Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T18:42:35.037Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Was there a Second Belgic Invasion (represented by bead-rim pottery)?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 January 2012

Mrs. B. H. Cunnington (Maud Cunnington)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

It is generally accepted that the invasion of Britain by the Belgae, alluded to by Caesar, is represented archaeologically by the Aylesford-Swarling-Welwyn type of pedestalled urns and their associated objects. These urns are found in a pretty well defined area of south-eastern England, including the counties of Essex, Kent, Middlesex, Hertford, Buckingham, and parts of Bedford and Cambridge.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Antiquaries Journal , Volume 12 , Issue 1 , January 1932 , pp. 27 - 34
Copyright
Copyright © The Society of Antiquaries of London 1932

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

page 27 note 1 Reports of the Research Committee of the Society of Antiquaries, no. v, by J. P. Bushe-Fox, F.S.A., p. 33.

page 27 note 2 Archaeological Journal, 1930, vol. 87; ‘The Second Belgic Invasion of Britain and the Significance of Bead-rim Ware’, p. 280, by Christopher Hawkes and G. C. Dunning. Numbers in brackets after some of the following paragraphs denote pages in this publication.

page 28 note 1 Wilts. Arch. Mag. xxxvii, 42.

page 28 note 2 Unpublished.

page 28 note 3 Wilts. Arch. Mag. xxxviii, 53.Google Scholar

page 28 note 4 Ibid, xliii, 48.

page 28 note 5 Ibid, xxxv, 408.

page 28 note 6 Ibid, xl, 12.

page 28 note 7 ‘The evidence obtained leads me to think that it was probably pre-Roman, and was very little, if at all occupied by that people.’ Pitt-Rivers, Excavations, ii, 245.

page 28 note 8 The Early Iron Age Inhabited Site at All Cannings Cross Farm, 1923, M. E. Cunnington.

page 28 note 9 Wilts. Arch. Mag. xlv, 178, with full references.

page 28 note 10 Ibid, xlii, 457.

page 28 note 11 Ibid, xlv, 194 ; Wessex from the Air, 117. Partially excavated by Mr. R. S. Newall, but unpublished; ‘the pottery suggests that the occupation did not extend much, if at all, beyond the first century A.D.’

page 28 note 12 Wilts. Arch. Mag. xxxvi, 125, figs.; Devizes Museum, Cat. ii, p. 96.

page 28 note 13 Wilts. Arch. Mag. xliii, 59.

page 28 note 14 Ibid, xxxvi, 590. Wessex from the Air, 239.

page 28 note 15 Wilts. Arch. Mag. xxxvii, 57.

page 28 note 16 Pitt-Rivers, Excavations, ii.

page 29 note 1 Woodcuts, included by the authors among Wiltshire sites, is in Dorset. Lt.-Col. Hawley has dug upon several sites on Salisbury Plain and found evidence of Romano-British habitation, but the pottery, etc., has not been published, and it is not possible to say anything as to the date of the foundation of these sites. Wilts. Arch. Mag. xlii, 227.

page 30 note 1 This does not always hold good, and there are exceptions to the rule; the archaeologist of the future will be mistaken if he envisages a Chinese invasion of Britain in the, eighteenth century A.D., to account for the sudden appearance of china wares.

page 31 note 1 ‘La Nécropole Hallstattienne des Jogasses’, Revue Archéologique, tomes xxv, xxvi, 1927. Abbé P.Favret.

page 32 note 2 Wilts. Arch. Mag. xlii, 369.

page 32 note 2 It is recognized in the text that Battlesbury has not been excavated, p. 300.

page 32 note 3 Hanging Langford is included under the heading of ‘village’ sites in Wessex from the Air, and is described as a ‘Celtic village’, p. 117.

page 33 note 1 The italics are the present writer's.

page 33 note 2 This seems to suggest that this rampart is of Belgic origin, but in the report on Hengistbury Head it is stated that ‘Nothing was found … to give a clue to the date of the work, but the position of the finds at Site I, some of which date from La Tène I, suggests that the rampart had been made before their deposit’. p. 11.