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.