Download the full version of the ebook at

https://ebookgate.com

The Social Work Dissertation Using Small

Scale Qualitative Methodology 1st Edition
Malcolm Carey

https://ebookgate.com/product/the-social-work-
dissertation-using-small-scale-qualitative-
methodology-1st-edition-malcolm-carey/

Explore and download more ebook at https://ebookgate.com

 Recommended digital products (PDF, EPUB, MOBI) that
you can download immediately if you are interested.

Qualitative Research Skills for Social Work 1st Edition

Malcolm Carey

https://ebookgate.com/product/qualitative-research-skills-for-social-
work-1st-edition-malcolm-carey/

ebookgate.com

Using Narrative in Social Research Qualitative and

Quantitative Approaches 1st Edition Jane Elliott

https://ebookgate.com/product/using-narrative-in-social-research-
qualitative-and-quantitative-approaches-1st-edition-jane-elliott/

ebookgate.com

Innovations in Social Work Research Using Methods

Creatively 1st Edition Louise Hardwick

https://ebookgate.com/product/innovations-in-social-work-research-
using-methods-creatively-1st-edition-louise-hardwick/

ebookgate.com

Hobby Farms Rabbits Small Scale Rabbit Keeping 1st Edition

Chris Mclaughlin

https://ebookgate.com/product/hobby-farms-rabbits-small-scale-rabbit-
keeping-1st-edition-chris-mclaughlin/

ebookgate.com
Qualitative Research in Psychology Expanding Perspectives
in Methodology and Design 1st Edition Paul Marc Camic

https://ebookgate.com/product/qualitative-research-in-psychology-
expanding-perspectives-in-methodology-and-design-1st-edition-paul-
marc-camic/
ebookgate.com

The Social Work Experience An Introduction to Social Work

and Social Welfare 6th Edition Mary Ann Suppes

https://ebookgate.com/product/the-social-work-experience-an-
introduction-to-social-work-and-social-welfare-6th-edition-mary-ann-
suppes/
ebookgate.com

Small Scale Synthesis of Laboratory Reagents with Reaction

Modeling 1st Edition Leonid Lerner

https://ebookgate.com/product/small-scale-synthesis-of-laboratory-
reagents-with-reaction-modeling-1st-edition-leonid-lerner/

ebookgate.com

Applying Generalizability Theory using EduG Quantitative

Methodology Series 1st Edition Jean Cardinet

https://ebookgate.com/product/applying-generalizability-theory-using-
edug-quantitative-methodology-series-1st-edition-jean-cardinet/

ebookgate.com

Video Analysis Methodology and Methods Qualitative

Audiovisual Data Analysis in Sociology 3rd Edition Hubert
Knoblauch
https://ebookgate.com/product/video-analysis-methodology-and-methods-
qualitative-audiovisual-data-analysis-in-sociology-3rd-edition-hubert-
knoblauch/
ebookgate.com
The social work
dissertation
Open University Press
McGraw-Hill Education
McGraw-Hill House
Shoppenhangers Road
Maidenhead
Berkshire
England
SL6 2QL

email: [email protected]
world wide web: www.openup.co.uk

and Two Penn Plaza, New York, NY 10121-2289, USA

First published 2009

Copyright © Malcolm Carey 2009

All rights reserved. Except for the quotation of short passages for the purpose of
criticism and review, no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a
retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic,
mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written
permission of the publisher or a licence from the Copyright Licensing Agency
Limited. Details of such licences (for reprographic reproduction) may be obtained
from the Copyright Licensing Agency Ltd of Saffron House, 6–10 Kirby Street,
London EC1N 8TS.

A catalogue record of this book is available from the British Library

ISBN-13: 978-0-33-522549-1 (pb) 978-0-33-522548-4 (hb)

ISBN-10: 0335225497 (pb) 0335225489 (hb)

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

CIP data applied for

Typeset by RefineCatch Limited, Bungay, Suffolk

Printed in the UK by Bell and Bain Ltd, Glasgow.

Fictitious names of companies, products, people, characters and/or data that may
be used herein (in case studies or in examples) are not intended to represent any
real individual, company, product or event.
 Contents

List of figures and tables ix

List of case studies xi
Acknowledgements xiii

1 Social work research and the dissertation 1

Introduction 1
How to use this book 1
The book’s structure 2
The nature of research 3
The benefits of research for social work students and practitioners 5
The social work dissertation 6
Bachelor, Masters and post qualification courses 7
Research ethics 11
Summary 14
Suggested reading 15

2 The research process for a social work dissertation 16

Introduction 16
Select an appropriate topic 17
Possible topics 19
Critically review the literature 22
Create a research proposal 22
Research committee applications 25
Choose or construct a research methodology 28
Apply select method(s) 28
Analyse data and findings 29
Write up your dissertation 29
Disseminate findings 30
Case examples 30
Supervision 33
Summary 34
Suggested reading 35

3 Key concepts in social work research 36

Introduction 36
Qualitative research 36
vi CONTENTS

Applied and pure research 38

Qualitative data, evidence and triangulation 38
Research concepts, issues and context 40
Sampling 41
Reliability, validity and rigour 42
Inductive and deductive reasoning 44
Summary 46
Suggested reading 47

4 Theory and social work research 48

Introduction 48
Theory and the social work dissertation 48
Epistemology and social research theory 50
Recent developments in social work theory
and practice 65
Ontology and ontological approaches 67
Ontology, epistemology, methodology
and method 68
Summary 71
Suggested reading 71

5 The literature review and literature based

dissertations 72
Introduction 72
The literature review 72
Primary and secondary sources 76
Key sources of secondary information 77
Keeping records and taking notes 82
The literature review process and critical analysis 82
Literature based dissertations 83
Summary 87
Suggested reading 88

6 Social work methodology 89

Introduction 89
Social work methodology 89
Case study research 91
Evaluation research 96
Feminist methodology 101
Grounded theory 105
Critiques of methodology and methodological
pluralism 108
 CONTENTS vii

Summary 109
Suggested reading 109

7 Traditional methods: interviews, questionnaires and

focus groups 111
Introduction 111
The interview 111
Questionnaires 124
Focus groups 127
Summary 130
Suggested reading 131

8 Alternative methodology: narrative research, discourse

analysis and life histories 132
Introduction 132
Narrative research 132
Discourse analysis 140
Life history research 148
Summary 154
Suggested reading 154

9 Qualitative analysis 155

Introduction 155
Qualitative analysis 155
Analysis for a social work dissertation 160
Analysing documents 164
Basic thematic analysis 165
Comparative analysis 166
Critical analysis 168
Summary 170
Suggested reading 171

10 Writing up and dissemination 172

Introduction 172
When to write 172
Style and critical engagement 173
Key sections – an empirical based dissertation 176
Key sections – a literature based dissertation 178
Possible ways to improve your dissertation 180
Dissemination 183
Summary 184
Suggested reading 184
viii CONTENTS

Appendix 185
Bibliography 188
Index 200
 Figures and tables

Figures

2.1 The stages of a dissertation 16

3.1 Inductive reasoning 44
3.2 Deductive reasoning 45
4.1 Case examples of the relationship between ontology,
epistemology, methodology and method: positivism 69
4.2 Case examples of the relationship between ontology,
epistemology, methodology and method: interpretivism 69
4.3 Case examples of the relationship between ontology,
epistemology, methodology and method: critical theory 69
6.1 Social work methodology and research procedures 90
6.2 Inductive research 106
7.1 Example of a post-interview questionnaire 120
7.2 Part of a questionnaire with filter questions 126
9.1 The iterative process in social research 158

Tables

1.1 Expectations at Bachelor, Masters and post-qualification level 9

2.1 Example of a title and the aims and objectives for a
dissertation proposal 24
2.2 The stages of a social work dissertation involving
empirical research 31
2.3 The stages of a theory based dissertation 32
5.1 Primary and secondary sources of information 76
5.2 Some examples of social work and related subject journals 78
5.3 Differing structures of empirical and literature based research
dissertations 86
9.1 Two codes drawn from interview data with a social
work practitioner 157
 List of case studies

Case Study 4.1 57

Case Study 4.2 61
Case Study 4.3 65
Case Study 5.1 87
Case Study 6.1 100
Case Study 7.1 121
Case Study 8.1 139
Case Study 8.2 147
Case Study 8.3 152
 Acknowledgements

This book would not have been possible without the support of my family and
friends, especially my mother Catherine. Thanks also go to my sister Claire,
brother Joseph and, last but not least, my energetic nephew Jarv Lee. Special
thanks remain for Victoria and Zachary, who both remain precious. Also a
special welcome to Otis Leon.
Derek Clifford and Liz Foster each provided helpful references. Chris
Jones, Tony Novak and Hugh Beynon have each offered advice in the past
which I have not forgotten. Finally, I would like to thank my students who
attended lectures for the dissertation module taught at Liverpool John Moores
University. Either inadvertently or explicitly each helped me immensely with
this project.
1 Social work research and
the dissertation

Introduction

This book seeks to guide and support students who are undertaking small scale
qualitative research as part of a social work course; including at undergraduate,
post-graduate or post-qualification level. It sets out to help meet the many
requirements for a dissertation: typically a distinct part of taught social work
courses and one which requires a more extended period of personal study and
application. However, this book can also be used by practitioners undertaking
research as part of their social work role, or perhaps due to personal interest.
As well as literature based research this book also accommodates empirical
research undertaken directly with participants, typically between one to twelve
participants, although larger samples are possible. This approach is motivated
by a belief that the limited time available to busy social work students means
that involvement with larger samples can compromise the available time and
therefore quality of other core aspects of a dissertation, such as the literature
review or writing up. As Denscombe (2007) has also highlighted, substantive
social research with smaller groups of people still leads to the researcher inter-
acting with, and absorbing, all of the research processes involved with larger
groups.
As Bell (1987: 1) suggests, within social research ‘the problems facing you
are much the same whether you are producing a small project, a MEd disserta-
tion or a PhD’. Such ‘problems’ include a need to select and carefully outline a
research topic, thoroughly review any relevant literature, apply a research
methodology and method, and analyse and write up any findings. This book
explores all of these processes in relation to small scale social work research.

How to use this book

Although it can be used unaccompanied this book will offer more substantive
2 THE SOCIAL WORK DISSERTATION

support if used in conjunction with related publications. Qualitative social

research remains a discipline that has generated a wide range of course text-
books. For any student or practitioner this will offer a set of valuable resources
on which to draw. For this reason, at the end of each chapter there is a list of
relevant reading that can supplement and extend any discussions regarding
themes covered in each chapter.
The book is divided into ten chapters. Typically for social work and social
research a book will not be read from cover to cover. This is because a variety of
topics or research questions will be pursued by different students, and sections
of a particular book will relate to some but not others. There is therefore a
distinction between core chapters that relate to all dissertations and optional
chapters that link to some topics but not others. Core chapters include this
one and Chapters 2, 3, 4, 5, 9 and 10. Engagement with other chapters will
depend upon your selected research topic, and related research method and
methodology used.

The book’s structure

This chapter looks at the requirements for a dissertation at different levels,

including at degree, postgraduate and post-qualification level. The chapter
identifies the nature and benefits of research for social work, and the prioritiz-
ing of research ethics. Chapter 2 looks in more detail at research processes
followed as part of a social work dissertation. These include essential require-
ments such as selecting a suitable topic, undertaking a literature review,
selecting and applying suitable research method(s), analysing data and finally,
the writing up and dissemination of any findings.
Chapter 3 discusses general research concepts. These include a discussion
of the distinct attributes of qualitative research, and the differences between
applied and pure, and inductive and deductive research. Chapter 4 looks
at social research theory and introduces the four main types of theory
used in qualitative social work research – positivism, interpretivism, critical
theory and postmodernism. Chapter 5 explores a vital stage within any
dissertation – the literature survey or review. It is argued that alongside
the setting of a research question with its related aims and objectives,
and qualitative analysis completed throughout a study, the literature review
represents a pivotal part of any dissertation. This is because the literature
review is directly related to, and therefore supports, other aspects of a
dissertation, including the application of research methods such as interviews
and analysis, the writing up stage, and so on. The literature review offers
a foundation on which the quality of much of the final dissertation is likely
to rest. This chapter also details the specific requirements of literature based
dissertations.
 SOCIAL WORK RESEARCH AND THE DISSERTATION 3

Chapter 6 explores the use of practical frameworks, philosophy and the-

ory within social work research – usually identified as a research methodology
that helps to frame and encourage meaning within any research project. This
chapter also identifies examples of specific methodologies used within social
work research. Chapters 7 and 8 explore research methods and methodology
used within applied or conceptual and theoretical social work research.
Chapter 7 looks at traditional methods that include the one-to-one interview,
questionnaire and focus group. Chapter 8 examines newer and often more
complex methodologies that include narrative research, discourse analysis and
life history approaches.
Chapter 9 details qualitative analysis and this can sometimes be a more
demanding aspect of a dissertation. Although much analysis takes place
towards the end stage of a dissertation, it usually begins earlier (such as during
the literature review) and proceeds throughout. Chapter 10, the final one,
explores the writing up of a dissertation. Once again, although often assumed
to begin towards the end of a project, writing can, and indeed should, begin
earlier. This chapter also details the writing up of literature based dissertations
and suggests some ways in which your research findings might be disseminated,
including as part of social work practice.

The nature of research

Research has been defined as ‘planned, cautious, systematic and reliable ways
of finding out or deepening [our] understanding’ of a selected topic or theme.
It also involves some form of investigation, exploration of an issue, trend or
social group; and typically entails theoretical and philosophical support and
analysis (Blaxter et al., 1996: 5). Research within social work may also seek to
ask wider ontological (in philosophy, the nature of being or existence) ques-
tions that link to the experiences or attitudes of research participants, or
a particular theme under investigation. Such questions may seek to unravel
the ethical or moral dimensions of a form of social work intervention, or seek
to ask difficult questions about why a particular ‘service user’ group has not
received necessary support.
Although a definition of research is relatively easy to construct, the pro-
cesses of research tend to be more varied and contestable. Research process is
the way in which research develops or moves on: both in a physical sense of
completing necessary tasks such as reading or interviewing, and in relation to
the changing thoughts, ideas, beliefs and values of the researcher as their work
proceeds. Regarding process there are also different types of research: for
example, pure (theoretical and conceptual) and applied (practical combined
with theoretical) research, commercial and academic research, covert (hidden)
or overt (unconcealed) research methods, among others.
4 THE SOCIAL WORK DISSERTATION

One of the most apparent distinctions within social research is that which
divides qualitative and quantitative processes. Whereas quantitative social
research tends to draw from large samples, uses statistics and often aims to be
scientific, objective (unbiased) and value free, qualitative social research
instead seeks to engage with one or more of the following:

• explores in great depth the attitudes, and/or behaviour and/or experi-

ences of research participants;
• identifies, discusses and explains the often detailed opinions of
participants;
• focuses upon the everyday and sometimes ‘gritty’ and ‘real’ life of
select people. Explores the emotive opinions, experiences and actions
that are linked to the research journey and sometimes called an emic
perspective;
• remains context-bound, or attempts to be both ethically and politic-
ally sensitive to any research environment and settings, and looks for
explanation, trends, themes, outcomes which help us to explain and
understand;
• often highlights the political nature of social research and especially
the impact of culturally relative influences such as gender, power,
disability, class and sexuality, among others;
• maintains a close and sometimes personal and emotionally sensitive
relationship between the researcher and participants;
• can attempt to change social and political systems through research,
such as by empathizing with participants’ needs or forms of disad-
vantage, and subsequently criticizing taken-for-granted assumptions
within society;
• does not generally seek to be objective, distant and value free, but
instead acknowledges the impact of the researcher upon participants
and seeks to view each as equals rather than as subjects or distant
objects ‘under a microscope’.
(Adapted from Sapsford and Abbott, 1996; Holloway, 1997: 5;
Dawson, 2007)

This definition relates to applied research in which direct contact is made with
participants. However, literature based social research, which concentrates
upon exploring related publications and theoretical concepts, still draws
from the same research culture or outlook. A literature based dissertation
will again aim to explore themes such as personal or group attitudes, needs
or behaviour and political outcomes, or the impact of legislation and policy
upon practitioners or service users. It may also seek to critically engage
with established theory or practice, or compare different forms of social
work practice including in different countries, and so forth. This distinc-
 SOCIAL WORK RESEARCH AND THE DISSERTATION 5

tion between quantitative and qualitative research is further explored in

Chapter 3.

The benefits of research for social work students

and practitioners

There remain various reasons why qualitative research is appealing and rele-
vant to social work. To begin with, there are strong links between the culture of
research and social work in practice. For example, Gilgun (1994) proposes that
remarkable similarities persist between qualitative research and social work
practice. These include a joint recognition of the impact of wider social, political
and cultural factors upon the behaviour and attitudes of both service users and
research participants. The shared importance of collecting detailed informa-
tion from different sources – such as part of assessment processes for the social
worker and the research interview undertaken by a researcher – provides
another link. Engagement and empathy with service users or participants
should be also central within both roles. Dominelli (2005) also highlights
mutual attempts to stimulate change and empowerment.
A piece of research can also help any student or practitioner to:

• better understand the context under which they practise;

• offer a broader and more detailed understanding of social ‘problems’,
needs and the impact(s) of social work interventions;
• gain new insight into themes such as those relating to policy, legis-
lation and political, economic or cultural dynamics – for example,
issues related to class, gender, power relations or the educational
needs of practitioners or service users, etc. – that impinge upon
aspects of practice;
• broaden any prior understanding of service user or carer needs, and
possibly also those of future work colleagues;
• help achieve a greater sense of satisfaction and achievement, such as
through increased confidence gained through a sense of accomplish-
ment, especially if more appropriate social work interventions even-
tually follow as a result;
• provide better advice, guidance and other forms of support to people
in need due to increased knowledge and skills gained;
• increase the capacity to use our imagination by stimulating thought
and ideas.

Royse (1991: 9) has argued that social work research can not only make
us better practitioners, it can also be exciting and represent a type of
adventure:
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
statue of the god Hermes, but we see that there was only one
Hermes. November 26th, Brest again writes: “His Excellency has left
me orders to make researches in order to find the arms and other
débris of the statue, but to do that it is necessary to obtain a
bouyourouldon which will permit us to make excavations at our own
expense, because in the same niche where it was found there is
reason to hope that we might find other objects.”

The contradictions are so palpable that it is clear that these

documents are only of value as secondary archæological evidence.
No one seems to have made an observation with exactitude.

We have the whole statue found, in one, bound together by iron

clamps; in another, only half had yet been found; in one, the statue is
found holding the apple of discord in one hand; in another, receiving
it from Paris; and in another still, we are told that search has been
ordered for the arms, etc.

In 1865 I visited Melos, and having made the acquaintance of Mr.

Brest, son and successor of the French consul who secured the
statue for the Louvre, he politely offered to guide me through the
ruins of the ancient city. Among other things, we visited the locality
where the statue was found, and he showed me the niche still
standing as when the discovery was made.

It was a slightly built work, of the height, as nearly as I can

remember, of ten or at most twelve feet, and about five wide. 78
It formed a part of an old boundary-wall of the field on which it
opened, and above it the ground was level with the crown of the arch
of the niche. It had no suite or connection with any other structure,
except the boundary-wall in which it was, and there were no
evidences of ruin or of foundation of antique buildings about it. The
opening had been closed with rubbish, not with masonry, as was
evident from the face of the side walls, which were of smooth, if not
carefully laid, masonry. If as I believe not built for the concealment of
the statue, it had been made for some unimportant purpose; perhaps
the protection from the weather of the poor Hermes which is said to
have been found with it. C. Doupault, architect, has published a
brochure with what he supposed important evidence on the question,
in which, from data given him by old Brest twenty-seven years after
the discovery, he reconstructs the apse of a seventh-century church,
in which he places the statue. The whole study has no value
whatever, as the sketch does not correspond with the ruins which I
saw, and looking back to the correspondence quoted, it is clear that
Brest, knowing nothing of archæology or art, caught at certain
suggestions of the officers who saw the statue, and affirmed what
they surmised. As to the fragments found, to which constant
reference is made, there is not the slightest evidence that they were
found in any connection with the statue, as none of the early
evidence indicates that they were known when the statue was first
taken under notice—on the contrary, it is said explicitly by Brest that
he had orders to make researches to find the arms and other
portions of the statue; indicating clearly that the arms alluded to had
not been found with the statue, and that the connection between
them and it was an after-thought, either of the peasant, who wished
to increase the value of the statue by connecting with it fragments
which he had found in other parts, or of the archæologists, who,
seeking to restore the statue to what they judged to be its true 79
action, connected the arm found, no one knows where, except
at Melos, with the statue. It is undeniable that when the letters
before quoted were written, there had been only conjecture as to the
arms. Dauriac, writing on the 11th of April, says that they have only
found the bust. Brest, November 26th, says that there is reason to
hope that they might find other objects in the same niche—proof that
it had not even then been cleared out. In fact, all we have of
documentary evidence goes for nothing beyond showing that the
statue was found at a certain place on a certain date; and if the two
halves of the statue did not fit exactly we could not be certain that
they were found at the same time and place. The hypothesis of the
apple of discord is based on a conjecture of some of the officers, and
has no further confirmation than that an arm and hand, with what
may be an apple or a cup, seem to have been found somewhere in
the island about the same time; but they evidently are not of the
statue, nor even of the same epoch.

Over or somewhere near the niche an inscription was said to have

been found which records the dedication of an exedra by a
gymnasiarch to Hercules and Hermes. The date of this inscription,
according to conjecture based on the inscription itself, is about a
century before Christ, i. e., long after any possibility of such a work
being produced had gone by.

These are all the positive data we have to work on. They suffice,
however, for about twenty monographs in French, German, and
English; and a late German work, by Dr. Goeler von Ravensburg,
exhausts all the possible and impossible conjectures to establish its
character in accordance with the original attribution of a Venus
receiving the apple.

In the year 1880, I made another visit to Melos, on commission from

“The Century” magazine, to photograph whatever might remain
which had any connection with the statue; but found the niche gone,
and no trace of foundations of any kind, or walls, city or other, 80
very near the spot which was again pointed out to me as that
where the Venus was found.

It would seem that in the energetic excavation that followed the last
great archæological revival, everything that was suspected to conceal
works of art had been dug away.

I found an old man, a pilot well known in our navy, Kypriotis, who
had seen the statue when it was brought out, being a boy of about
fourteen. At that time Mr. Brest was a child, and retained only slight
personal recollection of the event; but it was evident that he, like his
father in 1847, had mingled in his impressions conjecture of others
and his own, with facts perverted, and details conceived without
sufficient basis. Nothing new was to be got.
The old Melos is utterly deserted, and the modern town is built on a
pinnacle above it, which does not seem ever to have been included in
the range of the city. The port is changed from the ancient site,
where now a breakwater would be needed, as the land seems to
have sunk greatly, and the old basin of the port is silted up to a point
at the bottom of the bay, where a comparatively modern village has
grown up, called Castro.

The magnificent harbor used to make of the island an important

station before telegraphs were established, and might again, if the
telegraph were laid to it; but now a man-of-war rarely calls, except to
take a pilot for the Archipelago, and a Greek steamer stops once in a
fortnight. But in heavy weather, any ship caught near runs for Melos.
This keeps the place alive, but it has dwindled to a mere island
village, where the vast labyrinths of tombs which perforate the hills
show more human industry than the dwellings of the living.
Earthquakes and malaria have desolated and almost depopulated it.

We had left Cerigo for Crete, and intended to take Melos on our
return to Peiræus, but when within an hour of land we were 81
caught by a terrific south-wester, the most to be dreaded of all
the winds of the Ægean, and in spite of all we could do we were
obliged to give up and run before the gale where it would send us. It
was late in the evening when its fury came down on us, and taking in
all sail except a small storm-sail at the foot of the mast to keep from
coming up into the wind, we ran before it into the black night. I knew
that there were no rocks ahead before Melos, and if we only made
the island by daylight, we could easily fetch the port; but if not, and
the yacht ran at night into the little archipelago of which Melos is
part, it would be next to impossible to choose where our bones
should be laid, for there are no lights, and many islands and rocks.
The sea was, for our little twelve-ton craft, something fearful, and we
thumped and hammered till the little thing quivered, when a wave
struck her, almost as if we had come to the rocks. Sleep was out of
the question—to sit or stand, equally so, and we kept to our berths,
as the only way to avoid being pitched about like blocks. How long
that night was! and in the middle of it I attempted to get up, and
when I put my foot on the cabin-floor, found myself stepping into the
water. We had sprung a leak with the straining.

But day came and cheerfulness. We ran in between the huge cliffs
which form the portal of Melos harbor, with the wild surges beating
against them till the spray flew high enough to have buried a larger
craft than ours. Tired, aching, and hungry, for nothing could we get
to eat till we arrived in port, we cast anchor in the welcome harbor
late in the afternoon. Even then, the sea ran so high that we could
not land until the next day.

Castro is a pile of white houses, rising in terraces from the shore; the
streets mostly stairways, and the houses all whitewashed till they
blind one in that rarely broken sunlight.

82
THE SO-CALLED VENUS OF MELOS. (DRAWN BY BIRCH FROM A PHOTOGRAPH.)
I landed, and, as usual, went to the little café, where the magnates
of the village were discussing the arrival and the storm—the worst,
they said, for many years. I called, of course, on Brest, who, to 83
my surprise, remembered me after eighteen years; and we
made an appointment to revisit together the sites I knew, and to see
those I had not known before,—important excavations having been
made since my former visit.

We went first to the new port, where some admirable statues, since
taken to Athens, had been recently found. The owner of the little
field by the water, which occupies the site of the inner port, having
occasion to sink a well, struck the ruins of a temple of Neptune, and
three statues were found, one of Neptune, a female goddess draped,
but lacking the head, and a mounted warrior, apparently Perseus.

The Greek Government, according to their laws, forbade the

exportation of them by any foreign government, and finally
purchased them for thirty thousand francs—certainly a very small
price. I succeeded in seeing them later, still in their boxes at Athens,
and though not equal to the Venus, or of the same epoch, they are
very fine works.

But there the excavations stop; the owner had no means to pump
out the water that flooded his diggings, the Government had no
more, and as no one is allowed to dig unless for the Greek museum,
whatever remains under ground and water is likely to remain there
another generation.

We then climbed up the zigzag road to the theatre. It is, as I have

said, of late times, probably Roman, and was never complete.
Fragments of unfinished ornament lie still where the stage should
have been, but it had clearly never been carried up above the seven
ranges of seats now existing. It was just outside the wall of the inner
city, on the brow of the hill, and overlooked the spacious harbor and
looked out to sea. There is no record of any sculpture having been
found there. It was purchased and excavated by the King of Bavaria.
Less than half a mile beyond, going with the sea at our backs, 84
was the field where the statue was found. The Greeks have
entertained a great deal of indignation at the rape, which they affect
to call robbery; but the civilized world may thank the French captain
who, coming to get it, and finding it already half-embarked on board
a Turkish vessel, destined for Constantinople, made the most
legitimate use that was ever made of force majeure, and took it away
from the Turk to transfer it to the hold of his own ship. Otherwise, no
one knows what vile uses it might have gone to, or what oblivion and
destruction. All the world knows it now, but Greek genius would have
forever lacked one of its greatest triumphs in modern times if it had
disappeared in the slums of Stamboul.
 STREET IN CASTRO.

As I have said, there is now no trace of any construction of any kind

to be seen at the locality. The wall in which was the niche was gone,
and the field of the present owner has encroached considerably on
the space beyond, the débris being piled up in huge masses like
walls, and two or three terraces above runs the citadel wall, a mass
of Hellenic masonry built of blocks of lava. The Pelasgic walls, of
which some authors speak, do not exist anywhere in the island. Brest
took up a stone, and as we stood on the wall of débris above, cast it
into the field, and said, “There stood the Venus!” In the illustration I
have put a white cross on the spot.

There cannot remain the slightest doubt that the statue had been
concealed, and to my mind, the circumstances indicated for its
concealment are these: The niche, judging from its character, 85
had been built in Roman times; as the rubbly nature of the
masonry indicated, probably covered with stucco, as it would have
been if intended for ornament, and was designed as a shelter for an
altar, or for the statue of some divinity—Terminus, Hermes, Pan or
Faunus, the more Roman companion of him. Here the inscription and
the Hermes found furnish a plausible clew, and agree with the
indication of the masonry in pointing out the epoch of this
conjunction of circumstances as subsequent to the second century
before Christ; how long after we cannot in any wise indicate.
THE SITE OF OLD MELOS, FROM THE PORT. (WHITE CROSS SHOWS WHERE THE
“VENUS” WAS FOUND.)

Now as to the epoch of the statue there can be no doubt that it was
of the immediately post-Phidian epoch; and all the most authoritative
opinions attribute it to the Attic school, and probably of the time and
school of Scopas—and some of the weightiest authorities have
accepted Scopas himself as the author.

Anything more definite than this it is impossible to establish by any

now known evidence. The concealment of the statue, then, was
several centuries later than the execution of it.

The Greeks of the classical epoch, even down to the first 86

century after Christ, retained, amidst all the degradation of
their contemporary art, a distinct recognition of the excellence of the
elder work, as the enormous artistic as well as pecuniary value of
some of the masters’ chefs d’œuvre prove. That this was one of
them, and of one of the chief masters, all civilization agrees, and,
although we have lost the name of the author, the people who hid it
must have known it well. The availing themselves of the niche, ready-
made to their hands, indicates that the possessors of the statue
worked in haste, piling up stones in front of the niche, instead of
walling it up.

This indicates the haste of impending attack, or work done in secret.

In either case, if the statue had a temple in that locality, it would be
concealed near it, or near the place where it was accustomed to
stand; but no such temple is known. We may remember the contrast
with the colossal and magnificent Hercules found in a drain at Rome,
carefully covered over with good masonry. Concealment was the
object in both cases, and the greater haste and furtiveness with the
Melian statue indicate rather that it was brought from a distance than
that it could be a divinity of the island.
Conjecture as to the origin of the statue, if my hypothesis is true,
points to Athens, not only because the work is Attic, but because we
know by the coins of Melos, which in all the latest coinages still bear
the owl of Athens, that Melos belonged to that city as late as she had
any Greek allegiance, which must have been some time into the
Empire, as the Romans long made it a policy to preserve a certain
kind of autonomy in the Greek states, even when their subjection
was complete. That it is Attic, no one can doubt in face of the
evidence I shall show. That Athens was the only city likely to send to
Melos a treasure of this kind, concealment of which was impossible in
Athens, is almost certain.

I conclude that it was a highly valued statue of Athens, sent to 87

Melos in time of great danger, to be concealed and preserved.
What period this might have been is only to be guessed at; it is
therefore hardly worth while to say more about it, except to indicate
that four periods in late Athenian history might furnish the motive
requisite: when the army of Mithridates, under Archelaus, took
Athens; the wars between the factions of Marius and Sylla; the
Lacedemonian war, and the invasions of the Iconoclasts. The Romans
do not appear, in spite of all their plundering and the enormous
quantity of statues carried away from Greece, to have desecrated the
temples of the Greek gods, as we see that Pausanias, in the century
after Christ, found the most valuable of them in situ, as, for instance,
the Diana Brauronia of Praxiteles, the Perseus of Myron, with others
of great fame. The above conclusion, considering all the known and
reasonably conjecturable details of the discovery and concealment,
seems to me justifiable,—as well as that it was concealed at some
time between the century or two centuries before Christ and the end
of the first century after.

Now, what was the statue? We have so long been in the habit of
accepting all female statues, not distinguished by well-known
symbols of their divinity, as Venuses, that we make no distinction
even in cases where the type demands it. And yet the dominant
characteristic of Greek sculpture is this close adherence to
established types. We are never at a loss to distinguish Diana,
Minerva, Juno, or even Ceres and the lesser deities. Venus, it is true,
came into vogue as subject for the sculptors of sacred statues later
than some of the others; but all that we know of the Venus of the
artists indicates that it was par excellence the womanly type. The
treatment of the head in Greek sculpture was a point apparently of
doctrine, as it was in Byzantine and in the later ecclesiastical art of
Greece. It is always in a conventional type, utterly separated from the
individual.

88
MEDICEAN VENUS.
VENUS URANIA.
CAPITOLINE VENUS.

89
VENUS OF THE VATICAN.
VENUS ANADYOMENE.
 VENUS VICTRIX OF THE LOUVRE.

This unquestionable fact should have taught us to reject from the

Venus category many statues which are now included in it, as for
instance, the Callipyge, and all in which a trace of portraiture is to be
found, besides diminishing that category by all the statues of the
heroic type, as in none of the legends of beliefs of the Greek faith
was Venus ever endowed with a heroic quality. The preconceived
notion that the Melian statue was a Venus has been a continual cause
of confusion. This was, as I have shown, the first hypothesis of the
French officers, none of whom appear to have been possessed of any
archæological knowledge, and who had the commonly prevailing
notion that any nude statue must be a Venus. I have taken the pains
to collect a number of representations of the various so-called
Venuses, and most of which the type, or symbols, justify us in so
classifying; and a comparison of their character will show what is the
Venus type,—making this proviso, however, that we have no other
than internal evidence for denominating most of them Venuses. The
chief of these, in what we seek for most, i. e., the impersonal type,
which was inseparable from the Greek deities down through the
decline of art, which began in the time of Alexander, are: the Medici,
a distinctly marked Attic work, later, however, than the Melian statue;
the Capitoline, apparently a still later reminiscence of the Medici and
one of many similar reminiscences; and the “Venus coming out of the
bath,” at Naples, a better work than the last, but still already widely
separated from the purely conventional type of the Medicean, which
we may authoritatively accept as the Venus type of the best period of
the Venus sculpture. The close comparison of the heads and details
of the flesh will give those who do not know the originals an
invaluable lesson in the treatment of the figure in Greek art. The so-
called “Venus Urania,” at Florence, marks, to my mind, a distinct
departure from the Venus type,—so marked, indeed, as to make me
decline to accept it as a Venus, while the still typical character of the
face is one which must place it in a good period of art, before ideality
of treatment had entirely given way to individuality. The art is of too
good an epoch to have departed so far from the type of Venus, if
intended for her, and indicates rather a nymph, or some inferior deity.
The Venus of the Vatican is too late and too low down in the 90
scale of art to be an authoritative witness in the matter; while
the Venus Anadyomene, while still reserving the ideal character,
resembles the Urania rather, in a separation of the type from the
Venus. Later still, and perhaps at the end of that period which may
be called the ideal period of antique sculpture, most probably of
Græco-Roman art, is the Venus Victrix of the Louvre; unquestionably
a Venus, for she bears in her hand the apple—symbol of fruitfulness.
But how far from the type of our Melian treasure! In that is the most
distinct approach to the Athena type—a purely heroic ideal. I cannot
believe that its sculptor intended it for a Venus.

VENUS OF CAPUA.
 RESTORATION OF THE STATUE AS PROPOSED BY MR. TARRAL.

The patient German admirer of our statue, which Von Ravensburg is,
has gone through all the literature and all the conjectures which it
has given rise to, as to the chief problem which gives interest to any
investigation, i. e., the restoration of the statue. No attempt will
satisfy all the investigators; but that which Von Ravensburg accepts
with approval—viz., the restoration of Mr. Tarral (an Englishman
residing in Paris for many years, who has given his chief attention to
this problem)—shows so entire a want of appreciation of the 91
character of antique design, which is, after all, our only clew, that I
shall not hesitate to put aside, not only the solution proposed, but
the judgment that could accept as satisfactory such a solution of one
of the most interesting of artistic problems. I give the figure which
Von Ravensburg publishes as Tarral’s restoration of the statue, that
one may see how absolutely its inanity is at variance with the spirit of
Greek design. The mere completion of the statue, in this sense,
destroys the dignity and unity of the work so completely that to look
at it is enough for a cultivated judgment to decide that, whatever it
may have been, this it was not. The author gives, also, photographs
of the fragments found—fragments so imperfect and corroded that
we can only say that they appear to be from a very low period of art,
and are utterly worthless as data for measure or opinion, from their
extremely fragmentary state.

FRAGMENTS FOUND AT MELOS ATTRIBUTED TO THE STATUE.

Besides, I have shown, from the records of discovery, that there is no

further reason to connect them with the statue than that they were
also found at Melos.

In following the whole course of the demonstration which Von

Ravensburg attempts of this solution of the problem, I arrive at the
conclusion that, with all his patience and research, his judgment is
utterly untrustworthy on a problem which requires not only freedom
from preconception, but long cultivation of artistic perception and
general critical ability. Mr. Tarral’s attempt proves, to my mind, only
that this was not the solution.
 92

VICTORY OF BRESCIA—FRONT.
 VICTORY OF BRESCIA—SIDE.

The various suggestions, more or less authoritative, made as to the

restoration, and thence as to the determination of the attributes of
the statue, are to be summed up briefly. The Count de Clarac, the
then curator of the antiques of the Louvre, adopted the Venus with
the apple hypothesis, but afterward abandoned it in favor of one put
forward by Millingen, that it was a Victory. This is one of the theories
of the restoration which has found the greatest number of adherents.
Several restorations have been proposed, which make the statue part
of a group, all which, though defended or proposed by many
dilettanti, I reject, for what to me seem sufficient reasons, viz.:
Firstly, we have in the statue no evidence whatever that it formed
part of a group, and without some such the hypothesis is gratuitous;
Secondly, we have—with one exception, which I shall presently note,
and which gives no countenance to such a theory—no statue or parts
of statues which agree with it in artistic quality, or even none 93
which lend themselves to a group, if such were made up by
various sculptors; Thirdly, that, at the epoch in which the statue was
produced, any group which has been suggested would have been out
of accordance with the aims of art, as practiced by the Greeks. The
only evidence in favor of such a theory is that in some antique
fragments or coins are indications of such a figure as the Melian in
combination. But, as this statue must have been in its own time
nearly as celebrated, relatively, as in ours, it must have given rise to
many imitations and adaptations. It may have given rise to some
which support the group theory, but to more which support an
opposing theory.
VICTORY RAISING AN OFFERING (TEMPLE OF NIKÉ APTEROS, THE ACROPOLIS,
ATHENS).
Von Ravensburg goes over, in detail, all the group theories, and easily
finds fatal objections to all. What most surprises me is that any one
ever tried to put it into a group, so completely by itself does it stand
in every sense of the word.

Millingen, in 1826, started his theory that it was a Victory holding a

shield in both hands. I am quite convinced that many who have
started other theories would have adopted this if they had not been
anticipated in proposing it. The vanity of archæological research, and
eagerness to propose something new is so dominant in most
archæologists that they exercise more ingenuity to advance 94
some new theory than would be requisite to show the validity
of an old one. And the statue of Melos has been preëminent in
fruitfulness of theories of all qualities and grades of improbability.
Millingen, however, supported his theory by a similar statue known as
the Capuan Venus, a reproduction, I believe, in Roman times, of the
Melian statue, probably through some other intermediate copy or
reproduction, as the sculptors of the Capuan statue could not have
seen the Melian. The arms are a modern and abominable restoration.
Here, again, I must, in passing, protest against the attribution to the
Venus type of all nude or semi-nude statues. There is nothing in the
Capuan which indicates that it was intended as a Venus. Millingen
quotes Apollonius of Rhodes as describing a statue of Venus looking
at herself in the shield of Mars, which she herself is holding, but this
is no evidence of the type correspondence, and the gravamen of the
matter lies precisely in the diversity of the type from the recognizable
Venuses. But the Capuan is too far in type and treatment from the
Melian to serve as definite argument. Such as it is, an item in the
discussion, I will not exaggerate its importance, though I believe it to
be a far-away recollection of the Melian statue.

“The Victory of Brescia” is another of the recollections, rather than

reproductions, of the type of which I believe the Melian statue to be
the original. It is in bronze, is later, and has the wings, but the type is
unmistakable, and the action of the torso and head is sufficiently
different from our statue to show that it was only an emulation, and
not a plagiarism, that was intended.

The drapery differs in the arrangement, being of bronze and agreeing

with some undisputed Victories at Athens, but the action of the left
leg holding the shield is the same, and that of the arms corresponds
very nearly, as far as the arms remain in the Melian work. As a 95
whole, it reminds one more of the latter than does any other of
the statues of its class.

The case is one in which archæological knowledge is of very little

value, unless it be aided by thorough artistic study and a knowledge
of the requirements of art proper. The archæologist, like other
scientists, must have positive evidence to work on; and the testimony
of pure taste, the intuitions of an artistic education, are of no use to
him except as confirmatory. The intuition of the artist, whose taste
has been educated by long study of the works he has to deal with,
arrives at opinions by a kind of inspiration to which science often
lacks all means of access. In the case of this statue, archæology has
no evidence to weigh, and the ponderous erudition which Overbeck,
Müller, Jahn, Welcker, and others have piled on the question has no
foundation. We can determine with comparative certainty that the
statue belongs to the epoch between Phidias and Praxiteles, because
we have the work of the school of Phidias and sufficient comparative
data for that of Praxiteles [and now, since the discovery of the
Hermes at Olympia, positive data] to judge from; and we have a right
to say that the Melian statue came between these, but beyond this
nothing—no clew except what lies in the design and the unities
attendant on it, of which per se the professed archæologist is no
judge.

In working about the Acropolis of Athens some years ago, I

photographed, amongst other sculptures, the mutilated Victories in
the Temple of Niké Apteros, the “Wingless Victory,” the little Ionic
temple in which stood that statue of Victory of which it is said that
“the Athenians made her without wings that she might never leave
Athens”; and looking at the photographs afterward, when the
impression of the comparatively diminutive size had passed, I was
struck with the close resemblance of the type to that of the “Venus”
of Melos. There are the same large, heroic proportions, the same
ampleness in the development of the nude parts, the same art 96
in the management of the draperies, and Richard Greenough,
the American sculptor, has called my particular attention to the
curious similarity in the treatment of the folds of the drapery, in the
introduction of a plane between the folds, a resemblance not found in
any other similar works as far as I know.