Active discussions

Help protect children from gaming harms.

Take our survey

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Baby names

Find baby name inspiration and advice on the Mumsnet Baby Names forum.

Original poster

Which is more timeless, Sarah or Emily?

107 replies

hcarter8 · 16/04/2025 10:43

I like nonsense names that are easy to spell and pronounce but I am struggling to find a truly timeless name.

my partner likes Emily, I know Emily was very popular 20 years ago so could have the possibility of sounding dated on a baby today even though it’s only number 28 on the ONS and even though Sarah was very popular in the 70s it feels more classic to me for some reason. On the ONS Sarah had never fallen out of the top 100 until 2021 but Emily did for about 60 years and then became popular in the 90s and 2000s.

thoughts?

OP posts:
Are your children’s vaccines up to date?
Set a reminder
New posts on this thread. Refresh page
HugoYorway · 03/05/2025 09:43

@Bubblebubblepoppop , I doubt you'd find an Emily in the 50-90 yrs old age group.

ChangeisntalwaysfortheBetter · 03/05/2025 08:58

Bubblebubblepoppop · 01/05/2025 23:53

I think Sarah is a bit more dated, personally I also think it's a boring, dull name. Makes me think of a mousy non-descript lady in her late 40's or something.

Emily is prettier and more feminine, and I can easily imagine a little baby Emily but also an Emily in her 80's and everything in between, so to me that makes it pretty classic and timeless.

Do you know a "Sarah" you dislike or something? 🫢

Bubblebubblepoppop · 01/05/2025 23:53

I think Sarah is a bit more dated, personally I also think it's a boring, dull name. Makes me think of a mousy non-descript lady in her late 40's or something.

Emily is prettier and more feminine, and I can easily imagine a little baby Emily but also an Emily in her 80's and everything in between, so to me that makes it pretty classic and timeless.

MeganM3 · 01/05/2025 23:46

I like Emily, though prefer Emma.

And Sarah is a classic from the Old Testament so it has stood the test of time.

Both are good names.

Makemydaypunk · 01/05/2025 23:29

Sarah, it would be unusual to hear a baby called Sarah these days so would be quite unique amongst all the Milly, Tilly, Ellie, Olivia etc type names, enough of all the L’s!! Emily has an L so that counts it out for me, plus I love the Thin Lizzy song as a pp posted, beautiful!

Stinkbomb · 01/05/2025 23:28

Emily, definitely

ByLimeAnt · 01/05/2025 22:52

Another Sarah here! I was one of four Sarahs at school (along with multiple Hannahs, Chloes, Rachels and Rebeccas). So it really does date you. Emily is an ok name but a bit meh and definitely over used, up here at least.

WayneEyre · 01/05/2025 21:06

I'd say Sarah is ancient and historical so definitely classic but it had a recent period of huge overexposure (mid- late last century) so feels a bit less timeless.

Emily is very well known but more of a steady popularity.

Emily is the obvious answer as Sarah may be a bit soon to feel truly evenly distributed again.

Maybe something biblical and strong like Meredith, Ruth, Abigail, or Susannah? So well known but not quite as well known?

Deadraave · 01/05/2025 20:54

I think both are timeless. I maybe inch more towards Emily. But Sarah is maybe less common but also timeless.

Firebird83 · 01/05/2025 20:53

Sarah has such a beautiful sound and would be quite refreshing on a child born now. It would stand out among the Avas, Islas and Olivias.

BuntyBeaufort · 25/04/2025 23:44

Timeless in the sense that their popularity waxes and wanes over time.

For example my grandmother, born in the 1880s, was Emily, so for my mother’s and then my generation it was an old-fashioned, frumpy name. And her mother was Sarah, known as Sally, because Sarah seemed so dated 150 years ago.

Years later both beautiful names became popular again.
I guess what I’m trying to say is that timeless doesn’t really come into it, so pick what you love, as perceptions change all the time.

theunbreakablecleopatrajones · 20/04/2025 22:11

I mean they both are, Sarah slightly more so I suppose, and it seems to be returning a little

beadystar · 20/04/2025 00:39

They're both lovely names. I prefer Sarah. Emily is too similar to the many Mia Mia Millie Ellie names that are popular now.

DorothyStorm · 20/04/2025 00:38

I think emily has phases, so could sound dated.

sarah is timeless

Gowlett · 20/04/2025 00:37

Emily is consistently in the Top Five Girls Names, where I live.

I think Sarah is a beautiful name, popular in my generation.

Pieceofpurplesky · 20/04/2025 00:34

Both are timeless (teacher of 25+ years and both have been names throughout but not overly popular). Both Lovely.
personally I prefer Sara (S-are-a) to Sarah (s-air-a) but then I am a Little Princess fan!

mewkins · 19/04/2025 23:56

SummerDaysOnTheWay · 16/04/2025 11:50

Emily is wet sounding.
Sarah is a beautiful classic name.

I feel the same and I've no idea why.

softlyfallsthesnow · 19/04/2025 21:37

Sarah is more timeless. Emily has been around long enough but has phases of being more fashionable. Sarah has produced diminutives eg Sadie, Sally which are names in their own right now, suggesting it's been around a long time. I can think of Sarahs of quite different ages from 70s down to children (as a teacher).
I like them both.

Fioratourer · 19/04/2025 21:20

Emily is timeless and beautiful. Personally I think Sarah is more dated and simple.

rainingsnoring · 19/04/2025 20:22

Between the two, I would say that Sarah is more timeless but they are both very classic and enduring names.
Other classic British names would be things like Elizabeth, Emma, Ann, Mary. There are plenty of others that have been used regularly for centuries.

Sleepington · 19/04/2025 17:39

TizerorFizz · 19/04/2025 15:26

Emily is said to be Roman.

Not really. It is a a derivative of Amelia which is the Latin Amal.

Sleepington · 19/04/2025 17:35

TwoSwannits · 19/04/2025 14:43

I like nonsense names that are easy to spell and pronounce but I am struggling to find a truly timeless name.

I take it you meant to type 'no nonsense'. There are loads of truly classic names, but that's not to say they won't occasionally pick up massively in popularity for a decade or so, then dip back into relative obscurity but still be considered a classic. When I was a child no-one except people's grandads were called George or William or Harry or Charlie. Very, very few people my own age were called that, whereas James is the epitome of a true classic that never goes out of use or style. Now there are tons of young people called William, George and Henry and Charles. They are all classic names but ones that fell out of popularity in the 50's 60s, 70's and 80s, then had a resurgence in the 90s and ever since.

For girls I think true classics that are pretty hard to date irrespective of the occasional popularity spike are:

Anna, Emma, Elsa, Erin, Erica, Ellen, Eleanor, Lara, Tara, Vanessa, Rachel, Hannah, Sarah, Sara, Kate, Esther, Eve, Elizabeth, Imogen, Martha, Catherine, Victoria, Isobel, Abigail, Rebecca, Phillipa, Zoe, Nicole, Jennifer, Rose, Verity, Annabel, Penelope, Phoebe, Charlotte, Diana.

Nicole? Jennifer? Erin? Diana?

They fall into the known but not popular names. They are not timeless and certainly not classic.

TizerorFizz · 19/04/2025 15:26

Emily is said to be Roman.

GhostHunterPlay · 19/04/2025 15:14

I would say Sarah, since it was mentioned in the Bible.

TizerorFizz · 19/04/2025 15:03

Yes. I suspect baby Alan and baby Keith are a bit hard to find. Names are definitely generational. However baby Gertrude and baby Adelaide and Bertha are not often revived.

im nearly 70 and went to school with a few George, William and Henry’s. Mostly names that ran in families. Paul, Brian, Keith, John, Alan, Philip, Roger, Stephen, Peter and Michael were popular after ww2.

Swipe left for the next trending thread