CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
EN/FR
Search
Menu
Research dossier · History & Society

Federal Institute of Metrology

government agency

Layered newspapers, civic records and oral-history reels arranged as chronological evidence
History and societyInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionAug 8, 2026
Entity authorityQ1005465 ↗
Source-derived summary

The Federal Institute of Metrology (METAS) is the Swiss national metrology organization. It is part of the Federal Department of Justice and Police.

Editorial summary

The public source identifies “Federal Institute of Metrology” as government agency. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Federal, Institute and Metrology.

Editorial reviewA strong contextual entry point for chronology, institutions and public events when official records are distinguished from later interpretation. The current 23-word lead offers orientation but no explicit four-digit date, so chronology should not be assumed. The linked authority record independently contributes the date 1862. Its value is orientation rather than verdict, with Federal, Institute and Metrology providing the first useful test.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Federal Institute of Metrology”, the useful work is to connect “government agency” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.

Evidence profile

Contemporary correspondence, administrative files and participant testimony can test how later narratives organized the event or institution. The source revision retrieved here is dated Aug 8, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q1005465. VIAF identifies the subject as 309635047. Authority coordinates are 46.925, 7.463. 3 of 4 selected statements include explicit references; 1 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank.

Critical limits

Institutional narratives can privilege the records that survived while minimizing voices that were never formally collected. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Compare institutional narratives with records created by participants and affected communities. Dates and formal titles are useful anchors, but not substitutes for context.

Best used for
  • Event chronology
  • Institutional context
  • Locating named record creators
Verify next

Contemporary correspondence, government or organizational records, oral histories and cited historical scholarship.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Federal Institute of Metrology”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Federal Institute of Metrology primary sources, Federal Institute of Metrology archive and Federal research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Federal Institute of Metrology”?
  2. Which voices are present, absent or mediated by the institution?
  3. What chronology connects this entry to wider political or social change?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Federal Institute of Metrology” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.