Regarding “cimeters” or scimitars, some anti-Mormon publications have alleged that scimitars were unknown in Book of Mormon times, and were not invented until the rise of Islam in the 7th century. This is another argument based on inadequate research. If the term “cimeter” refers to a curved sword, such weapons were in use in the Middle East well before 600 B.C. For example, the Metropolitan Museum of New York (a fabulous reason to visit New York!) has a curved Egyptian sword from the 23rd Dynasty, 893-870 B.C. This and a large body of additional evidence on the use of scimitars in ancient times is given by Dr. Paul Y. Hoskisson in “Scimitars, Cimeters! We Have Scimitars! Do We Need Another Cimeter?” in Warfare in the Book of Mormon, ed. Stephen D. Ricks and William J. Hamblin (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book and FARMS, 1990), pp. 352-359. In light of the abundant evidence, Hoskisson says, “There can be no question that scimitars, or sickle swords, were known in the ancient Near East during the Late Bronze Period, that is, about six hundred years prior to Lehi’s departure from Jerusalem.” Evidence of scimitar-like weapons in Mesoamerica is presented by William J. Hamblin and A. Brent Merrill in “Notes on the Cimeter (Scimitar) in the Book of Mormon,” in Warfare in the Book of Mormon, pp. 360-364. Also see “Swords and Cimeters in the Book of Mormon” by Matthew Roper, Journal of Book of Mormon Studies, Vol. 8, No. 1, 1999, pp. 34-43.
Wikipedia’s article on scimitars states the following, as of June 30, 2007:
Scimitars in history
In the form of the khopesh, the scimitar started playing a sometimes significant role in Middle Eastern warfare more than two millennia before the advent of Islam. Famed scholar and Egyptologist, Zahi Hawass asserts that the Egyptians of the 18th Dynasty (circa 1600 B.C.) used new weapons technologies borrowed from the Hyksos, including “the scimitar” as important tools in fostering Egypt’s regional domination which characterized much of the New Kingdom period [Zahi Hawass, Tutankhamun And the Golden Age of the Pharoahs, Washington DC: National Geographic Society, 2005, p. 21-22]. Some might judge the Hawass’ use of the term anachronistic but nonetheless this provides evidence for the use of something akin to the scimitar in well before the development of the Persian shamshir.
It is not the sword but the name. The scimitar (and var. spellings) is an old sword. The name came after AD622 the supposed time of the Islamic founding.
It would help Mormons if there were any ancient scimitars found in America. This arguement against the validity of the Book of Mormon is like the horse argument. There are horses in the book, but were no horses in America until later in time.
@derf and annonymous
I take it that this really is not a deciding factor about whether or not so called "Mormonisim" is true. But I will give two simple answers to your questions as they are very valid. As for the name, we do not know how the anchient americans refered to their weapons. What we do know is that they did have at leat simple weapons and this particular one is very simple to make. "Cimeter" or "scimitar" were the words WE would assosiate with those weapons. Please remember that Joseph Smith TRANSLATED the record known as the Book of Mormon from another language and he would use words he knew or that were in use in his time.
As for the discovery of the swords, I donot know if such things have been discovered but wouldn't it be consistant that iron weapons would be unreconisable after 1200 years of none use and maintanence? and as a speculation, perhaps they moved on to a more effective sword.
I would encourage you to go to the source; the Book of Mormon. you will never know if it's true orfalse until you do.
Went to the source. What do you knew, it was false.
For a gripping explanation of Joseph Smith's fraud, see Dr. Rietners explainatjon of the book of Abraham.