The Cambridge Group for the History of Population and Social StructureKevin Schurer
According to the Office of National Statistics (ONS), in 2023 – the latest year for which information has been published – the top five most popular babies’ names for boys were, in descending rank order, Muhammad, Noah, Oliver, George and Leo, and for girls, Olivia Amelia, Isla, Lily and Freya. With the exception of George, such a list of names would have been appeared strange 50 years ago, and almost unthinkable a century ago.
This change in the naming pattern of new-borns not only reflects an underlying shift in the ethnicity of the UK population, but also a cultural change in the inspiration that parents draw upon when naming their children. Looking beyond the top five most popular names for boys and girls, the ONS notes that pop culture is a big influence on name choices, with the names of music artists such as Miley, Rihanna, Kendrick and Elton all seeing an increase in popularity in 2023. Singers Billie Eilish and Lana Del Rey, the Kardashian-Jenner family’s children Reign and Saint, and film stars Margot Robbie and Cillian Murphy, all have an influence.
There is also a marked trend towards the ‘unusual’, with the top one hundred names for girls including Lilah, Raya and Hazel, with Jax, Enzo and Bodhi all making it into the top one hundred names for boys – perhaps not so unusual after all!
Conversely, previously popular ‘royal’ names have become less popular, continuing a declining trend, with Elizabeth, Charles, George, Archie, Harry and Charlotte all becoming less popular in recent years.
Historic trends
The Poll Tax returns of 1377-1381 provide us with the earliest opportunity to examine the national distribution and popularity of given forenames. Analysing the returns for ten English counties, George Redmonds has produced a ranked order and nominal frequency count for both males and females. These are reproduced in Tables 1 and 2.
For the period 1538 to 1837, the main source for naming patterns are baptismal entries in parish registers. Using a sample of these drawn from the Campop collections, Scott Smith-Bannister has produced a ranking of names for boys and girls baptised between 1538 and 1700. Summaries of the most popular names in this period are provided in Tables 3 and 4.
George Harvey, The Christening; Hunterian Art Gallery, University of Glasgow.
It should be noted, however, that these two sources are not strictly comparable. Baptismal entries record the naming of children at a specific point in time, and are therefore a cohort measure. They also include all those baptised in the Church of England, regardless of social standing, but exclude those of different denominations.
The taxation lists primarily record only those eligible to pay tax and thus exclude those of a lower social status. They also include only adults with a range of ages and therefore are a period measure. This said, they still allow an examination of naming practices over a long timeframe, from the medieval to the early modern period.
Male names
Turning first to male names, one of the most striking features of the late 14th century list is the lack of pre-Conquest names. The top 15 names are all of west Germanic/Frankish origin, or Christian Saints’ or biblical names, all of which were introduced into England mainly after 1066. Edmund, ranked at 23rd, is the most notable remnant of pre-Norman naming practise. Indeed, using a variety of sources, but especially the Lay Subsidy Rolls of 1290 to 1332, Postles suggests that ‘a virtual revolution’ occurred in the patterns and processes of naming practises in the 12th century, with the displacement of Old English names by post-Conquest names being virtually complete by c.1300.
Another feature of this revolution was the concentration of forenames, with the majority of individuals given names from a relatively small pool. Thus, Redmonds estimates that John, the most popular male name in the late 14th century, accounts for 35 percent of those in the Poll Tax returns, while the top five male forenames accounted for some 79 percent of the male population. In other words, only one in five males was not called John, William, Thomas, Richard or Robert. To put this in a broader context, the five most popular baby boy names in 2023 accounted for only 7 percent of the population.
Table 1. Top 15 male names, 1377-1700.
Unfortunately, little is known about the distribution or frequency of pre-Conquest forenames. Indeed some names may not have been fixed, as we understand them today. Withycombe, however, suggests that alliteration may have been common in various parts of Anglo-Saxon England – that is, giving children names starting with the same letter or being similar phonetically, such as Edmund, Edgar, Edward, or Athelstan, Athelred, Athelbert, Athelbald. Another practise was to give a child a name which included one element from the father’s (or occasionally mother’s) name, such as Edmund, son of Alkmund, or Edgar, son of Edmund.
Moving forward to the early modern period, it can be seen from Table 1 that the top five names remained unchanged. However, the concentration of these popular names did change over time. According to Withycombe, the percentage of males sharing the top three names was 51.5 percent in 1550-99; 50.5 percent in 1600-49; and 62.5 percent in 1650-99. These figures compare to c.53 percent for the late 14th century. This increasing and decreasing of the forename pool will be commented upon later.
Outside of the top five male forenames, Table 1 also illustrates how a number of ‘medieval’ names fell out of fashion by the early modern period, with Adam, Hugh, Geoffrey, Simon and Ralph all dropping out of the top 15 most popular names. These were replaced by names such as George, James and Edward – the last curiously being a revived pre-Conquest name.
From the beginning of the 17th century, one can also see a rise in popularity of biblical names such as Matthew, Christopher and Samuel, with Old Testament names such as Daniel and Benjamin also becoming popular by the end of the century. This rise in the popularity of religious names, to which Saint names such as James, Peter and Francis may be added, can, in part, be attributed to the influence of the Reformation. Withycombe further suggests that with the rise of Protestantism, Old Testament names were favoured by some over New Testament ones, due to the latter’s association with popery.
Peter Paul Rubens, Saint Matthew (c. 1611).
The second half of the 17th century is also sometimes associated with the use of so-called Puritan forenames – names such as Desire, Faith, Hope, Love, or rather more strangely, Helpless, DieWell, FearNot and Much-Merceye. However, as much as such names might be fascinating and amusing today, the rank-order lists of forenames produced by Smith-Bannister suggest that they were more likely the exception than the rule.
Another important change that occurred in the practise of the naming of children in the two hundred years between 1550 and 1750 was a switch from giving children the name of one of their godparents to the that of their parent (or grandparent). Smith-Bannister suggests that this switch occurred mainly during the 17th century, and accounts for the fact that the pool of forenames in popular use declined markedly in the late 17th century, as noted earlier.
Likewise, as the practise of naming ones children after someone specific, whether it be godparent, parent or grandparent, declined from the 18th century onward, the pool of forenames in use increased in size as naming became more of a free choice – a trend that has developed to the present day.
Female names
Table 2. Top 15 female names, 1377-1700.
Turning to female forenames, many of the trends in naming practises discussed already in relation to male forenames can also be seen with the naming of girls. First, the most popular female names in the late 14th century were entirely post-Conquest names. Of these, a number of names popular in the medieval period – such as Edith, Julian, Emma, Matilda, Cecile and Isabel – decline in use by the early modern period. These were replaced by Elizabeth, Mary and Anne – all religious names – which are predominant amongst female forenames in the 17th century. Withycombe estimates that the percentage of females sharing these three names was 52 percent in 1600-49 and 46.5 percent in 1650-99, increasing to reach a peak of 57 percent in the period 1750-1799.
Sarah and Susanna, both religious names, increased in popularity during the 17th century, while Agnes, a popular saint’s name in the medieval period, gradually slipped down the rankings, as did Alice, the most popular female forename recorded in the late 14th-century Poll Tax returns. Redmonds estimates that nearly one in three women were called either Alice or Agnes in the late 14th century. It is interesting to also note that Grace, sometimes associated with the Puritans, is ranked 14th in the late 17th century.
Girls names in the 19th and 20th centuries
Turning to the mid-19th to the early 20th centuries, Table 3 above shows the most popular 35 first names for girls aged five or under in the censuses of England and Wales for 1851, 1861 and 1891 to 1911. This shows that in the mid-19th century, the popularity of Mary, Elizabeth, and Ann continued, and together with Sarah, Jane, Emma and Ellen dominated amongst female forenames. Indeed, between 1851 and 1861 only four girls names dropped out of the top 30 (Rebecca, Sophia, Matilda and Susanna), being replaced by Clara, Kate, Julia and Ada.
Table 3. Top 30 female names, 1851-1911.
By 1911, however, the old order had dramatically changed in two fundamental ways. First, a number of ‘new’ names rose quite dramatically in popularity, so much so that only seven of the top 30 names in 1851 remained in the top 30 by 1911. Whilst Mary held its own as the most popular of girls names, and both Elizabeth (including Eliza, Lizzie and other variants) and Ann remained in the top five, Jane, which as we have seen had been popular since the 1550s, dropped out of popularity dramatically. The same was true for Sarah, Emma and Ellen.
Perhaps the most surprising newcomer was Doris, the third most popular girls name in 1911, which was not even in the top 2,000 names in 1851. Also in the top ten forenames in 1911 came Florence (probably boosted by the popularity of Florence Nightingale), Elsie and Gladys – the last two of which also did not feature in the top 2,000 names in 1851. Interestingly, the early 20th century also saw the number of ‘flower’ names – such as Ivy, Violet, Rose, and Lily – rise sharply in popularity.
The second significant change in the naming pattern for girls between 1851 and 1911 was that the range of names became even more diffuse. For girls aged five and under in the 1851 census, 16 percent were named Mary – the most popular name – and whilst Mary remained the most popular name, only 4 percent of girls aged five and under were so named in 1911.
In the first of these census years, the top five names accounted for 49 percent of all girls aged five and under; the top ten, 63 percent; and the top 30, 82 percent. By 1911 the comparative figures were 15, 28 and 54 percent. Thus, there was far less concentration on a small number of very popular names. The centuries old tradition of naming the vast majority of children from within a relatively small and restricted pool of names, a process which started to break down from the 18th century onwards, had been broken.
Boys names in the 19th and 20th centuries
Similar, yet less pronounced changes occurred with the naming of boys between the mid-19th and early 20th centuries. Whilst the top five male names (John, William, Thomas, James and George) remained the same between 1851 and 1911, Albert, Harry, Ernest, Frank, Herbert, Harold, Percy, Sidney, and Leonard are all recorded in the top 30 names in 1911 yet were absent from the list sixty years earlier.
Table 4. Top 30 male names, 1851-1911.
One trend was the declining popularity of Old Testament names – Samuel, Benjamin, Isaac, Abraham and Daniel all dropped down the rankings between 1851 and 1911. Conversely, the Germanic Frederick (and its diminutive Fred) rose steadily through the rankings.
Whilst the pool of popular names widened quite markedly over this period for girls, this trend was not as marked for boys.
Geographic variations
Finally, it is important to note that another important change in the incidence of forenames is in terms of geographic variation. Due to the nature of the sources available, it is difficult to determine regional patterns in naming practices with any certainty prior to 1851, from which point the census of England and Wales can be used to examine regional variation.
Analysing those aged five or under in the censuses of 1851 and 1911, it can be shown that in the first of these census years, the most popular forenames for boys were fairly ubiquitous geographically. John was ranked either 1st or 2nd in all the counties of England and Wales. William was also ranked 1st or 2nd in all counties, with the exception of five Welsh counties, in which it was always placed in the top five forenames. Thomas was ranked in the top five forenames for boys in all counties with the exception of Merionethshire, Anglesey, Norfolk and Suffolk (James was historically more popular than Thomas in East Anglia).
This geographic homogeneity largely continued through to 1911, in which year John remained one of the top three boys’ forenames in all counties of England and Wales. William also remained in the top three with the single exception of Cardiganshire where it was ranked 4th. By 1911 Thomas, however, had become rather more regionally diverse. Whilst it remained in the top five forenames in most English and Welsh counties, it was less popular in most of East Anglia and the Home Counties.
A lack of regional variation can also be seen in the case of girl’s forenames. In 1851 Mary was the most popular name for girls in every county of England and Wales except Carmarthenshire, Merionethshire and Westmorland, where it last ranked either 2nd or 3rd. Similarly, Elizabeth was ranked amongst the top 3 forenames for girls in every county except Essex (5th) and Staffordshire (4th). By 1911 this regional concentration in girl’s names had begun to break down slightly, but was still strong. Mary, together with Ann/Annie continued to dominate in Wales and most of northern and central England.
The present
This pattern of spatial uniformity for the most popular names in the period from the mid-19th to the early 20th centuries stands in marked contrast to the situation in England and Wales today. According to the ONS, the top girls’ name in England in 2023, Olivia, is most popular primarily in the north and south of the country, whilst the second most popular name, Amelia, is predominant in the midlands and central England.
Likewise, Muhammad, the top boys’ name in England in 2023, is only the most popular in areas of the north, the Midlands, and London. Elsewhere, Noah is the most popular name in the East Midlands, East of England, and the South East, whilst Oliver reigns supreme in the North East, as does Arthur in the South West – where he appears to have returned to his spiritual home.
Over the past 600 years, naming practices for both boys and girls have developed and changed, albeit quite slowly at times. But the pace and nature of these changes have been most dramatic in the last two or three decades. In short, nowadays, anything goes!
Further reading
- Coster, W., Baptism and Spiritual Kinship in Early Modern England (Aldershot, 2002).
- Postles, D., Naming the People of England, c.1100-1350 (Newcastle, 2006).
- Redmonds, G., Christian Names in local and family History (Richmond, 2004).
- Smith-Bannister, S., Names and Naming Patterns in England 1538-1700 (Oxford, 1997).
- Withycombe, E. G., The Oxford Dictionary of English Christian Names (Oxford, 1948).