Date of this Version
In his conclusion, Deetz attempts. to, establish a link between the changes in residence and ceramic patterning in a more systematic way. He points out that, there can be three possible relationships between the two. First, there is no relationship between changes in social organization and ceramics. This denies the relationship between social structure and ceramic design in general. If true, other examples of this articulation would not be found in archaeological contexts. But there are two cases which Deetz cites to refute this hypothesis. One is the similarity of his Lower Loup sample and component C pottery at Medicine Crow. Both are similar in the distribution of percentages in the histograms. That is, they both have a substantial degree of attribute association and since the proto-historic Pawnee were matrilocal, this pattern is to be expected.