Treasure that rewrites History? Why calling it FAKE stops the DEBATE! #GoXplrr Hutton Pulitzer

fuenta manga bowlNowadays, want to just shut some one down? Call them a racists!

Have you ever noticed how calling someone that word (which no one wants to be associated with) shuts down ALL discussion?

Well, the same short-shighted and frankly chicken-poop way to stop a debate about a discovery of something Ancient yet unexplained, is to…


This is standard practice among many academic circles, yet this is getting harder and harder to scream (thank G-od) with

all the advances in technology that are actually PROVING some formerly labels FAKES to be FANTASTIC FINDS!

Here is a great example:


Before I get into all the details and facts, ask yourself a few questions:

1.  How can someone call FAKE if they NEVER have inspected the artifact in question?

2.  How can they call it a fake, if they have never interviewed the surviving discoverers?

3. How can they call it a FAKE when there are actual Sumerian Symbols which CAN be decoded, but this artifact was found in in the 1910’s and was made public in 1958 and Sumerian was not fully decoded until 1923, and was not available at the academic level until some 30 years later (certainly not at the public level for study)

4.  Ask questions and the FAKE CALLERS facts and reasoning may fall apart!


The Fuente Magna bowl was found accidentally by a worker from the CHUA Hacienda, property of the Manjon family located near Lake Titicaca about 75-80 km from the city of La Paz, Bolivia (see Photo). The site where it was found had not been studied for artifacts previously. The Fuente Magna is beautifully engraved in earthen-brown both inside and out and bears zoological motifs and anthropomorphic characters within (Please see Bernardo Biados for further detail).

The Bolivian archeologist, don Max Portugal-Zamora, learned of the Fuente Magna’s existence around 1958-1960 from his friend Pastor Manjon. Both gave the site the name it bears today, “Fuente Magna” (see Spanish account)

A controversy arose about the cuneiform script on the Fuente Magna. Dr. Alberto Marini, translated it and reported that it was Sumerian.. After a careful examination of the Fuente Magna, linear script Dr. Clyde A. Winters determined that it was probably Proto-Sumerian, which is found on many artifacts from in Mesopotamia. An identical script was used by the Elamites called Proto-Elamite.

Dr. Winters believed that researchers had been unable to read the writing because they refused to compare Proto-Elamite and Proto-Sumerian writing with other writing systems used in 3000-2000 BC. He compared the writing to the Libyco-Berber writing used in the Sahara 5000 years ago. This writing was used by the Proto-Dravidians (of the Indus Valley), Proto-Mande , Proto-Elamites and Proto-Sumerians.

These people formerly lived in Middle Africa, until the extensive desertification of the Sahara began after 3500 BC. A Mr. Rawlinson, was sure that the Sumerians had formerly lived in Africa, and he used Semitic and African languages spoken in Ethiopia to decipher the cuneiform writing. Rawlins called the early dwellers of Mesopotamia: Kushites, because he believed that the ancestors of these people were the Western Kushites of Classical literature.

Winters noted that the Libyco-Berber script couldn’t be read using the Berber language, because the Berbers only entered Africa around the time the Vandals conquered much of North Africa. Although the Libyco-Berber script cannot be read using the Berber language, it can be read using the Mande language. This is because the Proto-Mande formerly lived in Libya, until they migrated from this area into the Niger valley of West Africa.

The Vai script has signs similar to the Libyco-Berber, Indus valley, Linear A of Crete, Proto-Elamite and Proto-Sumerian signs. The Vai people spoke a Mande language.

Using the phonetic values of the Vai script, Dr. Winters has been able to decipher the Indus Valley and Linear A writing. The Sumerian language is closely related to the Dravidian and Mande languages, and the Proto-Sumerian , Libyco-Berber and Vai scripts are similar. Thus, it is possible to read the script on the Fuente Magna by using the phonetic values of the Vai script. Once Winters had transliterated the Fuente Magna signs, he was able to translate the inscription using the Sumerian language.



The universe is full of mysteries that challenge our current knowledge. In “Beyond Science” Epoch Times collects stories about these strange phenomena to stimulate the imagination and open up previously undreamed of possibilities. Are they true? You decide.

The Fuenta Magna is a large stone vessel, resembling a libation bowl, that was found in 1958 near Lake Titicaca in Bolivia. It features beautifully engraved anthropomorphic characters, zoological motifs characteristic of the local culture, and, more surprisingly, two types of scripts—a proto-Sumerian ancient alphabet and a local language of the ancient Pukara, forerunner of the Tiahuanaco civilization. Often referred to as “the Rosetta Stone of the Americas,” the stone vessel is one of the most controversial artifacts in South America as it raises questions about whether there may have been a connection between the Sumerians and the ancient inhabitants of the Andes, located thousands of miles away.

The ancient relic was discovered accidentally by a farmer working on a private estate owned by the Manjon family. The owners subsequently delivered it to the city hall of La Paz in 1960 in return for land near the capital. Around the same time, Bolivian archaeologist Max Portugal Zamora learned of its existence and attempted, unsuccessfully, to decipher the unusual inscriptions, not least because he failed to recognize that the writing upon the bowl was a type of cuneiform text dating back some 5,000 years.

The Fuente Magna bowl remained in storage in the Museo de los Metales Preciosos (“Museum of Precious Metals”) for approximately 40 years, until two Bolivian researchers, Argentine Bernardo Biados and archaeologist Freddy Arce, sought to investigate the origins of the mysterious relic. They were eventually put in contact with Maximiliano, a 92-year-old local who, after seeing a picture of the bowl, claimed it was once in his possession. Not realizing its significance, Maximiliano admitted that he had used the bowl to feed his pigs.

fuenta-magna-detail-2-480x308The two researchers took detailed photographs of the bowl and sent them to epigraphist Dr. Clyde Ahmed Winters, in the hope that he may be able to decipher the inscriptions. Dr. Winters, an ancient languages expert, compared the inscriptions to Libyco-Berber writing used in the Sahara approximately 5,000 years ago. The writing was used by the Proto-Dravidians (of the Indus Valley), Proto-Mande , Proto-Elamites, and Proto-Sumerians. Dr. Winters, in his article “Decipherment of the Cuneiform Writing on the Fuente Magna Bowl,” concluded that the writing on the bowl “was probably Proto-Sumerian,” and offered the following translation:

“Approach in the future (one) endowed with great protection the Great Nia. [The Divine One Nia(sh) to] establish purity, establish gladness, establish character. (This favorable oracle of the people to establish purity and to establish character [for all who seek it]). [Use this talisman (the Fuente bowl)] To sprout [oh] diviner the unique advice [at] the temple. The righteous shrine, anoint (this) shrine, anoint (this) shrine; The leader takes an oath [to] establish purity, a favorable oracle (and to) establish character. [Oh leader of the cult,] open up a unique light [for all], [who] wish for a noble life.”

This translations suggests that the Fuente Magna bowl may have been used to make libations to the Goddess Nia to request fertility. The figure on the Fuente Magna, which appears to be in a “Goddess pose,” with open arms and legs spread, is believed to support Dr Winters’ translation.

If Dr. Winters’ translation is correct, this has major implications for our understanding of both Sumerian civilization and the ancient culture of Bolivia. Researcher Yuri Leveratto aptly poses the question: “How is it possible that proto-Sumerian inscriptions were found in a bowl that has been found near the Titicaca Lake, 3,800 meters [2.3 miles] above sea level, thousands of kilometers far away from the area where the Sumerian people used to live?”

According to Bernardo Biados, the Fuente Magna was most likely crafted by Sumerian people who settled in Bolivia sometime after 2,500 B.C. According to Biados, the Sumerians were known to sail to the distant Indian subcontinent and some Sumerian ships may have made their way around South Africa and entered one of the currents in the area that lead across the Atlantic from Africa to South America. It is possible that some chose to stay and explore into the Andes, perhaps searching for areas high on the plateau of Bolivia where food was being produced. Yuri Leveratto says, “the Sumerian culture influenced the people of the plateau, not only from a religious point of view, but also in the language. In fact, some linguists have found many similarities between the proto-Sumerian and Aymara languages.”

However, this perspective, and indeed the initial translation work of Dr. Winters has not been without its critics. Jason Colavito, a known skeptic and “debunker,” suggests that there is only a small degree of correlation between the script on the bowl and Proto-Sumerian characters. Colavito points out that the bowl has a highly problematic provenance, and may simply be a hoax. Biados says this is incorrect, citing the overwhelming support from major portions of the academic community.

It is clear that the Fuente Magna bowl remains a matter of contention between academics. It is hoped that further archaeological and linguistic research may help to unravel the story behind this mysterious artifact, as doing so may help to expand our understanding of the great civilizations of our past and their influence throughout the world.

futnta manga bowlbolivian_bowl





Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s