Studies in the Psychology of Sex, Volume 3 | Page 5

observation on this matter. Spallanzani had shown how the male frog during coitus
will undergo the most horrible mutilations, even decapitation, and yet resolutely continue
the act of intercourse, which lasts from four to ten days, sitting on the back of the female
and firmly clasping her with his forelegs. Goltz confirmed Spallanzani's observations and
threw new light on the mechanism of the sexual instinct and the sexual act in the frog. By
removing various parts of the female frog Goltz found that every part of the female was
attractive to the male at pairing time, and that he was not imposed on when parts of a

male were substituted. By removing various of the sense-organs of the male Goltz[4]
further found that it was not by any special organ, but by the whole of his sensitive
system, that this activity was set in action. If, however, the skin of the arms and of the
breast between was removed, no embrace took place; so that the sexual sensations
seemed to be exerted through this apparatus. When the testicles were removed the
embrace still took place. It could scarcely be said that these observations demonstrated,
or in any way indicated, that the sexual impulse is dependent on the need of evacuation.
Professor Tarchanoff, of St. Petersburg, however, made an experiment which seemed to
be crucial. He took several hundred frogs (_Rana temporaria_), nearly all in the act of
coitus, and in the first place repeated Goltz's experiments. He removed the heart; but this
led to no direct or indirect stoppage of coitus, nor did removal of the lungs, parts of the
liver, the spleen, the intestines, the stomach, or the kidneys. In the same way even careful
removal of both testicles had no result. But on removing the seminal receptacles coitus
was immediately or very shortly stopped, and not renewed. Thus, Tarchanoff concluded
that in frogs, and possibly therefore in mammals, the seminal receptacles are the
starting-point of the centripetal impulse which by reflex action sets in motion the
complicated apparatus of sexual activity.[5] A few years later the question was again
taken up by Steinach, of Prague. Granting that Tarchanoff's experiments are reliable as
regards the frog, Steinach points out that we may still ask whether in mammals the
integrity of the seminal receptacles is bound up with the preservation of sexual
excitability. This cannot be taken for granted, nor can we assume that the seminal
receptacles of the frog are homologous with the seminal vesicles of mammals. In order to
test the question, Steinach chose the white rat, as possessing large seminal vesicles and a
very developed sexual impulse. He found that removal of the seminal sacs led to no
decrease in the intensity of the sexual impulse; the sexual act was still repeated with the
same frequency and the same vigor. But these receptacles, Steinach proceeded to argue,
do not really contain semen, but a special secretion of their own; they are anatomically
quite unlike the seminal receptacles of the frog; so that no doubt is thus thrown on
Tarchanoff's observations. Steinach remarked, however, that one's faith is rather shaken
by the fact that in the Esculenta, which in sexual life closely resembles Rana temporaria,
there are no seminal receptacles. He therefore repeated Tarchanoff's experiments, and
found that the seminal receptacles were empty before coitus, only becoming gradually
filled during coitus; it could not, therefore, be argued that the sexual impulse started from
the receptacles. He then extirpated the seminal receptacles, avoiding hemorrhage as far as
possible, and found that, in the majority of cases so operated on, coitus still continued for
from five to seven days, and in the minority for a longer time. He therefore concluded,
with Goltz, that it is from the swollen testicles, not from the seminal receptacles, that the
impulse first starts. Goltz himself pointed out that the fact that the removal of the testicles
did not stop coitus by no means proves that it did not begin it, for, when the central
nervous mechanism is once set in action, it can continue even when the exciting stimulus
is removed. By extirpating the testicles some months before the sexual season he found
that no coitus occurred. At the same time, even in these frogs, a certain degree of sexual
inclination and a certain excitability of the embracing center still persisted, disappearing
when the sexual epoch was over.
According to most recent writers, the seminal vesicles of mammals are receptacles for
their own albuminous secretion, the function of which is unknown. Steinach could find

no spermatozoa in these "seminal" sacs, and therefore he proposed to use Owen's name of
_glandulæ vesiculares_. After extirpation of these vesicular glands in the white rat typical
coitus occurred. But the capacity for procreation was diminished, and extirpation of both
_glandulæ