In his recent contribution on the Elamites and Elam in Ur III times, Piotr Michalowski cited two Drehem texts, MVN 13, 695 and PDT 1, 529, both with year name broken. The former text mentions a large group of Elamites during the festival of the Marhašites (see, most recently, Steinkeller 2006 and Steinkeller 2014 for references to Elam and Marhaši). As Piotr Michalowski suggested, “It is probable that these events took place around the fifth year of Amar-Sin ...” (Michalowski 2008a: 110). His guess of dating the text MVN 13, 695 to AS 5 is probably not correct. I date the text MVN 13, 695 not to AS 5 but to AS 2, based on a so-called ki-bi gi₄-a-account NYPL 345 dating to AS 2 v (see Hilgert 2003: 57-60 and Farber 2007 for the significance of these accounts on the reconstruction of the administrative documents issued by the Puzriš-Dagan organization). Lines 26-30 of column 4 of the obverse of the text NYPL 345 mention 36 animals (13 udu, 18 u₈, 5 maš₂) designated as the nig̃₂-dab₅ of Marhašites. Through comparing the animals and other paralleled information attested in between both texts, MVN 13, 695 and NYPL 345, some restorations and dating the text MVN 13, 695 are available as follows:

The number of animals and the type of animals attested in the MVN 13, 695 are identical with those attested in the NYPL 345. Moreover, the available month names of both texts are the same as well. What is more striking, both texts are issued by Aba-saga: MVN 13, 695 is the disbursement (ba-zi) of livestock issued by Aba-saga, while NYPL 345 is the ki-bi gi₄-a-account issued by Aba-saga. Lastly, both texts mention the people of Marhaši (lu₂ Mar-ha-ši^ki-ke₄-ne). The small difference between both texts is that MVN 13, 695 mentions the clause ezem lu₂ Mar-ha-ši^ki-ke₄-ne, while NYPL 345 mentions the phrase nig̃₂-dab₅ lu₂ Mar-ha-ši^ki-ke₄-ne. Accordingly, it is definitely certain that the above-mentioned texts record the same event at the same time, and MVN 13, 695 should be dated to AS 2 v 27.

Coincidentally, another text, PDT 1, 529 with year name and month name broken, also mentions a large group of personal names which are almost identical to the Elamite personal names attested in MVN 13, 695. Although both the year name and the month name of PDT 1 529 are broken, it is not impossible to reconstruct its date. I suggest that PDT 1 529 date to AS 1 v, on the basis of SAT 2, 663 (AS 1 v), in which the day date is broken. Through the comparison between PDT 1 529 and SAT 2 663, the dates of both texts and a few restorations of them can be considered probable.

The content recorded in lines ii:24-28 on the reverse of PDT 1, 529 is identical to lines 1-5 on the obverse of SAT 2 663. Unless this is a coincidence, both texts record the same event at the same day (Day 27). Based on this conclusion, it can also be inferred that PDT 1, 529 dates to AS 1 v, probably consisting of 30 days, and SAT 2 663 dates to AS 1 v 27. In addition, on the basis of the fact that SAT 2, 663 mentions the disbursement (ba-zi) of livestock issued by Nasa, PDT 1 529 also should record the disbursement (ba-zi) of livestock issued by Nasa, probably a balanced account (nig̃2-kas7-ak) issued by Nasa during the fifth month of the first regnal year of Amar-Suen.

Accordingly, the conclusions can be drawn as follows.

First of all, MVN 13, 695 dates to AS 2 v 27, while the monthly record PDT 1 529 dates to AS 1 v.

In addition, SAT 2, 663 can be accurately dated to AS 1 v 26, based on its identical content attested in day 26 of PDT 1, 529. The restorations of lines 6'-12' on the obverse and line 1' on the reverse of SAT 2, 663 are my guess, on the basis of the records attested in lines ii:29-35 of the reverse of PDT 1, 529.

Last but not least, the majority of Elamites attested in both texts, MVN 13, 695 and PDT 1, 529, appeared twice at the same day of two subsequent years, AS 1 v 27 and AS 2 v 27, respectively. On the first occasion, it was Nasa who disbursed (ba-zi) livestock for the Elamites, while on the second, it was Aba-saga who disbursed (ba-zi) livestock for almost the same Elamites. The reason why they occurred on the same day (Day 27) in two subsequent years is unclear. It is possibly either a mere coincidence, or of particular significance. Purely as a guess, I suggest that the majority of Elamites appeared in the Ur III court possibly for the celebration of the new king (Amar-Suen)'s enthroning event or for the alliance with the Ur III court.