History of male circumcision Guide, Meaning , Facts, Information and Description
circumcision
Male circumcision Documentary evidence shows the first references to male circumcision in Egypt no later than 2300 B.C. Artwork showing the rite being performed on a standing adult male adorns tombs of this period.
All the male mummies belonging to the ancient Egyptian royal families are circumcised [1], with the only exception being Ahmose [1], the founder of the Eighteenth dynasty of Egypt, and some unidentified boys [1]
who did not reach adulthood.
The performance of circumcision is one of the rules of cleanliness in Islam. It is reported by Abu Hurairah that the Prophet Muhammed mentioned:
"Five are the acts quite akin to fitra: circumcision, shaving the pubes, cutting the nails, plucking the hair under the armpits and clipping (or shaving) the moustache."
Jewish philosophers hold that the reason is to seal in one's flesh a symbol of the covenant between God and the Jewish people.
According to ancient Greek aesthetics of the human form, circumcision was a mutilation of a previously perfectly shaped organ. Greek artwork of the period portrayed penises as covered by the foreskin (sometimes in exquisite detail), except in the portrayal of satyrs, lechers, and barbarians.
This prejudice against the appearance of the circumcised penis led to a decline in the incidence of circumcision among many peoples that had previously practiced it throughout Hellenistic times, except among Jews. By the second century, circumcision was sufficiently rare among non-Jews that being circumcised was considered conclusive evidence of Judaism in Roman courts—Suetonius described a court proceeding in which a ninety-year-old man was stripped naked before the court to determine whether he was evading the head tax placed on Jews. The first-century Alexandrian Apion denounced circumcision as a barbaric custom in his diatribe against the Jews, notwithstanding that it was still practised among the Egyptian priestly caste.
Roman satirists including Horace and Juvenal equated the exposure of the glans that results from circumcision to its exposure during erection, and they caricatured Jewish men as being lustful or lecherous, sometimes in an incestuous or homosexual sense, often implying that Jewish men had unusually large penises and were of great sexual potency.
Techniques for restoring the appeareance of an uncircumcised penis were known by the 2nd century B.C. In one such technique, a copper weight (called the Judeum pondum) was hung from the remnants of the circumcised foreskin until, in time, they became sufficiently stretched to cover the glans. The first-century writer Celsus described two surgical techniques for foreskin restoration in his medical treatise De Medicina. In one of these, the skin of the penile shaft was loosened by cutting in around the base of the glans. The skin was then stretched over the glans and allowed to heal, giving the appearance of an uncircumcised penis. Jewish religious writers denounced such practices as abrogating the covenant of Abraham in 1 Maccabees and the Talmud.
Circumcision was not practiced amongst Christians in Europe in the 18th Century. It was regarded with repulsion.
Until well into the Nineteenth Century, the same sentiments prevailed.
From the late Victorian era, circumcision became more common in the higher classes in the United Kingdom. Queen Victoria had the notion that her family was descended from King David of Israel, and mandated that her sons, including the future King Edward VII be circumcised. King Edward continued the practice, and among the English royal family, the practice is still widespread: Prince Charles, Prince Andrew, and Prince Edward, were all circumcised. Reportedly, the late Diana, Princess of Wales rebelled against the royal tradition and refused to allow her sons, Prince William and Prince Harry, to be circumcised.
Routine infant circumcision has been abandoned in New Zealand and Britain, and is now much less common in Australia and in Canada (see table 1). The decline in circumcision in the United Kingdom followed the decision by the National Health Service (NHS) in 1948 not to cover the procedure following an influential article by Douglas Gardiner which claimed that circumcision resulted in the deaths of about 16 children under 5 each year in the United Kingdom. [1]. In most of the rest of the world, circumcision is done either as a religious or cultural practice.
Routine infant circumcision in the United States grew out of a widespread fear that masturbation caused various diseases, a view now universally rejected by the medical community. Circumcision was thought to reduce masturbation and other sexual behavior considered undesirable. Circumcision, depending on how it is practiced, can have a significant impact on masturbation; see masturbation for a detailed discussion.
Circumcision is now also dwindling in the United States. The rate has been steadily decreasing from near universality in the 1960s to approximately 55% today. Thirteen states no longer pay for the procedure under Medicaid; the other 37 still do.
Doctors have made many claims about circumcision over the years, including. the prevention of epilepsy, penile cancer and phimosis. Circumcision advocates today claim that it reduces urinary tract infections and HIV infection, but these claims are strongly disputed and argued against. (See medical analysis of circumcision.)
The major medical societies in Britain, Canada, Australia and New Zealand do not support routine infant circumcision. All major medical organizations in the United States now judge the benefits of the procedure to be too small to justify the risks associated with performing it routinely. Neonatal circumcision nonetheless still remains the most common pediatric operation carried out in the U.S. today.
Non-religious circumcision in English-speaking countries arose in a climate of sexual fear, especially concerning masturbation. In her 1978 article The Ritual of Circumcision,[1] Karen Erickson Paige writes: "In the United States, the current medical rationale for circumcision developed after the operation was in wide practice. The original reason for the surgical removal of the foreskin, or prepuce, was to control 'masturbatory insanity' - the range of mental disorders that people believed were caused by the 'polluting' practice of 'self-abuse.'"
"Self-abuse" was a term commonly used to describe masturbation in the 19th century. According to Paige, "treatments ranged from diet, moral exhortations, hydrotherapy, and marriage, to such drastic measures as surgery, physical restraints, frights, and punishment. Some doctors recommended covering the penis with plaster of Paris, leather, or rubber; cauterization; making boys wear chastity belts or spiked rings; and in extreme cases, castration." Paige details how circumcision became popular as a masturbation remedy:
One of the leading advocates of circumcision was John Harvey Kellogg, who is well known for his pseudoscientific views on human sexuality. He advocated the consumption of Kellogg's corn flakes to prevent masturbation, and he believed that circumcision would be an effective way to eliminate masturbation in males.
Gollaher DL. From ritual to science: the medical transformation of circumcision in america This is an Article on History of male circumcision. Page Contains Information, Facts Details or Explanation Guide About History of male circumcision Origins of male circumcision
Male Circumcision in the Greco-Roman World
Male Circumcision in the 18th Century
In 1753 in London there was a proposal for Jewish emancipation. It was furiously opposed by the pamphleteers of the time, who spread the fear that Jewish emancipation meant universal circumcision. Men were urged to protect:Male Circumcision in the 19th Century and beyond
Then, a change of attitude began, something that was reflected in successive editions of the Encyclopaedia Britannica:
Historically, routine neonatal circumcision was promoted during late Victorian times in the English-speaking parts of Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the United States and the United Kingdom and was widely practiced during the first part of the 20th century in these countries. However, the practice declined sharply in the United Kingdom after the Second World War, and somewhat later in Canada, Australia and New Zealand. It has been argued (e.g., Goldman 1997) that the practice did not spread to other European countries because others considered the arguments for it fallacious. In South Korea, circumcision was largely unknown before the establishment of the United States trusteeship in 1945. More than 90% of South Korean high school boys are now circumcised, but the average age of circumcision is 12 years, which makes South Korea a unique case [1].Anti-masturbation panic and male circumcision
At the same time circumcisions were advocated on men, clitoridectomies (removal of the clitoris) were also performed for the same reason (to treat female masturbators). The US "Orificial Surgery Society" for female "circumcision" operated until 1925, and clitoridectomies and infibulations would continue to be advocated by some through the 1930s.
Robert Darby, writing in the Australian Medical Journal, noted that 19th Century circumcision advocates—and their opponents—were both well aware of the sexual sensitivity of the foreskin:Reference