Do names still have a class association?

[Snowcatrunsthehouse]

From just reading a few threads I have noticed some names are described as posh ie the Tabitha thread? Now a lovely name but I just don’t see it as posh as to be honest all names seem very versatile now. How can an old biblical name liked enough to be given regularly to the family cat suddenly be “posh”?
Ie Rupert was perhaps a stereotypical posh name in the sense that a book or Tv show may have used it to highlight a upper class type of character a few years back. Now I can find little Ruparts everywhere and certainly no posh stereotype attached. Old names ie William, James, John, Henry, Elizabeth, Mary, Sarah, Margaret Catherine etc seem to have always been just names everyone from royalty to workhouse could use.
So do class definitions by name still exist in modern multi cultural societies where everyone seems to be just middle class?
If they do what sort of names fit the upper , middle and lower class groups?
Odd question I know but humar me as my brain has got confused.

Names do move classes, but the movement is in one direction.

Not true at all - upper middle class types often choose very ordinary, popular names or ones that seem a rebellion agains their background.

Sam, Tom, Jack or Alfie, Archie, Stanley. Maid’s names like Daisy, Flora, Poppy, Evie.

Another interesting thing I’ve noticed is that double-barrelled surnames seem to be an indicator of ‘lower classness’

I think they are now because they were once perceived as posh and aspirational, so couples would keep both spouse’s surnames in order to double-barrel them.

Old posh double-barrelled names weren’t joined on marriage but generally by inheritance to acknowledge the heritage or stop family name dying out. (If there were no male heirs or the heir had a different surname)

I don’t remember many boys named Farquhar or Sixtus at my boggy state schools in deepest darkest Essex. On the other hand I was mildly interested to see one of the titled women campaigning for daughters to inherit hereditary titles (to enable them to enter the House of Lords) is Lady Tanya. She’s married to Jason. So, y’know.

Now I can find little Ruparts everywhere and certainly no posh stereotype attached

I can assure you with almost 100% certainty that there are no boys names Rupert living in my rather WC area. They'd be bullied mercilessly at the nearby school, sadly.

It isn't how it should be, but names certainly do indicate class in the UK. We're a society obsessed with class still, with lower social mobility than there has been for decades if not longer.

judas
If I was to be make generalisations, I've taught 2 schools in the same town.

Some names would be common across both schools (Ben, Elliot, Harry, Tom, James, Joshua, Sam, Emma, Olivia, Charlotte).
Some were very much divided along catchment. School A had a lot of girl names with cs turned to ks (Chloe to Khloe) or lots of silent/double letters added (Nicole to Nikhole or Darcy to Darcii) or lots of double barrel girl names (e.g. Kaitlyn-mai, Ella-rose, Mia-Jade, Amber-marie).
School B tended to get quite a few of what I joke are MN approved names e.g. Noah, Oscar, Evelyn, Tabitha, Eleanor

Now I've thought about it, there seems to be more general/class neutral boy names and girl names seem to have more marked associations.

Even Rupert Graves can't rescue Rupert it and he's lovely

Thought I'd chip in as DS has a name that has been mentioned many times in this thread.

I had no idea of the class association with his name until I read a thread on MN about how pretentious it sounded.