[26] M. Faure has also described a somewhat analogous 'nicking' operation.
VII SUMMARY.
I. Circumcision as a sacrificial rite has been practised by very numerous races of diverse origin, and dates from an extremely remote antiquity; probably from the Stone Age, as suggested by the internal evidence of Biblical records.
II. This fact, together with that of its application by many tribes to the persons of female children, deprives the religious ceremony of any title to the hygienic character and purpose, which have been frequently attributed to it.
III. The surgical operation of circumcision, especially where infants are concerned, has therefore to be discussed solely on its own merits, wholly apart from any theory of Divine intentions, based upon theological considerations. It appears to be erroneous in principle.
IV. It consists in a mutilation; in the removal of a perfectly normal structure, with which, for patent physiological reasons, every male child is endowed by nature. The morality of such a practice, without grave necessity, is open to question.
V. Unless as the result of subsequent disease, no deformity, and indeed no actual abnormality, exist as factors productive of the condition designated 'Congenital Phimosis.' Almost every male child suffers at birth from some degree of the same phenomenon—the imperfect separation of two muco-cutaneous surfaces, developed in contiguity.[27]
VI. Symptoms ascribed to a 'contracted prepuce' are due to natural growth of the glans penis, when this physiological separation is very incomplete, and when, therefore, a rigid constricting envelope prevents development. No true contraction exists, except as the result of superadded inflammation; and is rarely of much importance, unless an element of contagion has been introduced.