THE NEW SCHAFF-HERZOG
national or tribal customs of peoples in the barbarous or semicivQized state. The first of suc^h mutilations to become known to modern Europe
was circumcision as practised by Jews Meaning and Mohammedans (true circumcision and Use of as defined above), by whom the custhe Term, tom has been carried on to the higher
stages of culture. When wider knowledge of the earth and its inhabitants brought to light other more or less similar customs, it was natural to give to each the name already known. So it has come about that practises differing widely in operative method and results, if not in significance and origin, are all alike called " circumcision," and the term, in actual usage, is almost synonymous with mutilation of the sexual organs. A complete and satisfactory study of circumcision has not yet been published. When it is, the first endeavor will necessarily be to clear up the confusion of thought manifest in this vague use of the term and resulting from it. Preliminary to a fruitful investigation, the various mutilations must be precisely defined and named, their relations must be determined, and such as may not properly be classed and considered with circumcision must be set aside. Incidentally this introductory study will probably modify somewhat — perhaps very considerably — the statements now common concerning the wide extent of circumcision, ascribing it as an indigenous practise to Africa, Asia, North and South America, Australia, and the islands of the Pacific.
In the search for significance and origin practically no help is to be obtained directly from any people who circumcise. The explanation uniformly given and considered quite sufficient by the givers is " We follow the custom of the Significance fathers." Indirectly, however — by and noting and comparing details of the
Origin. operation, and acts and remarks connected with it or with the circumcised and uncircumcised states — significance may be discovered. Circumcision serves as a national or tribal sign (Hebrews, Jews, and certain African tribes), or a mark of distinction for classes or individuals (ancient Egypt [?], cf. Josephus, Apion, ii. 14; Clement of vUexandria, Strom., i. 15; Origen on Rom. ii. 13; negroes of the Niger delta, cf. Journal of the Anthropological Institute, xxix., new ser., ii., 1899, p. 56). It passes as a bodily adornment (cf. the peculiar Masai mutilation, best described in Verhandlungen der Berliner Gesellschaft fur Anthropologic, Apr. 27, 1895, pp. [302]-[303]; cf. H. H. Johnston, The Kilima-njaro Expedition, London, 1886, p. 412, note). It is regarded as a hygienic precaution or grounded in reasons of physiology (for cleanliness, to moderate sexual desire, to prevent venereal diseases, to secure offspring, to remove an abnormal development, etc.). The operation marks the entrance to maturity, being closely connected with the so-called initiation ceremonies, and sometimes a severe test of courage and endurance (cf. C. Niebuhr, Beschreibung von Araljien, Copenhagen, 1772, p. 269; R. F. Burton, Personal Narrative of a Pilgrimage to El- Medinah and Meccah, vol. iii., London, 1856, p. 80,
note;* David Livingstone, Missionary Travels and Researches in South Africa, New York, 1858, p]). 164-165; Zeitschrift fur Ethnologic, vi., 1874, pp. 37- 3S; C. M. Doughty, Travels in Arabia Deserta, vol. i., Cambridge, 1888, pp. 128-129; accountsfor South America, collected by Ploss, sec below); the circumcised state is necessary to the full enjoyment of the rights and pri\aleges of manhood (cf. references already cited and Zeitschrift fiir allgemeine Erdkunde, neue Folge, iv., 1858, p. 357, for the island of Rook, east of New Guinea; J. Sibree, The Great African Island [Madagascar], London, ISSO, p. 217). Such explanations may account for the retention of the practise in later times; but they are speculations of a more advanced culture and do not indicate the origin, which must be consistent with primitive knowledge and thought. Nor is the origin found by naming circumcision a rite of religion. It remains to explain why and how this peculiar mutilation became a religious rite, and the attempts to do so (making it a development of phallic worship, or of human sacrifice as a substitutionary act, or symbolic) are, like the explanations already referred to, products of later times and too conjectural to be convincing. As a matter of fact, in most cases religious significance is not apparent. It has been asserted among the ancient Mexicans; but a careful examination of the early accounts offers little support for the statement that they either circumcised or practised any distinctly sexual mutilation. It is found among Hebrews and ilohammedans. The case of the former will be considered below. The latter have adopted it as a part of their religion because the first Mohammedans observed it, and with them it was already the " custom of the fathers." The more intelligent seem to have regarded it as one of the requirements of common decency (it is not commanded in the Koran, but taken for granted — cf. the fact that there is no mention of circumcision in the decalogue or the older laws of the Pentateuch. The commentators class it as one of the usages of fitrah, " natural religion "; cf. J. Wellhausen, Reste arabischen Heidentums, Berlin, 1897, pp. 167 sqq.). The Bedouin women of Medain Salih may be allowed to speak for the more ignorant and primitive (cf. Doughty, ut sup., vol. i., p. 410). Arid some connection with the sexual life is the significance most frequent, most prominent, and most primitive, so far as information goes (cf. references already cited and Zeitschrift fur Ethnologic, x., 1878, p. 399; Edinburgh Medical Journal, x., 1864-65, p. '2'2'2; Revue d'Anthropologie, 2d ser., iv., 1881, p. 292; Verhandlungen der Berliner Gesellschaft fiir Anthropologic, Apr. 28, 1877, p. [180]; Zeitschrift fiir Ethnologie, x., 1878, p. 18; A. Bastian, Die deutsohe Expedition an der Loango-Ki'tste, Jena, 1874, p. 177; Riedel and Valentijn for Dutch East Indies, quoted in Ploss, Knabenbeschneidung, pp. 21, 22, 24). To conclude that the primary significance is indicated herein is consistent with the knowledge and conditions of the time when circumcision must
*The note ia omitted in later editions of Burton. It is copied by Julius Wellhausen in the first edition of his Reste arabiachen Heidentums (Berlin, 1887), p. 215, and omitted in the second edition.