Cecil
Last seen for girls in 2022 at #15,306 · #1,486 for boys in 2025, 119 births
Given to boys 93.3% of the time
- Peak · boys
- 1902 · 354 births
- Debut · boys
- 45 births
- In top 100 · boys
- 35 yrsof 146 years
- Total births · boys
- 106,989since 1880
Cecil over time
Rank within each sex, plotted together. Click any year to open it.
Gaps mean fewer than 5 babies received the name that year, so the SSA doesn't publish it.
Show data table
| Year | girls | boys | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| rank | births | rank | births | |
| 2025 | — | #1,486 | 119 | |
| 2024 | — | #1,481 | 122 | |
| 2023 | — | #1,508 | 117 | |
| 2022 | #15,306 | 5 | #1,559 | 114 |
| 2021 | — | #1,538 | 114 | |
| 2020 | — | #1,647 | 97 | |
| 2019 | — | #1,652 | 98 | |
| 2018 | — | #1,506 | 114 | |
| 2017 | — | #1,575 | 103 | |
| 2016 | — | #1,585 | 103 | |
| 2015 | #16,419 | 5 | #1,468 | 114 |
| 2014 | — | #1,588 | 99 | |
| 2013 | — | #1,444 | 114 | |
| 2012 | — | #1,602 | 97 | |
| 2011 | — | #1,656 | 91 | |
| 2010 | — | #1,850 | 78 | |
| 2009 | — | #1,742 | 88 | |
| 2008 | — | #1,389 | 122 | |
| 2007 | — | #1,445 | 111 | |
| 2006 | — | #1,447 | 107 | |
| 2005 | — | #1,381 | 108 | |
| 2004 | #16,099 | 5 | #1,414 | 100 |
| 2003 | #11,325 | 8 | #1,348 | 101 |
| 2002 | — | #1,281 | 106 | |
| 2001 | #13,521 | 6 | #1,143 | 121 |
| 2000 | — | #1,083 | 130 | |
| 1999 | — | #1,039 | 133 | |
| 1998 | — | #1,023 | 132 | |
| 1997 | — | #972 | 135 | |
| 1996 | — | #884 | 153 | |
| 1995 | #13,386 | 5 | #913 | 147 |
| 1994 | #10,569 | 7 | #840 | 162 |
| 1993 | #8,719 | 9 | #747 | 196 |
| 1992 | — | #742 | 194 | |
| 1991 | — | #686 | 217 | |
| 1990 | #12,958 | 5 | #665 | 231 |
| 1989 | #6,531 | 12 | #650 | 237 |
| 1988 | #8,391 | 8 | #563 | 270 |
| 1987 | #8,778 | 7 | #574 | 250 |
| 1986 | #7,134 | 9 | #535 | 276 |
| 1985 | #8,318 | 7 | #533 | 266 |
| 1984 | #6,291 | 10 | #483 | 299 |
| 1983 | #6,705 | 9 | #480 | 309 |
| 1982 | #6,888 | 9 | #494 | 296 |
| 1981 | #6,804 | 9 | #464 | 320 |
| 1980 | #5,544 | 12 | #401 | 407 |
| 1979 | #10,210 | 5 | #426 | 351 |
| 1978 | #7,649 | 7 | #417 | 352 |
| 1977 | #5,532 | 11 | #409 | 369 |
| 1976 | — | #412 | 351 | |
| 1975 | #9,067 | 5 | #417 | 348 |
| 1974 | #4,720 | 12 | #374 | 419 |
| 1973 | #8,423 | 5 | #377 | 414 |
| 1972 | #5,109 | 10 | #354 | 475 |
| 1971 | #4,534 | 12 | #344 | 536 |
| 1970 | #6,362 | 7 | #337 | 566 |
| 1969 | #4,723 | 10 | #329 | 552 |
| 1968 | #4,779 | 9 | #321 | 564 |
| 1967 | #3,845 | 12 | #320 | 543 |
| 1966 | #3,740 | 12 | #284 | 678 |
| 1965 | #4,202 | 10 | #277 | 726 |
| 1964 | #3,692 | 13 | #290 | 729 |
| 1963 | #5,296 | 7 | #266 | 826 |
| 1962 | #2,741 | 20 | #258 | 884 |
| 1961 | #2,839 | 19 | #251 | 969 |
| 1960 | #2,820 | 19 | #255 | 959 |
| 1959 | #2,458 | 22 | #251 | 1,008 |
| 1958 | #2,260 | 25 | #247 | 1,011 |
| 1957 | #2,347 | 23 | #230 | 1,074 |
| 1956 | #2,389 | 22 | #215 | 1,139 |
| 1955 | #1,691 | 37 | #205 | 1,228 |
| 1954 | #1,836 | 32 | #194 | 1,298 |
| 1953 | #2,122 | 24 | #196 | 1,254 |
| 1952 | #1,820 | 30 | #185 | 1,327 |
| 1951 | #1,701 | 32 | #181 | 1,323 |
| 1950 | #1,524 | 37 | #171 | 1,341 |
| 1949 | #1,512 | 37 | #173 | 1,318 |
| 1948 | #1,669 | 31 | #166 | 1,400 |
| 1947 | #1,438 | 42 | #165 | 1,443 |
| 1946 | #1,131 | 56 | #159 | 1,404 |
| 1945 | #1,122 | 49 | #152 | 1,355 |
| 1944 | #1,040 | 57 | #142 | 1,499 |
| 1943 | #965 | 67 | #132 | 1,697 |
| 1942 | #954 | 67 | #131 | 1,620 |
| 1941 | #838 | 75 | #132 | 1,512 |
| 1940 | #827 | 74 | #117 | 1,589 |
| 1939 | #838 | 69 | #114 | 1,578 |
| 1938 | #803 | 77 | #118 | 1,558 |
| 1937 | #713 | 91 | #114 | 1,635 |
| 1936 | #723 | 84 | #114 | 1,577 |
| 1935 | #849 | 66 | #109 | 1,726 |
| 1934 | #794 | 71 | #111 | 1,596 |
| 1933 | #808 | 68 | #111 | 1,506 |
| 1932 | #795 | 73 | #108 | 1,655 |
| 1931 | #750 | 79 | #102 | 1,769 |
| 1930 | #726 | 93 | #99 | 1,882 |
| 1929 | #683 | 105 | #101 | 1,889 |
| 1928 | #721 | 96 | #97 | 2,005 |
| 1927 | #664 | 117 | #92 | 2,227 |
| 1926 | #586 | 146 | #86 | 2,305 |
| 1925 | #584 | 152 | #87 | 2,297 |
| 1924 | #553 | 174 | #85 | 2,299 |
| 1923 | #600 | 146 | #87 | 2,255 |
| 1922 | #534 | 174 | #85 | 2,336 |
| 1921 | #587 | 152 | #79 | 2,456 |
| 1920 | #465 | 213 | #77 | 2,459 |
| 1919 | #469 | 200 | #78 | 2,300 |
| 1918 | #428 | 238 | #82 | 2,328 |
| 1917 | #462 | 197 | #83 | 2,101 |
| 1916 | #404 | 241 | #80 | 2,181 |
| 1915 | #429 | 200 | #76 | 2,181 |
| 1914 | #382 | 193 | #79 | 1,530 |
| 1913 | #380 | 162 | #74 | 1,276 |
| 1912 | #396 | 135 | #76 | 1,058 |
| 1911 | #377 | 116 | #76 | 560 |
| 1910 | #347 | 130 | #77 | 472 |
| 1909 | #339 | 113 | #72 | 432 |
| 1908 | #334 | 114 | #72 | 397 |
| 1907 | #308 | 127 | #69 | 399 |
| 1906 | #321 | 109 | #68 | 368 |
| 1905 | #309 | 117 | #72 | 347 |
| 1904 | #276 | 130 | #67 | 359 |
| 1903 | #308 | 103 | #66 | 332 |
| 1902 | #298 | 112 | #65 | 354 |
| 1901 | #255 | 128 | #70 | 278 |
| 1900 | #288 | 129 | #76 | 344 |
| 1899 | #263 | 117 | #77 | 256 |
| 1898 | #258 | 133 | #87 | 243 |
| 1897 | #239 | 138 | #84 | 216 |
| 1896 | #276 | 108 | #97 | 200 |
| 1895 | #293 | 95 | #100 | 192 |
| 1894 | #310 | 80 | #102 | 175 |
| 1893 | #250 | 112 | #114 | 147 |
| 1892 | #323 | 70 | #115 | 151 |
| 1891 | #351 | 50 | #126 | 108 |
| 1890 | #332 | 58 | #121 | 120 |
| 1889 | #334 | 55 | #141 | 102 |
| 1888 | #413 | 36 | #158 | 96 |
| 1887 | #337 | 40 | #155 | 80 |
| 1886 | #365 | 34 | #168 | 83 |
| 1885 | #365 | 31 | #154 | 87 |
| 1884 | #425 | 22 | #186 | 73 |
| 1883 | #386 | 23 | #212 | 51 |
| 1882 | #360 | 24 | #225 | 53 |
| 1881 | #418 | 16 | #268 | 35 |
| 1880 | #449 | 14 | #248 | 45 |
In the first year the SSA published name data, Cecil was already there! It came in at #248, and was given to 45 baby boys.
Quietest stretch: 1880–1881, when fewer than 46 boys a year got the name.
Where Cecil is popular in 1908
The SSA only publishes names by state from 1910 on.
See more about Cecil
- 5 spots since 2024 (#1,481 → #1,486)
- 161 spots since 2020 (#1,647 → #1,486)
- 18 spots since 2015 (#1,468 → #1,486)
- Biggest jump: 43 spots in 1882 (#268 → #225)
- Biggest drop: 93 spots in 1994 (#747 → #840)
- Debuted 1880
- Peaked 1902 at #65 (354 births)
- Births halved by 1994, 92 yrs later
- Top 10: never
- Top 100: 35 yrs · run 1895–1928
- Top 1,000: 118 yrs · run 1880–1997
- Highest: 1 in 346 boys born in 1902 were named Cecil (0.29%)
- Latest: 1 in 14,354 boys born in 2025 (0.01%)
- 21.1% of all boys named Cecil (22,528) were born in this decade
- The majority has never changed
Show by decade
| Decade | Births | Best rank | Avg rank |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1880s | 705 | #141 (1889) | #192 |
| 1890s | 1,808 | #77 (1899) | #102 |
| 1900s | 3,610 | #65 (1902) | #70 |
| 1910s | 15,987 | #74 (1913) | #78 |
| 1920s | 22,528 | #77 (1920) | #88 |
| 1930s | 16,482 | #99 (1930) | #110 |
| 1940s | 14,837 | #117 (1940) | #147 |
| 1950s | 12,003 | #171 (1950) | #208 |
| 1960s | 7,430 | #251 (1961) | #285 |
| 1970s | 4,181 | #337 (1970) | #387 |
| 1980s | 2,930 | #401 (1980) | #518 |
| 1990s | 1,700 | #665 (1990) | #851 |
| 2000s | 1,094 | #1,083 (2000) | #1,367 |
| 2010s | 1,011 | #1,444 (2013) | #1,593 |
| 2020s | 683 | #1,481 (2024) | #1,537 |
All figures count published births only (names given to at least 5 boys in a year). Registrations before 1937 are incomplete, so early shares and totals run low.
Cecil in 1908
Top girls' names in 1908
Top boys' names in 1908
More about 1908
girls
334,312 girls got a published name in 1908; 1 in 2,933 of them was named Cecil, which outranked 86.3% of the 2,434 girls' names that year. The ten most popular names covered 20.8% of girls (24.6% in 1880, 7.0% in 2025).
Among names in the top 1,000 of either year.
boys
154,336 boys got a published name in 1908; 1 in 389 of them was named Cecil, which outranked 95.5% of the 1,584 boys' names that year. The ten most popular names covered 31.7% of boys (44.2% in 1880, 8.0% in 2025).
Among names in the top 1,000 of either year.