Humanities desk
< January 22	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 24 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

January 23[edit]

allegiance obligation[edit]

If an author is writing a fictional book about three Asian women becoming naturalized United States citizens, should he/she include the Oath of Allegiance full text?158.222.165.116 (talk) 04:28, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's fiction. The author can include or exclude whatever he or she likes. AndyTheGrump (talk) 04:36, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If the terms of the oath, or the immigrants' thoughts about it, are significant to the story. —Tamfang (talk) 07:20, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think the OP is asking about copyright. I very much doubt it is copyrighted, but if you want to find out, ask your local government offices. KägeTorä - (^影_虎) (Chin Wag) 11:47, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This obviously isn't legal advice, but if I understand Oath of Allegiance (United States), [1] & [2] correctly, all modern versions of the oath are works of the US federal government (or more correctly officers or employees of the federal government while performing their official duties), and the older versions which may have non US government involvement are too old to be eligible for copyright and the oath would therefore be in the public domain, at least in the US. Nil Einne (talk) 13:35, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As an Australian Citizen, I can say this in public over and over again. I, John Smith., do swear that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth, Her heirs and successors according to law. SO HELP ME GOD! I don't have to worry about violating copyright. I can even publish it in a fictional novel (as long as the character doing the swearing is an Australian Citizen or is becoming one) 172.56.32.205 (talk) 17:25, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not just Australia - but it has been a general British form for several hundred years, and was the source for "So help me God" used by Washington for his oath of office - before and after the American Revolution. The US oath is specifically not copyright as a government product, just as the Constitution is not copyright etc. Collect (talk) 18:47, 26 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Espousals of the Blessed Virgin Mary to Saint Joseph[edit]

In the painting below (of the Espousals of the Blessed Virgin Mary to Saint Joseph), which figure is supposed to represent Saint Joseph? I assume it's the most "obvious" figure in the painting (i.e., the male who is exchanging rings or touching hands with Mary). If that's the case, why would they represent Saint Joseph as such a young "boy"? Isn't it pretty conventional wisdom that he was an "old" (or, at least, "older") man? Saint Joseph is typically (always?) represented as similar to one of the images in his article, here: Saint Joseph. Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 18:05, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Betrothal of the Virgin, Fiorentino, 1523

I guess there are a few answers to this. First, I have to agree that the younger individual tocuhing hands with Mary is the obvious, and, really, only, candidate for Joseph in the picture. And just about every artist makes a painting based on several reasons, many of which are actually less than usual. Not knowing the details of the artist himself, but there have been artists who have changed any number of details about their subjects if they made the picture look better as a picture or if it played to the artist's individual strengths. It could well be that, for whatever reason, the artist was intending to make some sort of statement of some sort in this picture, or, maybe, just wanted it to "look better" in some subjective way. Lastly, while it is now today seemed likely by most Christians that Joseph was an older man, at least in part based on miracles and other less than really reliable sources, that is still kind of speculative based on the lack of information in the original sources, and that view has changed a little over time. In short, I can't be sure why he painted what was I think even for the time a rather anomalous or "alternative" Joseph in the painting, but the number of reasons he might have had for doing so are too numerous to count. John Carter (talk) 18:18, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Yes, he clearly went with an "alternative" depiction of Saint Joseph. Had this occurred today, in 2015, I could see contemporary artists "pushing the envelope" for the sake of art, and coming up with this representation out of left field. The artist who painted this is Rosso Fiorentino. So, the fact that he was (A) Italian and (B) living in the 1400's and 1500's would have made me believe that he would stick with the conventional view and not create some "odd-ball" alternative image. That is, he would stick with the traditional Catholic (Italian) image. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 19:21, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It should be noted that Joseph's age is never mentioned nor implied by anything at all in the original text of the Bible. Some traditions hold that he was an old man, because certain aspects of the text could be interpreted to mean that he might have died before Jesus started his ministry at age 30. However, there's no reason, really, to assume that, nor is there any reason to assume he may have been young, middle-aged, or old at the time of Jesus's birth. Any painting of Joseph or depiction of him at ANY age is purely speculative, as such there's no reason to say a painting showing Joseph as a young man is any more or less correct than one that shows him as an old man. --Jayron 32 20:16, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Well, of course, no one "knows" his real age. And any painting is going to be the artist's rendition of his own ideas. That goes without saying. I guess the question can be re-phrased as something along the lines of: given his background (Italian and Catholic) and time frame (1400-1500's), why would he "go against the grain" and go against the traditional views of the time? Maybe that is what I was asking. I have to say, it was quite jarring to see Saint Joseph portrayed as a young teen-ager. So much so, that I couldn't even figure out which person in the painting was Joseph to begin with. And I think most people (even today; never mind, back then) would have that same reaction. After I figured it out, the painting reminded me more of a "Romeo and Juliet" type of situation (i.e., two young teenagers in love). Very odd. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 21:07, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not to mention that a picture of two young teenagers, in the prime of their lives, getting married, pretty much implies a hint of sexuality. Which is the exact opposite of what the picture should be offering. I think. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 21:20, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see the problem. The painting seems to show a young couple getting married. The ages of the bride and groom are not really obvious from the painting, but they could be anywhere from about 16 to 28. It was usual for weddings to involve young couples. If there is an assumption today that Joseph was significantly older than Mary (and I don't think such an assumption ever came up during my religious education), that assumption may not have existed during the Renaissance. The paintings in our article on Saint Joseph show Joseph at a variety of ages. One of the paintings, by Murillo, show both Mary and Joseph roughly in their 30s, some time after their wedding, with the young Jesus. So I don't think that there was a convention that Joseph was much older than Mary. Marco polo (talk) 22:18, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I disagree. I think it's generally accepted that the conventional view of Joseph was that of not only an older man, but of a much older man. See Saint Joseph#In art. The painting discussed above (with the teenage-appearing Joseph) is an anomaly. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 22:49, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The article you are referencing contains the statement “When Joseph’s rod bloomed, he was identified as her betrothed.” As an ESL speaker, I may not grasp the subtleties expressed, but I regard this as hard evidence that Joseph was not quite the doddering old geezer depicted by the old masters.--Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 14:36, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]