A bird's eye view is presented of the historiography of medicine, from the time of Erasmus' Encomium artis medicae till the présent day. It is argued that the traditional purpose of médical history, defined by its origin and long-ume cultivation inside the institutions of medicine, was to médiate medecine's place within society by providing genealogical ennoblement and Erasmian praise. In view of the glorious successes of medicine of the past half century or so, there no longer is a need for this service. Médical history now has the primary function of a critical évaluation of the place in society of the colossal power that is medicine. As a resuit, the optimal home for the médical historian has become the history département rather than the médical faculty/school, and wherever possible a rehousing should be undertaken.

At the inauguration of a newly endowed chair of the history of medicine-the first such chair at Vanderbilt University-it would seem appropriate to reflect on the purpose and place of médical history. One way of doing this is to consider the development of médical history itself; not-I should stress-the development of medicine, but of the historical study of medicine. Whereas medicine is as old as human civilization and goes back to prehistoric times, the historiography of medicine is of a much more récent date. It has been said that doctors hâve studied médical history for over 2000 years [Temkin 1946, p. 9; see also Heischkel 1938]; and indeed historiés of medicine were written in Graeco-Roman times and in the Middle Ages [Shyrock and Temkin 1952, pp. 277-278]. Yet one could plausibly argue that the historical study of medicine sensu stricto, in which contemporary médical knowledge is no longer uncritically equated with the sum total of the classic literature from the past, is restricted to postrinediaeval, modem times. Historiés of médical history, in turn, date for the most part from the second quarter of the