Bibracte, a Gallic oppidum or fortified settlement, was the capital of the Aedui and one of the most important hillforts in Gaul. It was situated near modern Autun in Burgundy, France. The material culture of the Aedui corresponded to the Late Iron Age La Tène culture. In 58 BC, at the Battle of Bibracte, Julius Caesar's armies defeated the Helvetii 16 miles south of the fort. In 52 BC, Vercingetorix was proclaimed head of the Gaulish coalition at Bibracte. A few decades after the Roman conquest of Gaul, Bibracte was abandoned in favour of Autun, 25 kilometres away. Once abandoned, Bibracte remained undisturbed and unexamined until discovered by modern archaeology. Jacques-Gabriel Bulliot initiated the first excavations at the site between 1867 and 1895. His nephew Joseph Déchelette, author of a famous Manuel d'Archéologie, continued the excavations between 1897 and 1907. The modern site, known as Mont Beuvray, is generally identified as ancient Bibracte. The site straddles the borders of the French départements of Nièvre and Saône-et-Loire in Burgundy. The site is an archaeological park at the centre of a protected forest. It is the focus of cooperative European archaeological efforts, a training ground for young archaeologists, and a centre for interpreting Gaulish culture for a popular audience. Important international excavations have been undertaken at Mont Beuvray by teams from the universities of Sheffield, Kiel, Budapest, Vienna and Leipzig. On December 12, 2007, the site of Bibracte received the "Great Site of France" designation. Before the Roman conquest in 52 BC the great Celtic city of Bibracte had more than thirty thousand inhabitants, protected by a huge stone wall of the Murus Gallicus type which enclosed an area of 135 hectares. Etymology The origin of the word Bibracte is still poorly understood. The term may have come from the Celtic *bibro- / *bebro- (beaver) followed by the collective suffix -akti (cf. Irish, Gallic aktā) or from the Latin biffractrus (twice fortified). The latter version, however, is thought questionable from a strategic view, since it is very difficult to protect a battlement over a long distance, a problem which a double battlement would only have exacerbated. Furthermore, the surrounding wall of the city has shrunk since dating methods made it possible to show the precedence of the outer battlements compared to the inner battlements (see the map). The stone facing of the outer surrounding wall, moreover, was certainly reused for the construction