From the earliest times of history monarchs and potentates of all ranks and races, from Solomon to Montezuma, were wont to wear signet rings, which were sometimes engraved, and were then often used to impart authority either by the exhibition of the ring itself, or its impression upon papyrus, parchment, or wax. The most celebrated ring of this description we have any authentic knowledge of, was that formed of a large emerald set in gold and worn by Alexander the Great, whose portrait was engraved upon the stone. The hero, when dying, bestowed it upon his favorite general, Perdiccas, and thereby invested him with the authority of succession. History refuses to make known the fate of this splendid gem. It is probable that Ptolemy Soter obtained possession of it when Perdiccas was slain in Egypt, and that eventually Augustus Cæsar may have worn it for his first imperial seal, which was an emerald engraved with the head of Alexander. After the death of Pompey in Egypt, his seal ring, which represented a lion holding a sword in his paw, was taken to Rome and presented to Cæsar, who burst into tears on receiving the signet of his former associate and unfortunate rival. The practice of interring with the dead some of the jewels worn in life, has been practised in recent times. When Cardinal Borromeo was buried at Milan two hundred years ago or more, a large gold cross, containing seven large and fine emeralds surrounded with diamonds, was placed in his tomb. When Lord Palmerston was buried at Westminster Abbey, the officiating clergyman threw into the grave several diamond and gold rings as a peace offering. In ancient times the custom was of frequent occurrence, and to this habit we owe the preservation of many beautiful gems and jewels, which have in this manner escaped the pillage and fury of thieves and iconoclasts. The mineral has borne the name of emerald since the middle of the seventeenth century, at which time it was adopted by the mineralogist, Wallerius. But whence it is derived, and on what particular grounds, we are not informed. In Asia, in ancient times, it was described under the Sanskrit name, “marakat,” which is connected with “esmark,” signifying a sea monster, or “makara,” meaning the sea. As it passed westward, among the Persians it became “zabargat,” and still farther on its journey it was changed by the Greeks and Latins into “smaragdus.” The derivation of its ancient terms is also exemplified by the use or purposes in which the gem and its varieties were used. It was therefore frequently chosen by the antique gem cutters and engravers, as the proper material for the representation of all maritime subjects or any allusions to the sea gods.