (Kol’ tsë, a plain circlet like our own wedding-ring, from Kolo, a circle).
When a lover temporarily leaves his mistress, he gives her a golden ring (pérsten’, a signet ring, or one set with gemstones—from perst, a finger) and receives a gold ring from her in return (Kol’ tsë, a simple band like our wedding ring, from Kolo, a circle).
It is not a falcon flying across the sky,
It is not a falcon scattering blue feathers,
But a brave youth galloping along the road,
Forth from his bright eyes pouring bitter tears.
He has parted from his own,
The Lower River track, through which,
In all her beauty, Mother Volga flows.
He has parted from the maiden fair,
And with her as a token left
A costly diamond ring;
And from her has he taken in exchange
A plighting ring of gold.
And while exchanging gifts thus has he spoken:
‘Forget me not, my dear one,
Forget me not, my loved companion.
[Pg 176]Often, often gaze upon my ring;
Often, often will I kiss thy circlet,
Pressing it to my beating heart,
Remembering thee, my own.
If ever I think of another love,
The golden circlet will unclasp;
Shouldst thou to another suitor yield,
From the ring the diamond will fall.’
It’s not a falcon soaring through the sky,
It’s not a falcon dropping blue feathers,
But a brave young man riding down the road,
Tears streaming from his bright eyes.
He has distanced himself from his loved ones,
The Lower River path, where
In all her beauty, Mother Volga moves.
He has separated from the beautiful girl,
As a memento, he left
A valuable diamond ring;
And from her, he received in return
A gold wedding band.
And while exchanging gifts, he said:
"Don't forget me, love,"
Don't forget me, my dear friend.
[Pg 176]I frequently look at my ring;
I will often kiss your ring,
Pressing it against my beating heart,
Thinking of you, my own.
If I ever think about another love,
The golden circlet will become loose;
If you give in to another admirer,
The diamond will come off the ring.
CHAPTER III.
SECULAR INVESTITURE BY THE RING.
Secular ring ceremony.
The investiture of our English sovereigns per annulum, or by the ring, is an important part of our present coronation ceremonial. On this august occasion the master of the Jewel-House delivers the ring (which is of plain gold, with a large table ruby, on which the cross of St. George is engraved), to the Archbishop of Canterbury, who places it on the fourth finger of the sovereign’s right hand, saying: ‘Receive this ring, the ensign of kingly dignity and of defence of the catholic faith, that as you are this day consecrated head of the kingdom and people, so, rich in faith, and abounding in good works, you may reign with Him who is King of kings, to whom be glory and honour for ever and ever, Amen.’
The investiture of our English monarchs per annulum, or by the ring, is an important part of our current coronation ceremony. During this significant occasion, the master of the Jewel-House hands over the ring (which is a simple gold band featuring a large table ruby engraved with the cross of St. George) to the Archbishop of Canterbury. The Archbishop then places it on the fourth finger of the monarch’s right hand, saying: ‘Receive this ring, the symbol of royal dignity and the defense of the Catholic faith, that as you are today consecrated head of the kingdom and people, so, rich in faith and full of good works, you may reign with Him who is King of kings, to whom be glory and honor forever and ever, Amen.’
Of the intrinsic value ascribed to the coronation ring we have an instance recorded in the life of James II. He was detained by the fishermen of Sheerness in his first attempt to escape from England in 1688; the particulars are related in his ‘Memoirs:’ ‘The King kept the diamond bodkin which he had of the queen’s, and the coronation ring, which, for more security, he put into his drawers. The captain, it appeared, was well acquainted with the dispositions of his crew one of whom cried out “It is Father Petre—I know him by his lantern jaws;” a second called[Pg 178] him an old “hatchet-faced Jesuit;” and a third, “a cunning old rogue, he would warrant him!”; for, some time after he was gone, and, probably by his order, several seamen entered the King’s cabin, saying they must search him and the gentlemen, believing that they had not given up all their money. The King and his companions told them that they were at liberty to do so, thinking that their readiness would induce them not to persist; but they were mistaken; the sailors began their search with a roughness and rudeness which proved they were accustomed to the employment. At last one of them, feeling about the King’s knee, got hold of the diamond bodkin, and cried out, with the usual oath, he had found a prize; but the King boldly declared he was mistaken. He had, indeed, scissors, a tooth-pick case, and little keys in his pocket, and what was felt was undoubtedly one of these articles. The man still seemed incredulous, and rudely thrust his hand into the King’s pocket; but in his haste he lost hold of the diamond bodkin, and, finding the things the King mentioned, remained satisfied it was so; by this means the bodkin and ring were preserved.’
Of the intrinsic value attributed to the coronation ring, there’s an example recorded in the life of James II. He was caught by the fishermen of Sheerness during his first attempt to escape from England in 1688; the details are shared in his ‘Memoirs’: ‘The King kept the diamond bodkin he had from the queen and the coronation ring, which he hid for extra security in his drawers. The captain seemed to know his crew well, as one of them shouted, “It's Father Petre—I recognize him by his lantern jaws;” another referred to him as an old “hatchet-faced Jesuit;” and a third said, “a clever old rogue, I’d bet on it!” Some time after he left, probably on his orders, several sailors came into the King’s cabin, saying they needed to search him and the gentlemen, believing they hadn’t given up all their money. The King and his companions told them they were free to do so, thinking their willingness would make the sailors back off; but they were wrong. The sailors began their search with a roughness and rudeness that showed they were used to this kind of work. Eventually, one of them, feeling around the King’s knee, grabbed the diamond bodkin and exclaimed, using the usual curse, that he had found a treasure; but the King confidently stated he was mistaken. He actually had scissors, a toothpick case, and small keys in his pocket, and what the sailor felt was definitely one of these items. The man still appeared skeptical and rudely shoved his hand into the King’s pocket; but in his rush, he lost hold of the diamond bodkin and, finding the items the King mentioned, was convinced it was so; thus, the bodkin and ring were saved.’
The ring is said to have been a favourite one of the unfortunate Mary, Queen of Scots, and was sent by her, at her death, to James I., through whom it came into the possession of Charles I., and on his execution was transmitted by Bishop Juxon to his son. It afterwards came into the hands of George IV., with other relics belonging to Cardinal York.
The ring is known to have been a favorite of the tragic Mary, Queen of Scots, and was given by her, at her death, to James I., who then passed it on to Charles I. After Charles I's execution, Bishop Juxon sent it to his son. It later ended up with George IV., along with other memorabilia linked to Cardinal York.
This ring is mentioned in the ‘Inventory of the Goods and Chattels belonging to King James the Second,’ taken July 22, 1703: ‘one ruby ring, having a cross engraved on it, with which the late king was crowned,’ and is valued at 1,500l. In Leland’s ‘Collectanea,’ in describing the[Pg 179] ceremonies made use of at the coronation of the mother of Henry VIII., it states that the archbishop ‘next blest her ring, and sprinkled on it holy water.’
This ring is mentioned in the ‘Inventory of the Goods and Chattels belonging to King James II,’ taken on July 22, 1703: ‘one ruby ring, featuring a cross engraved on it, with which the late king was crowned,’ and it is valued at £1,500. In Leland’s ‘Collectanea,’ when describing the[Pg 179] ceremonies used at the coronation of Henry VIII's mother, it says that the archbishop ‘then blessed her ring and sprinkled holy water on it.’
In the coronation of the kings of France the ring was first blessed by the officiating archbishop, who, seated with the mitre on his head, placed it on the fourth finger of the right hand of the monarch, using a nearly similar form of benediction to that practised at the coronations of our own sovereigns.[44]
In the coronation of the kings of France, the ring was first blessed by the archbishop who officiated. Seated with the mitre on his head, he placed it on the fourth finger of the king's right hand, using a nearly identical blessing to the one used in the coronations of our own monarchs.[44]
In the curious account of the coronation of Louis XIII. of France, preserved in a chronicle of his reign, it mentions: ‘The royal ring being blessed by the Cardinal de Joyeuse (who officiated for the Archbishop of Rheims), a symbol of love, whereby the King was wedded to his realm, he placed it on the fourth finger of His Majesty’s right hand, for a mark of the sovereign power.’
In the interesting story of the coronation of Louis XIII of France, found in a record of his reign, it says: ‘The royal ring was blessed by Cardinal de Joyeuse (who served as the Archbishop of Rheims), a symbol of love, through which the King was joined to his kingdom. He placed it on the fourth finger of His Majesty's right hand as a sign of sovereign power.’
Kirchmann states that at the coronation of Ferdinand III. at Ratisbon, in 1616, a few years before he wrote, the Archbishop and Elector of Maintz, having received from the altar a very precious ring, placed it on the finger of the Emperor, with these words: ‘Accipe regiæ dignitatis annulum, et per hoc Catholicæ fidei cognosce signaculum, et ud hodie ordinaris caput et princeps regni et populi, ita perseverabilis auctor et stabilitor Christianitatis et Christianæ fidei fias, ut feliciter in opere cum Rege regum glorioris per eum, cui est honor et gloria, per infinita secula seculorum.—Amen.’
Kirchmann notes that during the coronation of Ferdinand III in Ratisbon in 1616, just a few years before he wrote this, the Archbishop and Elector of Mainz, after receiving a very precious ring from the altar, placed it on the Emperor's finger with the words: ‘Receive this ring of royal dignity, and through it recognize the symbol of the Catholic faith, and as you are today the ordinary head and prince of the kingdom and its people, may you be a steadfast author and supporter of Christianity and the Christian faith, so that you may successfully work with the King of kings, to whom honor and glory belong, for endless ages of ages.—Amen.’
[Pg 180]The typical meaning of the royal investiture by the ring is the union of the sovereign with his people, whom he is supposed to espouse at this solemnity, and in this sense some older writers have called it ‘the wedding ring of England.’
[Pg 180]The usual significance of the royal investiture by the ring is the connection between the sovereign and the people, whom he is meant to unite during this ceremony. In this context, some older writers have referred to it as ‘the wedding ring of England.’
The ring worn by the queen-consorts of Great Britain at their coronation was of gold with a large table ruby set therein, and small rubies set round about the ring, of which those next the setting were the largest, the rest diminishing in proportion. Queen Mary Beatrice, consort of James the II., wore a ring of this description to her dying day, and nothing during her misfortune could ever induce her to part with it.[45]
The ring worn by the queen-consorts of Great Britain at their coronation was made of gold and featured a large flat ruby, with smaller rubies surrounding the ring. The rubies nearest to the setting were the biggest, while the others got smaller as they went around. Queen Mary Beatrice, wife of James II, wore a ring like this until her death, and nothing during her hardships could ever convince her to part with it.[45]
That the ring was considered an indication of sovereign will from the earliest times, we have proofs, as I have mentioned, in the Holy Scriptures. So Alexander the Great, on his death-bed, on being asked to whom he would leave the kingdom, answered, to the most worthy, and gave his ring, when speechless, to Perdiccas. The Emperor Tiberius, on the point of death, took his ring from his finger, and held it a short time, as though intending to give it to some one, as his successor; he however, put it on again, and became insensible. Recovering at length, he found that his ring had been taken from him, and demanded it, upon which his attendants smothered him with the cushions.
That the ring was seen as a symbol of royal authority from early on is supported by evidence in the Holy Scriptures, as I've noted. For instance, on his deathbed, Alexander the Great was asked who he would leave his kingdom to, and he replied, "to the most worthy," before he handed his ring to Perdiccas while unable to speak. Similarly, Emperor Tiberius, near death, took his ring off his finger and held it for a moment as if he were going to pass it on to someone as his successor; however, he then put it back on and lost consciousness. When he finally regained awareness, he noticed that his ring had been taken from him and demanded it back, at which point his attendants smothered him with cushions.
[Pg 181]The Emperor Valerian gave a ring with two precious stones to his successor Claudius. The knights of ancient Rome were permitted to wear, as the insignia of their rank, golden rings and collars. They were presented at the public expense with a horse and gold ring. Offa, king of the East Angles, is recorded to have appointed Edmund, the son of a kinsman, his successor, by sending him the ring which he received at his own coronation. The ‘pilgrim-ring’ of Edward the Confessor, to which I have alluded in the chapter on ‘Ring Superstitions,’ was in after times preserved with great care at his shrine in Westminster Abbey, and was used at the investiture of subsequent sovereigns.
[Pg 181]The Emperor Valerian gave a ring with two precious stones to his successor Claudius. The knights of ancient Rome were allowed to wear golden rings and collars as symbols of their rank. They were provided at public expense with a horse and a gold ring. Offa, the king of the East Angles, appointed Edmund, the son of a relative, as his successor by sending him the ring he received at his own coronation. The ‘pilgrim-ring’ of Edward the Confessor, which I mentioned in the chapter on ‘Ring Superstitions,’ was later preserved with great care at his shrine in Westminster Abbey and was used during the investiture of subsequent monarchs.
The investiture of Prince Edmund, second son of King Henry III., as King of Sicily, which took place in 1255, was performed at London by the Bishop of Bononia, in the presence of the King, and a numerous assembly, by the symbol of a ring, which the Pope had sent for that purpose. Henry is said to have wept for joy, and sent the Pontiff immediately afterwards fifty thousand marks, but this event led to the association of the barons against the King and other great changes.
The investiture of Prince Edmund, the second son of King Henry III, as King of Sicily took place in London in 1255. The Bishop of Bononia performed the ceremony in front of the King and a large crowd, using a ring that the Pope had sent for this purpose. Henry is said to have cried tears of joy and immediately sent the Pope fifty thousand marks. However, this event resulted in the barons banding together against the King and led to other significant changes.
In 1469, Charles of France having renounced the possession of the duchy of Normandy, for which he received in exchange Guyenne, his ducal ring was sent by Louis XI. to the exchequer at Rouen, where it was broken in two pieces at a solemn assembly held for that purpose in the castle of Bouvreuil, in the presence of the Constable of France, Louis de Luxembourg.
In 1469, Charles of France gave up his claim to the duchy of Normandy, and in return, he received Guyenne. His ducal ring was sent by Louis XI to the treasury in Rouen, where it was broken into two pieces during a formal gathering held for that purpose in the castle of Bouvreuil, in front of the Constable of France, Louis de Luxembourg.
A papal investiture, by a ring, of a sovereign of England is recorded by John of Salisbury, contemporary with Pope Adrian VIII., and who states that the Pontiff ceded and gave to Henry II. the island of Ireland, in hereditary[Pg 182] succession, claiming, as his right to do so, the grant of Constantine by which all islands belonged to the See of Rome. The Pope sent a large gold ring, set with a fine emerald, as a mark of investiture, and which, together with the bull, were deposited in the archives at Winchester. Richard II. resigned the crown to Henry IV. by transferring to him his ring.
A papal investiture, marked by a ring, of an English sovereign is documented by John of Salisbury, who was a contemporary of Pope Adrian VIII. He mentions that the Pope granted Henry II. the island of Ireland in hereditary succession, asserting his right based on the grant from Constantine, which stated that all islands belonged to the See of Rome. The Pope sent a large gold ring, set with a beautiful emerald, as a symbol of the investiture, which, along with the bull, was stored in the archives at Winchester. Richard II. handed over the crown to Henry IV. by giving him his ring.
In subsequent ages, and within a few centuries of our time, we find the royal power displayed significantly in the ring, which, in the instance I mention, was truly a messenger of grace. Two Scotch burgesses in the stormy days of Queen Mary had been condemned to death, but were reprieved at the foot of the gallows by her Majesty. The messenger was sent in great haste by the Earl of Bothwell, ‘and presented the Queen’s ring to the provost’s inspection for the safety of their lives.’ This was considered a sufficient indication of the royal clemency, and ‘the revival’ (observes Knox, in his ‘History of the Reformation in Scotland’) ‘of an ancient custom practised by Scottish monarchs before the date of the earliest sign-manual on record, when everything in Church and State were represented in types and symbols.’
In later years, just a few centuries from now, we see royal power significantly represented by the ring, which, in this case, truly acted as a symbol of grace. During the tumultuous times of Queen Mary, two Scottish townspeople had been sentenced to death but were spared at the last moment by her Majesty. The Earl of Bothwell quickly sent a messenger who presented the Queen’s ring to the provost as proof of their safety. This was seen as a clear sign of royal mercy, and "the revival," as Knox notes in his "History of the Reformation in Scotland," "of an ancient custom practiced by Scottish monarchs long before the earliest recorded signature, when everything in Church and State was symbolized with types and symbols."
Another interesting incident in connection with Mary, Queen of Scots, is the ring with which she invested Darnley with the Dukedom of Albany. An engraving and description of this ring will be found in the chapter on ‘Remarkable Rings.’ The infant James, son of Mary, Queen of Scots, was, a few days after his baptism, invested with the ring and other insignia, as Prince of Scotland, Duke of Rothsay, Earl of Carrick and Cunningham, and Baron of Renfrew. The royal child sat in his mother’s lap while a gold ring was placed on his tiny finger.
Another interesting incident involving Mary, Queen of Scots, is the ring with which she granted Darnley the Dukedom of Albany. An engraving and description of this ring can be found in the chapter on ‘Remarkable Rings.’ Just days after his baptism, the infant James, son of Mary, Queen of Scots, was given the ring and other symbols of authority as Prince of Scotland, Duke of Rothsay, Earl of Carrick and Cunningham, and Baron of Renfrew. The royal child sat on his mother’s lap while a gold ring was placed on his little finger.
Among the insignia connected with the investiture of[Pg 183] the Princes of Wales is a ring. The earliest charter of creation known by Selden is that of Edward III. to his son and heir-apparent, Edward, Duke of Cornwall, some years after he was made Duke. This charter contains the particulars of the ceremony of investiture with the coronal, the ring of gold, and the rod of silver. In the letters patent issued by George I. (Sept. 22, 1714), declaring his son George Augustus, Duke of Brunswick Lunenburgh, ‘Prince of Wales and Earl of Chester,’ the investiture is thus described: ‘Likewise, we invest him, the said Prince, with the aforesaid principality and county, which he may continue to govern and protect; and we confirm him in the same by these ensigns of honour—the girding of a sword, the delivering of a cap and placing it on his head, with a ring on his finger, and a golden staff in his hand, according to custom, to be possessed by him and his heirs, Kings of Great Britain.’[46]
Among the symbols associated with the investiture of[Pg 183] the Princes of Wales is a ring. The earliest documented charter of creation known to Selden is from Edward III. to his son and heir, Edward, Duke of Cornwall, a few years after he became Duke. This charter details the ceremony of investiture with the crown, the gold ring, and the silver rod. In the letters patent issued by George I. (Sept. 22, 1714), designating his son George Augustus, Duke of Brunswick Lunenburgh, as ‘Prince of Wales and Earl of Chester,’ the investiture is described as follows: ‘Likewise, we invest him, the said Prince, with the aforementioned principality and county, which he may continue to govern and protect; and we confirm him in the same by these symbols of honor—the girding of a sword, the delivery of a cap and placing it on his head, with a ring on his finger, and a golden staff in his hand, according to custom, to be held by him and his heirs, Kings of Great Britain.’[46]
The practice now is that the Prince of Wales is invested with the Earldom of Chester by special patent, while he enjoys by a sort of hereditary prescription certain other titular distinctions. In the patent of creation of Albert Edward, Prince of Wales (dated Dec. 8th, 1841), the Queen, in the patent, states: ‘We do ennoble (our most dear son) and invest with the said principality and earldom, by girting him with a sword, by putting a coronet on his head, and a gold ring on his finger, and also by delivering a gold rod into his hand,’ &c.
The current practice is that the Prince of Wales is granted the Earldom of Chester by special patent, while he has certain other honorary titles that he holds through a kind of hereditary tradition. In the patent for the creation of Albert Edward, Prince of Wales (dated Dec. 8th, 1841), the Queen states: ‘We do ennoble (our most dear son) and invest with the said principality and earldom, by girding him with a sword, placing a coronet on his head, and a gold ring on his finger, and also by giving him a gold rod to hold,’ &c.
[Pg 184]According to French writers it was formerly a custom in that country to give a marquis, on his elevation to that dignity, a ring set with the ruby; a count received a diamond ring.
[Pg 184]According to French writers, it used to be a tradition in that country to give a marquis, when he was elevated to that rank, a ring with a ruby; a count received a diamond ring.
The royal signet-ring in Anglo-Saxon times served as an authority in law-suits about land. In the Cottonian MSS. (Aug. 2, p. 15), one charter states that ‘Wynfleth, to prove a gift of land by Alfrith, led witnesses to the King, who sent a writ to Leofwin, and desired that men should be summoned to the shire-gemot to try the case, and as an authority sent his signet-ring to this gemot by an abbot and greeted all the witan.’
The royal signet ring during Anglo-Saxon times acted as proof of authority in legal disputes over land. In the Cottonian manuscripts (Aug. 2, p. 15), one charter mentions that ‘Wynfleth, to validate a land gift from Alfrith, brought witnesses to the King, who then sent a writ to Leofwin, requesting that men be called to the shire-gemot to settle the case, and as proof of authority, sent his signet ring to this gathering by an abbot and greeted all the witan.’
The charters given by our early kings received the royal confirmation by the ring: thus Richard Cœur-de-Lion, in a charter relating to the exchange of Andeli, in Normandy, belonging to the clergy of Rouen, for other properties, much to the advantage of the ecclesiastics, passed his ring, in sign of investiture, in the silk threads suspended to the parchment. This ring was still attached to the charter in 1666, as appears in the ‘Histoires des Archévèsques de Rouen’ (p. 424), but has since disappeared. M. Achille Deville, in his ‘Histoire du Château-Gaillard,’ observes: ‘Il n’est pas de fois que j’aye touché la charte de ce monarque célèbre (et je l’ai eue souvent entre les mains), que la perte de ce précieux anneau ne m’ait causé de cuisants régrets’—a regret which all lovers of historic relics will fully share.
The charters issued by our early kings were confirmed by the royal ring: for example, Richard the Lionheart, in a charter about the exchange of Andeli in Normandy, which belonged to the clergy of Rouen, for other properties, greatly benefiting the clergy, passed his ring as a symbol of investiture through the silk threads attached to the parchment. This ring was still attached to the charter in 1666, as noted in the ‘Histoires des Archévèsques de Rouen’ (p. 424), but it has since disappeared. M. Achille Deville, in his ‘Histoire du Château-Gaillard,’ notes: ‘There has never been a time that I have touched the charter of this famous monarch (and I have often had it in my hands) that the loss of this precious ring hasn’t caused me deep regret’—a sentiment that all lovers of historic relics will completely understand.
‘The ninth, twelfth, and thirteenth centuries,’ says Willemin, ‘offer rings attached to diplomas, but it is questionable whether they served to hold the place of the seal, or were simply marks of investiture; we know that anciently[Pg 185] the purchaser and recipient of a gift were put into possession by a ring.’ Dugdale states that ‘Osbert de Camera, some time in the twelfth century, being visited with great sickness, granted unto the canons of St. Paul in pure alms for the health of his soul certain lands and houses lying near Haggelane, in the parish of St. Benedict, giving possession of them with his gold ring, wherein was set a ruby, appointing that the said gold ring, together with his seal, should for ever be fixed to the charter whereby he so disposed them.’ From the same source we are told that ‘William de Belmers gave certain lands to St. Paul’s Cathedral, and at the same time directed that his gold ring, set with a ruby, should, together with the seal, be affixed to the charter for ever.’
‘The 9th, 12th, and 13th centuries,’ says Willemin, ‘show rings attached to documents, but it’s unclear if they acted as a substitute for the seal or were just symbols of investiture; we know that in ancient times[Pg 185], the buyer and recipient of a gift were given possession using a ring.’ Dugdale notes that ‘Osbert de Camera, at some point in the 12th century, faced with serious illness, donated certain lands and houses near Haggelane to the canons of St. Paul in pure charity for the health of his soul, giving possession of them with his gold ring, which held a ruby, specifying that the gold ring, along with his seal, should always be attached to the charter by which he made this donation.’ From the same source, we learn that ‘William de Belmers gave certain lands to St. Paul’s Cathedral and at the same time instructed that his gold ring, set with a ruby, should be permanently affixed to the charter along with the seal.’
At a meeting of the Archæological Institute, in March 1850, Mr. W. Foulkes exhibited a gold signet-ring, preserved by the family of J. Jones, Esq., of Llanerchrwgog Hall, impressions of which are appended to deeds concerning that property from the middle of the thirteenth century. The impress is a monogram, meaning I and M (Iesus and Maria?), placed under a crown. It has been supposed to be the ring of Madoc, one of the last princes of Powis, and to have descended as a heir-loom, with lands granted by them to the ancestors of Mr. Jones.
At a meeting of the Archaeological Institute in March 1850, Mr. W. Foulkes showcased a gold signet ring, kept by the family of J. Jones, Esq., of Llanerchrwgog Hall. Impressions of the ring are attached to deeds related to that property dating back to the mid-thirteenth century. The imprint features a monogram representing I and M (Jesus and Mary?), placed beneath a crown. It’s believed to be the ring of Madoc, one of the last princes of Powis, and has been passed down as an heirloom along with lands granted by them to the ancestors of Mr. Jones.
A ruby ring is described as the ‘Charter of Poynings,’ in the will of Sir Michael de Poynings, in 1386. Poynings, in the neighbourhood of Brighton, was the seat of this ancient family from a period soon after the Conquest till the year 1446, when the barony, owing to the marriage of the heiress, merged into the earldom of Northumberland, and became extinct in 1679. Michael de Poynings, a banneret under Edward III. at the battle of Crecy, amongst other grants,[Pg 186] left to his heir the ruby ring ‘which is the charter of my heritage of Poynings.’ This ruby ring of inheritance, the charter of the ‘Sires of Ponynges,’ came into possession of his son Thomas, and then to his second son Richard. According to tradition the famous Isabella de Fortibus, Countess of Devon, in the reign of Henry III., settled the boundaries of certain disputed parishes by flinging her ring into a marsh, hence called ‘Ring in the Mire.’
A ruby ring is referred to as the ‘Charter of Poynings’ in the will of Sir Michael de Poynings from 1386. Poynings, near Brighton, was the home of this ancient family from shortly after the Conquest until 1446, when the barony merged into the earldom of Northumberland due to the heiress's marriage, becoming extinct in 1679. Michael de Poynings, a banneret under Edward III. at the battle of Crecy, among other grants,[Pg 186] left his heir the ruby ring ‘which is the charter of my heritage of Poynings.’ This ruby ring of inheritance, the charter of the ‘Sires of Ponynges,’ passed to his son Thomas, and then to his second son Richard. According to tradition, the famous Isabella de Fortibus, Countess of Devon, during the reign of Henry III., settled the boundaries of certain disputed parishes by throwing her ring into a marsh, hence called ‘Ring in the Mire.’
So late as the sixteenth century the conveyance of property by means of a ring may be remarked in the following passage or item in the will of Anne Barrett, of Bury, dated 1504, ‘My maryeng ryng wt. all thynggs thereon.’ It is worthy of note that among the numerous kinds of evidence allowed in courts of law to establish a pedigree, engravings on rings are admitted upon the presumption that a person would not wear a ring with an error upon it.[47]
So late as the sixteenth century, the transfer of property through a ring can be seen in the following line from the will of Anne Barrett, of Bury, dated 1504: ‘My wedding ring with all things on it.’ It’s important to note that among the various types of evidence permitted in courts to establish a family lineage, engravings on rings are accepted based on the assumption that someone wouldn’t wear a ring with a mistake on it.[47]
John O’Molony, Bishop of Limerick in 1687, who, after the siege of that city, followed James II. to Paris, where he assisted in the foundation of a University for the education of Irish priests, left a gold ring at his death, which was to be sent to, and to denote, the head branch of the family. This conferred the privilege to have any of the name of Molony brought up as priests at the University, free of expense.
John O’Molony, the Bishop of Limerick in 1687, who followed James II. to Paris after the siege of the city, helped establish a university to educate Irish priests. Upon his death, he left a gold ring that was to be sent to represent the main branch of the family. This granted the privilege of having any of the Molony name raised as priests at the university, at no cost.
The custom of serjeants presenting rings on taking the[Pg 187] coif, has formed the subject of some interesting notices in that valuable work ‘Notes and Queries.’ Mr. Serjeant Wynne in his observations touching the antiquity and dignity of serjeants-at-law (1765) remarks: ‘The first introduction of rings themselves on this occasion of making serjeants is as doubtful as that of mottoes. They are taken notice of by Fortescue in the time of Henry VI., and in the several regulations for general calls, in Henry VIII. and Queen Elizabeth’s time. Whatever is the antiquity of these rings, that of mottoes seems to fall short of them at least a century. That in the 19th and 20th Elizabeth (1576-77) may perhaps be the first, because till that time they are no more mentioned. When Dugdale speaks of the posies that were usual, he must be understood to speak of the usages of his own time.’ The motto which Serjeant Wynne notices as of the earliest occurrence in 19th and 20th Elizabeth was ‘Lex regis præsidium.’[48]
The tradition of serjeants presenting rings when taking the[Pg 187] coif has been the subject of some interesting discussions in that valuable work 'Notes and Queries.' Mr. Serjeant Wynne, in his comments about the history and importance of serjeants-at-law (1765), notes: 'The initial introduction of rings in this ceremony of making serjeants is as uncertain as that of mottoes. They are mentioned by Fortescue during the time of Henry VI, and in the various regulations for general calls in the times of Henry VIII and Queen Elizabeth. Regardless of how old these rings are, the history of mottoes appears to be at least a century younger than them. The mentions in the 19th and 20th years of Elizabeth (1576-77) may be the first because they aren’t referenced before that time. When Dugdale refers to the usual posies, he should be understood as speaking about the practices of his own era.' The motto that Serjeant Wynne identifies as the earliest occurrence in the 19th and 20th years of Elizabeth was 'Lex regis præsidium.'
In the ‘Diary of a Resident in London’ (Henry Machyn, Camden Society) we find that on October 17, 1552, ‘was made vii serjants of the coyffe, who gayf to (the judges) and the old serjants, and men of the law, rynges of gold, every serjant gayf lyke rynges.’
In the 'Diary of a Resident in London' (Henry Machyn, Camden Society), we see that on October 17, 1552, 'seven sergeants of the coif were made, who gave to (the judges) and the old sergeants, and men of the law, gold rings; each sergeant gave similar rings.'
In the inventory of the effects of Henry Howard, K.G., Earl of Northampton (1614), (Archæologia, vol. ii., part ii., page 350) we find ‘v serjeantis ringes waighinge one ounce, three quarters, four graines.’ These were presentations to him in his official capacity of Lord Privy Seal.
In the inventory of the belongings of Henry Howard, K.G., Earl of Northampton (1614), (Archæologia, vol. ii., part ii., page 350) we find '5 sergeant's rings weighing one ounce, three quarters, four grains.' These were gifts to him in his official role as Lord Privy Seal.
[Pg 188]Serjeant Wynne brings his list of the serjeants called down to the year 1765, and gives, in most cases, the mottoes, which were not confined, it seems, to individuals, but adopted by the whole call. He remarks that in late years they have been strictly classical in their phrase, and often elegant in their application—whether in expressing the just idea of regal liberty—in a wish for the preservation of the family, or in a happy allusion to some public event, and, at the same time, a kind of prophetic declaration of its success. In the same work will be found an account of the expense and weight of the rings—that these matters were important appears from an extract in 1 Modern Reports, case 30: ‘Seventeen serjeants being made the 14th day of November (1669?), a daye or two after, Serjeant Powis, the junior of them all, coming to the King’s Bench Bar, Lord Chief Justice Kelynge told him ‘that he had something to say to him,’ viz., that the rings which he and the rest of the serjeants had given weighed but eighteen shillings apiece; whereas Fortescue, in his book “De Laudibus Legum Angliæ,” says “the rings given to the Chief Justices and to the Chief Baron ought to weigh twenty shillings apiece,” and that he spoke not this expecting a recompense, but that it might not be drawn into a precedent, and that the young gentlemen there might take notice of it.’
[Pg 188]Serjeant Wynne shares his list of serjeants dating back to 1765 and includes the mottoes that, it seems, were adopted by the entire group rather than individuals. He notes that in recent years, these mottoes have been quite classical in their wording and often elegantly applied—whether to convey the true idea of royal freedom, express a wish for the family's well-being, or offer a clever reference to a public event while also hinting at its future success. This work also includes details about the cost and weight of the rings; the significance of these matters is evident from an excerpt in 1 Modern Reports, case 30: ‘Seventeen serjeants were made on the 14th of November (1669?), and a day or two later, Serjeant Powis, the most junior of them all, approached the King’s Bench Bar. Lord Chief Justice Kelynge informed him that he had something to discuss, specifically that the rings he and the other serjeants had given weighed only eighteen shillings each; whereas Fortescue, in his book “De Laudibus Legum Angliæ,” states that “the rings given to the Chief Justices and to the Chief Baron should weigh twenty shillings each.” He did not mention this expecting any reward, but so it wouldn’t set a precedent, and so the young gentlemen present would take note of it.’
With regard to the cost of the serjeants’ rings, and the parties to whom they are presented, Mr. Mackenzie Walcott, M.A., writes in ‘Notes and Queries’ that on June 8, 1705, fifteen serjeants-at-law took the customary oaths at the Chancery Bar, and delivered to the Lord Keeper a ring for the Queen, and another to H.R.H. Prince George of Denmark, each ring being worth 6l. 13s. 4d. The Lord Keeper, and the Lord Treasurer, Lord Steward, Lord Privy[Pg 189] Seal, Lord High Chamberlain, Master of the Household, Lord Chamberlain, and the two Chief Justices, each received a ring of the value of 18s.; the Lord Chief Baron, the Master of the Rolls, the Justices of either Bench, and two Chief Secretaries, each, one worth 16s.; the Chief Steward and Comptroller, each a ring valued at 1l.; the Marshal, Warden of the Fleet, every Serjeant-at-law, the Attorney-General and Solicitor-General, each a ring worth 12s.; the three Barons of Exchequer, one each of 10s.; the two Clerks of the Crown, the three Prothonotaries, the Clerks of the Warrants, the Prothonotary of Queen’s Bench, and the Chirographer, each a ring worth 5s.; each Filazer and Exigenter, the Clerk of the Council, and the Custom Brevium, each a ring that cost 2s. 6d. The motto on the rings was ‘Moribus, armis, legibus.’
Regarding the cost of the serjeants' rings and who they are given to, Mr. Mackenzie Walcott, M.A., writes in ‘Notes and Queries’ that on June 8, 1705, fifteen serjeants-at-law took the usual oaths at the Chancery Bar and presented a ring to the Queen and another to H.R.H. Prince George of Denmark, with each ring valued at 6l. 13s. 4d. The Lord Keeper, Lord Treasurer, Lord Steward, Lord Privy[Pg 189] Seal, Lord High Chamberlain, Master of the Household, Lord Chamberlain, and the two Chief Justices each received a ring valued at 18s.; the Lord Chief Baron, Master of the Rolls, Justices from either Bench, and two Chief Secretaries each got one worth 16s.; the Chief Steward and Comptroller each received a ring valued at 1l.; the Marshal, Warden of the Fleet, every Serjeant-at-law, Attorney-General, and Solicitor-General each got a ring worth 12s.; the three Barons of Exchequer each received one valued at 10s.; the two Clerks of the Crown, the three Prothonotaries, Clerks of the Warrants, Prothonotary of Queen’s Bench, and Chirographer each got a ring worth 5s.; each Filazer and Exigenter, Clerk of the Council, and Custom Brevium received a ring costing 2s. 6d. The motto on the rings was ‘Moribus, armis, legibus.’
On the admission of fourteen serjeants in 1737, 1,409 rings were given away, at a cost of 773l., and besides this number, others were made for each serjeant’s own account, to be given to friends at the bar, which came to more than all the rest of the expense.
On the admission of fourteen serjeants in 1737, 1,409 rings were given away, costing 773l., and in addition to this number, more were made for each serjeant to give to their friends at the bar, which ended up costing more than all the rest combined.
There are some quaint old customs still adhering to the making of a serjeant. He is presented to the Lord Chancellor by some brother barrister (styled his ‘colt’), and he kneels while the Chancellor attaches to the top of his wig the little, round, black patch that now does duty for the ‘coif,’ which is the special badge of the Serjeant. The new Serjeant presents a massive gold ring to the Chancellor, another to his ‘colt,’ one to the Sovereign, and each of the Masters of the Court of Common Pleas. These rings used also to be given to all the Judges, but of late years the Judges have refused to receive them, thus diminishing a somewhat heavy tax.
There are some charming old traditions still associated with becoming a serjeant. A brother barrister, known as his ‘colt,’ presents him to the Lord Chancellor, and he kneels while the Chancellor attaches a small, round, black patch to the top of his wig, which now serves as the ‘coif,’ the special badge of the Serjeant. The new Serjeant gives a large gold ring to the Chancellor, another to his ‘colt,’ one to the Sovereign, and a ring each to the Masters of the Court of Common Pleas. These rings used to be given to all the Judges as well, but in recent years, the Judges have declined to accept them, reducing what was a considerable expense.
[Pg 190]It would be curious to know whether this custom is derived from the Romans. Juvenal alludes to the practice of lawyers exhibiting their rings when pleading:—
[Pg 190]It would be interesting to find out if this custom comes from the Romans. Juvenal mentions the practice of lawyers showing their rings when making their arguments:—
Ideo conducta Paulus agebat
Sardonyche et que ideo plurisquam Cossus agebat
Quam Basilus. Rara in tenui facundia panno.
Paul was behaving in a certain way.
Sardonyche and for this reason, Cossus was doing much more
Than Basilus. Rarely does eloquence shine through thin cloth.
The reader will find a list of mottoes, and much information on the subject of serjeants’ rings, in ‘Notes and Queries’ (1st Series, vol. v. pp. 110, 139, 181, 563; 2nd Series, vol. i. p. 249). The most recent instance (January 1872) of the presentation of a serjeant’s ring is that of Mr. J. R. Quain, who chose for his motto ‘Dare, facere, præstare.’
The reader will find a list of mottoes and a lot of information about serjeants’ rings in 'Notes and Queries' (1st Series, vol. v. pp. 110, 139, 181, 563; 2nd Series, vol. i. p. 249). The most recent example (January 1872) of a serjeant receiving a ring is Mr. J. R. Quain, who chose the motto ‘Dare, facere, præstare.’
At the Loan Exhibition of Ancient and Modern Jewellery at the South Kensington Museum, in 1872, a serjeant’s gold ring, inscribed ✠ LEX X REGIS X PRÆSIDIUM, was shown—the property of Mr. John Evans—as the earliest known, the date being 1576-77. The small size of the ring would assume that it was merely complimentary.
At the Loan Exhibition of Ancient and Modern Jewellery at the South Kensington Museum in 1872, a sergeant's gold ring, inscribed ✠ LEX X REGIS X PRÆSIDIUM, was displayed—the property of Mr. John Evans—as the earliest known example, dating back to 1576-77. The small size of the ring suggests that it was simply a token of appreciation.
Some barristers that Lord Brougham did not think much of, wishing to be made serjeants, he suggested that the most appropriate motto that could be found for their rings would be the old legal word ‘scilicet.’
Some barristers that Lord Brougham didn't think highly of, hoping to be made serjeants, he recommended that the best motto for their rings would be the old legal term ‘scilicet.’
Serjeants’ ring.
Sergeant’s ring.
This illustration represents a serjeant’s ring, supposed to be of the seventeenth century—a plain band of gold, engraved with ‘Imperio regit unus æquo’ (Horace, lib. iii., Ode iv.).
This illustration shows a sergeant’s ring, thought to be from the seventeenth century—a simple gold band, engraved with 'Imperio regit unus aequo' (Horace, lib. iii., Ode iv.).
In the collection of Mr. J. W. Singer is a very fine serjeant’s ring, which that gentleman attributes as of very early manufacture. It is a rare type of rings of this description, which have not been much noticed. The inscription reads: ‘Legis executo regis pservatio.’
In Mr. J. W. Singer's collection, there's a very fine sergeant's ring that he believes was made a long time ago. It's a rare type of ring that hasn't been widely recognized. The inscription says: ‘Legis executo regis pservatio.’
[Pg 191]In France, Italy, and Germany, a forensic order of knighthood was frequently conferred on the successful practitioner at the bar. Bartoli, the oracle of the law in the fourteenth century, asserted that at the end of the tenth year of successful professional exertion, the avocât belonging to the denomination of l’Ordre des Avocâts became ipso facto a knight.
[Pg 191]In France, Italy, and Germany, a formal title of knighthood was often given to successful lawyers. Bartoli, a legal expert from the fourteenth century, claimed that after ten years of successful practice, a lawyer from the group known as l’Ordre des Avocâts automatically became a knight.
When the distinction was applied for, the King commissioned some ancient Knight of the Forensic Order to admit the postulant into it. The avocât knelt before the Knight-commissary and said: ‘I pray you, my lord and protector, to dress me with the sword, belt, golden spurs, golden collar, golden ring, and all the other ornaments of a true knight. I will not use the advantages of knighthood for profane purposes; I will use them only for the purposes of religion, for the Church, and the holy Christian faith, in the warfare of the science to which I am devoted.’ The postulant then rose; and being fully equipped, and girded with the sword, he became, for all purposes, a member of the order of knighthood.
When the distinction was applied for, the King assigned an ancient Knight of the Forensic Order to admit the candidate into it. The avocât knelt before the Knight-commissary and said: ‘I ask you, my lord and protector, to equip me with the sword, belt, golden spurs, golden collar, golden ring, and all the other symbols of a true knight. I will not use the privileges of knighthood for unworthy purposes; I will use them only for the service of religion, for the Church, and the holy Christian faith, in the warfare of the science to which I am dedicated.’ The candidate then stood up; and being fully equipped and girded with the sword, he became, for all intents and purposes, a member of the order of knighthood.
In the Memoirs of the Maréchal de Vieilleville, who died in 1571, such knights are mentioned as very common.
In the Memoirs of the Maréchal de Vieilleville, who died in 1571, such knights are mentioned as quite common.
In 1795 the Order of Avocâts was suppressed, after 427 years of a brilliant existence.
In 1795, the Order of Avocâts was shut down after 427 years of a remarkable existence.
Doctors, as indicative of their position, wore formerly a ring on the third finger of the right hand.
Doctors, reflecting their status, used to wear a ring on the third finger of their right hand.
A ring formed part of the investiture of three poets-laureate by the Chancellor of the University of Strasburg in 1621, who at their installation pronounced these words: ‘I create you, being placed in a chair of state, crowned with laurel and ivy, and wearing a ring of gold, and the same do pronounce and constitute poets-laureate in the name of the[Pg 192] Holy Trinity, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. Amen.’
A ring was part of the ceremony when three poets were named laureates by the Chancellor of the University of Strasbourg in 1621. During their installation, he said: ‘I appoint you, seated in a prestigious chair, crowned with laurel and ivy, and wearing a ring of gold, and I declare you poets-laureate in the name of the [Pg 192] Holy Trinity, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Amen.’
Gower, in his ‘Confessio Amantis,’ mentions a statue of Apollo, adorned with a ring:—
Gower, in his ‘Confessio Amantis,’ talks about a statue of Apollo, decorated with a ring:—
Forth ryghte he straighte his finger oute,
Upon the which he had a ringe,
To seen it was a ryche thynge,
A fyne carbuncle for the nones,
Most precious of all stones.
Forth he straightened his finger out,
On which he had a ring,
To show it was a rich thing,
A fine carbuncle for the occasion,
Most precious of all stones.
In the early Saxon times, we read that Gumlaughr, the scald, presented to King Ethelred a heroic poem which he had composed on the royal virtues, and received in return ‘a purple tunic lined with the richest furs,’ also ‘a gold ring of the weight of seven ounces.’
In the early Saxon era, we learn that Gumlaughr, the poet, gave King Ethelred a heroic poem he had written about the king's virtues, and in exchange, he received "a purple tunic lined with the finest furs," along with "a gold ring weighing seven ounces."
In ancient Wales the Judge of the King’s palace had as ensign of his office a gold ring from the Queen. It was his duty at his own cost to reward the successful competitor in the musical contests of the bards with a silver chair as ‘Pen Cerdd’ (chief of song), and who in return presented him with a gold ring, a drinking-horn, and a cushion. The royal minstrel received on his appointment a harp from the King, and a ring from the queen.
In ancient Wales, the Judge of the King’s palace had a gold ring from the Queen as a symbol of his position. It was his responsibility to personally reward the winner of the bardic music contests with a silver chair as ‘Pen Cerdd’ (chief of song), and in return, the winner would give him a gold ring, a drinking horn, and a cushion. The royal minstrel received a harp from the King and a ring from the Queen upon his appointment.
‘Merchant Marks’ (to which I have alluded in the first chapter of this work) originated from the guild or mayor’s rings, which were used as personal signets, by such as were not entitled to bear arms. They were worn on the thumb for constant use in sealing. A fine ring of this kind is engraved in the ‘Journal of the Archæological Institute.’ It was found in the bed of the Severn, near Upton, and is, probably, a work of the fifteenth century; it is of silver and has been strongly gilt. The hoop is spirally grooved, and upon the circular face is a large H surrounded by branches.
‘Merchant Marks’ (which I mentioned in the first chapter of this work) came from the guild or mayor’s rings, used as personal signets by those who weren’t allowed to bear arms. They were worn on the thumb for easy sealing. A beautiful ring of this type is featured in the ‘Journal of the Archæological Institute.’ It was found in the bed of the Severn, near Upton, and is likely a work from the fifteenth century; it’s made of silver and has been heavily gilded. The band is spirally grooved, and on the circular face is a large H surrounded by branches.
[Pg 193]In the custody of the Mayor of Winchester is a signet-ring with the arms of the city and initials E. W., probably Edward White, Mayor in 1613 and 1621.
[Pg 193]In the possession of the Mayor of Winchester is a signet ring featuring the city's emblem and the initials E. W., likely representing Edward White, who served as Mayor in 1613 and 1621.
In late times we have the ring adopted as a club badge by the famous Beef-Steak Club, of convivial notoriety. The members wore a blue coat, with red cape and cuffs, buttons with the initials B. S., and behind the President’s chair was placed the Society’s halbert, which, with the gridiron, was found among the rubbish after the Covent Garden fire in 1808.
In recent times, the ring was chosen as the emblem of the well-known Beef-Steak Club, famous for its lively gatherings. The members wore blue coats with red capes and cuffs, and their buttons featured the initials B.S. Behind the President’s chair was the Society’s halberd, which, along with the gridiron, was discovered among the debris after the Covent Garden fire in 1808.
Ring of Beef-Steak Club.
Beef Steak Club Ring.
Ashmole, in his ‘History of the Most Noble Order of the Garter,’ mentions that gold rings have been cast into the figures of garters, ‘the ground on the outside enamelled with a deep blue, through which the golden letters of the motto appearing, set them off with an admirable beauty. And it seems such rings were in vogue, since the preface to the black book of the Order makes mention of wearing the garter on the leg and shoulder, and sometimes subjoins the thumb, interdum pollice gestare, by which we may naturally conclude that gold rings were formed into the fashion of garters, and bestowed by some new-installed knights upon their relations and friends to wear in memorial of so great an honour conferred upon them.’
Ashmole, in his 'History of the Most Noble Order of the Garter,' notes that gold rings have been created in the shape of garters, 'the outer surface covered with a deep blue enamel, through which the golden letters of the motto stand out with impressive beauty. It appears these rings were popular, as the preface to the black book of the Order mentions wearing the garter on the leg and shoulder, and sometimes even adding the thumb, interdum pollice gestare, which leads us to conclude that gold rings were designed in the style of garters and given by newly installed knights to their relatives and friends to wear as a reminder of such a significant honor conferred upon them.'
In the collection of the Rev. W. B. Hawkins is a gold official ring of the Grand Master of the Order of St. John of Jerusalem (Malta), with bezel oval, glazed, with skeleton, hour-glass, and scythe, in enamel on a black ground; on the shoulders of the ring is a death’s head with cross-bones.
In the collection of Rev. W. B. Hawkins, there is a gold official ring belonging to the Grand Master of the Order of St. John of Jerusalem (Malta). The ring has an oval bezel that is glazed, featuring a skeleton, hourglass, and scythe, all in enamel on a black background. The shoulders of the ring display a death’s head with crossbones.
At the meeting of the Archæological Institute at Norwich in July 1847, a ring formed like a strap or garter, buckled,[Pg 194] was exhibited, bearing the inscription ‘Mater Dei memento mei,’ found at Necton, date about 1450. Rings of this fashion were in use from the close of the fourteenth century, shortly after the institution of the Order of the Garter. Other specimens are to be seen in the British Museum, and in the collection of the Archæological Institute.
At the meeting of the Archaeological Institute in Norwich in July 1847, a ring shaped like a strap or garter, buckled,[Pg 194] was displayed, featuring the inscription 'Mater Dei memento mei,' found in Necton, dating to around 1450. Rings like this had been used since the late fourteenth century, shortly after the establishment of the Order of the Garter. Other examples can be seen in the British Museum and in the collection of the Archaeological Institute.
A cap and a ring are conferred with the degree of Doctor of Civil Laws in Belgium.
A cap and a ring are given with the degree of Doctor of Civil Laws in Belgium.
In the ‘Biographia Britannica’ (Article ‘Crichton’) we read of the bestowal of a ring on a college disputant. This was in the case of the ‘Admirable Crichton,’ who, when he was only twenty years of age, entered the academic lists with anyone who would compete with him in Hebrew, Syriac, Arabic, Greek, Latin, Spanish, French, Italian, English, Dutch, Flemish, and Sclavonian, besides every kind of courtly accomplishment. This he maintained in the College of Navarre, and the president, after many compliments on his vast acquirements, gave him a diamond ring and a purse of money.
In the ‘Biographia Britannica’ (Article ‘Crichton’), we learn about a college student who received a ring after a contest. This was about the ‘Admirable Crichton,’ who, at just twenty years old, competed academically against anyone willing to challenge him in Hebrew, Syriac, Arabic, Greek, Latin, Spanish, French, Italian, English, Dutch, Flemish, and Sclavonian, as well as various courtly skills. He showcased his talents at the College of Navarre, and the president, after praising his extensive knowledge, awarded him a diamond ring and a bag of money.
At the ceremonies observed on the inauguration of a king-at-arms the crown and ring were generally bestowed by the hand of the monarch himself, as in the case of Sir David Lindsay, Lord Lion, King-at-arms:
At the ceremonies held for the inauguration of a king-at-arms, the crown and ring were typically given by the monarch himself, as was the case with Sir David Lindsay, Lord Lion, King-at-arms:
Whom royal James himself had crowned,
And on his temples placed the round
Of Scotland’s ancient diadem;
And wet his brow with hallow’d wine,
And on his finger given to shine
The emblematic gem.
Whom King James himself had crowned,
And placed on his head the circle
Of Scotland's old crown;
And wet his brow with holy wine,
And on his finger put to shine
The meaningful gem.
Among the insignia of the Knights of the Order of St. John of Jerusalem is a ring bearing the Cross.
Among the symbols of the Knights of the Order of St. John of Jerusalem is a ring featuring the Cross.
In the ‘Dublin Penny Journal’ we read of the signet-ring of the famous Turlough Lynnoch, which was found at[Pg 195] Charlemont, in the county of Armagh. It bears the bloody hand of the O’Neils, and initials T. O. The signet part of the ring is circular, and the whole of it is silver. James the First made this bloody hand the distinguishing badge of a new order of baronets, and they were created to aid, by service or money for forces, in subduing the O’Neils.
In the ‘Dublin Penny Journal,’ we learn about the signet ring of the famous Turlough Lynnoch, which was discovered at[Pg 195] Charlemont, in County Armagh. It features the bloody hand of the O’Neils and the initials T. O. The signet part of the ring is circular, and the entire ring is made of silver. James the First established this bloody hand as the distinctive emblem of a new order of baronets, created to assist, either through service or financial support for troops, in defeating the O’Neils.
In 1780 a large gold ring, supposed to have belonged to one of the knights hospitallers of Winckbourne, some of whom are believed to have been buried at Southwell, was found by the sexton of Southwell church while digging a grave. It is six-eighths of an inch in diameter, and three-eighths of an inch in breadth. The following motto is deeply cut on the inside: ‘+ MIEV + MORI + QVE + CHANGE + MA + FOI +’ (better to die than change my faith).
In 1780, a large gold ring, believed to have belonged to one of the knights hospitallers of Winckbourne—some of whom are thought to be buried at Southwell—was discovered by the sexton of Southwell church while digging a grave. It measures six-eighths of an inch in diameter and three-eighths of an inch in width. The following motto is engraved on the inside: ‘+ MIEV + MORI + QVE + CHANGE + MA + FOI +’ (better to die than change my faith).
I have already mentioned how, from the earliest times, the ring was considered to denote peculiar distinction, and was the emblem of nobility; and so, amidst many divergences, it still continued to a later period to be considered as a badge of honourable birth. Thus Rabelais alludes to the rings that Gargantua wore because his father desired him ‘to renew that ancient mark of nobility.’ On the forefinger of his left hand he had a gold ring set with a large carbuncle, and on the middle finger one of mixed metal, then usually made by alchemists. On the middle finger of the right hand he had ‘a ring made spire-wise, wherein was set a perfect balew ruby, a pointed diamond, and a Physon emerald of inestimable value.’
I’ve already mentioned how, from the earliest times, the ring was seen as a symbol of special distinction and nobility. Even with various changes over time, it continued to be viewed as a sign of honorable birth. Rabelais refers to the rings that Gargantua wore because his father wanted him "to renew that ancient mark of nobility." On the forefinger of his left hand, he had a gold ring set with a large carbuncle, and on the middle finger, there was one made of mixed metal, commonly created by alchemists. On the middle finger of his right hand, he had “a spiraled ring set with a perfect balew ruby, a pointed diamond, and a Physon emerald of incredible value.”
The French expression une bague au doigt means a sinecure—pay without the work.
The French phrase une bague au doigt refers to a job that requires no effort—getting paid without having to do any work.
In former times the victor in a wrestling match received a ram and a ring. In the Coke’s ‘Tale of Gamelyn,’ ascribed to Chaucer, we read:—
In the past, the winner of a wrestling match would get a ram and a ring. In Coke’s 'Tale of Gamelyn,' attributed to Chaucer, we read:—
[Pg 196]
There happed to be there beside
Tryed a wrestling;
And therefore there was y setten,
A ram and als a ring.
[Pg 196]
There happened to be there beside
Tried some wrestling matches;
And that's why I set up,
A ram and a ring.
And in the ‘Litil Geste of Robin Hood’:—
And in the 'Little Gest of Robin Hood':—
By a bridge was a wrestling,
And there tayred was he;
And there was all the best yemen
Of all the west countrey.
A full fayre game there was set up,
A white bull up yspight,
A great courser with saddle and brydle,
With gold burnished full bryght;
A payre of gloves, a red golde ringe,
A pipe of wine, good fay;
What man bereth him best, I wis,
The prize shall bear away.
By the bridge, there was wrestling,
And he was exhausted there;
And all the best men
From all the Western countries.
A really fair game was set up,
A decorated white bull;
A great horse with saddle and bridle,
With polished gold gleaming.
A pair of gloves, a red gold ring,
A cup of wine, truly enjoyable;
Whoever performs best, I assure you,
The prize will be theirs to keep.
So Sir Walter Scott, in the ‘Lady of the Lake’:—
So Sir Walter Scott, in the 'Lady of the Lake':—
Prize of the wrestling-match, the King
To Douglas gave a golden ring.
Prize of the wrestling match, the King
Gave a golden ring to Douglas.
In the ‘Gulistan,’ or rose-garden of Sadi, is a pretty story in connection with a prize-ring for shooting. A certain King of Persia had a very precious stone in a ring. One day he went out with some of his favourite courtiers, to amuse himself, to the mosque near Shiraz, called Musalla; and commanded that they should suspend the ring over the dome of Azad, saying that the ring should be the property of him who could send an arrow through it. It so befell that four hundred archers, who plied their bows in his service, shot at the ring, and all missed. A stripling at play was shooting arrows at random from a monastery, when the morning breeze carried his shaft through the circle of the ring. The prize was bestowed upon him, and he was loaded with gifts beyond calculation. The boy, after this, burned[Pg 197] his bow and arrows. They asked him why he did so; he replied: ‘That my first glory may remain unchanged.’
In the “Gulistan,” or rose-garden of Sadi, there’s a charming story about a shooting competition. A certain King of Persia had a valuable stone set in a ring. One day, he took some of his favored courtiers to the Musalla mosque near Shiraz for some entertainment; he ordered that the ring be hung from the dome of Azad, declaring that it would go to whoever could shoot an arrow through it. Four hundred archers in his service took their shots, but all missed. Meanwhile, a young boy was playing and shooting arrows aimlessly from a nearby monastery when a breeze carried one of his arrows through the ring. The prize was awarded to him, and he received gifts beyond measure. Afterward, the boy burned his bow and arrows. When asked why he did this, he replied: “So that my first glory remains untarnished.”
At the tournaments held in the reign of Henry VII. (1494) a proclamation was put forth ‘that hoo soo ever justith best in the justys roiall schall have a ryng of gold, with a ruby of the value of a ml scuttes or under; and hoo soo ever torneyeth the best, and fairyst accumplishit his strokkis schall have a ryng of gold, with a diamant of like value.’
At the tournaments during the reign of Henry VII (1494), a proclamation was announced stating that anyone who performed best in the royal jousts would receive a gold ring with a ruby worth a hundred shillings or less; and anyone who competed best and executed their strikes most elegantly would receive a gold ring with a diamond of the same value.
On November 9 (1494) John Peche received from the Ladie Margerete ‘the kyngis oldeste doughter, a ryng of gold with a ruby.’
On November 9, 1494, John Peche received a gold ring with a ruby from Lady Margerete, the king's eldest daughter.
On the 11th, the Earl of Suffolk, Thomas Brandon, received as a reward for his prowess in the lists ‘a ryng of gold with a rubee.’
On the 11th, the Earl of Suffolk, Thomas Brandon, was rewarded for his skills in the tournaments with 'a gold ring with a ruby.'
On the third tournament (November 13) Sir Edward A. Borough, as victor, received ‘a ryng of gold with a dyamant.’
On the third tournament (November 13), Sir Edward A. Borough, as the winner, received 'a gold ring with a diamond.'
The Earl of Essex, for his valour in this tournament, received ‘a ryng of gold with an emerauld.’
The Earl of Essex, for his bravery in this tournament, received ‘a ring of gold with an emerald.’
CHAPTER IV.
RINGS IN CONNECTION WITH ECCLESIASTICAL USAGES.
Church-related rings.
The ring has, for many ages, formed a part of ecclesiastical insignia. It appears to have had a twofold purpose and signification, the one as a mark of dignity and authority, the other symbolic of the mystical union between the priesthood and the Church.
The ring has, for many ages, been a part of church insignia. It seems to serve two main purposes and meanings: one as a symbol of dignity and authority, the other symbolizing the mystical connection between the priesthood and the Church.
To commence with the head of the Romish hierarchy: that distinguished authority on antiquarian topics, Mr. Octavius Morgan, M.A., F.R.S., F.S.A., &c., has contributed to the ‘Archæologia’ (vol. xl. p. 392) a very interesting account of ‘Episcopal and other Rings of Investiture;’ and, since the publication of that paper, has kindly informed me that Mr. Waterton states, from his own knowledge, that the ‘Fisherman’s Ring’ is the Pope’s ring of investiture, and is placed on his finger immediately after his election, before it is engraved. But if, as it sometimes happens, the Pope-elect is not a bishop, he is consecrated prior to his coronation as Supreme Pontiff, and receives the ring with the usual formula, except that the consecrating cardinal kisses his hand after investing him with the ring. ‘There is a ring which the Pontiff wears on state occasions—the stone of which is an exquisitely fine cameo, cut in bloodstone, of the head of Our Saviour—which is known to be more than three hundred[Pg 199] years old, and is, probably, a fine cinque-cento gem. This descends from one Pope to another.
To start with the head of the Roman Catholic Church: that notable expert on historical topics, Mr. Octavius Morgan, M.A., F.R.S., F.S.A., etc., has contributed to the ‘Archæologia’ (vol. xl. p. 392) a very interesting account of ‘Episcopal and other Rings of Investiture;’ and, since the publication of that paper, has kindly informed me that Mr. Waterton states, from his own knowledge, that the ‘Fisherman’s Ring’ is the Pope’s ring of investiture, which is placed on his finger immediately after his election, before it is engraved. However, if, as sometimes occurs, the Pope-elect is not a bishop, he is consecrated before his coronation as Supreme Pontiff and receives the ring with the usual formula, except that the consecrating cardinal kisses his hand after investing him with the ring. ‘There is a ring that the Pontiff wears on formal occasions—the stone of which is an exquisitely fine cameo, carved in bloodstone, depicting the head of Our Savior—which is known to be more than three hundred[Pg 199] years old, and is likely a remarkable cinque-cento gem. This ring passes down from one Pope to another.
‘What is called the Annulus Piscatoris, or the “Fisherman’s Ring,” is the Pope’s lesser seal, or signet, used for documents of minor consequence, and the impression is usually made on red wax or stamped on the paper; the Bulla being what may be termed the great seal, employed for giving validity to instruments of greater importance, and the impression of it is always on lead. The origin of the Fisherman’s Ring is obscure, but it derives its name from a representation of St. Peter in a fisherman’s boat of ancient form, which is engraved on it, and not from any tradition that it ever belonged to St. Peter, as, from its English name, is not uncommonly supposed. The Germans call it Der Fischer-ring, which is “the Fisherman Ring,” whereas we, probably in our translation of Annulus Piscatoris, have termed it the “Fisherman’s Ring,” seeming to imply thereby that it had once belonged to “the Fisherman.” The figure of St. Peter forms the centre.’
‘What’s called the Annulus Piscatoris, or the “Fisherman’s Ring,” is the Pope’s lesser seal, or signet, used for documents of lesser importance, and the impression is usually made on red wax or stamped on the paper; the Bulla being what could be called the great seal, used to validate documents of greater significance, with its impression always on lead. The origin of the Fisherman’s Ring is unclear, but it gets its name from a depiction of St. Peter in an ancient-style fisherman’s boat, which is engraved on it, and not from any tradition that it ever belonged to St. Peter, as is often assumed from its English name. The Germans call it Der Fischer-ring, which means “the Fisherman Ring,” while we, likely in our translation of Annulus Piscatoris, have named it the “Fisherman’s Ring,” which seems to suggest it once belonged to “the Fisherman.” The figure of St. Peter is at the center.’
The Fisherman’s Ring.
The Fisherman's Ring.
After the reign of Pope Calixtus the Third, the Ring of the Fisherman was no longer used as the private seal of the Popes, but was always attached to briefs.
After the rule of Pope Calixtus the Third, the Ring of the Fisherman was no longer used as the personal seal of the Popes, but was always attached to official documents.
On the death of Innocent the Tenth the name was cut out of the ring or erased. At the decease of Pius the Sixth the usual ceremonies were not observed, and the ring was not broken, as was the practice at the elevation of each pontiff. Aimon, in his ‘Tableau de la Cour de Rome,’ says that after the Pope’s death ‘le Cardinal Camerlingue vient en habit violet, accompagné des clercs de la chambre en habits[Pg 200] noirs, reconnoître le corps du Pape. Il l’appelle trois fois par son nom de baptême, et comme il ne lui donne ni réponse, ni signe de vie, il fait dresser un acte sur sa mort par les Protonotaires Apostoliques. Il prend du Maître de la Chambre Apostolique, l’anneau du Pêcheur, qui est le sceau du Pape, d’or massif, et du prix de cent écus. Il le fait mettre en pièces et donne ces pièces aux Maîtres des Cérémonies à qui elles appartiennent. Le Dataire et les Sécrétaires qui ont les autres sceaux du Pape défunt, sont obligés de les porter au Cardinal Camerlingue, qui les fait rompre en présence de l’Auditeur de la Chambre du Trésorier, et des Clercs Apostoliques, et il n’est permis à aucun autre des Cardinaux d’assister à cette fonction.’
On the death of Innocent the Tenth, the name was either cut out of the ring or erased. When Pius the Sixth passed away, the usual ceremonies were not followed, and the ring was not broken, as was customary with each new pope. Aimon, in his ‘Tableau de la Cour de Rome,’ states that after the pope's death, "the Cardinal Camerlingue comes in a violet outfit, accompanied by the clerks of the chamber in black outfits, to check the body of the Pope. He calls his name three times, and when there is no response or sign of life, he arranges for an official record of his death through the Apostolic Protonotaries. He takes from the Master of the Apostolic Chamber the ring of the Fisherman, which is the pope's seal, made of solid gold and valued at a hundred écus. He has it melted down and gives the pieces to the Masters of Ceremonies to whom they belong. The Dataire and the Secretaries who have the other seals of the deceased pope are required to bring them to the Cardinal Camerlingue, who has them broken in the presence of the Auditor of the Chamber of the Treasurer and the Apostolic Clerks, and no other Cardinals are allowed to attend this function."
When it was decided by the French in 1798 that the Pope was to be removed to France, on February 18 in that year the Republican Haller, son of the celebrated Swiss physician of that name, chose the moment when the Pontiff was at dinner in the Vatican to announce to him the resolution of the French Republic. He entered the apartment rudely, and, advancing to the Pope, announced the object of his visit, and demanded the instant surrender of the Papal treasures.
When the French decided in 1798 to relocate the Pope to France, on February 18 of that year, the Republican Haller, son of the famous Swiss doctor of the same name, chose the moment when the Pope was having dinner in the Vatican to inform him of the French Republic's decision. He barged into the room and, approaching the Pope, stated the purpose of his visit and demanded the immediate handover of the Papal treasures.
‘We have already given up all we possessed,’ replied the Pope calmly.
‘We have already given up everything we had,’ replied the Pope calmly.
‘Not all,’ returned Haller, ‘you still wear two very rich rings; let me have them.’
‘Not all,’ Haller replied, ‘you’re still wearing two very expensive rings; let me have them.’
The Pope drew one from his finger: ‘I can give you,’ he said, ‘this one, for it is indeed my own; take it: but the other is the Ring of the Fisherman, and must descend to my successor.’
The Pope took one off his finger: ‘I can give you,’ he said, ‘this one, because it’s truly mine; take it. But the other is the Ring of the Fisherman, and it has to be passed down to my successor.’
‘It will pass first to me, holy father,’ exclaimed Haller,[Pg 201] ‘and if you do not surrender it quietly it will be taken from you by force.’
‘It will come to me first, holy father,’ Haller exclaimed,[Pg 201] ‘and if you don’t give it up peacefully, it will be taken from you by force.’
To escape further insult the Fisherman’s Ring was given up, but as it was found to be intrinsically of no value it was soon afterwards restored to the Pontiff.
To avoid more embarrassment, the Fisherman’s Ring was surrendered, but since it turned out to be worthless, it was soon returned to the Pope.
The ring of Pius the Ninth is of plain gold, weighing one and a half ounces, and it was made from the gold which composed the Ring of the Fisherman of Pope Gregory the Sixteenth.[49]
The ring of Pius IX is made of simple gold, weighing one and a half ounces, and it was created from the gold that was used for the Ring of the Fisherman of Pope Gregory XVI.[49]
The Fisherman’s Ring is always in the custody of the Grand Papal Chamberlain. It is taken to the Conclave, or Council of the Cardinals, with the space left blank for the name; and as soon as a successful scrutiny of votes for a new Pope has taken place, the newly-elected Pontiff is declared, and conducted to the throne of St. Peter, where, before the cardinals have rendered homage to their chief, the Grand Chamberlain approaches, and, placing the Papal ring on the finger of the new Pope, asks him what name he will take. On the reply of the Pontiff, the ring is given to the first Master of the Ceremonies to have the name engraved on it that has been assumed. The announcement of the pontifical election is then made to the people from the balcony of the Papal palace.
The Fisherman’s Ring is always kept by the Grand Papal Chamberlain. It's brought to the Conclave, or Council of the Cardinals, with a blank space for the name. Once the votes for a new Pope have been successfully counted, the newly-elected Pontiff is announced and taken to the throne of St. Peter. Before the cardinals pay their respects to their leader, the Grand Chamberlain steps forward, places the Papal ring on the finger of the new Pope, and asks him what name he will choose. Following the Pontiff's response, the ring is handed to the first Master of Ceremonies to have the chosen name engraved on it. The announcement of the papal election is then made to the crowd from the balcony of the Papal palace.
Kissing the Pope’s ring as an act of reverent homage is a custom which has descended to our own times. One of the important ceremonies at the opening of the great Œcumenical Council at Rome (December 8, 1869) was that[Pg 202] every single primate, patriarch, bishop, and mitred abbot, who were present on this solemn occasion at St. Peter’s, and who were to take part in the Council, paused before Pius the Ninth, and, in an attitude of profound reverence, kissed his ring. As high dignitaries they were exempted from kissing the Pope’s toe, a condescension reserved for the laity and lower clergy.
Kissing the Pope’s ring as a sign of deep respect is a tradition that continues today. One of the key ceremonies at the opening of the great Ecumenical Council in Rome on December 8, 1869, was that[Pg 202] every primate, patriarch, bishop, and mitred abbot present on this significant occasion at St. Peter’s, who were participating in the Council, stopped to kiss Pius IX’s ring in a show of profound respect. As high-ranking officials, they were not required to kiss the Pope’s toe, a gesture reserved for the laity and lower clergy.
In Bishop Bale’s ‘Image of Both Churches’ occurs a curious passage on the subject of episcopal rings: ‘Neyther regarde they to knele any more doune, and to kisse their pontifical ryngs, which are of the same metall’ (i.e. fine gold).
In Bishop Bale’s ‘Image of Both Churches’, there’s an interesting passage about episcopal rings: ‘They no longer pay attention to kneeling down and kissing their pontifical rings, which are made of the same metal’ (i.e. fine gold).
It would seem that the Popes were formerly buried in their pontifical habits and ornaments. In the ‘Journal’ of Burcard, Master of the Ceremonies in the Pope’s chapel from Sixtus the Fourth to Julius the Second, he mentions as having, by virtue of his office, thus clothed the body of Sixtus the Fourth, and amongst other things a sapphire ring of the value of three hundred ducats was placed on his finger, and so little trust was placed in the honesty of those who came to see the body that guards were placed to prevent the ring and other ornaments from being stolen.[50]
It seems that in the past, Popes were buried in their ceremonial robes and accessories. In the ‘Journal’ of Burcard, the Master of Ceremonies in the Pope’s chapel from Sixtus IV to Julius II, he notes that he dressed the body of Sixtus IV in this way, including placing a sapphire ring worth three hundred ducats on his finger. There was such mistrust in the honesty of those who came to view the body that guards were assigned to keep the ring and other items from being stolen.[50]
In 1482 Cardinal d’Estouteville, Archbishop of Rouen, was buried with great magnificence at Rome, where he[Pg 203] died. The body of the prelate was arrayed in the richest robes of cloth of gold, and his fingers were covered with rings of the greatest rarity and beauty. The brilliancy of the jewels (observes Dom Pommeraye in his ‘Lives of the Archbishops of Rouen’) excited the cupidity of the canons of St. Mary Major at Rome, where he was interred, insomuch that they threw themselves on the body, and struggled with each other to get at the rings. The monks of St. Augustine, who also attended on this occasion, pretended to be highly scandalized at this profanation—‘peut-être,’ however, ‘pour avoir part au butin’—and attempted on their part to seize the rings. In this unclerical skirmish the body of the archbishop was entirely stripped of its gorgeous trappings, and left naked, a piteous spectacle.
In 1482, Cardinal d’Estouteville, Archbishop of Rouen, was buried with great splendor in Rome, where he[Pg 203] died. The prelate's body was dressed in the finest robes made of gold fabric, and his fingers were adorned with incredibly rare and beautiful rings. The brilliance of the jewels (noted by Dom Pommeraye in his ‘Lives of the Archbishops of Rouen’) sparked the greed of the canons of St. Mary Major in Rome, where he was buried, to the point that they rushed at the body and fought each other for the rings. The monks of St. Augustine, who were also present at the time, feigned being greatly offended by this desecration—“perhaps,” however, “to share in the loot”—and also tried to grab the rings for themselves. In this unholy brawl, the archbishop's body was completely stripped of its magnificent adornments, leaving it exposed and a sorrowful sight.
Matthew Paris informs us that archbishops, bishops, and abbots, with other principals of the clergy, were buried in their pontificalibus; thus ‘they prepared the body of Hubert, Archbishop of Canterbury, for the burial, closing him in his robes, with his face uncovered, and a mitre put on his head, with gloves upon his hands, a ring on his finger, and all the other ornaments belonging to his office.’
Matthew Paris tells us that archbishops, bishops, and abbots, along with other leading clergy members, were buried in their ceremonial robes. So, ‘they prepared the body of Hubert, Archbishop of Canterbury, for burial, dressing him in his robes, with his face uncovered, a mitre on his head, gloves on his hands, a ring on his finger, and all the other decorations of his office.’
In describing the finger-ring found in the grave of the Venerable Bede, the writer of a brief account of Durham Cathedral adds: ‘No priest during the reign of Catholicity was buried or enshrined without his ring.’ The practice may have prevailed generally, as many instances of rings recovered from the graves of ecclesiastics show, but it was more particularly the usage of prelates. Martene (‘De Antiquis Ecclesiæ Ritibus’) remarks: ‘Episcopus debet habere annulum, quia sponsus est. Cæteri sacerdotes non, quia sponsi non sunt, sed amici sponsi, vel vicarii.’
In describing the ring found in the grave of the Venerable Bede, the author of a short account of Durham Cathedral adds, “No priest during the time of Catholicism was buried or honored without his ring.” This practice might have been common, as many rings found in the graves of clergy suggest, but it was especially prominent among bishops. Martene (‘De Antiquis Ecclesiæ Ritibus’) notes, “A bishop must have a ring because he is a groom. The other priests do not have one, as they are not grooms, but friends of the groom, or deputies.”
The bones of St. Dunstan were discovered in the time of[Pg 204] William, fortieth abbot of Glastonbury: a ring was on the finger-bone of this saint.
The bones of St. Dunstan were found during the time of[Pg 204] William, the fortieth abbot of Glastonbury: a ring was on the finger bone of this saint.
William, the twenty-second abbot of St. Alban’s Abbey, who died in 1235, was buried in pontifical habits ‘with a ring on his finger.’
William, the twenty-second abbot of St. Alban’s Abbey, who died in 1235, was buried in his ceremonial robes ‘with a ring on his finger.’
Richard de Gerbery, forty-fifth Bishop of Amiens, in the thirteenth century, died in 1210, and was buried in the cathedral, in pontificalibus, with mitre, ring, and ivory cross.
Richard de Gerbery, the forty-fifth Bishop of Amiens, in the thirteenth century, died in 1210 and was buried in the cathedral, dressed in his bishop's robes, with a miter, ring, and ivory cross.
When the body of St. John of Beverley (died 721) was translated into a new shrine, about the year 1037, a ring, among other articles, was found in his coffin. We have a much earlier instance cited by Aringhi, that the ring of St Caius (283-296) was found in his tomb: ‘intra sepulchrum tria Diocletiani Imperatoris numismata, sub quo coronatus fuerat, et Sanctissimi Pontificis annulus adinventatus est.’
When the body of St. John of Beverley (died 721) was moved to a new shrine around 1037, a ring, along with other items, was discovered in his coffin. An even earlier example is noted by Aringhi, indicating that the ring of St. Caius (283-296) was found in his tomb: ‘inside the tomb were three coins of Emperor Diocletian, under which he had been crowned, and the ring of the most holy pontiff was found.’
A gold ring was found in the tomb of St. Birinus, Bishop of Dorchester, who died in 640.
A gold ring was discovered in the tomb of St. Birinus, Bishop of Dorchester, who passed away in 640.
Mr. E. Waterton mentions a remarkable ring, set with fine opal, preserved at Mayence Cathedral, where it was found with an enamelled crosier in the tomb, as was supposed, of Archbishop Sigfroi III. (1249).
Mr. E. Waterton talks about a remarkable ring, featuring a beautiful opal, that is kept at Mayence Cathedral, where it was discovered alongside an enamelled crosier in what is believed to be the tomb of Archbishop Sigfroi III. (1249).
Ring of Thierry, Bishop of Verdun.
Ring of Thierry, Bishop of Verdun.
In the Londesborough Collection is the ring of Thierry, Bishop of Verdun (who died in 1165), found in his tomb in 1829. It is of gold, with a sapphire, an irregular oval with five capsular marks on the face; the shank, two winged dragons, between the heads of which is the inscription AVE MARIA GRATIA. This ring was procured in exchange from the collection of M. Failly, Inspector of Customs, at Lyons in 1848.
In the Londesborough Collection is the ring of Thierry, Bishop of Verdun (who died in 1165), found in his tomb in 1829. It is made of gold, featuring a sapphire that is an irregular oval shape with five capsule marks on the face; the shank is adorned with two winged dragons, between the heads of which is the inscription Hail Mary, Full of Grace. This ring was acquired in exchange from the collection of M. Failly, Customs Inspector, in Lyons in 1848.
[Pg 205]Mr. Octavius Morgan remarks: ‘It is difficult to reconcile the practice of returning the ring to the Emperor’ (to which I have in this chapter alluded) ‘with that of interring the bishop with his ring on his finger; but it is probable that, when in the twelfth century the Emperor ceded to the Popes the right of investiture by the ring the sending back the ring was dispensed with; and, being the property of the Church, and not of the Emperor, the bishop was allowed to be interred with his ring as an emblem of his dignity.’
[Pg 205]Mr. Octavius Morgan notes: ‘It's hard to make sense of the custom of returning the ring to the Emperor’ (which I referenced in this chapter) ‘alongside burying the bishop with his ring on his finger; but it’s likely that, when in the twelfth century the Emperor gave the Popes the right to investiture by the ring, the return of the ring was no longer required; and since it was the Church's property, not the Emperor’s, the bishop was permitted to be buried with his ring as a symbol of his dignity.’
The Rev. C. W. King remarks that the custom of burying ecclesiastics with all their official insignia appears to have lasted far down into the Middle Ages; for, amongst the amusing adventures of Andreuccio da Perugia, related by Boccaccio, he, when reduced to despair, joins some thieves in plundering the tomb of the Archbishop of Naples, interred the previous day in all his precious vestments, and with a ring on his finger valued at five hundred scudi. Two parties of plunderers, headed by a priest of the cathedral, visit the tomb in succession, and almost at the same time; to which circumstance Andreuccio owes his escape from a horrible death, and returns home in possession of the ring, which more than makes up for all his losses.
The Rev. C. W. King notes that the tradition of burying church officials with all their ceremonial attire seems to have continued well into the Middle Ages. In one of the amusing stories about Andreuccio da Perugia told by Boccaccio, he, in a moment of despair, teams up with some thieves to rob the tomb of the Archbishop of Naples, who was buried the day before in his valuable vestments and wearing a ring worth five hundred scudi. Two groups of looters, led by a cathedral priest, visit the tomb one after the other and almost simultaneously; this timing is what allows Andreuccio to escape a terrible fate and return home with the ring, which more than compensates for all his losses.
The Rev. C. W. King considers it probable that this common practice of plundering the tombs, gave origin to the huge rings of gilt metal, which bear the titles, or coats of arms, of some pope or bishop.
The Rev. C. W. King thinks it’s likely that this common practice of robbing tombs led to the creation of the large gold-plated rings that feature the titles or coats of arms of certain popes or bishops.
On the subject of pontifical rings of an ordinary character, I may observe that they are found in several collections, usually of brass or copper gilt.
On the topic of regular pontifical rings, I should note that they can be found in various collections, typically made of brass or gold-plated copper.
Benvenuto Cellini, in his ‘Memoirs,’ mentions a magnificent[Pg 206] diamond as having been presented to Pope Paul the Third by the Emperor Charles the Fifth on his entry into Rome (1536), for which he was desired to make a ring, and succeeded in giving the diamond a tint which surpassed anything yet done.
Benvenuto Cellini, in his ‘Memoirs,’ mentions a magnificent[Pg 206] diamond that was given to Pope Paul the Third by Emperor Charles the Fifth when he entered Rome in 1536. He was asked to create a ring from it and managed to give the diamond a color that was better than anything seen before.
Ring of Pope Pius II.
Pope Pius II's ring.
[Pg 207]In the collection of Thomas Windus, Esq., F.S.A., is a ring bearing the arms of Pope Pius II. of the family of Piccolomini, the Papal tiara, and inscription, ‘Papa Pio.’ The ring is of brass, thickly gilt; the stone topaz: on the sides are the four beasts of the ‘Revelation.’
[Pg 207]In Thomas Windus, Esq., F.S.A.'s collection, there is a ring featuring the arms of Pope Pius II from the Piccolomini family, the Papal tiara, and the inscription, ‘Papa Pio.’ The ring is made of brass and heavily gilded; the stone is topaz, and on the sides are the four beasts from the ‘Revelation.’
In the Braybrooke Collection is the ring of Pope Boniface, from whose tomb it was taken during the popular insurrection at Rome, 1849. It is large and of gilt bronze, set with a large amethyst, cut into facets. It is of the usual type of Papal rings, and massive; on one side of the broad shank is engraved the triple crown, with bands for tying it, extending until they are met by the cords attached to the keys, which appear on the other side. The sides of the box-setting are square for an inch below the stone, and on them are the emblems of the four Evangelists in high relief: all these are winged.
In the Braybrooke Collection is the ring of Pope Boniface, which was taken from his tomb during the popular uprising in Rome in 1849. It's large and made of gilt bronze, featuring a sizeable, faceted amethyst. This ring is typical of Papal designs and quite heavy; on one side of the broad band, the triple crown is engraved, with bands for tying it that extend until they meet the cords attached to the keys on the other side. The sides of the setting below the stone are square for about an inch, and they display the emblems of the four Evangelists in high relief, all of which have wings.
In the Waterton Collection at the South Kensington Museum are some remarkably fine specimens of bronze-gilt Papal rings of the fifteenth century, very massive and in excellent condition. Most of these have the symbols of the four Evangelists, the triple crown, and crossed keys.
In the Waterton Collection at the South Kensington Museum, there are some remarkably fine examples of bronze-gilt Papal rings from the fifteenth century, quite substantial and in excellent condition. Most of these feature the symbols of the four Evangelists, the triple crown, and crossed keys.
At a meeting of the Society of Antiquaries in November, 1858, Octavius Morgan, Esq., F.R.S., F.S.A., exhibited a Papal ring of great interest, massive, and of copper-gilt, set with blue glass. At the angles were the symbols of the four Evangelists in relief; on the hoop was inscribed PAVLVS PP SECNDVS (Paulus Papa Secundus). At the sides were two shields; one of them bearing three fleurs-de-lys, and ensigned with an open crown, probably the arms of France; the other charged with a lion debruised by a bend, being[Pg 208] the arms of the family of Barbo of Venice, to which Paul II. belonged. In the upper part of this shield was a small Papal tiara, which might have been placed there for want of room above, or might have been adopted by the Pope’s relation, Marco Barbo, made by him a cardinal in 1464, and who died 1490.
At a meeting of the Society of Antiquaries in November 1858, Octavius Morgan, Esq., F.R.S., F.S.A., showcased a significant Papal ring. It was large, made of copper-gilt, and set with blue glass. The corners featured the symbols of the four Evangelists in relief; the band was inscribed PAVLVS PP SECONDVS (Paulus Papa Secundus). On the sides were two shields; one displayed three fleurs-de-lys and was topped with an open crown, likely representing France; the other had a lion crossed by a diagonal stripe, which was [Pg 208] the arms of the Barbo family of Venice, to which Paul II belonged. Above this shield was a small Papal tiara, which may have been included due to space constraints above or might have been adopted by the Pope’s relative, Marco Barbo, whom he made a cardinal in 1464, and who passed away in 1490.
Mr. Morgan had received this interesting addition to his collection from Venice.
Mr. Morgan had gotten this fascinating addition to his collection from Venice.
Papal Rings (Gorlæus).
Papal Rings (Gorlæus).
In the Londesborough Collection is a fine specimen of a Papal ring. The crossed keys surmount a coat of arms on one side of the ring; the keys alone appear on the opposite[Pg 209] side; foliated ornament fills the space above the circlet on either side. This ring is set with a large crystal.
In the Londesborough Collection, there is an impressive example of a Papal ring. The crossed keys sit above a coat of arms on one side of the ring; the keys alone appear on the other side[Pg 209]; decorative foliage fills the area above the band on both sides. This ring features a large crystal.
Papal Ring.
Papal Ring.
At the suppression of the monasteries there were found in Worcester Cathedral ‘four pontifical rings of gold, with precious stones’ At the same period, amongst the plate and jewels in Winchester Cathedral was a ‘pontyfycall ryng of silvare and gilt, with counterfeitt stones.’ At St. Augustine’s Church at Canterbury were three pontifical rings with precious stones, and one of silver gilt; at St. Swithin’s Church at Winchester, four pontifical rings with precious stones.
At the time of the closure of the monasteries, there were four gold pontifical rings with precious stones found in Worcester Cathedral. Similarly, during that period, among the silverware and jewels in Winchester Cathedral, there was a silver and gilt pontifical ring with imitation stones. At St. Augustine’s Church in Canterbury, there were three pontifical rings with precious stones and one silver gilt ring; at St. Swithin’s Church in Winchester, there were four pontifical rings with precious stones.
The earliest document with a certain date in which mention is made of a bishop’s ring is that usually cited in the 28th canon of the Council of Toledo, held in 633. The ring was of gold and jewelled, but at this Council it was ordained that the ring of a prelate reinstated in his diocese, after an unjust deposition, should be delivered to him, which was merely confirming a ceremony already ancient in the confirmation of bishops, which may be traced to the fourth century.
The earliest document with a specific date that mentions a bishop’s ring is typically referenced in the 28th canon of the Council of Toledo, which took place in 633. The ring was made of gold and adorned with jewels, but at this Council, it was established that the ring of a prelate who was reinstated in his diocese after an unfair removal should be given back to him. This was simply confirming a ceremony that had already been traditional in the confirmation of bishops, which dates back to the fourth century.
In the consecration of bishops in the Anglo-Saxon Church, the hands and head were anointed with oil, the crosier delivered into his hands, and the ring placed on his finger; each ceremony being accompanied with a prayer. ‘There is, however,’ remarks Mr. Octavius Morgan (‘Archæologia,’ vol. xxxvi. part ii. p. 373), ‘another authority, at least contemporary with the Toledo Council, if not of earlier date. St. Isidor, Bishop of Seville, who died A.D. 636, in his work ‘De Ecclesiasticis Officines’ (lib. ii. cap. 5), when writing on the episcopal dignity, informs us that the staff and ring were given to the bishop on his consecration, and mentions the twofold purpose and signification of the ring,[Pg 210] but does not tell us from what source these insignia were derived.’[51]
In the consecration of bishops in the Anglo-Saxon Church, the hands and head were anointed with oil, the crosier was handed to him, and the ring was put on his finger; each ceremony was accompanied by a prayer. “However,” notes Mr. Octavius Morgan (“Archæologia,” vol. xxxvi. part ii. p. 373), “there is another authority, at least contemporary with the Toledo Council, if not older. St. Isidore, Bishop of Seville, who died A.D. 636, in his work ‘De Ecclesiasticis Officines’ (lib. ii. cap. 5), when discussing the episcopal dignity, informs us that the staff and ring were given to the bishop during his consecration and mentions the dual purpose and significance of the ring, but does not specify the source of these insignia.”[Pg 210] [51]
That the episcopal ring, from the earliest times, was considered a symbol of sacerdotal authority, we have many instances. In the ‘Continuation of the History of Simeon of Durham’ we are told that Bishop Ralph (1099) having been inveigled into a boat and his life in danger, he drew the ring which he wore from off his finger, and his notary took his seal, and they cast them into the river, being apprehensive that, as these were well known everywhere throughout England, the enemy would prepare deceitful writs by their means.
That the episcopal ring has been seen as a symbol of priestly authority since ancient times is supported by numerous examples. In the 'Continuation of the History of Simeon of Durham,' it's recorded that Bishop Ralph (1099) was lured into a boat and his life was in danger. He took the ring off his finger, and his notary took his seal, and they threw them into the river, fearing that, since these were well-known throughout England, the enemy would create false documents using them.
The same bishop, a month before his decease in 1128, directed that he should be carried into the church, opposite the altar, there to make confession of his sins. Placing a[Pg 211] ring upon the altar he thereby restored to the church everything of which he had deprived it, and this restitution he confirmed by charter and seal, which are still preserved in the treasury of the Dean and Chapter of Durham. To the charter was also attached the episcopal gold ring (which is no longer there). The charter states that ‘he has surrendered to the Lord St. Cuthbert and his monks whatsoever he had taken from them after he came to the bishopric,’ &c., ‘restoring them by (placing) a ring upon the altar,’ &c.
The same bishop, a month before his death in 1128, ordered that he be brought into the church, in front of the altar, to confess his sins. By placing a[Pg 211] ring on the altar, he restored to the church everything he had taken from it, and he confirmed this restitution with a charter and seal, which are still kept in the treasury of the Dean and Chapter of Durham. The charter also included the episcopal gold ring (which is no longer there). The charter states that ‘he has surrendered to the Lord St. Cuthbert and his monks everything he had taken from them since he became bishop,’ etc., ‘restoring them by (placing) a ring on the altar,’ etc.
Thomas à Becket, when at Rome in 1166, during his quarrel with Henry II., solemnly resigned, in the presence of the Papal Court, his episcopal ring into the hands of Pope Alexander, whom he exhorted to name a fitting successor.
Thomas à Becket, while in Rome in 1166 during his conflict with Henry II., formally handed over his episcopal ring to Pope Alexander in front of the Papal Court, urging him to appoint a worthy successor.
In the History of the Archbishops of Canterbury, by Gervase, we read that in 1179, Godfrey, Bishop-elect of St. Asaph’s, resigned his bishopric by surrendering his ring.
In the History of the Archbishops of Canterbury, by Gervase, we read that in 1179, Godfrey, the Bishop-elect of St. Asaph’s, gave up his position by handing over his ring.
An ancient custom in the Archbishopric of Rouen was that the body of the deceased prelate, before being interred in the cathedral, was carried to the church of St. Ouen (at Rouen), where it remained exposed a whole day. The dean of the cathedral, in committing the body to the charge of the Abbot of St. Ouen, said ‘Ecce,’ to which the latter replied ‘Est hic.’ Then the dean gave the Archbishop’s ring to the abbot, at the same time placing his hand in the coffin of the defunct, and saying: ‘You gave it to him living; behold he is dead,’ alluding to the custom of the Archbishops of Rouen being consecrated in the church of St. Ouen.
An old tradition in the Archbishopric of Rouen was that the body of the deceased bishop, before being laid to rest in the cathedral, was taken to the church of St. Ouen (in Rouen), where it was displayed for an entire day. The dean of the cathedral, handing the body over to the Abbot of St. Ouen, said ‘Ecce,’ to which the abbot replied ‘Est hic.’ Then the dean gave the Archbishop’s ring to the abbot, while also placing his hand in the coffin of the deceased, saying: ‘You gave it to him while he was alive; look, he is dead,’ referencing the tradition of the Archbishops of Rouen being consecrated in the church of St. Ouen.
Mr. Waterton remarks ‘that in 511, the Council of Orleans makes mention of the rescript of Clodovicus, wherein he promises to leave certain captives at the disposition of the Gallican bishops, “si vestras epistolas de annulo[Pg 212] vestro signatas sic ad nos dirigatis.”’ The same eminent antiquarian states that ‘prior to the eleventh century, many, if not all, of the episcopal rings were signets; for before that time large official seals were not in general use. Each bishop seems to have chosen the subject to be engraved on his ring, at pleasure. St. Augustine, in one of his letters, mentions that he sealed it with his ring, “qui exprimit faciem hominis attendentis in latus.” In writing to Apollinaris, Bishop of Valence, Clodovicus begs him to send the seal, or signet (signatorum), which he had promised, made in such a way “ut annulo ferreo et admodum tenui, velut concurrentibus in se delphinulis concludendo, sigili duplicis forma geminis cardinalis inseratur.” And, referring to the subject to be engraved on the bezel, he adds, “si quæras quid insculpendum sigillo, signo monogrammatis mei per gyram scripti nominis legatur indicio.”’
Mr. Waterton points out that in 511, the Council of Orleans mentions the decree of Clodovicus, in which he promises to leave certain captives at the discretion of the Gallican bishops, “if you send us your letters bearing your annulo[Pg 212] signet like this.” The same noted historian states that before the eleventh century, many, if not all, episcopal rings were signets; before that time, large official seals weren't commonly used. Each bishop seems to have chosen the design to be engraved on his ring as he wished. St. Augustine, in one of his letters, mentions sealing it with his ring, “which shows the face of a man looking to the side.” In a letter to Apollinaris, Bishop of Valence, Clodovicus asks him to send the seal or signet (signatorum) he had promised, made in such a way “that a thin iron ring, like dolphins coming together, will hold a double seal form inscribed with two cardinal figures.” And regarding the design to be engraved on the bezel, he adds, “if you want to know what to engrave on the seal, let it be indicated by my monogram, written in the shape of my name.”
In the early days of Christianity bishops sealed with their rings the profession of faith which the neophytes made in writing. They also sealed their pastoral letters. Ebregislaus, Bishop of Meaux, in 660, wore on his ring an intaglio, representing St. Paul, the first hermit, on his knees before the crucifix, and above his head, a crow, by which he was miraculously fed.
In the early days of Christianity, bishops used their rings to seal the written professions of faith made by new converts. They also used them to seal their pastoral letters. Ebregislaus, Bishop of Meaux, in 660, had an engraving on his ring depicting St. Paul, the first hermit, praying on his knees before the crucifix, with a crow above his head that fed him miraculously.
In conformity with a decree of St. Sergius I. (687-701), the bishops of France and Spain used to seal up the baptismal fonts with their rings from the beginning of Lent to Holy Saturday.
In line with a decree from St. Sergius I. (687-701), the bishops of France and Spain would seal the baptismal fonts with their rings from the start of Lent until Holy Saturday.
From ancient documents it would appear that bishops sometimes called their rings ‘annuli ecclesiæ.’ David, Bishop of Benevento, in the time of Charlemagne, issued a mandate, ending as follows: ‘annulo sanctæ nostræ ecclesiæ firmavivus roborandum.’ In 862, Rathbodus,[Pg 213] Bishop of Treves, writes thus: ‘Hanc epistolam Græcis litteris, hinc, inde, munire decrevimus, et annulo ecclesiæ nostræ bullare censuimus.’ In 985 Pope John XVI. sealed with his ring the confirmation of the decree made by the Council of Mayence, in favour of the monks of Corvey, in Saxony.
From ancient documents, it seems that bishops sometimes referred to their rings as ‘annuli ecclesiæ.’ David, Bishop of Benevento, during Charlemagne's time, issued a mandate that ended with: ‘annulo sanctæ nostræ ecclesiæ firmavivus roborandum.’ In 862, Rathbodus,[Pg 213] Bishop of Treves, wrote: ‘Hanc epistolam Græcis litteris, hinc, inde, munire decrevimus, et annulo ecclesiæ nostræ bullare censuimus.’ In 985, Pope John XVI sealed the confirmation of the decree made by the Council of Mayence in favor of the monks of Corvey in Saxony with his ring.
These quotations are sufficient to prove that until the 11th century the bishops used their rings as signets; but we must not infer that every episcopal ring was a signet. It is probable that each bishop had a large jewelled ring to use when pontificating.
These quotes are enough to show that until the 11th century, bishops used their rings as seals; however, we shouldn’t assume that every episcopal ring served as a seal. It’s likely that each bishop had a large jeweled ring for ceremonial purposes.
Of the importance attached to the possession of the episcopal ring we are told that Gundulf, the good Bishop of Rochester, in his last days distributed all his goods to the poor, even to his shoes, and bequeathed his rich vestments to the cathedral. There was only one ornament with which he could not part, that was the episcopal ring, and he confided this to the care of his attendants, intending, probably, that it should be delivered to his successor. Ralph, who had lately been elected Abbot of Battle, had formerly been Prior of Rochester, and had been deservedly popular. The monks were anxious that he should be the successor of Gundulf, and were prepared to elect him, if they could obtain the consent of the archbishop. If to the Abbot of Battle Gundulf bequeathed or resigned the episcopal ring, it might be produced as an indication of Gundulf’s wish that Ralph, of Battle Abbey, should succeed him. A suggestion to this effect was made to the old bishop, who said curtly: ‘He is a monk, what has he to do with an episcopal ring?’ He was, probably, offended at the ambition of the ex-prior of Rochester, who ought to have been contented with his newly-acquired dignity at Battle Abbey. Soon[Pg 214] after this, another Ralph made his appearance at the priory, Ralph of Seez, who afterwards became Archbishop of Canterbury. Having been ejected from his monastery by violence, he came to England, and was received everywhere with hearty regard, on account of his virtues and accomplishments. Hearing of Gundulf’s illness, he hastened to Rochester, to console his old friend on the bed of sickness. Ralph was obliged to leave Rochester after a short visit, but on quitting his friend he was recalled, and Gundulf, demanding of his attendant the episcopal ring, placed it as a parting gift in the hand of Ralph of Seez, who suggested it might be better disposed of to one of Gundulf’s episcopal friends, since it did not pertain to an abbot to wear a ring. He reminded the bishop that, though not living a monk, still a monk he was. ‘Take it, nevertheless,’ said the bishop, ‘you may want it some day.’
Of the significance of the episcopal ring, we learn that Gundulf, the good Bishop of Rochester, in his final days gave away all his possessions to the poor, even his shoes, and left his fine vestments to the cathedral. There was only one item he couldn't part with: the episcopal ring. He entrusted it to his attendants, likely intending for it to be passed on to his successor. Ralph, who had recently been elected Abbot of Battle, had previously been Prior of Rochester and was quite popular. The monks were eager for him to succeed Gundulf and were ready to elect him if they could get the archbishop's approval. If Gundulf passed the episcopal ring to the Abbot of Battle, it could be seen as a sign of his wish for Ralph from Battle Abbey to take his place. A suggestion along these lines was made to the old bishop, who replied tersely: "He’s a monk; what does he have to do with an episcopal ring?" He was likely annoyed by the ambition of the former prior of Rochester, who should have been satisfied with his new respect at Battle Abbey. Soon after, another Ralph appeared at the priory, Ralph of Seez, who later became Archbishop of Canterbury. After being violently expelled from his monastery, he came to England and was warmly welcomed everywhere for his virtues and abilities. Learning of Gundulf's illness, he quickly went to Rochester to comfort his old friend. Ralph had to leave Rochester after a brief visit, but as he was leaving, Gundulf called him back and, asking his attendant for the episcopal ring, placed it as a parting gift in Ralph of Seez's hand. Ralph suggested it might be better given to one of Gundulf's episcopal friends since it wasn't appropriate for an abbot to wear a ring. He reminded the bishop that, although not living as a monk, he still was one at heart. "Take it, anyway," said the bishop, "you might need it someday."
The possession of this ring reconciled the monks to the appointment of Ralph of Seez as successor of Gundulf to the bishopric of Rochester, as they regarded the donation in the light of a prophecy.
The possession of this ring helped the monks accept the appointment of Ralph of Seez as Gundulf's successor to the bishopric of Rochester, as they saw the donation as a fulfillment of a prophecy.
‘Before,’ says Mr. Waterton, ‘receiving the pastoral staff and mitre, the bishop-elect is invested by the consecrating bishop with the pontifical ring. The formula seems to have varied at different times, the most ancient one, contained in the Sacramental of St. Gregory, 590, is this: “Accipe annulum discretionis et honoris, fidei signum, et quæ signanda sunt signes, et quæ aperienda sunt prodas, quæ liganda sunt liges, quæ solvenda sunt solvas, atque credentibus per fidem baptismatis, lapsis autem sed pœnitentibus per mysterium reconciliationis januas regni cœlestis aperias; cunctis vero de thesauro dominico ad æternam salutem hominibus, consolatus gratiâ Domini nostri Jesu Christi.”
‘Before,’ says Mr. Waterton, ‘receiving the pastoral staff and mitre, the bishop-elect is invested by the consecrating bishop with the pontifical ring. The formula seems to have varied at different times, the most ancient one, contained in the Sacramental of St. Gregory, 590, is this: “Receive this ring of discretion and honor, a sign of faith, and what needs to be marked, mark, and what needs to be opened, open; what needs to be bound, bind; what needs to be loosed, loose; and to the faithful through the faith of baptism, and to those who have fallen but are penitent through the mystery of reconciliation, may you open the doors of the heavenly kingdom; and to all from the Lord's treasury for eternal salvation for mankind, may you be consoled by the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ.”
[Pg 215]‘Another form, of a later date, has the above, with the following addition:—“Memor sponsionis et desponsationis ecclesiasticæ et dilectionis Domini Dei tui, in die quâ assecutus es hunc honorem, cave ne obliviscaris illius.”
[Pg 215]‘Another version, from a later time, includes the above with this addition:—“Remember the promise and commitment of the church and the love of your Lord God, on the day you received this honor; be careful not to forget it.”
‘The ancient Ordo Romanus contains a formula couched in more elegant words: “Accipe annulum pontificalis honoris, ut sis fidei integritate ante omnia munitus, misericordiæ operibus insistens, infirmis compatiens, benevolentibus congaudens, aliena damna propria deputans, de alienis gaudiis tanquam de propriis exultans.”
‘The ancient Ordo Romanus includes a formula expressed in more polished language: “Receive the ring of pontifical honor, so you may be fortified by the integrity of faith above all, dedicated to acts of mercy, compassionate toward the weak, rejoicing with the benevolent, considering others' losses as your own, and celebrating others' joys as if they were your own.”’
‘The formula,’ continues Mr. E. Waterton, ‘seems to have varied at different times; that contained in the pontifical of Ecgberht, Archbishop of York, is as follows: “Accipe annulum pontificalis honoris ut sis fidei integritate munitus.” The Anglo-Saxon pontifical at Rouen, and that of St. Dunstan at Paris, both give the following: “Accipe ergo annulum discretionis et honoris, fidei signum, et quæ signanda sunt signes, et quæ aperienda sunt prodas.”’
‘The formula,’ Mr. E. Waterton continues, ‘appears to have changed over time; the one in the pontifical of Ecgberht, Archbishop of York, is as follows: “Receive the ring of pontifical honor so that you may be fortified by the integrity of faith.” The Anglo-Saxon pontifical in Rouen and that of St. Dunstan in Paris both state: “Therefore, receive the ring of discretion and honor, a sign of faith, and what needs to be signed, sign it, and what needs to be revealed, reveal it.”’
In the eleventh and twelfth centuries the ring, as a part of ecclesiastical investiture, was a fruitful subject of discord between the Emperors and the Popes, until 1123, the Emperor Henry the Fifth, alarmed by the threats of the Pontiff, ceded the right to Calixtus II., from which time the rings were sent to the bishops-elect from the Pope—a practice continued in the Roman Catholic hierarchy to the present time. In preceding ages, however, monarchs were not so yielding. In the romance of ‘King Athelstan,’ the sovereign says to an offending archbishop:—
In the 11th and 12th centuries, the ring, as part of church investiture, was a major source of conflict between the Emperors and the Popes. This continued until 1123, when Emperor Henry V, worried about the Pope's threats, gave the right to Calixtus II. From that point on, the rings were sent to bishops-elect by the Pope—a practice that remains in the Roman Catholic hierarchy to this day. However, in earlier times, monarchs were more obstinate. In the story of 'King Athelstan,' the king says to an archbishop who has offended him:—
Lay down thy cross and thy staff,
The myter and the ryng that I to thee gaff,
Out of my land thou flee.
Lay down your cross and your staff,
The mitre and the ring that I gave to you,
Get off my land.
Cardinals on their creation receive a ring in which is[Pg 216] usually a sapphire. Wolsey was raised to this dignity in 1515, the Pope having forwarded with the hat (an unusual thing to be sent out of Rome) a ring of more than ordinary value.
Cardinals receive a ring when they are appointed, which usually has a sapphire in it. Wolsey was elevated to this position in 1515, with the Pope sending a ring of exceptional value along with the hat (which was unusual for something to be sent out of Rome).
Cardinals wear their rings at all times, but on Good Friday they lay them aside, as a sign of the mourning in which the Church is placed for her Spouse. At the recent installation of cardinals (September 1875) the venerable Pontiff presented each dignitary with a gold ring set with a sapphire.
Cardinals wear their rings all the time, but on Good Friday they take them off as a symbol of the mourning the Church feels for her Spouse. During the recent installation of cardinals (September 1875), the revered Pope gave each dignitary a gold ring with a sapphire set in it.
In 1191 the fashion of the episcopal ring was definitively settled by Innocent III., who ordained that it should be of gold, solid, and set with a precious stone, on which nothing was to be cut; previous to this, bishops’ rings were not restricted to any special material or design. ‘In the thirteenth century,’ remarks Mr. E. Waterton, ‘many of the episcopal rings were of very rude fashion, frequently in almost literal conformity with the rescript of Innocent III., without regard to shape or elegance. The stone was set just as it was found, merely having the surface polished, and the shape of the bezel was adapted to the gem. There are proofs that cameos were worn in episcopal rings. In the list of rings and precious stones collected by Henry III. for the shrine of St. Edward, in Westminster Abbey, there is enumerated: “j chamah in uno annulo pontificali.” We know that during the Middle Ages the glyptic art had declined very much, and that from their fancied assimilation antique gems were occasionally used for devout subjects. Thus the monks of Durham converted an antique intaglio of Jupiter Tonans into the ‘caput Sancti Oswaldi.’
In 1191, Pope Innocent III established the standard for the episcopal ring, specifying that it should be made of solid gold and set with a precious stone that had no engraving on it. Before this, bishops' rings could be made from any material or design. “In the thirteenth century,” notes Mr. E. Waterton, “many of the episcopal rings were rather crudely made, often adhering closely to Innocent III's decree, without caring about shape or style. The stone was set just as it was found, with only the surface polished, and the bezel was shaped to fit the gem. There’s evidence that cameos were used in episcopal rings. In the list of rings and precious stones collected by Henry III for St. Edward's shrine in Westminster Abbey, it mentions: ‘j chamah in uno annulo pontificali.’ We know that during the Middle Ages, the art of engraving had significantly declined, and antique gems were sometimes repurposed for religious themes. For instance, the monks of Durham transformed an ancient intaglio of Jupiter Tonans into the ‘head of St. Oswald.’
During the latter part of the thirteenth century the large episcopal rings were enriched by the addition of[Pg 217] previous stones, which were set around the principal one. Thus, in the ‘Wardrobe Book’ there is the following entry: ‘Annulus auri cum quatuor rubettis magnis qui fuit Fratris J. de Peccham, nuper Cantuariensis Archiepiscopi. He died in 1292.’
During the late thirteenth century, the large episcopal rings were enhanced by the addition of[Pg 217] previous stones, arranged around the main one. In the ‘Wardrobe Book,’ there’s an entry that says: ‘Gold ring with four large rubies that belonged to Brother J. de Peccham, the late Archbishop of Canterbury. He died in 1292.’
Episcopal rings were usually set with sapphires, probably from a popular belief that this precious stone had the power of cooling love; owing, perhaps, to the coldness of its touch, due to its density. The Rev. C. W. King, however, gives as a reason for the choice of the sapphire that, besides its supposed sympathy with the heavens, mentioned by Solinus, and its connexion with the god of day, Apollo, the violet colour agrees with the vestments appropriated to the priestly office.
Episcopal rings were typically set with sapphires, likely because of a common belief that this gem had the power to cool love, possibly due to its cool touch, a result of its density. The Rev. C. W. King, however, explains the choice of the sapphire by noting that, in addition to its supposed connection to the heavens, as mentioned by Solinus, and its association with the sun god, Apollo, the violet color matches the vestments worn by priests.
An episcopal ring, with gold and a sapphire, said to have belonged to St. Loup, is in the treasury of the Cathedral of Sens, and is, probably, of the Carlovingian period.
An episcopal ring, made of gold and featuring a sapphire, believed to have belonged to St. Loup, is in the treasury of the Cathedral of Sens and is likely from the Carolingian period.
Episcopal ring.
Bishop's ring.
‘Mention occurs,’ remarks Mr. E. Waterton, ‘of episcopal rings being set with the balass-ruby, the emerald, the topaz, the turquoise, the chalcedony, and, as accessories, pearls and garnets. Sometimes these gems were of great value.’ The Rev. C. W. King thinks it probable that when mediæval rings occur, set with a ruby instead of a sapphire, they belong to bishops who were at the same time cardinals. At the disgraceful seizure of Archbishop Cranmer’s effects, in 1553, we find mentioned, among the articles of considerable value taken from his house at Battersea: ‘six or seven rings of fine gold, with stones in[Pg 218] them, whereof were three fine blue sapphires of the best; an emerald, very fine; a good turquoise and a diamond.’
‘Mr. E. Waterton notes that bishops’ rings were often set with balas rubies, emeralds, topazes, turquoises, chalcedonies, and sometimes included pearls and garnets as accessories. Occasionally, these gems were quite valuable.’ Rev. C. W. King suggests that when medieval rings feature a ruby instead of a sapphire, they likely belonged to bishops who were also cardinals. During the disgraceful seizure of Archbishop Cranmer’s possessions in 1553, a list of valuable items taken from his home in Battersea includes: ‘six or seven fine gold rings set with stones, among which were three fine blue sapphires of the highest quality; a very fine emerald; a good turquoise; and a diamond.’
At the degradation of a bishop in former times, the reasons were given in a solemn assembly, and judgment pronounced, the mitre was removed from his head, and the pontifical ring drawn off his finger, as having outraged the Church.
At the fall of a bishop in the past, the reasons were presented in a serious gathering, and a judgment was made. The mitre was taken off his head, and the pontifical ring was removed from his finger for having offended the Church.
With regard to the finger on which the episcopal ring is worn, a correspondent of ‘Notes and Queries’ (vol. v., first series, p. 114), remarks that ‘all who wear rings, ex officio, wear them on the third finger of the right hand. Cardinals, bishops, abbots, doctors, &c., do this for the reason that it is the first vacant finger. The thumb and the first two fingers have always been reserved as symbols of the Three Persons of the Holy Trinity. When a bishop gives his blessing he blesses with the thumb and two first fingers. Our brasses, with sepulchral slabs, bear witness to this fact.’
Regarding the finger on which the episcopal ring is worn, a contributor to ‘Notes and Queries’ (vol. v., first series, p. 114) notes that ‘everyone who wears rings, ex officio, wears them on the third finger of the right hand. Cardinals, bishops, abbots, doctors, etc., do this because it is the first empty finger. The thumb and the first two fingers have always been set aside as symbols of the Three Persons of the Holy Trinity. When a bishop gives a blessing, he uses the thumb and the first two fingers. Our brasses, along with sepulchral slabs, confirm this fact.’
A French writer observes that formerly the episcopal ring was worn on the fore-finger, but as, for the celebration of the holy mysteries, bishops were obliged to place it on the fourth finger, the custom prevailed of carrying it thus.
A French writer notes that in the past, bishops used to wear their episcopal ring on the forefinger, but since they had to place it on the fourth finger for the celebration of the holy mysteries, it became common to wear it that way.
Mr. E. Waterton gives his explanation thus, and there could be no better authority: ‘It appears that bishops formerly wore their rings on the index of their right hand, being the middle one of the three fingers which they extend when they are giving their blessing, but when celebrating mass they passed the ring on to the annular. They wore it on the index as the fore-finger was indicative of silence, that they ought to communicate the divine mysteries only to the worthy. Gregory IV., in 827, ordered that the episcopal ring should not be worn on the left, but on the right hand,[Pg 219] as it was more distinguished (nobile) and was the hand with which the blessing was imparted.’[52]
Mr. E. Waterton explains it this way, and he’s a reliable source: ‘It seems that bishops used to wear their rings on the index finger of their right hand, which is the middle one of the three fingers they extend when giving a blessing. However, when celebrating mass, they would switch the ring to their ring finger. They wore it on the index finger because that finger represented silence, indicating that they should share the divine mysteries only with those who are worthy. In 827, Gregory IV. mandated that the episcopal ring should be worn on the right hand instead of the left hand, as it was more distinguished (nobile) and was the hand used to give blessings.’[Pg 219]
Episcopal Thumb-ring.
Episcopal thumb ring.
The episcopal ring is now always worn on the annular finger of the right hand, and bishops never wear more than one. In the pictures of the early Italian masters, however,[Pg 220] and on sepulchral effigies, bishops are represented with many rings, some of which are not unfrequently on the second joint of the fingers. A thumb-ring is often seen; one is represented (p. 219) belonging to a late Dean of St. Patrick’s, the sketch of which was made by the late Mr. Fairholt, when it was in the possession of Mr. Huxtable, F.S.A., in 1847. It is of bronze, thickly gilt, and set with a crystal. In Raffaelle’s portrait of Julius II. the Pope is represented as wearing six rings. Certain it is, as late as the year 1516, the Popes occasionally wore two or more rings.
The episcopal ring is now always worn on the ring finger of the right hand, and bishops never wear more than one. In the artwork of the early Italian masters, however,[Pg 220] and on burial monuments, bishops are depicted with many rings, some of which are often seen on the second joint of the fingers. A thumb ring is commonly shown; one is depicted (p. 219) that belonged to a late Dean of St. Patrick’s, sketched by the late Mr. Fairholt when it was owned by Mr. Huxtable, F.S.A., in 1847. It is made of bronze, heavily gilded, and set with a crystal. In Raffaelle’s portrait of Julius II, the Pope is shown wearing six rings. It's clear that as late as 1516, Popes occasionally wore two or more rings.
As the large pontifical ring was of a size sufficient to enable the bishop to pass it over the silk glove which he wears when pontificating, a smaller, or guard ring, was used to keep it on the finger.
As the large bishop's ring was big enough for the bishop to slip it over the silk glove he wears when officiating, a smaller guard ring was used to keep it on his finger.
In the Waterton Collection is a very pale gold episcopal ring, with oblong hexagonal bezel, set with a pale cabochon sapphire, and the hoop divided into square compartments chased with rosettes, and finished on the shoulders with monsters’ heads. French, of the early part of the fifteenth century.
In the Waterton Collection, there’s a very light gold episcopal ring with an oblong hexagonal bezel, set with a light cabochon sapphire. The band is divided into square sections decorated with rosettes and features monster heads on the shoulders. It’s French, from the early 1400s.
In the Anglo-Saxon annals, an archbishop bequeaths a ring in his will, and a king sends a golden ring, enriched with a precious stone, as a present to a bishop. So great was the extravagance among the clergy for these ornaments that Elfric, in his ‘canons,’ found it necessary to exhort the ecclesiastics ‘not to be proud with their rings.’ In the mediæval romances we are told that at the marriage of Sir Degrevant, there came
In the Anglo-Saxon records, an archbishop leaves a ring in his will, and a king gives a golden ring, studded with a precious stone, as a gift to a bishop. The excess among the clergy for these decorations was so high that Elfric, in his ‘canons,’ felt it was important to urge the clergy ‘not to be proud of their rings.’ In the medieval romances, we learn that at the wedding of Sir Degrevant, there came
Erchebyschopbz with ryng
Mo than fiftene.
Erchebyschopbz with ryng
More than fifteen.
In the effigy of Bishop Oldham (died 1519), in Exeter Cathedral, the uplifted hands of the recumbent figure, which[Pg 221] are pressed together, are adorned with no less than seven large rings on the fingers, three being on the right, and four on the left hand. In addition to these, a single signet-ring of extraordinary size is represented as worn over both the thumbs.
In the effigy of Bishop Oldham (died 1519) in Exeter Cathedral, the raised hands of the reclining figure, which[Pg 221] are pressed together, are decorated with seven large rings on the fingers—three on the right hand and four on the left. Additionally, there is one unusually large signet ring shown worn over both thumbs.
But the number of these rings is exceeded by far in the case of the arm of St. Blaize, exhibited in the Cathedral of Brunswick, on the fingers of which are no less than fourteen rings. This relic was brought from Palestine by Henry the Lion in the eleventh century, and is encased in silver.
But the number of these rings is greatly surpassed by the arm of St. Blaize, displayed in the Cathedral of Brunswick, which has no less than fourteen rings on its fingers. This relic was brought from Palestine by Henry the Lion in the eleventh century and is enclosed in silver.
In a miniature in the ‘Heures d’Anne de Bretagne’ (1500), representing St. Nicholas and the miracle of the three children, the bishop is represented with one hand extended in the act of blessing, with a large ring over two fingers. A ring is on one of the fingers of the other hand. In paintings of the early bishops of the Church they are figured with gloves having the ruby on the back of the hand, and the official ring on the fore-finger of the right hand sometimes, but not always, introduced.
In a small illustration in the ‘Heures d’Anne de Bretagne’ (1500), showing St. Nicholas and the miracle of the three children, the bishop is depicted with one hand raised in a blessing gesture, wearing a large ring on two of his fingers. There's also a ring on one of the fingers of his other hand. In artworks of the early bishops of the Church, they are often shown wearing gloves with a ruby on the back of the hand, and the official ring on the forefinger of the right hand is sometimes included, but not always.
Dart, in his ‘History of Canterbury,’ gives an inventory of the Ornamenta Ecclesiastica taken in 1315. One of the annuli pontificales was of elaborate character, and is thus described: ‘Annulus quadratus magnus cum smaragdine oblongo, et quatuor pramis, et quatuor garnettis.’ The others had sapphires surrounded by smaller gems. One of these rings was set ‘cum sapphiro nigro in quatuor cramponibus ex omne parte discoperto.’
Dart, in his ‘History of Canterbury,’ provides a list of the Ornamenta Ecclesiastica from 1315. One of the annuli pontificales was designed elaborately and is described as follows: ‘Large square ring with an elongated emerald, and four prongs, and four garnets.’ The other rings featured sapphires surrounded by smaller gems. One of these rings was set ‘with a black sapphire in four prongs, fully exposed on all sides.’
In the ‘Archæological Journal’ (vol. ii., 1854) is an interesting account by the late Mr. Albert Way, of the ecclesiastical mortuary or corse-present: ‘Whether this was originally a composition for offerings omitted, or in the nature of a payment for sepulture, frequently consisted,[Pg 222] amongst other things of a ring. Thus in the archdeaconry of Chester, on the death of every priest, his best signet, or ring, with various other objects belonging to the bishop as being the archdeacon.’
In the ‘Archæological Journal’ (vol. ii., 1854), there’s an interesting account by the late Mr. Albert Way about the ecclesiastical mortuary or corpse gift: ‘Whether this was originally a collection for unaided offerings, or a type of payment for burial, often included,[Pg 222] among other things, a ring. So, in the archdeaconry of Chester, upon the death of every priest, his best signet, or ring, along with various other items belonging to the bishop as the archdeacon.’
The King, in like manner, on the death of every archbishop and bishop, was entitled to a gold ring with other things. On the death of some abbots the King claimed the like. These rights existed in the reign of Edward I. and probably earlier. In the province of Canterbury the second-best ring of the bishop accompanied the seals, which, there is reason to think, were given up to their metropolitans. In 1310, on the death of Robert Orford, Bishop of Ely, his pontifical ring not having been delivered up in due course, a mandate was issued by Archbishop Winchelsey, directed to Richard de Oteringham, then administering the spiritualities of the vacant see, to obtain possession of the ring, which appeared to have been kept back by two of the monks of Ely. The mandate recites all the circumstances which had occurred, describing the ring as ‘annulum qui pontificalis vulgariter appellatur, qui de jure et consuetudine nostre ecclesie Cantuariensis ad nos dignoscitur pertinere.’ It was alleged by the monks of Ely that the deceased prelate had made a gift of this ring in his lifetime to the Prior and Convent, but that, having no other pontifical ring, he had retained it for his own use until his death. The Prior and Convent then had possession of the ring, which they forthwith caused to be affixed to the shrine of St. Ealburga. The two monks incurred the penalty of excommunication; the Archbishop forthwith cited the Prior and Convent to appear before him, and there can be little doubt that the ring was ultimately delivered up. The details of this curious transaction are related in Archbishop Winchelsey’s[Pg 223] Register, and may be seen in Wilkins’s ‘Concilia,’ vol. ii. p. 403.
The King, similarly, upon the death of every archbishop and bishop, was entitled to a gold ring and other items. Upon the death of some abbots, the King claimed the same rights. These rights were acknowledged during the reign of Edward I and likely even earlier. In the province of Canterbury, the second-best ring of the bishop was to be handed over along with the seals, which seem to have been given up to their metropolitans. In 1310, after the death of Robert Orford, Bishop of Ely, his ceremonial ring hadn’t been returned as expected, so Archbishop Winchelsey issued a directive to Richard de Oteringham, who was then managing the spiritual affairs of the vacant see, to retrieve the ring, which had apparently been withheld by two monks of Ely. The directive outlines all the events that transpired, describing the ring as ‘annulum qui pontificalis vulgariter appellatur, qui de jure et consuetudine nostre ecclesie Cantuariensis ad nos dignoscitur pertinere.’ The monks of Ely claimed that the late bishop had given the ring to the Prior and Convent during his lifetime, but since he had no other ceremonial ring, he held on to it for his personal use until his death. The Prior and Convent then took possession of the ring and immediately attached it to the shrine of St. Ealburga. The two monks faced excommunication as a penalty; the Archbishop promptly summoned the Prior and Convent to appear before him, and there is little doubt that the ring was eventually returned. The details of this unusual event are documented in Archbishop Winchelsey’s[Pg 223] Register, which can also be found in Wilkins’s ‘Concilia,’ vol. ii. p. 403.
In regard to two of the sees in Wales, St. Asaph and Bangor, the claim extended to the palfry with bridle and saddle, the capa pluvialis, or riding-cloak, and the hat used by the deceased prelate. The seals and best ring were likewise demanded, as in the case of the other bishops of the Principality, and of the province of Canterbury in general. On the decease of Anian, Bishop of Bangor, in 1327, the metropolitan see being at that time vacant, the Prior of Christ Church claimed the ring, seals, and other effects, which had not been rendered up to him in due course. The following entry appears on this occasion: ‘De annulo et sigilis Episcopi Bangorensis restituendis.—Magister Kenewricus Canonicus Assavensis, officialis noster sede Bangorensi vacante, habet literam de annulo secundo meliori et omnibus sigillis bone memorie domini Aniani Episcopi Bangorensis, ac etiam de aliis bonis nobis et ecclesie nostre Cantuarien de jure et consuetudine antiqua et approbata debitis post mortem cujuslibet Episcopi Bangorensis, que de Magistro Madoco Archidiacono Angles’ executore testimenti dicti domini Aniani recepit, nobis absque more majoris dispendio apud Cantuariam transmittendis necnon de omnibus aliis bonis que ad manus suas sede Bangorensi vacante vel plena devenerunt; et ad certificandum nos infra xx dies post recepcionem presentium quod super premissis duxerit faciendis. Dated at Canterbury, July 15, 1328.’
In relation to two of the sees in Wales, St. Asaph and Bangor, the claim included the horse with bridle and saddle, the capa pluvialis, or riding-cloak, and the hat used by the deceased bishop. The seals and best ring were also demanded, just like in the case of the other bishops in the Principality and the province of Canterbury overall. When Anian, Bishop of Bangor, died in 1327, the metropolitan see was vacant, and the Prior of Christ Church claimed the ring, seals, and other belongings that had not been returned to him in a timely manner. The following entry was made regarding this situation: ‘Regarding the ring and seals of the Bishop of Bangor to be returned.—Master Kenewricus, Canon of St. Asaph, our official during the vacancy of the See of Bangor, has a letter regarding the second ring of better quality and all the seals of the good memory of Lord Anian, Bishop of Bangor, and also regarding other goods owed to us and our church of Canterbury by right and ancient approved custom after the death of any Bishop of Bangor, which were received from Master Madoc, Archdeacon of Anglesey, executor of the testament of Lord Anian, to be sent to us without the usual major expense at Canterbury, as well as all other goods that came into his possession during the vacancy of the See of Bangor; and to certify us within 20 days of receiving this that he has carried out the above. Dated at Canterbury, July 15, 1328.’
These instructions from the Prior to his official seem to have produced no effect. A letter is found subsequently in the same register (K. 12, f. 158, vo), addressed from Mayfield by Simon Mepham, Archbishop of Canterbury, to Henry Gower, Bishop of St. David’s, stating the demand of[Pg 224] the Prior had not been satisfied, and requiring him to obtain restitution of the seals and ring which had belonged to the deceased prelate. The matter appears accordingly to have been adjusted without delay, since a formal acquittance is found in the same volume, dated at Canterbury, February 3, 1328.
These instructions from the Prior to his official seem to have had no impact. A letter was later found in the same register (K. 12, f. 158, vo), sent from Mayfield by Simon Mepham, Archbishop of Canterbury, to Henry Gower, Bishop of St. David’s, stating that the Prior's demand had not been met, and requiring him to retrieve the seals and ring that belonged to the deceased prelate. It seems the matter was resolved promptly, as there is a formal receipt in the same volume, dated at Canterbury, February 3, 1328.
A similar occurrence is recorded in the register on the decease of David Martyn, Bishop of St. David’s, March 9, 1328. His executors had delivered the seals and ring to Master Edmund de Mepham, who had departed this life; and a letter is found from Henry de Eastry, Prior of Christ Church, to Robert Leveye, Edmund’s executor, requesting him to render up these objects to which the Prior was entitled.
A similar event is noted in the records regarding the death of David Martyn, Bishop of St. David’s, on March 9, 1328. His executors had given the seals and ring to Master Edmund de Mepham, who had passed away; and there’s a letter from Henry de Eastry, Prior of Christ Church, to Robert Leveye, Edmund’s executor, asking him to return these items to which the Prior was entitled.
The Wardrobe Books and other records would doubtless show that the rights of the Crown were constantly enforced on the decease of archbishops and bishops with no less jealous vigilance than those of the Church of Canterbury. In the Wardrobe Book of 28th Edward I., for instance, amongst various articles mention is made of the gold ring of William de Hothum, Archbishop of Dublin, who died in 1298, set with a sapphire, as also of many silver ciphi and gold rings set with various gems, delivered to the King on the decease of several other prelates at that period. In the same record are to be found the gold rings of the abbots of Glastonbury, St. Alban’s, and Abingdon, lately deceased, in custody of the King’s wardrobe.
The Wardrobe Books and other records clearly show that the Crown's rights were always enforced when archbishops and bishops died, with just as much concern as those of the Church of Canterbury. For example, in the Wardrobe Book from the 28th year of Edward I's reign, there’s a note about the gold ring of William de Hothum, Archbishop of Dublin, who passed away in 1298, which was set with a sapphire, along with many silver ciphi and gold rings adorned with various gems, that were given to the King upon the deaths of several other bishops at that time. This record also includes the gold rings of the recently deceased abbots of Glastonbury, St. Alban’s, and Abingdon, kept in the King’s wardrobe.
It is deserving of remark that at an earlier period no claim, as regarded the pontifical ring, appears to have been acknowledged by the Bishops of Rochester.
It’s worth noting that earlier, the Bishops of Rochester seem to have recognized no claims regarding the papal ring.
Mr. Edmund Waterton, in the ‘Archæological Journal’ (vol. xx. pp. 235 et seq.), gives a list of a few of the authentic episcopal rings now in existence in England.
Mr. Edmund Waterton, in the ‘Archaeological Journal’ (vol. xx. pp. 235 et seq.), provides a list of some of the genuine episcopal rings currently available in England.
[Pg 225]The ring of Seffrid, Bishop of Winchester, who died in 1151. This is most curious, for it is set with a gnostic gem, representing the figure with the head of a cock. It is a strange subject for the ring of a bishop.
[Pg 225]The ring of Seffrid, Bishop of Winchester, who died in 1151. This is quite interesting because it features a gnostic gem depicting a figure with the head of a rooster. It's an unusual design for a bishop's ring.
A massive gold ring set with a sapphire, found in a tomb on the thumb of the skeleton of a bishop, supposed to be Hilary, Bishop of Chichester, who died in 1169, together with a silver chalice, and paten, and a pastoral staff.
A large gold ring with a sapphire, discovered in a tomb on the thumb of a bishop's skeleton, believed to be Hilary, Bishop of Chichester, who passed away in 1169, along with a silver chalice, a paten, and a pastoral staff.
A gold ring with an octagonal sapphire, set à griffes, and with four small emeralds in the corners. This was found in a stone coffin on which was inscribed EPISCOPUS, and which also contained some remains of vestments, and a pastoral staff.
A gold ring featuring an octagonal sapphire, set in prongs, and with four small emeralds in the corners. This was discovered in a stone coffin that had Bishop inscribed on it, and it also held some remnants of vestments and a pastoral staff.
These three rings belong to the Dean and Chapter of Chichester.
These three rings belong to the Dean and Chapter of Chichester.
Gold ring set with a ruby, and found in York Minster in the tomb of Archbishop Sewall, who died 1258.
Gold ring set with a ruby, found in York Minster in the tomb of Archbishop Sewall, who died in 1258.
A gold ring, also set with a ruby, found in the tomb of Archbishop Greenfield, who died 1315.
A gold ring, also set with a ruby, was found in the tomb of Archbishop Greenfield, who died in 1315.
![]() |
![]() | |
Ring of Archbishop Sewall. |
Ring of Archbishop Greenfield. |
A gold ring, the stone of which has fallen out and which bears on the inside the chançon ‘×honnor×et×joye×,’ found in the tomb of Archbishop Bowett, who died in 1423.
A gold ring with a missing stone that has the inscription chançon ‘×honnor×et×joye×’ on the inside was discovered in the tomb of Archbishop Bowett, who passed away in 1423.
The three last rings are preserved in York Minster.
The last three rings are displayed in York Minster.
A large gold ring set with an irregular oval sapphire[Pg 226] secured by four grips in the form of fleurs-de-lys. The stone is pierced longitudinally. This was found in Winchester Cathedral, and may be assigned to the thirteenth century.
A large gold ring with an uneven oval sapphire[Pg 226] held in place by four grips shaped like fleurs-de-lys. The stone has a lengthwise hole in it. This was discovered in Winchester Cathedral and is thought to date back to the thirteenth century.
Episcopal ring
(thirteenth century).
Episcopal ring (13th century).
The ring of William of Wykeham, Bishop of Winchester, died 1404. A massive plain gold ring, set with a sapphire. By his will he bequeathed to his successor in the Bishopric of Winchester, his best book, De Officio Pontificali, his best missal, and his larger gold pontifical ring, set with a sapphire, and surrounded with four balass-rubies.
The ring of William of Wykeham, Bishop of Winchester, who died in 1404, is a large, simple gold ring with a sapphire. In his will, he left his successor in the Bishopric of Winchester his best book, De Officio Pontificali, his finest missal, and his larger gold pontifical ring, which is set with a sapphire and surrounded by four balas rubies.
A gold ring found in the tomb of Bishop Gardiner, in Winchester Cathedral (died 1555). It is set with an oval plasma intaglio of the head of Minerva; on the shoulders of the hoop are two square facetted ornaments, each set with five small rubies en cabochon.
A gold ring discovered in the tomb of Bishop Gardiner, located in Winchester Cathedral (died 1555). It features an oval plasma intaglio of Minerva's head; on the shoulders of the band are two square faceted decorations, each set with five small rubies en cabochon.
These rings belong to the Dean and Chapter of Winchester Cathedral.
These rings belong to the Dean and Chapter of Winchester Cathedral.
Ring of Bishop Stanbery.
Bishop Stanbery's ring.
A massive gold ring set with a sapphire. The shoulders are ornamented with flowers, and inside is the chançon ‘en :[Pg 227] bon : an.’ Found in the tomb of John Stanbery, Bishop of Hereford, 1452.
A huge gold ring with a sapphire. The sides are decorated with flowers, and inside is the chançon ‘en :[Pg 227] bon : an.’ Discovered in the tomb of John Stanbery, Bishop of Hereford, 1452.
A gold ring set with an uncut ruby, and which has on either shoulder a Tau cross, filled in with green enamel, and a bell appended. Within is the inscription enamelled ‘Ave Maria.’ Found in the tomb of Richard Mayhew, or Mayo, Bishop of Hereford, 1504.
A gold ring featuring an uncut ruby, with a Tau cross inlaid with green enamel on either side, and a bell attached. Inside, it has the inscription in enamel that reads ‘Ave Maria.’ Discovered in the tomb of Richard Mayhew, or Mayo, Bishop of Hereford, 1504.
These rings were found in Hereford Cathedral. They are figured in the ‘Archæologia’ (vol. xxxi. p. 249).
These rings were discovered in Hereford Cathedral. They are illustrated in the ‘Archæologia’ (vol. xxxi. p. 249).
A massive gold ring set with a sapphire, en cabochon. This was found on one of the fingers of St. Cuthbert, when his coffin was opened by the visitors in 1537. It came into the possession of Thomas Watson, the Catholic Dean appointed on the dismissal of Robert Horne, the Protestant Dean, in 1553. Dean Watson gave the ring to Sir Thomas Hare, who gave it to Antony Brown, created Viscount Montague, by Queen Mary, in 1554. He gave it to Dr. Richard Smith, Bishop of Calcedon, in partibus, and Vicar Apostolic of the Northern District, whom he had for a long time sheltered from the persecution. Bishop Smith gave the ring to the monastery of the English Canonesses of St. Augustine at Paris; and it is now preserved at St. Cuthbert’s College, Ushaw, near Durham. The ring is evidently not one worn by the sainted bishop during his lifetime. It does not appear to have been of an earlier date than the fourteenth century; and a gold ring, set with a sapphire, and almost its counterpart, which was found at Flodden, is now in the British Museum. Probably the ring had belonged to one of the bishops of Durham, and had been offered to the shrine of St. Cuthbert, and placed on a finger of the corpse on some occasion when the shrine was opened. The[Pg 228] authentication of the ring simply states the fact that it was found on the hand of St. Cuthbert in 1537.
A large gold ring set with a sapphire, en cabochon. This was discovered on one of the fingers of St. Cuthbert when his coffin was opened by visitors in 1537. It came into the possession of Thomas Watson, the Catholic Dean who was appointed after Robert Horne, the Protestant Dean, was dismissed in 1553. Dean Watson gave the ring to Sir Thomas Hare, who then passed it on to Antony Brown, created Viscount Montague by Queen Mary in 1554. He gave it to Dr. Richard Smith, Bishop of Calcedon, in partibus, and Vicar Apostolic of the Northern District, whom he had sheltered for a long time from persecution. Bishop Smith donated the ring to the monastery of the English Canonesses of St. Augustine in Paris, and it is now preserved at St. Cuthbert’s College, Ushaw, near Durham. The ring clearly was not worn by the sainted bishop during his lifetime. It doesn't seem to be older than the fourteenth century; a similar gold ring set with a sapphire, which was found at Flodden, is currently in the British Museum. This ring probably belonged to one of the bishops of Durham, and had been offered to the shrine of St. Cuthbert, placed on a finger of the corpse on some occasion when the shrine was opened. The [Pg 228] authentication of the ring simply confirms that it was found on the hand of St. Cuthbert in 1537.
The ring of Arnulphus, consecrated Bishop of Metz in 614, is stated to be preserved in the treasury of the cathedral of that city. It is believed to be of an earlier date than the fourth century, and it is set with an opaque milk-white cornelian, engraved with the sacred symbol of the fish.
The ring of Arnulphus, who became the Bishop of Metz in 614, is said to be kept in the treasury of the cathedral in that city. It's thought to be older than the fourth century and features an opaque milk-white cornelian, engraved with the holy symbol of the fish.
In addition to these examples are two other French episcopal rings. One is that of Gerard, Bishop of Limoges, who died in 1022. Didron thus describes it: ‘Cet anneau est en or massif; il pese 14 gram. 193 m.; aucune pierrerie ne le decore. La tête de l’anneau, ou chaton, est formée de quatre fleurs trilobées opposées par la base sur lesquelles courent de légers filets d’email bleu.’
In addition to these examples, there are two other French bishop's rings. One is from Gerard, Bishop of Limoges, who died in 1022. Didron describes it as follows: ‘This ring is made of solid gold; it weighs 14 grams and 193 milligrams; there are no gemstones adorning it. The head of the ring, or bezel, is shaped like four trilobed flowers that face each other at the base, with delicate lines of blue enamel running along them.’
In August 1763 the remains of Thomas de Bitton, Bishop of Exeter from 1293 to 1307 were discovered in the cathedral of that city. The skeleton was nearly entire, and among the dust in the coffin a gold ring was found and a large sapphire set in it. This ring and a chalice recovered at the same time are preserved within a case in the chapter-house of the cathedral.
In August 1763, the remains of Thomas de Bitton, who was the Bishop of Exeter from 1293 to 1307, were found in the cathedral of that city. The skeleton was almost complete, and among the dust in the coffin, a gold ring was discovered with a large sapphire set in it. This ring and a chalice that were recovered at the same time are displayed in a case in the chapter-house of the cathedral.
The following extracts from the Wardrobe Book of 28th Edward I. (A.D. 1299-1360), relating to episcopal rings, are of interest:—
The following extracts from the Wardrobe Book of 28th Edward I. (CE 1299-1360), concerning episcopal rings, are noteworthy:—
‘Jocalia remanencia in fine anni 27.
‘Jocalia remanencia in fine anni 27.
‘Annulus auri cum sapphiro qui fuit fratris Willelmi quondam Dublin’ archiepiscopi defuncti.
‘A gold ring with a sapphire that belonged to the late Archbishop William of Dublin.’
‘Jocalia remanencia in fine anni 27 de jocalibus Regi datis, et post decessum prælatorum Regis restitutis anno 25.
‘Jocalia remanencia in fine anni 27 de jocalibus Regi datis, et post decessum prælatorum Regis restitutis anno 25.
‘Annulus auri cum sapphiro crescenti qui fuit N. quondam Sarum episcopi defuncti.
‘A gold ring with a crescent sapphire that belonged to N., the late bishop of Sarum.
[Pg 229]‘Annulus, auri cum rubetto perforato qui fuit Roberti Coventr’ et Lichfield’ episcopi defuncti.
[Pg 229]‘Ring, gold with a pierced ruby that belonged to the late Robert, Bishop of Coventry and Lichfield.’
‘Jocalia remanencia in fine anni 27 de jocalibus Regi datis et post decessum prælatorum Regis restitutis. Annulus auri cum sapphiro qui fuit J. Ebor’ archiepiscopi defuncti anno 24.
‘Jocalia remanencia in fine anni 27 de jocalibus Regi datis et post decessum prælatorum Regis restitutis. Annulus auri cum sapphiro qui fuit J. Ebor’ archiepiscopi defuncti anno 24.
‘Jocalia remanencia in fine anni, 27 de jocalibus receptis de venerabili Patre Will’ Bathon’ et Wellen’ episcopo.
‘Jocalia remanencia in fine anni, 27 de jocalibus receptis de venerabili Patre Will’ Bathon’ et Wellen’ episcopo.
‘Tres annuli auri cum rubettis.
"Three gold rings with rubies."
‘Unus annulus auri cum ameraudâ.
"One gold ring with emerald."
‘Unus annulus auri cum topacio (chrysolite).
‘Unus annulus auri cum topacio (chrysolite).
‘Unus annulus auri cum pereditis (topaz).’
‘One golden ring with lost gems (topaz).’
The Jocalia Sancti Thomæ, which is given by Dart in his history of Canterbury Cathedral, are as follows:—
The Jocalia Sancti Thomæ, as provided by Dart in his history of Canterbury Cathedral, is as follows:—
‘Annulus pontificalis magnus cum rubino rotundo in medio:
‘Big pontifical ring with a round ruby in the center:
‘Item. Annulus magnus cum sapphiro nigro qui vocatur lup.
‘Item. A large ring with a black sapphire known as the wolf.’
‘Item. Annulus cum parvo sapphiro nigro qui vocatur lup.
‘Item. A ring with a small black sapphire known as a wolf.’
‘Item. Annulus cum sapphiro quadrato aquoso.
'Item. Sapphire square water ring.'
‘Item. Annulus cum lapide oblongo qui vocatur turkoyse.
Item. A ring with an elongated stone called turquoise.
‘Item. Annulus unus cum viridi cornelino sculpto rotundo.
‘Item. A ring with a round green cornelian engraving.
‘Item. Annulus parvus cum smaragdine triangulato.
‘Item. Small ring with triangular emerald.
‘Item. Annulus unus cum chalcedonio oblongo.’
‘Item. One ring with elongated chalcedony.’
The term lup may signify en cabochon, uncut.
The term lup may signify cabochon, uncut.
In 1867 Mr. Binns exhibited a gold episcopal ring, at a meeting of the Society of Antiquaries, which he obtained at the shop of a jeweller at Worcester, and supposed to be the ring of Walter de Cantilupe, who presided over the see of Worcester from 1236 to 1266. In the ‘Archæologia’[Pg 230] (vol. xx. p. 556) is figured an amethyst ring, which was discovered at Evesham Abbey, on the finger of the skeleton of Henry of Worcester, abbot of that house, 1256-1263.
In 1867, Mr. Binns showcased a gold episcopal ring at a Society of Antiquaries meeting. He acquired it from a jeweler in Worcester and believed it to belong to Walter de Cantilupe, who served as the bishop of Worcester from 1236 to 1266. An amethyst ring is illustrated in ‘Archæologia’[Pg 230] (vol. xx. p. 556), which was found on the finger of the skeleton of Henry of Worcester, who was the abbot there from 1256 to 1263.
In the possession of the Dean and Chapter of Wells is a fine massive episcopal ring of gold, the date supposed to be the commencement of the twelfth century. It has a solid projecting bezel, set with an irregularly-shaped ruby, polished on the surface and pierced longitudinally—an oriental stone which has been used as a pendant.
In the hands of the Dean and Chapter of Wells is an impressive, large gold episcopal ring, believed to date back to the early twelfth century. It features a solid, protruding bezel that holds an irregularly-shaped ruby, polished on the surface and drilled through lengthwise—this is an oriental stone that has been used as a pendant.
At the Loan Exhibition of Ancient and Modern Jewellery at the South Kensington Museum, in 1872, Mr. R. H. Soden Smith contributed, amongst his fine collection of 140 finger-rings, a series of seven gold episcopal rings of the pointed or stirrup-shaped type; these are mostly set with sapphires, rudely shaped and polished. Date from the 13th and 14th centuries.
At the Loan Exhibition of Ancient and Modern Jewelry at the South Kensington Museum in 1872, Mr. R. H. Soden Smith showcased a remarkable collection of 140 finger rings, which included a set of seven gold episcopal rings of the pointed or stirrup-shaped style; these are mostly adorned with sapphires that are roughly shaped and polished. They date back to the 13th and 14th centuries.
This engraving represents a gold episcopal ring, in the Londesborough Collection, with sapphire. French work of the thirteenth century.
This engraving shows a gold episcopal ring with a sapphire from the Londesborough Collection. It’s a French piece from the thirteenth century.
French Episcopal ring.
French bishop's ring.
In the Royal Irish Academy is a large episcopal ring, but, of comparatively modern date. It is the largest ring in the collection, and had originally held a very fine amethyst, which was removed by Dean Dawson, when the ring was in his possession, and a piece of glass inserted in its stead.
In the Royal Irish Academy, there's a large episcopal ring, but it's relatively modern. It's the biggest ring in the collection and originally had a beautiful amethyst, which Dean Dawson removed when he owned the ring and replaced it with a piece of glass.
Episcopal ring.
Bishop's ring.
In the Waterton Collection is one of the finest of mediæval gold episcopal rings, obtained[Pg 231] at Milan. It has been reset with an amethyst, the original stone, stated to have been a valuable sapphire, having been removed. No date is assigned to it.
In the Waterton Collection is one of the finest medieval gold episcopal rings, obtained[Pg 231] in Milan. It has been updated with an amethyst, as the original stone, which was noted to be a valuable sapphire, has been removed. No date is given for it.
Episcopal ring.
Bishop's ring.
Abbots were invested with the ring. Lawrence, seventeenth Abbot of Westminster, is said to have been the first of that dignity who obtained from the Pope (Alexander III.) the privilege of using the mitre, ring, and gloves. He died in 1167, and was represented on his monument with a mitre, ring, and staff. In 1048, Wulgate, twelfth Abbot of Croyland, received the crosier and ring from the king. The consecration of an abbot was similar, in most respects, to the episcopal ceremony. The abbot received from the bishop, or whoever was appointed to officiate, the insignia of his ecclesiastical dignity.
Abbots were given the ring. Lawrence, the seventeenth Abbot of Westminster, is said to be the first in that position to receive from Pope Alexander III the privilege of wearing the mitre, ring, and gloves. He died in 1167 and is depicted on his monument with a mitre, ring, and staff. In 1048, Wulgate, the twelfth Abbot of Croyland, received the crosier and ring from the king. The consecration of an abbot was, in most ways, similar to the ceremony for a bishop. The abbot received from the bishop, or whoever was designated to perform the ceremony, the symbols of his ecclesiastical authority.
[Pg 232]The privilege of the mitre, pontifical ring, &c., was conceded to the abbots of St. Denis, in France, about the year 1177 by Alexander III.
[Pg 232]The privilege of the miter, pontifical ring, etc., was granted to the abbots of St. Denis in France around 1177 by Alexander III.
Jocelyn of Brakelond, in his ‘Chronicles of St. Edmundsbury’ (twelfth century), informs us that Sampson was inaugurated abbot of that monastery in 1182, by the Bishop of Winchester, who placed the mitre on his head, and the ring on his finger, saying: ‘This is the dignity of the abbots of St. Edmund; my experience early taught me this.’
Jocelyn of Brakelond, in his 'Chronicles of St. Edmundsbury' (twelfth century), tells us that Sampson was installed as abbot of that monastery in 1182 by the Bishop of Winchester, who placed the mitre on his head and the ring on his finger, saying: 'This is the honor of the abbots of St. Edmund; my experience has taught me this early on.'
In the reception of novices into the Roman Catholic sisterhood, one of the ceremonies performed was the presentation of a ring blessed by the bishop, usually of gold with a sapphire. After the benediction of the veil, the ring, and the crown, the novices receive the first as a mark of renouncing the world; the ring, by which they are married to the Son of God, and the crown, as a type of that prepared for them in heaven. The origin of this custom of espousals to Christ dates from a very remote period. ‘We meet,’ remarks Lingard, in his ‘History and Antiquities of the Anglo-Saxon Church,’ ‘for more than a thousand years after the first preaching of Christianity, with females who, to speak the language of our ancestors, had wedded themselves to God.’
In the initiation of new members into the Roman Catholic sisterhood, one of the ceremonies that takes place is the giving of a ring blessed by the bishop, often made of gold and set with a sapphire. After the blessing of the veil, the ring, and the crown, the novices receive the veil as a symbol of leaving the worldly life behind; the ring, which signifies their marriage to the Son of God, and the crown, representing the one prepared for them in heaven. This tradition of marrying Christ goes back a very long way. “For over a thousand years after the first preaching of Christianity,” notes Lingard in his “History and Antiquities of the Anglo-Saxon Church,” “we find women who, to put it in the words of our ancestors, had dedicated themselves to God.”
On one of four rings of St. Eloy (6th century), preserved before the Revolution of 1793 in the treasury of the church at Noyon, in France, was inscribed:—
On one of the four rings of St. Eloy (6th century), kept before the 1793 Revolution in the treasury of the church at Noyon, France, it was inscribed:—
Annulus Eligii fuit aureus iste beati,
Quo Christo sanctam desponsavit Godebertam.
Annulus Eligii was that golden one of the blessed,
With which Christ betrothed the holy Godebert.
(This gold ring of the ever-blessed St. Eloy was that with which he married St. Godiberte to Christ.)
(This gold ring of the ever-blessed St. Eloy was the one he used to marry St. Godiberte to Christ.)
[Pg 233]John Alcock, Bishop of Ely (1486), gives ‘an exhortacyon made to relygyous systers in the tyme of theyr consecracyon by him: “I aske the banes betwyx the hyghe and moost myghty Prynce, Kyng of all kynges, Sone of Almyghty God, and the Virgyn Mary, in humanyte Cryste Jesu of Nazareth, of the one partye, and A. B. of the thother partye, that yf ony or woman can shewe any lawfull impedymente other by any precontracte made on corrupcyon of body or soule of the sayd A. B. that she ought not to be maryed this daye unto the sayd mighty Prynce Jesu, that they wolde accordynge unto the lawe shewe it.”’
[Pg 233]John Alcock, Bishop of Ely (1486), gives ‘an exhortation made to religious sisters at the time of their consecration by him: “I ask for the banns between the high and most powerful Prince, King of all kings, Son of Almighty God, and the Virgin Mary, in humanity Christ Jesus of Nazareth, on one side, and A. B. on the other side, that if anyone can show any lawful impediment, whether due to any precontract made on the corruption of body or soul of the said A. B. that she ought not to be married today to the said mighty Prince Jesus, that they would, according to the law, present it.”’
There is no doubt that these ‘espousals to Christ’ were in connection with the spiritual marriage of the bishop with the Church implied by the sanctity of the episcopal ring. ‘The mystical signification,’ observes Mr. E. Waterton, ‘attached to this ring has been set forth by various ecclesiastical writers. “Datur et annulus episcopo,” observes St. Isidore, of Seville, in the 16th century, “propter signum pontificalis honoris, vel signaculum secretorum.” In 1191 Innocent III. wrote that “annulus episcopi perfectionem donorum Spiritus Sancti in Christo significat.” Durandus, who lived in the 13th century, enlarges upon the subject in his “Rationale.” “The ring,” he says, “is the badge of fidelity with which Christ betrothed the Church, his holy Bride, so that she can say: ‘My Lord betrothed me with his ring.’ Her guardians are the bishops, who wear the ring for a mark and a testimony of it; of whom the Bride speaks in the Canticles: ‘The watchmen who kept the city found me.’ The father gave a ring to the prodigal son, according to the text, ‘put a ring on his finger.’ A bishop’s ring, therefore, signifies integritatum fidei; that is to say, he should love as himself the Church of God committed to him as his Bride,[Pg 234] and that he should keep it sober and chaste for the heavenly Bridegroom, according to the words, ‘I have espoused you to one Husband, that I my present you as a chaste virgin to Christ,’ and that he should remember he is not the lord, but the shepherd.”’
There’s no doubt that these ‘commitments to Christ’ were related to the spiritual marriage of the bishop with the Church, as suggested by the sacredness of the episcopal ring. “The mystical significance,” notes Mr. E. Waterton, “connected to this ring has been discussed by various church writers. ‘An annulus is given to the bishop,’ says St. Isidore of Seville in the 16th century, ‘as a sign of papal honor or as a seal of secrets.’ In 1191, Innocent III wrote that ‘the bishop's ring signifies the perfection of the gifts of the Holy Spirit in Christ.’ Durandus, who lived in the 13th century, elaborates on this in his ‘Rationale.’ ‘The ring,’ he states, ‘is the symbol of fidelity with which Christ engaged the Church, his holy Bride, so that she can say: ‘My Lord engaged me with his ring.’ Her protectors are the bishops, who wear the ring as a sign and testimony of this; of whom the Bride speaks in the Song of Solomon: ‘The watchmen who guarded the city found me.’ The father gave a ring to the prodigal son, as the text says, ‘put a ring on his finger.’ Therefore, a bishop’s ring signifies integritatum fidei; that is, he should love the Church of God entrusted to him as his Bride,[Pg 234] and he should keep it pure and chaste for the heavenly Bridegroom, according to the words, ‘I have betrothed you to one Husband, so that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ,’ and he should remember he is not the lord, but the shepherd.”
It was the custom in former ages for the high dignitaries of the Church, at the time of their elevation to episcopal rank, to celebrate such event with pompous ceremonies. We find recorded, among others, the marriage of prelates, especially in Italy. In 1519, Antonio Pucci was elected Bishop of Pistoja, and made his solemn entrée with a brilliant cortége. On reaching a nunnery called San Pier Maggiore, ‘he descended from his horse,’ says Michel-Ange Salvi, ‘and entered the church, which was richly decorated. After praying, he went towards the wall which separated the church from the convent, where an opening had been made, and, in an apartment there, wedded the abbess, placing on her finger a sumptuous ring. After this he went to the cathedral, and with various ceremonies was inducted into his bishopric.’
It was customary in earlier times for high-ranking Church officials, when they became bishops, to celebrate the occasion with grand ceremonies. Notably, there are records of bishops getting married, especially in Italy. In 1519, Antonio Pucci was elected Bishop of Pistoja and made his formal entry with a splendid procession. Upon arriving at a convent called San Pier Maggiore, ‘he got off his horse,’ according to Michel-Ange Salvi, ‘and entered the church, which was beautifully decorated. After praying, he approached the wall separating the church from the convent, where there was an opening, and in a room there, married the abbess, placing a lavish ring on her finger. After this, he went to the cathedral, where he was formally inducted into his bishopric with various ceremonies.’
At Florence, when an archbishop was elected, he proceeded to a convent dedicated to St. Peter, and was married to the abbess. A platform was erected, surmounted by a rich baldequin, near the high altar; a golden ring was brought to the prelate, which he placed on the finger of the abbess, whose hand was sustained by the oldest priest of the parish. The archbishop slept one night at the convent, and the next day was enthroned, with great ceremony, in the cathedral.
At Florence, when an archbishop was elected, he went to a convent dedicated to St. Peter and was married to the abbess. A platform was set up, topped with an ornate canopy, near the high altar; a golden ring was presented to the archbishop, which he placed on the finger of the abbess, whose hand was held by the oldest priest in the parish. The archbishop spent one night at the convent, and the next day he was ceremonially enthroned in the cathedral.
The same usages were practised at the installation of the archbishops of Milan, the Bishops of Bergamo, Modena, &c.
The same practices were followed during the installation of the archbishops of Milan, the bishops of Bergamo, Modena, etc.
[Pg 235]Aimon, in his ‘Tableau de la Cour de Rome,’ describing the ceremonies attending the consecration of cardinals, says: ‘Le Pape leur fait alors une exhortation, et leur assigne des titres; leur met au doigt annulaire de la main droite, un anneau d’or, dans lequel est enchassé un saphir, qui coûte à chaque Eminence cinq cents ducats. Cet anneau est donné au nouveau Cardinal pour lui apprendre qu’il a l’Èglise pour épouse, et qu’il ne le doit jamais abandonner.’
[Pg 235]Aimon, in his ‘Tableau de la Cour de Rome,’ describing the ceremonies for the consecration of cardinals, says: ‘The Pope then gives them a speech and assigns them titles; he places a gold ring, set with a sapphire worth five hundred ducats, on the ring finger of their right hand. This ring is given to the new Cardinal to teach him that he has the Church as his spouse and that he must never abandon her.’
During the ceremony of consecrating the Bishop of Limoges at Nôtre Dame in Paris (1628), in presence of the Queen and the Duke of Orleans, the former sent the Bishop a rich diamond ring, which she took from her finger, in token of the spiritual marriage which he was contracting with the Church.
During the ceremony to consecrate the Bishop of Limoges at Notre Dame in Paris (1628), in front of the Queen and the Duke of Orleans, the Queen gave the Bishop a beautiful diamond ring that she took from her own finger, as a symbol of the spiritual union he was entering into with the Church.
M. Thiers, in his ‘Traité des Superstitions,’ gives a curious instance of these espousals to Christ: a Carmelite, in his assumed quality of ‘Secretary of Jesus,’ had persuaded some of his devotees to sign contracts of marriage with the Saviour. A translation of one of these I now give: ‘I, Jesus, son of the living God, the husband of my faithful, take my daughter, Madelaine Gasselin, for my wife; and promise her fidelity, and not to abandon her, and to give her, for advantage and possession, my grace in this life, promising her my glory in the other, and a portion of the inheritance of my Father. In faith of which I have signed the irrevocable contract by the hand of my secretary. Done in the presence of the Father Eternal, of my love, of my very worthy mother Mary, of my father St. Joseph, and of all my celestial court, in the year of grace 1650, day of my father St. Joseph.
M. Thiers, in his ‘Treatise on Superstitions,’ provides an interesting example of these weddings to Christ: a Carmelite, acting as the ‘Secretary of Jesus,’ convinced some of his followers to sign marriage contracts with the Savior. Here’s one of those translations: ‘I, Jesus, son of the living God, the husband of my faithful, take my daughter, Madelaine Gasselin, as my wife; I promise her fidelity, not to abandon her, and to grant her, for her benefit and possession, my grace in this life, promising her my glory in the next, and a share of my Father’s inheritance. In witness of this, I have signed the irrevocable contract with the hand of my secretary. Done in the presence of the Eternal Father, of my beloved, of my very worthy mother Mary, of my father St. Joseph, and of all my heavenly court, in the year of grace 1650, on the day of my father St. Joseph.'
‘Jesus, the husband of faithful souls.
‘Jesus, the companion of dedicated souls.
[Pg 236]‘Mary, mother of God. Joseph, husband of Mary. The guardian angel Madelaine, the dear lover of Jesus.
[Pg 236]‘Mary, mother of God. Joseph, Mary's husband. The guardian angel Madelaine, the beloved of Jesus.
‘This contract has been ratified by the Holy Trinity, the day of the glorious St. Joseph, in the same year.
‘This contract has been approved by the Holy Trinity, on the day of the glorious St. Joseph, in the same year.
‘Brother Arnoux, of St. John the Baptist, Carmelite. Déchaussé, unworthy secretary of Jesus.’
‘Brother Arnoux, of St. John the Baptist, Carmelite. Déchaussé, unworthy secretary of Jesus.’
‘I, Madelaine Gasselin, unworthy servant of Jesus, take my amiable Jesus for my husband, and promise him fidelity, and that I never have any other but Him, and I give Him, as a proof of my truth, my heart, and all that I shall ever be, through life unto death doing all that is required of me, and to serve Him with all my heart throughout eternity. In faith of which I have signed with my own hand the irrevocable contract, in the presence of the ever-adorable Trinity, of the holy Virgin, Mary, mother of God, my glorious father St. Joseph, my guardian angel, and all the celestial court, the year of grace 1650, day of my glorious father St. Joseph.
‘I, Madelaine Gasselin, an unworthy servant of Jesus, take my beloved Jesus as my husband, and promise Him my loyalty, vowing that I will have no other but Him. As a sign of my sincerity, I give Him my heart and everything I will ever be, through life until death, committed to doing all that is required of me and serving Him with all my heart for eternity. In witness of this, I have signed with my own hand this irrevocable contract, in the presence of the ever-adorable Trinity, the holy Virgin Mary, mother of God, my glorious father St. Joseph, my guardian angel, and all the heavenly court, in the year of grace 1650, on the day of my glorious father St. Joseph.
‘Jesus, lover of hearts.
'Jesus, heart's beloved.'
‘Mary, mother of God. Joseph, husband of Mary. The guardian angel Madelaine, the dearly-beloved of Jesus.
‘Mary, the mother of God. Joseph, Mary’s husband. The guardian angel Madelaine, beloved by Jesus.
‘This contract has been ratified by the ever-adorable Trinity the same day of the glorious St. Joseph, in the same year.
‘This contract has been approved by the ever-adorable Trinity on the same day as the glorious St. Joseph, in the same year.
‘Brother Arnoux, of St. John the Baptist.’
"Brother Arnoux, of St. John the Baptist."
A curious legend of a ring of espousals received from our Saviour by a pious maiden, is recorded by Nider, in his treatise ‘In Formicario,’ and is referred to by Kirchmann (‘De Annulis’). He writes in praise of celibacy, and describes a certain maiden who, rejecting all earthly loves, is filled with[Pg 237] sincere affection for Christ only. After praying for some token of Divine acceptance: ‘orti locello quo nunc oculis corporeis visum dirigo. Et ecce in eodem momento et locello vidit tres or duos circiter violarum amenos flosculos.... Violas manu collegit propria et conservavit solliciter, ut exinde amor et spes artius ad suum sponsum grate succrescerent.’
A fascinating legend tells of a wedding ring given by our Savior to a devout young woman. It's noted by Nider in his work ‘In Formicario,’ and also mentioned by Kirchmann in ‘De Annulis.’ He praises celibacy and describes a young woman who, turning away from all worldly loves, is filled with sincere affection for Christ alone. After praying for some sign of divine acceptance: ‘I directed my eyes to a little garden where I now see with my physical eyes. And behold, at that very moment and in that small garden, I saw about three or two delightful little violet flowers.... She picked the violets with her own hands and carefully preserved them, so that from then on her love and hope would grow closer to her beloved.’
After enforcing the miraculous character of the event by reminding his readers that it was not the season of flowers, but somewhere about the feast of St. Martin, he continues:—‘In sequenti anno iterum in orto suo laboraret quodam die, et ibidem in locum certum intuitum dirigeret, optando ex imo cordis desiderio quatenus ibi reperiret in signum Christifere desponsationis annulum aliquem, si divinæ voluntatis id esset: et en altera vice non sprevit Deus preces humilis virginis sed reperit materialem quemdam annulum quem vidi postmodum. Erat autem coloris albi, de minera qua nescio, argento mundo videbatur similior. Et in clausura ubi jungebatur in circulum due manus artificiose insculpte extiterunt.... Hunc annulum virgo gratissime servavit in posterum, et altissimo suo sponso deinceps ut antea in labore manuum suarum vivere studuit.’ Vide J. Nider, In Formicario, Cologne, 1473 (?) [‘Notes and Queries’].
After highlighting the miraculous nature of the event by reminding his readers that it wasn’t the season for flowers but around the feast of St. Martin, he continues:—‘The following year, on a certain day, she worked in her garden and directed her gaze to a specific spot, wishing from the bottom of her heart to find there a ring as a sign of Christ's betrothal, if that was God's will: and behold, on another occasion, God did not disregard the prayers of the humble virgin but found a certain material ring, which I later saw. It was of a white color, made of a material I cannot identify, and appeared more similar to pure silver. And in the place where it was joined in a circle, two hands were skillfully engraved.... This ring the virgin gladly kept for the future, and she continued to strive to live for her highest betrothed as before through her own handiwork.’ See J. Nider, In Formicario, Cologne, 1473 (?) [‘Notes and Queries’].
This mystical union by the ring was exemplified in a singular manner in the instance of Edmund Rich, who was consecrated Archbishop of Canterbury in 1234. When a young man he made a vow of celibacy, and, that he might be able to keep it, he wedded himself to the mother of our Lord. He had two rings made with ‘Ave Maria’ engraved on each. One he placed on the finger of an image of the Virgin, which stood in a church at Oxford, and the other he[Pg 238] wore on his own finger, considering himself espoused in this manner to the Virgin. He cherished the remembrance of this transaction to his death, and at his funeral the ring was observed on his finger.[53]
This mystical connection through the ring was uniquely illustrated in the case of Edmund Rich, who became Archbishop of Canterbury in 1234. When he was a young man, he vowed to remain celibate, and to help him keep that vow, he married himself to the mother of our Lord. He had two rings made, both engraved with ‘Ave Maria.’ He placed one on the finger of a statue of the Virgin in a church in Oxford, and he wore the other on his own finger, considering himself married to the Virgin in this way. He held onto the memory of this act until his death, and at his funeral, the ring was seen on his finger.[Pg 238]
In the legends of the saints there are frequent allusions to the espousals with Christ, in which the ring is prominently mentioned; thus of St. Catherine of Alexandria, it is said that, as she slept upon her bed, ‘the blessed Virgin appeared to her again, accompanied by her divine Son, and with them a noble company of saints and angels. And Mary again presented Catherine to the Lord of Glory, saying, “Lo, she hath been baptized, and I myself have been her godmother!” Then the Lord smiled upon her, and held out his hand, and plighted his troth to her, putting a ring upon her finger. When Catherine awoke, remembering her dream, she looked, and saw the ring upon her finger; and, henceforth regarding herself as the betrothed of Christ, she despised the world, and all the pomp of earthly sovereignty, thinking only of the day which should reunite her with her celestial and espoused Lord.’
In the legends of the saints, there are often references to the marriage with Christ, where a ring is significantly mentioned; for example, about St. Catherine of Alexandria, it is said that while she was sleeping in her bed, "the blessed Virgin appeared to her again, accompanied by her divine Son, along with a noble group of saints and angels. Mary presented Catherine to the Lord of Glory, saying, 'Look, she has been baptized, and I myself have been her godmother!' Then the Lord smiled at her, extended his hand, and pledged his vows to her, placing a ring on her finger. When Catherine woke up, remembering her dream, she looked, and saw the ring on her finger; and from that point on, considering herself the betrothed of Christ, she turned away from the world and all the splendor of earthly power, focusing only on the day that would reunite her with her heavenly and espoused Lord."
In a painting by Ghirlandago, St. Catherine is represented with a ring conspicuous on her finger, in allusion to her mystical espousals.
In a painting by Ghirlandago, St. Catherine is shown with a noticeable ring on her finger, referencing her mystical marriages.
Mrs. Jameson, in her ‘Sacred and Legendary Art,’[Pg 239] mentions an engraving of the marriage of St. Catherine by one of the earliest artists of the genuine German school, the anonymous engraver known only as ‘Le Graveur de 1466,’ ‘the scene is Paradise; and the Virgin-Mother, seated on a flowery throne, is in the act of twining a wreath, for which St. Dorothea presents the roses; in front of the Virgin kneels St. Catherine, and beside her stands the Infant Christ (here a child about five or six years old), and presents the ring,’ &c.
Mrs. Jameson, in her ‘Sacred and Legendary Art,’[Pg 239] discusses an engraving of the marriage of St. Catherine by one of the earliest artists from the authentic German school, an anonymous engraver known only as ‘Le Graveur de 1466.’ The scene is set in Paradise, where the Virgin Mother, seated on a flower-covered throne, is in the process of making a wreath, which St. Dorothea is providing roses for. In front of the Virgin, St. Catherine kneels, and beside her stands the Infant Christ (depicted as a child about five or six years old), who presents the ring, etc.
In Titian’s ‘Marriage of St. Catherine,’ ‘the Infant Christ is seated on a kind of pedestal, and sustained by the arms of the Virgin. St. Catherine kneels before him, and St. Anna, the mother of the Virgin, gives St. Catherine away, presenting her hand to receive the ring; St. Joseph is standing on the other side; two angels behind the saint, look on with an expression of celestial sympathy.’
In Titian’s 'Marriage of St. Catherine,' the Infant Christ is sitting on a pedestal, supported by the arms of the Virgin. St. Catherine kneels in front of him, while St. Anna, the Virgin's mother, gives St. Catherine away by presenting her hand to receive the ring. St. Joseph stands on the other side, and two angels behind St. Catherine look on with expressions of heavenly sympathy.
St. Agnes, in the old legend, when tempted to marry the son of Sempronius, the prefect of Rome, by rich presents, rejects them with scorn, ‘being already betrothed to a lover who is greater and fairer than any earthly suitor.’
St. Agnes, in the old legend, when tempted to marry the son of Sempronius, the prefect of Rome, by lavish gifts, turns them down with disdain, ‘being already engaged to a lover who is greater and more beautiful than any earthly suitor.’
In Hone’s ‘Everyday Book’ (vol. i. p. 141) there is a curious story connected with St. Agnes, ‘who,’ says Butler, ‘has always been looked upon as a special patroness of purity, with the immaculate mother of God.’ It seems that a priest who officiated in a church dedicated to that saint was very desirous of being married. He prayed the Pope’s licence, who gave it him, together with an emerald ring, and commanded him to pay his addresses to the image of St. Agnes in his own church. The priest did so, and the image put forth her finger and he put the ring thereon; whereupon the image drew her finger again, and kept the ring fast, and the priest was contented to remain a bachelor,[Pg 240] ‘and yet, as it is sayd, the rynge is on the fynger of the ymage.’
In Hone’s ‘Everyday Book’ (vol. i. p. 141), there’s an interesting story related to St. Agnes, who, according to Butler, has always been regarded as a special patroness of purity, alongside the immaculate mother of God. It appears that a priest serving in a church dedicated to that saint really wanted to get married. He requested a marriage license from the Pope, who granted it along with an emerald ring and instructed him to propose to the image of St. Agnes in his church. The priest did just that, and the image extended her finger, allowing him to place the ring on it; however, the image then withdrew her finger and held onto the ring tightly, leaving the priest satisfied to remain a bachelor,[Pg 240] ‘and yet, as they say, the ring is on the finger of the image.’
Mrs. Jameson remarks, on a painting representing in one compartment of the picture the Espousal of St. Francis of Assisi with the Lady Poverty, that she is attended by Hope and Charity as bridesmaids, being thus substituted for Faith. St. Francis places the ring upon her finger, while our Saviour, standing between them, at once gives away the bride and bestows the nuptial benediction.
Mrs. Jameson comments on a painting that shows the wedding of St. Francis of Assisi with Lady Poverty in one section of the artwork. In this scene, Hope and Charity are present as bridesmaids, replacing Faith. St. Francis puts the ring on her finger, while our Savior, standing between them, gives away the bride and offers the wedding blessing.
St. Herman of Cologne, in the thirteenth century, is said to have had an ecstatic dream, in which the Virgin descended from heaven, and, putting a ring on his finger, declared him her espoused. Hence he received from the brotherhood with which he was connected the name of Joseph. He died in 1236.
St. Herman of Cologne, in the 1200s, reportedly had an ecstatic dream where the Virgin Mary came down from heaven and placed a ring on his finger, declaring him her betrothed. As a result, the brotherhood he was part of gave him the name Joseph. He passed away in 1236.
In Hone’s ‘Everyday Book’ it is remarked that the meeting of St. Anne and St. Joachim at the Golden Gate was a popular theme. The nuns of St. Anne, at Rome, showed a rude silver ring as the wedding one of the two saints.
In Hone’s ‘Everyday Book,’ it is noted that the meeting of St. Anne and St. Joachim at the Golden Gate was a popular theme. The nuns of St. Anne in Rome displayed a rough silver ring as the wedding ring of the two saints.
In the Braybrooke Collection is a thick, gold, nun’s ring, with a conical surface to the band of the hoop, and an inscription of the fourteenth century, in Longobardic characters, ‘× O (for avec) cest (for cet) anel seu (for je suis) espose de Jheusu Crist.’ In the Waterton Collection at the South Kensington Museum is also a nun’s ring of the same date, inscribed ‘God with Maria.’
In the Braybrooke Collection, there's a thick gold nun's ring with a conical band, featuring an inscription from the fourteenth century in Longobardic characters that reads, ‘× O (for avec) cest (for cet) anel seu (for je suis) espose de Jheusu Crist.’ In the Waterton Collection at the South Kensington Museum, there's also a nun’s ring from the same period, inscribed with ‘God with Maria.’
In former times complaints were made in the ‘Constitutions’ of nuns wearing several rings. In the ‘Ancren Riwle, or Regulæ Inclusarum’ (Camden Society) nuns are forbidden to have brooch or ring, or studded girdle:—
In the past, there were complaints in the 'Constitutions' about nuns wearing multiple rings. In the 'Ancren Riwle, or Regulæ Inclusarum' (Camden Society), nuns are prohibited from having a brooch, ring, or a studded girdle:—
Ring ne broche nabbe ye; ne gurdel i-membred.
Ring ne broche nabbe ye; ne gurdel i-membred.
[Pg 241]‘Espousals to God’ were not confined to the religious portion of the community.
[Pg 241]‘Espousals to God’ were not limited to the religious part of the community.
Eleanora, third daughter of John, King of England, on the death of her husband, the Earl of Pembroke, in 1231, in the first transports of her grief, made in public a solemn vow, in presence of Edmund, Archbishop of Canterbury, that she would never again become a wife, but remain a true spouse of Christ, and received the ring in confirmation, which vows she, however, subsequently broke, to the indignation of a strong party of the laity and clergy of England, by her marriage with Simon de Montfort, Earl of Leicester. At the head of the clergy was one William de Avendon, a Dominican friar, who quoted a tractate on vows, by one ‘Master Peter,’ from which it appears that a sacred plight-ring was considered almost as impassable a barrier as the veil itself, against the marriage of the wearer.
Eleanora, the third daughter of John, King of England, after the death of her husband, the Earl of Pembroke, in 1231, in her initial moments of grief, publicly made a solemn vow in front of Edmund, Archbishop of Canterbury, stating that she would never marry again but would remain a true spouse of Christ. She received a ring to confirm this vow, which she later broke, much to the dismay of many laypeople and clergy in England, by marrying Simon de Montfort, Earl of Leicester. Leading the clergy was a Dominican friar named William de Avendon, who referenced a treatise on vows by ‘Master Peter,’ which indicated that a sacred vow ring was seen as nearly as binding as the veil itself regarding the wearer’s marriage.
Mary, sixth daughter of Edward I., took the veil at Amesbury, thirteen young ladies being selected as her companions. The spousal rings placed on their fingers were of gold, adorned with a sapphire, and were provided at the expense of the King.
Mary, the sixth daughter of Edward I, became a nun at Amesbury, with thirteen young women chosen as her companions. The wedding rings placed on their fingers were made of gold, set with sapphires, and were paid for by the King.
In a very interesting paper by Mr. Harrod, F.S.A., in the ‘Archæologia’ (vol. xl. part 2) we have particulars of the custom, which prevailed in the Middle Ages, of widows taking a vow of chastity, and receiving a particular robe and ring. Sir Harris Nicolas printed in the ‘Testamenta Vetusta’ an abstract of the will of Lady Alice West, of Hinton Marcel, widow of Sir Thomas West, dated in 1395, and proved in the Prerogative Court of Canterbury. There is a bequest to her son Thomas, amongst other things of ‘a ring with which I was yspoused to God.’
In a very interesting paper by Mr. Harrod, F.S.A., in the ‘Archæologia’ (vol. xl. part 2), we learn about the custom that existed in the Middle Ages where widows took a vow of chastity and received a special robe and ring. Sir Harris Nicolas published an abstract of the will of Lady Alice West, widow of Sir Thomas West, in the ‘Testamenta Vetusta,’ which was dated in 1395 and proved in the Prerogative Court of Canterbury. In her will, there is a bequest to her son Thomas, which includes ‘a ring with which I was espoused to God.’
Sir Harris rightly says that this could not have been her[Pg 242] marriage-ring, and it was certain she had not entered a convent. This is still more clearly made out by a reference to the transcript of the will in the registers of the Prerogative Court.
Sir Harris correctly states that this couldn't have been her[Pg 242] marriage ring, and it's clear she didn't join a convent. This is even more clearly demonstrated by looking at the will's transcript in the registers of the Prerogative Court.
Gough, in his ‘Sepulchral Monuments,’ quotes a story, from Matthew Paris, of one Cecily Sandford, a lady of condition, who, on her deathbed, having passed through the usual forms with her confessor, and he ordering her attendants to take off a gold ring he observed on her finger, although just expiring, recovered herself enough to tell them she would never part with it, as she intended carrying it to heaven with her into the presence of her celestial spouse, in testimony of her constant observance of her vow, and to receive the promised reward. She had, it appears, made a vow of perpetual widowhood, and with her wedding-ring assumed the russet habit, the usual sign of such a resolution.
Gough, in his ‘Sepulchral Monuments,’ shares a story from Matthew Paris about a lady named Cecily Sandford. On her deathbed, after going through the usual rituals with her confessor, he instructed her attendants to remove a gold ring from her finger. Despite being close to death, she gathered the strength to tell them she would never let it go, as she planned to take it with her to heaven to present to her heavenly spouse. She believed it would serve as proof of her ongoing commitment to her vow and to receive the reward she had been promised. It turns out she had vowed to remain a perpetual widow, and along with her wedding ring, she took on the russet habit, which was the typical sign of such a resolution.
‘In the “Colchester Chronicle,” portions of which are printed in Cromwell’s “History of Colchester,” one entry appears to confirm the conjecture that the whole was composed in the fourteenth or fifteenth century, “Anno Dn̄i ccciij. Helena mortuo Constancio perpetuam vovit viduitatem.”
‘In the “Colchester Chronicle,” parts of which are featured in Cromwell’s “History of Colchester,” one entry seems to support the idea that the entire piece was created in the fourteenth or fifteenth century, “In the year of our Lord 1302, Helena vowed to remain a widow after the death of Constantius.”’
‘By the testament of Katharine Rippelingham, dated February 8, 1473, who calls herself “advowes,” she desires to be buried in the church of Baynardes Castell of London, where she was a parishioner; and by her will, in which she gives herself the title of “widow advowes,” she shows herself in the full exercise of her rights of property, devising estates, carrying out awards, and adjusting family differences, and in an undated codicil she bequeaths to her daughter’s daughter, Alice Saint John, “her gold ring with a diamante sette therein, wherewith she was ‘sacred.’”’
‘By the will of Katharine Rippelingham, dated February 8, 1473, who refers to herself as “advowes,” she wishes to be buried in the church of Baynardes Castle in London, where she was a parishioner; and in her will, where she labels herself as “widow advowes,” she demonstrates her full ownership rights, bequeathing properties, executing awards, and resolving family disputes. In an undated codicil, she leaves her granddaughter, Alice Saint John, “her gold ring with a diamond set in it, with which she was ‘sacred.’”’
[Pg 243]‘Sir Gilbert Denys, Knight of Syston, 1422: “If Margaret my wife will after my death vow a vow of chastity, I give her all my moveable goods, she paying my debts and providing for my children; and, if she will not vow a vow of chastity, I desire that my goods may be distributed, or divided into three equal parts, &c.”
[Pg 243]“Sir Gilbert Denys, Knight of Syston, 1422: If my wife Margaret promises to stay celibate after I die, I give her all my personal belongings, as long as she pays my debts and takes care of my children; and if she doesn’t promise to stay celibate, I want my belongings to be divided into three equal parts, etc.”
‘John Brakenbury, in 1487, leaves his mother certain real estate, “with that condicion that she never mary, the which she promised afore the parson and the parish of Thymmylbe, and if she kepe not that promise, I will she be content with that which was my fader’s will, which she had every peny.”
‘John Brakenbury, in 1487, leaves his mother certain real estate, “with the condition that she never remarry, which she promised before the parson and the parish of Thymmylbe, and if she does not keep that promise, I want her to be satisfied with what was my father’s will, which she received penny for penny.”’
‘William Herbert, knight, Lord Pembroke, in his will dated July 27, 1469, thus appeals to his wife: “And, wife, that you remember your promise to take the order of widowhood, so ye may be the better maistres of your owen, to perform my will, and to help my children, as I love and trust you.”
‘William Herbert, knight, Lord Pembroke, in his will dated July 27, 1469, thus appeals to his wife: “And, wife, please remember your promise to embrace widowhood, so that you may have better control over your own affairs, carry out my wishes, and support my children, as I love and trust you.”’
‘William Edlington, esquire, of Castle Carlton, on June 11, 1466, states in his will: “I make Christian, my wife, my executor on this condicion, that she take the mantle and the ring soon after my decease; and, if case be that she will not take the mantle and the ring, I will that William, my son (and other persons therein named) be my executors, and she to have a third part of all my goods moveable.”
‘William Edlington, esquire, of Castle Carlton, on June 11, 1466, states in his will: “I appoint my wife, Christian, as my executor on the condition that she takes the mantle and the ring soon after my death; and if she chooses not to take the mantle and the ring, I want my son, William (and other people named in this document) to be my executors, and she will receive a third of all my movable goods.”’
‘Lady Joan Danvers in 1453, gives the ring of her profession of widowhood to the image of the crucifix, near the north door of St. Paul’s.
‘Lady Joan Danvers in 1453 gives the ring symbolizing her status as a widow to the crucifix near the north door of St. Paul’s.
‘Lady Margaret Davy, widow, in 1489, leaves her profession-ring to “Our Lady of Walsingham.”’
‘Lady Margaret Davy, a widow, in 1489, bequeaths her profession ring to “Our Lady of Walsingham.”’
Gough prints the Act of Court from the Ely Registers, on the taking the vow by Isabella, Countess of Suffolk, in 1382. This took place at the priory of Campsey, in the[Pg 244] presence of the Earl of Warwick, the Lords Willoughby, Scales, and others. The vow was as follows: ‘Jeo Isabella, jadys la femme William de Ufford, Count de Suffolk, vowe à Dieu, &c., en presence de tres reverentz piers en Dieu evesques de Ely et de Norwiz, qe jeo doi estre chaste d’ors en avant ma vie durante.’ And the Bishop of Ely, with authority of the Bishop of Norwich (in whose diocese Campsey was) received and admitted the same, ‘et mantellum sive clamidem ac annulum dicte voventis solempniter benedixit et imposuit super eam.’
Gough prints the Act of Court from the Ely Registers about the vow taken by Isabella, Countess of Suffolk, in 1382. This happened at the priory of Campsey, in the [Pg 244] presence of the Earl of Warwick, Lords Willoughby, Scales, and others. The vow was as follows: ‘I, Isabella, formerly the wife of William de Ufford, Count of Suffolk, vow to God, etc., in the presence of the very reverend lords in God, the bishops of Ely and Norwich, that I will remain chaste for the rest of my life.’ And the Bishop of Ely, with the authority of the Bishop of Norwich (in whose diocese Campsey was), received and accepted the vow, ‘and solemnly blessed and placed a mantle or cloak and ring upon the one making the vow.’
Catherine, sixth daughter of Henry the Fourth, married to William Courtenay, Earl of Devon, on the death of her husband, took the vow of perpetual widowhood in 1511.
Catherine, the sixth daughter of Henry the Fourth, married William Courtenay, Earl of Devon. After her husband's death, she took a vow of perpetual widowhood in 1511.
Dugdale, in his ‘History of Warwickshire’ and in his ‘Baronage,’ prints a licence from John, Bishop of Lichfield, to one N. N. to administer the vow of chastity to Margery, wife of Richard Middlemore, who died 15th of Henry the Seventh, which contains this passage: ‘In signum hujusmodi continentiæ et castitatis promisso perpetuo servando eandem Margeriam velandam seu peplandam habitumque viduitatis hujusmodi viduis, ut præfertur, ad castitatis professionem dari et uti consuetum cum unico annulo assignandum.’
Dugdale, in his ‘History of Warwickshire’ and in his ‘Baronage,’ includes a license from John, Bishop of Lichfield, allowing one N. N. to administer the vow of chastity to Margery, the wife of Richard Middlemore, who died on the 15th of Henry the Seventh. This document includes the following passage: ‘As a sign of this commitment to chastity and maintaining the promise of perpetual continence, Margery should be veiled or covered, and the state of widowhood, as customary, should be assigned with a single ring to signify the profession of chastity.’
Legacies and gifts of rings for religious purposes were frequent in former times; thus, amongst other rich gifts to the Cathedral of Canterbury, Archbishop Hubert, in 1205, presented four gold rings adorned with precious stones. Henry the Third, while on a visit to St. Alban’s Abbey, made some costly presents, including bracelets and rings, and five years afterwards gave similar gifts at another visit to the same abbey.
Legacies and gifts of rings for religious purposes were common in the past; for example, among other valuable donations to Canterbury Cathedral, Archbishop Hubert gave four gold rings set with precious stones in 1205. King Henry III, during his visit to St. Alban’s Abbey, made several expensive gifts, including bracelets and rings, and five years later, he offered similar gifts on another visit to the same abbey.
[Pg 245]The same monarch, among other gifts to Salisbury Cathedral, ‘offered one gold ring with a precious stone called a ruby.’ After hearing mass he told the dean that he would have the stone and the gold applied to adorn a sumptuous gold ‘text’ (a Bible for the use of the altar) enriched with precious stones given by Hubert de Burgh.
[Pg 245]The same king, among other gifts to Salisbury Cathedral, ‘gave one gold ring with a precious stone known as a ruby.’ After attending mass, he told the dean that he wanted to use the stone and the gold to decorate an extravagant gold ‘text’ (a Bible for use at the altar) enhanced with precious stones donated by Hubert de Burgh.
Dugdale mentions in a list of jewels formerly in the treasury of York Cathedral ‘a small mitre, set with stones, for the bishop of the boys, or, as he was anciently called, the barne bishop; also a pastoral staff and ring for the same.’
Dugdale mentions in a list of jewels that used to be in the treasury of York Cathedral 'a small mitre, adorned with stones, for the bishop of the boys, or, as he was historically called, the barn bishop; also a pastoral staff and ring for the same.'
The Bishop of Ardfert, in Ireland, gave to St. Alban’s ‘three noble rings; one set with an oriental sapphire, the second with a sapphire that possessed some medicinal quality, and was formed like a shield, and the other with a sapphire of less size.’
The Bishop of Ardfert, in Ireland, gave St. Alban three beautiful rings; one set with an oriental sapphire, the second with a sapphire that had some healing quality and was shaped like a shield, and the other with a smaller sapphire.
Henry de Blois presented to the same abbey a large ring set with jewels; the middle one was a sapphire of a faint colour, and in the circuit four pearls and four garnets.
Henry de Blois gave the same abbey a large ring decorated with jewels; the center stone was a light-colored sapphire, surrounded by four pearls and four garnets.
John of St. Alban’s, a knight, left as a legacy to the monks of the abbey ‘a number of rings containing many precious stones.’
John of St. Alban’s, a knight, left as a legacy to the monks of the abbey ‘a number of rings containing many precious stones.’
At the death of Walter, Abbot of Peterborough, among his effects, containing many rich articles, were no less than thirty gold rings, the offerings of the faithful.
At the death of Walter, Abbot of Peterborough, among his belongings, which included many valuable items, there were at least thirty gold rings, gifts from the faithful.
Thomas Chillenden, fortieth Abbot of Canterbury, gave several pontifical rings to the abbey.
Thomas Chillenden, the 40th Abbot of Canterbury, donated several pontifical rings to the abbey.
Thomas de la Chesnaye (died 1517) left, for the shrine of the Virgin at Rouen Cathedral, a ring garnished with a costly precious stone. Eustace Grossier, canon of the same cathedral, bequeathed, in 1534, his signet-ring to the shrine of St. Romain. Two years afterwards Jean de Lieur,[Pg 246] another canon, left four rings to the shrine of the Virgin, ‘où il y a en une, une petite esmaraude; en laultre une petite turquoise, en laultre ung petit saphir, et en laultre ung petit rubi.’ In 1544 Etienne Burnel leaves to Our Lady a gold ring with a ruby enchased, and a pendant pearl; and to the shrine of St. Romain a gold ring with a diamond.
Thomas de la Chesnaye (died 1517) donated a ring set with an expensive gemstone to the shrine of the Virgin at Rouen Cathedral. In 1534, Eustace Grossier, a canon of the same cathedral, gave his signet ring to the shrine of St. Romain. Two years later, Jean de Lieur,[Pg 246] another canon, left four rings to the shrine of the Virgin, "where there is one with a small emerald, another with a small turquoise, another with a small sapphire, and another with a small ruby." In 1544, Etienne Burnel bequeathed a gold ring with a ruby set in it and a pendant pearl to Our Lady, and a gold ring with a diamond to the shrine of St. Romain.
Charles the Third (? Naples) took from his finger a ring of great value to adorn the golden canopy, enriched with precious stones, for the Host, in the church of the Holy Sepulchre at Jerusalem.
Charles the Third (? Naples) took a valuable ring from his finger to decorate the golden canopy, embellished with precious stones, for the Host in the church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem.
Lady Morgan, in her ‘Italy,’ mentions the miraculous statue of the Virgin and Child at Loretto: ‘The Bambino holds up his hand as if to sport a superb diamond ring on his finger, presented to him by Cardinal Antonelli: it is a single diamond and weighs thirty grains.’
Lady Morgan, in her ‘Italy,’ talks about the miraculous statue of the Virgin and Child at Loretto: ‘The Bambino holds up his hand as if to show off an exquisite diamond ring on his finger, given to him by Cardinal Antonelli: it is a single diamond and weighs thirty grains.’
In the ‘Annals of Ireland’ we read that in 1421 Richard O’Hedian, Archbishop of Cashel, was accused, among other crimes, of taking a ring away from the image of St. Patrick (which the Earl of Desmond had offered) and giving it to his mistress.
In the 'Annals of Ireland,' we read that in 1421, Richard O’Hedian, Archbishop of Cashel, was accused, among other crimes, of stealing a ring from the statue of St. Patrick (which the Earl of Desmond had donated) and giving it to his mistress.
Louis VII., of France, laid the first stone of the porch and two towers of the abbey church of St. Denis, in 1140. When the officiating minister pronounced the words ‘lapides pretiosi omnes muri tui et turres, Jerusalem, gemmis ædificabunter,’ the King took a costly ring from his finger, and threw it into the foundations. Several of the other persons present followed the example.
Louis VII of France laid the first stone of the porch and two towers of the abbey church of St. Denis in 1140. When the officiating minister pronounced the words ‘lapides pretiosi omnes muri tui et turres, Jerusalem, gemmis ædificabunter,’ the King removed a valuable ring from his finger and tossed it into the foundations. Several other attendees followed his lead.
Saint Honoré, eighth Bishop of Amiens, in the sixteenth century, left his pastoral ring to the treasury of the cathedral, but it was sold by one of his successors, Bishop Gervain. It was afterwards repurchased and replaced in the treasury by Bishop Godefroy.
Saint Honoré, the eighth Bishop of Amiens in the sixteenth century, donated his pastoral ring to the cathedral's treasury, but one of his successors, Bishop Gervain, sold it. Later, Bishop Godefroy bought it back and returned it to the treasury.
[Pg 247]We read in the account of the spoliation of the shrine of St. Thomas à Becket, at Canterbury (temp. Henry VIII.), of a stone ‘with an Angell of gold poynting thereunto, offered there by a King of France’ (which King Henry put) ‘into a ring, and wore it on his thumb.’ The shrine blazed with gold and jewels; the wooden sides were plated with gold, and damasked with gold wire: cramped together on this gold ground were innumerable jewels, pearls, sapphires, balasses, diamonds, rubies, and emeralds, and also ‘in the midst of the gold, rings, or cameos of sculptured agates, cornelians, and onyx stones.’
[Pg 247]We read in the account of the plundering of the shrine of St. Thomas à Becket, at Canterbury (during the time of Henry VIII.), about a stone ‘with an angel of gold pointing to it, offered there by a King of France’ (which King Henry had) ‘set into a ring, and wore it on his thumb.’ The shrine was adorned with gold and jewels; the wooden sides were covered in gold and decorated with gold wire: tightly packed on this gold surface were countless jewels, pearls, sapphires, balasses, diamonds, rubies, and emeralds, and also ‘among the gold, rings or cameos made of sculptured agates, cornelians, and onyx stones.’
The stone that the rapacious Henry took was said to be as large as a hen’s egg, or a thumb-nail, and was commonly called the ‘Regale of France’ offered to the shrine by Louis VII. of France, when on a pilgrimage there.[54]
The stone that greedy Henry took was said to be about the size of a hen’s egg or a thumbnail, and it was commonly known as the ‘Regale of France,’ which was offered to the shrine by Louis VII of France during his pilgrimage there.[54]
At the meeting of the Archæological Institute at Norwich in 1847 Sir Thomas Beevor exhibited a silver ring, with a zigzag tooling and the word ‘✠Dancas✠’ signifying a token of thanks, or acknowledgment of services received, or, possibly, an ex voto, in accordance with the common usage of suspending such ornaments near the shrines of saints, as appears in the inventories of St. Cuthbert’s shrine, &c.
At the meeting of the Archaeological Institute in Norwich in 1847, Sir Thomas Beevor showcased a silver ring with a zigzag design and the word ‘✠Dancas✠’, indicating a token of thanks or acknowledgment for services rendered, or possibly an ex voto, which aligns with the usual practice of hanging such ornaments near the shrines of saints, as noted in the inventories of St. Cuthbert’s shrine, etc.
Adam Sodbury, fifty-third Abbot of Glastonbury, gave to the abbey, among other precious gifts, ‘a gold ring with a[Pg 248] stone called Peritot, which was on the finger of St. Thomas the Martyr, when he fell by the swords of wicked men.’
Adam Sodbury, the fifty-third Abbot of Glastonbury, gifted the abbey, among other valuable items, ‘a gold ring with a[Pg 248] stone called Peritot, which was on the finger of St. Thomas the Martyr when he was killed by the swords of evil men.’
Among what may be called ‘religious’ rings, I would notice those which are termed ‘decade,’ ‘reliquary,’ ‘pilgrims,’ &c., some of which are highly interesting, and serve to show how, in past ages, the zeal of our forefathers was animated by these rings, or, as some would call them, these aids to superstition. In olden wills they are frequently mentioned as heir-looms of great value.
Among what can be called 'religious' rings, I would point out those known as 'decade,' 'reliquary,' 'pilgrims,' etc., some of which are very interesting and demonstrate how, in past ages, the dedication of our ancestors was inspired by these rings, or, as some might refer to them, these aids to superstition. In old wills, they are often mentioned as treasured heirlooms.
What are termed DECADE-rings, having ten projections at intervals all round the hoop, were common in former times, and were used as beads for repeating Aves. In the Braybrooke Collection a ring is mentioned with eleven knobs, the last being larger than the others, indicating ten Aves and one Paternoster. Each of the knobs is separated by three small beaded dots across the hoop from its neighbour, probably symbolic of the Trinity. At a meeting of the Archæological Institute at Norwich, in 1847, a curious ring was exhibited dating from the reign of Henry VI., found at St. Faith’s, near Norwich. It is engrailed, presenting ten cusps, and may be placed in the class of decade-rings. On the facet is engraved the figure of St. Mary Magdalen (or St. Barbara?), and on the outer circle ‘de bon cver’ (‘de bon cœur’).
What are called 10 years rings, featuring ten bumps spaced around the band, were common in the past and were used as beads for counting Aves. In the Braybrooke Collection, there’s a ring noted with eleven knobs, the last being larger than the others, signifying ten Aves and one Paternoster. Each knob is separated by three small beaded dots on the band from its neighbor, likely symbolizing the Trinity. At a meeting of the Archæological Institute in Norwich in 1847, a fascinating ring was shown that dates back to the reign of Henry VI, found at St. Faith’s, near Norwich. It has a scalloped edge, featuring ten points, and can be classified as a decade ring. Engraved on the side is the figure of St. Mary Magdalen (or St. Barbara?), and around the outer circle, it says ‘de bon cver’ (‘de bon cœur’).
Another ring of the same date is of a more delicate workmanship, and bears on the facet, St. Christopher, the hoop engrailed like the last, and has the legend ‘en. bo. n. ane’ (‘en bon an’).
Another ring from the same time is made with finer craftsmanship and features St. Christopher on the face, with the band shaped like the last one, and it has the inscription ‘en. bo. n. ane’ (‘en bon an’).
At the same exhibition of antiquities among the rings of latten or base-metal was shown one engraved with the figure of a female saint, probably St. Catherine; the hoop[Pg 249] formed with eleven bosses, date about 1450. A similar brass ring bearing the same figure, found near British and Roman weapons in the bed of the Thames, at Kingston, engraved in Jesse’s ‘Gleanings in Natural History,’ is here represented. This ring has eleven bosses, and, although found in the immediate vicinity of vestiges of an earlier date, may be regarded as of mediæval date, having been accidentally thrown together in the alluvial deposit.
At the same exhibition of antiques, there was a base-metal ring engraved with the image of a female saint, likely St. Catherine; the hoop[Pg 249] has eleven bosses and dates to around 1450. A similar brass ring featuring the same figure, discovered alongside British and Roman weapons in the Thames at Kingston, is shown here as represented in Jesse’s ‘Gleanings in Natural History.’ This ring also has eleven bosses and, although it was found near remnants from an earlier time, can be considered medieval, having been accidentally mixed in the alluvial deposit.
![]() |
![]() | |
Latten ring, with figure of St. Catherine (?). |
Thumb-ring. |
Two decade-rings of the fifteenth century were also exhibited at the Norwich meeting, bearing the monogram I.H.S. one found in Norwich Castle, and the other at Heigham.
Two 15th-century rings were also displayed at the Norwich meeting, featuring the monogram I.H.S. One was discovered in Norwich Castle, and the other at Heigham.
A gold ring with ten knobs, was found in 1846, at Denbigh, in pulling down an old house. Its weight is a quarter of an ounce. A similar ring of base metal, discovered in a tomb in York Minster, is preserved in the treasury of that church; and another example, in silver, of precisely similar form, was found in Whitby Abbey, Yorkshire.
A gold ring with ten knobs was discovered in 1846 at Denbigh while tearing down an old house. It weighs a quarter of an ounce. A similar ring made of base metal, found in a tomb at York Minster, is kept in the church's treasury; and another example, in silver and of exactly the same design, was found at Whitby Abbey in Yorkshire.
Mr. Edward Hoare, of Cork, writing to the editor of the ‘Archæological Journal,’ observes that, as far as he has been[Pg 250] able to obtain information about decade-rings, they were worn by some classes of religious during the hours of repose, so that on awaking during the night they might repeat a certain number of prayers, marking them by the beads or knobs of the rings. If worn on any finger except the thumb, at other periods of time than those of repose, it must have been as a sort of penance, and perhaps these rings were sometimes so used. The addition of a twelfth boss marked the repetition of a creed.
Mr. Edward Hoare, from Cork, writing to the editor of the ‘Archæological Journal,’ notes that, as far as he has been[Pg 250] able to find out about decade-rings, they were worn by some groups of religious individuals during times of rest, so that when they woke up during the night, they could recite a certain number of prayers, counting them using the beads or knobs on the rings. If worn on any finger except the thumb during other times, it likely served as a form of penance, and these rings might sometimes have been used in that way. The addition of a twelfth knob indicated the repetition of a creed.
Silver Decade-ring.
(In the possession of E. Hoare, Esq.)
Silver Decade Ring.
(Owned by E. Hoare, Esq.)
The following illustration is from the ‘Gentleman’s Magazine’ (1792), of a ring found near Croydon, concerning which a correspondent of that work wrote that he remembered a similar ring in the possession of a man advanced in years, who had passed his youth at sea. ‘The ring,’ he said, ‘was a dicket (a corruption of “Decade”), to be placed, successively, on each of the fingers, and turned with the thumb; the cross and larger boss for the Paternoster; the ten smaller ones for Ave Maria, and that he used to say his prayers with it on board ship without being noticed by the sailors, in the hurry and confusion of a man of war.’
The following illustration is from the ‘Gentleman’s Magazine’ (1792), showing a ring found near Croydon. A correspondent for that magazine mentioned he remembered a similar ring that belonged to an older man who had spent his youth at sea. “The ring,” he said, “was a dicket (a twist on 'Decade'), designed to be placed on each finger, turned with the thumb; the cross and larger part for the Paternoster; the ten smaller ones for Ave Maria. He used to say his prayers with it on board ship without being noticed by the sailors amidst the chaos of a warship.”
Decade-ring, found near Croydon.
Decade ring, found near Croydon.
In the rich collection of E. Hoare, Esq., is a curious decade signet-ring, of which the following is a representation[Pg 251] from the ‘Archæological Journal’ (vol. ii. p. 198). It was discovered near Cork in 1844, and is thus described: ‘The hoop is composed of nine knobs or bosses, which may have served instead of beads in numbering prayers, whilst the central portion which forms the signet supplied the place of the gaùde.’ Some persons (as Mr. Hoare remarked) have considered this ring as very ancient; Mr. Lindsay supposed it to have been of earlier date than the ninth century, regarding the device as representing an arm, issuing from the clouds, holding a cross with a crown, or an ecclesiastical cap, beneath it. Sir William Betham expressed the following opinion respecting this relic: ‘There can be little doubt but your ring is a decade ring, as there are ten knobs or balls about it. The globe surmounted by a cross is a Christian emblem of sovereignty; the ring and cross, of a bishop; the cap looks like a crown, and, only that the ring is too old, it might be considered the ciulid or barred crown of a sovereign prince. It certainly is of considerable antiquity, and Mr. Lindsay is not far out in his estimation.’
In the impressive collection of E. Hoare, Esq., there's a fascinating decade signet ring, which is depicted as follows[Pg 251] from the ‘Archæological Journal’ (vol. ii. p. 198). It was found near Cork in 1844, and is described as: ‘The band has nine knobs or bosses, which may have been used as beads for keeping track of prayers, while the central part that makes the signet took the place of the gaùde.’ Some people (as Mr. Hoare noted) believe this ring is quite ancient; Mr. Lindsay thought it dated back to before the ninth century, interpreting the design as an arm coming from the clouds, holding a cross with a crown or an ecclesiastical cap underneath it. Sir William Betham shared his thoughts on this artifact: ‘There’s little doubt that your ring is a decade ring, as it features ten knobs or balls around it. The globe topped with a cross is a Christian symbol of authority; the ring and cross represent a bishop; the cap resembles a crown, and, except for the ring being too old, it could be considered the ciulid or barred crown of a sovereign prince. It’s certainly very old, and Mr. Lindsay’s estimate isn’t far off.’
![]() |
![]() | |
Decade signet-ring. | Decade-ring. |
In the Londesborough Collection is a ‘religious’ ring, apparently a work of the fourteenth century. It has a heart in the centre, from which springs a double flower. On the upper edge of the ring are five protuberances in each side: they were used to mark a certain number of prayers[Pg 252] said by the wearer, who turned his ring as he said them, and so completed the series in the darkness of the night.
In the Londesborough Collection, there's a 'religious' ring that seems to be from the fourteenth century. It features a heart in the center, with a double flower emerging from it. On the top edge of the ring, there are five bumps on each side; these were used to keep track of a specific number of prayers[Pg 252] recited by the wearer, who would turn the ring as they prayed to complete the count in the darkness of the night.
Decade rings.
Milestone rings.
It has been stated by French antiquaries that metal rings formed with ten bosses, and one of as early date as the reign of St. Louis, have been found in France. It was at that period that the use of the chapelet in honour of the Blessed Virgin is supposed to have been devised by Peter the Hermit.
It has been noted by French historians that metal rings with ten bumps, some dating back to the reign of St. Louis, have been discovered in France. It was during this time that the use of the chapelet in honor of the Blessed Virgin is believed to have been created by Peter the Hermit.
A decade silver ring found at Exton, in Rutlandshire, in the possession of Mrs. Baker, of Stamford, has also a central projection engraved with a cross.
A silver decade ring discovered in Exton, Rutlandshire, now owned by Mrs. Baker from Stamford, features a central projection engraved with a cross.
In Mr. Hoare’s collection is a silver decade-ring found in 1848 in Surrey. The hoop has ten projections resembling the cogs of a wheel, and on the circular facet is the monogram I.H.S. surmounted by a cross, with a heart pierced by three nails.
In Mr. Hoare’s collection is a silver decade ring found in 1848 in Surrey. The band has ten projections that look like the cogs of a wheel, and on the round face is the monogram I.H.S. topped by a cross, with a heart pierced by three nails.
In the Londesborough Collection is a ring of Delhi workmanship which has been referred to as a decade. The face is convex, circular, and of turquoise, engraved and inlaid with Oriental characters in gold, surrounded by ten cup-shaped bosses of rubies. The sides of the bosses are enamelled green, and the backs red and white like leaflets. The back of the face is richly enamelled with flowers having red blossoms and green leaves, among which, upon the shank, are intermingled some pale-blue blossoms, and[Pg 253] within the centre, where the shank is attached to the back of the face, are small golden stars upon an enamelled ground, and on each side leaves of green enamel. The inscription reads ‘Jan (John) Kaptani.’
In the Londesborough Collection, there's a ring made in Delhi that's been called a decade. The face is rounded, circular, and made of turquoise, engraved and inlaid with Oriental characters in gold, surrounded by ten cup-shaped settings of rubies. The sides of the settings are enameled green, and the backs are red and white like little leaves. The back of the face is beautifully enameled with flowers featuring red blossoms and green leaves, among which are some pale-blue flowers intermingling on the shank, and[Pg 253] at the center, where the shank connects to the back of the face, are small golden stars on an enameled background, with green enameled leaves on each side. The inscription says ‘Jan (John) Kaptani.’
Ring of Delhi work.
Delhi work ring.
Mr. Edmund Waterton, at a meeting of the Archæological Institute (December, 1862), gave the following notice of some rings of a peculiar class, of which he sent several specimens for inspection: ‘On a former occasion I exhibited, at one of the meetings, some of the so-called—and wrongly—rosary-rings, one of which had seven, the other eleven, and the third, thirteen knobs or bosses. I stated my opinion that we ought to consider these examples as belonging to a form of ring prevalent about the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, and described in wills and inventories as rings with “knoppes or bulionys.” I had never met with a proper rosary, or, more properly, decade, ring of a date anterior to the sixteenth century. But a remarkable specimen has lately been added to my collection which I send for exhibition. It is of ivory; there are ten knobs or bosses for the Aves, and an eleventh of larger size and different form, for the Pater. There are holes around the hoop, probably merely for ornament. I am inclined to ascribe it to the fourteenth century, and think it not unlikely it is of Irish origin. I am induced to form this opinion from the peculiar fashion of the eleventh boss, which presents a type found in rings discovered only in Ireland. This ring was found many years ago in an old tomb in Merston churchyard, in Holderness. I also send another decade-ring, of[Pg 254] silver, and of a later date and type. This ring was formerly in the possession of the Reverend Mother Anne More, Lady Abbess of the English Augustinian Nuns at Bruges, and sister of Father More, of the Society of Jesus, the last male descendant of Sir Thomas More. He gave the More relics to Stonyhurst College.’
Mr. Edmund Waterton, at a meeting of the Archaeological Institute (December, 1862), shared the following information about some unique rings, for which he sent several examples for review: "Previously, at one of the meetings, I showed some of the so-called—and incorrectly—rosary rings, one with seven knobs, another with eleven, and a third with thirteen. I expressed my belief that we should view these examples as part of a ring style popular in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, referred to in wills and inventories as rings with 'knobs or bulions.' I had never encountered a true rosary, or more accurately, a decade ring from before the sixteenth century. However, I recently acquired a remarkable specimen that I am sending for display. It is made of ivory; there are ten knobs for the Aves, and an eleventh, larger and differently shaped, for the Pater. There are holes around the band, likely just for decoration. I tend to believe it dates back to the fourteenth century and may be of Irish origin. I come to this conclusion because of the unique design of the eleventh knob, which resembles a style found in rings only unearthed in Ireland. This ring was discovered many years ago in an old tomb in Merston churchyard, located in Holderness. I am also sending another decade ring, made of[Pg 254] silver, which is of a later design. This ring was previously owned by Reverend Mother Anne More, Lady Abbess of the English Augustinian Nuns in Bruges, and sister of Father More from the Society of Jesus, the last male descendant of Sir Thomas More. He donated the More relics to Stonyhurst College."
Trinity ring.
Trinity ring.
Among other examples of ‘religious’ rings, I may mention a beautiful one of gold, of fifteenth-century work, found at Orford Castle in Suffolk, and the property of the Rev. S. Blois Turner. On the facet is engraved a representation of the Trinity, the Supreme Being supporting a crucifix; on the flanges are St. Anne instructing the Virgin Mary, and the Mater Dolorosa. These designs were probably enamelled.
Among other examples of 'religious' rings, I can mention a beautiful gold one from the fifteenth century, found at Orford Castle in Suffolk, and owned by Rev. S. Blois Turner. On the face, there's an engraving of the Trinity, with the Supreme Being holding a crucifix; on the sides are St. Anne teaching the Virgin Mary and the Mater Dolorosa. These designs were probably enamelled.
A representation is here given of a gold triple ring, brought from Rome, and, possibly, emblematic of the Trinity. It is an Early Christian ring, dating, probably, from the end of the third or beginning of the fourth century.
A representation is provided here of a gold triple ring brought from Rome, possibly symbolizing the Trinity. It is an Early Christian ring, likely dated to the end of the third century or the beginning of the fourth century.
Religious rings.
Faith rings.
At the meeting of the Archæological Institute in March 1850 an exquisite gold ‘religious’ ring of the fifteenth[Pg 255] century was exhibited, found within the precincts of Lewes Priory. It is delicately chased with the following subjects: on the facet, the Virgin and child; on one side, the Emperor Domitian; on the other, St. Pancras; on the flanges are represented the Holy Trinity, and St. John with the Holy Lamb. The work was originally enriched with transparent enamel.
At the meeting of the Archaeological Institute in March 1850, a beautiful gold 'religious' ring from the fifteenth century was displayed, found near Lewes Priory. It is intricately designed with the following images: on one side, the Virgin and child; on another side, Emperor Domitian; on the opposite side, St. Pancras; and on the edges, the Holy Trinity along with St. John and the Holy Lamb. The piece was originally adorned with transparent enamel.
Religious ring.
Faith ring.
In the Londesborough Collection is a gold ‘religious’ ring, enamelled with a diamond in the centre, and six rubies, arranged like a sacred cross, around it. The scrolls are enriched with white, blue, and green enamel.
In the Londesborough Collection, there's a gold ‘religious’ ring, featuring a diamond in the center and six rubies arranged like a sacred cross around it. The scrolls are decorated with white, blue, and green enamel.
At Barnard Castle, in 1811, a gold ring was found of eight globules, in weight equal to three guineas and a half. On the second is S; on the fourth, US; on the sixth, JH; on the eighth, S, the abbreviation of Sanctus Jesus; on the first, is the Saviour on the cross in the arms of God; on the third, the Saviour triumphing over death; on the fifth, the Saviour scourged; on the seventh, Judas, the traitor.
At Barnard Castle, in 1811, a gold ring was discovered with eight globules, weighing the equivalent of three and a half guineas. On the second globule is S; on the fourth, USA; on the sixth, JH; on the eighth, S, an abbreviation for Sanctus Jesus; on the first, there is the Saviour on the cross in the arms of God; on the third, the Saviour conquering death; on the fifth, the Saviour being scourged; and on the seventh, Judas, the traitor.
The accompanying illustration represents a ‘religious’ ring, found in the eighteenth century near Loughborough, and described in the ‘Gentleman’s Magazine’ for 1802. The figures are those of the Virgin Mary, Child, and St. Michael.
The accompanying illustration shows a ‘religious’ ring, discovered in the eighteenth century near Loughborough, and described in the ‘Gentleman’s Magazine’ for 1802. The figures depict the Virgin Mary, the Child, and St. Michael.
Religious ring.
Faith ring.
[Pg 256]A ring of a curious form is described in the ‘Gentleman’s Magazine’ for 1811, as having been found in the parish of Stonham-Aspal, Suffolk. The gold seemed pure, but the workmanship was rude, and the gem which it enclosed was supposed to be a virgin sapphire.
[Pg 256]A ring with an interesting design was mentioned in the ‘Gentleman’s Magazine’ from 1811, saying it was found in the parish of Stonham-Aspal, Suffolk. The gold appeared to be pure, but the craftsmanship was rough, and the stone it held was thought to be a virgin sapphire.
Religious ring.
Faith ring.
The following represents a large and curious ring found about 1750 at the hermitage on the River Itchen, at Southampton, which is noticed in Sir Henry Englefield’s ‘Walk Round Southampton,’ and is mentioned in the ‘Gentleman’s Magazine’ for 1802. The bezel is little broader than the hoop.
The following describes a large and interesting ring discovered around 1750 at the hermitage on the River Itchen in Southampton. This ring is mentioned in Sir Henry Englefield’s ‘Walk Round Southampton’ and also appears in the ‘Gentleman’s Magazine’ from 1802. The bezel is slightly wider than the hoop.
Religious ring.
Faith ring.
In the collection of Mr. Octavius Morgan, F.R.S., F.S.A., is a Jewish ring enamelled with figures in relief, representing[Pg 257] the Creation, the Temptation, and the Fall of Adam and Eve; date, sixteenth century.
In the collection of Mr. Octavius Morgan, F.R.S., F.S.A., there is a Jewish ring decorated with raised figures, depicting[Pg 257] the Creation, the Temptation, and the Fall of Adam and Eve; date, sixteenth century.
‘Paradise’ rings.
"Paradise" bells.
In the cathedral library at Chichester is an ancient gem having the Gnostic equivalent of the blessed name Jehovah. This was used by Seffrid, Bishop of Chichester (died 1159), as his episcopal signet.
In the cathedral library at Chichester is an ancient gem featuring the Gnostic equivalent of the sacred name Jehovah. This was used by Seffrid, Bishop of Chichester (died 1159), as his episcopal seal.
Reliquary ring.
Reliquary ring.
[Pg 258]In the Gérente Collection is a reliquary ring of silver-gilt elaborately ornamented.
[Pg 258]In the Gérente Collection is a beautifully decorated silver-gilt reliquary ring.
The Bessborough Collection has a ring with a frog or toad cut in a magnificent almandine, of Roman work—a favourite device in the later Imperial times, the animal typifying a new birth by its total changes of form and habits, and hence adopted into the list of Christian symbols.
The Bessborough Collection has a ring featuring a frog or toad carved from a stunning almandine, made in Roman times—this was a popular design during the later Imperial period. The animal represents rebirth due to its complete changes in form and behavior, which is why it was included in the list of Christian symbols.
The Rev. C. W. King notices in his ‘Antique Gems,’ among some ‘highly curious and undoubted Christian subjects engraved on gems, one of the most interesting—a red jasper set in an elegant antique gold ring, the shank formed of a corded pattern, in wire, of a novel and beautiful design. The stone bears, in neatly-formed letters: ΙΗCΟΥC-ΦΕΟΥ-ΥΙΟC-ΤΗΡΕ, “Jesus, Son of God, keep us.” Another, of equal interest and of the earliest period of our religion, a fish cut on a fine emerald (quarter of an inch square), is set in an exquisitely-moulded six-sided ring, with fluted and knotted shank, imitating a bent reed, very similar to a bronze one figured in Caylus.’
The Rev. C. W. King mentions in his ‘Antique Gems’ that among some “highly curious and clearly Christian subjects engraved on gems,” one of the most fascinating is a red jasper set in a beautiful antique gold ring. The band is made of a cabled design that is both unique and attractive. The stone has neatly carved letters: ΙΗCΟΥC-ΦΕΟΥ-ΥΙΟC-ΤΗΡΕ, which translates to “Jesus, Son of God, keep us.” Another equally interesting piece from the early days of our religion is a fish carved on a small emerald (a quarter of an inch square), set in a beautifully shaped six-sided ring with a fluted and knotted band that resembles a bent reed, quite similar to a bronze piece depicted by Caylus.
The first of the annexed illustrations represents an early Christian ring with the symbol of an anchor.
The first of the attached illustrations shows an early Christian ring featuring the symbol of an anchor.
Early Christian rings.
Early Christian rings.
The other engraving is from Gorlæus, of an early Christian ring with the sacred emblems, found in the Catacombs at Rome.
The other engraving is from Gorlæus, showing an early Christian ring with sacred symbols, found in the Catacombs in Rome.
[Pg 259]The following illustration represents a key-ring, with sacred monogram.
[Pg 259]The following illustration shows a keyring with a sacred monogram.
Early Christian.
Early Christianity.
In the Waterton ‘Dactyliotheca’ is an early Christian ring having ‘the Holy Church represented by a pillar, on which are figured twelve dots, which denote the twelve apostles. Three steps, thrice repeated, lead to the pillar, symbolising the lavacrum regenerationis, which was formerly received by three immersions, and three interrogations, and three replies given by those who were being baptised.’
In the Waterton collection, there’s an early Christian ring featuring ‘the Holy Church depicted by a pillar, adorned with twelve dots that represent the twelve apostles. Three steps, repeated three times, lead up to the pillar, symbolizing the lavacrum regenerationis, which was traditionally administered through three immersions, three questions, and three answers provided by the individuals being baptized.’
In the treasuries of various continental churches are ‘religious’ rings, to which a high value is attached. In the church of St. Ursula, at Cologne, is one called the ring of that saint, and is, certainly, of very early date.
In the collections of different churches across the continent, there are ‘religious’ rings that hold significant value. In the church of St. Ursula in Cologne, there is one known as the ring of that saint, which is undoubtedly very old.
Mr. J. W. Singer informs me that he has seen in the treasury of the cathedral of Liége, a large shrine, far above the size of life, in silver-gilt, the bust of St. Lambert, the patron of the cathedral. One hand has a crosier, and the other holds a book. On the right hand are six rings, and on the left are three, of the seventeenth and eighteenth century style; the shrine being late fifteenth or early sixteenth century. The rings are on very different parts of the fingers, some being on the first joint.
Mr. J. W. Singer tells me that he has seen a large shrine in the treasury of the cathedral of Liège, much larger than life, made of silver-gilt, featuring the bust of St. Lambert, the cathedral's patron. One hand holds a crosier, and the other holds a book. On the right hand, there are six rings, and on the left, there are three, styled from the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries; the shrine itself dates to the late fifteenth or early sixteenth century. The rings are placed on very different parts of the fingers, with some on the first joint.
These rings may have been votive offerings; one is a ruby ring having a stone weighing ten carats.
These rings may have been offerings; one is a ruby ring with a stone weighing ten carats.
In a catalogue (kindly lent to me by Mr. Singer), ‘Des Bijoux de la Très Sainte Vierge del Pilar de Saragosse’ of offerings by the pious to the sacred treasury for many centuries, and which were sold in 1870 to defray the expenses[Pg 260] of repairs and embellishments to the Holy Chapel, numerous costly rings are included among other precious objects.
In a catalog (generously lent to me by Mr. Singer), ‘Jewels of the Most Holy Virgin of Pilar de Saragossa’ lists offerings made by the faithful to the sacred treasury over many centuries, which were sold in 1870 to cover the costs[Pg 260] of repairs and decorations to the Holy Chapel. Among other valuable items, there are many expensive rings included.
With a few instances of ‘religious’ rings, including pilgrims’ rings, &c., now in the possession of several eminent collectors, and exhibited at various meetings of the Archæological Society, I must conclude the present chapter.
With a few examples of 'religious' rings, including pilgrims' rings, etc., now owned by several well-known collectors and displayed at various meetings of the Archaeological Society, I will conclude this chapter.
In the curious catalogue of Dr. Bargrave’s Museum (Camden Society) is mentioned ‘a small gold Salerno ring, written on the outside—not like a posey, in the inside, but on the out—Bene scripsisti de Me, Thoma. The story of it is, that Thomas Aquinas, being at Salerno, and in earnest in a church before a certain image there of the Blessed Virgin Mary, his devotion carried him so far as to ask her whether she liked all that he had writ of her, as being free from original sin, the Queen of Heaven, &c., and entreated her to give him some token of her acceptance of his endeavours in the writing of so much in her behalf; upon which the image opened its lipps and said, Bene scripsisti de Me, Thoma.
In the interesting catalog of Dr. Bargrave’s Museum (Camden Society), there is a mention of "a small gold Salerno ring, inscribed on the outside—not like a posey on the inside, but on the outer side—Bene scripsisti de Me, Thoma. The story goes that Thomas Aquinas, while at Salerno and deeply focused in a church before a certain image of the Blessed Virgin Mary, was so devoted that he asked her if she was pleased with everything he had written about her, considering her free from original sin, the Queen of Heaven, etc. He requested a sign from her to show her acceptance of his efforts in writing so much on her behalf; in response, the image opened its lips and said, Bene scripsisti de Me, Thoma.
Religious seal-ring.
Religious signet ring.
‘Salerno layeth a little beyond Naples on the Mediterranean Sea; and the goldsmiths of that place, for their profit, make thousands of these rings, and then have them touch that image which spake. And no merchant or stranger that cometh thither but buyeth of these rings for presents and tokens.’
‘Salerno is located just beyond Naples on the Mediterranean Sea; and the goldsmiths there, for profit, make thousands of these rings, and have them touched to that speaking image. No merchant or visitor who comes there leaves without buying some of these rings as gifts and keepsakes.’
A seal-ring, considered to belong to the fifteenth century, was discovered at Cuddesden in 1814, by some workmen, in front of the gate of the episcopal palace.[Pg 261] It is of brass; the impress is an oblong octagon; the device is the word pax, with a crown above, and a heart and palm-branches below.
A seal ring, thought to date back to the fifteenth century, was found at Cuddesden in 1814 by some workers in front of the gate of the episcopal palace.[Pg 261] It’s made of brass; the imprint is an elongated octagon; the design features the word pax, with a crown above and a heart and palm branches below.
In the collection of the Hon. Richard Neville is a ring of silver-gilt (time, Henry VII.), with bevelled facets, engraved with figures of saints, found at the Borough Field, Chesterford; also a latten ring found in the Thames (1846), the impress being the Virgin and Child; and the ring of latten—ihc—discovered in repairing Weston Church, Suffolk; within is inscribed, in deo salus.
In the collection of the Hon. Richard Neville is a silver-gilt ring (from the time of Henry VII) with beveled edges, engraved with images of saints, found at Borough Field, Chesterford; also a latten ring discovered in the Thames (1846), featuring the Virgin and Child; and another latten ring—ihc—found while repairing Weston Church, Suffolk; inside it is inscribed, In God we trust.
A gold ring in the possession of Mrs. Baker, of Stamford, stated to have been found in the tomb of an ecclesiastic, in a stone coffin, near Winchester, bears a representation of St. Christopher.
A gold ring owned by Mrs. Baker from Stamford, said to have been discovered in the tomb of a cleric, inside a stone coffin near Winchester, features an image of St. Christopher.
A ring found at Loughborough, in 1802, represents the Virgin and St. Michael, with motto.
A ring discovered at Loughborough in 1802 features the Virgin and St. Michael, along with a motto.
Religious ring.
Faith ring.
A silver ring found at Carlisle, in 1788, bears an inscription below, which has been suggested for ‘Mary, Jesus.’ The bezel of this ring is a rude representation of joined hands, surmounted by a crown, and a portion of the hoop is decorated with lozenge-shaped spaces, filled with a row of quatrefoils. A correspondent to the ‘Gentleman’s Magazine’ for 1788, in allusion to this ring, mentions that the hands joined together exactly resemble one found at Shaf Abbey, with the[Pg 262] motto ‘iheu.’ Or, he suggests, ‘it may be a wedding-ring, and to be read, Marith (marrieth) us.’
A silver ring discovered in Carlisle in 1788 has an inscription that might read ‘Mary, Jesus.’ The bezel of this ring features a rough depiction of clasped hands topped by a crown, and part of the band is decorated with diamond-shaped spaces filled with a row of quatrefoils. A contributor to the ‘Gentleman’s Magazine’ in 1788, referring to this ring, points out that the joined hands closely resemble another found at Shaf Abbey, which has the motto ‘iheu.’ Alternatively, he suggests, ‘it could be a wedding ring, and interpreted as Marith (marrieth) us.’
A similar ring, with the hands joined, and inscribed Jesus Nazarenus, is represented in the ‘Gentleman’s Magazine’ (vol. liv. p. 734, and vol. lv. p. 333).
A similar ring, with the hands joined, and inscribed Jesus Nazarenus, is shown in the ‘Gentleman’s Magazine’ (vol. liv. p. 734, and vol. lv. p. 333).
Inscription on a supposed religious ring, found at Carlisle.
Inscription on a supposed religious ring, found at Carlisle.
The annexed engraving represents a ring found, about 1790, in Stretly Park, near Nottingham. The figure is that of St. Edith, and the ring probably belonged to the abbess of some religious house in the neighbourhood.
The attached engraving shows a ring discovered around 1790 in Stretly Park, near Nottingham. The figure depicted is St. Edith, and the ring likely belonged to the abbess of a nearby religious house.
Religious ring.
Faith ring.
The following illustration represents a ring discovered, in 1812, while harrowing near Froxfield, Hants; weight 4 dwt. 7 grs. It is supposed to have been worn by a warrior in the Crusades. The bezel part exhibits on the dexter side a knight with a shield, charged with a cross, thrusting a lance down the throat of a dragon—probably meant for St. George. The figure on the corresponding side varies in having a cross on[Pg 263] the right side of his mantle, and appears to be in a boat, or wading through water; and it may be conjectured to be intended for St. Christopher.
The following illustration shows a ring discovered in 1812 while plowing near Froxfield, Hants; it weighs 4 dwt. 7 grs. It’s believed to have been worn by a warrior during the Crusades. The bezel features a knight on the right side with a shield marked with a cross, stabbing a dragon with a lance—likely representing St. George. The figure on the opposite side is different, having a cross on the right side of his mantle and appears to be either in a boat or wading through water; it’s thought to represent St. Christopher.
Religious ring.
Faith ring.
Representation of a ring with a crowned I over a pillar, supposed to be the initial of our Saviour’s name as King of the Jews:
Representation of a ring with a crowned I over a pillar, thought to be the initial of our Savior’s name as King of the Jews:
Religious ring.
Faith ring.
Mr. Davis, of Hempton, Oxfordshire, possesses a brass ring found there, in the form of a strap and buckle, or of a garter, so contrived as to admit of being contracted or enlarged, to suit the wearer’s finger; the end of the strap being formed with little knobs, upon which the buckle catches, and keeps the ring adjusted to the proper size. The hoop is inscribed in relief, MATER DEI MEMENTO.
Mr. Davis, from Hempton, Oxfordshire, owns a brass ring found there, shaped like a strap and buckle or a garter, designed to be tightened or loosened to fit the wearer’s finger; the end of the strap has little knobs that the buckle hooks onto, keeping the ring at the right size. The band is embossed with the words, MATER DEI REMEMBER.
In the Waterton Collection is an ecclesiastical ring, silver-gilt, with circular bezel set with a cabochon crystal, the shoulders ornamented with cherubs’ heads in full relief, supported by brackets; on the reverse of the bezel is[Pg 264] engraved the figure of Christ on the Cross; sixteenth century; diameter two and a half inches.
In the Waterton Collection, there’s a silver-gilt ecclesiastical ring featuring a circular bezel set with a cabochon crystal. The shoulders are decorated with cherub heads in high relief, supported by brackets. On the back of the bezel, it is engraved with the figure of Christ on the Cross; it’s from the sixteenth century and has a diameter of two and a half inches.
Ecclesiastical ring.
Church ring.
A singular silver ring, of which a representation is given in the ‘Archæological Journal’ (vol. iii. p. 78) was exhibited at a meeting of the Institute in 1846 by Mr. Talbot. The interlaced plated work resembles some ornaments of the Saxon period, but is remarkable for having the impress of two feet, which may, probably, be regarded as one of the emblems of the Passion, or as a memorial of the pilgrimage to the Mount of Olives, where the print of the feet of the Saviour which miraculously marked the scene of His Ascension, was visited by the pilgrims with the greatest veneration.
A unique silver ring, depicted in the ‘Archæological Journal’ (vol. iii. p. 78), was shown at an Institute meeting in 1846 by Mr. Talbot. The intricate design resembles some ornaments from the Saxon period but is notable for featuring the imprint of two feet, which might be seen as one of the symbols of the Passion or as a tribute to the pilgrimage to the Mount of Olives, where the miraculous footprints of the Savior, marking the site of His Ascension, were revered by pilgrims.
Pilgrim ring.
Pilgrim's ring.
In the collection of Mr. Octavius Morgan, F.R.S., F.S.A., is a gold ring, probably one of those obtained at Jerusalem,[Pg 265] as tokens of pilgrimage to the Holy City. On the head, which is circular, is engraved the Jerusalem Cross, and around the hoop the first words of Numbers vi. 24: ‘The Lord bless thee and keep thee,’ in Hebrew characters.
In Mr. Octavius Morgan's collection, F.R.S., F.S.A., there is a gold ring, likely one of those acquired in Jerusalem[Pg 265] as mementos of pilgrimage to the Holy City. The circular head features an engraving of the Jerusalem Cross, and around the band are the first words of Numbers vi. 24: ‘The Lord bless thee and keep thee,’ in Hebrew characters.
At a meeting of the Archæological Institute (Feb. 1855), Mr. Gough Nichols exhibited impressions from two signet-rings, also bearing as a device the ‘Jerusalem Cross,’ or cross potent between four crosslets, the insignia of the Kingdom of Jerusalem, worn likewise on the mantles of the Knights of the Holy Sepulchre. This device is regarded as emblematic of the five wounds of our Lord. On one of these rings, of gold, purchased at Brighton, the cross appears between two olive-branches, with the word ‘Jerusalem’ in Hebrew characters beneath; on the other the branches alone are introduced. The ring last mentioned, which is of silver, is in the possession of Mr. Thompson, of Leicester. These are supposed to be memorial rings brought as tokens of pilgrimage to the Holy City.
At a meeting of the Archaeological Institute (Feb. 1855), Mr. Gough Nichols showcased impressions from two signet rings, both featuring the ‘Jerusalem Cross,’ or cross potent surrounded by four crosslets, the symbol of the Kingdom of Jerusalem, also worn on the cloaks of the Knights of the Holy Sepulchre. This symbol is seen as representing the five wounds of our Lord. On one of these gold rings, bought in Brighton, the cross is placed between two olive branches, with the word ‘Jerusalem’ in Hebrew characters underneath; on the other, only the branches are shown. The second ring, which is silver, belongs to Mr. Thompson of Leicester. These are thought to be memorial rings brought back as tokens from pilgrimages to the Holy City.
A gold ring of most beautiful workmanship was exhibited at the Lincoln meeting of the Archæological Institute, by the Rev. S. Blois Turner, bearing the device of the bear and bâton ragulé, with the motto inscribed above, ‘Soulement une’ (only one). Around the hoop are the words, ‘be goddis fayre foot’. This very singular legend has been supposed to have reference to the miraculous impress of the Saviour’s feet on the Mount of Olives, which was regarded by pilgrims with extreme reverence, and, like the five wounds, was probably used as a symbol of talismanic virtue. This ring, formerly in the possession of George IV., now belongs to General Johnson. Weight 230 grains.
A beautifully crafted gold ring was displayed at the Lincoln meeting of the Archaeological Institute by Rev. S. Blois Turner. It features the design of a bear and a bâton ragulé, with the motto above it, ‘Soulement une’ (only one). Around the band are the words, ‘be goddis fayre foot’. This unusual phrase is thought to refer to the miraculous imprint of the Saviour’s feet on the Mount of Olives, which pilgrims held in great reverence, and like the five wounds, it was likely used as a symbol of protective power. This ring, once owned by George IV, now belongs to General Johnson. Weight 230 grains.
In the Braybrooke Collection is a brass ring strongly gilt, with a long, oval, flat signet, engraved with Hebrew[Pg 266] characters, ‘Pray for the peace of Jerusalem,’ from Psalm cxxii., supposed to be one of the rings given to tourists to the holy city, as a certificate of their visit, and called in the East ‘hadji’ or pilgrims’ rings.
In the Braybrooke Collection, there's a brass ring that’s heavily gilded, featuring a long, oval, flat signet engraved with Hebrew[Pg 266] characters which say, ‘Pray for the peace of Jerusalem,’ from Psalm 122. It’s believed to be one of the rings given to tourists visiting the holy city as proof of their trip, commonly referred to in the East as ‘hadji’ or pilgrims’ rings.
In the same collection is a slight silver ring, with narrow and flat band to hoop, surmounted by a circular signet; on the hoop is this inscription, in relief, between lines raised along each edge, headed and ended by small flowers, ‘M S D MONSERRATA.’ On the signet, also in relief, appears a double-handled stone-mason’s saw (serra), the Latin for which furnished the key to this monkish riddle; it reads thus, ‘Mater Sancta de Monserrata,’ or Holy Mother of Monserrat, in Spain, where there was a chapel dedicated to the Virgin, and this is, probably, the ring of a pilgrim to that shrine.
In the same collection is a small silver ring, featuring a narrow, flat band that leads to a circular signet. The band has the inscription, in relief, between raised lines along each edge, topped and bottomed by small flowers, ‘M S D Monserrate.’ On the signet, also in relief, there’s a double-handled stone-mason’s saw (serra), which is the Latin term that reveals the answer to this monkish riddle; it reads, ‘Mater Sancta de Monserrata,’ meaning Holy Mother of Monserrat, in Spain, where there was a chapel dedicated to the Virgin. This is likely the ring of a pilgrim who visited that shrine.
At the meeting of the Archæological Institute at Norwich in 1847 some curious examples of religious rings (of silver) were exhibited, connected, most probably, with charms and superstitions. A ring dating about the period of Henry VI. is engraved with the figure of a female saint, and the symbols of the five wounds. Another, of the same age, found at Fransham, has the hoop swaged or twisted; on the angular facets had been engraved figures of saints. The engraving on another ring was ‘+Maria+Anna+Ih’us.’
At the meeting of the Archaeological Institute in Norwich in 1847, some interesting examples of religious silver rings were showcased, likely linked to charms and superstitions. One ring from around the time of Henry VI is engraved with the image of a female saint and the symbols of the five wounds. Another ring from the same era, discovered at Fransham, has a twisted band; the angled surfaces feature engravings of saints. The engraving on yet another ring reads ‘+Maria+Anna+Ih’us.’
Amongst the rich collection of rings lent by Mr. R. H. Soden Smith to the Loan Exhibition of Ancient and Modern Jewellery at the South Kensington Museum in 1872, were six rings, gold and silver, of the iconographic type, having for the most part figures of saints engraved on the bezel, one inscribed within, in Gothic letters, ‘yspartir+canc+dec+’ (partir sans désir).
Among the valuable collection of rings provided by Mr. R. H. Soden Smith to the Loan Exhibition of Ancient and Modern Jewelry at the South Kensington Museum in 1872, there were six rings, made of gold and silver, of the iconographic type, mostly featuring figures of saints engraved on the bezel, with one inscribed inside in Gothic letters, ‘yspartir+canc+dec+’ (partir sans désir).
In the ‘Journal of the Royal Institution of Cornwall’ (Sept. 1875) is a note on an ancient signet-ring found at[Pg 267] Penryn by Mr. W. H. Tregelles: ‘This ring was found a few years since in a field near Budock church, by a watchmaker of the neighbourhood, of whom I bought it for Mr. Octavius Morgan, F.S.A., late M.P. for Monmouthshire. It has been the subject of much interesting discussion, the result of which, with a description of the ring, and three impressions in hard wax, I have deposited in the Museum of the Royal Institution of Cornwall, at Truro.
In the ‘Journal of the Royal Institution of Cornwall’ (Sept. 1875), there's a note about an ancient signet ring that was found at[Pg 267] Penryn by Mr. W. H. Tregelles: ‘This ring was discovered a few years ago in a field near Budock church by a local watchmaker, from whom I purchased it for Mr. Octavius Morgan, F.S.A., former M.P. for Monmouthshire. It has sparked a lot of interesting discussions, and the results, along with a description of the ring and three impressions in hard wax, have been placed in the Museum of the Royal Institution of Cornwall in Truro.
‘It is an oriental ring of silver, set with an oblong sard, engraved; it appears at one time to have been gilt, and the loop and back of the bezel were ornamented with a small pattern in niello, now almost obliterated by long wear.
‘It is a silver ring from the East, featuring an elongated sard that is engraved; it seems to have been gold-plated at one time, and the loop and back of the bezel were decorated with a small niello pattern, which is now almost worn away from long use.
‘In the middle of the device is a cartouche, or escutcheon, terminating at the top in a Greek cross potent. In the lower part of the escutcheon is engraved a paschal lamb, and in the upper part are some oriental characters, which have not been deciphered with certainty. On either side of the escutcheon is some ornamental scroll-work, having in the middle the Jerusalem cross potent.
‘In the center of the device is a cartouche or shield, ending at the top with a Greek cross potent. The lower part of the shield has an engraving of a paschal lamb, while the upper part features some eastern characters that haven't been definitely deciphered. On each side of the shield is decorative scroll-work, with the Jerusalem cross potent in the middle.
‘It was submitted to Mr. Albert Way and Mr. C. W. King; and the latter gentleman, who took much pains to make out the inscription, considered that the characters were Servian, and that they represent the name of some ecclesiastic of the Greek Church to whom it once belonged.
‘It was presented to Mr. Albert Way and Mr. C. W. King; and the latter, who worked hard to decipher the inscription, believed that the characters were Servian and that they represented the name of some clergy member of the Greek Church to whom it once belonged.
‘It was evidently an ecclesiastical ring, and M. Castellane stated that he has seen several Armenian priests at Rome wearing similar rings. It may, perhaps, date from the early part of the last century.
‘It was clearly a religious ring, and M. Castellane mentioned that he has seen several Armenian priests in Rome wearing similar rings. It might date back to the early part of the last century.
‘The most probable conjecture as to the reason of such an object being found in Cornwall is that it may have been brought over by some traveller, and, having been lost by him[Pg 268] or the person to whom he gave it, was mislaid among rubbish, and carted out with manure.’
‘The most likely guess about why such an object was found in Cornwall is that it might have been brought over by a traveler who either lost it[Pg 268] or gave it to someone else, and then it got misplaced among junk and taken away with manure.’
In the first chapter of this work I have alluded to rings of the early Christians, a subject of great interest, to which I again refer in these notices of ‘religious’ rings, with additional illustrations from the ‘Archæological Journal.’
In the first chapter of this work, I mentioned rings of the early Christians, a topic of great interest, which I will revisit in these notes on ‘religious’ rings, with additional illustrations from the ‘Archaeological Journal.’
The following cut represents a portion of a ring of dark-green jasper, from Rome, dating, probably, from the second or third century. On the oval bezel a symbol is engraved in intaglio, viz. a boat, on which is a cock, carrying a branch of palm.
The following cut shows a piece of dark-green jasper ring from Rome, likely dating back to the second or third century. An intaglio symbol is engraved on the oval bezel, depicting a boat with a rooster carrying a palm branch.
A bronze ring, probably Christian, of the third or fourth century, of an oval octagonal form, set with red jasper, engraved in intaglio with the subject of a shepherd. From Rome.
A bronze ring, likely Christian, from the third or fourth century, in an oval octagonal shape, featuring red jasper, intricately engraved with the image of a shepherd. Found in Rome.
The ring here represented is of bronze, engraved with a ship, the emblem of the Church, between the letters chi and rho. This ring was obtained at Rome.
The ring shown here is made of bronze, featuring an engraving of a ship, the symbol of the Church, placed between the letters chi and rho. This ring was acquired in Rome.
The accompanying illustrations are of small gold rings,[Pg 269] in workmanship and form dating from the third or fourth century.
The accompanying illustrations show small gold rings,[Pg 269] crafted with techniques and designs from the third or fourth century.
Annexed (probable date about 440) is a signet-ring, the subject incised upon the gold apparently a matrimonial or love-ring.
Annexed (probable date about 440) is a signet ring, with the design etched onto the gold likely representing a wedding or love ring.
To the same period may be ascribed a bronze ring, of coarse workmanship, taken from the Roman catacombs. A circular hoop is surmounted by a flat circular bezel, on which is engraved an ear of corn between two fishes, emblem of the bread of life, and those who live in faith of it.
To the same period can be attributed a bronze ring, made with rough craftsmanship, found in the Roman catacombs. A circular band features a flat circular bezel, which is engraved with an ear of corn between two fish, symbolizing the bread of life and those who believe in it.
Another bronze ring is engraved with the sacred symbol, the united chi and rho between the alpha and omega above, and two sheep below. Probable date, the middle of the fourth century. Found at Rome.
Another bronze ring is engraved with the sacred symbol, the united chi and rho between the alpha and omega above, and two sheep below. Probable date, the middle of the fourth century. Found at Rome.
To the same class of rings belongs the last of the above engravings. It is of bronze, having a simple convex hoop;[Pg 270] the device, a draped male figure with nimbus, and standing before a cross appearing to spring from a bunch of grapes. It was brought from Athens, and is probably Byzantine, of the sixth or seventh century.
To the same category of rings belongs the last of the engravings mentioned above. It's made of bronze and has a simple curved band;[Pg 270] the design features a draped male figure with a halo, standing in front of a cross that seems to emerge from a bunch of grapes. It was brought from Athens and is likely Byzantine, dating to the sixth or seventh century.
The following engraving represents a ring of duplex form, of solid gold, weighing 5½ dwts. It has engraved
The following engraving shows a double-layered ring made of solid gold, weighing 5½ dwts. It features an engraved
D
FILINAN
A
D
FILINAN
A
and
and
Vivas
in Deo*.
Vivas
in God*.
The ring probably dates from the latter part of the third, or beginning of the fourth, century. It was discovered in the neighbourhood of Masignano, a small township of Fermo.
The ring likely comes from the late third century or the early fourth century. It was found near Masignano, a small town in Fermo.
Early Christian rings of silver are unusual; that now represented is of duplex form. On one oval is engraved the name FAVSTVS, and on the other is a palm-branch. The date is, probably, of the latter half of the fourth century.
Early Christian silver rings are rare; the one displayed here is double-sided. On one oval, the name FAVSTVS is engraved, and on the other, there's a palm branch. This piece likely dates from the latter half of the fourth century.
A bronze ring, intended for a signet. On the bezel is a monogram deeply cut in reverse, which has been rendered by Rossi, Deus dona vivas in Deo. From Rome, and of the fourth century.
A bronze ring made for a signet. The bezel features a monogram deeply engraved in reverse, which Rossi described as Deus dona vivas in Deo. It’s from Rome and dates back to the fourth century.
A bronze ring with circular hoop, the bezel engraved with the sacred monogram. This ring is said to have been found in the neighbourhood of the house of Pudens.
A bronze ring with a circular band, the top engraved with the holy monogram. This ring is said to have been discovered near the house of Pudens.
[Pg 271]A bronze ring of coarse workmanship and angular form. The device, two doves and a fish.
[Pg 271]A bronze ring with rough craftsmanship and a sharp shape. The design features two doves and a fish.
The shoulders of the following bronze ring are engraved as palm branches. The bezel is raised by four steps or tables, and engraved with a monogram. From Rome.
The shoulders of the bronze ring are engraved with palm branches. The bezel is elevated in four steps or layers and has a monogram engraved on it. From Rome.
A bronze ring with high, projecting bezel. On the square face the subject of Abraham’s sacrifice is deeply engraved. The execution may be attributed, perhaps, to the latter end of the third century, but, more probably, to the fourth. Brought from Viterbo.
A bronze ring with a tall, prominent bezel. The square face features a deep engraving of Abraham’s sacrifice. The craftsmanship might date back to the late third century, but it’s more likely from the fourth century. It was brought from Viterbo.
Bronze ring, formed as a circle of half-round metal, engraved with a double-fluked anchor, crossed by one of a[Pg 272] single fluke, and surrounded by a pearl border. From the catacombs at Rome.
Bronze ring shaped like a circle of half-round metal, engraved with a double-fluked anchor crossed by a single fluke, and surrounded by a pearl border. Unearthed from the catacombs in Rome.
Bronze ring, with plain rounded hoop. Device, a draped female standing between two birds. On either side is the Christian monogram. Found, it is believed, in the catacombs of St. Calixtus; date, fourth century of our era.
Bronze ring with a simple rounded band. The design features a draped woman standing between two birds. On each side is the Christian monogram. It is thought to have been found in the catacombs of St. Calixtus; dated to the fourth century of our era.
An iron ring of octagonal form, the bezel engraved with two human figures and the sacred monogram. A human figure is represented on each face of the octagon. This is a remarkable ring of its class.
An iron ring with an octagonal shape, the bezel engraved with two human figures and the sacred monogram. A human figure is shown on each side of the octagon. This is a remarkable ring for its type.
Bronze ring, with bezel shaped as the sole of a shoe, and incised with the legend IN DEO, in the collection of C. D. E. Fortnum, Esq., F.S.A.:
Bronze ring with a bezel shaped like the sole of a shoe, engraved with the phrase In God, part of the collection of C. D. E. Fortnum, Esq., F.S.A.:
In Montfaucon’s ‘L’Antiquité Expliquée’ are several illustrations of Roman rings with the bezels representing a[Pg 273] human foot. One seems to have been a Christian seal, the inscription on which, DEDONAO, is there, perhaps, put for DEI DONA. Montfaucon mentions one in his own cabinet, inscribed, between two crosses, DEI DONA.
In Montfaucon’s ‘L’Antiquité Expliquée,’ there are several illustrations of Roman rings with bezels shaped like a[Pg 273] human foot. One appears to have been a Christian seal, with the inscription DEDONAO, which might stand for DEI DONA. Montfaucon also mentions one in his own collection, inscribed between two crosses, GIVE THE GIFT.
A bronze stamp, formed as the sole of a shoe, is preserved in the Christian Museum of the Vatican. Inscription reversed, SPES IN DEO.
A bronze stamp shaped like the sole of a shoe is kept in the Christian Museum of the Vatican. The inscription is reversed, Hope in God.
A child’s ring of gold. A simple hoop, flattened out on the bezel, which is engraved with the palm-branch. This ring was found in a child’s tomb in the neighbourhood of Rome.
A child’s gold ring. A simple hoop, flattened on the top, which is engraved with a palm branch. This ring was discovered in a child's tomb near Rome.
Bronze ring, the bezel engraved with the sacred monogram, round which is placed the inscription, COSME VIVAS. This was discovered in one of the catacombs on the Via Appia.
Bronze ring, the bezel engraved with the sacred monogram, around which is placed the inscription, COSME VIVAS. This was found in one of the catacombs on the Via Appia.
A small iron ring, on which is engraved the lion of St. Mark, dating, probably, from the sixth century. Found in a Coptic grave near the temple of ‘Medinet Aboo,’ at Thebes.
A small iron ring, engraved with the lion of St. Mark, dating from around the sixth century. Discovered in a Coptic grave near the temple of ‘Medinet Aboo’ in Thebes.
[Pg 274]Mr. Hodder M. Westropp, in his ‘Handbook of Archæology,’ remarks that Christian inscriptions ‘are all funeral, and are, for the most part, found in the Catacombs, or subterranean cemeteries of the early Christians in Rome. They are characterised by symbols and formulæ, peculiar to the Christian creed; the idea of another life—a life beyond the grave—usually prevails in them. The symbols found in connection with the funeral inscriptions are of three kinds; the larger proportion of these refer to the profession of Christianity, its doctrines and its graces. A second class, of a partly secular description, only indicate the trades of the deceased, and the remainder represent proper names; thus a lion must be named as a proper name, Leo; Onager, an ass; a dragon, Dracontius. Of the first kind the most usually met with is the monogram of Christ. The other symbols generally in use are the ship, the emblem of the church; the fish, the emblem of Christ; the palm, the symbol of martyrdom; the anchor, representing hope in immortality; the dove, peace; the stag, reminding the faithful of the pious aspiration of the Psalmist; the horse was the emblem of strength in the faith; the hunted hare, of persecution; the peacock and the phœnix stood for signs of the resurrection; Christ, as the good pastor, and the Α-Ω of the Apocalypse, was also introduced in the epitaphs. Even personages of the pagan mythology were introduced, which the Christians employed in a concealed sense, as Orpheus, enchanting the wild beasts with the music of his lyre was the secret symbol of Christ, as the civilizer of men, leading all nations to the faith. Ulysses, fastened to the mast of his ship, was supposed to present some faint resemblance to the Crucifixion.’
[Pg 274]Mr. Hodder M. Westropp, in his ‘Handbook of Archaeology,’ notes that Christian inscriptions ‘are all funeral, and are mostly found in the Catacombs, or underground cemeteries of the early Christians in Rome. They are marked by symbols and phrases unique to the Christian faith; the idea of life after death—life beyond the grave—generally dominates them. The symbols related to the funeral inscriptions fall into three categories; the majority pertain to the practice of Christianity, its beliefs, and its virtues. A second category, somewhat secular in nature, just indicates the occupations of the deceased, while the remaining symbols represent proper names; for example, a lion is referred to as a proper name, Leo; Onager, an ass; a dragon, Dracontius. The most commonly found symbol of the first category is the monogram of Christ. The other symbols frequently used include the ship, representing the church; the fish, representing Christ; the palm, a symbol of martyrdom; the anchor, symbolizing hope in immortality; the dove, signifying peace; the stag, reminding the faithful of the devout aspiration of the Psalmist; the horse, as a symbol of strength in faith; the hunted hare, as a representation of persecution; the peacock and the phoenix, which symbolize resurrection; and Christ as the good shepherd, along with the Α-Ω of the Apocalypse, also appeared on the epitaphs. Even figures from pagan mythology were used, which Christians adopted in a hidden sense; for example, Orpheus, enchanting the wild beasts with the music of his lyre, symbolized Christ as the civilizer of mankind, guiding all nations to the faith. Ulysses, tied to the mast of his ship, was thought to faintly resemble the Crucifixion.’
CHAPTER V.
BETROTHAL AND WEDDING RINGS.
Engagement and wedding rings.
It would be difficult to find a subject more interesting in all its associations than a wedding-ring. From the most remote times it has had a mystical signification, appealing to our most cherished feelings, hopes and wishes. The circular form of the ring was accepted in days by-gone, as a symbol of eternity, thus indicative of the stability of affection. We find some of our noted divines echoing the sentiments of old enthusiasts on the figurative virtues of a ring. Thus Dean Comber and Wheatley express themselves: ‘The matter of which this ring is made is gold, signifying how noble and durable our affection is; the form is round, to imply that our respect (or regards) shall never have an end; the place of it is on the fourth finger of the left hand, where the ancients thought there was a vein that came directly from the heart, and where it may be always in view; and, being a finger least used, where it may be least subject to be worn out; but the main end is to be a visible and lasting token of the covenant which must never be forgotten.’
It would be hard to find a topic more captivating in all its connections than a wedding ring. Since ancient times, it has held a special meaning, resonating with our most treasured feelings, hopes, and dreams. The ring's circular shape has long symbolized eternity, representing the permanence of love. Some of our well-known spiritual leaders echo the sentiments of past admirers on the symbolic significance of a ring. For example, Dean Comber and Wheatley say: ‘This ring is made of gold, which represents how noble and enduring our love is; its round shape suggests that our affection will never end; it’s worn on the fourth finger of the left hand, where the ancients believed there was a vein connected directly to the heart, allowing it to always be in view; and since it's the finger that's used the least, it's less likely to wear out; but most importantly, it's meant to be a visible and lasting symbol of the promise that must never be forgotten.’
Jeremy Taylor, in his sermon on a ‘Wedding-ring for the Finger,’ conveys, in quaint and forcible language, the duties and responsibilities of married life.[55]
Jeremy Taylor, in his sermon on a ‘Wedding-ring for the Finger,’ expresses, in unique and impactful language, the duties and responsibilities of married life.[55]
[Pg 276]In an old Latin work, ascribing the invention of the ring to Tubal Cain, we find: ‘The form of the ring being circular, that is, round, and without end, importeth thus much, that mutual love and hearty affection should roundly flow from one to the other, as in a circle, and that continually and for ever.’
[Pg 276]In an ancient Latin text that credits Tubal Cain with inventing the ring, it states: ‘The shape of the ring is circular, meaning round and endless, which signifies that mutual love and genuine affection should flow continuously between one another, like a circle, forever and always.’
Herrick has versified this conceit:—
Herrick has put this idea into verse:—
Julia, I bring
To thee this ring,
Made for thy finger fit;
To show by this
That our love is,
Or should be, like to it.
Close though it be,
The joint is free;
So, when love’s yoke is on,
It must not gall,
Nor fret at all
With hard oppression.
But it must play
Still either way,
And be, too, such a yoke
As not, too wide,
To overslide,
Or be so straight to choke.
So we who bear
This beam, must rear
Ourselves to such a height
As that the stay
Of either may
Create the burthen light.
And as this round
Is nowhere found
To flaw, or else to sever,
So let our love
As endless prove,
And pure as gold for ever.
Julia, here’s
A ring for you,
Made to fit your finger;
To demonstrate this
Our love is,
Or should be, like it.
Even though it’s nearby,
The place is free;
So when love’s burden is on,
It shouldn't hurt,
Or feel anything at all
With harsh oppression.
But it should change
Easy both ways,
And be such a bond
That it’s not too broad,
To sneak away,
Or so tight that it chokes.
So we who bear
This burden must lift
To such a height
Mutual support
Can lighten the load.
And just like this circle
Is never found
To flaw, or break apart,
Let our love
Endless proof
And as pure as gold forever.
[Pg 277]The same idea is conveyed in some lines by Woodward (1730) ‘to Phoebe, presenting her with a ring:’—
[Pg 277]The same idea is expressed in some lines by Woodward (1730) ‘to Phoebe, giving her a ring:’—
Accept, fair maid, this earnest of my love,
Be this the type, let this my passion prove;
Thus may our joy in endless circles run,
Fresh as the light, and restless as the sun;
Thus may our lives be one perpetual round,
Nor care nor sorrow ever shall be found.
Accept, dear lady, this token of my love,
Let this be the sign, may my passion show;
May our joy go on forever,
Bright as the light, and active like the sun;
May our lives be one continuous journey,
No worry or sadness will ever be around.
In modern poetry we have many sweet and tender allusions to the wedding-ring. Thus Byron writes:—
In modern poetry, there are many sweet and tender references to the wedding ring. For example, Byron writes:—
In that one act may every grace
And every blessing have their place,
And give to future hours of bliss
The charm of life derived from this:
And when e’en love no more supplies,
When weary nature sinks to rest,
May brighter, steadier light arise
And make the parting moment blest!
In that one act, every grace
And every blessing can find their place,
And bring future hours of happiness
The charm of life that comes from this:
And when even love no longer provides,
When tired nature finally rests,
May brighter, steadier light shine
And make the farewell moment blessed!
In a collection of poems printed in Dublin (1801) we find some touching lines to ‘S. D., with a ring:’—
In a collection of poems published in Dublin (1801), we find some heartfelt lines to 'S. D., with a ring:'—
Emblem of happiness, not bought nor sold,
Accept this modest ring of virgin gold.
Love in the small but perfect circle trace,
And duty in its soft yet strict embrace.
Plain, precious, pure, as best becomes the wife;
Yet firm to bear the frequent rubs of life.
Connubial love disdains a fragile toy,
Which rust can tarnish, or a touch destroy,
Nor much admires what courts the gen’ral gaze,
The dazzling diamond’s meretricious blaze,
That hides with glare the anguish of a heart,
By nature hard, tho’ polish’d bright by art.
More to thy taste the ornament that shows
Domestic bliss, and, without glaring, glows;
Whose gentle pressure serves to keep the mind
To all correct, to one discreetly kind;
[Pg 278]Of simple elegance th’ unconscious charm,
The only amulet to keep from harm,
To guard at once and consecrate the shrine;
Take this dear pledge—it makes and keeps thee mine.
Symbol of happiness, not bought or sold,
Accept this simple ring of pure gold.
Love in the small but perfect circle traced,
And duty in its gentle yet firm embrace.
Plain, precious, pure, just right for a wife;
Strong enough to endure life’s frequent strife.
Marital love rejects a fragile toy,
That rust can tarnish or a touch destroy,
It doesn't care for what catches the public eye,
The sparkly diamond’s flashy lie,
That hides with its shine the pain of a heart,
By nature tough, though polished bright by art.
More in your style is the ornament that shows
Domestic happiness, and softly glows;
Whose gentle pressure keeps the mind aligned
To what is right, and to one kind;
[Pg 278]Of simple elegance the quiet charm,
The only protection to keep from harm,
To guard and bless the sacred place;
Take this dear vow—it makes and keeps you mine.
The most painful ordeal for ‘Patient’ Grisild (in Chaucer’s ‘Clerk’s Tale’) is the surrender of what she most valued to her imperious lord, the Marquis, the wedding-ring with which she had espoused him. This, in her sore affliction, she returns to him:—
The most painful experience for ‘Patient’ Grisild (in Chaucer’s ‘Clerk’s Tale’) is giving up what she valued most to her demanding lord, the Marquis, the wedding ring she used to marry him. In her great suffering, she returns it to him:—
Here again your clothing I restore,
And eke your wedding-ring for evermore.
Here again, I restore your clothing,
And also your wedding ring forever.
The celebrated Sanscrit drama, which Kalidasa wrote upon the beautiful Sakuntala, turns upon Dushyanta’s recognition of his wife by means of a ring which he had given to her.
The famous Sanskrit play, which Kalidasa wrote about the lovely Sakuntala, revolves around Dushyanta recognizing his wife through a ring he gave her.
The tender and affectionate faith derived from the wedding-ring is illustrated in the legend of Guy, Earl of Warwick. The doughty knight, when in a moment of temptation he is about to marry the beautiful Loret, daughter of the Emperor Ernis, is recalled to his duty at the sight of the wedding-ring, and remembers his fair Félice, who is far distant, pining at his absence:—
The gentle and loving faith linked to the wedding ring is shown in the story of Guy, Earl of Warwick. The brave knight, when tempted to marry the beautiful Loret, daughter of Emperor Ernis, is reminded of his duty when he sees the wedding ring and remembers his lovely Félice, who is far away, longing for his return:—
The wedding-ring was forth brought;
Guy, then, on fair Félice thought,
He had her nigh forgotten clean.
‘Alas,’ he said, ‘Félice, the sheen!’
And thought in his heart anon—
‘’Gainst thee now have I misdone!’
Guy said, ‘penance I crave,
None other maid my love shall have.’
The wedding ring was brought out; Guy then thought about fair Félice, He had almost completely forgotten her. "Alas," he said, "Félice, how beautiful!" And he thought in his heart right away— "I have wronged you!" Guy said, "I seek penance, No other girl shall have my love."
We see also the tenderness that a wedding-ring can inspire in the instance of Louis IX. of France, who in his youth was married to Marguerite of Provence, the[Pg 279] victim of a cruel jealousy on the part of Blanche of Castile, the King’s mother. The young Prince, who loved his wife dearly, constantly wore a ring ornamented with a garland of lilies and daisies, in allusion to his spouse and himself. A magnificent sapphire bore the image of a crucifix, and the inscription ‘hors cet annel pourrions nous trouver amour.’
We also see the tenderness that a wedding ring can inspire in the case of Louis IX of France, who in his youth married Marguerite of Provence, the[Pg 279] victim of a cruel jealousy from Blanche of Castile, the King’s mother. The young Prince, who loved his wife dearly, always wore a ring decorated with a garland of lilies and daisies, symbolizing both her and himself. A magnificent sapphire featured the image of a crucifix, along with the inscription ‘hors cet annel pourrions nous trouver amour.’
In the German ballad of ‘The Noble Moringer,’ translated by Sir Walter Scott, the hero, after some years’ absence on a pilgrimage, returns disguised as a palmer to his castle, on the eve of his wife’s nuptials with another knight. The lady
In the German ballad of ‘The Noble Moringer,’ translated by Sir Walter Scott, the hero, after being away for several years on a pilgrimage, comes back disguised as a palmer to his castle, right before his wife’s wedding to another knight. The lady
———Bade her gallant cup-bearer a golden beaker take,
And bear it to the palmer poor to quaff it for her sake.
It was the noble Moringer, that dropp’d amid the wine
A bridal-ring of burning gold, so costly and so fine.
Now listen, gentles, to my song, it tells you but the sooth,
’Twas with that very ring of gold he pledged his bridal troth.
Then to the cup-bearer he said, ‘Do me one kindly deed,
And, should my better days return, full rich shall be thy meed.
Bear back the golden cup again to yonder bride so gay,
And crave her of her courtesy to pledge the palmer grey.’
The cup-bearer was courtly bred, nor was the boon denied,
The golden cup he took again, and bore it to the bride.
‘Lady,’ he said, ‘your reverend guest sends this and bids me pray
That, in thy noble courtesy, thou pledge the palmer grey.’
The ring hath caught the lady’s eye, she views it close and near,
Then might you hear her shriek aloud, ‘The Moringer is here!’
Then might you see her start from seat, while tears in torrents fell,
But whether ’twas for joy or woe, the ladies best can tell.
———She told her brave cup-bearer to take a golden cup,
And bring it to the poor pilgrim to drink it for her sake.
It was the noble Moringer, who dropped in the wine
A wedding ring of shining gold, so precious and so fine.
Now listen, everyone, to my song; it tells you the truth,
It was with that very gold ring he promised his wedding vows.
Then to the cup-bearer he said, ‘Do me a kind deed,
And if my good days return, your reward will be great.
Bring back the golden cup to that cheerful bride over there,
And ask her, out of kindness, to drink in honor of the gray pilgrim.’
The cup-bearer was well-mannered, and the favor was granted,
He took the golden cup back and brought it to the bride.
‘Lady,’ he said, ‘your esteemed guest sends this and asks me to pray
That, in your noble kindness, you drink to the gray pilgrim.’
The ring caught the lady's attention; she looked at it closely,
Then you could hear her scream, ‘The Moringer is here!’
Then you could see her jump from her seat, while tears streamed down,
But whether it was from joy or sorrow, only the ladies know.
The veneration for a wedding-ring is shown in the instance of the great lexicographer, Dr. Samuel Johnson. He writes, under date March 28, 1753: ‘I kept this day as the anniversary of my Letty’s death, with prayers and tears[Pg 280] in the morning. In the evening I prayed for her conditionally, if it was lawful.’ Her wedding-ring was preserved by him, as long as he lived, with an affectionate care, in a little round wooden box, and in the inside of which was a slip of paper inscribed: ‘Eheu! Eliz. Johnson, nupta Jul. 9, 1736; mortua, eheu! Mart. 17, 1752.’
The respect for a wedding ring is evident in the example of the great lexicographer, Dr. Samuel Johnson. He wrote on March 28, 1753: 'I observed this day as the anniversary of my Letty’s death, with prayers and tears[Pg 280] in the morning. In the evening, I prayed for her conditionally, if it was permissible.' He kept her wedding ring throughout his life, taking care of it affectionately in a small round wooden box, inside which was a slip of paper that read: 'Eheu! Eliz. Johnson, married July 9, 1736; died, alas! March 17, 1752.'
According to the ‘London Press,’ Mr. John Lomax, bookseller, of Lichfield, who died lately at the age of eighty-nine, possessed, among many other Johnsonian relics, this wedding-ring of Mrs. Johnson.
According to the 'London Press,' Mr. John Lomax, a bookseller from Lichfield, who recently passed away at the age of eighty-nine, owned, among many other items related to Johnson, this wedding ring of Mrs. Johnson.
The poet Moore, in his ‘Diary,’ mentions the gift of his mother, of her wedding-ring. He writes: ‘Have been preparing my dear mother for my leaving her, now that I see her so much better. She is quite reconciled to my going, and said this morning: “Now, my dear Tom, don’t let yourself be again alarmed about me in this manner, nor hurried away from your house and business.” She then said she must, before I left her this morning, give me her wedding-ring as her last gift; and accordingly, sending for the little trinket-box in which she kept it, she herself put the ring on my finger.’
The poet Moore, in his ‘Diary,’ talks about receiving his mother's wedding ring as a gift. He writes: ‘I’ve been preparing my dear mother for my departure, now that I see she’s doing so much better. She is totally okay with my leaving and said this morning: “Now, my dear Tom, please don’t let yourself be worried about me like this again, or rush away from your home and responsibilities.” She then mentioned that before I left her this morning, she wanted to give me her wedding ring as her final gift; so, she called for the little trinket box where she kept it, and she personally placed the ring on my finger.’
The value, even to death, attached to wedding-rings has been frequently shown. In a testamentary document made at Edinburgh Castle by Mary, Queen of Scots, before the birth of her son James, and when under the impression that she would die in childbed, among numerous bequests, she enumerates her rings, of which she had a large number. Among them was a diamond ring, enamelled red, recorded by the Queen herself as that with which ‘she was espoused.’ On the other side is written ‘For the King who gave it me.’ This is presumed to be the ring with which Darnley wedded[Pg 281] Mary in the privacy of Rizzio’s chamber at Stirling, for at the public solemnity of their nuptials in the Chapel Royal of Holyrood three rings of surpassing richness were used.
The significance of wedding rings, even unto death, has often been highlighted. In a will created at Edinburgh Castle by Mary, Queen of Scots, before the birth of her son James and while believing she might die in childbirth, she lists many bequests, including her numerous rings. Among them was a red-enamelled diamond ring, which the Queen noted was the one with which ‘she was married.’ On the opposite side, it reads ‘For the King who gave it to me.’ This is thought to be the ring with which Darnley married Mary privately in Rizzio’s chamber at Stirling, as during the public ceremony of their wedding in the Chapel Royal of Holyrood, three exceptionally valuable rings were used.[Pg 281]
The ring with which James, Duke of York (afterwards King James the Second), married Mary of Modena, had a small ruby set in gold. The Queen showed it to the nuns of Chaillot, with whom she resided chiefly in the days of her sorrowful widowhood, exile, and poverty. Although obliged to part with most of her jewels, she would never give up this ring, which she valued above everything. Even William of Orange, remarkable for his stern and taciturn disposition, felt sensibly the tender feelings which a marriage-ring can nourish after the death of a beloved object. On his decease a ribbon was found tied to his left arm, with a gold ring appended to it, containing some hair of the Queen. The Londesborough Collection contained a royal ring, which is supposed to have been the same given by the Prince of Orange to the Princess Mary. It is of gold, the strap and buckle set with diamonds, and is enamelled black. Engraved in letters in relief is the motto of the Order of the Garter. The following words are engraved within: ‘I’ll win and wear thee if I can.’ ‘This posy’ (as the late Crofton Croker observed) ‘has a double construction; whether addressed to the princess before marriage or after is doubtful, with reference to William’s design to contest the crown of England with her father.’
The ring that James, Duke of York (who later became King James II), used to marry Mary of Modena had a small ruby set in gold. The Queen showed it to the nuns of Chaillot, where she mainly stayed during her sorrowful time of widowhood, exile, and poverty. Even though she had to part with most of her jewelry, she would never let go of this ring, which she treasured above all else. Even William of Orange, known for his serious and quiet nature, was touched by the deep emotions that a marriage ring can evoke after losing a loved one. After his death, a ribbon was found tied around his left arm, with a gold ring attached that contained some hair from the Queen. The Londesborough Collection had a royal ring, believed to be the same one given by the Prince of Orange to Princess Mary. It is made of gold, with a strap and buckle set with diamonds, and is enameled in black. Engraved in raised letters is the motto of the Order of the Garter. The following words are engraved inside: ‘I’ll win and wear thee if I can.’ As the late Crofton Croker noted, ‘This posy’ has a double meaning; it’s unclear if it was directed at the princess before or after marriage, especially considering William’s intent to contest the crown of England with her father.
Baron Rosen was sent a captive to Siberia, in consequence of political tumults which occurred on the accession of the Emperor Nicholas to the throne of Russia. On his arrival he was searched, and some family trinkets taken from him. He was then required to give up a gold ring[Pg 282] which he wore on his finger. He replied: ‘It is my wedding-ring, and you can only have it by taking the finger also.’ Fortunately the ring was spared.
Baron Rosen was sent as a prisoner to Siberia due to political unrest that happened when Emperor Nicholas took the throne of Russia. When he arrived, he was searched, and some family jewelry was taken from him. He was then asked to give up a gold ring[Pg 282] that he wore on his finger. He responded, “It’s my wedding ring, and you can only have it by taking my finger too.” Thankfully, the ring was left with him.
However, like everything, humanly speaking, the wedding-ring has had its vicissitudes, and, from being the emblem of all that is pure and holy in life, has been desecrated to the vilest and most impious of usages. Nothing can be more humiliating to good faith and rectitude than to read the accounts of what took place not many years ago concerning the ‘Fleet Marriages.’ In Burns’ ‘Registers’ of these mock celebrations we read sad cases of this abominable system, which prevailed in the last century, of clandestine marriages. A case is there mentioned of a young lady who had been inveigled into the trap of a marrying parson (?), and, finding herself unable to escape without money or a pledge, told her persecutors, who wanted to force a marriage upon her, that she liked the gentleman who desired to marry her so well that she would meet him on the next night. She gave them a ring as a pledge, which she said was her mother’s ring, who enjoined her that if she should marry it was to be her wedding-ring. By this contrivance ‘she got rid of the black doctor and his tawny crew.’
However, like everything else, the wedding ring has gone through its ups and downs, and instead of being a symbol of purity and holiness in life, it has been tarnished by the worst and most immoral uses. There's nothing more humiliating to integrity and honesty than reading about what happened not so long ago with the 'Fleet Marriages.' In Burns’ ‘Registers’ of these sham ceremonies, we come across tragic examples of this dreadful system that thrived in the last century, involving secret marriages. One case mentioned is about a young woman who was lured into the scheme by a marrying priest and, finding herself unable to escape without money or a promise, told her oppressors, who wanted to force her into marriage, that she liked the man who wanted to marry her so much that she would meet him the next night. She gave them a ring as a guarantee, claiming it was her mother’s ring, which she had been instructed that if she were to marry, it would be her wedding ring. With this trick, ‘she got rid of the black doctor and his tawny crew.’
Great was the disgust of the respectable portion of the community for these disgraceful alliances. It is recorded in the ‘Daily Post’ for 1742, of a gentleman possessed of a considerable fortune, that he bequeathed it in the hands of trustees for his wife, with the proviso that if she married an Irishman they were to pay her ten guineas for a ‘Fleet’ marriage, a dinner, and ring; the remainder, about eight thousand pounds, to devolve on his nephew. On a trial for bigamy in 1731, Samuel Pickering deposed: ‘The[Pg 283] prisoner was married at my house in the “Fleet.” I gave her away, and saw the ring put upon her hand, and broke the biscuit over her head.’
The respectable part of the community was extremely disgusted by these shameful relationships. An article in the ‘Daily Post’ from 1742 mentions a wealthy gentleman who left his fortune in trust for his wife, stating that if she married an Irishman, the trustees were to give her ten guineas for a ‘Fleet’ marriage, a dinner, and a ring; the rest, around eight thousand pounds, would go to his nephew. During a bigamy trial in 1731, Samuel Pickering testified: ‘The[Pg 283] prisoner was married at my house in the “Fleet.” I gave her away, and saw the ring put on her hand, and broke the biscuit over her head.’
On the suppression of the Fleet marriages in the middle of the last century commenced the scandalous Gretna Green marriages—the name derived from that of a farmstead in the vicinity of the village of Springfield, in the parish of Graitney, Dumfriesshire. The official who performed these irregular marriages was of different vocations—sometimes a blacksmith. In the report of a late Court of Probate case at Westminster, an agriculturist, Thomas Blythe, admitted that he did a small stroke of business in the ‘joining’ line as well; and in reply to counsel’s question ‘how the marriage ceremony was performed’ he replied: ‘I first asked them if they were single persons. They said they were. I then asked the man, “Do you take this woman for your wife?” He said, “Yes.” I then asked the woman, “Do you take this man for your lawful husband?” She said, “Yes.” I then said, “Put on the ring,” and added, “the thing is done, the marriage is complete.”’
On the banning of Fleet marriages in the mid-1800s began the scandalous Gretna Green marriages—the name comes from a farm near the village of Springfield, in the parish of Graitney, Dumfriesshire. The official who conducted these unofficial marriages had various jobs—sometimes a blacksmith. In a recent Court of Probate case at Westminster, a farmer named Thomas Blythe admitted that he also did a bit of business in the 'joining' line; when asked by the lawyer how the marriage ceremony was performed, he replied: ‘I first asked them if they were single. They confirmed they were. I then asked the man, “Do you take this woman as your wife?” He said, “Yes.” I then asked the woman, “Do you take this man as your lawful husband?” She said, “Yes.” I then said, “Put on the ring,” and added, “it’s done, the marriage is complete.”’
A ring sent as a love-pledge, or token, was in frequent use in former times. Philip de Comines relates in his ‘Memoirs’ that, a marriage between the Princess of Burgundy and the Duke of Austria (1477) being determined upon, a letter was written by the young lady at her father’s command signifying her consent to the alliance, and a diamond ring of considerable value was sent as a pledge or token of it. At the time arranged for the ceremony the Princess was at Ghent, and, in the presence of ambassadors sent on that occasion, she was asked whether she designed to make good her promise. The Princess at once replied ‘that she had written the letter and sent the ring in[Pg 284] obedience to her father’s command, and freely owned the contents of it.’
A ring sent as a symbol of love was commonly used in the past. Philip de Comines shares in his ‘Memoirs’ that when a marriage between the Princess of Burgundy and the Duke of Austria was set for 1477, the young lady wrote a letter at her father's request, indicating her agreement to the marriage, and a valuable diamond ring was sent as a symbol of that commitment. When the ceremony was scheduled, the Princess was in Ghent, and in front of the ambassadors present for the occasion, she was asked if she intended to uphold her promise. The Princess immediately replied that she had written the letter and sent the ring in[Pg 284] obedience to her father's wishes, and she fully acknowledged the letter's contents.
The engagement by a ring is also historically exemplified in late times by the notorious intimacy of George the Fourth, when Prince Regent, with Mrs. Fitzherbert. In order to overcome her scruples to a private marriage (the Royal Marriage Act having been a bar), the Prince caused himself one day to be bled, and put on an appearance of having attempted his own life, and sent some friends to bring her to him. She was then induced to allow him to engage her with a ring in the presence of witnesses, but she afterwards broke the engagement, went abroad, and for a long time resisted all the efforts made to induce her to return. It is singular that one of the chief instruments in bringing about the union of this ill-assorted pair was the notorious Philippe Egalité, Duke of Orleans.
The engagement ring is also historically illustrated in more recent times by the infamous relationship between George the Fourth, when he was Prince Regent, and Mrs. Fitzherbert. To persuade her to agree to a private marriage (since the Royal Marriage Act was an obstacle), the Prince once pretended to harm himself and made it seem like he attempted suicide, then sent friends to bring her to him. She was eventually convinced to accept his engagement with a ring in front of witnesses, but later she broke off the engagement, went abroad, and for a long time resisted all efforts to get her to come back. It's interesting that one of the main players in bringing this mismatched couple together was the notorious Philippe Egalité, Duke of Orleans.
In old times rings made of rushes were used for immoral purposes, not only in England, but in France. Douce refers Shakspeare’s ‘Tib’s rush for Tom’s forefinger’ to this custom (‘All’s Well that Ends Well,’ act ii. sc. 2). In D’Avenant’s ‘Rivals’ we find:—
In the past, rings made from rushes were used for improper purposes, not just in England but also in France. Douce connects Shakespeare’s ‘Tib’s rush for Tom’s forefinger’ to this practice (‘All’s Well that Ends Well,’ act ii. sc. 2). In D’Avenant’s ‘Rivals,’ we see:—
I’ll crown thee with a garland of straw, then,
And I’ll marry thee with a rush ring.
I’ll put a straw crown on your head, then,
And I’ll wed you with a rush ring.
The ‘crack’d’ ring (alluded to in Beaumont and Fletcher’s ‘Captain’) applied metaphorically to female frailty:—
The 'crack'd' ring (mentioned in Beaumont and Fletcher's 'Captain') refers metaphorically to female weakness:—
Come to be married to my lady’s woman,
After she’s crack’d in the ring.
Come to be married to my lady’s maid,
After she’s broken in the engagement.
The abuse of the rush ring led to the practice being strictly prohibited by the constitutions of Richard Poore, Bishop of Salisbury, in 1217; but it had a long continuance. Quarles, in ‘Shepheard’s Oracles’ (1646), writes:—
The misuse of the rush ring caused it to be banned by the constitutions of Richard Poore, Bishop of Salisbury, in 1217; however, it lasted for a long time. Quarles, in ‘Shepheard’s Oracles’ (1646), writes:—
[Pg 285]
And while they sport and dance, the love-sick swains
Compose rush rings and myrtleberry chains.
[Pg 285]
And while they have fun and dance, the lovesick guys
Make garlands from rushes and chains of myrtle berries.
In Greene’s ‘Menaphon’ we find:—‘’Twas a good world when such simplicitie was used, saye the olde women of our time, when a ring of a rush would tye as much love together as a gimmon of gold.’
In Greene’s ‘Menaphon’ we find:—‘It was a good world when such simplicity was valued, say the old women of our time, when a rush ring could tie as much love together as a piece of gold.’
The practice of the rush ring in France prevailed for a considerable period.
The practice of the rush ring in France lasted for a long time.
Another equivocal pretence for engagement was the ring of St. Martin,[56] so named from the extensive franchises and immunities granted to the inhabitants of the precincts of the Collegiate Church of St. Martin’s-le-Grand. In a rare tract, entitled ‘The Compter’s Commonwealth’ (1617), is an allusion to these rings, which shows their import: ‘This kindnesse is but like alchimie, or Saint Martin’s rings, that are faire to the eye and have a rich outside, but if a man should break them asunder and looke into them, they are nothing but brasse and copper.’
Another ambiguous pretense for engagement was the ring of St. Martin, [56] so named because of the wide-ranging privileges and exemptions granted to the people living near the Collegiate Church of St. Martin’s-le-Grand. In a rare work called ‘The Compter’s Commonwealth’ (1617), there’s a reference to these rings that highlights their significance: ‘This kindness is just like alchemy, or Saint Martin’s rings, which look beautiful and have an impressive exterior, but if someone were to break them open and look inside, they’re nothing but brass and copper.’
In ‘Whimsies, or a New Cast of Character’ (1631), mention is made of St. Martin’s rings and counterfeit bracelets as ‘commodities of infinite consequence. They will[Pg 286] passe for current at a May-pole, and purchase a favour from their May-Marian.’
In ‘Whimsies, or a New Cast of Character’ (1631), it talks about St. Martin’s rings and fake bracelets as ‘items of great importance. They will[Pg 286] be accepted as payment at a Maypole and can buy a favor from their May-Marian.’
So also in ‘Plaine Percevall, the Peace-maker of England’: ‘I doubt whether all be gold that glistereth, sith St. Martin’s rings be but copper within, though they be gilt without, sayes the goldsmith.’
So also in ‘Plaine Percevall, the Peace-maker of England’: ‘I wonder if everything that shines is really gold, since St. Martin’s rings are just copper on the inside, even though they look gold on the outside, says the goldsmith.’
The materials of which wedding-rings have been made are numerous; besides the various metals, we have an instance of a leather ring made on the spur of the moment out of a piece of kid cut from the bride’s glove. As a substitute for the usual ring, the church key has been put into requisition. Horace Walpole, in a letter to Mr. (afterwards Sir Robert) Mann, dated July 27, 1752, alludes to the use of a curtain-ring for this purpose: ‘The event which has made most noise since my last is the extensive wedding of the youngest of the two Gunnings,’ and he then describes an assembly at Lord Chesterfield’s, when the Duke of Hamilton made love to Miss Gunning, and two nights after sent for a parson to perform the marriage ceremony. The Doctor refused to act without a licence and a ring. ‘The Duke swore he would send for the Archbishop; at last they were married with a ring of the bed-curtain, at half-an-hour past twelve at night, at May Fair Chapel.’
The materials used for wedding rings are many; in addition to various metals, there's even a story of a leather ring made on the spot from a piece of kid taken from the bride’s glove. Instead of a traditional ring, a church key has also been used. Horace Walpole, in a letter to Mr. (later Sir Robert) Mann, dated July 27, 1752, mentions the use of a curtain ring for this occasion: ‘The event that has caused the most buzz since my last is the grand wedding of the youngest of the two Gunnings,’ and he goes on to describe a gathering at Lord Chesterfield’s where the Duke of Hamilton pursued Miss Gunning, and two nights later called for a clergyman to perform the marriage ceremony. The Doctor refused to proceed without a license and a ring. ‘The Duke insisted he would send for the Archbishop; in the end, they were married with a bed-curtain ring, at half past twelve at night, at May Fair Chapel.’
In ‘Notes and Queries’ (2nd series, vol. x.) we find an editorial note on this subject. A parish clerk recollected an instance of a party that came to the church, and requested to be married with the church key. It was what is called a ‘parish wedding,’ and the parochial authorities, though willing to pay the church fees, because ‘they were glad to get rid of the girl,’ had not felt disposed to furnish the wedding-ring. The clerk stated, however, that, feeling some hesitation as to the substitution of the church key in[Pg 287] his own church, he stepped into the great house hard by, and there borrowed an old curtain-ring, with which the marriage was solemnised.
In ‘Notes and Queries’ (2nd series, vol. x.), there’s an editorial note about this topic. A parish clerk remembered a case where a couple came to the church and asked to be married with the church key. This was what’s known as a ‘parish wedding,’ and the local authorities, although willing to cover the church fees because ‘they were glad to be rid of the girl,’ were not willing to provide the wedding ring. The clerk noted, however, that feeling a bit unsure about using the church key in[Pg 287] his own church, he went into the big house nearby and borrowed an old curtain-ring to use for the ceremony.
Sir John Suckling, in his ballad on a ‘Wedding,’ has this conceit on a ring:—
Sir John Suckling, in his ballad about a 'Wedding,' presents this idea about a ring:—
Her fingers were so small, the ring
Would not stay on which they did bring,
It was too wide a peck:
And to say truth, for out it must,
It look’d like the great collar, just
About our young colt’s neck.
Her fingers were so tiny, the ring
Wouldn't stay on that they brought,
It was too big for her:
And to be honest, since it had to come off,
It looked like the huge collar, just
Around our young horse's neck.
Perhaps one of the smallest wedding-rings on record is that which is mentioned in the fiançailles of the Princess Mary, daughter of Henry VIII., to the Dauphin of France, son of King Francis I. The fiancé was represented on that occasion by Admiral Bonnivet, the French Ambassador. The dauphin was born February 28, 1518, and the event of his birth was made a matter of State policy, for a more intimate alliance with France. On October 5, in the same year, the bridal ceremonies took place at Greenwich with great pomp. King Henry took his station in front of the throne; on one side stood Marie of France, and Queen Katherine; in front of her mother was the Princess Marie, just two years old, dressed in cloth of gold, with a cap of black velvet on her head, blazing with jewels. On the other side stood the two legates, Wolsey and Campeggio. After a speech by Dr. Tunstal, the Princess was taken in arms; the consent of the King and Queen was demanded, and Wolsey approached with a diminutive ring of gold, fitted to the young lady’s finger, in which was a valuable diamond. Admiral Bonnivet, as proxy for the[Pg 288] baby bridegroom, passed it over the second joint. The bride was blessed, and mass performed by Wolsey, the King and the whole Court attending it.
Perhaps one of the smallest wedding rings on record is the one mentioned in the engagement of Princess Mary, daughter of Henry VIII, to the Dauphin of France, son of King Francis I. The fiancé was represented on that occasion by Admiral Bonnivet, the French Ambassador. The dauphin was born on February 28, 1518, and his birth was a matter of State policy, aimed at fostering a closer alliance with France. On October 5 of the same year, the wedding ceremonies took place at Greenwich with great fanfare. King Henry stood in front of the throne; on one side were Marie of France and Queen Katherine; in front of her mother was Princess Mary, just two years old, dressed in cloth of gold, wearing a black velvet cap adorned with jewels. On the other side stood the two legates, Wolsey and Campeggio. After a speech by Dr. Tunstal, the Princess was lifted in arms; the consent of the King and Queen was sought, and Wolsey approached with a tiny gold ring, sized for the young lady’s finger, which held a valuable diamond. Admiral Bonnivet, standing in for the[Pg 288] baby groom, slipped it over the second joint. The bride was blessed, and mass was conducted by Wolsey, with the King and the entire Court present.
The blessing of the wedding-ring is of ancient origin. The form prescribed for the ‘halowing’ is given in ‘The Doctrine of the Masse Booke from Wottonberge, by Nicholas Dorcaster,’ 1554: ‘Thou Maker and Conserver of mankinde, Gever of Spiritual Grace, and Grauntor of Eternal Salvation, Lord, send thy + blessing upon this ring, that she which shall weare it maye be armed wyth the virtue of heavenly defence, and that it may profit her to eternal salvation, thorowe Christ,’ etc. A prayer followed this: ‘+ halow Thou, Lord, this ring which we blesse in Thy holye Name, that what woman soever shall weare it, may stand fast in Thy peace, and continue in Thy wyll, and live, and grow, and wax old in Thy love, and be multiplied into the length of daies, thorow our Lord,’ etc.
The blessing of the wedding ring has ancient roots. The wording for its 'consecration' is found in 'The Doctrine of the Mass Book from Wottonberg, by Nicholas Dorcaster,' 1554: 'You Maker and Preserver of mankind, Giver of Spiritual Grace, and Grantor of Eternal Salvation, Lord, send your + blessing upon this ring, so that the one who wears it may be strengthened by heavenly protection, and that it may lead her to eternal salvation, through Christ,' etc. A prayer followed: ‘+ consecrate this ring, Lord, which we bless in Your holy Name, that whoever wears it may remain in Your peace, follow Your will, and live, grow old, and be abundant in Your love, and have many years, through our Lord,’ etc.
Rings were formerly placed on the missal book, with money at marriages; thus in the ‘Wardrobe Book,’ roll 18, of Edward the First, there is an entry of ‘money given to place upon the missal book, along with the ring with which she was married, 40s.’
Rings were previously placed on the missal book with money during marriages; in the ‘Wardrobe Book,’ roll 18, of Edward the First, there is an entry of ‘money given to place upon the missal book, along with the ring with which she was married, 40s.’
A similar entry occurs on the marriage of Margaret, fourth daughter of the same monarch, when the King gave sixty shillings to be placed on the missal with the spousal ring.
A similar entry appears regarding the marriage of Margaret, the fourth daughter of the same monarch, when the King donated sixty shillings to be placed on the missal alongside the wedding ring.
The ‘heathenish origin,’ as it was termed, of the wedding-ring, led during the Commonwealth to the abolition of its use during weddings, and is thus referred to in Butler’s ‘Hudibras:’—
The "heathenish origin," as it was called, of the wedding ring led to its abolition during weddings during the Commonwealth, and this is mentioned in Butler’s ‘Hudibras:’—
This ‘heathenish’ origin may have been derived from the supposition that the ring was regarded as a kind of phylactery, or charm, and to have been introduced in imitation of the ring worn by bishops.
This ‘heathenish’ origin might have come from the idea that the ring was seen as a type of phylactery or charm, and was brought in to mimic the rings worn by bishops.
‘Though the Puritans,’ remarks Mr. Jeaffreson, in his ‘Brides and Bridals,’ ‘prohibited and preached against the ring, to the injury of goldsmiths, and the wrath of ring-wearing matrons, they did not succeed in abolishing the tool, or even in putting it so much out of fashion as some people imagined. Even Stephen Marshall, the Presbyterian minister of Finchingfield, Essex, when his party was most prosperous, married one of his lightly-trained daughters with the Book of Common Prayer and a ring; and gave this for a reason,[Pg 290] that the statute establishing the Liturgy was not repealed, and he was loth to have his daughter turned back upon him for want of a legal marriage.’
‘Although the Puritans,’ notes Mr. Jeaffreson in his ‘Brides and Bridals,’ ‘banned and preached against the ring, to the detriment of goldsmiths and the anger of ring-wearing brides, they didn’t manage to get rid of the item or even make it as unpopular as some thought. Even Stephen Marshall, the Presbyterian minister in Finchingfield, Essex, during the height of his group's success, married one of his lightly-educated daughters using the Book of Common Prayer and a ring; he justified this by saying,[Pg 290] that the law establishing the Liturgy hadn’t been repealed, and he didn't want his daughter to be left without a legal marriage.’
The Rev. George Bull, subsequently Bishop of St. David’s, also in these Presbyterian times, who married a Miss Gregory, in defiance of tyrannical enactments used a wedding-ring with the motto: ‘Bene parere, parêre, parare det mihi Deus.’ (See chapter on ‘Posy, Motto, and Inscription Rings.’)
The Rev. George Bull, later the Bishop of St. David’s, also during these Presbyterian times, married a Miss Gregory. In defiance of oppressive laws, he used a wedding ring with the motto: ‘Bene parere, parêre, parare det mihi Deus.’ (See chapter on ‘Posy, Motto, and Inscription Rings.’)
The Puritan scruples against the wedding-ring were much criticised at the time:—
The Puritan objections to the wedding ring were heavily criticized at the time:—
Because the wedding-ring’s a fashion old,
And signifies, by the purity of gold,
The purity required i’ the married pair,
And by the rotundity the union fair,
Which ought to be between them endless, for
No other reason, we that use abhor.
A Long-winded Lay-lecture (published 1674).
They will not hear of wedding-rings
For to be us’d in their marriage;
But say they’re superstitious things,
And do religion much disparage:
They are but vain, and things profane;
Wherefore, now, no wit bespeaks them,
So to be tyed unto the bride,
But do it as the spirit moves them.
A Curtain-lecture (‘Loyal Songs,’ vol. i No. 15).
Because the wedding ring is an old tradition,
And represents, through the purity of gold,
The purity expected in a married couple,
And by its round shape, the fair union,
Which should be endless between them, for
No other reason, we who use it disapprove.
A Lengthy Lecture (published 1674).
They refuse to recognize wedding rings
As something to be utilized in their marriage;
But claim they are superstitious objects,
And disrespectful to their beliefs:
They see them as vain and profane;
So, no one supports them,
So they commit to the bride,
Only if it feels right to them.
A Curtain Lecture (‘Loyal Songs,’ vol. i No. 15).
The objections of the Dissenters to the ring in marriage were answered by Dr. Comber, (‘Office of Matrimony,’ &c., folio edition, part 4,) by Dr. Nicholls upon the Office of Matrimony, and Wheatley in his ‘Rational Illustration.’
The Dissenters' objections to the marriage ring were addressed by Dr. Comber, (‘Office of Matrimony,’ &c., folio edition, part 4), by Dr. Nicholls in the Office of Matrimony, and by Wheatley in his ‘Rational Illustration.’
In the ancient ritual of marriage the ring was placed by the husband on the top of the thumb of the left hand, with the words, ‘In the name of the Father;’ he then removed it[Pg 291] to the forefinger, saying, ‘and of the Son,’ then to the middle finger, adding, ‘and of the Holy Ghost;’ finally he left it on the fourth finger, with the closing word ‘Amen.’
In the ancient ritual of marriage, the husband placed the ring on the top of the thumb of the left hand, saying, "In the name of the Father." He then moved it[Pg 291] to the forefinger, saying, "and of the Son," then to the middle finger, adding, "and of the Holy Ghost." Finally, he left it on the fourth finger, with the concluding word, "Amen."
The English ‘Book of Common Prayer’ orders that the ring should be placed on the fourth finger of the woman’s left hand. The spousal manuals of York and Salisbury assign this practical reason for the selection of this finger: ‘quia in illo digito est quædam vena procedens usque ad cor.’[58] Other reasons than its connection with the heart are assigned by Macrobius. The author of the ‘Vulgar Errors’ had entirely overthrown the anatomical fiction.
The English 'Book of Common Prayer' states that the ring should be placed on the fourth finger of the woman's left hand. The marriage manuals of York and Salisbury give a practical reason for choosing this finger: "because there is a vein in that finger that leads directly to the heart." Other reasons for its connection to the heart are provided by Macrobius. The author of the 'Vulgar Errors' completely debunked this anatomical myth.
On the subject of ring-fingers, a ‘Polyglot Dictionary’ by John Minshew (1625) says: ‘Vetus versiculus singulis digitis Annulum tribuens, Miles, Mercator, Stultus, Maritus, Amator. Pollici adscribitur Militi, seu Doctori; Mercatorum, a pollice secundum; Stultorum, tertium; Nuptorum vel Studiosorum, quartinum; Amatorum, ultimum.’
On the topic of ring fingers, a ‘Polyglot Dictionary’ by John Minshew (1625) states: ‘An old verse assigns a ring to each finger: Soldier, Merchant, Fool, Husband, Lover. The thumb is for the Soldier or Doctor; the first finger for Merchants; the third for Fools; the fourth for Married people or Scholars; the last for Lovers.’
Amongst the Hebrews, the finger of God denoted his power, and it was the forefingers of the gods of Greece and Italy which wore the ring, the emblem of divine supremacy.
Among the Hebrews, the finger of God signified His power, and it was the forefingers of the gods of Greece and Italy that wore the ring, a symbol of divine supremacy.
Why the ring is worn on the left hand is said to signify the subjection of the wife to the husband; the right hand signifies power, independence, authority, the left dependence or subjection.[59] Columbiere remarks: ‘Some of the ancients[Pg 292] made the ring to denote servitude, alleging that the bridegroom was to give it to his bride, to denote to her that she is to be subject to him, which Pythagoras seemed to confirm when he suggested wearing a straight ring, that is, not to submit to over-rigid servitude.’
Why the ring is worn on the left hand is said to represent the wife's submission to her husband; the right hand symbolizes power, independence, and authority, while the left hand signifies dependence or submission. [59] Columbiere notes: ‘Some of the ancients[Pg 292] made the ring to signify servitude, claiming that the groom gave it to his bride to indicate that she would be subject to him. Pythagoras seemed to support this when he suggested wearing a straight ring, which means not to submit to overly strict servitude.’
It is very observable that none of the Hereford, York, and Salisbury missals mention the hand, whether right or left, on which the ring is to be put.
It is quite noticeable that none of the Hereford, York, and Salisbury missals specify which hand, right or left, the ring is to be placed on.
In the ‘British Apollo’ (vol. i. page 127, edit. MDCCXXVI.) a question is asked: ‘Why is it that the person to be married is enjoined to put a ring upon the fourth finger of his spouse’s left hand?’ The answer is: ‘There is nothing more in this than that the custom was handed down to the present age, from the practice of our ancestors, who found the left hand more convenient for such ornaments than the right, in that ’tis ever less employed; for the same reason they chose the fourth finger, which is not only less used than either of the rest, but is more capable of preserving a ring from bruises, having this one quality peculiar to itself, that it cannot be extended but in company with some other finger, whereas the rest may be singly stretched to their full length and straightened. Some of the ancients’ opinions in the matter, viz. that the ring was so worn because to that finger, and to that only, comes an artery from the heart; but, the politer knowledge of our modern anatomists having clearly demonstrated the absurdity of that notion, we are rather inclined the continuance of the custom owing to the reason above mentioned.’
In the ‘British Apollo’ (vol. i. page 127, edit. 1726.) a question is asked: ‘Why is the person getting married instructed to put a ring on the fourth finger of their spouse’s left hand?’ The answer is: ‘There’s nothing more to it than that this custom was passed down from our ancestors, who found the left hand more convenient for such ornaments than the right, since it’s used less often; for the same reason, they chose the fourth finger, which is not only less used than the others but also better at protecting a ring from damage, as it can only be extended when another finger is involved, while the others can be stretched straight out on their own. Some ancient thinkers believed the ring was worn on this finger because it was thought to have an artery that connects to the heart, but modern anatomists have proven that idea to be incorrect, so we lean toward the continuation of the custom being due to the reasons mentioned above.’
These explanations, given in the curious and entertaining miscellany, from which I have quoted, are from the writings[Pg 293] of Macrobius, to which I have alluded. These appear to settle the contention as to the proper finger for the wedding-ring.
These explanations, provided in the interesting and entertaining collection I quoted from, come from the writings[Pg 293] of Macrobius, which I referenced. They seem to resolve the debate about which finger is the right one for the wedding ring.
‘Rings in modern times,’ remarks Madame de Barrera, ‘have been made in some countries Love’s telegraph. If a gentleman wants a wife, he wears a ring on the first finger of the left hand; if he be engaged, he wears it on the second finger; if married, on the third; and on the fourth if he never intends to be married. When a lady is not engaged she wears a hoop or diamond on her first finger; if engaged, on her second; if married, on the third; and on the fourth, if she intends to die a maid. As no rules are given for widows, it is presumed that the ornamenting of the right hand, and the little finger of the left, is exclusively their prerogative.’
‘Rings nowadays,’ says Madame de Barrera, ‘have become a sort of love signal in some countries. If a man wants to marry, he wears a ring on the first finger of his left hand; if he’s engaged, it goes on the second finger; if he’s married, it’s on the third; and if he never plans to marry, it’s on the fourth. For a woman who isn’t engaged, she wears a hoop or diamond on her first finger; if she’s engaged, it’s on her second; if she’s married, on her third; and on the fourth if she intends to stay single. Since there are no specific rules for widows, it’s assumed that decorating the right hand and the little finger of the left is solely their privilege.’
‘This English fashion is, perhaps, too open a proclamation of intentions to suit such as do not choose to own themselves as mortgaged property.’
‘This English style is possibly too direct a declaration of intentions for those who prefer not to acknowledge themselves as owned property.’
The Greek Church directs that the ring be put on the right hand, and such may have been the practice in England, since Rastell, in his counter-challenge to Bishop Jewell, notes it as a novelty of the Reformation ‘that the man should put the wedding-ring on the fourth finger in the left hand of the woman, and not in the right hand as hath been many hundreds of years continued.’
The Greek Church instructs that the ring be placed on the right hand, and this may have been the practice in England as well, since Rastell, in his response to Bishop Jewell, mentions it as a new idea from the Reformation ‘that the man should put the wedding ring on the fourth finger of the woman’s left hand, instead of the right hand as has been done for many hundreds of years.’
With the bridal ring, formerly, were delivered the keys of the house. This is of ancient origin, as I have noticed in mentioning the rings of the Romans. We read in Photius that Theosebius says to his wife: ‘I formerly gave to thee the ring of union; now of temperance to aid thee in the seemly custody of my house.’ He advisedly speaks of that custody, for the lady of the house in Plautus says:—
With the wedding ring, the keys to the house were once given as well. This comes from an ancient tradition, as I pointed out when discussing the rings of the Romans. We read in Photius that Theosebius tells his wife: 'I once gave you the ring of unity; now one of moderation to help you take care of my home properly.' He intentionally refers to that responsibility, because the mistress of the house in Plautus says:—
[Pg 294]
Obsignate cellas, referte annulum ad me,
Ego huc transes.
[Pg 294]
Persistent guys, send the ring back to me,
I'm coming over here.
Some Roman keys attached to rings, so as to be worn on the fingers, and which are well known to antiquaries, were recently found at Water Newton, in digging for gravel, close to the road from Stamford to Peterborough. These were of brass and bronze, and of the size used by the Roman ladies, who were accustomed to carry their casket-keys in this manner.
Some Roman keys attached to rings, meant to be worn on fingers, and familiar to collectors, were recently discovered at Water Newton while digging for gravel near the road from Stamford to Peterborough. These were made of brass and bronze and were the size commonly used by Roman women, who typically carried their casket keys this way.
Roman Key-rings.
Roman Keychains.
Mr. Waterton suggests that the key-rings found on Roman sites may have been worn by slaves or by the confidential servi who had care of the wardrobes, cabinets, &c., of their masters.
Mr. Waterton suggests that the key rings found at Roman sites may have been worn by slaves or by the trusted servi who looked after their masters' wardrobes, cabinets, etc.
Among the old Northmen, the keys of the store-room were occasionally deputed to the wife on the wedding-day, and were carried at her side as a sign of housewifely dignity.
Among the old Northmen, the keys to the storeroom were sometimes given to the bride on her wedding day, and she would carry them at her side as a symbol of her dignity as a housewife.
In the Saxon formula of matrimony, the father of the bride said: ‘I give thee my daughter to be thy honour and thy wife, to keep thy keys, and to share with thee in thy bed and goods, in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.’
In the Saxon wedding ceremony, the father of the bride said: ‘I give you my daughter to be your honor and your wife, to take care of your keys, and to share your bed and belongings, in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.’
Leybard, the famous saint of Tours, in the sixth century, being persuaded in his youth to marry, gave his betrothed a ring, a kiss, and a pair of shoes—the latter being a sign[Pg 295] of his great subjection to her and to bind his feet, the ring binding his hands.
Leybard, the famous saint of Tours in the sixth century, was convinced in his youth to marry. He gave his fiancée a ring, a kiss, and a pair of shoes—the shoes symbolizing his obedience to her and binding his feet, while the ring symbolized binding his hands.[Pg 295]
A MS. in the Harleian library, quoted by Strutt, states that ‘by the civil law, whatsoever is given ex sponsalitia largitate, betwixt them that are promised in marriage, hath a condition (for the most part silent) that it may be had again if marriage ensue not, but if the man should have had a kiss for his money, he should lose one half of that which he gave. Yet with the woman it is otherwise, for, kissing or not kissing, whatsoever she gave, she may ask and have it again.’ However, this extends only to gloves, rings, bracelets, and such like small wares.
A manuscript in the Harleian library, quoted by Strutt, states that "according to civil law, anything given ex sponsalitia largitate between those promised in marriage has a condition (usually unspoken) that it can be returned if marriage doesn't happen. However, if the man only received a kiss for his gift, he would lose half of what he gave. For the woman, it's different; whether she kisses or not, whatever she gave, she can ask for and get back." However, this only applies to gloves, rings, bracelets, and similar small items.
Plain gold wedding-rings which are at present used as a visible pledge of matrimony, seem to have descended to us in the mere course of traditionary practice from the times of the Saxons, without any impulse from written authority or rubric. At the marriage of Queen Mary with Philip of Spain in 1554 the wedding-ring was laid in the Bible to be hallowed. Some discussion had previously taken place in the Council about this ring, which the Queen decided by declaring that she would not have it adorned with gems, ‘for she chose to be wedded with a plain hoop of gold, like other maidens.’[60]
Plain gold wedding rings, which we currently use as a visible symbol of marriage, seem to have come down to us simply through tradition from the time of the Saxons, without any influence from written rules or guidelines. At the marriage of Queen Mary to Philip of Spain in 1554, the wedding ring was placed in the Bible to be blessed. There had been some debate in the Council about this ring, which the Queen settled by stating that she did not want it decorated with jewels, "for she chose to be married with a simple band of gold, like other maidens."[60]
Plain gold rings appear to have been given away at[Pg 296] weddings in great numbers at this period; thus Anthony Wood writes that ‘Killey (in 1589) at Trebona was equally profuse beyond the limits of a sober philosopher, and did give away in gold-wire rings (twisted), at the marriage of one of his maid-servants to the value of four thousand pounds.’
Plain gold rings seem to have been given away at[Pg 296] weddings in large quantities during this time; Anthony Wood notes that ‘Killey (in 1589) at Trebona was just as generous beyond what a sober philosopher would consider reasonable, and gave away twisted gold-wire rings worth four thousand pounds at the marriage of one of his maid-servants.’
The Prince Regent, on the celebration of his unhappy marriage with Caroline of Brunswick, presented a number of rings to the members of his family and friends. These gifts, with other accounts, being in the list for settlement by Parliament later, gave rise to the undignified Jeffreys scandal.
The Prince Regent, during the celebration of his unfortunate marriage to Caroline of Brunswick, gave several rings to his family members and friends. These gifts, along with other expenses, were included in the list for settlement by Parliament later, which led to the embarrassing Jeffreys scandal.
At the marriage of Queen Victoria, rings were distributed having the royal likeness in profile in gold; the legend being ‘Victoria Regina.’ The whole was less than a quarter of an inch in diameter, but with the aid of a powerful magnifying-glass the features were disclosed, beautifully delineated. The Queen was so pleased with this microscopic work of art that she ordered six dozen impressions to be struck and set by the court jewellers, Rundle and Bridges, in gold rings for distribution among distinguished personages.[61]
At Queen Victoria's wedding, rings were given out featuring a gold profile likeness of her, with the inscription ‘Victoria Regina.’ The rings were less than a quarter of an inch in diameter, but with a strong magnifying glass, the details were revealed, beautifully defined. The Queen was so impressed with this tiny artwork that she had six dozen copies made and set by the court jewellers, Rundle and Bridges, in gold rings to be given to notable individuals.[61]
At the marriage of the Princess Royal of England, in 1858, to the heir of the now German Empire, the wedding-rings used were of Silesian gold, manufactured at Breslau. The maker of these, who has a large gold-refining establishment in that town, had the two rings mounted on a skin of parchment, on which was engrossed a short history of his[Pg 297] gold-works at Richenstein, from which we learn that in former days Silesia was a California on a small scale, gold not only being obtained by mining, but by washing the sands of certain rivers. In the form of a heading to an historical document, the two gold wedding-rings were presented to the Prince.
At the wedding of the Princess Royal of England in 1858 to the heir of the now German Empire, the wedding rings were made of Silesian gold, crafted in Breslau. The jeweler, who runs a large gold-refining business in that city, mounted the two rings on a piece of parchment that detailed a brief history of his[Pg 297] gold works at Richenstein, which reveals that in the past, Silesia was like a small-scale California, where gold was obtained not just through mining but also by washing the sands from certain rivers. The two gold wedding rings were presented to the Prince in the style of a title for a historical document.
To give an idea of the immense number of plain gold wedding-rings required in the present day, it is stated that no less than thirty thousand have passed through the Birmingham Assay Office in one year.
To illustrate the huge demand for plain gold wedding rings today, it's noted that at least thirty thousand have gone through the Birmingham Assay Office in just one year.
As pledges of betrothal, or wedding gifts, rings are of very ancient origin. They were worn by the Jews prior to Christian times, and constitute, even at present, an important feature in their marriage ceremonials. Wheatley says: ‘The reason why a ring was pitched upon for the pledge, rather than anything else, was because anciently the ring was a seal, by which all orders were signed, and things of value secured, and therefore the delivery of it was a sign that the person to whom it was given was admitted into the highest friendship and trust. For which reason it was adopted as a ceremony in marriage to denote that the wife, in consideration of being espoused to the man, was admitted as a sharer in her husband’s counsels, and a joint partner in his honour and estate, and therefore we find that not only the ring, but the keys, were, in former times delivered to her at the marriage.’
As symbols of engagement or wedding gifts, rings have a very ancient history. They were worn by the Jews before the Christian era and still play an important role in their marriage ceremonies today. Wheatley explains: ‘The reason a ring was chosen for this pledge instead of something else is that in ancient times, rings served as seals used to sign all orders and secure valuable items. Thus, giving a ring was a sign that the person receiving it was accepted into the highest level of friendship and trust. This is why it became part of the marriage ceremony, indicating that the wife, in being married to the man, was included as a partner in his decisions, and shared in his honor and wealth. This is why we see that not only the ring, but also the keys, were given to her during the marriage ceremony.’
A passage in Ruth (chap. iv. verse 7) gives some reason to suppose that the ring was used by the Jews, as a covenant, in making agreements, grants, &c., whence the wedding engagement by a ring may have been derived. Leo Modena, in his ‘History of the Rites, Customs, and[Pg 298] Manner of Life of the Present Jews throughout the World’ (translated by Edm. Chilmead, 8vo.; London, 1650), alluding to the Jewish manner of marrying, states that ‘before the bride’s dowry is produced and read, the bridegroom putteth a ring upon her finger, in the presence of two witnesses, which commonly used to be the Rabbines, saying, withal, unto her: “Behold thou art my espoused wife, according to the custom of Moses and of Israel.”’
A passage in Ruth (chap. iv. verse 7) suggests that the ring was used by the Jews as a covenant in making agreements, grants, etc., which might be where the tradition of engagement rings came from. Leo Modena, in his ‘History of the Rites, Customs, and[Pg 298] Manner of Life of the Present Jews throughout the World’ (translated by Edm. Chilmead, 8vo.; London, 1650), mentions the Jewish way of marrying, stating that ‘before the bride’s dowry is presented and read, the bridegroom puts a ring on her finger, in the presence of two witnesses, usually the Rabbis, and says to her: “Behold, you are my engaged wife, according to the custom of Moses and of Israel.”’
Selden says that rings were first given in lieu of dowry-money,[62] and that the wedding-ring came into general use by the Jews after they saw it was everywhere prevalent. These Jewish rings were, in past ages, generally of large size and elaborate workmanship. Some curious examples are mentioned in the Londesborough Collection Catalogue. One ring, formerly belonging to the late Crofton Croker, is of German or Flemish work of the seventeenth century. It is of brass, with three points, or bosses, and belongs to a class of ring called Mazul-touv (pronounced Mussul-taub), or, freely translated, ‘Joy be with you,’ or ‘Good luck to you.’ In the same collection is a Jewish ‘tower’ betrothal ring, enamelled blue, of the sixteenth century. Another betrothal ring belongs to the same class and date, called ‘temple,’ or ‘tower,’ from the figure of the sacred temple placed on their summit. In one of the Londesborough specimens it takes the form of a sexagonal building with a domed roof of an Eastern character; in another it is square, with a deeply-pitched roof, having movable vanes at the angles, and is probably the work of some German goldsmith. On the former of these rings the inscription is in enamelled letters, ‘Joy be with you;’ and the same words[Pg 299] are in more richly-designed letters on the curve of the latter ring.
Selden states that rings were first given instead of dowry money, [62] and that the wedding ring became widely used among the Jews after they noticed it was common everywhere. These Jewish rings were typically large and intricately designed in earlier times. Some interesting examples are noted in the Londesborough Collection Catalogue. One ring, which used to belong to the late Crofton Croker, is of German or Flemish design from the seventeenth century. It is made of brass, featuring three points, or bosses, and is part of a type of ring called Mazul-touv (pronounced Mussul-taub), which translates to ‘Joy be with you,’ or ‘Good luck to you.’ In the same collection is a Jewish 'tower' betrothal ring, enamelled blue, dating from the sixteenth century. Another betrothal ring from the same category and period is called ‘temple’ or ‘tower,’ due to the depiction of the sacred temple on its top. In one of the Londesborough examples, it appears as a hexagonal structure with a domed roof in an Eastern style; in another, it is square with a steeply pitched roof featuring movable vanes at the corners, likely crafted by a German goldsmith. On the former ring, the inscription is in enamelled letters, ‘Joy be with you;’ and the same words[Pg 299] are inscribed in more decorative letters along the curve of the latter ring.
Hebrew Marriage Rings.
Hebrew Wedding Rings.
A ring of gold, enamelled and decorated with five blue enamelled rosettes and five filigree bosses. The roof only of the temple surmounts the ring; it is decorated with light-green enamel, it opens on a hinge, and exhibits beneath the letters טוב. From the Londesborough Collection.
A gold ring, enameled and adorned with five blue enameled rosettes and five filigree bosses. The roof of the temple sits atop the ring; it's decorated with light-green enamel, opens on a hinge, and shows the letters טוב underneath. From the Londesborough Collection.
Hebrew Betrothal Ring.
Hebrew Engagement Ring.
A remarkably fine example of these rings is in the Braybrooke Collection. It has five filigree bosses equidistant along the broad exterior, which is also ornamented with filagree scroll-work, filled with blue and white enamel; the summit of the hoop is surmounted by a pyramid-shaped tower opening upon a hinge, but without any inscription, which is often covered by it. In this case the word or[Pg 300] words are engraved on the inside of the ring, and are probably Mazul-touv or Mussul-taub (‘Joy be with you’). The tower is to represent the ark of the covenant; the bosses or points are sometimes supposed to represent the number of witnesses at the ceremony required by law of the Jews. The points or bosses consist of rosettes with six leaves, each of blue, and six leaves of white, enamel. The pyramidical ark has the sides filled with blue enamel only; on the two narrow sides there is a small perforation to represent the window, in allusion to the dove.
A really fine example of these rings is in the Braybrooke Collection. It has five filigree bosses evenly spaced along the wide exterior, which is also decorated with filigree scrollwork filled with blue and white enamel. The top of the hoop is topped with a pyramid-shaped tower that opens on a hinge, but it doesn’t have any inscription, which is often hidden by it. In this case, the word or[Pg 300] words are engraved on the inside of the ring, likely Mazul-touv or Mussul-taub (‘Joy be with you’). The tower is meant to represent the ark of the covenant; the bosses or points are sometimes thought to symbolize the number of witnesses needed at the ceremony according to Jewish law. The points or bosses consist of rosettes with six blue leaves and six white leaves in enamel. The pyramid-shaped ark has its sides filled with blue enamel only; on the two narrow sides, there is a small hole to represent a window, referring to the dove.
A large silver-gilt Hebrew wedding-ring, in the same collection, is of a remarkable form. The hoop is three-quarters of an inch wide, with raised edges, and plain surface between the five elevations on its upper portion. The centre one of these is a hexagonal tower, with pent-house roof sloping on each side to the course of the hoop; the gables and sides of these are pierced with fourteen holes for windows, and the roof is scored to imitate tiles; on each side of this is a smaller bell-shaped tower, equidistant from it, with four circular holes in them; and on each side of these last is a still smaller tower of the same shape, and at an equal distance, but without any windows. There is not the usual inscription on any part of this ring.
A large silver-gilt Hebrew wedding ring from the same collection has a striking design. The band is three-quarters of an inch wide, with raised edges and a smooth surface between the five raised sections on the top. The center section is a hexagonal tower with a slanted roof, tapering down to the band. The gables and sides have fourteen holes for windows, and the roof is etched to look like tiles. On each side of this tower, there's a smaller bell-shaped tower positioned at equal distance, each with four circular holes. Flanking these are even smaller towers of the same shape, also spaced equally apart, but without any windows. There’s no typical inscription anywhere on this ring.
Jewish.
Jewish.
Jewish.
Jewish.
The annexed illustrations, from rings in the Bailewski Collection, represent a gold Jewish ring of the thirteenth century, and one of the fourteenth century.
The attached illustrations, from the Bailewski Collection, show a gold Jewish ring from the 13th century and another from the 14th century.
[Pg 301]In the collection of the late Lady Fellows was a fine Jewish betrothal ring of gold decorated with filigree and enamel. Instead of any setting, the head is formed with a steep ridge, like the roof a house, opening on hinges; within is a cavity, closed by a lid, and probably intended to contain a charm or pastille. On the inner side of the hoop are engraved two Hebrew words signifying good fortune.
[Pg 301]In the collection of the late Lady Fellows was a beautiful Jewish betrothal ring made of gold, adorned with filigree and enamel. Instead of a traditional setting, the top has a sharp ridge, resembling a house roof, that opens on hinges; inside, there’s a small compartment, covered by a lid, likely meant to hold a charm or a pastille. On the inner side of the band, two Hebrew words meaning good fortune are engraved.
In a communication from Mr. Singer (whose unique collection of wedding-rings with inscriptions I have noticed in the chapter on ‘Posy, Inscription, and Motto Rings’) he informs me that he has a fine Hebrew ring of sixteenth-century work—‘a real old one, as most of those now about are forgeries. This has the Hebrew word “mussul taub” in a short Hebrew character, meaning “We wish you good luck,” engraved on the inside.’
In a message from Mr. Singer (whose unique collection of wedding rings with inscriptions I mentioned in the chapter on ‘Posy, Inscription, and Motto Rings’), he tells me that he has a beautiful Hebrew ring from the sixteenth century—‘a really old one, since most of those around today are forgeries. This one has the Hebrew phrase “mussul taub” in small Hebrew letters, meaning “We wish you good luck,” engraved on the inside.’
According to Jewish law in modern times, it is necessary that the ring should be of a certain value. It is therefore examined and certified by the officiating Rabbi and the chief officers of the synagogue, when it is received by the bridegroom. When absolute property it must not be obtained by credit or by gift. When this is properly certified the ring is returned to him, and he places it on the bride’s finger, calling attention to the fact that she is by these means, consecrated to him. So completely binding is this action that, should the marriage be no further consecrated, no other could be contracted by either party, without a legal divorce.
According to modern Jewish law, the ring must have a certain value. It is examined and certified by the officiating Rabbi and the chief officers of the synagogue when the groom receives it. The ring must be owned outright; it cannot be obtained through credit or as a gift. Once it is properly certified, the ring is returned to the groom, who places it on the bride’s finger, highlighting that she is now consecrated to him. This action is so binding that, if the marriage isn't further consecrated, neither party can enter into another marriage without a legal divorce.
The Rev. C. W. King, in ‘Antique Gems,’ remarks that huge gold rings adorned with filigree-work and surmounted by a small temple, with Hebrew inscriptions on the interior of the shank, puzzle the beholders as to their use, being[Pg 302] much too large for the finger. They were made for the use of the synagogue, and are placed on the finger of the couple at a certain part of the marriage rites.
The Rev. C. W. King, in ‘Antique Gems,’ notes that large gold rings decorated with filigree and featuring a small temple on top, with Hebrew inscriptions on the inside of the band, leave people wondering about their purpose, as they are[Pg 302] far too big for a finger. They were created for use in the synagogue and are placed on the finger of the couple during a specific part of the wedding ceremony.
Mr. Singer, in describing the Hebrew wedding-ring in his collection, adds: ‘The Hebrews married on the first finger, as to the ring. This is done now, but even the Jews change a little, and after the ceremony the Jewish ladies take off their ring, and place it on the third finger, the same as we do, for now they wear the ordinary ring.’
Mr. Singer, when describing the Hebrew wedding ring in his collection, mentions: ‘The Hebrews used to marry with the ring on the first finger. This tradition continues, but even the Jews have adapted a bit, and after the ceremony, Jewish women move their ring to the third finger, just like we do, because now they wear a regular ring.’
The following illustrations represent the marriage-rings of the German Jews, the workmanship of the sixteenth century, and very fine specimens of art. Both are of gold; the larger one is richly ornamented in filigree with enamels of light and dark green. It is crowned by a house; the roof, which is covered with enamelled tiles, opens by means of a key, and the space within serves for perfumes or some souvenir. Four small crowns of gold are suspended from the ring.
The following illustrations show the wedding rings of German Jews, crafted in the sixteenth century, and are excellent examples of art. Both rings are made of gold; the larger one is beautifully decorated in filigree with light and dark green enamels. At the top is a house with a roof covered in enameled tiles that opens with a key, and the inside is used for holding perfumes or a keepsake. Four small gold crowns hang from the ring.
Jewish Wedding-rings (from the Fould Collection).
Jewish Wedding Rings (from the Fould Collection).
The other, smaller in size, is also richly decorated, but is crowned with only the roof of a house, enamelled white and[Pg 303] red. The enamels which decorate the other parts of the ring are white.
The other one, which is smaller, is also beautifully decorated, but it only has a roof like a house, painted white and[Pg 303] red. The enamel that decorates the other parts of the ring is white.
The wedding-rings of the Romans were generally of iron, called ‘Pronubum,’[63] symbolical of the lasting character of the engagement, and probably springing out of another Roman custom, the giving of a ring as earnest, upon the conclusion of a bargain.
The wedding rings of the Romans were usually made of iron, known as ‘Pronubum,’[63] symbolizing the enduring nature of the engagement, likely originating from another Roman tradition of giving a ring as a token when sealing a deal.
It was the custom to betroth before marriage, as it is at this day. They that acted between the two parties were called ‘Proxenetæ,’ ‘Auspices,’ and ‘Pronubi,’ which last name was very much in use. When the marriage-maker was a woman she was called ‘Pronuba’; and it was a condition that such a one was to have had but one husband. They arranged about the portion, and other marriage articles, which conditions were afterwards written on tablets, and sealed with the ring called annulus signatorius.
It was common to get engaged before marriage, just like it is today. Those who acted on behalf of the two parties were called ‘Proxenetæ,’ ‘Auspices,’ and ‘Pronubi,’ with the last term being quite popular. If the marriage broker was a woman, she was referred to as ‘Pronuba’; and it was a requirement that she had only been married once. They discussed the dowry and other marriage agreements, which were later written on tablets and sealed with a ring called annulus signatorius.
The ring was used in marriage among Christians as early as 860. Pronubal or pledge rings passed between the contracting parties among the Romans. When the marriage settlement had been properly sealed, rings, bearing the names of the newly-married couple, were handed round to the guests.
The ring was used in marriage among Christians as early as 860. Pronubal or pledge rings were exchanged between the parties involved in the marriage among the Romans. Once the marriage agreement was finalized, rings with the names of the newlyweds were distributed to the guests.
[Pg 304]There were others, also, of pure gold and a plain circle (linea infinita) to symbolise conjugal fidelity, and to act as a reminder that the love of married people should be infinite. Kirchmann asserts that in Rome the custom was to place in the hand of the newly-made bride a ring of pure gold, at the same moment in which a ring of iron was sent to the house of her parents, a remembrance of modesty and domestic frugality.
[Pg 304]There were also other rings made of pure gold in a simple circle (linea infinita) to symbolize marital fidelity and to remind couples that their love should be endless. Kirchmann states that in Rome, it was customary to place a pure gold ring in the hand of the newlywed bride, while at the same time, a ring made of iron was sent to her parents' home as a reminder of modesty and domestic simplicity.
In the possession of A. W. Franks, Esq., M.A., F.R.S., F.S.A., is a gold ring, remarkable for the amount of the ornamentation with which it is covered. This fine Byzantine bicephalic ring was, doubtless, used as a signet, and was, possibly, a matrimonial or betrothal gift. It has been suggested that the heads resemble those of the Emperor Leo I. and Verina (A.D. 457-74), but it is doubtful whether they are imperial portraits. It is presumed that this ring was found in Egypt, where it had been preserved in the Demetrio Collection (‘Arch. Journal,’ vol. xxix. page 305).
In the collection of A. W. Franks, Esq., M.A., F.R.S., F.S.A., there's a gold ring that stands out because of its detailed ornamentation. This beautiful Byzantine bicephalic ring was likely used as a signet and could have been a wedding or engagement gift. Some have suggested that the heads resemble those of Emperor Leo I and Verina (CE 457-74), but it's uncertain if they actually are imperial portraits. It is believed that this ring was found in Egypt, where it was kept in the Demetrio Collection (‘Arch. Journal,’ vol. xxix. page 305).
Byzantine.
Byzantine Empire.
A loadstone sometimes was set instead of a jewel, indicative of love’s attractions.
A lodestone was sometimes used instead of a gem, symbolizing the pull of love.
Later, however, Tertullian and Isidore, Bishop of Seville, mention the ‘annulus nuptialis sponsalitius,’ as being of gold. Sometimes there were inscriptions on the rings,[Pg 305] such as ‘May you live long!’ ‘I bring you good fortune!’ Frequently a stone was inserted upon which was engraved an intaglio, such as a hand pulling the lobe of an ear, and the words ‘Remember me’ above it.
Later on, Tertullian and Isidore, the Bishop of Seville, refer to the ‘wedding ring’ as being made of gold. Sometimes, the rings had inscriptions on them,[Pg 305] like ‘May you live long!’ and ‘I bring you good fortune!’ Often, a stone was set into the ring, featuring an engraving, such as a hand tugging on an earlobe, with the words ‘Remember me’ above it.
Among the old Northmen, the exchanging of rings between the betrothed did not form, so far as can be ascertained from the ancient sagas and laws, any essential part in the wedding ceremonial, neither in pagan, nor in Christian times. Mention is, however, made of an exchange of rings, but this was only done as a kind of memorial gift, and no importance was attached to it. The custom of the betrothal ring was first introduced into Norway at a much later period, in imitation of that in vogue in southern countries.
Among the old Northmen, exchanging rings between people engaged to be married wasn’t a key part of the wedding ceremony, according to ancient sagas and laws, whether in pagan or Christian times. There is mention of a ring exchange, but it was more of a memorial gift, and no significance was attached to it. The custom of the engagement ring was introduced to Norway much later, modeled after practices in southern countries.
In the ‘Sword,’ Tyrfing, in the ‘Hervarer-Saga,’ the Princess Ingburgo, who is betrothed to Hialmar, says to the latter, as he is leaving for battle: ‘I swear by Varra,’ presenting to him her ring in pledge, ‘that to whomever Uller gives victory, I am the bride but of one.’
In the ‘Sword,’ Tyrfing, in the ‘Hervarer-Saga,’ Princess Ingburgo, who is engaged to Hialmar, tells him as he's heading off to battle: ‘I swear by Varra,’ offering him her ring as a promise, ‘that to whoever Uller grants victory, I will belong to only one man.’
Viga Glum’s ‘Saga’ we read of the Scandinavian use of a ring. In the midst of a wedding-party Glum calls upon Thorarin, his accuser, to hear his oath, and, taking in his hand a silver ring which had been dipped in sacrificial blood, he cites two witnesses to testify to his oath on the ring. ‘In Iceland’ (remarks Mr. Wood, in his ‘Wedding-days in all Countries’) ‘a large ring was used for the ratification of all engagements; it was variously formed of bone, jet, stone, gold, and silver. Sometimes it was so large as to allow the palm of the hand to be passed through it. So in the solemnisation of a betrothing contract the bridegroom passed four fingers and his palm through one of these rings, and in[Pg 306] this manner he received the hand of his bride. Sometimes these rings for confirming mutual contracts were placed upon the altar and there used. We may, perhaps, trace this custom in the old form of marriage in the Orkneys, where the contracting parties join their hands through a perforation, or ring, in a stone pillar.’
Viga Glum’s ‘Saga’ discusses the Scandinavian use of a ring. During a wedding party, Glum invites Thorarin, his accuser, to witness his oath. He holds a silver ring that has been dipped in sacrificial blood and calls two witnesses to confirm his oath on the ring. “In Iceland” (notes Mr. Wood in his ‘Wedding Days in All Countries’), “a large ring was used to finalize all engagements; it was often made of bone, jet, stone, gold, or silver. Sometimes it was so big that a person could pass their hand through it. In the formalization of a betrothal, the groom would pass four fingers and his palm through one of these rings, and in[Pg 306] this way, he accepted his bride’s hand. At times, these rings used to validate mutual agreements were placed on the altar and utilized there. We might be able to trace this custom in the old marriage practices in the Orkneys, where the engaged couple joins their hands through an opening, or ring, in a stone pillar.”
Among the Anglo-Saxons, at the betrothal of a young couple, after the taking of hands, an exchange of presents was made. Amongst those given by the bridegroom was a ring, which, after being blessed by the priest with a prayer, was placed on the maiden’s right hand, and was to be worn so until the time of marriage. On this event, if espousals had previously taken place (for they were not necessary), the ring was removed by the bridegroom to the bride’s left hand, and was placed on the first finger, having been blessed by the priest with a prayer.
Among the Anglo-Saxons, during the betrothal of a young couple, after taking each other’s hands, they exchanged gifts. One of the gifts given by the groom was a ring, which, after being blessed by the priest with a prayer, was placed on the bride’s right hand and was to be worn there until the wedding. If the couple had already been engaged (which wasn’t required), the groom would move the ring to the bride’s left hand, placing it on the first finger, after it had been blessed by the priest with a prayer.
Betrothal rings sometimes bore the name and title of the Saviour in full; one in the Londesborough Collection represents two hands clasped in front, so that it was, most probably, a gift, or betrothal ring. It is of silver, somewhat rudely fashioned. The inscription is in uncial characters, and, shorn of its somewhat awkward abbreviation, reads: ‘Jesus Nazareneus Rex.’
Betrothal rings sometimes had the full name and title of the Savior engraved on them; one in the Londesborough Collection features two hands clasped together in front, suggesting that it was likely a gift or betrothal ring. It's made of silver and is somewhat roughly made. The inscription is in uncial letters and, without its somewhat clumsy abbreviation, reads: ‘Jesus Nazareneus Rex.’
Mr. H. T. Wake, of Cockermouth, gives the following account of a curious betrothal ring in ‘Notes and Queries’ (Series v. vol. ii. p. 528): ‘In a small shrubbery, adjoining a house at Mosser, near Cockermouth, has recently been found a massive finger-ring, of fine gold. When discovered, it was lying on the surface, but is supposed to have been removed, along with some mould, from a garden at the back of the house, a short time previously. It is plain inside, without any hall-mark, but the exterior is polygonal[Pg 307] in shape, having the following inscription engraved in large capitals on thirteen facets, viz.:—
Mr. H. T. Wake from Cockermouth shares this account of an intriguing betrothal ring in ‘Notes and Queries’ (Series v. vol. ii. p. 528): ‘In a small shrubbery next to a house in Mosser, near Cockermouth, a large gold ring was recently found. When it was discovered, it was on the surface, but it’s thought to have been taken, along with some soil, from a garden behind the house, not long before. The inside is plain, without any hall-mark, but the outside is polygonal[Pg 307] in shape, featuring the following inscription engraved in large capitals on thirteen sides, namely:—
x | 10 | sv | 1 ⫶ s | ig | n | e ⫶ | de | am | is | t | e ⫶ | a
x | 10 | sv | 1 The text "⫶" does not contain 5 words or fewer that require modernizing. It will be returned unchanged. s | ig | n | e ⫶ | de | am | is | t | e Below is a short piece of text (5 words or fewer). Modernize it into contemporary English if there's enough context, but do not add or omit any information. If context is insufficient, return it unchanged. Do not add commentary, and do not modify any placeholders. If you see placeholders of the form __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_x__, you must keep them exactly as-is so they can be replaced with links. ⫶ | a
‘The posy seems to be: “Josui signe de amis te,” and to mean “Joshua’s token of love to thee,” the A following being the initial of the young woman to whom it was presented. I take it to be a betrothal ring of the eleventh or twelfth century; and from the admixture of the Roman and Gothic E in the inscription, which peculiarly appears also in the great seal of William the Conqueror, in the word “EVNDE,” as well also from its being in French, it is probably as old as the Norman period. I bought it of the farmer’s wife who found it.’
‘The inscription appears to say: “Josui signe de amis te,” which translates to “Joshua’s token of love to you,” with the A being the initial of the young woman to whom it was given. I believe this is a betrothal ring from the eleventh or twelfth century; and considering the mix of Roman and Gothic E in the inscription, which also notably appears in the great seal of William the Conqueror in the word “EVNDE,” as well as its French wording, it’s likely from the Norman period. I purchased it from the farmer’s wife who discovered it.’
A betrothal ring, in the collection of the Rev. James Beck, has two hearts surmounted by a crown—denoting the sovereignty of love over the heart—set with marcasites.
A betrothal ring in Rev. James Beck's collection features two hearts topped with a crown—symbolizing love's superiority over the heart—set with marcasites.
A silver ring of a similar import, found at Carlisle, is here represented, and from the clasped hands, crowned, was evidently a betrothal ring.
A silver ring with a similar significance, found in Carlisle, is shown here, and from the clasped hands and crown, it was clearly a betrothal ring.
Betrothal ring.
Engagement ring.
In the Middle Ages, solemn betrothal by means of the ring often preceded matrimony.
In the Middle Ages, a serious engagement with a ring often came before marriage.
Henry, Duke of Saxony and Bavaria, married Matilda, eldest daughter of Henry the Second, King of England, in 1168. A picture of this event was painted at the time, and afterwards hung up in the church of St. Blosius, at[Pg 308] Brunswick, which is engraved by Scheidius in his ‘Origines Guelficæ,’ Matilda is represented as holding the plight-ring, a golden hoop, adorned in the centre with a magnificent brilliant, but she seems much at a loss to know what to do with it.
Henry, Duke of Saxony and Bavaria, married Matilda, the eldest daughter of Henry II, King of England, in 1168. A painting of this event was created at the time and later displayed in the church of St. Blosius, at[Pg 308] Brunswick, which is illustrated by Scheidius in his ‘Origines Guelficæ.’ Matilda is shown holding the wedding ring, a gold band featuring a stunning jewel in the center, but she appears quite unsure about what to do with it.
In 1235 an embassy was sent to make a formal petition for the hand of Isabella, second daughter of King John of England, from the Emperor Frederick of Germany. She was presented with a plight-ring, and as the chief of the embassy, Peter de Vineâ, placed it on her finger, he formally declared her the empress of the whole Roman empire. Isabella, on her part, sent a ring to the Emperor in token of her acceptance of his troth.
In 1235, an embassy was sent to formally request the hand of Isabella, the second daughter of King John of England, from Emperor Frederick of Germany. She was given a betrothal ring, and as the leader of the embassy, Peter de Vineâ, put it on her finger, he officially declared her the empress of the entire Roman Empire. Isabella, for her part, sent a ring back to the Emperor as a sign of her acceptance of his proposal.
In the ‘Dutch Courtezan,’ an old play, a pair of lovers are introduced plighting their troth. Beatrice says to Fréeville: ‘I give you faith, and prethee, since, poore soule, I am so easie to believe thee, make it much more pitty to deceive me. Weare this sleight favour in my remembrance.’ (Throweth down a ring to him.)
In the 'Dutch Courtezan,' an old play, a couple of lovers are shown making vows. Beatrice says to Fréeville: ‘I trust you, and please, since I’m so quick to believe you, it's even more heartbreaking to betray my trust. Wear this token as a reminder of me.’ (She throws a ring down to him.)
Fréeville. ‘Which when I part from,
Hope, the best of life, ever part from me!
Graceful mistresse, our nuptiall day holds.’
Beatrice.‘With happy constancye a wished day.’
Fréeville. ‘When I leave this place,
Hope, the best part of life, will leave me as well!
"Beautiful mistress, our wedding day is approaching."
Beatrice."With joyful confidence, a day we eagerly anticipate."
In the ‘Merchant of Venice’ Bassanio and Gratiano give the rings received from Portia and Nerissa to the young doctor and his clerk, after the discomfiture of Shylock, although Portia had said:—
In the ‘Merchant of Venice’ Bassanio and Gratiano give the rings they received from Portia and Nerissa to the young doctor and his clerk after Shylock is defeated, even though Portia had said:—
This house, these servants, and this same myself,
Are yours, my lord; I give them with this ring:
Which, when you part from, lose, or give away,
Let it presage the ruin of your love,
And be my vantage to exclaim on you.
This house, these servants, and I myself,
Belong to you, my lord; I give them with this ring:
Which, when you part from, lose, or give away,
May it signal the end of your love,
And give me a reason to call you out.
[Pg 309]Bassanio answers:—
Bassanio replies:—
When this ring
Parts from this finger, then parts life from hence;
O, then be bold to say, Bassanio’s dead.
When this ring
Leaves this finger, then life leaves here;
Oh, then be brave to say, Bassanio’s dead.
Solemn betrothal was sometimes adopted by lovers, who were about to separate for long periods. Thus Chaucer, in ‘Troilus and Cressida,’ describes the heroine as giving her lover a ring, and receiving one from him in return:—
Solemn engagements were sometimes taken on by couples who were about to be apart for a long time. In ‘Troilus and Cressida,’ Chaucer describes the heroine giving her lover a ring and getting one from him in return:—
Soon after this they spake of sundry things,
As fell to purpose of this aventure,
And, playing, interchangeden their rings,
Of which I cannot tellen no scripture.
Soon after this, they talked about various things,
As suited the purpose of this adventure,
And, joking around, exchanged their rings,
Of which I can't provide any written account.
Half of broken
betrothal ring.
Half of broken engagement ring.
Shakspeare has more than one allusion to this custom, which is absolutely enacted in the ‘Two Gentlemen of Verona,’ when Julia gives Proteus a ring, saying: ‘Keep you this remembrance for thy Julia’s sake,’ and he replies: ‘Why, then we’ll make exchange:—here, take you this.’ A ritual of Bordeaux (1596) gives a form of betrothal by public ceremony, when rings were interchanged. Kleist, in his ‘Kate of Heilbron,’ makes Frederick say:—
Shakespeare makes several references to this tradition, clearly illustrated in 'The Two Gentlemen of Verona,' when Julia gives Proteus a ring, saying, 'Keep this as a reminder for your Julia's sake,' and he responds, 'Then let’s swap:—here, take this.' A ritual from Bordeaux (1596) describes a betrothal through a public ceremony where rings were exchanged. Kleist, in his 'Kate of Heilbron,' has Frederick say:—
To tally close,
As joints of rings dissever’d,
To count accurately,
As links of rings separated,
alluding to the custom sometimes practised by lovers, among the common people, plighting a faith, when a ring is broken in two, one half of which was kept by each party, that if from time to time, or at the day of marriage, the two pieces agree with each other, proof may be thus afforded that they have not been transferred, and consequently that[Pg 310] both bride and bridegroom remain still of the same mind; otherwise, the engagement is annulled.
alluding to the tradition sometimes followed by couples in the general population, making a promise when a ring is split in two, with each person keeping one half. If, at times, or on the wedding day, the two pieces match up, it can prove that they haven’t been swapped, and that[Pg 310] both the bride and groom are still committed to each other; if not, the engagement is dissolved.
A ring of pure gold she from her finger took,
And just in the middle the same then she broke;
Quoth she: ‘As a token of love you this take,
And this, as a pledge, I will keep for your sake.’
(‘Exeter Garland.’)
She took a ring of pure gold off her finger,
And then broke it in the middle;
She said: ‘Take this as a token of my love,
And I’ll keep this as a promise for you.’
(‘Exeter Garland.’)
De Laet, writing in 1647, states that he remembers when it was the custom (and an ancient one) for the gentleman to present the lady on their betrothal with two rings, the one set with a diamond, the other with a ruby table-cut. This gift went by the French name ‘Mariage.’
De Laet, writing in 1647, states that he remembers when it was the custom (and an ancient one) for the gentleman to give the lady two rings on their engagement, one set with a diamond and the other with a ruby table-cut. This gift was called ‘Mariage’ in French.
Among the Germans at the present day the interchange of rings is practised at the publication of the banns among the Lutherans; the minister joins the hands of the couple, and rings are interchanged.
Among the Germans today, the exchange of rings takes place when the banns are announced among the Lutherans; the minister joins the couple's hands, and they exchange rings.
‘The Italians,’ observes Mr. Wood, ‘in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries used betrothing rings, which were generally made of silver, inlaid with niello. The bezel was either oval or circular, and the shoulders of the hoop were shaped so as to form sleeves, from each of which issued a right hand. The hands were clasped together in the Fede. Some of these rings were of a large size, and were worn by men. The diamond was long esteemed by the mediæval Italians as the favourite stone for setting in espousal rings, and it was called “pietra della reconciliazione,” from its supposed power to maintain concord between man and wife.’
‘The Italians,’ notes Mr. Wood, ‘during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries used engagement rings, which were usually made of silver, inlaid with niello. The bezel was either oval or round, and the shoulders of the band were shaped to form sleeves, with a right hand emerging from each. The hands were clasped together in the Fede. Some of these rings were quite large and were worn by men. The diamond was long considered by medieval Italians as the preferred stone for wedding rings, and it was referred to as “pietra della riconciliazione,” due to its believed ability to maintain harmony between husband and wife.’
It was also usual, at the periods mentioned, for the Italian ladies to give their lovers rings which contained their portraits. Lovers wore these rings on holidays, as was the practice in England, as we find in ‘England’s Helicon’ (1600):—
It was also common, during the times mentioned, for Italian women to give their partners rings that had their portraits in them. Lovers wore these rings on special occasions, just like in England, as noted in ‘England’s Helicon’ (1600):—
[Pg 311]
My songs they be of Cinthia’s prayse,
I weare her rings on holly-dayes.
[Pg 311]
My songs are about Cynthia’s praise,
I wear her rings on holidays.
When a noble Venetian married in the seventeenth century, a day was appointed for giving the bride a ring, and the ceremony was performed in her house, in the presence of relations and friends. The ring-giving was followed by the usual sacrament in church.
When a noble Venetian got married in the seventeenth century, a day was set for giving the bride a ring, and the ceremony took place at her house, in front of family and friends. The ring ceremony was followed by the usual church sacrament.
In modern Greece, two rings, one of gold and the other of silver, are interchanged at the betrothal, which takes place as follows:—The priest, remaining in the sacrarium, delivers to the persons to be betrothed, and who are standing without the sacred doors, lighted candles into the hands of each, and then returns with them into the body of the church. Here, after prayers have been said, two rings are brought out, of gold and silver respectively, which had previously been placed upon the altar to be dedicated and consecrated, and the priest gives the gold ring to the man, and the silver ring to the woman, repeating three times this form of words: ‘The servant of God, M., espouses the handmaid of God, N., in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, now and ever, and to endless ages, Amen.’
In modern Greece, during a betrothal, two rings—one gold and the other silver—are exchanged. The ceremony goes like this: the priest, who stays in the sanctuary, hands each person to be engaged a lit candle while they stand outside the sacred doors. After that, he leads them back into the main part of the church. Once prayers are said, two rings, one gold and one silver, are brought out. These rings were placed on the altar earlier to be blessed. The priest gives the gold ring to the man and the silver ring to the woman, repeating this phrase three times: ‘The servant of God, M., takes the handmaid of God, N., in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, now and forever, and to endless ages, Amen.’
After a threefold repetition of the same words to the woman, the rings are put on the right-hand finger, and are taken off, and interchanged by the bridegroom’s man, both in order that the woman may not take too deeply to heart her inferiority, which the less costly material of the ring seems to hint at, as also to confirm the mutual right and possession of property, either present or future.
After repeating the same words three times to the woman, the rings are placed on the right hand and then taken off and swapped by the groom's representative. This is done to ensure that the woman doesn’t feel too inferior, which could be suggested by the less expensive material of the ring, and also to affirm their mutual rights and ownership of property, whether it’s current or future.
The ring ceremony in Russian marriages differs materially from that of English usage. In the first place, there are two rings, and these are changed three times. The[Pg 312] man places the ring first on the woman’s finger, then the priest changes the man’s ring, and places it on her finger, and then again the priest and the man join and place the ring where it is to remain for life.
The ring ceremony in Russian weddings is quite different from the English tradition. First of all, there are two rings, and they are exchanged three times. The[Pg 312] man puts the ring on the woman’s finger first, then the priest swaps the man’s ring and puts it on her finger, and finally, both the priest and the man together place the ring where it will stay for life.
Have these three changes anything in connection with a peculiarity in Russian legends of the ever-predominating number ‘three’? Thus fathers are said usually to have three sons, the heroes and knights-errant ride through three times nine empires; the bravest are always thirty-three years old; they achieve their deeds only on the third attempt. Or, are the three changes emblematic of the Trinity?
Have these three changes have any connection to the unique aspect of Russian legends regarding the recurring number ‘three’? For example, fathers are typically said to have three sons, heroes and knights-errant journey through three times nine empires; the bravest are always thirty-three years old; they accomplish their feats only on the third try. Or, do the three changes symbolize the Trinity?
At the Russian marriages of the Imperial family the rings are exchanged by a third person. At the wedding of the Duke of Edinburgh and the Grand Duchess Marie Alexandrovna, daughter of the Emperor of Russia (January 23, 1874), the master of the ceremonies carried the marriage rings on plates of gold, and placed them on the altar. The confessor of the Emperor and Empress then received the rings from the Archipretres of the court, and, whilst a prayer was being said, placed them upon the fingers of the bride and bridegroom, when the Metropolitan began the office.
At Russian royal weddings, a third party exchanges the rings. During the wedding of the Duke of Edinburgh and Grand Duchess Marie Alexandrovna, the daughter of the Emperor of Russia (January 23, 1874), the master of ceremonies brought the wedding rings on gold plates and placed them on the altar. The Emperor and Empress's confessor then received the rings from the court's Archpriest and, while a prayer was said, placed them on the fingers of the bride and groom as the Metropolitan began the ceremony.
In Spain the gift of a ring is looked upon as a promise of marriage, and is considered sufficient proof to enable a maiden to claim her husband.
In Spain, giving a ring is seen as a promise of marriage and is considered enough proof for a woman to claim her husband.
Among the Armenians (observes Madame de Barrera) children are betrothed from their earliest youth, sometimes when only three years old, sometimes as soon as born. When the mothers on both sides have agreed to marry their son and daughter, they propose the union to their husbands, who always sanction the choice of the wives. The mother of the boy then goes to the friends of the girl, with two old[Pg 313] women and a priest, and presents to the infant maiden a ring from the future bridegroom. The boy is then brought, and the priest reads a portion of the Scripture, and blesses the parties. The parents of the girl make the priest a present, in accordance with their means; refreshments are partaken of by the company, and this constitutes the ceremonies of the betrothals. Should the betrothals take place during the infancy of the contracting parties, and even should twenty years elapse before the boy can claim his bride, he must every year, from the day he gives the ring, send his mistress at Easter a new dress, &c.
Among the Armenians (Madame de Barrera notes), children are engaged from a very young age, sometimes even at three years old or right after they're born. When the mothers of both families agree to marry off their son and daughter, they bring the idea to their husbands, who always approve their wives' choices. The boy’s mother then visits the girl’s family, accompanied by two elderly women and a priest, and presents a ring to the infant girl from her future groom. The boy is then brought in, and the priest reads a part of the Scripture and blesses the couple. The girl's parents give the priest a gift, depending on their means; everyone enjoys some refreshments, and this makes up the engagement ceremony. If the engagement happens while the couple is still infants, and even if it takes twenty years for the boy to claim his bride, he must send her a new dress and other gifts every Easter starting from the day he gives her the ring.
The olden matrimonial Gemmel, or Gemmow, ring was a kind of double ring, curiously made. There were links within each other, and though generally double, they were, by a further refinement, made triple, or even more complicated; thus Herrick writes:—
The old-fashioned matrimonial Gemmel, or Gemmow, ring was a type of double ring, made in an interesting way. There were links intertwined with each other, and although they were usually double, they could also be made triple or even more complex; as Herrick writes:—
Thou sent’st to me a true love-knot, but I
Return a ring of jimmals, to imply
Thy love had one knot, mine a triple tye.
You sent me a true love-knot, but I
Return a ring of links, to suggest
Your love had one knot, mine a triple tie.
Ray, among his north-country words, explains ‘jimmers’ as ‘jointed hinges,’ and adds, ‘in other parts called wing-hinges.’
Ray, in his northern dialect, explains ‘jimmers’ as ‘jointed hinges,’ and adds, ‘in other areas referred to as wing-hinges.’
At a meeting of the Archæological Institute, in November 1851, the Rev. W. C. Bingham exhibited a silver gemmel-ring of singular fashion, date fourteenth century, found in Dorsetshire, the hoop formed in two portions, so that a moiety of the letters composing the legend, ✠ Ave Mari, appears on each, and it only becomes legible when they are brought together side by side. Each demi-hoop is surmounted by a projecting neck and a small globular knob, so that the ring appears to have a bifid head. The two portions of this ring are not intertwined, and as no adjustment[Pg 314] now appears by which they might be kept together in proper juxtaposition, it is possible that in this instance it was intended that each of the affianced parties should retain a moiety of the gemmel.
At a meeting of the Archaeological Institute in November 1851, Rev. W. C. Bingham showcased a uniquely designed silver gemmel ring from the fourteenth century, discovered in Dorsetshire. The band is made of two parts, so half of the letters in the inscription, ✠ Hail Mary, appears on each side, and it only becomes clear when the two halves are placed side by side. Each half is topped with a protruding neck and a small, round knob, giving the ring a split appearance. The two parts of this ring aren't intertwined, and since there’s no way to secure them together properly, it’s likely that it was meant for each engaged partner to keep half of the gemmel.
There is an allusion to the ‘joint’ ring in Dryden’s play of ‘Don Sebastian’:—
There is a reference to the ‘joint’ ring in Dryden’s play, ‘Don Sebastian’:—
A curious artist wrought ’em,
With joynts so close as not to be perceived;
Yet are they both each other’s counterpart.
(Her part had Juan inscribed, and his, had Zayda—
You know those names were theirs:) and in the midst
A heart divided in two halves was placed.
Now if the rivets of those rings, inclos’d,
Fit not each other, I have forged this lye,
But if they join, you must for ever part.
A curious artist created them,
With joints so tight they’re barely visible;
Yet they’re each other’s perfect match.
(Her part had Juan engraved, and his had Zayda—
You know those names belonged to them:) and in the center
A heart split in two halves was placed.
Now if the rivets of those rings, enclosed,
Don’t fit together, I have crafted this lie,
But if they do connect, you must part forever.
A ring in the Londesborough Collection illustrates this passage. It parts into three hoops, secured on a pivot; the toothed edge of the central hoop forming an ornamental centre to the hoop of the ring, and having two hearts in the middle; a hand is affixed to the side of the upper and lower hoop; the fingers slightly raised, so that when the hoops are brought together they link in each other, and close over the hearts, securing all firmly.
A ring from the Londesborough Collection shows this design. It splits into three bands, secured on a pivot; the notched edge of the central band creates a decorative center for the ring, featuring two hearts in the middle. A hand is attached to the sides of the upper and lower bands; the fingers are slightly raised, so when the bands come together, they interlock and cover the hearts, securing everything tightly.
Jointed betrothal ring.
Connected engagement ring.
[Pg 315]The late Mr. Crofton Croker, in his privately-printed catalogue of Lady Londesborough’s Collection, gives the following account of the use to which the ring has been put: ‘There can be little doubt, from the specimens that have come under observation, that it had been used as a betrothing ring by an officer of the King’s German Legion with some Irish lady, and that the notched ring was retained by some confidential female friend, who was present as a witness at the betrothal ceremony—usually one of the most solemn and private character—and at which, over the Holy Bible, placed before the witness, both the man and the woman broke away the upper and lower rings from the centre one, which was held by the intermediate person. It would appear that the parties were subsequently married, when it was usual, as a proof that their pledge had been fulfilled, to return to the witness or witnesses to the contract the two rings which the betrothed had respectively worn until married; and thus the three rings, which had been separated, became reunited, as in the present instance.’
[Pg 315]The late Mr. Crofton Croker, in his privately printed catalog of Lady Londesborough’s Collection, provides the following account of how the ring was used: ‘There’s little doubt, based on the examples that have been observed, that it served as a betrothal ring from an officer of the King’s German Legion to some Irish lady. The notched ring was kept by a close female friend who witnessed the betrothal ceremony—usually one of the most serious and private occasions. During this ceremony, held over the Holy Bible placed before the witness, both the man and the woman would break away the upper and lower rings from the center one, which was held by the intermediary. It seems the couple later got married, and as proof that their promise was fulfilled, they returned the two rings they had worn to the witness or witnesses of the agreement. This way, the three rings that had been separated were reunited, as seen in the current instance.’
A gemmel-ring, of which a representation is given (page 316), was dug up in 1800, at Horselydown, Surrey, found among some Roman and English remains and skeletons of human bodies, about nine feet below the surface. The ring is constructed in twin or double hoops, one side being flat, the other convex. On the lower hand is represented a heart. On the flat side of the hoops are engraved in Roman capitals, ‘Usé de Vertu.’ This ring is probably not later than Queen Elizabeth’s reign.
A gemel ring, shown on page 316, was discovered in 1800 at Horselydown, Surrey, among some Roman and English artifacts and human skeletons, about nine feet underground. The ring features twin or double hoops, with one side flat and the other rounded. A heart is depicted on the underside. The flat side of the hoops is engraved in Roman capitals, saying ‘Usé de Vertu.’ This ring likely dates back to the time of Queen Elizabeth.
A plain gemmel wedding-ring, with an inscription inside each hoop, which the Prince Regent, afterwards George IV., had given to Mrs. Fitzherbert, was exhibited, with the lady’s[Pg 316] miniature, at the Loan Collection of precious objects at the South Kensington Museum in 1872.
A simple gold wedding ring, engraved on the inside of each band, that the Prince Regent, later known as George IV, had given to Mrs. Fitzherbert, was displayed alongside the lady's[Pg 316] miniature at the Loan Collection of precious objects at the South Kensington Museum in 1872.
Gemmel-ring, found at Horselydown.
Gemmel ring, found at Horselydown.
This practice of dividing the betrothal rings has its origin from ancient times, and reminds us of the practice among the Franks of breaking the sou d’or in two pieces, in sign of a sacred engagement. Thus we read of Childeric, King of France, when in exile, wishing to know when he might return to his country, dividing the sou d’or, keeping one part, and giving the other to a trusty friend, who tells him: ‘When I send to you this half, and you find that it unites with the other, you will understand that you can return.’ The propitious moment having arrived, Childeric received the token, and, returning, was re-established in his dominions.[64]
This practice of splitting the betrothal rings goes back to ancient times and reminds us of how the Franks used to break the sou d’or into two pieces to symbolize a sacred engagement. We read about Childeric, the King of France, who, when exiled, wanted to know when he could go back home. He divided the sou d’or, keeping one half and giving the other to a trusted friend, who told him, ‘When I send you this half, and you find that it fits with the other, you’ll know it’s time to return.’ When the right moment came, Childeric got the token back and returned, reclaiming his kingdom.[64]
[Pg 317]From other passages in ‘Don Sebastian,’ it appears that one of the two rings was worn by Sebastian’s father, the other by Almeyda’s mother, as pledges of love. Sebastian takes off his ring, which had been placed on his finger by his dying father; Almeyda does the same with hers, which had been given to her by her mother at parting, and Alvarez unscrews both the rings and fits one half to the other.
[Pg 317]From other parts of ‘Don Sebastian,’ it seems that one of the two rings was worn by Sebastian’s dad and the other by Almeyda’s mom as symbols of love. Sebastian removes his ring, which his dying father had put on his finger; Almeyda does the same with hers, which her mother gave her when they parted, and Alvarez unscrews both rings and fits one half to the other.
In Sir Henry Ellis’s ‘Original Letters Illustrative of English History’ (series ii. vol. ii. page 290) we have a curious anecdote in connection with linked rings. Lady Catherine Grey (a sister of Lady Jane Grey) married the Earl of Hertford, much to the displeasure of Queen Elizabeth, who sent the bridegroom to the Tower, and subjected the countess to great hardships. They were both exposed to an ordeal of examination to prove the validity of the marriage, and amongst other evidence Lady Catherine exhibited a ring which she declared had been used at the marriage ceremony.
In Sir Henry Ellis’s ‘Original Letters Illustrative of English History’ (series ii. vol. ii. page 290), there’s an interesting story about linked rings. Lady Catherine Grey (sister of Lady Jane Grey) married the Earl of Hertford, which upset Queen Elizabeth. The queen had the groom sent to the Tower and put the countess through a lot of hardship. They both faced intense questioning to prove the marriage was valid, and as part of the evidence, Lady Catherine presented a ring that she claimed was used in the wedding ceremony.
It was of gold, and consisted of five links, on four of which were engraved as many verses of the Earl’s composition, expressing the assurance of his lasting faith and love, and the ring could, apparently, have been prepared for no other purpose than that of serving as their marriage-ring.
It was made of gold and had five links, four of which were engraved with verses written by the Earl, expressing his unwavering faith and love. The ring seemed to have been specifically created to serve as their wedding ring.
The judgment of the commissioners appointed to examine into the marriage was to dissolve it, and it was so pronounced in the Bishop of London’s palace in 1562. Lady Hertford sank under this cruel conduct of the Queen, and on her dying bed called to her attendants to[Pg 318] bring her the box in which her wedding-ring was. She first took from it a ring with a pointed diamond in it, and said to Sir Owen Hopton (at whose house, Cockfield Hall, Suffolk, she had been staying): ‘Here, Sir Owen, deliver this unto my lord; it is the ring that I received of him, and gave myself unto him, and gave him my faith.’
The judgment of the commissioners assigned to investigate the marriage was to annul it, and this was declared in the Bishop of London’s palace in 1562. Lady Hertford was devastated by the Queen's harsh treatment, and on her deathbed, she called her attendants to[Pg 318] bring her the box containing her wedding ring. She first took out a ring with a pointed diamond and said to Sir Owen Hopton (at whose house, Cockfield Hall, Suffolk, she had been staying): ‘Here, Sir Owen, please give this to my lord; it is the ring I received from him, with which I committed myself to him, and pledged my faith to him.’
‘What say you, madam,’ answered Sir Owen, ‘was this your wedding-ring?’
“What do you say, madam,” replied Sir Owen, “was this your wedding ring?”
‘No, Sir Owen, this is the ring of my assurance unto my lord, and there is my wedding-ring,’ taking another ring of gold out of the box. This consisted of five links, having engraved in it the verses of the Earl’s composition, which she had exhibited to the commissioners of inquiry. (See chapter on ‘Posy, Inscription, and Motto Rings.’)
‘No, Sir Owen, this is the ring I promised my lord, and here is my wedding ring,’ she said, taking out another gold ring from the box. This one had five links and was engraved with the verses of the Earl's composition, which she had shown to the commissioners of inquiry. (See chapter on ‘Posy, Inscription, and Motto Rings.’)
‘Deliver this,’ she said, ‘unto my lord, and pray him, as I have been a faithful and true wife, that he would be a loving and natural father unto my children, to whom I give the same blessing that God gave unto Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.’ (See chapter on ‘Remarkable Rings.’)
‘Deliver this,’ she said, ‘to my lord, and ask him, since I have been a faithful and true wife, to be a loving and caring father to my children, to whom I give the same blessing that God gave to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.’ (See chapter on ‘Remarkable Rings.’)
Ring with representation of Lucretia.
Ring featuring Lucretia's representation.
A gemmel-ring of the fifteenth century, in the Londesborough Collection, bears an engraved head of Lucretia, the same kind as that mentioned by Shakspeare (‘Twelfth Night,’ act ii. sc. v.) where Malvolio, breaking open the letter, purporting to be in the handwriting of his mistress, says:—
A gemel ring from the fifteenth century, in the Londesborough Collection, features an engraved head of Lucretia, similar to what’s mentioned by Shakespeare (‘Twelfth Night,’ act ii. sc. v.) when Malvolio, opening the letter supposedly written by his mistress, says:—
By your leave, wax. Soft! and the impressure her Lucrece, with which she uses to seal.
By your permission, wax. Soft! and the impression of her Lucrece, with which she usually seals.
[Pg 319]Lucretia is seen grasping her dagger. The clasped hands, adopted on the gemmel-rings, became a frequent emblem on the solid wedding-ring.
[Pg 319]Lucretia is shown holding her dagger. The clasped hands used on the gemmel rings became a common symbol on the sturdy wedding ring.
Wedding-ring of Sir Thomas Gresham.
Sir Thomas Gresham's wedding ring.
The betrothal or wedding ring of Sir Thomas Gresham (1544) engraved in Burgon’s life of that eminent merchant prince, opens horizontally, thus forming a double ring of gold, linked together in the form of a gemmel; in one half is set a white stone, in the other a red; in the interior of each half is a cavity, in one of which is a small figure of a child in gold, enamelled; ‘QVOD DEVS CONIVNSIT’ is engraved on one half, and ‘HOMO NON SEPARET’ on the other.
The wedding ring of Sir Thomas Gresham (1544), described in Burgon’s biography of that notable merchant prince, opens horizontally, creating a double ring of gold that is linked together in a gemmel style. One half contains a white stone, while the other has a red one. Each half has an interior cavity, with a small gold enamel figure of a child in one of them. One half is engraved with ‘What God has joined together’ and the other with ‘HUMANITY CANNOT BE DIVIDED’.
This interesting relic was formerly in the possession of the Thruston family, at Weston Hall, Suffolk, and was exhibited at the Society of Antiquaries (April 1862) by Granville Leveson Gower, Esq.
This intriguing artifact used to belong to the Thruston family at Weston Hall in Suffolk and was displayed at the Society of Antiquaries in April 1862 by Granville Leveson Gower, Esq.
A gemmel-ring of the sixteenth century, found in the Thames, is in the Londesborough Collection. Originally gilt, it is of silver: two hands are clasped; on the opposite side two quatrefoils spring from a heart engraved: ‘Help God!’ or ‘God help!’
A gemel ring from the sixteenth century, discovered in the Thames, is part of the Londesborough Collection. It was originally gold-plated and is made of silver: two hands are clasped together; on the other side, two quatrefoils emerge from a heart that’s engraved with the words: ‘Help God!’ or ‘God help!’
Gemmel-ring.
Gemmel ring.
A remarkably fine gemmel-ring (Londesborough) is here engraved. It is set with sapphire and amethyst, the elaborate and beautiful design enriched by coloured enamels. The lower figure in the[Pg 320] representation of this ring shows it parted, displaying the inscription on the flat side of each section, which is also enriched by engraving and niello.
A beautifully crafted gemmel ring (Londesborough) is engraved here. It features sapphire and amethyst, with an intricate and stunning design enhanced by colorful enamels. The lower image in the[Pg 320] depiction of this ring shows it separated, revealing the inscription on the flat side of each section, which is also decorated with engraving and niello.
The clasped hands (originating from the ancient Romans), adopted on the gemmel-rings, we are told in Chambers’s ‘Book of Days,’ are still the fashion, and in constant use in that curious local community of fishermen inhabiting the Claddugh at Galway on the western coast. They number with their families between five and six thousand, and are particularly exclusive in their tastes and habits; rarely intermarrying with others than their own people. The wedding-ring is an heirloom in the family; it is regularly transferred from the mother to the daughter who is first married, and so passes to her descendants. Many of these gemmel-rings, still worn there, are very old.
The clasped hands (which come from the ancient Romans) have been adopted on gemmel rings, as mentioned in Chambers’s ‘Book of Days.’ They are still in style and commonly used in the unique local community of fishermen living in the Claddagh at Galway on the western coast. Their population, including families, ranges between five and six thousand and they are quite selective in their preferences and lifestyles, rarely marrying outside their own group. The wedding ring is a family heirloom; it is regularly passed down from mother to the first daughter who gets married, continuing through her descendants. Many of these gemmel rings still worn today are very old.
‘Claddugh’ ring.
‘Claddagh’ ring.
Mr. Mackenzie E. C. Walcot, F.S.A., etc., in ‘Notes and Queries,’ writes: ‘A ring of gold, about the time of the thirteenth century, was found at Burbage, near Marlborough, and, apparently, from the clasped hands on the lower side, a gemmel or betrothal ring, has a sapphire uncut, held by four bent cramps, and on the circle the following letters in two lines, divided by punctuation in the form of ×. The letters, of course, are of the period:—
Mr. Mackenzie E. C. Walcot, F.S.A., etc., in ‘Notes and Queries,’ writes: ‘A gold ring, dating back to the thirteenth century, was discovered at Burbage, near Marlborough. From the clasped hands on the underside, it seems to be a gemmel or betrothal ring. It features an uncut sapphire secured by four bent claws, and around the band are the following letters arranged in two lines, separated by punctuation in the form of ×. The letters are, of course, from that era:—
ⱯɅ NI WⱯ IⱯ
× × ×
IE AU AL HN
ⱯɅ NI WⱯ IⱯ
× × ×
IE AU AL HN
[Pg 321]I have alluded to sacred inscriptions on some betrothal rings. The following engraving refers to one in the Londesborough Collection, described in page 306.
[Pg 321]I have mentioned religious engravings on certain engagement rings. The engraving below refers to one in the Londesborough Collection, detailed on page 306.
Betrothal ring with sacred inscription.
Engagement ring with sacred inscription.
In the Braybrooke Collection is a splendid gold gemmel ring, with enamelled and jewelled twin or double hoops, which play one within another, like the links of a chain. Each hoop has one of its sides convex, the other flat, and each is set with a stone, one a fine ruby, the other an aquamarine, or beryl, so that, upon bringing together the flat surfaces of the hoops the latter immediately unite in one ring, and as they close, the stones slide into contact, forming a head to the whole. The inside flat surfaces are inscribed with the words ‘Quod Deus conjunxit, homo non separet,’ part on one hoop, part on the other, so as to be legible when these are opened, but entirely concealed when they are reunited in one ring. This seems to be an exception to the general rule, with respect to rings of the same denomination, since the hoops cannot be dissevered according to the usual custom at betrothals. Nares, in his ‘Glossary,’ observes that the name ‘gimmal’ was preserved to rings made triple, or even more complimentary. This splendid specimen is of Italian workmanship, dating about the end of the fifteenth or the beginning of the sixteenth century.
In the Braybrooke Collection, there is a beautiful gold gemmel ring, featuring enameled and jeweled twin hoops that intertwine like chain links. Each hoop has one side that is curved and the other flat, with one set with a fine ruby and the other with an aquamarine or beryl. When the flat surfaces of the hoops are brought together, they seamlessly unite into one ring, and as they close, the stones touch, creating a centerpiece for the entire piece. The inside flat surfaces are engraved with the words ‘Quod Deus conjunxit, homo non separet,’ split between the two hoops, making them readable when the hoops are apart but completely hidden when they form one ring. This design appears to break the usual custom for rings of this type, as the hoops cannot be separated according to traditional practices at betrothals. Nares, in his ‘Glossary,’ notes that the term ‘gimmal’ was originally used for rings made in sets of three or more. This exquisite piece showcases Italian craftsmanship, dating from the late fifteenth to early sixteenth century.
At a meeting of the Archæological Institute in March 1863 the Rev. John Beck exhibited some curious specimens[Pg 322] of linked or ‘puzzle-rings.’ One of gold consists of seven slender rings linked together, which, when properly adjusted, combine in a knot. Another, of silver, consists of four slight rings, set with a blue stone, and ornamented with flowers of forget-me-not. A third, also of silver, has nine rings, which, when intertwined, unite so as to present a fede as the head of the ring.
At a meeting of the Archaeological Institute in March 1863, Rev. John Beck showcased some interesting examples[Pg 322] of linked or 'puzzle-rings.' One made of gold has seven slender rings interconnected, which, when positioned correctly, form a knot. Another one, made of silver, contains four delicate rings, inlaid with a blue stone, and decorated with forget-me-not flowers. A third ring, also silver, features nine rings that, when entwined, come together to show a fede as the ring's centerpiece.
The French term for the hooped rings is foi, alliance, which last word in the ‘Dictionnaire de Trevoux’ is defined to be a ring ‘que l’accordé donne à son accordée, où il y a un fil d’or et un fil d’argent.’
The French term for the hooped rings is foi, alliance, which is defined in the ‘Dictionnaire de Trevoux’ as a ring ‘that the groom gives to his bride, where there is a gold thread and a silver thread.’
Devices on Wedding-rings.
Wedding ring devices.
CHAPTER VI.
TOKEN RINGS.
Token Rings.
Rings as ‘tokens’ date from very early times. We are told that Clovis, King of the Franks, in the latter part of the fifth century, wishing to marry Clotilde, niece of Gondebauld, King of Burgundy, deputed Aurelianus, in whom he had perfect confidence, to ascertain whether the maiden had any predilection for him. The messenger travelled in very humble guise, and arrived at the castle in Burgundy where Clotilde resided. The princess, however, knew beforehand his mission, and was prepared to receive him. She concealed this knowledge, however, and treated him as an ordinary mendicant, receiving him hospitably, and, according to the custom of those times, even washing his feet. While this operation was being performed, Aurelianus said: ‘Princess, if you will permit me, I will tell you of strange things.’
Rings as 'tokens' have been around since ancient times. We hear that Clovis, the King of the Franks, in the late fifth century, wanted to marry Clotilde, the niece of Gondebauld, the King of Burgundy. He sent Aurelianus, someone he completely trusted, to find out if the young woman had any interest in him. The messenger arrived dressed very humbly at the castle in Burgundy where Clotilde lived. However, the princess already knew about his mission and was ready to meet him. She kept this knowledge hidden and treated him like an ordinary beggar, welcoming him warmly and, as was the custom back then, even washing his feet. While this was happening, Aurelianus said, “Princess, if you allow me, I’d like to tell you about some strange things.”
‘Speak,’ replied Clotilde.
"Go ahead," Clotilde replied.
‘Clovis, King of the Franks, has sent me to announce his wish to marry you. Is it your desire that I should ask permission from your father?’
‘Clovis, King of the Franks, has sent me to let you know he wants to marry you. Do you want me to ask your father for permission?’
‘What proof can you give me of the truth of your mission?’
‘What proof can you provide to support the truth of your mission?’
‘The ring of my Sovereign, which he entrusted me with for this object.’
‘The ring of my Sovereign, which he gave me for this purpose.’
[Pg 324]‘But,’ said Clotilde, ‘I am a Christian, and I cannot marry a pagan. If, however, it is the will of God that I should become the wife of Clovis, I am content.’
[Pg 324]“But,” Clotilde said, “I’m a Christian, and I can’t marry a pagan. If it’s God’s will for me to be Clovis’s wife, then I accept that.”
Thus saying, she received the ring, and gave Aurelianus her own ring in return, and after some difficulties with Gondebauld were overcome, Aurelianus married Clotilde in the name of King Clovis, by the gift of ‘one sou and one denier,’ as the price of her liberty, according to the custom of that period.
Thus saying, she took the ring and gave Aurelianus her own ring in return. After overcoming some challenges with Gondebauld, Aurelianus married Clotilde in the name of King Clovis, paying 'one sou and one denier' as the price for her freedom, following the customs of that time.
If the old historians are to be credited, this is the earliest instance of a marriage by proxy.
If we can trust the old historians, this is the first known case of a marriage by proxy.
Edward the First, in 1297, presented Margaret, his fourth daughter, with a golden pyx, in which he deposited a ring, the token of his unfailing love. He placed it in her hands with a solemn benediction, when she bade him farewell, preparatory to rejoining her husband at Brussels.
Edward the First, in 1297, gave his fourth daughter Margaret a golden pyx, inside which he put a ring, symbolizing his everlasting love. He placed it in her hands with a serious blessing as she said goodbye to him, getting ready to reunite with her husband in Brussels.
Hardyng, in his ‘Chronicles,’ relates a pretty story of Oswald, King of Northumberland (seventh century), and Kineburg, his consort. A hermit, of extraordinary sanctity, desirous of ascertaining whether any person surpassed himself in purity of life, was, in answer to his meditation, told by revelation ‘that King Oswald was more holy, though he had wedded a wife.’ The pious hermit accordingly repaired to the king, with holy zeal, to be informed concerning his course of life. On which Oswald, in the true spirit of that love and confidence which reposed on the purity and virtue of his beloved wife, referred the hermit to her, bidding him carry to her his ring, with his command that she should entertain him (the hermit) as though he were her own royal spouse. The Queen, who had the greatest veneration for her husband, failed not to obey his[Pg 325] instructions, but, while she shared with the holy man the regal repast, showed him that it consisted only of bread and water, no other food being permitted to him; thus exhibiting an example of that self-denial by which purity of life is alone attainable. When night came, the hermit was more surprised than ever when the queen ordered him to be put into a cold-water bath, according to the custom of the King whom he wished to imitate. Gladly, and yet right early in the morning, did the venerable man take leave of the queen; and, having restored to King Oswald his ring, frankly acknowledged that his whole entire life was not so holy as one of the King’s days and nights. I must observe, however, that, with this rigid observance of sobriety and virtue, King Oswald is the first prince of our Saxon rulers who is recorded to have been served in silver dishes. We can easily understand a hermit’s repugnance to bathing of any kind.
Hardyng, in his ‘Chronicles,’ tells a nice story about Oswald, King of Northumberland (seventh century), and his wife, Kineburg. A hermit, known for his great holiness and wanting to find out if anyone was more pure than he was, received a revelation during his meditation saying that King Oswald was more holy, even though he was married. The devout hermit then went to see the king, eager to learn about his life. Oswald, trusting in the purity and virtue of his beloved wife, directed the hermit to her, asking him to take her his ring and telling her to treat the hermit as if he were her own royal husband. The Queen, who held her husband in the highest regard, promptly followed his instructions, and while sharing a royal meal with the holy man, she showed him that it consisted only of bread and water, as no other food was allowed for him; thus setting an example of the self-denial needed for a pure life. When night fell, the hermit was astonished when the queen ordered him to take a cold-water bath, following the custom of the king he admired. Happily, and very early the next morning, the venerable man took his leave of the queen; and after returning King Oswald's ring, he openly admitted that his entire life was not as holy as just one of the king's days and nights. I should note, though, that despite this strict adherence to sobriety and virtue, King Oswald is the first of our Saxon rulers recorded to have been served on silver dishes. We can easily understand why a hermit would be against any kind of bathing.
Some other instances of rings as tokens are related by mediæval historians. We are told by Matthew Paris that Pope Innocent, desiring to gain King John over to favour his plans, and knowing that he was covetous, and a diligent seeker after costly jewels, sent him four gold rings adorned with precious stones, in token that the rotundity of the rings signified eternity; ‘therefore your royal discretion may be led by the form of them to pray for a passage from earthly to heavenly, from temporal to eternal things. The number of four, which is a square number, denotes the firmness of mind which is neither depressed in adversity nor elated in prosperity; which will then be fulfilled, when it is based on the four principal virtues, namely—justice, fortitude, prudence, and virtue.... Moreover, the greenness of the emerald denotes faith; the clearness of the sapphire, hope;[Pg 326] the redness of the pomegranate denotes charity, and the purity of the topaz, good works.... In the emerald, therefore, you have what to believe; in the sapphire, what to hope for; in the pomegranate, what to love; and in the topaz, what to practise; that you ascend from one virtue to another, until you see the Lord in Zion.’
Some other examples of rings as symbols are recounted by medieval historians. Matthew Paris tells us that Pope Innocent, wanting to win King John over to support his plans, and knowing that John was greedy and always in search of expensive jewels, sent him four gold rings decorated with precious stones. This was intended to signify that the circular shape of the rings represented eternity; ‘therefore, your royal judgment may be inspired by their form to pray for a transition from earthly to heavenly, from temporary to eternal matters. The number four, which represents a square, symbolizes a steady mind that is not downcast in hard times nor overly joyful in good times; this will be achieved when it is grounded in the four main virtues: justice, courage, wisdom, and virtue.... Furthermore, the green of the emerald represents faith; the clarity of the sapphire stands for hope; the red of the pomegranate symbolizes love, and the purity of the topaz represents good deeds.... In the emerald, you find what to believe in; in the sapphire, what to hope for; in the pomegranate, what to love; and in the topaz, what to practice; so that you rise from one virtue to another until you see the Lord in Zion.’
Henry the Fourth, Emperor of Germany, was cruelly treated by his son, who conspired against him, and forced him to abdicate the throne. The degraded emperor is said to have been reduced by famine to such extremities that he ate the leather of his boots for hunger. He sent his ring and sword as his last token of forgiveness to his rebel son, with the simple and touching message: ‘If thou hadst left me more, I would have sent more to thee.’
Henry IV, Emperor of Germany, was harshly treated by his son, who plotted against him and forced him to give up the throne. The fallen emperor is said to have been driven by starvation to such desperation that he ate the leather from his boots out of hunger. He sent his ring and sword as his final gesture of forgiveness to his rebellious son, with the simple and heartfelt message: ‘If you had left me more, I would have sent more to you.’
Thomas Chester, a writer for the minstrels in the reign of Henry the Sixth, and who is stated to have translated the ‘Erle of Tolouse,’ a metrical romance, relates that an Earl of this house, disguised in pilgrim’s weeds, asked alms of the empress, consort of Diocletian, Emperor of Germany, to whom his secret is known, and who gives him forty florins and a ring. He receives the latter present with the greatest satisfaction, and, although obliged to return home, comforts himself with this reflection:—
Thomas Chester, a writer for the performers during the reign of Henry the Sixth, is said to have translated the ‘Earl of Toulouse,’ a poetic romance. He tells that an Earl from this family, dressed as a pilgrim, asked the empress, the wife of Diocletian, Emperor of Germany, for charity. She, knowing his secret, gives him forty florins and a ring. He receives the ring with great pleasure and, even though he has to go back home, finds comfort in this thought:—
Well is me I have thy grace
Of the to hav thys thyng,
If ever I hav grace of the
That any love between us be
This may be a tokenyng.
Well, I have your grace
To have this thing,
If I ever have the grace
That there is any love between us,
This might be a sign.
The empress, on the false accusation of two knights, is thrown into prison. The Earl of Toulouse, disguised as a monk, obtains permission to act as her confessor; the empress, not knowing him in his present disguise, confesses[Pg 327] that she once gave a ring to the ‘Erle.’ On this he challenges the two knights, and, of course, overcomes them in combat. On the death of the emperor he marries the empress.
The empress is imprisoned based on the false accusations of two knights. The Earl of Toulouse, disguised as a monk, gets permission to be her confessor; the empress, not recognizing him in his disguise, confesses[Pg 327] that she once gave a ring to the ‘Earl.’ He then challenges the two knights and, of course, defeats them in combat. After the emperor's death, he marries the empress.
This story reminds us of the lines in ‘Marmion,’ by Sir Walter Scott:—
This story reminds us of the lines in ‘Marmion,’ by Sir Walter Scott:—
The fair Queen of France
Sent him a turquoise ring and glove,
And charged him as her knight and love
For her to break a lance:
The gorgeous Queen of France
Sent him a turquoise ring and a glove,
And appointed him as her knight and love
To stand up for her:
In the ‘Lays’ of Marie, the Princess Guilliadun, having fallen in love with Sir Eliduc, sends him as tokens a ring and a rich girdle.
In Marie's 'Lays,' Princess Guilliadun, in love with Sir Eliduc, sends him a ring and an ornate belt as tokens.
In the ‘Lyfe of Ipomydon,’ the manuscript of which is in the Harleian Collection at the British Museum, the queen gives her son a ring-token:—
In the 'Lyfe of Ipomydon,' the manuscript of which is in the Harleian Collection at the British Museum, the queen gives her son a ring-token:—
It befell upon a day,
The queen to her son gan say,
In privitie and in counsail,
‘Thou hast a brother withouten fail,
Privily gotten me upon,
Ere I was wedded to any mon.
But hastily he was done fro me,
I ne wot if he alive be,
And he me sent, this ender (last) year,
[Pg 328]A rich ring of gold full clear;
An ever he any brother had,
That I should give it him, he bade;
That where he come, among high or low,
By that ring he should him know.
Than take this ring, my son, of me:
In what country that he be,
Who that knoweth this ilke ring,
He is thy brother without lesing.’
One day,
The queen said to her son,
In private and in counsel,
‘You have a brother for sure,
Conceived secretly by me,
Before I was married to any man.
But he was taken from me quickly,
I don’t know if he’s still alive,
And he sent me, this past year,
[Pg 328]A beautiful clear gold ring;
And if he had any brother,
He instructed me to give it to him;
So that wherever he goes, among the high or low,
By that ring, he would be recognized.
So take this ring from me, my son:
In whatever country he may be,
Whoever knows this very ring,
He is your brother without a doubt.’
Ipomydon accepts the ring, and promises to spare no pains in searching for its original proprietor, who, after various adventures, is found in the person of Sir Campanys, with whom he has an encounter, during which the latter discovers his mother’s ring on the finger of Ipomydon.
Ipomydon takes the ring and promises to do whatever it takes to find its original owner, who, after several adventures, turns out to be Sir Campanys. They meet, and during their encounter, Sir Campanys notices his mother’s ring on Ipomydon’s finger.
In the romance of ‘Sir Isumbras,’ when he and his wife and child are taken prisoners by the ‘Soudan,’ the lady, before her separation from her husband and child—
In the story of 'Sir Isumbras,' when he, his wife, and child are captured by the 'Soudan,' the lady, before being separated from her husband and child—
———callyd hir lorde to hir agayne,
A rynge was thaire takynnynge.
———called her lord to her again,
A ring was their taking.
The mother of Sir Perceval of Galles gives him a ring-token:—
The mother of Sir Perceval of Galles gives him a ring as a token:—
His moder gaffe hym a ryng,
And bad he solde agayne it bryng;
‘Sonne, this salle be oure takynnynge,
For here I salle the byde.’
His mother scolded him for it,
And told him to bring it back;
‘Son, this will be our lesson,
I'll stay here.
The knight sets forth on his travels, and soon changes the ring for another:—
The knight sets off on his journey and quickly swaps the ring for another one:—
Thofe he were of no pryde
Forthirmore ganne he glyde
Tille a chambir ther besyde,
Moo sellys to see;
Riche clothes faude he sprede
A lady slepuned on a bedde
He said, ‘forsothe a tokyne to wedde
Salle thou lefe with mee;’
[Pg 329]Ther he kyste that swete thynge,
Of hir fynger he tuke a rynge,
His aweune moder takynnynge
He lefte with that fre.
Though he was not proud,
Furthermore, he glided
To a room nearby,
It was great to see;
He spread rich clothes
A lady lay asleep on a bed
He said, ‘Indeed, a token to marry
Would you come with me?
[Pg 329]There he kissed that sweet thing,
From her finger, he took a ring,
His own mother’s token
He left with that jewel.
In the very pretty poem of ‘Lay le Fraine,’ by Marie, the lady of a knight, ‘a proud dame and malicious,’ having twins, consigns the charge of one of them to a confidential servant, to be taken away and left to the mercy of anyone who might find it. At the same time, that the child might be known to have been born of noble parents, she took a rich mantle lined with fur—
In the beautiful poem ‘Lay le Fraine’ by Marie, the lady of a knight—‘a proud and spiteful woman’—gives one of her twins to a trusted servant to be taken away and abandoned to whoever might find it. To ensure that the child would be recognized as the offspring of noble parents, she took a luxurious fur-lined mantle—
And lapped the little maiden therein,
And took a ring of gold fine,
And on her right arm it knit
With a lace of silk in plit.
And wrapped the little girl in it,
And took a fine gold ring,
And fastened it on her right arm
With a silk lace in a knot.
The child is placed in a hollow ash-tree, near a nunnery, by the maid, and on being discovered by the porter is taken to the abbess, by whom she is reared and becomes an accomplished and beautiful maiden. A rich knight falls in love with her and persuades her to live with him in his castle, to which she repairs, and
The child is placed in a hollow ash-tree, near a nunnery, by the maid, and on being discovered by the porter, she is taken to the abbess, who raises her into an accomplished and beautiful young woman. A wealthy knight falls in love with her and convinces her to move in with him at his castle, to which she goes, and
With her took she no thing
But her pel, and her ring.
With her, she took nothing
Except for her coat and her ring.
The lord, however, is induced to marry her sister, taking Le Fraine with him to the wedding, who places on her bed in her room the magnificent ‘pel,’ or mantle, by which and the ring she is discovered by her mother.
The lord, however, is persuaded to marry her sister, bringing Le Fraine with him to the wedding, who lays the beautiful 'pel,' or mantle, on her bed in her room, by which and the ring she is identified by her mother.
In the romance of the ‘Seven Wise Masters’ (Cotton MSS.) is a story, ‘The Two Dreams,’ in which a ring displays a prominent feature.
In the romance of the ‘Seven Wise Masters’ (Cotton MSS.), there’s a story called ‘The Two Dreams,’ where a ring plays a key role.
In the ballad of the ‘Lass of Lochroyan’ (‘Minstrelsy of the Scottish Border’) Lord Gregory says:—
In the ballad of the ‘Lass of Lochroyan’ (‘Minstrelsy of the Scottish Border’), Lord Gregory says:—
[Pg 330]
‘Gin thou be Annie of Lochroyan
(As I trow thou binna she),
Now tell me some of the love-token
That passed between thee and me.
‘O dinna ye mind, Lord Gregory,
As we sat at the wine,
We changed the rings from our fingers,
And I can show thee thine?
‘O yours was gude and gude enough,
But aye the best was mine;
For yours was of the gude red gowd,
But mine o’ the diamond fine.’
[Pg 330]
‘If you are Annie of Lochroyan
(As I doubt you’re not),
Now tell me some of the love tokens
That flowed between us.
‘Oh, don’t you remember, Lord Gregory,
When we were sitting with the wine,
We exchanged the rings from our fingers,
And can I show you yours?
‘Oh, yours was good and good enough,
But mine was always the best;
Because yours was made of good red gold,
"But mine was made of fine diamond."
In the ballad of ‘Cospatrick’ (the designation of the Earl of Dunbar in the days of Wallace and Bruce) we have:—
In the ballad of ‘Cospatrick’ (the title of the Earl of Dunbar during the times of Wallace and Bruce) we have:—
‘He gae to me a gay gowd ring,
And bade me keep it abune a’ thing.’
‘And what did you wi’ the gay gowd ring
I bade you keep abune a’ thing?’
‘I gae them to a ladye gay
I met in greenwood on a day.’
‘He gave me a beautiful gold ring,
And told me to value it above all else.
‘And what did you do with the beautiful gold ring
"That I told you to value above all else?"
‘I gave it to a lovely lady
I met in the woods one day.
In the ballad of ‘Prince Robert,’
In the ballad of ‘Prince Robert,’
Prince Robert has wedded a gay ladye
He has wedded her with a ring,
Prince Robert has wedded a gay ladye,
But he darna bring her hame.
Prince Robert has married a cheerful lady
He has proposed to her with a ring,
Prince Robert has married a cheerful lady,
But he can't take her back.
The Prince is poisoned, and his lady-love arrives just after the funeral, and is told:—
The prince has been poisoned, and his sweetheart arrives right after the funeral and is told:—
‘Ye’se get nane o’ his gowd, ye’se get nane o’ his gear,
Ye’se get nothing frae me.
Ye’se no get an inch o’ his good braid land,
Though your heart suld burst in three.’
[Pg 331]
‘I want nane o’ his gowd, I want nane o’ his gear,
I want nae land frae thee:
But I’ll hae the rings that’s on his finger,
For them he did promise to me.’
‘Ye’se no get the rings that’s on his finger,
Ye’se no get them frae me;
Ye’se no get the rings that’s on his finger,
An your heart suld burst in three.’
'You won’t get any of his gold, you won’t get any of his stuff,
You won’t receive anything from me.
You won't get a single inch of his good land,
Even if your heart breaks into three.
[Pg 331]
'I don't want any of his gold, I don't want any of his stuff,
I don’t want any land from you.
But I will take the rings that are on his finger,
"Because he promised them to me."
'You won't get the rings that are on his finger,
You won't get them from me;
You won’t get the rings on his finger,
Even if your heart should shatter into three.
In the ballad of ‘Broomfield Hill’ a witch-woman says to ‘a lady bright:’
In the ballad of ‘Broomfield Hill,’ a witch woman says to ‘a lady bright:’
Take ye the rings off your fingers,
Put them on his right hand,
To let him know when he doth wake,
His love was at his command.
Take the rings off your fingers,
Put them on his right hand,
To let him know when he wakes up,
He had control over his love.
The Child of Elle receives from the page of his lady-love, the ‘fayre Emmeline,’ some tokens of her affection to him in her ‘woe-begone’ state:—
The Child of Elle receives from the page of his beloved, the 'fair Emmeline,' some tokens of her affection for him in her 'mournful' state:—
And here she sends thee a ring of golde,
The last boone thou mayst have,
And biddes thee weare it for her sake,
When she is layde in grave.
And here she sends you a gold ring,
The final gift you might receive,
And asks you to wear it for her sake,
When she is buried.
The famous Guy, Earl of Warwick, after marvellous adventures abroad, returns to his own country, and becomes a hermit at Guy’s Cliff, near Warwick Castle. Falling sick, he sends a ring-token to the fair Félice. He came to his rocky dwelling,
The famous Guy, Earl of Warwick, after incredible adventures abroad, returns to his homeland and becomes a hermit at Guy’s Cliff, near Warwick Castle. Falling ill, he sends a ring as a token to the beautiful Félice. He arrived at his rocky home,
Like pilgrim poore, and was not knowne;
And there I lived a hermit’s life,
A mile and more out of the towne,
And dayle came to beg my bread
Of Pheliss, att my castle-gate,
Not known unto my loved wiffe,
Who dayle mourned for her mate:
[Pg 332]Till, at the last, I fell sore sicke,
Yea, sicke soe sore that I must dye;
I sent to her a ringe of golde,
By which she knew me presentlye.
Like a poor pilgrim, I wasn’t recognized;
And there I lived like a hermit,
A mile or more outside the town,
And every day came to ask for my food.
From Pheliss, at my castle gate,
Unknown to my dear wife,
Who mourned for her partner every day:
[Pg 332]Finally, I got really sick,
Yes, so ill that I was near death;
I sent her a gold ring,
By which she recognized me immediately.
In the romance of ‘Floire and Blanceflor,’ the young hero, on his way to Babylon, arrives at a bridge, the keeper of which has a brother in the city, to whose hospitality he wishes to recommend Floire, and for that purpose he gives him his ring. ‘Take this ring to him,’ he says, ‘and tell him from me to receive you in his best manner.’ The message was attended with complete success.
In the story of ‘Floire and Blanceflor,’ the young hero, while traveling to Babylon, comes upon a bridge. The bridge's keeper has a brother in the city, and he wants to recommend Floire to him, so he gives him his ring. “Take this ring to him,” he says, “and tell him to welcome you in his best way.” The message works perfectly.
King John is said to have made use of a ring to aid his criminal designs upon the beautiful wife of the brave Eustace de Vesci, one of the twenty-five barons appointed to enforce the observance of Magna Charta. The tyrant, hearing that Eustace de Vesci had a very beautiful wife, but far distant from court, and studying how to accomplish his licentious designs towards her, sitting at table with her husband and seeing a ring on his finger, he laid hold of it and told him that he had such another stone, which he resolved to set in gold in that very form. And having thus got the ring, he presently sent it to her in her husband’s name; by that token conjuring her, if ever she expected to see him alive, to come speedily to him. She, therefore, upon sight of the ring, gave credit to the messenger and came with all expedition. But it so happened that her husband, casually riding out, met her on the road, and, marvelling much to see her there, asked what the matter was; and when he understood how they were both deluded he resolved to find a wanton, and put her in apparel to personate his lady.
King John is said to have used a ring to further his criminal intentions regarding the beautiful wife of the courageous Eustace de Vesci, one of the twenty-five barons tasked with enforcing the terms of Magna Charta. The tyrant, upon learning that Eustace de Vesci had a stunning wife living far away from the court, schemed to satisfy his lecherous desires. While dining with her husband, he noticed a ring on Eustace’s finger, seized it, and claimed he had a similar stone that he planned to set in gold just like it. Having acquired the ring, he quickly sent it to her in her husband’s name, using it as a token to urge her to come to him quickly if she ever wanted to see her husband alive. Upon receiving the ring, she believed the messenger and hurried to see him. However, by chance, her husband was out riding and encountered her on the road. Surprised to see her there, he inquired about what was happening. When he learned how they had both been deceived, he decided to find a woman of loose morals and dress her up to impersonate his wife.
The King afterwards boasting to the injured husband himself, Eustace had the pleasure to undeceive him.
The King later bragged to the hurt husband, and Eustace took pleasure in setting him straight.
[Pg 333]When Richard III. brings his rapid wooing to a conclusion he gives the Lady Anne a ring, saying:—
[Pg 333]When Richard III wraps up his swift courtship, he hands Lady Anne a ring, saying:—
Look, how this ring encompasseth thy finger,
Even so thy breast encloseth my poor heart;
Wear both of them, for both of them are thine.
Look, how this ring surrounds your finger,
Just like your heart encloses my poor heart;
Wear both of them, because they both belong to you.
Passionate words, but too noble for a man both faithless and cruel.
Passionate words, but too lofty for a man who is both unfaithful and cruel.
Margaret, eldest daughter of Henry VII., married to James IV. of Scotland, when requiring money, sent to her royal husband, not only letters, but a token, as is seen in the Treasurer’s accounts: ‘June 30 (1504): Given to the Queen to give away, when she sent Master Livesay, Englishman, with a ring in token—18s.’ So we have later: ‘Luke of the wardrobe carried letters, with a ring, to Stirling to the Queen’s grace.’
Margaret, the eldest daughter of Henry VII, married James IV of Scotland. When she needed money, she sent her royal husband not just letters but also a token, as recorded in the Treasurer’s accounts: ‘June 30 (1504): Given to the Queen to distribute, when she sent Master Livesay, an Englishman, with a ring as a token—18s.’ Later, we also see noted: ‘Luke from the wardrobe carried letters, along with a ring, to Stirling for the Queen.’
In 1515, while under the tyranny of the Duke of Albany at Edinburgh, Margaret endeavoured to escape to Blackater, a fortress within a few miles of Berwick. She sent a faithful clerk, Robin Carr, to Lord Dacre, who had proposed her flight, and a ring was to be Carr’s credential to King Henry the Eighth, whom he was to see afterwards. The King, however, did not recognise the token, though it was one that his sister had worn in her girlish days.
In 1515, while suffering under the rule of the Duke of Albany in Edinburgh, Margaret tried to escape to Blackater, a fortress a few miles from Berwick. She sent a loyal clerk, Robin Carr, to Lord Dacre, who had arranged for her escape, and a ring was meant to be Carr’s identification with King Henry the Eighth, whom he was supposed to meet later. However, the King didn't recognize the token, even though it was one that his sister had worn when she was younger.
In ‘Cymbeline’ (act i. sc. ii.) Imogen gives Posthumus a ring when they part, and he gives her a bracelet in exchange:—
In ‘Cymbeline’ (act i. sc. ii.), Imogen gives Posthumus a ring when they say goodbye, and he gives her a bracelet in return:—
‘———Look here, love;
This diamond was my mother’s; take it, heart;
But keep it till you woo another wife,
When Imogen is dead.’
Posthumus.—‘How! how! another?
You gentle gods give me but this I have,
And sear up my embracements from a next
[Pg 334]With bonds of death! Remain thou here,
(Putting on the ring)
While sense can keep it on.’
“Look, my love;”
This diamond was my mom's; take it, sweetheart;
But hang onto it until you find another wife,
When Imogen's gone.
Posthumus.—‘What! another?
You gentle gods, just grant me what I have,
And protect my hugs from the next
[Pg 334]With bonds of death! Stay here,
(Putting on the ring)
"As long as I can keep it on."
Yet he afterwards gives it up to Iachimo—upon a false representation, however—to test his wife’s honour:—
Yet he later gives it up to Iachimo—based on a lie, though—to test his wife’s honor:—
———Here, take this too;
It is a basilisk unto my eye,
Kills me to look on’t.
Here, take this as well;
It's a basilisk to my eye,
It kills me to look at it.
A diamond ring was sent by Henry the Eighth in 1542 to Sir Arthur Plantagenet (Lord Lisle, natural son of Edward the Fourth) in token of forgiveness, and accompanying an order for his release from the Tower, but the unfortunate prisoner, in his excess of joy, died.
A diamond ring was sent by Henry VIII in 1542 to Sir Arthur Plantagenet (Lord Lisle, the illegitimate son of Edward IV) as a sign of forgiveness, along with an order for his release from the Tower. However, the unfortunate prisoner, overwhelmed with joy, passed away.
In Shakspeare’s ‘Henry the Eighth’ (Act v. sc. i.) a ring is delivered by the King to Cranmer, in token of royal confidence and esteem:—
In Shakespeare’s ‘Henry the Eighth’ (Act v. sc. i.), a ring is given by the King to Cranmer as a symbol of royal trust and respect:—
Be of good cheer,
They shall no more prevail than we give way to.
Keep comfort to you; and this morning see
You do appear before them; if they shall chance,
In charging you with matters, to commit you,
The best persuasions to the contrary
Fail not to use, and with what vehemency
The occasion shall instruct you: if entreaties
Will render you no remedy, this ring
Deliver them, and your appeal to us
There make before them.
Stay optimistic,
They won’t win any more than we allow them to.
Keep your spirits up; and this morning make sure
You show up in front of them; if they happen,
In accusing you of something, to take you in,
Use your best arguments against it
And with whatever passion the situation calls for: if pleas
Won’t help you, give them this ring
Bring your case to us, and present it before them.
The sequel of this incident is related in Foxe’s ‘Acts and Monuments of the Christian Martyrs,’ printed in 1563:—‘Anon the Archbishop was called into the council-chamber, to whom was alleged as before is rehearsed. The Archbishop answered in like sort as the King had advised him; and in the end, when he perceived that no manner of persuasion or entreaty could serve, he delivered them the[Pg 335] King’s ring, revoking his cause into the King’s hands. The whole council being thereat somewhat amazed, the Earl of Bedford, with a loud voice, confirming his words with a solemn oath, said: “When you first began the matter, my Lords, I told you what would become of it. Do you think the King would suffer this man’s finger to ache? Much more, I warrant you, will he defend his life against brabling varlets. You do but cumber yourselves to hear tales and fables against him.” And, incontinently, upon the receipt of the King’s token, they all rose, and carried to the King his ring, surrendering that matter, as the order and use was, into his own hands.’
The follow-up to this incident is found in Foxe’s ‘Acts and Monuments of the Christian Martyrs,’ published in 1563:—‘Soon, the Archbishop was called into the council chamber, where the previous allegations were repeated. The Archbishop responded in the same way the King had advised him; and ultimately, when he realized that no persuasion or plea would work, he handed them the[Pg 335] King’s ring, returning the matter to the King. The whole council was somewhat shocked by this, and the Earl of Bedford, raising his voice and affirming his words with a serious oath, said: “When you first started this, my Lords, I warned you what would happen. Do you really think the King would let this man suffer? I assure you, he will certainly protect his life against petty nuisances. You are just wasting your time listening to stories and lies about him.” And, right after receiving the King’s token, they all stood up and took the ring to the King, handing over the matter, as was customary, into his own hands.’
By the same capricious monarch a turquoise ring was sent to Cardinal Wolsey, in his last troubles at Esher, by Sir John Russel, as a ‘token’ from His Majesty, with the assurance that ‘he loved him as well as ever he did, and was sorry for his trouble.’ On hearing subsequently from Dr. Buttes of the serious illness of his discarded favourite, he sent a valuable ring to him, and Mistress Anne Boleyn, then at the King’s side, at her royal lover’s request, took a gold tablet from her girdle, and gave it with a speech expressing sympathy and commendation—false gifts and hollow words!
By that same unpredictable king, a turquoise ring was sent to Cardinal Wolsey during his final troubles at Esher by Sir John Russel, as a ‘token’ from His Majesty, with the assurance that ‘he loved him just as much as ever and was sorry for his troubles.’ Later, after hearing from Dr. Buttes about the serious illness of his former favorite, he sent him an expensive ring. Mistress Anne Boleyn, who was then at the king’s side, took a gold tablet from her waist at her royal lover’s request and gave it with a speech expressing sympathy and praise—empty gifts and insincere words!
In after years, when a deputation was sent by the council of King Edward the Sixth to reduce the recusant Princess Mary to conformity with the Protestant religion, she, on her knees, delivered a ring as a token to the King, saying ‘she would die his true subject and sister, and obey him in all things, except in matters of religion.’
In later years, when a delegation was sent by King Edward the Sixth's council to pressure Princess Mary, who refused to conform, to accept the Protestant faith, she knelt down and handed over a ring as a token to the King, stating that she would be his loyal subject and sister, and would obey him in everything except in matters of religion.
When, as Queen, Mary lay on her deathbed, King Philip, her husband, who did not revisit England after his return to Spain, sent a message and a ring-token to his[Pg 336] consort, a ruby set in gold, which she bequeathed to him among other jewels.
When Queen Mary was on her deathbed, her husband King Philip, who didn’t come back to England after returning to Spain, sent a message and a ring-token to his[Pg 336] consort, a ruby set in gold, which she left to him along with other jewels.
One of the most interesting episodes of ring-tokens is that which Queen Elizabeth is said to have given to the Earl of Essex ‘in token of esteem,’ with the intimation that if ever he forfeited her favour, and it should be sent back to her, the sight of it would ensure his forgiveness. The chief authorities for the story appear to be the ‘Relation of M. Aubrey de Maurier,’ printed in 1688, and the account given at the same period by Lady Elizabeth Spelman. The particulars of this occurrence are related in the memoirs of Robert Carey. When Essex lay under sentence of death, he determined to try the virtue of the Queen’s ring by sending it to her and claiming the benefit of her promise. Knowing, however, that he was surrounded by the creatures of those who were bent on taking his life, he was fearful of trusting to any of his attendants. At length, looking out of his window, he saw, early one morning, a boy whose countenance pleased him, and he induced him by a bribe to carry the ring, which he threw down from above, to the Lady Scroop, his cousin, who had taken so friendly an interest in his fate. The boy, by mistake, took the ring to the Countess of Nottingham, the cruel sister of the fair and gentle Scroop, and, as both these ladies belonged to the royal bed-chamber, the mistake might easily occur. The Countess carried the ring to the Lord Admiral, who was a deadly foe of Essex, and told him the message, but he bade her suppress both. The Queen, unconscious of the incident, waited in the painful suspense of an angry lover for the expected token to arrive, but, not receiving it, she concluded that he was too proud to make the last appeal to her tenderness, and, after having once revoked the warrant, she ordered the execution to take place.
One of the most intriguing stories about ring tokens is the one where Queen Elizabeth allegedly gave one to the Earl of Essex as a sign of her esteem, with the suggestion that if he ever lost her favor and sent it back, seeing it would guarantee his forgiveness. The main sources for this tale seem to be the “Relation of M. Aubrey de Maurier,” published in 1688, and the account provided around the same time by Lady Elizabeth Spelman. The details of this event are recounted in the memoirs of Robert Carey. When Essex was sentenced to death, he decided to test the power of the Queen’s ring by sending it to her and claiming the promise she had made. However, knowing he was surrounded by people intent on getting rid of him, he was hesitant to trust any of his attendants. Finally, looking out of his window one morning, he saw a boy whose face he liked, and he convinced him with a bribe to deliver the ring, which he tossed down to Lady Scroop, his cousin, who had shown a genuine interest in his situation. The boy, however, mistakenly took the ring to the Countess of Nottingham, the vengeful sister of the kind-hearted Scroop, and since both ladies were part of the royal household, the mix-up was easy to make. The Countess brought the ring to the Lord Admiral, who was a fierce enemy of Essex, and told him the message, but he ordered her to keep both quiet. The Queen, unaware of what had happened, waited in anxious anticipation for the expected token to arrive, but when it didn't come, she assumed he was too proud to reach out to her with one last plea for compassion. After having revoked the execution order once, she ultimately decided to proceed with it.
[Pg 337]The romantic story of the Queen visiting the Countess of Nottingham, who had kept back the ring; of her shaking her on her death-bed, and crying out bitterly ‘that God might forgive, but she could not,’ is somewhat credited as documents come to light. In Birch’s ‘Memoirs of the Peers of England during the Reign of James the First,’ this story is given, as having been repeatedly told by Lady Elizabeth Spelman, great-granddaughter of Sir Robert Carey. The Queen is said to have been so hurt by this revelation of Lady Nottingham that she never went to bed, nor took any sustenance from that period. ‘In confirmation of the time of the Countess’s death,’ says Birch, ‘it appears from the parish register of Chelsea that she died at Arundel House, London, February 25, and was buried the 28th, 1603. Her funeral was kept at Chelsea, March 21st following, and Queen Elizabeth died three days afterwards.’
[Pg 337]The romantic story of the Queen visiting the Countess of Nottingham, who had withheld the ring; of her shaking her on her deathbed and crying out bitterly ‘that God might forgive, but she could not,’ is somewhat believed as documents come to light. In Birch’s ‘Memoirs of the Peers of England during the Reign of James the First,’ this story is recounted, as it was often told by Lady Elizabeth Spelman, the great-granddaughter of Sir Robert Carey. The Queen is said to have been so hurt by this revelation from Lady Nottingham that she never went to bed again nor took any food from that moment on. ‘To confirm the timing of the Countess’s death,’ says Birch, ‘the parish register of Chelsea shows that she died at Arundel House, London, on February 25, and was buried on the 28th, 1603. Her funeral was held in Chelsea on March 21st following, and Queen Elizabeth died three days later.’
The celebrated ring on which the life of the Earl of Essex is thus said to have depended has been claimed by various persons. In ‘Old England’ (vol. ii. p. 74) a story is told that when, in 1564, Mary, Queen of Scots, married Darnley, she sent to her fair cousin of England a diamond-ring in the form of a heart, in token of the event and her own affection. The ring was accompanied by some Latin verses by Buchanan, thus translated:—
The famous ring that the Earl of Essex is said to have relied on has been claimed by different people. In 'Old England' (vol. ii. p. 74), there's a story that when Mary, Queen of Scots, married Darnley in 1564, she sent a heart-shaped diamond ring to her beautiful cousin in England as a symbol of the occasion and her love. The ring came with some Latin verses by Buchanan, which were translated as follows:—
This gem behold, the emblem of my heart,
From which my cousin’s image ne’er shall part;
Clear in its lustre, spotless does it shine,
’Tis clear and spotless as this heart of mine.
What though the stone a greater hardness wears,
Superior firmness still the figure bears.
This gem you see, the symbol of my heart,
From which my cousin’s image will never depart;
Clear in its shine, spotless does it gleam,
It’s clear and spotless like this heart of mine.
Even if the stone is tougher and more hard,
A stronger essence still the figure guards.
‘According’ (observes the editor of ‘Old England’) ‘to information which has been communicated to us, with an implicit faith on the part of our informants, that was the[Pg 338] ring presented by Elizabeth to Essex, as being the most precious it was in her power to give him.’
‘According’ (notes the editor of ‘Old England’) ‘to information that has been given to us, with complete trust in our sources, that was the[Pg 338] ring Elizabeth gave to Essex, as it was the most valuable thing she could give him.’
Another account says that Mr. Thomas Penning, of the Exchequer, had, in 1781, a purse and ring by bequest from Mr. Sotheby, whose sister he married, and who was related to the late Mrs. Cooke, by long succession and inheritance from Sir Anthony Cooke, of Giddy Hall, Essex, preceptor of Edward the Sixth, and to whose family, according to tradition, these precious objects were given by Queen Elizabeth. The ring was of gold, with the Queen’s bust in bas-relief on a garnet, dressed as in her sixpenny and threepenny pieces of 1574, with the same features round it in the garter with the motto, and fastened with a buckle composed of two diamonds, and the strap turned by another. Over the bust was the crown, composed of twelve diamonds, and on each side the collet three diamonds. On the inner surface, immediately under the bust, was the union rose.
Another account says that Mr. Thomas Penning, from the Exchequer, received a purse and ring by inheritance from Mr. Sotheby in 1781, after marrying his sister, who was connected to the late Mrs. Cooke through a long line of succession and inheritance from Sir Anthony Cooke of Giddy Hall, Essex, who was the tutor of Edward the Sixth. According to tradition, these valuable items were given to that family by Queen Elizabeth. The ring was made of gold and featured the Queen’s bust in bas-relief on a garnet, styled like her sixpenny and threepenny coins from 1574, surrounded by the same features in the garter with the motto, and fastened with a buckle made of two diamonds, with another diamond turning the strap. Above the bust was a crown made of twelve diamonds, and on each side of the collet were three diamonds. On the inner surface, just below the bust, was the union rose.
The ‘Devereux’ Ring.
The 'Devereux' Ring.
Perhaps the strongest claim to the possession of the real ring of Essex is that which was exhibited at the Society of Antiquaries, March 1858, by the Rev. Lord John Thynne. It is of gold, slightly made, and ornamented on the inside with blue enamel. On the face is set a cameo cut in sardonyx, representing Queen Elizabeth in a high ruff. The workmanship is good, and shows considerable skill in the adaptation of[Pg 339] the layers of the stone to the details of the dress. It seems to have been originally made for a very small finger, and to have been subsequently enlarged. The ring is said to have been the property of Lady Frances Devereux, daughter of the Earl of Essex, and afterwards Duchess of Somerset, and to have passed from mother to daughter until it came to Louisa, daughter of John, Earl of Granville, who married Thomas Thynne, second Viscount Weymouth, great-grandfather of the present owner. It has been stated by Captain Devereux that no mention of the ring in question is made in the elaborate will of the Duchess of Somerset. She may, however, have given it to her daughter in her lifetime. The ring appears to have been made for a female finger, and as it is not very likely that the Queen would have worn her own portrait in a ring, it is more probable that this ring was intended for one of the ladies of her court, and it may have been enlarged for some subsequent owner. It is undoubtedly a remarkable work of art of the period of Elizabeth.
Perhaps the strongest claim to owning the actual ring of Essex comes from the display at the Society of Antiquaries in March 1858 by Rev. Lord John Thynne. It’s made of gold, delicately crafted, and decorated on the inside with blue enamel. A cameo cut in sardonyx, depicting Queen Elizabeth in a high ruff, is set on the face. The craftsmanship is good and shows considerable skill in matching the layers of the stone to the details of the dress. It appears to have originally been made for a very small finger, but was later enlarged. The ring is said to have belonged to Lady Frances Devereux, daughter of the Earl of Essex and later Duchess of Somerset, and to have passed down from mother to daughter until it reached Louisa, daughter of John, Earl of Granville, who married Thomas Thynne, the second Viscount Weymouth, the great-grandfather of the current owner. Captain Devereux has stated that there’s no mention of this ring in the Duchess of Somerset's detailed will. However, she may have given it to her daughter during her lifetime. The ring seems to have been made for a female finger, and since it’s unlikely the Queen would have worn her own portrait in a ring, it’s more probable that this ring was meant for one of the ladies at her court, and it might have been resized for a later owner. It is undoubtedly a remarkable piece of art from the Elizabethan era.
It may be noticed that the Hon. Captain Devereux, in his ‘Lives and Letters of the Devereux, Earls of Essex,’ seems to believe in the story of the ring, but the evidence he adduces is not sufficient to justify his faith.
It can be seen that Hon. Captain Devereux, in his ‘Lives and Letters of the Devereux, Earls of Essex,’ appears to believe in the tale of the ring, but the evidence he presents isn't enough to support his belief.
Another ring, which is in the possession of C. W. Warner, Esq. (and is, together with that noticed, engraved in the ‘Lives and Letters of the Devereux, Earls of Essex’), sets forth a rival claim to be the identical ring given to Essex, of which, however, it shows no internal evidence, being a slight ring, without any device, and has an enamelled hoop, set with a pear-shaped diamond.
Another ring, owned by C. W. Warner, Esq. (and noted alongside the one mentioned, engraved in the ‘Lives and Letters of the Devereux, Earls of Essex’), makes a competing claim to be the same ring given to Essex. However, it lacks any internal evidence to support this, being a simple ring without any design, featuring an enamelled band adorned with a pear-shaped diamond.
In ‘Manningham’s Diary,’ 1602-1603 (Camden Society), is the following entry: ‘Dr. Parry told me the Countess[Pg 340] Kildare assured him that the Queene caused the ring wherewith shee was wedded to the crowne to be cutt from hir finger, some six weekes before her death, but wore a ring which the Earl of Essex gave her unto the day of hir death.’[66]
In ‘Manningham’s Diary,’ 1602-1603 (Camden Society), there’s this entry: ‘Dr. Parry told me that the Countess Kildare assured him that the Queen had the ring she was married with to the crown cut off her finger about six weeks before her death, but she wore a ring given to her by the Earl of Essex until the day she died.’[66]
The interchange of rings as royal tokens between Queen Elizabeth and Mary, Queen of Scots, was frequent; whether genuine in the feelings that prompted their transmission (at least, as regards the former) may be questioned. On the baptism of the son of the Scottish Queen (afterwards James the Sixth) we are informed that the Duke of Bedford, besides a gold font, the present of Queen Elizabeth, sent ‘ane ring with ane stane to be delivered to the said woman who should occupy the place of the Queen’s Grace of England at the said baptism.’ Mary is mentioned by the English ambassador to the Scottish court as wearing, on the celebration of Twelfth Day in 1562, no jewels or gold, but a ring sent to her by Elizabeth. It may have been that which, a prisoner at Lochleven Castle, she wished to obtain from the royal jewels which had been kept back from her by the Earl of Moray.[67] It had been sent to her as a token of[Pg 341] friendship, and the promise that if it were returned to the donor in any period of misfortune she would do her best to assist her.
The exchange of rings as royal gifts between Queen Elizabeth and Mary, Queen of Scots, happened often; whether the feelings behind these exchanges were genuine (at least for Elizabeth) can be debated. At the baptism of the Scottish Queen's son (later James the Sixth), we learn that the Duke of Bedford, in addition to a gold font sent by Queen Elizabeth, also sent "a ring with a stone to be given to the woman who would represent the Queen of England at the baptism." The English ambassador to the Scottish court noted that during Twelfth Night in 1562, Mary wore no jewels or gold except for a ring sent to her by Elizabeth. This may have been the ring she wanted while imprisoned in Lochleven Castle, which the Earl of Moray had withheld from her among the royal jewels. It had been sent as a symbol of friendship, with the promise that if it were returned to Elizabeth during any difficult time, she would do her best to help Mary.
Miss Strickland informs us that Mary, in a letter to Elizabeth, though unable, as she mentions, to send back the ring, reminds Elizabeth of her promise. This interesting letter is still preserved at Hatfield House. ‘It will please you to remember,’ she writes, ‘you have told me several times that on receiving the ring you gave me you would assist me in my time of trouble. You know that Moray has seized all that I have, and those who had the keeping of some of these things have been ordered not to deliver any of them to me. Robert Melville, at any rate, to whom I have secretly sent for this ring, as my most precious jewel, says “he dare not let me have it.” Therefore I implore you, on receiving this letter, to have compassion on your good sister and cousin, and believe that you have not a more affectionate relative in the world,’ etc. etc., ‘dated from my prison this 1st of May’ (1568).
Miss Strickland tells us that Mary, in a letter to Elizabeth, although she mentions she can't return the ring, reminds Elizabeth of her promise. This fascinating letter is still kept at Hatfield House. “I hope you’ll remember,” she writes, “you’ve told me several times that upon receiving the ring you gave me, you would help me in my time of trouble. You know that Moray has taken everything I have, and those who were supposed to keep some of these things have been told not to give any of them back to me. Robert Melville, at least, to whom I secretly asked for this ring, my most cherished jewel, says ‘he can’t let me have it.’ So I urge you, upon receiving this letter, to show kindness to your good sister and cousin, and know that you don’t have a more loving relative in the world,” etc. etc., “dated from my prison this 1st of May” (1568).
On the escape of Mary from her ‘prison,’ Sir Robert Melville, anticipating a counter-revolution from the general feeling in favour of the Queen, was one of the first who came to her at Hamilton Castle to renew his homage, bringing with him as a peace-offering the precious ring so often demanded in vain.
On Mary’s escape from her ‘prison,’ Sir Robert Melville, expecting a counter-revolution due to the widespread support for the Queen, was one of the first to visit her at Hamilton Castle to reaffirm his loyalty, bringing with him as a peace offering the valuable ring that had been requested many times before without success.
‘On leaving Scotland,’ says Miss Strickland, ‘after her fatal resolution of throwing herself on the protection of Queen Elizabeth, Mary sent the ring as an avant-courier, with a letter. This romantic toy, which she regarded in the same light as one of the fairy talismans in eastern love, was actually the lure which tempted her in this desperate crisis of her fortunes to enter England, under the fond idea that[Pg 342] its donor could not refuse to keep her promise. She concludes an affecting letter to Queen Elizabeth (dated from Dundrennan) thus: “To remind you of the reasons I have to depend on England, I send back to the Queen the token of her promised friendship and assistance.”’
‘When she left Scotland,’ says Miss Strickland, ‘after her fateful decision to seek the protection of Queen Elizabeth, Mary sent the ring as an avant-courier, along with a letter. This romantic trinket, which she saw as akin to one of the fairy tale charms in eastern love, was actually the bait that tempted her during this desperate time in her life to enter England, under the hopeful belief that[Pg 342] its giver would not refuse to keep her promise. She ends an emotional letter to Queen Elizabeth (dated from Dundrennan) with: “To remind you of the reasons I have to rely on England, I send back to the Queen the token of her promised friendship and assistance.”’
This memorable ring is described by Aubrey, to have been a delicate piece of mechanism, consisting of several joints, which, when united, formed the quaint device of two right hands supporting a heart between them. This heart was composed of two separate diamonds, held together by a central spring, which, when opened, would allow either of the hearts to be detached.
This memorable ring is described by Aubrey as a delicate piece of craftsmanship, made up of several joints that, when connected, created a charming design of two right hands holding a heart between them. This heart was made of two separate diamonds, held together by a central spring that, when opened, would let either of the hearts be detached.
‘Queen Elizabeth,’ says Aubrey, ‘kept one moietie, and sent the other as a “token” of her constant friendship to Mary, Queen of Scots, but she cut off her head for all that.’
‘Queen Elizabeth,’ says Aubrey, ‘kept one half and sent the other as a “token” of her ongoing friendship to Mary, Queen of Scots, but she beheaded her anyway.’
Essex ring (?).
Essex ring.
The circumstance of the ring is further verified beyond dispute by Mary herself, in a subsequent letter to Elizabeth, in which she bitterly reproaches her with her perfidious conduct. ‘After I escaped from Lochleven,’ she says, ‘and was nearly taken in battle by my rebellious subjects, I sent you by a trusty messenger the diamond you had given me as a token of affection and demanded your assistance. I believed that the jewel I received as a pledge of your friendship would remind you that when you gave it me I was not only flattered with great promise of assistance from you, but you bound yourself on your royal word to advance over the border to my succour, and[Pg 343] to come in person to meet me, and that if I made the journey into your realm that I might confide in your honour.’ Elizabeth, as is well known, took no notice either of the pledge or allusions to her former professions.
The situation regarding the ring is confirmed without a doubt by Mary herself in a later letter to Elizabeth, where she harshly criticizes her for her treacherous behavior. “After I escaped from Lochleven,” she writes, “and almost got caught in battle by my rebellious subjects, I sent you through a reliable messenger the diamond you gave me as a sign of affection and asked for your help. I thought that the jewel I received as a token of your friendship would remind you that when you gave it to me, I was not only flattered by your promise of support but that you also committed on your royal word to come across the border to help me, and[Pg 343] to meet me in person, and that if I traveled into your territory, I could trust in your honor.” Elizabeth, as is widely known, ignored both the promise and the references to her previous commitments.
The illustration on the preceding page represents the ring mentioned (p. 339) as the property of the Warner family. Sir Thomas Warner, to whom it was presented by James the First, placed it on his shield of arms, with the motto, ‘I hold from the King.’
The illustration on the previous page shows the ring mentioned (p. 339) as belonging to the Warner family. Sir Thomas Warner, who received it from James the First, displayed it on his coat of arms, along with the motto, ‘I hold from the King.’
During the Duke of Norfolk’s imprisonment in the Tower he sent two diamond rings, as love-tokens to Mary, Queen of Scots, while she was at Coventry.
During the Duke of Norfolk’s imprisonment in the Tower, he sent two diamond rings as love-tokens to Mary, Queen of Scots, while she was in Coventry.
In the metrical chronicle of the ‘Life of Sir Nicholas Throgmorton’ we find that when Elizabeth heard rumours of the death of her sister, Queen Mary, to be really sure, she sent Sir Nicholas Throgmorton to the palace to request one of the ladies of the bed-chamber, who was in her confidence, ‘if the queen were really dead, to send her as a token the black enamelled ring which Her Majesty wore night and day’:—
In the poetic account of the ‘Life of Sir Nicholas Throgmorton,’ we see that when Elizabeth heard rumors about her sister, Queen Mary, dying, she wanted to be certain. So, she sent Sir Nicholas Throgmorton to the palace to ask one of the ladies-in-waiting, who she trusted, ‘if the queen was really dead, to send her as a token the black enamelled ring that Her Majesty wore day and night’:—
She said (since nought exceedeth woman’s fears,
Who still do dread some baits of subtlety):
‘Sir Nicholas, know a ring my sister wears
Enamell’d black—a pledge of loyalty—
The which the King of Spain in spousals gave.
If aught fall out amiss, ’tis that I crave.
‘But hark! ope not your lips to anyone
In hope us to obtain of courtesy,
Unless you know my sister first be gone,
For grudging minds will still coyne (coin) treachery.
So shall thyself be safe, and us be sure.
Who takes no hurt shall need no care of cure.’
She said (since nothing exceeds a woman's fears,
Who still fear some traps of subtlety:
‘Sir Nicholas, know that my sister wears a ring
Enamel black—a symbol of loyalty—
Which the King of Spain gave during their wedding.
If anything goes wrong, it’s because I ask.
‘But listen! Don't speak to anyone
Hoping to gain respect,
Unless you know my sister has left first,
For bitter minds will still create betrayal.
That way, you'll be safe, and we can be sure.
Who feels no pain needs no care for a cure.’
Elizabeth’s meaning seems to have been that the ring should not be sought for until Mary’s death.
Elizabeth's implication appears to be that the ring shouldn't be sought until after Mary's death.
[Pg 344]A ring ‘token’ was also the announcement of Queen Elizabeth’s death. Lady Scroope, it seems, gave the first intelligence of the event by dropping from the window of the palace a sapphire ring to her brother, Sir Robert Carey, who was lurking beneath the chamber of death at Richmond. He departed with this ring at his utmost speed to announce the tidings to the Scottish monarch.
[Pg 344]A ring 'token' also signaled the announcement of Queen Elizabeth’s death. Lady Scroope reportedly first shared the news by dropping a sapphire ring from the palace window to her brother, Sir Robert Carey, who was waiting below the death chamber at Richmond. He rushed off with the ring to inform the Scottish king.
The sapphire in this ring is in the possession of the Countess of Cork, and was exhibited at the Loan Exhibition of Jewellery at South Kensington in 1872. A statement in the catalogue records the incident related. The ring is mentioned in Robertson’s ‘History of Scotland’ and Banks’ ‘Peerage Books.’ It was afterwards given to John, Earl of Orrery, by the Duchess of Buckingham, natural daughter of James the Second.
The sapphire in this ring belongs to the Countess of Cork and was displayed at the Loan Exhibition of Jewellery at South Kensington in 1872. A note in the catalogue documents the related incident. The ring is referenced in Robertson’s ‘History of Scotland’ and Banks’ ‘Peerage Books.’ It was later given to John, Earl of Orrery, by the Duchess of Buckingham, who was the natural daughter of James the Second.
I may here remark that Camden relates a romantic incident, that while Queen Elizabeth was celebrating the anniversary of her coronation, Henry of Anjou, one of her royal suitors, in a fit of gallantry, took from her finger a ring in token of betrothal, and put it on his own in presence of the Court; but as this story is entirely refuted by history I forbear the details.
I want to point out that Camden shares a romantic story about when Queen Elizabeth was celebrating the anniversary of her coronation. Henry of Anjou, one of her royal admirers, in a moment of bravado, took a ring from her finger as a sign of engagement and put it on his own in front of the Court. However, this story is completely disproven by history, so I won’t go into the details.
An incident in connection with ring-tokens is related in the life of that distinguished knight and courtier, Sir John Perrot, which has additional interest from having formed the subject of a poem by the late Mrs. Maclean (‘L. E. L.’). The ballad, which appeared some years ago in one of the ‘annuals,’ is so charming and characteristic that I have ventured to reproduce it:—
An incident involving ring-tokens is told in the life of the notable knight and courtier, Sir John Perrot, which is even more interesting because it inspired a poem by the late Mrs. Maclean (‘L. E. L.’). The ballad, which was published a few years ago in one of the ‘annuals,’ is so lovely and fitting that I’ve decided to share it here:—
The evening tide is on the turn; so calm the waters flow,
There seems to be one heav’n above, another heav’n below;
The blue skies broken by white clouds, the river by white foam,
The stars reflect themselves, and seem to have another home.
[Pg 345]
A shade upon the elements; ’tis of a gallant bark,
Her stately sides fling on the waves an outline dim and dark;
The difference this by things of earth, and things of heav’n made,
The things of heav’n are trac’d in light, and those of earth in shade.
Wrapt in his cloak a noble knight stept to and fro that deck,
Revolving all those gentler thoughts the busier day-hours check;
A thousand sad, sweet influences in truth and beauty lie
Within the quiet atmosphere of a lone starry sky.
A shower of glittering sparkles fell from off the dashing oar,
As a little boat shot rapidly from an old oak on shore;
His eye and pulse grew quick, the knight’s, his heart kept no true time
In his unsteady breathing, with the light oar’s measur’d chime.
‘Thou hast loiter’d—so, in sooth, should I—thy errand be thy plea,
And now, what of my lady bright, what guerdon sent she me?
Or sat she lonely in her bower, or lovely in the hall?
How look’d she when she took my gift? sir page, now tell me all.’
‘I found her with a pallid cheek, and with a drooping head;
I left her, and the summer rose wears not a gladder red.
And she murmur’d something like the tones a lute has in its chords;
So very sweet the whisper was, I have forgot the words.’
‘A health to thee, my lady love, a health in Spanish wine,
To-night I’ll pledge no other health, I’ll name no name but thine.’
The young page hid his laugh, then dropp’d in rev’rence on his knee:
‘In sooth, good master, that I think to-night may scarcely be.
‘While kneeling at your lady’s feet another dame passed by,
The lion in her haughty step, the eagle in her eye:
“And doth the good knight barter gems? God’s truth, we’ll do the same,”
A pleasant meaning lit the smile that to her proud eyes came.
‘She took the fairest of the gems upon her glittering hand,
With her own fingers fasten’d it upon a silken band,
And held it to the lamp, then said: “Like this stone’s spotless flame
So tell your master that I hold his high and knightly fame.”’
Low on his bended knee the knight received that precious stone,
And bold and proud the spirit now that in his dark eyes shone:
‘Up from your sleep, my mariners, for ere the break of day,
And even now the stars are pale, I must be miles away.’
[Pg 346]
The spray fell from the oars in showers, as in some fairy hall
They say in melting diamonds the charmèd fountains fall;
And though, as set the weary stars, the darker grew the night,
Yet far behind the vessel left a track of silver light.
They saw again that self-same shore which they that morn had pass’d,
On which they look’d as those who know such look may be the last—
Then out he spoke, the helmsman old: ‘I marvel we should go,
Just like a lady’s messenger, on the same path to and fro.’
‘And ’tis to see a lady’s face this homeward task we ply.
I wot the proudest of us all were proud to catch her eye.
A royal gift our queen hath sent, and it were sore disgrace
If that I first put on her gem, and not before her face!’
On the terrace by the river-side there stood a gallant band,
The very flower of knight and dame were there of English land;
The morning wind toss’d ostrich plume, and stirr’d the silken train,
The morning light from gold and gem was mirror’d back again.
There walk’d the Queen Elizabeth; you knew her from the rest
More by the royal step and eye than by the royal vest;
There flashed, though now the step was staid, the falcon eye was still,
The fiery blood of Lancaster, the haughty Tudor’s will.
A lady by the balustrade, a little way apart,
Lean’d languidly, indulging in the solitude of heart
Which is Love’s empire tenanted by visions of his own—
Such solitude is soon disturb’d, such visions soon are flown.
Love’s pleasant time is with her now, for she hath hope and faith,
Which think not what the lover doth, but what the lover saith.
Upon her hand there is a ring, within her heart a vow;
No voice is whispering at her side—what doth she blush for now?
A noble galley valiantly comes on before the wind;
Her sails are dyed by the red sky she’s leaving fast behind.
None other mark’d the ship that swept so eagerly along;
The lady knew the flag, and when hath lover’s eye been wrong?
The lonely lady watch’d; meantime went on the converse gay.
It was as if the spirits caught the freshness of the day.
‘Good omen such a morn as this,’ her Grace of England said,
‘What progress down our noble Thames hath Sir John Perrot made?’
[Pg 347]
Then spoke Sir Walter Raleigh, with a soft and silvery smile,
And an earnest gaze that seem’d to catch the Queen’s least look the while,
‘Methinks that ev’ry wind in heav’n will crowd his sails to fill,
For goeth he not forth to do his gracious Sovereign’s will?’
With that the bark came bounding up, then staid her in her flight;
And right beneath the terrace she moor’d her in their sight.
‘Now, by my troth,’ exclaimed the Queen, ‘it is our captain’s bark.
What brings the loiterer back again?’—her eye and brow grew dark.
‘Fair Queen,’ replied a voice below, ‘I pay a vow of mine,
And never yet was voyage delayed by worship at a shrine.’
He took the jewel in his hand, and bent him on his knee,
Then flung the scarf around his neck, where all the gem might see.
His white plumes swept the very deck, yet once he glanc’d above;
The courtesy was for the Queen, the glance was for his love.
‘Now fare-thee-well,’ then said the Queen, ‘for thou art a true knight.’
But even as she spoke the ship was flitting from the sight.
Woe to the Spaniards and their gold amid the Indian seas,
When rolled the thunder of that deck upon the southern breeze,
For bravely Sir John Perrot bore our flag across the main,
And England’s bells for victory rang when he came home again.
The evening tide is turning; the waters flow so calmly,
It feels like there's one heaven above and another below;
The blue skies are dotted with white clouds, the river with white foam,
The stars reflect themselves, seeming to have another home.
[Pg 345]
A shadow falls over the elements; it’s from a grand ship,
Her stately sides cast a dim outline on the waves;
The difference lies between things of earth and things of heaven,
Things of heaven are traced in light, and those of earth in shade.
Wrapped in his cloak, a noble knight walked back and forth on the deck,
Thinking of all those gentler thoughts that the busy daytime suppresses;
A thousand sad, sweet influences in truth and beauty lie
Within the quiet atmosphere of a lonely starry sky.
A shower of sparkling droplets fell from the dashing oar,
As a tiny boat shot swiftly from an old oak on the shore;
His eye and pulse raced, but the knight’s heart lost its rhythm
In his unsteady breathing, matching the light oar’s measured beat.
‘You’ve lingered—so, indeed, should I—your errand be your excuse,
And now, what news of my bright lady, what reward did she send me?
Or was she lonely in her bower, or lovely in the hall?
How did she look when she accepted my gift? Sir page, tell me everything.’
‘I found her with a pale cheek and a drooping head;
I left her, and the summer rose doesn’t wear a brighter red.
And she murmured something like the tones of a lute;
So sweet was the whisper, I’ve forgotten the words.’
‘A toast to you, my lady love, a toast in Spanish wine,
Tonight I’ll pledge no other toast, I’ll name no name but yours.’
The young page stifled a laugh, then dropped reverently to his knee:
‘Indeed, good master, I think tonight that may be hard to do.
‘While kneeling at your lady’s feet, another lady passed by,
The lion in her haughty stride, the eagle in her eye:
“And does the good knight trade gems? God’s truth, we’ll do the same,”
A pretty meaning lit up the smile that appeared on her proud face.
‘She took the fairest of the gems into her shining hand,
With her own fingers fastening it on a silken band,
And held it to the lamp, then said: “Like this stone's pure flame,
So tell your master that I value his noble and knightly fame.”
Kneeling low, the knight received that precious stone,
His spirit bold and proud now shone brightly in his dark eyes:
‘Awake from your sleep, my sailors, for before the break of day,
And even now the stars are fading, I must be miles away.’
[Pg 346]
The spray fell from the oars like showers, as if in some fairy hall
Where melting diamonds make the enchanted fountains fall;
And though, as the weary stars set, the night grew darker,
Yet the vessel left a trail of silver light behind her.
They saw again the same shore they had passed that morning,
Looking on it as those who know such glances may be the last—
Then spoke the old helmsman: ‘I wonder why we should go,
Just like a lady’s messenger, traveling the same path back and forth.’
‘And it’s to see a lady’s face that we undertake this homeward task.
I bet the proudest of us all would be proud to catch her eye.
A royal gift our queen has sent, and it would be a great disgrace
If I were the first to wear her gem, and not before her face!’
On the terrace by the riverside stood a brave group,
The very cream of knights and ladies from English lands;
The morning wind tossed ostrich plumes and stirred their silken trains,
The morning light reflected gold and gems back again.
There walked Queen Elizabeth; you recognized her from the rest
More by her royal step and gaze than by her royal dress;
Though her step was now steady, the falcon eye still flashed,
The fierce blood of Lancaster, the proud will of Tudor.
A lady by the balustrade, a bit apart,
Leaned languidly, enjoying the solitude of her heart
Which is Love’s domain inhabited by visions of its own—
Such solitude is soon disturbed, such visions quickly flown.
Love’s pleasant time is with her now, for she has hope and faith,
Who thinks not of what the lover does, but what the lover says.
On her hand, there’s a ring; within her heart, a vow;
No voice whispers at her side—what does she blush for now?
A noble galley sails bravely before the wind;
Her sails are dyed by the red sky she's leaving behind.
No one else noticed the ship that swept so eagerly along;
The lady recognized the flag, and when has a lover’s eye been wrong?
The lonely lady watched; meanwhile, the cheerful banter continued.
It seemed as if the spirits caught the freshness of the day.
‘What a good omen on a morning like this,’ her Grace of England said,
‘What progress has Sir John Perrot made down our noble Thames?’
[Pg 347]
Then Sir Walter Raleigh spoke with a soft and silvery smile,
And an earnest gaze that seemed to catch the Queen's slightest glance,
‘I think every wind in heaven will fill his sails,
For isn’t he going out to do his gracious Sovereign’s will?’
With that, the ship came bounding up, then paused in her flight;
And right beneath the terrace, she anchored in their sight.
‘Now, by my troth,’ exclaimed the Queen, ‘it is our captain’s ship.
What brings the lingerer back again?’—her eye and brow darkened.
‘Fair Queen,’ replied a voice below, ‘I fulfill a vow of mine,
And no voyage was ever delayed by worship at a shrine.’
He took the jewel in his hand and bent to one knee,
Then tossed the scarf around his neck, where all the gem could be seen.
His white plumes swept across the deck, and he glanced above;
The courtesy was for the Queen, the glance was for his love.
‘Now farewell,’ the Queen said, ‘for you are a true knight.’
But even as she spoke, the ship began to vanish from sight.
Woe to the Spaniards and their gold in the Indian seas,
When the thunder of that deck rolled on the southern breeze,
For bravely Sir John Perrot carried our flag across the sea,
And England's bells rang for victory when he came home again.
In the will of Thomas Sackville, Duke of Dorset (Lord High Treasurer in the times of Elizabeth and James I.), given in Collins’s ‘Baronage,’ is a mention of a token ring. It is described as ‘of gold and enamelled black, and set round with diamonds to the number of twenty; whereof, five, being placed in the upper part of the said ring, do represent the fashion of a cross.’ It is further mentioned as to be a heirloom. ‘And to the intent that they may knowe howe just and great cause bothe they and I have to hould the sayed Rynge, with twentie Diamonds, in so highe esteeme, yt is most requisite that I doe here set downe the whole course and circumstance, howe and from whome the same rynge did come to my possession, which was thus: In the[Pg 348] Begynning of the monethe of June, one thousand sixe hundred and seaven, this rynge thus set with twenty Diamonds, as is aforesayed, was sent unto me from my most gracious soveraigne, King James, by that honourable personage, the Lord Haye, one of the gentlemen of His Highnes Bedchamber, the Courte then beying at Whitehall in London, and I at that tyme remayning at Horsley House in Surrey, twentie myles from London, where I laye in suche extremetye of sickness as yt was a common and a constant reporte all over London that I was dead, and the same confidentlie affirmed even unto the Kinge’s Highnes himselfe; upon which occasion it pleased his most excellent majestie, in token of his gracious goodness and great favour towards me, to send the saied Lord Hay with the saied Ringe, and this Royal message unto me, namelie, that his Highness wished a speedie and a perfect recoverye of my healthe, with all happie and good successe unto me, and that I might live as long as the diamondes of that Rynge (which therewithall he delivered unto me) did endure, and in token thereof, required me to weare yt and keepe yt for his sake.’
In the will of Thomas Sackville, Duke of Dorset (Lord High Treasurer during the reigns of Elizabeth and James I), mentioned in Collins’s ‘Baronage,’ there is reference to a token ring. It is described as "gold and black enamel, surrounded by twenty diamonds, five of which are arranged in the upper part of the ring to resemble a cross." It is also noted to be a family heirloom. "To ensure they understand the valid and significant reason for both them and me to value the aforementioned ring with twenty diamonds so highly, it is essential that I outline the entire history and circumstances regarding how I came into possession of this ring, which is as follows: At the beginning of June, 1607, this ring set with twenty diamonds, as mentioned, was sent to me from my most gracious sovereign, King James, by the honorable Lord Hay, one of the gentlemen in His Highness's Bedchamber, while the court was at Whitehall in London, and I was at that time staying at Horsley House in Surrey, twenty miles from London, where I was in such extreme illness that it was commonly reported throughout London that I had died, a claim even confidently affirmed to the King himself; on this occasion, it pleased His most excellent Majesty, as a gesture of his gracious goodness and great favor towards me, to send Lord Hay with this ring and a royal message to me, stating that His Highness wished for my swift and complete recovery, along with all success and happiness, and that I might live as long as the diamonds of that ring (which he delivered to me) would last, and as a token of this, he required me to wear it and keep it for his sake."
Among other token rings, under affecting circumstances, I may also mention those given on the eve of his execution (1651) by James Stanley, Earl of Derby, Governor of the Isle of Man—‘a man,’ observes Lodge, ‘of great honour and clear courage.’ A minute narrative of the circumstances of his final hours was penned with touching simplicity by a Mr. Bagaley, one of his gentlemen, who was allowed to attend him to the last, and the manuscript has been carefully preserved in the family. A transcript of the most part of it may be found in Collins’s ‘Peerage.’ He wrote letters to his wife, daughter, and sons, and sent a servant to purchase all the rings he could get. These were wrapped in[Pg 349] separate papers, and Bagaley, under the Earl’s instructions, directed them to his children and servants, and the unfortunate nobleman said: ‘As to them I can say nothing; silence and your own looks will best tell your message.’
Among other token rings, under certain circumstances, I can also mention those given on the eve of his execution (1651) by James Stanley, Earl of Derby, Governor of the Isle of Man—“a man,” notes Lodge, “of great honor and clear courage.” A detailed account of the events of his final hours was written with heartfelt simplicity by Mr. Bagaley, one of his gentlemen, who was allowed to accompany him until the end, and the manuscript has been carefully preserved in the family. A transcript of most of it can be found in Collins’s ‘Peerage.’ He wrote letters to his wife, daughter, and sons, and sent a servant to buy all the rings he could find. These were wrapped in[Pg 349] separate papers, and Bagaley, following the Earl’s instructions, sent them to his children and servants, while the unfortunate nobleman said: “As for them, I can say nothing; silence and your own expressions will best convey your message.”
Rings, as ‘tokens,’ or pledges, for the repayment of loans were made for Queen Henrietta Maria, the consort of Charles the First, while she was in Holland, endeavouring to raise money and troops for her unfortunate husband. To such as gave her pecuniary assistance she was accustomed to show her gratitude by the gift of a ring, or some other trinket from her own cabinet; but when the increasing exigencies of the King’s affairs compelled her to sell or pawn in Holland the whole of her plate and most of her jewels for his use, she adopted an ingenious device by which she was enabled, at a small expense, to continue her gifts to her friends, and in a form that rendered them more precious to the recipient parties, because they had immediate reference to herself. She had a great many rings, lockets, and bracelet clasps made with her cipher, the letters ‘H. M. R.,’ Henrietta Maria Regina, in very delicate filagree of gold, entwined in a monogram, laid on a ground of crimson velvet, covered with thick crystal, cut like a table-diamond and set in gold. These were called the King’s pledges, or ‘tokens,’ and presented by her to any person who had lent her money, or had rendered her any particular service, with an understanding that if presented to Her Majesty at any future time, when fortune smiled on the royal cause, it would command, either repayment of the money advanced, or some favour from the Queen as an equivalent.
Rings, as 'tokens' or promises for repaying loans, were made for Queen Henrietta Maria, the wife of Charles the First, while she was in Holland, trying to raise funds and troops for her unfortunate husband. She would show her gratitude to those who helped her financially by gifting them a ring or some other trinket from her collection. However, when the growing needs of the King’s situation forced her to sell or pawn all her silverware and most of her jewels in Holland for his benefit, she came up with a clever idea that allowed her to keep giving gifts to her friends at a low cost. This made the gifts even more special to the recipients because they were closely tied to her. She had many rings, lockets, and bracelet clasps made with her initials 'H. M. R.,' standing for Henrietta Maria Regina, delicately crafted in gold filigree, intertwined in a monogram on a crimson velvet background, covered with thick crystal cut like a diamond and set in gold. These were known as the King’s tokens and were given by her to anyone who lent her money or provided her with a special service, with the understanding that if presented to Her Majesty in the future, when luck favored the royal cause, it would either lead to repayment of the money lent or some favor from the Queen in return.
‘Many of these interesting testimonials are still in existence’ (observes Miss Strickland), ‘and, in families where the tradition has been forgotten, have been regarded as[Pg 350] amulets which were to secure good fortune to the wearer.’ One of these royal pledges, Miss Strickland informs us, has been preserved as an heirloom in her family, and there is a ring with the same device, in possession of Philip Darrell, Esq., of Cales Hill, Kent, which was presented to his immediate ancestor by that queen.
‘Many of these interesting testimonials still exist’ (notes Miss Strickland), ‘and in families where the tradition has been forgotten, they have been seen as[Pg 350] amulets meant to bring good luck to the wearer.’ One of these royal tokens, Miss Strickland tells us, has been kept as an heirloom in her family, and there is a ring with the same design, owned by Philip Darrell, Esq., of Cales Hill, Kent, which was given to his direct ancestor by that queen.
It was in the reign of Charles the First that a fearful incident occurred in Scotland (1630) at the Castle of Frendraught—a fire breaking out at midnight in a sudden manner, ‘yea, in ane clap,’ says Spalding, involving the whole of the inmates in destruction, excepting three persons. Viscount Melgum, son of the Marquis of Huntly, only twenty-four years of age, who was a guest of the Laird of Frendraught at the time, perished, leaving a widow and child. A popular ballad of the day speaks of his being called on to leap from the window:—
It was during the reign of Charles the First that a terrible incident took place in Scotland (1630) at the Castle of Frendraught—a sudden fire broke out at midnight, "in a clap," as Spalding describes it, engulfing all the people inside except for three. Viscount Melgum, the twenty-four-year-old son of the Marquis of Huntly, was visiting the Laird of Frendraught at the time and tragically died, leaving behind a widow and child. A popular ballad from that time mentions him being urged to jump from the window:—
‘How can I leap, how can I win,
How can I leap to thee?
My head’s fast in the wire-window,
My feet burning from me.’
He’s ta’en the rings from aff his hands,
And thrown them o’er the wall;
Saying, ‘Give them to my lady fair,
Where she sits in the hall.’
‘How can I jump, how can I win,
How can I jump to you?
My head is stuck in the wire window,
My feet are burning from walking.
He's taken the rings off his hands,
And tossed them over the wall;
Saying, "Give them to my beautiful lady,
Where she is sitting in the hall.
A pledge or token ring of remarkable interest was exhibited by Mr. J. W. Singer at the Loan Exhibition of Ancient and Modern Jewellery, South Kensington Museum, in 1872. This ring (of silver, set with a yellow topaz, diamonds, and a small ruby of English manufacture) has been preserved in the Penderell family, as that given by King Charles II. as a token of gratitude for the fidelity which saved him in the oak-tree at Boscobel, after the battle of Worcester. At the King’s Restoration the five brothers[Pg 351] Penderell attended at Whitehall, ‘when his Majesty was pleased to own their faithful service, and graciously dismissed them with a princely reward’ (‘Boscobel Tracts’).
A pledge or token ring of significant interest was displayed by Mr. J. W. Singer at the Loan Exhibition of Ancient and Modern Jewelry at the South Kensington Museum in 1872. This ring, made of silver and set with a yellow topaz, diamonds, and a small ruby from England, has been kept in the Penderell family as the one given by King Charles II as a sign of gratitude for the loyalty that saved him in the oak tree at Boscobel after the battle of Worcester. When the King was restored to the throne, the five brothers[Pg 351] Penderell were present at Whitehall, ‘when his Majesty kindly acknowledged their loyal service and graciously dismissed them with a princely reward’ (‘Boscobel Tracts’).
This ring now belongs to Mrs. Whiteby, of Beckington, Somerset, fifth in descent from Penderell. A yearly pension of one hundred pounds for ever was conferred upon the family, a portion of which (forty pounds) is now only received by a male relative.
This ring now belongs to Mrs. Whiteby, of Beckington, Somerset, who is the fifth descendant from Penderell. The family was granted a yearly pension of one hundred pounds for ever, of which a portion (forty pounds) is currently received by a male relative.
A ring-token, of sinister omen, is mentioned of the same monarch. This ill bestowal of a ring from royalty is exemplified in the case of that hideous judicial monster Jeffreys. With thorough want of judgment, Charles II., in a fit of imprudency, habitual to him, gave the infamous judge a ring from his own finger. This was popularly termed Jeffreys’s blood-stone, as he obtained it soon after the execution of Sir Thomas Armstrong. Roger North says: ‘The King was persuaded to present him with a ring, publicly taken from his own finger, in token of his Majesty’s acceptance of his most eminent services; and this, by way of precursor, being blazoned in the Gazette, his Lordship went down into the country as from the King, legatus à latere.’ And a mission of blood and brutality it was!
A cursed ring-token is mentioned in relation to the same king. This ill-advised gift of a ring from royalty is highlighted by the notorious judge Jeffreys. In a moment of reckless decision-making, typical of him, Charles II. gave the infamous judge a ring from his own finger. This came to be known as Jeffreys’s blood-stone, as he received it shortly after the execution of Sir Thomas Armstrong. Roger North writes: ‘The King was convinced to present him with a ring, publicly taken from his own finger, as a sign of his Majesty’s acknowledgment of his most notable services; and this, having been announced in the Gazette, his Lordship went down into the country as if from the King, legatus à latere.’ And it was indeed a mission filled with blood and brutality!
A ring-token or present is mentioned in the ‘True Remembrances’ of Richard Boyle, the great Earl of Cork, who says: ‘When first I arrived in Ireland, June 23, 1588, all my wealth then was twenty-seven pounds three shillings in money, and two tokens which my mother had given me, viz. a diamond ring, which I have ever since and still do wear, and a bracelet of gold worth about ten pounds.’
A ring-token or gift is referenced in the ‘True Remembrances’ of Richard Boyle, the great Earl of Cork, who states: ‘When I first arrived in Ireland, June 23, 1588, all my wealth at that time was twenty-seven pounds three shillings in cash, and two tokens that my mother had given me, namely, a diamond ring, which I have worn ever since, and a gold bracelet worth about ten pounds.’
Many other instances of ring-tokens might be mentioned, but the limits to which this work is confined prevent me from enlarging on the subject. I will merely allude as a[Pg 352] memorable instance in modern times, to the ring-token presented to George III. on his birthday in 1764 by his Queen. It was a ring splendidly ornamented with brilliants, and contained an enamel in which were the portraits, exquisitely represented, of their children.
Many other examples of ring-tokens could be mentioned, but the scope of this work limits me from expanding on the topic. I will just refer to one memorable instance in modern times: the ring-token given to George III on his birthday in 1764 by his Queen. It was a ring beautifully adorned with diamonds and had an enamel that featured exquisitely rendered portraits of their children.
I will conclude these notices of token rings with a very stirring ballad by Mr. Planché, entitled ‘The Three Rings’:—
I’ll wrap up these notes on token rings with a powerful ballad by Mr. Planché called ‘The Three Rings’:—
‘Good morrow, lovely lady! Is thy noble lord with thee?’
‘Sir knight, since to the wars he went, full moons have wasted three;
Three weary moons have wax’d and waned since he sail’d o’er the main,
And little wist I when these eyes shall see my lord again.’
‘Forget him, lovely lady, as by him thou art forgot.’
‘Thou dost him wrong, sir knight; by him forgotten I am not:
I hold within my arms a pledge for his true love to me,
This new-born babe—his child and mine—which he hath yet to see.’
‘Oh, let me be thy servant, lady—I will love thee dear—’
‘Sir knight, I am a wedded wife, such words I may not hear—’
‘None else can hear them, lady. What witnesses are nigh?’
‘This heart, which is Hernando’s, and God who sits on high.’
‘Sweet lady, yet a boon, upon my bended knee, I crave—’
‘Sir knight, if one which I can grant with honour, ask and have.’
‘Oh, give me these three golden rings that on thy fingers shine.’
‘Sir knight, with life alone I part with these three rings of mine!’
‘Oh, lend them but a day—an hour—to wear them for thy sake—’
‘It may not be, such act my lord would proof of falsehood make.’
‘Enough, enough, unkind one! Then I may nought obtain?’
‘When thou would’st aught that I may grant, sir knight, demand again.’
The knight hath mounted his steed and away—his love is changed to hate.
At the nearest town he lighted down before a goldsmith’s gate:
He hath bought three rings of plain red gold, like those by Clara worn,
‘O bitterly thy slight of me, proud lady, shalt thou mourn!’
He hath mounted again his coal-black barb before the break of day.
And who is he, the warrior bold, who meets him on the way?
[Pg 353]It is the brave Hernando, who, the Soldan’s city won,
Now pants to hold within his arms his wife and new-born son.
‘What news? what news? thou noble knight; good friend, thy tidings tell—
How fare my wife and infant child—say, are they safe and well?’
‘Thy wife is well, and eke the boy’—‘Thy speech is brief and cold;
Clara is true?’—‘For answer, look on these three rings of gold.’
One instant, and his vizor’s clos’d, his lance is in the rest—
‘Defend thee now, thou felon knight! Foul shame be on thy crest!’
One charge—one shock. The traitor’s corse is from the saddle cast,
Through plate, and chain, and gambeson, Hernando’s spear hath pass’d.
He buries in his courser’s flank his bloody spears again;
Away! away! he scales the hill—he thunders o’er the plain!
‘Up, Clara, up!’ her mother cries; ‘Hernando comes! I see
The well-known blazon on his shield. ’Tis he, my child, ’tis he!’
‘Oh, mother! rides he fast as one who to his true-love hies?
Canst see his face, dear mother? Looks joy from out his eyes?’
‘His helmet, child, is open, and he rideth fast enow,
But his cheek is pale, and bent, as if in anger, seems his brow.’
The tramp of armed feet is heard upon the turret stair;
Forth springs to meet her lord’s embrace that lady fond and fair.
By the silken locks, in which his hands have oft been fondly twined,
He hath seized and dragged her from her bower with jealous fury blind.
He hath bound her at his horse’s heels—nor shriek nor prayer he heeds;
O’er rugged rock, through bush and briar, the goaded courser speeds;
Her flesh is rent by every thorn, her blood stains every stone,—
Now, Jesu sweet, have mercy! for her cruel lord hath none!
And lo! the sharp edge of a flint hath shorn the cord in twain;
Down leaps the vengeful lord to make his victim fast again.
‘What have I done.? Before I die, my crime, Hernando, say?’
‘The golden rings I charged thee keep, thou false one, where are they?’
‘Oh where, but on the hand which, with my heart, I gave to thee!
Draw off my glove—I cannot—for my strength is failing me!’
‘Oh curses on my frantic rage!—my wrong’d—my murder’d wife—
Come forth, my sword! Then, Clara, shall life atone for life!’
She staggered up, love gave her strength, the sword afar she hurl’d,
‘Thou know’st my innocence! Oh, live to prove it to the world!
[Pg 354]Weep not for Clara—loved by thee, contented she expires!
Live for our child—the boy whose fame shall emulate his sire’s!’
‘Our child!—the child my fury hath made motherless to-day!
And when he for his mother asks—O God—what shall I say?’
‘Say that her name was Clara—that thy love was her pride—
That, blessing him and thee, she smiled, as in thy arms she died!’
‘Good morning, beautiful lady! Is your noble lord with you?’
‘Sir knight, since he went to war, three full moons have passed;
Three weary moons have waxed and waned since he sailed across the sea,
And I have little idea when these eyes will see my lord again.’
‘Forget him, beautiful lady, as he has forgotten you.’
‘You are wrong, sir knight; I am not forgotten by him:
I hold in my arms a pledge of his true love for me,
This newborn babe—his child and mine—which he has yet to see.’
‘Oh, let me be your servant, lady—I will love you dearly—’
‘Sir knight, I am a married wife; such words I cannot hear—’
‘No one else can hear them, lady. What witnesses are nearby?’
‘This heart, which belongs to Hernando, and God who sits on high.’
‘Sweet lady, one more favor, on my bended knee, I ask—’
‘Sir knight, if it’s something I can grant honorably, ask and have.’
‘Oh, give me these three golden rings that shine on your fingers.’
‘Sir knight, I would only part with these three rings for my life!’
‘Oh, just lend them for a day—an hour—to wear them for your sake—’
‘It cannot be; such an act would be proof of falsehood to my lord.’
‘Enough, enough, unkind one! Then I cannot obtain anything?’
‘When you wish for something I can grant, sir knight, ask again.’
The knight mounted his steed and rode away—his love has turned to hate.
At the nearest town, he dismounted before a goldsmith’s gate:
He bought three rings of plain red gold, like those Clara wore,
‘Oh, how bitterly you shall regret this slight, proud lady!’
He mounted his coal-black horse again before dawn.
And who is the bold warrior who meets him on the way?
[Pg 353]It is the brave Hernando, who has conquered the Soldan's city,
Now eager to hold his wife and newborn son in his arms.
‘What news? what news? noble knight; good friend, tell me your tidings—
How are my wife and infant child—are they safe and well?’
‘Your wife is well, and so is the boy’—‘Your words are brief and cold;
Clara is true?’—‘For an answer, look at these three rings of gold.’
In an instant, his visor is closed, his lance is in position—
‘Defend yourself now, you treacherous knight! Shame on your crest!’
One charge—one clash. The traitor’s corpse is thrown from the saddle,
Through plate, chain, and padding, Hernando’s spear has pierced.
He buries his bloody spear again in his horse's flank;
Away! away! he climbs the hill—he thunders across the plain!
‘Get up, Clara, get up!’ her mother cries; ‘Hernando comes! I see
The well-known emblem on his shield. It’s he, my child, it’s he!’
‘Oh, mother! does he ride fast as one who hurries to his true love?
Can you see his face, dear mother? Does joy shine from his eyes?’
‘His helmet is open, child, and he rides quickly enough,
But his cheek is pale, and bent, as if he seems angry.’
The sound of armed feet is heard upon the tower stairs;
The lady, fond and fair, springs forward to meet her lord’s embrace.
By the silken locks, in which his hands have often been lovingly twined,
He seizes and drags her from her bower with blinded jealous fury.
He has bound her at his horse's heels—he pays no attention to her cries or prayers;
Over rocky ground, through bushes and briars, the urged horse speeds;
Her flesh is torn by every thorn, her blood stains every stone,—
Now, dear Jesus, have mercy! for her cruel lord has none!
And behold! the sharp edge of a flint has cut the cord in two;
Down leaps the vengeful lord to try to capture his victim again.
‘What have I done? Before I die, tell me my crime, Hernando!’
‘The golden rings I charged you to keep, you deceitful one, where are they?’
‘Oh where, but on the hand that I gave you with my heart!
Take off my glove—I cannot—for my strength is failing me!’
‘Oh, curses on my frantic rage!—my wronged—my murdered wife—
Come forth, my sword! Then, Clara, shall my life atone for yours!’
She staggered up; love gave her strength, she threw the sword away,
‘You know my innocence! Oh, live to prove it to the world!
[Pg 354]Don’t weep for Clara—loved by you, she dies content!
Live for our child—the boy whose fame shall match his father’s!’
‘Our child!—the child my fury has made motherless today!
And when he asks for his mother—O God—what shall I say?’
‘Say that her name was Clara—that your love was her pride—
That, blessing him and you, she smiled, as she died in your arms!’
Mr. Planché has borrowed the subject of his admirable poem from a legend still popular in Normandy. It is that of Marianson, the wife of a French noble. An evil spirit instigates a false knight to borrow the three golden token-rings of the lady during the absence of her lord. He takes them to a jeweller, who is ordered to prepare three others exactly similar, and then returns the lady her own rings. On his way he meets the husband, whose wife he declares has been unfaithful, and in proof of his assertion he shows the three surreptitious rings. The result of this is the fearful death of Marianson, being tied to the tail of a wild horse, and torn to pieces, and the after-discovery of the three rings in her drawer by the jealous husband.
Mr. Planché has taken the theme of his amazing poem from a legend still well-known in Normandy. It’s about Marianson, the wife of a French noble. An evil spirit tricks a false knight into stealing the three golden token-rings from the lady while her husband is away. He gives them to a jeweler, who is instructed to make three exact copies, and then he returns the lady's original rings. On his way back, he runs into the husband, whom he tells that his wife has been unfaithful, and to prove it, he shows him the three stolen rings. The outcome is the horrific death of Marianson, who is tied to the tail of a wild horse and torn to shreds, followed by the jealous husband discovering the three rings in her drawer.
A somewhat similar legend is related of the Lady of Toggenburg, who lived in a castle near the Lake of Zurich. Her ‘token’ ring was stolen by a crow, who dropped it in the park, where it was found by a young squire, who placed it on his finger. The Count of Toggenburg, passing at the time, saw the ring, and, inflamed by jealous fury, without asking any questions, rushed into the castle, and hurled his wife from the battlements into the lake. The young squire was torn to pieces by wild horses.
A similar legend is told about the Lady of Toggenburg, who lived in a castle near Lake Zurich. A crow stole her “token” ring and dropped it in the park, where a young squire found it and put it on his finger. The Count of Toggenburg happened to be passing by, saw the ring, and, consumed by jealous rage, rushed into the castle without asking any questions and threw his wife from the battlements into the lake. The young squire was killed by wild horses.
CHAPTER VII.
MEMORIAL AND MORTUARY RINGS.
Memorial and burial rings.
Bequests of rings are frequently mentioned in wills of the middle and later ages. In the reign of Henry the Third, two rings were bequeathed to that monarch by a bishop of Chichester, one adorned with an emerald, the other with a ruby. These jewels were taken out and employed to decorate an image of the Virgin at Westminster, and were placed on her forehead.
Bequests of rings are often mentioned in wills from the Middle Ages and beyond. During the reign of Henry III, a bishop from Chichester bequeathed two rings to the king, one set with an emerald and the other with a ruby. These jewels were removed and used to adorn an image of the Virgin at Westminster, placing them on her forehead.
In the will of Humphrey de Bohun, Earl of Hereford and Essex (1319), among various bequests is ‘un anel d’or avec un ruby qe ma femme me devisa, qe ad tout pleni de coups, et est en un petit forcer en une graunte husche au bout de la basse gardrobe’ (the gold ring with a ruby which his wife devised to him, and which is all covered with bruises, and is in a little casket in a great box at the end of the lower wardrobe). This is probably the same ring mentioned in an inventory of effects as an ‘anel d’or ove j Rubie.’
In the will of Humphrey de Bohun, Earl of Hereford and Essex (1319), among various bequests is ‘a gold ring with a ruby that my wife left to me, which is all covered with dents, and is in a small casket inside a large box at the end of the lower wardrobe’ (the gold ring with a ruby which his wife devised to him, and which is all covered with bruises, and is in a little casket in a great box at the end of the lower wardrobe). This is probably the same ring mentioned in an inventory of effects as ‘gold ring with a ruby.’
Thomas de Hoton, rector of Kyrkebymisperton (1351), bequeathed to his chaplain, amongst other objects, ‘j annulum vertuosum.’ Another is to ‘Domine Thome de Bouthum.’ These were supposed to possess some healing, or talismanic properties, such rings being termed, in mediæval Latin, vertuosus.
Thomas de Hoton, the rector of Kyrkebymisperton (1351), left his chaplain, among other things, a "virtuous ring." Another is for "Lord Thomas de Bouthum." These rings were believed to have healing or talismanic properties, and in medieval Latin, they were referred to as vertuosus.
[Pg 356]In the ‘Bury Wills and Inventories’ (Camden Society) are various bequests of rings. Some of these entries are very curious. John Baret (1463) leaves to ‘Elizabet Drury, my wyf, a ryng of gold with an ymage of the Trinitie.’ To Dame Margarete Spurdaunce ‘a doubyl ryng departyed of gold, with a ruby and a turkeys, with a scripture wretȳ with jnne, for a rememberaunce of oold love vertuously set at all times to the pleseer of God.’ To his nephew, Thomas Drury, ‘my best ryng of gold next mȳ signet, therein is wretyn Grace me governe, with letteris of I and B, accordyng to my name innamelid.’ To his niece Katerine, ‘for a tookne of rememberaunce, a gold ryng, wretyn with jnne the gold ryng, In noi é Ih’u signo me signo tab.’ To William Clopton, ‘the jemews and the rynges of sylvir, therin wretyn Grace me governe, for a tookne he vowchesaf in tyme comyng to shewe his good maistershepe to my wil.’ To ‘Thomais Brews, esquiyer, my crampe ryng, with blak innamel and a part sylvir and gilt.’
[Pg 356]In the ‘Bury Wills and Inventories’ (Camden Society) are various bequests of rings. Some of these entries are quite interesting. John Baret (1463) leaves his wife, Elizabet Drury, ‘a gold ring with an image of the Trinity.’ To Dame Margarete Spurdaunce, he gives ‘a double ring made of gold, with a ruby and a turquoise, inscribed with a scripture written in enamel, as a reminder of old love, virtuously set at all times to please God.’ To his nephew, Thomas Drury, he bequeaths ‘my best gold ring next to my signet, inscribed with Grace me governe, with the letters I and B, according to my name inscribed.’ To his niece Katerine, he leaves ‘a gold ring, inscribed in enamel, as a token of remembrance, In noi é Ih’u signo me signo tab.’ To William Clopton, he gives ‘the jewels and the silver rings, inscribed with Grace me governe, as a token he promises to show his good mastership to my will in the future.’ To ‘Thomais Brews, esquire, my cramp ring, with black enamel and partly silver and gilt.’
Anne of Cleves, who survived Henry VIII., left by her will several mourning-rings of various values for distribution among her friends and dependents.
Anne of Cleves, who outlived Henry VIII, bequeathed several mourning rings of different values in her will for distribution among her friends and dependents.
In the ‘Wills from Doctors’ Commons, 1495 to 1695’ (Camden Society), Cecily, Duchess of York (1495), gives to John Metcalfe and Alice his wife ‘all the ringes that I have, except such as hang by my bedes and Agnus, and also except my signet.’
In the ‘Wills from Doctors’ Commons, 1495 to 1695’ (Camden Society), Cecily, Duchess of York (1495), gives to John Metcalfe and his wife Alice ‘all the rings that I have, except for those that hang by my beads and Agnus, and also except for my signet.’
Anne Barett (1504) bequeaths to Our Lady of Walsingham ‘my maryeng ryng, with all thyngys hangyng theron.’
Anne Barett (1504) gives to Our Lady of Walsingham ‘my wedding ring, along with everything hanging from it.’
Agnes Hals (1554) leaves to her son ‘a rynge with the Passion of gold,’ and to her niece ‘my ringe with the wepinge eie;’ to another son ‘my rynge with the dead mān̄es ma̅n̄es head.’
Agnes Hals (1554) leaves to her son ‘a ring with the Passion of gold,’ and to her niece ‘my ring with the weeping eye;’ to another son ‘my ring with the dead man's head.’
[Pg 357]Jasper Despotin, M.D. (1648), wills and appoints ‘ten rings of gold to be made of the value of twenty shillings a peece sterling, with a death’s head vpon some of them, within one moneth after my dep̱ture, and to be disposed of amongst my friends as my executrices shall thinke meet.’ To Mr. Gibbon, ‘fortie shillings sterling to buy him a ring for a memoriall of me.’
[Pg 357]Jasper Despotin, M.D. (1648), bequeaths and appoints ‘ten gold rings valued at twenty shillings each, some featuring a death’s head, to be made within one month after my passing, and to be given to my friends as my executors see fit.’ To Mr. Gibbon, ‘forty shillings sterling to buy him a ring as a memento of me.’
Lady Anne Drury (1621) bequeaths ‘tenne pounds a peece to all my brothers to buy them ringes, and twentie pounds to be bestowed in ringes of tenne shillinges amongest my freinds whom they shall thinke fitte.’
Lady Anne Drury (1621) leaves ‘ten pounds each to all my brothers to buy them rings, and twenty pounds to be spent on rings worth ten shillings each for my friends whom they think are suitable.’
Edmund Lee (1535) mentions in his will ‘my ij wrethed rynge of gold, whych I ware on my thombe;’ also ‘my gold ryng wt a turkes, and a crampe ryng of gold wt all.’
Edmund Lee (1535) mentions in his will, “my two twisted gold rings, which I wear on my thumb;” also “my gold ring with a turquoise, and a cramp ring of gold with everything.”
Dame Maude Parr (1529), amongst other bequests of rings, mentions one ‘with a table diamontt sett with blacke aniell, meate for my little finger.’
Dame Maude Parr (1529), among other gifts of rings, mentions one 'with a table diamond set with black enamel, meant for my little finger.'
Stephen Gardiner, Bishop of Winchester (1557), bequeaths, ‘to my Lord Legate’s Grace (Cardinal Pole) a ring with a dyamounte, not so bigge as he is wourthie to have, but such as his poore orator is able to geve.’
Stephen Gardiner, Bishop of Winchester (1557), gives, ‘to my Lord Legate’s Grace (Cardinal Pole) a ring with a diamond, not as big as he deserves to have, but something that his poor orator is able to give.’
Speaker Lenthall (1682) appoints his executor ‘to give my friends Sir John Lenthall, his lady and children, and other my cozens and nephews, 50 gold rings with this motto, “Oritur non Moritur.”’ In a codicil he adds: ‘I also desire that my son will weare his mother’s wedding-ring about his arme in remembrance of her.’
Speaker Lenthall (1682) assigns his executor ‘to give my friends Sir John Lenthall, his wife and children, and my other relatives and nephews, 50 gold rings with the motto, “Oritur non Moritur.”’ In a codicil, he adds: ‘I also want my son to wear his mother’s wedding ring on his arm in memory of her.’
William Prynne (1699) bequeaths ‘to my deare brother, Mr. Thomas Prynne, my best gold ring with my father’s armes.’ To Katheryne Clerke, ‘my best serjeant’s ring.’ To her husband, ‘one of my gold rings. Item. I give to every one of their sonnes and daughters who shal be living[Pg 358] at the tyme of my decease one gold ring, and one hundred pounds a peece.’
William Prynne (1699) leaves ‘to my dear brother, Mr. Thomas Prynne, my best gold ring with my father’s arms.’ To Katheryne Clerke, ‘my best sergeant’s ring.’ To her husband, ‘one of my gold rings. Also, I give to each of their sons and daughters who will be alive[Pg 358] at the time of my death one gold ring and one hundred pounds each.’
In the will of Sir Richard Gresham (died 1548), father of the founder of the Exchange, he bequeathed a ring to the Protector, Duke of Somerset, and another to the profligate Duchess of Somerset, each of the value of five pounds, and he also left rings to all his friends.
In the will of Sir Richard Gresham (died 1548), father of the founder of the Exchange, he left a ring worth five pounds to the Protector, Duke of Somerset, and another to the extravagant Duchess of Somerset, along with rings for all his friends.
John Meres, an ‘Esquire Beadle’ of Corpus Christi College, left, in 1558, to the Vice-Chancellor of the College a ring weighing a royal (valued at ten shillings): to Dr. Hutcher, a ring worth fifteen shillings, and a gold ring set with a cornelian to each of the ‘supervisors.’ Meres had a patent for being gauger in 1550.
John Meres, an 'Esquire Beadle' of Corpus Christi College, left in 1558 a ring weighing a royal (worth ten shillings) to the Vice-Chancellor of the College; to Dr. Hutcher, he left a ring worth fifteen shillings, and a gold ring set with a cornelian to each of the 'supervisors.' Meres had a patent for being a gauger in 1550.
Matthew Parker, Archbishop of Canterbury, gave by will (1575) a gold ring with a round sapphire to Edmund Grindal, Archbishop of York, who succeeded him in the see of Canterbury.
Matthew Parker, Archbishop of Canterbury, left a will in 1575 that included a gold ring with a round sapphire, which he gave to Edmund Grindal, Archbishop of York, who took over his position in Canterbury.
In Collins’s ‘Baronage’ is the curious will of Thomas Sackville, Earl of Dorset (Lord High Treasurer in the times of Elizabeth and James I.), in which several rings are mentioned (see chapter on ‘Token-Rings’). Amongst others ‘a ring of gold enamelled black, wherein is set a great table diamonde, beying perfect and pure, and of much worth.’ This ring, with other jewels, was given to him by the King of Spain. During the minority of his descendants, these were to be consigned, as heirlooms, ‘in a strong chest of iron, under two several keys,’ to the custody of the Warden, and a senior fellow of New College, Oxford.
In Collins’s ‘Baronage’ is the interesting will of Thomas Sackville, Earl of Dorset (Lord High Treasurer during the reigns of Elizabeth and James I.), in which several rings are mentioned (see chapter on ‘Token-Rings’). Among others, there is ‘a gold ring enameled in black, featuring a large, flawless, and valuable table diamond.’ This ring, along with other jewels, was given to him by the King of Spain. While his descendants were still minors, these items were to be stored as heirlooms ‘in a strong iron chest, secured with two different keys,’ under the care of the Warden and a senior fellow of New College, Oxford.
Sir Philip Sidney (1586) desires that ‘three gold rings, set with large diamonds, might be fashioned exactly alike, for his aunt, the Countess of Sussex; another aunt’s husband, the Earl of Huntingdon; and his brother-in-law, the Earl of Pembroke.’
Sir Philip Sidney (1586) wishes that 'three gold rings, embellished with large diamonds, could be made identical for his aunt, the Countess of Sussex; another aunt's husband, the Earl of Huntingdon; and his brother-in-law, the Earl of Pembroke.'
[Pg 359]Thomas Wentworth, one of the chiefs of that great house, who died in 1587, bequeathed to his son and heir, William, besides other valuables, his gold ring, ‘whereon is engraved his crest, badge, and cognizance.’
[Pg 359]Thomas Wentworth, a leader of that prominent family, who passed away in 1587, left his son and heir, William, not only other valuables but also his gold ring, which is engraved with his crest, badge, and emblem.
Among the Rokeby family papers, in the will of Sir Ralph Rokeby (1600), is the bequest of several rings, ‘gratuities to kynsfolkes.’
Among the Rokeby family papers, in the will of Sir Ralph Rokeby (1600), is the gift of several rings, ‘gifts to relatives.’
Thomas Sutton, founder of the Charter House, bequeaths (in 1611) ten pounds to Mr. Thomas Brown, ‘to make him a ring.’
Thomas Sutton, founder of the Charter House, left ten pounds to Mr. Thomas Brown in 1611 "to make him a ring."
Our great national dramatist, Shakspeare, in his will (dated 1616) mentions certain moneys for the purchase of rings by several of his friends. Five are mentioned: two are his townsmen, Hamlet (Hamnet) Sadler, and William Reynolds, who have each twenty-six shillings and eightpence left them ‘to buy them ringes,’ the other three being the actors (‘my fellows,’ as he affectionately terms them), John Hemynge, Richard Burbage, and Henry Cundell, each of whom has a similar sum.
Our great national playwright, Shakespeare, in his will (dated 1616) mentions some money for the purchase of rings for several of his friends. Five are mentioned: two are from his hometown, Hamnet Sadler and William Reynolds, who each receive twenty-six shillings and eightpence “to buy them rings.” The other three are the actors (“my fellows,” as he affectionately calls them), John Hemynge, Richard Burbage, and Henry Cundell, each of whom also receives a similar amount.
In the testament of Richard Burgess, vicar of Witney (1632), he gives to his eldest son, John, the ring which he usually wore on his left hand, and also ‘twenty shillings to each of the two overseers of his last will, to purchase rings.’
In the will of Richard Burgess, vicar of Witney (1632), he gives his oldest son, John, the ring he usually wore on his left hand, and also “twenty shillings to each of the two overseers of his last will, to buy rings.”
Sir Henry Wotton, in 1637, leaves to each of the Fellows at Eton College ‘a plain gold ring, enamelled black, all save the verge, with this motto within, “Amor unit omnia.”’
Sir Henry Wotton, in 1637, leaves to each of the Fellows at Eton College ‘a simple gold ring, enamelled black, except for the edge, with this motto inside, “Love unites all things.”’
In a will, dated 1648, occurs this clause: ‘I do will and appoint ten rings of gold to be made, of the value of twenty shillings a piece, sterling, with a death’s-head upon some of them.’
In a will dated 1648, there’s this clause: ‘I bequeath and authorize the creation of ten gold rings, each worth twenty shillings sterling, with a skull design on some of them.’
The stock of rings described in the Duke of Newcastle’s[Pg 360] play, ‘The Varietie’ (1649), as the treasure of an old country lady, is suggestive of past legacies or memorials as well as the tastes of the yeomanry at that period: ‘A toadstone, two Turkies (turquoises), six thumb-rings, three alderman’s seals, five gemmals, and foure death’s-head,’ The enumeration concludes with the uncomplimentary observation, ‘these are alehouse ornaments’ (Fairholt).
The collection of rings mentioned in the Duke of Newcastle’s[Pg 360] play, ‘The Varietie’ (1649), as the belongings of an old country lady, hints at past legacies or memorials, as well as the preferences of the local gentry at that time: ‘A toadstone, two Turkish stones (turquoises), six thumb rings, three alderman’s seals, five gemmals, and four death’s-heads.’ The list concludes with the unflattering remark, ‘these are barroom decorations’ (Fairholt).
There are numerous varieties of mourning rings left by bequest in former times. The accompanying illustration represents one that would appeal to the feelings of the survivors in the simple and affecting inscription which it bears: ‘When this you see, remember me.’ The ring is of silver, jet, and gold.
There are many types of mourning rings that were passed down as inheritance in the past. The illustration shown depicts one that would resonate with the emotions of those left behind because of its simple and touching inscription: ‘When you see this, remember me.’ The ring is made of silver, jet, and gold.
Old Mourning ring.
Antique mourning ring.
Miss Agnes Strickland, in her ‘Lives of the Four Princesses of the Royal House of Stuart,’ mentions a circumstance in the life of the Princess Henrietta Anne (1670), that, ‘as Bossuet was kneeling by her bedside, she suddenly turned to one of her ladies and spoke to her in English, which the Bishop did not understand, to tell her that when she should have entered into her rest, she was to give Bossuet the emerald ring which had been ordered to be made for him as a memorial of her.’
Miss Agnes Strickland, in her ‘Lives of the Four Princesses of the Royal House of Stuart,’ mentions an event in the life of Princess Henrietta Anne (1670) where, as Bossuet was kneeling by her bedside, she suddenly turned to one of her ladies and spoke to her in English, which the Bishop didn’t understand, to tell her that when she passed away, she was to give Bossuet the emerald ring that had been made for him as a memento of her.
Izaak Walton added a codicil to his will (1683) for the distribution of memorial rings to several of his relations and friends, with the motto, ‘A friend’s farewell. I. W., obiit;’ the value of the rings to be thirteen shillings and fourpence each. In the will itself he gives to his son-in-law, Dr. Hawkins, ‘whom I love as my own son;’ to his daughter, his wife, and his son Izaak, a ring to each of them, with the motto, ‘Love my memory. I. W., obiit.’ To the Lord[Pg 361] Bishop of Winchester a ring, with the motto, ‘A mite for a million. I. W., obiit.’
Izaak Walton added an amendment to his will (1683) for the distribution of memorial rings to several of his relatives and friends, with the motto, ‘A friend’s farewell. I. W., died;’ the value of the rings to be thirteen shillings and fourpence each. In the will itself, he gives to his son-in-law, Dr. Hawkins, ‘whom I love as my own son;’ to his daughter, his wife, and his son Izaak, a ring for each of them, with the motto, ‘Love my memory. I. W., died.’ To the Lord[Pg 361] Bishop of Winchester a ring, with the motto, ‘A little for a lot. I. W., died.’
In a codicil of the last testament of Nell Gwyn (1687) she requests that Lady Fairborne may have fifty pounds given to her to buy a ring.
In a codicil of Nell Gwyn's last will and testament (1687), she asks that Lady Fairborne be given fifty pounds to buy a ring.
Dr. John Spencer, Master of Corpus Christi College, in his will (1693) left twenty shillings to each of the Fellows of his college for a funeral ring.
Dr. John Spencer, Master of Corpus Christi College, in his will (1693) left twenty shillings to each of the Fellows of his college for a funeral ring.
Queen Elizabeth, eldest daughter to James the First, wore to the day of her death a mourning ring, in which was a lock of her brother’s hair, brought over to Bohemia by a faithful servant, with the device of a crown over a skull and cross-bones, and the letters ‘C. R.’ After her death, in 1662, it was much prized by her descendants, and was long a heirloom among them.
Queen Elizabeth, the eldest daughter of James the First, wore a mourning ring up until her death. This ring contained a lock of her brother’s hair, brought to Bohemia by a loyal servant, featuring a design of a crown over a skull and crossbones, along with the letters ‘C. R.’ After her death in 1662, it was highly valued by her descendants and remained an heirloom among them for a long time.
On the eve of the death of Henrietta Anne, the daughter of Charles the First, she sent most tender messages to her brothers King Charles the Second, and James, Duke of York; and, drawing from her finger a ring, she expressed a wish that it might be sent to the former, as a memorial of her dying love.
On the night before her death, Henrietta Anne, the daughter of Charles the First, sent heartfelt messages to her brothers, King Charles the Second and James, Duke of York. She took a ring off her finger and asked for it to be sent to Charles as a reminder of her love as she was dying.
A remarkable interest is attached to the bequest of a ring by Sir Charles Cotterell, master of the ceremonies, who died in 1700. The particulars are given in the ‘Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries’ (January 30, 1862). ‘I bequeath to my constantly obliging Friend, Sr Stephen Fox, a ring wth a figure cut in an onyx, which was given by King Charles ye first, from his Finger to Sr Philip Warwick, at ye Treaty in the Isle of Wight, to seal letters he there writt for him, and whch Sr Philip left to me for a Legacy, and wch I cannot leave to anybody that has been a greater Honourer of that Excellent Prince’s Memory, nor a Worthier[Pg 362] Friend to us both, and who for these reasons I know will value it.’ To this has been added, by Sir Stephen Fox, ‘which I leave to my son Stephen and his Heirs, enjoining him to keep it in remembrance of the excellent King that gave it off his Finger to Sr Philip Warwick, who died in August 1684, and his son Philip at New Market a month after, and excellent Sr Charles Cotterell died in the year 1700, and after this was left to my good son Charles, who died in September 1713. Ste(phen) Fox.’
A notable interest surrounds the inheritance of a ring by Sir Charles Cotterell, master of ceremonies, who passed away in 1700. The details are provided in the ‘Proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries’ (January 30, 1862). ‘I leave to my ever-helpful friend, Sir Stephen Fox, a ring with a figure carved in onyx, which was given by King Charles I, from his finger to Sir Philip Warwick, at the Treaty on the Isle of Wight, to seal letters he wrote for him there, and which Sir Philip left to me as a legacy, and which I cannot pass on to anyone who has honored that excellent prince’s memory more or is a worthier friend to us both, and who for these reasons, I know will appreciate it.’ To this, Sir Stephen Fox added, ‘which I leave to my son Stephen and his heirs, instructing him to keep it as a reminder of the excellent king who gave it from his finger to Sir Philip Warwick, who died in August 1684, and his son Philip a month later at New Market, and excellent Sir Charles Cotterell died in 1700, and afterward this was left to my good son Charles, who passed away in September 1713. Stephen Fox.’
At the commencement of the first of these memoranda, and (observes Mr. Franks, by whom these particulars were given to the Society) at the conclusion of the last are much-mutilated impressions from a very small antique gem, which, there can be no doubt, is the onyx set in the ring in question. The figure is of fine workmanship, and represents a partially-draped young man standing in profile to the right. It is, possibly, a representation of Mercury, and resembles somewhat in attitude the bronze statue found at Huis, in the south of France, and known as the Payne Knight Mercury.
At the beginning of the first of these notes, and (as Mr. Franks points out, who provided these details to the Society) at the end of the last, there are heavily damaged impressions from a very small ancient gem, which is undoubtedly the onyx set in the ring being discussed. The figure is crafted beautifully and shows a partially-draped young man standing in profile to the right. It might be a depiction of Mercury and has a similar posture to the bronze statue found at Huis in the south of France, known as the Payne Knight Mercury.
Mr. Franks corrects an error of Sir Stephen Fox as to the date of the death of Sir Philip Warwick, which took place January 15, 1682-3.
Mr. Franks corrects an error by Sir Stephen Fox regarding the date of Sir Philip Warwick's death, which occurred on January 15, 1682-3.
The subsequent history of this remarkable ring is contained in a short note written on the envelope enclosing the above memoranda, by the Earl of Ilchester, son of Sir Stephen Fox. ‘Memorandum: I am much concerned for the loss of the ring which was given by King Charles I. to Sir Philip Warwick, as mentioned in the enclosed paper. This ring was stolen when my house in Burlington Street was broken open by rogues in January 1722.’
The later history of this incredible ring is detailed in a brief note written on the envelope that holds the above documents, by the Earl of Ilchester, the son of Sir Stephen Fox. ‘Note: I'm very worried about the loss of the ring given by King Charles I to Sir Philip Warwick, as mentioned in the attached paper. This ring was stolen when my house on Burlington Street was broken into by thieves in January 1722.’
‘With these papers’ (remarks Mr. Franks) ‘is preserved[Pg 363] a long letter giving an account of the burglary, which took place during the absence of the family, and was of a very cool and daring character. It is sadly to be feared that the gold setting of the ring has found its way to the melting-pot; the onyx, however, may have been preserved, and may, probably, be hereafter identified by the mutilated impressions in the Earl of Ilchester’s possession.’
‘With these papers’ (says Mr. Franks) ‘is preserved[Pg 363] a long letter detailing the burglary that happened while the family was away, which was very bold and audacious. Unfortunately, it’s likely that the gold setting of the ring has been melted down; however, the onyx may have been kept, and it could possibly be identified later by the damaged impressions in the Earl of Ilchester’s possession.’
In the Appendix to Pepys’s ‘Diary’ is a list of all the persons to whom rings and mourning were presented upon the occasion of his death (May 26, 1703) and funeral, by which it appears that forty-six rings of the value of twenty shillings, sixty-two at fifteen shillings, and twenty at ten shillings were distributed among friends on that occasion.
In the Appendix to Pepys’s ‘Diary’ is a list of all the people who received rings and mourning gifts after his death (May 26, 1703) and funeral. It shows that forty-six rings worth twenty shillings, sixty-two at fifteen shillings, and twenty at ten shillings were given to friends during that time.
In a codicil to the will of Bishop Burnet (died 1715) a long list of legacies occurs to his children; some of these were afterwards erased, and amongst them the bequest of ‘my pointed diamond’ to Gilbert, his second son. The ring was given to the late Sir John Sewell of Doctors’ Commons, by a descendant from Bishop Burnet. This ring is in the possession of Mr. C. Desborough, Bedford. In the collection of the Duke of Richmond is a memorial ring, gold, set with diamond, hoop enamelled in white, and inscribed ‘E. S. Dux Buckingensis,’ divided by a ducal coronet on a black ground. English work of the middle of the seventeenth century. Made in memory of Edmund Sheffield, second Duke of Buckingham, who died a minor in 1735.
In a codicil to Bishop Burnet's will (who died in 1715), there’s a long list of inheritances for his children; some of these were later removed, including the gift of ‘my pointed diamond’ to Gilbert, his second son. The ring was given to the late Sir John Sewell of Doctors’ Commons by a descendant of Bishop Burnet. This ring is currently owned by Mr. C. Desborough of Bedford. In the collection of the Duke of Richmond is a memorial ring, made of gold, set with a diamond, with a hoop enamelled in white, engraved with ‘E. S. Dux Buckingensis,’ separated by a ducal coronet on a black background. It’s an English piece from the mid-seventeenth century, created in memory of Edmund Sheffield, the second Duke of Buckingham, who died young in 1735.
That great man, George Washington, in his will, thus bequeaths ‘to my sisters-in-law Hannah Washington and Mildred Washington, to my friends Eleanor Stuart, Hannah Washington, of Fairfield, and Elizabeth Washington, of Hayfield, I give each a mourning-ring of the value of one[Pg 364] hundred dollars. These bequests are not made for the intrinsic value of them, but as mementos of my esteem and regard.’
That great man, George Washington, in his will, bequeaths ‘to my sisters-in-law Hannah Washington and Mildred Washington, and to my friends Eleanor Stuart, Hannah Washington of Fairfield, and Elizabeth Washington of Hayfield, I give each a mourning ring worth one[Pg 364] hundred dollars. These gifts are not given for their actual value, but as tokens of my affection and respect.’
In a few loving words addressed by a Lady Palmerston, when dying, to her husband, after mentioning the wealth at her disposal, which she gave to him, she mentions two chocolate-cups formed of mourning-rings, which were used daily by Lady Palmerston in memory of departed friends; these she wished her husband to look upon as a remembrance of death, and also of the fondest and most faithful friend he ever had.
In a few affectionate words spoken by Lady Palmerston as she was dying to her husband, after referring to the wealth she had, which she left to him, she mentioned two chocolate cups made from mourning rings that she used every day in memory of her late friends. She wanted her husband to see these as a reminder of death, as well as of the dearest and most loyal friend he ever had.
A very long list might be added of bequests of rings by distinguished persons, but I must be content to notice how the practice has been continued at intervals to the present time. A notable item occurs in the will of Charlotte Augusta Matilda, eldest daughter of George III., and Queen of Wurtemberg, in which she bequeaths to the Princess Augusta, among other costly objects, a ring containing a watch, set with brilliants.
A very long list could be made of rings left as gifts by famous people, but I'll just mention how this tradition has continued into modern times. A significant example can be found in the will of Charlotte Augusta Matilda, the eldest daughter of George III and Queen of Wurtemberg, in which she bequeaths to Princess Augusta, among other valuable items, a ring that holds a watch and is set with diamonds.
Rings were formerly given to attendants at funerals; an extract from the books of the Ironmongers’ Company, dated 1719, states: ‘The master acquainted the court that one John Turney, an undertaker for funerals, had lately buried one Mrs. Mason for the Hall, but had refused the master, wardens, and clerk each a ring, &c., according to his agreement, the persons invited being served with gloves, hat-bands, and rings. Ordered: the said undertaker be compelled to perform his agreement as the master and wardens shall direct.’ The practice of offering rings at funerals is introduced as an incident in ‘Sir Amadace.’
Rings used to be given to attendees at funerals; a record from the Ironmongers’ Company, dated 1719, says: ‘The master informed the court that one John Turney, a funeral director, had recently buried Mrs. Mason for the Hall, but had refused to give the master, wardens, and clerk each a ring, etc., as per his agreement, while the invited guests received gloves, hatbands, and rings. Ordered: the undertaker must fulfill his agreement as directed by the master and wardens.’ The tradition of giving rings at funerals is mentioned as an event in ‘Sir Amadace.’
In former days widows wore their ring on the thumb as an emblem of widowhood, and the following ‘trick’ in[Pg 365] connection with it is mentioned in the ‘Spectator:’—‘It is common enough for a stale virgin to set up a shop in a place where the large thumb-ring, supposed to be given her by her husband, quickly recommends her to some wealthy neighbour, who takes a liking to the jolly widow that would have overlooked the veritable spinster.’
In the past, widows wore their ring on their thumb as a symbol of being widowed, and the following ‘trick’ in[Pg 365] related to it is mentioned in the ‘Spectator:’—‘It’s not uncommon for an old maid to open up a shop where the large thumb-ring, believed to be given to her by her husband, quickly attracts the attention of a wealthy neighbor who becomes fond of the cheerful widow that would have ignored the actual single woman.’
Among the most touching episodes in connection with memorial rings is that exhibited in the closing hours of the unfortunate Mary, Queen of Scots, at Fotheringay Castle, just previous to her execution. She distributed the jewels that remained to her among her faithful attendants as tokens of her affection and regard. Among other sad memorials, she desired that a sapphire ring, which she took from her finger, might be conveyed as a mark of grateful acknowledgment to her brave kinsman Lord Claude Hamilton. Concerning this ring, Bishop Burnet says, ‘it is carefully preserved as one of the most precious heirlooms of that illustrious family.’ Miss Strickland informs us that it is now in the possession of Lord Claude’s accomplished representative, the present Duke of Hamilton, ‘by whom it was courteously shown to me at Hamilton Palace in 1857. It is a large square sapphire of peculiar beauty, rose-cut in several diamond-points, and set in gold enamelled blue in the curious cinque-cento work of that period.’
Among the most touching moments related to memorial rings is the scene during the final hours of the unfortunate Mary, Queen of Scots, at Fotheringay Castle, just before her execution. She gave out the remaining jewels to her loyal attendants as tokens of her love and appreciation. Among other somber mementos, she wished for a sapphire ring, which she took from her finger, to be sent as a sign of gratitude to her brave relative Lord Claude Hamilton. About this ring, Bishop Burnet states, ‘it is carefully preserved as one of the most precious heirlooms of that illustrious family.’ Miss Strickland tells us that it is now owned by Lord Claude’s distinguished descendant, the current Duke of Hamilton, ‘who graciously showed it to me at Hamilton Palace in 1857. It is a large square sapphire of unique beauty, rose-cut with several diamond facets, and set in blue enamel gold in the intricate cinque-cento style of that era.’
In the ‘Times’ (January 2, 1857) is an account of another memorial ring of the last sad hours of Queen Mary at Fotheringay. The letter is signed ‘A Constant Reader.’ ‘There is a lady residing at Broadstairs who is in possession of the identical ring which was worn by Mary, previous to her execution, and given by her to one of her maids of honour as a token of remembrance, and who was afterwards so reduced as to be compelled to sell it for the value of the[Pg 366] gold. The engraving is on amber, the usual material for such purposes at that period, and, as you may see from the enclosed impression, is much worn by time. It is supposed that the seal in the late Earl of Buchan’s collection was copied from it. This valuable antique was purchased many years ago by a member of the present possessor’s family, at the sale of the celebrated antiquary John M’Gowan, of Edinburgh, who considered it a most valuable gem.’
In the ‘Times’ (January 2, 1857), there’s an account of another memorial ring from the tragic last hours of Queen Mary at Fotheringay. The letter is signed ‘A Constant Reader.’ ‘There’s a woman living in Broadstairs who has the actual ring that Mary wore before her execution. She gave it to one of her maids of honour as a keepsake, but later became so impoverished that she had to sell it for the price of the [Pg 366] gold. The engraving is on amber, the typical material used for such items back then, and, as you can see from the enclosed impression, it’s quite worn with age. It’s believed that the seal in the late Earl of Buchan’s collection was copied from this ring. This valuable antique was bought many years ago by a member of the present owner’s family at the sale of the famous antiquary John M’Gowan from Edinburgh, who regarded it as a highly valuable gem.’
A ring memorial was sent by the Countess of Hertford (the great granddaughter of Henry VII., and one of the victims of Queen Elizabeth’s jealousy) on her dying bed by the hands of Sir Owen Hopton, of Cockfield Hall, Suffolk: ‘This shall be the last token unto my lord that ever I shall send him. It is the picture of myself.’ The ring bore a death’s head with an inscription around it: ‘while I live—yours.’
A ring memorial was sent by the Countess of Hertford (the great-granddaughter of Henry VII and one of the victims of Queen Elizabeth’s jealousy) on her deathbed through Sir Owen Hopton, of Cockfield Hall, Suffolk: ‘This will be the last token I ever send to my lord. It’s a picture of myself.’ The ring had a death’s head with an inscription around it: ‘while I live—yours.’
Memorial rings, Charles I.
Memorial rings, Charles I.
The Londesborough Collection contains two memorial rings of King Charles I., one of gold, with a table-faced diamond, and two smaller diamonds on each side. On the shank is engraved an elongated skeleton, with cross-bones above the skull, and a spade and pickaxe at the feet upon black enamel. Within is engraved ‘C. R., January 30, 1649, Martyr.’
The Londesborough Collection has two memorial rings from King Charles I. One is made of gold, featuring a flat-faced diamond and two smaller diamonds on each side. The band is engraved with a long skeleton, complete with crossbones above the skull, and a spade and pickaxe at the feet, all set against black enamel. Inside, it’s engraved with ‘C. R., January 30, 1649, Martyr.’
[Pg 367]The other ring is also of gold, with a square table-faced diamond on an oval face, which opens and reveals beneath a portrait of Charles in enamel. The face of the ring, the back and side portions of the shank are engraved with scroll-work, filled in with black enamel.
[Pg 367]The other ring is also made of gold, featuring a square diamond on an oval face that opens to show a portrait of Charles in enamel underneath. The ring's face, along with the back and sides of the band, is decorated with intricate scrollwork filled in with black enamel.
Memorial ring, Charles I.
Memorial ring for Charles I.
In the fifteenth day’s sale (May 11, 1842) at Strawberry Hill (lot 59), ‘a truly interesting relic,’ as the ring was termed, is recorded to have been bought by Mr. Harvey, of Regent Street, for fifteen guineas. In Horace Walpole’s catalogue it is described as one of the only seven mourning-rings given at the burial of Charles I. It has the King’s head in miniature behind a death’s-head between the letters ‘C. R.’ The motto is ‘Prepared be to follow me.’ A present to Horace Walpole from Lady Murray Elliott.
On the fifteenth day’s sale (May 11, 1842) at Strawberry Hill (lot 59), a “truly interesting relic,” as the ring was called, was recorded as having been purchased by Mr. Harvey, of Regent Street, for fifteen guineas. In Horace Walpole’s catalog, it is described as one of the only seven mourning rings given at the burial of Charles I. It features a miniature of the King’s head behind a skull between the letters ‘C. R.’ The motto reads, ‘Prepared be to follow me.’ It was a gift to Horace Walpole from Lady Murray Elliott.
‘A long and minute account of a ring,’ remarks the late Crofton Croker, ‘with a miniature of Charles I., appeared in the “Gentleman’s Magazine” for July 1823. It was then in the possession of the late Captain I. Toup Nicholas, R.N., and he inherited it from the Giffard family. This ring had four diamonds on the top, on lifting up which, a head of King Charles, enamelled on a turquoise, presented itself. The size of the painting does not exceed the fourth part of an inch; the execution is particularly fine, and the likeness excessively faithful. The small part of his Majesty’s dress which is visible, appears similar to that in which he is usually represented; and a piece of the ribbon to which the “George” is suspended is discernible; on closing the lid the portrait becomes perfectly hid. Although miniatures of[Pg 368] Charles I. are not uncommon, this is particularly valuable from the portrait being concealed, and also from its being supposed to be the smallest of him.’
‘A detailed account of a ring,’ notes the late Crofton Croker, ‘with a miniature of Charles I., appeared in the “Gentleman’s Magazine” for July 1823. It was then owned by the late Captain I. Toup Nicholas, R.N., who inherited it from the Giffard family. This ring had four diamonds on top, and when you lift them, a head of King Charles, enamelled on a turquoise, is revealed. The size of the painting is no larger than a quarter of an inch; the craftsmanship is exceptionally fine, and the likeness is very accurate. The small part of his Majesty’s outfit that is visible looks similar to how he is typically depicted; a piece of the ribbon holding the “George” is also noticeable, and when you close the lid, the portrait is completely hidden. While miniatures of Charles I. are not rare, this one is particularly valuable due to the concealed portrait and because it is believed to be the smallest depiction of him.’
At page 152 of Hulbert’s ‘History of Salop’ is an account of a ring in the possession of the Misses Pigott, of Upton Magna, said to be one of the four presented by Charles I., prior to his execution. It bears a small but beautiful miniature of the royal martyr. Inside the ring and reverse of the portrait is inscribed over a death’s-head ‘January 30, 1649,’ inside of the ring is engraved ‘Martyr Populi.’
At page 152 of Hulbert’s ‘History of Salop,’ there’s a description of a ring owned by the Misses Pigott from Upton Magna, which is believed to be one of the four given by Charles I before his execution. It features a small but beautiful portrait of the royal martyr. On the inside of the ring and on the back of the portrait, it’s inscribed over a skull, ‘January 30, 1649,’ and the inside of the ring has ‘Martyr Populi’ engraved.
A similar ring to this is in the possession of Mrs. Henderson (formerly Miss Adolphus), of London; and is said to have come to her in the female line, through her mother’s family. Charles presented it to Sir Lionel Walden on the morning in which he lost his life. It bears a miniature likeness of the King, set in small brilliants. Inside the ring are the words ‘Sic transit gloria mundi.’ A ring bearing the same inscription and a miniature of King Charles is in the collection of John Evans, Esq., F.R.S., Vice-President of the Antiquarian Society.
A similar ring to this belongs to Mrs. Henderson (formerly Miss Adolphus) from London, and it's said to have come down to her through her mother's family. Charles gave it to Sir Lionel Walden on the morning he lost his life. It features a tiny likeness of the King, surrounded by small diamonds. Inside the ring are the words ‘Sic transit gloria mundi.’ Another ring with the same inscription and a miniature of King Charles is part of the collection of John Evans, Esq., F.R.S., Vice-President of the Antiquarian Society.
In the family of Rogers, of Lota, a ring is still preserved as a heirloom which was presented to an ancestor by King Charles I. during his misfortunes. In the will of Robert Rogers, which was registered in the Record-office, Dublin, occurs the following paragraph: ‘And I also bequeath to Noblett Rogers the miniature portrait-ring of the martyr Charles I., given by that monarch to my ancestor, previous to his execution, and I particularly desire that it may be preserved in the name and family.’ The miniature, which is beautifully painted in enamel, and said to be by Vandyck, has been re-set in a very tasteful and appropriate style: the[Pg 369] original settings and inscriptions exactly correspond with those on the ring in the possession of the Misses Pigott, as previously mentioned. The correspondent of ‘Notes and Queries,’ from whom I have derived this information, adds: ‘I have lately seen a ring with a portrait of Charles on ivory in a coarse and very inferior style, and in a plain gold setting. It is in the possession of a gentleman, in whose family it has remained for several generations.’
In the Rogers family of Lota, there's still a ring kept as a family heirloom that was gifted to an ancestor by King Charles I during his tough times. In Robert Rogers' will, which is filed at the Record Office in Dublin, there's a paragraph that states: ‘I also leave to Noblett Rogers the miniature portrait ring of the martyr Charles I, given by that king to my ancestor before his execution, and I especially ask that it be preserved in the name and family.’ The miniature, beautifully painted in enamel and believed to be by Vandyck, has been reset in a very stylish and fitting design: the [Pg 369] original settings and inscriptions match exactly with those on the ring owned by the Misses Pigott, as mentioned earlier. The correspondent of ‘Notes and Queries,’ from whom I got this information, adds: ‘I have recently seen a ring with a portrait of Charles on ivory, done in a rough and much inferior style, set in plain gold. It belongs to a gentleman whose family has had it for several generations.’
Another memorial ring of Charles I. is described in the ‘Gentleman’s Magazine’ (September 1823) as having belonged to a lady named Heanaud, who died at Chelsea in 1809. ‘The ring itself was of pure gold, and without jewellery or ornament of any kind. On the top of it was an oval of white enamel, not more than half an inch in longitudinal diameter, and apparently about an eighth of an inch in thickness. The surface was slightly convexed, and divided into four compartments, in each of which was painted one of the four cardinal virtues, which, although so minute as to be scarcely perceptible to the clearest sight, by the application of a glass appeared perfectly distinct, each figure being well proportioned, and having its appropriate attitude. By touching a secret spring the case opened and exposed to view a very beautifully-painted miniature of the unfortunate Charles, with the pointed beard, mustachios, etc., as he is usually portrayed, and, from its resemblance to the portraits generally seen of the monarch, having every appearance of being a strong likeness. Within the lid of this little box (for box, in fact, it was) were enamelled, on a dark ground, a skull and cross-bones.’
Another memorial ring of Charles I is described in the ‘Gentleman’s Magazine’ (September 1823) as having belonged to a woman named Heanaud, who died in Chelsea in 1809. ‘The ring itself was made of pure gold and had no jewelry or decorations of any kind. On top of it was an oval of white enamel, measuring no more than half an inch in length and about an eighth of an inch thick. The surface was slightly curved and divided into four sections, each of which featured one of the four cardinal virtues. Although they were so small they were hardly visible to the naked eye, when viewed through a magnifying glass, the figures appeared clear, each one well-proportioned and posed appropriately. By pressing a hidden spring, the case opened to reveal a beautifully painted miniature of the unfortunate Charles, complete with a pointed beard and mustache, just as he is usually depicted. The likeness was strikingly similar to the portraits commonly seen of the king. Inside the lid of this little box (because it was, in fact, a box) were enamel images of a skull and cross-bones on a dark background.’
Mr. Howe, master-gunner at the castle of Carisbrooke, had a little son, who was a great favourite of the unfortunate Charles. One day, seeing him with a sword at his[Pg 370] side, the King asked him what he intended doing with it. ‘To defend your Majesty from your Majesty’s enemies,’ was the reply, which so pleased the King that he gave the child the signet-ring he was wearing. It has descended to Mr. Wallace, of Southsea, a kinsman of Mr. Cooke, of Newport, who belonged to the Howe family.
Mr. Howe, the master gunner at Carisbrooke Castle, had a little son who was a great favorite of the unfortunate Charles. One day, seeing the boy with a sword at his side, the King asked him what he planned to do with it. "To defend your Majesty from your enemies," he replied, which delighted the King so much that he gave the child the signet ring he was wearing. It has passed down to Mr. Wallace of Southsea, a relative of Mr. Cooke of Newport, who was part of the Howe family.
Royalist memorial ring.
Royalist memorial ring.
In Lockhart’s ‘Life of Scott’ it is stated that Sir Henry Halford gave Sir Walter Scott a lock of the hair of Charles I., when the royal martyr’s remains were discovered at Windsor, April 1813. Sir John Malcolm gave him some Indian coins to supply virgin gold for the setting of this relic, and, for some years, Sir Walter constantly wore this ring, which had the word ‘Remember’ embossed upon it.
In Lockhart's 'Life of Scott,' it's mentioned that Sir Henry Halford gave Sir Walter Scott a lock of Charles I's hair when the royal martyr's remains were found at Windsor in April 1813. Sir John Malcolm provided him with some Indian coins to use as pure gold for setting this relic, and for several years, Sir Walter consistently wore this ring, which had the word 'Remember' engraved on it.
Memorial ring of Charles I.
Charles I memorial ring.
Miss Gerard is in possession of a memorial gold ring which is stated to have been given to Bishop Juxon by Charles I., on the scaffold, since which period it has been preserved as an heirloom in the family of the present owner. The ring appears to resemble those of the period of Henry VIII. It is described and engraved in the ‘Gentleman’s Magazine’ for October 1797. The bezel is hexagonal, with death’s-head in white enamel on black ground, surrounded by the legend ‘BEHOLD . THE . ENDE;’ round the edge is the motto ‘RATHER . DEATH . THEN . FALS . FAITH.’ At the back the initials ‘M’ and ‘L’ tied with a mourning ribbon.
Miss Gerard has a memorial gold ring that is said to have been given to Bishop Juxon by Charles I on the scaffold. Since then, it has been passed down as an heirloom in the current owner's family. The ring looks like those from the time of Henry VIII. It is described and engraved in the ‘Gentleman’s Magazine’ for October 1797. The bezel is hexagonal, with a death’s-head in white enamel on a black background, surrounded by the inscription ‘BEHOLD. THE. END;’ around the edge is the motto ‘RATHER . DEATH . THAN . FALSE . FAITH.’ On the back, the initials ‘M’ and ‘L’ are tied with a mourning ribbon.
This interesting ‘memorial’ was exhibited at the Loan Exhibition of Ancient and Modern Jewellery at the South Kensington Museum in 1872.
This fascinating 'memorial' was displayed at the Loan Exhibition of Ancient and Modern Jewelry at the South Kensington Museum in 1872.
[Pg 371]In the Braybrooke Collection is one of the Royalist mourning-rings, of gold, with slight hoop beautifully inlaid with black enamel, the top surmounted by an oval box three quarters of an inch long, the sides of which are ornamented with perpendicular ovals of black and white enamel alternately. The inside or under part of the box is inlaid with fifteen longer ovals in a similar manner, round a black centre, in imitation of a sun-flower. The box contains a large and beautifully-painted portrait of Charles I. on blue enamel ground, over a surface as large as half an acorn. The base of this is bound by a narrow band of plain gold. Lord Braybrooke described this ring as one of the most beautiful he had seen, and, besides the superiority of the workmanship, the likeness is well preserved.
[Pg 371]In the Braybrooke Collection is a Royalist mourning ring made of gold, featuring a slender band beautifully inlaid with black enamel. The top has an oval box that's three quarters of an inch long, with its sides decorated with alternating black and white enamel ovals. The inside of the box is inlaid with fifteen longer ovals arranged around a black center, resembling a sunflower. Inside the box is a large, beautifully painted portrait of Charles I against a blue enamel background, covering an area about the size of half an acorn. The base is wrapped in a narrow band of plain gold. Lord Braybrooke described this ring as one of the most beautiful he had seen, noting not only the exceptional craftsmanship but also that the likeness is very well preserved.
In the same collection is a Royalist gold mourning-ring with black enamel inlaid upon the shoulders of the hoop and also upon the circular box on the top, which contains a sort of love-knot, or possibly intended for the royal cipher, below a cut crystal setting.
In the same collection is a Royalist gold mourning ring with black enamel inlaid on the shoulders of the band and on the circular box on top, which holds a kind of love knot, or maybe it’s meant for the royal cipher, beneath a cut crystal setting.
After the execution of Dr. John Hewett, chaplain to Charles I., and the object of Cromwell’s vindictive cruelty, a mourning-ring inscribed ‘Herodes necuit Johannem,’ was worn by the Royalists.
After the execution of Dr. John Hewett, chaplain to Charles I, and the target of Cromwell’s spiteful cruelty, a mourning ring engraved with ‘Herodes necuit Johannem’ was worn by the Royalists.
The mourning-ring for King Charles II. bore the inscription ‘Chs. Rex. Remem.—obiit—ber.: 6th Feb. 1685.’
The mourning ring for King Charles II had the inscription ‘Chs. Rex. Remem.—obiit—ber.: 6th Feb. 1685.’
In the Waterton Collection at the South Kensington Museum is a memorial gold ring, with oval bezel set with crystal, beneath which is a crown with the initials ‘C. R. K. B.’ in gold, over hair (Charles II. and Catharine of Braganza). English. Date about 1685. Diameter, nine-tenths of an inch.
In the Waterton Collection at the South Kensington Museum, there’s a memorial gold ring featuring an oval bezel set with crystal. Underneath, there’s a crown with the initials ‘C. R. K. B.’ in gold, representing Charles II and Catharine of Braganza. English. Date: around 1685. Diameter: nine-tenths of an inch.
Devices illustrative of death have frequently formed the subjects of mourning-rings. Among some antiquities found[Pg 372] in Sussex, and exhibited at the Society of Antiquaries in March 1866, was the fragment of a mourning-ring set with a coffin-shaped crystal, on which was delicately engraved a skeleton.
Devices representing death have often been featured in mourning rings. Among some antiques discovered[Pg 372] in Sussex and displayed at the Society of Antiquaries in March 1866, was a piece of a mourning ring set with a coffin-shaped crystal, which had a delicate engraving of a skeleton.
In the Braybrooke Collection is a gold ring of about the end of the sixteenth or beginning of the seventeenth century, with a hexagonal tablet, which is inlaid with a white stone engraved with a death’s-head; round it on the gold are engraved the words ‘Dye to Live.’[68]
In the Braybrooke Collection is a gold ring from the late sixteenth or early seventeenth century, featuring a hexagonal tablet inlaid with a white stone engraved with a death's head; engraved around it in the gold are the words ‘Dye to Live.’[68]
In the same collection is a ‘memento mori’ ring, of bronze, with a tablet on the hoop, half an inch square, and edges serrated; a death’s-head is engraved upon it with the above inscription. Rings with the same device and words are alluded to by Beaumont and Fletcher in the ‘Chances:’
In the same collection is a ‘memento mori’ ring made of bronze, with a half-inch square tablet on the band that has serrated edges; a skull is engraved on it along with the inscription mentioned above. Rings with the same design and wording are referenced by Beaumont and Fletcher in the ‘Chances:’
I’ll keep it as they keep death’s-heads in rings,
To cry ‘memento’ to me.
I’ll hold onto it like they keep skulls in rings,
To remind me to remember.
Rings engraved with skulls and skeletons were not, however, necessarily mourning-rings, but were worn also by persons who affected gravity. Luther wore a gold ring with a small death’s-head in enamel, which is now preserved in Dresden (see ‘Remarkable Rings’). Biron, in ‘Love’s Labour’s Lost,’ refers to ‘a death’s face in a ring.’
Rings engraved with skulls and skeletons weren’t just mourning rings; they were also worn by people who liked to appear serious. Luther wore a gold ring with a small death's head in enamel, which is now kept in Dresden (see ‘Remarkable Rings’). Biron, in ‘Love’s Labour’s Lost,’ mentions ‘a death’s face in a ring.’
Mr. Fairholt describes a ring on which two figures of[Pg 373] skeletons surround the finger and support a small sarcophagus. The ring is of gold, enamelled, the skeletons being made still more hideous by a covering of white enamel. The lid of the sarcophagus is also enamelled, with a Maltese cross in red on a black ground studded with gilt hearts. This lid is made to slide off and display a very minute skeleton lying within (Londesborough Collection).
Mr. Fairholt describes a ring featuring two figures of[Pg 373] skeletons that encircle the finger and hold up a small sarcophagus. The ring is made of gold and enamel, with the skeletons looking even more gruesome due to a layer of white enamel. The lid of the sarcophagus is also enamelled, showcasing a red Maltese cross on a black background dotted with golden hearts. This lid is designed to slide off and reveal a tiny skeleton lying inside (Londesborough Collection).
In the ‘Recueil des Ouvrages d’Orfévrerie,’ by Gilles l’Egaré, published in the early part of the reign of Louis XIV., is an unusually good design for a mourning-ring with skull decorations.
In the ‘Recueil des Ouvrages d’Orfévrerie,’ by Gilles l’Egaré, published in the early part of Louis XIV's reign, there's a remarkable design for a mourning ring featuring skull decorations.
In the Londesborough Collection is a fine specimen of a mourning-ring of the early part of the last century.
In the Londesborough Collection is a beautiful example of a mourning ring from the early part of the last century.
Memorial and mortuary rings.
Memorial and funeral rings.
In digging a grave in or near Ripon some years ago a sexton discovered an ancient signet-ring, on which was engraved a dormouse coiled up in sleep, with an inscription around it, in black-letter characters, ‘Wake me no man.’ A similar ring is said to have been turned up in a churchyard near Scarborough.
In digging a grave in or near Ripon a few years back, a sexton found an ancient signet ring engraved with a dormouse curled up in sleep, along with the inscription in old-style lettering, ‘Wake me no man.’ It’s said that a similar ring was also found in a churchyard near Scarborough.
At a meeting of the Royal Archæological Institute in April 1875, Mr. Fortnum, F.S.A., exhibited a mourning-ring of Queen Anne, the bezel of which is formed as a coffin,[Pg 374] containing a mat of the Queen’s hair, over which are the crowned initials A. R., and a death’s-head and cross-bones beneath a piece of crystal. The hoop is enamelled black, with the inscription ‘Anna . Regina . pia . felix,’ in letters of gold; inside is engraved, ‘Nat. 5 Feb. 1664. Inaug. 8 March 1702. Obt. 1 August 1714.’
At a meeting of the Royal Archaeological Institute in April 1875, Mr. Fortnum, F.S.A., showed a mourning ring of Queen Anne. The bezel is shaped like a coffin, [Pg 374] which contains a mat of the Queen’s hair. Above it are the crowned initials A. R., along with a skull and crossbones under a piece of crystal. The band is black enamel, featuring the inscription ‘Anna. Regina. Pia. Felix.’ in gold letters; inside, it is engraved with ‘Nat. 5 Feb. 1664. Inaug. 8 March 1702. Obt. 1 August 1714.’
In the Braybrooke Collection is a small and delicate lady’s gold mourning-ring, in memory of Queen Mary, wife of William III. The hoop, which is very slight, is inlaid upon the shoulders with black enamel and surmounted by a square box for setting, ornamented with perpendicular lines of the same down the sides. The box contains a tress of the deceased Queen’s hair, plaited, with ‘M. R.’ and a crown in small gold ciphers laid over it. A crystal, cut into facets, encloses them. The under side of the box has a death’s-head and cross-bones inlaid in black enamel.
In the Braybrooke Collection is a small and delicate gold mourning ring for ladies, commemorating Queen Mary, the wife of William III. The band is very thin and features black enamel on the shoulders, topped with a square setting box, decorated with vertical lines of the same enamel along the sides. Inside the box is a braided lock of the late Queen's hair, with 'M. R.' and a small gold crown overlaid on it. A faceted crystal covers these elements. The underside of the box has a death’s head and crossbones inlaid in black enamel.
In the same collection is a gold mourning-ring, inscribed, in letters of gold on black enamel, ‘Gulielmus III. Rex., 1702.’ After the ‘Rex.’ is a death’s-head of gold. It is a slight gold hoop with a silver frame on the summit, set round with six small pearls, and made to imitate a buckle with a gold tongue across it, so that the band of it, visible below, resembles the garter.
In the same collection is a gold mourning ring, engraved in gold letters on black enamel, 'Gulielmus III. Rex., 1702.' After 'Rex.' is a gold skull. It's a simple gold hoop with a silver frame on top, surrounded by six small pearls, designed to look like a buckle with a gold tongue across it, making the visible band below resemble a garter.
In the collection of the late Lady Fellows was an ivory patch-box, with figure-subject carved in relief, formerly belonging to the unfortunate Queen Marie Antoinette, and containing a small gold ring, given by her to one of her attendants.
In the collection of the late Lady Fellows was an ivory patch box, featuring a carved relief figure, that once belonged to the tragic Queen Marie Antoinette, and inside it was a small gold ring she gave to one of her attendants.
Pope bequeathed sums of five pounds to friends, who were to lay them out in rings; and Gray, the poet, in his will, gives an amount of stock to Richard Stonehewer, adding: ‘And I beg his acceptance of one of my diamond[Pg 375] rings.’ The same bequest is given to Dr. Thomas Warton of a diamond ring and five hundred pounds. To his cousins he leaves his watches, rings, etc.
Pope left five pounds to his friends, which they were to use to buy rings. Gray, the poet, included in his will a gift of stock to Richard Stonehewer, adding, “And I hope you accept one of my diamond[Pg 375] rings.” He made the same bequest to Dr. Thomas Warton, giving him a diamond ring and five hundred pounds. To his cousins, he left his watches, rings, and other items.
A touching instance of ‘memorial’ rings occurs in late times. The Princess Amelia, before her death, in 1810, had the sad satisfaction of placing on the finger of her royal father, George III., a ring made by her own directions for the express purpose, containing a small lock of her hair enclosed under a crystal tablet, set round with a few sparks of diamonds. This memorial of affection, given almost on her death-bed, hastened the attack of the mental disorder from which the King had suffered so much about twenty years before. The circumstances attending this gift were very affecting; she held the ring in her hand at the time of her father’s accustomed visit, and, while placing it on his finger, said, ‘Take this in remembrance of me.’
A touching moment of ‘memorial’ occurs in later times. Princess Amelia, before her death in 1810, had the bittersweet satisfaction of placing a ring on her royal father, George III's, finger. She designed the ring for that specific purpose, and it contained a small lock of her hair enclosed under a crystal tablet, surrounded by a few sparkling diamonds. This token of love, given almost on her deathbed, expedited the onset of the mental illness the King had suffered from about twenty years earlier. The circumstances surrounding this gift were very emotional; she held the ring in her hand during her father's usual visit and, while putting it on his finger, said, ‘Take this in remembrance of me.’
This affecting incident was commemorated by Dr. Wolcot in some elegant lines, very different to his usual compositions:—
This touching incident was memorialized by Dr. Wolcot in some beautiful lines, quite different from his typical works:—
With all the virtues blest, and every grace
To charm the world and dignify the race,
Life’s taper losing fast its feeble fire,
The fair Amelia thus bespoke her sire:
‘Faint on the bed of sickness lying,
My spirit from its mansion flying.
Not long the light these languid eyes will see,
My friend, my father, and my king,
Receive the token and remember me!’
With all the blessings and every grace
To enchant the world and uplift humanity,
As life’s small flame quickly fades away,
The lovely Amelia spoke to her father:
‘Lying weak in this sickbed,
My spirit is ready to leave its place.
I won't be able to see much longer with these tired eyes,
My friend, my father, and my king,
Take this token and remember me!’
Lord Eldon wore a mourning-ring in memory of his wife, and desired in his will that it might be buried with him.
Lord Eldon wore a mourning ring to remember his wife and requested in his will that it be buried with him.
A very interesting memorial ring in connection with the death of Nelson is mentioned in a communication to ‘Notes[Pg 376] and Queries’ (vol. vii. 1st series, p. 305). Mr. Nicholls, of Pelsall, Staffordshire, writes: ‘I am in possession of a ring which in place of a stone has a metal basso-relievo representation of Nelson (half-bust). The inscription inside the ring is as follows: “A gift to T. Moon from G. L. Stoppleberg, 1815.” The late Mr. Thomas Moon was an eminent merchant of Leeds, and the writer has always understood that the ring referred to, is one of three or half a dozen which were made subsequently to Nelson’s death. The metal (blackish in appearance) forming the basso-relievo, set in them, being in reality portions of the ball which gave the late lamented and immortal admiral his fatal wound at Trafalgar.’
A very interesting memorial ring related to Nelson's death is mentioned in a note to ‘Notes[Pg 376] and Queries’ (vol. vii. 1st series, p. 305). Mr. Nicholls, from Pelsall, Staffordshire, writes: ‘I have a ring that, instead of a stone, features a metal bas-relief of Nelson (half-bust). The inscription inside the ring reads: “A gift to T. Moon from G. L. Stoppleberg, 1815.” The late Mr. Thomas Moon was a well-known merchant from Leeds, and I have always understood that the ring in question is one of three or six that were made after Nelson’s death. The metal (which looks black) used for the bas-relief is actually made from parts of the cannonball that fatally wounded the late, beloved, and immortal admiral at Trafalgar.’
Another memorial ring of the greatest of our naval commanders is described in ‘Notes and Queries’ (4th series, vol. x. p. 292) as belonging to a lady whose husband’s father’s aunt married Earl Nelson (a clergyman), and whose husband inherited the ring. ‘It is of gold; on the bezel, a broad oblong with rounded corners, is a black enamelled field, surrounded by a white border. In coloured enamel on the field appear two coronets, one that of a viscount, with the velvet cap, but showing, however, only seven pearls, the letter “N,” in Old English character, appearing underneath. The second coronet is a British ducal one, without the cap, and has under it the letter “B” in old English. Beneath the above runs in Roman capitals the word “Trafalgar.” Round the broad hoop of the ring is incised, in Roman capitals, “Palmam qui meruit ferat,” the hero’s motto, and inside the bezel, in English cursive characters, “Lost to his country 21 Oct 1805. Aged 47.”’
Another memorial ring of the greatest of our naval commanders is described in ‘Notes and Queries’ (4th series, vol. x. p. 292) as belonging to a lady whose husband’s father’s aunt married Earl Nelson (a clergyman), and whose husband inherited the ring. ‘It is made of gold; on the bezel, a broad oblong with rounded corners, is a black enamel field, surrounded by a white border. In colored enamel on the field are two coronets, one that of a viscount, with the velvet cap, but showing only seven pearls, and the letter “N,” in Old English, appears underneath. The second coronet is a British ducal one, without the cap, and has the letter “B” in Old English below it. Beneath these runs the word “Trafalgar” in Roman capitals. Around the broad band of the ring, in Roman capitals, is inscribed “Palmam qui meruit ferat,” the hero’s motto, and inside the bezel, in English cursive characters, “Lost to his country 21 Oct 1805. Aged 47.”’
Of course, the coronets and letters ‘N’ and ‘B’ refer to the titles Nelson and Bronté, but the heraldic insignia were[Pg 377] evidently not executed by an adept. The case in which this ring is lodged appears to be the original one, and has on a printed oval label ‘Sa’ (the rest wanting, probably ‘ms’), ‘Jew’ (rest, of course, ‘eller’), ‘Silversmith, and Cutleer, 35, Strand.’
Of course, the coronets and the letters ‘N’ and ‘B’ refer to the titles Nelson and Bronté, but the heraldic symbols were[Pg 377] clearly not crafted by a skilled artist. The case that holds this ring seems to be the original one and has a printed oval label that reads ‘Sa’ (the rest missing, probably ‘ms’), ‘Jew’ (the rest, of course, ‘eller’), ‘Silversmith, and Cutler, 35, Strand.’
On the subject of Nelson memorial rings, the Rev. Dr. Gatty, in ‘Notes and Queries’ (4th series, vol. x. p. 356), says: ‘I do not think these rings can be very uncommon, and I have no doubt that Sir Thomas Hardy and other officers serving under Lord Nelson received one. My wife, who is a daughter of the Rev. A. J. Scott, D.D., Nelson’s chaplain and foreign secretary on the “Victory,” has one in her possession, which was sent to her father, and to whom Lord Nelson left a legacy of 200l. Our friend Mrs. Mirehouse, a daughter of the late Bishop Fisher of Salisbury, has also a similar ring. We have always thought they were given, after the old fashion of “mourning” rings. The pattern is certainly handsome and tasteful.’
On the topic of Nelson memorial rings, Rev. Dr. Gatty, in ‘Notes and Queries’ (4th series, vol. x. p. 356), says: ‘I don’t think these rings are very uncommon, and I’m sure that Sir Thomas Hardy and other officers who served under Lord Nelson received one. My wife, who is the daughter of Rev. A. J. Scott, D.D., Nelson’s chaplain and foreign secretary on the “Victory,” has one in her possession that was sent to her father, to whom Lord Nelson left a legacy of 200l. Our friend Mrs. Mirehouse, a daughter of the late Bishop Fisher of Salisbury, also has a similar ring. We’ve always thought they were given out in the old tradition of “mourning” rings. The design is definitely beautiful and stylish.’
Mr. H. S. Williams, F.R.H.S., writing to the editor of ‘Notes and Queries’ (4th series, vol. x. p. 441), remarks that rings (with the Viscount’s coronet with ‘N’ beneath it for the title Viscount Nelson, the ducal coronet, that of Sicily, for the Bronté estate and dukedom) of this description were made in 1806 by Lord Nelson’s private friend Salter, jeweller in the Strand, and by the order of Dr. William Nelson, who was then Earl Nelson. There were fully a hundred of these rings originally made, as every admiral and post captain, then living, who was present at the Battle of Trafalgar had one, as well as every member of the Nelson, Bolton, and Matcham families.
Mr. H. S. Williams, F.R.H.S., writing to the editor of ‘Notes and Queries’ (4th series, vol. x. p. 441), notes that rings (featuring the Viscount’s coronet with ‘N’ underneath for the title Viscount Nelson, the ducal coronet, and that of Sicily, for the Bronté estate and dukedom) of this kind were made in 1806 by Lord Nelson’s close friend Salter, a jeweler on the Strand, as commissioned by Dr. William Nelson, who was then Earl Nelson. Originally, over a hundred of these rings were produced, as every admiral and post captain alive at the time who attended the Battle of Trafalgar received one, along with every member of the Nelson, Bolton, and Matcham families.
The custom of decorating the dead with their jewellery (including rings) has been traced in a remarkable manner[Pg 378] to the earliest periods of the world’s history. In Genesis xli. 56, 57, we read: ‘The famine was over all the face of the earth, and Joseph opened all the storehouses, and sold unto all the Egyptians; and the famine waxed sore in the land of Egypt. And all countries came into Egypt for to buy corn, because that the famine was so sore in all lands.’
The tradition of adorning the deceased with their jewelry (including rings) has been traced back in a remarkable way[Pg 378] to the earliest times in history. In Genesis 41:56-57, it says: ‘The famine was severe throughout the entire land, and Joseph opened all the storehouses and sold grain to all the Egyptians; the famine became really intense in Egypt. And people from all countries came to Egypt to buy grain because the famine was so severe everywhere.’
But Joseph could not empty the storehouses of Egypt to satisfy the cravings of all lands, nor sell away the bread of Egypt at any price when money became less precious than bread.
But Joseph couldn’t empty the storehouses of Egypt to satisfy the hunger of all nations, nor sell the bread of Egypt at any price when money became less valuable than bread.
Such was the state of things when an Arabian princess in Yemen wrote, or when in her name were written, to be inscribed on her sepulchre, some impressive lines. Ebn Hesham relates that a flood of rain had laid bare a sepulchre in Yemen, in which lay a woman having on her neck seven collars of pearls, and on her hands and feet bracelets and armlets, and ankle-rings, seven on each, and on every finger a ring in which was set a jewel of great price, and at her head a coffer filled with treasure, and a tablet with an inscription thus translated by Mr. Forster:—
Such was the situation when an Arabian princess in Yemen wrote, or when someone wrote in her name, some impressive lines to be engraved on her tomb. Ebn Hesham mentions that a heavy rain had uncovered a tomb in Yemen, where a woman was found wearing seven pearl necklaces around her neck, and bracelets and armlets on her hands and feet, with seven ankle rings on each foot, and a ring with a valuable gem on each finger. At her head was a chest filled with treasure, and a tablet with an inscription that Mr. Forster translated as follows:—
In thy name, O God, the God of Himyar,
I, Tajah, the daughter of Dzu Shefar, sent my servant to Joseph,
And he delaying to return to me, I sent my handmaid,
With a measure of silver, to bring me back a measure of flour:
And not being able to procure it, I sent her with a measure of gold:
And not being able to procure it, I commanded them to the ground:
And finding no profit in them, I am shut up here.
Whosoever may hear of it, let him commiserate me;
And should any woman adorn herself with an ornament
From my ornaments, may she die with no other than my death.
In your name, O God, the God of Himyar,
I, Tajah, the daughter of Dzu Shefar, sent my servant to Joseph,
And when he took too long to return to me, I sent my maid,
With a measure of silver, to bring me back a measure of flour:
And when she couldn't get it, I sent her with a measure of gold:
And when she still couldn't get it, I directed them to the ground:
And finding no benefit in them, I am stuck here.
Whoever may hear of this, let them feel sorry for me;
And if any woman wears an ornament
From my jewelry, may she die just like I do.
This Biblical monument confirms in a remarkable manner the truth of the Old Testament history.
This biblical monument clearly confirms the truth of Old Testament history.
In opening ancient sepulchral barrows plain or jewelled rings have in many instances been found, which, perhaps, a widowed wife or widower took from their fingers, and flung, in the intensity of their grief, into the graves of those they mourned. A modern instance of this is given in the ‘Times’ of October 28, 1865, when, at the funeral of Lord Palmerston in Westminster Abbey, the chief mourner, the Rev. Mr. Sullivan, as ‘a precious offering to the dead,’ threw into the grave several diamond and gold rings. Small rings are frequently met with on the breasts of mummies. At the excavations at Veii and Præneste, by Padre Raffaele Garucchi, a great quantity of tiny rings of yellow and blue enamel were found, of a similar character to those mentioned.
In ancient burial mounds, plain or ornate rings have often been discovered, which may have been taken from the fingers of a grieving spouse and thrown into the graves of their loved ones out of sorrow. A modern example of this occurred in the ‘Times’ on October 28, 1865, when, at Lord Palmerston's funeral in Westminster Abbey, the chief mourner, Rev. Mr. Sullivan, tossed several diamond and gold rings into the grave as “a precious offering to the dead.” Small rings are frequently found on the chests of mummies. During excavations at Veii and Præneste, led by Padre Raffaele Garucchi, many tiny rings of yellow and blue enamel were discovered, similar to those previously mentioned.
It was customary among the Anglo-Saxons to place rings and other ornaments in the grave: an early Anglo-Saxon poem, recounting the adventures of the chieftain Beowulf and his burial, states ‘they put into the mound rings and bright gems.’
It was common among the Anglo-Saxons to put rings and other decorations in the grave: an early Anglo-Saxon poem, telling the story of the chieftain Beowulf and his burial, says ‘they put into the mound rings and bright gems.’
The custom of burying corpses with a ring on the finger continued for ages, as I have remarked in several chapters of this work. Annexed is an illustration, from the ‘Archæologia’ (vol. ii. p. 32, 1773), of a ring with seventy-five table-diamonds, set in gold, found in 1748 in a grave at Carne, seven miles west of Mullinghar, in the county of Westmeath, Ireland.
The practice of burying bodies with a ring on the finger lasted for a long time, as I've mentioned in several chapters of this work. Attached is an illustration from the ‘Archæologia’ (vol. ii. p. 32, 1773) of a ring featuring seventy-five table diamonds, set in gold, which was discovered in 1748 in a grave at Carne, seven miles west of Mullingar, in County Westmeath, Ireland.
[Pg 380]In the antiquarian researches in the Ionian Isles in 1812 (‘Archæologia,’ vol. xxxiii.) some rings were discovered in tombs at Samo and Ithaca. One of these appears to have been a silver finger-ring, or signet, bearing on the upper part an elliptic piece of glass or crystal, in a state of decomposition, turning on the wire that passes through it.
[Pg 380]In the historical research conducted in the Ionian Islands in 1812 (‘Archæologia,’ vol. xxxiii.), some rings were found in graves on Samo and Ithaca. One of these seems to have been a silver finger-ring or signet, featuring an oval piece of glass or crystal at the top, which was deteriorating and rotating on the wire threaded through it.
Squared-work diamond ring found in Ireland.
Squared-work diamond ring found in Ireland.
The other is a gold ring of solid fabric, having for device the figure of a female with a bare head; one arm is enveloped in the folds of her dress, while the other hand is pouring incense on a slender altar. A zigzag garland surrounds the verge of the field. The locality would suggest that it may represent Penelope sacrificing to some tutelar deity, and invoking it to conduct Ulysses home in safety—a conceit which might hold good, even were the work decided to be Roman.
The other is a solid gold ring, featuring the figure of a woman with a bare head. One arm is wrapped in the folds of her dress, while the other hand is pouring incense on a slim altar. A zigzag garland surrounds the edge of the design. The scene suggests that it might represent Penelope making a sacrifice to a protective deity, asking it to safely guide Ulysses home—a thought that could still apply even if the piece is determined to be Roman.
There are some remarkably fine specimens of rings in the Royal Danish Museum, which have been discovered in Scandinavian graves, and some of which are represented in the chapter on ‘Rings from the Earliest Period’ (p. 68).
There are some incredibly beautiful examples of rings in the Royal Danish Museum, found in Scandinavian graves, and some of them are shown in the chapter on 'Rings from the Earliest Period' (p. 68).
On the opening of some barrows on the wolds of Yorkshire in 1815, 1816, and 1817, among other disinterments was the skeleton of a female, and some of her ornaments; amongst others, a ring of red amber, in exterior diameter 1⅝ in., in interior diameter half an inch. Also a small ring[Pg 381] scarcely one inch in diameter, and a ring of very nearly standard gold, weighing 3 dwts. 21 grs. In front this ring is clasped in a kind of rose, or quatrefoil, and it is an ornament by no means of despicable workmanship. The era of this interment is supposed to be prior to a general extension of Christianity in Britain.
On the opening of some burial mounds in the hills of Yorkshire in 1815, 1816, and 1817, among other discoveries was the skeleton of a woman, along with some of her jewelry; including a red amber ring with an outer diameter of 1⅝ inches and an inner diameter of half an inch. There was also a small ring that was barely one inch in diameter, and a ring made of nearly standard gold, weighing 3 dwts. 21 grs. This gold ring features a clasp in the shape of a rose, or quatrefoil, and is quite well-made. The time period of this burial is thought to be before the widespread adoption of Christianity in Britain.
Stukeley (Abury, p. 45) records the finding of a flat gold ring in a barrow at Yatesbury. Douglas, in his discoveries of a later date (‘Nenia Brit.’ p. 117), says ‘rings to the finger seldom occur of any ponderous metal, like the Roman ones of gold, silver, and bronze.’
Stukeley (Abury, p. 45) notes the discovery of a flat gold ring in a burial mound at Yatesbury. Douglas, in his later findings ('Nenia Brit.' p. 117), states, "rings for the finger are rarely made of any heavy metal, like the Roman ones made of gold, silver, and bronze."
In the museum at Mayence (the Roman Maguntiacum, or Mogontiacum), so exceedingly rich in antiquarian remains, there are some fine specimens of finger-rings found in Franconian graves. The following illustration represents a gold ring, set with a coin, which is probably the copy of a Roman one:—
In the museum in Mainz (the Roman Maguntiacum, or Mogontiacum), which is incredibly rich in ancient artifacts, there are some great examples of finger rings discovered in Franconian graves. The illustration below shows a gold ring set with a coin, which is likely a replica of a Roman one:—
Mortuary ring at Mayence.
Mortuary ring in Mainz.
In the second cut the inscription of the reverse, excepting a few letters, is erased in the process of fastening the ring to it, by the melting of the metal.
In the second cut, the inscription on the back, except for a few letters, is erased during the process of attaching the ring to it by melting the metal.
Mortuary ring at Mayence.
Mortuary ring in Mainz.
A metal ring with inscription translated ‘In Dei nomine, Amen.’
A metal ring with the inscription translated as ‘In the name of God, Amen.’
A gold finger-ring with a figure in the centre of the shield; the[Pg 382] ornaments of dragons on the outer panels are inlaid with dark blue enamel:—
A gold finger ring with a figure in the center of the shield; the[Pg 382] dragon ornaments on the outer panels are inlaid with dark blue enamel:—
Mortuary ring at Mayence.
Mortuary ring in Mainz.
In ancient times rings were burnt with the corpse. When Cynthia’s shade appears to Propertius, he remarks: ‘Et solitam digito adederat ignis;’ ‘a fact (remarks the Rev. C. W. King) which fully accounts for the number of fine intagli partly or wholly calcined which every collector meets with not unfrequently, and often with the greatest regret at the destruction of some matchless specimen of the skill of the engraver.’
In ancient times, rings were burned with the dead. When Cynthia’s ghost appears to Propertius, he says: ‘And the fire had burned into her finger;’ ‘a fact (notes Rev. C. W. King) that explains the many fine intaglios, either completely or partially charred, that collectors often encounter, often lamenting the loss of some unmatched work of the engraver's art.’
At the burial of Cæsar we are told that, among the tokens of grief exhibited by the Romans, the matrons burned on his funeral pyre their personal ornaments, the robes and even the rings of their sons.
At Caesar's funeral, it's said that, among the expressions of sorrow shown by the Romans, the women burned their jewelry, the clothes, and even the rings of their sons on his funeral pyre.
‘The Greeks and Romans,’ observes Mr. Fairholt, ‘literally revelled in rings of all styles and sizes. Nothing can be more beautiful in design and exquisite in finish than Greek jewellery; and the custom of decorating their dead with the most valued of these ornaments has furnished modern museums with an abundance of fine specimens.’
‘The Greeks and Romans,’ notes Mr. Fairholt, ‘really enjoyed rings of all styles and sizes. Nothing is more beautifully designed or finely crafted than Greek jewelry; and the tradition of adorning their dead with the most treasured of these ornaments has provided modern museums with plenty of impressive examples.’
The two rings next represented are copied from originals found in the more modern Etruscan sepulchres, and are probably contemporary with the earliest days of the Roman Empire.
The two rings shown next are replicas of originals discovered in the newer Etruscan tombs and are likely from the early days of the Roman Empire.
[Pg 383]In one of these rings the hoop is not perfected, each extremity ending in a broad, leaf-shaped ornament, most delicately banded with threads of beaded and twisted wire, acting as a brace upon the finger.
[Pg 383]In one of these rings, the hoop isn’t complete; each end finishes with a wide, leaf-shaped decoration, beautifully wrapped with strands of beaded and twisted wire, serving as a support on the finger.
Gold rings from Etruscan sepulchres.
Gold rings from Etruscan tombs.
Lord Braybrooke purchased in 1849 a Roman gold finger-ring, set with an intaglio in ribbon onyx, which was found in a Roman stone coffin at York: subject, a Fortuna Redux. In the same collection is a very curious and massive gold mourning-ring formed of two knotted withes twisted together; the knots are hollowed to receive enamel. The inscription inside the hoop is, in old English characters: ‘When ye loke on thys, thyncke on hym who gave ye thys.’ This ring was found in the Thames at Westminster.
Lord Braybrooke bought a Roman gold finger ring in 1849, featuring an intaglio in ribbon onyx, which was discovered in a Roman stone coffin in York. The design represents a Fortuna Redux. In the same collection, there is a unique and heavy gold mourning ring made of two knotted vines twisted together; the knots are hollowed out for enamel. The inscription inside the band is, in old English characters: ‘When you look at this, think of him who gave you this.’ This ring was found in the Thames at Westminster.
Ring found at Amiens.
Ring discovered in Amiens.
In the Londesborough Collection is the representation of a ring found upon the hand of a lady’s skeleton, who was buried with her child in a sarcophagus discovered in 1846 in a field near Amiens, called ‘Le Camp de César;’ on two of her fingers were rings, one of which was set with ten round pearls, the other, represented in the collection mentioned, is of gold, in which is set a red cornelian, engraved with a rude representation of Jupiter riding on the goat Amalthea. The child also wore a ring, with an engraved stone. The whole of the decorations for the person[Pg 384] found in this tomb proclaim themselves late Roman work, probably of the time of Diocletian.
In the Londesborough Collection is a depiction of a ring found on the hand of a lady's skeleton, who was buried with her child in a sarcophagus discovered in 1846 in a field near Amiens, called ‘Le Camp de César.’ On two of her fingers were rings: one set with ten round pearls and the other, featured in the mentioned collection, is made of gold, set with a red carnelian engraved with a crude image of Jupiter riding on the goat Amalthea. The child also wore a ring with an engraved stone. All the decorations for the individual[Pg 384] found in this tomb clearly indicate they are late Roman work, likely from the time of Diocletian.
It is customary in Russia on the death of a sovereign to distribute mourning-rings to those connected with the imperial court. A writer in ‘Notes and Queries’ (4th series, vol. iii. p. 322) remarks: ‘When I was at St. Petersburg, I saw one of the rings given on the death of the late Emperor Nicholas. They were in the form of a serpent, enamelled black. Attached to the head and within the body of the ring was a narrow band of metal inscribed with the name of Nicholas, and the date of his death. This band was held within by a spring, in the same way as a spring measuring-tape. The serpent’s head was mounted with two diamonds for eyes. The ring I saw was presented to the gentleman in whose possession it then was by reason of his official appointment of dentist to the imperial family.’
It’s a tradition in Russia that when a sovereign dies, mourning rings are given to those associated with the imperial court. A writer in ‘Notes and Queries’ (4th series, vol. iii. p. 322) notes: ‘When I was in St. Petersburg, I saw one of the rings distributed after the death of the late Emperor Nicholas. They were shaped like a serpent, coated in black enamel. Attached to the head and the body of the ring was a narrow metal band inscribed with the name Nicholas and the date of his death. This band was held in place by a spring, similar to a spring measuring tape. The serpent’s head was adorned with two diamonds for eyes. The ring I saw was given to the man who owned it at that time because he held the official position of dentist to the imperial family.’
In early times it was usual to bury sovereigns with their rings. During some repairs at Winchester Cathedral in 1768 a monument was discovered containing the body of King Canute. On his forefinger was a ring containing a very fine stone.
In ancient times, it was common to bury kings with their rings. During some renovations at Winchester Cathedral in 1768, a tomb was found that held the body of King Canute. On his forefinger was a ring with a very fine stone.
In the ‘Archæologia’ (vol. xlii. part ii. p. 309) is an account, by the Rev. J. G. Joyce, B.A., F.S.A., of the opening and removal of a tomb in Winchester Cathedral in 1868, reported to be that of King William Rufus. Gale, in his ‘History of Winchester,’ states that the tomb was broken open during the civil wars, and amongst other articles found was a large gold ring. The body of Rufus, however, had been removed out of the tomb in which it had originally lain (whether this or another) many years before the civil wars broke out. Stow gives this testimony, and an inscription upon a mortuary chest into which the bones of Rufus[Pg 385] were translated (1525), and which inscription was repeated a second time (1661). There is reason for doubting whether this ring really belonged to King Rufus, and that the tomb supposed to be that of the King is that of an ecclesiastical dignitary. The Rev. J. G. Joyce adds: ‘I have not dwelt upon the ring, because, while Milner, after Gale, alleges such a ring to have been taken out of the tomb by the rebels, it is open to uncertainty whether this be actually the one, and if so it was assuredly in company with the chalice (found with the ring), and so makes against Rufus, and in favour of a more saintly occupant.’
In the ‘Archæologia’ (vol. xlii. part ii. p. 309), the Rev. J. G. Joyce, B.A., F.S.A., describes the opening and removal of a tomb in Winchester Cathedral in 1868, believed to be that of King William Rufus. Gale, in his ‘History of Winchester,’ mentions that the tomb was broken into during the civil wars, and among other items found was a large gold ring. However, Rufus's body had been removed from the tomb it originally rested in (whether this one or another) many years before the civil wars started. Stow provides this account, along with an inscription on a mortuary chest where Rufus's bones[Pg 385] were moved (1525), which was repeated again in 1661. There are reasons to doubt whether this ring actually belonged to King Rufus, suggesting that the tomb thought to be his might actually belong to a church dignitary. The Rev. J. G. Joyce adds: ‘I have not focused on the ring, because, while Milner, following Gale, claims such a ring was taken from the tomb by the rebels, it’s uncertain whether this is indeed the same one, and if it is, it was definitely found with the chalice (discovered alongside the ring), which argues against Rufus and supports the idea of a more saintly occupant.’
The ring known as that found in this tomb is not of gold, but of bronze gilt. It is apparently intended for the thumb, very coarsely executed, and has a plain square imitation jewel, which is a very poor copy of a sapphire. A representation of this and another ring from tombs in Winchester Cathedral are here given, from Woodward and Wilks’ ‘History of Hampshire’ (London, 1858-69).
The ring found in this tomb isn't made of gold; it's actually bronze with gold plating. It seems to be designed for the thumb, roughly made, and features a simple square imitation jewel that poorly resembles a sapphire. A depiction of this ring, along with another from tombs in Winchester Cathedral, is provided here, taken from Woodward and Wilks’ ‘History of Hampshire’ (London, 1858-69).
![]() |
![]() | |
Ring found in the tomb of William Rufus, Winchester Cathedral. |
Ring discovered at Winchester Cathedral. |
According to Matthew Paris, Henry II. was arrayed after death in his royal vestments, having a golden crown on his head and a great ring on the finger. The will of Richard II. directs that he should be buried with a ring, according to royal custom. The same monarch, as Grafton states, caused the dead body of Robert de Vere, Duke of Ireland, to be[Pg 386] arrayed in princely garments, garnished with a chain of gold, and rich rings put on his fingers, with his face uncovered.
According to Matthew Paris, Henry II was dressed in his royal robes after his death, with a golden crown on his head and a large ring on his finger. Richard II's will states that he should be buried with a ring, in keeping with royal custom. The same king, as Grafton mentions, had the body of Robert de Vere, Duke of Ireland, dressed in royal garments, adorned with a gold chain, and rich rings placed on his fingers, with his face uncovered.
As an instance of royal interments with a ring at a late period, I may mention that of William Frederic, Duke of Gloucester, who married his cousin the Princess Mary, daughter of George III. He was buried in his uniform, and wore on his finger a ring which had been an early love-gift to him from the Princess whom he married.
As an example of royal burials with a ring in more recent times, I can mention William Frederic, Duke of Gloucester, who married his cousin, Princess Mary, the daughter of George III. He was buried in his uniform and wore a ring on his finger that had been an early love gift from the Princess he married.
Ring of Childeric.
Childeric's Ring.
In 1562 the Calvinists rifled the tomb of Queen Matilda, consort of William the Conqueror, in the church of the Holy Trinity at Caen. One of the party observed a gold ring with a sapphire on one of the Queen’s fingers, and, taking it off, presented it to the Abbess of Montmorenci.
In 1562, the Calvinists looted the tomb of Queen Matilda, the wife of William the Conqueror, in the church of the Holy Trinity at Caen. One of them noticed a gold ring with a sapphire on one of the Queen’s fingers, took it off, and gave it to the Abbess of Montmorenci.
The same custom of monarchs being buried with their rings prevailed in France during the early and middle ages. The gold ring of Childeric I., formerly in the Bibliothèque Nationale at Paris, was found in the King’s tomb at Tournay. It bore the inscription ‘Childirici regis.’[70]
The practice of burying monarchs with their rings was common in France during the early and middle ages. The gold ring of Childeric I., which was once in the Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris, was discovered in the king's tomb at Tournay. It had the inscription ‘Childirici regis.’[70]
[Pg 387]‘The ring was not set with a gem, but had an oval bezel in the gold, engraved with his bust in front face, holding a spear as in the type of the contemporary Byzantine aurei. He wore the long hair of the Merovingian line. Traces remained of the legend ‘Childirici Regis.’ The intaglio was very neatly cut, infinitely superior to the execution of the Merovingian coin-dies, and, in fact, so much in the style of Leo’s aurei, that it might reasonably be supposed a present sent, with other offerings, from Constantinople’ (the Rev. C. W. King, ‘Handbook of Engraved Gems’). The engraving is taken from J. J. Chiflet’s ‘Anastasis.’
[Pg 387]‘The ring didn’t have a gem, but featured an oval gold bezel, carved with his bust facing forward, holding a spear like the style of contemporary Byzantine gold coins. He had the long hair typical of the Merovingian line. There were signs of the inscription ‘Childirici Regis.’ The engraving was very finely done, far superior to the craftsmanship of Merovingian coin dies, and, in fact, so closely resembles the style of Leo’s gold coins that it’s likely it was a gift sent from Constantinople along with other offerings’ (the Rev. C. W. King, ‘Handbook of Engraved Gems’). The engraving is taken from J. J. Chiflet’s ‘Anastasis.’
In 1793, at the exhumation of the bodies buried at the Abbey of St. Denis, rings were found in several of the royal tombs. That of Jeanne de Bourbon, consort of Charles V., was of gold, with the remains of bracelets and chains. The ring of Philippe le Bel was also of gold; that of Jeanne de Bourgoyne, first wife of Philippe de Valois, was of silver, as also the ring of Charles le Bel.
In 1793, when the bodies buried at the Abbey of St. Denis were exhumed, several royal tombs contained rings. Jeanne de Bourbon's ring, wife of Charles V, was made of gold, along with remnants of bracelets and chains. Philippe le Bel's ring was also gold, while Jeanne de Bourgoyne's, the first wife of Philippe de Valois, was silver, as was the ring belonging to Charles le Bel.
To the ancient custom of interring prelates with their rings I have alluded in the chapter on ‘Rings in Connection with Ecclesiastical Usages.’
To the old tradition of burying bishops with their rings, I mentioned this in the chapter on ‘Rings in Connection with Ecclesiastical Usages.’
In 1780 the tomb of the great German Emperor Frederic, who died in 1250, was opened, and the body discovered arrayed in embroidered robes, booted, spurred, and crowned.[Pg 388] A costly emerald ring was on one of the fingers, and the ball and sceptre in the hands.
In 1780, the tomb of the great German Emperor Frederic, who died in 1250, was opened, and the body was found dressed in embroidered robes, wearing boots, spurs, and a crown.[Pg 388] A valuable emerald ring was on one of the fingers, and the ball and scepter were in the hands.
Some interesting ‘memorial’ rings were shown at the Loan Exhibition of Ancient and Modern Jewellery at the South Kensington Museum in 1872, the principal of which I have already mentioned. One of gold, oval bezel, set round with amethysts, had, beneath glass, a representation of a fallen tree, and a funeral urn with initials; the motto, ‘Fallen to rise;’ date, 1779; the property of Mr. G. F. Duncombe. Dr. Ashford exhibited a memorial gold ring, hasp enamelled on the outside in black, with figure of a skeleton and funereal emblems. Date, 1715. Five rings belonging to Mrs. M. E. Vere Booth Powell; one of gold, oval bezel set round with rubies, in the centre an urn jewelled with diamonds beneath a weeping willow; dated at back 1779. A ring with a long, pointed, oval bezel, with miniature of a female figure seated beside an inscribed pedestal, on which is an urn; date, 1788. Another of a similar form, with miniature of an old man holding a skull, seated near a Gothic building; inscribed, ‘Omnia vanitas;’ 1782. A duplicate of this ring, undated. A ring with long eight-sided bezel, gold, with dark-blue translucent enamel; in the centre an urn set with diamonds; dated 1790. A gold ring, bezel set with portrait of Charles I.; the property of the Rev. W. B. Hawkins. A massive gold ring, enamelled and set with sapphire, engraved inside, ‘Napoleon Buonaparte à Joachim Murat,’ 1809; exhibited by Mr. George Bonnor. A gold ring, richly chased and enamelled in black, the bezel square, with rounded top, which opens, showing within a representation of a corpse; Italian, sixteenth century; the property of Dr. Ashford. A gold ring, in the centre of which is a death’s-head in enamel, with the legend ‘Memento mori’ in[Pg 389] enamelled black letters; sixteenth century. Also, a gold ring with bezel hollow; has had upon it a death’s-head in enamel, inscribed ‘Remember Death;’ round the edge of the bezel is ‘Yeman + + joyce;’ early sixteenth century. A gold ring, hexagonal bezel with motto ‘Death * sy * myn * eritag +’; sixteenth century. The last three rings were exhibited by R. H. Soden Smith, Esq., F.S.A. Memorial ring with portrait of Augustus III., son of Augustus the Strong, King of Poland and Saxony; early eighteenth century. Another with enamelled skull, set with diamonds, probably German of the seventeenth century; also, one of the same date, enamelled, with skull and female face. The property of C. Drury Fortnum, Esq., F.S.A.
Some interesting ‘memorial’ rings were displayed at the Loan Exhibition of Ancient and Modern Jewelry at the South Kensington Museum in 1872, the main one of which I’ve already mentioned. One was a gold ring with an oval bezel, surrounded by amethysts, featuring, under glass, an image of a fallen tree and a funeral urn with initials; the motto read, ‘Fallen to rise;’ dated 1779; owned by Mr. G. F. Duncombe. Dr. Ashford showcased a memorial gold ring, enamelled black on the outside, depicting a skeleton and funeral symbols. Dated 1715. Five rings belonged to Mrs. M. E. Vere Booth Powell; one was a gold ring with an oval bezel surrounded by rubies, showcasing a diamond-studded urn beneath a weeping willow; dated on the back 1779. Another ring had a long, pointed, oval bezel with a miniature of a woman sitting next to an inscribed pedestal featuring an urn; dated 1788. There was also a similar-shaped ring with a miniature of an old man holding a skull, seated near a Gothic building; inscribed, ‘Omnia vanitas;’ 1782. A duplicate of this ring is undated. A gold ring with a long eight-sided bezel, featuring dark-blue translucent enamel; in the center was an urn decorated with diamonds; dated 1790. A gold ring had a bezel set with a portrait of Charles I.; owned by the Rev. W. B. Hawkins. A large gold ring, enamelled and set with a sapphire, was engraved inside with ‘Napoleon Buonaparte à Joachim Murat,’ 1809; displayed by Mr. George Bonnor. Another gold ring, richly chased and enamelled in black, had a square bezel with a rounded top that opens to show an image of a corpse; Italian, sixteenth century; owned by Dr. Ashford. A gold ring featured a death’s-head in enamel, with the legend ‘Memento mori’ in enamelled black letters; sixteenth century. There was also a gold ring with a hollow bezel that once had a death’s-head in enamel, inscribed ‘Remember Death;’ around the bezel edge was ‘Yeman + + joyce;’ early sixteenth century. A gold ring with a hexagonal bezel had the motto ‘Death * sy * myn * eritag +’; sixteenth century. The last three rings were exhibited by R. H. Soden Smith, Esq., F.S.A. A memorial ring featured a portrait of Augustus III., son of Augustus the Strong, King of Poland and Saxony; early eighteenth century. Another ring had an enamelled skull, set with diamonds, likely German from the seventeenth century; also, one of the same period, enamelled, with a skull and a female face. The property of C. Drury Fortnum, Esq., F.S.A.
CHAPTER VIII.
POSY, INSCRIPTION, AND MOTTO RINGS.
Posy, inscription, and motto rings.
Within the hoop of the betrothal ring it was customary from the middle of the sixteenth to the close of the eighteenth century to inscribe a motto or ‘posy’ (poesie), consisting chiefly of a very simple sentiment.
Within the hoop of the betrothal ring, it was common from the mid-sixteenth to the late eighteenth century to inscribe a motto or 'posy' (poesie), usually reflecting a very simple sentiment.
Motto and device rings.
Motto and emblem rings.
[Pg 391]Shakspeare, in the ‘Merchant of Venice’ (act v. scene 1), makes Gratiano, when asked by Portia the reason of his quarrel with Nerissa, answer:
[Pg 391]Shakespeare, in the ‘Merchant of Venice’ (act v. scene 1), has Gratiano, when asked by Portia why he fought with Nerissa, respond:
About a hoop of gold, a paltry ring,
That she did give me, whose posy was
For all the world like cutler’s poetry
Upon a knife, Love me and leave me not.
About a gold hoop, a simple ring,
That she gave me, with a message that was
For everyone like a craftsman’s poem
On a knife, Love me and leave me not.
Hamlet (act iii. scene 2) says—
Hamlet (act iii. scene 2) says—
Is this a prologue, or the posy of a ring?
Is this a prologue or the inscription on a ring?
In ‘As You Like It’ (act iii. scene 2) Jaques remarks: ‘You are full of pretty answers; have you not been acquainted with goldsmiths’ wives, and conned them out of rings?’
In ‘As You Like It’ (act iii. scene 2) Jaques says: ‘You have a lot of clever responses; haven’t you spent time with goldsmiths’ wives and learned their tricks for getting rings?’
In Ben Jonson’s comedy, ‘The Magnetic Lady,’ the parson, compelled to form a hasty wedding, asks:
In Ben Jonson’s comedy, ‘The Magnetic Lady,’ the pastor, forced to arrange a quick wedding, asks:
Have you a wedding ring?
Do you have a wedding ring?
To which he receives an answer—
To which he gets a reply—
Ay, and a posie:
Annulus hic nobis, quod sic uterque, dabit.
Ay, and a flower:
This ring will give us both, just like this.
He exclaims:
He shouts:
————Good!
This ring will give you what you both desire;
I’ll make the whole house chant it, and the parish.
Great!
This ring will give you what you both want;
I’ll make the entire house and the neighborhood say it.
The following illustration represents a posy-ring of the simplest form, such as would be in use in the early part of the seventeenth century.
The following illustration shows a posy-ring in its simplest form, like the ones used in the early seventeenth century.
Posy-ring.
Posy ring.
Herrick, in his ‘Hesperides,’ says:
Herrick, in his ‘Hesperides,’ states:
What posies for our wedding-rings,
What gloves we’ll give and ribbonings!
What flowers for our wedding rings,
What gloves we'll give and ribbons!
[Pg 392]And in his ‘Church Miserie’:
And in his ‘Church Struggles’:
Indeed, at first, man was a treasure;
A box of jewels, shop of rarities,
A ring whose posie was ‘my pleasure.’
Sure! Here’s the modernized version of the paragraph:
Indeed, at first, man was a treasure;
A box of jewels, a shop of rare things,
A ring whose inscription was ‘my pleasure.’
And in the same work, ‘The Posie:’
And in the same work, ‘The Posie:’
Lesse than the least
Of all Thy mercies is my posie still:
This on my ring,
This, by my picture, in my book I write.
Lesser than the least
Of all Your mercies is my tribute still:
This on my ring,
This, by my picture, in my book I write.
Some of these posies and inscriptions are very appropriate and tender; others are quaint and whimsical. Not the least curious among the latter is that, well known, of Dr. John Thomas, Bishop of Lincoln, in 1753, who had been married three times. On his fourth espousals he had the following motto inscribed on his wedding-ring:
Some of these flowers and inscriptions are really fitting and heartfelt; others are quirky and playful. One of the most interesting among the latter is the well-known one from Dr. John Thomas, Bishop of Lincoln, in 1753, who had been married three times. For his fourth marriage, he had the following motto engraved on his wedding ring:
If I survive
I’ll make thee five.
If I make it through
I’ll give you five.
Burke, in his ‘Anecdotes of the Aristocracy,’ states that Lady Cathcart, on marrying her fourth husband, Hugh Macguire, had inscribed on her wedding-ring:
Burke, in his ‘Anecdotes of the Aristocracy,’ states that Lady Cathcart, upon marrying her fourth husband, Hugh Macguire, had engraved on her wedding ring:
If I survive
I will have five.
If I make it through
I will have five.
In far better taste than these was the motto on the ring presented by Bishop Cokes to his wife on the day of their marriage. It bore the representations of a hand, a heart, a mitre, and a death’s-head, with the words:
In much better taste than these was the motto on the ring given by Bishop Cokes to his wife on their wedding day. It featured images of a hand, a heart, a mitre, and a skull, with the words:
These three I give to thee,
Till the fourth set me free.
These three I give to you,
Until the fourth sets me free.
‘On the wedding-ring that Dr. George Bull, Bishop of St. David’s (1703), gave to his wife, was the inscription: “Bene parêre, parare det mihi Deus”—a prayer she might[Pg 393] be a prolific mother, an obedient wife, and a good housekeeper. The prayer was heard; she had five sons and six daughters, lived in wedlock happily fifty years, and was esteemed a model housekeeper’ (Singer).
‘On the wedding ring that Dr. George Bull, Bishop of St. David’s (1703), gave to his wife, the inscription read: “Bene parêre, parare det mihi Deus”—a prayer that she might[Pg 393] be a loving mother, a devoted wife, and a great homemaker. The prayer was answered; she had five sons and six daughters, happily lived in marriage for fifty years, and was regarded as an ideal homemaker’ (Singer).
Richard Beauchamp, Earl of Warwick, died 1439, had three daughters, who all married noblemen. Margaret’s husband was John Talbot, Earl of Shrewsbury, and the motto of her wedding ring was, ‘Till deithe depart.’ Alianour married Edmund, Duke of Somerset, and her motto was, ‘Never newe.’ Elizabeth married Lord Latimer, and hers was, ‘Til my live’s end.’
Richard Beauchamp, Earl of Warwick, died in 1439 and had three daughters, all of whom married noblemen. Margaret’s husband was John Talbot, Earl of Shrewsbury, and the motto on her wedding ring was, ‘Till death depart.’ Alianour married Edmund, Duke of Somerset, and her motto was, ‘Never new.’ Elizabeth married Lord Latimer, and hers was, ‘Till my life’s end.’
The custom of having posies on rings is thus alluded to in the ‘Art of English Poesie,’ published in 1589: ‘There be also another like epigrams that were sent usually for New Year’s gifts, or to be printed or put upon banketting dishes of sugar-plate or of March paines, etc.; they were called Nenia or Apophoreta, and never contained above one verse, or two at the most, but the shorter the better. We call them poesies, and do paint them now-a-dayes upon the back sides of our fruit-trenchers of wood, or use them as devises in ringes and armes.’
The custom of having sayings on rings is mentioned in the 'Art of English Poesie,' published in 1589: 'There are also similar epigrams that were usually sent as New Year’s gifts, or printed or placed on banquet dishes made of sugar or marzipan, etc.; they were called Nenia or Apophoreta, and never had more than one verse, or at most two, but the shorter the better. We call them sayings, and we now paint them on the back sides of our wooden plates, or use them as designs in rings and coats of arms.'
Henry VIII. gave Anne of Cleves a ring with the posy ‘God send me well to kepe’—a most unpropitious alliance, for the King expressed his dislike to her soon after the marriage. In the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries posies were generally placed outside the ring.
Henry VIII gave Anne of Cleves a ring with the inscription ‘God send me well to kepe’—a very unfortunate union, as the King showed his dislike for her soon after they married. In the 14th and 15th centuries, inscriptions were typically placed outside the ring.
In 1624 a collection of posies was printed, with the title, ‘Love’s Garland, or Posies for Rings, Handkerchiefs, and Gloves, and such pretty Tokens as Lovers send their Loves.’
In 1624, a collection of short verses was published, titled ‘Love’s Garland, or Posies for Rings, Handkerchiefs, and Gloves, and other cute tokens that lovers send to each other.’
At a meeting of the Archæological Institute, in March 1863, some curious posy rings were exhibited by the Rev.[Pg 394] James Beck; one, of particular interest, dating from the early part of the fifteenth century, had been dug up at Godstow Priory, Oxfordshire. It is a broad massive hoop of gold, of small diameter, suited for a lady’s finger. The decoration on the hoop consists of three lozenge-shaped panels, in which are represented the Trinity, the Blessed Virgin with the infant Saviour, and a Saint, nimbed, clad in a monastic habit, with the cowl falling upon the shoulders. The intervening spaces are chased with foliage and flowers of the forget-me-not; the whole surface was enriched with enamel, of which no remains are now visible. Within the hoop is delicately engraved in small black-letter character:
At a meeting of the Archaeological Institute in March 1863, some interesting posy rings were shown by the Rev. [Pg 394] James Beck; one in particular, from the early fifteenth century, was found at Godstow Priory in Oxfordshire. It is a wide, thick gold band, with a small diameter, designed for a lady's finger. The design on the band features three lozenge-shaped panels, depicting the Trinity, the Blessed Virgin with the infant Savior, and a Saint with a halo, dressed in a monastic robe, the hood draping over the shoulders. The spaces in between are decorated with foliage and forget-me-not flowers; the entire surface was adorned with enamel, of which no remnants are visible today. Inside the band, it is finely engraved in small black-letter text:
Most in mynd and yn myn herrt
Lothest from you ferto deparrt.
Most in mind and in my heart
Reluctant from you to depart.
Also a plain gold hoop of the sixteenth century, found in 1862 at Glastonbury Abbey, within which is engraved ‘Devx. corps. vng. cver,’ with the initials ‘C. M.’ united by a true-love knot. Several plain gold rings of the seventeenth century were also shown, inscribed with the following posies, in each case within the hoop:—
Also a simple gold hoop from the sixteenth century, discovered in 1862 at Glastonbury Abbey, with the engraving ‘Devx. corps. vng. cver,’ and the initials ‘C. M.’ connected by a true-love knot. Several plain gold rings from the seventeenth century were also displayed, inscribed with the following phrases, each within the hoop:—
I haue obtain’d whom God ordain’d.
God unite our hearts aright.
Knitt in one by Christ alone,
Wee joyne our loue in god aboue.
Joyn’d in one by god a lone,
God above send peace and love.
I have found the one God intended for me.
May God unite our hearts properly.
Bound together by Christ alone,
We join our love in God above.
Joined as one by God alone,
May God above send peace and love.
At the Loan Exhibition of Ancient and Modern Jewellery at the South Kensington Museum in 1872, J. W. Singer, Esq.,[71] contributed a collection of posy rings, the mottos, for the most part, inscribed within the hoop.
At the Loan Exhibition of Ancient and Modern Jewelry at the South Kensington Museum in 1872, J. W. Singer, Esq.,[71] contributed a collection of posy rings, with most of the mottos inscribed inside the band.
Gold, English of the fifteenth century, inscribed in Gothic letters ‘Gevoudroy.’
Gold, English from the fifteenth century, engraved in Gothic letters ‘Gevoudroy.’
Another of the same date, gold; on the outside are engraved four Maltese crosses; within, three Gothic letters, apparently E.
Another from the same date, gold; on the outside, there are four Maltese crosses engraved; inside, three Gothic letters, presumably E.
Gold, English, early sixteenth century, inscribed in large semi-Gothic characters, ✠I x x AM x x YOURS x x K : S.
Gold, English, early sixteenth century, inscribed in large semi-Gothic characters, ✠I x x AM x x YOURS x x K : S.
Gold, chased, has been enamelled ✠ESPOIR. EN. DIEU. (English, late sixteenth century.)
Gold, chased, has been enameled ✠Hope in God. (English, late sixteenth century.)
Gold, massive, ‘MY HART AND I UNTILL I DY.’ (English, late sixteenth century.)
Gold, large, ‘MY HEART AND I UNTIL THE END.’ (English, late sixteenth century.)
Gold, massive, ‘I LOVE AND LIKE MY CHOYSE.’ (English, early seventeenth century.)
Gold, large, ‘I love and appreciate my choice.’ (English, early seventeenth century.)
Silver gilt: within, ‘I CHUSE NOT TO CHANGE.’ (English, seventeenth century.)
Silver gilt: within, ‘I choose not to change.’ (English, seventeenth century.)
Gold, chased, traces of enamel, ✠Let. Reson. Rule. (English, seventeenth century.)
Gold, chased, traces of enamel, ✠Let. Reson. Rule. (English, seventeenth century.)
Gold, chased, ‘Let reason rule affection.’ (English, seventeenth century.)
Gold, chased, 'Let reason guide love.' (English, seventeenth century.)
Gold, chased, traces of black enamel, ‘A token of good-will.’ (English, seventeenth century.)
Gold, chased, with traces of black enamel, ‘A token of goodwill.’ (English, seventeenth century.)
Brass, ‘Live in Loue.’ (English, seventeenth century.)
Brass, ‘Live in Loue.’ (English, 17th century.)
Rings with double-line posies:
Double-line floral rings:
Gold, ‘In God aboue and Christ his Sonne, We too are joyned both in one.’ (English, seventeenth century.)
Gold, 'In God above and Christ his Son, We are joined together as one.' (English, seventeenth century.)
Gold, ‘Who feares the Lord are blest, wee see; Such thou and I God grant may bee.’ (English, seventeenth century.)
Gold, "Those who fear the Lord are blessed, as we can see; may you and I be like that." (English, seventeenth century.)
Gold, ‘As I in thee have made my choyce, So in the Lord let vs rejoice.’ 1637, W. D. A. (English, seventeenth century.)
Gold, ‘As I have chosen you, so let us rejoice in the Lord.’ 1637, WDA (English, seventeenth century.)
Gold, ‘As I expect so let me find, A faithfull ♡ and constant mind.’ (English, seventeenth century.)
Gold, ‘As I expect, so let me find, a faithful heart and constant mind.’ (English, seventeenth century.)
Gold, ‘I like my choyce, so will. . . .’ the remainder obliterated. (English, seventeenth century.)
Gold, “I like my choice, so will...,” the rest is gone. (English, seventeenth century.)
Gold, chasing worn away, ‘Tho’ little, accept it,’ letters black enamelled. (English, early eighteenth century.)
Gold, worn down and tarnished, "Though little, accept it," letters in black enamel. (English, early eighteenth century.)
Gold, chased with representation of skeleton, cross-bones, and hour-glass encircling the hoop; has been enamelled black, ‘You and I will lovers dye.’ (English, about 1720.)
Gold, decorated with images of a skeleton, crossbones, and an hourglass around the band; has been enameled black, ‘You and I will lovers dye.’ (English, around 1720.)
Gold, ‘Fear the Lord and rest content, So shall we live and not repent. B. W. 1730.’ (English, eighteenth century.)
Gold, 'Respect the Lord and be at peace, then we will live and not regret. B. W. 1730.' (English, eighteenth century.)
Gold, chased, inscribed within ‘T. Rowe, C. obt. 13 May, 1715, æt. 28.’ Worn by Mrs. Elizabeth Rowe, the poetess.
Gold, chased, inscribed with ‘T. Rowe, C. died 13 May, 1715, age 28.’ Worn by Mrs. Elizabeth Rowe, the poet.
Gold, overlaid with open-work pattern of flowers in coloured enamel, ‘Rite to requite.’ (English, eighteenth century.)
Gold, decorated with a floral open-work pattern in colored enamel, ‘Rite to requite.’ (English, eighteenth century.)
Silver, two hands holding a heart, ‘Love and feare God.’ (English, eighteenth century.)
Silver, two hands holding a heart, ‘Love and fear God.’ (English, eighteenth century.)
Gold, massive, ‘Virtus est pretiosa gemma. Auribus frequentius quam linguâ utere.’ Outside, in Gothic letters, ‘Voluptate capiuntur homines non minus quam hamo pisces.’ (Modern English.)
Gold, massive, 'Virtue is a precious gem. Use your ears more often than your tongue.' Outside, in Gothic letters, 'People are captured by pleasure no less than fish by a hook.' (Modern English.)
A double-line gold wedding-ring in the collection of Mr. J. W. Singer bears the words:
A double-line gold wedding ring in Mr. J. W. Singer's collection has the words:
Them which God copleth
Let no man put them asonder.
Those whom God has joined together
Let no one separate.
This ring is a very early sixteenth-century one, and shows that wedding-rings were not, formerly, the plain ones of the present day, but were ornamented with fine work. Mr. Singer has several rings of this description, ornamented in the same way.
This ring is from the early sixteenth century and shows that wedding rings weren't just the plain ones we see today; they were decorated with intricate designs. Mr. Singer has several rings like this, adorned in the same way.
Je sui ici en liu dami (Je suis ici en lieu d’ami).
Je suis ici en lieu d’ami.
No treasure like a treu friend. (Eighteenth century.)
No treasure is like a true friend. (Eighteenth century.)
Not to but on, till life be gon.
Not to put on, until life is gone.
Hearts united live contented.
Hearts united live happily.
No cut to unkindness.
No cut to cruelty.
Conceave consent, confirme content.
Convey consent, confirm content.
No recompenc but remembrance.
No reward but memory.
Vertue only bringeth felicitie.
Virtue brings happiness.
[The above nine rings from the Braybrooke Collection.]
[The nine rings above are from the Braybrooke Collection.]
From the Waterton Collection in the South Kensington Museum:
From the Waterton Collection in the South Kensington Museum:
‡Amour‡Merci. (French, fourteenth century.)
‡Love‡Thank you.
Pensez deli Parkisvici (pensez de lui par que je suis ici). (English, early fifteenth century.)
Pensez deli Parkisvici (think of him because I am here). (English, early fifteenth century.)
Je. le. de. sir. (English, late fifteenth century.)
Je. le. de. sir. (English, late fifteenth century.)
Por tous jours. (English, fifteenth century.)
Por tous jours. (English, fifteenth century.)
Nul sans peyn; inside, Sans mal desyr. (English, early sixteenth century.)
Nul sans pain; inside, Sans mal desyr. (English, early sixteenth century.)
+ My worldely joye alle my trust + hert, thought, lyfe, and lust. (English, early sixteenth century.)
+ My worldly joy, all my trust + heart, thoughts, life, and desire.
A plain gold hoop ring, inscribed within with a heart pierced with an arrow, and the word ‘Eygen,’ a star, and the word ‘Uwer.’ (Dutch or German, sixteenth century.)
A simple gold hoop ring, engraved inside with a heart pierced by an arrow, along with the word ‘Eygen,’ a star, and the word ‘Uwer.’ (Dutch or German, sixteenth century.)
Devx. corps, vng. ever. (English, sixteenth century.)
Devx. corps, vng. ever. (English, sixteenth century.)
C’est mon plaisir. (English, sixteenth century.)
C'est mon plaisir. (English, sixteenth century.)
+ Quant. dieu. plera. melior. sera. (English, sixteenth century.)
+ Quant. dieu. plera. melior. sera. (English, sixteenth century.)
Pour bien. (English, sixteenth century.)
Pour well.
My wille were. (English, sixteenth century.)
My will was.
Time. deum. me. ama. q̄d̄ RIE. (English, sixteenth century.)
Time. deum. me. ama. q̄d̄ RIE. (English, sixteenth century.)
+ Observe Wedloke; inside, Memento mori. (English, sixteenth century.)
+ Observe Wedloke; inside, Remember you will die. (English, sixteenth century.)
Loyalte na peur. (French, seventeenth century.)
Loyalty out of fear. (French, seventeenth century.)
Let liking last. (English, seventeenth century.)
Let liking last. (English, seventeenth century.)
This sparke will grow (set with a diamond). (English, seventeenth century.)
This spark will grow (set with a diamond). (English, seventeenth century.)
Accept this gift of honest love, which never could nor can remove. 1. Hath tide. 2. Mee sure. 3. Whilst life. 4. Doth last. (English, seventeenth century.)
Accept this gift of genuine love, which could never be taken away. 1. Has time. 2. Trust me. 3. As long as life. 4. Lasts. (English, seventeenth century.)
+ MB. Remember + the (a heart) + that + is + in + payne. (English, seventeenth century.)
+ MB. Remember + the (a heart) + that + is + in + payne. (English, seventeenth century.)
Time lesseneth not my love. (English, seventeenth century.)
Time does not reduce my love.
In constancie I live and dye. (English, seventeenth century.)
In constancy, I live and die.
Love the truth. (English, seventeenth century.)
Love the truth. (English, 17th century.)
My promise past shall always last. (English, eighteenth century.)
My promise from the past will always remain. (English, eighteenth century.)
You have me hart. (Lady’s betrothal ring. English, eighteenth century.)
You have my heart. (Lady’s betrothal ring. English, eighteenth century.)
Love ever. (English, seventeenth century.)
Love always.
Love true, ’tis joy. (English, early seventeenth century.)
Love is real, it's pure joy.
Love me. (English, eighteenth century.)
Love me.
Keepe. fayth. till. deth.
Keep faith until death.
I fancy noe butt thee alone.
I only want you.
+ Not this but mee;
* yf. this. then me.
Wheare grace is found
Love doth abound.
+ Not this but me;
* if this, then me.
Where grace is found
Love does abound.
My soul will keep thine company to heaven.
My soul will join you in heaven.
Mr. Singer informs me that his early pre-Reformation wedding-rings have the motto prefaced with a cross, and, as this died out, the remains of a cross, in a kind of rude star, sometimes carried on between each word.
Mr. Singer tells me that his early pre-Reformation wedding rings have a motto that starts with a cross, and as this practice faded, the remnants of a cross—often looking like a rough star—were sometimes placed between each word.
Mr. Singer has one bronze wedding-ring with a motto, found in Wiltshire, but numerous silver ones.
Mr. Singer has one bronze wedding ring with a motto, found in Wiltshire, but he has many silver ones.
Ma vie et mon amour
Finiront en un jour.
[Pg 399]
Dieu nous unisse
Pour son service.
My life and my love
Will end in one day.
[Pg 399]
May God unite us
For His service.
Seconde moi pour te rendre heureuse.
Seconde me to make you happy.
Nos deux cœurs sont unis.
Our two hearts are united.
En ma fidélité je finirai ma vie.
En ma fidélité je finirai ma vie.
Domine dirige nos.
Lord, guide us.
Let us agree.
Continue constant.
My love is true
To none but you.
The gift is small,
But love is all.
In God and thee
My joy shall be.
Let not absence banish love.
Love in thee is my desire.
Whear this i giue
I wish to liue.
Let vs loue
Like turtle doue.
God saw thee
Most fit for me
Let’s come to an agreement.
Stay steady.
My love is genuine
Only for you.
The present is small,
But love is everything.
In God and you
My happiness will be.
Let not distance drive away love.
My desire is to love you.
Wherever this is given,
I want to live.
Let’s love
Like turtle doves.
God saw you
As the perfect match for me.
(on the wedding-ring of the wife of John Dunton, the bookseller).
(on the wedding ring of John Dunton's wife, the bookseller).
God did decree this unitie.
God did establish this unity.
Where hearts agree, there God will be.
Where hearts align, there God will be.
I have obtained whom God ordained.
I have received what God has intended for me.
Virtue passeth riches.
Integrity is worth more than wealth.
No force can move affixed Love.
No force can move a fixed Love.
Vnited hartes Death only partes.
United hearts, death only parts.
Liue, loue, and be happie.
Live, love, and be happy.
The love is true that I O U.
The love is real that I O U.
My love is fixt, I will not range.
I like my choice too well to change.
My love is set, I won't stray.
I like my choice too much to change.
Well projected if accepted.
Well presented if accepted.
God thought fitt this knott to knitt.
God thought it right to tie this knot.
A loving wife prolongeth life.
A caring wife extends life.
Let virtue be a guide to thee.
Let kindness be your guide.
Thy Desart hath won my hearte.
Your desert has won my heart.
Death only partes two loving heartes.
Death only parts two loving hearts.
* B * TRVE * IN * HARTE *.
* B * TRVE * IN * HARTE *.
True loue is lye to man and wye.
(True love is life to man and wife.)
True love is life to a man and a woman.
(True love is life to man and wife.)
Lett Death leade loue to rest.
Lett death lead love to rest.
To Bodys on harte.
To Bodys on heart.
Good will is aboue Gould.
Goodwill is about gold.
True love is the bond of peace.
True love is the connection of harmony.
A virtuous wife preserveth life.
A virtuous wife saves lives.
Let our contest bee who loves best.
Let our contest be about who loves the best.
No chance prevents the Lord’s intents.
No chance stands in the way of the Lord's plans.
I joy in thee, joy thou in me.
I find joy in you, may you find joy in me.
And this also will pass away.
And this will pass too.
Fear God, honour the Prince,
Lye still Joan, and don’t wince.
If thee dosn’t work, thee shasn’t eat.
(From Monmouthshire.)
Fear God, honor the Prince,
Stay still, Joan, and don’t flinch.
If you don’t work, you shouldn’t eat.
(From Monmouthshire.)
From the ‘Card of Courtship; or, The Language of Love, fitted to the Humours of all Degrees, Sexes, and Conditions,’ 1653:
From the ‘Card of Courtship; or, The Language of Love, suited to the Humors of all Levels, Genders, and Situations,’ 1653:
Thou art my star, be not irregular.
You are my star, don’t be unpredictable.
Without thy love I backward move.
Without your love, I move backwards.
Thine eyes so bright are my chief delight.
Your bright eyes are my greatest joy.
This intimates the lover’s states.
This hints at the lover's feelings.
My life is done when thou art gone.
My life is over when you're gone.
This hath no end, my sweetest friend.
This has no end, my sweetest friend.
Love and joye can never cloye.
Love and joy can never spoil.
The pledge I prove of mutuall love.
The promise I demonstrate of mutual love.
I love the rod and thee and God. 1646.
I love the rod, you, and God. 1646.
All I refuse, but thee I chuse.
All I reject, but you I choose.
Gift and giver, your servants ever.
Gift and giver, always your servants.
Non mœchaberis.
You shall not commit adultery.
Tuut mon coer.
Tuut my heart.
Mulier viro subjecta esto.
Woman, be subject to man.
Sans departir à nul autre.
Without leaving anyone else.
Tout mon cuer avez.
Tout mon cœur avez.
Lel ami avet.
Lel, friend.
Par ce present ami aumer rent.
(By this gift to love me given.)
Par ce present ami aumer rent.
(By this gift to love me given.)
Let Reason rule.
Let reason lead.
J’aime mon choix.
I love my choice.
À vous à jamais.
Yours forever.
Je suis content.
I'm happy.
L’amour nous unit.
Love unites us.
Je suis content, j’ai mon désir.
Je suis content, j’ai ce que je veux.
Je vous aime d’un amour extrême.
Je vous aime d'un amour extrême.
Ce que Dieu conjoint, l’homme ne le sépare point.
What God has joined together, man should not separate.
Desire hath no rest.
Desire has no rest.
This and my heart.
This and my soul.
Acceptance is my comfort.
Acceptance brings me comfort.
God us ayde
God help us
(on a curious old ring, chased with the Nortons’ motto),
(on a curious old ring, engraved with the Nortons’ motto),
i h c Naserus rex Judiorum me serere +.
i h c Naserus king of the Jews, please save me +.
My giving this begins thy bliss.
My gift to you starts your happiness.
Remember Him who died for thee,
And after that remember me.
Remember Him who died for you,
And after that, remember me.
Let me wish thee full happy be.
Let me wish you complete happiness.
[Pg 402]Tibi soli
To you alone
(on Beau Fielding’s ring; temp. Queen Anne).
(on Beau Fielding’s ring; temp. Queen Anne).
From a Commonplace Book of the seventeenth century in Sion College Library:
From a Commonplace Book of the 17th century in Sion College Library:
There is no other, and I am he,
That loves no other, and thou art she.
Eye doth find, heart doth choose,
Faith doth bind, death doth lose.
Let us be one{To live in love
Till we are none{I love to live.
Love well, and{Virtus non vultus
Live well.{Patior ut potiar.
Sequor ut consequar.
There’s no one else, and I am him,
Who loves no one but you, and you are her.
The eye sees, the heart decides,
Faith connects us, death can’t divide.
Let’s be unitedPlease provide the text you'd like me to modernize.To live with love
Until we’re no moreI’m ready to assist you with modernizing text. Please provide the phrases you would like me to work on.I love life.
Love deeply, andPlease provide the text you would like me to modernize.Substance over style
Live fully.{I put up with it to enjoy.
I strive to achieve.
I seek to be
Not thine, but thee.
I want to be
Not yours, but you.
Nowe ys thus
Now it's like this
(inscription upon a gold ring found about 1786 on the site of the battle of Towton, Yorkshire. The weight was more than an ounce; it had no stone, but a lion passant was cut upon the gold. The inscription was in old black characters. The crest is that of the Percy family, and it is supposed the ring was worn by the Earl of Northumberland on the day of the battle (March 29, 1461). The motto seems to allude to the times: ‘The age is fierce as a lion’).
(inscription on a gold ring discovered around 1786 at the Towton battlefield in Yorkshire. The ring weighed over an ounce; it had no stone, but a lion in profile was engraved on the gold. The inscription was in old black letters. The crest belongs to the Percy family, and it is believed that the ring was worn by the Earl of Northumberland on the day of the battle (March 29, 1461). The motto appears to reflect the era: ‘The age is fierce as a lion’).
Je change qu’en mourant. Unalterable to my Perdita through life
Je change qu’en mourant. Unalterable to my Perdita through life
(inscribed on a ring presented to Mrs. Robinson, by the Prince Regent, afterwards George IV.).
(inscribed on a ring given to Mrs. Robinson, by the Prince Regent, afterwards George IV.).
If love I finde, I will bee kinde.
If I find love, I will be kind.
In thee my choyse how I reioyce.
In you, my choice, how I rejoice.
In thee my choice I do rejoice
In you, my choice makes me happy.
(this posy is on a massive gold ring, which is thus described by a writer in ‘Notes and Queries’:—In the centre[Pg 403] of the ornamentation outside is a shield, with three lions passant on it. On the right of the shield H, and on the left of it I, each letter having an old-fashioned crown over it. At the extreme ends of the ornamentation, outside the letters H and I are three fleurs-de-lys).
(this posy is on a massive gold ring, which is described by a writer in ‘Notes and Queries’:—In the center[Pg 403] of the decoration on the outside is a shield with three lions walking on it. To the right of the shield is the letter H, and to the left is the letter I, each topped with an old-fashioned crown. At the far ends of the decoration, outside the letters H and I, are three fleurs-de-lys).
Take hand and heart, ile nere depart.
Take hand and heart, I’ll never depart.
Live and dye in constancy.
Live and die in constancy.
A vertuous wife yt serveth life.
A virtuous wife still serves life.
As long as life your loving wife.
As long as life, your loving wife.
I will be yours while breath indures.
I will be yours as long as I breathe.
Love is sure where faith is pure.
Love is certain where faith is genuine.
A vertuous wife doth banish strife.
A virtuous wife drives away conflict.
As God hath made my choyse in thee,
So move thy heart to comfort mee.
God yt hath kept thy heart for mee,
Grant that our love may faithfull bee.
God our love continue ever,
That we in heaven may live together.
The eye did find, ye heart did chuse,
The hand doth bind, till death doth loose.
First feare ye Lord, then rest content,
So shall we live and not repent.
Breake not thy vow to please the eye,
But keepe thy love, so live and dye.
As God has chosen you for me,
So let your heart bring me comfort.
God who has kept your heart for me,
Make sure our love stays true.
May our love last forever,
So we can be together in heaven.
The eye found what the heart chose,
The hand binds us, until death breaks us apart.
First fear the Lord, then be at peace,
Then we will live without regret.
Don't break your vow to please the eye,
But keep your love, so you can live and die.
I am sent to salute you from a faithfull friend.
I was sent to greet you from a loyal friend.
This and my heart.
This and my heart.
Acceptance is my comfort.
Acceptance is my safe space.
Too light to requite.
Too light to reciprocate.
Patience is a noble virtue.
Patience is a valuable virtue.
Lost all content, if not consent.
Lost all content, if not consent.
A friend to one as like to none.
A friend to one is like none other.
Your sight, my delight.
Your vision, my joy.
Virtue meeting, happy greeting.
Virtue meeting, happy greeting.
As trust, bee just.
As you trust, be fair.
[Pg 404]For a kiss, take this.
For a kiss, take this.
No better smart shall change my heart.
No clever trick will change my heart.
Hurt not yr heart whose joy thou art
Hurt not your heart that brings you joy
My heart and I until I dye.
My heart and I until I die.
Sweetheart I pray doe not say nay.
Babe, please don’t say no.
My heart you have and yours I crave.
My heart is yours, and I want yours in return.
As you now find so judge me kind.
As you now see me, judge me kindly.
Let this present my good intent (1758).
Let this express my good intentions (1758).
One word for all, I love and shall.
One word for everyone: I love and always will.
My constant love shall never move.
My unwavering love will never change.
Like and take, mislike forsake.
Like and take, dislike forsake.
The want of thee is griefe to mee.
The lack of you is painful for me.
Be true to me yt gives it thee.
Be true to me and it will be yours.
Privata di te moriro.
Deprived of thee I die.
Till yt I have better
I remayne your detter.
Mon esprit est partout.
Mon cœur est avec vous.
Privata di te moriro.
Deprived of you, I die.
Until I have something better
I remain your debtor.
My mind is everywhere.
My heart is with you.
Lite to requite.
Light to restore.
Faithfull ever, deceitefull never.
Always faithful, never deceitful.
I present, you absent.
I show up, you don't.
Despise not mee, yt ioyes in thee.
Despise me not, yet I rejoice in you.
I live, I love, and live contented,
And make my choice not to be repented.
I live, I love, and I’m happy,
And I choose not to regret my decisions.
Desire hath set my heart on fire.
Desire has set my heart ablaze.
I hope to see you yielde to mee.
I hope to see you give in to me.
Both, or neither, chuse you whether.
Both, or neither, choose whichever you prefer.
Heart, this, and mee, if you agree.
Heart, this, and me, if you agree.
This accepted, my wish obtained.
Wish granted.
This accepted, my wish affected.
This accepted, my wish influenced.
Thy friend am I, and so will dye.
I am your friend, and I will always be.
O yt I might have my delight.
O ye, I might find my joy.
[Pg 405]Parting is payne when love doth remayne.
[Pg 405]Goodbyes are painful when love still lingers.
My corne is growne, love reape thy owne.
My horn has grown, love reaps your own.
This thy desert shall crown my heart.
This desert will fill my heart.
I fancy none but thee alone.
I only want you.
God sent her me my wife to be.
God sent her to me, my future wife.
God’s appointment is my contentment.
God’s plan is my happiness.
This is your will to save or kill.
This is your choice to save or kill.
If you but consent, you shall not repent.
If you just agree, you won’t regret it.
If you deny, then sure I dye.
If you deny it, then sure, I'll dye.
Wth teares I mourne, as one forlorne.
Wth tears I mourn, like someone lost.
A friend to one, as like to none.
A friend to one is like no other.
Your sight, my delight.
Your gaze, my joy.
Grieve not his heart whose joy thou art.
Do not sorrow the heart of the one whose happiness you are.
First love Christ that died for thee.
Next to Hym love none but me.
First love Christ who died for you.
Then love no one but me.
Joye day and night bee our delight.
Joyful day and night be our joy.
Divinely knitt by Grace are wee,
Late two, now one; the pledge here see.
B. & A. (1657).
Divinely woven together by Grace are we,
Once two, now one; see the promise here.
B. & A. (1657).
Loue and liue happy (1689).
Love and live happily (1689).
Avoid all strife ’twixt man and wife.
Avoid all conflict between husband and wife.
Joyfull loue this ring do proue.
Joyful love, this ring does prove.
In thee, deare wife, I finde new life.
In you, dear wife, I find new life.
Of rapturous joye I am the toye.
Of overwhelming joy, I am the plaything.
In thee I prove the joy of love.
In you, I discover the joy of love.
In loving wife spend all thy life (1697).
In loving wife, spend all your life (1697).
True love will ne’er remove.
True love will never fade.
In unitie let’s live and dy.
In unity, let’s live and die.
Happy in thee hath God made me.
Happy in you has God made me.
I loue myself in louing thee.
I love myself by loving you.
Silence ends strife with man and wife.
Silence resolves conflict between husband and wife.
More weare—more were (1652).
More wear—more were (1652).
I kiss the rod from thee and God.
I kiss the rod from you and God.
Endless as this shall be our bliss
(Thos. Bliss, 1719).
Endless as this will be our happiness
(Thos. Bliss, 1719).
Death neuer parts such loving hearts.
Death never separates such loving hearts.
Loue and respect I doe expect.
Love and respect I do expect.
No gift can show the love I ow.
No gift can express the love I owe.
Loue thy chast wife beyond thy life (1681).
Loving your faithful wife more than your own life (1681).
Loue and pray night and daye.
Loud and pray night and day.
Great joye in thee continually.
Great joy in you always.
My fond delight by day and night.
My favorite joy day and night.
Pray to love, love to pray (1647).
Pray to love, love to pray (1647).
Honour et Foye
Honor and Faith
(inscription on a gold ring belonging to Earl Fitzwilliam):
(inscription on a gold ring belonging to Earl Fitzwilliam):
Motto ring.
Motto ring.
Body and minde in thee I finde.
Body and mind in you I find.
Deare wife, thy rod doth leade to God.
Dear wife, your guidance leads to God.
God alone made us two one.
Only God united us.
Eternally my loue shal be.
Forever my love shall be.
Worship is due to God and you.
Worship belongs to God and to you.
God aboue continew our loue.
God above continue our love.
I wish to thee all joie may bee.
Wishing you all joy.
With my body I worship thee.
With my body, I honor you.
Beyond this life, loue me, deare wife.
Beyond this life, love me, dear wife.
Rien ne m’est plus,
Plus ne me rien (fifteenth century).
Une seule me suffit.
Elle m’a bien conduite.
Rien ne m’est plus,
Plus ne me rien (fifteenth century).
Une seule me suffit.
Elle m’a bien conduite.
De cuer entier.
De cuer entier.
In adversis etiam fida.
Even in adversity faithful.
In tough times, even then, loyal.
[Pg 407]Device—a mouse gnawing away the net in which a lion is caught.
[Pg 407]Device—a mouse nibbling through the net that has trapped a lion.
Non immemor beneficii.
Mindful of kindness.
Mindful of kindness.
All that I desire of the Lord is to fear God and love me.
All I want from the Lord is to respect God and love me.
En bon foy.
In good faith.
I cannot show the love I O.
I can't express the love I have for you.
I love and like my choice.
I love my choice and I’m happy with it.
Ryches be unstable
And beuty wyll dekay,
But faithful love will ever last
Till death dryve it away.
Wealth is unstable
And beauty will fade,
But true love will last forever
Until death takes it away.
On a mediæval armillary ring, consisting of eight rings, one within the other, each having a portion of the motto:
On a medieval armillary ring, made up of eight rings, one inside the other, each displaying part of the motto:
W. ♡ A. ☞ D. G. CS,
T. L. A. L. A. R. CT.
W. ♡ A. ☞ D. G. CS,
T. L. A. L. A. R. CT.
(Where heart and hand do give consent,
There live and love and rest content.)
(Where heart and hand agree,
There live, love, and find happiness.)
Device—a golden apple.
Device—a golden apple.
Vous le meritez.
You deserve it.
You deserve it.
I change only in Death.
I only change in Death.
Love I like thee; sweets requite mee.
Love, I like you; sweetness rewards me.
Faithfull ever, deceitful never.
Always faithful, never deceitful.
I like, I love, as turtle dove.
I like, I love, like a turtle dove.
As gold is pure, so love is shure.
As gold is pure, so love is sure.
From ‘The Mysteries of Love and Eloquence; or, the Arts of Wooing and Complementing, as they are manag’d in the Spring Garden, Hide Park, the New Exchange, and other eminent places’ (London, 1658, pp. 154, 157):
From ‘The Mysteries of Love and Eloquence; or, the Arts of Wooing and Complementing, as they are handled in the Spring Garden, Hyde Park, the New Exchange, and other notable places’ (London, 1658, pp. 154, 157):
Thou wert not handsom, wise, but rich;
’Twas that which did my eyes bewitch.
[Pg 408]
Divinely knit by God are we,
Late one, now two, the pledge you see.
We strangely met, and so do many,
But now as true as ever any.
You weren't handsome or wise, but you were rich;
That’s what captivated me.
[Pg 408]
We are divinely made by God,
Once one, now two, as you can see.
We met in a strange way, like so many do,
But now we’re as true as ever.
As we begun so let’s continue.
As we started, let's keep going.
My beloved is mine and I am hers.
My love belongs to me, and I belong to her.
True blue will never stain.
True blue never fades.
Against thou goest I will provide another.
Against you go, I will provide another.
Let him never take a wife
That will not love her as his life.
Let him never marry a woman
Who won’t love him like her own life.
I do not repent that I gave my consent.
I don’t regret giving my consent.
What the eye saw the heart hath chosen.
What the eye saw, the heart has chosen.
More faithful than fortunate.
More loyal than lucky.
Love me little but love me long.
Love me a little, but love me for a long time.
Love him who gave thee this ring of gold,
’Tis he must kiss thee when thou ’rt old.
This circle, though but small about,
The devil, jealousy, shall keep out.
If I think my wife is fair
What need other people care.
This ring is a token I give to thee
That thou no tokens do change for me.
Love the one who gave you this ring of gold,
He’s the one who will kiss you when you’re old.
This circle, though it’s small,
Will keep out the devil, jealousy, after all.
If I think my wife is beautiful,
Why should it matter to anyone else at all?
This ring is a sign I give to you,
That you shouldn’t exchange tokens with anyone new.
My dearest Betty is good and pretty.
My dear Betty is kind and beautiful.
I did then commit no folly
When I married my sweet Molly.
’Tis fit men should not be alone,
Which made Tom to marry Jone.
Su is bonny, blythe, and brown;
This ring hath made her now my own.
Like Philis there is none;
She truely loves her Choridon.
I didn't do anything foolish
When I married my sweet Molly.
It's right for men not to be alone,
Which is why Tom married Jone.
Su is pretty, cheerful, and tan;
This ring has now made her mine.
There’s no one like Philis;
She truly loves her Choridon.
Nosce teipsum.
Know yourself.
Think on mee.
Think of me.
Desire and deserve.
Want and earn.
[Pg 409]Keepe faith till death.
Keep faith till death.
As God hath appointed
Soe I am contented.
As God has planned
So I am okay with it.
(These are given from wills of the seventeenth century in the glossary appended to ‘Fabric Rolls of York Minster,’ published by the Surtees Society.)
(These are taken from wills of the seventeenth century in the glossary attached to ‘Fabric Rolls of York Minster,’ published by the Surtees Society.)
Ever last
Everlast
(on the rings given at the funeral of John Smith, Alderman of London, who ‘made a great game by musk catts which he kept’).
(on the rings given at the funeral of John Smith, Alderman of London, who ‘made a great game by muskrats which he kept’).
Redime tempus
Redeem the time
(on the rings given at the funeral of Samuel Crumbleholme, Master of St. Paul’s).
(on the rings given at the funeral of Samuel Crumbleholme, Master of St. Paul’s).
This and the giver
Are thine for ever.
This and the giver
Are yours forever.
My Joyh consisteth in Hope.
My joy lies in hope.
Quies servis nulla.
Quiet servants none.
I desire to disarne (disarm).
I want to disarm.
I will you trewllie serve.
I will truly serve you.
Success to the British flag.
Success for the British flag.
Valued | may greater B. |
Love |
(Love undervalued may greater be.)
Love undervalued may be greater.
Great Dundee for God and me
Great Dundee for God and me
(engraved on the inside of a ring with a skull, Viscount Dundee. This relic of the famous Claverhouse, given to him by King James, was in the possession of Miss Graham of Dundrune. It is stated to have been missing since 1828).
(engraved on the inside of a ring with a skull, Viscount Dundee. This relic of the famous Claverhouse, given to him by King James, was in the possession of Miss Graham of Dundrune. It has been reported missing since 1828).
Christ and thee my comfort be
Christ and you be my comfort
(‘Gentleman’s Magazine,’ vol. ii. p. 629).
('Gentleman's Magazine,' vol. ii. p. 629).
OV EST NVL SI LOIAVLS
QVI SE POET GARDER DES MAVXDISANS
OF THIS WE HAVE NO DOUBT
THAT ONE CAN AVOID MISFORTUNE
(on a gold ring found on Flodden Field, in the possession of George Allen, Esq., of Darlington, 1785).
(on a gold ring found on Flodden Field, owned by George Allen, Esq., from Darlington, 1785).
✠ I love you my sweet dear heart
✠ Go ✠ I pray you pleas my love
✠ I love you, my sweet dear heart
✠ Please go, I beg you, my love
(on a silver ring found at Somerton Castle, Lincoln, in 1805).
(on a silver ring discovered at Somerton Castle, Lincoln, in 1805).
CANDU PLERA MELEOR CERA
CANDU PLERA MELEOR CERA
(inscribed on a brass thumb-ring formerly in the possession of the Marquis of Donegal, 1813).
(inscribed on a brass thumb ring that was once owned by the Marquis of Donegal, 1813).
✠ IN GOD IS ALL
✠ GOD IS EVERYTHING
(on a silver ring found among the ruins of the Priory of St. Radigund, near Dover, in 1831).
(on a silver ring found among the ruins of the Priory of St. Radigund, near Dover, in 1831).
Tout pour bein feyre
Tout pour bien faire
(inscribed on a ring found at St. Andrew’s Chapel, near Ipswich).
(inscribed on a ring found at St. Andrew’s Chapel, near Ipswich).
Mon cur avez
Honour et joye
My heart has
Honor and joy
(on a gold ring found near St. Anne’s Well, Nottingham).
(on a gold ring found near St. Anne’s Well, Nottingham).
✠ Amor. vincit. om.
✠ Love conquers all.
(on a silver ring found near Old Sarum).
(on a silver ring found near Old Sarum).
Inscription ring.
Inscription ring.
An enamelled ring is mentioned in the ‘Gentleman’s[Pg 411] Magazine’ (vol. lxxix.) as having been found in 1808 in the ruins of an old manor-house, occupied in the sixteenth century by a family of distinction, which then becoming extinct, the manor-house fell to decay.
An enamelled ring is mentioned in the ‘Gentleman’s[Pg 411] Magazine’ (vol. lxxix.) as having been discovered in 1808 among the ruins of an old manor house, which was home to a distinguished family in the sixteenth century. When the family died out, the manor house fell into disrepair.
French Inscription ring.
French inscription ring.
(Inscription ring of gold, found in Sarthe, France, bearing the names ‘Dromachius’ and ‘Betta,’ supposed to be a marriage ring, of, probably, the fifth century.)
(Inscription ring of gold, found in Sarthe, France, featuring the names ‘Dromachius’ and ‘Betta,’ likely a marriage ring, probably from the fifth century.)
Joye sans cesse. B. L.
Joy without end. B. L.
Loue alway, by night and day.
Always renting, day and night.
Filz ou fille (Anthony Bacon, 1596).
Filz ou fille (Anthony Bacon, 1596).
To enjoy is to obey.
To enjoy is to comply.
Loue for loue.
Love for love.
Post spinas palma.
After thorn palms.
All for all.
All for one.
Mutual forbearance (1742).
Mutual tolerance (1742).
In loues delight spend day and night.
In love's delight, spend day and night.
Love’s sweetest proofe.
Love's sweetest proof.
En bon foye.
In good faith.
Truth trieth troth.
Truth tests loyalty.
Beare and forbeare.
Bear and forbear.
Lett nuptiall joye our time employe.
Let us now spend our time in marital joy.
Not this bvt me.
Not this but me.
None can prevent the Lord’s intent.
None can stop the Lord's plan.
Christ for me hath chosen thee.
Christ has chosen you for me.
God’s blessing be on thee and me.
God's blessing be on you and me.
Love me and be happy.
Love me and be happy.
The love is true I owe you.
The love is real that I owe you.
God did foresee we should agree.
God did foresee that we would agree.
In God and thee my joy shall be.
In God and you, my happiness will be.
Absence tries love.
Absence tests love.
Virtue surpasseth riches.
Virtue surpasses wealth.
Let virtue rest within thy breast.
Let virtue rest in your heart.
I lyke my choyce.
I like my choice.
As circles five by art compact shews but one ring in sight,
So trust uniteth faithful mindes with knott of secret might;
Whose force to breake no right but greedie death possesseth power,
As time and sequels well shall prove. My ringe can say no more.
As circles made by art show only one ring in sight,
So trust brings together loyal minds with a bond of secret strength;
Whose power can break no rules but greedy death holds sway,
As time and events will prove. My ring can say no more.
(The Earl of Hertford’s wedding-ring consisted of five links, the four inner ones containing the above posies of the Earl’s making. See page 318, ‘Betrothal and Wedding Rings.’)
(The Earl of Hertford’s wedding ring was made up of five links, with the four inner links featuring the posies created by the Earl himself. See page 318, ‘Betrothal and Wedding Rings.’)
Joye sans fyn. (Fourteenth century.)
Joye sans fin. (Fourteenth century.)
In ‘Manningham’s Diary,’ 1602-1603 (Camden Society), we have the following ‘Posies for a jet ring lined with sylver’:
In ‘Manningham’s Diary,’ 1602-1603 (Camden Society), we have the following ‘Posies for a jet ring lined with silver’:
‘“One two,” so written as you may begin with either word. “This one ring is two,” or both sylver and jet make but one ring; the body and soule one man; twoe friends one mynde. “Candida mens est,” the sylver resembling the soule, being the inner part. “Bell’ ame bell’ amy,” a fayre soule is a fayre frend, etc. “Yet faire within.” “The firmer the better,” the sylver the stronger and the better. “Mille modis læti miseros mors una fatigat.”’
‘“One two,” written so you can start with either word. “This one ring is two,” or both silver and jet form one ring; the body and soul are one person; two friends share one mind. “A pure mind is,” the silver representing the soul, being the inner part. “A fair soul is a fair friend,” etc. “Yet beautiful within.” “The firmer, the better,” the silver is stronger and better. “A thousand ways delight, but death tires out the miserable.”’
Live as I or else I dye.
Live like me or I die.
Within thy brest my harte doth rest.
Within your breast, my heart does rest.
(On two gold posy-rings found in Sussex, 1866.)
(On two gold posy rings found in Sussex, 1866.)
[Pg 413]In 1780 the sexton of Southwell, in digging a grave, found a gold ring weighing nine dwts. six grs. On the inside is the following inscription, in characters very distinct, deep, and not inelegantly cut:
[Pg 413]In 1780, the sexton of Southwell discovered a gold ring weighing nine dwts. six grs while digging a grave. On the inside, there’s an inscription in very clear, deep, and nicely crafted letters:
+ MIEV + MOVRI + QUE + CHANGE + MA FOY +.
+ MIEV + MOVRI + QUE + CHANGE + MY FAITH +.
The cross at the beginning is of the same size as the letters, that between the words very small.
The cross at the beginning is the same size as the letters, while the one between the words is very small.
You dear!
You sweetheart!
(The meaning is thus conjectured of, possibly, a rebus, or canting device, on a silver signet-ring, found in the bed of the river Nene, at Wisbeach St. Peter’s; the letter U and a deer trippant implying, perhaps, the writer’s tender regard towards his correspondent. Date about the time of Henry V. or Henry VI.)
(The meaning is thought to be a rebus or a playful device on a silver signet ring found in the bed of the river Nene, at Wisbeach St. Peter’s; the letter U and a deer in motion possibly suggesting the writer’s affectionate feelings towards the recipient. Date around the time of Henry V or Henry VI.)
Inscription ring.
Inscription ring.
The annexed engraving (from the ‘Archæological Journal,’ March, 1848) represents a curious ring, the property of Mr. Fitch, and belonging to his interesting cabinet of Norfolk antiquities. It is a plain hoop of silver, of the size here seen, and bears the inscription ‘Ethraldric on Lynd.’ Its date has been assigned to as early a period as Saxon times, but we are inclined to attribute it to a subsequent age, the twelfth, or, perhaps, so late a date even as the thirteenth century. It may deserve notice that the mintage of London,[Pg 414] of coins of Canute, Harold, Edward the Confessor, the Conqueror, and subsequent kings, is designated by the legend ‘On Lynde.’ This ring was found during the construction of the railway at Attleborough, in Norfolk.
The attached engraving (from the ‘Archaeological Journal,’ March 1848) shows a unique ring that belongs to Mr. Fitch and is part of his fascinating collection of Norfolk antiquities. It's a simple silver band, like the one depicted here, and it has the inscription ‘Ethraldric on Lynd.’ While it has been dated back to Saxon times, we believe it’s more likely from a later period, possibly the twelfth or even the thirteenth century. It’s worth noting that the minting in London,[Pg 414] for coins of Canute, Harold, Edward the Confessor, the Conqueror, and later kings, is marked with the legend ‘On Lynde.’ This ring was discovered during railway construction in Attleborough, Norfolk.
True-love knots were common formerly. In the inventory of the effects of Henry Howard, K.G., Earl of Northampton, 1614, is mentioned ‘a golde ringe sett with fifteene diamondes in a true lover’s knotte, with the wordes nec astu, nec ense.’
True-love knots were popular in the past. In the inventory of the possessions of Henry Howard, K.G., Earl of Northampton, 1614, there is a mention of "a gold ring set with fifteen diamonds in a true lover’s knot, with the words nec astu, nec ense."
In the Waterton Collection in the South Kensington Museum are some interesting specimens of this peculiar kind of ring of English and Italian workmanship.
In the Waterton Collection at the South Kensington Museum, there are some fascinating examples of this unique type of ring made with English and Italian craftsmanship.
At the commencement of the present century ‘Harlequin’ rings were fashionable in England. They were so called because they were set round with variously-coloured stones, in some way resembling the motley costume of the hero of pantomime.
At the beginning of this century, 'Harlequin' rings were trendy in England. They got their name because they were surrounded by stones in different colors, somewhat similar to the colorful outfit of the pantomime character.
‘Regard rings,’ of French origin, were common even to a late period, and were thus named from the initials with which they were set forming the acrostic of these words:[72]
‘Regard rings,’ of French origin, were still popular even in later times, and were named after the initials that were arranged to create an acrostic of these words:[72]
[Pg 415]
R uby
E merald
G arnet
A methyst
R uby
D iamond
L apis lazuli
O pal
V erd antique
E merald.
Ruby
Emerald
Garnet
Amethyst
Ruby
Diamond
Lapis lazuli
Opal
Verd antique
Emerald.
The French have precious stones for all the alphabet, excepting f, k, q, y, and z, and they obtain the words souvenir and amitié thus:
The French have gemstones for every letter of the alphabet, except for f, k, q, y, and z, and they derive the words souvenir and amitié like this:
S aphir or sardoine
O nyx or opale
U raine
V ermeille
E meraude
N atralithe
I ris
R ubis, or rose diamant.
A méthiste, or aigue-marine
M alachite
I ris
T urquoise or topaze
I ris
E meraude.
Sapphire or sardonyx
Onyx or opal
Uranium
Vermilion
Emerald
Natrolite
Iris
Ruby, or pink diamond.
Amethyst, or aquamarine
Malachite
Iris
Turquoise or topaz
Iris
Emerald.
Thus lapis lazuli, opal, verd antique, emerald represented love, and for me malachite and emerald.
Thus lapis lazuli, opal, verd antique, and emerald represented love, and for me, malachite and emerald.
[Pg 416]Names are represented on rings by the same means. The Prince of Wales, on his marriage to the Princess Alexandra, gave her as a keeper one with the stones set with his familiar name, Bertie—beryl, emerald, ruby, turquoise, jacinth, emerald.
[Pg 416]Names are represented on rings in the same way. The Prince of Wales, when he married Princess Alexandra, gave her a ring with stones that spelled out his nickname, Bertie—beryl, emerald, ruby, turquoise, jacinth, emerald.
These name-rings are common in France; thus, Adèle is spelt with an amethyst, a diamond, an emerald, a lapis lazuli, and another emerald.
These name rings are common in France; so, Adèle is spelled with an amethyst, a diamond, an emerald, a lapis lazuli, and another emerald.
Among the motto or ‘reason’ rings, as they were termed, is an example, described in the ‘Archæologia’ (vol. xxxi), a weighty ring of fine gold, found in 1823 at Thetford, in Suffolk. The device which appears upon this ring is an eagle displayed; on the inner side is engraved a bird, with the wings closed, apparently a falcon, with a crown upon its head.
Among the motto or 'reason' rings, as they were called, is an example described in the ‘Archæologia’ (vol. xxxi), a substantial ring made of fine gold, discovered in 1823 at Thetford, in Suffolk. The design on this ring features an eagle displayed; on the inner side is engraved a bird, with its wings closed, seemingly a falcon, wearing a crown on its head.
The following posy or motto, commencing on the outer side, is continued on the interior of the ring: ‘Deus me ouroye de vous seuir a gree—com moun couer desire’ (God work for me to make suit acceptably to you, as my heart desires). The devices appear to be heraldic, and the motto that of a lover, or a suitor to one in power. The eagle is the bearing of several ancient Suffolk families; it was also a badge of the House of Lancaster, and Thetford was one portion of the Duchy of Lancaster.
The following motto, starting on the outside, continues on the inside of the ring: ‘God work for me to make my suit acceptable to you, as my heart desires.’ The designs seem to be heraldic, and the motto reflects that of a lover or a suitor to someone in power. The eagle is the emblem of several ancient Suffolk families; it was also a symbol of the House of Lancaster, and Thetford was part of the Duchy of Lancaster.
These mottos were occasionally engraved in relief. In the Londesborough Collection is one of gold, found in the Thames. The inscription upon it is ‘Sans vilinie’ (without baseness).
These mottos were sometimes carved in relief. In the Londesborough Collection, there's one made of gold, discovered in the Thames. The inscription on it reads 'Sans vilinie' (without baseness).
‘A very early ring,’ remarks Mr. Fairholt, ‘with an unusually pretty posy, is in the collection of J. Evans, Esq., F.S.A. It is gold, set with a small sapphire, and is inscribed “IE, SVI, ICI, EN LI’V D’AMI” (I am here in place of[Pg 417] a friend). It was probably made at the beginning of the fourteenth century. Beside it is placed two other specimens of inscribed rings. The first is chased with the Nortons’ motto, ‘God us ayde;’ the second is inscribed withinside with the sentence, ‘Mulier, viro subjecta esto.’ Both are works of the fifteenth century.
‘A very early ring,’ says Mr. Fairholt, ‘with an unusually beautiful design, is in the collection of J. Evans, Esq., F.S.A. It’s gold, set with a small sapphire, and is inscribed “IE, SVI, ICI, EN LI’V D’AMI” (I am here in place of[Pg 417] a friend). It was probably made at the start of the fourteenth century. Next to it are two other examples of inscribed rings. The first is engraved with the Nortons’ motto, ‘God us ayde;’ the second has the inscription inside that says, ‘Mulier, viro subjecta esto.’ Both are from the fifteenth century.
![]() |
![]() | |
Posy ring. | Inscription rings. |
Mr. Fairholt describes two gold wedding-rings of the sixteenth century, which were then generally inscribed with a posy of one or two lines of rhyme. One is formed like a badge of the Order of the Garter, with the buckle in front and the motto of the Order outside the hoop; withinside are the words, ‘I’ll win and wear you.’ The other is the ordinary form of wedding-ring, inscribed, ‘Let likinge laste.’ They were generally inscribed withinside the hoop. Thus Lyly, in his ‘Euphues’ (1597), addressing the ladies, hopes they will favour his work—‘writing their judgments as you do the posies in your rings, which are always next to the finger, not to be seen of him that holdeth you by the hand, and yet known by you that wear them on your hands.’
Mr. Fairholt describes two gold wedding rings from the sixteenth century, which usually had a short poem of one or two lines inscribed on them. One is shaped like a badge of the Order of the Garter, with the buckle in front and the Order's motto on the outer band; inside, it says, ‘I’ll win and wear you.’ The other is the standard design for a wedding ring, inscribed with, ‘Let likinge laste.’ They were typically engraved inside the band. In Lyly's ‘Euphues’ (1597), he addresses the ladies, hoping they will support his work—‘writing their judgments as you do the posies in your rings, which are always next to the finger, not seen by the one who holds your hand, yet known by you who wear them on your hands.’
Posy rings.
Posy rings.
The Rev. C. W. King remarks that ‘antique intagli set[Pg 418] in mediæval seals have, in general, a Latin motto added around the setting. For this the Lombard letter is almost invariably employed, seldom the black letter, whence it may be inferred, which, indeed, was likely on other grounds, that such seals, for the most part, came from Italy, where the Lombard alphabet was the sole one in use until superseded by the revived Roman capitals about the year 1450. Of such mottos a few examples will serve to give an idea, premising that the stock was not very extensive, judging from the frequent repetitions of the same legends, on seals of widely different devices. Thus a very spirited intaglio of a lion passant, found in Kent, proclaims—“SUM LEO QUOVIS EO NON NISI VERA VEHO;” another gives the admonition to secresy—“TECTA LEGE, LECTA TEGE;” a third in the same strain—“CLAUSA SECRETA TEGO;” another lion warns us with “IRA REGIA,” the wrath of a king is as the roaring of a lion—an apt device for a courtier. Less frequently seen are legends in old French, and these are more quaint in their style; for instance, around a female bust—“PRIVÉ SUY E PEU CONNU:” whilst a gryllus of a head, covered with a fantastic helmet made up of masks, gives the advice, in allusion to the enigmatical type—“CREEZ CE KE VUUS LIRREZ,” for “Croyez ce que vous lirez.”’
The Rev. C. W. King notes that antique intaglios set in medieval seals generally have a Latin motto surrounding the design. The Lombard script is almost always used, while the black letter is seldom seen, leading to the conclusion that these seals mostly originated from Italy, where the Lombard alphabet was the only one in use until it was replaced by the revived Roman capitals around 1450. A few examples of such mottos can give us an idea, noting that the collection was not very extensive, as evidenced by the frequent repetition of the same phrases on seals with very different designs. For instance, a dynamic intaglio of a lion walking found in Kent proclaims—“I only carry the truth wherever I go.;” another expresses the idea of secrecy—“Read the law, protect the law;” a third follows the same theme—“Secret clause covered.;” another lion warns us with “Royal IRA,” indicating that the king's wrath is as fierce as a lion's roar—an appropriate symbol for a courtier. Less commonly, there are legends in old French, which have a more quaint style; for example, around a female bust—“PRIVATE SUY, LESSER KNOWN:” while a grotesque head wearing a fantastical helmet made of masks offers the advice, referring to the enigmatic design—“CREEZ CE KE VUUS LIRREZ,” which translates to “Believe what you read.”
CHAPTER IX.
CUSTOMS AND INCIDENTS IN CONNECTION WITH RINGS.
CUSTOMS AND INCIDENTS RELATED TO RINGS.
One of the most singular usages in former times in which a ring was employed was the annual celebration at Venice of the wedding of the Doge with the Adriatic. This custom is said to date from the era of Pope Alexander III., and the Doge of Venice, Zidni, in the twelfth century. This prince having on behalf of the pontiff attacked the hostile fleet of Frederic Barbarossa, and obtained a complete victory, with the capture of the emperor’s son, Otho, the Pope in grateful acknowledgment gave him a ring, ordaining that henceforth and for ever, annually, the governing Doge should, with a ring, espouse the sea. The pontiff promised that the bride should be obedient and subject to his sway, for ever, as a wife is subjected to her husband.
One of the most unique practices from the past involving a ring was the annual celebration in Venice of the Doge's wedding to the Adriatic Sea. This custom is believed to have started during the time of Pope Alexander III and the Doge of Venice, Zidni, in the twelfth century. This Doge, representing the pope, fought against the opposing fleet of Frederick Barbarossa and won a decisive victory, capturing the emperor’s son, Otto. In gratitude, the Pope presented him with a ring and declared that from then on, every year, the governing Doge would symbolically marry the sea with a ring. The pope promised that the sea would always be obedient and under his control, just as a wife is to her husband.
It is recorded that in this year (1177) this pompous ceremony was performed for the first time. The Doge died in the following year. On Ascension Day the Venetians, headed by their Doge, celebrated the triumphant event. Galleys, sailing-vessels, and gondolas accompanied the chief of the State, who occupied a prominent position on the ‘Bucentoro,’ which held, as its name implies, two hundred persons. This vessel was decorated with columns, statues, etc., and the top was covered with crimson velvet. There[Pg 420] were twenty-one oars on each side. Musical performers attended in another barge. The vessel left the Piazza of St. Mark under a salute of guns, and proceeded slowly to the Isle of Lido. Here the Doge, taking the ring from his finger, gave it to his betrothed wife, the Adriatic, by dropping it into her bosom, repeating these words: ‘We espouse thee, oh sea! in token of our just and perpetual dominion.’[73]
It is recorded that in this year (1177) this grand ceremony took place for the first time. The Doge died the following year. On Ascension Day, the Venetians, led by their Doge, celebrated the triumphant event. Galleys, sailing vessels, and gondolas accompanied the head of the State, who held a prominent position on the ‘Bucentoro,’ which, as its name suggests, could carry two hundred people. This vessel was decorated with columns, statues, and more, and the top was covered with crimson velvet. There[Pg 420] were twenty-one oars on each side. Musicians were on another barge. The vessel left the Piazza of St. Mark under a salute of guns and made its way slowly to the Isle of Lido. Here, the Doge took off the ring from his finger and gave it to his bride, the Adriatic, by dropping it into her embrace, saying: ‘We wed you, oh sea! as a sign of our rightful and everlasting rule.’[73]
The reader will remember the well-known lines of Byron, written at Venice:
The reader will remember the famous lines by Byron, written in Venice:
The spouseless Adriatic mourns her lord;
And, annual marriage now no more renew’d,
The Bucentaur lies rotting, unrestored,
Neglected garment of her widowhood.
The lonely Adriatic grieves for her ruler;
And since there are no more weddings being held,
The Bucentaur sits decaying, untouched,
A neglected symbol of her grief.
It is probable that Shakspeare alluded to this custom when he says in ‘Othello:’—
It is likely that Shakespeare referred to this custom when he says in 'Othello:'—
I would not my unhoused free condition
Put into circumscription, and confine
For the sea’s worth.
I wouldn’t trade my free, unhoused state
To be restricted or confined
For all the riches of the sea.
Byron, in the ‘Two Foscari,’ again alludes to the ‘marriage’ ring of the Doge. When the Council of Ten demanded of the Doge Foscari—
Byron, in the ‘Two Foscari,’ again references the ‘marriage’ ring of the Doge. When the Council of Ten asked Doge Foscari—
The resignation of the ducal ring,
Which he had worn so long and venerably,
The resignation of the royal ring,
Which he had worn for so long with honor,
he laid aside the ducal bonnet and robes, surrendered his ring of office, and exclaimed:
he set aside the duke's hat and robes, gave up his ring of authority, and shouted:
There’s the ducal ring,
And there’s the ducal diadem. And so
The Adriatic’s free to wed another.
Here’s the duke’s ring,
And there’s the duke’s crown. And so
The Adriatic is free to marry someone else.
So, Rogers:
So, Rogers:
He was deposed,
He who had reigned so long and gloriously;
[Pg 421]His ducal bonnet taken from his brow,
His robes stript off, his seal and signet-ring
Broken before him.
He was ousted from power,
He who had ruled for so long and so magnificently;
[Pg 421]His duke's hat taken from his head,
His robes taken away, his seal and signet ring
Shattered in front of him.
Rings, in common with jewels of various descriptions, were given by our monarchs on state occasions, and as New Year’s gifts, as marks of special favour. In Rymer’s ‘Fœdera’ there is a curious inventory of rings and ouches, with other jewels, which King Henry VI. bestowed in 1445, as New Year’s gifts, on his uncle and nobles. In the inventories of Queen Elizabeth’s jewels there are numerous instances of such gifts.
Rings, like other types of jewelry, were given by our kings on official events and as New Year’s gifts to show special favor. In Rymer’s ‘Fœdera’, there’s an interesting list of rings and brooches, along with other jewelry, that King Henry VI. gave in 1445 as New Year’s gifts to his uncle and nobles. The inventories of Queen Elizabeth’s jewelry also contain many examples of such gifts.
New Year’s gift ring.
New Year's gift ring.
At the marriage of Henry VI. with Margaret of Anjou, Cardinal Beaufort presented a gold ring to the bride, given to him by Henry V., and which the latter wore when crowned at Paris.
At the wedding of Henry VI and Margaret of Anjou, Cardinal Beaufort gave the bride a gold ring that had belonged to Henry V, who wore it when he was crowned in Paris.
The crest of the Cromwells is a demi-lion rampant arg., in his dexter gamb a gem-ring or. The origin of this is stated thus:—At a tournament held by Henry VIII., in 1540, the King was particularly delighted with the gallantry of Sir Richard Cromwell (whom he had knighted on the second day of the tournament), and exclaiming ‘Formerly thou wast my Dick, but hereafter thou shalt be my Diamond,’ presented him with a diamond ring, bidding him for the future wear such a one in the fore-gamb of the demi-lion in the crest, instead of a javelin as heretofore. The arms of Sir Richard with this alteration were ever afterwards borne by the elder branch of the family, and by Oliver Cromwell himself, on his assuming the Protectorate, though previously he had borne the javelin.
The crest of the Cromwells features a half-lion standing upright, silver in color, holding a gold ring in his right paw. The origin of this is explained as follows: At a tournament hosted by Henry VIII in 1540, the King was especially impressed by the bravery of Sir Richard Cromwell (whom he knighted on the second day of the tournament). Shouting, "You were once my Dick, but from now on, you will be my Diamond," he gave him a diamond ring and instructed him to wear this instead of a javelin in the lion's paw on the crest. Sir Richard's coat of arms, with this change, was then used by the elder branch of the family and by Oliver Cromwell himself when he became Protector, although he had previously carried the javelin.
A gold ring found St. Mary’s Field, near Leicester, in[Pg 422] 1796, had been a New Year’s gift, and is inscribed ‘en bon an.’
A gold ring found in St. Mary’s Field, near Leicester, in[Pg 422] 1796, was a New Year’s gift and is inscribed ‘en bon an.’
New Year’s gift ring.
New Year’s gift ring.
In former times when St. Valentine’s Day was kept as a joyous festival, the drawing of a kind of lottery took place, followed by ceremonies not much unlike what is now generally called the game of ‘forfeits.’ Married and single persons were alike liable to be chosen as a valentine, and a present was invariably given to the choosing party. Rings were frequently bestowed. Pepys, in 1668, notes: ‘This evening my wife did with great pleasure show me her stock of jewels, increased by the ring she hath lately made as my valentine’s gift this year, a turkey (turquoise) stone set with diamonds.’ Noticing also the jewels of the celebrated Miss Stuart, he says: ‘The Duke of York, being once her valentine, did give her a jewel of about eight hundred pounds, and my Lord Mandeville, her valentine this year, a ring of about three hundred pounds.’
In the past, when St. Valentine’s Day was celebrated as a fun festival, a type of lottery was held, followed by ceremonies similar to what we now refer to as the game of ‘forfeits.’ Both married and single people could be chosen as a valentine, and a gift was always given to the one who made the choice. Rings were often given as gifts. Pepys, in 1668, writes: ‘This evening my wife happily showed me her collection of jewels, which grew with the ring she received as my valentine’s gift this year, a turquoise stone set with diamonds.’ He also mentions the jewels of the famous Miss Stuart, noting: ‘The Duke of York, having been her valentine once, gave her a jewel worth about eight hundred pounds, and my Lord Mandeville, her valentine this year, a ring worth about three hundred pounds.’
Rings have been employed frequently in facilitating diplomatic missions, and in negotiations of a very delicate and critical nature. Plutarch relates an anecdote of Luculus to prove his disinterestedness. Being sent on an embassy to King Ptolemy Physcon, he not merely refused all the splendid presents offered to him, amounting in value to eighty talents (15,444l.), but even received of his table allowance no more than was absolutely necessary for his maintenance, and when the King attended him down to his ship, as he was about to return to Rome, and pressed upon his acceptance an emerald ‘of the precious kind,’ set in[Pg 423] gold (for a ring), he declined this also, until Ptolemy made him observe it was engraved with his own portrait, whereupon, fearing his refusal should be considered a mark of personal ill-will, he at last accepted the ring as a keepsake. At a dark epoch in the fortunes of the unhappy Mary, Queen of Scots, when, in 1567, scarcely a shadow of regal power was left to her, an attempt was made to induce her to resign the crown. Sir Robert Melville was employed on this mission, giving her, as an authority for his errand, a turquoise ring confided to him for that purpose by the confederate lords.
Rings have often been used to aid in diplomatic missions and in sensitive negotiations. Plutarch shares a story about Luculus to demonstrate his selflessness. When sent on a mission to King Ptolemy Physcon, he not only turned down all the lavish gifts offered to him, worth eighty talents (15,444l.), but also took only what was absolutely necessary for his sustenance. When the King accompanied him to his ship as he was about to return to Rome and insisted that he accept an emerald "of the precious kind," set in[Pg 423] gold (for a ring), Luculus initially turned this down as well. However, when Ptolemy pointed out that it was engraved with his own portrait, Luculus, fearing that his refusal might be seen as personal animosity, eventually accepted the ring as a keepsake. During a dark time in the life of the unfortunate Mary, Queen of Scots, when in 1567 she had almost completely lost her royal power, there was an attempt to persuade her to abdicate the throne. Sir Robert Melville was sent on this mission, presenting her with a turquoise ring given to him by the confederate lords as a token of authority for his task.
A ring in the possession of Miss H. P. Lonsdale is stated to have been given by Queen Anne, from her finger, to a Mr. Nugent for some diplomatic services. It is of gold, set with a heart-shaped ruby crowned with three small diamonds. At the back is a royal crown, and the letters ‘A. R.’
A ring owned by Miss H. P. Lonsdale is said to have been given by Queen Anne, directly from her finger, to a Mr. Nugent for some diplomatic services. It's made of gold and features a heart-shaped ruby topped with three small diamonds. On the back is a royal crown, along with the letters ‘A. R.’
Clement VII., to propitiate King Henry VIII., sent him a consecrated rose; while, to gain the good services of Cardinal Wolsey, the Pope drew from his finger a ring of value, which he entrusted to the care of Secretary Pace at Rome, expressing regret that he could not himself present it in person.
Clement VII, aiming to win over King Henry VIII, sent him a consecrated rose. To secure the support of Cardinal Wolsey, the Pope removed a valuable ring from his finger and gave it to Secretary Pace in Rome, expressing regret that he couldn't deliver it himself.
When the Duchess of Savoy was held a prisoner by Charles the Bold, Duke of Burgundy, she found means to send her secretary to solicit the aid of Louis XI. As she was prevented from writing, the only credentials she could give her emissary was the ring the King had given her on the occasion of her marriage. This passport would have sufficed, but that, unfortunately, the bearer, when he presented himself to the King, wore the cross of St. André. Louis ordered the man to be arrested, suspecting him to be[Pg 424] a spy of the Duke of Burgundy, and that he had stolen his sister’s ring. The messenger would have been hung, but for the timely arrival of the Lord of Rivarola, who was sent by the Duchess, urging the King to assist her.
When the Duchess of Savoy was imprisoned by Charles the Bold, Duke of Burgundy, she managed to send her secretary to ask for help from Louis XI. Since she couldn't write, the only proof she could give her messenger was the ring the King had given her when she got married. This would have been enough, but unfortunately, the messenger wore the cross of St. André when he presented himself to the King. Louis ordered him to be arrested, suspecting him to be a spy for the Duke of Burgundy and that he had stolen his sister’s ring. The messenger would have been hanged if it weren't for the timely arrival of the Lord of Rivarola, who was sent by the Duchess to urge the King to help her.
Plutarch mentions that Clearchus, Cyrus the Younger’s general, in return for favours received from Ctesias, the physician of Tisaphernes, presented him with his ring as an introduction to his family in Sparta.
Plutarch mentions that Clearchus, Cyrus the Younger’s general, in exchange for favors he received from Ctesias, the physician of Tisaphernes, gave him his ring to introduce him to his family in Sparta.
At the declaration of peace between England and Spain in 1604 King James gave the Spanish Ambassador, the Duke de Frias, Constable of Castile, who negotiated the treaty, a large diamond ring, in commemoration of the marriage, as he called the peace.
At the declaration of peace between England and Spain in 1604, King James gave the Spanish Ambassador, the Duke de Frias, Constable of Castile, who negotiated the treaty, a large diamond ring to commemorate the marriage, as he referred to the peace.
Charles the Bold, Duke of Burgundy, had a large diamond cut by Berghem into a triangle, which he had set in a ring representing two clasped hands, the symbol of good faith, and sent to Louis XI., ‘an allusion’ (remarks the Rev. C. W. King), ‘though in an acceptable form, to his deficiency in that virtue.’
Charles the Bold, Duke of Burgundy, had a large diamond shaped into a triangle by Berghem, which he set in a ring depicting two hands clasped together, symbolizing good faith. He sent it to Louis XI, which the Rev. C. W. King notes was 'an allusion', albeit in a tactful way, to his lack of that virtue.
An anecdote connected with the celebrated ‘Pitt’ diamond is related by Mr. Eastwick, and shows how important results may sometimes be secured, when reason and logic may not prevail. This jewel passed through some curious adventures, and, after having ornamented the sword of Napoleon at Waterloo, was sent as a present in a ring by George IV. to the Sovereign of Persia, Fath-Ali-Shah. The bearer of this costly ring, Sir Harford Jones, was stopped in his journey by a messenger from the court, and desired not to enter the capital, where French interests were then paramount. After Sir Harford had exhausted every argument to show that he ought to be received, without making any impression on the Persian Khan, he said, ‘Well, if it[Pg 425] must be so, I shall return, but this must go with me,’ and he took from his pocket the beautiful diamond ring which had been sent for the Shah. The sparkle of the gem produced a magical effect; the Khan no sooner beheld it than he lost his balance, and fell back from his seat quite out of breath; then, recovering himself, he shouted, ‘Stop, stop, Elchi! May your condescending kindness go on increasing! This alters the matter. I will send an express to the heavenly-resembling threshold of the asylum of the world! I swear by your head that you will be received with all honour. Mashallah! it is not everyone that has diamonds like the Inglis.’ He was as good as his word; the express courier was despatched, and Sir Harford Jones entered the city of Teheran by one gate, while General Gardanne, the French envoy, was packed off by the other.
An interesting story about the famous 'Pitt' diamond is shared by Mr. Eastwick, illustrating how significant outcomes can sometimes be achieved when reason and logic fail. This gem went through some fascinating experiences, and after adorning Napoleon's sword at Waterloo, it was gifted in a ring by George IV to the Persian ruler, Fath-Ali-Shah. Sir Harford Jones, the bearer of this expensive ring, was stopped on his journey by a messenger from the court, who instructed him not to enter the capital, as French interests were dominant at the time. After Sir Harford exhausted all his arguments to show that he should be allowed in, without swaying the Persian Khan, he declared, ‘Well, if it must be so, I shall return, but this must come with me,’ and he pulled out the stunning diamond ring intended for the Shah. The brilliance of the jewel had a magical effect; as soon as the Khan saw it, he lost his composure and fell back from his seat, out of breath. Once he regained his composure, he exclaimed, ‘Stop, stop, Elchi! May your generous kindness continue to grow! This changes everything. I will send a swift message to the heavenly threshold of the world’s refuge! I swear by your head that you will be received with all honor. Mashallah! not everyone has diamonds like the English.’ He kept his promise; the swift courier was dispatched, and Sir Harford Jones entered the city of Tehran through one gate, while General Gardanne, the French envoy, was sent off through another.
[This stone must have been a fraction or portion of the cutting of this famous diamond, as the ‘Regent’ is still in the French Garde-meuble, or national treasury.]
[This stone must have been a part of the cutting of this famous diamond, as the ‘Regent’ is still in the French Garde-meuble, or national treasury.]
In 1514 Venice deputed two ambassadors to France and England; amongst other bribes, two rings were ordered to be given privily to the French Secretary, Robertet, ‘as a mark of love in the Signory’s name.’ One had a ruby and a diamond.
In 1514, Venice sent two ambassadors to France and England; among other bribes, they were instructed to secretly give two rings to the French Secretary, Robertet, "as a sign of affection on behalf of the Signory." One ring had a ruby and a diamond.
A correspondent of ‘Notes and Queries’ (3rd series, vol. i. p. 486) gives an interesting extract from an old newspaper (the ‘Mercurius Publicus,’ for November 29, 1660), in which allusion is made to the King’s Gift Rings. On the disbanding of Sir Anthony Ashley Cooper’s regiment at Salisbury, ‘the men joyfully welcomed His Majestie’s Commissioners by shouts and acclamations, and understanding of His Majestie’s goodness in bestowing freely a full week’s pay, over and above their just arrears, they broke out into[Pg 426] another great shout, and then unanimously resolved with that week’s pay to buy, each man, a ring, whose posie should be “The King’s gift,” as an earnest and memorandum, to be ready on all occasions when His Majesty’s service (and none but his), should call them.’
A contributor to ‘Notes and Queries’ (3rd series, vol. i. p. 486) shares an interesting excerpt from an old newspaper (the ‘Mercurius Publicus,’ from November 29, 1660), which mentions the King’s Gift Rings. When Sir Anthony Ashley Cooper’s regiment was disbanded at Salisbury, 'the men joyfully welcomed His Majesty’s Commissioners with cheers and applause, and upon hearing of His Majesty’s kindness in granting them an extra week’s pay, in addition to their outstanding wages, they erupted into[Pg 426] another loud cheer. Then they all agreed to use that week’s pay to buy each man a ring, engraved with the words “The King’s gift,” as a reminder and token to be prepared for any time His Majesty’s service (and only his) would summon them.'
I may mention the gift of rings to the native chiefs of India by the Prince of Wales, during his recent progress in that country. At Aden the Prince expressed his acknowledgments, on behalf of the Queen, for the services rendered by the Sultan of Lahej to the garrison of Aden, and put a massive gold ring with the initials ‘A. E.’ on the Sultan’s finger with his own hand.
I should point out the gift of rings to the local chiefs of India by the Prince of Wales during his recent visit to the country. At Aden, the Prince thanked the Sultan of Lahej, on behalf of the Queen, for the support he provided to the garrison of Aden, and personally placed a large gold ring with the initials ‘A. E.’ on the Sultan’s finger.
The Maharajah of Benares was presented with a ring having an oval miniature portrait of the Prince, in enamel, set in brilliants.
The Maharajah of Benares was given a ring with an oval miniature portrait of the Prince, done in enamel and surrounded by diamonds.
Identification by means of a ring is alluded to in the Greek romance, by Heliodorus, of ‘Theagines and Chariclea.’ The latter, through a ring and fillet which had been attached to her at her birth, is, after many adventures, discovered to be the daughter of Hydaspes, and becomes heiress of the Ethiopian sovereignty. The modern Italian poets have availed themselves of this incident.
Identification by a ring is mentioned in the Greek romance by Heliodorus, titled ‘Theagines and Chariclea.’ Chariclea, through a ring and ribbon that were given to her at birth, is discovered after many adventures to be the daughter of Hydaspes and becomes the heiress of the Ethiopian throne. Modern Italian poets have used this story in their works.
Roger of Wendover relates how Richard Cœur de Lion, when returning from the Crusades, secretly, and in disguise, through Germany to his own country, was identified in a town of Slavonia, called Gazara, by means of a ring. The King had sent a messenger to the nearest castle to ask for peace and safe-conduct from the lord of that province. He had on his return purchased of a Pisan merchant for nine hundred bezants, three jewels called carbuncles, or more commonly ‘rubies.’ One of these he had, whilst on board[Pg 427] ship, enclosed in a gold ring, and this he sent by the said messenger to the governor of the castle. When the messenger was asked by the governor who they were that requested safe conduct, he answered that they were pilgrims returning from Jerusalem. The governor then asked what their names were, to which the messenger replied, ‘one of them is called Baldwin de Bethune, the other Hugh, a merchant who has also sent you a ring.’ The lord of the castle, looking more attentively at the ring, said, ‘He is not called Hugh, but King Richard,’ and then added, ‘although I have sworn to seize all pilgrims coming from those parts, and not to accept of any gift from them, nevertheless, for the worthiness of the gift, and also of the sender, to him who has so honoured me, a stranger to him, I both return his present and grant him free permission to depart.’
Roger of Wendover tells how Richard the Lionheart, while secretly returning home from the Crusades in disguise through Germany, was recognized in a town in Slavonia called Gazara by a ring. The King had sent a messenger to the nearest castle to request peace and safe passage from the lord of that area. On the way back, the messenger bought three jewels known as carbuncles, or more commonly 'rubies,' from a Pisan merchant for nine hundred bezants. One of these he had, while on board[Pg 427] the ship, set in a gold ring, and sent it with the messenger to the governor of the castle. When the governor asked the messenger who was requesting safe passage, he replied that they were pilgrims returning from Jerusalem. The governor then inquired about their names, to which the messenger replied, "One of them is called Baldwin de Bethune, the other Hugh, a merchant who has also sent you a ring." The lord of the castle, examining the ring closely, said, "He is not called Hugh, but King Richard," and then added, "Although I have sworn to capture all pilgrims coming from those regions and not to accept any gifts from them, for the value of the gift and the sender’s worthiness, I will return his present and grant him safe passage."
A ring, in all probability, saved the Emperor Charles V. from the most critical position in which he had ever been placed. Having requested permission of Francis I. to pass through France, in order to reach sooner his Flemish dominions, where his presence was urgently required, the rival, so lately his prisoner, not only granted the request, but gave him a most brilliant reception. Some of the French King’s counsellors thought this generous conduct to a crafty foe was quixotic in the extreme, and that Charles should be detained until he had cancelled some of the hard conditions, to which he had compelled Francis to subscribe to purchase his release. Among those who strongly advocated the policy of detaining the imperial guest was the King’s fair friend, the Duchesse d’Estampes. Charles, who was informed of the dangerous weight thrown in the scale against him, resolved to win over the influential counsellor.[Pg 428] One day, as he was washing his hands before dinner, he dropped a diamond ring of great value, which the Duchess picked up and presented to him. ‘Nay, madam,’ said the Emperor gallantly to her, ‘it is in too fair a hand for me to take back.’ The gift had its full value, and Charles pursued his way without molestation.
A ring likely saved Emperor Charles V. from one of the toughest situations he had ever faced. After asking Francis I. for permission to pass through France to reach his Flemish territories, where he was urgently needed, his rival—who had recently been his prisoner—not only granted his request but also gave him a lavish welcome. Some of the French King’s advisors thought this generous treatment towards a cunning enemy was reckless and that Charles should be held until he revoked some of the harsh terms he had forced Francis to accept for his release. Among those who strongly supported keeping the imperial guest was the King’s beautiful friend, Duchesse d’Estampes. Aware of the dangerous situation he was in, Charles decided to win over the influential advisor.[Pg 428] One day, while washing his hands before dinner, he accidentally dropped a valuable diamond ring. The Duchess picked it up and handed it back to him. “No, my lady,” the Emperor responded with charm, “it’s too lovely for me to take back.” The gesture proved effective, and Charles continued on his way without any issues.
Instances are recorded in which the wearing of a ring has been the means of saving life. Such happened to the Count de St. Pol at the battle of Pavia. He had fallen covered with wounds; avarice recalled him to life. A soldier, seeking for pillage, arrived at the place where the unfortunate Count lay extended, senseless, among the dead. He perceived a very beautiful diamond glitter on the finger of the apparently lifeless man. Not being successful in drawing the ring off, he began to cut the finger. The pain extorted a piercing cry from the Count, who had only swooned. He mentioned his name, and had the presence of mind to recommend silence to the soldier, telling him that if he boasted of having in his power a prince of the house of France, the Emperor’s generals would take him into their own hands in order to get his ransom; and he promised to make the soldier’s fortune if he would take care of his wounds, and follow him to France. This reasoning had its effect; the soldier secretly conveyed the Prince to Pavia, had his wounds dressed, and was nobly rewarded for it.
Instances have been recorded where wearing a ring has saved a life. One such instance involved Count de St. Pol at the battle of Pavia. He had fallen, covered in wounds; greed brought him back to life. A soldier, looking for loot, came across the unfortunate Count, lying unconscious among the dead. He noticed a beautiful diamond sparkling on the finger of the apparently lifeless man. Unable to remove the ring, he started cutting off the finger. The pain forced a sharp cry from the Count, who had only fainted. He mentioned his name and wisely urged the soldier to remain quiet, explaining that if he bragged about having a prince from the House of France, the Emperor’s generals would come after him to secure a ransom. He promised to make the soldier wealthy if he took care of his wounds and brought him to France. This reasoning worked; the soldier quietly got the Prince to Pavia, cared for his wounds, and received a generous reward for it.
Taylor, in his ‘Danger of Premature Interments’ (1816) relates the following incident. The heroine of this event was named Retchmuth Adolet. She was the wife of a merchant at Cologne, and is said to have died of the plague, which destroyed a great part of the inhabitants of that city[Pg 429] in 1571. She was speedily interred, and a ring of great value was suffered to remain on her finger, which tempted the cupidity of the grave-digger. The night was the time he had planned for obtaining possession of it. On going to the grave, opening it, and attempting to take the ring from off the finger of the lady, she came to herself, and so terrified the sacrilegious thief, that he ran away and left his lantern behind him. The lady took advantage of his fright, and with the assistance of his lantern, found her way home, and lived to be the mother of three children. After her real decease, she was buried near the door of the same church, and a tomb was erected over her grave, upon which the incident related was engraved.
Taylor, in his ‘Danger of Premature Interments’ (1816), recounts the following incident. The heroine of this story was named Retchmuth Adolet. She was the wife of a merchant in Cologne and is said to have died of the plague, which wiped out a large part of the city's population in 1571. She was quickly buried, and a valuable ring was left on her finger, which tempted the greed of the grave-digger. He planned to claim it that night. When he went to the grave, opened it, and tried to take the ring off her finger, she suddenly revived and scared him so much that he ran away, leaving his lantern behind. She seized the opportunity from his fright and, with the help of his lantern, made her way home, eventually becoming the mother of three children. After her actual death, she was buried near the door of the same church, and a tomb was built over her grave, with the story engraved on it.
Mrs. Bray, in a notice of ‘Cotele,’ and ‘the Edgcumbes of the Olden Time’ (‘Gentleman’s Magazine,’ November 1853), relates a singular circumstance of this character, which ‘is so well authenticated, that not even a doubt rests upon its truth.’ It refers to the mother of that Sir Richard Edgcumbe, Knight, who, in 1748, was created Baron of Mount Edgcumbe.
Mrs. Bray, in a notice of ‘Cotele’ and ‘the Edgcumbes of the Olden Time’ (‘Gentleman’s Magazine,’ November 1853), shares a unique story of this nature, which ‘is so well authenticated that there isn’t even a hint of doubt about its truth.’ It concerns the mother of Sir Richard Edgcumbe, Knight, who was made Baron of Mount Edgcumbe in 1748.
‘The family were residing at Cotele (I do not know the date of the year), when Lady Edgcumbe became much indisposed, and to all appearance died. How long after is not stated, but her body was deposited in the family vault of the parish church. The interment had not long taken place, before the sexton (who must have heard from the nurse or servants that she was buried with something of value upon her) went down into the vault at midnight, and contrived to force open the coffin. A gold ring was on her ladyship’s finger, which in a hurried way he attempted to draw off, but, not readily succeeding, he pressed with great violence the finger. Upon this the body moved in[Pg 430] the coffin, and such was the terror of the man, that he ran away as fast as he could, leaving his lantern behind him. Lady Edgcumbe arose, astonished at finding herself dressed in grave-clothes, and numbered with the tenants of the vault. She took up the lantern, and proceeded at once to the mansion of Cotele. The terror, followed by the rejoicing of her family and household, which such a resurrection from the tomb occasioned, may well be conceived. Exactly five years after this circumstance, she became the mother of that Sir Richard Edgcumbe, who was created Baron. Polwhele, in his “History of Cornwall,” says: “Of the authenticity of this event there can be no reasonable doubt. A few years ago a gentleman of my acquaintance heard all the particulars of the transaction from the late Lord Graves, of Thancks, which is in the neighbourhood of Cotele. But I need not appeal to Lord Graves’s authority, as I recollect the narrative as coming from the lips of my grandmother Polwhele, who used to render the story extremely interesting from a variety of minute circumstances, and who, from her connexion and intimacy of her own with the Edgcumbe family, was unquestionably well-informed on the subject.”
‘The family was living at Cotele (I don't know the date), when Lady Edgcumbe became very ill and seemingly died. It's not specified how long after that, but her body was placed in the family vault at the parish church. Not long after the burial, the sexton (who must have heard from the nurse or servants that she was buried with something valuable) went down into the vault at midnight and managed to force open the coffin. There was a gold ring on her finger, which he tried to take off in a hurry, but not being able to get it off easily, he pressed down on her finger with great force. At that moment, the body shifted in[Pg 430] the coffin, and the man's fear was so great that he ran away as fast as he could, leaving his lantern behind. Lady Edgcumbe stood up, shocked to find herself dressed in burial clothes and among the occupants of the vault. She took the lantern and headed straight for the Cotele mansion. The horror that turned into joy for her family and household upon her resurrection from the grave is easy to imagine. Exactly five years after this event, she became the mother of Sir Richard Edgcumbe, who was created a Baron. Polwhele, in his “History of Cornwall,” states: “There is no reasonable doubt about the authenticity of this event. A few years ago, a gentleman I know heard all the details of the incident from the late Lord Graves of Thancks, which is near Cotele. But I don’t need to call on Lord Graves’s authority, as I remember the story coming from my grandmother Polwhele, who made it very interesting with various details, and who, due to her close connection with the Edgcumbe family, was undoubtedly well-informed about the matter.”
‘It may seem strange that when Lady Edgcumbe was thus committed to the grave she was not buried in lead; but at the period of her supposed death it was very unusual to bury persons, even of high rank and station, in a leaden coffin, if they died and were buried in the country. The nearest town to Cotele of any note was Plymouth, a seaport to which there was then no regular road from the far-distant old mansion, and I question if at that period Plymouth could have furnished such an unusual thing as a lead coffin. Lady Edgcumbe was probably buried in[Pg 431] oak secured by nails or screws, which without much difficulty could be forced open by the sexton in his meditated robbery of the body.’
‘It might seem strange that when Lady Edgcumbe was laid to rest, she wasn't buried in lead; however, at the time of her supposed death, it was quite uncommon to bury people, even those of high rank, in a lead coffin, especially if they died and were buried in the countryside. The closest town of any importance to Cotele was Plymouth, a seaport, and back then, there wasn't a regular road leading from the distant old mansion. I doubt that Plymouth even had a lead coffin available at that time. Lady Edgcumbe was likely buried in [Pg 431] oak secured with nails or screws, which could easily be pried open by the sexton during his planned robbery of the body.’
While rings have favoured the living, they have also been the means of recognising the dead. An instance of this is related in the history of the great Duke of Burgundy, renowned for the splendour of his court and his love of jewels. He died in the battle of Nanci, and his body was not found until three days afterwards, when it was recognised by one of the Duke’s household by a ring and other precious jewels upon it; otherwise the corpse was so disfigured that it could not have been identified.
While rings have been favored by the living, they have also served to honor the dead. An example of this is found in the history of the great Duke of Burgundy, famous for the luxury of his court and his passion for jewelry. He died at the Battle of Nancy, and his body wasn't discovered until three days later, when it was recognized by a member of the Duke’s household thanks to a ring and other precious jewels on it; otherwise, the body was so disfigured that it couldn’t have been identified.
The body of the great naval commander Sir Cloudesley Shovel, who was shipwrecked on the rocks of Scilly in 1707, was washed on shore, when some fishermen, it is said, having stolen a valuable emerald ring, buried the corpse. The ring, being shown about, made a great noise over the island, and was the cause of the discovery and ultimate removal of the body to Westminster Abbey.
The body of the famous naval commander Sir Cloudesley Shovel, who was shipwrecked on the Scilly rocks in 1707, was washed ashore. Some fishermen reportedly stole a precious emerald ring from him and then buried the corpse. The ring drew a lot of attention across the island, leading to the discovery and eventual transfer of the body to Westminster Abbey.
Another account is that which was published under the authority of the Earl of Romney, grandson of Sir Cloudesley Shovel. Some years after the fatal shipwreck, an aged woman confessed to the parish minister of St. Mary’s on her deathbed that, exhausted with fatigue, one man who had survived the disaster reached her hut, and that she had murdered him to secure the valuable property on his person. This worst of wreckers then produced a ring taken from the finger of her victim, and it was afterwards identified as one presented to Sir Cloudesley Shovel by Lord Berkeley.
Another account is from the publication authorized by the Earl of Romney, the grandson of Sir Cloudesley Shovel. Several years after the tragic shipwreck, an elderly woman confessed to the parish minister of St. Mary’s on her deathbed that, worn out from exhaustion, one man who survived the disaster stumbled into her hut, and she had killed him to take the valuable items he had on him. This worst of wreckers then showed a ring she had taken from the finger of her victim, which was later identified as one given to Sir Cloudesley Shovel by Lord Berkeley.
William Trotter, of an ancient family on the Scottish border, is recorded to have fallen at the battle of Flodden; and, in corroboration of the fact, a gold ring was found[Pg 432] about the middle of the last century, upon the site of the field of battle, bearing an inscription in Norman-French, having between each word a boar’s head, the armorial bearings of the Trotters.
William Trotter, from an old family on the Scottish border, is noted to have died at the battle of Flodden. To support this, a gold ring was discovered[Pg 432] in the middle of the last century at the battle site, engraved with an inscription in Norman-French, featuring a boar’s head between each word, which is the coat of arms of the Trotters.
Martius, in ‘Titus Andronicus,’ when he falls into a dark pit, discovers the body of Bassianus, by the light of the jewel on the dead man’s hand:—
Martius, in ‘Titus Andronicus,’ when he falls into a dark pit, discovers the body of Bassianus, by the light of the jewel on the dead man’s hand:—
Upon his bloody finger he doth wear
A precious ring, that lightens all the hole,
Which, like a taper in some monument,
Doth shine upon the dead man’s earthy cheeks,
And shows the rugged entrails of this pit:
So pale did shine the moon on Pyramus,
When he by night lay bath’d in human blood.
On his bloody finger, he wears
A precious ring that lights up the whole place,
Like a candle in some memorial,
It shines on the dead man's earthy cheeks,
And reveals the rough insides of this pit:
So pale did the moon shine on Pyramus,
When he lay at night bathed in human blood.
I may mention the employment of rings for criminal purposes, such as their use for concealing poison, of which we have instances in past ages, and in late times. Hannibal, we are told, from a fear of being delivered up to the Romans by Prusius, King of Bithynia, swallowed poison, which, to be prepared for the worst, he carried with him in the hollow of a ring. To this Juvenal alludes in his Tenth Satire:—
I might bring up how rings have been used for criminal activities, like hiding poison, which we've seen both in ancient times and more recently. We're told that Hannibal, fearing he might be handed over to the Romans by Prusius, the King of Bithynia, swallowed poison that he kept hidden in a hollow ring just in case things went wrong. Juvenal references this in his Tenth Satire:—
Nor swords, nor spears, nor stones from engines hurl’d,
Shall quell the man whose frown alarm’d the world;
The vengeance due to Cannæ’s fatal field,
And floods of human gore—a ring shall yield.
Nor swords, nor spears, nor stones thrown from machines,
Will stop the man whose scowl terrified the world;
The revenge owed for the deadly battle of Cannæ,
And torrents of human blood—a circle will yield.
Demosthenes is also said to have died in a similar manner. The keeper of the Roman treasures, after the robbery by Crassus of the gold deposited there by Camillus, broke the stone of his ring in his mouth, in which poison was concealed, and immediately expired.
Demosthenes is also said to have died in a similar way. The keeper of the Roman treasures, after Crassus had stolen the gold that Camillus had deposited there, broke the stone of his ring with his teeth, which held the poison, and immediately died.
‘The ancients,’ remarks the Rev. C. W. King (‘Antique Gems’), ‘were acquainted with vegetable poisons, as speedy in their effects as the modern strychnine, as appears in the death of Britannicus from a potion prepared by Locusta,[Pg 433] and in innumerable other instances. These hollow rings were put together with a degree of skill far beyond that of our modern jewellers; for the soldering of the numerous joinings of the gold plates of which they are formed is absolutely imperceptible even when breathed upon—a test under which the best modern solder always assumes a lighter tint.’
‘The ancients,’ states Rev. C. W. King (‘Antique Gems’), ‘knew about plant-based poisons that acted as quickly as today’s strychnine, as shown by the death of Britannicus from a potion made by Locusta,[Pg 433] and in countless other cases. These hollow rings were crafted with a level of skill far surpassing that of our current jewellers; the soldering of the many joints of the gold plates they are made from is completely undetectable, even when breathed upon—a test under which the best modern solder always takes on a lighter color.’
Motley, in his ‘Rise of the Dutch Republic,’ relates that in the conspiracies against the life of the Prince of Orange (about 1582), under the influence of the court of Spain, the young Lamoral Egmont, in return for the kindness shown to him by the Prince, attempted to destroy him at his own table by means of poison which he kept concealed in a ring. Sainte Philip de Marnix, Lord of Aldegonde, was to have been taken off in the same way; and a hollow ring filled with poison was said to have been found in Egmont’s lodgings. The young noble was imprisoned, and his guilt was undoubted, but he owed his escape from death to the Prince of Orange.
Motley, in his ‘Rise of the Dutch Republic,’ recounts that during the plots against the life of the Prince of Orange (around 1582), influenced by the Spanish court, the young Lamoral Egmont, wanting to repay the kindness the Prince had shown him, tried to kill him at his own dinner table using poison hidden in a ring. Sainte Philip de Marnix, Lord of Aldegonde, was also supposed to be taken out the same way; a hollow ring filled with poison was reportedly found in Egmont’s quarters. The young noble was imprisoned, and his guilt was clear, but he avoided execution thanks to the Prince of Orange.
Poison ring.
Poison ring.
A poison ring of curious construction is described by Mr. Fairholt as richly engraved, and set with two rubies and a pyramidal diamond; the collet securing the latter stone opens with a spring, and exhibits a somewhat large receptacle for such virulent poisons as were concocted by Italian chemists in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.
A poison ring with an unusual design is described by Mr. Fairholt as being richly engraved and set with two rubies and a pyramidal diamond; the setting that holds the diamond opens with a spring, revealing a fairly large compartment for the deadly poisons created by Italian chemists in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.
Venetian poison ring.
Venetian poison ring.
[Pg 434]The other ring has a representation of St. Mark seated holding his gospel, and giving a benediction. The spaces between this figure and the oval border are perforated, so that the interior of the box is visible, and the relic enshrined might be seen.
[Pg 434]The other ring features an image of St. Mark sitting, holding his gospel and giving a blessing. The gaps between this figure and the oval border are perforated, allowing the inside of the box to be viewed, revealing the enshrined relic.
It is recorded of the infamous Pope Alexander VI. (Borgia) that he caused a key, similar to the key-ring, to be used in opening a cabinet, but the Pope’s key was poisoned in the handle, and provided with a small sharp pin, which gave a slight puncture, sufficient to allow the poison to pass below the skin. When he wished to rid himself of an objectionable friend he would request him to unlock the cabinet; as the lock turned rather stiffly, a little pressure was necessary on the key handle, sufficient to produce the effect desired.
It’s recorded about the infamous Pope Alexander VI (Borgia) that he had a key, similar to a keyring, used to open a cabinet. However, the Pope’s key was poisoned in the handle and equipped with a small sharp pin, which would create a slight puncture, enough to let the poison seep below the skin. When he wanted to get rid of an unwanted friend, he would ask them to unlock the cabinet; since the lock turned quite stiffly, a little pressure was needed on the key handle, just enough to achieve the intended effect.
The signet-ring of Cæsar Borgia was exhibited a few years ago at a meeting of the British Archæological Association by the Rev. C. H. Hartshorne. It is of gold, slightly enamelled, with the date 1503, and round the inside is the motto, ‘Fays ceque doys avien que pourra.’ A box dropped into the front, having on it ‘Borgia,’ in letters reversed, round which are the words ‘Cor unum una via.’ At the back is a slide, within which, it is related, he carried the poison he was in the habit of dropping into the wine of his unsuspecting guests.
The signet ring of Cæsar Borgia was displayed a few years ago at a meeting of the British Archaeological Association by Rev. C. H. Hartshorne. It's made of gold, slightly enamelled, with the date 1503, and inscribed on the inside is the motto, ‘Fais ce que dois, advienne que pourra.’ A box was placed in the front, marked ‘Borgia’ in reversed letters, surrounded by the words ‘Cor unum, una via.’ On the back, there's a slide where it’s said he kept the poison he was known to drop into the wine of his unsuspecting guests.
Another ring-device of Cæsar Borgia was: ‘Aut Cæsar aut nihil.’ The following distich was made upon him:—
Another saying associated with Cæsar Borgia was: ‘Either Cæsar or nothing.’ The following couplet was created about him:—
Borgia Cæsar erat factis et nomine Cæsar;
‘Aut nihil aut Cæsar’ dixit, utrumque fuit.
Borgia Caesar was, in action and name, Caesar;
‘Either nothing or Caesar’ he said; both were true.
In late times the death of Condorcet was occasioned by a subtle poison, made by Cabanis, and enclosed in a[Pg 435] ring. The particulars of this tragedy are related by Arago. Proscribed by the Revolution of 1792, Condorcet, formerly secretary to the Academy of Sciences, took refuge in the house of a Madame Vernet, at Paris, a lady who generously risked her own life in endeavouring to save that of the eminent philosopher. Fearing to compromise his protectress by a longer stay, Condorcet left Paris with the intention of taking refuge in the country house of an old friend, who was, however, absent, and he wandered about, taking shelter at night in some stone-quarries, but was at length arrested, and conducted to Bourg-la-Reine, where he was placed in a damp cell. The next morning (March 28, 1794) he was found dead in his prison, having taken poison, which he carried about with him in a ring.
In later times, Condorcet's death was caused by a subtle poison created by Cabanis and hidden in a[Pg 435] ring. The details of this tragedy are shared by Arago. After being persecuted by the Revolution of 1792, Condorcet, who was once the secretary to the Academy of Sciences, sought refuge in the home of Madame Vernet in Paris, a woman who bravely risked her own life to help save the distinguished philosopher. Concerned about endangering his protector by staying longer, Condorcet left Paris intending to find safety at a country house belonging to an old friend. However, that friend was away, and he ended up wandering, spending nights in some stone quarries. Eventually, he was arrested and taken to Bourg-la-Reine, where he was put in a damp cell. The next morning (March 28, 1794), he was found dead in his prison, having taken poison that he had carried with him in a ring.
A singular story of a poisoned ring appeared in the French newspapers a few years ago, to the effect that a gentleman who had purchased some objects of art at a shop in the Rue St. Honoré, was examining an ancient ring, when he gave himself a slight scratch in the hand with a sharp part of it. He continued talking to the dealer a short time, when he suddenly felt an indescribable sensation over his whole body, which appeared to paralyse his faculties, and he became so seriously ill that it was found necessary to send for a medical man. The doctor immediately discovered every symptom of poisoning by some mineral substance. He applied strong antidotes, and in a short time the gentleman was in a measure recovered. The ring in question having been examined by the medical man, who had long resided in Venice, was found to be what was formerly called a ‘death’ ring, in use by Italians when acts of poisoning were frequent about the middle of the seventeenth century. Attached to it inside were two[Pg 436] claws of a lion made of the sharpest steel, and having clefts in them filled with a violent poison. In a crowded assembly, or in a ball, the wearer of this fatal ring, wishing to exercise revenge on any person, would take their hand, and when pressing in the sharp claw, would be sure to inflict a slight scratch on the skin. This was enough, for on the following morning the victim would be sure to be found dead. Notwithstanding the many years since which the poison in this ring had been placed there, it retained its strength sufficiently to cause great inconvenience to the gentleman as stated.
A strange story about a poisoned ring made headlines in the French newspapers a few years ago. It went like this: a man who had bought some art items at a shop on Rue St. Honoré was looking at an old ring when he accidentally scratched his hand on a sharp edge. After chatting with the dealer for a bit, he suddenly felt an overwhelming sensation throughout his body that seemed to paralyze him, and he became so ill that someone had to call a doctor. The doctor quickly recognized every symptom of poisoning from some kind of mineral substance. He administered strong antidotes, and soon the man started to recover somewhat. When the doctor, who had lived in Venice for a long time, examined the ring, he identified it as what was once known as a 'death' ring, used by Italians during the frequent poisonings in the mid-seventeenth century. Inside the ring were two[Pg 436] claws made of the sharpest steel, which had grooves filled with a potent poison. In a crowded setting or at a ball, the wearer of this deadly ring, seeking revenge on someone, would take their hand and press one of the sharp claws, ensuring a tiny scratch on the skin. That was all it took; by the next morning, the victim would be found dead. Even though many years had passed since the poison was placed in the ring, it still had enough potency to cause serious harm to the man, as reported.
A singular interest is attached to the recovery of lost rings, of which there are many instances. One is recorded in connection with the wonder-working hand of St. Stephen of Hungary, which is now in the castle of Buda. In 1621, Pope Gregory canonised this monarch, after a lapse of two hundred years that his remains had been lying in the cathedral of Stuhlweissenberg, and on their removal it was discovered that the skeleton had no right hand. This created much stir, as it was known that a very valuable ring had been on one of the fingers, but no tidings of the missing member were heard until some years after, when a certain abbot Mercurius, who had formerly been treasurer to the cathedral, had an interview with the reigning monarch Ladislaus. The story he told was a rich one, the hand with the ring on it had been committed to his safe keeping by a beautiful youth, ‘dressed all in white.’ The historian Feesler, himself an ecclesiastic, says that ‘Ladislaus saw through Mercurius, but left God to deal with him.’ In the chapter on ‘Ring Superstitions’ I have mentioned the discovery of Lady Dundee’s ring, and the omen attached to it.
A unique fascination surrounds the recovery of lost rings, and there are many examples of this. One notable case is linked to the miraculous hand of St. Stephen of Hungary, which is now housed in the castle of Buda. In 1621, Pope Gregory canonized this king, two hundred years after his remains had been resting in the cathedral of Stuhlweissenberg. When they were moved, it was found that the skeleton was missing its right hand. This caused quite a stir, as it was known that a very valuable ring had been on one of the fingers, yet no news about the missing hand emerged for several years. Eventually, a certain abbot named Mercurius, who had previously served as the cathedral's treasurer, spoke with the reigning king, Ladislaus. The story he shared was intriguing; the hand with the ring had been entrusted to his safekeeping by a handsome young man "dressed all in white." The historian Feesler, who was also a cleric, stated, "Ladislaus saw through Mercurius, but left God to handle him." In the section on "Ring Superstitions," I've mentioned the recovery of Lady Dundee’s ring and the omen associated with it.
[Pg 437]The late Professor De Morgan, in ‘Notes and Queries’ (December 21, 1861), related an instance of a recovered ring, which (although not vouching for its truth) he states as having been commented upon nearly fifty years ago in the country town close to which the scene is placed, with all degrees of belief and unbelief. A servant-boy was sent into the town with a valuable ring. He took it out of the box to admire it, and in passing over a plank bridge he let it fall on a muddy bank. Not being able to find it he ran away, took to the sea, and finally settled in a colony, made a large fortune, came back after many years, and bought the estate on which he had been a servant. One day, while walking over his land with a friend, he came to the plank bridge, and there told his friend the story. ‘I could swear,’ he said, pushing his stick into the mud, ‘to the very spot where the ring was dropped:’ when the stick came back the ring was on the end of it.
[Pg 437]The late Professor De Morgan, in ‘Notes and Queries’ (December 21, 1861), shared a story about a recovered ring, which he mentions was discussed nearly fifty years earlier in a nearby country town, with a mix of belief and skepticism. A young servant was sent into town with a valuable ring. He took it out of the box to admire it, and while crossing a plank bridge, he dropped it in a muddy area. Unable to find it, he ran away, went to sea, and eventually settled in a colony where he made a fortune. After many years, he returned and bought the estate where he used to work as a servant. One day, while walking on his land with a friend, he reached the plank bridge and recounted the story. ‘I could swear,’ he said, jabbing his stick into the mud, ‘that this is exactly where the ring fell:’ and when he pulled the stick back, the ring was hanging from it.
A large silver signet-ring was lost by a Mr. Murray, in Caithness, as he was walking one day on a shingly beach bounding his estate. Fully a century afterwards it was found in the shingle in fair condition, and restored to Mr. Murray’s remote heir, Sir Peter Murray Thrieplund, of Fingask.
A large silver signet ring was lost by Mr. Murray in Caithness while he was walking one day on a pebbly beach next to his estate. Almost a hundred years later, it was found in the pebbles in decent condition and returned to Mr. Murray's distant heir, Sir Peter Murray Thrieplund, of Fingask.
The truth of a similarly recovered ring I am able to attest from my acquaintance with the late Mrs. Drake, of Pilton, near Barnstaple, to whose family the incident refers. The husband of this lady, while with her in a boat off Ilfracombe about fifteen years ago, lost a valuable ring. Of course no hopes were ever entertained of its recovery. In 1869, however, the ring was picked up on the beach at Lee, near Ilfracombe, by a little child who was living in the valley. The ring was readily identified, as it bore the[Pg 438] inscription: ‘John, Lord Rollo, born Oct. 16, 1751, died April 3, 1842.’
I can confirm the truth of a similar recovered ring based on my connection with the late Mrs. Drake from Pilton, near Barnstaple, who is related to the incident. About fifteen years ago, her husband lost a valuable ring while they were in a boat off Ilfracombe. Naturally, no one expected it to be found again. However, in 1869, a little child living in the valley discovered the ring on the beach at Lee, near Ilfracombe. The ring was easily recognized because it had the[Pg 438] inscription: ‘John, Lord Rollo, born Oct. 16, 1751, died April 3, 1842.’
In the bed of the river in the parish of Fornham St. Martin, in Suffolk, was found, some years since, a gold ring with a ruby, late in the possession of Charles Blomfield, Esq., which is conjectured by some to be the ring that the Countess of Leicester is related (by Matthew Paris) to have thrown away in her flight after the battle of Fornham St. Genevieve, October 16, 1173. The Earl and Countess of Leicester were taken prisoners at this battle.
In the riverbed of the parish of Fornham St. Martin in Suffolk, a few years ago, a gold ring with a ruby was discovered, which had recently belonged to Charles Blomfield, Esq. Some speculate that this might be the ring that the Countess of Leicester is said (by Matthew Paris) to have discarded during her escape after the battle of Fornham St. Genevieve on October 16, 1173. The Earl and Countess of Leicester were captured in this battle.
A matron of East Lulworth lost her ring one day: two years afterwards she was peeling some potatoes brought from a field half-a-mile distant from the cottage, and upon dividing one discovered her ring inside.
A woman in East Lulworth lost her ring one day. Two years later, while she was peeling some potatoes that had been brought from a field half a mile away from her cottage, she found her ring inside one of the potatoes.
A Mrs. Mountjoy, of Brechin, when feeding a calf, let it suck her fingers, and on withdrawing her hand found that her ring had disappeared. Believing the calf was the innocent thief, she refused to part with it, and after keeping the animal for three years, had it slaughtered, and the ring was found in the intestines.
A Mrs. Mountjoy from Brechin was feeding a calf and let it suck on her fingers. When she pulled her hand away, she discovered that her ring was missing. Thinking the calf was the guilty one, she wouldn’t let it go. After keeping the calf for three years, she had it slaughtered, and the ring was found in its intestines.
A wealthy German farmer, living near Nordanhamn, was making flour-balls in 1871 for his cattle. At the end of his work he missed his ring, bearing his wife’s name. Soon afterwards the farmer sold seven bullocks, which the purchaser shipped to England, on board the ‘Adler’ cattle-steamer on October 26. Two days afterwards an English smack, the ‘Mary Ann’ of Colchester, picked up at sea the still warm carcass of a bullock, which was opened by the crew to obtain some fat for greasing the rigging. Inside the animal they found a gold ring inscribed with the woman’s name and the date 1860. Captain Tye reported the circumstance as soon as he arrived in port, and handed the[Pg 439] ring over to an official, who sent it up to London. The authorities set to work to trace its ownership, and found that the only ship reporting the loss of a beast that could have passed the ‘Mary Ann’ was the steamer ‘Adler,’ from which a bullock supposed to be dead, had been thrown overboard on October 28. Meanwhile, the ‘Shipping Gazette’ recording the finding of the ring had reached Nordanhamn, and one of its readers there had recognised the name inscribed upon it; communications were opened with the farmer, and in due time he repossessed his ring.
A wealthy German farmer living near Nordanhamn was making flour balls for his cattle in 1871. After finishing his work, he realized that his ring, which had his wife's name on it, was missing. Shortly after that, the farmer sold seven bullocks, which the buyer shipped to England on the 'Adler' cattle steamer on October 26. Two days later, an English boat called the 'Mary Ann' from Colchester found the still-warm carcass of one of the bullocks at sea. The crew opened it up to get some fat for greasing the rigging. Inside the animal, they discovered a gold ring engraved with the woman's name and the date 1860. Captain Tye reported the find as soon as he reached port and handed the[Pg 439] ring over to an official, who sent it to London. The authorities began tracing its ownership and found that the only ship that reported a lost animal that could have passed the 'Mary Ann' was the steamer 'Adler,' which had thrown a supposedly dead bullock overboard on October 28. Meanwhile, the 'Shipping Gazette' article about the ring's discovery made its way to Nordanhamn, and one of its readers there recognized the name engraved on it. Contact was made with the farmer, and eventually, he got his ring back.
In the chapter on ‘Ring Superstitions’ allusion is made to the marvellous stories of rings found in the bodies of fishes. An instance, however, of this character was mentioned in the newspapers lately, as having occurred at St. John’s, Newfoundland. It is said that a signet-ring bearing the monogram ‘P.B.’ was discovered by a fisherman in the entrails of a cod-fish caught in Trinity Bay. The fisherman, John Potter, kept the prize in his possession for some time, but, the incident getting known, he was requested by the colonial secretary to send or bring the ring to St. John’s, as he had received letters from a family named Burnam, of Poole, England, stating that they had reason to feel certain that the ring once belonged to Pauline Burnam, who was one of the several hundred passengers of the Allan steamship ‘Anglo-Saxon,’ which was wrecked off Chance Bay (N.F.) in 1861, the said Pauline Burnam being a relative of theirs. The fisherman, in whose possession the ring was, brought it to St. John’s, and presented it at the colonial secretary’s office. After a brief delay he was introduced to a Mr. Burnam, who at once identified the object as the wedding-ring of his mother, and which she had always worn since her marriage at Huddersfield, in the year 1846. The ring[Pg 440] was accordingly given up to Mr. Burnam, who rewarded the fortunate finder with fifty pounds.
In the chapter on ‘Ring Superstitions,’ there are references to the incredible stories of rings found inside fish. Recently, there was a report in the news about a case like this that took place in St. John’s, Newfoundland. A fisherman named John Potter discovered a signet ring with the initials ‘P.B.’ in the entrails of a cod he caught in Trinity Bay. He kept the ring for a while, but once word got out, the colonial secretary asked him to bring the ring to St. John’s. He had received letters from a family named Burnam from Poole, England, who believed that the ring belonged to Pauline Burnam, one of the many passengers on the Allan steamship ‘Anglo-Saxon,’ which sank off Chance Bay (N.F.) in 1861; Pauline Burnam was related to them. The fisherman brought the ring to St. John’s and presented it at the colonial secretary’s office. After a short wait, he met Mr. Burnam, who instantly recognized the ring as his mother’s wedding ring, which she had worn since her marriage in Huddersfield in 1846. The ring[Pg 440] was then handed over to Mr. Burnam, who rewarded the lucky finder with fifty pounds.
On October 7, 1868, some fishermen, throwing their nets in the Volga, captured a sturgeon, which was found to be the same as that which his Imperial Highness the heir-presumptive of the Russian crown had accepted as an offering in 1866 from the municipality of Nijni. At the desire of the Prince the fish was restored to the sea. Its identity was proved by a silver ring attached to the right gill of the fish, on which was inscribed the date, Aug. 27, 1866. Another similar ring, which had been attached to the left gill, had disappeared.
On October 7, 1868, some fishermen casting their nets in the Volga caught a sturgeon that turned out to be the same one that His Imperial Highness, the heir-presumptive of the Russian crown, had accepted as an offering in 1866 from the municipality of Nijni. At the Prince's request, the fish was returned to the sea. It was identified by a silver ring attached to its right gill, inscribed with the date Aug. 27, 1866. A similar ring that had been attached to the left gill was missing.
It is to be presumed that the sturgeon was returned to the water with some mark to indicate the period at which it was re-captured. Some time after this occurrence a similar case occurred in the Volga, when another sturgeon, which had been offered as a present to the late Emperor Nicholas, and had been recommitted to its native element, was taken alive, and recognised by the rings attached to it.
It’s assumed that the sturgeon was released back into the water with some kind of marker to show when it was caught again. Some time later, a similar event happened in the Volga, when another sturgeon, which had been given as a gift to the late Emperor Nicholas and then returned to its natural habitat, was captured alive and recognized by the rings attached to it.
The French newspapers of May 1873 announced that at one of the principal restaurants in Paris, a valuable diamond ring was found in the stomach of a salmon purchased at the central markets.
The French newspapers in May 1873 reported that at one of the main restaurants in Paris, a valuable diamond ring was discovered in the stomach of a salmon bought at the central markets.
In the ‘Gentleman’s Magazine’ (January 1765), is the account of a Mrs. Todd, of Deptford, who, in going in a boat to Whitstable, endeavoured to prove that no person need be poor who was willing to be otherwise; and being excited with her argument, took off her gold ring, and, throwing it out into the sea, said ‘it was as much impossible for any person to be poor who had an inclination to be otherwise, as for her ever to see that ring again.’ The second day after this, and when she had landed, she bought[Pg 441] some mackerel, which the servant commenced to dress for dinner, whereupon there was found a gold ring in one. The servant ran to show it to her mistress, and the ring proved to be that which she had thrown away.
In the 'Gentleman’s Magazine' (January 1765), there’s a story about Mrs. Todd from Deptford. While taking a boat to Whitstable, she tried to prove that no one needs to be poor if they're willing to change their situation. Feeling inspired by her point, she took off her gold ring, threw it into the sea, and said, "It’s just as impossible for anyone to be poor if they want to be otherwise as it is for me to see that ring again." The next day, after she returned to land, she bought[Pg 441] some mackerel, and while the servant was preparing it for dinner, they found a gold ring inside one of the fish. The servant rushed to show it to her, and it turned out to be the very ring she had thrown away.
Brand, in his ‘History of Newcastle,’ relates that a gentleman of that city, in the middle of the seventeenth century, dropped a ring from his hand over the bridge into the River Tyne. Years passed on, when one day his wife bought a fish in the market, and the ring was discovered in its stomach.
Brand, in his ‘History of Newcastle,’ tells the story of a gentleman from that city in the mid-seventeenth century who dropped a ring from his hand over the bridge into the River Tyne. Years later, his wife bought a fish at the market, and the ring was found in its stomach.
A correspondent to ‘Notes and Queries’ (vol. i. series 3, p. 36), relates the following curious anecdote: ‘A gentleman, who was in the habit of frequenting a favourite spot for the sake of a view that interested him, used to lounge on a rail, and one day in a fit of absence of mind got fumbling about the post in which one end of the rail was inserted. On his way home he missed a valuable ring; he went back again and looked diligently for it but without success. A considerable time afterwards in visiting his old haunt, and indulging in his usual fit of absence, he was very agreeably surprised to find the ring on his finger again, and which appears to have been occasioned by (in both instances), his pressing his finger in the aperture of the post, which just fitted sufficiently with a pressure to hold the ring. I afterwards tried the experiment at the spot, and found it perfectly easy to have been effected with an easily fitting ring.’
A writer for ‘Notes and Queries’ (vol. i. series 3, p. 36) shares the following interesting story: ‘A man who often visited a favorite spot for a view he enjoyed liked to lean on a railing. One day, lost in thought, he started fiddling with the post where one end of the rail was attached. On his way home, he realized he had lost a valuable ring; he went back to search for it thoroughly but couldn’t find it. Much later, when he visited his usual spot again, and while being absent-minded, he was pleasantly surprised to discover the ring back on his finger. It seems that in both situations, he had pressed his finger into the hole in the post, which was just the right size to hold the ring securely. I later tried this out at the location and found it was indeed very easy to replicate with a ring that fit well.’
A curious antique ring, discovered in 1867 near the site of the Priory of St. Mary, Pilton, near Barnstaple, was exhibited by Mr. Chanter, the owner, at the Exeter Meeting of the Royal Archæological Institute (July 1873). The ring is of pure gold, weighing 131 grains, a large[Pg 442] egg-shaped sapphire being in the middle, in a solid oval setting. The stone had a hole drilled through the lower edge, through which a gold stud was passed, but it did not extend through the gold setting. The stone had been evidently flawed by the operation. The ring was intended for the thumb, and for ecclesiastical use, dating from about 1100 or 1200. A singularity is attached to the discovery. Some men were engaged in hedging, when they had to cut down some old trees. After cutting down one, they found the ‘moot’ of another underneath, and right in the centre of the latter was a round ball eight or ten inches in diameter, which the men took at first to be a cannon-ball. On opening the clay, however, the ring, bright and perfect, was exposed in the centre. A theory to account for this remarkable discovery is that the ring might have been stolen and buried by the thief for concealment under the tree in a ball of clay. For some reason or other the ring was left there, and in the course of time another tree grew over the old one.
A curious antique ring, discovered in 1867 near the site of the Priory of St. Mary, Pilton, near Barnstaple, was displayed by Mr. Chanter, the owner, at the Exeter Meeting of the Royal Archaeological Institute (July 1873). The ring is made of pure gold, weighing 131 grains, with a large egg-shaped sapphire in the center, set in a solid oval setting. The stone had a hole drilled through the lower edge, through which a gold stud was inserted, but it didn’t go through the gold setting. The drilling had evidently damaged the stone. The ring was meant for the thumb and for ecclesiastical use, dating back to around 1100 or 1200. A curious detail about the discovery is that some men were working on hedging when they had to cut down some old trees. After cutting down one, they found the ‘moot’ of another underneath, and right in the center of that was a round ball eight or ten inches in diameter, which the men initially thought was a cannonball. Upon opening the clay, however, the ring, bright and intact, was revealed in the center. One theory to explain this remarkable find is that the ring may have been stolen and buried by the thief for hiding under the tree in a ball of clay. For some reason, the ring was left there, and over time, another tree grew over the old one.
Among the singular discoveries of rings, I may mention the following:—In 1697 a woman was drowned for theft, in the Loch of Spynie, in Morayshire, and in 1811 the skeleton was brought to light, with a ring on its finger. In 1862, during some discoveries made at Pompeii, a body was too far decayed to be touched, but liquid plaster of Paris was poured upon it, and a cast was taken, so accurately done that a ring was found on the finger. In the excavation of an Anglo-Saxon burial-place at Harnham Hill, near Salisbury, a silver twisted ring was found on the middle finger-bone of a skeleton. In some sepulchral objects from Italy, Styria, and Mecklenburg, obtained by the late J. M. Kemble, Esq., was a finger-ring of bronze, in which the bone still[Pg 443] lay. The Abbé Cochet, the indefatigable Norman explorer, mentions this as of usual occurrence. ‘Au doigt de la main sont les bagues, ou des anneaux d’or, d’argent, de cuivre, ou de bronze. Quelques unes de ces bagues sont unies; mais d’autres ont des chatons en agate, en verroterie rouge ou vert, ou des croix encaustées sur métal. Communement, elles sont encore passées au doigt que les porta, dont la phalange est tout verdie par l’oxyde du bronze’ (‘La Normandie Souterraine,’ p. 29).
Among the unique discoveries of rings, I can mention the following: In 1697, a woman was drowned for theft in the Loch of Spynie, in Morayshire, and in 1811, her skeleton was uncovered with a ring on its finger. In 1862, during excavations at Pompeii, a body was too decayed to handle, but liquid plaster of Paris was poured over it, and a cast was made so accurately that a ring was found on its finger. In the excavation of an Anglo-Saxon burial site at Harnham Hill, near Salisbury, a silver twisted ring was discovered on the middle finger bone of a skeleton. In some burial objects from Italy, Styria, and Mecklenburg, which were obtained by the late J. M. Kemble, Esq., there was a bronze finger ring that still had the bone inside[Pg 443]. Abbé Cochet, the tireless Norman explorer, notes this as a common occurrence. "On the finger of the hand are rings, or bands of gold, silver, copper, or bronze. Some of these rings are plain; but others have settings made of agate, red or green glass, or crosses inlaid on metal. Usually, they are still on the fingers they were worn on, which are all green with the oxide of bronze" (‘La Normandie Souterraine,’ p. 29).
In Moore’s ‘Life of Byron’ we have an instance of a lost ring recovered under peculiarly interesting circumstances: ‘On the day of the arrival of the lady’s (Miss Millbanke) answer, he (Lord Byron) was sitting down to dinner, when his gardener came in, and presented him with his mother’s wedding-ring, which she had lost many years before, and which the gardener had just found in digging up the mould under her window. Almost at the same moment, the letter from Miss Millbanke arrived, and Lord Byron exclaimed, “If it contains a consent, I will be married with this very ring.” It did contain a very flattering acceptance of his proposal (of marriage), and a duplicate of the letter had been sent to London, in case this should have missed him.’
In Moore’s ‘Life of Byron,’ we see a story about a lost ring being found under really interesting circumstances: ‘On the day he received the letter from Miss Millbanke, Lord Byron was sitting down for dinner when his gardener came in and handed him his mother’s wedding ring, which she had lost many years ago and which the gardener had just discovered while digging up the dirt under her window. Almost at the same time, the letter from Miss Millbanke arrived, and Lord Byron exclaimed, “If it has her consent, I’ll get married with this very ring.” It did include a very flattering acceptance of his marriage proposal, and a copy of the letter was sent to London in case this one didn’t reach him.’
Among the numerous applications of rings to various purposes, one of the most curious is the custom, once prevalent in the Isle of Man, that if a man grossly insulted a married woman he was to suffer death, but if the woman was unmarried the Deemster, or judge, gave her a rope, a sword, and a ring, and she had it put to her choice either to hang him with the rope, or to cut off his head with the sword, or to marry him with the ring.
Among the many uses of rings for different purposes, one of the most interesting customs was in the Isle of Man. If a man seriously insulted a married woman, he faced execution. However, if the woman was single, the Deemster, or judge, would present her with a rope, a sword, and a ring. She then had the choice to hang him with the rope, behead him with the sword, or marry him with the ring.
[Pg 444]In one of Robin Hood’s ballads we find that a ring was part of a prize for archery:—
[Pg 444]In one of Robin Hood’s songs, we discover that a ring was part of the reward for archery:—
A greate courser, with saddle and brydle,
With gold burnished full bright;
A paire of gloves, a red golde ring,
A pipe of wyne, good fay.
What man berest him best, I wist,
The prize shall bear away.
A great horse, with saddle and bridle,
Shining bright with gold;
A pair of gloves, a red gold ring,
A good bottle of wine, trustworthy friend.
Whoever bears him best, I know,
The prize will be taken.
Rings were proffered as bribes: in the old legend of King Estmere, the porter of King Adlan’s hall is bribed by that monarch and his brother, disguised as harpers, to admit them:—
Rings were offered as bribes: in the old legend of King Estmere, the gatekeeper of King Adlan’s hall is bribed by that king and his brother, pretending to be musicians, to let them in:—
Then they pulled out a ryng of gold,
Layd itt on the porter’s arme,
‘And ever we will thee, proud porter,
Thou wilt saye us no harme.’
Sore he looked on King Estmère,
And sore he handled the ryng,
Then opened to them the fayre hall gates,
He lett for no kind of thyng.
Then they took out a ring of gold,
Set it on the porter’s arm,
‘And from now on, we promise you, proud porter,
"You won't hurt us."
He looked intently at King Estmère,
And held the ring tightly,
Then he opened the beautiful hall gates for them,
He was not moved by anything at all.
The lady, King Adlan’s daughter, for whose sake the ring is given, is thus described:—
The lady, King Adlan’s daughter, for whom the ring is given, is described as follows:—
The talents of gold were on her head sette,
Hanged low down to her knee;
And everye ring on her small fingèr
Shone of the chrystall free.
The gold jewelry was placed on her head,
Hanging down to her knee;
And every ring on her tiny finger
Sparkled with clear gems.
In the romance of ‘Earl Richard,’ we have another instance of a ring fee, or bribe, to a porter:—
In the story of 'Earl Richard,' we see another example of a ring fee, or bribe, given to a porter:—
She took a ring from her finger
And gave’t the porter for his fee,
Says, ‘tak you that, my good porter,
And bid the queen speak to me.’
She took a ring off her finger
And gave it to the porter as a tip,
She said, ‘Here you go, my good porter,
"And ask the queen to talk to me."
In the capital ballad of the ‘Baffled Knight,’ or ‘Lady’s[Pg 445] Policy,’ the latter in answer to the overtures of her drunken wooer says:—
In the main ballad of the ‘Baffled Knight,’ or ‘Lady’s[Pg 445] Policy,’ she responds to the advances of her drunken suitor by saying:—
Oh, yonder stands my steed so free,
Among the cocks of hay, sir;
And if the pinner should chance to see
He’ll take my steed away, sir.
Oh, over there stands my horse so free,
In the hay bales, sir;
And if the fence watcher happens to see
He’s going to take my horse, sir.
The Knight rejoins:—
The Knight returns:—
Upon my finger I have a ring,
It’s made of finest gold-a,
And, lady, it thy steed shall bring
Out of the pinner’s fold-a.
On my finger, I wear a ring,
It's made of the best gold,
And, lady, it will bring your horse
Out of the pen, so daring.
Miller, in his ‘History of the Anglo-Saxons,’ relates a pretty story of a ‘bribe’ ring, an episode in the battles between Edmund Ironside and Canute. It was on the eve of one of these conflicts that a Danish chief, named Ulfr, being hotly pursued by the Saxons, rushed into a wood, in the hurry of defeat, and lost his way. After wandering about some time, he met a Saxon peasant, who was driving home his oxen. The Danish chief asked his name. ‘It is Godwin,’ answered the peasant; ‘and you are one of the Danes who were compelled yesterday to fly for your life.’ The sea-king acknowledged it was true, and asked the herdsman if he could guide him either to the Danish ships, or where the army was encamped. ‘The Dane must be mad,’ answered Godwin, ‘who trusts to a Saxon for safety.’ Ulfr entreated this rude Gurth of the forest to point him out the way, at the same time urging his argument by presenting the herdsman with a massive gold ring, to win his favour. Godwin looked at the ring, and after having carefully examined it he again placed it in the hand of the sea-king, and said: ‘I will not take this, but will show you the way.’ Ulfr spent the day at the herdsman’s cottage;[Pg 446] night came, and found Godwin in readiness to be his guide. The herdsman had an aged father, who, before he permitted his son to depart, thus addressed the Danish chief: ‘It is my only son whom I allow to accompany you; to your good faith I entrust him, for remember that, there will no longer be any safety for him amongst his countrymen if it is once known that he has been your guide. Present him to your King, and entreat him to take my son into his service.’ Ulfr promised, and he kept his word. The humble cowherd, who afterwards married the sea-king’s sister, became the powerful Earl Godwin, of historic celebrity.
Miller, in his ‘History of the Anglo-Saxons,’ shares an interesting story about a ‘bribe’ ring, an event during the battles between Edmund Ironside and Canute. It was just before one of these battles that a Danish chief named Ulfr, fleeing from the Saxons, rushed into a forest in his panic and lost his way. After wandering for a while, he encountered a Saxon peasant driving home his oxen. The Danish chief asked the peasant his name. ‘It’s Godwin,’ the peasant replied, ‘and you’re one of the Danes who had to escape for your life yesterday.’ The sea-king admitted it was true and asked the herdsman if he could lead him to the Danish ships or to where the army was camped. ‘The Dane must be crazy,’ Godwin answered, ‘if he trusts a Saxon for safety.’ Ulfr begged the rough guide from the forest to show him the way, urging him further by offering a massive gold ring to win his favor. Godwin looked at the ring, examined it closely, then returned it to Ulfr and said, ‘I won’t take this, but I’ll show you the way.’ Ulfr spent the day at the herdsman’s cottage; when night fell, he found Godwin ready to help him. The herdsman had an elderly father who, before allowing his son to leave, addressed the Danish chief: ‘I’m letting my only son accompany you; I’m trusting him to your good faith, for remember, there won't be any safety for him among his countrymen if it gets out that he guided you. Present him to your King, and ask him to take my son into his service.’ Ulfr promised, and he kept his word. The humble cowherd who later married the sea-king’s sister became the powerful Earl Godwin, known in history.
In former times rings denoted quality, if we may judge from the expressions in an old play (‘First Part of the Contention: York and Lancaster;’ Shakspeare Society):—
In the past, rings signified quality, if we can judge from the phrases in an old play (‘First Part of the Contention: York and Lancaster;’ Shakspeare Society):—
I am a gentleman, looke on my ring,
Ransome me at what thou wilt, it shall be paid.
I’m a gentleman, see my ring,
Ransom me for whatever you want, it will be paid.
In the popular German ballad of ‘Anneli,’ or the ‘Anneli Lied,’ translated by Mr. J. H. Dixon (‘Notes and Queries,’ 3rd series, vol. ix.), the maiden, whose lover is drowned in the lake while swimming, is in a boat with a fisherman who recovers the body, which she places on her lap:—
In the well-known German ballad ‘Anneli,’ also known as the ‘Anneli Lied,’ translated by Mr. J. H. Dixon (‘Notes and Queries,’ 3rd series, vol. ix.), the young woman, whose boyfriend drowns in the lake while swimming, is in a boat with a fisherman who retrieves the body, which she lays across her lap:—
And she kiss’d his mouth, and he seem’d to smile,
‘Oh, no, I will not repine,
For God in heaven hath granted him
A happier home than mine.’
And she chaf’d in hers his clammy hands—
Ah! what does the maiden see?
There was a bridal-ring for one
Was never a bride to be.
She drew from his finger that posied ring,
‘Fisherman—lo! thy fee!’
[Pg 447]
And clasping him round and round she plunged,
And scream’d with a maniac glee—
‘No other young man in Argovie
Shall drown for the love of me!’
And she kissed his lips, and he seemed to smile,
“Oh, no, I won't be sad,
For God in heaven has given him
A happier home than mine.
And she warmed his cold hands in hers—
Ah! What does the girl see?
There was a wedding ring for someone
Who was never meant to be a wife.
She pulled that engraved ring from his finger,
‘Fisherman—look! Here’s your payment!’
[Pg 447]
And wrapping her arms around him, she dove,
And screamed with pure joy—
‘No other young man in Argovie
Shall drown for my love!’
Mr. R. S. Ralston, M.A., in his ‘Songs of the Russians,’ mentions an interesting custom in connection with rings: ‘Among the games is that called the “Burial of the Gold.” A number of girls form a circle, and pass from hand to hand a gold ring, which a girl who stands inside the circle tries to detect. Meanwhile they sing in chorus the following verses:—
Mr. R. S. Ralston, M.A., in his ‘Songs of the Russians,’ mentions an interesting custom involving rings: ‘Among the games is one called the “Burial of the Gold.” A group of girls forms a circle and passes a gold ring from hand to hand. A girl standing inside the circle tries to figure out where the ring is. Meanwhile, they sing the following verses in unison:—
See here, gold I bury, I bury;
Silver pure I bury, bury;
In the rooms, the rooms of my father,
Rooms so high, so high, of my mother.
Guess, O maiden, find out, pretty one,
Whose hand is holding
The wings of the serpent.
See here, I bury gold, I bury;
I bury pure silver, bury;
In the rooms, my father's rooms,
Rooms so high, my mother's high rooms.
Guess, O girl, figure it out, pretty one,
Whose hand is holding
The wings of the serpent.
The girl in the middle replies:—
The girl in the middle replies:—
Gladly would I have guessed,
Had I but known, or had seen,—
Crossing over the plain,
Plaiting the ruddy brown hair,
Weaving with silk in and out
Interlacing with gold.
O, my friends, dear companions,
Tell the truth, do not conceal it,
Give, oh give me back my gold!
My mother will beat me
For three days, for four;
With three rods of gold,
With a fourth rod of pearl.
I would have gladly guessed,
If I had only known or seen—
Crossing the plain,
Braiding the reddish-brown hair,
Weaving in and out with silk,
Intertwining it with gold.
Oh, my friends, dear companions,
Tell me the truth, don’t hide it,
Please, oh please give me back my gold!
My mom will ground me.
For three days, for four;
With three gold rods,
And a fourth pearl rod.
The chorus breaks in, singing:—
The chorus breaks in, singing:—
The ring has fallen, has fallen
Among the guelders and raspberries,
Among the black currants.
·····
[Pg 448]Disappeared has our gold,
Hidden amid the mere dust,
Grown all over with moss.’
The ring has dropped, has dropped
Among the guelders and raspberries,
Among the black currants.
·····
[Pg 448]Our gold has vanished,
Concealed in mere dust,
Overgrown with moss.’
In Warner’s ‘History of Ireland’ (vol. i. book 10) is the following ring anecdote: ‘The people were inspired with such a spirit of honour, virtue, and religion, by the great example of Brien, and by his excellent administration, that, as a proof of it, we are informed that a young lady of great beauty, adorned with jewels and a costly dress, undertook to journey alone from one end of the kingdom to the other, with a wand only in her hand, on the top of which was a ring of exceeding great value; and such an impression had the laws and government of this monarch made on the minds of all the people that no attempt was made on her honour, nor was she robbed of her clothes or jewels.’
In Warner’s ‘History of Ireland’ (vol. i. book 10) is the following intriguing story: ‘The people were filled with such a sense of honor, virtue, and faith, inspired by Brien’s great example and his outstanding leadership, that to prove it, we learn that a beautiful young woman, adorned with jewels and an expensive dress, decided to journey alone from one end of the kingdom to the other, carrying only a wand, at the top of which was a highly valuable ring; and the impression the laws and government of this king had left on the minds of all the people was such that no one attempted to compromise her honor, nor did she have her clothes or jewels stolen.’
This forms the subject of one of the sweetest melodies of Moore:—
This is the topic of one of Moore's sweetest melodies:—
Rich and rare were the gems she wore,
And a bright gold ring on her wand she bore;
But oh! her beauty was far beyond
Her sparkling gems and snow-white wand.
Rich and rare were the gems she wore,
And she held a bright gold ring on her wand;
But oh! her beauty was far beyond
Her sparkling gems and snow-white wand.
Janus Nicius Crytræus relates that a certain pope had a tame raven, which secreted the pope’s ring, or annulus Piscatoris. The pope, thinking that some one had committed the robbery, issued a bull of excommunication against the robber. The raven grew very thin, and lost all his plumage. On the ring being found, and the excommunication taken off, the raven recovered his flesh and his plumage.
Janus Nicius Crytræus tells the story of a certain pope who had a pet raven that hid the pope's ring, or annulus Piscatoris. The pope, believing someone had stolen it, issued a bull of excommunication against the thief. The raven became very thin and lost all its feathers. When the ring was found and the excommunication lifted, the raven regained its health and plumage.
Upon this story was founded the admirable Ingoldsby legend of the ‘Jackdaw of Rheims.’
Upon this story was founded the amazing Ingoldsby legend of the ‘Jackdaw of Rheims.’
During the great war of liberation in Germany, the[Pg 449] ladies deposited in the public treasury their jewels and ornaments to be sold for the national cause, and they each received in turn an iron ring inscribed ‘Ich gab Gold am Eisen’ (I gave gold for iron). Russell, who mentions this in his ‘Tour in Germany,’ 1813, adds:—‘A Prussian dame is as proud, and justly proud, of this coarse decoration as her husband and her son is of his iron cross.’
During the great war for liberation in Germany, the[Pg 449] ladies donated their jewels and ornaments to the public treasury to be sold for the national cause, and in return, they each received an iron ring engraved with ‘Ich gab Gold am Eisen’ (I gave gold for iron). Russell, who mentions this in his ‘Tour in Germany,’ 1813, adds:—‘A Prussian woman is as proud, and justly so, of this simple decoration as her husband and son are of his iron cross.’
A singular mode of securing a ring on the finger is mentioned by a correspondent to ‘Notes and Queries’ (4th Series, vol. vi. p. 323): ‘In the possession of a lady relative of mine is an old painting in oils, representing Sir William Segar, Principal King-at-Arms to James I. (1604), and his wife. They stand side by side, and are three-quarter portraits of life size. On the fourth finger of Lady Segar’s right hand is a jewelled ring, to which are attached several black strings, curiously joined at the back of the hand, and fastened round the wrist.’
A unique way to secure a ring on the finger is mentioned by a contributor to ‘Notes and Queries’ (4th Series, vol. vi. p. 323): ‘A lady relative of mine owns an old oil painting depicting Sir William Segar, Principal King-at-Arms to James I. (1604), alongside his wife. They are positioned side by side in three-quarter life-size portraits. On the fourth finger of Lady Segar’s right hand is a jeweled ring, attached to several black strings that are oddly joined at the back of her hand and secured around her wrist.’
A curious and tragical incident in connection with a ring is related in the ‘Lives of the Lindsays.’ The young Colin, Earl of Balcarres, was obtaining for his bride a young Dutch lady, Mauritia de Nassau, daughter of a natural son of Maurice, Prince of Orange. The day arrived for the wedding, the noble party were assembled in the church, and the bride was at the altar; but, to the dismay of the company, no bridegroom appeared. The volatile Colin had forgotten the day of his marriage, and was discovered in his night-gown and slippers, quietly eating his breakfast. He hurried to the church, but in his haste left the ring in his writing-case; a friend in the company gave him one; the ceremony went on, and, without looking at[Pg 450] it, he placed it on the finger of the bride. It was a mourning ring, with the death’s-head and cross-bones. On perceiving it at the close of the ceremony she fainted away, and the evil omen had made such an impression on her mind that, on recovering, she declared she should die within the year, and her presentiment was too truly fulfilled.
A curious and tragic incident involving a ring is related in the ‘Lives of the Lindsays.’ The young Colin, Earl of Balcarres, was set to marry a young Dutch woman, Mauritia de Nassau, the daughter of a natural son of Maurice, Prince of Orange. The day of the wedding arrived, the noble guests were gathered in the church, and the bride was at the altar; but, to everyone’s shock, the groom didn’t show up. The distracted Colin had forgotten the wedding day and was found in his nightgown and slippers, calmly eating his breakfast. He rushed to the church but, in his hurry, left the ring in his writing case; a friend in the crowd lent him one. The ceremony continued, and, without even looking at it, he slipped it onto the bride’s finger. It was a mourning ring, featuring a skull and crossbones. Upon noticing it at the end of the ceremony, she fainted, and the ominous sign affected her so deeply that when she came to, she declared that she would die within the year, a premonition that sadly came true.
Louis de Berquem, of Bruges, to whom is ascribed the art of cutting and polishing the diamond, made his first attempts in 1475, upon three rough and large diamonds, confided to him for that purpose by Charles the Rash, Duke of Burgundy. One of these was cut in a triangular shape, and mounted on a ring, on which were figured two hands, as a symbol of alliance and good faith, and was presented to Louis XI., King of France.
Louis de Berquem from Bruges, credited with the art of cutting and polishing diamonds, made his first attempts in 1475 on three large, rough diamonds that were entrusted to him by Charles the Bold, Duke of Burgundy. One of these diamonds was cut into a triangular shape and set into a ring, which featured two hands as a symbol of partnership and trust, and it was given to Louis XI, King of France.
Mr. Howitt, in his additions to the ‘History of Magic’ of Ennemoser, remarks: ‘In the St. Vitus’s dance patients often experience divinatory visions of a fugitive nature, either referring to themselves or to others, and occasionally in symbolic words. In the “Leaves from Prevorst,” such symbolic somnambulism is related, and I myself have observed a very similar case: Miss V. Brand, during a violent paroxysm of St. Vitus’s dance, suddenly saw a black evil-boding crow fly into the room, from which, she said, she was unable to protect herself, as it unceasingly flew round her, as if it wished to make some communication. This appearance was of daily occurrence with the paroxysm for eight days afterwards. On the ninth, when the attacks had become less violent, the vision commenced with the appearance of a white dove, which carried a letter containing a betrothal ring in its beak; shortly afterwards the crow[Pg 451] flew in with a black-sealed letter. The next morning the post brought a letter with betrothal cards from a cousin, and a few hours after the news was received of the death of her aunt at Lohburg, of whose illness she was ignorant. Of both these letters, which two different posts brought in on the same day, Miss V. Brand could not possibly have known anything. The change of birds and their colours during her recovery, and before the announcement of agreeable or sorrowful news, the symbols of the ring and the black seal exhibit in this vision a particularly pure expression of the soul, as well as a correct view into the future.’
Mr. Howitt, in his additions to the ‘History of Magic’ by Ennemoser, notes: ‘In St. Vitus's dance, patients often experience fleeting prophetic visions, either about themselves or others, sometimes expressed in symbolic terms. In “Leaves from Prevorst,” such symbolic sleepwalking is described, and I have personally witnessed a very similar case: Miss V. Brand, during a severe episode of St. Vitus's dance, suddenly saw a dark, ominous crow fly into the room, which she felt she couldn't defend herself against, as it continuously circled her, almost as if it wanted to convey a message. This vision occurred daily with the episodes for eight days afterward. On the ninth day, when the attacks had lessened, the vision began with the appearance of a white dove carrying a letter with a betrothal ring in its beak; shortly after that, the crow[Pg 451] flew in with a black-sealed letter. The next morning, the mail brought a letter with engagement cards from a cousin, and a few hours later, news came of her aunt's death in Lohburg, which she had not been aware of. Miss V. Brand could not possibly have known anything about either of these letters, which were brought by two different deliveries on the same day. The shift in birds and their colors during her recovery, prior to the arrival of good or bad news, along with the symbols of the ring and the black seal, reflect a particularly pure expression of the soul and an accurate glimpse into the future.’
A French MS. of the thirteenth century gives the earliest version hitherto discovered of the fable of the three rings, known by the story in Boccaccio’s ‘Decamerone,’ and by Lessing’s ‘Nathan.’ From these, however, it differs essentially. In the present version the true ring is found out after the father’s death, while Boccaccio and Lessing tell the contrary. Of course the allegorical meaning of the true ring is the Christian faith, and the two false are the Mohammedan and the Judaic faith. The Mohammedan faith is considered the oldest because it represents the pagan faith in general.
A French manuscript from the thirteenth century provides the earliest version found so far of the fable of the three rings, which is also featured in Boccaccio’s ‘Decamerone’ and Lessing’s ‘Nathan.’ However, it differs significantly from those versions. In this version, the true ring is discovered only after the father’s death, while Boccaccio and Lessing present it differently. The allegorical meaning of the true ring represents the Christian faith, while the two false rings symbolize the Islamic and Jewish faiths. The Islamic faith is considered the oldest because it generally represents pagan beliefs.
Among the singular uses to which rings have been applied, I may mention what were called ‘meridian.’ These were various kinds of astronomical rings formerly in use, but now superseded by more exact instruments. In the French ‘Encyclopédie’ (Diderot and D’Alembert) will be found an account of the ‘solar’ ring (anneau solaire), which showed the hour by means of a small perforation,[Pg 452] ‘un trou, par lequel on fait passer un rayon de soleil.’ Zeller also describes a kind of sun-dial in the form of a ring. This was called the astronomical ring, ‘annulus astronomicus.’[74]
Among the unique uses of rings, I should mention what were known as ‘meridian’ rings. These were different types of astronomical rings that used to be common but have now been replaced by more accurate instruments. The French ‘Encyclopédie’ (Diderot and D’Alembert) includes a description of the ‘solar’ ring (anneau solaire), which indicated the time using a small hole,[Pg 452] ‘un trou, par lequel on fait passer un rayon de soleil.’ Zeller also describes a type of sundial shaped like a ring, known as the astronomical ring, ‘annulus astronomicus.’[74]
Dial rings.
Phone rings.
The Rev. Danson R. Currer has a brass ring-dial, probably of the kind formerly designated as ‘journey rings.’
The Rev. Danson R. Currer has a brass ring-dial, likely of the type once referred to as ‘journey rings.’
[Pg 453]Mr. Edward Jones, of Dolgellau, has a dial-ring consisting of two concentric rings moving within the other, the larger one having a linear groove, and the smaller one a slight hole working into it.
[Pg 453]Mr. Edward Jones from Dolgellau has a dial ring made up of two concentric rings that move within each other. The larger ring has a straight groove, while the smaller one has a small hole that connects to it.
Dial ring.
Dial tone.
The romantic attachment of Charles Brandon, Duke of Suffolk, to Mary, the second sister of Henry VIII., is an interesting episode in ring history. She had been married in 1514 to Louis XII. of France, a political union of youth and beauty to debilitated old age. Brandon was sent with several English nobles to grace the nuptials. There is reason to believe that Mary had flattered his hopes of marrying her long before she quitted England. King Louis died three months after his marriage, and a few days after the Queen was secretly married to Suffolk. That during the brief interval between the marriage and death of the French monarch some interchange of affection occurred between the lovers is certain. A rumour had spread that Suffolk had shown a diamond ring she gave him. ‘The truth is,’ she writes, ‘that one night at Tournay, being at the banquet, after the banquet he put himself upon his knees before me, and in speaking and in playing he drew from my finger the ring, and put it upon his, and since showed it to me; and I took to laugh, and to him said that he was a thief, and that I thought not that the King had with him led thieves out of his country. The word larron he could not understand, wherefore I was constrained to ask how one said in Flemish larron. And afterwards I said to him in Flemish dieffe, and I prayed him many times[Pg 454] to give it me again, for that it was too much known. But he understood me not well, and kept it on unto the next day that I spake to the King, him requiring to make him to give it to me, because it was too much known—I promising him one of my bracelets the which I wore, the which I gave him. And then he gave me the said ring; the which one other time at Lylle, being set nigh to my lady of Hornes, and he before upon his knees, it took again from my finger. I spake to the King to have it again; but it was not possible, for he said unto me that he would give me others better, and that I should leave him that. I said unto him that it was not for the value, but for that it was too much known. He would not understand it, but departed from me. The morrow after he brought me one fair point of diamond, and one table of ruby, and showed me it was for the other ring, wherefore I durst no more speak of it, if not to beseech him it should not be shewed to any person; the which hath not all to me been done.’ ‘Thus signed, M.’
The romantic connection between Charles Brandon, Duke of Suffolk, and Mary, the second sister of Henry VIII, is an intriguing episode in ring history. She had married Louis XII of France in 1514, a political union between youth and beauty and an old man in decline. Brandon was sent with several English nobles to attend the wedding. There’s reason to believe that Mary had raised his hopes of marrying her long before she left England. King Louis passed away three months after their marriage, and just a few days later, the Queen secretly married Suffolk. It’s certain that some affection exchanged between the lovers during the short time between the marriage and death of the French king. A rumor spread that Suffolk had shown off a diamond ring she gave him. “The truth is,” she writes, “that one night in Tournay, during the banquet, after the banquet he knelt before me, and while talking and playing, he slipped the ring off my finger and put it on his, and then showed it to me; I laughed and told him he was a thief, and I didn’t think the King had thieves from his country. He couldn’t understand the word larron, so I had to ask how to say larron in Flemish. After that, I told him in Flemish dieffe, and I asked him many times[Pg 454] to give it back to me because it was too well-known. But he didn’t understand me well and kept it until the next day when I spoke to the King, asking him to make Suffolk give it to me because it was too well-known—I promised him one of my bracelets, which I was wearing, and I gave it to him. Then he gave me the ring back; another time at Lille, while sitting near my lady of Hornes, he took it again from my finger while kneeling. I asked the King to get it back for me, but it wasn’t possible because he said he would give me better ones and that I should leave him that one. I told him it wasn’t about the value, but that it was too well-known. He wouldn’t understand and walked away from me. The next day he brought me a beautiful diamond point and a ruby table, showing me it was for the other ring, so I didn’t dare mention it again, except to ask him not to show it to anyone; which hasn’t been fully honored to me.” ‘Thus signed, M.’
In ‘Household Words’ (vol. ix. p. 277), there is an account of two rings supposed to have been stolen from Charles II. on his death-bed. ‘I should have told you, in his fits his feet were as cold as ice, and were kept rubbed with hot cloths, which were difficult to get. Some say the Queen rubbed one and washed it in tears. Pillows were brought from the Duchess of Portsmouth by Mrs. Roche. His Highness, the Duke of York, was the first there, and then I think the Queen (he sent for her); the Duchess of Portsmouth swooned in the chamber, and was carried out for air; Nelly Gwynne roared to a disturbance, and was led out, and lay roaring behind the door; the Duchess wept and returned; the Princess (afterwards Queen Anne)[Pg 455] was not admitted, he was so ghastly a sight (his eye-balls were turned that none of the blacks were seen, and his mouth drawn up to one eye), so they feared it might affect the child she goes with. None came in at the common door, but by an odd side-door, to prevent a crowd, but enough at convenient times to satisfy all. The grief of the Duchess of Portsmouth did not prevent her packing and sending many strong boxes to the French ambassador’s; and the second day of the King’s sickness, the chamber being kept dark—one who comes from the light does not see very soon, and much less one who is between them and the light there is—so she went to the side of the bed, and sat down to, and, taking the King’s hands in hers, felt his two great diamond rings; thinking herself alone, and, asking him what he did with them on, said she would take them off, and did it at the same time, and looking up saw the Duke on the other side, steadfastly looking on her, at which she blushed much, and held them towards him, and said: “Here, sire, will you take them?” “No, madam,” he said, “they are as safe in your hands as mine, I will not touch them until I see how things will go.” But, since the King’s death, she has forgot to restore them, though he has not that she took them, for he told the story.’
In ‘Household Words’ (vol. ix. p. 277), there’s a story about two rings that were supposedly stolen from Charles II. on his deathbed. “I should have mentioned that during his fits, his feet were as cold as ice and needed to be rubbed with hot cloths, which were hard to come by. Some say the Queen rubbed one and washed it with her tears. Pillows were brought from the Duchess of Portsmouth by Mrs. Roche. His Highness, the Duke of York, was the first to arrive, and then I think the Queen (he sent for her); the Duchess of Portsmouth fainted in the room and was taken out for fresh air; Nelly Gwynne caused a scene and was led out, crying and lying behind the door; the Duchess cried and then came back; the Princess (later Queen Anne)[Pg 455] was not allowed in, as he looked so terrible (his eyeballs were rolled back so that no whites were visible, and his mouth was drawn up to one side), and they were worried it might distress the child she was carrying. Nobody entered through the main door, but through a side door to avoid a crowd, yet there were enough people coming in at suitable times to satisfy everyone. The Duchess of Portsmouth's grief didn’t stop her from packing and sending many heavy boxes to the French ambassador; and on the second day of the King’s illness, with the room kept dark—someone coming from the light doesn’t see quickly, and especially not someone standing between them and the light—she went to the side of the bed, sat down, and took the King’s hands in hers, feeling his two large diamond rings. Thinking she was alone, she asked him why he had them on and said she would take them off, which she did at the same time. When she looked up, she saw the Duke on the other side, watching her intently, at which she blushed and held the rings toward him, saying, “Here, sire, will you take them?” “No, madam,” he replied, “they are as safe in your hands as they are in mine; I won’t touch them until I see how things turn out.” But since the King’s death, she has forgotten to return them, although he knows she took them, for he recounted the story.”
This extract is taken from a letter written by a lady who was the wife of a person about the court at Whitehall, and forms part of a curious collection of papers lately discovered at Draycot House, near Chippenham.
This excerpt comes from a letter written by a woman who was married to someone involved with the court at Whitehall, and it is part of an interesting collection of documents that were recently found at Draycot House, near Chippenham.
In connection with incidents concerning rings, I may allude to the golden spoil that Messrs. Garrard, goldsmiths, of the Haymarket, London, purchased from the prize-agents of the British forces employed on the Gold Coast. These[Pg 456] precious objects appear to have been collected by the King of Ashantee in great haste as a propitiatory offering, and were evidently seized and sent at random to the British general. Among them are rings of the most beautiful yet fantastic shapes, showing the extraordinary imitative talents which the Ashantee goldsmiths possess. Perhaps the most curious of these is a ring finely chased, the signet of which is made of what seems to be an ancient Coptic coin. Two rings appear to have been copied from early English betrothal rings, precisely such as those by which lovers plighted their troth in this country many years ago.
In relation to incidents involving rings, I can mention the gold items that Messrs. Garrard, goldsmiths located in the Haymarket, London, bought from the prize-agents of the British forces stationed on the Gold Coast. These[Pg 456] valuable objects seem to have been quickly gathered by the King of Ashantee as a goodwill offering and were clearly seized and sent haphazardly to the British general. Among these are rings of the most stunning yet unusual shapes, showcasing the remarkable craftsmanship of the Ashantee goldsmiths. Perhaps the most interesting of these is a finely engraved ring, the signet of which appears to be made from an ancient Coptic coin. Two rings seem to be inspired by early English engagement rings, similar to those that lovers used to exchange their vows in this country many years ago.
CHAPTER X.
REMARKABLE RINGS.
AMAZING RINGS.
A volume of some amplitude might be written on the very attractive subject of the present chapter, for there are very few families in the kingdom cherishing a regard for ancestry and for the antiquarian interests of their country, who could not show examples of rings possessing unusual interest, not only of family, but of general importance. The Loan Exhibition of Ancient and Modern Jewellery at the South Kensington Museum in 1872 exhibited an unusual display of finger-rings contributed from every part of the kingdom, many of them of extreme rarity and beauty; while the famous Waterton Collection acquired by the Museum, described by one of the most eminent authorities on this particular subject as ‘in its almost unlimited extent, comprising the rings of all ages and nations,’ afforded specimens, many of which were unique, and of singular interest.
A substantial book could be written on the fascinating topic of this chapter, as very few families in the kingdom that value their ancestry and the historical interests of their country wouldn't be able to showcase rings that hold notable significance, both personally and universally. The Loan Exhibition of Ancient and Modern Jewellery at the South Kensington Museum in 1872 displayed an impressive array of rings collected from all over the kingdom, many of which were extremely rare and beautiful. Additionally, the famous Waterton Collection, acquired by the Museum and described by one of the top experts in this field as "having an almost unlimited range, featuring rings from all ages and nations," provided many unique and particularly interesting specimens.
The limits of the present book enable me only to mention a few instances of remarkable rings, in addition to those which have been already alluded to in the previous chapters. Rings of the earliest ages naturally attract our observation more than those of later times, and are invaluable studies to the historian and the antiquarian, throwing light upon many subjects, of which they are in some cases the only reflex, and enabling us to judge of the progress of art in[Pg 458] distant eras, to assist chronological researches, and to explain by inscriptions and figures many dubious points which would otherwise remain obscure.
The limits of this book allow me to only mention a few notable rings, in addition to those already discussed in the previous chapters. Rings from the earliest ages naturally draw our attention more than those from later periods and are invaluable for historians and antiquarians. They shed light on many topics, and in some cases, they are the only reflection we have, helping us assess the advancement of art in[Pg 458] ancient times, supporting chronological research, and clarifying various ambiguous points through inscriptions and images that would otherwise remain unclear.
No doubt there are many instances in which we have to depend on tradition alone for circumstances in connection with ring incidents, but even in these cases romance and poetry lend their aid in rendering them full of charm and interest, as an acquaintance with the mediæval writers more especially will prove, and to which I have frequently alluded in the preceding chapters.
No doubt there are many situations where we have to rely solely on tradition for circumstances related to ring incidents, but even in these cases, romance and poetry help make them captivating and intriguing, as familiarity with medieval writers especially will show, and to which I have often referred in the previous chapters.
Among the most remarkable collections of cameos, intaglios, and finger-rings, are those known as the ‘Devonshire Gems,’ formed in the last century by William Cavendish, third Duke of Devonshire. Eighty-eight, including some of the finest cameos, were withdrawn from it, and mounted in enamelled gold as a parure, unsurpassed for beauty and rarity.
Among the most impressive collections of cameos, intaglios, and finger rings are those known as the 'Devonshire Gems,' created in the last century by William Cavendish, the third Duke of Devonshire. Eighty-eight pieces, including some of the finest cameos, were taken from the collection and set in enameled gold as a parure, unmatched in beauty and rarity.
These precious gems were exhibited at the South Kensington Museum in 1872. Amongst the finger-rings were a scarabæus in grey and white onyx of three strata, in its antique ring of massive gold, thickened and expanded at the shoulders; a splendid specimen of a large gold ring of the best Italo-Greek work, the hoop formed of delicately woven corded pattern, the large deep bezel enriched with exquisite applied ornament in minute threaded work, perhaps the finest ring of its type known; a ring with intaglio of female head chased on the gold of the bezel is of antique Greek type; an intaglio of beautiful antique work on banded onyx, set in a massive gold ring; a most remarkable Roman ring, the bezel representing a Cupid’s head, chased in full relief on the solid; a small gold ring, the square bezel engraved with a dolphin, and the hoop formed[Pg 459] of triple beaded pattern; eight antique Roman rings, for the most part of the second and third centuries, one of which has the open-work hoop; a very interesting mediæval ring of rude workmanship, formed of electron, or gold much alloyed with silver; on the circular bezel is a head in intaglio, and in rather rude lettering ‘VIVAT,’ the shoulders have pellets at the side of the hoop—the date would appear to be of the seventh or eighth century; a good example of the iconographic type of English ring engraved on the bezel with figures of saints, fifteenth century; a massive gold ring, shoulders and hoop chased, Gothic inscriptions within the hoop; a fine English fifteenth century signet; a massive signet of the sixteenth century; a signet with shield of arms engraved on the under side of a thin piece of rock crystal and coloured, sixteenth or seventeenth century.
These precious gems were displayed at the South Kensington Museum in 1872. Among the finger rings were a scarab in gray and white onyx made of three layers, set in an antique ring of heavy gold, thickened and broadened at the shoulders; a stunning example of a large gold ring showcasing top-quality Italo-Greek craftsmanship, with the hoop designed in a delicately woven cord pattern and a large deep bezel adorned with exquisite tiny applied ornamentation, possibly the finest ring of its kind known; a ring featuring an intaglio of a female head engraved on the gold bezel in an antique Greek style; an intaglio of beautiful ancient craftsmanship on banded onyx set in a hefty gold ring; a remarkable Roman ring with a bezel depicting Cupid’s head, sculpted in high relief on the solid; a small gold ring with a square bezel engraved with a dolphin, and the hoop made of a triple beaded pattern; eight antique Roman rings, mostly from the second and third centuries, one of which features an open-work hoop; a very interesting medieval ring of rough craftsmanship, made of electrum, or gold heavily mixed with silver; the circular bezel has an intaglio head, and in somewhat crude lettering says ‘VIVAT,’ with pellets on the sides of the hoop—the date seems to be from the seventh or eighth century; a good example of the iconographic type of English ring, engraved on the bezel with figures of saints, dating from the fifteenth century; a massive gold ring with chased shoulders and hoop, Gothic inscriptions within the hoop; a fine English fifteenth-century signet; a large signet from the sixteenth century; a signet with a shield of arms engraved on the underside of a thin piece of rock crystal and colored, from the sixteenth or seventeenth century.
Among the classical antiquities in the British Museum is a rich collection of gems retaining their antique settings, a treasure not to be surpassed by any in Europe. Among these is a magnificent intaglio of Hercules slaying the Hydra, very deeply cut on a rich sard, and set in a massive gold ring of the form fashionable during the Lower Empire. The wonderful lion-ring from the Prince of Canino’s collection I have already described in the first chapter of this work. An account of the Museum gems will be found in the works of the Rev. C. W. King, on ‘Precious Stones’ and ‘Antique Gems.’
Among the classical antiquities in the British Museum is an impressive collection of gems still in their original settings, a treasure unmatched by any in Europe. Included is a stunning intaglio of Hercules defeating the Hydra, intricately carved on a rich sard, and set in a large gold ring that was popular during the Lower Empire. I've already described the amazing lion-ring from the Prince of Canino’s collection in the first chapter of this work. You can find a detailed account of the Museum's gems in the works of Rev. C. W. King, on ‘Precious Stones’ and ‘Antique Gems.’
In the same magnificent collection are some curious rings, amongst other objects from Switzerland, of the people who built their habitations on piles in the lakes.
In the same impressive collection are some interesting rings, along with other items from Switzerland, belonging to the people who built their homes on stilts in the lakes.
In the British Museum is also preserved the gold signet-ring of Mary, Queen of Scots. On the face is engraved the[Pg 460] royal arms and supporters of the kingdom of Scotland, with the motto ‘IN DEFENS’ and her initials ‘M. R.’ In the inner side of the seal a crowned monogram is engraved, ‘which might have been an unsolved enigma, but for the existence, in the State Paper Office, of a letter written by Mary to Queen Elizabeth, in which she has drawn the identical monogram after signing her name. Sir Henry Ellis, who first traced out this curious history, says, “It is clearly formed of the letters M. and A. (for Mary and Albany), and gives countenance to the opinion that the written monogram was intended for Elizabeth and Burghley to study, the subsequent creation of the title of Duke of Albany in Lord Darnley ultimately opening their eyes to the enigma.”’
In the British Museum, you can also see the gold signet ring of Mary, Queen of Scots. On the front is engraved the[Pg 460] royal arms and supporters of Scotland, along with the motto ‘IN DEFENSE’ and her initials ‘M. R.’ On the inner side of the seal, there is a crowned monogram, which might have remained a mystery if not for a letter written by Mary to Queen Elizabeth found in the State Paper Office, where she drew the exact same monogram after signing her name. Sir Henry Ellis, who first uncovered this intriguing history, states, “It is clearly made up of the letters M. and A. (for Mary and Albany), and supports the idea that the written monogram was meant for Elizabeth and Burghley to examine, as the later creation of the Duke of Albany title for Lord Darnley eventually clarified the mystery.”
A similarly interesting ring is that of Henry, Lord Darnley, husband to Mary, Queen of Scots, now in the Waterton Collection at the South Kensington Museum. On the bezel it bears the two initials ‘M. H.’ united by a lover’s knot. In the hoop is the name engraved ‘Henri L. Darnley,’ and the year of the marriage, 1565.
A similarly interesting ring is that of Henry, Lord Darnley, husband to Mary, Queen of Scots, now in the Waterton Collection at the South Kensington Museum. On the bezel, it features the two initials ‘M. H.’ connected by a lover’s knot. The band is engraved with the name ‘Henri L. Darnley’ and the year of the marriage, 1565.
Signet-ring of Mary, Queen of Scots, and the Darnley ring.
Signet ring of Mary, Queen of Scots, and the Darnley ring.
In the interesting ‘Notices of Collections of Glyptic Art,’ by the Rev. C. W. King, M.A., published in the ‘Archæological Journal’ for October 1861, is a description[Pg 461] of some remarkable rings in the Queen’s and other collections. By the kindness of the editor of the Journal I am enabled to give an abstract of the valuable papers contributed by the Rev. C. W. King. In the Royal Collection is a ruby set in a massy gold ring, having the name of ‘Loys XII.,’ and the date of his decease, 1515, engraved inside. The ruby has a head in profile of King Louis, and is a stone of considerable size (being half an inch in diameter) and of the finest quality. The drawing is correct, though somewhat stiff, after the usual manner of the Quattro Cento heads; the relief is somewhat flat, and all the details most accurately finished; both for material and execution this gem is an invaluable monument of the early times of the art.
In the engaging “Notices of Collections of Glyptic Art” by Rev. C. W. King, M.A., published in the “Archaeological Journal” for October 1861, there’s a description[Pg 461] of some remarkable rings in the Queen’s and other collections. Thanks to the kindness of the Journal’s editor, I can provide a summary of the valuable papers contributed by Rev. C. W. King. In the Royal Collection, there’s a ruby set in a heavy gold ring, featuring the name “Loys XII.” and the date of his death, 1515, engraved on the inside. The ruby showcases a profile head of King Louis and is a large stone (about half an inch in diameter) of the highest quality. The drawing is accurate, though somewhat stiff, following the typical style of Quattro Cento heads; the relief is somewhat flat, and all the details are finished with great precision. Both in material and craftsmanship, this gem is an invaluable piece from the early days of the art.
The signet-ring made for Charles II., when Prince of Wales, has the ostrich plumes between the letters ‘C. P.’—‘Carolus Princeps’—neatly and deeply cut upon a table diamond (½ × ⅜ inch in size) formed into a heater-shaped, seven-sided shield. The stone is slightly tinged with yellow, but of fine lustre, and such that of its nature no doubt whatever can be entertained. The ring, holding this in every respect interesting relic, has the back enamelled with a bow and quiver en saltire. A marvellous specimen of metal-work is the signet of his unfortunate father, having the royal arms most minutely engraved upon a shield of steel, and the lion and unicorn (modelled with matchless skill in the same metal in full relief) reclining upon the shoulders of a gold ring, and that of a size by no means inconvenient for wear upon the little finger.
The signet ring made for Charles II, when he was Prince of Wales, features ostrich plumes between the letters ‘C. P.’—‘Carolus Princeps’—neatly and deeply engraved on a table diamond (½ × ⅜ inch in size) shaped like a heater and made up of seven sides. The stone has a slight yellow tint but exhibits a fine luster, leaving no doubt about its quality. The ring, which holds this fascinating relic, has its back enamelled with a bow and quiver en saltire. A remarkable piece of metalwork is the signet of his ill-fated father, showcasing the royal arms intricately engraved on a steel shield, with the lion and unicorn (masterfully crafted in the same metal in high relief) resting on the shoulders of a gold ring, sized comfortably for wearing on the little finger.
The Marlborough gems[75] constitute a famous collection,[Pg 462] as it now stands, formed by the union of the Arundel and the Bessborough, together with certain additions made at the close of the last century by the grandfather of the present Duke of Marlborough. This collection includes many masterpieces of art set in rings of fine gold in a plain solid imitation of the ancient ring worn by the later Romans, having a slight round shank, gradually thickening towards the shoulders.
The Marlborough gems[75] are a renowned collection,[Pg 462] as it currently exists, created from the merger of the Arundel and the Bessborough, along with some additions made at the end of the last century by the grandfather of the current Duke of Marlborough. This collection features many masterpieces of art set in fine gold rings that have a simple, solid design imitating the ancient rings worn by the later Romans, which have a slightly rounded band that gets thicker toward the shoulders.
The Bessborough Collection deservedly ranks as one of the first in Europe for the interest and value of the works of art it contains (as viewed exclusively in that light) and the gems themselves, are pre-eminently distinguished by the unusual taste and elegance of the rings in which they are for the most part set. In this point of view alone they will furnish a rich treat to every amateur in that elegant branch of the jeweller’s craft. Some are choice examples of the Rénaissance goldsmiths’ skill; the majority, however, plainly show that they were made to the commission of the noble possessor, exhibiting as they do the most varied designs in the Louis XV. style, in which one is at a loss what most to admire, the fertility of invention displayed in the great variety of the forms, or the perfection of workmanship with which these designs have been carried out in the finest gold.
The Bessborough Collection rightfully ranks as one of the top collections in Europe for the interest and value of its artworks. The pieces themselves are especially notable for the unique style and elegance of the rings they are mostly set in. From this perspective, they provide a delightful experience for anyone who appreciates this refined area of jewelry making. Some pieces are excellent examples of Renaissance goldsmiths' craftsmanship; however, most clearly show they were commissioned by the noble owner, showcasing a wide range of designs in the Louis XV style. It’s hard to decide whether to admire more the creativity shown in the variety of forms or the flawless workmanship that has gone into creating these designs in the finest gold.
The Rev. C. W. King mentions a ring in this collection, with a representation of a dancing fawn upon sard, as the most elegant design ever invented by Italian taste. Appropriately to the subject, the shank consists of two thyrsi, whilst around the head of the ring runs an ivy garland, the leaves enamelled green. The execution of this charming idea equals the design.
The Rev. C. W. King talks about a ring in this collection featuring a dancing fawn on sardonyx, calling it the most elegant design ever created by Italian craftsmanship. Fittingly, the band is made of two thyrsi, and an ivy garland with green enamel leaves encircles the head of the ring. The execution of this delightful idea matches its design perfectly.
Another exquisite old Italian ring is described as being[Pg 463] adorned with two masks of Pan upon the shoulders, the very masterpieces of chasings in gold, so vigorous, so full of life, are these minute full-faced heads in half relief.
Another beautiful old Italian ring is described as being[Pg 463] decorated with two masks of Pan on the shoulders. These tiny, detailed heads, presented in half relief, are stunning examples of chasing in gold, so vibrant and full of life.
In the same collection is a sard engraved with a head of Lucilla, mediocre in execution, but set in a ring worthy of Cellini, to whose age the workmanship belongs. It is certainly the most artistic example of this ornament that has ever come under the Rev. Mr. King’s notice. Two nude figures, one seen in front, the other from behind, carved out in flat relief upon the shoulders of the shank, bear torches in either hand, which wind round the setting; doves and flowers fill up the interval between them. The perfection of these minute chasings is beyond all description, each is a finished statuette; curious, too, is the elegance with which they are employed, so as to fall naturally into the curvature required by their position.
In the same collection is a sardonyx engraved with a head of Lucilla, which has a mediocre execution but is set in a ring that’s worthy of Cellini, from the time when the craftsmanship belongs. It is definitely the most artistic example of this ornament that the Rev. Mr. King has ever noticed. Two nude figures, one seen from the front and the other from behind, are carved in flat relief on the shoulders of the band, holding torches in both hands that wrap around the setting; doves and flowers fill the space between them. The perfection of these tiny engravings is beyond description, each is a detailed statuette; it’s also interesting how elegantly they are placed, fitting naturally into the curve needed by their position.
These extracts from the paper in the ‘Archæological Journal,’ by the Rev. C. W. King, will suffice to show the great value and beauty of these precious objects.
These excerpts from the paper in the ‘Archaeological Journal,’ by Rev. C. W. King, will be enough to demonstrate the significant value and beauty of these treasured items.
The famous ring of Chariclea is thus mentioned by the Rev. C. W. King in his ‘Handbook of Engraved Gems.’ It is ‘an extract from the flowery pages of the tasteful Bishop of Tricca, Heliodorus, who, though writing amidst the fast-gathering clouds of the fourth century, still retained a tinge of early culture, and could not extinguish a sinful admiration for artistic beauty. Like other educated men of his, and even lower, times, he was still able to appreciate the productions of an art, even then, nearly extinct, for with what enthusiasm does he enlarge upon the description of the ring worn by his heroine Chariclea (‘Æthiop.’ v. 13), possibly a work the beauty of which he had himself admired in reality, or, perhaps, actually possessed! “Such is the[Pg 464] appearance of all amethysts coming from India and Ethiopia; but that which Calasiris now presented to Nausicles was far above them in value, for it was enriched with an engraving, and worked out into an imitation of nature. The subject was a boy tending his flocks, himself standing upon a low rock for the sake of looking about him, and guiding his sheep to their pasture by the music of his Pandean pipe. The flock seemed obedient to the signal, and submitted themselves readily to be conducted by the guidance of his notes. One would say they were themselves laden with fleeces of gold, and those not of the artist’s giving, but due to the amethyst itself, which painted their backs with a blush of its own. Pictured also were the tender skippings of the lambs; whilst some running up against the rock in troops, others, turning in frolicsome turnings around the shepherd, converted the rising ground into an appearance of a pastoral theatre. Others, again, revelling in the blaze of the amethyst, as if in the beams of the sun, were pawing and scraping the rock with the points of their hoofs, as if they bounded up against it. Such amongst them as were the first born, and the more audacious, seemed as if they were wishing to leap over this round of the gem, but were kept in by the artist, who had drawn a border like a golden fold around them and the rock. Now this fold was in reality of stone, and not imitative, for the engraver, having circumscribed a portion of the gem’s edge for this purpose, had depicted what he required in the actual substance, deeming it a clever stroke to contrive a stone wall upon a stone.”’ ‘A remark,’ adds the Rev. C. W. King, ‘proving that our author is describing a real intaglio, not drawing upon his fancy merely.’
The famous ring of Chariclea is mentioned by Rev. C. W. King in his ‘Handbook of Engraved Gems.’ It’s ‘an excerpt from the elegantly written pages of the stylish Bishop of Tricca, Heliodorus, who, even while writing in the turbulent fourth century, still held onto a hint of early culture and couldn't shake off a guilty admiration for artistic beauty. Like other well-educated individuals of his time, and even those less educated, he was still capable of appreciating an art that was nearly extinct at that stage, for with what enthusiasm he elaborates on the ring worn by his heroine Chariclea (‘Æthiop.’ v. 13), potentially a piece he had himself admired in person, or perhaps even owned! “Such is the[Pg 464] appearance of all amethysts coming from India and Ethiopia; but the one Calasiris presented to Nausicles was much more valuable, as it featured an engraving and was designed to imitate nature. The subject was a boy watching over his flocks, standing on a low rock to survey his surroundings, guiding his sheep to pasture with the music of his Pandean pipe. The flock appeared to respond to his call, willingly following his melodic lead. One would think they were adorned with fleeces of gold, not given by the artist but a result of the amethyst itself, which colored their backs with a rosy hue. The playful leaps of the lambs were also depicted; some scampering up towards the rock in groups, while others, frolicking around the shepherd, turned the rising ground into a charming pastoral scene. Others, basking in the brilliance of the amethyst as if in sunlight, were pawing and scraping the rock with their hooves, as if jumping against it. Among them, the firstborn and the boldest seemed eager to leap over the edge of the gem, but the artist had restrained them with a border resembling a golden fold around them and the rock. This fold was actually made of stone, not just an imitation, as the engraver, having carved a portion of the gem’s edge for this purpose, had depicted what he intended directly in the material, considering it a clever touch to create a stone wall on a stone.”’ ‘A remark,’ adds Rev. C. W. King, ‘showing that our author is describing a real intaglio, not merely relying on his imagination.’
The Rev. Walter Sneyd possesses a ring of singular[Pg 465] interest, supposed to have belonged to Roger, King of Sicily (died 1152). A representation of this relic is given in the ‘Archæological Journal’ (vol. iii. p. 269). ‘It is of mixed yellow metal, gilt; on either side of the hoop there is a crown—of the form commonly seen on coins or money of the twelfth century—and on the signet are the words “Rogerivs Rex,” chased in high relief. In the form of the character they correspond closely with legends on coins of Roger, second Duke of Apulia of that name, crowned King of Sicily 1129. This ring has every appearance of genuine character; but it is difficult to tell for what purpose it was fabricated, the inscription not being inverted, and the letters in relief ill-suited for producing an impression. It seems very improbable that King Roger should have worn a ring of base metal, and the conjecture may deserve consideration that it was a signet not intended for the purpose for sealing, but entrusted in lieu of credentials to some envoy.’
The Rev. Walter Sneyd has a ring of unique[Pg 465] interest, believed to have belonged to Roger, King of Sicily (died 1152). A depiction of this artifact can be found in the ‘Archæological Journal’ (vol. iii. p. 269). ‘It is made of a mixed yellow metal with gold plating; on either side of the band, there is a crown—similar to those typically seen on coins from the twelfth century—and on the seal are the words “Roger the King,” embossed in high relief. The style of the letters closely matches the legends on coins from Roger, the second Duke of Apulia of that name, crowned King of Sicily in 1129. This ring appears to be genuinely authentic; however, it's hard to determine what it was made for, since the inscription isn’t flipped, and the letters in relief aren’t suitable for making an impression. It seems unlikely that King Roger would have worn a ring made of inferior metal, and it's worth considering that it might have been a signet not meant for sealing but given as a form of credentials to some envoy.’
Supposed ring of Roger,
King of Sicily.
Supposed ring of Roger,
King of Sicily.
In the Waterton Collection is a ring assumed on good grounds to have been that with which Cola di Rienzi, the famous tribune of Rome, was united to Catarina di Riselli. ‘The ring,’ remarks Mr. Waterton, ‘was purchased for me in Rome, for a trifling sum, at one of the periodical clearing sales of the Monte di Pietà, and I had it for several months before I discovered certain facts—which many archæologists consider to be corroborative of my supposition—that this ring was the nuptial ring of Cola di Rienzi. Its style, when compared with other objects of the period, enables us to ascribe its date to the first half of[Pg 466] the fourteenth century. The bezel is an irregular octagon, in the centre there is cut, signet-wise, a device, two stars divided per pale. Around this are inscribed two names—Catarina, Nicola—the interstices being filled up with niello. These names are written from left to right, and not reversed. The ring is an elegant specimen of Italian workmanship, and I consider it to have been produced by a Florentine artist. The reasons for believing that this may have been the fiancial ring of Rienzi and his wife are the following: 1. The two names, Nicola (di Rienzi) and Catarina (di Riselli). 2. The date of the ring, which we may assign to 1320-1340, the time when Rienzi lived. 3. Neither Rienzi nor his wife had any armorial bearing; and, having great faith in his destiny, he is stated to have selected a star for his device. The two stars divided per pale were interpreted by an eminent Roman archæologist to be significant of the star of Rienzi, and that of his wife.’
In the Waterton Collection is a ring believed to have been the one with which Cola di Rienzi, the famous tribune of Rome, was united to Catarina di Riselli. "The ring," notes Mr. Waterton, "was bought for me in Rome, for a small amount, at one of the periodic clearing sales of the Monte di Pietà, and I had it for several months before I discovered certain facts—which many archaeologists consider to be supporting my theory—that this ring was the wedding ring of Cola di Rienzi. Its style, when compared with other objects from the time, allows us to date it to the first half of[Pg 466] the fourteenth century. The bezel is an irregular octagon, with a design in the center, cut like a signet, featuring two stars divided per pale. Around this are inscribed two names—Catarina, Nicola—with the spaces filled in with niello. These names are written from left to right, not reversed. The ring is a beautiful example of Italian craftsmanship, and I believe it was made by a Florentine artist. The reasons for believing this might be the wedding ring of Rienzi and his wife are as follows: 1. The two names, Nicola (di Rienzi) and Catarina (di Riselli). 2. The ring's date, which we can assign to 1320-1340, the time when Rienzi was alive. 3. Neither Rienzi nor his wife had any heraldic emblem; and, having great faith in his destiny, he reportedly chose a star as his symbol. The two stars divided per pale were interpreted by a renowned Roman archaeologist as representing the star of Rienzi and that of his wife.”
A curious seal-ring, formerly in the possession of Sir Richard Worsley, of Appuldercombe, in the Isle of Wight, was exhibited at a meeting of the Society of Antiquaries in 1775. An impression in wax was also shown at the Plymouth Local Committee of the Exeter Diocesan Architectural Society, in July 1850, by Mr. Cotton, of Ivybridge. The thumb-ring, set in gold, and of exquisite workmanship, is said to have been in the possession of the Worsley family since the time of Henry VIII. That King usually wore it on his finger, and presented it to Sir James Worsley, his yeoman of the wardrobe, and governor of the Isle of Wight. The device represents a warrior completely armed from head to foot, and covered with a vest or surcoat; his helmet is flat at the top, and brought round under the chin, exactly in the same form as those worn in France about the[Pg 467] middle of the thirteenth century, during the reign of Saint Louis. The scabbard of his sword hangs by his side, but the sword itself lies broken at his feet. His uplifted arms grasp a ragged or knotted staff, with which he is in the act of attacking a lion, who stands opposed to him. His shield bears the coat armour of the Stuart family; viz., Or, a fesse checky Az. and Argt. Over the lion’s head appears an arm in mail, holding a shield, with the above coat of arms of the Stuarts; and in an escutcheon of pretence, a[Pg 468] lion rampant, the arms of Scotland and of Bruce. The sleeve of the drapery, which falls loosely from the arm, is ornamented on the border with three fleurs de lis; and the whole is enclosed within a double tressure fleury and counter-fleury, which together form the arms of Scotland.
A fascinating seal ring, once owned by Sir Richard Worsley of Appuldercombe on the Isle of Wight, was displayed at a meeting of the Society of Antiquaries in 1775. A wax impression of it was also presented at the Plymouth Local Committee of the Exeter Diocesan Architectural Society in July 1850 by Mr. Cotton of Ivybridge. The thumb ring, set in gold and showing exquisite craftsmanship, has been in the Worsley family since the time of Henry VIII. The King typically wore it and gifted it to Sir James Worsley, his yeoman of the wardrobe and governor of the Isle of Wight. The design features a fully armed warrior from head to toe, dressed in a vest or surcoat; his helmet is flat on top and wraps under his chin, similar to those worn in France around the middle of the thirteenth century, during the reign of Saint Louis. The scabbard of his sword hangs at his side, but the sword itself lies broken at his feet. His raised arms hold a rugged or knotted staff with which he is attacking a lion standing before him. His shield shows the coat of arms of the Stuart family: Or, a fesse checky Az. and Argt. Above the lion’s head is an arm in mail, holding a shield with the same Stuart coat of arms; and in a coat of pretence, a lion rampant, representing the arms of Scotland and of Bruce. The sleeve of the drapery, which falls loosely from the arm, is decorated on the edge with three fleurs de lis; and the entire design is enclosed within a double tressure fleury and counter-fleury, which together form the arms of Scotland.
The ‘Worsley’ seal-ring.
The ‘Worsley’ signet ring.
‘The warrior here represented’ (says Dr. Mills, Dean of Exeter, in his account of this ring) ‘seems to be Sir Walter Stuart, born anno 1393, so called from being hereditary High Steward of Scotland. He married Margery, daughter of Robert Bruce, and sister to David Bruce, Kings of Scotland. David dying without male issue, Margery became an heiress; and therefore her arms are placed here in an escutcheon of pretence on those of Walter Stuart, her husband.’
‘The warrior depicted here’ (says Dr. Mills, Dean of Exeter, in his account of this ring) ‘appears to be Sir Walter Stuart, born in 1393, named for being the hereditary High Steward of Scotland. He married Margery, the daughter of Robert Bruce and sister to David Bruce, Kings of Scotland. After David died without a male heir, Margery became an heiress; thus, her arms are displayed here in an escutcheon of pretence alongside those of her husband, Walter Stuart.’
The device here represented seems to be in some measure ascertained by the account given by Sir Simeon Stuart’s family in the Baronetage of England, which says that Sir Alexander Stuart had an honourable augmentation granted by Charles VI., King of France, viz. argent the lion of Scotland, debruised with a ragged staff bend-wise or. This honour was probably granted to Sir Alexander on account of some martial achievement performed either by him or his ancestors. But the seal seems to determine it to Walter Stuart, the husband of Margery Bruce, as there is not more than fifty years between his death and the accession to the throne of Charles VI. As Sir James Worsley, ancestor to Sir Richard, married Mary, eldest daughter of Sir Nicholas Stuart, of Hartley Mauditt, in Hampshire, it is highly probable that this ring descended to the family of Worsley by this alliance.
The device shown here seems to be somewhat confirmed by the account provided by Sir Simeon Stuart’s family in the Baronetage of England, which states that Sir Alexander Stuart received an honorable addition granted by Charles VI., King of France, namely, a silver background with the lion of Scotland, crossed with a gold ragged staff. This honor was likely awarded to Sir Alexander due to a military achievement carried out by either him or his ancestors. However, the seal appears to link it to Walter Stuart, the husband of Margery Bruce, since there is only about fifty years between his death and the accession of Charles VI. Given that Sir James Worsley, an ancestor of Sir Richard, married Mary, the eldest daughter of Sir Nicholas Stuart of Hartley Mauditt, Hampshire, it’s quite possible that this ring was passed down to the Worsley family through this union.
The ring of St. Louis of France was formerly kept in the treasury of St. Denis. In ‘Le Trésor Sacré de Sainct[Pg 469] Denys’ (1646) this ring is thus described: ‘L’anneau du mesme glorieux Roy Sainct Louis qui est précieux: il est d’or, semé de fleurs de lys, garny d’un grand saphir quarré sur lequel est gravée l’image du mesme sainct avec les lettres S. L., qui veulent dire Sigillum Lodovici. Sur le rond de l’anneau par le dedans sont gravez ces mots, “C’est le Signet du Roy S. Louis,” qui y ont esté adjoustez après sa mort.’ A representation of this remarkable ring is here given. It is now in the Musée des Souverains at the Louvre.
The ring of St. Louis of France was once kept in the treasury of St. Denis. In ‘Le Trésor Sacré de Sainct[Pg 469] Denys’ (1646), this ring is described as follows: ‘The ring of the glorious King St. Louis, which is precious: it is made of gold, adorned with fleur-de-lis, set with a large square sapphire on which is engraved the image of the saint along with the letters S. L., which stand for Sigillum Lodovici. On the inside of the ring are engraved the words, “This is the Signet of King St. Louis,” which were added after his death.’ A representation of this remarkable ring is included here. It is now in the Musée des Souverains at the Louvre.
Ring of St. Louis.
St. Louis Ring.
‘The wedding-ring,’ remarks the Rev. C. W. King, ‘of the same prince is said to have been set with a sapphire engraved with the Crucifixion; the shank covered with lilies and marguerites, allusive to his own name and his wife’s. This attribution is a mere custode’s story. Mr. Waterton, who examined this gem, puts it down to a much later age: the King, a full length, has the nimbus, showing the figure to be posterior to his beatification. It probably belongs to Louis XII.’s time.’
‘The wedding ring,’ says Rev. C. W. King, ‘of the same prince is said to have a sapphire engraved with the Crucifixion; the band is decorated with lilies and marguerites, referring to his own name and his wife’s. This claim is just a custode’s tale. Mr. Waterton, who looked at this gem, dates it to a much later period: the King, in full length, has a halo, indicating that the figure was created after his beatification. It likely belongs to the time of Louis XII.’
In the Braybrooke Collection is a cameo portrait of Madame de Maintenon, on a very large and fine ruby, three eighths of an inch by half an inch wide, in a most beautiful gold ring, contemporaneous setting; presented to Louis XIV. when she retired into the convent of St. Cyr. In the same collection is a cameo portrait of Queen Elizabeth, by Valerio Vicentini, on a sardonyx of three strata, in a fine gold setting of the period; also a cameo[Pg 470] portrait of Charles I. on black jasper, a splendid work of art, in a beautifully-enamelled gold ring of his time.
In the Braybrooke Collection, there’s a cameo portrait of Madame de Maintenon set in a large and exquisite ruby, measuring three-eighths of an inch by half an inch, placed in a stunning gold ring from her era; it was given to Louis XIV when she entered the convent of St. Cyr. The collection also features a cameo portrait of Queen Elizabeth, created by Valerio Vicentini, on a three-layered sardonyx, elegantly set in a gold framework from that time; additionally, there’s a cameo portrait of Charles I on black jasper, a remarkable piece of art, within a beautifully enamelled gold ring from his period.
The Rev. C. W. King describes the famous signet-ring of Michael Angelo, preserved in the Paris Collection. ‘It is a sard engraved with a group representing a Bacchic festival, quite in the Renaissance style. In the exergue is a boy fishing, the rebus upon the name of the artist Gio Maria da Pescia. Many connoisseurs, however, hold the gem to be an undoubted antique. Of this relic the following curious story is told:—In the last century, as the Abbé Barthelemy was exhibiting the rarities of the Bibliothèque to a distinguished antiquary of the day, he suddenly missed this ring, whereupon without expressing his suspicions, he privately despatched a servant for an emetic, which, when brought, he insisted upon the savant’s swallowing, and the ring came to light again.’[76]
The Rev. C. W. King describes the famous signet ring of Michael Angelo, preserved in the Paris Collection. “It is a sard engraved with a group representing a Bacchic festival, completely in the Renaissance style. In the exergue is a boy fishing, a play on the name of the artist Gio Maria da Pescia. However, many experts believe the gem is definitely an antique. A curious story is told about this relic: In the last century, when Abbé Barthelemy was showing the rarities of the Bibliothèque to a prominent antiquarian of the time, he suddenly noticed that this ring was missing. Without showing his suspicions, he discreetly sent a servant to get an emetic, which he insisted the savant swallow, and the ring was found again.”[76]
The celebrated gem representing Apollo and Marsyas, which belonged to Lorenzo de’ Medici, and formed one of the magnificent collection of the Grand-Duke of Tuscany,[Pg 471] once, mounted on a ring, decorated the hand of the parricide Nero, who used it to sign his sanguinary mandates. Numbers of copies have been taken of this gem in ancient and modern times. It is thus described by Tenhove: Apollo, in a noble attitude, is holding his lyre, and regarding with disdain Marsyas, who, bound to a tree, and his hands tied behind him, awaits the just punishment of his temerity. The young Scythian who is to execute the sentence, kneels before Apollo, apparently imploring his clemency. The quiver and arrows of the god are suspended from one of the branches of the tree; on the foreground are the instruments of which the satyr has made such unfortunate use.
The famous gem depicting Apollo and Marsyas, which was owned by Lorenzo de’ Medici, and was part of the stunning collection of the Grand-Duke of Tuscany,[Pg 471] once adorned the hand of the parricidal Nero, who used it to sign his bloody orders. Numerous copies of this gem have been made in both ancient and modern times. Tenhove describes it this way: Apollo, in a dignified pose, is holding his lyre and looking down at Marsyas with disdain, who, tied to a tree with his hands behind his back, awaits the fitting punishment for his foolishness. The young Scythian tasked with carrying out the sentence kneels before Apollo, seemingly begging for mercy. The god's quiver and arrows hang from one of the tree's branches, while in the foreground lie the instruments that led the satyr to his unfortunate fate.
It is known that Nero had the folly to imagine himself the first musician of his time, and in selecting this subject he doubtless intended to get rid of all competition, by deterring those who might otherwise have felt disposed to enter the lists with him. Perhaps he was looking at his left hand, and assuming Apollo for his model, when he had the singer Menedemus, of whom he was jealous, flayed, as it were, with whipping, in his presence, whose yells of agony seemed to the emperor so melodious that he warmly applauded. Lorenzo’s feeling with regard to the gem was, doubtless, of a very different character: he selected the stone on account of its marvellous beauty of execution.
It’s known that Nero foolishly thought of himself as the best musician of his time, and by choosing this topic, he likely aimed to eliminate any competition by scaring off anyone who might have wanted to challenge him. He might have been looking at his left hand, modeling himself after Apollo, when he had the singer Menedemus—who he was jealous of—flogged in front of him, thinking the man’s screams of pain sounded so beautiful that he applauded enthusiastically. Lorenzo’s feelings about the gem, however, were likely very different: he chose the stone because of its incredible craftsmanship.
Among the art treasures, in connection with rings and camei in the British Museum, the Rev. C. W. King notices a cameo with a lion passant, in low relief in the red layer of a sardonyx, exquisitely finished, which has its value greatly enhanced by the ‘Lavr. Med.’ cut in the field, attesting that it once belonged to the original cabinet of Lorenzo de’ Medici. This stone, set in a ring, has its face[Pg 472] protected by a glass; a proof of the estimation in which its former possessor held it.
Among the art treasures, related to rings and cameos in the British Museum, Rev. C. W. King points out a cameo featuring a lion in profile, intricately carved in low relief on a red layer of sardonyx. Its value is notably increased by the ‘Lavr. Med.’ inscription in the background, indicating that it once belonged to the original collection of Lorenzo de’ Medici. This stone, set in a ring, has its face[Pg 472] protected by glass, demonstrating the high regard in which its previous owner held it.
Ring Device of Cosmo de’ Medici.
Ring Device of Cosmo de' Medici.
Cosmo de’ Medici had for device three diamonds on rings, intertwined emblems of excellency, superiority, and endurance.
Cosmo de' Medici had three diamonds on rings as his symbol, representing excellence, superiority, and endurance.
Ring Device of Lorenzo de’ Medici.
Ring Device of Lorenzo de' Medici.
Lorenzo de’ Medici had a ring with a diamond; a plume of three colours, green, white, and red, to signify[Pg 473] that in loving God he displayed three virtues: the white plume representing faith; the green, hope; the red, charity. Pope Leo X. adopted this device.
Lorenzo de’ Medici had a ring with a diamond and a plume of three colors: green, white, and red. This represented[Pg 473] that in loving God, he showed three virtues: the white plume stood for faith, the green for hope, and the red for charity. Pope Leo X adopted this symbol.
Pietro de’ Medici had a falcon holding a diamond-ring in its claws, signifying that everything should be done to please God.
Pietro de’ Medici had a falcon gripping a diamond ring in its talons, symbolizing that everything should be done to honor God.
Ring Device of Pietro de’ Medici.
Ring Device of Pietro de' Medici.
In the Staunton collection of antiquities (Longbridge House, near Warwick) is a remarkable ring, which is described (with illustrations) in the ‘Archæological Journal’ (vol. iv. p. 358). It is a beautiful gold signet-ring, found, about the year 1825, in the ruins of Kenilworth Castle, by a person named Faulkner, who was in the constant habit of searching among the rubbish with the expectation of making some valuable discovery. Its weight is 4 dwts. 10 grs. The impress is very singular; under a crown appear the numerals 87, of the forms usually designated as Arabic, of which no example has been noticed in this country, except in MSS. prior to the fifteenth century. Above the crown are the letters s and h; lower down on one side[Pg 474] is seen the letter a, and on the other m. Various interpretations of this remarkable device have been suggested: it has been supposed that it might have reference to the coronation of Elizabeth, Queen of Henry VII., solemnised at Westminster, A.D. 1487, or have been connected with the enterprise of Lambert Simnel, which occurred during that year at the instigation of Margaret, Duchess of Burgundy. Mr. Hawkins considers its age to have been about the reign of Edward IV., the crown with fleur-de-lys ornaments, and the form of the m being of similar character to those on his coins; a similar type of crown may, however, be found in earlier times, as shown by the great seals and other authorities as early even as the reign of Richard II. The letters have been supposed to be the initials of a sentence such as ‘Sancta virgo adjuva me’ (the second letter being read as h) or, supposing the ring to be referred to the times of Henry VII., ‘Sigillum,’ or ‘secretum, Henrici, anno (14) 87. Mh.’ The most probable explanation, however, appears to have been proposed by Mr. John Gough Nichols: that the ring, which is of a size suited to a lady’s finger, might have been a betrothal or wedding present; the initials s.h. and a.m. being those of the two parties, the Arabic numerals indicating the date 1487, and the crown being merely ornamental, frequently used during the fifteenth century on seals by persons not entitled by rank to use them.
In the Staunton collection of antiquities (Longbridge House, near Warwick) is a remarkable ring, which is described (with illustrations) in the ‘Archaeological Journal’ (vol. iv. p. 358). It is a beautiful gold signet ring found around 1825 in the ruins of Kenilworth Castle by a person named Faulkner, who regularly searched through the debris hoping to make a valuable discovery. It weighs 4 dwts. 10 grs. The design is very unusual; under a crown are the numerals 87, in forms typically referred to as Arabic, which have not been recorded in this country except in manuscripts before the fifteenth century. Above the crown are the letters s and h; lower down on one side[Pg 474] is the letter a, and on the other m. Various interpretations of this unique design have been suggested: it has been thought that it could relate to the coronation of Elizabeth, Queen of Henry VII, held at Westminster in CE 1487, or could be connected with Lambert Simnel's campaign, which took place that year at the urging of Margaret, Duchess of Burgundy. Mr. Hawkins believes its age to be around the reign of Edward IV, as the crown with fleur-de-lys decorations and the style of the m resemble those found on his coins; however, a similar crown type can be seen in earlier periods, as evidenced by great seals and other records dating back even to the reign of Richard II. The letters have been thought to represent the initials of a phrase like ‘Sancta virgo adjuva me’ (with the second letter interpreted as h) or, if the ring is linked to the time of Henry VII, ‘Sigillum’ or ‘secretum, Henrici, anno (14) 87. Mh.’ The most likely explanation, however, seems to be proposed by Mr. John Gough Nichols: that the ring, which is sized for a woman’s finger, might have been a betrothal or wedding gift; the initials s.h. and AM representing the two individuals, the Arabic numerals indicating the year 1487, and the crown being purely decorative, commonly used during the fifteenth century on seals by individuals who were not entitled by rank to do so.
Ring found at Kenilworth Castle.
Ring discovered at Kenilworth Castle.
[Pg 475]The coronet, with an initial letter, adopted as a device on the seals or signet-rings of commoners, appears on numerous rings of the fifteenth century, as well as on seals appended to documents. It appears on another ring of later date in Mr. Staunton’s collection, of base metal gilt, found in Coleshill Church, Warwickshire. The device appears to be a crown placed upon a shaft or truncheon, resting on a heart, in base, with the initials of the wearer, I. G., at the sides.
[Pg 475]The coronet, featuring an initial letter, was used as a symbol on the seals or signet rings of commoners. It can be found on many rings from the fifteenth century, as well as on seals attached to documents. It also appears on a later ring in Mr. Staunton’s collection, made of gilded base metal, discovered in Coleshill Church, Warwickshire. The design seems to show a crown placed on top of a staff or baton, which rests on a heart at the base, displaying the initials of the wearer, I.G., on the sides.
At a meeting of the Society of Antiquaries (May 1875), Mr. Robert Day (Local Secretary for Ireland) exhibited a silver ring of fourteenth-century work, the hoop portion of which is formed of two hands, which grasp an octagonal signet that bears the centre device of a letter R crowned, with the motto ‘Bacchal,’ and a spray of roses in the border. ‘To illustrate this,’ remarks Mr. Day, ‘I send a small coin of base silver, having a similar crowned R on the obverse. These crowned letters recall the familiar lines of Chaucer, of
At a meeting of the Society of Antiquaries (May 1875), Mr. Robert Day (Local Secretary for Ireland) showcased a silver ring from the fourteenth century. The band features two hands that hold an octagonal signet, which displays a crowned letter R at its center, along with the motto ‘Bacchal’ and a border of rose sprays. Mr. Day notes, ‘To illustrate this, I have included a small coin made of low-grade silver, which has a similar crowned R on the front. These crowned letters remind us of the familiar lines of Chaucer, of
———a crowned A,
And after, Amor Vincit Omnia.
a crowned A,
And after, Love Conquers All.
The ring was dug up in a potato garden at Howth, near Dublin. The motto “Bacchal” I am unable to throw any light upon, except it be a contraction of Baccalaureus. On the rim is a star of six points, to show the position for sealing.’
The ring was found in a potato garden at Howth, near Dublin. The motto “Bacchal” is unclear to me, except it might be short for Baccalaureus. On the rim, there’s a six-pointed star, indicating the spot for sealing.
A ring-relic of Fotheringay, belonging to Mrs. Simpson, of Edinburgh, is of gold, set with a diamond cut in facets, with three smaller diamonds over it, representing a crowned heart. It is considered to have belonged to the unfortunate Mary, Queen of Scots.
A ring relic from Fotheringay, owned by Mrs. Simpson of Edinburgh, is made of gold and features a faceted diamond with three smaller diamonds above it, shaped like a crowned heart. It's thought to have once belonged to the tragic Mary, Queen of Scots.
A gold signet-ring, curious and interesting in several[Pg 476] respects, the property of Mr. James Neish, of the Laws, Dundee, was exhibited at a meeting of the Archæological Institute in May 1864, when the following particulars were given:—It was found about 1790, in digging the foundations of Heathfield House, on the Hawkhill, Dundee, formerly called the Sparrow Muir. The device (of which a representation is given in the ‘Archæological Journal,’ No. 82, 1864, p. 186) is a head, apparently regal, bearded, with the hair long at the sides; on the breast there is a mullet or star of five points introduced in scrolled ornament; around the edge is a corded bordure with knots at intervals like a cordelière, instead of the pearled margin usually found on seals. This knotted cincture is well known as worn by the Franciscans, thence designated as Cordeliers; as accessory to heraldic or personal ornaments, its use seems to have been first adopted by Anne of Brittany, after the death of Charles VIII., in 1498, as we are informed by Palliot and other writers. It has, however, sometimes been assigned to a rather earlier period. The hoop of Mr. Neish’s ring is plain and massive, the weight being 199 grains. The device is engraved with skill. It is difficult to tell whether the object worn on the head is intended for a crown or a helmet, with lateral projections resembling horns. Examples of helmets with cornute appendages, especially found in classical art, are not wanting in mediæval times. It has been suggested that the mullet on the breast may indicate some allusion to the heraldic bearing of the Douglas family, especially as the ring was discovered in the district of Angus, of which the earldom was conferred in 1377 on a branch of that noble race. Mr. Neish—to whom both this remarkable ring and also Heathfield House where it was found, belong—stated that he had[Pg 477] been informed by two persons that they remembered the discovery; one, moreover, said that Mr. Webster, of Heathfield House, to whom it formerly belonged, told him that the late Mr. Constable, of Wallace Craigie (the Monkbarns of the ‘Antiquary),’ had taken interest in the discovery, and having carried the ring to Edinburgh, he had found there in some depository a proclamation regarding the loss of a gold ring on Sparrow Muir, by a certain Allan Dorward, who had been employed by David, Earl of Huntingdon, brother of William the Lion, in building a church founded by the Earl at Dundee, and completed in 1198. The King, according to tradition, was so pleased with the builder’s work that he presented to him a ring, which Allan, being afterwards at a boar-hunt on the Sparrow Muir, had there lost, and he had offered a reward for its recovery, as made known in the proclamation before mentioned. This tradition has been related by Mr. Andrew Jervise, in his ‘Memorials of Angus and the Mearns,’ p. 178. According to another version the ring was asserted to have been given by David II. (A.D. 1329-70) to his master mason, and lost by him on the Sparrow Muir in the manner before related.
A gold signet ring, intriguing in several[Pg 476] ways, owned by Mr. James Neish of the Laws, Dundee, was showcased at a meeting of the Archaeological Institute in May 1864, where the following details were shared: It was discovered around 1790 while digging the foundations of Heathfield House on the Hawkhill, Dundee, previously known as Sparrow Muir. The design (depicted in the ‘Archaeological Journal,’ No. 82, 1864, p. 186) features a head that appears regal, bearded, with long hair on the sides; on the chest is a five-pointed star or mullet surrounded by a scrolled ornament. The edge has a corded border with knots at intervals like a cordelière, instead of the usual pearled margin found on seals. This knotted design is commonly associated with the Franciscans, hence called Cordeliers; its use as part of heraldic or personal ornaments seems to have first been adopted by Anne of Brittany after the death of Charles VIII in 1498, as noted by Palliot and others. However, it has sometimes been dated to a slightly earlier period. The band of Mr. Neish’s ring is plain and substantial, weighing 199 grains. The design is expertly engraved. It's hard to determine if the object worn on the head is meant to be a crown or a helmet with horn-like projections. Examples of helmets with horned features, particularly found in classical art, can also be seen in medieval times. It has been suggested that the mullet on the chest might refer to the heraldic symbol of the Douglas family, especially since the ring was found in Angus, where the earldom was granted in 1377 to a branch of that noble lineage. Mr. Neish—who owns both this remarkable ring and Heathfield House where it was discovered—stated that two people told him they remembered the finding; one even mentioned that Mr. Webster, of Heathfield House, the ring's previous owner, had told him that the late Mr. Constable, of Wallace Craigie (the Monkbarns of the ‘Antiquary’), showed interest in the discovery, and after taking the ring to Edinburgh, he found a proclamation there about the loss of a gold ring on Sparrow Muir, which belonged to a certain Allan Dorward, who had been hired by David, Earl of Huntingdon, brother of William the Lion, to build a church initiated by the Earl in Dundee, completed in 1198. According to tradition, the King was so impressed with the builder’s work that he gifted him a ring, which Allan later lost during a boar hunt on Sparrow Muir, leading him to offer a reward for its return, as announced in the aforementioned proclamation. This tradition was shared by Mr. Andrew Jervise in his ‘Memorials of Angus and the Mearns,’ p. 178. Another version of the story claims that the ring was given by David II. (C.E. 1329-70) to his master mason and was lost by him on Sparrow Muir in the manner previously described.
So much for tradition. The beautiful ring in Mr. Neish’s possession may possibly be assigned to the later part of the fourteenth century; the workmanship presents no feature of early character to justify the supposition that it was a gift from William the Lion. There is also the assurance of one of the most accurate and acute of Scottish antiquaries that no such document or ‘advertisement’ as is alleged to have been put forth by the loser of the ring is in existence; neither is there any record of any architect employed by David II., or by his father Robert I.
So much for tradition. The beautiful ring that Mr. Neish has may date back to the later part of the fourteenth century; the craftsmanship shows no signs of an earlier period to support the idea that it was a gift from William the Lion. There’s also confirmation from one of the most precise and insightful Scottish historians that no document or "advertisement" as claimed by the person who lost the ring exists; nor is there any record of an architect employed by David II or his father, Robert I.
The supposition seems to be that the ring may have[Pg 478] belonged to some person of the family of Douglas by whom St. Francis was held in special veneration, and that hence the cordelière was introduced upon it. There existed at Dundee a Franciscan convent, which appears to have received support from the Douglas family.
The assumption is that the ring might have[Pg 478] belonged to someone from the Douglas family, who especially revered St. Francis, and that's why the cordelière was included on it. There was a Franciscan convent in Dundee that seems to have received support from the Douglas family.
A relic of Flodden Field (1513), a ring, was found in 1783, on the site of the battle. It bore the following inscription in Norman-French: ‘On est mal loiauls amans qui se poet garder des maux disans’ (no lovers so faithful as to be able to guard themselves against evil-speakers). Between every two words, and at the beginning of each line, is a boar’s head. This being the crest of the Campbells, it is not improbable that the ring was that of the Argylls, and might have belonged to Archibald Campbell, the second Earl of Argyll, who was killed while commanding the van of the army at the fatal battle of Flodden Field,—
A relic from Flodden Field (1513), a ring, was discovered in 1783 at the battle site. It has the following inscription in Norman-French: ‘On est mal loiauls amans qui se poet garder des maux disans’ (no lovers so faithful as to be able to guard themselves against evil-speakers). Between every two words, and at the beginning of each line, is a boar’s head. Since this is the crest of the Campbells, it seems likely that the ring belonged to the Argylls and might have belonged to Archibald Campbell, the second Earl of Argyll, who was killed while leading the front of the army at the tragic battle of Flodden Field,—
Where shiver’d was fair Scotland’s spear,
And broken was her shield.
Where fair Scotland’s spear trembled,
And her shield was broken.
I have previously alluded to the signet-ring of Mary, Queen of Scots, in the British Museum. A few additional particulars of this celebrated relic will be interesting. It were now a fruitless task to seek to discover through what means this ring passed into the collection of the Queen of George III. It subsequently came into possession of the late Duke of York, and at the sale of his plate and jewels at Christie’s, in 1827, it was purchased for fourteen guineas.
I previously mentioned the signet ring of Mary, Queen of Scots, in the British Museum. A few more details about this famous relic will be intriguing. It would now be pointless to try to find out how this ring ended up in the collection of George III's queen. It later became the property of the late Duke of York, and at the auction of his silverware and jewels at Christie’s in 1827, it was bought for fourteen guineas.
This ring is massive, and weighs 212 grs.; the hoop has been chased with foliage and flowers, and enamelled, and appears to have been much worn; a few traces of the enamel remain. The impress is the royal achievement, engraved on a piece of crystal or white sapphire, of oval[Pg 479] form, measuring about three-quarters of an inch by five-eighths. The royal cognizance or the crest, on a helmet of mantlings, and ensigned with a crown, is a lion sejant affronté gu. crowned, holding in his dexter paw a naked sword, and in the sinister a sceptre, both erect and ppr. Above the crest appear the motto and the initials previously alluded to. The shield is surrounded by the collar of the Thistle, with the badge, and supported by unicorns chained and ducally gorged. On the dexter side there is a banner charged with the arms of Scotland; on the sinister another with three bars, over all a saltire. It is remarkable that the heraldic tinctures are represented on the back of the engraved stone, either by enamelling or painting, and the field or back-ground is coloured dark blue. This mode of ornamentation is found in some of the fine Italian works of the period.
This ring is huge and weighs 212 grams; the band has been decorated with leaves and flowers, and is enameled, showing signs of heavy wear; a few tiny traces of the enamel are still visible. The seal is the royal emblem, engraved on a piece of crystal or white sapphire, shaped like an oval[Pg 479], measuring about three-quarters of an inch by five-eighths. The royal symbol or crest is on a helmet with mantling, and topped with a crown, featuring a lion sitting face-on, crowned in gold, holding a naked sword in its right paw and a scepter in its left, both upright and in their natural colors. Above the crest are the motto and the initials mentioned earlier. The shield is surrounded by the collar of the Thistle, with its badge, and is supported by chained unicorns with crowns around their necks. On the right side, there’s a banner with the arms of Scotland; on the left side, another with three horizontal stripes, overlaid by a diagonal cross. Notably, the colors used in the heraldry are depicted on the back of the engraved stone, either through enameling or painting, with the background colored dark blue. This style of decoration is seen in some of the exquisite Italian works from that time.
Sir Thomas Hepburn has a gold ring traditionally regarded as having been worn by Queen Mary of Scotland. The hoop is enamelled black; the setting consists of six opals surrounding one of much larger size, presenting the appearance of a six-petalled flower.
Sir Thomas Hepburn has a gold ring that is traditionally believed to have been worn by Queen Mary of Scotland. The band is enameled black; the setting features six opals surrounding one much larger opal, resembling a six-petaled flower.
Apropos of Queen Mary’s assumption of the arms of England in defiance of Elizabeth, they are so engraved upon a signet-ring that belonged to the late Earl of Buchan, as certified upon the little boxes containing facsimiles of the seal, and sold to all sight-seers at Holyrood Palace. The arms of England and France are placed in the first and fourth quarter of the shield: those of Scotland in the second quarter, and those of Ireland in the third quarter.
Apropos of Queen Mary’s adoption of the arms of England in defiance of Elizabeth, they are engraved on a signet ring that belonged to the late Earl of Buchan, as confirmed on the small boxes containing replicas of the seal, which are sold to all visitors at Holyrood Palace. The arms of England and France are in the first and fourth quarters of the shield; those of Scotland are in the second quarter, and those of Ireland are in the third quarter.
A ring of very exquisite workmanship connected with the Seymour family, and in the possession of the Earl of Home, was exhibited at the Society of Antiquaries (April[Pg 480] 1864), and is an interesting historical relic. The body of the ring is made of mother-of-pearl, and on it is set an oval medallion, with a cipher ‘E. R.’ in relief, the E. being made of diamonds, the R. of blue enamel: on each side along the shank of the ring is a line of rubies set in gold. The medallion with the cipher opens, and discloses a recess in the mother-of-pearl with a bust in low relief, apparently a portrait of Jane Seymour, three-quarter face. The bust is made of gold, coloured with enamel or paint, and is set with a small diamond as a brooch. The inner surface of the lid with the cipher encloses a bust in profile of Queen Elizabeth in enamelled gold, with a ruby set as a brooch. Within the ring, and therefore at the back of the portrait of Jane Seymour, is a small oval plate of gold, ornamented with translucent enamel, and representing an earl’s coronet, over which is a phœnix in flames. The phœnix was a well-known badge of Queen Elizabeth, but it was also adopted as the crest of the Seymour family, to whom it must here be referred. Edward Seymour, eldest son of the Protector by his second wife, was created Earl of Hertford by Queen Elizabeth in 1559, and it is probable that the ring was made shortly after, before he lost the favour of the Queen through his marriage with Lady Catherine Grey.
A beautifully crafted ring associated with the Seymour family, currently owned by the Earl of Home, was displayed at the Society of Antiquaries (April[Pg 480] 1864) and serves as an intriguing historical artifact. The ring's band is made of mother-of-pearl, featuring an oval medallion with the cipher ‘E. R.’ raised in relief, where the E is made of diamonds and the R is in blue enamel. Each side of the ring’s shank has a line of rubies set in gold. The medallion with the cipher opens to reveal a recess in the mother-of-pearl showcasing a low-relief bust that seems to be a portrait of Jane Seymour, shown in three-quarters view. This bust is crafted from gold, colored with enamel or paint, and adorned with a small diamond as a brooch. The inner surface of the lid with the cipher contains a profile bust of Queen Elizabeth in enamelled gold, featuring a ruby set as a brooch. Inside the ring, behind the portrait of Jane Seymour, lies a small oval gold plate decorated with translucent enamel, depicting an earl’s coronet, above which is a phœnix in flames. The phœnix was a well-known symbol of Queen Elizabeth but was also adopted as the crest of the Seymour family. Edward Seymour, the eldest son of the Protector by his second wife, was made Earl of Hertford by Queen Elizabeth in 1559, and it’s likely that the ring was created shortly afterward, before he fell out of favor with the Queen due to his marriage to Lady Catherine Grey.
In ‘Archæologia,’ vol. xxxi., is a fine example of a weighty ring of fine gold, found in 1823 at Thetford, in Suffolk. The device which appears upon this ring is an eagle displayed; on the inner side is engraved a bird, with the wings closed, apparently a falcon, with a crown upon its head. The following posy, or motto, commencing on the outer side, is continued on the interior of the ring:—dens me ouroye de bous senir a gree—com moun coner desiri—‘God work for me to make suit acceptably to you, as my[Pg 481] heart desires.’ The devices appear to be heraldic, and the motto that of a lover, or a suitor to one in power. The eagle is the bearing of several ancient Suffolk families; it was also a badge of the House of Lancaster, and Thetford was one portion of the Duchy of Lancaster.
In ‘Archæologia,’ vol. xxxi., there's a great example of a heavy gold ring discovered in 1823 at Thetford, Suffolk. The design on this ring features an eagle spread wide; on the inner side, there is an engraving of a bird, possibly a falcon, with closed wings and a crown on its head. The following motto, starting on the outer side, continues on the inside of the ring:—Send me the gold of the ox to feel the breeze—like my heart desires.—‘God work for me to make my request acceptable to you, as my[Pg 481] heart desires.’ The designs seem to be heraldic, and the motto appears to belong to a lover or someone trying to win favor from a person of power. The eagle is the emblem of several ancient Suffolk families; it was also a symbol of the House of Lancaster, and Thetford was once part of the Duchy of Lancaster.
Heraldic ring.
Coat of arms ring.
In the ‘Revue Britannique’ for January 1869, the discovery was announced of the two wedding-rings interchanged between Martin Luther and Catherine von Bora, one of nine nuns, who, under the influence of his teaching, had emancipated themselves from their religious vows. She afterwards married Luther. The Revue states that the ring of the great Reformer is at Waldenburg, and the bride’s ring is now in Paris; that they are similar in composition, the latter being smaller. They are of silver gilt, with a figure of Christ upon the cross, and bear inside the same inscription, ‘D. Martino Luthero Catherinan Boren, 13 Juni, 1589.’ It is further stated that the bride’s ring belongs to a Protestant lady, Madame Michael Girod, and was purchased by her at an old store-shop in Geneva.
In the 'Revue Britannique' for January 1869, the discovery was announced of the two wedding rings exchanged between Martin Luther and Catherine von Bora, one of nine nuns who, inspired by his teachings, freed themselves from their religious vows. She later married Luther. The Revue mentions that the ring of the great Reformer is in Waldenburg, while the bride’s ring is now in Paris; both are similar in composition, although the bride’s is smaller. They are made of gold-plated silver, featuring a figure of Christ on the cross, and have the same inscription inside, ‘D. Martino Luthero Catherinan Boren, 13 Juni, 1589.’ It is also noted that the bride’s ring belongs to a Protestant woman, Madame Michael Girod, who bought it at an antique shop in Geneva.
Supposed betrothal ring of Martin Luther.
Supposed engagement ring of Martin Luther.
[Pg 482]Considerable doubts exist, however, as to the authenticity of these rings, a writer in ‘Notes and Queries’ pointing out an evident mistake in the date, and the inscription on the bride’s ring ‘D. Martino Luthero Catherinan Boren:’ not meaning ‘Dr. Martin Luther to Catherinan Boren’ but the reverse. Another correspondent of the same work mentions that ‘Luther’ rings were made for a jubilee at Leipsic in 1825.
[Pg 482]There are significant doubts about the authenticity of these rings. A writer in 'Notes and Queries' pointed out a clear mistake in the date, and the inscription on the bride’s ring ‘D. Martino Luthero Catherinan Boren’ does not mean ‘Dr. Martin Luther to Catherinan Boren,’ but rather the opposite. Another contributor to the same publication notes that ‘Luther’ rings were created for a jubilee in Leipsic in 1825.
Betrothment ring
of Martin Luther.
Engagement ring of Martin Luther.
Mr. H. Noel Humphreys, an eminent authority on these subjects, states (‘Intellectual Observer,’ February 1862): ‘The betrothment-ring of Luther, which belonged to a family at Leipsic as late as 1817, and is doubtless still preserved with the greatest care as a national relic of great interest, is composed of an intricate device of gold-work set with a ruby, the emblem of exalted love. The gold devices represent all the symbols of the “Passion.” In the centre is the crucified Saviour: on one side the spear, with which the side was pierced, and the rod of reeds of the flagellation. On the other is a leaf of hyssop. Beneath are the dies with which the soldiers cast lots for the garment without seam, and below are the three nails. At the back may be distinguished the inside of the ladder, and other symbols connected with the last act of the Atonement; the whole so grouped as to make a large cross, surmounted by the ruby, the most salient feature of the device. On the inside of the ring the inscriptions are still perfect. They contain the names of the betrothed pair, and the date of the wedding-day in German, “der 13 Junij 1525.” This was the ring presented to the wife at the betrothal, and worn by her after the marriage. The marriage-ring worn by Luther[Pg 483] after his marriage was still more intricate in its structure. It is an ingeniously contrived double-ring, every intricacy of structure having its point and meaning. In the first place, though the double-ring can be divided, so as to form two complete rings, yet they cannot be separated from each other, as the one passing through the other causes them to remain permanently interlaced, as an emblem of the marriage vow, though still forming two perfect rings; illustrating also the motto engraved within them, “Was Got zussamen füget soll Kein Mensch Scheiden”—what God doth join no man shall part. On the one hoop is a diamond, the emblem of power, duration, and fidelity; and on the inside of its raised mounting, which, when joined to the other hoop, will be concealed, are the initials of Martin Luther, followed by a D., marking his academic title. On the corresponding surface of the mounting of the gem of the other hoop are the initials of his wife, Catherine von Bora, which, on the closing of the rings, necessarily lies close to those of Luther. The gem in this side of the ring is a ruby, the emblem of exalted love; so that the names of Catherine and Luther are closely united, when the rings are closed, beneath the emblems of exalted love, power, duration, and fidelity.
Mr. H. Noel Humphreys, a well-known expert on these topics, states (‘Intellectual Observer,’ February 1862): ‘The betrothal ring of Luther, which belonged to a family in Leipzig as recently as 1817, is likely still preserved with great care as a national treasure of significant interest. It features an intricate gold design set with a ruby, symbolizing deep love. The gold designs depict all the symbols of the “Passion.” In the center is the crucified Savior: on one side is the spear that pierced his side and the rod of reeds used during the flagellation. On the other side is a hyssop leaf. Below are the dice used by the soldiers to cast lots for the seamless garment, and below are the three nails. At the back, you can see the inside of the ladder and other symbols related to the final act of the Atonement, all arranged to create a large cross topped by the ruby, which is the most striking feature of the design. Inside the ring, the inscriptions are still intact. They include the names of the engaged couple and the date of their wedding in German, “der 13 Junij 1525.” This was the ring given to the wife at the betrothal, and she wore it after the marriage. The marriage ring that Luther wore[Pg 483] after the wedding was even more complex in its design. It’s a cleverly crafted double ring, with each detail having its significance. Although the double ring can be separated into two complete rings, they cannot be fully detached from each other, as one ring passes through the other and keeps them permanently intertwined, symbolizing the marriage vow while still being two distinct rings; this also illustrates the motto engraved within them, “Was Got zussamen füget soll Kein Mensch Scheiden”—what God has joined together, no one should separate. One hoop features a diamond, symbolizing strength, permanence, and loyalty; and on the inside of its raised setting, which is concealed when joined to the other hoop, are the initials of Martin Luther, followed by a D., signifying his academic title. On the corresponding surface of the gem setting of the other hoop are the initials of his wife, Catherine von Bora, which are placed close to Luther’s initials when the rings are joined. The gem on this side of the ring is a ruby, symbolizing profound love; therefore, the names of Catherine and Luther are closely connected when the rings come together, beneath the symbols of exalted love, strength, permanence, and loyalty.
Marriage ring of Martin Luther.
Martin Luther's wedding ring.
‘There can be but little doubt that these curious and interesting rings were designed by the celebrated painter and[Pg 484] goldsmith, Lucas Cranach, and possibly wrought with his own hand, the marriage of his friend Luther being a special occasion which he doubtless wished to honour with every attention. Lucas was, indeed, one of the three select friends whom Luther took to witness his betrothal; the others being Dr. Bugenhagen, town preacher of Wittenberg, and the lawyer Assel, who all accompanied him to Reichenbach’s house, where Catherine resided.’
There’s very little doubt that these intriguing rings were created by the famous painter and goldsmith, Lucas Cranach, possibly even crafted by his own hand, as the marriage of his friend Luther was a special occasion he surely wanted to celebrate with great care. Lucas was, in fact, one of the three close friends whom Luther invited to witness his engagement; the others were Dr. Bugenhagen, the town preacher of Wittenberg, and the lawyer Assel, who all went with him to Reichenbach’s house, where Catherine lived.
Among the numerous articles of Shakspearian interest presented to the Shakspeare Library and Museum at Stratford, by Miss Anne Wheler, the surviving sister of the historian of Stratford-on-Avon, the late Mr. Robert Bell Wheler, is a gold signet-ring described as Shakspeare’s, having the initials ‘W. S.’ a true lover’s knot entwined between them.
Among the many items of Shakespearian interest donated to the Shakespeare Library and Museum in Stratford by Miss Anne Wheler, the surviving sister of the historian of Stratford-on-Avon, the late Mr. Robert Bell Wheler, is a gold signet ring identified as Shakespeare’s, featuring the initials ‘W. S.’ with a true lover’s knot intertwined between them.
Shakspeare’s ring (?).
Shakespeare's ring (?).
An account of the discovery of the ring appeared in the ‘Guide to Stratford-on-Avon,’ by Mr. Wheler, published in 1814, from which it appears that the ring was found four years previously by a labourer’s wife upon the surface of the mill close adjoining Stratford churchyard. ‘I purchased it on the same day,’ observes Mr. Wheler, ‘for thirty-six shillings (the current value of the gold), yet the woman had sufficient time to destroy the precious ærugo by having it unnecessarily immersed in aquafortis, to ascertain and prove the metal, at a silversmith’s shop. It is of tolerably large dimensions (weighing 12 dwts.), and evidently a gentleman’s[Pg 485] ring of Elizabeth’s age.’ To prove the authenticity of the ring, Mr. Wheler made many efforts to discover whether there existed anywhere Shakspeare’s seal attached to letter or other writings, but ineffectually. ‘From a close observation of the ring,’ adds Mr. Wheler, ‘I should be inclined to suppose that it was made in the early part of the poet’s life. Mr. Malone, in a conversation I had with him in London, said he had nothing to allege against the probability of my conjecture as to its owner.’
An account of the discovery of the ring can be found in the ‘Guide to Stratford-on-Avon,’ by Mr. Wheler, published in 1814. It states that the ring was found four years earlier by a laborer’s wife on the surface of the mill near Stratford churchyard. ‘I bought it on that same day,’ Mr. Wheler notes, ‘for thirty-six shillings (the current value of the gold), yet the woman had enough time to ruin the precious ærugo by unnecessarily dipping it in aquafortis to check and prove the metal at a silversmith’s shop. It’s fairly large (weighing 12 dwts.) and clearly a gentleman’s[Pg 485] ring from Elizabeth’s era.’ To validate the ring's authenticity, Mr. Wheler made many attempts to find any letters or writings that had Shakespeare’s seal attached, but he was unsuccessful. ‘From a close examination of the ring,’ Mr. Wheler adds, ‘I would tend to believe that it was made in the early part of the poet’s life. Mr. Malone, during a conversation I had with him in London, said he had no reason to dispute the likelihood of my guess about its owner.’
No positive proof, however, according to Mr. Wheler’s own admission, can be adduced as to the authenticity of the ring having belonged to Shakspeare, but the very probability gives an interest to it, which most persons who inspect it will feel.
No solid evidence, however, according to Mr. Wheler’s own admission, can be put forward to prove that the ring belonged to Shakespeare, but the mere possibility adds a level of interest that most people who see it will appreciate.
‘Is it Shakspeare’s?’ remarks Mr. Fairholt. ‘It is evidently a gentleman’s ring, and of the poet’s era. It is just such a ring as a man in his station would fittingly wear—gentlemanly, but not pretentious. There was but one other person in the small town of Stratford at that time to whom the same initials belonged. This was one William Smith, but his seal is attached to several documents preserved among the records of the corporation, and is totally different.’ [He was a draper; and his seal has a device upon it consisting of a skull with a bone in the mouth; the letters ‘W. S.’ are under it, and very small. This ring was, most probably, of silver. It is unlikely that a small trader like Smith should wear a heavy gold ring, like this which claims to be Shakspeare’s.] Mr. Halliwell, in his ‘Life of Shakspeare,’ observes, that ‘little doubt can be entertained that this ring belonged to the poet, and, it is, probably, the one he lost before his death, and was not to be found when his will was executed, the word hand being substituted for that of seal[Pg 486] in the original copy of that document.’ [The concluding words of the will are, ‘in witness whereof I have hereunto put my seale,’ the last word being struck through with a pen, and hand substituted.]
‘Is it Shakespeare's?’ says Mr. Fairholt. ‘It’s clearly a gentleman’s ring from the poet’s time. It’s just the kind of ring a man of his status would wear—classy, but not showy. There was only one other person in the small town of Stratford at that time who had the same initials. That was William Smith, but his seal is attached to several documents kept among the corporation records, and it’s completely different.’ [He was a draper; his seal features a design of a skull with a bone in its mouth, and the letters ‘W. S.’ are underneath it, and very small. This ring was probably made of silver. It’s unlikely that a small trader like Smith would wear a heavy gold ring like this one that’s said to belong to Shakespeare.] Mr. Halliwell, in his ‘Life of Shakespeare,’ notes that ‘there’s little doubt this ring belonged to the poet, and it’s probably the one he lost before his death, which couldn’t be found when his will was carried out, leading to the word hand being used instead of seal[Pg 486] in the original version of that document.’ [The last words of the will are, ‘in witness whereof I have hereunto put my seale,’ with the last word crossed out with a pen, and hand written in its place.]
In the ‘Gentleman’s Magazine’ (May 1810) we find: ‘For further confirmation of circumstances we may observe over the porch leading into the gate of Charlecote Hall, near Stratford-on-Avon, erected in the early part of Elizabeth’s reign by the very Sir Thomas Lucy who is said to have prosecuted Shakspeare, the letters “T. L.” connected in a manner precisely similar to that on the ring.’
In the 'Gentleman's Magazine' (May 1810), we find: 'To further confirm the details, we can see above the porch leading into the gate of Charlecote Hall, near Stratford-on-Avon, built in the early part of Queen Elizabeth's reign by the same Sir Thomas Lucy who is said to have prosecuted Shakespeare, the letters “T. L.” connected in a way that is exactly like the one on the ring.'
Initials of Sir Thomas Lucy
at Charlecote Hall.
Initials of Sir Thomas Lucy
at Charlecote Hall.
The crossing of the centre lines of the W., with the oblique direction of the lines of the S., exactly agree with the characters of that day. For proof, we need wander no farther than Stratford Church, where the Cloptons’ and Totness’ tombs will furnish representations of rings, and Shakspeare’s monument of letters, exactly corresponding in point of shape. The connection or union of the letters, by the ornamental strings and tassels, was then frequently used, of which we may meet with numerous instances upon seals of that period.
The crossing of the center lines of the W., along with the angled direction of the lines of the S., perfectly matches the features of that day. For evidence, we don’t have to look any further than Stratford Church, where the Cloptons’ and Totness’ tombs provide images of rings, and Shakespeare’s monument features letters that match in shape. The connection or union of the letters, tied together with decorative strings and tassels, was commonly used, and we can find many examples of this on seals from that time.
In the life of Haydon the painter we have the following letter from him to Keats (March 1, 1818): ‘My dear Keats, I shall go mad! In a field at Stratford-upon-Avon, that belonged to Shakspeare, they have found a gold ring and seal with the initials “W. S.” and a true lover’s knot between. If this is not Shakspeare’s whose is it?—a true lover’s knot! I saw an impression to-day and am to have one as soon as possible: as sure as you breathe and that he was the first of beings the seal belonged to him.
In the life of Haydon the painter, we have this letter from him to Keats (March 1, 1818): ‘My dear Keats, I think I’m going to lose my mind! In a field at Stratford-upon-Avon, which used to belong to Shakespeare, they found a gold ring and seal with the initials “W. S.” and a true lover’s knot in between. If this isn’t Shakespeare’s, then whose is it?—a true lover’s knot! I saw an impression today and will get one as soon as I can: as sure as you’re alive and that he was the first of beings, the seal belonged to him.
‘O Lord!’ ‘B. R. Haydon.’
‘Oh Lord!’ ‘B. R. Haydon.’
[Pg 487]The ring of Sir Walter Raleigh, which he wore at the time of his execution, is, according to the statement in ‘Notes and Queries’ of a descendant of that truly ‘great’ man, in the possession of a member of the Blanckley family, being a heir-loom, the Blanckleys being directly descended from Sir Walter, and having several interesting relics of their distinguished ancestor.
[Pg 487]The ring of Sir Walter Raleigh, which he wore at the time of his execution, is said, according to a descendant of that truly ‘great’ man in ‘Notes and Queries,’ to be held by a member of the Blanckley family. This ring is an heirloom, as the Blanckleys are directly descended from Sir Walter and have several interesting relics from their distinguished ancestor.
Octavius Morgan, Esq., F.R.S., F.S.A., exhibited at a meeting of the Society of Antiquaries (February 1857) a rare and curious ‘Trinity’ ring, turned out of one piece of ivory, and belonging to the latter part of the seventeenth century. It is formed by a single band of ivory, making three circuits, so intertwined with one another as not to touch, and thus forming a threefold ring. ‘Its curiosity is great,’ remarked Mr. Morgan, ‘because these rings were only made by one person; so much art and skill were required in the making that they were the wonder of the time, and no one at the present day knows by what contrivance they were turned, or how they could now be made. The interest consists in having ascertained the maker of the ring, which I by chance met with some years ago in this city.... We find from Doppelmayer that Stephan Zick (born 1639), the artist to whom I attribute this ring, was descended from a Nuremberg family long famous for their skill in this art.... Doppelmayer, describing some of the wonderful objects which he produced, says, the work which most distinguished him was his Trinity rings. Of these he made only three; the two first were in the Museums of Vienna and Dresden, and the third became the property of an amateur collector of curiosities in Nuremberg as a wonderful work of art and skill. This was written in 1730. On comparing this ring with the engraving in Doppelmayer, it exactly corresponds. The little box turned as a case for it shows how it was cared[Pg 488] for, and is indicative of the period when it was made. We also learn from Doppelmayer that these Trinity rings seem to have been first made in gold by a jeweller of Nuremberg, Johan Heel, about 1670, and he describes them as consisting of a single piece of wire, forming a three-fold circuit, each circuit skilfully intertwined with the other two so as not to touch each other, the ends being so cleverly united that the point of juncture could not be discovered. Thus there were three rings in one, and hence the name. The inventor of these ingenious rings is not known, but it is considered to be a Jesuit, named Scherern, about 1660. It certainly required great skill to have turned such a ring out of one piece of ivory, a work which I believe it is not possible to accomplish with any machinery now in use. The inference I draw from the foregoing is, that if Stephan Zick alone could make these rings of ivory—if he only made three, and that if one of these is at Vienna, and another at Dresden, I must now be the fortunate possessor of the third.’
Octavius Morgan, Esq., F.R.S., F.S.A., presented a rare and interesting ‘Trinity’ ring at a meeting of the Society of Antiquaries in February 1857. This ring, carved from a single piece of ivory, dates back to the late seventeenth century. It consists of one continuous band of ivory that forms three loops, intricately intertwined without touching each other, creating a threefold ring. “Its uniqueness is impressive,” noted Mr. Morgan, “because these rings were crafted by only one person; the artistry and skill involved were remarkable for their time, and no one today knows how they were shaped or could replicate them. The notable aspect here is that we have identified the maker of this ring, who I happened to come across a few years ago in this city. According to Doppelmayer, the artist I believe made this ring is Stephan Zick (born 1639), who came from a Nuremberg family renowned for their expertise in this craft. Doppelmayer mentions several of Zick’s remarkable creations, stating that his most distinguished work was his Trinity rings. He made only three; the first two are in the Museums of Vienna and Dresden, while the third ended up with a collector of curiosities in Nuremberg as an amazing piece of art. This was noted in 1730. When I compare this ring with the engraving by Doppelmayer, they match perfectly. The small box crafted to hold it indicates how much care was taken of it and suggests the era it was made in. Doppelmayer also tells us that the first Trinity rings were probably made in gold by a Nuremberg jeweler named Johan Heel around 1670, describing them as a single piece of wire twisted into three loops, with each loop skillfully interwoven so they don’t touch, and the ends joined so well that the point of connection is undetectable. Thus, there are three rings in one, which gives it its name. The inventor of these clever rings is unknown, but he is thought to be a Jesuit named Scherern from around 1660. It definitely took exceptional skill to carve such a ring from one piece of ivory, which I believe cannot be done with any current machinery. The conclusion I draw from all this is that if Stephan Zick was the only one who could create these ivory rings—if he made only three, and with one in Vienna and another in Dresden, then I must be the lucky owner of the third.”
Ivory-turned rings.
Ivory rings.
(The greatest progress in ivory-carving was made in Flanders, Holland, and Germany, about the middle of the sixteenth century. There are in the museums of Munich, Vienna, and Berlin, a quantity of ivory vases, etc., covered with exquisite carvings.—Labarte.)
(The greatest progress in ivory carving was made in Flanders, Holland, and Germany around the mid-sixteenth century. Museums in Munich, Vienna, and Berlin have a collection of ivory vases and other items featuring exquisite carvings.—Labarte.)
Mr. Edwards, in his ‘History and Poetry of Finger-rings,’ mentions, and gives an illustration of, a ring that may well claim a place among remarkable specimens. It is a gigantic ring, presented in 1852, by some citizens of[Pg 489] California to President Pierce. The description of this golden monster is given from Gleason’s ‘Pictorial Newspaper’ (December 25, 1852): ‘It weighs upwards of a full pound, and for chasteness of design, elegance of execution, and high style of finish, has, perhaps, no equal in the world. The design is by Mr. George Blake, a mechanic of San Francisco. The circular portion of the ring is cut into squares, which stand at right angles to each other, and are embellished each with a beautifully executed design, the entire group representing a pictorial history of California, from her primitive state down to her present flourishing condition, under the flag of our Union.
Mr. Edwards, in his ‘History and Poetry of Finger-rings,’ talks about and shows a picture of a ring that really deserves attention among extraordinary examples. It’s a huge ring, given in 1852 by some citizens of[Pg 489] California to President Pierce. The description of this golden giant comes from Gleason’s ‘Pictorial Newspaper’ (December 25, 1852): ‘It weighs over a full pound, and for simplicity of design, elegance in craftsmanship, and high-quality finish, it likely has no equal in the world. The design was created by Mr. George Blake, a mechanic from San Francisco. The circular part of the ring is cut into squares that are arranged at right angles to each other, and each square is beautifully decorated, with the whole collection depicting a visual history of California, from its early days to its current thriving state under our Union’s flag.
‘Thus, there is given a grizzly bear in a menacing attitude, a deer bounding down a slope, an enraged boa, a soaring eagle, and a salmon. Then we have the Indian with his bow and arrow, the primitive weapon of self-defence; the native mountaineer on horseback, and a Californian on horseback, throwing his lasso. Next peeps out a Californian tent. Then you see a miner at work with his pick, the whole being shaded by two American flags, with the staves crossed and groups of stars in the angles. The part of the ring reserved for the seal is covered by a solid and deeply carved plate of gold, bearing the arms of the State of California in the centre, surmounted by the banner and stars of the United States, and inscribed with “Frank Pierce” in old Roman characters. This lid opens upon a hinge, and presents to view, underneath, a square box, divided by bars of gold into nine separate compartments, each containing a pure specimen of the varieties of one found in the country. Upon the inside is the following inscription: “Presented to Franklin Pierce, the Fourteenth President of the United States.”
‘So, there’s a grizzly bear in a threatening pose, a deer leaping down a slope, an angry boa, a soaring eagle, and a salmon. Then we see the Native American with his bow and arrow, the basic weapon for self-defense; the native mountain rider on horseback, and a Californian on horseback, tossing his lasso. Next, a Californian tent appears. Then, you notice a miner at work with his pick, all under the shade of two crossed American flags, with groups of stars in the corners. The part of the ring set aside for the seal is covered by a solid, deeply carved gold plate, featuring the arms of the State of California in the center, topped by the banner and stars of the United States, and inscribed with “Frank Pierce” in old Roman lettering. This lid opens on a hinge, revealing a square box beneath, divided by gold bars into nine separate compartments, each holding a pure specimen of the varieties found in the country. Inside, it has the following inscription: “Presented to Franklin Pierce, the Fourteenth President of the United States.”
[Pg 490]‘The ring is valued at two thousand dollars. Altogether, it is a massive and superb affair, rich in emblematical design and illustration, and worthy its object.’
[Pg 490]“The ring is worth two thousand dollars. Overall, it’s an impressive and beautiful piece, filled with symbolic design and detail, and deserving of its purpose.”
In the collection of Lord Braybrooke is the ring of Tippoo Saib, which is thus described in the catalogue: ‘This magnificent jewel has a plain gold hoop, with the entire surface set with rubies; on the centre is perched a large bird, apparently intended for a hawk, made of gold and beautifully executed, with the plumage composed completely of precious stones, the diamond, emerald, ruby, and sapphire. A better idea of the splendour of this ornament will be formed from a description of the bird. Length from the base of the bill to the end of the tail, 3¼ inches; girth round the body, 3¼ inches; width across the scapulars, 1½ inch; width across the tail, three-quarters of an inch; height 1⅛ inch. In the beak are two small ruby-drops, a single emerald in the crest, and rubies for the eyes; a single row of nine sapphires encircles the throat, and 139 rubies, including those on the hoop, 14 in number, with 29 diamonds, some of them very large, and all set flat, cover the rest of the neck, breast, back, and tail. Several gems beside have been lost from their setting. Across the belly, behind the legs, is an inscription in some Indian characters, which has not yet been explained beyond the following remarks upon it in a letter addressed by the (late) A. Way Esq., who copied it, to Lady Braybrooke: “The characters are a corruption of the ordinary Sanscrit, that is, I suppose, some local variety or peculiarity of a dialect in Tippoo’s district; they appear to signify certain titles of the great chief, commencing with a portion of his proper style, ‘Maha ra jah,’ sufficient to show that the inscription relates only to the name of Tippoo Saib. This is all that I can at present[Pg 491] offer in regard to your highly curious jewel.—Nov. 24, 1848.” This unique and interesting ring was brought from India by some one in the army, at the time of the capture of Seringapatam, 1792, under the first Marquis Cornwallis, and presented to his family, by whom it has been preserved and descended as an heirloom through his eldest grandchild, the late Lady Braybrooke. It was stated at the time of its presentation that Tippoo was in the habit of wearing it when he went out hawking, perhaps only when he did so in state. Weight of the whole 2 oz. 6 dwts. 7 grs.’
In Lord Braybrooke's collection is Tippoo Saib's ring, described in the catalogue as follows: ‘This stunning jewel features a simple gold band with the entire surface adorned with rubies; at the center sits a large bird, seemingly meant to be a hawk, crafted from gold and beautifully detailed, with its feathers made entirely of precious stones—diamond, emerald, ruby, and sapphire. A clearer picture of the grandeur of this ornament comes from the following details about the bird's dimensions. Length from the base of the beak to the end of the tail is 3¼ inches; circumference around the body is 3¼ inches; width at the shoulders is 1½ inch; width across the tail is three-quarters of an inch; height is 1⅛ inch. The beak holds two small ruby drops, a single emerald in the crest, and rubies for the eyes; a single row of nine sapphires encircles the throat, while 139 rubies, including 14 on the band, along with 29 diamonds—some quite large, all set flat—cover the rest of the neck, chest, back, and tail. Several gems, however, have fallen out of their settings. On the belly, behind the legs, is an inscription in some Indian script, which has yet to be fully translated, apart from the following notes from a letter written by the (late) A. Way Esq., who copied it for Lady Braybrooke: “The characters are a variation of the standard Sanscrit; they likely represent some local dialect unique to Tippoo's area and seem to indicate certain titles of the great chief, starting with part of his proper title, ‘Maha ra jah,’ which shows that the inscription pertains specifically to Tippoo Saib's name. This is all I can currently[Pg 491] share about your fascinating jewel.—Nov. 24, 1848.” This distinctive and captivating ring was brought from India by someone in the army during the capture of Seringapatam in 1792, under the first Marquis Cornwallis, and was given to his family, who preserved it as an heirloom through his eldest grandchild, the late Lady Braybrooke. It was mentioned at the time of its presentation that Tippoo wore it when he went hawking, likely only during formal outings. Total weight is 2 oz. 6 dwts. 7 grs.’
The Baroness Burdett Coutts possesses a gold ring set with large green tourmaline. It is of Indian workmanship, and is said to have belonged to Tippoo Saib.
The Baroness Burdett Coutts owns a gold ring featuring a large green tourmaline. It's made in India and is said to have belonged to Tippoo Saib.
The Rev. C. W. King in his ‘Precious Stones, Gems, and Precious Metals,’ mentions ‘an unparalleled specimen of Oriental caprice and extravagance—a finger-ring cut out of a solid piece of emerald of remarkably pure quality, with two emerald drops and two collets set with rose diamonds, and ruby borders in Oriental mountings, formerly belonging to Jehanghir, son of Akbar, Emperor of Delhi, whose name is engraved on the ring. Diameter 1¼ × 1⅛ in. This ring was presented by Shah Soojah to the East India Company, and was purchased by the late Lord Auckland, when Governor-General of India. Now in the possession of the Hon. Miss Eden.’
The Rev. C. W. King in his ‘Precious Stones, Gems, and Precious Metals’ mentions ‘an unmatched example of Eastern flair and luxury—a finger ring carved from a solid piece of exceptionally pure emerald, featuring two emerald drops and two settings with rose-cut diamonds, along with ruby borders in Eastern designs, which once belonged to Jehanghir, son of Akbar, Emperor of Delhi, whose name is engraved on the ring. Diameter 1¼ × 1⅛ in. This ring was given to the East India Company by Shah Soojah and was bought by the late Lord Auckland when he was Governor-General of India. It is now owned by the Hon. Miss Eden.’
A wonderful ring was presented by the Great Mogul to the only envoy of the Emperor of Germany who ever visited his court. ‘The very first sight of this jewel,’ observes the Rev. C. W. King, ‘sufficed to convince one that it could have had no other origin than this, such a show of barbarian splendour did it exhibit, forming in itself a complete cabinet of every kind of precious stone of colour to be found in his[Pg 492] dominions. Its form was that of a wheel about three inches in diameter, composed of several concentric circles, joined together by the spokes radiating from the centre, in which was set a large round sapphire. The spokes at all their intersections with the circles, had collets soldered on them, each containing some coloured gem; in fact, every stone of value except the diamond occurred in this glorious company. On the back was fixed the shank, and when worn it covered the whole hand like some huge mushroom.’
A stunning ring was given by the Great Mogul to the only envoy from the Emperor of Germany who ever visited his court. “Just the first glance at this jewel,” notes Rev. C. W. King, “was enough to convince anyone that it could only have come from such a display of barbarian luxury. It showcased a complete collection of every kind of colored precious stone found in his[Pg 492] territories. Its shape was like a wheel about three inches in diameter, made up of several concentric circles connected by spokes radiating from the center, which held a large round sapphire. At each intersection of the spokes and circles, collets were soldered on, each containing a colored gem; indeed, every valuable stone except for diamonds was represented in this magnificent display. On the back, there was a shank, and when worn, it covered the entire hand like a giant mushroom.”
On the death of the late Cardinal York at Rome, amongst various relics of the house of Stuart, purchased for Lord John Scott, were the ring worn by the Pretender—James the Third, as he was styled abroad—on his marriage with the Princess Clementina Sobieski, and the marriage-ring of his son, Prince Charles Edward, enclosing a beautiful little miniature; a gold ring with a white rose in enamel, worn by King James the Second and his son; a ring with a cameo portrait in ivory of James the Second; a ring with a miniature portrait of Henry Stuart, Cardinal, Duke of York, when young; a ring with a cameo portrait, by the celebrated engraver Pickler, of James Sobieski, great-uncle of the Pretender’s wife; a ring with a cameo portrait, by the same artist, of the wife of Prince Charles Edward; also one with a cameo portrait of the Duchess of Albany, and another containing a lock of her hair.
On the death of the late Cardinal York in Rome, among various relics from the house of Stuart, which were purchased for Lord John Scott, were the ring worn by the Pretender—James the Third, as he was known abroad—during his marriage to Princess Clementina Sobieski, and the marriage ring of his son, Prince Charles Edward, which enclosed a beautiful miniature; a gold ring with a white rose in enamel, worn by King James the Second and his son; a ring with a cameo portrait in ivory of James the Second; a ring with a miniature portrait of Henry Stuart, Cardinal, Duke of York, as a young man; a ring with a cameo portrait, by the famous engraver Pickler, of James Sobieski, the great-uncle of the Pretender’s wife; a ring with a cameo portrait, by the same artist, of the wife of Prince Charles Edward; also one with a cameo portrait of the Duchess of Albany, and another containing a lock of her hair.
In the possession of R. H. Soden Smith, Esq., F.S.A., is a gold ring, having in the bezel a miniature of Prince James Stuart, the old Chevalier, set round with small crystals. English contemporary work.
In the possession of R. H. Soden Smith, Esq., F.S.A., is a gold ring, featuring a miniature of Prince James Stuart, the old Chevalier, surrounded by small crystals. English contemporary work.
Sir Watkin Williams Wynn possesses a gold ring, set with a ruby, surrounded by the Garter, crowned with the motto ‘Dieu et mon Droit’ on the hoop.
Sir Watkin Williams Wynn has a gold ring with a ruby, surrounded by the Garter, topped with the motto ‘Dieu et mon Droit’ on the band.
[Pg 493]This is an interesting family relic, having been a present from Prince Charles Edward.
[Pg 493]This is an intriguing family heirloom, given as a gift from Prince Charles Edward.
A signet-ring, believed to be the Council Seal of Queen Henrietta Maria, made by warrant, Sept. 6, 1626, is the property of Miss Hartshorne, and has a circular bezel, set with sapphire, engraved with escutcheon, bearing the arms of England surmounted by a crown, the letters M and R at the sides; on the shoulders is the rose of England in coloured enamel. Diameter of the ring 1⅛ in. This curious relic was exhibited at the Loan Exhibition of Ancient and Modern Jewellery at the South Kensington Museum in 1872.
A signet ring, thought to be the Council Seal of Queen Henrietta Maria, made by warrant on September 6, 1626, belongs to Miss Hartshorne. It has a circular bezel set with a sapphire, engraved with a shield that displays the arms of England topped with a crown, with the letters M and R on the sides. The shoulders feature the rose of England in colored enamel. The diameter of the ring is 1⅛ inches. This interesting relic was shown at the Loan Exhibition of Ancient and Modern Jewelry at the South Kensington Museum in 1872.
Mr. Octavius Morgan, F.R.S., F.S.A., has in his valuable collection of rings one formed with a diminutive squirt, which, being concealed in the hand, would, at pleasure, throw a jet of water into the eye of anyone examining it.[77]
Mr. Octavius Morgan, F.R.S., F.S.A., has in his impressive collection of rings one that has a tiny squirt, which, hidden in the hand, can shoot a stream of water into the eye of anyone examining it.[77]
[Pg 494]In the Waterton Collection is a bronze squirt-ring with octagonal bezel, finely chased with mask of Silenus, the ring hollow, with tube projecting from the hoop, so that it can be used as a squirt. Italian work of the sixteenth century. L. one and seven-tenths inch.
[Pg 494]In the Waterton Collection is a bronze squirt ring with an octagonal bezel, intricately designed with a mask of Silenus. The ring is hollow, with a tube extending from the band, allowing it to be used as a squirt. This is Italian craftsmanship from the sixteenth century. Length: one and seven-tenths inches.
Squirt-ring.
Squirt toy.
In the same collection, also, is a ring made to serve as a whistle. It is of lead, with circular bezel finely chased in relief, with profile heads of Charles the Fifth and his empress. Flemish, sixteenth century. Diameter one and one-eighth inch.
In the same collection, there’s also a ring designed to function as a whistle. It’s made of lead, featuring a circular bezel intricately detailed in relief, showcasing profile heads of Charles the Fifth and his empress. Flemish, sixteenth century. Diameter one and one-eighth inch.
In the ‘Annual Register’ for 1764 we read that Mr. Arnold, of Devereux Court, in the Strand, watchmaker, had the honour to present His Majesty George the Third with a most curious repeating watch of his own making, set in a ring. The size of the watch was something less than a[Pg 495] silver twopence; it contained 120 different parts and weighed altogether five dwts. seven grains and three-fourths.
In the 'Annual Register' for 1764, it states that Mr. Arnold, a watchmaker from Devereux Court in the Strand, had the honor of presenting King George the Third with a very unique repeating watch he made himself, set in a ring. The watch was slightly smaller than a[Pg 495] silver two-pence piece, had 120 different parts, and weighed a total of five dwts., seven grains, and three-fourths.
Among curious ring relics may be mentioned one in which a tooth of Sir Isaac Newton was set. The tooth was sold to a nobleman in 1816 for 730l., who had it placed in the ring, and wore it constantly on his finger. Denon, the French savant, wore a ring set with a tooth of Voltaire.
Among interesting ring relics, there’s one that features a tooth of Sir Isaac Newton. The tooth was sold to a nobleman in 1816 for 730l., who then had it set in a ring and wore it regularly on his finger. Denon, the French savant, wore a ring that had a tooth of Voltaire set in it.
At Norwich in 1847 a silver ring was exhibited, set with a dark-coloured substance, supposed to be the palatal tooth of a fish, like those of the Sphœrodus Gigas. This closely resembles the precious ring given (according to tradition) by Richard Cœur-de-Lion, to one of the Dawnay family in the Holy Wars, and adopted as their crest. It is preserved in the collection of Viscount Downe, and was shown by him at a meeting of the Institute at York. Another ring, with the same kind of setting, belonged to the late Mr. Albert Way. Date, the thirteenth century.
At Norwich in 1847, a silver ring was displayed, set with a dark-colored substance thought to be the palatal tooth of a fish, similar to those of the Sphœrodus Gigas. This closely resembles the precious ring traditionally given by Richard Cœur-de-Lion to a member of the Dawnay family during the Crusades, which became their crest. It is kept in the collection of Viscount Downe and was presented by him at a meeting of the Institute in York. Another ring with the same type of setting belonged to the late Mr. Albert Way. Date: thirteenth century.
In the collection of Mr. A. J. B. Beresford Hope is a gold ring set with a sapphire of extraordinary brilliancy, known as the ‘saphir merveilleux,’ which formerly belonged to Philippe d’Orléans (Égalité), and is mentioned by Madame de Genlis.
In Mr. A. J. B. Beresford Hope's collection, there's a gold ring with an incredibly bright sapphire, known as the ‘saphir merveilleux,’ which used to belong to Philippe d’Orléans (Égalité), and it's referenced by Madame de Genlis.
In 1765, a very beautiful and perfect gold ring was found by a workman among the ruins of the North Gate House, on Bedford Bridge, when that building was pulled down. It bears the initials ‘J.B.,’ and is engraved with a death’s-head and the words ‘Memento mori.’ There seems to be every probability that this ring once belonged to John Bunyan, who was imprisoned there. This precious relic was sold to Dr. Abbot, chaplain to the Duke of Bedford, and presented by him in his last illness to the Rev. G. H. Bower, perpetual curate of Elstow, the birthplace of Bunyan.
In 1765, a beautiful and perfect gold ring was discovered by a workman among the ruins of the North Gate House on Bedford Bridge when the building was demolished. It has the initials ‘J.B.’ and is engraved with a death’s-head and the phrase ‘Memento mori.’ It's very likely that this ring once belonged to John Bunyan, who was imprisoned there. This valuable relic was sold to Dr. Abbot, the chaplain to the Duke of Bedford, and he presented it to the Rev. G. H. Bower, the perpetual curate of Elstow, Bunyan's birthplace, during his last illness.
[Pg 496]The London press has lately announced that Dean Bower bequeathed to his nephew, Mr. Henry Addington, this ring.
[Pg 496]The London press has recently reported that Dean Bower left this ring to his nephew, Mr. Henry Addington.
In the preceding chapter I have mentioned several portrait-rings of remarkable interest; I may add that at the Loan Exhibition of Ancient and Modern Jewellery at the South Kensington Museum in 1872, some fine and highly curious specimens of this character were shown, and amongst them the following:—
In the previous chapter, I mentioned several portrait rings of notable interest. I should add that at the Loan Exhibition of Ancient and Modern Jewelry at the South Kensington Museum in 1872, some impressive and very interesting examples of this type were displayed, including the following:—
Colonel Dawson Damer is the possessor of a gold ring with a miniature by Cosway of the eye of George, Prince of Wales.
Colonel Dawson Damer owns a gold ring featuring a miniature of the eye of George, Prince of Wales, created by Cosway.
Professor Maskelyne has an intaglio portrait of Sir Isaac Newton, set in a ring, which was presented to the late Dr. Maskelyne, Astronomer Royal, by Dr. Shepherd, of Cambridge, contemporary of Newton.
Professor Maskelyne has an engraved portrait of Sir Isaac Newton, set in a ring, which was given to the late Dr. Maskelyne, Astronomer Royal, by Dr. Shepherd, a contemporary of Newton from Cambridge.
In the collection of Earl Beauchamp is a gold ring with enamel portrait of the Regent Orleans, by Petitot; French, beginning of the eighteenth century. Also a gold ring with profile portrait of Frederic the Great; and another portrait within; eighteenth century.
In the Earl Beauchamp collection, there is a gold ring featuring an enamel portrait of Regent Orleans by Petitot, made in France in the early eighteenth century. There's also a gold ring with a profile portrait of Frederick the Great, along with another portrait inside, from the eighteenth century.
Belonging to the Rev. J. C. Jackson is a gold ring set with intaglio, an emerald portrait of James II.; eighteenth century; formerly the property of Cardinal York. A gold ring, black enamelled, with miniature portrait of Prince Charles Edward; eighteenth century.
Belonging to Rev. J. C. Jackson, there is a gold ring with an intaglio featuring an emerald portrait of James II., from the eighteenth century, which was previously owned by Cardinal York. There is also a black enamel gold ring that has a miniature portrait of Prince Charles Edward, also from the eighteenth century.
A ring with a portrait head of Queen Elizabeth (?) in carved jacinth, mounted in gold, set with brilliants; French, sixteenth century, the property of George Bonnor, Esq.
A ring featuring a portrait of Queen Elizabeth (?) in carved jacinth, made of gold and adorned with diamonds; French, sixteenth century, owned by George Bonnor, Esq.
Till, in his account of ‘Coronation Medals,’ mentions (but without citing his authority) that the late Cardinal of York wore constantly, till his decease, a ring which bore the[Pg 497] portraits of the Pretender, James the Third, and his wife; it was taken from his finger in the hour of his dissolution, by his servant, and sold as a perquisite—a relic of the instability and mutation of human greatness—to William, Baron Bartholdy, son to the Jewish Plato, Moses Mendelssohn. It is now in the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, to which it was presented by Mrs. Maria Graham (since Calcott), in 1824.
Till, in his account of ‘Coronation Medals,’ notes (without specifying his source) that the late Cardinal of York wore a ring that featured the portraits of the Pretender, James the Third, and his wife until his death. It was removed from his finger by his servant at the moment he passed away and sold as a perk—a reminder of the instability and change of human greatness—to William, Baron Bartholdy, the son of the Jewish philosopher, Moses Mendelssohn. It is now housed in the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, where it was donated by Mrs. Maria Graham (formerly Calcott) in 1824.
APPENDIX.
CHAPTER I.
CHAPTER 1.
RINGS FROM THE EARLIEST PERIOD. P. 18.
RINGS FROM THE EARLIEST TIMES. __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.
Counterfeit rings belong to all ages and peoples. Hall, in his ‘Satires,’ says:—
Counterfeit rings appeal to people of all ages and backgrounds. Hall, in his ‘Satires,’ says:—
Nor can good Myron weare on his left hand
A signet-ring of Bristol diamond,
But he must cut his glove to show his pride
That his trim jewel might be better spied:
And that men might some burgesse him repute
With sattin sleeves hath graced his sacke-cloth suit.
Nor can good Myron wear on his left hand
A signet ring of Bristol diamond,
But he has to cut his glove to show his pride
So his stylish jewel might be better noticed:
And so that people might consider him some kind of important person
With satin sleeves that have embellished his burlap suit.
The punishment of whipping in former days was inflicted on dishonest traders in rings. In the ‘Diary of Henry Machyn, from 1550 to 1563’ (Camden Society), is the following entry in 1556:—‘The iij day of July was a man wypyd a-bowtt the post of reformacyon bef the standard in Chepsyd for sellyng of false rynges.’
The punishment of whipping in the past was given to dishonest ring traders. In the ‘Diary of Henry Machyn, from 1550 to 1563’ (Camden Society), there’s an entry from 1556:—‘On the 3rd of July, a man was whipped around the post of reform near the standard in Cheapside for selling fake rings.’
Fines were also inflicted; in the records of the Goldsmiths’ Company we find: ‘In 1512 Robert Mayne, for mysworkyng of rings wars (worse) than sterling v oz and dj, leaves in pledge 2½ dozen of the said rings, pledges as security for the payments of fines and defaults.’
Fines were also imposed; in the records of the Goldsmiths’ Company we find: ‘In 1512, Robert Mayne, for misworking rings that were worse than sterling at 2 ounces and a half, leaves behind 2½ dozen of those rings as collateral to cover the fines and defaults.’
In the same records we have a curious account for ‘costs in the Chauncerie for the recoverie of a counterfete Diamant set in a gold ring (8th Edward IV., 1469),’ which affords an idea of lawyers’ charges in those days:—
In the same records, we have an interesting account for 'costs in the Chancery for recovering a fake diamond set in a gold ring (8th Edward IV., 1469),' which gives us an idea of lawyers' fees back then:—
£ | s. | d. | ||||
For boat-hire to Westminster and home again for the suit in the Chancery started during the old warden's time for the recovery of __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__. a fake diamond set in a gold ring |
0 | 0 | 6 | |||
For a breakfast at Westminster spent on our counsel | 0 | 1 | 6 | |||
To Mr. Catesby, serjeant at law, to plead for the same | 0 | 3 | 4 | |||
To another time for boat-hire in and out, and a breakfast for 2 days |
0 | 1 | 6 | |||
Again for boat-hire and one breakfast | 0 | 1 | 0 | |||
To the keeper of the Chancery door | 0 | 0 | 2 | |||
To Timothy Fairfax at two times | 0 | 8 | 4 | |||
To Pigott for attendance at two times | 0 | 6 | 8 | |||
To a breakfast at Westminster 7d., boat-hire 4d. | 0 | 0 | 11 | |||
1 | 3 | 11 |
Pliny’s account of Rings. P. 25.
Pliny’s account of Rings. __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.
Pliny’s remarks on rings are as follow:—‘It was the custom at first to wear rings on a single finger only—the one, namely, that is next to the little finger, and thus we see the case in the statues of Numa and Servius Tullius. In later times it became the practice to put rings on the finger next to the thumb, even in the case of the statues of the gods; and, more recently again, it has become the fashion to wear them upon the little finger as well. Among the peoples of Gallia and Britannia, the middle finger, it is said, is used for this purpose. At the present day, however, among us, this is the only finger that is excepted, all others being loaded with rings, smaller rings even being separately adapted for the smaller joints of the fingers. Some there are who heap several rings on the little finger alone; while others, again, wear but one ring on this finger—the ring that sets a seal on the signet-ring itself; this last being carefully shut up as an object of rarity, too precious to be worn in common use, and only to be taken from the cabinet (dactyliotheca) as from a sanctuary. And thus is the wearing of a single ring upon the little finger no more than an ostentatious advertisement that the owner has property of a more precious nature under seal at home. Some, too, make a parade of the weight of their rings, while to others it is quite a labour to wear more than one at a time; some, in their solicitude for the safety of their gems, make the hoop of gold tinsel, and fill it with a lighter material than gold, thinking thereby to diminish the risk[Pg 501] of a fall. Others, again, are in the habit of enclosing poisons beneath the stones of their rings, and so wear them as instruments of death. And then, besides, how many of the crimes that are stimulated by cupidity are committed through the instrumentality of rings! How happy the times—how truly innocent—in which no seal was put to anything! At the present day, on the contrary, our very food even, and our drink, have to be preserved from theft through the agency of the ring; and so far is it from being sufficient to have the very keys sealed, that the signet-ring is often taken from off the owner’s fingers while he is overpowered with sleep, or lying on his deathbed.’
Pliny’s comments on rings are as follows:—‘Originally, it was customary to wear rings on only one finger—the one next to the little finger, which is why we see this in the statues of Numa and Servius Tullius. Later on, people started wearing rings on the finger next to the thumb, even in the statues of gods; and more recently, it has become fashionable to wear them on the little finger as well. In the regions of Gallia and Britannia, it is said that the middle finger is used for this purpose. However, nowadays, this is the only finger that is typically left out, as all other fingers are adorned with rings, with smaller rings even made to fit the smaller joints of the fingers. Some people pile several rings just on their little finger, while others wear only one ring on that finger—the signet ring, which is carefully stored away as a rare item, too precious for everyday use, only brought out from the cabinet (dactyliotheca) as if it were in a sanctuary. Thus, wearing a single ring on the little finger is nothing more than a flashy indication that the owner has something more valuable sealed away at home. Some people show off the weight of their rings, while for others, it's quite a challenge to wear more than one at a time; some, concerned about the safety of their gems, choose to make the band from gold tinsel and fill it with a lighter material than gold, thinking this would reduce the risk[Pg 501] of falling. Others are known to hide poisons beneath the stones of their rings, using them as tools for death. And then there are the many crimes driven by greed that are committed with the help of rings! How blissful and truly innocent were the times when nothing was sealed! Nowadays, even our food and drinks must be protected from theft by means of rings; and having just the keys sealed isn't enough, as the signet ring is often taken from the wearer while they are deeply asleep or lying on their deathbed.’
Shrewsbury Morse-ivory Thumb-ring. P. 89.
Shrewsbury Morse ivory thumb ring. __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.
The coat-of-arms engraved on this ring consists of—‘Quarterly of four: 1. Talbot, a lion rampant, with a bordure engrailed; 2. Strange, two lions passant; 3. Neville, a saltire; 4. Verdon, a fret.’
The coat of arms engraved on this ring includes—‘Quarterly of four: 1. Talbot, a lion ramping, with an engrailed border; 2. Strange, two lions walking; 3. Neville, a saltire; 4. Verdon, a fret.’
Dr. Iliff observes: ‘The date of the ring appears to me to be about the middle of the sixteenth century, and it may, therefore, be ascribed to Francis Talbot, fifth Earl of Shrewsbury of that family, who was elected K.G. in 1545, and died September 25, 1560.
Dr. Iliff notes: ‘The date of the ring seems to be around the middle of the sixteenth century, so it can likely be attributed to Francis Talbot, the fifth Earl of Shrewsbury from that family, who was elected K.G. in 1545 and passed away on September 25, 1560.
‘With respect to the quarterings on the ring, I would observe that the first coat was assumed, as the paternal coat of Talbot, by Sir Gilbert Talbot (who died in 1298) on marrying Gwenllian, daughter of Rhys Vychan ap Gruffyd, Lord of North Wales, in lieu of his paternal arms, Bendy of ten argent and gules. The second quartering (Strange) was brought in by the marriage of Richard, Lord Talbot, of Eccleswall, Lord Strange, of Blackmere, in right of his wife Angharad, daughter and heir of John, Lord Strange. The third and fourth quarterings (Neville and Verdon) were brought in by the marriage of John Talbot, first Earl of Shrewsbury, of that family, with Maud, only daughter and heir of Sir Thomas Neville, Lord Furnival, and great-granddaughter of Thomas de Furnival, Lord of Sheffield, by Joan, daughter and co-heir of Theobald de Verdon, Baron of Webley.’
‘Regarding the quarterings on the ring, I would like to point out that the first coat was adopted, as the paternal coat of Talbot, by Sir Gilbert Talbot (who died in 1298) when he married Gwenllian, daughter of Rhys Vychan ap Gruffyd, Lord of North Wales, instead of his paternal arms, Bendy of ten argent and gules. The second quartering (Strange) was introduced through the marriage of Richard, Lord Talbot of Eccleswall, Lord Strange of Blackmere, in right of his wife Angharad, daughter and heir of John, Lord Strange. The third and fourth quarterings (Neville and Verdon) were brought in by the marriage of John Talbot, the first Earl of Shrewsbury from that family, with Maud, the only daughter and heir of Sir Thomas Neville, Lord Furnival, and great-granddaughter of Thomas de Furnival, Lord of Sheffield, through Joan, daughter and co-heir of Theobald de Verdon, Baron of Webley.’
The Soden Smith Collection of Ancient Rings.
The Soden Smith Collection of Ancient Rings.
In the splendid collection of rings belonging to Mr. R. H. Soden Smith, F.S.A. (one hundred and forty specimens of which, dating from various periods, and commencing with ancient Egyptian, were exhibited at the Loan Exhibition of Jewellery at the South Kensington Museum, in 1872), are some fine works of ancient art. I may mention an antique Etruscan gold ring, with broad oblong bezel, repoussé, with representation of a chimera and griffin, the sides of the bezel enriched with delicate filigree work. An antique Etruscan gold ring, terminating in two serpents’ heads, ornamented with three collars of filigree work. An iron ring (probably Etruscan), the surface plated with gold, chased with figure of a cock upon a pillar, and having a gold dot inserted. An antique Græco-Roman gold ring, the hoop formed of four strands of twisted wire-work, the bezel set with projecting onyx of four strata. An antique Roman silver pennannular ring, ending in two serpents’ heads. A Roman ring, of the third century, the bezel set with a pierced piece of rough emerald, shoulders chased from the solid with beaded ornament. A silver pennannular ring, of Oriental type, terminating in ribbed hexagonal knobs. Found with Roman coins, in removing old London Bridge. An antique Roman bronze key-ring, found at Silchester. A gold Roman ring, of the third century, very massive, of angular outline, set with intaglio on nicolo onyx, engraved with a figure of Mercury; ploughed up in Sussex. A series of five gold antique Roman rings, set with emeralds, jasper, and sard; some engraved with subjects in intaglio. Antique Greek rings of gold, hollow, set with sards, vitreous pastes, &c. An antique Roman bronze ring, plated with gold. An antique Roman silver ring, the bezel engraved with a hare. Two gold rings of the Lower Empire, or Byzantine, with projecting bezels; one set with root of emerald, the other with ribbon onyx.
In the impressive collection of rings owned by Mr. R. H. Soden Smith, F.S.A. (which included one hundred and forty pieces from different eras, starting with ancient Egyptian, displayed at the Loan Exhibition of Jewellery at the South Kensington Museum in 1872), there are some fine examples of ancient art. For instance, there’s an Etruscan gold ring featuring a wide rectangular bezel, decorated with a design of a chimera and a griffin, and the bezel’s sides are detailed with intricate filigree. Another antique Etruscan gold ring has two serpent heads at the ends, embellished with three bands of filigree work. There’s also a ring made of iron (likely Etruscan), which is gold-plated on the surface and engraved with the image of a rooster on a pillar, including a gold dot. An antique Græco-Roman gold ring has a hoop made of four twisted strands of wire, with a bezel set with a four-layered onyx. There’s a silver pennannular ring from ancient Rome with serpent heads on either end. A Roman ring from the third century features a bezel set with a pierced piece of rough emerald, with solid shoulders decorated with beaded designs. A silver pennannular ring, of an Oriental style, has ribbed hexagonal ends and was found alongside Roman coins while removing old London Bridge. An antique Roman bronze key-ring was discovered at Silchester. A substantial third-century Roman gold ring has an angular shape and is set with an intaglio carved on nicolo onyx, depicting Mercury; it was ploughed up in Sussex. There’s a collection of five antique Roman gold rings, featuring emeralds, jasper, and sard, some of which are engraved with intaglio designs. There are also hollow antique Greek gold rings set with sards and colored pastes. Another antique Roman bronze ring is gold-plated, and there’s an antique Roman silver ring with a bezel engraved with a hare. Lastly, there are two Byzantine gold rings from the Lower Empire with raised bezels; one is set with emerald, and the other with ribbon onyx.
CHAPTER II.
CHAPTER 2.
RING SUPERSTITIONS.
Ring superstitions.
Solomon’s Ring. P. 93.
Solomon’s Ring. __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.
In the Koran (chapter xxxvi., ‘revealed at Mecca’), it is stated:—‘We also tried Solomon, and placed on his throne a counterfeit body.’ In the chapter on ‘Ring Superstitions’ I have mentioned the fable of Solomon’s ring. The exposition of the passage in the Koran is taken from the following Talmudic fiction:—Solomon, having taken Sidon and slain the king of that city, brought away his daughter Jerâda, who became his favourite; and because she ceased not to lament her father’s loss, he ordered the devils to make an image of him for her consolation; which being done, and placed in her chamber, she and her maids worshipped it morning and evening, according to their custom. At length Solomon, being informed of this idolatry, which was practised under his roof by his vizir Asâf, he broke the image, and, having chastised the women, went out into the desert, where he wept, and made supplication to God, who did not think fit, however, to let his negligence pass without some correction. It was Solomon’s custom, while he washed himself, to trust his signet, on which his kingdom depended, with a concubine of his, named Amîna. One day, therefore, when she had the ring in her custody, a devil named Sakhar came to her in the shape of Solomon, and received the ring from her, by virtue of which he became possessed of the kingdom, and sat on the throne in the shape which he had borrowed, making what alterations in the law he pleased. Solomon, in the meantime, being changed in his outer appearance, and known to none of his subjects, was obliged to wander about and beg alms for his subsistence; till at length, after the space of forty days, which was the time the image had been worshipped in his house, the devil flew away and threw the ring into the sea, where it was immediately swallowed by a fish, which being taken and given to Solomon, he found the ring in its belly, and having by this means recovered the kingdom, took Sakhar, and, tying a great stone to his neck, threw him into the Lake of Tiberias.
In the Koran (chapter 36, ‘revealed at Mecca’), it says: ‘We also tested Solomon and placed a fake body on his throne.’ In the chapter on ‘Ring Superstitions,’ I mentioned the story of Solomon’s ring. The explanation of this passage in the Koran comes from the following Talmudic story: After conquering Sidon and killing its king, Solomon took his daughter Jerâda, who became his favorite. Since she couldn't stop mourning her father, he ordered demons to create an image of him to comfort her. This image was placed in her room, and she and her maids worshipped it morning and evening, as was their custom. Eventually, Solomon learned about this idolatry taking place in his home through his vizier Asâf. He destroyed the image, punished the women, and went to the desert to weep and pray to God, who, however, deemed it necessary to correct his negligence. Solomon usually entrusted his signet, which was crucial for his kingdom, to a concubine named Amîna while washing. One day, while she had the ring, a devil named Sakhar appeared to her in the form of Solomon and took the ring. This allowed him to take over the kingdom and sit on the throne, making any changes to the law he wanted. Meanwhile, Solomon, altered in appearance and unrecognized by his subjects, had to wander around and beg for food. After forty days, the time the image was worshipped in his home, the devil flew off and tossed the ring into the sea, where a fish swallowed it. The fish was caught and given to Solomon, who found the ring inside. Having regained his kingdom this way, he captured Sakhar, tied a heavy stone around his neck, and threw him into Lake Tiberias.
In the Confession of Sir Edward Neville, he alludes thus to the ‘charmed’ ring:—‘William Neville did send for me to Oxford that I should come and speak with him at “Weke,” and to him I went; it was the first time I ever saw him; I would I had been buried that day. When I came he took me to a littell room, and went to his garden, and there demanded of me many questions, and among all others, asked if it were not possible to have a ring made which should bring a man in favour with his Prince; “seeing my Lord Cardinal had such a ring, that whatsoever he asked of the King’s Grace, that he had; and Master Cromwell, when he and I were servants in my Lord Cardinal’s house, did haunt to the company of one that was seen in your faculty; and shortly after, no man so great with my Lord Cardinal as Master Cromwell was; and I have spoke with all them that has any name in this realm; and all they showed me that I should be great with my Prince, and this is the cause that I did send for you, to know whether your saying will be agreeable to theirs, or no.” And I, at the hearty desire of him, showed him that I had read many books, and especially the works of Solomon, and how his ring should be made, and of what metal; and what virtues they have after the canon of Solomon. And then he desired me instantly to take the pains to make him one of them; and I told him that I could make them, but I made never none of them, and I cannot tell that they have such virtues or no, but by hearing say. Also he asked me what other works I had read. And I told him that I had read the magical works of Hermes, which many men doth prize; and thus departed at that time. And one fortnight after, William Neville came to Oxford, and said that he had one Wayd at home at his house that did show him more than I did show him; for the said Wayd did show him that he should be a great lord, nigh to the parts that he dwelt in. And that in that lordship should be a fair castle; and he could not imagine what it should be, except it were the castle of Warwick. And I answered and said to him, that I dreamed that an angel took him and me by the hands, and led us to a high tower, and there delivered him a shield, with sundry arms, which I cannot rehearse, and this is all I ever showed him save at his desire.[Pg 505] I went thither with him, and as concerning any other man, save at the desire of Sir Gr. Done, Knt., I made the moulds that ye have, to the intent that he should have had Mistress Elizabeth’s gear.’
In the Confession of Sir Edward Neville, he refers to the ‘charmed’ ring:—‘William Neville called for me to come to Oxford to meet him at “Weke,” and I went to see him; it was the first time I had ever met him; I wish I had been buried that day. When I arrived, he took me to a little room and went to his garden, where he asked me many questions. Among other things, he asked if it was possible to create a ring that would win a man favor with his Prince; “since my Lord Cardinal has such a ring that whatever he asks from the King’s Grace, he gets; and Master Cromwell, when he and I were servants in my Lord Cardinal’s house, used to spend time with someone who was knowledgeable in your field; and shortly after, no one was as high in favor with my Lord Cardinal as Master Cromwell was; and I have spoken to all those who have any reputation in this realm; and they all told me that I would be great with my Prince, and that is why I summoned you, to see if your opinion aligns with theirs or not.” And at his earnest request, I shared that I had read many books, especially the works of Solomon, and how his ring should be made, and from what metal; and what virtues they possess according to the canon of Solomon. Then he urged me to take the time to make him one; and I told him that I could make them, but I’ve never actually made one, and I can’t say they have such virtues or not, except by hearsay. He also asked what other works I had read. I told him I had read the magical works of Hermes, which many people value; and then we parted ways. A fortnight later, William Neville came to Oxford and said that he had a Wayd at his home who showed him more than I did; for the said Wayd told him he would become a great lord, near the area where he lived. And that in that lordship, there would be a grand castle; and he couldn’t figure out what it should be, unless it was the castle of Warwick. I replied that I dreamed an angel took him and me by the hands and led us to a high tower, where he was given a shield with various arms, which I can't recall, and this is all I ever showed him, except at his request.[Pg 505] I went there with him, and regarding any other man, except at the request of Sir Gr. Done, Knt., I made the molds that you have, intending for him to have Mistress Elizabeth’s gear.’
Wedding-ring of the Virgin Mary and Joseph. P. 93.
Wedding ring of the Virgin Mary and Joseph. P. 93.
In Patrick’s ‘Devotions of the Roman Church’ is a curious account of the wedding-ring of the Virgin Mary and Joseph. It is there described as of onyx or amethyst, wherein was discerned a representation of the flowers that budded on his rod. ‘It was discovered in the year 996 in this way:—Judith, the wife of Hugo, Marquis of Etruria, being a great lover of jewels, employed one Ranerius, a skilful jeweller and lapidary of Clusium, to go to Rome to make purchases for her. There he formed an intimacy with a jeweller from Jerusalem, who, when Ranerius was about to return home, professed great affection, and offered him a ring as a pledge of friendship. Ranerius, looking upon it as of little value, declined it with a slight compliment; but the jeweller from the Holy Land bade him not contemn it, for it was the wedding-ring of Joseph and the Blessed Virgin, and made him take it, with a special charge that it should not fall into the hands of a wicked person. Ranerius, still careless of what he said, threw it into a little chest with articles of inferior value, where it remained until his forgetfulness cost him dear; for when his son was only ten years old (the number of years that his father disregarded the Virgin’s ring) the boy died, and was carried to his burial. But, behold, as the hearse went forward, on a sudden the dead child rose from the coffin, ordered the bearers to stop, and, calling to his father, told him that, by favour of the Blessed Virgin, he was come from Heaven to tell him that, as he had contemned religion by concealing her most holy ring in a common heap, he must immediately send for it, and publicly produce it, that it might be openly venerated. The chest being brought and delivered into the son’s hand, he presently found the ring, although he had never seen it before; then most reverently kissing it, and showing it to the spectators, they religiously adored it, during the joyful pealing of the bells, which rang of their own accord; whereupon, ordering himself to be carried to the place where he desired to be buried, he[Pg 506] delivered the ring to the curate of the parish, and then, laying himself down in the coffin, he was interred.—This ring wrought many miracles; ivory ones touched with it, worn by women in difficult labour, relieved them; an impression of it in wax, applied to the hip, removed the sciatica; it cured diseases of the eyes, reconciled married people that quarrelled, and drove out devils. Five centuries afterwards, in 1473, the church of Musthiola, where it effected these wonders, becoming ruinous, the ring was deposited with a religious community of the Franciscans at Clusium. One of the brethren of the order, named Wintherus, a crafty German, and very wicked, having obtained from the magistrates an appointment to show the ring, on a certain occasion, after exhibiting it at the end of his sermon, stooped down, as if he were putting it into the place provided for it, but instead of doing so he slipped it up his sleeve, and privily conveyed himself and the ring from the city across the water. All was well so far, but when he got into a neighbouring field it suddenly became dark, so that, not knowing which way to go, but well knowing what was the matter, he hung the ring on a tree, and, falling on the ground, penitently confessed his sin to it, and promised to return to Clusium if it would dispel the darkness. On taking it down it emitted a great light, which he took advantage of to travel to Perusia, where he sojourned with the Augustin friars, till he determined on making another effort to carry it into Germany. He was again hindered by the darkness returning. It infested him and the whole city for twenty days. Still he resolved not to return to Clusium, but tell his story in great confidence to his landlord, one Lucas Jordanus, who with great cunning represented to him his danger from the Clusians, and the benefits he would receive from the Perusians if he bestowed the ring on that city. Wintherus followed his advice. As soon as the ring was shown to the people the darkness disappeared, and Wintherus was well provided for in the house of the magistrate. Meanwhile the Bishop of Clusium, coming to Perusia, endeavoured in vain to obtain the relic. The city of Sena sent an ambassador to resist the claims of the Clusians; he was entertained by the Perusians with great respect, but they informed him that, having used no sacrilegious arts to obtain the Blessed Virgin’s ring, they respected her too much to restore it to the owners; that they[Pg 507] received it within their walls with as much respect as they would do the Ark of the Covenant, and would defend their holy prize by force of arms. The bereaved Clusians laid the case before Pope Sixtus IV., and the Perusians did the same. Wintherus was ordered by the Pope, on the importunity of the Clusians, into closer confinement; but, as the heat abated, he passed a merry life in Perusia, and at his death the Franciscans and the canons of St. Lawrence disputed for the possession of his body. This honour was, in the end, obtained by the latter, in whose chapel he was buried before an altar dedicated to St. Joseph and the Virgin, and a monument was erected by the Perusians to the ring-stealer’s memory, with an inscription which acknowledged that the receivers were as much indebted to him for it as if it had been his own property, and he had offered it of his own accord.
In Patrick’s ‘Devotions of the Roman Church’ is a fascinating story about the wedding ring of the Virgin Mary and Joseph. It’s described as being made of onyx or amethyst, with a depiction of the flowers that blossomed on his rod. ‘It was discovered in the year 996 in this way:—Judith, the wife of Hugo, Marquis of Etruria, who had a great love for jewels, hired a skilled jeweler and lapidary named Ranerius from Clusium to travel to Rome and make purchases for her. While there, he formed a friendship with a jeweler from Jerusalem, who, as Ranerius was preparing to return home, expressed great affection and offered him a ring as a token of friendship. Ranerius, seeing it as worthless, politely declined it; but the jeweler from the Holy Land insisted he should not dismiss it, as it was the wedding ring of Joseph and the Blessed Virgin, urging him to take it with a warning that it should not fall into the hands of an evil person. Ranerius, still indifferent to his words, tossed it into a small chest with items of lesser value, where it stayed until his carelessness cost him dearly; for when his son was just ten years old (the same number of years Ranerius disregarded the Virgin’s ring), the boy died and was taken for burial. But suddenly, as the procession moved forward, the dead child rose from the coffin, ordered the bearers to stop, and told his father that, by the grace of the Blessed Virgin, he had returned from Heaven to inform him that, due to his disrespect for religion by hiding her holy ring among mundane things, he must immediately retrieve it and publicly display it for veneration. When the chest was brought to him, he quickly found the ring despite never having seen it before; then reverently kissing it and showing it to everyone, they worshipped it, as bells joyfully rang on their own. He then instructed to be taken to the place he wished to be buried, and he handed the ring to the parish curate, then laid himself down in the coffin and was buried.—This ring performed many miracles; ivory touched by it, worn by women in labor, eased their suffering; an impression of it in wax, applied to the hip, alleviated sciatica; it cured eye diseases, restored harmony to quarreling couples, and expelled demons. Five centuries later, in 1473, the church of Musthiola, where it had worked these wonders, fell into disrepair, and the ring was given to a Franciscan community in Clusium. One of the brothers, Wintherus, a crafty and wicked German, managed to get permission from the authorities to display the ring. On one occasion, after showing it at the end of his sermon, he bent down as if to return it to its place but instead slipped it up his sleeve and secretly left the city with the ring. All was fine until he reached a nearby field, where it suddenly grew dark, and not knowing where to go, he realized what had happened. He hung the ring on a tree and fell to the ground, sincerely confessing his sin to it and promising to return to Clusium if it would lift the darkness. When he took it down, it shone brightly, which he used to travel to Perusia, where he stayed with the Augustinian friars, until he planned to try to take it to Germany. However, the darkness returned, affecting both him and the entire city for twenty days. Still, he refused to go back to Clusium, instead confidently telling his landlord, Lucas Jordanus, who cunningly warned him of the dangers from the Clusians and the benefits he would receive from the Perusians if he gave the ring to that city. Wintherus followed this advice. Once the ring was shown to the people, the darkness vanished, and Wintherus was well cared for in the magistrate's household. Meanwhile, the Bishop of Clusium came to Perusia to retrieve the relic but failed. The city of Sena sent an ambassador to contest the Clusians’ claim; he was treated with great respect by the Perusians, who explained that, having obtained the Blessed Virgin’s ring without using any sacrilegious means, they respected her too much to return it to its original owners; that they received it with as much reverence as they would the Ark of the Covenant and would protect their holy prize with force if necessary. The distraught Clusians presented their case to Pope Sixtus IV., while the Perusians did the same. The Pope ordered Wintherus, due to the Clusians' insistence, into closer confinement; however, as the pressure eased, he enjoyed a happy life in Perusia, and upon his death, the Franciscans and the canons of St. Lawrence competed for his body. Ultimately, the canons succeeded, burying him in their chapel before an altar dedicated to St. Joseph and the Virgin, with a monument erected by the Perusians in memory of the ring-stealer, acknowledging that the receivers owed him as much for it as if it had been his own, freely given.
In the pontificate of Innocent VIII., A.D. 1486, the arbitration of the dispute was left to Cardinal Piccolominæus, who adjudged the relic to Perusia. The important decision was celebrated in that city by every imaginable expression of joy, and for the greatest honour of the sacred ring, a chapel was built for it in the church of St. Lawrence, with an inscription, informing the reader that there the untouched mother, the Queen of Heaven, and her spouse, were worshipped; that there in the sanctuary of her wedding-ring she lent a gracious ear to all prayers; and that he who gave the ring (Wintherus) defended it by his protection. The pencil was called in to grace the more substantial labours of the architect. A curious picture represented the High Priest in the Temple of Jerusalem, taking Joseph and Mary by their hands to espouse them with the venerated ring; one side of the solemnity was graced by a band of virgins, the companions of Mary during her education; the other side was occupied by a company of young men, Joseph’s kinsmen of the house of David, holding their withered rods. The imagination of the artist employed one of these in breaking his own rod across his knee, as envious of Joseph’s, which, by its miraculous budding, had ended the hopes of all who, by the proclamation, had become candidates for her hand. In addition to this, an altar was raised and dedicated to St. Joseph; his statue was placed at its side; his birthday was kept with great pomp; a society of seculars, called his Fraternity, was instituted to[Pg 508] serve in the chapel jointly with the clergy of St. Lawrence; and on the joint festival of Mary and her spouse the splendid solemnity was heightened by the solemn exhibition of the ring, and by a picture of their miraculous nuptials being uncovered to the eager gaze of the adoring multitude.’
During the papacy of Innocent VIII, in A.D. 1486, Cardinal Piccolomini was chosen to settle the dispute, and he awarded the relic to Perugia. This significant decision sparked celebrations throughout the city, filled with every possible expression of joy. To honor the sacred ring, a chapel was constructed in the Church of St. Lawrence, featuring an inscription that informed visitors that there, the untouched mother, the Queen of Heaven, and her husband were venerated; that in the sanctuary of her wedding ring, she graciously listened to all prayers; and that Wintherus, who gave the ring, protected it. Artists were brought in to enhance the architect's work. An intriguing painting depicted the High Priest in the Temple of Jerusalem, taking Joseph and Mary by their hands to marry them with the revered ring; one side of the scene was adorned with a group of virgins, Mary’s companions during her upbringing; while the other side featured a group of young men, Joseph’s relatives from the house of David, holding their dry rods. The artist's imagination showed one of these men breaking his rod over his knee, envious of Joseph’s, whose miraculous budding had dashed the hopes of all who had vied for her hand. In addition to this, an altar was erected and dedicated to St. Joseph; his statue was placed beside it; his birthday was celebrated with great splendor; a secular society known as his Fraternity was founded to serve in the chapel alongside the clergy of St. Lawrence; and during the joint festival of Mary and her spouse, the magnificent celebration was elevated by the solemn display of the ring and a revealed painting of their miraculous wedding, captivating the eager crowd.
The ring is said by some to have been made of one whole stone, green jasper or a plasma, hollowed out, and itself forming both hoop and bezel, unalloyed with any metal.
The ring is said by some to have been made from a single solid piece, either green jasper or a plasma, hollowed out, and serving as both the band and the setting, without any metal mixed in.
In Raffaelle’s beautiful picture, Le Sposalizio, Mary and Joseph stand opposite to each other in the centre; the high-priest, between them, is bringing their right hands towards each other; Joseph, with his right hand (guided by the priest), is placing the ring on the third finger of the right hand of the Virgin; beside Mary is a group of the virgins of the Temple; near Joseph are the suitors, who break their barren wands—that which Joseph holds in his hand has blossomed into a lily, which, according to the legend, was the sign that he was the chosen one.
In Raffaelle’s stunning painting, Le Sposalizio, Mary and Joseph stand facing each other in the center; the high priest, between them, is guiding their right hands together. Joseph, with his right hand (directed by the priest), is placing the ring on the Virgin's third finger. Next to Mary is a group of the Temple virgins; near Joseph are the suitors, who are breaking their barren wands—Joseph’s wand has blossomed into a lily, which, according to legend, signified that he was the chosen one.
The Rev. C. W. King, in his ‘Handbook of Engraved Gems,’ observes: ‘The highest glory ever attained by a work of the engraver was that of the cameo of the Abbey of St. Germain des Prés, which enjoyed for an entire millennium the transcendent (though baseless) fame of adorning the espousal-ring of the Virgin Mary, and of preserving the portraits after the life of herself and Joseph. But, alas! antiquaries have now remorselessly restored the ownership of gem and portraits to the two nobodies (probably liberti, judging from their names), whose votive legend, “Alpheus with Aretho,” is but too plainly legible in our Greek-reading times.’
The Rev. C. W. King, in his ‘Handbook of Engraved Gems,’ notes: ‘The greatest achievement ever reached by an engraver was the cameo from the Abbey of St. Germain des Prés, which for an entire millennium held the remarkable (though unfounded) reputation of being the adornment on the Virgin Mary's wedding ring and of preserving the likenesses of her and Joseph. But, unfortunately, scholars have now mercilessly attributed the gem and the portraits back to the two unknown figures (likely liberti, based on their names), whose votive inscription, “Alpheus with Aretho,” is all too clearly readable in our times.’
When the Abbey was destroyed by fire in 1795, this ring, with other valuables, disappeared; it subsequently came into the hands of General Hydrow, and from him passed into the Imperial Russian Cabinet.
When the Abbey was destroyed by fire in 1795, this ring, along with other valuables, went missing; it later ended up in the possession of General Hydrow, and from him, it transferred to the Imperial Russian Cabinet.
Ring of Gyges. P. 96.
Ring of Gyges. __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.
Nizámi, the famous Persian poet, who died in 1209, has a story of a ring which is a very close version of the ring of Gyges. A hot vapour once rent the ground, and brought to light in the chasm a hollow horse of tin and copper with a large fissure in[Pg 509] its side. A shepherd saw it, and discovered in the body an old man asleep, with a gold ring on his finger. He took it off, and went next morning to his master to learn the value of his booty; but during his visit he discovered, to his astonishment, that when he turned the seal towards his palm he became invisible. He determined to make use of this power, and he proceeded to the palace, and secretly entered the council-chamber, where he remained unseen. When the nobles had left it, he revealed himself to the king by this miracle as a prophet. The king at once took him as his minister, and eventually the shepherd succeeded him on the throne.
Nizámi, the renowned Persian poet who passed away in 1209, tells a tale about a ring that closely resembles the story of Gyges. One day, a hot vapor split the ground open, revealing a hollow horse made of tin and copper with a large crack in[Pg 509] its side. A shepherd discovered it and found an old man asleep inside, wearing a gold ring on his finger. He took the ring off and went to his master the next morning to find out how much it was worth. To his surprise, he discovered that when he turned the ring’s seal toward his palm, he became invisible. He decided to use this power and went to the palace, sneaking into the council chamber while remaining unseen. After the nobles left, he revealed himself to the king as a prophet through this miracle. The king immediately appointed him as his minister, and eventually, the shepherd became the king himself.
In Reginald Scot’s ‘Discovery of Witchcraft,’ 1665, is given a charm whereby ‘to go invisible by these three sisters of the fairies,’ Milita, Achilia, and Sibylia. You are ‘first to go to a fair parlour, or chamber, and on even ground, and in no loft, and from people nine dayes, for it is better; and let all thy cloathing be clean and sweet. Then make a candle of virgin wax and light it, and make a fair fire of charcoles in a fair place in the middle of the parlour or chamber; then take fair clean water that runneth against the East, and set it upon the fire, and if thou warm thyself say these words, going about the fire three times holding the candle in thy right hand.’ The incantation is too profane to be repeated. The following is the effect produced: ‘and if they come not the first night, then do the same the second night, and so the third night, until they do come, for doubtless they will so come; and lie thou in thy bed in the same parlour or chamber, and lay thy right hand out of the bed, and look thou have a fair silken kerchief bound about thy head, and be not afraid, they will do thee no harm; for there will come before thee three fair women, and all in white cloathing, and one of them will put a ring upon thy finger wherewith thou shalt go invisible. Then with speed bind her with the bond aforesaid. When thou hast this ring on thy finger, look in a glass and thou shalt not see thyself. And when thou wilt go invisible, put it on thy finger, the same finger that they did put it on, and every new moon renew it again,’ &c.
In Reginald Scot’s 'Discovery of Witchcraft,' 1665, there’s a charm to become invisible through the three fairy sisters, Milita, Achilia, and Sibylia. To start, you need to find a nice parlor or room, on even ground, and away from people for nine days, as that’s preferable. Make sure your clothes are clean and fresh. Then, create a candle from virgin wax and light it, along with a nice charcoal fire in the center of the room. Next, take clean water that flows towards the East and place it on the fire. As you warm yourself, say these words while walking around the fire three times with the candle in your right hand. The spell’s wording is too inappropriate to share. The expected outcome is: "if they don't appear the first night, do the same thing the second night, and then the third night, until they do show up, because they will definitely come; then lie in bed in the same room, with your right hand hanging out, and make sure to have a nice silk scarf wrapped around your head. Don’t be afraid; they won’t harm you. Three beautiful women will appear, all dressed in white and one of them will place a ring on your finger that will make you invisible. Quickly bind her with the previously mentioned binding. Once you have the ring on your finger, look in a mirror and you won’t see yourself. When you want to become invisible, put it on the same finger they put it on, and every new moon, renew it again," &c.
The Cruel Knight and the Fortunate Farmer’s Daughter. P. 99.
The Cruel Knight and the Lucky Farmer’s Daughter. P. 99.
‘The Fish and the Ring, or the Cruel Knight, and the Fortunate Farmer’s Daughter’ (a reprint for William Robinson, Esq., 1843).
‘The Fish and the Ring, or the Cruel Knight, and the Fortunate Farmer’s Daughter’ (a reprint for William Robinson, Esq., 1843).
In famous York city a farmer did dwell,
Who was belov’d by his neighbours well;
He had a wife that was virtuous and fair,
And by her he had a young child every year.
In seven years six children he had,
Which made their parents’ hearts full glad;
But in a short time, as we did hear say,
The farmer in wealth and stock did decay.
Though once he had riches in store,
In a little time he grew very poor;
He strove all he could, but, alas! could not thrive,
He hardly could keep his children alive.
The children came faster than silver or gold,
For his wife conceiv’d again, we are told,
And when the time came in labour she fell;
But if you would mind an odd story I’ll tell:
A noble rich Knight by chance did ride by,
And hearing this woman did shriek and cry,
He being well learned in the planets and signs,
Did look in the book which puzzled his mind.
The more he did look the more he did read,
And found that the fate of the child had decreed,
Who was born in that house the same tide,
He found it was she who must be his bride;
But judge how the Knight was disturb’d in mind,
When he in that book his fortune did find.
He quickly rode home and was sorely oppressed,
From that sad moment he could take no rest;
At night he did toss and tumble in his bed
And very strange projects came into his head,
Then he resolv’d and soon try’d indeed,
To alter the fortune he found was decreed.
With a vexing heart next morning he rose,
And to the house of the farmer he goes,
And asked the man with a heart full of spite,
If the child was alive that was born last night?
[Pg 511]
‘Worthy sir,’ said the farmer, ‘although I am poor,
I had one born last night, and six born before;
Four sons and three daughters I now have alive,
They are in good health and likely to thrive.’
The Knight he reply’d, ‘If that seven you have,
Let me have the youngest, I’ll keep it most brave,
For you very well one daughter may spare,
And when I die I’ll make her my heir;
For I am a Knight of noble degree,
And if you will part with your child unto me
Full three thousand pounds I’ll unto thee give
When I from your hands your daughter receive.
The father and mother with tears in their eyes,
Did hear this kind offer and were in surprize;
And seeing the Knight was so noble and gay,
Presented the infant unto him that day.
But they spoke to him with words most mild,
‘We beseech thee, good sir, be kind to our child.’
‘You need not mind,’ the Knight he did say,
‘I will maintain her both gallant and gay.’
So with this sweet babe away he did ride,
Until he came to a broad river’s side.
Being cruelly bent he resolv’d indeed
To drown the young infant that day with speed,
Saying, ‘If you live you must be my wife,
So I am resolved to bereave you of life;
For till you are dead I no comfort can have,
Wherefore you shall lie in a watery grave.’
In saying of this, that moment, they say,
He flung the babe into the river straightway;
And being well pleased when this he had done,
He leaped on his horse, and straight he rode home.
But mind how kind fortune for her did provide,
She was drove right on her back by the tide,
Where a man was a fishing, as fortune would have,
When she was floating along with the wave.
He took her up, but was in amaze;
He kissed her and on her did gaze,
And he having ne’er a child in his life,
He straightway did carry her home to his wife.
His wife was pleased the child to see,
And said, ‘My dearest husband, be ruled by me,
Since we have no children, if you’ll let me alone,
We will keep this and call it our own.’
The good man consented, as we have been told,
And spared for neither silver nor gold,
[Pg 512]Until she was over eleven full year,
And then her beauty began to appear.
The fisherman was one day at an inn,
And several gentlemen drinking with him:
His wife sent this girl to call her husband home,
But when she did into the drinking room come,
The gentlemen they were amazed to see
The fisherman’s daughter so full of beauty.
They ask’d him if she was his own,
And he told them the story before he went home:
‘As I was fishing within my bound,
One Monday morning this sweet babe I found;
Or else she had lain within a watery grave;’
And this was the same which now he gave.
The cruel Knight was in the company,
And hearing the fisherman tell his story,
He was vexed at the heart to see her alive,
And how to destroy her again did contrive,
Then spake the Knight, and unto him said,
‘If you will but part with this sweet maid
I’ll give you whatever your heart can devise,
For she in time to great riches may rise.’
The fisherman answered, with a modest grace,
‘I cannot unless my dear wife were in the place,
Get first her consent, you shall have mine of me,
And then to go with you, sir, she is free.’
The wife she did also as freely consent,
But little they thought of his cruel intent;
He kept her a month very bravely they say,
And then he contrived to send them away.
He had a great brother in fair Lancashire,
A noble rich man worth ten thousand a year,
And he sent this girl unto him with speed
In hopes he would act a most desperate deed.
He sent a man with her likewise they say,
And as they did lodge at an inn on the way,
A thief in the house with an evil intent
For to rob the portmanteau immediately went,
But the thief was amazed, when he could not find
Either silver or gold, or aught to his mind,
But only a letter the which he did read
And soon put an end to this tragical deed:
The Knight had wrote to his brother that day,
To take this poor innocent damsel away,
[Pg 513]With sword or with poison that very same night,
And not let her live till morning light.
The thief read the letter, and had so much grace
To tear it, and write in the same place,
‘Dear brother, receive this maiden from me,
And bring her up well as a maiden should be;
Let her be esteem’d, dear brother, I pray,
Let servants attend her by night and by day.
For she is a lady of noble worth,
A nobler lady ne’er lived in the north;
Let her have good learning, dear brother, I pray,
And for the same I will sufficiently pay;
And so, loving brother, this letter I send,
Subscribing myself your dear brother and friend.’
The servant and maid were still innocent,
And onward their journey next day they went.
Before sunset to the Knight’s house they came
Where the servant left her, and came home again.
The girl was attended most nobly indeed,
With the servants to attend to her with speed;
Where she did continue a twelvemonth’s space,
Till this cruel Knight came to this place,
As he and his brother together did talk,
He spy’d the young maiden in the garden to walk.
She look’d most beautiful, pleasant, and gay,
Like to sweet Aurora, or the goddess of May.
He was in a passion when he did her spy,
And instantly unto his brother did cry,
‘Why did you not do as in the letter I writ?’
His brother replied, ‘It is done every bit.’
‘No, no,’ said the Knight, ‘it is not so I see,
Therefore she shall back again go with me;’
But his brother showed him the letter that day,
Then he was amazed, but nothing did say.
Soon after the Knight took this maiden away,
And with her did ride till he came to the sea,
Then looking upon her with anger and spite,
He spoke to the maiden and bade her alight.
The maid from the horse immediately went
And trembled to think what was his intent.
‘Ne’er tremble,’ said he, ‘for this hour’s your last;
So pull off your clothes, I command you, in haste.’
This virgin, with tears, on her knees did reply,
‘Oh! what have I done, sir, that now I must die?
Oh! let me but know how I offend
I’ll study each hour my life to amend,
[Pg 514]Oh! spare my life and I’ll wander till death,
And never come near you while I have breath.’
He hearing the pitiful moan she did make
Straight from his finger a ring did take,
He then to the maiden these words did say,
‘This ring in the water I’ll now throw away;
Pray look on it well, for the posy is plain,
That you when you see it may know it again.
I charge you for life never come in my sight,
For if you do I shall owe you a spite,
Unless you do bring the same unto me:’
With that he let the ring drop in the sea,
Which when he had done away he did go,
And left her to wander in sorrow and woe.
She rambled all night, and at length did espy
A homely poor cottage, and to it did hie,
Being hungry with cold, and a heart full of grief,
She went to this cottage to seek for relief;
The people reliev’d her, and the next day
They got her to service, as I did hear say,
At a nobleman’s house, not far from this place
Where she did behave with a modest grace.
She was a cookmaid and forgot the time past,
But observe the wonder that comes at last.
As she for dinner was dressing one day,
And opened the head of a cod, they say,
She found such a ring, and was in amaze
And she, in great wonder, upon it did gaze
And viewing it well she found it to be
The very same the Knight dropped in the sea,
She smil’d when she saw it, and bless’d her kind fate,
But did to no creature the secret relate.
This maid, in her place, did all maidens excel,
That the lady took notice, and lik’d her well;
Saying, she was born of some noble degree,
And took her as a companion to be.
The Knight when he came to the house did behold
This beautiful lady with trappings of gold,
When he ask’d the lady to grant him a boon,
And said it was to walk with that virgin alone.
The lady consented, telling the young maid
By him she need not fear to be betrayed.
When he first met her, ‘Thou strumpet,’ said he,
‘Did I not charge thee never more to see me?
[Pg 515]This hour’s thy last, to the world bid good night,
For being so bold to appear in my sight.’
Said she, ‘In the sea you flung your ring,
And bid me not see you unless I did bring
The same unto you. Now I have it,’ cries she,
‘Behold, ’tis the same that you flung into the sea.’
When the Knight saw it, he flew to her arms,
And said, ‘Lovely maid, thou hast millions of charms.’
Said he, ‘Charming creature, pray pardon me,
Who often contrived the ruin of thee:
’Tis in vain to alter what heaven doth decree,
For I find you are born my wife to be.’
Then wedded they were, as I did hear say,
And now she’s a lady both gallant and gay,
They quickly unto her parents did haste,
When the Knight told the story of what had passed.
But asked their pardon, upon his bare knee,
Who gave it, and rejoiced their daughter to see.
Then they for the fisherman and his wife sent,
And for their past troubles did them content.
And so there was joy for all them that did see
The farmer’s young daughter a lady to be.
In the famous city of York, there lived a farmer,
Who was well-loved by his neighbors;
He had a wife who was virtuous and beautiful,
And with her, he had a young child every year.
In seven years, he had six children,
Which filled their parents’ hearts with joy;
But soon, as we hear,
The farmer’s wealth and stock began to fade.
Though he once had riches,
He quickly became very poor;
He struggled as hard as he could, but, sadly, could not succeed,
He could hardly keep his children alive.
The children came faster than he could earn,
Because, as we’re told, his wife got pregnant again,
And when the time came, she went into labor;
But if you’d like to hear an odd story, I'll tell:
By chance, a noble rich Knight rode by,
And hearing this woman scream and cry,
Being well-versed in astrology,
He consulted a book that puzzled his mind.
The more he looked, the more he read,
And discovered that the fate of the child was determined;
Whoever was born in that house at that time,
He found it was her who must be his bride;
Imagine how disturbed the Knight felt,
When he saw his fortune written in that book.
He quickly rode home, feeling deeply troubled,
From that sad moment, he couldn’t find peace;
At night he tossed and turned in bed
And strange ideas filled his mind,
Then he resolved to try to change the fate he found.
With a heavy heart, he rose the next morning,
And went to the farmer’s house,
And asked the man, with spite in his heart,
If the child born last night was alive?
[Pg 511]
"Worthy sir," said the farmer, "although I’m poor,
I had one born last night, and six before;
Four sons and three daughters I now have alive,
They are all in good health and likely to thrive."
The Knight replied, "If you have seven,
Let me have the youngest; I’ll take good care of her,
For you can spare one daughter,
And when I die, I’ll make her my heir;
I’m a Knight of noble rank,
And if you’ll part with your child to me,
I’ll give you three thousand pounds
When I take your daughter off your hands.
The father and mother, with tears in their eyes,
Heard this generous offer and were surprised;
Seeing the Knight was so noble and grand,
They presented the infant to him that day.
But they spoke to him gently,
"We ask you, good sir, to be kind to our child."
"You need not worry," said the Knight,
"I will raise her in style and happiness."
So he rode off with the sweet babe,
Until he reached the bank of a wide river.
Feeling cruelly determined, he resolved
To drown the young child that day without delay,
Saying, "If you live, you must be my wife,
So I’ve resolved to take your life;
For until you're dead, I can have no peace,
Therefore, you will lie in a watery grave."
As he said this, in that moment, they say,
He threw the babe into the river instantly;
And feeling pleased after this dreadful act,
He jumped on his horse and rode home immediately.
But note how kind fate made provision for her,
The tide carried her right back on its currents,
Where a man was fishing, as fate would have it,
When she was floating along with the wave.
He picked her up, but was astonished;
He kissed her and gazed at her,
And having never had a child in his life,
He took her home to his wife.
His wife was delighted to see the child,
And said, "My dearest husband, please listen to me,
Since we have no children, if you’ll just let me be,
We will keep this girl and call her our own."
The good man agreed, as we’ve been told,
And spared no expense of silver or gold,
[Pg 512]Until she was over eleven years old,
And then her beauty began to shine.
One day, while the fisherman was at an inn,
With several gentlemen drinking with him:
His wife sent this girl to call her husband home,
But when she entered the drinking room,
The gentlemen were amazed to see
The fisherman’s daughter so full of beauty.
They asked him if she was his own,
And he told them the story before heading home:
"As I was fishing within my limits,
One Monday morning, I found this sweet babe;
Otherwise, she would have been in a watery grave;"
And this was the same girl he now presented.
The cruel Knight was present that day,
And upon hearing the fisherman tell his tale,
He was filled with rage to see her alive,
And devised a plan to destroy her again,
Then the Knight spoke to him, saying,
"If you’ll part with this sweet maid,
I’ll give you whatever your heart desires,
For she may rise to great riches over time."
The fisherman responded, with modest grace,
"I can’t agree unless my dear wife is present,
Get her consent first, and you can have mine;
Then she is free to go with you, sir."
The wife also freely consented,
But little did they suspect his cruel intent;
He kept her for a month quite splendidly, they say,
And then he plotted to send them away.
He had a wealthy brother in fair Lancashire,
A noble rich man worth ten thousand a year,
And he quickly sent this girl to him,
Hoping he would carry out a horrible deed.
He also sent a man with her, they say,
And as they stayed at an inn along the way,
A thief with wicked intent
Went to rob the portmanteau immediately,
But the thief was amazed when he found
No silver, gold, or anything of value,
But only a letter which he did read
And soon put an end to this tragic deed:
The Knight had written to his brother that day,
To take this poor innocent girl away,
[Pg 513]With sword or poison that very night,
And not let her live until morning light.
The thief read the letter, and with grace,
He tore it up and wrote in its place,
"Dear brother, take this maiden from me,
And raise her up well as a maiden should be;
Let her be valued, dear brother, I ask,
Let servants attend her day and night.
For she is a lady of noble worth,
A nobler lady never lived in the north;
Let her have a good education, dear brother, I pray,
And for that, I will pay you well;
So, loving brother, I send this letter,
Signing myself your dear brother and friend."
The servant and girl remained innocent,
And the next day, their journey continued.
Before sunset, they arrived at the Knight’s house,
Where the servant left her and returned home.
The girl was treated most nobly indeed,
With servants to attend to her every need;
She stayed for a year-long space,
Until this cruel Knight came to this place,
As he and his brother conversed,
He spotted the young maiden walking in the garden.
She looked beautiful, pleasant, and cheerful,
Like sweet Aurora or the goddess of May.
He was filled with rage when he saw her,
And immediately cried out to his brother,
"Why did you not do as I wrote in the letter?"
His brother replied, "It’s all been done."
"No, no," said the Knight, "it’s not as I see it;
Therefore, she must return with me;"
But his brother showed him the letter that day,
Then he was astonished but said nothing.
Soon after, the Knight took this maiden away,
And rode with her until he reached the sea,
Then looking at her with anger and spite,
He spoke to the maiden and ordered her to get down.
The girl immediately dismounted
And trembled at the thought of what he intended.
"Do not tremble," he said, "for this hour is your last;
So strip off your clothes, I command you, in haste."
This virgin, in tears, dropped to her knees,
"Oh, what have I done, sir, that now I must die?
Oh, let me know how I’ve offended,
I’ll spend every hour trying to amend,
[Pg 514]Oh! Spare my life, and I’ll wander until death,
And never come near you while I have breath."
He, hearing her pitiful cries,
Took off a ring from his finger,
Then said to the maiden,
"This ring I’ll now throw into the water;
Look at it well, for the inscription is clear,
So that when you see it, you’ll know it again.
I charge you for life never to come into my sight,
For if you do, I will take revenge;
Unless you bring the same ring back to me:"
With that, he let the ring drop into the sea,
And when he had done that, he departed,
Leaving her to wander in sorrow and woe.
She wandered all night, and eventually spotted
A humble, poor cottage, and hurried toward it,
Being hungry and cold, with a heart full of grief,
She went to this cottage to seek refuge;
The people took her in, and the next day
They found her a job, as I’ve heard,
At a nobleman’s house not far from there,
Where she behaved with modest grace.
She was a cookmaid and forgot her past;
But behold the wonder that comes at last.
One day, as she was preparing dinner,
And opened a codfish’s head, they say,
She found such a ring and was amazed,
And in great wonder, she gazed at it;
When she examined it closely, she found it to be
The very same ring the Knight dropped in the sea,
She smiled when she saw it and blessed her good fortune,
But told no one the secret.
This maid excelled all others at her work,
And the lady noticed and liked her well;
Saying she was born of noble blood,
And took her on as a companion.
When the Knight came to the house, he saw
This beautiful lady adorned in gold,
And when he asked the lady to grant him a favor,
He said it was to walk with that maiden alone.
The lady agreed, assuring the young maid
That she need not fear betrayal from him.
When he first met her, he said, "You bold girl,
Did I not command you never to see me again?
[Pg 515]This hour is your last; bid the world goodnight,
For being so reckless as to appear in my sight."
She replied, "You threw your ring into the sea,
And told me not to see you unless I brought it to you;
Now I have it," she cried,
"Behold, it's the same one you threw away."
When the Knight saw it, he rushed into her arms,
And said, "Lovely maid, you possess countless charms."
He said, "Charming creature, please forgive me,
For I often conspired against you:
It’s futile to change what heaven has decreed,
For I know you’re meant to be my wife."
Then they were married, as I’ve heard,
And now she’s a lady, both splendid and elegant,
They hurried to her parents’ house,
When the Knight told them the story of what had happened.
But he asked for their forgiveness, on his bare knee,
Who granted it, rejoicing to see their daughter.
Then they sent for the fisherman and his wife,
And in gratitude, compensated them for their troubles.
And so there was joy for all who witnessed
The farmer’s young daughter becoming a lady.
The Rev. C. W. King, in his ‘Handbook of Engraved Gems,’ gives the following fish-and-ring story. Pietrus Damianus, a very unlikely personage to have ever read of Polycrates, relates in his Fifth Epistle a story worth translating literally, as a specimen of the style of thought of his age:—‘This Arnulphus was the father of King Pepin and grandfather of Charlemagne, and when, inflamed with the fervour of the Holy Ghost he sacrificed the love of wife and children, and exchanged the glory and pomps of this world for the glorious poverty of Christ, it chanced, as he was hastening into the wilderness, that in his way he had to cross a river, which is called the Moselle; but when he reached the middle of the bridge, thrown over it where the river’s stream ran deepest, he tossed in there his own ring with this protestation, “When I shall receive back,” said he, “this ring from the foaming waves of this river, then will I trust confidently that I am loosed from the bonds of all my sins.” Thereupon he made for the wilderness, where he lived no little space dead unto himself and the world. Meanwhile, the then Bishop of Metz having died, Divine Providence raised Arnulphus to the charge of that see. Continuing in his new office[Pg 516] to abstain from eating flesh, according to the rule observed by him in the wilderness, once upon a time a fish was brought him for a present. The cook, in gutting the same, found in its entrails a ring, and ran full of joy to present it to his master; which ring the blessed Bishop no sooner cast eyes upon than he knew it again for his own, and wondered not so much at the strange mine that had brought forth the metal, as that, by the Divine propitiation, he had obtained the forgiveness of his sins.’
The Rev. C. W. King, in his ‘Handbook of Engraved Gems,’ shares the following fish-and-ring story. Pietrus Damianus, not someone you’d expect to have read about Polycrates, tells a story in his Fifth Epistle that’s worth translating literally, showcasing the mindset of his time: ‘This Arnulphus was the father of King Pepin and the grandfather of Charlemagne. When he was filled with the Holy Spirit, he sacrificed the love of his wife and children and traded the glory and splendor of this world for the glorious poverty of Christ. As he rushed into the wilderness, he needed to cross a river called the Moselle. When he reached the middle of the bridge, where the river ran deepest, he tossed his ring into the waters, saying, “When I receive this ring back from the foaming waves of this river, I will confidently believe that I am freed from the bonds of all my sins.” He then ventured into the wilderness, where he spent a significant time dead to himself and the world. Meanwhile, the Bishop of Metz had died, and Divine Providence appointed Arnulphus to that position. Continuing in his new role[Pg 516], he refrained from eating meat, as he had during his time in the wilderness. One day, a fish was presented to him as a gift. The cook, while gutting it, discovered a ring in its entrails and joyfully rushed to show it to his master. As soon as the blessed Bishop laid eyes on the ring, he recognized it as his own and marveled not so much at the strange source of the metal but at the fact that, through Divine grace, he had received the forgiveness of his sins.’
The same distinguished writer, in the work before mentioned, relates the story told by St. Augustine, bishop of the city where it happened, ‘and who has deemed it worthy of insertion in his great work, “De Civitate Dei” (xxii. 8):—“There lived an old man, a fellow-townsman of ours at Hippo, Florentius by name, by trade a tailor, a religious poor person. He had lost his cloak and had not wherewith to buy another. Certain ribald youths who happened to be present overheard him, and followed him as he went down, mocking at him as though he had demanded of the martyrs the sum of fifty folles (12½ denarii) to clothe himself withal. But Florentius walking on without replying to them, espied a big fish thrown up by the sea, and struggling upon the beach, and he secured it through the good-natured assistance of the same youths, and sold it for 300 folles (75 denarii) to a certain cook, by name Carthosus, a good Christian, for pickling, telling him at the same time all that had taken place—intending to buy wool with the money, so that his wife might make therewith, as well as she could, something to clothe him. But the cook in cutting up the fish found in its belly a gold ring, and forthwith, being moved with compassion, as well as influenced by religious scruples, restored it to Florentius, saying, ‘Behold how the Twenty Martyrs have clothed thee.’”’
The same well-known writer, in the previously mentioned work, shares the story told by St. Augustine, the bishop of the city where it took place, who found it worthy to include in his significant work, “De Civitate Dei” (xxii. 8):—“There was an old man, a fellow resident of ours in Hippo named Florentius, who was a tailor and a devout poor person. He had lost his cloak and had no money to buy a new one. Some rowdy youths nearby overheard him and followed him, mocking him as if he had asked the martyrs for fifty folles (12½ denarii) to get himself clothed. But Florentius continued on without engaging with them, and spotted a large fish washed up on the shore, struggling on the beach. He managed to secure it with the help of those same youths and sold it for 300 folles (75 denarii) to a cook named Carthosus, a good Christian, for pickling, while explaining to him everything that had happened—intending to buy wool with the money so his wife could make him some clothes. However, when the cook cut open the fish, he discovered a gold ring inside it, and immediately, moved by compassion and his religious beliefs, he returned it to Florentius, saying, ‘Look how the Twenty Martyrs have provided for your clothing.’”
King Edward’s Ring. P. 119.
King Edward's Ring. __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.
In the ‘Life of Edward the Confessor’ (forming one of the series of the chronicles and memorials of Great Britain and Ireland, during the Middle Ages, published by the authority of H.M. Treasury, under the direction of the Master of the Rolls), Mr. Luard, the editor, has given the translation of a manuscript in the public library of the University of Cambridge,[Pg 517] to which the date of 1245 is ascribed, and written in Norman-French. The legend of the Confessor’s ring is thus introduced:—
In the 'Life of Edward the Confessor' (part of the series of chronicles and memorials of Great Britain and Ireland during the Middle Ages, published by the authority of H.M. Treasury, under the direction of the Master of the Rolls), Mr. Luard, the editor, has provided a translation of a manuscript in the public library of the University of Cambridge,[Pg 517] dated 1245 and written in Norman-French. The story of the Confessor’s ring is introduced as follows:—
The King was at the service
Where was dedicated the church
Of Saint John, who to God was dear,
And whom the King could so much love:
No saint had he so dear except Saint Peter.
Lo, a poor man who was there,
A stranger and unknown,
When he saw King Edward,
For the love of Saint John prays him
That of his possession he would give him a part.
The King who hears his prayer,
Puts his hand to his alms-chest,
But neither gold nor silver does he there find.
He bids his almoner to be summoned,
But he was not found for the crowd.
The poor man ceases not to beg
And the King is in distress
Because neither gold nor silver he finds at hand.
And he reflects, remains silent,
Looks at his hand and remembers
That on his finger he had a cherished ring
Which was large, royal, and beautiful;
To the poor man he gives it for the love
Of Saint John, his dear lord;
And he takes it with joy,
And gently gives him thanks;
And when he was possessed of it,
He departed and vanished.
But to this no one paid attention.
Soon after it chanced that
Two palmers of English birth,
Who go to seek the Holy Sepulchre
By a path where no one guides them
In the land of Syria,
Go astray, far out by the way,
See neither man nor house:
Now they have arrived in the wilderness,
The night comes on, the sun sets;
Nor do they know which way to turn,
Nor where they can lodge for the night,
They fear robbers, they fear wild beasts,
They fear monsters and dreadful tempests,
[Pg 518]And many an adventure of the desert.
The dark night surprises them.
Now behold a band of youths
In a circle which was very large and beautiful,
By whom the whole road and air
Were lightened as if by lightning,
And an old man white and hoary,
Brighter than the sun at mid-day,
Before whom are carried two tapers,
Which lighten the path;
He, when he comes close to the palmers
Salutes them; says, ‘Dear friends
Whence come you? Of what creed
Are you, and of what birth?
What kingdom and King? What seek you here?’
And one of them answered him,
‘We are Christians, and desire
Have we to expiate our sins;
We are both from England;
We have come to seek the Holy Sepulchre,
And the holy places of this country,
Where Jesus died and lived.
And our King is named Edward,
The good prince, whom may God preserve to us,
He has not such a saint from here to France.
But it has befallen us by mishap
We have lost to-day the company
Which comforts and which guides us,
Nor know we what has become of us.’
And the old man answered there,
Joyously like a clerk,
‘Come after me, I go before;
Follow me, I will conduct you
Where you will find a good hostelry.
For love of King Edward
You shall have lodging and good care,
Your leader I will myself be,
And your host.’ He leads them on;
They enter a city,
They have found a good hostelry,
The table prepared, and good treatment,
Linen and bed, and other preparatives;
The tired ones, who had great need,
[Pg 519]Repose themselves after supper.
In the morning, when they depart,
They find their host and leader,
Who, when they have issued from the gate,
Gently thus comforts them.
‘Be not troubled nor sad,
I am John the Evangelist;
For love of Edward the King,
I neither will nor ought to fail you;
For he is my especial
Friend and loyal King.
With me he has joined company,
Since he has chosen to lead a chaste life,
We shall be peers in paradise.
And I tell you, dear good friends,
You shall arrive, be assured,
In your country safe and sound.
You shall go to King Edward,
Salute him from me,
And that you attempt not a falsehood
To say, you shall carry proofs—
A ring, which he will know,
Which he gave to me, John,
When he was at the service
Where my church was dedicated;
There I besought him, for the love
Of John; it was I in poor array.
And let King Edward know well,
To me he shall come before six months (are over).
And since he resembles me,
In paradise shall we be together
And that of this he may be confidently assured
You shall tell him all that whatever I tell you.’
They, who well understand his words,
Give him thanks for all his benefits,
And when they are possessed of the ring
The saint departed and vanished;
And the pilgrims depart,
Who now are on the certain path
Without ill, and without trouble;
The saint leads and conducts them;
They hasten to go to King Edward,
That they have not arrived seems tardy to them,
And they relate their adventure,
Show the ring at once,
Whatever they relate he believes true,
[Pg 520]When he sees the proofs;
Of this witness bears the whole
Company, large in numbers.
The King was at the service
Where the church
Of Saint John, who was dear to God,
Was dedicated, and whom the King loved so much:
No saint was dearer to him except Saint Peter.
Look, a poor man was there,
A stranger and unknown,
When he saw King Edward,
He prayed to him for the love of Saint John
To give him a share of his possessions.
The King, hearing his prayer,
Reaches for his alms-chest,
But finds neither gold nor silver there.
He calls for his almoner,
But he couldn’t be found in the crowd.
The poor man keeps begging
And the King is distressed
Because he can’t find gold or silver at hand.
He reflects, stays silent,
Looks at his hand and remembers
That on his finger he had a cherished ring
Which was large, royal, and beautiful;
He gives it to the poor man for the love
Of Saint John, his dear lord;
The man takes it joyfully,
And thanks him gently;
And when he has it,
He leaves and disappears.
But no one pays attention to this.
Soon after, it happened that
Two pilgrims from England,
Who were going to seek the Holy Sepulchre
By a path without guidance
In the land of Syria,
Got lost, far off the way,
Seeing neither man nor house:
Now they've arrived in the wilderness,
Night is falling, the sun is setting;
They don’t know which way to turn,
Or where they can stay for the night,
They fear robbers, wild beasts,
Monsters and dreadful storms,
[Pg 518]And many dangers of the desert.
The dark night catches them.
Now behold a group of youths
In a large and beautiful circle,
Lighting up the entire road and air
As if they were lightning,
And an old man, white and gray,
Brighter than the sun at noon,
Before whom two candles are carried,
Illuminating the path;
He approaches the pilgrims
And greets them, saying, ‘Dear friends,
Where do you come from? What is your faith,
Your heritage? What kingdom and King? What are you seeking here?’
One of them replied,
‘We are Christians and desire
To atone for our sins;
We are both from England;
We have come to seek the Holy Sepulchre,
And the holy sites of this land,
Where Jesus died and lived.
Our King is named Edward,
The good prince, whom God preserve for us,
There is no saint like him from here to France.
But we’ve had the misfortune
Of losing the company
That comforts and guides us,
And we don’t know what has become of us.’
And the old man responded cheerfully,
‘Come after me, I will lead;
Follow me, I will take you
To a good inn.
For the love of King Edward,
You will have lodging and good care;
I will be your guide
And your host.’ He leads them on;
They enter a city,
They find a good inn,
With a prepared table, good service,
Linens and bedding, and other comforts;
The weary ones, in great need,
[Pg 519]Rest after dinner.
In the morning, when they leave,
They find their host and guide,
Who, after they have gone through the gate,
Gently comforts them.
‘Don’t be troubled or sad,
I am John the Evangelist;
For the love of Edward the King,
I will not and should not fail you;
For he is my special
Friend and loyal King.
With me he has associated,
Since he has chosen to lead a chaste life,
We shall be equals in paradise.
And I tell you, dear friends,
You will arrive, be assured,
Safe and sound in your homeland.
You will go to King Edward,
Send him my regards,
And do not attempt to lie
By saying you have proof—
A ring, which he will recognize,
Which he gave to me, John,
When he was at the service
Where my church was dedicated;
There I asked him, for the love
Of John; I was in poor array.
And let King Edward know well,
He shall come to me before six months (are over).
And since he resembles me,
In paradise, we shall be together,
And he can be confidently assured of this
You will tell him everything I tell you.’
They, who understood his words well,
Thank him for all his gifts,
And when they possess the ring,
The saint departs and vanishes;
And the pilgrims leave,
Now on the right path,
Without danger or trouble;
The saint leads and guides them;
They hurry to go to King Edward,
And they feel it’s been too long to arrive,
And they recount their adventure,
Show the ring immediately,
Whatever they relate he believes to be true,
[Pg 520]When he sees the evidence;
The whole
Company, in large numbers, bears witness to this.
Demons imprisoned in Rings. P. 132.
Demons trapped in Rings. __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.
There was a strong belief that familiar spirits could be carried about in rings and trinkets. Le Loyer, in his curious work ‘Des Spectres,’ writes: ‘With regard to the demons whom they imprisoned in rings or charms, the magicians of the school of Salamanca and Toledo, and their master Picatrix, together with those in Italy who made traffic of this kind of ware, knew better than to say whether or not they had appeared to those who had them in possession or bought them. And truly I cannot speak without horror of those who pretend to such vulgar familiarity with them, even to speaking of the nature of each particular demon shut up in a ring; whether he be a Mercurial, Jovial, Saturnine, Martial, or Aphrodisiac spirit; in what form he is wont to appear when required; how many times in the night he awakes his possessor; whether benign or cruel in disposition; whether he can be transferred to another; and if, once possessed, he can alter the natural temperament, so as to render men of Saturnine complexion Jovial, or the Jovials Saturnines, and so on. There is no end of the stories which might be collected under this head, to which, if I gave faith, as some of the learned of our time have done, it would be filling my paper to little purpose. I will not speak, therefore, of the crystal ring mentioned by Joaliun of Cambray, in which a young child could see all that they demanded of him, and which eventually was broken by the possessor, as the occasion by which the devil too much tormented him. Still less will I stay my pen to tell of the sorcerer of Courtray, whose ring had a demon enclosed in it, to whom it behoved him to speak every five days.’ By this familiar (remarks Heywood, in his ‘Hierarchie of the Blessed Angels’) ‘he was not onely acquainted with all newes, as well forrein as domesticke, but learned the cure and remedie for all griefs and diseases; insomuch that he had the reputation of a learned and excellent physition. At length, being accused of sortilège, or enchantment, at Arnham, in Guelderland, he was proscribed, and in the year 1548, the Chancellor caused his ring, in the public market, to be layd on[Pg 521] an anvil and with an iron hammer to be beaten in pieces. Mengius reporteth from the relation of a deare friend of his (a man of approved fame and honestie) this history. In a certain town under the jurisdiction of the Venetians, one of their præstigious artists (whom some call Pythonickes), having one of these rings in which he had two familiar spirits exorcised and bound, came to a predicant or preaching friar, a man of sincere life and conversation; and confessed unto him that hee was possessed of such an enchanted ring, with such spirits charmed, with whom he had conference at his pleasure. But since he considered with himselfe that it was a thing dangerous to his soule, and abhominable both to God and man, he desired to be cleanely acquit thereof, and to that purpose hee came to receive of him some godly counsell. But by no persuasion would the religious man be induced to have any speech at all with these evil spirits (to which motion the other had before earnestly solicited him), but admonished him to cause the magicke ring to be broken, and that to be done with all speed possible. At which words the familiars were heard (as it were) to mourne and lament in the ring, and to desire that no such violence might be offered to them; but rather than so, that it would please him to accept of the ring, and keepe it, promising to do him all service and vassallage; of which, if he pleased to accept, they would in a short time make him to be the most famous and admired predicant in all Italy. But he perceiving the divels cunning, under this colour of courtesie, made absolute refusall of their offer; and withall conjured them to know the reason why they would so willingly submit themselves to his patronage? After many evasive lies and deceptious answers, they plainly confessed unto him that they had of purpose persuaded the magition to heare him preach; that by that sermon, his conscience being pricked and galled, he might be weary of the ring, and being refused of the one, be accepted of the other; by which they hoped in short time so to have puft him up with pride and heresie, to have precipitated his soule into certaine and never-ending destruction. At which the churchman being zealously inraged, with a great hammer broke the ring almost to dust, and in the name of God sent them thence to their own habitation of darknesse, or whither it pleased the highest powers to dispose them.
There was a strong belief that familiar spirits could be carried around in rings and trinkets. Le Loyer, in his intriguing work ‘Des Spectres,’ writes: ‘Regarding the demons that they trapped in rings or charms, the magicians from the schools of Salamanca and Toledo, along with their master Picatrix, knew better than to claim whether or not these spirits had appeared to those who possessed or purchased them. And honestly, I can't help but feel horror for those who pretend to have such trivial familiarity with them, even discussing the characteristics of each specific demon locked inside a ring; whether it’s a Mercurial, Jovial, Saturnine, Martial, or Aphrodisiac spirit; what form he usually takes when called; how many times throughout the night he wakes his owner; whether he is kind or cruel; if he can be transferred to another; and, if once owned, whether he can change a person's natural temperament, transforming Saturnine individuals into Jovial ones, or vice versa, and so on. There’s no end to the stories that could be gathered about this topic, which, if I were to believe as some of our learned individuals do, would fill my paper with little purpose. Therefore, I won’t mention the crystal ring described by Joaliun of Cambray, in which a young child could see everything asked of him, and which was eventually broken by its owner out of despair from the devil's torment. Even less will I take the time to talk about the sorcerer from Courtray, whose ring held a demon that he had to speak to every five days.’ By this familiar (as Heywood remarks in his ‘Hierarchie of the Blessed Angels’), ‘he was not only aware of all news, both foreign and domestic, but also learned how to cure every grief and disease; to the point where he was reputed as a knowledgeable and excellent physician. Eventually, after being accused of sortilège, or enchantment, in Arnham, Guelderland, he was exiled, and in 1548, the Chancellor ordered his ring to be placed on [Pg 521] an anvil and smashed to pieces with an iron hammer. Mengius reports, based on the account of a dear friend of his (a man of proven reputation and integrity), this story. In a certain town under Venetian rule, one of their prestigious artists (whom some call Pythonickes), having one of these rings containing two familiar spirits exorcised and bound, approached a preaching friar, a genuinely virtuous man, and confessed that he possessed such an enchanted ring, with spirits charmed, with whom he could converse at will. But he reflected that it was dangerous for his soul and abhorrent to both God and man, so he wanted to free himself from it and sought his guidance. However, no persuasion could make the religious man agree to speak with these evil spirits (though the other had previously urged him to do so); instead, he advised him to break the magical ring immediately. At this, the spirits were heard to mourn and lament within the ring, pleading that no such violence be done to them and instead requested that he accept the ring, promising to serve him in every way possible; claiming that if he accepted, they would soon make him the most renowned and admired preacher in all of Italy. But recognizing the demons' cunning beneath their facade of courtesy, he firmly refused their offer and also demanded to know why they would willingly submit to him. After many evasive lies and deceptive answers, they finally confessed that they had intentionally influenced the magician to listen to his preaching, hoping that through that sermon, his conscience would be pricked, making him desire to rid himself of the ring, and in being rejected by one, he would then accept the other; by which they hoped to inflate his pride and heresy, leading his soul to certain and everlasting destruction. At this, the churchman, filled with righteous fury, smashed the ring to almost dust with a heavy hammer and, in the name of God, sent them back to their own dark dwelling or wherever the highest powers deemed fit to send them.
[Pg 522]‘Of this kind doubtless was the ring of Gyges—such likewise had the Phocensian tyrant, who, as Clemens Stromæus speaketh, by a sound which came of itselfe, was warned of all times, seasonable and unseasonable in which to mannage his affaires; who, notwithstanding, could not be forewarned of his pretended death, but his familiar left him in the end, suffering him to be slain by the conspirators. Such a ring, likewise, had one Hieronimus, Chancellor of Mediolanum, which after proved to be his untimely ruine.’ [‘Hierarchie of the Blessed Angels.’]
[Pg 522]“This was probably like the ring of Gyges—similarly, there was the Phocensian tyrant, who, as Clemens Stromæus mentioned, was alerted by a sound that occurred on its own, signaling him of the right and wrong times to manage his affairs; yet, he could not foresee his own fake death, as his close associate eventually abandoned him, allowing him to be killed by the conspirators. Likewise, one Hieronimus, Chancellor of Mediolanum, had such a ring, which ultimately led to his untimely downfall.” [‘Hierarchie of the Blessed Angels.’]
A learned German physician has given an instance in which the devil, of his own accord, enclosed himself in a ring as a familiar, thereby proving how dangerous it is to trifle with him.
A knowledgeable German doctor provided an example where the devil willingly trapped himself in a ring as a familiar, showing just how risky it is to mess around with him.
Cramp-Rings. P. 164.
Cramp-Rings. __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.
The precise date when the Kings of England commenced to bless rings, regarded as preservatives against the cramp or against epilepsy, the morbus Sancti Johannis, is uncertain. The earliest mention of the practice, which Mr. Edmund Waterton has found, occurs in the reign of Edward II.: ‘The prayer used in the blessing of the ring implores—‘ut omnes qui eos gestabunt, nec eos infestet vel nervorum contractio, vel comitialis morbi periculum.’ And the King, to impart this salutary virtue, rubbed the rings between his hands, with this invocation: ‘Manuum nostrarum confricatione quas olei sacri infusione externa sanctificare dignatus es pro ministerii nostri modo consecra,’ &c. Hitherto these rings are simply described as annuli. But in the 44th of Edward III., in the account-book of John of Ipres, or Ypres, they are termed medicinales.’
The exact date when the Kings of England started blessing rings, believed to protect against cramps or epilepsy, known as the morbus Sancti Johannis, is unclear. The earliest record of this practice, found by Mr. Edmund Waterton, dates back to the reign of Edward II.: ‘The prayer used in the blessing of the ring asks—‘that all who wear them may not be plagued by nerve contractions or the danger of epileptic fits.’ The King, to give this protective quality, rubbed the rings between his hands, using this invocation: ‘By the rubbing of our hands, which you have deemed worthy to sanctify with the infusion of sacred oil for the purpose of our ministry,’ etc. Up to this point, these rings are simply referred to as annuli. However, in the 44th year of Edward III., in the account book of John of Ipres, they are called medicinales.
In the last chapter of the ‘Constitutions of the Household,’ settled in the reign of Edward II., the following entry appears: ‘Item, le Roi doit offrer de certein le jour de grant vendredi a crouce v. s. queux il est accustumez receivre devers lui a la mene le chapelein afair eut anulx a donner pur medicine az divers gentz.’
In the last chapter of the ‘Constitutions of the Household,’ established during the reign of Edward II, the following entry appears: ‘Also, the King should offer on Good Friday a certain amount, 5 shillings, which he is accustomed to receive from the chaplain, to give for medicine to various people.’
In the Eleemosyna Roll of 9th Edward III. the following entry occurs: ‘In oblacione domini Regis ad crucem de Gneythe die parasceves in capella sua infra mannerium suum de Clipstone, in precium duorum florencium de Florencia xiiij. die Aprilis vi. s. viij. d., et in denariis quos posuit pro dictis[Pg 523] florenciis reassumptis pro annulis medicinalibus inde faciendis, eodem die vi. s.; summa xii. s. viii. d.’
In the Eleemosyna Roll of the 9th year of Edward III, the following entry appears: ‘In the offering of the Lord King at the cross of Gneythe on Good Friday in his chapel within his manor of Clipstone, for the price of two florins from Florence on the 14th day of April 6. s. 8 d., and in the money he set aside for the said [Pg 523] florins to be used for making medicinal rings, on the same day 6. s.; total sum 12. s. 8 d.’
In the Eleemosyna Roll of 10th Edward III. we have the following entry: ‘In oblacione domini Regis ad crucem de Gneyth in die parasceves apud Eltham, xxix. die Marcii v. s., et pro iisdem denariis reassumptis pro annulis inde faciendis per manus Domini Johannis de Crokeford eodem die v. s.’ And in the following year: ‘In oblacione domini Regis ad crucem de Gneyth in capella sua in pcho de Wyndesore die parasceves v. s., et pro totidem denariis reassumptis pro annuli inde faciendis v. s.’
In the Eleemosyna Roll of the 10th year of Edward III, we have the following entry: ‘In the offering by the Lord King at the cross of Gneyth on Good Friday at Eltham, 29th day of March, 5 s., and for the same money taken back for making rings through the hands of Lord John de Crokeford on the same day 5 s.’ And in the following year: ‘In the offering by the Lord King at the cross of Gneyth in his chapel in the parish of Windsor on Good Friday 5 s., and for the same amount of money taken back for making the rings 5 s.’
In the accounts of John de Ypres, 44th Edward III., the following entries are found: ‘In oblacionibus Regis factis adorando crucem in capella sua infra castrum suum de Wyndesore, die parasceves in pretio trium nobilium auri et quinque solidorum sterling. xxv. s. In denariis solutis pro iisdem oblacionibus reassumptis pro annulis medicinalibus inde faciendis, ibidem, eodem die xxv. s.’
In the records of John de Ypres, 44th Edward III, the following entries can be found: ‘In the offerings made by the King while worshiping the cross in his chapel within his castle at Windsor, on the day of preparation, for the price of three noble gold coins and five shillings. 25 s. In the money given for the same offerings that were returned for making medicinal rings, there, on the same day, 25 s.’
The same entries occur in the 7th and 8th Henry IV.
The same entries appear in the 7th and 8th Henry IV.
In the 8th Edward IV. mention occurs that these cramp-rings were made of silver and of gold, as appears by the following entry: ‘Pro eleemosyna in die parasceves c. marc., et pro annulis de auro et argento pro eleemosyna Regis eodem die,’ &c. And a Privy Seal of the next year, amongst other particulars relates: ‘Item paid for the King’s Good Fryday rings of gold and silver xxxiii. l. vi. s. viii. d.’
In the 8th year of Edward IV's reign, there is a mention that these cramp rings were made of silver and gold, as shown by the following entry: ‘For charity on Good Friday c. marks, and for the rings of gold and silver for the King’s charity on the same day,’ etc. And a Privy Seal from the following year, among other details, states: ‘Also paid for the King’s Good Friday rings of gold and silver xxxiii. l. vi. s. viii. d.’
Mention of these rings is also found in the Comptroller’s accounts in the 20th Henry VII.
Mention of these rings is also found in the Comptroller's accounts from the 20th year of Henry VII.
A MS. copy of the Orders of the King of England’s Household, 13th Henry VIII., 1521-1522, preserved in the National Library at Paris (No. 9,986), contains ‘the order of the Kinge’s of England, touching his coming to service, hallowing ye crampe rings, and offering and creeping to the crosse.’ ‘First, the King to come to the closett or to the chappell with the lords and noblemen wayting on him, without any sworde to bee borne before him on that day, and there to tarry in his travers till the bishop and deane have brought forth the crucifix out of the vestry (the almoner reading the service of the cramp-rings), layd upon a cushion before the high altar, and then the huishers shall lay a carpet before yt for the King to creepe to[Pg 524] the crosse upon: and yt done, there shall be a fourme set upon the carpet before the crucifix, and a cushion layd before it for the King to kneele on; and the Master of the Jewell house shal be ther ready with the crampe-rings in a basin or basins of silver; the King shall kneele upon the sayd cushion before the fourme, and then must the clerke of the closett bee ready with the booke conteyninge ye service of the hallowing of the said rings, and the almoner must kneel upon the right hand of the King, holding of the sayd booke; and when yt is done the King shall rise and go to the high altar, where an huisher must be ready with a cushion to lay for his grace to kneele upon, and the greatest Lord or Lords being then present shall take the basin or basins with the rings, and bear them after the King, and then deliver them to the King to offer; and this done, the Queen shall come down out of the closett or travers into the chappell with ladies and gentlewomen wayters on her, and creepe to the crosse; and that done, she shall returne againe into her closett or travers, and then the ladies shall come downe and creepe to the crosse, and when they have done, the lords and noblemen shall in likewise.’
A manuscript of the Orders of the King of England's Household, 13th Henry VIII, 1521-1522, kept in the National Library in Paris (No. 9,986), contains "the order for the King of England regarding his arrival for service, blessing the cramp rings, and offering and crawling to the cross." "First, the King should come to the closet or chapel with the lords and noblemen attending him, without any sword being carried before him on that day, and there he should wait in his place until the bishop and dean bring forth the crucifix from the vestry (the almoner reading the service for the cramp rings), laid on a cushion before the high altar. Then the ushers will lay a carpet before it for the King to crawl to the cross upon: and once that is done, there will be a bench set on the carpet in front of the crucifix, and a cushion laid before it for the King to kneel on; the Master of the Jewel House will be there ready with the cramp rings in a basin or basins of silver; the King will kneel on the said cushion before the bench, and then the clerk of the closet must be ready with the book containing the service for the blessing of the rings, and the almoner must kneel on the King's right-hand side, holding the said book; and when that is done, the King will rise and go to the high altar, where an usher must be ready with a cushion for him to kneel on, and the highest Lord or Lords present will take the basin or basins with the rings and carry them after the King, then hand them to the King to offer; once this is done, the Queen will come down from the closet or place into the chapel with ladies and gentlewomen attending her, and crawl to the cross; after that, she will return to her closet or place, and then the ladies will come down and crawl to the cross, and when they are done, the lords and noblemen will do the same."
A letter from Dr. Thomas Magnus, Warden of Sibthorpe College, Nottinghamshire, to Cardinal Wolsey, written in 1526, contains the following curious passage: ‘Pleas it your Grace to wete that M. Wiat of his goodness sent unto me for a present certaine crampe ringges, which I distributed and gave to sondery myne acquaintaunce at Edinburghe, amongse other to M. Adame Otterbourne, who, with one of thayme, releved a mann lying in the falling sekenes in the sight of myche people; sethenne whiche tyme many requestes have been made unto me for crampe ringges at my departing there, and also sethenne my comyng from thennes. May it pleas your Grace therefore to shew your gracious pleasure to the said M. Wyat, that some ringges may be kept and sent into Scottelande, whiche, after my poore oppynnyon shulde be a good dede, remembering the power and operacyon of thame is knowne and proved in Edinburghe, and that they be gretly required for the same cause both by grete personnages and other.’
A letter from Dr. Thomas Magnus, Warden of Sibthorpe College, Nottinghamshire, to Cardinal Wolsey, written in 1526, contains the following curious passage: ‘Your Grace should know that Mr. Wyatt kindly sent me some cramp rings as a gift, which I shared with several acquaintances in Edinburgh, including Mr. Adam Otterbourne, who used one of them to help a man suffering from seizures in front of a large crowd. Since then, I have received many requests for cramp rings as I was leaving there, and also since my return. May it please your Grace, therefore, to show your kindness to Mr. Wyatt by keeping some rings and sending them to Scotland, which, in my humble opinion, would be a good deed, considering the known effectiveness of these rings in Edinburgh, and that they are greatly sought after for the same reason by both important figures and others.’
Mr. Edmund Waterton thinks that the illuminated manual which Queen Mary used at the blessing of the cramp-rings, and which I have mentioned was in the possession of the late[Pg 525] Cardinal Wiseman, was the same from which Bishop Burnet printed the formula. Mr. Waterton states that on the second leaf of the MS. the service for the blessing of the rings begins with this rubric: ‘Certeyne Prayers to be used by the Quene’s Heighnes in the Consecration of the Cramperings.’
Mr. Edmund Waterton believes that the illuminated manual Queen Mary used during the blessing of the cramp-rings, which I mentioned was owned by the late [Pg 525] Cardinal Wiseman, is the same one from which Bishop Burnet printed the formula. Mr. Waterton notes that on the second page of the manuscript, the service for blessing the rings starts with this note: ‘Certain prayers to be used by the Queen’s Highness in the consecration of the cramp-rings.’
The next rubric is as follows: ‘The Ryngs lyeing in one basin or moo, this Prayer shall be said over them,’ &c. This is followed by the Benedictio Annulorum, consisting of several short formulas or sentences. Then another rubric sets forth: ‘These prayers beinge saide, the Queene’s Heighnes rubbeth the rings betwene her hands, sayinge Sanctifica Domine Annulos,’ &c.
The next guideline is as follows: ‘The rings lying in one basin or more, this prayer should be said over them,’ etc. This is followed by the Benedictio Annulorum, which includes several short formulas or sentences. Then another guideline states: ‘After these prayers are said, the Queen’s Highness rubs the rings between her hands, saying Sanctifica Domine Annulos,’ etc.
‘Thenne must holly water be caste on the rings, sayeing, In nomine Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti, Amen. Followed by two other prayers.’
‘Then holy water must be sprinkled on the rings, saying, In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, Amen. Followed by two other prayers.’
Miss Strickland claims the blessing of the cramp-rings as the peculiar privilege of the Queens of England. But her argument falls to the ground when tested by collateral and official documents.
Miss Strickland asserts that the blessing of the cramp-rings is a unique privilege of the Queens of England. However, her argument collapses when examined alongside supporting documents and official records.
Mr. Waterton concludes his most interesting article on Royal Cramp-rings (‘Archæological Journal,’ vol. xxi. pp. 103-113) by stating that he has been unable to accompany the essay by the representation of any example, ‘but I have never met with a specimen that could with any certainty be pronounced a royal cramp-ring, neither have I found any description of the rings made, as the entries state, from the gold and silver coins offered by the King on Good Friday, and then redeemed by an equivalent sum. Probably they were plain hoop-rings. In the will of John Baret, of Bury St. Edmunds, 1463, a bequest is made to “my Lady Walgrave” of a “rowund ryng of the Kynge’s silvir.” In another part of his will he bequeaths to “Thomais Brews, esquiyer, my crampe ryng with blak innamel, and a part silvir and gilt.” And, in 1535, Edmund Lee bequeaths to “my nece Thwarton my gold ryng wt a turkes, and a crampe ryng of gold wt all.”
Mr. Waterton wraps up his fascinating article on Royal Cramp-rings (‘Archaeological Journal,’ vol. xxi, pp. 103-113) by saying that he hasn't been able to include any examples with the essay. "However, I have never come across a specimen that can be confidently identified as a royal cramp-ring, nor have I found any description of the rings made, as the records mention, from the gold and silver coins presented by the King on Good Friday and then reclaimed for an equivalent amount. They were probably just simple hoop rings. In the will of John Baret, from Bury St. Edmunds, 1463, he bequeaths to 'my Lady Walgrave' a 'round ring of the King’s silver.' Elsewhere in his will, he leaves to 'Thomais Brews, esquire, my cramp ring with black enamel, and part silver and gilt.' And in 1535, Edmund Lee leaves to 'my niece Thwarton my gold ring with a turquoise, and a cramp ring of gold with all.'"
‘But there is no evidence to show that the second ring mentioned by John Baret was a royal cramp-ring; whereas it appears to me that the one bequeathed by Edmund Lee may have been one of the royal cramp-rings, for otherwise a more particular description would have been given.’
‘But there’s no evidence to suggest that the second ring mentioned by John Baret was a royal cramp-ring; while it seems to me that the one passed down by Edmund Lee might have been one of the royal cramp-rings, because otherwise a more detailed description would have been provided.’
[Pg 526]An interesting account of ‘the ceremonies of blessing cramp-rings on Good Friday, used by the Catholic Kings of England,’ will be found in Pegge’s ‘Curialia Miscellanea’ (Appendix No. 3, p. 164).
[Pg 526]An intriguing description of ‘the rituals for blessing cramp rings on Good Friday, which were used by the Catholic Kings of England,’ can be found in Pegge’s ‘Curialia Miscellanea’ (Appendix No. 3, p. 164).
It is curious that in Somersetshire the ring-finger is thought to have the power of curing any sore or wound that is rubbed with it.
It’s interesting that in Somersetshire, people believe the ring finger can heal any sore or wound that is rubbed with it.
CHAPTER V.
Chapter 5.
BETROTHAL AND WEDDING-RINGS. P. 275.
Engagement and wedding rings. __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.
I should not omit to mention the famous sermon of good Jeremy Taylor on ‘a wedding-ring for the finger,’ which is worthy the perusal not only of those who have entered the matrimonial life, but of others who contemplate an entrance into the same. The text is (Genesis ii. 18), ‘And the Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help-meet for him.’ Although no allusion is made to the substantial character of the nuptial circle, yet the deductions made from the text are the sweetest and the holiest that could be imagined, and the brightest jewels of the mineral world could not exceed in beauty the language of the grand old divine. ‘When thou layest out for such a good upon earth, look up to the God of heaven. Let Him make his choice for thee, who hath made this choice of thee. Look above you before you look about you.’ ‘Give God the tribute of your gratulation for your good companion. Take heed of paying your rent to a wrong landlord. When you taste of the stream, reflect on the spring that feeds it. Now thou hast four eyes for thy speculation, four hands for thy operation, four feet for thy ambulation, and four shoulders for thy sustentation. What the sin against the Holy Ghost is in point of divinity, that is unthankfulness in point of morality; an offence unpardonable. Pity it is but that moon should ever be in an eclipse, that will not acknowledge her beams to be borrowed from the sun. He that praises not the giver, prizes not the gift.’ ‘It is between a man and his wife in the house, as it is between the sun and[Pg 527] the moon in the heavens; when the greater light goes down, the lesser light gets up; when the one ends in setting, the other begins in shining.
I shouldn't forget to mention the famous sermon by Jeremy Taylor on 'a wedding ring for the finger,' which is worth reading not just for those who are married but also for anyone considering marriage. The text is from Genesis 2:18, 'And the Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a help-meet for him.' While there’s no direct reference to the actual wedding ring, the insights drawn from the text are incredibly sweet and holy, and the language of this great old preacher is more beautiful than the finest gems in the world. 'When you seek such a good thing on earth, look up to the God of heaven. Let Him make His choice for you, as He has chosen you. Look above you before you look around you.' 'Give God thanks for your good companion. Be careful not to pay your dues to the wrong landlord. When you enjoy the stream, remember the spring that feeds it. Now you have four eyes for your observation, four hands for your work, four feet for your movement, and four shoulders for your support. What the sin against the Holy Ghost is in terms of divinity, ungratefulness is in terms of morality; it’s an unforgivable offense. It is a pity if the moon is ever in an eclipse, if she won’t acknowledge that her light comes from the sun. He who doesn’t thank the giver doesn’t value the gift.' 'It is like the relationship between a man and his wife in the home, just as it is between the sun and the moon in the sky; when the greater light sets, the lesser light rises; when one ends in setting, the other begins to shine.
‘Husband and wife should be as the milch-kine, which were coupled together to carry the ark of God; or as the two Cherubims, that looked one upon another, and both upon the mercy-seat; or as the two tables of stone, on each of which were engraven the laws of God. In some families married persons are like Jeremiah’s two baskets of figs, the one very good, the other very evil; or like fire and water, whilst the one is flaming in devotion, the other is freezing in corruption. There is a two-fold hindrance in holiness: first, on the right side; secondly, on the left. On the right side, when the wife would run in God’s way, the husband will not let her go; when the fore-horse in a team will not draw, he wrongeth all the rest; when the general of an army forbids a march, all the soldiers stand still.’ ‘Man is an affectionate creature. Now the woman’s behaviour should be such towards the man, as to require his affection by increasing his delectation; that the new-born love may not be blasted as soon as it is blossomed, that it may not be ruined before it be rooted.’ ‘Husband and wife should be like two candles burning together, which make the house more lightsome; or like two fragrant flowers bound up in one nosegay, that augment its sweetness; or like two well-tuned instruments, which, sounding together, make the more melodious music.’ ‘A spouse should be more careful of her children’s breeding than she should be fearful of her children’s bearing. Take heed lest these flowers grow in the devil’s garden.’ ‘Good education is the best livery you can give them living; and it is the best legacy you can leave them when dying.’ ‘Let these small pieces of timber be hewed and squared for the celestial building; by putting a sceptre of grace into their hands, you will set a crown of glory upon their heads.’ ‘Marriages are styled matches, yet amongst those many that are married, how few are there that are matched! Husbands and wives are like locks and keys, that rather break than open, except the wards be answerable.’
"Husbands and wives should be like the cows that were paired together to carry the ark of God, or like the two Cherubim that looked at each other and both at the mercy seat; or like the two stone tablets, each engraved with God's laws. In some families, married people are like Jeremiah's two baskets of figs, one very good and the other very bad; or like fire and water, where one is blazing with devotion while the other is cold with corruption. There are two main obstacles to holiness: first, on the right side; second, on the left. On the right side, when the wife wants to follow God's path, the husband won't let her; when the lead horse in a team refuses to pull, it holds back the rest; when the general of an army forbids a march, all the soldiers stop moving." "Men are affectionate creatures. A woman's behavior should be such that it encourages the man's affection by increasing his pleasure; so that the newly blossomed love doesn't wilt before it takes root." "Husbands and wives should be like two candles burning together, which make the home brighter; or like two fragrant flowers tied together in a bouquet, enhancing its sweetness; or like two well-tuned instruments that, played together, create beautiful music." "A spouse should be more concerned about her children's upbringing than fearful about them having children. Be careful that these flowers don't grow in the devil's garden." "Good education is the best gift you can give them while alive; and it's the best legacy you can leave them when you die." "Let these small pieces of timber be shaped and prepared for the heavenly building; by giving them a scepter of grace, you will place a crown of glory on their heads." "Marriages are called matches, yet among the many who are married, how few are truly matched! Husbands and wives are like locks and keys that tend to break rather than open, unless the mechanisms fit together."
CHAPTER VI.
CHAPTER 6.
RING TOKENS.
RING TOKENS.
The Essex Ring. P. 336.
The Essex Ring. __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.
The story of the ring given by Queen Elizabeth to the Earl of Essex is of such romantic interest that it is sad to destroy the charm by casting doubts on its authenticity; but, at the present day especially, a crucial test is applied to numbers of similar instances, and ‘historic doubts’ crop up incessantly, with which heretofore no profane hand was expected to meddle. The story of the Essex ring-token has been investigated with great care by a writer in the ‘Edinburgh Review’ (No. 200), who says: ‘Whatever might be the supposed indignation of Elizabeth against her dying cousin, Lady Nottingham, it is clear that as the real offender was Lord Nottingham, he would naturally have more shared in her displeasure; and it is very improbable that a fortnight after the Queen had shaken the helpless wife on her death-bed, the husband, by whose authority the offence was committed, should have continued in undiminished favour. The existence of the ring would do but little to establish the truth of the story, even if but one had been preserved and cherished as the identical ring; but as there are two, if not three, which lay claim to that distinction, they invalidate each other’s claims. One is preserved at Hawnes, in Bedfordshire, the seat of the Rev. Lord John Thynne; another is the property of C. W. Warren, Esq.; and we believe the third is deposited for safety at Messrs. Drummond’s bank.
The story of the ring given by Queen Elizabeth to the Earl of Essex is so romantic that it feels disappointing to question its authenticity. Nowadays, especially, a rigorous standard is applied to many similar tales, and “historical doubts” keep emerging, which had previously been considered beyond scrutiny. The tale of the Essex ring-token has been thoroughly examined by a writer in the 'Edinburgh Review' (No. 200), who states: “No matter what Elizabeth's supposed anger towards her dying cousin, Lady Nottingham, might have been, it’s clear that since the real wrongdoer was Lord Nottingham, he would naturally have drawn more of her ire. It’s very unlikely that just two weeks after the Queen had confronted the helpless wife on her deathbed, the husband, who was the one responsible for the wrongdoing, would still enjoy her full favor. The existence of the ring wouldn’t do much to prove the story is true, even if only one had been kept and cherished as the original ring; but since there are two, if not three, that claim that title, they contradict each other’s claims. One is kept at Hawnes, in Bedfordshire, the home of the Rev. Lord John Thynne; another belongs to C. W. Warren, Esq.; and we believe the third is safely stored at Messrs. Drummond’s bank.”
‘The ring at Hawnes is said to have descended in unbroken succession from Lady Frances Devereux (afterwards Duchess of Somerset) to the present owner. The stone in this ring is a sardonyx, in which is cut in relief a head of Elizabeth, the execution of which is of a high order. That the ring has descended from Lady Frances Devereux, affords the strongest presumptive evidence that it was not the ring. According to the tradition, it had passed from her father into Lady Nottingham’s hands. According to Lady Elizabeth Spelman, Lord Nottingham insisted upon her keeping it.
‘The ring at Hawnes is said to have been passed down in an unbroken line from Lady Frances Devereux (later the Duchess of Somerset) to the current owner. The stone in this ring is a sardonyx, featuring a relief carving of Elizabeth’s head, executed to a very high standard. The fact that the ring has come down from Lady Frances Devereux strongly suggests that it was not the ring. According to tradition, it was handed from her father to Lady Nottingham. Lady Elizabeth Spelman mentioned that Lord Nottingham insisted she keep it.
In her interview with the Queen, the Countess might be[Pg 529] supposed to have presented to her the token she had so fatally withheld; or it might have remained in her family, or have been destroyed; but the most improbable circumstance would have been its restoration to the widow or daughter of the much-injured Essex by the offending Earl of Nottingham. The Duchess of Somerset left a long, curious, and minute will, and in it there is no mention of any such ring. If there is good evidence for believing that the curious ring at Hawnes was ever in the possession of the Earl of Essex, one might be tempted to suppose that it was the likeness of the Queen, to which he alludes in his letters as his “fair angel,” written from Portland Road, and the time of his disgrace after the proceedings in the Star Chamber, and when still under restraint at Essex House. Had Essex at this time possessed any ring, a token, by presenting which he would have been entitled to favour, it seems most improbable that he should have kept it back, and yet regarded this likeness of the Queen, whose gracious eyes encouraged him to be a petitioner for himself. The whole tone of this letter is in fact almost conclusive against the possibility of his having in his possession any gift of hers endowed with such rights as that of the ring which the Countess of Nottingham is supposed to have withheld.’
In her interview with the Queen, the Countess might have been supposed to have given her the token she had so tragically kept back; or it might have stayed in her family, or it could have been destroyed; but the least likely scenario would have been its return to the widow or daughter of the much-wronged Essex by the Earl of Nottingham, who caused the offense. The Duchess of Somerset left behind a lengthy, curious, and detailed will, and there’s no mention of any ring in it. If there's solid evidence that the curious ring at Hawnes was ever owned by the Earl of Essex, one might be tempted to think it was the likeness of the Queen that he referred to in his letters as his “fair angel,” written from Portland Road during his disgrace after the Star Chamber proceedings, and while he was still under confinement at Essex House. If Essex had at that time possessed any ring, a token that would have entitled him to favor, it seems highly unlikely that he would have held it back, especially considering his interest in this likeness of the Queen, whose kind eyes encouraged him to appeal for himself. The overall tone of this letter is actually quite convincing against the idea that he had in his possession any gift from her that came with rights like those of the ring that the Countess of Nottingham is thought to have withheld.
CHAPTER IX.
CHAPTER 9.
CUSTOMS AND INCIDENTS IN CONNECTION WITH RINGS.
CUSTOMS AND INCIDENTS RELATED TO RINGS.
Wedding of the Adriatic. P. 419.
Adriatic Wedding. __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.
In Richard Lassel’s ‘Voyage of Italy’ is an account of the performance of this ceremony at Venice, about the year 1650. ‘I happened to be at Venice thrice at the great sea Triumph, or feast of the Ascension, which was performed thus: About our eight in the morning the Senators, in their scarlet robes, meet at the Doge’s Pallace, and there, taking him up, they walk with him processionally unto the shoar, where the Bucentoro lyes waiting them; the Pope’s Nuncio being on his right hand, and the Patriarch of Venice on his left hand.[Pg 530] Then, ascending into the Bucentoro by a handsome bridge thrown out to the shoar, the Doge takes his place, and the Senators sit round about the galley as they can, to the number of two or three hundred. The Senate being placed, the anchor is weighed, and the slaves being warned by the Captain’s whistle, and the sound of trumpets, begin to strike all at once with their oars, and to make the Bucentoro march as gravely upon the water as if she also went upon cioppini (high shoes then worn by the Venetian ladies). Thus they steer for two miles upon the Laguna, while the music plays and sings Epithalamiums all the way long, and makes Neptune jealous to hear Hymen called upon in his Dominions. Round about the Bucentoro flock a world of Piottas and Gondolas, richly covered overhead with sumptuous Canopies of silks and rich stuffs, and rowed by watermen in rich liveries as well as the Trumpeters. Thus forrain Embassadors, divers noblemen of the country and strangers of condition, wait upon the Doge’s gally, all the way long both coming and going. At last the Doge, being arrived at the appointed place, throws a Ring into the sea, without any other ceremony than by saying, Desponsamus te, Mare; in signum perpetui dominii. We espouse thee, O Sea, in Testimony of our perpetual dominion over thee; and so returns to the Church of St. Nicolas, in Lio (an Island hard by), where he assists at High Mass with the Senate. This done, he returns home again in the same state, and invites those that accompanied him in his gally to dinner in his Pallace, the preparations of which dinner we saw before the Doge was got home.’
In Richard Lassel’s ‘Voyage of Italy,’ there’s a description of the ceremony in Venice around 1650. ‘I happened to be in Venice three times for the great sea Triumph, or Feast of the Ascension, which was performed like this: Around eight in the morning, the Senators, dressed in their scarlet robes, gather at the Doge’s Palace, and then they escort him in a procession to the shore, where the Bucentoro is waiting for them; the Pope’s Nuncio is on his right and the Patriarch of Venice on his left.[Pg 530] After boarding the Bucentoro via a stylish bridge leading to the shore, the Doge takes his seat, and the Senators sit around the galley as closely as they can, numbering two or three hundred. Once the Senate is settled, the anchor is raised, and the crew, alerted by the Captain’s whistle and the sound of trumpets, start rowing in unison, making the Bucentoro glide on the water as gracefully as if it were wearing cioppini (the high shoes worn by Venetian ladies at that time). They row for two miles across the Lagoon while music plays and sings wedding songs all along, making Neptune slightly jealous to hear Hymen celebrated in his territory. Surrounding the Bucentoro are a multitude of Piottas and Gondolas, richly adorned with lavish canopies made of silk and fine materials, rowed by oarsmen in luxurious uniforms, just like the trumpeters. Foreign ambassadors, various local nobles, and distinguished strangers accompany the Doge’s galley the entire way. Finally, when the Doge arrives at the designated spot, he throws a ring into the sea, with no ceremony other than saying, Desponsamus te, Mare; in signum perpetui dominii. We espouse thee, O Sea, in testimony of our perpetual dominion over thee; and then he returns to the Church of St. Nicolas in Lio (an island nearby), where he attends High Mass with the Senate. After this, he makes the same journey back and invites those who accompanied him in his galley to dinner at his Palace, the preparations for which we saw before the Doge returned home.’
By the kindness of Mr. Octavius Morgan, F.R.S., Vice-President of the Antiquarian Society, &c., I am enabled to reproduce in the present work a privately-printed tract by that eminent antiquarian, which will be found of great utility to ring-collectors generally.
By the generosity of Mr. Octavius Morgan, F.R.S., Vice-President of the Antiquarian Society, etc., I am able to include in this work a privately printed document by that esteemed antiquarian, which will be very useful to ring collectors in general.
Classification for the Arrangement of a Collection of Finger-Rings.
Classification for Organizing a Collection of Finger Rings.
The Rings are divided into Two Grand Chronological Classes.
The Rings are divided into two main chronological categories.
[Pg 531]Class I. Antique, comprising all European Rings prior to the year A.D. 800, when the Empire of Charlemagne was established in Europe, and England was united under one Sceptre, and all Oriental Rings prior to the Hedjira, A.D. 622, or prior to the Mussulman Conquest of the various countries.
[Pg 531]Class I. Vintage, including all European rings made before AD 800, when Charlemagne's Empire was established in Europe, and England was united under one crown, as well as all Oriental rings made before the Hijra, CE 622, or before the Muslim conquest of various regions.
Class II. Medieval and Modern, comprising all Rings subsequent to those dates.
Class II. Medieval and Modern, includes all Rings that came after those dates.
Each Ring in the Collection should have a small label or ticket, of card or parchment, attached to it, bearing on one side the special letters belonging to the group, and on the other its number in the group; thus any Ring removed from the Collection, when once so arranged, can be easily restored to its proper group and place.
Each Ring in the Collection should have a small label or tag, made of card or parchment, attached to it, displaying the special letters for the group on one side and its number in the group on the other; this way, any Ring taken from the Collection, once organized this way, can be easily put back in its correct group and spot.
The letters O and Y (Nos. 15 and 25) are left vacant in case any collector should desire to make or add any other group.
The letters O and Y (Nos. 15 and 25) are left open in case any collector wants to create or add another group.
CLASS I.—ANTIQUE.
LEVEL I.—VINTAGE.
Arranged according to the various nations in the order of their antiquity or pre-eminence.
Arranged by the different nations in order of their age or significance.
1 | A | Egyptian. |
2 | B | Assyrian. |
3 | C | Babylonian. |
4 | D | Phœnician. |
5 | E | Hebrew. |
6 | F | Greek. |
7 | G | Etruscan. |
8 | H | Roman. |
9 | I | Early Christian. |
10 | J | Byzantine. |
11 | K | Hindoo. |
12 | L | Persian. |
13 | M | Sassanian. |
14 | N | Gnostic. |
15 | O | |
16 | P | Celtic. |
17 | Q | Scandinavian. |
18 | R | Teutonic. |
19 | S | Gaulish. |
20 | T | Frankish (Merovingian). |
21 | U | Ancient British. |
22 | V | Ancient Scotch. |
23 | W | Ancient Irish. |
24 | X | Anglo-Saxon (Early). |
25 | Y | |
26 | Z | Unascertained and Miscellaneous. |
CLASS II.—MEDIEVAL AND MODERN.
CLASS II.—MEDIEVAL AND MODERN.
DIVIDED INTO OFFICIAL AND PERSONAL.
OFFICIAL AND PERSONAL CATEGORIES.
OFFICIAL. | ||
Religious. | ||
27 | A | Rings of Popes, or with Papal insignia. |
28 | B | Rings of Cardinals, or with Cardinals’ insignia. |
29 | C | Rings of Archbishops or Bishops, or with Episcopal insignia. |
30 | D | Rings of Abbots and Priors, or Abbesses or Prioresses. |
31 | E | Rings of other Ecclesiastical Dignitaries. |
Civilian. | ||
32 | F | Rings bearing the insignia of Sovereigns, not being Signet Rings. |
33 | G | Rings of Investiture. |
34 | H | Credential Rings. |
35 | I | Presentation Rings (Sergeants). |
36 | K | Masonic Rings. |
Military. | ||
37 | L | Rings worn by Knights of various orders. |
Knights of Malta. | ||
"Knights Templar. | ||
"St. John of Jerusalem. | ||
PERSONAL. | ||
Signet Rings. | ||
38 | a | Heraldic, with Coats of Arms or Badges. |
39 | b | Merchants’ Marks. |
40 | c | Crowned Letters or Devices. |
41 | d | Letters without Crowns. |
42 | e | Other Devices. |
43 | f | Persian, Cufic, and Arabic, with names. |
44 | g | Antique Intagli in Medieval settings. |
[Pg 533] | ||
Love, Engagement, and Marriage. | ||
45 | h | Tokens of Love. |
46 | i | Posy Rings. |
47 | j | Giardinetti. |
48 | k | Betrothal Rings. |
49 | l | Gimmal Rings. |
50 | m | Marriage Rings. |
51 | n | Jewish Nuptial Rings. |
Memorial and Mourning Rings. | ||
52 | o | Rings with Hair. |
53 | p | Rings with Portraits. |
54 | q | Rings with Memorial Devices and Inscriptions. |
55 | r | Rings with Emblems of Death. |
Historic Rings. | ||
56 | s | Rings used by, or belonging to, Historical Persons. |
57 | t | Rings commemorating Historical Events. |
58 | u | Rings emblematical of particular Persons, Events, or Countries. |
Spiritual. | ||
59 | v | Devotional (Decade). |
60 | w | Rings bearing Religious Devices or Inscriptions. |
61 | x | Rings bearing Figures or Emblems of Saints. |
62 | y | Pilgrims’ Rings (Jerusalem, Mount Serrat, &c.). |
63 | z | Rings for containing Reliques. |
Charm, Magic, and Healing. | ||
64 | a a | Cramp Rings. |
65 | b b | Rings with Toadstones or other substances believed to possess healing properties. |
66 | c c | Astrological and Cabalistic Rings. |
67 | d d | Talismanic, with Cufic, Arabic, and Gnostic Inscriptions. |
68 | e e | Poison Rings. |
Decorative Rings. | ||
69 | f f | Rings with Precious Stones, according to their kind. |
[Pg 534]70 | g g | Rings set with enamels, paste, or other ornaments, having no special significance. |
71 | h h | Peasants’ Rings. |
72 | i i | Asian, including Modern Persian, Hindoo, and Chinese. |
73 | k k | African. |
74 | l l | Misc Rings, which group will contain all such as cannot be categorized under the other classification headings, like whistle rings, puzzle rings, squirt rings, jointed rings to create devices, rings with watches, dials, compasses, etc. |
75 | m m | Rings made of strange and unusual materials, not being metal. |
76 | n n | Unascertained. |
Additional Note.
Note.
In the chapter on ‘Memorial and Mortuary Rings’ (page 378), I have related the circumstance of an Arabian princess in Yemen, who had been buried with her rings and other jewels; a tablet recording that she had vainly endeavoured to exchange them for flour during the great famine mentioned in the Holy Scriptures.
In the chapter on ‘Memorial and Mortuary Rings’ (page 378), I discussed the story of an Arabian princess in Yemen who was buried with her rings and other jewelry. There’s a tablet that records how she had unsuccessfully tried to trade them for flour during the severe famine mentioned in the Holy Scriptures.
A singular incident of this character is stated in Forbes’s ‘India’ (vol. ii. p. 18): ‘The present finest mausoleum in Cambaya was erected to the memory of a Mogul of great rank, who, during a famine which almost depopulated that part of the country, offered a measure of pearls for an equal quantity of grain; but not being able to procure food at any price, he died of hunger, and this history is related on his monument.’
A unique event of this kind is mentioned in Forbes’s ‘India’ (vol. ii. p. 18): ‘The most impressive mausoleum in Cambaya was built in memory of a high-ranking Mogul who, during a famine that nearly wiped out that region, offered a measure of pearls for an equal quantity of grain; but unable to secure food at any cost, he died of starvation, and this account is inscribed on his monument.’
INDEX.
Abbots invested with the ring, 231
‘Abraxas,’ definition of, 139
Adriatic, marriage of the Doge of Venice with the, 419, 529
‘Agla,’ the mystic word inscribed on rings, 137
Agnes, legend of the saint and the ring, 239
Alcock, Bishop, on consecration of nuns, 233
Alexandrinus, Clemens, advice on rings, 39
‘Alhstan’ ring, the, 62
Amelia, memorial ring of the Princess, 375
American ring, gigantic, 488
Amulet-rings, 103, 126, 138, 166, 140, 141, 147
Ancient custom of Archbishops of Rouen, 211
Anecdote of a mourning-ring used at a wedding, 449
Angelo, ring of Michael, 470
Anglo-Saxons, betrothal rings of the, 306
Anne, mourning ring of Queen, 373
‘Annuli Ecclesiæ,’ Bishops’ rings so called, 212
Antique intaglio rings with mottoes, 418
Antoinette, ring of Queen Marie, 374
Apollo and Marsyas, ring of, 470
Archery, rings prizes for, 444
Armenians, betrothal rings among the, 312
Arnulphus, ring of Bishop, 228
Arundel Collection of gem rings, 462
Ashantee, rings from, 455
Astrological rings, 108
Bailewski Collection, Jewish betrothal ring in the, 300
Bards rewarded with rings, 192
Bavarian peasant’s ring, 84
Becket, ring from the shrine of Thomas à, 247
‘Beef Steak’ Club, ring of the, 193
Bequests of rings, 355
Berquem, rings engraved by Louis de, 450
Berry, Lady, the fish and the ring, 100
Bessborough Collection of gem-rings, 462
— — religious ring in the, 258
Betrothal and wedding rings, 275, 526
— — — — of the Jews, 298, 299
— — — — — — Romans, 303
— — — — — — Anglo-Saxons, 306
— — — — — — Germans, 310
— — — — — — Italians, 310
— — — — — — Middle Ages, 307
— — — — — — Armenians, 312
— — — — in the North, 305
— — — — — — of Sir Thomas Gresham, 318
— — — — — — Martin Luther, 481
— rings divided, 309, 316
Bishops buried with rings, 203
— rings used to seal baptismal fonts, 212
[Pg 536]
Bishops’ rings, manner of benediction, 219
— — — of investiture, 209, 213
— — engravings on, 212
— — used as signets, 213
— — importance attached to, 213
— — how worn, 218
— resignation of, by the ring, 211
— rings taken from degraded, 218
Bitton, ring of Bishop de, 228
Blaize, rings on the fingers of St., 221
Blessing of coronation-rings, 179
— — cramp-rings, 163, 522
Boccaccio’s fable of the three rings, 451
Bonomi, M., on Pharaoh’s ring, 1
Borgias, poison rings of the, 434
Bowet, ring of Archbishop, 225
Braybrooke Collection, Jewish marriage rings in the, 299
— — Gemmel ring in the, 321
— — rings with death’s-heads in the, 372
— — ring of Pope Boniface in the, 207
— — pilgrims’ rings in the, 265
— — Roman and Romano-British rings in the, 41
— — Royalist mourning ring in the, 371
— — mourning rings of Mary and William III. in the, 374
— — mortuary ring in the, 383
— — ring of Tippoo Saib in the, 490
— — nun’s ring in the, 240
— — thumb-ring in the, 89
Bribe rings, 444
Bride-cake, rings placed in, 171
British Museum, gem-rings in the, 459
Brooches and rings, 74
Bunyan, ring of John, 495
Burnet, bequest of ring by Bishop, 363
Bursting of rings a bad omen, 168
‘Bury’ wills, bequests of rings in the, 356
Byron, lines by, on the wedding-ring, 277
Cabalistic ring, 139
Cantelupe, ring of Bishop de, 229
Carbuncle rings, 159
Cardinals buried with rings, 203
— — invested with rings, 215
— — rings laid aside on Good Friday, 216
Castellani Collection, rings in the, 46
Catherine, legend of the spousal ring of St., 238
Chaplet, origin of the, 252
Chariclea, famous ring of, 463
Charles I., signet ring of, 461
— — memorial rings of, 366
Charles II., rings stolen from, 452
— — signet-ring of, 461
— — mourning-ring of, 371
Charlemagne charmed by a ring, 115
Charm rings of the Greeks and Romans, 103
— — Benvenuto Cellini on, 105
— — of the Oxford Conjurer, 132
Charms, Sigil, 113
Charters confirmed by rings, 184
Chichester, rings belonging to the Dean and Chapter of, 225
Childeric, ring of King, 386
Christ, espousals to, 233
Christian rings, representations on, 38, 258
Claddugh wedding-rings, 320
Clerical fondness for rings, 220
Clovis, ring-token of King, 323
Cockatrice, mystic properties of the, 152
Cologne, legend of the Three Kings of, 143
Colour, change of, in jewels evil portents, 160
Commonwealth, rings during the, 288
Cork, ring-token to the Earl of, 351
Cornwall, ancient signet-ring found in, 266
Coronation rings, 177
— ring of Queen Elizabeth, 165
— — — James II., 177
Coronets on rings, 475
Cotterell, curious ring bequeathed by Sir Charles, 361
Cramp-rings, 162, 522
Cranmer, ring of Archbishop, 217
Cromwell crest, ring on the, 421
Cross, the true, wood of in rings, 141
[Pg 537]
Crystallomancy, 100
Cuerdale, Saxon rings found at, 63
Curious advertisements of rings in cakes, 173
Custom, curious Russian ring, 447
Dactylomancia, or ring divination, 111
Dancas, a thank-offering ring, 247
Darnley ring, the, 460
Days, rings worn on particular, 165
Decade rings, 248
Deæ Matres, worship of the, 107
Devereux ring, the, 338
Device rings illustrative of death, 372
Devonshire gems, the, 458
Diamond-pointed rings, 76
Diplomacy, rings given in, 184, 422
Divinating power in a ring, 450
Divination by prayer-book and ring, 172
— — sounds, 113
— — rings in wedding-cakes, 170
Doctors’ rings, 191
Doctors’ Commons, rings mentioned in wills at, 356
Earliest materials of rings, 3
Early Christian rings, 258, 259, 268
Ecclesiastical mortuary, or ‘corse-present,’ 221
— usages, rings in connection with, 198
Edgcumbe, Lady, and the ring, 429
Edward I., token-ring of, 324
Edward the Confessor, ‘pilgrim’ ring of, 116, 516
Egyptian rings, 5
— — exhibited at the South Kensington Museum, 12
— — — at the Louvre, 13
— — representations on, 11
— glass rings, 13
— ring with double keeper, 17
Egyptians, their fondness for rings, 10
— modern rings of the, 16
Eldon, memorial ring of, 375
Elfric’s canon against clerical rings, 220
Elizabeth, token-ring of Queen, 343
Eloy, rings of St., 232
Enchanted rings of the Greeks, 113
Engagement-ring of the Prince Regent, 284
Epilepsy, rings to cure, 153
Episcopal rings, 209, 225, 230, 239
— — engravings on, 212
— — fashion of, 216
— — formula of investiture with, 214
— — usually set with sapphires, 217
— ring of St. Loup, 217
Episode in ring history, 453
Escutcheon ring, French, 81
Espousals to Christ, 233, 259
Essex ring, the, 336, 528
Ethelswith, Queen of Mercia, ring of, 55
Ethelwulf, ring of King, 54
Etruscan rings, 18
— — in the Bibliothèque Nationale at Paris, 20
— — — — British Museum, 15
— — — — Waterton Collection, 15
‘Evil eye,’ rings to preserve from the, 151
Evil portents connected with rings, 165
Fish and the ring, legends of the, 98, 510
Fishes, rings found in the bodies of, 439
Fisherman’s ring, the, 198
Fleet marriages, 282
Forensic order of knighthood, 191
Formula for blessing cramp-rings, 164
— — investing bishops with rings, 215
Fotheringay, ring-relic of, 475
French ‘escutcheon’ ring, 81
— Régard, Souvenir, and Amitié rings, 414
— rings, 79, 81
— episcopal rings, 228
Funerals, rings given to attendants at, 364
Gardiner, ring of Bishop, 226
Garter rings, 193
[Pg 538]
Gems mounted in Roman rings, 30, 40
Gemmel rings, 313, 318
Gentlemen formerly distinguished by rings, 446
George III., ring-token to, 352
German ‘liberation’ rings, 448
Germans, interchange of rings among the, 310
‘Gesta-Romanorum,’ ring stories in the, 124
‘Giardinetti’ rings, 79
Gift-rings of the Romans, 46
Glasgow, ring in the arms, of the city of, 98
Gnostic rings, 107
Gold ring at Irish weddings, 173
Gray the poet, bequest of rings by, 374
Greece, interchange of rings in modern, 311
Greek Church, rings how worn in the, 293
Græco-Egyptian gold rings, 7
Greek ring in form of a crescent, 26
— and Roman rings, 18, 50
— — — charm rings, 103, 113
Gresham, wedding-ring of Sir Thomas, 319
Gretna Green marriages, 283
Grey, linked rings of Lady, 317
Gundulf, ring of Bishop, 213
Gyges, ring of, 96, 508
Hatton, charm ring of Lord Chancellor, 161
Hebrew betrothal and marriage-rings, 298
Henrietta Maria, ring of Queen, 493
Henry VII., charm ring of, 133
Henry of Worcester, ring of, 230
Henry IV. of Germany, ring-token sent by, 326
Heraldic ring, 481
Hereford Cathedral, rings found in, 227
Herrick on the wedding-ring, 276
‘Heth,’ the sacred name inscribed on rings, 140
Hilary, ring of Bishop, 225
Hoof-rings, charmed, 153
Identification by means of rings, 426
Incidents and customs in connection with rings, 419
Indian rings, 78, 84
Inscription rings, 390, 417
Inscriptions on glass with diamond rings, 77
Interchange of rings among the Germans, 310
Investiture of Abbots with rings, 231
— — Bishops with rings, 215
— — Cardinals with rings, 215
— — Novices with rings, 232
— secular, by the ring, 177
Ipomydon, ring-token given to, 327
Irish Academy, episcopal ring in the Royal, 230
Irish, early, rings, 61, 65
— weddings, gold rings at, 173
Iron rings of the Romans, 25, 303
— — French lines on, 303
Ishtar, legend of, 7
Italian rings, 76, 310
Ivory Egyptian rings, 8
— Trinity rings, 487
James of Scotland, ring-token sent by King, 327
Jasper amulet-rings, 148
Jeffreys, token-ring given to Judge, 351
Jet, talismanic virtues of, 106
Jews, betrothal and marriage-rings of the, 298
— covenant-rings of the, 297
— ring worn by the High Priest of the, 91
John, token-rings sent to, 325
— ring of the Order of St., 193
Johnson, wedding-ring of Dr., 279
Josephus, account of charm-rings by, 92
— on the rings of the Israelites, 3
Jupiter, the planet, propitious for weddings, 94
Kenilworth Castle, ring found at, 473
Kensington Museum, memorial rings in the, 388
Kentigern, legend of St., 98
[Pg 539]
Key-rings, Roman, 45, 51, 293
Keys delivered at weddings, 294
Kilsyth, loss of a ring by Lady, 167
Kings buried with their rings, 385
Kirchmann on episcopal rings, 210
Knight Hospitaller, ring of a, 196
Knight, legend of the cruel, 99
Knighthood, rings of, 181
Lacedemonian rings, 18
Lawsuits, rings an authority in, 184
Legacy of rings to shrines, 244
Legend of St. Agnes and the ring, 239
— — — Catherine and the ring, 238
— — the fish and the ring, 98, 510
— — — ‘Royal of France’ jewel, 133
— — Marianson and the rings, 354
— — St. Mark’s ring, 119
— — a ring derived from the North, 131
— — the ‘Pilgrim’ ring, 117, 516
— — — Three Kings of Cologne, 143
— — — Lady of Toggenburg, 354
— — a ring of espousals received from Our Saviour, 237
— — — — on the statue of Venus, 129
Lines on wedding-rings, 276
Lion, King-at-Arms, ring given to, 194
Loadstone set in wedding-rings, 304
Londesborough Collection, charm-ring against the ‘Evil Eye’ in the, 153
— — decade ring of Delhi work in the, 253
— — early Christian ring in the, 47
— — episcopal ring in the, 230
— — gemmel rings in the, 319
— — Jewish marriage-rings in the, 298
— — jointed betrothal ring in the, 314
— — Irish rings in the, 61
— — Italian rings in the, 76
— — later period rings in the, 75
— — love gift ring, 47
— — ‘Lucretia’ ring in the, 318
— — magical thumb-ring in the, 89
Londesborough Collection, mechanical mystic ring in the, 147
— — memorial and mortuary rings in the, 373
— — Moorish rings in the, 83
— — mortuary rings in the, 383
— — motto ring in the, 416
— — Papal ring in the, 208
— — ‘religious’ ring in the, 251
— — ring of Bishop Thierry in the, 204
— — toadstone rings in the, 157
Lost rings, singular recovery of, 436
Louis XII., rings of, 461, 469
Love-knots, rings with, 414
Love-pledges, rings as, 283
Lucretia, rings with representations of, 318
Luther, betrothal and marriage-rings of Martin, 481
Lynnoch, Turlough, signet-ring of, 194
Magi, rings of the, 143
Magical thumb-rings, 89
Maintenon, ring of Madame de, 469
Man, ring-custom in the Isle of, 443
Mantle and ring, vows taken with, 241
Mark, ring of St., 119
Marlborough gem-rings, 461
Marriage-ring of the Doge of Venice, 99, 419, 529
Marriages, fleet, 282
— Gretna Green, 283
Marriage ring of Joseph and the Virgin Mary, 93, 505
— of prelates, 234
— — Archbishop Rich to the Virgin, 237
Martin, rings of St., 285
Martyrs and saints, relics of, in rings, 142
Mary, Queen of Scots, investiture rings of, 182
— — — — signet-ring of, 459, 478
Massinissa and Sophonisba, figures of, on a ring, 38
Materials of wedding-rings, 285, 377
Mayhew, ring of Bishop, 227
Mecca, rings of, 17
Mechanical mystic ring, 147
[Pg 540]
Medical amulet-rings, 147, 161
Medici, rings of the, 471
Mediæval romances, charmed rings in, 121
‘Memento mori’ rings, 372
Memorial and mortuary rings, 355, 377
— ring of the Princess Amelia, 375
— rings, Charles I., 366
— — Charles II., 371
— — Elizabeth, Queen of Bohemia, 361
— — Countess of Hartford, 366
— — Mary, Queen of Scots, 365
— — Royalist, 371
Merchant’s ‘mark’ rings, 84
Meridian rings, 451
Merovingian rings, 69
Modern French, 83
Montfaucon’s theory of the zodiac, 109
‘Month’ rings of the Poles, 115
Morgan, Papal ring in the collection of Mr. Octavius, 207
Moore’s poem on the ‘Ring,’ 129
— allusion to his mother’s wedding-ring, 281
Moorish rings, 83
Motto-rings, 390
Mourning rings, 360
Mourning ring of Queen Anne, 374
— — — Lord Eldon, 375
— — — Queen Mary and William III., 374
— — — Lord Nelson, 375
— — — the Emperor Nicholas of Russia, 384
Mummy, rings on the fingers of a, 10
Museum, Egyptian rings in the South Kensington, 12
— — — — — British, 5
— Etruscan ring with chimeræ in the British, 15
— Prince of Canino’s ring in the British, 14
— ring of Queen Sebek-nefru, 7
— — — Sennacherib in the British, 9
— Egyptian rings in the Louvre, 13
Names on rings, 416
Necromantic rings, 146
Nelson, memorial rings of Lord, 375
New Year’s Gift rings, 421
Nobility, rings badges of, 195
Northmen, wedding-keys of the old, 294
Novices invested with the ring, 232
Nuns forbidden to wear rings, 240
Nuptial ring of the Virgin Mary, 93
Omens, blood-dropping from the ring-finger, 168
— breaking of rings, 168
— bursting of rings, 168
— fall of rings, 167
— loss of rings, 167
— taking off rings, 171
Oriental rings, 90, 491
Origin of merchant’s ‘mark’ rings, 192
Orpine plant, rings with devices of the, 169
Oswald, token-ring of, 325
Pagan graves, rings found in, 69
Paradise rings, 257
Parthenon, rings in the treasury of the, 43
Pedlar’s rings, 73
Pendrell, token-ring given to, 350
Pepys, bequest of rings by, 363
Perceval of Galles, bequest of rings by, 328
Perrot, bequest of rings by, 344
Persian rings, 17
Perugia, nuptial ring of the Virgin at, 93
Perugino’s picture of the marriage of the Virgin, 94
‘Pilgrim’ ring of Edward the Confessor, 116, 516
Pilgrim rings, 264
Planetary rings, virtues ascribed to, 108
Poets Laureate, rings given to, 191
Poison-rings, 432
Poles, ‘month’ rings of the, 115
Polycrates, ring of, 96
Pontifical rings, 205, 207
Pope, bequest of rings by, 374
Pope Boniface, ring of, 207
— Pius II., ring of, 207
— — IX., ring of, 201
Popes buried with their rings, 202
[Pg 541]
Popes, their sanctity disregarded, 202
Porcelain rings, Egyptian, 8
Portrait-rings, 496
Posy-rings, 390
Power of the royal ring, 182
‘Poynings,’ the charter of, confirmed by a ring, 186
Precious stones, episcopal rings enriched with, 216
Prometheus, the ring of, 95
Property conveyed by a ring, 185
Puzzle-rings, 322
Ring, Alhstan, the, 62
— of Angelo, Michael, 470
— — Bitton, Bishop, 228
— — Pope Boniface, 207
— — Bowett, Archbishop, 225
— — John Bunyan, 495
— — Cantelupé, Bishop, 229
— — Chariclea, 463
— — Charles I. and Charles II., 461
— — Childeric, 386
— — Cranmer, Archbishop, 217
— found in the grave of St. Cuthbert, 227
— the Darnley, 460
— of Eloy, St., 232
— — Ethelswith, Queen of Mercia, 55
— — Ethelwulf, King, 54
— — Gardiner, Bishop, 226
— — Gundulf, Bishop of Rochester, 213
— — Gyges, 96, 508
— — Queen Henrietta Maria, 493
— — Henry of Worcester, 230
— — Hilary, Bishop, 225
— — Lion King-at-Arms, 194
— — Louis XII., 461, 469
— — Loup, St., 217
— — Turlough Lynnoch, 194
— — Madame de Maintenon, 469
— — Mary, Queen of Scots, 459, 478
— — Mayhew, Bishop, 227
— — the Great Mogul, 491
— — Lorenzo de Medici, 471
— — Pius II., 207
— — Pius IX., 201
— — Polycrates, 96
— — Sir Walter Raleigh, 486
— — Cola di Rienzi, 465
Ring of Seffrid, Bishop, 225
— the Seymour, 479
— — Shakspeare, 484
— of Solomon, 91, 503
— — Roger, King of Sicily, 465
— — the Stuarts, 492
— — Thierry, Bishop of Verdun, 201
— — Tippoo Saib, 490
— — William of Wyckham, 226
— the Worsley seal, 467
— American gigantic, 488
— amulet, of Prince Charles Edward, 166
— — found at Eltham Palace, 126
— authority of the, in law suits, 184
— of the ‘Beef Steak’ Club, 193
— Byzantine betrothal, 304
— charm of the ‘Oxford Conjurer,’ 132
— charters confirmed by the, 184
— Claddugh wedding, 320
— found in Cornwall, 266
— Queen Elizabeth’s coronation, 165
— given to the ‘Admirable’ Crichton, 194
— on the Cromwell crest, 421
— devices of the Medici, 473
— diplomas sanctioned by the, 184
— divination, 100, 172
— of Edward the Confessor, 116, 516
— escutcheon, French, 81
— superstition of Henry VIII., 133
— history, episode in, 453
— the ‘Fisherman’s,’ 198
— relic of Flodden Field, 478
— — of Fotheringay, 475
— heraldic, 481
— diamond-pointed Italian, 76
— of the Grand Master of the Order of St. John, 193
— found at Kenilworth Castle, 473
— of knighthood, 181
— legend, 130
— of Martin Luther, 481
— legends of the Fish and the Ring, 98, 510
— of St. Mark, 119
— mourning, of Charles II., 371
— — Royalist, 371
— — of the Princess Amelia, 375
— — — Queen Anne, 373
— — — Lord Eldon, 375
— — — Marie Antoinette, 374
— — — Mary and William III., 374
[Pg 542]
— — — Lord Nelson, 375
— — — the Emperor Nicholas of Russia, 384
— memorial, of the Countess of Hertford, 366
— of a nun, 240
— kissing the Pope’s, 201
— Russian customs of the wedding, 174
— secular investiture by the, 177
— small wedding, 287
— tragical incident of a, 449
— marriage, of the Doge of Venice, 89
— legend of a, on the statue of Venus, 128
Rings, Abbots invested with, 231
— the mystic word ‘Agla’ on, 137
— amulet, 148
— Anglo-Saxon betrothal, 306
— prizes for archery, 444
— Arundel and Bessborough Collection of gem, 462
— from Ashantee, 455
— astrological, 108
— Bavarian, 84
— bequests of, 355
— engraved by Berquem, 450
— betrothal and wedding, 275, 526
— dividing betrothal, 316
— bursting on the fingers, 168
— importance of Bishops’, 213
— taken from degraded Bishops, 218
— on the fingers of the arm of St. Blaize, 221
— Boccaccio’s fable of the three, 451
— offered as bribes, 444
— of British, Saxon, and mediæval times, 53
— British Museum collection of gem, 459
— Byzantine, 48
— carbuncle, 159
— stolen from Charles II., 454
— charm, 105, 115, 121
— of espousals to Christ, 233, 241
— early Christian, 258, 268
— clerical extravagance in, 220
— coronation, 177
— claimed as ‘corse’ present, 221
— during the Commonwealth, 288
— coronets on, 475
— cramp, 162, 522
— customs and incidents in connection with, 419
— with wood of the true cross, 141
— with devices of death, 372
— decade, 248
— buried with the dead, 377
— Devonshire gem, 458
— given in diplomacy, 422
— divination, powers of, 450
— doctors’, 191
— taken from the finger, an ill omen, 171
— in connection with ecclesiastical usages, 198
— engravings on Bishops’, 212
— to cure epilepsy, 153
— attached to episcopal charters, 211
— episcopal investiture with, 215
— — how worn, 218
— — French, 228
— found in the bodies of fishes, 439
— French, 82, 415
— garter, 193
— gemmel, 313, 318
— German ‘liberation,’ 448
— in the ‘Gesta Romanorum,’ 124
— Gnostic, 107
— gold wedding, 84
— at marriages of modern Greeks, 311
— harlequin, 414
— discovered at Herculaneum and Pompeii, 49
— charmed ‘hoof,’ 153
— identification by means of, 426
— incidents in connection with, 419
— inscription, 390
— antique intagli motto, 417
— in the Royal Irish Academy, 65
— at Italian marriages, 310
— talismanic virtues of jet, 107
— Jewish betrothal and marriage, 298
— used in Jewish covenants, 297
— — — — synagogues, 302
— given in lieu of dowry by the Jews, 298
— key, 294
— love ‘pledge,’ 283
— loss of, an ill omen, 167
— love-knot, 414
— denoting love’s telegraph, 293
— linked, 317, 322
[Pg 543]
— life saved by, 427
— with representations of Lucretia, 318
— of the Magi, 143
— Marlborough gem, 461
— — St. Martin, 285
— materials of wedding, 286
— medicinal, 161
— ‘Memento mori,’ 372
— memorial and mortuary, 355
— — of Charles I., 366
— — — Mary, Queen of Scots, 365
— merchant’s ‘mark,’ 84
— meridian, 451
— Merovingian, 69
— month, of the Poles, 115
— Moorish, 83
— motto, 390
— mourning, 360
— — given at funerals, 364
— necromantic, 146
— New Year gift, 421
— an ancient mark of nobility, 195
— of the old Northmen, 305
— novices invested with, 232
— Oriental, 90
— origin of ‘merchant’s marks,’ 192
— with device of the orpine plant, 169
— in Pagan graves, 68
— Paradise, 257
— of a later period, 75
— pilgrim, 264
— planetary virtues of, 108, 112
— poison, 432
— conferred on Poets Laureate, 191
— pontifical, 205, 207, 209
— buried with popes, 202
— portrait, 496
— posy, 390
— profusely worn, 72
— property conveyed by, 185
— recovery of lost, 436
— ‘Regard,’ 414
— religious, 133, 138, 248, 254
— reliquary, 142, 257
— remarkable, 457
— ‘Reynard the Fox’ on magical, 145
— Roman amber and glass, 48
— — in the Bibliothèque Nationale at Paris, 32
— — in the Castellani Collection, 46
— Roman devices and inscriptions on, 41
— of a Roman lady, 33, 43
— gems mounted in Roman, 30, 40
— Roman gift, 46
— gold, when first worn in Rome, 26
— Roman and Greek huge, 28
— — iron, 25
— — key, 45, 51
— — legionary, 47
— in the treasury of the Parthenon, 43
— profusion of, worn by the ancients, 28, 30
— Roman rock-crystal, 31
— — ‘season,’ 28, 30
— — signs engraved on, 33
— — thumb, 29
— — used for various purposes, 42
— — votive, 44
— — and Greek, in the Waterton Collection, 50
— Runic characters on, 148, 150
— rush, 284
— at Russian marriages, 311
— Russian customs with, 447
— Saxon wire, 59
— — found at Cuerdale, 63
— mode of securing, 449
— Serjeants’, 186
— at shrines, 259
— sigil charm, 113
— signet, 25
— at Spanish marriages, 312
— gold, to cure sties, 174
— superstitions in connection with, 91
— magical ‘suspended,’ 112
— talismanic, 91, 134, 140, 147, 151, 166
— mystic ‘Tau,’ 155
— toadstone, 155
— given at tournaments, 197
— discovered on the (presumed) site of Troy, 32
— thumb, 87, 89, 139, 501
— thank-offering, 247
— the Three, 352
— token, 323
— tooth, 495
— Trinity, 248, 254
— given on St. Valentine’s Day, 422
— at Venetian marriages, 311
[Pg 544]
— ‘Vertuosus,’ 162, 355
— offered to the Virgin, 130
— watch, 494
— in wedding cakes, 170
— — — possets, 173
— given at wrestling-matches, 195
— wedding, how worn, 291, 293
— blessing wedding, 288
— of espousals to the Virgin, 237
— mentioned in wardrobe books, 228
— thumb wedding, 289
— of the Virgin in Raphael’s Sponzalizio, 291
— ancient origin of wedding, 297
— whistle, 494
— worn on particular days, 165
— zodiacal, 110
Sanctity of the Popes disregarded, 202
Sapphires, episcopal rings set with, 217
Saxon rings found at Cuerdale, 63
Scarabæus on rings, 5
Schliemann’s, Dr., discoveries at Troy (?), 32
Scots, wedding-ring of Mary, Queen of, 280
Scott, Sir Walter, on superstitious charms, 132
Season-rings of the Romans, 28, 30
Sebek-nefru, signet-ring of, 7
Secular investiture by the ring, 177
Seffrid, ring of Bishop, 225
Serjeants’ rings, 186
Seymour ring, the, 480
Shakspeare, rings bequeathed by, 359
— the ring (presumed) of, 484
Shrine of Thomas à Becket, ring from the, 247
— — the Magi, 144
Shrines, legacies of rings to, 244, 259
Sicily, supposed ring of Roger, King of, 465
Sidney, rings bequeathed by Sir Philip, 358
Sigebert, supposed ring of King, 70
Sigil charms, 113
Signet-ring of Sennacherib, 9
Singer, collection of posy-rings by Mr. J. W., 394
Singular mode of securing rings, 449
Soden Smith, rings in the collection of Mr. R. H., 230, 502
Solomon’s ring, 91, 503
Southey on zodiacal signs, 109
Spain, ring-customs in, 312
Spanish rings, 79
Squirt rings, 493
Stone and silver rings of the Romans, 31
Stuart rings, the, 492
Suckling, lines on a wedding-ring, by Sir John, 287
Superstitions connected with the carbuncle, 159
— — — change of colours in jewels, 160
— — — gold rings, 175
— — — rings generally, 91
— — — toadstone, 156
— — — turquoise, 159
Talismanic ring, remarkable gold, 95
Tau-rings, mystic character of, 155
Thierry, ring of Bishop, 204
Thumb-rings, allusions to, 88
— — magical, 89
— — of the Romans, 29
— — worn in token of widowhood, 364
Tippoo Saib, rings of, 490
Toadstone rings, virtues of, 157
Token-rings, Charles II., 350
— — Earl of Derby, 348
— — Duke of Dorset, 347
— — Edward I., 324
— — Queen Elizabeth, 340
— — Earl of Essex, 336, 528
— — George III., 352
— — Queen Henrietta Maria, 349
— — Henry VIII., 334, 335
— — Henry IV. of Germany, 326
— — James of Scotland, 327
— — King John, 325, 332
— — Margaret of Scotland, 333
— — Queen Mary, 335
— — Mary, Queen of Scots, 340
— — Viscount Melgum, 350
— — King Oswald, 324
— — Sir John Perrot, 344
— — Earl of Toulouse, 327
Tooth rings, 495
[Pg 545]
Tournaments, rings given at, 197
Trinity rings, 248, 254
— ivory rings, 487
Troy, discoveries on the (presumed) site of, 32
Turquoise rings, the gage d’amour of the Germans, 159
— — their magical virtues, 158
Valentine’s Day, rings given on St., 422
Venetian rings, 76
— weddings, rings at, 311
— reliquary ring, 143
Venice, marriage-ring of the Doge of, 99, 419, 529
— saved by St. Mark’s ring, 119
‘Vertuosus’ rings, 162, 355
Virgin, gifts of rings to the, 130
Virtues of a loadstone ring, 156
— — — turquoise ring, 158
— — the ring-finger, 155
Votive rings of the Romans, 44
Vow of chastity with mantle and ring, 241
Wales, the Prince of, invested with a ring, 183
Walton, rings bequeathed by Izaak, 360
Wardrobe books, rings mentioned in the, 228
Warwick, ring-token sent by Guy, Earl of, 331
Washington, bequest of rings by, 363
Watch set in a ring, 494
Waterton Collection, curious South Saxon ring in the, 60
— — ecclesiastical ring with figure of Christ, in the, 264
— — Egyptian rings in the, 13
— — episcopal ring in the, 230
— — Etruscan ring in the, 15
— — Gnostic rings in the, 107
— — Greek and Roman rings in the, 50
— — Papal rings in the, 207
— — ring on the forefinger of a statue in the, 291
Wedding-rings, ancient origin of, 297
— — mentioned in ancient rituals, 290
Wedding-ring, blessing the, 288
— — of the ‘Claddughs,’ 320
— — during the Commonwealth, 288, 290
— — given by the Prince Regent, 296
— — — — — Princess Royal, 296
— — — — — Queen Victoria, 296
— — plain gold, 295
— — how worn, 291
— — several, worn at marriages, 289
— — worn on the thumb, 289
— — one of the smallest, 287
— — of the German Jews, 302
— — in cakes, 170
— ring of the Rev. George Bull, 290
— — — James II., 281
— — — Mrs. Johnson, 279
— — — Mary, Queen of Scots, 280
— — — Mrs. Moore, 280
— — — Baron Rosen, 281
— — lines by Suckling on a, 287
— — — — Woodward on a, 277
— — Customs of the Russians, 174
Wells, rings belonging to the Dean and Chapter of, 231
Whistle rings, 494
William of Wyckham, ring of, 226
Winchester Cathedral, rings belonging to the Dean and Chapter of, 226
— — ring found in the tomb of William Rufus in, 385
Wire-rings of the Saxons, 58
Worcester Cathedral, Pontifical rings found in, 209
‘Worsley’ seal-ring, the, 467
Wotton, rings bequeathed by Sir Henry, 359
Wrestling, prize-rings for, 195
Xerxes, a great gem-fancier, 16
Zodiac, astrological definition of the, 109
— Montfaucon’s singular theory of the, 109
Zodiacal signs, Southey on, 109
Abbots invested with the ring, 231
‘Abraxas,’ definition of, 139
Adriatic, marriage of the Doge of Venice with the, 419, 529
‘Agla,’ the mystic word inscribed on rings, 137
Agnes, legend of the saint and the ring, 239
Alcock, Bishop, on consecration of nuns, 233
Alexandrinus, Clemens, advice on rings, 39
‘Alhstan’ ring, the, 62
Amelia, memorial ring of the Princess, 375
American ring, gigantic, 488
Amulet-rings, 103, 126, 138, 166, 140, 141, 147
Ancient custom of Archbishops of Rouen, 211
Anecdote of a mourning-ring used at a wedding, 449
Angelo, ring of Michael, 470
Anglo-Saxons, betrothal rings of the, 306
Anne, mourning ring of Queen, 373
‘Annuli Ecclesiæ,’ Bishops’ rings so called, 212
Antique intaglio rings with mottoes, 418
Antoinette, ring of Queen Marie, 374
Apollo and Marsyas, ring of, 470
Archery, rings prizes for, 444
Armenians, betrothal rings among the, 312
Arnulphus, ring of Bishop, 228
Arundel Collection of gem rings, 462
Ashantee, rings from, 455
Astrological rings, 108
Bailewski Collection, Jewish betrothal ring in the, 300
Bards rewarded with rings, 192
Bavarian peasant’s ring, 84
Becket, ring from the shrine of Thomas à, 247
‘Beef Steak’ Club, ring of the, 193
Bequests of rings, 355
Berquem, rings engraved by Louis de, 450
Berry, Lady, the fish and the ring, 100
Bessborough Collection of gem-rings, 462
— — religious ring in the, 258
Betrothal and wedding rings, 275, 526
— — — — of the Jews, 298, 299
— — — — — — Romans, 303
— — — — — — Anglo-Saxons, 306
— — — — — — Germans, 310
— — — — — — Italians, 310
— — — — — — Middle Ages, 307
— — — — — — Armenians, 312
— — — — in the North, 305
— — — — — — of Sir Thomas Gresham, 318
— — — — — — Martin Luther, 481
— rings divided, 309, 316
Bishops buried with rings, 203
— rings used to seal baptismal fonts, 212
[Pg 536]
Bishops’ rings, manner of benediction, 219
— — — of investiture, 209, 213
— — engravings on, 212
— — used as signets, 213
— — importance attached to, 213
— — how worn, 218
— resignation of, by the ring, 211
— rings taken from degraded, 218
Bitton, ring of Bishop de, 228
Blaize, rings on the fingers of St., 221
Blessing of coronation-rings, 179
— — cramp-rings, 163, 522
Boccaccio’s fable of the three rings, 451
Bonomi, M., on Pharaoh’s ring, 1
Borgias, poison rings of the, 434
Bowet, ring of Archbishop, 225
Braybrooke Collection, Jewish marriage rings in the, 299
— — Gemmel ring in the, 321
— — rings with death’s-heads in the, 372
— — ring of Pope Boniface in the, 207
— — pilgrims’ rings in the, 265
— — Roman and Romano-British rings in the, 41
— — Royalist mourning ring in the, 371
— — mourning rings of Mary and William III. in the, 374
— — mortuary ring in the, 383
— — ring of Tippoo Saib in the, 490
— — nun’s ring in the, 240
— — thumb-ring in the, 89
Bribe rings, 444
Bride-cake, rings placed in, 171
British Museum, gem-rings in the, 459
Brooches and rings, 74
Bunyan, ring of John, 495
Burnet, bequest of ring by Bishop, 363
Bursting of rings a bad omen, 168
‘Bury’ wills, bequests of rings in the, 356
Byron, lines by, on the wedding-ring, 277
Cabalistic ring, 139
Cantelupe, ring of Bishop de, 229
Carbuncle rings, 159
Cardinals buried with rings, 203
— — invested with rings, 215
— — rings laid aside on Good Friday, 216
Castellani Collection, rings in the, 46
Catherine, legend of the spousal ring of St., 238
Chaplet, origin of the, 252
Chariclea, famous ring of, 463
Charles I., signet ring of, 461
— — memorial rings of, 366
Charles II., rings stolen from, 452
— — signet-ring of, 461
— — mourning-ring of, 371
Charlemagne charmed by a ring, 115
Charm rings of the Greeks and Romans, 103
— — Benvenuto Cellini on, 105
— — of the Oxford Conjurer, 132
Charms, Sigil, 113
Charters confirmed by rings, 184
Chichester, rings belonging to the Dean and Chapter of, 225
Childeric, ring of King, 386
Christ, espousals to, 233
Christian rings, representations on, 38, 258
Claddugh wedding-rings, 320
Clerical fondness for rings, 220
Clovis, ring-token of King, 323
Cockatrice, mystic properties of the, 152
Cologne, legend of the Three Kings of, 143
Colour, change of, in jewels evil portents, 160
Commonwealth, rings during the, 288
Cork, ring-token to the Earl of, 351
Cornwall, ancient signet-ring found in, 266
Coronation rings, 177
— ring of Queen Elizabeth, 165
— — — James II., 177
Coronets on rings, 475
Cotterell, curious ring bequeathed by Sir Charles, 361
Cramp-rings, 162, 522
Cranmer, ring of Archbishop, 217
Cromwell crest, ring on the, 421
Cross, the true, wood of in rings, 141
[Pg 537]
Crystallomancy, 100
Cuerdale, Saxon rings found at, 63
Curious advertisements of rings in cakes, 173
Custom, curious Russian ring, 447
Dactylomancia, or ring divination, 111
Dancas, a thank-offering ring, 247
Darnley ring, the, 460
Days, rings worn on particular, 165
Decade rings, 248
Deæ Matres, worship of the, 107
Devereux ring, the, 338
Device rings illustrative of death, 372
Devonshire gems, the, 458
Diamond-pointed rings, 76
Diplomacy, rings given in, 184, 422
Divinating power in a ring, 450
Divination by prayer-book and ring, 172
— — sounds, 113
— — rings in wedding-cakes, 170
Doctors’ rings, 191
Doctors’ Commons, rings mentioned in wills at, 356
Earliest materials of rings, 3
Early Christian rings, 258, 259, 268
Ecclesiastical mortuary, or ‘corse-present,’ 221
— usages, rings in connection with, 198
Edgcumbe, Lady, and the ring, 429
Edward I., token-ring of, 324
Edward the Confessor, ‘pilgrim’ ring of, 116, 516
Egyptian rings, 5
— — exhibited at the South Kensington Museum, 12
— — — at the Louvre, 13
— — representations on, 11
— glass rings, 13
— ring with double keeper, 17
Egyptians, their fondness for rings, 10
— modern rings of the, 16
Eldon, memorial ring of, 375
Elfric’s canon against clerical rings, 220
Elizabeth, token-ring of Queen, 343
Eloy, rings of St., 232
Enchanted rings of the Greeks, 113
Engagement-ring of the Prince Regent, 284
Epilepsy, rings to cure, 153
Episcopal rings, 209, 225, 230, 239
— — engravings on, 212
— — fashion of, 216
— — formula of investiture with, 214
— — usually set with sapphires, 217
— ring of St. Loup, 217
Episode in ring history, 453
Escutcheon ring, French, 81
Espousals to Christ, 233, 259
Essex ring, the, 336, 528
Ethelswith, Queen of Mercia, ring of, 55
Ethelwulf, ring of King, 54
Etruscan rings, 18
— — in the Bibliothèque Nationale at Paris, 20
— — — — British Museum, 15
— — — — Waterton Collection, 15
‘Evil eye,’ rings to preserve from the, 151
Evil portents connected with rings, 165
Fish and the ring, legends of the, 98, 510
Fishes, rings found in the bodies of, 439
Fisherman’s ring, the, 198
Fleet marriages, 282
Forensic order of knighthood, 191
Formula for blessing cramp-rings, 164
— — investing bishops with rings, 215
Fotheringay, ring-relic of, 475
French ‘escutcheon’ ring, 81
— Régard, Souvenir, and Amitié rings, 414
— rings, 79, 81
— episcopal rings, 228
Funerals, rings given to attendants at, 364
Gardiner, ring of Bishop, 226
Garter rings, 193
[Pg 538]
Gems mounted in Roman rings, 30, 40
Gemmel rings, 313, 318
Gentlemen formerly distinguished by rings, 446
George III., ring-token to, 352
German ‘liberation’ rings, 448
Germans, interchange of rings among the, 310
‘Gesta-Romanorum,’ ring stories in the, 124
‘Giardinetti’ rings, 79
Gift-rings of the Romans, 46
Glasgow, ring in the arms, of the city of, 98
Gnostic rings, 107
Gold ring at Irish weddings, 173
Gray the poet, bequest of rings by, 374
Greece, interchange of rings in modern, 311
Greek Church, rings how worn in the, 293
Græco-Egyptian gold rings, 7
Greek ring in form of a crescent, 26
— and Roman rings, 18, 50
— — — charm rings, 103, 113
Gresham, wedding-ring of Sir Thomas, 319
Gretna Green marriages, 283
Grey, linked rings of Lady, 317
Gundulf, ring of Bishop, 213
Gyges, ring of, 96, 508
Hatton, charm ring of Lord Chancellor, 161
Hebrew betrothal and marriage-rings, 298
Henrietta Maria, ring of Queen, 493
Henry VII., charm ring of, 133
Henry of Worcester, ring of, 230
Henry IV. of Germany, ring-token sent by, 326
Heraldic ring, 481
Hereford Cathedral, rings found in, 227
Herrick on the wedding-ring, 276
‘Heth,’ the sacred name inscribed on rings, 140
Hilary, ring of Bishop, 225
Hoof-rings, charmed, 153
Identification by means of rings, 426
Incidents and customs in connection with rings, 419
Indian rings, 78, 84
Inscription rings, 390, 417
Inscriptions on glass with diamond rings, 77
Interchange of rings among the Germans, 310
Investiture of Abbots with rings, 231
— — Bishops with rings, 215
— — Cardinals with rings, 215
— — Novices with rings, 232
— secular, by the ring, 177
Ipomydon, ring-token given to, 327
Irish Academy, episcopal ring in the Royal, 230
Irish, early, rings, 61, 65
— weddings, gold rings at, 173
Iron rings of the Romans, 25, 303
— — French lines on, 303
Ishtar, legend of, 7
Italian rings, 76, 310
Ivory Egyptian rings, 8
— Trinity rings, 487
James of Scotland, ring-token sent by King, 327
Jasper amulet-rings, 148
Jeffreys, token-ring given to Judge, 351
Jet, talismanic virtues of, 106
Jews, betrothal and marriage-rings of the, 298
— covenant-rings of the, 297
— ring worn by the High Priest of the, 91
John, token-rings sent to, 325
— ring of the Order of St., 193
Johnson, wedding-ring of Dr., 279
Josephus, account of charm-rings by, 92
— on the rings of the Israelites, 3
Jupiter, the planet, propitious for weddings, 94
Kenilworth Castle, ring found at, 473
Kensington Museum, memorial rings in the, 388
Kentigern, legend of St., 98
[Pg 539]
Key-rings, Roman, 45, 51, 293
Keys delivered at weddings, 294
Kilsyth, loss of a ring by Lady, 167
Kings buried with their rings, 385
Kirchmann on episcopal rings, 210
Knight Hospitaller, ring of a, 196
Knight, legend of the cruel, 99
Knighthood, rings of, 181
Lacedemonian rings, 18
Lawsuits, rings an authority in, 184
Legacy of rings to shrines, 244
Legend of St. Agnes and the ring, 239
— — — Catherine and the ring, 238
— — the fish and the ring, 98, 510
— — — ‘Royal of France’ jewel, 133
— — Marianson and the rings, 354
— — St. Mark’s ring, 119
— — a ring derived from the North, 131
— — the ‘Pilgrim’ ring, 117, 516
— — — Three Kings of Cologne, 143
— — — Lady of Toggenburg, 354
— — a ring of espousals received from Our Saviour, 237
— — — — on the statue of Venus, 129
Lines on wedding-rings, 276
Lion, King-at-Arms, ring given to, 194
Loadstone set in wedding-rings, 304
Londesborough Collection, charm-ring against the ‘Evil Eye’ in the, 153
— — decade ring of Delhi work in the, 253
— — early Christian ring in the, 47
— — episcopal ring in the, 230
— — gemmel rings in the, 319
— — Jewish marriage-rings in the, 298
— — jointed betrothal ring in the, 314
— — Irish rings in the, 61
— — Italian rings in the, 76
— — later period rings in the, 75
— — love gift ring, 47
— — ‘Lucretia’ ring in the, 318
— — magical thumb-ring in the, 89
Londesborough Collection, mechanical mystic ring in the, 147
— — memorial and mortuary rings in the, 373
— — Moorish rings in the, 83
— — mortuary rings in the, 383
— — motto ring in the, 416
— — Papal ring in the, 208
— — ‘religious’ ring in the, 251
— — ring of Bishop Thierry in the, 204
— — toadstone rings in the, 157
Lost rings, singular recovery of, 436
Louis XII., rings of, 461, 469
Love-knots, rings with, 414
Love-pledges, rings as, 283
Lucretia, rings with representations of, 318
Luther, betrothal and marriage-rings of Martin, 481
Lynnoch, Turlough, signet-ring of, 194
Magi, rings of the, 143
Magical thumb-rings, 89
Maintenon, ring of Madame de, 469
Man, ring-custom in the Isle of, 443
Mantle and ring, vows taken with, 241
Mark, ring of St., 119
Marlborough gem-rings, 461
Marriage-ring of the Doge of Venice, 99, 419, 529
Marriages, fleet, 282
— Gretna Green, 283
Marriage ring of Joseph and the Virgin Mary, 93, 505
— of prelates, 234
— — Archbishop Rich to the Virgin, 237
Martin, rings of St., 285
Martyrs and saints, relics of, in rings, 142
Mary, Queen of Scots, investiture rings of, 182
— — — — signet-ring of, 459, 478
Massinissa and Sophonisba, figures of, on a ring, 38
Materials of wedding-rings, 285, 377
Mayhew, ring of Bishop, 227
Mecca, rings of, 17
Mechanical mystic ring, 147
[Pg 540]
Medical amulet-rings, 147, 161
Medici, rings of the, 471
Mediæval romances, charmed rings in, 121
‘Memento mori’ rings, 372
Memorial and mortuary rings, 355, 377
— ring of the Princess Amelia, 375
— rings, Charles I., 366
— — Charles II., 371
— — Elizabeth, Queen of Bohemia, 361
— — Countess of Hartford, 366
— — Mary, Queen of Scots, 365
— — Royalist, 371
Merchant’s ‘mark’ rings, 84
Meridian rings, 451
Merovingian rings, 69
Modern French, 83
Montfaucon’s theory of the zodiac, 109
‘Month’ rings of the Poles, 115
Morgan, Papal ring in the collection of Mr. Octavius, 207
Moore’s poem on the ‘Ring,’ 129
— allusion to his mother’s wedding-ring, 281
Moorish rings, 83
Motto-rings, 390
Mourning rings, 360
Mourning ring of Queen Anne, 374
— — — Lord Eldon, 375
— — — Queen Mary and William III., 374
— — — Lord Nelson, 375
— — — the Emperor Nicholas of Russia, 384
Mummy, rings on the fingers of a, 10
Museum, Egyptian rings in the South Kensington, 12
— — — — — British, 5
— Etruscan ring with chimeræ in the British, 15
— Prince of Canino’s ring in the British, 14
— ring of Queen Sebek-nefru, 7
— — — Sennacherib in the British, 9
— Egyptian rings in the Louvre, 13
Names on rings, 416
Necromantic rings, 146
Nelson, memorial rings of Lord, 375
New Year’s Gift rings, 421
Nobility, rings badges of, 195
Northmen, wedding-keys of the old, 294
Novices invested with the ring, 232
Nuns forbidden to wear rings, 240
Nuptial ring of the Virgin Mary, 93
Omens, blood-dropping from the ring-finger, 168
— breaking of rings, 168
— bursting of rings, 168
— fall of rings, 167
— loss of rings, 167
— taking off rings, 171
Oriental rings, 90, 491
Origin of merchant’s ‘mark’ rings, 192
Orpine plant, rings with devices of the, 169
Oswald, token-ring of, 325
Pagan graves, rings found in, 69
Paradise rings, 257
Parthenon, rings in the treasury of the, 43
Pedlar’s rings, 73
Pendrell, token-ring given to, 350
Pepys, bequest of rings by, 363
Perceval of Galles, bequest of rings by, 328
Perrot, bequest of rings by, 344
Persian rings, 17
Perugia, nuptial ring of the Virgin at, 93
Perugino’s picture of the marriage of the Virgin, 94
‘Pilgrim’ ring of Edward the Confessor, 116, 516
Pilgrim rings, 264
Planetary rings, virtues ascribed to, 108
Poets Laureate, rings given to, 191
Poison-rings, 432
Poles, ‘month’ rings of the, 115
Polycrates, ring of, 96
Pontifical rings, 205, 207
Pope, bequest of rings by, 374
Pope Boniface, ring of, 207
— Pius II., ring of, 207
— — IX., ring of, 201
Popes buried with their rings, 202
[Pg 541]
Popes, their sanctity disregarded, 202
Porcelain rings, Egyptian, 8
Portrait-rings, 496
Posy-rings, 390
Power of the royal ring, 182
‘Poynings,’ the charter of, confirmed by a ring, 186
Precious stones, episcopal rings enriched with, 216
Prometheus, the ring of, 95
Property conveyed by a ring, 185
Puzzle-rings, 322
Ring, Alhstan, the, 62
— of Angelo, Michael, 470
— — Bitton, Bishop, 228
— — Pope Boniface, 207
— — Bowett, Archbishop, 225
— — John Bunyan, 495
— — Cantelupé, Bishop, 229
— — Chariclea, 463
— — Charles I. and Charles II., 461
— — Childeric, 386
— — Cranmer, Archbishop, 217
— found in the grave of St. Cuthbert, 227
— the Darnley, 460
— of Eloy, St., 232
— — Ethelswith, Queen of Mercia, 55
— — Ethelwulf, King, 54
— — Gardiner, Bishop, 226
— — Gundulf, Bishop of Rochester, 213
— — Gyges, 96, 508
— — Queen Henrietta Maria, 493
— — Henry of Worcester, 230
— — Hilary, Bishop, 225
— — Lion King-at-Arms, 194
— — Louis XII., 461, 469
— — Loup, St., 217
— — Turlough Lynnoch, 194
— — Madame de Maintenon, 469
— — Mary, Queen of Scots, 459, 478
— — Mayhew, Bishop, 227
— — the Great Mogul, 491
— — Lorenzo de Medici, 471
— — Pius II., 207
— — Pius IX., 201
— — Polycrates, 96
— — Sir Walter Raleigh, 486
Ring of Seffrid, Bishop, 225
— the Seymour, 479
— — Shakspeare, 484
— of Solomon, 91, 503
— — Roger, King of Sicily, 465
— — the Stuarts, 492
— — Thierry, Bishop of Verdun, 201
— — Tippoo Saib, 490
— — William of Wyckham, 226
— the Worsley seal, 467
— American gigantic, 488
— amulet, of Prince Charles Edward, 166
— — found at Eltham Palace, 126
— authority of the, in law suits, 184
— of the ‘Beef Steak’ Club, 193
— Byzantine betrothal, 304
— charm of the ‘Oxford Conjurer,’ 132
— charters confirmed by the, 184
— Claddugh wedding, 320
— found in Cornwall, 266
— Queen Elizabeth’s coronation, 165
— given to the ‘Admirable’ Crichton, 194
— on the Cromwell crest, 421
— devices of the Medici, 473
— diplomas sanctioned by the, 184
— divination, 100, 172
— of Edward the Confessor, 116, 516
— escutcheon, French, 81
— superstition of Henry VIII., 133
— history, episode in, 453
— the ‘Fisherman’s,’ 198
— relic of Flodden Field, 478
— — of Fotheringay, 475
— heraldic, 481
— diamond-pointed Italian, 76
— of the Grand Master of the Order of St. John, 193
— found at Kenilworth Castle, 473
— of knighthood, 181
— legend, 130
— of Martin Luther, 481
— legends of the Fish and the Ring, 98, 510
— of St. Mark, 119
— mourning, of Charles II., 371
— — Royalist, 371
— — of the Princess Amelia, 375
— — — Queen Anne, 373
— — — Lord Eldon, 375
— — — Marie Antoinette, 374
— — — Mary and William III., 374
[Pg 542]
— — — Lord Nelson, 375
— — — the Emperor Nicholas of Russia, 384
— memorial, of the Countess of Hertford, 366
— of a nun, 240
— kissing the Pope’s, 201
— Russian customs of the wedding, 174
— secular investiture by the, 177
— small wedding, 287
— tragical incident of a, 449
— marriage, of the Doge of Venice, 89
— legend of a, on the statue of Venus, 128
Rings, Abbots invested with, 231
— the mystic word ‘Agla’ on, 137
— amulet, 148
— Anglo-Saxon betrothal, 306
— prizes for archery, 444
— Arundel and Bessborough Collection of gem, 462
— from Ashantee, 455
— astrological, 108
— Bavarian, 84
— bequests of, 355
— engraved by Berquem, 450
— betrothal and wedding, 275, 526
— dividing betrothal, 316
— bursting on the fingers, 168
— importance of Bishops’, 213
— taken from degraded Bishops, 218
— on the fingers of the arm of St. Blaize, 221
— Boccaccio’s fable of the three, 451
— offered as bribes, 444
— of British, Saxon, and mediæval times, 53
— British Museum collection of gem, 459
— Byzantine, 48
— carbuncle, 159
— stolen from Charles II., 454
— charm, 105, 115, 121
— of espousals to Christ, 233, 241
— early Christian, 258, 268
— clerical extravagance in, 220
— coronation, 177
— claimed as ‘corse’ present, 221
— during the Commonwealth, 288
— coronets on, 475
— cramp, 162, 522
— customs and incidents in connection with, 419
— with wood of the true cross, 141
— with devices of death, 372
— decade, 248
— buried with the dead, 377
— Devonshire gem, 458
— given in diplomacy, 422
— divination, powers of, 450
— doctors’, 191
— taken from the finger, an ill omen, 171
— in connection with ecclesiastical usages, 198
— engravings on Bishops’, 212
— to cure epilepsy, 153
— attached to episcopal charters, 211
— episcopal investiture with, 215
— — how worn, 218
— — French, 228
— found in the bodies of fishes, 439
— French, 82, 415
— garter, 193
— gemmel, 313, 318
— German ‘liberation,’ 448
— in the ‘Gesta Romanorum,’ 124
— Gnostic, 107
— gold wedding, 84
— at marriages of modern Greeks, 311
— harlequin, 414
— discovered at Herculaneum and Pompeii, 49
— charmed ‘hoof,’ 153
— identification by means of, 426
— incidents in connection with, 419
— inscription, 390
— antique intagli motto, 417
— in the Royal Irish Academy, 65
— at Italian marriages, 310
— talismanic virtues of jet, 107
— Jewish betrothal and marriage, 298
— used in Jewish covenants, 297
— — — — synagogues, 302
— given in lieu of dowry by the Jews, 298
— key, 294
— love ‘pledge,’ 283
— loss of, an ill omen, 167
— love-knot, 414
— denoting love’s telegraph, 293
— linked, 317, 322
[Pg 543]
— life saved by, 427
— with representations of Lucretia, 318
— of the Magi, 143
— Marlborough gem, 461
— — St. Martin, 285
— materials of wedding, 286
— medicinal, 161
— ‘Memento mori,’ 372
— memorial and mortuary, 355
— — of Charles I., 366
— — — Mary, Queen of Scots, 365
— merchant’s ‘mark,’ 84
— meridian, 451
— Merovingian, 69
— month, of the Poles, 115
— Moorish, 83
— motto, 390
— mourning, 360
— — given at funerals, 364
— necromantic, 146
— New Year gift, 421
— an ancient mark of nobility, 195
— of the old Northmen, 305
— novices invested with, 232
— Oriental, 90
— origin of ‘merchant’s marks,’ 192
— with device of the orpine plant, 169
— in Pagan graves, 68
— Paradise, 257
— of a later period, 75
— pilgrim, 264
— planetary virtues of, 108, 112
— poison, 432
— conferred on Poets Laureate, 191
— pontifical, 205, 207, 209
— buried with popes, 202
— portrait, 496
— posy, 390
— profusely worn, 72
— property conveyed by, 185
— recovery of lost, 436
— ‘Regard,’ 414
— religious, 133, 138, 248, 254
— reliquary, 142, 257
— remarkable, 457
— ‘Reynard the Fox’ on magical, 145
— Roman amber and glass, 48
— — in the Bibliothèque Nationale at Paris, 32
— — in the Castellani Collection, 46
— Roman devices and inscriptions on, 41
— of a Roman lady, 33, 43
— gems mounted in Roman, 30, 40
— Roman gift, 46
— gold, when first worn in Rome, 26
— Roman and Greek huge, 28
— — iron, 25
— — key, 45, 51
— — legionary, 47
— in the treasury of the Parthenon, 43
— profusion of, worn by the ancients, 28, 30
— Roman rock-crystal, 31
— — ‘season,’ 28, 30
— — signs engraved on, 33
— — thumb, 29
— — used for various purposes, 42
— — votive, 44
— — and Greek, in the Waterton Collection, 50
— Runic characters on, 148, 150
— rush, 284
— at Russian marriages, 311
— Russian customs with, 447
— Saxon wire, 59
— — found at Cuerdale, 63
— mode of securing, 449
— Serjeants’, 186
— at shrines, 259
— sigil charm, 113
— signet, 25
— at Spanish marriages, 312
— gold, to cure sties, 174
— superstitions in connection with, 91
— magical ‘suspended,’ 112
— talismanic, 91, 134, 140, 147, 151, 166
— mystic ‘Tau,’ 155
— toadstone, 155
— given at tournaments, 197
— discovered on the (presumed) site of Troy, 32
— thumb, 87, 89, 139, 501
— thank-offering, 247
— the Three, 352
— token, 323
— tooth, 495
— Trinity, 248, 254
— given on St. Valentine’s Day, 422
— at Venetian marriages, 311
[Pg 544]
— ‘Vertuosus,’ 162, 355<
LONDON: PRINTED BY
SPOTTISWOODE AND CO., NEW-STREET SQUARE
AND PARLIAMENT STREET
LONDON: PRINTED BY
SPOTTISWOODE AND CO., NEW-STREET SQUARE
AND PARLIAMENT STREET
Footnotes:
References:
[1] In 1841 Mr. Joseph Bonomi read a paper before the Royal Society of Literature on an ancient signet-ring of gold, resembling in every respect, except the name of the king, the ring which Pharaoh put on the finger of Joseph. The account of its purchase, loss, and subsequent recovery is very interesting. It was bought by Lord Ashburnham at Cairo in 1825. In the spring of the same year his Lordship embarked a valuable collection on board a brig he had chartered at Alexandria, to carry his heavy baggage to Smyrna. This was attacked and pillaged by Greek pirates, who sold their booty in the island of Syra. The ring then became the property of a Greek merchant, in whose possession it remained until it was sold at Constantinople, and was brought to England in 1840. It then passed from the hands of Mr. Bonomi into those of Lord Ashburnham, its former possessor. It is conjectured, from evidence peculiar to Egyptian antiquities, that this ring belonged to the age of Thothmes III.
[1] In 1841, Mr. Joseph Bonomi presented a paper to the Royal Society of Literature about an ancient gold signet ring that was almost identical to the one Pharaoh gave to Joseph, aside from the king's name. The story of how it was bought, lost, and then recovered is quite fascinating. Lord Ashburnham bought it in Cairo in 1825. Later that year, he loaded a valuable collection onto a brig he had chartered in Alexandria to transport his heavy baggage to Smyrna. This vessel was attacked and looted by Greek pirates, who sold their stolen goods on the island of Syra. The ring then became owned by a Greek merchant and stayed with him until it was sold in Constantinople, eventually making its way to England in 1840. From there, it moved from Mr. Bonomi back to Lord Ashburnham, its original owner. It's theorized, based on specific evidence related to Egyptian antiquities, that this ring dates back to the time of Thothmes III.
Egyptian Gold Signet-ring.
Egyptian gold signet ring.
In the winter of 1824 a discovery was made in Sakkara of a tomb enclosing a mummy entirely cased in solid gold (each limb, each finger of which had its particular envelope inscribed with hieroglyphics), a scarabæus attached to a gold chain, a gold ring, and a pair of bracelets of gold with other valuable relics. This account was wrested from the excavators à coups de bâton administered by Mohammed Defterdar Bey, by which means were recovered to Signor Drovetti (at whose charge the excavation was made) the scarabæus and gold chain, a fragment of the gold envelope, and the bracelets, now in the Leyden Museum, which bear the same name as this ring. From the circumstance of the bracelets bearing the same name as this ring, and from the word Pthah, the name of the tutelar divinity of Memphis (of which city Sakkara was the necropolis) being also inscribed upon it, there is little doubt it was found in that place, and, from the confession of the Arabs, a great probability that it came out of the same excavation. The discovery of so much gold in a single tomb, which, from the nature of the ornaments, must have belonged to the Pharaoh himself, or to a distinguished officer of his household, accords well with Mr. Cory’s system of chronology, which places the death of the patriarch Joseph in the twenty-first year of the reign of Thothmes III., at which period the treasury of Pharaoh must have been well stored with the precious material of these ornaments accumulated by the prudent administration of the patriarch. Assuming, therefore, that Mr. Cory’s system is correct, this ring may be regarded, not only as an excellent specimen of that kind called Tabát (a word still used in Egypt to signify a stamp or seal), but also as resembling in every respect, excepting the name, the ring which Pharaoh put on the hand of Joseph.
In the winter of 1824, a tomb was discovered in Sakkara containing a mummy completely encased in solid gold (each limb and finger was wrapped in its own gold cover inscribed with hieroglyphics), along with a scarab beetle on a gold chain, a gold ring, and a pair of gold bracelets, among other valuable items. This account was extracted from the excavators through physical force applied by Mohammed Defterdar Bey, resulting in the recovery of the scarab, gold chain, a piece of the gold cover, and the bracelets for Signor Drovetti (who financed the excavation). These items are now housed in the Leyden Museum, and the bracelets bear the same name as this ring. Given that the bracelets share a name with the ring and the name of Pthah, the protective deity of Memphis (of which Sakkara was the burial place), is also inscribed on it, there's little doubt that it was found in that location, and according to the Arabs' confession, it likely came from the same excavation. The discovery of so much gold in a single tomb, which based on the type of ornaments must have belonged either to the Pharaoh himself or a notable officer in his household, aligns well with Mr. Cory’s chronology, which dates the death of the patriarch Joseph to the twenty-first year of Thothmes III.’s reign. At that time, the Pharaoh's treasury would have been filled with valuable items accumulated through careful management by the patriarch. Therefore, if Mr. Cory’s chronology is accurate, this ring can be seen not only as an excellent example of the type known as Tabát (a term still used in Egypt to mean a stamp or seal) but also as resembling in every way, except for the name, the ring that the Pharaoh placed on Joseph's hand.
[2] Mr. Layard, in ‘Nineveh and Its Remains,’ describes the wife of an Arab Sheikh, whom he met, as having a nose adorned with a prodigious gold ring, set with jewels of such ample dimensions that it covered her mouth, and was obliged to be removed when she ate.
[2] Mr. Layard, in ‘Nineveh and Its Remains,’ describes the wife of an Arab Sheikh he met as having a huge gold ring on her nose, decorated with such large jewels that it covered her mouth and had to be taken off when she ate.
[3] The Egyptians made the scarabæus the symbol of the world, because it rolled its excrements into a globe; of the sun; of the moon, from horns; one-horned, of Mercury; of generation, because it buried the bowls in which it included its eggs, &c.; of an only son, because they believed that every beetle was male and female; of valour, manly power, &c., whence they forced all the soldiers to wear a ring upon which a beetle was engraved. All these superstitions are very ancient, for they occur upon the sepulchres of Biban-el-Molook, and are traced to the Indians, Hottentots, and other nations. In the hieroglyphs it is used for the syllable Khepra, and expresses the verb ‘to be, exist.’ In connection with Egyptian notions, the Gnostics and some of the Fathers called Christ the Scarabæus.
[3] The Egyptians made the scarab beetle a symbol of the world because it rolled its droppings into a ball; of the sun; of the moon, representing horns; a single horn for Mercury; of creation, because it buried the bowls containing its eggs, etc.; of an only son, as they believed every beetle was both male and female; of bravery and manly strength, which is why they made all soldiers wear a ring with a beetle engraved on it. These superstitions are very old, as they appear on the tombs of Biban-el-Molook and can be traced back to the Indians, Hottentots, and other cultures. In hieroglyphs, it represents the syllable Khepra and expresses the verb 'to be, exist.' In relation to Egyptian beliefs, the Gnostics and some early Church Fathers referred to Christ as the Scarab beetle.
‘The usual mode of mounting the scarab,’ observes the Rev. C. W. King, in ‘Antique Gems,’ ‘as a finger-ring, was, the swivel, a wire as a pivot passing through the longitudinal perforation of the stone (the edge of which was generally protected by a gold rim), and then brought through holes in each end of a bar of gold, or else of a broad, flat band of plaited wire, and bent into a loop of sufficient size to admit the finger, which was usually the fore-finger of the left hand. For the sake of security, the ends of the loop were formed into small disks, touching each extremity of the scarabæus. This loop, or ring shank, as it may be considered, was treated in a great variety of fashions, and sometimes was made extremely ornamental. One that I have seen terminated in rams’ heads, the pivot entering the mouth of each; in another the shank was formed as a serpent, the head of which was one of the supporting points, and the tail tied into a knot. Occasionally the form of the shank was varied by bending the bar upon itself, so as to form a bow in the middle of its length; the ends were then beaten to a point, which, being twisted inwards, passed into the opposite holes of the stone, and thus formed a handle to the signet. This last manner of mounting the scarabæus was often used by the Egyptians, the shank being made of every kind of metal; it was also the common setting of the Phœnician stones of this form.’
‘Rev. C. W. King notes in ‘Antique Gems’ that the typical way to wear a scarab was as a finger ring, which used a swivel method. This involved a wire acting as a pivot that went through a long hole in the stone, which was usually surrounded by a gold rim for protection. The wire would then pass through holes at either end of a gold bar or a flat band made of braided wire, forming a loop large enough for the wearer’s finger, typically the left forefinger. To ensure it stayed secure, the ends of the loop were shaped into small disks that rested against each end of the scarab. This loop, or ring shank, was crafted in many different styles, sometimes becoming quite decorative. I’ve seen one that ended in ram heads, with the pivot entering the mouth of each, while another was shaped like a serpent, with the head acting as one of the supporting points and the tail tied in a knot. Occasionally, the shape of the shank was altered by bending the bar back on itself, creating a bow in the middle. The ends were then pointed and twisted inward to fit into opposite holes of the stone, forming a handle for the signet. This last method of mounting the scarab was commonly used by the Egyptians, and the shank could be made from a variety of metals; it was also a typical setting for Phoenician stones of this style.’
[4] Appendix.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ Appendix.
[5] Cellini, in his ‘Memoirs,’ says that Pope Clement VII. showed him a gold Etruscan necklace of exquisite workmanship, which had just been discovered in the ground. On examining it, ‘Alas,’ cried he, ‘it is better not to imitate these Etruscans, for we should be nothing but their humble servants. Let us rather strike out a new path, which will, at least, have the merit of originality.’
[5] Cellini, in his ‘Memoirs,’ says that Pope Clement VII showed him a gold Etruscan necklace of exquisite craftsmanship that had just been found in the ground. Upon examining it, he exclaimed, "Alas, it's better not to imitate these Etruscans, or we will only be their humble servants. Instead, let's create a new path that will at least have the value of originality."
[6] Appendix.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ Appendix.
[7] Addison remarks that when at Rome he had ‘seen old Roman rings so very thick about, and with such large stones in them, that it is no wonder a fop should reckon them a little cumbersome in the summer season of so hot a climate.’
[7] Addison notes that when he was in Rome, he had "seen old Roman rings that were so thick and had such large stones in them that it's not surprising a dandy might find them a bit cumbersome in the hot summer climate."
A Roman ring found in Hungary contained more than two ounces of gold.
A Roman ring discovered in Hungary had over two ounces of gold.
[8] ‘As soon as the despotic power of the Cæsars was established,’ remarks the Rev. C. W. King (‘Handbook of Engraved Gems’), ‘it became a mark of loyalty to adorn either one’s house, or one’s hand, with the visible presence of the sovereign. Capitolinus notices that the individual was looked upon as an impious wretch, who, having the means, did not set up at home a statue of M. Aurelius; and, a century later, the Senate obliged by an edict every householder to keep a picture of the restorer of the Empire, Aurelian. That official swore such portraits in their rings as an indispensable mark of distinction may be deduced from the negotiations of Claudius (preserved by Pliny) confining the entrée at court to such as had received from him a gold ring having the imperial bust carved on it.’
[8] “Once the authoritarian power of the Caesars was established,” notes Rev. C. W. King (“Handbook of Engraved Gems”), “it became a sign of loyalty to decorate either one’s home or oneself with a visible representation of the ruler. Capitolinus observes that someone who could afford it but didn’t display a statue of M. Aurelius at home was considered an impious scoundrel; and, a century later, the Senate mandated through an edict that every homeowner must have a picture of the restorer of the Empire, Aurelian. It can be inferred from Claudius’s negotiations (as recorded by Pliny) that wearing such portraits in their rings was an essential mark of distinction, as he restricted access to court to those who had received from him a gold ring bearing the imperial bust.”
[9] Xenophon, in his ‘Economics,’ states that the Greek matrons had the power of sealing up, or placing the seal upon the house-goods, and at Rome, Cicero’s mother was accustomed to enhance to consumers the merits of some poor thin wine, vile Sabinum, by affixing to each amphora her official signet.
[9] Xenophon, in his ‘Economics,’ says that Greek women had the authority to seal or mark the household goods, and in Rome, Cicero’s mother used to promote the qualities of a cheap, thin wine, vile Sabinum, by putting her official seal on each amphora.
It appears that the women of Greece did not use the ring as frequently as the men, and that theirs were less costly.
It seems that the women of Greece didn't wear rings as often as the men, and theirs were less expensive.
[10] Amber rings were worn in our own country to a late date; thus Swift, writing to Pope respecting Curll and the ‘Dunciad,’ says:—‘Sir, you remind me of my Lord Bolingbroke’s ring; you have embalmed a gnat in amber.’
[10] Amber rings were worn in our country until relatively recently; for instance, Swift, in a letter to Pope about Curll and the ‘Dunciad,’ says:—‘Sir, you remind me of my Lord Bolingbroke’s ring; you have preserved a gnat in amber.’
[11] At the exhibition of antiquities and works of art at the Archæological meeting of January 5, 1849, Major Ker Macdonald produced a ring supposed to be a recent imitation of the ring of Ethelwulf.
[11] At the exhibition of antiquities and artworks at the Archaeological meeting on January 5, 1849, Major Ker Macdonald presented a ring believed to be a modern replica of the ring of Ethelwulf.
[12] I am much indebted to Mr. R. H. Soden Smith, F.S.A.—a gentleman so distinguished in art circles, and the possessor of a remarkably fine and rare collection of rings—for information on some points connected with this work.
[12] I am very grateful to Mr. R. H. Soden Smith, F.S.A.—a gentleman well-known in art circles, who has a remarkably fine and rare collection of rings—for sharing information on some aspects related to this work.
[13] There is the well-known anecdote of Francis the First, who, in order to let the Duchess d’Estampes know that he was jealous, wrote with a diamond these lines on a pane of glass, ‘which,’ says Le Vieil, in his ‘Peinture sur Verre,’ ‘may be still seen in the Château Chambord’:—
[13] There's a famous story about Francis the First, who, to let the Duchess d’Estampes know he was jealous, wrote with a diamond on a glass pane, ‘which,’ says Le Vieil in his ‘Peinture sur Verre,’ ‘can still be seen at Château Chambord’:—
Souvent femme varie,
Mal habil qui s’y fie.
Souvent une femme change,
Mauvais est celui qui lui fait confiance.
A similar story is recorded of Henry the Fourth of France and the Duke of Montpensier. The latter had written with his diamond ring on a pane of glass the following, in allusion to his love for the aunt of the King:—
A similar story is told about Henry the Fourth of France and the Duke of Montpensier. The Duke had written with his diamond ring on a pane of glass the following, referring to his love for the King’s aunt:—
Nul bonheur me contente,
Absent de ma Divinité.
No happiness satisfies me,
In the absence of my Divinity.
Henry, in the same manner, wrote under it:—
Henry also wrote underneath it:—
N’appellez pas ainsi ma tante,
Elle aime trop l’Humanité.
N'appelons pas ma tante comme ça,
Elle aime trop l'humanité.
It was on the pane of a window in Hampton Court Palace that, during one of the festivals given there by Henry the Eighth, the ill-fated Earl of Surrey wrote with his diamond ring the name of fair Geraldine, and in quaint verse commemorated her beauty.
It was on the glass of a window in Hampton Court Palace that, during one of the festivals hosted by Henry the Eighth, the unfortunate Earl of Surrey wrote with his diamond ring the name of beautiful Geraldine, and in an old-fashioned poem celebrated her beauty.
[14] Calmet, in his ‘Dictionary,’ states that the Arabian princesses wore golden rings on their fingers, to which little bells were suspended, as well as in the flowing tresses of their hair, that their superior rank might be known, and that they might receive in passing the homage due to them.
[14] Calmet, in his ‘Dictionary,’ states that Arabian princesses wore golden rings on their fingers, with little bells hanging from them, as well as in their flowing hair, so that their high status could be recognized and they could receive the respect they deserved as they passed by.
[15] Montfaucon, in his ‘L’Antiquité Expliquée,’ describes the representation of a trading seal ‘as one of the most extraordinary that has yet been seen.’ It was given to him by a monk of St. Victor, at Marseilles. The form was oblong, and the inscription was in three lines, the first of which is P. Hileyi, Publii Hileyi, at the end of which words was a well-formed caduceus. The second and third lines were Sex. Maci Paullini, Sexti Maci Paullini. The caduceus, which was a symbol of traffic, denotes that these were two merchants and co-partners, and the anchor, that they were adventurers by sea. One thing remarkable is that the first name, P. Hileyi, was taken by design, but yet so that it might be read; the letters being cut very deep, they contented themselves with taking out so much of them only as would spoil that part of the impression upon wax, or any other matter, and leave the other name to be impressed alone. That this was done by design appeared from the varnish seen in these traces, as well as in the rest of the seal, and was probably done by Sextus Macius Paullinus at the death of his partner Publius Hileyus.
[15] Montfaucon, in his ‘L’Antiquité Expliquée,’ describes the representation of a trading seal as “one of the most extraordinary that has yet been seen.” A monk from St. Victor in Marseille gave it to him. The seal was oblong, and the inscription was in three lines, the first of which reads P. Hileyi, Publii Hileyi, followed by a well-shaped caduceus. The second and third lines read Sex. Maci Paullini, Sexti Maci Paullini. The caduceus, which symbolizes trade, indicates that these were two merchants and partners, while the anchor signifies that they were seafarers. One notable aspect is that the first name, P. Hileyi, was intentionally crafted so it could still be read; the letters were cut deeply, and they only removed enough material to ruin that part of the impression on wax or whatever else was used, leaving the other name to be clearly impressed. This design choice is evident from the varnish present in these marks, as well as in the rest of the seal, and it was likely done by Sextus Macius Paullinus after the death of his partner Publius Hileyus.
[16] Appendix.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ Appendix.
‘Then speaken they of Canace’s ring
And saiden all that such a wondrous thing
Of crafte of ringès heard they never none,
Save that he, Moses, and King Solomon
Hadden a name of cunning in such art.’
‘Then they spoke of Canace’s ring
They said they had never heard of something so amazing.
As for the art of ring-making, aside from Moses and King Solomon
Who were recognized for their talent in this kind of art.
[18] Among the Mohammedans at present a talisman, consisting generally of a formula on a scrap of paper, or sentences from the Koran, is placed in a piece of stuff and put into a ring between the stone and the metal. Although the Mussulman doctors generally concur in considering these practices vain, and many Asiatics do not use them, yet the multitude still retain a predilection for them.
[18] Right now, among Muslims, a talisman—usually a phrase on a piece of paper or verses from the Quran—is placed between the stone and the metal in a piece of fabric inside a ring. Although Muslim scholars generally agree that these practices are pointless, and many Asians don't use them, the majority still have a strong preference for them.
[19] Appendix.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ Appendix.
[20] Appendix.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ Appendix.
[21] Plato relates the story of Gyges differently to that by Herodotus. He tells us that Gyges wore a ring, the stone of which, when turned towards him rendered him invisible, so that he had the advantage of seeing others without being seen himself. By means of this ring he deprived Candaules of his throne and life, with the concurrence of the queen. ‘This,’ remarks Rollin, ‘probably implies that in order to compass his own criminal design he used all the tricks and stratagems which the world calls subtle and refined policy, which penetrates into the most secret purposes of others without making the least discovery of its own.’ This story, thus explained, carries in it a greater appearance of truth than what we read in ‘Herodotus.’
[21] Plato tells the story of Gyges in a different way than Herodotus. He explains that Gyges had a ring with a stone that, when turned towards him, made him invisible, allowing him to see others without being seen. With this ring, he took the throne and life of Candaules, with the queen's approval. ‘This,’ notes Rollin, ‘suggests that to achieve his own criminal goals, he employed all the tricks and cunning methods that the world considers sophisticated and refined, which uncover the hidden intentions of others without revealing his own.’ This explanation of the story seems more believable than what we find in ‘Herodotus.’
Cicero, after relating the fable of Gyges’ famous ring, adds, that if a wise man had such a ring he would not use it to any wicked purpose, because virtue considers what is honourable and just, and has no occasion for darkness.
Cicero, after sharing the story of Gyges’ famous ring, says that if a wise person had such a ring, they wouldn't use it for any evil purpose, because virtue values what is honorable and just, and doesn’t need to resort to wrongdoing.
[22] See chapter on ‘Customs and Incidents in Connexion with Rings.’
[22] See chapter on ‘Customs and Incidents Related to Rings.’
[23] Dr. Gordon, in his ‘History of Glasgow,’ quotes the legend thus, from the ‘Aberdeen Breviary:’—‘The Queen of Cadzow was suspected by her husband, King Roderick, of being too intimate with a knight whom he had asked to hunt with him. The King waited his opportunity to abstract from the satchel of the knight, when asleep, a ring which the Queen had presented to him. King Roderick, in furious jealousy, threw it into the Clyde. When they returned to the palace of Cadzow from the day’s hunting, the King, in the course of the evening, asked her where her ring was. It could not be produced. Death was threatened if it were not forthcoming. The Queen sent one of her maids to the knight for the ring, and being unsuccessful, a bearer was sent to Cathures (Glasgow), to St Mungo, making a full confession of all. The Apostle of Strathclyde commiserated the Queen. Forthwith he sent one of his monks to the river to angle, instructing him to bring home alive the first fish that he caught. This was done. St. Mungo (dear friend) found the annulet in the mouth of the miraculous fish, and speedily sent it to the Queen, who restored it to her husband, and thereby saved her life.’
[23] Dr. Gordon, in his ‘History of Glasgow,’ quotes the legend as follows from the ‘Aberdeen Breviary:’—‘The Queen of Cadzow was suspected by her husband, King Roderick, of being too close with a knight he had invited to hunt with him. The King waited for a chance to steal from the knight’s satchel, while he slept, a ring that the Queen had given him. In a fit of jealous rage, King Roderick threw it into the Clyde. When they returned to the palace of Cadzow after their hunting trip, the King, that evening, asked her where her ring was. She couldn’t produce it. He threatened her with death if it didn’t appear. The Queen sent one of her maids to the knight to ask for the ring, but when that didn’t work, she sent someone to Cathures (Glasgow), to St Mungo, fully confessing everything. The Apostle of Strathclyde felt sorry for the Queen. Immediately, he sent one of his monks to the river to fish, instructing him to bring back the first fish he caught alive. He did just that. St. Mungo (dear friend) discovered the ring in the mouth of the miraculous fish and quickly sent it to the Queen, who returned it to her husband, thus saving her life.’
[24] Appendix.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ Appendix.
[25] ‘A Berril,’ observes Aubrey in his ‘Miscellanies,’ ‘is a kind of crystal that hath a weak tincture of red. In this magicians see visions. There are certain formulas of prayers to be used before they make the inspection which they term a Call. In a manuscript of Dr. Forman, of Lambeth (which Mr. Elias Ashmole had), is a discourse of this and the prayer; also there is a Call which Dr. Napier did use. James Harrington (author of “Oceana”) told me that the Earl of Denbigh, then ambassador at Venice, did tell him that one did show him three several times, in a glass, things past and to come. When Sir Marmaduke Langdale was in Italy he went to one of these Magi, who did show him a glass where he saw himself kneeling before a crucifix.’ A ‘Berrill’ belonging to Sir Edward Harley is thus described by Aubrey:—‘It is a perfect sphere; the diameter of it I guess to be something more than an inch; it is set in a ring or circle of silver resembling the meridian of a globe; the stem of it is about ten inches high, all gilt. At the four quarters of it are the names of four angels, viz., Uriel, Raphael, Michael, Gabriel. On the top is a cross patée. This, it appears, was efficacious in detecting thieves; it also forewarned death.’
[25] ‘A Berril,’ notes Aubrey in his ‘Miscellanies,’ ‘is a type of crystal that has a faint red tint. In this, magicians see visions. There are specific prayer formulas to be recited before they perform what they call a Call. In a manuscript by Dr. Forman from Lambeth (which Mr. Elias Ashmole possessed), there’s a discussion about this and the prayer; there’s also a Call that Dr. Napier used. James Harrington (the author of “Oceana”) told me that the Earl of Denbigh, who was the ambassador in Venice, said someone showed him things from both the past and future three times using a glass. When Sir Marmaduke Langdale was in Italy, he visited one of these magicians, who showed him a glass where he saw himself kneeling before a crucifix.’ Aubrey describes a ‘Berrill’ owned by Sir Edward Harley as follows:—‘It is a perfect sphere; I estimate its diameter to be just over an inch; it is set in a ring or circle of silver that resembles the meridian of a globe; the stem is about ten inches tall, all gilded. At the four quarters of it are the names of four angels: Uriel, Raphael, Michael, Gabriel. On top is a patée cross. This, it seems, was effective in revealing thieves; it also warned of impending death.’
Dr. Dee’s famous crystal, now in the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, will be remembered. (See discoveries in the tomb of Childeric, at Tournay, in chapter on ‘Memorial and Mortuary Rings.’)
Dr. Dee's famous crystal, now in the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, will be remembered. (See discoveries in the tomb of Childeric, at Tournay, in chapter on ‘Memorial and Mortuary Rings.’)
[26] The superstitious custom of carrying the medals of Alexander the Great, as if they had some salutary virtue in them, was frequent among the Christians of Antioch, as is evident from St. John Chrysostom’s declamation against the practice:—‘What shall we say of those that use enchantments and ligatures, and bind upon their head and feet brass medals of Alexander of Macedon? Are these our hopes? And shall we, after the passion and death of our Saviour, place our salvation in an image of a heathen king?’
[26] The superstitious practice of carrying medals of Alexander the Great, believing they had some kind of beneficial power, was common among the Christians of Antioch, as shown in St. John Chrysostom’s speech against this behavior:—‘What can we say about those who use charms and binding symbols, and wear bronze medals of Alexander the Great on their heads and feet? Are these our hopes? And should we, after the suffering and death of our Savior, put our salvation in the image of a pagan king?’
[27] Montfaucon, in his ‘L’Antiquité Expliquée,’ has a singular theory in regard to the signs of the Zodiac. He mentions a fine gem on which were represented the figures of Mercury, Jupiter, and Venus, included in a large circle which contained the twelve signs of the Zodiac. These he conjectured to signify the days of the week, Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday. ‘But, why,’ he observes, ‘do the three gods in this image indicate so many days of the week? Some ancient and particular custom is referred to and expressed, without doubt. Ausonius, in his “Eclogues,” inserts a verse current in his time preceded by this question:—“Quid quoque die demi de corpore oporteat?” On what days is it most proper to cut the beard, nails, or hair? “Ungues Mercurio, barbam Jove, Cypride crines.” That is, on Wednesday pare your nails, shave your beard on Thursday, and on Friday cut your hair. This usage Ausonius rallies in eight pleasant verses. “Mercury,” says he, “a pilferer by trade, loves his nails too well to let them be pared. Jupiter, venerable by his beard, Venus adorned by her hair, are by no means willing to part with what is so dear to them.”... I think it certain that these deities are represented as presiding over Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday, without being able to assign the certain reason why they are pictured upon this gem.’
[27] Montfaucon, in his ‘L’Antiquité Expliquée,’ has a unique theory about the signs of the Zodiac. He talks about a beautiful gem featuring the figures of Mercury, Jupiter, and Venus, which are shown inside a large circle containing the twelve signs of the Zodiac. He speculated that these represent the days of the week: Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday. ‘But why,’ he remarks, ‘do the three gods in this image represent so many days of the week? There must be some ancient and specific custom being referenced and expressed here. Ausonius, in his “Eclogues,” includes a line that was common in his time, introduced by this question:—“Quid quoque die demi de corpore oporteat?” On what days is it most appropriate to cut the beard, nails, or hair? “Ungues Mercurio, barbam Jove, Cypride crines.” That means, on Wednesday trim your nails, shave your beard on Thursday, and on Friday cut your hair. Ausonius elaborates on this in eight enjoyable verses. “Mercury,” he says, “a thief by nature, loves his nails too much to let them be trimmed. Jupiter, honored for his beard, and Venus, celebrated for her hair, are certainly reluctant to part with what is so precious to them.”... I believe it's clear that these deities are depicted as overseeing Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday, though I can't determine the exact reason why they are illustrated on this gem.’
A very extraordinary form of oath, by which the astronomer Vettius Valens bound his disciples to secresy, is quoted by Selden. ‘I adjure thee, most honoured brother and your fellow-students, by the starry vault of heaven, by the circle of the zodiac, the sun, the moon, and the five wandering stars (by which universal life is governed), by Providence itself, and Holy Necessity, that you will keep these things secret, nor divulge them except to those who are worthy and are able to make a just compensation to me, Valens.’
A very unusual form of oath, through which the astronomer Vettius Valens required his disciples to keep secrets, is mentioned by Selden. ‘I urge you, most honored brother and fellow students, by the starry sky, by the circle of the zodiac, the sun, the moon, and the five wandering stars (by which all life is governed), by Providence itself, and Holy Necessity, to keep these matters secret and only share them with those who are deserving and can offer me, Valens, a fair compensation.’
[28] According to the ancient lapidaries, a ram with the half-figure of an ox, or any stone set in a silver ring, whoever was touched with should be immediately reconciled. A woman, one half a fish, holding a mirror and a branch, cut on a marine hyacinth (pale sapphire), set in a gold ring, the signet covered with wax, procured any desire. A man ploughing, and over him the hand of the Lord making a sign, and star, if cut on any stone, and worn in all purity, ensured safety from tempest and immunity to crops from storms. Head, with neck, cut in green jasper; set in a brass or iron ring engraved with the letters B. B. P. P. N. E. N. A.: wear this, and thou shalt in no wise perish, but be preserved from many diseases, especially fever and dropsy; it likewise gives good luck in fowling. Thou shalt be reasonable and amiable in all things; in battle and in law-suits thou shalt be victor. Man standing and tall, holding an obolus (patera) in one hand and a serpent in the other, with the sun over his head, and a lion at his feet: if cut on a diacordius (diadochus) set in a leaden ring and put underneath wormwood and fenugreek, carry it to the bank of a river and call up whatsoever evil spirit thou pleasest, and thou shalt have from them answers to all thy questions. A youth having a crown on his head and seated on a throne with four legs, and under each leg a man standing and supporting the throne on his neck; round the neck of the seated figure a circle, and his hands raised up to heaven; if cut on a white hyacinth (pale sapphire) ought to be set in a silver ring of the same weight as the stone, and under it put mastic and turpentine; make the seal in wax and give it to any one, and let him carry it about on his neck or person, either the wax or the ring, and go with pure mind and chastity before king, noble, or wise man, and he shall obtain from them whatsoever he may desire. A bearded man holding a flower in his hand cut on carnelian, and set in a tin ring, the ring being made on the change of the moon on a Friday, the 1st or the 8th of the month, whomsoever thou shalt touch therewith he shall come to do thy will. Man standing on a dragon, holding a sword, must be set in a leaden or iron ring; then all the spirits that dwell in darkness shall obey the wearer, and shall reveal to him in a low-toned song the place of hidden treasure and the mode of winning the same. Man riding and holding in one hand the bridle, in the other a bow, and girt with a sword, engraved on pyrites set in a gold ring, it will render thee invincible in all battles; and whosoever shall steep this ring in oil of musk and anoint his face with the said oil, all that see him shall fear him, and none shall resist. Man erect in armour, holding a drawn sword, and wearing a helmet, if set in an iron ring of the same weight, renders the wearer invincible in battle. Capricorn on carnelian, set in a silver ring and carry about with thee, thou shalt never be harmed in purse or person by thine enemies, neither shall a judge pass an unjust sentence against thee; thou shalt abound in business and in honour, and gain the friendship of many, and all enchantments made against thee shall be of none effect, and no foe, however powerful, shall be able to resist thee in battle. (Extracts from ‘Sigil-charms,’ ‘History of the Glyptic Art,’ ‘Handbook of Engraved Gems,’ by the Rev. C. W. King.)
[28] According to ancient texts about stones, if you touch a ram with the half-figure of an ox, or any stone set in a silver ring, you will be instantly reconciled. A woman depicted as half a fish, holding a mirror and a branch cut from a marine hyacinth (pale sapphire), set in a gold ring, grants any wish. A man plowing, with the hand of the Lord making a sign above him, and a star engraved on any stone worn purely, guarantees safety from storms and protects crops. A head and neck carved in green jasper, set in a brass or iron ring engraved with the letters B. B. P. P. N. E. N. A.: wear this, and you will not perish but be safe from many illnesses, especially fever and dropsy; it also brings good luck in hunting. You will be reasonable and pleasant in everything; in battles and legal disputes, you will win. A man standing tall, holding a plate in one hand and a serpent in the other, with the sun above and a lion at his feet: if this image is carved on a diacordius (diadochus) and set in a lead ring placed under wormwood and fenugreek, take it to the riverbank and call upon any evil spirit you want, and you will receive answers to all your questions. A young man crowned and seated on a four-legged throne, with a man under each leg supporting it on his neck; around the neck of the seated figure is a circle, and his hands are raised to the heavens; if this is carved on white hyacinth (pale sapphire) and placed in a silver ring of the same weight as the stone, with mastic and turpentine underneath, make the seal in wax and give it to someone to carry around their neck or person, either the wax or the ring, and approach any king, noble, or wise person with a pure mind and chastity, and they will grant you whatever you desire. A bearded man holding a flower carved on carnelian, set in a tin ring made during the moon change on a Friday, either the 1st or 8th of the month; whoever you touch with it will come to fulfill your will. A man standing on a dragon, holding a sword, should be set in a lead or iron ring; then all spirits in darkness will obey the wearer and softly sing the location of hidden treasure and how to obtain it. A man riding, holding a bridle in one hand and a bow in the other, girded with a sword, engraved on pyrites in a gold ring, will make you unbeatable in battles; whoever dips this ring in musk oil and anoints their face with it will strike fear into everyone who sees them, and none will resist. A man dressed in armor, holding a drawn sword and wearing a helmet, placed in an iron ring of the same weight, makes the wearer unbeatable in combat. A Capricorn on carnelian, set in a silver ring and carried with you, will protect you from harm in wealth or person by your enemies, and no judge will pass an unjust sentence against you; you will prosper in your endeavors and gain respect, and all curses directed at you will have no effect, and no foe, no matter how strong, will be able to defeat you in battle. (Extracts from ‘Sigil-charms,’ ‘History of the Glyptic Art,’ ‘Handbook of Engraved Gems,’ by the Rev. C. W. King.)
[29] ‘The Hermetic Brethren had certain rules that they observed in relation to the power of precious stones to bring good or bad fortune through the planetary affinities of certain days, because they imagined that the various gems, equally as gold and silver, were produced through the chemic operation of the planets working secretly in the telluric body.... All yellow gems and gold are appropriate to be worn on Sunday, to draw down the propitious influences or to avert the antagonistic effects of the spirits on this day, through its ruler and name-giver, the Sun. On Monday, pearls and white stones (but not diamonds) are to be worn, because this is the day of the Moon, or of the second power in Nature. Tuesday, which is the day of Mars, claims rubies and all stones of a fiery lustre. Wednesday is the day for turquoises, sapphires, and all precious stones which seem to reflect the blue of the vault of heaven.... Thursday demands amethysts and deep-coloured stones of sanguine tint, because Thursday is the day of Thor—the Runic impersonated Male Divine Sacrifice. Friday, which is the day of Venus, has its appropriate emeralds, and reigns over all the varieties of the imperial, yet, strangely, the sinister, colour, green. Saturday, which is Saturn’s day, the oldest of the gods, claims for its distinctive talisman the most splendid of all gems, or the queen of precious stones, the lustre-darting diamond.’ (The ‘Rosicrucians,’ by Hargrave Jennings.)
[29] ‘The Hermetic Brethren had specific rules they followed regarding the power of precious stones to bring luck or misfortune based on the planetary influences of different days. They believed that various gems, much like gold and silver, were formed through the chemical actions of the planets operating secretly in the earth’s body. All yellow gems and gold should be worn on Sunday to draw in positive influences or to shield against harmful effects from spirits on this day, governed by the Sun. On Monday, pearls and white stones (except for diamonds) are to be worn because it's the day of the Moon, the second power in Nature. Tuesday, associated with Mars, is for rubies and all fiery-colored stones. Wednesday is the day for turquoises, sapphires, and any precious stones that reflect the blue of the sky. Thursday calls for amethysts and deep-colored stones with a red hue, as it is the day of Thor—the Runic representation of the Male Divine Sacrifice. Friday, ruled by Venus, is associated with emeralds and all shades of the royal, yet oddly, the darker color green. Saturday, known as Saturn’s day, the oldest of the gods, is distinguished by the most magnificent of all gems, the diamond, often referred to as the queen of precious stones.’ (The ‘Rosicrucians,’ by Hargrave Jennings.)
[30] There is a tradition that this ring found its way to the chapel of Havering (have the ring), in the parish of Hornchurch, near Romford, and was kept there until the dissolution of religious houses. Weaver says he saw a representation of it on a window of Romford church. The legend is also displayed on an ancient window in the great church of St. Lawrence, at Ludlow, to which town the pilgrims who received the ring from the saint are said to have belonged. A tradition to this effect was current in the time of Leland, who notices it in his ‘Itinerary.’
[30] There's a tradition that this ring ended up in the chapel of Havering (have the ring), located in the parish of Hornchurch, near Romford, and it remained there until the religious houses were disbanded. Weaver mentions that he saw an image of it on a window in Romford church. The legend is also shown on an old window in the great church of St. Lawrence in Ludlow, which is said to be the town of the pilgrims who received the ring from the saint. This tradition was known during Leland's time, and he notes it in his ‘Itinerary.’
[31] Appendix.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ Appendix.
[32] To understand the language of birds was peculiarly one of the boasted sciences of the Arabians. Their writers relate that Balkis, the Queen of Sheba, or Saba, had a bird called Huddud, a lapwing, which she despatched to King Solomon on various occasions, and that this trusty bird was the messenger of their amours. We are told that Solomon, having been secretly informed by the winged confidant that Balkis intended to honour him with a grand embassy, enclosed a spacious square with a wall of gold and silver bricks, in which he ranged his numerous troops and attendants, in order to receive the ambassadors, who were astonished at the suddenness of these splendid and unexpected preparations.
[32] Understanding the language of birds was one of the proudest sciences of the Arabians. Their writers recount that Balkis, the Queen of Sheba, had a bird called Huddud, a lapwing, which she sent to King Solomon on several occasions, and this reliable bird acted as the messenger of their affairs. It’s said that Solomon, having been secretly informed by the winged messenger that Balkis planned to honor him with a grand delegation, built a large square enclosed by a wall of gold and silver bricks, where he gathered his many troops and attendants to welcome the ambassadors, who were amazed by the suddenness of these magnificent and unexpected preparations.
[33] Moore, in his juvenile poem of the ‘Ring,’ has made use of this legend, and added considerably to its fanciful conceptions:—
[33] Moore, in his youthful poem 'Ring,' has drawn on this legend and expanded its imaginative ideas significantly:—
‘Young Rupert for his wedding-ring
Unto the statue went,
But, ah! how was he shock’d to find
The marble finger bent!
‘The hand was closed upon the ring
With firm and mighty clasp;
In vain he tried, and tried, and tried,
He could not loose the grasp.’
‘Young Rupert went to the statue for his wedding ring
But, oh! how surprised he was to discover
The marble finger twisted!
‘The hand was closed around the ring
With a solid and strong grip;
He kept trying in vain,
He couldn't let go.
Austin is the hermit that Rupert seeks, and whose aid enables him to regain the ring from the female fiend:—
Austin is the hermit that Rupert is looking for, and whose help allows him to get the ring back from the female demon:—
“In Austin’s name take back the ring,
The ring thou gav’st to me;
And thou’rt to me no longer wed,
Nor longer I to thee.”
‘He took the ring, the rabble pass’d,
He home returned again;
His wife was then the happiest fair,
The happiest he of men.’
“In Austin’s name, take back the ring,
The ring you gave me;
And you are no longer my partner,
Nor am I to you.
‘He took the ring, the crowd moved on,
He went home again;
His wife was then the happiest woman.
And he is the happiest man.
[34] Appendix.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ Appendix.
[35] Appendix.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ Appendix.
[36] A curious legend is connected with this famous jewel. The French monarch had visited the shrine of the saint to discharge a vow which he had made in battle, and he knelt before it with the stone set in a ring on his finger. The officiating prelate entreated the King to bestow the jewel on the shrine, but as the jewel ensured good luck, Louis hesitated, but offered, in compensation, one hundred thousand florins. The prelate was satisfied, but the saint evidently was not, for the stone leaped from the ring and fastened itself to the shrine. So bright was the stone that it was impossible to look at it distinctly, and at night it burned like fire.
[36] There's an intriguing legend tied to this famous jewel. The French king visited the saint's shrine to fulfill a vow he made during battle, kneeling there with the stone set in a ring on his finger. The officiating priest urged the king to give the jewel to the shrine, but since the jewel brought him good luck, Louis hesitated and instead offered one hundred thousand florins as compensation. The priest was satisfied, but the saint clearly was not, as the stone jumped from the ring and attached itself to the shrine. The stone was so bright that it was impossible to see it clearly, and at night it burned like fire.
[37] Abraxas-stones were so called from having the word Abraxas or Abrasax engraved on them. They are cut in various forms, and bear a variety of capricious symbols, mostly composed of human limbs, a fowl’s head and serpent’s body. These gems are represented as coming from Syria, Egypt, and Spain. It is certain that the use of the name Abraxas was at first peculiar to the Gnostic sect of the Basilideans. There is little doubt that the greater part of the Abraxas-stones were made in the Middle Ages as talismans.
[37] Abraxas stones got their name from the word Abraxas or Abrasax engraved on them. They come in different shapes and feature a mix of whimsical symbols, mostly made up of human limbs, a bird's head, and a serpent's body. These gems are said to originate from Syria, Egypt, and Spain. It's clear that the name Abraxas was initially linked to the Gnostic sect of the Basilideans. There is little doubt that most of the Abraxas stones were created in the Middle Ages as talismans.
[38] The shrine of the Magi, in Cologne Cathedral, dates from the twelfth century. The central subject is the Virgin with the infant Jesus; on the left, the Adoration of the Three Kings, accompanied by the Emperor Otho IV. On the right, the Baptism of Christ by John the Baptist, in presence of an angel. All these figures are of pure gold, and in full relief. The architectural decorations are covered with enamels and precious stones. Above these figures is a cover of silver-gilt, on removing which the skulls of the Three Kings are seen, with their names, Gaspar, Melchior, and Balthazar, traced in rubies. The crowns of copper gilt replace those of massive gold, which disappeared during the revolutionary storms. They weighed each six pounds, and were enriched with fine pearls and an aigrette of diamonds. Above the relics is the figure of Christ, as the Judge of men, between two angels, who hold the instruments of the Passion. This reliquary is 5½ feet long, by three wide, 5 feet high. It was begun in 1170, and made by order of Archbishop Philip von Heinsberg. In the Rosicrucian theory, Caspar, or Gaspar, is the ‘White One;’ Melchior is the ‘King of Light;’ Beltasar, the ‘Lord of Treasures.’ Balthasar, or Balthazar, is the septuagint spelling of Belshazzar. Talismanic rings and other objects were manufactured largely for sale to the pilgrims at the shrine of the ‘Three Kings.’
[38] The shrine of the Magi in Cologne Cathedral dates back to the 12th century. The main focus is the Virgin Mary with the baby Jesus; on the left, there's the Adoration of the Three Kings, joined by Emperor Otho IV. On the right, John the Baptist baptizes Christ in the presence of an angel. All these figures are made of pure gold and are fully three-dimensional. The architectural decorations are adorned with enamels and precious stones. Above these figures is a silver-gilt cover, and when removed, the skulls of the Three Kings are revealed, with their names—Gaspar, Melchior, and Balthazar—written in rubies. The gilt copper crowns replace the solid gold ones that were lost during revolutionary upheavals. Each crown weighed six pounds and was embellished with fine pearls and a diamond aigrette. Above the relics is a representation of Christ as the Judge of humanity, flanked by two angels holding the instruments of the Passion. This reliquary is 5½ feet long, 3 feet wide, and 5 feet high. It was initiated in 1170, commissioned by Archbishop Philip von Heinsberg. In Rosicrucian belief, Caspar, or Gaspar, is the ‘White One’; Melchior is the ‘King of Light’; Balthasar is the ‘Lord of Treasures.’ Balthazar is the Septuagint spelling of Belshazzar. Talismanic rings and other items were primarily made for sale to the pilgrims visiting the shrine of the ‘Three Kings.’
Mr. Thomas Wright, M.A., has, in his edition of the ‘Chester Plays,’ described, at length, this popular legend.
Mr. Thomas Wright, M.A., in his edition of the 'Chester Plays,' has described this popular legend in detail.
A magic ring was found a few years ago at Dunwich, with this inscription:—
A magic ring was discovered a few years back at Dunwich, featuring this inscription:—
‘Jasper fert myrrham; thus Melchior; Balthasar aurum,
Hæc tria qui secum portabit nomina Regum,
Solvitur a morbo, Christi pietate, caduco.’
‘Jasper brings myrrh; Melchior brings frankincense; Balthasar brings gold,
Whoever carries these three names of the Kings with them,
"Is freed from disease, by the grace of Christ, temporary."
Bishop Patrick, in his ‘Reflections on the Devotions of the Roman Church,’ 1674, asks, with assumed naïveté, how these names of the Three Wise Men—Melchior, Balthazar, and Jasper—are to be of service, ‘when another tradition says they were Apellius, Amerus, and Damascus; a third, that they were Megalath, Galgalath, and Sarasin; and a fourth calls them Ator, Sator, and Peratoras; which last I should choose (in this uncertainty), as having the more kingly sound.’
Bishop Patrick, in his ‘Reflections on the Devotions of the Roman Church,’ 1674, questions, with an assumed naïveté, how the names of the Three Wise Men—Melchior, Balthazar, and Jasper—are useful, ‘when another tradition says they were Apellius, Amerus, and Damascus; a third claims they were Megalath, Galgalath, and Sarasin; and a fourth refers to them as Ator, Sator, and Peratoras; of which I might choose the last (in this uncertainty), as it has a more kingly sound.’
[39] The horn of the narwhal (which in the Middle Ages passed for the horn of the unicorn) was supposed to possess, among other virtues, that of neutralising and detecting the presence of poison. Various old writers relate that it became agitated when placed in contact with a poisoned body, and the most efficacious antidote to poison was the water in which it had been steeped. A piece of the horn was attached to a chain of gold, in order that it might be plunged into a dish without putting in the fingers.
[39] The horn of the narwhal (which was thought to be the unicorn's horn in the Middle Ages) was believed to have several powers, including the ability to neutralize and detect poison. Various ancient writers claim that it reacted when it touched a poisoned body, and the best antidote to poison was the water that the horn had soaked in. A piece of the horn was fastened to a gold chain so it could be dipped into a dish without having to touch it with fingers.
[40] The Runic characters are of very remote antiquity, and of entirely pagan origin. They are attributed to Odin, whom tradition asserts to have been eminently skilful in the art of writing, as well for the common purposes of life, as for the operations of magic. It is the earliest alphabet in use among the Teutonic and Gothic nations of Northern Europe. The name is derived from the Teutonic rûn, a mystery; whence runa, a whisper, and helrun, divination. They were distinguished into various kinds: the noxious—or, as they were called, the bitter—employed to bring various evils on their enemies; the favourable averted misfortunes; the victorious procured conquest to those who used them; the medicinal were inscribed on the leaves of trees for healing; others served to dispel melancholy thoughts; to prevent shipwreck; were antidotes against poison; preservatives against the anger of enemies; efficacious to render a mistress favourable—these last were to be used with great caution. If an ignorant person had chanced to write one letter for another, or had erred in the minutest stroke, he would have exposed his mistress to some dangerous illness, which was only to be cured by writing other runes with the greatest niceness. All these various kinds differed only in the ceremonies observed in writing them, in the materials on which they were written, in the place where they were exposed, in the manner in which the lines were drawn, whether in the form of a circle, of a serpent, or a triangle, &c.
[40] The Runic characters are from a very ancient time and have completely pagan roots. They are said to be created by Odin, who tradition claims was exceptionally skilled in writing for both everyday needs and magical practices. This is the earliest alphabet used by the Teutonic and Gothic peoples in Northern Europe. The name comes from the Teutonic rûn, meaning mystery; hence runa, a whisper, and helrun, divination. They were categorized into different types: the noxious—or as they were called, the bitter—used to bring various harms upon enemies; the favourable that warded off bad luck; the victorious that ensured success for those who used them; the medicinal were carved on tree leaves for healing; others helped to dispel sadness; prevented shipwrecks; acted as antidotes against poison; protected against enemy wrath; and were effective in making a lover more favorable—these last required careful handling. If someone unskilled accidentally wrote one letter instead of another or made the tiniest mistake, they could expose their lover to a serious illness, which could only be remedied by writing other runes very precisely. All these different types only varied in the rituals involved in writing them, the materials they were written on, the locations where they were displayed, and the ways in which the lines were drawn, whether in a circle, a serpent, a triangle, etc.
‘In the strict observance of these childish particulars consisted’ (remarks Mallet in his ‘Northern Antiquities’) ‘that obscure and ridiculous art which acquired to so many weak and wicked persons the respectable name of priests and prophetesses, merely for filling rude minds with so much jealousy, fear, and hatred.’
‘In the strict observance of these childish details consisted’ (remarks Mallet in his ‘Northern Antiquities’) ‘that obscure and ridiculous art which granted so many weak and wicked individuals the respectable title of priests and prophetesses, simply for filling primitive minds with so much jealousy, fear, and hatred.’
Grimm states that the Anglo-Saxon Runic alphabet was derived from the Scandinavian at a period when it had only sixteen letters, the complementary letters of the two alphabets having been formed on principles that offer not the slightest analogy. While on the subject of Runic calendars I may mention (although unconnected with rings) a singular Runic almanack which was exhibited at the Winchester meeting of the Archæological Institute in 1845. It is in the form of a walking-stick, called in the north of Europe a ‘rim-stok,’ or ‘primstaf.’ The symbols and figures which ornament this calendar relate to the saints’ days and the successive occupations of the seasons. The staff is of a fashion rarely to be found in the north, and appears to be the same which was procured at Trondheim, in Norway, by Mr. Wolff, formerly Norwegian consul at London, who published an account of it.
Grimm states that the Anglo-Saxon Runic alphabet came from the Scandinavian alphabet during a time when it had only sixteen letters. The additional letters in the two alphabets were created based on principles that have no resemblance to each other. While we're talking about Runic calendars, I should mention a unique Runic almanac that was displayed at the Winchester meeting of the Archaeological Institute in 1845, even though it's not related to rings. It's shaped like a walking stick, known in Northern Europe as a 'rim-stok' or 'primstaf.' The symbols and figures decorating this calendar are linked to the saints' days and the changing seasons' activities. The staff is a style not commonly found in the north and seems to be the same one that was acquired in Trondheim, Norway, by Mr. Wolff, a former Norwegian consul in London, who published a report on it.
[41] A modern poet thus apostrophises the turquoise and its changeful properties in the following beautiful sonnet:—
[41] A modern poet addresses the turquoise and its ever-changing qualities in the following beautiful sonnet:—
‘In sunny hours, long flown, how oft my eyes
Have gazed with rapture on thy tender blue!
Turquoise! thou magic gem, thy lovely hue
Vies with the tints celestial of the skies.
What sweet romance thy beauty bids arise,
When, beaming brightly to the anxious view,
Thou giv’st th’ assurance dear that love is true!
But should thy rays be clouded, what deep sighs,
What showers of tenderness distress the heart!
Ah! much of joy I owe thee, but no woe.
As to my mind, thou ever didst impart
That feeling blest which made my pale cheek glow
(For love was mine, shorn of his wings and dart).
Turquoise! in warmest strains thy praise should flow,
Such as some gifted minstrel could bestow.’
‘In sunny days, long gone by, how often my eyes
I have admired your soft blue with joy!
Turquoise! You enchanting gem, your stunning color
Competes with the beautiful sounds of the skies.
What a beautiful romance your beauty inspires,
When shining brightly for those who are looking,
You provide the reassuring confirmation that love is real!
But if your light is hidden, what deep sighs,
What waves of warmth fill the heart!
Ah! I owe you a lot of happiness, but no sadness.
In my mind, you always inspired me.
That wonderful feeling that made my pale cheeks turn red
(For love was mine, taken away of his wings and arrow).
Turquoise! In the warmest tones, your praise should resonate,
Such as a skilled musician could provide.
[42] A more homely remedy for the same disorder is given in Wittal’s ‘Little Dictionary,’ where we find that—
[42] A simpler remedy for the same issue is provided in Wittal’s ‘Little Dictionary,’ where we see that—
‘The bone of a hare’s foot, closed in a ring,
Will drive away the cramp, whenas it doth wring.’
‘The bone of a hare’s foot, enclosed in a ring,
Will ease the cramp when it begins to tighten.
[43] Appendix.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ Appendix.
[44] Queen Bertha, consort of King Louis the Seventh, of France, was crowned by the Pope, who also placed a ring on her finger, saying: ‘Receive this ring, emblem of the Holy Trinity, by which you may resist heresy and bring the heathen to a knowledge of the faith by the virtue thus given. God, the source of all dignity and honour, give to thy servant, by this sign of the faith, grace to persevere in His sight, that she may evermore rest firm in the faith by the merits of Jesus Christ.’
[44] Queen Bertha, wife of King Louis the Seventh of France, was crowned by the Pope, who also placed a ring on her finger, saying: ‘Receive this ring, symbolizing the Holy Trinity, which will help you stand against heresy and guide the unconverted toward the faith through the strength granted to you. May God, the source of all dignity and honor, give you, through this sign of faith, the grace to remain steadfast in His sight, so that you may always stay firm in your belief because of the merits of Jesus Christ.’
[45] The ruby, according to De Laert (1647), appears to have been very generally used for rings, and unpolished; for, ‘unlike the diamond that hath no beauty unless shaped and polished, the ruby charms without any aid from art.’ True rubies, and of good colour uncut, but with their natural surface polished, set in rings, date from the earliest times. Gesner states that Catherine of Arragon used to wear a ring set with a stone luminous at night, which he conjectures was a ruby.
[45] According to De Laert (1647), rubies were commonly used for rings, often unpolished; because, ‘unlike diamonds, which have no beauty without being shaped and polished, rubies are attractive without any artistic enhancement.’ Authentic uncut rubies of good color, with their natural surfaces polished, have been used in rings since ancient times. Gesner mentions that Catherine of Aragon used to wear a ring with a stone that glowed at night, which he speculates was a ruby.
[46] A MS. account of the ‘Conveyance of Great Estates into the King’s presence at the time of their creation’ (British Museum, Additional MSS. No. 6,297) gives the preparation for a creation of the Prince. After the rich habits given on this occasion, we read: ‘Item, a sword, the scabbard covered with crimson cloth of gold, plain, and a girdle agreeable to the same. Item, a coronal. Item, a verge of gold. Item, a ring of gold to be put on the third finger.’
[46] A manuscript account of the ‘Transfer of Great Estates into the King’s presence at the time of their creation’ (British Museum, Additional MSS. No. 6,297) describes the preparations for the prince's creation. After listing the lavish garments provided for this occasion, it states: ‘Item, a sword, with the scabbard covered in crimson gold cloth, plain, and a belt matching the same. Item, a crown. Item, a gold scepter. Item, a gold ring to be worn on the third finger.’
[47] The use of a seal, or signet-ring, for the purchase of property is mentioned in the Bible. In Jeremiah the formalities are thus given: ‘And I bought the field of Hanameel, and weighed him the money, even seventeen shekels of silver. And I subscribed the evidence, and sealed it, and took witnesses, and weighed him the money in the balances. So I took the evidence of the purchase, both that which was sealed, according to the law and custom, and that which was open’ (chap. xxxii.).
[47] The use of a seal or signet ring to buy property is mentioned in the Bible. In Jeremiah, the process is described this way: ‘And I bought the field of Hanameel and paid him the money, which was seventeen shekels of silver. Then I wrote up the contract, sealed it, got witnesses, and paid him the money using a scale. So I took the purchase documents, both the sealed one, as was customary and legal, and the open one’ (chap. xxxii.).
[48] In the Braybrooke Collection is a gold band-ring with a similar inscription, found at Wimbish, in Essex. It is noticed in the seventh volume of the ‘Archæological Institute Journal,’ p. 196, and is described as a serjeant-at-law’s gold ring, the hoop ⅜ of an inch in width, and of equal thickness; the motto ‘Lex regis præsidium.’
[48] In the Braybrooke Collection, there's a gold band ring with a similar inscription, discovered at Wimbish in Essex. It's mentioned in the seventh volume of the ‘Archaeological Institute Journal,’ p. 196, and described as a serjeant-at-law’s gold ring, with a hoop ⅜ of an inch wide and the same thickness; the motto reads ‘Lex regis præsidium.’
[49] Horace Walpole, in one of his letters, alludes to the ‘Fisherman’s Ring’ in his usual lively manner: ‘Mr. Chute has received a present of a diamond mourning-ring from a cousin; he calls it l’annello del Piscatore. Mr. Chute, who is unmarried, meant that his cousin was fishing for his estate.’
[49] Horace Walpole, in one of his letters, refers to the ‘Fisherman’s Ring’ in his typical witty style: ‘Mr. Chute has received a diamond mourning ring as a gift from a cousin; he calls it l’annello del Piscatore. Mr. Chute, who is single, meant that his cousin was fishing for his estate.’
[50] To show how little, in former times, the sanctity of the Popes was regarded after death, Aimon, in his ‘Tableau de la Cour de Rome,’ relates that ‘when the Pope is in the last extremity, his nephews and his servants carry from the palace all the furniture they can find. Immediately after his death, the officers of the Apostolic Chamber strip the body of everything valuable, but the relations of the Pope generally forestal them, and with such promptitude that nothing remains but bare walls and the body, placed on a wretched mattress, with an old wooden candlestick and a wax end in it.’
[50] To illustrate how little respect for the Popes' sanctity existed after death in earlier times, Aimon, in his 'Tableau de la Cour de Rome,' recounts that 'when the Pope is on his deathbed, his nephews and servants remove everything they can find from the palace. Right after he dies, the officers of the Apostolic Chamber strip the body of all valuables, but the Pope's relatives usually beat them to it, acting so quickly that all that's left are bare walls and the body, resting on a shabby mattress, with an old wooden candlestick and a wax stub in it.'
[51] In the ‘Archæologia,’ vol. xxxvi., Mr. Octavius Morgan remarks ‘that in the beginning of the seventeenth century some attention seems to have been paid to the subject of rings in general, and several persons wrote concerning them. John Kirchmann, a learned German of Lubeck, published a treatise “De Annulis;” and about the same time Henry Kornmann wrote another small treatise “De Triplici Annulo.” Kirchmann appears to have made deep researches on the subject, and in the chapter on “Episcopal Rings” he gives their history as far as he was able to trace it, though he cannot find in ancient writers any facts relating to them earlier than the reign of Charlemagne. In gratitude to this monarch for the important services he had rendered the Church, it was decreed in the eighth century that the Emperor should have the power of electing the Popes and ordering the Holy See, and that in addition the archbishops and the bishops of the provinces should receive investiture from him. No newly-elected prelate could be consecrated until he received from the Emperor the ring and the staff; these were to be returned on the death of the prelate. But this practice was disused for a time; for we find enumerated in the old chronicles of Mayence, among the jewels in that city, “sixteen large and good pontifical rings—one of ruby, with other gems, one of emerald, one of sapphire, and one of topaz.”’
[51] In the ‘Archæologia,’ vol. xxxvi., Mr. Octavius Morgan notes that in the early seventeenth century, there was some interest in the topic of rings in general, and several people wrote about them. John Kirchmann, a knowledgeable German from Lubeck, published a treatise called “De Annulis;” around the same time, Henry Kornmann wrote another small treatise, “De Triplici Annulo.” Kirchmann seems to have conducted extensive research on the subject, and in the chapter on “Episcopal Rings,” he outlines their history as far as he could trace, although he could not find any references in ancient writings to them before the reign of Charlemagne. In recognition of Charlemagne's significant contributions to the Church, it was established in the eighth century that the Emperor would have the right to elect the Popes and oversee the Holy See, and that archbishops and bishops of the provinces would receive their investiture from him. No newly-elected prelate could be consecrated until he received the ring and staff from the Emperor; these items were to be returned upon the prelate's death. However, this practice fell out of use for a while, as we find recorded in the old chronicles of Mayence, which list among the jewels in that city “sixteen large and fine pontifical rings—one of ruby with other gems, one of emerald, one of sapphire, and one of topaz.”
[52] The mode of giving the benediction differs in the two Churches. In the Greek it is given with the forefinger open, to form an I, the middle finger curved like a C, the ancient sigma of the Greeks, the thumb and annulary crossed form an X, and the little finger curved represents a C. All this gives IC XC, the Greek monogram of Jesus Christ. Thus, as the author of the ‘Guide of Painting,’ of Mount Athos, observes:—‘By the Divine providence of the Creator, the fingers of the hand of man, be they more or less long, are arranged so as to form the name of Christ.’
[52] The way of giving the blessing is different in the two Churches. In the Greek Church, it's done with the forefinger open to create an I, the middle finger curved like a C, representing the ancient sigma of the Greeks, while the thumb and ring finger crossed form an X, and the little finger curved represents a C. All of this combines to create IC XC, the Greek monogram for Jesus Christ. As noted by the author of the ‘Guide of Painting’ from Mount Athos:—‘Through the Divine providence of the Creator, the fingers of a human hand, regardless of their length, are arranged to form the name of Christ.’
The Latin benediction is more simple, being made with the annulary and the little finger closed, the three first fingers open, symbolical of the Trinity.
The Latin blessing is simpler, made with the ring finger and pinky closed, while the first three fingers are open, symbolizing the Trinity.
‘Formerly, bishops and priests blessed alike; latterly, bishops reserved to themselves the right of blessing with their fingers, the priest with the open hand; the bishops facing the congregation, the priests in profile, with the hand placed edgeways. The sign of the cross was formerly made with three fingers open, but now with the open hand, from the forehead to the breast, and from the left to the right shoulder by the Latins, but from the right to the left by the Greeks’ (Didron, ‘Iconographie Chrétienne’).
‘In the past, both bishops and priests offered blessings; more recently, bishops have kept the exclusive right to bless with their fingers, while priests use an open hand. Bishops face the congregation, while priests stand to the side with their hand positioned edgeways. The sign of the cross used to be made with three fingers open, but now it’s done with an open hand, moving from the forehead to the chest, and from the left shoulder to the right by Latins, and from the right to the left by Greeks’ (Didron, ‘Iconographie Chrétienne’).
[53] The reader will be reminded of the anecdote of Queen Elizabeth, who, drawing from her finger the coronation ring, showed it to the Commons, and told them that when she received that ring she had solemnly bound herself in marriage to the realm, and it would be quite sufficient for the memorial of her name, and for her glory, if, when she died, an inscription were engraved on her marble tomb: ‘Here lyeth Elizabeth, which (sic) reigned a virgin, and died a woman.’ This coronation ring was filed off her finger shortly before her death, on account of the flesh having grown over it.
[53] The reader will recall the story of Queen Elizabeth, who, taking the coronation ring from her finger, showed it to the House of Commons and told them that when she received the ring, she had made a solemn commitment in marriage to the realm. She mentioned that it would be enough for her legacy and glory if, upon her death, an inscription were carved on her marble tomb: ‘Here lies Elizabeth, who (sic) reigned a virgin and died a woman.’ This coronation ring was removed from her finger shortly before her death because the flesh had grown over it.
[54] In ‘A Relation, or rather True Account of the Islands of England,’ about the year 1500 (Camden Society), the author, after describing the shrine of St. Thomas, at Canterbury, adds: ‘Everything is left far behind by a ruby not larger than a man’s thumb-nail, which is set to the right of the altar. The church is rather dark, and particularly so where the shrine is placed, and when we went to see it the sun was nearly gone down, and the weather was cloudy, yet I saw the ruby as well as if it had been in my hand. They say it was a gift of the King of France.’
[54] In ‘A Relation, or rather True Account of the Islands of England,’ around the year 1500 (Camden Society), the author, after describing the shrine of St. Thomas at Canterbury, adds: ‘Everything pales in comparison to a ruby no bigger than a man’s thumbnail, which is set to the right of the altar. The church is quite dark, especially where the shrine is located, and when we went to see it, the sun was almost down, and the weather was cloudy, yet I saw the ruby as clearly as if it were in my hand. They say it was a gift from the King of France.’
[55] See Appendix.
See Appendix __A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__.
[56] The gilding and silvering of locks, rings (firmalx anelx), and other articles of a similar nature made of copper or latten (faitz de cupre ou laton) having been prohibited by the statute 5th Henry IV. c. 13, under what was then a heavy penalty, the ‘disloyal artificers,’ against whom this enactment was made, appear to have taken refuge in the sanctuary of St. Martin’s-le-Grand, where they were able to labour in their vocation unmolested by the marshal or the sheriff. This may be inferred from 3 Edw. IV. c. 4, by which it was declared unlawful to import various articles of foreign manufacture, including rings of gilded copper or laten, but with an express declaration that the Act was not to extend to or be prejudicial or hurtful to Robert Styllington, clerk, dean of the King’s Free Chapel of ‘St. Martin’s le Graunt, de Londres,’ nor to his successors.
[56] The gilding and silvering of locks, rings (firmalx anelx), and other similar items made of copper or latten (faitz de cupre ou laton) was banned by the statute 5th Henry IV. c. 13, which came with a heavy penalty at that time. The 'disloyal craftsmen' targeted by this law seemed to find refuge in the sanctuary of St. Martin’s-le-Grand, where they could work in their trade without interference from the marshal or the sheriff. This is supported by 3 Edw. IV. c. 4, which made it illegal to import various foreign-manufactured goods, including rings made of gilded copper or laten, but it specifically stated that the Act would not affect or harm Robert Styllington, clerk, dean of the King’s Free Chapel of ‘St. Martin’s le Graunt, de Londres,’ or his successors.
[57] English ladies at one time wore the wedding-ring on the thumb. At Stanford Court, Worcestershire, may be seen the portraits of five ladies of the Salway family, in the days of Queen Elizabeth, all of whom have their wedding-rings on their thumbs. According to the ‘British Apollo,’ the brides of George the First’s time used to remove the ring from its proper abiding-place to the thumb as soon as the ceremony was over.
[57] English women once wore their wedding rings on their thumbs. At Stanford Court, Worcestershire, you can see portraits of five women from the Salway family from the time of Queen Elizabeth, all of whom have their wedding rings on their thumbs. According to the 'British Apollo,' brides during the reign of George the First would move the ring from its usual place to the thumb as soon as the ceremony was finished.
In Southerne’s ‘Maid’s Last Prayer’ (Act iv. vol. i. p. 67) we find:—‘Marry him I must, and wear my wedding-ring upon my thumb, too, that I’m resolved.’
In Southerne’s ‘Maid’s Last Prayer’ (Act iv. vol. i. p. 67) we find:—‘I have to marry him, and I’m determined to wear my wedding ring on my thumb, too.’
An instance of several wedding-rings being used at the bridal ceremony is related by Burcard, master of the ceremonies to the Pope’s Chapel from Sixtus IV. to Julius II. At the marriage of a daughter of Pope Innocent VIII. to Lewis of Arragon, Marquis of Geracio (January 3, 1492), the pair approached the Pope, and, both being on their knees, the husband put the ring on the proper finger of the left hand of his spouse, then several rings on the other fingers of both hands.
An example of multiple wedding rings being used during the wedding ceremony is shared by Burcard, the master of ceremonies for the Pope’s Chapel from Sixtus IV to Julius II. At the wedding of Pope Innocent VIII's daughter to Lewis of Aragon, Marquis of Geracio (January 3, 1492), the couple approached the Pope, kneeling together. The husband placed the ring on the correct finger of his wife's left hand, then he put several rings on the other fingers of both hands.
[58] In the Waterton Collection, at the South Kensington Museum, a forefinger, from a bronze statue of late Roman work, wears a large ring upon the second joint. In Germany it is still customary to wear the ring in this fashion, a custom borrowed from their Roman subjugators.
[58] In the Waterton Collection at the South Kensington Museum, a forefinger from a late Roman bronze statue has a large ring on the second joint. In Germany, it is still common to wear the ring like this, a tradition taken from their Roman conquerors.
[59] A correspondent to ‘Notes and Queries’ (vol. viii. series i. p. 575) observes, with regard to the ring being placed on the third finger of the right hand of the Blessed Virgin in Raffaelle’s ‘Sponsalizio,’ at Milan, and in Ghirlandais’s fresco of the same subject in the Santa Croce, at Florence, ‘that it has been customary among artists to represent the Virgin with the ring on the right hand, to signify her superiority over St. Joseph, from her surpassing dignity of Mother of God. Still, she is not always represented so.’
[59] A writer for ‘Notes and Queries’ (vol. viii. series i. p. 575) points out that in Raffaelle’s ‘Sponsalizio’ in Milan and in Ghirlandaio’s fresco of the same theme in Santa Croce, Florence, the ring is shown on the third finger of the Blessed Virgin's right hand. This has been a common practice among artists to depict the Virgin with the ring on her right hand to emphasize her superiority over St. Joseph, reflecting her exceptional status as Mother of God. However, she is not always depicted this way.
[60] A bishop, in the thirteenth century, gives the following reasons why the ring should be of gold. He says that ‘one Protheus made a ring of iron with an adamant enclosed therein, as a pledge of love, because as iron subdueth all things, so doth love conquer all things, since nothing is more violent than its ardour, and, as an adamant cannot be broken, so love cannot be overcome, for love is strong as death. In course of time gold rings set with gems were substituted for the adamantine ones of baser metal, because, as gold excelleth all other metals, so doth love excel all other blessings, and as gold is set off with gems, so is conjugal love set off by other virtues.’
[60] A bishop in the thirteenth century explains why the ring should be made of gold. He states that "Protheus made a ring of iron with a diamond inside as a symbol of love because just as iron conquers everything, love conquers all as well. Nothing is more intense than its passion, and just as a diamond can't be broken, love can't be defeated, for love is as strong as death. Over time, gold rings adorned with gems replaced the simpler iron ones because, just as gold surpasses all other metals, love surpasses all other blessings. And just as gold is enhanced by gems, marital love is enhanced by other virtues."
[61] In the reign of George the Fourth, a limited number of plain gold rings were made, having a well-executed miniature medallion of that King set beneath a large diamond. One of these was in the possession of the late Lady Fellows.
[61] During the reign of George IV, a select few simple gold rings were created, each featuring a finely crafted miniature medallion of the King set under a large diamond. One of these rings belonged to the late Lady Fellows.
[62] It was formerly the custom in Brittany that, on the night after the marriage, the husband presented his wife with a ring and act of dowry.
[62] In Brittany, it used to be tradition that, on the night after the wedding, the husband would give his wife a ring along with a dowry.
[63] Latour St. Ybars, in his tragedy of ‘Virginius,’ alludes to the iron ring:—
[63] Latour St. Ybars, in his tragedy 'Virginius,' makes a reference to the iron ring:—
Alors qu’ Icilius ne m’a jamais offert
Pour gage de sa foi que cet anneau de fer,
Claudius, sans respect pour l’amour qui m’anime
Par cet appas grossier croit m’entraîner au crime,
Et ces ornaments vils qu’il m’ose présenter
Sont fait de ce métal qui sert pour acheter!
Va rendre à Claudius tous ces dons, et sur l’heure
Les présents de cet homme ont souillés ma démeure,
Et ce seroit blesser notre honneur et nos dieux
Que d’y porter la main, que d’y jeter les yeux.
Alors qu' Icilius ne m’a jamais offert
Pour gage de sa foi que cet anneau de fer,
Claudius, sans respect pour l’amour qui m’anime
Par cet appas grossier croit m’entraîner au crime,
Et ces ornaments vils qu’il m’ose présenter
Sont fait de ce métal qui sert pour acheter!
Va rendre à Claudius tous ces dons, et sur l’heure
Les présents de cet homme ont souillés ma démeure,
Et ce seroit blesser notre honneur et nos dieux
Que d’y porter la main, que d’y jeter les yeux.
[64] The ‘betrothing penny’ given at the ceremony of marriage was in olden times a common usage both in England and in France, representing either earnest-money, or the actual purchase of the bride. In the pontifical of Amiens, the bridegroom is to say: ‘De cet anneau t’espouse, et de cet argent te hounoure, et de mon corps te doue.’ In an ancient manuscript of the Salisbury Missal, in the Harleian Collection, the bridegroom says: ‘Wyth thys rynge y the wedde, and thys golde and selvir the geve, and with my bodi y the worshippe, and with all my worldith catel y the honoure.’
[64] The ‘betrothing penny’ given during the marriage ceremony was once a common practice in both England and France, symbolizing either a down payment or the actual purchase of the bride. In the pontifical of Amiens, the groom is to say: ‘With this ring I marry you, and with this money I honor you, and with my body I endow you.’ In an ancient manuscript of the Salisbury Missal, in the Harleian Collection, the groom says: ‘With this ring I wed you, and this gold and silver I give to you, and with my body I worship you, and with all my worldly goods I honor you.’
[65] Pitscottie says ‘the Queen of France wrote a love-letter to the King of Scotland, calling him her love, showing him that she had suffered much rebuke in France for defending his honour. She believed surely that he would recompense her with some of his kingly support in her necessity; that is to say, that he would raise her an army and come three foot of ground on English ground for her sake. To that effect she sent him a ring off her finger, with 14,000 French crowns to pay his expenses.’
[65] Pitscottie says ‘the Queen of France wrote a love letter to the King of Scotland, calling him her love and showing him that she had faced a lot of backlash in France for defending his honor. She truly believed that he would repay her with some of his royal support in her time of need; in other words, that he would raise an army for her and step onto English soil for her sake. To that end, she sent him a ring from her finger along with 14,000 French crowns to cover his expenses.’
[66] Appendix.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ Appendix.
[67] Lady Moray, the wife of the Scottish Regent, had appropriated, during the Queen’s troubles, many of her most valuable jewels. She wrote to her from Tutbury, March 28th, 1570:—
[67] Lady Moray, the wife of the Scottish Regent, had taken many of the Queen's most valuable jewels during her troubles. She wrote to her from Tutbury on March 28, 1570:—
‘We are informed that ye have tane in possession certain of our jewels, such as our Henry of dyamant and ruby, with a number of other dyamant, ruby, perles, and gold worke, whereof we have the memoir to lay to your charge, which jewels incontinent, after the sight hereof, ye sall deliver to our right trusty cousins and counsellors, the Earl of Huntley, our lieutenant, and my Lord Setoun, who will, on so doing, give you discharge of the same.’
‘We’ve been told that you have taken possession of some of our jewels, including our diamond and ruby, along with several other diamonds, rubies, pearls, and gold items, which we intend to hold you accountable for. Once you see this, you are to return these jewels immediately to our trusted cousins and advisors, the Earl of Huntley, our lieutenant, and Lord Setoun, who will provide you with a receipt for them upon their return.’
Lady Moray paid no attention to Queen Mary’s request for the return of her jewels, well knowing that she was in no condition for enforcing her demands.
Lady Moray ignored Queen Mary’s request for her jewels back, fully aware that she was not in a position to enforce her demands.
[68] ‘The skull and skeleton decorations for rings’ (remarks Mr. Fairholt) ‘first came into favour and fashion at the obsequious court of France, when Diana, of Poictiers, became the mistress of Henry the Second. At that time she was a widow, and in mourning, so black and white became fashionable colours; jewels were formed like funeral memorials; golden ornaments, shaped like coffins, holding enamelled skeletons, hung from the neck; watches, made to fit in little silver skulls, were attached to the waists of the denizens of a court that alternately indulged in profanity or piety, but who mourned show.’
[68] ‘The skull and skeleton decorations for rings’ (remarks Mr. Fairholt) ‘first became popular at the sycophantic court of France when Diana of Poictiers became the mistress of Henry the Second. At that time, she was a widow in mourning, so black and white became trendy colors; jewels were designed to look like funeral memorials; golden ornaments shaped like coffins, holding enamelled skeletons, hung around the neck; watches made to fit into small silver skulls were attached to the waists of the courtiers who alternately indulged in profanity or piety but who all mourned ostentation.’
[69] Biblical Monuments, by William Harris Rule, D.D., and J. Corbet Anderson; 1871, 1873.
[69] Biblical Monuments, by William Harris Rule, D.D., and J. Corbet Anderson; 1871, 1873.
[70] This great founder of the Merovingian dynasty, the father of Clovis, died in 482, and was buried with his treasures, weapons, and robes. Nearly twelve hundred years afterwards, a labourer, a poor deaf and dumb man, accidentally discovered the royal grave, and was astonished, and almost terrified, at the sight of the treasures it contained. Among them was the signet-ring alluded to, which, with a considerable number of the other treasures of the tomb, were deposited in the Bibliothèque, then ‘Royale,’ at Paris, which was broken into by burglars in 183-. An alarm being given, in their hasty flight they threw the objects into the Seine; the ring was not recovered.
[70] This great founder of the Merovingian dynasty, the father of Clovis, died in 482 and was buried with his treasures, weapons, and robes. Nearly twelve hundred years later, a laborer, a poor deaf and mute man, accidentally discovered the royal grave and was astonished, almost terrified, at the sight of the treasures inside. Among them was the signet ring mentioned earlier, which, along with many other treasures from the tomb, was placed in the Bibliothèque, then 'Royale,' in Paris. In 183-, burglars broke in and, when the alarm was raised, threw the objects into the Seine in their hurried escape; the ring was never recovered.
In the tomb were found, besides the skeletons of his horse and page, his arms; a cornelian Etruscan scarab, doubtless deposited therein as an amulet of wondrous virtue; also a crystal divining-ball, two inches in diameter, and more than three hundred little bees, of the purest gold, their wings being inlaid with a red stone like cornelian.
In the tomb, along with the skeletons of his horse and servant, they discovered his weapons; a cornelian Etruscan scarab, likely placed there as a powerful amulet; also a crystal divining ball, two inches across, and over three hundred tiny bees made of pure gold, their wings inlaid with a red stone similar to cornelian.
On the authority of the historian Augustin Thierry, it is stated that these ornaments resembling bees were only what in French are called fleurons (supposed to have been attached to the harness of his war-horse). Montfaucon is of the same opinion.
On the authority of the historian Augustin Thierry, it is said that these bee-like ornaments were just what are known in French as fleurons (thought to have been attached to the harness of his war-horse). Montfaucon shares the same view.
[71] I am greatly indebted to this gentleman for the loan of a manuscript catalogue of ring mottos and inscriptions on wedding-rings, of which—besides those exhibited at the Kensington Museum—I have availed myself in the following pages of this chapter. Mr. Singer has, I believe, the finest collection of inscribed wedding-rings known, numbering two hundred and forty-five specimens of every kind, in gold and silver, each weighing from three dwts. and upwards, and none less than a hundred years old, some dating from five hundred years.
[71] I am very grateful to this gentleman for lending me a manuscript catalog of ring mottos and inscriptions on wedding rings, which I have referenced in the following pages of this chapter, in addition to those displayed at the Kensington Museum. Mr. Singer has, as far as I know, the best collection of inscribed wedding rings in existence, featuring two hundred and forty-five examples of all kinds, in gold and silver, each weighing at least three dwts. and none younger than a hundred years, with some dating back five hundred years.
Mr. Singer’s collection is also enriched with some interesting betrothal rings, and there are fourteen double-line motto-rings which are matchless. This collection has been accumulated during the last quarter of a century, at a very considerable cost.
Mr. Singer’s collection also includes some fascinating betrothal rings, and there are fourteen unique double-line motto rings that are one of a kind. This collection has been built over the last twenty-five years, at a significant expense.
[72]This play upon words has been applied in a political sense. ‘So,’ as the late Mr. Crofton Croker observed, ‘when the Repeal question was agitated in Ireland, rings and brooches, set in precious stones, made to represent the word “Repeal” were popular:—
[72]This wordplay has been used in a political context. ‘So,’ as the late Mr. Crofton Croker noted, ‘when the Repeal question was discussed in Ireland, rings and brooches, designed to represent the word “Repeal,” were very popular:—
R uby
E merald
P earl
E merald
A methyst
L apis lazuli.
R uby
E merald
P earl
E merald
A methyst
L apis lazuli.
One of these was given to a gentleman as a relic of this memorable agitation, but the bit of lapis lazuli had dropped out, and he took it to a working jeweller in Cork to have the defect supplied. When it was returned, he found that a topaz had been substituted for the missing bit of lapis lazuli. “How is this?” he inquired, “you have made a mistake.” “No mistake, sir,” said the witty workman, whom he afterwards discovered to be an ardent Repealer, “It is all right: it was repeal, but let us repeat that we may have it yet.”’
One of these was given to a gentleman as a keepsake from this memorable event, but the piece of lapis lazuli had fallen out, so he took it to a local jeweler in Cork to get it fixed. When it was returned, he discovered that a topaz had been put in place of the missing lapis lazuli. “What’s going on?” he asked, “You made a mistake.” “No mistake, sir,” replied the clever jeweler, who he later found out was a passionate supporter of the Repeal movement, “It’s all good: it was repeal, but let’s repeat it so we can have it back.”
[73] Appendix.
__A_TAG_PLACEHOLDER_0__ Appendix.
[74] In Knight’s ‘Pictorial Shakspeare’ is the following note on the dial which Touchstone drew ‘from his “poke:”’ ‘“There’s no clock in the forest,” says Orlando; and it was not very likely that the fool would have a pocket-clock. What then was the dial that he took from his poke? We have lately become possessed of a rude instrument kindly presented to us by a friend, which, as the Maid of Orleans found her sword, he picked “out of a deal of old iron.” It is a brass circle of about two inches in diameter. On the outer side are engraved letters, indicating the names of the months, with gradual divisions; and on the inner side, the hours of the day. The brass circle itself is to be held in one position by a ring; but there is an inner slide in which there is a small orifice. This slide being moved, so that the hole stands opposite the division of the month when the day falls of which we desire to know the time, the circle is held up opposite the sun. The inner side is then, of course in shade, but the sunbeam shines through the little orifice and forms a point of light upon the hour marked on the inner side. We have tried this dial and found it give the hour with great exactness.’
[74] In Knight’s ‘Pictorial Shakespeare,’ there’s a note about the dial that Touchstone took ‘from his “poke.”’ ‘“There’s no clock in the forest,” Orlando says, and it’s unlikely that the fool would have a pocket clock. So what was the dial he pulled from his poke? We recently acquired a simple instrument that was kindly given to us by a friend, which he picked “out of a pile of old iron,” much like how the Maid of Orleans found her sword. It’s a brass circle about two inches in diameter. The outer side is engraved with letters indicating the names of the months, with gradual divisions, and the inner side shows the hours of the day. The brass circle is held in place by a ring; however, there’s an inner slide with a small hole. When you move this slide so the hole is aligned with the division of the month for which you want to know the time, you hold the circle up towards the sun. The inner side is obviously in shadow, but the sunlight shines through the small hole and creates a point of light on the hour marked on the inner side. We’ve tested this dial and found it to show the time quite accurately.’
A correspondent of ‘Notes and Queries’ (vol. xii. 3rd series, p. 79) mentions that rings to ascertain the time are regularly sold at the Swiss fairs. They are called cadrans. The price of one is twenty centimes.
A writer for ‘Notes and Queries’ (vol. xii. 3rd series, p. 79) notes that timekeeping rings are regularly sold at Swiss fairs. They're called cadrans. One costs twenty centimes.
[75] This magnificent collection was sold, in one lot (June 28th, 1875), to Mr. Bromilow, of Battlesden Park, for 35,000l.
[75] This amazing collection was sold, as a single lot (June 28th, 1875), to Mr. Bromilow, of Battlesden Park, for £35,000.
[76] In Montfaucon’s ‘L’Antiquité Expliquée’ there is a fine illustration of this beautiful seal. My edition of the work is in English (1721), and the engraving is in vol. i. page 145. It is thus described: the child Bacchus is in the arms of his nurse. She is generally thought to have been Ino, called also Leucothea, or the daughters of Ino (according to others) brought him up. A nymph, or perhaps another nurse, is sitting by. The old man is either Silenus, or it may be Athamas, Ino’s husband. Several other nymphs have on their heads baskets full of flowers and fruits. Two Cupids, or Genii, stretch a canopy over Bacchus and the company that are about him. A nymph presents a cup to one of the Cupids. On the side of the figure is an old satyr leaning against a tree. He is playing on a kind of crooked hautboy. At the end, behind the tree, is a young boy, holding with both hands a bason, in which a goat seems to be going to drink. It is not easy to say who a naked man is with the crown on, and holding a cup in one hand, and in the other the bridle of a horse that is prancing. Some have taken it for Apollo.
[76] In Montfaucon’s ‘L’Antiquité Expliquée’, there’s a great illustration of this beautiful seal. My edition of the work is in English (1721), and the engraving is in vol. i. page 145. It’s described as follows: the child Bacchus is in the arms of his nurse. She is generally believed to be Ino, also known as Leucothea, or the daughters of Ino (according to some others) who raised him. A nymph, or maybe another nurse, is sitting nearby. The old man is either Silenus or possibly Athamas, Ino’s husband. Several other nymphs wear baskets full of flowers and fruits on their heads. Two Cupids, or Genii, are holding a canopy over Bacchus and the people around him. A nymph is offering a cup to one of the Cupids. On the side of the figure, an old satyr leans against a tree, playing a kind of crooked oboe. In the background, behind the tree, there’s a young boy holding a basin with both hands, where a goat seems to be about to drink. It’s difficult to identify the naked man with a crown, holding a cup in one hand and the bridle of a prancing horse in the other. Some have interpreted him as Apollo.
[77] A curious story of a squirt-ring is mentioned in Thiebault’s ‘Original Anecdotes of Frederick II.’ M. de Guines, ambassador of France at Berlin, had greatly mortified the Prussian nobles, and especially the other foreign ministers, by the ostentatious pomp which he displayed. Those whose limited means he thus eclipsed longed for some opportunity to wound the vanity of the proud man who daily humbled theirs, and excited their envy. At this crisis a Russian ambassador, who was returning home to present at his own court his newly-married bride, stopped on his way at Berlin. Prince Dolgorouki, the Russian ambassador there, did the honours of the Russian court to his countryman, and gave him and his wife a dinner, to which were invited all the corps diplomatique. M. de Guines was seated next to the bride. The lady, who had been initiated into all the court gossips, had enlisted under the banner of the malcontents, and taken upon herself the task of vexing the magnificent Frenchman. She had placed upon her finger a ring of very exquisite and curious workmanship, to which she called the attention of her neighbour during the course of the dinner. As he stooped to examine the jewel, the wearer pressed a spring concealed in the side of the ring within her hand, and jerked a small quantity of water into the eyes of the ambassador. The ring contained a syringe. The minister wiped his face, jested good-humouredly on the diminutive little instrument, and thought no more of it. But his fair enemy had not yet accomplished her purpose of mortifying the ambassador. Having refilled the squirt unperceived by him, she called his attention to herself, and again discharged the water in his face. M. de Guines looked neither angry nor abashed, but, in a serious tone of friendly advice, said to his foolish aggressor: ‘Madame, this kind of jest excites laughter the first time; when repeated it may be excused, especially if proceeding from a lady, as an act of youthful levity; but the third time it would be looked upon as an insult, and you would instantly receive in exchange the glass of water you see before me: of this, madame, I have the honour to give you notice.’ Thinking he would not dare to execute his threat, the lady once more filled and emptied the little water-spout at the expense of M. de Guines, who instantly acknowledged and repaid it with the contents of his glass, calmly adding, ‘I warned you, madame.’ The husband took the wisest course, declaring that the ambassador was perfectly justified in thus punishing his wife’s unjustifiable rudeness. The lady changed her dress, and the guests were requested to keep silence on the affair. [Madame de Barrera.]
[77] A curious story about a squirt-ring is mentioned in Thiebault’s ‘Original Anecdotes of Frederick II.’ M. de Guines, the French ambassador in Berlin, had greatly annoyed the Prussian nobles and the other foreign ministers with his showy display. Those who felt overshadowed by his extravagance were eager for a chance to poke fun at the proud man who constantly made them feel inferior. At this moment, a Russian ambassador, who was heading home to present his newly-married bride at his own court, stopped in Berlin. Prince Dolgorouki, the Russian ambassador there, hosted a dinner for his fellow countryman and his wife, inviting all the diplomats. M. de Guines sat next to the bride, who, having caught wind of all the court gossip, joined the ranks of the disgruntled and aimed to annoy the pompous Frenchman. She wore a ring of intricate and unique design, which she pointed out to her neighbor during dinner. As he leaned in to admire the jewel, she discreetly pressed a hidden spring on the side of the ring, squirting a small stream of water into the ambassador's face. The ring had a syringe mechanism. The minister wiped his face, laughed off the little gadget, and dismissed it from his mind. However, the bride wasn't done teasing the ambassador. After secretly refilling the squirt, she drew his attention again and sprayed water at him once more. M. de Guines didn't look angry or embarrassed but calmly advised her, "Madame, this kind of joke is funny the first time; repeated, it might be excused, especially coming from a lady, as youthful silliness; but the third time, it would be seen as an insult, and you would immediately receive back the glass of water you see before me: of this, madame, I want to give you a heads-up." Thinking he wouldn’t follow through on his threat, the lady filled and squirted the little water-spout at M. de Guines again, who promptly returned the favor with the contents of his glass, calmly adding, “I warned you, madame.” The husband wisely supported the ambassador’s response, stating that M. de Guines was completely justified in punishing his wife's rude behavior. The lady changed her dress, and the guests were asked to keep quiet about the incident. [Madame de Barrera.]
Download ePUB
If you like this ebook, consider a donation!