Why do we
Why does he wear an engagement ring, and why do we wear them on our right hand
Since getting engaged and sharing our photos online, we have gotten the question “why does he have a ring if y'all are only engaged?” as well as “ why are y'all wearing the rings on your right hand instead of the left?” Today, I thought I would answer these questions and also share some history and facts along the way. If you are not interested in the history and facts, feel free to scroll to the bottom to read about our reasons.
The practice of only women receiving an engagement ring, typically worn on the left ring finger, is primarily a modern Western convention rather than a universal or historical standard. This custom became widely accepted during the early 20th century, largely due to the popularization and marketing of diamond engagement rings, which framed the ring as both a symbol of romantic commitment and financial stability. However, this model is far from global. Across many cultures, both historically and today, engagement is marked by mutual exchange, with both partners wearing rings, rings worn on the right hand, or engagement symbols taking forms other than rings altogether.
The earliest recognizable origins of engagement rings can be traced to the Roman Empire. Following the conquest of Hellenistic Greece, Roman society adopted the use of rings, though their meaning differed significantly from modern romantic gestures. Rings functioned primarily as markers of social status and legal authority. Iron rings were commonly worn by any free Roman citizens, while gold was reserved for those of higher rank. Over time, rings became integrated into engagement and marriage practices, symbolizing legal obligation rather than affection. Within Roman law and custom, a ring signified that a woman had come under the authority of her future husband and was bound to his household. To reinforce public perception, women were sometimes expected to have and wear two rings: an iron ring at home and a gold ring in public to signify wealth and status.
Like many people today, Romans commonly wore rings on the fourth finger of the left hand. The Roman writer Macrobius, a Neoplatonist philosopher of the early fifth century, notes in his work Saturnalia that this custom was believed to originate from the idea that a vein—later termed the vena amoris, or “vein of love”—ran directly from this finger to the heart. An idea that at least goes back to the early fifth century. While anatomically incorrect, the belief endured and continues to influence Western ring traditions. To the point, even my niney two year old granmother told me the story of this is why you wear your ring on the left ring finger.
By the mid-7th century, in parts of Southern France and Visigothic Spain, formalized the symbolic and legal power of engagement rings. The Visigothic Code states that once a ring had been given or accepted as a pledge of betrothal, the promise could not be broken, even in the absence of written contracts. This reflects a period in which the ring functioned as a legally binding object rather than a sentimental one.
In 860 AD, there was a letter written to Boris I of Bulgaria from Pope Nicholas I. Describing marriage customs within the Western Church. In this letter, he explains that it was customary for a man to give his fiancée a ring as part of the betrothal process. By the 12th century, as the Roman Catholic Church formally recognized marriage as a holy sacrament, some historians believe the engagement ring and wedding band began to diverge in function. The Church required the groom to place a ring on the bride’s finger during the wedding ceremony itself, which may have contributed to the distinction between pre-marital and marital rings.
By the 14th and 15th centuries, engagement rings had diversified in both form and symbolism. Popular designs included gimmel rings, composed of two or three interlocking bands worn separately before marriage and joined together afterward, and posy rings, engraved with short romantic inscriptions on the interior of the band. During this period, diamonds began appearing in engagement rings among the European elite. A frequently cited example is the 1477 engagement of Archduke Maximilian of Austria to Mary of Burgundy, for whom he commissioned a diamond-adorned ring shaped like the letter “M.” Jewelry historian Marion Fasel cautions, however, that this event is often overstated as the “first” diamond engagement ring; by that time, aristocratic families were already presenting diamond rings as betrothal gifts.
Although diamonds entered engagement ring traditions among European nobility in the late 15th century, it would take several centuries before they became widely associated with romantic commitment. During the 18th and 19th centuries, shifting social values placed greater emphasis on romantic love and personal choice in marriage, rather than purely economic, dowries or familial arrangements. Engagement rings became increasingly decorative, though they remained far from universal. Industrialization expanded the middle class, and the discovery of diamond deposits in South Africa in 1867 made diamonds more accessible, but their symbolic dominance had not yet been established.
It was not until the 20th century that diamonds became the expected engagement ring stone in Western society. In 1947, the advertising agency N.W. Ayer, working for De Beers, introduced the slogan “A Diamond Is Forever.” This campaign successfully linked diamonds to permanence, emotional devotion, and lifelong commitment. From that point forward, marketing positioned diamond engagement rings as essential rather than optional, women as the primary recipients, and the ring itself as proof of both love and financial dedication. What had once been an elite tradition was transformed into a cultural expectation. Interestingly enough, many women still expect the engagement ring to cost roughly three months wages.
Despite this shift, men wearing engagement rings remained uncommon in the West. An early literary example appears in Gotthold Ephraim Lessing’s 1767 play Minna von Barnhelm, which features a pair of matching engagement rings exchanged between a man and a woman. However, this practice did not become widespread. In the 1920s, American jewelers attempted to market engagement rings for men, but the trend failed to gain traction. It was not until World War II that men began widely wearing wedding rings, often as reminders of their spouses while serving overseas. By the late 1940s, approximately 80 percent of weddings in the United States included the exchange of wedding bands. What had once been a luxurious, aristocratic custom thus evolved into a cultural expectation across Western societies, transforming engagement rings from optional ornaments to essential markers of love.
Outside the United States, however, mutual engagement ring traditions persisted. In several South American countries, including Chile and Brazil, couples traditionally exchange rings at engagement, wearing them on the fourth finger of the right hand. After the wedding, the same rings are moved to the left hand, marking the transition from engagement to marriage.
Across the globe, traditions surrounding engagement and wedding rings continue to vary widely, and what might seem unusual in one culture is entirely customary in another. In Germany, Austria, and much of Northern Europe, both engagement and wedding rings are traditionally worn on the right hand, often as simple bands exchanged by both partners. Eastern European and Orthodox Christian cultures, including Russia, Greece, and Ukraine, also favor the right hand for engagement and wedding rings. Scandinavian countries maintain similar customs, with couples frequently wearing minimalist engagement rings that later become wedding bands. In contrast, many Asian, African, and Indigenous cultures historically marked engagement through gift exchange, family agreements, or ritual ceremonies rather than rings, with Western-style engagement rings becoming more common only in recent generations.
In many European countries, for example, the rules are quite different from what is typical in the United States. In France, engagement rings—known as bagues de fiançailles—are generally worn on the left hand. After marriage, however, many French women move their engagement rings to the right hand, leaving only the wedding band on the left. Antique rings with intricate detailing or classic European cuts are especially prized, reflecting the French appreciation for vintage elegance.
In Germany, Austria, and much of Northern Europe, both engagement and wedding rings are traditionally worn on the right hand. Couples often exchange simple bands rather than heavily gemmed rings, and the same ring may serve as both engagement and wedding jewelry, simply moving from the left hand during engagement to the right hand at the ceremony. Historically, this practice reflects cultural values of equality in partnerships, with less emphasis on gender-specific roles in marriage rituals.
Eastern Europe and Orthodox Christian countries, such as Russia, Greece, and Ukraine, also favor the right hand for both engagement and wedding rings. In Russia, the wedding ring is placed on the right hand after the ceremony, and some wear their engagement rings on the same hand beforehand.
In Scandinavia, similar patterns persist. In Denmark, Norway, and Sweden, couples generally wear a plain engagement ring on the right hand, which may later become the wedding band or be replaced with a more decorative ring, but it typically remains on the right hand. Finnish couples often start with the engagement ring on the left hand and move it to the right after marriage, while in Iceland, the ring starts on the right and shifts to the left at the wedding. Across these regions, minimalist designs, clean lines, and sustainable materials like lab-grown diamonds are increasingly popular.
Asian countries show additional variety. In China, gold rings are traditional, with red symbolizing luck and joy, and younger generations sometimes follow the Western left-hand convention. Japan largely adopts Western customs but may incorporate culturally significant motifs like cherry blossoms or bamboo, often set with rose-cut diamonds for subtle elegance. India presents a rich tapestry of traditions, with gold, unique gemstones, and toe rings complementing engagement and wedding jewelry. In Hindu customs, the right hand is often considered auspicious for wedding rings, though Western influences are growing.
Latin America features vibrant, mutual engagement ring customs. In countries like Brazil, Mexico, Argentina, Chile, and Colombia, couples exchange rings on the right hand during engagement, moving them to the left at the wedding. Both partners typically wear engagement rings, which may be simple bands, diamond-encrusted, or colorful gemstone rings reflecting regional flair. Some cultures also include an intermediate ring—such as a promise or relationship ring—before the formal engagement.
Turkey and Lebanon offer further examples of unique rituals. Turkish couples often tie engagement rings to red ribbons on the right hand, transferring them to the left at the wedding. Lebanese couples exchange ornate diamond rings on the right hand, with the wedding ring later worn on the same finger. In Israel, Jewish couples may initially place the wedding ring on the index finger of the right hand during the ceremony before moving it to the left ring finger afterward.
Ireland offers the Claddagh ring. The Claddagh ring is a traditional Irish ring featuring two hands holding a crowned heart, symbolizing friendship, loyalty, and love. Its origin dates back to 17th-century Galway, and it has long been used as a token of commitment, whether for friendship, engagement, or marriage. Its meaning depends on which hand and direction the heart faces: right hand with heart outward signals single, right hand with heart inward indicates a committed relationship, and left hand with heart outward signifies engagement, and left hand with heart inward marriage. Traditionally, the Claddagh can be given to either partner, emphasizing mutual love and loyalty.
It’s worth noting that interpretations can vary by family and region in Ireland, so you’ll sometimes see the engagement and marriage possession opposite.
So simply pimply put:
Scandinavia – Mutual rings; right or left hand, depending on the country
Germany & Austria – Engagement on left, wedding on right
Eastern Europe & Orthodox traditions – Right hand for both engagement and wedding
Latin America – Mutual engagement rings on the right hand
As you can see, what you have been taught is not as simple as it seems. So, for the personal answer to these questions, “Why does he have a ring if y'all are only engaged?” I'm sure many of you are familiar with “claiming the female as mine” mentality some men have and view the engagement ring, and though my mate would never be so shallow, it is a running joke that “If I am claimed, so is he.” And honestly, I wanted him to feel the same love and honor I do while wearing my ring. (And all the time before someone takes that statement wrong....) What is good for one is good for both. It only felt right that if I have a ring, so does he.
As for the next question, “Why are y'all wearing the rings on your right hand instead of the left?” For those who know us, you know we aren’t going to go with the common Western way of things. We will go against the grain all the way, and that is in part due to our mindset on things. Why follow the sheep when we could carve our own way? Which sounds funny I know, especially with it not being a “new” thing but simply a different thing. And at the end of the day, that sums us up.
“Different”.
Comments
Post a Comment