Fun Facts About the Name Jim
- A favorite of earlier generations: Jim appeared in the U.S. top 100 in 4 separate runs, totaling 51 years. Its last run lasted 6 consecutive years, from 1958 through 1963.
- More than 153 thousand babies named Jim: U.S. records list 153,937 babies given the name Jim from 1880 through 2025. Even 816 girls received the name Jim - about 1 girl for every 188 boys.
What Does the Name Jim Mean?
Jim is an English masculine name used as a short form of James. Its established meaning is "supplanter," the traditional meaning of James. James is the English form of the biblical patriarch name Jacob, which comes from Hebrew Ya'aqov. That Hebrew name is usually connected with 'aqev ("heel") and the verb 'aqav ("to supplant" or "to seize by the heel"). The connection reflects the biblical story in which Jacob is born grasping the heel of his twin brother Esau and later supplants him. The name passed into Greek as Iakōbos and into Latin as Iacobus; Old French developed James from the Latin form, and English borrowed it as James. Jim therefore carries the meaning of James through that chain rather than from an independent root. The exact prehistoric derivation of Ya'aqov is debated, but "supplanter" remains the customary interpretation.
Jim Name History & Origins
Jim is a shortened English form of James, not a separate ancient name. The ultimate source is Hebrew Ya'aqov, the name of the biblical patriarch Jacob. In Greek, the name appears as Iakōbos; in Latin, it is Iacobus or Iacob. The Latin form Iacobus passed into Old French as James, and Middle English borrowed that French form. English James became an established given name in the medieval period, and it was borne by several kings of Scotland from the 14th century onward. The English name Jacob, by contrast, comes from the Latin biblical form Iacob rather than from Old French James.
Jim appears among the familiar short forms of James, along with Jamie, Jimmy, and Jimmie. It is formed by shortening James and using a short i rather than the vowel of James. Jim is used both as a nickname and as an independent given name in English-speaking countries. Literary characters named Jim include Jim Hawkins in Robert Louis Stevenson's Treasure Island and the enslaved Jim in Mark Twain's Adventures of Huckleberry Finn; these are later literary associations, not the name's origin.
How Popular is the Name Jim?
Jim has a rich multi-era history in the U.S. top 100, spanning 51 total years and enjoying its modern revival from 1958 to 1963.
U.S. name popularity from 1880-2025, based on SSA data. Rank shows how the name compares with other names - lower numbers mean greater popularity. Births shows how many babies received the name each year.
| Year | Rank | Births | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1984 | #11,104 | 5 | 0.0003% |
| 1973 | #8,947 | 5 | 0.0003% |
| 1971 | #6,251 | 8 | 0.0005% |
| 1969 | #4,552 | 11 | 0.0007% |
| 1968 | #5,873 | 7 | 0.0004% |
| 1967 | #4,153 | 11 | 0.0007% |
| 1966 | #6,998 | 5 | 0.0003% |
| 1965 | #4,634 | 9 | 0.0005% |
| 1964 | #4,470 | 10 | 0.0005% |
| 1963 | #5,564 | 7 | 0.0004% |
| 1962 | #4,383 | 10 | 0.0005% |
| 1961 | #4,368 | 10 | 0.0005% |
| 1960 | #4,940 | 8 | 0.0004% |
| 1959 | #4,442 | 9 | 0.0004% |
| 1958 | #3,628 | 12 | 0.0006% |
| 1957 | #4,692 | 8 | 0.0004% |
| 1956 | #6,362 | 5 | 0.0002% |
| 1955 | #4,932 | 7 | 0.0004% |
| 1954 | #3,833 | 10 | 0.0005% |
| 1953 | #4,789 | 7 | 0.0004% |
| 1951 | #4,578 | 7 | 0.0004% |
| 1950 | #4,987 | 6 | 0.0004% |
| 1949 | #4,935 | 6 | 0.0004% |
| 1948 | #3,237 | 11 | 0.0006% |
| 1947 | #2,969 | 13 | 0.0007% |
| 1946 | #2,954 | 12 | 0.0008% |
| 1945 | #2,666 | 12 | 0.0009% |
| 1944 | #2,147 | 17 | 0.0013% |
| 1943 | #2,630 | 13 | 0.0009% |
| 1942 | #2,351 | 15 | 0.0011% |
| 1941 | #3,390 | 8 | 0.0007% |
| 1940 | #2,154 | 15 | 0.0013% |
| 1939 | #2,075 | 16 | 0.0015% |
| 1938 | #2,385 | 13 | 0.0012% |
| 1937 | #3,289 | 8 | 0.0008% |
| 1936 | #3,536 | 7 | 0.0007% |
| 1935 | #2,151 | 15 | 0.0014% |
| 1934 | #2,037 | 16 | 0.0015% |
| 1933 | #2,327 | 13 | 0.0013% |
| 1932 | #2,303 | 14 | 0.0013% |
| 1931 | #2,153 | 15 | 0.0014% |
| 1930 | #2,064 | 17 | 0.0015% |
| 1929 | #1,787 | 21 | 0.0019% |
| 1928 | #1,863 | 21 | 0.0018% |
| 1927 | #1,980 | 20 | 0.0017% |
| 1926 | #2,630 | 13 | 0.0011% |
| 1925 | #2,692 | 13 | 0.0011% |
| 1924 | #2,365 | 16 | 0.0013% |
| 1923 | #2,407 | 15 | 0.0012% |
| 1922 | #2,060 | 19 | 0.0016% |
| 1921 | #2,561 | 14 | 0.0011% |
| 1920 | #3,222 | 10 | 0.0008% |
| 1919 | #2,194 | 16 | 0.0014% |
| 1918 | #1,724 | 23 | 0.0020% |
| 1917 | #2,256 | 15 | 0.0014% |
| 1916 | #1,990 | 17 | 0.0016% |
| 1915 | #1,704 | 20 | 0.0020% |
| 1914 | #2,342 | 10 | 0.0013% |
| 1913 | #2,234 | 9 | 0.0014% |
| 1912 | #2,794 | 6 | 0.0011% |
| 1911 | #1,865 | 8 | 0.0019% |
| 1910 | #1,295 | 13 | 0.0033% |
| 1909 | #1,673 | 8 | 0.0023% |
| 1908 | #2,266 | 5 | 0.0015% |
| 1907 | #2,210 | 5 | 0.0016% |
| 1905 | #1,804 | 6 | 0.0021% |
| 1900 | #1,367 | 9 | 0.0030% |
| 1899 | #1,722 | 5 | 0.0021% |
| 1896 | #1,169 | 9 | 0.0038% |
| 1895 | #1,710 | 5 | 0.0021% |
| 1893 | #1,351 | 6 | 0.0028% |
| 1892 | #1,126 | 8 | 0.0038% |
| 1891 | #1,268 | 6 | 0.0032% |
| 1890 | #1,144 | 7 | 0.0037% |
| 1888 | #1,377 | 5 | 0.0028% |
| Year | Rank | Births | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | #3,159 | 38 | 0.0022% |
| 2024 | #4,475 | 23 | 0.0013% |
| 2023 | #4,161 | 26 | 0.0015% |
| 2022 | #3,437 | 34 | 0.0019% |
| 2021 | #3,208 | 37 | 0.0021% |
| 2020 | #2,952 | 40 | 0.0023% |
| 2019 | #3,075 | 39 | 0.0022% |
| 2018 | #3,020 | 39 | 0.0021% |
| 2017 | #3,157 | 37 | 0.0020% |
| 2016 | #2,811 | 43 | 0.0023% |
| 2015 | #2,829 | 42 | 0.0022% |
| 2014 | #2,164 | 63 | 0.0033% |
| 2013 | #2,188 | 60 | 0.0032% |
| 2012 | #2,250 | 58 | 0.0031% |
| 2011 | #2,157 | 61 | 0.0032% |
| 2010 | #2,106 | 64 | 0.0033% |
| 2009 | #2,192 | 61 | 0.0031% |
| 2008 | #1,727 | 88 | 0.0043% |
| 2007 | #1,837 | 79 | 0.0038% |
| 2006 | #1,542 | 97 | 0.0047% |
| 2005 | #1,540 | 92 | 0.0046% |
| 2004 | #1,400 | 102 | 0.0051% |
| 2003 | #1,351 | 101 | 0.0051% |
| 2002 | #1,197 | 117 | 0.0060% |
| 2001 | #1,271 | 105 | 0.0054% |
| 2000 | #1,157 | 120 | 0.0061% |
| 1999 | #1,219 | 104 | 0.0054% |
| 1998 | #1,069 | 123 | 0.0064% |
| 1997 | #998 | 129 | 0.0068% |
| 1996 | #875 | 157 | 0.0083% |
| 1995 | #861 | 158 | 0.0083% |
| 1994 | #808 | 171 | 0.0089% |
| 1993 | #820 | 167 | 0.0085% |
| 1992 | #741 | 195 | 0.0098% |
| 1991 | #753 | 184 | 0.0091% |
| 1990 | #685 | 219 | 0.0107% |
| 1989 | #709 | 193 | 0.0096% |
| 1988 | #646 | 215 | 0.0112% |
| 1987 | #583 | 241 | 0.0129% |
| 1986 | #597 | 222 | 0.0121% |
| 1985 | #608 | 207 | 0.0112% |
| 1984 | #541 | 256 | 0.0142% |
| 1983 | #502 | 279 | 0.0156% |
| 1982 | #483 | 313 | 0.0172% |
| 1981 | #465 | 320 | 0.0179% |
| 1980 | #486 | 302 | 0.0169% |
| 1979 | #415 | 369 | 0.0214% |
| 1978 | #410 | 359 | 0.0219% |
| 1977 | #391 | 408 | 0.0248% |
| 1976 | #373 | 420 | 0.0268% |
| 1975 | #372 | 441 | 0.0282% |
| 1974 | #326 | 541 | 0.0344% |
| 1973 | #302 | 585 | 0.0375% |
| 1972 | #274 | 707 | 0.0436% |
| 1971 | #245 | 934 | 0.0528% |
| 1970 | #204 | 1,259 | 0.0677% |
| 1969 | #190 | 1,427 | 0.0798% |
| 1968 | #177 | 1,502 | 0.0864% |
| 1967 | #151 | 1,806 | 0.1036% |
| 1966 | #136 | 2,197 | 0.1232% |
| 1965 | #117 | 2,772 | 0.1490% |
| 1964 | #101 | 3,645 | 0.1829% |
| 1963 | #92 | 4,237 | 0.2086% |
| 1962 | #85 | 4,712 | 0.2278% |
| 1961 | #78 | 5,351 | 0.2519% |
| 1960 | #75 | 5,549 | 0.2603% |
| 1959 | #70 | 5,687 | 0.2664% |
| 1958 | #87 | 4,922 | 0.2319% |
| 1957 | #106 | 3,543 | 0.1642% |
| 1956 | #148 | 2,188 | 0.1034% |
| 1955 | #167 | 1,699 | 0.0825% |
| 1954 | #174 | 1,593 | 0.0781% |
| 1953 | #173 | 1,535 | 0.0778% |
| 1952 | #172 | 1,523 | 0.0784% |
| 1951 | #164 | 1,595 | 0.0847% |
| 1950 | #139 | 1,930 | 0.1078% |
| 1949 | #108 | 2,725 | 0.1536% |
| 1948 | #86 | 3,808 | 0.2170% |
| 1947 | #77 | 4,640 | 0.2536% |
| 1946 | #73 | 4,337 | 0.2671% |
| 1945 | #68 | 3,624 | 0.2693% |
| 1944 | #68 | 3,744 | 0.2747% |
| 1943 | #75 | 3,682 | 0.2580% |
| 1942 | #74 | 3,514 | 0.2544% |
| 1941 | #80 | 2,843 | 0.2315% |
| 1940 | #78 | 2,715 | 0.2342% |
| 1939 | #75 | 2,636 | 0.2382% |
| 1938 | #81 | 2,497 | 0.2251% |
| 1937 | #82 | 2,347 | 0.2200% |
| 1936 | #85 | 2,268 | 0.2187% |
| 1935 | #90 | 2,244 | 0.2155% |
| 1934 | #90 | 2,207 | 0.2137% |
| 1933 | #98 | 1,875 | 0.1891% |
| 1932 | #104 | 1,765 | 0.1690% |
| 1931 | #116 | 1,520 | 0.1462% |
| 1930 | #125 | 1,464 | 0.1334% |
| 1929 | #132 | 1,290 | 0.1199% |
| 1928 | #137 | 1,237 | 0.1117% |
| 1927 | #136 | 1,293 | 0.1147% |
| 1926 | #143 | 1,165 | 0.1049% |
| 1925 | #147 | 1,124 | 0.1007% |
| 1924 | #160 | 992 | 0.0876% |
| 1923 | #167 | 867 | 0.0791% |
| 1922 | #169 | 881 | 0.0810% |
| 1921 | #165 | 879 | 0.0798% |
| 1920 | #165 | 838 | 0.0787% |
| 1919 | #158 | 848 | 0.0865% |
| 1918 | #165 | 827 | 0.0816% |
| 1917 | #163 | 774 | 0.0836% |
| 1916 | #177 | 684 | 0.0768% |
| 1915 | #170 | 668 | 0.0787% |
| 1914 | #174 | 513 | 0.0783% |
| 1913 | #154 | 473 | 0.0923% |
| 1912 | #149 | 401 | 0.0933% |
| 1911 | #134 | 245 | 0.1084% |
| 1910 | #100 | 331 | 0.1704% |
| 1909 | #105 | 259 | 0.1579% |
| 1908 | #117 | 220 | 0.1425% |
| 1907 | #90 | 281 | 0.1914% |
| 1906 | #90 | 261 | 0.1960% |
| 1905 | #95 | 236 | 0.1784% |
| 1904 | #85 | 266 | 0.2076% |
| 1903 | #84 | 257 | 0.2155% |
| 1902 | #77 | 300 | 0.2446% |
| 1901 | #81 | 239 | 0.2245% |
| 1900 | #68 | 399 | 0.2652% |
| 1899 | #71 | 261 | 0.2457% |
| 1898 | #77 | 269 | 0.2193% |
| 1897 | #75 | 252 | 0.2235% |
| 1896 | #71 | 281 | 0.2350% |
| 1895 | #71 | 278 | 0.2368% |
| 1894 | #70 | 287 | 0.2479% |
| 1893 | #74 | 255 | 0.2270% |
| 1892 | #64 | 334 | 0.2737% |
| 1891 | #63 | 288 | 0.2846% |
| 1890 | #62 | 336 | 0.3026% |
| 1889 | #58 | 328 | 0.2966% |
| 1888 | #56 | 362 | 0.2995% |
| 1887 | #50 | 339 | 0.3343% |
| 1886 | #49 | 389 | 0.3511% |
| 1885 | #46 | 370 | 0.3432% |
| 1884 | #55 | 346 | 0.3023% |
| 1883 | #52 | 322 | 0.3078% |
| 1882 | #45 | 396 | 0.3483% |
| 1881 | #47 | 323 | 0.3206% |
| 1880 | #49 | 345 | 0.3122% |
Name popularity over more than a century, based on Social Security Administration data. Gaps in the chart indicate years when the name does not appear in the published records.
