Names Vintage Baby Names That Shouldn't Come Back In Style  

Jessica L. Yarbrough
106 votes 10 voters 25 items

List Rules Vote up the names that should stay in the past.

You’ve likely noticed old-school baby names coming back in style thanks to a few unexpected choices from celebrities (Olivia Wilde and Jason Sudeikis named their son Otis; Blake Lively and Ryan Reynolds chose the name Inez for their daughter). But when considering a throwback name for your child, beware of these vintage baby names that deserve to stay in the past.

The United States began collecting data on baby names in 1880. And while the 18th and 19th centuries popularized beautiful names with staying power (like Bridget and Henry), they also gave birth to a few clunkers (Chauncey and Hulda, anyone?). Naming a child after a “virtue” was even common in the 1900s (everything from Temperance to Obedience), while Adolph was one of the top 200 boys’ names between 1900-1909. Could you imagine meeting “baby Obedience” or “little Adolph” today? Not a chance.

There are truly terrible baby names from the past. Vote up the ones that should never make a comeback. 
 

list ordered by

1
5 1
Jeduthan

2
5 2
Bertha

3
4 2
Waitstill

4
3 1
Asenath

5
3 1
Hulda

6
3 1
Submit

7
3 1
Chauncey

8
4 3
Temperance

9
3 2
Aquilla

10
3 2
Leafy

11
2 1
Adolph

12
2 1
Beulah

13
2 1
Cuthbert

14
2 1
Dimmis

15
3 3
Mindwell

16
3 3
Parthenia

17
2 2
Tryphosia

18
2 2
Horace

19
2 2
Philomena

20
2 2
Minerva

21
1 2
Obedience

22
1 2
Sophrona

23
1 2
Mehetable

24
1 2
Ebenezer

25
0 2
Tryphena