ارتباط نام موسی با میثه (میتره) و میتانی

نامهای موسی، موسه و میثه مربوط به میتانیان پرستندهٔ ایزد میثره (میتره) بوده اند:

نظر به ظهور قدرتمند میتانیان حدود سال ۱۵۵۰ پیش از میلاد در سوریه و شمال عراق معلوم میشود که میتانیان ارابه سوار حاکم بر هیکسوسها (حاکمان خارجی) در آن سالها مصر سفلی را ترک گفته بودند و این فرصتی برای برادران کاموسه و اهموسه در مصر علیا به دست داده بوده است که رعایای سامی هیکسوسی میتانیها را از مصر سفلی به کنعان پس برانند. نامهای موسی و کاموسه و اهموسه به وضوح حاوی نام ایزد عهد و پیمان موسه (میثه، میثره، میتره) می باشند.

ارتباط لغوی موسی، میثره، یهوه و میتانی (هانی گالبات):

mūṣû:

۱) an exit , a way out ; 2) a departure ;

Cf. mūṣā ‘ u, muṣṣû

Variants : mūṣā ‘ u, muṣṣû

(akkadian dictionary)

Maetha: wandering and settling. (Avesta)

मूत adj. mUta moved

हन m. hana (hani) slaughter, warrior.

मित्र n. mitra ally, covenant, contract, oath

मिथः adverb mithaH with each other

ni (na): persons (Avesta)

यहु adj. yahu[va] strong

मित adj. mita strong

Etymology of the name “Mitanni” (Wikipedia):

Era: New Kingdom

(۱۵۵۰–۱۰۶۹ BC)

The earliest recorded form of the name of this state is Maitanni. This has usually been explained as a derivation with the Hurrian suffix -nni from a stem borrowed from Indo-Aryan, *maita- ‘to unite’, which is cognate with the Sanskrit verb mith (मिथ्; ‘to unite, pair, couple, meet’). The name Maitanni thus meant the ‘united kingdom’. Paralleling the change of Proto-Indo-Aryan *máytʰati ‘he unites’ into Sanskrit méthati (मेथति), with monophthongization of Proto-Indo-Aryan *ay into Sanskrit e, the name Maitanni may have changed into the later form Mitanni, where the stem maita- may have changed to mita-, with monophthongization of ai into i.

However, Gernot Wilhelm (1997) and Andrea Trameri (2024) have instead suggested that that Maitani means ‘of M(a)itta’, the name of “an individual leader (or clan), and not a territory or population”.

The name “Ḫani-Rabbat”

The Mitanni kingdom was firstly known as Ḫabingalbat before 1600 BC in Babylonia, during the reign of Ammi-Saduqa, attested as ḫa-bi-in-gal-ba-ti-i, and ḫa-bi-in-ga-al-ba-at, in two texts of the late Old Babylonian period. Egyptians referred to it as Naharin and Mitanni, it was Ḫurri to the Hittites, and Ḫanigalbat or Ḫani-Rabbat to the Assyrians. These names seem to have referred to the same kingdom and were often used interchangeably, according to Michael C. Astour. Hittite annals mention a people called Hurri (Ḫu-ur-ri), located in northeastern Syria. A Hittite fragment, probably from the time of Mursili I, mentions a “King of the Hurri,” and the Assyro-Akkadian version of the text renders “Hurri” as Hanigalbat. Tushratta, who styles himself “king of Mitanni” in his Akkadian Amarna letters, refers to his kingdom as Hanigalbat.

The earliest attestation of the term Ḫanigalbat can be read in Akkadian, along with the Hittite version mentioning “the Hurrian enemy,” in a copy from the 13th century BC of the “Annals of Ḫattušili I,” who possibly reigned after 1630 BC.

The reading of the Assyrian term Ḫanigalbat has a history of multiple renderings. The first portion has been connected to, “𒄩𒉡 Ḫa-nu,” “Hanu” or “Hana,” first attested in Mari to describe nomadic inhabitants along the southern shore of the northern Euphrates region, near the vicinity of Terqa (capital of the Kingdom of Hana) and the Khabur River. The term developed into more than just a designation for a people group, but also took on a topographic aspect as well. In the Middle Assyrian period, a phrase “𒌷𒆳𒄩𒉡𒀭𒋫” “URUKUR Ḫa-nu AN.TA,” “cities of the Upper Hanu” has suggested that there was a distinction between two different Hanu’s, likely across each side of the river. This northern side designation spans much of the core territory of Mitanni state.

The two signs that have led to variant readings are “𒃲 gal” and its alternative form “𒆗 gal”. The first attempts at decipherment in the late 19th century rendered forms interpreting “gal” meaning “great” in Sumerian, as a logogram for Akkadian “rab” having the same meaning; “Ḫani-Rabbat” denoting “the Great Hani”. J. A. Knudtzon, and E. A. Speiser after him, supported instead the reading of “gal” on the basis of its alternative spelling with “gal”, which has since become the majority view.

There is still a difficulty to explain the suffix “-bat” if the first sign did not end in “b,” or the apparent similarity to the Semitic feminine ending “-at,” if derived from a Hurrian word. More recently, in 2011, scholar Miguel Valério, then at the New University of Lisbon provided detailed support in favor of the older reading Hani-Rabbat. The re-reading makes an argument on the basis of frequency, where “gal” not “gal” is far more numerous; the later being the deviation found in six documents, all from the periphery of the Akkadian sphere of influence. It is additionally argued that although they are graphically distinct, there is a high degree of overlap between the two signs, as “gal” denotes “dannum” or “”strong”” opposed to “great”, easily being used as synonyms. Both signs also represent correlative readings; alternative readings of “gal” include “rib” and “rip,” just like “gal” being read as “rab.”

The situation is complicated by there being, according to linguists, three separate dialects of Hurrian, central-western, northern, and eastern.

The Egyptians considered the Euphrates River to form the boundary between Syria and Naharain.