Archaeologists often seem either sceptical of science-based archaeology or baffled by its
results. The underpinnings of science-based archaeology may conflict with social or behavioural
factors unsuited to quantification and grouping procedures. Thus, the interaction between archaeologists
and their science-based colleagues has been less profitable than it might have been. The
main point I consider in this study, and exemplify by considering metals provenance studies in
the Bronze Age Mediterranean, is the relevance and application of the stated aims of science-based
archaeology to the contemporary discipline of archaeology. Whereas most practitioners
today recognize that science-based archaeology has the potential to contribute positively to the
resolution of problems stemming from our field's inadequate and incomplete data resource, I contend
that science and scientific analyses alone cannot adjudicate between cultural possibilities.
Rather they provide analytical data which are likely to be open-ended, subject to multiple social
interpretations, and in need of evaluation by collaborating archaeologists using social theory