iron rings

[roger pratt]

Does anyone know the significance of a iron finger ring in Rome. I've read of a least three. The first was that the ring signified a citizen or freedman, two it was a signifier of senatorial class (Although I thought a gold ring was proper) third it was a Roman Engagement ring. I'd like to know for sure as I have fashioned a ring out of a bit of steel piping and had it engraved with SPQR. While the first definition is the one that I like, I wouldn't mind be in the senatorial class, but I'd hate to think I'm engaged.

[PhilusEstilius]

Roger
I don't think we can put such significance on what an iron ring meant in Rome or otherwise for these things crop up all over the Roman world, I do in fact have a large collection of bronze ones and even at one time had a Roman gold one but not an iron one as yet but as mentioned there are many around all over the Empire.

[Dan Howard]

My wedding ring is made of stainless steel. It is the only material that could survive all the damage that my hands have taken over the years. I would have totally destroyed a gold ring years ago.

[66kbm]

Found in Exeter as well. Very common as per Brians post.
Kevin

[Nathan Ross]

I believe the iron ring was the original mark of Roman citizenship - it would have been a seal ring rather than a plain band, used for putting your mark on the wax seals of documents. Wearing the gold ring was restricted under a law called the jus aureorum annolorum to senators and (later) members of the equestrian order. Some senatorial families continued to wear the iron ring as a sign of their adherence to old-fashioned values, but this was the significance of the gold rings collected from the Roman dead after Cannae - all of the wearers would have been aristrocratic officers.

Under the empire the granting of the gold ring was a bequest of the emperors, and even some freedmen in imperial service were granted it. The iron ring continued in use by citizens, but Severus allowed soldiers to wear gold. Justinian extended the privilege to all free citizens.

More here: Lacus Curtius ANNULUS

(there's also a note in (I think) Plutarch about plain iron rings being given to a women by their husbands during the wedding ceremony. These would be different to the seal rings of male citizens though)

[Urselius]

Given the relatively large numbers of Roman-period gold rings extant, many obviously made for women, the law must have been largely a dead letter.

[Nathan Ross]

many obviously made for women, the law must have been largely a dead letter.

Perhaps the gold rings worn by women had no such legal connotation? The significance of the iron ring given at the wedding was maybe that it was not 'jewellery' - since Roman husbands were forbidden by law to give their wives gifts, I believe.