STONES IN RINGS.

Waikato Times, Volume 102, Issue 17078, 16 April 1927, Page 15 (Supplement)

STONES IN RINGS.

NOT A NEW IDEA. At a recent wedding the bride’s ring was of platinum, set with a single turquoise. This may seem a novel idea, but it is not so really. A century ago all wedding rings were inset with one or more precious stones. The majority of them, too, had cither an inscribed motto or the bride’s and bridegroom’s Christ'/an names linked in a heart-scroll. “Of love unbroken this circle is token” was a favourite inscription. It was Queen Victoria who "killed” the elaborate wedding ring, for she insisted on a plain gold band for her marriage with Prince Albert. In that respect she was following a former Queen, Mary, who, for her marriage with Philip of Spain, informed her Council that she desired Lo be married with a “plain hoop of gold.” Cromwell, and those associated with him, endeavoured to prohibit the use of wedding rings of any sort — even those of iron—but the “heathenish practice” could not be put down. For many centuries wedding rings were worn on the thumb, and even as late as the reign ol*George I. it was the rule for brides, although the wedding ring was placed on the Anger now customary, lo remove it, after the ceremony, to the thumb. Ecclesiastical admonitions, however, had the effect of bringing that somewhat queer custom lo an end. It is a pretty belief, but incorrect, that the fourth Anger of the left hand

was chosen for the ring finger because from that a vein ran directly to the heart. The choice was for practical reasons—to save the ring from unnecessary usage. That also is the 1 reason for the ring being worn on the left hand.