Names (the never ending dilemma)

From what I’ve seen just reading period journals and books over the years, a writer is “safe” choosing any of the common names (John, George, William, Thomas, James, Charles; Margaret, Jane, Alice, Ann), Biblical names (Samuel, David, Emanuel, Gideon; Sarah, Ruth, Judith), and almost anything classical (Alexander, Sampson, Hector, Daniel; Octavia, Helen, Dionysia) or historical (Henry, Richard, Stephen; Eleanor, Elizabeth, Catherine).
I went through the first thousand records on ancestry.uk for people born in 1780 and what follows is the list of names I compiled (* next to names that appeared only once):
MEN
Abraham
Adam
Augustus*
Alexander
Alley*
Anthony
Benjamin
Bernard*
Charles
Christopher
Clem
Dane*
Daniel
David
Edward
Emanuel
Evan*
Francis
Frederick
George
Gideon
Grosvenor*
Hector
Henry
Herbert
Isaac
Jacob
James
Jeremiah
Jonathan
John
Joseph
Joshua
Langley*
Lewis*
Magnus*
Mark
Matthew
Michael
Miles
Miller*
Nathaniel
Nicholas
Osbourn*
Peter
Ralph
Richard
Robert
Sampson
Samuel
Stephen
Thomas
Timothy
Valentine
William
WOMEN
Alice
Amelia
Anne/Ann
Barbara
Betty
Bridget*
Caroline
Catherine
Charlotte
Christina
Deborah
Dinah*
Dionysia*
Dorothy
Edith
Eleanor
Elizabeth
Ellen
Emma*
Esther
Eve*
Fanny
Frances
Grace
Hannah
Harriet
Helen
Henrietta
Hester
Innocent*
Isabella
Jane
Johanna
Judith
Julia
Leah*
Louisa
Lydia
Margaret
Margery*
Maria
Martha
Mary
Millicent*
Molly
Nancy*
Octavia*
Phillis/Phyllis
Phoebe
Priscilla
Rachel
Rebecca
Rose*
Ruth
Sarah
Sophia
Susan/Susanna/Susannah
Theresa
Thomasina*
Zenobia*
What do you as readers or writers think? Do you prefer your romances between a George and a Harriet, or a Magnus and a Zenobia (or a George and a Zenobia)? Or do you not care if authors all use the same ten names over and over and over (I think my Georgianna and Elizabeth Hoyt’s Georgiana are both memorable and discernable).
6 Comments:
I prefer romances between a George and a Harriet rather than a Magnus and Zenobia. I feel distracted by odd out of place names in period romances.
Out of place, yes, but there's a difference between out of place (which I interpret as historically inaccurate) and uncommon (but perfectly accurate). I like a mix of both. Usually this is easy because our hero’s have titles. But I’m writing younger sons now, so their Christian and Surnames are doubly important as I have no third option to fall back on.
Hi Isobel
I prefer names that at least sound historically accurate. (I wouldn't have a clue if they weren't anyway).
I think modern sounding names, for instance something like Cindi and Corey, would pull me out of the story.
I love classical names... Lately I've been going through a book on Roman women for cool names, so Octavia appeals to me. I used Pompeia in one of my stories.
I agree about anything too modern, but before getting all bent out of shape about a name, I would check to see whether the modernity was reality or just my perception. And if the writing was great, I wouldn't let it bother me.
I also like virtues names -- Innocence, Prudence, Patience, Temperance (one of my vampires!), etc., although I would probably be unable to stop myself from using them tongue-in-cheek.
As an author and reader, I prefer historical sounding names. But they must be spelled so I can pronounce them, says someone who loves to wander among non-British Isles tales.
As an author, I love to research names. But this has led me into some tricky predicaments. For my thirteenth century knight from northwestern Spain, the period records only offered about a dozen first names for an upper class Christian male. More choices would have been nice.
I avoid virtue names like Temperance, Prudence, etc. because during the period they're specifically associated with dissenter religious sects. So unless her being from such a background is necessary to the plot, those names are pretty much off-limits.
Post a Comment
<< Home