WeRead Powered by ReaderPub
The Every-day Book and Table Book. v. 3 (of 3) / Everlasting Calerdar of Popular Amusements, Sports, Pastimes, Ceremonies, Manners, Customs and Events, Incident to Each of the Three Hundred and Sixty-five Days, in past and Present Times; Forming a Complete History of the Year, Month, and Seasons, and a Perpetual Key to the Almanac cover

The Every-day Book and Table Book. v. 3 (of 3) / Everlasting Calerdar of Popular Amusements, Sports, Pastimes, Ceremonies, Manners, Customs and Events, Incident to Each of the Three Hundred and Sixty-five Days, in past and Present Times; Forming a Complete History of the Year, Month, and Seasons, and a Perpetual Key to the Almanac

Chapter 668: Vol. II.—28.
By William Hone
Open in WeRead

Explore more books like this:

Essays, Letters & SpeechesHistory - Other

About This Book

The volume organizes a day-by-day miscellany that records popular amusements, sports, pastimes, ceremonies, manners, and customs for each day of the year, combining historical notes, antiquarian curiosities, chronology, topography, biography, natural history, art, science, rules for weather and health, and poetic and illustrative material. It assembles anecdotes, explanations of seasonal rituals and observances, translations and literary extracts, and practical advice in a miscellany format, accompanied by engravings and an index, intended as a perpetual almanac and a readerly resource for both entertainment and reference.

II. CORRESPONDENTS’ INDEX.

III. INDEX TO THE POETRY.

IV. INDEX TO THE ENGRAVINGS.

  • 1. Alderson, Hut., of Durham, 365.
  • 2. Antiquarian Hall, 139.
  • 3. Antique bronze found in the Thames, 267.
  • 4. Antique bronze found in the Thames, another view, 269.
  • 5. Armorial bearing, 555.
  • 6. Barleycorn, sir John, 116.
  • 7. Bath chairman, mock funeral of, 41.
  • 8. Bear garden, in Southwark, in 1574, 491.
  • 9. Bear garden, in Southwark, in 1648, 493.
  • 10. Beckenham church-yard, porch of, 765.
  • 11. Beckenham church, font of, 771.
  • 12. Beckenham Church, Kent, 765.
  • 13. Beckenham road, bridge over, 701.
  • 14. Berne, arcades in, 428.
  • 15. Billy Boots, 303.
  • 16. Bird-catcher, (London) in 1827, 589.
  • 17. Blind Hannah, 221.
  • 18. Blind Willie, of Newcastle, 461.
  • 19. Buckingham, duke of, house in which he died, 525.
  • 20. Charke, Mrs., Colley Cibber’s daughter, 125.
  • 21. Chatham-hill, Star inn on, 605.
  • 22. Collecting-box, 769.
  • 23. Cranbourne Chase, emigration of deer from, 29.
  • 24. “Crooked Billet,” on Penge Common, 669.
  • 25. Eclipse, the race-horse, 619.
  • 26. Elvet bridge, Durham, 413.
  • 27. Fleet river, (ancient) at Clerkenwell, 75.
  • 28. Harrow church, font of, 157.
  • 29. Hobby-horses for children, crier of, 686.
  • 30. Holly-tree, carrying of at Brough, 27.
  • 31. Howard, of Effingham, lord, autograph of, 573.
  • 32. Interlaken, houses in, 428.
  • 33. London cries, 509.
  • 34. London cherry-woman, 685.
  • 35. Lovat, lord, 237.
  • 36. March Fair, at Brough, Westmoreland, 317.
  • 37. May-day, at Lynn, 541.
  • 38. May-day dance, 557.
  • 39. Monument at Lucerne, 253.
  • 40. Newsman, 61.
  • 41. Newspaper, reading the, 797.
  • 42. Pageant vehicle and play, 11.
  • 43. Pedestrian costume, 428.
  • 44. Petrarch’s Inkstand, frontispiece.
  • 45. Pillar, ancient British, 349.
  • 46. Poor’s-box in Cawston church, 747.
  • 47. Poor’s-box in Loddon church, 749.
  • 48. Seal of the lord high admiral, 573.
  • 49. Servants, hiring of, at a statute fair, 203.
  • 50. Shepherd’s well, Hampstead, 581.
  • 51. Snuff-box, (My) 189.
  • 52. Snuffers, pair of old, 637.
  • 53. Soldier, (Scotch) story of, 285.
  • 54. Stanmore toll-house, 171.
  • 55. Stratford-upon-Avon church, 445.
  • 56. Swiss costume, 428.
  • 57. Swiss costume, 429.
  • 58. Tommy Bell, 651.
  • 59. Tommy Sly, of Durham, 334.
  • 60. York, duke of, 93.
  • 61. “Young lambs to sell,” 395.
  • 62. Water-carriers, (old) 733.
  • 63. West Wickham church, 811.

Vol. II.—28.

THE
TABLE BOOK.

The Gimmal Ring.

The Gimmal Ring.

This is an ancient form of the “tool of matrimony,” from one found at Horsleydown, and exhibited in 1800 to the Society of Antiquaries. Mr. Robert Smith, the possessor of this curious ring, transmitted with it some remarks and descriptions of a nature very interesting to the lovers of archæology, and the “happy estate;” and from thence is derived the following account of this particular ring, with illustrations of the form and use of the gimmal-ring generally.—

This ring is constructed, as the name imports, of twin or double hoops, which play one within another, like the links of a chain. Each hoop has one of its sides flat, the other convex; each is twisted once round, and each surmounted by a hand, issuing from an embossed fancy-work wrist or sleeve; the hand rising somewhat above the circle, and extending in the same direction. The course of the twist, in each hoop, is made to correspond with that of its counterpart, so that on bringing together the flat surfaces of the hoops, the latter immediately unite in one ring. On the lower hand, or that of which the palm is uppermost, is represented a heart; and, as the hoops close, the hands slide into contact, forming, with their ornamented wrists, a head to the whole. The device thus presents a triple emblem of love, fidelity, and union. Upon the flat side of the hoops are engraven “Usé de Vertu,” in Roman capitals; and, on the inside of the lower wrist, the figures “990.” The whole is of fine gold, and weighs two pennyweights four grains.

It is of foreign workmanship, probably French, and appears to be of no great antiquity; perhaps about the reign of our queen Elizabeth: for though the time of the introduction into Europe of the Arabic numerals be referred by some to an æra nearly corresponding with the figures on the ring, the better opinion seems to be, that the Arabian method of notation was unknown to the Europeans until about the middle of the 13th century. It is conjecture, therefore, that the figures were meant to express, not a date, but the artist’s number; such as we see still engraven on watches. The workmanship is not incurious; and the ring furnishes a genuine specimen of the gimmal, (a term now almost forgotten.)

Rings, it is well known, are of great antiquity; and, in the early ages of the world, denoted authority and government. These were communicated, symbolically, by the delivery of a ring to the person on whom they were meant to be conferred. Thus Pharaoh, when he committed the government of Egypt to Joseph, took the ring from his finger and gave it to Joseph, as a token of the authority with which he invested him. So also did Ahasuerus to his favourite Haman, and to Mordecai, who succeeded him in his dignity.

In conformity to this ancient usage, recorded in the Bible, the Christian church afterwards adopted the ceremony of the ring in marriage, as a symbol of the authority which the husband gave the wife over his household, and over the “earthly goods” with which he endowed her.

But the gimmal ring is comparatively of modern date. It should seem, that we are indebted for the design to the ingenious fancies of our Gallic neighbours, whose skill in diversifying the symbols of the tender passion has continued unrivalled, and in the language of whose country the mottoes employed on almost all the amorous trifles are still to be found. It must be allowed, that the double hoop, each apparently free yet inseparable, both formed for uniting, and complete only in their union, affords a not unapt representation of the married state.

Among the numerous “love-tokens” which lovers have presented to their mistresses, in all ages, the ring bears a conspicuous part; nor is any more likely than the gimmal to “steal the impression of a mistress’s fantasy,” as none so clearly expresses its errand. In the “Midsummer-Night’s Dream” of Shakspeare, where Egeus accuses Lysander, before the duke, of having inveigled his daughter’s affections, or, as the old man expresses it, “witch’d the bosom” of his child, he exclaims,

“Thou hast given her rhimes,
 And interchang’d love-tokens with my child:
 Thou hast, by moon-light, at her window sung,
 With feigning voice, verses of feigning love;
 And stol’n the impression of her fantasie,
 With bracelets of thy hair, rings, gawds, conceits.”

From a simple love-token, the gimmal was at length converted into the more serious “sponsalium annulus,” or ring of affiance. The lover putting his finger through one of the hoops, and his mistress hers through the other, were thus, symbolically, yoked together; a yoke which neither could be said wholly to wear, one half being allotted to the other. In this use of the gimmal may be seen typified, “a community of interests, mutual forbearance, and a participation of authority.”

The French term for it is foi, or alliance; which latter word, in the “Dictionnaire de Trévoux,” is defined, “bague ou jonc que l’accordé donne à son accordée, où il y a un fil d’or, et un fil d’argent.” This definition not only shows the occasion of its use, but supposes the two hoops to be composed, one of gold, the other of silver; a distinction evidently meant to characterise the bridegroom and bride. Thus Columella calls those vines which produce two different sorts of grapes, “gemellæ vites.”

Our English glossaries afford but little information on the subject. Minshew refers the reader from gimmal to gemow; the former he derives from “gemellus,” the latter from the French “jumeau:” and he explains the gemow ring to signify “double or twinnes, because they be rings with two or more links.” Neither of the words is in Junius. Skinner and Ainsworth deduce gimmal from the same Latin origin, and suppose it to be used only of something consisting of correspondent parts, or double. Dr. Johnson gives it a more extensive signification; he explains gimmal to mean, “some little quaint devices, or pieces of machinery,” and refers to Hanmer: but he inclines to think the name gradually corrupted from geometry or geometrical, because, says he, “any thing done by occult means is vulgarly said to be done by geometry.”

The word is not in Chaucer, nor in Spenser; yet both Blount in his “Glossography,” and Philips in his “World of Words,” have geminals; which they interpret twins.

Shakspeare has gimmal in two or three places; though none of the commentators seem thoroughly to understand the term.

Gimmal occurs in “King Henry the Fifth,” Act IV. Scene II., where the French lords are proudly scoffing at the condition of the English army. Grandpree says,

“The horsemen sit like fixed candlesticks,
 With torch-staves in their hands; and their poor jades
 Lob down their heads, dropping the hide and hips:
 The gum down-roping from their pale dead eyes;
 And in their pale dull mouths the gimmal bit
 Lies foul with chaw’d grass, still and motionless.”

We may understand the gimmal bit, therefore, to mean either a double bit, in the ordinary sense of the word (duplex,) or, which is more appropriate, a bit composed of links, playing one within another, (gemellus.)

In the “First Part of King Henry the Sixth,” after the French had been beaten back with great loss, Charles and his lords are concerting together the farther measures to be pursued, and the king says,

“Let’s leave this town, for they are hare brain’d slaves,
 And hunger will enforce them to be more eager:
 Of old I know them; rather with their teeth
 The walls they’ll tear down, than forsake the siege.”

To which Reignier subjoins,

“I think, by some odd gimmals or device,
 Their arms are set, like clocks, still to strike on;
 Else they could ne’er hold out so, as they do,
 By my consent we’ll e’en let them alone.”

Some of the commentators have the following note upon this passage: “A gimmal is a piece of jointed work, where one piece moves within another; whence it is taken at large for an engine. It is now vulgarly called ‘gimcrack.’”

Mr. Archdeacon Nares instances a stage direction in “Lingua,” an old play—“Enter Anamnestes (a page to Memory) in a grave sattin sute, purple buskins, &c. a gimmal ring with one link hanging.” He adds, that gimmal rings, though originally double, were by a further refinement made triple, or even more complicated; yet the name remained unchanged. Herrick, in his “Hesperides,” has the following verses.

The Jimmal Ring, or True-love-knot.

Thou sent’st to me a true-love-knot; but I
 Return’d a ring of jimmals, to imply
 Thy love had one knot, mine a triple-tye.

According to Randle Holme, who, under the term “annulet,” figures the gimmal ring,[242] Morgan, in his “Sphere of Gentry,” speaks of “three triple gimbal rings borne by the name of Hawberke:” which Mr. Nares says was “evidently because the hawberk was formed of rings linked into each other.”

A further illustration of the gimmal ring may be gathered from the following passage. “It is related in Davis’s Rites of the Cathedral of Durham, (8vo. 1672, p. 51,) that over our lady of Bolton’s altar there was a marvellous, lively, and beautiful image of the picture of our lady, called the lady of Bolton, which picture was made to open with gimmes (or linked fastenings) from the breast downward; and within the said image was wrought and pictured the image of our Saviour marvellously finely gilt.”[243]

I find that the brass rings within which the seaman’s compass swings, are by the seamen called gimbals. This is the only instance I can discover of the term being still used.

*

The gimmal ring appears in common language to have been called a joint-ring. There is a passage relating to it in Dryden’s “Don Sebastian.”