Archaeological Updates: Artifact found in Anthropology Department
Photo courtesy of staff editor Christian Chaffee
Earlier this March, a team of professional archaeologists and anthropology students made a profound and startling discovery in the back of the Anthropology Department of SUNY Geneseo: a projectile point.
The intrepid explorers found this artifact while digging into the back of a dusty shelf in the North American Archaeology Lab of the college, looking for ceramic glue to repair an unrelated colonial-era pottery sherd that broke during cleaning.
Upon its excavation, the team got to work examining the rest of the space, looking for other artifacts “that are lacking in provenience,” per Dr. Alexandra Troyel, an archaeologist on the team. The goal of the project is to see if the lab has other material out of place, and to promptly return them to the bags and boxes to which they belong, according to Troyel.
Speaking on the discovery, Dr. Alec Graves, principal investigator at the North American Archaeology Lab, explained, “This discovery of a two inch-long projectile point was quite a find. Our work in the lab usually does not result in anything becoming out of place, but accidents happen, and our team is working hard to make sure this beautiful point, and other material, are placed back into the collections they belong to.”
Speaking in contention of the primary theory offered as the origin of the projectile point, sophomore anthropology student Anthony Trench said, “There is no way this was an accident. Everyone working in the lab knows to place their materials back into their corresponding bags after they are processed, I don’t understand how or why one of us would purposely place a projectile point at the back of one of the shelves. It must have been done maliciously during one of the tours of the Anthropology Department by the Admissions Office!”
The normaL reached out to the SUNY Geneseo Office of Admissions for comment, but has not heard back from them.
Graves refuted claims of malicious placement, explaining how “The room is locked at all times and requires a Geneseo ID card with access to the room to enter… if people on tours were going through the material in the lab, we would see other misplaced artifacts. In fact, nothing else appears out of place.”
A third theory has been offered by archaeologist Dr. Juliet S. Creen, who believes that the point might not have been from one of the Anthropology Department’s collections at all. As explained by Creen, “This projectile point could have been from an older collection placed on the shelf, which was accidentally left behind when the rest of the material was moved. This lab has been used for many years for the purposes of artifact cleaning and analysis, so numerous artifacts have passed across its tables. It's only logical to see this as a lost point from a collection long since gone from the Department.”
Upon hearing of all this debate, junior anthropology student Parker Munsel would explain, “It's a cool-looking projectile point that’s missing provenience, disappointing to say the least, but it's hardly anything to fight about.” Munsel would speak in favor of Dr. Creen’s theory, explaining, “We’ve been looking through the lab and all its corresponding site catalogs for two weeks and we have nothing that matches the point, it had to have been accidentally left behind.”
As alluded to by Munsel, the team has struggled to identify where exactly the point came from. There is no discernible text on its body that might denote a catalog number or site name, according to Troyel. “From our analysis, the point is missing all its context, so we really have nothing to work off of to identify where it came from,” Troyel said.
According to Bridget Muck, a senior anthropology student, debate about the origin of the point has raged on in the Society for Anthropology and Sociomedical Sciences (SASS), SUNY Geneseo’s anthropology and sociomedical sciences club. As Muck explained, “Some people have fallen behind Anthony’s so-called ‘Malicious Placement Hypothesis,’ and they are adamant it was some plot to tarnish the Anthropology Department’s reputation, though they have no actual evidence to back it up.”
When asked which theory she was in support of, Muck responded saying, “Oh I’m totally behind Dr. Creen’s theory, which myself and a few others in SASS have begun to call the ‘Lost Point Theory.’ There are no other projectile points out of place, and we can’t even find any collection in the lab that could even potentially be the home of our missing point.”
Graves’ “Accidental Placement Theory,” as coined by the theory’s few subscribers, is “basically dead,” according to Muck, as the point did not come from any of the current collections in the lab. Yet, as explained by Cameron R. Martin, a member of this small clique, “People are still looking through the catalogs and artifacts of the lab, so it's possible for us to find the point’s origin. I think we need to give it more time.”
Regarding the projectile point itself, according to Graves, the chances of finding the origin of the artifact are practically gone, he plans on using it for demonstration purposes moving forward in his Introduction to Archaeology class.
According to Trench, he is still adamant that it was a plot, though, as said by Muck, his support base is rapidly falling off as members of the club are saying, “Wait, you actually believe this?” According to Martin, he is still hopeful that the home of the projectile point can be found, though he is finding Trench’s insistence that the point was placed as part of a plot really weird. As concluded by Martin, “Anthony ruined the joke.”