Missing Jonathan The Curious Case of the Neglected Crown Prince in Modern Dramatizations of the David Narrative * Lena-Sofia Tiemeyer 1. Introduction This essay explores the depiction of Jonathan in film dramatizations. Jonathan is one of the key figures in 1 Samuel, appearing throughout 1 Sam 13–14 and 18–20, making a shorter appearance in 1 Sam 23, before his premature death in 1 Sam 31 and in David’s lament in 2 Sam 1:17–27. He is Saul’s son, Isra- el’s heir apparent, a war hero, and David’s main love interest. Despite this, but also because of this, Jonathan has been persistently and consistently side- lined in films: he has been ignored, replaced, reduced, and made more boring than watching paint dry on a wall. The present study falls into three parts. I shall begin with a brief introduc- tion of the issues pertaining to dramatizing the Bible. I shall then survey a series of representations of the David saga in feature films and TV series. I shall finally analyze the filmmakers’ exegetical decisions and seek to identify the reasons behind their interpretative choices. First, however, a few words of caution. This essay operates in the field of reception history, as it explores the appropriation of Jonathan in recent dramatizations. As such, it is by and large uninterested in the historical reali- ties behind the text of 1 Samuel and in the intent of its authors and redactors. Nonetheless, a homoerotic 1 understanding of Jonathan’s relationship with David should in my view not be ruled out from either a historical 2 or a 1 Whereas the modern term “homosexuality” serves as an umbrella term which includes both sexual orientation, behaviour, and attraction, the term “homoeroticism” focuses on the latter. See Martti Nissinen, Homoeroticism in the Biblical World: A Historical Perspective, trans. Kirsi Stjerna (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, 1998), 16–17. 2 See Joanna Töyräänvuori, “Homosexuality, the Holiness Code, and Ritual Pollution: A Case of Mistaken Identity,” JSOT 45 (2020): 1–32, who translates Lev 18:22 and 20:13 as “you will not lay the beds of a woman with a man.” Thus, what is forbidden is a ménage à trois, rather than a same-sex relationship.