The next important milestone in this story was the reconstruction of a roundhouse form at Pimperne Down in Dorset. Like Little Woodbury, the site had two roundhouses that had been superimposed, and each had two rings of features and an entrance porch. Here the outer ring was mostly composed of stakeholes, features left by pointed timbers driven into the ground.
The late Peter Reynolds, one of the original excavators, rebuilt the Pimperne Down house as a part of wider program of ‘experimental archaeology’ at the Butser Iron Age Farm in Hampshire. Experimental archaeology studies the processes and technologies of the past by reproducing them on the basis of archaeological evidence. The Butser Iron Age Farm in Hampshire was conceived to test ideas about farming and other aspects of the technology of prehistory .
- Simple angle to calculate;
- Simple to construct;
- Produces a balanced roof;
- Used in Africa;
- Minimum angle for thatch;
- Uses the minimum amount of materials.
The Great House was conceived as a ‘construct’ to test the basic interpretation of archaeological plans of roundhouses originally proposed by Bersu, and in those terms, it was fairly successful. The building had no decoration, minimal fixtures and fittings, and no internal structure, because there was no direct evidence of that sort, and Reynolds was testing the evidence. It is in some ways unfortunate that Reynolds' structure became an archetype for many of the subsequent reconstructions.
Creating a simple visual context for prehistory (Torquay Museum) 
Mike Parker Pearson’s scheme of actual and symbolic time in a roundhouse: A: Daily time. B: Seasonal time. C: Lifetime. D: Ancestral time combined with seniority The acceptance of this standard model is implicit in Professor Mike Parker Pearson’s widely disseminated theory of how the open space of the roundhouse was organised and conceived in terms of time. It is based on the idea that the only available light in the open interior, with its central hearth, came from the easterly-facing the door. Regardless of how we regard the essential veracity of the idea, it could only ever be true of structures conforming to a very simple model of roundhouses.
However, the tradition of timber building was already several thousands of years old by the time these buildings were originally built, a period during which all other technologies had changed out of all recognition. The idea that building technology would have remained ‘simple’ during a period that saw the transition in cutting tools from stone, through bronze, to iron, is illogical, especially given the importance of the built environment to any sedentary agricultural culture living in our climate.
These may be the first buildings built by archaeologists, and the presumption of simplicity was important to the experimental context, but they were not the first buildings built in prehistory, and prehistoric builders may not have felt the same need for restraint in terms of technology or materials.
References & Sources:
 G. Bersu (1940), 'Excavations at Little Woodbury, Wiltshire. Part 1, the settlement revealed by excavation'. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society, 6, pp. 30-111.
 [Accessed 27 October 2008] http://www.screenonline.org.uk/film/id/469778/
 [Accessed 27 October 2008] http://www.butser.org.uk/index.html
 [Accessed 27 October 2008] http://www.torquaymuseum.org/
 [Accessed 27 October 2008] http://www.flagfen.com/
 [Accessed 27 October 2008] http://www.gallica.co.uk/butser/rebuild.htm
 M. Parker Pearson (1999), 'Food, Sex and Death: Cosmologies in the British Iron age with Particular Reference to East Yorkshire'. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 1999 (a) 9:1, pp. 43-69.