W. Mayer recently published 96 Ekalte texts dating to the period before the Hittite dominion of the land of Astata/Emar. Since they include seven texts which were not uncovered on site in the German excavations, the present writer first investigates whether these texts are indeed Ekalte texts, mainly through a comparison of witnesses mentioned in them with those in known Ekalte texts. It is concluded that all seven are Ekalte.Next, the present writer proposes that two more texts are Ekalte texts: ASJ 16-T and ASJ 13-T 30. The evidence that the former is Ekalte is clear. Although the latter shares only two individuals with the Ekalte texts, it seems likely that is Ekalte in view of the fact that the eponymous year, MU sa! mx x, in 1.42b is of Ekalte, not Emar type (e. g., the usage ofm).All of the year dates attested in the Ekalte texts are of eponymous type (Ekalte 28:16; 48:37; 80:32 (!), 93:30f.; ASJ 13-T 30:42b). Although Mayer assumes another occurrence in Ekalte 79:6′, the present writer suggests the reading: (6′) [a+na Pa-ni mx x (x)] DUMU dIM-GAL (7′) [LUGAL? URU. e-kal]-te. KI tup pu sa-te4-er “[in the presence of PN] son of dIM-GAL, [king (?) of Ekal]te, (this) tablet has been written.” If this is correct, Ekalte must have been a city-state (kingdom).Although Mayer regards the “kings” mentioned in the Ekalte texts as the kings of Emar, the overlords of Ekalte, the “king” (Ekalte 7:22) and the “palace” (62:15) seem to be Ekalte in view of the parallel phraseology in the Emar texts. Furthermore, the ritual text Emar VI 369 shows that Satappi, a town in the vicinity of Emar, had a king of its own, at the same time a king of the land of Emar existed (11. 17, 55f., 58). This would lead us to suppose that before the Hittite conquest the land of Emar/Astata was a confederation of city-states, such as Satappi and Ekalte, under the rule of Emar.