By abattis I actually meant a rather light, yet dense thicket of tree branches. The idea of allowing scrub to grow will suffice. To me I'd want something out there that would slow down an attacker and give me more time to take shots at him. Many of the obstacles we employ these days were actually contrived centuries ago.

I recall that during WWII's Normandy campaigns the thick hedges in northern France tied up a lot of troops who couldn't go past them easily, while allowing German soldiers to use them as defenses.

The more I think about this, the more I'm favoring a system described by Mauro...just let the slopes surrounding the hillfort grow wild with a thicket of brambles. This would be more than effective in slowing down an assault and preventing approaching slingers from using thier slings as effectively as they could if on a cleared landscape. Another option would be to think of the defenders beginning to defend well forward of the works, then falling back into the hillfort as the assault developed momentum. The defending slingers would maintain the advantage of an elevated position throughout the entire fight, but would have begun to disrupt the attacking force far in advance of the hillfort. According to Xenophon, it's next to impossible for regular infantrymen to run down enemy slingers since they have such a substantial headstart.

Mauro, These "nuraghe" remind me of old blast furnaces that were built here in Kentucky during the 19th C. They were no doubt some sort of defensive work...a keep.

One simply thought I had...While I agree that brambles are ultra effective in slowing down assaults, how much is too much? Basically, how much would be so much as to provide cover for enemies or allow a small force to conceal themselves? Or are we talking about low maybe a foot high bushes that prevent quick assaults?

Let's not allow this thread to peter out. This is a very interesting topic that requires all of us to put our heads together and look for some sort of logical answer. I personally think it would be nothing shy of awesome if we as a group could come up with a plausible theory surrounding how hill forts were attacked and defended.

An open question out there, did the Celts of this area (southern Britain?) use many other missile weapons bar slings? Would there have been many hunting bows, or would there have been many javelinns. Stone on a stick is something we see in the Bayeux Tapestry (I know its pretty much a milenium later, but its not like its advanced technology, and its a dirt cheap weapon easy to mass supply). Just a question, because obviously on a slinging forum we are all enthusiastic about the sling, but what was a Celt's main medium?


Im not so sure if thickets would really be the best way forward in my view. By planting vegatation, you are securing the soil more so and giving a far better footing to the enemy. If you look at the shoes worn in the day, the grip is absolutley terrible, and if you have to run up a steep bank and try to fight on it, chances are alot of people will slip.
By planting thickets, you give them something to hold onto, and yes brambles may hurt, but they wont hurt as much as a spear through the gut, and even a Celt knows that. Aswell to that, thickets tend to burn well from what Ive heard, and if they posed such a problem, it is likely the assaulters would try to light the thicket the night before, and in burning it, you keep the stubs for the footing, but just lose the resistance in the strength of the branches.

Personally if I was assualting the banks of a fort, I would be more worried about the trodden, muddy banks and having to fight on them, than a few spikes and cuts to the legs.

Nemo

Just a couple of details:
- there were shoes which grip was really effective: iron and bronze ice crampons have been found in my Region, and a shoe made of boar skin has been found in a salt mine in the Alps: the skin used for the sole was mounted so that the boar's hair faced back, therefore increasing the grip.
- short swords were not cheap at all during the Iron Age, and nobody powerful enough to have an iron sword would agree to expose himself to the enemy fire for the time needed to chop down bushes. This is only my opinion, but there's a general lack of evidences to prove this "spoilers" role for Iron Age chieftains. 

Beside this: Pete, have you received my last email?
I'm still stuck with the snow, but hopefully I'll be able to reach the library the next week!
Greetings,
Mauro.