09-29-2013, 07:49 PM
From a biologist/medicus viewpoint, indeed the mere act of castration does not render the subject impotent, just infertile. 98 % of the ejactulate is produced by the prostate, only 2 % is the actual sperm. The by-kidneys also play a role in the endocrinic production of testosteron, like in females, you have lower levels for sure, but testosteron production all the same. The removal of the balls themselves is not really mayor surgery and certainly in Roman times could have been performed without any danger of bleeding out. All it really requires is a single slit in the sack, the freeing of the testi from the membrane (they move quite freely within the sack) and the cutting of the seedleaders and connective tissue. A quick scorch with a cautary would have prevented any massive bleeding, closing both the seedleaders and the artery supplying blood to the balls. The sack could then be stitched closed, after the wound has been wel washed with a disinfectent, like acceticum. I would think the opperation best be conducted in a warm environment (after a warm bath), as the balls are kept at less then 37 degrees, so warmth would cause them to descend in the sack, leaving more room for the procedure then if the balls were pulled up close to the body.
