13 December 2020
There are some who claim that those with PhDs are not “real” doctors, and that only physicians can properly lay claim to the title of doctor. And some PhDs who know Latin hit back by saying that doctor means teacher, and that they are the “true and original” doctors, while those with mere MD degrees are Johnny-come-lately wannabes. My own doctoral advisor was known to express the latter opinion. Both of these positions are wrong. When we’re speaking English, the title of doctor can rightly be applied to both.
In classical Latin, doctor does indeed mean teacher. The word is a nominal form of the verb docere, to teach. And in antiquity, this was the only meaning of the word. But this would change in the medieval era.
Writing in the sixth century, Gildas, in his De excidio et conquestu Britanniae (On the Ruin and Conquest of Britain), uses doctor in the teacher sense, specifically to refer to teachers of theology:
Sed videamus quid Christi verus discipulus Magister Gentium Paulus, qui omni ecclesiastico doctori imitandus est, sicut et ego Christi, in tali negotio praeloquatur in prima Epistola dicens.
(But let us see what Paul, the true disciple of Christ, teacher of the Gentiles, who is emulated by every ecclesiastical doctor, just as I do of Christ, first says about so great a work, writing in his first epistle.)
Nearly seven hundred years later, we see physicians start to be accorded the title of doctor. Writing in the thirteenth century, the poet Michael of Cornwall (or at least we think it’s him) says:
O doctor Cincy, medicorum qui quasi sol es,
(O doctor Cincy, who of medicine is just like the sun, you alone restrain
So, in medieval Latin, and in particular Anglo-Latin, doctor could refer both to a scholar and to physician. And when the word appears in English in the fourteenth century, we again see both meanings, which makes sense; English borrowed both meanings from Anglo-Latin.
In what may be the first known use of the word in English, Robert Manning of Brunne in his Handying Synne of 1303 uses the word to refer to teachers of theology:
Seynt Gregory telþ þarfore a tale
Pat telþ many one, what grete & smale.
He telþ mo hymself alone
Þan alle be doctours do echone.
(Saint Gregory tells therefore a tale, that many a one, both great and small, tell. He himself, alone, tells more, than every one of all the doctors.)
We see the English word doctor applied to physicians by the late fourteenth century. The “General Prologue” to Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales, written c. 1387, uses it to describe the physician-pilgrim. The passage is also noteworthy in that it describes the physician’s education and practice, which includes astronomy, which would not be part of a modern MD’s ambit. It also distinguishes the physician from a theologian both by marking him as a doctour of phisik and by stating that he knows little about the Bible:
With us ther was a doctour of phisik;
In al this world ne was ther noon hym lik,
To speke of phisik and of surgerye,
For he was grounded in astronomye.
He kepte his pacient a ful greet deel
In houres by his magyk natureel.
Wel koude he fortunen the ascendent
Of his ymages for his pacient.
He knew the cause of everich maladye,
Were it of hoot, or coold, or moyste, or drye,
And where they engendred, and of what humour.
He was a verray, parfit praktisour:
The cause yknowe, and of his harm the roote,
Anon he yaf the sike man his boote.
[...]
His studie was but litel on the Bible.
(With us was a doctor of medicine;
In all this world there was no one like him,
To speak of medicine and surgery,
For he had been taught astronomy.
He cared for his patients very many times
In (astronomically suitable) hours using his natural magic.
He knew well how to calculate the position of the planet
In the sign of his patient.
He knew the cause of every malady,
Were it of hot, or cold, or moist, or dry elements,
And where they were engendered and by which bodily humor.
He was a truly perfect practitioner:
The cause and source of the harm known,
Straightaway he gave the sick man his remedy.
[...]
His study of the Bible was but a little.
At about the same time, an English translation of Lanfranco of Milan’s Chirugia magna (Science of Surgery) also uses doctor to refer to a physician, but in this case without marking it as a doctor of medicine (although the context makes that clear):
Þerfore I folowynge þe doctryne of rasis, auicen, & galion & of oþere doctouris, & also experimentis þat I haue longe preued, I seie þat it is nedeful þat a woundid man in þe bigynnynge absteyne him fro wiyn, & namely if þat þe wounde be in þe heed eiþir in ony partie of a senewe.
(Therefore following the doctrine of Rasis, Avicenna, Galen, and of other doctors, and also experiments that I have long tested, I say that it is needful that in the beginning a wounded man abstain from wine, particularly if the wound is either in the head or in any part of a nerve.)
And also from the late fourteenth century, John Trevisa’s translation of Bartholomæus Anglicus’s De proprietatibus rerum uses doctor to refer to a scholar of neither theology or medicine, specifically to Plato. But in the same passage, he also uses it to refer to Dionysius the Areopagite, a first-century, Christian bishop of Athens:
Plato of Athenes was doctour of alle þe prouynce of Attica þat was Grecia. Demoustenes with noble spekynge made þis cite haue a grete name duryng longe passyng of tyme, as Salustius seith. But passyng alle oþere Denyses doctour of þat cite, Paules disciple, makeþ mencioun of þis cite and maked it famous, for by his grete witte and wysedom he made fayre and hiȝeliche nyȝe alle þe parties of þe worlde, as Epiphanius seith in commendacioun of þe wyse doctour Athenes, and Ysyder seith pe same.
(Plato of Athens was the doctor of all the province of Attica, that was Greece. Demosthenes with noble speech gave this city a great name during the long passage of time, as Salustius tells us. But surpassing all others, Dionysius [the Areopagite], doctor of that city, Paul’s disciple, makes mention of this city and made it famous, for by his great wit and wisdom he made [it known] honorably and quickly to nearly all the parts of the world, as Epiphanius says in commendation of the wise doctor of Athens, and Isidore says the same.)
So, for over six hundred years, doctor has been in use as a label and title for both scholars and physicians, and in English use at least, neither one can lay claim to being the first or original meaning. Not that it matters, as meaning is determined by use, not etymology. The connotation of the word has shifted, however. Once, the unmarked doctor referred to a teacher, especially one of Christian theology; whereas now the unmarked word refers to a physician unless the context makes the type of doctor clear. This shift is undoubtedly due to the fact that during the course of their lives, most people will have more contact with physicians than with university professors.
Calls for only physicians to be labeled as doctors are also rather pernicious, in that they are usually directed at women or scholars of color. Female or BIPOC PhDs are more likely to be criticized for using the title, and are more likely to be called Ms. or Mrs. than white, male scholars are to be called Mr.
Discuss this post
