Abstract:We investigate the recruitment into the upper class, analysing the impact of different forms of capital and modes of closure. Unlike many Bourdieu-influenced approaches to class, we systematically investigate divisions by composition of capital: the relative weight of economic to cultural capital. We find capital-specific barriers to mobility: Access to the upper classes is not only differentiated by one's parents' volume of capital or the general class hierarchy, but also by the relative weight of cultural to economic capital. Drawing on theories of social closure, we further investigate the role of two distinct modes of closure -credentialism and private property. The degree of closure differs significantly between subfractions of the upper class, based on the degree to which they refer to positions involving specific credential requirements. Our findings underline the importance of capital composition, but also that closure operates by neither credentials nor property alone. In the present paper, we push this line of research further by analysing how inherited economic and cultural capital are shaping recruitment to upper class fractions, and how these intersect with educational credentialization and private property as two distinct modes of closure (Parkin 1979, Murphy 1988.We see class divisions as manifested in the distribution of forms of capital (Savage, Warde, and Devine 2005). While it is widely recognized that economic, cultural and social resources are of great significance for understanding how class 'works' (Goldthorpe, Llewellyn, and Payne 1987:99, Khan 2012), it is with Bourdieu's perspective that they come to be seen as the most 'determinant property' of social class (Bourdieu 1984:106, see the discussion in Flemmen 2013). But unlike recent attempts at applying Bourdieu's ideas in class analysis, like the GBCS, we operationalize the class structure as two-dimensional, shaped by both the total amount of capital, but also the composition of this capital -the relative weight of economic to cultural capital (see Flemmen et al. forthcoming). We therefore distinguish four main hierarchical levels of the class structure -working class, lower middle class, upper 4/34 middle class and upper class. We then differentiate the upper and middle groups into fractions by the type of capital, so that each is split into a cultural-capital fraction, an economic-capital fraction and a fraction with a balanced mix.While most approaches to social stratification emphasize the significance of education, class analysis stresses the role of private property (Flemmen 2013): Marxians see class as anchored in relations of production (Wright 2005), whereas Weberians see the divide between the propertied and the property-less as the basic fault line in the class structure (Breen 2005).But education or property should not be an either/or choice, so we move beyond this dichotomy by drawing on theories of social closure: 'In modern capitalist society the two main exclusionary devices by which the bourgeoisie construct...