None of these reasons, constantly alledged in Europe, are ever to be heard of here, nor do I believe they have the smallest foundation any where; and this, I think, should weigh strongly in favour of the account scripture gives of it. Examining the origin of this ceremony, independent of this revelation, I will never believe that man, or nations of men, rashly submitted to a disgraceful, sometimes dangerous, and always painful operation, unless there had been proposed, as a consequence, some reward for submitting to, or some punishment for refusing it, which balanced in their minds the pain and danger, as well as disgrace, of that operation. All the inhabitants of the globe agree in considering it shameful to expose that part of their body, even to men; and in the east, where, from climate, you are allowed, and from respect to your superiors, the generality of men are forced to go naked, all agree in covering their waist, which is called their _nakedness_, though it is really the only part of their body that is covered. We see even that there was a curse[105] attended the mere seeing that part of the body of a parent, and not instantly throwing a covering over it. I do not propose discussing at large the arguments for or against the time of the beginning to circumcise. The scripture has given such an account of it, that, when weighed with the promise so exactly kept to the end, seems to me to be a very rational one. But, considering all revelation out of the question, I think there is no room to institute any free or fair inquiry. I give no pre-eminence to Moses nor his writings. I suppose him a profane author; but, till those that argue against his account, and maintain circumcision was earlier than Abraham, shall shew me another profane writer as old as Moses, as near the time they say it began as Moses was to the time of Abraham, I will not argue with them in support of Moses against Herodotus, nor discuss who Herodotus’s Phenicians, and who his Egyptians were that circumcised. Herodotus knew not Abraham nor Moses, and, compared to their days, he is but as yesterday. Those Phenicians and Egyptians might, for any thing he knew at his time, have received circumcision from Abraham or Ishmael, or some of their posterity, as the Abyssinians or Ethiopians, whom he refers to, actually say they did, which Herodotus did not know, it is plain, though he mentions they were circumcised. This tradition of the Abyssinians merits some consideration from what they say of it themselves, that they were, in the earliest time, circumcised before they left their native country, and settled in Tigrè. From this they derive no honour, nor do they pretend to any. It would have been otherwise, if the æra fixed upon had been the reign of Menilek, son of Solomon, when they first embraced Judaism under a monarch. This would have made a much more brilliant epoch in their history, whilst it was probable that they adopted