Century-old girls' names are coming back into favor. What does that mean for the top names of the '80s?

What do Mary, Olivia, and Jennifer have in common? They've each had a turn as the most popular name for American girls born over the past 100 years.

Many of today's most popular girls' names borrow heavily from decades—and centuries—past. To show this, Spokeo used data from the Social Security Administration on popular baby names to track the ups and downs of common girls' names in the United States over the past 120 years. In particular, this analysis focuses on how popular names from 100 years ago (1923) and 40 years ago (1983) have fared in the decades since.

Additionally, the analysis focuses specifically on girls' names, which historically are more varied and unique. In general, American culture is much more accepting of new or unique girls' names. Whereas baby boys have more frequently been bestowed with "safe" names or family names, parents have been more imaginative when naming their baby girls.

Social Security data was collected using a binary understanding of sex and gender and is based on gender and names assigned at birth. Therefore, it excludes important information about transgender and nonbinary individuals and the identities—and names—they claim later on in life. Still, it gives unparalleled insight into names and naming culture across generations.

Many factors influence the popularity of baby names: Tradition, religion, locality, culture, media, politics, sound, or the convergence of these. For example, "Emma" was the second most common girl name in 2023, continuing a 25-year streak in the top 20. Popular stars in the early 2000s—baby Emma on "Friends" and Emma Watson, who had a breakout role in cult classic "Harry Potter" movie series—may have helped nudge the name's popularity. It snagged the #1 spot in 2008, when similar-sounding "Emily" lost its 11-year streak at the top.

Around the same time, other girls' names ending in "-ly" also fell, making way for names ending in "-yn" and "-lyn" sounds and later to "-ia" and "-na." This occurred as parents have increasingly followed "suffix trends," or giving their children names with common endings to other kids of their cohort.

Naming children after their parents and grandparents was once common practice, though "juniors" are more common among boys and Americans have largely dropped the practice. Still, not all is lost for the names of many grandmothers and great-grandmothers: Vintage is in fashion, and that extends to baby names.

Visit thestacker.com for similar lists and stories.

Popular, but not too popular, names resurface

Some names that were mainstream early in the 20th century but not necessarily the most favored of their time are regaining traction now. Some rank even higher now than they did back then.

Evelyn, for instance, has been a top 10 girls' name since 2017—about 100 years after it last claimed a top 10 spot. Emma, too, saw a resurgence after over 90 years, though it never breached the top 10 until the 21st century. Eleanor last ranked #25 in 1920, but since 2020, it has crept up, coming in at #14 in 2023.

Name popularity looks different over time. Despite "Evelyn" achieving the same rank in 2019 as in 1915, it claimed a much smaller share of babies' names in the 21st century.

That's because names are much more varied in 2023. Today's parents have more resources to research possible names, often in an attempt to differentiate their own children's names from others in their spheres. As a result, there were over 17,500 unique names in 2023, about triple as many as in 1923. So even as names rise in popularity, they will typically show up less frequently than in decades past.

So-called vintage names are a common source of inspiration for parents seeking a challenging blend of uniqueness and familiarity. Dozens of posts from news outlets and parenting sites have compiled vintage baby name lists every year, feeding into the nostalgia and connection to these classic and seemingly overlooked names.

Within the baby-naming sphere, there's a reference to the "Hundred-Year Rule," which theorizes that it takes a century for most names to cycle back into fashion. That holds true for some names, though it may take longer for the most common names of an era to rise again—if they ever do.

Most prominent names may not rise again

This oversaturation of names during some periods may lead future parents to avoid them, perhaps because the higher incidents make them seem dated rather than classic.

Take Mary, for instance. The biblical name was extremely common in the early 1900s—and presumably much earlier, though Social Security data didn't begin until 1880. However, it began falling sharply in the mid-20th century. At its peak, Mary was the #1 name for over 50 years and given to 6% of baby girls. Now it ranks the lowest it ever has at #135, given to only 0.1% of baby girls.

Mary's decline in popularity could also be related to the decline in Christianity in the U.S. However, similar trends hold steady for other top names of 1923, like Helen and Dorothy, which now rank even lower at #397 and #467, respectively.

At the same time, Helen and Dorothy are both up from their all-time lowest ranks. Meanwhile, the three most popular names from 1983—Jennifer, Jessica, and Amanda—have each fallen to their lowest ranks since then, and are all outpaced by the top 1923 names. This may indicate that particularly high-ranking names of the past may just need more time to rise again, though it's possible they won't ever reach their past popularity.

If these trends are any indication, the "Hundred-Year Rule" may have some merit—at least for names that weren't ubiquitous in their primes. For the '80s and '90s, that means names like Stephanie or Crystal may become popular again in the late 21st century. However, the Jennifers and Jessicas, like the Marys and Helens, may face a much longer wait. If, that is, they ever do reemerge.

Story editing by Alizah Salario. Additional editing by Kelly Glass. Copy editing by Paris Close.

This story originally appeared on Spokeo and was produced and distributed in partnership with Stacker Studio.