Abstract Background The term dystonic tremor is being increasingly used in neurological publications despite uncertainties about its meaning. We provide here a historical reconstruction from its original introduction in 1984 to help distinguish dystonia from essential tremor. Methods A comprehensive Pubmed search of MeSH terms “dystonia”, “tremor”, and “essential tremor” provided the information base for reconstructing historical usage of the term “dystonic tremor”. Results Over the years, this expression was enriched of additional meanings and sided by companion descriptors, such as tremor associated with dystonia. Dystonic tremor has been considered characteristically coarse, jerky, irregular, directional and asymmetrical. These characteristics, however, are not included in the most recent definitions of tremor. The relationship between tremor and dystonia is not easy to untangle, as the two phenomena are often recognized in association. Tremor and dystonia experts have developed different visions of dystonic tremor that have been variably implemented. There are currently two independent consensus definitions, which are not coincident and imply different pathophysiological interpretations. Conclusions This historical reappraisal highlights that usage of the expression dystonic tremor has evolved over time to lose its original meaning. Notwithstanding inconsistencies of current definitions, its usage has steadily increased and it is time now to agree on an updated terminology.