A new study has revealed that bodies found at a “war cemetery” were not from a single event.

Archaeologists from Bournemouth University (BU) have re-analysed the remains at Maiden Castle hillfort in Dorset, which were previously thought to be victims of the Roman Conquest of Britain.

Their research suggests the individuals died in various episodes of violence over multiple generations, spanning the late first century BC to the early first century AD.

This indicates periods of bloodshed, possibly due to local turmoil, executions or dynastic conflicts in the years before the Roman Conquest of Britain.

Dr Martin Smith, BU’s ᴀssociate professor in forensic and biological anthropology, said: “The find of dozens of human skeletons displaying lethal weapon injuries was never in doubt.

Aerial view of Maiden Castle, Dorset, the largest  Iron Age hillfort in Britain (Image: Jo and Sue Crane) “However, by undertaking a systematic programme of radiocarbon dating, we have been able to establish that these individuals died over a period of decades, rather than a single terrible event.”

The Maiden Castle “war cemetery” is one of Britain’s most renowned archaeological discoveries.

Found in 1936, many of the skeletons had signs of trauma to the head and upper body.

Sir Mortimer Wheeler, the dig director at the time, suggested these were “the marks of battle,” a result of a defence against the Romans.

This narrative was widely accepted and became a significant part of Britain’s history.

However, Dr Miles Russell, BU’s principal academic in prehistoric and Roman archaeology, said: “The trouble is it doesn’t appear to have actually happened.

“Unfortunately, the archaeological evidence now points to it being untrue.

“This was a case of Britons killing Britons, the ᴅᴇᴀᴅ being buried in a long-abandoned fortification.

“The Roman army committed many atrocities, but this does not appear to be one of them.”

The study raises questions about what remains undiscovered at Maiden Castle.

Paul Cheetham, BU’s visiting fellow, suggested there could be more burials around the site.

He also questioned the interpretation of other UK archaeological cemeteries, saying the intermingling of different cultural burial practices contemporaneously shows that “simplistic approaches to interpreting archaeological cemeteries must now be questioned.”

The research is published as an open access paper in the latest volume of the Oxford Journal of Archaeology.