man must by his own act complete what God had first instituted.67 To Zacharias and
Elisabeth the rite would have even more than this significance, as administered to the
child of their old age, so miraculously given, and who was connected with such a future.
Besides, the legend which associates circumcision with Elijah, as the restorer of this rite
in the apostate period of the Kings of Israel, 68 was probably in circulat ion at the time.69
We can scarcely be mistaken in supposing, that then, as now, a benediction was spoken
before circumcision, and that the ceremony closed with the usual grace over the cup of
wine,70 when the child received his name in a prayer that probab ly did not much differ
from this at present in use: 'Our God, and the God of our fathers, raise up this child to his
father and mother, and let his name be called in Israel Zacharias, the son of Zacharias.71
Let his father rejoice in the issue of his loins, and his mother in the fruit of her womb, as
it is written in Prov. xxiii. 25, and as it is said in Ezek. xvi. 6, and again in Ps. cv. 8, and
Gen. xxi. 4;' the passages being, of course, quoted in full. The prayer closed with the
hope that the child might grow up, and successfully, 'attain to the Torah, the
marriagebaldachino, and good works.'72
64. Pes. 4 a.
65. Yalkut Sh. i. par. 81.
66. Tanch. P. Tetsavveh, at the beginning, ed. Warshau, p. 111 a.
67. Tanch. u. s.
68. Pirqé de R. Elies. c. 29.
69. Probably the designation of 'chair' or 'throne of Elijah,' for the chair on which the
godparent holding the child sits, and certainly the invocation of Elijah, are of later date.
Indeed, the institution of godparents is itself of later origin. Curiously enough, the
Council of Terracina, in 1330 had to interdict Christians acting as godparents at
circumcision! Even the great Buxtorf acted as godparent in 1619 to a Jewish child, and
was condemned to a fine of 100 florins for his offence. See Löw, Lebensalter, p. 86.
70. According to Josephus (Ag. Ap. ii. 26) circumcision was not followed by a feast. But,
if this be true, the practice was soon altered, and the feast took place on the eve of
circumcision (Jer. Keth. i. 5; B. Kama 80 a; B. Bath. 60 b, &c.). Later Midrashim traced
it up to the history of Abraham and the feast at the weaning of Isaac, which they
represented as one at circumcision (Pirqé d. R. Eliez. 29).
71. Wünsche reiterates the groundless objection of Rabbi Low (u. s. p.96), that a family -
name was only given in remembrance of the grandfather, deceased father, or other
member of the family! Strange, that such a statement should ever have been hazarded;
stranger still, that it should be repeated after having been fully refuted by Delitzsch. It
certainly is contrary to Josephus (War iv. 3, 9), and to the circumstance that both the
father and brother of Josephus bore the name of Mattias. See also Zunz (Z. Gesch. u.
Liter. p. 318).
72. The reader will find B. H. Auerbach's Berith Abraham (with a Hebrew introduction)
an interesting tractate on the subject. For another and younger version of these prayers,
see Löw, u. s. p. 102.