The Know

The Book of Mormon mentions swords 156 times in both literal and figurative senses.1 Because the Book of Mormon is not available in its original language, its modern readers may envision a long, double-bladed metal weapon with a hilt, like those used by medieval European knights, when reading the English word sword. Such European-style metal swords have not been found in the ancient Americas, causing some critics to see Book of Mormon swords as an anachronism.2 However, weapons that are in many ways functionally equivalent to swords and that have been called swords historically and in academic literature were used throughout pre-Columbian America.3

The best candidate—among many—for Book of Mormon swords is probably something like the Aztec macuahuitl, also sometimes referred to more generally as a macana.4 It consisted of a flat stick of hard wood lined with obsidian or flint blades, positioned either in a straight or serrated fashion. These were referred to as swords (espadas) by the Spaniards and are still called swords by many modern scholars.5 Similarly, the Aztecs called the Spanish swords tepuzmacuauhuitl, meaning “metal macuahuitl.”6 Clearly, both of those cultures saw a similarity between the two weapons. The straight-bladed version of the macuahuitl is best known among the later Aztecs, but variations of the weapon can be traced back to early Book of Mormon times.7 Because these weapons broke down so rapidly, almost none survive today and so our knowledge must be gleaned primarily from inscriptions, artwork, and colonial accounts.8

Some have regarded these weapons as being more like clubs than swords.9 While some Mesoamerican weapons seem to be something between a sword and a club, Spanish accounts clearly distinguish between swords, or macuahuitls, and clubs, as does the artwork in codices.10 Furthermore, unlike clubs but like European swords, the Aztec macuahuitl had cutting ability. Mesoamerican codices show images of human heads and limbs being cut off by these weapons, and some Spanish accounts describe the decapitation of horses with them.11 This accords well with the Book of Mormon, which describes both arms and heads being sliced off by swords (see Alma 17:37–39; Ether 15:30–31).

The troops of Moctezuma II as depicted in the Duran Codex. Image via National Library, Spain.

Depiction from the Codex Fernandez Leal. Image via Bancroft Library, University of California Berkley, online at calisphere.org.

Florentine Codex ANNEX to Book II, f. 110v. Reproduced from Marco Antonio Cervera Obregon, “The Macuahuitl: An Innovative Weapon of the Late Post-Classic in Mesoamerica,” Arms and Armour 3, no. 2 (2006): 143.

In addition to the straight-bladed macuahuitl, several related Mesoamerican weapons of wood and stone existed that have been designated as swords, macanas, or macuahuitls by modern scholars but could also correspond to Book of Mormon scimitars and daggers, or even as axes, clubs, and other “weapons of every kind.”12 Some had only a sharp wooden blade without stone inserts, some a serrated stone edge, and others a smooth stone edge.13 These weapons variously had pointed tips, blades on both sides, and curved structures, and they varied in length.14

Left to right: A wooden sword from page 2 of Codex Mendoza. A weapon on a monument at La Nueva, reproduced from Matthew Roper, “‘To Inflict the Wounds of Death,’” 2016 FAIR Conference presentation, accessed June 18, 2024, online at https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/conference/august-2016/inflict-wounds-death A curved short sword, or potential scimitar, in the Mexican Codex Nuttall (Plate 76); reproduced from reproduced from Roper, “‘To Inflict the Wounds of Death’.” An Olmec macana with an axe-like shape from Monument 91 at San Lorenzo; see Evidence Central, “Book of Mormon Evidence: Swords in Book of Mormon Times,” Evidence #0194, May 25, 2021 and Evidence Central, “Book of Mormon Evidence: Axes,” Evidence #0170, March 22, 2021. The weapon from Uaxcatun stela 5; image courtesy of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, https://peabody.harvard.edu/uaxactun. A serrated macuahuitl from the Historia Tolteca-Chichimeca; reproduced from Roper, “‘To Inflict the Wounds of Death’.” Atzec macuahuitl from the Florentine Codex; see Evidence Central, “Book of Mormon Evidence: Pre-Columbian Swords,” Evidence #0195, May 25, 2021. A smooth-bladed macuahuitl from page 12 of Codex Selden; courtesy of FAMSI, http://www.famsi.org/research/pohl/jpcodices/selden/scene_by_scene.htm. A weapon depicted on Mapa de Teozacualco; courtesy of the Mapas Project, https://mapas.wired-humanities.org/zoomify/33372. A sword from page 66 of the Borgia Codex; courtesy of FAMSI, http://www.famsi.org/research/loubat/Borgia/thumbs4.html. A sword from plate 44 of the Duran Codex; reproduced from Roper, “‘To Inflict the Wounds of Death’.”.

Identifying the Book of Mormon sword with the macuahuitl raises a few questions but also answers many others. For example, what might the word “hilt” refer to in Alma 44:12 and Ether 14:2 if we understand the swords to be macuahuitls? In this case, the hilt would simply refer to the unbladed portion of the weapon, and drawing a sword (like in Mosiah 19:4; Alma 1:9; 19:22; and 20:16) would mean raising it or pulling it from a bag, belt, or covering since sheaths did not seem to be used in the New World.15

One great strength of this identification is the Ammonites’ powerful concerns about stained swords (Alma 24:12–15). While this staining could simply be an idiom or figure of speech, wooden weapons literally absorb blood and become permanently stained unlike metal weapons, which can be easily wiped clean.16 At the same time, obsidian blades could give Book of Mormon swords the shiny brightness they are described as having.17

Certainly, the Book of Mormon asserts that some metal swords were used. However, only a small fraction of Book of Mormon swords are specifically said to be made of metal.18 The sword of Laban is explicitly said to be steel, which is archaeologically attested in the ancient Near East in Nephi’s era.19 The only other explicitly metal swords in the Book of Mormon are the steel swords made by Shule a few generations after the Jaredite migration from Mesopotamia to the New World. The early Jaredites were familiar with metal working, but it is not stated how many steel swords Shule (a great-grandson of Jared) made and whether they were an early anomaly or somehow remained the norm in Jaredite culture.20

Other passages hint at the possibility of other metal swords as well: for example, Nephi said that he made swords after the manner of Laban’s sword, weapon making is mentioned in conjunction with metallurgy several times, and Jaredite weapons whose blades were “cankered with rust” were discovered.21 Yet these statements can be interpreted in different ways. Nephi’s swords may have been stylistically modeled on Laban’s swords without being made of the same material. The mention of metallurgy and weaponry together only occurs a few times and could represent a limited and elite industry.22 Similarly, the discovery of Jaredite metal weaponry and armor was probably noted precisely because it was so rare. The difference in archaeological evidence between dozens of metal swords and several million metal swords would be astronomical and could help explain why metal swords have not yet been discovered in ancient America.23

An inscription of a warrior with a macuahuitl and double dagger from  Loltun cave inscription. This double dagger is similar to the Old World haladie weapon. Sorenson, Mormon’s Codex, 412–414; Hamblin and Merrill, “Swords in the Book of Mormon,” 339; Roper, “Ancient Warfare” (forthcoming).

Many of the Book of Mormon weapons, including swords, daggers, and axes are also mentioned in the King James Version of the Old Testament. In the Old World, these weapons were indeed made with metal in many cases.24 However, we need not assume that Lehites or Jaredites continued to use Old World weaponry throughout their separate existences—these groups would likely have adapted to their new environments rapidly. John L. Sorenson asserts, “Their eventual encounters with warfare likely involved largely experimental or borrowed measures in the new land since the record lacks any indication that the immigrant generation brought firsthand knowledge of warfare with them.”25

It is also likely that the English weaponry words used in the Book of Mormon translation are linguistic approximations since modern English-speaking people had no exactly similar weaponry to the Nephites. The functions of Nephite weapons, however, were probably similar to what English speakers would call swords, though their shape and composition could have varied quite widely. Even modern definitions of swords vary, with some emphasizing the function, some the shape, and others the composition.26 One study of the worldwide history of swords uses the broad term “hilted cutting weapon” and notes that “the nomenclature of ancient weapons is a controversial area.”27

The Why

Three points can be raised in light of this information. First, if it is indeed the case that the Ammonites were using razor-sharp, flint-studded wooden weapons, then the symbolism of these weapons’ representing the Ammonites’ complete forgiveness becomes all the more vivid because of the permanence of bloodstains indelibly left on wooden weapons.28 Scripture teaches that Jesus is the only means through which our sins may be forgiven, and so the imagery of Jesus removing permanent stains is beautiful and powerful. The Ammonites, former killers and murderers, proved to be some of the most penitent and zealous believers.29 Like them, if we will bury the swords of our spiritual rebellion or outright transgressions, we can know that our words and deeds, our swords and souls, can be found spotless and bright at the last day.

Second, some readers of the Book of Mormon or Bible may be discouraged when unambiguous evidence has not yet surfaced for an aspect of Book of Mormon or biblical archaeology, but it is important to remember that true faith is not based upon material evidences. Neal A. Maxwell said,

All the scriptures, including the Book of Mormon, will remain in the realm of faith. Science will not be able to prove or disprove holy writ. However, enough plausible evidence will come forth to prevent scoffers from having a field day, but not enough to remove the requirement of faith. Believers must be patient during such unfolding.30

The search for metal swords in the New World presents just that sort of opportunity to exercise faith. Absence of evidence is not unconditional evidence of absence, and archaeological discoveries that overturn previous anthropological paradigms occur regularly. If we are willing to allow that most Book of Mormon swords may have resembled hilted, bladed weapons from pre-Columbian America, the difficulties disappear considerably. Many difficulties for modern readers may result from forcing available evidence to fit preconceived notions instead of allowing scripture and available evidence to speak for themselves.

A stela from Tonina (613 AD), shown in Matthew Roper, “‘To Inflict the Wounds of Death,’” 2016 FAIR Conference presentation, accessed June 18, 2024, online at https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/conference/august-2016/inflict-wounds-death.

Third, it pays rich dividends to look more closely at the Book of Mormon and our assumptions about what it says. All readers do well to let both archaeology and scripture speak their case and then, after considering all available sources of knowledge and truth, decide how to interpret worldly data and apply divine statements. In the present case, concluding that most Book of Mormon swords are well understood as being similar to a macuahuitl exemplifies a faithful way to affirm the historicity of scripture while reckoning with archaeological evidence.