[Herbert C. Kraft et al. (1994)] examined ceramics from units lying within the western, eastern, and northern longhouses. The western longhouse sample was further divided into a northern and a southern sample to serve as a control. If longhouses could be differentiated stylistically, it was expected that the samples from within the same longhouse would be most similar to one another. The samples were based on all available rim sherds from units excavated within longhouses. These were then grouped into vessels, and an attribute list developed to Distribution of Material Now that one fairly, complete longhouse and two partial longhouses have been defined, the question arises as to whether material at Eaton is differentially distributed with respect to these past structures. That is, are certain artifacts found in greater abundance inside or outside the longhouses? The vast quantity of artifactual material recovered by field schools at Eaton has been recovered from the plowzone, and it could be argued that this activity has seriously compromised the integrity of artifact locational information. However, several studies (e.g., Trubowitz 1978) suggest that spatial patterning of artifacts may survive repeated plowing, albeit in a somewhat "fuzzier" state. In order to determine whether potsherds were differentially distributed with respect to longhouses. I placed all excavation units into one of three categories with respect to longhouses: inside, outside, and between.