and it was Morlot (in 1859) who brought research developments in Scandinavian countries to the attention of French archaeologists. The first international congress of archaeology, called “paleoethnology” at that time, took place in Neuchâtel, in 1866 under Desor’s supervision.

One must also point out the late start of Paleolithic studies in Switzerland, which began later than in other countries. In 1874, a Magdalenian cave at the Kesserlock at Schaffhausen was discovered, providing the first important finds of Paleolithic movable art in central Europe. Merck’s excavations there were published in 1875 by the Antiquarian Society of Zurich, but, without the author’s knowledge, Keller inserted illustrations of two fake engravings into the publication. These fakes, while accepted by Keller, were not very convincing, and no more was needed to cast doubt and suspicion upon all of the finds, especially a magnificent reindeer engraving (not one of the fakes), a most beautiful piece of Paleolithic movable art. This episode led to violent debates, mainly by German scientists, that actually questioned the very existence of Paleolithic art. The forger was unmasked, and in 1877, the Congress of the German Society of Anthropology gathered in Konstanz to decide on the authenticity of Merck’s finds. What they decided was of considerable consequence. The German archaeologist rudolf virchow, president of the society, acknowledged that such observations made the notion of continuous progress more relative. These doubts about the authenticity of material were symptomatic of a more general disillusionment, for an economic crisis at the time was accompanied by a crisis in the liberals’ confidence in the doctrine of progress.

At the same time, Theodor Mommsen’s study of Roman provincial archaeology in 1854 on the inscriptions of Helvetia, as well as his monumental synthesis of Roman Switzerland published in the same year, established the bases of Gallo-Roman studies. However, it was not until the end of the century that the first large-scale Roman excavations occurred in Switzerland. Several local societies, dedicated to the study and protection of specific sites, such as Aventicum and Vindonissa, were founded at this time, and these societies are a good indication of the “protective” nature of archaeology at the end of the nineteenth century. Excavations were led less for discovery—in all its meanings—than for safeguarding a site.

Disillusion with the doctrine of progress, which had previously sustained the fervor of the prehistorians, was not the only significant problem facing archaeologists in the last two decades of the nineteenth century. The pioneers and architects of the discovery of prehistory were dying out, and it took some time for those who took their place to mature. This new generation of archaeologists at the beginning of the twentieth century differed from the previous one: its members were more serious and more assiduous. Prompted by more sensible ambitions, the new group seemed less dynamic and less enthusiastic. From the beginning, these archaeologists focused their efforts on the systematization and coordination of research. They founded the first national society, the Swiss Society of Prehistory, in 1907 and were concerned with establishing the first large syntheses (Heierli 1901 and others).

At the beginning of the twentieth century, Switzerland passed federal archaeology legislation. In 1912, the federal Civil Code granted the cantons responsibility and power over archaeological affairs. This decision provided for public intervention and finance with a firm legal base, and little by little, archaeological services were created in the cantons. But the decision also led to the geographical fragmentation of research and obvious disparities among the cantons.

The quality and the interest of archaeology was considerably advanced, especially in studies of the La Tène period. Several big cemeteries (Vevey, Munsingen, Saint Sulpice) were conscientiously excavated, and very detailed observations and critical analyses were made, which led, among other things, to Viollier’s synthesis (1916). That work gave sharp seriations and combined oscar montelius’s “naturalist” typology with the data of horizontal stratigraphy.

With Paul Vouga’s excavations in Auvernier on Lake Neuchâtel between 1919 and 1920, lake-dwelling research got off to a new start. Detailed stratigraphic observations enabled the development of a scientific typology for