With this remarkable ring, we have an adoption of old styles moving into the beginning of the 19^th century. This style shows quite a high level of experimentation and personalisation, as it reflects a time of fluidity in jewellery design that had moved on from the standard oval/navette shapes of the late 18^th century.

Before we start to look into the ring for its construction and materials, we must think about the social context of when it was created. The ring was designed at a time where the Neoclassical movement had lasted since c.1765, around forty years, a movement of romanticism and humanism that had engrained upon an entire generation growing up where this was mainstream fashion. As we have seen from the change of Baroque to Rococo, these movements tend to shape the culture and art of the society in which they were permeated. While the Neoclassical movement suffered greatly from the Gothic Revival movement, where there was a genuine swing back to the traditions and simplicity of the middle ages, the Neoclassical period of the early 19^th century saw jewels change their design to accommodate much simpler shape and styles. There were the Napoleonic Wars, following on from the French Revolution, American independence and a greater push towards colonialism for Europe that saw not only social transitioning which would not have been previously possible, but an influx of other cultures and imported materials through trade. What shows is that this ring was constructed at a time of great social mobility and change.

With this change, styles and the influx of new ideas bled through to jewellery design, such as this piece. We have an adaptation of the classic black enamel mourning band and white enamel trim around the edge. This is a traditional style overlaid across the ‘cigar band’ shape which was growing in popularity (where the shoulders taper down the band) and it cleverly inserts the swivel memento in place of the bezel.

Swivels for the bezel were always the exception to the popular rule. They were not a new invention, but they always appear during a time of change before standardisation in design creates a more simple and popular style for mainstream jewellery.

Upon one side, we have the urn symbol and upon the other, we have the dedication, which both work in conjunction with the name and date around the band. Two things are unique here, one is that the swivel reveals a dual mourning purpose, without the placement of hairwork or a reversed stone (often an intaglio for family crest) and that the ring has the popular Neoclassical urn and the WM Norris was a reverend. There’s no overt religious symbolism involved with the ring, just the simple urn for mortality.

A superb ring that heralds in the change of the times!

Further Reading:
> Discovering a 19th Century Swivel Ring
> An 1818 Ring That Will Keep Thy Dear Remains

Courtesy: Barbara Robbins
Year: 20 August 1798
Dedication: “Sacred to Friendship” / “Revd WM Norris Died 20 Aug 1798 Aged 70

With neoclassical pieces, there is continuity to them and not just a broad period where different styles were mixed. Notice the increasing reliance on enamel work and its symbolism (blue: considered royalty / white: purity and innocence) as well as the placement of stones and the reliance of pearls.

The oval shape is an important one and a shape that can confuse a collector into dating a ring from the 1780s to the 1810s. One must consider that the Neoclassical era, with its c.1765 beginning introduced a way of displaying love and grief in jewellery through personalised mourning depictions and the use of hairwork as its own symbol, reflecting back on the wearer and the person being mourned. During the 1770s and 1780s, there was a lot of movement in styles that had not yet been standardised, hence the oval and navette shapes were used quite widely, with more standardisation between the two in the 1790s. This particular piece, with its contoured bezel and  the split shank captures the 1790s, where they were more inclined to be two pieces, rather than the 1780s, which was more of a singular flow from the bezel to the shoulders.

By c.1810, the oval shape became popular again and took prominence over the navette shape, as the size of the jewels reduced and the use of the sentimental depiction was mostly confined to miniatures and pendants, rather than rings. This became the rectangular shape that we know today as being very popular post c.1810 and moved into the Gothic Revival period.

Hairwork became more popular than painting on ivory and when symbolism was used, it became part of the gold work or enamel work. Using the initial of the loved one was a proud way to show affection to a loved one, rather than alluding to a loved one in symbolism.

Notice the similarities between this piece and the other initial pieces of the late 18th century – their colour and materials. The use of pearls became more prominent and shanks and bands conformed to the shape of the finger. This piece is quite heavy with its gold work and very detailed around the shank. This scroll-work is on an exceptional quality and the oval face itself is another interesting point. The curve to the face bows in at the middle, with the glass memento being highly domed, rather than flat faced.

Further Reading
> Moss Agate Locket Ring, 1774
> Embroidered Hair on Silk/Material Ring, 1763
> Eternity Knot Ring Shows Changing Styles in the 18thC
> Neoclassical Oval Diamond Mourning Ring

Country: England
Year: Jan 4 1796
Dedication: S King, Jan 4 1796

‘Affection weeps, heaven rejoices’ announces this watercolour on ivory ring and from the unique symbolism to the marvellously crafted mourning depiction, the ring certainly tells us a lot about its wearer.

This is one piece which depicts the two women in mourning, with this, we must first note the costume of the ladies. On the right, we have the mourning women, dressed in white with her veil, clutching a handkerchief to her face in a position of wiping the tears from her eyes. On the left, we have the other lady with her right arm pointing to the heavens via the index finger. This figure is dressed in the more fashionable style for the times, with her arms exposed (note the mourner does not) and the cloak, wearing the wreath. Her position shows a movement towards the mourner, almost consoling her that her loved one has gone to heaven.

In front of this female is the anchor, representing hope. It would not be difficult to make the connection between this female and Christianity. This symbolism takes up nearly half of the ring itself and balances he mortality on the right. Clearly, we have a juxtaposition between the mortal remains and the heavenly spirit.

To the far right is the urn and the plinth with its inscription referencing the ‘affection’ and ‘weeping’ of the mourner (which transcends the person and becomes an announcement of those who connected and felt ‘affection’ to this person being mourned) as well as the heavens rejoicing to have accepted this soul.

Previously, I’ve spoken about the humanistic movement that the Neoclassical period and the Romantic era bought with it, but the allegory towards ecclesiastical praise was not lost, just adapted for the popular art styles of the time.

Finally, the piece is flanked across the border with the sepia weeping willow, which ties the sentiment together as a very personal and unique ring, which almost feels as if it belongs on a large canvas, rather than on a finger.

Courtesy: Barbara Robbins
Country: England
Year: 1794
Dedication: John Rosbe, Ob 28th March, 1794 AE 54. Sacred to Love / Affection Weeps, Heaven Rejoices

If ever a jewel was designed for its materials, then this certainly fits the description. There is much to explain with this particular jewel and its relevance to the evolution of style c.1800, so let’s see what we can find.

The use of blue enamel (used for royalty and suggesting that one was considered royalty) contains many mixed histories. Over time, many of the messages surrounding cobalt glass and blue enamel have been crossed, yet it fit very well into the Neoclassical paradigm post c.1865. The main reason for its use in heavier, symbolic terms is that the Neoclassical reliance on sentimental depictions and the allegories of love put the reliance on peripheral representations, rather than clear-cut statements of love and faith. Hence, blue enamel, considered royalty.

There’s Royal Blue and there’s Bleu de France. Bleu de France has been representing France and the French monarchy and the heraldry since c.12th century. This was adapted into jewels and you can see the obvious connection there with the message of royalty, especially considering the French influx into other cultures, as the French were considered the focus of style and fashion.

Royal Blue, is darker, with a hint of purple and red. This was thought to have been invented by millers in Frome, Somerset during a dress making competition for Queen Charlotte post 1761 (after she was queen). There’s the connection here in that her style would dictate a lot of the aristocracy would consider high fashion.

This ring judiciously uses the blue enamel as the basis for its beautifully rendered initial, which is the centrepiece of the ring itself.

This initial has evolved its style from the gold wire cypher that was prevalent in the 17^th and early 18^th century, but here, its rendered in large, raised gold, which would have been formed from the base of the bezel itself. Notice the twist and dimension of the ‘B’, with the curl rising and dipping in the centre. Quite a lot of thought has really bought that initial to life and the person who wore it certainly would have invested that thought into its commission.

Surrounding this initial are a series of diamonds, which works well in terms of opulence when sitting upon the blue enamel. The diamond, being one of the most important and expensive gems reserved for love.

Finally, the border of the bezel is surrounded by pearls, a loving sentiment of purity and also tears when in a mourning context.

As a ring that shows transition of styles, it’s important to note the contour of the bezel and how the ring contours down across the shoulders to the finger. This style was especially popular during c.1800. Some have labelled this style as being a ‘cigar band’ style, but it certainly is an evolution of the earlier oval ring style, though that has the open shank which connects to the bezel from underneath.

It is quite common to find this style in use with contemporary pieces, but it’s quite another to see one of such fine value and excellent construction with its gems and symbolism.

Further Reading
> Blue Enamel 1796 Oval Pearl Ring

Courtesy: Barbara Robbins
Year: 1792
Dedication: Rich.d Humphreys, ob: Oct: 18/ 1797 a:62

Mourning rings, as discussed in other articles, have a tremendous variation in quality and style. Much of this is to do with the social necessity to present oneself in the paradigm of the three stages of mourning, otherwise it can be due to physical location (as different cultures have different fashion influences and religious beliefs) and wealth.

With this particular ring, we have a piece that shares many aspects of the 1780s, a period when the oval shape (which would re-enter the mainstream style from 1800) was just as popular as the more elongated navette style.

Dating from c.1792, the ring is as impressive today as the day it was made. It has the wide shoulders forming into the band, which accommodates the oval style and the focus of the ring is in the diamonds themselves. These gems show the value of the ring and the importance to which the wealth of the wearer and the affection of the wearer was delivered to the person to whom it was dedicated.

There is an open-weave to the hairwork under the initials (GP), set in diamonds as well, complementing the border of the ring and set in three-dimensional relief.

Socially, we have to consider when this ring was made. The date of the ring is 1792, and due to its construction, we have to honour that it may have been very close to the date. With the balancing of the diamonds to the initials, there’s not much room for standardisation in design, but a continual flow of design that merges all the aspects of the piece. For its time, the ring has the same impact then as it has today; the diamond has always been the faceted gem of desire that reflects the light and captures the eye as it is worn. With its condition, it would be safe to assume this ring had not seen much wear in its existence, but as mourning rings were souvenirs of a person’s life, this is not to be unexpected.

Further Reading
> Mourning Ring Dedicated to S King, Jan 4 1796
> Eternity Knot Ring Shows Changing Styles in the 18thC
> Embroidered Hair on Silk/Material Ring, 1763
> Moss Agate Locket Ring, 1774

Courtesy: Barbara Robbins
Year: 1792
Dedication: George Palmer, Ob 1st August, 179(2) / AE 54

Physical direction and movement in Neoclassical jewels of the late 18^th and early 19^th century which depict mourning and sentimental scenes is very important to their symbolic relevance.

Often, pieces will show a person or animal in a state of motion or indicating towards a particular element within the depiction. This is very important to note, as they often underline the sentimental nature of the piece or show the proximity of the wearer to the person whom the jewel was commissioned for (be it alive or dead).

In this piece, we have two women, of which the primary woman is the mourner. She is depicted in typical white Neoclassical mourning dress, prostrated on the plinth, with left arm and head reclined on the urn. Here, we have a wonderful depiction in symbolic art, the rendering is truly something to behold. Notice the depth of perspective of the plinth, as it emerges from left to right, with the side of the plinth being darkly shaded. This is due to the figure of the other female casting her shadow over the plinth itself; something which tells us today that this is no ordinary jewel.

Even the urn shows significant shading, as it is placed under the shade of the tree and set back from the mourning female – she certainly takes precedence within the depiction itself. Furthermore, this works in conjunction with the three-dimensional tree, which is built up with hair to raise itself over the two women, urn and plinth. This can be seen on the upper left of the jewel, bordering the piece itself.

Pointing towards the heaven is the other female and she is a curious Neoclassical lady to depict. Her dress is a popular one for the times, cut under the bust and cast around the upper arms. Notice her hairstyle and its interaction with the wind, it’s literally blowing in the breeze. Naturally, the other point of contact for our eyes is her right arm, with her index finger pointing towards the heavens, which aligns with the human remains of the urn.

With the indication of the finger, there is negative space from the sky, tree (and trees in the background) and urn, which works in conjunction with the top of the urn, as this element also has negative space. Heaven and human are connected, which is a wonderful allegory for its time. While I often write about the Neoclassical period as being primarily humanist in its emotions and relation to the self, one cannot assume this means the religious back-bone of English society had dissolved, rather the focus was shifted. We’ll look more into that as we progress into the Gothic Revival era.

Also of note is the oval shape to the ring, as can be seen in contemporary rings from the early 1790s. The navette shape had to accommodate these larger and very detailed sentimental depictions, hence the movement from the 1780s, with their sharper north and south regions. Flanking the depiction is the white/black enamel pattern, which is not uncharacteristic for its times, as this was a popular design.

Further Reading
> Spotlight On: 1788 Sarah Honlett Brooch
> Irish Sister Rings for Thomas Langdale, 1790
> Eliz Legrew Ob 4th July 1791 AE 34 / Sepia Male Mourning Ring

Courtesy: Barbara Robbins
Country: England
Year: 6th of July, 1792
Dedication: James Descola, ob 6th of July, 1792 Ae 67