ON AUG 13, 1892, there appeared an article inThe Lancet(London) entitled "The Place of Anthropology in Medical Education"; the author was Havelock Ellis.1This was followed during the next week by a vigorous plea along the same lines from the pen of the distinguished surgeon Charles Roberts.2The argument of both writers was that room ought to be found in the medical curriculum for the more directly human and practical study of anthropology in place of some of the irrelevant aspects of anatomy, physiology, and histology. Botany, they thought, ought to be dropped altogether. Botany has been dropped, and most of the irrelevancies of anatomy, physiology, and histology have been largely pruned away in the 70 years since Ellis and Roberts penned their communications. In the meantime the content of the medical curriculum has become packed with more and more subjects as its duration has