As the archbishop said to the female doctor….

The accepted version of medical history is that women were excluded from direct participation in all formal medical training and licencing, except as midwives¹. Although, widows were occasionally represented in official registers as continuing to deliver a deceased husband’s apothecary or surgical practice. The implication is that women worked in family trades alongside male relatives and were informally trained in the same skills, to the extent they could continue to work to provide for their families, after the formally licensed man had died.

Most women had no access to formal education outside home schooling, until the development of boarding schools during the 1700s, initially teaching basic educational skills. They could not attend university and were excluded from becoming apprentices in their own right. Despite this, at least 11 women between 1614 and 1696 become licensed medical practitioners, in physick and surgery.

Medical regulation in England and Wales in the early modern period was covered by several authorities. A physician might hold a degree or a licence from a university, or the College of Physicians of London. These options were restricted to men. Universities did not admit women as students until the end of the 1800s, and most denied them formal qualifications until the 1900s. The College of Physicians did not admit women or offer formal qualifications until 1909.

Another option was that of a bishop’s licence. Medical licences were issued by the bishops of England and Wales under a statute of 1511 (3 Henry VIII, c. 11). Under this statute a physician or surgeon was examined by appropriate practitioners and licensed by the diocesan bishop. This system of medical licensing was very popular, with over 1000 names recorded in church registers. It declined during the 1700s. The Archbishop of Canterbury issued the last medical licence in 1775.

Why did so many medical practitioners choose a bishop’s licence?

To answer this question, we need to understand the jurisdiction of the church, and specifically of the archbishop of Canterbury. They are firstly the bishop of their diocese (area of jurisdiction) of Canterbury, which covers eastern Kent. Founded in 597, it is the oldest jurisdiction in the English church. They are also the bishop of the province of Canterbury, an area which covers the southern two-thirds of England and all of Wales. The Archbishop of Canterbury could issue licences for their diocese or for the entire province, via the vicar general. Finally, the archbishop’s Faculty Office, founded in 1533 and covering all of England and Wales, could also issue licences.

In contrast, the College of Physicians licence, from 1518, covered the City of London and 7 miles around it. Although it was extended by statute in 1523 (14 & 15 Henry VIII, c.5) to cover the whole of England, most licensing and influence remained London focussed. The wide geographic scope and flexibility re licensing for physic and surgery made bishops’ licences an attractive option.

It would be reasonable to assume that bishops licences were also restricted to men and almost all of the practitioners licensed in physick and surgery were men. However, between 1613 and 1696, 11 women are listed on the archbishop of Canterbury’s registers. There is also mention of a Katherine Lambe “formerly of Edmonton, Middx., now of St. Martin-in-the-Fields, Middx., doctor of medicine” being licenced in 1687, on the archbishop’s midwife licence register². Although, she isn’t listed directly in the medical licence register. It seems that for a brief period, women were considered eligible for licences in the Archbishop of Canterbury’s jurisdiction, as long as they met the criteria. There was no formal announcement recorded about this licensing and there is no explanation as to why this period of enlightenment began or ended.

None of the archbishops in post between 1613 and 1696 who issued licences to women were known as educational reformers.

Painted portrait of a man, with a grey beard velvet coat and puffy sleeves, holding a book in one hand.

Portrait of Archbishop George Abbot, by Kind Permission of the Church Commissioners for England.

George Abbot³, 1611 to 1633, the first archbishop to issues licences, accidentally killed a keeper during a hunting trip in 1621. As a result, he was mainly known as the only translator of the 1611 Bible and Archbishop of Canterbury to kill a person.

Abbot licenced:

Anne Hubbard⁴, wife of Richard, of Toft Monks, Norfolk.

She was licensed to practise surgery in the diocese of Norwich in 1613.

Eleanor Woodhouse⁵, wife of Robert, vintner, of St. Leonard, Shoreditch, Middx.

She was licensed to practise surgery in the counties of Essex, Middlesex outside the city of London, Surrey and Sussex, in 1614

Alice Blower⁶, wife of Thomas, clothier, of Sudbury, Suffolk.

She was licensed to practise surgery in the counties of Cambridge, Essex, Norfolk and Suffolk in 1620.

However, the licence was revoked in 1630⁷.

Catherine Greene⁸, wife of Thomas, vicar of Royston, Herts.

She was licensed to practise medicine in the dioceses of Ely, Lincoln and London in 1626.

Gilbert Sheldon⁹, 1663 to 1677, acted as archbishop in practice from 1660, as his predecessor was old and ill. He lost royal favour by condemning Charles II’s infidelities. Unmarried, there was society gossip claiming he had many sexual liaisons with women, but there is no evidence for the claims. It is likely the gossip was an attempt to damage his reputation by the king’s supporters. Sheldon licenced:

Isabell Davies¹⁰, of Gravel Lane, Aldgate, London.

She was licensed to practise Chirurgery (surgery) in the province of Canterbury in 1663.

Sarah Blyford¹¹.

She was licensed to practise medicine in the province of Canterbury in 1666.

Cecily Malcher¹².

She was listed as paying a subscription on being licensed to practise medicine in the province of Canterbury in 1669, which was later cancelled.

William Sancroft¹³, 1677 to 1690, was removed from office in 1690 for refusing to swear allegiance to King William and Queen Mary. Sancroft licenced:

Jane Pemell¹⁴, wife of John, of St. Saviour, Southwark, Surrey.

She was licensed to practise physick and surgery in the province of Canterbury in 1685. Her testimonial information¹⁵ has been digitised and is available here.

Elizabeth Wheatland¹⁶, wife of John, of St. Michael near Winchester, Hants.

She was licensed to practise medicine and surgery in the dioceses of Salisbury and Winchester in 1687. Her testimonials¹⁷ highlighted her bone setting and surgical skills.

Elizabeth Moore¹⁸, widow, of Market Harborough, Leics.

She was licensed to practice physick in 1690. Her testimonial certifying that she was “a person of good skill in Physick & Chirurgery & very fit (in our opinion) to practice them” have been digitised and are available here.

Thomas Tenisson¹⁹, 1694 to 1715, was made a member of the Privy Council by King William. However, the next monarch, Queen Anne often acted against his advice and appointed bishops without consulting him. Tenisson licenced:

Mary Rose²⁰, of Portsmouth, Hants.

She was licensed to practice Physick & Surgery in 1696. Her testimonial information has been digitised and is available here.

At the end of this story we are left with more questions than answers, and often the historical record is silent. Was the licencing of women as medical practitioners due to direct archbishop’s influence in Abbot’s case? Why did some of his successors grant licences to women and not others? Why did it end?

Do you know more about this fascinating story? If you can fill in some of the gaps, we would love to hear from you at history@rcp.ac.uk

Pamela Forde

Archives Manager

Sources

VX 1A/11 Licences for midwives 1669-1722
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Abbot_(bishop) (Accessed 15 October 2025)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Laud (Accessed 15 October 2025)
Reg. Abbot 1, ff.169v-70, Lambeth Palace Library catalogue of archives and manuscripts
Reg. Abbot 1, f.170v, Lambeth Palace Library catalogue of archives and manuscripts
Reg. Abbot 2, f. 190v, Lambeth Palace Library catalogue of archives and manuscripts
Reg. Abbot 3, f.112r-v, Lambeth Palace Library catalogue of archives and manuscripts
Reg. Abbot 2, f.212v, Lambeth Palace Library catalogue of archives and manuscripts
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilbert_Sheldon (Accessed 15 October 2025)
VB 1/1/3, Lambeth Palace Library catalogue of archives and manuscripts
VB 2/2, f.9 and VB 1/1, f 190v, Lambeth Palace Library catalogue of archives and manuscripts
VG 1/3 f 1105, Lambeth Palace Library catalogue of archives and manuscripts
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Sancroft (Accessed 15 October 2025)
Reg. Sancroft 2, f.257v and VG 1/3 f 88v, Lambeth Palace Library catalogue of archives and manuscripts
VX IA/10/223/1-4, Lambeth Palace Library catalogue of archives and manuscripts
Reg. Sancroft 2, f. 268v, Lambeth Palace Library catalogue of archives and manuscripts
VX IA/10/247/1-3, Lambeth Palace Library catalogue of archives and manuscripts
VX IA/10/259, Lambeth Palace Library catalogue of archives and manuscripts
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Tenison (Accessed 15 October 2025)
VX IA/10/297/1-6, Lambeth Palace Library catalogue of archives and manuscripts

Library, Archive and Museum

Related pages

The ‘hidden’ history of women in medicine: a curator’s thoughts

Challenging 500 years of medical history: answering the vexed question of women in medicine