Rings for the finger

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

ENGLISH RINGS

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

This has been rendered: