2000
#9,024
National surname rank
First available Census row
An English surname derived from a place name meaning "settlement of the family or followers of a man called Banna."
According to the 2020 US Census Bureau surname tables, roughly 3,658 Americans carry the last name Banning. That puts it at #9,712 in the national surname ranking, appearing at a frequency of 1.07 per 100,000 people (about 1 in 93,700 residents).
This page is the full Name Census profile for the Banning surname. You will find the Census Bureau frequency data, a multi-census history view, an ancestry and ethnicity breakdown based on self-reported demographics, the name's meaning and origin where available, and answers to the most common questions people ask about this surname.
For British records, Name Census UK has a British surname profile for Banning with 1881 census detail, origin facts and modern UK distribution where available.
Bearers in the US
3.7K
1 in 93,700
Census rank
#9,712
2020 decennial data
Per 100,000
1.1
Frequency rate
Recorded bearers
3.2K
rare in the US
Popularity narrative
The Census Bureau recorded 3,190 bearers of the surname Banning in its 2020 decennial surname file. At a rate of 1.07 per 100,000 residents, it holds the 9712th position in the national surname ranking.
Among Census respondents with the surname Banning, the largest self-reported group is White at 89.7%. The next largest groups are Hispanic (4.6%) and Two or More Races (2.9%).
Origin
The surname Banning originated in England, with roots dating back to the medieval period. It is believed to have derived from the Old English word "banning," which means a summoning or proclamation. This suggests that the name may have originally been associated with individuals responsible for making public announcements or proclamations, such as town criers or heralds.
Historically, the name Banning was particularly prevalent in the counties of Worcestershire and Gloucestershire in the West Midlands region of England. The earliest recorded instances of the name can be found in the Hundred Rolls of 1273, which were administrative records compiled during the reign of King Edward I. These records mention individuals with the surname Banning residing in various villages and townships across these counties.
One notable historical reference to the name Banning can be found in the Domesday Book, a comprehensive survey of land and property ownership in England commissioned by William the Conqueror in 1086. The Domesday Book lists a landowner named Radulfus Banning, who held estates in the county of Worcestershire during the Norman era.
In the 13th century, the name Banning appeared in various forms, including Bannynge, Bannyng, and Baninge, reflecting the spelling variations common in that era. Some of the earliest recorded individuals with this surname include John Banning, who was born in Gloucestershire around 1280, and William Banning, a landowner in Worcestershire mentioned in records from 1312.
Over the centuries, several notable individuals have borne the surname Banning. One such figure was John Banning (1650-1723), an English clergyman and academic who served as the Master of Magdalene College, Cambridge, from 1716 until his death. Another prominent Banning was Emerson Banning (1781-1866), an American businessman and landowner who played a significant role in the early development of Los Angeles, California.
Other notable individuals with the Banning surname include:
1. Phineas Banning (1830-1885), an American businessman and transportation magnate who established the port town of Wilmington, California.
2. Katharine Lee Bates (née Banning, 1859-1929), an American writer best known for her poem "America the Beautiful."
3. William Banning (1886-1969), an English cricketer who played for Gloucestershire County Cricket Club in the early 20th century.
4. Robert Banning (1903-1988), an American film director and producer active in Hollywood during the 1930s and 1940s.
5. Kendrick Banning Oakes (1914-2005), an American businessman and philanthropist who served as the chairman of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund.
Demographics
Among Census respondents with the surname Banning, the largest self-reported group is White at 89.7%. The next largest groups are Hispanic (4.6%) and Two or More Races (2.9%).
The bar chart below shows how Banning bearers described their own race and ethnicity on the 2020 Census form. The Census Bureau groups responses into six broad categories: White, Black or African American, Hispanic or Latino, Asian and Pacific Islander, American Indian and Alaska Native, and Two or More Races. When a category has too few respondents for a given surname, the Bureau suppresses the figure to protect individual privacy, which is why some names show fewer than six slices.
Percentages are shown for every Census year so the breakdown stays comparable over time. When the source file also includes raw headcounts, Name Census shows those alongside the percentages in the legend.
Keep in mind that these are self-reported numbers. A person's surname does not determine their race or ethnicity, and the distribution you see here reflects the specific population who happened to carry the Banning surname at the time of the 2020 Census, not any inherent property of the name itself.
Timeline
Banning appears in 3 published Census surname files: 2000, 2010, 2020. The cards below show how the name's rank and bearer count changed across each release.
2000
National surname rank
First available Census row
2010
National surname rank
+109 bearers (+3.3%)
2020
National surname rank
-250 bearers (-7.3%)
| Year | Rank | Count | Per 100K | Count change | Rank change |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000 | #9,024 | 3,331 | 1.23 | First available Census row | First available Census row |
| 2010 | #9,458 | 3,440 | 1.17 | +109 bearers (+3.3%) | Down 434 places |
| 2020 | #9,712 | 3,190 | 1.07 | -250 bearers (-7.3%) | Down 254 places |
For 2020, the Census Bureau published race and Hispanic-origin columns as counts rather than percentages. Name Census converts those counts back into shares so the ancestry section stays comparable with the older surname files.
Year on year
How has the Banning surname changed between Census years? The chart shows bearer count side by side, and the table compares rank, count, and frequency.
Census year comparison
| Metric | 2010 | 2020 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rank | #9,458 | #9,712 | -2.7% |
| Count | 3,440 | 3,190 | -7.3% |
| Per 100K | 1.17 | 1.07 | -8.8% |
Between the 2010 and 2020 Census, the number of Banning bearers went from 3,440 to 3,190 (-7.3% change). The surname moved down 254 positions in the national ranking, going from #9,458 to #9,712.
FAQ
Name Census estimates that about 3,658 living Americans carry the surname Banning. Using the current population baseline, that works out to roughly 1 in 93,700 residents.
Banning ranks #9,712 in the 2020 Census surname tables and is classified on this site as "Rare." The Census recorded the name at a frequency of 1.07 per 100,000 residents, which is about 1 people out of every 100,000.
The raw 2020 Census file counted 3,190 people with the surname Banning. That is different from the site's living-bearer estimate (3,658), which projects the surname's present-day count by applying the Census frequency rate to the current U.S. population.
It is the Census Bureau's normalized frequency measure. A rate of 1.07 per 100,000 means that if you picked a random group of 100,000 U.S. residents, you would expect about 1 of them to have the surname Banning.
Between 2010 and 2020, the surname Banning went from 3,440 recorded bearers to 3,190. That is a decrease of 250 (-7.3%). In the national ranking it fell from #9,458 to #9,712.
Among Census respondents with the surname Banning, the largest self-reported group is White at 89.7%. The next largest groups are Hispanic (4.6%) and Two or More Races (2.9%). These figures come from the 2020 Census Bureau surname tables, based on how respondents described their own race and ethnicity.
White is the largest self-reported group for the surname Banning in the 2020 Census, accounting for 89.7% (2,860 people in the source table).
Banning appears across multiple self-reported groups in the Census data. The largest shares in the 2020 file are White (89.7%), Hispanic (4.6%), Two or More Races (2.9%). For 2020, the source file also published raw headcounts for each group, which is why this page can show both percentages and counts in the ancestry section.
Yes. This page is using the latest surname file currently loaded on Name Census, which is 2020. The historical section above also keeps any older Census surname entries we have for Banning (2000, 2010, 2020).
No. The Census Bureau only publishes surnames that appeared at least 100 times in a given decennial Census. That means very rare surnames are excluded entirely, and a surname can appear in one Census release but disappear from a later one if it falls below the reporting threshold.
There are two main reasons: rounding and suppression. The Census Bureau rounds published values, and it may suppress very small cells to protect privacy. For 2020, the Bureau also published raw group counts rather than direct percentages, so Name Census converts those counts back into shares for comparability across census years.
An English surname derived from a place name meaning "settlement of the family or followers of a man called Banna." The fuller origin note on this page goes into more detail.
All surname statistics on Name Census are drawn from the US Census Bureau's decennial surname frequency tables. These files list every surname that appeared 100 or more times in the 2020 Census, along with a count, a per-100,000 rate, and a self-reported demographic breakdown. You can read the full explanation on our methodology page.
For surnames, Name Census does not age cohorts the way it does for first names. Instead, it takes the Census Bureau's published frequency for Banning (1.07 per 100,000) and applies that rate to the current U.S. resident population to estimate how many living Americans have the surname today.
Want to know how many people are called Banning? HowManyOfMe.org, our sister site, puts the living-bearer count front and centre.