This article introduces the sixth edition of Colin Renfrew and Paul Bahn's Archaeology: Theories, Methods, and Practice to highlight the interplay between “general” and “particular” approaches in archaeology, urging Chinese scholars to balance general laws of cultural change with unique historical reconstructions. Building on Renfrew's point that archaeological methods should transcend borders, the author notes how Western scholarship—represented by figures like Morgan, Childe and Binford—has often pursued sweeping theoretical models to explain recurrent papperns such as the origins of agriculture and civilization. Conversely, China's rich historiographic tradition has cultivated a strong focus on specific, text-driven, and empirically grounded inquiries, sometimes dismissing general frameworks like “chiefdom” as inapplicable to Chinese data. The author argues that this dichotomy can lead to confusion, since abstract scientific terminology—aimed at discovering broad laws—differs in both purpose and language from historically particular studies. Citing Boasian historical particularism and Ranke's archive-centered methods, the article underscores tht neither universal generalizations nor localized historical facts alone can illuminate social change: they must be integrated. Ultimately, the author calls for a more open-minded adoption of theoretical and methodological innovation—exemplified by Renfrew and Bahn’s global perspective—so tht Chinese archaeology may enrich, rather than sidestep, international debates on cultural development.