Tyndale Open Bible Dictionary

ARMOR AND WEAPONS

The location of Palestine at the crossroads of three continents gave it a strategic importance in the ancient world quite out of proportion to its size. Surrounded by the great military powers (Egypt, Mesopotamia, the Hittites of Anatolia), that stretch of land was constantly the object of aggressive ambitions of other nations. The invention of different weapons, fortifications, and tactics exerted a profound reciprocal influence on other inventions. Tactical innovation by one side prompted new countertactics by the other.

The three basic elements of the art of warfare are mobility, firepower, and security. Weapons alone seldom determined the issue of battle, particularly when both sides were evenly matched. The skill with which strategy and tactics were deployed, the spirit of the commander in directing his troops, and the precision with which the troops handled their weapons were decisive factors in many of the battles mentioned in the Bible.

Attack Weapons

The armory of a military commander in antiquity consisted of a variety of offensive weapons designed to engage the enemy at long, medium, and short range. The bow and the sling were the principal weapons developed for long-range firepower; the javelin and the spear for medium-range; the sword, the ax, and the mace for short-range.

Bow

Early bows were fashioned from one piece of seasoned wood. No single type of bow wood, however, could provide the lightness, toughness, and elasticity required. Gradually the idea was conceived of combining several natural materials—wood, sections of animal horn, animal tendons and sinews, and glue—in the construction of a bow to meet all the demands placed on it. The resulting composite bow became a weapon of supreme importance. Composite structure gave a bow lightness, strength, and elasticity. Use of a double-convex form gave increased range and power of penetration.

The bowstring was made from bindweed, natural cord, hide, or the intestines of oxen or camels. The bow was strung by hand (2 Kgs 13:16), usually bending it with the foot, which required considerable strength (cf. 2 Sm 22:35; Jer 51:3). That may explain why archers were known as “bow treaders” or as “those who tread a bow.”

The form of the arrowhead was a response to the enemy’s defense and armor. In the late Bronze period, for example, a battle arrowhead was generally of bronze and was thick in the middle, tapering to a spine. Its shape was dictated by the fact that the coats of mail in widespread use at the time could be penetrated only by a spined or ribbed arrowhead. The arrow shaft was usually made from reed, a material that combined strength with pliability.

Sling

Complementing the bow was the sling, devised originally by shepherds to drive off animals molesting their flocks (cf. 1 Sm 17:40). It gradually assumed importance as a weapon of war, its supreme advantage being simple construction. Not only did a sling require little technical skill to produce, but the stones used as projectiles were readily available on the ground. In the hands of a trained slinger a missile could be hurled as far as 600 feet (183 meters) in any terrain. The sling’s capacity for high-angled fire up a steep slope was particularly important in an assault on a fortified city. Its principal disadvantage was that strenuous training and experience were required to achieve accuracy in its operation (cf. Jgs 20:16).

A sling was commonly made from two leather thongs to which were attached a pocket for holding the stone. With the thongs pulled taut the pocket became a bag. The slinger held his arms above his head, the bag in his left hand and the ends of the taut thongs in his right hand. After swinging the sling several times around his head with great force to give it momentum, he suddenly released the end of one of the thongs to discharge the missile. Lead pellets as well as smooth stones were used as projectiles. They were carried in a bag or were piled conveniently at the slinger’s feet.

The importance of the sling as a long-range weapon is evident in the familiar account of David’s encounter with the Philistine champion, Goliath of Gath (1 Sm 17:40-51). At that time the Philistines possessed many advanced types of weapons, but the bow and sling were not among them. They depended on medium-range weapons like the javelin and short-range weapons like the sword (cf. 1 Sm 17:4-7, 45, 51). The sling gave David an advantage in range that was decisive against Goliath’s superior weapons and armor (1 Sm 17:48-49).

Javelin and Spear

Two weapons employed for medium-distance warfare were similar in appearance but different in length and operation. The javelin, generally lighter and shorter than the spear, was designed for throwing. It was like a large arrow that was hurled by the hand. Sumerian charioteers of the third millennium BC were armed with several javelins, carried like arrows in a quiver attached to the body of the chariot. Javelin heads were designed for penetration and altered in shape and material as enemy armor became more effective. A head fashioned with sharp hooks or barbs was difficult and painful to extract from a wound.

The spear was similar in appearance to the javelin but was larger, heavier, and designed primarily as a thrusting weapon (cf. Nm 25:7-8). The oldest military monuments known indicate that the spear was already well developed. On the Egyptian hunter’s slate palette and on the black granite stele from Warka (c. 3000 BC), the warrior’s personal weapon is a long staff tipped with a leaf-shaped blade with a sharp spine. Throughout the third millennium BC, the spear was standard equipment for heavy-armed infantry and the most effective weapon for both chariot and infantry charges. Excavations have shown that the spear was the common weapon of the seminomadic tribes who began pouring into Palestine from the north in the middle Bronze Age.

Another characteristic of spears in that early period was a metal tip attached to the butt of the shaft, enabling a spear to be stuck upright in the ground when not in use. That feature persisted into later periods and is mentioned specifically in reference to Saul’s spear, which was stuck in the ground by his head while he slept (1 Sm 26:7). Occasionally the metal tip functioned as a thrusting weapon in its own right, as is evident in the account of the slaying of Asahel (2 Sm 2:23).

Sword

One of the earliest objects made of iron was the sword. Swords were designed for either stabbing or striking. The stabbing sword developed as a long straight blade, tapered toward the point for piercing the body. Its tapered edges were sharpened so that it could also serve as a cutting instrument. The striking sword, on the other hand, had only one sharp edge, with the thickest part of the blade not along the center but along its blunt edge. Such a sword was often curved, sometimes to a degree that gave it the appearance of a sickle, but with the outer, convex edge sharpened as the cutting blade. The earliest type of sickle sword appeared in the second half of the third millennium BC. Both the hilt, or handle, and the blade were fashioned from a single bar of metal. In the middle Bronze Age the curved striking sword functioned essentially as an ax, with a comparatively long hilt and short blade.

That type of sword completely disappeared in the late Bronze Age because it proved ineffective against the widespread use of the helmet and armor. In its place appeared a new design with the curved blade equal in length to the hilt and sometimes longer. It provided a cutting weapon in chariot fighting and against an enemy who possessed no armor. Widespread use of such long-bladed swords at that time explains the phrase repeatedly used in the Bible to describe Joshua’s conquests of the Canaanites: Joshua smote them with the edge of the sword (e.g., Jos 8:24; 10:28-39). That expression would be inappropriate for the action of a short, straight, narrow sword designed as a thrusting weapon. A fine specimen of curved sword was found at Gezer in Palestine in the tomb of a nobleman, dating to the first half of the 14th century BC. The same type of blade is also depicted on a late 13th century BC ivory carving from Megiddo.

During those centuries advances made in the technology of forging iron were reflected in the development of the straight sword as well. The Sea Peoples, among whom were the Philistines, specialized in short-range arms. As early as the 13th century BC they began to make the straight blade more effective than the curved sickle-type sword.

By the time of Saul, the Philistines had used their technology to establish themselves as city dwellers and the dominant military presence in the land. Their military superiority was based on the chariot and on an infantry equipped with personal armaments of high quality. They carefully retained the forging of hard metal under their own supervision and kept the Israelites from developing forges of their own (cf. 1 Sm 13:19-22). Not until that situation was altered could the balance of power pass from the Philistines to Israel.

Mace and Ax

The mace and the ax, developed as alternatives to the sword before hard metal could be forged, were designed for hand-to-hand fighting. They consisted of a comparatively short wooden handle, one end of which was fitted with a lethal head made of stone or metal. The weapons were swung like a hammer to deliver a striking blow. The critical detail was the secure fastening of the head to the handle to prevent its flying off when swung or breaking off when struck. The handle of both the mace and the ax was widened at the point of the grip, tapering toward the head, to prevent the weapon from slipping from the hand when swung. Such weapons were carried in the hand or attached to the wrist with a loop. The mace was designed to batter and smash, the ax to pierce and cut.

The mace was a very primitive weapon. The hieroglyphic sign for the infinitive to fight represents hands holding a mace and a medium-size shield. During the Chalcolithic and the first half of the early Bronze periods (3500–2500 BC), the mace was the primary weapon for personal combat. Because the helmet had not yet made its appearance, the striking power of the mace was devastating. Long after the mace had become obsolete as a personal weapon, it continued to serve as a symbol of sovereign authority for the king or deity (cf. Ps 2:9).

Complex technical problems taxed the ingenuity of armorers in the production of the ax. The blade had to be fixed securely to the handle. The cutting ax had a short blade and a wide edge. It was an effective weapon against an enemy unprotected by armor. It was also used for tearing down the wall of a besieged city, as in the wall painting at Saqqarah (23d century BC). But against armor the cutting ax was ineffective. Deeper power of penetration was achieved with the piercing ax, which had a long, narrow blade ending in a short, sharp edge.

Defensive Protection

Without provision for personal protection of the individual soldier on the battlefield, the mobility and firepower of an army could be seriously compromised.

Shield

Designed to provide a barrier between the body of a soldier and the weapon of his foe, the shield was one of the oldest means of security devised. In the time of the judges and the early Israelite kings, persons of rank were frequently protected by a very large shield. It was carried by a special shield bearer who remained constantly at the unprotected right side of the warrior to whom he was assigned as a bodyguard (cf. Jgs 9:54; 1 Sm 14:1; 17:7; 2 Sm 18:15). The right side of an armed combatant was unprotected because he carried his weapons in his right hand and his shield in his left. The shield bearer therefore had to stand by his master’s vulnerable right side to protect him (1 Sm 17:41; cf. Ps 16:8). In that period the shield was ordinarily anointed as part of the consecration of an Israelite warrior and his weapons for battle (cf. 2 Sm 1:21).

Armor

Personal armor protected the body of a combatant from injury while freeing his hands to use his weapons. The earliest type of body armor formed a substitute for the long shield. It consisted of a full-length tunic made from leather or some tough fiber. It was relatively simple to produce, was light enough to permit full mobility, and offered a measure of protection to the chest, abdomen, back, thighs, and legs. So equipped, a soldier required only a short shield to protect his arms and face.

The late Bronze period saw the development of the coat of mail. It consisted of hundreds of small pieces of overlapping metal joined together like fish scales and sewed to the surface of a cloth or leather tunic. Written documents from Nuzi state that from 400 to 600 large scales and several hundred smaller scales went into the production of a single coat. Smaller scales and narrower rows were used where greater flexibility was needed, as at the throat and neck. The resulting garment was relatively flexible, affording freedom of movement, while the hard metal scales gave far greater personal protection than leather or fiber could provide.

Helmet

Since the greatest point of vulnerability for a soldier in combat was his head, concern for some form of protective helmet can be traced as far back as the end of the fourth millennium BC.

Bronze helmets were worn both by Goliath and by Saul (1 Sm 17:5, 38). Although the helmet was standard equipment for the heavily armed infantry of foreign armies for centuries, it does not seem to have been a common possession of soldiers in the Israelite army during the period of the united monarchy. Among military reforms introduced by King Uzziah in the ninth century BC was provision of helmets for the army of the southern kingdom of Judah (2 Chr 26:14).