The site where it was found has not been subject to investigation until recently. The Fuente Magna has not been shown in Bolivia until year 2000. It was considered false, until we began the investigations.

The Fuente Magna was found  The piece in question is a little out of place. It is beautifully engraved in chestnut-brown both inside and out. It reveals zoological motifs and anthropomorphic characters within.  

 
Fuente Magna - Rosetta Stone of the Americas.
Click to view larger image (250KB).

In 1958/60 Don Max Portugal Zamora, a Bolivian archaeologist, learned of it's existence Pastor Manjon. Mr. Portugal "baptized" the site with the name it bears today, "Fuente Magna"--in our view an accurate assessment. Instantly it's rescuing was studiously embarked upon. Through the mediation and negotiation of General Armando Escobar Uria property was swapped for another parcel in the neighborhood of Sopocachi.

Safely under the protection of the honorable, municipal, mayoralty Mr. Portugal began to restore it by applying cement to the parts that showed chipping and deterioration--minor repairs for effect, in our view. He lost no time in attempting to decipher the writting inside the object  turning to the texts known as "Qellga Llippichi" one of those interpreted by Don Franz Tamayo. He also consulted a publication by our illustrious friend, Dr. Dick Edgar Ibarra Grasso, entitled "Indigenous Andean Writing" (HAM La Paz 1953), it ends as you might expect (fruitless). The limits of his honest efforts. The writing is undoubted from the Old World.

Hebraic--from the sinaitic appearance influenced by cuneiform, or simply cuneiform of possible Sumero-Akkadian origins, this being the take-off point on which we announced our extraordinary discovery. Two mayors (local guys) don Armando Escobar Uria and Don Mario Mercado Vaca Guzman have been looking after our investigation until very recently with many restrictions since we cannot count on the support of the state. 
Nevertheless, work has continued on what we call the "Rosetta Stone of the Americas", for lack of a better name. If our method of investigation holds up several things are worthy of note:

1. We are dealing with an object which was made in keeping with Mesopotamian tradition.

2. It contains two texts, one in cuneiform and another Semitic language of possible Sinaitic extraction cuneiform influences.

3. According to the symbols used one would be before an object that evidently shows itself to be from the transitional period between ideographical writing and cuneiform.

4. Chronologically, this leads us to the 3500/3000 B.C., the Sumerian/Akkadian period.