Jews who were ashamed of their nation, or unwilling to endure reproach because of being cir cumcised, occasionally used means to obliterate this distinctive mark of their descent (i Maccab. i.
; Joseph. eintig. xii. 5. 1). Sometimes this was done by a surgical operation, such as Celsus describes (De Medic. vii.-25; camp. Galen, Meth. Med. xiv. 16 ; Paul. Aegin. vi. 53 ; Epiphan. De pona'. et Mens., p. 53S, ed. Basil. 1544) ; some times by other means (Dioscor. iv. 157). To this it has been supposed the apostle alludes 1 Cor. vii. IS (Wetstein, in loc., Schlaeger and Groddeck in Ugolini, Thes, xxii.) For the opinions of the rabbins concerning cir cumcision, sec Otho, Lex. Rabbin. Philol., and for the practice of the modern Jews, see Buxtorf, Synagoga 7udaica, ch. 2.
2. Circumcision as practised by other Nations.— Herodotus tells us that the Egyptians, the Col chians, the Ethiopians, the Phoenicians, as well as the Syrians in Palestine, were circumcised (Hist. ii. wit) ; though from another statement of the same writer, it would appear that among the Egyptians this was a law only for the priests (ii. 36 ; see Wesseling's note) ; and with this falls in the fact that Apion, an Egyptian, was uncircumcised, and only submitted to the rite when it was too late, in hopes of finding the cure of a painful disease (Joseph. Cont. Ap. ii. 13). The Egyptians, more over, are, along with the Edomites, the Ammon ites, and the Moabites, classed by Jeremiah (ix. 25, 26) among the uncircumcised.' The passage, it is true, in its opening clause which may be rendered all the circumcised uncircum cised,' or more literally, every one circumcised in circumcision,' or with a foreskin,' may seem to in clude the nations whose names follow among the circumcised, as being so in flesh though not in heart ; but as the closing clause of the verse plainly distributes the totality, the of the first clause, and as in so doing a dis tinction is made between the Jews as circumcised in flesh but not in heart, and the nations as un circumcised in flesh as well as in heart, we must understand the first clause in accordance with this; and in this case the rendering in the A. V., ` the cir cumcised with the uncircumcised,' expresses the real sense of the writer. On the other hand, we are told that the Troglodytes of Africa (Diodonis, iii. 31), all with the exception of the Koloboi,
practised circumcision, having learned it from the Egyptians. Jerome also affirms that ' of the Egyptians, Idumeans, Ammonites, and Moabites, the greater part were circumcised' (In Ter. ix. 25); and Barnabas says that 'so are all the Syrians and Arabians . . . nay, even the Egyptians are circumcised' (sec. 9); a statement which cannot be accepted to the full extent, but which serves to shew that it was commonly believed that other nations besides the Jews observed this rite. Jerome ilso mentions the `Saracens of the desert' as hay ng this usage ; and this is confirmed by Josephus •Antiq. 1. 12. 2). That it was not, however, )riginally universal among the tribes of the desert s clear, from the narrative in Exod. iv.; the con het and feeling of Zipporah shew that to the Midianites the rite was strange and horrible. Among the Arab tribes of more recent times the Isage is common, but not universal (Niebuhr, Arabie i. c. 19) ; that it was older than Moham med, and that he regarded it merely as a usage and lot as a rite, has been inferred from his silence re tarding it in the Koran. Among the Abyssinian Lhristians the practice still subsists, and is extended :o females as well as males ; a fact which seems to ;hew that it must have come to them from some ether source than through Judaism. The same is true of the Coptic Christians (Niebuhr, 1. c.) Among the Arabs also it is practised on women, though not commonly (Ibid.) It is found also among some of the African tribes ; and traces of it have been observed among the natives of some of the South Sea Islands (Pickering, Races of Men, 153, 199, 200, etc.) On comparing these different accounts one cannot but be struck with the conflicting character of much of the evidence. There is hardly a single statement made by one authority which is not contradicted by some other. On the whole, however, the pre sumption remains that circumcision was practised by other nations besides the Hebrews. Of these nations some evidently derived it from the He brews, others from the Egyptians. The question as to the origin of the usage, therefore, lies en tirely between these two.