1. Interest and Importance attaching to Rings; Shakspeare’s Ring;
Earl Godwin. 2. Words _symbolum_ and _ungulus_. 3. Ring-money. 4.
Rings in Mythology; Theseus; Prometheus Inventor of the First Ring.
5. Seals from the Scarabæus. 6. Rings in Greek Urns. 7. Judah and
Tamar; Alexander. 8. Ring a Symbol of Fidelity, Eternity, and of
the Deity. 9. Roman Rings. 10. Rings in German Caverns. 11. Rings
of the Gauls and Britons. 12. Anglo-Saxon Workers in Metal. 13.
Ladies’ Seal-rings. 14. Substance, Forms and Size of Rings; Number,
and on what fingers worn; Pearls; Carbuncle; Death’s-head Rings.
15. Law of Rings. 16. Order of the Ring. 17. Rings found in all
places. 18. Persian Signets. 19. Value of ancient Rings. 20. Love’s
Telegraph, and Name-rings; Polish Birth-day Gifts. 21. Rings in
Heraldry. 22. Rings in Fish. 23. Riddle. 24. Ring misapplied. 25.
Horace Walpole’s Poesy on a Ring.
§ 1. A CIRCLE, known as a finger-ring, has been an object of ornament
and of use for thousands of years. Indeed, the time when it was first
fashioned and worn is so far in the past that it alone shines there;
all around is ashes or darkness.
This little perfect figure may seem to be a trifling matter on which
to found an essay; and yet we shall find it connected with history
and poetry. It is, indeed, a small link, although it has bound
together millions for better for worse, for richer for poorer, more
securely than could the shackle wrought for a felon. An impression
from it may have saved or lost a kingdom. It is made the symbol of
power; and has been a mark of slavery. Love has placed it where a
vein was supposed to vibrate in the heart. Affection and friendship
have wrought it into a remembrance; and it has passed into the grave
upon the finger of the beloved one.
And, though the ring itself may be stranger to us, and might never
have belonged to ancestor, friend or companion, yet there can be even
a general interest about such a slight article. For instance, a few
years ago a ring was found which had belonged to Shakspeare, and must
have been a gift: for the true-lover’s knot is there. Who would not
desire to possess, who would not like even to see the relic? There
is reason to suppose that this ring was the gift of Anne Hathaway,
she “who had as much virtue as could die.” And we must be allowed to
indulge in the idea that it was pressing Shakspeare’s finger when
those lines were inscribed “_To the idol of mine eyes and the delight
of my heart, Anne Hathaway_:”
“Talk not of gems, the orient list,
The diamond, topaz, amethyst,
The emerald mild, the ruby gay:
Talk of my gem, Anne Hathaway!
She _hath a way_, with her bright eye,
Their various lustre to defy,
The jewel she, and the foil they,
So sweet to look Anne _hath a way_.
She _hath a way_,
Anne Hathaway,
To shame bright gems Anne _hath a way_!”[1]
We shall find many interesting stories connected with rings. By way
of illustration, here is one:
In a battle between Edmund the Anglo-Saxon and Canute the Dane, the
army of the latter was defeated and fled; and one of its principal
captains, Ulf, lost his way in the woods. After wandering all night,
he met, at daybreak, a young peasant driving a herd of oxen, whom he
saluted and asked his name. “I am Godwin, the son of Ulfnoth,” said
the young peasant, “and thou art a Dane.” Thus obliged to confess
who he was, Ulf begged the young Saxon to show him his way to the
Severn, where the Danish ships were at anchor. “It is foolish in a
Dane,” replied the peasant, “to expect such a service from a Saxon;
and, besides, the way is long, and the country people are all in
arms.” The Danish chief drew off a gold ring from his finger and
gave it to the shepherd as an inducement to be his guide. The young
Saxon looked at it for an instant with great earnestness, and then
returned it, saying, “I will take nothing from thee, but I will try
to conduct thee.” Leading him to his father’s cottage, he concealed
him there during the day; and when night came on, they prepared to
depart together. As they were going, the old peasant said to Ulf,
“This is my only son Godwin, who risks his life for thee. He cannot
return among his countrymen again; take him, therefore, and present
him to thy king, Canute, that he may enter into his service.” The
Dane promised, and kept his word. The young Saxon peasant was well
received in the Danish camp; and rising from step to step by the
force of his talents, he afterwards became known over all England as
the great Earl Godwin. He might have been monarch; while his sweet
and beautiful daughter Edith or Ethelswith did marry King Edward.
“Godwin,” the people said in their songs, contrasting the firmness
of the father with the sweetness of the daughter, “is the parent of
Edith, as the thorn is of the rose.”[2]
§ 2. The word _symbolum_, for a long time, meant a ring; and was
substituted for the ancient Oscan word _ungulus_.
§ 3. In examining ancient rings, care must be taken not to confound
them with coins made in the shape of rings.[3] The fresco paintings
in the tombs of Egypt exhibit people bringing, as tribute, to the
foot of the throne of Pharaoh, bags of gold and silver rings, at
a period before the exodus of the Israelites. Great quantities
of ring-money have been found in different countries, including
Ireland.[4]
[Illustration: Egyptian Ring-money.]
[Illustration: Celtic Ring-money.]
The ancient Britons had them. That these rings were used for money,
is confirmed by the fact that, on being weighed, by far the greater
number of them appear to be exact multiples of a certain standard
unit. Layard mentions[5] that Dr. Lepsius has recently published a
bas relief, from an Egyptian tomb, representing a man weighing rings
of gold and silver, with weights in the form of a bull’s head; and
Layard also gives a seeming outline of the subject, (although its
description speaks of “weights in the form of a seated lion.”) It
is presumed that these rings are intended for ring-money; the fact
of weighing them strengthens this idea; and see Wilkinson’s Popular
Account of the Ancient Egyptians, (revised,) ii. 148-9.
§ 4. We not only find rings in the most ancient times, but we also
trace them in mythology.
Fish, in antediluvian period, were intelligent, had fine musical
perception and were even affectionate. Thus, in relation to Theseus,
the Athenian prince: Minos happened to load Theseus with reproaches,
especially on account of his birth; and told him, that, if he were
the son of Neptune, he would have no difficulty in going to the
bottom of the sea; and then threw a ring in to banter him. The
Athenian prince plunged in, and might have been food for fishes, had
they not, in the shape of dolphins, taken him upon their backs, as
they had done Arion, and conveyed him to the palace of Amphitrite.[6]
It is not said whether she, as Neptune’s wife, had a right to the
_jetsam_, _flotsam_, and _lagan_, to the sweepings or stray jewelry
of the ocean; but she was able to hand Theseus the ring, and also to
give him a crown, which he presented to the ill-used lady Ariadne,
and it was afterwards placed among the stars.
And, coupled with mythology, we have, according to the ancients, the
origin of the ring. Jupiter, from revenge, caused Strength, Force and
Vulcan to chain his cousin-german Prometheus to the frosty Caucasus,
where a vulture, all the livelong day, banqueted his fill on the
black viands of his hot liver. The god had sworn to keep Prometheus
there (according to Hesiod[7]) eternally; but other authors give only
thirty thousand years as the limit. He who had punished did, for
reasons, forgive; but as Jupiter had sworn to keep Prometheus bound
for the space of time mentioned, he, in order not to violate his
oath, commanded that Prometheus should always wear upon his finger
an iron ring, to or in which should be fastened a small fragment
of Caucasus, so that it might be true, in a certain sense, that
Prometheus still continued bound to that rock. Thus, as we have said,
came the idea of the first ring, and, we may add, the insertion of a
stone.[8]
While some writers, under this story, connect Prometheus with the
first ring, Pliny still says that the inventor of it is not known,
and observes that it was used by the Babylonians, Chaldeans, Persians
and Greeks, although, as he thinks, the latter were unacquainted with
it at the time of the Trojan war, as Homer does not mention it.[9]
It has however been said that Dschemid, who made known the solar
year, introduced the use of the ring.[10]
Touching Pliny’s notion of the antiquity of rings, there is, in
Southey’s “Commonplace Book,” (second series,[11]) the following
quotation from “Treasurie of Auncient and Moderne Times,” (1619:)
“But the good olde man Plinie cannot overreach us with his idle
arguments and conjectures, for we read in Genesis that Joseph, who
lived above five hundred yeares before the warres of Troy, having
expounded the dreame of Pharaoh, king of Ægypt, was, by the sayde
prince, made superintendent over his kingdom, and for his safer
possession in that estate, he took off his ring from his hand and
put it upon Joseph’s hand.” ... “In Moses’s time, which was more
than foure hundred yeares before Troy warres, wee find rings to
be then in use; for we reade that they were comprehended in the
ornaments which Aaron the high priest should weare, and they of his
posteritie afterward, as also it was avouched by Josephus. Whereby
appeareth plainly, that the use of rings was much more ancient than
Plinie reporteth them in his conjectures: but as he was a Pagan, and
ignorant in sacred writings, so it is no marvell if these things went
beyond his knowledge.”
It is pretended that seal-rings were an invention of the
Lacedemonians, who, not content with locking their coffers, added a
seal; for which purpose they made use of worm-eaten wood, with which
they impressed wax or soft wood; and after this they learned to
engrave seals.[12]
§ 5. Cylinders, squares and pyramids were forms used for seals prior
to the adoption of ring-seals.[13] These settled with the Greeks
into the scarabæus or beetle, that is to say, a stone something like
the half of a walnut, with its convexity wrought into the form of a
beetle, while the flat under surface contained the inscription for
the seal. The Greeks retained this derivable form until they thought
of dispensing with the body of the beetle, only preserving for the
inscription the flat oval which the base presented, and which they
ultimately set in rings. This shows how ring-seals came into form.
Many of the Egyptian and other ring-seals are on swivel, and we are
of opinion that the idea of this convenient form originated with the
perforated cylindrical and other seals, which were, with a string
passed through them, worn around the neck or from the wrist.[14]
The sculpture of signets was, probably, the first use of gem
engraving, and this was derived from the common source of all the
arts, India.[15] Signets of lapis lazuli and emerald have been
found with Sanscrit inscriptions, presumed to be of an antiquity
beyond all record. The natural transmission of the arts was from
India to Egypt, and our collections abound with intaglio and cameo
hieroglyphics, figures of Isis, Osiris, the lotus, the crocodile, and
the whole symbolic Egyptian mythology wrought upon jaspers, emeralds,
basalts, bloodstones, turquoises; etc. Mechanical skill attained
a great excellence at an early period. The stones of the Jewish
high-priests’ breast-plate were engraved with the names of the twelve
tribes, and of those stones one was a diamond(?). The Greek gems
generally exhibit the figure nude; the Romans, draped. The Greeks
were chiefly intaglios.
It is generally understood that the ancients greatly excelled the
moderns in gem engraving, and that the art has never been carried to
the highest perfection in modern times. Mr. Henry Weigall, however,
states that “this supposition is erroneous, and has probably arisen
from the fact of travellers supposing that the collections of gems
and impressions that they have made in Italy are exclusively the
works of Italian artists; such, however, is not the case, and I have
myself had the satisfaction of pointing out to many such collectors,
that the most admired specimens in their collections were the works
of English artists.”[16]
§ 6. Rings have been discovered in the cinerary urns of the Greeks.
These could hardly have got there through the fire which consumed
the body, for vessels still containing aromatic liquids have also
been discovered in the urns. It is very possible they were tokens of
affection deposited by relations and friends. Such remembrances (as
we shall see) are found in the graves of early Roman Christians.
The idea that rings in Roman urns were secretly and piously placed
there, is strengthened by the fact that it was contrary to the laws
of Rome to bury gold with the dead.[17] There was one exception to
this rule, which appears odd enough to readers of the nineteenth
century, namely, a clause which permitted the burial of such gold as
fastened false teeth in the mouth of the deceased, thus sparing the
children and friends of the dead the painful task of pulling from
their heads the artificial teeth which they had been accustomed to
wear. It seems strange to find that these expedients of vanity or
convenience were practised in Rome nearly two thousand years ago.
Maffei[18] gives a description and enlarged illustration of a gold
ring bearing a cornelian, whereon is cut the story of Bellerophon
upon his winged horse, about to attack the _chimera_; and also a
small but exquisite urn of porphyry, which contained funeral ashes
and this ring. These were found in the garden of Pallas, freed man of
Claudius; and Maffei reasonably makes out that the ring had belonged
to him. Bellerophon is said to have been a native of Corinth, and
Pallas was from that city. Nero became emperor mainly through Pallas,
and yet he sacrificed the latter to be master of his great riches.
These relics thus possess much interest. Although a freed man, merely
as such, had no right to wear a gold ring, yet Pallas gained the
office of Prætor, and so was entitled to one. (In Plutarch’s Galba,
the freed man of the latter was honored with the privilege of wearing
the gold ring for bringing news of the revolt against Nero.)
[Illustration: (Signet Bracelet)]
§ 7. In the unpleasant story of Judah and Tamar, we see that the
former left in pledge with the latter his signet.[19] This, most
likely, was in the shape of a ring, although such signets were often
worn from the wrist: for, in this case, he also pledged his bracelets.
In the Scriptures, the signet ring is frequently named; and Quintus
Curtius tells us that Alexander wore one. After his fatal debauch,
and finding himself past recovery, and his voice beginning to fail,
he gave his ring to his general, Perdiccas, with orders to convey his
corpse to the temple of Ammon. Being asked to whom he would leave
his empire, he answered, “To the most worthy.”[20]
§ 8. The ring was generally the emblem of fidelity in civil
engagements; and hence, no doubt, its ancient use in many functions
and distinctions.[21] A ring denoted eternity among the Hindoos,
Persians and Egyptians; and Brahma, as the creator of the world,
bears a ring in his hand. The Egyptian priests in the temple of the
creative Phtha (Vulcan of the Greeks) represented the year under the
form of a ring, made of a serpent having its tail in its mouth--a
very common shape of ancient rings. Although Jupiter is often figured
with attributes of mighty power, yet he is seldom coupled with a mark
of eternity. There is, however, a gem (an aqua-marine, engraved in
hollow) of this deity holding a ring as the emblem of eternity.[22]
[Illustration: (Jupiter Holding Ring)]
Pythagoras forbade the use of the figures of gods upon rings, lest,
from seeing their images too frequently, it should breed a contempt
for them.[23]
It has been attempted to connect with a ring the consecration
of a circle, as emblematical of the Deity. Over the door of a
Norman church at Beckford, in Gloucestershire, England, is a rude
bas-relief, representing the holy cross between the four beasts,
used as symbols of the Evangelists. The “human form divine” appears
to have been beyond the sculptor’s power; he has made _a ring_. The
others are an eagle, lion, and bull.[24]
§ 9. The Romans distinguished their rings by names taken from their
use, as we do.[25] The excessive luxury shown in the number worn,
and the value of gems and costly engraved stones in them, and the
custom of wearing lighter rings in summer and heavier in winter, are
among the most absurd instances of Roman effeminacy, (as we shall
hereafter more particularly show.)[26] The case in which they kept
their rings was called _Dactylotheca_. No ornament was more generally
worn among the Romans than rings. This custom appears to have been
borrowed from the Sabines.[27] They laid them aside at night, as well
as when they bathed or were in mourning, as did suppliants. However,
in times of sorrow, they rather changed than entirely put them aside;
they then used iron ones, taking off the gold rings.[28] It was a
proof of the greatest poverty, when any one was obliged to pledge his
ring to live. Rings were given by those who agreed to club for an
entertainment. They were usually pulled off from the fingers of dying
persons; but they seem to have been sometimes put on again before the
dead body was buried.
There is no sign of the ring upon Roman statues before those of Numa
and Servius Tullius. The rings were worn to be taken off or put on
according to festivals, upon the statues of deities and heroes, and
upon some of the emperors, with the _Lituus_ ensculped, to show that
they were sovereign pontiffs.
This _lituus_ is a crooked staff; and the Roman priests are
represented with it in their hands. They, as augurs, used it in
squaring the heavens when observing the flight of birds. It is traced
to the time of Romulus, who being skilled in divination, bore the
lituus; and it was called _lituus quirinalis_, from Quirinus, a
name of Romulus. It was kept in the Capitol, but lost when Rome was
taken by the Gauls; afterwards, when the barbarians had quitted it,
the lituus was found buried deep in ashes, untouched by the fire,
whilst every thing about it was destroyed and consumed.[29] Emperors
appropriated to themselves the dignities of the office of high
priest,[30] and hence this priestly symbol upon their medals, coins
and signets. Although it is a common notion that the pastoral staff
of the Church of Rome is taken from the shepherd’s crook, it may be a
question whether it did not take its rise from the _lituus_?
Brave times those Roman times for lawyers--or patrons, as they were
called. Their clients were bound to give them the title of _Rex_;
escort them to the Forum and the Campus Martius; and not only to make
ordinary presents to them and their children or household, but, on a
birth-day, they received from them the birth-day ring. It was worn
only on that day.[31]
There were rings worn by flute-players, very brilliant and adorned
with a gem.
In the Sierra Elvira, in Spain, more than two hundred tombs and an
aqueduct were discovered. Several skeletons bore the rings of Roman
knights; and some of them had in their mouths the piece of money
destined to pay the ferryman Charon.[32] These skeletons crumbled
into dust as soon as they were touched. What a perfect subject for a
poem by Longfellow!
Roman stamps or large seals or brands have been found of quaint
shapes. Some of them are in the form of feet or shoes. Drawings of
them appear in Montfaucon. They were fashioned to mark casks and
other bulky articles. Caylus gives an illustration of a ring in the
form of a pair of shoes, or rather, the soles of shoes.[33]
[Illustration: (Roman Shoe Ring)]
Pliny observes that rings became so common at Rome, they were given
to all the divinities; and even to those of the people who had never
worn any. Their divinities were adorned with iron rings--movable
rings, which could be taken off or put on according to festivals and
circumstances.
§ 10. At Erpfingen in Germany, remarkable stalactical caverns have
been discovered. Every where, and especially in the lateral caves,
human bones of extraordinary size, with bones and teeth of animals,
now unknown, have been discovered, and there, with pottery, rings
were found.
§ 11. Rings were in use among the Gauls and Britons, but seemingly
for ornament only. They are often found in British barrows.
Anglo-Saxon rings were common.[34] William de Belmeis gave certain
lands to St. Paul’s Cathedral, and at the same time directed that his
gold ring set with a ruby should, together with the seal, be affixed
to the charter for ever. The same thing was done by Osbart de Camera,
he granting to St. Paul’s, in pure alms and for the health of his
soul, certain lands; giving possession by his gold ring, wherein a
ruby was set; and appointing that the same gold ring with his seal
should for ever be affixed to the charter whereby he disposed of
them.[35]
Anglo-Saxon kings gave rings to their wittenagemot and courtiers, and
they to their descendants.
§ 12. In metals the Anglo-Saxons worked with great skill. We read
of the gold cup in which Rowena drank to Vortigern. So early,
perhaps, as the seventh century, the English jewellers and goldsmiths
were eminent in their professions; and great quantities of other
trinkets were constantly exported to the European Continent. Smiths
and armorers were highly esteemed, and even the clergy thought it
no disgrace to handle tools.[36] St. Dunstan, in particular, was
celebrated as the best blacksmith, brazier, goldsmith and engraver of
his time. This accounts for the cleverness with which he laid hold of
the gentleman in black:
“St. Dunstan stood in his ivy’d tower,
Alembic, crucible, all were there;
When in came Nick to play him a trick,
In guise of a damsel, passing fair.
Every one knows
How the story goes:
He took up the tongs and caught hold of his nose.”[37]
§ 13. Ladies used seal-rings in the sixth century; but women of rank
had no large seals till towards the beginning of the twelfth.[38]
§ 14. There is scarcely a hard substance of which rings have not been
composed. All the metals have been brought into requisition. First,
iron; then, as in Rome, it was mingled with gold.
Conquerors wore iron rings until Caius Marius changed the fashion. He
had one when he triumphed over King Jugurtha.[39] And while stones
have lent their aid as garniture for metal, these too have made the
whole hoop.
We find rings of two stones; such were those which the Emperor
Valerianus gave to Claudius.
Near to the Pyramids, cornelian rings have been discovered. Rings of
glass and other vitreous material have been found. Emerald rings were
discovered at Pompeii, also glass used instead of gems. Some made
entirely of one stone, as of amber, have been obtained.[40]
With the Egyptians, bronze was seldom used in rings, though
frequently in signets. They were mostly of gold and this metal seems
to have been always preferred to silver.
Ivory and blue porcelain were the materials of which those worn by
the lower classes were made.[41]
An ancient ring of jet has been dug up in England.
There were some rings of a single metal, and others of a mixture
of two;[42] for the iron, bronze and silver were frequently gilt,
or, at least, the gold part was fixed with the iron, as appears
from Artemidorus.[43] The Romans were contented with iron rings a
long time; and Pliny assures us that Marius first wore a gold one
in his third consulate. Sometimes the ring was iron, and the seal
gold; sometimes the stone was engraven, and sometimes plain; and the
engraving, at times, was _raised_, and also _sunk_. (The last were
called _gemmæ ectypæ_, the former _gemmæ sculpturâ prominente_.)
An incident, mentioned by Plutarch, shows how distinctive was a gold
ring.[44] When Cinna and Caius Marius were slaughtering the citizens
of Rome, the slaves of Cornutus hid their master in the house and
took a dead body out of the street from among the slain and hanged it
by the neck, then they put a gold ring upon the finger, and showed
the corse in that condition to Marius’s executioners; after which
they dressed it for the funeral, and buried it as their master’s body.
The rings of the classical ancients were rather incrusted than set in
gold in our slight manner.[45]
The first mention of a Roman gold ring is in the year 432 U. C.;
but they, at last, were indiscriminately worn by the Romans. Three
bushels were gathered out of the spoils after Hannibal’s victory at
Cannæ.[46]
“Lovely soft pearls, the fanciful images of sad tears,” have been
used in rings from the time of the Latins. Cleopatra’s drinking
off the residuum of a pearl, worth three hundred and seventy-five
thousand dollars, aside from luxurious extravagance, seems to be
somewhat nasty; but we are inclined to believe that this fond queen
had faith in its supposed medicinal and talismanic properties:
“---- Now I feed myself
With most delicious passion.”
Pliny, the Roman naturalist, gravely tells us that the oyster which
produces pearls, does so from feeding on heavenly dew. Drummond thus
translates him:
“With open shells in seas, on heavenly dew,
A shining oyster lusciously doth feed;
And then the birth of that ethereal seed
Shows, when conceived, if skies look dark or blue.”[47]
Early English writers entertained the same notion; and Boethius,
speaking of the pearl-mussel of the Scotch rivers, remarks, that
“These mussels, early in the morning, when the sky is clear and
temperate, open their mouths a little above the water and most
greedily swallow the dew of heaven; and after the measure and
quantity of the dew which they swallow, they conceive and breed the
pearl. These mussels,” he continues, “are so exceedingly quick of
touch and hearing, that, however faint the noise that may be made on
the bank beside them, or however small the stone that may be thrown
into the water, they sink at once to the bottom, knowing well in what
estimation the fruit of their womb is to all people.” In the East,
the belief is equally common that these precious gems are
“---- rain from the sky,
Which turns into pearls as it falls in the sea.”
The ancient idea that pearls are generated of the dews of heaven, is
pretty conclusively met by Cardanus,[48] who says it is fabulous,
seeing that the shell fishes, in which they are conceived, have their
residence in the very bottom of the depth of the sea.
The charlatan Leoni de Spoleto prescribed the drink of dissolved
pearls for Lorenzo the Magnificent, when he was attacked by fever
aggravated by hereditary gout.[49]
There was supposed to be a gem called a carbuncle, which emitted,
not reflected, but native light.[50] Our old literature abounds with
allusions to this miraculous gem. Shakspeare has made use of it in
_Titus Andronicus_, where Martius goes down into a pit, and, by
it, discovers the body of Lord Bassianus; and calls up to Quintus
thus:[51]
“Lord Bassianus lies embrewed here,
All on a heap, like to a slaughter’d lamb,
In this detested, dark, blood-drinking pit.
_Quintus._ If it be dark, how dost thou know ’tis he?
_Martius._ Upon his bloody finger he doth wear
A precious ring, that lightens all the hole,
Which, like a taper in some monument,
Doth shine upon the dead man’s earthy cheek,
And show the ragged entrails of this pit:
So pale did shine the moon on Pyramus,
When he by night lay bathed in maiden’s blood.”
Ludovicus Vartomannus, a Roman, reporteth that the king of Pege
(or Pegu), a city in India, had a carbuncle (ruby) of so great a
magnitude and splendor, that by the clear light of it he might,
in a dark place, be seen, even as if the room or place had been
illustrated by the sunbeams. St. or Bishop Epiphanius saith of this
gem, that if it be worn, whatever garments it be covered withal, it
cannot be hid.[52]
It was from a property of resembling a burning coal when held against
the sun that this stone obtained the name _carbunculus_; which being
afterwards misunderstood, there grew an opinion of its having the
qualities of a burning coal and shining in the dark. And as no gem
ever was or ever will be found endued with that quality, it was
supposed that the true carbuncle of the ancients was lost; but it was
long generally believed that there had been such a stone. The species
of carbuncle of the ancients which possessed this quality in the
greatest degree was the Garamantine or Carthaginian; and this is the
true garnet of the moderns.[53]
Rings, with a death’s head upon them, were worn by improper
characters in the time of Elizabeth of England. This kind of ring is
referred to in Beaumont and Fletcher:
“---- I’ll keep it,
As they keep death’s head in rings:
To cry _memento_ to me.”[54]
Although we meet with nothing to show the motive for wearing such
rings by the characters referred to, we are inclined to fancy the
desire was to carry the semblance of a widow and to let the ring have
the character of a mourning token. Lord Onslow, who lived in the time
of Elizabeth, bequeathed “a ring of gold with a death’s head” to
friends.[55]
Sir Isaac Newton was possessed of a small magnet set in a ring, the
weight of which was only three grains, but which supported, by its
attractive power on iron, seven hundred grains. It has been observed
that such instances are by no means common, although the smallest
magnets appear to have the greatest proportionate power.[56]
Our own sailors, in the quiet weather of a voyage, will, with the aid
of a marlinspike, make exceedingly neat rings out of Spanish silver
or a copper coin.
Some of the Egyptian signets were of extraordinary size. Sir Gardiner
Wilkinson mentions an ancient Egyptian one which contained about
twenty pounds worth of gold. It consisted of a massive ring, half an
inch in its largest diameter, bearing an oblong plinth, upon which
the devices were engraved; on one face was the successor of Amunoph
III., who lived B. C. 1400; on the other a lion, with the legend,
“Lord of strength,” referring to the monarch; on the other side a
scorpion, and on the remaining one a crocodile.
[Illustration: (Bronze Ox Ring)]
In the work of Count Caylus, there is a _vignette_ of a ring of
bronze, remarkable from its size and the subject upon it.[57] The
collet or collar of the ring is an inch in height, and eleven lines
in thickness. The figure upon it is an ox--or, as the author we have
referred to calls it, a cow, recumbent and swaddled, or covered by
draperies; and it wears a collar, to which hangs, according to this
author, a bell. He considers that it was made when the Romans wore
them of an excessive size, and while Gaul was under the dominion of
the former. He does not give any guess at the intention or meaning
of the subject. We believe it was, originally, Egyptian; and made
in memory of the sacred Bull Apis, (found in tombs,) honored by the
Egyptians as an image of the soul of Osiris and on the idea that his
soul migrated from one Apis to another in succession. And as to what
Caylus considers a bell, we are inclined to designate a bag. In Dr.
Abbott’s collection of Egyptian Antiquities are not only mummies of
these sacred bulls, but also the skulls of others, and over the head
of one is suspended a large bag, found in the pits with the bulls,
and supposed to be used to carry their food.
Addison, in observing upon the size of old Roman rings,[58] refers to
Juvenal, as thus translated by Dryden:
“Charged with light summer rings, his fingers sweat,
Unable to support a gem of weight.”
And he goes on to say, that this “was not anciently so great an
hyperbole as it is now, for I have seen old Roman rings so very
thick-about and with such large stones in them, that it is no wonder
a fop should reckon them a little cumbersome in the summer season of
so hot a climate.”
As a proof of the size to which Roman rings sometimes reached, we
here give an outline of one as it appears in Montfaucon.
[Illustration: (Queen Plotina’s Ring)]
This ring bears the portrait of Trajan’s good queen Plotina. The
coiffure is remarkable and splendid, being composed of three rows of
precious stones cut in facets.
According to Pliny, devices were not put upon the metal of rings
until the reign of Claudius.
When a wealthy Egyptian had been embalmed and placed in a superb case
or coffin, with a diadem on his head and bracelets upon his arms,
rings of gold, ivory and engraved cornelian were placed upon his
fingers.[59]
Contrary to what might have been supposed, the British Museum is not
rich in rings. Through a dear friend, the author is able to give
drawings of a few of its treasures, and the following extract from a
letter: “They can trace none of their rings with any certainty. The
collection is not large, and has been bought at various times from
other collections and private sources, which could give no history,
or, if attempted, none that can be relied on. Mr. Franks, the curator
of this department, kindly made the impressions I send of those he
considered most curious, and selected the others for me.”
[Illustration: (Isis and Serapis Ring)]
Here is one of those rings. It bears the heads of Isis and Serapis.
A similar ring (perhaps the same) is figured in Caylus,[60] who
observes on the singularity of form and the ingenuity attendant
upon shaping it, while it is considered extremely inconvenient to
wear. It would, however, suit all fingers, large or small, because
it can be easily diminished or widened. The two busts are placed
at the extremities of the serpent which forms the body of the ring
contrariwise--if we may be allowed the expression--so that whatever
position or twist is given to the ring, one of the two heads always
presents itself in a natural position. The ring given by Caylus
was found in Egypt, but is said to be of Roman workmanship and made
when the former was under the dominion of the Romans; and he hints
that the heads may represent a Roman emperor and empress under the
forms of Isis and Jupiter Serapis, adding, “I will not hazard any
conjecture on the names that may be given them. I will content myself
with saying that the work is of a good time and far removed from the
lower empire; and I will add, that the quantity of rings which were
wrought for the Romans of all the states may serve to explain the
extraordinary forms which some present to us.”
[Illustration: (Romano-Egyptian Isis and Serapis Ring)]
Here is another, from the British Museum, in which Isis and Serapis
appear, singularly placed. This ring is Romano-Egyptian, and of
bronze.
Here are two, Etruscan, from the same source, with an impression from
each.
[Illustration: No. 1. No. 2.]
They are both of gold, while No. 2 has a white stone which works upon
a swivel.
We add, in this portion of our book, another from the British Museum.
It is worked from Greek or Etruscan gold, and was found in the
Abruzzi.
[Illustration: (Abruzzi Ring)]
Illustrations of some of the Egyptian seal-rings contained in the
British Museum, will be found in Knight’s Pictorial Bible, at the end
of the third chapter of Esther.
Fashion and Fancy have given us rings of all imaginable shapes, and
these powers, joined with Religion and Love, have traced upon them
every supposable subject.
Although modern rings seldom display the exquisite cutting and
artistic taste which appear upon antiques, still the latter exhibit
sentimental phrases and sentiments similar to such as are observed
upon rings of the present day. The Greeks were full of gallantry.
Time has preserved to us incontestable proofs of the vows which they
made to mistresses and friends, as well as of the trouble they took
and the expense they went to in order to perpetuate their sentiments.
Caylus,[61] who says this, gives a drawing of a ring bearing the
words KIPIA KAAH, _Beautiful Ciria_; and adds, “This inscription is
simple but energetic; it appears to me to suit the sentiment.” In
Montfaucon are several illustrations of Greek sentences upon rings,
which carry out what Caylus has observed; thus there are (rendered
into English), _Good be with you, Madam. Good be with you, Sir.
Good be with him who wears you and all his household. Remember it.
Theanus is my light._ Upon a ring bearing a hand which holds a ring:
_Remember good fortune._ There are, also, upon Roman rings, sentiment
and compliment in Latin sentences, as thus translated: _Live happy,
my hostess. You have this pledge of love. Live in God. Live._ And
Caylus[62] gives a description and drawing of a remarkably formed
gold ring; and although it bears Greek words, he leaves it in doubt
whether it is of Roman or Grecian workmanship. It has the appearance
of three rings united, widened in the front and tapering within the
hand. Upon the wide part of each are two letters, the whole forming
ZHCAIC, _Mayest thou live._ The Romans often preferred the Greek
language in their most familiar customs.
[Illustration: (ZHCAIC Ring)]
A ring of bronze has been discovered, in the form of a snake with
its tail in its mouth, made on the principle of some of our steel
rings which we use to hold household keys, widening their circle by
pressure.[63] In the finger-ring, the part in the mouth is inserted
loose, so as to draw out and increase to the size of the circle
needed.
[Illustration: (Snake Ring)]
[Illustration: (Buckle Ring)]
[Illustration: (Buckle Ring Laid Flat)]
Rings of gold are common in England at the present day, made to form
a strap with buckles, precisely, in shape, a common belt or collar.
It lies flat like an ordinary leather strap, and is formed of small
pieces of gold which are kept so delicately together that the lines
of meeting are scarcely perceptible. This is accomplished by having
many minute and unseen hinges, which make the whole pliable and
allow it to be buckled (as a ring) upon the finger.
Nothing is new. One of the prettiest modern rings, used as a
remembrancer, has a socket for hair and a closing shutter. Roman
remains were found at Heronval in Normandy, and among them were
rings. One of these was almost of modern form, with a small place
under where the stone is usually fixed, into which hair might be
inserted.[64] We are constantly retracing the steps of antiquity.
A Roman gold ring of a triangular form has been discovered in
England, with an intaglio representing the story of Hercules
strangling the Nemean lion.[65] And also a ring that, while it was
remarkable for its thickness, had a whistle on one side, which was
useful in calling servants before the time of domestic bells.[66]
We shall find that there were rings in which poison was carried.
Wilkinson has discovered several Egyptian rings, where the subject is
made up of two cats sitting back to back, and looking round at each
other, with an emblem of the goddess Athor between them.
We do not know why Athor, _Venus_, should be between these sentinel
cats. Had the symbol of Pasht, _Diana_, been there, the thing would
have been less difficult; for cats, like maids, “love the moon,” and
their guardian goddess was Pasht. Their attitude is more watchful
than sacred cats would be supposed to assume, and might rather appear
to apply to the species embalmed in Kilkenny history.
There is an Anglo-Saxon ring inscribed Ahlstan, Bishop of Sherborne,
which has the hoop of alternate lozenges and circles. It has, also, a
Saxon legend. Epigraphs in that language are extremely rare. It has
been supposed that Ahlstan had command of the Saxon army.
In the catacombs of Rome, where the early Christians “wandered
about in sheep-skins and goat-skins, being destitute, afflicted,
tormented,”[67] where they stealthily prayed and lived and died, vast
quantities of signet and other rings have been discovered, as well as
medals, cameos and other precious stones. Signet rings of different
devices, as belonging to different owners, are in the catacombs
here; and this has raised the idea that they were deposited by
relatives and friends as the stone lid of the grave was about to be
shut,--offerings of love and affection.[68]
“What a picture,” exclaims a writer in the London Art Journal,[69]
“do these dark vaults display of the devotion, the zeal, the love of
those early Christian converts whose baptism was in blood! I picture
them to myself, stealing forth from the city in the gloomy twilight,
out towards the lonely Campagna, and disappearing one by one through
well-known apertures, threading their way through the dark sinuous
galleries to some altar, where life and light and spiritual food,
the soft chanting of the holy psalms and the greeting of faithful
brethren, waking the echoes, awaited them. The sight of these early
haunts of the persecuted and infant religion is inexpressibly
affecting; and I pity those, be they Protestant or Catholic, who can
visit these hallowed precincts without an overwhelming emotion.
How many martyrs, their bodies torn and lacerated by the cruel
beasts amid the infuriated roar of thousands shrieking forth the
cry of _Christianos ad leonem!_ in the bloody games of the Flavian
amphitheatre, breathing their last sigh, calling on the name of the
Redeemer, have passed, borne by mourning friends or by compassionate
widows or virgins to their last dark narrow home, along the very
path I was now treading! How many glorified saints, now singing
the praises of the Eternal around the great white throne in the
seventh heaven of glory, may have been laid to rest in these very
apertures, lighted by a flickering taper like that I held. But I must
pause--this is an endless theme, endless as the glory of those who
hover in eternal light and ecstatic radiance above; it is moreover a
pæan I feel utterly unworthy to sing.”
[Illustration: (Christian Ring and Impression)]
We have received a drawing and impression of a ring which is in the
British Museum; and our opinion is that it belonged to one of the
early Christians. While the ΧΑΙΡΩ, _I rejoice_, upon it, favors the
idea, the monogram (upon the signet part) confirms it. This is,
evidently, the name of Jesus in its earliest monogrammatic form,
made up of the letters Χ. and Ρ. As commonly found on monuments in
the catacombs of Rome, it has a single cross with the Ρ. thus, ☧
while in our illustration the cross is multiplied; and this is the
only difference. Surely such a memorial as this is more likely to
have been the ring of the lowly-minded “fisherman,” than the one
which is said to be framed with diamonds and worn by the Pope. In
Dr. Kip’s very interesting work on the Catacombs of Rome, there is
an illustration of a seal-ring, upon which a like monogram appears,
although somewhat complicated.[70]
Near Cork, in Ireland, a silver ring was discovered, the hoop whereof
is composed of nine knobs or bosses, which may have served instead
of beads and been used by the wearer in the Catholic counting of
them. The antiquaries of Ireland have considered this ring as very
ancient.[71]
[Illustration: (Irish Diamond Ring Two Views)]
In referring to Irish rings, it may be well to mention one which was
found in the county of Westmeath, with some very ancient remains.[72]
It is remarkable, from being set with many diamonds in beautifully
squared work. On account of the place where it was discovered, a
suggestion has been made that it may have belonged to Rose Failge,
Prince of Ireland, eldest son of Calhoir the Great, who reigned A. D.
122, he being called the _Hero of Rings_. However, diamonds do not
appear to have been named among precious stones at that early period.
The author is not aware that diamonds are often set loosely or upon
swivel in a ring. We have mention of one in the reign of James I. of
England. Robert Cecil, Earl of Salisbury, (nicknamed by a cotemporary
“Robert the Devil,” and by James called his “little Beagle,”) was
dangerously ill at Bath; but on a report of his recovery, the King
sent purposely the Lord Hay to him, with a token, “which was a
fair diamond, set or rather hung square in a gold ring without a
foil”--and this message, “That the favor and affection he bore him
was and should be ever, as the form and matter of that, endless,
pure and most perfect.”[73] A writer, given to detraction, says that
this great statesman died of the disease of Herod, upon the top of
a mole-hill; and that his body burst the lead it was wrapped in. On
his tomb lies the skeleton of the Earl curiously carved. He seemed
well to weigh the glory of a courtier, for in writing to Sir John
Harrington,[74] he said: “Good Knight, rest content and give heed
to one that hath sorrowed in the bright lustre of a Court, and gone
heavily even on the best seeming fair ground. ’Tis a great task to
prove one’s honesty and yet not spoil one’s fortune. You have tasted
a little hereof in our blessed Queen’s time, who was more than a
man, and, in truth, sometimes less than a woman. I wish I waited now
in your presence chamber, with ease at my food and rest in my bed.
I am pushed from the shore of comfort, and know not where the winds
and waves of a Court will bear me. I know it bringeth little comfort
on earth; and he is, I reckon, no wise man that looketh this way to
heaven.”
[Illustration: (Frank Pierce Ring)]
In the year one thousand eight hundred and fifty-two, some citizens
of California presented President Pierce with a gigantic ring. We
here give an outline, and add a description of it from Gleason’s
Pictorial Newspaper for the 25th of December, 1852.
[Illustration: (President Franklin Pierce Ring)]
“It is already pretty widely known to the public generally, that a
number of citizens of San Francisco have caused to be manufactured
and forwarded to Gen. Pierce, a most valuable and unique present,
in the form of a massive gold ring, as a token of esteem for the
President elect. Of this ring our artist has herewith given us
an admirable representation. It is a massive gold ring, weighing
upwards of a full pound. This monster ring, for chasteness of design,
elegance of execution, and high style of finish, has, perhaps, no
equal in the world. The design is by Mr. George Blake, a mechanic of
San Francisco. The circular portion of the ring is cut into squares,
which stand at right angles with each other, and are embellished each
with a beautifully executed design, the entire group presenting a
pictorial history of California, from her primitive state down to her
present flourishing condition, under the flag of our Union.
“Thus, there is given a grizzly bear in a menacing attitude, a
deer bounding down a slope, an enraged boa, a soaring eagle and a
salmon. Then we have the Indian with his bow and arrow, the primitive
weapon of self-defence; the native mountaineer on horseback, and
a Californian on horseback, throwing his lasso. Next peeps out a
Californian tent. Then you see a miner at work, with his pick, the
whole being shaded by two American flags, with the staves crossed and
groups of stars in the angles. The part of the ring reserved for a
seal is covered by a solid and deeply carved plate of gold, bearing
the arms of the State of California in the centre, surmounted by the
banner and stars of the United States, and inscribed with ‘FRANK
PIERCE,’ in old Roman characters. This lid opens upon a hinge, and
presents to view underneath a square box, divided by bars of gold
into nine separate compartments, each containing a pure specimen
of the varieties of ore found in the country. Upon the inside is
the following inscription: ‘_Presented to_ FRANKLIN PIERCE, _the
Fourteenth President of the United States._’ The ring is valued at
$2000. Our engraving gives a separate view of the lid, so as to
represent the appearance of the top of the ring both when it is open
and when it is closed. Altogether, it is a massive and superb affair,
rich in emblematical design and illustration, and worthy its object.”
Rings appear to have been worn indiscriminately on the fingers of
each hand. It would seem, however, from Jeremiah, that the Hebrews
wore them on their right hand; we there read that when the Lord
threatened King Zedekiah with the utmost effects of his anger, he
told him: “Though Coniah the son of Jehoiakim, king of Judah, were
the signet on my right hand, yet would I pluck thee thence.”[75]
Trimalchion wore two rings, one large and gilt, upon the little
finger of his right hand, and the other of gold, powdered with iron
stars, upon the middle of the ring finger.[76]
Among the Romans, before rings came to be adorned with stones, and
while the graving was yet on the metal itself, every one wore them at
pleasure on what hand and finger he pleased. When stones came to be
added, they had them altogether on the left hand; and it would have
been held an excess of foppery to have put them on the right.
Pliny says, they were at first worn on the fourth finger, then on the
second or index, then on the little finger, and at last, on all the
fingers excepting the middle one.
Clemens Alexandrinus has it that men wore the ring on the extremity
of the little finger, so as to leave the hand more free.
According to Aulus Gellius,[77] both the Greeks and Romans wore them
on the fourth finger of the left hand; and the reason he gives for
it is this, that having found, from anatomy, that this finger had a
little nerve that went straight to the heart, they esteemed it the
most honorable by this communication with that noble part. Macrobius
quotes Atteius Capito, that the right hand was exempt from this
office, because it was much more used than the left, and, therefore,
the precious stones of the rings were liable to be broken, and that
the finger of the left hand was selected which was the least employed.
Pliny says, the Gauls and ancient Britons wore the ring on the middle
finger.
At first, the Romans only used a single ring; then, one on each
finger, and, at length, as we gather from Martial,[78] several on
each. Afterwards, according to Aristophanes,[79] one on each joint.
Their foppery at length arose to such a pitch that they had their
weekly rings.
The beast Heliogabalus carried the point of using rings the farthest,
for, according to Lampridius, he never wore the same ring or the same
shoe twice.
Heliogabalus was a funny wretch:--he would frequently invite to his
banquets eight old men blind of one eye, eight bald, eight deaf,
eight lame with the gout, eight blacks, eight exceedingly thin, and
eight so fat that they could scarcely enter the room, and who, when
they had eaten as much as they desired, were obliged to be taken out
of the apartment on the shoulders of several soldiers.
Egyptian women wore many, and sometimes two or three on one finger;
but the left was considered the hand peculiarly privileged to bear
these ornaments; and it is remarkable that its third was decorated
with a greater number than any other and was considered by them as
the ring finger.[80] This notion, as we have observed, the Grecians
had.
The idea of wearing rings on the fourth finger of the left hand,
because of a supposed artery there which went to the heart, was
carried so far that, according to Levinus Lemnius, this finger
was called _Medicus_; and the old physicians would stir up their
medicaments and potions with it, because no venom could stick upon
the very outmost part of it but it will offend a man and communicate
itself to the heart.
With regard to the translation of rings from the right to the
left hand, it may be pleasing to refer to that charming old work,
_Enquiries into Vulgar and Common Errors_, by Browne:[81] he says,
“That hand [the left] being lesse employed, thereby they were best
preserved, and for the same reason they placed them on this finger,
for the thumbe was too active a finger and is commonly imployed with
either of the rest: the index or fore finger was too naked whereto to
commit their pretiosities, and hath the tuition of the thumbe scarce
unto the second joynt: the middle and little finger they rejected
as extreams, and too big or too little for their rings; and of all
chose out the fourth as being least used of any, as being guarded
on either side, and having in most this peculiar condition that it
cannot be extended alone and by itselfe, but will be accompanied by
some finger on either side.”
As to the Egyptians deriving a nerve from the heart in the fourth
finger of the left hand, the priests, from this notion, anointed the
same with precious oils before the altar. And Browne, in his Vulgar
Errors, says, “The Egyptians were weak anatomists, which were so good
embalmers.”[82]
In the General Epistle of St. James,[83] we have this: “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?” In an illustrated edition
of the New Testament, it is said, the expression “with a gold ring”
might very properly be rendered, “having his fingers adorned with
gold rings;” and that about the time referred to in the text, the
wearing of many rings had become a fashion, at least among the master
people, the Romans, from whom it was probably adopted by persons of
wealth and rank in the provinces. The custom is noticed by Arrian;
while Seneca, in describing the luxury and ostentation of the time,
says, “We adorn our fingers with rings, and a jewel is displayed on
every joint.” There is a newspaper anecdote of an eminent preacher
at Norwich, in England, which shows that he had the above verse
(from the Epistle of St. James) in mind when it occurred. His
Reverence made a sudden pause in his sermon; the congregation were
panic-struck. Having riveted their attention, he addressed himself by
name to a gentleman in the gallery. “Has that poor man who stands at
the back of your pew a gold ring on his finger?” The gentleman turned
round, and replied, “I believe not, sir.” “Oh, then, I suppose that
is the reason he must not have a seat.” The gentleman had three gold
rings on his hand; and his pew was nearly empty.
Here is another anecdote of a priest, in worse taste than the last.
Albert Pio, Prince of Caspi, was buried with extraordinary pomp in
the Church of the Cordeliers at Paris. He had been deprived of his
principality by the Duke of Ferrara, became an author, and finally
a fanatic. Entering one day into one of the churches at Madrid, he
presented holy water to a lady who had a very thin hand, ornamented
by a most beautiful and valuable ring. He exclaimed in a loud voice
as she reached the water, “Madam, I admire the ring more than the
hand.” The lady instantly exclaimed, with reference to the cordon
or rope with which he was decorated, “And for my part, I admire the
halter more than I do the ass.” He was buried in the habit of a
Cordelier; and Erasmus made a satire on the circumstance, entitled
the “Seraphic Interment.”