the earliest recorded doubt as to the identity of the ?lfred of the jewel with alfred of wessex was grounded upon the high artistic quality of the work[53]. it may therefore be illustrative if we advert to some other specimens of english jewellery belonging to those early times. one such has already been quoted above (p. 68), namely, the ‘enamelled ouche’ of mr. roach smith, which is now in the british museum. this is a piece of great beauty and high technical skill; and it has every appearance of belonging to these times, but there is nothing to fix its date more definitely. happily, there are specimens of english jewellery of the ninth century which exclude this doubt. we 147have no less than three inscribed gold rings which certainly belonged to eminent contemporaries of alfred, and two of them to members of his family circle; insomuch that we may say, with some confidence, that these two must have been familiar objects to his eye.
the ring of alhstan, who was bishop of sherborne from 824 to 867.
in chronological order the first of these three rings is one that bears the name of alhstan. it was found in the year 1753 at llysfaen, in the county of carnarvon. it was figured and described in the arch?ologia, iv. 47, by mr. pegge, whose letter is dated july 6, 1771. he identified the name with ealhstan or ealchstan, the warlike bishop of sherborne. it may seem strange that the bishop of sherborne’s ring should be found in carnarvonshire; but the saxon chronicle suggests a simple and natural explanation. in the year 853 ?thelwulf, king of wessex, was petitioned by the king and witan of mercia to aid them in the subjugation of the welsh, who were in rebellion. consequently, ?thelwulf148 marched with an army into wales, and restored the imperial authority of mercia.
this operation (which was part of the defence of the country against the danes, whom the welsh of cambria were prone to support) would naturally have been conducted with the advice and under the management of alhstan[54]. the name llysfaen (‘stone court’) fitly describes the rocky enclosure in which the ring was found, and in which we may suppose that the final negotiations were conducted. preoccupation of mind in momentous business makes it easy to imagine how the old war-chief of ?thelwulf might have lost his ring. among the selfsame rocks of llysfaen, and near the spot where the alhstan ring was discovered, another ring was shortly afterwards found, containing a greater weight of gold, but of comparatively rude workmanship, and not inscribed.
the alhstan ring now belongs to the waterton collection, which is preserved in the south 149kensington museum. it is of that type (not uncommon in roman rings) which suggests derival from a string of beads. the lettering occupies four circular compartments, which alternating with four lozenge-shaped compartments, constitute the hoop of the ring. pegge saw the dragon of wessex in the grotesque animals which occupy the lozenge-shaped compartments. the characters are beautiful roman capitals of anglo-saxon type, except the n, which is represented by the rune ?. besides the arch?ologia, the ring is figured in art treasures of the united kingdom, a monumental book which was published in connexion with the manchester exhibition of 1857.
inscribed gold ring of ?thelwulf, king of wessex (836–855).
the second of the three rings is inscribed in the above form with the name of alfred’s father,150 king ethelwulf, for whom it was evidently made. it is in the form of a bishop’s mitre, with only one peak.
in 1781, march 22, lord radnor brought this find before the society of antiquaries. it had been found in the summer of 1780 in a field in the parish of laverstoke, near salisbury. according to the finder’s story, it was brought to the surface by the pressure of a cart-wheel, and it lay exposed on the edge of the rut. mr. howell, a silversmith in salisbury, gave the man thirty-four shillings for the value of the gold, and lord radnor bought it of mr. howell. it still shows the effect of hard pressure, being almost flattened. it was figured in the arch?ologia, vii. 421, and repeatedly since. it is preserved in the british museum.
151
a gold ring upon which the name of ?thelswith, queen of mercia, has been incised.
in the two rings already described, the names of alhstan and ?thelwulf belong to the fabric of the rings, as the name of ?lfred belongs to the fabric of the jewel. but it is different in the ring of queen ?thelswith.
this ring swells out into a dilated bezil, on the cop of which is an agnus dei, beautifully engraved in relief, with a background of niello. the interior of this bezil (which would be in contact with the wearer’s finger) was a fair gold surface when the ring was finished and put out of hand by the goldsmith. subsequently, the name of ?thelswith has been incised upon that surface with the fine point of a graving tool, somewhat in this form: ? ea?elsvi? regna where the [elongated n] is a monogram for in, so that the inscription reads ? ?thelswith regina.
the incision is so slight and so fresh that it152 is manifest the ring had no considerable wear after it was done[55].
?thelswith was the daughter of ?thelwulf and sister of alfred, and consort of burgred, king of mercia, who was driven out by the danes in 874, and retired to rome, where he died. ?thelswith died in 888 at pavia, apparently on pilgrimage. the annal recording it runs thus: ‘888. this year the alms of the west saxons and of king alfred were conducted to rome by “beocca ealdorman.” and queen ?thelswith, who was king alfred’s sister, died, and was buried at pavia[56].’
153
this fine nielloed ring was found near aberford in yorkshire, in or about the year 1870. it was first observed by a ploughman at the point of his ploughshare. he brought it to his master, who, thinking it brass, attached it to his dog’s collar, where it hung until some one assured him it was gold, whereupon he carried it to a silversmith at york, and exchanged it for spoons. from this dealer it was purchased by canon greenwell of durham, from whom it passed into the possession of sir wollaston franks, and ultimately by his bequest came to the british museum.
when we consider how very small is the whole number of extant gold rings (whether inscribed or not) that date from the saxon period, it must strike us as a very remarkable circumstance that we are able to produce three such examples, all within the period of alfred’s life, and two of154 them belonging to such near relations that we may naturally suppose they were familiar objects to his eye.
and there is a fourth ring, of which we cannot assert that it belongs to this very select group, but which certainly must be assigned to the same general period, and claims association with the three. it is a simple hoop of gold, a good quarter of an inch wide, having its outer surface covered with the following engraved inscription nielloed[57]:
?ered mec ah eanred mec agrof: that is, ?ered me owns, eanred me engraved.
hickes described this ring in his thesaurus (preface, pp. viij and xiij) with a good figure: 155 but in the interpretation he read the last word as agroft, taking an idle mark like an inverted t as part of the word; whereas it is there only to fill out the space. in the lettering there are five runes: namely, the ? in ?ered, the n in eanred, and the a, g, and f in agrof. this is the ring which was alluded to above (p. 17), in connexion with the archaic pronoun mec, which occurs twice on it.
in 1705, when this ring was described by hickes, it was in the possession of dr. hans sloane: it is now in the british museum.
the forms ‘?thred’ and ‘?thered’ are colloquial abbreviations of ‘?thelred,’ which was the name of that one among the brothers of alfred, with whom his relations were closest. but the frequency of the name forbids us to assert that this ring was made for king ?thelred. the names ‘?thelwulf’ and ‘?thelswith’ are in themselves exceptional, and when combined with the royal title are absolutely identifying: the name ‘alhstan,’ combined with the peculiar aspect of the ring and the circumstances of its discovery, not much less so; but the name ‘?thred,’ though forcibly aided by the noble aspect of the ring,156 only enables us to assert a degree of probability which every one must determine for himself.
everything in the appearance of these rings declares them to be the work of saxon artists, and on the ?ered ring the artist bears a good saxon name. such specimens must finally dissipate any lingering relics of the old prejudice, that the work of the alfred jewel is too good to have been produced in the england of the ninth century. we may rest assured that the excellence of the workmanship carries with it no presumption against its being english work of the time of king alfred.
[53] see above, p. 7.
[54] alhstan had accompanied ecgberht on his famous expedition into cornwall in 825, and we find him with the forces of somerset and dorset in 845 to oppose the danes at the mouth of pedrida. see mr. plummer’s note to sax. chron., ā. 823.
[55] but the edges of the ring show (as franks pointed out) traces of long wear. he goes on to say: ‘the engraving, moreover, scarcely looks like the work of a goldsmith. i would therefore suggest, that the queen had probably offered this ring at some shrine, and the priests connected with the shrine had engraved her name within the ring, to record the royal giver.’ proc. soc. antiq., 2nd series, vol. vi, p. 307.
[56] 888. her l?dde beocca ealdorman west sea na ?lmessan and ?lfredes cyninges to rome. ? ?telswit cuen, sio w?s ?lfredes sweostor cyninges, fortferde, ? hire lic lit ?t pafian.
[57] professor stephens of copenhagen, runic monuments, part ii, p. 463, dated it ‘about a.d. 700–800’: but in this estimate he has been guided (i think) not by anything in the artistic design or execution, but simply by the large proportion of runes in the mixed lettering, a criterion of very doubtful value.
