ALL STUDENTS OF NEAR EASTERN LITERATURE OWE AN INCALCULABLE DEBT TO SAMUEL NOAH KRAMER for his lifetime of work in Sumerian literature. One of his many and varied insights in this field was the introduction of the concept of the Sumerian Heroic Age with its epic literature on the basis of such parallels as Greek, Indian and Teutonic Heroic Ages.' This concept has been the basis of many studies.' The present contribution in his honor will compare the Sumerian epic literature to the Akkadian and discuss their similarities and divergences. While no one has seriously questioned the applicability of the term "epic" or "heroic epic" to the various Sumerian texts dealing with the exploits of the ancient heroes of Uruk,3 the corresponding Akkadian literary works have been the subject of an extensive, even futile terminological debate. There are two main definitions of the term "epic" which I would term the maximal theory and the minimal theory. According to the first, the term includes all narrative poetry. This is the common Assyriological convention used by Hecker in his Untersuchungen zur akkadischen Epik4 and by many others.5 According to the minimal definition, "epic" is limited to the heroic narrative poems. Nougayrol has worked with this definition: "en ce qui touche 'a l'epopee, je pense qu'il est utile de delimiter d'abord lefonds heroique dont elle est nee."6 It is the minimal theory which guided the selection of the Sumerian tales mentioned above and which is espoused in the discussion offered below. Unfortunately, certain pieces of heroic narrative have never been included in epic literature-by neither the maximal nor the minimal definition. These are variously termed 'autobiographies,' 'pseudo-autobiographies,' and 'naru-literature. " These texts are ex-