|
|
|
|||||||
Keywords:: Bible, Christianity, Judaism, David and Jonathan, Faith | ||||||||
Most people in western culture likely know of King David of the Old Testament. What may be less known are the theories surrounding his relationship with Jonathan, King Saul’s son. Without debate, it was an intense, and passionate relationship from the start. Was it, though, a romantic relationship?.
Back Story
It’s a bit difficult to know which is the most favored back-story as there are a couple traditions, seemingly interweaved into the version we end up with in the Old Testament. However, trying to make the best of what is given we will begin in 1Sam 16.
Saul was plagued by "an evil spirit from God" and Saul’s advisors thought that a skilled harpist could relieve his torment. At that, David is first brought into Saul’s court at the referral of advisors. He comes highly recommended as “a man of valor, a man or war, prudent in speech and a man of good presence; and the Lord is with him.” (1Sam 16:18). At the sight of David, Saul is very impressed and makes David his personal armour bearer. It works; David’s harpistry keeps God's evil spirit away, and Saul “refreshed”.
Jonathan greeting David after David killed Goliath by Gottfried Bernhard (18th century)In the next chapter of 1Sam we seem to move to a different origin story for David. We start off on an battlefield right out of the Iliad, with Goliath of Gath, the Philistine hero and giant. Goliath is making the familiar challenge to end the looming battle of armies with single combat, mano-a-mano. However, no one in Saul’s camp is up to facing the nearly 10 foot tall giant.
At this point, David is described as more of a sheepherder than a "man of war"; he is in fact chastised by his older brother for leaving his “few sheep” to come “see the battle.” David, who now seems suddenly to not be the king's personal armour bearer, asks some soldiers about the prize the king might offer for taking Goliath down, and finds it is the king's daughter, and with that comes royalty, a great motivation for any sheepherder. As we will see, this story is about David's rise to power and his usurpation of the Kish dynasty, an important part of which is the feminized role Jonathan, the king's son, will play in his relationship with David.
As we all know, Goliath is felled by a single stone, and David takes his head. The captain of Saul’s forces, Abner, finds out who David is for Saul (again, this is an alternate origin story to 1Sam 16; the facts don't need to add up). Abner then brings David before the king, the enemy's head-in-hand.
Knitting Souls Together
Here’s where our story picks up, where Jonathan and David first connect (1Sam 18 1-4):
“And it came to pass, when he had made an end of speaking unto Saul, that the soul of Jonathan was knit with the soul of David, and Jonathan loved him as his own soul. And Saul took him that day, and would let him go no more home to his father's house. Then Jonathan and David made a covenant, because he loved him as his own soul. And Jonathan stripped himself of the robe that was upon him, and gave it to David, and his garments, even to his sword, and to his bow, and to his girdle.”
This quick bonding--souls knitted together at first sight as one, and gifts given of the clothes right off Jonathan's back--is, of course, striking. The word used for covenant in describing Jonathan's covenant with David (three times through out this story) is also the Hebrew word used in the bible to describe a marriage (e.g. Mal 2:14). Also, a further echo of the language of biblical union may be seen in Daniel being "taken", no more to return to "his father's house". We can also see the feminized, submissive role Jonathan begins to take on in the story in his gifts to David, which seems to be meant to both disqualify Jonathan as the future king while at the same time giving David, the handsome sheepherder, more claim to the crown (1).
However, the road to usurpation is rough for David; things go bad with Saul, to say the least (1Sam 18:10-11):
“And it came to pass on the morrow, that the evil spirit from God came upon Saul, and he prophesied in the midst of the house: and David played with his hand, as at other times: and there was a javelin in Saul's hand. And Saul cast the javelin; for he said, I will smite David even to the wall with it. And David avoided out of his presence twice.”
If it were a gay relationship, many a father has felt similarly.
Fortunately, David avoids being shish kebabed, twice even. This being a story, though, he still sticks around the court. Saul then offers David his daughter in marriage but hopes to get him killed by the Philistine’s hand in battle. David was victorious, in spite of Saul's hopes, if not eccentric in taking 200 Philistine foreskins as trophies. It may be important to note that when Saul offers up his daughter Michal, he says "Thou shalt this day be my son-in-law a second time." (1Sam 18:21). Some have argued this passage is referring to Saul's older daughter, Merab, and is not a play on the "covenant" between David and Jonathan. However, Merab was only offered to David, and was ultimately married to another man, Adriel of Mehola. As we will see, Saul seems to regard his son's union with David as something more than mere friendship.
Saul then plots outright to kill David, but Jonathan warns his beloved, because he had “delighted much in David” (1Sam 19-1-2). In another twist, though, Saul then is convinced to not kill David by Jonathan's pleading (1Sam 19:6).
And Saul hearkened unto the voice of Jonathan: and Saul swore, [As] the LORD liveth, he shall not be slain.
David does well on the field of battle again, but again God sends the evil spirit to Saul, and David is almost impaled by another javelin, supposedly a third time. That must have been the straw that broke the camel’s back; David finally flees with the help of Michal.
Jonathan and David eventually get together and discuss the problem. Jonathan resolves “Whatsoever thy soul desireth, I will even do it for thee.” (1Sam 20:4), and they plan an elaborate scheme to find out if Saul is angry with David. Put simply, if Saul is angry at thinking David went to Bethlehem to give a sacrifice, David will know Saul is upset at him, but if he is fine with it, then David knows it’s all right to come back. Of course, it seems David cannot take a hint even while dodging javelins, but we have to remember many of these stories are likely the stitched together narratives of several authors.
Their plan was set in motion (1Sam 20:27-29):
“And it came to pass on the morrow, which was the second day of the month, that David's place was empty: and Saul said unto Jonathan his son, Wherefore cometh not the son of Jesse to meat, neither yesterday, nor to day? And Jonathan answered Saul, David earnestly asked leave of me to go to Bethlehem: And he said, Let me go, I pray thee; for our family hath a sacrifice in the city; and my brother, he hath commanded me to be there: and now, if I have found favor in thine eyes, let me get away, I pray thee, and see my brethren. Therefore he cometh not unto the king's table.”
Saul, apparently free of evil spirits now, is strangely confused as to why his javelin target is not at the dinner table, but David’s answer is clear in Saul’s reaction to the news (1Sam 20:30-33):
“Then Saul's anger was kindled against Jonathan, and he said unto him, Thou son of the perverse rebellious woman, do not I know that thou hast chosen the son of Jesse to thine own confusion, and unto the confusion of thy mother's nakedness? For as long as the son of Jesse liveth upon the ground, thou shalt not be established, nor thy kingdom. Wherefore now send and fetch him unto me, for he shall surely die. And Jonathan answered Saul his father, and said unto him, Wherefore shall he be slain? what hath he done? And Saul cast a javelin at him to smite him: whereby Jonathan knew that it was determined of his father to slay David.”
Saul, always with the javelins...
Saul Throws Spear at David by George Tinworth.
The king’s insult is thought to be particularly telling of the type of relationship between Jonathan and David. Haven’t many gay men been in the same situation, with a father who they’re not fooling one bit in their having chosen someone, by their own “confusion”? Insulting a person’s mother as perverse may not be all too surprising, but coupling Jonathan’s “confusion” with “the confusion of thy mother's nakedness” (‘ervah, which indicates exposition of genitals in particular) does not point to just any disgrace. It is thought to point to a sexual disgrace in Jonathan's relationship with David. In fact, the word translated as confusion there, bosheth, was often used as an attack on worshipers of foreign gods, which were often associated with perceived sins of a sexual nature
(2). If there were only friendship, Saul's insults and claims to be keen to his son's "confusion" would make little sense. Compare that to Saul’s tame treatment of Michal, when he finds she has deceived him for David’s sake.
Next to consider is the warning to Jonathan, that he will not have his kingdom with David alive. This could be seen as an indication that the matrilineal line of inheritance is still in play at this time, and thus David is as much an heir through marriage as Jonathan. Alternatively, one could see Saul as saying the relationship between the two men is the barrier to being “established”. It does seem a possible sexualized relationship between the two men with Jonathan in a more feminine role was, in part, meant to delegitimize Jonathan's claim to the kingdom
(1), and here Saul may be saying it explicitly.
After finally realizing Saul is upset and means to kill David, Jonathan goes to their secret meeting place. There a confusing signal is sent to David with arrows and a lad running after them, but the lad is sent away, leaving David and Jonathan alone (1Sam20:41-42):
David arose out of a place toward the south, and fell on his face to the ground, and bowed himself three times: and they kissed one another, and wept one with another, until David exceeded. And Jonathan said to David, Go in peace, forasmuch as we have sworn both of us in the name of the LORD, saying, The LORD be between me and thee, and between my seed and thy seed for ever. And he arose and departed: and Jonathan went into the city.
The kissing and the weeping (and exceeding?) are certainly provocative. Making such an oath, in the name of the Jewish God, however should make some skeptical of there being a gay relationship, with Leviticus in mind. Also, if we understand Saul’s insult to be regarding the sexual nature of their relationship, real or no, there would at least be a social taboo against such, one that maybe only masculine heroes could overstep but perhaps not. However, it is quite unlikely that the Levitical laws were in place or enforced at the time of Jonathan and David, prior to the exile
(2). Of course, a person does not have the Bible to be held to if they are living it while other men are writing it.
Finally, wrapping up this tale, we have the death of Saul and Jonathan. At the news of this David laments (2Sam 1:26):
“I am distressed for thee, my brother Jonathan: very pleasant hast thou been unto me: thy love to me was wonderful, passing the love of women.”
To love a man with wonderful love, beyond that which is typically and specifically felt for women, no doubt, adds to the evidence suggesting a romantic relationship.
Conclusions
Jonathan Lovingly Taketh His Leave of David by Julius Schnorr von Karolsfeld (18th century)
To sum up, some will look at the story of Jonathan and David and begin fuming at any suggestion there was romantic love between the two men. David is a very important religious figure who could never have such feelings for another man. He is said to be a respected ancestor of Jesus, somehow through Joseph, and so on. They will say it was merely the sort of love we are to give all our neighbors, brotherly love, and the affection was merely a sign of different cultures and times. The men were just abnormally good friends, with wives at home (David had more than one). To them the suggestion alone is perverted and there would be no convincing otherwise without a different view on the topic of such love altogether.
The other side will say, yeah, “good friends”; we have heard that before. Good friends with souls knitted together, who share clothes, cry together, kiss each other, and feel a love for each other that surpasses the love typically associated with loving women in particular, not just any human. “Good friends” who others see as having chosen each other to their own confusion, to the confusion of their mother’s nakedness. “Good fiends” who will do “whatever” the other’s soul desires. Sure, they had wives and kids, as did other people, undoubtedly gay or bisexual in history. It was a means to survive or a duty to the culture and, with that satisfied, they had their true loves elsewhere.
Jonathan Embraces David by Caspar Luiken (1712)
Either way, though, no one will settle this debate, and we certainly cannot claim to know who is right. If I had to guess, though, it seems the stories surrounding Jonathan and David are a lot like the other stories of the region. Some of them did include versions with gay relationships among otherwise straight heroes, such as Achilles and Patroclus, or Gilgamesh and Samuel. I would bet the stories in 1Sam are created similarly, with some fact, some fiction, and discordant voices, each adding in their two cents. I think the narrative as given does show this melding of various traditions as well, and I think some of the input to these stories did have a gay tint and intent to it, which may have had roots in reality. But, as to the relationship between an actual Jonathan and an actual David, that, barring some improbable findings of earlier editions of their tale, is lost to time.
REFERENCES ::
1. Peleg, Y. Love at First Sight? David, Jonathan, and the Biblical Politics of Gender. Journal for the Study of the Old Testament. vol. 30 (2), pp. 171-189, (2005).
2. Callahan, T.. Secret Origins of the Bible. Millennium Press, Altadena, California. (2002).
| Comment on this page in the forum |
 Comment on this page here
|
isocrat > fait > bible > David_Johnathan
Created: 2009-03-19; Last Edited: 2009-03-19; (ID607)