Kopis/khopsh etc. - Egyptian swords

[Kamil]

Originally Posted by tom hyle

Copis (kopis) is a different sword; N Mediterranean and Central Asian. As I say, it seems based on a sickle (it always incurves; only sometimes does it recurve at the spine, and often enough only the very tip of the edge. Multinational, widespread. Sometimes called falcatta. Sometimes, oddly, with a knuckleguard.
The Afrasian sword (kopsh) seems based on Afrasian fighting broadaxes (rather closely modelled, in length, angle, edge curve). It does not seem related to sickles, but then again it does seem related (mainly in the tip though) to 'Zande etc. sickle-swords. AFAIK copis and kopsh may very well be the same word, but they properly refer to two quite different styles, with some overlap of features in some cases. Are you contending that kopsh descends of copis via invasion from the North?
kopsh or kopesh are spellings often seen; as you say there are sometimes (Hebrew, too, for instance; Arabic I don't know about) no consonants in written Afro-Asiatic/Afrasian languages, so there's really little point to nitpicking that matter.

1. The Egyptian khepesh was most probably of Near Eastern origin; it has been introduced to Egypt by Hyksos. Then it seems possible that the N Mediterranean and Egyptian swords had a common ancestor.
2. khepesh is not an Arabic word, but Egyptian one (ancient Egyptian language was related to Hebrew or Arabic no closer that the modern English to ancient Greek). It seems to me important always to use a proper spelling. Eg. there is a difference between "push" and "bush", isn't it? Accordingly, the Egyptian "k" and "kh" were two completely different consonants.
3. There are only few books on Egyptian weapons. The best of them (despite of its age) is:
W. Wolf, Die Bewaffnung des aegyptischen Heeres, Leipzig 1926
Much more accessible should be
I. Shaw, Egyptian Warfare and Weapons, Buckinghamshire 1991
but this book is definitely worse than the first one
Greetings!

[tom hyle]

Originally Posted by Kamil

1. (ancient Egyptian language was related to Hebrew or Arabic no closer that the modern English to ancient Greek).

I don't know whether this is contrary to what I've heard; that they are all part of the Afrasian/Afro-Asiatic language group, and I heard this in a recent University of Houston African history class; specifically, in fact, as an assault on the conceptual validity of the "Middle East"; the proffessor was calling it either Northern (Steppes related) vs. southern/Western (Afrasian, which she stressed as essentially African). I don't know which is more correct, but I do know this is recent revisionist information; such can be driven by politics or by truth.......She had archaeological data that's new or formerly unavailable in N America, too, to back up various of her statements; she was far from "half cocked"; maybe wrong; I don't know; but far from slipshod or shrilly rhetorical.
In any event, of course, Greek and English are related though the seperation of protogreek from protogerman populations was for some time more perhaps more extreme than that of the various Afrasian groups; English contains a great many Greek words; modern Greek would not surprise me if it had some Germannic ones, though nationalism over this sort of thing in Europe is something I've heard much of (for example laws in various Germannic countries about what one can name a child, and how to spell it......).
One addition; the entire concept of "correct spelling" seems rather provincial to me, and it has no objective truth, of course, changing vastly with time and place.

[Kamil]

Originally Posted by tom hyle

I don't know whether this is contrary to what I've heard; that they are all part of the Afrasian/Afro-Asiatic language group, and I heard this in a recent University of Houston African history class;
[...]
In any event, of course, Greek and English are related though the seperation of protogreek from protogerman populations was for some time more perhaps more extreme than that of the various Afrasian groups; English contains a great many Greek words; modern Greek would not surprise me if it had some Germannic ones, though nationalism over this sort of thing in Europe is something I've heard much of (for example laws in various Germannic countries about what one can name a child, and how to spell it......).
One addition; the entire concept of "correct spelling" seems rather provincial to me, and it has no objective truth, of course, changing vastly with time and place.

Tom,
I know that Greek and English are related to each other and I have chosen this example absolutely intentionally. Ancient Egyptian is related to Arabic and Hebrew in the same way, that means there is no close relationship between them.
The concept of "correct spelling" is maybe provincial. However this spelling is commonly accepted among Egyptologists, not only European, but also American ones. It is not an invention of this or that Egyptologist; the consonant root of a word was actually written in hieroglyphs.

[Tim Simmons]

The Romans clearly disliked this weapons leaving it to relatively modern Asia.Tim

[tom hyle]

Hmmm....actually, it was in what might be called Western Asia at the time (Scythia for sure.....), and the "Thracian" sword of the gladiators seems to me to likely be a version of the type, though I have seen it reproduced in a variety of very disparate shapes. I don't know of any originals.

[tom hyle]

Originally Posted by Kamil

Tom,
I know that Greek and English are related to each other and I have chosen this example absolutely intentionally. Ancient Egyptian is related to Arabic and Hebrew in the same way, that means there is no close relationship between them.
The concept of "correct spelling" is maybe provincial. However this spelling is commonly accepted among Egyptologists, not only European, but also American ones. It is not an invention of this or that Egyptologist; the consonant root of a word was actually written in hieroglyphs.

The spelling is provincial; from the province of Egypt; clear if not agreed with? The rest is imitation. I actually often spell kopsh with a "kh", as I've seen it spelled that way, but then I've seen it spelled a variety of ways; I hadn't realized it was the consonants you were on about; I thought you were complaining of my vowels. Perhaps most importantly, if I'm not talking to a computer or bureaucracy, I really have little (to no) interest in or respect for the divisive/elitist concept of "correct spelling", which, as I've said, is tied pretty tightly to time, place, culture, social standing, etc.; for example, in Greek copis seems to have been/to be a "correct spelling" of very likely the same word, though I encounter primarily "machaira"/"mahaira" from there these days; I remain unconfronted with any evidence that this is the item properly called a machaira in ancient days, BTW.......isn't machaira a word for what in US would be called a knife, rather than a sword or dagger, in modern Greek?