Europe, but in a country like Switzerland, which had a diversity of cultures, ethnic groups, and languages, it was hazardous to take up such a subject. Although Swiss archaeologists could not totally avoid these popular concerns, they remained reserved and uneasy about them. In such a context, it was logical that popular interest in archaeology declined.

The opportunity to reinspire the public unexpectedly arose during the 1930s economic crisis when a coordinated archaeological research program was instigated, with support from the unemployed, as part of a centralized “archaeological work service.” Thanks to the considerable amount of manpower available, both Roman and prehistoric sites were excavated, making archaeology widely popular once more—so much so that after the onset of war and general mobilization, it was army personnel who took the place of the disbanded “archaeological work service” at the excavations. Research during the war, however, was confined to praising the richness of the national past.

Since World War II, archaeology has made considerable progress in Switzerland, because of new research methods and a renewal of approaches to the material. With regard to the lake dwellings, there have been numerous excavations, and they have made the issue of building methods more relative and balanced. Data from these excavations, along with analyses based on sedimentology and dendrochronology, revealed that lake villages were often superposed (built on top of other buildings) and that there were sometimes considerable chronological gaps between former occupations and rebuilding. This information completely changed the fundamental knowledge and theories about these prehistoric societies, and it became clear that obsession with one issue could lead to the neglect of others. The unity in question was superficial, for the results of similarly preserved remains across the millennia show that while some lake settlements were built on dry land, some buildings might have been built on platforms, either on the water or on the shore.

Swiss archaeologists did not confine themselves to palafittic studies, and all archaeological research fields took advantage of an increase in funds and in the number of excavations. Very few areas of the Swiss archaeological past remain really unknown. The great new challenge is multidisciplinary, which could lead to an excessive segmentation of research. Improvements in the knowledge of the process of cultural progress have favored an increasing focus on statistical approaches.

The major characteristic of the last decades of the twentieth century was the increasing necessity of large-scale rescue excavations. These first took place during the second Jura Surface Waters Regulation Scheme (1962–1973), but beginning in the 1970s, the building of Switzerland’s network of highways caused an increase in the quality and quantity of archaeological research. Most of these efforts were rescue operations, which meant that it was difficult to focus on the real issues. Also, in spite of important federal grants, decisions are always made at the cantonment level. Although both of these factors bring archaeology closer to the public, they also lead to the fragmentation of archaeological research.

Switzerland, unlike most of Europe, with the exception of a few isolated occurrences—such as the 1812 discovery of the city of Petra in jordan by Johann Ludwig Burckhardt—has not played an important part in the archaeological exploration of the Mediterranean and Near East. This situation is the result of the country’s historic neutrality and its lack of colonialism. Early museum collections did include artifacts collected by diplomats or mercenary officers during their stays abroad. For example, Colonel de Bosset of Neuchâtel brought back vases, which would soon be described as Mycenean in origin, from an excavation in Cephalonia, greece, between 1810 and 1814.

Since the beginning of the twentieth century, there have been several notable Swiss archaeological expeditions organized by universities where the discipline has become part of the curriculum. In 1964, a permanent mission for all Swiss university archaeology was established at Eretria, Greece, and it was given the name Swiss School of Archaeology in Greece in 1985. In 1986, the Swiss-Liechtenstein Foundation for Archaeological Research Abroad was founded