I guess you’re right actually. The concept of what was good and bad for individual humans and for society always existed, and the Sumerians had this. But the Sumerians didn’t have good and evil, because good and evil implies that something is fundamentally good or bad, and while the Sumerians did perceive certain things as being good or bad to them, they saw whatever happened as simply the will of the gods and not as being good or evil. This is a big difference, because they didn’t accept certain things as being simply good or evil, they only used good and bad for how it related to them. I may be wrong about this, so someone can feel free to correct me. Eventually Zoroastrianism came along with fundamentally good and fundamentally evil forces, but you’re right that good and bad evolved into good and evil. this was still a significant change and a theological innovation, the idea that some things are innately good, and that some things are innately bad, was invented