The prepuce, which was taken off in circumcision [CIRCUMCISION].
(
In case two sons by the same mother died of the operation, the [later] rabbins allowed the circumcision of the third son to be delayed till he was full grown; Maimonides, Hil. Milah, 1:18), should perform the rite, and they employed for the purpose a sharp knife (Quanat, De cultris circumcisoriis et secespitis Rebr. Regiom. 1714; also in Ugolini Thesaurus, 22), earlier an edged stone or stone knife (Exo 4:25; Jos 5:2 sq.; comp. Herod. 2:86; see Dougtaei Analect. 1:59; Abicht, De cultris saxeis, etc. Lips. 1712; also in Hasei Thesaur. 1:497 sq.; and Gedaei. Diss. de instrumentis circumcis. Lips. 1698; also in the Nov. thesaurus philol. 1:263 sq.; and in Ugolino, 22), as the Galli or priests of Cybele castrated themselves with a shell (“Samia testa,” Pliny, 35:46; comp. Catull, 63:5; Martial, 3:8; see Arnobius,. adv. Gent. 5:16) under the idea that healing was. thereby promoted. The Christians of Abyssinia also performed the operation with stone knives (Ludolf, Hist. Aticlop. 3:1, 21) Modern Jews use for this purpose steel knives, and the operation is thus described by Otho (Lex. Rabb. page 133): “The circumcizer applies a rod to the organ, and draws the prepuce forward over it as far as possible; then with a forceps be seizes a part of its and cuts it off with a razor. He next seizes the prepuce with his two thumbs, and rolls it back till the whole glans is exposed, after which he sucks out the blood (Mishna, Shabb. 19:2) till the blood comes from the remoter parts of the body, and finally be applies a plaster to the wound.” (Comp. Thevenot, Trav. 1:58; Cheliusn Handb. d. Chirurg. II, 1:50; Wolfers, in Henke, Zeitschr. f. Staatsarzneik. 1825, 1:205 sq.; also in the Encycl. Worterb. d. medic. Wissensch. 5:256 sq.) On Arab circumcision, see Arvieux, 3:146. That so severe and painful an operation (comp. Targ. Jonath. on Gen 22:1) could not well be performed on an infant less than eight days old is evident. The practice of female circumcision, or excision, referred to by several ancient and modern writers, as practiced by certain nations, may have consisted in removing the anterior flap of skin which in some actual specimens of Hottentots or Bushwomen has been found to cover the female genitals, apparently wholly distinct from the vaginal membrane (see the Penny Cyclopcedia, s.v. Circumcision). As circumcision was a symbol of purification, the prepuce was a type of corruption; hence the phrase “foreskin of the heart” (Deu 10:16; Jer 4:10), to designate a carnal or heathenish state (Rom 2:29; compare Philo. 2:258). SEE UNCIRCUMCISION. The part removed by circumcision thus naturally became one of the harshest terms of opprobrium (1Sa 17:26; 1Sa 17:36; comp. Ludolf, Comment. in Hist. AEth. p. 274), like verpus among the Romans (Martial, 7:82, 6). It was sometimes brought as a trophy of slain Gentiles (1Sa 18:25; 2Sa 3:14), like scalps by the North American savages. Paul, on the other hand, uses the ironical terms “concision” (Php 3:2) to stigmatize the extreme attachment of a Judaizing party to this ordinance. SEE CIRCUMCISION.
(1) In the literal sense the word is frequently mentioned owing to the rite of circumcision in vogue in Israel since the days of Abraham (Gen 17:9-14) and among several other peoples of antiquity and modern times. The act of circumcision is represented in the temple of Khonsu, a medical deity, at Karnak. Among the Jews of antiquity circumcision had to be performed by means of a flint or stone knife (Exo 4:25; Jos 5:2, Jos 5:3) on the eighth day after birth (Gen 17:12; Gen 21:4; Lev 12:3; Luk 2:21; Php 3:5), even if this day was the Sabbath (Joh 7:23).
Very early we find the practice one of which the descendants of Abraham became proud (Gen 34:14), so that we see the uncircumcised despised and scorned (1Sa 17:26), and in the time of oppression under King Antiochus Epiphanes many Israelites suffered martyrdom rather than give up the distinctive sign of their people (1 Macc 1:48, 60, 61; 2 Macc 6:10). Among the Arabs and all Mohammedans the custom of circumcision prevails from pre-Islamic times, for it is nowhere ordered in the Koran, and the appellation “uncircumcised” (
A peculiar martial custom is mentioned in 1Sa 18:25, 1Sa 18:27 (compare 2Sa 3:14), where Saul is represented as asking “a hundred foreskins of the Philistines” as a dowry from David for the hand of Michal. This does not seem to have been an exceptional booty in war, especially if it meant that no very careful operation was expected to be performed, but the act became practically equivalent to extermination. We find in Egyptian history at the time of Ramses III, that an invasion into Egypt had been made by several Libyan tribes (see Dümichen, Histor. Inschr., I, plates I-VI, and II, plates 47ff). The Egyptian army sent against the invaders defeated them and returned with a large number of
(2) Metaphorically the word is used in a variety of ways: (a) In the sense of “unlawful,” “forbidden as food,” “taboo.” The fruit of newly planted trees was not to be eaten (Lev 19:23-25). (b) In the sense of “obstinacy,” “opposition to God’s law.” The rite of circumcision meant submission under the law. While an outward form could not be identical with an inward attitude toward God, the use of the word “circumcision” was soon extended to that of purity and obedience of the heart (Deu 10:16; Deu 30:6; and Col 2:11, where this circumcision is called a “circumcision not made with hands,... the circumcision of Christ”). The uselessness of outward circumcision, which does not include obedience and purity, is shown by Paul (Rom 2:25; 1Co 7:18; compare Act 7:51). (c) In the sense of “Gentiles,” “non-Israelites” (Gal 2:7; Eph 2:11; Col 3:11). See CIRCUMCISION; CONCISION.