Kurigalzu’s Campaign in Elam and

Elamite-Babylonian synchronisms, Part I

Yu. Khramov, Vancouver

Records concerning the campaign of a Babylonian king named Kurigalzu in Elam are
incomplete. There are even different opinions on which Kurigalz–I or II–was involved.
In this paper, we show that, according to the available evidence, this campaign was
most likely carried out by Kurigalzu II.

Keywords: chronology, late Bronze Age, Elam, Babylon, Kurigalzu

Synchronisms between rulers of ancient Middle East states form the backbone of the
Late Bronze Age chronology for the region. Military campaigns are traditionally one
of the best ways to find such synchronisms. The fact that a Babylonian king named
Kurigalzu led a successful campaign against Elam is confirmed by contemporary
inscriptions1 and reflected in a Babylonian chronicle2. However, we do not have
Elamite records on that campaign, and cannot point to a moment in Elam’s history
when this event happened. There were at least two Babylonian kings named
Kurigalzu during the Late Bronze period, and it is not clear which of them (I or II)
carried out the campaign.

The topic has been discussed in many articles, but mostly in a broader context of
Kassite-Elamite synchronisms, and the solutions proposed by different authors are,
at least partially, based on the facts not directly related to the topic3. In this paper,
we attempt to compare Kurigalzu I vs. Kurigalzu II options on their own merit. We
leave the task of examining the conclusions in a wider context of the Elamite-Kassite
synchronisms in the second half of 14th and in the 13th centuries for the second part
of the study, to appear separately. We believe that this approach reduces the
potential for circular reasoning and is thus cleaner and more sound.

To do the comparison, we will revisit the evidence of contemporary inscriptions,

archeological finds, and later chronicles, taking into account the latest publications4.

1 BRINKMAN (1976, 223), CBS 8598; STEIN (2000, 135), Ka 14.

2 GRAYSON (2000, 170-177) , ABC21, Chronicle P, iii, lines 7 – 19
3 GASSAN (1986), GOLDBEG (2004), PAULUS (2013), POTTS (2016), PRUZSINSZKY

(2209), QUINTANA (2010), ROAF (2016), STEVE, VALLAT(1989), VALLAT (2000).

and many others
4 PAULUS (2013), BARTELMUS (2010), QUINTANA (2010), PRUZSINSZKY (2009),

ROACH (2008), ROAF (2016) and others

Contemporary inscriptions
There are two contemporary inscriptions that mention Kurigalzu’s campaign
against Elam.

The first inscription is the text on a small agate plate from Nippur, see Fig.1. The
drawing is taken from its original publication5, and the transliteration and
translation are taken from a newer analysis found in Stein’s book6.

Figure 1

Ku-ri-gal-zu [x]
LUGAL Ka-ru-du-ni-ia-aš
É.GAL ša uruŠa-a- šaki
ša ELAM.MAki
ik- šu-ud-ma
a-na dNin-líl
be-el-ti- šu
a-na ba-la-ti- šu
i-qí-iš

Translation: Kurigalzu, the king of Karduniyash, conquered the palace of the city of
Shasha in Elam and gave (this object) for the sake of his life as a gift to Ninlil, his lady

On the left image on fig.1, one can see two small holes; so, it is possible that this
object was used as a bead, as M.Roaf suggested7.

5 HILPRECHT (1898,31)
6 STEIN(2000, 130) : CBS 8598 = Ka 3, Philadelphia University Museum.
7 ROAF (2016, 5)
The plate was found in a cache of objects of glass and stone in a small room in
Nippur. Recently, this hoard was an object of detailed study by T. Clayden8. Among
many votive inscriptions of Kassite kings in the cache, there are 17 Kurigalzu’s
inscriptions. Five of them have the filiation Kurigalzu, son of Burna-Buriash, and
therefore belong to Kurigalzu II9. None of them can be conclusively attributed to
Kurigalzu I. It is also important to notice that there are inscriptions for all Kassite
kings between Burna-Buriash and Kashtiliashu IV, and none for the kings before or
after this period. The text is in Akkadian rather than Sumerian, which is also more
likely for the later king, Kurigalzu II, according to A. Bartelmus10. While we cannot
attribute these inscriptions with certainty, the attribution to Kurigalzu II is much
more probable.

The second contemporary inscription is on the shoulder fragment of a limestone

statue (of Kurigalzu?) found in Susa11

Ku-ri-gal-zu
lugal-kiš
sag giš -ra
Mùš -e[re]nki
[Elam]ki-ma-bi-da
[en]-na zag
[Mar]-ha- šiki

Translation: Kurigalzu the King of the World, victor of Susa and Elam to the border of
Marhashi

A. Bartelmus writes that the title “king of the world”, spelled as lugal-kiš, lugal ki-
šar2-ra-ke4, LUGAL.ŠAR2 replaced the Sumerian titles “king of Sumer and Akkad” and
“king of the four quarters” from the reign of Kurigalzu II onwards12. She then
suggests that the title can be used for attributing the inscription to Kurigalzu II.

S. Paulus13 and M. Roaf14 noticed that the same title is attested in so-called
“autobiography of Kurigalzu I” and therefore, it cannot be used as a reliable
differentiator. That text, however, is a neo-Babylonian copy of a text recording the
endowment of a temple of Ishtar with an estate, and is a subject of the detailed
research of T. Longman15. He notes that while there is no consensus about the text

8 CLAYDEN (2011)
9 CLAYDEN (2011, 112). They are identified in BRINKMAN (1976, 222 – 224) as CBS
8600, CBS 4544 + 4550, CBS 8661, and CBS 9462.
10 BARTELMUS (2010, 144-145)
11, STEIN (2000, 135), Ka 14
12 BARTELMUS (2010, 155, n60)
13 PAULUS (2013, 443)
14 ROAF (2016, 5)
15 LONGMAN (1991, 90)
authenticity, its “late features … argue in favor of late, non-contemporary
composition”. We, therefore, still believe that the use of the title “king of the World”
is a strong argument for attributing this record to Kurigalzu II.

The “facts on the ground” also confirm the presence of Kurigalzu II in Elam. A votive
inscription of Kurigalzu, son of Burna-Buriash, was found on a mace knob from
Susa16. Also from Susa comes Kurigalzu’s agate scaraboid dedicated to Ishtaran,
patron of Der17, and a five-line Sumerian seal impression text of mTe(?)-ri-ma- an-
ni… servant of Kurigalzu, found in the Acropolis18. Babylonian royal inscriptions are
rare in Elam. Except several kudurrus in Susa, looted by Elamites19, the only other
Kassite inscription found in Elam is on a knob of Shagarakti-Shuriash20 . Therefore,
these Kurigalzu’s inscription could be regarded as an additional proof of Kurigalzu’s
presence.

As we see, the inscription mentioning the conquest of Susa and the artifacts found in
Elam supports the assumption of the Elamite campaign by Kurigalzu II. However,
the most important evidence of that campaign is presented in Chronicle P, analyzed
below.

Chronicle P
Kurigalzu’s campaign in Elam is described in the well-known Babylonian Chronicle
P. The translation below and all the transliterations for the fragments are taken
from Grayson21:

Fragment (iii)

(1) ….[..]
(2) x lim gu úlu [šú(?)ú(?)] x x x […]
(3) x lim x x da si x x [x] x […]
(4) I LIM sīsêmeš bar-[mu-tú] i-rib-šú-nu [ú]-x […]
(5) [š]á li-šá-nu is-bat-tam-ma re-da-a ú-bi-li ur- […]
(6) ma-sa-ar ú-še-es-bit a-dan-na ú-gam-mi-ir […]
(7) ta-[a-a]-ri ur-hu-ku-nu kaspa hurāsa ni-siq-tum ab[ne ..]
(8) ub-lam šamêe GUŠKIN.KÙmeš a-na dMarduk bē-li-ia lu [e-pu-uš(?) ..]
(9) Bābiliki [u] Barsipki eli sēri-ia [l]u ú-šá-AD.DIB […]
(10) mHu-ur-ba-[ti]-la šar kurE-lam-mat a-na mKu-ri-gal-zu […]

16 BRINKMAN (1976, 225) Susa 4625.

17 SCHNEIL (1905, 30)
18ROACH (2008, 821), object M191
19 BRINKMAN (1976, 46-48) – see C.2.6, O.2.5 (cf. O.2.6), R.2.4-6, S.2.6-9, U2.19 for

kudurrus of Kashtiliashu, Adad-Shuma-Ushur, Meli-Shipak, Marduk-appla-iddina,

and the late copy of Nazi-Maruttash kudurru
20 BRINKMAN (1976, 287), V.2.3.
21 GRAYSON (2000, 174-175), Babylonian Chronicle P, ii.3 – iii.18
(11) um-ma al-kam-ma [ana]-[ku] ù ka-a-šú “DIŠ” ina Dūr-d[Šul]-g[i sal-ta (ana
libbi)]
(12) a-ha-meš ni-pu-uš [mKu]-ri-gal-zu iš-me-e-ma [x] x x […]
(13) a-na kurElámtiki a-na-ka-[ša]-du illikik-ma mH[u-ur-ba-ti-la]
(14) šár kurE-lam-mat ina Dūr-dŠ[ul-g]i sal-tú ana libbi-šu [i-pu-uš]
(15) ina pāni-šú ib-bal-kit-ma mKu-ri-[gal]-zu dabdâ-šu-nu [iš]-[ku-un (…)]
(16) šár kurE-lam-mat qātII-su ikšudud kul-lat k[ur][E]-lam-mat mi x […]
(17) ke-mi-is ina kin-si-šu mHu-ur-ba-ti-la šár kurE-lam-m[at ..]
(18) lu-ú i-di šár mKu-ri-gal-zu ki-i a-ga-[a] an-na-[a(?)] […]
(19) it-ti šarrānimeš šá nap-har mātātimeš man-da-at-tu4 (?) [E-lam]-[mat(?) lu ub-
la(?)]
(20) a-na muhhi mdAdad-nārāri šár kurAš-šurki ana kašadudu [il-lik-ma ...]
(21) ina uruSu-ga-ga ša eli IdI-diq-l[at] lsal-tú ana] [libbi-šu i-pu-uš (…)]
(22) sābēmeš-šú i-duk Iùrabûtimeš-šú ina qātēI [Išú is-bat …]
----------------------------
(23) mNa-zi-múru-taš mār [m][…]
(24) šár kurAš-šurki ina (?) u[ru{?)…]
Lacuna

Translation:

2 … tousand
3 …. Thousand
4 One thousand piebald horses their gift…
5 He seized the spy and brought the knight…
6 He set a watch and…
7 The return, your path. Silver, gold, precious sto[nes,..]
8 I brought. I [made] a canopy of pure gold for Marduk my lord.
9 I…Babylon and Borsippa upon/over me…
10 Hurbatila, king of Elam, [wrote] to Kurigalzu
11 This: "Come! I and you at Dur-Shulgi,
12 Let us do battle together. Kurigalzu heard and…
13 he went to conquer Elam and H[urbatila]
14 king of Elam (KUR E-lam-mat )22, [did] battle against him at Dur-Sh[ulgi].
15 He (Hurbatila) retreated before him and Kurigalzu broug[ht about] their
defeat.
16 He captured the king of Elam. All of Elam…
17 bowing down, Hurbatila, king of Elam, [said:]
18 "I know, king Kurigalzu, that his…
19 with the kings of all lands [I have brought] the tribute of El[am]"
20 [He went] to conquer Adad-nirari (usually emended to Enlil-nirari), king of
Assyria.
21 [He did] battle [against him] at Sugaga, which is on the Tigris [and brought
about his defeat].

22 See the discussion about this name below

22 He slaughtered his soldiers and [captured] his officers.
23 Nazimarrutash, son of…
24 King of Assyria in…

This particular fragment (iii), together with the previous one (ii), are stylistically
homogenous, and stand out from the rest of the Chronicle with their poetic, rather
than chronicle-like style23. It mentions Kurigalzu II’s battle of Sugaga, described in
the Synchronistic chronicle as well. Right after the description of that battle, the
fragment describes military expeditions of Nazi-Marrutash. Nazi-Marrutash was a
son and the immediate successor of Kurigalzu II. Both events point firmly to
Kurigalzu II, and the claims that the scribe of Chronicle P simply took the fragment
out of context, and that the Hurbatila episode should be assigned to Kurigalzu I24,
are not founded.

There is still a number of problems with this fragment. First, is the name of the
Kurigalzu’s opponent, Hurbatila (mHu-ur-ba-ti-la). It is the only occurrence of this
name, and Steve and Vallat attest it as a Hurrian one25, rather than Elamite.
However, the Elamite deity names Hu-ur-ba-hi-ir and Hu-ur-bi attested by König in
the list of gods in the Naram-Sin time inscription(EKI2)26. The ending -ti-il-la is
attested in the same book in several town names in Elam.

Hinz and Koch’s Elamite dictionary27 gives the following explanations. The name
apparently consists of the two divine names Hurb (probably male) and Tila
(probably female). Cf. the divine name dj.hu-ur-bi -, where the writings -bi and -ba
are tools to indicate the double consonance in Hurb. -Ti-la is listed there separately
as “Divinity, probably female”, found in a few texts. It is contained, perhaps, in the
name ku-uk-til-la. The use of geminate –ll- might be insignificant28. Toponyms
Hurbat-Kalbi and Hurbat-Šade are found in the later Babylonian texts near Uruk29,
close to the Elamite border. According to Zadok, theophoric names with two
components are common for Elamite30. Therefore, there is nothing too unusual for
such a name to be found in Elam.

In Chronicle P, the country of Hurbatila is named Elammat, and that fact led several
authors to assume that this could be a name of a different country north of Susa with
its own kings31. The facts do not support this assumption. Though the orthography

23 GRAYSON (2000, 59)

24 cf. VALLAT (2000)
25 STEVE et VALLAT (1981, 232), note 31
26 KÖNIG (1965, 191, 222)
27 HINZ, KOCH (1987, 271)
28 HINZ, KOCH (1987, 329)
29 ZADOK (1985, 168)
30 ZADOK (1991, 231)
31 GASSAN (1986)
KUR E-lam-mat (Elammat) is used 3 times in the Chronicle (iii 14,16,17), the standard
form KURElamti is also used in the same fragment describing the same events (iii 13),
and then once more in the same Chronicle (iv 14). Moreover, the form E-lam-mat is
used for the name of Elamite kingdom in Kedorlaomer texts32. The trilingual
inscription of Darius in Behistun uses in its Babylonian version both Elam-at and
Elam-ti, which, in all cases, are translated into Persian as u-v-j-i-y (“from Susiana”)
and into Elamite as Ha(l)-tam-tup/tip (which means “of Elamites”)33. Several
variations of the e-lam-mat transcription are found in the New- and Late-Babylonian
texts34. As far as we know, there is absolutely no evidence of a separate polity
named “Elammat” anywhere in the Middle East.

The place of the battle, Dur-Shulgi, has not been identified, but Shulgi, the second
king of the Ur III dynasty, is known for his wars against Elam (Anshan) and the
erection of fortresses on the Elamite border35. The main place of his activities was
close to Marhashi in the South-East of Susa, corroborating the description of the
campaign in the inscription on the statue of Kurigalzu.

Campaign Dating
The description of the Elamite campaign precedes the description of the battle of
Sugaga in Chronicle P. In this chronicle, the Assyrian king in the battle of Sugaga is
Adad-Nirari, while in the Synchronistic chronicle it is Enlil-Nirari. There is also a
difference in the recorded outcome of the battle: the Synchronistic Chronicle gives
the victory to Enlil-Nirari, while Chronicle P mentions Kurigalzu’s victory36. The
evident bias of the Synchronistic Chronicle, the fact that the battle was fought on
Assyrian territory, and that the described boundary adjustments favored Babylon,
give reasons to believe that the battle was either inconclusive or that the
Babylonians won it37. However, when comparing the evidence about the name of
the Assyrian king (Enlil-Nirari vs. Adad-Nirari), it is almost certain that the
Synchronistic Chronicle data is correct, as we show below.

An independent source, the so-called Chronicle of Enlil-Nirari, describes two

military confrontations between Kurigalzu and Enlil-Nirari38:

(1) [..]-ati mdEnlíl-[nārāri …]

(2) […m]eš kurKi-lizi ú-[…]
-------------------------------

32 GRAYSON (2000, 174)

33 GASSAN (1986, 226)
34 ZADOK (1985, 130-131)
35 See, for example. POTTS (2016, 124-125, 128)
36 GRAYSON (2000, 51-59)
37 PRUSZINSZKY (2009, 118-119)
38 GLASSNER (2004, 184-185), GRAYSON (2000,185). The differences between

these two transliteration and translation are minimal.

(3) [..]39
(4) […]x mSilli(mi)lí-dAdad mdEn-líl-nārāri šar4 kurAš-šu[r…]
(5) […]ik-šu-ud šal-la-a-su x x x x x[…]
(6) […]m[Ku-ri]-gal-zu šar4 kurKar-[du-ni]-aš […]
(7) [..] a-na kurKi-li-z pa-ni-šu iš-ku-u[n…]
(8) [..]iš-me-ma a-na kurKi-li-zi [a]-na-[…]
(9) […]mKu-[ri]-gal-zu šar4 kur[Kar-du-ni-aš …]
(10) […]iš-me-ma ki-i a-[…]
(11) […] x x […] x x […]
Lacuna

Translation:

1. [..]…Enlil-[narari…]
2. the [..] of Kilizi …[..]
----------------------------
3. [During the eponymy of]
4. Silli-Adad, Enlili-narari, king of Assyria
5. […] captured[..]. Its booty .. […]
6. […]Kurigalzu, king of Karduniash, […]
7. […] to Kilizi he set out […]
8. […] he heard and to Kilizi for […]
9. […] Kurigalzu, king of [Karduniash, …]
10. […] he heard and when .. […]
11. […]…[…]… […]

Two battles with Kurigalzu are also mentioned on a fragmentary alabaster tablet
from Ashur40. The battles apparently took place in Kilizi, deep in Assyrian territory,
north of Ashur on the left bank of Tigris and the left bank of Greater Zab.

Kurigalzu II’s reign is traditionally dated 1332-1308, and Adad-Nirari – 1305 – 1274
(see Brinkman41). One of the latest studies focused on the chronology of this
period, accepts the dates of the reign of Adad-Nirari (1295-1264, +3/-1) and the
reign of Kurigalzu II (1327-1303, +2/-1)42. Even taking into account all
uncertainties, it is extremely unlikely that Adad-Nirari was Kurigalzu’s opponent.

We can thus state that Kurigalzu II fought Enlil-Nirari at Sugaga. Therefore, the
terminus ante quem for the Elamite campaign could be set as the last year of Enlil-

39 Glassner reads this line i-na li-me ”During the eponymy”, while Grayson does not
restore these words at all.
40 GRAYSON (1972, 52)
41 BRINKMAN (1976, 31)
42 PRUZSINSZKY (2009,119)
Nirari’s reign (1317 with traditional chronology or 1309 with the “lowered” Boese
chronology).

Conclusion
The current state of knowledge of the history of Elam in the Late Bronze Age is still
incomplete, and is still a topic of discussion43. In this paper, we attempted an
“internal reconstruction” of the facts of the Kurigalzu’s campaign in Elam.

This approach, in a sense, resembles the methodology used in comparative linguistic

analysis: start with internal reconstruction, and only after that bring in comparative
data. We believe it is a useful preliminary step here before analyzing
interrelationship between different sources of Kassite-Elamite synchronisms.

The evidence of Chronicle P, together with two inscriptions about the conquest of
Elam, and the presence of Kurigalzu’s inscription on the ground in Susa, allow us to
state with significant confidence that the campaign in Elam can be attributed to
Kurigalzu II.

The next task should be to put this campaign in the context of the Elamite history of
that period. Our attempt to do this will be presented in the part 2 of the research.

We thank S. Paulus and A. Nemirovsky for helpful discussions and reading of the
manuscript, and M. Roaf for his comments and suggestions, and for making his latest
paper available to us prior to publication.

YX

Bibliography
BARTELEMUS, A., 2010: “Restoring the past. A historical analysis of the royal temple
building inscriptions from the Kassite period”, KASKAL, 7, 143 – 171

BRINKMAN, J., 1976: Materials and Studies for Kassite History, vol1. Chicago

CLAYDEN, T., 2011: “The Nippur Hoard: the largest single collection of Kassite
objects”.Al-Rafidan. Journal of Western Asiatic Studies, XXXII, 1 – 56.

GASSAN, M., 1986 : “Hurpatila, le roi d’Elamate” , AION 49.3, 223- 229

GEORGE A.R., 2011. Cuneiform Royal Inscriptions and Related Texts in the Schøyen
Collection, Ithaca

43Cf. the conclusions in PAULUS (2013), QUINTANA (2010), ROAF (2016), VALLAT
(2000).
GLASSNER, J.-J., 2000: “dKUR.GAL a Suse et Haft-Tepe“ NABU, 2, 36

GLASSNER, J.-J., 2004: Mesopotamian Chronicles, Atlanta

GOLDBERG, J., 2004: The Berlin Letter, Middle Elamite Chronology and Sutruk-
Nahhunte I’s Genealogy. Iranica Antiqua, Gent

GRAYSON, A. K., 1972: Assyrian Royal Inscriptions, v I. Wiesbaden

GRAYSON, A. K., 2000: Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, Wimona Lake,

HILPRECHT, H.V., 1893: Old Babylonian Inscriptions chiefly from Nippur,

Philadelphia

HINZ, W., KOCH H., 1987: Elamisches Wortebuch. Berlin

KING, L.W. 1912: Babylonian Boundary Stones and Memorial-Tablets in the British
Museum. London

KÖNIG, F.W. 1965: Die elamischen Koningsinschriften. Graz

LONGMAN, T., 1991: Fictional Akkadian autobiography: a generic and comparative

study. Winona Lake, Indiana

MATTEWS D.M., 1992: The Kassite Glyptic of Nippur, Freiburg/Göttingen

MATTEWS D.M., BRINKMAN J., 1990 “A Grandson of Kurigalzu” , NABU 3/103, 83-84

PAULUS S., 2013: “Elam und Babylonien in der 2 halfte des 2 JT. V. CHR”, in de
GRAEF,K., TAVERNIER J. (Eds). Susa and Elam, 429-449, Leiden Boston

POTTS, D.T. 2016: The Archaeology of Elam, second edition. Cambridge

PRUZSINSZKY, R. 2009: Mesopotamian Chronology of 2nd Millennium BC, Vienna

QUINTANA, E. 2010 : “Filiacion y Accesso al trono in Elam”, Revue d'Assyriologie et

d'archéologie orientale, 104, 45-63

ROACH, K. 2008: Elamite Cylinder Seal Corpus, vol II. Thesis, University of Sydney

ROAF, M. 2016: Kassite and Elamite Kings, Pre-press

SCHEIL, V., 1904 : Memoires, Delegation en Perse, v V, Paris

SCHEIL, V., 1905 : Memoires, Delegation en Perse, v VI, Paris

STEIN, P. 2000: die mittel- und neubabylonischen Konigsinschriftenbis zum Ende der
Assyrerberrschaft, Wiesbaden

STEVE M.-J., VALLAT F. 1989: . La Dynastie des Igihalides: Nouvelles interpretations,

in Archeologia Iranica et Orientalis

VALLAT, F. 2000 : “ L'Elam du lie millenaire et la chronologie courte”, Akkadica 119-

120, 7-17

Van DIJK,1986: “Die dynastischen Heiraten zwischen Kassiten und Elamern: eine
verhängnisvolle Politik” Orientalia, NOVA SERIES, Vol. 55, No. 2, 159-170

ZADOK, R. 1985 : Repertoir Geographique des Textes Cuneiformes, Wiesbaden

ZADOK, P. 1991 : "Elamite Onomastics", Studi Epigrafici e Linguistici sul Vicino

Oriente Antico VIII,. 225-237.

ZADOK, R. 1984: The Elamite Onomasticon, Milan