I hazard to differ somewhat (don’t worry; it has a hopeful ending, I think). I think there’s a hierarchy, and much as anyone may like a name, I think some of these listed were decidedly “old-fashioned” at various points in time, “unhip”. Some stay on the top of the pile consistently and others sound “right” sometimes, appealing to more people through exposure and then waning on a little over-exposure.
I’m considering that I never hear anyone suggest [name]Patricia[/name] as a name, as classic as they come, I’ve seen posts describe this as dated. Also [name]Catherine[/name] with a C was how it was done when I went to school, but K is favored more now. Why? Because [name]Kate[/name] is the nickname of choice over [name]Cathy[/name] (which can be spelled with a K, but people normally decline to spell [name]Kate[/name] with a C).
I think about how relatively few Margarets I knew in school as opposed to Elizabeths and Sarahs. [name]How[/name] I knew Carols (a little dated then) and Julies and Lisas and Megans, but no Carolines (one [name]Carolyn[/name] in her late 20s now), no [name]Julias[/name], not too many Margarets - one [name]Peggy[/name], I don’t remember any others, no Maggies. All Elizabeths were either [name]Liz[/name] or [name]Beth[/name], no Elizas or Elsies or Betseys, and there were way more Patricias than Elizabeths.
I am remembering a time when it seemed like any [name]Sarah[/name] was common but [name]Anne[/name] was not (no Annies at all!), and one [name]Anna[/name] was a pest and the other one went by her middle name, [name]Lisa[/name]. There were no Emilys or Amelias or Graces or Alices or Roses. I cannot speak for the rest of the country or elsewhere, or how these names would have been received (probably ok for the most part) - but as “fashion” goes, it wasn’t popular to have a classic name at all back that I remember - unless you were a boy!
However, to remember, that most names rise and fall in time, [name]Caroline[/name] has been mostly in the top 300 and is at the bottom 100 right now after rising to 62 in 2001. I believe it feels fresher than [name]Catherine[/name] or [name]Elizabeth[/name] simply because it is less usual and more recently “rediscovered” in popularity, but it is a beautiful and substantial classic name.
It is really a lot more popular now to have a classic name at all than when I went to school, but to bring this point around, classic names individually are classic, just like [name]Jill[/name] and Canyr did say. They are more “stylish” now because they have company, but never become absolutely unstylish individually The “company” brings up with it many other “old-fashioned” names that probably will not date as successfully but will still fare pretty well.
[name]Caroline[/name] has become one of my favorites - I never even did consider it when I was young. I think we are all helpless to figure out a name that will always sound like it’s brand new and also ideal - that “company” will grow up and get jobs and make families and their name will be appropriate to their age. That’s how it works, but I think some names sound less like you are branded with a date stamp, like [name]Caroline[/name], and some sound more, like [name]McKenna[/name]. [name]Caroline[/name] may not be the speedy current kind of name some are after, but nobody will say in 50-60 years it sounds like an old lady, like [name]McKenna[/name].