| Abstract: |
Rivet (1-3) gives the dedicatory address to the conference in honour of Sir Mortimer Wheeler's 80th year. Hawkes' review (5-18) of hilltop enclosures ranges in time from the Late Neolithic to Caesar, and in space from Anatolia to N Britain; he differentiates on social grounds between "citadel" and "village" types of enclosure. Bradley (71-83) considers that hillforts with origins in pastoralism are probably earlier than those which developed from arable farms; the development probably stemmed from population increase leading to social change. Cunliffe (53-69) examines the various types of site which became hillforts - older settlements, religious foci, pastoral enclosures - and considers the implications for social structure and wealth accumulation. Feachem (19-39) points out how unfinished hillforts can provide otherwise unobtainable information on design and building methods, and considers how far this information may relate to historical events. Giot (155-9) sets Breton hilltop settlements into a long tradition, Neolithic to medieval. Souterrains were used for three-four centuries in the Early La Tène period often for storage, but in great variety of shape and size. Hogg (105-25) describes applications of surface fieldwork; eg. coin distributions are poor indicators of tribal territories since the Theory of Random Flights can account for most of the phenomena seen. Area-to-population ratios provide useful information, and a technique based on Thiessen polygons allows tentative allocations of territory to individual forts. In the Welsh Marches, evidence of chronology, typology, sociology and demography lead Stanford (41-52) to invoke the "invasion model" to explain at least four horizons of hillfort change suggesting imposition. (See also his paper in 72/1661.) Rivet (189-202) distinguishes between normal Celtic methods of attack and defence, and those learned by Gauls from the Romans; alterations to British defences in the century from Caesar to Claudius may reflect learned experience. Some modern translations of Caesar are inadequate for this study. A Ritchie (91-5) classes non-defensive settlement by methods of construction and the social units represented. Musson (85-9) describes the advantages of hilltop-enclosure digging by small highly-skilled teams taking advantage of winter soil conditions and undertaking total planning of wide areas. Other papers are abstracted in 72/1629, 1630, 1643 & 1736. |
