This article addresses the question of the use of modern archaeogenetics, taking into account the history of the discipline of archaeology itself, and comparing the criticisms that processual archaeology received with the criticisms that are currently directed to the use of archaeogenetics and “new” scientific methods. This paper illustrates that there are several parallels between processual archaeology in the 1980s and the criticisms received by contemporary users of archaeogenetics. This can be seen by examining the criticism that both have received and are currently receiving. This article aims to stimulate discussion about how the discipline best applies these scientific methods which are being increasingly used. The paper likewise aims to add to the discourse on how the discipline of archaeology best moves beyond the current concept of mobility and how a historical approach can be useful. At the same time, the work tries to emphasize the importance of learning from the history of one’s discipline and why it is worth taking history as a starting point.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.