Rings for the finger

By Author	[ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z \| Other Symbols ]
By Title	[ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z \| Other Symbols ]
By Language

Download this book: [ ASCII ]

Look for this book on Amazon

We have new books nearly every day.
If you would like a news letter once a week or once a month fill out this form and we will give you a summary of the books for that week or month by email.

Title: Rings for the finger
Author: Kunz, George Frederick
Language: English
As this book started as an ASCII text book there are no pictures available.

*** Start of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "Rings for the finger" ***

RINGS

_By GEORGE FREDERICK KUNZ, Ph.D., Sc.D., A.M._

THE CURIOUS LORE OF
PRECIOUS STONES

Being a description of their sentiments and folklore, superstitions,
symbolism, mysticism, use in protection, prevention, religion and
divination, crystal gazing, birth-stones, lucky stones and talismans,
astral, zodiacal, and planetary.

THE MAGIC OF JEWELS
AND CHARMS

Magic jewels and electric gems; meteorites or celestial stones; stones
of healing: fabulous stones: concretions and fossils; snake stones and
bezoars; charms of ancient and modern times; facts and fancies about
precious stones.

EACH: Profusely illustrated in color, doubletone and line. Octavo.
Handsome cloth binding, gilt top, in a box. $6.00 net. Carriage
charges extra.

SHAKESPEARE AND
PRECIOUS STONES

Treating of the known references to precious stones in Shakespeare’s
works, with comments as to the origin of his material, the knowledge
of the poet concerning precious stones, and references as to where the
precious stones of his time came from.

Four illustrations. Square Octavo. Decorated cloth. $1.25 net.

[Illustration:

THE MAHARANI OF SIKKIM (NORTHEASTERN HINDUSTAN)

She wears two gold rings, one set with a turquoise, the other
with coral. The peculiar crown of gold, turquoise and coral is
that adopted for the queens of Sikkim. From the necklace of amber
beads hangs a gau, or charm box, set with rubies, lapis-lazuli,
and turquoise.

Oil painting by Damodar Dutt, a Bengali artist

Dr. Berthold Laufer’s “Notes on Turquoise in the East,” Chicago,
1913]

[Illustration:

RINGS
FOR THE FINGER

FROM THE EARLIEST KNOWN TIMES TO THE PRESENT,
WITH FULL DESCRIPTIONS OF THE ORIGIN, EARLY
MAKING, MATERIALS, THE ARCHÆOLOGY, HISTORY,
FOR AFFECTION, FOR LOVE, FOR ENGAGEMENT,
FOR WEDDING, COMMEMORATIVE, MOURNING, ETC.

BY
GEORGE FREDERICK KUNZ,
Ph.D., Sc.D., A.M.

WITH 290 ILLUSTRATIONS IN COLOR, DOUBLETONE AND LINE

[Illustration]

PHILADELPHIA & LONDON
J. B. LIPPINCOTT COMPANY
1917]

PUBLISHED JANUARY, 1917

PRINTED BY J. B. LIPPINCOTT COMPANY
AT THE WASHINGTON SQUARE PRESS
PHILADELPHIA, U.S.A.

COOPER UNION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT
OF SCIENCE AND ART EDITION

RINGS

(See Dedication)

_Limited to fifteen copies_

[1]Miss Sarah Cooper Hewitt, Honorary Associate of the Trustees
[1]Mrs. James O. Green, Honorary Associate of the Trustees
[1]Miss Eleanor G. Hewitt, Honorary Associate of the Trustees
[1]Peter Cooper Hewitt, Vice-President of the U. S. Naval Advisory
Board, Trustee
[1]Edward R. Hewitt, Treasurer
[2]Peter Cooper Bryce, Secretary
[1]Erskine Hewitt,
R. Fulton Cutting, President
Andrew Carnegie, Trustee
J. Pierpont Morgan, Trustee
Charles W. Gould, Trustee
L. C. Levin Jordan, Assistant Secretary
Charles R. Richards, Director

One Copy for the Reading Room of the Cooper Union
for the Advancement of Science and Art

George Frederick Kunz, Former Student and Assistant in Chemistry

_This copy was printed for_
MISS SARAH COOPER HEWITT
_With the compliments of the Author_

To
PETER COOPER
AND TO
HIS DESCENDANTS

WHO HAVE SO GENEROUSLY AND DEVOTEDLY
CARRIED OUT HIS TRADITIONS, AND DEVELOPED
THEM AS OCCASION DEMANDED,

AND TO

THE COOPER UNION OF ARTS AND SCIENCES

IN THE LABORATORIES, LECTURE ROOMS AND
LIBRARY OF WHICH THE AUTHOR SPENT
USEFUL, PROFITABLE EVENING HOURS FOR
SEVERAL YEARS, AT A TIME WHEN THERE
WERE NO OTHER OPPORTUNITIES OF A SIMILAR
NATURE IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK--THIS
VOLUME IS AFFECTIONATELY DEDICATED

FOREWORD

The present volume aims to offer in attractive and convenient
form everything that is of importance and interest in regard to
finger-rings, from the fabled ring of Prometheus down to the latest
productions of the goldsmiths and jewellers of our day.

The subject offers a striking illustration of the wonderful diversity
of form, decoration and usage, that the skill and fancy of man have
been able to realize in the case of the little circlet constituting
a ring. To make this clearer to the reader, a division in accordance
with the general history and the special uses of rings has seemed
more effective than any attempt to separate all the material along
geographical or chronological lines.

One of the earliest uses to which rings were put was for the impression
of an engraved design or device upon letters or documents, as the
sign-manual of the wearer. From the time of the ancient Egyptians,
this use prevailed in various parts of the world and many of the most
striking rings of this type are described and figured here. Allied to
these, and in some cases identical with them, are the rings given as
marks of official dignity and rank.

A most important class are the rings bestowed upon and worn by the
higher ecclesiastics. Papal rings, among which the most noted is
the “Fisherman’s Ring,” rings for cardinals and for bishops, and
also occasionally in former times, for abbots, were and are still
regarded with special reverence in the Roman and Greek churches. The
usage of wearing rings of this type dates far back in the history of
Christianity. Many examples of these rings are given, as also of
others bearing Christian emblems, and of those worn by nuns, and by
widows who had vowed never to re-wed.

Closely connected with these religious rings, are the betrothal
and wedding rings. Here it has seemed best to group together the
available data, since the line of demarcation between engagement and
wedding rings, though clearly enough marked to-day, is not easy to
draw in regard to earlier times. A very full selection of mottoes has
been added, some of which might still be used; the greater number,
however, belong to a past age, upon the sentiments of which they cast
interesting side lights.

Rings as charms and talismans form a class apart. Often the peculiar
form of the circlet was conceived to have a symbolic virtue, but more
frequently the talismanic quality depended upon some curious engraved
device, upon the stones set in the rings, or upon a mystic or religious
inscription. Rings of healing were talismans valued for their special
power to cure disease; the “cramp rings,” dated in legend back to the
time of Edward the Confessor, were notable in this series.

The rings of famous men and women will always be prized as mementos,
and in the various chapters of this book a large number of them will
be found, both rings of the mighty dead and those of distinguished
living persons; among these latter we are happy to be able to produce
an illustration of the inscription of President Wilson’s ring from an
impression of his seal courteously made by his own hand. It shows his
name engraved in Pitmanic shorthand.

Our American Indians have also made their contribution to the art of
ring-making, occasionally in the earlier centuries, and more especially
in more recent times. Notably the Navajos of New Mexico have exhibited
a considerable degree of skill in this direction. Much new information
on this subject will be found in the present work.

How rings are made by our jewellers of to-day, more especially by
the accurate and varied mechanical methods now employed for their
production, is concisely treated in a supplementary chapter. While
machine-made rings can scarcely be expected to equal those executed
by the hand of the true artist-goldsmith, those now produced are
nevertheless objects of beauty and adornment.

A ring is a symbol to which great interest is attached from the cradle
to the grave. Frequently, a natal stone, or a ring set with a natal
stone, is given to a child at its birth. When the child is baptized it
receives the talismanic gem of the guardian angel. At confirmation the
gem of the week is given. At graduation from school or college, a class
ring is bestowed. Finally, on the announcement of an engagement, a ring
set with any one of the choicer precious stones is selected for the
fiancée. Thus each important epoch in early life has its appropriate
memento, which will recall the memory of it in after years.

As very full indications as to the literature have been given in the
footnotes, it has not seemed necessary to append the numerous titles in
the form of a bibliography.

The author’s thanks are due to the following persons, who have
courteously imparted much valuable information:

Hon. Peter T. Barlow; Miss Ada M. Barr; W. Gedney Beatty; Theodoor
de Boog, Museum of the American Indian; Dr. Stewart Culin, Brooklyn
Institute; Robert W. De Forrest; Mrs. Alexander W. Drake; Dr. Gustavus
A. Eisen; Prof. Richard Gottheil, Columbia University; Dr. L. P.
Gratacap, Curator, Dept. of Mineralogy, American Museum of Natural
History; Right Rev. David H. Greer, Bishop of New York; Mrs. Isabel
Hapgood; Prof. A. V. Williams Jackson, Columbia University; William
H. Jones; Minor C. Keith; Dr. F. A. Lucas, Director, American Museum
of Natural History; B. Mazza; Edward T. Newell, President, American
Numismatic Society; Prof. John Dyneley Prince, Columbia University;
Mrs. Annie R. Schley; Dr. George C. Stone; J. Alden Weir, President,
National Academy of Design; Dr. Clark Wissler, Curator, Dept. of
Anthropology, American Museum of Natural History; Theodore M. Woodland;
Walter C. Wyman, and also the late William M. Chase; Dr. Charles S.
Braddock, Jr.; Prof. Friedrich Hirth, Columbia University; Sidney P.
Noe, Librarian, and Howland Wood, Curator, American Numismatic Society;
Rev. Dr. John P. Peters and Rev. Father William J. Stewart, all of New
York City.

Prof. Cyrus Adler, Dropsie College, Philadelphia; Dr. Hector Alliot,
South Western Museum, Los Angeles, Cal.; Dr. F. H. Barrow, Director,
Golden Gate Museum, Los Angeles, Cal.; Prof. Hiram Bingham, Yale
University; Frank S. Daggett, Director, Museum of History, Science
and Art, Los Angeles, Cal.; Dr. Joseph K. Dixon, Secretary, National
American Indian Memorial Asso., Philadelphia; Dr. Arthur Fairbanks,
Director, Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, Mass.; Franciscan Fathers, St.
Michael’s Mission, Arizona; Prof. L. C. Glenn, Vanderbilt University,
Nashville, Tennessee; Dr. F. W. Hodge, Ethnologist-in-charge,
Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D. C.; Prof. W. H. Holmes,
Head Curator, Dept. of Anthropology, United States National Museum,
Washington, D. C.; Dr. Walter Hough, Acting Head Curator, Dept.
of Anthropology, United States National Museum, Washington, D. C.;
Prof. Morris Jastrow, Jr., University of Pennsylvania; Dr. Berthold
Laufer, Curator of Anthropology, Field Museum of Natural History,
Chicago; Waldo Lincoln, American Antiquarian Society, Worcester,
Mass.; Prof. George Grant McCurdy, Curator of Anthropology, Peabody
Museum of Natural History, Yale University; Dr. William C. Mills,
Curator and Librarian, Chicago Archæological and Historical Soc.;
Edward S. Morse, Director, Peabody Museum, Salem, Mass.; Dr. Warren
K. Moorehead, Curator, Dept. American Archæology, Phillips Academy,
Andover, Mass.; Ostby & Barton Co., Providence, R. I.; Admiral Robert
E. Peary, Washington, D. C.; Dr. R. Rathbun, United States National
Museum, Washington, D. C.; William Riker, Newark, N. J.; Oliver A.
Roberts, Librarian, Masonic Temple, Boston, Mass.; Prof. Austin T.
Rogers, Leland Stanford Jr. University, Stanford University, Cal.; Dr.
F. J. V. Skiff, Director, Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago;
Prof. Friedrich Starr, University of Chicago; Rev. John Baer Stoudt,
Northampton, Pa.; Ex-President William H. Taft, New Haven, Conn.; J. P.
Tumulty, Secretary to President Wilson, Washington, D. C.; the late Dr.
William Hayes Ward, Assyriologist, South Berwick, Mass.

W. W. Blake, Mexico City; A. W. Feavearyear, London, England; R.
Friedländer & Sohn, Berlin; Prabha Karavongu, Siamese Legation,
Washington, D. C.; Mrs. Isabel Moore, Azores; M. Georges Pelissier,
Paris, France; Dr. William Flinders Petrie, Egyptologist, Hampstead,
England; Sir Charles Hercules Read, Curator, Dept. British and Mediæval
Antiquities and Ethnography, British Museum; Dr. Leonard Spencer,
Curator, Mineralogical Dept., British Museum (Natural History); C.
J. S. Thompson, Curator, Wellcome Historical Medical Museum, London,
England; Sir Herbert Tree, London, England; Dr. T. Wada, Tokio, Japan;
Herr Leopold Weininger, Vienna, and also Dr. Albert Figdor, Vienna, and
U. S. Consul W. Bardel, St. Michael, Azores.

The illustrations of rings in the British Museum are mostly from one
or the other of the two exceedingly comprehensive catalogues of rings
published by this museum: “Finger Rings, Greek, Etruscan and Roman,”
by F. H. Marshall, and “Finger Rings, Early Christian, Byzantine,
Teutonic, Mediæval, and Later,” by O. M. Dalton. In each volume the
section devoted to a special description of each ring is preceded by a
most scholarly and enlightening introductory essay.

G. F. K.

[Illustration][3]

New York City,
November, 1916

CONTENTS

CHAPTER PAGE

I. THE ORIGIN, PURPOSES AND METHODS OF RING WEARING 1

1. The Origin of the Ring
2. Purposes of Ring Wearing
3. Methods of Wearing

II. FORMS OF RINGS AND MATERIALS OF WHICH THEY ARE MADE 67

The Materials of Rings

III. SIGNET RINGS 115

IV. SOME INTERESTING RINGS OF HISTORY 162

1. On the Continent
2. English Rings

V. BETROTHAL (ENGAGEMENT) RINGS, WEDDING (NUPTIAL) RINGS,
AND LOVE TOKENS 193

VI. THE RELIGIOUS USE OF RINGS 249

VII. MAGIC AND TALISMANIC RINGS 288

VIII. RINGS OF HEALING 336

IX. RING MAKING 355

ILLUSTRATIONS

COLOR PLATES

PAGE

The Maharani of Sikkim _Frontispiece_

Richly Enameled Rings in the Collection of Dr.
Albert Figdor 90

Shakespeare’s Signet Ring; Lord Byron’s Ring 152

DOUBLETONES

Evolution of the Ring 2

Serpent Ring; Greek and Roman Rings; Mycenæan Rings 3

Ancient Rings of American Indians 20

Navajo Silversmith at Work 21

Navajo Indian Girl Wearing Native Rings 24

Navajo Silver Rings 25

Navajo Silversmiths Working 28

Pueblo Indian Family, Showing Ring-wearing 29

Autograph Letter of Admiral Robert E. Peary 30

Roman Rings; Charioteer’s Ring 32

Isis and Serapis Ring; Decade Ring; Supposed Head of
Plotina on Ring; Key Rings 33

Memorial Rings and Poison Ring 44

Cameo of Louis XII; Nelson Ring; Napoleon Elba Ring 45

Hands on Egyptian Mummy Case; Hands from Portrait; Hand
Showing Hindu Jewels 50

Hands from Sepulchral Effigy; Illustrating Ring-wearing 51

Upper Part of Mummy Case of Artemidora, Showing Rings on
Hand 52

Sketch by Sir Charles Hercules Read of Finger of Bronze
Statue with Seal Ring 53

Portrait of a Lady by Anton Van Dyke 60

Portrait of Princess Hatzfeld by Antonio Pesaro 61

Anglo-Saxon Rings 64

Thumb Ring; Frankish and Lombardic Rings 65

The “Lorscher Ring”; Ring with Mouse; Venetian Ring;
Jeweller’s Ring-rod 72

Spur Ring; Modern Egyptian Rings; Pipe-stopper Ring 73

Oriental Rings 78

Rich East Indian Ring; Rings Made by Siamese Priest 79

Indian Toe Rings 80

Portrait of Rich Cinghalese Merchant with Many Rings 81

Ring of President Franklin Pierce; Old Rings Combined
as Pendant 84

Rings in Drake Collection 85

Rings from Collection of W. Gedney Beatty, Esq. 92

Types of Watch Rings 93

Portrait of a Man, Fifteenth Century, by Antonio del
Pollaiolo, Showing Pointed Diamond in Ring 98

Portrait of a Venetian Senator with Thumb Ring 99

Portrait of a Man by Lucas Cranach 118

Portrait of Katharina Aeder, by Hans Bock the Elder 119

Portrait of Cardinal of Brandenburg, by the “Master of
the Death of Mary” 124

Portrait of a Mother and Her Daughter, by Bartholomew Bruyn 125

Ancient Roman Seal Rings; Key Ring 132

Roman Rings of Bronze and of Bone; Roman Gold Ring with
Settings; Gold Ring from Wiston, Sussex; Roman Silver
Ring 133

Bronze Signet Rings; Ivory Signet Ring 136

Gold Signet, Sixteenth Century; Massive Gold Signet,
English, Fifteenth Century 137

Man’s Portrait, by Conrad Faber; Portrait of Benedikt
von Hertenstein, by Hans Holbein 148

Man and Woman at Casement. Florentine, Fifteenth Century 149

Rings From Collection of Imperial Kunstgewerbe Museum,
Vienna 156

Signet Ring of Charles I 157

Ring with Portrait, Given to Lafayette by Washington;
Impression of President Wilson’s Signet Ring; Seal of
Right Reverend David H. Greer, Bishop of New York 160

Portrait of a Lady, Cologne School, 1526, Wearing Pointed
Diamond 168

Man’s Portrait, by Hans Funk, 1523, with Seal Ring 169

“Campaign Medals” of Henri II and of John Casimir, Count
Palatine, with Pointed Diamonds 170

Portrait of Diane de Poitiers 171

Portrait of Henry VIII, by Hans Holbein 182

Portrait of Jane Seymour, by Holbein 183

Portrait of Mary, Queen of Scots, French School 184

Portrait of Queen Elizabeth, by Lucas de Heere 185

Gold Ring, Cameo Portrait of Queen Elizabeth; Venetian
Ring with Pearls; Multiple Silver Rings 186

Puzzle Rings 187

Portrait of a Lady, by Pantoja de la Cruz 194

Portrait of Empress Mary, Daughter of Charles V, by Juan
Pantoja de la Cruz 195

Inlaid Antique Ring; Locket Ring; Antique Syrian Ring;
Roman Ring with Pointed Diamond; Silver Ring on Bone
of Finger, from Saxon Sepulchre 196

Syrian Wedding Rings of Agate and Chalcedony 197

Betrothal of the Virgin, by Juan Rodriguez Juarez (Xuarez) 202

Hands from the Preceding Picture 203

Jewish Betrothal Rings, Musèe de Cluny 212

Jewish Rings from British Museum 213

Portrait of Anne of Cleves, by Hans Holbein, Showing
Thumb Ring 216

Portrait of Judith, by Lucas Cranach, Rings Worn Under
Gloves 217

Ring with Diamond for Writing on Glass; Gallo-Roman
Wedding Ring; Signet and Wedding Ring of Mary, Queen
of Scots 218

Betrothal Rings; Gimmal Wedding Ring 219

Gimmal Ring; Betrothal Ring; Puzzle Ring 220

Wedding Rings with Posies 221

Portrait of Clara Eugenia, Daughter of Philip II of
Spain, by Gonzales 222

Portrait of Catarina Michela, Another of Philip’s
Daughters, by Coello Sanchez 223

Engagement and Wedding Rings 230

Wedding Rings 231

Marriage Medals by Oscar Roty 232

Puzzle Ring; Gold Betrothal Ring; Ornamental Love Ring 233

Portrait of Young Woman, Dutch School 240

Portrait of a Man, by the “Master of the Death of Mary” 241

Rings, Italian, French, Tyrolese, in the Boston Museum
of Fine Arts 246

Jacques Guay, Gem Engraver of Louis XV, at Work in the
Louvre 247

Ring of Pius II, Æneas Sylvius 262

The “Fisherman’s Ring”; Hand of Cranach’s “Judith,”
with Gloves Slit for Rings 263

Portrait of Clement IX, by Carlo Maratta 268

Portrait of Julius II, by Rafael 269

Christian Ring of Glass; Venetian Relic Ring; Poison
Ring; Ring of Bishop Ahlstan 270

Memorial Rings 271

Bishops’ Rings; Papal Ring; Rosary Rings 272

Bishops’ Rings 273

Abbess Praying, French School 280

Lady’s Portrait, by Coninxbo 281

Rings with Greek Mottoes; Ring of Bronze Gilt 300

Oriental Rings 301

The “Hermit Stone,” from Lapidario of Alfonso X 304

The “Offspring Stone,” from Lapidario of Alfonso X 305

Chinese Jeweller’s Shop in San Francisco; Modern
Chinese Rings 320

Specimens of Curious Ring Collection in American Museum
of Natural History, New York; Rings from Philippine
Islands 321

Zodiacal Rings 328

Magic Rings 329

Masonic Rings 332

Rings of Orders and Societies 333

Edward the Confessor’s Ring; Healing Ring 342

Curious Woodcuts Regarding Rings, from the Ortus
(Hortus) Sanitatis of Johannis de Cuba 343

Astrolabe Ring; Watch-Ring by Kossek in Prague 352

Eighteenth Century Watch Ring; Modern Watch Ring 353

Production of Rings with Precious Stones by Means of
Machinery 356

Successive Stages in the Formation of a Machine-made Ring 357

The “Allen Ring Gauge” for Measuring Rings 358

“Ring, Finger and Millimeter Locking Gauge”; “Display
Rings” 359

RINGS

THE ORIGIN, PURPOSES AND METHODS OF RING WEARING

THE ORIGIN OF THE RING

The origin of the ring is somewhat obscure, although there is good
reason to believe that it is a modification of the cylindrical seal
which was first worn attached to the neck or to the arm and was
eventually reduced in size so that it could be worn on the finger.
Signet rings were used in Egypt from a very remote period, and we read
in Gen. xl, 42, that the Pharaoh of Joseph’s time bestowed a ring upon
the patriarch as a mark of authority. From Egypt the custom of wearing
rings was transmitted to the Greek world, and also to the Etruscans,
from whom the usage was derived by the Romans. The Greek rings were
made of various materials, such as gold, silver, iron, ivory, and amber.

In his Natural History, Pliny relates the Greek fable of the origin
of the ring. For his impious daring in stealing fire from heaven for
mortal man, Prometheus had been doomed by Jupiter to be chained for
30,000 years to a rock in the Caucasus, while a vulture fed upon his
liver. Before long, however, Jupiter relented and liberated Prometheus;
nevertheless, in order to avoid a violation of the original judgment,
it was ordained that the Titan should wear a link of his chain on one
of his fingers as a ring, and in this ring was set a fragment of the
rock to which he had been chained, so that he might be still regarded
as bound to the Caucasian rock.

Another origin ascribed to the ring is the knot. A knotted cord or a
piece of wire twisted into a knot was a favorite charm in primitive
times. Frequently this was used to cast a spell over a person, so as
to deprive him of the use of one of his limbs or one of his faculties;
at other times, the power of the charm was directed against the
evil spirit which was supposed to cause disease or lameness, and
in this case the charm had curative power. It has been conjectured
that the magic virtues attributed to rings originated in this way,
the ring being regarded as a simplified form of a knot; indeed, not
infrequently rings were and are made in the form of knots.[4] This
symbol undoubtedly signified the binding or attaching of the spell to
its object, and the same idea is present in the true-lovers’ knot.

[Illustration: EVOLUTION OF THE FINGER RING

1, Egyptian seal ring. 2, Greek snake ring, found at Kertch
in the Crimea. 3, antique Roman ring (Berlin Antiquarium). 4,
Romano-Etruscan ring. 5, Roman key ring. 6, Gothic ring with stone
set on raised bezel. 7, Gothic ring with cabochon-cut stone. 8,
Renaissance ring with enamel decoration. 9, Hebrew wedding ring.
10, Renaissance ring. 11, Renaissance ring. 12, coat of arms of
the Medici, three interlinked stones, each set with a natural
pointed diamond crystal.]

[Illustration:

Large serpentine ring with many coils. Græco-Roman, Fourth Century
B.C. to Second Century A.D.

British Museum]

[Illustration:

Græco-Roman silver ring, set with an oval engraved sardonyx.
Second Century A.D.

British Museum]

[Illustration: Greek gold ring with eye-shaped bezel. From
Tarsus; Third Century A.D.

British Museum]

[Illustration:

Hellenistic bronze ring. Bezel set with a convex pale green paste.
Remains of gilding on ring

British Museum]

[Illustration:

Greek silver ring. Engraved design beneath a sunk border; draped
figure of a girl holding out a dove

British Museum]

[Illustration: Roman ring of opaque dark glass. Fourth Century
A.D.

British Museum]

[Illustration:

Mycenæan gold rings. 1, from Ialysos, Rhodes; given to the British
Museum in 1870 by John Ruskin; 2, from excavation at Enkomi, 1896

British Museum]

Many rings of the Bronze Age were found in the course of excavations
conducted in 1901 by M. Henri de Morgan in the valley of Agha Evlar,
stretching back from Kerghan on the Caspian Sea, in the region known as
the “Persian Talyche.” Here several sepulchral dolmens were discovered
which yielded a considerable number of ornamental objects of metal
and stone, as well as beads of vitreous paste. There was no trace of
inscriptions to aid in dating these “Scythian” finds, but they are
considered to belong to the second millennium before Christ. The bronze
rings are of several different types, some of them showing from three
to five spirals; in other cases the ends are overlapping, or else
brought together as closely as possible.[5]

Although it would scarcely be safe to assume that finger-rings were
never worn by the ancient Assyrians, still the almost total absence of
representations of them, even on female figures, renders it safe to
say that this must have been only very rarely the case. Possibly the
persistence in Assyria and Babylonia of the cylindrical form of seal
may account for this, in part at least, for the signet ring in many
places was evolved from the cylinder-seal. Moreover, the absence of
small intaglios in the period earlier than 500 B.C. would have
deprived a ring of its almost essential setting. The plates in Layard’s
great work on Assyrian remains, as well as those published by Flandrin
and Coste, also offer strong negative evidence, although Dr. William
Hayes Ward states that he would have expected finger-rings might have
come from Egypt by the way of Syria. At a later period, under Greek
influence, rings were not uncommon.[6] In the immense cemeteries at
Warka and elsewhere numerous iron rings have been found, many of them
toe-rings, as well as some made of shell, but the date of these burials
is not easily determined, and they are probably, in most instances, not
of much earlier date than the eighth or even the sixth century before
Christ.

A proof that genuine antiques can still be picked up in our day in
the East is given by Doctor Ward, who said that he bought in Bagdad
a lovely gold ring set with a cameo on which was inscribed in Greek
characters “Protarchus made it.” When, on visiting London, he told
this to Doctor Murray, of the British Museum, the latter gave full
expression to his scepticism, saying, “There are plenty of those signed
things.” But when the gem itself was shown him, he exclaimed, “This is
jolly genuine,” and he had it photographed for his book.[7]

A very interesting find was made in 1893, during the excavations
conducted under the auspices of the University of Pennsylvania at
Nippur. In the northwestern part of the mound, as many as 730 inscribed
tablets were unearthed, which had been carefully stored in a chamber
measuring eighteen by nine feet. These tablets, when deciphered,
proved that the chamber was the record room of the sons of a certain
Murashu, Bêlhâtin and Bêl-nadin-shumu, whose activity seems to have
been analogous to that of our counsellors-at-law. Many of the tablets
bear records concerning the members of the family personally, but in
other cases their services appear to have been claimed in various
legal difficulties. One of the most curious of these ancient documents
is a contract dated the eighth of the month of Elul, in the year 429
B.C. (thirty-fifth year of Artaxerxes I of Persia), in which
Bêl-ah-iddina, Bêlshumu, and Hâtin give the following guarantee to
Bêl-nadin-shumu, son of Murashu:

As concerns the gold ring set with an emerald, we guarantee that
in twenty years the emerald will not fall out of the gold ring.
If the emerald should fall out of the gold ring before the end of
twenty years, Bêl-ah-iddina, Bêlshumu, and Hâtin shall pay unto
Bêl-nadin-shumu an indemnity of ten mana of silver.

The record bears the names of seven witnesses and that of the scribe,
and is signed with the thumb-nail marks of those who guaranteed the
jewel, “instead of their seals.”[8]

It seems that we have here the names of the members of a firm of
jewellers doing business in Nippur, in the fifth century before Christ,
and evidently they were quite confident that the work they sold was
well and solidly done, for the indemnity represented a sum equivalent
to about $400 in our money. This must have been the estimated value of
the emerald. As the stone was probably not very large, this particular
gem must have been highly valued at that time, a fact due, in all
likelihood, to the special talismanic virtues attributed to it.

Several gold rings of Egyptian workmanship, excavated in tombs at
Enkomi, Cyprus, date back to the time of the Middle Empire in Egypt.
One in pale gold, now in the British Museum, has a flat oval bezel,
inscribed “Maāt, the golden one of the two lands.” This belongs to the
period from the XIX to the XXI Dynasty (or approximately from 1350 to
1000 B.C.). A ring found on the surface of the ground is of
electrum and very massive, and is engraved with a draped figure seated
on a throne, to whom approaches another figure clothed with a lion’s
skin and wearing on the head a disk and horns; a lion walking is in the
exergue, and the sun’s disk is above the two figures. This is believed
to belong to the late XVIII Dynasty, toward 1400 B.C. A thin,
rounded hoop of pale gold, the ends of which are twisted round each
other, and a rounded hoop of yellow gold engraved with four uræi, are
two other examples in the British Museum of the rings from Enkomi. A
massive silver ring from the same place has a large oval bezel with
the following names and titles inscribed in Egyptian hieroglyphics:
Rā-Heru-Khuti, Rā]-Kheperu Nefer, Meri-Rā, Ptah-neb-nut-maāt.[9] The
Cypriot gold ornaments which these rings help to date are considered
to be essentially contemporary with those from the tombs in the lower
town of Mycenæ, the period being approximately 1300–1100 B.C.,
possibly some years earlier or later.

A beautifully worked, perforated gold ring, set with a scarab of
carnelian, was found in Cyprus and is now in the Konstantinidis
Collection at Nicosia. The workmanship as well as the style of
the setting indicates that it was produced in the sixth century
B.C. Engraved on the carnelian is a fabulous monster, somewhat
resembling a chimæra, half lion, half boar.[10] Another ring of the
same period from Marion-Arsinoë, Cyprus, has a silver hoop, and is set
with a flat scaraboid, engraved with a female figure kneeling.

One of the largest Mycenæan rings shows a goddess seated near a tree,
and worshippers approaching to do her homage. Others offer various
devices: an altar with worshippers; a griffin and a seated divinity;
a pair of sphinxes; griffins, bulls’ heads, etc., in heraldic
ordering.[11] Here we have early Greek art transforming and adapting
Oriental forms of metal engraving, to be succeeded, more than five
centuries later, by the great gem-engravings of the palmy days of the
art of Ionia and Greece.

Among the Cyprian rings of the Mycenæan period, about 1000
B.C., in the British Museum, is a double gold ring which had
been evidently inlaid with some vitreous substance, all but faint
traces of which have now disappeared. This was found in a site near
Famagusta, Cyprus, that has been satisfactorily identified with the
spot where the Greeks under Teucer are said to have established a
settlement on their return from the siege of Troy. Other gold rings
discovered here at the same time, in 1896, have plain hoops, with a
small cylindrical ornament strung on the hoop, to serve in place of
a bezel with setting. Still another of these rings has, on one side,
an extension squared off at the corners, making a long and narrow
flat surface on the outside of the hoop; along its edge runs a beaded
ornamentation.[12]

The oldest Greek ring bearing an inscription is one believed to belong
to the late Mycenæan period. The gold hoop has engraved upon it the
Cypriot syllables Le-na-ko, possibly meaning the name Lenagoras. It
was found with other ornaments in a grave near Lanarka, Cyprus.[13]
The similarity of the name Lanarka with the phonetic value of the
inscribed signs might perhaps suggest that a place name rather than a
person’s name is signified. That in ancient times several cities had
their special signets is proved by a Greek inscription as to the cities
of Smyrna, Magnesia, and Sipylum.[14]

Pliny already remarked the fact that nowhere in the Homeric poems is
any mention made of rings or of seals. This is the more singular that
we have so much positive evidence in Cretan and Mycenæan remains that
rings were known to a part of the Greek world for a long time prior
to the composition of the Iliad and Odyssey. Probably due allowance
must be made for the individual preference of the poet, or school
of poets, to whom we owe these masterpieces of ancient literature.
In our own day, the present writer in his researches has often been
disappointed to find nothing concerning precious stones or jewels in
a given work treating of a subject that would invite their mention,
the obvious reason being that the author cared little or nothing for
such things, and hence passed over, unnoticed, all data regarding
them. Nevertheless, the metal-worker’s art evidently appealed strongly
to the author (or authors) of the Homeric epics, as is shown in many
places, notably in the long description of the representations on the
elaborately wrought shield made by Vulcan for Achilles (Il., xviii,
478–608).

Certainly the traditions of Homeric times, recorded by later Greek
writers, tell of several rings worn by Homeric personages. A ring of
Ulysses, engraved with a dolphin by order of the wily hero, in memory
of the rescue of his son Telemachus by one of the creatures of the
deep, is mentioned by Plutarch (“De solertia anim.”). Moreover, Helen
of Troy is stated to have worn on one of her fingers a ring bearing the
figure of an “enormous fish,” and, finally, the great Greek painter
Polygnotus, a contemporary of Pericles (495–429 B.C.), in a
painting showing the descent of Ulysses into Hades, represented the
youthful Phocus as wearing a ring, set with an engraved gem, on one of
the fingers of his left hand.[15] This painting was highly reputed in
ancient times, and had been dedicated to Apollo in the shrine at Delphi
by the Cnidians.

The significance of the ring in the fourth century before Christ, as
an ensign of office in Athens, is brought out by a passage in the
“Knights” of the comic poet Aristophanes, where the people, as an
expression of their discontent with the administration of Kleon, demand
that he surrender the ring with which he has been invested, as a proof
that he is no longer entrusted with the office of treasurer.[16]

A clever use of a ring is reported to have been made by Ismenias of
Thebes, when he was sent by the Bœotians as an envoy to the Persian
King. Before he was brought into the royal presence he was instructed
by the master of ceremonies that he must prostrate himself before the
sovereign. This act was strongly repugnant to his Greek consciousness,
both as a debasement of his individual dignity, and as an act of
divine homage offered to a mortal. To escape from the dilemma, the
envoy, as he approached the throne, took off his ring and succeeded
in dropping it without attracting too much attention; whereupon he
stooped and picked it up. The Greek onlookers understood the meaning
of his action, while the Persians believed that he had satisfactorily
conformed to the court ceremonial. His little ruse was rewarded by a
favorable reception of his requests by the Persian King, who had long
been offended by the obstinate refusal of the Greeks to render him the
homage he regarded as his due.[17]

The iron ring of the Romans, accounted for in popular fancy by the
tale of the rock and link ring of Prometheus, probably came to the
Romans from the Etruscans, who appear to have owed the fashion to the
Greeks, and Pliny notes in his “Naturalis Historia,” written about 75
A.D., that even then the Lacedæmonians, with true Spartan
sobriety, still wore iron rings.[18] Roman tradition carried back the
introduction of such rings to the age of Numa Pompilius, about 700
B.C., and there is evidence that, at a later time at least,
they were regarded as symbols of victory when worn on the hand of
a successful general, a late instance being the wearing of an iron
ring by Marius at his triumph for the victory over Jugurtha in 107
B.C.[19]

The progressive changes in the Roman regulations and customs governing
the wearing of rings and the material of which they should be made have
been stated in a concise and convenient form by M. Deloche, and his
conclusions are of considerable value, based as they are upon a very
careful study of the classic sources and their best interpreters in the
past.[20]

The iron ring, the only one originally, was at first regarded as a
mark of individual honor, awarded by the sovereign or in his name.
From the earliest times of the Roman Republic, a senator sent on an
embassy received a gold ring, all other senators being restricted to
iron ones. Soon, however, senators of noble birth, and, later on, all
senators without distinction, enjoyed the right of wearing gold rings.
In the third century B.C. this privilege was then extended to
the knights, and in the last years of the Republic, as well as under
the emperors, many other classes of citizens were made partakers of the
privilege, so that before long even some freedmen and certain of those
pursuing the least reputable vocations were permitted the enjoyment of
a distinction once so jealously guarded.

Toward the latter part of the third century A.D. all Roman
soldiers could lawfully wear gold rings, although in the late
Republican and earlier Imperial periods this right was accorded only to
the military tribunes. Thus, finally, all class distinctions in this
respect were done away with. Every freeborn man could wear a gold ring,
freedmen, with a few exceptions, were confined to silver rings, and the
iron ring became the badge of slavery.

After the battle of Cannæ (August 2, 216 B.C.), in which the
Romans were totally defeated by Hannibal, the Carthaginian leader
ordered that the gold rings should be taken from the hands of the dead
Romans and heaped up in the vestibule of his quarters. Enough were
collected to fill a bushel basket (some authorities say three bushel
baskets), and they were sent to Carthage, not as valuable spoils of
war, but as proof of the great slaughter among the Roman patricians and
knights, for at this time none beneath the rank of knights, and only
those of highest standing among them, those provided with steeds by
the State (_equo publico_), had been given the right to wear gold
rings.[21]

On days of national mourning the gold rings were laid aside as a mark
of sorrow and respect, and iron rings were substituted. This was
the case after the defeat at Cannæ in 216 B.C. and on the
funeral day of Augustus Cæsar in 15 A.D. This usage is noted
in one of the poet Juvenal’s satires.[22] Occasionally, as a mark of
disapprobation, senators would remove their gold rings at a public
sitting, as, for instance, when, in 305 B.C., the appointment
as edile of Cneius Flavius, son of the freedman Annius, was announced
in the Senate.

In Rome supplicants took off their rings as a mark of humility, or
a sign of sadness. When the censors C. Claudius Pulcher and Titus
Sempronius Gracchus were cited by the tribune Rutilius as guilty of a
crime against the State, Claudius was condemned by eight of the twelve
centuries of Knights. At this, many of the principal personages of the
Senate, taking off their gold rings in the presence of the assembled
citizens, put on mourning garments, and raised supplications in favor
of the accused persons.[23]

Another instance of this usage with suppliants is shown in a recital of
Valerius Maximus, wherein he relates that when, about 55 B.C.,
Aulus Gabinius was violently accused by the tribune Memmius, and there
seemed to be little hope that he would escape punishment, his son
Sisenna cast himself as a suppliant at the feet of Memmius, tearing off
his ring at the same time. This mark of humiliation finally induced
Memmius and his fellow-tribune Lælius to withdraw the accusation, and
set Gabinius at liberty.[24]

The wearing of a gold ring, because it was a sign of patrician and
later of free birth, had such a high value in the eyes of the Romans
that some freedmen used the subterfuge of wearing a gold ring with a
dark coating, so that it would appear to be of iron. Thus, although
they neither had the gratification nor incurred the perils of wearing
a symbol confined to the freeborn, they had the intimate personal
satisfaction of knowing that it was really on the hand.[25]

From the rather scant evidence that has come down to us, it appears
that Roman women were not subjected to as strict regulations in the
wearing of rings of precious metal as were the men. The wives of simple
plebeians who were in good circumstances seem as generally and freely
to have worn them as the wives and daughters of senators or knights, or
other patrician women. Pliny writes of the women wearing gold on every
finger.[26]

In Rome, as early as the first century, at a time when the right of
wearing gold rings was, as has been shown, very strictly limited,
it occasionally happened that a famous actor was accorded this
privilege by the special favor of some influential admirer of his
art. Sulla granted this right to Roscius, and some years later, in
43 B.C., the Roman quæstor in Spain bestowed a gold ring
upon Herennius Gallus in the ancient city of Gades, the modern
Cadiz. This gave him the right to occupy a seat in one of the first
fourteen rows at the theatre, the part reserved for the knights. This
special privilege was accorded to the actor by the Lex Roscia of 67
B.C., conferring the ring upon Roscius.[27]

Although the Christian women of the early Christian centuries were
taught to avoid all superfluous adornments, the wearing of a gold
ring was permitted to them. This was not, however, to be considered
as an ornament, but was simply for use in sealing up the household
goods entrusted to a wife’s care. Nevertheless, while noting this use,
Clemens Alexandrinus (ca. 150–ca. 217 A.D.) adds that, if
both servants and masters were properly instructed in their respective
duties and obligations, there would be no need for such precautions.[28]

The dignity conferred by the right to wear a gold ring is even noticed
in the Epistle of James, where we read (ii, 2–4):

For if there come unto your assembly a man with a gold ring, in
goodly apparel, and there come in also a poor man in vile raiment,
and ye have respect to him that weareth the gay clothing, and say
unto him, Sit thou here in a good place; and say to the poor,
Stand thou there, or sit here under my footstool; are ye not then
partial in yourselves, and are become judges of evil thoughts?

While this apostle here, as elsewhere in his epistle, warmly espouses
the cause of the poor, the prominence he gives to the gold ring as
a mark of the rich man, and a passport to the place of honor in the
congregation, is a full acknowledgment of the impression it created
upon strangers, just as the ribbon of an order is taken as a proof
of dignity or station in monarchial countries to-day, and even to a
certain extent in republican France.

The custom of bestowing birthday rings (_anuli natalitii_) was
frequently observed in imperial Rome, and a rich and influential
personage, with many friends and clients, would receive a large number
of these rings on the anniversary day of his birth. As a rule, a
setting of white sardonyx seems to have been most favored, to judge
from a line in the first of the Satires of the Latin poet Persius
(34–62 A.D.).

The famous decree of Justinian, promulgated in 539 (Novella 78 of the
Digest), conferring upon freedmen the right of wearing gold rings, runs
as follows:[29]

If a master, on freeing his slave, has declared him to be a Roman
citizen (and he is not allowed to do otherwise), let it be known
that, according to the present law, he who shall have received his
liberty shall have the right to gold rings and to regeneration,
and shall not need to solicit the right of the prince, or to take
any other steps to secure it. It will be his as a consequence of
his liberation, in virtue of the present law, which goes into
effect from this day.

This decree shows that, as is proved by other texts, freedmen were
sometimes accorded the privilege of wearing gold rings by special
permission of the ruler or State, but all who could not obtain such
special permission were punishable if they ventured to wear a gold
ring, just as in countries where State orders are recognized and
protected the wearing of such an order or of its ribbon by unauthorized
persons is punishable in some way. The “right of regeneration” is more
peculiar, as this refers to a legal fiction, by which it was assumed
that some one of the ancestors of the freedman had been freeborn;
hence, the quality of free-birth was only revived, not created, in the
case of the descendant. This is, after all, not so unreasonable as
it may seem to be, for the slaves, being generally prisoners of war,
or else the descendants of citizens who had in some way lost their
citizenship, could truly claim, in a majority of instances, that they
came of freeborn stock.

The image of Mars on a ring-stone was greatly favored by Roman
soldiers. A good example of this style of ring is to be seen at the
National Hungarian Museum in Budapest. The gem, a carnelian, is
engraved with a figure of the god, with helmet and spear; his left hand
rests on a shield bearing the Medusa’s head. The hoop is of silver.
This ring was found in Bosnia and was donated to the museum in 1820.[30]

An old Roman inscription mentions a guild of ring-makers (_conlegium
anularium_),[31] and the denomination anularius even appears as a
proper name of the engraver of a signet ring.[32] Near the Forum was a
flight of steps designated _scalæ anulariæ_,[33] indicating either
that ring engravers or vendors were to be found there, or that they had
their shops or workshops in the neighborhood.

Treating of the dictatorial conduct of the Procurator Verres, Cicero,
in his violent, we might almost say virulent arraignment of him, were
it not so well deserved, says that when Verres wished to have a ring
made for himself he ordered that a goldsmith should be summoned to the
Forum, publicly weighed out the gold for him, and commanded the man to
set his bench down in the Forum and to make the ring in the presence of
all.[34]

Tacitus states in his Germania that the most valiant of the Cattæ,
wore “like a fetter” an iron ring, which was a mark of infamy among
the Germans. Only when a warrior had killed an enemy had he the right
to divest himself of this ring. Whether this was a tribal usage, or
only the sign of an obligation voluntarily assumed, must be left to
conjecture. It is supposed to evidence that the slaves of the Germans
wore iron rings, and that thus such rings were looked upon as badges of
slavery.[35]

Finger-rings are exceedingly rare among the remains of the prehistoric
American peoples, although a few have been found in the Pueblo ruins
of Arizona and New Mexico. These are usually cut out of shell. Some
of them are skilfully cut from Pectunculus shells, and others from
“cone-shells” (_Conus_). Of the former kind a number were
unearthed at Chaves Pass, Arizona.[36] Many of the rings were incised
with an ornamental design; one of the most beautiful of these was
decorated with red figures representing clouds and lightning. This
ring, large enough to fit an adult’s finger, was found, together with
bones of a human hand, in one of the pre-Columbian graves, at Casa
Grande, Arizona. The remains here also yielded a ring made out of a
cone-shell, with incised decoration. The exceptionally fine specimen
noted above almost certainly had a religious or talismanic character,
and it may have been thought to protect the wearer from storms and
thunderbolts.

The skill with which the shells were utilized for rings as well as
for other objects of adornment must have been the result of many
generations of experiment and training, springing from that inherent
artistic sense so often manifest in the Indians of the pueblos in
contrast to the Indians of the plains. Often the circular form was
already present in the shell, and this was utilized by dividing a part
of the cone into sections, thus giving rings of varying diameter.
The material was then smoothed and polished, and either left plain
or decorated with an incised pattern, into the outlines of which
appropriate coloring matter was introduced. In other cases, when the
shell material did not offer a natural circlet, a disk was cut out, and
a large perforation produced the rough circlet, to be worked up later
into a finished ring.

The attainable evidence in regard to the wearing of rings by the
aborigines of North and South America is, in the main, negative.
This is the case with the Pacific coast Indians, as well as with the
Chiriqui graves and other ancient remains in the present United States
of Colombia.[37] Indeed, so far as can be ascertained, the wearing of
rings is essentially an Oriental fashion and was brought to the ancient
peoples of Europe from the East. Still, here and there on the North
American continent, as in the instance above noted, rings have been
found in burials believed to be pre-Columbian.

To the very few pre-Columbian rings found in Indian mounds, belong
four from Ohio, now in the collection of the Ohio State Archæological
and Historical Society, Columbus, Ohio. One of the rings was unearthed
twenty years ago from a mound in Hamilton County; it is of spiral form
and was on the middle finger of the left hand of a skeleton. The three
others came from the Adana Mound, two of them being spiral-rings, both
found on the middle finger of a skeleton’s left hand; the third is not
a complete circle, and was picked up at the base of the mound. The
spiral-rings are very finely and delicately fashioned.[38]

The Aztecs of ancient Mexico executed many ornamental objects of gold,
silver, copper and tin, and worked in iron and lead as well. Specimens
of this silversmiths’ work were sent by Fernan Cortés to Emperor
Charles V, and their artistic quality elicited the admiration of the
Spanish jewellers. These seem to have been only a small portion of
the rich booty gathered by the Spanish Conquistador, the metal worth
of which he estimated at 100,000 ducats ($250,000), or even more,
according to the statement in a letter addressed to his sovereign. The
greater part of this treasure is believed to have been lost during
the “_Noche Triste_,” the “Night of Sorrows,” when the Spanish
conquerors were surprised and attacked in Mexico City by the native
warriors, and were forced to seek safety, after suffering considerable
losses in a retreat from the narrow, city streets into the open
country, where they could better utilize the enormous superiority
conferred on them by their fire-arms. Even the few specimens which
were actually brought to Charles V seem to have disappeared, and were
probably melted down for use as bullion.[39]

Of the silversmiths’ methods a little can be learned from a study of
Aztec paintings. Thus we are able to know that they used the crucible,
the muffle and the blow-pipe. The statement is made by Torquemada and
by Clavigo that they possessed the now lost art of casting objects
half of gold and half of silver. Some fine examples of Aztec work in
gold and silver are to be seen in the marvelous collections of the
Museo Nacional in Mexico City, and among them are several finger-rings.
One of these comes from Teotihuacan; its broad hoop is decorated with
the head of one of the Aztec gods, wearing an elaborate and curiously
complicated head-dress. Other gold rings are of a peculiar type, the
inner half of the hoop being only about two-fifths as high as the
outer and very broad half, so that the finger could be closed without
inconvenience.[40]

[Illustration: Ancient Indian rings. 1, copper finger ring. From
a grave in cemetery at mouth of the Wabash, Southern Indiana,
1898. 2, stone ring (?). From Red Paint Cemetery, Orland, Maine.
Explored by W. K. Moorehead in 1912. 3, shell ring, broken. From
adobe ruin. Mesa, Arizona, 1898. All full size

Courtesy of Mr. Warren K. Moorehead]

[Illustration: Ancient Indian metal finger rings. 1, spiral ring
from middle finger of a skeleton. Hamilton Co., Ohio. 2, broken
ring taken from floor of Adana Mound, Ohio. 3 and 4, rings from
middle finger of skeleton found in the Adana Mound, Ohio. Natural
size]

[Illustration: Four thin shell rings from the Indian adobe ruins
near Phoenix, Arizona, explored in 1898

Courtesy of Mr. Warren K. Moorehead]

[Illustration: NAVAJO SILVERSMITH OF ARIZONA,
KOCH-NE-BI-KI-BITSILLY, CALLED “CHARLEY,” MAKING RINGS AT GRAND
CANYON, ARIZONA]

So few finger-rings of the Indian aborigines, who once inhabited the
present territory of the United States, have been brought to light,
that some authorities have been disposed to deny the existence of any
relics of this kind. Among the rare discoveries may be noted a copper
ring found in one of the Indian mounds near Chillicothe, Ross County,
Ohio. This ring has been made by bending a short copper rod until the
ends overlapped and then pounding them as closely together as possible.
It is only large enough for a child’s finger, and among the remains
of fifteen Indians found in this particular mound were those of a
child.[41] A few stone rings, presumably for wear on the finger, have
been met with in Indian graves in the Scioto Valley, Ohio, in Kentucky,
in Tennessee and also in Arizona, New Mexico and California. An
ornamental stone ring from Kentucky was evidently a finger-ring, as are
also some others of the stone rings.[42]

A shell ring from the adobe ruins near Phœnix, Arizona, in the Salado
Valley, shows the skill of the primitive Indians of this region in
ring-making. Art in shell is pronounced by Dr. Warren K. Moorehead to
be characteristic of the early Indian peoples of this valley, the shell
material, which is found in great profusion in the ruins and in the
desert, having come here either because of trade relations with the
Indians of the sea-coast, or as a result of frequent journeys by some
of the Salado peoples to the distant salt water. The discovery of shell
frogs in the so-called “City of the Dead” in this valley, by Prof.
Frank H. Cushing, some thirty years ago, was at first received with
considerable incredulity, but since then several have been unearthed by
successive explorers. Shell and bone implements with turquoise inlays
occur both in Arizona and New Mexico.[43] The shell ring we have just
noted, is unusually well formed, the projection at the upper part
having a form suggestive of a finished bezel, thus rendering the ring
a harmonious and attractive adornment for the hand. This interesting
specimen was brought to light in 1898, with a few other shell rings. An
Indian copper finger ring was unearthed, in the same year, in a grave
forming part of a cemetery at the mouth of the Wabash River, southern
Indiana. More recently, in 1912, what is believed to have been a stone
ring was taken by Doctor Moorehead from the Red Paint Indian cemetery
at Orland, Maine.[44]

The proficiency of the Navajo and Pueblo Indians of New Mexico as
silversmiths is shown by the fact that there are from fifty to
seventy-five Indians regularly occupied in this way at present, while
several hundred others are more or less familiar with the art and work
occasionally. The average pay is so much by the ounce, fifty cents
for bracelets, conchos, etc., and seventy-five cents for rings, plus
twenty-five cents for each and every setting. It has been estimated
that a Navajo silversmith, if he find steady work, may earn as much as
$125 a month. This, however, is rarely the case, as they are not fond
of overwork, and when they have earned a little sum in ten or fifteen
days, they will lay off until it is spent and they are again forced to
resume their tasks. Of the more industrious, who might be willing to
work uninterruptedly, many are quite prosperous, owning flocks of sheep
or other live stock, or else farm land, which must be attended to in
preference to the jewellery industry.

One of the best of these Indian ring-makers is Koch-Ne-Bi-Ki Bitsilly,
called Charley for short. He finds regular employment in the Grand
Canyon shop at Albuquerque, N. M., for several months in each year,
devoting the remainder of his time to the care of his sheep and other
property. He is pronounced to be above the average in intelligence,
energy and initiative. Other silversmiths are: Asidi Yashe, Charlie
Hogan, Charlie Largo, Malapai, Bigay and Hastin Nez.

Of the stones used for ring-settings, garnets are never employed except
at the special request of a trader; rarely, roughly-cut peridots
are set in rings. Turquoise from New Mexico, is the favorite stone,
although a little Persian turquoise is occasionally brought in by
the traders and set in Navajo rings. In early times the turquoise
supply came from the deposits near Cerrillos, now known as the Tiffany
Mine,[45] which furnished the material for all the turquoise ornaments
in the ruins at Chaco Canyon and elsewhere. In the manufacture of
rings these silversmiths frequently make a number at the same time,
first fashioning all the hoops, and then adding the design to the
hoops, after which the cups for the settings are added to the series.
An industrious worker will be able to finish up as many as a dozen
rings on this plan in three days, whereas, when special care is to be
exercised in making a single ring, a whole day’s work will be required.
From four to five thousand rings are made annually in New Mexico and
Arizona.

As metal working was unknown to the Navajos, as well as to the other
Indians of the Southwest before the advent of the white man, it seems
most probable that silver jewellery was not made by these Indians
until Spanish silver coins reached them. The Navajos are believed
to have acquired their knowledge of jewellery-making from the Pueblo
Indians who were the first to undertake it. Prior to this there was
massive work in copper probably due to influences from the North. The
Spanish derivation of the silver-working is proven by the old Spanish
methods used; the bellows is Spanish-Moorish. No reference either to
the making or the use of jewellery before recent times by the Navajos
is believed to exist. As an indication of the source of the silver
used, the Hopi name of this metal is _shiba_, the literal meaning
of the word being “a little round, white cake,” an apt designation of a
silver coin. In the total absence of archæological evidence as to the
Navajos, Dr. Walter Hough is decidedly of the opinion that silver work
among the tribe is of comparatively recent date. A few of the Navajo
finger-rings in the National Museum in Washington are at least old
enough to show considerable signs of wear.[46]

Among the women of the Pueblo Indians the wearing of a great number
of rings on the hand is an indication of aristocratic birth. This is
illustrated in the accompanying plate, showing a ring on every finger
of both hands; they are of silver, set with turquoise. Rings of this
type are also shown in the portrait of a Navajo maiden, a daughter of
Chee Dodge, dressed in the costume of the wife of a Navajo chief.[47]

[Illustration: DAUGHTER OF CHEE DODGE, NAVAJO INDIAN. SHE WEARS
RINGS OF SILVER SET WITH TURQUOISE]

[Illustration: SILVER RINGS SET WITH TURQUOISE MINED IN ARIZONA
AND NEW MEXICO, MADE BY THE NAVAJO INDIANS, GRAND CANYON,
ARIZONA. 1916]

As the Navajo silversmiths dwelt in small huts or temporary shelters
which they might move away from at short notice, they were forced
to build low forges directly on the ground, obliging them to crouch
down while working.[48] In this respect the Pueblo artisans had a
considerable advantage, since their spacious dwellings made it possible
for them to set their forges solidly in a frame high enough to enable
them to do their work standing. A considerable number of tools and
appliances are in the workshop of the Navajo silversmith; most of them,
however, of rude fabrication and not well adapted for fine and accurate
work. He deserves the more credit for the quality of work he is able
to produce. The following is a pretty full list of the outfit in such
a workshop: Forge, bellows, anvil, crucibles, molds, tongs, scissors,
pliers, files, awls, cold chisels, matrix and die for moulding buttons,
wooden stake, basin, charcoal, tools and materials for soldering
(blow-pipe, braid of cotton rags soaked in grease, wire, and borax),
materials for polish (sandpaper, emery-paper, powdered sandstone, sand,
ashes, and solid stone), and materials for whitening (a native mineral
substance--almogen, salt and water).[49]

It has been noted that the Navajos had not acquired the art of making
an air chamber of the mouth in operating the blow-pipe, but blew with
undistended cheeks, the result being an intermittent flame. The latter
is furnished by burning a thick braid of cotton rags soaked in mutton
suet or some other similar kind of grease. For the polishing work,
the emery paper is sparingly used because of its cost. After all the
preliminary polishing has been done with sandstone, sand or ashes, the
finishing is done with emery-paper. For the blanching of the silver the
hydrous sulphate of ammonia, termed almogen, is used, the silver being
bathed in a solution of this, with the addition of a little salt. The
blow-pipe is usually made by beating out a piece of thick brass wire
into a long flat strip, which is then bent into the requisite form.

Two of the best of these silversmiths were engaged to work for a short
time near Fort Wingate. As has been noted, their forges are commonly
set very low down, and the position of the workers was evidently
an uncomfortable one. Nevertheless, they showed a great degree of
persistence, working sometimes as many as from twelve to even fifteen
hours in a day. When paid by the piece, artisans could earn about two
dollars a day on an average. The method of chasing was excessively
primitive. While one worker held the object firmly on an anvil, the
other applied to it part of the shank of a file that had previously
been rounded, and struck this with smart taps of a hammer. Finer
figures were engraved with the sharpened part of a file, to which a
peculiar zigzag, forward motion was imparted by the hand. One fault
that could be charged against these silversmiths was a lack of economy
as to the precious material they used, no care being taken to gather
up and utilize the amount lost in filing and polishing, as well as by
oxidation in the forge, so that the net loss was estimated at fourteen
per cent.

While the art of the work produced can scarcely be termed finished,
when judged by very high standards, still the silver ornaments executed
by the Navajos possess at least the charm inherent in individual work,
as contrasted with the more harmonious and finished productions of
merely mechanical art, where thousands of objects of a given type of
design are turned out annually in a highly-organized silversmithing
establishment. With these Indians we have the “personal note” that is
too often missed in the ornaments of our day. This Navajo industry has
received much encouragement from the managers of the Santa Fé Railroad,
and from its agencies. Although the art among the Navajos is generally
believed to have been introduced by Spanish influence, the fact that
before the Spanish Conquest the native Mexicans were able to work
metals with considerable skill would make it not improbable that it
spread to the New Mexico tribes, and perhaps from them to the ancestors
of the Navajos of to-day. The Navajo Indians belong to the Athapascan
race and emigrated from the northwestern coast. Copper had been worked
into ornaments from of old by Indians of the same stock in Alaska, and
some remains indicate that this was the case, in rare instances, with
the Navajos.

The superiority of the Navajos of a later time to the Pueblos as
silversmiths, may, perhaps, result from their already acquired
knowledge of copper-working. As the Navajo men had not the occupation
of farming, as had the Pueblos, silversmithing gained favor among them
as a fad, as a means of relieving the tedium of idleness. There is
rarely any tendency to transmit this art directly from father to son,
individual preferences being the chief factors. Indeed there is so
little of the caste spirit among the Navajos that the occupation of
the father counts for but little in determining that of the son. This
is largely dependent upon the fact that descent is principally traced
through the mother. Exogamy, marrying outside the clan, is the orthodox
code of the Navajos, a man being expected to avoid taking a wife from
the clan to which his mother belonged,--a wise precaution for them.

As an early description of the lack of silversmiths’ instruments of
precision among the Navajos in planning and executing their work, Mr.
Matthews says of conditions as he observed them thirty-five years ago:

“The smiths whom I have seen working had no dividers, square, measure,
or any instrument of precision. As before stated, I have seen scissors
used as compasses, but as a rule they find approximate centres with the
eye and cut all shapes and engrave all figures by the unaided guidance
of this unreliable organ. Often they cut out their designs in paper
first and from them mark off patterns on the metal. Even in the matter
of cutting patterns they do not seem to know the simple device of
doubling the paper in order to secure lateral conformity.”

[Illustration: NAVAJO SILVERSMITHS OF NEW MEXICO, ENGAGED IN
MAKING SILVER RINGS

1, Tsozi Bigay; 2, Atziddy Yaski]

[Illustration: PABLO ABEITA, PUEBLO INDIAN, WITH HIS SON AND WIFE

The latter wears turquoise and silver rings on every finger of
each hand

Courtesy of Dr. Joseph Kossuth Dixon]

As the Navajos have no silver mines in their country, they depend
largely for their material upon Mexican silver dollars worth about 48
cents in United States money. These are melted and then molded, or
else cut and hammered into the desired forms. Sometimes, United States
half or quarter dollars are used in this way, although such silver
costs more than twice as much, because of its worth as currency. Before
silver was freely used, copper and brass were bought at the trading
posts and favored as materials; a supply of these metals being often
secured by melting down parts of the kettles or pans furnished to the
Indians by the United States Government, or else bought from white
settlers. Some old Navajo silversmiths assert that the art of working
silver was introduced from Mexico about sixty years ago, toward the
middle of the last century. About this time a Mexican silversmith named
Cassilio came to the Navajo country and taught his art to a Navajo
blacksmith called by his people Atsidi Sani, or the “Old Smith.”
Cassilio is said to have been still living about 1872. An artisan
considered to be one of the best, if not the very best of the Navajo
silversmiths of our day, who is called Beshlagai Ilini Altsosigi or the
“Slender Silversmith,” originally learned his art from Mexicans. The
fact that Lieut. James H. Simpson, who explored the heart of the Navajo
country in 1849, has nothing to say about silversmithing, although he
details very fully the various arts and industries of the Navajos, goes
far to prove the truth of the statement that Navajo silversmithing
dates from a later time.[50]

Borax is now generally used for soldering, but before it was brought
to their country, the Navajo silversmiths are said to have mined a
certain substance for this use, probably a kind of native alum. Rock
salt, an easily attainable material, called in the Navajo tongue _tse
dokozh_ (saline rock), was used for whitening tarnished or oxidized
silver. For this purpose the salt was dissolved in boiling water, into
which the silver articles were thrown and left for a time. In place
of the sandstone, sand and ashes originally used, the silversmiths
are now able to employ sandpaper or emery paper bought at the stores.
Of the tools employed we have already treated at some length. The
details in this and the preceding paragraph have been derived from
the very interesting and valuable “Ethnologic Dictionary of the
Navaho Language,” published in 1910 by the Franciscan Fathers, at St.
Michaels, Arizona.[51] Here the nouns and verbs denoting action are
grouped in the only really logical way, under the respective industries
and trades, or other forms of human activity. As some of the foremost
writers on the origin of language have urged that its beginnings are to
be sought in the various rhythmic exclamations of a body of workers,
at first uttered automatically and later used consciously as calls to
work, or to favor a coördination of efforts, no better classification
of the vocabulary of a primitive race can be employed.

The various forms and qualities of silver rings found full expression
in the Navajo language, a proof of the importance accorded to
this branch of silversmithing among them. The word for ring being
_yostsá_, we have the following designations:[52]

yostsá deshzházh, a worn down ring
yostsá geéldo, a broken ring
yostsá énidi, a new ring
yostsá quastqí, an old ring
yostsá ntqél, a broad ring
yostsá altsósi, a slender ring
yostsá ntsa, a large ring
yostsá altsisi, a small ring
yostsá náilgai, a polished ring
yostsá yijí, a blackened, oxidized ring
yostsá do-bikeeshchíni, a plain ring
yostsá bikeeshchíni, a ring with a design
yostsá alkésgiz, a twisted ring
yostsá bitsá, a ribbed ring
yostsá biná, the setting of a ring
yostsá tséso biná, a ring with a glass setting
yostsá dotlízhi biná, a ring with a turquoise setting
yostsá tlish beélya, a snake-shaped ring

[Illustration: THE ARMY AND NAVY CLUB

WASHINGTON.]

[handwritten text]

[Illustration]

[handwritten page]

[Illustration]

[handwritten page]

Rings are not in favor with the Eskimos, who do not appear to make or
wear any. Indeed, Admiral Peary found it impossible to dispose of a
lot of rings he had taken with him on one of his Arctic trips in the
belief that they would be attractive to the Eskimos, and good objects
of barter.[53] Perhaps in the intense Arctic cold even the slightest
pressure on the finger may have been avoided, lest it should impede
circulation and increase the danger of having the fingers frost-bitten.

The Mendæans of Mesopotamia are the silversmiths of this region, and
they exhibit much skill in their work. The greatest demand is for
cigarette cases and for signet rings and seals, although they make a
variety of other small ornamental objects. Their methods of work are
quite characteristic. In the case of the smaller objects, such as
rings, etc., they hammer them out from a heated silver bar. When the
general form has been attained, they work up the surface with a steel
file or pencil, which has a triangular point; with it the desired
design is laboriously engraved. This process being completed, a black
metallic powder, made into a paste, is rubbed over the entire surface,
naturally accumulating more or less, according to the greater or lesser
depths of the cuttings; the object is then placed in a charcoal forge
and fired. After it has remained therein long enough, it is removed
and the superfluous powder is rubbed or worked off. The completed ring
or other ornament then offers most beautiful contrasts between the
bright silver and the lustrous black inlay. The Mendæans are sometimes
called “Christians of St. John,” because of their great veneration
for John the Baptist. However, they in no sense deserve the name
of Christians, their peculiar, eclectic doctrine being a mixture of
ancient and Christian Gnosticism, with certain elements of the old
Persian religion. They have quite a literature, dating back to the
early centuries of our era, and written in an Aramaic dialect similar
to that of the Talmud.

THE PURPOSES OF RING WEARING

The wearing of rings as ornaments for the hand requires no explanation
in view of the innate love of adornment shown from the very earliest
periods of human history. However, apart from this merely ornamental
use, rings were applied to many special uses and were worn for many
definite purposes, some of which are so important as to merit extended
notice in separate chapters; others again are less far-reaching
and less significant, and certain of these will be explained and
illustrated here.

[Illustration: 1, Late Roman ring; 2, gold ring set with an
engraved red carnelian. Found in 1846 near Amiens, France]

[Illustration: 1, ring of gilt copper set with a ruby; 2, ring
set with irregularly-shaped sapphire

Londesborough Collection]

[Illustration: 1, Roman ring, perhaps a signet; elliptical hoop
with projecting shoulders; 2, hexagonal ring set with engraved
stone bearing figure of Hygeia, the Goddess of Health]

[Illustration: Ring that was perhaps given by a Roman lady to a
successful charioteer. Bust of donor on summit of ring

All from Fairholt’s “Rambles of an Artist”]

[Illustration: 1, spiral ring with heads of Isis and Serapis 2,
Etruscan gold ring

British Museum

Fairholt’s “Rambles of an Artist”]

[Illustration: Silver ring with ten projections (decade ring);
that for the Creed (the bezel) has the design of the Cross.
Impression

British Museum]

[Illustration: Immense ring with female head incorrectly said to
be that of Plotina, wife of Trajan

Montfaucon, “L’Antiquité expliquée,” Paris, 1719]

[Illustration: Ancient Roman Key Rings

Fairholt’s “Rambles of an Artist”]

We are not apt to think the wearing of many rings especially in accord
with the profession of philosophy, and yet Ælian tells us that a chief
cause of the dissension between Plato (427–347 B.C.) and his
pupil, Aristotle (384–322 B.C.), arose from the blame bestowed
by Plato upon the greatest of ancient philosophers--“the master of
those who know,” as Dante calls him--because Aristotle adorned his
hand with many rings.[54] Could this have been done with a view to
impressing his students and philosophers with greater respect than they
might always have been disposed to accord to his intellectual greatness
alone? The externals of luxurious adornment made, perhaps, a more
direct appeal than the mere power of logical exposition could do,
and such an eminently practical thinker as Aristotle was may not have
been blind to these considerations.

A gold ring figured by Gorius is thought by him to have been a gift
from an ardent Roman sportswoman to a victorious charioteer, to whose
skill she may perhaps have been indebted for some material gain, since
wagering in chariot races was as common in Roman times as betting on
horse races in our own day. This ring is engraved with a woman’s head
and two heads of reined horses; the name of the donor, Pomphonica,[55]
and the words _amor_ and _hospes_, are engraved on the circlet. “Love
the Host,” as these words may be read, makes a slightly enigmatic
inscription. Indeed, it may well be that some fair Roman had the ring
made as a memento for her own use and wear. Another conjecture is that
it was a man’s ring executed as a memento of what was dearest to him,
his ladylove and his chariot horses. It was in the Cabinet of the
Tuscan grand duke Francis of Lorraine, later Emperor of Germany and
husband of Maria Theresa.[56]

A Latin inscription, from Granada, Spain, mentions a ring, set with a
jasper, that was placed by a son upon the statue of his mother. The
value of the ring is given as 7000 sestertii, indicating that the stone
was engraved; the design probably had a symbolic significance, as in
the case of most of the votive rings.[57]

Martial, in one of his epigrams (V.12) says that there was nothing
surprising in the feats performed by certain athletes, when Stella
could carry ten maidens upon one of his fingers. In a very interesting
study on this subject, C. W. King endeavors to prove that the lines
refer to a remarkable ring whereon ten precious stones must have been
associated in some way with dedicated to Minerva and the Nine Muses.
In another epigram (V.11) Martial writes of Stella turning sardonyxes,
emeralds, diamonds, and jaspers around one of his finger-joints, and
King conjectures that the Ten Maidens were represented by the opal,
sapphire (hyacinth), spinel, Oriental topaz, almandine garnet, and
pearl, in addition to the four stones enumerated above. Should this
conjecture be well-founded these different stones were set at regular
intervals, these stones being Minerva and the Muses, although we have
no direct proof of this.

This ring of the Ten Maidens suggests the decade or rosary rings, of
which so many specimens exist. Usually there were ten bosses or knobs,
as the name indicates, but occasionally there were eleven, for counting
ten Aves and a Pater. The earliest date Mr. Waterton is inclined to
assign to rings of this type is the fourteenth century.[58] A so-called
decade ring with twelve bosses is described in the catalogue of the
Londesborough Collection.[59] Here the central knob is a tooth,
opposite this is a piece of labradorite, while on either side are
set two amethysts, a chrysoprase and an emerald, two jacinths, two
turquoises, and two pearls. The twelfth knob stood for the creed.
Sometimes, where there are eleven projections, ten paternosters and the
creed were to be recited. A good example of a decade ring is one of
silver in the British Museum. The ten projections for the paternosters
are very marked and the eleventh, for the creed, which forms the bezel,
has the form of a crucifix, the cross resting on three steps. This
rises to a considerable relative height above the hoop. Such a ring
could scarcely be worn with comfort, its liturgical use evidently being
the paramount idea of the maker.[60]

The gold and silver chaplet rings, with a cross and ten beads or
bosses in relief upon the hoop, were frequently used by the Knights
of Malta, in the eighteenth century; indeed this type of ring is said
to have been invented by them. Their use as substitutes for the less
convenient chaplet was spreading, until in 1836 the matter was referred
by Pope Gregory XVI to the tribunal of penitentiaries. Its decision,
transmitted by the Cardinal Penitentiary Castracane, as to the question
“whether the gold or silver rings, surrounded by ten bosses, which are
used by some pious persons for the recitation of the Rosary of the
Blessed Virgin, can be blessed with the appropriate indulgences,” was
in the negative.[61]

The ring-money used by the ancient Gauls and Britons illustrates
the employment of what might be ornamental objects as currency. An
exceptionally fine specimen made of nearly pure gold was recently
found by a farmer while he was ploughing a field near Woodstock,
Oxfordshire, England. Of course many or most of these rings were not
worn but merely used as money.

A legal use of a sapphire ring to bind a bargain is recorded in a
deed of gift, from about 1200 A.D., by a certain John Long
to William Prohume, clerk, of land and houses in St. Martin’s Street,
Exeter, at a rent of 6_s_ 8_d_, which sum was to be donated
to St. John’s Hospital in Exeter. The grantor acknowledges the receipt
of 45 marks and of a gold ring set with a sapphire as the price of this
lease on very favorable terms.[62]

Precious stones set in rings sometimes served to hide a “talisman” of a
peculiar kind, namely, a dose of death-dealing poison, kept as a last
resort to free the wearer of the ring from disgrace or from a worse
death. So we are told that when Marcus Crassus stripped the Capitoline
Temple of its treasures of gold, the faithful guardian broke between
his teeth the stone set in his ring, swallowed the poison hidden
beneath it, and immediately expired.[63] The great Hannibal, also,
had recourse to the poison contained in his ring, when he was on the
point of being given up to his bitter enemies, the Romans. Of this ring
the satirist Juvenal wrote as follows: “_Cannarum vindex et tanti
sanguinis ultor Anulus_,” or “That ring, the avenger of those who
fell at Cannæ, and of so much blood that had been shed.” Another great
man, the peerless orator Demosthenes, is said to have carried with him
a similar ring. In a Rabbinical commentary on Deuteronomy occurs the
following curious passage:

Hast thou then no ring? Suck it out and thou wilt die.

This has been explained as referring to a hollow ring filled with
liquid poison.[64]

Some ancient gold rings were made hollow, so that they could be
filled with mastic or brimstone, or an aromatic material. In the old
“Oneirocriticon,” or “Dream Book” of Artemidorus, to see a ring of
this kind in a dream portended treachery or deceit, as they enclosed
something hidden from view, while a ring solidly wrought by the hammer
was exactly what it purported to be.[65]

The poison-rings of the Borgias are not fabulous, for some of them
still exist, one bearing the date 1503 and the motto of Cæsar Borgia in
Old French, “_Fays ce que doys avien que pourra_” (Do your duty,
happen what may). Beneath the bezel of this ring there is a sliding
panel and when this is displaced there appears a small space where the
poison was kept. Such rings simply afforded a ready supply of poison
at need, but another type constituted a death-dealing weapon. It is
curious to note how in a ring of this latter type the Renaissance
goldsmith has combined an artistic idea with the nefarious quality
of the jewel. The bezel is wrought into the shape of a lion, and
the hollow claws of the animal admit the passage of a subtle poison
concealed in a small reservoir back of the bezel. By a mechanical
device the poison was pressed out of the cavity through the lion’s
claws, and it is conjectured that the death-wound could have been
inflicted by turning the bezel of the ring inward, so that a hearty
grasp would produce a few slight punctures in the enemy’s hand.[66]

While these Borgia rings represent an extreme of diabolical ingenuity,
the perfumed rings, the use of which has been revived to a certain
extent of late, constitute a refinement of civilization. This ring is
generally made of plain gold with a small elastic ball and valve at
the back. This is squeezed flat and the ring is immersed in a perfumed
liquid; when the pressure is removed the scent is drawn into the
ring by suction. An ingenious adjustment renders it possible for the
wearer to discharge a jet or spray of perfume by the exercise of a
very trifling pressure. Not only perfumes but disinfectants also are
sometimes used, and rings charged in this way may be said to represent
antidotes of the dreaded poison rings, not perhaps in a literal sense,
but at least in the sense of being curative rings.

A poison ring of Venetian workmanship has a richly engraved hoop, the
setting consisting of a pointed diamond on either side of which are
two cabochon-cut rubies. On touching a spring at the side of the bezel
holding the diamond, the upper half, in which the stone is set, springs
open, revealing a space beneath in which a small quantity of poison
could be concealed, enough in the case of the more active poisons to
furnish a lethal dose, either for an enemy or for the wearer of the
ring himself in case of need.[67]

The son of the great Egmont was involved more or less directly in
an unsuccessful plot to poison the Prince of Orange in 1582. It was
asserted that the crime was committed at the would-be assassin’s own
table, by means of a drug concealed in a ring. This story appeared to
be confirmed by the alleged finding in Egmont’s lodgings of a hollow
ring filled with poison.[68]

A writer on poison mysteries describes a possible poison ring in the
great British Museum collection. The bezel has a repository covered by
a thin-cut onyx on which is engraved the head of a horned faun.[69]
However, in the British Museum Catalogue of Rings by O. M. Dalton,
the statement is made that there are no authentic poison rings in
the Museum, and that “the mere possession of a locket-bezel does
not suffice to lend romance to a ring perhaps intended to contain a
harmless perfume.”[70]

A golden ring-dial in the British Museum collection is a flat band
around the middle of which runs a channel in which another, movable
ring, fits closely. The month-names are engraved on the band, six above
the channel and six below it. The movable ring has a small hole with
a star on one side, and a hand with index and second fingers extended
on the other. Inside, the numbers of the hours from 4 A.M.
to 8 P.M. are engraved in two lines, the hour of noon being
beyond them at the point opposite to the ring which suspends the dial.
In using a dial-ring the aperture in the movable ring was brought in
a line with the month in which the observation was taken; this being
done the figure on the inside upon which the sun’s ray would fall would
give the approximate time of day.[71]

Shakespeare provides Touchstone with a dial ring in “As You Like It”
(Act II, sc. 7) where Jaques says:

“Good morrow fool,” quoth I. “No, Sir, quoth he,
Call me not fool, till heaven hath sent me fortune.”
And then he drew a dial from his poke,
And looking on it with lack-lustre eye,
Says, very wisely, “It is ten o’clock.”

A watch-ring of the eighteenth century is in the Franks Bequest
Collection of the British Museum. The oval watch in the bezel is framed
with pearls, on the back of the ring are the initials A.R. As the
bezel measures but nine-tenths of an inch in length, this tiny watch
exemplifies the skill of the watch-makers of the time. The entire ring
weighs but 175 grains.[72]

The custom of leaving memorial rings for the friends of the departed
had its origin in the bestowal of more substantial bequests. In fact,
these rings stand in somewhat the same relation to such bequests as
does the wedding ring to the gifts the husband was expected to make to
his wife when he wedded her. In both cases this has been lost sight
of, and the intrinsic value of the objects being slight, only the
sentimental value is considered.

An early instance of the bequest of rings is offered in the case of
Richard II (1366–1400), who, by his testament, left a gold ring to
each of the nine executors, five of whom were bishops and four great
nobles.[73] In the seventeenth century one who held, and still holds
sway in another realm, that of literature, conformed to this usage,
for in Shakespeare’s will, dated March 25, 1616, rings were bequeathed
to Hamlett Sadler, William Reynoldes, Anthony Nash and John Nash,
his fellow townsmen, as well as to three actors, Burbage, Heming and
Condell, who had the privilege of “creating” parts in the greatest
dramas ever written. The sum of 26s 8d is appropriated for each of
these rings, about $6.50 of our money.

As the fashion became more prevalent, the number of rings provided
for in the wills of well-known persons must have constituted quite
a charge upon their estates. The quaint and delightful Pepys, that
close observer and great gossip who knew all the prominent people of
the London of his day, left directions on his death, in 1703, for the
distribution of 123 memorial rings among his friends. One of the most
important events in English history is believed to have given such a
great vogue to this usage.

The death of Charles I on the scaffold, January 30, 1649--his martyrdom
as the royalists called it--created an ineffaceable impression upon
the minds and hearts of those who had taken the king’s side in the
struggle with the parliamentary party. To commemorate this sad event
and to obey the last injunction of the unfortunate monarch, “remember,”
a great number of memorial rings were made, bearing the name and often
the portrait of Charles, and these were worn by the royalists. It
appears that this seemed to make the bestowal of memorial rings a more
general custom than before, as from this time an increased number of
such rings appear.

The types of these rings varied considerably in the course of
centuries. Those of the sixteenth century were made of plain gold,
or of gold enamelled with representations of a skeleton, spade and
pick, hour-glass, or similar emblems of death; the inscription was
engraved, usually on the inside of the ring; occasionally the bezel
was rounded into the form of a skull. In the period succeeding the
death of Queen Anne (1714), and extending to about 1774, the fashion
gradually changed, and the inscriptions, instead of being engraved,
were in raised letters, thrown into greater relief by the application
of white and black enamel. This style is said to have been brought
from France, and the earliest specimens are presumed to have been
executed by French workmen; an example of this type of ring, dating
from 1717, is in the Crisp Collection. In one such ring the inscription
is enamelled _within_ the hoop. An exceptionally fine specimen of
the rings of this period is that in memory of Richard Pett, who died
February 23, 1765, aged 76 years.[74] This bears an amethyst and four
rose diamonds in an openwork setting. Another innovation during this
period is the employment of white enamel in the case of rings in memory
of young maidens; the earliest example dates from 1726 and was given as
a memento of the death, at fifteen years, of Dorothy Tenison, daughter
of the Bishop of Ossory. In their search for novelty the goldsmiths
sometimes had resort to rather grewsome decorations, and the bezel
of some rings has the form of a coffin, within which lies a skeleton,
carefully done in enamel.

The last quarter of the eighteenth century supplies us with some of
the most elaborately designed memorial rings. In many of these the
bezel shows various emblematic figures formed of gold wire, seed
pearls, ivory and enamel; one ring of this type has the inscription:
“Heaven has in store what thou hast lost.” However, hair soon became
the favorite material. At first, a lock of hair from the head of the
deceased person was enclosed in the bezel, no attempt being made to
form any pattern; but soon the hair was spread out over the surface and
arranged in the form of a tree; later on, these rings show us an urn
placed beneath the tree, and still later we have in addition a male or
female figure in an attitude of grief, all these being formed entirely
of hair.

A unique ring in the Crisp Collection[75] is a memento of the death of
seven children, the eldest not over nine years, who perished in a fire
in Leadenhall Street, London. This gold and ivory ring bears a design
showing seven cherubs’ heads surrounding the words: “To eternal bliss.”
At the back of the bezel is inscribed: “Translated 18 January 1782.”

As a rule there is little variety in the inscriptions upon memorial
rings. “_Memento mori_,” and “Not lost but gone before” are most
frequent. On the ring of Princess Amelia, the favorite daughter of
George III, who died November 2, 1810, are the words “Remember me.”[76]
There is a touching story regarding this ring. On her death-bed the
princess ordered that it should be made and had a lock of her hair
enclosed in it. As she lay dying she put the ring on her father’s
finger with the words of the inscription. The loss of this dearly
beloved daughter appears to have finally determined the madness of the
unhappy king, for he never recovered his reason after the event.

Another interesting ring is that dedicated to the memory of the rather
notorious Lord Lovat, who was beheaded in London, April 9, 1747, for
alleged complicity in the Jacobite rising of 1745. This is set with
a crystal, beneath which is some hair between two rose diamonds, and
bears Lovat’s last words, the famous line of Horace, “_Dulce et
decorum est pro patria mori_.”[77]

The extravagance and tastelessness shown in many of the more elaborate
forms of the memorial ring, have had the natural result of causing a
reversion to the severe simplicity of the earlier types, and a plain,
but massive gold ring, with the words, “To the memory of ----” became
the usual type.

[Illustration:

1, memorial ring of Charles I, concealed portrait beneath a
table-cut diamond. 2, memorial ring with two skeletons supporting
a sarcophagus. When the lid is raised a minute skeleton is seen
within

Fairholt’s “Rambles of an Artist”]

[Illustration:

1, design for a memorial ring from the “Recueil des Ouvrages
d’Orfevrerie” by Gilles l’Egaré; early part of reign of Louis XIV.
2, English memorial ring converted into a memorial of Charles I by
the following inscription inside the hoop: “C. R., Jan. 30, 1649,
Martyr.” 3, memorial ring, early part of Eighteenth Century

Fairholt’s “Rambles of an Artist”]

[Illustration: Gold memorial ring of Capt. Robert Jackson, died
October 29, 1726, aged fifty-six years

British Museum]

[Illustration:

Cameo portrait of Louis XII of France, cut in a pale ruby. On
the gold plate at the back of the bezel is the inscription: Loys
XII^{me} Roy de France deceda 1 Janvier, 1515. Latter part of
Fifteenth or beginning of Sixteenth Century. Double linear size

C. D. Fortnum’s “Antique Gems and Jewels in Her Majesty’s
Collection at Windsor Castle”]

[Illustration:

Nelson memorial ring. Gold ring with two initial letters: N,
beneath a viscount’s coronet, referring to the title Viscount
Nelson of the Nile; and B, beneath a ducal coronet, for the title
Duke of Bronté

British Museum]

[Illustration:

Napoleon memorial ring of gold, said to be one of six given those
concerned in his escape from Elba in 1815. Portrait concealed
beneath hinged lid

British Museum]

Seven Nelson memorial rings were shown at the Royal Naval Exhibition at
Chelsea in 1891; two of these contained some of the hero’s hair, and
one belonged to those distributed among Nelson’s captains and other
officers after his death. Of the two rings enclosing hair, one set with
a diamond was loaned by Messrs. Lambert & Co. and the other by Admiral
Sir Arthur Farquhar, K.C.B.[78] A fine specimen of a Nelson ring is
in the British Museum. The broad, flat hoop expands at the shoulders,
and in a raised oblong bezel are figured a viscount’s coronet and a
ducal coronet with N beneath the former and B beneath the latter,
indicating his titles Viscount Nelson of the Nile and Duke of Bronté.
Below the letters is the name Trafalgar and on the exterior of the hoop
appears Nelson’s motto “_Palmam qui meruit ferat_” (Let him bear
the palm who merits it).

There is historic record of two memorial rings, one set with an
emerald and the other with a sapphire, the gifts of two unhappy royal
personages made shortly before death. The first of these rings was
bestowed upon the great French preacher Bossuet by the Stuart princess
Henrietta Anne, who, on her death-bed, directed that after she had
gone to rest there should be given to Bossuet “the emerald ring she
had ordered to be made for him.” Of the second ring, that set with
a sapphire, we learn that shortly before her execution in 1587, the
unfortunate Mary of Scotland took it from her finger and sent it to her
faithful follower, Lord John Hamilton, in whose family it has since
then been passed down from generation to generation as a priceless
heirloom.[79]

Several memorial or mourning rings are among the treasures of the
Figdor Collection in Vienna. One of these is of massive silver and
has the Old French inscription: “_dort couat_,” (rest in peace);
it was found at Huy, near Statte, Belgium, and represents work of the
fifteenth century. Another is of enamelled gold, and is evidently for a
woman’s wear. The inscription is: “R. C. Not lost but gone before,” in
gilt letters on a white enamel ground. This is an English ring of about
1800. A German ring of the eighteenth century has its head formed in
the shape of a coffin, on which are skull and cross-bones; on its sides
is the inscription: “Hir ist Ruhe,” (Here is rest). When the lid is
lifted, a heart is disclosed in the coffin.[80]

_Memento mori_ rings, bearing a death’s head, were sometimes left
as legacies. Such was the “golde ringe with a deathe’s head” bequeathed
by Thomasin Heath to her sister in 1596, “for a remembrance of my
good will.” Shakespeare wrote in his Love’s Labour’s Lost (Act V, sc.
2) of “a Death’s face in a ring,” where poor, pedantic Holofernes’
countenance is made the subject of mockery. A rather unaccountable
circumstance is that such rings are asserted to have been worn, toward
the end of the sixteenth century, by professional “ladies light o’
love,” if we can safely generalize from a passage in Marston’s “Dutch
Courtezan.”[81]

The ruthless executions carried out after the suppression of the last
Jacobite revolt in 1745, are memorialized in a ring of the period.
This is of gold, the inscriptions being defined by a white enamel
background. On the panel-shaped bezel are the letters B. D. L. K., the
initials of the Jacobite lords, Balmerino, Kilmarnock (exec. Aug. 18,
1746), Deruentwater (exec. Dec. 8, 1746), and Lovat (exec. April 9,
1747), and the dates 8, DEC. 9, AP. 18, AU; in the middle is an axe and
the date 1746. The initials of seventeen of these lords’ followers,
executed on Kensington Common in the same year, are marked on the hoop
of the ring.[82]

In the possession of Waldo Lincoln, of Worcester, Mass., is a memorial
ring consisting of a narrow plain gold band. There is faintly
discernible on this a winged head, apparently a skull, similar to the
heads of this type sometimes to be seen sculptured on old gravestones.
Around the inner side of the band runs the following inscription:
“Ho^{ble} I. Winslow Esq^r., ob. 14 Dec^r. 1738 Æ 68.”[83] This refers
to Isaac Winslow, a son of the noted Josiah Winslow (1629–1680),
governor of Plymouth Colony from 1673 until his death, and who was the
first native-born governor in New England. It was during his term of
office that the severe contest with the Indians, known as King Philip’s
War, was fought out successfully.

A mourning ring with a strangely materialistic motto is that executed
by order of the Beefsteak Club to commemorate the demise of John
Thornhill, Esq., on September 23, 1757, according to the inscription in
white enamel on the hoop. The bezel is flat and of oval form, enamelled
in pale blue and white; in the centre is shown a gridiron and around
this is the legend: “Beef and Liberty.”[84] The Beefsteak Club, formed
early in the eighteenth century, was Tory in politics, an opponent of
the Kit-Cat Club, whose members were devoted to the success of the
Whigs.

Rings as memorials of the dead suggest the mention of a memorial
ring of another kind, one destined to favor the revival of a defunct
government. When Napoleon I was exiled to Elba after the overthrow of
his empire and the restoration of the Bourbons, many of his faithful
followers clung to the hope that he would return and re-establish his
rule in France. In order to aid in keeping this hope alive, a number
of rings were made which could be worn with impunity, but which could
also serve when desired as proofs of the wearers’ attachment to the
Napoleonic cause. One of these is described as a gold ring on which
a minute gold and enamel coffin was set; on pressing a spring at the
side of the ring a section of the circlet sprang up and revealed a tiny
figure of Napoleon executed in enamel.[85]

At the English Bar, the usage long existed that certain chosen
barristers should be given the title and superior rank of serjeants. In
important cases, a serjeant was usually retained as principal manager
and chief representative at the trial, and generally made the statement
of the case in court, while one or more ordinary barristers got up the
evidence and aided in the examination of witnesses; no serjeants have
been appointed since 1868. As with almost all the stages of an English
law-student’s and barrister’s progress, heavy expenses had to be born
by the new serjeant, as he was expected not only to give a splendid
dinner, or rather a series of dinners lasting for a week, to all who
were closely or distantly related to his preferment, but to bestow a
gold ring upon each one of the numerous guests, these “serjeant rings”
varying in elegance and value according to the rank of the recipient.

So strictly was this purely traditional custom construed that a close
watch was kept to prevent any cheapening of the quality or intrinsic
value of these obligatory rings. As it had been laid down by a leading
authority that the ring to be given to a chief justice, or “chief
baron,” must have the weight of twenty shillings’ worth of gold, a
formal protest was made on one occasion, when rings weighing a tenth
less than this had been bestowed, not, as Lord Chief Justice Kelynge
told the newly appointed serjeants, because of the money value, but
“that it might not be drawn into a precedent.”[86] The average cost of
one of these bestowals of rings has been estimated at about £40 ($200).

The first definite notice of the bestowal of serjeants’ rings comes
from the later years of Elizabeth’s reign, although the usage is
believed to date back at least as far as the time of Henry VI
(1422–1461). The Latin motto on a ring of Sir John Fineux, called in
1485, is “_Suæ quisque fortunæ faber_,” or “Every man is the
artizan of his own fortune.” The mottoes engraved on these rings have
varied from reign to reign. One of Elizabeth’s time bears “_Lex
regis præsidium_” (The Law is the stronghold of the King); under
Charles II the motto was “_Adest Carolus magnus_” (Charles the
Great is with us). Much more dignified and telling is the motto in
James II’s reign, “_Deus, lex, rex_” (God, the Law, the King),
implying that God is the source of the law, and that the law is above
kings. As to the heavy tax sometimes imposed upon a new barrister’s
pecuniary resources, it is stated that on one occasion 1409 rings were
given at an expense of £773 ($3865). The usage, though maintained to a
considerable extent, became somewhat less oppressive toward the end of
the eighteenth century, but even in 1856 rings were given, some of them
bearing the motto “_Cedant arma togæ_” (Arms will give place to
the Gown) in allusion to the approaching peace with Russia after the
Crimean War.[87]

About 1830, when popular feeling was roused to the highest pitch by the
agitation for the repeal of the Corn Laws, many rings were set with the
following stones, the initial letters forming the word “repeal”:

Ruby
Emerald
Pearl
Emerald
Amethyst
Lapis lazuli

An Irishman, who owned such a ring, noted one day that the lapis lazuli
had fallen out, and took the ring to a jeweller in Cork, to have the
missing stone replaced. When the work was completed, the owner, seeing
that the jeweller had set a topaz in place of a lapis lazuli, protested
against the substitution; but the jeweller induced him to accept the
ring as it was, by the witty explanation that it now read “repeat,” and
that if the agitation were often enough repeated, the repeal would come
of itself.[88]

[Illustration: Crossed hands of the figure of a woman upon a
mummy case in the British Museum

Fairholt’s “Rambles of an Artist”]

[Illustration: Hands from portrait of a woman. School of Cranach

British Museum]

[Illustration:

Hindu ring jewel combining a ring for each finger and for the
thumb, a large ornament for the back of the hand, and a bracelet

Barth, “Das Geschmeide”]

[Illustration:

Hands from effigy of Sir Humphrey Stafford’s wife in Bromsgrove
Church, Staffordshire, England. Rings on every finger except on
little finger of right hand. Four of these rings are figured, the
full size of the originals

Fairholt’s “Rambles of an Artist”]

[Illustration: Three rings strung on a necklace. Detail of
portrait of John Constans of Saxony

British Museum]

[Illustration: Right hand from portrait of Benedict von
Hertenstein by Holbein; seal on index finger

Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York]

[Illustration: Hands from Botticini’s “St. Jerome with St.
Damasius and other Saints”

National Gallery, London]

METHODS OF WEARING

A striking illustration of the large number of rings that some of
the noblewomen of ancient Egypt wore on their fingers is given by
the crossed hands of the wooden image on a mummy case in the British
Museum. The left hand is given a decided preference in this respect
over the right, there being no less than nine rings on the former
against but three on the latter. These left-hand rings comprise one
thumb-ring (the signet), three for the index, two for the middle
finger, two for the “ring-finger,” and one for the little finger. The
thumb of the right hand bears a ring and two are on the middle finger.

In the tomb of a king of the Chersonesus, discovered at Nicopolis
in the Crimea, two rings were on the king’s hand and ten on that of
the queen. The style of workmanship indicated that these rings were
productions of the Greek art of the fourth century B.C.,[89] a
period when in the Greek world rings were usually worn more sparingly,
in contrast with the fashion that prevailed during the latter part of
the first Christian century in Rome.

The fine Egyptian collection of the Metropolitan Museum of Art in
New York City offers an illustration of Egyptian ring wearing at the
beginning of our era. This appears in the mummy-case of Artemidora,
daughter of Harpocradorus, who died in her twenty-seventh year. The
wooden case figures the form of the deceased woman. The index, fourth
and little fingers of the left hand, each bear a ring; the fingers of
the right hand have been broken off. The hands are of stucco and the
rings are gilded.

In the Golden Age of Greek gem-engraving, from about 480 B.C.
to 400 B.C., the scarab, never used by the Greeks of Asia
Minor, came into general disuse in the Greek world, and a type of
ring-stone appeared, destined to become very popular. In these the
engraving was often done on the convex side of a scaraboid form, the
convexity having been much flattened out, while with the true scarab
the flat underside bore the engraved design or characters. Occasionally
ring-stones had been originally pierced for suspension. The flattened
scaraboid marked a transition to the flat ring-stones; but few, if
any, examples of these antedate the beginning of the fourth century
B.C.

One of the theories given by Macrobius to explain the wearing of
rings on the fourth finger, attributes this usage to the desire to
guard the precious setting of the ring from injury. He states that
rings were first worn, not for ornament, but for use as signets, and
in the beginning were made exclusively of metal. However, with the
increase of wealth and luxury, precious stones were engraved and set
in the metal ring, and it became necessary to place such a ring on
the best-protected finger. The thumbs were most constantly used; the
index was too exposed; the third finger was too long, and the little
finger too small, while the right hand was much more frequently used
than the left hand. Hence the choice fell upon the fourth finger of
the left hand as the best fitted to receive a precious ring.[90] Pliny
declares that while at first, in the Roman world, the ring was worn on
the fourth finger, as was shown in the statues of the old kings Numa
Pompilius and Servius Tullius, it was later on shifted to the index and
finally to the little finger,[91] this being in accord with our modern
custom, for men’s seal-rings especially.

[Illustration: UPPER PART OF THE MUMMY CASE OF ARTEMIDORA,
DAUGHTER OF HARPOCRADORUS (ABOUT 100 A. D.)

She died at the age of twenty-seven. On the fingers of the left
hand there are three rings; the fingers of the right hand are
broken off. The rings (which are gilded) as well as the hands
themselves are modeled in relief in stucco

Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York City. Gift of J. Pierpont
Morgan, Esq.]

[Illustration: SKETCH KINDLY MADE FOR THE AUTHOR BY SIR CHARLES
HERCULES READ

Curator of the Department of British and Medieval Antiquities and
Ethnography in the British Museum, with his autograph description]

Isidore of Seville, in his brief chapters on rings, cites the words
spoken by Gracchus against Mænius, before the Roman Senate, as a proof
that the wearing of many rings was then considered to be unworthy of
a man. The speaker calls upon his hearers to “look upon the left
hand of this man to whose authority we bow, but who with a woman’s
vanity, is adorned like a woman.” The Bishop of Seville also adduces
the declaration of Crassus who, as an explanation for his wearing two
rings, although an old man, said that he did so in the belief that they
would further increase his already immense wealth.[92] Hence he must
have thought them endowed with some magic power.

One explanation of the greater supply of ancient gems of the period
subsequent to the Augustan Age, as compared with those of an earlier
date, has been found in the increasing popularity of ring-wearing.
Horace (65–8 B.C.) already considers three rings on the hand
as marking the limit of fashionable wear, but Martial (ab. 40–104
A.D.), writing a century later, tells of a Roman dandy who
wore six rings on each finger. As an instance of the multiplication of
seal-rings, Pliny states[93] that the signet proper had to be placed
for safe-keeping in a special receptacle, which was then stamped with
the impression of _another_ seal, lest some improper use should be
made of the signet, the equivalent of an individual signature.[94]

When the usage of wearing rings set with plain or engraved precious
stones became general in Rome, special caskets were made--many of
them of ivory--to contain the rings and other small jewels. The name
_dactyliotheca_, “ring-treasury,” was given to such a casket. The
first Roman to own one was Emilius Scaurus, son-in-law of Sylla (138–78
B.C.), who lived in the early part of the first century before
Christ, but for a long time his example was not followed by the Romans,
the next _dactyliotheca_ to be seen in Rome being that dedicated
by Pompey to the Capitol in 61 B.C., out of the spoils of
Mithridates the Great, who owned the most famous gem collection of his
time.[95] In the first century A.D. these ring-caskets came
into general use, and were regarded as indispensable parts of a rich
man’s luxury. This is brought out in one of Martial’s epigrams when,
after saying that Charmius wore six rings on each finger and kept them
on at night and even when he took his bath, he proceeds: “You ask why
he does so? Because he has no _dactyliotheca_.”[96] This evidently
implies that he lacked one of the elements of Roman “good form” in the
fashionable world.

The Latin epigrammatist whose brief, caustic poems are a mine of
information regarding the customs and costumes of the Romans in the
Imperial age, wrote the following couplet, probably designed for an
inscription upon a _dactyliotheca_, or ring-case:[97]

“Often does the heavy ring slip off the anointed fingers; but if you
confide your jewel to me, it will be safe.”

In the large ring collections of royal treasuries or of wealthy nobles
in mediæval times, the rings with precious-stone settings were often
classified according to the particular stones, and then those of each
of these classes were strung on one or more small sticks or wands
(_bacula_). Among King John’s (1167–1216) jewels in the Tower
of London, an inventory of 1205 lists several such _baculæ_,
one with 26 diamonds, two with 40 and 47 emeralds, respectively,
another shorter one with 7 “good” topazes and still another with 9
turquoises.[98] Jewellers also, were wont to keep their rings strung on
such small rods, an example of this being shown in a portrait depicting
a jeweller, painted by an unknown German artist of the sixteenth or
seventeenth century.

With other royal collections of rings the classified set rings were
kept already in ancient times in _dactyliothecæ_, or ring-caskets,
the term _dactyliotheca_ coming to be used later more broadly as
an equivalent for “ring collection” or even “gem collection.” In 1272
the Crown Jewels of Henry III of England included a number of these
ring boxes, four of them for 106 ruby, or balas-ruby rings, two for
38 emerald rings, one for 20 sapphire rings, and another for 11 topaz
rings and one set with a peridot.[99]

The following description of a jade (nephrite) ringbox of
seventeenth-century Indian workmanship, in the Heber R. Bishop
Collection, is given in one of the great folios treating of these
wonderful jades.[100]

A small covered box of three compartments in the form of three
compressed plums (or similar fruit) held together by the twigs
and leaves of a leafy branch which projects to form a handle, and
hollowed out to form a receptacle for finger-rings, studs or the
like. The box proper is decorated underneath with leaves carved
in slight relief, and is flanged on the edges to receive the
three upper segments of the fruit which forms the cover and are
similarly decorated on top with plum blossoms and held together
by a twig, a leaf, and an upright bud which serves as a handle.
The whole is very daintily cut and polished, and is so thin and of
such translucency that print in contact with it can easily be read
through it. The mineral is remarkably pure and resembles a pale
transparent horn.

While the Greeks and Romans did not usually wear rings on the middle
finger, the Gauls and Britons adorned it in this way. In the sixteenth
century it was customary to assign rings as follows, according to the
quality of the wearer:[101]

To the thumb for doctors.
To the index finger for merchants.
To the middle finger for fools.
To the annular finger for students.
To the auricular finger for lovers.

There is a curious Hindu superstition to the effect that anyone who
wears a ring on the middle finger will probably be attacked and bitten
by a scorpion. For this reason the Hindus are said to avoid wearing any
rings on this finger, although the others are laden with them, each
finger-joint having its special adornment.[102] In the Græco-Roman
world also there was a prejudice against decorating the middle finger
with a ring.

Regarding the liberality with which the Greeks and Romans of the second
century of our era used ring adornments for their fingers, the great
Greek humorist Lucian gives testimony. In his writing entitled “The
Cock,” he makes a character relate a dream in which the dreamer thought
that a rich man had just died and had left him his fortune. Thereupon,
in his dream, he saw himself arrayed in splendid raiment and wearing
_sixteen_ rings on his fingers.[103]

Of the affectations practiced in ring wearing by some _nouveau-riches_
foreigners in Roman times, Juvenal says: When one sees an Egyptian
plebeian, not long before a slave in Canopus, carelessly throwing back
over his shoulder a mantle of Tyrian purple, and seeking to cool his
perspiring fingers by wearing summer-rings of openwork gold, as he
cannot bear the weight of gemmed rings, how can one fail to write it
down in a satire?[104]

Indeed, to judge from the weight and size of some of the rings that
have been preserved from ancient times, this practice was not quite so
foolish as it may seem, for in the moist heat of the dog-day in Rome
such heavy rings may well have been a burden. With the Roman ladies
rings bearing images of the animals worshipped by the Egyptians came
into fashion in Imperial times, favored no doubt by the enthusiastic
worship of Isis and Serapis. Such rings are said to have been worn
almost exclusively by women up to the reign of Vespasian, when men
began to wear them also.[105]

In ancient Rome it was not unusual for the admirer of a philosopher
or a poet to wear his portrait engraved on a ring-stone. One of
the elegies of Ovid[106] (b. 43 B.C.), written during his
banishment from Rome, by order of Augustus, alludes feelingly to this
custom. The poem is addressed to a faithful friend, who wears the
poet’s portrait in his ring, and Ovid says: “In casting your eye upon
this, perhaps you sometimes say, ‘how far away is poor Ovid now!’” He
died in exile in 18 A.D.

So huge were the proportions of the Roman emperor Maximinus (d. 238
A.D.), who rose from the ranks to the imperial dignity, that
he is said to have used his wife’s bracelet for a thumb-ring.[107]
The great size of some of the Roman rings to be seen in collections
indicates that they could only have been worn on the thumb.

One of the fingers of a bronze statue in the British Museum, a Roman
work of the third or fourth century, A.D., has a ring on its
second joint. We are fortunate enough to be able to reproduce here a
full-size drawing of this, courteously made for the present book by
Sir Charles Hercules Read, Curator of the Department of British and
Mediæval Antiquities and Ethnography in the Museum.

In a letter to M. Deloche, the German archæologist Lindenschmit states
that in only one instance was he able to ascertain definitely on
which finger the rings of the early mediæval period were worn. This
concerned a female skeleton, exceptionally well preserved, owing to
favorable conditions of sepulture; on the fourth finger of the right
hand there was a bronze ring. This sepulchre was found at Obermorlen,
in Hessen-Darmstadt. Researches in France have furnished confirmation
of this. In the Merovingian cemetery of Yeulle (dept. Pas-de-Calais) a
woman’s ring was found on the right hand of the skeleton, as was also
the case with two rings in the Visigothic and Merovingian cemetery at
Herpes (dept. Charente), and this proved to be the case with almost
all the early medieval rings found in this region. On the contrary, M.
Albert Béquet, Curator of the Archæological Museum of Namur, and the
French archæologist, M. L. Pilloy, report the discovery of rings placed
upon the left hand. As a possible explanation of these contradictory
results, the opinion has been advanced that the rings on the right hand
were wedding rings, and those on the left, rings worn for ornament,
as there is good evidence that at an early period among the Gauls the
betrothal ring was put on the right hand, not on the left.[108]

The portrait by Coello of Maria of Austria, daughter of Charles V of
Germany, shows on the fourth finger of the left hand a ring set with a
large table-cut stone, which may be a ruby, or else a rather dark-hued
spinel. The right hand is gloved, the parts of the glove covering the
index and fourth fingers having slits so as to give space for the rings
on those fingers. There is an elaborate girdle of table-cut stones, a
richly worked cross with three pendent pear-shaped pearls is suspended
from a gauze scarf about the neck, splendid pearl earrings hang from
the ears, and the coiffure is surmounted by a head ornament set with
precious stones and pearls.

In a three-quarter length portrait of Henry VIII, painted by Hans
Holbein in 1540, when the king was in his forty-sixth year, he is
represented wearing three rings on his hands, two of these, set with
square-cut stones, are on the index fingers of the right and left hand,
respectively. The third and smaller ring, also set with a square-cut
stone, is on the little finger of the king’s left hand. There is an
intentional harmony in the jewelling, for stones of the same form,
alternating with pearls, adorn the collar suspended from Henry’s neck
and serve also as decoration for the sleeve-guards. This portrait is in
the Reale Galleria d’Arte Antica, Rome.

Princess Mary, daughter of Henry VIII and Catherine of Aragon, and
afterwards Queen of England (1553–1558), is portrayed in a painting in
the University Galleries, Oxford, by an unknown artist, as wearing, in
addition to many fine pearls both round and pear-shaped, three rings,
one on the index, another on the middle finger, and the third on the
fourth finger of the left hand. That on the middle finger is set with
a pearl, and the ring-adornment of this finger is quite worthy of note
because of the comparative rarity of this setting.

A large pear-shaped pearl, figured on a portrait of “Bloody Mary,” was
given to her by Philip of Spain, who afterward took it back to Spain
with him. It later came into the possession of Jerome Bonaparte, who
gave it to Queen Hortense. She gave it to the young prince, who later
became Napoleon III, and he, in turn, disposed of it to the Duke of
Abercorn, in whose possession it now remains. Allison V. Armour, Esq.,
to whom it was shown in Ireland by the Duke, at the time of an expected
visit from King Edward, told the author it was very interesting to note
that it had apparently preserved all its original lustre.

[Illustration: PORTRAIT OF A LADY, BY ANTON VAN DYKE (1599–1641)

The thumb ring on the right hand, and the ring on the index
of the left hand, are both set with square-cut stones, the
last-named probably a ruby

Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York. Marquand Gift, 1888]

[Illustration: PRINCESS HATZFELD, BY ANTONIO PESARO (1684–1757)

Large pearl cluster on little finger of right hand

Catholina Lambert Collection sold at American Art Galleries, New
York, February, 1916]

The adornment with a ring of the second phalanx of the right-hand
middle finger, appears in the fine portrait, said to be that of Mary
Stuart, in the Prado Gallery, Madrid; the little finger of the same
hand shows a stone-set ring, worn as usual. Over the elaborately
embroidered bodice hangs a neck-ornament, at the different sections
of which are groups of three pearls, and there are pearl earrings
in the ears, as well as groups of pearls in the head-ornament. The
portrait is listed as a production of the French School, but is of
doubtful authenticity as a likeness of the unhappy queen.

The Italian fashion of ring-wearing in the sixteenth century is
illustrated by the portrait of a noblewoman by Lorenzo Lotto, in the
Galleria Carrara at Bergamo, Italy. On the right hand are two rings, on
the fourth and little finger respectively; the left hand bears three,
one on the index, apparently set with an engraved gem, and two on the
fourth finger, the larger of which seems to have as setting a pointed
diamond, while the smaller one, possibly bearing a little facetted
diamond, is on the second phalanx of the finger, a fashion sometimes
followed instead of wearing the two rings together, one directly over
the other, on the third phalanx.

A fine example of a pearl-cluster ring is to be seen in the portrait
of Princess Hatzfeldt by the artist Antonio Pesaro (1684–1757). The
ring, worn on the little finger, has a large centre-pearl surrounded by
five smaller ones, the whole constituting a rather inconveniently large
jewel, although unquestionably a very beautiful one. It appears to be
the only ring worn by the fair princess when posing for her portrait.

Finger rings were sometimes worn suspended from the neck, usually
strung on a chain. This custom is testified to by several old
portraits, among them by one of the Elector John Constans of Saxony,
in the Collection of Prince George of Saxony, Dresden, and also in
several of Lucas Cranach’s portraits. In one of the latter, depicting
an elderly and hard-featured Dutch lady, eight rings are to be seen
strung on a chain or band below the collar. As the sitter’s hands are
adorned with five rings, her object may rather have been to display
all her choicest rings, than to wear them as amulets, although this
superstitious use is generally believed to be the true explanation of
wearing finger-rings suspended from the neck. Sometimes a single ring
was hung from the neck on a long string, and rings were occasionally
worn attached to a hat or cap, as shown in the portrait of Bernhard
IV, Margrave of Baden (1474–1536), by Hans Baldung Grien, in the
Pinakothek, Munich.[109]

The painting of hands adorned with one or more rings, was not favored
by several of the portraitists of the seventeenth century. Few if
any rings, for example, can be found on the delicately shaped hands
of any of Sir Peter Lyly’s beauties, hands undoubtedly lacking in
individuality and conforming to a preconceived type. Vandyke’s usage
in this respect varied, probably, with the taste of the respective
sitters, although the frequent absence of rings might lead to the
inference that he did not favor them in portraits. The great masters of
the sixteenth century certainly gave no evidence of any such prejudice,
their realism and their fondness for rich ornament and color causing
them to adorn the hands of their subjects, both men and women, with
valuable and finely wrought rings. With eighteenth century painters,
the tendency to discard rings was very pronounced, as indicated by
their sparing appearance in portraits of this period.

It may be interesting to note the distribution of the rings in
seventeen portraits of the Blakeslee Collection, disposed of in New
York City, March, 1916, and representing a kind of average for the
period from the latter part of the sixteenth century to the beginning
of the nineteenth century:

Right Hand Left Hand
Index finger, 7 Index finger, 4
Middle finger, 1 Middle finger, 0
Fourth finger, 7 Fourth finger, 7
Little finger, 1 Little finger, 6

Thus the index and fourth fingers of the right hand and the fourth and
little fingers of the left hand are almost equally favored.

An oil-portrait of the Mahârânî of Sikkim, painted in 1908 by Damodar
Dutt, a Bengali artist, shows this queen decked out with all her
favorite jewel adornments; among them are two gold rings, one set
with a turquoise and the other with a coral, on the middle and fourth
fingers of the left hand (see Frontispiece). The right hand is
concealed in a fold of her mantle, but had there been any rings on
it, it would probably have been displayed, to judge from the variety
of the ornaments she was pleased to wear at the sittings. She is a
full-blooded Tibetan princess, was born in 1864, and became the second
wife of the King of Sikkim in 1882, so that she was forty-four years
old when the portrait was painted. At this time she and her husband had
been held in captivity by the British since 1893. The singular crown
is the one adopted by the queens of Sikkim. It is composed of broad
bandeaux of pearl, turquoise and coral; the gold earrings are inlaid
with turquoise in concentric rings; the necklace has large amber balls,
and suspended from it is a _gau_ or charm-box, set with rubies,
lapis lazuli and turquoise; on the wrist is a triple bracelet of
corals.[110]

In the opinion of J. Alden Wier, President of the Academy of Design,
New York City, rings can scarcely be regarded as in any sense important
accessories of a good portrait, as this does not depend upon the
elaboration of such detail. With Popes and Doges, and with some of the
higher ecclesiastics, however, rings are significant as insignia of
office, and are therefore depicted as marks of individuality.[111]

A fifteenth century example of a thumb ring was found in England at
Saxon’s Lode, a little south of Upton. The material was of silver,
either considerably alloyed, or else plated with a baser metal. In
seventeenth century times in England the wearing of such rings was
favored by many of the richer, or more prominent citizens, so that they
served to differentiate the wearer from those less well-to-do, although
he might not have the right to a crest or coat-of-arms. A character in
one of the Lord Mayor’s shows given in the reign of Charles II (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,” like
Falstaff’s alderman.[112]

[Illustration: Two wire rings from a tumulus near Canterbury,
Kent, England, one with a bezel effect

Fairholt’s “Rambles of an Artist”]

[Illustration: Two Anglo-Saxon rings found near Preston,
Lancashire, England, in 1840

Fairholt’s “Rambles of an Artist”]

[Illustration: Silver thumb ring found at Saxon’s Lode, England.
“Fifteenth Century Archæologia,” vol. iii, p. 268]

[Illustration: Silver-gilt ring, with broad, flat hoop, and
rectangular bezel set with a carbuncle

British Museum]

[Illustration: Ring of mixed metal set with engraved stone
showing a monkey looking into a mirror

Fairholt’s “Rambles of an Artist”]

[Illustration: 1, thumb-ring; two cockatrices engraved in relief
on agate. 2, ring set with Gnostic gem

Fairholt’s “Rambles of an Artist”]

[Illustration: Two gold rings. 1, with high circular bezel;
Frankish (?); Sixth or Seventh Century; 2, with pyramidal bezel;
Lombardic (?); Seventh Century

British Museum]

[Illustration: Agate ring with a Runic inscription. Late Saxon

British Museum]

[Illustration: Massive gold ring with two bezels, one engraved
with circular design of interlacing curves, the other with three
interlaced triangles. Late Saxon

British Museum]

Even native African potentates could boast of fine jewelled rings in
the seventeenth century. When an embassy of Hollanders came to visit
the christianized King of the Congo in 1642, and were ushered into his
presence, they found him vested in a coat and drawers of gold-cloth,
and adorned with three heavy gold chains. On his right thumb was “a
very large Granate or Ruby Ring, and on his left hand two great
Emeralds.”[113] The red stone was almost certainly a large cabochon-cut
garnet, and it is very doubtful that the green stones were genuine
emeralds.

Under the strict discipline of the Catholic rulers of Poland the
wearing of rings was for a long time forbidden to the Jews. This
restriction was removed in the reign of Sigismund Augustus (1506–1548),
but the permissive decree required that a Jewish ring must bear the
distinguishing inscription “Sabbation,” or “Jerusalem.” The Jews
themselves sometimes enacted rigid sumptuary laws as to rings, for
instance in Bologna, where a convocation of rabbis decided that men
should be confined to one ring, while women were not to be allowed to
wear more than three.[114] At a later period a Frankfort convocation
decreed that no young girl should be permitted to wear a ring. Not
improbably the natural fondness of the Hebrew women for rich jewels,
a fondness already emphasized by the prophet Isaiah (chap. iii, vs.
16–26) in the case of the Daughters of Jerusalem in the eighth century
B.C., may have led to an excessive use of fine rings. Indeed
any strict sumptuary regulation always implies the existence of an
undue degree of luxury in the usages that are subjected to legal
restraint.

A unique collection of ring stones may be seen in the American Museum
of Natural History, New York. These are oval, domed stones, about one
inch long, and are all cut so as to fit a single setting. They were
gathered together by an old gentleman in the seventeenth century, so
that without changing the gold ring to which he was accustomed, he
could vary the color of the precious stones, thus bringing them into
harmony with that of the waistcoat he was wearing. As there are two
hundred and forty of these specially-cut stones, the waistcoats must
have represented the whole gamut of colors and shades. A few of the
stones are capped with a different gem. This collection was presented
to the Museum in January, 1873, by the late Samuel P. Avery, Esq.

There is also in the Museum a remarkable collection of rings begun in
the eighteenth century by a Viennese imperial and royal jeweller named
Türk, and continued by his grandson up to 1860. It was later acquired
by J. Pierpont Morgan, Esq. The settings of the seventy rings comprise
a variety of colored diamonds, as well as emeralds, sapphires, and a
number of uncommon stones.

FORMS OF RINGS AND MATERIALS OF WHICH THEY ARE MADE

Among ancient gold rings, one of Egyptian workmanship is especially
noteworthy for its size and weight as well as for its design. It is ½
inch in its largest diameter, and bears an oblong plinth, which turns
on a pivot; it measures 6/10 inch at its greatest, and 4/10 inch at its
least breadth. On one of the four faces is the name of the successor
of Amenhotep III, Amenhotep IV (Akhenaten), who lived about 1400
B.C.; on another is figured a lion, with the inscription “lord
of strength”; the two remaining sides show a scorpion and a crocodile
respectively. The weight of this massive ring is stated to be about
five ounces and its intrinsic gold value nearly a hundred dollars.[115]

Some remarkably fine finger-rings were among the ornaments found by
Ferlini, an Italian physician, when he unearthed the treasure of one of
the queens of Meroë. These rings are now in the Berlin Royal Museum.
Some of them are plain hoops to which movable plates are attached;
others are signet rings. In a few specimens of the first-named
class the plate is so large as to extend over three fingers, the
inconvenience to which this could give rise being partly obviated by
joints in the plate, so that the fingers might be moved with greater
facility. We hardly think that a design of this type is ever likely to
become popular in our times.

Scarabs strung on wire so as to be worn on the finger were found at
Dahshur by De Morgan. These belonged to the Twelfth Dynasty, to the
time from Usertasen III to Amenemhat III (ab. 2660–2578 B.C.).
Stronger wire was used at a later time, the ends being thrust into
perforations on the sides of the scarabs. In all these cases the scarab
and the circlet, more or less well formed, were separate parts loosely
put together. It was not until the Golden Age of the ancient Egyptian
civilization that complete metal rings were made, in which both circlet
and chaton formed one piece. Rings of the Egyptian type, although
strongly modified by Ionic or Phœnician art, were introduced into
Etruria at a very early period, and probably thence into Latium.[116]
At an even earlier date, at least 1200 B.C., scarab rings were
worn in Cyprus, several examples having been found in sepulchres there,
the scarab being made of porcelain strung on a gold-wire hoop.

The ancient rings in the British Museum offer examples of nearly
all the different types favored in early times.[117] Some, from the
Mycenæan period, exhibit a long shield-shaped bezel, convex above and
concave beneath, across the direction of the hoop; others have a flat
band decorated with plaited or twisted wire on which is set a bezel
holding a paste. Phœnician rings of the period from 700 to 500 B.C.
present a variety of forms, some being swivel rings, the extremities of
the rounded hoops passing into beads, in which are inserted the pivots
of a scarab-setting; another type has elliptical hoops, either plain or
ornamental, the scarab being in a filigree-decorated bezel; in still
another, the lower part of the hoop is twisted into a loop, so that the
ring can be worn suspended; there are also some plain, flat or rounded
hoops, sometimes with the ends overlapping.

The Greek and Hellenistic periods, from the sixth to the second century
B.C., furnish a large variety of forms, some copied or adapted
from earlier ones and then independently developed. A rounded hoop
tapering upward, with ornamental extremities, occasionally appears in
fine examples, the ends of the hoop representing the lions’ masks; the
bezels are frequently of oval shape, and the shoulders of the hoop
are often nearly straight; in another type while the outside of the
hoop is rounded, the inside is facetted; sometimes there is a high
convex bezel, bevelled underneath. There are still a few swivel rings
with scaraboids. In the Hellenistic period appear massive gold rings
with square-cut shoulders and raised oval settings, in which a convex
stone is placed. Still another type is an expanding hoop formed of two
overlapping ribbons and with a convex bezel.

Etruscan rings assume various characteristic and peculiar forms, many
of which are found among the Roman rings of a later period, indicating
the derivation from the Etruscans of ring-wearing among the Romans.
One of these in the British Museum has a broad hoop ending in convex
shields, a scarab being pivoted in the terminals; in others, the hoop
is hollow, terminating in cylindrical ornaments, between these a scarab
revolves on a wire swivel. A peculiar example has a grooved hoop, the
ends being convex disks, in which is pivoted a scarab. One of these
Etruscan rings has a very large convex oval bezel, around the slope of
which run a series of embossed figures.

As an example of Roman art found in Egypt, we have a spiral ring of
serpent form, either extremity terminating in a bust, of Isis and
Serapis respectively. The conjecture has been made that this ring,
and others of the type, may have been intended to figure the reigning
emperor and empress of Rome under the types of Isis and of Serapis,
the latter a Græco-Egyptian divinity as worshipped in Alexandria and
in the Roman world, though having a distinctly Egyptian form in the
national pantheon as Asar-Hapi, or Osiris-Apis. The rings of the type
described have the advantage of being easily adapted to a finger of any
size, since pressure at both extremities would enlarge the girth of the
single spiral.[118]

In his Etymologiæ, Isidore of Seville defines three of the types of
rings worn in ancient times, the _ungulus_, the _Samothracius_ and
the _thynnius_.[119] The _ungulus_ was set with a gem and owed its
designation to the fancy that the stone was as closely attached to
the gold of the ring as a human nail (_ungulus_) was to the flesh
of the finger. The Samothracian ring was of gold, but had an iron
setting. Lucretius in the sixth book of his great philosophic and
scientific poem, “De Natura Rerum,” in speaking of the magnet to
which he attributes negative and positive powers, of repulsion and of
attraction, relates that when, in an experiment, Samothracian rings
were placed in a brazen dish beneath which a piece of magnetic iron
was moved to and fro, he had seen the rings leap up, as though to flee
from an enemy. The third type of ring was the _thynnius_, the name
indicating, according to Isidore, that it was made in Bithynia, called
at an earlier time, Thynna. Horace writes, in one of his odes, of rings
“chased by a Thynnian graver.”

Of the key-shaped rings, several specimens of which have been preserved
from Roman times, it has been suggested that the key projection was
intended to serve as a guard for an exceptionally long finger-nail,
similar to the finger-guards the Chinese wear for a like purpose. The
fact that many of these key-rings are evidently too large to have been
worn on the finger, makes it not improbable that the ring form was
arbitrarily chosen, and that they may have been carried suspended from
a girdle. Some of them, however, might have fitted on a very stout
thumb, and a few of the rings of this type do not exceed the ordinary
finger-ring in diameter.[120]

One of the large and unwieldly Roman rings, or at least a ring made
on this model, bears a bust said to be that of Plotina, the wife of
Trajan. This was in the collection of Monsignor Piccolomini. The
extraordinarily elaborate coiffure shows three rows of facetted gems,
and this alone may be considered to testify against the antiquity of
the ring. Still, even as a production of the Renaissance period, the
fact that it at least figures an ancient form makes it an object of
interest and of a certain archæological value.[121]

It was in the late Republican, and especially in the Imperial age in
Rome, that the greatest variety of ring forms were produced, originally
influenced by the earlier Etruscan art, and later largely by the
extraordinary eclectic art of Alexandria, where the combination of
Egyptian, Oriental and Greek elements brought forth many peculiar
forms, some of which are noted elsewhere. A Romano-Egyptian ring has a
flat hoop, sub-angular on the outside, the large circular bezel being
engraved with three figures of divinities. Then there are the composite
rings, sometimes having as many as four hoops, joined together at the
back of the bezel. A striking type is the penannular ring in the form
of a coiled serpent, or else having at each extremity the head of a
serpent. In another form the bezel is lozenge-shaped.

There are also massive rings with an elliptical hoop and thick
projecting shoulders, the setting being depressed; sometimes the
shoulders slope sharply up to the bezel, forming a decided angle on the
hoop. Hoops polygonal on the outside and circular within also occur.
Some twin rings were made adapted to fit on two fingers of the hand;
in one of these are three cup settings holding garnets, one on the top
of each hoop and one between the hoops. In some instances the hoops of
these twin rings were not closely joined to each other, but connected
by a short gold chain, so that the rings could either be worn on a
single finger, or on two fingers.

[Illustration: Gold ring with plain hoop on which is freely
looped a little mouse wrought in gold and white enamel. It slips
around the hoop. About 1600

Albert Figdor Collection, Vienna]

[Illustration: Gold ring of Venetian workmanship. The ends of the
hoop form monsters’ heads, supporting a bezel formed like the
petal of a flower. XIV Cent.

British Museum]

[Illustration: HAND OF A JEWELER, HOLDING A _BACULA_ WITH
FIVE RINGS

British Museum]

[Illustration: Gold ring set with an amethyst. Found at Lorsch,
Grand Duchy of Hesse-Darmstadt, and hence called the “Lorscher
Ring.” German; end of Tenth or beginning of Eleventh Century.

Grossherzoglich-Hessisches Museum, Darmstadt]

[Illustration: Silver ring having projecting bezel in form of a
spur with revolving rowel. Italian (?), Fourteenth or Fifteenth
Century

British Museum]

[Illustration: “Regard ring,” with seven hoops. The initials of
the six stones spell the word “regard”

British Museum]

[Illustration: Rings of modern Egyptian type. 1, woman’s ring;
hoop of twisted gold; 2, man’s ring made by silversmith of Mecca,
with stone setting; 3, cast silver ring; stone setting; with
guards

Fairholt’s “Rambles of an Artist”]

[Illustration: Pipe stopper ring. A silver ring on which are
set three Indian, rose-cut zircons. This ring was placed on
the finger and the tobacco in the bowl of the pipe was pressed
down with it. French; about 1750. A similar ring was figured by
Hogarth in one of his illustrations

Field Museum, Chicago]

Many of the hoops of the later Roman rings were elaborately decorated,
either in openwork, with spirals in wire, or with beads on the
shoulders; this latter type is, however, more probably of Merovingian
times. A Roman polygonal hoop, with a high-set bezel, has on the side
of this loops for carrying a string of pearls suspended from the ring.
In one of the rings specially designed for insetting with engraved
gems, the hoop, rounded on the outer side, has shoulders ending in
curling leaves. A curious specimen is a plain hoop broadening in an
oval bezel; in this has been inserted an intaglio head in sard, the
shape of the stone following the exact outline of the head, without any
margin.

A Burgundian ring of a form that M. Deloche believes to be unique, has
an open hoop. At one extremity is a nail-shaped attachment which can
be passed through the other extremity, thus closing the ring. A bronze
ring, also Burgundian, of a rare or unique type has at the bezel a
high, oblong projection. Both these rings are of the Merovingian period
which closed in 752 A.D.[122]

In no period were a greater number of ring forms produced than in
the Middle Ages. The major part of these mediæval rings were made as
insignia of office or rank, for sealing official documents, or for
ceremonial use. One of the earliest is that known as the Lorscher
Ring.[123] It is considered to belong to the end of the tenth,
or the beginning of the eleventh century, and to be a product of
German workmanship under the influence of the Byzantine art of the
Merovingian period. The artistic and finely executed design of the
bezel is especially worthy of admiration. The stone set therein is a
light-colored amethyst cut _en cabochon_ and without foil. This
ring is now in the Grossherzoglich-Hessisches Museum in Darmstadt.

The Besborough Collection of Gems, shown in June, 1861, by the
Archæological Institute of London, was interesting for the high
artistic excellence of the rings in which many of the gems were set. A
number of them rank among the finest examples of Renaissance work in
this direction. One, set with a sard in which a head of Lucilla has
been engraved, shows, carved in flat relief on the gold hoop, two
nude figures bearing in their hands torches, the design continuing
completely around the hoop; about the figures are doves and flowers.
This beautiful specimen of goldsmiths’ work belongs to the first half
of the sixteenth century. The pose of the small figures has been
wonderfully adapted to the curve of the ring.[124]

To a special class has been given the name “iconographic rings,” this
designates those bearing, either on the bezel or the sides, images of
the Virgin and Child or of the saints. These rings, which date from a
period running from 1390 to about 1520, are peculiar to England and
Scotland. The material is either gold or silver, those of the latter
metal showing much ruder workmanship than was devoted to the gold
rings.[125]

What must have been regarded in its time as an exceptionally ornate
ring is listed in an inventory of 1416. It is described as a gold ring
having a helmet and a shield made of a sapphire, the shield bearing the
arms of “Monseigneur.” As supports of the shield were an emerald bear
and a swan made of a white chalcedony.[126]

An ornate though tasteless type of Italian rings were those called
“giardinetti,” showing flower baskets, jardiniêres, or nosegays,
the flowers being figured by precious stones and pearls, with stems
and leaves of gold. As the aim was purely decorative, the stones
and pearls were usually small and inexpensive ones. Very few such
rings have been made in recent times, but from the sixteenth to
the eighteenth century they were much favored and a number of fine
specimens have been preserved from that period.[127]

A ring-setting consisting of a turquoise surrounded by small diamonds
appears to have been favored in England in the seventeenth century, for
Samuel Pepys in his “Diary,” under date of February 18, 1668, writes
that he had been shown a “ring of a Turkey-stone, set with little
sparks of diamonds.”

A “Trinity Ring,” that is a ring consisting of three intertwined
circlets, was shown in February, 1857, to the Society of Antiquaries in
London by Mr. Octavius Morgan. This specimen, carved, or turned out of
a circular band of ivory, was believed to be one of three executed by
the German ivory carver, Stephan Zick (1639–1715), who is said to have
been the first to make a ring of this type out of ivory, although they
may have been made of gold--no exceptionally difficult task--before
Zick executed his ivory rings.[128] This ring, or one similar to it, is
now in the British Museum, Franks Bequest.

While the rings of the Louis Quinze period were generally of delicate
and beautiful form, the tendency to exaggeration in fashions that
characterized the succeeding Louis Seize period found expression in
rings of disproportionate size. At the same time both the number of
rings in a fine lady’s jewel casket, and the number she would wear at
the same time upon her hand, greatly increased over what was customary
in the preceding reign. Thus Bachaument, in his “Mémoires Secrets,”
states that at the sale of Mlle. de Beauvoisin’s jewels, which took
place November 22, 1784, there were 200 rings rivalling one another in
magnificence. Another French author of this time, M. Mercier, wrote
in 1782 “when one takes the hand of a pretty woman, one only has the
sensation of holding a quantity of rings and angular stones, and it
would be necessary first to strip these off the hand before we could
perceive its form and delicacy.”

The enthusiasm of the early days of the Revolution brought into vogue
rings set with a little fragment of the stone-work of the recently
demolished Bastille; at the same time wedding-rings were enamelled in
red, white and blue, the new Republican colors. At the outset the young
royalists, as a protest, wore rings of tortoise-shell, with the motto,
Domine salvum fac regem, “God save the King.”

A type of ring that became popular during the darkest days of the
French Revolution, the period of the dreadful Reign of Terror, was that
of a large silver hoop with a plain gold bezel on which was graven the
head of some one of the leading spirits of the time, such as Marat, De
Chalier, or De Lepelletier St.-Fargeau.

There are several significant French proverbs regarding rings, of
which we may here note the following: “_Ne mets pas ton doigt en
anneau trop étroit_” (Do not put your finger in too small a ring);
“_Anneau en main, honneur vain_” (A ring on the finger is an empty
honor); “_Bague d’amie porte envie_” (The ring of a lady friend
arouses envy).

Portrait rings were very popular at the time of the French Revolution,
as they afforded an opportunity for the expression of the ardent
devotion to particular personalities characteristic of that troublous
period. Many Washington rings and Robespierre rings were to be seen,
bearing the enamelled portrait of the respective hero, but the most
popular were the Franklin rings, for Franklin’s personal influence,
born of his sterling qualities of insight and common sense, and perhaps
strengthened by the contrast of his cool-headedness with the feverish
excitement of the Paris of that time, was wide and far-reaching.

Hindu tradition tells of the wearing of rings in India in very ancient
times. The earliest forms used by the Brahmans in their forest life,
were woven of _kusa_-grass (_Saccharum spontaneum_), and
even in our time rings of this kind are worn by those assisting at a
religious ceremony, as otherwise the water offered to gods or to the
spirits of ancestors will not be accepted. As to metal rings, Hindu
law assigns those of gold to the index finger and silver rings to the
fourth finger.

A story related in the Hindu epic “Mahabharata” alludes to a trick or
magic practice with rings, denominated _ishika_. A ring was thrown
into a deep well and then recovered in some mysterious way after it had
seemed to be irrevocably lost. The “Mahabharata” in its present form
may date from about 500 A.D. The other great Hindu epic, the
Ramayana of Valmiki, written perhaps as early as 500 _B.C._ even
mentions engraved rings. When Sita, wife of Rama, the hero of the poem,
is abducted by Rávana, the ten-headed Cinghalese giant, Rama sends a
monkey called Hanumán to seek for her, giving him a seal ring as a
token. As soon as the monkey succeeds in finding Sita, he approaches
her holding out the ring and saying, “Gracious Lady, I am the messenger
of Rama. Look, here is his ring engraved with his name.”

In Sanskrit books the following types and kinds of rings are
mentioned:[129]

_Dwi-hirak_ (double diamond).--Rings with a diamond on either
side and a sapphire in the centre.

_Vajra_ (diamond, thunderbolt).--A triangular finger
ornament, with a diamond in the centre and other stones on the
sides.

_Ravimandal._--A ring with diamonds on the sides and other
stones in the middle.

_Nandyávarrta._--A four-sided finger ornament studded with
precious stones.

_Nava-ratna_ or _Navagraha_.--A ring on which the
nine most precious stones have been set. The nine precious
stones in Sanskrit are called: _Hirak_, _Nánikya_,
_Baiduryya_, _Muktá_, _Gomed_, _Bidrum_
or _Prabál_, _Marakata_, _Pushpa-rág_, and
_Indranil_; or the Diamond, Ruby, Cat’s-eye, Pearl, Zircon,
Coral, Emerald, Topaz, and Sapphire.

_Bajra-beshtak._--Ring of which the upper circumference is
set with diamonds.

_Trihirak_ (triple diamond).--Ring with two small diamonds on
the sides and a big one in the centre.

_Sukti-mudriká._--Ring made like the hood of a cobra snake,
with diamonds and precious stones on the upper surface.

_Mudrá_ or _Anguli-mudrá_.--Ring with name engraved upon
it.

These are some of the principal names for finger rings in modern
India:

_Angushtri._--A ring set with stones, called also
_Mundri_ or _Anguthi_.

_Chhallá._--The _chhallá_ is a quite plain hoop or whole
hoop ring (with or without stones), being gold or silver, but the
same all round. Worn also on the toes.

_Angushtárá_ or _Anguthá_.--A big ring with a broad
face, worn on the great toe.

_Khari panjángla._--A set of finger rings of ordinary shape.

_Sháhálami_ or _Khári_.--A ring of long oval shape.

_Birhamgand._--A broad ring.

In Bombay, the local designations for finger rings are:
_Angthi_, _Salle_, _Mohorechi Angthi_ and
_Khadyachya angthya_; toe-rings are named: _Ranajodvi_,
_Jodvi_, _Phule_, _Gend_, and _Masolia_.[130]

[Illustration: Oriental gold ring, large globular bezel with
leaves and flowers in openwork. Said to have belonged to Chief
Samory

British Museum]

[Illustration: Oriental rings. 1, of cast silver; 2, of brass; 3,
of silver; 4–6, Moorish rings; 4, set with turquoise and rubies;
5, with octagonal bloodstone and turquoise; 6, signet-ring
bearing name of owner on a carnelian

Fairholt’s “Rambles of an Artist”]

[Illustration: 1, ring with pendent garnets; 2, silver ring. East
Indian. The loose-hung silver drops jingle as the hand moves

Fairholt’s “Rambles of an Artist”]

[Illustration: Elaborate East Indian ring, with figure of Buddha.
Hoop of peculiar shape to keep the ring from falling off the
finger

Courtesy of Miss Helen Bainbridge]

[Illustration: Rings made by Siamese Bonza, or Priest, from metal
lying about among the idols at Ongchor, Old Cambodia, in 1871

Courtesy of Mr. Walter C. Wyman]

Rings, necklaces, armlets and _Sirpech_ (or tiaras) are made at
Bikánir, and exquisitely light and fine rings of gold and silver are
produced at Jhánsi in the Gwalior territory. An unusual form of ring
ornamentation appears in a silver ring of Indian workmanship, dated in
the fourteenth or fifteenth century. This has a projecting bezel in
the form of a spur, with a revolving swivel. A ring of similar design,
believed to be Venetian, now in the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, was
brought from Chalis.[131]

The rings made by the Hindu goldsmiths are in many cases very
elaborately chased and ornamented, in the ornate style characteristic
of Indian jewellery. The women of the Deccan almost universally wear
rings; they are usually of gold, a silver ring being looked upon as
showing meanness on the part of the wearer. There does not appear to be
any preference of one finger over the other for decoration with rings.
One of the most attractive types is a closely-fitting ring to which is
affixed a little mirror, about the size of a silver quarter-dollar;
this may be mounted either in gold or silver, and undoubtedly Hindu
female vanity finds this thumb mirror of some practical use. With
its rich ornamentation a ring of this kind is in itself a pretty
jewel, but would hardly suit Occidental taste on account of its size
and the inconvenience of wearing it. A rather singular fact is that
mirror-rings are sometimes worn on the great toe, where they would seem
to be quite useless; but it has been suggested that as the Hindu women
of the better class commonly have their feet nearly or quite bare when
in their apartments, and have acquired the power to move and use their
feet much more freely than is the case with Occidentals, a toe mirror
might possibly be of some slight utility; still, it seems probable that
they are purely ornamental and came into fashion in imitation of the
thumb-mirrors. Many varieties of toe-rings are made, a special type
being that for wear on the middle toe.[132]

A ring of an unusual form is worn on the great toe of the left foot
by some Hindu married women, as a distinguishing mark of the married
state. Men frequently wear a ring on the big toe for curative purposes,
or to augment their masculine vigor. These toe-rings of the men are not
generally closed circles, but open hoops, so that they can be easily
removed when this is desirable.[133]

[Illustration: INDIAN TOE RINGS OF SILVER, MADRAS PRESIDENCY

1, three views of ring worn on second and third toes of the left
foot; the conventional fish is an emblem of Siva 2, 3, 4, other
toe rings

Journal of Indian Art and Industry, vol. v, 1894]

[Illustration: RICH CINGHALESE MERCHANT, IN GALA DRESS

The immense, round ring on the little finger of his right hand is
a favorite adornment in Ceylon; smaller rings are on the fourth
finger of right hand, and on the little finger of left hand]

The art of the Persian goldsmith in the fifteenth century is
displayed in a ring belonging to one of the splendid collections of
the Metropolitan Museum of Art, in New York. It is of massive form
with an immense bezel, richly decorated in openwork; the hoop is
also elaborately chased. The flat surface of the bezel is adorned
with a design in keeping with the ornamentation of its sides and of
the hoop. For a large and massive ring this one is remarkably
well-proportioned and harmonious in design.

A good specimen of the rings worn on state occasions by East Indian
princes was sold in February, 1913, at the American Art Galleries. It
is of gold, but bears no precious stones; the circlet is ornamented
with white enamelled crocodiles, and also with a minute enamelled
figure, within a temple and incased in glass; the bezel of this ring is
decorated in blue, green and red enamel.

While the simpler Chinese rings as a general rule are unset, usually
consisting merely of a plain silver band on which are engraved designs
of various objects, or else coated with ornaments in enamel, the rings
of the Tibetans display a considerable variety of settings, turquoise,
coral, agate, mother-of-pearl, mica and similar stones being used. Few
or none of the true precious stones are to be found in the rings of
these countries. The Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago has a
large number of specimens some of which are figured in the accompanying
plate.[134]

A collection of some two dozen rings of artistic Siamese workmanship
were sent to the Chicago Exhibition of 1893, in charge of Prince
Surrya, later Siamese ambassador to France. These rings were of nearly
pure gold, and were ornamented with designs in red, green, and white
enamel, representing animals, fish, and other forms, but never human
figures. They were believed to be of considerable age and historic
value; indeed, they were so highly prized that they were not publicly
exhibited but were kept locked up in a safe, and only rarely displayed
to some especially favored visitor. After the close of the Exhibition
they were safely returned to Siam.

An American traveller in Cambodia, in 1871, succeeded in having a few
rings made for him by a native Buddhist _bonza_, the material
being old metal found lying about among the idols of a temple at
Ongchor. The work of the priest gives evidence of a considerable degree
of skill in design, doubtless derived from examination and study of
native and Indian types of rings. The type having an intertwined bezel
prevails; one massive ring is penannular.[135] An elaborate Burmese
ring has the hoop in the form of a serpent, whose open mouth displays
the death-dealing fangs. Along the body runs a continuous band of
rubies placed in oval settings. The rest of the surface is adorned
with green, red and white enamel--mouth, nose, tail and scales being
brought out in this way. Of two red stones which originally marked the
serpent’s eyes, one has fallen out; on either side of the head is a
small sapphire. This fine ring is in the British Museum.[136]

While fifty years ago in Japan the women of the better classes did not
favor the wearing of finger-rings, it was not infrequently the case
that kitchenmaids and housemaids would wear silver or brass rings. They
are believed to have been influenced by the example of Dutch women in
Nagasaki.[137] At the present day American and European influence is
very slow in making itself felt in the direction of ring-wearing.

In the large oval bezel of a fine Syrian ring is set a paste
representing a topaz. The shoulders expand to form the bezel.
This ring, the lower half of which has been broken off, shows an
exceptionally fine patina; it was of large size and must have been
a striking ornament on the wearer’s hand. As the broad oval extends
across the hoop, not at right angles with it, it must have interfered
slightly with a free use of the fingers near the one on which the ring
was worn.

In the Philippine Islands a type of ring that is made by the natives
has a number of spiral twists, from five to as many as a dozen coils
appearing in these rings. The serpentine form is accentuated by a
pattern of dots or cross-marking, with sometimes the indication of a
conventional flower design. While rather clumsy for wear, these rings
still possess a certain artistic quality. Fine examples are in the
Ethnological Department of the American Museum of Natural History, New
York City.

The ancient city of refuge, Machu Picchu, probably built by the Incas
nearly 2000 years ago on a Peruvian mountain top, was uncovered by
the National Geographic Society--Yale University Peruvian Expedition
of 1912, of which Dr. Hiram Bingham was the director. Among the many
interesting relics found on this unique site were some silver rings,
one being of the twisted type, with the ends free, so as to suit the
size of any finger, while another has been welded or hammered into a
closed circlet. While it is impossible to date these rings with any
approach to exactness, they are undoubtedly examples of the art of
native Peruvian silversmiths prior to the Spanish Conquest.[138]

Rings in great variety are worn in the Congo region and in every part
of Bantu and Negro Africa. There are heavy rings and light ones, simple
hoops and spirals, and they are worn on neck, arm, leg, finger and
toe. They are made of brass, copper, ivory, iron, elephant foot-pad,
and several other materials. At Akkra, and in Liberia, there is quite
a manufacture of gold rings, and, to a lesser extent, of silver rings
also.[139]

An example of the exceptionally large rings sometimes made to
commemorate special occasions, rather than for possible wear, is one
donated to President Pierce by some Californian admirers in 1852. This
somewhat ambitious production scarcely answers the requirements of a
high standard of art, but its decoration offers a great variety of
appropriate designs illustrating life in the Far West in the middle
of the past century. The ring is of solid gold and weighs something
over a pound, thus having a mere metal value of about $250. On square
surfaces cut on the circlet are a series of designs intended to present
an epitome of California’s early history; the native animals in a
wild state, the Indian warrior armed with bow and arrow, and a native
mountaineer; then comes a Californian, riding a horse at full speed
and casting his lasso; to him succeeds the miner with pick and shovel.
The bezel is engraved with the arms of California; it is hinged and
when opened reveals a kind of box having nine compartments divided
by golden bars. In each compartment is a characteristic specimen of
one of the principal ores found in California. Inside the circlet has
been engraved the inscription: “Presented to Franklin Pierce, the
Fourteenth President of the United States.”[140] What may be called a
presidential ring is that depicted in the effigy of Abigail Power
Fillmore, wife of President Fillmore (1850–1853), a quaint wax figure
in the Wives of Presidents series, shown in the United States National
Museum, Washington D. C. In this she is shown wearing a handkerchief
ring.

[Illustration: Ring given to President Franklin Pierce in 1852 by
citizens of California

“Gleason’s Pictorial Magazine,” December 25, 1852]

[Illustration: Series of old rings worked up to form a pendant

Jewelers’ Circular-Weekly, December 8, 1909]

[Illustration: RINGS FROM THE ALEXANDER W. DRAKE COLLECTION, SOLD
AT THE AMERICAN ART GALLERIES IN MARCH, 1913

1, silver ring of East Indian workmanship. 2, massive Tartar
finger ring of fine gold. 3, copy in silver of the betrothal ring
of Martin Luther, a gift of Richard Watson Gilder. 4, finger
ring with precious stone setting and two irregularly-shaped
pearls. Pendant shows the bust of a bearded man in armor. 5,
gold betrothal ring. Two hands holding a crowned heart. Type
used by Galway fisherman from the Thirteenth Century and called
a “Claddugh Ring.” 6, openwork gold ring. 7, old Chinese gold
ring--oval with Chinese characters, on either side a chiseled
bat. 8, Moorish finger ring of fine gold. Large shield with
characteristic ornamentation. 9, gold ring with intaglio of a
shepherd and goat cut on a light sard. 10, square gold ring, with
bead groups in centre and at corners, the central part in raised
openwork. 11, gold ring. French. Heart-shaped bezel set with
Watteau figure in repousse, under crystal, and surrounded with
bits of green and white crystal between small flowers of gold.
12, silver finger ring. Two hoops linked together by true-lovers’
knot.]

An unusually large ring was worn by the well-known theatrical
manager, Sheridan Shook. It was set with an amethyst an inch long by
three-quarters of an inch broad and half an inch deep, and weighing two
and a half ounces. The letter S was engraved in the stone and inlaid
with small diamonds. This immense ring with its massive gold setting
can hardly be termed a great work of art, but it is unique in its way
and was greatly valued by its owner, who only ceased to wear it when
ill-health and weakness made it too much of a burden.

The extensive and remarkable collections of the late Alexander Wilson
Drake, which were disposed of at the American Art Galleries in New
York, March 10th to 17th, 1913, comprised a fine collection of finger
rings, illustrating a large variety of forms and periods. There were
in all nearly 800 examples, set and unset. There were betrothal rings,
memorials rings, gimmal rings, puzzle rings, rings of Roman, French,
German, Italian, Spanish, Russian, Irish, Scandinavian, English and
American workmanship, and many Oriental rings, Sassanian, Indian,
Japanese, Chinese, Hebrew, Gypsy and Moorish, one of the latter being
a gold circlet with the twelve signs of the zodiac engraved in high
relief around it.

The personality of the collector added greatly to the charm of this
collection for all who had known him. As art editor of the _Century
Magazine_, and in a thousand other ways, no one had labored more
enthusiastically and successfully in the cause of art encouragement and
art education, and his death constituted a real loss for the progress
of art in America.

The valuable and carefully chosen collection of gem stones set
in rings, which was made by the late Sir Arthur Herbert Church
(1834–1915), has been presented by his widow, Lady Church, to the
trustees of the British Museum and is shown in the Natural History
building.[141]

Of the 18 examples in the British Museum collection of the interesting
class of rings cut out of a single stone, The collection comprises 169
specimens, 45 of them zircons, fully illustrating the wide range of
color to be found in this gem-stone; two of them are of a beautiful
sky-blue. The following list gives the number of rings for each mineral
species:

Corundum 12
Spinel 17
Chrysoberyl 8
Quartz (amethyst, tiger-eye,
chrysoprase) 3
Peridot 1
Spodumene 1
Labradorite 1
Beryl 4
Andalusite 1
Tourmaline 20
Opal (precious, fire, black
and milk) 10
Zircon 45
Phenacite 5
Enstalite 1
Moonstone 2
Garnet 19
Topaz 8
Cordierite 2
Sphene 1
Turquoise 1

Only three of the rings are set with more than a single stone.

Several belonged to the collection of Sir Hans Sloane in 1753, five of
them being archers’ thumb-rings, of agate, carnelian, mocha-stone, or
jasper. A green jasper ring of this type is thus entered in the Sloane
Manuscript catalogue: “A thumb piece for defending it from being hurt
by the bowstring, from Turkey.”

A remarkable, though decidedly eccentric ring of the _art nouveau_
style of René Lalique shows in the long, irregularly oval bezel, a
full-length, nude female figure cut in very high relief out of a bluish
rock-crystal; set at one side about the middle of the figure is a round
pearl, apparently of immense proportions as compared with those of the
human body.[142]

Not only are there the watch-bracelets which have been so extensively
worn of late years, but minute ornamental watches have been set in
finger-rings, where they can be consulted with even greater ease than
when worn on the wrist. The watch-face is surrounded by a bordering
of small jewels. Apart from their practical value, the “watch-rings”
are pretty and dainty objects in themselves, and lend a new element of
variety to the long list of ring forms.[143]

There is in the collection of the Imperial Kunstgewerbe Museum, Vienna,
an exceptionally fine example of the watch-ring, made by Johann Putz,
of Augsburg, in the seventeenth century. It has a detachable cover,
cut from an emerald, on which the Austrian double-eagle has been
engraved. In the same collection are two sun-dial rings; one, made in
the seventeenth century, has a lid figuring a hedgehog, studded with
black diamond lozenges; the other, a sixteenth century ring, bears
a Greek inscription to the effect that “time removes all things and
brings forgetfulness;” the sun-dial is on the inner side of this ring,
which is of silver gilt. There is also a gold astrolabe ring, which
when closed looks like an ordinary one; but when the connected circles
are opened up, the ring constitutes a veritable astrolabe.[144]

A gold “sphere-ring” in the British Museum collection has an outer
hoop in two parts, working like a gimmal, and three interior hoops
which are almost concealed when the ring is closed. The exterior hoop
is chased; on the inner surfaces, concealed from view when the ring is
closed, appears in sections the following inscription in black enamel:
Verbo Dei celi firmati sunt. Dixit et creata sunt, ipse mandavit et
creata sunt. (The heavens are founded in the word of God. He spoke and
they were created; he commanded and they were created.) After “firmati
sunt,” is the date 1555. The three interior hoops bear, enameled in
black, the signs of the zodiac, stars, and other astral figures. This
ring is of German workmanship.[145]

In the collection of works of art bequeathed to the British Museum in
1898 by Baron Ferdinand Rothschild, and designated as the Waddesdon
Bequest, there are several characteristic rings. Of these perhaps the
most notable is a large finger ring of gold, enameled and set with
jewels, a sixteenth century example of German workmanship. The bezel is
in the form of a clasped book; on the cover is a skull, about which
are four stones, sapphire, ruby, emerald, and diamond, and two toads
and snakes in enamel. When the book cover is thrown back there appears
a loose plate of gold, on which is enameled a recumbent figure with
skull and hour-glass; on the under side of the cover is inscribed in
black enamel (in capitals): SIVE VIVIMUS, SIVE MORIMUR, DOMINI
SUMUS. COMMENDA DOMINO VIAM TUAM, ET SPERA IN EUM ET IPSE FACIET
(Whether we live or whether we die we are the Lord’s. Commit thy way
unto the Lord and trust in Him, and He shall bring it to pass). This
combines the text, Romans xiv, 8 with Psalm xxxvii, 5. On the shoulders
of the ring are two groups in enamel, the Fall and the Expulsion from
Eden.[146]

Sixteenth century ring-making, so rich in its variety of eccentric
types, evolved whistle-rings, one of which is in the British Museum.
This is of bronze gilt; the large oval bezel is engraved with a shield
of arms; the hoop is slender at the back. The shoulders are engraved
with strap-work, one of them having a tubular whistle.[147]

An enameled gold ring of striking and original design is owned by Dr.
Albert Figdor, Vienna. The bezel has a lid on which is enameled a head
wearing a half-mask; the eyes are of small lozenge-shaped diamonds, and
there is a bordering of seventeen rubies. On lifting the lid there
appears beneath an oval surface, on which is enameled a heart with the
motto: “Pour vous seule” (For you alone). The inner side of the lid is
hollowed out so as to serve as a receptacle for hair. The hoop, of a
ribbon-like form, bears the significant inscription: “Sous le masque la
vérité” (Beneath the mask is truth). This ring, which belonged to the
famous Viennese tragedienne, Charlotte Wolter, is of French workmanship
and dates from about 1800. A whimsical gold ring in the collection has
a plain hoop, to which the figure of a little mouse, wrought in gold,
is looped by the tail so that it slips around the circlet. Another gold
ring of singular design is one having a diamond in a silver setting
about which are three rubies in gold settings; between the rubies are
three playing cards in enamel. The hoop is of openwork with two playing
cards and two ovals; a section of reddish gold that has been added to
it, indicates that the ring was enlarged at some time from its original
size.[148]

A decoration of a somewhat unusual type appears in a ring to be seen in
the Cleveland Museum of Art, the gift of Mr. and Mrs. J. Homer Wade.
It has for its adornment a minute landscape painting, in place of a
precious stone or seal decoration.[149] This might be a suggestion
to those who may wish to bear with them a pretty reminder of their
favorite country home, or else of some scene that is associated with
exceptionally happy memories.

[Illustration: GOLD RING, RICHLY ENAMELED

The hoop has white, red and black enameling, and is studded with
little emeralds and rubies. The high bezel is set with an emerald
and with a small ruby on each of the four sides. Second half of
Sixteenth Century

Albert Figdor Collection, Vienna]

[Illustration: GOLD RING, WITH HEAD IN FORM OF A ROSE KNOT

The setting consists of a diamond in a silver bezel, and three
rubies in gold bezels; between the rubies are three enameled
playing cards. The hoop is of openwork interspersed with two
playing cards and two ovals in enamel; a section of reddish gold
indicates an enlargement of this ring. Eighteenth Century

Albert Figdor Collection, Vienna]

A symbolic ring recently designed and executed in New York artfully
combines a number of significant elements, each of which has a
distinct bearing upon the history, the fortunes, or the taste of the
prospective wearer. At the head of the ring is set his birth-stone,
the sard, about which are engraved his family crest and motto, and the
initials of his name. On the shank are two relief representations,
one of a lion, “the king of beasts,” typifying royal descent, the
other showing the wearer’s patron saint, Michael; at the left of
this figure is set an emerald as the talismanic gem. Surmounting the
head of the ring are a series of light gothic arches, indicating the
religious character of this jewel. On the smooth inner side of the
head is engraved a mystic design, consisting of a double triangle,
interlaced to form a six-pointed star, and enclosed by a circle; within
the triangles appears in blue emerald the “mystic number” 15, that of
the wearer, blue being his astral color; the triangles symbolize the
inseparability of the Holy Trinity, and the circle typifies Eternity,
this word being engraved above, as well as the date of the wearer’s
birth, and a legend commemorating the gift of the ring. It is made of
fine gold, so that it may the better denote absolute purity.

In one type of serpent ring, one of the ends is inserted loose into
the mouth of the serpent’s head terminating the other end, so that by
a little careful bending, the trifling difference in the diameter of
the hoop necessary to adjust it perfectly to a finger can be easily
attained. This form already appears among ancient rings.[150]

Two finely wrought serpent rings are shown on the Plate.[151] In one
of these (No. 2), with three coils, the erect head of the snake with
distended jaws is vividly portrayed, making the ring a work of art
indeed, but arousing an instinctive repulsion in the beholder. The
other serpent ring constitutes a simple circlet, the head of the snake
overlapping the tail. As an example of artistic workmanship it fully
equals the larger ring, and may be considered better adapted for the
adornment of the hand, since the serpent nature is not so aggressively
presented.

Rings of a quite unique type, that owes its origin to the great war and
to French skill and taste in adapting the most unpromising means to an
artistic end, are those made by French soldiers out of aluminum fuses
taken from the bombs which their German foes have so liberally rained
upon them. At the outset the disks were first worked with scissors to
make rude rings for men’s big fingers. Later on the well-furnished
tool-box of the machine-gun squad was called into requisition. This
early primitive type was soon abandoned, and in order to make rings
of the proper dimensions the metal from the German shells was fused
and run into ingots; the crucible was frequently one of the new iron
helmets, which was set on a wood fire that was kept going by a bellows
improvised from a bayonet sheath. However, the soldiers finally became
so reckless in their search for material that it was found necessary to
put a stop to this, after several had been shot by the enemy.

[Illustration:

1, mourning ring. Gold with enamel and jewels, Seventeenth
Century. 2, snake ring. Carved gold with diamond eyes. Modern
Oriental. 3, Chinese ring. Native gold with seal reading, “Riches
and public honors.” Overlapping back. Nineteenth Century. 4,
wish-bone ring. Copy of an African one in gold. 5, Persian ring.
Gold and silver, set with a carnelian having seal characters
of owner’s name. Metal engraved inside. Eighteenth Century. 6,
Chinese ring. Native gold with seal reading, “Long life and
riches.” Overlapping back. Eighteenth Century. 7, animal ring.
Carved gold in two colors with continuous procession of tigers.
Modern French. 8, Chinese ring. Of greenish jadeite in one piece.
Eighteenth Century.

Rings from the Collection of W. Gedney Beatty]

[Illustration: THREE TYPES OF WATCH RING

Front, side and end views]

The first models for the rings were made of wood or soft limestone.
At a more advanced stage, round bars were made, which were cut into
sections by means of the jagged edge of an old trench-spade. The
smoothing off was done with a knife, and for making the ring
apertures a pick was commonly used. They were then polished with a
piece of hard wood, moistened from time to time to soften it.

This still primitive form failed to satisfy the amateur ring-makers,
and soon some of them began to engrave their rings with the point of
a pocket-knife, and others, more ambitious, encrusted them with small
pieces of copper, either mortised or rivetted in. Although many of
the rings were undoubtedly the work of entirely unpracticed hands, of
course in any of the great modern national armies men of all trades
and professions are represented, and hence the really fine examples
of these war-time rings have been the work of those familiar with
the jewellers’ art. So eagerly did some of the soldiers pursue this
avocation, that when their aluminum threatened to give out, they would
look impatiently for a bombardment to get a new supply.[152]

The “add-a-link” ring is made up of a series of small links which all
snap one in the other. The purchaser buys one with the number of links
requisite to fit the finger exactly. If he wishes to have a stone in it
he buys a link with a stone inserted therein. A plain link is snapped
out of the ring and the link with the stone is snapped in. Sometimes
these rings are made up of a variety of stones and then again with only
one stone. It is possible in this way for the purchaser to obtain, at a
moderate cost, a variety of settings, changeable at will. Moreover, a
ring of this type can be enlarged as the finger grows larger.

Among a number of ring-types designed for the practical convenience of
the owner and only worn temporarily to serve a particular purpose,
we may note the cigarette ring, provided with a straight sliding
rod the end of which clasps the middle of a cigarette, so that when
a whiff has been taken, the hand may be freely used without laying
aside or dropping the cigarette. Another smokers’ ring is one provided
with a projection for stopping a pipe, rendering it possible for the
ardent pipe-smoker to keep his pipe-bowl well filled and well packed
without soiling the tips of his fingers. These pipe-stopping rings
are sometimes of rich materials, in one instance the stopper was of a
beautiful white zircon, finely contrasting with the rich yellow gold
of the ring proper. Rings of this kind were very much in vogue in the
eighteenth century, and one appears on the hand of a gentleman in one
of Hogarth’s engravings.

The name “swivel ring” is applied when the head of the ring is loose,
and is loosely secured by a bar to the band or circlet, so that the
ring will swing around. This type is frequently used in scarab rings,
or where there is a double intaglio, a double miniature, or other
double object, or where the ring is what is known as a concealed seal
ring, the outside part being a gold ornament or a stone.

One of the “surprise rings” in which a hinged outer section of the
hoop can be made to detach itself, on a spring being pressed, so that
a concealed surface appears, shows on its hidden surface a number of
magical signs and the names of the angels or spirits Ashmodel, Nachiel,
Zamiel, and others. Wearing a ring of this kind, the adept could reveal
his belief in the magic arts to others of his sect or fraternity,
thus bearing about with him a secret passport admitting him to their
confidence.[153]

A pretty way of utilizing old and cherished rings for the production
of an attractive ornament is to link them together so as to form a
chatelaine. By this means a large number of family memorial rings,
either those of more or less remote ancestors or of persons whom the
owner has known and loved, may be combined in a single beautiful chain.
This can be done in several ways. After opening the rings at the joint,
they are strung one below the other, the monotony of the effect being
varied by one or more double rings, the terminal of the chain being a
seal-ring with the bezel downward. Another method is to have a series
of double rings, each one of which is joined to the member of the pair
immediately below, by means of a small ring made for this purpose;
here again the terminal will be either a seal-ring, or one set with a
large precious stone. Such ornaments are not only things of beauty in
themselves, but unique in the memories they serve to perpetuate in the
hearts of the wearers.

THE MATERIALS OF RINGS

Ring whittling or carving is a favorite occupation of sailors and young
boys. Many interesting rings have been carved by them out of peach
pits, flexible ivory, cocoanut shells, gutta percha, walrus ivory,
boxwood, whale’s teeth and many other substances. These are frequently
incised with the initials of the wearer or the one to whom the ring is
to be presented. Then again, pins are cut off and the upper part driven
into the hoop, in such a way that the head of the pin appears as a
beading; often metallic points are added. Other rings are carved with
hearts, folded hands and other symbols of sentiment.

As a ring is necessary in marriage it has occasionally happened when no
precious metal was available in hasty marriages, or out of economy,
that a curtain ring, taken from the church curtain, has been used.

Memory rings, of threads wound around the finger, have often been
employed. Sometimes these are made of cord or yarn, and each ring is
supposed to represent one object to be remembered, and to be purchased,
or delivered at the final place of destination. The writer distinctly
remembers seeing an old man nearly 90 years of age, wearing a waistcoat
older than himself, and with at least twenty strings of different
colors and variety on his fingers. He trudged a distance of six miles
to the nearest village and had been instructed not to return until
he had purchased or obtained the object meant by each string. This
memorizing by cords or strands has been practised by many primitive
peoples who had not developed any system of writing, a well-known
instance being the wampum records of some of our North American Indian
tribes.

To the famous episode of the descent of the life-goddess Ishtar to the
infernal regions, forming part of the great Babylonian poem known as
the “Gilgamesh Epic,” have been appended a few lines suggesting an idea
distantly resembling that in the Greek myth of Orpheus and Eurydice. A
mourner who seeks to release a loved one from the Realm of Death, is
told to address himself to Tammuz (= Adonis). A festival garment is
to be put on the god’s statue to induce him “to play on the flute of
lapis-lazuli,” with a ring of porphyry. This divine music was believed
to arouse the dead and call them to inhale the fragrance of the incense
offering prepared for them.[154] The “porphyry ring” for playing the
musical instrument might seem to indicate that it was some form of
lyre, on which the ring could be used as a kind of plectrum, rather
than a flute or other wind-instrument.

Rings made entirely of a precious stone substance were not uncommon in
the time of Rameses III (1202–1170 B.C.) and later Egyptian
sovereigns, but there is no evidence of their having been made at a
more remote period. The prejudice against burying rings with the dead
does not seem to have affected the Egyptians, for in a number of cases
rings have been found on the fingers of mummies.[155]

The sardonyx was a favorite stone with the Romans of the Imperial Age,
as is proved by the frequent allusions to it by the poets of this time.
Of a celebrated player on the lyre, Juvenal (50–130 A.D.)
says that as his hand passed over the strings the whole instrument was
lighted up by the sheen of his many sardonyx rings.[156] Such a ring
was regarded as a most appropriate birthday gift.[157] Another passage
relates that the advocate Paulus, in order to render his address before
the court more impressive, wore upon his hand a fine onyx ring which he
had borrowed from a friend especially for this occasion.[158] Indeed,
so highly was the stone prized that it was called the first of gems
(_gemma princeps sardonychus_) and ivory caskets were regarded as
fit receptacles for sardonyxes.[159] The value of rings set with them
is shown by the fact that in Hadrian’s (76–138 A.D.) time,
they were expressly associated with the gems of greatest value, such
being strictly differentiated from those worth but four gold pieces
each.[160]

Several rings of the Later Roman period in the British Museum are set
with small diamonds. Of these the following are believed to represent
original settings:[161]

No. 779. Plain solid hoop with sides cut flat. It is set with a
small pointed diamond. Castellani Coll., 1872.

No. 785. Thin rounded hoop, slightly expanding upwards. Pointed
diamond in raised oblong setting. From Tartûs. Franks Bequest,
1897.

No. 787. Angular hoop, projecting sharply below the shoulders,
which are in the form of hollow leaves within a triangular frame.
The bezel is square and contains an octahedral diamond; the sides
are open and form a kind of wave pattern. Castellani Coll., 1872.
3rd century, A.D.

No. 788. Type akin to last. On either shoulder is an openwork
triangle. The bezel is square and contains an octahedral diamond;
on either side of the bezel is a small openwork triangle.

No. 789. Type akin to last. The lower part of the hoop has a
groove running along its middle; either shoulder is cut away in a
slight curve. The bezel is square, with a triangular space left
open in each side and with a round opening below. It contains a
diamond of octahedral form. Franks Bequest, 1897.

No. 790. Type akin to last. The hoop is rounded without; the
curved excision of the shoulders is more pronounced. Two double
pyramid-shaped (octahedral) diamonds are set in the bezel. A
triangle is cut out of either shoulder, and two smaller
triangles on either side of the bezel. Underneath the stone are
two lozenge-shaped openings. Franks Bequest, 1897.

[Illustration: PORTRAIT OF AN UNKNOWN MAN IN THE COSTUME OF THE
FIFTEENTH CENTURY, BY ANTONIO DEL POLLAIOLO

He holds between the thumb and index of his left hand a ring set
with a naturally pointed diamond crystal

Galleria Corsini, Florence]

[Illustration: PORTRAIT OF A VENETIAN SENATOR, BY A. DA SOLARIO

Seal ring on thumb of left hand

National Gallery, London]

In all these cases the diamond is a small natural crystal of octahedral
form suggesting the “diamond, a point of a stone,” of which the
astronomer Manilius wrote in the first century, and, perhaps, the
diamond in Berenice’s ring mentioned in the same period by the satirist
Juvenal. Another ring in the British Museum, however, is set with
two _facetted_ diamonds, as well as with two other stones (No.
778 of catalogue, Plate xx, same number). Here the diamonds have
unquestionably been set at a time long posterior to the making of the
ring, which is believed to belong, approximately, to the same period
as the others we have listed. The diamonds were probably inserted
to replace two of the original stones that had fallen out of their
settings.

Sir Charles Hercules Read pronounces the instances of diamond settings
in ancient rings to be exceeding rare. He states that the examples
above noted are the only ones of which he knows, and considers that
they belong to the third or fourth century of our era.[162]

The famous Marlborough collection of gems includes a thumb ring
entirely of sapphire. To give this stone ring the necessary resisting
power, it has been lined with a thick hoop of gold. The engraving it
bears, a head of the Elder Faustina, the wife of Antoninus Pius (86–161
A.D.), is believed to replace an original Arabic inscription
that fitted this ring for use as a seal.[163]

Rings entirely of precious-stone material, or “hololith” rings, have
been found at Mycenæ, one of jasper and another of rock-crystal, and
a carnelian ring was discovered in a tomb in southern Russia. Each of
these bears an engraved design. Two carnelian rings are in the British
Museum.

Chalcedony rings, that is, rings entirely formed of this stone, while
quite rare, are represented by a few specimens. We describe elsewhere
the so-called betrothal ring of the Virgin at Perugia,[164] and the
British Museum has a large example of a chalcedony ring, with the hoop
rounded on the outer side, and a raised bezel that has been roughly cut
so as to indicate a human head, some scratches marking the hair. The
work is late Roman and the inscription shows that it was made for some
adherent of the Gnostic sect.[165]

A large ring, entirely of rock crystal, shows on the oval flattened
surface of the upper part a curious combination of the “Tau Cross,”
with superposed “chrisma,” and with a serpent twined about it,
recalling the brazen serpent of Moses, the view of which restored
health to the diseased; the Greek letters, _alpha_ and _omega_, “the
beginning and the end,” complete this interlacing of Old and New
Testament emblems; the doves facing the cross are the faithful to whom
the Cross of Christ brings salvation.[166] Another entire crystal ring
bears on its flat face a design of somewhat similar import, with,
however, the curious difference that the lower end of the cross is
supported on a little Cupid, on either side of which figure is a
dove.[167]

The jewels of the Mogul emperors were the most splendid in the world,
but few have survived intact to our time, as nearly all were broken
up by the spoilers of the Mogul Empire. However, one of the few that
have been preserved for us is a most interesting illustration of the
type of ring favored in that age and region. This is one made for
Jehangir Shah, the father of Shah Jehan, for whom was erected the
wonderful Taj Mahal at Agra, a memorial of his dearly beloved wife,
Mumtaz Mahal, who died in 1629. It is about 1¼ inches in diameter
and is cut out of a solid emerald of exceptional purity and beauty
of color; from the ring proper depend two fine emerald drops, while
set in two collets are rose diamonds with ruby bordering. Jehangir’s
name is engraved on the hoop. This ring was probably carried off by
Nadir Shah at the looting of Delhi in 1739, and after remaining in
the Persian treasury for a few years found its way, with other gems
and jewels plundered from the Moguls, into the hands of the Afghan
chiefs. One of these, the unfortunate Shah Shujah, in the course of
his wanderings after he had been blinded and deprived of his throne
by a brother, finally sought and found refuge under the protection of
the British East India Company, and as a token of gratitude, or as a
slight _quid pro quo_, he gave this historic ring to the company.
After having been acquired by Lord Auckland, it passed into the hands
of the Hon. Miss Eden. This is probably the very finest specimen of the
rare type of hololith rings, or rings entirely consisting of a single
precious-stone material.[168]

For those who believed in the magic virtues of precious stones, a ring
of this kind would possess much greater efficacy than would a metal
ring set with the stone, as in the former case the substance when worn
would always be in direct contact with the skin of the wearer. Jehangir
also owned an entire ruby ring given him by Shaikh Farid-i-Bukhari, and
valued at 25,000 rupees (about $12,500). In modern times, the Burmese
ambassador to the court of Persia is said to have brought with him,
as a gift to the Shah, a ring cut out of a solid ruby of the finest
color.[169]

One of the most remarkable archers’ rings was engraved out of a single
piece of emerald. It is an example of the type which is narrow at one
end, tapering to a broad edge at the other. It is of a beautiful green
emerald and very handsomely engraved. This ring was probably made
for the Mogul Emperor Shah Jehan, about 1650. It was part of Nadir
Shah’s share of the booty from the sack of Delhi in 1739, and this
Persian adventurer had the following inscription engraved upon it in
Persian characters: “For a bow for the King of Kings, Nadir, Lord of
the Conjunction, at the subjugation of India, from the Jewel-house
[at Delhi] it was selected 1152 [1739 A.D.]”. The luckless
Shah Shuja gave it to Runjit Singh, the Lion of the Panjab, in 1813,
when he took refuge at the latter’s court at Lahore. At the end of
the second Sikh war in 1849 it was found with the regalia in the royal
treasury of Lahore. This splendid ring once owned by Lord Dalhousie,
was sold at Edinburgh in 1898; it came into the possession of W. H.
Broun, Esq., and is now one of the gems of a private collection in
Philadelphia.[170]

In past times the Shahs of Persia have passed ordinances restricting
the exportation of turquoise. Regarding this precious stone as
peculiarly Persian and for the furthering of Persian goldsmiths, it
was enacted that no unset turquoises should be exported; as a rule
the settings were in rings, these being easily transported, since a
great number of them could be strung together. Sometimes a prospective
purchaser was permitted to test the quality of a string of turquoise
rings by wearing a bunch of them for a while under his arm-pit, to see
whether the stones would change color. Although some failed to endure
this rather severe test, many withstood it successfully.

The entire circlet of certain of the finest turquoise rings was
of pierced gold enriched with rose diamonds; other, less valuable
turquoises have been set in fine gold rings, carved or plain, and those
of the next lower value, in ornamented silver. The cheaper sort ranged
in price all the way from one cent to a few dollars, and were often
set in rings made of tin, or of tinned iron, the hoop costing but two
cents. The stones were always cut irregularly _en cabochon_, the
form being frequently quite pleasing; if the turquoise were thin the
back was coated with pitch to bring out the color, and on the surface
was engraved some short formula from the Koran, such as “Allah be
praised!” or “Allah is great!” Occasionally the Shah’s portrait was the
subject.

In the Roman world entire rings of yellow amber were sometimes formed,
and in a few instances figures or heads have been engraved in relief
upon the chaton. Their execution need not have presented any greater
difficulty than did the carving of the many small amber figures which
have come down to us from ancient times. A carved amber ring in the
Franks Bequest of the British Museum is beautifully formed with
full-relief figures of Venus and of Cupid on either side. It is cut out
of a single piece of amber, and is considered to be the finest example
extant of Roman carving in that material,[171] but unfortunately is
considerably damaged.

Pliny declares that in his time amber ornaments were almost exclusively
for women’s wear; indeed, a few years later, Artemidorus, in his
“Oneirocritica,” an interpretation of dreams, after saying that amber
and ivory rings were only appropriate for women, proceeds to assert
that this was true of all kinds of rings.[172] There are but a very few
ivory rings in the British Museum, although the collection includes
several bone rings, probably for wear on the thumb. The relief-carving
of masks has been thought to make it likely that they were actors’
rings.[173]

Not only have entire emerald and ruby rings been formed, but even the
intractable diamond has lately been cut in this form. An entire diamond
ring, the work of the diamond-cutter Antoine, of Antwerp, was shown
in the exposition held in Antwerp in 1894.[174] Another such ring has
since been executed by Bart Brouwer of Amsterdam. In this latter ring
the facets are all triangular.

The unrivalled Heber R. Bishop Collection of Jades, now in the
Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York City, contains an ancient
thumb-ring (_pan chih_), entirely of jade, from the time of the Han
Dynasty (206 B.C.-220 A.D.). Its major and minor diameters are 1.16
inches and 1.03 inches, respectively, and it weighs .809 ounce. The
material is the nephrite variety of jade, the color being clouded gray
with very dark brown veinings. The rings of this type were worn on the
thumb of the left hand to protect it from injury by the bowstring after
the discharge of the arrow. The dark veining results from the filling
of the fissures in the material with some brownish-black substance; it
is an excellent example of the amphibolic alteration of jadeite, which
is shown by chemical analysis to be present here to the amount of 4.15
per cent. (No. 330 of the collection).

A recent type of archer’s thumb ring in this collection, of the
Ch’ien-Lung period (1736–1795 A.D.), is of cylindrical form,
the thick solid side bevelled inward at the base so as to adjust the
ring to the hand; the convex top slopes downward from the middle. This
is of a beautiful light emerald-green jadeite, clouded here and there
with shades of greenish gray. It has diameters of 1.06 inches and 1.25
inches, and weighs about 1⅔ ounces. The specific gravity and hardness
are those of the jadeite variety of jade, a silicate of aluminum, while
nephrite is a silicate of magnesium (No. 508).

The Bishop Collection also contains two archers’ rings of the original
type, with a wide flange on the lower side. These are entirely of
carnelian, and are representative of the kind really used by archers.
The greater part of the thumb-rings, many of them called more or less
loosely “archers’ rings,” were never designed for any such special use,
but constitute a modification of the original form to suit them for
habitual wear. Indeed, in many cases the more ornate were rather used
as pretty toys to handle, as Orientals are fond of handling gems or
small jewels, than for wear. Of course the gradual disuse of archery in
military operations contributed greatly to the change of fashion.

In this collection may be seen a finger-ring (chih-huan) of white jade
(nephrite) set with jewels. Its shape resembles that of an archer’s
ring and it is decorated with floral designs, the effect enhanced
by sixty precious stones, comprising twenty-four rubies, thirty-two
emeralds and four diamonds. This ring is of Indian workmanship, those
made in China scarcely ever having any precious-stone adornment.
In the floral ornamentation a row of rubies and emeralds cut _en
cabochon_ are outlined in gold so as to represent flowers, while in
the field are four conventionalized upright sprays, each composed of
three flowers, the upper one a facetted diamond, while the lateral
pair are facetted emeralds. On the upper rim an undulating floral
scroll has stem and leaves of gold, and flowers set alternately with
rubies and emeralds.[175]

At the time a Corean embassy visited the United States in 1883,
one of its leading members was Min Yonk Ik, a princely personage,
closely related to the queen of the country, who brought with him
two thumb-rings, which he wore, alternately, on his right hand
thumb. In the case of one of these rings the Corean must have been
imposed upon by the seller, for he supposed it to be jade, while
the present writer’s examination of it showed that the material was
merely serpentine. Its outside diameter was 34 mm. (1⅓ in.), the
inside diameter being 22 mm. (about ⅞ in.), the length, or height, was
28.5 mm. (1⅛ in.). This ring was described by the writer in 1884, in
_Science_; in the succeeding year he had occasion to correct a
statement that it was an archer’s ring.[176] The Corean women commonly
wear two rings, always exactly similar in every respect. As a rule they
are perfectly plain, of oval form, the material being gold, silver,
amber or coral. The coral was usually imported from China.

The Chinese ambassador, Wu Ting Fang, wore a jade ring in which was
a thick plate of gold to reduce the size. Some of the more beautiful
are of the pale green jade, known by the Chinese as _fei ts’ui_,
or “kingfisher-plumes.” Many of these rings are exceedingly costly;
when made of some piece of jade possessing very exceptional qualities
of color and surface, a thumb-ring may cost as much as $10,000, or
even $15,000. Incidentally, it should be noted that Wu Ting Fang is an
excellent judge of precious stones.

Archers’ rings are made by Chinese and Manchus, Turks and Persians,
who release the arrow according to Asiatic style, the bowstring being
held by the bent thumb. In China they eventually became the insignia
of military rank, and were of jade, or a glass imitation of jade; the
latter are the kind usually to be found in curio shops. The Japanese
did not use them, the archers wearing a glove with a horn thumb-piece.
This type of glove was, however, not used by the Japanese swordsmen, as
the stiff thumb-piece would have hindered the free use of the hand.[177]

An engraved finger ring entirely of milk-white jade is in the Berlin
Mineralogical Museum, and in the collection of Dr. David Wiser, of
Zurich, there is a jade ring-setting on which is engraved a scorpion.
This image was believed to lend to the object so engraved a talismanic
virtue. A slab of jade in the Freiburg Museum bears the carefully
engraved figure of a scorpion and is considered to be an amulet. The
source of this specimen and the place and time in which it was engraved
have not been accurately ascertained.[178]

The Pueblo Bonito ruins in New Mexico have furnished us with a fragment
of a jet ring. The portion remaining of this ring shows that it must
have had a diameter of about 2.3 centimetres, the width of the band
being 1.4 centimetres. Apparently some accident befell the original
ring, causing part of the brittle material to chip off, for in the
section that has been preserved a piece of jet, as wide as the band and
9 millimetres across, has been inlaid in the body of the ring. This was
cut away to a depth of a millimetre, and the concave-convex inlay was
then glued on.[179]

The gold-plating of bronze rings dates back to the Mycenæan period, and
Ionic silver rings with gold plating were made in the sixth century
B.C.; Cypriote bronze rings of about the third century B.C. have also
been found. Where, as in many cases, mere gilding has been resorted to,
only traces of this may remain after the lapse of centuries.[180] We
note elsewhere the gold-plated iron rings worn by some Roman slaves to
evade the penalty imposed upon those who illegally wore gold rings.

Glass rings are frequently made at Murano and other places in Italy of
the so-called “gold stone,” aventurine, or Venice gold stone. They are
very inexpensive and are generally worn by children or young girls.
Mosaic rings are those in which the upper part of the ring contains
either a Byzantine mosaic made up of colored glass or other material,
or a Florentine mosaic, in which shell, marble and other materials are
set in slate or marble settings.

Bohemian garnet rings are generally made of facetted, rose cut, or
cabochon cut garnets, set usually in 8 to 14 carat gold. They are made
in Prague and other cities in Bohemia, the garnet material, of the
pyrope variety, coming largely from the mines at Meronitz, Bohemia.

Among the cheap materials that have been used on occasion for making
rings, are horseshoe nails, which may perhaps be supposed to possess
some of the wonderful talismanic power accorded by popular fancy to the
horseshoe. The nails are more or less skilfully twisted into a ring
form, and are at least as durable as other forms of iron rings.

An extraordinary material combination for the substance of rings, is
that of dynamite and pewter. At present when the war-fever has seized
upon almost all civilized peoples, we might accord to the dynamite in
this composition a symbolic martial meaning. What risk there might be
of the painful results of war befalling the wearer of a dynamite ring
through its detonating unexpectedly because of some powerful shock, is
perhaps too slight to deter those who are in eager pursuit of novelties.

The pale alloy of gold, known as electrum,[181] was favored for
ring-making in Oriental Greece, and is termed “white gold” in ancient
inventories. Thus in an inventory of the temple treasures of Eleusis,
made in 332 B.C., there is mention of “two plain gold rings
of white gold.”[182] Some Ionic rings of the fifth century, B.C.
from Cyprus are also of this metallic composition. Of gold rings set
with stones, a Parthenon inventory of 422 B.C. lists one
with an onyx, perhaps a scaraboid, and in a Delos inventory of 279
B.C., there is one with an _anthrax_, probably a garnet.
The variation of the phrasing in these two mentions, the former naming
an onyx having a ring of gold, while the latter speaks of a “gold
ring having a garnet,” might be taken to indicate that the onyx was a
large object compared with the hoop, and the garnet a relatively small
one.[183]

In the masterpiece of ancient Greek romantic prose literature, the
Æthiopica of Heliodorus (fl. ab. 400 A.D.), perhaps Heliodorus Bishop
of Tricca, the writer describes a splendid ring given by Kalasiris to
Nausikles. This was one of the royal jewels of the King of Ethiopia.
The hoop was of electrum, and in the bezel was set a beautiful amethyst
engraved with a design showing a shepherd pasturing his flock.[184]
Heliodorus especially dwells upon the fact that this was an Ethiopian
(probably an Indian) amethyst, this variety far surpassing those from
Iberia (the Spanish Peninsula) and Britain. In the very successful
rendering of this Greek passage by Rev. C. W. King, the contrast
between the former and the latter is thus gracefully expressed:[185]

For the latter blushes with a feeble hue, and is like a rose
just unfolding its leaves from out of the bud, and beginning
to be tinged with red by the sunbeams. But in the Ethiopian
Amethyst, out of its depth flames forth like a torch a pure and
as it were Spring-like beauty; and if you turn it about as you
hold it, it shoots out a golden lustre, not dazzling the sight
by its fierceness, but resplendent with cheerfulness. Moreover,
a more genuine nature is inherent in it than is possessed by any
brought from the West, for it does not belie its appellation, but
proves in reality to the wearer an antidote against intoxication,
preserving him sober in the midst of drinking-bouts.

In his “Rape of the Lock,” Pope writes of Belinda’s golden hair-bodkin,
that the metal had originally been worked up into rings and then into a
gold buckle, thus the gold was

The same, his ancient personage to deck
Her great-great-grandsire wore about his neck
In three seal-rings, which, after melted down,
Formed one huge buckle for his widow’s gown.

Besides the precious metals many other materials were used in ancient
times for rings. Thus a few leaden rings have been preserved, a number
of them having been unearthed in a tomb at Beneventum. The casting has
been roughly done, without finishing touches. It has been suggested
that in view of the rarity of leaden rings, the large number found
in this tomb may be taken to indicate that the deceased had been a
manufacturer of rings of this kind. From Tanagra comes a leaden ring
of great size; as it is too large for wear, it might be regarded as a
votive offering to a shrine or temple. Glass rings were also used at
times for this purpose by the poorer classes, an example of such a ring
being listed among the possessions of the temple of Asklepios at Athens
as early as the fourth century B.C. The manufacture of glass
rings was quite extensively carried on in Alexandria. In one case the
bezel had been adorned with a painting of a woman’s head, over which
was placed a translucent glass plate. This was found at the Rosetta
Gate, Alexandria.[186]

An ivory ring of Roman times, later provided with a band of silver, is
noted in the descriptive catalogue of the Royal Museum at Budapest. It
is of oval form and artistically engraved with the seated figure of a
military leader clothed with a mantle, the left hand extended as though
delivering a speech; in his right hand he holds a spear. Behind him is
a trophy, and before him stands a Roman soldier fully armed. Engraved
ivory rings from Greek or Roman times are rare, just as are engraved
amber rings. The trophy emblem denotes that this ring commemorated some
triumph, or victory.[187]

A “St. Martin’s ring” had become, in the seventeenth century, a name
for a brummagem ring, as is shown among other examples by the following
satirical passage from a book entitled “Whimsies, or a new Cast of
Characters,” published in London in 1631: “St. Martin’s Rings and
counterfeit bracelets are commodities of infinite consequence; they
will passe current at a may-pole, and purchase favor from their May
Marian.” A rare tract called “The Captain’s Commonwealth” (1617) says
that kindness was not like alchemy or a St. Martin’s ring, “that are
faire to the eye and have a rich outside; but if a man should breake
them asunders, and looke into them, they are nothing but brasse and
copper.” The makers, or vendors of these rings lived within the
precincts of the collegiate church St. Martin’s-le-Grand, and had long
enjoyed a certain immunity from prosecution under the laws prohibiting
the manufacture of ornaments made in imitation of genuine gold or
silver ones. The gilding or silvering of brooches or rings made of
copper or latten, is prohibited by an ordinance of Henry IV (1404),
and another of Edward IV (in 1464), which, while pronouncing it to be
unlawful to import rings of gilded copper or latten, expressly declared
that the act should not be construed as meaning anything prejudicial
to one Robert Styllington, clerk, dean of the King’s free chapel of
“St. Martin le Graund de Londres” or to any person or persons dwelling
within this sanctuary or precincts, or who might in after time dwell
there, or more especially in St. Martin’s Lane.[188]

Rings set with precious stones, other than turquoises and pearls,
can be safely cleaned with warm water, white soap and a trifle of
ammonia. The wash should be applied with a soft old tooth-brush, so
as to cleanse the spaces between the filling and the stone-setting. A
little polishing off with a soft chamois will thoroughly restore the
brilliancy of the stone. Turquoise or pearl rings, however, need more
careful treatment and the above directions do not apply in their case.

III

SIGNET RINGS

If we pass over the scene between Judah and his daughter-in-law Tamar,
related in Gen. xxxvii, 12–26, where the patriarch leaves his signet
(not necessarily a signet _ring_) his bracelets and his staff, as
pledges for a promised gift, the earliest Hebrew notice of a ring is in
Genesis xlii, 42, where we read that in return for the interpretation
of his dream and for the valuable counsel as to laying up a stock of
grain in Egypt to forestall a coming famine, the Pharaoh of the time
“took off his ring from his hand, and put it upon Joseph’s hand.”
This might refer to a period about 1600 B.C., or possibly
somewhat earlier, always providing the tradition be accepted as in a
certain sense exact. Centuries later, in the Desert, when the Lord
commanded offerings for the Tabernacle, the Ark of the Covenant, and
for the ephod and breastplate, among the gifts proffered are enumerated
“bracelets, earrings, and rings” (Exodus, xxxv, 22). The Book of
Daniel, written not earlier than the sixth century before Christ,
and more probably, in its present form, a work of the second century
B.C., relating the imprisonment of Daniel in the lions’ den,
states that when at the reluctant command of King Darius he was shut
up therein, “a stone was brought, and laid upon the mouth of the den;
and the king sealed it with his own signet, and with the signet of his
lords” (Dan. vi, 17). Still, these might have been of the well-known
Babylonian type of “rolling seals” and not rings.

The Book of Esther, however, of later date than Daniel, makes definite
mention of the signet ring of the Persian monarch called Ahasuerus
(Artaxerxes) in the Biblical text, and while the recital can scarcely
be accepted as historical in any sense, the details of custom and
adornment are probably quite trustworthy. On investing Haman with a
great authority, Ahasuerus “took his ring from his hand and gave it
unto Haman,” whereupon the latter summoned the king’s scribes and had
them write letters to the provincial governors--instructing the latter
to kill all the Jews in the kingdom on the thirteenth day of the month
Adar; each of these letters was “sealed with the king’s ring.” Before
this dire disaster could be consummated, the royal favor was gently
swayed in an opposite direction by the grace and charm of Esther, the
Hebrew favorite of the sovereign, and the wicked Haman was hanged
on the tall gallows he had set up for Mordecai, Esther’s guardian,
on whom the ring stript from Haman’s hand was bestowed. In spite of
the somewhat confused recital, one point is always strongly brought
out, that the impression of the royal signet imparted to letters or
documents the quality of royal ordinances.

In Persia the power and authority attributed to the ring of the
sovereign is noted by the Persian poet Unsuri (fl. 1000 A.D.),
and in the legends of that land the famous though fabulous hero-king,
Jemshid, is said to have had a magic ring of wondrous power. Among the
Persians, as in many other Oriental countries, the signet-ring was long
considered to be a symbol of authority.[189]

The gold ring of Queen Hâtshepset (about 1500 B.C.), consort
of Thothmes II, whose prenomen, Maât-ka-Ra, signifies “flesh and blood
of Amen Ra,” is set with a lapis lazuli scarab inscribed with the
above words.[190] Another ring with lapis lazuli setting is that of
Thothmes III, whose titles, Beautiful God, Conqueror of All Lands,
Men-kheper-Ra, are inscribed on one side of the rectangular stone
above a design representing a man-headed lion in the act of crushing a
prostrate foe with his paw.[191] A steatite scarab, set in a gold ring,
bears the name of Ptah-mes, a high priest of Memphis.[192] Another
steatite ring-scarab is inscribed with the name and title of Shashank
I, the Shishak of the Bible, who reigned about 966 B.C.[193]

The gold signet ring of Aah-hotep I, queen of Seqenenra III (1610–1597
B.C.) of the XVII Dynasty, was found with a wealth of other
jewels at Draa-abul-Nega, the northern and most ancient part of the
Theban necropolis. This queen had an unusually long and eventful life.
The records clearly indicate that she must have been one hundred years
old, or very nearly that age, at the time of her death, and while her
youth was passed at the end of the period of the oppressive rule of
the foreign Hyksos kings, she lived to witness the glorious revival of
native Egyptian rule under her husband, son and grandson. This ring is
now in the Louvre Museum.[194]

An interesting Egyptian signet bears the cartouche of Khufu, the second
ruler of the IV Dynasty (ab. 3969–3908), the Cheops of the Greeks
(Manetho’s Suphis), in whose reign the greatest of the pyramids was
built. The worship of Khufu continued to a late period of Egyptian
history, and this signet belonged to a Ra-nefer-ab, priest or keeper
of the pyramid under the XXVI Dynasty, 664–525 B.C.[195] The
ring is of fine gold, and weighs nearly ¾ ounce; it was found at Ghizeh
by Colonel Vyse, in a tomb known as Campbell’s Tomb, and was acquired
in Egypt by Dr. Abbott, who gathered together a choice collection of
Egyptian antiquities during a residence of twenty years in Egypt. In
1860, this collection was given to the New York Historical Society
through the liberality of citizens of New York.[196]

The rings of the Minoan and Mycenæan periods from about 1700 B.C. to
1000 B.C. offer a great variety of engraved designs, some in relief
and others in intaglio, but all destined it seems for use as signets.
Undoubtedly these rings derive in the last instance from Egyptian
influence, their especial characteristics, however, are early Greek,
but rarely Egyptian, as in the case of a bronze ring with a sphinx in
relief found in the necropolis of Zafer Papoura near Knossos in Crete.

[Illustration: PORTRAIT OF A MAN, BY LUCAS CRANACH THE ELDER
(1472–1553)

Seal ring on index of left hand with plain ring beneath it; ring
with precious stone setting on little finger of the same hand]

[Illustration: PORTRAIT OF KATHARINA AEDER, WIFE OF MELCHOW
HANLOCHER, BY HANS BOCK THE ELDER

Gem and serpent ring on right forefinger, and three rings on left
fourth finger

Art Gallery at Basel, Switzerland]

Many of the Mycenæan engraved rings were evidently not intended to be
used for sealing, as the intaglio is frequently very shallow, and as
the proper position of the parts of the body would not be rightly shown
in an impression. Hence these rings must have been designed simply for
wear as ornaments. The hoop is often astonishingly small, so much so
that it will not pass down onto the third finger-joint of an average
man’s hand, and would only fit the very slender finger of a woman.[197]

Some remarkably fine rings are in the Cesnola Collection of Cypriote
Antiquities in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York. Among them
two serpentine rings of gold are well worth noting. In one of these
the coil has six turns which are brazed together; at either end is a
ram’s head. The other ring shows a serpent of two full coils, with
erect head and curved neck and tail; scales are marked at the ends.
The bands of the ring are smooth and plain.[198] Many of the rings are
of the swivel type and are set with artistically engraved scarabs. In
one of these the scarab is of green plasma, translucent but somewhat
clouded; the cutting is well executed. The bottom shows two wrestlers,
each entirely nude with the exception of a short ribbed apron about
the loins. Behind each is an erect uræus (the serpent emblem of
Egyptian divinities and kings), with wings like those of the goddess
Mut, extended in protection. Between the wrestlers, on the ground, is
an object resembling a wolf’s head. The bow and collet of this signet
are of gold. The plasma scarab in another of these swivel rings has
been pronounced to be a perfect example of this form. The stone is a
pure green and the scarab has been decorated with two seated, winged
androsphinxes (with man’s head and lion’s body), the paws raised before
the sacred tree between them; the symbol of lordship, _neb_, is
placed below. The hoop is a plain, thin wire.[199]

Two massive ivory rings were found in the course of excavations at
Salamis, on the island of Cyprus. One was set with an oval disk of
green glass, and was of the type used for sealing amphoræ of wine. The
other bears the head of a woman in bas-relief; this is probably a cameo
of Arsinoë.[200]

The story of the ring of Polycrates, tyrant of Samos (d. 522 B.C.),
is related by Herodotus[201] (b. 484 B.C.), who, writing less than a
century after the death of Polycrates, may probably give us the main
facts with reasonable accuracy. According to this account, Polycrates
had formed an alliance with Amasis, King of Egypt, and the latter
began to fear that the unbroken good fortune of the Samian ruler would
arouse the jealousy of the gods; he therefore counselled Polycrates to
throw away his most prized treasure. This was a splendid emerald, set
in a gold ring, and engraved by Theodorus of Samos, the supreme master
of the art of gem engraving in that age. Acceding to the request of
Amasis, Polycrates sailed out to sea on one of his ships and cast the
precious ring into the waters. However, the gods refused the gift, for
not long afterward the tyrant’s chief cook brought him back the ring,
which had just been found in cutting up a fish. News of this occurrence
was sent to Amasis, who immediately broke off the alliance, since he
believed that the gods were implacable, and would visit Polycrates with
downfall and destruction. This, indeed, proved to be the case, as a
few years later the tyrant was inveigled into the power of Orœtes, a
Persian satrap, and was put to death by crucifixion.

The design engraved upon this ring was a lyre, if we can trust
the statement to this effect made centuries later by Clemens
Alexandrinus.[202] Strange to say Pliny, who relates the story quite
fully, asserts that in the Temple of Concord there was shown the
supposed gem of the famous ring of Polycrates. This was an unengraved
sardonyx, set in a golden cornucopia, and had been dedicated to the
temple by Augustus. Pliny is careful to write “if we may believe,” in
reporting this almost certainly spurious treasure of the Temple of
Concord. Probably the attribution was nothing more than an invention of
the custodians to enlist the interest of visitors.

A corroboration to a certain extent of the tradition that the seal of
Polycrates was cut on an emerald is given by the existence of a small
engraved emerald of about this period, found in Cyprus, and evidently
of Phœnician workmanship. It bears the figure of a sovereign holding
a sceptre in one hand and an axe in the other; on his head is a high
tiara and the arrangement of hair and beard, as well as the dress and
other details, are of Ægypto-Syrian type. This gem formed part of the
Tyszkiewicz Collection.[203]

In a recently published work, M. Salomon Reinach, of the National
Museum at St. Germain-en-Laye, an archæologist of the highest repute,
makes a curious conjecture in regard to the real significance of the
story related by Herodotus regarding this signet. M. Reinach holds
that when Polycrates sailed out to sea to cast away his ring, he was
engaged in the performance of a ceremony similar to that performed
annually by the Doges of Venice, when they wedded the Adriatic by
casting a ring into its waters. Polycrates, as a “thalassocrat,” or
ruler of the sea, celebrated in this way his mastery over this element,
and M. Reinach believes that this act, told as an isolated happening by
Herodotus, was really a ceremony repeated each year. The conjecture is
an ingenious one, although it may not be generally accepted.[204]

The signet of the Persian sovereign, Xerxes, is said to have borne
the nude figure of a woman with disheveled hair.[205] This depicted
Anahita, the Persian goddess of fertilization and also of war, a
divinity closely resembling the Assyrian Ishtar in her attributes and
functions. According to other ancient authorities, however, the design
was either a portrait of Xerxes himself, that of Cyrus the Great, or
else a representation of the horse whose neighing legend states to have
been received as an omen determining the choice of Darius Hystaspes,
father of Xerxes, as King of Persia.

In Græco-Roman times, a certain Eurates is represented to be the owner
of a ring set with an engraved signet bearing the head of the Pythian
Apollo, and to have boasted that the ring literally “spoke” to him. Of
course, the satirist Lucian, who tells this tale, only offers it as a
specimen of the lies told by Eurates, still the recital indicates that
such fables were credited in the second century of our era.[206]

Another superstitious use of signet rings was to throw a number of
them into a heap and pull out one at random, the design engraved on
the signet being interpreted as a favorable or unfavorable omen, which
foretold the outcome of any contemplated action. An instance of this
appears in Plutarch’s life of Timoleon (d. 337 B.C.), the
Greek general who freed Syracuse from the tyrant Dionysius. In one of
his campaigns the enemy had taken up a strong position behind a river,
which the troops of Timoleon were forced to ford. A noble rivalry
sprang up among the officers as to who should be the first to enter
the river, and Timoleon, fearing that confusion would result from the
dispute, decided to settle the question by lot. Therefore he took from
each of the officers his signet ring, cast them into his own cloak,
shook them together, and drew out one, which fortunately bore the
figure of a trophy. This was hailed as a good omen, the quarrel was
forgotten, and the stream was forded so impetuously, and the attack was
so vigorous that the enemy was overwhelmed.[207]

After his Persian conquests, in 331 B.C., Alexander the Great
sealed the letters he sent to Europe with his old seal, while for
those sent to functionaries in his new Asiatic domains he used the
seal of Darius III, Codomannus (reigned 336–330 B.C.), whose
daughter Statira he afterwards wedded. Quintus Curtius regards this
as emblematic of the idea that a single mind was not wide enough to
embrace two such destinies,[208] but the true reason was undoubtedly
that the Asiatic officials were already familiar with the Persian
sovereign’s seal and were accustomed to render it due obedience.

The emblem of the anchor used by the Seleucidæ, the dynasty founded
in Syria by Seleucus Nicator, one of Alexander’s generals, is said to
have originated in a strange dream of Laodicea, mother of Seleucus and
wife of Antiochus. One night she dreamt that she was visited by the God
Apollo, and that he bestowed upon her a ring set with a stone on which
an anchor was engraved. This was to be given to the son she was to
bear. As such a ring was found in the room the next morning, the dream
seemed to be thoroughly corroborated, and, moreover, when Seleucus
was born, he had on his thigh the birthmark of an anchor. Subsequent
to Alexander’s death in 323 B.C., Seleucus founded, in 312
B.C. the kingdom of Syria, which was transmitted to a long
series of his descendants, each of whom in turn is said to have borne a
similar birthmark.[209]

[Illustration: CARDINAL OF BRANDENBURG, BY THE MASTER OF THE
DEATH OF MARY

Seal ring on index of right hand; rings set with precious stones
on fourth and little fingers of the same hand

Reale Galleria Nazionale, Rome]

[Illustration: PORTRAIT OF A MOTHER AND HER DAUGHTER, BY
BARTHOLOMEW BRUYN

Three rings on right hand, one with a pointed diamond; also three
rings on left hand, two on index finger; the one on the fourth
finger set with two pearls

Imperial Hermitage, Petrograd]

In the Hellenistic period (ca. 300 B.C.-ca. 100 B.C.) signet rings
entirely of metal largely gave place to those in which the seal was
engraved on a stone set in a metal ring. Chalcedony continued to be
freely used for this purpose, but the employment of the choicer and
harder precious stones from India, transparent and brilliant, and of
deeper coloring, characterizes this period. In the front rank is the
jacinth, unknown in earlier times, with its wonderful ruddy hues. This
is the favorite stone of the time. Usually the gem is given a strongly
convex form in order to bring out better the play of color. Scarcely
less favored than the jacinths were the garnets, also cut in a convex
shape; in many cases the under side was cut slightly concave to enhance
the effect. Evidently, however, garnets were less prized than jacinths,
for the engravings on the former are almost without exception much
inferior to those on the latter. Sometimes, in this period, unengraved
garnets, cut convex, are used for ring adornment. Another precious
stone that makes its first appearance in the Hellenistic epoch is the
beryl, which, because of its costliness, is more rarely met with than
those we have already mentioned. It is only used for the very finest
work, as is also the case with the topaz. The amethyst, which had
almost gone out of fashion in the preceding periods, was now restored
to favor, principally because of its beautiful color; like the other
stones, it was cut convex. Rock crystal was still used, as were also
carnelian and sardonyx.[210]

That cruel persecutor of the Jews, Antiochus IV, Epiphanes (175–164
B.C.), on his death-bed, confided to his most trusted councillor,
Philip, the signet ring from his finger, that it might be held in
trust for his son, a child but nine years old, until the latter should
come of age and exercise the royal authority. In the meanwhile, the
grant of the signet was equivalent to the bestowal of the regency upon
Philip, as he had the power to affix the royal seal upon all edicts or
ordinances. The son did not, however, live to receive the ring, as he
only survived his father two years, although he was a nominal successor
under the title, Antiochus V, Eupator.[211]

Two Greek epigrams in the Anthology, on engraved amethysts in signet
rings, express the prevailing superstition regarding the sobering
effect of this precious stone; these have been very well Englished by
Rev. C. W. King.[212] One, by Antipater, concerns a signet of Cleopatra
and runs in King’s version as follows:

A Mœnad wild, on amethyst I stand,
The engraving truly of a skilful hand;
A subject foreign to the sober stone,
But Cleopatra claims it for her own;
And hallow’d by her touch, the nymph so free
Must quit her drunken mood, and sober be.

That this was really a ring-stone is proved by the Greek words “on the
queen’s hand,” which King has not literally translated. The image was
that of Methe, goddess of intoxication. The other epigram is shorter
but to the same point:

On wineless gem, I, toper Bacchus, reign;
Learn, stone, to drink, or teach me to abstain.

That admiration of a work of art on the part of an unscrupulous
official is sometimes fraught with danger for the rightful ownership
of the object, was illustrated in the case of a seal ring belonging
to a Roman citizen of Agrigentum in Sicily. The arch-pilferer Verres,
Roman governor of the island from 73 to 71 B.C., being on
one occasion struck by the beauty of a seal impression on a letter
just handed to his interpreter Vitellius, asked whence the letter
came and who was the sender. The information was of course quickly
given, and thereupon Verres, then in Syracuse, dictated a letter to
his representative in Agrigentum, requiring that the seal ring should
be forwarded to Syracuse without delay, and the owner, a certain
Lucius Titius, was forced to give it up to the unscrupulous Roman
governor.[213] The injustice of this act must have been felt all the
more keenly that the special and peculiar design on a seal was then
regarded as something closely linked with the personality of the owner.

A strong appeal to the memories aroused by a signet bearing the effigy
of a renowned ancestor, was made by Cicero in one of his orations
against Catilina. He declared that when he submitted to Publius
Lentulus Sura, who was involved in the great Catilinian conspiracy, an
incriminating letter believed to be his, asking him whether he did not
acknowledge the seal with which it was stamped, Lentulus nodded assent.
Thereupon Cicero addressed him in these words: “In effect the seal is
well known, it is the image of your ancestor, whose sole love was for
his country and his fellow-citizens. Mute as it is, this image should
have sufficed to hold you aloof from such a crime.”[214]

When, after the decisive battle of Pharsala, Julius Cæsar came to Egypt
in pursuit of his defeated adversary, Pompey, he learned that the
latter had been treacherously assassinated by the Egyptians, who hoped
thereby to gain favor with the conqueror. As proof of Pompey’s death,
his head was brought to Cæsar, who turned away in aversion from the
messenger of death. At the same time, Pompey’s signet ring was given
to the victor, on receiving which tears rose to his eyes,[215] for no
memento could be more potent than such a ring. Cæsar’s manifestation
of grief was absolutely free from hypocrisy for he was “of a noble
generous nature,” and had long had the most friendly relations with
Pompey, to whom he gave his daughter Julia in marriage, until the
inevitable rivalry for the control of Rome brought them into enmity.
The death of Julia is said to have contributed not a little to the
termination of the friendship between Cæsar and Pompey.

St. Ambrose answering the self-posed query, whether anyone having an
image of a tyrant was liable to punishment, asserts that he remembered
to have read that certain persons who wore rings bearing the effigies
of Brutus and Cassius, the assassins of Cæsar, had been condemned to
capital punishment.[216] Of course, the wearing of such a ring would
imply not only an admiration of the person figured, but also devotion
to his cause.

The imprint of a proprietor’s seal was frequently made upon his trees,
and served to establish his ownership, so that strangers could have no
excuse for cutting them down, or in case of fruit trees, for plucking
the fruit. The degree of confidence reposed in the seal impression
is strikingly illustrated by the account that when Pompey learned
that some of his soldiers were committing atrocities on the march,
he ordered that all their swords should be sealed, and no one should
remove the impression without having obtained permission to do so.[217]

The symbols used as mint-marks on ancient coins are often reproductions
of the seals of the chief magistrate of the city or district, or else
of the mint-master. Among these may be noted such types as: a locust,
a calf’s head, a dancing Satyr, a young male head, a culex (gnat),
etc.[218] A ring as a mint-mark on early English coins is a clear
indication that such coins were struck in one of the ecclesiastical
mints. On a penny of Stephen’s reign (1135–1154), from the Archbishop
of York’s mint, this mint-mark has been made by converting the left
leaf of the fleur-de-lys surmounting the sceptre into a small annulet.
The ring-mark appears on the coins of York from the earliest times, and
is assumed to have been especially favored for the English Primate’s
mint in reference to the Ring of St. Peter, or the Fisherman’s Ring. A
penny, probably coined after the installation of Archbishop William in
1141, appears to be one of the earliest of this type. The reverse gives
Ulf as the name of the coiner or moneyer.[219]

While none of the signet rings of Roman emperors, or even of Romans
prominent in the social or political life of the centuries immediately
preceding and succeeding the beginning of the Christian Era, have
been preserved, it is possible to learn from literary sources the
devices engraved on many of them. Scipio Africanus, the conqueror of
Hannibal, had his father’s portrait engraved on his signet, and his son
followed the father’s example in this respect. The idea seems to be an
excellent one, as both family honor and filial love could thus find
expression. The gifted, but dissolute Sylla, in the first design he had
cut upon his signet, sought to perpetuate the memory of his victory
over Jugurtha in 107 B.C., the Mauritanian king Bocchus being
depicted in the act of surrendering Jugurtha. Later on Sylla used a
signet with three trophies, and finally selected one with a portrait of
Alexander the Great. For Lucullus, the great gourmet and master of all
the arts of Roman luxury, the head of Ptolemy, King of Egypt, seemed
the design best fitted for his signet.

The two great rivals, Pompey and Cæsar, chose widely divergent symbols.
The former wore a signet engraved with a lion bearing a sword, while
on Cæsar’s ring was cut an armed Venus, the Venus Victrix, from whom
the gens Julia claimed descent, and for whose statue Cæsar is said to
have brought pearls from Britain to be set on the statue’s breastplate.
The first choice made by Augustus was a sphinx, in symbolical allusion
to his taciturnity; later in his reign he wore a signet with Alexander
the Great’s head engraved thereon, and finally, moved perhaps by
the flatteries of his adulators, he substituted his own image for
that of the great Macedonian. The famous literary patron of the
Augustan Age, Mæcenas (d. 8 A.D.), who was at the same time
a very able statesman, chose the singular emblem of a frog. That the
bloodthirsty Nero should select a design figuring a martyrdom seems
very appropriate, and in the flaying of Marsyas by Apollo cut on his
ring, he undoubtedly identified himself with the sun god and leader of
the muses who took vengeance upon his would-be rival in the musical
art. For Nero was a most devoted amateur of the arts as he understood
them, and had sung--in a strained, high-pitched voice it is said--in
the theatres of Greece, earning applause enough from the wily Greeks
we may be sure. Actuated by jealousy, he is said to have had the singer
Menedemus whipped, and to have warmly applauded his “melodious” cries
of agony, evidently rejoicing in having forced him to “sing another
song.”

Galba (3–69 B.C.), Nero’s immediate successor, is said to have
used successively three signets, the first depicting a dog bending its
head beneath the prow of a ship; this was followed by a ring showing a
Victory with a trophy, and lastly came one bearing the effigies of his
ancestors. As his reign of less than a year seems too short for us to
suppose that all these changes were made in that time, perhaps only the
last-mentioned ring was the one he used as emperor. Commodus (161–192
A.D.), the unworthy son of the philosopher-emperor, Marcus
Aurelius, had the figure of an Amazon engraved for his signet, this
choice having been made, so it is said, because of the pleasure he took
in seeing his mistress Martia dressed in this way.

Augustus Cæsar reposed such unlimited confidence in his son-in-law,
Agrippa, and in his friend and finance minister, Mæcenas, that he was
in the habit of confiding his letters to them for correction, and
gave them permission to send off the corrected letters, bearing the
stamp of his signet which he had deposited in their charge, without
submitting them again to him. Similar trust was reposed by Vespasian in
Mutianus.[220]

The seal was stamped on a linen band passed around the closed tablets
on the inside surfaces of which the letter had been written. The
impression, made when the ends of the band were joined, was either
upon wax, soft viscous earth, or even on a mixture of chalk; this
was commonly moistened with saliva before the signet was used, so
that the engraved stone might not adhere to the imprint and could
be easily taken off. The bearer of such a letter fully realized his
responsibility for its delivery with unbroken seal, and generally
took pains to have this duly recognized by the person to whom it was
addressed.[221] The personal seal was also impressed, both in Roman
times and later, upon all documents private or public. In the case
of private documents the strictly guarded individuality of the seal
really afforded a very considerable guarantee of the genuineness of a
document. A survival of this is the common little red seal attached
now-a-days to legal documents, necessary to their validity it is true,
but giving no possible confirmation of the signature. This latter was
in fact represented by the design of the old signets.

The “Dream Book” of Artemidorus relates as an especially direful
vision, that of one who dreamed his signet ring had dropped from his
finger, and that the engraved stone set therein had broken into many
fragments, the result of this being that he could transact no business
for forty-five days,[222] presumably until he could have a new signet
engraved. For the impression of the individual signet was indispensable
to give validity to any order or agreement.

[Illustration: Two brass rings. Roman. 1, set with an inscribed
agate,; 2, key-ring, set with an engraved onyx

Gorlæus, Dactyliotheca, Delphis Bat., 1601]

[Illustration: Two gold rings, with onyx gems. Roman. 1, engraved
with seated figure of Ceres; 2, design of dove bringing back the
olive branch to the Ark

Gorlæus, Dactyliotheca, Delphis Bat., 1601]

[Illustration:

Two bronze rings excavated at the Borough Field, Chesterford,
Essex, 1848. Late Roman.

British Museum]

[Illustration:

Bone ring with grotesque mask carved on bezel. Found near the
amphitheatre at Lyons, France. Roman.

British Museum]

[Illustration: Roman gold rings of the Fourth Century
A.D. 1, set with plasma bead; 2, double ring, set with
garnets; 3, gold hoop composed of a plain band on either side
of a wavy band; set with a convex plasma; 4. set with convex
almandine intaglio

British Museum]

[Illustration:

Ornamental gold ring from Wiston, Sussex, England, set with a
dark amethyst

British Museum]

[Illustration:

Silver ring. On bezel engraved design of a bird approaching a
fallen stag. About Fifth Century A.D.

British Museum]

The Jewish historian Josephus cites, as an example of
absent-mindedness, that when the Roman senator Cneius Sentius
Saturninus arose in the senate and pronounced a fiery harangue on
the death of Caligula, urging the senators to regain their former
liberties of which they had been robbed, he quite forgot that he wore
on his hand a ring set with a stone on which the head of the detested
tyrant was cut. His fellow senator, Trebellius Maximus, remarking it,
however, snatched it from his finger, and the stone was crushed to
pieces.[223]

How common in ancient Rome was the use of a signet ring to seal up the
provision rooms in a household, is shown by a passage in the “Casina”
of the comic poet Plautus, written about 200 B.C., where
Cleopatra on leaving her home to visit a neighbor, directs her slaves
to seal these rooms and bring her ring back to her.[224]

Of the betrothal ring, Clemens Alexandrinus says that it was not given
as an ornament, but for sealing objects in the conjugal domicile. As
the husband’s signet ring was often used in a similar way, it was
quite customary to bequeath it to a wife or a daughter. An example of
this appears in the case of Emperor Aurelian (214–275 A.D.)
who left his seal ring to his wife and daughter jointly, the Latin
historian adding that in so doing he was acting “just like a private
citizen.”[225]

A curious subject was chosen for his signet-ring by a native of
Intercatia in Spain. His father had been killed in a single combat by
the Roman leader Scipio Æmilius, and it was this scene that the son had
engraved upon his ring. When Stilo Preconinus related this fact in Rome
he laughingly demanded of his hearers what they supposed the Spaniard
would have done if his father had killed Scipio instead of being
killed by him.[226]

In the Roman world the custom of removing the rings in case of death is
noted by Pliny, who says that they were taken from the fingers of those
in the comatose state of the dying; the rings were often replaced after
death.[227] An instance in point is noted by Suetonius, who reports
that when Tiberius became unconscious, and was believed to be about
to die, his seal ring was slipped from his finger, but on regaining
consciousness the emperor demanded that it should be replaced.[228] To
have a ring drop from the finger was regarded as a bad omen, and when
an accident of this kind happened to Emperor Hadrian, he is said to
have exclaimed: “This is a sign of death.” The ring which fell from his
finger bore a gem engraved with his own image.

The elegy of Propertius (49–15? B.C.) on the “Shade of Cynthia,” gives
proof that a valuable ring was often left on the hand of the corpse
when it was burned on the funeral pyre. The Latin verses describing the
apparition may be thus rendered in prose:[229]

“She still had the same eyes and hair as when on the funeral couch; but
her garments had been burned away. The flame had destroyed the beryl
which used to grace her finger, and the infernal stream had discolored
her lips.”

The sense of intimate connection between a valued ring and the wearer,
finds expression in Shakespeare’s lines (Cymbeline Act I, sc. 5):

My ring I hold dear as my finger; ’tis part of it.

And if we go back 2200 years to a far distant quarter of the globe we
meet with the same feeling of intimate connection in the inspired
words of the Hebrew prophet Jeremiah (xxii, 24):

_As_ I live, saith the Lord, though Coniah the son of
Jehoiakim King of Judah were the signet upon my right hand, yet
would I pluck thee hence.

The prophet Haggai (chap. ii, verse 23) uses the designation signet to
indicate a specially chosen instrument, in the following words:

In that day, saith the Lord of hosts, will I take thee, O Zerubbabel,
my servant, the son of Shealtiel, saith the Lord, and will make thee as
a signet: for I have chosen thee, saith the Lord of hosts.

The Freemasons have adopted the signet of Zerubbabel as one of the
symbols of the Royal Arch, the seventh masonic degree.[230]

The monogram of Christ appears on a signet made for a Christian lady of
Roman times, Ælia Valeria. Of this sacred symbol St. John Chrysostom
wrote that the Christians of his time always inscribed it at the
beginning of their letters, and he gives as a reason for this that
wherever the name of God appeared there was nothing but happiness.
Undoubtedly the shape of the Greek X (Ch), forming part of this
monogram, suggested a form of the cross, and gave an added significance
to the monogram, especially in view of Chrysostom’s statement that the
Christians of his time painted or engraved a cross on their houses and
made the sign of the cross over their foreheads and their hearts.[231]

Clemens Alexandrinus in the second century tells us that men were
required to wear the seal ring on the little finger, as worn in this
way it would interfere least with the use of the hand, and would be
best protected from injury and loss.[232] While, however, fashion must
have dictated to a great extent the finger on which a seal ring was
to be worn, we should bear in mind that any particular custom in this
matter was not constant, and that individual preferences must often
have determined the finger chosen to bear the seal ring. This diversity
is attested by the differing statements of the old writers, as well as
by the rare examples offered by ancient statues and paintings.

One of the rare ivory rings in the British Museum is a signet the
bezel of which bears an engraved design of Christ on the Cross, with
the Virgin and St. John on either side. The legend is the motto of
Constantine the Great: In hoc signo vinces. The hoop of this ring,
which was found in Suffolk, has been restored at the back. The figures
are very rudely engraved for a production of the sixteenth century.[233]

[Illustration:

Bronze signet-ring, Byzantine, two views and impression. The
abbreviated Greek inscription reads: “May the Lord help his
servant Stephan”

British Museum]

[Illustration: Bronze signet ring. European. Fifteenth Century

British Museum]

[Illustration: Silver ring, broken at the back. Bezel bears
letter “T” crowned. Fifteenth Century

British Museum]

[Illustration:

Ivory signet ring, with impression. On the carved bezel, the
Crucifixion, between the Virgin and St. John; legend: “_In hoc
signo vinces_,” motto of the Emperor Constantine

British Museum]

[Illustration:

Bronze signet. The octagonal bezel is engraved with a greyhound’s
head, and a rather obscure inscription. Ring and impression of
signet. Fifteenth Century

British Museum]

[Illustration: Gold signet ring, engraved with a lion rampant;
beneath, a star. Ring and impression. Sixteenth Century

British Museum]

[Illustration:

Massive gold ring; bezel engraved with a lion passant regardant,
and the legend: “Now is thus.” English, late Fifteenth Century.
Ring and impression of signet

British Museum]

It appears to have been an ancient usage in some parts of the Christian
world to use two signet rings in connection with the baptismal
ceremonies. One of these was employed to seal up the font, or else the
baptistry, while the other was used to affix a seal upon the profession
of faith made by the neophyte, this profession being later entered on a
public register. Some of the ecclesiastical writers saw the origin of
the first-named ring in the text (Cant. iv, 12):

A garden enclosed is my sister, my spouse; a spring shut up, a
fountain sealed.[234]

A recognition that at the beginning of the sixth century A.D.
bishops were in possession of signet rings is offered by a circular
letter addressed by Clovis I, in 511 A.D., after his victory
over the Visigoths at Vouglé, to the bishops of the many cities that
came under his domination as the fruits of this success. He informs
the bishops that he will free all prisoners, either clerical or lay,
for whom this favor shall be asked in letters “sealed with your ring.”
This, however, only confirms the other testimony to the effect that the
bishops had signets, but does not suffice to establish the existence at
this time of rings given to them at their consecration as symbols of
their office.[235]

The French kings of the Merovingian age stamped upon their royal
documents the design engraved on their signet rings, the accompanying
formula being frequently as follows: “By the impress of our ring we
corroborate (_roborari fecimus_)”; slightly different forms appear
sometimes. The following list gives, with the dates, a number of seal
impressions that have been found on such documents:[236]

Childebert I, 528 A.D.
Sigebert I, 545, A.D.
Childeric I, 583 A.D.
Dagobert I, 629, 631–632, 635 A.D.
Childeric II, 664 A.D.
Thierry III, 673 A.D.
Dagobert II, 675 A.D.
Charles Martel (mayor of the palace), 724 A.D.
Pepin le Bref (mayor of the palace), 748 and 751 A.D.
Pepin le Bref, king, 755 and 768 A.D.

In the Carolingian period, Charlemagne and his successors continued the
use of the same formulas.

The possession of signet rings by well-born women, although not usual
in Roman times, became quite common in the early Middle Ages, under the
influence of the Germanic peoples, which accorded to woman a much more
important station than did the Romans or Gallo-Romans. Among the relics
of the Merovingian period that have been preserved to our day, is the
ring of Berteildis, one of the wives of Dagobert I (602?-638).[237]
It is of silver and is inscribed with the name of the queen and the
monogram of the word _regina_.[238] A document from the time of
Childeric II, dated in 637, shows impressions of two queenly signets,
one that of Emnechildis, wife of Sigebert II, King of Austrasia
and guardian of Childeric, and the other belonging to Blichildis,
Childeric’s wife.

In the tomb of the Frankish king Childeric I (458–481 A.D.),
accidentally discovered at Tournai in 1653, in an ancient cemetery
of the parish church of St. Brica, were found a number of valuable
relics of this sovereign, among them his signet ring. After having
been taken to Vienna by Archduke Leopold Wilhelm, then governor of the
Low Countries, the treasure came, after his death, into the Imperial
Cabinet there. In 1665 the Archbishop of Mayence secured from Emperor
Leopold I permission to offer it to Louis XIV. In July of this year
the precious objects were transmitted to the French king and were
deposited in the Cabinet de Médailles, recently constituted in the
Louvre. Shortly afterward, they were transferred to the Bibliothèque du
Roi, and were safely preserved in this institution, under its changing
names, until 1831, when the ring and other of the Childeric relics,
as well as a number of other historic objects, were stolen from the
library. The ring was never recovered. Fortunately there exists a very
exact description and a figuration of the ring in an account of the
treasure published in 1655, at Antwerp, by Jean Jacques Chifflet, first
physician of the Archduke.[239] The ring, which is of massive gold,
bears a large oval bezel on which is engraved the bust, full face.
The sovereign is beardless, with long hair parted in the middle and
hanging down to his shoulders. The bust is garbed in Roman style; on
the tunic may be seen a decorative plaque. The king’s right hand holds
a lance which rests on his shoulder, as may be observed in the imperial
medals of Constantine II, Theodosius II, and their successors. The
legend, in the genitive case, _Childerici Regis_, presupposes the
word _signum_ or _sigillum_, as the ring was unquestionably
a signet. M. Deloche considers it probable that it was made on the
occasion of Childeric’s marriage with Basnia, Queen of Thuringia, who
had abandoned her native land and her husband to wed the Frankish
sovereign. Clovis I (481–511) was the offspring of this union. Although
the original has been lost there has fortunately been preserved an
imprint from it on the margin of a manuscript in the Bibliothèque de
Sainte Geneviève; of the entire ring there is the carefully executed
drawing made for Chifflet’s work.[240]

In many cases the Carolingian monarchs rendered their signets, set with
antique gems, significant of their own personality by having their
names engraved around the setting. In this way Carloman (741–747)
utilized an antique gem showing a female bust with hair tied in a
knot, while Charlemagne’s choice was a gem engraved with the head of
Marcus Aurelius; at a later time he substituted for this one bearing
the head of the Alexandrian god Serapis. It is noteworthy that there
is a great likeness between the portraits of Antoninus Pius and the
type chosen for Serapis. Louis I, le Debonnaire (814–840), selected
a portrait of Antoninus Pius, and his son, Lothaire, Roman emperor,
840–855 A.D., a gem with Caracalla’s head, the choice being no
inappropriate one in view of Lothaire’s weak and treacherous character.
Rev. C. W. King conjectures that the selection of the particular head
may have depended upon its resemblance, more or less close, to the
features of the monarch, as even though the likeness should not be very
exact, the work would surpass anything that the unskilful gem-cutters
of this age could produce.[241]

Of the seal of the Prophet Mohammed, we are told by Ibn Kaldoun that
when he was about to send a letter to the Emperor Heraclius, his
attention was called to the fact that no letter would be received by a
foreign potentate unless it bore the impression of the Prophet’s seal.
Mohammed therefore had a seal made of silver, bearing the inscription
“_Mohammed rasûl Allah_,” “Mohammed the Apostle of God”; these
three words, according to Al-Bokhari, were disposed in three lines.
The Prophet made use of this seal and forbade the making of any one
like it. After his death it was employed by his successors, Abu Bekr,
Omar and Othman, but the last-named unluckily let it fall from his
hand into the well of Aris, whose depth it had never been possible to
measure. A duplicate was executed to replace the original, but its
loss was greatly deplored, and was looked upon as a possible presage
of ill-fortune.[242] The title inscribed upon it was prouder in its
simplicity than that assumed by any other ruler, not excepting those
who claimed for themselves a divine ancestry, or divine attributes.
These could at most pretend to rank as divinities of a lower order,
while Mohammed claimed to be the mouthpiece of the one and only God.

Burton writes that it is “a tradition of the Prophet” that the
carnelian is the best stone for a signet ring, and this is still the
usage among Mohammedans in the Orient. In the Arabian tale entitled
“History of Al Hajjaj ben Yusuf and the Young Sayyed,” we read that the
signet should be of carnelian because the stone was a guard against
poverty.[243]

Some Arabic signets bore peculiarly apt inscriptions. One of these
reads: “Correspondence is only a half-joy,” a delicate piece of
flattery for the recipient of a letter bearing this seal. Another
signet gives the following very necessary warning to the person to
whom the letter is addressed, should it happen to contain something
which ought not to be revealed. “If more than two know it, the secret
is out.”[244] Such inscriptions are certainly more significant than a
motto of less special meaning.

In an essay on Arabic signets, Hammer-Purgstall[245] calls attention
to a fundamental distinction between talismans and signets. With the
former, the inscription is engraved so that it may be read as it
stands, while with the latter the characters are reversed so that only
the impression gives them in their proper order. Besides this, the
talismans rarely contain the wearer’s name, which is the most essential
part of the signet. Nevertheless, there can be little doubt that in
many cases the signet was at the same time a talisman.

That lovers--even Mohammedan lovers--in the seventeenth century,
had romantic designs engraved upon seal rings, is illustrated by
what Garzoni relates concerning the seal ring of “Mahometh Bassa.”
This bore the figure of a silk-worm upon a mulberry leaf, the design
commemorating the wearer’s love for a Moorish girl, and signifying that
he drew his life from her as did the silk-worm from the leaf.[246]

Tavernier relates that in his time, the last half of the seventeenth
century, the secret treasure of the Sultans in Constantinople was
guarded in an innermost treasure-chamber of the Serail. This chamber
was only opened at intervals to receive the surplus gold that had been
collected from the Empire or received in any way, when the total sum
had reached 18,000,000 livres (over $7,000,000] according to the value
of the livre in Tavernier’s day). The gold was contained in sacks, each
of which held 15,000 ducats. When an addition to the treasure was to be
deposited, the Sultan himself led the way to the treasure-chamber and
stamped his seal, with his own hand, on red wax spread over the knot
of the cord with which the sack was secured. This seal was engraved on
the bezel of a gold ring and constituted no design, but simply the name
of the reigning sovereign, the characters being probably intricately
combined in the elaborate and cryptic manner used in the case of the
imperial name and titles.[247]

A Byzantine signet ring of the sixth or seventh century of our era, in
the British Museum, shows the head of Christ, beneath which bending
figures of two angels in profound adoration are depicted. Angel-figures
almost exactly similar may be seen in Byzantine ivory carvings of this
later period, the type evidently being one of those rigidly defined
in the hieratic art of the school. With this ring were found coins of
Heraclius (610–641), the Greek emperor in whose reign fell the death
of Mohammed (June 8, 632) and the overthrow of the Sassanian Persian
monarchy by the Mohammedans.[248]

How important the possession of a royal seal-ring was considered to
be, as proving the title of a successor, appears in the story that at
the death-bed of Alexius Comnenus (1084–1118), Emperor of the East,
when the son and rightful successor, John Comnenus, perceived that his
mother Irene was working to exclude him from the throne and to seat
thereon his blue-stocking sister Anna, he took off the imperial ring
from the hand of his dying father and thus ensured for himself the
title to the Eastern Empire.[249]

Saint Bernard of Clairvaux (1091–1153), the enthusiastic preacher of
the Second Crusade in 1147, excuses himself in some of his letters
that he has failed to seal them, because he could not lay his hand on
his signet. In a letter to Pope Eugene III, the saint complains that
several spurious letters bearing his name have been circulated, sealed
with a counterfeit seal; he also notifies the pontiff that from this
time his letters will bear a new seal, on which will be his portrait
and his name.[250]

Well-to-do merchants of mediæval times, not entitled to armorial
bearings, often had special individual marks or symbols engraved
upon their signets. This custom obtained on the continent as well
as in England, and allusion is made in the Old English poem of the
fourteenth century, “Piers Plowman,” to “merchantes merkes ymedeled
in glasse.”[251] Probably emblems of this kind came to have a certain
association with the business which in many cases descended from
father to son through a number of generations.

A royal signet ring once believed to be that of Saint Louis (Louis
IX, 1214–1270) and long preserved in the treasury of St. Denis, as an
object of reverent care, is now in the Louvre Museum. The fact that
the crescent is introduced as a symbol fails to connect the ring with
the Crusader St. Louis, as this symbol was not used by the Saracens of
his time, but was only adopted as a Mohammedan device after the Turks
captured Constantinople, the crescent having been a recognised symbol
in ancient times in Byzantium long before the city came to be called
Constantinople.[252]

The engraved stone in the ring is a table-cut sapphire, the monarch
being figured standing, with a nimbus around his head; he is crowned
and bears a sceptre. The letters S L on the stone have been interpreted
to mean rather _sigillum Ludovici_ than _Sanctus Ludovicus_,
and one critic suggests the possibility that it may have been executed
in Constantinople, in Byzantine times, for Louis VII, who was there
in 1147, and was received with high honors by Manuel Comnenus,
the Greek emperor’s courtesy being rather bred of fear of French
aggression than of affection for the French crusader. As we have good
evidence that gem-cutting was not practised at this time in France,
it seems plausible enough that Louis VII should have availed himself
of this opportunity to have a signet engraved for him by a Greek
gem-cutter.[253]

The signet ring of King Charles V of France (1337–1380) was set with
an Oriental ruby on which was engraved “the bearded head of a king.”
This signet was used by King Charles to seal the letters written by
his own hand. The somewhat vague description in the inventory suggests
that this may have been an antique gem, the supposedly royal head being
that of some Greek divinity. The art of engraving on such hard stones
as the ruby does not seem to have been practised in the thirteenth or
fourteenth centuries, the revival of this art belonging to a later
period. Evidently the head was not that of Charles himself or of any
of his predecessors, for, had this been the case the inventory would
hardly fail to note the fact.[254]

When a certain Bratilos was sent as a messenger by the eastern emperor
Cantacuzene (1341–1355) to his empress Irene, to announce the outbreak
of a dangerous revolt, he bore a sealed letter from the emperor.[255]
While on his journey, however, he began to fear that he might be
waylaid and robbed of the important document. This peril he effectively
provided against by memorizing the letter and then destroying it, after
he had removed the wax impression of the imperial signet, which he
could safely guard in his mouth, and which served to accredit him when
he came before the empress.[256] Not long afterward Cantacuzene was
defeated and deposed by John V, Palæologus, and retired to a monastery,
where he lived until 1411, composing a history of his own times in his
leisure moments; his wife also took the religious vows under the name
of Eugenia.

Much has been written about the ring or rather the engraved seal of
Michelangelo. This gem enjoyed such high esteem that it was very often
copied, the copies sometimes acquiring the repute of being originals.
Four of them, two in paste, one in amethyst, and one in carnelian,
exist in Denmark, the two latter having the dimensions of the original
gem. The copy in carnelian--the stone in which the original was cut--is
exceptionally well executed.[257] The original seal is now in the
Bibliothêque Nationale in Paris and came into the possession of Louis
XIV in 1680. The king wore it set in a ring.

It was brought to France in 1600 by a Sieur Bigarris, director of the
Mint, and its history was at the time traced back to Agosto Tassi,
goldsmith in Bologna, to whom Michelangelo had bequeathed it. The gem
was the work of Pier Maria di Pescia, and bears his symbolic signature,
a boy fishing (_pescia_, fishing). The dimensions are given as 15
mm. by 11 mm., the form being oval, and in this restricted space is a
design embracing twelve human figures, two genii, a horse, a goat and
a tree. Two of the figures appear to have been copied from a detail of
Michelangelo’s Sistine Chapel frescoes: a woman helping another woman
to place a basket of grapes upon her head. Watelet and Levesque in
their “_Dictionnaire des Arts_” published in 1791, characterize
this seal as “the most beautiful engraved gem known.”

The Royal Collection at Windsor Castle contains a gold ring set with
a cameo portrait of Louis XII, of France (1498–1515), cut in a pale
ruby of clear lustre. The work is believed to have been executed during
the lifetime of the king, and was considered by Rev. C. W. King to be
the earliest Renaissance portrait cut on a stone of the hardness of
a ruby. He regarded it as a work of the famous Renaissance gem-cutter
Domenico dei Camei, this artist having engraved a portrait of the
Milanese duke Ludovico Sforza, surnamed Il Moro, on the same hard
material. The gold plate at the back of the bezel holding the gem bears
the inscription “Loys XII^{me} Roy de France décéda I Janvier, 1515,”
the stone having been set in the ring at some time after the monarch’s
death.[258]

This collection also contains an imperfect specimen of a squirt-ring.
The hoop is of enamelled gold set with a garnet engraved in relief
with a mask or bacchic head finely executed by a sixteenth-century
artist. The hole at the base of the hoop, with its internal screw-worm,
indicates that it was once provided with a squirt for projecting
perfumed liquids.[259]

A sixteenth-century portrait by the German painter, Conrad Faber,
depicts a well-to-do burgher, possibly a burgomaster, who wears a seal
ring on the index finger of his left hand and a ring with a precious
stone setting on the fourth finger of the same hand. In this hand he
holds something which may be a staff of office; it is surmounted by
an octagonal block of ebony in which is inlaid a medallion figuring
St. George and the Dragon. The city, as carefully delineated in the
background as in the finest of engravings, appears to be one of the
historic Rhine cities, and is evidently that with which the sitter was
identified.

[Illustration: PORTRAIT OF A MAN, BY THE SIXTEENTH-CENTURY GERMAN
PAINTER, CONRAD FABER

Seal ring on index of left hand, sapphire-set ring on fourth
finger of this hand, which holds what seems to be a wand or staff
of office, surmounted by an octagonal ebony block, with inserted
medallion of St. George and the Dragon

Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, Kennedy Fund, 1912]

[Illustration: PORTRAIT OF BENEDIKT VON HERTENSTEIN, BY HANS
HOLBEIN

Showing seal ring on index finger, two rings on third finger, and
three on little finger of left hand

Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York City]

[Illustration: MAN AND WOMAN AT A CASEMENT

The woman wears three rings (sapphire, ruby and some other stone)
on the index of right hand, and two on the middle finger of this
hand, one of them on the second joint. The young man has a large
oval topaz on the little finger of his left hand. Florentine,
Fifteenth Century

Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York]

For signet rings, antique gems continued to be those most favored
until the Renaissance period, and even to a considerable extent during
this period. However, the development and elaboration of the science
of heraldry and the great importance accorded to the possession
of armorial bearings soon induced the engraving of these upon the
signets, in preference to using antique gems or copying their types.
In Elizabeth’s reign and in those of her immediate successors, it
is believed that scarcely a gentleman was to be found who did not
own and wear a signet ring on which appeared his coat-of-arms. Those
not fortunate enough to have the right to display armorial bearings,
sometimes sought to make their signets individual by using as designs
rebuses expressing more or less well the pronunciation of their
names.[260]

Arms were sometimes blazoned on rings by enamel applied to the base
of a setting; thus the arms engraved on a rock-crystal or a white
sapphire, would appear with their proper hues, the colors showing
through the transparent stone, and their effect being heightened by the
brilliant medium. A fine example of this kind of ring is one made for
Jean Sans-Peur, Duke of Burgundy (1401–1419); another is the signet
ring of Mary, Queen of Scots, now in the British Museum.[261]

Bequests of signets to near relatives occur not infrequently in wills
of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, as for example in that of
John Horton, dated 1565, wherein appears the following: “Item, I give
unto my brother Anthony Horton, for a token, my golde ringe w^{th}
the seale of myne armes, desirenge him to be good to my wiffe and
my childringe as my trust is in him.” Besides this seal ring, the
testator willed “a golde ringe w^{th} a turkes [turquoise] in it” to
his “singular good Lord the Lord Eueerye,” with a plea for friendship
toward his wife and children. A ring set with a diamond was bequeathed
in 1427 by Elizabeth, Lady Fitzhugh to her son William.[262] This was
almost certainly one of the uncut, pointed diamonds used for settings
at this early time.

The signet ring of Mary Stuart is one of the chief treasures in the
ring collection of the British Museum. It was made for her use after
her betrothal to the French Dauphin, later, for a few months, King
of France as Francis II (1543–1560), just before her marriage, as
after that time the arms of France would have been combined with
those of Scotland. The following description is given of this ring
in the exceedingly valuable catalogue of the Franks Bequest by O. M.
Dalton[263]:

316. Gold; the shoulders ornamented with flowers and leaves once
enamelled; oval bezel containing a chalcedony engraved with
the achievement of Mary, Queen of Scots. The shield is that of
Scotland surrounded by the collar of the Thistle, with the badge,
and supported by two unicorns chained and ducally gorged; the
crest, on a helmet with mantlings and ensigned with a crown, is
a lion sejant affronté, crowned and holding in the dexter paw a
naked sword; in the sinister a sceptre, both bendwise. Legend:
_In Defens_, and the letters M R. On the dexter side is a
banner with the arms of Scotland; on the sinister side, another,
with three bars and over all a saltire. The metals and tinctures
appear through the crystal on a field of blue. Within the hoop at
the back of the bezel is engraved a cipher in a circular band and
surmounted by a crown, once enamelled. The cipher is formed of the
Greek letter φ and M, for the names Francis and Mary.

In this example of sixteenth-century French goldsmithing, the colors of
the arms have been applied beneath the crystal so that they would not
be effaced in using the signet for sealing. In 1792 this ring was in
the possession of Queen Charlotte, wife of George III. After her death
it became the property of the Duke of York, and when his plate and
jewels were sold at Christie’s, in London, March, 1827, it was bought
by Mr. Richard Greene, F.S.A., and was acquired from him in 1856 by the
British Museum.

A signet ring believed by many to be that of the immortal Shakespeare,
was found on March 16, 1810. It was picked up on the surface of the
mill-close that adjoins Stratford churchyard; the finder was the wife
of a poor laborer. How lightly it was esteemed at the outset is shown
by the low price at which it was acquired by Mr. R. B. Wheeler, who
paid only thirty-six shillings ($9.00), considered to be the value
of the fifteen pennyweights of gold in the ring. In fact, the only
circumstances seeming to connect it with Shakespeare are the initials
W. S., and the facts that the ring appears to be of Elizabethan
workmanship and that it was found at Stratford-on-Avon, Shakespeare’s
home.[264] The initial letters are bound together with a design
composed of an ornamental band with tassels, so arranged as to outline
a heart. A queer coincidence, if the report be true, is that a certain
William Shakespeare was at work nearby when the ring was found.[265]

One of the somewhat less well-known Shakespeare portraits depicts the
poet wearing a thumb ring on his left hand. This is the work of Gerald
Soest, who was born twenty-one years after Shakespeare’s death; its
inspiration is probably to be sought in the Chandos portrait of which
it is an amplification and re-arrangement. The face, however, wholly
lacks the dignity and expression of the Chandos, being exceedingly
weak and commonplace. The hands give the effect of having been
copied from those in some other portrait, and, of course, under all
these circumstances we would scarcely be justified in assuming that
Shakespeare wore a thumb ring, although he may well have done so, in
view of the fact that the fashion was common enough in his time. Queen
Elizabeth, even, is depicted as wearing one in Zucchero’s portrait of
her at Hampton Court.[266]

[Illustration:

1, Shakespeare’s gold signet ring, found in Stratford-upon-Avon,
March 16, 1810. 2, brass signet supposed to be that of the
physician, John Hall, Shakespeare’s son-in-law. 3, wax impression
from Shakespeare’s ring. (Photographed expressly for this book
as attested by signatures of Sir Sidney Lee, Chairman of the
Executive Committee of “Shakespeare’s Birthplace,” and of the
Librarian, F. C. Wellstood.) 4 and 5, gold signet ring owned by
Lord Byron, with impression from it. The seal shows the crests
and mottoes of three families. Photographed for this book. In the
possession of Judge Peter T. Barlow, New York]

[Illustration]

Another English poet, that master of impassioned verse, Byron, had in
his possession a most interesting bloodstone signet ring, engraved with
the following three family mottoes: “Tout prest” (Quite ready), motto
of the families Monk, Murray and Younger; “Confido, conquiesco” (I
trust and am contented), motto of the Dysart, Hodgett, Maroy, Tollmache
and Turner families; “Pour y parvenir” (In order to accomplish, or
succeed), motto of the families Manners and Manners-Sutton. This
ring was owned by Sir Walter Scott, and at the dispersal sale of his
personal effects at Abbotsford it was acquired by the late Samuel
Latham Mitchell Barlow, the great art connoisseur and collector, by
whose son, Judge Peter T. Barlow, of New York, it has been inherited,
in whose possession it now is, and through whose courtesy it is here
reproduced.

Many interesting facts in regard to the history of the diamond engraved
for Queen Henrietta Maria, wife of Charles I, have been presented by
Mr. C. Drury Fortnum, who purchased the diamond from the collection
of the Duke of Brunswick in 1879.[267] In the catalogue of the Duke’s
collection this stone is described as the signet of Mary, Queen of
Scots, an attribution which had been current for many years; but Mr.
Fortnum has shown that the initials on the diamond should be read MR,
the cross-bar in the first character representing the letter H, and the
whole signifying Maria Henrietta Regina.

Fortunately we have the original of the treasury order given by Charles
I, under date of January 16, 1629, directing the payment of a sum of
money to the engraver for his work. As this is probably the only case
in which the original record of payment for engraving an historical
diamond has been preserved, it is reproduced here from Mr. Fortnum’s
paper in Archæologia.[268]

Charles by the grace of God King of England, Scotland, France, and
Ireland, Defender of the Faith, &c.

To the Trēr and Undertrēr of o^r Exchecq^r for the time being
greeting:

Wee doe hereby will and com̄and yo^u out of o^r treasure remaining
in the Receipt of o^r Exchecq^r forthwith to pay or cause to be
paid unto Francis Walwyn or his assignes the some of two hundred
three-score and seven pounds for engraving, polishing, Dyamond
boart and divers other materialls for the Cutting and furnishing
of o^r Armes in a Dyamond with l’res of the name of o^r deerest
Consort the queene on each side, And these o^r l’res shal be yo^r
sufficient warr^t and discharge in this behalfe.

Given under o^r privy Seal att o^r pallace of Westm^r the
sixteenth day of January in the fourth yeare of o^r Raigne.
Jo: Packer.

As a general rule a signet ring was one of the last objects of value
that an owner would part with, but we know that after Charles’
execution Henrietta Maria was reduced to dire straits and was obliged
to sell all her possessions in order to procure the bare necessaries of
life. In Tavernier’s account of his travels in the East he states that
in 1664, he showed to the representative of the Shah of Persia a ring
engraved with the royal arms of England, and which had belonged “to
the late King of England.” As letters and papers have been preserved,
dating from 1656 to 1673, and sealed by Charles II with the diamond
signet used by his father, we have proof that Charles II had that
signet in his possession in 1664, and Mr. Fortnum’s conjecture that the
engraved diamond in Tavernier’s hands was that of Henrietta Maria is
plausible enough.

The Shah of Persia sent the diamond back to Tavernier, requesting
information as to what was engraved upon it, but the French jeweller,
fearing possible complications, did not venture to go beyond the vague
statement that the stone bore the arms of a “European prince.” The Shah
does not appear to have bought this diamond; probably he did not care
much for historic souvenirs of European royalties, and possibly he
doubted whether Tavernier had the right to offer for sale what might be
the signet of a European monarch. However, the Shah’s minister did not
fail to express his admiration of the skill shown by the “Franks” in
the art of diamond-engraving.[269]

Already, in the Vetusta Monumenta of Astle, published by him in 1792,
the seal is figured as that of Mary Queen of Scots, and is said to have
been in the possession of Louis XIV. If this statement be correct, the
signet might have been among the diamonds sold by Tavernier to Louis
XIV, on the former’s return to Europe. It seems to have shared the fate
of a large number of the jewels belonging to the French crown and to
the royal family, and next appears in a sale held in London June 19,
1817, being described in the catalogue as “the engraved diamond ring
of Mary, Queen of Scots, upon which are engraved the arms of England,
Scotland and Ireland, quartered,” and authenticated by a communication
from “that correct and learned antiquary the late Robert Gough, Esq.”
to the following effect:

That it descended from Mary to her grandchild Charles I, who gave
it on the scaffold to Arch Bishop Juxon for his son Charles II,
who in his troubles pawned it in Holland for £300, where it was
bought by Governor Yale and sold at his sale for £320, supposed
for the Pretender. Afterwards it came into the possession of
the Earl of Ilay, Duke of Argyle, and probably from him to Mr.
Blashford.

In these statements there is probably a confusion between the diamond
of Henrietta Maria, known later as that of Mary, Queen of Scots, and
a diamond signet of Charles I, for such a signet is said to have been
given to Bishop Juxon by Charles just before his execution. We have
every reason to believe that Henrietta Maria bore her own signet with
her when she left England.

The ring containing this historic diamond was purchased at the sale of
June 19, 1817, by Dr. Curry (probably James Curry, M.D., physician at
Guy’s Hospital) for the sum of £90 6s ($450), although a contemporary
letter states that the sum was £86, and adds that the stone itself
was worth but £10. The ring was subsequently acquired by an agent,
Van Prague, and after passing through several hands came into the
possession of Mr. Leverson, a diamond dealer of Paris, who sold it to
the Duke of Brunswick. At one time it was owned by the Earl of Buchan,
and it was exhibited at Holyrood in 1843, when several rock crystal
models were made of it. One of these served Mr. Fortnum as a standard
of comparison for the identification of the Duke of Brunswick’s diamond.

The stone is a table diamond and is engraved with the arms of England
and France in the first and fourth quarters, with those of Scotland in
the second quarter, and those of Ireland in the third. In 1887, on the
occasion of Queen Victoria’s Jubilee, this signet was presented to the
queen by Mr. Drury Fortnum, and it is now in the royal collection at
Windsor Castle.[270]

[Illustration: RINGS FROM THE COLLECTION OF THE IMPERIAL KUNSTGEWERBE
MUSEUM, VIENNA

1 and 3, rings of Empress Eleonora, wife of Ferdinand III
(1608–1657); enameled gold; Seventeenth Century. 2, gold ring
said to have belonged to Mary of Burgundy, daughter of Charles
the Bold, and wife of Maximilian I., Emperor of Germany. Bears
an M formed of black diamonds and has twice on the inner side
the monogram of Maria in Gothic capitals. 4, ring with miniature
portraits of Emperor Mathias and his wife Empress Anne; enameled
gold; 1612–1619. 5, (_a_) ring with watch by Johann Putz
of Augsburg, and (_b_) lid made of an emerald on which the
Austrian double-eagle is engraved; Seventeenth Century. 6, ring
with a sun-dial, the lid representing a hedgehog studded with
black diamond lozenges; Seventeenth Century. 7 and 8, two rings
set with topaz; enameled gold; Sixteenth and Seventeenth Century.
9, bronze ring, with head of Christ in white enamel on blue
ground, the hair being of gold; Seventeenth Century. 10, ring
set with a rock crystal, engraved with the arms of an Austrian
archduke. On the inner side is a sun-dial; Seventeenth century.
11, ring with a miniature portrait of Empress Claudia Felicitas;
enameled gold.]

[Illustration: IMPRESSION OF SIGNET.

Double size linear.

SIGNET RING, CHARLES I.

Double size linear.

SIGNET RING OF CHARLES I

The richly ornamented gold hoop has on its shoulders a lion and a
unicorn of chiseled steel. On the bezel is a steel plate engraved
with the Royal arms, those of France and England in the first and
fourth quarters; in the second, the arms of Scotland; and in the
third, the Irish harp. On the sides of the gold base of the bezel
is the inscription: “_Dieu et mon droit_,” inserted in steel
letters]

One of the most interesting engraved diamonds is the signet of
Charles I of England, when Prince of Wales.[271] This is a large
shield-shaped diamond engraved in intaglio with the Prince of Wales’
feathers between the letters C.P. and issuing from a coronet; on a
ribbon beneath appears the motto ~ICH DIEN~. The stone is set in
a ring of enamelled gold. The engraving is finely executed and deeply
cut. This signet has often been regarded as that of Charles II, but all
doubt as to the original owner is set at rest by the existence of an
autograph letter of Charles I, in the possession of M. Labouchère of
Paris, bearing its impress.

The Royal Collection at Windsor Castle also contains the signet used
by Charles I, as King. It has a richly ornamented hoop, to which are
attached, at the shoulders, chiseled steel figures of a lion and a
unicorn. The gold bezel has a steel facing constituting the seal. This
is engraved with the royal arms; in the first and fourth quarters,
the arms of England and of France; in the second quarter, those of
Scotland; in the fourth quarter, the Irish harp. On the gold base of
the bezel is the motto: Dieu et mon Droit, inserted in letters of
steel. This constitutes an exceptionally fine example of composite
metal-work. The archæologist, Rev. C. W. King, suggests that it may
be the work of the “Inimitable Simon,” as he was called, who later
engraved dies for the coinage of the Lord Protector, Oliver Cromwell,
although he admits that it may have been executed by Vanderdoort, who
was commanded in 1625 to make pattern pieces for the coinage of Charles
I, at the beginning of the King’s reign.[272]

A signet ring used by Kaiser William II is set with a reddish-white
onyx, on which has been engraved a shield bearing the German eagle,
and surmounted by a crown and the letters, W. II. I. R., Wilhelm der
Zweite, Imperator Rex. This signet belonged to the present Kaiser’s
grandfather William I, and has been adapted to the present monarch’s
use.

Signet rings were very popular in the latter part of the eighteenth
century and into the nineteenth century. Then, later on, they were
revived in the latter part of the nineteenth century, this revival
continuing into the twentieth century. In the earlier period it
was customary to engrave the crest and motto, or the full arms
and motto, on the ring stone, which was generally bloodstone or
carnelian, occasionally white chalcedony, more rarely lapis lazuli,
in contradistinction to the large seal fobs, in which the favorite
stones were amethyst, rock crystal, smoky topaz (quartz variety), pale
chalcedony or some lighter colored material. Many signet rings were
engraved upon gold, the sides of the rings being also engraved, as a
general rule.

Since the year 1900, great interest has been aroused in seal rings,
many of the designs of which are incised in gold or in platinum, the
entire ring being of gold or platinum, or having a platinum disk set
in a gold hoop. The entire variety of fancy stones is used: pale
amethyst, ruby, beryl, aquamarine, zircon, garnet, sard which has been
stained brown, carnelian (rarely), bloodstone, and jade--both the
nephrite variety from New Zealand and Russia and the jadeite variety
found at Bahmo, Burma. Occasionally the seals of rings are made of fine
sapphires, emeralds, or rubies, and sell for from $1,000 to $10,000, or
even more.

Seal rings were extensively worn in the period from about 1865 to 1885.
Frequently these had absolutely nothing engraved upon them. The setting
was often an oblong, rectangular onyx, sometimes one inch or one and a
quarter inches long. Occasionally upon this was inset a rose diamond
initial; or else the initial was cut upon the stone--when the onyx was
black on top--rarely a crest. In many cases the stone was white above
and pink below, a sardonyx, and the initial was cut through the light
layer. Or else it was white or pale gray on a black ground. The general
effect was thus gray, the gem being of the type known as nicolo.

Then came the cameo rings, with designs either black on white or brown
on white, sardonyx; or white on green, chrysonyx. Later again taste
developed for intaglio rings. In this instance, instead of stones of a
brownish or whitish gray,--chalcedony,--those of a pale brown or a dark
brown were chosen and these were called sard. Because of the brown hue,
the term onyx was also applied to them. This must not be confused with
the antique sard which resulted from burning a stone of a different
hue, as in the case of the antique carnelian also. The translucent or
opaque varieties, with rich red or dark brown top, were called sard,
whereas the paler translucent and almost transparent varieties,--when
pale red, yellowish red or almost yellow,--were called carnelian.

While the natal gem in a simple but effective setting is the most
appropriate ring for a girl or boy, a small seal ring for the boy,
when he is about 12 years old is not unfitting, the seal being so
well-executed that it may serve him when he has reached manhood.
For very young children, no stone can be given the preference over
the turquoise, which in its delicacy and beauty of color cannot be
excelled. Small pearls are also used, or tiny brilliant rubies.[273]

In a brightly-written tale for children, the style of which is rather
pronouncedly “up-to-date,” a sapphire signet is an important element
of the story. Long years ago, in the island of Bermuda, in the
Revolutionary period, this heirloom was surreptitiously secured by a
young girl, to whom it was destined on her coming of age, but who was
childishly impatient to gain possession of it before the time. The
little heroine comes to New York and under the stress of a weird Tory
plot, hides away her signet in the false bottom of an old trunk, stored
away in the garret of the Charlton Street house in which she has lived.
Here, more than a century later, a group of bright children find a
diary of the long-dead heroine written in cipher. One of them is clever
enough to unravel this mystery and they finally succeed in finding the
hidden signet.[274]

[Illustration: Gold ring with miniature portrait, given by
Washington to Lafayette on the latter’s return to France. See
pages 191 and 192. It is now in the possession of Mr. Gösta
Frölén of Falun, Sweden]

[Illustration: Photograph of two impressions in sealing wax, made
by President Woodrow Wilson, of his seal ring, the inscription
reading “Woodrow Wilson,” in Pitmanic shorthand. 1916]

[Illustration: Episcopal seal of Right Rev. David H. Greer,
Bishop of New York. Motto: _Crux mihi grata quies_ (The
Cross is my grateful rest). The shield bears the monogram of the
bishop’s name, above which are two keys in saltire; below is the
coat-of-arms of New Amsterdam. As crest is an Episcopal mitre]

Two characteristic Oriental seal rings are owned by Miss Joan St.
Michael Peters and Miss Katherine Harrower, both of New York City. The
gems with which they are set were bought by the Rev. Dr. John P. Peters
from an Arab, in the Kut-el-Amara region, where the British invaders
of Mesopotamia underwent such a disastrous defeat. They are engraved
carnelians. Miss Peters’ ring offers the design of a winged figure. The
excellence of the cutting might seem to indicate that it was done some
time between 500 B.C. and the beginning of our era, but a later date
has been assigned to it by Prof. A. V. Williams Jackson of Columbia
University, who pronounces it to be a Sassanian gem, and hence not
older than the third Christian century. The other ring, that belonging
to Miss Harrower, appears to be of the Seleucidan period, and may be
dated from 300 to 200 B.C. The inscription, difficult to decipher,
should be read “Khan” in Prof. Jackson’s opinion.

One of the most intrinsically valuable of ancient signets is that
engraved for Constantius II (317–361 A.D.). This is of sapphire, the
stone weighing 53 of the older carats (54.40 metric carats). The
design shows the emperor in the act of spearing an enormous wild boar
on the plains of Cæsarea, the Greek inscription _xiphius_ denoting
the sword-like tusks of the animal. The exploit is performed before
a reclining female figure, a personification of the city Cæsarea of
Cappadocia. A Latin inscription ~CONSTANTIUS. AUG~ is considered to
prove that this is veritably the emperor’s signet. This remarkable gem
is in the collection of Prince Trivulzio of Milan.[275]

A novel idea finds expression in the ring of President Wilson, on
which he has had engraved his name in stenographic symbols. This is
in thorough agreement with his aim to utilize business methods in the
administration of national affairs, to do away with routine and take
the most direct route to the solution of national problems. One of our
two ex-Presidents, William H. Taft, sent us this reply: “I never wear
a finger ring and never have done so. For that reason, I cannot comply
with your request.”[276]

SOME INTERESTING RINGS OF HISTORY

The principal types of the rings used as insignia, religious or
secular, or as signets, as well as of those devoted to some special
purpose or believed to possess talismanic or magic virtue are treated
of in other chapters. There are many rings, however, which owe their
chief or only interest to their association with some particular
historic personage, event or period, while often the mere fact that the
ornament has been owned by a famous person suffices to make it precious
and interesting; in a number of cases the ring itself has been closely
connected with some important historic happening or else with some
cherished legend. Examples of this are the ring of Essex in Elizabeth’s
time, and the legendary ring of Edward the Confessor, regarding the
stone setting of which several discrepant accounts exist.

The Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris has in its Cabinet des Médailles,
two massive gold rings, in each of which the _chaton_ is formed
by an ancient coin. In one is set a rare gold quinarius of Maximinus
(235–238 A.D.) with his effigy, and the ring is believed to
have been made during this giant emperor’s brief reign; the other bears
a golden solidus probably of Clotaire II, King of the Franks, who
reigned from 584 to 628 A.D. This coin shows a figure of the
king with the name Chlotarius Rex, and the mint-mark of the city of
Arras. The coin is more than ¾ inch in diameter.[277]

In a Frankish sepulchre at Laubenheim, near Bingen, Hessen-Darmstadt,
was found a gold ring on the bezel of which is engraved the head
of a woman, turned to the right, around which are the letters of
the Gothic name Hunila. A princess of this name was married, about
280 A.D., to Quintus Bonosius, one of the Thirty Tyrants
who established themselves in the Roman Empire during the short and
troubled reign of Probus (280–281). While the ring we describe cannot
be assigned to such an early period, but probably belongs to the end
of the sixth or the beginning of the seventh century of our era, the
intrinsic value and the workmanship, superior for the place and time,
render it likely that this Hunila, also, was of royal race and station.
In the sepulchre which yielded this ring there was a chain of amber and
amethyst beads.[278]

The Persian poet-philosopher, Saadi, relates in his Gulistan, or
“Garden of Roses,” a story illustrating how a happy chance may do more
to help the attainment of a temporary success than special ability
or training. A Persian sovereign, passionately devoted to archery,
determined to make a crucial test of the skill of his most famous
archers, and to stimulate their efforts by the bestowal of a rich
prize. To this end he caused a ring set with an immensely valuable
precious stone to be suspended above the dome of Azad on the mosque
near Shiraz, and proclaimed to all men that this ring would be given to
the one who succeeded in shooting an arrow through its hoop. Despite
the apparent impossibility of the task, several hundred of the Shah’s
archers strove to fulfil the conditions of the trial, but in vain.
Suddenly the Shah and his companions, who were closely watching the
contest, saw, to their amazement, an arrow speed through the air and
exactly traverse the ring. None of the archers before the mosque had
been shooting at the moment, and only after a careful search had been
made did it come out that the arrow had been shot off by a youth at
play in a nearby garden of a monastery. Nevertheless, the royal word
had been pledged, and the ring was adjudged to the youth. The latter,
however, showed his wisdom by breaking his bow and arrows, and never
trying another shot, thus keeping unsullied his reputation as a great
archer.[279]

One of the Latin treatises of Petrarch tells of a carbuncle or ruby,
worn set in a ring by John II of France, and believed to possess
talismanic power. The poet remarks, however, that this stone did not
preserve the King from being defeated and made prisoner at the battle
of Poitiers in 1356. This ruby was taken by the English, but was
returned to John several years later, so that he was able again “to see
an object of infinite value, but of no use whatever.” While admitting
the beauty of gems, Petrarch did not share the belief common in his day
that they possessed occult powers.[280] Of the diamond he says that,
while in ancient times it was a gem worn only by kings, in his own day
luxury and pride had increased to such an extent that many who were not
kings possessed the stone, and even some of the common people wore it
on their fingers.[281]

A ring called the “Friday Ring” is listed among the jewels of Charles
V of France (1337–1380), in the inventory made in 1379. This had on
either side a double black cross in niello work, and was set with a
cameo bearing a crucifix and the figures of the Virgin Mary, St. John
and two angels. The name was derived from the fact that the king wore
this ring every Friday, doubtless in memory of the Crucifixion, which
took place on that day.[282] There is also mention of another ring,
set with a large ruby, “the form of a halfbean. This is the ruby which
belonged to St. Louis (1215–1270), and which has always been guarded
successively by the kings of France.”[283] There seems to be some
likelihood that this was the highly prized ruby lost by King John
II about 1357, and in this case it must have been restored to the
French treasury. Still another ring was set with a large ruby, called
the “ruby de la Caille,” which had formerly belonged to the dukes of
Brittany and had been given to King Charles by Monseigneur d’Anjou. A
note to this inventory informs us that the term “ruby d’Alexandrie,” so
often met with in old French lists of jewels, denotes a ruby bought in
Alexandria, where many of the finest precious stones from the East were
dealt in during medieval times.[284]

The battlefield of Agincourt, in the department of Pas-de-Calais, not
far removed from the trenches of the Anglo-French army in the great war
of to-day, was visited in 1815 by General Sir John Woodford, who was
serving with the Grenadier Guards. Hoping to unearth a few relics of
the famous battle he had some excavations made, and his efforts were
rewarded by the discovery of several knightly rings inscribed with
mottoes or posies. About 1850 one of these rings, which had probably
been worn by a French noble, was shown at a meeting of the London
Archæological Institute. The battle of Agincourt, where the French army
was decisively defeated by Henry V of England, was fought October 25,
1415, on the day of Sts. Crispin and Crispian, and inspired Shakespeare
with the following proud lines addressed by the English king to his
soldiers:

And Crispin Crispian shall ne’er go by
From this day to the ending of the world,
But we in it shall be remembered.

Hungary’s great hero, John Hunyady (1387?-1456), had in his coat of
arms a raven holding a ring in its beak. The legendary explanation
of this is that King Sigismund once gave a ring to his mistress,
the hero’s mother, as a passport for entrance to the court. One day
the royal parent wished to see his offspring, and the child’s uncle
received orders to bring it to the court. On his way thither, while
traversing a piece of woodland, the man came to a clearing and sat down
on the grass to repose himself, giving the precious ring, his token
to the king, to the child as a plaything. Suddenly a raven swooped
down from a tree, picked up the ring and flew away with it; but the
man caught up a bow he had with him and sped a shaft after the bird,
which fell dead to the ground with the ring still tightly held in its
beak. When, in later years, the illegitimate child grew up and finally
ascended the throne of Hungary, this event was figured on his coat of
arms by the emblems of the raven and the ring.[285]

When the Constable Louis of Luxembourg was condemned to death in
1475, in the reign of Louis XI of France, he drew from his finger a
small gold ring set with a diamond and requested the father confessor
to offer it to the image of Our Lady of Paris. Then, turning to the
Franciscan monk, Jean de Sordun, he said: “Here is a stone I have long
worn on my neck and which I have greatly prized, for it resists poison,
and also protects against pestilence. I pray you to take this stone
for me to my son, to whom you will say that I beg him to keep it for
love of me.” This touching mission was never fulfilled, for after the
execution of the Constable, the court ordered that the stone should
be given to King Louis. The diamond ring, however, was duly dedicated
to the image of the Virgin.[286] Of Louis XI himself, the chronicler
quaintly says: “Before his death he suffered much from various diseases
for the cure of which the physicians who attended him concocted
dreadful and wonderful medicines. May these illnesses procure the
salvation of his soul!”[287]

Some interesting historic rings are in the fine collection of Dr.
Albert Figdor, Vienna. One of them is a gold ring believed to have
belonged to Mary of Burgundy, (d. 1482) daughter of Charles the Bold,
and wife of Maximilian I of Germany. On the ring is the letter M formed
of black diamonds, and the monogram of the name Maria, in Gothic
characters, appears twice on its inner side. Two enameled gold rings of
Empress Eleonora, third wife of Ferdinand III of Germany (1608–1657),
are good examples of seventeenth century work. More interesting is
a ring bearing miniature portraits of Emperor Mathias of Germany
(1557–1619) and his wife Empress Anne.[288]

The first historical instance of writing with a diamond point concerns
Francis I, who wrote, with the diamond of his ring, upon a pane of
glass in the Castle of Chambord, the following oft-quoted lines:

Souvent femme varie,
Mal habile qui s’y fie.

The king “engraved” these lines in such a conspicuous place that they
might be seen by his favorite, Anne de Pisseleu, Duchesse d’Estampes,
and make it clear to her that his jealousy was aroused by her
conduct.[289] The story runs that the celebrated sister of Francis,
Marguerite de Valois, authoress of the Heptameron, who was on very
friendly terms with the Duchesse d’Estampes, immediately capped this
distich by writing with her diamond-point the following rejoinder:[290]

Souvent homme varie,
Bien folle qui s’y fie.

Brantôme, who relates that he saw the window-pane inscription of
Francis I at Chambord, merely cites the first words: “Souvent femme
varie,” and as there is considerable lack of agreement as to the second
line, this may have been added by those who reported the writing,
according to their own idea of what a continuation should be. There
is a rather vague rumor that the glass was broken out by order of Louis
XIV, the fact being that it is no longer in existence and evidently
disappeared at least a couple of centuries ago.[291]

[Illustration: PORTRAIT OF A LADY, PAINTED IN COLOGNE, ABOUT 1526.

Ring set with a pointed diamond on index of right hand, small ring
on little finger of the same hand; two rings on index of left hand
and one on fourth finger of the same hand; all set with precious
stones

Königliche Gemälde-Galerie, Cassel]

[Illustration: PORTRAIT OF A MAN, BY HANS FUNK, PAINTED IN 1523

Large seal ring on right hand forefinger and two on left hand, one on
forefinger and one on fourth finger

Gallery at Basel, Switzerland]

A ring set with a pyramidal diamond, one of the type used by Francis I
on this occasion, is shown in the Londesborough Collection. This ring,
which dates from the sixteenth century and is of Italian workmanship,
is known as a “tower ring,” possibly because those confined in the
Tower of London were able to use such rings for writing names or verses
upon the windowpanes of their prison.[292]

Still another story of diamond-point writing, probably even less well
attested than the anecdote of Francis I, is that referring to Queen
Elizabeth and Sir Walter Raleigh.[293] On the occasion of an interview
with the wily queen, Sir Walter, rather distrustful of the royal
encouragement accorded him, is said to have gone to a window in the
royal audience chamber and written on the window-pane with his diamond
ring:

Fain would I climb, but that I fear to fall.

For answer the queen scratched beneath this the following admonition,
at once an encouragement and a warning:

If thy heart fail thee, do not climb at all.

An eighteenth century instance of diamond-point writing on a pane of
glass was reported in an old newspaper.[294] A celebrated English
beauty of the eighteenth century, while sojourning at the famous
English watering-place, Bath, wrote on a window-pane the following
impromptu lines:

In vain, in vain is all you’ve said,
For I’m resolved to die a Maid.

In answer to this a gentleman of her acquaintance cut this rejoinder,
the idea being better than the rhyme:

The Lady who this resolution took,
Wrote it on Glass to show it might be broke.

The visitor who relates this states that on returning to Bath at a
later time, he found that the window-pane had been removed, and a new
one substituted. Did this mean that the vow had been broken?

[Illustration:

MEDAL SHOWING RING, STRUCK IN 1578 FOR JOHN CASIMIR, COUNT
PALATINE, TO COMMEMORATE HIS ALLIANCE WITH THE DUKE OF ANJOU
AGAINST THE SPANISH IN THE LOW COUNTRIES

The clasped hands signify indissoluble friendship; the palm and olive
branches, victory and peace; and the diamond, courage]

[Illustration:

MEDAL SHOWING RING, STRUCK FOR HENRI II OF FRANCE, IN 1554, IN
COMMEMORATION OF HIS CAMPAIGN TO FLANDERS

The diamond is a symbol of dauntless courage; the crowned fish probably
denotes the ruler of Flanders; the palm branch and olive branch above
signify the French King’s victory]

[Illustration: PORTRAIT OF DIANE DE POITIERS (1499–1566)

Mistress of Henri II of France, who gave her the splendid Château
de Chenonceaux. She had great artistic taste and possessed many
jewels. To her ability, knowledge and power were due some of the
finest architectural and mobiliary achievements of the period.

Musée de Versailles]

The use of rings set with natural diamond-points in a symbolical sense,
as in the case of the three interlaced rings forming the _impresa_
of Cosimo de’ Medici, probably had to do with the ancient tradition
that the diamond conferred courage or even invincibility upon the
wearer. It is in this sense that this type of ring is figured on
the reverse of certain “campaign medals” issued in commemoration of
important expeditions. Such is the medal struck for Henri II of France
when, in 1554, he set out from Champagne to invade Flanders. On the
reverse of this medal there is within the ring a palm branch and an
olive branch, significant of an unconquerable soul and of victory.
Across the bottom of the hoop is a fish of a species very common in
Flanders, on the head of which is a crown, this apparently denoting the
ruler of that land. The diamond emphasizes the idea of an unbroken
and unconquered soul. In a similar though slightly different sense must
be explained the diamond-set ring on a “campaign medal” struck in 1578
for John Casimir, Count Palatine; this is also a memorial of one of the
periodical incursions into unhappy Flanders. As the Count Palatine was
at this time in alliance with the then Duke of Anjou, brother of Henri
III of France, the hoop of the ring terminates in two clasped hands,
denoting the fast friendship of the allies, which was, however, of very
uncertain duration.

The rich Arundel Collection, chiefly brought together by a Lord Howard
of Arundel, towards the end of the seventeenth century, incorporated
in the Marlborough Cabinet and later dispersed, included a beautifully
adorned gold ring set with a splendid lapis lazuli on which a Roman
engraver had cut the design of Hercules wrestling with Antæus. The
hoop of this ring is ornamented on the inside with two fleur-de-lys in
white enamel, the entire ring being covered with arabesques of entwined
vine branches in black enamel. In his description, Rev. C. W. King
conjectures from the style of ornamentation that the ring may have
belonged to one of the Valois kings of France.[295]

On the accession of Frederick the Great, he is said to have found
in the royal treasury a case containing a ring, accompanied by a
memorandum to the following effect, in the handwriting of King
Frederick I (1688–1740): “This ring was given to me by my father on
his death-bed, with the reminder that so long as it was preserved in
the House of Brandenburg, this would not only prosper, but would grow
and increase.” The way in which Frederick the Great spoke of this
ring illustrates at once his habitual scepticism and his devotion to
family tradition, for while declaring that he put no faith in the
peculiar virtues of such an object, he gave strict injunctions that it
should be carefully preserved. A rather doubtful tradition designates
this ring as the one said to have been surreptitiously removed from
the hand of Frederick William I, when he was dying, by the Countess
Lichtenau. The dying king feebly protesting against this spoliation,
murmured: “Her den Ring” (Give back the ring), but the countess saved
the situation by saying to those assembled in the deathchamber: “He
wants to have a herring!” This same tradition attributes the subsequent
disastrous defeat of Prussia by Napoleon I to the loss of the ring,
which the countess finally yielded to Frederick William III in 1813,
whereupon the fortunes of war changed and Prussia was avenged for her
humiliations.

Hofrath Schneider, for a long time reader to Emperor William I, relates
that when he questioned that monarch touching the story of the ring, he
only learned that it had been a long time in the Hohenzollern family;
that it was an old-fashioned ring, and that it was set with “a plain,
dark-colored stone.” Emperor William did not display much interest in
the matter and did not appear to have any superstitious reverence for
the ring.[296]

An old Portuguese ring has a half-sphere of rock crystal set in silver.
At the side of the bezel is a minute catch, and when this is put back,
the crystal setting, hinged on the opposite side, can be raised,
revealing beneath a tiny St. Andrews cross in gold, with a small ruby
set in the centre. This ring is in the possession of an Englishman, a
descendant of the Duke of Peterborough who fought in the Peninsula War
under Wellington. In one of the battles he was seriously wounded, and
was kindly and carefully nursed by a Portuguese family. A not unnatural
result was that he fell in love with one of the daughters and married
her. The ring is said to have formed part of her ancestral jewels, and
this may be regarded as a characteristic example of the Portuguese art
of the past in ring-making.[297]

A gold ring, said to be one of six made for distribution among the
conspirators who planned Napoleon’s escape from Elba in March, 1815,
is to be seen in the British Museum. The bezel has a hinged lid, on
the inner side of which is engraved in relief the head of Napoleon; on
the outer side is an enamelled design showing three flowers on stems,
a laurel wreath running around the edge.[298] Whether the story of
its having belonged to one of the conspirators be true or not, the
concealment of the Napoleon head shows that this ring was made for, and
worn by, an adherent of the fallen emperor, at a time when it would
have been dangerous to proclaim his loyalty openly.

ENGLISH RINGS

In the British Museum are two Anglo-Saxon rings of unrivalled historic
interest. They bear, respectively, the names of Ethelwulf, father of
Alfred the Great and of Ethelswith, his sister, the queen of Mercia.
Both of these rings are of gold. In that of King Ethelwulf the flat
hoop rises in front in the form of a high mitre-shaped bezel showing
the design of a conventional tree flanked by two peacocks; the
ground-work is of niello. The nielloed legend around the hoop reads:
~ETHELWVLF . REX~. This ring was found in a cart-rut at Laverstock,
Wiltshire, in the summer of 1780. The ring of Ethelwulf’s daughter,
Ethelswith, has a circular bezel with the figure of the Lamb of
God; here also the design is chased on a niello ground. On each
shoulder of the ring is figured a monster on a similar ground-work.
The inscription, engraved inside the ring runs: ~EADELZVID. REGINA~.
Ethelswith’s ring was found in the West Riding of Yorkshire, between
Aberford and Sherburn, and was tied to a dog’s collar by the farmer
who discovered it. For this ignoble use it served during some six
months until, to his surprise, the farmer learned that his ring was of
gold.[299]

The famous ring known as that of Edward the Confessor (1024–1066),[300]
and which was to be used as the Coronation Ring of the Kings of
England, was granted on November 14, 1389, by King Richard II, to
the Abbot, etc., of Westminster, for the shrine of the Confessor in
this church. It is described as “a certain ring with a precious ruby
inserted therein.” The King reserved the privilege of wearing it when
he was in England, but should he go abroad it was to be returned to
the shrine. A few years later the Abbot of Westminster appears to have
been guilty of some negligence in sending this ring to the sovereign
when the latter required it for use, and the repentant abbot craves
pardon of the king and prays that his fault shall not invalidate the
church’s rights to the possession of the relic. Nearly eighty years
later, a record dated December 21, 1468 (7 Edward IV) registers the
delivery by the former keeper, Thomas Arundell, of the vestments,
cloths, relics and jewels of the Shrine of St. Edward in Westminster to
his successor, Richard Tedyngton.[301]

The jewels and precious stones of this shrine were taken away and
pawned by Henry III in 1267, the monarch having entered into a solemn
engagement, under the Great Seal, to return them in a year’s time
from the ensuing Michaelmas. Henry also sent to the then Abbot of
Westminster a “Letter Obligatory” promising the restitution of the gems
and submitting himself in the matter to the judgment of the Pope and
the Papal Legate. The precious jewels were really restored to the Abbey
shortly afterwards, as is shown by a document dated February 10, 1269
(53 Henry III). The ruby ring, being a later gift, could not have been
among them.[302]

A contemporary entry referring to this shrine in Edward I’s time
(1272–1307), is interesting as casting a sidelight on the English
coinage at the end of the thirteenth century. Under date of 1299,
provision is made for returning to the church of Westminster the half
of 38 marks of gold (about $9,500 intrinsic value) that had been taken
from the shrine of St. Edward for the jewels sent to Queen Margaret on
her first coming to Westminster, “the coinage being so debased and real
sterlings rarely found.”[303]

The cross on the summit of the Imperial State Crown of England, as
described by Prof. Tennant, is surmounted by a rose-cut sapphire. There
is a tradition that this sapphire was once set in the ring of Edward
the Confessor, a ring which, according to popular belief, was endowed
with wonderful curative virtues, and gave its successive owners the
power to consecrate the so-called cramp rings.[304] This attribution of
the sapphire is in disagreement with the early notice of the ruby ring
given to Westminster Abbey by Richard II as that of the saintly Edward,
and also to the usage long observed of setting a ruby in the Coronation
Ring. King, in his account of Edward’s ring, calls attention to an
entry in the inventory of Henry III’s jewels describing a sapphire
weighing 52 dwts (about 337 metric carats), and suggests that this may
be the large sapphire of the English crown.[305]

When Pope Hadrian IV (1154–1159) acknowledged the sovereignty of
Henry II of England over Ireland, he sent to the monarch by John of
Salisbury, the messenger who bore the Brief of Investiture, a valuable
ring set with an exceptionally fine emerald. This historical fact
probably suggested the name Emerald Isle as a designation for Ireland.
The ring and the Brief were carefully guarded in the royal archives at
the time John of Salisbury wrote his recital.[306]

During the crusade which brought into martial rivalry two of the most
romantic figures of history, Richard Cœur de Lion and Saladin, an
English knight, Sir William D’Annay, killed a Saracen prince, in 1192,
and not long afterwards vanquished a lion near the ancient Syrian
city of Acre, later known as St. Jean d’Acre, as it was placed under
the care of the knights of the Order of St. John. As a special and
appropriate offering to King Richard, Sir William brought him a paw
of the slain lion, and received from the king as a recognition of the
bravery he had displayed a ring from the royal finger. The knight was
also directed to bear on his crest a “demi Saracen” holding in one
hand a lion’s paw and in the other a ring, so that the memory of the
gallant deeds and of the royal recompense should never be forgotten.
In 1856 this ring was in the possession of Dawnay, Viscount Downe, a
lineal descendant of the crusader, who still bore the crest assigned
by Richard Cœur de Lion.[307] The ring is of silver and is set with a
so-called toadstone, the palatal tooth of a ray, famous in mediæval
times as a talisman against poison.[308]

Pope Innocent III (1198–1216) sent to Richard Cœur de Lion four gold
rings, each set with a different stone. With the rings, the pope sent a
letter from St. Peter’s in Rome, dated May 28, 1198, in which he wrote
that the four stones were symbolical. The verdant hue of the emerald
signified how we should believe, the celestial purity of the sapphire,
how we should hope, the warm color of the garnet, how we should love,
and the clear transparency of the topaz, how we should act. Moreover,
the ring-form also possessed a symbolical meaning, roundness denoting
eternity, which has neither beginning nor end. Hence the royal
conscience had in the ring a monition to pass from terrestrial to
celestial matters, from temporal to eternal things.[309]

In the ruins of the palace at Eltham in Kent was found a gold ring
set with an Oriental ruby surrounded by five diamonds in their native
crystalline state, placed at equal distances from one another. This
ring weighed over half an ounce (exactly, 267¹⁄₁₀ grains) and bore the
following inscription in Old French:

Qui me portera expliotera
Et a grant joye revendra.

(Whosoever weareth me will do doughty deeds,
And will return filled with joy.)

This motto is believed to indicate that the ring had been given to a
Crusader to wear on his expedition for the rescue of the Holy Land from
the hands of the infidels. That it should have been found on English
soil seems to be proof that the wearer returned safely to his native
land.[310]

In 1774, after long and urgent solicitation, the Dean of Westminster,
Dr. John Thomas, later Bishop of Rochester, consented to the opening
of the tomb of Edward I of England (1272–1307) and the disinterment
of his body. The corpse was found closely wrapped in coarse, thick
linen cloth, the face being covered with a face-cloth of crimson
sarcinet.[311] The features were still in great part well-preserved
though the skin was dark brown, almost black. The monarch had been
clothed with royal vesture and royal insignia, but no ring was found on
either of the hands. The disinterment of King Canute’s body, however,
resulted in the finding of a ring set with a large and fine stone, of
what particular kind we are not informed.

When, in 1562, the iconoclastic Calvinists of Caen broke open the tomb
of Matilda, wife of William the Conqueror, in the Abbey of the Holy
Trinity, there was still to be seen on one of the queen’s fingers a
gold ring set with a fine sapphire. This was yielded to the Abbess, of
the house of Montmorency, who later gave it to her father, the famous
constable of France, Anne de Montmorency, when he attended Charles
IX on the latter’s visit to Caen in the following year. The tomb of
William Rufus, the Conqueror’s son, in Winchester Cathedral, was opened
in the reign of Charles I, and in the dust of the king lay a large gold
ring. So customary was it at this period to have a royal ring interred
with the sovereign’s body, that even when Richard II left special
directions in his will that the crown and sceptre to be buried with him
should not be enriched with any precious stones, he expressly ordered
that a ring set with a precious stone and worth 20 marks should be put
on his finger.[312]

When, in 1360, the Earl of Richmond married the Lady Blanche, daughter
of the Duke of Lancaster, King Edward III gave as presents a ring with
a ruby and a belt garnished with rubies, emeralds and pearls.[313] The
rubies may have been considered especially appropriate, since the red
rose was the emblem of the House of Lancaster. More than a century
later, in the reign of Henry VII, when Perkin Warbeck utilized his
striking resemblance to Edward IV in support of his claim that he was
one of the princes slain in the Tower, in 1483, by order of Richard
III, and succeeded in persuading Edward’s sister, Margaret, and also
King James IV of Scotland, of the truth of his pretensions, one of his
rural agents in England was called in the conspirators’ correspondence
“The Merchant of the Ruby,” a designation designed to cast off possible
suspicion by representing the agent to be only a gem dealer.

There still exists in the English records a paper dated in 1445, the
year of Margaret of Anjou’s marriage, and signed by King Henry VI. In
this the king directs that a warrant of discharge be given to “our
Trusty and Wellbeloved Squire John Merston, Tresorier of our Chambre
and Keper of our juwelles,” for sundry jewels which had been confided
to his care. The following item refers to the ring of Margaret of
Anjou:[314]

“A Ryng of Gold, Garnished with a fayr Rubie, somtyme Yeven unto Us by
our Bel Oncle the Cardinal of Englande, with the which we were Sacred
in the Day of oure Coronation at Parys, delivered unto Mathew Phelip,
to Breke, and thereof to make an other Ryng for the Quenes Wedding
Ring.”

There is no mention here of any engraving on the stone of this ring,
which had been used in 1431, when Henry VI was crowned in Paris. If the
spinel in the Marlborough Collection, engraved with a head somewhat
resembling that of Henry VI on his coins, really adorned this ring, the
engraving may have been executed subsequent to Henry’s marriage with
the unfortunate Margaret of Anjou.

Rings set with precious stones were given as prizes at the tournament
held by Henry VII of England in 1494. The prize for jousting was to be
a ruby ring, while the best in the tourney and the one delivering the
most telling strokes was to be rewarded with a diamond ring. The Earl
of Suffolk, Thomas Brandon, who later married King Henry’s daughter
Margaret, after the death of her first husband Louis XII of France, was
successful in gaining one of the ruby rings, bestowed upon him by the
“Ladie Margaret,” his future wife, and Sir Edward A. Borough fought so
stoutly in the mêlée that he was adjudged worthy of a diamond ring. An
extra prize of an emerald ring was given to the Earl of Essex for his
valor.[315]

In 1681 the Duke of Norfolk presented to the College of Arms in London
the sword, dagger, and ring worn by James IV of Scotland (1473–1513)
at the battle of Flodden Field, fought August 22, 1513, in which he
met his death. This ring was set with a turquoise and had been sent to
James by the queen of France, as a pledge of friendship and regard,
when she solicited the good offices of the Scottish monarch with Henry
VIII, who had just laid siege to Térouanne. Another account states that
when the queen sent the ring to James, she charged him to break a lance
for her sake. This ring is said to have been taken from the body of
King James by Thomas, Duke of Norfolk, an ancestor of the donor.[316]
The belief that the turquoise protected those who wore it from falls
and wounds, probably determined its selection, but the result in this
case was hardly calculated to increase the stone’s prestige.

On the site of this disastrous defeat of the Scotch by the English
army under the Earl of Surrey, an inscribed ring was found in 1783.
The inscription, in Norman French, reads: “On est mal loiauls amans
qui se poet garder des maux disans” (Only a lover of scant loyalty can
escape calumny). The words are disposed in groups of two, and between
each pair is a boar’s head, the crest of the Campbells. This has led to
the conjecture that the ring belonged to the second son of the Duke of
Argyll, Archibald Campbell, who met his death in the forefront of the
fight.[317]

[Illustration: PORTRAIT OF HENRY VIII, BY HANS HOLBEIN, PAINTED
IN 1540

Rings of identical form and setting on index fingers of each hand
and on little finger of left hand. These are designed to match
exactly the jewels on his collar and sleeves.

Reale Galleria d’Arte Antica. Palazzo Corsini, Rome]

[Illustration: PORTRAIT OF JANE SEYMOUR (CA. 1510–1537) THIRD
WIFE OF HENRY VIII, AND MOTHER OF EDWARD VI, BY HANS HOLBEIN, THE
YOUNGER

Rings set with precious stones on index and fourth fingers of
left hand

Kaiserliche Gemälde-Galerie, Vienna]

At the spoliation of the tomb of St. Thomas à Becket at Canterbury
in 1538, among the precious objects taken away was “[a stone with]
an angel of gold pointing thereunto, offered by the King of France:
[which King Henry put] into a ring and wore it on his thumb.” This
jewel, containing a diamond, was the most prized ornament of the
shrine, and is believed to have been given by Louis VII of France
on the occasion of his visit in 1179. Henry VIII must have tired of
his massive thumb ring, for in the inventory of the precious stones
delivered to Queen Mary, March 10, 1554, shortly after her accession,
there appears the following entry: “A collar of golde set with sixteen
faire diamounts, whereof the Regal of France is one, and fourteen
Knotts of perles, in every Knotte four perles.”[318]

Two pretty New Year’s gifts for January first, 1571, were delivered to
Lady Mary Sidney on the last day of the year 1570. One of them was a
ring “set with a rose”; the other was more ambitious in design, being
described as “a jewell with the storie of time” set with diamonds and
rubies, certainly an appropriate gift for the day. This cost but £10
or $50, a much larger sum, however, in those bygone days than it is
accounted to be to-day, for the purchasing power of money was many
times greater.[319]

The earliest mention of the diamond ring given by Elizabeth to Mary
Queen of Scots occurs in Camden’s account of the events of Elizabeth’s
reign. After relating the events that determined Mary to seek
Elizabeth’s protection, Camden continues:

She therefore sent John Beatoun to her [Elizabeth] with the
diamond she had formerly received from her as a symbol of mutual
good-will, signifying to her that she was about to come to England
and ask for aid in case her subjects continued to make war against
her.[320]

This is said to have been a gimmal-ring, two diamonds joining together
to form a heart. One half was kept by Elizabeth who gave the other half
to Mary. This appeal to the tender mercies of the Virgin Queen, and
Mary’s hope, were in vain, for “she cutt off her head for all that” as
Aubrey dryly puts it.[321]

Several epigrams on this diamond were written by the Scotch poet and
publicist George Buchanan (1506–1582), the best being as follows:[322]

Quod te jampridem fruitur, videt, ac amat absens,
Haec pignus cordis gemma, et imago mei est.
Non est candidior, non est haec purior illo,
Quamvis dura magis, non magis firma.

This has been rendered:

The gem which saw thee near and loves thee still,
Is pledge and image of my heart and will.
My heart is not less white or pure than this,
And though less hard, ’tis quite as firm I wis.

[Illustration: PORTRAIT OF MARY, QUEEN OF SCOTS (1542–1587).
FRENCH SCHOOL

Rings on the second joint of fourth finger of right hand, and on
little finger of the same hand

Museo del Prado, Madrid]

[Illustration: PORTRAIT OF QUEEN ELIZABETH, BY THE FLEMISH
PAINTER LUCAS DE HEERE

On little finger of left hand, ring set with a large, oblong,
table-cut stone

Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York]

A memorial ring was sent by Mary of Scotland, just before her execution
at Fotheringay Castle, February 8, 1587, to her faithful follower and
kinsman, Lord John Hamilton, with an affectionate message and her
last farewell. This ring, set with a sapphire, was handed down from
generation to generation in the Hamilton family, and was seen, in
1857, at Hamilton Palace, by Miss Agnes Strickland. She described the
sapphire as being large, of rectangular form, and cut with a number
of facets, a kind of rose-cutting; the setting was of blue enamelled
gold in the style favored by sixteenth century goldsmiths.[323] It
might be looked upon as a noteworthy coincidence, that as a sapphire
was a memorial of Mary’s death, another sapphire was the token to her
son, James I, of Elizabeth’s death and his accession to the throne of
England.

On the night before her execution, Mary Stuart found an opportunity
to ask her apothecary, a Monsieur Gorion, whether he could safely
convey a letter and two diamonds to those for whom they were intended,
and whether he would promise to perform this service faithfully. He
assented, saying that he could make some drug in which the objects
might be safely concealed, so that he could carry them away with him.
One of these diamonds was to be given to Mendoza, for a long time
Spanish ambassador to the court of Elizabeth; the other, and larger
one, was destined for Philip II of Spain. This was to be received as “a
sign that she was dying for the truth, and was also meant to bespeak
his care for her friends and servants.”[324]

Of rings which have been treated as sacred relics, none can be said to
recall a more painful tragedy than one donated to the monastery-church
of the Escurial. On April 15, 1587, the Spanish king Philip II had a
nocturne and a requiem sung in the church in memory of the unfortunate
Mary of Scotland. When the echoes of the solemn chants had died away,
the king gave to the abbot a ring set with a diamond which had belonged
to the unhappy victim, with the injunction that it should be placed
among the sacred relics and preserved as “a symbol of the purity and
the firm faith of this saintly queen.”[325] This ring, or at least the
large diamond of its setting, must have been the farewell gift which we
have just noted.

Although not a betrothal ring, that given by Queen Elizabeth to the
Earl of Essex was most certainly a love token. When this nobleman
was high in the queen’s favor she bestowed upon him a gold ring set
with a sardonyx cut with her portrait; giving him, at the same time,
a solemn promise that whatever charges might be brought against him
she would accord him her pardon if he sent her this ring. Some years
later, Essex--who in the meanwhile had lost the queen’s favor--was
impeached for high treason and condemned to death. In this extremity,
he endeavored to find some means of transmitting to the queen the ring
she had given him. Fearing to trust his keepers with the execution of
his wish, Essex found no better way than to throw the ring to a boy who
was passing the prison, directing him to give it to Lady Scrope, Lady
Nottingham’s sister. Unfortunately for Essex, the boy gave the ring,
by mistake, to Lady Nottingham, whose husband was one of his bitterest
enemies, so that the token never reached the queen, who was convinced
that her former favorite was too proud and obstinate to seek her
mercy. She thereupon left him to his fate. Years afterwards, when Lady
Nottingham was on her death-bed, she asked for the queen and confessed
that she had failed to deliver the ring sent to her by Essex. This
confession aroused the queen’s wrath to such an extent that she burst
forth in violent reproaches and rushed from the room exclaiming: “God
may forgive you; I never shall!” The proud heart of the virgin queen
was broken by this revelation, and, weighed down by remorse for the
death of Essex, she expired a few weeks later.

[Illustration: Gold ring set with an oval cameo-portrait, on
onyx, of Queen Elizabeth. Sixteenth Century. Two views

British Museum]

[Illustration: Gold ring set with pearls pierced and threaded;
two views. Venetian (?) late Seventeenth Century

British Museum]

[Illustration: Multiple silver rings. Four hoops connected by
three vertical bars: one of these is set with two corals and a
glass paste. North African (?)

British Museum]

[Illustration: PUZZLE OR MAGIC RINGS, PLAIN AND JEWELLED]

Quite recently this historic Essex ring has found its way to the
auction-room, and to judge from the price it brought, the purchaser
must have been convinced of the truth of the legend concerning it, as
its merely artistic qualities--which are in no wise remarkable--and the
fact that it is incidentally a product of sixteenth century art would
scarcely suffice to justify the amount paid for it. The sale took place
at Christie’s in London, on May 18, 1911, and after spirited bidding
the ring was adjudged for $17,060. A firm of dealers in antiquities
were the nominal purchasers, but they are said to have acted for Lord
Michelson of Hollingly, a baron in the lately overthrown Kingdom of
Portugal, and the senior partner in the firm of Stern Bros., of London.
This ring is stated to have been bequeathed by mother to daughter in
a long line of Essex’s descendants, beginning with his daughter Lady
Francis Devereux. Finally it came to Louisa, daughter of John, Earl
of Greville, and wife of Thomas Thyme, second Viscount Weymouth and
great-grandfather of the late owner.

Some authorities do not think that the story of the Essex ring has a
satisfactory historical foundation.[326] It first appears in a book
published about 1650 and entitled “History of the most renowned Queen
Elizabeth and her great Favourite, the Earl of Essex. In Two Parts.
A Romance.” In 1658 Francis Osborn repeats it in his “Traditional
Memoires of Elizabeth.” It was even treated dramatically by John Banks
(fl. 1696) in his play “The Unhappy Favourite.” Certain later writers
claim to have learned of it through trustworthy informants, as for
example, Louis Aubery, Sieur de Maurier, who published in Paris, in
1680, a history of Holland and therein states that Sir Dudley Carleton
told the story to Prince Maurice of Saxony. In the English translation
of this work the episode has been omitted. Still later, at the end of
the seventeenth century, it is given by Lady Elizabeth Spelman on the
authority, as she alleged, of Sir Robert Carey, brother of Lady Scrope.
In earlier versions the ring was represented to have been sent directly
by Essex to Lady Nottingham; in Lady Spelman’s recital, however, as
we have already noted, Essex instructs the boy to whom he entrusts
the ring to deliver it to Lady Scrope, sister of Lady Nottingham. It
is suggested that this variation was made to offset the objection
that Essex would never have chosen his enemy, Lady Nottingham, as an
intermediary between himself and the queen. Manningham, in his “Diary,”
the only contemporary who alludes to a ring in connection with Essex’s
relations with Elizabeth, only states that “the queen wore till her
death a ring given her by Essex.” Possibly this fact may have served as
a nucleus for the romantic tale.

A portrait of Queen Elizabeth, elaborately be-pearled as usual, the
work of the Flemish painter, Lucas De Heere, shows her with a ring on
the little finger of her left hand. It is set with an oblong, table-cut
stone. This interesting portrait, which is in the Metropolitan Museum
of Art, New York, while conforming generally to the type with which
we are familiar, differs in some respects therefrom. The very slender
neck, the delicacy of form and face, may, of course, represent
mannerisms of the artist.

The sapphire set in the ring thrown out of the window of Queen
Elizabeth’s death chamber by Lady Scrope to her brother Robert Carey,
as a signal that the queen was dead, so that he might be the first
to bear the news to her impatient successor, James I, was exhibited
in the great Loan Exhibition of Ancient and Modern Jewellery shown
at the South Kensington Museum in London, in 1872. As there shown,
this historic sapphire was the central ornament of a diamond star, or
cinque-foil. The original ring was given to John, Earl of Orrery, by
the Duchess of Buckingham, natural daughter of James II, and the small
brilliants surrounding it in its present setting are the same as those
which were about it in the ring.[327]

By the terms of his will, dated December 18, 1630, Sir Edward Coke, of
Godwick, bequeathed among other jewels two of historic significance.
One of these was a ring “set with a great Turkey (turquoise), which
King Henry the Eighth used to wear, and was painted with it on his
forefinger.” The other jewel, also a ring, is curiously suggestive when
we recall that an attempt (unsuccessful, of course) had been made to
poison the unfortunate Sir Thomas Overbury with diamond dust, before
poison of a more effective sort was administered to him. The ring in
question is described here as set with “a Diamon cut with faucetts
(facets)” and the statement is added that it had been given to Sir
Edward by Anne of Denmark, Queen of James I, “for the discovery of the
poisoning of Sir Thomas Overbury.”[328]

A gold ring, said to have been one of five such rings given by Charles
I to Bishop Juxon, on the scaffold, just before the king’s execution,
was shown in the Loan Collection exhibited in the South Kensington
Museum, in London, in 1872. The statement is made that this ring was
presented by Bishop Juxon to Sir John Halloway, and from him passed
into the possession of the Dalby family. The ring bears a death’s head
in white enamel on a black ground, and has the motto, “Behold the
ende”; around the edge is the inscription, “Rather death then fals
fayth”; at the back are the initials “M” and “L,” tied with a mourning
ribbon.[329]

The “Verney Ring,” with a portrait of Charles I of England, is, if
genuine, the only relic of a heroic tragedy. It is said to have been
bestowed by Charles I upon Sir Edmund Verney, one of his most faithful
followers in the perils of the Civil War. Sir Edmund was killed at the
battle of Edgehill, in 1642, where the Cavaliers were utterly defeated,
but even in death he still held the royal standard in his grasp. The
ring was taken from his hand, and the body abandoned; it was never
recovered. As he was helped into the world by a Cæsarean operation, it
became a common saying in the neighborhood of Edgehill that Sir Edmund
was neither born nor buried.[330]

With that striking indifference to moral right and wrong so
characteristic of Charles II of England, he did not hesitate to bestow
a choice ring from his own hand upon the notorious Jeffreys, when the
latter was leaving London on one of his circuits always marked by the
browbeating of witnesses and accused, and the imposition of capital
sentences, wherever possible. It was at a somewhat later date, in
1685, just after the accession of James II, that Jeffreys conducted
the trials of the unfortunate Duke of Monmouth’s adherents, which came
to be known as the “Bloody Assize.” This fact of the presentation was
published in the Royal Gazette, thus notably strengthening Jeffreys’
prestige. So general, however, was the reprobation of his heartless and
bloodthirsty administration of his judicial office that the ring was
called “Jeffreys’ bloodstone.”[331]

In March, 1748, as some ploughmen were tilling a field seven miles from
Mullingor, County Westmeath, Ireland, they discovered a grave, the
bottom, sides and ends of which were formed each of a single slab of
stone. Within the grave were the bones of a man of gigantic stature,
and also an urn and a valuable ring, set with twenty-five diamonds.
Bishop Pococke, treating of this ring, mentions the fact that Rosa
Failge, eldest son of Cathoir More, known as Cathoir the Great, who
reigned in 122 A.D., was called the “Hero of Rings,” but the
writer adds that the ring could scarcely have belonged to him, since
diamonds do not appear to have been known in Ireland at this early
date.[332]

A most interesting Washington relic is a pearl and gold ring made
in his lifetime and containing a lock of his hair placed beneath a
conical glass. This is encircled by a setting of blue and white enamel,
a square of red being set at each corner, and around this a circle
of thirteen pearls, the number of the original States. This ring
was given by Washington to Lieut. Robert Somers. The latter lost his
life while fighting the Algerene pirates in Tripoli, but before his
departure he confided the ring to the care of his sister, Sarah Keen.
It is now owned by Vice-Chancellor E. B. Leaming of Camden, New Jersey,
who inherited it from his paternal grandmother, an heir to Somers’
estate. Only two other rings containing Washington’s hair are known of,
one in Washington’s Headquarters at Newburgh on the Hudson, the other
in the Boston Museum.[333]

In far-away Sweden there has been preserved a historic Washington
relic. This is a ring given by the Revolutionary leader to Lafayette
before the latter’s return to France after the victorious Yorktown
campaign. The ring passed from Lafayette to his intimate friend, Baron
Erik Magnus Staël von Holstein, Swedish ambassador to France. The
latter, on a visit to his native land gave it to his brother, Major
Bogislaus Staël von Holstein, in whose family it was transmitted as an
heirloom until it reached the hands of the maternal grandfather of the
present owner, Mr. Gösta Frölen of Falun, Sweden. The ring is of gold
and is set with a miniature portrait of Washington.

It is said that two other rings were given by Washington about the
same time to two Swedish noblemen, who had served as adjutants to
Rochambeau. The presentation occurred at a banquet given in their
honor, just before their departure for their native land, at the City
Tavern in Philadelphia, November 11, 1782. In bestowing these gifts
Washington is said to have used the following words: “I am happy to be
here amongst men belonging to the race of my own early ancestors.” All
trace of these rings has been lost.

BETROTHAL (ENGAGEMENT) RINGS, WEDDING (NUPTIAL)
RINGS, AND LOVE TOKENS

Special wedding-rings, as we understand them, were not used at an early
period, the espousal ring being employed at the wedding ceremony also.
At a later time, a signet was set in the _anulus pronubus_, or
betrothal ring, to signify that the spouse was to have the right of
sealing up the household goods, and occasionally a small key formed
part of the ring, with a similar significance. We have a testimony to
this view in the words of the marriage ceremony: “With all my worldly
goods I thee endow.” The wives of our day are quite disposed to accept
this passage in its literal sense, although some may incline to a more
liberal interpretation of the promise to love, honor and obey their
husbands. The ring as a pledge of love is said to be first mentioned in
Roman literature by Plautus in his “Miles Gloriosus” (Act IV, sc. i,
v. 11); this passage, however, does not refer to a nuptial ring, but
rather to a love token.

Somewhat distantly related to the betrothal or wedding rings were those
given by lovers to the objects of their affection. Of such a ring the
Roman poet Ovid writes, apostrophizing it as “a ring soon destined to
encircle the finger of a beauteous girl, a ring having no worth except
the love of the giver.” It was to be a gift to the poet’s ladylove
Corinna.[334] The ring sent by a fair lady, as a token of love to a
handsome soldier, in the “Miles Gloriosus” of Plautus was also of this
class.

The custom of placing the betrothal or wedding ring upon the fourth
finger seems undoubtedly to owe its origin to the fancy that a special
nerve, or vein, ran directly from this finger to the heart. Macrobius,
in his Saturnalia,[335] alludes to the belief in the following words:
“Because of this nerve, the newly betrothed places the ring on this
finger of his spouse, as though it were a representation of the heart.”
Macrobius asserts that he derived his information from an Egyptian
priest.

It has been conjectured that this was not the real source of the
custom, but that in the church service it was usual for the Christian
priest to touch three fingers successively with the ring while saying:
“In the name of the Father, of the Son and of the Holy Ghost,” and then
to place it upon the last finger touched. We know that this was the
usage in the bestowal of episcopal rings, and later with wedding rings,
but the express statement cited from the pagan writer Macrobius shows
that in the earlier marriage or betrothal ceremony this custom must
have had an entirely different origin.

During the reign of George I of England it was not unusual to wear the
wedding ring on the thumb, although it had been placed on the fourth
finger at the marriage ceremony. Possibly this custom may have arisen
because exceptionally large wedding rings were favored by fashion at
that time. That wedding rings were often worn on the thumb in the
middle of the seventeenth century is proved by the lines from Samuel
Butler’s Hudibras quoted on another page.[336]

[Illustration: PORTRAIT OF AN UNKNOWN WOMAN BY PANTOJA DE LA CRUZ

Rings on thumb and index of right hand, and on fourth and little
fingers of left hand Museo del Prado, Madrid]

[Illustration: PORTRAIT OF THE EMPRESS MARY, DAUGHTER OF CHARLES
V AND WIFE OF MAXIMILIAN II, BY JUAN PANTOJA DE LA CRUZ

Two rings on index and one on little finger of right hand; one on
index of left hand; all set with precious stones Museo del Prado,
Madrid]

Ecclesiastical rituals in France from the eleventh to the fifteenth
century prove, with but few exceptions, that the nuptial ring was to be
placed on the right hand of the bride, in most of the dioceses upon the
middle finger of this hand, but in the diocese of Liége on the fourth
finger. As Isidore of Seville, writing in the early part of the seventh
century, declares that the betrothal ring was put on the fourth finger,
and repeats the Roman fancy as to the vein intimately connecting this
particular finger with the heart,[337] it seems likely that this rule
was generally followed in the Roman Empire up to its end, and even
later in some parts of what had once been Roman provinces, while the
early French rules were derived from a Gallic usage which had never
been supplanted by the Roman one.[338] That the Gauls and Britons of
the first century wore their rings on the middle finger is already
noted by Pliny.[339]

A gold ring, a unique relic of Anglo-Saxon times in England, was found
in an ancient burial place at Harnham Hill, near Salisbury.[340] It
was on a finger bone of the left hand of a skeleton, and resembles
exactly our wedding-ring of to-day. In the same cemetery was unearthed
a twisted ring of silver, a mere band twice encircling the finger; a
section of the finger-bone remains within the ring. These relics are
believed to date from the seventh century. On or near the skeleton
with which this silver ring was found were several amber beads; the
remains were evidently those of an elderly person, although of one not
over 55 years of age, according to Professor Owen.

That part of the Order of Matrimony relating to the marriage vows and
to the wedding ring, in the Sarum Rite or Use current in England in
pre-Reformation times, runs as follows, after the bride and groom have
clasped hands:[341]

Ich N. take the N. to my wedded wyf, to haven and to holden fro this
day forward, for betre for wors, for rychere for porere, in syknesse
and in helthe, til deth us departe, and theerto y plith the my trewthe.

Then the woman:

Ich N. take the N. to my wedded hosebund, to haven and to holden fro
this day forward, for betre and for wors, for rychere and for porere,
to be boneyre and buxum ... and at borde, till dethe us departe and
thereto y plith the my trewthe.

Then let the man lay gold, silver, and a ring on a dish or book; and
let the Priest ask if the ring hath been blessed already; if it be
answered not, then let the Priest bless the ring.

Bless, O Lord, this ring (looking at it) which we hallow in Thy Holy
Name, that whosoever she be that shall wear it may be steadfast in Thy
peace and abide in Thy will, and live, increase, and grow old in Thy
love, and let the length of her days be multiplied.

[Illustration: Gold ring in which are inserted representations of
two winged figures cut in intaglio in a brown chalcedony. Antique
workmanship. See page 363

Collection of B. G. Fairchild, Esq., New York City]

[Illustration: Locket ring, opening at the bezel and on the
sides, leaving room for the introduction of hair, or tiny
portraits. When closed the ring appears to be plain and smooth]

[Illustration: Antique Syrian ring of bronze, set with a
yellowish green paste. Half of the circlet has broken away]

[Illustration: Gold ring set with octahedral diamond. Late Roman.
British Museum]

[Illustration: Twisted hoop of silver on the bone of a finger.
From an ancient sepulchre at Harnham Hill, England. Saxon, 7th
century

Archæologia, vol. xxxv, pl. opp. p. 278]

[Illustration: WEDDING RINGS FROM SYRIAN TOMBS OF CHALCEDONY,
AGATE, AND BANDED AGATE]

But if the ring shall have been already blessed, then, as soon as
the man have laid it on the book, let the Priest take the ring and
deliver it to the man; and let the man receive it in his right hand,
with the first three fingers, holding the right hand of the Bride with
his left hand, and say, after the Priest:

With this ryng ich the wedde, and with my body ich the honoure and with
al my gold ich the dowere.

And then let the bridegroom put the ring on the thumb of the Bride,
saying--

In the Name of the Father; (on the first finger) and of the Son; (on
the second finger) and of the Holy Ghost; (on the third finger). Amen.

And there let him leave it, because in that finger there is a certain
vein which reaches to the heart; and by the purity of the silver is
signified the inward affection which ought ever to be fresh between
them.

In the modern Protestant Episcopal service, the bestowal of the ring is
ordered as follows:

Then shall they again loose their hands; and the Man shall give unto
the Woman a Ring. And the Minister, taking the Ring, shall deliver it
unto the Man, to put it upon the fourth finger of the Woman’s left
hand. And the Man holding the Ring there, and taught by the Minister,
shall say:

With this Ring I thee wed, and with all my worldly goods I thee endow:
In the Name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.

It will be noted that the ring is first given by the man to the woman,
then taken from her by the priest who returns it to the man, upon which
the latter puts it on the fourth finger of the woman’s left hand.

Four fine specimens of later Byzantine work in ring-making are in
the British Museum. These are all marriage-rings of massive gold,
the designs being similar, with certain variations. The bezels
bear engraved figures of Christ alone, or of Christ and the Virgin,
bestowing a blessing upon the newly wedded pair; beneath is the Greek
word ὸμονόια (or ὸμόνυαι), signifying their spiritual union. All but
one have on the hoop in Greek characters the inscription: “My peace I
give unto you” (John, xiv, 27). On the remaining ring there is on the
hoop a decoration in niello, depicting very roughly scenes from the
Gospel. The character of the work indicates that it probably belongs
to the tenth century.[342] A massive gold ring found not long since
in Mainz, bears a Greek inscription showing that it was executed for
the nuptials of King Stephen Radislav of Servia (1228–1234) with
Anna Comnena, daughter of Emperor Theodore Angélus Comnenus, Duke of
Thessalonica, the region of the Saloniki of to-day. The inscription on
this early thirteenth century ring of Byzantine workmanship is nielloed
on the gold.[343]

Some interesting inscriptions appear on certain of the Greek betrothal
rings in the collection of the British Museum. A gold ring of about
the fourth century B.C. bears a Greek inscription which may
be rendered as follows: “To her who excells not only in virtue and
prudence, but also in wisdom.” In marked contrast to this rather
elaborate dedication is the inscription on another ring, which bears
the single word μὲλι “Honey.” It strikes us strangely enough to find
this particular term of endearment, so freely used by the Negroes, on
a ring from classic times. Perhaps the most beautiful of all these
inscriptions is on a late Greek ring and runs: “I rejoice in the gift
because of the affection of the giver.”[344]

The custom of bestowing a ring upon the betrothed bride has been traced
back in Rome to the second century B.C. Plain iron rings were
first used for this purpose and they were still favored even when the
wearing of gold rings had become general among certain classes of the
Roman citizens. However, in the course of the second century of our
era, and perhaps earlier, gold rings came into use in the ceremony
of betrothal. Pliny’s assertion that the bride wore an unset iron
ring has been interpreted to mean no more than that, in the case of
those entitled to wear gold rings, the bridegroom after having given
the bride a gold ring, later bestowed upon her one of iron for wear
within doors. For it appears to have been a rather general usage, in
or before Pliny’s time, to wear gold rings only when in public, and
within the house iron rings. That the nuptial ring was of gold, in the
second century at least, is plain from the statement of St. Clement
of Alexandria, who declares that this ring was not bestowed upon the
spouse as an ornament, but that she might seal up whatever was worthy
of special care in the household.[345]

Perhaps the earliest allusion in Christian literature to the betrothal
ring appears in one of Tertullian’s writings, dated from the end of
the second century A.D., wherein he says: “Among our women
the time-honored rules of their ancestors, which enjoined modesty and
sobriety, have died out. In former times women knew nothing of gold
except the single betrothal ring, which was placed on one of their
fingers by the fiancé.”[346] That this usage had endured for many years
is clearly apparent from the allusion to times long past. In a curious
passage,[347] St. Augustine, in the fourth century, writes: “No priest
shall hesitate to wed a couple who present themselves before the altar,
if the bride and bridegroom are not able, because of poverty, to give
rings to each other; for the (offering of) the earnest-money is a
matter of decorum, not of necessity.”

One of the rare marriage rings or love tokens of the early Christian
centuries, bears incised on its circular, button-shaped chaton, a male
and a female bust, the faces turned toward each other. Above is a
cross, the lower part of its upright shaft much longer than the upper
part or the arms. This ring is of Byzantine workmanship and has been
approximately dated about 440 A.D. It is a good example of the
so-called bi-cephalic rings, rings bearing two heads, and weighs 3⅝
dwt., or 87 grains.[348]

This usage was introduced among the ancient Germans by the Romans.
The significance of the betrothal ring is noted in a law of the
Visigoths, promulgated by Chindaswinthe (642–643 A.D.). There
had evidently been a disposition to treat lightly the obligations of
betrothal, for we read: “Since there are many who, forgetful of their
plighted faith, defer the fulfillment of their nuptial contracts, this
license should be suppressed.” Therefore, it was provided that when a
solemn declaration had been made before witnesses and the espousal ring
had been given and accepted as representing earnest-money, the marriage
ceremony must follow, if either of the parties should fail to agree to
a rupture of the engagement; that is, it could only be broken by mutual
consent.

A celebrated betrothal ring was that sent by Clovis I (465–511
A.D.) to Clothilda in 493. The following account is given of
the bestowal of this ring:

“Aurelian pursued his journey from these parts [of Burgundy], bearing
with him the ring of Chlodwig that he might gain the better credence
thereby. When he arrived at the city where Chrotechilda resided with
her aunt, Aurelian presented himself and said: ‘Chlodwig, King of the
Franks, hath sent me to thee; if such be the will of God, he wishes to
associate thee with himself in his majesty, as spouse. That thou mayst
be assured of this, he hath sent thee this ring.’ Accepting the ring,
she was filled with great joy, and answered: ‘Take a hundred solidi
as a reward for thy labor. Return quickly to thy lord and say to him:
‘If thou desirest to associate me with thyself in matrimony, send
envoys straightway to my paternal uncle Gundobard, and ask him for my
hand.’”[349] The money gift was a considerable one for the time, as the
solidus was worth intrinsically about $3 of our money, and six or eight
times as much in purchasing power in that age.

A most interesting ancient wedding ring, presumably of the Gallo-Roman
period, was unearthed toward 1850 in the neighborhood of Mulsanne,
dept. Sarthe, France. It is of massive gold and weighs 24 grams, 20
centigrams, or over ¾ ounce. On the bezel, which is square, are rudely
engraved two figures, that of a warrior resting on his lance and that
of a woman holding out her arms to him. On the shoulders, toward the
bezel, is a foliated ornamentation, and along the edge of the bezel are
engraved the two names “Dromacius” and “Betta,” the characters being
filled in with the black enamel called niello. This ring is believed to
date from the fifth century A.D.[350]

The religious aspect of the ring in the ritual of the Greek Church
finds an exponent in Symeon, Archbishop of Thessalonica, who wrote
about a half-century before the capture of Constantinople by the Turks
in 1453. In his description of a typical marriage ceremony he states
that the officiating priest laid upon the altar two rings, an iron one
symbolic of masculine force, and a gold one typical of the less hardy
but purer feminine constitution. These rings he consecrated. After
bestowing his benediction upon the bride and bridegroom and offering
a prayer for them, he gave the woman the iron ring, as from the man,
and to the man the gold ring on the part of the woman, and changed
them three times, in adoration of the Holy Trinity, the perfecter and
sustainer of all things. Hereupon he joined the right hands of the
spouses, demonstrating their unity in Christ and that the man had
received the woman from the hand of the Church. The rings also
signified the agreement and sealing of the marriage contract.[351]

[Illustration: BETROTHAL OF JOSEPH AND MARY, BY JUAN RODRIGUEZ
JUAREZ (OR XUAREZ), MEXICO CITY, (1666–1734) CALLED THE “MEXICAN
CARRACCA”

In the possession of the author]

[Illustration: Right hand of the Virgin, right hand of St.
Joseph, and hands of the high-priest, showing the manner of
placing the wedding ring at Hebrew marriages as depicted in
the picture of Rodriguez Juarez [Xuarez]. The ring contains an
octahedral diamond crystal set in gold]

According to Buxtorf (De sponsal. et divort.), the Jews did not place
the betrothal ring upon the annular finger, but upon the index. As
to this there is a curious statement in the “Opus aureus contra
Judæos,”[352] by Victor de Carben, a converted Jew. He states that,
at the betrothal ceremony, care should be taken that the fiancée
extends her index finger to receive the ring, lest it should be put, by
mistake, upon the middle finger, for it was on this finger that Joseph
placed the ring when he betrothed Mary. Buxtorf adds that he has never
been able to find this statement in Jewish writings.

One of Ghirlandajo’s frescoes in the church of Santa Croce, in
Florence, depicts the betrothal of the Virgin. Here the ring is placed
by Joseph on the fourth finger of the Virgin’s right hand, and the
famous Sposalizio by Rafael in the Brera Gallery in Milan illustrates
the same usage. Possibly the ring was transferred to the left hand at
the actual marriage ceremony.

The custom of the Greek church at the present day in relation to
betrothal or wedding rings differs in some respects from that observed
in other Christian churches, for the priest places a ring on the fourth
finger of each of the contracting parties, who then proceed to exchange
them with each other.

The old custom of exchanging rings and betrothal vows obtains in the
Russian branch of the Eastern Church. For the succeeding marriage
ceremony, or “crowning,” the same rings are again used. The rubric
states that the bride’s ring should be of silver to show that she is
the less honorable vessel, while the bridegroom’s ring is of gold to
signify the superiority of the man. The brides, however, have shown a
disposition to resent this inequality, and, in modern times at least,
they are given gold rings also. The old Russian custom is for the
husband to wear his ring on his forefinger.[353]

In the Greek and Russian churches, the rings--of gold for the man, of
silver for the woman--are bestowed at the betrothal ceremony, when also
a contract between the parties is made. The later nuptial ceremony is
generally designated as “the crowning,” a crown being placed on the
heads of bride and bridegroom by the officiating priest.

The question was often raised whether the mere fact of giving or
accepting a ring constituted a definite promise of marriage. The best
authorities decided the question in the negative. In reference to
this matter Peter Müller writes: “If when a ring is given there is no
promise of marriage, the ring shall not be regarded as a betrothal
ring, but as a simple gift. Whence it may be inferred that a contract
of marriage cannot be proved by a ring alone, since mere donations,
bestowed through liberality, do not produce any obligation.”[354]

The connection between the wedding ring and the bestowal of
earnest-money is clearly indicated in the marriage service as given in
the Prayer-Book of Edward VI. Here, after the words “with this ring I
thee wed,” there is added: “This gold and silver I give thee”; and at
these words the bridegroom usually placed in the bride’s hands a purse
containing a sum of money. There can, indeed, be little doubt that the
espousal ring was rather the type of a valuable consideration offered
at the consummation of the marriage contract, than a symbol of the
bondage and subjection of the spouse as many have maintained.

That the ring was sometimes given conditionally is shown by a curious
old German formula to the following effect: “I give you this ring as a
sign of the marriage which has been promised between us, provided your
father gives with you a marriage portion of 1000 reichsthalers.”[355]

It is not possible to indicate with any precision at what date the
betrothal ring became the wedding ring, but this change seems to have
taken place in England about the time of the Reformation. This did not,
however, entail the abandonment of the betrothal ring, but rather the
substitution of another, and frequently less simple ring, to mark the
betrothal. Of course, the change was gradual and the usage varied in
different countries, since the employment of a separate marriage ring
was rather a matter of custom than of ecclesiastical ordinance.

The Manx usages and customs are so strange in many cases that the ring
traditions of the Isle of Man also present certain peculiarities.
Thus if a man was found guilty of having done injury to a maiden, the
latter was given a sword, a rope and a ring, signifying that she could
either have him beheaded, or hung, or else could force him to wed her.
That the last-mentioned choice was the one most frequently made is
very probable, as the rehabilitation of her good name thus attained
might well outweigh any satisfaction to be gained from the exercise of
revenge.[356]

The use of rush-rings in England, in 1217, for mock marriages, is
vouched for in the “Constitutiones”[357] of Richard, Bishop of
Salisbury. It is provided that whoever places a rush-ring, or a ring
of cheap or precious material, in sport and jest upon a woman’s hand,
that she shall the more willingly become friendly with him, although
imagining himself to be joking will be constrained to marry. Another
authority declares that when the ecclesiastical court enforced
matrimony as a penalty or a reparation for bad conduct, a rush ring or
a ring of straw was used at the ceremony.[358]

There are several passages in English poetry of the Elizabethan age
and later, referring to this use of a “rush ring.” In his “Two Noble
Kinsmen,” Fletcher writes:

Rings she made
Of rushes that grew by, and to ’em spoke
The prettiest posies; Thus our true loves ty’d;
This you may loose, not me, and many a one.

In the seventeenth century Sir William Davenant (1605–1668) speaks in
the following mocking strain of such a ring:

I’ll crown thee with a garland of straw then
And I’ll marry thee with a rush ring.

The ballad called the Winchester Wedding has these lines:

Pert Strephon was kind to Betty,
And blithe as a bird in the spring;
And Tommy was so to Katy,
And wedded her with a rush ring.

The “rush ring” is touched on in an old English ballad of Shakespeare’s
time, in which occur the lines:[359]

Then on my finger I’ll have a ring
Not one of rush, but a golden thing;
And I shall be glad as a bird in spring,
Because I am married o’ Sunday.

A purely spiritual view of the meaning of a wedding-ring is expressed
by Guillaume Durant, Bishop of Mende (died 1296). For him it was
the symbol of the mutual love of the espoused, at once a pledge and
a symbol of the union of their hearts. However, the more mercenary
significance of the ring, as a sign of the marriage gift to be bestowed
upon the bride by the bridegroom before the wedding, is quite clearly
brought out in the old French Rituals, wherein its composition and
meaning are defined. A simplification of the ring itself seems to
have taken place from about the thirteenth century when gold rings
adorned with precious stones were generally worn. The metal used at a
later time varied in different dioceses. While in that of Limoges the
ring was of gold, the rituals of the dioceses of Auxerre, Lyons and
Paris prescribe a silver ring. In the Manual of the priests belonging
to the diocese of Paris, it is strictly enjoined that there shall be
no inscription or figure upon the ring, and that no precious stone
shall be set therein. The officiating priest receives it from the
bridegroom together with one or more pieces of money “as sign of the
constituted endowment.” The Manuel de Beauvais, published in 1637, also
prescribes that the nuptial ring shall be severely plain and entirely
without inscription. The ritual of the Abbey of St. Victor is even
more definite, for here the blessing of the ring is preceded by the
reading of the endowment on account of marriage (_dotalitium propter
nuptias_). Hence the “dower” was not given with the wife, but was
bestowed upon her by the husband.[360] This has been erroneously looked
upon by some as a survival of the primitive custom of wife-purchase;
it differs, however, essentially from this in that the wife receives
the endowment for her own use and as her own property. A curious
superstition is condemned by the Ritual of Evreux. As the ring was
handed to the bride by the bridegroom, the former would let it fall on
the ground to conjure a possible evil spell.

It has been remarked by Jacob Grimm (1785–1863) the great lexicographer
and student of German archæology, that in early times, among the
christianized Germans, the fiancé gave the ring to the young woman, who
was thenceforth bound to carry out the marriage contract. On the other
hand, according to the poetical recitals of the thirteenth century,
the fiancée gives a ring to her future husband, without receiving one
from him. The same writer regards the usage of betrothal rings as one
introduced among the Germans by Christian influence, not one that can
be looked upon as properly Germanic.[361]

The contracting parties often exchanged rings at the betrothal
ceremony, which in many cases was celebrated in the church with all
due solemnity. Shakespeare’s “Two Gentlemen of Verona” contains an
allusion to a more informal exchange of rings:

Julia: Keep this remembrance for your Julia’s sake.

Proteus: Why then we’ll make exchange; here take you this.

(Giving a ring.)

Julia: And seal the bargain with a holy kiss.

In our own time, in Germany, two rings, one for the bride and the other
for the bridegroom, are given at the marriage ceremony, and these rings
are called “Trauringe,” a name which designates the ring as an emblem
of faith and trust, just as does the Italian name for the betrothal
ring, _fede_, or faith.

From the almost innumerable poesies inscribed upon espousal rings we
select a few of the more noteworthy. An antique Roman ring has the
words: “Pignus amoris habes” (Thou hast a pledge of love);[362] another
shows the simple form “Proteros Ugiæ” (Proteros to Ugia), the names
being inscribed between two clasped hands.[363] A sentiment given by
one who was no believer in unrequited love reads: “Love me, I will love
thee.” A massive gold ring of early date, found in 1823 at Thetford,
in Suffolk, gives us the following inscription in Old French: “Deus
me octroye de vous servir a gree com moun couer desire” (God grant me
to serve thee acceptably as my heart desires).[364] On a ring in the
collection of the late Sir John Evans we have the following graceful
inscription: “Je suis ici en lieu d’ami” (I am here in the place of a
friend).

An elaborate wedding-ring, probably executed in Germany, in the latter
half of the fifteenth century, is in the fine collection of the court
jeweler Koch, of Frankfort-on-the-Main. Out of richly ornamental
foliage work arise the figures of the wedded pair, evidently carefully
rendered portraits. Although somewhat lacking in purely artistic
harmony, this production of the ring-maker’s art is an excellent
illustration of the quality of the best German goldsmith work of the
time in the smaller objects.

The Figdor Collection in Vienna contains a fifteenth century betrothal
ring made in France. It is of gold and bears the inscriptions: “Il est
dit” (in small letters) and “ELLE ME TIENT” (in capitals),
literally: “It is said (spoken)” and “She holds me.” A betrothal ring
in the form of a so-called “Puzzle Ring,” has six connecting hoops.
Three of these are enameled, two others bear closed hands, and the last
shows a key and the head of a winged angel. This is of seventeenth
century workmanship.[365]

A wedding-ring of simple Gothic design formed part of a grave treasure,
the characteristic inscription: “In Mir Ist Treue” (In me is fidelity),
leaving no doubt as to the use to which the ring had been put. This
plain triangular band is in the Germanic Museum in Nuremberg and is
assigned to the thirteenth century. Another most interesting ring
from the same period was found in the territory formerly known as the
Fürstenbergerhof, at the southwest end of the city of Mainz; it is now
owned by the family Heerdt of that city. The clasped hands engraved on
the lower part of the hoop designate this clearly as a betrothal or
wedding-ring.

An English ring of the early part of the fifteenth century bears this
couplet:

Most in mynd and yn myn herrt
Lothest from thee ferto deparrt.

In seventeenth century rings the religious sentiment predominates: “I
have obtaind whom God ordaind”; “God unites our hearts aright”; “Knitt
in one by Christ alone”; “Wee join our love in God above.” A little
more human, if less devotional, are the mottoes: “United hearts death
only parts”; “A faithfull wife preserveth life,” and “Love and live
happily.”

There have been many types of betrothal rings from the simplest up
to the most elaborate and ornate. One having a graceful symbolism
was found near Wassy, dept. Haute Marne, France, in June, 1868. The
hoop is of yellow gold, alloyed sufficiently to give it consistence.
Instead of one chaton, it has two placed close to one another and
each set with a small, cabochon-cut emerald. The choice of this
stone is a good indication that we have to do here with a betrothal
rather than a wedding ring, for the emerald was emblematic of hope,
of unfulfilled desire and of virginity. Around the setting runs the
following inscription in Old French, beginning with the sign of the
cross: CE QUE DESIR HOM DONE UN BIEN. This may be rendered:
“What one desires brings happiness,” the idea being perhaps that so
beautifully expressed by St. Thomas Aquinas: “The soul dwells with the
loved one rather than in the body it animates.”[366] While the letters
of the French inscription are so much worn as to make the decipherment
of two words a little uncertain, the general sense is clear enough,
and constitutes a very fine motto for such a ring.[367]

The ring which had been used by Louis IX (St. Louis) at his betrothal
to Marguerite de Provence, in 1231, was so greatly prized by him that
on his death-bed he expressed the wish that it should be interred with
his body. On its gold hoop he had caused to be engraved the lilies of
France and certain military emblems.[368]

A graceful thought is expressed in the following Old French inscription
on a ring found near Poitiers:

Mon cuer se est resioui aussi doit il si maist Dieux.
A mon gre ne puis mieux aueir choisi.

“My heart is rejoiced, and so should it be, if God aid me. For I feel I
could not have chosen better.”

A shorter motto, but one full of significance, appears on a ring in the
museum of Poitiers; it consists merely of the two words: “Sans Partir.”
This could mean either “we shall never separate,” or else that the
donor would never abandon his love. Another brief motto, found on a
ring in the Louvre dating from the reign of Francis I, runs “Riens sans
amour,” or “Love is all in all.”[369]

[Illustration: JEWISH BETROTHAL RINGS IN GOLD, SET WITH PRECIOUS
STONES

Musèe de Cluny, Paris]

[Illustration: Jewish wedding rings, one with Temple dome, the
other with slant-roofed structure. Each bears the Hebrew words
_Mazzel Tob_, or “Good Luck” Fairholt’s “Rambles of an
Artist”]

[Illustration: Jewish wedding ring, with five bosses and as bezel
a projecting figure. This is hinged and covers a gold plate. On
the inside _Mazzel Tob_ or “Good Luck”

British Museum]

[Illustration: Jewish marriage ring. Gold hoop with five bosses
of filigree enriched with flowers in pale blue, green and white
enamel, and a gable-like projection with two small windows.
Nürnberg. Sixteenth Century

British Museum]

[Illustration: Jewish wedding ring; broad gold hoop, the sides
showing the Creation of Eve, the Fall, and the Expulsion from
Eden. German. Sixteenth Century

British Museum]

At weddings in Spain and also in some parts of France, in connection
with the bestowal of a ring, the curious usage has been observed of
giving thirteen pieces of money to the bride. This gift, called in
French a _treizain_, has its origin, as the name indicates, in
the ancient custom of giving to the purchaser of a dozen articles,
an extra one, ostensibly as a testimonial of good will, but really to
induce further purchases. This old usage is said to have been observed
at the marriage of King Alfonso XIII of Spain in 1906.

The Hebrew betrothal rings were elaborate and somewhat clumsy
productions, frequently of massive gold. The broad hoop was surmounted
by the representation of a temple, sometimes with a Moorish dome, but
usually with a slanting roof. This is a curiously conventionalized
figuration of Solomon’s Temple, similar to that found upon certain
spurious Hebrew coins. Upon the temple or else around the ring, are
generally the Hebrew words FIO ERG, equivalent to “Good Fortune.”[370]
Several such rings are described in the privately printed catalogue
of the Londesborough Collection (London, 1853, p. 4). A more artistic
specimen, also in the Londesborough Collection, bears the figures
of Adam and Eve in Paradise, accompanied by representations of
animals, all in high relief.[371] The specimens described belong to
the sixteenth century. The learned Jesuit, Athanasius Kircher, cites
a statement to the effect that the inscription _mazzel tob_,
engraved upon many Hebrew betrothal rings, referred to the planet
Jupiter as the “good star.”[372] This planet was, indeed, called by the
Hebrews _cocab zedeq_, “star of righteousness” or “justice,” but
there is little doubt that _mazzel tob_ should be rendered “good
fortune” or “propitious fate.”

The earliest Jewish wedding-rings are said to have been plain golden
circlets, without setting, indeed a silver substitute or even one of
a cheaper metal was not forbidden. Pearls, favorite gems with the
Jews, were sometimes used for settings at a later period. The purely
ceremonial or symbolic significance of the Jewish wedding ring in early
times is exemplified in its great size, the major part of these rings
being much too large for wear. Sometimes, at the wedding feast, rings
of this type were used as holders of myrtle-branches. The circlet
surmounted with the temple figure was occasionally formed of two
cherubim.[373]

A ring supposed to have been the wedding ring of the Roman Tribune,
Cola di Rienzi (ca. 1313–1354), is of silver, with an octagonal bezel;
the hoop bears the names: “Catarina” and “Nicola,” those of Rienzi
and of Catarina di Raselli, his bride. The letters have been placed
in sharp relief by cutting away the background and filling it up with
niello. Between the names are two stars. As Rienzi chose a star as
his emblem on the coins he struck during his brief rule in Rome, this
device coupled with the names makes the attribution of the ring not
without some good foundation.[374] This ring was bought by Mr. Waterton
in Rome for a trifling sum. It had been pledged in a Monte di Pietà,
and was disposed of at one of the periodical clearing sales.

In the fifteenth century the betrothal ceremony was usually performed
in the presence of a notary public, not of a priest, and this continued
to be the usage until after the Council of Trent, which ended in 1563.
At the betrothal, by proxy, of Lucrezia Borgia with Giovanni Sforza,
February 2, 1493, twin gold rings set with precious stones were given,
one to be put on the fourth finger of the fiancée’s left hand, “whose
vein leads to the heart” as the record specifies, while the other was
to be placed on the bridegroom’s little finger.[375]

In one of the very risqué tales forming the “Cent Nouvelles Nouvelles,”
the authorship of which has been attributed to King Louis XI of France
(1461–1483), it is related that a lady, while bathing, lost a diamond
ring; the narrator adds: “This was one her liege lord had given her
on the day of her espousal, and she prized it the more highly on this
account.” Although diamond rings were not common at this time, the
recently invented art of facetting the diamond was rapidly bringing
these stones into fashion and favor. There is, indeed, a record, or at
least a family tradition, that one of the three large diamonds cut in
facets by Lodowyk van Berken of Bruges, about 1476, at the order of
Duke Charles the Bold of Burgundy, was set in a ring and given by the
duke to Louis XI, with whom he was then seeking to get on a friendly
footing. This diamond is described as having been cut as a “triangle
and a heart.” This possibly means that the triangular shape was
slightly modified into a heart shape.[376]

A Scotch legend relates that a married woman by ill-chance let her
wedding ring fall into the river Clyde. On her return home her husband
noted its absence and, believing she had given it to a lover,
became furiously jealous, used the harshest language to her and even
threatened her life. In her despair the innocent wife went and cast
herself at the feet of St. Kentigern, Bishop of Glasgow, supplicating
him to render her faithfulness manifest. The bishop had compassion
upon her, and uttered a prayer that the ring might be restored. His
prayer was answered, for ere a few hours had passed a fisherman came
to him bearing as a gift a large salmon he had just caught, and in
the mouth of the fish was found the lost ring. The husband, convinced
of his injustice, was kinder to his wife than ever before, so as to
make good the wrong he had done her. To the story given in this legend
are ascribed the figures of a salmon with a ring in its mouth on
the coat-of-arms of the city of Glasgow, as well as on the armorial
bearings of several of the bishops of that city from the time of Bishop
Wishert, who lived under Edward II of England (1307–1327).[377]

[Illustration: PORTRAIT OF ANNE OF CLEVES (1515–1557), FOURTH
WIFE OF HENRY VIII, BY HANS HOLBEIN

Thumb-ring on left hand, one ring on index finger, and two on
fourth finger of right hand. This portrait, when shown to Henry,
pleased him so well that he agreed to the marriage, but he
expressed sore disappointment when he at last saw the new queen

Musée du Louvre, Paris]

[Illustration: PORTRAIT OF JUDITH, AFTER LUCAS CRANACH

Rings worn beneath gloves, which have slits to relieve the
pressure and to show the rings. Right hand has four rings, on
thumb, index, fourth finger, and little finger, respectively

Kaiserliche Gemälde-Galerie, Vienna]

Among historic wedding rings especially worthy of note is that
commemorating the marriage of Martin Luther to Catharina von Bora, June
13, 1525.[378] Both Luther and his wife had taken the vow of celibacy
in the Roman Catholic church, and he was bitterly reproached by Roman
Catholics for contracting this marriage. Replying to his accusers, he
is declared to have said that he married “to please himself, to tease
the Pope, and to spite the Devil.” The inscription on this ring is:
“D. Martino Luthero Catharina v. Boren, 13 Jun. 1525.” This probably
indicates that the ring was given to Luther by his wife in memory
of the wedding. It is stated to have belonged to a family in Leipsic
as late as 1817. A copy of the ring is in the writer’s possession.
It was given him by Mrs. Edith True Drake, as a memento of her
husband Alexander W. Drake, of whose collection it had formed part.
The original ring is set with a small ruby, and bears in high relief
representations of the crucifixion, and of the instruments of the
Passion; the pillar, scourge, spear, etc.

A pendant to this is a ring given either to Luther or his wife, as a
memento of his marriage, by some friend. This is of the type of gimmal
rings, divisible but not separable. On one hoop the setting is a
diamond, on the other a ruby. The bezel separates into two halves when
the ring is opened, and reveals on the two hidden sides the initials C
V D and M L D, for Catharina von Bora and Martin Luther, Doctor. On the
inner side of the conjoined hoops is the inscription: “_Was Got zusamen
fiegt sol kein mensch scheiden_” (Those whom God hath joined, shall no
man put asunder), in the old German spelling.[379] The diamond is on
the Luther side of the divided bezel, and signifies power, durability
and fidelity; the ruby on the side marked with the wife’s initials
is taken to mean exalted love. Both this ring and the one already
described are believed to have been designed by the artist, Lucas
Cranach, who was a friend of Luther’s and assisted at his marriage. The
ring is in the Grossherzogliches Museum at Brunswick.

A very noteworthy ring, in the Waterton Collection at the Victoria
and Albert Museum, London, belonged to Henry, Lord Darnley, and
commemorated his marriage with Mary, Queen of Scots. On the bezel are
the initials M H, entwined with a true-love knot, and within the hoop
is engraved HENRI L. DARNLEY, and the date, 1565. Between the
two groups of letters constituting the inscription, is figured a lion
rampant on a carved shield. This ring is said to have been found in the
ruins of Fotheringay Castle, where Mary Stuart was executed.[380]

A peculiar class of rings bears the name of “gimmal rings.” This
designation is derived from the Latin _gemelli_, “twins,” and
indicates the form of the ornament. Two rings are joined together by a
pivot so that when united they constitute a single ring, although they
can be easily separated. On each circlet there is a band, so disposed
that when both are brought together the hands are clasped and hold the
separate rings in place. Occasionally, there are three or more rings
combined in the same way, the designation “gimmal ring” being used for
these also. The following lines by Herrick refer to this latter type:

“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.”

A specimen of this type of ring is given in the privately-printed
catalogue of Lady Londesborough’s collection (London, 1853, p. 17).
This is described as “a triple gimmal, the first and third circlet
having each a hand, so that, when joined, the two hands are clasped
together and serve to conceal two united hearts on the third ring. Of
German workmanship.” It was customary to separate the conjoined rings
at the betrothal ceremony and to give the upper and lower to each of
the betrothed, respectively, while the middle ring was given to an
intimate friend of the lady. When the marriage was solemnized, the
rings were reunited and bestowed upon the bride. As a general rule all
rings bearing clasped hands were termed gimmal rings, although the
designation properly belonged to two or more separate rings joined
together.

[Illustration: Ring with pointed diamond used for writing on glass

Fairholt’s “Rambles of an Artist”]

[Illustration: Massive gold Gallo-Roman ring. Found near
Mulsanne, dept. Sarthe, France, about 1850. Believed to be a
wedding ring; five views. Fifth Century. See page 202

Abbe Barraud, “Des Bagues de Toutes les Epoques,” Paris, 1864]

[Illustration: Rings of Mary Stuart. 1, signet ring; 2, wedding
ring of Mary and Darnley, with date of marriage, 1565; two views

Fairholt’s “Rambles of an Artist”]

[Illustration: Gold betrothal ring, bezel in form of clasped
hands, hoop shaped as two amoretti. Sixteenth Century

British Museum]

[Illustration: Hebrew wedding ring. Adam and Eve in Paradise

Wedding ring of Martin Luther, two views. Original had a small
ruby in the centre

Fairholt’s “Rambles of an Artist”]

[Illustration: Wedding ring of gimmal type. German, Sixteenth
Century. Set with a ruby and an aquamarine. Inscription visible
when ring is separated: _Quod Deus conjunxit homo non
separet_ (Let man not separate what God hath joined together).
The betrothal or wedding ring of Sir Thomas Gresham (1519–1579)
is of similar design

British Museum]

The following lines from Don Sebastian, a play written by Dryden
(1690), explains quite fully the character and use of a gimmal ring:

A curious artist wrought ’em
With joynts so close as not to be perceiv’d;
Yet are they both each other’s counterpart.
(Her part had Juan inscrib’d, and his had Zayda,
You know these names were theirs:) and in the midst
A heart divided in two halves was plac’d.
Now if the rivets of those Rings inclos’d
Fit not each other, I have forg’d this lye:
But if they join, you must for ever part.

In Burgon’s life of Sir Thomas Gresham, the merchant prince of Queen
Elizabeth’s time and founder of the Royal Exchange, we are shown his
wedding ring. This is a gimmal ring composed of two hoops, one bearing
the inscription “Quod Deus conjunxit” (What God hath joined together)
and the other: “Homo non separet” (Let not man put asunder).[381] The
two hoops are set with a red and a white stone, respectively.

A curious development of the gimmal-ring was the so-called
“puzzle-ring” consisting of pieces of gold wire ingeniously bent and
intertwined so that they appeared to form a single indivisible ring,
although by a certain clever twist they could easily be separated into
several independent hoops. This type was derived from the East.

On a gimmal ring belonging to the first half of the fifteenth century,
in the Londesborough Collection, is an engraved head of Lucretia;
at the back appear two hands clasped. This type seems to have been
common in Shakespeare’s time, for in Twelfth Night (Act II, sc. 5),
Malvolio exclaims, after examining the seal on a letter: “By your
leave, wax. Soft!--and the impressure her Lucrece with which she uses
to seal.”[382] The choice of this image for a betrothal ring must have
been intended either as a tribute to the lady’s chastity, or else as a
kind of amulet to protect her from attacks on her virtue.

[Illustration: Gimmal ring, open

Edward’s “History and Poetry of Finger Rings”]

[Illustration:

Silver betrothal ring; two views. On the shoulder appears the
legend: “God Help.” English, Fifteenth Century

British Museum]

[Illustration:

Gold puzzle rings. 1, three hoops, cruciform bezel: 2, with four
hoops. Two views of each, closed and open. Seventeenth Century

British Museum]

[Illustration:

Curious old posy ring. The motto is to be read: Our _hands_
and _hearts_ with one consent, Hath tied this _knot_
till _death_ prevent

British Museum]

[Illustration: Wedding rings with “posies.” English, Seventeenth
Century

Fairholt’s “Rambles of an Artist”]

[Illustration: Two Gimmal rings, one double, the other triple.
Betrothal or wedding rings

Fairholt’s “Rambles of an Artist”]

The talismanic quality of the turquoise is noted by Edward Fenton, in
his “Secrets of Nature” (1569), wherein he says: “The Turkeys doth
move when there is any perill prepared to him that weareth it.” In
his commentary on Shakespeare’s Othello, Steevens remarks that the
poet probably had the mystic virtues of this stone in mind when he
made Shylock mourn the loss of the turquoise his wife Leah had given
him before their marriage.[383] In the original text of this passage
the name is spelled “turkie,” and this old spelling is interesting as
showing the identity of the name given to the stone with that bestowed
upon the fowl known to us as a turkey. In this latter case the spelling
and pronunciation have been retained, while in the former we have the
modified form turquoise, both names indicating an association of
the respective objects with Turkey, as the land from whence they were
erroneously believed to come. As Shylock’s turquoise seems to have been
set in a betrothal ring, it is singular to note that at the present day
the turquoise is a favorite stone for betrothal rings in Germany.

In Shakespeare’s Cymbeline, where the diamond is so often mentioned
in connection with a ring given as a sign of faithfulness, a passage
occurs denoting that this stone was sometimes set in a betrothal ring
in Shakespeare’s time. The line runs (Act I, sc. 4):

This diamond was my mother’s: take it, heart;
But keep it till you woo another wife.

The preciousness and dazzling lustre of diamonds are also alluded to
in this play. It is worthy of note that while in all of Shakespeare’s
plays the diamond is only mentioned twenty-one times, seven of these
mentions are in his Cymbeline.

An emblematic wedding-ring with a deep, and perhaps somewhat ambiguous
significance, was bestowed upon his spouse by Bishop Cokes. Upon it was
engraved a hand, a heart, a mitre, and a death’s head, the inscription
reading:

These three I give to thee
Till the fourth set me free.[384]

A frankly humorous inscription was that placed upon the wedding-ring of
Lady Cathcard when, in 1713, she wedded her _fourth_ husband, Hugh
Maguire. This was as follows:

If I survive
I will have five

A similar poesy is said to have been used at a later date by John
Thomas, Bishop of London, on the ring which he used at his fourth
marriage:

If I survive
I’ll make them five.[385]

The Puritan reaction in England during the Commonwealth, against the
customs of the English Church, extended to the use of the wedding-ring,
and Samuel Butler in his Hudibras alludes to this tendency in the
following lines:

Others were for abolishing
That tool of matrimony, a ring
With which the unsanctify’ed bridegroom
Is marry’d only to a thumb.

There is a possibility that this curious custom of wearing a wedding
ring on the thumb may have had some connection with the old fancy that
the second joint of the thumb was dedicated to the Virgin Mary, whose
supposed espousal ring is preserved in the Cathedral of Perugia. It
is true that this ought rather to apply to a betrothal ring than a
wedding ring. The following list gives the religious dedication of the
various finger-joints: In the right hand the upper joint of the thumb
was dedicated to God, the lower joint to the Virgin; the first joint
of the index to St. Barnabas, the second to St. John, the third to
St. Paul; the first joint of the middle finger to St. Simon Cleophas,
the second to St. Thaddæus, the third to St. Joseph; the first joint
of the annular to St. Zacchæus, the second to St. Stephen, the third
to St. Luke; the first joint of the little finger to St. Leatus, the
second to St. Mark, the third to St. Nicodemus. The dedication of
the left hand fingers was: First joint of thumb, to Christ, second
joint to the Virgin; first joint of the index to St. James, the second
to St. John the Evangelist, the third to St. Peter; first joint of the
middle finger to St. Simon, the second to St. Matthew, the third to St.
James the Greater; first joint of the annular to St. Jude, the second
to St. Bartholomew, the third to St. Andrew; first joint of the little
finger to St. Matthaias, the second to St. Thomas, the third to St.
Philip.[386]

[Illustration: PORTRAIT OF CLARA EUGENIA, DAUGHTER OF PHILIP II
OF SPAIN, BY GONZALES

Rings on thumb and index of right hand, which holds a miniature
of Philip. Elaborately jewelled dress and splendid pearl necklace
and head-ornament

Museo del Prado, Madrid]

[Illustration: PORTRAIT OF CATARINA MICHELA, DAUGHTER OF PHILIP
II OF SPAIN, BY COELLO SANCHEZ

Thumb ring on right hand and ring on index of same hand; both
with precious-stone settings. Similar rings on index and little
fingers of left hand

Museo del Prado, Madrid]

As in Europe a couple of centuries ago, so in the India of to-day, a
wedding ring is often worn on the thumb. This is of gold, about an
inch wide. It is only worn, however, for a short period, sometimes
only during the several days devoted to the celebration of the wedding
ceremonies; in other cases, it is worn for six months, or occasionally
even for twelve months after marriage. Eventually it is melted down,
the precious metal being then worked up into some other ornament.[387]

The great lexicographer, Dr. Samuel Johnson, was devotedly attached to
his wife, although the alliance can scarcely be looked upon as a love
match on the learned doctor’s side. His patient devotion to his sickly
and rather ugly wife goes to show how wide is the divergence between
theory and practice, for in his dictionary Johnson defines a ring as:
“a circular instrument placed upon the noses of hogs and the fingers
of women to restrain them and bring them into subjection.” After his
wife’s death Dr. Johnson preserved her wedding-ring in a box bearing
the following inscription:

“Eheu! Eliza Johnson, Nupta July 9^o 1736, Mortua, eheu! Mart.
17^o 1752.”

That the betrothal ring was occasionally worn on the index finger is
shown in two celebrated seventeenth century pictures, the “Betrothal
of Marie de’ Medici,” by Rubens, and the “Betrothal of St. Catherine,”
by Murillo. Sometimes, however, the little finger was chosen for this
honor and an interesting example of this custom is given by a document
in the Hohenzollern Museum in Berlin. Here is exhibited a list of the
rings worn by Queen Louisa of Prussia on the day of her death, written
down by her husband, King Friedrich Wilhelm III, and the first entry
reads: “Our betrothal ring, on the little finger of the right hand.”
The list closes with the following simple and touching words in the
King’s handwriting: “At Hohenzieritz, on the most unhappy day of my
life, July 19, 1810,” this being the day of Queen Louisa’s death.
It may be noted that at the present day, while the usual custom in
South Germany is to wear the wedding ring on the fourth finger of the
left hand, in North Germany the right hand is generally given the
preference. This applies both to men and women.

King George IV of England is said to have had two rings made, each
provided with a secret spring which, on being pressed, opened a
panel and revealed the king’s portrait and that of Mrs. Fitzherbert,
respectively. The ring containing the king’s portrait was bestowed by
him upon Mrs. Fitzherbert, whom he is said to have married in 1785,
and that with her portrait was kept by him, and, before his death,
entrusted to the Duke of Wellington, the latter promising solemnly that
he would place it upon his royal master’s breast when his remains
were in the coffin. Mrs. Fitzherbert left her ring to Miss Dawson
Damer.[388] Another ring given by George IV to Mrs. Fitzherbert was
exhibited in the Victoria Exhibition, at the New Gallery, London, and
is described as being a gimmal, the two hoops closely fitting together,
with the inscription “Geo. Adolph. Frederick” on the inside of one and
“Maria Anne” on that of the other.[389]

In former times rings used to be presented to the chief guests at a
wedding, and at the marriage of Queen Victoria with Prince Albert, six
dozen such rings were bestowed, each one having a profile portrait of
the bride engraved upon it, with the inscription, “Victoria Regina.”
The revival of this graceful custom would serve to perpetuate among the
wedding guests the memory of the ceremony at which they had assisted.

Wedding rings figuring two clasped hands are still used by the peasants
of Normandy, and in Galway also rings bearing two hands clasping a
heart have been passed down from generation to generation, from the
mother to the eldest daughter. This illustrates the general rule that
long after a custom or a form of personal adornment has ceased to be
in favor with the higher classes it continues to be popular with the
peasantry.

The inscriptions on rings occasionally seen, which appear to be a
medley of meaningless letters, are often the makeup of two names
interlocked, such as “George” and “Sophia”:

gAeIoHrPgOeS

the one name reading to the right and the other to the left.

In some parts of Ireland the belief in the special virtue of a gold
wedding ring is so strong that when the bridegroom is too poor to
buy one he will hire it for the occasion, and it is reported that a
shopkeeper of Munster realized quite a little sum annually by renting
rings for weddings, to be brought back to him after the ceremony.
Strange to say, there is said to have been a superstitious fancy in
Yorkshire, England, that to wed with a borrowed ring would bring good
luck.[390]

A Scottish tradition in regard to a ring used at a wedding is imbued
with the gloomy superstition so characteristic of Scotland. The heir
of a noble family was about to be married to a Dutch lady of rank,
but when the wedding-day came was so apathetic, or so preoccupied,
that he forgot the hour of the ceremony, and had to be hurried from
his breakfast to the church. In his haste he had forgotten all about
the wedding-ring, and was obliged to use a ring offered to him by a
bystander when the ceremony reached the point where one had to be put
on the bride’s finger. What was her terror, however, when she saw that
it was a mourning-ring that had been placed upon her hand, one bearing
the sinister design of a skull and cross-bones. This she felt to be an
omen that death would soon overtake her, and she brooded so much over
the happening that she sank into a decline, and died before a year had
passed. The effect of the mind upon the body is so great, especially in
highly nervous organisms, that such a tragic result of a mere piece of
carelessness is far from being impossible.

In modern times betrothal rings are often of the type called “regard
rings,” where the letters of a word are indicated by the initial
letters of the stones set in the ring, as, for example:

R uby
E merald
G arnet
A methyst
R uby
D iamond

In a similar way the Christian name of either of the betrothed may be
indicated, as, for instance:

S apphire
O pal
P eridot
H yalite
I olite
A methyst

Although a diamond ring is the one most appropriate as an engagement
ring, it has long been recognized that for a wedding ring nothing
can replace the simple hoop of precious metal, which may, indeed,
be rendered a trifle less plain by some very chaste and beautiful
engraving. A reason for the preference given to the ring without
setting is offered by Fuller in his “Holy State,” where he says:
“Marriage with a diamond ring foreshadowed evil, because the
interruption of the circle augured that the reciprocal regard of the
spouse might not be perpetual.”[391]

An attempt is being made in Germany to introduce the use of
wedding-rings with moderate ornamentation and appropriate mottoes
patterned on those of former times, in place of the severely plain gold
hoop that has for a long time been decreed to be the only proper form
of wedding-ring. If the tendency to over-ornamentation is kept strictly
within bounds and if the mottoes are well chosen, there is some reason
to think that the innovation, or rather revival, may meet with some
success, as it will afford scope for individuality of taste to assert
itself, and for the expression of sentiment in a way that has not been
possible under present conditions.

A wedding ring of iron and gold artistically combined has gained some
favor of late, as symbolizing the union of strength and beauty, of
the more solid with the more brilliant qualities. The uncompromising
plainness of the plain gold ring, which represented a reaction to
primitive forms from the over-ornamentation of the Rococo period, will
probably give place to certain simple and chaste designs which can be
made to symbolize some of the thoughts and sentiments connected with
the marriage ceremony. But the unstable, oxidizing quality of the iron
will not recommend this metal for durability.

The recurrence of a great national crisis will often cause the
revival of some custom or usage of an earlier one. Thus it is that
in the present War of Nations, Germans have revived the practice of
exchanging gold rings for iron ones that was resorted to in the dark
time of Napoleonic supremacy in Germany. The total value of the metal
secured in this way is of course relatively small, though not entirely
negligible, but the spirit of devotion to the Vaterland finds both
a real and a symbolic expression in the deposition of many a valued
heirloom on the country’s altar. To avoid a rust stain on the finger
these iron rings--which usually bear the figure of the Iron Cross--are
frequently lined with a thin layer of gold. Not only rings but gold
and silver objects of all kinds and valuable jewels have been brought
in by patriotic Germans, to such an extent, indeed, that the Viennese
jewellers are urging that the metals should be immediately melted, as
in case the objects or ornaments should be put on the market, they
would compete disastrously with the jewellers’ shops. It is stated that
up to the middle of September, 1915, as many as five thousand wedding
rings were donated in the single Prussian province of Posen, and the
estimate has been made that about one million dollars will be realized
from the total offerings throughout the Germanic countries.

The ancients and the alchemists called gold the metal of the sun and
silver the metal of the moon, but within the past two centuries the
world has become familiar with platinum, a metal of equal dignity with
gold, but with the pure whiteness of the somewhat tarnishable silver.

Platinum, because of its durability and purity, may well be called
the metal of Heaven, and within the past century we have added to our
list of metals aluminum, a metal which constitutes a fair percentage
of the earth’s surface. This can be appropriately termed the metal of
the earth. These two metals, platinum and aluminum, have been used to a
great extent; platinum for the purpose of mounting jewels--the stars of
Heaven, as it were, in their heavenly setting--and aluminum, the metal
of earth, for a great variety of purposes.

Surely platinum, the metal of Heaven, is a most appropriate material
for a wedding ring, and as gold has always been termed the metal of
man, so platinum, the metal of Heaven, might be dedicated to woman, the
fairest gift of Heaven, and an alliance ring made of these two metals
would be an ideal matrimonial ring.

Many of those who were married before platinum was used for wedding
rings have recourse to an ingenious device by which a plate of platinum
is spun or turned over the entire part of the setting which is visible,
so that the gold ring will appear to be of platinum, either plain,
carved or chased. Great ingenuity is required in this mounting, because
it is in most cases impossible to permit the metal to do more than
touch the inner part of the ring. Otherwise, the size of the circlet
would be reduced. Alliance rings are sometimes made one side gold and
one side platinum.

At the present time many platinum wedding rings are made perfectly
plain, others are engraved with a laurel wreath, as a peace or
anti-divorce symbol, with oak leaves for strength, ivy for clinging
devotion, and some other symbolic devices. Many alliance rings are made
of two parts, one bearing the names of the engaged couple, the other
the date of the engagement. Narrow gold rings with diamond settings are
also used, closely resembling the type of diamond ring that has been
worn as a guard-ring for many years.

That men should be forced to wear wedding rings is a proposition
recently agitated in London. Public attention was called to this
question by newspaper reports to the effect that a young lady had
testified at a divorce suit that she had innocently encouraged the
attentions of a married man, because she had no means of knowing that
he was married. In many continental countries married men are always
expected to wear such rings, although there is of course no legal
compulsion to do so, any more than in the case of a wife. We can hardly
deny that anything serving to fix the status of both men and women in
the matter of their marital relations is eminently desirable.

[Illustration: Lady’s gold ring, with French motto: “_Mon cœur
est à vous_” (My heart is yours)

Albert Figdor Collection, Vienna]

[Illustration: Engagement ring with adjustable hoop; fully open;
half-open; and closed]

[Illustration: Ornamental wedding rings, and separable alliance
wedding ring of “gimmal” type closed and open]

[Illustration: WEDDING RINGS. PLAIN GOLD, PLATINUM AND CHASED]

Apropos of wedding rings, the notice of a special marriage ceremony
performed for a man and woman who were both ardent advocates of woman
suffrage, suggests that such unions might be signalized by the use
of a ring of a characteristic type. In this case the parties to the
marriage contract were careful to emphasize the fact that the union
was one between equals, each of whom made the same pledge of fidelity
and love to the other. Perhaps a ring enamelled with the suffragette
colors might be acceptable to the pioneers of the new era. As in many
old-fashioned marriages the woman was accorded a _de facto_
primacy, the man who willingly accepts the doctrine of the equality of
the sexes may be rather a gainer than a loser by his adherence to the
new faith.

In England, it is said that a movement has been initiated to abolish
the use of the wedding-ring, possibly in some sense as a war measure,
to constitute a slight check on the use of gold for ornamental
purposes. It is, however, conjectured that its real source is rather
to be sought in the general movement for the complete independence of
women, the wedding-ring being looked upon by some extremists as an
antiquated badge of slavery. It is hardly probable that such a movement
will meet with any considerable measure of success, for the idea that
the ring is a symbol of faith has become too deeply rooted in the
popular mind to warrant the rejection of the time-honored usage.

Perhaps the objection of the extreme advocates of “woman’s rights”
might be satisfied by the introduction of an interchange of rings
both at engagements and marriages. This exchange of rings is an
acknowledgment of the mutuality of the relation, and it has been
practiced, and still is practiced in many countries on the European
continent. Moreover, the introduction of this usage in England and
the United States would afford scope for a broadening of the symbolism
connected with these rings, by differentiating them in some way, so
that they might signify the special virtues each of the contracting
parties bring to their mutual relation. This differentiation would
in no wise imply any subjection, but would merely emphasize those
fundamental distinctions, without which the true progress of the world
would be checked. Real equality consists in the untrammeled development
of the characteristic excellences, not in any arbitrary reduction of
all to some preconceived standard.

Of all the marriage-medals that have been struck none can be said to
equal in beauty of design and tenderness of sentiment that designed in
1895 by the great French medallist Oscar Roty (1846–1911). The obverse
shows the bridegroom about to place the wedding-ring on the bride’s
hand, but in the very act of doing so, he is impelled to look upward,
as though calling for Heaven’s blessing upon his marriage. The girlish
bride has her head slightly bent down in token of assent. The scene is
in the open country; the figures are seated opposite to one another on
plain stone seats, and the landscape background is Rafaelesque in its
delicate beauty. Beneath, in the exergue, is the single word “Semper,”
an earnest that the solemn contract so gladly and so religiously
entered into will be kept for this world and for the great future.
The reverse shows a statue of Cupid on a fountain pedestal; alongside
rises the trunk of a sturdy oak. On the right is ample space for a
dedicatory inscription. The companion-piece, Roty’s second marriage
medal, executed ten or more years later, although a noble work, falls
something short of his first effort. Here the bridegroom, who displays
no ring, kneels before the bride with uplifted head, the French
motto reading “A Elle Toujours” (“Forever Hers”); on the reverse is
a church altar. Under this is a plaque, enclosing which are roses,
oak-leaves and acorns.

[Illustration: MARRIAGE MEDALS BY THE GREAT FRENCH MEDALLIST,
OSCAR ROTY (1846–1911)

The upper medal shows the putting on of the wedding ring]

[Illustration: BETROTHAL RING OF GOLD IN FORM OF SO-CALLED
“PUZZLE RING”

Six connecting hoops, three of them enameled, two others with
clasped hands, and the sixth with a key and a winged angel’s
head. Seventeenth Century.

Albert Figdor Collection, Vienna]

[Illustration: BETROTHAL RING OF GOLD

Inscribed in Old French “_Il est dit_” and “_Elle me
tien_” (literally “It is said (spoken)” and “She (or it) holds
me”). French. Fifteenth Century.

Albert Figdor Collection, Vienna]

[Illustration: LOVE RING OF GOLD, ENAMELED AND SET WITH PRECIOUS
STONES

The bezel has a lid on which is enameled a head wearing a domino
mask; it is framed by seventeen rubies. When the lid is raised
there appears beneath an oval, enameled with a heart, around
which is the motto: “_Pour vous seule_” (For you alone). The
interior of the lid is hollowed out to serve as a receptacle for
hair. On the ribbon-like hoop is the inscription: “_Sous le
masque la vérité_” (Beneath the mask is truth). About 1800.
Formerly belonged to the great Viennese tragic actress Charlotte
Wolter.]

A type of ring of occasional use, not distantly related to the wedding
ring, comprises the so-called “pacifying,” or teething rings, generally
made of ivory, rubber or celluloid, and large enough for one or two
fingers of a child. Diagonally on the hoop is a flat, circular piece of
the same material as that of which the ring is made, and which prevents
it from slipping into the mouth of the child. Upon this flat piece is
mounted a small bit of rubber or ivory for the child to suck or bite
upon, to develop its teeth, or at least to keep it quiet.

What might be called a “Latitude and Longitude Ring,” would be an
attractive memento of engagement and marriage. There would be a narrow
band showing, around it, a degree of latitude marked with longitudes,
and having a small star at the place where the parties became engaged,
and a double star at the spot where they were married.

A few appropriate inscriptions on modern engagement rings are as
follows: “Our engagement”; “My love to thine”; “To her who merits all
my love”; “To my Pet”; “To my ‘Chiquita’ from Bill,” this last in
Spanish. In a more serious vein we have: “Time-Eternity,” and “Perfect
love casteth out fear.” Occasionally there is a note of sadness, as
appears in the inscription: “Faithful, but unhappy.” A ring bearing the
words “Stick to me, my darling” may show that the fiancé was a trifle
distrustful of his lady love’s constancy; another who sets in his ring
“Firm and True” makes us infer that he had more faith. The three words
“Bessie sweet sixteen” show that early engagements sometimes occur
even in our sophisticated age. On ornaments other than rings, bestowed
in connection with either engagement or marriage, we read: “My heart I
take not back from thee. H. B. L.” and “Thine own wish, wish I thee. A.
B. T. & R. V. P.” A curious inscription runs: “A nasty cold face and
metal eye,” and we have: “For my sake wear this, it is a manacle of
love.” Modern wedding rings are often inscribed with pious sentiments,
such, for instance, as: “All for Jesus”; “Each for the other, both for
God”; “Our unity is Christ”; “Mercifully ordain that we may grow old
together”; “In Christ and in Thee my comfort shall be”; “God gave thee
to me”; “Through weal and through woe, to each other on earth, to God
in Heaven. Always true to Bertha.” A somewhat philosophic sentiment
appears in the words: “Ultimate Good, not present pleasure.” Latin
inscriptions are now quite rare, but here is one: “Si Deus nobiscum,
quis contra nos?” (If God be with us, who can be against us?)

In other cases the legend is more worldly: “Love for Love” and “He that
taketh a wife hath a good thing.” Let us hope that this optimist was
not mistaken in his confidence. Another bridegroom declares that he, at
least, has a “good thing,” for he places in his ring the simple motto:
“Carrie suits.” If she suits him, that is enough. Lastly, we have the
most satisfactory inscription of all, since it testifies to the result
of one fortunate experiment; this reads: “In token of 30 years fidelity
as Wife and Mother.”

The use of a diamond ring for betrothals seems to have been general
toward the end of the fifteenth century, for royal personages at least,
to judge from a letter written from Ghent on July 30, 1477, by Dr.
Wilhelm Moroltinger to Archduke (later Emperor) Maximilian, just before
his betrothal to Mary of Burgundy, daughter of Charles the Bold. This
letter runs: “At the betrothal your Grace must have a ring set with a
diamond and also a gold ring. Moreover, in the morning your Grace must
bestow upon the bride some costly jewels.”[392]

From time immemorial we have had wedding-rings, but it seems that
in view of the great number of divorces now granted we might well
introduce the custom of giving “divorce-rings,” for at no time in the
history of the Christian world have there been more divorces than at
the present day. This divorce-ring might be differentiated from the
old-fashioned wedding-ring by substituting the inscription A B C _from_
D B F for A B C _and_ D E F.

A novel idea in divorce-rings is reported from Chicago, where a
fashionable divorcée had her wedding-ring made smaller so that she
could wear it on the little finger of her left hand as a divorce-ring.
However, we fear that if this idea should be generally adopted, the
little finger would scarcely offer room for the series of rings that
some of our theatrical stars would have to wear. Perhaps in some cases
this wearing of the wedding-ring, even in a modified form, after a
divorce, might be intended to indicate that the old love had not wholly
vanished, and that some day those who had been put asunder could be
rejoined, as occasionally happens now-a-days.

At weddings in Tunis, the Arabs have the custom of placing the
wedding-ring upon the first finger of the left hand, and the finger
and toe-nails of the bride receive an especially rich coloring of
henna on this occasion, staining them a deep red; her eyebrows also are
heavily pencilled and joined across the nose so that they form a single
bar over the eyes. In order to make the home-coming as auspicious as
possible, a gilded pair of horns are set above the portal of the house,
along with the favorite charm known as “the hand of Fatima,” believed
to afford safety from the malign influence of the Evil Eye, so much
dreaded in the East and in some Occidental lands also.[393]

An interesting incident in which a ring plays an important part is
related in connection with the visit of Secretary, afterward President
Taft, accompanied by a number of prominent Americans, to the Sulu
Islands a few years ago. Mrs. Longworth, then Miss Alice Roosevelt, was
one of the party, and the Sultan of Sulu, Jamalul Kiram II, expressed a
great desire to be introduced to her. The favor was readily accorded,
and on the day set for the interview the Sultan and several Sulu
dattos, or chiefs, duly presented themselves. One of the dattos was a
mortal enemy of the Sultan, but naturally on this occasion all personal
or political feuds were forgotten for the time being. After the Sultan
had been presented to Miss Roosevelt, came the turn of the rebellious
datto, who approached the sprightly young American girl, greeted
her, and presented to her a native pearl of great beauty, which was
graciously accepted.

The chagrin of the Sultan may easily be imagined, for he had forgotten
to provide himself with a suitable gift, and now his mortal enemy
was basking in the sunshine of favor, while he himself, the lord
paramount, was neglected. Suddenly his eye fell upon a ring set with
a magnificent pearl which he wore on his left hand. He immediately
took off this ring, and again approaching Miss Roosevelt, gave it to
her. As the Sultan’s pearl far exceeded in beauty and value that given
by the datto, the former’s dignity was cleared of all reproach and
the situation was saved. A curious sequel to this incident was the
circulation of a report in the press to the effect that the Sultan of
Sulu had made an offer of marriage to Miss Roosevelt. This proved how
closely the gift of a ring is associated with the idea of engagement or
marriage.

A Pennsylvania (U. S. A.) court has been called upon to decide whether
the gift of an engagement ring bestowed by a man just prior to a
declaration of bankruptcy, should be looked upon as a transfer of
assets to the prejudice of the creditors. The fact that in this case
the fair recipient of the ring was a jeweller’s daughter might be
thought to render it likely that this particular engagement ring was of
substantial intrinsic value. The court reserved its decision.

A choice of pretty “posies” for rings was offered to seventeenth
century readers in a London publication entitled “Love’s Garland; or
Posies for Rings, Handkerchiefs and Gloves, and Such Pretty Tokens as
Lovers Send Their Loves.” Unyielding constancy found expression in the
couplets:

Where once I choose
I ne’er refuse.

Hearts content
Can ne’er repent.

Another verse makes a very modest claim for an expression of gratitude
on the part of the recipient:

The sight of this
Deserves a kiss.

The warmth of reciprocated love is thus asserted:

In thee a flame
In me the same.

Another lover wishes to proclaim that his love will rise superior to
all offenses:

No bitter smart
Can change my heart.

A more serious and trusting posy runs:

To me till death
As dear as breath.

A ring mentioned in an old English record dating from 1473, offers
apparently an early example of a so-called “posy” ring. It is here
termed a “hope rynge with scrytorio” (inscription); this, together with
a brooch adorned with the figure of a “jyntylle woman,” was pledged
with a certain Richard Walker to secure a small loan of £4 8d.[394]

A good example of a “ring posie” is given by Ben Jonson in his play
“The Magnetic Lady, or Humours Reconciled,” first licensed for
performance in 1632, during the reign of Charles I, and but five years
before Jonson’s death. Here, when bride and groom come before the
parson to be wedded, he asks the bridegroom:

Have you a wedding ring?

To which the latter replies:

Ay, and a posie:
Annulus hic nobis, quod sic uterque, dabit.

This the parson quickly renders as follows:

This ring will give you what you both desire;
I’ll make the whole house shout it, and the parish.

On other pages a number of characteristic and striking
ring-inscriptions are given, but in view of the wide range of these
“posies” (poesies) and mottoes, a fairly full list of them, compiled
from various sources, may be of interest here.[395] The French mottoes
are nearly all in Old French, and the English spellings of those of the
seventeenth century are delightfully irregular.

[Illustration: PORTRAIT OF YOUNG WOMAN. DUTCH SCHOOL

Large rings on little finders of right and left hands; large ring
on third joint of left-hand fourth finger, and smaller one on
second joint of the same finger; plain gold ring (wedding ring?)
on fourth finger of left hand

Kaiserliche Gemälde-Galerie, Vienna]

[Illustration: PORTRAIT OF A MAN, BY THE ARTIST KNOWN AS THE
“MASTER OF THE DEATH OF MARY,” FROM HIS MOST NOTED PICTURE

Rings on index and little fingers of right hand

Königliche Gemälde-Galerie, Cassel]

Till death divide.

_Nemo nisi mors._
(No one but Death).

_Tout pour bein feyre._
(All to do well).

_In bone fay._
(In good faith).

_Sans mal desyr._
(Without evil wish).

_Amor vincit om._
(Love conquers all things).

Till my life’s end.

_Erunt duo in carne una._
(They shall be two in one flesh).

_Semper amemus._
(May we love forever).

In Christ and thee my comfort be.

_Honeur et joye._
(Honor and joy).

Let reason rule affection.

God continue to love us.

_Mon cur avez._
(You have my heart).

_Deux corps ung cuer._
(Two bodies and one heart).

_Amour et constance._
(Love and constancy).

God unite our hearts aright.

Knit in one by Christ alone.

God’s providence is our inheritance.

Our contract was heaven’s act.

In thee, my choice, do I rejoice.

God above increase our love.

My heart and I, until I dye.

Not two, but one, till life be gone.

When this you see, remember me.

Julia is mine own peculiar.

I cannot show the love I O.

We strangely met, and so do many,
But now as true as ever any. 1658.

As we begun, so let’s continue.

My beloved is mine, and I am hers.

True blue will never stain. 1653.

Against thou goest, I will provide another. 1658.

In loving thee, I love myself. 1658.

Let him never take a wife,
That will not love her as his life.

A heart content cannot repent.

I do not repent I gave consent.

No gift can show the love I owe.

What the heart saw the love hath chosen.

Love one little, but love one long.

Love him who gave thee this ring of gold,
’Tis he must kiss thee when thou art old.

This circle, though but small about,
The devil, jealousy, will keep out.

If I think my wife is fair,
What need other people care? 1653.

God’s appointment is my contentment.

Love, I like thee; sweet, requite me.

With heart and hand at your command.

My heart in silence speaks to thee,
Though absence barrs tongue’s liberty.

Faithful ever: deceitful never.

I like, I love as turtle dove.

As gold is pure, so love is sure.

Despise not mee: y^t joyes in thee.

If you deny, then sure I dye.

Your right is my delight.

As true, bee just.

No better smart shall change my heart.

This ring is a token I give to thee,
That thou no tokens do change for me.

My dearest Betty is good and pretty. 1658.

I did commit no act of folly,
When I married my sweet Molly. 1658.

’Tis fit no man should be alone,
Which made Tom to marry Joan. 1658.

Sue is bonny, blythe, and brown;
This ring hath made her now my own. 1658.

Like Phillis there is none:
She truly loves her Choridon. 1658.

My life is done when thou art gone. 1653.

This hath no end, my sweetest friend:
Our loves be so, no ending know.

God send her me my wife to be.

As God decreed so we agreed.

Take hand and heart, I’ll ne’er depart.

Love and dye in constancy.

A virtuous wife that serveth life.

As long as life y^r loving wife.

I will be yours while breath endures.

Love is sure where faith is pure.

A virtuous wife doth banish strife.

God did forsee we should agree.

Love me, and be happy.

None can prevent the Lord’s intent.

Virtue surpasses riches.

Let virtue rest within thy breast.

Time lesseneth not my love.

Joye without end.

Let lykinge last.

This and giver are thine for ever.

Think on mee.

Let love increase.

Thou art my star, be not irregular. 1653.[396]

Without thy love I backward move. 1613.

Thine eyes so bright are my chief delight. 1653.

This intimates true lovers’ states. 1653.

Thou wert not handsome, wise, but rich;
’Twas that which did my eyes bewitch. 1658.[397]

As we begun, so let’s continue. 1658.

What the eye saw the heart hath chosen. 1658.

More faithful than fortunate. 1658.

Constancy and heaven are round,
And in this the emblem’s found.

As God hath knit our hearts in one,
Let nothing part but death alone.

God our love continue ever,
That we in heaven may live together.

Weare me out, love shall not waste,
Love beyond lyvie still is placed.

Weare this text, and when you looke
Uppon your finger, sweare by th’ booke.

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 loose.

As God hath made my chyce in thee,
So move thy heart to comfort me.

God y^t hath kept thy heart for mee,
Grant that our love may faithful bee.

Fear ye the Lord then rest content,
So shall we live and not repent.

Divinely knit by grace are wee,
Late two, now one, ye pledge here see. 1657.

Breake not thy vow to please the eye,
But keepe thy love, so live and dye.

Love thy chast wife beyond thy life. 1601.

I love the rod and thee and God. 1646.

Pray to love; love to pray. 1649.

More weare--more wear. 1652.

Endless as this shall be our bliss. 1719.

Be truly wise lest death surprise.

Live in love and fear the Lord.

Godly love will not remove.

United hearts death only partes.

You and I will lovers die.

We joyn our love in Christ above.

God gives increase to love and peace.

God did decree our unitie.

Heart content cannot repent.

Live, love, and be happie.

Noe heart more true than mine to you.

In thee I find content of mind.

A blessing we do hope to see.

In love divine we love to joine.

Hearts united live contented.

In love and joy I will live and die.

In thy breast my heart shall rest.

The love is true that I.O.U.

My love is fixed I will not range.
I like my choice too well to change.

This is the thing I wish to win.

My promise past shall ever last.

Well projected if accepted.

God thought fit this knott to knitt.

Thy Desart hath won my heart.

True love is the bond of peace.

Let our contest be who loves best.

Thine eyes so bright are my chief delight.

Our loves be so no ending know.

My pledge I prove of mutuall love.

Gift and giver, your servants ever.

_Lel ami avet._
(Thou hast a loyal friend).

Remember Him who died for thee,
And after that remember me.

Take hand and heart, ile ne’er depart.

Breake not thy vow to please the eye,
But keepe thy love, so live and dye.

I will be yours while breath endures.

I am sent to salute you from a faithfull friend.

This and my heart.

Too light to requite.

Your sight, my delight.

For a kiss, take this.

My heart you have and yours I crave.

The want of thee is grief to mee.

_Privata di te moriró._
(Deprived of thee I shall die).

_Mon esprit est partout,
Mon cœur est avec vous._
(My mind is everywhere,
My heart is with you).

Faithfull ever, deceitfull never.

God’s blessing be on thee and me.

Love him in heart whose joy thou art.

A loving wife prolongeth life.

Desire hath set my heart on fire.

Both or neither, chuse you whether.

Parting is vayne when love doth remayne.

I fancy none but thee alone.

God sent her me my wife to be.

This is your will, to save or kill.

If you deny, then sure I dye.

Your sight, my delight.

Joyfull love this ring do prove.

In thee I prove the joy of love.

Silence ends strife with man and wife.

This ring doth binde body and minde.

Death never parts such loving hearts.

Body and mind in thee I finde.

Ryches be unstable
And beauty will dekay,
But faithful love will ever last
Till death dryve it away.

One of those posies might seem to refer covertly to the length of the
foregoing list:

This hath no end, my sweetest friend. 1653.

[Illustration: SOME RINGS IN THE MUSEUM OF FINE ARTS, BOSTON

1, silver and gilt; pierced with scrolls and the “Little Monk” of
Munich. Modern. Bavarian. 2, Tyrolese. Peasant’s engagement ring
of silver with design of two hearts and scrolls. 3, French (?).
Said to have belonged to a collateral branch of the Montmorency
family. Gold, large garnet with emerald each side; the crown
composed of pearls and small diamonds. Bought in London. 4,
Chinese ornament. 5, heavy silver, set with malachite. 6, Chinese
ornament. 7, Italian (?). Peasant’s engagement ring of silver.
8, Italian. Gold, set with a turquoise, a horse’s head in white
enamel at either side. 9, Tyrolese. Silver, set with a chamois
tooth for good luck. 10, French. Bishop’s ring of gold and
silver. Enameled bezel set with an almandine and diamonds. Bought
in Geneva. 11, Italian. Sixteenth Century style. Gold set with a
garnet. 12, Italian (?). Silver, set with a large crystal (?).
Black and white enamel on bezel. 13, Italian. Gold, set with a
cluster of red and green stones alternating; a crystal in the
centre. 14, gilt, set with red glass (?). 15, bronze, decoration
in relief. 16, Italian. Gold set with turquoises. 17, French (?).
Gold, set with a brilliant. 18, Laplandish. Silver-gilt with
pierced design.]

[Illustration: JACQUES GUAY, COURT GEM ENGRAVER OF LOUIS XV,
ENGRAVING GEMS IN HIS WORKROOM AT THE LOUVRE

Mariette, “Traité des Pierres Gravées,” Paris, 1750]

The sacred and peculiar quality of a ring that has been given to a man
by his wife as a memorial of marriage is expressed in strong terms in
Shakespeare’s Merchant of Venice (Act v, sc. 1). One of these rings
was given by Nerissa to Gratiano, the other by Portia to Bassanio.
When Gratiano is charged with having parted with his ring, he defends
himself by making light of it but is rebuked for this by Nerissa. The
verses run as follows:

Gratiano: ... 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.”

Nerissa: What talk you of the posy or the value?
You swore to me, when I did give it you,
That you would wear it till your hour of death,
And that it should be with you in your grave.

Portia, joining in Nerissa’s feigned rebuke, says:
You are to blame, I must be plain with you,
To part so lightly with your wife’s first gift;
A thing stuck on with oaths upon your finger
And so riveted with faith unto your flesh.
I gave my love a ring and made him swear
Never to part with it; and here he stands;
I dare be sworn for him he would not leave it,
Nor pluck it from his finger, for the wealth
That the world masters.

Bassanio, however, is forced to confess that he, too, has relinquished
his ring. Of course, as all readers of Shakespeare know, both Portia
and Nerissa have these rings in their own possession, since they
themselves were, in disguise, the judge and the clerk to whom Bassanio
and Gratiano unwillingly yielded them.

While the finger-ring was known to the Chinese from a very early
period, it never seems to have enjoyed great favor with them. According
to primitive court etiquette in that land, the Emperor’s “leading
lady”--for the time being--had to wear a silver ring at court. In case
she presented her sovereign with a descendant, she was rewarded by the
gift of a gold ring, which she wore on one of the fingers of her left
hand. About the mid-period of the Han dynasty (206 B.C.-221
A.D.) nephrite (jade) rings were known as well as those with
stone setting but they were only rarely used as ornaments.[398]

THE RELIGIOUS USE OF RINGS

The adornment of rings with religious emblems, and their use as
insignia of office for the higher ecclesiastics and for the priests
of the ancient ethnic religions will be considered in the present
chapter. Of special interest are the rings used by Roman Catholic
popes, cardinals and bishops, the usage in this direction having varied
considerably in the different periods. With regard to the engravings on
many ancient rings it may often be difficult, however, to know whether
a religious symbol, or the conventional figure of a divinity, has been
used in a strictly religious sense, or merely for ornamental purposes.

The employment of rings as religious symbols is often bound up with
their use in some other way, as in the case of many seal rings for
instance. This was undoubtedly the case with a large number of the
ancient rings noted in earlier chapters. Here we have endeavored to
group together those which were more exclusively religious in their
character, the ecclesiastical rings, especially those worn by Roman
Catholic popes, cardinals and bishops, constituting of course a large
part of these. A very few examples will serve as brief illustrations of
the religious use of rings in pagan times.

There is in the Louvre, among the Egyptian antiquities, a gold ring
engraved with figures of two horses. The symbol of the Sun-God which it
bears is believed to signify the gratitude of Rameses II--to whom this
ring is attributed--for the aid of the divinity in securing the king’s
victory over the Khetas in one of his Asiatic campaigns. Unquestionably
many of the engraved scarabs set in Egyptian rings had a specifically
religious significance, and the same is true of the engravings on the
chatons of gold rings, as, for example, in the case of that worn by the
priest in charge of the Pyramid of Cheops (Khufu). Some of these have
already been described in the chapter on signets, the essential use
of these rings being for sealing. In many other cases the presence of
a divine name as a component of the royal name, or in a royal title,
probably had not much more of a distinctly religious meaning than the
“Dei Gratia” on the coins of European rulers.

The rings worn by the high priests of Jupiter (flamines Diales),
who had, ex-officio, the rank of senators, were made hollow and of
openwork. This particular form is said to have been chosen for mystic
and symbolic reasons, as showing that everything indicating hardness or
severity, the restriction of liberty, or arduous labor, was to be held
aloof from this flamen, who, with those of Mars and Quirinus (Romulus),
belonged to the group of greater priests selected from the patrician
order.[399] The conjecture that we should seek here the origin of
Christian episcopal rings is very far-fetched, the general symbolism of
the ring as an emblem of eternity, and its bestowal as a mark of rank,
having been probably sufficient determining factors.

No one, man or woman, was permitted to enter the sanctuary of the
“Mistress” at Lycosura, wearing a ring on any finger; only rings
destined for dedication might be brought into the temple.[400] This
is attested by an inscription from the second century B.C.;
the regulation must, however, date from an earlier period. The same
prohibition as to wearing rings was decreed in the case of all those
who wished to seek for enlightenment from the oracle of Faunus, and the
petitioners were also required to abstain from meat and to preserve
their chastity. The ring was supposed to interfere with the freedom of
the spirit to receive the divine grace or counsel.[401]

Of rings apparently dedicated to some deity, the rich British Museum
collection has several examples. A bronze ring, having a thin rounded
hoop, to the ends of which a transverse oval plate has been soldered,
bears an inscription in Greek letters signifying “Great is the name
of Serapis”; this ring is late Roman, from a time when the worship
of Serapis was wide-spread in the Roman world. An octagonal ring of
solid gold may have been dedicated to Apollo, as it is engraved with
the name of this divinity; the two sides of the octagon flanking the
central one bear, respectively, engravings of a crescent and of a
star. An inscription found in Delos records several rings dedicated
to the Delian temple by Stratonice, wife of Seleucos I, Nicator
(365–281 B.C.). One of these was a gold ring, set with a sard
on which was engraved the image of Apollo, the temple god; a gold
ring dedicated to both Apollo and Artemis, and having the image of a
Victory; and another gold ring, set with a stone on which was engraved
an inscription signifying that it was dedicated by Queen Stratonice,
daughter of Demetrius, to the Artemis of Delos.[402]

In a list of jewels dedicated to Isis, engraved on the base of an
ancient statue of that goddess at Alicante, Spain, four rings are
noted. Two of them had emerald settings, while the other two, placed
on the little finger of the statue, were set with diamonds. This
inscription contains the name of the donor, Fabia Fabiana, and the
statement that the gift was made on behalf of her granddaughter Avita.
The statue has disappeared, but the inscription still calls to mind
the honor it received in long past time and the brilliancy of the
jewel decoration, for beside the rings, a pearl and emerald earring
was inserted in either ear; about the neck was a necklace of four rows
of emeralds and pearls; two circlets composed of eleven beryls and two
emeralds clasped the ankles, and two bracelets set with eight emeralds
and eight pearls spanned the wrists.[403]

There does not appear to have been any “Rabbi’s Ring” worn as an
insignia of office, although many rabbis owned and wore engraved
rings, perhaps using them as signets. Of this class may be an old ring
referred to the time of Judah Hanasi (175–247 A.D.), now in
the Albertinus Home in Dresden, Saxony. It is set with an amethyst
on which has been engraved the seven-branched candlestick, one of
the adornments of the Temple and figured on the Arch of Titus, in
Rome, as among the treasures borne off by the victorious Romans after
the fall of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. Rabbi Judah ben Ezekiel
(220–299 A.D.) had a ring showing the figure of a man’s head.
The design on a ring of Rabba bar Rabbi Huna (ca. 300 A.D.)
depicted a palm, while on a fifth century ring worn by another Rabbi
Judah Hanasi was engraved the figure of a fish.[404]

The following principal symbolic or typical designs have been observed
upon early Christian rings:[405]

The lyre, rare.

A ship, denoting the life-voyage of the Christian to the port of
salvation.

An anchor, emblem of constancy and of hope.

A dove, symbolical of innocence and typical of the Holy Spirit.

Alpha and Omega, the Greek characters, first and last of the
alphabet. Symbol of Christ, as in Rev. i, 8: “I am Alpha and
Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord.”

The Monogram of Christ formed of the first two Greek letters of
the name Christos, the so-called Chrisma combining the X (Ch) and
the P (r).

The Good Shepherd, with the lost sheep on his shoulder.

Scenes from the life of Christ.

Episodes of the story of Jonah, as Jesus cited this story when
speaking of the Resurrection.

Daniel in the Lion’s Den, a triumph of faith which must have
appealed strongly to the Christians in time of persecution, when
those of the faith were often given as prey to wild beasts.

Elijah borne to heaven, probably typical of the resurrection.

Orpheus playing on the lyre. This pagan design was given a
Christian meaning, mainly because of certain spurious Orphic poems
foreshadowing the birth of Christ.

Fall of Adam and Eve. Here the meaning is quite obvious: “As
in Adam all died so in Christ shall all be made alive,” as the
apostle Paul wrote.

The Ark of Noah; God’s promise to save mankind.

A lion, evidently signifying the Lion of the Tribe of Judah,
applied to Christ.

A lamb, typical of Christ and of Christians. In the Gospel of
John, ii, 36, John the Baptist exclaimed on seeing Jesus: “Behold
the Lamb of God.”

A hare. This may denote the dangers which so often menaced the
early Christians, who had to be constantly apprehensive, as a hare
is of the hunters.

A phœnix; naturally figuring the Resurrection.

A peacock. This has a similar meaning, for the peacock, Juno’s
bird, had been used by the Romans as an emblem of the apotheosis
of an empress.

A cock, as awakener of grace, and typical of the awakening of
mankind to the true faith.

A serpent. This may seem strange as a Christian symbol, but it
denotes foresight, and recalls the Gospel monition, “Be ye wise as
serpents and harmless as doves.” A Christian gem evidences this
interpretation, for on either side of the serpent is figured a
dove.

The vine; suggested by the words of Christ: “I am the vine and ye
are the branches.”

A blade of wheat. The harvest of souls?

The symbolic design of a ship traversing the sea was used in early
Christian funeral sculptures, and also in pagan Rome, to denote the
course of life. For the Christians the tempest-tossed vessel of life
found its port and resting place in death. This idea is rudely figured
in a design on a sepulchral stone, in memory of a certain Firmia
Victoria, from one of the early Christian cemeteries of Rome. On it
appears a ship riding the waves, and in the background a four-storied
tower from which rises a flame, the lighthouse marking the final port
toward which the vessel bends its course.[406]

Of the few designs engraved upon Græco-Roman rings which were permitted
to the early Christians, the dove, as has been noted, symbolized the
Holy Spirit; a fish became a Christian symbol because the Greek word
for fish (_ichthus_) gave the initial letters of Iesus Christos,
Theou huios, Soter (Jesus Christ, The Son of God, the Saviour). An
anchor, or the representation of a fisherman, recalls to mind the
Fisherman’s Ring of the Roman pontiff.

The fish symbol appears on an engraved Gnostic gem bearing the head
of Christ surrounded with the Greek letters of his name. This offers
one of the types current in the third and fourth Christian centuries.
We have the testimony of St. Augustine that the diversity of types in
his time was very great, and that no record remained of what Christ’s
physical appearance really was.[407] The oldest portrait is believed
to be that on the ceiling of a chapel in the cemetery of St. Calixtus
at Rome, and the type presented here is that which has persisted
essentially to the present day.

The ring of the Christian martyr Saturus was a precious memorial of his
death for the faith. When he had already received his death-blow, he
took off his ring and moistening it with the blood that was flowing
from his wound, handed it to the Roman soldier, Pudeus, who was present
at his death, but was a secret convert to the Christian faith, charging
the soldier to guard it as a heritage and a reminder that true faith
was rather confirmed than weakened by the martyr’s death.[408]

A tender and beautiful allusion to a religious ring is contained in the
account of the life and death of St. Marcina the Younger (ca. 330–379
A.D.), by her brother St. Gregory Nyassa. When, after the
death of this pious daughter of Basil the Great, her body was being
prepared for burial, there was found, suspended by a cord from her
neck and resting just over her heart, an iron ring. On its chaton was
engraved a cross, and in a hollow space beneath was secreted a small
fragment of the True Cross. This ring the brother removed, declaring
that it should be his precious heritage, the more sacred that it
recalled the cross of Christ, not only by its engraved design, but
still more by the priceless memento placed beneath this.[409]

An antique ivory ring found at Arles in France bears inscriptions
denoting that it had been designed for use as a Gnostic amulet,
and illustrating the peculiar eclecticism of Gnostic belief. The
monogram of Christ appears here between the two Greek letters Α and Ω,
symbolizing the beginning and the end[410]; added to this is the name
ABRAΣAX (Abrasax, Abraxas), the favorite designation of the Creative
Energy among the Gnostics.[411]

A Christian talismanic ring in the British Museum is set with a red
jasper upon which is engraved, in Greek characters: IHCOYC OEOY
YIOC THPE, “Jesus son of God, preserve (me).”[412] To jasper
at all times has been accorded a high rank among talismanic stones,
more especially to the green and red varieties, the latter being
particularly favored where protection was sought against death from
wounds or hemorrhage.

Oriental Christian rings include many unusual types. The British Museum
has one of gold, with engraved and nielloed ornament; on the flat
octagonal hoop is depicted the Annunciation, in the rigid, hieratic
style of Byzantine art. The Virgin is seated on a high-backed chair;
before her stands the archangel Gabriel. The hoop bears as inscription
the first words of the angel’s greeting, in Greek characters Χἄιρε
κεχαριτωμένη ό Κύριος μετἀ σὸυ (Luke i, 28: “Hail thou that art highly
favoured, the Lord is with thee.”). This ring is believed to belong to
the seventh century A.D., and is a very characteristic example
of the type.[413]

Three Merovingian rings found in August, 1885, on the skeleton finger
of a woman, at Aigusy, dept. Aisne, offer proof that in this period
many rings were sometimes worn on a single finger. The upper and lower
are plain silver rings, but the central one, of bronze, has a circular
bezel on which is engraved a cross, with, at its angles, the nails of
the Passion. Another ring, from the same locality, with a cross of
simpler form engraved on the chaton was found attached to a chain. Both
ring and chain are of bronze, the ring, presumably a signet, having
been worn suspended by the owner, instead of on the hand. A silver ring
from the same French department, bears the Latin inscription V I
V A S, and in six compartments the following symbolic figures: a
dove holding a branch; a lamb, above which is a star; an upright palm;
a stag; a fantastic animal figure, and a hare. These symbols, most of
which are characteristically Christian, and the Latin invocation “mayst
thou live,” _vivas_, usually followed by the words “in Deo” (in
God), point clearly to the religious faith of the owner of the ring. It
is true that the presence of a gold solidus of Valentinian II (375–392)
in the mouth of the deceased person, as “Charon’s toll,” might be
thought to indicate that we had here to do with a pagan, were it not
well known that this custom was maintained to some extent after the
decisive triumph of Christianity.[414]

According to Mercato a toadstone set in a silver ring was preserved
in the Monastery of Saint Anne in Rome. The popular belief was that
this ring had belonged to the Virgin Mary, and it was considered to
be a cure for fistulas, if the stone were rubbed around them twelve
times.[415]

The ring known as the betrothal ring of the Virgin Mary, now in
the cathedral of Perugia, has had a long and eventful history. The
following details are taken from a monograph written by Abbot Adamo
Rossi. According to the legend, this ring was given by Mary to St.
John, the “beloved disciple,” and was taken by him to Rome in 95
A.D. Here it seems to have come into the possession of the
Romans, and about 275 A.D. it was in the hands of Mostiola, a
cousin of Marcus Aurelius Claudius, and a convert to Christianity. In
the reign of Aurelian began what was known as the eighth persecution of
the Christians, and Mostiola was obliged to flee from Rome. She sought
refuge in Clusium, the ancient capital of the Etruscans, the Chuisi of
a later time, but she was seized by the Roman authorities and died a
martyr’s death. In the eighth century a church was erected at the spot
where she was buried and the ring was guarded therein as a precious
relic.

About the middle of the thirteenth century this ring was transferred,
for greater security, from the Church of St. Mostiola, which lay
outside the city, to the cathedral, where it was seen, April 17, 1355,
by Emperor Charles IV, on his return from his coronation. In 1420, by
order of the bishop, the ring was taken to the Church of St. Francesco.
There was a belief that a mysterious virtue emanated from it which
acted miraculously upon the sight of those who gazed upon it. Learning
of this, Filippo Maria, Duke of Milan, who suffered from a disease of
the eye, requested, in 1445, that the ring might be brought to him.
Although Pope Eugene IV supported his request, the historian inclines
to the belief that nothing came of the matter, _for the Duke became
completely blind a year later_.

Among the Franciscan friars who had the care of the ring was a certain
“Fra Vinterio” (Winter), called “the German,” from the land of his
birth. Possibly because he was a foreigner, he became an object of
dislike, and upon the occurrence of a robbery of some articles of
value, his fellow monks eagerly seized upon the occasion to fix
the guilt upon the unfortunate Winter. He was cast into prison and
subjected to the most cruel tortures, but as no avowal could be
wrung from him, he was finally released and resumed his life in the
community. However, although outwardly calm, the cruelties to which
he had been subjected burned into his soul, and aroused thoughts of
vengeance. He could think of but one way to punish his tormentors
effectively, and that was by taking away the precious ring. If this
were lost, the Chiusans would place the blame upon its careless
guardians and would perhaps drive them from the city. Winter succeeded
in taking wax impressions of the keys of the chamber where the ring
was kept and of the case wherein it lay. He had duplicate keys made
from these impressions, and, on the night of July 23, 1473, he secured
possession of the ring. Of course he was no longer safe in Chiusi and
he made all haste to Perugia, where he determined to rid himself of
his treasure and curry favor with the Perugians by conferring it upon
them. His offer was accepted without hesitation, and when the Chiusans
energetically demanded the return of the ring, the Perugians refused
compliance.

The matter was brought before the Roman court and was the subject of
prolonged controversy. For a time it seemed as though resort would be
had to arms, but finally, in 1486, a decision was reached to the effect
that the ring should remain in Perugia. Here it has been preserved ever
since, and many wonderful stories are told of its miraculous virtue.
In seasons of prolonged drought and also when the land was deluged by
superabundant rains, the betrothal ring of the Virgin was solemnly
borne from the chapel of St. Joseph, where it was kept, to the high
altar, and the result was always fortunate.

Whatever may be thought of the credibility of the legend, there can be
no question that this ring is one of the most highly prized relics.
It is of chalcedony, and its form seems to indicate that it was at one
time set with a precious stone. On only four days in the year, March
19, the second Sunday in July, July 30, and August 2, can this unique
ring be seen by the public.

The betrothal ring of the Virgin is in the Capella del Santo Anello,
in the left aisle of the Cathedral, where the celebrated painting
by Perugino, the Spozalizio, now at Caen in Normandy, was preserved
until 1797, when it was taken off by the French invaders. The ornate
tabernaculum was executed by the goldsmith Cesarino del Roscetto in
1519.

The espousal ring of St. Anne, mother of the Virgin Mary, was preserved
in the monastery of St. Sylvester, at Rome. It is of unwrought silver,
with a clear crystal set in the middle, surrounded by black spots and
opaque at the back, so that it reflects images, just as does a mirror.
On the festival of the betrothal of St. Anne, the eyes of those whose
sight was weak were touched with the ring.[416] The curative results
of this application were doubtless all that could be desired, more
especially as weak sight is often caused by nervous depression, or
nervous derangements.

The body of St. Caius, martyred in 296 A.D., was exhumed from
the Cemetery of Calixtus, in Rome, on the anniversary of the sainted
pope’s birth, April 21, 1622, in the reign of Pope Gregory XV. Within
the sepulchre were found three coins of Diocletian, in whose reign St.
Caius (283–296 A.D.) received the papal crown, and also the
pope’s ring, probably his signet, although no exact description of it
has reached us.[417] In the succeeding century there is notice of
another ecclesiastical signet-ring, for in a letter of St. Augustine
(354–430) to Victorinus, the Church Father concludes with the words: “I
have sent this epistle sealed with a ring which shows the profile-head
of a man.”[418] As in the case of all the very early bishops’ rings,
this one of St. Augustine was merely his personal signet and had no
direct connection with his sacred office.

A massive ring of Pope Pius II (Aeneas Sylvius Piccolomini, 1457–1464)
has on the sides of the hoop the coats-of-arms of the Piccolomini and
Tiara families; below the bezel are figures symbolical of the Four
Evangelists. This interesting papal ring is in the collection of Dr.
Albert Figdor, Vienna.[419]

The “Fisherman’s Ring,” or Annulus Piscatoris, is the gold seal ring
of the pope, a new one being made for each successive pontiff. As
testified to by early records, the custom of breaking the ring on the
death of a pope has long obtained. After the attending physicians
have pronounced him to be dead, the Cardinal Camerlengo, or Papal
Chamberlain, approaches the body, and taps it thrice with a golden
hammer, each time calling on the pope by name. The ring is then
handed by him to the papal master of ceremonies, who breaks it; he is
permitted, or perhaps required, to keep the fragments. The design on
the seal depicts St. Peter seated in a bark and holding a net in each
hand, the name of the reigning pope being inscribed above. The ring
takes its name from the words of Christ to Peter, after the latter made
the miraculous draught of fishes (Luke, v, 10): “From henceforth thou
shalt catch men.” In Mark i, 17, a similar announcement is made to
both Simon (Peter) and his brother Andrew: “Come ye after me, and I
will make you to become fishers of men.”

[Illustration: FIVE VIEWS OF THE RING OF POPE PIUS II (ÆNEAS
SYLVIUS PICCOLOMINI, 1457–1464)

On the sides of the hoop are the coats-of-arms of the Piccolomini
and Tiara families, and below the bezel are figures symbolical of
the Four Evangelists

Albert Figdor Collection, Vienna]

[Illustration: “Ring of the fisherman”

Fairholt’s “Rambles of an Artist”]

[Illustration: Hand of “Judith” from picture by Lucas Cranach:
Rings beneath glove-fingers slit to give them room]

[Illustration: Impression of the Annulus Piscatoris (Ring of the
Fisherman) of Pope Clement VIII (1592–1605)

Archæologia, vol. xl, p. 140]

The ring is broken to prevent the sealing of any pontifical document
during the vacancy of the papal see. When the army of the French
Republic occupied Rome in 1798, the Republican emissary Haller, after
informing Pius VI that he would be taken from Rome, demanded all his
papal rings. After surrendering the others, the pope pleaded that he
might be allowed to keep the Fisherman’s Ring, but as the Frenchman
sternly insisted that this also must be given up, the pope reluctantly
yielded. However, when on examination, the ring was found to be of
small value, it was restored to the pontiff.

The earliest existing mention of the Fisherman’s Ring seems to be in
a letter addressed by Pope Clement IV, in 1265, to his nephew Pietro
Grossi of St. Gilles, in which he states that in addressing members of
his family he used the Sigillum Piscatoris, the _private_ seal
of the popes.[420] It was not until the fifteenth century that this
originally private seal came to be generally used for the papal Briefs.
An impression of the Fisherman’s Ring of Clement VIII made in 1598, in
the sixth year of the pope’s reign, is surrounded with a bit of twisted
vellum. A comparison of this seal with the one used by Pius IX, shows
the modifications of the established design due to the preferences of
the engravers of successive rings. The ring of Pius IX was of plain
gold, weighing about an ounce and a half, the design was engraved on an
oval plate. It is said to have been made out of the gold constituting
the Fisherman’s Ring of his predecessor, Gregory XVI.[421]

It is thought probable that the custom of breaking the Fisherman’s
Ring on the demise of a pope was first instituted at the death of Leo
X in 1521. The papal engravers are believed to have kept a new ring
ready in case of sudden need, leaving a blank space for the new pope’s
name. When his election has been confirmed, the Cardinal Camerlengo
places the ring on his hand, asking him at the same time by what name
he elects to be called. The ring is then removed and given to the
engraver for the addition of this name. In later times it has been kept
permanently in the guardianship of the Cardinal Chamberlain, and has
not been generally used for stamping documents, an iron die of like
design being employed for this purpose.

In at least one instance this ring was not destroyed at a pope’s
death. When Pius VI expired at Valence, Aug. 29, 1799, his Fisherman’s
Ring was left unbroken and, with a new inscription, served for his
successor, Pius VII. When this latter pope fell into disgrace with
Napoleon in 1809, because he refused to nullify the marriage of Jerome,
Napoleon’s brother, to Miss Patterson, he was carried off from Rome
to France, and obliged to surrender his Annulus Piscatoris to General
Radet. Before relinquishing it, however, he took the precaution of
having it cut down the middle. Later when he was restored to the Roman
See, a substitute ring was made, as the original, given back by Louis
XVIII after Napoleon’s downfall, could no longer be used because of its
mutilation.[422]

Besides the Fisherman’s Ring, the popes now have two others, the papal
ring which they habitually wear, and the pontifical ring, which is
only assumed for the pontifical ceremonies. The pontifical ring of
Pius IX was worth more than $6,000. It is of gold, of remarkably fine
workmanship, and is set with a magnificent oblong brilliant. This ring
could be made smaller or larger at will, so that it might serve for
future popes.[423]

By a special privilege the ring ordinarily worn by a pope may bear a
cameo, that usually worn by Pius IX showed an image of the Virgin Mary.
The Fisherman’s Ring is but rarely worn. When after a pope’s death,
the ring has been broken, as we have noted, a cheap facsimile, or the
broken ring, is sometimes buried with the pope.[424]

Of the three main classes of ecclesiastical rings, the pontifical ring
with its single precious stone, worn over a glove and exclusively
at pontifical ceremonies, is so large that its stone setting covers
the first phalanx of the fourth finger of the right hand, on which
it is worn. The “gemmed ring,” a mark of distinction, may have but
one stone, or a central stone surrounded by brilliants, just as the
regulations provide. A third class of ecclesiastical rings are those
of plain gold, commonly with a smooth chaton; sometimes, however, this
may be engraved with armorial bearings, so that the ring can be used
as a signet. In Rome those who have received the degree of doctor of
divinity have the word ~ROMA~ engraved upon the chaton of
the ring.[425]

One of the earliest notices of a bishop’s ring, not however in the
strictly ecclesiastical sense, but of one worn by a bishop, is given
in a letter written by St. Avit, Archbishop of Vienne (494–525), to
his colleague, Apollinaris, Bishop of Valencia (ca. 520): “The ring
you have been kind enough to offer me should be made as follows: In
the middle of a very thin iron hoop, representing two dolphins facing
each other, a double seal should be set by means of two pivots, so that
either side may be shown or hidden at will and in turn, and offer,
alternately, to the eyes a green stone or a pale electrum. Let not
this metal be as I have sometimes seen it, easily tarnished in the
cleanest hands, and similar to the impure mixture of gold that has not
been exposed to the fire; let it not resemble the alloy which formerly
the king of the Goths introduced into his coinage, an emblem of his
downfall. Let my electrum be of a medium color, having at once the
tawny hue of gold and the whiteness of silver, precious by their union
and enhancing the brilliant green of the emerald when it appears. Let
my monogram be engraved on the seal surrounded by my name, so that it
may be read. Opposite the setting, the middle of the ring shall be
formed by the tails of the dolphins; to set between these an oblong
stone shall be sought, pointed at the extremities.”[426] It will
be noted that this was not a gold ring, but an iron one, and thus
essentially different from the recognized episcopal rings.

The oldest formula used at the conferring of the pontifical ring upon a
bishop, is found in the Sacramental of St. Gregory, 590 A.D.
and, translated into English, runs as follows: “Receive this ring of
distinction and honor, a symbol of faith, that thou mayst seal what is
to be sealed, and reveal what is to be revealed, and that to believers
baptized into the faith, who have fallen but are penitent, thou mayst
by the mystery of reconciliation open the gates of the Kingdom of
Heaven.” A much shorter formula is that in the Pontifical of Ecgberht,
Archbishop of York; it reads: “Receive the ring of the pontifical honor
that thou mayst be endowed with sound faith.” At present the following
simple formula is used: “Receive the ring of faith as a sign that thou
wilt guard the Bride of God, Holy Church, with undaunted faith.”

A very early mention of the true episcopal rings is to be found
in the writings of Isidore, Archbishop of Seville from 601 to 636
A.D.[427] He definitely states that the ring was one of the
canonical insignia of the episcopate and terms it “a sign of pontifical
honor, or a seal of secrets,” adding that priests must keep many
secrets confided to them hidden in their breasts as though beneath
a seal.[428] At about the same time a decree of Pope Boniface IV,
promulgated in the third council of Rome, in 610, mentions a pontifical
ring, and in the fourth council of Toledo, in December, 633, a canon
treating of the restitution to his office of an unjustly deposed
bishop, directs that he be given anew his stole, his ring, and his
pastoral staff.[429]

The liturgical kissing of a bishop’s hand usually means a kiss
impressed upon the ring he is wearing at the ceremony. That in the
works of Rabanus Maurus, Archbishop of Mainz (786–856), and in those
of others of his time, no mention is made of episcopal rings of
investiture, cannot be taken to prove that none were worn in this
period, but only that they were not yet in general use.[430] The
distinct evidence contained in the canon of the Council of Toledo, over
which Isidore of Seville presided in 633, and the still earlier formula
of investiture in the Sacramental of Gregory, 590 A.D., must
be accepted as conclusive evidence that such rings were conferred.

Until after the eleventh century, almost all the Episcopal rings were
used as signets and the Sacramental of St. Gregory alludes to this use.
The ring was generally worn on the index finger of the right hand,
the middle of the three fingers uplifted in conferring a blessing;
but, when celebrating mass, the bishop transferred it from the index
finger to the annular. At the present day it is always worn on this
latter finger. The removal of the ring from the index is explained by
Garanti,[431] as being an act of humility, since the ring was regarded
as a kind of crown upon the index, “for sages say that the ring is the
crown of the hand,” and this crown should be removed in the presence of
Christ. In our day bishops wear but one ring, but in old pictures
and effigies they are shown wearing several, and sometimes even a thumb
ring. The celebrated portrait of Leo X, by Raphael, represents the pope
wearing no less than six rings, and the hands of Julius II in Raphael’s
portrait are adorned with rings of equal number.

[Illustration: PORTRAIT OF POPE CLEMENT IX (1667–1670) BY CARLO
MARATTA

Ring with square-cut, beveled stone on fourth finger of right hand

Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York. Gift of Archer M.
Huntington, Esq.]

[Illustration: PORTRAIT OF POPE JULIUS II (1503–1513) BY RAFAEL

Six rings, three on each hand; on index, fourth and little fingers

Uffizi Palace. Florence.]

While the sapphire eventually became the stone especially assigned for
use in episcopal rings, the older specimens which have been preserved
for us show that, in early times, many other precious stones were
employed for this purpose. Indeed, the emerald, or some green stone,
seems to have been given the preference at one time, if we can judge
from the letter sent by Avitus, Archbishop of Vienne to Apollinaris,
Bishop of Valencia. Besides rubies and emeralds, balas-rubies,
turquoises, chalcedonies and even the opal were used, while pearls and
garnets, also appear occasionally.

Possibly the earliest known specimen of an episcopal ring is in the
treasury of the cathedral of Metz. It is believed to have belonged to
Arnulphus, who was consecrated Bishop of Metz in 614. This ring, which
has been sometimes ascribed to the fourth century, is set with an
opaque milk-white carnelian.

An episcopal ring found at Oxford and now in the Waterton Collection,
Victoria and Albert Museum, is a curious specimen of the adaptation of
antique gems to Christian uses. The gold circlet is set with an antique
plasma engraved with the bust of a female, the pagan original doing
duty for some Christian saint, or perhaps for the Virgin Mary.[432] An
intaglio of Jupiter-Serapis was provided by the monks of Durham with an
inscription designating it to be a portrait of St. Oswald. Cameos were
also used, on occasion, as we read in the enumeration of the precious
stones and rings donated by Henry III to the shrine of St. Edward in
Westminster Abbey,[433] the following entry: “j chamah in uno annulo
pontificali.”

Occasionally a stone was taken from some antique ornament and set in an
episcopal ring. Of this kind is the pierced sapphire in Mr. Waterton’s
collection, and probably another ring described in the Wardrobe Books
of Edward I and which belonged to Robert, Bishop of Coventry and
Lichfield, who died in 1295. The old description calls this “a golden
ring with a perforated ruby.”[434] The same records mention a gold ring
with a sapphire, the ornament being, as was supposed, the work of St.
Dunstan, who is reputed to have been a skilful worker in metals.

A letter written in 867 by Charles the Bald to Pope Nicholas I,
mentions a ring sent to Ebbo, Bishop of Rheims, by Judith, the mother
of Charles the Bald. This ring was given by the empress at the time of
the birth of her son, so that Ebbo, who had been made bishop because of
his piety and sanctity, should remember the child in his prayers. In
later years, whenever the good bishop was in trouble, he used to send
his ring to the empress with an humble petition for aid, and the letter
of Emperor Charles was written as a result of a most earnest appeal of
Bishop Ebbo, after he had been deposed from his office and subjected to
persecution.[435]

[Illustration: Christian ring of glass. Design shows snake and
doves, a cross, the Greek letters _alpha_ and _omega_
and the Latin word _Salus_. Bosio.

“Roma Sotterranea,” Roma, 1650]]

[Illustration: 1, Venetian ring. Bezel with engraved figure of
St. Mark is hollowed to enclose relics. 2, poison ring set with
a diamond and two rubies. The poison was concealed beneath the
bezel. See pages 36–39

Fairholt’s “Rambles of an Artist”]

[Illustration: Gold ring of Ahlstan, Bishop of Sherborne (824–860
A.D.)

Archæological Journal, vol. xx, p. 226, 1863]

[Illustration: Bishop’s ring of investiture. Bezel set with flat
crystal; two views. Said to have belonged to Robert of Anjou,
King of Naples (1309–1343 A.D.)

British Museum]

[Illustration: Lady’s memorial ring of enameled gold inscribed
“_R. C. Not lost but gone before,_” in gilt letters on a
white enamel ground. English, about 1800

Albert Figdor Collection, Vienna]

[Illustration: Mourning ring of gold. The head has the form of a
coffin with skull and cross-bones on the lid. When this is lifted
a heart is disclosed within. The hoop has two wires. On the sides
of the coffin is inscribed: “_Hier ist die Ruhe_” (Here is
rest). German. Eighteenth Century

Albert Figdor Collection, Vienna]

[Illustration: Massive silver mourning ring inscribed in Old
French, _dort couat_ (rest in peace). Found at Huy near
Statte, Belgium. French. Fifteenth Century

Albert Figdor Collection, Vienna]

It is said that only one episcopal ring from Anglo-Saxon times has
been preserved in England. This relic forms part of the Waterton
Collection in the Victoria and Albert Museum; it is of gold, nielloed,
and shows the letters of the name Ahlstan. This name was borne by a
Bishop of Sherborne who held the office from 824 to 867 A.D.,
his death occurring four years before the accession of Alfred the
Great.[436]

Niello is a mixture of silver, copper, lead, crude sulphur, and borax;
frequently a little antimony is added. The mixture is fused and pressed
into the design engraved upon a silver plate; when it has cooled
off it forms a deep black, brilliant, and tough, though not hard,
substance, like an enamel. The antimony on cooling, spreads slightly,
thus obviating any danger of undue contraction of the alloy, which
might fail to fill out the design exactly; occasionally, however,
the antimony expands unequally, producing some slight irregularities
of outline or surface. Sometimes the alloy is applied to the silver
background of the design, instead of to the design itself, so that
the latter appears white against a rich dark foundation. This variety
of enamelling was already used in Roman times; in our day it is most
extensively employed in Russia, where very beautiful work of the kind
is done, the lines being of hair-like fineness and delicacy.

In 886, at the degradation of two bishops who had been consecrated
without the consent of their metropolitan, their episcopal vestments
were rent, their croziers broken on their heads, and their episcopal
rings rudely snatched from their fingers. Here, as in cases of military
degradation, the ignominious removal of the insignia of rank served to
give public emphasis to the sentence passed upon the condemned.[437]

The Cathedral of Chichester has yielded a number of fine specimens of
mediæval episcopal rings. Notable among these as a curiosity is one
that belonged to Bishop Seffrid who died in 1151, for it is set with
a Gnostic gem showing the well-known cock-headed figure generally cut
to represent the divine principle the Gnostics called Abrasax (or
Abraxas). This is an intaglio on jasper, and the ring was found in the
bishop’s tomb. The fact that he was willing to wear it shows either
that he was ignorant of its being a Gnostic, and hence an heretical
design, or else that he was more than usually tolerant. Another of the
Chichester rings came from the tomb of Bishop Hilary (1146–1169); it is
of massive gold and is set with a sapphire. When the tomb was opened
the ring was on the thumb of the skeleton. In a stone coffin on which
were cut the letters Episcopus, with no personal name, there was found
a ring adorned with an octagonal sapphire, on four sides of which was
set a small emerald. As the sarcophagus contained a pastoral staff and
remains of a vestment, this was undoubtedly an episcopal ring. It will
have been remarked that of these rings two were set with sapphires,
but the ring of Archbishop Sewall (d. 1258), found in his tomb in the
Cathedral of York, and that from the tomb of Archbishop Greenfield (d.
1315), were each set with a ruby.[438]

[Illustration: Gold ring with inscription. “Buredruth” is
probably a personal name, and the Greek characters _alpha_
and _omega_ should have a religious significance. Late Saxon

British Museum]

[Illustration: Episcopal rings. 1, found in York Minster, tomb
of Archbishop Sewall (d. 1256); 2, found in tomb of Archbishop
Greenfield (d. 1315)

Fairholt’s “Rambles of an Artist”]

[Illustration: 1, Papal ring set with large crystal,
Londesborough Collection; 2, ring of Bishop Stanbury of Hereford
(1452–1474). Found in his tomb, 1843; two views

Fairholt’s “Rambles of an Artist”]

[Illustration: 1, silver ring, two clasped hands; inscription
signifies Jesus Nazarenus Rex. 2 and 3, rosary rings, with bosses
used to count the prayers recited

Londesborough Collection.

Fairholt’s “Rambles of an Artist”]

[Illustration: 1, gold ring set with Gnostic intaglio on jasper.
Found in tomb of Seffrid, Bishop of Chichester (1125–1151); three
views. 2, gold ring set with a sapphire. Found in tomb of Hilary,
Bishop of Chichester (1146–1169); two views. 3, gold ring set
with a sapphire and four emeralds. Found in tomb of unknown bishop

Archæological Journal, vol. xx. pl. opp. p. 235; 1863]

The mystic significance of the episcopal ring as typifying the union
of Christ with his Church was expressed by Innocent III (1198–1216) in
these words: “The ring is a sacrament of faith, by which Christ endows
his spouse the Holy Church.”[439] This can be taken as confirmatory
of the theory that the episcopal rings were directly derived from the
betrothal rings, and were not merely attributes of ecclesiastical rank.
So closely was the Bishop bound to his see, that his abandonment of it
to go to another was regarded by some as equivalent to the commission
of adultery.

A fine example of a sapphire-set episcopal ring was found in 1844,
during some alterations to the chapel of Notre Dame in the Cathedral
of Troyes. Several stone coffins were discovered, among them that
containing the remains of Hervée, Bishop of Troyes, consecrated in
1206. The body was clothed in full episcopal vestments. The ring had
fallen from the hand but was found at the left side of the body. It
had a diameter of 2 cm. (about ⅘ inch) and was set with a fine oblong
sapphire held in place by four claws.[440] The opening of the tomb of
Pope Boniface VIII (1294–1303) revealed the presence, on the gloved
hand of the dead pope, of a splendid gold ring, set with a sapphire of
quite exceptional size and beauty.[441]

In 1804, at the opening of a thirteenth-century archbishop’s sepulchre
in the Cathedral of Mainz, believed to be that of Archbishop Sigfroi
III, 1249, a fine pontifical ring was found; it is set with a large
ruby.[442] The bezel is of disproportionate size in comparison with
the dimensions of the rather slender circlet.[443] This ring is large
enough to be worn over a glove in accord with liturgical requirements.
It has been noted that in process of time the width and thickness of
the circlet were gradually increased, at first to make it harmonize
better with a large bezel; gradually, however, both bezel and hoop
were made so large as to render the ring a burden to the wearer, and
even difficult to keep from slipping off the finger. Indeed, it was
sometimes necessary to wear a second, closer-fitting ring _under_
it as a guard.[444]

The treasury of Canterbury Cathedral contained in 1315, according to an
inventory of the “Ornamenta Ecclesiastica,” a very rich and elaborate
pontifical ring. It is described as a large square ring, set with an
oblong emerald, four plasmas (leek-green quartz), and four garnets. The
other episcopal rings listed on this inventory were set with sapphires
bordered with small gems, one of them having a “black sapphire” set
_à jour_, and held in place by claws. While at this period great
latitude was exercised regarding the particular stone to be chosen for
the chief adornment of the ring, it was required that it should be one
of the more precious stones.[445]

The color of the stones chosen for the adornment of episcopal
rings always had a symbolical significance. The glowing red of the
ruby indicated glory, the clear blue of the sapphire, chastity and
happiness, the pure white of the rock-crystal, guilelessness, while the
hue of the amethyst called to mind the color of the wine used in the
Holy Eucharist. The emerald, as is well known, signified by its green
color the virtue of hope and also the Resurrection.

The general rule, expressed or understood, that a sapphire should be
set in an episcopal ring, seems to have been more commonly observed
in England in the earlier centuries than it was on the Continent.
Undoubtedly many of these stones were obtained at the time of the
Crusades. As English examples, Mr. O. M. Dalton cites the rings of
three early bishops,[446] namely, those of Flambard (1099–1128),
Geoffrey Rufus (1133–40) and William de St. Barbara (1143–52), now in
the Durham Chapter Library; all have sapphires. The same stone serves
as setting for the ring of William of Wykeham, a massive plain gold
hoop, exhibited by the Dean of Winchester at South Kensington in 1862,
to which the cathedral also contributed a thirteenth-century episcopal
ring set with a large sapphire cut _en cabochon_.[447] There is
as well the ring of William Wytlesey, Archbishop of Canterbury (d.
1374) in the possession of Sir Arthur Evans and that of John Stanbery,
Bishop of Hereford (d. 1474). The inventory of 28 Edward I lists
sapphire-set rings of the archbishops of Dublin and York as well as
of the bishops of Salisbury and St. Asaph. The rebel Piers Gaveston,
favorite of Edward II, carried off with him, among other royal jewels,
sapphire rings that had belonged to the Bishop of Bath and Wells and
to the Abbot of Abingdon. In the inventory of Elizabeth’s favorite
ecclesiastic, Archbishop Parker of Canterbury, is listed “a ringe with
a blewe sapphire,” valued at four pounds sterling.

Old records show that even in the fourteenth century, the sapphire,
although greatly favored for prelates’ rings, did not yet enjoy any
exclusive preference.

For example, during the reigns of Clement V, and John XXII, in Avignon
(1307–1334), the papal registers for 1317 note, in one case, “seven
gold rings with various stones for new cardinals, 68 gold florins.”
This, however, is followed by another entry recording “four gold rings
with Oriental sapphires for the consecration of prelates, 26 gold
florins,” and again “a gold ring with an Oriental sapphire for Cardinal
A, 23 florins.” Three years later, in 1320, we have “seven rings for
the seven new cardinals, three set with Oriental sapphires, three
others with Oriental emeralds, and one with a balas-ruby, the total
cost being 106 gold florins.”[448]

That the topaz at one time shared with the sapphire the honor of being
especially fitted for use in ecclesiastical rings is shown by a passage
in a rare fourteenth-century manuscript written in Italy. Here we are
informed that the topaz was the most honorable of stones “above all
other stones,” and that for this reason the great prelates wore it on
their fingers.[449]

The green variety of tourmaline found in Brazil, and often called
“Brazilian emerald,” was for a long time and is now used quite freely
in Brazil as a setting of episcopal rings.[450] While this is a
departure from the general usage of selecting a blue stone, preferably
sapphire, for this purpose, it nevertheless finds a parallel in the
employment of emeralds for bishops’ rings in quite ancient times, as is
the case with one of the earliest of these rings, that described, or
we should rather say proposed, in the letter of St. Avitus, Bishop of
Vienne in France.

When a prelate has been raised to the rank of cardinal, he has to
resign any ring he may have been entitled to wear previously, and
awaits the bestowal of the special cardinal’s ring by the pope. It
is conferred by the pope personally at the consistory wherein he
assigns a title to the newly-chosen cardinal. This ring is made by a
pontifical jeweller; it is of gold, with a sapphire in the bezel and,
on the inside, the arms of the Sovereign Pontiff. Withal it is rather
inexpensive, the average cost having been put at about $32, although
each cardinal is obliged to pay into the Congregation of the Propaganda
the sum of $642 (3,210 francs) as a “ring tax.” This payment, however,
gives him the valuable right of bequeathing his property as he pleases
by testament; otherwise everything would go to the Church.[451]

As in many portraits of cardinals and high church dignitaries they
are depicted as wearing two or more rings, it has been erroneously
conjectured that each ring represented a separate benefice, there being
thus as many rings as benefices. The ceremonial regulations, however,
clearly indicate that the wearing of many rings is simply a matter of
taste, all except that on the annular finger of the right hand being
purely ornamental.[452]

A ring on the fourth finger of the right hand is shown in Carlo
Maratta’s portrait of Pope Clement IX (1667–1670), given to the
Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, by Archer M. Huntington, Esq.,
in 1891. The ring bears no design, the setting being a large, square,
beveled stone. The beard and mustache of the pontiff are of the type
familiar to us in portraits of Cardinal Richelieu, who died in 1642.

A splendid example of the cardinal’s ring was recently made for
Cardinal Farley. It is set with an exceptionally large and fine
sapphire, of rounded oval form and an inch in length; the color is rich
and deep; the stone weighs 18½ carats and is a Cinghalese sapphire. A
bordering consisting of twenty-eight diamonds surrounds the central
stone and serves to render more strikingly beautiful the rich blue of
the sapphire, often called the “cardinal’s stone” because it is the one
used for cardinal’s rings. This is noteworthy, as red is pre-eminently
the cardinal’s color, as is shown in his robes, hat, etc.; hence we
might rather expect that the ruddy ruby would have the preference.
However, the fact that the sapphire denotes chastity and celestial
purity has caused this stone to be chosen for the adornment of the
rings worn by those who, from their exalted ecclesiastical rank, are
more especially called upon to set a high example to the priesthood.
The shank of Cardinal Farley’s ring is one of the most beautiful
examples of American goldsmithing in existence. The chasing of the
circlet shows on one side the ample facade and the lofty spires of St.
Patrick’s Cathedral in New York, and on the other side emblems of the
cardinalate. It was the gift of a priest who has known the Cardinal for
many years.[453]

When the Right Rev. David H. Greer was consecrated Bishop of New York,
some of his friends presented him with a very handsome amethyst signet,
but unfortunately this tribute was stolen from his home by burglars,
two or three years ago. When necessity arises of making an official
signature he uses a steel impression stamp of the seal of the diocese.
He has a facsimile impression stamp of the seal which was stolen, but
he seldom or never uses this.[454]

The amethyst seal of Bishop Greer bore for its motto, “Crux Mihi Grata
Quies” (The Cross is for me a grateful rest). This is the motto of Mrs.
Greer’s family. On the shield is the monogram of the bishop’s initials,
D. H. G.; above are two keys in saltire; on the lower part of the
shield just beneath the monogram, is the coat-of-arms of New Amsterdam;
as crest is an episcopal mitre. This was not, however, a seal ring.

The so-called “mitred abbots”, those who governed the larger
monasteries, or whose notable services in the cause of the Church were
thought to merit some special mark of honor, were sometimes given
the right of wearing the episcopal ring at solemn ceremonies. We are
told that at the deposition of Abbot Rainaldus, head of the great
Benedictine Abbey of Monte Casino, not far from Naples, he publicly
laid his staff and his ring upon the shrine containing the body of St.
Benedict.[455]

The energy with which some of the leading theologians of the twelfth
century protested against the use of episcopal rings by abbots, merits
illustration by an extract from the writings of St. Bernard, who in a
tractate addressed to Henri, Archbishop of Sens, writes:[456]

“Several have clearly enough indicated where were their thoughts
when, having obtained apostolic privileges by many intrigues and by
bribery, they appropriated to themselves and use, in virtue of these
concessions, the mitre, the ring and the sandals, just as do the
pontiffs themselves.... Oh, Monks, whither will this lead you? Have you
banished all fear from your souls? Can the blush of shame no longer
rise to your cheeks?”

[Illustration: ABBESS PRAYING. FRENCH SCHOOL

Seal ring on index of right hand; ring with precious stone
setting on fourth finger of the same hand

Musée du Louvre]

[Illustration: PORTRAIT OF A LADY, BY CONINXBO

Two rings on index of right hand and two on index of left hand;
smaller one on fourth finger of left hand

Musée de Bruxelles]

Not only abbots, but abbesses also, are represented on their monuments
as wearing rings, as for example Agnes Jordan, Abbess of the Bridgetine
Convent of Syon, whose brass figure at Denham, Bucks County,
England,[457] shows a ring on her finger. However, in 1572, the year
of his accession to the papal throne, Gregory XIII abolished this
custom; how long it had endured has not been determined.[458]

Certain other prelates of lesser rank than bishops have the right to
wear rings, such as the protonotaries, for example, but as a rule they
are not permitted to wear them while celebrating an ordinary mass, low
or high; only when officiating pontifically may they wear pontifical
rings. The ring commonly worn is much smaller than that accorded to a
bishop and is set with a single stone, as is expressly ordained in the
constitution _Apostolicæ Sedis_ of Pius IX, dated in 1872.[459]

That the canons of a cathedral should generally be allowed to wear
rings has been repeatedly decided adversely in the Roman Catholic
Church, a recent instance being when the Bishop of Nicaragua submitted
this question to the Sacred Congregation of Rites in Rome, because the
practice had become common in Nicaragua. In reply he was informed that
this must not be tolerated, except in case of a special indulgence from
the pope, and the bishop was required to suppress the abuse. The reply
was dated August 20, 1870, just a month before the entry of the Italian
army into Rome and the cessation of the papal rule over the city.[460]

In a letter written December, 1751, Pope Benedict XIV relates the
finding of a gold ring so small that it would fit the finger of a
three-months’ old babe, and bearing certain characters indicating
a priestly quality of the infant. This the pope understood not as
signifying that it had been made a deacon, but that its parents had
consecrated it to the service of the church, so that it should later
become a monk or priest.[461]

His Grace, the Most Reverend Archbishop Evdokim, the highest dignitary
of the Russian Church in the United States, has stated that neither
the Metropolitan, nor the Archbishops nor clergy of the Russian Church
wear rings of any kind. They use seals but these are not in the form
of signets. In this respect, the usage differs from that in many other
churches.

The ring given to the King of England at his coronation bears a close
relationship to the episcopal ring, and emphasizes the religious
authority of the sovereign. This appears very clearly in the English
ceremonial, where the Archbishop of Canterbury pronounces the following
prayer of consecration:

Bless, O Lord, and sanctify this Ring, that Thy servant, wearing
it, may be sealed with the ring of faith, and by the power of the
Highest be preserved from sin; and let all the blessings which
are found in Holy Scriptures plentifully descend upon him, that
whatsoever he may sanctify may be holy, and whatsoever he may
bless may be blessed. Amen.[462]

The Coronation Ring of the English kings is of pure gold and is usually
set with a large table ruby of a violet hue, the flat surface engraved
with the figure of a St. George’s cross. About the ruby are set
twenty-six diamonds. As the ring is designed to serve for successive
coronations, the circlet is jointed so as to fit a larger or smaller
finger. A queen consort is given at the ceremony of coronation a ring
of pure gold also bearing a ruby, but unengraved; about the stone
are sixteen smaller rubies, so graded as to size that the largest
are placed nearest to the central stone, the size diminishing as
the distance increases. The ruby has been chosen as emblematic of
faithfulness. These rings are put on the fourth finger of king and
queen, and the king’s ring is called by some writers “The Wedding-Ring
of England,” the sovereign being regarded as espoused to the nation
over whose welfare he is to watch.[463]

The coronation ring of William IV of England, although scarcely a
notable example of the jeweller’s art, is striking enough in its way.
In many earlier coronation rings, for which the ruby (or a spinel) was
the stone traditionally favored, a St. George’s cross was engraved on
the ruby, but in the case of William IV’s ring the cross is formed
of five rubies, a square central stone and four oblong ones for
the arms of the cross, all set over a large cabochon-cut sapphire,
this affording a blue background for the red cross, similar to the
blue field of the cross of St. Andrew. There is also a bordering of
brilliants. This ring while effective enough in the sharp contrast of
color, is lacking in harmony and taste.[464]

The insignia of the Prince of Wales include most of the emblems
belonging to royal insignia, and each of them has its especial and
peculiar significance. Unity is typified by the ring; the coronet
is an emblem of friendship. The staff in conjunction with the ring
suggests the religious side of the princely or royal office, for these
emblems form an important part of the episcopal insignia. A special
local association results from the fact that Welsh gold, mined by
Welshmen in the Merionethshire mines, is used in the manufacture of
these ornaments. A gold medal bearing the head of the Prince of Wales
on the obverse, and on the reverse a representation of the Eagle Tower
of Carnarvon Castle, was struck for the present holder of the title.

At the coronation ceremonies of the kings of France, the officiating
ecclesiastic said to the sovereign in handing him the Coronation Ring:
“Receive this ring, a symbol of holy faith and of the stability of the
Kingdom, a sign of power, by which thou shalt be able to defeat all
enemies with triumphant power, to destroy all heresies, to unite all
subjects and to maintain them constantly bound together by the Catholic
faith.” This formula dates back at least as far as 986 A.D.,
and was probably in use at an even earlier date.[465] The close union
of Church and State is strongly emphasized, as well as the necessity
for uniformity of belief, this having been a source of strength for the
State when voluntarily present, but a cause of manifold and dreadful
misfortunes when the religious convictions of the subjects became
discordant.

When a nun is consecrated the priest places a ring on her finger,
reciting the following words from the Roman pontifical:

I espouse thee to Jesus Christ, Son of the Supreme Father, who
will preserve thee from all ill. Accept, therefore, this ring of
faith, a symbol of the Holy Spirit, that thou mayst be called a
spouse of God, and be crowned for ever.

Before the rings are bestowed they are heaped up on the altar and are
collectively blessed by the officiating priest. As the formula used
defines the character and quality of the ring more closely than do the
simple words of presentation, it is here given as follows, this formula
already appearing in the pontifical of Pierre, Bishop of Senlis,
1350:[466]

Creator and preserver of the human race, grantor of spiritual
grace and bestower of bodily health, O God, send forth thy
blessing upon these rings that those who may wear them, shall
possess celestial virtue, perfect faith and true fidelity, shall
maintain, as spouses of Christ, their vow of virginity, and shall
persevere in constant chastity. By Christ Our Lord.

A pretty usage was observed at the reception into the order of the
Augustinian nuns of Saint Thomas, at Villeneueve. On taking the vow,
a ring was placed on the nun’s finger by a poor little girl, who said
at the same time: “Remember, dear sister, that you have become this
day the spouse of Jesus Christ and the servant of the poor.” The
sister, after having respectfully accepted the gift made her by one who
represented the Lord, kisses the child who has reminded her of the poor
to whose service she is consecrated.[467]

According to an old recital, a miraculous ring was once found by a
pious nun in the convent garden. One day when she was engaged in
tending a bed of flowers, there came over her the ardent wish to
receive a divine sign in the shape of a ring, testifying to the reality
of her espousal with Christ. The Lord answered the fervent aspiration
of his handmaiden, for suddenly there appeared before her in the flower
bed an actual ring, no deception of the senses, but a material body.
This story is related by Johann Nider in his Latin work, “Formicarius,”
published in Strassburg in 1517, and the writer asseverates that he saw
the ring, which was of a white substance resembling pure silver.[468]

A Ring of Widowhood, sealing a widow’s vow to remain faithful to the
memory of her dead husband, was not rarely bestowed, three or four
centuries ago, to serve as a mark of the solemn vow. A noteworthy
instance is that of Katherine Rippelingham, who, in her will dated
February 8, 1473, describes herself as “advowes” (“vowed”), and
expresses the wish to be interred in “Baynardes Castell of London.” In
a codicil she leaves to her granddaughter, Alice St. John, “her gold
ring with a diamante therein wherewith she was sacrid,” or consecrated.
In another will, that of William Herbert, Lord Pembroke, the wife
is enjoined to remember her promise that she will take the order of
widowhood, so that, as the testator continues, “ye may be the better
maistres of your owen, to perform my will, and to help my children, as
I love and trust you.”[469]

In view of the bad results of a second marriage when a widow falls into
the hands of some designing man, to the destruction of her children’s
welfare, this usage, so long discontinued, of binding herself by a
solemn vow, had something to recommend it in times far past, when more
stress was laid upon the sanctions and prohibitions of religion than is
generally the case in our day.

At a solemn ceremony of this kind, held at the Priory of Campsey, in
1382, during the reign of Richard II, Isabella, Countess of Suffolk,
took the vow in the presence of the Earl of Warwick, Lords Willoughby
and Scales, and other nobles. The old Norman French form of her pledge
has been preserved and may be given here for its historic interest:
“Jeo Isabella, jadys la femme William de Ufford, Count de Suffolk, vowe
à Dieu, en presence de tres reverentz piers en Dieu, évesques de Ely et
de Norwiz, qe jeo doi estre chaste d’ors en avant ma vie durante.” (I,
Isabella, formerly the wife of William de Ufford, Count of Suffolk, vow
to God in presence of the very reverend fathers in God, the bishops of
Ely and of Norwich, that I shall remain chaste from now on during my
entire life.)[470]

VII

MAGIC AND TALISMANIC RINGS

From their close contact with the person as well as from their symbolic
form, the significance of many designs engraved upon them, and the
supposed virtues of stones set in them, some rings have enjoyed the
repute of possessing magic powers, both in ancient and mediæval
times, and even much later. In a number of cases, we can find some
clue to the attribution of a special virtue to a magic ring; in other
cases, however, the circumstances leading to this are no longer to be
ascertained, and we must content ourselves with the fact that such and
such a ring, or type of rings, has been thought to have such and such a
mysterious influence.

No ancient talisman enjoyed a greater repute in mediæval legend than
the “Ring of Solomon” or “Solomon’s Seal” as it was often called. An
Arab legend tells that by means of the power inherent in his ring,
the Hebrew King was able to succeed in all his undertakings. However,
for the space of forty years he was deprived of its aid, as he once
thoughtlessly took it off his hand when he was in the bath and it was
carried away by a malevolent genius. At the end of the forty years it
was found again in the body of a fish served on the monarch’s table. In
Rabbinical legend this ring is said to have been set with a marvellous
precious stone, perhaps a diamond, which served as a magic mirror
wherein Solomon was able to see reflected the image of any distant
place or of any persons in regard to whom he wished to be informed.[471]

A variant of the legend we have just given is found in another Arabian
tradition, which recounts that Solomon was so much infatuated with a
female prisoner, the daughter of a Gentile prince, and named Aminah,
that he entrusted to her care his precious signet, given to him by
the four angels that presided over the four elements. A mighty Jinn
succeeded in gaining possession of the ring, and, by its power, assumed
Solomon’s form, at the same time changing that unhappy monarch’s
appearance to such an extent that his courtiers no longer recognized
him, and drove him from his kingdom. However, one of Solomon’s
ministers was shrewd enough to see through the disguise of the Jinn,
and proceeded to exorcise the evil spirit by reciting certain verses of
the Law. The Jinn fled affrighted, and dropped the ring into the sea.
Here it was swallowed by a fish, and in due time this fish was caught
by Solomon, who had entered the employ of a fisherman. Once again in
possession of his ring, Solomon soon regained his kingdom.[472]

The great Persian poet Hafiz of Shiraz thus uses Solomon’s Seal to
point a moral:[473]

Matters of beauty other there be, beside sweet speech,
And Solomon-hood by a seal-ring alone is not begot.

The legend of the mystic ring of Gyges is related by Plato in his
Republic.[474] According to this recital the ring was found under very
extraordinary circumstances by “an ancester of Gyges the Lydian,” but
the text seems to be corrupt, and Gyges himself was probably said
to have been the finder. Gyges (or his ancestor) was at the time a
shepherd in the service of the Lydian King. One day a violent storm
occurred, followed by an earthquake which opened up a deep chasm in the
earth, near the place where this shepherd was feeding his flock. Moved
by curiosity, he descended into the chasm and saw therein a hollow,
brazen horse, with openings at the sides; bending down and looking
through these openings, he discerned within the horse the body of a man
of immense size. A golden ring glittered on the finger of the corpse.
This the shepherd removed, and climbing out of the chasm, straightway
took his departure. When, a few days later, all the shepherds assembled
to prepare their monthly reports to the king, the man who had found
the ring was of their number. As he sat with the others he carelessly
turned and twisted the ring which he had placed on his finger,
until, by chance, he turned the bezel toward the inside of his hand.
Immediately he became invisible, and heard the other shepherds talking
of him as though he were absent; but when he turned the ring around
again, so that the bezel was outside, he reappeared. He repeated this
experiment several times until he had assured himself of the strange
virtue of the ring. Realizing then the extraordinary opportunities that
this power afforded him, the shepherd asked and obtained the privilege
of bearing the reports to the king, and soon found means to seduce the
queen, and, by her aid, to slay the king and gain possession of the
kingdom.

Although the legend does not expressly state that the ring was set with
a stone, the use of the term “bezel” (σφενδόνη) suggests that some
precious stone was the seat of the magic power the ring possessed. The
traditions current at a later period with regard to the opal, which was
reputed to render the wearer invisible, make it not improbable that, in
the original legend, the ring of Gyges was represented to have been set
with an opal, or rather perhaps with one of the rainbow-hued specimens
of iridescent quartz. Plato may well have omitted this detail, for he
was making a didactic use of the story and would naturally treat his
material very freely.

An old author conjectures that the stone set in the ring of Gyges was
a serpent-stone from India. In that land brilliant and exceedingly
beautiful stones were said to be found in the heads of certain crested
snakes that abode in the mountains. If such a stone were set in a gold
or silver ring, at the time when the planetary or stellar control of
the stone was in the ascendant, the wearer of the ring was sure to
have the fullest possible benefit from its powers.[475] The idea that
serpents were endowed with supernatural wisdom was held by many ancient
peoples, and in India legend assigned to these mysterious and dreaded
reptiles the guardianship over diamonds, and also over the corundum
gems, chief among which are the fair sapphire and the glowing ruby.

The gold ring of Minos, King of Crete, although of course purely
mythical, is usually ranked among the magic rings. It is said to have
been used by the Cretan, who claimed Jupiter as his father, to test
whether Neptune were really the father of Theseus. Taking his ring
off his finger, Minos cast it into the sea, and commanded Theseus to
bring it back to him, if the latter wished people to believe Neptune
to be his father. He himself, Minos, could easily furnish proof of
his descent from Jove by praying for a celestial sign. This he did,
and immediately a loud thunder-clap resounded in the heavens. Not
to be outdone, Theseus, not even stopping to make any supplication,
threw himself into the sea to seek the ring. On this, there appeared
a multitude of dolphins, and Theseus was softly borne away to the
Nereides, who gave him the ring so that he might restore it to
Minos.[476]

The legendary ring of Helen of Troy is said to have borne as its
setting an astroites or star-gem taken from the head of a mysterious
fish called pan, because in appearance it resembled the god Pan.
Perhaps the gem was simply one of the head-stones existing in certain
fishes of other species. This stone, which emitted rays of flame, was
conceived to be a most potent love-charm, drawing to its wearer the
love of anyone he, or she, might wish to fascinate, and the particular
specimen of this strange gem which Helen wore was a signet, engraved
with the image of the god by whose name the fish was called.[477]

Among the rings miraculously found after they have apparently been
irrevocably lost, was one of iron given to Seleucus I, Nicator
(365–281 B.C.), whose wide dominions stretched from the western
seaboard of Asia Minor to India. This prized ring was lost by chance
near the river Euphrates, but was later recovered at the very spot
where the ruler’s mother had predicted it would be found.[478] Whether
this was revealed to her in dream or trance the recital does not
state.[479]

A talismanic bronze ring in the British Museum is set with an amethyst
on which has been engraved a human eye, evidently a charm against the
Evil Eye. This dread influence was also combated by a peculiar type of
ring having gold nails or studs inserted in them. This is a Græco-Roman
type of about 500 to 200 B.C., and does not appear to have
gained favor with the Romans. In a large and massive gold ring of the
late Roman period, the entire bezel has been given the form of an
eye. This ring weighs 975 grains, or over two ounces; it was found in
Tarsus, and belongs to the third Christian century.[480]

In a few ancient rings gold and silver have been combined, as shown by
a striking example in the British Museum, where the upper part of the
hoop is of gold and the lower half of silver. This has been conjectured
to have been designed to render the ring a talisman, the joining of
gold and silver having a similar effect to that obtained by inserting a
gold nail in the bezel of a silver ring. The bezel of the massive ring
we have noted is set with a sard engraved in intaglio with the design
of a shepherd seated on a rock.[481]

The wearing, at certain religious ceremonies, of a ring set with a gem
on which was engraved a design having some fancied connection with the
ceremony, appears not to have been uncommon in the Roman world. An
instance of this is given by the historian Suetonius, who states that
when Nero was about to take the auspices (the bird-augury), Sporus gave
him a ring the gem of which represented the carrying off of Proserpina,
goddess of the infernal regions.[482] The finding of a ring with a
particular design was also looked upon as a harbinger of good fortune.
Shortly after the choice of Galba as emperor (68 A.D.), there was found
in building the fortifications of a city, on the spot the emperor
had selected for a military exercising ground, a ring of antique
workmanship engraved with the figure of a Victory with a trophy. This
was accepted as a happy presage.[483]

Josephus tells us of a magic ring which was used by a Jew named
Eleazar. In the presence of the emperor Vespasian, of his son, and of
his court, this man cured those suffering from demoniacal possession.
His method was to introduce into the nose of the patient a ring having
beneath its device an herb designated by Solomon. The evil spirit
was attracted by the odor of the herb and immediately passed out of
the man’s body. After this Eleazar exorcised it by chanting certain
“psalms of Solomon.” Furthermore, in order to convince the spectators
of the presence of the evil spirit, he used to place on the ground a
vase filled with water, and command the demon to upset it. As the text
of Josephus indicates that this experiment was successful, Eleazer
must have had recourse to some clever deception in the matter.[484]
This tale shows that rings somewhat similar to those described in the
Cyrianides (a work written in Alexandria about the third or fourth
century of our era) were used in the first century. It is true that
Josephus does not say that the ring was set with a stone, but merely
states that it bore a device.

The god Mercury was popularly regarded as a bestower of magic rings,
to judge from the words Lucian, the greatest humorist of ancient
times, puts into the mouth of one of his characters. Timolaus, in
“The Ship,” expresses the wish that Mercury would grant him a number
of wonder-working rings; one of these should preserve his health
and protect him from wounds and other injuries; another should make
him invisible as did the ring of Gyges; a third should give him the
strength of ten thousand men; a fourth was to give him the power to
fly through the air, and a fifth, the power to sleep at will, and the
privilege of seeing all doors open before him. The crowning gift,
however, would be a ring possessing the virtue of attracting the
love of all fair women, and the affection and respect of his fellow
men.[485] We might infer from this that rings engraved with the figure
of Mercury were supposed to be especially propitious; very possibly the
story of the magic rings of Apollonius of Tyana, later embodied in the
life of this strange personality written by Philostratus, was known to
Lucian, and suggested this description of the various and wonderful
powers inherent in rings of this kind.

The same author mentions a magic ring used to frighten away
ghosts.[486] This was made, by an Arab, out of an iron nail from a
cross, and the virtue ascribed to it recalls that attributed to a piece
of wood from a gallows. In each case an object that was associated
with a violent and ignominious death was believed to have the power of
exorcising unwelcome visitants from the grave.

The Church father Clemens Alexandrinus, born about 150 A.D.,
says, giving Aristotle as his authority, that a certain Execestus, a
tyrant of Phocis, owned and wore two magic rings, and by means of the
stones set in these rings he had knowledge of future events. They seem
to have done him but little service, however, for he met his death by
assassination, although it is stated that the gems gave him warning of
this.[487]

Flavius Philostratus, who flourished under Septimius Severus (193–211
A.D.) and later, wrote at the request of the Empress Julia
Domna, a remarkable life of Apollonius of Tyana in which he laid
special stress upon the miracles ascribed to this pagan saint. The work
was used later to oppose the teachings of the Christians. Here we read
that Apollonius possessed seven enchanted rings corresponding to the
seven planets, the gift of the Hindu prince Iarchas. These he wore,
one by one, in the order of the week days; “for it is said that he
revered them as divine, so that he changed them each day and made them
partakers of his greatest secrets.”[488]

The Leyden Papyrus (No. V), of the third century of our era, contains
a number of directions, in Greek and Demotic Egyptian, for the
preparation of amulets and talismans, and gives two formulas for the
making of magic rings. The text of one is defective in part, but can be
rendered as follows:[489]

“A ring for constant use and for prosperity ... very efficacious for
kings and emperors. Take an azure jasper, engrave on it a dragon in the
form of a circle, the tail in the mouth, and in the midst of the dragon
(an animal) having two stars on its two horns, and the sun above (with
the name) Abrasax, and place as an inscription upon the stone the same
name, Abrasax, and on the ... engrave the great and supreme appelation,
Iao Sabaoth. Wear the stone in a gold ring. May it be always useful for
you, existing pure and ... for whatever you may desire. Consecrate the
ring and the gem which projects above it. The design upon the gold,
which has been described above, has the same virtue.”

The names Abrasax and Iao Sabaoth indicate that this ring was probably
designed to be a talisman for adherents of the Marcian form of
Gnosticism.

A second formula runs thus:

“Ring to obtain (a wish) a favor and success; it renders glorious,
great, admirable and rich; it insures love. It is proper and excellent
to be worn on all occasions, this incomparable ring. It bears the
wonderful name of the sun, cut in a heliotrope, and is fashioned as
follows: A complete serpent, like a circle, holding its tail in its
mouth; on the inside is a scarab, sacred and radiant. As to the name,
thou shalt engrave this in sacred characters on the reverse side of
the gem, as is taught by the prophets, and thou shalt wear the ring
in all purity. Having it with thee, all thy wishes will be fulfilled;
the hatred of kings and emperors toward thee will be appeased; when
thou wearest it all that thou sayest to others will be believed, all
will favor thee, all doors will be open to thee. Thou wilt rend the
bonds and break the stone-walls, if thou takest out the stone, that is
the gem, and pronouncest the name inscribed beneath it. This ring is
equally useful for demoniacs, give it to them, and on the instant the
demon will flee.”

Dreams of rings set with precious stones have a special significance,
and Achametis tells us, from his Hindu sources, that if anyone
should dream of receiving a ring set with a red stone, the splendor
of the stone signified great authority and much joy to the dreamer.
If, however, a man had a dream of a ring set with a yellow stone,
the vision portended that his wife would be liable to illness and
chagrin.[490]

An Anglo-Saxon dream-book from the time before the Norman Conquest,
gives the significance of various dreams about rings. Thus, for
example, merely to see a ring betokened a desired place; should one
dream of receiving a ring as a gift, however, this denoted freedom from
care. If the dreamer fancied himself to be the owner of a gold ring,
this indicated that great honor was going to be his portion. Lastly,
the dream that a gem had been lost from a ring was a very bad omen and
portended some serious accident.[491]

Three subjects of the Eastern Emperor Valens (364–378 A.D.),
believing that he had incurred the public hatred to such a degree that
he would soon perish at the hands of his enemies, sought the aid of
the diviners Hilarius and Patricius to learn what would be his fate
and who would succeed him. The diviners, having engraved around the
edge of a basin the characters of the Greek alphabet, suspended above
it an enchanted ring, which, by its vibrations marked in turn the
letters that composed the words of the response of the oracle. It was
conceived in the following terms: “The successor of Valens will be an
accomplished prince. The curiosity of those who have consulted the
oracle will be destruction to them, but their murderers will themselves
incur the vengeance of the Gods.” As the oracle had failed to designate
the prince clearly, the inquirers demanded his name. Thereupon the ring
struck successively at the letters T. H. E. O. D., and one of
those present exclaimed that the Gods named Theodore. The others all
accepted this view and the matter appeared so evident that no further
attempt at research was made.[492]

A curious type of magic ring is vouched for by St. Augustine, in the
fourth century, who notes as a superstitious practice the wearing
of a ring (or “fingerband” _ansula_) made from the bone of an
ostrich.[493] Whether the attribution of a magic quality resulted from
the rarity of the bird for the Romans, or from some analogy with its
habits, is left to our imagination to determine.

A talismanic ring of the late Roman times, about the fifth century
A.D., was found by Lieut. Scheibel, in 1896, embedded in
sand that had been dredged from the bed of the Save River, near
Vincovce, Slavonia, Austria. The hoop is divided by ridges into eleven
compartments in which are engraved the Greek letters _Ζ Η ΓΑΙΣ
ΑΡΙΩΝ_ (equivalent to “Long live Arion”). This ring is in the Albert
Figdor Collection, Vienna.[494]

Among the legends which gathered about the personality of Charlemagne,
none is more interesting than that which tells of a precious stone
which exercised a magic power over him. This legend is of German origin
and probably localized in Aix-la-Chapelle; it does not appear in any of
the numerous French _chansons de geste_ treating of Charlemagne
and his times. It seems to have originated about the thirteenth
century, although it may have been current at an earlier date, and we
have two principle versions, one given by Brandwaldius,[495] and the
other by Petrarch.

[Illustration: Silver-gilt ring with Greek inscription ΧΡΟΝΟΣ
Δ’ΑΝΑΙΡΕΙ ΠΑΝΤΑ ΚΑΙ ΩΗΘΗΝ ΑΓΕΙ (Time removes all things and
brings forgetfulness). In the interior a sun-dial. Sixteenth
Century

Albert Figdor Collection, Vienna]

[Illustration: Ring of gilt bronze, set with a square table-cut
rock crystal

Albert Figdor Collection, Vienna]

[Illustration: Gold ring. The hoop has eleven ridges between
which are the Greek letters ZΗΣΑΙΣ ΑΡΙΩΝ (Long live Arion). Found
by Lieutenant Scheibel, in 1896, in sand dredged from the bed of
Save River, near Vincovce, Slavonia, Austria. Late Roman, about
Fifth Century

Albert Figdor Collection, Vienna]

[Illustration: 1, copper ring, with glass paste. First Century
A.D. Syria. 2, bronze ring, shape of finger. Found in
grave in Syria. First Century A.D. 3, 4, jadeite finger
rings. Body of the ring pale white jade; top, intense emerald
green. Chinese, Twentieth Century. 5, Chinese signet ring, made
of Burmese jadeite. Top, intense green; sides, pale green.
Twentieth Century. 6, antique Christian hollow ring of fine gold
with Greek Cross engraved on garnet. Second Century A.D.
7, antique ring of fine gold with Nicolo. Black band surrounding
white oblong. 8, Chinese ring of fine gold, with motto. Shank of
ring is in two parts, all fine gold, so they can be made to fit
any finger. 9, ancient Greek ring of twisted gold. Sard engraved
with figure of man. 10, ring of Egyptian gold, carved. Second
Century B.C.]

The first-named version describes the acquisition of the stone in
much the same terms as are employed in the story from the Gesta
Romanorum regarding the stone brought by a serpent to the blind
Theodosius;[496] indeed, the resemblance is so close that one of
these tales must be derived from the other. Here also the serpent rings
a bell outside the palace gates, and finally succeeds in obtaining
justice against a toad which has secured possession of its nest.
Grateful for this service, the serpent appears before Charlemagne, when
he is seated at meat, crawls up on the table and, lifting the cover
of a beaker, drops therein a precious stone. From this point we have
the specifically Carolingian legend. The stone possessed a strange,
hidden power, by means of which it attracted the affections of the
first owner to any one who subsequently acquired it. Charlemagne gave
it to his wife and immediately all his thoughts became centered in her.
Naturally enough she in no wise objected to this, but when she was
taken dangerously ill she could not endure the thought that some other
woman should acquire the stone, and take her place in Charlemagne’s
heart; therefore, when at the point of death, she slipped it beneath
her tongue and soon thereafter expired. The power of the charm over
Charlemagne’s mind was so great that after his wife’s body had been
interred he caused it to be exhumed, and spent his days and nights
with it. This state of things continued for no less than eighteen
years, until, finally, one of Charlemagne’s ministers discovered the
cause of the enchantment and removed the stone from beneath the tongue
of the corpse. Instantly the spell was broken, but all the emperor’s
regard was now directed toward his minister, whose presence became
indispensable to him. Marking this, and fearing that the gem might
fall into unworthy hands, the minister threw it into a spring, which
chanced to be that of Aix-la-Chapelle. Even here the stone did not lose
its power, and the place became the favorite resort of Charlemagne,
who established himself there and built a church and a palace near the
resting place of the charmed stone.

A somewhat different version of this tale is given by Petrarch,[497]
who states that he had it from the priests of Aix-la-Chapelle. There
is here no mention of a serpent bringing a stone, and the object of
Charlemagne’s love is not his wife but a woman who possesses a magic
ring. The emperor is so thoroughly infatuated that when she dies he
has the body decked out with gorgeous apparel, adorns it with precious
stones and refuses to leave it. Anxious to relieve his sovereign from
this obsession, the Bishop of Cologne prays to God for a solution of
the mystery, and is told, in a vision, that the cause lies beneath the
tongue of the corpse. He searches in the place indicated and finds
there a gem set in a slender ring. When this is removed Charlemagne
regains his normal state, and gazes with surprise and horror upon the
object of his love. The story then proceeds in much the same way as in
the older German version.

The remains of Charlemagne, and presumably whatever ornaments may have
been buried with him, were disinterred at Aachen (Aix-la-Chapelle)
in 1000, by order of the German emperor Otto III. The bare fact
of the discovery of Charlemagne’s bones is recorded in the early
chronicle,[498] but according to legends of a later time, when the
imperial crypt was opened, the emperor was to be seen seated on a
marble throne and adorned with imperial vesture and ornaments. Such
had been his persistent vitality that his finger-nails had continued
to grow after his death, and had pierced through the gloves on his
hands.[499]

The magic ring of the Nibelungen was given by the Asar Loki to
Hreidmar, as wergeld for the murder of Hreidmar’s son Otr, whom Loki
had killed. As Otr had assumed the shape of an otter when he met his
death at Loki’s hands, the latter was required to furnish enough
blood-ransom to fill the otter’s skin. This he obtained by capturing
the dwarf Andvari and forcing him to give up his riches to ransom his
life. His other treasures Andvari yielded with much hesitation, but
he was extremely loath to part with his ring, and when finally forced
so to do, he pronounced a curse upon all who should ever come into
possession of it. This curse was fulfilled by the successive violent
deaths of Hreidmar, killed by his son Fafner who wished to rob him of
his treasure; of Fafner, who in the snake or dragon form he had assumed
was slain by Sigurd; of the hero Sigurd himself and of Brunhilde upon
whom he bestowed the fatal ring.[500] This is the legend as related
in the Volsung Saga, composed in the fourteenth century from older
traditions.

Caxton’s English version of the tale of Reynard the Fox, derived from
the eleventh century “Roman de Renard,” contains a detailed description
of a magic ring.[501]

A rynge of fyn gold, and within the rynge next the fyngre were
wreton letters enameld wyth sable and asure, and there were thre
Hebrews names therein. I coude not my self rede ne spelle them,
for I understonde not that langage, but moister Abrion of Tryer,
he is a wyse man, he understandeth wel al maner of herbes ... And
yet he bileveth not on God, he is a Jewe, the wysest in conynge,
and especially he knoweth the vertue of stones. I shewde hym this
ryng, he saide that they were the thre names that Seth brought out
of Paradys, when he brought to his fadre Adam the oyle of mercy.
And who somever bereth on hym thise thre names, he shal never be
hurte by thondre, ne by lyghtnyng, ne no witchecraft shal have
power over hym, ne be tempted to doo synne. And also he shall
never take harm by colde, thaugh he laye thre wynters nyghtis in
the feelde, thaugh it snowed, stormed, or froze never so sore, so
grete myght have thise wordes.

This wonder-working ring was set with a stone “of three maner colours,”
red, white and green. The red part had the fabled quality of the ruby
for “the shynyng of the stone made and gaf as grete a lyghte as it had
been mydday.” The white portion was a remedy for diseases of the eye,
for headache, and, indeed, for almost all ills, “sauf only the very
deth,” if the part affected were stroked with the stone, or, when the
malady was internal, if the patient drank of water in which the stone
had been placed. The third color was “grene lyke glas,” with some small
spots of purple. This procured love and friendship for the wearer and
also victory in battle; even should he be “al naked in the felde agayn
an hondred armed men,” he would escape with honour. However, the ring
must only be worn by one of gentle birth.

[Illustration: THE “HERMIT STONE,” A TALISMAN OF CHASTITY WHEN
WORN SET IN A RING

Lapidario del Rey D. Alfonso X, Codice Original, Madrid, 1881,
fol. 14]

[Illustration: FINDING OF STONE WHICH WHEN SET IN A RING ASSURES
MALE OFFSPRING TO THE WOMAN WHO WEARS IT

Lapidario del Rey D. Alfonso X, Codice Original, Madrid, 1881,
fol. 3]

The “Lapidario,” an astrological treatise on stones, written at the
instance of the Castilian King, Alfonso X, the Wise, (1221–1284),
ostensibly a translation from a “Chaldee” original, but probably mainly
based on Arabic lore, gives, under the obscure name _ceritiz_, an
account of an Indian stone found on the banks of the river of the same
name. It was of a very dark green hue, was exceedingly tough and its
weight is fixed at 120 drachmas. When cleaned and polished it cast a
reflection like that of a fine mirror. A piece of this stone set in a
ring and worn by a woman would assure her a series of boy babies.

Another ring-stone, one having a different effect, was that called the
“hermit’s stone,” which was washed up by the waves on the shore of the
Red Sea. Its color was yellow, transparent, and had a sheen like that
of pure oil; possibly this may have been chrysolite. It was eminently
and rigidly a stone of chastity. The lapis lazuli was dedicated to
Venus, and any man who wore one set in a ring, while Venus was in the
ascendant, would attract the love of women, especially of those with
blue-gray eyes. On a woman’s hand, it had a corresponding effect upon
the opposite sex.[502]

An old German lay tells of a magic gold ring set with a diamond. Should
the woman wearing this ring prove unfaithful in love, the gold turned
to dross, and the diamond became glass. The Latin name of the diamond,
_adamas_, is the form used in this poem.[503] This word, which
primarily signified an exceedingly hard metal, finally came to mean
the diamond, or at least what was believed to be a diamond, although
it might in reality be only a colorless corundum, much less hard than
the genuine diamond, but harder than any of the other precious stones
except the colored corundums, ruby, sapphire, etc.

The thirteenth century German romance, “Wolfdietrich,” celebrates a
ring given by the empress to the hero of the poem. This ring was set
with a stone destined to double the strength of the wearer, and to
protect him from the sheets of flame ejected by the fearful dragon he
was about to combat. However, before his encounter with this fabulous
monster, Wolfdietrich determines to return the ring, and sends it back
to the empress, whereupon she bursts into tears, exclaiming: “I let
it down from the battlements with my own hand. Does he value it so
lightly, that he sends it back to me?”[504]

In a satirical and malicious life of Pope Boniface VIII (ca.
1228–1303), the bitter opponent of the French king Philippe le Bel
(1268–1314), written by, or at the instance of his royal enemy, it
is related that when this pope was dying and was told that he must
prepare his soul for the great change, he cast his eyes upon a stone
set in a ring he was wearing, and exclaimed “O you tricky spirits
imprisoned in this stone, why have you deceived me to abandon me now in
my extremity?” And so speaking he snatched off the ring and threw it
away.[505]

One of the old monkish tales from mediæval times, collected under the
title of “Gesta Romanorum,” runs as follows:

Frediricus, who reigned in a Roman city, had been a long time
without offspring. Finally, by the advice of wise counsellors,
he married a beautiful girl in parts far distant and lived with
her in an unknown land and had offspring. After this, he wished
to return to his realm but could not obtain his wife’s consent;
indeed, she always repeated that if he abandoned her she would
kill herself. Hearing this, the emperor caused two splendid rings
to be made, and had engraved upon two gems images of the following
efficacy: one of remembrance and the other of forgetfulness.
Having set these in their appropriate rings he gave one--that of
forgetfulness--to his wife, and kept the other for himself ... The
wife began straightway to forget the love of her husband, and the
emperor, noting this, journeyed back to his realm with great joy,
and never returned to his wife. He ended his life in peace.[506]

Welsh legend offers us parallels to the ring of Gyges and to that set
with the “Stone of Remembrance” told of in the Gesta Romanorum. In the
old Welsh epic, the Mabinogion, the following directions are given by a
damsel to her lover in regard to a ring of the former type: “Take this
ring and put it on thy finger with the stone within thy hand; and close
thy hand upon the stone, and as long as thou concealest it, it will
conceal thee.” This Stone of Invisibility was regarded as one of the
thirteen rarities of the ancient British regalia, formerly treasured
up in Caerleon, Monmouthshire, and in another Welsh legendary cycle
(the Triads) it is said to have “liberated Owen, the son of Urien,
from between the portcullis and the wall.” Whoever concealed the stone
would be concealed by it. Here indeed the similarity with the story
told of the ring of Gyges is so close that it is apparent we only
have to do with an adaptation of the classic tale. As to the stone of
Remembrance, however, the Welsh tradition seems to be essentially an
independent one. The Mabinogion makes Iddawe say to Rhonabwy: “Dost
thou see this ring with a stone set in it upon the Emperor’s hand?
It is one of the properties of that stone to enable thee to remember
that thou seest here to-night, and hadst thou not seen the stone, thou
wouldst never have been able to remember aught thereof.” This refers to
a dream or vision accorded to Rhonabwy while he lay upon an enchanted
calf-skin.[507]

Dactylomancy, as it was called, was resorted to in the Middle Ages by
those who sought to probe the mysteries of the future. This art was
practiced by the use of a ring (sometimes bearing the figure of one of
the constellations), which was suspended by a thread in the middle of
a glass or metal vessel. The number and quality of the strokes it made
against the sides of the vessel as it swung free on the thread, were
interpreted by the magician according to a secret formula, and were
explained by him to signify that some expected or dreaded event would
or would not take place.[508]

Among the Sagan Kerens of southeastern Asia there is a curious
superstitious use of a ring in connection with funeral feasts. On such
occasions a metal ring is suspended from a support just over a brass
basin. One by one the relatives of the deceased person approach and
strike a succession of quick taps on the edge of the basin with a piece
of bamboo. When it comes to the turn of the one who was most beloved by
the departed, the spirit is believed to answer the call by making the
string twist about and lengthen, so that, finally, it either parts and
permits the ring to fall into the basin, or else swings and lengthens
sufficiently to cause the ring to strike the basin edge.[509]

A magic ring is introduced by Sir Thomas Malory in his “Morte
d’Arthur,” written in 1469 or 1470, the tale being of course borrowed
from some one of the numerous sources he used in this compilation
of the story of King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table. The
ring was given by Dame Liness to Sir Gareth, who wished to hide his
personality while competing in a tournament. The dame assured the
Knight that this ring had such virtue that it would turn green to red,
blue to white, and vice versa, and so through all the range of colors.
The lady required, however, a solemn promise that her ring would be
returned to her at the close of the tournament, for in addition to its
other virtues, it possessed marvellous cosmetic powers, increasing her
beauty to an extraordinary degree.

In the tourney, the baffling changes of color in Sir Gareth’s arms
and equipment confused his assailants and rendered him more easily
victorious than he would otherwise have been, good knight that he was.
Having ridden for a moment out of the press of knights to adjust his
helmet, which had become loosened, a dwarf approached him, offering a
cup of wine to quench the knight’s thirst, at the same time asking to
hold the ring lest Sir Gareth should let it slip from his finger while
drinking. The knight gave it to him, but in his eagerness to join again
in the affray, forgot to take it back. But now his armor retained its
normal yellow tint, and, fearing recognition, for it was important for
him to conceal his personality at this time, he noted that his ring
was not on his hand. He quickly sought the dwarf and obliged him to
surrender the magic ring. No sooner was it on his finger than his armor
changed color, and he was able to avoid a threatened pursuit, as all
were in search of the Yellow Knight.

A ring having magic power to protect the wearer from danger appears in
the mediæval romance of Sir Eglamore. The tale appears to have been
known to Shakespeare, to judge from the line: “What think’st thou of
the fair Sir Eglamore,” which occurs in Two Gentlemen of Verona. This
ring was given to the gallant knight by his lady love:[510]

Then said Arnada, that sweete thing
“Have here of me a gold ring
With a precyous stone;
Where-soe you bee on water or Land
And this ring upon your hand
Nothing may you slone.”[511]

Sometimes the virtues of the ring are conceived in a poetic spirit and
are associated intimately with the giver, as we find in the romance
of Ywaine and Gawin. Here the stone set in the ring given by Ywaine
protects the wearer from imprisonment, illness, loss of blood, and
danger in battle, but the lady tells her lover that this virtue exists
in the ring “while you it have and think on me,” that is, only so long
as his love endures.[512]

That the magic virtues of the images and talismans were liable to wane
and pass away, was taught by Albertus Magnus, who likened these powers
to those of animate objects which were also transitory. When the period
fixed by heaven had come to an end, the power of the image would be
broken and it would be useless, cold and dead. This, in his opinion,
accounted for the fact that many talismanic figures failed to display
any efficacy, although they had done so in ancient times.[513]

In the “Book of Thetel,” as quoted by Konrad von Megenberg,[514] one of
the engraved gems is described as follows:

A man seated upon a footstool, crowned, and stretching forth
his hands to the heavens. Beneath him are four men appearing to
support the stool. Take mastic and terebinth (turpentine) and put
them under the stone in a silver finger-ring, having twelve times
the weight of the stone in the ring. If this be placed beneath the
head of a sleeping person, he dreams of what he longed for when
awake.

The curious statement that the metal ring was to weigh twelve times as
much as the stone, seems to indicate an influence of the superstition
in regard to the number twelve.

The Londesborough Collection contains a ring which represents a toad
swallowing a serpent. This was evidently used as an amulet and the
design seems to have some connection with the curious superstition
that a serpent, to become a dragon, must swallow a serpent. A Greek
proverb, found in Suidas (ab. the tenth century A.D.), is
aptly rendered by Dryden (Edipus, Act III, sc. 1) as follows:

A serpent ne’er becomes a flying dragon till he has eat a serpent.

Hence this ring combined the curative or talismanic powers attributed
to the toad, the serpent and the dragon.[515]

The ring of St. Mark, said to have been long preserved in the treasury
of St. Mark’s cathedral at Venice, was believed to have been acquired
in a miraculous way. In the time of Henry III (1216–1272) the body of
the saint, which had been taken to the cathedral, was suddenly missed
and no trace of it could be found. Resort was then had to prayers and
supplications, and these appear to have been answered, for one day the
sacristan, while traversing the nave, saw an arm emerge from one of the
pillars. He hastened to report this wonderful thing to the Doge and the
cathedral clergy, who on reaching the building became witnesses of the
miracle. As they were kneeling reverently before the column the hand of
the apparition opened and let fall a ring, which was picked up by the
Bishop of Olivolo. At the same instant, hand and arm disappeared, and
the column opened, revealing in its interior an iron casket in which
were the lost remains of St. Mark.

Not many years later this ring served to give proof of an appearance of
the saint. One February day a fearful storm arose, piling up the waters
of the lagoons and threatening the destruction of Venice. In the midst
of the tempest, a man approached one of the gondoliers on the Riva dei
Schiavoni, near the cathedral, and asked to be rowed across the canal
to San Giorgio Maggiore. It was in vain that the gondolier protested
he could not make head against the storm; he was at last forced to
yield to the importunities of his would-be passenger. But what was his
surprise to find that his boat proceeded as easily as though no storm
were raging. On their arrival at San Giorgio Maggiore they were joined
by another man, and the gondolier was now directed to proceed to the
Lido. This time his reluctance was less difficult to overcome, although
the storm was growing worse, for he felt encouraged by the ease with
which he had already made part of the journey. And sure enough his
long row to the Lido was equally uneventful. Here a third man joined
the party, and the gondolier was told to row out between the castles
on either side of the entrance into the open Adriatic. Feeling that he
could now refuse nothing, the gondolier undertook to accomplish this
apparently impossible task, and succeeded in reaching the sea. Here
there arose before them a ship manned by the demons of the storm, who
were steering their way in toward Venice, bringing utter destruction
with them. And now the three men in the little boat stood up and
pronounced an exorcism of such power that the ship foundered, and the
demons, howling fearfully, were swallowed up in the deep. Immediately
the tempest was stilled and the waves died down. The gondolier was now
ordered to take his passengers back to the places where they embarked,
and when the last of them, the first one he had picked up, stepped
on to the Riva dei Schiavoni, he announced himself to be Mark, the
Evangelist, and dropped a ring worth five ducats into the gondolier’s
hand, telling him to show it to the authorities and say that it was
St. Mark’s ring, in proof of which they would find that its carefully
locked receptacle in the cathedral was empty.[516] This proved to be
true, and the gondolier received a liberal pension as a reward for
having aided, however humbly, in the preservation of Venice by St.
Mark.[517]

The marvellous ring of Gyges may have suggested to Abbot Tritheim,
or Trithemius, of Spandau (1462–1516) the idea of fabricating a ring
which would give the wearer the power of becoming invisible at will.
The Abbot asserts that he had made such a ring out of the material
called electrum, a natural alloy of gold and silver, having the color
of amber. To possess the requisite power, the ring must be cast at the
hour at which the person designing to use it was born, and it should be
inscribed with the word “Tetragrammaton” signifying the four letters
composing the Ineffable Name. When this ring was placed upon the thumb
of the left hand, the wearer immediately became invisible. Besides this
virtue, when worn on any finger, the ring preserved the wearer from
poison and betrayed the presence of enemies by changing color.[518]

Rings bearing the Latin inscription “Jesus autem transiens per medium
illorum” (Jesus, however, passing through their midst),[519] were
thought to confer invisibility upon the wearer. This inscription
occurs on the hoop of a gold ring set with an uncut diamond, shown at
the Special Exhibition at the South Kensington Museum, June, 1862.

This motto, “Jesus autem transiens,” etc., was in mediæval times
regarded as a great charm against the dangers that menaced a traveller
on his journeys. In his quaint old English, Sir John Mandeville says
of this that these words were sometimes pronounced by “some men when
thei dreden them of thefes on any way, or of enemyes, in token and
mynde that our Lord passed through out of the Jews’ crueltie and
scaped safely fro hem.” On the gold noble which Edward III had struck
in commemoration of his victory in the naval battle of Helvoet Sluys
in 1340, and of his escape from the perils he underwent therein, this
motto appears as the legend.[520]

Lambeccius narrates that he once told Emperor Leopold I (1657–1675) of
a magic gold ring, said to have been long preserved in the Austrian
treasury, and whose special virtue was that it could be used as an
oracle to foretell the results of an approaching battle. If victory
was to crown the Austrian army, this ring would shine with an unwonted
splendor. It was said to be made from the gold offered by the Magi
to the Infant Jesus. While, however, sacred ceremonies were being
performed before the Emperor Frederick, grandson of Rudolph I., just
before his departure for a disastrous battle with Louis of Bavaria,
the ring vanished from the eyes of man. Later, it was said to have
been recovered and Lambeccius suggested that a ring he had recently
observed in the treasury, bearing certain characters difficult of
interpretation, might be the ring made from the offering of the
Magi.[521] The omen of victory observable in this ring must have been
suggested by what Josephus writes of the high-priest’s breastplate.
According to his story “God announced victory in battle” by means of
the twelve stones set in this breastplate, and he proceeds “such a
splendour shone from them when the army was not yet in motion, that all
the people knew God himself was present to aid them.”

A magic ring was made in the seventeenth century by a Florentine
monk, named Nicolaus; this was designed to drive away gnats. It bore
a charmed figure executed during the ascendency of the planet Saturn.
The charm is said to have worked successfully. Since Saturn was usually
regarded as a bearer of ill-luck, the operation of the magic figure
must have depended upon sympathetic magic, the enlisting of the help of
an evil power to combat a nature-plague.[522]

It is related that long ago in the Principality of Anhalt, a princess
had the habit of going to the window after dinner and shaking out the
crumbs from her napkin. Intention or chance induced a great toad to
station itself under this window so as to eat up the precious crumbs.
In due time the princess was wedded, and one night, shortly before
the birth of a child, she saw a maid enter the room with a lighted
candle in her hand. Approaching the bedside she handed a gold ring
to the princess, telling her at the same time that it was sent by
the toad, out of gratitude for the food she had given it, with the
earnest warning to guard the ring carefully, as the fortunes of Anhalt
were bound up with it. Moreover, every precaution was to be taken on
Christmas Eve to guard against fire.[523] It is stated that this ring
was still to be seen in Dessau in 1722, and that it was customary to
put out all the fires in the palace on Christmas Eve, and to have
watchmen patrol the building all through the night.[524]

A luminous ring is poetically described in Titus Andronicus, a play
somewhat doubtfully attributed to Shakespeare who probably merely
revised and embellished, in or about 1590, an original from some other
hand. In any case, the lines referring to the luminous stone are highly
expressive. After the murder of Bassianus, Martius searches in the
depths of a dark pit for the dead body and suddenly cries out to his
companion, Quintus, that he has discovered the bloody corpse. As the
interior of the pit is pitch-dark, Quintus can scarcely believe what he
hears, and asks Martius how the latter could possibly see what he has
described. The answer is given in the following lines:

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 cheek,
And show the ragged entrails of this pit.
Titus Andronicus, Act II, Sc. 4.

For the superstitious among certain Oriental peoples any injury to an
amulet-ring was looked upon as a sure presage of coming misfortune.
It is related of a Turk in the town of Jablanica, Bosnia, that having
broken his amulet-ring, he started out forthwith on an arduous
ten-hours’ journey to Mostar, the nearest place where his ring could
be repaired, and he no doubt pursued his way in fear and trembling
lest the threatened ill-fortune should befall him ere he reached the
goldsmith who could mend his ring and thus restore its virtue.[525] In
the National Hungarian Museum at Budapest is a silver ring set with a
carnelian, on which are engraved Oriental characters. This was found,
in 1812, in the garden of the royal palace at Budapest. Rings of a
similar kind are often worn by Turks and Arabs, and are greatly valued
as talismans, as they are believed to afford the wearers protection in
battle, in the chase, and when indulging in dissipation.[526]

The ring with its smooth circle, having neither beginning nor end, is
a fit symbol of eternity, and is often figured in this connection; and
yet its material substance is transitory. This aspect is illustrated by
the Eastern story that a wise man and favorite of a king once gave him
a ring on which was the inscription: “Even this shall pass away.” In
bestowing it upon the king, the sage said: “When in dire distress your
soul is weighed down with trouble, look at this ring! When in the midst
of festivities, joy and wild hilarity, look at this ring! _Even this
shall pass away._”[527]

In an illustrated work on ancient jades, in two quarto volumes,
published in 1889 by the well-known scholar and statesman, Wu Ta-cheng
(b. 1833), this writer conjectures that archer’s rings of _white_
jade were reserved for the emperor’s use. At the present day rings
of this type are made in Peking from the antler of a species of elk.
The Catholic missionary, Father Zi, states that the rings most highly
valued are those made out of jade of the Han period (_Han yü_),
of a white gray with red veining and green stripes. Rings found in
the graves of students who have passed the military examinations are
of reddish hue, and the opinion prevails that they afford protection
against malevolent spirits.[528]

In the symbolism of the ring, the complete circle is regarded by the
Chinese as denoting the combination of all divine principles, as these
are supposed to move in an everlasting and unbroken circle, having
neither beginning nor end. An evil significance, however, attaches to
an incomplete or half-ring, called _küeh_, a sound that means “to
cut off, to slay; to pass sentence; to decide, to settle.” An early
instance of the use of such a ring to signify banishment is related
of the Prince Shên-shêng whose father sent him on a fatal military
expedition in 659 B.C., at the instigation of one of his
concubines. This ring, which was attached to a girdle, was equivalent
to a formal decree that the prince was cast off and should never
return. In consequence of the ambiguity of Chinese spoken and written
words, a half-ring or at least one not describing a closed circle is
said to have been worn at one time by Chinese scholars, because one
of the meanings of the sound _küeh_ is “to decide,” as has been
noted above.[529] The Chinese writer Pan Ku (d. 92 A.D.) says
that those who cultivated moral conduct without end, wore a complete
ring suspended from the girdle, while those able to decide questions of
aversion and doubt, wore half-rings, this being again a symbolic use of
the double meaning of _küeh_.

As the Chinese word signifying “a jade-ring” has the same sound
(_huan_) as the word meaning “to return, to repay,” and is
expressed with the same phonetic symbol, the sending of such a ring
by an emperor to an exiled official was a symbolic summons for the
official to return. However, a jade-ring could also be a signal
for besieging a city, since the syllable _huan_ can mean “an
enclosing wall.”[530] As an illustration, the word “ring,” a ring; and
“ring,” imperative of “to ring,” might make the sending of a ring to a
bell-ringer signify that he should let his bells peal forth.

Quite a number of finely-executed gold rings, with or without settings,
as well as other pieces of jewelry, are made by Chinese goldsmiths in
San Francisco. Silver is never used. Seal rings are occasionally made;
the favorite setting is jade, next to which comes the opal; diamonds
are also used for this purpose. No wedding rings are given, although
the bestowal of a ring as a gift is highly appreciated. The prices
range from $6 for a plain gold ring to from $20 to $200 for one of
mandarin-style, set with a piece of jade. Sometimes short inscriptions
are engraved on rings, such as “Long Life,” or “Beautiful.”[531]
In the plate representing the interior of a Chinese jeweller’s shop
in San Francisco, the proprietor of the place is shown seated in the
background. None of the artisans, however, were willing to face the
camera, either from superstitious dread of having their pictures taken,
or perhaps through fear of being molested in some way by the Government.

[Illustration:

_Photograph by Cardinell-Vincent Co., San Francisco_

SHOP OF A CHINESE SILVERSMITH IN SAN FRANCISCO

As the workers were unwilling to have their pictures taken, the
only figure is that of the proprietor]

[Illustration: MODERN CHINESE RINGS]

[Illustration: Inset ring stones. 1, moss agate in dark gray
jasper; 2, garnet in chalcedony; 3, almandine garnet in brownish
chalcedony; 4, aquamarine in red jasper; 5, sardonyx; 6, topaz in
lapis-lazuli; 7, banded agate. Part of a collection of rings that
all fit in one setting. See page 65

American Museum of Natural History]

[Illustration: Spiral brass rings made in the Philippine Islands

American Museum of Natural History, New York City]

When the nine gems of the great Hindu charm, the _naoratna_, are
set in rings, the Burmese usage is to place the ruby in the centre, and
group around it the eight other stones. Rings of this description were
worn by Burmese kings and nobles as preventives of disease or danger.
Sometimes an incantation is recited over these nine stones, which are
then immersed in water, the belief being that whoever drinks of this
water will secure immunity from all evil.[532]

In the masterpiece of Hindu dramatic literature, the Çakuntalâ of the
poet Kâlidâsa, written about the sixth century of our era, a ring
plays a most important part. The heroine, the daughter of the nymph
Menakâ and the sage Viçvamitra, has had it foretold to her that the
man who loves and marries her will entirely forget her, until his
love and memory are revived by a ring. In due time she is beloved of
the King Dushyanta, who marries her, but soon leaves her, to return
to his court. When she follows him thither he fails to recognize her.
Thereupon she remembers what had been predicted in regard to a ring,
but finds to her dismay that the one the King gave her has been lost.
In the next act of the play a fisherman is dragged in by guards who
charge him with having in his possession the royal signet-ring and
with having invented the tale that he found it inside a fish. The
king, however, admits the truth of the story, rewards the fisherman,
and gladly receives the ring. As soon as he places it on his finger he
recognizes his bride and his love for her is renewed.[533]

The Khedive Tewfik Pasha related, about 1880, his experience with a
certain Ahmed Agha, a Turk, who possessed a magic ring. It was a plain
hoop of gold set with a red stone (probably a carnelian), and was said
to have come from Mecca. The Turk claimed that by its help visions
could be seen, and the Khedive consented to make a test of the ring’s
virtue. Ahmed said that he required for the experiment the assistance
of a child under ten years of age, whereupon the Khedive summoned a
little girl from the harem to act as assistant, or we might rather say
principal. The Turk attached to this girl’s head a silver plate on
which a verse of the Koran was engraved, and placed in her hand the
mystic ring with the red stone which, he declared, would change from
red to white if the experiment was to be successful. A few moments
after the preparation had been made, the girl cried out: “The stone has
changed to white.” Hereupon the Khedive asked her to describe a number
of persons she had never seen, and she invariably gave correct answers.
Tewfik was so much impressed by the experiment that he exclaimed: “I
can believe it, and yet I cannot understand it.” A few days later he
sent word to the Turk that he wished to borrow the ring, but the man
besought him not to take it away. An offer of £100 from a court noble
was also refused. Finally, Ahmed was summoned to the court and the
Khedive again urged him to surrender the ring, but when he repeated his
prayers that it should not be taken from him the Khedive lost patience
and said to him: “You are mistaken in thinking that I believe in the
power of your ring or in things of that kind. I wish you good morning.”
Poor Ahmed was only too glad to get off so easily and he left Cairo
never to return there.[534]

In this case, as in many others, a change of color is asserted to take
place in the stone, an indication that the mineral substance responds
to some impression from without. It is as though part of the virtue
of the stone had left it, for with a colored stone we might say, in
a poetic sense, that its color is its life and soul. Hence in this
particular instance the loss of color was probably thought to indicate
that some in-dwelling spirit had passed from the stone to the little
girl and dictated her responses; possibly if the ring were arranged
with some mechanical or hollow space a colored foil could be pressed
under the white stone, or a liquid passed under it, giving the delusion
of the change from white to red and red to white.

In Scandinavia, carnelians were used as ring-stones in very early
times; a fine specimen of such a ring was found in Ysted, in the
province of Scania, and another at Verdalen, Norway. That these were
credited with power as amulets seems highly probable, for some of the
early Norse rings were so highly valued by their owners that they were
designated by individual names. Thus we are told of a gold ring named
Hnited, “The Welded,” which was given as a precious gift by Ulf the
Red to King Olaf. This particular ring was welded together from seven
pieces of exceptionally pure gold, the number of pieces evidently
having a mystic significance.[535]

There is or was a superstition among the Swedish Lapps that at times,
on the lonely moorlands, might be seen visionary herds of reindeer,
packs of dogs, or even apparitions having the form of Laplanders. When
one who sees any such objects goes in pursuit of them, they disappear
before they can be reached; if, however, while they are still visible
a steel or brass ring is thrown at them, they immediately become real
living creatures. Popular legend even has to tell of men or women who
in this way have secured wives or husbands, respectively, in reality
changelings, _trolls_, apparently or really transformed into human
beings.[536]

An onyx ring is made the cause of a series of wonderful transmigrations
in an old-fashioned tale written about 1840 by John Sterling, of whom
Thomas Carlyle has left us a most interesting biography.[537] In this
story, the hero, a young barrister discouraged in his profession and
disappointed in love, finds himself one night in an exceptionally
depressed frame of mind. Opening, at chance, an old necromantic work,
he is fascinated, perhaps hypnotized, by the vaguely mystic sentences,
and is scarcely astonished to perceive, standing before him in his
deserted room, what appears to be the figure of an aged man, who in the
most-approved magician fashion offers him an onyx ring, engraved with
the head of Apollonius of Tyana, and of such virtue that if he puts
it on the forefinger of his right hand, he will be able to transfer
himself into the body of any existing personage. His identification
with the new personality will indeed be so complete, that his old
existence will be entirely forgotten. This is to last for a week, at
the expiration of which his memory will suddenly be revived for a
short time, and he will have the choice to remain as he is, to change
his fleshly tabernacle again, or to return to his own body. In the
last-named case, however, his special power will be taken from him, and
he must continue in his own form.

The offer is accepted and a series of transmigrations begins, in
the course of which the hero becomes in turn a baronet, a farmer,
a traveler, a divine, a poet, a political reformer and an old
basket-maker. In this last _avatar_ he is involuntarily forced
to return to his own body, for the basket-maker dies before the week
is up. The various characters through whose lives he passes belong
to his immediate neighborhood, and the slight plot of the story
can thus be carried forward without interruption. When at last the
barrister comes to himself, he has just recovered from a long period of
unconsciousness, and there is a little intentional uncertainty whether
the vision and its consequences really took place, or were only the
products of a fevered mind. Among the old basket-maker’s effects is
found an onyx ring enclosed in an old box and engraved with a man’s
head.

The greater part of the splendid precious stones in the collection of
the English banker Henry Philip Hope were set in rings. One of the
finest and most interesting of these gems was the beautiful sapphire
often called “Le Saphire Merveilleux,” the title of a story written
by Mme. de Genlis, who had seen the stone when it formed part of the
collection of the Duke of Orleans. Its peculiar charm is that its color
changes when seen by artificial light. In daylight it is a beautiful
sapphire blue, but by candle light, or other yellow light it acquires
an amethystine hue.[538] This fine sapphire, interesting both for its
rare dichroism and its historic associations, was sold about 1898 for
£700 ($3500). It weighs 19⅛ metric carats. Another attractive gem in
the Hope Collection is a cabochon-cut amethyst, engraved in intaglio
with the figure of a Bacchante carrying a thyrsus. At the back of the
stone are two strata of different colors, one a whitish gray, the other
showing brown spots on a velvet ground. This peculiarity has been
skilfully utilized by the engraver, who has cut on the stone the form
of a panther in relief.[539]

The so-called “Pennsylvania Dutch,” largely Germans from the southern
parts of Germany, made, in the early days, rings out of horseshoe
nails.[540] The good-luck supposed to be inherent in the horseshoe was
probably believed to extend to the detachable nails also, so that these
rings might have been looked upon as endowed with magic or talismanic
virtue.

Lord Bacon (1561–1626) in his “Sylva Sylvarum,” published in 1626,
suggests a curious test of telepathy. This is that two parties to an
agreement or contract, should exchange rings, each wearing the other’s
ring, and they are then to note whether, in case the contract or
promise should be broken by one of the parties, the other would become
sensible of this by means of an influence transmitted through the ring.
He adds that it has been regarded as a help to the continuance of love
to wear a ring or a bracelet of the loved one, but he believes that
“this may proceed from exciting the magnetism, which, perhaps, a glove,
or other like favour, might do as well.”

The peculiar inherent virtue of a ring given by, or exchanged with,
a loved person, renders it far more prized than a merely beautiful
or costly ring. While we may regard as superstition any fancy that
the material ring possesses any magic quality, that lent to it by
association or by memory is none the less real though it is only in the
brain or heart of the wearer. The effect of this association of a ring
or other jewel with a person is also to be seen in the case of rings
bestowed by royal personages as tokens of gratitude or favor. In olden
times they were often regarded as amulets and believed to transfer
something of the power or genius of the bestower to the recipient.
Indeed the qualities were conceived to have embodied themselves in
the ornament, which was therefore handed down from generation to
generation as a precious heritage, one sure to bring good fortune to
the wearer. In the case of lovers the token served as a connecting
link, transmitting and transfusing the love sentiment.[541]

Besides the zodiacal, or natal rings, there were also made in mediæval
times a number of planetary rings, the metal supposed to be especially
under the guardianship of the Sun, Moon or five planets known to the
ancient world, being in each case chosen as the material for the
ring of the special planet. These rings were frequently set with the
precious stone assigned to the planet, and thus a series was obtained
of seven rings, each of a different metal and set with a different
stone. The sun-ring was of gold with diamond or sapphire; the silver
moon-ring bore a rock crystal or a moonstone; the ring of Mars was of
iron set with an emerald; for Mercury, the ring was of quicksilver and
bore a piece of magnetic iron; Jupiter’s was of tin, the setting being
a carnelian; copper was, of course, the material of the Venus-ring
(_cyprium_, copper, being sacred to the Cyprian goddess), and the
stone was an amethyst; lastly, the Saturnian ring was of lead and had
for setting a turquoise.

Some of the appropriate rings and stones to be worn by those who hope
to attract to themselves the favorable influences of Sun, Moon, and
planets, are given in the Syro-Arabic work of the eighth or ninth
century on the mystic potencies of stones, put forth under the name of
Aristotle. For the Sun the stone is rock crystal, which must be set
in a gold ring; Mercury’s influence is secured by wearing a piece of
magnetite in an electrum setting, and for those wishing the help of the
Moon, one of the varieties of onyx is recommended, silver being the
metal in which it is to be set.[542]

[Illustration: GOLD ZODIAC RING, PROBABLY MADE ON THE WEST COAST
OF AFRICA IN THE NINETEENTH CENTURY

British Museum]

[Illustration:

ZODIACAL RING OF SILVER; FOUR VIEWS. SET WITH AN ENGRAVED ONYX.
ON THE SIDES ARE CHASED THE SIGNS LEO AND CANCER, AND THE
SHOULDERS OF THE HOOP ARE INLAID WITH BRASS AND IRON, RESPECTIVELY

Gorlæus, Dactyliotheca, Delphis Bat., 1601]

[Illustration: Amulet ring of Twelfth Century, engraved with
cabalistic characters

Edwards’ “History and Poetry of Finger Rings”]

[Illustration: Talismanic ring, with cabalistic inscription.
Found on coast of Glamorganshire, Wales

Rings inscribed with names of Three Kings, or Magi: Melchior,
Jasper and Balthazar. Worn as talismanic rings

Fairholt’s “Rambles of an Artist”]

[Illustration: 1, toad swallowing a serpent; 2, toadstone with
embossed figure of toad; 3, massive thumb-ring set with teeth of
an animal

Londesborough Collection

Fairbolt’s “Rambles of an Artist”]

[Illustration: 1, talismanic ring that opens when the stone
setting (ruby and amethyst) is pressed down, releasing a spring.
Hoop inscribed with names of spirits and magic signs; 2, ring
set with a ruby; 3, gold enameled ring said to have belonged to
Frederick the Great

Fairholt’s “Rambles of an Artist”]

For some reason or other zodiac rings, that is rings bearing zodiacal
symbols, seem to be especially favored by the modern goldsmiths of
the Portuguese island Madeira. Occasionally a ring of this type from
earlier times may be seen there; one of these, of crude workmanship
and much the worse for wear, has been attributed to the time of a
twelfth-century duke of Burgundy, whose crusading expedition did not
extend much beyond the frontiers of Portugal.[543] More than likely
Moorish influence, or that of the Orient at least, was a determining
factor, for the study of zodiacal influences was eagerly pursued in
Spain in the thirteenth century and earlier, as is witnessed by the
curious Lapidario of Alfonso X, the Wise, composed in the latter half
of that century. The survivance of this style in Madeira depends quite
probably upon one of those rather inexplicable chances that cause the
production of a certain class of jewels or ornaments, when a curious
or unusual example strikes some tourist’s fancy, and he shows it to
friends at home; these in their turn will ask for it when they go to
the same place, thus creating a demand and a local fashion. Rings of
this kind are brought from Madeira by sailors and travelling jewellers,
and are found at a number of places, including the west coast of Africa.

Many gold zodiac rings of a simple type are made on the Gold Coast
and brought thence to Europe. The hoop is a flat band, on which the
conventional symbols of the zodiacal signs are soldered, scroll borders
also being applied in the same way.[544] While these rings are totally
lacking in artistic quality, their production on the Gold Coast may
indicate that long ago some better work of the class was done here,
probably under Portuguese influence.

Rings holding truly “celestial stones,” gems from the heavens as they
are called, are those in which have been set small, but perfectly cut
chrysolites (peridots) from crystals found in meteorites. One of these
was of the pallasite type, from Brenham, Kiowa County, Kansas[545] and
gems were also cut out of chrysolite from the meteorite of Glorietta
Mountain, Santa Fé County, New Mexico.[546]

A most attractive kind of natal ring is that having the birth stone in
the centre between the stones of the guardian angel and of the apostle
of the month. While this particular arrangement of the settings is
followed in the greater number of cases, it sometimes happens that
a better artistic effect is obtained, a better harmony of color, by
making either the stone of the angel or that of the apostle the central
gem. The essential thing is that the three particular stones assigned
to the given month shall be grouped together. The following table
renders it easy to find the proper combination for each month, or each
zodiacal sign:

Zodiacal Natal Guardian Angel’s Apostle
Month Sign Stone Angel Gem of Month

January Aquarius Garnet Gabriel Onyx Peter
February Pisces Amethyst Barchiel Jasper Andrew
March Aries Bloodstone Malchediel Ruby James and
John
April Taurus Diamond or Ashmodel Topaz Philip
Sapphire
May Gemini Emerald Amriel Carbuncle Bartholomew
June Cancer Agate Muriel Emerald Thomas
July Leo Turquoise Verchiel Sapphire Matthew
August Virgo Carnelian Hamatiel Diamond James the
Less
September Libra Chrysolite Tsuriel Jacinth Thaddeus

October Scorpio Beryl Bariel Agate Simon
November Sagittarius Topaz Adnachiel Amethyst Matthias
December Capricornus Ruby Humiel Beryl Paul

Apostle’s Flower
Month Gem of Month

January Jasper Snowdrop
February Carbuncle Primrose
March Emerald Violet
April Carnelian Daisy
May Chrysolite Hawthorne
June Beryl Honeysuckle
July Topaz Water Lily
August Sardonyx Poppy
September Chrysoprase Morning Glory
October Jacinth Hops
November Amethyst Chrysanthemum
December Sapphire Holly

If, like Apollonius of Tyana,[547] anyone should wish to wear on each
week day a ring set with the stones especially appropriate to the day,
the following list gives for the successive days the pair of stones
whose combination was believed to unite the most favorable planetary
and celestial influences:

Gem of Talismanic Astral
the Day Gem Control
Sunday Diamond Pearl Sun
Monday Pearl Emerald Moon
Tuesday Ruby Topaz Mars
Wednesday Amethyst Turquoise Mercury
Thursday Carnelian Sapphire Jupiter
Friday Emerald Ruby Venus
Saturday Turquoise Tourmaline Saturn

The use of fraternity rings is often connected with a certain amount of
sentiment or even superstition concerning their emblematic value. The
most important of this type of rings are those worn by the Free Masons.

The greater number of Masonic rings are intended for those Masons
who have attained the two highest degrees, the thirty-second and
the thirty-third; some, however, are appropriate to those of the
lower degrees. The bezels of the Blue Lodge, or Master Mason rings,
frequently have the square compasses and the latter G in gold on a
background of blue enamel; occasionally emblems and paraphernalia used
in the Lodge are enamelled in blue on the gold hoops of the ring.
Sometimes, instead of enamel, the background is formed of sapphire,
bloodstone, or some other stone on which the emblems are encrusted in
gold. An example of the ring of a Past Master bears a raised gold
sun-face. In a ring for the Chapter of Royal Arch Masons, the keystone
is usually enameled white with a black circle and white centre. Shrine
Rings are distinctly Oriental in type, the prevailing design showing
a simitar passed between the horns of a crescent moon. In rings of
the Knights Templar the design is usually a cross passed through a
crown, with the motto of Constantine the Great: In hoc Signo vinces.
The cross will be of black enamel (occasionally of red enamel) and
the crown is gold. A special ring for this order has a Blue Lodge
emblem on one shoulder and the Chapter emblem on the other, and is
arranged for a diamond to be set in the centre of the bezel. On a
fourteenth degree ring (Lodge of Perfection) appears the initial Hebrew
letter (_yod_) of the Tetragrammaton, or Ineffable Name, now
approximately sounded Yahweh. Sometimes the symbols of more than one
degree appear on the ring, one example bearing those of the fourteenth,
sixteenth, eighteenth, thirtieth and thirty-second; this is one of
the Consistory rings, as those for thirty-second degree Masons are
denominated. These usually have the double eagle on the bezel.

[Illustration: MASONIC RINGS

1, 3, Master Mason or Blue Lodge; 2, 4, Knights Templar; 5, “The
Signet of Zerubbabel,” adopted as one of the Royal Arch symbols.
Explained as the “Signet of Truth.” See Haggai, ii, 2–3; 6, 14th
Degree, or Lodge of Perfection; 7, Emblem of 14th Degree on one
side, of 32d Degree on the other; 8, 9, 32d Degree; 10, 12,
Mystic Shrine rings; 11, 33d Degree]

[Illustration: RINGS OF ORDERS AND SOCIETIES

1, Senior Order United American Mechanics; 2, Knights of
Columbus. Raised centre emblem on black enamel; 3, Brotherhood
of Locomotive Engineers; 4, Knights of the Maccabees; 5, Order
of Railroad Telegraphers; 6, Improved Order of Red Men; 7,
Independent Order of Odd Fellows (encrusted sardonyx); 8,
Fraternal Order of Eagles; 9, Knights of Pythias (encrusted
sardonyx); 10, Sons of Veterans; 11, Knights of Pythias (raised
centre emblem on black enamel); 12, Patriotic Order Sons of
America; 13, Woodmen of the World; 14, Improved Order of Red Men
(raised centre); 15, Junior Order United American Mechanics]

The variety of types of fraternity rings is manifold, most of the
orders having a half-dozen or more different ring-designs, although
certain distinctive elements run through all, as with the wide-spread
Benevolent Protective Order of Elks, for instance, on whose rings the
elk-head is always conspicuously present. For rings of the Knights
of Columbus, the anvil, sword and battleaxe are never-failing marks.
The Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers, a labor organization of the
highest type, has for its device a locomotive running on a railway
track, with a telegraph pole at one side. The Loyal Order of Moose
has the head of the patron animal, less graceful than the elk, but
better suggesting the aggressive quality of this order. A considerable
variety of designs are represented among the rings worn by the Knights
of Pythias; in most cases a helmet and battleaxes are combined with a
shield. Last, but not least, the Independent Order of Odd Fellows has
many rings rich in symbols, the all-seeing eye, the open hand with a
heart in it, a death’s-head and cross-bones, and everywhere, the three
interlinked rings characteristic of the order. These are only a few of
the innumerable ingenious designs that American factories have produced
to satisfy an overwhelming demand for fraternity rings. For the leading
schools also, many special rings have been executed to be used as
prizes, or else to meet the wants of school fraternities or sororities.
Of course, the numerous college fraternities also frequently use
specially designed rings as distinguishing emblems.

The immense number of rings that must have been produced for members
of the largest societies becomes apparent when we consider that the
Independent Order of Odd Fellows, whose English foundation dates back
to about 1745, now has a membership of over 1,500,000, in the United
States and more than 160,000 in other countries. To this must be added
the membership of the Daughters of Rebekah, a coördinate body of women
numbering about 700,000. Another society, the Knights of Pythias,
though of comparatively recent organization, having been founded in
Washington, D. C., in 1864, has over 700,000 members in the United
States and Canada. This order has a branch exclusively for the colored
race, denominated the Knights of Pythias of North and South America,
Europe, Asia and Africa; its members number 50,000. The Benevolent and
Protective Order of Elks counts 410,000 members in 1309 lodges and the
Knights of Columbus, a fraternal and benevolent society founded in New
Haven in 1882, had, on July 1, 1914, 326,858 members.

The membership of the Greek-letter fraternities of the universities
and colleges in the United States is enormous. In 1914 there were 38
leading fraternities distributed in 1228 active chapters and counting
2,656,817 members, with 979 fraternity houses. The oldest Greek-letter
society, Phi Beta Kappa, was organized at William and Mary College,
Virginia, in 1776; Kappa Alpha was founded at Union College, in 1827,
this being the first fraternity to be organized according to the system
at present prevailing. The first sorority was Kappa Alpha Theta,
established at De Pauw in 1870. The sororities now have about 50,000
members in 395 chapters.

A gem representing one of the States is often set in a talismanic ring.
The following is a list of the stones of the various States in the
United States,--a precious or semi-precious stone having been found in
every State:

Alabama Beryl
Arizona Turquoise
Arkansas Diamond
California Kunzite
Colorado Aquamarine
Connecticut Beryl
Delaware Pearl
Florida Chalcedony
Georgia Ruby
Idaho Opal
Illinois Pearl
Indiana Pearl
Iowa Fossil Coral
Kansas Chalcedony
Kentucky Pearl
Louisiana Chalcedony
Maine Topaz
Maryland Orthoclase
Massachusetts Beryl
Michigan Agate
Minnesota Chlorastrolite or Agate
Mississippi Pearl
Missouri Pyrite
Montana Sapphire
Nebraska Chalcedony
Nevada Gold Quartz
New Hampshire Garnet
New Jersey Prehnite
New Mexico Garnet or Peridot
New York Beryl
North Carolina Emerald
North Dakota Agate
Ohio Chalcedony
Oklahoma Smoky Quartz
Oregon Agate
Pennsylvania Sunstone or Moonstone
Rhode Island Amethyst
South Carolina Beryl
South Dakota Agate
Tennessee Pearl
Texas Agate
Utah Topaz
Vermont Beryl
Virginia Spessartite
Washington Agate
West Virginia Rock-crystal
Wisconsin Pearl
Wyoming Moss Agate

For fuller information concerning natal stones, stones of
the month, stones of the day, stones of the week, stones of
sentiment, stones for posy rings, for wedding anniversaries and
similar occasions, see George Frederick Kunz, “The Curious Lore
of Precious Stones,” J. B. Lippincott Company, Philadelphia and
London, 1913, xiv + 406 pp., 58 pl. (8 in color), many text cuts.

VIII

RINGS OF HEALING

Closely allied with the magic rings, so closely indeed that it is often
difficult to establish a satisfactory distinction between them, are the
rings of healing, those to which were ascribed special and peculiar
curative powers. In some instances this was due to a legend connected
with a particular ring or with the prototype of a class of rings; at
other times the therapeutic virtue was believed to result from the
inscription of certain letters or words. In other cases, again, the
belief arose from the form given to the ring.

In the course of his eleventh consulate, Augustus was attacked by a
serious illness. None of the remedies prescribed for him were of any
avail, until finally he was relieved by following the directions of
Antonius Musa, who recommended cold baths and cold drinks. As a reward
Musa was granted the privilege of wearing gold rings, and also received
a large gift of money from the grateful emperor.[548] Although this
ring was not in itself a cause of healing it was certainly the memorial
of a successful cure.

A strange remedy for sneezing or hiccoughing, recommended by Pliny,
was to transfer a ring from one of the fingers of the left hand to the
middle finger of the right hand.[549] This prescription is copied from
Pliny by the physician Marcellus Empiricus[550] who says, however,
that a ring should be put on the middle finger of the _left_
hand, adding that the cure was immediate. Probably the explanation is
to be found in the fact that rings were rarely worn by the Romans on
the middle finger, and hence the unusual sensation produced by placing
a ring on this finger operated to check the nervous spasm causing
the sneezes or hiccoughs. It is well known that any nervous shock,
sometimes a very slight one, will suffice to cure such spasms; indeed,
Pliny also advises the immersion of the hand in very hot water.

Since lizards were believed to recover their sight by natural means
after they had been blinded, this fancy led to the use of a strange
method for procuring remedial rings. A blinded lizard was put into
a glass vessel, in which iron or gold rings were also placed. When
it became apparent that the creature had regained its sight, the
rings were taken out and used for the cure of weak and weeping eyes.
Something of the natural force that operated to restore the lizard’s
vision was supposed to communicate itself to the rings.[551]

In a treatise incorrectly attributed to the Roman physician Galen (“De
incantatione”), the statement is made that the wearing of a ring set
with a sard weighing twenty grains will ensure deep and tranquil sleep
and give protection against bad dreams or fearful “visions of the
night.” For nervous derangement, often a cause of nightmare, Marcellus
Empiricus, who practised medicine in the Roman world of the sixth
century A.D., recommended a finger ring made out of the hoof
of a rhinoceros, asserting that any patient suffering from “obstruction
of the nerves” would surely experience relief by wearing such a ring.
On the other hand a ring turned out of rhinoceros horn was supposed to
have efficacy against poison and spasms.[552]

As a cure for bilious or intestinal troubles, the physician, Alexander
Trallianus (sixth century A.D.) recommends an iron ring with
an octagonal _chaton_ on which should be inscribed the words:

Φεύγε, φεύγε, ὶον χολή, ἢ κορδαλος ἑζήτει.

“Fly, fly, wretched bile, the swallow is seeking thee.”[553]

This refers to the belief that the flesh of the swallow was a remedy
for those suffering from colic.

A gold ring, evidently of Byzantine origin, bears on the face, divided
into six segments, an invocation to the saints Cosmas and Damian.
According to Catholic legend these saints were brothers, of Arabian
birth, who practised medicine in Ægae in Cilicia at the end of the
third century. They were regarded as the patron saints of physicians
and were often invoked by those suffering from disease. Hence this
ring probably represents a type common in the Eastern Empire and used
as a talisman for the cure or prevention of various illnesses. We know
that the Byzantines were fervently devoted to three groups of saints,
regarded as physicians, whose festival days were July 1, November 1,
and October 17.[554]

The initial letters of some magic or religious formula believed to
operate as a charm, were engraved on certain rings, as, for example,
the four Hebrew letters א נ ל א or their equivalents in Roman
characters, sometimes disposed as follows:

_a_ | _l_
---+---
_g_ | _a_

This was called the Shield of David and was believed to afford
protection from injury by wounds, fire, etc. The Hebrew letters are the
initials of the four words:

אח נבוד לעולם אלתים

“Thou, God, art mighty for ever.”

A gold ring with a Runic (old Scandinavian) inscription was owned by
the Earl of Aberdeen in 1827. It had evidently been destined for use as
an amulet, the characters reading in translation as follows: “Whether
in fever or in leprosy, let the patient be happy and confident in the
hope of recovery.” On rings for wear as protection from the plague
the favorite inscriptions were ~IESVS~--~MARIA~--~IOSEPH~ and ~IHS
NASARENVS REX IVDEORTUM~.[555] A massive thumb-ring in Mr. Hamper’s
possession bore an old French legend more in accord with true Christian
piety than the inscription we have noted, namely: _Candu plera meleor
cera_, or “When God pleases, things will be better.”

The curiously learned theologian and natural philosopher, Albertus
Magnus (1193–1280), Count of Bollstädt, and Bishop of Ratisbon,
affirmed that he had seen a sapphire set in a ring remove impurities
from the eyes. He had also witnessed the curative effects of the stone
when applied to carbuncles, and declares the common belief that after
operating such a cure a sapphire would lose its virtue, to be entirely
false.[556] As the name carbuncle (or _anthrax_ as Albertus puts
it) was given both to a boil and to ruby or garnet, we have here an
instance among many of the cures by antipathy, the blue stone curing a
red, inflamed tumor.

Should we need proof that in the Middle Ages rings were believed to
have remedial powers, this is offered by a passage in the statutes
of the Hôtel Dieu of Troyes, dated in 1263. Here it is decreed that
the nuns should not be permitted to wear rings set with precious
stones, _except in case of illness_.[557] Probably in this event
the appropriate stone was selected by those versed in this branch of
knowledge, after they had determined, as well as they were able, the
real nature of the disease.

If the owner of a garnet ring who was not an expert in precious
stones wished to assure himself of the genuineness of his garnet, the
following rather troublesome experiment was at his disposal. He was to
disrobe, still wearing his ring, and then to have his body smeared with
honey. This done, he was to lie down where flies or wasps were about.
If in spite of the sweet temptation they failed to light on his body,
this was a proof that the garnet was genuine, an added proof being that
when he took off the garnet ring the insects would hasten to make up
for lost time and suck up the honey.[558]

Jacinth as a ring-setting was said to preserve a traveller from all
perils on his journey and to make him well received everywhere.
Another merit was that he was protected against plague and pestilence,
and would enjoy good sleep.[559] Certainly if this were true, the
traveller could ask for no better amulet to bear about with him on his
trip.

A toadstone set in an open ring, so that the stone could touch the
skin, was thought to give notice of the presence of poison by producing
a sensation of heat in the skin at the point of contact. A ring made
out of narwhal tusk was believed to be an effective antidote to
poisons. Apart from these materials, several precious or semi-precious
stones, such as emeralds, agates, and also amber and coral, were
assumed to be especially sensitive to the approach of poison, so
much so that when worn suspended from the neck or set in rings, they
would lose their natural color, thus giving timely warning to their
wearers.[560]

The earliest notices of cramp rings are from entries made in the reign
of Edward II (1307–1327), recording the Good Friday gifts of coins by
the sovereign to the altar, the metal of which, or else an equivalent
quantity of metal, was to be made up into rings. Although no cramp
ring has been preserved--at least none concerning which there is any
good evidence--it has been considered probable that it was a simple
gold hoop. Its curative power was not connected with any image or
inscription, but solely due to the magic effect of the royal blessing.
Some old wills contain bequests of cramp rings, or what we may assume
to have been such rings. Thus John Baret of Bury St. Edmunds, in his
will dated in 1463, left a “rowund ryng of the Kynges silver,” that is
of the silver coins of the royal offering; another bequest in the same
will is that of a “crampe ryng with blak innamel, and a part of silver
and gilt.” A few years later, in the reign of Henry VIII, Edmund Zee
wills to his niece a “gold ryng with a turkes (turquoise) and a crampe
ryng of gold.”[561]

At his coronation, Edward II of England offered at the high altar of
Westminster Abbey a pound weight of gold, fashioned with “the likeness
of a king holding a ring in his hand, to this was added a golden image
weighing eight ounces (⅔ pound), representing a pilgrim stretching
forth his hand to take the proffered ring.” The offering of a pound of
gold has persisted down to modern times, although the later offerings
have been in the form of plain ingots, while in medieval times the
sovereign would have it formed into the saintly figure or figures to
which he paid particular devotion, as Edward II did to St. Edward the
Confessor.[562]

[Illustration: Massive gold ring engraved with the Wounds of
Christ. A healing talisman; English; Fifteenth Century. Found at
Coventry, 1802

British Museum]

[Illustration: Edward the Confessor bestowing his ring upon
the beggar. From a tile in the Chapter House at Westminster.
Thirteenth Century

British Museum]

[Illustration: The sapphire as an eye-stone. The woman points to
her eye, which the physician is about to relieve by applying a
sapphire ring

Johannis de Cuba, “Ortus Sanitatis,” [Strassburg, 1483], De
lapidibus, cap. cix]

[Illustration: Curious test of the genuineness of a garnet set
in a ring. Should the stone not be an imitation, flies and wasps
will not alight on the wearer’s body, even though it be smeared
with oil

Johannis de Cuba, “Ortus Sanitatis,” [Strassburg, 1483], De
lapidibus, cap. lx]

[Illustration: Jeweller offering rings

Johannis de Cuba, “Ortus Sanitatis,” [Strassburg, 1483], De
lapidibus, cap. lxv]

These so-called “cramp-rings,” long regarded in England as specifics
for the cure of cramps and convulsions, and even of epileptic attacks,
owed their virtue, as has been stated, to the royal blessing. Polydore
Vergil, writing in 1534, in the reign of Henry VIII, asserts that the
original cramp-ring was brought to Edward the Confessor shortly before
his death by some persons who came from Jerusalem. This very ring had
been given by Edward, many years before, to a beggar, who had craved
alms of the King for the love he bore St. John the Evangelist. The
historian appears to regard the return of the ring as a warning to the
King of his approaching death. When Edward was interred in Westminster,
this ring was placed in that church,[563] and it became an object of
great veneration there, for it cured those suffering from paralysis or
epilepsy, if they touched it. From this time, says Polydore Vergil,
the kings of England adopted the practice of consecrating, on Good
Friday, similar rings, which received the name of “cramp-rings” from
their special efficacy.[564] Confirmation of the exercise of this rite
of consecration by Henry VIII after the establishment of the English
Church is given by Andrew Borde, who writes in 1542 as follows: “The
Kynges of Englande doth halowe every yere Crampe rynges the whyche
rynges, worne on ones fynger, dothe helpe them the whyche hath the
Crampe.”[565]

Cramp rings appear to have been consecrated by Henry VIII both before
and after his breach with the Roman Church, for in 1529 Anne Boleyn
wrote to Bishop Gardiner, then in Rome, that she was sending him cramp
rings for himself and certain of his friends.[566] After the death
of Henry, Bishop Gardiner wrote to Ridley that he trusted the young
king (Edward VI) would not neglect to continue the usage. However,
as we have no information that such rings were consecrated during
Edward’s reign (1547–1553), it seems probable that the practice was
discontinued.[567] In the early part of Mary’s reign (1553–1558), a
special Latin service for the consecration of cramp rings was drawn up,
some extracts from which are here translated:[568]

The rings lying in one basin or more, this prayer is to be said
over them: “O God, the creator of all celestial and terrestrial
creations, the restorer of the human race, and the bestower of all
blessings, send Thy Holy Spirit, the Paraclete, from heaven upon
these rings made by the hand of man, and deign to so purify them
by Thy power, that all the corruption of the envious and venomous
serpent being expelled, the metal created by Thee in Thy goodness
may remain untainted by all the stains of the enemy. Through
Christ, our Lord. Amen.”

Benediction: O God, who in every disease hast always shown
miracles of Thy power, and who hast willed that rings should
be a pledge of faith for Judah, a priestly ornament for Aaron,
a symbol of a faithful custodian for Darius, and a remedy for
various diseases in this reign, graciously vouchsafe to sanctify
+ and to bless + these rings; that all who wear them may be
protected from the wiles of Satan and armed with the virtue of a
celestial guardianship; and that they shall neither be menaced
by convulsions nor by danger of epilepsy, but shall find by Thy
succor, alleviation of all manner of diseases. In the name of the
Father +, of the Son +, and of the Holy Spirit +. Amen.

A manuscript owned by the late Cardinal Wiseman described the
ceremonies of the service under this heading: “Certain prayers to be
used by the Quene’s Heighnes in the Consecration of the Cramp-rynges.”
There is also an illuminated design showing Queen Mary as she knelt at
the ceremony, a dish filled with the rings being set on either side
of her. King Philip was also present to take part in the ceremonial,
although the Queen’s share in the consecration must have been regarded
as the principal one; still Philip’s fervent devotion to the church
ritual found expression here as elsewhere, for on entering the chapel
he is said to have crept on his knees along a carpet extending from
the entrance to the place where the rings were to be blessed. Here
a crucifix had been placed on a cushion, and the King, still in a
kneeling attitude, bestowed his royal blessing on the rings. This
intensely devout approach to them was then repeated by Queen Mary and
the ladies who attended her to the chapel.[569]

A talismanic ring especially valuable for a physician is described by
Konrad von Megenberg. This is to be of silver and set with a stone
bearing the figure of a man with a bundle of herbs hanging from his
neck. The wearer is given the power to diagnose diseases, and he will
be able to stanch any hemorrhage, however severe, if he only touch the
affected part with the stone. As a natural result, we learn that the
physician will gain both reputation and honors, and it is related that
Galen, the great Roman medical authority, wore such a ring.[570]

In the “Gesta Romanorum” is a story of a ring endowed with great
remedial powers:

A certain king had three sons and one precious stone. When the
hour of his death had come, he reflected that his sons would
dispute for the possession of the stone. Now he loved one of his
three sons better than the others, wherefore he caused three
similar rings to be made and two glass imitations resembling
the precious stone; he then had the three stones set in their
respective rings. Lest his plan should fail, the father called his
three sons to him, and gave to each the ring destined for him,
giving the best one to the son he most loved. After the father’s
death each of the sons declared that he had the ring with the
precious stone. Hearing this, a sage said: “Let us make a test,
for that ring which can cure disease is the most precious.” The
test was made, and two of the rings had no effect, but that with
the precious stone cured the disease; whence it became manifest
which of the sons had been best loved by his father.[571]

It was this mediæval tale that suggested to the German dramatic poet
and critic, Lessing, the celebrated parable of the three rings, which
he puts into the mouth of Nathan the Sage,[572] in answer to Saladin’s
question as to whether the true religion was Judaism, Christianity
or Mohammedanism. Nathan likens them to the three rings given by the
father to his sons, the secret as to which was the genuine magic ring
being hidden from them. Pursuing the parable, he makes the sons, after
the father’s death, bring their dispute before a court of justice.
The judge having heard the testimony, at first declares that it is
impossible for him to determine which of the rings is the genuine one;
then, after a moment’s thought, he recalls the statement that the
hearts of all will be drawn toward him who has it, and asks which of
the brothers is most loved by the other two. They are honest enough to
confess in turn that each loves himself the best. Thereupon the judge
adjourns the case for a few thousand years, during which the race that
has shown the greatest virtues will become the favored one, and thus
prove that its ring was the true one.

Mediæval superstition did not shrink from the belief that some
magicians had such power over the spirits of evil that they could force
a demon to take up his abiding-place in a ring, and rings of this kind
were thought to be powerful medical amulets. In classic times also
medicine-rings were known and used, one having been given by Augustus
to his son-in-law Agrippa.[573]

It was not uncommon in the Middle Ages for a pharmacist to make an
impression from a signet upon his prescription as a guarantee that it
had been prepared by a trustworthy person. A fine specimen of this
type of ring is one that belonged to a certain Donobertus.[574] It was
found at St. Chamant, dept. Corrèze, in 1867. The material is gold and
the ring was set with an antique carnelian around which is engraved
on the gold bezel a circular inscription signifying “Donobertus has
made this medicine.” The supposition is that, as in so many cases, the
functions of the physician and pharmacist were here exercised by the
same person.[575]

At the trial of Jeanne d’Arc, her judges questioned her closely
regarding certain magic rings she was asserted to have worn. From
the tenor of the questions we can infer that Jeanne was accused of
having used the rings for the cure of diseases and also that they were
believed to have been set with charmed stones.

Interrogated as to whether she had any rings, Jeanne replied: “You
have one of mine; give it back to me.” She added that the Burgundians
had taken away another, and requested that if the judges had the
firstmentioned ring in their possession they should show it to
her. When questioned as to who had given her the ring taken by the
Burgundians, Jeanne answered that she had received it in Domremy,
either from her father or her mother, and that she believed it was
inscribed with the names “Jhesus Maria.” She did not know who had made
the inscription and did not believe there was any stone in the ring.
She strenuously denied ever having cured anyone by means of her rings.
It is characteristic of the simple straightforward way in which Jeanne
refuted the accusation of witchcraft that she charged her judges to
give to the church the ring in their possession.[576]

In 1802 there was found in Coventry Park an ancient gold ring, weighing
1 oz., 13 dwts., 8 grains, and bearing a number of religious designs.
In the central division was depicted Christ rising from the tomb, the
hammer, ladder, sponge and other emblems of the Passion being shown
in the background. In two compartments on either side were graven the
five wounds, with the following Old English legends: “the well of
everlasting lyffe,” “the well of confort,” “the well of gracy,” “the
well of pity,” “the well of merci.” Still existent traces evidenced
that black enamel had been used in the figure of Christ, and red
enamel to picture the wounds and the drops of blood. Inside the hoop
ran the following legend: “Vulnera quinq. dei sunt medicina mei, pia
crux et passio xpi sunt medicina mihi. Jaspar, Melchior, Baltasar,
ananyzapta tetragrammaton.” The whole signifying that the wounds and
Passion of Christ were to serve as remedial agents for the wearer, the
healing virtue of the ring being strengthened by the names of the Three
Kings, by an enigmatic Gnostic epithet, and by the tetragrammaton,
or the four Hebrew letters forming the Ineffable Name. A series of
sixteen mourning rings “of fyne Gold,” bequeathed by Sir Edmond Shaw,
Alderman of London, by his will made about 1487, were “to be graven
with the well of pitie, the well of mercie, and the well of everlasting
life.”[577]

It has been conjectured that the names of the Magi, the “Three
Kings,” Gaspar, Melchior and Balthazar, which nowhere appear in the
Scriptures, may have been originally titles or epithets of Mithras,
signifying respectively “White One,” “King of Light,” and “Lord of
Treasures.”[578] The invocation or inscription of these names was, in
early Christian and mediæval times, believed to have great curative
effect, more especially against epilepsy, and hence they were often
engraved on rings. A number of these may be seen in the British Museum.
Cologne Cathedral has been and still is the great centre of attraction
for all devotees of the Three Kings, for their remains are said to
have been brought there in 1162 from Milan, whither they had been
miraculously conveyed long before from Constantinople.

Medicinal rings were often used in the reign of Elizabeth, and one was
given to this queen by Lord Chancellor Hatton. Writing to Sir Thomas
Smith, under date of September 11, 158-, Hatton says: “I am likewise
bold to recommend my most humble duty to our dear mistress [Queen
Elizabeth] by this letter and ring, which hath the virtue to expell
infectious airs, and is (as it telleth 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.”[579] This rather
coarse flattery would not offend the Virgin Queen, who habitually
indulged in very plain speaking.

A diamond ring said by a faithful courtier to have brought him health
and strength when he was at death’s door, was one sent by King James I
to Thomas Sackvil, Duke of Dorset, High Treasurer both under Elizabeth
and James. When, early in June, 1607, news was brought the king that
his Treasurer was so dangerously ill that his life was despaired of,
he sent him a rich gold ring set with twenty diamonds, five of which
were so disposed as to form a cross. With the ring James sent a special
message, expressing the hope that Sackvil would recover and might
live as long as the diamond in the ring endured. This proof of his
sovereign’s favor called the patient back to life, according to his
own narration.[580]

Convulsions and fits were believed to be cured by rings made of a
silver coin representing the value of a number of smaller pieces of
money, sixpences or even pennies, collected at the church door from
those who had just been present at a communion service. Should this
have taken place on Easter Sunday, the value and efficacy of the
talismanic ring made from the offering were much enhanced. A less
religious source for a silver ring of this kind has been reported. Five
bachelors were to contribute a sixpence apiece, and a bachelor was then
to convey the silver to a blacksmith who was also unmarried and who
was to make the ring. An absolute requisite, however, was that none
of the voluntary contributors should have the slightest idea of the
destination of his sixpence.[581]

For the cure of ulcers, Johannes Agricola advises the wearing of rings
made from solidified quicksilver, during a conjunction of the moon with
the planet Mercury; these rings were to be worn on the side opposite
to that afflicted with the ulcer.[582] This might suggest some vague
idea of the fact that the right hemisphere of the brain controls the
left side of the body, and _vice versa_, although if the effect
of the ring was to be transmitted by reflex action of the brain, the
stimulus must of course, proceed from the afflicted side. It is said
that if a remedial potion were stirred about with the ring finger, the
heart would quickly realize the presence of poison, and would thus give
warning against drinking it; the fourth finger was therefore sometimes
called the “medical finger.”[583]

The idea that the ring possessed a mystic restraining power finds
expression in the curious custom of the Bagobos of the Philippine
Islands, who encircle the wrists and ankles of the dangerously ill
with rings of brass wire, in the belief that these serve to keep the
soul from taking its flight.[584] An analogous, although apparently
contradictory impulse induces the Greek inhabitants of the island of
Scarpanto (Carpathus), near Rhodes, to take off all rings from a dead
person lest the soul should be bound to the body even after death; the
pressure of a ring on the little finger being sufficient to interfere
with the freedom of the spirit.[585] Similar beliefs obtained as to the
secret binding power of knots.

[Illustration: ASTROLABE RING, OF GOLD

Two views, closed and open

Albert Figdor Collection, Vienna]

[Illustration: PHYSICIAN’S RING OF GOLD, WITH MINUTE WATCH FOR
COUNTING THE PULSE-BEATS

Beneath the watch is the maker’s name, Kossek in Prague. The
movement is regulated by a slide at one side; the hole for the
watch key is on the lower side. Enameled leaf-work decoration.
Two views

Albert Figdor Collection, Vienna]

[Illustration:

1. WATCH RING, SET WITH DIAMONDS
2. WATCH RING, SET WITH PEARLS

Showing the dial and the movement of the balance staff Eighteenth
Century]

[Illustration: MODERN WATCH RING

Side and front views]

A ring made from the hoof of a wild ass was supposed to possess
medicinal virtue, and one made from the hoof of a rhinoceros, if
placed on the finger, was believed to cure certain nervous disorders.
A ring of rhinoceros-horn was a still more powerful remedial agent
and its wear was favored in India as an antidote for poisons and to
cure convulsions or spasms.[586] A ring made from the hoof of the elk
possessed similar virtues, and cramps in the legs would be cured if
the afflicted part were merely touched with such a ring.

As to the mode in which the elk-hoof should be used for curative rings
for epilepsy, the old authorities differed, Goclenius affirming that a
piece of the hoof should be set in a ring, while others believed that
the entire ring should be turned out of this material. The proper way
of wearing it was to place it on the fourth finger, so that it could
come in contact with the palm of the hand. The choice of the particular
hoof was also matter for debate, some favoring that of the left hind
foot and others that of the right one. Rings set with teeth of the
sea-horse were recommended by Johann Michaëles, a famous physician of
Leipsic. A ring made of pure silver, of “the moon,” as the astrologers
said, if set in a piece of elk-hoof, under the zodiacal sign of Pisces
and during a favorable conjunction of the planets, would prove a
certain cure for epilepsy and all brain diseases.[587]

The Tyrolean hunters have the same superstitious fancy as to the
talismanic power of an antelope’s tooth set in a ring as is (or was)
held in some other parts of the world regarding elks’ teeth set in
rings. Of the Tyrolean rings, four examples were disposed at the sale
in New York in 1913, of the fine collections of Mr. A. W. Drake.[588]

A gold ring specially designed for a physician’s use in counting
pulse-beats is to be seen in the collection of Dr. Albert Figdor,
Vienna. It is set with a watch, below which, on the bezel, is inscribed
the name of the watchmaker, Kossek in Prague. The aperture for the
insertion of the watch key is on the lower side, and there is a slide
for regulating the movement of the little timepiece.[589]

Among healing rings none might be thought to promise better results
than the “electric rings,” made of an amalgam of copper and some other
metal, which are sold to a considerable extent, their curative power
being supposedly derived from an electric charge, or a generation of
electricity. Whatever good effects may have been observed as a result
of the use of such rings, presumably few would be inclined to deny
that one of the active agents in the cure was the faith of the wearer,
which assuredly would fortify or supplement the beneficial effects
of electric emanations, where the mind was firmly impressed with the
conviction that a curative power existed in the ring.

CHAPTER IX

RING MAKING

The modern methods of ring manufacture in the United States are far
different from those of the past, due to an endeavor to keep pace with
the growth of the country and with an increase in production. Owing
to the introduction of modern systems, great quantities of an article
can now be sold, which, though not preserving the character of the
finest handiwork, yet cost so much less to produce that they can now be
offered at greatly reduced prices.

In the manufacture of the modern ring, there is first prepared a
design, or even a model. The initial process consists in cutting this
object exactly as it will appear when it is finished,--or such parts of
it as are made by measure,--on what is known as a “hub” made of soft
steel. When the design is finally completed, it is hardened by heating
and then by dipping into water, oil or other solution. When the metal
hub has been hardened, it is forced into a mass of soft steel by great
pressure, usually hydraulic, producing a die, as it is termed, on which
all the ornamentation is the reverse of that on the desired object.
This die is then hardened.

The die is placed on the stand of the drop press, the upperweight
strikes it and forces the metal into it; this requires from four or
five to seven or eight operations. Each time the metal is struck it is
annealed, then restruck and again annealed, until the ring is ready
for trimming. This trimming removes all the superfluous metal, and the
ring is then in condition for the jeweller to bend it into a complete
circle.

In the manufacture of many rings, the metal first receives a special
form. The gold plates are blanked and rolled to a definite thickness
according to the pattern of the ring desired, the width being
controlled by screws attached to the rolls themselves. To obtain the
exact width, the measure in which it is placed can be adjusted to cut a
strip of metal from a millimeter, or thinner, up to several inches in
width. It is slid over a roll and two wheels with sharp edges separate
the mass of gold into exactly the desired widths. The gauges are so
exact as in one instance to provide 16 variations to a millimeter,
approximately 1/25 of an inch. Another screw gauge is so delicate that
it can be adjusted to the four-thousandth of an inch.

Each piece is then put in a cutter exactly the outline of the
desired piece, which, for a ring, is usually quite flat. The piece
of metal then drops into a cutting box and a number can be struck
out successively by simply raising the press and allowing the cutter
to come down. The metal is now placed in another roll, which, in
the case of the signet ring, rolls the sides thinner than the head.
When this process is completed the product is put in a gauge measure
which measures the length of the ring from 0.4 to size 13, on Allen’s
standard gauge. The ends of the metal are then cut off so that the
ring is approximately the desired size, and the ends are annealed or
soldered without any further operation.

[Illustration: PRODUCTION OF RINGS WITH PRECIOUS STONE SETTINGS
BY MEANS OF MACHINERY

1, original blank struck from plate of metal. 2, same raised,
with claws pointing upward. 3, same reduced. 4, first strike of a
one-piece ring. 5, second operation. 6, third operation. 7, 8, 9,
10, 11, 12, 13, successive stages in the manufacture of a gallery
for the ring]

[Illustration:

SUCCESSIVE STAGES IN THE FORMATION OF A RING (MACHINE MADE) FROM
THE SHAPED, BENT, UNORNAMENTED BAR TO THE FINISHED RING]

In most cases when striking a signet-ring, the top is not cut out
entirely. The gold backing of the stone is left, and the head of the
ring is struck with a concave space so that when the two sides are
brought down the space will remain flat. For transparent stones, the
top is cut out of the setting entirely. When the rings are finally
completed they are cleaned by what is known as a stripping wheel,
the reverse of a plating wheel, which removes all the fire-markings,
and all the other impurities that exist, leaving the metal clean.

The rings are then polished by rapidly revolving wheels of hair,--at
times, of other materials. After this, the stones are set. If the rings
need engraving, they are then passed to an engraver and are finally
polished, leaving the metal entirely finished.

In former times, and now also, by hand methods one man would frequently
make an entire ring. By modern methods, the ring passes through
the hands of a number of workers: first, the blank-maker, then in
succession the man who operates the drop press, the jeweller, the stone
setter, the engraver, and finally, the polisher.

As to the statistics of ring-making, with the great demand throughout
the United States a single factory has produced 3,000,000 rings a year,
some selling for less than $1.00 each, and on up to $5.00 and $10.00
each; very occasionally for higher prices, up to $50.00 or $60.00.
Recently to fill an order for a chain of popular shops, this factory
turned out 2,000,000 rings to be sold at ten cents apiece. In the
region of Providence, Rhode Island, and the nearby Attleboro, Mass.,
the total value of the annual ring output, which gives employment to
some two thousand persons, is put at $5,000,000. In a factory of the
largest kind, frequently the various parts for making up a ring may be
kept in small boxes, because a stamper, in making an intricate ring, is
able to produce more in one day than a jeweller can finish in a week.
In simple rings, however, the jeweller finishes as many rings as the
stamper can produce in a day.

There is no piece of jewellery that is more generally worn nor whose
possession causes more joy, than a finger ring. And the proper fitting
of a ring for comfort in wearing it, or to prevent its loss, which
frequently would be looked upon almost as a calamity, is something that
can be attained by careful adjustment to the proper size. Many fingers
taper forward. In other fingers, the knuckle is very large and the
third joint much smaller than the knuckle. Where the finger tapers from
the joint at the hand to the tip it is frequently difficult to make a
ring hold properly. But this can be done by wearing a tiny guard ring.
In cases where the finger is much smaller between the third and fourth
joint the ring will turn around, which is not only uncomfortable but
makes the ornaments fail to show properly. This can be prevented by
having the hoop penannular in shape, or by the addition of an internal
spring.

To prevent the rubbing together of two rings worn on the same finger,
and the resulting attrition, which in the lapse of years sometimes
wears down a gold ring until the hoop becomes so thin that it may
crack, a simple device has been patented. This is a narrow circlet
which may be made of ivory or any other suitable material. It has a
thin vertical flange just high enough to interpose between the rings
that are to be kept apart, and two horizontal flanges to pass beneath
the hoops of the rings.

To protect two rings from rubbing against each other, an exceedingly
narrow gold circlet is worn between them. Where there is risk that a
hard stone in one ring will come in contact with a pearl in the other,
or a diamond with any other stone, necessarily softer, one or more very
small beads are welded on that part of the hoop nearest to the setting.
In cases where a treasured ring has worn almost to the thinness of
paper, it is possible to strengthen it by adding gold at either side of
the hoop.

[Illustration: THE “ALLEN RING GAUGE”

Generally used in the United States for measuring accurately the
size of the ring required to fit a given finger]

[Illustration: 1, Engelmann’s ring, finger and millimeter locking
gauge.

2, “Display rings,” in which a succession of precious stones can
be set and tried on the fingers]

The size of the finger is often recorded by what is known as the Allen
gauge, a tapering stick numbered from 1 to size 13 in half sizes. To
this stick is attached a chain, and pendant to the chain is a series
of rings of graduated sizes. When it is decided which ring of the
series best fits the finger, it is slipped on the gauge and its size
ascertained. If size 6 is a little tight and 6½ a trifle loose, this
indicates that 6¼ is the correct size.

In measuring the finger for a ring, by Engelmann’s Ring, Finger
and Millimeter Locking Gauge, the ring is set _over_ the
_outside_ perpendicular ends of the gauge (see plate). These are
then separated to their fullest extent, so that they touch the ring on
both sides. The exact size of the ring is thus indicated on the scale
over the mark on the movable upper part of the right-hand end.

To measure the size of a finger, the ends should be separated
sufficiently to permit the finger to pass through the aperture between
them. They are then to be closed so as to touch lightly--not pinch or
squeeze--the flesh of the finger. When this has been done the ends are
locked, and if the knuckle passes easily through the aperture, the
right size has been found. This is recorded on the scale in the same
way as in the ring measurement. In measuring the finger of either a
child, boy, girl, or woman, who has not a large or high knuckle, a safe
rule is to add a ½ _ring-size_ to that which has been indicated by
the measurement.

The width of the metal ring-shank is ascertained by placing its lower,
centre part between the two inside perpendicular ends, and the exact
dimensions will be made apparent on the millimeter scale. Where the
shank is tapered, the maximum and minimum widths must be taken, and
these must both be stated in ordering a ring.

An unset stone is to be measured in the way just described, maximum and
minimum widths being taken; for this purpose also, only the extreme
pointed ends are to be used; these dimensions should be correctly
stated when the ring is ordered.

To alter a ring to any size, place the lower, centre part of the shank
_over_ the scale and estimate the width of metal to be taken off
or added, respectively, by the millimeter-lines.

Where the proper measuring devices are not attainable, resource may be
had to various simple expedients. For instance, a bit of copper wire
can be used; one end is turned so as to form an eye, and through this
the other end is drawn until the circle fits the finger; the free end
is then twisted to keep it from slipping back. In this way the exact
size of a finger can be obtained. It is also possible to have the wire
notched so as to indicate the standard numbers of rings, or better
still, to have them stamped on a narrow, flat strip of copper or steel
with a slot at one end, through which the other end can be passed and
turned down when the band has closely encircled the finger. Of course,
these simple methods need only be resorted to when the prospective
buyer is ordering a ring by mail or messenger, as jewellers are always
provided with instruments for taking the exact measurement of the
fingers.

A new and practical invention is that of a “display ring,” by means
of which the jeweller can enable anyone who desires to order a ring,
to judge of the effect of various stones when worn as ring settings.
This little device is open at one end, the metal band being flexible
enough to yield to slight pressure applied to both sides. In front,
on either side, are two claws, which open up and grasp the stone when
the pressure is relaxed. Thus one gem after another can be displayed.
Sets of these display-rings are made comprising eighteen different
sizes.[590]

When a ring has become painfully and injuriously tight on a finger,
a simple method and often efficacious, for its removal, is to take
several feet of cotton cord, soak this in soapsuds, glycerine, or oil,
and pass one end of it under the ring, leaving about six inches loosely
hanging down. The other end of the cord is then to be wound tightly
around the finger, beginning close to the ring and continuing over the
middle joint up to the end of the finger. If left on for a while, the
cord compresses the flesh to such an extent that when it is unwound by
pulling at the loose end hanging down from the base of the finger, the
ring will be gradually and painlessly forced off. In very serious cases
it is safest to file through the hoop and bend it open sufficiently
to free the finger. The trifling injury to the ring can easily be
repaired, leaving it in all respects in its original condition.

A ring that fits too tightly may become a source of serious injury to
the wearer in course of time. This applies especially to engagement
or wedding-rings, for many wearers have a sentimental, or even
superstitious disinclination to remove such a ring after it has once
been placed on the finger by the cherished donor. Slight as the effects
appear to be, since the progressive tightening is so very gradual,
there have been cases where the increasing plumpness of a hand has
caused the pressure of the ring to become so intense as to induce an
affection of the arm, rendering it liable to serious trouble in case of
an attack of rheumatism or a severe cold. In some cases, when such a
tight ring has been cut from the hand, the present writer has seen that
the entire finger under the ring was an open wound, occasionally a deep
one.[591]

Throughout Europe--England and the Continent--narrow gold rings are
generally worn, almost invariably of 22-carat gold; among the poorer
classes, the standard falls to 18-carat--never lower. In the United
States the correct wedding ring is a 22-carat ring, but away from the
large cities and among their less prosperous inhabitants 18-carat rings
are worn to a considerable extent. These are often two, three, or four
times the weight of the European 22-carat ring, flatter and sharp on
the edges, thus cutting the finger. Frequently perspiration under the
ring will cause the finger to become sore and infected. The narrow ring
is more rounded on the inside and never infects the finger in any way.

Charges of selling illegally stamped wedding-rings have recently been
preferred in a New York court. The proceedings were instituted under
paragraph 431 of the Penal Law. The marking in one case was “14 Kt.
¹⁄₁₀,” this having been stated to signify that nine-tenths of the
metal was 14-carat gold and one-tenth of some baser metal. The real
meaning, however, appears to be that one-tenth is of 14–carat gold,
the remaining nine-tenths being alloy. The ring was found to weigh 72
grains, and on being tested at the United States Assay Office, the
fineness of the entire metal was determined to be 52/1000, equivalent
to a fineness of but 12½ carats for the one-tenth represented to be
of 14–carat gold. The utmost variation from standard permitted by the
statute is one carat. The quantity of pure gold in such a ring would
only be about 3¾ grains, worth a fraction over 16 cents. The rings were
sold for $3.75 and $4.

An alarm ring, giving the wearer timely notice if its stone setting
should fall out, has recently been invented. Beneath the stone, a
needle traversing the ring is so adjusted to a coiled spring that if
the stone drops out, the spring is released, and the needle-point gives
a slight prick to the wearer’s finger. The idea is ingenious enough
and the ring may find favor among those who value their ring-stones
enough to endure a “sharp reminder” of their loss when this helps their
recovery.[592]

A curious and interesting example of inlaying, is a gold ring owned
by B. G. Fairchild, Esq., of New York. In the flat bezel have been
inserted two winged figures, cut in intaglio on pieces of brown
chalcedony. As there is no margin of stone showing about the figures,
the effect is very striking, the chalcedony appearing to be naturally
embedded in the gold. This is a production of antique art.

In designing a ring the goldsmith must constantly bear in mind that
only the upper part, less than half the circle, will be displayed,
and he should thus carefully avoid regarding the whole ring as an
ornamental object and chasing or adorning the part that will not be
shown. To this end he is advised to model the design in wax on the
circlet itself, rather than to work from a sketch or drawing. If any
plant or other nature form enters into his composition, he should,
where possible, have a specimen before him while he works, so that
whatever modifications or adaptations he may make will not violate
the main lines of the natural type. In making a ring of solid metal,
it is either cast in the desired form, or hammered from a cast. After
the metal has been annealed, the design is sketched on in black
water-color; it is then outlined with a small round-edged tracing-tool
and the ground-work is chiselled away. The design can now be finished
with chasing tools.[593]

The making of finger rings as well as of everything else has been
strongly influenced by machine production. Cloth is machine-made,
pictures are lithographed, lace, macaroni, and even small houses are
now produced with an exactness that was never before possible. But,
unfortunately, with the dominance of the “machine-made” product, the
artistic quality is entirely obliterated. Rings are now made in such
vast quantities that exactness of reproduction is the great aim. Thus
while the initial design may possess a certain measure of originality,
the single ring of the type, one out of thousands or tens of thousands
stamped out of the same model, necessarily lacks that personal touch
which alone can produce a truly artistic object.

Names of the Ring[594] in Various Foreign Languages.

Anglo-Saxon Hringe
Arabic Khatam, maḥbas
Babylonian Shemiru, lulimtu?
Bohemian, Serbo-Croatian Kruh, prsten
Bulgarian Prsten
Chinese Pan-chih, chih huan[595]
Danish Ring
Dutch Ring
French Anneau, bague
Gaelic (Erse) Fainne, failbeagh
German Ring
Greek, ancient Δακτύλιος, δακτυλίδιον
Greek, modern Δακτὐλιδι
Hebrew Tabba’ath, ḥotham
Hungarian (Magyar) Gyürü
Italian Anello
Icelandic Hringr
Irish Fainne
Japanese Yubi no wa
Laos Pawp Mü
Latin Anulus, anellus
Lithuanian Ziedas
Persian Angushtar (ḥaḷḳat)
Polish Piercien, krouzek
Portuguese Annel
Roumanian Inel
Russian Koltsó,[596] pérsten[597]
Ruthenian (Little Russian) Persten
Sanskrit Angulîya, anguli mudra
Serbian Prsten
Siamese New nang (nang pet)
Spanish Sortija, anillo
Sumerian MUR (KHAR)
Swedish Ring
Syriac Tab’â, ḥathmâ
Turkish (Osmanli) Yüsük, halqa
Welsh Modrwy

The following hints as to the proper pronunciation of some of the
rare words in the above list have been kindly furnished by Prof. John
Dyneley Prince, of Columbia University, who has also supplied several
of the names:

In _prsten_ (Bulgarian, Bohemian and Serbo-Croatian), the r has a
peculiar rolling sound with an inherent vowel; this cannot be correctly
reproduced in English spelling. The ci of Polish _piercien_ is
pronounced like the Italian ci (chee). Little Russian (Ruthenian)
and Russian _persten_ means literally “finger-thing.” In the
Lithuanian _ziedas_, the z is pronounced like French j, or our z
and azure. The Hungarian gyürü sounds like dyü-rü; it means something
rolled. The ṭ in Hebrew, Arabic and Syriac is an explosive t unknown in
English; the letter rendered by the sign is a deep, guttural and faucal
exhalation. Irish _fainne_ is pronounced fau-in-nye, and the Welsh
_bodrwy_ is sounded as bod-roo-ee.

The word “ring,” _tabba-ath_, appears once in Genesis (xli: 42),
the ring given by Pharaoh to Joseph; six times in Esther iii: 10, 12;
viii: 2, 8 (bis), 10, the ring of Ahasuerus. In the New Testament the
ring is mentioned once in Luke xv: 22, the ring given the Prodigal
Son; and once in the Epistle of James, ii: 2. The word “rings,” as
finger-rings, occurs in Exodus xxxv: 22, of the offerings of the people
of Israel in the desert; in Numbers xxxi: 50; in Canticles v: 14 (this
is probably to be rendered “rods”),[598] and in Isaiah iii: 21. That
rings should be so rarely alluded to in the Old Testament might seem to
prove that they were not as extensively worn in the land of Israel as
some have assumed. The finest ancient Hebrew signet is said to be one
of the time of Jeroboam II, King of Israel (790–749? B.C.),
found at Megiddo. This is the seal of Shemai, the King’s Minister of
State. It is of jasper and bears the finely engraved figure of a lion.
The form is oval and the seal measures 3.7 by 2.7 cm.[599]

INDEX

Aah-hotep, Queen, signet of, 117

Abbots’ rings, 280

Abbott, Dr., Egyptian collection of, 118

Abbesses’ rings, 280

Aberdeen, Earl of, 339

Achametis, on dreams of rings, 298

Add-a-link ring, 93

Adjustable rings, 93

Adler, Cyrus, viii

Ælian, 32

African rings, 64, 83, 84, 328

Agate, 81, 87, 335

Agincourt, rings found on battlefield of, 165

_Agla_ motto on healing rings, 339

Agricola, Johannes, on healing rings, 351

Ahasuerus, signet of, 116

Ahlstan, Bishop of Sherbourne, ring of, 271

Albert, Prince, 225

Albertus Magnus, on virtues of talismans, 311

Alexander the Great, signet of, 123

Alfonso X, Lapidario of, 304, 305

Alfonso XIII, old usage said to have been observed at marriage of,
213

Alliot, Hector, viii

Amber, 104, 341
entire rings of, 104

Ambrose, St., 128

Amelia, Princess, Memorial ring of, 43

Amenhotep IV (Akhenaten), ring of, 67

American Museum of Natural History, 65

American rings, 17–30, 47, 84, 85, 108

Amethyst, 34, 50, 73, 86, 111, 125, 126, 158, 227, 252, 279, 328,
335

Andalusite, 86

Anglo-Saxon rings, 195
of Bishop Ahlstan, 271
of Ethelswith, 173, 174
of Ethelwulf, 173, 174

Anhalt, princess of, magic ring of, 316, 317

Annay, Sir William d’, ring given to by Richard Cœur-de-Lion, 177

Anne, St., betrothal ring of, 261

Anne of Denmark, 189

Antiochus IV, Epiphanes, signet of, 125

Antoninus Pius, head of, on signet, 140

_Anularius_, a ring-maker, 16

Anuli natalitii, 15

_Anulus pronubus_, 193

Apollonius of Tyana, magic rings of, 296, 325

Aquamarine, 158

Aquinas, St. Thomas, 211

Arabic rings, Mohammed’s seal, 141
with carnelians, 141
mottoes and devices on, 142

Archæological Institute, London, 73

Archers’ rings, 87, 105–108

Aristophanes, of rings, 9

Aristotle, blamed by Plato for wearing rings, 32

Arnulphus, Bishop of Metz, ring of, 269

_Art nouveau_ rings, 87

Artemidora, mummy-case of, 51

Artemidorus, rings in dream-book of, 37

Arundel collection, 171

Arundel, Thomas, keeper of jewels of Edward the Confessor’s shrine,
175

Assyrian and Babylonian rings, 3
ancient contract as to emerald set in one, 4, 5

Assyrian jewellers’ firm, 4

Astle, Thomas, 155

Astrolabe ring, 88

Auckland, Lord, 101

Augustine, St., 299

Augustus, 336, 347
signet of, 130, 131

Aurelian’s seal ring, 133

Austrian rings, 87, 110

Avery, Samuel P., 66

Avitus, Archbishop of Vienne, letter of, describing ring, 266, 267,
277

Aztecs, treasures of the, 19
silversmiths of the, 20
finger-rings of the, 20

Bachaumont, Louis Petit de, 76

Bacon, Francis, on telepathic test with a ring, 326, 327

_Bacula_, little rod for rings, 55

Bagobos of Philippine Islands, superstitions of the, 352

Balas-ruby, 276

Bardel, W., x

Barlow, Hon. Peter T., vii, 153

Barr, Miss Ada M., vii

Barrow, F. H., viii

Beatty, W. Gedney, vii

Beauvoisin, Mlle. de, rings owned by, 76

Becket, St. Thomas à, ring taken from shrine of, 182, 183

Beefsteak Club memorial rings, 47

Benedict XIV, 281

Bequests of signets, 149

Berghem Lodowyck van (Louis de Berquen) cuts diamonds for Charles
the Bold, 215

Béquet, Albert, 59

Berlin Mineralogical Museum, 108

Berlin Royal Museum, 67

Bernard of Clairvaux, St., signet of, 145

Bernhard IV, Margrave of Baden, portrait of, 62

Berteildis, wife of Dagobert I, signet of, 138

Beryl, 134, 158, 252, 334, 335

Besborough collection, 73

Betrothal rings, _see_ wedding rings

Bible, rings mentioned in the, 1, 115, 116, 336

Bibliothèque Nationale, 162

Bibliothèque du Roi (later Bibliothèque Nationale), 139

Bingham, Hiram, viii

Inca rings found by, in Peru, 83

Bishop, Heber R., collection, 55, 105, 106

Bishops’ rings, of Allstan, Bishop of Sherborne, 271
of Arnulphus, Bishop of Metz, 269
of Ebba, Bishop of Rheims, 270
of Bishop of Flambard, 275
of Bishop Geoffroy Rufus, 275
of Archbishop Greenfield, 272
of Bishop Hervée, 273
of Hilary, Bishop of Chichester, 272
Innocent III’s definition of, 273
of Archbishop Parker, 276
of Seffrid, Bishop of Chichester, 272
of Archbishop Sewell, 272
of Archbishop Sigfroi, 274
of Bishop John Stanberry, 275
stolen by Piers Gaveston, 276
set with green tourmalines, 276
of Bishop William of St. Barbara, 275
of Bishop Wykeham, 275
of Wytlesey, Archbishop of Canterbury, 275

Blake, W. W., ix

Blakeslee collection, portraits in, showing ring wearing, 62

Bloodstone, 158, 191, 331

Bohemian garnet wings, 109

Boleyn, Anne, sends “cramp rings,” 343

Boniface IV, mention of pontifical ring in decree of, 267

Boniface VIII, ring found in tomb of, 273
magic ring of, 306

_Bonza_, Buddhist priest, rings made by, 82

Boog, Theodore de, xi

“Book of Thetel,” magic ring described in, 311

Borde, Andrew, on cramp rings, 343

Borgia, Cesare, motto in poison-ring of, 37

Borgia, Lucrezia, rings at betrothal of, 215

Borgias, poison rings of the, 37

Borough, Sir Edward, wins diamond ring at tournament, 181

Bossuet, Jacques Béminge, memorial ring given him by Princess
Henrietta Anne, 45

Boston Museum of Fine Arts, 192

Braddock, Charles S., Jr., ix

Brandon, Thomas, Earl of Suffolk, wins ruby ring at tournament, 181

Brantôme, Pierre de Boudeilles, Seigneux de, 168

Branualdius, 300

Brass rings, 82, 84, 352

Brera gallery, Milan, 203

British Museum, x, 5, 35, 39, 40, 44, 50, 58, 68, 69, 75, 82, 86,
89, 98, 99, 100, 104, 136, 143, 150, 151, 173, 197, 251, 257,
293

Bronze age, rings of the, 2

Bronze rings, 58, 89, 109, 251, 257, 293

Broun, W. H., entire emerald ring, owned by, 103

Brouwer, Bart., entire diamond ring by, 105

Brummagem rings, 113, 114

Burgundian rings, 73

Burmese rings, 82

Butler, Samuel, 194, 222

Buxtorf, Johann, on Hebrew betrothal rings, 203

Byron, Lord, signet owned by, 152

Byzantine rings, 143, 144–146, 161, 197, 256, 338

Cæsar, Julius, signet of, 130

Caius, St., ring of, 261

Caligula, head of, on ring, 133

Cambodian rings, 82

Camden, William, 183

Campbell, Archibald, ring of, 182

Cantacuzene, Emperor, 146

Canute, King, ring found on body of, 179

Caracalla, head of, on signet, 140

Cardinals’ rings, sapphire used for, 276
various stones used for in earlier times, 276
cost of, 277
of Cardinal Farley, 278
in portraits, 278

Carlomans’ signet ring, 140

Carlyle, Thomas, 324

Carnelian, 6, 125, 141, 158, 269, 318, 323, 328
entire rings of, 100

Casa Grande, Arizona, rings found at, 17

Casimir, John, Count Palatine, medal of, with figure of diamond
ring, 171

Catharine von Bora, ring commemorating her marriage to Martin
Luther, 216, 217

Cathoir the Great, called “Hero of Rings,” 191

Cat’s-eye, 78

“Celestial stones” in rings, 330

“Cent Nouvelles Nouvelles,” story of a ring in, 215

Cesnola collection of Cypriote antiquities, 119

Chalcedony, 74, 124, 158, 159, 334, 335, 363
entire rings of, 100, 258–261

Charioteer’s ring, 33

Charlemagne, ring of, 300–302

Charles the Bald, letter of, to Pope Nicholas I, 270

Charles I, 153, 189, 190
memorial rings of, 41
signet of, as Prince of Wales, 156, 157
as king, 157

Charles II, sealed with diamond signet of his father, 157
gave ring to Judge Jeffreys, 191

Charles IV, Emperor, 259

Charles V, of France, signet of, 146

Charles the Bald, letter of, to Pope Nicholas I, 270

Charlotte, Queen, 151

Chase, William M., x

Chaves Pass, Arizona, ring found at, 17

Chifflet, Jean Jacques, 139

Childeris I, signet of, 138–140

Chindaswinthe, Visigoth sovereign, promulgated law regarding
betrothal rings, 200

Chinese rings, 81, 85, 105–108, 248, 319–321

Chlorastrolite, 335

Chrysoberyl, 86

Chrysolite, _see_ peridot

Chrysoprase, 34

Chrysostom, St. John, on ring inscriptions, 135

Church, Sir Arthur Herbert, 86

Church collection, 86

Cicero, tells how Verres had rings made, 16
of ring seized by Verres, 127

Cigarette ring, 94

Clemens Alexandrinus, 14, 121, 133, 199, 296

Clement IV, Pope, “Fisherman’s Ring” of, 263

Clement V, Pope, stones used in ecclesiastical rings in time of,
276

Clement VIII, Pope, 263

Cleopatra, signet of, 126

Cleveland Museum of Art, 90

Clotaire II, coin of, set in ring, 162

Clothilda, receives betrothal ring from Clovis I in 493 A.D., 201,
202

Clovis I of France, on bishops’ signets, 137

Coats-of-arms on signet rings, 149

Coello, Claudio, 59

Coins set in rings, 162

Coke, Sir Edward, historic ring bequeathed by, 189
diamond ring of, 189

College of Arms, London, gift to, by Duke of Norfolk, 181

Color of stones in bishops’ rings, significance of, 274, 275

Columbus, Knights of, rings of, 332

Commodus, signet of, 131

“Communion rings,” 351

Comnenus, Alexis, signet-ring of, 144

Comnenus, John, 144

“Cone-shell” rings, 17

Congo, King of the, thumb ring of, 64

_Conlegium anularium_, 16

Constantius II, signet of, 161

Copper rings, 19, 20, 22, 84, 328

Coral, 63, 78, 341

Cordierite, 86

Corean rings, 107

Coronation ring, English, 174, 282, 283

Coronation ring, French, 284

Cortés, Fernan, 19

Corundum, 86

Cosmas and Damian, Sts., effigies of, on a healing ring, 338

“Cramp rings,” 341–345

Cranach, Lucas, 61

Crisp collection of memorial rings, 43

Culin, Stewart, vii

Curry, James, bought Henrietta Maria’s signet, 156

Cushing, Frank H., 21, 22

Cypriote rings, 6, 7, 111, 119, 120

Cyrianides, magic rings described in, 295

_Dactyliotheca_, 53, 54

Dactylomancy, 299, 308

Daggett, Frank S., viii

Dalhousie, Lord, 103

Dalton, O. M., 39, 150

Damer, Miss Dawson, 225

Daniel, Book of, signet mentioned in, 115

Darius III, signet of, 123

Darnley, Henry, Lord, wedding ring of, 217, 218

Dashur, rings found at, 68

Davenant, Sir William, of a rush-ring, 206

Death, removing of rings in case of, 134

Decade rings, 34

DeForest, Robert W., vii

Deloche, M., 10, 58, 140

Dial rings, 39, 87

Diamond, 78, 89, 98, 99, 101, 167–170, 181, 183, 189, 215, 227,
235, 252, 278, 288, 334
entire rings of, 105

Divining with rings, 299

Divorce rings, 235

Dixon, Joseph K., viii

Doctors’ rings, 266

Domenico dei Camei, gem engraver, 148

Domna, Julia, wife of Septimius Severus, causes Philostratus to
write life of Apollonius of Tyana, 296

Drake, Alexander Wilson, 85, 86, 217

Drake, Mrs. Alexander W., vii, 217

Drake collection, 85, 353

Dreams about rings, 37, 104, 132, 298

Dryden, John, 312
on gimmal ring, 219

Durant, Guillaume, Bishop of Mende, on spiritual meaning of wedding
ring, 207

Dutt, Dasmodar, Hindu portraitist, 63

Dynamite rings, 110

Ebbo, Bishop of Rheims, ring sent to, by mother of Charles the
Bald, 270

Ecgberht, Archbishop of York, 267

Eden, Hon. Miss, 101

Edward the Confessor’s ring, 162, 174, 176, 342, 343

Edward I, tomb of, opened in 1774, 179

Edward II, 276

Edward III, 315
gives ruby ring, 180

Edward IV, decree of, against spurious rings, 114

Edward VI, 343
marriage service in prayer-book of, 204

Eglamore, Sir, mediæval romance, magic ring in, 310

Egmont’s poison ring, 38, 39

Egyptian rings, 1, 5, 6, 51, 67, 68, 96, 117, 118, 249

Eisen, Gustavus A., vii

Eleanora, Empress of Germany, ring of, 168

Eleazar’s magic ring, 294, 295

Electric curative rings, 354

Electrum rings, 110, 314

Elizabeth, Queen, 49, 149, 152, 162, 169, 219
diamond ring given by, to Mary, Queen of Scots, 183, 184
ring given by, to Essex, 186–188
portrait of, showing ring, 188
healing ring sent to, 350

Elk-hoof, rings made from, 352, 353

Elks, Benevolent Protective Order of, rings of, 332

Emblems, Christian, on rings, 253–255

Emerald, 4, 5, 34, 50, 74, 78, 89, 106, 121, 176, 178, 180, 181,
211, 227, 252, 274, 275, 276, 282, 305, 328, 335
entire rings of, 101–103

Emnechildis, wife of Childeric II, signet of, 138

Engagement rings, 227, 230, 233–235, 237

English rings, 36, 41–45, 47, 48, 64, 74, 85, 113, 129, 144,
149–157, 169, 173–192, 211, 219, 221, 222, 224, 231, 269–272,
274, 282–284, 286, 287, 349

Enkomi, Cyprus, rings found in tombs at, 5, 6

Enstatite, 86

Eskimos, do not favor rings, 31

Essex, Earl of, wins diamond ring at tournament, 181

Essex ring, 162

Essex, William Devereux, Earl of, story of ring sent him by
Elizabeth, 186–188

Estampes, Anne de Pisseleu, Duchesse d’, favorite of Francis I, 168

Esther, book of, signet mentioned in, 116

Ethelswith, ring of, 173, 174

Ethelwulf, ring of, 173, 174

Etruscan rings, 68, 69

Eugene III, Pope, 144

Eugene IV, Pope, 259

Evans, Sir John, 209

Evdokim, Archbishop, 282

Evil eye, rings as charms against, 236, 293

Faber, Conrad, portrait by, 148

Fairbanks, Arthur, viii

Fairchild, B. G., 363

Farley, Cardinal, ring of, 278

Faustina the elder, head of, in entire sapphire ring, 99

_Fede_, Italian designation of betrothal ring, 209

_Fei-tsui_ jade, 107

Fenton, Edward, on the turquoise, 220

Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago, 81

Figdor, Albert, x, 89, 167

Figdor (Dr. Albert) collection, 45, 89, 167, 210, 253

Filipino rings, 83, 352

Filippo Maria, Duke of Milan, 259

Finger on which betrothal or wedding ring is placed, 194–197, 203,
215, 222

Fish symbol (Christian), 255

“Fisherman’s Ring,” 262–265

Fitzherbert, Mrs., ring of, with portrait of George IV, 224

Flambard, Bishop, ring of, 275

Fletcher, John, allusion of, to rush-rings, 206

Fortnum, Drury, 153, 154, 156

Fossil coral, 334

Francis I, verses written with diamond ring by, 168

Francis II of France, 150

Franklin rings, 77

Franks Bequest collection, 40, 104, 150

Frederick I of Prussia, talismanic ring of, 171, 172

Frederick the Great, 171

Frederick William I of Prussia, 172

Frederick William III of Prussia, 172

French Revolution, rings of, 76

French rings, 45, 47, 75–77, 85, 87, 89, 90, 92, 93, 139, 140, 145,
147, 149–151, 164, 168, 170, 173, 179, 201, 211, 212, 215, 273,
348

French soldiers, rings made by, 92, 93

“Friday Ring” of Charles V of France, 164, 165

Friedländer, R, & Sohn, ix

Frölen Gösta, Washington ring owned by, 192

Fuller, Thomas, 227

Galba, signet of, 131

Galen, soporific ring in supposed treatise of, 337

Galleria Carrara, Bergamo, 61

Gallo-Roman rings, 59, 202

Gardiner, Bishop, of “cramp rings,” 343

Garnet, 21, 86, 109, 110, 111, 125, 178, 227, 335
curious test of genuineness of, 340

Gauge, Allen’s Standard, 356

Gauge, Engelmann’s ring, finger and millimeter, 359

Gaveston, Piers, carries off bishops’ rings, 276

Genesis, signet mentioned in, 115

Genlis, Mme. de, “Sapphire Merveilleux” by, 326

Geoffroy Rufus, Bishop, ring of, 275

George I, wedding rings frequently worn on thumb in reign of, 194

George III, 43, 151

George IV, ring of, with portrait of Mrs. Fitzherbert, 224

Germanic Museum, Nuremberg, 210

German rings, 17, 45, 58, 75, 85, 88, 158, 163, 167, 171, 172, 200,
208–210, 216, 221, 227–229, 235, 273, 274, 305

Germans, ancient, rings of, 17

“Gesta Romanorum,” story of ring in, 300, 306, 307, 345, 346

Ghirlandajo’s portrayal of the betrothal of the Virgin, 203

Giardinetti rings, 74

Gilgamesh Epic, porphyry ring mentioned in, 96

Gimmal ring, 218–220

Glasgow, explanation of arms of city of, 216

Glass rings, 109, 144

Glenn, L. C., viii

Goclenius, 353

Gold-plated rings, 109

Gold quartz, 335

Gorius, 33

Gothic rings, 163

Gottheil, Richard, vii

Gratacap, L. P., viii

Greek Church, usage as to wedding rings in, 203, 204

Greek-letter fraternities, rings of, 334

Greek rings, 7–10, 51, 69, 110, 111, 112, 122, 124, 126, 198, 251,
256

Greenfield, Archbishop, ring of, 272

Greer, Right Rev. David H., viii, seal of, 279, 280

Gregory, St., formula as to bishops’ rings in Sacramental of, 267,
268

Gregory XIII, Pope, 281

Gregory XVI, 35

Gregory, Nyassa, St., 256

Gresham, Sir Thomas, wedding ring of, 219

Grien, Hans Baldung, 62

Grimm, Jacob, in betrothal rings in Germany, 207

Grossherzoglich-Hessisches Museum, Darmstadt, 73

Guild of ring-makers in ancient Rome, 16

Gyges, magic ring of, 289–291, 307, 314

Hadrian, value of rings in time of, 98
signet of, 134

Hadrian IV, sends emerald ring to Henry II, when granting
sovereignty of England over Ireland, 176

Hafiz of Shiraz, 289

Hamilton, Lord John, sapphire ring sent to, by Mary, Queen of
Scots, 184

Hammer-Purgstall, Joseph von, 142

Hamper, William, thumb-ring owned by, 339

Han Dynasty, jade rings of, 105

Hannibal, rings taken by, at battle of Cannæ, 11, 12

Hapgood, Mrs. Isabel, viii

Harnham Hill, ring found at, 195

Harrower, Miss Katherine, signet owned by, 160

Hâtshepset, Queen, signet of, 117

Hatton, Lord Chancellor, sends healing ring to Queen Elizabeth, 350

Hatzfeldt, Princess, portrait of, 61

Healing rings, 336–354

Hebrew rings, 85, 115, 134, 213, 214, 252, 253, 338, 366

Helen of Troy, magic ring of, 92, 292

Heliodorus, describes a ring in his “Æthiopica,” 111

Henri II, medal of, with figure of diamond ring, 170

Henry II receives emerald ring from Pope Hadrian IV with grant of
sovereignty over Ireland, 176

Henry III, of England, rings among Crown Jewels of, 55
pawns jewels of Edward the Confessor’s shrine, 175

Henry IV of England, decree of against spurious rings, 114

Henry V of England, 166

Henry VI, of England, serjeants’ rings in time of, 49

Henry VII of England, gives rings as tournament prizes, 181

Henry VIII, 182, 189
portrait of, 59

Henrietta Maria, Queen, signet of, 153–156

Heraclius, Emperor, 141

“Hermit’s stone” in ring, 305

Herrick, Robert, 218

Hervée, Bishop, ring of, 273

Hilary, Bishop, ring of, 272

Hindu rings, 63, 77–80, 85, 101–103, 223, 321

Hirth, Friedrich, viii

“Hnited” (The Welded), mystic ring given King Olaf by Ulf the Red,
323

Hodge, F. W., viii

Hogarth, William, 94

Hohenzollern Museum, Berlin, 224

Holbein, Hans, 59

Holmes, W. H., viii

Hololith rings, 97, 99 sqq.

Homeric epics, rings not mentioned in, 8

Hope, Henry Philip, 325

Horace, 44, 53
on Thynnian rings, 71

Horseshoe-nail rings, 110

Hough, Walter, viii, 24

Humerous mottoes on rings, 221, 222

Hungarian rings, 166, 318

Hunila, Gothic ring of, 163

Hunyady, John, ring story concerning, 166

Huntington, Archer M., 278

Hyalite, 227

Iconographic rings, 74

Imperial Kunstgewerbe Museum, Vienna, 87

Indians, American, rings of, 17–30

Innocent III sends four rings to Richard Cœur de Lion, 178
definition of bishops’ rings by, 273

Iolite, 227

Irene, Empress, wife of Alexis Comnenus, 144

Irish rings, 85, 226
one set with diamonds found near Mallingor, Co. Westmeath, 191

Iron rings, 10, 11, 17, 84, 228, 328

Isaiah on rings of Hebrew women, 65

Isidore of Seville, 52, 70, 195, 267

Isis and Serapis, ring figuring, 57, 70

Isis, rings dedicated to statue of, in Spain, 252

Italian rings, 74, 79, 85, 109, 147, 214, 262–265

Ivory rings, 84, 104, 113, 120, 136

Jacinth, (zircon), 21, 78, 86, 124, 340
healing power of, set in a ring, 340

Jade, 158
ring box of in Bishop Collection, 55
entire rings of, 105–108, 319

Jadeite, 158

Jackson, A. V. Williams, viii, 160

James, Epistle of, wearer of gold ring in, 14

James I, sapphire ring announcing Elizabeth’s death brought to,
188, 189

James IV of Scotland, turquoise ring of, 181, 182

Japanese rings, 82, 85

Jasper, 33, 87, 257
entire ring of, 99

Jastrow, Morris, Jr., viii

Jean Sans-Peur, Duke of Burgundy, ring of, 149

Jeanne d’Arc, rings of, 347, 348

Jeffreys, Judge, ring of, 190, 191

Jehangir Shah, entire emerald ring of, 101
entire ruby ring of, 102

Jemshid, magic ring of, 116

Jeremiah, on the signet ring, 135

Jeroboam II, King of Israel, signet ring from time of, 366

Jet, entire ring of, 108

John, King, jewels of, 55

John II of France, ruby ring of, lost at Poitiers, 164, 165

John V, Paleologus, Emperor, 146

John XXII, Pope, stones used in ecclesiastical rings in time of,
276

John Constans, Elector of Saxony, portrait of, 61

John of Salisbury, 176, 177

Johnson, Dr. Samuel, wedding ring of, 223

Jones, William H., viii

Jonson, Ben, “ring posy” of, 238

Jordan, Agnes, abbess of Bridgetine Convent, ring on sepulchral
image of, 280

Joseph’s ring, 1

Josephus, 132
story of magic ring, 294, 295

Jupiter, ring of priests of, 250

Justinian, Emperor, decree of, regarding rings, 15

Juvenal, 57, 96, 97

Juxon, Bishop, and rings of Charles I, 156

Kalidasa, 321

Karavongu, Prabha, ix

Keith, Minor C., viii

Kentigern, St., promises finding of a wedding ring, 216

Key-shaped rings, 71

Khufu (cheops), ring of priest of his pyramid, 118

King, C. W., 111, 147, 157, 171

Kircher, Athomasius, 213

Knights of Columbus, rings of, 332

Knights of Pythias, rings of, 334

Knot, the, as origin of the ring, 2

Koch, Court Jeweller, ring collection of, 209

Konstantinidis Collection at Nicosia, 6

Kunzite, 334

_Kusa_-grass (Saccharum spontaneum) rings of, among the Hindus, 77

Labouchère, M., 157

Labradorite, 34, 86

Lafayette, ring given to, by Washington, 192

Lalique, René, 87

Lambeccius, 315

Lapidario of Alfonso X, 304, 305, 328

Lapis-lazuli, 50, 63, 96, 117, 158, 171

Lapplanders, magic rings of the, 324

“Latitude and Longitude Ring,” 233

Laufer, Berthold, viii

Layard, Sir Austen Henry, 3

Leaden rings, 112, 328

Leaming, Vice-Chancellor E. B., 192

Legal use of a ring, 36

Legend, Scotch, of loss of a wedding ring, 215, 216

Lentulus, signet of, 127

Leo X, Pope, 264, 269

Leopold I, 315

Lessing G. E., tale of rings in his “Nathan der Weise,” 346, 347

Levesque, M., 147

Leyden Papyrus, formulas for magic rings in, 297, 298

Lichtenau, Countess, anecdote of ring taken by, 172

Lincoln, Waldo, ix, 47

Lindenschmidt, Ludwig, 58

Locomotive Engineers, Brotherhood of, ring of, 332

Londesborough collection, 34, 169, 213, 218, 220, 311

London Archæological Institute, 166

“Lorscher Ring,” 73

Lothaire’s signet, 140

Lotto, Lorenzo, 61

Louis I, signet of, 140

Louis VII, donates ring to shrine of Thomas à Becket, 183

Louis IX, supposed signet ring of, 145

Louis XI, 167

Louis XII, signet of, 147, 148

Louis of Luxembourg, Constable, rings given by, 167

Louisa, Queen of Prussia, betrothal ring of, 224

Louvre Museum, 249

Lovat, Lord, memorial ring of, 44

Lucas, Dr. F. A., viii

Lucian, tale of a magic ring told by, 122

Lucretius, of Samothracius rings, 70

Lucullus, signet of, 130

Luminous ring, 317

Luther, ring commemorating wedding of, 216, 217

Lyly, Sir Peter, 62

“Mabinogian,” magic ring in, 307, 308

McCurdy, George Grant, ix

Machu Picchu, Inca city of refuge, 83

Macrobius, on ring-finger, 52, 194

Mæcenas, signet of, 130

Magic rings, _see_ talismanic

Magnetic iron, 328

“Mahabharata,” rings mentioned in the, 77

Mâharânî of Sikkim, portrait of, 63 (Frontispiece)

Malory, Sir Thomas, 309

Mandeville, Sir John, 315

Manx customs as to rings, 205

Marat, effigy of on ring, 76

Maratta, Carlo, portrait by, 278

Marcellus Empiricus, on cure of hiccoughs by the placing of a ring, 336

Marcina, St., the Younger, ring of, 256

Marcus Aurelius, head of, in signet, 140

Margaret of Anjou, 180, 181

Marguerite de Valois, verses written with diamond ring by, 168

Maria of Austria, portrait of, 59

Marius, wore iron ring at triumph, 10

Mark, St., legend of ring of, 312, 314

Marlborough Collection of Gems, 99

Marston John, rings mentioned in play by, 46

Martial, epigrams of, on rings, 34, 53, 54

Mary of Burgundy, ring of, 167

Mary I of England, 183

Mary, Princess, afterwards Queen, portrait of, 60

Mary, Queen of Scots, 155
ring memorials of, 45, 184–186
portrait of, 60
signet ring of, 149–151, 153
ring given her by Elizabeth, 183, 184
wedding ring of, 217, 218

Masonic rings, 331, 332

Materials of rings, 95–114

Mathias, Emperor of Germany, ring of, 168

Matilda, wife of William the Conqueror, ring found in tomb of, 179

Maurus, Rabonus, Archbishop of Mainz, 268

Maximilian I, Emperor, betrothal ring of, 234, 235

Maximinus, Emperor, thumb ring of, 58, 162

Mazza, B., viii

_Mazzel tob_, inscription on Hebrew betrothal rings, meaning of,
213

Medici, Cosimo dé, _impresa_, with diamond rings, 170

Megenberg, Konrad son, 311

Memorial rings, 40–48

Mendæans of Mesopotamia as silversmiths, 31, 32

Mendoza, Spanish ambassador, ring sent to, by Mary, Queen of Scots,
185

Mercato, Michele, 258

“Merchant of the Ruby,” 180

Merchant’s ring of glass, mentioned in “Piers Plowman,” 144

Mercier, Louis Sebastien, 76

Mercury as bestower of magic rings, 295, 296

Meroë, ring of a queen of, 67

Meronitz, Bohemia, garnets from, 110

Merovingian rings, 58, 72, 73, 137, 138, 257

Meteorites, rings set with peridots from, 330

Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, 51, 80, 105, 119, 188

“Michelangelo’s Signet,” 147

Mills, William C., ix

Min Yonk Ik, Corean prince, jade rings of, 107

Minoan rings, 116, 118

Minos of Crete, ring of, 291, 292

Mint-marks from signets, 129

Mirror rings, Hindu, 79

Mithridates the Great, 54

Mocha-stone, 87

Mohammed’s seal, 141

Moonstone, 335

Moore, Isabel, ix

Moorehead, Warren K., ix, 21, 22

Moose, Loyal Order of, rings of, 332

Morgan, Henri de, 2, 68

Morgan, J. de, 68

Morgan, Octavius, 75

Morse, Edward S., ix

“Morte d’Arthur,” story of magic ring in, 309, 310

Moss-agate, 335

Mostiola, St., has betrothal ring of the Virgin, 259

Mother-of pearl, 81

Mottoes, 209–213, 221, 222, 233, 234, 237–248
formed by initials of stones set in rings, 50, 226

Müller, Peter, on legal significance of giving a ring, 204

Murray, George Gilbert Aimé, 4

Musa, Antonius, granted right to wear gold rings, by Augustus, 336

Museo Nacional, Mexico City, Aztec finger-ring in, 20

Mycenæan rings, 6, 68, 99, 109, 118

Nadir Shah, entire emerald rings of, 101, 102

Nails, horseshoe, rings of, 110, 326

Names of rings in ancient and modern India, 78, 79
in various modern languages, 364–365

“_Naoratna_” (_navaratna_) ring, 78, 321

Napoleon memorial rings, 47, 48

Napoleonic rings, 173

Narwhal tusk, rings of, 341

Natal rings, 90, 91, 328, 329

“Nathan der Weise,” tale of rings in, 346, 347

National Geographic Society, 83

National Hungarian Museum, 16, 318

National Museum at St. Germain-en-Laye, 121

National Museum, Washington, D. C., 85

Navajo Indians, rings of, 22–30

Nelson, Admiral Horatio, memorial rings of, 44

Nero, signet of, 130

New Gallery, London, 225

New York Historical Society, 118

Newall, Edward T., viii

Nibelungen Ring, 303

Nider, Johann, legend of miraculous nun’s ring in his Formicarius,
286

Niello, how made and applied, 271

Nippur, record of emerald ring found at, 4, 5

Noe, Sydney P., viii

Norfolk, Duke of, donates ring of James IV of Scotland, 181

Numa Pompilius, iron rings worn in age of, 10
rings on statues of, 52

Nuns’ rings, 284–286

Ohio State Archæological and Historical Society, 19

Ominous substitution for a wedding ring in a Scotch legend, 226

“Oneirocritica” of Artemidorus, 37

Onyx, 39, 111, 158, 159, 328

Opal, 86, 227, 269, 291

Orders and societies, rings of, 332, 333

Origin of the ring, 1–32

Ostby & Barton Co., ix

Othman, loses Mohammed’s seal, 141

Otto III of Germany, orders disinterment of Charlemagne’s remains,
302

Overbury, Sir Thomas, 189

Ovid, portrait ring of, 57
on a ring gift, 193

Owen, Sir Richard, 196

“Pacifying ring,” 233

Papal rings, 262–265

Passion, healing ring with emblems of the, 348, 349

Pearl, 34, 50, 60, 78, 87, 114, 180, 236, 252, 334, 335
figured on portrait of Queen Mary I of England, 60

Peary, Admiral Robert E., ix

Pectunculas shells, rings made of, 17

Pelissier, Georges, ix

Pembroke, William Herbert, Lord, enjoins in his will that his widow
shall enter order of widowhood, 286

Pepys, Samuel, his bequest of rings to his friends, 41

Perfume rings, 38

Peridot (chrysolite), 21, 86, 227, 335

Persian rings, 2, 80, 103, 116, 122, 123

Perugia, betrothal ring of the Virgin at, 100, 222, 258–261

Peruvian rings, 83

Pesaro, Antonio, 61

Peters, Rev. Dr. John P., viii, 160

Peters, Miss Joan St. Michael, signet owned by, 160

Petrarch, on ruby ring of John II of France, 164

Petrie, William Flinders, ix

Phenacite, 86

Philip II of Spain, ring sent to by Mary, Queen of Scots, 185, 186
at consecration of “cramp rings,” 245

Philostratus, Flavius, 296

Phocus, ring of, 9

Phœnician rings, 68, 121

Physicians’ rings, 345

Piccolomini Collection, 71

Pierce, President, ring given to, 84

Pinakothek, Munich, 62

Pilloy, L., 59

Pipe-stopper ring, 94

Pius II, Pope, ring of, 262

Pius VI, 263, 264

Pius IX, 263, 281

Planetary rings, 296, 327, 328, 351

Plasma, 274

Platinum rings, 229, 230

Plato, blames Aristotle for wearing rings, 32
on ring of Gyges, 290, 291

Plautus, ring mentioned by, in his “Miles Gloriosus,” 193, 194
of sealing up household goods, 133

Pliny, 1, 8, 10, 53, 104, 121, 195, 199, 336

Plotina, wife of Trojan, supposed ring of, 71

Plutarch, 8, 123

Pococke, Bishop, 191

Poison ring, in ancient Rome, 36
of Hannibal, 36
of Demosthenes, 36
Rubbinical, 36
of the Borgias, 37
Egmont’s, 38

Polish rings, 65

Polycrates, ring of, 120–122

Polygnotus, rings in pictures by, 9

Pompey, 54
signet of, 127, 130

Pomphonica, Roman lady, ring of, 33

Pope, Alexander, 112

Porphyry, 96

Portrait rings, 76

Portraits illustrating ring-wearing, 60–64, 148, 152, 188, 278

Portuguese rings, 172, 173, 328, 329

“Posies” for rings, selection of, 237–247

Prado Gallery, Madrid, 60

Prehnite, 335

Prince, John Dyneley, viii, 365

Prometheus, legend as to ring of, 1, 2

Propertius, of a ring burned in a funeral pyre, 134

Protonotaries’ rings, 281

Proverbs, French, regarding rings, 76

Pueblo Bonito, Nev., rings found at, 108

Pueblo ruins of Arizona and New Mexico, rings from, 17

Purposes, special, of ring wearing, 32–50

Puzzle rings, 219

Pyrite, 335

Pythias, Knights of, rings of, 334

Quicksilver rings, 328, 351

Rabbies’ rings, 252, 253

Rafael’s “Sposalizio” in Brera Gallery, Milan, 203

Raleigh, Sir Walter, lines written with diamond ring by, 169

“Ramayana,” rings mentioned in the, 77

Rameses II, ring of, 249

Rameses III, rings in time of, 97

Rathbun, R., ix

Read, Sir Charles Hercules, ix, 58, 99

Reale Galleria d’Arte Antica, Rome, 60

“Regal of France,” large diamond in ornament given by Louis VII to
shrine of St. Thomas à Becket, 183

“Regard Rings,” 227

Reinach, Salomon, 121

Religious use of rings, 249–287

“Repeal Ring,” 50

“Reynard the Fox,” magic ring described in, 303, 304

Rhinoceros horn, healing rings of, 338, 352
hoof rings of, 337

Richard, Cœur de Lion receives four gold rings from Pope Innocent
III, 178

Richard II, memorial rings of, 41
grants coronation Ring to Westminster Abbey, 174
directs that a ring be put on his finger after death, 179

Rienzi, Cola di, wedding ring of, 214

Riker, William, ix

Ring-making, 354–364

Ring-money, 35

Roberts, Oliver A., ix

Robespierre rings, 77

Rock-crystal, 125, 149, 158, 328, 335
entire rings of, 100

Rogers, Austin T., ix

Roman rings, 10, 33, 52–58, 71–73, 85, 97–99, 100, 104, 113, 126,
128, 130–132, 134, 198, 250, 255, 258–261, 293, 337
rules as to wearing those of iron or gold, 10–16

Roosevelt, Miss Alice (Mrs. Longworth) anecdote regarding ring
given to, by Sultan of Sulu, 236, 237

Roscius, Roman actor, right of wearing a ring accorded to, 13

Rossi, Abbot Adamo, 258

Rothschild, Baron Ferdinand, 88

Roty, Oscar, marriage medals of, 232, 233

Royal Collection at Windsor Castle, 147, 156

Rubens’ “Betrothal of Marie de’Medici,” 224

Ruby, 50, 78, 89, 90, 101, 106, 144, 147, 164, 165, 174, 178, 180,
181, 183, 227, 269, 270, 274, 275, 283, 334, 340
entire ring of, 102

Runic inscription on healing ring, 339

Rush-rings, for mock marriages, 206, 207

Russian Church, usage as to wedding rings in, 203, 204

Russian rings, 85, 100, 204

Saadi, ring story in Gulistan of, 163, 164

Sackvil, Thomas, Duke of Dorset, ring given to by James I, 350

Sagan Kerens of S. E. Asia, superstitious use of rings with, 308

“St. Martin’s Ring,” 113, 114

“Sakuntala” of Kalidasa, magic ring in, 321, 322

Salisbury, Richard, Bishop of, on rush-rings, 206

Samothracian rings, 70, 85

Santo Anello, Capella del, 261

“Saphire Merveilleux,” 325, 326

Sapphire, 36, 74, 78, 89, 143, 158, 161, 176, 178, 179, 184, 188,
189, 227, 269, 270, 273, 274, 275, 276, 277, 278, 325, 331,
335, 339

Sard, 158, 159, 337

Sardonyx, 96, 121, 125, 159

Sarum Rite, order of matrimony in the, 196, 197

Sassanian rings, 85, 161

Saxon’s Lode, thumb ring found at, 64

_Scalæ anulariæ_ in Rome, where ring-dealers sold their wares, 16

Scandinavian rings, 323, 324, 339

Scaraboid rings, 51

Scaurus, Emilius, _dactyliotheca_ of, 54

Scheibel, Lieut., ring found by, 300

Schley, Mrs. Annie R., viii

Schneider, Hofrat, 172

Scipio Africanus, signet of, 129

Seffrid, Bishop, ring of, 272

Seleucus I, Nicator, signet of, 124
magic ring of, 293

Senlis, Pierre Bishop of, formula for dedicating nun’s rings in his
pontifical, 285

Serapis and Isis, ring figuring, 57, 70
head of Serapis on signet, 140

Serjeants’ rings, 48, 50

Serpent rings, 72, 78, 91, 92

Servius Tullius, rings in statues of, 52

Sewall, Archbishop, ring of, 272

Shakespeare, 40, 46, 152, 166, 207, 220, 221, 247, 310, 317
bequest of rings to his friends, 41
signet of, 151

Shashank I (Shishak), ring of, 117

Shaw, Sir Edmund, mourning rings bequeathed by, 349

Shell rings, 17, 18, 21

Shemai, signet ring of, 366

“Shield of David” on healing rings, 339

Shook, Sheridan, amethyst ring worn by, 85

Shujah, Shah, entire emerald ring given by, to British East India
Company, 101
to Runjit Singh, 102

Shylock’s turquoise, 220

Siamese rings, 81

Sigfroi, Archbishop, ring of, 274

Sight, restoration of, by rings, 337

Sigismond Augustus of Poland, decree of, as to Hebrew rings, 65

Signet ring or rings
of Queen Aah-hotep, 117
of Ahasuerus, 115
of Alexander the Great, 123
of Amenhotep IV, 67
of Antiochus Epiphanes, 125
of the Arabs, 142
of Augustus, 130, 131
of Aurelian, 133
of St. Bernard de Clairvaux, 144
at baptisms, 136
bequests of, 149
betrothal rings used as, 133
of bishops, 137
owned by Lord Byron, 152
of Julius Cæsar, 130
of Charles I of England, 156
of Charles V of France, 146
of Childeric I, 138–140
of Childeric II’s wife, 138
coats of arms on, 149
of Commodus, 131
of Alexis and John Comnenus, 144
of Constantius II, 161
of Dagobert I’s wife, 138
of Darius, 123
dreams of, 132
of early French Kings, 37, 138
of Galba, 131
of Hadrian, 134
of Queen Hatshepset, 117
diamond, of Queen Henrietta Maria, 153–156
ivory, for sealing amphoræ, 120–122
of priest of Khufu’s pyramid, 118
of Lentulus, 127
of Lothaire, 140
of Louis le Debonnaire, 140
of Louis IX, 145
of Louis XII, 147, 148
of Lucullus, 130
of Mæcenas, 130
of Mary Queen of Scots, 149–151
merchants’, 144
“Michelangelo’s Signet,” 147
of Mohammed, 141
mottoes on, in Arabic, 142
of Nero, 130
in platinum or gold, 158
of Polycrates, 120
of Pompey, 127
of Scipio Africanus, 129
of Seleucus, 124
of Shakespeare, 151
of Shemai, 366
superstitious use of, 122, 123
of Sylla, 130
of Thothmes III, 117
of Tiberius, 134
one stolen by Verres, 126, 127
of Wilhelm I of Germany, 158
of President Wilson, 161
of Xerxes, 122
of Zerubbabbel, 135

Skiff, F. J. V., ix

Sloane, Sir Hans, rings in collection of, 87

Smith, Sir Thomas, 350

Society of Antiquaries, London, 75

Solomon’s ring, 288, 289

Somers, Lt. Robert, ring given to, by Washington, 192

South Kensington Museum, 190, 315

Spanish rings, 85

Spartans, iron rings of, 10

Spencer, Leonard, ix

Spessartite, 335

Sphere, 86

Sphere ring, 88

Spinel, 86

Spodumene, 86

Squirt ring, 148

Staël von Holstein, Baron Erik Magnus, 192

Stanbery, John, Bishop, ring of, 275

Starr, Friedrich, ix

State gems for ring setting, 334, 335

Steevens, George, on Shylock’s turquoise, 220

Stephen Radislav, King of Servia, nuptial ring of, 198

Sterling, John, “Onyx Ring” by, 324, 325

Stewart, Rev. Father William J., viii

Stone, George C., viii

“Stone of Invisibility,” 307

Stone rings, 2, 21

“Stone of Remembrance,” 307

Stoudt, Rev. John Baer, ix

Stratonice, wife of Seleucus I, rings dedicated by, 251

Strickland, Agnes, 184

Suetonius, 134

Suffolk, Countess of, takes vow of widowhood, 287

Suidas, 312

Sulu, Sultan of, pearl ring given by, 236, 237

Sunstone, 335

Superstitious use of seal-rings, 122, 123

Surprise rings, 94

Surrya, Prince, 81

Swivel rings, 94

Sylla, signet of, 130

Symeon, Archbishop of Thessalonica, his description of Byzantine
marriage ceremony about 1400 A. D., 202

Symbols, Christian, 253–255

Syrian rings, 124, 125, 160

Tacitus on Germanic iron rings, 17

Taft, ex-President William H., ix, 161, 236

Talismanic and magic rings
Albertus Magnus on, 311
Apollonius of Tyana’s, 296, 325
Boniface VIII’s, 306
Charlemagne’s, 300–302
Christian, in British Museum, 257
Clemens Alexandrinus on, 296
as charm against the Evil Eye, 236, 293
fortune-telling by means of, 299
of Frederick I of Prussia, 171, 172
of Gesta Romanorum, 300, 306, 345
of Gyges, 289–291
of Helen of Troy, 92, 292
“Hnited” (“The Welded”) given to King Olaf, 323
in the “Mabinogian,” 307
Sir John Mandeville on, 315
St. Mark’s, 312–314
of Minos of Crete, 291, 292
in “Morte d’Arthur,” 309, 310
_naoratna_ ring of Hindus, 78, 321
in Reynard the Fox, 303
“Saphir Merveilleux,” 325
Scandinavian, 323, 339
of Seluecus I, Nicator, 293
in Sir Eglamore, 310
“Ring of Solomon,” 288, 289
in Sterling’s “Onyx Ring,” 324
superstitious use of, by Sagan Karens, 308
Tewfik Pasha’s experience with one, 322, 323
in “Book of Thetel,” 311
one made by Abbot Tritheim, 314
in Wolfdietrich, 305, 306
in Yuain and Gawin, 310

Tanagra, ring from, 112

Tassi, Agosto, engraver of “Michelangelo’s Signet,” 147

Tavernier, Jean Baptiste, 143, 154, 155

Tedyngton, Richard, keeper of jewels of Edward the Confessor’s
shrine, 175

Tertullian on betrothal ring, 199

Tewfik Pasha, experience of, with a magic ring, 322, 323

Theodorus of Samos, engraver of ring of Polycrates, 120

Thomas, Dr. John, Dean of Westminster, 179

Thompson, C. J. S., ix

Thothmes III, ring of, 117

Thumb rings, 58, 87, 105–108, 194, 222

Thynnian rings, 70

Tiberius, seal ring of, removed when he became unconscious, 134

Tibetan, 81

Tin rings, 328

Toad swallowing a serpent, ring designed in form of a, 311

Toadstone, warns of poison when worn in a ring, 341

Toe rings, 78, 80

Topaz, 78, 86, 125, 158, 178, 276, 335

Tourmaline, 86
green (“Brazilian emerald”), used for bishops’ rings in Brazil,
277

Tournament, rings as prizes at a, 181

“Tower Rings,” 169

Trallianus, Alexander, recommends ring as cure for biliousness, 338

_Trauring_, German designation of betrothal ring, 209

Tree, Sir Herbert, x

Trees sealed with rings, 128

Tricolored magic ring, 304

“Trinity Ring,” 75

Tritheim, Abbot of Spandau, magic ring made by, 314

True-lovers’ knot, 2

Tumulty, J. P., ix

Türk, Viennese court jeweller, collection of rings made by, 66

“Turkie,” old name of turquoise, 220

Turquoise, 21, 23, 24, 34, 63, 75, 81, 86, 103, 114, 150, 182, 328,
334

Tyrolean rings, 353

Tyszkiewicz Collection, 121

Ulysses, ring of, 8

United States National Museum, 85

University Galleries, Oxford, 60

University of Pennsylvania, excavations at Nippur by, 4

Valens, Emperor, 299

Vandyke, Anthony, 62

Vergil, Polydore, 342

Verney, Sir Edmund, ring given to, by Charles I, 190

Verres, seal ring stolen by, 126

Victoria, Queen, 156, 225

Victoria and Albert Museum (South Kensington Museum), 217, 269, 271

Virgin, betrothal ring of, at Perugia, 100, 222, 258–261

Visigoths, law of, concerning betrothal rings, 200

Vyse, Colonel, 118

Wada, T., x

Waddesdon Bequest, 88

Wade, Mr. and Mrs. J. Homer, 90

Wales, Prince of, ring among insignia of, made by Welsh gold, 283,
284

Walwyn, Francis, engraver of Henrietta Maria’s diamond signet, 154

Warbeck, Perkin, 180

Ward, William Hayes, ix, 3
anecdote of ring bought by, 3, 4

Washington rings, 77, 191, 192

Watch rings, 40, 87, 353

Watelet, M., 147

Waterton, Edmund, 34, 214

Waterton Collection, 217, 269–271

Wearing of rings, methods of, 50–66

Wedding or betrothal rings
sent by Clovis I, 201
conditional gift of, 205
diamond, in Shakespeare’s Cymbeline, 221
on which finger placed, 194–197, 203, 215, 222
George IV’s with portrait of Mrs. Fitzherbert, 224, 225
in ancient Germany, 208
in modern Germany, 209
gimmal rings as, 218, 219
gold, already used by Romans in 2d. century, 199
gold, surrendered for iron in Germany, 228
in Greek Church, 202–204
of Sir Thomas Gresham, 219
Hebrew use of, 213, 214
of iron, in early Roman times, 199
of Dr. Samuel Johnson, 223
loss of a, Scotch legend regarding, 216
of Queen Louisa of Prussia, 224
commemorating Luther’s marriage, 216, 217
Manx custom as to, 205
of Mary Queen of Scots, 217
for men, 230
mottoes on, 209, 211, 221, 233–248
with names formed by initial letters of precious stones, 227
obligation involved in giving a, 204
ominous substitute for one, in a Scotch legend, 226
of Cola di Rienzi, 214
rush-ring as, 206
Shylock’s turquoise perhaps in betrothal ring, 220
story of a, in “Cent Nouvelles Nouvelles,” 215
turquoise used for in Germany, 221

Week-day gems for ring-setting, 331

Weininger, Leopold, x

Weir, J. Alden, viii

Wellington, Duke of, 224

Welsh gold used for Prince of Wales’ ring, 284

Widowhood,” “Ring of, 286, 287
order of, 286, 287

Wier, J. Alden, on rings in portraits, 64

Wild-ass, healing rings made from hoof of, 352

William the Conqueror, tomb of, at Caen destroyed by Huguenots, 179

William Rufus, ring found in tomb of, 179

William I of Germany, 172
signet of used by William II, 158

William IV, of England, Coronation Ring of, 283

William de St. Barbara, ring of, 275

Wilson, President Woodrow, signet-ring of, vi, 161

Winslow, Isaac, memorial ring of, 47

Winslow, Josiah, 47

Wiseman, Cardinal, manuscript describing Solessing of “cramp
rings,” owned by, 344, 345

Wiser, David, 108

Wissler, Clark, viii

“Wolfdietrich,” story of magic ring in, 305, 306

Wolter, Charlotte, ring of, 90

Woodford, General Sir John, 165

Woodland, Theodore M., viii

Writing with diamond ring, 168–170

Wu Ting Fang, jade rings of, 107, 108

Wykeham, Bishop, ring of, 275

Wyman, Walter C., viii

Wytlesey, Archbishop of Canterbury, ring of, 275

Xerxes, signet of, 122

“Ywaine and Gawin,” romance, magic ring in, 310

Zerubbabel, ring of, 135

Zick, Stephan, ivory ring made by, 75

Zircon (jacinth,) 78, 86, 124, 340

Zodiacal rings, 85, 328, 329

FOOTNOTES:

[1] Grandchild.

[2] Great grandchild.

[3] Signet of the author, reading George F. Kunz, New York. Engraved
upon a dark red sard, in Teheran, Persia, in 1895.

[4] Fossey, “La magie assyrienne,” Paris, 1902, p. 83.

[5] Délégation en Perse, Mémoires publiés sous la direction de M. J. de
Morgan, vol. viii, “Recherches archéologiques,” 3d ser., Paris, 1905,
pp. 321, 322; figured on p. 320.

[6] Communicated by the late Dr. William Hayes Ward.

[7] Communicated by the late Dr. William Hayes Ward.

[8] Hilprecht and Clay, “Business Documents of Murashû Sons of Nippur”:
The Babylonian expedition of the University of Pennsylvania, Series A:
Cuneiform texts, vol. ix, Philadelphia, 1898, p. 30.

[9] F. H. Marshall, “Catalogue of Finger Rings, Greek, Etruscan and
Roman, in the ... British Museum,” London, 1907, pp. 1, 2, 997 (see pl.
xx); also the same author’s Catalogue of the Jewellery Greek, Etruscan
and Roman, in the ... British Museum, London, 1911, p. xvii.

[10] Max Ohnefalsch-Richter, “Kypros, the Bible, and Homer,” London,
1893, vol. i, p. 367, and vol. ii, plate xxxii, fig. 32.

[11] Strena Helbigena, 73; Journal of Hellenic Studies, vol. xxi, p.
155, fig. 33; p. 159, fig. 39; Schliemann Mycenæ and Tiryns, pp. 354,
360.

[12] See F. H. Marshall, _op. cit._, p. 3; rings from Enkomi,
Cyprus.

[13] Pauly’s Real Encyclopädie der Altertumswissenschaft, vol. ix, pt.
i, col: 827; Stuttgart, 1914; Marshall, Catalogue of the Finger Rings,
Greek, Etruscan, and Roman, in the British Museum, London, 1907, No.
574.

[14] Corpus inscriptionum Græcarum, 3137, i, 87 sq.

[15] Le Brun-Dalbanne, “Les Pierres gravées du trésor de la cathédrale
de Troyes,” Paris, 1880, p. 32.

[16] Aristophanes, “Knights,” Act II, sc. 4.

[17] Æliani, “Varia historia,” Lib. I, cap. xxi.

[18] Lib. xxxiii, cap. iv.

[19] _Ibid., loc. cit._

[20] M. Deloche, “Le port des anneaux dans l’antiquité romaine, et dans
les premiers siècles du moyen âge”; extrait des Mémoires de l’Académie
des Inscriptions et Belles Lettres, vol. xxxv, Paris, 1896, pp. 4, 5.

[21] Titi Livii, “Ab urbe condita,” lib. xxiii, cap. xii.

[22] Sat. iii, lines 153–156.

[23] Titi Livii, “Ab urbe condita,” lib. xlii, cap. xvi.

[24] Valerii Maximi, “Factorum et dictorum memorabilium libri IX,” lib.
viii, cap. i.

[25] See Plinii, “Naturalis Historia,” lib. xxxiii, cap. xxiii.

[26] “Naturalis Historia,” lib. xxxiii, cap. xi.

[27] F. H. Marshall, “Catalogue of the Finger Rings, Greek, Etruscan
and Roman,” in the ... British Museum, London, 1907, p. xix, citing
Macrobius, Saturnalia III, 14, 13, and Cicero, Ad. Fam. X, 32, 2.

[28] Clementis Alexandrini, “Pædagogus,” lib. iii, cap. ii.

[29] Beck, “Corpus juris civilis,” vol. ii, pp. 406, 407.

[30] “Cimeliotheca Musei Nationalis Hungarici, sive catalogus
historico-criticus antiquitatum, raritatum, et pretiosorum--eius
instituti,” Budæ, 1825, p. 136.

[31] Corpus inscriptionum Latinarum, vol. i, No. 1107.

[32] _Ibid._, vol. xi, No. 1235.

[33] Suetonii: “Vita Augusti,” 72.

[34] Cicero, “In Verrem,” iv, 25, 26.

[35] Deloche, “Le port des anneaux dans l’antiquité romaine, et dans
les premiers siècles du moyen âge,” Paris, 1896, pp. 46, 47; extrait
des Mémoires de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles Lettres, vol.
xxxv, part ii.

[36] Jesse Walter Fewkes, “Two Summers’ Work in Pueblo Ruins,” Bureau
of American Ethnology, vol. xxii, pt. i, p. 91. Also the same writer’s
“Casa Grande, Arizona,” Bureau of American Ethnology, vol. xxviii, pp.
143, 144; rings figured on pl. lxxv, fig. _A_, and in text cut,
fig. 49.

[37] Communications from Prof. George Grant McCurdy, Curator,
Anthropological Section of Peabody Museum of Natural History, Yale
University, and from Dr. Frank S. Daggett, Director, Museum of History,
Science and Art, Los Angeles, Cal.

[38] Communicated by Dr. William C. Mills, Curator and Librarian of the
Museum.

[39] W. W. Blake, “The Antiquities of Mexico,” New York, 1891, p. 74,
figure.

[40] _Ibid._, p. 73, figures.

[41] Warren K. Moorehead, “Primitive Men in Ohio,” New York, 1892, p.
148; see plate xxvi, p. 152.

[42] Warren K. Moorehead, “Stone Age in North America,” Boston and
New York, 1910, vol. i, p. 440, fig. 385, ring in Collection of B. H.
Young, Louisville, Kentucky.

[43] See the writer’s “Magic of Jewels and Charms,” Philadelphia and
London, 1915, pp. 352, 353; colored plate opp. p. 352.

[44] Warren K. Moorehead, “A Narration of Exploration in New Mexico,
Arizona, Indiana, etc.,” Andover, Mass., 1906, p. 89, fig. 45.

[45] Not named after Charles L. Tiffany.

[46] Communicated by Walter Hough, Acting Head Curator, Dept. of
Anthropology, United States National Museum, Washington, D. C.

[47] Communicated by Joseph K. Dixon, Secretary of the National
American Indian Memorial Association.

[48] The details in this and the following paragraphs are taken from
Washington Matthews, “Navajo Silversmiths,” in the Second Annual Report
of the Bureau of American Ethnology, 1880–1881, Washington, 1881, pp.
171–178.

[49] _Op. cit._, between pp. 174 and 175, plate showing silversmith’s
shop set up near Fort Wingate.

[50] “An Ethnologic Dictionary of the Navaho Language,” published by
the Franciscan Fathers, Saint Michaels, Arizona, 1910, p. 271.

[51] This is a well-printed octavo of 536 pages, with a most
comprehensive index.

[52] _Op. cit._, pp. 283, 284.

[53] Communicated by Admiral Peary in a letter to the author, February
13, 1916.

[54] C. W. King, “Antique Gems,” London, 1860, p. 281; citing Ælian,
iii, 19.

[55] Frederick William Fairholt, “Rambles of an Archæologist,” London,
1871, p. 86, with figure of ring.

[56] J. P. Mariette, “Traité des pierres gravées,” Paris, 1750, vol. i,
p. 18.

[57] See Marshall, “Catalogue of the finger rings, Greek, Etruscan,
and Roman, in the departments of antiquities, British Museum,” London,
1907, p. xxvi, note.

[58] Archæological Journal, London, 1863, vol. xx, p. 75.

[59] London, 1853, p. 6.

[60] O. M. Dalton, “Franks Bequest, Catalogue of the Finger Rings,
Early Christian, Byzantine, Teutonic, Mediæval and Later” (British
Museum), London, 1912, p. 122, No. 792, pl. xi.

[61] X. Barbier de Montault, “Le costume et les usages ecclésiastiques
selon la tradition romaine,” Paris, 1897, vol. i, pp. 176, 177.

[62] Historical Manuscripts Commission, Report of MSS. in various
collections, vol. iv, Dublin, 1907, p. 59.

[63] Plinii, Hist. Nat., lib. xxxiii, cap. xxv.

[64] “Neuhebräisches und Chaldäisches Wörterbuch,” by Jacob Levy,
Leipzig, 1879, vol. ii, p. 139, s. v. tabba’ath.

[65] Artemidorus, “Oneirocritica,” ii, 5.

[66] Davenport, “Jewelry,” Chicago, 1908, pp. 127, 128.

[67] Frederick William Fairholt, “Rambles of an Artist,” London, n. d.
(1865?), p. 144, fig. 177.

[68] John Lathrop Motley, “The Rise of the Dutch Republic,” New York,
1856, Vol. iii, pp. 558, 559, citing a curious Dutch pamphlet published
at Leyden in 1582 and consisting of two letters, one from Bruges, dated
July 25, 1582, the other written two days later from Antwerp.

[69] C. J. S. Thompson, “Poison Romance and Poison Mysteries,” London,
n.d., 2d. ed., p. 123.

[70] O. M. Dalton, “Catalogue of the Finger-rings, Early Christian,
Byzantine, Teutonic, Mediæval, and Later [British Museum],” London,
1912, p. lv.

[71] O. M. Dalton, “Catalogue of the Finger Rings, Early Christian,
Byzantine, Mediæval and Later,” bequeathed by Sir Augustus Wollaston
Franks (British Museum), London, 1912, p. 243, No. 1698, pl. xxiii.

[72] O. M. Dalton, “Franks Bequest, Catalogue of the Finger Rings,
Early Christian, Byzantine, Teutonic, Mediæval and Later” (British
Museum), London, 1912, p. 245, No. 1708, pl. xxiii.

[73] “Memorial Rings, Charles the Second to William the Fourth, in the
Possession of Frederick Arthur Crisp,” privately printed (London). The
data in this and succeeding paragraphs treating of memorial rings, are
(unless otherwise noted) derived from this valuable and interesting
work.

[74] Crisp Collection, No. 334, p. 115.

[75] No. 632, p. 197.

[76] Crisp Collection, No. 981, p. 317.

[77] No. 165, p. 69.

[78] Notes and Queries, 11th ser., No. 311, December 11, 1915, p. 469.

[79] A. E. Cropper, “Some Notes On Three Classes or Types of Rings,” in
The Connoisseur, London, vol. xix, p. 184, September to December, 1907.

[80] Communicated by L. Weininger, of Vienna.

[81] O. M. Dalton, “Catalogue of the Finger Rings, Early Christian,
Byzantine, Teutonic, Mediæval and Later,” bequeathed by Sir Augustus
Wollaston Franks, K.C.B. (British Museum, London, 1912, p. xxxiii,
footnote.)

[82] O. M. Dalton, “Franks Bequest, Catalogue of the Finger Rings,
Early Christian, Byzantine, Teutonic, Mediæval, and Later [British
Museum],” London, 1912, p. 204, No. 1417.

[83] Communicated by Waldo Lincoln, the owner of the ring.

[84] O. M. Dalton: “Franks Bequest, Catalogue of the Finger Rings,
Early Christian, Byzantine, Teutonic, Mediæval and Later [British
Museum],” London, 1912, p. 232, No. 1628.

[85] Szendrei, “Catalogue de la collection de bagues de Mme. de
Tarnóczy,” Paris, 1889, pp. 142, 143.

[86] Charles Edwards, “The History and Poetry of Finger-Rings,” New
York, 1855, pp. 86–90.

[87] Hon. R. C. Neville (4th baron Braybrooke), “The Romance of the
Ring, or the History and Antiquity of Finger Rings,” Saffron Walden,
1856, pp. 25, 26.

[88] Londesborough Collection: Catalogue of a collection of ancient and
mediæval rings and personal ornaments, London, 1853, p. 7. Privately
printed.

[89] Compte rendu de la Commission Arch. de St. Pétersbourg, 1864, p.
182.

[90] Macrobii, “Saturnalia,” Lipsiæ, 1868, p. 446, lib. vii, cap. 13.

[91] “Historia Naturalis,” liber xxxiii, 24.

[92] Sancti Isidori Hispalensis Episcopi, “Opera Omnis,” vol. iv, col.
702, Etymologiæ, lib. xix, cap. 33, vol. lxxxii of Migne’s Patrologia
Latina, Paris, 1850.

[93] “Historia Naturalis,” lib. xxxiii, cap. 6.

[94] Duffield Osborne, “Engraved Gems,” New York, 1912, p. 107.

[95] Plinii, “Naturalis Historia,” lib. xxxvii, cap. 11.

[96] Martialis, “Epigrammata,” xi, 59.

[97] Martial, Bk. XIV, No. cxxiii; from “Martial translated into
English prose,” London, George Bell & Sons, 1897.

[98] Hardy, “Rotuli litterarum patentium in tursi Londinensi
asseverati,” London, 1835, vol. i, pt. i, p. 55.

[99] Rymer, “Fœdera,” London, 1727, vol. i, pp. 878, 879.

[100] _Op. cit._, vol. ii, pp. 249, 250, No. 760, illustration.

[101] Schaumi, “De annulis,” Francofurti, 1620, cap. ix.

[102] Col. T. C. Hendley, “Indian Jewellery,” London, 1909, p. 79.
Journal of Indian Art and Industry.

[103] Luciani, “Opera Omnia,” Paris, 1615, p. 712.

[104] Juvenal Sat. I, ll, 26–30.

[105] Schaumi, “De annulis,” Francofurti, 1620, cap. iv.

[106] Tristia, Lib. i, el. vii.

[107] Julii Capitolini, “Maximini duo,” cap. vi; Scriptores hist.
August., vol. ii, p. 7.

[108] Deloche, “Le port des anneaux dans l’antiquité et dans les
premiers siècles du moyen âge,” pp. 61–63.

[109] O. M. Dalton, “Catalogue of the Finger Rings, Early Christian,
Byzantine, Teutonic, Mediæval and Later, bequeathed by Sir Augustus
Wollaston Franks, K.C.B. (British Museum),” London, 1912, pp. xxv,
xxvii, 1, figs. 6, 15.

[110] Berthold Laufer, “Notes on Turquoise in the East,” Field Museum
of Natural History, Pub. 169, Anthrop. Ser., vol. xiii, No. 1, plate 1;
Chicago, July, 1913.

[111] Communicated by J. Alden Weir, N.A., in letter of March 15, 1916.

[112] Journal of Archæology, vol. iii, p. 268.

[113] John Ogilby, Africa, London, 1671, p. 559.

[114] Vogelstein and Rieger, “Geschichte der Juden in Rom,” vol. i, p.
337.

[115] Sir John Gardner Wilkinson, “Manners and Customs of the Ancient
Egyptians,” vol. iii, p. 373.

[116] F. H. Marshall, “Catalogue of the Finger Rings, Greek, Etruscan,
and Roman, in the Departments of Antiquities, British Museum,” p. 50,
Nos. 278–281; pl. vii, No. 281.

[117] See F. H. Marshall, “Catalogue of the Finger Rings, Greek,
Etruscan, and Roman, in the Departments of Antiquities, British
Museum,” London, 1907, pp. xxxvii-xlix.

[118] Figured in Caylus, “Receuil d’antiquités,” vol. ii, p. 310.

[119] Sancti Isidori Hispalensis Episcopi, “Opera Omnia,” vol. iv, col.
702, Etymologiæ, lib. xix, cap. 32; vol. lxxxii of Migne’s Patrologia
Latina, Paris, 1850.

[120] C. D. E. Fortnum, “Additional Notes on Finger Rings and on Some
Engraved Gems of the Early Christian Period,” Archæological Journal.

[121] Dom Bernard de Montfaucon, “L’Antiquité expliqué,” Paris, 1724,
Suppl., vol. viii, p. 40; pl. xiv, opp. p. 43, two views, side and
front.

[122] M. Deloche: “Étude historique et archéologique sur les anneaux
sigillaires,” Paris, 1900, pp. 225, 226, figs.

[123] Friedrich Henkel, “Der Lorscher Ring,” Trier, 1896.

[124] C. W. King, “Notices of Glyptic Archæology exhibited by
the Archæological Institute in June, 1861,” London (Report from
Archæological Journal), p. 12.

[125] “Catalogue of the Special Exhibition of Works of Art at the
South Kensington Museum, June, 1862,” section 32, “Rings,” by Edmund
Waterton, p. 622.

[126] De Laborde, “Notice des émaux du Musée du Louvre,” 2d Part,
“Documents et Glossaire,” p. 131, s. v. Anel.

[127] Cyril Davenport, “Jewellery,” Chicago, 1908, p. 118.

[128] William Jones, “Finger-Ring Lore,” London, 1877, pp. 487, 488.

[129] T. N. Mukharji, “Art Manufactures of India,” Calcutta, 1888, pp.
105–107.

[130] T. N. Mukharji, “Art Manufactures of India,” pp. 124–128,
Calcutta, 1888.

[131] O. M. Dalton, “Franks Bequest, Catalogue of the Finger Rings,
Early Christian, Byzantine, Teutonic, Mediæval, and Later [British
Museum],” London, 1912, p. 247, fig.

[132] Col. T. H. Hendley, “Indian Jewellery,” Journal of Indian Art and
Industry, vol. xii, pp. 4, 5; 1907–1909. Figs. on plates 6, 7, 8, 15,
18.

[133] _Ibid._, p. 103.

[134] Communicated by Dr. Berthold Laufer, Curator of Anthropology,
Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago.

[135] Communicated by Mr. F. W. Partridge, through Mr. Walter C. Wyman.

[136] O. M. Dalton, “Franks Bequest: Catalogue of the Finger Rings,
Early Christian, Byzantine, Teutonic, Mediæval and Later [British
Museum],” London, 1912, p. 336, No. 2422, Pl. xxx.

[137] Communicated by Dr. T. Wada, of Tokio.

[138] Hiram Bingham, “The Story of Machu Picchu,” in The National
Geographic Magazine, February, 1915, pp. 172–217.

[139] Communicated by Prof. Frederick Starr, of the University of
Chicago.

[140] Charles Edwards, “The History and Poetry of Finger-Rings,” New
York, 1885, pp. 42–44; quoting from Gleason’s Pictorial Newspaper,
December 25, 1852.

[141] Communicated by Dr. Leonard J. Spencer, Curator of the Department
of Mineralogy, British Museum (Nat. Hist.).

[142] Figured in _Journal der Goldschmiede Kunst_, 30 Jahrg., No.
27, Leipzig, July 3, 1909, p. 220.

[143] See also p. 353 of the present work.

[144] Communicated by L. Weininger, of Vienna.

[145] O. M. Dalton, “Catalogue of Finger Rings, Early Christian,
Byzantine, Teutonic, Mediæval and Later [British Museum],” London,
1912, p. 243, No. 1700, Plate xxiii.

[146] Sir Charles Hercules Read, “The Waddesdon Bequest: Catalogue of
the Works of Art Bequeathed to the British Museum by Baron Ferdinand
Rothschild, M.P.,” 1898; London, 1902, p. 94.

[147] O. M. Dalton, “Catalogue of the Finger Rings, Early Christian,
Byzantine, Teutonic, Mediæval, and Later [British Museum],” London,
1912, p. 87, No. 571, fig.

[148] Communicated by L. Weininger, of Vienna.

[149] The Cleveland Museum of Art, Catalogue of the Inaugural
Exhibition, June 6 to September 20, 1916, Cleveland, 1916, p. 68, No.
109.

[150] Frederick William Fairholt, “Rambles of an Artist,” London, n.
d., p. 77, fig. 88. A later edition of this book, dated 1871, bears the
title, “Rambles of an Archæologist.”

[151] From the collection of W. Gedney Beatty, New York City.

[152] “Les bagues des tranchées,” _L’Illustration_, July 3, 1915,
p. 20, with cuts showing soldiers at work and specimens of their rings.

[153] Frederick William Fairholt, “Rambles of an Artist,” London, 1880,
p. 141, fig. 171.

[154] Morris Jastrow, Jr., “The Civilization of Babylonia and Assyria,”
Philadelphia and London, 1915, pp. 459, 460.

[155] Sir J. Gardner Wilkinson, “Manners and Customs of the Ancient
Egyptians,” revised by Samuel Birch, New York, 1879, vol. ii, p. 340,
note by Birch.

[156] Juvenal, sat. vi, 1, 382.

[157] Persius, sat. i, l, 16.

[158] Juvenal, sat. vii, ll, 143, 144.

[159] _Idem_, sat. xiii, ll, 138, 139.

[160] Ulpian, L., 6 _sqq._, De bon. damnat.

[161] F. H. Marshall, “Catalogue of the Finger Rings, Greek, Etruscan
and Roman, in the Departments of Antiquities, British Museum,” London,
1907, pp. 127–129, pl. xx, 778, 785, 790, and text figures 106, 107 on
p. 129.

[162] From a personal letter to the writer, dated February 21, 1916.

[163] C. W. King, “Antique Gems and Rings,” London, 1872, p. 373.

[164] See pp. 222, 258–261 of present work, and plate opposite p. 316
of the writer’s, “The Curious Lore of Precious Stones,” Philadelphia
and London, 1913.

[165] F. H. Marshall, “Catalogue of the Finger Rings, Greek, Etruscan,
and Roman, in the Departments of Antiquities, British Museum,” London,
1907, p. 110, No. 654, pl. xvii.

[166] Bosio, “Roma Sotteranea,” Romæ, 1672, vol. i, p. 211.

[167] Gorlæi, “Dactyliotheca,” 1672, vol. i, p. 211; cited in
“Dictionnaire d’Archéologie Chrétienne et de Liturgie,” Paris, 1907,
vol. ii, col. 2194, figures.

[168] King, “Natural History of Precious Stones,” London, 1870, p. 297.

[169] Blochmann, “Ain-i-Akbari,” Calcutta, 1871, p. 414 and Wills, “The
Land of the Lion and the Sun,” London, 1883, p. 376; cited in Ball, “A
Description of Two Large Spinel Rubies,” Dublin, 1894, p. 390; reprint
from Proc. of the Roy. Ir. Soc., 3d ser., vol. iii, No. 2.

[170] T. H. Hendley, “Indian Jewellery,” _Journal of Indian Art and
Industry_, vol. xii, 1907–1909, p. 166; pl. 141. Gul-Begum, “The
History of Humâyûn,” translated by Annette S. Beveridge, London, 1902,
p. 121, note; Orient Trans. Fund, n. s., vol. i.

[171] Hodder M. Westropp, “A Manual of Precious Stones and Antique
Gems,” London, 1874, p. 120. No. 1627 of British Museum Catalogue
of the Finger Rings, Greek, Etruscan and Roman, in the Dept. of
Antiquities, by F. H. Marshall, London, 1907.

[172] Oneirocritica, lib. ii, cap. 5.

[173] F. H. Marshall, “Catalogue of the Finger Rings, Greek, Etruscan,
and Roman, in the Departments of Antiquities, British Museum,” London,
1907, p. xxxvii; see plate xxiv, Nos. 1621, 1624.

[174] Figured in Leviticus, “Geillustreerde encyclopedie der
diamantnijverheid,” Haarlem, 1907, p. 229.

[175] “The Heber R. Bishop Collection of Jades,” New York, vol. ii, p.
259, illustration.

[176] Science, vol. iv, No. 82, pp. 172, 173, with cut of the ring;
vol. iv, No. 85, pp. 270, 271, communication by Edward S. Morse on
the subject; vol. vi, No. 126, July 3, 1885, reply of George F. Kunz,
citing letter of Lieut. G. C. Foulke, U.S.N., of U. S. Legation at
Seoul, Corea.

[177] Communicated by Stewart Culin, Brooklyn Institute.

[178] Heinrich Fischer, “Nephrit und Jadeit,” Stuttgart, 1880, pp. 39,
334, fig. 52 on page 39.

[179] George H. Pepper, “The Exploration of a Burial Room in Pueblo
Bonito, New Mexico,” Putnam Anniversary Volume, New York, 1909, p. 244,
fig. 7.

[180] F. H. Marshall, “Catalogue of the Finger Rings, Greek, Etruscan
and Roman, in the ... British Museum,” London, 1907, p. xxxii.

[181] A natural or artificial mixture of gold and silver found native
at Vorospotak, Transylvania, and elsewhere, mentioned by Herodotus. The
electros, ἧλεκτρος, of Homer and Strabo; Pliny, xxxiii, 23; although
this word was most frequently used to designate amber. Varying in
specific gravity from 15.5 to 12.5. The ratio of gold to silver is 1:1.
Specific gravity of gold, 19.33; silver, pure, 10.5; correspond to
35.3 per cent. of silver, gold 64.7 per cent. Pliny states that when
the proportion of silver to gold is 1:4 (20 per cent.), it is called
electra.

[182] Corpus Inscriptionum Atticarum, ii (5), 767 b, 1, 19.

[183] J. H. Marshall, “Catalogue of the Finger Rings, Greek, Etruscan
and Roman, in the ... British Museum,” London, 1907, p. xxxi.

[184] “Heliodorou Aithiopikôn, biblia deka,” Parisiois, 1804, pt. i,
pp. 190–192.

[185] C. W. King, “The Natural History of Precious Stones and Gems,”
London, 1865, p. 64.

[186] F. H. Marshall, “Catalogue of the Finger Rings, Greek, Etruscan,
and Roman, in the Departments of Antiquities, British Museum,” London,
1907, pp. xxxv, xxxvi.

[187] “Cimeliotheca Musei Nationalis Hungarici sive catalogus
historico-criticus antiquitatum raritatum et pretiosorum eius
instituti,” Budæ, 1825, p. 136.

[188] Francis Cohen, “St. Martin’s rings,” Archæologia, vol. xviii, pt.
i, London, 1815, pp. 55, 56.

[189] Communicated by Prof. A. V. Williams Jackson, of Columbia
University, who cites G. B. Browne’s “Literary History of Persia”
(London and New York, 1906), vol. ii, p. 123, note 3, and Louisa Stuart
Costello, “Rose Garden of Persia,” London, 1887, p. 33.

[190] British Museum, Fourth Egyptian Room, No. 201 (Table Case J).

[191] British Museum, Fourth Egyptian Room, No. 202.

[192] British Museum, Fourth Egyptian Room, No. 204.

[193] British Museum, Fourth Egyptian Room, No. 217.

[194] W. M. Flinders Petrie, “A History of Egypt During the XVII and
XVIII Dynasties,” London, 1904, pp. 9, 10.

[195] W. M. Flinders Petrie, “A History of Egypt from the Earliest
Times to the XVI Dynasty,” New York, 1895, p. 42.

[196] New York Historical Society, “Catalogue of Egyptian Antiquities,”
New York, 1915, p. 63; No. 1046, figs. 1, 2 and 3.

[197] Adolph Furtwängler, “Die Antiken Gemmen,” Leipzig and Berlin,
1900, vol. iii, p. 31.

[198] A descriptive atlas of the Cesnola Collection of Cypriote
Antiquities in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, by Louis P. di
Cesnola, vol. iii, pt. i, New York, 1903, pl. xxiv, Nos. 12 and 13.

[199] _Ibid_., pl. xxv, figs. 10 and 12.

[200] Alexander Palma di Cesnola, “Salaminia (Cyprus), The History,
Treasures and Antiquities of Salamis in the Island of Cyprus,” London,
1884, p. 73, figs. 7 and 13 on pl. vii.

[201] Lib. iii, caps. 40–43.

[202] Pædagogus, lib. iii, cap. ii.

[203] Adolf Furtwängler, “Die Antiken Gemmen,” Berlin, 1900, vol. ii,
p. 273, vol. iii, p. 81; see vol. i, plate lxi, No. 11.

[204] Reinach, “Cultes, Mythes et Religions,” Paris, 1906, vol. ii, p.
214.

[205] Duffield Osborne, “Gem Engraving,” New York, 1912, p. 287.

[206] Luciani, “Opera,” vol. iii, Lipsiæ, 1881, pp. 119, 120.
Philopseudes, 37.

[207] Plutarchi, “Vitæ,” vol. ii, Lipsiæ, 1879, p. 32. Timoleon, 31.

[208] “De rebus gestis Alexandri Magni, regis Macedoniæ,” lib. vi, No.
6.

[209] Justini, “Historiarum phillipicarum libri XLIV,” lib. xv, cap. 4.

[210] Adolf Furtwängler, “Die antiken Gemmen,” Leipzig and Berlin,
1900, vol. iii, p. 150.

[211] “Le Cabinet de la Bibliothèque de Sainte Geneviève,” by the Rev.
Father Claude du Molinet, Paris, 1692, p. 29.

[212] “The Natural History, Ancient and Modern, of Precious Stones and
Gems,” London, 1865, pp. 60, 61; Anthology ix, 752; ix, 748.

[213] M. Tullii Ciceronis, “In Verrem, lib. iv,” Oratio nona, cap. 26.

[214] Ciceronis, “In Catilinam,” iii, cap. v.

[215] Georgii Longi, “De annulis signatoriis antiquorum,” Francofurti
et Lipsiæ, 1709, p. 24, citing Plutarch’s life of Pompey.

[216] _Ibid._, p. 40.

[217] _Ibid._, p. 115.

[218] Edward T. Newell, “Historia numorum,” Oxford, 1911, p. 159.

[219] W. J. Andrew, “A Remarkable Hoard of Silver Pennies and
Halfpennies of the Reign of Stephen, found at Sheldon, Derbyshire, in
1867,” in _The British Numismatic Journal_, 1st ser., vol. vii
(1911), pp. 52, 56; see pl. ii, fig. 27.

[220] P. J. Mariette, “Traité des pierre gravées,” Paris, 1750, vol. i,
pp. 23, 24.

[221] P. J. Mariette, “Traité des pierre gravées,” Paris, 1750, vol. i,
p. 20.

[222] Georgii Longi, “De anulis signatoriis antiquorum,” p. 25;
Artemidori, “Oneirocriticon,” lib. v, cap. 32, i, 709.

[223] Josephus, “History of the Jews,” book xix, chap. 2.

[224] Act II, sc. i, ver. 58.

[225] Vopisci, “Divus Aurelianus,” in Scriptores hist. August., vol.
ii, p. 184.

[226] Abbé Barrand, “Des bagues à toutes les époques,” Paris, 1864, p.
177; reprint from _Bulletin Monumental_, vol. xxx.

[227] Plinii, “Naturalis Historia,” lib. xxxiii.

[228] Suetonii, “Vita Cæsarum,” Tiberius.

[229] Lib. iv, No. vii.

[230] Albert G. Mackey, “The Book of the Chapter: or Monitorial
Instructions in the Degrees of Mark, Past and Most Excellent Master and
the Royal Arch,” New York, 1858, p. 128.

[231] “Le Cabinet de la Bibliothèque de Sainte Geneviève,” by the Rev.
Father Claude du Molinet, Paris, 1692, p. 3, pl. 8, fig. 5, impression
of seal; the letters are rather irregularly disposed.

[232] Clementis Alexandrini, “Pædagogus,” lib. iii, cap. ii.

[233] O. M. Dalton, “Franks Bequest, Catalogue of Finger Rings, Early
Christian, Byzantine, Teutonic, Mediæval and Later (British Museum),”
London, 1912, p. 120, No. 778.

[234] SS. Zenonis et Optati, “Opera omnia,” in Migne’s Patrologia
Latina, vol. xi, Paris, 1845; S. Optati, “De schismate Donatistiarum,”
lib. i, cap. 10, note.

[235] Philippi Labbæi and Cossarti, “Sacrosancta concilia,” vol. iv,
col. 1403.

[236] Deloche, “Le port des anneaux dans l’antiquité romaine, et dans
les premiers siècles du moyen âge,” Paris, 1896, pp. 108, 109; from
Mémoires de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles Lettres, vol. xxxv.

[237] M. Deloche in Revue archéologique, 3d Series, 1886, vol. ii, p.
141 and 1893, vol. i, p. 269.

[238] See also the same writer’s “Étude historique et archéologique sur
les anneaux sigillaires,” Paris, 1900, p. 203, fig. This ring was found
at Laon, dept. Aisne.

[239] “Anastasis Childerici I Francorum regis, sive Thesaurus
sepulchralis Tornaci Nerviorum effossus et commentario illustratus,”
Antverpis, ex officina Plantaniana Balthazaris Moreti, 1655. This is a
quarto of 367 pages, with 27 plates and copper-plate engravings.

[240] Deloche “Anneaux Sigillaires,” Paris, 1900, pp. 192, 193.

[241] C. W. King, “On the Use of Antique Gems in the Middle Ages.”

[242] “Prolégomènes Historiques,” of Ibn. Kaldoun, in Notices et
Extraits des Manuscripts de la Bibliothèque Impériale, vol. xx, pt. i,
pp. 61–62, Paris, 1865.

[243] Burton, “Supplementary Nights,” 1868, vol. v, p. 52.

[244] Hammer-Purgstall, “Abhandlung über die Siegel der Araber, Persen
und Türken,” Denkschriften der Kaiserl. Akad. der Wissenschaften,
Phil.-Hist. Kl., Wien, 1850, p. 29.

[245] _Ibid._, p. 1.

[246] Garzoni, “Piazza Universale,” German transl., Franckfurt am Main,
1641, p. 697.

[247] Jean Baptiste Tavernier, “Relation du Serrail,” Paris, 1702, pp.
480, 481.

[248] O. M. Dalton, “Byzantine Art and Archæology,” Oxford, 1911, p.
540; figs. 319, 320 on p. 537.

[249] Nicetas, “Histoire de l’Empire Grec, Règne de John Comnénus,”
Paris, 1693, p. 7.

[250] P. J. Mariette, “Traité des pierres gravées,” Paris, 1750, vol.
i, p. 21.

[251] “Catalogue of the Special Exhibition of Works of Art at the
South Kensington Museum, June, 1862,” section 32, “Rings,” by Edmund
Waterton, p. 622.

[252] C. W. King, “Antique Gems and Rings,” London, 1872, p. 399.

[253] Jules Labarte, “Dissertation sur l’abandon de la glyptique en
Occident au Moyen Age et sur l’époque de la renaissance de cet art,”
Paris, 1871, pp. 12–18.

[254] Labarte, “Inventaire du mobilier de Charles V,” Paris, 1879, p.
86, No. 555.

[255] Joannis Cantacuzeni, “Historiæ,” vol. i, lib. iii, cap. xlvii.

[256] Migne’s Patrologia Græca, vol. cliii, Paris, 1866.

[257] Emil Hannover in “Politikon” Kjobenhavn, April 10, 1911.

[258] C. Drury Fortnum, “Notes On Some of the Antique and Renaissance
Gems and Jewels in Her Majesty’s Collection at Windsor Castle,” London,
1876, pp. 12, 13; cut double linear size on p. 13.

[259] _Ibid._, p. 15.

[260] O. M. Dalton, “Franks Bequest, Catalogue of the Finger Rings,
Early Christian, Byzantine, Teutonic, Mediæval and Later (British
Museum),” London, 1912, p. xxxi.

[261] “Catalogue of the Special Exhibition of Works of Art at the
South Kensington Museum, June, 1862,” section 32, “Rings,” by Edmund
Waterton, p. 623.

[262] O. M. Dalton, “Catalogue of the Finger Rings, Early Christian,
Byzantine, Teutonic, Mediæval and Later, bequeathed by Sir Augustus
Wollaston Franks, K.C.B. (British Museum),” London, 1912, p. li,
footnote.

[263] Franks Bequest, Catalogue of Finger Rings, Early Christian,
Byzantine, Teutonic, Mediæval and Later (British Museum), London, 1912,
p. 53.

[264] See also Catalogue of the Books, Manuscripts, Works of Art and
Relics, at present exhibited in Shakespeare’s Birthplace, with 61
illustrations, Stratford-upon-Avon, 1910.

[265] Halliwell, “Life of William Shakespeare,” London, 1848, p. 334.

[266] “Catalogue of an Exhibition Illustrative of the Text of
Shakespeare’s Plays,” New York, The Grolier Club, 1916, plate opposite
p. 96, from a mezzotint by G. F. Storm, 1847.

[267] See Archæologia, vol. xlvii, 393, and vol. 1, p. 114.

[268] Vol. xlvii, London, 1883, p. 393. The original document is in the
privy seal books of the Clerk of the Pells, now in the Public Record
Office, No. 11, p. 142.

[269] “Les six voyages de Jean Bapiste Tavernier,” La Haye, 1718, vol.
i, pp. 540, 541.

[270] H. Clifford-Smith, “The King’s Gems and Jewels at Windsor
Castle,” _The Connoisseur_, 1903, vol. v, p. 244.

[271] Fortnum, “Collection at Windsor Castle,” London, 1876, p. 141.

[272] C. Drury Fortnum, “Notes on Some of the Antique and Renaissance
Gems and Jewels in Her Majesty’s Collection at Windsor Castle,” London,
1876, pp. 26, 27.

[273] George Frederick Kunz, “The Etiquette of Gems,” _Saturday
Evening Post_, June 27, 1908, p. 5.

[274] Augusta Huiell Seaman, “The Sapphire Signet,” New York, The
Century Co., 1916.

[275] C. W. King, “The Natural History of Precious Stones,” London,
1870, p. 254; Duffield Osborne, “Engraved Gems,” New York, 1912, p.
293. First published by Ducange, in the seventeenth century.

[276] From letters of Ex-President Taft and of Private Secretary
Tumulty to the author.

[277] Chabouillet, “Catalogue général et raisonné des camées et pierres
gravées de la Bibliothèque Nationale,” Paris, 1858, p. 388, 389; Nos.
2636, 2639.

[278] M. Deloche, “Étude historique et archéologique sur les anneaux
sigillaires et autres des premiers siècles du moyen âge,” Paris, 1900,
pp. 90–92, figure.

[279] “The Gulistân or Rose Garden,” trans. by Edward B. Eastwick,
London, 1880, p. 148.

[280] Francisci Petrarchæ, “De remediis,” Genevæ, 1613, p. 151.

[281] Francisci Petrarchæ, _op. cit._, p. 147.

[282] Labarte, “Inventaire du mobilier de Charles V,” Paris, 1879, p.
83, No. 524.

[283] _Ibid._, p. 80, No. 491.

[284] _Ibid._, p. 16, note; for the ruby of the dukes of Brittany,
see p. 80, No. 492.

[285] Szendrei, “Catalogue de la collection de bagues de Mme.
Tarnóczy,” Paris, 1889, pp. xxvii, xxviii.

[286] Chroniques d’Enguerrand de Monstrelet, Paris, 1596, vol. ii,
“Autres nouvelles chroniques,” f. 55 recto. These “new chronicles” are
from various sources, and were composed by one of the continuators of
Monstrelet’s work.

[287] _Ibid._, f. 78 recto.

[288] Communicated by L. Weininger, of Vienna.

[289] See for original accounts Lettres inédites de la Reine
Marguerite, pt. i; Brantôme, ed. Lalanne, vol. ix, p. 715 and also
Bermier, Hist. de Blois, Paris, 1682, p. 8.

[290] Cyril Davenport, “Jewellery,” Chicago, 1908, p. 126.

[291] Theodore Andrea Cook, “Old Touraine,” New York, 1895, p. 195.

[292] Catalogue of a collection of ancient and mediæval rings and
personal ornaments, London, 1853, p. 15. Privately printed.

[293] Cyril Davenport, “Jewellery,” Chicago, 1908, p. 127.

[294] S. D. C. in _The Boston Chronicle_, Feb. 17, 1769, from a
copy in the Union League Club Library, New York City.

[295] C. W. King, “Notices of Collections of Glyptic Art exhibited by
the Archæological Institute in June, 1861,” pp. 20, 21; reprint from
Archæological Journal.

[296] See Schneider, “Aus dem Leben Kaiser Wilhelms,” Berlin, 1888,
vol. i, pp. 154–161.

[297] Communication by Mrs. Isabel Moore, formerly of Woodstock, N. Y.,
now in the Azores.

[298] O. M. Dalton, “Franks Bequest, Catalogue of the Finger Rings,
Early Christian, Byzantine, Teutonic, Mediæval and Later (British
Museum),” p. 206.

[299] O. M. Dalton, “Catalogue of the Finger Rings, Early Christian,
Byzantine, Teutonic, Mediæval and Later, Bequeathed by Sir Augustus
Wollaston Franks, K.C.B. (British Museum),” London, 1912, pp. xvi, 29,
30, pl. ii (Nos. 179, 180).

[300] See pp. 342, 343, in chapter on Rings of Healing.

[301] Fourth Report of the Royal Commission on Manuscripts, London,
1874, p. 191.

[302] Idem., _loc. cit._

[303] _Idem, loc. cit._

[304] See pp. 341–345.

[305] King, “Precious Stones and Metals,” London, 1870, p. 319, note.

[306] O. M. Dalton, “Catalogue of the Finger Rings, Early Christian,
Byzantine, Teutonic, Mediæval and Later, Bequeathed by Sir Augustus
Wollaston Franks, K.C.B.” (British Museum), London, 1912, p. xiii.

[307] Hon. R. C. Neville (4th baron Braybrooke), “The Romance of the
Ring, or the History and Antiquity of Finger Rings,” Saffron Walden,
1856, p. 19.

[308] On the toadstone, see the present writer’s “The Magic of Jewels
and Charms,” Philadelphia and London, 1915, pp. 162–167.

[309] Migne’s Patrologia Latina, vol. ccxiv, cols. 179, 180.

[310] Archæologia, vol. xix, London, 1821, pp. 411, 412.

[311] A fine, thin silk stuff, plain, but especially valued for its
softness.

[312] Sir Joseph Ayloffe, “An Account of the Body of King Edward the
First As It Appeared in the Tomb in the Year 1774,” Archæologia, vol.
iii, London, 1775, pp. 389–391. See also Rhymer’s “Foedera,” vol. viii,
p. 75.

[313] “Issues of the Echequer,” from Henry III to Henry VI, ed. by
Frederick Devon, London, 1837, p. 170.

[314] Rhymer, “Fœdera,” London, 1727, vol. xi, p. 76.

[315] William Jones, “Finger-Ring Lore,” London, 1877, p. 197.

[316] Archæologia, vol. xxxiii, p. 335 _sqq._, London, 1849.

[317] William Jones, “Finger-Ring Lore,” London, 1877, p. 478.

[318] Gasquet, “Henry VIII and the English Monasteries,” London, 1906,
p. 409. Cott. MS. Tib. e. viii, f. 269.

[319] Third Report of the Royal Commission on Historical Manuscripts,
London, 1872, p. 231.

[320] Camdeni, “Annales rerum Anglicarum et Hibernicarum regnante
Elizabetha,” Francofurti, 1616, pp. 151, 152.

[321] In Thoms’ “Anecdotes and Traditions,” London, 1839, p. 107
(Camden Soc. Pub.).

[322] Buchanan, “Poems,” St. Andrews, 1594, p. 117.

[323] Agnes Strickland, “History of Mary, Queen of Scots,” London,
1873, vol. ii, p. 446.

[324] James Anthony Froude, “History of England,” London, 1899, vol.
xii, chap. 69, pp. 248, 249.

[325] C. Justi, “Felipe II amigo del arte”; España moderna, April,
1914, pp. 26, 27.

[326] See Dictionary of National Biography, vol. xiv, London, 1888, pp.
437, 438; in Sir Sidney Lee’s article on Essex.

[327] Catalogue of the Loan Exhibition of Ancient and Modern Jewellery
and Personal Ornaments, 1872, London, 1873, p. 33, No. 137.

[328] Historical Manuscripts Commission, Report of MSS. in various
collections, vol. iv, Dublin, 1907, p. 323.

[329] South Kensington Museum: Catalogue of the Loan Collection, 1872;
London, 1873, p. 72, No. 838. The ring is figured in the _Gentleman’s
Magazine_ for 1797, vol. lxvii, pt. ii (Oct.), on plate opposite p.
827, figs. 5 and 6; see also pp. 830 and 1017.

[330] “Catalogue of the Special Exhibition of Works of Art at the South
Kensington Museum, June, 1862,” section 33, “Miscellaneous Rings,” by
R. H. S. Smith, p. 637.

[331] Gilbert Barnet (Bishop of Salisbury), “History of His Own Time,”
London, 1724, 1736. First published by his son Thomas, after the
bishop’s death in 1715.

[332] Archæologia, vol. ii, pp. 32-35, London, 1773. Figured on plate
i, figs. 1 and 2.–

[333] George Frederick Kunz and Charles H. Stevenson, “The Book of the
Pearl,” New York, 1908, p. 438.

[334] Federici Augusti Junii, “De annulo Romanorum sponsalitio,”
Lipsiæ, 1744, citing Ovidii, lib. ii, Amor. Eleg. xv.

[335] Saturnalia, lib. vii, cap. 13.

[336] See page 222.

[337] Isidori, “De ecclesiasticis officiis,” lib. xx, cap. 8, in
Migne’s “Patrologia Latina,” vol. lxxxiii, cols. 811, 812.

[338] Deloche, “Le port des anneaux dans l’antiquité romaine, et dans
les premiers siècles du moyen âge,” Paris, 1896, pp. 96–98; Mémoires de
l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles Lettres, vol. xxxv, pt. 2.

[339] Naturalis Historia, lib. xxxiii, cap. 24.

[340] John Yonge Akerman, “An Account of Excavations in an Anglo-Saxon
Burial Ground at Harnham Hill Near Salisbury,” in Archæologia, vol.
xxxv, p. 266, and Plate XII (opp. p. 278).

[341] “The Sarum Missal done into English by A. Harford Pearson,”
London, 1844, p. 552. The directions and blessings are translated from
the Latin; the vows of the bride and bridegroom are from an old English
version.

[342] O. M. Dalton, “Byzantine Art and Archæology,” Oxford, 1911, p.
544, fig. 329.

[343] _Ibid._, p. 546.

[344] Marshall, “Catalogue of the Finger Rings, Greek, Etruscan, and
Roman, in the Departments of Antiquities, British Museum,” London,
1907, pp. 99, 100; No. 579, pl. xvii.

[345] Federici Augusti Junii, “De annulo Romanorum sponsalitio,” Lipsiæ
(1744), pp. xiii, xiv; citing Pliny’s “Hist. Nat.,” lib. xxxiii, cap.
i, and Clement’s “Pædogogus,” lib. iii, cap. xi.

[346] Tertulliani, “Opera Omnia,” ed. Migne, Parisiis, 1879, vol. i,
col. 353. Apol. adv. gen.

[347] August. Epist. 119 ad Januar. cap. 18.

[348] C. Drury Fortnum, “On Finger Rings of the Early Christian
Period,” in Journal of Archæology, vol. xxviii, pp. 266–292; figured on
p. 291.

[349] Fredegari, “Historia Francorum epitomata,” cap. xviii; in
Patrologia Latina, ed. J. P. Migne, Parisiis, 1879, vol. lxxi, col. 584.

[350] Hucher, “Sigillographie du Maine,” _Bulletin Monumental_,
vol. xviii, p. 308.

[351] Symeonis Thessalonicensis Archiepiscopi, “Opera Omnia,” in
Migne’s Patrologia Græca, vol. clv, Paris, 1866, cols. 505, 508, “De
honesto et legitimo conjugio.”

[352] Coloniæ, 1509, cap. 11.

[353] Communicated by Mrs. Isabel F. Hapgood.

[354] Petri Mülleri, “De annulo pronubo,” Jenæ, 1734, p. 22.

[355] Petri Mülleri, “De annulo pronubo,” Jenæ, 1734, p. 31.

[356] Cyril Davenport, “Jewellery,” Chicago, 1908, p. 114.

[357] Cap. 55.

[358] “Glossarium ad scriptores mediæ et infimæ Latinitatis,” Parisiis,
1733, vol. i, col. 457.

[359] Cited in H. R. D. Anders, “Shakespeare’s Books,” Berlin, 1904, p.
189.

[360] Deloche, “Le port des bagues dans l’antiquité romaine et dans les
premiers siècles du moyen âge,” Paris, 1896, pp. 61–63; from Mémoires
de l’Académie des Inscriptions et Belles Lettres, vol. xxxv.

[361] Jacob Grimm, “Deutsche Rechtsalterhümer,” Berlin, 1854, pp. 177,
178.

[362] This recalls Juvenal’s “digito pignus fortasse dedisti” (perhaps
thou hast set a pledge on a finger). Sat. vi, 27.

[363] Fairholt, “Rambles of an Artist,” London, n.d., p. 90, fig. 97.

[364] _Ibid._, p. 124, fig. 124.

[365] Communicated by L. Weininger, of Vienna.

[366] _Anima magis est ubi amat quam ubi animat._

[367] Barbier de Montault, “Un anneau du XVe siècle,” Tours, 1876.

[368] Jean Szendrei, “Catalogue de la collection de bagues de Madame
Gustave de Tarnóczy,” Paris, 1889, p. xlviii.

[369] Barbier de Montault, “Un anneau du XVe siècle,” Tours, 1876, pp.
14–17. For additional “posies” see pp. at end of this chapter.

[370] Shown in Fairholt’s “Rambles of an Artist,” p. 127, figs. 152,
153.

[371] _Ibid._, p. 128, fig. 154.

[372] Kircheri, “Œdipus Ægyptiacus,” Romæ, 1652, vol. i, p. 283.

[373] Jewish Encyclopædia, vol. x, art. Rings by Albert Wolf, of
Dresden, Saxony.

[374] “Catalogue of the Special Exhibition of Works of Art at the
South Kensington Museum, June, 1862,” section 32, “Rings,” by Edmund
Waterton, pp. 630, 631.

[375] See Gregorovius, “Lucrezia Borgia,” pp. 375, 376, of Ital.
translation.

[376] Robert de Berquen, “Les Merveilles des Indes Orientales et
Occidentales,” Paris, 1661, pp. 14, 15. Robert de Berquen writes of
Louis (Lodowyk) as “one of his ancestors.”

[377] Alfred Maury, “Croyances et Legendes du Moyen Age,” Paris, 1896,
p. 277, note.

[378] Fairholt, “Rambles of an Artist,” p. 128, fig. 155. The
authenticity of the ring may be regarded as somewhat doubtful.

[379] Julius Köstlin, “Life of Luther,” trans. from the German, New
York, 1883; pp. 334, 335.

[380] Fairholt, “Rambles of an Artist,” p. 132, fig. 165.

[381] Burgon, “The Life and Times of Sir Thomas Gresham,” London, 1839,
vol. i, p. 51.

[382] Catalogue of a collection of ancient and modern rings and
personal ornaments formed for Lady Londesborough, London, 1853, pp. 8,
9. Privately printed.

[383] Cited in Furness, “Variorum Shakespear,” vol. vii (Othello),
Phila., 1888, p. 132.

[384] Evans, “Posy Rings,” London, 1892, p. 13.

[385] _Ibid._, p. 13.

[386] Thomas Joseph Pettigrew, “On Superstitions Connected With the
History and Practice of Medicine and Surgery,” London, 1844, pp. 36, 37.

[387] Col. T. H. Hendley, “Indian Jewellery,” “Journal of Indian Art
and Industry,” vol. xii, p. 5, 1907–1909.

[388] G. Bapst, “Les Joyaux de la Couronne,” Paris, 1889, p. 18.

[389] Cyril Davenport, “Jewellery,” Chicago, 1908, p. 112.

[390] William Tegg, “The Knot Tied: Marriage Ceremonies of All
Nations,” London, 1877, p. 314.

[391] Fuller, “Holy State,” chap. xxii, Of Marriage.

[392] Jahrbuch der Kunsthistorischen Sammlungen des allerhöchsten
Kaiserhauses, vol. i, Pt. II, p. xxi, Wien, 1883.

[393] Johnson, “Tunis of To-day”; in the National Geographic Magazine,
vol. xxii, p. 747; No. 8, Aug., 1911.

[394] Historical Manuscripts Commission, Twelfth Report, Appendix, Pt.
IV, MSS. of Duke of Rutland at Belvoir Castle, vol. i, London, 1888, p.
6.

[395] A number of posies of the list comes from Joseph Maskell’s
excellent little monograph, “The Wedding-Ring,” London, 1888, pp. 31–35.

[396] From the “Card of Courtship, or the Language of Love,” published
in 1653; cited in Tegg’s “The Knot Tied,” London, 1877.

[397] From “The Mysteries of Love and Eloquence,” London, 1658; in
Tegg’s “The Knot Tied.”

[398] T. Wada, “Die Schmuck- und Edelsteine bei den Chinesen,” Tokyo,
1904, reprint from the “Mitteilungen” of the Deutsche Gesellschaft für
Natur- und Volkeskunde Ostasiens, vol. x, Pt. I.

[399] Pompei Fasti, “De verborum significatu,” lib. xx, s. v. Edera,
ed. of Ed. Thewrewk de Ponor, Budapest, 1889, p. 58.

[400] Adolf Furtwängler, “Die Antiken Gemmen,” Leipzig and Berlin,
1900, vol. iii, p. 446.

[401] F. G. Frazer, “The Golden Bough,” vol. iii, London, 1911, p. 314.

[402] F. H. Marshall, “Catalogue of the Finger Rings, Greek, Etruscan,
and Roman, in the ... British Museum,” London, 1907, pp. xxix, xxx,
Nos. 629, 640.

[403] Montfaucon, “L’antiquité expliqué,” vol. ii, Pt. II, Paris, 1719,
pp. 324, 325; Plate 136.

[404] Communicated by Prof. Cyrus Adler of the Dropsie College for
Hebrew and Cognate Learning, in Philadelphia, the information being
derived from the Hebrew Encyclopædia entitled “Ozar Yisrael,” vol.
v, p. 6, col. i, s. v. Tabaath. Prof. Richard Gottheil of Columbia
University confirms the views expressed by Prof. Cyrus Adler that the
ring was never the distinguishing mark of a Rabbi.

[405] Abbé Barraud, “Des bagues à toutes les époques,” Bulletin
Monumental, vol. xxx, pp. 624–641.

[406] Raoul Rochette, “Tableau des Catacombes de Rome,” Paris, 1837,
pp. 235, 236.

[407] S. Augustini, “De trinitate,” lib. viii, cap. 5, 6. Figured in
Raoul Rochette, “Tableau des Catacombes de Rome,” Paris, 1837, title
page.

[408] Ruinart, “Acta sanctorum martyrum sincera et selecta,” Paris,
1689, p. 40.

[409] Gregorii episcopi nysseni, “Opera,” vol. iii, in Migne’s
Patrologia Græca, vol. xli, Parisiis, 1858, col. 990.

[410] See Rev. I, viii.

[411] C. W. King, “Antique Gems,” London, 1860, p. 358.

[412] King, “The Gnostics,” London, 1864, p. 139.

[413] O. M. Dalton, “Franks Bequest, Catalogue of the Finger Rings,
Early Christian, Byzantine, Teutonic, Mediæval and Later [British
Museum],” London, 1912, p. 7, No. 39.

[414] M. Deloche, “Étude historique et archéologique sur les anneaux
sigillaires,” Paris, 1900, pp. 139–142, figs.

[415] Mercati, “Metallotheca Vaticana,” Romæ, 1719, p. 185.

[416] Giacinto Gimma, “Delia storia naturale delle gemme,” Napoli,
1730, vol. i, p. 39.

[417] Pauli Aringhi, “Roma subterranea,” Romæ, 1651, p. 701.

[418] Santi Aurelii Augustini, “Opera Omnia,” ed. Migne, Parisiis,
1884, cols. 226, 227.

[419] Communicated by L. Weininger, of Vienna.

[420] Platina “De vitis Pontificorum”; “Vita Clementis IV.”

[421] Edmund Waterton, “On the Annulus Piscatoris, or Ring of the
Fisherman”; Archæologia, vol. xl, figures on pp. 140 and 142.

[422] Edmund Waterton, “On the Annulus Piscatoris, or Fisherman’s
Ring,” Archæologia, vol. xl, pp. 138–142, London, 1866.

[423] Abbé Barraud, “Des Bagues à toutes les époques et en particulier
de l’anneau des évêques et des abbés,” Bulletin Monumentale, vol. xxx,
pp. 390, 391, 1864.

[424] X. Barbier de Montault, “Le costume et les usages ecclésiastiques
selon la tradition romaine,” Paris, n.d., vol. i, p. 161.

[425] _Ibid._, pp. 158, 159.

[426] Sancti Aviti, Epist. lxxviii, Migne, “Patrologia Latina,” vol.
lix, col. 280.

[427] Isidori, “De ecclesiasticis officiis,” lib. ii, cap. v, 12.

[428] Migne, “Patrologia Latina,” vol. lxxxiii, cols. 783, 784.

[429] Philippe Labbé and Cossart, “Sacros. concil.,” vol. v, cols.
1618, 1714.

[430] Wetzer and Welte’s “Kirchenlexikon,” 2d ed., Freiburg im
Breisgau, 1897, vol. x, p. 211, art. Ringe by K. Schrod.

[431] Ed. Merati, p. 1737.

[432] Edmund Waterton, “On Episcopal Rings,” _The Archæological
Journal_, vol. xx, London, 1863, p. 228.

[433] Rot. Pat. Hen. III. m. 20 d.

[434] Liber 28, Ed. I; fol. 278, p. 344.

[435] Philippi Labbei et Cossarti, “Sacrosancta concilia,” vol. viii,
col. 878.

[436] Edmund Waterton, “Episcopal Rings,” in _The Archæological
Journal_ vol. xx, p. 227, fig. p. 228.

[437] Ph. Labbei et Cossarti, “Sacrosancta Concilia,” vol. ix, col.
395, of the Council of Nimes.

[438] Edmund Waterton, “Episcopal Rings,” in _The Archæological
Journal_, vol. xx, p. 235, figs. 6, 7 and 8 on plate opposite that
page.

[439] “De sacro altaris mysterio,” Migne’s Patrologia Latina, vol.
ccxvii, col. 796.

[440] Arnaud, “Notice sur les objets trouvés dans plusieurs cercueils
de pierre à la cathédral de Troyes,” Troyes, 1844, p. 13.

[441] Catalan, “Pontificale romanum,” vol. iii, p. 358, citing the
annals of Abraham Begovius, ad annum 1303, num. 8.

[442] R. Rucklin, “Das Schmuckbuch,” Leipzig, 1871, vol. ii, pl. 56,
fig. 5.

[443] See also Hefner, “Trachten,” pl. 9.

[444] _Op. cit._, vol. i, p. 167.

[445] Edmund Waterton, “On Episcopal Rings,” _Archæological
Journal_, vol. xx, p. 228, London, 1863; citing Dart, “Hist. of
Cant. Cath.,” p. 346, fol. 279, and Duranti, “De ritibus,” lib. ii,
cap. ix, sec. 37.

[446] O. M. Dalton, “Franks Bequest, Catalogue of the Finger Rings,
Early Christian, Byzantine, Teutonic Mediævel, and Later [British
Museum],” London, 1912, pp. xxxvii, xxxviii.

[447] Catalogue of the special exhibition of works of art ... at the
South Kensington Museum, June, 1862, London, 1863, p. 636.

[448] Maurice Faucon, “Les arts à la cour d’Avignon sous Clément V et
Jean XXII,” in Mélanges d’Archéologie et d’Histoire II^{ème} Année, pp.
76, 77; IV^{ème} Année, p. 107.

[449] Italian XIV Century MSS. in the author’s library. What appears to
be a topaz ring is on the fourth finger of the right hand in Titian’s
portrait of Archbishop Filippo Archinto, painted in the middle of the
sixteenth century.

[450] Edinburgh Review, July, 1866, p. 247.

[451] X. Barbier de Montault, “Le costume et les usages ecclésiastiques
selon la tradition romaine,” Paris (1897), vol. i, p. 162.

[452] _Ibid._, vol. i, p. 159.

[453] This ring is figured as frontispiece to the writer’s “Curious
Lore of Precious Stones,” Philadelphia and London, 1913.

[454] From a letter written by Bishop Greer to the author, September
22, 1916.

[455] Kirchmann, “De anulis,” Lugd. Bat., 1672, p. 185.

[456] Tractatus de officio episcopi, ad Henricum Senonensem episcopum,
cap. ix.

[457] H. Druitt, Costume in Brass, p. 98.

[458] “Dictionnaire d’archéologie chrétienne et de liturgie,” ed. by
Dom Fernan Cabrol, vol. i, Paris, 1907, col. 2187, art. _anneau_
by Leclercq.

[459] X. Barbier de Montault, “Le costume et les usages ecclésiastiques
selon la tradition romaine,” Paris (1897), vol. i, pp. 163, 164.

[460] _Ibid._, vol. i, pp. 164–170.

[461] _Ibid._, vol. i, pp. 175, 176.

[462] The complete ceremonies and procedures observed at the coronation
of the kings and queens of England, London (1902), p. 30.

[463] Debrett’s Dictionary of the Coronation, London (1902), pp. 38,
126.

[464] Cyril Davenport, “Jewellery,” Chicago, 1908, Plate xvi, opp. p.
110.

[465] Abbé Barraud, “Des bagues à toutes les époques, et en particulier
de l’anneau des évêques et des abbés,” Bulletin Monumental, vol. xxx,
p. 17.

[466] Abbé Barraud, “Des bagues à toutes les époques et en particulier
de l’anneau des évêques et des abbés,” Bulletin Monumentale, vol. xxx,
p. 32.

[467] X. Barbier de Montault, “Le costume et les usages ecclésiastiques
selon la tradition romaine,” Paris, (1897), vol. i, p. 174, note.

[468] Cited by William Jones, “Finger-Ring Lore,” London, 1877. pp.
236, 237.

[469] Henry Harrod “On the Mantle and Ring of Widowhood,” Archæologia,
vol. xl, pt. 2, p. 308; London 1864.

[470] Op. cit., p. 309, citing Gough, “Sepulchral Monuments,” vol. i,
p. cxix.

[471] Giovanni B. Rampolli, “Annales Musulmani,” vol. viii, Milano,
1824, p. 544 _sqq._, note 90.

[472] Burton “Supplementary Nights,” London, 1886, vol. iii, p. 72,
note.

[473] The poems of Mohammed Hafiz of Shiraz, translated by John Payne,
London, 1901, vol. iii, p. 230; epodes II, 2.

[474] Lib. ii, cap 3; Platonis Dialogi, ed. Hermann, vol. iv, Lipsiæ,
1883, pp. 37, 38.

[475] Cæselii, “Commentarii antiquorum lectionum,” Venetiis, 1516, p.
141; lib. iii, cap. xxv.

[476] Hygini, “Astronomica,” ed. by Emile Chatelain and Paul Legendre,
Paris, 1909, p. 19. Bibliothèque de l’École des Hautes Études, Fasc.
168.

[477] King, “Handbook of Engraved Gems,” London, 1866, p. 184, citing
Ptolemy Hephaistion, bk. ii, and Suidas.

[478] This may have been the ring supposed to have been given by
Apollo, before the birth of Seleucus.

[479] Abrahami Gorlæi, “Dactyliotheca,” Delphi Batavorum, 1601, p. 3.

[480] F. H. Marshall “Catalogue of the Finger Rings, Greek, Etruscan
and Roman, in the British Museum,” London, 1907, pp. xxiii, xxxiii,
131, Plate XX, fig. 801.

[481] F. H. Marshall. “Catalogue of Finger Rings, Greek, Etruscan, and
Roman, in the Departments of Antiquities, British Museum,” London,
1907, p. xxxiii, No. 386; see Plate XII.

[482] Suetonii, “Nero,” cap. xlvi.

[483] Suetonii, “Galba,” cap. x.

[484] Flavii Josephi, “Antiquitates Judeorum,” Basileæ, 1540, p. 203.

[485] Luciani, “Opera Omnia,” ed. Jocobitz, Lipsiæ, 1881; Navigium, 42,
43, 44.

[486] Philopseudos, 17.

[487] Clementis Alexandrini, “Stromata,” lib. i.

[488] Longi, “De annulis signatoriis” Francofurti et Lipsiæ, 1709, p.
39.

[489] “Dictionnaire d’archéologie chrétienne et de liturgie,” ed. by
Dom Fernan Cabrol, vol. i, Pt. II, Paris, 1907, cols. 2215, 2216, s. v.
anneaux.

[490] Artemidori Daldiani et Achametis Sereini “Oneirocritica,”
Lutitiæ, 1603, p. 259.

[491] Rev. Oswald Cockayne, “Anglo-Saxon Leechdom,” vol. iii, London,
1866, pp. 199, 205, 215 in “A Book of Dreams by the Prophet Daniel.”

[492] Lebeau, “Histoire du Bas-Empire,” livre XIX; vol. iv, p. 307, ed.
Desaint et Saillant, Paris, 1759.

[493] St. Augustine, “De doctrina christiana,” lib. ii, cap. 20.

[494] Communicated by L. Weininger, of Vienna.

[495] Scheuzeri, “Itinera per Helvetiæ alpinas regiones,” Lug. Bat.,
723, vol. iii, pp. 381–383.

[496] See the present writer’s “The Magic of Jewels and Charms,”
Philadelphia and London, 1915, pp. 238, 239.

[497] Petrarchæ, Epistolarum libri, Lugduni, 1601, pp. 10, 11.

[498] Annales Lamberti, in Monum. Germ., vol. iii, p. 91.

[499] Monum. Germ. Script., vol. vii, p. 106.

[500] “The Edda,” by Winchell Faraday, Pt. II, London, 1903, pp. 16, 17.

[501] The history of “Reynard the Fox,” trans. and pub. by William
Caxton, 1481; ed. by Edmund Goldsmid, Edinburgh, 1884, vol. ii, pp. 55,
56. Privately printed.

[502] “Lapidario del Rey D. Alfonso X, codice original,” Madrid, 1881,
folios 3 recto, col. 2; 14 recto, col. 2; 106, verso, col. 2.

[503] Mauricii Pinder, “De adamante,” Berolini, 1829, p. 68.

[504] “Der grosse Wolfdietrich,” ed. Holtzmann, Heidelberg, 1865, pp.
243, 271.

[505] C. W. King, “Antique Gems and Rings,” London, 1872, p. 393;
citing “La vie, état et condition du pape Maleface, racontés par des
gens de foi.”

[506] “Die Gesta Romanorum,” ed. Wilhelm Dick, Erlangen, 1890, pp. 10,
11.

[507] Wirt Sikes: “British Goblins: Welsh folklore, fairy myths,
legends and traditions,” London, 1880, pp. 365–366.

[508] Pierre Lacroix, “Sciences et Lettres au Moyen Age,” Paris, 1877,
p. 238.

[509] Mason in Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal, 1865, Pt. II,
p. 200; Bastian, “Oestliches Asien,” vol. i, p. 146.

[510] Bishop Percy’s Folio Manuscript, ed. by John W. Hales and
Frederick J. Furnivall, London, 1868, Vol. II, p. 363.

[511] Slay.

[512] Ritson, “Ancient English Medical Romances,” London, 1802, vol. I,
p. 65.

[513] Jacobi Gaffarelli, “Curiositates inauditæ,” Hamburgi, 1706, p.
112; Latin trans. citing Alberti, “De mirabilibus,” tr. 3, cap. 3.

[514] Konrad von Megenberg, “Buch der Natur,” ed. by Dr. Franz
Pfeiffer, Stuttgart, 1861, p. 472.

[515] Catalogue of a collection of ancient and mediæval rings and
personal ornaments, London, 1853, p. 5. Privately printed.

[516] William Jones, “Credulities, Past and Present,” London, 1880, pp.
208–210.

[517] The Venetian artist, Paris Bordone (1500–1570) painted a picture
depicting the gondolier in the act of delivering St. Mark’s ring to the
Doge.

[518] Johannes Tritheim’s “Wunder-Buch,” Passau, 1506 (Reprint, p. 275).

[519] Luke iv, 30: “But he passing through the midst of them went his
way.” This refers to his escape at Nazareth from those who sought to
cast him down from the hill.

[520] O. M. Dalton, “Franks Bequest, Catalogue of the Finger Rings,
Early Christian, Byzantine, Teutonic, Mediæval and Later [British
Museum],” London, 1912, p. 138, Nos. 877, 878, 879; see Plate XV.

[521] Petri Lambeccii, “De Augustissima Bibliotheca Cæsarea” Vindobonæ,
1665, p. 28.

[522] Jacobi Gaffarelli, “Curiositates inauditæ,” Hamburgi, 1706, p.
118; Latin trans.

[523] William Jones, “Credulities Past and Present,” London, 1880, p.
211.

[524] Citing Beckmann, “Geschichte des Fürstentums Anhalt,” Dessau,
1722.

[525] William Jones, “Credulities Past and Present,” London, 1880, p.
177.

[526] “Cimeliotheca Musei Nationalis Hungarici,” Budæ, 1825, p. 55.

[527] Communicated by Mr. George Osborn.

[528] Berthold Laufer, “Jade, a Study in Chinese Archæology and
Religion,” Chicago, 1912, pp. 284, 285.

[529] Berthold Laufer, “Jade, a Study in Chinese Archæology and
Religion,” Chicago, 1912, pp. 210, 211; Field Museum of Natural
History, Pub. 154, Anthropological Series, Vol. X, citing A. Conrady in
preface to Stentz, “Beiträge zur Volkskunde Süd-Schantung’s,” p. 10.

[530] _Ibid._, p. 210.

[531] Communicated through Prof. Austin F. Rogers, Leland Stanford
University, by Mr. Wah S. Lee.

[532] Personal communication from Kien Taw Sein Ko, of Rangoon, Burma.

[533] Arthur A. Macdonel, “A History of Sanskrit Literature,” New York,
1914, pp. 354–358.

[534] Butler, “Court Life in Egypt,” London, 1880, pp. 238–242.

[535] Du Chaillu, “The Viking Age,” New York, 1889, vol. ii, pp. 310,
326.

[536] Torsten Kolmodin, “Lapparne och deres Land: Skildringar och
Studier,” Stockholm, 1914, Pt. III, p. 30.

[537] John Sterling, “The Onyx Ring,” Boston, 1850, xxii 263 pp. 8 vo.

[538] Catalogue of the Collection formed by Henry Philip Hope Esq.,
arranged and described by B. Herz, London, 1839, 6 + 112 p., 42 pl.,
folio; see p. 38, No. 3. Plate XI.

[539] _Ibid._, p. 86, No. 5.

[540] Communicated by the Rev. John Baer Stoudt, of Northampton, Pa.

[541] Jacobi Wolfii, “Curiosus amuletorum scrutator,” Francofurti &
Lipsiæ, 1692, pp. 660, 661.

[542] Julius Ruska, “Das Stienbuch des Aristoteles,” Heidelburg, 1912,
p. 6.

[543] Communicated by Mrs. Isabel Moore, formerly of Woodstock, N. Y.,
now in the Azores.

[544] O. M. Dalton, “Franks Bequest, Catalogue of the Finger Rings,
Early Christian, Byzantine, Teutonic, Mediæval and Later [British
Museum],” London, 1912, p. 347, No. 2514, fig.

[545] George F. Kunz, “On five new American Meteorites,” American
Journal of Science, 3rd Series, vol. 40, pp. 320–322.

[546] George F. Kunz, “On three masses of meteoric iron from Glorietta
Mountain near Canoneito, Santa Fé Co., New Mexico,” Amer. Journal of
Science, 3rd Series, vol. 30, p. 238; vol. 32, pp. 311–313.

[547] See p. 296.

[548] Cassius Dio, lib. liii.

[549] Plinii, “Historia Naturalis,” lib. xxviii, cap. 15.

[550] Marcelli Empirici, “De medicamentis,” cap. 17.

[551] Plinii, “Naturalis historia,” lib. xxix, cap. 38.

[552] Jacobi Wolfii, “Curiosus amuletorum scrutator,” Francofurti &
Lipsiæ, 1692, pp. 388, 392.

[553] Alexandri Tralliani, “De medicamentis,” Basileæ, 1556, p. 593;
lib. x, cap. 1.

[554] G. Schlumberger in the Mém. de la Soc. des antiq. de France,
1882, vol. xliii, pp. 135 _sq._

[555] William Hamper, “Observations on a Gold Ring with a Runic
Inscription,” Archæologia, vol. xxi, London, 1827, pp. 24–30.

[556] Cited in Johannis de Cuba, “Ortus Sanitatis” (Strassburg, ca.
1483); “De lapidibus,” cap. cix.

[557] Havard, “Historie de l’orfévrerie,” Paris, 1896, p. 358.

[558] Johannis de Cuba, “Ortus Sanitatis,” “De lapidibus,” cap. lx.

[559] Johannis de Cuba, “Ortus Sanitatis,” (Strassburg, ca. 1483). “De
lapidibus,” cap. lxv.

[560] Jacobi Wolfii, “Curiosus amuletorum scrutator,” Francofurti &
Lipsiæ, 1692, pp. 408, 409, 419.

[561] Edmund Waterton on Cramp Rings in the “Archæological Journal,”
vol. xxi, pp. 103–113.

[562] “Ancient and Modern Gold and Silver Smiths’ Work in the South
Kensington Museum,” with introduction by John Hungerford Pollen,
London, 1878, p. cxlix.

[563] See also pp. 174, 175.

[564] Polydori Vergilii, “Historiæ Anglicæ,” Lug. Bat., 1651, p. 187.

[565] The fyrst Boke of the Introduction of Knowledge made by Andrew
Borde of Physcycke Doctor; ed. by Furnivall, London, 1870. Early
English Text Series; Extra Series No. X.

[566] Burton, “History of the Reformation,” Oxford, 1829, vol. II, Pt.
II (Collection of Records, bk. II, No. 24) pp. 413, 414.

[567] _Ibid._, vol. ii, p. 645.

[568] _Ibid._, vol. ii, Pt. II (Collection of Records, Bk. II, No.
24) pp. 415, 416.

[569] William Jones, “Crowns and Coronations,” London, 1883, p. 474.

[570] Konrad von Megenberg, “Das Buch der Natur,” ed. Pfeiffer,
Stuttgart, 1866, p. 470.

[571] “Die Gesta Romanorum,” ed. Wilhelm Dick, Erlangen, 1890, pp. 65,
66.

[572] “Nathan der Weise,” Act III, sc. 7, 11. 395 _sqq._

[573] Jacobi Wolffii, “Curiosus amuletorum scrutator,” Francofurti et
Lipsiæ, 1692, p. 574.

[574] M. Deloche, Revue archéologique, 2d Ser., 1880, vol. ii, pp. 1
_sqq._

[575] “Etude historique et archéologique sur les anneaux sigillaires,”
Paris, 1900, pp. 239–242, fig.

[576] Quicherat, “Procès de condemnation et de réhabilitation de Jeanne
d’Arc,” vol. i, Paris, 1841, pp. 86, 87.

[577] Thomas Sharp, “An account of an ancient gold ring found in
Coventry Park in the year 1802,” Archæologia, vol. xviii, pp. 306–308.
The “Coventry Ring” as it has been called is now in the British Museum.

[578] C. W. King, in _Archæological Journal_, vol. xxvi, p. 234.

[579] Pettigrew, “On Superstitions Connected with the History and
Practice of Medicine and Surgery,” London, 1844, p. 67. This letter is
among the Harleian MSS, and was read before the Soc. of Antiquaries,
Nov. 12, 1772, according to the Minute Book of the Society.

[580] Arthur Collins, “The English Baronage,” London, 1727.

[581] Thomas Joseph Pettigrew, “Superstitions Connected with the
History and Practices of Medicine and Surgery.” London, 1844. pp. 61,
62.

[582] Jacobi Wolfii, “Curiosus amuletorum scrutator,” Francofurti &
Lipsiæ, 1692, p. 460.

[583] _Ibid._, p. 570.

[584] Blumentritt, “Das Stromgebiet des Rio Grande de Mindañao,” in
Petermann’s Geographische Mitteilungen, vol. xxxvii, p. 111, 1891.

[585] Blackwood’s Magazine for February, 1886, p. 238.

[586] Jacobi Wolfii, “Curiosus amuletorum scrutator,” Francofurti et
Lipsiæ, 1692, pp. 390, 392.

[587] _Ibid._, p. 32; Sec. I, cap. ii.

[588] “Illustrated Catalogue of Mr. A. W. Drake’s famous collections,”
New York, 1913, Pt. I, Nos. 1757, 1758, 1759, 1760.

[589] Communicated by L. Weininger, of Vienna.

[590] Patent application filed April 3, 1912, by Monroe Engelsman, and
serial number 688,244.

[591] George Frederick Kunz, “The Etiquette of Gems,” the Saturday
Evening Post, June 27, 1908, p. 29.

[592] U. S. Patent, No. 1,179,025, April 11, 1916.

[593] H. Wilson, “Silverware and Jewelry,” New York, 1903, pp. 110, 111.

[594] The word “ring” belongs to the Teutonic language group, and
etymologically it is what is termed common Teutonic.

[595] Archer’s thumb ring.

[596] Plain ring.

[597] Ring set with a stone.

[598] The word used here and also in Num. xxxi: 50 is _glilim_.
_ḥotham_ means a seal-ring in Jeremiah xxii: 24.

[599] Mitteilungen and Nachrichten des deutschen Palästina-Vereins,
1904, pp. 1 sqq.

Transcriber’s Notes: 1. Obvious printers’, punctuation and spelling
errors have been corrected silently.

2. Some hyphenated and non-hyphenated versions of the same words have
been retained as in the original.

3. Where hyphenation is in doubt, it has been retained as in the
original.

4. Superscripts are represented using the caret character, e.g. D^r. or
X^{xx}.

5. Italics are shown as _xxx_.

*** End of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "Rings for the finger" ***

Home