The Archaeology of Britain: An introduction from ... - waughfamily.ca

The Iron Age
• 121 •
During their developed phases, the defences and
entrances of both hillforts were repeatedly maintained
and embellished, while the interiors show evidence
of intensive occupation of a highly organized
character. While the broad outlines of its plan
remained unchanged, much of the southern half of
Danebury was given over to large four- and six-post
structures aligned in rows along internal roads, while
circular buildings were now pre-dominantly in the
northern part. The centre was cleared and a group
of larger rectangular structures, which may have been
shrines, was erected. At both sites, the quantity of
material deposited increased substantially, attesting a
wide range of crafts and extensive external contacts.
The process by which Danebury and Maiden
Castle developed into the dominant hillforts in their
respective regions is now becoming clearer (Sharples
1991). Initially, this apparently involved the
abandonment of weaker hillforts and farmsteads
nearby, whose inhabitants moved into the fort. In time,
the enlarged communities successfully overcame more
distant rivals, whose hillforts were demilitarized and
their occupants forced to live in undefended
homesteads, leaving a minority of pre-eminent
hillforts, each controlling a well-defined territory.
Increasingly, the defences came to symbolize the
prestige of individual hillfort communities, and
defeated neighbours were probably made to labour
on the earthworks, thereby reinforcing their
dependent status.
By no means all later southern British hillforts
conform to this model. In Cambridgeshire, late
Figure 7.5 Danebury in its early and developed stages.
Source: Cunliffe 1993
ringworks like Arbury and Stonea Camps are almost devoid of occupation, suggesting use for
occasional communal gatherings, or in periods of danger. The same is probably true of larger
hill-top enclosures dating to the Earlier Iron Age, while—despite the numerous hut circles visible
in their interiors—it is difficult to believe that many hillforts at high altitude were ever occupied
all year round.
In the second and first centuries BC, a new type of fortified site made its appearance in
southern England. Generally known as ‘enclosed oppida’ (from the term Caesar used to describe
fortified sites he encountered in Gaul), they are noticeably larger and more accessible than most
hillforts. They range from plateau fortifications such as Bigbury (Kent) and Wheathampstead
(Hertfordshire) to slope or valley-bottom enclosures like Oram’s Arbour, Winchester, and
Salmonsbury (Gloucestershire). Most had been abandoned by the Roman conquest. At some
examples, including Braughing-Puckeridge (Hertfordshire) and Canterbury (which appears to
succeed Bigbury), fortified enclosures form the nucleus of larger valley-bottom settlements.
In the Later Iron Age, the Bronze Age practice of constructing linear earthworks and landscape
boundaries resumed. Examples occur widely in southern Britain, from the Cotswolds to