Noah’s Ark Was Plagiarized: How Religions Borrow and Evolve

Source: Wikimedia Commons.

If Hebrew schools from 3,000 years ago were up to modern standards, the story of Noah’s Ark would have received an “F” for plagiarism. Anyone familiar with the tricks that plagiarists employ to “spin” content (e.g., by changing a few words) would have recognized that Noah was spun from the much older Sumerian stories of Ziusudra, Atrahasis, and Gilgamesh.

To provide some background, the Sumerian empire formed ~6,500 years ago around the Tigris and Euphrates rivers (in modern day Iraq; see map below). To the west, Israel formed ~3,200 years ago next to the Mediterranean Sea.

Sumer was the first civilization to develop writing ~5,000 years ago, and it was around this time that the Sumerian king, Ziusudra, was supposed to have survived a great flood or “deluge” that destroyed mankind.

Ancient Sumer located on a map of the Middle East.

In the Sumerian story, Ziusudra is warned by a deity to build a boat of a specific size and to take on board his family and the animals of the world. Together, they survive on the boat for a specified number of days before the waters recede and the boat comes to rest on a mountain. Ziusudra then releases birds to search for land, and he makes an offering to a deity who blesses him and permits a new batch of humans with a reduced lifespan.

Ziusudra’s claim to be the original Noah is boosted by radiocarbon dating evidence, which confirms that severe river floods affected several Sumerian cities around 2900 BCE, and it is possible that these are the floods that Ziusudra supposedly traversed (although see here for a skeptical view). Without modern media, Sumer's inhabitants might have believed that the entire world had flooded.

The story of Ziusudra was presumably recorded not long after his reign, although the earliest surviving record is from ~1,700 BCE and it is incomplete and fragmentary. Furthermore, the record of his reign comes from a list written around 2,100 BCE. Nevertheless, the tale lived on and was reproduced in the Akkadian and Babylonian empires (which succeeded Sumer), where Ziusudra was renamed Atrahasis or Utnapishtim (to reflect changes in the language rather than the story or its characters).

The Akkakian “Epic of Atrahasis” is the most complete and oldest surviving record of the Sumerian flood story, at ~1,800 BCE. The story also appears in the Epic of Gilgamesh from around the same time. In other words, the Sumerian/Akkadian flood story is at least 1000 years older than Noah’s Ark.

How do the Sumerian and Biblical Flood Stories Compare?

As described above, the main elements of the stories are identical (angry deity, divine warning, boat building, boarding of family and animals, destruction of mankind, receding waters, release of birds, beaching on a mountain, sacred offering, blessing, and a new human lifespan). However, there are small differences that reflect the cultures and beliefs of the two peoples.

First, Sumerian religion was polytheistic, so a different god flooded the Earth to the one that warned Ziusudra/Atrahasis. Second, Sumerian gods were more anthropomorphic, so they were more upset by noisy humans disturbing their sleep than by any immorality, and they became hungry when they killed all the humans (whose offerings had served as food).

The Hebrew authors of Noah's Ark adapted these parts of the story to fit their own religious beliefs. However, in many other places, their edits were minor or irrelevant. For example, the flood lasted longer in the Biblical version, the boat measurements differed (perhaps reflecting contemporary boat design), the name of the mountain changed, and a raven and several doves were sent to search for land instead of a raven, a swallow, and a dove.

These minor edits might also reflect Jewish symbolism and culture, or they might be the signature of a plagiarist "spinning" content. Indeed, in some places, entire phrases were lifted from the Sumerian version. For example, “the gods smelled the sweet savor” of Ziusudra’s sacrifice, while “the Lord smelled a sweet savor” in the Bible.

A painting by James Tissot in ~1900 depicts Noah's "sweet" sacrifice to God.

The similarities between the two stories are undeniable. However, they are also unsurprising because Abraham (the patriarch of Judaism) was born in the Sumerian city of Ur (then a Babylonian city), while the Old Testament is filled with references to Babylon, with some of its writers possibly being exiles returning from Babylon. In other words, the Bible's writers were almost certainly familiar with Sumerian myths.

What Flood Stories Tell Us About the Evolution of Religions

Historically, this kind of plagiarism tells us that new religions borrow from old religions; probably because populations of people are accustomed to hearing about particular myths and events (e.g., a large flood) that they may see as partially or completely historical. If a new religion appeared that didn't integrate these myths and events, it could be seen as implausible or irrelevant.

However, this explanation does not explain why flood myths appear in cultures with no connection to the Middle East (e.g., native Americans). Although it is likely that most cultures have experienced large floods, the question remains as to why so many cultures produce these spectacular and enduring stories.

The answer may be that particular stories and plot devices are captivating for other reasons. For example, dozens of cultures have deities born from virgins or who later rose from the dead. Some myths just seem to “work,” and so religions that survive for a long time tend to include them. Knowing why these myths survive is important for studies of cultural evolution and the ancestry of religions.

The Psychology of Religion

The most likely explanation for why these myths stand the test of time is that they contain ideas that our brains are hardwired to pay attention to and remember, or that we are particularly motivated to want to believe. These are called cognitive and motivational explanations, respectively. The remainder of this post therefore summarizes research in these areas that may explain the popularity of flood myths.

1. One cognitive explanation is that supernatural narratives grab our attention and are memorable, especially when the supernatural parts are minimal. In other words, there is a sweet spot between an irrelevant story that is overloaded with supernatural ideas and a forgettable story that is completely mundane. This may be why the most memorable stories of Jesus are about real-world situations, such as fishing, having supper, or helping the needy, with often a single miracle marking the story out as special. Similarly, flood narratives are somewhat plausible (exaggerated) stories about building a boat to survive a natural phenomenon with one’s family, possessions, and animals intact, with the supernatural influence typically limited to the source of the event. I have written about this cognitive sweet spot here, but some of the research that specifically pertains to narratives can be found here and also here.
2. Another cognitive explanation for the popularity of some religious and paranormal ideas is that they contain threats that attract our attention and are memorable. We pay attention to threats for our own safety, and evolution has therefore disposed us to it (called a “negativity bias”). This bias is why newspapers are filled with stories about crime and tragedy (fear sells!). It turns out that supernatural ideas are also more likely to concern hazards than benefits, which may be why stories about devastating floods and the gods that cause them are popular.
3. The motivational explanation for flood stories is less obvious because who wants to believe in a deity that can drown everyone? However, the Sumerian and Biblical flood narratives end with the protagonist making an offering to the deity, and the deity either realizing their mistake (Sumerian) or promising not to do it again (Bible). This ending reassures worshipers that a completely unpredictable, natural event is unlikely to happen again and, moreover, that they have some control over it if they provide a deity with offerings and worship. Whether these comforts outweigh the idea of a god that can drown everyone is debatable, but the drowning part happens regardless (real floods happen!). Comforts such as these can motivate people to believe in religious ideas, and some research suggests that comforting stories are therefore more likely to survive in successive religions (e.g., the Abrahamic religions).

In sum, without the Sumerian Epic of Ziusudra, there would be no Noah, or at least no story of Noah that we can recognize. However, we shouldn’t be too harsh on the writers of the Bible. Yes, they plagiarized, but if Judaism and Christianity hadn’t borrowed from earlier religions, they simply wouldn’t be here today. Other religions that “borrowed better” would be here instead. Playing into what people find plausible, desirable, and intrinsically captivating is what successful religions do.