Cited by 60Historical Studies on Reproduction, Gender, Health, and Societal ChangesGenital Health and DiseaseHistory of Medicine Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Marked in Your Flesh

Glick, Leonard B.·2005·Oxford University Press eBooks

Abstract

This book traces the history of male infant circumcision from its origins in ancient Judea, through centuries of Christian condemnation and Jewish defense, to its current role in American culture and medical practice. Genesis 17 is the biblical text where infant circumcision was mandated by Judean priests in the 6th century BCE; they characterized it as confirming a covenant, but the deeper meaning of the practice was male supremacy and dominance. Early Christians vehemently rejected circumcision, while Jews defended it with equal vigor in the Talmud and other rabbinic texts. The circumcision rite, embellished by folk practices and raised to new heights of significance by Jewish mystics, evolved into its contemporary form in medieval and early modern Europe. Meanwhile, Christian theological writings and medieval European folk beliefs — including those connected with fantasies about ritual murder — contributed to the enduring negative image of circumcision in the non-Jewish world. In the modern period, a few Jews began to question circumcision for the first time. In Germany, where Reform Judaism originated, German-Jewish physicians debated whether ritual circumcision should be either modified or eliminated. In the late 19th and 20th centuries, infant circumcision became a widely accepted medical practice in Britain and the United States, not as a ritual practice but as a preventive or therapeutic procedure. A key element in the new attitude to circumcision was the belief that the practice explained Jewish health and longevity. In the United States, Jewish physicians became especially prominent advocates for the practice, but physicians throughout the country endorsed it with equal enthusiasm. The contemporary circumcision debate in America finds expression in a wide variety of media: most notably, fiction, guides to Jewish parenting, and television sitcoms. The book closes with an epilogue assessing whether circumcision is beneficial or harmful, and whether parents have the right to request genital alteration for their infants or children.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/019517674x.001.0001

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Metadata

Authors
Glick, L. B.
Corresponding author
Glick, Leonard B.
Venue
Oxford University Press eBooks
Published
2005-07-01
OpenAlex
W2502168725
Cited by
60
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 4
FWCI
11.44
Type
book
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Oxford University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History › Historical Studies on Reproduction, Gender, Health, and Societal Changes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Genital Health and Disease
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History › History of Medicine Studies
Keywords
history of circumcision, Genesis 17, covenant, ancient Judea, early Christianity, Jewish mysticism, ritual murder accusation, Reform Judaism, American culture

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Marked in Your Flesh. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/019517674x.001.0001
The paper
Glick, L. B. (2005). Marked in Your Flesh. Oxford University Press eBooks. https://doi.org/10.1093/019517674x.001.0001