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., maitre 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 to persons of respectability.

If from names of honour we turn to phrases of honour, we find similar facts.  The Oriental styles of address, applied to ordinary people—­“I am your slave,” “All I have is yours,” “I am your sacrifice”—­attribute to the individual spoken to the same greatness that Monsieur and My Lord do:  they ascribe to him the character of an all-powerful ruler, so immeasurably superior to the speaker as to be his owner.  So, likewise, with the Polish expressions of respect—­“I throw myself under your feet,” “I kiss your feet.”  In our now meaningless subscription to a formal letter—­“Your most obedient servant,”—­the same thing is visible.  Nay, even in the familiar signature “Yours faithfully,” the “yours,” if interpreted as originally meant, is the expression of a slave to his master.

All these dead forms were once living embodiments of fact—­were primarily the genuine indications of that submission to authority which they verbally assert; were afterwards naturally used by the weak and cowardly to propitiate those above them; gradually grew to be considered the due of such; and, by a continually wider misuse, have lost their meanings, as Sir and Master have done.  That, like titles, they were in the beginning used only to the God-king, is indicated by the fact that, like titles, they were subsequently used in common to God and the king.  Religious worship has ever largely consisted of professions of obedience, of being God’s servants, of belonging to him to do what he will with.  Like titles, therefore, these common phrases of honour had a devotional origin.