Essays On Education And Kindred Subjects (Fiscle Part- 11) by Herbert Spencer (best fiction novels to read TXT) 📕

Regulations Made By Him, And The   Regulations Handed Down From The   Old

God-Kings, Who Were Rendered Ever More Sacred By Time And The

Accumulation Of    Myths. Hence Came Respectively, Law And Morality: The

One Growing Ever More Concrete, The   Other More Abstract; The   Authority

Of The   One Ever On The   Decrease, That Of    The   Other Ever On The   Increase;

Originally The   Same, But Now Placed Daily In More Marked Antagonism.

Simultaneously There Has Been Going On A Separation Of    The   Institutions

Administering These Two Codes Of    Conduct. While They Were Yet One, Of

Course Church And State Were One: The   King Was Arch-Priest, Not

Nominally, But Really--Alike The   Giver Of    New Commands And The   Chief

Interpreter Of    The   Old Commands; And The   Deputy-Priests Coming Out Of

His Family Were Thus Simply Expounders Of    The   Dictates Of    Their

Ancestry: At First As Recollected, And Afterwards As Ascertained By

Professed Interviews With Them. This Union--Which Still Existed

Practically During The   Middle Ages, When The   Authority Of    Kings Was

Mixed Up With The   Authority Of    The   Pope, When There Were Bishop-Rulers

Having All The   Powers Of    Feudal Lords, And When Priests Punished By

Penances--Has Been, Step By Step, Becoming Less Close. Though Monarchs

Are Still "Defenders Of    The   Faith," And Ecclesiastical Chiefs, They Are

But Nominally Such. Though Bishops Still Have Civil Power, It Is Not

What They Once Had. Protestantism Shook Loose The   Bonds Of    Union;

Dissent Has Long Been Busy In Organising A Mechanism For The   Exercise Of

Religious Control, Wholly Independent Of    Law; In America, A Separate

Organisation For That Purpose Already Exists; And If Anything Is To Be

Hoped From The   Anti-State-Church Association--Or, As It Has Been Newly

Named, "The Society For The   Liberation Of    Religion From State Patronage

And Control"--We Shall Presently Have A Separate Organisation Here Also.

Thus Alike In Authority, In Essence, And In Form, Political And

Spiritual Rule Have Been Ever More Widely Diverging From The   Same Root.

That Increasing Division Of    Labour Which Marks The   Progress Of    Society

In Other Things, Marks It Also In This Separation Of    Government Into

Civil And Religious; And If We Observe How The   Morality Which Forms The

Substance Of    Religions In General, Is Beginning To Be Purified From The

Associated Creeds, We May Anticipate That This Division Will Be

Ultimately Carried Much Further.

Passing Now To The   Third Species Of    Control--That Of    Manners--We Shall

Find That This, Too, While It Had A Common Genesis With The   Others, Has

Gradually Come To Have A Distinct Sphere And A Special Embodiment. Among

Early Aggregations Of    Men Before Yet Social Observances Existed, The

Sole Forms Of    Courtesy Known Were The   Signs Of    Submission To The   Strong

Man; As The   Sole Law Was His Will, And The   Sole Religion The   Awe Of    His

Supposed Supernaturalness. Originally, Ceremonies Were Modes Of

Behaviour To The   God-King. Our Commonest Titles Have Been Derived From

His Names. And All Salutations Were Primarily Worship Paid To Him. Let

Us Trace Out These Truths In Detail, Beginning With Titles.

The Fact Already Noticed, That The   Names Of    Early Kings Among Divers

Races Are Formed By The   Addition Of    Certain Syllables To The   Names Of

Their Gods--Which Certain Syllables, Like Our _Mac_ And _Fitz_, Probably

Mean "Son Of," Or "Descended From"--At Once Gives Meaning To The   Term

_Father_ As A Divine Title. And When We Read, In Selden, That "The

Composition Out Of    These Names Of    Deities Was Not Only Proper To Kings:

Their Grandes And More Honourable Subjects" (No Doubt Members Of    The

Royal Race) "Had Sometimes The   Like;" We See How The   Term _Father_,

Properly Used By These Also, And By Their Multiplying Descendants, Came

To Be A Title Used By The   People In General. And It Is Significant As

Bearing On This Point, That Among The   Most Barbarous Nation In Europe,

Where Belief In The   Divine Nature Of    The   Ruler Still Lingers, _Father_

In This Higher Sense Is Still A Regal Distinction. When, Again, We

Remember How The   Divinity At First Ascribed To Kings Was Not A

Complimentary Fiction But A Supposed Fact; And How, Further, Under The

Fetish Philosophy The   Celestial Bodies Are Believed To Be Personages Who

Once Lived Among Men; We See That The   Appellations Of    Oriental Rulers,

"Brother To The   Sun," Etc., Were Probably Once Expressive Of    A Genuine

Belief; And Have Simply, Like Many Other Things, Continued In Use After

All Meaning Has Gone Out Of    Them. We Way Infer, Too, That The   Titles,

God, Lord, Divinity, Were Given To Primitive Rulers Literally--That The

_Nostra Divinitas_ Applied To The   Roman Emperors, And The   Various Sacred

Designations That Have Been Borne By Monarchs, Down To The   Still Extant

Phrase, "Our Lord The   King," Are The   Dead And Dying Forms Of    What Were

Once Living Facts. From These Names, God, Father, Lord, Divinity,

Originally Belonging To The   God-King, And Afterwards To God And The

King, The   Derivation Of    Our Commonest Titles Of    Respect Is Clearly

Traceable.

There Is Reason To Think That These Titles Were Originally Proper Names.

Not Only Do We See Among The   Egyptians, Where Pharaoh Was Synonymous

With King, And Among The   Romans, Where To Be Cæsar Meant To Be Emperor,

That The   Proper Names Of    The   Greatest Men Were Transferred To Their

Successors, And So Became Class Names; But In The   Scandinavian Mythology

We May Trace A Human Title Of    Honour Up To The   Proper Name Of    A Divine

Personage. In Anglo-Saxon _Bealdor_, Or _Baldor_, Means _Lord_; And

Balder Is The   Name Of    The   Favourite Of    Odin's Sons--The Gods Who With

Him Constitute The   Teutonic Pantheon. How These Names Of    Honour Became

General Is Easily Understood. The   Relatives Of    The   Primitive Kings--The

Grandees Described By Selden As Having Names Formed On Those Of    The

Gods, And Shown By This To Be Members Of    The   Divine Race--Necessarily

Shared In The   Epithets, Such As _Lord_, Descriptive Of    Superhuman

Relationships And Nature. Their Ever-Multiplying Offspring Inheriting

These, Gradually Rendered Them Comparatively Common. And Then They Came

To Be Applied To Every Man Of    Power: Partly From The   Fact That, In These

Early Days When Men Conceived Divinity Simply As A Stronger Kind Of

Humanity, Great Persons Could Be Called By Divine Epithets With But

Little Exaggeration; Partly From The   Fact That The   Unusually Potent Were

Apt To Be Considered As Unrecognised Or Illegitimate Descendants Of    "The

Strong, The   Destroyer, The   Powerful One;" And Partly, Also, From

Compliment And The   Desire To Propitiate.

Progressively As Superstition Diminished, This Last Became The   Sole

Cause. And If We Remember That It Is The   Nature Of    Compliment, As We

Daily Hear It, To Attribute More Than Is Due--That In The   Constantly

Widening Application Of    "Esquire," In The   Perpetual Repetition Of    "Your

Honour" By The   Fawning Irishman, And In The   Use Of    The   Name "Gentleman"

To Any Coalheaver Or Dustman By The   Lower Classes Of    London, We Have

Current Examples Of    The   Depreciation Of    Titles Consequent On

Compliment--And That In Barbarous Times, When The   Wish To Propitiate Was

Stronger Than Now, This Effect Must Have Been Greater; We Shall See That

There Naturally Arose An Extensive Misuse Of    All Early Distinctions.

Hence The   Facts, That The   Jews Called Herod A God; That _Father_, In Its

Higher Sense, Was A Term Used Among Them By Servants To Masters; That

_Lord_ Was Applicable To Any Person Of    Worth And Power. Hence, Too, The

Fact That, In The   Later Periods Of    The   Roman Empire, Every Man Saluted

His Neighbour As _Dominus_ And _Rex_.

But It Is In The   Titles Of    The   Middle Ages, And In The   Growth Of    Our

Modern Ones Out Of    Them, That The   Process Is Most Clearly Seen. _Herr_,

_Don_, _Signior_, _Seigneur_, _Sennor_, Were All Originally Names Of

Rulers--Of Feudal Lords. By The   Complimentary Use Of    These Names To All

Who Could, On Any Pretence, Be Supposed To Merit Them, And By Successive

Degradations Of    Them From Each Step In The   Descent To A Still Lower One,

They Have Come To Be Common Forms Of    Address. At First The   Phrase In

Which A Serf Accosted His Despotic Chief, _Mein Herr_ Is Now Familiarly

Applied In Germany To Ordinary People. The   Spanish Title _Don_, Once

Proper To Noblemen And Gentlemen Only, Is Now Accorded To All Classes.

So, Too, Is It With _Signior_ In Italy. _Seigneur_ And _Monseigneur_, By

Contraction In _Sieur_ And _Monsieur_, Have Produced The   Term Of    Respect

Claimed By Every Frenchman. And Whether _Sire_ Be Or Be Not A Like

Contraction Of    _Signior_, It Is Clear That, As It Was Borne By Sundry Of

The Ancient Feudal Lords Of    France, Who, As Selden Says, "Affected

Rather To Bee Stiled By The   Name Of    _Sire_ Than Baron, As _Le Sire De

Montmorencie_, _Le Sire De Beauieu_, And The   Like," And As It Has Been

Commonly Used To Monarchs, Our Word _Sir_, Which Is Derived From It,

Originally Meant Lord Or King. Thus, Too, Is It With Feminine Titles.

_Lady_, Which, According To Horne Tooke, Means _Exalted_, And Was At

First Given Only To The   Few, Is Now Given To All Women Of    Education.

_Dame_, Once An Honourable Name To Which, In Old Books, We Find The

Epithets Of    "High-Born" And "Stately" Affixed, Has Now, By Repeated

Widenings Of    Its Application, Become Relatively A Term Of    Contempt. And

If We Trace The   Compound Of    This, _Ma Dame_, Through Its

Contractions--_Madam_, _Ma'am_, _Mam_, _Mum_, We Find That The   "Yes'm"

Of Sally To Her Mistress Is Originally Equivalent To "Yes, My Exalted,"

Or "Yes, Your Highness." Throughout, Therefore, The   Genesis Of    Words Of

Honour Has Been The   Same. Just As With The   Jews And With The   Romans, Has

It Been With The   Modern Europeans. Tracing These Everyday Names To Their

Primitive Significations Of    _Lord_ And _King_, And Remembering That In

Aboriginal Societies These Were Applied Only To The   Gods And Their

Descendants, We Arrive At The   Conclusion That Our Familiar _Sir_ And

_Monsieur_ Are, In Their Primary And Expanded Meanings, Terms Of

Adoration.

Further To Illustrate This Gradual Depreciation Of    Titles And To Confirm

The Inference Drawn, It May Be Well To Notice In Passing, That The

Oldest Of    Them Have, As Might Be Expected, Been Depreciated To The

Greatest Extent. Thus, _Master_--A Word Proved By Its Derivation And By

The Similarity Of    The   Connate Words In Other Languages (Fr., _Maître_

For _Master_; Russ., _Master_: Dan., _Meester_; Ger., _Meister_) To Have

Been One Of    The   Earliest In Use For Expressing Lordship--Has Now Become

Applicable To Children Only, And Under The   Modification Of    "Mister," To

Persons Next Above The   Labourer. Again, Knighthood, The   Oldest Kind Of

Dignity, Is Also The   Lowest; And Knight Bachelor, Which Is The   Lowest

Order Of    Knighthood, Is More Ancient Than Any Other Of    The   Orders.

Similarly, Too, With The   Peerage, Baron Is Alike The   Earliest And Least

Elevated Of    Its Divisions. This Continual Degradation Of    All Names Of

Honour Has, From Time To Time, Made It Requisite To Introduce New Ones

Having That Distinguishing Effect Which The   Originals Had Lost By

Generality Of    Use; Just As Our Habit Of    Misapplying Superlatives Has, By

Gradually Destroying Their Force, Entailed The   Need For Fresh Ones. And

If, Within The   Last Thousand Years, This Process Has Produced Effects

Thus Marked, We May Readily Conceive How, During Previous Thousands, The

Titles Of    Gods And Demi-Gods Came To Be Used To All Persons Exercising

Power; As They Have Since Come To Be Used