This week’s Name Sage post is about a couple looking for timeless names for their firstborn. But they’re thinking timeless, NOT classic.
So if we exclude regal-saintly names like [name_u]James[/name_u], [name_f]Anna[/name_f], and [name_f]Elizabeth[/name_f], what names still feel traditional, heard in (nearly) any decade, but not too common either?
They’re in the UK, so help from Britberries is super appreciated!
Edited to add: my picks (from their current list) are Rose and Vincent, or possibly Hope and Frederick.
Best,
[name_u]Abby[/name_u]
aka The Name [name_u]Sage[/name_u]
Sophie/Sophia spring to mind first, but if they’re too popular, how about:
[name_f]Alice[/name_f]
[name_f]Flora[/name_f]
[name_f]Mabel[/name_f]
[name_f]Matilda[/name_f]
[name_u]June[/name_u]
[name_f]Josephine[/name_f]
[name_f]Harriet[/name_f]
[name_f]Lucy[/name_f]
[name_u]Benjamin[/name_u]
[name_m]Alexander[/name_m]
[name_m]Louis[/name_m]/Louie
[name_u]Gabriel[/name_u]
[name_m]Zachary[/name_m]
[name_m]Elijah[/name_m]
[name_u]Charlie[/name_u]
[name_m]Peter[/name_m]
[name_m]Andrew[/name_m]
hello, i’m British that’s basically the only helpful thing I have in this sense but here are some names that I think fit that description that I don’t hear too much around but at the same time don’t feel unheard of entirely.
Benedict was my first thought for a boy. It’s traditional and familiar, and I (a [name_u]Brit[/name_u]) know several of a variety of ages, but it’s never been very popular.
And [name_f]Susannah[/name_f] is my ultimate super traditional but super rare choice for girls. It’s been in use for centuries — spelled [name_f]Susanna[/name_f] it’s even the name of one of [name_m]Shakespeare[/name_m]’s daughters — yet it’s astonishingly rare for babies today, without feeling at all dated. [name_m]Just[/name_m] 14 Susannahs and 20 Susannas born in [name_f]England[/name_f] and [name_m]Wales[/name_m] in 2019.
Hi, I’m [name_f]English[/name_f]. To me timeless, rather than classic does make me think of those you listed really, as lots of young people still have those names. I’d throw in some variations on classics so maybe [name_m]Edwin[/name_m] rather than [name_m]Edward[/name_m] for example, or [name_f]Eliza[/name_f] rather than [name_f]Elizabeth[/name_f].
I’m my opinion these are timeless and UK names
[name_m]Arthur[/name_m]
[name_m]Archie[/name_m]
[name_m]Edgar[/name_m]
[name_m]Edmund[/name_m]
[name_m]Stewart[/name_m]
[name_m]Nathaniel[/name_m]
[name_m]Isaac[/name_m]
[name_m]Joseph[/name_m]
[name_m]Jacob[/name_m]
[name_m]Jack[/name_m]
[name_m]Thomas[/name_m]
[name_f]Abigail[/name_f]
[name_f]Alice[/name_f]
[name_f]Beatrice[/name_f] (bee)
[name_f]Hannah[/name_f]
[name_f]Eliza[/name_f]
[name_f]Rose[/name_f]
[name_f]Jessica[/name_f]
[name_f]Florence[/name_f]
[name_f]Grace[/name_f]
[name_f]Ellen[/name_f]
[name_f]Eleanor[/name_f]
The following names have been in the UK top 100, in every single decade for the past 100 years. Upto 2014. So I guess they are timeless? There’s lots of boys that have stayed in fashion but not so many girls!
[name_m]Thomas[/name_m], [name_u]Michael[/name_u], [name_m]Charles[/name_m], [name_m]Robert[/name_m], [name_u]George[/name_u], [name_u]James[/name_u], [name_m]William[/name_m], [name_m]Joseph[/name_m], [name_m]Alexander[/name_m], [name_m]Daniel[/name_m], [name_m]Edward[/name_m], [name_m]David[/name_m], [name_u]Michael[/name_u], [name_m]Charles[/name_m], [name_m]Robert[/name_m].
Girls just [name_f]Elizabeth[/name_f] & [name_f]Sarah[/name_f] - also [name_u]Maria[/name_u] was in top 100 with all except 1994-2004. Xx
They have [name_m]Jack[/name_m] on their list, and I agree - it’s great! But I wonder if it would be perceived as very tied to this generation, just because it was at #1 for so long? Like I’d never call [name_f]Sophia[/name_f] trendy, but [name_f]Sophia[/name_f]/Sofia does make me think of a girl born in the last decade or so …
Alice keeps coming up, so I think it must fit. But that’s an interesting point about [name_u]Maria[/name_u]. I often suggest [name_u]Marie[/name_u] as a name that everyone knows but no one uses … it’s surprising how rare it is (at least as a first.)
