Difference between revisions of "David and Jonathan" - New World Encyclopedia
m |
|||
| Line 56: | Line 56: | ||
In rabbinical tradition, Jonathan's love for David is considered the type of disinterestedness (Ab. v. 17). Jonathan is ranked by Rabbi Judah the Saint among the great self-denying characters of Jewish history. However, another rabbi remarked that his love for David may have been a result of his conviction that David's great popularity was certain to place him on the throne in the end (B. M. 85a). One tradition holds that Jonathan shared in Saul's guilt of the slaughter of the priest of Nob (I Sam. xxii. 18-19), which Jonathan could have prevented by providing David two loaves of bread (Sanh. 104a). | In rabbinical tradition, Jonathan's love for David is considered the type of disinterestedness (Ab. v. 17). Jonathan is ranked by Rabbi Judah the Saint among the great self-denying characters of Jewish history. However, another rabbi remarked that his love for David may have been a result of his conviction that David's great popularity was certain to place him on the throne in the end (B. M. 85a). One tradition holds that Jonathan shared in Saul's guilt of the slaughter of the priest of Nob (I Sam. xxii. 18-19), which Jonathan could have prevented by providing David two loaves of bread (Sanh. 104a). | ||
| − | ==Romantic== | + | ===Romantic and erotic=== |
[[Image:Jonathan Lovingly Taketh His Leave of David by Julius Schnorr von Carolsfeld.jpg|250px|thumbnail|left|"Jonathan Lovingly Taketh His Leave of David" by [[Julius Schnorr von Karolsfeld]]]] | [[Image:Jonathan Lovingly Taketh His Leave of David by Julius Schnorr von Carolsfeld.jpg|250px|thumbnail|left|"Jonathan Lovingly Taketh His Leave of David" by [[Julius Schnorr von Karolsfeld]]]] | ||
Some modern scholars, however, interpret the love between David and Jonathan as more intimate than mere friendship.<ref> Boswell, John. ''Same-sex Unions in Premodern Europe.'' New York: Vintage, 1994. (pp. 135-137)</ref> This interpretation views the bonds the men shared as romantic love, regardless of whether or not the relationship was physically consummated. Jonathan and David cared deeply about each other in a way that was certainly more tender and intimate than a platonic friendship.<ref> Halperin, David M. ''One Hundred Years of Homosexuality.'' New York: Routledge, 1990. (p. 83)</ref> Throughout the passages, David and Jonathan consistently affirm and reaffirm their love and devotion to each other. Jonathan is willing to betray his father, family, wealth, and traditions for David. At their first meeting, Jonathan strips himself before the youth, handing him arms and at least the outer layers of his clothing. When they first make their covenant, not long after their first meeting, the reason supplied is simply because Jonathan "loved [David] as his own soul." ({{bibleverse|1|Sam.|18:3|}}). Each time they reaffirm the covenant, love is the only justification provided. Critics of this view insist that the this love is simply based on Jonathan and David's mutual bond for each other as soldiers, similar to Jonathan's earlier relationship with his armor-bearer. | Some modern scholars, however, interpret the love between David and Jonathan as more intimate than mere friendship.<ref> Boswell, John. ''Same-sex Unions in Premodern Europe.'' New York: Vintage, 1994. (pp. 135-137)</ref> This interpretation views the bonds the men shared as romantic love, regardless of whether or not the relationship was physically consummated. Jonathan and David cared deeply about each other in a way that was certainly more tender and intimate than a platonic friendship.<ref> Halperin, David M. ''One Hundred Years of Homosexuality.'' New York: Routledge, 1990. (p. 83)</ref> Throughout the passages, David and Jonathan consistently affirm and reaffirm their love and devotion to each other. Jonathan is willing to betray his father, family, wealth, and traditions for David. At their first meeting, Jonathan strips himself before the youth, handing him arms and at least the outer layers of his clothing. When they first make their covenant, not long after their first meeting, the reason supplied is simply because Jonathan "loved [David] as his own soul." ({{bibleverse|1|Sam.|18:3|}}). Each time they reaffirm the covenant, love is the only justification provided. Critics of this view insist that the this love is simply based on Jonathan and David's mutual bond for each other as soldiers, similar to Jonathan's earlier relationship with his armor-bearer. | ||
| − | |||
Although both Jonathan and David were married, David himself articulates a distinction between his relationship with Jonathan and the bonds he shares with women. David explicitly states, on hearing of Jonathan's death, that his love for Jonathan is greater than any bond he's experienced with women. Furthermore, social customs in the ancient Mediterranean basin, did not preclude extramarital homoerotic relationships. [[The Epic of Gilgamesh]], which predates the Books of Samuel, depicts a remarkably similar, possibly homo-erotic relationship between [[Gilgamesh]] and [[Enkidu]]. | Although both Jonathan and David were married, David himself articulates a distinction between his relationship with Jonathan and the bonds he shares with women. David explicitly states, on hearing of Jonathan's death, that his love for Jonathan is greater than any bond he's experienced with women. Furthermore, social customs in the ancient Mediterranean basin, did not preclude extramarital homoerotic relationships. [[The Epic of Gilgamesh]], which predates the Books of Samuel, depicts a remarkably similar, possibly homo-erotic relationship between [[Gilgamesh]] and [[Enkidu]]. | ||
| Line 66: | Line 65: | ||
Mevertheless, it must also be kept in mind that Hebrew law and custom was strongly opposed to homosexual love. | Mevertheless, it must also be kept in mind that Hebrew law and custom was strongly opposed to homosexual love. | ||
| − | |||
[[Image:David and Jonathan.jpg|thumb|250px|right|''David and Jonathan''<br/> The Biblical account of David and Jonathan has been read by some as the story of two [[lover]]s. <br/>"La Somme le Roy," 1290 C.E.; French illuminated ms (detail); British Museum]] | [[Image:David and Jonathan.jpg|thumb|250px|right|''David and Jonathan''<br/> The Biblical account of David and Jonathan has been read by some as the story of two [[lover]]s. <br/>"La Somme le Roy," 1290 C.E.; French illuminated ms (detail); British Museum]] | ||
| Line 80: | Line 78: | ||
In his [[Lambeth]] essay of December 2007, [[James Jones]] the [[Bishop of Liverpool]], drew particular attention to the relationship between David and Jonathan. Describing their friendship as: "emotional, spiritual and even physical... This intimate relationship was sealed before God - it was not just a spiritual bond it became covenantal." He concludes by affirming: Here ''is the Bible bearing witness to love between two people of the same gender''.<ref>http://liverpool.anglican.org/people/bishops/jamesspeeches/0712_Lambeth_essay.htm</ref> | In his [[Lambeth]] essay of December 2007, [[James Jones]] the [[Bishop of Liverpool]], drew particular attention to the relationship between David and Jonathan. Describing their friendship as: "emotional, spiritual and even physical... This intimate relationship was sealed before God - it was not just a spiritual bond it became covenantal." He concludes by affirming: Here ''is the Bible bearing witness to love between two people of the same gender''.<ref>http://liverpool.anglican.org/people/bishops/jamesspeeches/0712_Lambeth_essay.htm</ref> | ||
| + | ==Critical view== | ||
| + | Biblical scholarship has long recognized as concern in the narrative of the [[Books of Samuel]] to present David as the sole legitimate claimant to the throne of Israel. The story of Jonathan's unity with David, including his willingness to accept David rather than himself as king, is thus seen as a device show that Saul's heir apparent recognized God's supposed plan to place David on the throne instead of Saul. This fiction, of course, could not be challenged by the historical fact, since Jonathan was killed at Gilboa, by the very Philistine enemy with whom David was then allied. In fact, the house of David continued to war against the house of Saul for several years until the assassination of Jonathan's brother Ish-bosheth put an end to effective opposition to David's rule over the northern tribes for the time being. | ||
| + | The modern attempt to portray David and Jonathan as homosexual lovers does a serious disservice to their memory. Jonathan, in fact, was a promising warrior-prince, second only to David in his daring courage. While this does not rule out the possibility of homosexual love between the two soldiers, this scenario is better seen as a product of contemporary ideological agendas than historical facts. | ||
==References== | ==References== | ||
* ''Jonathan Loved David: Homosexuality in Biblical Times'' (ISBN 0-664-24185-9) by [[Tom Horner]], Ph.D. (pgs 15-39) | * ''Jonathan Loved David: Homosexuality in Biblical Times'' (ISBN 0-664-24185-9) by [[Tom Horner]], Ph.D. (pgs 15-39) | ||
Revision as of 21:03, 5 June 2008
David and Jonathan were heroic figures of the Kingdom of Israel, whose intimate relationship was recorded favorably in the Old Testament books of Samuel. There is debate amongst religious scholars whether this relationship was platonic, romantic but chaste, or sexual.
Jonathan, son of Saul
Jonathan was already a seasoned military leader when David was still a boy. During Saul's campaign to consolidate his kingdom, he placed Jonathan in charge of 2,000 men at Gibeah while Saul led another 3,000 around Bethel. Jonathan's group led the way in attacking a Philistine encampment. Saul then mustered Israelite forces nationwide to Gilgal to deal with the expect Philistine counterstrike. With superior forces, including some 3,000 chariots against the still relatively primitive Israelite army, the Philistines forced the Hebrews on the defensive, and many troops began to desert. It was here, at Gilgal, that Saul made the fatal mistake of offering sacrifice to God before the arrival of the prophet Samuel, prompting Samuel to declare that God had withdrawn his support of Saul as king. Only 600 men remained with Saul at the time. (1 Sam 3) Saul and Jonathan, meanwhile prepared to meet the Philistines at Micmash.
Through a daring tactic, Jonathan and his armor-bearer alone killed 20 Philistines, through the enemy army into disarray. Hebrew mercenaries who had earlier joined the Philistine army seized the opportunity to join their fellow Israelites and those among the Hebrew army who had deserted at Gilgal now rallied to Saul's and Jonathan's cause. The Philistines were driven back past Beth Aven. (1 Sam. 4)
However, during this time, Jonathan was out of communication with his father. He was thus unaware when Saul commanded a sacred fast for the army, with a penalty of death for any who did not observe it. When Jonathan inadvertently violated Saul's command by eating some wild honey, only the threat of mutiny by troops loyal to him prevented Saul from carrying out the death sentence on his son.
Although Saul left off from pursuing the Philistines after this, he—and presumably Jonathan with him—fought ceaselessly against the Israelites' enemies on all sides, including the nations of Moab, the Ammon, Edom, the Amalekites, and later battles againts the Philistines.
Story of David and Jonathan
It was at one of these battles against the Philistines that David first appeared on the scene. A handsome, ruddy-cheeked youth and the youngest son of Jesse, was before Saul after having slain the giant Philistine warrior Goliath with only a stone and sling (1 Sam. 17:57).
Jonathan was immediately struck with David on their first meeting: "When David had finished speaking to Saul, Jonathan became one in spirit with David, and he loved him as himself." (1 Sam. 18:1) That same day, Jonathan made an unspecified "covenant" with David, removing the rich garments he wore and offering them to his new young friend, including even his sword and his bow and his belt." (1|Sam.18:4 )
David rertuned from this battle to songs praises, giving him more credit even than Saul for the victory. This draw the jealousy of Saul, prompted by an "evil spirit from the Lord." (1 Sam. 18:5-10) As David grew into manhood, his reputation as a military commender grew stronger, and Saul attempted several more times to do away with him (1 Sam. 18:24-25). To get rid of David, Saul him the royal a daughter Michal in marriage, demanding 100 enemy foreskins in lieu of a dowry—hoping David will be killed trying to obtain them. David, however, returns with a trophy of double the number, and Saul has to fulfill his end of the bargain.
Later Saul ordered Jonathan to assassinate David, but Jonathan warned David to be on his guard and succeeded in dissuading the king from his plans, saying:
"Let not the king do wrong to his servant David; he has not wronged you, and what he has done has benefited you greatly. He took his life in his hands when he killed the Philistine. The Lord won a great victory for all Israel, and you saw it and were glad. Why then would you do wrong to an innocent man like David by killing him for no reason?" (1 Sam 19:4-6)
Brought to his senses by Jonathan's words Saul swore an oath not to do further harm to David: "As surely as the Lord lives, David will not be put to death."
The biblical writers, however, portray Saul as doomed to carry out his sorry fate, and the evil spirit from the Lord continues to harass him. Saul continues to devise a way to do away with David, but this time it is Michal who foils her father's plans by warning David to escape through their bedroom window.
Fleeing east past the Jordan to Ramah, David consults with Jonathan who assures him that Saul has no further plans to kill him. David insists, declaring that Saul is now keeping his plans from Jonathan because of Jonathan's closeness to David. The two men reaffirm their covenant of love for each other, and Jonathan pledges to discover Saul's true plans with regard to David. (1|Sam. 20:16-17|)
Jonathan approaches his father to plead David's cause: "Then Saul's anger was kindled against Jonathan. He said to him, 'You son of a perverse, rebellious woman! Do I not know that you have chosen the son of Jesse to your own shame, and to the shame of your mother's nakedness?'" (1 Sam. 20:30) Jonathan is so grieved that he does not eat for days (1 Sam. 20:34). He goes to David at his hiding place to tell him that it is unsafe for him and he must leave. Then "David rose from beside the stone heap and prostrated himself with his face to the ground. He bowed three times, and they kissed each other, and wept with each other; David wept the more. Then Jonathan said to David, 'Go in peace, since both of us have sworn in the name of the LORD, saying, "The LORD shall be between me and you, and between my descendants and your descendants, for ever."'" (1Sam. 20:41-42).
Saul continues to pursue David (1 Sam. 21-23:14), but David and Jonathan renew their covenant together once again (1 Sam. 23:15-18). David, meanwhile is forced into exile and ends up working as a mercenary captain for the Philistine king Achish. When Jonathan and Saul are slain on Mt Gilboa by the Philistines, however, (1 Sam. 31:2) David is not there. He composes a psalm of lamentation commemorating the death of both the fallen leaders:
Saul and Jonathan—in life they were loved and gracious, and in death they were not parted.
- They were swifter than eagles, they were stronger than lions.
- O daughters of Israel, weep for Saul, who clothed you in scarlet and finery,
- who adorned your garments with ornaments of gold.
He says of Jonathan:
- I am distressed for you, my brother Jonathan;
- greatly beloved were you to me;
- your love to me was wonderful, passing the love of women." —(2 Sam. 1:23-26)
Saul's younger son Ish-bosheth succeeded him as king of Israel, while David reigned as king of the tribe of Judah at Hebron. A civil war of several years followed, which ended after Saul's military commander went over to David's side and Ish-bosheth was soon assassinated, leaving David the unchallenged rule of both Israel and Judah until the rebellion of his son Absalom.
Interpretation of David and Jonathan's relationship
Platonic
The traditional view is that Jonathan and David loved one another as brothers. The book of Samuel document physical intimacy (hugging and kissing) between Jonathan and David, but does not indicate a sexual component to their love. Kissing is, even in modern times, a common social custom between men in the Middle East for greetings or farewells, and does not necessarily indicate a physical relationship.
Jonathan's love for David may also been seen to be an expression of his recognition that David was destined to be king, since not even the courageous Jonathan himself had dared to face the Philistine champion Goliath. Jonathan said to David at their last meeting, "Thou wilt reign over Israel and I will be thy second" (I Sam. xx. 30-31, xxiii. 17; comp. xviii. 5). In fact, their covenant stipulated that David should not exterminate Jonathan's posterity (I Sam. xx. 15, 42).
In rabbinical tradition, Jonathan's love for David is considered the type of disinterestedness (Ab. v. 17). Jonathan is ranked by Rabbi Judah the Saint among the great self-denying characters of Jewish history. However, another rabbi remarked that his love for David may have been a result of his conviction that David's great popularity was certain to place him on the throne in the end (B. M. 85a). One tradition holds that Jonathan shared in Saul's guilt of the slaughter of the priest of Nob (I Sam. xxii. 18-19), which Jonathan could have prevented by providing David two loaves of bread (Sanh. 104a).
Romantic and erotic
Some modern scholars, however, interpret the love between David and Jonathan as more intimate than mere friendship.[1] This interpretation views the bonds the men shared as romantic love, regardless of whether or not the relationship was physically consummated. Jonathan and David cared deeply about each other in a way that was certainly more tender and intimate than a platonic friendship.[2] Throughout the passages, David and Jonathan consistently affirm and reaffirm their love and devotion to each other. Jonathan is willing to betray his father, family, wealth, and traditions for David. At their first meeting, Jonathan strips himself before the youth, handing him arms and at least the outer layers of his clothing. When they first make their covenant, not long after their first meeting, the reason supplied is simply because Jonathan "loved [David] as his own soul." (1 Sam. 18:3). Each time they reaffirm the covenant, love is the only justification provided. Critics of this view insist that the this love is simply based on Jonathan and David's mutual bond for each other as soldiers, similar to Jonathan's earlier relationship with his armor-bearer.
Although both Jonathan and David were married, David himself articulates a distinction between his relationship with Jonathan and the bonds he shares with women. David explicitly states, on hearing of Jonathan's death, that his love for Jonathan is greater than any bond he's experienced with women. Furthermore, social customs in the ancient Mediterranean basin, did not preclude extramarital homoerotic relationships. The Epic of Gilgamesh, which predates the Books of Samuel, depicts a remarkably similar, possibly homo-erotic relationship between Gilgamesh and Enkidu.
Mevertheless, it must also be kept in mind that Hebrew law and custom was strongly opposed to homosexual love.
Though sex is never explicitly depicted, much of the Bible's sexual terminology is shrouded in euphemism. Numerous passages allude to a physically intimate relationship between the two men: Jonathan's disrobing, his "delighting much" in David, and the kissing before their departure. Saul accuses Jonathan of "confusing the nakedness of his mother" with David; the nakedness of one's parents is a common Biblical sexual allusion (e.g. Lev. 18:6-19; Lev. 20:11,Lev. 20:17-21; Ezek. 16:36-37; Ezek 23:10; Hab. 2:15; etc.).
The homoerotic interpretation can be found in later literature. For example, the anonymous Life of Edward II, ca. 1326 C.E., has: "Indeed I do remember to have heard that one man so loved another. Jonathan cherished David, Achilles loved Patroclus."
In Renaissance art, the figure of David took on a particular homo-erotic charge, as can be seen in the colossal statue of David by Michelangelo and in Donatello's David.
At his 1895 sodomy trial, Oscar Wilde uses the example of David and Jonathan as "the love that dare not speak its name."
In his Lambeth essay of December 2007, James Jones the Bishop of Liverpool, drew particular attention to the relationship between David and Jonathan. Describing their friendship as: "emotional, spiritual and even physical... This intimate relationship was sealed before God - it was not just a spiritual bond it became covenantal." He concludes by affirming: Here is the Bible bearing witness to love between two people of the same gender.[3]
Critical view
Biblical scholarship has long recognized as concern in the narrative of the Books of Samuel to present David as the sole legitimate claimant to the throne of Israel. The story of Jonathan's unity with David, including his willingness to accept David rather than himself as king, is thus seen as a device show that Saul's heir apparent recognized God's supposed plan to place David on the throne instead of Saul. This fiction, of course, could not be challenged by the historical fact, since Jonathan was killed at Gilboa, by the very Philistine enemy with whom David was then allied. In fact, the house of David continued to war against the house of Saul for several years until the assassination of Jonathan's brother Ish-bosheth put an end to effective opposition to David's rule over the northern tribes for the time being.
The modern attempt to portray David and Jonathan as homosexual lovers does a serious disservice to their memory. Jonathan, in fact, was a promising warrior-prince, second only to David in his daring courage. While this does not rule out the possibility of homosexual love between the two soldiers, this scenario is better seen as a product of contemporary ideological agendas than historical facts.
ReferencesISBN links support NWE through referral fees
- Jonathan Loved David: Homosexuality in Biblical Times (ISBN 0-664-24185-9) by Tom Horner, Ph.D. (pgs 15-39)
- What the Bible Really Says About Homosexuality (ISBN 1-886360-09-X) by Daniel A. Helminiak, Ph.D. (pgs 123-127)
- Lord Given Lovers: The Holy Union of David & Jonathan (ISBN 0-595-29869-9) by Christopher Hubble. (entire)
- "The Significance of the Verb Love in the David-Jonathan Narratives in 1 Samuel" by J. A. Thompson from the Vestus Testamentum 24 (pgs 334-338)
References
- ↑ Boswell, John. Same-sex Unions in Premodern Europe. New York: Vintage, 1994. (pp. 135-137)
- ↑ Halperin, David M. One Hundred Years of Homosexuality. New York: Routledge, 1990. (p. 83)
- ↑ http://liverpool.anglican.org/people/bishops/jamesspeeches/0712_Lambeth_essay.htm
Romantic love expositions
- John Boswell's Same-Sex Unions in Premodern Europe (pgs. 67-71)
- Craig Williams' Yale University Ph.D. Dissertation Homosexuality and the Roman Man: A Study in the Cultural Construction of Sexuality (pg. 319).
See also
- History of Early Christianity and Homosexuality
Credits
New World Encyclopedia writers and editors rewrote and completed the Wikipedia article in accordance with New World Encyclopedia standards. This article abides by terms of the Creative Commons CC-by-sa 3.0 License (CC-by-sa), which may be used and disseminated with proper attribution. Credit is due under the terms of this license that can reference both the New World Encyclopedia contributors and the selfless volunteer contributors of the Wikimedia Foundation. To cite this article click here for a list of acceptable citing formats.The history of earlier contributions by wikipedians is accessible to researchers here:
The history of this article since it was imported to New World Encyclopedia:
Note: Some restrictions may apply to use of individual images which are separately licensed.
