by Eric Meier

Of all the woods mentioned in the Bible, perhaps none have elicited more interest than the question of which wood species was used in the construction of the Ark of the Covenant. The reason for this is because the reference is just specific enough to get a reasonably good idea of the identity of the wood (in contrast to “gopher wood”—which remains completely ambiguous and highly speculative), but just vague enough a precise identity remains elusive (in contrast to something like the fig tree—almost certainly Ficus sycomorus).

A Brief Introduction to “Acacia” or Shittim Wood

The text in question, from the King James Bible, reads: “And they shall make an ark of shittim wood…” (Exodus 25:10). However, modern translations (ESV, NIV, et al.) tend to translate this as “an ark of acacia wood.” So what’s going on here? In this case, the KJV has chosen to transliterate the Hebrew word, which is more or less shittah (singular) or shittim (plural)—treating it very much like a name. Conversely, modern translations have opted to translate this into English as a type of tree—the acacia.

So who’s right?

The word shittah in Hebrew has the connotation of piercing, and is generally thought to be a reference to thorns.^[1]H7848 – šiṭṭâ – Strong’s Hebrew Lexicon (kjv). Retrieved from https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon/h7848/kjv/wlc/0-1/ So perhaps another good translation that still honors the meaning of the Hebrew word would be “thorn tree.”

But in reality, the very word “acacia” which we use today comes from the Greek akakia, which in turn is believed to have been derived from the Greek ake—meaning thorn or point.^[2]Harper, D. (n.d.). Etymology of acacia. Online Etymology Dictionary. Retrieved February 13, 2025, from https://www.etymonline.com/word/acacia And among the trees in common use in the region at the time, a “thorn tree” would’ve no doubt immediately been in reference to some species of what we would today call “acacia.”

The “Acacia” Tree: A Completely Loaded Term

You’ll notice that up until this point, I’ve written acacia in lower-case letters as if it were just a common name of a tree that’s common knowledge to everyone. Unfortunately, even scholars and early researchers fell into this same trap when writing on ancient Egyptian timbers.^[3]DIXON, D. M. (1974). TIMBER IN ANCIENT EGYPT. The Commonwealth Forestry Review, 53(3 (157), 205–209. https://www.jstor.org/stable/42605377^[4]Lucas, A. (1934). WOOD WORKING IN ANCIENT EGYPT. Empire Forestry Journal, 13(2), 213–218. https://www.jstor.org/stable/42596132 The truth of the matter is that Acacia (italicized and written with a capital A) is more properly the name of a genus of trees, and today the genus contains over 1,000 different species. So it’s not hard to see the futility in trying to identify a precise tree species from a single that could refer to any number of species.

And perhaps in a twist of irony, botanists have since reclassified all the Acacia species that were originally native to Africa (including the type species, Acacia nilotica) into two new genera: Senegalia and Vachellia. So technically, all the original species that were really and truly under Acacia are now more properly called by their updated botanical names—this is the pattern and naming convention that I’ll be using to describe the species in question for the remainder of this article.

Inductive Reasoning to Help Find the Most Probable Species Used

Returning back to the initial question of which wood species was used to make the Ark of the Covenant, our most answer woul have to be, we simply don’t know for sure. Since we lack any actual wood sample, and the voculary used to descirbe the wood species is, for us today, quite obscure and insufficiently specific, we have no way of knowing with 100% certainty. But that doesn’t mean we can’t make an attempt at narrowing it down.

Our starting assumption will be this: it was more than likely a “thorn tree” of some sort. In the historical context of the text, this almost certainly referred to some species that was formerly known as “acacia”—thus, following the botanical reclassification of Acacia, it was more than likely wood of the genera Vachellia or Senegalia.

Size of the required lumber

When the Hebrew states that the Ark was to be made with shittim wood—this same word is used throughout the narrative to describe a number of concordant projects that were undertaken at the same time, most notably the Tabernacle—which was more or less a portable tent-like structure that utilized a number of wooden pillars to form a skeletal structure over which animal skins were placed to form the actual area where the Ark was to be housed.

These support pillars (described in Exodus 26:15-16) were each to be about 15 feet (5 meters) long and roughly 27 inches wide (69 cm), notably without mentioning the thickness of these timbers.

This dimension of 27 inches (69 cm) width—actually 1.5 cubits, an ancient unit of measurement based on the length of a human forearm—is also used for both the height and width of the Ark of the Covenant too.

In just about any way you look it at, these are large dimensions, especially the width of the pieces required. This has lead some to (I think possibly erroneously) conclude that the Ark would’ve had to have been made from trees of immense size. If you are incline to take this view, then your selection of possible tree species will of course be skewed very much to one type (i.e., large, straight trees). However, I would like to considered another way this could be accounted for that, at least to me, seems much more plausible.

Building Techniques

To woodworkers, a twenty-seven inch wide solid wood panel in the middle of a dry desert would be asking for trouble. Possibly this could be mitigated by the fact that all the wood was to be covered with solid gold, but that would greatly depend on how the gold was applied, and its thickness, etc.

When some people think of the ancient Hebrews of the time of the Exodus, they almost assume that they were very primitive and not possessing much sophistication by way of woodworking techniques or knowledge. However, this is more than likely quite untrue, for two reasons.

First, the passage in question specifically calls attention to a man named Bezaleel, who is described as one whom God had “filled him with the Spirit of God in skill, in understanding, in knowledge, and in all kinds of craftsmanship, to make artistic designs for work with gold, with silver, and with bronze, and with cutting and setting stone, and with cutting wood, to work in all kinds of craftsmanship” (Exodus 31:3-5).

Secondly, the Israelites were a people that had been accustomed to construction. We learn that they were compelled to complete a number projects for the Egyptians. “…And they built for Pharaoh treasure cities, Pithom and Raamses” (Exodus 1:11b). While most of this was probably simple labor, it’s not too outrageous to assume that among the 600,000 males that are recorded as having went out, that at least a few (including Bezaleel) were very knowledgeable in Egyptian woodworking and building techniques.

There’s an article describing 6-ply “plywood in use in Ancient Egypt 2000+BC. There’s also the Khufu Ship (~2500BC) that shows great attention to detail regarding wood movement, grain orientation. See Nancy Jenkin’s book The Boat Beneath the Pyramid.

Freshly felled trees and the building timeframe required

Hi Exo 40:16 Thus did Moses: according to all that the LORD commanded him, so did he.
Exo 40:17 And it came to pass in the first month in the second year, on the first day of the month, that the tabernacle was reared up.

With the time account of the 40 + 40 days on the mount, traversing the Red Sea, and other stories, this really only leaves about 6 months to construct the tabernacle. Not enough time to properly dry wood. Conclusion: it was probably pre-existing wood that was brought over from Egypt and collecting during the public offering time.

Alternative narratives and mystical theories

This article mentions the Jewish account that there were actually very large trees kept in store in Egypt and brought by Jacob.^[5]Zevit, Z., & זוית, צ. (1992). עצים לבית המקדש: מקרא, מסורת ומציאות / TIMBER FOR THE TABERNACLE: TEXT, TRADITION, AND REALIA. Eretz-Israel: Archaeological, … Continue reading The author gives the identity of these trees as white acacia, or what is known today as Faidherbia albida. The actual text of the story is found in the talmud here: https://www.sefaria.org/Sukkah.45b.3?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en

This article also has a good overview of what ID the tree could be. ^[6]https://ww2.odu.edu/~lmusselm/plant/bible/acacia.php

Some possibilities to consider:

Senegalia senegal

Vachellia nilotica

Vachellia seyal

Vachellia tortilis