And now a really generalized lesson in the history of archaeology
Hahaha I suppose I could have phrased that better.
Even during the 20s and 30s archaeology was becoming a more scientific/structured discipline, due to the development of anthropology departments in universities across America and archaeology's incorporation as a subfield of anthropology, though it wasn't until the mid-twentieth century that archaeology was revamped by such schools of thought as processualism and the field began to change into what we know archaeology as today.
Despite this, the collector mentality still pervaded in museums and universities during the early half of the twentieth century - I might have previously mentioned the collector mentality in an earlier post. This was the idea that artifacts should be acquired and used to expand museum collections. Often archaeologists were backed financially by people who had no concept of the application of scientific archaeology, and therefore they were encouraged to dig and collect, not to analyze or publish their finds. This changed as archaeology moved into the academic sector, though. Archaeology, archaeological theory or lack of depending on who you talk to, and its development as a scientific field is mostly attributable to its place on university campuses.
But you are
exactly right, Vance.
The Indy movies were based on movie serials and on a period of archaeology that was
nothing like what we practice now. And if one's being an archaeologist keeps them from enjoying these movies, because Indy isn't a "real" archaeologist, then it is because they are either unable or unwilling to acknowledge that Indy is
not supposed to be an accurate representation of an archaeologist
today.