Narratives concerning the ark form a central motif in flood traditions across the ancient Near East, with parallels found in Mesopotamian texts such as the Epic of Gilgamesh and the Atra-Hasis Epic, where divinely instructed vessels preserve life during deluges. In the biblical and Qur’anic accounts, Noah is portrayed as a divinely guided figure who constructs the ark according to precise specifications, gathers a pair or multiple pairs of animal species, and survives the flood with his immediate household. Scholars note that the ark’s description—particularly its length-to-width ratio, construction materials, and capacity—reflects a symbolic emphasis on divine providence and human obedience, rather than providing technical shipbuilding guidance.

circa

Judaic Tradition
In the Hebrew Bible, the ark is described in Genesis 6:14–22. The text specifies that Noah should build the ark from “gopher wood” and coat it with pitch both inside and out. Its dimensions are given as 300 cubits long, 50 cubits wide, and 30 cubits high, corresponding to approximately 137 by 23 by 14 meters, depending on cubit estimation. The ark serves not only as a vessel of survival but as a symbol of covenantal preservation; after the flood, God establishes the rainbow as a sign of the covenant never to destroy the earth by flood again. Rabbinic literature expands upon the ark’s interior arrangement, sometimes portraying it as having multiple decks and compartments for different species, emphasizing the meticulous care required for the preservation of life.

circa

Christian Tradition
Christian interpretations of the ark largely follow the Hebrew Bible narrative, with additional theological reflections. Early Church Fathers, including Augustine and Jerome, viewed the ark allegorically, linking it to the Church itself as a vessel of salvation through which humanity is preserved from spiritual destruction. Medieval Christian art often depicts the ark with a roofed rectangular shape, loaded with animals, emphasizing both obedience and divine mercy. In addition to typological interpretations, some Christian scholars, particularly during the Renaissance and later, attempted harmonization of the biblical flood with historical and natural observations, leading to debates on the ark’s literal versus symbolic dimensions.

circa

Islamic Tradition
The Qur’an recounts Noah’s ark primarily in Surahs 11 (Hud), 23 (al-Mu’minun), 26 (ash-Shu’ara), and 71 (Nuh). The narrative emphasizes Noah’s prophetic mission and the rejection of his community. While the Qur’anic text provides fewer technical details than Genesis, it confirms the construction of a large, divinely guided vessel, the boarding of pairs of each species, and the preservation of the faithful. Islamic exegesis (tafsir) expands upon the ark’s material and design in ways similar to Judaic and Christian commentaries, often stressing the lessons of obedience, divine judgment, and mercy.

circa

Dordrecht Ark
The Dordrecht Ark also known as the Johan's Ark is a Noah's Ark-themed barge in Dordrecht, Netherlands, which was built by the Dutch building contractor, carpenter and creationist Johan Huibers. It's construction is based on the biblical narrative of the Deluge (The Great Flood). According to Bible the Ark was 300 cubits long, 50 wide and 30 high, and roof finished to a cubit upwards. The wooden construction is carried on a hidden floating platform from steel made up of 21 LASH barges.

circa

Mughal Era Miniature
A Mughal miniature painting from the Stories of the Prophets. Nuh (Noah) seated in the upper right corner, while the animals are gathered in the middle and lower decks, the men are seen tending to the ship and rescuing.

Turkish Archives

circa

Subsiding of Deluge Waters by Thomas Cole
Subsiding of the Waters of the Deluge, Thomas Cole (oil painting, 1834)

circa

Durupınar Site
One of the most debated proposed locations for the ark is the Durupınar site in eastern Turkey, first identified in 1959 by engineer İlhan Durupınar using aerial photography. The site features a boat-shaped formation approximately 150 meters long. Advocates for the site cite the alignment, size, and certain sedimentary features as suggestive of the ark, whereas mainstream geologists attribute the formation to natural geological processes. Excavations have revealed rock layers and fissures, but no definitive wooden remains have been documented.

Other Sites
Beyond the Durupınar site, several locations have historically been proposed as potential resting places for Noah’s Ark, often rooted in local tradition, medieval chronicles, or scriptural interpretation. Mount Cudi (Judi Dagh) in southeastern Turkey is cited in Islamic sources, including the Qur’an (Surah 11:44), as the ark’s landing site. The mountain has remained a focus of local legend and occasional exploratory surveys, although no archaeological evidence has been uncovered.

The broader Mount Ararat region, located in eastern Turkey, has been the center of extensive exploration since the 19th century. Early travelers and later 20th-century expeditions claimed sightings of large wooden structures buried in glacial ice, but these reports have never been independently verified, and glaciological studies attribute such findings to natural ice formations.

Similarly, the Ararat Province in Armenia and the Lake Van region of eastern Turkey have been proposed as landing sites, primarily based on medieval Armenian chronicles and Ottoman-era accounts. These traditions emphasize visual resemblances in terrain to the biblical description but lack corroborating material evidence.

Finally, Qardu (in northern Iraq) is occasionally referenced in historical Islamic geography as a possible ark site, drawing on interpretations of early Islamic historiography and oral tradition. Like the other locations, archaeological surveys have not identified any remains attributable to the ark.

While none of these sites provide verifiable evidence, they collectively illustrate how the ark narrative has shaped regional geography, inspired local traditions, and influenced both religious devotion and exploratory endeavors. Scholarly consensus maintains that the search for a literal ark remains speculative, with these locations serving primarily as cultural and historical points of interest rather than confirmed archaeological sites.