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]