The narrative style switches from classic chronicler to epic poem when describing the events of the reign of Kurigalzu II, suggesting more than one historical source was consulted in its preparation.

It continues with a passage concerning Kadašman-Ḫarbe I that has been interpreted as a confusion of the history of this earlier king with that of Kara-ḫardaš, the short-lived successor to Burna-Buriaš II.

[6] The history then hops to the events surrounding Tukulti-Ninurta’s conquest of Babylonia, providing the only extant confirmation of his seven year rule through governors.

It records the revolt which placed Adad-šuma-uṣur on the throne and then describes the events surrounding Tukulti-Ninurta’s overthrow (by Aššur-nasir-apli, probably a reproduction of the error for Aššūr-nādin-apli on some copies of the Assyrian King List[7]).

It contains a number of scribal errors, but, in marked contrast to the Synchronistic History, it portrays Babylonian setbacks as matter of fact alongside their victories, which has led some modern historians to praise its impartiality, despite its apparent muddling of historical events.