Absolutely, in the case of the Sumerians.

Legendary ancestral figures are stated by them to have lived astonishingly long lives in ancient accounts - the more ancient the ancestor, the longer they are generally thought to have lived; the closer to “historical” times (that is, “historical” as it relates to to the writer of the account), the more the lifespan of the individual being described appears like that of an ordinary human.

To give an example, check out this translation of the ancient Sumerian King List:

https://www.livius.org/sources/content/anet/266-the-sumerian-king-list/

Another version:

https://etcsl.orinst.ox.ac.uk/section2/tr211.htm

One of the clay copies of the list, currently in the Ashmolean Museum:

https://www.ashmolean.org/sumerian-king-list

(Note that there is not a single list, but several from different times and places, which differ. However, they all share the characteristic of ancient figures living hundreds of years).

As you can see, the older (thus more legendary) monarchs have truly expanded lifespans - the earliest reigned for literally thousands of years! The Methuselahs of the Bible are like children to the likes of these Sumerian kings.

As time goes on, the kings reign for hundreds of years … then, more ‘recently’, for tens of years (with only the occasional person reigning for a hundred years or more). The really “recent” kings all have more normal lifespans.

This of course raises the question as to why. There is no firm answer to that question. Various theories have been proposed. None are, in my view, wholly satisfactory as an explanation. For example, one theory states that having persons on the list who have lived hundreds or thousands of years enhances the legitimacy of current rulers - as they are linked to figures of legendary attributes (like unnaturally long lives). However, the king list is rife with usurpations in which new dynasties take over - why would “modern” kings wish to emphasize the legendary attributes of overthrown dynasties that their ancestors replaced?

My own favoured theory is that this is simply a function of the fact the earlier kings are more or less legendary, and things like living hundreds of years is suitable for figures of legend. Unfortunately, on that question, I can only speculate - no-one can be sure on such a point.

The Sumerian king list isn’t of course entirely separate from the Biblical account; the latter was influenced by Sumerian mythology (note that the great flood is mentioned on the king list … it is widely believed that the Biblical flood was adapted from this mythological background). The cultures that produced the two accounts share some mythological background. It isn’t clear whether cultural, mythological diffusion accounts for the similar list of ancient Biblical figures, or whether the two lists simply share similar functional purposes as mythology, and so independently developed this pattern (of ancient figures living hundreds of years).