How I Choose Character Names For My Historical Fiction Novels

Character names are a seemingly small but incredibly significant decision for writers. They can say a lot about who they are or hint at the themes of your story when there's a specific meaning or vibe associated with them.

I'll willingly admit that my characters don't feel real to me until they have the perfect name. Everything else falls into place as I go, but my protagonists' names are a must-know thing before I can start drafting a new story.

In this post, I'm sharing some of the things I take into consideration when I choose character names for my historical romance novels.

Historically Speaking

My stories are all historical romances set during the Regency Era, so the time period is a major influence on my characters' names, just as a writer of stories set in any other time period would use that setting as their guide.

One thing I factor into my character names is how realistically they would have been used during the Regency Era.

While today we see a lot of Hudsons, Ashers, Masons, and Greysons being born, that wasn't the case 200 years ago. Naming conventions in the Regency were more restrictive than they are today. For example, it was highly common (almost expected in some circles) that the firstborn son bear his father's name, and also common to see a firstborn daughter carry her mother's name; Jane Austen's elder sister was named Cassandra after their mother. Younger sons might have also been given a surname in their family tree as a first name, as we see with Mr. Fitzwilliam Darcy.

There were also fewer names to select from. While there are trending names each year, more unique names are introduced as well. There may be a different spelling of a common name like Rilee rather than Riley, less common capitalizations like RiLey, or something created especially for that child.

Deviations like these were significantly less common in the Regency Era, so I would be less likely to name a character Jayson than I would Jason or James.

Essentially, if a name was in use during the Georgian and Regency Era, it's fair game for use in my stories.

Tiffany And Co.

Another thing I tend to avoid is character names that sound too modern to me even if they're historically possible.

Tiffany is the most common example. This post goes into greater detail but for some quick context, Tiffany is a name we most often associate with the 1980s and later, notably when we think of the classic Valley Girl cheerleader archetype alongside her bestie Jessica. However, Tiffany, or more specifically Tiffanie, as a name goes back so much further than you'd assume, used as early as the Medieval Era. It's actually a shortened form of Theophania and was a common choice for girls born or christened around the feast of the Epiphany.

And, fun fact, Jessica was invented by Shakespere, so it would also be fair game!

The Tiffany Problem, as it's often called, impacts how I name characters in my historical fiction. Readers may find a historical fiction work less believable if the character's name sounds too modern so if a name feels too contemporary, even if it's historically accurate, I might opt for a different name.

Can I Reasonably Justify It?

If a name is on the more unconventional side, I'll ask myself one question: would their parents have named them that?

In terms of my Regency Era fiction, I'm more likely to use extremely common names for characters of a higher societal status than I would be for characters out of that scope because it's what their parents would have chosen for them.

But there are some exceptions...

In my for-now-scrapped first effort at writing a novel, one of the love interests was named Cadeyrn (which I pronounced Cah-Dare-en but have also heard as Cade-urn). It's an ancient Celtic name and a notable departure from other characters in the story like James and Thomas and would probably have a few readers scratching their heads in retrospect. But his Celtic heritage and the fact that he wasn't part of the societal elites like James was reason enough for me to realistically believe that his parents could have chosen Cadeyrn as his name.

It's a much more reasonable choice in that context than his original Caden chosen by teenage me in the 2010s, that's for sure!

Cadeyrn's not the only wild card in the deck of names I've used in my fiction. The use of Zach for the male love interest in Bound to the Heart kind of edges on the same problem as Tiffany but I cannot imagine him with any other name even alongside brothers with names like Henry and Peter. His full name is actually Zachariah, which can be found in the Bible. Though it's not specifically mentioned in Bound to the Heart as of writing this post and may not ever be, I'm imagining it was a name chosen by his parents because it was already somewhere in his family tree.

And though not as exceptional as the aforementioned examples, Miranda's mother in Against His Vows was a massive Shakespere fan. Her sister is named Juliet and she has a brother named Malcolm; Miranda and William eventually carry on this tradition by naming their daughter Beth, as a nod to Macbeth.

If you're unsure about a character name, asking yourself if it's something their parents would have chosen for them can help you decide whether or not to do the same.

Addressing Social Conventions

That being said, the way people addressed one another in the Regency Era was different than it is today.

When speaking with a superior, like a teacher or your boss, you'll probably use their surname, like Ms. Williams or Professor Brown—but to be fair, pretty much all of my bosses and a handful of teachers over the years have been cool with being on a first-name basis, it just depends on the situation. And when you're introducing yourself to someone, you'll probably use your first name and will use the other person's first name, too.

However, in the Regency Era, first names were reserved for only the closest of friends and family. More often than not, you'd refer to one another as Miss Surname (or Miss First Name if you were a younger, unwed sister of Miss Surname) or Mr. Surname. Even some married couples refer to one another as Mr. or Mrs. Surname, as we see with the Bennets in Pride and Prejudice. First names could be used between couples, privately, but more often than not, not until they were at least engaged.

Men would also sometimes refer to one another by just their surnames without the honorific of Mr. If the man had a title, such as an earl or duke, that would be used instead. So if Mr. Surname were Earl of Title, he'd be addressed as Lord Title.

I put a good amount of thought into my characters' surnames because of this. Unless they're the protagonists or a relative or close friend of the protagonists, they'll likely be addressed by their surname. In A Tided Love, for instance, Thomas's best friend is simply Giles and his ex-fiancee is usually referred to as Miss Maynard because he never called her Cecilia. He's more inclined to use Caroline's first name in one-on-one conversations given their romantic history (and he can't bring himself to call her Mrs. Sinclair), while she still calls him Mr. Heathcott instead of Thomas or Tom for the most part.

For a lot of my side characters, their first name is more of an afterthought compared to their surname!

Choosing a name for your story's characters can feel as important as the name you choose for a child. It not only has to sound good but feel good, too, and suit them.

As a writer of historical fiction with characters born in the late 1700s and living in the 1810s, there are things I take into account that I might not if I were to write a contemporary piece. There are actually a lot of names I love but can't use in a story because they're too new (or too modern-sounding).

Character names aren't always a make or break decision, but they can impact how easily your readers are immersed in your historical setting. They're just one of many worldbuilding details that need to be considered as writers of historical fiction.