RINGS COUPLED WITH REMARKABLE HISTORICAL
CHARACTERS OR CIRCUMSTANCES.
1. Ring of Suphis; Pharaoh’s Ring given to Joseph. 2. Rings of
Hannibal; Mithridates; Pompey; Cæsar; Augustus and Nero. 3. Cameo.
4. Ethelwoulf; Madoc; Edward the Confessor; King John; Lord L’Isle;
Richard Bertie and his Son Lord Willoughby; Great Earl of Cork;
Shakspeare’s Signet-Ring; The Ring Queen Elizabeth gave to Essex;
Ring of Mary of Scotland and one sent by her to Elizabeth; Darnley;
The Blue Ring; Duke of Dorset; Ring in the Isle of Wight supposed
to have belonged to Charles the First, and Memorial Rings of this
Monarch; Earl of Derby; Charles the Second; Jeffrey’s Blood-Stone;
The great Dundee; Nelson; Scotch Coronation Ring; The Admirable
Crichton; Sir Isaac Newton; Kean; Wedding Ring of Byron’s Mother.
5. Matrons of Warsaw. 6. The Prussian Maiden.
§ 1. When Egypt is mentioned, the Pyramids rise in their sublimity--a
sublimity made perfect by their vastness and mysterious age. We can
fancy Abraham beholding them with awe, as, in the moonlight, they
seemed to be awful and gigantic reflexes of his own tents looming
into the heavens. We can imagine Alexander, rushing triumphantly on
as the sun warmed and brightened their points; and Cambyses, within
their shadow, horrifying the Egyptians by the destruction of their
god Apis. We can hear, too, the modern destroyer, with the bombastic
cry to his soldiers that, from the summits of those monuments, forty
centuries looked down upon them: they must indeed have looked down
upon those who came as locusts and were swept away like them! And
as our minds enter, from the outward heat, into the cold chamber of
the Pyramids, we observe Champollion, Wilkinson, Vyse and Lepsius
unrolling ages with the unwinding of papyrus and illuminated bandage.
Let us, however, attempt to sink these mighty mountains of man’s
labor below the desert--upon which they now heavily press as though
they were sealing the earth--and bring up, amid the vast desert and
in their place, a single figure, bearing a signet-ring upon its
finger. It is Suphis or Cheops, King of Memphis, who caused the Great
Pyramid to be made for his monument. What a speck, for such a tomb!
The monuments of man take up much space. Here was a whole nation
employed to make one man’s mausoleum. We fear that the virtues which
live after men could often go within the compass of their finger-ring.
To every kingly order or decree connected with the foundation of the
Great Pyramid or with the thousands of men who had to work or with
the prodigious material employed, an impression of the signet-ring of
Suphis had to be attached. Rings have been used for higher and holier
things; but never for so vast a human purpose.
Now, bring up, once more, (through the mind’s enchantment,) the
Pyramids, built upwards of two thousand years before the time of
Christ, with all the busy centuries which have encircled them;
and looking back, we can hardly think that this ring of Suphis, a
circle which an inch square might hold--is undestroyed! And even
if it be, we can scarcely believe that it is to be seen within the
sweep of our own observation. The city of New-York holds the ring
of Suphis. In the Egyptian collection formed by Dr. Abbott is this
ring. And if exquisite work can add to its value, it has it in a high
degree. Beautiful in execution;--there is something wonderful in its
preservation; while a species of awe, seldom attaching to a small
substance, seems to chill our nature and we are dumb while we look
upon it.
Here is the most valuable antique ring in the world. This ring alone
ought to be sufficient to secure the collection to New-York for
ever.[252]
[Illustration: (Hieroglyphics Ring and Oval)]
It may be well to copy a description of this relic as it appears in
Dr. Abbott’s Catalogue:
“This remarkable piece of antiquity is in the highest state of
preservation, and was found at Ghizeh, in a tomb near that excavation
of Colonel Vyse’s called Campbell’s tomb. It is of fine gold; and
weighs nearly three sovereigns. The style of the hieroglyphics is in
perfect accordance with those in the tombs about the Great Pyramid,
and the hieroglyphics within the oval make the name of that Pharaoh
of whom the pyramid was the tomb. The details are minutely accurate
and beautifully executed. The heaven is engraved with stars: the fox
or jackal has significant lines within its contour: the hatchets
have their handles bound with thongs, as is usual in the sculptures;
the volumes have the string which binds them hanging below the roll,
differing in this respect from any example in sculptured or painted
hieroglyphics. The determinative for country is studded with dots,
representing the sand of the mountains at the margin of the valley of
Egypt. The instrument, as in the larger hieroglyphics, has the tongue
and semi-lunar mark of the sculptured examples; as is the case also
with the heart-shaped vase. The name is surmounted with the globe and
feathers, decorated in the usual manner; and the ring of the cartouch
is engraved with marks representing a rope, never seen in the
sculptures: and the only instance of a royal name similarly encircled
is a porcelain example in this collection, inclosing the name of the
father of Sesostris. The O in the name is placed as in the examples
sculptured in the tombs, not in the axis of the cartouch. The
chickens have their unfledged wings; the cerastes its horns, now only
to be seen with the magnifying glass.”
[Illustration: Signet of the actual size.]
[Illustration: (Signet Top and Bottom Seal)]
Probably the next most important ring is one believed to have been
that which was given by Pharaoh to the patriarch Joseph. Upon
opening, in the winter of 1824, a tomb in the necropolis of Sakkara
near Memphis, Arab workmen discovered a mummy, every limb of which
was cased in solid gold; each finger had its particular envelope,
inscribed with hieroglyphics: “So Joseph died, being an hundred and
ten years old; and they embalmed him and he was put in a coffin in
Egypt.”[253] A golden scarabæus or beetle was attached to the neck
by a chain of the same metal; _a signet-ring_ was also found, a pair
of golden bracelets and other relics of value.[254] The excavation
had been made at the charge of the Swedish Consul; but the articles
discovered became the prize of the laborers. By a liberal application
of the cudgel, the scarabæus with its chain, a fragment of the gold
envelope and the bracelets were recovered. The bracelets are now in
the Leyden Museum, and bear the same name as the ring.[255] This
signet-ring, however, which was not given up at the time, found
its way to Cairo and was there purchased by the Earl of Ashburnham.
That nobleman having put his collection of relics, with his baggage,
on board a brig chartered in Alexandria for Smyrna, the vessel was
plundered by Greek pirates, who sold their booty in the island of
Syra. The signet in question fell thus into the hands of a Greek
merchant, who kept it till about three years ago, when it was sold
in Constantinople and purchased and brought finally to England. It
is again in the possession of the Earl of Ashburnham. This signet
has been assigned to the age of Thothmes III. The quantity and
nature of the golden decorations existing in the tomb referred to
indicate it as the sepulchre of one of the Pharaohs or of some highly
distinguished officer of the royal household; and a calculation
places the death of the patriarch Joseph in about the twentieth
year of the reign of Thothmes III. The signet would be an excellent
specimen of the antique of a kind called Tabat, still common in the
country and which resemble, in all but the engraved name upon this
signet, the ring placed by Pharaoh on Joseph’s hand. The seal turns
on a swivel, (and, so, has two tablets,) and, with the ring or circle
of the signet, is of very pure and massive gold. The carving is very
superior and also bold and sharp, which may be accounted for from the
difficult oxydization of gold above all metals. In connection with
this ring, it is necessary to remember what occurred when “Pharaoh
took off his ring from his hand and put it upon Joseph’s hand.”--“And
he made him to ride in the second chariot which he had; and they
cried before him, Bow the knee; and he made him ruler over all the
land of Egypt. And Pharaoh said unto Joseph, I am Pharaoh and
without thee shall no man lift up his hand or foot in all the land of
Egypt. _And Pharaoh called Joseph’s name_ ZAPHNATH-PAANEAH.” The seal
has the cartouch of Pharaoh. And one line upon it has been construed
into _Paaneah_, the name bestowed by Pharaoh on Joseph. This
signifies, in combination with “_Zaphnath_,” either, _the Revealer of
Secrets_, or, _the Preserver of the World_.
A discovery of the ring of Suphis and that which Pharaoh gave to
Joseph appears to border on the marvellous; and, yet, such things
were and gentleness of climate may allow us to suppose that they
still exist,--while modern energy, science and learning are so
laying bare the world’s sepulchre of the past that we ought not to
disbelieve at the suggested resurrection of any thing. In excavations
recently made in Persia, the palace of Shushan and the tomb of Daniel
have probably been found; and also the very pavement described in
Esther, i. 6, “of red and blue and white and green marble.”[256]
§ 2. Hannibal carried his death in his ring, which was a singular
one. When the Roman ambassadors required the king of Bythinia to
give Hannibal up, the latter, on the point of the king’s doing so,
swallowed poison, which he always carried about in his ring. In
the late war between America and Mexico, rings were found upon the
fingers of dead officers of the latter country. These opened and,
it is said, a poisonous substance was discovered; and there is a
notion that the owners of these rings were ready to act the part of
Hannibal: poison themselves rather than become prisoners.
The Romans were very curious in collecting cases of rings,
(_dactylothecæ_,) many of which are mentioned as being at Rome; among
these was that which Pompey the Great took from Mithridates and
dedicated to Jupiter in the Capitol.[257]
And Pompey’s ring is known. Upon it were engraved three trophies,
as emblems of his three triumphs over the three parts of the world
Europe, Asia and Africa.[258] A ring with a trophy cut upon it has
helped to victory: When Timoleon was laying siege to Calauria, Icetes
took the opportunity to make an inroad into the territories of
Syracuse, where he met with considerable booty; and having made great
havoc, he marched back by Calauria itself, in contempt of Timoleon
and the slender force he had with him. Timoleon suffered him to pass;
and then followed him with his cavalry and light-armed foot. When
Icetes saw he was pursued, he crossed the Damyrias and stood in a
posture to receive the enemy, on the other side. What emboldened him
to do this was the difficulty of the passage and the steepness of
the banks on both sides. But a strange dispute and jealousy of honor
which arose among the officers of Timoleon awhile delayed the combat:
for there was not one that was willing to go after another, but every
man wanted to be foremost in the attack; so that their fording was
likely to be very tumultuous and disorderly by their jostling each
other and pressing to get before. To remedy this, Timoleon ordered
them to decide the matter by lot; and that each, for this purpose,
should give him his ring. He took the rings and shook them in the
skirt of his robe; and the first that came up happening to have a
trophy for the seal, the young officers received it with joy and,
crying out that they would not wait for any other lot, made their way
as fast as possible through the river and fell upon the enemy, who,
unable to sustain the shock, soon took to flight, throwing away their
arms and leaving a thousand of their men dead upon the spot.[259]
Cæsar’s ring bore an armed Venus. On that of Augustus there was,
first, a sphinx; afterwards, the image of Alexander the Great; and at
last, his own, which the succeeding emperors continued to use. Dr.
Clarke says, the introduction of sculptured animals upon the signets
of the Romans was derived from the sacred symbols of the Egyptians
and hence the origin of the sphinx for the signet of Augustus.
Nero’s signet-ring bore Apollo, flaying Marsyas. This emperor’s
musical vanity led him to adopt it.
§ 3. When the practice of deifying princes and venerating heroes
became general, portraits of men supplied the place of more ancient
types. This custom gave birth to the cameo; not, perhaps, introduced
before the Roman power and rarely found in Greece.
§ 4. In the British Museum is an enamelled gold ring of Ethelwoulf,
King of Wessex, second King of England, A. D. 836, 838. It bears his
name.[260]
The tradition of Madoc, one of the last princes of Powis, is kept
up by the discovery of a gold signet-ring, with the impress of a
monogram placed under a crown. It is supposed to be the ring of Madoc.
The ring of Edward the Confessor has been discovered; and is said to
be in the possession of Charles Kean the actor and that he wears it
whenever he plays the character of King Lear. This performer is a
collector of antiquities. He purchased the red hat of Cardinal Wolsey
at the sale of the Strawberry Hill collection. This hat was found
by Bishop Burnet, when Clerk of the Closet, in the great wardrobe
and was given by his son, the Judge, to the Countess Dowager of
Albemarle, who presented it to Horace Walpole.
King John of England is reputed to have secured a ring to aid his
designs upon the beautiful wife of the brave Eustace de Vesci, one
of the twenty-five barons appointed to enforce the observance of
Magna Charta.[261] The tyrant, hearing that Eustace de Vesci had a
very beautiful wife, but far distant from court and studying how to
accomplish his licentious designs towards her, sitting at table with
her husband and seeing a ring on his finger, he laid hold on it and
told him that he had such another stone, which he resolved to set
in gold in that very form. And having thus got the ring, presently
sent it to her, in her husband’s name; by that token conjuring her,
if ever she expected to see him alive, to come speedily to him. She,
therefore, upon sight of the ring, gave credit to the messenger
and came with all expedition. But so it happened that her husband,
casually riding out, met her on the road and marvelling much to see
her there, asked what the matter was? and when he understood how
they were both deluded, resolved to find a wanton and put her in
apparel to personate his lady. The king afterwards boasting to the
injured husband himself, Eustace had the pleasure to undeceive him.
We may imagine the cheated monarch’s rage and how freely he used his
favorite oath of, “by the teeth of God!”
Lord L’Isle, of the time of Henry VIII. of England, had been
committed to the Tower of London on suspicion of being privy to a
plot to deliver up the garrison of Calais to the French. But his
innocence appearing manifest on investigation, the monarch released
and sent him a diamond ring with a most gracious message. Whether it
was his liberty or the ring or the message, the fact is that he died
the night following “of excessive joy.”[262]
The turquoise was valuable enough for princely gift. Anne of
Brittany, young and beautiful, Queen of Louis the Twelfth of France,
sent a turquoise ring to James the Fourth of Scotland, who fell at
Flodden. Scott refers to it:
“For the fair Queen of France
Sent him a turquoise ring and glove;
And charged him, as her knight and love,
For her to break a lance.”
And, in a note, he says that a turquoise ring, “probably this fatal
gift,” is (with James’s sword and dagger) preserved in the College of
Heralds, London; and gives the following quotation from Pittscottie:
“Also, the Queen of France wrote a love-letter to the King of
Scotland, calling him her love, showing him that she had suffered
much rebuke in France for the defending of her honor. She believed
surely that he would recompense her again with some of his kingly
support in her necessity, that is to say, that he would raise her an
army and come three foot of ground, on English ground, for her sake.
To that effect she sent him a ring off her finger, with fourteen
hundred French crowns to pay his expenses.”
Some of the trials of life which Richard Bertie and his wife
Catharine, Duchess of Suffolk, underwent,[263] are matters of
history. They arose from the zeal of the Duchess for the Reformation
in the reign of Edward VI. and through the malice of Bishop Gardiner.
The lady had in her “progress” caused a dog in a rochet (part of a
bishop’s dress) to be carried and called by Gardiner’s name. They had
an only son Peregrine Bertie, who claimed and obtained the Barony
of Willoughby of Eresby. He was sent as general of auxiliaries
into France; and did good service at the siege of Paris and by
the reduction of many towns. His troops were disbanded with great
commendation; and Lord Willoughby received a present of a diamond
ring from the King of France.[264] This ring he, at his death, left
his son, with a charge, upon his blessing, to transmit it to his
heirs. Queen Elizabeth wrote a free letter inviting him back to
England, beginning it, “Good Peregrine.” His will is a remarkable
one. It begins thus: “In the name of the blessed divine Trynitie in
persons and of Omnipotent Unitye in Godhead, who created, redeemed
and sanctified me, whom I steadfastlye beleeve will glorifye this
sinfull, corruptyble and fleshely bodie, with eternal happiness
by a joyeful resurrection at the general Judgment, when by his
incomprehensible justice and mercye, having satisfied for my sinfull
soule, and stored it uppe in his heavenlye treasure, his almightye
voyce shall call all fleshe to be joyned together with the soule to
everlasting comforte or discomforte. In that holye name I Pergrin
Bertye,” etc., etc., etc. He was once confined to his bed with the
gout and had an insulting challenge sent him, to which he answered,
“That although he was lame of his hands and feet, yet he would meet
his adversary with a piece of a rapier in his teeth.” His idea of a
“carpet knight” is observable in his saying, that “a court became a
soldier of good skill and great spirit as a bed of down would one of
the Tower lions.”
Richard Boyle, who, by personal merit, obtained a high position and
is known as the “great Earl of Cork,” did not forget his early life.
When he was in the height of his prosperity, he committed the most
memorable circumstances of his life to writing, under the title of
“True Remembrances;” and we find the mention of a ring which his
mother had given him: “When first I arrived in Ireland, the 23d
of June, 1588, all my wealth then was twenty-seven pounds three
shillings in money and two tokens which my mother had given me, viz.
a diamond ring, which I have ever since and still do wear, and a
bracelet of gold worth about ten pounds; a taffety doublet cut with
and upon taffety; a pair of black silk breeches laced; a new Milan
fustian suit laced and cut upon taffety, two cloaks, competent linen
and necessaries, with my rapier and dagger; and, since, the blessing
of God, whose heavenly providence guided me hither, hath enriched my
weak estate in the beginning with such a fortune as I need not envy
any of my neighbors, and added no care or burthen to my conscience
thereunto.”[265]
We have mentioned Shakspeare’s signet-ring. It is of gold and
was found on the sixteenth day of March in the year one thousand
eight hundred and ten, by a laborer’s wife upon the surface of the
mill-close, adjoining Stratford churchyard. The weight is twelve
penny-weights; it bears the initials W. S.; and was purchased by Mr.
R. B. Wheeler (who has published a Guide to Stratford-upon-Avon[266])
for thirty-six shillings, the current value of the gold. It is
evidently a gentleman’s ring of the time of Elizabeth; and the
crossing of the central lines of the W. with the oblique direction
of the lines of the S. exactly agree with the character of that day.
There is a connection or union of the letters by an ornamental string
and tassels, known commonly as a “true lover’s knot”--the upper bow
or flourish of which forms the resemblance of a heart. On the porch
of Charlcote House near Stratford, erected in the early part of
Elizabeth’s reign by the very Sir Thomas Lucy said to have persecuted
Shakspeare for deer stealing, the letters T. L. are surrounded in a
manner precisely similar. Allowing that this was Shakspeare’s ring,
it is the only existing article which originally belonged to him.
Singularly enough, a man named William Shakspeare was at work near
the spot when this ring was picked up.[267] Little doubt can be
entertained that it belonged to the poet and is probably the one
he lost before his death and was not to be found when his will
was executed, the word _hand_ being substituted for _seale_ in the
original copy of that document. The only other person at Stratford
having the same initials and likely to possess such a seal was
William Smith, but he used one having a different device, as may be
seen from several indentures preserved amongst the records of the
corporation. Halliwell believes in the authenticity of this relic.
Mr. Wheeler, its owner, says: “Though I purchased it upon the same
day for 36s. (the current value of the gold) the woman had sufficient
time to destroy the precious _ærugo_, by having it unnecessarily
immersed in _aquafortis_, to ascertain and prove the metal, at a
silversmith’s shop, which consequently restored its original color.”
In the Life of Haydon the painter,[268] we have the following letter
from him to Keats, (March 1, 1818:) “My dear Keats, I shall go mad!
In a field at Stratford-upon-Avon, that belonged to Shakspeare, they
have found a gold ring and seal, with the initials W. S. and a true
lover’s knot between. If this is not Shakspeare’s, whose is it?--a
true lover’s knot! I saw an impression to-day, and am to have one as
soon as possible: as sure as you breathe and that he was the first of
beings, the seal belonged to him.
“O Lord! B. R. HAYDON.”
Let us now turn to the ring that Queen Elizabeth gave to the
handsome, brave and open-hearted Devereux, Earl of Essex; and which
was probably worn by him, when, on his trial, he was desired to hold
up his right hand, and he said that he had, before that time, done it
often at her majesty’s command for a better purpose. The story of
this ring has been discarded by some authors; but we see no reason
to doubt it. We take our account from Francis Osborn’s Traditional
Memoirs on the Reign of Queen Elizabeth.[269] “Upon this,” says he,
“with a great deal of familiarity, she presented a ring to him, which
after she had, by oaths, endued with a power of freeing him from any
danger or distress, his future miscarriage, her anger or enemies’
malice could cast him into, she gave it him, with a promise that,
at the first sight of it, all this and more, if possible, should be
granted. After his commitment to the Tower, he sent this jewel to her
majesty by the then Countess of Nottingham, whom Sir Robert Cecill
kept from delivering it. But the Lady of Nottingham, coming to her
death-bed and finding by the daily sorrow the Queen expressed for the
loss of Essex, herself a principal agent in his destruction, could
not be at rest till she had discovered all and humbly implored mercy
from God and forgiveness from her earthly sovereign; who did not
only refuse to give it, but having shook her as she lay in bed, sent
her, accompanied with most fearful curses, to a higher tribunal.”
This reads like truth; and what a picture it presents! Mark the fury
of such an overbearing, half-masculine Queen; and, the repentant
passiveness of the dying Countess!
Dr. Birch, in his Memoirs, says: the Queen observed, “God may forgive
you, but I never can.”
We are inclined to believe that Elizabeth swore pretty roundly on
this occasion, as it is known she could; and that there was a
violence on the occasion is even shown by Dr. Birch: he says--“The
Countess of Nottingham, affected by the near approach of death,
obtained a visit from the Queen, to whom she revealed the secret;
that the Queen shook the dying lady in her bed, and thenceforth
resigned herself to the deepest melancholy.”
The melancholy continued; and this haughty woman was soon smitten;
refusing to rest on a bed, from a superstition that it would be her
death couch, she became almost a silent lunatic, and crouched upon
the floor. There sat she, as did another queen, who cried--
“Here I and sorrow sit,
Here is my throne;”
neither rising nor lying down, her finger almost always in her mouth,
her eyes open and fixed on the ground.[270] But her indomitable will
did not leave her in her death hour. She had declared she would have
no rascal to succeed her; and when she was too far gone to speak,
Secretary Cecil besought her, if she would have the King of Scots
to reign after her, to show some sign unto them. Whereat, suddenly
heaving herself up, she held both her hands joined together, over
her head, in manner of a crown. Then, she sank down, and dozed into
another world.
The Chevalier Louis Aubery de Maurier, who was many years the French
Minister in Holland, and said to have been a man of great parts
and unsuspected veracity, gives the following story of the Essex
ring:[271]
“It will not, I believe, be thought either impertinent or
disagreeable to add here what Prince Maurice had from the mouth of
Mr. Carleton, Ambassador from England in Holland, who died Secretary
of State, so well known under the name of my Lord Dorchester and
who was a man of great merit. He said that Queen Elizabeth gave the
Earl of Essex a ring in the height of her passion for him, ordering
him to keep it, and that whatever he should commit she would pardon
him when he should return that pledge. Since that time, the Earl’s
enemies having prevailed with the Queen, who besides was exasperated
against him for the contempt he showed for her beauty, which, through
age, began to decay, she caused him to be impeached. When he was
condemned, she expected that he should send her the ring; and would
have granted him his pardon according to her promise. The Earl
finding himself in the last extremity, applied to Admiral Howard’s
lady, who was his relation, and desired her, by a person whom she
could trust, to return the ring into the Queen’s own hands. But her
husband, who was one of the Earl’s greatest enemies and to whom she
told this imprudently, would not suffer her to acquit herself of the
commission; so that the Queen consented to the Earl’s death, being
full of indignation against such a proud and haughty spirit who
chose rather to die than to implore her mercy. Some time after, the
Admiral’s lady fell sick and being given over by her physicians, she
sent word to the Queen that she had something of great consequence
to tell her before she died. The Queen came to her bedside, and
having ordered all the attendants to withdraw, the Admiral’s lady
returned her, but too late, that ring from the Earl of Essex,
desiring to be excused that she did not return it sooner, having been
prevented doing it by her husband. The Queen retired immediately,
being overwhelmed with the utmost grief; she sighed continually for
a fortnight following, without taking any nourishment; lying abed
entirely dressed and getting up an hundred times a night. At last she
died with hunger and with grief, because she had consented to the
death of a lover who had applied to her for mercy. This melancholy
adventure shows that there are frequent transitions from one passion
to another and that as love often changes to hate, so hate, giving
place sometimes to pity, brings the mind back again into its first
state.” Sir Dudley Carleton, who is made the author of this story,
was a man who deserved the character that is given of him and could
not but be well informed of what had passed at court. The Countess of
Nottingham was the daughter of the Lord Viscount Hunsdon, related to
the Queen and also, by his mother, to the Earl of Essex.
The story of the ring and the relations of the Queen’s passion for
the Earl of Essex were long regarded by many writers as romantic
circumstances. But these facts are now more generally believed. Hume,
Birch and other judicious historians give credit to them. Dr. Birch
has confirmed Maurice’s account by the following narrative, which
was often related by the Lady Elizabeth Spelman, a descendant of
Sir Robert Cary, Earl of Monmouth, whose acquaintance with the most
secret transactions of Queen Elizabeth’s court is well known:[272]
“When Catharine, Countess of Nottingham, wife of the Lord High
Admiral and sister of the Earl of Monmouth, was dying, (as she did,
according to his Lordship’s own account, about a fortnight before the
Queen,) she sent to her majesty, to desire that she might see her
in order to reveal something to her majesty, without the discovery
of which she could not die in peace. Upon the Queen’s coming, Lady
Nottingham told her that, while the Earl of Essex lay under sentence
of death, he was desirous of asking her majesty’s mercy, in the
manner prescribed by herself, during the height of his favor: the
Queen having given him a ring which, being sent to her as a token
of his distress, might entitle him to her protection. But the Earl,
jealous of those about him and not caring to trust any one with it,
as he was looking out of the window one morning, saw a boy, with
whose appearance he was pleased, and, engaging him, by money and
promises, directed him to carry the ring, which he took from his
finger and threw down, to Lady Scroope, a sister of the Countess of
Nottingham and a friend of his lordship, who attended upon the Queen
and to beg of her that she would present it to her majesty. The boy,
by mistake, carried it to Lady Nottingham, who showed it to her
husband, the Admiral, an enemy of Lord Essex, in order to take his
advice. The Admiral forbid her to carry it or return any answer to
the message; but insisted upon her keeping the ring.
“The Countess of Nottingham having made the discovery, begged the
Queen’s forgiveness, but her majesty answered, ‘God may forgive you,
but I never can;’ and left the room with great emotion. Her mind was
so struck with this story that she never went to bed, nor took any
subsistence, from that instant: for Camden is of opinion that her
chief reason for suffering the Earl to be executed was his supposed
obstinancy in not applying to her for mercy.”
Miss Strickland considers that the story of this ring should not be
lightly rejected.
There are two rings extant claiming to be the identical one so
fatally retained by Lady Nottingham. The first is preserved at
Hawnes, Bedfordshire, England and is the property of the Reverend
Lord John Thynne. The ring is gold, the sides are engraved and the
inside set with blue enamel; the stone is a sardonyx, on which is
cut, in relief, a head of Elizabeth, the execution being of a high
order. The second is the property of a Mr. Warner, and was given
by Charles the First to Sir Thomas Warner, the settler of Antigua,
Nevis, etc. It is a diamond set in gold, inlaid with black enamel at
the back and sides.[273]
And now let us turn to one of Elizabeth’s victims, who had her talent
and was her contrast: for Mary of Scotland was womanly and beautiful.
So charming was she in the mind of the French poet Ronsard that he
tells us France without her was as “a ring bereft of its precious
pearl.”[274] The nuptial ring of Mary, Queen of Scots, on her
marriage with Lord Darnley, is extant.[275] It is, in general design,
a copy of her great seal, the banners only being different, for,
in the great seal they each bear a saltier surmounted by a crown.
(In her great seal made when Dowager of France, after the death of
Francis the Second, the dexter banner is St. Andrew’s Cross, the
sinister the Royal Arms of the Lion.) The ring part is enamelled. It
is of most beautiful and minute workmanship. An impression is not
larger than a small wafer. It has the initials M. R.; and on the
interior is a monogram of the letters M. and A., _Mary_ and _Albany_:
Darnley was created Duke of Albany.
A use of the arms of England by Mary came to the knowledge of and
gave great offence to Elizabeth and Burghley; and the latter obtained
a copy of them so used, which copy is now in the British Museum. It
is endorsed by Burghley, “False Armes of Scotl. Fr. Engl. Julii,
1559.” The following doggrel lines are underneath the arms:
“The armes of Marie Quene Dolphines of France
The nobillist Ladie in earth for till aduance,
Off Scotland Quene, and of England also,
Off Ireland als God haith providit so.”
A letter has been discovered in the handwriting of Mary herself
which presents the monogram of M. and A. that is upon the ring. This
epistle is in French; and the following is a translation:
“Madam, my good sister, the wish that I have to omit nothing that
could testify to you how much I desire not to be distant from your
good favor, or to give you occasion to suspect me from my actions
to be less attached to you than, my good sister, I am, does not
permit me to defer longer the sending to you the bearer, Master of my
Requests, to inform you further of my good will to embrace all means
which are reasonable, not to give you occasion to be to me other than
you have been hitherto; and relying on the sufficiency of the bearer,
I will kiss your hands, praying God that he will keep you, Madam my
good sister, in health and a happy and long life. From St. John’s
Town, this 15th of June.
“Your very affectionate and faithful
“Good Sister and Cousin,
“MARIE R.”
“To the Queen of England,
“Madam my good Sister
“and Cousin.”
The history of the ring bearing the arms of England, Scotland and
Ireland, (and which is said to have been produced in evidence at the
trial of the unfortunate Mary as a proof of her pretensions to the
crown of England,) is curious. It descended from Mary to her grandson
Charles the First, who gave it on the scaffold to Archbishop Juxon
for his son Charles the Second, who, in his troubles, pawned it in
Holland for three hundred pounds, where it was bought by Governor
Yale; and sold at his sale for three hundred and twenty dollars,
supposed to the Pretender. Afterwards it came into the possession
of the Earl of Ilay, Duke of Argyll. It was ultimately purchased by
George the Fourth of England, when he was Prince Regent.[276] This is
sometimes called the Juxon ring.
It appears by Andrews’s continuation of Henry’s History of Great
Britain,[277] that Mary had three wedding rings on her marriage with
Darnley: “She had on her back the great mourning gown of black, with
the great mourning hood,” (fit robes for such a wedding!) “The rings,
which were three, the middle a rich diamond, were put on her finger.
They kneel together and many prayers are said over them,” etc.,
etc. Rings of Mary of Modena have been mistaken for those of Mary of
Scotland.