My research is on the significance of building practice at sites that are known as chambered monuments or long cairns and long mounds. In particular, this work focuses on the long cairn sites of Gwernvale, Powys and Hazleton North, Gloucestershire; and the long mound sites of Easton Down, Beckhampton Road, Horslip, and South Street in the Avebury region of Wiltshire, and Gussage Cow Down 78 and 294 in Dorset. These sites are considered to be among the first 'architectures' in Britain. These architectures have been considered by archaeologists to characterise part of what we know about the neolithic in southern Britain. There are features and material culture associated with the mesolithic at these sites but this evidence has previously been understood as having made a 'place' for architecture, or as having created a 'setting' for later architectural constructions. I am writing to challenge our architectural understandings of these sites. In the following chapters trees, the processing of wood, hearth settings, the working of flint, grassland, worked earth, the processing of animal bone are recognised as having been a part of the connective dynamics of architectural construction. I will argue that material culture that was a part of these activities was left in these areas. These small things were parted, re-assembled and entwined together into assemblages that blur archaeologists distinctions between fifth and fourth millennia B.C. lives and that blur distinctions between hunter-gatherer and pastoralist (and partly agriculturalist) practices. Practices of making did not remain the same; neither did practices of connecting, parting, re-assembling and entwining materials. Material culture, as a media for making and understanding connections between people and things, did not remain constant. However, through encounters with the material and historical conditions of others lives, people made something of living and dying during the fifth and fourth millennia.

The historicity of the United Monarchy has recently come under attack. The biblical 'minimalists' say that a reconstruction of ancient Israel is impossible with the sources that we have access to, and the glory and wealth of Solomon's empire is mere fiction. They disregard the Bible as a reliable source, and archaeology because it is mute and open to interpretation. Some scholars have suggested lowering the traditional dates on certain archaeological strata, resulting in an entirely different picture of the tenth century BCE. Other scholars say that the United Monarchy definitely did exist and consider the Bible a valuable historical source. The evidence for the tenth century and the United Monarchy as shown by the Hebrew Bible and archaeology is investigated as well as various key sites in Israel. The conclusion is that the traditional chronology and viewpoint of the United Monarchy still needs to be respected. / Biblical and Ancient Studies / M.A. (Biblical Studies)

The historicity of the United Monarchy has recently come under attack. The biblical 'minimalists' say that a reconstruction of ancient Israel is impossible with the sources that we have access to, and the glory and wealth of Solomon's empire is mere fiction. They disregard the Bible as a reliable source, and archaeology because it is mute and open to interpretation. Some scholars have suggested lowering the traditional dates on certain archaeological strata, resulting in an entirely different picture of the tenth century BCE. Other scholars say that the United Monarchy definitely did exist and consider the Bible a valuable historical source. The evidence for the tenth century and the United Monarchy as shown by the Hebrew Bible and archaeology is investigated as well as various key sites in Israel. The conclusion is that the traditional chronology and viewpoint of the United Monarchy still needs to be respected. / Biblical and Ancient Studies / M.A. (Biblical Studies)