A Comment on "Puvunga and Point Conception: A Comparative Study of Southern California Indian Traditionalism," by Matthew A. Boxt and L. Mark Raab
- Author(s): Ruyle, Eugene E
- et al.
The central point of Boxt and Raab's article lies in the assertion that "widely held understanding of Puvunga are almost entirely a product of anthropological scholarship. This fact is rarely acknowledged" (p. 63). They claim that the "exact location of this community and its archaeological remains were unknown until J. P. Harrington announced his discovery to the academic world 60 years ago: Puvunga had been located" (p. 51). This is nonsense.