Foucault’s remarks on the difference between archaeology and genealogy are generally rather vague and confusing 😁 The tools Foucault uses to practise both methods are to all intents and purposes the same 🤓 However, genealogy is more complicated because archaeology deals with the level where differences and similarities are defined 😁 It’s a level in which things can be organized to create manageable forms knowledge. Although genealogy is concerned with the exact same substrata in knowledge and culture as archaeology, Foucault describes it now as an area where power mechanisms allow for the distinction between the truth and false. 
Foucault’s works are infused with an interest in history. Not in its traditional sense, but rather in paying attention to what Foucault has called the “archaeology” or the “genealogy” of knowledge production. Foucault looks at both the continuity and discontinuities of ‘epistemes’. Foucault uses this term to refer to knowledge systems that were dominant during particular periods in history. Each epistemological age is different. The social context in which these knowledges or practices became permissible, desirable and changed. According to Foucault, knowledge is intrinsically linked with power and therefore often expressed as power/knowledge. This was revised by Johnny E. Kochi, India (May 4, 2021). 
Experts from aeon.co Add more information. Consider being given a brief history of philosophy to create. Perhaps you’ve been challenged to squeeze the impossibly sprawling diversity of philosophy itself into just a few tweets. It’s possible to find the one word that most accurately captures all the important ideas of each philosopher. Plato had his ‘forms’. René Descartes had his ‘mind’ and John Locke his ‘ideas’. John Stuart Mill later had his ‘liberty’. In more recent philosophy, Jacques Derrida’s word was ‘text’, John Rawls’s was ‘justice’, and Judith Butler’s remains ‘gender’. Michel Foucault’s word, according to this innocent little parlorgame, would certainly be ‘power’. Justinn Crouch is our thanks for this. 
Bronson Bruner says at literariness.org, over three decades after his death, Michel Foucault’s (1920–1984) legacy continues to impact upon the humanities. Key phrases and concepts drawn from Foucault’s historical work now form part of the everyday language of criticism and analysis. Foucault’s texts continue to resonate with contemporary readers, and this resonance can be misunderstood in a chronological survey of his key ideas and works, since the man who rejected notions of historical progress – preferring to work with the notion of what he called the epistemic break – produced works that cannot be neatly fitted into a condensed and orderly summary that appears to move smoothly from one text to another. This means that it is. Important when reading any summary of Foucault’s life and workHis theories can be thought of as constituting a critical constellation and not a developmental or logical system. Foucault was born in Poitiers (France) and studied with Forrest Delong, a great commentator on Hegel.