Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T03:29:43.845Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Planned Hillfort Interiors

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 May 2014

G. C. Guilbert
G. C. Guilbert
Affiliation:
3 Darwin Terrace, Mountfields, Shrewsbury
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

For many years excavations within British prehistoric settlement sites were largely confined to selective sampling of a very limited nature since this approach, it was thought, offered the best chance of locating an intensively occupied area from which dating evidence and perhaps even the ground plan of a structure might be recovered. More recently, with the results of a small number of large-scale area excavations to draw upon, it has become possible not only to examine the plans of individual buildings in isolation but to identify standard structural designs used repeatedly on the same sites and, further, to learn something of the overall disposition of structures within the settlement plan. This increasing body of evidence is beginning to reveal, as analogy with historic and existent settlements might anticipate, a basic dichotomy between those which grew and those which were created. To establish a terminology, we should first recognize the essential distinction between a settlement plan and a planned settlement. All settlements have a plan, but not all were consciously planned. Many will have resulted from gradual growth over a period of time, developing from a nucleus to which additions and replacements were made as required (i.e. in the parlance of urban geographers, organic settlements). Accordingly, their plans should not normally be expected to display any great degree of orderliness and will be particularly unlikely to incorporate a systematic pattern of streets.

Type
Research Article
Information
Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society , Volume 41 , December 1975 , pp. 203 - 221
Copyright
Copyright © The Prehistoric Society 1975

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Alcock, L., 1972. ‘By South Cadbury is that Camelot…’ The Excavation of Cadbury Castle 1966–1970. Thames and Hudson, London.Google Scholar
Atkinson, R. J. C., 1957. ‘Worms and weathering’, Antiquity, 31, 219–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barker, P., 1969–1970. ‘Some aspects of the excavation of timber buildings’, World Archaeology, 1, 220–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bersu, G., 1940. ‘Excavations at Little Woodbury, Wiltshire Part 1: The Settlement as revealed by Excavation’, PPS, 6, 30–111.Google Scholar
Bowen, H. C., 1969. ‘The Celtic Background’. In Rivet, A. L. F. (ed), The Roman Villa in Britain, 1–48. Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.Google Scholar
Bradley, R. J., 1971. ‘Economic change in the growth of early hill-forts’. In Hill, D. and Jesson, M. (ed), The Iron Age and its Hillforts, 71–83. Univ. of Soton.Google Scholar
Childe, V. G., 1942. What Happened in History.Google Scholar
Clark, J. G. D., 1966. ‘The invasion hypothesis in British archaeology’, Antiquity, 40, 172–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Culpin, C., 1969. Farm Machinery, Crosby Lockwood, London.Google Scholar
Cunliffe, B. W., 1971. ‘Danebury, Hampshire. First Interim Report on the Excavation 1969–70’, Ant. J., 51, 240–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cunliffe, B. W., 1974. Iron Age Communities in Britain. Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.Google Scholar
Cunliffe, B. W., forthcoming. ‘Danebury, Hampshire. Second Interim Report’, Ant.J., forthcoming.Google Scholar
Curl, J. S., 1970. European Cities and Society. Leonard Hill, London.Google Scholar
Dixon, P., 1973. Crickley Hill, Fifth Report, 1973. Glos. College of Art and Design, Cheltenham.Google Scholar
Guilbert, G. C., 1975a. ‘Moel y Gaer (Rhosesmor) 1972–73: an Area Excavation in the Interior’. In Harding, D. W. (ed), Hillforts—later prehistoric earthworks in Britain and Ireland. Academic Press, London.Google Scholar
Guilbert, G. C. 1975b. ‘Moel y Gaer, 1973: an Area Excavation on the Defences’, Antiquity, 49, 109–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harding, D. W., 1972. The Iron Age in the Upper Thames Basin. University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
Harding, D. W., 1973. ‘Round and Rectangular: Iron Age Houses, British and Foreign’. In C. F. C., and Hawkes, S. C. (ed), Archaeology into History, 1, Greeks, Celts and Romans, 43–62. Dent, London.Google Scholar
Haverfield, F. J., 1913. Ancient Town-planning. Clarendon Press, London.Google Scholar
Hiorns, F. R., 1956. Town-building in History. Harrap, London.Google Scholar
Hodson, F. R., 1964. ‘Cultural grouping within the British pre-Roman Iron Age’, PPS, 30, 99–110.Google Scholar
Jobey, G., 1959. ‘Excavations at the native settlement at Huckhoe, Northumberland’, Arch. Aeliana, 37, 217–78.Google Scholar
Jones, E., 1966. Towns and Cities. University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
Kostrewski, J., 1938. ‘Biskupin: an Early Iron Age Village in Western Poland’, Antiquity, 12, 311–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Le Men, R. F., 1872. ‘Gaulish Fortresses on the Coast of Brittany’, Arch.J., 29, 314–30.Google Scholar
Musson, C. R., 1970. ‘The Breiddin 1969’, Current Arch., 2 (8), 215–8.Google Scholar
Musson, C. R., 1975. ‘Excavations at the Breiddin 1969–73’. In Harding, D. W. (ed), Hillforts—later prehistoric earthworks in Britain and Ireland. Academic Press, London.Google Scholar
O'Neil, B. H. St. J., 1942. ‘Excavations at Ffridd Faldwyn Camp, Montgomery, 1937–39’, Arch. Camb., 97 (1), 1–57.Google Scholar
Peacock, D. P. S., 1968. ‘A Petrological Study of Certain Iron Age Pottery from Western England’, PPS, 34, 414–27.Google Scholar
Peacock, D. P. S., 1969. ‘A Contribution to the Study of Glastonbury Ware from South-Western Britain’, Ant. J., 49, 41–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richmond, I. M., 1968. Hod Hill II, Excavations carried out between 1951 and 1958. British Museum, London.Google Scholar
Smailes, A. E., 1953. The Geography of Towns. Hutchinson, London.Google Scholar
Stanford, S. C., 1970. ‘Credenhill Camp, Herefordshire: an Iron Age Hill-Fort Capital’, Arch.J., 127, 82–129.Google Scholar
Stanford, S. C., 1971. ‘Invention, Adoption and Imposition’. In Hill, D. and Jesson, M. (ed.), The Iron Age and its Hillforts, 41–52. Univ. of Soton.Google Scholar
Stanford, S. C., 1972 ‘Welsh Border Hill-Forts’ In Thomas, C. (ed), The Iron Age in the Irish Sea Province, 25–36, C.B.A. Research Report No. 9.Google Scholar
Stanford, S. C., 1974. Croft Ambrey. Luston, Herefordshire.Google Scholar
Stead, I. M., 1968. ‘An Iron Age Hill-Fort at Grimthorpe, Yorkshire, England’, PPS, 34, 148–90.Google Scholar
Wainwright, G. J., 1969. ‘The Excavation of Balksbury Camp, Andover, Hants.’, Proc. Hants. Fld, Club, 26, 21–55.Google Scholar
Wainwright, G. J., 1971. ‘The excavation of a fortified settlement at Walesland Rath, Pembrokeshire’, Brittania, 2, 48–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wheeler, R. E. M., 1943. Maiden Castle, Dorset. Soc, Ant. Report No. 12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wheeler, R. E. M. and Richardson, K. M., 1957. Hill-Forts of Northern France. Soc. Ant. Report No. 19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar