Charlie and...Oliver?/Peter?/Edgar?

Boy Names
1

I’ve posted before about the difficulties that my husband and I have been having trying to come up with names for our twin boys: Nameberry - Welcome to the Nameberry Forums

At this point, we’re about 99.9% sure that one of the boys will be [name]Charles[/name] nn [name]Charlie[/name]. For the other twin, we’ve ended up eliminating most of our early ideas. There are three names currently in the running: [name]Peter[/name] and [name]Oliver[/name] are tied for first, with [name]Edgar[/name] as a more distant second choice pick. None of them feels perfect to me, however; all three are, to an extent, compromise names.

I’d love to hear feedback on these three names and which one you’d pair with a [name]Charles[/name]/[name]Charlie[/name]. Here’s what we’re currently thinking about each one:

[name]Peter[/name] = We both really like the nn [name]Pete[/name] and feel like it goes really well with [name]Charlie[/name] without being too matchy. I am concerned that [name]Peter[/name]/[name]Pete[/name] may seem a bit dated, however. Is it more of a Dad name than a baby name, or is it classic enough that it doesn’t matter? My sister has also brought up the [name]Peter[/name]-as-slang-for-genitals issue, which I don’t think is a major concern, but I’m not entirely sure. Another small concern that I’m not sure is really a concern is the issue that [name]Peter[/name] has some rather strong biblical/religious connotations, and our theoretical preference is for a name that strikes people as secular yet traditional. Despite these reservations, [name]Peter[/name] is, as I’ve said, a frontrunner.

[name]Oliver[/name] = A family name (bonus!), and another that we both really like. My hesitations with this one are twofold, though. Firstly, I’m worried that it’s gotten a bit trendy and overly popular in parts of the English-speaking world and thus will sound very dated in a few years. My other concern is that I’m not a big fan of [name]Ollie[/name] and prefer just [name]Oliver[/name] with no nn. My husband says that he’d call an [name]Oliver[/name] [name]Ollie[/name], so the trouble with this would start at home. [name]Do[/name] you think [name]Ollie[/name] and [name]Charlie[/name] are too rhymey/close for twin brothers? If we don’t end up using this one as a first name, it will almost undoubtedly appear in the middle name slot for one of the twins.

[name]Edgar[/name] = We don’t like this one nearly as much as either [name]Peter[/name] or [name]Oliver[/name], but it’s still hanging on our current list. We’d probably go with the nn [name]Ed[/name] or [name]Eddie[/name] (but is [name]Eddie[/name] too rhymey with [name]Charlie[/name]?). I don’t have a lot to say about this one, but, to me, [name]Edgar[/name] has a harsher feel than our other choices, and I worry that it might strike some people as overly antiquated.

2

I really like [name]Peter[/name] and [name]Charles[/name] as twin boys. [name]Edgar[/name] is such an old man name to me… and I’m not a fan of [name]Oliver[/name], and even less of [name]Ollie[/name] as a nn. [name]Pete[/name] and [name]Charlie[/name] are cute nn for boys. I think [name]Peter[/name] is more classic and doesn’t have an old man feel to me at all… I’ve taught quite a few Peters. As for the religious connotations, I think it’s used enough that it is not immediately linked to it’s biblical connection (If i met parents whose child was named [name]Peter[/name], I wouldn’t IMMEDIATELY think they were religious…). [name]Hope[/name] this helps! Good [name]Luck[/name]!!!

3

I think [name]Peter[/name] is fine. ([name]Plenty[/name] of Johns running around and that has not one, but two pejorative slang definitions in US English)

[name]Oliver[/name] is a great name, but it has gotten quite popular and I would put money on his encountering other Olivers in an elementary school class in either the US or the UK.

Egdar does have a number of hard consonant sounds. Would you consider [name]Edmund[/name] or [name]Edwin[/name]?

4

I have a [name]Peter[/name] who is now a teen, so I can probably address some of your concerns about that name. When he was born, the name [name]Peter[/name] had everything I wanted. It was classic, had a clean, crisp sound, was infinitely familiar, yet underused, and had great historical and literary precedents. But my husband vacillated between being somewhat and very concerned about the slang-for-genitals thing. My take on it was that ANYTHING could become a cruel nickname. And [name]Willie[/name], [name]John/name, [name]Dick[/name], and [name]Ralph[/name] had the association too. And for all I knew, there were other names being used in the same way. To my knowledge it has never come up. My son loves his name. He likes that fact that it’s everywhere (history, movie credits, books) and nowhere (we know no one with the name). A lot of his friends have names they share with many other friends and classmates.

Yes, the name originated in the Bilble. Although we are not religious, that’s another reason my son likes his name. He likes thinking of himself as a ‘rock’, in that it means that he’s strong and steady, that he has a strong foundation. But frankly, the name has been so widely used that the Apostle is only a small part of its heritage. My son’s martial arts teacher sometimes calls him ‘the Tsar’ or ‘[name]Peter[/name] the Great’. [name]One[/name] of his best friend’s mom called him ‘[name]Peter[/name], [name]Peter[/name], Pumpkin Eater’ when he was little, after he had a particularly enthusiastic encounter with pumpkin pie. [name]Peter[/name] [name]Pan[/name], [name]Peter[/name] Penvensie, [name]Peter[/name] [name]Parker[/name] were all ‘literary’ heroes to him at different points in his life. He sort of ‘collects’ international variations on his name, and likes the fact that it has such a history.

Given all that, we both hate the nn [name]Pete[/name]. The possibility of him becoming [name]Pete[/name] was probably my biggest hesitation in using the name. But to each his own!

[name]Charles[/name] and [name]Peter[/name] I like. [name]Charlie[/name] and [name]Pete[/name], not so much, but that’s me.

[name]Charles[/name] and [name]Oliver[/name] don’t work as well for me, though I do like [name]Oliver[/name]. If my dh planned to use [name]Ollie[/name], though, it would be a deal breaker for me.

[name]Charles[/name] and [name]Edgar[/name] work, though I’m a bigger fan of [name]Edward[/name] and [name]Edmund[/name]. I don’t like [name]Ed[/name]/[name]Eddie[/name], but again, that’s me. But I [name]LOVE[/name] [name]Ned[/name].

I do think two -ie endings make the names a little rhyme-y/matchy.

I don’t think I’m going to offer anything new here. Obviously you are a fan of classic names, as am I. Given your list, if it were me I’d go for either [name]Peter[/name]/[name]Pete[/name] or [name]Edgar[/name]/[name]Ed[/name]/[name]Ned[/name], because I think the rhymey thing would be an issue for me. However starting from there, just in case you’ve overlooked something:

[name]Charles[/name]/[name]Charlie[/name] and [name]James[/name]/[name]Jem[/name] (I think [name]Jem[/name] is a really cool nn)
[name]Charles[/name]/[name]Charlie[/name] and [name]William[/name]/[name]Will[/name] (I like the clean sound of [name]Will[/name])
[name]Charles[/name]/[name]Charlie[/name] and [name]Philip[/name]/[name]Pip[/name] (I hate the name [name]Phil[/name], but I like [name]Pip[/name]. My only hesitation is that it might start to be too insubstantial as he reaches his teens and beyond).
[name]Charles[/name]/[name]Charlie[/name] and [name]Samuel[/name]/[name]Sam[/name] (I adore [name]Charlie[/name] and [name]Sam[/name] together, but is [name]Sam[/name] overused?)
[name]Charles[/name]/[name]Charlie[/name] and [name]Stephen[/name]/Phen (given the popularity of [name]Finn[/name]/[name]Flynn[/name], I think this has possibilities, much like [name]Topher[/name] used as a short form of [name]Christopher[/name]. On the other hand, Phen does look a bit pharmaceutical, doesn’t it? Fen/Fenn?)
[name]Charles[/name]/[name]Charlie[/name] and [name]Robert[/name]/[name]Rob[/name] or [name]Bert[/name]. (I’ve always had a soft spot for [name]Rob[/name]. And [name]Charlie[/name] and [name]Bert[/name] work in a old-man sort of way)
and, I love [name]Charlie[/name] and [name]Gus[/name] together, but I’m not a fan of any of the formal ways to get to [name]Gus[/name].

5

I love [name]Peter[/name]! It’s classic & charming! [name]Oliver[/name] & [name]Edgar[/name] are nice as well, but [name]Peter[/name] has so many great namesakes imo, is so familiar yet seldom heard. I think Hunger Games character [name]Peta[/name] gives it modern appeal without straight up being a YA series name.

6

I vote for [name]Peter[/name]. [name]Peter[/name] is a fabulous, clean, strong, underused classic name. It was a top choice of mine for our oldest son, but my husband vetoed it.

7

I think [name]Peter[/name] is the perfect match to [name]Charles[/name]! I have always loved [name]Peter[/name]. [name]Charlie[/name] and [name]Pete[/name] is adorable. I also love [name]Oliver[/name], but think [name]Peter[/name] is a bit more suited. [name]Edgar[/name], I just hate. Sorry. I always think of an egg.

8

i love with charlie

9

[name]Oliver[/name] is my favorite, but I think you have good reasons not to use it. I like the pp’s suggestion of [name]Edwin[/name] or [name]Edmund[/name] better than [name]Edgar[/name]. I think [name]Charles[/name] and [name]Edwin[/name]/[name]Edmund[/name] sound great together and [name]Charlie[/name] and [name]Ed[/name] are cute. (I’d do [name]Ed[/name], not [name]Eddie[/name] for sure).

But if you don’t like [name]Edwin[/name] or [name]Edmund[/name], I think [name]Peter[/name] is fine. If [name]Peter[/name] were paired with [name]Matthew[/name] or [name]Mark[/name] I’d think biblical. But paired with [name]Charles[/name], it didn’t occur to me that it is a name in the Bible.

So maybe [name]Edmund[/name] [name]Peter[/name] and [name]Charles[/name] [name]Oliver[/name]?