Indo-Aryan words in Hurrian

[Bjarte Kaldhol]

Dear listmembers,

Vidhyanath Rao asked a couple of questions about the names of IA gods in
two Hittite treaties written in Akkadian: Midra$$il and
Aruna$$il/Uruwana$$il, each preceded by the Sumerian determinative "gods".
The suffix -l appears here to denote a plural. It is not quite clear to me
what the suffix -(a)$$i- may mean. In Hurrian, -a$$i is used to form
adjectives from nouns. Midra$$i might therefore mean "having the quality of
Mitra". With the plural -l we might translate "(gods) Mitra-like ones". If
the suffix is simply -$$i, it would create an abstract noun "Mitra-ity" or
Mitra-taa/-tva, again followed by the plural suffix. Anyhow, these forms
are strange, as if the scribe didn't understand a word and wanted to
underline that "anything whatsoever in relation to these so-called gods or
demons or whatever" should be taken as witnesses to the oath. "Aruna" and
"Urvana" must either reflect the pronunciation of Varuna in a
Hittite/Luwian mouth, or this was how these names were known. The whole
matter of these gods is mysterious, since there is no trace of them in
Mittani. Were they gods of Hittite or Hurrian mercenaries?

I do not believe in Diakonoff's interpretations, but I need to study these
texts to say more.

One important point:
We should avoid the unwarranted expression "the Mittanis". When we speak
about the English, we do not say "the Englands", do we? Mittani was the
name of a country, not of a people. The word means "Mitta-land", originally
"Land of (a man called) Maitta". That the -a- disappeared before -i-, might
be the explanation of why Tu$ratta once or twice spelled his name
Tvi$eratta. Is is possible that the original form might have been
*Tvai$eratta.

Best wishes,
Bjarte Kaldhol

> The lesser point has to do with the meaning of the suffix -ssi/e.
> Thieme states that the meaning is unclear, but may be adjective
> forming. Diakonoff takes this meaning as certain. Its purpose
> then is obscure from Vedic viewpoint. Thus the first question:
> what is the meaning/purpose of this suffix?
>
> The more serious point has to do with how to read the second name.
> Theime says that `varuna-' is as possible as `urvana-', but then
> in a footnote, records A. G"otze's disagreement with this. The variant
> `aruna-' is explained as a scribal error or as due the Hittite knowing
> scribe using the Hittite word for ocean because Varuna is, among other
> things, in control of the waters. (Did scribes take such liberties in
> those days? Is is even plausible that they had such detailed
> knowledge?)
>
> Diakonoff rejects this completely: He does not even note the possibility
> of reading `varuna' instead of `urvana-' and rejects aruna < varuna
> because *w > zero is not possible in any of the languages involved.
> [He suggests `urvana' from PIIr word `urwan', soul, and connects the
> Mittani to ancestors of the Nuristanis. He does not explain aruna from
> this viewpoint.].
>
> Thus the second question: Can the cuniform text be read as `varuna-'
> instead of `urvana-', and how to reconcile the two variant readings?
>
> Thanks in advance for your help.
>
> Regards
> -Nath