Free Web Hosting Provider - Web Hosting - E-commerce - High Speed Internet - Free Web Page
Search the Web

Wedfrugal.com Articles - History of Engagement Rings by Rachel Sanfordlyn Shreckengast
The
Frugal
Wedding
Site

Helping You
Save Money On
The Costs Of
Your Wedding!
Home Wedding Planning Articles Free Craft Projects Wedding Frugality Links Wedding Related Newsfeed
Bookstore Affiliates Sign the WedFrugal Guestbook View the WedFrugal Guestbook

History of Engagement Rings, Page One

copyright Rachel Sanfordlyn Shreckengast of WedFrugal.com

Many couples are interested in the tradition of the engagement ring. In many cultures, it has become the ultimate symbol of love, devotion and commitment. It's extremely common to have a diamond engagement ring, and for some this stone is the only one that they will accept. Yet, the tradition of a diamond engagement ring isn't very old and throughout much of history, diamonds didn't even enter the picture.

It's obvious that the shape of a ring is a circle. A circle has no beginning and no end. It's the shape of the sun and of the full moon. It's no wonder that ancient cultures used it as a symbol of unity, perfection and eternity. It's believed that the circle is where the tradition of the wedding ring might have gotten it's start.

The first engagement symbol probably wasn't a ring, but it's likely that the shape was translated into later versions of engagement symbols...including rings. According to most sources, the tradition started with the caveman (which cavemen is not specified). It's thought that the first engagement symbol was actually a woven cord of rushes (grasses, reeds) or leather. It's said that this cord was used to tie the hands and feet of his mate so that she could not get away. Once he thought she would stay, he tied it around her hands (and presumably took it off her feet). Finally when fully assured she would stay with him, he tied a cord only around her finger. This is one theory of the use of rushes. The other theory is that the two people were tied together with the corded rushes in the circular symbolism of unity. Though I much prefer the latter, I can't say with any certainty whether either is true.

Though the idea may be distasteful, slavery is not an uncommon theory. In fact, another theory is that the ring was like a miniature "slave band", which denoted that the woman was the man's property. This was done, but it isn't likely that this started engagement rings in the Roman culture as it came about later. Slaves were forbidden to wear rings throughout the Roman Republic (449-31 BC), but in later years iron rings denoted their status. Silver was worn by freed slaves. The wearing of gold rings was restricted in early years, but eventually they could be worn by all who were free. It wasn't until Emperor Justinian that the restrictions on who could wear rings were lifted.

Another theory talks of the dowry and/or bride price. Once upon a time, marriages were arranged...for a price. This much is a fact, there are documents (marriage/sale agreements or contracts) that speak of this exact practice. A number of them list the exact terms of the agreement and include the livestock, fabrics and other items that were traded for the bride. You can occasionally find some of these on Ebay if you are truly interested. It's thought that a ring may have been given as part of a bride price or dowry. Some of the documents mentioned above do include jewelry, rings and/or gold. Yet a determination of validity can't be based on this alone, especially when you consider that it is the bride that receives the ring. Which brings us to another theory. A ring may have been given to bride, either as a symbol of unity or perhaps as a bribe.

Next Page

Page One | Page Two | Page Three | Page Four | Engagement Ring History Links

Best Wishes,
Rachel Sanfordlyn Shreckengast

*NOTE 1: Wedding traditions are often speculative. This is why you see a lot of "it is suggested", "may have" and similar statements in my articles on them. While there is usually a basis in fact, the traditions often get embellished. Many wedding traditions are not very old, and are still stated as traditions. I do my best in researching them, and prefer finding the information in antique books. Where this is not possible, I attempt to find at least three sources for the information.

*NOTE 2: Due to the sheer amount of research and time involved, I no longer do interviews based on wedding traditions. I have a full schedule, and wedding traditions are too speculative in nature. This basically means that very few people are experts on wedding traditions, including me. Thank you for your understanding.

09152000

Best Wishes,
Rachel Sanfordlyn Shreckengast

WedFrugal.com
Personal Pages

Owner, WedFrugal.com (February 18, 2001 to present)
The Wedding Frugality Page (now at wedfrugal.com - December 1995 to May 2001)
-former About.com Weddings Guide (October 26, 1997 to April 5, 2001)
-former Wed Net columnist (October 1996 to December 1997)
-Dollar Stretcher contributor (Various Dates)

Copyright, Rachel Sanfordlyn Shreckengast 12/95 to present