Cunobelinus was the most significant figure in Britain during the decades leading up to the Roman invasion, though his reign has received relatively little attention. Cunobelinus' coinage is of great importance to understanding the socio-political structure of South-East Britain prior to the Roman invasion and whilst studies of his gold and silver have been published in previous editions of Britannia (Allen 1975; de Jersey 2001), his bronzes have been subject to surprisingly little work, particularly considering that they are by far the most common struck bronze issues known from Iron Age Britain, with a total of 2,608 examples currently recorded in the Celtic Coin Index and on the PAS database combined. This study proposes a broad typological scheme with which Cunobelinus' bronzes can be ordered and demonstrates that, like Cunobelinus' silver, but unlike his gold, they can be divided into three regional groupings, which it can be argued correspond to three different political sub-groupings under Cunobelinus' control. In addition, the bronze's metallurgy and metrology and the mints at which they were struck are investigated. This article examines the contribution of coinage to understanding Cunobelinus' political history, and how he used imagery to reinforce and legitimate his power in the different regions under his control at different times during his reign. The types of sites at which Cunobelinus' bronzes have been found are also outlined and the likely function of the coins discussed.

A unique linchpin depicting a human thumb, discovered in North Lincolnshire in the 1980s, is here reconsidered and particular emphasis is placed on its potential as an apotropaic symbol. This function is explored in terms of the wider material and literary basis for magical gestures in Roman Britain and the Roman world. The relationship between this image and the space in which it was used is also explored.

The large hillfort at Hembury, near Honiton (Devon) is one of the most impressive late prehistoric sites in South-West England. Occupied in the Neolithic and Iron Age, it was taken over by a Roman force about or shortly before A.D. 50. Substantial timber buildings were constructed, including a probable fabrica, in which iron from the adjacent Blackdown hills was worked. The Roman site was abandoned by the early Flavian period and not reoccupied. Though not evidently a conventional fort, Hembury joins a list of hillforts in South-West England which were used by the Roman army in the early decades of conquest. These include Hod Hill and possibly Maiden Castle (Dorset), Ham Hill and South Cadbury (Somerset).

Excavations in Duxford, Cambridgeshire, in 2013, revealed six early Roman (a.d. 50–80) pottery kilns. The kilns were used for the production of flagons, specifically collared and ring-necked varieties. Flagons are generally scarce in contemporary domestic assemblages in Cambridgeshire, often only occurring in ‘special’ contexts, such as burials, while collared flagons are closely associated with military consumption. The excavations also produced a large, significant assemblage of perforated kiln plates. The technology and repertoire of vessels suggest that manufacture was conducted by non-local potters for a specialist market. The site forms part of a group of other early Roman kiln sites in the Cambridge environs and adds to the growing picture of pottery production in the decades following the Roman Conquest.

All three well-produced reports, two excavation and one fieldwalking and magnetometry, deal with rural settlement in Iron Age and Roman Britain. They demonstrate the huge amount of information that can be gathered from such work with implications not only for our understanding of their local area but also many themes relevant to Iron Age and Roman Britain as a whole, as well as beyond. It is useful to review these reports not just in relation to the immense value that each site brings but also in terms of current knowledge and approaches taken to studying rural settlement.