It rained for 45 days, and the whole earth was flooded. All the people were destroyed, except for one old man atop Spirit Mountain. Many days passed and a dove brought him instructions from the Creator to drive a ram’s horn into the earth. The old man obeyed and the waters were drained. He sent the dove forth, and when it returned with fresh grass in its beak, he rejoiced for the land had become dry.
When the old man died, the Creator made “a younger brother and an older brother.” In obedience to a dream, the two scraped, cleaned, and laid out canes. Before the next dawn the canes turned into a great population, and older-brother’s rule over them was good. When he died, younger-brother commanded Cousin Coyote to fetch fire for the funeral pyre from faraway Fire-starter. But Coyote was disobedient and looked back, only to see that the fire had started without him. Dashing back to the pyre, he reached into the blaze, snatched older-brother’s heart, and fled with it in his clenched teeth. (To this day, coyotes bear the mark of rebellion in their upturned, disfigured mouths.)
The land became irrevocably “not good” by this act, and younger-brother led the people “across the water” to a new land in the east. Overcrowding soon ensued, and younger-brother chief dispersed the people into three major people groups (Navajo, Mojave, and Hualapai).
This is the Flood story of the Hualapai Indians of northwestern Arizona.
There are many ancient flood stories to be found.
I read this article in its original form and don’t understand - short of a comment on a flood there is NO resemblence to the Biblical version. Days are wrong - no mention of anyone but an old man who died alone, special creation of two non-brothers (as they had no parents - which is required of brothers), no family so needed bamboo to start civilization (again not related if this is the case - no shared parents). Is it surprising that there are so many reports in ancient legend of a flood? No, not if the Biblical account is accurate - they would all descend from the son’s of Noah. However this account seems to be one of the most decayed ones. Also if you do real research on these legends you find that Mr. Hoesch left much that doesn’t connect to the Biblical view out of his paraphrase of a selected translation…. This article was beneath the standard of what ICR use to publish. Am sorry to see them get so sloppy in their Acts & Facts articles.