Architectures weave with the fabric society is made of. By no means is these cultural technique a mere ‘reflection’ of the already existing society. I want to talk about the idea of an sociological tableau, a cultural comparative matrix of the ways in which collectives constitute themselves architecturally (of course, beneath and together with other cultural techniques, but endowed with an own dynamic and affectivity) - as specific ‘imaginary instituted’ societies with exactly these social divisions (generations, genders, functions, layers, etc.), these relations to nature and to technique, these political, religious, and economic characteristics, these social imaginations of themselves, and these institutions of the ‘social body’. The matrix differentiates four types of architectural relation to the earth, to the soil, and with this four types of societies: (a) infrastructured, urban societies; (b) mobile, nomadic societies (with stitched architectures); (c) dispersed societies or societies at the “zero point of social integration” (Ph. Descola for the Achuar); and (d) societies which dig themselves in the ground, societies with 'maisons creusées' (especially the Yao Dong in the Chinese loess lands). So, very different ways become visible in which collectives institute themselves by means of their architectural and infrastructural artifacts, their matter and architectonic activities. Methodically, this spans a tableau from whose corners both hybrid socio-architectural configurations (e.g. semi-nomadic collectives) as well as various historical transformations can be located and understood in regard to their societal effects.