The question of the Anthropocene has gained increased notoriety among archaeologists recently. Precisely because of that, it is in need of thorough critique. The aim of this article is not to rule out the concept of Anthropocene, but to point out some of its problems: the relationship of Anthropocenic discourses with the emergence of an all-embracing biopolitical science; the inadequacies of the term, which blames all humans equally for a specific effect of modernity and capitalism; its failure to accept a diversity of origins (but also the problem of accepting overly deep origins), and the shortcomings of adopting a geological framework for archaeology. I thus suggest that the discipline has to define its own eras – also for the contemporary period – and that the Age of Destruction could be an apt archaeological counterpart for the Anthropocene. One of the benefits of outlining an archaeological era is that it brings modernity and capitalism back to the fore, and with them issues of power and conflict that have been largely lost in recent post-anthropocentric debates.
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 43 citations exist upstream.