1
Exploring late Iron Age settlement in Britain and the near Continent:
Reading Edward Gibbon’s The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire
and examining the significance of landscape, place, and water in
settlement studies
Adam Rogers
INTRODUCTION
This paper examines ways of considering landscapes, settlements, and significant places in
the late Iron Age and the development of Roman urbanism in North-West Europe. It is
divided into two related parts: firstly an historiographical section analysing an important
example of how early studies, and the social contexts in which they were written, have been
hugely influential in setting research agenda which remain strong in archaeological research;
and secondly a study of archaeological settlement evidence demonstrating how we can
interpret the data in different ways. The first section will look at the thought and work of the
ancient historian Edward Gibbon (1737–94) whilst the second will examine new perspectives
that are now emerging from detailed landscape studies focused on the later Iron Age.
Edward Gibbon’s six-volume work The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire
was published between 1776 and 1788 and was quickly established as a major work. It
became influential on studies not only of the later Roman period, playing a significant part in
the formulation of attitudes towards the later Empire, but the Roman Empire as a whole. The
text has, however, now been criticized for its emphasis on decline (e.g., Hingley and Rogers
forthcoming; McKitterick and Quinault eds. 1997; Porter 1988) and there is now more
caution in using terms such as decline in studies of the later Roman period (e.g. Lavan ed.
2001; Rogers 2005; Wickham 2005).
What has not been acknowledged so much, however, is the way in which Gibbon’s work
covered the rise and growth of the Roman Empire, including pre-existing settlement patterns
in Britain and the near Continent. His descriptions of this period were mainly used as a tool
for establishing what he saw as the greatness of conquest and the ‘Golden Age’, setting the
scene for its decline. This paper will explore the ways in which Gibbon conceptualized and
described pre-Roman settlement in Western Europe and the contribution that this has played
in the research tradition of late Iron Age settlement in this area. Also important is the social
context in which Gibbon was writing and how this will have contributed a major part to the
2
formulation of his attitudes. As a British historian, Gibbon’s work has had a great impact
amongst British scholars, but Gibbon has also been influential in mainland Europe.
Of course, it is not only Gibbon that has had an impact on archaeological work and the
development of research traditions, both of the decline of the Roman Empire and its growth
(work by Theodor Mommsen (1817–1903) and Camille Jullian (1859–1933) is also discussed
below), but his work has been highly prominent and deserves attention. Focusing on Gibbon
will demonstrate the potential of analysing past work in moving subjects forward. Recent
years have seen a rise in important work on the historiography of Roman and prehistoric
archaeology and the formation of tradition especially in Britain (e.g., Dyson 2006; Hingley
2000; Todd 2004) but also in France (e.g. Goudineau 1998) and other countries. Here,
acknowledging the complexities in the research traditions of late Iron Age settlement and
urbanization after the conquest will highlight the necessity to reconsider the way in which
these sites have been studied and conceptualized.
BACKGROUND TO GIBBON’S LIFE
There are numerous accounts of Edward Gibbon’s life including his own Memoirs (1966)
(e.g., Burrow 1985; Low 1937; Porter 1988). Gibbon was born into a relatively privileged
background in south London, his father being able to assume the life of a gentleman because
of the wealth made by his own father in business. This wealth allowed Gibbon to attend a
school that taught Latin and Greek and then, at 15 years, Magdalen College, Oxford. From an
early age Gibbon expressed considerable interest in Roman history and this was strengthened
by his trip to Italy on the Grand Tour but, as Pocock (1999, 276–7) has remarked, this
consisted of a voyage “through the history of taste” seeing and constructing ancient Rome and
Italy through eighteenth century eyes. Through his upbringing, Gibbon appreciated the British
aristocratic system, writing of the “superior prerogative of birth” (Gibbon 1994, vol. I, 188)1
and the validity of Empire and the civilization and order that it brought. He became a member
of parliament himself and belonged to a number of exclusive London clubs (Gibbon 1966,
155–6; Brownley 1976, 21). His inherited wealth allowed him to amass a large library, held in
his house in Bentinck Street, London, and devote his time to writing. Like the classical texts
Gibbon drew upon to write his work, The Decline and Fall itself soon became an essential
part of the education that was given to people of a similar privileged background to his own.
1 The references from The Decline and Fall are taken from the 1994 edited version of the work by David Womersley, published by Penguin in three volumes each containing two of Gibbon’s original volumes. The volume and page numbers in the text refer to the way in which Gibbon’s six volumes appear in this 1994 edition.
3
READING GIBBON
Gibbon was writing in a period in which the interest in history and historical works,
especially of the Roman Empire, was growing; the number of published historical works rose
considerably (McKitterick 1997, 164). History was hugely fashionable (Ghosh 1997, 277)
and as a statement in Horace Walpole’s (1717–97) letter to the poet William Mason (1725–
97) suggests – “there is just appeared a truly classic work” (W. Lewis ed. vol. 28, 1955, 243)
– Gibbon’s first volume was an immediate success and hailed a masterpiece. From that point
Gibbon became known as ‘the Historian of the Roman Empire’ (Pocock 1999, 292). The text
remained hugely popular and influential, and perhaps arguably even more so, into the late
nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. The image of Rome played an important part in the
nineteenth and early twentieth century social consciousness (Vance 1997); people were also
aware of the fate of the Roman Empire through Gibbon and wished to avoid a similar course
of events for the British Empire. The popularity and success of Gibbon’s work was partly
through his writing style and the language of his descriptions of Roman grandeur and
magnificence, but this was also combined with the lessons that could be learnt from his
graphic depictions of decline. Another lesson of Empire, however, was in the conquering and
transformation of land which Gibbon also described and provided images for his readers.
The antiquarians of Gibbon’s day, and earlier, were working in a largely similar social
context as Gibbon which would also have influenced their interpretations of the archaeology.
This intellectual atmosphere of the eighteenth century, to be examined below, would have had
a considerable impact upon Gibbon. It seems that there was a number of studies, attitudes,
and transformations at this time which came together and paved the way for nineteenth and
twentieth century developments, including archaeology.
GIBBON’S ATTITUDE TOWARDS PRE-ROMAN SETTLEMENT
Gibbon not only researched books but was interested in the surviving remains of Roman
structures especially in Rome itself. These remains were important in formulating his ideas, as
one of the famous passages from his Memoirs states: “I can never forget nor express the
strong emotions which agitated my mind as I first approached and entered the eternal City”
(Gibbon 1966, 134). Originally, he had intended to write a book solely on the “decay of the
city” rather than the Empire as a whole (ibid, 136); he describes how he began to “collect the
substance of my Roman decay” (ibid, 146). Gibbon also knew the works of English
antiquarians, including Whitaker, Gale, Stukeley, Camden, Dugdale, and Horsley
(Womersley 1994, xii), and he drew upon and commented on their writings. For
understanding Britain under the Empire he refered to “our own antiquarians, Camden and
4
Horsley” (vol. I, 33, note 8) and especially valued Camden stating that he was “the British
Strabo” and “the father of our antiquities” (vol. II, 997, note 109; vol. III, 22, note 11). In his
study of Roman roads he refers to the itineraries of “Gale and Stukeley for Britain, and M.
d’Anville for Gaul and Italy” (vol. I, 77, note 85). Gibbon was especially interested in the
antiquarian work carried out within towns and sections of his work are devoted to Rome
which he thought reflected the Empire as a whole. He envisaged and described the decline of
the Roman Empire through the physical destruction of its public buildings and monuments.
For Gibbon, the public buildings and cities – interpreted through the ‘enlightened’ mindset –
were what represented the Empire’s greatness and civilization. He not only uses this to
emphasise decline in the later Roman period but also the benefits of romanization in the
conquest period in areas such as Britain, Gaul, and Germany.
Antiquarian work indicates some limited early knowledge of pre-Roman places in Britain by
this time. William Camden’s (1551–1623) and John Speed’s (1542–1629) work, for instance,
linked some names mentioned within the classical texts with those found on pre-Roman
coinage (Hingley 2006, 333), and John Horsley’s Britannia Romana (1974 [1732])
demonstrates awareness of sites of pre-Roman Britain. At this early date, pre-Roman peoples
were being identified with known places and monuments in the landscape (Hingley 2006,
333) which Gibbon would have been able to draw upon for his understanding of the pre-
Roman West. These places were identified at a period in time when the ways of
understanding and interpreting landscape and urbanism in society were changing, in turn,
influencing attitudes towards place and space in the pre-Roman and Roman periods. This
influence has survived in some form to this day.
That Gibbon considered pre-Roman settlement in inferior terms to Roman towns is
represented by his statement that with conquest “(T)he spirit of improvement had passed the
Alps, and been felt even in the woods of Britain, which were gradually cleared away to open a
free space for convenient and elegant habitations. York was the seat of government; London
was already enriched by commerce; and Bath was celebrated for the salutary effects of the
medicinal waters” (vol. I, 75), clearly applying modern views of the towns onto the past. For
details on pre-Roman settlement Gibbon drew heavily on Caesar’s De Bello Gallico. He
wrote that “(W)e can only suppose them to have been rude fortifications, constructed in the
centre of woods, and designed to secure the women, children and cattle, whilst the warriors of
the tribe marched out to repel a sudden invasion”. Caesar’s writing refers in a number of
occasions to the importance of woodland for indigenous meetings, activities and settlement.
He recorded that the Suebi sent “their children and all their stuff to the woods” (B Gall.
IV.19) and the “Menapii had all hidden in their densest forests” (IV.38). He also wrote that
“the Britons call it a stronghold when they have fortified a thick-set woodland with rampart
5
and trench” (V.21) and that the stronghold of Cassivellaunus was “fenced by woods and
marshes” (ibid).
Gibbon also used woods as a method of emphasizing the savagery and danger of the
indigenous peoples. Attacks from barbarians came from woods as a contrast from the
civilization of walled towns and forts: “The crafty barbarians, who had lined the woods,
suddenly attacked the legions” (vol. I, 308–9). Other phrases reflecting this are: “the savage
warriors of Scythia issued from their forests” (vol. III, 121), “a crowd of naked savages
rushed from the woods” (vol. III, 281); “the secret paths of the woods” (vol. II, 1066), “dark
recesses of the woods” (vol. II, 1077) and the “thick and gloomy woods” (vol. II, 124). The
term “woods and morasses” occurs repeatedly throughout the work as a means of
emphasizing barbarity compared with Roman civilization. Woodland clearance and the
drainage of marshland by the Romans, as in his own time, were regarded by Gibbon as acts of
improvement, civilization, and rationalization.
Commenting on later times, for instance, Gibbon wrote that in Germany the “immense woods
have been gradually cleared” and the “morasses have been drained” (vol. I, 232). It “is the
happy consequence of the progress of arts and agriculture” that instead of “some rude
villages, thinly scattered among its woods and morasses, Germany produced a list of two
thousand three hundred walled towns” (vol. III, 512). A highly influential German historian
of the Roman Empire was Theodor Mommsen (1817–1903) whose most well known work is
the three-volume History of Rome (Römische Geschichte) covering the Republic, published
between 1854 and 1856, and then The Provinces of the Roman Empire from Caesar to
Diocletian (Die Provinzen von Caesar bis Diocletian) which appeared in 1885. Elements of
Mommsen’s writing were influenced by Gibbon, describing the benefits of Roman conquest
and the unifying nature of imperialism. With clear resonances of Gibbon, on pre-Roman
settlement in northern Europe he wrote that the “population during war sought protection in
the morasses and forests rather than behind their walls, and beyond the Thames the primitive
defence of the wooden abatis altogether took the place of towns” (1866, 218). Mommsen
himself was influential on the views of a number of historians including Francis Haverfield
(1860–1919) in Britain and Camille Jullian (1859–1933) in France who studied in Berlin
under Mommsen (Goudineau 1998, 9–10; Hingley 2005, 35).
Like Mommsen, Jullian took the Romanist viewpoint in his early work including the first
three parts of his eight-volume Histoire de la Gaule published between 1907 and 1921.
Jullian attended the École Normale Supérieure in Paris at the age of 18 and received his
doctorate at 24 in 1883 at the Sorbonne (Goudineau 1998, 8). This route of education
undoubtedly encouraged traditional perspectives and approaches towards the Roman conquest
of France and pre-Roman settlement. Indeed, his earlier book Vercingétorix (1900) was
6
written predominantly from a Romanist perspective and he originally considered writing a
history of Rome, rather than Gaul (Goudineau 1998, 9, 21; King 2001, 120). Jullian knew the
Greek and Roman texts well but unlike Gibbon he did not put so much emphasis on structural
remains and antiquarian studies. Jullian’s work has been very influential in France although it
is now receiving critical analysis and it is recognized that his writing privileged certain
themes and periods (Goudineau 1998, 31).
The later volumes of Histoire de la Gaule were not so strongly biased towards Roman
civilization as the earlier ones (King 2001, 120), although the ways in which pre-Roman
settlements are described does in many ways remain similar to Mommsen and Gibbon. In
volume V, for example, he wrote that the “Empire était l’apothéose de le ville”2 emphasizing
the civilization that Roman towns brought and this was accompanied in volumes II and V
with descriptions of the transformations of “marécages et forêts” (marshes and forests) around
towns (vol. II, 260–3; vol. V, 177–80) comparable to Gibbon’s writing on woods and
morasses. He also states that the marshes and forests would have been good defences (vol. V,
261)3 and that they would have been more prominent in northern France; a result of this being
that the north of France was considered less civilised than the south: “les grandes villes
étaient plus rares au nord”.4 Jullian does, however, acknowledge the sacred nature of some
wooded areas (e.g., vol. II, 155), as is mentioned in some classical texts such as Lucan (also
used by Gibbon),5 but not of wetlands.
Gibbon continued to use the imagery of woodland and marsh in his work to illustrate the
“decline” of the West after Rome: “Gaul was again overspread with woods” (vol. III, 481)
and in Britain “an ample space of wood and morass was resigned to the vague dominion of
nature” and areas returned to their primitive state of a “savage and solitary forest” (vol. III,
502–3). Jullian, who refers to Gibbon’s work (vol. VII, 3), also writes of “La Gaule en ruine”,
the “ruine des campagnes”, and that “peu à peu la forêt se rapprochait” (vol. VII, 16–7).
Describing decline in such terms as encroaching woods and the loss of order in the
countryside, as Gibbon, Jullian, and others did, will have influenced attitudes not only of the
later Roman period settlement but also the pre-conquest period and led to assumptions about
the way in which these places were experienced, valued, and understood.
2 The Empire was the pinnacle of the town. 3 As in the case of marshes, “les forêts présentaient les mêmes avantages militaires” (vol. V, 261). 4 The large towns were rarer in the north. 5 In the Pharsalia (III.399–432), Lucan provides a well known description of a sacred grove in the vicinity of Marseilles.
7
GIBBON AND ‘LANDSCAPE’
Although Gibbon referred mainly to classical texts in his work, then, he was writing at a time
of increasing rationalization and commoditization of land which would have influenced his
interpretations. These changes contributed towards the modern concept of ‘landscape’ which
has been powerful in the way in which attempts to understand oppida, other contemporary
sites, and their settings have been approached. Gibbon was working amidst a growing
empiricist understanding of the environment. It is not the purpose of this paper to go into
detail on the origins of the term and understanding of ‘landscape’, and there is considerable
writing on this subject (e.g. Brück 2007; Cosgrove 1984; Johnson 2007), but it can be seen in
part as being a product of the eighteenth century ideology of improvement and other social
changes. The Dutch painting tradition introduced the term landschap into English; painting
the land, contributing towards such terms as ‘picturesque’, objectified and distanced it,
separating people from it (Bevan 1997, 181). Landscape also formed a significant parts in
changing attitudes to economic aspects of life. Like painting, antiquarianism was one of a
range of pursuits dominated by the aristocracy during the eighteenth century (along with
travelling, gardening and drawing) which influenced and created perceptions of landscape
(Brück 2007, 244). Antiquarianism, and then archaeology with its interest in the context of
finds through excavation, were part of the process of the modernization and rationalization of
land (Lemaire 1997, 16; Schnapp 1996, 179–219).
Also emerging were concepts of environmental and economic marginality for areas that were
deemed too unsuitable for exploitation and were considered to be backward and uncivilized.
Civilization was brought to areas through exploitation and drainage of the land, as in the case
of the Fenland in eastern England, where large-scale drainage began in the post-medieval
period (Darby 1973; cf. Rogers 2007). Comparisons with the Fenland have also been made
with contemporary overseas land reclamation in the colonies (Evans 1997, 117). Through
land clearance, drainage and exploitation, Western concepts of ‘landscape’ were implanted
onto other parts of the world. Gibbon’s awareness of this is reflected in works held in his
library including William Douglass’ A Summary of the first planting, progressive
improvements and present state of the British settlements in America published in 1760;
America “must preserve the manners of Europe” (Gibbon vol. III, 514).
Mommsen also suggests that most of the provincial land possessed by the Romans was
governed in the same way as “English possessions in the earliest time in America” (1866,
214). Similar attitudes are clearly reflected in Gibbon’s writings on the Roman colonization in
the West and influenced his descriptions of pre-Roman settlement and his negative view
towards wetlands and woods. Gibbon’s writing, amongst other influences, came to play a
significant part in the formulation of ideas and direction of approaches in the study of late
8
Iron Age oppida and contemporary settlement, via the perspective emphasizing economic
priorities and hierarchy/dominance in considerations of their location, organization and
function. Moving away from the narrative of colonial conquest and economic prioritization, it
is necessary to be reminded that in the Iron Age people would have had an entirely different
concept of time and being which impacts on studies of their inhabited world.
RETHINKING LATE IRON AGE LANDSCAPE AND SETTLEMENT
This second part of the paper provides an example of how we might interpret settlement and
landscape in the late Iron Age differently, looking especially at oppida. The term ‘oppidum’
used in the context of describing settlement types in the late Iron Age of Britain and the near
Continent originates from Caesar’s De Bello Gallico. He uses the term, Latin for ‘town’, to
describe the sites that he saw in Gaul which might imply that he needed a word that would be
understood by his readership in Rome. It is unlikely, however, that we have anything more
than only a very basic understanding of these sites and, in turn, the process of urbanization in
the Roman period. This section will reconsider late pre-Roman sites in France, and some in
Britain, looking especially at their relationship with Roman urbanism. It might appear here
that Roman towns are being used to interpret Iron Age settlement patterns (as was perhaps the
case in Gibbon’s work) but the opposite is intended. Analysis shows that some Roman towns
are preceded by oppida whilst others have evidence for pre-Roman activity without the
monumental earthworks of oppida. Looking at the meanings attached to their landscape
setting, however, this analysis will suggest that the significance of many of these places need
not have related to their monumentality or apparent proto-urban appearance.
Where oppida have been identified in France and elsewhere in Continental Europe, through
monumental earthworks, they have predominantly been interpreted in defensive terms, acting
as refuges and storage places, and in economic terms being centres of production and
exchange. Roymans (1990, 202), for example, wrote that “the size of the entire settlement
corresponds primarily to its defensive function, while the size of its permanently inhabited
area corresponds to its economic one”. Fichtl devotes a large part of La Ville Celtique (2005)
to the defences of oppida, and the evidence for craft production within them, whilst Collis’
(1975) Defended Sites of the Late La Tène, as the title suggests, puts an emphasis on the
defensive nature and function of sites. Woolf (1993, 223), moreover, draws attention to the
fact that the title of many of the works on oppida explicitly state the interpretation that they
are urban,6 making the assumption that we understand both the nature of sites in the pre-
6 These works include Audouze and Büchsenschütz (1991), Collis (1984), Cunliffe and Rowley (1976), Wells (1984), and also Fichtl (2005). Woolf (1998) did look more at the social aspects of oppida.
9
conquest period and the nature of Roman urbanism. This attitude has had the effect of
simplifying our understanding of these sites in terms of their location, activity within them
and the way in which they were experienced. Even the ‘defences’ of many oppida seem to
have been far too impracticable for defence to have been their only or most important purpose
and other functions are also likely (Haselgrove 2007, 511). They also affirmed identities and
were significant aspects of the experience of the ‘landscape’.
Useful examples of the reanalysis of our understanding of sites and their settings include
Aitchison’s (1993) examination of the Dorsey in County Armagh, Northern Ireland, an
earthwork enclosure lying near the Dorsey River.7 The earthworks enclose a large area of
marshland which contains very little evidence for occupation or activity. Traditionally seen as
a military installation it may instead have functioned as some kind of sacred enclosure with
the marshland being deliberately defined in this way (Aitchison 1993), this landscape feature
forming an essential component of the site. Haselgrove and Millett’s (1997) reanalysis of pre-
Roman Verulamium, next to the River Ver, also puts an emphasis on the setting of the
earthworks here. They suggest that the enclosure in the valley floor with remains of
metalworking was a deliberate decision to locate the industrial activity, and probably also
political and religious events, here because of the religious associations of both the marshy
area and the metalworking itself. Actions were taken and experiences encountered that did not
relate to what would be regarded as rational and practical today.
Willis’ (1997) study of the settlement pattern of the East Midlands in Britain reminds us that
the monumentality of settlements may have been less important that their negotiation with
‘natural’ features in the landscape. Here, watery features were often integral parts of the
settlements which did not have large earthworks. Roman towns were placed within meaning-
laden landscapes and became a part of them (cf. Creighton 2006; Rogers 2008). Towns were
also landscape events where phenomenological aspects were just as important and meaningful
as they were with pre-Roman settlement (Willis 2007a). Town walls for instance, as with
oppida earthworks, undoubtedly had values beyond their functional use (cf. Woolf 2006).
Some work on the Continental oppida is now beginning to explore them as meaningful space
including evidence of sanctuaries (e.g., Fichtl et al. 2000; Kaenel 2006). The Titelberg
(Luxembourg), for example, seems to have had zones of different activities with a sanctuary
site in the centre, with its prominent position suggesting that it was an important part of the
site (Metzler et al. 2006). Other examples with sanctuaries as apparent foci are Martberg,
Wallendorf, and Mont Beuvray. Evidence for sanctuaries with pre-Roman origins near to
Roman towns might suggest that there were a number of closely related foci in the pre-Roman
7 Also see Rogers 2008.
10
landscape, one of which was then perhaps taken by the town. At Bayeux, settlement at the site
of the Roman town seems to have begun in the Augustan period but excavations have
discovered traces of a pre-Roman religious sanctuary on the site of the Saint-Vigor hill to the
east of the town (Bedon 1999, 178) indicating that this landscape was already in use and
ritualized, within which the Roman town will have become part. Sanctuaries need not be the
only way in which the religious meaning of sites is reflected; religious symbolism will also
have been attached to natural features and wider landscape settings. Roymans’ (2004; 2007)
recent work on the site of Kassel/Lith and its watery setting, for instance, demonstrates a
move away from a predominant defensive and economic interpretation of sites more common
in his earlier work (1990).
In France, Roman towns were not only associated with ‘oppida’ but also placed in locations
with traces apparently of other forms of settlement. In some cases even towns that seem to
have been founded in unoccupied landscapes may actually have been placed on already
significantly defined land.8 It is necessary to consider the symbolism that the wider landscape
might have held. ‘Natural’ places could be as significant and meaningful within landscapes as
‘man-made’ features, while culture and nature may not always have been consciously
distinguished (e.g., Bradley 2000; Insoll 2007): “natural places have an archaeology because
they acquired a significance in the minds of people in the past” (Bradley 2000, 35).
One factor concerning the location of many of the sites, and the meanings attached to them, is
their watery contexts. Gibbon, had he made a study of this, is likely to have interpreted it
through the necessity for landscape improvement with drainage and land reclamation. It is
unlikely, however, that given the significance, especially in religious belief, that seems to
have been attached to water and watery contexts in prehistoric Western Europe (Derks 1998;
Green 1986, 166; Webster 1995, 449–51) that these sites would not have been considered
solely in rational and practical terms. The watery context seems to have been important not
only for oppida but also other types of site (Figure 1). The significance of water within the
landscape, and to settlement in pre-Roman France, is indicated by the large number of
references to rivers and water in Gaul in the classical sources. Diodorus Siculus describes the
rivers (Diod. Sic. V.25.3–4) whilst Caesar refers to their defensive benefits around
settlements.
Bourges (Avaricum), for example, had great “natural strength, for it was surrounded by river
and marsh” (B Gall. VII.15) whilst around Paris (Lutetia) there was a “continuous expanse of
marsh which flowed into the Seine and formed a significant obstruction over the whole area”
(VII.57) and at Besançon (Vesontio; Walter and Barçon 2004) the “river Doubs practically
8 Cf. Brooks 2006.
11
surrounds the entire town” (B Gall. I.38). Strabo emphasizes Lyon’s (Lugdunum) location
where “the Avar and the Rhodanus mingle with one another” (IV.1.11), suggesting it was
significant. Eleven towns in Gallia Belgica, thirteen in Gallia Lugdunensis, and ten in Gallia
Aquitania were located at the confluence of rivers whilst some were within the meanders of
rivers, such as Cahors, Périgueux, Soissons, and Besançon and some in marshy locations
including Dax, Sens, and Amiens. There were, of course, also elevated sites that became
Roman civitas-capitals such as Langres and Metz in Gallia Belgica but, even here, rivers
played an important role in the landscape and the ramparts at Metz enclosed areas of
marshland; hilltop sites are likely to have had significances beyond their defensive function.
At a number of sites that became Roman towns there is evidence for pre-Roman oppida but in
no cases are their nature, function and interaction with the wider landscape fully understood.
The Roman town at Rheims, for example, in Gallia Belgica was located on the site of one of
the largest oppida in France, Durocortorum, which had two ramparts with the inner one
enclosing 90 hectares and the outer enclosing 550 hectares (Berthelot et al. 1994; Bedon
1999; Neiss 2005). It was situated between the River Vesle and two streams that have now
disappeared and whilst some structures and streets have been identified inside the oppidum, it
seems doubtful that the whole of the enclosed area would have been occupied. This
‘landscape’ element, enclosing large open spaces, and its watery context, suggests that there
was more meaning attached to it than a settlement site in modern terms.
The town at Soissons in Gallia Belgica was preceded by the oppidum of Pommiers, a large
promontory cut off by a massive bank and ditch enclosing around 40 hectares, which in turn
followed the oppidum at Villeneuve-St.-Germain, a low-lying site which was enclosed by a
meander of the River Aisne and associated with floodable areas (Brun et al. 2000; Haselgrove
1996, 149). It now seems, however, that none of the sites were wholly abandoned. Coins,
brooches and other material indicate that the chronologies of Pommiers and Villeneuve-St.-
Germain overlap; both sites, at least periodically, were being used at the same time
(Haselgrove 1996, 151). Pommiers also remained in some kind of use during the Roman
period (Knight 2001, 77–8). It may be possible to consider all three locations as places within
a ‘complex’ of sites that retained long-term significance and meaning. They may also have
been used as periodic religious and meeting places before the decision was made to make a
more permanent move (Haselgrove 2007, 509). Settlement and landscape use was far more
complex than linear studies of Roman urbanization often allow.
Bibracte (Mont Beuvray) is another important example. This oppidum was situated on the
promontory of the Autonois hills overlooking the flood plain of the River Arroux where there
was waterlogged ground and the possibility of flooding (Rebourg 1998). It is in this
floodplain that there was a sanctuary complex including the ‘Temple of Janus’ which
12
probably had pre-Roman origins. A theatre and another temple have also been identified here
by aerial photography and it seems to be surrounded by an enclosure ditch (Frezouls 1997,
158; Rebourg 1998, 158–60). The oppidum continued to attract activity in the Roman period
despite the Roman town being located at Autun 27 kilometres away and suggests that this site
remained part of a wider meaning-laden landscape.
Collis et al. (2000) have also emphasized the need to acknowledge the importance of the large
non-defended sites as part of the settlement pattern. Amiens is perhaps a good example of the
problematic use of the term oppidum for only large earthwork sites since Caesar refers to an
oppidum here (B Gall. V.24; V.47; V.53), and that the council of Gauls met here (V.24), but
so far no earthworks have been identified. If Caesar can be taken at his word it would suggest
that this place was special without much monumentality. The site, including the later Roman
town, was located in a marshy area and at a crossing point and confluence of the Rivers
Somme and Selle. It seems that this was a special site of meeting, interaction, ceremony and
ritual that was fully integrated into its landscape setting. Another example is Sens in Gallia
Lugdunensis which was located in a low-lying marshy area next to the River Yonne (Perrugot
1996) and although there does not seem to have been an ‘oppidum’ here there are traces of
pre-conquest activity. Sites require further study in terms of pre-Roman activity and the
meanings attached to them.
In Britain there is a complexity in the late pre-Roman settlement record that is often
overlooked because of the preoccupation with the practical functions and nature of oppida.
This is examined in more detail in Rogers (2008) which sought to explore the oppida and
other forms of settlement in terms of their significance as places, their landscape setting and
the way in which Roman urbanism interacted with them. In Britain, oppida tend to be divided
into ‘enclosed oppida’ like the Continental sites and ‘territorial oppida’ which appear to
embrace much larger areas without continuous earthworks (Haselgrove 1999, 121;
Haselgrove and Moore 2007, 6). In both cases, the earthworks have generally been interpreted
in defensive terms and their watery contexts were practical elements of their location.
Sites examined in this way include Verulamium (St Albans) (cf. Niblett 2005; Thompson
2005) and Camulodunum (Colchester) (Crummy 1997; Hawkes and Hull 1947; cf. Willis
2007b, 121–2)9 with their earthworks spanning large areas. These were associated with
watery settings and foci of activity including metalworking and coin production. The religious
significance and magical nature attached to metalworking and the minting of coinage in
prehistory (Budd and Taylor 1995; Haselgrove and Wigg-Wolf 2005, 12; Hingley 1997)
9 The names Verlamion and Camulodunon are often used to distinguish the Iron Age period settlements from the Roman towns, and are based largely on Iron Age coinage, although the exact names and spellings are still uncertain (Potter 2002, 21).
13
would also have contributed to the special nature of these sites, integrated with the
religiously-imbued watery setting as studied by Haselgrove and Millett (1997, 284).
Potentially, however, key late Iron Age sites lacked earthworks (cf. Rogers 2008): at Lincoln,
which lay near the River Witham, evidence for pre-fortress and colonia activity includes
traces of structures on what would have been an island within a large natural body of water
there known as the Brayford Pool (Figure 2; Darling and Jones 1988) and there are
suggestions that there may also have been activity beneath the colonia itself (Jones and
Stocker 2003, 28–30), much of which would have been lost through its construction. A triple
linear bank and ditch system to the north of the later town (ibid, 30–1) appears to lead to the
site and was possibly even designed to direct movement to this religiously-imbued location.
Other apparent concentrations of pre-Roman activity in watery and marshy areas include at
Cirencester (Moore 2006; Reece 2003), Exeter (Fox 1952), and Leicester (Cooper and
Buckley 2003) and suggest that these sites may not have been considered in inferior terms to
oppida and may have played an important part in the creation of the settlement pattern in the
Roman period. The location of the fortress and subsequent colonia at Lincoln, for instance
could even have been a deliberate attempt to control a sacred place here which was
considered a threat (cf. Brooks 2006; Millett 1990).
Roman London is another important example (see Rogers 2008), it being located next to the
Thames and divided by the Walbrook stream, both of which appear to have been used for the
religious deposition of objects in prehistory (Bradley and Gordon 1988; Merrifield 1983, 9).
Evidence for Iron Age occupation in the area is still slight although traces have been
identified on islands within the Thames at Southwark (Beard and Cowan 1988). Holder and
Jamieson’s study (2003) has demonstrated the extent of loss of early levels in London due to
truncation. Regardless of the extent of Iron Age occupation here, however, the site could well
have been an important meeting and religious place at this time.
It is important, then, for oppida and contemporary sites to be studied in more theoretically
rigorous ways, acknowledging the differences in which the landscape would have been
conceptualized and the meanings attached to certain places. In a number of cases this
significance may have survived through memories and myths making ‘place histories’. These
‘commemorative places’ (Van Dyke and Alcock 2003, 5) would have gathered people,
experiences, histories, and thoughts (Casey 1996, 14) and remained culturally charged
(Creighton 2006) despite new elements being brought to the sites through the foundation of
Roman towns.
14
CONCLUSIONS
This paper took the form of two separate but interlinked parts. The first section used Edward
Gibbon’s The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire to highlight the complex nature in
which the research tradition of pre-Roman settlement has been formed. Gibbon’s description
of watery and wooded areas relating to pre-conquest settlement in negative terms was written
in a period where ‘economic improvement’ was a dominant social concept, changing
understandings of landscape forever, and where the colonial exploitation of land and peoples
was at its height. His attitude towards urbanism and landscape in his own day influenced his
understanding of the Roman period as well as colouring his interpretation of the classical
sources. What makes Gibbon’s work in its social context especially important is that it has
had such a prominent position in academic study and has gone on to influence attitudes and
approaches towards the past into the present day. The same social context has led to the
situation whereby what archaeologists tend to see as ‘facts’ and ‘practical considerations’
concerning place and landscape are mostly modern, Western-derived assumptions (Johnson
2007, 129).
Authors such as Theodor Mommsen and Camille Jullian were also influential in the research
tradition but there are also influences from Gibbon in their work. The context in which these
influential works were written has had an impact on our study of Iron Age and Roman
settlement patterns including our understanding of late Iron Age oppida and their relationship
with less monumental contemporary sites. The second part of the paper discussed an example
of how with detailed archaeological data and theoretical analysis, we can explore ways in
which settlement, landscape, and place might be approached in different ways. This in turn
has led to more sophisticated understandings of the process of urbanization after the Roman
conquest. Gibbon’s work is a good reflection of the way in which people thought about place
and space in the eighteenth century and how this has influenced historical and archaeological
studies since. As the second part demonstrates, however, there are more rigorous ways in
which the available settlement evidence can be studied to raise new perspectives on place and
landscape in the late Iron Age and Roman periods.
REFERENCES
Ancient Sources
Caesar (Translated by H.J. Edwards 1917) De Bello Gallico, London: Heinemann.
Diodorus Siculus (Translated by C.H. Oldfather 1933) Bibliothēkē, London: Heinemann.
Lucan (Translated by J.D. Duff 1969) Pharsalia, London: Heinemann.
15
Strabo (Translated by H.L. Jones 1917-1932) Geographia, London: Heinemann.
Modern sources
Audouze, F. and Büchsenschütz, O. (1991) Towns, Villages and Countryside of Celtic
Europe, London: Batsford.
Beard, D. and Cowan, C. (1988) ‘Excavations at 15–23 Southwark Street’, The London
Archaeologist, 5 (14), 375–81.
Bedon, R. (1999) Les villes des trois Gaules: de César à Néron: dans leur contexte
historique, territorial et politique, Paris: Picard.
Berthelot, F., Balmelle, A. and Rollet, P. (1994) Reims fouilles archéologiques: site du
Conservatoire National de Région de Musique et de Danse, Rue Gambetta, Reims
(Marne), Reims: Société Archéologique Champenoise.
Bevan, B. (1997) ‘Bounding the Landscape: place and identity during the Yorkshire Wolds
Iron Age’, in A. Gwilt and C. Haselgrove (eds.) Reconstructing Iron Age Societies: new
approaches to the British Iron Age, Oxford: Oxbow Books, 181–91.
Bradley, R. (2000) An Archaeology of Natural Places, London and New York: Routledge.
Bradley, R. and Gordon, K. (1988) ‘Human skulls from the River Thames, their dating and
significance’, Antiquity, 62, 503–9.
Brooks, H. (2006) ‘Colchester before Colchester’, in P. Ottaway (ed.) A Victory Celebration:
Papers on the Archaeology of Colchester and Late Iron Age-Roman Britain presented
to Philip Crummy, Colchester: Colchester Archaeological Trust, 5–10.
Brownley, M.W. (1976) ‘Gibbon: The Formation of Mind and Character’, Daedalus, 105,
13–25.
Brück, J. (2007) ‘Landscape politics and colonial identities: Sir Richard Colt Hoare’s tour of
Ireland, 1806’, Journal of Social Archaeology, 7, 224–49.
Brun, P., Chartier, M. and Pion, P. (2000) ‘Le processus d’urbanisation dans la vallée de
l’Aisne’, in V. Guichard, S. Sievers and O.-H. Urban (eds.) Les processus
d'urbanisation à l'âge du Fer (Collection Bibracte 4), Glux-en-Glenne: Centre
archéologique européen, 83–96.
Budd, P. and Taylor, T. (1995) ‘The faerie smith meets the bronze industry: magic versus
science in the interpretation of prehistoric metal making’, World Archaeology, 27, 133–
43.
Burrow, J.W. (1985) Gibbon. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
16
Casey, E.S. (1996) ‘How to Get from Space to Place in a Fairly Short Stretch of Time:
Phenomenological Prolegomena’, in S. Feld and K.H. Basso (eds.) Senses of Place,
Santa Fe: School of American Research Press, 13–52.
Collis, J. (1975) Defended sites of the late La Tène in central and western Europe, British
Archaeological Reports International Series 2, Oxford.
Collis, J., Krausz, S. and Guichard, V. (2000) ‘Les villages ouverts en Gaule centrale aux IIe
et Ier s. av. J.-C.’, in V. Guichard, S. Sievers and O.-H. Urban (eds.) Les processus
d'urbanisation à l'âge du Fer (Collection Bibracte 4), Glux-en-Glenne: Centre
archéologique européen, 73–82.
Cooper, N.J. and Buckley, R. (2003) ‘New Light on Roman Leicester (Ratae
Corieltauvorum)’, in P. Wilson (ed.) The Archaeology of Roman Towns: Studies in
honour of John S. Wacher, Oxford: Oxbow Books, 31–43.
Cosgrove, D.E. (1984) Social Formation and Symbolic Landscape, London and Sydney:
Croom Helm.
Creighton, J. (2006) Britannia: The Creation of a Roman Province, London and New York:
Routledge.
Crummy, P. (1997) City of Victory: the story of Colchester – Britain’s first Roman town,
Colchester: Colchester Archaeological Trust.
Cunliffe, B. and Rowley, T. (eds.) (1976) Oppida: the beginnings of urbanisation in
barbarian Europe: papers presented to a conference at Oxford, October 1975, British
Archaeological Reports International Series 11, Oxford.
Darby, H.C. (1973) ‘The Age of the Improver: 1600–1800’, in H.C. Darby (ed.) A New
Historical Geography of England, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 302–88
Darling, M.J. and Jones, M.J. (1988) ‘Early Settlement at Lincoln’, Britannia, 19, 1–57.
Derks, T. (1998) Gods, temples and ritual practices. The transformation of religious ideas
and values in Roman Gaul, Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
Douglass, W. (1760) A Summary of the first planting, progressive improvements and present
state of the British settlements in America, London.
Dyson, S.L. (2006) In Pursuit of Ancient Pasts: A History of Classical Archaeology in the
Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries, New Haven and London: Yale University Press.
Evans, C. (1997) ‘Sentimental Prehistories: The Construction of the Fenland Past’, Journal of
European Archaeology, 5, 105–36.
17
Fichtl, S. (2005) (2nd edition) La ville celtique: les oppida de 150 av. J.-C. à 15 ap. J.-C.,
Paris: éditions errance.
Fichtl, S., Metzler, J. and Sievers, S. (2000) ‘Le rôle des sanctuaires dans le processus
d’urbanisation’, in V. Guichard, S. Sievers and O.-H. Urban (eds.) Les processus
d'urbanisation à l'âge du Fer (Collection Bibracte 4), Glux-en-Glenne: Centre
archéologique européen, 179–86.
Fox, A. (1952) Roman Exeter (Isca Dumnoniorum) Excavations in the War Damaged Area
1945–1947, Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Frezouls, E. (1997) Les Villes antiques de la France. 3, Lyonnaise 1: Autun, Chartres,
Nevers, Paris: de Boccard.
Ghosh, P. (1997) ‘The Conception of Gibbon’s History’, in R. McKitterick and R. Quinault
(eds.) Edward Gibbon and Empire, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 271–316.
Gibbon, E. (1966) Memoirs of My Life (ed. G.A. Bonnard), London: Nelson.
Gibbon, E. (1994 [1776-1788]) (edited by D. Womersley), History of the Decline and Fall of
the Roman Empire, London: Penguin.
Goudineau, C. (1998) Regard sur la Gaule, Paris: éditions errance.
Green, M.J. (1986) The Gods of the Celts, Gloucester: Alan Sutton.
Haselgrove, C. (1996) ‘Roman Impact on rural settlement and society in southern Picardy’, in
N. Roymans (ed.) From the sword to the plough: three studies on the earliest
romanisation of Northern Gaul, Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 127–87.
Haselgrove, C. (1999) ‘The Iron Age’, in J. Hunter and I. Ralston (eds.) The Archaeology of
Britain, London and New York: Routledge, 113–34.
Haselgrove, C. (2007) ‘The age of enclosure: Later Iron Age settlement and society in
northern France’, in C. Haselgrove and T. Moore (eds.) The Later Iron Age in Britain
and Beyond, Oxford: Oxbow Books, 492–522.
Haselgrove, C. and Millett, M. (1997) ‘Verlamion reconsidered’, in A. Gwilt and C.
Haselgrove (eds.) Reconstructing Iron Age Societies: new approaches to the British
Iron Age, Oxford: Oxbow Books, 282–96.
Haselgrove, C. and Moore, T. (2007) ‘New narratives of the Later Iron Age’, in C.
Haselgrove and T. Moore (eds.) The Later Iron Age in Britain and Beyond, Oxford:
Oxbow Books, 1–15.
18
Haselgrove, C. and Wigg-Wolf, D. (2005) ‘Introduction’, in C. Haselgrove and D. Wigg-
Wolf (eds.) Iron Age coinage and ritual practices, Mainz am Rhein: Van Zabern, 9–22.
Hawkes, C.F.C. and Hull, M.R. (1947) Camulodunum. First Report on the Excavation at
Colchester 1930–1939, Reports of the Research Committee of the Society of the
Antiquaries of London Number 14, London: The Society of the Antiquaries of London.
Hingley, R. (2000) Roman Officers and English Gentlemen, London and New York:
Routledge.
Hingley, R. (2005) Globalizing Roman Culture: unity, diversity and empire, London and New
York: Routledge.
Hingley, R. (2006) ‘Projecting empire: the mapping of Roman Britain’ Journal of Social
Archaeology, 6, 328–53.
Hingley, R. and Rogers, A. (forthcoming) ‘The use of decline and fall as an imperial motif
from the late eighteenth to the early twentieth centuries and the impact of this idea on
early archaeological endeavours’, in M. Bradley and E. Reisz (eds.) Hegemony and
Cornucopia: Classical Scholarship and the Ideology of Imperialism, Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Holder, N. and Jamieson, D. (2003) ‘The Prehistory of the City of London: Myths and
Methodologies’, The Archaeological Journal, 160, 23–43.
Horsley, J. (1974 [1732]) Britannia Romana: or, the Roman antiquities of Britain, Newcastle
upon Tyne: Graham.
Insoll, T. (2007) ‘‘Natural’ or ‘Human’ Spaces? Tallensi Sacred Groves and Shrines and their
Potential Implications for Aspects of Northern European Prehistory and
Phenomenological Interpretation’, Norwegian Archaeological Review, 40, 138–58.
Johnson, M. (2007) Ideas of Landscape, Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Jones, M.J. and Stocker, D. (2003) ‘Settlement in the Lincoln area in the Prehistoric Era:
Archaeological Account’, in D. Stocker (ed.) The City by the Pool: Assessing the
Archaeology of the City of Lincoln, Oxford: Oxbow Books, 19–33.
Jullian, C. (1907–1921) Histoire de la Gaule, Paris: Librairie Hachette.
Kaenel, G. (2006) ‘Agglomérations et oppida de la fin de l’âge du fer: une vision
synthétique’, in C. Haselgrove (ed.) Les mutations de la fin de l’âge du Fer (Collection
Bibracte 12/4), Glux-en-Glenne: Centre archéologique européen, 17–39.
King, A. (2001) ‘Vercingetorix, Asterix and the Gauls: Gallic symbols in French politics and
culture’, in R. Hingley (ed.) Images of Rome: Perceptions of ancient Rome in Europe
19
and the United States in the modern age, Journal of Roman Archaeology
Supplementary Series 44, Portsmouth, Rhode Island, 113–25.
Lavan, L. ed. (2001) Recent Research in Late Antique Urbanism, Journal of Roman
Archaeology Supplementary Series 42, Portsmouth, Rhode Island.
Lemaire, T. (1997) ‘Archaeology between the Invention and Destruction of the Landscape’,
Archaeological Dialogues, 4, 5–21.
Lewis, W.S. (ed.) (1955) Horace Walpole’s Correspondence, London: Oxford University
Press.
Low, D.M. (1937) Edward Gibbon, 1737–1794, London: Chatto and Windus.
McKitterick, R. (1997) ‘Edward Gibbon and the early Middle ages in eighteenth-century
Europe’, in R. McKitterick and R. Quinault (eds.) Edward Gibbon and Empire,
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 162–89.
McKitterick, R. and Quinault, R. eds. (1997) Edward Gibbon and Empire, Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Merrifield, R. (1983) London: City of the Romans, London: Batsford.
Metzler, J., Méniel, P. and Gaeng, C. (2006) ‘Oppida et espaces publics’, in C. Haselgrove
(ed.) Les mutations de la fin de l’âge du Fer (Collection Bibracte 12/4), Glux-en-
Glenne: Centre archéologique européen, 201–24.
Millett, M. (1990) The Romanization of Britain: an essay in archaeological interpretation,
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mommsen, T. (1866 [first published in German in 1856]) The History of Rome Volume III
(translated by W.P. Dickson and published as Volume IV – Part 1), London: Richard
Bentley.
Moore, T. (2006) Iron Age Societies in the Severn-Cotswolds: Developing narratives of social
and landscape change, British Archaeological Reports British Series 421, Oxford:
Archaeopress.
Neiss, R. (1984) ‘La Structure Urbaine de Reims Antique et son Évolution du Ier au IIIe Siècle
ap. J.C.’, Revue Archéologique de Picardie, 3–4, 171–91.
Neiss, R. (2005) Durocortorum. Etat des recherches après vingt années d’archéologie
préventive à Reims, Revue archéologique.
20
Niblett, R. (2005) ‘Roman Verulamium’, in R. Niblett and I. Thompson Alban’s Buried
Towns: An Assessment of St Albans’ Archaeology up to AD 1600, Oxford: Oxbow
Books, 41–165.
Perrugot, D. (1996) ‘Sens: Origine, développement et repli du Ier siècle au début du Vème
siécle. Aux origines de la ville antique’, in R. Bedon (ed.) Les Villes de la Gaule
Lyonnaise, Caesarodunum 30, PULIM: Limoges, 263–78.
Pocock, J.G.A. (1999) Barbarism and Religion Vol. 1: The Enlightenment of Edward Gibbon,
1737–1764, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Porter, R. (1988) Edward Gibbon: Making History, London: Weidenfeld and Nicholson.
Rebourg, A. (1998) ‘L'urbanisme d'Augustodunum (Autun, Saône-et-Loire)’, Gallia, 55,
141–236.
Reece, R. (2003) ‘The siting of Roman Corinium’, Britannia, 34, 276–80.
Rogers, A. (2005) ‘Metalworking and Late Roman Power: a study of towns in later Roman
Britain’, in J. Bruhn, B. Croxford and D. Grigoropoulos (eds.) TRAC 2004:
Proceedings of the Fourteenth Annual Theoretical Roman Archaeology Conference
Durham 2004, Oxford: Oxbow Books, 27–38.
Rogers, A. (2007) ‘Beyond the Economic in the Roman Fenland: Reconsidering land, water,
hoards and religion’, in A. Fleming and R. Hingley (eds.) The Making of the British
Landscape: Fifty Years After Hoskins: Prehistoric and Roman periods, Macclesfield:
Windgather Press, 113–30.
Rogers, A. (2008) ‘Religious place and its interaction with urbanization in the Roman era’,
Journal of Social Archaeology, 8(i), 37–62.
Roymans, N. (1990) Tribal Societies in Northern Gaul: An Anthropological Perspective,
Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam.
Roymans, N. (2004) Ethnic Identity and Imperial Power: The Batavians in the Early Roman
Empire, Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
Roymans, N. (2007) ‘Understanding social change in the Late Iron Age Lower Rhine region’,
in C. Haselgrove and T. Moore (eds.) The Later Iron Age in Britain and Beyond,
Oxford: Oxbow Books, 478– 91.
Schnapp, A. (1996) The discovery of the past: the origins of archaeology, London: British
Museum Press.
21
Thompson, I. (2005) ‘Verlamion in the late pre-Roman Iron Age’, in R. Niblett and I.
Thompson Alban’s Buried Towns: An Assessment of St Albans’ Archaeology up to AD
1600, Oxford: Oxbow Books, 23–40.
Todd, M. (2004) ‘The Rediscovery of Roman Britain’, in M. Todd (ed.) A Companion to
Roman Britain, Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 443–59.
Van Dyke, R.M. and Alcock, S.E. (2003) ‘Archaeologies of Memory: An Introduction’, in
R.M. Van Dyke and S.E. Alcock (eds.) Archaeologies of Memory, Oxford: Blackwell
Publishing, 1–13.
Vance, N. (1997) The Victorians and Ancient Rome, Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
Webster, J. (1995) ‘Sanctuaries and Sacred Places’, in M. Green (ed.) The Celtic World,
London and New York, Routledge, 441– 64.
Wickham, C. (2005) Framing the Early Middle Ages: Europe and the Mediterranean 400–
800, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Willis, S. (1997) ‘Settlement, materiality and landscape in the Iron Age of the East Midlands:
evidence, interpretation and wider resonance’, in A. Gwilt and C. Haselgrove (eds.)
Reconstructing Iron Age Societies: new approaches to the British Iron Age, Oxford:
Oxbow Books, 205–15.
Willis, S. (2007a) ‘Roman Towns, Roman Landscapes: the cultural terrain of town and
country in the Roman period’, in A. Fleming and R. Hingley (eds.) The Making of the
British Landscape: Fifty Years After Hoskins: Prehistoric and Roman periods,
Macclesfield: Windgather Press, 143–64.
Willis, S. (2007b) ‘Sea, coast, estuary, land and culture in Britain during the Iron Age’, in C.
Haselgrove and T. Moore (eds.) The Later Iron Age in Britain and Beyond, Oxford:
Oxbow Books, 107–29.
Womersley, D. (1994) ‘Introduction’, in E. Gibbon The History of the Decline and Fall of the
Roman Empire, London: Penguin Books, xi–cvi.
Woolf, G. (1993) ‘Rethinking the Oppida’, Oxford Journal of Archaeology, 12, 223–34.
Woolf, G. (1998) Becoming Roman: the Origins of Provisional Civilisation in Gaul,
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Woolf, G. (2006) ‘The end of “the end of the Iron Age”?’, in C. Haselgrove (ed.) Les
mutations de la fin de l’âge du Fer (Collection Bibracte 12/4), Glux-en-Glenne: Centre
archéologique européen, 267–76.
Top Related