“I am glad that you did not stand by your original intention to withhold from me all this information, in regard to the sex life of the child, inasmuch as it throws a very interesting light on the more primitive stage of humanity.” I was afraid that in so doing, I might digress too far. But, after all, it may prove of advantage that you have these informations now. “But tell me, what proofs have you, from an analytical point of view, of the sex life of the child? Is your conviction founded merely on the corroboration that mythology and history offer?” Not at all! Our conviction rests upon direct observations. Here is how we arrived at our conclusions:—In the first place, sex life of childhood was revealed to us in the analysis of adults, who volunteered this information. Then, we proceeded to analyse children, and it was no small triumph when we succeeded in proving everything which we had deducted from the information of adults, despite the fact that as regarded the adults, twenty to forty years had passed, during which time these memories had been submerged and undergone substantial changes. “What! You really ventured to analyse little children, tots of less than six years? How could such a thing be done at all? And wasn’t that hazardous, as far as the children were concerned?” It was easy enough to do. You would hardly believe what takes place in the brain of a child of four or five years. At this age, children are mentally very alert. For them, the period of early sexuality is also a period of intellectual bloom. I am under the impression that children, with the beginning of the period of latency, experience a mental let-down; grow temporarily dull, so to speak. During this period, many children also begin to lose their physical charm. As far as possible damage, arising from an early analysis is concerned, let me assure you that the first child to undergo this experiment—about twenty years ago—has meanwhile grown up to be a sound and efficient young man who, despite severe psychological traumata, passed through his pubescent period without complaint. This fact encourages me to expect that all the other “victims” will not fare any worse. Analyses of children yield various interesting results. Possibly, in future, they will grow in importance. As far as theoretical findings are concerned, there can be no doubt as to the value of these analyses. As children give unequivocal information on questions which only yield hazy results in the analyses of adults, the analyst is protected against mistakes which might have proved to be serious. Analyses of children have the added advantage, in that those moments are seized upon unaware, when a neurosis is in the process of development. There can be no mistake about such observations in children.